Atheists are demons

[Jahnu]

On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 20:09:04 -0700 (PDT), casey
<jgkj...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

>If that is what you want to believe ...

ID is not a belief. It's a direct observable fact. That's why it has
to be rejected by atheists. Atheism is like a disease of the mind.
That's why the sanskrit word for demon and atheist is synonymous -
asura - ungodly.

>Clearly you don't understand what natural selection is.

No one does. It's just a meaningless term invented by atheists to make
their idiotic beliefs sound scientific. There is not so much as a
shred of scientific observation that supports ET. And all scientists
with a brain agree.

"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are
great con-men, And the story they are telling may be the GREATEST HOAX
EVER." -- Dr.T.N.Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission

"We must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian
accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only
a variety of wishful speculations." -- Franklin Harold, Emeritus
Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Colorado State
University, in an Oxford University Press text.

>There is a similarity except the car engine developed by artificial
>selection.

Atheists are like people who say that a car engine created itself
without any intelligent direction. I mean, how stupid can you get?

Krishna says:

Those miscreants who are grossly foolish, who are lowest among
mankind, whose knowledge is stolen by illusion, and who partake of the
atheistic nature of demons do not surrender unto Me. (Bg. 7.15)

PURPORT by Srila Prabhupada

It is said in Bhagavad-gita that simply by surrendering oneself unto
the lotus feet of the Supreme Personality Krsna one can surmount the
stringent laws of material nature. At this point a question arises:
How is it that educated philosophers, scientists, businessmen,
administrators and all the leaders of ordinary men do not surrender to
the lotus feet of Sri Krsna, the all-powerful Personality of Godhead?
Mukti, or liberation from the laws of material nature, is sought by
the leaders of mankind in different ways and with great plans and
perseverance for a great many years and births. But if that liberation
is possible by simply surrendering unto the lotus feet of the Supreme
Personality of Godhead, then why don't these intelligent and
hard-working leaders adopt this simple method?

The Gita answers this question very frankly. Those really learned
leaders of society like Brahma, Siva, Kapila, the Kumaras, Manu,
Vyasa, Devala, Asita, Janaka, Prahlada, Bali, and later on
Madhvacarya, Ramanujacarya, Sri Caitanya and many others -- who are
faithful philosophers, politicians, educators, scientists, etc. --
surrender to the lotus feet of the Supreme Person, the all-powerful
authority. Those who are not actually philosophers, scientists,
educators, administrators, etc., but who pose themselves as such for
material gain, do not accept the plan or path of the Supreme Lord.

They have no idea of God; they simply manufacture their own worldly
plans and consequently complicate the problems of material existence
in their vain attempts to solve them. Because material energy (nature)
is so powerful, it can resist the unauthorized plans of the atheists
and baffle the knowledge of "planning commissions."

The atheistic planmakers are described herein by the word duskrtinah,
or "miscreants." Krti means one who has performed meritorious work.
The atheist planmaker is sometimes very intelligent and meritorious
also, because any gigantic plan, good or bad, must take intelligence
to execute. But because the atheist's brain is improperly utilized in
opposing the plan of the Supreme Lord, the atheistic planmaker is
called duskrti, which indicates that his intelligence and efforts are
misdirected.

In the Gita it is clearly mentioned that material energy works fully
under the direction of the Supreme Lord. It has no independent
authority. It works as the shadow moves, in accordance with the
movements of the object. But still material energy is very powerful,
and the atheist, due to his godless temperament, cannot know how it
works; nor can he know the plan of the Supreme Lord. Under illusion
and the modes of passion and ignorance, all his plans are baffled, as
in the case of Hiranyakasipu and Ravana, whose plans were smashed to
dust although they were both materially learned as scientists,
philosophers, administrators and educators. These duskrtinas, or
miscreants, are of four different patterns, as outlined below.

(1) The mudhas are those who are grossly foolish, like hardworking
beasts of burden. They want to enjoy the fruits of their labor by
themselves, and so do not want to part with them for the Supreme. The
typical example of the beast of burden is the ass. This humble beast
is made to work very hard by his master. The ass does not really know
for whom he works so hard day and night. He remains satisfied by
filling his stomach with a bundle of grass, sleeping for a while under
fear of being beaten by his master, and satisfying his sex appetite at
the risk of being repeatedly kicked by the opposite party. The ass
sings poetry and philosophy sometimes, but this braying sound only
disturbs others. This is the position of the foolish fruitive worker
who does not know for whom he should work. He does not know that karma
(action) is meant for yajna (sacrifice).

Most often, those who work very hard day and night to clear the burden
of self-created duties say that they have no time to hear of the
immortality of the living being. To such mudhas, material gains, which
are destructible, are life's all in all-despite the fact that the
mudhas enjoy only a very small fraction of the fruit of labor.

Sometimes they spend sleepless days and nights for fruitive gain, and
although they may have ulcers or indigestion, they are satisfied with
practically no food; they are simply absorbed in working hard day and
night for the benefit of illusory masters. Ignorant of their real
master, the foolish workers waste their valuable time serving mammon.
Unfortunately, they never surrender to the supreme master of all
masters, nor do they take time to hear of Him from the proper sources.
The swine who eat the night soil do not care to accept sweetmeats made
of sugar and ghee. Similarly, the foolish worker will untiringly
continue to hear of the sense-enjoyable tidings of the flickering
mundane world, but will have very little time to hear about the
eternal living force that moves the material world.

(2) Another class of duskrti, or miscreant, is called the naradhama,
or the lowest of mankind. Nara means human being, and adhama means the
lowest. Out of the 8,400,000 different species of living beings, there
are 400,000 human species. Out of these there are numerous lower forms
of human life that are mostly uncivilized. The civilized human beings
are those who have regulative principles of social, political and
religious life. Those who are socially and politically developed but
who have no religious principles must be considered naradhamas. Nor is
religion without God religion, because the purpose of following
religious principles is to know the Supreme Truth and man's relation
with Him. In the Gita the Personality of Godhead clearly states that
there is no authority above Him and that He is the Supreme Truth. The
civilized form of human life is meant for man's reviving the lost
consciousness of his eternal relation with the Supreme Truth, the
Personality of Godhead Sri Krsna, who is all-powerful.

Whoever loses this chance is classified as a naradhama. We get
information from revealed scriptures that when the baby is in the
mother's womb (an extremely uncomfortable situation) he prays to God
for deliverance and promises to worship Him alone as soon as he gets
out. To pray to God when he is in difficulty is a natural instinct in
every living being because he is eternally related with God. But after
his deliverance, the child forgets the difficulties of birth and
forgets his deliverer also, being influenced by maya, the illusory
energy.

It is the duty of the guardians of children to revive the divine
consciousness dormant in them. The ten processes of reformatory
ceremonies, as enjoined in the Manu-smrti, which is the guide to
religious principles, are meant for reviving God consciousness in the
system of varnasrama. However, no process is strictly followed now in
any part of the world, and therefore 99.9 percent of the population is
naradhama.

When the whole population becomes naradhama, naturally all their
so-called education is made null and void by the all-powerful energy
of physical nature. According to the standard of the Gita, a learned
man is he who sees on equal terms the learned brahmana, the dog. the
cow, the elephant and the dog-eater. That is the vision of a true
devotee. Sri Nityananda Prabhu, who is the incarnation of Godhead as
divine master, delivered the typical naradhamas, the brothers Jagai
and Madhai, and showed how the mercy of a real devotee is bestowed
upon the lowest of mankind. So the naradhama who is condemned by the
Personality of Godhead can again revive his spiritual consciousness
only by the mercy of a devotee.

Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, in propagating the bhagavata-dharma, or
activities of the devotees, has recommended that people submissively
hear the message of the Personality of Godhead. The essence of this
message is Bhagavad-gita. The lowest amongst human beings can be
delivered by this submissive hearing process only, but unfortunately
they even refuse to give an aural reception to these messages, and
what to speak of surrendering to the will of the Supreme Lord?
Naradhamas, or the lowest of mankind, willfully neglect the prime duty
of the human being.

(3) The next class of duskrti is called mayayapahrta-jnanah, or those
persons whose erudite knowledge has been nullified by the influence of
illusory material energy. They are mostly very learned fellows --
great philosophers, poets, literati, scientists, etc. -- but the
illusory energy misguides them, and therefore they disobey the Supreme
Lord.

There are a great number of mayayapahrta-jnanah at the present moment,
even amongst the scholars of the Bhagavad-gita. In the Gita, in plain
and simple language, it is stated that Sri Krsna is the Supreme
Personality of Godhead. There is none equal to or greater than Him. He
is mentioned as the father of Brahma, the original father of all human
beings. In fact, Sri Krsna is said to be not only the father of Brahma
but also the father of all species of life. He is the root of the
impersonal Brahman and Paramatma; the Supersoul in every entity is His
plenary portion. He is the fountainhead of everything, and everyone is
advised to surrender unto His lotus feet. Despite all these clear
statements, the mayayapahrta-jnanah deride the personality of the
Supreme Lord and consider Him merely another human being. They do not
know that the blessed form of human life is designed after the eternal
and transcendental feature of the Supreme Lord.

All the unauthorized interpretations of the Gita by the class of
mayayapahrta-jnanah, outside the purview of the parampara system, are
so many stumbling blocks on the path of spiritual understanding. The
deluded interpreters do not surrender unto the lotus feet of Sri
Krsna, nor do they teach others to follow this principle.

(4) The last class of duskrti is called asuram bhavam asritah, or
those of demonic principles. This class is openly atheistic. Some of
them argue that the Supreme Lord can never descend upon this material
world, but they are unable to give any tangible reasons as to why not.
There are others who make Him subordinate to the impersonal feature,
although the opposite is declared in the Gita. Envious of the Supreme
Personality of Godhead, the atheist will present a number of illicit
incarnations manufactured in the factory of his brain. Such persons,
whose very principle of life is to decry the Personality of Godhead,
cannot surrender unto the lotus feet of Sri Krsna.

Sri Yamunacarya Albandaru of South India said, "O my Lord! You are
unknowable to persons involved with atheistic principles, despite Your
uncommon qualities, features and activities, despite Your
personality's being confirmed by all the revealed scriptures in the
quality of goodness, and despite Your being acknowledged by the famous
authorities renowned for their depth of knowledge in the
transcendental science and situated in the godly qualities."
Therefore, (1) grossly foolish persons, (2) the lowest of mankind, (3)
the deluded speculators, and (4) the professed atheists, as above
mentioned, never surrender unto the lotus feet of the Personality of
Godhead in spite of all scriptural and authoritative advice.

Have a look at my art -

http://youtu.be/Ucvk5t2Inyk - Friction
http://youtu.be/sVUgoBaq71Q - I am your soul
http://youtu.be/2uRbsf9Vzg8 - Sudder street
http://youtu.be/DC5OHr-Pm4I - Jahnava
http://youtu.be/jduAKsBJjz0 - Gopala
http://youtu.be/rzq_8CA3G2Y - Mayapur
http://youtu.be/y9KqLPCWR1E - Krishnart

https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu
http://www.facebook.com/groups/138462029613179/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5QIX5h8y1w&feature - TOVP

[casey]

On Apr 11, 7:44 am, Jahnu <jahnud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 20:09:04 -0700 (PDT), casey
>

> <jgkjca...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> >If that is what you want to believe ...
>

> It's a direct observable fact.

Why don't you just pack up your "direct observable facts"
and leave us alone and we promise not to intrude upon
your vaisnava newsgroup ok?

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 03:14:50 +0530
Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 20:09:04 -0700 (PDT), casey
> <jgkj...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> >If that is what you want to believe ...
>
> ID is not a belief. It's a direct observable fact. That's why it has
> to be rejected by atheists. Atheism is like a disease of the mind.

I don't know a single atheist who denies the fact that ID is
observable, and in fact many atheists also carry ID with them when they
go to the store to buy alcohol or cigarettes where the clerks, who are
required by law to, routinely ask for patrons to show their ID to them,
so I know for a fact that ID is real. It's not clear how this is
related in any way to atheism.

> That's why the sanskrit word for demon and atheist is synonymous -
> asura - ungodly.

What could the Sanskrit language possibly have against ID cards?

> >Clearly you don't understand what natural selection is.
>
> No one does. It's just a meaningless term invented by atheists to make
> their idiotic beliefs sound scientific. There is not so much as a
> shred of scientific observation that supports ET. And all scientists
> with a brain agree.

Which atheists do you contend created that term?

There was a famous religious man named Charles Darwin who wrote an
entire theory about natural selection (he was religious while he wrote
and published his theory), and it was his sense of scientific
curiousity and his personal integrity that made him credible, but
perhaps you don't mean to credit Mr. Darwin for being one of the
creators of that term.

> "Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are
> great con-men, And the story they are telling may be the GREATEST HOAX
> EVER." -- Dr.T.N.Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission

That's a fallacious ad hominem attack against teachers, and its premise
is not included. (Did it even have a premise in the first place?)

> "We must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian
> accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only
> a variety of wishful speculations." -- Franklin Harold, Emeritus
> Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Colorado State
> University, in an Oxford University Press text.

That statement is vague on the point of what qualifies as "detailed."

> >There is a similarity except the car engine developed by artificial
> >selection.
>
> Atheists are like people who say that a car engine created itself
> without any intelligent direction. I mean, how stupid can you get?

[snip - boilerplate quotations of scripture]

How are atheists like the people who say such things? You did not
suggest any causality, and you might even be assuming that all atheists
are evolutionists (which is not a logical assumption because neither
atheism nor evolution is dependent on one another).

--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
"False facts are highly injurious to the progress of science, for they
often endure long; but false views, if supported by some evidence, do
little harm, for everyone takes a salutary pleasure in proving their
falseness."
-- Charles Darwin

[Jahnu]

On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 15:13:44 -0700 (PDT), casey
<jgkj...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

>Why don't you just pack up your "direct observable facts"
>and leave us alone and we promise not to intrude upon
>your vaisnava newsgroup ok?

Leave you alone? Why? I'm having so much fun here.

And if you didn't have God and religion to bitch and moan about, your
life would be devoid of any meaning at all. You ought to thank me for
giving you somerthing to bitch and bicker about. Now, you are one of
the more reasonable types here. You don't just go fuck, fuck like the
Ken thingy or squawk squawk like Bird Twat, but still, you are after
all an atheist and hence a naradhama - a sub-human who needs help to
evolve. One day you will thank me for having subjected you to the
sound of God's name.

Anyone, regardless of his beliefs and convictions, can experience that
he is a constant or eternal observer of existence.

Krishna says:

As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood
to youth to old age, the soul similarly passes into another body at
death. A sober person is not bewildered by such a change. (Bg. 2.13)

What Krishna is saying here, is that one's body changes all the time
from childhood, to youth, to old age. But the self or the I within,
remains constant. One's mind and intelligence change, sure. You are
are supposed to grow wiser with age. One's thoughts, feelings,
willpower, and convictions change as time progresses.

But it is the same I-feeling, who experience all these changes. It is
the same observer. The person stays the same despite the altercations
in matter.

That is the eternal soul. It is the same person, or the same soul who
sits in a child's body as the one who sits in the old man's body. The
person didn't change, in the sense that he is the same observer. His
thoughts and feelings and intelligence changed, but he remained the
same soul. In this way anyone can experience his own eternality.

It's a question of absorption - either one is absorped in matter,
which is in constant change. One is absorped in his thoughts,
feelings, and will. Or one is absorped in one's eternal self. That
means, one is absorped in observing one's thoughts, feelings, and
will. IOW one is absorped in his own consciousness.

That is a choice one has. And one's choice will be determined by the
way one is controlled by matter. When one's choice is motivated by the
desire to become FREE from matter, then one begins his spiritual
journey back home, back to Godhead.

Krishna says:

A person who is not disturbed by the incessant flow of desires - that
enter like rivers into the ocean, which is ever being filled but is
always still - can alone achieve peace, and not the man who strives to
satisfy such desires. (Bg 2.70)

A person who has given up all desires for sense gratification, who
lives free from desires, who has given up all sense of proprietorship
and is devoid of false ego - he alone can attain real peace. (Bg 2.71)

That is the way of the spiritual and godly life, after attaining which
a man is not bewildered. If one is thus situated even at the hour of
death, one can enter into the kingdom of God. (Bg 2.72)

[casey]

On Apr 11, 8:28 am, Jahnu <jahnud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 15:13:44 -0700 (PDT), casey
>

> <jgkjca...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> >Why don't you just pack up your "direct observable facts"
> >and leave us alone and we promise not to intrude upon
> >your vaisnava newsgroup ok?
>
> Leave you alone? Why? I'm having so much fun here.
>
> And if you didn't have God and religion to bitch and moan about, your
> life would be devoid of any meaning at all. You ought to thank me for
> giving you somerthing to bitch and bicker about.

There is some truth in that you only have to look at
alt.atheism.moderated

Well have your fun if that is what you are here for
because I suspect that is all you will get.

