How did people imagine "evolution, creation and prehistoric civilization"

The most primitive existence in the universe is not spiritual things, not gods, not gods, but energetic substances. This living energy evolves into a living element in an evolutionary way, that is, a cell; This cell is the beginning of all life.

In the history of western thought, British biologist Darwin (1809- 1882) holds the view of evolution. After years of exploration, Darwin gradually formed a systematic evolutionary thought: there are individual differences in the biological world, and under the pressure of survival competition, the fittest survive and the unsuitable are eliminated; The favorable characteristics of species retention gradually change in the process of generation-to-generation transmission, and new species are formed after the differentiation of intermediate types disappears.

Darwin believed that the evolution and variation of biological species were based on natural selection. In addition, it is supplemented by the genetic thought of sex selection and congenital characteristics. From 65438 to 0859, the publication of Darwin's Origin of Species shocked the whole academic and religious circles and strongly impacted the creationism of the Bible.

Darwin's On the Origin of Species put forward the theory of biological evolution, which revolutionized the religious creationism and species invariance of Linnaeus and Ju Ye Wei and shocked the contemporary world. Evolution has been the focus of religious debate since it came out, because it violates the creationism in the Bible.

Darwin's theory of evolution and later neo-Darwinism have been arguing endlessly since their emergence. 100 years have passed. The development of science has not been unified and different, but has been expanding, and people have criticized it more and more severely from all levels of understanding. There has been a lot of scientific discussion on this aspect, and here we just summarize it.

John McDonjo, a geneticist at the University of Georgia in the United States, said: "In the past 20 years, the results of adaptive gene research have made us more and more trapped in a huge Darwinian trap."

Australian evolutionary geneticist George Mikros is puzzled by the use of Darwinism. He said, "So, what can this inclusive theory of evolution foresee? Put forward many assumptions, such as random variation or degree of selection ... are these issues discussed by the Great Evolution Theory? "

Professor Jerry Cohen, from the Department of Ecological Evolution at the University of Chicago, said: "Unfortunately, we can only say that the neo-Darwinian view has almost no basis, and its theoretical basis and experimental basis are insufficient."

1966, Westchester College in Philadelphia held a seminar attended by some mathematicians and evolutionary biologists. The theme of the seminar is Darwin's theory of evolution. At the meeting, mathematicians suggested that Darwin's theory of evolution was fundamentally wrong from the perspective of mathematical theory. They said, "There are many loopholes in the neo-Darwinian theory of evolution, which we think cannot be filled and explained by the current biologists' point of view. "

Stuart Kaufman of Santa Fe University may have a more objective view. He said, "No matter how creative scientists complain, Darwin and his theory of evolution are always far away from us. Is Darcy's view correct? In other words, does his theoretical viewpoint apply? I don't think it applies. It's not that Darwin himself is wrong, but that he only knows part of the truth. " He once wrote a book, The Origin of Natural Laws. He believes that the origin, metabolism, genetic process and cross-sectional diagram of the body can not be explained by Darwin's theory.

In fact, as early as 187 1 years ago, shortly after Darwin's theory of evolution was published, Qiao Shengzhi Mivart questioned Darwin's theory of evolution. The main points are as follows: natural selection can not explain the initial stage of adaptive structure in some studies; It does not conform to the principle of approximation of different population structures; It is reasonable to think that some specific differences may suddenly appear, but not necessarily gradually; There are many organic phenomena that cannot be explained by natural selection. ...

In other words, there are unanswerable questions in Darwin's theory of evolution, which have nothing to do with the size of knowledge or the development of science, but everyone can't answer them. So, is the future scientist wrong or Darwin wrong?

Evolution is now in a very delicate position. As a philosophical point of view, almost any teacher will tell students, but as a scientific basis, it is rarely written into textbooks. According to relevant statistics, Reininger, a professor of biophysics at Johns Hopkins University in the United States, wrote a biology textbook at 1970, which was reprinted after many revisions, but there are only two entries under the title of "evolution" in the index entries of the whole book, which seems that evolution has little to do with biology; When the book was reprinted in 1986, the index entries increased to more than 8,000, and evolution only accounted for 22.

Someone once investigated 30 biochemistry textbooks used by American universities for more than 20 years, and found that many textbooks completely ignored the theory of evolution. For example, a biochemistry textbook written by Professor Thomas Davilin of Jefferson University in Philadelphia was reprinted three times, with as many as 5,000 index entries, but none of it involved evolution. Oxford Press published a textbook written by Armstrong of North Carolina State University, which was reprinted three times, but there was no mention of evolution in any chapter, not even in the index. In all journals of biological evolution in the United States, the articles that really belong to structural evolution are less than 1%, and there is no monograph on this issue in computer book indexes over the years.

