Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Moderne videnskab
14 views
Skip to first unread message
Jahnu
Mar 30, 2013, 3:02:21 AM3/30/13
to
Jeg l�ste lige i avisen, at videnskaben har beregnet de fire ringe
omkring Saturn til at v�re 4 milliarder �r gamle, og de kan hj�lpe os
til at forst� universets oprindelse.
Hahaha Kan I se morskaben? Videnskabsfolk har end ikke den mindste
viden om om, hvor gammelt universet er eller hvordan, det er opst�et.
Hvad de end kommer frem til, s� er det ren spkulation. Bem�rk i
avisen, at n�r der er tale om videnskaben, s� beregner de. Vi andre
d�delige tror og t�nke os, eller vi frembrygger, men videnskabsm�nd? -
de beregner skam.
Videnskaben har beregnet, at universet er 4 milliarder �r gammelt. Jeg
undrer mig over, hvordan de er kommet frem til det nummer. Hvis man
sp�rger en almindelig person, s� siger han � men det ved vi nu til
dags. N�r man s� sp�rger, men hvordan ved videnskaben, at universet er
4 milliarder �r gammelt, s� siger de � I dag har Videnskaben har
bevist alting, jeg har selv set det p� TV. Og se her min Iphone og
BMW, dem har videnskaben givet os, hvor ville vi v�re uden
videnskaben?
Hvis man sp�rger en videnskabmand til geng�ld, s� giver han dig en
gang videnskabeligt hurlum hej, man skal v�re professor p�
universitetet for at forst�t den mindset smule af, eller hvis du ikke
har en universitetsuddannelse, vil han sige, det er lat for komliceret
til at forklare for dig. Du ville ikke forst� en lyd.
En meget interessant ting er, at den Vediske version fort�ller os, at
en af brhmas dage er 4 milliarder �r lang. Efter hver af Brahmas dage
sker der en toal destruktion af universet. Det sker med ild og vand.
F�rst svides universet af i tusinder af �r af en br�ndende sol,
derefter oversv�mmes alting af vand og ligger s�dan under Brahmas nat,
der ogs� er 4 milliarder �r lang. N�ste morgen, st�r Brahma s� op og
skaber universet. Brahmas daglige arbejde er at skabe universet.
Personligt er jeg overbevist om at videnskaben, som jeg kalder m�nd I
hvide kitler � de f�r deres numre og forudsigelser fra vedaerne � den
st�rste kilde til viden kendt af menneskeheden � det tager de 4
milliarder �r, som er forudsagt i Vedaerne, og s� h�vder de, at de er
n�et frem til det gennem videnskabelige beregninger. Det samme med den
store oversv�mmelse. Videnskaben fort�ller os, at jorden engang var et
stort hav, og s� dukkede der land frem efterh�nden som tiden gik.
Vedaerne forudsiger en oversv�mmelse af jorden hver 4 milliarder �r.
Har du nogensinde h�rt det i skolen? Nope� ikke s� meget som et lille
bitte ynkeligt kv�k h�rte vi nogensinde om den vediske kultur I
skolen.
I stedet l�rte vi, at fortidens mennesker var primitive huleboere og
efterh�nden gennem evolutionen blev mennesket til den avanceret
skabning, vi kender i dag.
Min ide er, at den vediske kundskab med vilje bliver undertrykt at de
ateist kr�fter, der styrer verden i �jeblikket. De tager tal og
forudsigelser direkte fra Vedaerne og hylder det i alle medier og
undervisning som videnskabelige fremskridt.
Jeg finder det simpelthen ur-interessant, at alt der kan observeres i
naturen, i verden, samfundet, i mennesket bliver bekr�ftet igen og
igen af den Vediske Version.
Som s�dvanligt hersker Hare Krishna :)
---men, men du er bare et hjernevasket sektmedlem. Du ved ingenting.
Du beh�ver nogle gamle st�vede b�ger til at fort�lle dig om naturen,
men os? � vi har videnskaben til at fort�lle os, hvad der er rigtigt
og forkert. Vi beh�ver ikke gamle b�ger til at fort�lle os det, for vi
kan se det p� TV. Der var en flink mand i hvid kittel, han sagde det
selv. Det er s�en jeg ved det.
