Gauracandra

This was the first quote I came across: "Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." It reminded me greatly of a line from George MacDonald in Phantastes. George MacDonald is considered by many to be the founder of modern fantasy writing having influenced JRR Tolkien, CS Lewis, Lewis Carol, and many others. In Phantastes the main character encounters a diminutive woman who springs from his dresser drawer and leads him on into a fantastic world. Here is the quote from Phantastes that I remembered: "Her dress was of a kind that could never grow old-fashioned because it was simply natural." When I first read this I realized something about devotional clothing. There is something about a sari & a dhoti that allows a certain amount of self-expression, and yet everyone looks the same. No one would ever see a dhoti and think it was out of style. Nor a sari. It just is. In one sense it is very natural clothing. A piece of cloth that is wrapped around and forms clothing, then is returned to just a piece of cloth. Devotional clothing isn't old-fashioned in that sense, its just natural. Things with stitches, and buttons, and tassles and this and that, can go out of style, because some days big buttons are in, some days tassles are out. But a piece of cloth is about as simple a piece of clothing as you can get. I liked Leonardo's quote as well in this connection. There is something sophisticated in a simple garment. Its timeless.

I came across these quotes and found them interesting: "Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." "Iron rusts from disuse; stagnant water loses its purity and in cold weather becomes frozen; even so does inaction sap the vigor of the mind." "All our knowledge has its origin in our perceptions." "Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been, and there you long to return." "A well-spent day brings happy sleep." "As every divided kingdom falls, so every mind divided between many studies confounds and saps itself." "There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see." "Where the spirit does not work with the hand there is no art" "I have been impressed with the urgency of doing. Knowing is not enough; we must apply. Being willing is not enough; we must do."

If the guy can in fact do it, there is no way the oil companies would allow it. The entire world economy runs on oil. There are literally trillions of dollars at stake.

Assuming thats the temple room, I honestly can't think of any reason one would perform that move. Maybe if there are two thugs on either side trying to disrupt kirtan, then "Heeee Yaahh" and you kick one with your left foot and one with your right foot. But beyond that its just strange. Now for myself, I don't like it. But what bothers me more is someone new to Krishna Consciousness, either a Westerner or say an Indian visiting the temple, when they see this kind of activity what goes through their minds? Myself, I can dismiss it as juvenile. Others visiting might think its common practice and weird.

Yes, its actually been a few instances lately. Just a couple days ago during kirtan this one devotee was making a spectacle of himself spinning around all over the place doing twirls wildly. These two indian ladies, I'd guess maybe in their mid-30s walk into the temple to see the deities and he almost crashes into each SEPARATELY. They see the deities and then as they are leaving he almost crashes into them each SEPARATELY again. I was just embarrassed. So today the problem I had was with these kids (8-10 years old) who think the temple room is a place to play tag. They are running all over the place playing tag. I told them to take it outside and they still kept playing it. Eventually they left. But how is it that anyone thinks its acceptable to play tag in the temple room in the first place? Maybe two weeks back another incident. There was a big kirtan and this kid and these two brahmacharis were playing "monkey in the middle" with the kids jacket while dancing. I'm sorry, but you don't come into the temple to play games. Either get serious or get out. And by serious I don't mean you can't enjoy the kirtan, I mean get in the right frame of mind that you are going to see the Lord. Personally I'm the guy who stands in the back, claps his hands and shuffles his feet. I'm pretty conservative. But I actually love it when there is a rip-roaring kirtan and the devotees are dancing. By comparison I think of Christian churches. These places may be boring but they are very respectful when they enter the church. While I don't want temples to be boring, I do think they need to be separate from the world outside. Play "monkey in the middle" all you want, but play it outside the temple. As for cartwheels and summersaults, I haven't seen that in a temple since the early 80s. It still embarasses me thinking about it. Ok, so I've vented a bit /images/graemlins/smile.gif

How do you maintain temple room behavior that is respectful without losing spontaneity of individuals in their expression of worship? I've tried to put this question in a positive way. Initially I started to write a "venting" post because of a number of incidents I've seen recently. Truth be told, this is the third draft of this post because each time I felt I was venting too much.

