One of the stupidest fucking replies ever.

[genkaus]

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.

Is that how you rationalize this mistake? Well, even your rationalization is wrong.

If we are talking about the ecliptic plane, then the distance of the moon, whose orbit would necessarily intersect that plane, would be zero.

Further, if you are going to post the first rationalization you are going to find after a google search, atleast make sure that it does not contradict the words of your own master. Prabhupada, as it happens, was a firm believer of a moon that is more distant than the sun.

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.

And the first step is "shut down your brain".

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.

Actually, it can. And it does.

It can talk about how things in the universe work, but it can't talk about where anything has ultimately come from.

Again, it can and does.

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).

Actually, we can make such organs. We've made eyes and ears that are much better than any naturally occurring ones and are halfway towards making a brain.

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.

What is obvious is your abysmal understanding of what science is and does. The rules and standards about how to know the origin of universe are set on basis of the nature of your senses and mind. Whatever that "something" is that sets the rules can be known only within the context of those rules and as it happens, we are not currently capable of contravening those rules.

You are the one attempting to go against those rules by trying to know find that something without using either your senses or your mind.

God is the origin of existence.

Prove it.

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.

That's not because of any limitation on part of science, but because your god doesn't exist. Science cannot find what's not there.

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.

Oh, the stupidity. The ignorance.

As it happens, science does have good, testable theories with a lot of evidence backing them up on both topics.

At least the Vedas present a testable theory on the subject!

You mean the ones that have already been shown to be false?

If you are unhappy about calling the source of everything "God", ok fine. Then present the source of everything.

Its called the singularity. Look it up.

Don't just tell me I don't know anything or understand anything about the original source of existence

The first honest words out of your mouth.

- how would you know anything about what I know?

Because your ignorance is self-evident. Thus we know a lot about what you know - nothing.

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?

Look it up:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XL9S3csJGwI

"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

ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?

HAVE YOU READ THE ACTUAL BHAGVAD GITA OR JUST PRABHUPADA'S SELF-SERVING TRANSLATION?

The verse that you are shamelessly and horribly mistranslating actually is:

"moghāśā moghakarmāṇo moghajñānā vicetasaḥ
rākṣasīm āsurīṃ caiva prakṛtiṃ mohinīṃ śritāḥ"

Literally translated as:

"Of vain hopes, of vain works, of vain knowledge, and senseless, they verily are possessed of the delusive nature of Râkshasas and Asuras."

The word here that you mistranslated as "atheist" is "asura", which refers to a group of power-seeking deities. What is actually being said here is that "people with vain or fruitless hopes, works, knowledge and those who are senseless, become possessed of (or come to possess) demonic or fiendish nature".

Next time, try to get your own fucking holy book right.