[Davej]

On Apr 10, 4:44 pm, Jahnu <jahnud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]

>
> ID is not a belief. It's a direct observable fact.

The only "directly observable fact" is that you're an idiot.

[Jahnu]

On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 15:43:37 -0700 (PDT), casey
<jgkj...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

>There is some truth in that you only have to look at
>alt.atheism.moderated

Exactly, not much is happening there. See, that's the funny thing -
atheism is completely defined by its resistance to God. Without God
atheism is meaningless :)... it's a world-view based on a negative.
That's also one of the reasons atheism is considered less intelligent.
You'd have to be less intelligent to base your life on a negative. I
mean, I can easily appreciate why a person would not have faith in a
particular religion. Most religions, after all, like the Church eg.
what to speak of Islam, have pretty silly theologies and philosophies,
but to right out deny a Supreme Intelligence - now that's extremely
unintelligent.

>Well have your fun if that is what you are here for
>because I suspect that is all you will get.

As I said, one day you'll thank me for having subjected you to the
sound of the holy names. If not for that, you'd be headed for a very
dark destiny.

You'll still have to suffer for your ignorance and sinful activities,
but in the end you'll be redeemed because of having heard Krishna's
name.

"Simply by chanting one holy name of Hari, a sinful man can counteract
the reactions to more sins than he can commit." (Brihad-vishnu Purana)

"If one chants the holy name, even in a helpless condition or without
desiring to do so, all of one's sinful reactions immediately depart,
just as a lion's roar causes the small animals in the forest to flee
in fear." (Garuda Purana)

"A person who once chants the holy name of the Lord, consisting of the
two syllables ha-ri, guarantees his path to liberation."
(Skanda Purana)

Vishnu says:

When one is envious of the demigods, who represent the Supreme
Personality of Godhead, of the Vedas, which give all knowledge, of the
cows, brahmanas, Vaisnavas and religious principles, and ultimately of
Me, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he and his civilization will
be vanquished without delay. -- Srimad Bhagavatam 7.4.27

[Jahnu]

On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 21:31:57 -0700 (PDT), Davej <gal...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>The only "directly observable fact" is that you're an idiot.

I'm glad it looks like that to you. It shows I'm on the right track :)

https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu#5863737145733662418

[casey]

On Apr 11, 2:55 pm, Jahnu <jahnud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]

> "Simply by chanting one holy name of Hari, a sinful man can counteract
> the reactions to more sins than he can commit." (Brihad-vishnu Purana)

Yes a well-known technique for inducing a delusion state.

This is the reason science works and religion doesn't when
it comes to understanding the world we live in.

[SkyEyes]

On Apr 10, 3:24 pm, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess"

<godd...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 03:14:50 +0530
>

> Jahnu <jahnud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 20:09:04 -0700 (PDT), casey

[Piggybacking, sorry; I've got Jahnu killfilled.]

> > >Clearly you don't understand what natural selection is.
>
> > No one does.

All sorts of people do. *I* do.

> > It's just a meaningless term invented by atheists to make
> > their idiotic beliefs sound scientific.

Actually, it's quite a simple construct, and one that's pitifully easy
to demonstrate.

Take two people of breeding age, neither of which has had any children
yet. To make the test fair, they should be of the same gender, since
males and females have different breeding strategies.

Plonk these two individuals down out in the wilderness, about 20 yards
from the nearest hungry large predator.

One of them is likely to run faster than the other one (for any number
of physical reasons). Remember, he doesn't have to run faster than
the lion/bear/tiger, only faster than the other guy.

The one that gets away is now free to mate and have offspring. The
slower guy is...never gonna get to do that.

That's natural selection. There was something about the one that got
away - more endurance, quicker reflexes, less appetizing body odor,
longer legs, whatever - that gave him an advantage over the other guy,
and so the one who got away left more offspring. These offspring
inherit their parents' successful trait - the quicker reflexes, less
appetizing body odor, longer legs, whatever - and in their turn - if
they don't meet up with another person with even *better* adaptive
traits - they'll continue passing this successful trait on to *their*
young 'uns, etc., etc., and in a few generations you have a population
with quicker reflexes or stinky body odor or longer legs - whatever it
is that allows them to get away from a predator successfully.

And that's *all* natural selection is. The only thing complicated
about it is that it's continually working on *all* traits in a
population, not just the ability to get away from predators. Another
instance of natural selection at work occurred in populations of
cattle-herding people in East Africa, who developed the ability to
drink milk as adults because when that mutation first occurred, it
gave the persons who first had it the ability to use a food source
that had heretofore been unavailable - diary products. So those
people had more children, passing their genes on into an ever-
widening, ever-more-able-to-drink-milk population.

Simple. Elegant. TRUE.

> There is not so much as a
> > shred of scientific observation that supports ET. And all scientists
> > with a brain agree.

Ah, but there is, ma petite chou Jahnu. The fact that we have two
main populations of people who can drink milk into adulthood - one in
East Africa and one in northern Europe - is exactly that, one shred
(data point) that supports evolution. Look at the thing and actually
*see* it for once. That's what it is - a shred of evidence supporting
evolution. And it's not a lonely shred, either, there are mountains
of them.

--
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
--

[Jahnu]

On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 01:24:46 -0700 (PDT), casey
<jgkj...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:


>Yes a well-known technique for inducing a delusion state.

How would you know? You have no method to distinguish between reality
and illusion. Just see how atheism has reduced you to a mindless,
blithering fool who can't discern reality.

>This is the reason science works and religion doesn't when
>it comes to understanding the world we live in.

hahaha :) You are no closer to understanding the world you live in
than they were in the stone-age. It's funny, eh? Crime, rape, murder,
disease, insanity, depression, poverty etc etc are ever increasing,
and there is nothing science can do about it.

Who decided that technological expertise is the best method to measure
our ability to understand the reality we live in? Those who are
influential in defining peoples' realities - the producers,
scientists, advertising, the media, politicians, etc. -- have made
technological advancement the barometer of human progress, claiming
that the advancement of technology is a most noble pursuit for the
human race, that it has made the world a better place to live in.

As proof, they list all the consumer gadgets we use and are dependent
Upon - CD players, computers, cameras, cell-phones, televisions, DVDs,
cars, and so on - and say that the intelligence to build these things
shows that we have advanced our understanding of nature and how she
works far beyond our ability in the middle ages.

But is this proposition correct? To build a CD player, one certainly
requires advanced knowledge of physics and chemistry, but these two
elements contribute to only a small part of the reality we perceive. A
far greater portion of reality consists of our conscious experience of
it -- something most people have forgotten. The unsuspecting public
does not realize that they are the observers of reality, and that such
observation is conditioned by the culture they grew up in. They take
it for granted that what they experience is reality, and that this
reality is best described in physical and chemical terms.

Modern science is very useful for making technology, and when we live
in a world where the masses are kept in awe and reverence of
technological wonders, science is of course a most important
undertaking. But the jubilation of the modern people over the newest
technology is not different from the gaping wonder with which people
in the middle ages looked upon sorcerers and magicians firing off
sulphur and gun powder. The magicians did this to dupe their audience
and secure their comfortable hold on society. In the middle ages the
regents of society kept people in ignorance so they were easy to
control and manipulate, and today modern controllers use the exact
same means to enslave people in ignorance. In the global culture the
slaves have just been upgraded to a middle class who owns their own
house and car. But they still slave their lives away in boring jobs
and are marred by the same endless worries and miseries, people have
always suffered from. They are still being ground down by taxation,
victims of greedy politicians, exactly like it's always been.

There is no basis for saying that advanced knowledge of mathematics
and physics enables a person to better understand the reality he lives
in any more than the cave dweller of some 4000 years ago who
worshipped nature and various gods. If modern society were based on a
proper understanding of reality, why is it ruining nature and her
inhabitants, who are sustainers of life? It is atheism that keeps the
consciousness on this lower scale of conscious evolution and blocks a
human being from becoming self realized. Self realization simply means
to realize oneself as separate from matter, without which there is no
question of God-realization.

No amount of technological expertise can aid us in that. Despite the
so-called advancement of modern society the human being is till not
able to transcend his mental conditioning. The proof is that modern
society does not produce people with evolved consciousness. Rather, we
see the exact opposite taking place - in proportion to the advancement
of technology, people have become more and more base and animalistic.

So why aren't the principles of recognizing the self -- which is the
basis of all understanding and learning -- not being taught in the
modern educational institutions? Because society, as it exists, is not
equipped to facilitate self-realized human beings. What need does a
self realized person have of the plethora of useless products that are
produced by the few conglomerates that control world consumerism? Such
enlightenment would indeed negate the necessity for the technological
advancement upon which the world's finances now rely. That is why, in
the current global culture, a deliberate campaign exists to transform
people into atheists. In such a culture, religion has been replaced
with politics. Instead of voting for a particular religion, one now
votes for politicians, who are mostly hired by those multinationals
with the biggest checkbooks -- all in the name of serving the people,
of course. The modern Coca-cola and Disney culture has
already made the whole world into one big marketplace - a worldwide
altar where technology is worshipped as the new opium of the masses.

Being fed endless propaganda from Hollywood -- where technology is
being depicted as the saving grace for all of life's problems -- and
living in an environment where they are constantly bombarded by
cell-phone and computer emissions (EMF), we quickly forget that
technology, despite assurances to the contrary, cannot save us from
the onslaughts of nature. Time and time again, technology comes up
short in the fight against nature; the new priests of society, now
clad in white coats instead of black, fail to comprehend how the
mechanisms of nature work. And how could they? They also
suffer from the misunderstanding that everything is dead matter, and
are restricted by the assumption that their knowledge of physical laws
can explain everything.

Yet more important than the understanding of how matter works is to
understand how consciousness, false ego, intelligence and mind work.
These make up a much greater part of the reality we perceive. As long
as we fail to understand the difference between matter and
consciousness, we cannot even be said to have evolved beyond animal
consciousness. That's why atheism is dangerous - it keeps the
consciousness trapped in a one-dimensional world of matter. It keeps
the living being from its rare mission in the human life form, which
is to study consciousness. It cultivates a perception of life where
the consciousness cannot see itself - a deception where the
consciousness in its absorption in matter forgets itself.

Every individual is duty-bound to alter their consciousness and
connect it with the whole - Sri Krishna. While Srila Prabhupada was a
nitya-siddha, he was also a social revolutionary, as was the Lord he
served: Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. The political correctness that
predominates in the world and passes as social etiquette should not
stop us from assisting him his mission - to silence the atheistic
class of men, and to inundate the world with Krishna Consciousness.

[Jahnu]

On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 02:39:33 -0700 (PDT), SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net>
wrote:

>All sorts of people do. *I* do.

Nope you don't. The only thing you understand about natural selection
is what some idiot in a white coat told you.

>Actually, it's quite a simple construct, and one that's pitifully easy
>to demonstrate.
>
>Take two people of breeding age, neither of which has had any children
>yet. To make the test fair, they should be of the same gender, since
>males and females have different breeding strategies.
>
>Plonk these two individuals down out in the wilderness, about 20 yards
>from the nearest hungry large predator.
>
>One of them is likely to run faster than the other one (for any number
>of physical reasons). Remember, he doesn't have to run faster than
>the lion/bear/tiger, only faster than the other guy.

hahaha :) It doesn't take much to convince you of anything, huh?

---but, but, I have seen it with my own eyes on Animal Planet.

According to your own idiotic theory there woulld have been no need
for the first living organisims to evolve beyond cock-roaches. A
cock-roach is infinitely better equipped to survive than a human.

Try again. You have to remember, this is not one of your brain-dead
friends you are speaking to. Contrary to you friends I have a working
brain. The only thing you have going for you is that you are in a
group of complete anti-intellectual retards. In a group of thinking
people you'd be laughed out in 5 seconds.

"A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a
superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry
and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about
in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so
overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question."

- Fred Hoyle, astrophysicist

[casey]

On Apr 11, 9:54 pm, Jahnu <jahnud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 01:24:46 -0700 (PDT), casey
>

> <jgkjca...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> >Yes a well-known technique for inducing a delusional state.

>
> How would you know?
> You have no method to distinguish between reality and illusion.

Wrong. We do have methods to make such a distinction.

> Just see how atheism has reduced you to a mindless,
> blithering fool who can't discern reality.

Attack the speaker not the argument fallacy. Now that
is a sign of a mindless blithering fool.

> >This is the reason science works and religion doesn't when
> >it comes to understanding the world we live in.
>
> hahaha :) You are no closer to understanding the world you live in
> than they were in the stone-age. It's funny, eh? Crime, rape, murder,
> disease, insanity, depression, poverty etc etc are ever increasing,
> and there is nothing science can do about it.

More rubbish. Prove there is more crime, rape, murder, disease,
insanity, depression, poverty etc. On the contrary medical science
has reduced disease and increased the production of food to the
extent we now have an exploding population. Drugs have also
helped "insane" people and depressed people to the extent that
many of them can function again. As we begin to understand
more about the brain I suspect crime can be reduced as well.

> Who decided that technological expertise is the best method to measure
> our ability to understand the reality we live in?

It works!! It produces the results. No amount of religion will find
cures for disease or enable us to fly to the moon. Science shows
its ability to understand (model) reality by real results. It doesn't
have to make up silly stories about reality it can actually prove
a reality that religion could never have imagined because it
transcends our intuition.

> There is no basis for saying that advanced knowledge of mathematics
> and physics enables a person to better understand the reality he lives
> in any more than the cave dweller of some 4000 years ago who
> worshipped nature and various gods.

On the contrary. We now know that many of the natural events
do not require a super person to cause them. We now know
that our mind is something the brain does. We know now that
knowledge is patterns in the brain and thought is the processing
of those patterns.

The magic of reality as revealed by science is so much more
amazing than any of the imagined alternate realities.

[Uncle Vic]

Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:v7nbm85omvgf36cg3...@4ax.com:

> ID is not a belief. It's a direct observable fact.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4hOrmiW0i0

--
Uncle Vic
aa# 2011
BAAWA

AA Quotemeister

Visit my You Tube Channel!
http://www.youtube.com/user/Vicman6311?feature=mhee

[raven1]

On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 03:14:50 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>>Clearly you don't understand what natural selection is.
>
>No one does.

Translation: *you* don't. Any high school biology student could tell
you what it is, just like and high school chemistry student could tell
you the difference between organic and inorganic chemistry. Not
everyone is as invincibly ignorant as you are, Jesper.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article
<862fe165-11c8-4e6c...@af5g2000pbd.googlegroups.com>,

The godbots say the same kind of nonsense about things like earthquakes.
They're so blinded that they don't realize that improved communications
is why they're hearing about crimes and earthquakes they never would
have heard of before.

--

JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden

[Jahnu]

On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 05:43:04 -0700 (PDT), casey
<jgkj...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

>On Apr 11, 9:54 pm, Jahnu <jahnud...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> How would you know?
>> You have no method to distinguish between reality and illusion.
>
>Wrong. We do have methods to make such a distinction.

...and that is?

>More rubbish. Prove there is more crime, rape, murder, disease,

hahaha :) It's in all the statistics, bozo. Besides, I have to prove
jack-squat to you before you prove to me that life comes from
chemicals.

Atheists on AA always bitch and moan about proof. Forget that,
apparently, they don't have the wits to realize that their own belief
system - ie. that the ultimate cause is purely material - is
completely unfounded, blind belief. Why don't atheists demand proof of
that?

But this is the double-standard one is forced to accept as an atheist.
Stone-hard and cold facts are required to give credibility to the
opposition, but when it comes to one's own belief the same demands are
suddenly not required.

Anyway, that's not even the point I want to make. The point is, that
atheists always go on and on about scientific proof and evidence. So
then I give you the scientific proof - that if you maintain an
atheistic mentality, you will experience a lot more suffering and
frustration than if you accept to connect with Krishna. That is a test
anyone can perform and verify that Krishna conciousness brings greater
happiness in life and atheism brings greater misery and suffering in
life.

And you can't lie about it and say, but I am happy. I am happy as an
atheist. I am not suffering. If you think you are not suffering, it is
either because you are like most people, and you will take the good
with the bad. IOW, the pauses in the suffering you get from sense-
gratification outweighs the bad reactions you get from your sinful
activities. The good outweighs the bad. You don't think suffering is
so bad. You even think that without suffering there can't be
happiness.

What you don't understand is that life in the material world is
basically one of suffering and frustration. It is so, because Krishna
has designed it that way. The reason Krishna has designed it that way,
is because if things were perfect in the material world, the fallen,
lost souls would not want to go back to the spiritual world and enjoy
with Krishna. They would want to stay in the material world and enjoy
the body. Actually, this is what most people want, anyway - stay in
the material world and enjoy their senses. Krishna is even so kind,
that a soul in the body of a worm in stool, thinks he is enjoying.
Even the souls living under the most hellish conditions think they are
enjoying.