10) In San Francisco we went on many walks. One of his favorite places was Stowe Lake which is a beautiful lake in the middle of Golden Gate park. Actually Prabhupada called it a garden because it is man made. In the morning there was this woman who was always walking her dog and every time Srila Prabhupada would say “Good morning. How are you?” He never said “Hare Krishna.” So one morning a disciple asked why don’t you say “Hare Krishna” to the lady? He replied “Because most likely she will not say it in return. But in this way she gets the benefit of being respectful to a saintly person.” Same idea at the fishing lady on Venice beach. 11) Govinda dasi told me “Swamiji prefers to be called Srila Prabhupada.” It was a little disturbing to me because I was attached to the name ‘Swamiji’. So on this walk I asked “I understand you prefer to be called Prabhupada.” He replied “WHERE DID YOU HEAR THIS? WHO TOLD YOU THIS?” Then his mood changed and he said “Actually, I don’t prefer but it is better.” 12) Srila Prabhupada used to use Eucalyptus twigs to clean his teeth. They had to be a certain length, soaked in water over night, then he would fray the end of one and use it like a tooth brush. So one day I went to a park before sunrise with my bead bag in one hand and a huge knife in the other. So I cut down a huge branch and sat on a bench and started to trim the branch when all of a sudden a patrol car pulls up. The policeman struts up to me and says “What do you have there young man?” I said “I’m cutting these for my spiritual master. He uses them as a tooth brush.” He asked me “Have you ever been in a mental institution?” [laughs] “What do you have in your bag?” Anyways, he left me alone. I told this to Srila Prabhupada and he said “Did you ask him if he was crazy?” Prabhupada was teaching me to be bold. 13) We had easy access to Srila Prabhupada. I would be in anxiety but as soon as we would go to his room we knew we just had to chant Hare Krishna and the anxiety would go away. So one time I went to him and sat and chanted. He said “Take a pillow because sitting on the floor creates hemorrhoids.” Just like that. Very practical. I started chanting and it suddenly dawned on me that I was taking up too much of his time. Still I asked “Is it true we can speak to Krishna like I am talking to you?” and he replied “Yes”. 14) So we had this wonderful Ratha Yatra in San Francisco. So I wrote to Srila Prabhuapda and he wrote back saying “Krishna Consciousness is like electric energy. So you should spread these festivals all over your country.” 15) Going back to San Francisco, there is a devotee in Los Angeles now, its ok to mention his name because this story has circulated before. His name was Makanlal and his brother was Nara-Narayan and they were very sincere. Prabhupada said “They are very nice but a little eccentric.” They were very sincere but always seemed to me to be very Shakespearean. When they spoke it was like “Hare Krishna” [imitates a Shakesperean wave with accent] Makanlal still has that. So it used to irritate me a lot. We had arranged an engagement at the YMCA. All of a sudden Makanlal was singing. I couldn’t take it so I was visibly showing my displeasure. I think I walked out of the room even. After the program we were driving back and Prabhupada turns to me and says “Aniruddha, this Makanlal sings very nicely.” [laughs] So Prabhupada never found fault but only looked for the good. This is something I never understood until recently. Prabhupada was the perfect Vaisnava gentleman. 16) Visnujana Swami was a wonderful devotee. Srila Prabhupada said by his singing he can go back to Godhead. But he used to create his own melodies and would play them. At one point Prabhupada came in and said “What is wrong with the melodies I have given you?” I say this because we have expanded so much. Often we have concerts and to attract others there might be a rock band. But we shouldn’t compromise too much. 17) I had been in Hawaii for a number of years. So Ambarish bought a beautiful home for Prabhupada to translate in. So there was this property on Aloaloa [probably spelled it wrong] loop in a residential area. Sudama was in charge. Prabhupada had cooked the feast. So we had gurupuja and we were singing “Sri Guru Charana padma” and Srila Prabhupada said “We should enter the meaning of this.” I don’t know if you want to put this on tape, but the spiritual master’s feet are everything. When you change your heart you can enter the meaning. Some times we say “I’ll try” We all have a different pace. 18) One particular morning I went up the stairs and was telling some stories to a devotee. Prabhupada came and said “So Aniruddha, how are you?” Very general question. I had to be honest and said “Not so great Srila Prabhupada. I’m not living in the temple.” Prabhupada replied “SOOOO?” That’s all he had to say. It was apparent “You are speaking like this but not acting like this.” So when Prabhupada was leaving I went to the airport and stayed outside. So Bhumya came to the glass and said “Prabhupada wants to see you.” I hesitated but eventually went inside. He had me sit right next to him and asked “Oh, how have you been? Have you been with your father? Most of my problems I have had came from a bad relationship with my father. I said “Ever since I came to Krishna Consciousness my parents want nothing to do with me.” I have thought about it many times and wished I had said “Srila Prabhupada you are my father.” Then he turned and said “In L.A. Aniruddha was the beginning.” Immediately I felt ashamed because he knew my heart. So Prabhupada was walking to the gate and I could see out of the corner of his eye he was watching me. He walks off and says “Aniruddha, you take charge of Sankirtan!” I wasn’t even chanting my rounds then. I said “Take charge?” and he replied “YESSS!!!” In one letter he said “You can do tremendous things for Krishna.” He knew our potential. If we don’t worry about the results it all falls into place. There is a real freedom with that. 19) Upendra was a wonderful devotee. Srila Prabhupada told him “You know Upendra. Those were the good old days. They will not be like that anymore.” [sobs for a few moments] I certainly wouldn’t exchange any of those experiences. Everything has its purpose.