Krishna siger:
Den H�jeste Personlige Guddom sagde: Min k�re Arjuna, eftersom du
aldrig er misundelig p� Mig, vil Jeg hermed give dig denne mest
fortrolige kundskab og indsigt. N�r du kender den, vil du blive
frigjort for alle den materielle eksistens elendigheder. (Bg. 9.1)
Denne viden er kongen over al uddannelse og den mest fortrolige af
alle hemmeligheder. Det er den reneste viden, og eftersom den giver en
direkte opfattelse af selvet gennem indsigt, er det religionens
fuldkommenhed. Den varer evigt og udf�res med gl�de. (Bg. 9.2)
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
omkring Saturn til at v�re 4 milliarder �r gamle, og de kan hj�lpe os
til at forst� universets oprindelse.
Hahaha Kan I se morskaben? Videnskabsfolk har end ikke den mindste
viden om om, hvor gammelt universet er eller hvordan, det er opst�et.
Hvad de end kommer frem til, s� er det ren spkulation. Bem�rk i
avisen, at n�r der er tale om videnskaben, s� beregner de. Vi andre
d�delige tror og t�nke os, eller vi frembrygger, men videnskabsm�nd? -
de beregner skam.
Videnskaben har beregnet, at universet er 4 milliarder �r gammelt. Jeg
undrer mig over, hvordan de er kommet frem til det nummer. Hvis man
sp�rger en almindelig person, s� siger han � men det ved vi nu til
dags. N�r man s� sp�rger, men hvordan ved videnskaben, at universet er
4 milliarder �r gammelt, s� siger de � I dag har Videnskaben har
bevist alting, jeg har selv set det p� TV. Og se her min Iphone og
BMW, dem har videnskaben givet os, hvor ville vi v�re uden
videnskaben?
Hvis man sp�rger en videnskabmand til geng�ld, s� giver han dig en
gang videnskabeligt hurlum hej, man skal v�re professor p�
universitetet for at forst�t den mindset smule af, eller hvis du ikke
har en universitetsuddannelse, vil han sige, det er lat for komliceret
til at forklare for dig. Du ville ikke forst� en lyd.
En meget interessant ting er, at den Vediske version fort�ller os, at
en af brhmas dage er 4 milliarder �r lang. Efter hver af Brahmas dage
sker der en toal destruktion af universet. Det sker med ild og vand.
F�rst svides universet af i tusinder af �r af en br�ndende sol,
derefter oversv�mmes alting af vand og ligger s�dan under Brahmas nat,
der ogs� er 4 milliarder �r lang. N�ste morgen, st�r Brahma s� op og
skaber universet. Brahmas daglige arbejde er at skabe universet.
Personligt er jeg overbevist om at videnskaben, som jeg kalder m�nd I
hvide kitler � de f�r deres numre og forudsigelser fra vedaerne � den
st�rste kilde til viden kendt af menneskeheden � det tager de 4
milliarder �r, som er forudsagt i Vedaerne, og s� h�vder de, at de er
n�et frem til det gennem videnskabelige beregninger. Det samme med den
store oversv�mmelse. Videnskaben fort�ller os, at jorden engang var et
stort hav, og s� dukkede der land frem efterh�nden som tiden gik.
Vedaerne forudsiger en oversv�mmelse af jorden hver 4 milliarder �r.
Har du nogensinde h�rt det i skolen? Nope� ikke s� meget som et lille
bitte ynkeligt kv�k h�rte vi nogensinde om den vediske kultur I
skolen.
I stedet l�rte vi, at fortidens mennesker var primitive huleboere og
efterh�nden gennem evolutionen blev mennesket til den avanceret
skabning, vi kender i dag.
Min ide er, at den vediske kundskab med vilje bliver undertrykt at de
ateist kr�fter, der styrer verden i �jeblikket. De tager tal og
forudsigelser direkte fra Vedaerne og hylder det i alle medier og
undervisning som videnskabelige fremskridt.
Jeg finder det simpelthen ur-interessant, at alt der kan observeres i
naturen, i verden, samfundet, i mennesket bliver bekr�ftet igen og
igen af den Vediske Version.
Som s�dvanligt hersker Hare Krishna :)
---men, men du er bare et hjernevasket sektmedlem. Du ved ingenting.
Du beh�ver nogle gamle st�vede b�ger til at fort�lle dig om naturen,
men os? � vi har videnskaben til at fort�lle os, hvad der er rigtigt
og forkert. Vi beh�ver ikke gamle b�ger til at fort�lle os det, for vi
kan se det p� TV. Der var en flink mand i hvid kittel, han sagde det
selv. Det er s�en jeg ved det.