So the human form of life is a chance for the soul to get rid of all
suffering. A clever person will ask the question, why do I suffer? and
try to get rid of it. The human form of life is a chance for the soul
to get rid of all suffering. Atheism bars the human being from this
opportunity. Atheism just conditions the soul to suffering. Therefore
atheism is evil - Krishna says:

From the highest planet in the material world down to the lowest, all
are places of misery wherein repeated birth and death take place. But
one who attains to My abode, O son of KuntI, never takes birth again.
(Bg. 8.16)

Humility; pridelessness; nonviolence; tolerance; simplicity;
approaching a bona fide spiritual master; cleanliness; steadiness;
self-control; renunciation of the objects of sense gratification;
absence of false ego; the perception of the evil of birth, death, old
age and disease; detachment; freedom from entanglement with children,
wife, home and the rest; even-mindedness amid pleasant and unpleasant
events; constant and unalloyed devotion to Me; aspiring to live in a
solitary place; detachment from the general mass of people; accepting
the importance of self-realization; and philosophical search for the
Absolute Truth�all these I declare to be knowledge, and besides this
whatever there may be is ignorance. (Bg.13. 8-12)

Note. that the perception of the evil of birth, death, old age and
disease is one of the symptoms of knowledge. Most people on AA are
intelligent enough to understand they are suffering. Only animals
don't understand they are suffering. In the human form of life the
soul is given sufficient intelligence by nature to understand he is
suffering. Whether you will admit it here, is another matter. But who
cares, if you say you don't suffer, you are either lying or too
animalistic to even comprehend your own suffering.

So anyone who is serious about becoming free from suffering must
surrender to Krishna and God's laws. These laws are explained in the
Vedas.

And anyone who maintains an atheistic mentality will suffer
repeatedly. That's the proof that atheism is bad for you. And anyone
who chants Krishna's name on a regular basis will experience great joy
and happiness in life. That's proof that Krishna is good for you. It's
as simple as that.

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 02:39:33 -0700 (PDT)
SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Apr 10, 3:24 pm, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess"
> <godd...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 03:14:50 +0530
> >
> > Jahnu <jahnud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 20:09:04 -0700 (PDT), casey
>
> [Piggybacking, sorry; I've got Jahnu killfilled.]

Feel free to piggyback on my replies as often as you like.

That's an excellent explanation of natural selection (I think you should
add it to the alt-atheism.org FAQ web site somewhere appropriate
regarding evolution, and do give it its own page). I really enjoyed
reading that.

The problem posed by societies that works against natural selection's
effectiveness is the invention of luxuries -- these luxuries make it
easier for people to basically "cheat" against natural selection, which
shifts the balance in favour of laziness and stupidity. I wonder if
there really would be so many lazy and stupid people in the world today
if there wasn't such an abundance of luxuries.

> > There is not so much as a
> > > shred of scientific observation that supports ET. And all
> > > scientists with a brain agree.
>
> Ah, but there is, ma petite chou Jahnu. The fact that we have two
> main populations of people who can drink milk into adulthood - one in
> East Africa and one in northern Europe - is exactly that, one shred
> (data point) that supports evolution. Look at the thing and actually
> *see* it for once. That's what it is - a shred of evidence supporting
> evolution. And it's not a lonely shred, either, there are mountains
> of them.

And to top it off those would be mostly peer-reviewed mountains too.

--

Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess

"I believe that the long-term future of the human race must be in
space. It will be difficult enough to avoid disaster on planet Earth
in the next hundred years, let alone the next thousand, or million.
The human race shouldn't have all its eggs in one basket, or on one
planet. Let's hope we can avoid dropping the basket until we have
spread the load."
-- Dr. Stephen W. Hawking

[Jahnu]

On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 22:39:36 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:

>Feel free to piggyback on my replies as often as you like.

Whatever...

https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu#5864937895703430194

[fasgnadh]

On 11/04/2013 8:43 AM, casey wrote:
> On Apr 11, 8:28 am, Jahnu <jahnud...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 15:13:44 -0700 (PDT), casey
>>
>> <jgkjca...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>>> Why don't you just pack up your "direct observable facts"
>>> and leave us alone and we promise not to intrude upon
>>> your vaisnava newsgroup ok?
>>
>> Leave you alone? Why? I'm having so much fun here.
>>
>> And if you didn't have God and religion to bitch and moan about, your
>> life would be devoid of any meaning at all. You ought to thank me for
>> giving you somerthing to bitch and bicker about.
>
> There is some truth in that you only have to look at
> alt.atheism.moderated

You are the first atheist to admit what I predicted and
saw come to pass!


# Subject: The death of alt.atheism.moderated reflects the global
# decline of atheism
# From: fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.agnosticism,
# alt.philosophy,alt.religion,alt.religion.christian,
# uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,alt.politics.republicans
# Message-ID: <nTUMs.2925$1k5...@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com>
# Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 05:03:02 +1100
#
# On 27/01/2013 5:03 AM, fasgnadh wrote:
#
# # From: raven1 <quotht...@nevermore.com>
# # Newsgroups: alt.atheism.moderated
# # Subject: Re: Query
# # Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 18:54:54 -0500
# # Message-ID: <a1u0g89j09d3q0klb...@4ax.com>
# #
# # I see a total of six messages posted here since the 17th.
#
# One message per day is not a discussion group, it's a WAKE!
#
# BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAA
#
# Especially as most of them were that thread lamenting
# the pitiful number of posts! B^D
#
# I'm on record predicting, and then documenting it's decline.

https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en&fromgroups#!aboutgroup/alt.atheism.moderated

# I called it way back when atheists were gloating that they
# finally had a forum where they could censor and exclude critics
# of atheism.
# It always was just a Sheltered Workshop for the weak minded
# incapable of defending atheism from it's critics.
#
# Atheists fear rational debate and are incapable of defending
# atheism from a critique based on historical evidence.
#
# I predicted that with only atheist voices, they would get
# bored, because atheism has nothing to say of any use to anyone.
#
# I was right. B^]
#
# Oh, BTW, atheists clearly have NO ONE BUT THEMSELVES to
# blame for it's downfall, but, as with the atheist states
# that murdered over 80,000,000 human beings, they will
# probably try to blame the God they pretend not to believe in.
#
# B^]


Apart from Casey EVERY OTHER ATHEIST IN USENET REMIANS
IN DENIAL about the fiasco that was alt.atheism.ShelteredWorkshop!

NOT ONE ATHEIST WHO SLANDERED ME OVER THAT ISSUE
HAS THE INTELLECTUAL HONESTY AND INTEGRITY TO
CONCEDE I WAS RIGHT and APOLOGISE! B^D

That is why people are descending on alt.atheism...

Word is out that atheists are weak in logic, reason and
moral values, and, all through history, that is the
precursor to defeat!

B^]

Glad to have played a part in puncturing atheist hubris!

> Well have your fun if that is what you are here for

Oh no, correct analysis produces a predictive capacity,
so pedicting the collapse of alt.pleasantville was
a no brainer.

It waqs linking it to the GLOBAL decline in atheism
that was significant! B^]

Pointing out TO ATHEISTS that they are NOT VIABLE
wthout theism to parasitically feed off, that ANTI-THEISM
is the RULE, not the exception for atheist agitprop, was
the completion of the Methodology Proving phase.

Sure it was satisfying to watch their hypocrisy, hubris,
bravado and swagger, their hate filled vitriol lies and
slander FAIL UTTERLY, but that is nothing to what I have
shown others is possible more broadly!

ONE honest man can take on, expose and destroy an antire CULT!!!

It makes you feel proud to see what reason and evidence can achieve!

It's like the often overlooked effect of the Japanese war in the
Pacific. (Although they were ultimately defeated) the sight of
Japanese defeating European Powers in Asia destroyed the MYTH of
European invilnerability, and meant that when the war was over, European
Colonialism and Imperialism struggled to become
re-estabished in Asia! Asian independence was seen as possible and
FOUGHT FOR, and European hegemony was SMASHED.

Since then Asia has prospered! Only the Middle East remains to escape
the remnant effects of the Seven Sisters and Oil Imperialism, and Africa
to recover from it's devastating colonial period, and the world will
be transformed.

Similarly only One remaining atheist terror state, Nth Korea needs
to be disposed of, and the 20th century atheist holocausts can be
forgotten, as atheism sinks into the failed ideological shit at
the bottom of the dustbin of History

That is the defeat that one man who wreaked havoc on atheism IN
ALT.ATHEISM and it's temoporary rally, a.a.m., achieved!

Atheism in USENET will never recover! B^]

Already I have acolytes adopting the Historical Critique
of atheist states, and that was only my opening gambit!

B^]

> because I suspect that is all you will get.

Oh I have more interest in my threads in a day than Bukakke
gets in a MONTH!

I post at will and always have an effect.

My agenda has been successful since the day I got here.

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAA


Now, what about thoes latest ATHEIST LIES!

We all know that Hysteria7's stats are a lie,

There are not 2300 atheists in USENET, there are not even 2% of that!

Hysteria7 is a statistical innumerate, she only counts ARRIVALS not
DEPARTURES!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA

--
---------

"every ... "atheist society" has been an
evil abomination killing and opressing it's citizens."

- Scott Balneave, the OFFICIAL ATHEIST TROLL WEBSITE


That explains why religion continues to spread globally while atheism
declines:


"At the dawn of the 20th Century approximately one half of the world's
population identified itself as either Muslim, Catholic, Protestant,
Hindu or Buddhist, and 100 years of secularism, and technological
advancement, and scientific progress later and that number is now
two thirds.

So, for those of you who enjoy beginning coffee shop
conversations with "The Death of God" .. it's time to change
the subject! It's time to talk about something else , because
it's not happening at all.

People are becoming more religious, not less religious,
and religion itself is also evolving"



- Dr Reza Aslan

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/bigideas/stories/2010/2929354.htm


---------

alt.atheism FAQ:

http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/


"Communism, of course, is an ideology, of which atheism is a part of."

- Scott Balneave explaining how atheism is part of Lenin's IDEOLOGY.


Lenin, Scott Balneave's ideological mentor, saying the same thing;

"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Atheist tyrant Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest


"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin

Nothing has changed in violent atheist anti-theism...;

http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest

.. since atheist thugs terrorised, tortured and killed even the
innocent women and children of their enemy's families:

http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg

[Les]

It is like all bad things. They get reported, good things rarely do.

The news gives the impression of a bad world constantly at
war or in strife.

A good few years ago we had nighly reports from Beirut with various
relgious factions doing what religious factions love to do: murdering
hating and harming one another. There was great destruction and even
a green line was set up to keep them apart

Now we get total silence from Beirut. No nightly reports of peace
happening, no nightly reports of reconstruction, no reports of
children playing happily or in school learnning.

Then there was Vietnam dominating the news. News reporters
won awards awards for telling us about atrocities and children
suffering. Now complete silence. No awards are given to
reporters for telling us about happy children learning in
school and playing safely.

If properly analysed the world will be seen as being far more
peaceful down the ages than it has been in conflict but nobody seems
to want to know about peace or people going about their daily business
growing crops, trading and enjoying sports. That is not interesting
for reporters and people will not buy newspapers full only
of good news.

Even during the greatest ferocity and extent of WW2 most
countries were still at peace and not involved in the war.

One Chinese philospher said it was a curse to be born in
'interesting times'



--
Les Hellawell
Greeting from:
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County

"When you are in a crowd and you stand out from the
crowd it's ususually because you are being carried on
the shoulders of others."
- Desmond Tutu

[Jahnu]

On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 14:56:18 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
<hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:

>The godbots say the same kind of nonsense about things like earthquakes.
>They're so blinded that they don't realize that improved communications
>is why they're hearing about crimes and earthquakes they never would
>have heard of before.

The statistics say that there have been more natural catastrophies
within the last 10 years than in the previous 100 year, and more
natural catastrophies the last 2 years than in the previous 10 years
put together. Thus a clear excalation of natural disturbances can be
observed.

---but, but, but it's only because they report more in the news now a
days.

hahaha :) See how idiotic atheism has made you? Do you now understand
why atheists per definition are considered less intelligent?

https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu#5863737145733662418

[raven1]

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 11:51:29 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 22:39:36 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
>atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>
>>Feel free to piggyback on my replies as often as you like.
>
>Whatever...

Is your snip and "whatever" an admission that you were wrong yet
again, Jesper?

[casey]

On Apr 12, 8:27 pm, Jahnu <jahnud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 14:56:18 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
>

> <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >The godbots say the same kind of nonsense about things like earthquakes.
> >They're so blinded that they don't realize that improved communications
> >is why they're hearing about crimes and earthquakes they never would
> >have heard of before.
>
> The statistics say that there have been more natural catastrophies
> within the last 10 years than in the previous 100 year, and more
> natural catastrophies the last 2 years than  in the previous 10 years
> put together. Thus a clear excalation of natural disturbances can be
> observed.
>
> ---but, but, but it's only because they report more in the news now a
> days.
>
> hahaha :) See how idiotic atheism has made you? Do you now understand
> why atheists per definition are considered less intelligent?

Atheists are considered less intelligent by who? Theists?
Is that conclusion based on the notion that intelligent
people would think like you or is it a conclusion you have
reached by some objective measure?

Those educated in reason, logic and the use of evidence
would tend to be less theistic.

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

That's a rhetorical question, to which the answer is obviously "yes."

--

Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess

"Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence
of the improbable."
-- Henry Louis Mencken

[fasgnadh]

Fidem Turbare, the non-cognitive atheist gobshite wrote:
>
> SkyEyes uses Natural Selection to explain the FAILURE of atheism:

>> On Apr 10, 3:24 pm, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess"
>> <godd...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 03:14:50 +0530
>>>
>>> Jahnu <jahnud...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 20:09:04 -0700 (PDT), casey
>>
>> [Piggybacking, sorry; I've got Jahnu killfilled.]

And yet you decide to debate someone based on what is
pre-digested by other atheists!?!!!
Then you are not interested in rational debate,
just in propaganda and shared bias and bigotry.

This is not a comment on the topic, or the individuals
involved, just on an intellectually bankrupt methodology,
which is akin to judging the quality of food by tasting it
after it has been pre-digested by your friend,

ie atheists SWALLOW each others shit and think it is nutricious.

The logical flaw in such idiocy is clear;

Atheists such as Virgil and Olrik are known post forgers
and you have no idea if you are just another victim of
atheist forgery, lies, slander and fraud! 8^o

I prefer primary sources, but then, atheists often like to debate
their own strawman misrepresentations, rather than the poster's
ideas.

> Feel free to piggyback on my replies as often as you like.

Jahnu may be wrong on Natural selection, but he is 100%
correct about atheist mass-debation:

"The only thing you have going for you is that you are in a
group of complete anti-intellectual retards."

Such a hermetically sealed world of the LIKE minded,
actively PREVENTS the natural selection of good ideas!!!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!

Priceless atheist HYPOCRISY!

>>>>> natural selection

>>
>> Actually, it's quite a simple construct, and one that's pitifully easy
>> to demonstrate.
>>
>> Take two people of breeding age, neither of which has had any children
>> yet. To make the test fair, they should be of the same gender, since
>> males and females have different breeding strategies.

Take two ideas: Theism and Atheism

>> Plonk these two individuals down out in the wilderness, about 20 yards
>> from the nearest hungry large predator.

Place these ideas in human society, initially primitive but capable of
evolving.

>> One of them is likely to run faster than the other one (for any number
>> of physical reasons).

Religion started civilisation, and built all the great and enduring ones
which followed:

"The Birth of Religion"

"We used to think agriculture gave rise to cities
and later to writing, art, and religion.
Now the world�s oldest temple suggests the
urge to worship sparked civilization."

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2011/06/gobekli-tepe/mann-text

>> Remember, he doesn't have to run faster than
>> the lion/bear/tiger, only faster than the other guy.

In this case, atheism limped from the outset... B^D

One of these ideas, theism, proves more efficacious in evolving great
and enduring civilisations, lifting humans out of their primitive state
faster than the other, atheism, which never produces a single free,
open, progressive democracy, let alone a civilisation, as atheists
themselves admit:


# From: raven1 <quotht...@nevermore.com>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: Re: Anyone seen Hysteria, Abu Baker Bashir and Kelsey
Bjarnyard? B^D
# Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 21:15:11 -0500
# Message-ID: <87ttk498t9sueojr7...@4ax.com>
#
# There has never been a "Great, Enduring Atheist Civilization"

>> The one that gets away is now free to mate and have offspring. The
>> slower guy is...never gonna get to do that.

Those in theist societies prosper and theism spreads, those in atheist
states suffer terror, torture and death in holocaust proportions,
over 80,000,000 die in just 7 decades! 8^o

The theist meme propogates because it is more efficacious... superior.

>> That's natural selection.

The atheist meme has been trid and failed, yet it's adherents cling
blindly to it, and their atheist regimes perpetuate the PRIMITIVE state
humanity started in.

The theist meme continues to evolve, distancing itself from the
primitive state humans began in.

