in agganna sutra and other sutras i don't remember correctly buddha has stated that humans originated from some divine beings kotis of years ago while theory of evolution clearly states that we are no older than 2 million years. and about the shape of the world, what buddhism says is our world is flat and that's what buddhists believed for centuries until science proved it to be wrong. so buddhists change their interpretation. buddhism is just another religion with it's own myths and rituals. nothing more.
Latest ads
-
Tele marketing executive- nuwandse
- Updated:
-
Gampaha Thenya Mishel
- menuka2000
- Updated:
-
Handmade Character Soft Toy Bluey Bingo- anil1961
- Updated:
-
Colombo Dahua POE Switch 8 Ports (DH-PFS3010-8ET-65)- hashaz2012
- Updated:
-
Singapore V2Ray VPN for Tunneling
- hu KANNA
- Updated:
කෘතිම බුද්ධියට පින් පව් වෙනවද?
- Thread starter DragonD
- Start date
in agganna sutra and other sutras i don't remember correctly buddha has stated that humans originated from some divine beings kotis of years ago while theory of evolution clearly states that we are no older than 2 million years. and about the shape of the world, what buddhism says is our world is flat and that's what buddhists believed for centuries until science proved it to be wrong. so buddhists change their interpretation. buddhism is just another religion with it's own myths and rituals. nothing more.
these hardcore buddhists will always change their interpretations and try to prove their myths
that's what happens with every religion. every theory goes through 2 stages.
1. they say it doesn't match with their religious texts so it will be proven otherwise later.
2. then they say they knew it all along and right here their texts have stated something that is similar to the new findings and they knew it all along.
theory is evolution is not just a theory
http://io9.gizmodo.com/8-scientific-discoveries-that-prove-evolution-is-real-1729902558
here is a nice video explaining toe
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOfRN0KihOU
You've been told that "evolution is just a theory", a guess, a hunch, and not a fact, not proven. You've been misled. Keep reading, and in less than two minutes from now you'll know that you've been misinformed. We're not going to try and change your mind about evolution. We just want to point out that "it's just a theory" is not a valid argument.
The Theory of Evolution is a theory, but guess what? When scientists use the word theory, it has a different meaning to normal everyday use.1 That's right, it all comes down to the multiple meanings of the word theory. If you said to a scientist that you didn't believe in evolution because it was "just a theory", they'd probably be a bit puzzled.
In everyday use, theory means a guess or a hunch, something that maybe needs proof. In science, a theory is not a guess, not a hunch. It's a well-substantiated, well-supported, well-documented explanation for our observations.2 It ties together all the facts about something, providing an explanation that fits all the observations and can be used to make predictions. In science, theory is the ultimate goal, the explanation. It's as close to proven as anything in science can be.
Some people think that in science, you have a theory, and once it's proven, it becomes a law. That's not how it works. In science, we collect facts, or observations, we use laws to describe them, and a theory to explain them. You don't promote a theory to a law by proving it. A theory never becomes a law.
This bears repeating. A theory never becomes a law. In fact, if there was a hierarchy of science, theories would be higher than laws. There is nothing higher, or better, than a theory. Laws describe things, theories explain them. An example will help you to understand this. There's a law of gravity, which is the description of gravity. It basically says that if you let go of something it'll fall. It doesn't say why. Then there's the theory of gravity, which is an attempt to explain why. Actually, Newton's Theory of Gravity did a pretty good job, but Einstein's Theory of Relativity does a better job of explaining it. These explanations are called theories, and will always be theories. They can't be changed into laws, because laws are different things. Laws describe, and theories explain.
Just because it's called a theory of gravity, doesn't mean that it's just a guess. It's been tested. All our observations are supported by it, as well as its predictions that we've tested. Also, gravity is real! You can observe it for yourself. Just because it's real doesn't mean that the explanation is a law. The explanation, in scientific terms, is called a theory.
Evolution is the same. There's the fact of evolution. Evolution (genetic change over generations)3 happens, just like gravity does. Don't take my word for it.4 Ask your science teacher, or google it. But that's not the issue we are addressing here. The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection is our best explanation for the fact of evolution. It has been tested and scrutinised for over 150 years, and is supported by all the relevant observations.
Next time someone tries to tell you that evolution is just a theory, as a way of dismissing it, as if it's just something someone guessed at, remember that they're using the non-scientific meaning of the word. If that person is a teacher, or minister, or some other figure of authority, they should know better. In fact, they probably do, and are trying to mislead you.5
Evolution is not just a theory, it's triumphantly a theory!
source
theory is evolution is not just a theory
http://io9.gizmodo.com/8-scientific-discoveries-that-prove-evolution-is-real-1729902558
here is a nice video explaining toe
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOfRN0KihOU
You've been told that "evolution is just a theory", a guess, a hunch, and not a fact, not proven. You've been misled. Keep reading, and in less than two minutes from now you'll know that you've been misinformed. We're not going to try and change your mind about evolution. We just want to point out that "it's just a theory" is not a valid argument.
