(August 20, 2015 at 12:07 pm)Redbeard The Pink Wrote:

(August 20, 2015 at 10:58 am)Little Rik Wrote: Wrong again Pinky.  
Science is a word used in the English language but it originate elsewhere
So please don't tell me that my knowledge of English is such and such.
This has really nothing to do with the issue.  

Regardless of what you think you know about English, your stated definition of science is wrong. Do not tell us what our words mean until you have learned the proper meaning of those words.

Also, if you keep smashing your head against the wall like that, your little brain will rattle around in there and wake up the neighbors.

1) Our words?
Since when a word that DID NOT originate in the west is your word?
Are you engaged in words piracy or what?  

2) if you keep smashing your head against the wall
This is even more funny Pinky.
Actually that head is not mine.
Guess who belong Pinky?      

(August 20, 2015 at 11:37 am)Stimbo Wrote:

(August 20, 2015 at 10:40 am)Little Rik Wrote: Look nutter.
I never report anyone for swearing to me.
It doesn't really worry that but talking about my mother is a different story.
I hope the moderator will do something about it.

Nope.

I always find very very difficult to understand your deep philosophy behind your words.
You will have to excuse me if i humbly ask you what you really mean.
Do you mean that if someone make filthy references about your mother you will let it go
and let at the same time turn this forum into a dump tavern where the pit of humanity
roam among cigarettes butts and stale urine?
Please Stim help Little Rik to understand.  

(August 20, 2015 at 3:24 pm)Little Rik Wrote: 1) Our words?
Since when a word that DID NOT originate in the west is your word?
Are you engaged in words piracy or what?  

2) if you keep smashing your head against the wall
This is even more funny Pinky.
Actually that head is not mine.
Guess who belong Pinky?      

Rik, the actual word "science" does not arrive until Middle English. It is based on the Old French Word scientia, which is from the Latin scire.

While it has its roots in Latin, the word "science" is an English word, and you do not properly understand the definition by your own account. You don't get to decide what words mean, and you don't get to tell us that we don't properly understand certain words when it's clear from your typing that you barely understand the language you're using.

"Guess who belong"? Yeah...the neighbors are probably sick of that rattling sound, Rik. Better give the wall a break. It'll be there tomorrow (unless its consciousness activates and it walks off somewhere, I guess).

(August 20, 2015 at 3:36 pm)Redbeard The Pink Wrote:

(August 20, 2015 at 3:24 pm)Little Rik Wrote: 1) Our words?
Since when a word that DID NOT originate in the west is your word?
Are you engaged in words piracy or what?  

2) if you keep smashing your head against the wall
This is even more funny Pinky.
Actually that head is not mine.
Guess who belong Pinky?      

Rik, the actual word "science" does not arrive until Middle English. It is based on the Old French Word scientia, which is from the Latin scire.

While it has its roots in Latin, the word "science" is an English word, and you do not properly understand the definition by your own account. You don't get to decide what words mean, and you don't get to tell us that we don't properly understand certain words when it's clear from your typing that you barely understand the language you're using.

"Guess who belong"? Yeah...the neighbors are probably sick of that rattling sound, Rik. Better give the wall a break. It'll be there tomorrow (unless its consciousness activates and it walks off somewhere, I guess).

Your deep ignorance is outstanding.
Well before the Latin and Greek era further east in the Indian subcontinent arts literature and science
were created.

systems of science whose antiquity baffled all power of astronomical calculation
William Cooke Taylor

The study of language in India was much more objective and scientific than in Greece or Rome
Walter Eugene Clark

https://www.facebook.com/notes/salil-gew...9974678035

(August 20, 2015 at 3:35 pm)Little Rik Wrote: I always find very very difficult to understand your deep philosophy behind your words.
You will have to excuse me if i humbly ask you what you really mean.
Do you mean that if someone make filthy references about your mother you will let it go
and let at the same time turn this forum into a dump tavern where the pit of humanity
roam among cigarettes butts and stale urine?
Please Stim help Little Rik to understand.  

The word was no. I'm sorry if you have difficulty understanding one of the shortest words in English. Taking the piss will not alter my response.

Rik, not to rub salt in the wound, but no one -- and I mean no one -- exhibits the sort of breath and muscle control in downward dog as your mother. I get tumescent just remembering it.

(August 20, 2015 at 3:15 pm)Little Rik Wrote: I agree that all this appear like rubbish to someone who relate everything to a science that deal
with the physical world.
Unfortunately for you your idea of man as an entity made only of physicality does not exist.

Or does it? Why should I believe this? What are the facts that make you say this?

Also, that does not appear rubbish to me because I "relate everything" to naturalistic science. I would be really happy to learn that there is a whole new plane of reality to explore and tap into - but where's the evidence? I simply don't want to be deceived.

(August 20, 2015 at 3:15 pm)Little Rik Wrote: Man is a lot more than a physical entity therefore he also need something else that is not
physical.

Or is it? Hell, how do you even prove the existence of something that is not physical? Why don't you ever give a shred of evidence for what you say?