Why is this? For those knowledgeable scholars, we don't need to remind them: Sir, what have you forgotten?

The problem lies in evolution itself. Let's give a few examples to illustrate.

Evolution has an important proposition: big changes can differentiate into a series of small changes in growth time, that is, complex human organs are a process of gradual formation. Dahl himself once said in the Origin of Species: "If someone can prove that all existing organs are not caused by countless, gradual and minor changes, my theory will collapse completely." But it is this conclusion that is inconsistent with contemporary scientific experiments, because when an organ works, it is a comprehensive reflection of various conditions. Without any conditions, this organ cannot have any effect.

For example, in the animal world, complex system organs cannot evolve and accumulate. For example, there is a beetle with a special defense system. When threatened, it will spray a hot toxic solution from the back of the body. This beetle is called "gunner". It turns out that the "Gunner" beetle produces two highly chemical mixtures at the same time in a special structure called secretory sac, one is hydrogen oxide and the other is hydroquinone. When these two chemicals exist alone, there is no heat. Once they are mixed together, they will produce a lot of heat energy, the temperature of which can reach the boiling point, and they are also toxic. Once the beetle is in danger, the two chemicals will be quickly mixed together and sprayed by contracting muscles. The problem is that this beetle must evolve the following things at the same time: hydrogen oxide and hydroquinone, catabolic enzymes produced by embryonic glands, bladder, sphincter, dilator and efflux catheter. If the "gunner" beetle's defense system evolved, the same question: advanced what?

For another example, we often cut our fingers in our lives. If the wound is small, even if it is not treated, the blood flow will stop automatically. It turned out that the blood clot was at work. Modern research shows that blood clots are composed of more than 20 interdependent protein. In this system, one component activates the second component, the second component activates the third component, and so on, so people call this interrelated process tandem protein chain. For example, a protein called Stewart Factor cleaves prothrombin and converts it into active thrombin. Thrombin can cut fibrinogen into fibrin and form blood clots. In order to ensure that thrombin does not work out of order, Stuart factor needs to exist in an inert state, and once needed, it will be activated by another protein called tachykinin. In order to ensure the accurate location and time of blood clots, a protein C is needed to regionalize blood clots ... It can be said that the formation, restriction, strengthening and elimination of blood clots are an inseparable biological system with the characteristics of "irreducible complexity", and some single components will cause the failure of the whole system. To form this system, it must be produced at the same time, otherwise many animals will die because of excessive blood loss.

No matter how great Darwin's theory of evolution is, it really can't explain the biological phenomena at the molecular level. According to Darwin's explanation, the appearance of any creature is the result of a small number of superposition, but the research of biomolecular science completely destroyed Darwin's fantasy.

Creationism advocate

Genesis in the Bible tells us that God created the world in six days and created the first man Adam from the earth. Many Christians believe that God created human beings in the Garden of Eden 6000 years ago. Scientists and religious scholars call this theory "creationism".

1859, Darwin put forward another view. He believes that the emergence of human beings can only be explained by evolution and natural selection under the background of material creation. In other words, survival of the fittest. According to Darwin's theory, man evolved from monkeys, which is really an odd idea compared with the interpretation of the Bible.

The struggle between creationism and evolution has always been fierce. Recently, in Abbotsford, British Columbia, a Christian-controlled board asked schools to teach evolution and intelligent creation theory (a kind of creationism). Maclean magazine reported: "What they are debating is really a big problem. The biggest question is: How did life come into being? Was it created by BIGBANG or by God? "

Opponents of Abbotsford's policy are very worried that the school board will put Genesis and Darwin's Origin of Species on the same footing. They accused the board of directors of imposing their beliefs on students. But at the same time, some Christians believe that teaching Darwin's theory of evolution also means imposing certain beliefs on students.

Despite the red-faced debate between the two sides, recent research shows that supporters of both sides should reconsider their positions. Studies have shown that the debate between evolution and creationism may have completely lost its meaning.

Richard Thompson and Michael Cremo Cremo jointly wrote the Forbidden Archaeology, in which they collected a batch of evidence to prove that South Africa100000 years ago did not have modern people, but appeared millions of years ago.