It's majority religious societies have created free, open,
progressive, tolerant, rights-based scientifically literate, prosperous,
secular democracies which even the ATHEIST HYPOCRITES
prefer to live in!!!!!!!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAAA

>> There was something about the one that got
>> away - more endurance, quicker reflexes, less appetizing body odor,
>> longer legs, whatever -

If you ask the theists where they got the ideas that made them more
successful, they say "God"

But the unsuccessful atheists continue to claim that there is no
evidence for God. Now that is UNNATURAL SELECTION of the EVIDENCE!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHA

The theist tries to explain the spiritual values

>>>that gave him an advantage over the other guy,

but the atheist is certain he is right, despite all historical
evidence to the contrary!

>> and so the one who got away left more offspring.
>>
>> These offspring inherit their parents' successful
>> trait - the quicker reflexes, less
>> appetizing body odor, longer legs, whatever

"At the dawn of the 20th Century approximately one half of the world's
population identified itself as either Muslim, Catholic, Protestant,
Hindu or Buddhist, and 100 years of secularism, and technological
advancement, and scientific progress later and that number is now
two thirds.

So, for those of you who enjoy beginning coffee shop
conversations with "The Death of God" .. it's time to change
the subject! It's time to talk about something else , because
it's not happening at all.

People are becoming more religious, not less religious,
and religion itself is also evolving"



- Dr Reza Aslan

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/bigideas/stories/2010/2929354.htm

The same process of natural selection applies WITHIN theism,
older, primitive expreswsions of belief give way to new ones
in response to changing times and the evolving capacities
of the species, their understanding and their social, political
economic and technological sophistication.

>> - and in their turn - if
>> they don't meet up with another person with even *better* adaptive
>> traits - they'll continue passing this successful trait on to *their*
>> young 'uns, etc., etc., and in a few generations you have a population
>> with quicker reflexes or stinky body odor or longer legs - whatever it
>> is that allows them to get away from a predator successfully.

eg In the early stages of PRE-LITERATE humanity, social laws
had to be brief and the sanctions memorable. So by todays
standards they appear harsh, but were necessarily so to ensure
the survival of small subsistence-level tribes, whose unity
could be threatened by fornication or theft, but to imprison
offenders would remove a worker (or two if a guard was required)
but leave the same number of mouths to feed. The death penalty
was the rational solution, even those these thesit tribes were the FIST
to understand that killing was wrong, unless sanctioned by necessary law.

As the theist civilsations progressed they grew in their capacities
and complexity and could more fully pursue their spiritual objectives of
Love, Compassion, Justice, Mercy and Forgiveness.

The core spiritual values were shared by all the great world religions,
despite the geographic and time distance between their emergence,
but the social mores derived from those values changes dependent
upon the limes. Theists refer to this unique capacity for spiritual
texts to evolve and adapt to evolving circumstances as "The Living Word"

Some remnants of earlier religious forms still survive, and so you have
a vast diversity of religious beliefs, some more sophisticated than
others, and even abberrant ideas can survive in a world of comfort and
plenty.. and so in the 'Modern Era' we have experienced viral outbreaks
of plausible sounding, but empty and dangerous ideologies: Fascism,
Communism, Nazism, Racism, Atheism, Imperialism, Colonialism...

With the economic prosperity and greater freedoms in the emerging
'Modern' states, Natural Selection is suspended and these radical ideas
can take hold with catastrophic results as the effects of adopting them
are initially cushioned , until it is too late, and catastrophe ensues.

Similarly, in the modern world, so many human needs are met that
increasing numbers of people assume life has always been like this,
see no need for the self-sacrifice and selflessness that was required
to achieve this level of civilisation, and may choose to throw the
Spiritual Baby out with the Religious Bathwater. Ultimately,
ideas which are true, and useful, are tested and adopted.
And so we live in the world where after 100 years of the dreadful
effects of unblidled ideologies; Fascism, Communism, Nazism, Racism,
Atheism, Imperialism, Colonialism... humanity has returned to what
gives results.. and so science AND religion continue their global growth.

>> And that's *all* natural selection is. The only thing complicated
>> about it is that it's continually working on *all* traits in a
>> population, not just the ability to get away from predators.

And that is why there are 300,000,000 new believers in China
which was once an atheist state tyranny under Mao which
persecuted religion and killed over 40,000,000 of it's own
people, but changed it's constitution to allow greater
freedom of of thought and belief and now prospers..

and atheism in the USA increased by from a pathetic 902,000 (0.4%) to a
feeble 1,621,000 (0.7%) in the same time period, and in places where
atheism is actually DISCUSSED OPENLY, such as USENET, it declined
and DIED:

https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en&fromgroups#!aboutgroup/alt.atheism.moderated


THAT IS NATURAL SELECTION! B^D


>> Simple. Elegant. TRUE.

Atheim is a failed hypothesis which history has naturally selected OUT!

Theism has been naturally selected through history because it is
efficacious.

> That's an excellent explanation of natural selection

Thanks.

> (I think you should add it to the alt-atheism.org FAQ web site

Oh no, I'd rather put it here in USENET where it's more likely
someone will actually READ IT!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA

But you have my permission to reproduce it, but only if you do so
VERBATIM, atheists are notorious fabricators, propogandist liars and
trolls.

> The problem posed by societies that works against natural selection's
> effectiveness is the invention of luxuries -- these luxuries make it
> easier for people to basically "cheat" against natural selection, which
> shifts the balance in favour of laziness and stupidity.

EXACTLY! and Abberrant ideologies such as Hedonism, Fascism,
Materialism, Communism, Nazism, Racism, Atheism, Sadism, Imperialism,
Colonialism... can all take hold,.. for a while, until their
inadequacies cause catastrophic failure, and they are rejected by the
foolish societies that embraced them!

That was certainly the experience of EVERY ATHEIST STATE in history!!!!

> I wonder if there really would be so many
> lazy and stupid people in the world today
> if there wasn't such an abundance of luxuries.

Jesus made the same point thousands of years before you!


Matthew 19:23-24

"Then Jesus said to his disciples, �Truly I tell you,
it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the
kingdom of heaven. 24 Again I tell you, it is
easier for a camel to go through the eye of a
needle than for someone who is rich to enter
the kingdom of God.�

Note, it does not say IMPOSSIBLE, just harder.

1 Timothy 6:10

"For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil.
Some people, eager for money, have wandered from
the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs."

When ideas are so ORIGINAL and so TRUE natural selection
ensures they endure, just like successful DNA!

B^D

[Jahnu]

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 13:19:14 -0700 (PDT), casey
<jgkj...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

>Atheists are considered less intelligent by who? Theists?

By anyone with a functioning brain. And in Bhagavad Gita God calls
atheists less intelligent fools and rascals.

>Is that conclusion based on the notion that intelligent
>people would think like you or is it a conclusion you have
>reached by some objective measure?

It's totally objective. Who but a less intelligent fool would base his
world-view on a negative?

>Those educated in reason, logic and the use of evidence
>would tend to be less theistic.

As I said, I can understand why a person would have no faith in a
particular religion. Most of them, especially Xtianity and Islam, have
silly philosophies and theologies. But only a less intelligent fool
would rule out the presence of a Supreme Intelligence. All observable
facts point to it.

Krishna says:

Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My
transcendental nature as the Supreme Lord of all that be. (Bg. 9.11)

Those who are thus 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.
(Bg. 9.12)

[Jahnu]

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 08:35:38 -0400, raven1
<quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:

>Is your snip and "whatever" an admission that you were wrong yet
>again, Jesper?

Nope.

"A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a
superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry
and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about
in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so
overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question."

- Fred Hoyle, astrophysicist

[Jahnu]

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 15:29:43 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:

>That's a rhetorical question, to which the answer is obviously "yes."

... and then you woke up. If not before, then death will be an
unpleasanrt awakening for you and all other atheists.

Krishna says:

Just try to learn the truth by approaching a spiritual master. Inquire
from him submissively and render service unto him. The self-realized
souls can impart knowledge unto you because they have seen the truth.
(Bg. 4.34)

Having obtained real knowledge from a self-realized soul, you will
never fall again into such illusion, for by this knowledge you will
see that all living beings are but part of the Supreme, or, in other
words, that they are Mine. (Bg. 4.35)

Even if you are considered to be the most sinful of all sinners, when
you are situated in the boat of transcendental knowledge you will be
able to cross over the ocean of miseries. (Bg. 4.36)

As a blazing fire turns firewood to ashes, O Arjuna, so does the fire
of knowledge burn to ashes all reactions to material activities. (Bg.
4.37)

In this world, there is nothing so sublime and pure as transcendental
knowledge. Such knowledge is the mature fruit of all mysticism. And
one who has become accomplished in the practice of devotional service
enjoys this knowledge within himself in due course of time. (Bg. 4.38)

A faithful man who is dedicated to transcendental knowledge and who
subdues his senses is eligible to achieve such knowledge, and having
achieved it he quickly attains the supreme spiritual peace. (Bg. 4.39)

But ignorant and faithless persons who doubt the revealed scriptures
do not attain God consciousness; they fall down. For the doubting soul
there is happiness neither in this world nor in the next. (Bg. 4.40)

[casey]

On Apr 13, 10:14 am, Jahnu <jahnud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 13:19:14 -0700 (PDT), casey
>

> <jgkjca...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> >Atheists are considered less intelligent by who? Theists?
>
> By anyone with a functioning brain.  And in Bhagavad Gita God calls
> atheists less intelligent fools and rascals.

Insults don't prove anything. An imaginary god can say
whatever silly thing you want it to say as it doesn't exist
to actually contradict you.

> >Is that conclusion based on the notion that intelligent
> >people would think like you or is it a conclusion you have
> >reached by some objective measure?
>
> It's totally objective.

Delusional statement. You don't even know what that means.

> Who but a less intelligent fool would base his
> world-view on a negative?

An intelligent person basis beliefs on physical evidence rather
than living in a fantasy alternate reality.

> >Those educated in reason, logic and the use of evidence
> >would tend to be less theistic.
>
> As I said, I can understand why a person would have no faith in a
> particular religion. Most of them, especially Xtianity and Islam, have
> silly philosophies and theologies. But only a less intelligent fool
> would rule out the presence of a Supreme Intelligence.
>
> All observable facts point to it.

No they don't. The only "fact" for a god is this inner feeling
that there is more to it so it must be god.

[Jahnu]

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:47:17 -0700 (PDT), casey
<jgkj...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

>Insults don't prove anything.

I agree.

>An imaginary god can say
>whatever silly thing you want it to say as it doesn't exist
>to actually contradict you.

Note how your statement about God being imaginary is completely
impulsive. No intelligence or rational thought invovled :)

>Delusional statement. You don't even know what that means.

You are being impulsive :)

>An intelligent person basis beliefs on physical evidence rather
>than living in a fantasy alternate reality.

The physical evidence of God is the observable ID in nature. That
there will be people denying observable facts is predicted by God in
the Bhagavad Gita.

Krishna says:

Those who are demoniac do not know what is to be done and what is not
to be done. Neither cleanliness nor proper behavior nor truth is found
in them. (Bg 16.7)

They say that this world is unreal, with no foundation, no God in
control. They say it is produced of sex desire and has no cause other
than lust. (Bg. 16.8)

Following such conclusions, the demoniac, who are lost to themselves
and who have no intelligence, engage in unbeneficial, horrible works
meant to destroy the world. (Bg. 16.9)

Taking shelter of insatiable lust and absorbed in the conceit of pride
and false prestige, the demoniac, thus illusioned, are always sworn to
unclean work, attracted by the impermanent. (Bg. 16.10)

They believe that to gratify the senses is the prime necessity of
human civilization. Thus until the end of life their anxiety is
immeasurable. Bound by a network of hundreds of thousands of desires
and absorbed in lust and anger, they secure money by illegal means for
sense gratification. (Bg. 16.11-12)

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 05:48:48 +0530
Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 15:29:43 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
> atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>
> >That's a rhetorical question, to which the answer is obviously "yes."
>
> ... and then you woke up. If not before, then death will be an
> unpleasanrt awakening for you and all other atheists.

[snip - boilerplate]

I find it peculiar that theists so often accuse atheists of re-defining
the word "atheism" as "absence of theism" (which is what it really
means), yet they never seem to criticize or make fun of themselves for
their implicit attempts to re-define the word "death" (which is final).

Why do you call it death and then immediately proceed to contradict
yourself by claiming that that death is an awakening? If it's death,
then the possibility of an awakening is obviously and clearly ruled out.

--

Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess

"... if you find this type of discourse either painful or stressful,
you need to retire to more sedate activities like weaving or eating ice
cream."
-- John E. Raza (January 2012)

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

It gets even better than that -- a 5-year-old child recently told me
about the Periodic Table of the Elements. She knew the names and uses
for many of the elements, and referenced the one- and two-letter
symbols interchangeably with the element names. People can learn
things at any age, and 5 years is definitely no exception.

The periodic table of elements for kids that she learned it from can be
found on this web page (click on chart for high-resolution version):

http://www.atheistfrontier.com/people/dmitri-mendeleyev/

I encourage you to get that chart printed and laminated so that you can
give it to friends with young children. It's the kind of gift that is
meaningful and will be appreciated later in life after the kids grow up.

--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess

"Life in reality has value beyond measure."
-- Michael Moffat (April 12, 2013)

[casey]

On Apr 13, 11:53 am, Jahnu <jahnud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:47:17 -0700 (PDT), casey
>

> <jgkjca...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> >Insults don't prove anything.
>
> I agree.
>
> >An imaginary god can say
> >whatever silly thing you want it to say as it doesn't exist
> >to actually contradict you.
>
> Note how your statement about God being imaginary is completely
> impulsive. No intelligence or rational thought invovled :)

On the contrary many years were spent looking for any evidence
for a god and none were found outside of the brain.

> >Delusional statement. You don't even know what that means.
>
> You are being impulsive :)

No many years of reading and thinking about these questions
were involved before coming to the conclusion it was a delusion.

> >An intelligent person basis beliefs on physical evidence rather
> >than living in a fantasy alternate reality.

The appearance that the world was designed by some super
human outside of nature is an illusion. There is no reason it
could not have formed all by itself as explained by the theory
of evolution. You may not know the molecular mechanisms
that allow a single cell to multiply and form colonies we call
human beings but it is observed to happen and we don't
observe any super human joining them up just as we don't
see fairies painting the flowers different colors. It all happens
by itself. It is indeed magic but real magic no need to look
for the magician.

> The physical evidence of God is the observable ID in nature.
> That there will be people denying observable facts
> is predicted by God in the Bhagavad Gita.

An obvious prediction if you think about it that any man
would have predicted.

[Jahnu]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 00:01:43 -0700 (PDT), casey
<jgkj...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

>On the contrary many years were spent looking for any evidence
>for a god and none were found outside of the brain.

That says more about your brain than it says about any evidence.
Besides, as they say, the proof is in the taste of the pudding. What's
the evidence that, say, honey is sweet? That's right, the proof is in
your brain. You won't have the proof that honey is sweet until you
have tasted it.

Similarly, you won't understand the proof of God until and unless you
practice the prescribed process to know Him.

Krishna says:

Now hear, O son of Prtha, how by practicing yoga in full consciousness
of Me, with mind attached to Me, you can know Me in full, free from
doubt. (Bg 7.1)

My dear Arjuna, only by undivided devotional service can I be
understood as I am, standing before you, and can thus be seen
directly. Only in this way can you enter into the mysteries of My
understanding. (Bg 11.54)

The science of self-realization described by God in the Bhagavad Gita
is like any other science - you won't understand it until you practice
it under expert guidance. It's like mathematics, you won't understand
any proofs of mathematics until you have studied and learned from a
certified professor.

>No many years of reading and thinking about these questions
>were involved before coming to the conclusion it was a delusion.

That's because your mind is deluded.

Krishna says:

O scion of Bharata, O conqueror of the foe, all living entities are
born into delusion, bewildered by dualities arisen from desire and
hate. (Bg 7.27)

>The appearance that the world was designed by some super
>human outside of nature is an illusion.

Because you say so? hahaha :) So now you are arguing from your
personal incredulity, eh? That's real intelligent... :)

>There is no reason it
>could not have formed all by itself as explained by the theory
>of evolution.

There are no observations, no logic, no reason, no science, nothing
whatsoever that suppport the idea, the world created itself by
chance.

"Mutations have a very limited �constructive capacity� . No matter how
numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution."
--Past president of the French Academy of Sciences Pierre-Paul Grasse

"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are
great con-men, And the story they are telling may be the GREATEST HOAX
EVER." -- Dr.T.N.Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission

"We must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian
accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only
a variety of wishful speculations." -- Franklin Harold, Emeritus
Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Colorado State
University, in an Oxford University Press text.

>You may not know the molecular mechanisms
>that allow a single cell to multiply and form colonies we call
>human beings but it is observed to happen and we don't
>observe any super human joining them up just as we don't
>see fairies painting the flowers different colors. It all happens
>by itself. It is indeed magic but real magic no need to look
>for the magician.

