adodd@tartarus.uwa.edu.au (Aaron Dodd) wrote:
>Madhudvisa dasa (madhudvisa@krishna.org) wrote:
>: adodd@tartarus.uwa.edu.au (Aaron Dodd) wrote:
>: >Madhudvisa dasa (madhudvisa@krishna.org) wrote:
>: >: Material scientists, encouraged by the magical changes their
inventions
>: >: have brought about, cannot see the real potency of God behind matter.
>: >: Therefore science is gradually leading people to a godless
civilization at
>: >: the cost of the goal of human life.
>: >Given that there is absolutely *NO* evidence for the existance of a god,
>: There is plenty of evidence for God... You don't want to see it that's
>: all.
>Well, would you care to present some. Any and all contributions welcome
>provided the arguements are logical.
I have presented a couple of logical arguments below but you have just
unreasonably dismissed them with your "roffle"...
So I know whatever I write, no mater how logical, no matter how scientific, you
will just write "roffle" and go off on your merry way... Another battle won...
So I'm not very interested in discussing it with you. The internet is full of
preachers preaching to atheists who have no intention of accepting anything...
It's useless. Unless you are prepared to at least theoretically accept that God
exists and reasonably consider the arguments I put forward [and not just write
"roffle" after perfectly good scientific arguments..] there's no point...
You want to believe in science but in reality science has not improves our
"quality of life". It has given us wonderful things certainly. You mention
medicine and public sanitation, they are nice of course... But people are still
getting sick. There are so many new diseases, AIDS, cancer, stress-related
illnesses, etc... And are the people happier today than they were 50 years ago?
NO...
We are destined to enjoy a certain amount and we are destined to suffer a certain
amount. The enjoyment comes from our "good" activities in the past in this life
and in previous lives and the suffering comes from our sinful acts in the past.
This is called karma and it is the same physical law you have discovered which
says every action has an equal and opposite reaction, it works for all actions,
not just the physical ones... Scientists have difficulties as soon as we get out
of the five material elements: earth, water, fire, air and ether. They now only
believe in four of them anyhow... [They don't believe in ether anymore -- ether is
the sky, the space in which the universe is manifest... It is also created and it
is real... but they don't believe it any more.. I am told they now have a new
concept called "fields" which is more or less the same thing]
So anyhow, even though the scientists get stumped after five [or four] elements,
there are actually 24 elements which constitute this material world. The five
gross elements: earth, water, fire, air, either are there; but then there is the
mind, the inetlligence and the ego or "identity". These are real, perceivable
qualities. I know I have a mind, you know you have a mind. It is not gross like
the earth, fire, water... But it exists. And above all this is the soul and above
the soul is the supersoul, or God.
This knowledge [and all other knowledge] is scientifically presented in the Vedic
scriptures from India but you will just say "roffle..." I can hear it now. So you
have to become a little inquisitive. You have to become a little concerned about
the spiritual aspect of your life. We are not these bodies. We are not Austrailian
men we are spirit souls. I am in an Australian mans body now but I had a different
body in my last life and I will have a different one in the next as well. The
trick is to not take another material body. Because I am not material. I am
spiritual. This material body is covering my natural spiritual being... It's very
uncomfortable. I am eternal, full of knowledge and full of pleasure... But this
body is getting old and dying, it is full of anxiety and it is full of
ignorance... But I can just hear it now "ROFFLE..."
naham prakasah sarvasya
yoga-maya-samavrtah
mudho 'yam nabhijanati
loko mam ajam avyayam
"I am never manifest to the foolish and unintelligent. For them I am
covered by My internal potency, and therefore they do not know that I am
unborn and infallible." (Bhagavad-gita 7.25)
So Krishna [God] doesn't manifest Himself to fools... But His devotees can see
Him. That is the real proof... But I know "ROFFLE"...
>Actually there is absolutely *NO* evidence for your godless
>: world-view being valid. You are desperately trying to show that the whole
>: universe came from nowhere, there is no cause, no intelligence behind it
>: and that we are just the result of some extraordinary fluke of "luck...."
>I'm not desperately trying to show anything. As I've previously stated, I
>*DON'T* know whether God (tm) exists. What I *DO* know is that there is
>*NO* evidence for God (tm) and that the concept of God (tm) is not
>required for a scientific understanding of the universe.
Well why are you so sarcastic(tm) about God then. If I didn't know whether He
exists or not I'd be interested in finding out... In your next breath you go on
to say that the concept of God is not required for a scientific understanding of
the universe... Yet later on when I mention the current so-called scientific
understanding of the universe, the "big bang" your response is "Oh, I'm not an
astrophysist.. I wouldn't know anything about that..." YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA
WHAT THE CURRENT SCIENTIFIC UNDERSTANDING OF THE UNIVERSE IS.
