“Science says so” should not be an atheists ‘get out of jail free’ card

July 30, 2015

<www.religiousforums.com>Thread:”A Suggestion: A Science sub-forum”

Post #10

 Red Economist said:

Paarsurrey wrote:

I liked following points in your post:

  • “Science says so” should not be an atheists ‘get out of jail free’ card.
  • “where’s your proof”
  • Science is Atheism’s sacred cow
  • Science, philosophy and religion were not in conflict until very recently in historical time (particularly after Darwin)
  • science, philosophy and religion are intimately connected with one another

You are a keen observer.
Regards

”Science can only discover what G-d has already created/evolved in nature?

July 27, 2015

<www.religiousforums.com>Thread:”Science can only discover what G-d has already created/evolved in nature?”

Please click the post # below to view,comments and or join discussion on the topic.

post #1

paarsurrey started the thread:”Science can only discover what G-d has already created/evolved in nature?”

For any claim and reason on behalf of science, please quote from:

  • A peer reviewed article published in a science journal of repute
  • From a text book of science
  • Please mention the specific science discipline that deals with it.

Thread open for Theists and the Atheists alike.
Regards

Post #12
 Thief Wrote:
Thief

The title is correct as is.
Proving is not required….see Webster’s

paarsurrey liked the above post.
Post #26
Thief

Thief

The point is clear…..
God created the universe….such is faith.
Science seeks to know how…..

“pompous wanky ‘science’ fanboy”

July 24, 2015

<www.religiousforums.com>Thread:”When science goes gibberish; what does it indicate?”

Please click the post # below to view,comments and or join discussion on the topic.

Post #1
paarsurrey started the Topic ” When science goes gibberish; what does it indicate?”  :
 Open for discussion for the Theists and the Atheists alike.

Regards

In response following posts are a must read

Post #65 by LegionOnomaMoi Well-Known Member
LegionOnomaMoi
Post #69#71, and #73 by our friend Augustus
Augustus

science (concept), science (practice), scientists, scientific publications-One must differentiate between

July 24, 2015

<www.religiousforums.com>Thread:”When science goes gibberish; what does it indicate?”

Please click the post # below to view,comments and or join discussion on the topic.

Post #1
paarsurrey started the Topic ” When science goes gibberish; what does it indicate?”  :
 Open for discussion for the Theists and the Atheists alike.

Regards

Post #62
Augustus

Augustus wrote

I assume you are highly familiar with academic journals if you can see through my paper thin charade so easily. My ‘juvenile renunciation’ certainly deserves a rapid chastisement from a more learned individual, one so wise in the ways of science. Consider me humbled :pensive:

Augustus

Augustus wrote

What’s wrong with many ‘rationalists’ (apart from the fact that they vastly overstate their own rationality), is that they feel the need to get caught up in wanky ‘science’ fanboyism. “Oh no! Somebody has tainted the honour of science by claiming it isn’t the omnipotent and omniscient god that I believe it is, stand back whilst I give the scoundrel who defamed her a stern verbal rebuke!”.

The problem is people like you can’t actually differentiate between science (concept), science (practice), scientists, scientific publications, etc. and get themselves into a fankle when anything with some connection to ‘science’ is criticised in any way.

Automatically you jump to the conclusion that this person is either an imbecile or some science-hating Taliban fundamentalist type who wants to ban books and insist the world is flat. “Oh No! Augustus is trying to ‘asassinate’ science. He must be stopped!”.

The biggest danger with playing the pompous, wanky fanboy card though is that you end up looking like a bit of a trumpet if you are wrong.

The points I made are frequently raised by more enlightened people involved with sciences and academia and have been mentioned in scientific journals and discussion for a long time. You can read up on it if you want to know more, it’s an interesting, but worrying, topic.

Now, as a ‘truly rank amateur’, a ‘truly rank amateur’ that has ‘evidently never read an academic journal in my life’ ‘let alone understood one’, how long do you think it would take me to find support for what I said from within an actual scientific journal? [Hint: I already did it, took me about 6 seconds].

Now I wouldn’t want to patronise someone as knowledgable as yourself by posting a link. I assume you will be able to find one far more easily than a truly rank juvenile amateur such as myself. Please let me know if you enjoyed the read though and if your views have changed as a result of it.

If you can’t find anything though and would like a helping hand all you need to do is ask: “Hi Augustus. Sorry, it seems I was wrong in saying you were a ‘sad but amusing truly rank juvenile amateur who speaks manufactured crap’. It has come to my attention that you have read at least 1 academic journal article. Would you be kind enough to share with me the article so I can understand why my pompous, wanky fanboyism was misguided? Thanks in advance. Jojom xx”

Just to remind you of my claims:

In many areas termed ‘science’ much if not most published material is wrong… frequently due to things such as poor methodology, poor maths, deliberate misrepresentation for professional or financial advancement and wishful thinking.

Happy hunting! :kissingheart:

paarsurrey liked the above post.

When science goes gibberish; what does it indicate?

July 24, 2015

<www.religiousforums.com>Thread:When science goes gibberish; what does it indicate?