----but, but, but there is no magic involved in creating life. It's
all a natural process. If you ask me what exactly is that natural
process, I have no idea, I just call it a natural process to make it
sound like it's science, to fool creationists into thinking, that I
know what I'm talking about.

These poor religious fanatics, they need some magical, invisible pixie
sitting in the sky, to explain nature, but me? Forget it, I don't need
magic to explain nature, because it's all a naturall process.

You see, first there was a point... I call the point a singularity to
make it sound less ridiculous, I fabulate it's a point of all mass,
space, and time, so no need to worry about what was outside the point,
because there was nothing outside the point - no space, no time, no
mass, no condencity, no nothing, you understand? There was only the
point, and from that point a universe came out, just like that, for no
apparent reason, it just happened, see? No magic involved... it's all
a natural process, and as we all know natural processes are very
scientic.

I won't get into what happened with the natural processes after the
universe popped into existence - how life evolved out of chemicals and
then transmuted from an amoeba into a talking human being. Don't worry
yourself about all these annoying details, all you have to understand
is that it's completely natural and scientific.... and that it
happened over long, long time. That's all you have to know.

Also, don't worry yourself that noone with a brain actually believes
the world created itself out of a bunch of chemicals, don't worry that
the most prominent and brainy scientists on the planet support the
idea of ID - Intelligent Design, simply because it makes more sense.

That's totally inconsequential. All you have to know, is that it's all
completely natural. It doesn't matter you have no clue what it means
or entails. You simply have to repeat it like a mantra, just try it -
natural process, natural process, natural natural process process, no
magic, no magic, magic magic no no... see how good it makes you feel?

"A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a
superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry
and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about
in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so
overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question." - Fred
Hoyle, astrophysicist

[Jahnu]

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 21:03:55 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:

>I find it peculiar that theists so often accuse atheists of re-defining
>the word "atheism" as "absence of theism" (which is what it really
>means), yet they never seem to criticize or make fun of themselves for
>their implicit attempts to re-define the word "death" (which is final).

Well, what's your definition of death? My definition of death is when
the soul leaves the body.

>Why do you call it death and then immediately proceed to contradict
>yourself by claiming that that death is an awakening? If it's death,
>then the possibility of an awakening is obviously and clearly ruled out.

Because you say so? hahaha :) You have no idea what happens at the
point of death. I do. And you don't have to take my word for it.
You'll have first hand experience of it in due course. Death is going
to be a rude awakening for you.

Krishna says:

As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood
to youth to old age, the soul similarly passes into another body at
death. A sober person is not bewildered by such a change. (Bg 2.13)

For the soul there is neither birth nor death at any time. He has not
come into being, does not come into being, and will not come into
being. He is unborn, eternal, ever-existing and primeval. He is not
slain when the body is slain. (Bg 2.20)

As a person puts on new garments, giving up old ones, the soul
similarly accepts new material bodies, giving up the old and useless
ones. (Bg 2.22)

[casey]

On Apr 13, 9:06 pm, Jahnu <jahnud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]

> Similarly, you won't understand the proof of God until and unless you
> practice the prescribed process to know Him.

Your notion of proof is very different to mine. I understand what
you are talking about. It has to do with neurology of the religious
experience which "proves" to the person having the experience
that they know god. For anyone interested a simple chapter on
it can be found in chapter 9 "God and the Limbic System" in
the book "Phantoms in the Brain" by V.S. Ramachandran.

[raven1]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 05:45:39 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 08:35:38 -0400, raven1
><quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>
>>Is your snip and "whatever" an admission that you were wrong yet
>>again, Jesper?
>
>Nope.

So you still maintain that no one understands natural selection after
it was painstakingly explained to you? Talk about delusional, Jesper.

---
raven1
aa # 1096
EAC Vice President (President in charge of vice)
BAAWA Knight

[Irreverend Dave]

"Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess"

While they're at it, they should print this one up too!

- The Periodic Table of Irrational Nonsense -

http://www.crispian.net/PTOIN3.jpg

--
Men become civilized, not in proportion to their willingness to believe,
but in proportion to their readiness to doubt - Ambrose Bierce

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 21:11:57 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 10:22:06 -0400
>raven1 <quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 03:14:50 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>Clearly you don't understand what natural selection is.
>> >
>> >No one does.
>>
>> Translation: *you* don't. Any high school biology student could tell
>> you what it is, just like and high school chemistry student could tell
>> you the difference between organic and inorganic chemistry. Not
>> everyone is as invincibly ignorant as you are, Jesper.
>
>It gets even better than that -- a 5-year-old child recently told me
>about the Periodic Table of the Elements. She knew the names and uses
>for many of the elements, and referenced the one- and two-letter
>symbols interchangeably with the element names. People can learn
>things at any age, and 5 years is definitely no exception.

Some time in the 1980s I was coming back by train from Swindon to
Manchester (change at Gloucester and Birmingham).

A mother and child got on the train and sat opposite me.

I was reading a railway magazine, and the kid says "look, Mummy, a
class 40" (on the cover). Kids that young didn't usually recognise
individual locomotive classes. So I asked the mother how he knew.

It turned out that her husband was another train freak, and that I
actually knew him professionally - he was a well known recruiter in my
field.

I showed him a few more pictures from the magazine and he recognised
them all, including the slightly smaller class 37.

I asked how he knew it was a 37 not a 40, and he pointed to the wheels
(6 axles instead of 8).

Get them interested in something and you'd be surprised how much they
learn.

[Jahnu]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 05:16:55 -0700 (PDT), casey
<jgkj...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

>Your notion of proof is very different to mine. I understand what
>you are talking about. It has to do with neurology of the religious
>experience which "proves" to the person having the experience
>that they know god. For anyone interested a simple chapter on
>it can be found in chapter 9 "God and the Limbic System" in
>the book "Phantoms in the Brain" by V.S. Ramachandran.

"It remains a mystery how the undirected process of mutation, combined
with natural selection, has resulted in the creation of thousands of
new proteins with extraordinarily diverse and well optimized
functions. This problem is particularly acute for tightly integrated
molecular systems that consist of many interacting parts. --Two
leading biologists inAnnual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics

Science now know that many of the pillars of the Darwinian theory are
either false or misleading. Yet biology texts continue to present them
as factual evidence of Evolution. What does this imply about their
scientific standards? - Jonathan Wells

[Jahnu]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 11:29:38 -0400, raven1
<quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:

>So you still maintain that no one understands natural selection after
>it was painstakingly explained to you? Talk about delusional, Jesper.

"Mutations have a very limited �constructive capacity� . No matter how
numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution."
--Past president of the French Academy of Sciences Pierre-Paul Grasse

[Mike Duffy]

Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:o5sjm8hcp744lgoeq...@4ax.com:

> "It remains a mystery how the undirected process of mutation, combined
> with natural selection, has resulted in the creation of thousands of
> new proteins with extraordinarily diverse and well optimized
> functions.

"It remains a mystery" means "scientists have not yet discovered".

--
http://pages.videotron.ca/duffym/index.htm

[casey]

On Apr 14, 10:00 am, Jahnu <jahnud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 11:29:38 -0400, raven1
>

> <quoththera...@nevermore.com> wrote:
> >So you still maintain that no one understands natural selection after
> >it was painstakingly explained to you? Talk about delusional, Jesper.
>
> "Mutations have a very limited ‘constructive capacity’ . No matter how
> numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution."
> --Past president of the French Academy of Sciences Pierre-Paul Grasse

"Unfortunately, most religious creationists and
intelligent design advocates usually equate
evolution with "Darwinism" and it is clear many
of these authors out of dishonesty do this on
purpose. Where it is clear non-Darwinian
scientists or writers are only debating the
role of natural selection in evolution and the
mechanisms which brought evolution about,
creationists often quote mine and distort
quotes from these scientists in an attempt to
create the impression that these scientists
were actually denying evolution."

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Non-Darwinian_evolution

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

That's very good. Do you think that Circumcision (Cu) should be in the
Quack block rather than the Delusion block though? They also screwed
up with Homeopathy because "H2O" is not a single element (they probably
should have called it "Ho" or something similar).

Thanks for that table, it's a great idea.

--

Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess

"We had managers that communicated to our work force that the
attendance at the Romney event was mandatory, but no one was forced to
attend the event."
-- Rob Moore, CFO, Murray Energy

[Jahnu]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 00:14:48 +0000 (UTC), Mike Duffy
<Use.web.form@website_in_sig.com> wrote:

>"It remains a mystery" means "scientists have not yet discovered".

---but, but I have faith in science. They'll figure it out in the
future...

hahaha :) That's what Walt Disney thought, too. Where is he now?

"[The] Darwinian claim to explain all of evolution is a popular
half-truth whose lack of explicative power is compensated for only by
the religious ferocity of its rhetoric."

--National Academy of Sciences member Lynn Margulis

Krishna says:

Those who are demoniac do not know what is to be done and what is not
to be done. Neither cleanliness nor proper behavior nor truth is found
in them. (Bg 16.7)

They say that this world is unreal, with no foundation, no God in
control. They say it is produced of sex desire and has no cause other
than lust. (Bg. 16.8)

Following such conclusions, the demoniac, who are lost to themselves
and who have no intelligence, engage in unbeneficial, horrible works
meant to destroy the world. (Bg. 16.9)

Taking shelter of insatiable lust and absorbed in the conceit of pride
and false prestige, the demoniac, thus illusioned, are always sworn to
unclean work, attracted by the impermanent. (Bg. 16.10)

They believe that to gratify the senses is the prime necessity of
human civilization. Thus until the end of life their anxiety is
immeasurable. Bound by a network of hundreds of thousands of desires
and absorbed in lust and anger, they secure money by illegal means for
sense gratification. (Bg. 16.11-12)

The demoniac person thinks: "So much wealth do I have today, and I
will gain more according to my schemes. So much is mine now, and it
will increase in the future, more and more. He is my enemy, and I have
killed him, and my other enemies will also be killed. I am the lord of
everything. I am the enjoyer. I am perfect, powerful and happy. I am
the richest man, surrounded by aristocratic relatives. There is none
so powerful and happy as I am. I shall perform sacrifices, I shall
give some charity, and thus I shall rejoice." In this way, such
persons are deluded by ignorance. (Bg. 16. 13-15)

Thus perplexed by various anxieties and bound by a network of
illusions, they become too strongly attached to sense enjoyment and
fall down into hell. (Bg. 16.16)

Self-complacent and always impudent, deluded by wealth and false
prestige, they sometimes proudly perform sacrifices in name only,
without following any rules or regulations. (Bg. 16.17)

Bewildered by false ego, strength, pride, lust and anger, the demons
become envious of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is situated
in their own bodies and in the bodies of others, and blaspheme against
the real religion. (Bg. 16.18)

Those who are envious and mischievous, who are the lowest among men, I
perpetually cast into the ocean of material existence, into various
demoniac species of life. (Bg. 16. 19)

Attaining repeated birth amongst the species of demoniac life, O son
of Kunti, such persons can never approach Me. Gradually they sink down
to the most abominable type of existence. (Bg. 16.20)

There are three gates leading to this hell�lust, anger and greed.
Every sane man should give these up, for they lead to the degradation
of the soul. (Bg. 16.21)

The man who has escaped these three gates of hell, O son of Kunti,
performs acts conducive to self-realization and thus gradually attains
the supreme destination. (Bg. 16.22)

He who discards scriptural injunctions and acts according to his own
whims attains neither perfection, nor happiness, nor the supreme
destination. (Bg. 16.23)

One should therefore understand what is duty and what is not duty by
the regulations of the scriptures. Knowing such rules and regulations,
one should act so that he may gradually be elevated. (Bg. 16.24)

[Jahnu]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 17:30:57 -0700 (PDT), casey
<jgkj...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> "Unfortunately, most religious creationists and
> intelligent design advocates usually equate
> evolution with "Darwinism" and it is clear many
> of these authors out of dishonesty do this on
> purpose. Where it is clear non-Darwinian
> scientists or writers are only debating the
> role of natural selection in evolution and the
> mechanisms which brought evolution about,
> creationists often quote mine and distort
> quotes from these scientists in an attempt to
> create the impression that these scientists
> were actually denying evolution."

After scientists discovered that Darwin's theory was blatantly wrong -
no scientific evidence of it what so ever - they began to call
observable traits in nature, such as living entities adapting to their
environment, evolution. They call the changes happening in the genes
and on the micro-level evolution. In this way they mislead the public
into thinking that evolution is a fact. Now, they even say, when it is
being pointed out to them that Darwin's theory is false - but, but
evolution is a fact because living enties adapt to their enviroments,
living entities have imune systems, THAT's evolution... in this way
they try to escape the fact the their theory is pure myth. See the
cheating that's going on in the name of science?

"Mutations have a very limited �constructive capacity� . No matter how
numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution."
--Past president of the French Academy of Sciences Pierre-Paul Grasse

Science now know that many of the pillars of the Darwinian theory are
either false or misleading. Yet biology texts continue to present them
as factual evidence of Evolution. What does this imply about their
scientific standards? - Jonathan Wells

[fasgnadh]

Sir Fred M. McNeill wrote:

> 'Humans' need their stories.

Hi Fred, tell us one, when were you knighted and why?

> Both atheism and theism provide
> stories.

The story of theism is a series of great and enduring civilisations
inspired, built and sustained, from the very beginning of History:

"The Birth of Religion

"We used to think agriculture gave rise to cities
and later to writing, art, and religion.
Now the world�s oldest temple suggests the
urge to worship sparked civilization."

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2011/06/gobekli-tepe/mann-text

The atheist stories never enspired anything great or enduring
just a series of TOTALITARIAN TYRANNIES in EVERY athesit state.


Tell us an atheist story that inspired a single decent atheist
democracy, let alone a great and enduring atheist civilisation.

> "Efficacious" and pragmatic
> are good words. Some stories are more
> "efficacious" and pragmatic than others.
> Consider the evolution of stories. "Survival
> of the fittest" and all. Even here, with very
> constrained 'humans'.

NONE of the atheist states in history were efficacious or pragmatic,
they were all catastrophic failueres that terrorised tortured and killed
over 80,000,000 men women and children;

# From: raven1 <quotht...@nevermore.com>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: Re: Anyone seen Hysteria, Abu Baker Bashir and Kelsey
Bjarnyard? B^D
# Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 21:15:11 -0500
# Message-ID: <87ttk498t9sueojr7...@4ax.com>
#
# There has never been a "Great, Enduring Atheist Civilization"

An atheist explains why:

[Mike Duffy]

Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:i8vjm853ptpq2rgt7...@4ax.com:

> ... the demoniac, who are lost to themselves

Demons do not hold sway over atheists, Janhu.

It is only theists such as yourself who believe in demons who can fall
under the power of a demon. The fact that demons are your own mental
constructs does not diminish their power to cloud your thinking.

Krishna, Jehovah, Rah, Baal, Zeus, Jupiter, take your pick. To an atheist
they are much the same. The only difference is that people have stopped
believing in the majority of gods that have so far "existed".

--
http://pages.videotron.ca/duffym/index.htm

[casey]

On Apr 14, 11:16 am, Jahnu <jahnud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]

> "Mutations have a very limited ‘constructive capacity’ . No matter how
> numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution."
> --Past president of the French Academy of Sciences Pierre-Paul Grasse

Do you realize Grasse believed in Lamarckian evolution?

Mutations in an artificial neural network and natural selection by
a win state feedback evolved into a network capable of giving a
value to backgammon game states that enabled it to beat even
the best backgammon player. (google td-gammon). I would say
that is a simple example of the constructive capacity of mutations
with selection.

[casey]

On Apr 14, 11:38 am, Mike Duffy <Use.web.form@website_in_sig.com>
wrote:
> Jahnu <jahnud...@gmail.com> wrote innews:i8vjm853ptpq2rgt7...@4ax.com:

>
> > ... the demoniac, who are lost to themselves
>
> Demons do not hold sway over atheists, Janhu.
>
> It is only theists such as yourself who believe in demons who can fall
> under the power of a demon. The fact that demons are your own mental
> constructs does not diminish their power to cloud your thinking.
>
> Krishna, Jehovah, Rah, Baal, Zeus, Jupiter, take your pick. To an atheist
> they are much the same. The only difference is that people have stopped
> believing in the majority of gods that have so far "existed".

Yes, imaginary gods and demons can only control the brains
that hold such notions. You can induce such creatures as
patterns in your brain using well known techniques such as
the one suggested by Jahnu.



>
> --http://pages.videotron.ca/duffym/index.htm

[raven1]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 05:30:59 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 11:29:38 -0400, raven1
><quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>
>>So you still maintain that no one understands natural selection after
>>it was painstakingly explained to you? Talk about delusional, Jesper.
>
>"Mutations have a very limited �constructive capacity�

Mutation isn't natural selection, you hopeless fool. Nice try at
evasion, though.