The Theory of Evolution is a theory, but guess what? When scientists use the word theory, it has a different meaning to normal everyday use.1 That's right, it all comes down to the multiple meanings of the word theory. If you said to a scientist that you didn't believe in evolution because it was "just a theory", they'd probably be a bit puzzled.
In everyday use, theory means a guess or a hunch, something that maybe needs proof. In science, a theory is not a guess, not a hunch. It's a well-substantiated, well-supported, well-documented explanation for our observations.2 It ties together all the facts about something, providing an explanation that fits all the observations and can be used to make predictions. In science, theory is the ultimate goal, the explanation. It's as close to proven as anything in science can be.
Some people think that in science, you have a theory, and once it's proven, it becomes a law. That's not how it works. In science, we collect facts, or observations, we use laws to describe them, and a theory to explain them. You don't promote a theory to a law by proving it. A theory never becomes a law.
This bears repeating. A theory never becomes a law. In fact, if there was a hierarchy of science, theories would be higher than laws. There is nothing higher, or better, than a theory. Laws describe things, theories explain them. An example will help you to understand this. There's a law of gravity, which is the description of gravity. It basically says that if you let go of something it'll fall. It doesn't say why. Then there's the theory of gravity, which is an attempt to explain why. Actually, Newton's Theory of Gravity did a pretty good job, but Einstein's Theory of Relativity does a better job of explaining it. These explanations are called theories, and will always be theories. They can't be changed into laws, because laws are different things. Laws describe, and theories explain.
Just because it's called a theory of gravity, doesn't mean that it's just a guess. It's been tested. All our observations are supported by it, as well as its predictions that we've tested. Also, gravity is real! You can observe it for yourself. Just because it's real doesn't mean that the explanation is a law. The explanation, in scientific terms, is called a theory.
Evolution is the same. There's the fact of evolution. Evolution (genetic change over generations)3 happens, just like gravity does. Don't take my word for it.4 Ask your science teacher, or google it. But that's not the issue we are addressing here. The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection is our best explanation for the fact of evolution. It has been tested and scrutinised for over 150 years, and is supported by all the relevant observations.
Next time someone tries to tell you that evolution is just a theory, as a way of dismissing it, as if it's just something someone guessed at, remember that they're using the non-scientific meaning of the word. If that person is a teacher, or minister, or some other figure of authority, they should know better. In fact, they probably do, and are trying to mislead you.5
Evolution is not just a theory, it's triumphantly a theory!
source
In the middle of the discussion, Dr. Ruse claimed that evolution is a proven fact, just as "proven" as 2+2=4. When challenged, he insisted the two statements are equivalently true. Is this so? If not, what is the difference?
Here's a simple experiment to verify one of the statements. Extend two fingers on your left hand, and then extend two on your right hand. Lay them all on the table in front of you, and count them. You should get four. If you are careful, every time you count them, you will get four. It's an observational fact.
Now devise an experiment to verify evolution. Keep trying. There must be one. I suspect even Dr. Ruse would be unable to propose an experiment to verify evolution like we verified our mathematical equation. Even if both statements are facts, obviously they are not the same kind of facts.
That's because evolution is not something we can observe. If it's happening today, it's going too slow to observe. If it happened in the past, we can't return to the past to see. It may be a fact of history, but how would we know? Certainly not in the same way we know 2+2=4.
Evolution, at the most, is an idea about history, not observational science. There may be inferences we can make about the past based on modern observations, and these may or may not be true, but don't bother claiming that ideas about history are the same as repeatable observations in the present. And don't insult us by thinking that we will believe that they are.
It makes you wonder if evolutionists really believe what they say or if they are purposively trying to mislead. I suspect there are some of both.
Source
We can pull out sources all day long. but nothing proves anything. be vigilant before you believe 100% in anything. because there are always other possibilities.
who says there are evidence to disprove TOE ? you are misguided by church. it's them who spread the myth that TOE is just a theory. every evidence we have found so far proves we evolved from a primate. what evidence do you have to say otherwise ? just because we can't see past doesn't mean everything we say about past has to be just a theory. and what evidence do you have to support buddha's theory of evolution ? that we are evolved from some divine beings kotis of years ago ? what fossil have you found to prove there was a time when average human life span is billions of years ? evolution is not a theory it's a fact. no matter how many times you and church repeats it you can't change that. it clearly disproves the statement that buddha could see past.
you asked where buddhism says earth is flat. read saptha suryodgamana sutra. it clearly states that when the 7th sun rose maha sumeru mountain collapse or something. what buddhism says is it's a huge mountain situated at the center of the ocean and 4 lands. what evidence have you found to prove the existence of such a mountain ? when confronted in "pancha maha wadaya" a buddhist monk claimed that science is a child compared to science, earth is flat. what science says today will proved to be false tomorrow. and what buddhists do now is using ambiguity of tripitaka and interpret it as something else which accords with latest findings just as the same way you interpret agganna sutra to explain origin of micro organisms. if you read tripitaka you will find many other references where buddha believed in maha sumeru mountain. it's your blind faith that lead you to ignore the obvious meaning and interpret them in the way you like so that scientific facts wont contradict them. buddhism is just another religion supported by mere faith.
saptha surydgama sutra gena hoyaddi mata honda wiwadayak hambuna
kiyawanna kemati ayata mama dannam balanna
http://sanwedi.blogspot.com/2013/07/blog-post_7521.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
conversation
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atheist
1.