If you actually knew anything about science you would be aware that we don't
scientifically understand the universe at all. There is not even a good
explaination as to how it was created... Very few scientists accept the big bang
now... It is accepted as the best of the available models but it is very
unsatisfactory. It doesn't explain so many things in the universe. The whole
concept is crazy. A big bang from nowhere... caused by no one, just happens to, by
some incredable chance, generate everything we see around us now... all purely by
chance!!! It is nothing short of crazy. The only logically sound explaination of
the creation of the universe is it was done by some intelligent person... Science
has no alternative.
>: Even though now the big-bang theory has been proved to be inconsistent
>: with the observed universe because you have no alternative [except to
>: accept God created the universe] you still believe it....
>Firstly, I'm not an astrophysicist so I can't comment on the validity of
>the big bang model. However it is alot more reasonable an idea than just
>throwing your arms up in disgust and claiming that 'god did it', that is
>an intellectual cop-out.
We have hundreds of books explaining just how He did it in great scientific
detail.... But will you read them... No just type "Roffle"....
>: Everywhere you look you can see the beauty and intelligence of God.
>Everywhere I look I see the results of fundamental interactions between
>the componenents of the universe. Just because they look pretty doesn't
>mean they were created by someone or something.
Look in your brain. See all those thoughts going on... Is there not something
there [I hope there is!]
>That
>: there is a "Supreme Father" is a natural and scientific conclusion. You
>: can test it. Just study where all of your friends have come from. Do a
>: survey. See how many of them came from a "big-bang" and see how many of
>: them have parents.... I guarantee most of them have parents!
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>So what? What for f..k sake does the big bang have to do with having parents?
Read it freedy, read it...
>If your
>: big-bank happened we'd expect to see similar things happening on a smaller
>: scale. If the universe was created by a big-bang then small universes
>: [people] should also be created in the same way. After all we are all
>: self-contained universes within one big universe. I have a body and the
>: universe is a body... So because we [the small universes] don't come from
>: big [or even small] bangs it is highly unlikely that the universe came
>: from a big-bang.
>ROTFL!
See. You didn't think about it at all. You just type [oh I thought it was
roffle...]
>: Mandelbrot and others have done much work on developing the fractal theory
>: and it goes a long way to more realistically modeling many things in
>: nature than anything science had previously and central to his ideas is
>: set-similarity. The idea that the same "patterns" repeat on all scales. So
>: it would be reasonable to assume in a fractal system [and many scientists
>: now consider the universe is fractal] that the process of creation would
>: be a scale-indpenedant one. IE: the creation of the universe would be
>: similar [but on a big scale] to the creation of a person [a small
>: universe.] So we see a child is born because the father places the living
>: entity, the person, into the womb of the mother where he develops a
>: material body from the materials provided by the mother. Similarly the
>: Vedas describe the universe is created by the glance of the Supreme Father
>: [God, Krishna] over the inert matter ["mother" nature]. So He impregnates
>: mother nature with all the living entities and they develop within the
>: "womb" of mother nature.
>The above paragraph is wonderful example of the truism that a little
>knowledge is dangerous. Dangerous in the sense that it makes you look
>even sillier than you obviously are.
You don't seem to have even a little knowledge about the scientific description of
the universe. My description is completely logical and reasonable. You can
disagree with it... that's up to you. But it's valid logically and it's a valid
application of fractal theory...
>: This is a completely reasonable and scientific theory [it's a fact
>: actually -- but you have to at least accept it as a bona fide theory --
>: it's far more reasonable then the big bang...]
>At least astrophysicist have evidence to back up their conclusions. You
>on the other hand . . .
WHAT EVIDENCE....
>: >it certainly cannot be the result of the work of 'material scientists'
>: >that is leading towards a godless civilisation
>: It IS the result of the material scientists preaching their godless
>: creation dogma that is making the world godless! You are doing it
>: yourself! "Givin that there is absolutely *NO* evidence of God..." It's
>: fanatical nonsense. There is absolutely *NO* evidence to back up your
>: godless ideas...
>: Science has provided the dogma for the atheists and science is
>: systematically working to paint God out of the picture. So what do we have
>: left. There is no God, there is no heaven, no hell, no right, no wrong...
>: If it feels good do it... this means a hellish world for everyone and it
>: encourages almost everyone to act sinfully because "there is no future"
>: just "live for the moment...." So everyone's going to hell...
>You have a wonderful gift for wild extrapolations from faulty premises.
>Science never 'wrote' God (tm) out of anything. It merely showed that the
>concept of God (tm) is not required to understand the workings of the
>universe.
THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND THE WORKINGS OF THE UNIVERSE... They don't even claim to.
