Evolution?

[DreadFish]

I miss a lot but I will share this because I dont think it was already mentioned

EDIT: oops, nameless did already mention this: http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2865226-post14.html

Life originated in water in unicellular form to start with. This was followed by aquatic life forms, and subsequently Amphibians(i.e. creatures who could live equally well in water as well as on land) came into existence. Homo sapiens evolved during a very later stage of evolution. Scientists have postulated various theories about this evolution. Darwin, Wallace & others postulated various theories on this subject.

British geneticist and evolutionary biologist, J B S Haldane, observed that the Dasavataras are a true sequential depiction of the great unfolding of evolution.[citation needed]. The first few avatars of Vishnu show an uncanny similarity to the biological theory of evolution of life on earth.[19]

Avatars | Explanation | Evolution

Matsya: First avatar is a fish, one which is creature living in water. Initial forms of life were aquatic during Cambrian period.

Kurma: Second avatar was in the form of Tortoise (reptiles). Aquatic life evolved into Amphibians of which reptiles are a representative.

Varaha: Third avatar was in the form of Boar. Evolution of the amphibian to land dwelling animals.

Narasimha: The Man-Lion (Nara=man, Sinha=lion) was the fourth avatar. This avatar is compared to primitive uncivilised human forms by believers in Dasavathara - Evolution theory.

Vamana: Fifth Avatar is the dwarf man. It may be related with the first man originated during Pliocene.

Parashurama: The man with an axe was the sixth avatar. Evolution of humans during Quaternary period to weapon wielding Iron Age.

Lord Rama, Lord Krishna and Lord Buddha were the seventh, eighth and ninth other avatars of Lord Vishnu. It indicates the physical and mental changes and evolution in the man from its time of appearance.

Source: Dashavatara - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


So, it was already mentioned, but in regard to it, it's an interesting idea. I dont really have a stance on it, but I thought I would share it too


I dont really hold a stance on evolution, but as all things change, and I believe that all sentient beings are gradually on their way to complete enlightenment, it makes sense that as consciousness changes, also physical forms change.

 

[Cassandra]

Yes, I do believe that the outer is a reflection of the inner. And in this context, it is our spiritual state of evolution that results in our particular physical manifestation.

Hi Madhuri,

Evolution is a process in which lower species (or genes these days) develop in higher (more complex) ones by selection (a combination of chance and environmental pressure)
(It is much more than simple adaptation or change)

Since you believe in evolution on a outer material level, and ...
The outer is reflection of the inner then ...
Then is at a inner level the same selection process occurring?

 

[Rasheed Saeed]

Please excuse me as I haven't bothered to read all the posts, so if I say something that has already been mentioned/clarified, please do excuse me.

I'm not an Evolutionist, I don't know a whole lot of the theory apart from Natural Selection, but even that I don't have covered. But to start this off; Evolution is a fact!: That's a factual statement. No mater how much you refute it, Evolution is a fact; so deal with it.

As for the battle of the strongest, yes, that's true. If it weren't for the K-2, we wouldn't of evolved to such a state or even survived. Even if we survived, we wouldn't be like how we are now.

But in general, yes... Battle for the strongest.

 

[Cassandra]

Friends,

Evolution: Well it is a theory as far as the scientific enquiry is concerned. None has proved it but meditators have realized it even before humans started investigating scientifically.

Friend Madhuri has her acts in place and to it would add that evolution is ongoing and even if we suppose that monkeys evolve to humans then we should not forget that the specie that turns to monkeys are still joining the monkey state through the same process continually.
TOTALITY/WHOLE/ENERGY/EXISTENCE is always in a balance. Today if we find less trees on earth we find more humans on the other side. Energy forms keep evolving but the balance is always maintained.

Friend Cassandra,
Responding to your query:

Everything is Consciousness/Energy and in that state forms are just temporary vibrations and consciousness has no inner or outer. It is the mind that perceives the body and soul as two separate entity when it is body at one end and soul at the other like states of water ice as solid water as liquid and vapour as gas.
It is only that vibration that is evolving and every time going back to that stillness. Thoughts are vibration that comes out of stillness and returns to that stillness. The process is eternal and evolution is continuous. This is the very basis for which Gautama's concept is subtly different from the classical Indian understanding, because it denies the existence of a self or a soul. In Buddhism, the idea of self is merely an illusion. Which from the point of consciousness is agreeable as there is no separation to start with. The mind itself is an illusion to think of an individual soul.
Now the take is yours!

