Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
New posts
All threads
Latest threads
New posts
Trending threads
Trending
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New ads
New profile posts
Latest activity
Free Ads
Latest reviews
Search ads
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Contact us
Latest ads
Ad icon
Video Content Creator
pramukag
Updated:
Today at 6:10 AM
Ad icon
QA Engineer Intern
pramukag
Updated:
Today at 6:07 AM
Ad icon
Sell your Land, House on idamata.lk for FREE
sajith.xp.pk
Updated:
Thursday at 9:03 AM
Handmade Character Soft Toys
anil1961
Updated:
Tuesday at 2:11 PM
Bodim.lk out now !
Manoj Suranga Bandara
Updated:
Jun 21, 2026
Electronics
Vehicles
Property
Search
Reply to thread
Forums
General
Religious
Buddism-the only real science
Get the App
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ela_eluwa120" data-source="post: 6441167" data-attributes="member: 193664"><p><strong><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"><span style="color: Blue">I used to be a scientist</span></span></span><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"><span style="color: blue">.</span></span></span></strong>[FONT=&quot]<span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"><strong><span style="color: Blue"> I did Theoretical Physics at Cambridge University, </span></strong>hanging out in the same building as the later-to-be-famous Professor Stephen Hawking. I became disillusioned with such science when, as an insider, I saw how dogmatic some scientists could be. <strong><span style="color: Blue">A dogma, according to the dictionary, is an arrogant declaration of an opinion. This was a fitting description of the science that I saw in the labs of Cambridge.</span></strong> Science had lost its sense of humility. Egotistical opinion prevailed over the impartial search for Truth. My favourite aphorism from that time was:</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"></span></span> </p><p>[/FONT] <span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px">"The eminence of a great scientist, is measured by the length of time that they <strong><span style="color: #ff6600">OBSTRUCT PROGRESS</span></strong> in their field"!</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"></span> <span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px">To understand real science, one can go back to one of its founding fathers, the English philosopher Francis Bacon (1561 - 1628). He established the framework on which science was to progress, namely "the greater force of the negative instance". This meant that, having proposed </span></span><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px">a <strong><span style="color: Blue">theory to explain some natural phenomenon</span></strong></span></span><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><strong><span style="font-size: 15px"><span style="color: Blue">,</span></span></strong></span><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"> then one should try one's best to disprove it! One should test the theory with challenging experiments. One must put it on trial with rigorous argument. When a flaw appears in the theory, only then does science advance. A new discovery has been made enabling the theory to be adjusted and refined. <span style="color: Red"><strong>This fundamental and original methodology of science understood that it is impossible to prove anything with absolute certainty.</strong></span> One can only disprove with absolute certainty.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"></span> </span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"></span> <span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"><strong><span style="color: Blue">For example, how can one prove the basic law of gravity that "what goes up comes down, eventually"? </span></strong>One may throw objects up one million times and see them fall one million times. But that still does not prove "what goes up comes down".<strong><span style="color: Blue"> For NASA might then 'throw' a Saturn rocket up into space to explore Mars, and that never comes down to earth again. </span><span style="color: red">One negative instance is enough to disprove the theory with absolute certainty.</span></strong></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"><strong><span style="color: red"></span></strong></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"><strong><span style="color: red"></span></strong></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"><strong><span style="color: red"></span></strong></span></span><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"><strong><span style="color: Red">some misguided scientists </span></strong><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><strong><span style="color: Red">maintain the theory that there is no rebirth,</span></strong> that this stream of consciousness is incapable of returning to a successive human existence.