The following are recollections by Aniruddha from the Srila Prabhupada Memories video number 32 transcribed as best I could. 1) There were a lot of prospective initiates and Gurudas was arranging everything. So my initiation was in Prabhupada’s house one on one. I brought some dakshina, some sandalwood oil, incense, some cloth. I was very timid in those days. I knocked on the door and was very anxious to see the swami. After a while Srila Prabhupada called me in. I didn’t know how to act. The first thing he said was “So you want to be initiated?” and immediately I felt myself condescending like “Of course I do. Why else would I be here?” But this false pride dissipated quickly. The thing I noticed was that I was very attracted to his eyes. They were like glowing. Something was different. So he said he would initiate me and I bowed but didn’t know how long to stay down so I just stayed there. Then after some time he said “Ok, you can go now.” A little while later Kirtanananda called me in to see Srila Prabhupada. It was a very small room. He told me the basic regulations, chanted on my beads. There was no fire sacrifice at the time. He said “Your name is Aniruddha.” I asked what it meant and he said “It is the name of the grandson of Krishna.” I didn’t know what to say. He asked if I had any questions and I couldn’t think of anything. Then I remembered I had heard one of the qualities of a devotee is that they are grave. So I asked “What does grave mean?” and he explained. 2) A little while later Prabhupada was calling me but I had forgotten my name. He was calling “Aniruddha?” But I was just sitting there. So Kirtanananda came saying the Swami is calling you. So I went in. I don’t recall what he said. I have heard this from a lot of my Godbrothers that we were so nervous that we don’t remember the specifics, but the overall impression was overwhelming. What I did remember is that his life was very organized. He had a time to wake up, a time to bathe, a time for walking, a time for letters, a time for massage. He was very organized and that impressed me a lot. 3) I know I walked with him on the ocean. Then I was taking the bus and thinking “I don’t feel anything different.” I was thinking the spiritual master is like magic where you get some charge or something. I expected to feel something but didn’t. But as we approached the temple I felt a surge of enthusiasm to be very strict. I told the devotees about this feeling and they said “Don’t worry, you’ll get over it” [laughs] In those days the San Francisco temple was considered very loose compared to New York which was very strict. It was a different mood. In San Francisco after kirtan some of the devotees would go to the local coffee shop and have donuts. But I was very attracted to what Prabhupada said and wanted to be very serious. 4) I didn’t know what kind of show it was so I mentioned to the Producer that we had an album. The interviewer, the first thing he asks is, “I understand you have an album Swami. You must make a lot of money.” And Prabhupada looked at him and said “Yes. $1000 a week.” So Prabhupada cut him down quickly. Another show, the Les Crane show, was wonderful. Prabhupada was singing and chanting. Then they interviewed him. He was very gentlemanly. He said “I am such and such age and still have all of my original teeth.” So he made the audience like him immediately because they thought they were going to get a heavy lecture. And he let Mukunda do a lot of the speaking about what is tilak etc… the last part had a Youth For Christ group on which was very dogmatic and the audience didn’t like very much. But the audience really like Srila Prabhupada because they could see he was genuine. He was a perfect Vaisnava gentleman. 5) Then we had the college engagements. UCLA was a fiasco. No one showed up. So Prabhupada came and we didn’t have much Laxmi and nothing was really organized well. So Prabhupada said “So Aniruddha, this is alright, lets have kirtan.” Some Indian students saw there was a sadhu on campus and so came in. And you could see they were a bit challenging and argumentative. They were speaking in their native language to Prabhupada. But when he spoke in English, Srila Prabhupada said “So tell me young man. Where are your Indian countrymen?” and the man was flustered and didn’t have an answer. Srila Prabhupada then said gravely “I will tell you. They are lost. Hare Krishna.” 