//එහි අවිද්යාත්මක අසාර්ථක තර්කනයක් යැයි හුවා දක්වමින් බිඳ දැමිය හැකි එකදු කරුණක් හෝ සොයාගැනීමට අසමත් වීමි. ඒ වෙනුවට මට පෙනී ගියේ සියල්ල ඉතා ප්රවේශමෙන් තර්කාණුකූලව ගොඩ නගන ලද ශක්තිමත් දර්ශනයක් බවය//
මමත් තරමක් බර්ට්රන්ඩ් රසල්ගේ අදහස් කියවා තියෙනවා. ඔබේ උපුටා දැක්වීම මා මවිත කලා! ලෝ ප්රකට හේතුවාදියෙක් වන ඔහු මෙවැන්නක් යම් තැනක කියා ඇතිනම්, එසේ කීමට ඔහු පෙලඹුනු හේතු නිසැකවම තර්කානුකූලව විග්රහ කර ඇතුවාට සැක නැහැ. ඔබට හැකිද උපුටා ඇති රසල්ගේ වැකි වල මූලාශ්රය කුමක්දැයි කියන්න?
2. භෞතිකවාදීන් නිශ්ප්රභා කරන්නේ අධි භෞතික දේ පමනයි. Cognitive Science වල මූලික අංශ වන psychology, artificial intelligence, philosophy, neuroscience, linguistics, and anthropology විශයන් තුල එකකවත් අධි භෞතික දෙයක් හෝ බුද්ධ දර්ශනයේ එන හෝ ගෞතම සිද්ධාර්ථ වදාල අධි භෞතික දෙයක් ඔප්පු කර තිබෙනවාද? මට පෙනෙනා අයුරින් ඔබ ඒ ගැන හොඳ දැනුමක් ඇති අයෙක් බවයි පෙනෙන්නෙ. ඔබට හැකිද අඩුවශයෙන් බුද්ධ දර්ශනය හෝ ගෞතම සිද්ධාර්ථ පොරක් යැයි කීමට යොදා ගත හැකි ශාස්ත්රීය පර්යේශන පත්රිකා එකක් හෝ කීපයක් නම් කරන්න. අදාල පර්යේශන පත්රිකා විස්තරය Topic, Author, Journal, Year ආදී වශයෙන් සම්මත ආකාරයෙන් වන්නේ නම් නොමග යෑම් අවම කරගත හැකියැයි සිතනවා.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Buddhist
1. මේ අදහස් 100% ක්ම බලාගෙන කරන ලද පරිවර්තනයක් නොවන නමුත් රසල් සිටියේ මේ මතයේ බව මට හොඳටම විශ්වාසයි. ඒ බව මා කියවා තිබෙනවා. නමුත් මූලාශ්ර නම් වශයෙන් නම් කරන්නට තරම් මට මතකයක් නැහැ. කරුණාකර Russel and Buddhism කියා Google Search කර බලන්න. මින් පසුව මා එවැනි වැදගත් යමක් කියවනවිට එහි මූලාශ්රය සහ පිටුඅංකය ලියා තබාගන්නම්.
2. භාවනාවෙන් ලබන මානසික දියුණුව යනු අධි භෞතික දෙයක් බව ඔබ පිළිගන්නවාද? මේ පිළිබඳව ලෝ පතළ සිල්වෙස්ටර් විශ්වවිද්යාලයේ Cognitive Science Laboratory මගින් පළකර ඇති පර්යේෂණ පත්රිකා කියවා බලන්න. මා මේ ක්ෂේත්රයේ විශේෂඥයෙක් නොවෙයි. නමුත් මාත් සමඟ මොරටුව සරසවියේ පශ්චාත් උපාධිය ඔය ක්ෂේත්රයෙන් හැදෑරූ මිතුරන් දෙදෙනෙක් ( Salinda Hettiarachchi , Viraj Dayarathne) ළඟ ඒ බව සනාථ කළ හැකි බාගත කරගත් එවැනි පර්යේෂණ පත්රිකා සිය ගණනක් තිබෙනවා. මා මෙහි සඳහන් කළ අදහස් ඔවුන්ද සනාථ කළා. ඔවුන්ගෙන් ඒ තොරතුරු ලබාගන්නට මා උත්සාහයක යෙදෙන්නම්.
