For the perception of many alternative scientific theories, Vedic teachings, the traditional worldview as a whole, it is first necessary to understand the Vedic scheme of perception of time, evolution and history, which is very different from the everyday positivist one.
From a modern positivist point of view, the entire natural and cultural world develops from simple forms to complex ones, from less developed species to more developed ones, from less perfect technologies to more perfect ones. That is, the positivist sees progress in the surrounding material world and takes this progress for good.
The Tradition person has the opposite perception of time and history. For him, evolution is a regression - a transition from more perfect creatures to less perfect ones. In traditional perception, the world was created. Moreover, it was created by a perfect Being or Beings. Everything that comes from a perfect being must be perfect. This means that the world at its starting point was perfect.
This means that this world had no other direction of development other than degradation, a transition to a less perfect state. From here we get the well-known Greek and Indian teachings about four centuries (Hesiod) or Yugas (Aryan Vedas), reflecting the stages of the degradation of the World. Another feature of the traditional worldview is the awareness of the cyclical nature of time. In particular, the possibility of returning to the World of perfection is allowed. This movement of the World towards perfection begins immediately after passing the maximum degradation.
All traditional religions agree that the time in which we live is the maximum degradation, the most profane era. With regard to man, the evolutionary process looks like this: the immortal gods have turned into modern people, who in the future must regain their divine immortal status. In the Slavic worldview, the gods are relatives, ancestors of people. In translating the language of mythological images into modern language, the following picture is obtained.
When this World (planet Earth) was created, the gods appeared in it. They appeared in it for the revitalization, spiritualization of the planet, for life creation. That is, they acted as a kind of colonizers and at the same time the creators of this World. But the parameters of this World were such that in order to adapt to it and further close interaction with it, it was necessary to slightly alter, transform, condense, “degrade”. Perhaps it looked like the clothing of the gods with dense (human, superhuman, protohuman, but not monkey) bodies.
Man is a spirit who has undertaken the mission of transformation, spiritualization of the material Universe. At the moment of "colonization" by the gods of the Earth, some dark forces appear on the stage, evil, lies, envy, death appear. Moreover, evil comes out victorious in the battle with good. In Heaven, the power usurps one of the immortal Brothers - Yahweh and forces other disembodied Brothers - angels, archangels, and so on - to serve themselves. He declares his earthly brothers to be slaves, choosing among them 12 tribes especially close to him to carry out his will among the “slaves”. The disobedient ethereal Brothers (Perun, Veles, Dazhdbog, Tengri, etc.) are declared demons and anarchists, successfully waging a war with them for millennia. In this millennial Battle of the Gods, the forces of evil are defeating. Prometheus, Svyatogor, Serpent Gorynych,Koschey the Immortal and the other last surviving warriors of Light are walled up under the ground (mountains) for a long time.
On the Earth, at this time, an uncontrolled process of degradation began. Many people have turned into beasts. Almost all mammals (except for elephants and whales) in the understanding of Tradition are mutated people. Life expectancy began to decrease, needs increased, mental and physical capabilities began to decrease from generation to generation. Archaeologists find on the planet the remains of many former civilizations, forcibly destroyed. Moreover, there is a regularity - the older the civilization, the higher its level of culture and technology.
Promotional video:
Each victory of Yahweh, each next flood or other punishment was the next stage of degradation of a person, his body and consciousness. According to traditional perception, the current era is the time of the Twilight of the Gods, the final loss of true values, the victory of Darkness. World civilization is no longer guided by the values of the Family. But right now a grain of Light should be born in the World. Grandfather Svarog will not allow the final departure of mankind from the path of rule. The Last Battle is coming - the Battle of the Slavic-Rus and the Dark Gods. The battle for our will and immortality.
Let's return to the topic of the features of traditional time perception. It must be remembered that from a pagan point of view, time is not an objective property of the world, but a characteristic way, an instrument of human perception. The same applies to space. This is the fundamental difference between traditional and positivist thinking. That is, we think and perceive (and therefore form) the World in terms of time and space, and do not live in them as in an external and independent given from us. The fact that all people have the same perception of space and time is a consequence of raising children in a kind of "social contract". Therefore, from the point of view of Tradition, the behavior and even the structure of thinking of an individual person can change the space-time parameters of the "external" world.
