Best Theistic Arguments

[Little Rik]

By definition, you cannot have consciousness and not be aware of it.  If you are talking about something other than consciousness as such, you're talking about something that on the surface of it, is not consciousness.  Your claim in the evolution thread is that whatever it is that is in vibrations is the same stuff that is in the human mind, but is simply in a different form.  This is about evidence, remember, not simply about what you believe.  You're welcome to believe whatever you want about matter and its relationship to other things such as evolved beings, as long as you lack evidence for your belief, it is just dogma. What you have presented is nothing more than an assertion that the two are the same quantity.

Yes I can.........have consciousness and not be aware of it.
Of course I can.
When I sleep my consciousness is still alive and well.
The awareness is almost gone that however doesn't mean that the consciousness is gone.
Consciousness can not be killed.
The same apply to energy.
If you kill energy-consciousness you kill the whole universe because the universe is made of consciousness.
That is impossible to happen.
That is why consciousness is always there.
The awareness is a different story.
That vary from almost nil in matter to great in humans and to 100% in God's mind.

Suppose for a sec. that motion is not enough to say that vibrations are alive or not.
Now let us add something to this motion.
Let us add the fact that the bodies in which these vibrations exist are capable of giving new life.
So this plus motion is a clear evidence that vibrations are alive.

The fact that a composite thing, such as an alive body, possesses a capacity does not show that its parts contain this property.  I am or was capable of getting pregnant and bearing a child.  That by itself doesn't mean that my fingers or my foot is capable of getting pregnant and giving birth.  That's the fallacy of division and renders your conclusion invalid.

More BS on your part.  
Any body is made of vibrations therefore if you take away the vibrations you take away the full body and the chances to produce more life.
Here I am talking about pure mats.
No vibrations= no body.
No body= no new life.

The body being made of vibrations must be alive in order to create new life and because the body is none but vibrations these vibrations must be fully alive or new life is not possible.    

It doesn't really need Sarkar to prove that consciousness and energy are the two sides of the same sheet.  Lightbulb
You can easily see in everyday life.
Take your car.
In it there is a lot of energy but this energy is unable to do anything unless you direct it to act or to express her potential.
Or take your computer.
Until you direct it to do something nothing happen so it is clear that energy plus consciousness must go hand in hand in order to do something.

Although low form of lives act according mother nature instinct the rule is the same which is that consciousness and energy always go hand in hand.

In the first place, the latter doesn't follow from the former.  Regardless, we have plenty of examples of the contrary.  Two planets placed near each other will move toward each other by gravitational attraction.  Steel ball bearings placed near a magnet will move toward the magnet.  So, your generalization simply doesn't hold.  Like your other beliefs, you have no valid justification for your belief.  Moreover, if Sarkar did not give reasons for his claim, and you believed it simply on the basis of his say so, that is the very essence of dogma.  Your attempt to provide ad hoc rationalizations for your prior belief is simply irrelevant.

Wrong once again yog.  

Energy and consciousness are NOT two separate things that for some mysterious reasons come to unite.
They are always been together.
Your thought could not exist without energy that is why the two are one.  

If you really think that there is something void of life please show to the world such an interesting theory.  Lightbulb
Didn't I tell you that you may even go for a Nobel prize?

The question here is not what I believe, nor why.  So any observations you might care to make about me do not clear you of the charge of having a worldview that is based on dogma.  I could have no theory whatsoever, and it wouldn't matter one whit.

Your way is a long long way to see clear.
By trying to demolish other people ideas (something that you of course fail at every instance) you hope to come up as a winner.
Unfortunately you get nowhere because the real progress depend on you and you alone.
But how can you ever get any progress when you do absolutely nothing to achieve any progress?
Don't you think that is about time to wake up and grow up?