Please click the post # below to view,comments and or join discussion on the topic.

Post #1
paarsurrey started the Topic ” When science goes gibberish; what does it indicate?”  :

Open for discussion for the Theists and the Atheists alike.
Regards

Post #32
Augustus wrote in response:
Augustus

I find it interesting that most people have claimed that when ‘science talks gibberish’ it is because the reader doesn’t understand. The ‘science’ is right, it’s just the reader that is wrong.

Of course this is an issue, but in many areas termed ‘science’ much if not most of material published in academic journals is wrong.

When scientists talk gibberish it is frequently due to things such as poor methodology, poor mathematics (especially statistics and probability), deliberate misrepresentation for professional or financial advancement and wishful thinking.

In terms of language though, scientists aren’t half as bad as other academics who tend to use the most complex way possible to explain a simple concept just to affect an image of sophistication. Can’t remember who it was but someone said something along the lines of ‘the value of an academic discipline is inversely proportional to how long a layman can talk about it before the expert realises the layman doesn’t know what they are talking about’.

You like this.

Aryan invaders did not merge peacefully with the indigenous Dravidians

July 22, 2015

<www.religiousforums.com>Thread:”How would you describe Hinduism to someone?”

Please click the post # below to view,comment and join discussion on the topic.

Post #7
Paarsurrey wrote:
Aryans merged​

Were not Aryans, the invaders? How peaceful the merger was with the original inhabitants?
Anybody, please
Regards

Post #9
Paarsurrey wrote:

Aryan invaders merge with the indigenous Dravidian people

“the Aryans arrived in north India somewhere from Iran and southern Russia at around 1500 BC. Before the Aryans, the Dravidian people resided in India. The Aryans disregarded the local cultures. They began conquering and taking control over regions in north India and at the same time pushed the local people southwards or towards the jungles and mountains in north India. According to this historical fact the general division of Indian society is made. North Indians are Aryans and south Indians are Dravidians. But this division isn’t proper because of many reasons.”
Aryans and Dravidians

Regards

“Hinduism” is a misnomer

July 22, 2015

<www.religiousforums.com>Thread:”How would you describe Hinduism to someone?”

Please click the post # below to view,comment and join discussion on the topic.

Post #1

It is a question in Hinduism DIR sub-forum; I could not answer it there.
I answer it here:

It is a misnomer.​

Regards

Oldest’ Koran fragments found in Birmingham University

July 22, 2015
<www.religiousforums.com>Thread:Oldest’ Koran fragments found in Birmingham University.
Please click the post # below to view,comment and join discussion on the topic.
Post #1
JRMcC and Godobeyer like this.
Thread:Oldest?Koran found in England.
 Post #5
Paarsurrey wrote:

It is a happy news.
Thanks and regards

DawudTalut likes this.

Hinduism is Monotheistic

July 21, 2015

<www.religiousforums.com> Thread:”Hinduism is Monotheistic!”

Post #1

Chandogya Upanishad 6:2:1 says, “He is one only without a second.”
Svetasvatara Upanishad 6:9 says, “Oh him there are neither parents or lord”
Svetasvatara Upanishad 4:19 says, “there is no likeness of him”
Yajurveda 32:3 says, “There is no image of him”
Yajurveda 40:8 says, “He is bodyless and pure”
Yajurveda 40:9 says, “They enter darkness, those who worship the natural elements” (Air, Water, Fire, etc.). “They sink deeper in darkness, those who worship sambhuti.”
Sambhuti means created things like a table, idol, etc.
Rigveda 1:164:46 says, “Sages (learned Priests) call ONE God by many names.”
Yajurveda 32:3 says, “There is no image of him”
Rigveda 8:1:! says, “O friends, do not worship ANYBODY BUT HIM, the divine one, praise him ALONE”
The Brahma Sutra of Hinduism is
“There is only one God, not the second; not at ALL, NOT AT ALL, not in the least bit”

So…Hinduism says only one God!

ABOUT “HINDU” AND “HINDUISM”

July 21, 2015

Paarsurrey quotes here for the benefit of public.

QUOTES ABOUT “HINDU” AND “HINDUISM”

by Swami Jnaneshvara Bharati
SwamiJ.com

There are many valuable quotes, some are given below:

http://www.swamij.com/hindu-word.htm#quotes

Quote

“The word Hindu is also not mentioned in holy books, Upanishads, Shashtras and Valmiki Ramayan, Shatpath Brahmin Granth etc. And in these holy books there is not any word Hindus or sects or caste system, where as it is clearly mentioned in every chapter of thereof that there is only one God of the Universe.”

“The name Hinduism is a misnomer and of a foreign coinage. Indeed the term Hindu is found nowhere in the Vedic scriptures, nor can it be found in any classical texts of Sanatana Dharma.”

“According to Jawaharlal Nehru, the earliest reference to the word ‘Hindu’ can be traced to a Tantrik book of the eighth century C.E., where the word means a people, and not the followers of a particular religion. The use of the word ‘Hindu’ in connection with a particular religion is of very late occurrence.”

Unqoute

http://www.swamij.com/hindu-word.htm#quotes


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 68 other followers