[raven1]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 06:46:49 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>After scientists discovered that Darwin's theory was blatantly wrong -

Who discovered such a thing? Be specific, Jesper; methinks you're
bullshitting again, as always. Moreover, I don't believe you have the
faintest clue what Darwin's theory even is. Feel free to prove me
wrong by giving a quick summary of it here: a couple of sentences
should suffice...

[Jahnu]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 01:38:01 +0000 (UTC), Mike Duffy
<Use.web.form@website_in_sig.com> wrote:

>Demons do not hold sway over atheists, Janhu.

The sanskrit word for demon or atheist is the same - asura, or
ungodly.

Atheists ARE demons. Of course, you are just a poor victim of the
demoniac, atheistic forces that rule the world at present.

In any human society there are two classes of people - the cheaters
and the cheated. You belong to the broad masses - the cheated The
broad masses always mindlessly follow who ever is in charge whether it
be godly or ungodly people.

>It is only theists such as yourself who believe in demons who can fall
>under the power of a demon. The fact that demons are your own mental
>constructs does not diminish their power to cloud your thinking.

Whether it be you or me who are under the sway of clouded thoughts
only time will tell...

>Krishna, Jehovah, Rah, Baal, Zeus, Jupiter, take your pick. To an atheist
>they are much the same. The only difference is that people have stopped
>believing in the majority of gods that have so far "existed".

That's because the people are ruled by ungodly forces exactly as
predicted in the vedas. You just have to think about - a culture in
which the two main enterprises - weapons and meat - profit on death
and destruction is not a benevolent, advanced culture. The only
direction such a culture advances is towards hell.

Shukadeva Gosvami said:

Then, O King, religion, truthfulness, cleanliness, tolerance, mercy,
duration of life, physical strength and memory will all diminish day
by day because of the powerful influence of the age of Kali. (SB
12.2.2)

In Kali-yuga, wealth alone will be considered the sign of a man's good
birth, proper behavior and fine qualities. And law and justice will be
applied only on the basis of one's power. (SB 12.2.3)

Men and women will live together merely because of superficial
attraction, and success in business will depend on deceit. Womanliness
and manliness will be judged according to one's expertise in sex, and
a man will be known as a br�hmana just by his wearing a thread. (SB
12.2.4)

A person's spiritual position will be ascertained merely according to
external symbols, and on that same basis people will change from one
spiritual order to the next. A person's propriety will be seriously
questioned if he does not earn a good living. And one who is very
clever at juggling words will be considered a learned scholar. (SB
12.2.5)

A person will be judged unholy if he does not have money, and
hypocrisy will be accepted as virtue. Marriage will be arranged simply
by verbal agreement, and a person will think he is fit to appear in
public if he has merely taken a bath. (SB 12.2.6)

A sacred place will be taken to consist of no more than a reservoir of
water located at a distance, and beauty will be thought to depend on
one's hairstyle. Filling the belly will become the goal of life, and
one who is audacious will be accepted as truthful. He who can maintain
a family will be regarded as an expert man, and the principles of
religion will be observed only for the sake of reputation. (SB 12.2.7)

As the earth thus becomes crowded with a corrupt population, whoever
among any of the social classes shows himself to be the strongest will
gain political power. (SB 12.2.8)

Losing their wives and properties to such avaricious and merciless
rulers, who will behave no better than ordinary thieves, the citizens
will flee to the mountains and forests. (SB 12.2.9)

Harassed by famine and excessive taxes, people will resort to eating
leaves, roots, flesh, wild honey, fruits, flowers and seeds. Struck by
drought, they will become completely ruined. (SB 12.2.10)

[fasgnadh]

On 13/04/2013 2:11 PM, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess

wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 10:22:06 -0400
> raven1 <quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 03:14:50 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Clearly you don't understand what natural selection is.

Skyeyes and I provided an informative outine:

# Subject: Natural Selection: why theism built Civilisation and
# atheism built Gulags! B^D was Re: Atheists are demons
# Message-ID: <TX%9t.555$e66...@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com>
# Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2013 08:32:45 +1000
# From: fasgnadh <fasg...@yahoo.com>
# Newsgroups: alt.religion.vaisnava,alt.atheism,talk.atheism,
# alt.religion,alt.religion.christian,alt.agnosticism,
# alt.philosophy,uk.politics.misc,alt.talk.creationism
#
# Fidem Turbare, the non-cognitive atheist gobshite wrote:
# > SkyEyes uses Natural Selection to explain the FAILURE of atheism:
# >>>>>
# >>>>> natural selection
# >>
# >> Actually, it's quite a simple construct, and one
# >> that's pitifully easy to demonstrate.
# >>
# >> Take two people of breeding age, neither of which
# >> has had any children yet. To make the test fair,
# >> they should be of the same gender, since
# >> males and females have different breeding strategies.
#
# Take two ideas: Theism and Atheism
#
# >> Plonk these two individuals down out in the wilderness,
# >> about 20 yards from the nearest hungry large predator.
#
# Place these ideas in human society, initially primitive but
# capable of evolving.
#
# >> One of them is likely to run faster than the other one
# >> (for any number of physical reasons).
#
# Religion started civilisation, and built all the great
# and enduring ones which followed:
#
# "The Birth of Religion"
#
# "We used to think agriculture gave rise to cities
# and later to writing, art, and religion.
# Now the world�s oldest temple suggests the
# urge to worship sparked civilization."
#
# http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2011/06/gobekli-tepe/mann-text
#
# >> Remember, he doesn't have to run faster than
# >> the lion/bear/tiger, only faster than the other guy.
#
# In this case, atheism limped from the outset... B^D
#
# One of these ideas, theism, proves more efficacious in
# evolving great and enduring civilisations, lifting humans
# out of their primitive state faster than the other, atheism,
# which never produces a single free, open, progressive
# democracy, let alone a civilisation, as atheists
# themselves admit:
#
# # From: raven1 <quotht...@nevermore.com>
# # Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# # Subject: Re: Anyone seen Hysteria, Abu Baker Bashir
# # and Kelsey Bjarnyard? B^D
# # Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 21:15:11 -0500
# # Message-ID: <87ttk498t9sueojr7...@4ax.com>

# #
# # There has never been a "Great, Enduring Atheist Civilization"

#
# >> The one that gets away is now free to mate and have offspring. The
# >> slower guy is...never gonna get to do that.
#
# Those in theist societies prosper and theism spreads, those in atheist
# states suffer terror, torture and death in holocaust proportions,
# over 80,000,000 die in just 7 decades! 8^o
#
# The theist meme propogates because it is more efficacious...
# superior.
#
# >> That's natural selection.
#
# The atheist meme has been trid and failed, yet it's adherents
# cling blindly to it, and their atheist regimes perpetuate
# the PRIMITIVE state humanity started in.
#
# The theist meme continues to evolve, distancing itself
# from the primitive state humans began in.
#
# It's majority religious societies have created free, open,
# progressive, tolerant, rights-based scientifically literate,
# prosperous, secular democracies which even the ATHEIST
# HYPOCRITES prefer to live in!!!!!!!
#
# BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAAA
#
# >> There was something about the one that got away -
# >> more endurance, quicker reflexes, less appetizing body odor,
# >> longer legs, whatever -
#
# If you ask the theists where they got the ideas that made them more
# successful, they say "God"
#
# But the unsuccessful atheists continue to claim that there is no
# evidence for God. Now that is UNNATURAL SELECTION of the EVIDENCE!
#
# BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHA
#
# The theist tries to explain the spiritual values
#
# >>>that gave him an advantage over the other guy,
#
# but the atheist is certain he is right, despite all historical
# evidence to the contrary!
#
# >> and so the one who got away left more offspring.
# >>
# >> These offspring inherit their parents' successful
# >> trait - the quicker reflexes, less
# >> appetizing body odor, longer legs, whatever
#
# "At the dawn of the 20th Century approximately one
# half of the world's population identified itself as
# either Muslim, Catholic, Protestant, Hindu or Buddhist,
# and 100 years of secularism, and technological advancement,
# and scientific progress later and that number is now
# two thirds.
#
# So, for those of you who enjoy beginning coffee shop
# conversations with "The Death of God" .. it's time to change
# the subject! It's time to talk about something else , because
# it's not happening at all.
#
# People are becoming more religious, not less religious,
# and religion itself is also evolving"
#
#
# - Dr Reza Aslan
#
# http://www.abc.net.au/rn/bigideas/stories/2010/2929354.htm
#
# The same process of natural selection applies WITHIN theism,
# older, primitive expreswsions of belief give way to new ones
# in response to changing times and the evolving capacities
# of the species, their understanding and their social, political
# economic and technological sophistication.
#
# >> - and in their turn - if
# >> they don't meet up with another person with even *better* adaptive
# >> traits - they'll continue passing this successful trait on to
# >> *their* young 'uns, etc., etc., and in a few generations you
# >> have a population with quicker reflexes or stinky body
# >> odor or longer legs - whatever it is that allows them to
# >> get away from a predator successfully.
#
# eg In the early stages of PRE-LITERATE humanity, social laws
# had to be brief and the sanctions memorable. So by todays
# standards they appear harsh, but were necessarily so to ensure
# the survival of small subsistence-level tribes, whose unity
# could be threatened by fornication or theft, but to imprison
# offenders would remove a worker (or two if a guard was required)
# but leave the same number of mouths to feed. The death penalty
# was the rational solution, even those these thesit tribes
# were the FIRST to understand that killing was wrong, unless
# sanctioned by necessary law.
#
# As the theist civilsations progressed they grew in their
# capacities and complexity and could more fully pursue
# their spiritual objectives of Love, Compassion, Justice,
# Mercy and Forgiveness.
#
# The core spiritual values were shared by all the great
# world religions, despite the geographic and time distance
# between their emergence, but the social mores derived from
# those values changes dependent upon the limes.
# Theists refer to this unique capacity for spiritual
# texts to evolve and adapt to evolving circumstances as
# "The Living Word", and the process as Progressive revelation.
#
# Some remnants of earlier religious forms still survive,
# and so you have a vast diversity of religious beliefs,
# some more sophisticated than others, and even abberrant
# ideas can survive in a world of comfort and plenty..
# and so in the 'Modern Era' we have experienced viral
# outbreaks of plausible sounding, but empty and
# dangerous ideologies: Fascism, Communism, Nazism, Atheism,
# Racism, Imperialism, Colonialism...
#
# With the economic prosperity and greater freedoms in the
# emerging 'Modern' states, Natural Selection is suspended
# and these radical ideas can take hold with catastrophic
# results as the effects of adopting them are initially cushioned,
# until it is too late, and catastrophe ensues.
# (See Russsian Revolution and the first atheist state)
#
# Similarly, in the modern world, so many human needs are
# met that increasing numbers of people assume life has
# always been like this, see no need for the self-sacrifice
# and selflessness that was required to achieve this level of
# civilisation, and may choose to throw the Spiritual Baby out
# with the Religious Bathwater. Ultimately, ideas which are
# true, and useful, are tested and adopted.
#
# And so we live in the world where after 100 years of
# the dreadful effects of unbridled ideologies; Fascism,
# Communism, Nazism, Racism, Atheism, Imperialism, Colonialism...
# humanity has returned to what gives results..
# and so science AND religion continue their global growth.
#
# >> And that's *all* natural selection is. The only thing complicated
# >> about it is that it's continually working on *all* traits in a
# >> population, not just the ability to get away from predators.
#
# And that is why there are 300,000,000 new believers in China
# which was once an atheist state tyranny under Mao which
# persecuted religion and killed over 40,000,000 of it's own
# people, but changed it's constitution to allow greater
# freedom of of thought and belief and now prospers..
#
# and atheism in the USA increased by from a pathetic
# 902,000 (0.4%) to a feeble 1,621,000 (0.7%) in the same
# time period, and in places where atheism is actually
# DISCUSSED OPENLY, such as USENET, it declined and DIED:
#
#
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en&fromgroups#!aboutgroup/alt.atheism.moderated

# THAT IS NATURAL SELECTION! B^D
#
#
# >> Simple. Elegant. TRUE.
#
# Atheim is a failed hypothesis which history has naturally
# selected OUT!
#
# Theism has been naturally selected through history
# because it is efficacious.
#
# > That's an excellent explanation of natural selection

Thanks.


# > (I think you should add it to the alt-atheism.org FAQ web site

Oh no, I'd rather put it here in USENET where it's more likely
someone will actually READ IT!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA

But you have my permission to reproduce it, but only if you do so
VERBATIM, atheists are notorious fabricators, propogandist liars and
trolls.

# > The problem posed by societies that works against
# > natural selection's effectiveness is the invention
# > of luxuries -- these luxuries make it easier for
# > people to basically "cheat" against natural selection, which
# > shifts the balance in favour of laziness and stupidity.

EXACTLY! and Abberrant ideologies such as Hedonism, Fascism,
Materialism, Communism, Nazism, Racism, Atheism, Sadism, Imperialism,
Colonialism... can all take hold,.. for a while, until their
inadequacies cause catastrophic failure, and they are rejected by the
foolish societies that embraced them!

That was certainly the experience of EVERY ATHEIST STATE in history!!!!

# > I wonder if there really would be so many
# > lazy and stupid people in the world today
# > if there wasn't such an abundance of luxuries.

Jesus made the same point thousands of years before you!


Matthew 19:23-24

"Then Jesus said to his disciples, �Truly I tell you,
it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the
kingdom of heaven. 24 Again I tell you, it is
easier for a camel to go through the eye of a
needle than for someone who is rich to enter
the kingdom of God.�

Note, it does not say IMPOSSIBLE, just harder.

1 Timothy 6:10

"For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil.
Some people, eager for money, have wandered from
the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs."

When ideas are so ORIGINAL and so TRUE natural selection
ensures they endure, just like successful DNA!

B^D

> It gets even better than that

Atheists are actually starting to acknowledge the debt they
ow to scientists who shoed that FAITH and REASON go hand in hand:

> -- a 5-year-old child recently told me

Great to see atheists are prepared to learn from those
better educated than themselves, (which is everyone! ;-);

> about the Periodic Table of the Elements.

Ah yes the work of reknowned believer, Dmitri Ivanovich Mendeleev,
Russian chemist, inventor and deist - "the belief that reason and
observation of the natural world are sufficient to determine the
existence of God"

> http://www.atheistfrontier.com/people/dmitri-mendeleyev/

Great to see atheists acknowledging the work of the great
scientists who were Believers, on whose shoulders we all stand!

> I encourage you to get that chart printed and laminated so that you can
> give it to friends with young children. It's the kind of gift that is
> meaningful and will be appreciated later in life after the kids grow up.

If only Bukakke had one before he tried to tell everyone that the dust
remaining after a carbon based organism is cremated or buried is
'silicon dirt' rather than the dust (small particles of various elements
and compounds formed in stars after the big bang) which
Genesis accurately describes us as being made of! B^D

Snot Balneave explains why atheists deliberately try to conflate atheism
with reason and science;


--

[raven1]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 07:42:46 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Whether it be you or me who are under the sway of clouded thoughts
>only time will tell...

You're the only one who doesn't already know, Jesper.

[Jahnu]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 18:51:31 -0700 (PDT), casey
<jgkj...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

>Do you realize Grasse believed in Lamarckian evolution?

Who gives a shit what Grasse belived? The point is, that he was decent
enough to admit, that there is no evidence of the idiotic idea, that
one species gradually, through series of mutations over long. long
time, changes into another species. And all decent scientists agree,
whatever the hell they believe. It's only the broad masses who think
evolution is science. Every scientist knows it's hogwash. You may
redefine evolution to mean something other than Darwin's theory, you
may call the imune system and environmental adaption of the species
for evolution, but it's still an unscientific idea with nothing to
support it.

"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life
are great con-men, And the story they are telling may be the GREATEST
HOAX EVER." -- Dr.T.N.Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission

"We must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian
accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only
a variety of wishful speculations." -- Franklin Harold, Emeritus
Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Colorado State
University, in an Oxford University Press text.

Have a look at my art -

[raven1]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 07:54:18 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 18:51:31 -0700 (PDT), casey
><jgkj...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
>>Do you realize Grasse believed in Lamarckian evolution?
>
>Who gives a shit what Grasse belived?

You should, you idiot. He held the thoroughly wrong Lamarckian idea
that acquired traits could be passed on to subsequent generations,
which perspective led him to downplay the utility of mutation as an
agent of change. Once again, your ignorance bites you in the ass,
Jesper. Don't you ever get tired of it?

[Jahnu]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 22:16:11 -0400, raven1
<quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:

>You're the only one who doesn't already know, Jesper.

Me and other people with brains. You are making the mistake of
thinking that a group of anti-intellectual retards is everyone. It's
going to be a rude awakening for you when reality comes and crushes
your Mickey Mouse conception of the world. Your world is in be process
of being crushed by nature already as we speak, only brainwashed fools
don't see the writing on the wall. If you look at it with a
dispassionate and objective mind, you'll see that everything Hare
Krishna says about the world is coming true.