Love & rgds

Hi zenzero,

The problem I have with that is:
If everything is consciousness....,
than illusion is very real.

 

[Cassandra]

Please excuse me as I haven't bothered to read all the posts, so if I say something that has already been mentioned/clarified, please do excuse me.

I'm not an Evolutionist, I don't know a whole lot of the theory apart from Natural Selection, but even that I don't have covered. But to start this off; Evolution is a fact!: That's a factual statement. No mater how much you refute it, Evolution is a fact; so deal with it.

As for the battle of the strongest, yes, that's true. If it weren't for the K-2, we wouldn't of evolved to such a state or even survived. Even if we survived, we wouldn't be like how we are now.

But in general, yes... Battle for the strongest.

Hi Rasheed

They still call it evolution theory, not evolution fact
So what definition of "fact" you use?

 

[Cassandra]

I think it would be better to ask this question on the open forum so that non-Hindus with better knowledge can answer.
It might interest you to know that there are numerous examples of species evolving that are considered fact. Even the theory of evolution is considered fact. But when we get into the debate about it being only a theory, we then have to admit that everything we think we know is only a theory. 'Gravity' is also only a theory. The existence of the sun is also only a theory.

Hi Maduri,

I think you are mixing things up here. We have concrete observations, abstract definitions and we have theories. Those are separate. Repeatable objective observations are considered fact by science (like the existence of the Sun). Theories are only about the relationships between repeated observations.

The theory of evolution describes a relationship, a mechanism, how species of lower life forms might evolve in species of higher life forms. This mechanism (selection based on environmental pressure and chance) is what the theory is about.

Evolution is more than change or adaptation, most people will agree that life is constantly changing and adapting. But that a human being evolved from slime is another thing.

We need to understand that the person that developed this theory lived in a culture that rejected the idea of consciousness in nature (except in man, but man was apart from nature). It was also widely believed that God too was separate from nature and that after initial creation stopped interfering with it. The biggest shock of this theory was that it considered man an animal too, which gave rise to atheism..

This theory was NOT developed on the basis of repeated observation or even observation. No one ever saw a species turn into another species, let alone a higher level species.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

For all the believers in the THEORY (don't look at me...I did not coin that word!) of Evolution, please give me one FACTUAL recorded example where one species EVOLVED into another. Facts and no theory please!

I think your confused about the meaning of scientific theory. Once a hypothesis is verified, it becomes a theory.

A scientific theory will always remain a theory; a scientific law will always remain a law. It is common misconception that scientific theories are ideas that will eventually graduate into scientific laws.

Just off the top of my head The London Underground mosquito is a species of mosquito that lives in London Subways. It evolved from the overground species. This all happend very recently. So yes there is some proof for you. I am sure you can find more examples of this.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

What is it with you guys? Didn't anyone take a science course in school? A theory is an explanation of observed facts. It is not conjecture. Speciation is a theory -- and a fact. CB910: New species
And what are the alternatives -- magic? Is magic more reasonable than the clear and obvious mechanisms of evolution?

This might be of interest to you. It seems all kinds of new species of animals and plants seem to have been created around the area of the Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster. I don't think it can be called natural selection though.

 

[Cassandra]

I think your confused about the meaning of scientific theory. Once a hypothesis is verified, it becomes a theory.

A scientific theory will always remain a theory; a scientific law will always remain a law. It is common misconception that scientific theories are ideas that will eventually graduate into scientific laws.

Just off the top of my head The London Underground mosquito is a species of mosquito that lives in London Subways. It evolved from the overground species. This all happend very recently. So yes there is some proof for you. I am sure you can find more examples of this.

Hi Wannabe Yogi,

Still this is not evolution, but simply adaptation to environment.
The Inuit adapted to cold climate too, they did not become a superior new species

adaptation is only believed to lead to evolution
But it is for a reason people like Dawkins changed the object of evolution from species to genes
Because it turns out that over-adaptation of species is the quickest road to extinction and not survival
So now they say, superior genes survive, creating superior species.

