WELCOME TO CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM



The power of perfect reasoning is essential to know.


The one true religion

A discriminating intellect is that in which knowledge based only on words, real knowledge and ordinary knowledge based on sense perception or reasoning are present in a mixed state and the mind alternates between them.

"When the time of destruction is at hand the intellect becomes perverted." Vridha Chan. 16:17.
Topic of discussion
Five Tests of true religion - Feb 08, 2002
  1. It (revelation) must exist in its entirety from the very beginning of creation for all of mankind, and not over a long period of time after.
    Oppose - It is unjust of Yahwe, Allah and Christ, to deprive millions born before the revelation of the Ten Commandments, the Q'uran, and the New Testament of His 'divine wisdom'. An injustice which cannot be the work of a Just, Compassionate and Merciful God.
  2. It must conform with (immutable) Natural laws
  3. Oppose - The cause of the physical body is the reproductive element - any other method as man was created from dust or blood-clot and all other miracles of God and Prophets are a breach to this law.
  4. It must be in harmony with reasoning.
    Oppose - Incest which results in mental and physical infirmities, is an immoral action and it had to be the same also in the beginning (creation of one man and one woman).
  5. It must be in harmony with science.
    Oppose - Modern science has proven creation to be more than 6,000 years old, the earth is spherical and it rotates and revolves, contradictions to the Torah, Bible and Q'uran.
  6. Its truth must be confirmed by four evidences :-
  • Direct Cognition - Not all that is known by perception can be true.
  • Inferences - God is eternal therefore we can infer that there were past creations and as well as there will be future ones.
  • Testimony - The testimonies of Rishis, sages and seers of the Vedas (altruistic teachers are all in harmony with each other.
  • History - There are many books (Mahabharata, Valmiki's Ramayan) and source of other civilization which speak of the past ancient Vedic (Aryas) civilization of 5,000 years ago and earlier.

Let's be reasonable when it comes the most abstruse science of God (wisdom), the ignorant (by repenting) and the wise (by austerity) can never reap the same rewards.


WARNING! Reader's discretion is advised - the truth offends!
Past dialogues debunking Religion
Other discussion boards:-  Can a fool, fool God?    Do all paths lead to God?   Debunking evolution
Guestbook
​​​​​​​
The one true religion
"No one is more hated than he who speaks the truth." Plato
​​​​​​​
Welcome to constructive criticism
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
Why the science of evolution is a failure?

It breaches the laws of nature which dictates progression to be always downwards.

The theory of natural selection is indicative of nature's imperfections. According to it Nature is still improving. This theory points out the absence in Nature at present of the best forms that it will produce in the future.


Re: Why the science of evolution is a failure?

Either English is your second language or you are a sixth grader trying to sound like an adult.

Evolution is the most supported theory in science, more proven than gravity and it is religion that “breeches the laws of nature”.

Re: Why the science of evolution is a failure?

If I am what you say, it would be an insult to you who claim to know better. It would mean you have a better understanding of natural laws than Einstein.

"We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws." Albert Einstein

**One of the originators of the Physical Evolution Theory, Dr. A. R. Wallace was the first to strike down the Social Evolution Theory. He rightly affirmed that: "The Veda admittedly the oldest book in the library of mankind contains the essential teachings of the most advanced religious thinkers and is a vast system of religious teachings which are pure and lofty."

He further wrote in "Social Environment and Moral Progress," strongly refuting the social and moral evolution theory:

"In the earliest records which have come down to us from the past, we find ample indications that accepted standard of morality and the conduct resulting from these were in no degree inferior to those which prevail today, though in some respects, they were different from ours. The wonderful collection of hymns known as the Vedas are a vast system of religious teachings as pure and lofty as those of the finest portions of the Hebrew Scriptures. Its authors were fully our equals in their conception of the universe and the Deity expressed in the finest poetic language."

"In it (Veda) we find many of the essential teachings of the most advanced religious thinkers." "We must admit that the mind which conceived and expressed inappropriate language, such ideas as are everywhere present in those Vedic hymns, could not have been inferior to those of the best of our religious teachers and poets to our Milton, Shakespeare, and Tennyson."

Here is my debate - Evolution Debunked

Re: Why the science of evolution is a failure?

If I am what you say, it would be an insult to you who claim to know better.

- Is that supposed to make sense?

It would mean you have a better understanding of natural laws than Einstein.

- Einstein was not an evolutionary biologist.

We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws."** Albert Einstein

- SO? At one time we did not understand lightening, or thunder or volcanoes. Your point?

One of the originators of the Physical Evolution Theory, Dr. A. R. Wallace was the first to strike down the Social Evolution Theory.

- Which has nothing to do with evolution. That is simply a social construct.

He rightly affirmed that: "The Veda admittedly the oldest book in the library of mankind contains the essential teachings of the most advanced religious thinkers and is a vast system of religious teachings which are pure and lofty."** ()

- SO?

how was it that for thousands of years past, no lower creature had evolved into a human being.

- Because it takes millions of years, and the right mutations and right environmental pressures. See what taking a high school biology class can do for you?