(August 20, 2015 at 3:15 pm)Little Rik Wrote: To me what is important is not whether Shiva existed or not although i believe he did exist.
What i value most is whether these teaching are working or not in the sense that they give result.
And guess what Luc?
They do work.  

And here lies your fundamental error - the "teachings" you believe in might work. Sure, they might. But it doesn't mean that they are right.

Now, suppose we're two ancient Romans, living in a villa in the countryside near Naples. One day, you get a fever. So, I go to the woods nearby, to the white willow tree, and take some of its bark to make an extract. While preparing the willow tree extract I say my prayers to Esculapius, and then I give it to you to drink.
On the next day, you wake up, and, lo and behold, the temperature's gone! Obviously, Esculapius has listened to my prayers and blessed the holy extract. The method has worked, therefore Esculapius must be true.

Turns out, though, that this kind of reasoning ("Post hoc ergo propter hoc", to use some gratuitous Latin) is wrong and fallacious.

In fact, today, with our understanding of chemistry and physiology, we know that the curative properties of the willow bark extract are not blessings of Esculapius, but instead the result of the chemical properties of one of the components of the extract (salicilic acid) that we still use today, albeit with a little modification to reduce its toxicity, as the Aspirin.

The fact that something works does not imply that the explanation you are giving for it is correct, as there might be some other explanations that work too. If you think your explanation is correct, then prove it. This is how science works in general, not just "physical science".

(August 20, 2015 at 3:56 pm)Little Rik Wrote: Your deep ignorance is outstanding.
Well before the Latin and Greek era further east in the Indian subcontinent arts literature and science
were created.

systems of science whose antiquity baffled all power of astronomical calculation
William Cooke Taylor

Quote:W. C. Taylor, writing in the Journal of Royal Asiatic Society, said that India:
“possessed ... a language (Sanskrit), the parent of all those dialects that Europe has fondly called classical-the source alike of Greek flexibility and Roman strength. A philosophy, compared with which. in point of age, the lessons of Pythagoras are but of yesterday, and in point of daring speculation Plato's boldest efforts were tame and commonplace. A poetry more purely intellectual than any of those of which we had before any conception; and systems of science whose antiquity baffled all power of astronomical calculation. This literature, with all its colossal proportions, which can scarcely be described without the semblance of bombast and exaggeration claimed of course a place for itself-it stood alone, and it was able to stand alone.”

Indic Visions: In an Age of Science
By Varadaraja V. Raman

(August 20, 2015 at 3:35 pm)Little Rik Wrote: [...]Do you mean that if someone make filthy references about your mother you will let it go
and let at the same time turn this forum into a dump tavern where the pit of humanity
roam among cigarettes butts and stale urine?
[...]

Just trying to make you feel at home. Otherwise you might - god forbid! - f*** off to spew your word diarrhea somewhere else...



Don't get pissy, just because I proved you wrong. It's no shame to lose an argument to a smarter person - especially when you're a delusional moron, disconnected from reality.

(August 20, 2015 at 3:56 pm)Little Rik Wrote:

(August 20, 2015 at 3:36 pm)Redbeard The Pink Wrote: Rik, the actual word "science" does not arrive until Middle English. It is based on the Old French Word scientia, which is from the Latin scire.

While it has its roots in Latin, the word "science" is an English word, and you do not properly understand the definition by your own account. You don't get to decide what words mean, and you don't get to tell us that we don't properly understand certain words when it's clear from your typing that you barely understand the language you're using.

"Guess who belong"? Yeah...the neighbors are probably sick of that rattling sound, Rik. Better give the wall a break. It'll be there tomorrow (unless its consciousness activates and it walks off somewhere, I guess).

Your deep ignorance is outstanding.
Well before the Latin and Greek era further east in the Indian subcontinent arts literature and science
were created.

systems of science whose antiquity baffled all power of astronomical calculation
William Cooke Taylor

The study of language in India was much more objective and scientific than in Greece or Rome
Walter Eugene Clark

https://www.facebook.com/notes/salil-gew...9974678035

You're citing...somebody's Facebook notes? As a source?...

Look, I have zero interest in whatever alchemical-yoga-pseudoscience you and your facebook friend think you've dredged up from the ancient world. I'm talking about actual science, under the modern English definition, and that kind of science is a systematic study of the natural world based on evidence.

That kind of science has crushed virtually every testable religious claim that's brought before it, to such an extent that apologists have been reduced to hiding behind circular logic and "God of the Gaps" while their pocket of viable scientific ignorance for Gaud to exist in grows smaller, and smaller, and smaller by the day. They've been forced to hide behind claims that cannot be tested by science because science is (among other things) the scythe to which superstition falls and the thresh that batters the chaff of ignorance to the wind. You don't get to call your Chopra-choker bullshit "science," and you don't get to tell us what the word "science" means. If you want to bring up some ancient ghost story that happens to involve math, don't refer to it as science because that's not what the word means. At best what you have is pseudoscience, and if we're being honest what you actually have is some made-up bullshit.