One of the stupidest fucking replies ever.

[Akincana Krishna dasa]

The Vedas claim that the Moon is further away than the sun.

You really want to stick with that?

Not true.

In Chapter 22 of the Fifth Canto (Srimad Bhagavatam), the heights of the planets above the earth are given, and it is stated that the moon is 100,000 yojanas above the rays of the sun. In this chapter, the word "above" means "above the plane of Bhu-mandala." It does not refer to distance measured radially from the surface of the earth globe... If the plane of Bhu-mandala corresponds to the plane of the ecliptic, then it indeed makes sense to say that the moon is higher than the sun relative to Bhu-mandala. This does not mean that the moon is farther from the earth globe than the sun.

---

Ever heard "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"? The sun has come up is not an extraordinary claim. In your example, the man refuses to verify whether the sun has come up or not. Most of us have read enough from holy books to know that their claims are false.

And no, we shouldn't just 'have faith'. This is self-delusion by which anyone could believe anything. Do not ask us to let go of our mental facilities in order to understand from your point of view, try to look at the evidence objectively yourself.

I'm glad we agree that ordinary evidence won't get us very far. If you want to know God, there is a standard method. Are you ready to step into the laboratory?

Science can talk about a series of natural laws that operate in the universe, but it can't talk about the source of these laws. It can talk about how things in the universe work, but it can't talk about where anything has ultimately come from. Science starts from an intermediate point. Science is an attempt to understand the natural world using the limited faculties of knowledge that nature itself has bestowed upon humanity. You got your eyes and ears and brain because someone or something gave them to you - you didn't make them yourself (nor can science make such organs, nor does it entirely understand them). Science is a noble attempt, and it has produced all kinds of helpful, as well as destructive, technology. But someone or something else controls the rules about what's possible for you to know with your senses and mind - they were given to you by powers both higher than you and which you haven't understood. Why do you think you get to make the rules and set the standards about how to know the origin of everything, including your own faculties of knowledge? It's so obvious that you don't.

God is the origin of existence. You'll never find God by the scientific method - and it is your arrogance, not your reason, that you imagine that scientific methods are the only, or even the best, means of knowledge.

Science simply doesn't know about the origin of life and the universe. Science can only dream up wild, unprovable hypotheses on this topic, not present any type of testable theory. At least the Vedas present a testable theory on the subject!

If you are unhappy about calling the source of everything "God", ok fine. Then present the source of everything. Don't just tell me I don't know anything or understand anything about the original source of existence - how would you know anything about what I know?

Present the source of everything - then science could be taken seriously as a way to know about God, or the absence of God. Otherwise, why insist science has anything to say on the subject at all?

"Those who are bewildered are attracted by demonic and atheistic views. In that deluded condition, their hopes for liberation, their fruitive activities, and their culture of knowledge are all defeated." - Krishna, Bhagavad gita 9.12