1. Standard memberDasa
    Dasa
    Account suspended
    Joined
    20 May '10
    Moves
    8042
    18 Feb '11 21:24
    In an attempt to kill the reality of God ....science puts forward absurd theories of what constitutes life.

    They present that life is chemicals and there reactions.

    Show me a consciousness molecule.

    Show me an awareness molecule.

    Show me a intelligence molecule.

    Show me a free will molecule.

    Show me my ant.......and show me where a mind boggling complex system can come about by random accident without intelligence.

    Because science believes they have the crown of keepers of the truth, they present any absurd theory, whilst meanwhile they scramble to find out what life is.

    They are constantly trying to find this out, but meanwhile they present to the public false theories, which is to give them much needed time to actually find out what is this thing called life.

    Vedanta gives them the answers they are seeking, but to embrace Vedanta they will loose the crowns of keepers of the truth, so they continue to cheat the public by mis-informing them of what constitute life and what are its origin..

    Why doesn't science actually be scientific, and explore all avenues of knowledge and possibilities for understanding life?

    Why do they remain unscientific and embrace biased methodology which excludes the spiritual factor.

    Acknowledging the spiritual factor will expose there cheating ways and this will take their crown of keepers of the truth and steal their glory...this they cannot allow.



    .
  2. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    18 Feb '11 21:481 edit
    Originally posted by Dasa
    In an attempt to kill the reality of God ....science puts forward absurd theories of what constitutes life.

    They present that life is chemicals and there reactions.

    Show me a consciousness molecule.

    Show me an awareness molecule.

    Show me a intelligence molecule.

    Show me a free will molecule.

    Show me my ant.......and show me where a mind boggli ke their crown of keepers of the truth and steal their glory...this they cannot allow.



    .
    Simply because science is not concerned with what is true, it is concerned with what is plausible. The utter folly of the pure materialist is that they attempt to answer why the cake was made simply by looking at the ingredients. Knowing that caramalisation occurs when sugar is heated does not tell us why the cake was made. Why this very simple truth escapes their notice, i cannot at present say. Their house is abandoned to them. Let them be and develop your own spirituality.
  3. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    the Devil himself
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    91900
    18 Feb '11 22:211 edit
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    Simply because science is not concerned with what is true, it is concerned with what is plausible. The utter folly of the pure materialist is that they attempt to answer why the cake was made simply by looking at the ingredients. Knowing that caramalisation occurs when sugar is heated does not tell us why the cake was made. Why this very simple tr ...[text shortened]... present say. Their house is abandoned to them. Let them be and develop your own spirituality.
    Thats right. Science has traditionally been concerned with materialism, so as long as they keep asking the wrong questions they are unlikely to discover anything of a "spiritual" nature.


    (now , lets hold for the fervourous rebuttall🙂 )
  4. Subscriberhuckleberryhound
    Devout Agnostic.
    DZ-015
    Joined
    12 Oct '05
    Moves
    41994
    18 Feb '11 23:00
    Originally posted by Dasa
    In an attempt to kill the reality of God ....science puts forward absurd theories of what constitutes life.

    They present that life is chemicals and there reactions.

    Show me a consciousness molecule.

    Show me an awareness molecule.

    Show me a intelligence molecule.

    Show me a free will molecule.

    Show me my ant.......and show me where a mind boggli ...[text shortened]... ke their crown of keepers of the truth and steal their glory...this they cannot allow.



    .
    Surely the intelligent werson would not see science and religion as being mutially exclusive?
  5. Standard memberAgerg
    The 'edit'or
    converging to it
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    11458
    18 Feb '11 23:27
    Originally posted by huckleberryhound
    Surely the intelligent werson would not see science and religion as being mutially exclusive?
    It's not so much the case that they're mutually exclusive; more there is no and can be no interaction between the two.
  6. Standard memberDasa
    Dasa
    Account suspended
    Joined
    20 May '10
    Moves
    8042
    19 Feb '11 00:08
    Originally posted by Agerg
    It's not so much the case that they're mutually exclusive; more there is no and can be no interaction between the two.
    This is not true for Vedanta explains the higher science of existence.

    Science could put part of its energy and endeavour into exploring the Vedanta teachings and then present to the people the true explanation of life instead of the false.

    While science presents the false explanation of life, they will misdirect everyone away from spiritual living towards living like animals....with no ultimate purpose for their endeavours.

    A society based on spiritual principles will produce a society without war, corruption, greed and ignorance.......and people will be content and happy and peaceful.

    These spiritual principles have nothing to do with the false doctrines of Christianity, Islam and Judaism.

    Science is the root cause of the crazy world we live in, by having people believe they are simple a bag of chemicals without inherent purpose or cause.

    I am not talking about technologies sciences, but some are included.
  7. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    19 Feb '11 05:47
    Originally posted by Dasa
    In an attempt to kill the reality of God ....science puts forward absurd theories of what constitutes life.
    'Life' is a word in the English language. It is also used in science as a scientific word. In both cases it has a definition with a range of meaning.
    What is truly absurd is when you choose to create your own definition with a new meaning that does not match either the English language definition or the Scientific definition and then announce that anyone making claims about 'life' is therefore wrong and dishonest because their claim no-longer holds true under your definition.

