Let's take this "debate" regarding science to a grass root level. E.g. at the moment I'm doing a course that focuses on medical powders and their properties. I am fortunate enough to have two of the most prominent persons in the field in the country as a lecturer and as an assistant in the lab, which mean I have access to the newest discoveries and data. Do I consider these persons as authorities in the field? Yes. Do I take every word they say for granted? No. I have a fundamental understanding of chemistry and the forces working on minuscule chemical particles and can take what I already know and apply this to the new information given to me and confirm that it seems consistent. In the lab I get to put that knowledge into practice and actually see the results for myself. There is no doubt in my mind that the knowledge I've received is anyway corrupt, because when comparing my work to the other groups doing the same in the lab it is proven that powders indeed work the way we were told.
So here's the beef I've got with you Akincana Krishna dasa. Third time is the charm, what is your knowledge and background in the natural sciences?
If you are, what I suspect, quite ignorant in the matter, why you keep ranting on that us who are well acquainted with the sciences don't know what we're talking about? It's fine if you don't know, not possessing knowledge can always be rectified. But to give your opinion so decidedly that all we scientists here have said is bullshit is beyond you. If you really have something that would debunk our statements, you would have provided proof already instead of all your belittling and sarcastic remarks that actually have no valid content. Your claims are based on the personal, on the circular thinking that your holy texts are right because there's a god that inspired the holy texts (ad infinitum), but yet you have the stomach to call peer reviewed data as ridiculous. No on here has made any extraordinary claims, the things beyond us we've honestly said that we don't know. I don't mind you questioning (actually, I find that admirable), but learn your own limits.
So here's the beef I've got with you Akincana Krishna dasa. Third time is the charm, what is your knowledge and background in the natural sciences?
If you are, what I suspect, quite ignorant in the matter, why you keep ranting on that us who are well acquainted with the sciences don't know what we're talking about? It's fine if you don't know, not possessing knowledge can always be rectified. But to give your opinion so decidedly that all we scientists here have said is bullshit is beyond you. If you really have something that would debunk our statements, you would have provided proof already instead of all your belittling and sarcastic remarks that actually have no valid content. Your claims are based on the personal, on the circular thinking that your holy texts are right because there's a god that inspired the holy texts (ad infinitum), but yet you have the stomach to call peer reviewed data as ridiculous. No on here has made any extraordinary claims, the things beyond us we've honestly said that we don't know. I don't mind you questioning (actually, I find that admirable), but learn your own limits.
When I was young, there was a god with infinite power protecting me. Is there anyone else who felt that way? And was sure about it? but the first time I fell in love, I was thrown down - or maybe I broke free - and I bade farewell to God and became human. Now I don't have God's protection, and I walk on the ground without wings, but I don't regret this hardship. I want to live as a person. -Arina Tanemura