*බුදුන්වහන්සේ සහ භික්ෂුවක් අතර සංවාදයේ මූලාශ්රය මා කමෙන්ටුවක දක්වා තිබෙනවා. එයත් අධි භෞතික නොවේද...?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atheist
1. බලන්න.. ඔබ කලින්ම දරා ගෙන සිටින මතයක් සත්යේක්ශනය කිරීමට ඔබ යොදා ගන්නේ "රසල් සිටියේ මේ මතයේ බව මට හොඳටම විශ්වාසයි" යන ඔබගේම විශ්වාසයක්! ඔබට හොඳටම විශ්වාසයි යන්න මට ප්රශ්න කරන්න බැහැ තමයි. නමුත් කියවන්නාට ඒත්තු යන අයුරින්, සාක්ශි සහිතව යමක් ප්රකාශ කිරීම [විශේශයෙන් විවාදාත්මක දේ කීමේදී] ඕනෑම කෙනෙකුගේ වගකීම. [අයි.ටී.එන්. විපරම භාවිතා කරන්නෙත් ඔබේ ක්රමයයි!] බලන්න ඔබ ඔබේ විශ්වාසය ගැන සීරියස් වුවත්, මා ප්රශ්න කරන දෙය ගැන එතරම් සීරියස් නැහැ. ඒ ඔබ ඉතා දැඩිව පූර්ව නිගමනයකට දැනටම එලඹී ඇති නිසයි. ඔබ ඉතා සැහැල්ලුවෙන් මට කියන්නේ ගූගල් හි සර්ච් කරන ලෙස. ඇත්තටම මම කලින් කිව්වා වගේ, මම මේ විශය ගැන උනන්දුයි. ඇති තරම් සර්ච් කර තිබෙනවා. මට නම් මහා විද්යාඥයන්/විද්වතුන් විසින් බුදු දහමේ එන කරුනු ගැන සමස්තයක් ලෙස මහා ඉහලින් වර්නනා කරන විශේශ ප්රකාශ කිසි දිනක හමුවී නැහැ. පහත DKRulzzJuly දී ඇති http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_science පිටුවට යන්න. ඇත්ත.. බුදු දහමේ එන දර්ශනවාදී පිවිසුම ගැන සහ එය ආචාර ධර්ම පද්ධතියක් ලෙස විද්වතුන් එකඟවී තිබෙනවා සහ ඒ ගැන කිසිම විවාදයක් නැහැ. නමුත් එයින් ගම්යවන්නේ නැහැ බුදු දහමේ එන සියල්ල කෙටියෙන් කිව්වොත් - A [නැවත ඉපදීම] සිට Z [නිවන] දක්වා මෙකී නොකී දේවල් ඔවුන් අනුමත කල බව. ඔබ එසේ යැයි කියනවානම් [ඔබේ විශ්වාසය ගැන නොවේ!], මගේ අභියෝගය ..."හැකිනම් මූලාශ්ර පෙන්වන්න!"... පිලිගත හැකි සාක්ෂි, නිරවුල් මූලාශ්ර ඇත්නම් ඕනෑම දෙයක් කිසිම කෙනෙකුට ප්රතික්ශේප කරන්න බැහැ.
ඔබ ඇතැම් විට ඊලඟට උපුටා දක්වනු ඇති ආතර් සී ක්ලාක් විසින් කලා යැයි ප්රකාශිත ජනප්රිය කතාවේ මූලාශ්රය නම් ඔහුගේ Deep Range නැමැති නවකතාවයි!
2. " භාවනාවෙන් ලබන මානසික දියුනුව" යන්නෙන් ඔබ අදහස් කරන්නේ කුමක්ද? සිත එකඟ කිරීම හෝ සන්සුන් කරගැනීමේ මගක් ලෙස භාවනාව යොදාගත හැකියි යන්නට විවාදයක් තිබිය නොහැකියි. එය කිසිසේත්ම අධි මානසික තත්වයක් නොවෙයි. මා ප්රශ්න කරන්නේ එය නොවේ. එය (භාවනා) මගින් ලබා ගත හැකියි කියන අධි මානසික හෝ අධි භෞතික තත්ව ගැනයි. මා ඉතාමත් කෘතඥ වෙනවා එවැනි දෙයක් ඔප්පු කර ඇති නම් ඒවා දැනගැනීමට. මූලාශ්ර දකින තුරු ඇතැයිද නොකියමි! නැතැයිද නොකියමි!! හදිසියක් නැහැ.
බුදුන්වහන්සේ සහ භික්ෂුවක් අතර සංවාදයේ මූලාශ්රය ගැන: ඔබ කියා ඇති මූලාශ්රය කියවන තුරු යමක් කිව නොහැකියි. මතක තබා ගත යුතු දේ තමයි, බොහෝ විට මෙවැනි දෙයක නොයෙක් අර්ථ ගැන්වීම් කල හැකිවීම. උදාහරනයක් ලෙස ගන්න නොස්ට්රඩාමුස්ගේ ප්රකාශ. එහිදී වන්නේ එම නොපැහැදිලි [vague] ප්රකාශ අපි දන්නා දෙයකට හුවා දැක්වීම්. මෙවැනි දේ කියවීම එවැනි දෙයකට නොනැඹුරු පසුබිමක සිට වියයුතුයි. පූර්ව නිගමන නැහැ. මූලාශ්ර දකින තුරු ඇතැයිද නොකියමි! නැතැයිද නොකියමි!! හදිසියක් නැහැ.