But they never witnessed the development of superior genes either
It is all conjecture
It is not even real science
For real science is based on repeated observation
Theories must be rejected if they do not produce the predicted observation

nowadays scientist violate the principles of science
A theory disproved has to be rejected, not augmented every time it is disproved
Keeping theories alive in this way is a direct violation of the core principles of science

The same with relativity theory
It proved wrong!
We need 95% more matter to explain the expanding universe than there is
So it should be rejected
But instead they fantasized "dark matter", defined as "matter that can not be observed"
And this was still not enough, so they fantasized: "dark energy", defined as: "energy that can not be observed"
You can not observe them, but they fill up the holes in the theory
But science is based on observation, it has its very bases in observation
Things not observed have no scientific base for existence
They used to call God a pink elephant, now they have their own pink elephants.

Without observation a theory has no scientific base, it is just conjecture!
But for atheists science theories have become the core of their belief system.
So these people are calling evolution a fact
But it is nothing but baseless belief
People wrongly think that it is a big deal to create a fitting explanation
This is a mistake, there are at any given time lots of competing fitting explanations

So why is one theory considered best?
Simply because it is supported by most scientist (communis opinio doctorum)
Scientist will never support a theory which encompasses things like: consciousness or God
Why?
Because these have no basis for objective observation, since these are non physical.
Natural sciences exclusively deal only with physical phenomena

People do not realize this, but evolution theory is based on the denial of consciousness
It ignores consciousness, which is half of reality
Consciousness is assumed to spontaneously come to play during evolution
Like a ghost in the machine
But they never succeeded in creating a mechanism for that
It can not be done for scientifically speaking consciousness does not even exist
Half of reality is unprovable, so lets ignore that part in our theories
People in the west traded a blind belief in religious dogma's in for a blind belief in scientific dogma's
In the west religion and science each describe half of reality
That is why there are no theories to describe both at the same time
A religious theory can only be spiritual, a scientific theory only materialistic.

This strict division was created when church created her dogma's to end all discussion
for reason of political stability in the Roman empire
Any involvement in spirtual affairs meant to be burned at the stakes
Both became extremely arrogant
Western religion claims to be the only truth
Western science does exactly the same
Thousands of years of eastern science is considered to have no or little value
It does not comply to western standards

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Hi Wannabe Yogi,

Still this is not evolution, but simply adaptation.
The Inuit adapted to cold climate too, they did not become a superior new species

adaptation is only believed to lead to evolution

From what I understand it is a whole different species. When the two varieties were cross-bred the eggs were infertile this shows reproductive isolation. One hibernates in the winter the other does not. They eat different pray ect. They have become different mosquitos.The separated populations have very minor genetic differences, this shows the subway type of mosquito developed recently.

 

[Cassandra]

From what I understand it is a whole different species. When the two varieties were cross-bred the eggs were infertile this shows reproductive isolation. One hibernates in the winter the other does not. They eat different pray ect. They have become different mosquitos.The separated populations have very minor genetic differences, this shows the subway type of mosquito developed recently.

Hi Wannabe Yogi,

Maybe, but creating a new species is not yet evolution. And also take in consideration: The idea that species are different because they cannot cross breed is nothing more than a definition scientists themselves invented.

Even if the changes are such that if becomes difficult even impossible to crossbreed, it only means change, not evolution. Evolution means more than changes, it means to evolve in higher beings.

Even if they are proved to evolve, it still is not proof of the evolution theory, I give you an example:

------
Picture the far future

In thousands of years from now when robots will be the dominant race on earth
robot scientists will want to explain their origin
Other than the old religious explanation of Godly creators
One smart robot scientist comes up with the "evolution theory"
He believes that his robot race is a superior survivor

He does extensive archaeological research
In the oldest layers he finds remains of primitive transistors beings (one cell lifeforms)
in less old layers he finds integrated circuits of thousands transistors
In newer layers he finds chips with millions of transistors
the newer the layer, the more evolved the chips
It is so wonderful!

He says to his fellow robots
finaly we have the proof how our silicon race evolved
it is clear that the more developed IC-beings out-competed the transistors-beings
And in turn it was out-competed by chip-beings
And every new generation of chip-beings out-competed the previous
until finally one was struck with intelligence

Now we can rest assured, there is no creator
We are product of evolution, not intelligence!