Man is a part of the World, and that part that is a point of growth, development of the entire Universe. This is a huge human responsibility. Together with man, the World develops, together with him it degrades. But a person's ability to change generally accepted space-time parameters is not given to him from birth. In its most general form, Tradition divides the path of human development into three stages: an ordinary person, a magician, an immortal. A person differs from an animal in the ability to foresee, to predict future events. The magician is distinguished by the ability to consciously form, correct future events. The immortal differs from the magician in the ability to change, to correct the past. That is, one of the characteristic features of immortality is the ability to perfectly control one's perception.
The life of people existing in a modern profane, anti-traditional civilization has completely lost direction and meaning. To return the meaning of life, we must restore basic traditional values and live in harmony with them. Only this will give us a chance to get out alive from the darkness of the Twilight of the Gods. It is necessary to understand that the values of Tradition are very far from modern "humanistic" and "progressive" values, and the science of Tradition is opposed to modern positivist science on many issues. This concerns, for example, the theory of human origin. Neo-Darwinists believe that a person as a species cannot be more than a million years old. At the same time, the first people, supposedly, looked very much like monkeys, since they were their closest relatives.
Numerous facts of paleontology, embryology, genetics, comparative morphology serve as evidence of this. But if you take a closer look at this evidence (the structure of DNA, the similarity of skeletons, embryos …), then they prove, at the most, the common origin of many animal species, but they do not prove the origin of man from some rodent-like animals, or, even cooler, from unicellular flagellates! Vedic science asserts the origin of many chordates (vertebrates), or at least almost all mammals from humans. The following reasoning can lead to this conclusion. The phenomena of human aging are characterized by the fact that the bone skeleton is deformed, the back is bent, the arms hang below the knees, hair growth occurs in most parts of the body, and the size of teeth and nails increases.
Old people become more "snout" than children because of age-related growth of the facial part of the skull. The metabolic processes in the body slow down, the volume of the brain decreases, insanity manifests itself, the body bends, the bones of the arms lengthen, acquiring monkey features. Flat feet appear. All these are signs of ape-like behavior. Baby monkeys are very similar to humans. The entire bodily organization of a newborn monkey resembles a human: posture, finger length, large brain, skull and small facial region of the skull, pink bare skin. Based on these facts, Balck suggested that man did not descend from an adult monkey, but from its young.
In fact, everything is different. A monkey is an old, overdeveloped person who inherited these qualities. In embryonic and early infancy, the monkey briefly lives the life of a person in order to live like a monkey in adulthood. This means that the ancestors of monkeys were people. The same principle, revealed in the embryos of humans and monkeys, when a more perfect creature manifests itself at the stage of intrauterine development, is characteristic of all vertebrates.
Embryos of dogs, cats, rats, birds, reptiles, amphibians look more perfect and more human-like than adult animals: a large proportion of the brain in relation to the body is much smaller, the jaws are extended forward, a lesser specialization of the organism - all this is typical for all vertebrate embryos. Thanks to this, it can be argued that all vertebrates trace their ancestry from more perfect creatures than they themselves are. This is also confirmed by paleontological data. For example, in Madagascar, fossil remains of a pork-headed lemur (Megaladapis) are known, which had the head and teeth of a pig and, apparently, like a pig, dug up roots and nuts, but at the same time possessed a five-fingered hand with an opposed thumb and freely climbed trees, like and common primates. The pig lemur has a piglet and a head, like an ordinary pig,but everything else - the hands, the arms themselves, the shoulder blades, the rib cage, the spine without a tail, the pelvis, legs and feet - are human, just like you and me.
The age of the find is venerable: the skeleton lay in the ground for tens of millions of years, and according to official views, Homo sapiens appeared in Africa no earlier than one and a half million years ago. It is possible that this lemur was a transitional form from primates to pigs. There are also known forms of living and fossil primates, which have a similarity of the dental apparatus with the teeth of carnivores. Lemur Vari has, in addition to canines, a sharp tooth, characteristic of canines. The thin body in the upper part of the jaw has saber-toothed fangs, similar to the fangs of saber-toothed cats. Dog-headed baboons live in savannas in open areas, and their hunting method resembles that of dogs. It is known from paleontology that the ancestors of horses and hippos lived in trees, ate foliage and had a five-toed hand.
Many fossil primates have rodent dentures. Based on these and other facts, we came to the conclusion that all the variety of mammals (except for whales and elephants), including those leading an aquatic lifestyle: dolphins, walruses, and so on, are specialized and overdeveloped forms of primates whose ancestors were humans. Biologist Vladimir Vitaliev provides the following evidence of the primacy of the human body in relation to the body of animals. “All vertebrates from humans to amphibians have five-toed limbs. It seems incredible that a five-fingered limb appears in a cross-finned fish for the first time. Only man uses five fingers to the fullest.
