View source for Your knowledge says that millions of years ago there were higher forms of living entities on this planet?

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"your knowledge says that millions of years ago there were higher forms of living entities on this planet"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|Visnu Murti}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|09May11}}
{{last|09May11}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=1|Con=0|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:knowledge]]
[[Category:say]]
[[Category:Millions]]
[[Category:years]]
[[Category:Ago]]
[[Category:There Was]]
[[Category:Higher]]
[[Category:Forms Of]]
[[Category:Living Entities]]
[[Category:This Planet]]
[[Category:Questions asked to Srila Prabhupada]]
[[Category:Questions asked to SP... 1971]]
</div>
<div id="Lectures" class="section" sec_index="4" parent="compilation" text="Lectures"><h2>Lectures</h2>
</div>
<div id="Philosophy_Discussions" class="sub_section" sec_index="13" parent="Lectures" text="Philosophy Discussions"><h3>Philosophy Discussions</h3>
</div>
<div id="PhilosophyDiscussiononCharlesDarwin_0" class="quote" parent="Philosophy_Discussions" book="Lec" index="5" link="Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin" link_text="Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin">
<div class="heading">Oh, yes. Because our Vedic information is that the first creation is the most intellect, that is the most intellectual personality within this universe, Brahmā. So how we can say..., how we can accept your theory that intellect develops? We are receiving Vedic knowledge from Brahmā, so perfect. So that is the evidence. The first creature was so perfect.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin|Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Śyāmasundara: I have excavated in all parts of the world, and every time I go to the...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No. You have not excavated all parts of the world. That is another nonsense. You have not done this.</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: Well, on seven continents I have excavated...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: But that seven continents is not the whole world. That is our charge. That you are claiming that you have excavated all. We say no, not even an insignificant portion. So your knowledge is limited. (indistinct) they say the same (indistinct), Dr. Frog. Dr. Frog is limited within the three-feet well. If he says "I have seen everything," that is not acceptable.</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: But at least in thousands of places they have bored into the earth or dug into the earth, and they've found...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. Thousands of places is not this finishing, the whole planet.</p>
<p>Karandhara: They're always coming up with something new. They're having to revise their theory. Just like that pamphlet. They had to revise the whole theory about Carbon 14 because they found a new factor in the deterioration in the element which they never before considered...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: This experimental knowledge is always imperfect. Because they are experimenting with imperfect senses, therefore they must be  imperfect. Our source of knowledge is different. We do not depend on experimental knowledge.</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: Let us say that the remains of every animal, every living entity that has ever been found in the ground...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That is also a limited space. You cannot say you have excavated a portion of the earth and that is all. You cannot say.</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: So far, anyway.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: So far means that is not all. That is, so far, as soon as it is so far, that is not all.</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: But, so surely we must be practical and say that every...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Practical means...</p>
<p>Karandhara: We can only operate on things that we have...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Practical means which is beyond your knowledge, beyond your capacity, that is impractical. So nothing is practical.</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: How can I theorize there were other or higher forms...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: You theorize partially, as far as. That is not perfect(?).</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: If I accept your knowledge, how can I theorize that there were higher forms of life millions of years ago if I have never found any evidence and I have searched...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: This is the evidence. This is the evidence. You have to see through the evidence, because there are, in the evolution there are so many species of life, say 8,400,000, they are all existing now. They are all existing now. Therefore why should I conclude that millions of years they did not exist?</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: You say they are all existing now, but I don't see the dinosaur. There are no dinosaurs on this planet.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That is not the denied. Dinosaur you may not have seen, it may be existing some other... Neither I have seen the 8,400,000 different species of, different forms of life. But my source of knowledge is different. Your source of knowledge is different. You are experimenter with imperfect senses. I am taking from the perfect who has seen, who knows things. Therefore my knowledge is perfect. Just the same example: I am receiving knowledge from my mother, "Here is your father," and you are trying to search out where is your father. You don't go to the mother, but you are searching out. So therefore, however you may search, your knowledge always will be imperfect.</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: And your knowledge says that millions of years ago there were higher forms of living entities on this planet.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Oh, yes. Because our Vedic information is that the first creation is the most intellect, that is the most intellectual personality within this universe, Brahmā. So how we can say..., how we can accept your theory that intellect develops? We are receiving Vedic knowledge from Brahmā, so perfect. So that is the evidence. The first creature was so perfect.</p>
<p>Karandhara: You are accepting authority anyway. We are accepting Darwin's authority that he went to these islands and found these animals. How do we know he went to the islands and found the animals?</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: Because you can go there now and find them; they are still there.</p>
<p>Karandhara: But you have to go there to make, to make your point and deduct it. (break)</p>
<p>Svarūpa Dāmodara: ...when it will be cause of all his existence, survival for the fittest, but he is not going into the, who posed this, how it has been done, how it is going to that theory, so his theories are not complete.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: His theory, it is not science. It is suggestion, guess.</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: They call it "doctrine of natural selection," not theory.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Doctrine. So doctrine, doctrine should be fact, but Darwin's theory, so far... It is called Darwin's theory...</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: It's not called theory, it's doctrine. It should be doctrine.</p>
<p>Karandhara: What they mean by doctrine is that they can't agree on it and say it's fact. That there's so many short-comings that they will call it a doctrine but they won't call it fact. That's practically the whole story in scientific research: the real scientists, they never call anything a solid fact; it's always a theory or a doctrine because they never find a perfect enough conclusion which takes into account everything and perfectly reconciles...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: What is that uncertainty? What do you call that?</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: It's called Theory of Uncertainty. Heisenberg's Theory of Uncertainty.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That is also theory.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>