</span></span></span><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><strong><span style="color: Blue">All one needs to disprove this theory, according to science, is to find one instance of rebirth, just one! </span></strong></span></span></span><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><strong><span style="color: Blue">Professor Ian Stevenson, as some of you would know, has already demonstrated many instances of rebirth.</span></strong> The theory of no rebirth has been disproved. </span><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong><span style="color: Red">[FONT=&quot]<span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'">Rebirth is now a scientific</span> <span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'">fact!</span></span></strong></span></span></span>[/FONT][FONT=&quot]<span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"><strong><span style="color: Red"> </span></strong></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"><strong><span style="color: Red"></span></strong></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"><strong><span style="color: Red"></span></strong>Modern science gives a low priority to any efforts to disprove its <strong>pet theories.</strong> There is too much vested interest in power, prestige and research grants. A courageous commitment to truth takes too many scientists out of their comfort zone.</span></span>[/FONT][FONT=&quot]<span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"><strong><span style="color: Blue">Scientists are, for the most part, brainwashed by their education and their in-group conferences to see the world in a very narrow, microscopic, way.</span></strong></span></span>[/FONT]<strong>[FONT=&quot]<span style="color: Red"><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"> The very worst scientists are those who behave like eccentric evangelists, claiming that they alone have the whole truth, and then demanding the right to impose their views on everyone else.</span></span></span></strong></p><p><strong><span style="color: Red"><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"></span></span></span></strong></p><p><strong><span style="color: Red"><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"></span></span></span>[/FONT]</strong> [FONT=&quot]<span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px">Ordinary people know so little about science that they can hardly even understand the jargon. <strong><span style="color: Blue">Yet, if they read in a newspaper or magazine "a scientist says that?", then they automatically take it to be true.</span><span style="color: Blue"> Compare this to our reaction when we read in the same journal "a politician says that?"! </span></strong></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"><strong><span style="color: Blue"></span></strong></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"><strong><span style="color: Blue"></span></strong>Why do scientists have such unchallenged credibility? Perhaps it is because the language and ritual of science has become so far removed from the common people, that scientists have become today's revered and mystical priesthood. Dressed in their ceremonial white lab coats, chanting incomprehensible mumbo jumbo about multi-dimensional fractal parallel universes, and performing magical rituals that transubstantiate metal and plastic into TV's and computers, these modern day alchemists are so awesome we'll believe anything they say. Elitist science, as once was the Pope, is now infallible.</span></span>[/FONT]</p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p><strong>[FONT=&quot]<span style="color: Red"><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"> </span></span></span></strong></p><p><strong><span style="color: Red"><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"></span></span></span></strong></p><p><strong><span style="color: Red"><span style="font-family: 'Arial Narrow'"><span style="font-size: 15px"></span></span></span>[/FONT]</strong></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ela_eluwa120, post: 6441167, member: 193664"] [B][FONT=Arial Narrow][SIZE=4][COLOR=Blue]I used to be a scientist[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Arial Narrow][SIZE=4][COLOR=blue].[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT][/B][FONT="][FONT=Arial Narrow][SIZE=4][B][COLOR=Blue] I did Theoretical Physics at Cambridge University, [/COLOR][/B]hanging out in the same building as the later-to-be-famous Professor Stephen Hawking. I became disillusioned with such science when, as an insider, I saw how dogmatic some scientists could be. [B][COLOR=Blue]A dogma, according to the dictionary, is an arrogant declaration of an opinion. This was a fitting description of the science that I saw in the labs of Cambridge.