This is the case with all religious people. They are biased against proved facts and believe in every fairy tale their religious leaders or texts say about anything. This example is enough to understand how their mind works. They can't understand how others who don't believe in their religion fail to understand or believe such obvious things they believe in. We experienced the same thing when we were religious and they still think their case is entirely different and special and keep stating their beliefs without evidence saying we are fools not to see how accurate their beliefs are.
ane bun ochara deyak terum ganna barida bun ubata
aaradanawak kalama api yanne garu karana nisa ho asawak nisa witaramada bun
aradanwak kalama banata wadinne asawata da?
lo satwaya duken mudawa ganime aramuna tamai eka asawak nemei
pinak karane api asawak nisa nemei asawal duru karanna
daana denne loba kama nati karanna
dan ubala gedara daaana ehema denawa neda ea denne aasawak nisada?
pinak kara ganima aramuna uda misak tawa tawa labenna kiyala daana denne na ne
who says there are evidence to disprove TOE ? you are misguided by church. it's them who spread the myth that TOE is just a theory. every evidence we have found so far proves we evolved from a primate. what evidence do you have to say otherwise ? just because we can't see past doesn't mean everything we say about past has to be just a theory.
This is like asking evidence to disprove existence of God. I say there is a golden egg 1km beneath your house underground. Can you disprove it? Just because you can't disprove something doesn't mean it is correct. What is true is there are many cases for and against evolution. Since you asked "who says" i would like to refer you to this
and what evidence do you have to support buddha's theory of evolution ? that we are evolved from some divine beings kotis of years ago ? what fossil have you found to prove there was a time when average human life span is billions of years ?
Absolutely none. Evolution is the last thing i want to gather from his teachings.
evolution is not a theory it's a fact. no matter how many times you and church repeats it you can't change that. it clearly disproves the statement that buddha could see past.
Just because you believe in something and just because something "seems" to be true and appealing, doesn't make it a fact.
you asked where buddhism says earth is flat. read saptha suryodgamana sutra. it clearly states that when the 7th sun rose maha sumeru mountain collapse or something. what buddhism says is it's a huge mountain situated at the center of the ocean and 4 lands. what evidence have you found to prove the existence of such a mountain ? when confronted in "pancha maha wadaya" a buddhist monk claimed that science is a child compared to science, earth is flat.
About "Earth is Flat": When one monk says or does something he wish, it does not become part of Buddhism. I guess you will agree with me.
About Sunera: The time span we are talking is billions of years from now. Have you considered the possible changes in such timespan?
Have you considered the effects of having 6 suns?
Have you read the actual thripitaka and confirmed it's not an interpretation mistake like most of the people have done ?
This is like asking evidence to disprove existence of God. I say there is a golden egg 1km beneath your house underground. Can you disprove it? Just because you can't disprove something doesn't mean it is correct. What is true is there are many cases for and against evolution. Since you asked "who says" i would like to refer you to this
and what evidence do you have to support buddha's theory of evolution ? that we are evolved from some divine beings kotis of years ago ? what fossil have you found to prove there was a time when average human life span is billions of years ?
Absolutely none. Evolution is the last thing i want to gather from his teachings.
evolution is not a theory it's a fact. no matter how many times you and church repeats it you can't change that. it clearly disproves the statement that buddha could see past.
Just because you believe in something and just because something "seems" to be true and appealing, doesn't make it a fact.
you asked where buddhism says earth is flat. read saptha suryodgamana sutra. it clearly states that when the 7th sun rose maha sumeru mountain collapse or something. what buddhism says is it's a huge mountain situated at the center of the ocean and 4 lands. what evidence have you found to prove the existence of such a mountain ? when confronted in "pancha maha wadaya" a buddhist monk claimed that science is a child compared to science, earth is flat.
About "Earth is Flat": When one monk says or does something he wish, it does not become part of Buddhism. I guess you will agree with me.
About Sunera: The time span we are talking is billions of years from now. Have you considered the possible changes in such timespan?
Have you considered the effects of having 6 suns?
Have you read the actual thripitaka and confirmed it's not an interpretation mistake like most of the people have done ?
Last edited:
එහෙම කෘතිම බුද්ධියක් හැදුවත් එතනට පෙර ජීවිතයකින් සිතක්(විඥානයක්) එන්නෙ නෑ කැඩිල ගියාම ඊලඟ තැනට යන්නෙත් නැති නිසා පව් පින් අදාල වෙන්නෙ නෑ නේද..