6) We bought incense at the Vedanta Society. It was on Hollywood & Vine. I mentioned that to Prabhupada. He walked around the property and said he wanted a meeting with the swami in charge who was Swami Prabhavananda. He wrote the Penguin edition of the Bhagavad Gita that many of us were reading at the time. The Vedanta Society was the Ramakrishna mission founded by Vivekananda in 1918 or so. So I made the arrangements. We arrived and this swami was wearing a business suit. We could see there was going to be a very challenging situation. We couldn’t tell what was being said. Every so often we’d hear the name Chaitanya. But we couldn’t tell what was going on but we weren’t very enthused. On the way back we were all very quiet. Then Prabhupada said “This Vedanta Society was introduced in America by Vivekananda who was teaching about Ramakrishna. Ramakrishna was not very popular in India. But Vivekananda came and told everyone in America how great Ramakrishna was and a lot of famous and scholarly people became attracted and so he became famous. Anything that becomes famous in America became popular in India. But in India he wasn’t very well known. This Swami Vivekananda came here 50 years ago and they have 7 centers and we too have 7 centers.” This enthused us because we could see in such a short time we had expanded very quickly. So we all said “Jai.” Now just recently I was reading a letter Srila Prabhupada had written to Janardhana. I had said we didn’t know what was being discussed by Srila Prabhupada and Swami Prabhavananda. So in this letter Srila Prabhupada says “I have met with Swami Prabhavananda. He is teaching that Vivekananda says that Ramakrishna in his previous life was Chaitanya. So what sort of incarnation is this that teaches one thing then another.” So this is what the argument was about. I thought perhaps the argument was about putting our books into their store but it was about the teaching that Ramakrishna was Chaitanya. 7) We took a walk on the pier at Venice beach. There was a lone woman fishing at the end. She said “Oh Swami, I saw you on the Les Crane show. Very nice to meet you.” Srila Prabhupada told us “Just because she has given some respect to a saintly person so she will advance greatly.” Now, I don’t remember where we were going but we saw a sign that said Santa Cruz a certain number of miles. So Prabhupada asked “What is this Santa Cruz?” I gave my understanding that it was a name for Lord Jesus Christ meaning “Saint of the Cross”. He said “Yes in India there is a place called Santa Cruz founded by some missionaries. It comes from the word “Shanta” meaning saintly. You can call me Shanta Bhaktivedanta.” [laughs] It seems so simple but it was ecstatic. 8) Another time Prabhupada was trying to get a permanent Visa. He needed a health recommendation from a doctor. So we were driving to the doctor. Of course, this was an old hippie car some hippie who was favorable had donated. It had big, big daisies painted on it with different colors. So naturally a policeman stops it. Subala was the driver and had a number of traffic violations so the police immediately took him away. So Prabhupada is sitting there on the side of the freeway. Someone else took to driving and Prabhupada said “Krishna is telling us we need a better car.” 9) Now also when Prabhupada first arrived I got a call from “Life” magazine that was doing an article on the “Swami Circuit” because there was beginning an interest in the various groups of impersonalist swamis. So they went to 26th 2nd Avenue in New York but heard he was in Los Angeles. So they arranged for a freelance journalist to go to the L.A. temple. I was sitting there while a woman reporter was asking him some questions. He mentioned his mission but she didn’t write anything down. Anything dealing with philosophy they didn’t write but were only interested in why we were wearing tilak and what the bead bag was. At first I was confused. I was very anxious to see the article and sure enough there was not a single word of what Prabhupada had said in the article. But they did say “Of all the groups we’ve mentioned you can’t get this Hare Krishna mantra out of your head.” So Srila Prabhupada said because the readers will see the name of Krishna they will get great benefit.

