Theos-Talk Archives (April 1996 Message tl01217)

Alexis,

you write:

>. If Homo Sapiens , and that's the only kind there is, is
>no more than 70,000 to 100,00 years old and the latest
>anthropological/paleontological studies all generally agree that is true.
>Then all the Anthropogenesis falls to pieces. If all of humankind is
>descended from a breeding stock of some 10,000 individuals, and this too is
>generally accepted, and if all the races are simply mutations of that one
>group in response to an entire congerie of influences ranging from
>environmental pressures, to simple survival and a thousand or so other
>influences in between the two, then the entire "Root Race Premise" falls
>apart. Homo Sapiens is a new species (my wolf is some 3,000,000 years old
>genetically) and it is a single species. That there was a precursor culture
>i personally have no doubt, but it certainly doesn't present adequate proof
>of it's existence to accept it as gospel. When you combine these, which are
>a very concise version of my objections, with my equal objections to the
>Cosmo genesis. I think you can understand why I prefer "Isis Unveiled" to
>the "Secret Doctrine"......
>>

Daniel comments as follows:

In the above remarks you write:  " the latest
anthropological/paleontological studies all generally agree...."

To me this statement means or at least implies  that official science or the
scientific community or the majority of anthropologists/paleontologists
agree on "such and such".  And you say that this "such and such" knowledge
therefore invalidates HPB's anthopogenesis.  Hence throw out Root Races,
Atlantis, Lemuria, etc.

But if we go by that kind of thinking, how much of what is left in HPB's
teachings (after
throwing out anthopogenesis) would merit our attention?   Well, for
starters, there are HPB's teachings on
the occult constitution of a human being. ( The kind of stuff Jerry HE and
Jerry S
have been going around and around on.)  HPB's affirms the reality of  psychic
phenomena and affirms the reality of other invisible planes of existence.
She affirms
the reality of life after death and even reincarnation. She even performed
psychic feats such
as materializing a cup and saucer at a Simla, India picnic.   But what does
official science
and the scientific community as a whole say that is relevant to these
teachings and claims of HPB's?

For example, in an 1988  report prepared under the auspices of the National
Academy of Sciences,  the following conclusions were drawn:

"...the best scientific evidence does not justify the conclusion that
ESP...exists."

"...Nor does scientific evidence offer support for the existence of
psychokinesis...."

"The Commitee finds no scientific justification from reserach conducted over
a period
of 130 years for the existence of parapsychological phenomena."

Most members of this committee are well-known psychologists.

Furthermore, if ESP and PK were accepted in the scientific community, would we
not see parapsychology being taught in universities and colleges?  Would we
not see
parapsychology as a valid part of departments of psychology in universities
and colleges?
In reality, very few universities in the WHOLE world even have courses on
parapsychology. And can you  name the departments of psychology that have
parapsychological sections?

I think we can truthfully say (paraphrasing Alexis and the above mentioned
report on
psychic phenomena) the following:

The latest psychological studies all generally agree that there is no
scientific justification for the existence of parapsychological (psychic)
phenomena.

And Dr. Michael Mueckler, a cellular biologist, (who has been posted and
mentioned on this
list before), would agree with the above statement.  Mueckler says that his
scientific
colleagues would also concur  with such a dismissive summary about psychic
phenomena.

Therefore, in light of this scientific finding, who would be foolish enough
to believe what
HPB's says about the psychic, about life after death, etc.  Following
Alexis' reasoning, we
should therefore throw out everything HPB said on THIS  subject, too.  Right?

Well, remember HPB was
fallible and was (let's face it) simply wrong.  And she could have made
"intentional" errors?
Right?

Okay, now what is left of HPB's teachings?  Let us turn to an examination of
WHATS LEFT......................