@thelaa rox
I read the article and it only proved that both you and the person who wrote this know next to nothing about evolutionary theory. What it proves is how much religious beliefs can lead someone to believe in myths. Besides he got his phd in engineering. Read his wikipedia article. Young earth creationist, christian apologist bla bla bla. If one is to be awed by the opinion of a scientist, one should much more so by the opinions of thousands of scientists. Regarding the facts he stated, I don't think even a 4th grader would accept them to be true.
Evolution Is Not Happening Now, There are no intermediate forms these are bullshits. It's happening now right before our eyes. This man is driven with the desperation to collect whatever he can to prove the bible is correct. As it seems you haven't read the article. What you have done was googled to find an article written by some scientist, hoping we accept anything written in the name of science by any scientist, against evolutionary theory and pasted here. Next time clearly state your claims or beliefs against something. Debate isn't about 2 parties sharing links. If you honestly read it and believed it I feel sorry for you. It explains how you are capable of believing in fairy tales in the name of religion. You are deluded with confirmation bias.
This is the paramount draw back in Buddhism as a religion. Even if it teaches avihinsa and many other good things, it still deludes people into false beliefs leading them to reject facts.
I didn't say buddhism says earth is flat just because a monk said so. Read Spata Suryodgamana Sutra. It clearly states that earth is flat and there are 4 lands surrounding Maha sumeru mountain and that mountain situated at the center of the ocean. Have we found any such mountain ? Where is the center of the ocean ? All this was just another theory of buddha which turned out to be wrong. Apart from Buddhism, Hinduism and Jainism teaches about the existence of a such mountain. What I said is when confronted by a christian priest in pancha maha wada claiming earth isn't flat, the monk said buddhism is something beyond science and scientist will found in future they were wrong about saying earth isn't flat. I emphasized it to see how Buddhists using the ambiguity of texts to interpret it in the way they like to avoid criticism. Every modern Buddhist know no such mountain exists on earth and earth isn't flat. So what they believe now is the mountain Buddha said is another celestial thing situated somewhere in universe dividing these 4 worlds. What Buddhists and every devotees of other religions do is hold on to their beliefs as long as they are not challenged and interpret it according to the latest findings so that it cannot be challenged.
I read the article and it only proved that both you and the person who wrote this know next to nothing about evolutionary theory. What it proves is how much religious beliefs can lead someone to believe in myths. Besides he got his phd in engineering. Read his wikipedia article. Young earth creationist, christian apologist bla bla bla. If one is to be awed by the opinion of a scientist, one should much more so by the opinions of thousands of scientists. Regarding the facts he stated, I don't think even a 4th grader would accept them to be true.
Evolution Is Not Happening Now, There are no intermediate forms these are bullshits. It's happening now right before our eyes. This man is driven with the desperation to collect whatever he can to prove the bible is correct. As it seems you haven't read the article. What you have done was googled to find an article written by some scientist, hoping we accept anything written in the name of science by any scientist, against evolutionary theory and pasted here. Next time clearly state your claims or beliefs against something. Debate isn't about 2 parties sharing links. If you honestly read it and believed it I feel sorry for you. It explains how you are capable of believing in fairy tales in the name of religion. You are deluded with confirmation bias.
This is why I said you are blinded by faith.What you are doing is collecting facts to support your current beliefs and ignore everything else just like the aforementioned creationist did.
That's why I explained with evidence why evolutionary theory is correct. Evolutionary theory isn't something that explains how we originated. It's something that explains the observed fact that we evolved from a primate. Think about it in this way. Newton's gravitational theory isn't something that predicts you will fall when jumped off from a building. It's a theory that explains the fact that you fall from the building. Are you willing to jump off a building just because it's a theory ? It could be wrong in certain cases. But the fact that you will fall is 100% right no matter how inaccurate the theory is. It's a good thing being skeptical about scientific theories. But basis of your skepticism is utter ignorance and that's why you are willing to reject facts to support your false beliefs. Every then current major religions taught humans have a celestial origin and that's what Buddha learned. He couldn't find the beginning of the human kind and learned all these theories and formed a new theory saying we are from some brahmas loka kotis of years ago while the truth is we are from primates 2 millions of years ago.
This is the paramount draw back in Buddhism as a religion. Even if it teaches avihinsa and many other good things, it still deludes people into false beliefs leading them to reject facts.
I didn't say buddhism says earth is flat just because a monk said so. Read Spata Suryodgamana Sutra. It clearly states that earth is flat and there are 4 lands surrounding Maha sumeru mountain and that mountain situated at the center of the ocean. Have we found any such mountain ? Where is the center of the ocean ? All this was just another theory of buddha which turned out to be wrong. Apart from Buddhism, Hinduism and Jainism teaches about the existence of a such mountain. What I said is when confronted by a christian priest in pancha maha wada claiming earth isn't flat, the monk said buddhism is something beyond science and scientist will found in future they were wrong about saying earth isn't flat. I emphasized it to see how Buddhists using the ambiguity of texts to interpret it in the way they like to avoid criticism. Every modern Buddhist know no such mountain exists on earth and earth isn't flat. So what they believe now is the mountain Buddha said is another celestial thing situated somewhere in universe dividing these 4 worlds. What Buddhists and every devotees of other religions do is hold on to their beliefs as long as they are not challenged and interpret it according to the latest findings so that it cannot be challenged.