[/COLOR][/B] Science had lost its sense of humility. Egotistical opinion prevailed over the impartial search for Truth. My favourite aphorism from that time was: [/SIZE][/FONT] [/FONT] [FONT=Arial Narrow][SIZE=4]"The eminence of a great scientist, is measured by the length of time that they [B][COLOR=#ff6600]OBSTRUCT PROGRESS[/COLOR][/B] in their field"![/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Arial Narrow] [/FONT] [FONT=Arial Narrow][SIZE=4]To understand real science, one can go back to one of its founding fathers, the English philosopher Francis Bacon (1561 - 1628). He established the framework on which science was to progress, namely "the greater force of the negative instance". This meant that, having proposed [/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Arial Narrow][SIZE=4]a [B][COLOR=Blue]theory to explain some natural phenomenon[/COLOR][/B][/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Arial Narrow][B][SIZE=4][COLOR=Blue],[/COLOR][/SIZE][/B][/FONT][FONT=Arial Narrow][SIZE=4] then one should try one's best to disprove it! One should test the theory with challenging experiments. One must put it on trial with rigorous argument. When a flaw appears in the theory, only then does science advance. A new discovery has been made enabling the theory to be adjusted and refined. [COLOR=Red][B]This fundamental and original methodology of science understood that it is impossible to prove anything with absolute certainty.[/B][/COLOR] One can only disprove with absolute certainty. [/SIZE] [/FONT] [FONT=Arial Narrow][SIZE=4][B][COLOR=Blue]For example, how can one prove the basic law of gravity that "what goes up comes down, eventually"? [/COLOR][/B]One may throw objects up one million times and see them fall one million times. But that still does not prove "what goes up comes down".[B][COLOR=Blue] For NASA might then 'throw' a Saturn rocket up into space to explore Mars, and that never comes down to earth again. [/COLOR][COLOR=red]One negative instance is enough to disprove the theory with absolute certainty. [/COLOR][/B][/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Arial Narrow][SIZE=4][B][COLOR=Red]some misguided scientists [/COLOR][/B][FONT=Arial Narrow][B][COLOR=Red]maintain the theory that there is no rebirth,[/COLOR][/B] that this stream of consciousness is incapable of returning to a successive human existence.[/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Arial Narrow][SIZE=4][FONT=Arial Narrow][B][COLOR=Blue]All one needs to disprove this theory, according to science, is to find one instance of rebirth, just one! [/COLOR][/B][/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Arial Narrow][SIZE=4][FONT=Arial Narrow][B][COLOR=Blue]Professor Ian Stevenson, as some of you would know, has already demonstrated many instances of rebirth.[/COLOR][/B] The theory of no rebirth has been disproved. [/FONT][SIZE=5][B][COLOR=Red][FONT="][FONT=Arial Narrow]Rebirth is now a scientific[/FONT] [FONT=Arial Narrow]fact![/FONT][/COLOR][/B][/SIZE][/SIZE][/FONT][SIZE=4][SIZE=5][B][COLOR=Red][/COLOR][/B][/SIZE][/SIZE][/FONT][FONT="][FONT=Arial Narrow][SIZE=4][B][COLOR=Red] [/COLOR][/B]Modern science gives a low priority to any efforts to disprove its [B]pet theories.[/B] There is too much vested interest in power, prestige and research grants. A courageous commitment to truth takes too many scientists out of their comfort zone.[/SIZE][/FONT][/FONT][FONT="][FONT=Arial Narrow][SIZE=4][B][COLOR=Blue]Scientists are, for the most part, brainwashed by their education and their in-group conferences to see the world in a very narrow, microscopic, way.[/COLOR][/B][/SIZE][/FONT][/FONT][B][FONT="][COLOR=Red][FONT=Arial Narrow][SIZE=4] The very worst scientists are those who behave like eccentric evangelists, claiming that they alone have the whole truth, and then demanding the right to impose their views on everyone else. [/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/B] [FONT="][FONT=Arial Narrow][SIZE=4]Ordinary people know so little about science that they can hardly even understand the jargon. [B][COLOR=Blue]Yet, if they read in a newspaper or magazine "a scientist says that?", then they automatically take it to be true.[/COLOR][COLOR=Blue] Compare this to our reaction when we read in the same journal "a politician says that?"! [/COLOR][/B]Why do scientists have such unchallenged credibility? Perhaps it is because the language and ritual of science has become so far removed from the common people, that scientists have become today's revered and mystical priesthood. Dressed in their ceremonial white lab coats, chanting incomprehensible mumbo jumbo about multi-dimensional fractal parallel universes, and performing magical rituals that transubstantiate metal and plastic into TV's and computers, these modern day alchemists are so awesome we'll believe anything they say. Elitist science, as once was the Pope, is now infallible.[/SIZE][/FONT][/FONT] [B][FONT="][COLOR=Red][FONT=Arial Narrow][SIZE=4] [/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/B] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Hathara warak wissa keeyada? (Hathara wadi karanna 20)
Post reply
Top
Bottom