Vishnu says:

When one is envious of the demigods, who represent the Supreme
Personality of Godhead, of the Vedas, which give all knowledge, of the
cows, brahmanas, Vaisnavas and religious principles, and ultimately of
Me, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he and his civilization will
be vanquished without delay. -- Srimad Bhagavatam 7.4.27

[Jahnu]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 22:42:47 -0400, raven1
<quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:

>You should, you idiot. He held the thoroughly wrong Lamarckian idea
>that acquired traits could be passed on to subsequent generations,
>which perspective led him to downplay the utility of mutation as an
>agent of change. Once again, your ignorance bites you in the ass,
>Jesper. Don't you ever get tired of it?

"Darwinian evolution - whatever its other virtues - does not provide a
fruitful heuristic in experimental biology. This becomes especially
clear when we compare it with a heuristic framework such as the atomic
model, which opens up structural chemistry and leads to advances in
the synthesis of a multitude of new molecules of practical benefit.
None of this demonstrates that Darwinism is false. It does, however,
mean that the claim that it is the cornerstone of modern experimental
biology will be met with quiet skepticism from a growing number of
scientists in fields where theories actually do serve as cornerstones
for tangible breakthroughs."

--U.S. National Academy of Sciences member Philip Skell

[Jahnu]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 22:04:40 -0400, raven1
<quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:

>Who discovered such a thing? Be specific, Jesper; methinks you're
>bullshitting again, as always. Moreover, I don't believe you have the
>faintest clue what Darwin's theory even is. Feel free to prove me
>wrong by giving a quick summary of it here: a couple of sentences
>should suffice...

"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are
great con-men, And the story they are telling may be the GREATEST HOAX
EVER." -- Dr.T.N.Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission

"We must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian
accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only
a variety of wishful speculations." -- Franklin Harold, Emeritus
Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Colorado State
University, in an Oxford University Press text.

[Irreverend Dave]

This is version 3 of this table so I suspect Crispian is open to
suggestions to improve it. He has an email address on this page if you
feel the need to contact him.

http://www.crispian.net

[Father Haskell]

On Apr 13, 12:11 am, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess"

<godd...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 10:22:06 -0400
>

> raven1 <quoththera...@nevermore.com> wrote:

> > On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 03:14:50 +0530, Jahnu <jahnud...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >>Clearly you don't understand what natural selection is.
>
> > >No one does.
>
> > Translation: *you* don't. Any high school biology student could tell
> > you what it is, just like and high school chemistry student could tell
> > you the difference between organic and inorganic chemistry. Not
> > everyone is as invincibly ignorant as you are, Jesper.
>
> It gets even better than that -- a 5-year-old child recently told me
> about the Periodic Table of the Elements.  She knew the names and uses
> for many of the elements, and referenced the one- and two-letter
> symbols interchangeably with the element names.  People can learn
> things at any age, and 5 years is definitely no exception.
>
> The periodic table of elements for kids that she learned it from can be
> found on this web page (click on chart for high-resolution version):
>
> http://www.atheistfrontier.com/people/dmitri-mendeleyev/
>
> I encourage you to get that chart printed and laminated so that you can
> give it to friends with young children.  It's the kind of gift that is
> meaningful and will be appreciated later in life after the kids grow up.

How about a 4 year old singing the Tom Lehrer version complete,
and from memory? Enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWkVO6Bp8VM

If anyone will discover 119, it will be him.

[Jahnu]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:15:28 -0700 (PDT), Father Haskell
<father...@yahoo.com> wrote:


>If anyone will discover 119, it will be him.

https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu#5866214193602902530

[sbalneav]

In alt.atheism Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 00:14:48 +0000 (UTC), Mike Duffy
> <Use.web.form@website_in_sig.com> wrote:
>
>>"It remains a mystery" means "scientists have not yet discovered".
>
> ---but, but I have faith in science. They'll figure it out in the
> future...
>
> hahaha :) That's what Walt Disney thought, too. Where is he now?

Dead. Same as you will be.

Get used to the idea, Jahnu. See that clock ticking? Hear that church bell
goin off at every hour?

Ask not for whom the bell tolls, Jahnu.

It tolls for thee.

--
sbalneav | Good ideas are not adopted automatically. They must be
a.a #2171 | driven into practice with courageous impatience.
alt-atheism.org | -- Admiral Hyman Rickover

[Jahnu]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:13:29 +0000 (UTC), sbalneav
<sbal...@alt-atheism.org> wrote:

>> hahaha :) That's what Walt Disney thought, too. Where is he now?
>
>Dead. Same as you will be.

You have absolutely no idea where Disney is now. You can dream and
fantacize that death is final, even though all religions and spiritual
traditions on the planet since time immemorial have proclaimed the
opposite, if it makes you feel better, but it is that very
misconception that is the cause of all your suffering. Because you
think you are the body you will suffer again and again and you will
keep suffering until you realize that you are not the body, that you
are an eternal part of Krishna. It's as simple as that. That's why I'm
saying that death will be a rude awakening for you.

>Get used to the idea, Jahnu. See that clock ticking? Hear that church bell
>goin off at every hour?
>
>Ask not for whom the bell tolls, Jahnu.
>
>It tolls for thee.

Krishna says:

The total material substance, called Brahman, is the source of birth,
and it is that Brahman that I impregnate, making possible the births
of all living beings, O son of Bharata. (Bg. 14.3)


It should be understood that all species of life, O son of Kunti, are
made possible by birth in this material nature, and that I am the
seed-giving father. (Bg. 14.4)

Material nature consists of three modes�goodness, passion and
ignorance. When the eternal living entity comes in contact with
nature, O mighty-armed Arjuna, he becomes conditioned by these modes.
(Bg. 14.5)

O sinless one, the mode of goodness, being purer than the others, is
illuminating, and it frees one from all sinful reactions. Those
situated in that mode become conditioned by a sense of happiness and
knowledge. (Bg. 14.6)

The mode of passion is born of unlimited desires and longings, O son
of Kunt�, and because of this the embodied living entity is bound to
material fruitive actions. (Bg. 14.7)

O son of Bharata, know that the mode of darkness, born of ignorance,
is the delusion of all embodied living entities. The results of this
mode are madness, indolence and sleep, which bind the conditioned
soul. (Bg. 14.8)

O son of Bharata, the mode of goodness conditions one to happiness;
passion conditions one to fruitive action; and ignorance, covering
one's knowledge, binds one to madness. (Bg. 14.9)

Sometimes the mode of goodness becomes prominent, defeating the modes
of passion and ignorance, O son of Bharata. Sometimes the mode of
passion defeats goodness and ignorance, and at other times ignorance
defeats goodness and passion. In this way there is always competition
for supremacy.
(Bg. 14.10)

[Irreverend Dave]

Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:13:29 +0000 (UTC), sbalneav
> <sbal...@alt-atheism.org> wrote:
>
>>> hahaha :) That's what Walt Disney thought, too. Where is he now?
>>
>>Dead. Same as you will be.
>
> You have absolutely no idea where Disney is now.

Walt's here....

http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=284



You can dream and fantasize that death is not final, even though all

religions and spiritual traditions on the planet since time immemorial

have proclaimed the opposite, Just because it makes you feel better about
your wasted life, doesn't make it true.

[Mike Duffy]

Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:5b3km8d7duol4to8i...@4ax.com:

> The sanskrit word for demon or atheist is the same - asura, or
> ungodly.

So, this grammatically superior language does not posess the simple
distinction between a lack of religious belief and a harmful religious
belief?

It sounds like Sanskrit needs updating.

--
http://pages.videotron.ca/duffym/index.htm

[raven1]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 08:28:19 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 22:16:11 -0400, raven1
><quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>
>>You're the only one who doesn't already know, Jesper.
>
>Me and other people with brains. You are making the mistake of
>thinking that a group of anti-intellectual retards is everyone.

No, I'm pretty clear that the anti-intellectual retards here are
limited to you, Jesper.

[raven1]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 19:06:03 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:13:29 +0000 (UTC), sbalneav
><sbal...@alt-atheism.org> wrote:
>
>>> hahaha :) That's what Walt Disney thought, too. Where is he now?
>>
>>Dead. Same as you will be.
>
>You have absolutely no idea where Disney is now.

Well, that may be true. There are those persistent rumors that he was
cryogenically frozen...

[raven1]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 08:29:35 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>None of this demonstrates that Darwinism is false.

Oh my, did you miss that part, Jesper?

[raven1]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 08:30:33 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 22:04:40 -0400, raven1
><quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>
>>Who discovered such a thing? Be specific, Jesper; methinks you're
>>bullshitting again, as always. Moreover, I don't believe you have the
>>faintest clue what Darwin's theory even is. Feel free to prove me
>>wrong by giving a quick summary of it here: a couple of sentences
>>should suffice...

No summary there, Jesper. Try again.

[Jahnu]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 14:31:12 +0000 (UTC), Mike Duffy
<Use.web.form@website_in_sig.com> wrote:

>So, this grammatically superior language does not posess the simple
>distinction between a lack of religious belief and a harmful religious
>belief?

Sanskrit is known as a very precise language. That;s why asura, or
ungodly, is described as a disease of the mind. Atheism is a disease
of the mind that's the cause of all your suffering. As long as you
think you are your body you are going to suffer, and you will keep
suffering till you realize you are an eternal part of Krishna. In
between the suffering you may enjoy some bodily pleasures, but
whatever you do, it will always end in suffering. The end state in the
material world is one of suffering, because you get sick, and old and
then you die.

>It sounds like Sanskrit needs updating.

It sounds like the only way you can escape the suffering of the
material world is by surrendering to Krishna. Until you want to get
rid of all suffering you are not a fit candidate for Krishna. Krishna
is only for those who want to become free from suffering.

Krishna says:

An intelligent person does not take part in the sources of misery,
which are due to contact with the material senses. O son of Kunti,
such pleasures have a beginning and an end, and so the wise man does
not delight in them. (Bg 5.22)

O learned Uddhava, those who fix their consciousness on Me, giving up
all material desires, share with Me a happiness that cannot possibly
be experienced by those engaged in sense gratification.

--Srimad Bhagavatam 11.14.12

[Mike Duffy]

Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:1silm8pt3b9565c06...@4ax.com:

> Sanskrit is known as a very precise language. That;s why asura, or
> ungodly, is described as a disease of the mind.

So, there is no word in this precise language for someone who has never
heard of the notion of gods?

I'm not speaking of someone like myself who categorically rejects such
neurosis. Consider the child who has not yet learned to speak. Sanskit
considers him a mentally-deranged demon according to your definition.

--
http://pages.videotron.ca/duffym/index.htm

[Jahnu]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 17:05:24 +0000 (UTC), Mike Duffy
<Use.web.form@website_in_sig.com> wrote:

>So, there is no word in this precise language for someone who has never
>heard of the notion of gods?

All human civilizations throughout all history, whether primitive
jungle people or sophisticated urban dwellers, have had and have
notions of gods. I have heard that in Chinese there is no word for
God. Still Chinese people have notions of a Supreme.

>I'm not speaking of someone like myself who categorically rejects such
>neurosis. Consider the child who has not yet learned to speak. Sanskit
>considers him a mentally-deranged demon according to your definition.

The only thing that separates the human from the animal is that humans
have notions of God or gods.

Personally I grew up in a totally irreligious society. Everyone I knew
were atheists. In my family the word God was never uttered. God or
religion was just something that never crossed our minds. Until I was
17 and went to church in the US, I had been to church twice - when I
was baptized and when I was confirmed. And that was only as a matter
of tradition. The public school I went to had something like 1500
pupils, and out of those only one kid came from a religious family.
Her family was Jehova's, and that was something she liked to keep real
quiet about. To be religious was considered weird. That's how I grew
up in Copenhagen. When I came to the US at 17 as an exchange student,
my host family was a minister family. That was like a cultural shock
for me. Luckily, the two boys in the family - Mark and David , aged 17
and 15, were the main dope-dealers in the red-neck town I went to in
Illinois in 1974.

Anyway, anyone, regardless of his beliefs and convictions, can
experience that he is a constant or eternal observer of existence.

Krishna says:

As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood
to youth to old age, the soul similarly passes into another body at
death. A sober person is not bewildered by such a change. (Bg. 2.13)

What Krishna is saying here, is that one's body changes all the time
from childhood, to youth, to old age. But the self or the I within,
remains constant. One's mind and intelligence change, sure. You are
are supposed to grow wiser with age. One's thoughts, feelings,
willpower, and convictions change as time progresses.

But it is the same I-feeling, who experience all these changes. It is
the same observer. The person stays the same despite the altercations
in matter.

That is the eternal soul. It is the same person, or the same soul who
sits in a child's body as the one who sits in the old man's body. The
person didn't change, in the sense that he is the same observer. His
thoughts and feelings and intelligence changed, but he remained the
same soul. In this way anyone can experience his own eternality.

It's a question of absorption - either one is absorped in matter,
which is in constant change. One is absorped in his thoughts,
feelings, and will. Or one is absorped in one's eternal self. That
means, one is absorped in observing one's thoughts, feelings, and
will. IOW one is absorped in his own consciousness.

That is a choice one has. And one's choice will be determined by the
way one is controlled by matter. When one's choice is motivated by the
desire to become FREE from matter, then one begins his spiritual
journey back home, back to Godhead.

Krishna says:

A person who is not disturbed by the incessant flow of desires - that
enter like rivers into the ocean, which is ever being filled but is
always still - can alone achieve peace, and not the man who strives to
satisfy such desires. (Bg 2.70)

A person who has given up all desires for sense gratification, who
lives free from desires, who has given up all sense of proprietorship
and is devoid of false ego - he alone can attain real peace. (Bg 2.71)

That is the way of the spiritual and godly life, after attaining which
a man is not bewildered. If one is thus situated even at the hour of
death, one can enter into the kingdom of God. (Bg 2.72)

[Mike Duffy]

Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:fskmm85unhbqcbvub...@4ax.com:

> ... Luckily, the two boys in the family - Mark and David , aged 17

> and 15, were the main dope-dealers in the red-neck town I went to in
> Illinois in 1974.

Did you have experiences with psychedelic drugs at that time?

(Not including cannabis. For example, LSD, psilocybin, peyote, etc.)

Some people have what they perceive as a religious experience with such
substances.

--
http://pages.videotron.ca/duffym/index.htm

[Dreamer In Colore]

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 21:03:55 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 05:48:48 +0530
>Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 15:29:43 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
>> atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>>
>> >That's a rhetorical question, to which the answer is obviously "yes."
>>
>> ... and then you woke up. If not before, then death will be an
>> unpleasanrt awakening for you and all other atheists.
>[snip - boilerplate]
>
>I find it peculiar that theists so often accuse atheists of re-defining
>the word "atheism" as "absence of theism" (which is what it really
>means), yet they never seem to criticize or make fun of themselves for
>their implicit attempts to re-define the word "death" (which is final).
>
>Why do you call it death and then immediately proceed to contradict
>yourself by claiming that that death is an awakening? If it's death,
>then the possibility of an awakening is obviously and clearly ruled out.

The concept of death as an awakening is a salve for those who are
scared of shuffling off the mortal coil.

Nobody knows what's going to happen after the cells stop dancing,
Fidem, and that is just so unbelievably scary for most people that
there is an entire set of businesses dedicated to the softening of the
blow.

A lot of people find comfort in the notion that they will bask in the
soft light of a benevolent deity; others want to believe that their
enemies will be consigned to a lake of fire; yet others feel that an
awakening/reincarnation will somehow give them a second chance at what
they wasted the first time around.

I think that's awful.

I think it's grotesque that people can find solace in the idea that
they'll get another chance, or that they'll be wrapped in swaddling
clothes because they need so much succor after their lives are over.

As far as we know, we have this existence. We might hope for something
else, or better, or worse, but we only know what we have now. And
wasting that is a tragedy, and people just want to be given the excuse
that there's something else after... because this absolves them of
responsibility.

Death isn't an awakening. It's the end. And that alone should fill
everyone with the urgent need to pack as much life in as possible, as
much learning as possible, as much of everything as possible, and not
spend a whole lot of time in the pursuit of what comes next.

If the deity is omniscient, and omnipotent, he's already going to know
everything you've done, and will act accordingly, so contrition and
repentance at the end aren't going to have a whole lot of weight, are
they?

No. I choose to learn now, and ask questions now, and think now, and
let my "immortal soul" handle its own affairs after my physical body's
given up. After all, it has all the time forever at its disposal.

Cheers,
Dreamer
AA 2306

[Jahnu]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 21:46:46 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
<dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:

<snip>

>No. I choose to learn now, and ask questions now, and think now, and
>let my "immortal soul" handle its own affairs after my physical body's
>given up. After all, it has all the time forever at its disposal.

