WHO ARE WE? WHAT ARE WE?

I'm tired of reading so many asinine theories of mans
evolution up from the animal world to man -as he is today!


From Elaine Morgan�s, The Descent of Woman., where we all stood
around for a few thousand years on the seashore, to Robert
Ardrey�s, Territorial Imperitive, where we spent all our time
bashing each others brains out for space; the mistakes go on.
Although Claiborne�s, God or Beast, makes some very valid
points, even he falls far short of the mark.


Why? Why are they wrong?


Well, to begin with, they aren�t all wrong, but all of them have
one thing in common; they all begin at the middle of the trail.
They start where man is already almost a finished product without
any backup on how he got to that stage. Being forced to stand on
the seashore for a few thousand years still doesn�t explain the
development of the cerebral cortex does it? Cranes have been
standing on the seashore for a long time and they didn�t
develope brains as we know them. And fighting for a bit of space
or supremacy can�t be what develops brains either as many of the
larger animals fight for space and supremacy without any sign of
a cerebral cortex developing.


Why is it so important at this time to know how man began?


It is important to man at this point in time, if he is to
survive, that he be in accord with the rest of his kind. And in
order to do that he must reach an agreement, based on the full
knowledge of his origins of what his ultimate goal is. As we
stand now we are a world torn apart. We stand at a gigantic
crossroads of life wrangling over which way to go.


We are a species that finds itself in a forest and in the middle
of a trail. And when you have lost the knowledge of why you went
into the forest in the first place how can you possibly agree on
what to do at that point in your travels?


Evidently, mankind senses that he is on the wrong path or that we
are about to take a wrong turn and that the beginning may hold
the clue or directions we need to correct this mistake before we
go too far.


His instinct is right. He is aware that he travels a path having
a beginning and an end but he has no conception of where he is
heading or for what purpose. Or even if there is a purpose. That
information was on a sign at the beginning of the path and until
he retraces his steps to retrieve that information he can have no
idea what his purpose is on the path, nor his goal. More
important still; He can never attain any unity with the rest of
his kind until he does. Without that purpose clearly known by all
he can have no way of knowing how he should behave during his
journey. Isn�t that what is basically wrong with the World
to-day?


When an individual human wars within himself over his own reason
for being, and seeks a clue that will tell him how to behave
during his life, and fails to find answers, certainly no nation
can find the answer to peace.


Mankind spends or wastes most of his time asking himself; what am
I doing? Moving from one form to another? (man to Angel) Am I on
a business trip? (conquering) Visiting? (space seeds) Aimless
wandering?(evolution) Or what? What am I looking for? Is there a
goal ahead of me? Or will it be whatever and wherever I make it?
Do I go on my own - or was I sent? Will I arrive alone or find
others ahead of me?


As you can see by this, the beginning of the journey is very
important to us. Only by going back to it can we find out all the
answers to those questions.


We are like a large family in that forest, that has been on the
road so long that the only members who knew why we were there are
all dead and have been for a long time. Somehow we forgot to keep
all the records or forgot how to read them. Or maybe there were
none? And so we stand in a tangle of brush in the forest
undecided on what to do.


Hey, Joe, one will ask another, "what are we doing here? Are we
supposed to wait here or do we keep walking?"


"Yes, Joe," asks a second, "am I supposed to kill that green bug
over there? Or should I set up a trading post and start
negotiating with it?"


"Joe? Do we have a lot of time left or are we in a hurry? Are we
supposed to worship anything? Or build an alter? Why don�t we
stop and rest here...it looks nice and I�m tired."


"Joe? Is there anyone watching us? Are we alone in this forest? I
thought I saw something. Should we stick together or scatter and
see if we can find any others? If I find something green, 6ft
tall with scales, Joe, do I pet it, kill it, chase it away or
marry it? Maybe I should run from it...or worship it. What do we
do, Joe?"

Poor Joe! He can�t tell them what to do or how to behave because
he doesn�t know why they are there in the first place. All of his
guesses will be in doubt because he cannot back it with proof or
conviction.

Unless or until we can find out about the truth of our beginnings
we cannot really know how to behave in this forest.


For instance; If random mutation of cells into man as he is
today, is what life is all about, then we really have no need to
seek answers do we? That is the real dilemma behind the principal
of evolution. The idea that; whatever we do we will only be
carrying out our destiny of random behaviour with no goal but the
ones we choose. That makes our own personal survival the only
true goal we should accept. To hell with the other guy! That
would make Robert Ardrey�s belief in the �Territorial Imperitive�
as good a pattern of behaviour as any other.


If this is true, then truth must follow after truth and so that
form of thinking must make the Hitlers of this world justified in
their actions as well. We must then ask ourselves this; Is a
conscience really a deeply built in part of our makeup? Or is it
created by ourselves in order to control our own kind, as a
substitute for the club, by some that are more powerful than
others? Was religion and God a political expedient for the masses
as a new form of control?


If a �Godly� Creation was the beginning, then we have to ask; to
what purpose? No church has ever given a truly satisfying answer
to that question. Just being �good� isn�t a goal. Its a state of
being. A static position so to speak. To the minister and priest
who would argue that statement I say to you; One God-One act of
creation- one purpose, implies unity, and there is no unity in
the church today, let alone on the face of the Earth. Why?
Because none can agree on the purpose of creation - it�s goal!
And they cannot state that goal with any sureness so that we can
all be convinced because they cannot prove the beginning of the
creation as spoken in the Bible.


However, if the first purpose was only the creation of man just
as he is, that is still great enough to carry us on to a goal:
The justification of the creation by we, the created. If I create
a form for its own sake out of a pure love of artistic creativity
I am content. However, if it becomes a useful object in the eyes
of someone else, then I am ecstatic because its existance has
been justified and my work has new meaning to me. In just such a
fashion my we have been created.


