Views and beliefs

A place to discuss casual topics amongst spiritual friends.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Views and beliefs

Post by Ceisiwr »

Still waiting for you to provide these definitive and indisputable, comprehensive answers and the supporting documentation from 'Big Daddy Science'

With reguards to evolution no one can argue with it, its an undeniable fact that has no other competing theory accept for current Creationist pseudoscience which is just laughable

As to abiogenesis as i said there are still different theories so it isnt a deffinite, all i said was i feel that we are close to the final answer in reguards to it

'Big Daddy Science'
No really sure what your meaning/intent is by this sentence??


:namaste:
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
nathan
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:11 am

Re: Views and beliefs

Post by nathan »

clw_uk wrote:
Still waiting for you to provide these definitive and indisputable, comprehensive answers and the supporting documentation from 'Big Daddy Science'

With reguards to evolution no one can argue with it, its an undeniable fact that has no other competing theory accept for current Creationist pseudoscience which is just laughable

You haven't provided an argument for it at all. Only completely baseless claims to the supremacy of what could as easily be the contention that the world sprouted into being fully fashioned on the back of a tortoise.

As to abiogenesis as i said there are still different theories so it isnt a deffinite, all i said was i feel that we are close to the final answer in reguards to it
So far all there is to actually consider here is 'presumed theories' and 'rumors of theories'.
'Big Daddy Science'
No really sure what your meaning/intent is by this sentence??

So far we have a materialist scientist doctrine that sounds more like scientrollogy that anything from even mainstream much less leading edge science. So long as your going to present this all in a completely patronizing and paternalistic manner as if the actual data is too far over our heads to consider you can expect that I for one will continue to be responding mainly to the utterly vain and vacant pretense of an entirely unsubstantiated superiority.

:namaste:
But whoever walking, standing, sitting, or lying down overcomes thought, delighting in the stilling of thought: he's capable, a monk like this, of touching superlative self-awakening. § 110. {Iti 4.11; Iti 115}
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Views and beliefs

Post by Ceisiwr »

You haven't provided an argument for it at all. Only completely baseless claims to the supremacy of what could as easily be the contention that the world sprouted into being fully fashioned on the back of a tortoise.
Evolution never has and never will state such a thing since its not about how the world come to be and also evolution doesnt state that things happen by chance out of nothing (the out of nothing bit is acctualy the creationist argument that we all come from gods magic)

So far we have a materialist scientist doctrine that sounds more like scientrollogy that anything from even mainstream much less leading edge science. So long as your going to present this all in a completely patronizing and paternalistic manner as if the actual data is too far over our heads to consider you can expect that I for one will continue to be responding mainly to the utterly vain and vacant pretense of an entirely unsubstantiated superiority.
Saying evolution is a fact is mainstream, saying it can be wrong is fringe

Im not patronizing anybody here unless there a creationist (and even then im not trying to be patronizing with intent to upset) and i dont hold the data is over anyones head, when have i said that???

All im stating in reguards to evolution is that it is a perfect theory that accurately shows how humans came to be through natural selection and how there is no other theory that can compete with it, the only one thats attempts to do so is creationism, which isnt science its merely the presentation of false data, bad science and a clinging to religous dogma that no longer has any basis in reality

Metta
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
cooran
Posts: 8503
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: Views and beliefs

Post by cooran »

Hello clw_uk, all,

What puzzles me is why does it matter about what the cause of rupa is?
The flux of becoming (you or me or anyone) takes rebirth according to the fruit of its previous kamma. Human Rebirth is the rarest of all. Most of the humans on earth have rarely been born as humans before.

Far better to practise and study, so that the chances of another rebirth in human form at a time when the Dhamma exists in the world, is more likely.

metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Views and beliefs

Post by Ceisiwr »

Chris wrote:Hello clw_uk, all,

What puzzles me is why does it matter about what the cause of rupa is?
The flux of becoming (you or me or anyone) takes rebirth according to the fruit of its previous kamma. Human Rebirth is the rarest of all. Most of the humans on earth have rarely been born as humans before.

Far better to practise and study, so that the chances of another rebirth in human form at a time when the Dhamma exists in the world, is more likely.

metta
Chris

It doesnt, the whole discussion of evolution is a sidetrack, the main point i was making was

A if science disproves a buddhist teaching should it be abandoned?
B if so isnt this a unique aspect of Buddhism, its willingless to accept scientific knowledge and not cling to religous dogma


I only used the whole evolution v creationism thing to show how religous dogma can be clung to instead of accepting scientific fact
Metta
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
nathan
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:11 am

Re: Views and beliefs

Post by nathan »

clw_uk wrote:
You haven't provided an argument for it at all. Only completely baseless claims to the supremacy of what could as easily be the contention that the world sprouted into being fully fashioned on the back of a tortoise.
Evolution never has and never will state such a thing since its not about how the world come to be
clw_uk wrote:Evolution being a fundemental fact of how life came to be
and also evolution doesnt state that things happen by chance out of nothing (the out of nothing bit is acctualy the creationist argument that we all come from gods magic)Much like this statement:
science somehow disproves that without a doubt a certain buddhist teaching is in fact not true
from Evolutionism.