They have models which predict the operation of certain parts of the universe,
they have theories that describe how certain things MAY work but almost nothing in
science is a solid fact. Everything is open to revision and change. Just look at a
fifty year old science book if you want a good laugh. And save one of yours now
and look at it in fifty years time, it will seem ridicules, I guarantee it.
>: >: Having missed the goal of life, materialists strive for self-
sufficiency,
>: >: not knowing that material nature is already self-sufficient by the
grace
>: >: of God. So in the name of "civilization" they create an imbalance in
the
>: >: natural self-sufficiency of material nature.
>: >An imbalance of what sort? All we know is that nature is the way it is
>: >and that no 'god' is necessary to keep it that way.
>: You "economic development" [as you know quite well] is destroying the
>: natural balance. You are ripping down the forests, ripping the minerals
>: out of the earth, draining the oil, pumping billions of tons of poison
>: into the air, the rivers and the sea, you are encouraging people to
>: "consume" so many unnecessary things. You are destroying the earth and
>: everything on the earth in the name of "economic development","progress"
>: and science... But where is your "progress" leading us...
>More wild extrapolations based on faulty premises. I've never supported
>unconstrained economic development and it certainly isn't the result of
>science that the environment is being altered.
WHAT FAULTY PREMISES... Economic development is what your science-lead society is
about and economic development REQUIRES exploitation of the environment. That's
one of the costs... You can't have your medicine, and nice car to drive around in,
and all the mod-cons and expect to be able to breathe the air as well. That is an
unreasonable expectation...
>BTW, science and engineering have lead to some of the greatest
>improvements in the quality of life of all people, for example consider
>medical care and public sanitation ( both are the result of science and
>engineering ).
ROFFLE!
>Care to show me any comparable examples of religious belief improving
>the quality of life?
You don't know what the quality of life is. I lived in Sydney near Central Station
last year and I saw tens of thousands of your people with "improved quality of
life" thanks to science, fighting on the trains from five in the morning to seven
at night. This is an improvement! One gets up at four in the morning, shower and
shave, gets in the car, drives to the station, gets in the train, spends two hours
traveling on different trains and busses and finally arrives at work half-dead...
Then 8 [or 10 or 12] hours "at the office" then another two to get home, then
collapse, then drag yourself out and do it all again the next day. And you think
this is a good "quality of life"! I think you are not in the workforce yet...
>: >: To explain how material nature acts by God's power one can consider
the
>: >: example of an iron rod in a fire. Although the rod is not fire, it
becomes
>: >: red-hot and acts like fire itself. Similarly all actions and reactions
of
>: >: material nature are not actually the work of material nature, but are
>: >: actions and reactions of the Supreme Lord manifested through matter.
>: >: The power of electricity is transmitted through a medium of copper,
but
>: >: this does not mean the copper is electricity. The power is generated
at
>: >: the powerhouse under the control of an expert living being. Similarly,
>: >: behind all the jugglery of the natural laws is a great living being,
who
>: >: is a person like the mechanical engineer in the powerhouse. It is by
His
>: >: intelligence that the entire cosmic creation moves in a systematic
way.
>: >When you say 'natural laws', what do you mean? Things like Newtons laws?
>: >I've got news for you, these aren't laws, these are mathematical models
>: >of nature.
The natural law is karma. For every action there is an equal and opposite
reaction. So if you do good something good will happen to you in the future. If
you do bad something bad will happen... That is it in a nutshell.
>: Yes, that's all they are, mathematical models that sometimes approximate
>: the observed results of nature... But do they have anything to do with
>: reality? Do they describe what is really happening?
You just ignore my points....
>: >You also claim that this expert living being controls the
>: >world in a systematic way. Why should an intelligent being behave in a
>: >sytematic way, surely nature would behave in a more arbitarary way if it
>: >were controlled by an intelligent being.
>: It is controlled by many intelligent beings. Krishna, God, is not directly
>: controlling it. He has much better things to do. He has his agents, the
>: demigods, and there are at least 33,000,000 of them in the universe and
>: they all have some responsibility in the scheme of things...
> ROTFL! and almost in pain
>So you see it
>: is a very big operation and many personalities are involved... But there
>: are natural laws established by God so this provides the basic backdrop...
>: The planets have to follow their allotted orbits, the sun has to rise and
>: set on time... But everything is controled by people... Nothing happens,
>: all by itself, or from nowhere [like the supposed "big bang"]
>: So you can criticize all you like but look at your own dogma first. You
>: are not in a very strong position...
>I have not presented one 'dogmatic view' and, BTW, you have not presented
>one scrap of evidence to support your case.
ROFFLE ROFFLE ROFFLE!!!
>Meanwhile we will go on serving God
>More pathetic delusions of miniscule minds
>: and chanting Hare Krishna.
Thank you. Hare Krishna!
Madhudvisa dasa
(madhudvisa@krishna.org)
Sudarsana
Home madhudvisa@krishna.org