The structure of the fingers is “designed” so that they can grip objects optimally. It is absolutely incomprehensible why reptiles, amphibians and even more cross-finned fish need such an acquisition of fingers in sequence: from thumb to little finger, equipped with joints and phalanges? Adaptation to what conditions of life could contribute to the emergence of the finger mechanism and bring it unchanged to humans through a variety of various animal forms ?! Meanwhile, the question is solved simply: fingers passed to animals by inheritance from man. Animals do not use their fingers for their intended purpose, it became unnecessary for them with the loss of the human way of life.
In many cases, fingers, and even limbs, become a burden and a hindrance, in these cases they become rudimentary (ungulates, birds, fish, snakes). Another common feature of the human and mammalian body is the arrangement of the limbs. It is clearly seen that the arms and legs, bending in different directions at the knees and elbows, serve different functions. Human legs are "made" for walking, and hands - for carrying objects. For this, the hands are turned with the palms to the head, and the soles of the feet are turned with the soles to the ground. This limb arrangement is ideal for an upright body position. But quadrupeds with such a device have a lot of problems. To run fast, tetrapods need to form, instead of an arm with an elbow bend back, a semblance of a leg with a knee bend forward. And this is really happening.
The scapula becomes mobile and begins to play the role of the hip. The shoulder plays the role of the knee, and the elbow plays the role of the heel. Thus, a functional likeness of a leg is formed from the hand. In this case, it is clearly seen that the hand of the erectus is primary in relation to the forelimb of the quadruped (this does not apply to elephants, unique mammals, in which the forelimbs are represented by the second pair of legs with knees - S. S.). Confirms that tetrapods are descended from bipeds, the fact that, standing on four legs, the animal inevitably lifts the heel off the ground.
The knee remains bent in any position. There is a partial dysfunction of the limb (discrepancy between its structure and use). The heel in all mammals hangs above the ground (mammals are digitalis, not plantigrade). And the knee of almost all quadrupeds does not unbend to the end, that is, it does not fulfill its intended function. To seize food with their mouths without the help of hands, tetrapods need jaws extended forward with large teeth and a powerful neck, which arises in them as an adaptation to that terrible, but regular lifestyle that they lead."
It is clear that all mammals, including modern man, are products of degeneration of more perfect forms, and no one guarantees that the processes of degradation are stopped. Judging by the state of humanity, rather the opposite. Scientists, for example, clearly cannot guarantee that the consumption of genetically modified foods, or the use of genetically modified drugs and implants in medicine will not form changes in the genes of germ cells and will not cause, after several generations, an intense hereditary mutagenesis, as a result of which women will be born not people, but some new species of animals.
The worldwide spread of cellular communications can lead to the same result. Even if the harmful effects of each of these factors (radiation of transmitting devices and the fruits of genetic engineering) are individually and insignificant, their combined effect on the genetic apparatus is unambiguously destructive. At the disposal of scientists today there is a mass of facts that were not included in the catechism of history according to Darwin. An example is the skeleton of an anatomically modern human being discovered by workers during the construction of a church in a layer 4 million years old.
This find was made in 1850, 300 kilometers from Castenedolo in the city of Savona (Italy). In the Lagoo Santa region of Brazil, a fossilized skull with very thick walls and exceptionally heavy brow ridges was found. It resembled the skull of Homo erectus, but the find was made in South America, and according to the official version, modern man appeared in America 30,000 years ago. As it turned out, this skull differs significantly from the finds in the Old World in a number of important signs. But under mysterious circumstances, the skull disappears from the Brazilian museum.
Also missing is a very important skeleton of a man of skill, found by Hans Reck in the Olduvai Gorge (Africa), because of which the age of the first people on Earth had to be revised. There are a lot of finds made in many places on the planet, the age of which ranges from 3 to 55 million years. Artifacts found only in America: a jaw from Miramar, a spine from Monte Hermoso, a skull from Calaveras and numerous tools of ancient people completely refute the Darwinist assertion that modern man appeared on Earth no more than 40,000 years ago. The time of the appearance of the first person is a controversial and inappropriate question (first you need to develop scientific methods for obtaining dates). In addition, the question must be posed in a completely different way: not when, but where did the first people come from, why did they appear, and how many were there?