Thanks. That was very nice. This is why I wished that 'In Memoriam' website was still operational. So many devotees will pass away and there should be a single site to record something about them. Imagine in 200 years we will be kicking ourselves for not compiling these stories and remembrances of the devotees who gave us everything. Anyways, the story sounded familiar so I looked through my old Memories videos and found a tape with Aniruddha telling his various remembrances of Srila Prabhupada (that story is on it). I have transcribed them all down (pen scribbles), about 20 stories or so and will type them up and post them tomorrow.

The program really shows how in the last 50 years American diets have changed to have the mass slaughter. They mentioned that the cattle ranches feed the cows lots of corn which fattens them up but also is unhealthy for them. Because of this they give US cows about 3.7 million pounds of anti-biotics, over 1 million pounds more than given to American people. The point out that the strength of the cow was always that it could eat grass on freeland and convert it into milk. This meant that a person living out in the country could let their cows roam and graze and convert something they can't eat (grass) into something they can use - milk. Industrialization has changed all that since most people live in the city and can't possibly get milk by letting their cows graze. There is no freeland in the city. Once, just 70 years ago perhaps about 50% of the country lived and worked on farms. Then the agricultural products were cheapend by mechanization that the family farmer couldn't compete and so was run out of business. They moved into the cities, and the industrial food industry was born.

There is a program on PBS (Public Broadcasting) called Holy Cow. It looks at the impact of cows on our worldwide culture. I've seen it before. Its pretty good. Except when it goes into looking at cows for meat, or like an African tribe that drinks their milk, and then cuts them and drinks their blood. Those points are really, Really gross. The cow is something very peculiar if you think about it in terms of the Bhagavatam. In the Srimad Bhagavatam it predicts as a sign for Kali Yuga the abuse and slaughter of cows. Why not some other animal? Now that is a very odd sort of prediction. There is no reason to think why some person living in a village in India thousands of years ago should see cow slaughter as becoming rampant. For one thing, it wouldn't have been rampant in India at the time, and if it occured outside of India (say Europe) it certainly wouldn't have taken on an industrial scale thousands of years ago. Yet today we see it is such a huge portion of the world food market and economy. In fact, one of the biggest cause of loss of rain forest is due to cutting down trees in Brazil to create grazing land for beef cattle.