Krishna siger:
Den H�jeste Personlige Guddom sagde: Min k�re Arjuna, eftersom du
aldrig er misundelig p� Mig, vil Jeg hermed give dig denne mest
fortrolige kundskab og indsigt. N�r du kender den, vil du blive
frigjort for alle den materielle eksistens elendigheder. (Bg. 9.1)
Denne viden er kongen over al uddannelse og den mest fortrolige af
alle hemmeligheder. Det er den reneste viden, og eftersom den giver en
direkte opfattelse af selvet gennem indsigt, er det religionens
fuldkommenhed. Den varer evigt og udf�res med gl�de. (Bg. 9.2)
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
Henrik Eriksen
Mar 30, 2013, 5:06:45 AM3/30/13
to
Den 30-03-2013 08:02, Jahnu skrev:
> En meget interessant ting er, at den Vediske version fort�ller os, at
> en af brhmas dage er 4 milliarder �r lang. Efter hver af Brahmas dage
> sker der en toal destruktion af universet. Det sker med ild og...
> En meget interessant ting er, at den Vediske version fort�ller os, at
> en af brhmas dage er 4 milliarder �r lang. Efter hver af Brahmas dage
En meget interessant ting er, at videnskaben s�tter universets alder til
at v�re mellem 13 og 15 milliarder �r. Ikke fire.
Det er _jordens_ alder der er ca. 4.5 milliarder �r.
Jørgen Farum Jensen
Mar 30, 2013, 7:21:16 AM3/30/13
to
Den 30-03-2013 08:02, Jahnu skrev:
> Jeg l�ste lige i avisen, at videnskaben har beregnet de fire ringe
> omkring Saturn til at v�re 4 milliarder �r gamle, og de kan hj�lpe os
> til at forst� universets oprindelse.
>
> Hahaha Kan I se morskaben?
Hahaha. Kan I se morskaben. Jeg har l�st det i avisen, s� derfor m� det
> Hahaha Kan I se morskaben?
v�re rigtigt.
Videnskabsfolk har end ikke den mindste
> Hvad de end kommer frem til, s� er det ren spkulation. Bem�rk i
> avisen, at n�r der er tale om videnskaben, s� beregner de. Vi andre
> d�delige tror og t�nke os, eller vi frembrygger, men videnskabsm�nd? -
> de beregner skam.
Og fordi det st�r i avisen at videnskaben "beregner", s� er det alts�
det videnskaben g�r?
> Videnskaben har beregnet, at universet er 4 milliarder �r gammelt. Jeg
> undrer mig over, hvordan de er kommet frem til det nummer. Hvis man
Nummer? P� dansk siger vi "tal", n�r vi skal anf�re et antal af ditten
eller datten, inklusive alderen p� Saturns ringe. Som der i �vrigt er
langt flere end fire af. S�dan g�r det jo, n�r man bevidstl�st
efterplaprer hvad der st�r i aviserne.
> sp�rger en almindelig person, s� siger han � men det ved vi nu til
> dags. N�r man s� sp�rger, men hvordan ved videnskaben, at universet er
> 4 milliarder �r gammelt, s� siger de � I dag har Videnskaben har
> bevist alting, jeg har selv set det p� TV. Og se her min Iphone og
> BMW, dem har videnskaben givet os, hvor ville vi v�re uden
> videnskaben?
Hvem er det lige du har spurgt?
> Hvis man sp�rger en videnskabmand til geng�ld, s� giver han dig en
> gang videnskabeligt hurlum hej, man skal v�re professor p�
> universitetet for at forst�t den mindset smule af, eller hvis du ikke
> har en universitetsuddannelse, vil han sige, det er lat for komliceret
> til at forklare for dig. Du ville ikke forst� en lyd.
Har du faktisk spurgt en videnskabsperson om noget som helst?
M�ske. Og fordi du ikke forstod, hvad han eller hun fortalte, s� m� det
v�re videnskabspersonen der dum og ikke ved hvad han eller snakker om.
> En meget interessant ting er, at den Vediske version fort�ller os, at
> en af brhmas dage er 4 milliarder �r lang. Efter hver af Brahmas dage
> sker der en toal destruktion af universet. Det sker med ild og vand.
> F�rst svides universet af i tusinder af �r af en br�ndende sol,
> derefter oversv�mmes alting af vand og ligger s�dan under Brahmas nat,
> der ogs� er 4 milliarder �r lang. N�ste morgen, st�r Brahma s� op og
> skaber universet. Brahmas daglige arbejde er at skabe universet.
