Evolution and Diseases

ACCORDING TO DARWIN

According to Darwin's theory, man should have evolved in such a way that the weakest should succumb and disappear forever! The weakest are those who could not 'adapt', according to Darwin's theory. The weakest would include those who cannot protect themselves or cure themselves against the evils of this world full of dangers! Diseases are part of man's weaknesses; and yet, according to the evolutionary theory of Darwin, man should have adapted to his illnesses to better withstand them naturally [there often exists a 'protection' mechanism - as, for example, for malaria (red blood cell deformation) or for Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia (the 'development' of a chromosome called Philadelphia - despite the fact that many researchers think the opposite way), but, unfortunately, this is achieved at the cost of another disease] or succumbed forever to diseases to which he cannot protect or cure himself. Yet, neither of these two phenomena has taken place during evolution. 

Was Darwin mistaken with regards to his theory? With all due respect, we owe him, one must believe that yes! 

How then could one explain the process of evolution, which is, in fact, real and no one can deny that? 

And, if it was assumed that evolution is not due to a phenomenon of chance, but rather calculated by nature? 

It would then be wise to make the assumption that it is advanced, persistent and positive thoughts and acts, and very deep and sincere wishes of living beings (people, animals and plants) that would be the engines of evolution, and these have absolutely nothing to do, in one way or another with the said Darwin's theory! For, nothing, absolutely nothing, in our Universe would be due to chance! The Universe would be constantly animated by advanced, persistent and positive thoughts and acts, and very deep and sincere wishes of living beings; and those would be the very engines of evolution, which would thus be a dynamic phenomenon and not a coincidence due to chance, as the theory of evolution of Darwin would make us believe! 

By the same logic, it would not be inappropriate to suggest that, by a same dynamism, but reversed, the negative thoughts and acts and wishes against progress 'would impede' the process of evolution, which in itself is always positive... ; and if the process of evolution would be particularly hampered since several centuries, it is precisely due to negative thoughts and acts and wishes against progress; which are formulated primarily by man, and which, today, have become epidemic!

The Univers cannot be controlled in several different ways

Why must the natural have the upper hand?

Evolution has existed and it still exists, this is undeniable; though some religious groups categorically refute this. 

Can the process of evolution be explained by a combination of Darwin's theory and one or more of other parallel theories? We think not. Just as reincarnation, either it exists or it does not exist; and it's not because we know absolutely nothing about it, that automatically it would not exist. It would be absolutely ridiculous to think that reincarnation would exist among some people and would not exist in some other people of different religious faith! It would certainly not be religious writings, created by man, which would determine the 'anatomy' of nature as it was since the beginning of time, and that even before religions have ever existed. 

So we come to the conclusion that either the Darwin's theory of evolution is true or it is not. And, if it is not true, there would be only one other theory of evolution that would be true. Which one?

Our hypothesis that it is advanced, persistent and positive thoughts and acts, and very deep and sincere wishes of living beings (people, animals and plants) that would be the engines of evolution (and therefore a theory in which the process of evolution is calculated by nature according to its needs of the moment) is supported by the following facts: 

• Everything is explained and works beautifully with our hypothesis that the process of evolution is calculated; and this would verify the hypothesis advanced. 
  
• We saw above that, according to the Darwin's theory of evolution, man could not evolve either to adapt himself to his diseases so as to better resist them naturally or to succumb forever to diseases against which he cannot protect himself or of which he cannot cure himself. 
  
• Nature regulates itself and is self-sufficient in everything; and this allows all living beings (people, animals and plants) to support each other. Thus, if nature has created a problem, nature itself would 'calculate' to find the solution to the problem. Diseases are created by nature and it is nature to 'calculate' to find cures for these diseases; and this is true for any type of disease including cancer. It would be enough for man to do some research and find the right remedy in plants. In the majority of animals, the finding of good medicine in plants is instinctive. 
  
• And above all, Ayurvedic medicine, for its cancer treatments using plants in their natural state and complete form (see our page 'METHODOLOGY'), provides undeniable proof that nature can 'calculate' and can, if necessary, produce all remedies to the ills it would have itself caused (see our page 'COMPARATIVE STATISTICS FOR CANCER').