His Holiness Bhakti Swarup Damodhar Swami Under Construction: Sri Sri Radha Krishnachandra Manimandir Temple Room Floor Their Lordships

That’s a very good similarity. Also note that Achilles was killed by an arrow to the foot (the same way that Krsna left this world). Further, Achilles was invulnerable to his entire body except for his heel (his mother dipped him into a river and so he was invulnerable). Note that Duryodhan was invulnerable over his entire body except for his thigh. Here is an old post that also shows other similarities between Plato & Vedic Civilization (Varnas, creation of material world, cyclical destruction): http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/showflat/cat/hinduism/2189/124/collapsed/5/o/1 I have never read the Iliad or the Odyssey, but I am curious just how many similarities can be noted.

Let me suggest that this newspaper writer does not understand the nature of his question. His question is right but he misses the point. The one thing we all understand not simply intuitively but practically is matter. When asking questions about ultimate things we inevitably run into a problem. What came before everything. The atheistic view point basically states that "Everything came from nothing." The theistic point of view can be stated as "Everything came from something." Now one thing we know about matter is its finitude. We can have a copper pan, but we can't conceive of an infinitely large copper pan. Matter takes up space. It even exists within time. Even something which is huge, say the universe, is still finite. It does not extend forever. The theist concludes that the universe does not explain itself. Matter cannot be a first principle. The theist therefore says "There must be something that is "Not Matter", something outside space, outside time, from which matter can rest upon." This something we call spirit. Now we may not fully understand it. Christians will say one thing about it. Vaisnavas will say something a bit different. But all theistic groups sense this problem. Its as if the universe is masking something. Something or Someone is behind the veil. Now one problem people have with evolution is it is often taught in schools as giving answers to ultimate questions. What is man? Man is a machine. Where did he come from? He is the result of random processes. What is his relation to the universe? He and the universe are a piece of clockwork. Once wound, it goes on ticking until unwound. Now the mind of man naturally revolts against this. No atheist can give a credible defense of "meaning" from random processes. Art has no meaning if it is simply the next step in the random sequence. Love has no meaning if it is simply the dead leaf on an unconscious tree. The atheist in fact has to live a double life. They say one thing but live another way. They will say "I have free will" but can't truly defend it philosophically. If everything is random then so too is your "free will" even if you try to confuse the issue. If there is some meaning to art or beauty or ethics or love, it must be based on some standard, and the theist would say a 'perfect standard'. Finally, I think it worth questioning the nature of this 'science'. We are often told "Look at how much science has done for us? How can it be wrong?" But here I would assert that we are talking about two different types of science. Is psychology a science? What evidence is there for Jungian archetypes? None. Jung told a story that he thought fit the human mind. What evidence is there to Freud? None. He manufactured a story that all objects are phallic objects. Buildings are tall because they represent man's desires. I would say this is preposterous. Buildings are tall because with finite space it makes sense to build upwards. This is logical. Yet Freud was/is taken seriously as a scientist, when in fact his story is more a fairy tale than the Grimm brothers could produce. So what of evolution? It too is a story. So a story is told. A tooth bone is found and they tell some story. They truly don't know who the bone belonged to, what the person felt, what stories they told or really anything about these people. Things which are prehistoric naturally have very little evidence precisely because they existed before "history". The problem we have with evolution is that it is a story much like Jung and Freud. But there is no way to prove this story. There have in fact been many changes to the evolutionary tale to try to compensate for problems in the story. Originally it was stated that evolution happened slowly. But this ran into some serious problems when people analyzed the issue on the microlevel. So then a new story was told that evolution actually happens quickly in spurts. Once a story was told that the Neanderthal was the ancestor of man. Today a new story is told that the Neanderthal was just a offshoot that lived side by side with man. Stories are told but they can't be tested. Other sciences can be tested and shown wrong. But we can't put a monkey in a lab and watch him evolve. To reiterate: First we must understand the question - what is the basis of everything? The theist says everything does have a basis in an eternal person. The atheist says everything comes from nothing. Second, we must understand the consequence of these two stories. For the theist, love can exist because it is some deviation off of a perfect standard. For the atheist, love (or beauty or ethics) is simply the result of a random process having no ultimate basis. Finally, we must ask ourselves what is science? Is it objective or subjective. I would suggest evolution if it be counted as science not be given the same level of credibility as physics or chemistry or any other testable science.