--------

See that here is why evolution theory fails
We do not need a new unproven explanation
We already have a perfect proven explanation
We know with certainty intelligence can create new species
And the products of intelligence evolve

And intelligence is not unproven but a reality!

Evolution theory is simply based on the idea
that this intelligence is absent in nature and only present in man
But is that what we observe in nature?

No, this is based on Abramistic religious ideas
The same ideas that let people believe animals have no consciousness
That animals do not really feel or suffer
Butcher them and eat them, even if they cry
it is only a meaningless instinctive reflex
That is what past generations firmly believed

Remember Aryan invasion theory?
These theories were pushed for a purpose
To prove that humans are superior to animals
To prove that western white race is the superior human race
To prove that werstern white culture is the superior culture
To prove western white religion was superior religion
The West was colonizing the world
What ethical base was there for western rule?
They were the winner of the evolution!
The natural masters!
Gods chosen ones!

Darwin was no atheist!
People like Darwin and Newton wanted to proof that
everything worked according to God's plan
God made the mechanism's in nature
God made the white race the victors!
It was all part of Gods plan

They never envisioned their theories would become support for atheist materialistic ideology
.

 

[Cassandra]

Modern people have no idea of the mental environment, the idea world, that previous generations lived in.

Evolution theory, Aryan invasion theory were invented to prove western superiority, Even economic theory like Adam Smith "invisible hand" governing markets, was not meant to be pure mechanical thing. No Adam Smith too believed this was God's hand. Why were the rich rich and stayed the factory laborers poor? That was Gods hand! God favored the rich! That is why the rich did not feel bad about keeping the poor poor, it was destined to be this way. One should only thank God for his grace.

Just like religion science simply sweeps under the carpet what does not fit modern ideas. It does not want to remember that science in the west was an offshoot of the same religion it so despises nowadays. But where did the universities come from? They came from the monasteries. The oldest Universities like Oxford evolved out of monasteries and the people studying there where full of religious ideas. They were not only driven by scientific idealism but also often by religious idealism. They were determined to prove that God was governing the universe through his invisible hand.

Gravity for Newton was the invisible hand with which God moved the heavenly bodies. The market mechanism the invisible hand used by God to divide wealth. And the evolution mechanism was the invisible hand that God used to create the superior white race ruling the world. By struggle of the fittest the white race was destined to conquer the world and bring it her superior culture and religion.

The Aryan invasion theory was to prove it had always been this way. This theory was not believed by the Nazi's alone, it was widely believed all over Europe. The white Europeans firmly believed that all great civilizations were the product of their (Aryan) forefathers. The pharaoh's in Egypt were white. They simply rewrote the history of the people they conquered to fit this idea of white superior race and civilization. It was so obvious to them that they did not even consider for one moment that they were doing something wrong. They were simply setting things right.

Not only the Nazi's but psychiatrist in countries all over the West were killing off mentally handicapped people and schools castrated homosexual boys without even telling their family. They did not even consider this something questionable. They understood that evolution was Gods way to get rid of the weak. But in modern society there was no longer a selection mechanism killing the weak, so they regarded it their responsibility to do Gods will and kill them to keep the race healthy. They were keeping up the Divine order. In schools and orphan homes too, this order had to be maintained by all means. It meant that free willed children had to be broken, they were abused even tortured to break their will and change them in God abiding servants and citizens.

Experimental psychologist did horrible experiments on animals and people operating even on children to find new ways to make people subject to the God installed order. In the time of the Spanish inquisition it was already established that converted non whites, like Jews, could never be fully trusted. The inquisition was not directed at unbelievers but converted Jews that secretly kept to their old religious ways. Torturing was the means to make them confess.

That is why Hitler said, it does not matter if Jews convert to Chrisitanity, all Jews that have more than a quarter Jewish blood must be wiped out. They are polluting our superior race, and our beautiful white religion. When they converted people in the colonies they would stay secondary class people. It would take many generations, if ever, before they would reach white levels of civilization.