Krishna says:

And whoever, at the end of his life, quits his body remembering Me
alone at once attains My nature. Of this there is no doubt. (Bg. 8.5)

Whatever state of being one remembers when he quits his body, O son of
Kunti, that state he will attain without fail. (Bg 8.6)

[Jahnu]

On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 01:46:15 +0000 (UTC), Mike Duffy
<Use.web.form@website_in_sig.com> wrote:

>Did you have experiences with psychedelic drugs at that time?
>
>(Not including cannabis. For example, LSD, psilocybin, peyote, etc.)
>
>Some people have what they perceive as a religious experience with such
>substances.

I did. In that town in the midwest there were three distinct groups of
kids - the jocks, the freaks, and the blacks. I hung out with the
freaks :) I guess, because it was the midwest, they called hippies
freaks :)

Apart from that, psychedelic drugs naturally give experiences of what
seem to be other dimensions. That's why they are out-lawed in the
Coca-cola culture, and harmful shit like alcohol and psychofarmica is
legal and even encouraged.

Most atheists are ardent supporters of the established society and its
values and goals. That's why atheists in general have alcohol as their
drug of choice, IMO.

[linuxgal]

Mike Duffy wrote:
> Some people have what they perceive as a religious experience with such
> substances.

Because such substances induce temporary psychosis.

--
Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0

[Jahnu]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 19:33:49 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
wrote:

>Mike Duffy wrote:
>> Some people have what they perceive as a religious experience with such
>> substances.
>
>Because such substances induce temporary psychosis.

To an atheist anything that takes the mind just one millimeter above
ground-level is considered a psychosis :)

In fact, anyone dares try and break free from the established norms
and values of the Coca-cola culture is considered psychotic...

https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu#5861136465712357570

[linuxgal]

Jahnu wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 19:33:49 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com>
> wrote:
>
>> >Mike Duffy wrote:
>>> >>Some people have what they perceive as a religious experience with such
>>> >>substances.
>> >
>> >Because such substances induce temporary psychosis.
> To an atheist anything that takes the mind just one millimeter above
> ground-level is considered a psychosis

How many millimeters above ground level is the mind of a child who is
told to believe in Santa Claus?

[Jahnu]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 19:56:58 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
wrote:

>How many millimeters above ground level is the mind of a child who is
>told to believe in Santa Claus?

You tell me... :)

https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu#5859947800085364066

[Landis Ragon]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 18:12:35 +0000 (UTC), Irreverend Dave
<revere...@ministerpants.com> wrote:

>"Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess"
><god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>

>> On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 10:22:06 -0400

>> raven1 <quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 03:14:50 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com>

>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >>Clearly you don't understand what natural selection is.
>>> >
>>> >No one does.
>>>
>>> Translation: *you* don't. Any high school biology student could tell
>>> you what it is, just like and high school chemistry student could
>>> tell you the difference between organic and inorganic chemistry. Not
>>> everyone is as invincibly ignorant as you are, Jesper.
>>
>> It gets even better than that -- a 5-year-old child recently told me
>> about the Periodic Table of the Elements. She knew the names and uses
>> for many of the elements, and referenced the one- and two-letter
>> symbols interchangeably with the element names. People can learn
>> things at any age, and 5 years is definitely no exception.
>>
>> The periodic table of elements for kids that she learned it from can
>> be found on this web page (click on chart for high-resolution
>> version):
>>
>> http://www.atheistfrontier.com/people/dmitri-mendeleyev/
>>
>> I encourage you to get that chart printed and laminated so that you
>> can give it to friends with young children. It's the kind of gift
>> that is meaningful and will be appreciated later in life after the
>> kids grow up.
>>
>

>While they're at it, they should print this one up too!
>
>- The Periodic Table of Irrational Nonsense -
>
>http://www.crispian.net/PTOIN3.jpg

SWEET!!!

copied!

[Jahnu]

On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 21:37:33 -0500, Landis Ragon
<landis...@attgobal.net> wrote:


>SWEET!!!
>
>copied!

https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu#5868151306191076866

Have a look at my art -

http://youtu.be/K6y-GNCHgow - Buddha Bar

http://youtu.be/Ucvk5t2Inyk - Friction
http://youtu.be/sVUgoBaq71Q - I am your soul
http://youtu.be/2uRbsf9Vzg8 - Sudder street
http://youtu.be/DC5OHr-Pm4I - Jahnava

http://youtu.be/y9KqLPCWR1E - Krishnart

https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu
http://www.facebook.com/groups/138462029613179/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fq-n0bbhpaA - George
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5QIX5h8y1w&feature - TOVP

[Bob Casanova]

On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 21:37:33 -0500, the following appeared
in sci.skeptic, posted by Landis Ragon
<landis...@attgobal.net>:

>On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 18:12:35 +0000 (UTC), Irreverend Dave
><revere...@ministerpants.com> wrote:

<snip>

>>- The Periodic Table of Irrational Nonsense -
>>
>>http://www.crispian.net/PTOIN3.jpg
>
>
>
>SWEET!!!

Agreed.

>copied!

Same here. And posted to talk.origins.
--

Bob C.

"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."

- McNameless

[Jahnu]

On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 09:54:12 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
wrote:

>Same here. And posted to talk.origins.

Post this, too :)

"We must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian
accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only
a variety of wishful speculations." -- Franklin Harold, Emeritus
Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Colorado State
University, in an Oxford University Press text.

[Bob Casanova]

On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 07:35:18 +0530, the following appeared
in sci.skeptic, posted by Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com>:

>On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 09:54:12 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>wrote:
>
>>Same here. And posted to talk.origins.
>
>Post this, too :)

No, thanks; there are plenty of science denials posted there
already.

>"We must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian
>accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only
>a variety of wishful speculations." -- Franklin Harold, Emeritus
>Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Colorado State
>University, in an Oxford University Press text.

"Wishful speculations"? Hardly. "Hypotheses based on known
physical and chemical processes" is quite a bit closer, deny
it as you may.

>Have a look at my art -
>
>http://youtu.be/K6y-GNCHgow - Buddha Bar
>http://youtu.be/Ucvk5t2Inyk - Friction
>http://youtu.be/sVUgoBaq71Q - I am your soul
>http://youtu.be/2uRbsf9Vzg8 - Sudder street
>http://youtu.be/DC5OHr-Pm4I - Jahnava
>http://youtu.be/y9KqLPCWR1E - Krishnart
>
>https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu
>http://www.facebook.com/groups/138462029613179/
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fq-n0bbhpaA - George
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5QIX5h8y1w&feature - TOVP

No, thanks; I tend to avoid YouTube and Facebook.

[raven1]

On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 07:35:18 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 09:54:12 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>wrote:
>
>>Same here. And posted to talk.origins.
>
>Post this, too :)
>
>"We must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian
>accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only
>a variety of wishful speculations." -- Franklin Harold, Emeritus
>Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Colorado State
>University, in an Oxford University Press text.

I have a better idea, Jesper. Why don't you come over to talk.origins
and post material like this there? It would be fun to see how quickly
you run away with your tail between your legs at the responses.

[Jahnu]

On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 10:27:03 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
wrote:

>No, thanks; there are plenty of science denials posted there
>already.

The only one who denies science here is you. There is nothing
scientific about ET, and scientists agree. Only atheists fantasize ET
has anything to do with science.

"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are
great con-men, And the story they are telling may be the GREATEST HOAX
EVER." -- Dr.T.N.Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission

[Bob Casanova]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 02:55:28 +0530, the following appeared

in sci.skeptic, posted by Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com>:

>On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 10:27:03 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>wrote:

>>No, thanks; there are plenty of science denials posted there
>>already.

>The only one who denies science here is you.

Nope; sorry. Science, including evolutionary biology, is
about observation and hypothesis, not belief in the
supernatural. And those (like you) who deny the validity of
those observations because they imagine they contradict a
particular religious belief are science deniers.

> There is nothing
>scientific about ET, and scientists agree.

Name ten biologists (not "scientists", but specifically
biologists; other disciplines are irrelevant) who agree with
you. Be prepared to support your claims with cites to
publicly-available evidence.

Oh, and quotes from "authorities" who published them prior
to, let's say, 1980 can be omitted, since in such a
fast-moving field they're no more relevant than Plato or
Aristotle.

> Only atheists fantasize ET
>has anything to do with science.

Evolutionary theory has nothing to do with atheism; one is
about science and the other is about religious faith. Sorry
you didn't know that.

>"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are
>great con-men, And the story they are telling may be the GREATEST HOAX
>EVER." -- Dr.T.N.Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission

Really? Here's another quote for you:

"Not only is the opinion of a single nuclear scientist of
questionable relevance, Dr. T. N. Tahmisian does not appear
to be a real person."

And even *if* he's not a figment of the imagination of a
Liar for Christ, as a (supposed) nuclear physicist he's no
more an authority about biology than I am. Sorry you didn't
know that.

>Have a look at my art -

Once again, no thanks.

>http://youtu.be/K6y-GNCHgow - Buddha Bar
>http://youtu.be/Ucvk5t2Inyk - Friction
>http://youtu.be/sVUgoBaq71Q - I am your soul
>http://youtu.be/2uRbsf9Vzg8 - Sudder street
>http://youtu.be/DC5OHr-Pm4I - Jahnava
>http://youtu.be/y9KqLPCWR1E - Krishnart
>
>https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu
>http://www.facebook.com/groups/138462029613179/
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fq-n0bbhpaA - George
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5QIX5h8y1w&feature - TOVP

[Jahnu]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 10:18:04 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
wrote:

<blah blah>

>Name ten biologists (not "scientists", but specifically
>biologists; other disciplines are irrelevant) who agree with
>you. Be prepared to support your claims with cites to
>publicly-available evidence.

Biologists? hahaha :) What the hell do they know about the world?

Anyone who suggests that the world created itself without ID is a
brain-damaged simpleton, doesn't matter what he calls himself or how
many letters are after his name. Get it, Bob?

You see, atheism is a disease of the mind that makes people extremely
dumb and dull. That's why you don't find happy and satisfied or
generous atheists. Atheists are the scum of the earth, exactly as
predicted by God in the Bhagavad Gita - Krishna says:

Those miscreants who are grossly foolish, who are lowest among
mankind, whose knowledge is stolen by illusion, and who partake of the
atheistic nature of demons do not surrender unto Me. (Bg 7.15)

Here is what thinking people have to say about your retard creation
myth...

"We must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian
accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only
a variety of wishful speculations." -- Franklin Harold, Emeritus
Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Colorado State
University, in an Oxford University Press text.

"It remains a mystery how the undirected process of mutation, combined
with natural selection, has resulted in the creation of thousands of
new proteins with extraordinarily diverse and well optimized
functions. This problem is particularly acute for tightly integrated
molecular systems that consist of many interacting parts." --Two
leading biologists in Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics

"New species usually appear in the fossil record suddenly, not
connected with their ancestors by a series of intermediates."
--Eminent evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr

Have a look at my art -

[Mike Duffy]

Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:hh19n81n8330s80ul...@4ax.com:

> You see, atheism is a disease of the mind

Janhu, which of the following is your idea of atheism:

1) Someone who rejects the idea of gods.

2) Someone who has never been exposed to the idea.

3) Someone who considers the whole idea a pointless argument if the two
parties discussing it do not agree on what a "god" is.

4) Something else?

--
http://pages.videotron.ca/duffym/index.htm

[Jahnu]

On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 01:30:44 +0000 (UTC), Mike Duffy
<Use.web.form@website_in_sig.com> wrote:

>Janhu, which of the following is your idea of atheism:
>
>1) Someone who rejects the idea of gods.

This one.

>2) Someone who has never been exposed to the idea.
>
>3) Someone who considers the whole idea a pointless argument if the two
>parties discussing it do not agree on what a "god" is.

That's a good point. The Vedic Version, as usual, rules supreme in
that is offers a consistent definition of God. There are several
definitions given, but personally I like the one offered by Brahma -
the god of creation:

Krishna, also known as Govinda, is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
He has a body consisting of eternity, knowledge and bliss. He has no
other cause than Himself, for He is the cause of all other causes.

(Brahma-samhita 5.1)

So, in short, God is defined as the cause of all causes. This is also
confirmed in Vedanta Sutra - janmady yasya yatah - the Supreme is
that source from which everything emanates.

[raven1]

On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 06:23:10 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 10:18:04 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>wrote:
>
><blah blah>
>
>>Name ten biologists (not "scientists", but specifically
>>biologists; other disciplines are irrelevant) who agree with
>>you. Be prepared to support your claims with cites to
>>publicly-available evidence.
>
>Biologists? hahaha :) What the hell do they know about the world?

Here's a radical idea, Jesper: why don't you try actually learning
something about the field and find out for yourself what biologists
know, and how they know it? It's no one's fault but your own that
you're comically ignorant of every topic you attempt to discuss.

[Bob Casanova]

On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 06:23:10 +0530, the following appeared

in sci.skeptic, posted by Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com>:

>On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 10:18:04 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>wrote:

><blah blah>

Inability to refute statements regarding the nature of
science noted.

>>Name ten biologists (not "scientists", but specifically
>>biologists; other disciplines are irrelevant) who agree with
>>you. Be prepared to support your claims with cites to
>>publicly-available evidence.
>
>Biologists? hahaha :) What the hell do they know about the world?

Inability to support your assertions, and ignorance
regarding the nature of scientific disciplines, noted.

HAND.

<snip rant>

[Bob Casanova]

On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 07:27:15 -0400, the following appeared
in sci.skeptic, posted by raven1
<quotht...@nevermore.com>:

>On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 06:23:10 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 10:18:04 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
>>wrote:

>>>Name ten biologists (not "scientists", but specifically
>>>biologists; other disciplines are irrelevant) who agree with
>>>you. Be prepared to support your claims with cites to
>>>publicly-available evidence.

>>Biologists? hahaha :) What the hell do they know about the world?

>Here's a radical idea, Jesper: why don't you try actually learning
>something about the field and find out for yourself what biologists
>know, and how they know it? It's no one's fault but your own that
>you're comically ignorant of every topic you attempt to discuss.

He doesn't "discuss"; he makes ignorant pronouncements and
fails to support them.

[Jahnu]

On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 07:27:15 -0400, raven1
<quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:

>Here's a radical idea, Jesper: why don't you try actually learning
>something about the field and find out for yourself what biologists
>know, and how they know it? It's no one's fault but your own that
>you're comically ignorant of every topic you attempt to discuss.

The sage, Kavi says:

Although the duality of the material world does not ultimately exist,
the conditioned soul experiences it as real under the influence of his
own conditioned intelligence. This imaginary experience of a world
separate from Krsna can be compared to the acts of dreaming and
desiring. When the conditioned soul dreams at night of something
desirable or horrible, or when he daydreams of what he would like to
have or avoid, he creates a reality that has no existence beyond his
own imagination. The tendency of the mind is to accept and reject
various activities based on sense gratification. Therefore an
intelligent person should control the mind, restricting it from the
illusion of seeing things separate from Krsna, and when the mind is
thus controlled he will experience actual fearlessness.

--Srimad Bhagavatam, 11.2.38

[Mike Duffy]

Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:ebi9n8hvorff8m4hs...@4ax.com:

> On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 01:30:44 +0000 (UTC), Mike Duffy
> <Use.web.form@website_in_sig.com> wrote:
>
>>Janhu, which of the following is your idea of atheism:
>>
>>1) Someone who rejects the idea of gods.
>
> This one.

Does this apply to someone who hears about gods from someone very inept at
providing a good explanation? (e.g. who uses logical fallacies, etc.)


> Krishna ... has no other cause than Himself,

> for He is the cause of all other causes.
>

> So, in short, God is defined as the cause of all causes.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning :

Circular reasoning ... is a logical fallacy

--
http://pages.videotron.ca/duffym/index.htm

[Jahnu]

On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:26:55 +0000 (UTC), Mike Duffy
<Use.web.form@website_in_sig.com> wrote:

>Does this apply to someone who hears about gods from someone very inept at
>providing a good explanation? (e.g. who uses logical fallacies, etc.)

I'd say that people who reject bad, inconsistent explanations of God
are agnostics rather than atheists. Atheists just reject God whatever
the qualitty of the explantion. That's because atheists by definition
are less intelligent.

>Circular reasoning ... is a logical fallacy

Whatever. The Vedic definition of God is superior to definitions
offered by any other religion on the planet. There is no question -
religious, philosophical, existential or otherwise which is left
unanswered in the Vedic tradition. That's not my belief, it's a fact
that can be investigated and verified by any open-minded person.
That, of course, excludes the vast majority of atheists.

Krishna says:

My dear Arjuna, because you are never envious of Me, I shall impart to
you this most confidential knowledge and realization, knowing which
you shall be relieved of the miseries of material existence. (Bg. 9.1)

This knowledge is the king of education, the most secret of all
secrets. It is the purest knowledge, and because it gives direct
perception of the self by realization, it is the perfection of
religion. It is everlasting, and it is joyfully performed. (Bg. 9.2)