No I do not. Believing in a almighty god or any kind of deities is not different from believing in Buddha could do miracles and see past. Faith is the only basis to support such claims.
Person of interest baluwada?
nattam hoyagena balanna tv series eka.. oya hitapu ewa eke wenawa
for the question:
AI eka machan jeewiyek wenne na neda? AI ekata hitanna puluwan unata physical body ekak na and power ekath ekka depend ne.
Human kenek, sathek kiyanne athmayak tiyana kenek (Buddhism anuwa). artificially hadapu ekakata athmayak ennenane. oya AI ekata Buddhism kiyala dunnoth uu logically hitai mama mehema kaloth paw, (un acceptable) kiyala nokara innath puluwan.
pin paw balapanne jeewayak/athmayak tiyana ayata witarane. so AI eken mini maruwa kiyala uu kawada hari marunama apaye yanne nane..
harida manda///
mata hituna eka mama kiwe...
nattam hoyagena balanna tv series eka.. oya hitapu ewa eke wenawa
for the question:
AI eka machan jeewiyek wenne na neda? AI ekata hitanna puluwan unata physical body ekak na and power ekath ekka depend ne.
Human kenek, sathek kiyanne athmayak tiyana kenek (Buddhism anuwa). artificially hadapu ekakata athmayak ennenane. oya AI ekata Buddhism kiyala dunnoth uu logically hitai mama mehema kaloth paw, (un acceptable) kiyala nokara innath puluwan.
pin paw balapanne jeewayak/athmayak tiyana ayata witarane. so AI eken mini maruwa kiyala uu kawada hari marunama apaye yanne nane..
harida manda///
mata hituna eka mama kiwe...
I read the article and it only proved that both you and the person who wrote this know next to nothing about evolutionary theory. What it proves is how much religious beliefs can lead someone to believe in myths. Besides he got his phd in engineering. Read his wikipedia article. Young earth creationist, christian apologist bla bla bla. If one is to be awed by the opinion of a scientist, one should much more so by the opinions of thousands of scientists. Regarding the facts he stated, I don't think even a 4th grader would accept them to be true.
You are going after the person who wrote it and not the opinions he wrote?
seems not that smart. In Galileo's time were there thousands of scientists in the same opinion or just him? 
when something is said by thousands it will appear as the truth even if it is not. It applies to everything including science.
Evolution Is Not Happening Now, There are no intermediate forms these are bullshits. It's happening now right before our eyes. This man is driven with the desperation to collect whatever he can to prove the bible is correct. As it seems you haven't read the article. What you have done was googled to find an article written by some scientist, hoping we accept anything written in the name of science by any scientist, against evolutionary theory and pasted here. Next time clearly state your claims or beliefs against something. Debate isn't about 2 parties sharing links. If you honestly read it and believed it I feel sorry for you. It explains how you are capable of believing in fairy tales in the name of religion. You are deluded with confirmation bias.
This is why I said you are blinded by faith.What you are doing is collecting facts to support your current beliefs and ignore everything else just like the aforementioned creationist did.
You "asked" who says evolution is not a fact and i just showed you one of many articles. I was in the opinion that it is being debated so i proved my point. Wait a minute! did i told you i believe in anything? Did i reject evolution anywhere? OR did i accept it anywhere? How do you know what i believe? You seem to be good at jumping into conclusions, no wonder you believe in evolution
That's why I explained with evidence why evolutionary theory is correct. Evolutionary theory isn't something that explains how we originated. It's something that explains the observed fact that we evolved from a primate. Think about it in this way. Newton's gravitational theory isn't something that predicts you will fall when jumped off from a building. It's a theory that explains the fact that you fall from the building. Are you willing to jump off a building just because it's a theory ? It could be wrong in certain cases. But the fact that you will fall is 100% right no matter how inaccurate the theory is. It's a good thing being skeptical about scientific theories. But basis of your skepticism is utter ignorance and that's why you are willing to reject facts to support your false beliefs. Every then current major religions taught humans have a celestial origin and that's what Buddha learned. He couldn't find the beginning of the human kind and learned all these theories and formed a new theory saying we are from some brahmas loka kotis of years ago while the truth is we are from primates 2 millions of years ago.
This is the paramount draw back in Buddhism as a religion. Even if it teaches avihinsa and many other good things, it still deludes people into false beliefs leading them to reject facts.
Please don't compare law of gravity with theory of evolution. Law of gravity can be proved but evolution can't. It is like when you go to a dying person with a stab wound with a knife suddenly someone comes and you become a murderer in a hindi movie
You can have millions of evidence but it does not mean you have 100% assurance.