Black slaves tried to convert to Christianity to escape persecution and maltreatment, but it changed nothing, they remained inferior beings, like apes with pants. Rich white ladies would even keep black children as a pet, and walk them on a leash. It is in this climate that these theories were developed. The age of enlightenment brought change, but not by far as fast as people think. The theories of Science were very much a reflection of generally held views about the world, and they still are. Take economical theories which are totally based on the idea man is an egoist. This comes directly from the religious conviction that man is basically evil and was cast out of paradise for it. By educating everyone in this, it became natural to be an egoist in stead of supporting society. It became a self-fulfilling prophecy.

When colonizers met peoples that had societies based on more noble principles, they did their best to destroy them as fast as they could. They even destroyed all evidence that these people were more civilized than them. Many accounts of history are total lies and the people writing the lies are not even aware of doing anything wrong. Even today we are in this conversion process.

Even today, Westerners like to attack Hindu's for the Caste-system, but the Caste-system is not the Varna system of the Hindu's. The Caste system was brought by white colonizers to every colony all over the world. Everywhere the colonizers divided people by race. Whites, half-whites, part-whites and non whites, and the installed a class of mixed people to act as in between. They perverted the Varna-system that had already been perverted by Muslim rule. The same way as whites criticize other peoples for corruption but fail to see that corruption was the natural byproduct of foreign rule. No colonized people will freely pay tax to a foreign colonizer, they all despise him and rather pay bribes. After independence these practices simply continued, because the ruling class was mostly the same people that were the in-betweens before.

Not only whites are victims of ideas impressed in them for generations, the victims often started to believe the same things. That is why many people have a blind belief in things like evolution theory. White science is superior, objective, free of bias. It is what arrogant western scientists believe and present with total conviction. But it is not true.

 

[zenzero]

Friend Cassandra,

The problem I have with that is:
If everything is consciousness....,
than illusion is very real.

Yes, exactly. Illusions too are real and TRUE!
That is what life is all about. Transcending that which is perceived.

Love & rgds

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

opinions on evolution

Did we evolve to what we are in a process of natural selection, some call survival of the fittest, the strong eat the weak
Or
Are we creatures made by God
Or
something else

What is your view?

I think we evolved physically (as per Evolution theory) and when we reached a point where we can be intellectual and civilized (learned to write and started forming complex communities ect) then Ishwar provided us with the knowledge through inspirational means.

Ishwar i think is what governs the Laws of Evolution.

 

[Madhuri]

Then is at a inner level the same selection process occurring?

Not at all. The sort of survival we deal with can only occur on a material level. On the spirit or soul level of reality, there is no such thing as death.

Keep in mind that one of or the greatest purpose of experiencing material life is so that we can make spiritual progressions. It is through our efforts and realisations in this world that our inner Self and reality flourishes. In order to accommodate this inner evolution, the physical bodies must also evolve.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Yes, it does. There is evidence beyond all reasonable doubt. Certainly more evidence, from more varied sources, than the Copernican theory that the planets orbit around a central Sun.

Just saying Yes it does ...PROVES nothing.

God says:-

na jayate mriyate va kadachin
nayam bhutva bhavita va na bhuyah
ajo nityah savato 'yam purano
na hantate hanyamane sarire

For the soul there is neither birth nor death at anytime. He has not come into being, does not come into being, and will not come into being. He is unborn, eternal, ever-existing and premival. He is not slain when the body is slain. B.G. - 2.20


God has clearly stated that we are the 'soul' not this body. So much for your 'ToE', which hypothesizes man came from monkey. Such false understanding is correct when we are on the platform that 'I am the body'. . Darwin's theory therefore is nothing but IGNORANCE OF THE SELF - SOUL.

Why does everyone keep bringing up Darwin? We don't cite the Wright brothers when we're discussing aeronautics or Fulton when we're talking about automotive engineering, and our knowledge of astronomy has come a long way since Copernicus.
Darwin was a pioneer. He's not exactly on the cutting edge anymore.

Darwin's theory is the basis of the theory furthered by others. If the foundation is incorrect, the whole building collapses after it reaches a particular level/height...is it not?

"The evidence" is not going to fit into a chat room format. There's too much. I'd suggest you peruse a few books on the subject and get back to us.

Friend, I have read books on evolution theory. Because I do not conform to your belief on the subject, does that disqualify me from having this discussion?

