Theos-Talk Archives (April 1996 Message tl01136)

Paul continues:

> I'd say the burden of proof is on those who
> would assert:
>
> 1. That present "Aryan" humanity was preceded by a race of
> Atlantean giants who had highly evolved civilizations 5-10
> million years ago.
> 2. That before that, there was a third-race humanity which
> evolved from "egg-born" to mammalian reproduction.
> 3. That humanity was on earth before the animals.
> 4. That human evolution has proceeded from spiritual, to
> semi-ethereal, to physical form.
> 5. That 18 million years ago, a single "descent of
> Manasaputras" transformed something non-human into humanity.
>
> Your mission, Rich, should you choose to accept it, is to write
> a one-page or so summary of Blavatskian anthropology, stating
> where and how you think it can or will be confirmed by future
> science, for this person to address.

Okay.  This will be brief as I have a full plate of work to digest tonight.

I would like current anthropologists/archeologists/etc. to critically examine
Rupert Sheldrake's proposal for a morphogenetic field.  In particular, the
"100th monkey" phenomenon should be directly discussed, as well as
experiments that have confirmed it.  The anthropolist should discuss the role
of consciousness in evolution, and give DEFINITIVE PROOF that all evolution
proceeds by chance, not by intelligent adaptation.

The arguments in Denton's *Evolution: A Theory in Crisis* should be
addressed, coupled with Philip E. Johnson's criticisms in *Darwin on Trial*.
 Particular attention should be paid to the problems of the wing, the
feather, hemoglobin, and the molecular problems in going from single-celled
organisms without nuclei to multi-celled organisms with specialized cell
functions, and the FOSSIL or other evidence that such a transformation took
place.

The problems with carbon dating should be addressed, as well as the knotty
possibility that half-lives of various elements may not be CONSTANT.

Modern science today will not consider such evidence, but: isn't it
interesting that all ancient cultures indicate the existence in the distant
past of giant races (addressing point #1) and discuss ancient but advanced
civilizations?  Not Plato alone, but European, Tibetan, Chinese, Japanese,
Indian, Egyptian, etc. traditions indicate long-lost kingdoms ruled by giants
and by descendents of the Sun.

The existence of aerial diagrams in huge proportions on the earth, the
discovery of both a battery and a miniature wooden plane in an Egyptian
pyramid, and the recently discovered cave paintings in France (the new ones,
with the Michaelangelo-esque quality), the crystal-carved skull, the ancient
maps Donnelly discusses in his book *Atlantis* -- all this and much more
evidence suggests ancient civilizations.

As for question #2, it seems no harder to postulate a human transformation
from egg-born to mammalian reproduction that it is to postulate that
transition for animals.  To date the fossil record suggests no intermediate
stages, and the evolution of mammals from reptilians is purely SPECULATIVE.

#3 requires new dating methods, and it is entirely possible that no physical
evidence exists, or can exist, for early humanity, because THEY WEREN'T
PHYSICAL.  Only one with astral sight -- or instruments tapping the astral --
could help us here.

# 4 seems quite easy, and not only is it universally attested in ancient
literature the world over, but is brilliantly explored in Ken Wilber's *A
BRIEF HISTORY OF EVERYTHING*.  A fuller explanation of "involution" is in
Wilber's *Sex, Ecology and Spirituality*.

#5 could only be answered by astral sight, or by discovery of enough fossils
which can be relatively dated to show that after the incarnation of mind,
human existence radically changed and actual "civilization" occurred.

Short of astral equipment, let the anthropologists chew on numbers 1, 2 and 4
for a while.  That alone should be interesting.