1In February, 996, NBC filmed a documentary called The Mystery of the Origin of Man, and Thompson and Kramer came here with empirical and other experts. The evidence they brought shows that human beings did not evolve from monkeys, nor did God create them from clay 4000 years before the birth of Christ. The theory they put forward has far-reaching influence and may force everyone to rethink the origin of the whole human race.

In this documentary, Charlton Heston showed a lot of evidence that was ignored by scientific institutions. In this way, the mystery of human origin makes the debate between the Bible and evolution open. Let's talk about the human footprints found in Texas, which are printed next to the dinosaur footprints; Discuss whether stone tools date back to 55 million years ago; Talking about an accurate map of an unknown era; We also discussed the evidence of prehistoric advanced civilization.

/kloc-at the turning point of the 0/9th century, Darwin's theory of evolution began to become the mainstream theory in the scientific community. Based on the comprehensive study of this period and archaeological discoveries in the later period, The Mystery of the Origin of Man reveals a certain phenomenon of "knowledge filtering" in scientific institutions: a prejudice that is more willing to accept dogma and turn a blind eye to some evidence, just because the evidence does not support the traditional theory.

Unfortunately, over the past century, fossil evidence points out that human beings appeared much earlier than the traditional theory thinks. Humans did not evolve from monkeys, and of course they were not made of soil. The documentary of NBC revealed that this view was banned because it violated a solid belief system. In addition, scientists who challenge dogma finally find that they are not only excluded from the debate, but also may lose their jobs.

Thompson, science observer Richard Milton and other experts pursue the so-called "inferential leap" of evolution. They believe that the so-called ancestors of humans and monkeys have never been found, but have been concocted by scientists who are too keen on finding the "missing link" in human evolution. Speaking of 120 years' efforts to prove the theory of evolution, Milton thinks that "there seems to be no missing link".

Let's take a look at the so-called example of Homo erectus in Java. 189 1 year, anthropologist Eugene Dubois discovered a human femur and an ape skull in Indonesia, which were only 40 feet apart. So he had a brainwave and pieced the two bones together to create the famous Javanese ape-man. However, many experts believe that this femur has nothing to do with the skull. Shortly before his death, Dubois himself said that the skull actually belongs to a big monkey and the femur belongs to a person. To this day, Javanese apes are still used as evidence that monkeys have evolved into adults. It didn't appear in new york Museum as a symbol of evolution until 1984.

Another example is piltdown man, the masterpiece of another evolutionist. It was excavated in the year of 19 10. Similar to other evidence, this discovery turned out to be just another false evidence carefully planned by evolutionary fanatics. Even the famous "Lucy" found in Ethiopia in 1974 is a rare treasure among the fossils of human ancestors. According to many anthropologists, it is difficult to distinguish her from monkeys or extinct apes.

Charles Oxnard, a physical anthropologist, and other scientists painted another picture of human evolution completely different from the traditional picture scroll, pointing out the facts neglected by universities and museums. Oxnard believes that genus (that is, the category to which human beings belong) appeared in a time period older than the standard theory of evolution, which makes people begin to question the basis of evolution. As reported in the Forbidden Area of Archaeology edited by Kramer and Thompson, oxnard pointed out: "The traditional concept of human evolution has become seriously rigid, and we must begin to explore new concepts."

The most severe attack of the opponents of evolution is that evolution can't explain the origin of new species and new characteristics at all. Evolutionary theory speculates that countless faces in biological life are produced by random natural selection, even down to pores in human skin, legs of some beetles and protective pads on camel knees. But the intrinsic purpose of the universe obviously does not conform to the explanation of evolution.

For Darwinists, life only exists on the premise of absolute materialism: everything that happens in the universe is just a series of accidental events and chemical reactions. In the face of scientific dogma, even common sense has to take a back seat. We can take the human brain for example. The doctrine of "survival of the fittest" cannot explain its higher functions (such as calculating calculus, playing the violin, and even consciousness itself).

What is the relationship between the Bible and creationism?

Creationists' arguments come directly from orthodox religious teachings, and they refuse to accept biblical metaphors or fables. This is a belief system that many Christians can't really accept and even the Bible itself doesn't support. At the same time, it also lacks scientific support. You know, fossil records show that as early as 6000 years ago, there were people on the earth. Moreover, literally speaking, the idea of six days of creation is also inconsistent with the time when the universe was born.

Nowadays, the common sense concept of creationism is increasingly recognized, and even some scientists find it difficult to deny the existence of intelligence in the universe. However, the problem of creationists lies not in the concept of intelligent design, but in its dogmatism and mechanical reproduction of the Bible in the debate on the origin of mankind.