You want a quick overview? Try: TalkOrigins Archive: Exploring the Creation/Evolution Controversy[/url]

I went to the advised site. The website claims:

Talk.origins is a Usenet newsgroup devoted to the discussion and debate of biological and physical origins.

Inside is '29+ Evidences of Macroevolution: The Scientific Case for Common Descent'.
This link when clicked, the article opens with heading:
29+ Evidences for Macroevolution "Evidences"?

The heading says it all ....
There is not single evidence there. Only a discussion on 'evidences' vis-a-vis 'proofs'!

Do not believe me? Try: [talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/evidences.html]29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: "Evidences"?[/url]

Just Google searching a topic does not validate anything. Just saying 'Yes it does ... ' proves NOTHING 'o wise internet-surfer'

Friction? Not Bernoulli's effect? [en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernoulli%27s_principle]Bernoulli's principle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/url]

We're all entitled to our own opinions and 'understandings'. We're not entitled to our own facts.

Yes...you have got it! That was the exact intent in use of word 'friction' there. :yes:

Truth or reality is independent of your, my or anyone's beliefs. If I do not know the truth, that does not give me the licence to 'believe my own logic of limited understanding' and portray it as TRUTR.

Exactly! Now we're seeing eye to eye.

Absolutely right! The feeling is mutual my friend. Just because half the world believed 'the world is flat.. and said...YES IT IS....did that make the world flat? People of that era, with their THEORIES also believed the world to be flat with as much conviction which you have on theory of evolution. It did not make them anymore right than it makes you.

So it is a dead-lock. Where do we go from here? We have to take knowledge from a higher source...

The HIGHEST SOURCE IS GOD. God explains everything perfectly because He is the origin of both material sciences and spiritual science - religion. Scriptures are infallible. But I see you have carefully omitted the scriptural portions from my post. May I suggest you surf a few books on the subject and get back to us.

God says:-

dehino smin yatha dehe kaumaram yauvanam jara
tatha dehantara-praptir dhisar tatra na muhyati

As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood to youth to old age, the soul similarly passes into another body at death. A sober person is not bewildered by such a change. B.G. - 2.13

 

[zenzero]

Friend Cassandra,

Darwin was no atheist!
People like Darwin and Newton wanted to proof that
everything worked according to God's plan
God made the mechanism's in nature
God made the white race the victors!
It was all part of Gods plan

The above description is like what is mentioned in gita on demons: GITA Summary, Chapter - 16 of 18 .
[excerpt]

demons take up the role of preacher, mislead the people, and become known as religious reformers or as incarnations of God. They make a show of performing yajnas (sacrifices) , or they worship the demigods, or manufacture their own God. Ignorant men advertise them as God and worship them, and by the foolish they are considered advanced in the principles of religion, or in the principles of spiritual knowledge. They take the dress of the renounced order of life and engage in all nonsense in that dress.
The demonic and atheistic persons, have no faith in the Supreme God . Such men perform all kinds of sinful activities simply for sense gratification. such ill-fated men put forward false arguments against the existence of God and refutes the scriptural authority. They think themselves independent and powerful in every action. They act according to their own whims.

Love & rgds

 

[Madhuri]

As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood to youth to old age, the soul similarly passes into another body at death. A sober person is not bewildered by such a change. B.G. - 2.13

So much for your 'ToE', which hypothesizes man came from monkey. Such false understanding is correct when we are on the platform that 'I am the body'. But God has clearly stated that we are the 'soul' not this body.

[/B]

This is what makes me think that you have not actually studied Evolution.

How does the belief in reincarnation have any relationship with the concept of evolution? If anything, it goes hand in hand as I have explained earlier.

And humans did not come from 'monkeys' according to evolution.

 

[Cassandra]

Friend Cassandra,


Yes, exactly. Illusions too are real and TRUE!
That is what life is all about. Transcending that which is perceived.

Love & rgds

Then it should it not be called illusion, but reality?

 

[Cassandra]

I think we evolved physically (as per Evolution theory) and when we reached a point where we can be intellectual and civilized (learned to write and started forming complex communities ect) then Ishwar provided us with the knowledge through inspirational means.

Ishwar i think is what governs the Laws of Evolution.

you believe a material evolution, preceded evolution of consciousness?