So far we have a materialist scientist doctrine that sounds more like scientrollogy that anything from even mainstream much less leading edge science. So long as your going to present this all in a completely patronizing and paternalistic manner as if the actual data is too far over our heads to consider you can expect that I for one will continue to be responding mainly to the utterly vain and vacant pretense of an entirely unsubstantiated superiority.
Saying evolution is a fact is mainstream, saying it can be wrong is fringe

The DOGMA of EVOLUTIONISM is really thickening up now. Still, in a deathmatch against creationsim my money is on age against beauty.

Im not patronizing anybody here unless there a creationist (and even then im not trying to be patronizing with intent to upset) and i dont hold the data is over anyones head, when have i said that???

Since you began with no data and simply continue to insist that this magical data set exists I am forced conclude your EVOLUTIONISM is more mythical that any Creationism I have ever heard of.

All im stating in reguards to evolution is that it is a perfect theory I'll add that one to the list. That's rich. that accurately shows how humans came to be But won't show it to us unwashed buddhists apparently. through natural selection Like your selectively comprehensive lack of evidence for all of this? and how there is no other theory that can compete with it You are peaking now! , the only one thats attempts to do so is creationism I'll tell them you said that. , which isnt science its merely the presentation of false data, bad science and a clinging to religous dogma that no longer has any basis in reality Is that a frank assessment of what you've brought to the table or what? At least you found a suitable mirror.

Metta
But whoever walking, standing, sitting, or lying down overcomes thought, delighting in the stilling of thought: he's capable, a monk like this, of touching superlative self-awakening. § 110. {Iti 4.11; Iti 115}
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Views and beliefs

Post by Cittasanto »

Nathan read Darwins Book the origin of species, it is how life came to be (as it is now).
creationism starts with a story and tries to prove it, science starts with an idea sometimes a story and sees if the evidence is there to support it.

evolution has nothing to do with how it started but how it progressed, Abiogenesis looks for how it began.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Views and beliefs

Post by Ceisiwr »

Nathan, im not an evolutionary biologist so i dont know the data off the top of my head i can only point you to other sources for the data, i.e.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Since you began with no data and simply continue to insist that this magical data set exists I am forced conclude your EVOLUTIONISM is more mythical that any Creationism I have ever heard of.
All the data you need is in any decent evolutionary book or website and its far from magical
The DOGMA of EVOLUTIONISM is really thickening up now. Still, in a deathmatch against creationsim my money is on age against beauty.
Evolutionism isnt a dogma anymore than maths is, its a fact of the universe

if i say 1+1=2 is that being dogmatic??


You are peaking now! , "the only one thats attempts to do so is creationism" I'll tell them you said that.
By all means tell them if you wish, any creationist argument will come from the scientific theory of "god did it"


:anjali:
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
cooran
Posts: 8503
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: Views and beliefs

Post by cooran »

Hello clw-uk, all,

I think you would have to wait until scientists do state that they have disproved something the Buddha taught as essential to the Dhamma (Things as They Really Are).

To your knowledge, in over 2500 years ... has science done so with any essential part of the Teachings? If you put up something maybe we can look at it.

metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Views and beliefs

Post by Ceisiwr »

Hi Chris

No i dont think it has and i personally think that there is a great furture is in store for buddhism and science


I dont really see any threat in modern science to Buddhism at all, not even from materialism or physicalism (ive never understood why these are considered threats to buddhism by some) since if these are true i still think the Buddhadhamma wouldnt lose any of its effectiveness, i see the Buddhadhamma as perfectly compatible with many scientific understandings (since both are concerned with reality)

Metta
Last edited by Ceisiwr on Sat Mar 14, 2009 12:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
nathan
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:11 am

Re: Views and beliefs

Post by nathan »

clw_uk wrote:Nathan, im not an evolutionary biologist so i dont know the data off the top of my head i can only point you to other sources for the data, i.e.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You can't be serious! Do you know any actual scientists or do you just worship them from afar?
Since you began with no data and simply continue to insist that this magical data set exists I am forced conclude your EVOLUTIONISM is more mythical that any Creationism I have ever heard of.
All the data you need is in any decent evolutionary book or website and its far from magical