I didn't say buddhism says earth is flat just because a monk said so. Read Spata Suryodgamana Sutra. It clearly states that earth is flat and there are 4 lands surrounding Maha sumeru mountain and that mountain situated at the center of the ocean. Have we found any such mountain ? Where is the center of the ocean ? All this was just another theory of buddha which turned out to be wrong. Apart from Buddhism, Hinduism and Jainism teaches about the existence of a such mountain. What I said is when confronted by a christian priest in pancha maha wada claiming earth isn't flat, the monk said buddhism is something beyond science and scientist will found in future they were wrong about saying earth isn't flat. I emphasized it to see how Buddhists using the ambiguity of texts to interpret it in the way they like to avoid criticism. Every modern Buddhist know no such mountain exists on earth and earth isn't flat. So what they believe now is the mountain Buddha said is another celestial thing situated somewhere in universe dividing these 4 worlds. What Buddhists and every devotees of other religions do is hold on to their beliefs as long as they are not challenged and interpret it according to the latest findings so that it cannot be challenged.
Don't say earth is flat because something is situated at center of 4 lands that would be hilarious. I have read that suthra but i never found the part you are talking about. If you are mislead by the term "thalaya" thalaya does not mean that a flat surface (of course that is one meaning) it is used in the meaning of a plane of existence. I challenge you to quote the part which says earth is flat
You are going after the person who wrote it and not the opinions he wrote?
seems not that smart. In Galileo's time were there thousands of scientists in the same opinion or just him? when something is said by thousands it will appear as the truth even if it is not. It applies to everything including science.Evolution Is Not Happening Now, There are no intermediate forms these are bullshits. It's happening now right before our eyes. This man is driven with the desperation to collect whatever he can to prove the bible is correct. As it seems you haven't read the article. What you have done was googled to find an article written by some scientist, hoping we accept anything written in the name of science by any scientist, against evolutionary theory and pasted here. Next time clearly state your claims or beliefs against something. Debate isn't about 2 parties sharing links. If you honestly read it and believed it I feel sorry for you. It explains how you are capable of believing in fairy tales in the name of religion. You are deluded with confirmation bias.
This is why I said you are blinded by faith.What you are doing is collecting facts to support your current beliefs and ignore everything else just like the aforementioned creationist did.
You "asked" who says evolution is not a fact and i just showed you one of many articles. I was in the opinion that it is being debated so i proved my point. Wait a minute! did i told you i believe in anything? Did i reject evolution anywhere? OR did i accept it anywhere? How do you know what i believe? You seem to be good at jumping into conclusions, no wonder you believe in evolution
That's why I explained with evidence why evolutionary theory is correct. Evolutionary theory isn't something that explains how we originated. It's something that explains the observed fact that we evolved from a primate. Think about it in this way. Newton's gravitational theory isn't something that predicts you will fall when jumped off from a building. It's a theory that explains the fact that you fall from the building. Are you willing to jump off a building just because it's a theory ? It could be wrong in certain cases. But the fact that you will fall is 100% right no matter how inaccurate the theory is. It's a good thing being skeptical about scientific theories. But basis of your skepticism is utter ignorance and that's why you are willing to reject facts to support your false beliefs. Every then current major religions taught humans have a celestial origin and that's what Buddha learned. He couldn't find the beginning of the human kind and learned all these theories and formed a new theory saying we are from some brahmas loka kotis of years ago while the truth is we are from primates 2 millions of years ago.
This is the paramount draw back in Buddhism as a religion. Even if it teaches avihinsa and many other good things, it still deludes people into false beliefs leading them to reject facts.
Please don't compare law of gravity with theory of evolution. Law of gravity can be proved but evolution can't. It is like when you go to a dying person with a stab wound with a knife suddenly someone comes and you become a murderer in a hindi movie
You can have millions of evidence but it does not mean you have 100% assurance.
I didn't say buddhism says earth is flat just because a monk said so. Read Spata Suryodgamana Sutra. It clearly states that earth is flat and there are 4 lands surrounding Maha sumeru mountain and that mountain situated at the center of the ocean. Have we found any such mountain ? Where is the center of the ocean ? All this was just another theory of buddha which turned out to be wrong. Apart from Buddhism, Hinduism and Jainism teaches about the existence of a such mountain. What I said is when confronted by a christian priest in pancha maha wada claiming earth isn't flat, the monk said buddhism is something beyond science and scientist will found in future they were wrong about saying earth isn't flat. I emphasized it to see how Buddhists using the ambiguity of texts to interpret it in the way they like to avoid criticism. Every modern Buddhist know no such mountain exists on earth and earth isn't flat. So what they believe now is the mountain Buddha said is another celestial thing situated somewhere in universe dividing these 4 worlds. What Buddhists and every devotees of other religions do is hold on to their beliefs as long as they are not challenged and interpret it according to the latest findings so that it cannot be challenged.
Don't say earth is flat because something is situated at center of 4 lands that would be hilarious. I have read that suthra but i never found the part you are talking about. If you are mislead by the term "thalaya" thalaya does not mean that a flat surface (of course that is one meaning) it is used in the meaning of a plane of existence. I challenge you to quote the part which says earth is flat