If I am niether of the above, having no roots in the evolution of
this planet, as some feel today, nor a creation that begins on
this plane, then I would know that too. For, until we can unravel
the mystery of our past and learn whether we possess a goal and
what it is, we will continue to flounder around without a clear
understanding of how to behave towards each other.


At this point in time we�re assailed from all directions with
different goals; to work towards perfection and go to heaven when
we die; to accumulate great wealth and power and gain perfection
in this life; to increase and fill the universe with man; or to
just balance on a wheel of fortune that stops by chance at �win
or lose�. And every advocate bases their goal and behavior on one
of these two points; Are we biological accidents or creations of
an intelligent God? The former infers that we have no purpose but
what we as individuals care to make it. The later insists that we
have purpose and are abusing it.


If we are biological branches on an ever growing tree, then that
brings up one small but startling question; why, when every other
creature on this planet has evolved his own unique behaviour
patterns, man has none that are uniquily his own save that born
of the mind? Why, when all other species control their numbers to
keep pace with the food supply, do humans continue unchecked? Did
we not learn these things along with the rest of the evolving
branches? Why is it that with our thinking minds we can observe
and copy every lifestyle on this earth? Are they patterns for us
to use? Consciously or unconsciously we have done just that.


We herd together or live in isolation. We go to war like army
ants, or live in harmony like migrating birds or beasts. We farm
like ants and termites and gather honey like the bees. We are
territorial or wander where we will. We collect bright shiny
objects as the crows and dump our young in other nests like the
cuckoo. We trap and snare food as the spider or kill for food as
the lion, or for sport as the leopard. We mate for life as the
eagle and are as promiscuous as the baboon.


In short--man is the only species that can�t make up his mind
what his species should be doing!


Ah yes! Evolutionists explain this as mans adaptability; the
reason he survived...and make the best point I�ve ever heard for
the other side, as created man would have that as his only means
of survival save devine interference. Why would evolved man need
adaptability? Other species have survived just as well with only
a small degree of it and they wouldn�t even need that if our
species wasn�t around changing their world on them. At that we�ve
only been interfering for a short space of time. Nature itself is
the cause of the need for some adaptability. Planted Man would
also have to have that adaptability.


By planted man, I refer to the concept that is now pushing
evolution and creation aside to allow for man having been �space
seeds� from another planet or galaxy. This thought doesn�t cancel
out the other two though, it just pushes them further back in
time and local.


Man has other differences also. He has an allergic reaction to
his environment that has never been explained properly. Now why
would a creature that evolved here be allergic to anything on
this world? Everything that lives on this earth is supposed to go
back to a common beginning! Be part and parcel of the elements of
this earth.


Man is the only species that has burial! And burial implies an
extension of life beyond death (Although the origins may be more
complicated than we dream of). And a life beyond death means a
very complicated evolution indeed!


You say that it was a form of respect for the dead? A way to keep
them around a little longer? Then why not dry them out and
preserve the bones and keep them in the cave or community? A far
better reminder of cousin Joe than looking at a mound of earth!
That way he could still be a part of the community even if he
didn�t contribute and far more mobile if the whole community had
to move because of lack of food. Sound horrible? Not at all if
you have grown up with it, as some tribes that keep grampa�s
skull have in the Islands of the Pacific rim. Was burial the
reason why man settled in one spot and not food growing as some
would have us believe?


At the time when man was learning to settle down in one place
this world must have been teeming with game and wild food. Not
the barren, logged off, worked over, fought over, populated by
man, place that it now is and which the scientists who evolve
these theories keep forgetting about. The way this continent was
when we first came here. The reason the North American indian
didn�t need big cities to create a commerce of support for those
that needed to be fed.


I have already mentioned man as a copier of other species;
whether accidental or not. Still, it is virtually impossible for
man to concieve of anything new to his experiance.
Try it! Try imagining a brand new color, or a shape other than
the circle, square, or cube. You can�t.


Everything on this earth that man has invented has a parallel in
nature! Or is a combination of systems in nature. One and one
adding up to a third and then to nine and so on. Where then did
the mound builders get the idea to preserve the dead? Why a
mound... the shape of a saucer? For what purpose if we are
biological accidents? His religion hadn�t evolved that far
according to the experts. He had no knowledge of the cause of
disease. Keeping the body served no useful purpose. These were
primitive people according to all the experts, who had no
conception of a life after death or even what death was all about
except that the dead didn�t move anymore or need food or respond
to urgent appeals to get up. What ever made man care for his
dead? Was this the reason that we were forced to stay in one
place? To care for the dead who could no longer move with us? No
other species saves a body except for food. Did early man have
more knowledge of his creation than we give him credit for today?
Were there other reasons for his behaviour that we haven�t yet
thought of? Are we branches on a growing tree? Devine sparks of
life? Are we even human?


The time has come to admit that we are lost. We are lost and need
to find ourselves and hopefully our destiny. All mans efforts
should be directed towards this end. We will never be able to
live in harmony until we do know just what we are. Nor can we
ever leave this earth and take a chance on encountering a race
that does know the answer.


Until we can answer the question of man as biological accident or
divine creation or none of these, we will not know with certainty
how to behave as individuals nor as members of a comman race...
or even if we are of the same race.


To me it is shameful that we can organize a war or go to the moon
but we cannot organize our sciences and the wealth of information
that has been compiled to come up with even the smallest clue to
how we come to have our being, different colors, blood, faces. Or
any answer as to our beginning that would help unite us all. If
we are so complicated how will we ever be able to handle another
world that has even the smallest difference from us?