Is a person developing or degrading? Who comes from whom? Many ancient teachings are united in the statement that all living things have a single ancestor - a person. Any living form on Earth is built according to the type of the human body - this is an axiom that does not require proof. If a living being, degrading, loses all or part of human qualities, then in terms of species, the form of the body of this living being changes to a more primitive one. The more human qualities a living creature loses in the process of life, the clearer the degree of its biological involution. From this we can conclude that for most living beings, if not for all, life on Earth is a series of losses and losses: species life expectancy decreases, growth decreases, the body shell loses some of the features inherent in it initially.
A few years ago, sensational reports flashed in the press: an unusual population of monkeys with a primitive language and fluent speech was discovered in the Amazon jungle. How this can be, and in what language the monkeys speak, the press did not report. Only the legend of a tribe of people, which in ancient times, fleeing from warlike neighbors, went into the jungle and to this day live in a remote area of the Amazon, was cited from ancient times.
This raises a question; Is a monkey tribe found in the Amazon? How will a person behave in the jungle? There are frequent cases of the capture of wild people, lost in the forest in childhood and raised by animals. They run on four limbs no worse than animals, with agility not inferior to a monkey, climb trees, hunt and eat their prey, like real animals - their fellow tribesmen. It is quite reasonable to assume that such human-beasts, if they find themselves together, after a few generations will begin to give birth to children covered with wool, with a tail and from birth possessing animal inclinations. How are we going to classify these creatures from today's scientific perspective?
Shall we single them out as a separate class or call them “hitherto unknown species of monkeys”? Such "monkey" communities are known to science. They are very different from their "relatives" in the monkey tribe, nor to anyone else in general, except for people - their distant ancestors. Darwinian scientists usually distinguish such "new" species in a special family in the suborder of monkeys or semi-monkeys. So it happened with lemurs, attributed by scientists to the category of semi-monkeys; although lemurs and monkeys are completely different branches of the offspring of man. The so-called great apes, which lived 10-20 million years ago in Africa, Asia, Europe - from France to China, from Central Africa to Central Europe, are even more dissimilar to each other and to modern humans. For instance,one of the alleged human ancestors - "Rama's monkey" - Ramapithecus (a creature the size of a medium-sized dog, weighing up to 12 kg), who lived exclusively in one of the regions of India (his remains were found there).
Ramapithecus is clearly not suitable for the role of the father of all mankind, and this is precisely the role that Darwinists assign to him! But as a degenerate descendant of man, Ramapithecus is quite suitable: both his small stature and the ability to walk on two legs testify precisely in favor of this. And what about Neanderthals, Australopithecines, Rhodesians, Sinanthropus, Paleoanthropus, Neoanthropus and other ancient people? They are very different from each other, neither in brain volume nor in body size.
They are not similar in the structure of the bones of the skull and skeleton, the way of existence and nutrition is not similar, they are also not similar in skills and habits! Where did they get such a variety of species, moreover, with a rigid constant localization of settlement? How to explain all this? The explanation can be found only from the position that in various regions of the World for many millions of years there was a local degradation of the previously single, genetically related community of people, due to the isolated location of the continents. Over the past three million years, mankind has been rapidly losing its typological unity. As a result of this process, numerous races and nationalities with an altered genotype were formed. Living beings, who abandoned civilization altogether, and even earlier gave preference to wild existence, underwent a stronger involution.
Such people quickly degraded, lived and continue to live in a state of ferality for tens of millions of years. It was they who formed the so-called anthropoid forms of apes. Judging by the information contained in the myths and legends of various peoples of the World, there were several civilizations on Earth similar to ours. Paleontological data make it possible to assert that the civilization of multi-armed demigods (described in the Vedas) or hundred-armed (in the myths of Ancient Greece) existed on the planet for a very long time. Arthropods (insects, spiders, crustaceans) are its degenerate descendants. The first fossils found - two-meter shellfish - are about 500 million years old. The claws of trilobites and crustaceans are a chiton-covered palm where the thumb is opposed to the rest. The next civilization in time is referred to in the scriptures as the civilization of three-eyed giants. People of this lineage have a third eye in the forehead.
Indeed, all stegocephals - ancient amphibians, reptiles, including dinosaurs, had a third eye connected with the pineal gland - the pineal gland. Some species of living lizards and the New Zealand tuatara have retained a similar adaptation. Chronologically, after the three-eyed giants, the titan civilization arose. Large mammals originated from them: giant carnivores, ungulates, sloths, bears, elephants, whales. The civilization of people of the modern type is much younger and traces its lineage from the generation of the Gods. The appearance of people was preceded by the battle of the Gods and Titans. Most of the material about their former civilization is given by insects.