Alt det ovenst�ende f�r egentlig kun mening, hvis det er ens opfattelse
at universet er identisk med solsystemet, og at fjerne stjerner,
galakser osv er noget videnskabeligt fup.
�n br�ndende sol? Og hvor kommer vandet fra, n�r alt er svedet af?
> Personligt er jeg overbevist om at videnskaben, som jeg kalder m�nd I
> hvide kitler � de f�r deres numre og forudsigelser fra vedaerne � den
> st�rste kilde til viden kendt af menneskeheden � det tager de 4
> milliarder �r, som er forudsagt i Vedaerne, og s� h�vder de, at de er
> n�et frem til det gennem videnskabelige beregninger. Det samme med den
Og personligt er jeg overbevist om at de f�rreste videnskabsm�nd g�r
rundt i hvide kitler � undtagen selvf�lgelig i tandpasta-reklamer �
ligesom jeg personligt er overbevist om at moderne videnskabsm�nd ikke
har brug for vedaerne i deres daglige arbejde. Vedaerne indeholder ikke
meget om biologi, astronomi og atomfysik, og absolut ingen ting om
pladetektonik.
> store oversv�mmelse. Videnskaben fort�ller os, at jorden engang var et
> stort hav, og s� dukkede der land frem efterh�nden som tiden gik.
Hvor har du det fra?
> Vedaerne forudsiger en oversv�mmelse af jorden hver 4 milliarder �r.
N�h.
> Har du nogensinde h�rt det i skolen? Nope� ikke s� meget som et lille
> bitte ynkeligt kv�k h�rte vi nogensinde om den vediske kultur I
> skolen.
Du har vel pj�kket fra historietimerne. Jeg har i hvert fald h�rt om den
vediske civilisation i skolen, og tillige l�st om det i adskillige
historieb�ger.
> I stedet l�rte vi, at fortidens mennesker var primitive huleboere og
> efterh�nden gennem evolutionen blev mennesket til den avanceret
> skabning, vi kender i dag.
Vi andre kan vel ikke have noget ansvar for at du ikke har forst�et
noget af det du har f�et fortalt i skolen.
> Min ide er, at den vediske kundskab med vilje bliver undertrykt at de
> forudsigelser direkte fra Vedaerne og hylder det i alle medier og
> undervisning som videnskabelige fremskridt.
LOL
> undervisning som videnskabelige fremskridt.
> Jeg finder det simpelthen ur-interessant, at alt der kan observeres i
> igen af den Vediske Version.
Har du noget som helst begreb om, hvilke metoder man bruger for at finde
ud af universets alder? Og hvor i vedaerne finder du den faktiske alder
p� 13,7 milliarder �r bekr�ftet.
Er det ikke snarere s�dan, at hvis videnskaben finder ud af noget
(evolution, for eksempel :-)) der ikke stemmer med vedaerne, s� er det
den moderne videnskab, der tager fejl.
Og hvordan kan du overhovedet afg�re hvad vedaerne siger om alle slags
videnskab? Du har jo erkendt at vedaerne intet indeholder om
trigonometri eller infinitesimalregning. Omfatter de vediske skrifter
b�ger om pladetektonik, geologi, sorte huller, kosmisk str�ling,
cellebiologi etc etc. I think not.
> Som s�dvanligt hersker Hare Krishna :)
>
> ---men, men du er bare et hjernevasket sektmedlem.
Man kan kun blive hjernevasket hvis der er noget at vaske.
> ---men, men du er bare et hjernevasket sektmedlem.
Du ved ingenting.
> Du beh�ver nogle gamle st�vede b�ger til at fort�lle dig om naturen,
> men os? � vi har videnskaben til at fort�lle os, hvad der er rigtigt
> og forkert. Vi beh�ver ikke gamle b�ger til at fort�lle os det, for vi
> kan se det p� TV. Der var en flink mand i hvid kittel, han sagde det
> selv. Det er s�en jeg ved det.
Det eneste en hvidkitlet videnskabsmand siger i TV er at XYZ tandpasta
er bedre end ABC tandpasta. Det tror jeg heller ikke p�.
--
Med venlig hilsen
J�rgen Farum Jensen
Jahnu
Mar 30, 2013, 8:49:21 PM3/30/13
to
On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 10:06:45 +0100, Henrik Eriksen
<henri...@fjernhotmail.com> wrote:
>En meget interessant ting er, at videnskaben s�tter universets alder til
>at v�re mellem 13 og 15 milliarder �r. Ikke fire.