No your right, not even magical since you have even yet to pull a rabbit out of anything here. I've read plenty of science. Show me some HARD SCIENCE that supports ANY of your BASELESS CONTENTIONS presented as unquestionable gospel in THIS THREAD.
The DOGMA of EVOLUTIONISM is really thickening up now. Still, in a deathmatch against creationsim my money is on age against beauty.
Evolutionism isnt a dogma anymore than maths is, its a fact of the universe

Do you write for Stephen Collbert? So far a dogma is all Evolution is according to you that's why I call it Evolutionism because you have taken the worst of creationism and applied it to some hazy and indistinct pseudo-scientific idea fantastically spun out of what has possibly been more or less roughly determined so far about what may in some contexts be considered to be 'evolutionary' processes. I imagine the actual scientists around here are too appalled to post anything actually relevant to a grown up discussion of any of this. I am not going to bother bringing any hard science to the table if you won't do us the courtesy of supporting your initial contentions in some significant way with hard science in the first place. So, to put it simply, no, Evolution as you present it is complete b-llsh-t.

if i say 1+1=2 is that being dogmatic??

You probably need some rest and a nutritious meal.
You are peaking now! , "the only one thats attempts to do so is creationism" I'll tell them you said that.
By all means tell them if you wish, any creationist argument will come from the scientific theory of "god did it"

They are going to take it as a complement, your sinking to their level.

:anjali:
But whoever walking, standing, sitting, or lying down overcomes thought, delighting in the stilling of thought: he's capable, a monk like this, of touching superlative self-awakening. § 110. {Iti 4.11; Iti 115}
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Views and beliefs

Post by Ceisiwr »

Do you write for Stephen Collbert? So far a dogma is all Evolution is according to you that's why I call it Evolutionism because you have taken the worst of creationism and applied it to some hazy and indistinct pseudo-scientific idea fantastically spun out of what has possibly been more or less roughly determined so far about what may in some contexts be considered to be 'evolutionary' processes. I imagine the actual scientists around here are too appalled to post anything actually relevant to a grown up discussion of any of this. I am not going to bother bringing any hard science to the table if you won't do us the courtesy of supporting your initial contentions in some significant way with hard science in the first place. So, to put it simply, no, Evolution as you present it is complete b-llsh-t.

Im sorry what exactly about how i have put evolution accross is Bull-sh*t?

Is it wrong to say evolution is pretty much a fact? or that it can explain where humans come from? or that the only opposition to it in our age is creationism OR some kind of "intelligent design" which is just another word for creationism and a way to peddle religous magical dogma as scientific fact

Why are you opposed to evolution? or are you opposed to someone saying that its a fact?

You can't be serious! Do you know any actual scientists or do you just worship them from afar?
So you can only understand science if you personaly know a scientist????



No your right, not even magical since you have even yet to pull a rabbit out of anything here. I've read plenty of science. Show me some HARD SCIENCE that supports ANY of your BASELESS CONTENTIONS presented as unquestionable gospel in THIS THREAD.

The hard science of evolution is there to find in any evolutionary book
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Views and beliefs

Post by Ceisiwr »

I hold evolution in the same light as gravity, pretty much a fundemental fact of the universe


Or am i being dogmatic by asserting that gravity cant be disputed?
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
nathan
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:11 am

Re: Views and beliefs

Post by nathan »

clw_uk wrote:I hold evolution in the same light as gravity, pretty much a fundemental fact of the universe
Or am i being dogmatic by asserting that gravity cant be disputed?
Yes these are all articles of faith, supported by absentee and invisible authorities. Pretty pure dogma devoid of even a doctrine and indicating no practice whatsoever. As factual and objectively real as my saying something like 'a nearby stop sign gives me the next day's lottery ticket numbers every Tuesday at noon'. Don't you believe it? Everyone else does. Obviously you are not getting my elementary school point and it would be cruel to continue. Good luck with your... well good luck with whatever it is you are about. :anjali:
But whoever walking, standing, sitting, or lying down overcomes thought, delighting in the stilling of thought: he's capable, a monk like this, of touching superlative self-awakening. § 110. {Iti 4.11; Iti 115}
User avatar
AdvaitaJ
Posts: 234
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:17 am
Location: Michigan, USA

Re: Views and beliefs

Post by AdvaitaJ »

clw_uk wrote:...isnt this a unique aspect of Buddhism, its willingless to accept scientific knowledge and not cling to religous dogma
Considering what happened to Galileo, Copernicus, et al, I believe the word I want is:

Sadhu :thumbsup:

Regards: AdvaitaJ
The birds have vanished down the sky. Now the last cloud drains away.
We sit together, the mountain and me, until only the mountain remains.
Li Bai
Post Reply