Insects are in no way a preparatory stage in the formation of a person. Nor can they be considered a by-product of human evolution. On the contrary, in the structure of the organism and its individual parts, insects exhibit more perfect forms than mammals or humans. Some forms of insect life exhibit such phenomena that make us recognize a very rich past for insects, and consider their present forms as degenerate. This applies mainly to ants and bees. They are admired for the amazing completeness and rationality of their organization. At the same time, they repel us with the absolute impossibility for the individual to free himself from the cycle of life of an anthill or a hive. One cannot help but be horrified by the thought that with each generation we become more and more like them. How could social insects emerge as we know them?
Careful observations of their life lead to the conclusion that the initial organization of the hive and anthill in the distant past, undoubtedly, required reason and powerful logical reason, although their further existence did not require either reason or reason. This could happen for one reason: ants or bees, being at different periods intelligent and evolving creatures, lost their mind and the ability to evolve, because their mind went against their own evolution. In other words, believing that they were contributing to their evolution, they somehow contrived to stop it. They probably organized their lives on the basis of a kind of "Marxism", which seemed to them very precise and scientific. They implemented a socialist order of things that completely subordinates the individual to the interests of society.
Thus, they destroyed every opportunity for the development of the individual, for his separation from the general mass. But it was the development of individuals and their separation from the general mass that constituted the goal of nature, the goal of evolution. Neither the bees nor the ants were willing to admit it. They saw their goal in something else, they strove to conquer Nature. And to one degree or another, they changed the plan of Nature, made its implementation impossible. It must be remembered that every living being is an expression of cosmic laws, a complex symbol or hieroglyph. Bees and ants, taken as individuals, broke their connection with the laws of Nature, stopped expressing them individually and began to express them only collectively.
After a while, their thinking abilities, completely useless in a well-organized anthill or hive, atrophied; automatic habits were passed down from generation to generation. Reducing the size of the once giant insects was Nature's response to breaking its laws, otherwise they would simply destroy the planet. Man became the point of growth for further evolution. In general, today, as a result of the struggle for existence and natural selection, so many unanswered questions have accumulated to the Darwinian theory of the origin of species from simple organisms to more complex ones that this theory has become completely inadequate to the level of accumulated knowledge. For example, it is not clear why and how Nature has passed as a result of evolution from a very perfect and simple way of reproduction - cell division, to complex sexual reproduction.
Yes, sexual reproduction contributes to the mixing of genotypes, rearrangement of characters, the appearance of individual differences, which serve as material for natural selection. But in this case, the equivalence of males and females, the absence of sex differences would be reasonable. This would help the survival of small populations, where finding a mate is always a problem.
The very essence of neo-Darwinism is this: any individuality of an organism is consolidated in subsequent generations, if an individual better adapts to living conditions thanks to this particular individuality. The environment itself makes selection, which is why it is called natural. A better adapted individual is more likely to survive and leave offspring. But the next example of the evolutionist Ernst Mayr shows an ambiguous relationship between the fitness of the individual and his productivity. The order of his reasoning is as follows. Among people, an intelligent educated person, an intellectual, is most adapted to the (public) environment.
It is known that intelligence is associated with genetic predisposition. However, according to statistics, which are approximately the same for all countries, “people (as a rule, with a standard of living above the average), whose professions require high intelligence, have on average fewer offspring and produce them at a later age than, say, unskilled workers, whose work is not designed for any high intelligence. Those with more intelligence contribute less to the gene pool of the next generation than those with less than average intelligence. Here is the mechanism of human degradation.
And if in ancient cultures there was a practice of killing (at least emasculation) of clearly inferior babies, now, due to the spread of the infection of humanism, this preventive measure seems monstrous and is no longer practiced. But it is the inferior, the mentally retarded who have increased fertility. All this has led to the fact that the share of clearly disabled children has now increased to 10-15% (from 0.3% of the background share). That is, 30-40 times more than the norm. “In general, in living nature, where the Darwinist sees remarkable harmony and adaptability of species, the opposite is striking: their amazing inability. The predator dies amid the abundance of fruits, the herbivore - with the abundance of meat; many fish go to spawn in strictly defined local places; some species of fish, having swept away their eggs, immediately perish. It is simply not necessary to speak about the unsuitability of individual individuals. Hence, what is called the amazing generosity of nature: thousands of frog eggs, millions of cod, billions of poplar and dandelion fluffs …
But all this is a huge expense, an insane waste of DNA, energy, vitality! Is the sturgeon, say, with thirty million eggs and some ungulate animal with a dozen or even fewer cubs in a lifetime in an equal position with respect to natural selection, which protects uniquely successful specimens … It is clear that in all cases until maturity On average, only two individuals survive new reproduction, but after all, choosing one pair from millions of possible ones is not at all the same as choosing from a few individuals! In the first case, evolution should, it seemed, rush forward with “leaps and bounds” … The Chukchi live beyond the Arctic Circle in the extreme northeast of Eurasia, the Hottentots in southern Africa, in the Kalahari desert. The former have obvious physiological adaptations to cold, the latter to heat. Accidental occurrence of random traits and subsequent selection from generation to generation according to "tests" of frost and heat resistance? But is there enough time for this (hundreds, or even tens of generations) and are these human populations too small (only a few thousand people)?..