New field or the wisdom of the ancients?

The evidence of the origin of ancient humans has led many people to consider the external causes of the earth, although some people strongly oppose this idea. But for others, the debate between creationism and evolution is still tasteless from beginning to end. Catastrophists who were once sneered at still have many tenacious opponents, and their views have only recently been partially recognized by the scientific community. Catastrophic theory insists that the continuous evolution of life on earth was suddenly destroyed and changed the evolution process.

To be exact, this fact obviously cannot be ignored: there have been various types of disasters on earth and in the universe. There is a famous catastrophe theory that dinosaurs died out because a huge meteor hit the earth, generating energy equivalent to thousands of hydrogen bombs. Other catastrophe theories study the drastic changes of climate, earthquakes and even the exchange of magnetic poles on the earth.

The argument between catastrophe theory and gradual change theory shows how little the scientific community knows about prehistoric things, and also exposes the bad habit of jealousy within the scientific community, which has existed since Darwin's time. The argument between the two theories is always related to biblical disasters (such as floods). Of course, this connection is more inclined to catastrophe theory than gradual change in evolution.

The disaster theory also contributes to the development of another theory of human origin. In Fingerprints of the Gods: Evidence of the Earth's Loss of Civilization, Hankak said that at some time in the past, there was a sudden and catastrophic change in the earth's lithosphere, which was called "crustal displacement".

Rand Flem-Ath and Rose Flem-Ath also mentioned this point in "The Day Falls: Looking for Atlantis". According to Einstein's theory, this theory holds that the crust may suddenly change the appearance of the planet, causing the continents to drift to completely different positions.

Inspired by Charles Hapgood's works, Mr. and Mrs. Flem Yas believed that this could explain why hundreds of mammoths, rhinos and other ancient mammals were frozen in the dead zones in Siberia and northern Canada. Impressively, these mammals all have temperate plants in their stomachs, which means that the animals grazing on this land suddenly moved from the temperate continent to the cold continent. According to Hapgood and Einstein's theory, ancient Antarctica may be 2000 miles north than today's Antarctica, and suddenly changed and frozen due to crustal displacement.

Ancient maps recorded Antarctica before freezing, which also supported the view that prehistoric Antarctica was once located in a mild climate zone. Hankak and Flem-Yas copied some primitive ancient maps of unknown ages, including Piriis map, Oronteus Finaeus map and Mercator map. Therefore, they suggested that some prehistoric societies could accurately calculate the accuracy and draw the coastline, but in recorded history, this ability did not appear until the18th century.

The main point of Flem Yas and Hankak's works is that these maps, together with a lot of evidence, prove the existence of prehistoric advanced civilization. Charlton Heston, the narrator of "The Mystery of the Origin of Man" filmed by NBC, compared the importance of this speculation with Plato's description of lost Atlantis.

Is the loss of civilization a real "missing link"?

After investigating the stone carving techniques in ancient cities such as Bolivia, Peru and Egypt, Hankak believes that these wonders of stone carving could not have originated from nomadic hunting civilization, which is exactly what traditional science tries to convince us. Bolivian scholar Arthur? Arthur Poznansky said that Tiahuanaco in Bolivia was magnificent before 15000 years ago. This is a suitable example to show that there was an advanced civilization in ancient times. In Tiavanaco, the technology of cutting boulders is very accurate, with the deviation of no more than one fifteenth of an inch on each side, and then these boulders have to be transported for a long distance. This technology has been able to rival or even surpass modern engineers.

We always thought that people at that time were primitive and backward, so how did they transport the boulder to Muqiu, Peru? This is a huge mystery and a miracle that traditional science can't explain. Hankak claims that even if we accept the view of most archaeologists that these buildings are very recent, we have to admit that the knowledge and technical level of these builders must be the product of the long-term development of a civilization. Therefore, we can infer that a higher civilization existed before the written history.

Hankak said, "My view is that we are watching such a civilization, which involves all parts of the world and has universal influence, appearing before recorded history. As a distant third-party civilization, it has not yet been recognized by historians. "

At present, there are a lot of natural evidence and records of human activities to confirm the existence of this civilization. Etymology holds that there is a prehistoric Indo-European language family, which can explain the deep similarity of world languages. So, is it possible that this language system is the language of prehistoric civilization spoken by Hankaku people?