>Det er _jordens_ alder der er ca. 4.5 milliarder �r.
Whatever. Det er under alle omst�ndigheder total spekulation. Har
<henri...@fjernhotmail.com> wrote:
>En meget interessant ting er, at videnskaben s�tter universets alder til
>at v�re mellem 13 og 15 milliarder �r. Ikke fire.
>Det er _jordens_ alder der er ca. 4.5 milliarder �r.
intet med videnskab at g�re.
Siden den engelske invasion af Indien, begyndende med de kristne
mission�rer, der fulgte i k�lvandet p� det �stindiske kompagni, er der
foreg�et en systematisk kampagne for minimere og underkende
betydningen af den vediske kultur og de vediske skrifter.
Teorien om den ariske invasion er en myte fabrikeret af kristne
mission�rer ansat af det �stindiske kompagni til at underkende,
minimere og destruere vedisk kultur og etablere deres egen kulturs
overlegenhed.
Der er ingen, der ved med sikkerhed, hvor gamle Vedaerne er. If�lge
Vedaerne selv blev de skrevet ved Kali-yugas begyndelse for ca. 5000
�r siden. Her er et citat jeg har fundet i en bog, der hedder 'The
hidden Glories of India (Indiens glemte storhed). Det er fra en
professor Georg Feuerstein;
'Set i lyset af den store popularitet, som hatha yoga har nydt i
vesten, er andre yoga grene helt blevet overskygget. Blandt dem er
bhakti yoga, der har en langt �ldre historie end hatha yoga. Faktisk
har hengivenhedens vej (bhakti) sine r�dder i Vedaernes urgamle
mystiske tradition. Disse oprindelige sanskrit skrifter menes at v�re
godt over 4000 �r gamle.'
I Scientific American skriver J.F. Jarrige og R.H. Meadow i august
udgaven 1980 i en artikel kaldet 'Den tidligere civilisation i Indus
dalen', at nylige udgravninger i Mehrgarh viser, at forg�ngeren til
Indus kulturen kan dateres tilbage til mere en 6000 f.kr. i Indien.
Der er heller ingen sammenligning med Bhagavad Gita og andre hellige
skrifter. Der er ingen andre hellige skrifter i verden, hvor en
person, der h�vder, Han er Gud, giver s� detaljeret og fyldestg�rende
information om sig selv, sj�len og naturen og hvordan alting h�nger
sammen. At sammenligne Bhagavad Gita med andre hellige skrifter er som
at sammenligne Shakespears samlede v�rker p� originalsproget i 40 bind
med en lommeudgave p� 200 sider. Og Bhagavad Gita er blot ABC'en i
den vediske �ndelige kundskab.
Det videre studie af Gud og skabelsen i fx. Bhagavat Purana overg�r
langt noget, man finder i nogen anden kulturs religi�se
overleveringer. Der er ingen andre hellige skrifter i verden, hvor der
gives s� meget detaljeret information om Gud og verden som i Vedaerne.
I Vedaerne finder vi kundskab om hvem Gud er, hvordan Han ser ud, hvem
Hans kvindelige modstykke er, hvad Han laver, hvad Han vil med os,
hvad sj�len er, hvorfor og hvordan Han skabete verden, hvordan Hans
energier virker, hvordan verden er skruet sammen, hvordan man kan leve
i samklang med naturen, hvordan man modvirker lidelse og bliver
lykkelig osv osv. Den tid er p� vej i en ikke s� fjern fremtid, hvor
Vedaerne igen vil str�le i deres rette glans og oplyse verden.
Krishna siger:
Jahnu
Mar 30, 2013, 8:53:12 PM3/30/13
to
On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 12:21:16 +0100, J�rgen Farum Jensen
<farum...@mailme.dk> wrote:
>Det eneste en hvidkitlet videnskabsmand siger i TV er at XYZ tandpasta
>er bedre end ABC tandpasta. Det tror jeg heller ikke p�.
<farum...@mailme.dk> wrote:
>Det eneste en hvidkitlet videnskabsmand siger i TV er at XYZ tandpasta
Der er s�dan set ikke en k�ft i hele verden, der bryder sig en pind
om, hvad du tror p�, Jensen :)
Set fra en evig, �ndelig synsvinkel er det mere eller mindre
ligegyldigt, hvad der foreg�r i den materielle verden. Ikke desto
mimdre synes folk, at det er utrolig vigtigt, hvad de g�r og laver.