    What is even more absurd is that you promised to change you habit of calling everyone dishonest yet you are continuing the practice and seem to be making it worse by using the word 'cheating' instead.
  8. Joined
    24 Apr '05
    Moves
    3061
    19 Feb '11 07:16
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    Simply because science is not concerned with what is true, it is concerned with what is plausible. The utter folly of the pure materialist is that they attempt to answer why the cake was made simply by looking at the ingredients. Knowing that caramalisation occurs when sugar is heated does not tell us why the cake was made. Why this very simple tr ...[text shortened]... present say. Their house is abandoned to them. Let them be and develop your own spirituality.
    Simply because science is not concerned with what is true, it is concerned with what is plausible.

    Yes, clearly if one wishes to concern himself with what is true, he should not fall into the trap of concerning himself with what is plausible. 🙄
  9. Lowlands paradise
    Joined
    25 Feb '09
    Moves
    14018
    19 Feb '11 08:05
    Originally posted by Agerg
    It's not so much the case that they're mutually exclusive; more there is no and can be no interaction between the two.
    Different roads with many crossings. Pure science and spirituality have a common denominator: curiosity
  10. Standard memberrvsakhadeo
    rvsakhadeo
    India
    Joined
    19 Feb '09
    Moves
    36550
    19 Feb '11 08:51
    Originally posted by souverein
    Different roads with many crossings. Pure science and spirituality have a common denominator: curiosity
    Rightly said !
    There cannot be a purely scientific person nor can there be a totally non scientific person( We are humans after all and not machines.). In these modern times, in the so-called New Age, all humans are perforce exploring alternate ways of thinking and there is no doubt in my mind that Science and Metaphysics have to lean towards each other.
  11. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    19 Feb '11 10:08
    Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
    ... there is no doubt in my mind that Science and Metaphysics have to lean towards each other.
    How do you define 'Metaphysics'?

    Wikipedia seems to imply that it is now used to mean the study of existence via methods other than scientific ones.
  12. Standard memberrvsakhadeo
    rvsakhadeo
    India
    Joined
    19 Feb '09
    Moves
    36550
    19 Feb '11 10:25
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    How do you define 'Metaphysics'?

    Wikipedia seems to imply that it is now used to mean the study of existence via methods other than scientific ones.
    Wikipedia definition of Metaphysics is what I and Kazet mean.
  13. Standard memberAgerg
    The 'edit'or
    converging to it
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    11458
    19 Feb '11 13:542 edits
    Originally posted by souverein
    Different roads with many crossings. Pure science and spirituality have a common denominator: curiosity
    In the strictest sense I'm no so sure there are many crossings. Yes there may be religious people who contribute to scientific knowledge and perhaps their intention is to "discover" god - but in the end what they find via the scientific method, in so far as it relates to the supernatural , I say is nothing. The supernatural, is by definition, not natural - and so any inquiry cannot be reliably conducted using natural aparatus and natural senses.

    The common denominator "curiosity" without a specific referent could equally well be applied to cookery, murder investigation and so on... Science seems to be curious about what there is, X, we can directly observe, test for, or measure, how X interacts with other things, and whether X can be expressed in terms of other, more fundamental things.
    Religion on the other hand seems to be interested in what there is, Y, we cannot observe, test for, or measure, how Y gives rise to X *by magic* (or the will of god etc...), what happens to people who fail to have a similar opinion about Y; and in my opinion, pretentiously, seems to think it answers "why" X and Y exist. These regions of curiosity have little overlap.
  14. Wat?
    Joined
    16 Aug '05
    Moves
    76863
    19 Feb '11 14:102 edits
    Originally posted by Dasa
    [b]
    What is wrong with science?

    Nooooooo argument.

    Fuct nothing is wrong with science, apart from your deluded brain.

    What's wrong with your Vedantic twitted brain?

    -m.

    [/b] You see? You make a statement which you believes holds weight. It doesn't. So my answer to your attempted delusion is simple.

    Q.E.D.

    Edit II: You are Hindu by definition. 😛
  15. Lowlands paradise
    Joined
    25 Feb '09
    Moves
    14018
    19 Feb '11 16:08
    Originally posted by Agerg
    In the strictest sense I'm no so sure there are many crossings. Yes there may be religious people who contribute to scientific knowledge and perhaps their intention is to "discover" god - but in the end what they find via the scientific method, in so far as it relates to the supernatural , I say is nothing. The supernatural, is by definition, not natural - and ...[text shortened]... to think it answers "why" X and Y exist. These regions of curiosity have little overlap.
    I meant (and wrote) spirituality and not religion. Religions are not driven by curiosity; they (pretend to) know already. Religions are organized and tell you how to live. Spirituality at the other hand is a personal journey. When religious people become spiritual they often get a tense relation with their old religion because they become independent and in the eye of the church-fathers heretic.
    There are many differences between spirituality and science. Science is communicable, spirituality is not. Science is the outward search, spirituality the inward search. Science is limited by its own rules; spirituality is not. But both are driven by curiosity about our world. The curiosity of science is mainly directed to the hows and whats; spirituality includes also the whys. They both are concerned with fundamental questions. Cooking etc. not. Science and spirituality are at least complementary.
Back to Top