A few years back there was a made for television program on Steve Jobs & Bill Gates. Jobs created Apple computers (which was always considered the best PC, though IBM clones always had more software). Bill Gates ended up stealing Jobs's ideas to create Windows. Anyways, the television series had a short clip of Noah Wyle (as Steve Jobs) dancing in a Hare Krishna kirtan. So I ran across this story with a brief mention of Steve Jobs & Prasadam: http://www.canada.com/technology/story.html?id=2663f865-f2f4-4987-b947-6129a5d55cae “It wasn't all romantic. I didn't have a dorm room, so I slept on the floor in friends' rooms, I returned coke bottles for the 5 cents deposits to buy food with, and I would walk the seven miles across town every Sunday night to get one good meal a week at the Hare Krishna temple. I loved it.” Great tidbit. Prasadam Ki Jaya /images/graemlins/smile.gif

I wouldn't say I'm for introducing Intelligent Design in a biology class. In a Philosophy class I'd have no problem with it. However, I do think pointing out the improbabilities and holes in Darwinian evolution would be important to relay side by side with explaining Darwinian evolution in a biology class. If you accept the Darwinian view of the origin of life you are pretty much asking for people to believe in a miracle. Often people are fooled into thinking it is logical because it is smooth and occurs over a long period of time. But something that happens slowly or quickly does not make it any more logical. Read a book called Darwin's Black Box if you want to know the sheer improbability of life occuring the way evolution says it did. It may have happened that way but if it did it was just as much a miracle as any in the Bible. Present the odds, and let the kids decide. There are many questions that I think need to be answered. Darwin's Black Box gives many good questions. But here is a simple one I've long wondered and have asked friends who believe in evolution (none have been able to answer it). We know that when genetically similar people (say within a family) in breed there is a doubling up of negative traits. The Amish for instance have started to experience this. They have had a closed community and the genes they share have over time become more and more similar. This has resulted in deformaties, dwarfism, increased cancer etc.... Royal families have experienced the same thing. Now I first thought of this in relation to human evolution a few years ago. I read an article (on like CNN or such) that suggested there was a point in time when humanity was almost wiped out. They said there were probably only a few thousand humanoids around and they lived in small tribes of a few dozen. Now imagine. You are these sloped foreheaded cavemen. You run in a tribe of 20 people (10 women, 10 men). You must not have that great genetic difference. And this was a time where the dispersion of people would have made even short distances difficult to intermingle. So wouldn't you think all the bad traits would double, quadruple and so forth up? Take it back a little further. Remember most mutations are not positive. Most are negative (ie. there are a thousand ways to do something wrong but only a few ways of doing something right). When humanoids first appeared there weren't millions of them all genetically varied. When they FIRST appeared how many are there? And then they breed with one another. You should see the effects of inbreeding. Let someone explain this to me. I think this is a legitimate question to pose in a biology class and I don't think they can answer it. Now, Bible people with Adam and Eve don't have this problem (not saying I believe in the Biblical creation story). They believe Adam and Eve were the first humans and were made perfect. So any interbreeding would result in only doubling up of perfect genes (there would be no dwarfism gene, or cancer gene that would become increasingly prominent). I think this is a simple question that can be introduced into such presentations.

This coverage is ridiculous. I've been playing Mystery Science Theater 3000 with the newscasts. Its ridiculous how they are playing it up. I understand it can cause a lot of damage. But these reporters are just hamming it up. "Did you see that? Did you see the fear in their faces. The wind is incredible. Its phenomenal. This is amazing. I've never seen such powerful wind and rain. Look. Look. Did you see that branch fly across the ground. Back up. BACK UP. GET BACK. Watch out!!!! Another branch is coming. Its so incredible. Its happening in real time." Man. This is the problem with 24 hour news and 150 channels.