Creationism and Intelligent Design
- Campaigns of darkness

On other pages on this site I have remarked on the incompatibility of holding belief and being open to truth. Generally speaking, religions fall down as as any supposed way to connecting with genuine truth because they are based on the holding of beliefs rather than having fully open minds and allowing oneself to see, and understand from one's deepest good sense, what is actually there.

The problem about the public debate on the issue of whether life and the human race have arrived here on Earth through evolution or some form of Divine creation is that we have a slanging match between belief systems, which obscures the underlying truth. The religious factions are seeking to suppress even the most basic openness to truth, claiming that their beliefs represent Truth. Their campaigns are thus ones of ignorance and 'darkness'. 

On the other hand the 'science' faction, although they are rightly pointing to the commonsense of a rational, physical explanation based on the data in the geological record and observed evolutionary processes, fail to take into account a form of 'intelligent design' that, to really aware people, looks like actually have been working through the evolutionary process and which has brought humans to Earth - almost certainly not as physical alien beings but as consciousnesses incarnating here in the physical bodies of extant pre-humans*. Thus the 'science' faction in their different way also are seeking to suppress even the most basic openness to truth apart from actual physical observations and conclusions narrowly drawn from those, claiming that their beliefs represent 'the truth'. At least they don't usually capitalize the word 'truth', but through their greater use of reasoning from actual observations, they assume that they have superiority - refusing to understand how limited is their viewpoint and their reasoning. Their campaigns are thus also to a considerable extent ones of ignorance and 'darkness', even though they are pointing more in the right direction than the religious factions.

* Even that would be a correct view only from a particular, non-enlightened viewpoint. When you become enlightened you perceive directly the breathtakingly simple fact or 'truth' that your own true nature is simply consciousness or naked awareness, and all that you experience arises within the 'meta-space' of consciousness. You can thus never truly (sic) know of any enduring reality or 'truth' (whether physical or non-physical) outside of or separate from consciousness and thus yourself. More about this in On the Nature of Reality and Truth.

Thus, from the enlightened viewpoint a person would view scientists' researches into the supposed origins of life and of humans, and indeed the origin of the Universe itself, with a certain wry smile - because none of that, even in the slightest degree, can tell you anything about your true nature and any origin that you might have (as a micro-aspect of fundamental consciousness), which has nothing remotely to do with biology any more than it has anything to do with religions or mystical beliefs / perceptions.

I have no truck with the extant 'Intelligent Design' faction, who, as far as I can tell so far, are just a variant of the religious fundamentalist 'creationist' lobby, also seeking to discount evolution and uphold scriptural writings as more or less literal truth. On the other hand the form of 'intelligent design' that I do recognise does not negate any of our scientific data, but that recognition does require the recognition of a broader, non-physical context within which the physical Universe operates.

Let us be clear that, provided that we are prepared to take the wording in religious scriptures as generally being imagery rather than literal, physical truth, then we can say that there need be no conflict between the notion of a creator 'God' (I would prefer to say 'Creator consciousness') and the process of evolution, and even devoutly religious people should have no problem about this - for the evolutionary processes can be seen to be the physical means by which the postulated or figurative creator 'God' works. And on the other hand any scientist with a healthily open mind (i.e. not hamstrung by the materialist-reductionist belief system) should be at least open to the possibility of some sort of creator consciousness that is working through the evolutionary process.

The science faction has an important part of the picture, but they foul their own pitch by considering the physical 'reality' in isolation from its context among the non-physical aspects of what we experience - and indeed the non-physical and indeed indefinable nature of consciousness itself. This deficiency arises because of their materialist-reductionist belief system, which I demolish on my page On the Nature of Reality and Truth. We need to understand that consciousness or awareness is our primary experience or truth - NOT an external, physical Universe, which latter actually is secondary and arises within the 'space' of consciousness. Once we take that on board, then we can begin to understand that cause and effect work through all aspects of what we experience of the Universe - i.e. both physical and non-physical, and all this actually being within consciousness - and because consciousness itself is the ultimate reality, NO process in the Universe is operating independently of at least the deepest levels of consciousness. Thus the room for all manner of 'intelligent design' is huge and beyond the imagination of most people, and can operate through what scientists are calling random or chance processes.

There has been a lot of debate as to whether evolution occurs through a gradual process of adaptation or whether it occurs in big steps, and also about whether Darwinism has got it wrong. Such arguments are pointless, because it is clear that many processes have played a part in evolution, and there is no one process that accounts for all of how life on Earth has arrived at how it is today. Also, you cannot go back 'there' and observe what actually did happen, so you can never absolutely know how evolution occurred.

Some people have channelled information to the effect that advanced extra-terrestrial civilizations have been assisting and guiding the evolutionary progress of life and indeed humans here on Earth - in particular a civilization based in the star system NGC 584. This latter civilization allegedly specializes in genetic manipulation for positive purposes and at various times has seeded Earth life forms with modified DNA to bring particular life forms to a state where what we recognise as human consciousnesses could start incarnating in them.

However, ALL channelled 'information' comes to us with a pernicious and usually unseen agenda, as I explain in Better Without Channelling, and I think almost certainly the morsel of channelled 'information' that I've repeated here is untrue (having come to us from the dark force in order to cause serious problems for many people), but nonetheless we are being plain stupid when we keep our minds closed to possible unseen influences on evolution here on Earth or indeed anywhere.

I personally hold no belief one way or the other about such influences, but I do keep a healthily open mind about it - and in particular I bear in mind that it has so far been a mystery to the scientific community as to how humans could have such large brains, and have such abundance of aesthetic / 'deep' experiences, without any obvious biological selective pressures to cause these to come about. I wonder how much longer scientists are going to keep saying "Go away, I'm looking for the truth!" each time truth comes knocking on their door, or indeed staring them full in the face!

As long as scientists maintain such a narrow, belief-bound outlook on the origin of life and of humans as we know them, they unwittingly ally themselves with, and give much support to, the forces of 'darkness' and ignorance which they are publicly making out to be dismissing.