The theory of natural selection is indicative of nature's imperfections. According to it Nature is still improving.

- No, it is changing, “improving” is subjective.

Progression is always downward, a law.

- Now THAT is absurdly stupid.

but still the tyranny and barbarism of the past, rules the age.

- Because we have an over developed adrenal gland and an underdeveloped frontal cortex.

What is instinctive is natural, it can neither increase nor decrease nor can it help any one to make any progress,

- Your opinion and an absurd one.

since the savages also possess this instinctive knowledge and yet they have not made any progress.

- Instinct is survival not invention.

The acquired knowledge alone is the cause of progress.

- WOW, how profound, yet known in some manner for a few million years.

All of us during our childhood did not possess accurate knowledge of right and wrong,

- ABSOLUTELY CORRECT, we will not “possess” it, but we can LEARN it.

but after having studied under our learned teachers, we were enabled to distinguish between right and wrong, virtue and vice.

- and where did they get it? An infinite regression to the point where some one “learned it on their own”. and if they can do it, so can anyone else.

- And the rest is just more ignorant word salad.

Re: Why the science of evolution is a failure? Part 1

If I am what you say, it would be an insult to you who claim to know better.
Is that supposed to make sense?
Vj ~ Not to anyone ignorant of the functions of natural laws.

Einstein was not an evolutionary biologist.
Vj ~ Besides being a scientist, he was also a philosopher - “science without religion is lame……….” It simply means science doesn’t have all the answers and whatever answers (evolution) they have, do not conform to natural laws.

"We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws."Albert Einstein
SO? At one time we did not understand lightening, or thunder or volcanoes. Your point?
Vj ~ Speak for yourself. The fixedness of the Sun, the motion of the earth, of fixed and moving stars (the milky way), the planetary systems, of the moons, of earthquakes and hurricanes and many countless branches of sciences can be incontrovertible be proven by the many branches of Vedic philosophy. Even the discovery of the law of gravitation of which many credited Sir Isaac Newton becomes contradicted when many Vedic verses deal with the law of gravitation, thousands of years earlier.

One of the originators of the Physical Evolution Theory, Dr. A. R. Wallace was the first to strike down the Social Evolution Theory.
Which has nothing to do with evolution. That is simply a social construct.
Vj ~ It has everything to do with with evolution. It shows humans were far more intelligent long before evolution made them out to be.

He rightly affirmed that: "The Veda admittedly the oldest book in the library of mankind contains the essential teachings of the most advanced religious thinkers and is a vast system of religious teachings which are pure and lofty."
SO?
Vj ~ It wasn’t past down from an ape.

how was it that for thousands of years past, no lower creature had evolved into a human being.
Because it takes millions of years, and the right mutations and right environmental pressures. See what taking a high school biology class can do for you?
Vj ~ You’ve got to think dumb-a-s-s! The laws of nature calls for repeated occurrences. As long as there are apes the process of a human evolving must continue. Just as the clouds don’t wait for centuries to rain.

The theory of natural selection is indicative of nature's imperfections. According to it Nature is still improving.
No, it is changing, “improving” is subjective.
Vj ~ Let me make it simple for you. According to science of evolution we emerged out of a primitive state, then came the medieval age and now the advance age of technology. This trend is progression upwards.

Progression is always downward, a law.
Now THAT is absurdly stupid.
Vj ~ As you get older, isn’t your dick shrinking? Tell me what you know is finite that would not decay and finally dissolved.

but still the tyranny and barbarism of the past, rules the age.
Because we have an over developed adrenal gland and an underdeveloped frontal cortex.
Vj ~ No dumb-a-s-s, it is the lack of the correct or true knowledge.

What is instinctive is natural, it can neither increase nor decrease nor can it help any one to make any progress,Your opinion and an absurd one.
Vj ~ How is it absurd, when you don’t know the origin of matter or even language?

since the savages also possess this instinctive knowledge and yet they have not made any progress.- Instinct is survival not invention.

Vj ~ Animals (stupor) can rely on instinct to survive, but humans need intelligence.

Re: Why the science of evolution is a failure? Part 2

The acquired knowledge alone is the cause of progress.
WOW, how profound, yet known in some manner for a few million years.
Vj ~ Yep! It was revealed.

All of us during our childhood did not possess accurate knowledge of right and wrong,
ABSOLUTELY CORRECT, we will not “possess” it, but we can LEARN it.
Vj ~ So which ape taught the first human?

but after having studied under our learned teachers, we were enabled to distinguish between right and wrong, virtue and vice.
and where did they get it? An infinite regression to the point where some one “learned it on their own”. and if they can do it, so can anyone else.- And the rest is just more ignorant word salad.
Vj ~ No one can learn it on their own. We’re being taught now and will be so for the future and so we were from the very beginning of creation.

Ideas grew out of intelligence and intelligence grew out of language. So how could the idea of language evolve, before or without intelligence? If a sentence is not complete, it won't make any sense. In the same way, if a language is not complete, it cannot make us intelligent.