Professor Gilgio from MIT? De? Centrenan and Dai Chengde, a professor of science history at Frankfurt University, co-wrote Hamlet's Stone Mill. This book studies how ancient myths describe 1 precession. In addition, it also involves the problem of common language, trying to prove that prehistoric human society has a widely developed high civilization. Centilanan and Dai Chengde discussed the records of numbers and symbols in ancient mythology. They think that many ancient civilizations have advanced knowledge of celestial mechanics, and we have barely mastered this knowledge with the help of satellites and computers recently.

We can also see that the biological species living on the continent separated by the ocean are closely related, and their reproduction puzzles evolutionists, which may also be explained by a prehistoric advanced marine civilization. All the evidence supports the fact that human beings and civilizations existed much earlier than traditional scientific or religious ideas. So is the existence of these civilizations a real missing link in human history?

Why should the debate be confined to the western model?

As we have seen in the main media, the traditional debate about our origin has a characteristic, that is, the origin of mankind and the universe ignores the thoughts of a large part of people on earth: people in the mysterious land of the East. Einstein attached importance to the East because the East supported his belief in the universality of intelligence. Recently, Nobel Prize winner and physicist Brian Josephson and others also described the connection between oriental mysticism and modern physics. In addition, Fritjof Capra combined the philosophy of Vedas, Buddhism and Taoism with the infinitesimal theory in his book The Tao of Physics.

When explaining why the universe shrinks one by one, the Vedas put forward a view similar to modern physics: the God of Creation is breathing, which is the projection of omnipresent consciousness. Brahma is the essence of the god of creation, and naturally exists in all things in the evolution of the universe. Taoism, on the other hand, provides a way to understand the reality of consciousness, similar to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle 1, which holds that opinions or consciousness form objective reality.

Like other scholars in the fields of physics, philosophy and religion today, it is natural for Einstein (especially for him in his later years) to construct reality by consciousness. Consciousness is a universal existence of consciousness, which is inseparable from identity and creativity. "When I was old, the particularity of the here and now began to fade away. It dissolves and blends into nature. " Einstein said.

The greatest ideas of our time, including Darwin's theory, all have a self-evident premise that they are all based on materialism. They firmly believe that all life originated from simple materials by accident, without purpose and design. At the same time, idealistic creationism provides another choice: to accurately interpret the Bible and distinguish the creator with personality from human beings and nature.

Science has always been indifferent to consciousness. On the origin of life, it never dared to explore what materialism belief could not explain. David? Chalmers once wrote a paper entitled "Puzzlement of Conscious Experience" in Scientific American published in February 1995, in which he emphasized this point.

Chalmers said: "For many years, researchers have been avoiding the mainstream view of consciousness, that is, science depends on objective reality, which is completely incompatible with subjectivity and consciousness." Chalmers went on to say that neuroscientists, psychologists and philosophers have only recently begun to deny the idea that consciousness cannot be studied. He tactfully suggested that while firmly believing that matter is the basis of consciousness, we might as well consider that "(this problem) may be explained by a new theory, which may include new basic laws, which will have a great impact on our understanding of the universe and our own problems."

The famous physicist Steven Weinberg put forward another theory in his book Dream of the Ultimate Theory. He believes that the goal of physics should be to establish a "theory about everything", which can tell us all the rules or principles about the origin of the universe. According to this statement, Weinberg exposed the limitations of scientific materialism and tried to surpass it, just as he tried to resist authority and reason. You know, this means that you can no longer stand in the academic world in the shadow of materialistic creationism. Weinberg admits that the real problem is consciousness because it is independent of matter.

Darwinism, for example, is based on the assumption that all existence is made of matter. Therefore, it cannot explain the most distinctive feature of human beings: consciousness, because consciousness does not come from the random and mechanical process of natural selection and creation, and the ability of human thinking far exceeds the degree of survival needs. As for absolute creationism, it failed to seriously consider the issue of consciousness when it strongly opposed Darwinism.

In order to understand the origin of human beings and establish a "The Theory of Everything", a real scientist can not only evaluate the evidence presented in Forbidden Area of Archaeology and Hankak's Fingerprint of God: Evidence of the Lost Civilization of the Earth. He must also study consciousness, otherwise he will ignore the most basic human ability, the ability to think and create. He must do experiments in the subjective world and study everything that the scientific community thinks taboo. He must be independent of any cliche and focus on the essence of consciousness, just as he focuses on the mystery of material creation. Just like Einstein, he regards this job as an indispensable goal of science and belief, and as the pursuit of knowledge in the purest sense, because the meaning of the word science itself comes from the Latin word "sciere". Only in this way can science establish a kind of "theory of everything".