Perhaps the Chukchi and Hottentots adapted to climate conditions not from generation to generation, but somehow almost at the same time? In search of some new regularities, the very concept of “randomness” no longer satisfies us. When considering evolution, any chance is only a connection of phenomena unknown to us. The mutation is essentially the same as a typing error. How many reprints are needed for errors to be summed up into a somewhat coherent new text! Let's take into account, moreover, that the overwhelming majority of mutations - errors of the gene structure - are harmful or even fatal for an individual … There are a lot of incredible coincidences in living Nature. The well-known lichen is a symbiosis of a fungus and algae; luminous bacteria, which have settled in special glands of deep-sea fish, allow them to see in pitch darkness…. And the ubiquitous conjugation of flowering plants and pollinating insects!..
How monstrously incredible the counter evolution of groups that are not at all related to each other must look like to coincide like this as a result of countless trial and error, random mutations and the chances of subsequent selection! In one of the Brazilian orchids, nectar is placed at the bottom of a tube almost a third of a meter long. For a long time they could not believe that there is an insect with a proboscis of such incredible length. It turned out that it is coiled in a spiral in a twilight butterfly from the Sphynx breed. … But how did such an incredible pairing arise in the course of evolution, while the most natural and simple way out was to simply shorten the tube with nectar? " (MS Tartakovsky. "Man - the crown of evolution?").
And how to explain the emergence not only of a function, but also of an organ that is expedient only in its final form? An illustrative example is an elephant's trunk, suitable for grabbing, defending, dousing, and all this only when it is already a trunk, and not just a big nose. That is, if the transitional form between the nose and the trunk is not a useful adaptation, then, according to the logic of Darwinists, this form should not be fixed in generations, and even more so, progress into a real trunk. The famous evolutionist K. Zavadsky, foreseeing such objections, spoke of "pre-adaptations", that is, mutations "that have already arisen as a ready-made adaptation." But such an explanation would fundamentally contradict Darwin himself, and genetic logic too.
A radical mutation would destroy the whole harmonious organism, would come into conflict with other systems. In addition, an elephant with a trunk among its trunkless relatives would have to overcome a strong behavioral barrier associated with its appearance and find a mate to reproduce. In this regard, Skovron writes: “In order for a 'monster with perspective' to pass on its traits to the next generation, he must find an appropriate partner.
It seems absolutely incredible to us that at the same time and in the same place several individuals could arise mutationally, altered in the same way. " But an adaptation can be not only as outwardly simple as an elephant's trunk. The electrical systems of rays are much more complex than our artificial electric batteries and consist of a number of elements, each of which does not work by itself. That is, one adaptation is inconceivable without the synchronously arising second, third … nth. Mimicry (for example, the external identity of a leaf and an insect) is still explained by Darwinists as the result of the survival of the fittest individuals. They argue that one of the insects could "accidentally" be born with a greenish body.
Thanks to this, the insect and its descendants successfully hid among the leaves, better deceived enemies, and therefore increased the proportion of green insects in the population. After thousands of generations, one of the green insects "accidentally" turned out to be flatter than the others, and thus became even less visible among the leaves. Accordingly, his chances of leaving offspring increased.
After thousands of generations, one of the green and flat insects resembled a leaf in shape, got a better chance of leaving offspring, etc. But taking a closer look at an insect that imitates a green leaf or shoot, we will find not three, not four, but thousands of features that make it look like a plant. According to Darwinian theory, each of these traits should be formed separately, independently of the others. Obviously, Darwin's explanation of mimicry, the emergence of an electrical circuit in the slope and trunk of the elephant, does not take into account the mathematical impossibility of such a series of "random" combinations and their repetitions in intermediate forms.
Continued here