Specielt folketingsvalg anses for meget vigtige af de fleste mennesker
i Dk.
Set ud fra Guds totale, absolutte, synsvinkel er det ret ligegyldigt,
hvem der bliver statsminister. Set fra en h�jere �ndelig synsvinkel er
det helt ligegyldigt hvad der sker her p� vores plan, men eftersom vi
ikke ved, hvad Gud ved eller ikke ved, s� kan vi f� os selv til med
stor iver at g� op i et folketingsvalg og diskutere udfaldet med vore
venner og bekendte, som om det var en meget vigtig begivenhed.
Her falder sammenligningen med en myretue let for. For den enkelte
myre er det meget vigtigt, om han n�r frem til tuen med sin last af
bagbenet fra en d�d billet. Har du aldrig betragtet en myretue og
undret dig over den iver og arbejdsomhed, de l�gger for dagen? Med dit
st�rre overblik kan du se alle de forhindringer myren vil m�de p� sin
vej tilbage til tuen, men myren har ikke den fjerneste anelse om hvad
du ved, og derfor maser den videre med sit liv, som om det havde nogen
betydning. For dig er det ligegyldigt, hvad der sker med myren, men
for myren selv, virker det meget vigtigt.
Myren har ikke den udviklet intelligens, der skal til, for at s�tte
sig ned og fundere over tilv�relsen og sp�rge sig selv, hvorfor den
slider s� h�rdt til ingen verdens nytte. Vi er i n�jagtig samme b�d
som myren, med en eneste undtagelse. Vi kan fundere over, om det
egenligt ikke er meningsl�st at slide et helt liv med at opdrage b�rn,
arbejde for f�den, glo p� TV, have lidt sex, for s� bare at d� kort
tid efter.
Hvis vi t�nker os lidt om og er �rlige med os selv, kender vi jo
alternativet. Vi vil blive syge, gamle og s� vil vi d�, og ind imellem
vil vi spise, sove, parre dig og forsvare os. Hvorfor ikke l�gge sig
til at d� med det samme? Hele vores liv er forudbestemt. Det eneste,
der varierer er detaljerne.
Men det kan da v�re sp�ndende at t�nke p� hvor meget sygdom, man
kommer til at opleve, eller hvor meget sex, man kan n� at score, inden
man bliver for gammel og aff�ldig til at f� den op at st�, eller hvor
sv�r eller let en alderdom, man vil f�, eller hvordan d�den rammer en.
Det er da uden tvivl interessante detaljer, der g�r livet lidt mindre
kedeligt at leve, ik?
Krishna siger:
Min k�re Arjuna, eftersom du aldrig er misundelig p� Mig, vil Jeg
hermed give dig denne mest fortrolige kundskab og indsigt. N�r du
kender den, vil du blive frigjort for alle den materielle eksistens
elendigheder. (Bg. 9.1)
Henrik Eriksen
Mar 31, 2013, 3:58:53 PM3/31/13
to
Den 31-03-2013 01:49, Jahnu skrev:
> On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 10:06:45 +0100, Henrik Eriksen
> <henri...@fjernhotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> En meget interessant ting er, at videnskaben s�tter universets alder til
>> at v�re mellem 13 og 15 milliarder �r. Ikke fire.
>> Det er _jordens_ alder der er ca. 4.5 milliarder �r.
>
> Whatever. Det er under alle omst�ndigheder total spekulation. Har
> intet med videnskab at g�re.
Du kommer med et tal. Du bruger dette tal til at teoretisere over, og
> On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 10:06:45 +0100, Henrik Eriksen
> <henri...@fjernhotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> En meget interessant ting er, at videnskaben s�tter universets alder til
>> at v�re mellem 13 og 15 milliarder �r. Ikke fire.
>> Det er _jordens_ alder der er ca. 4.5 milliarder �r.
>
> Whatever. Det er under alle omst�ndigheder total spekulation. Har
> intet med videnskab at g�re.
drager nogle - i dine egne �jne - fremragende konklusioner.
Man p�peger at tallet er forkert.
Dit svar er "whatever"...!
M� jeg g�tte p�, at du stadig mener dine teorier er korrekte, p� trods
af at udgangspunktet viste sig at v�re forkert?
Jahnu
Mar 31, 2013, 5:57:20 PM3/31/13
to
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 21:58:53 +0200, Henrik Eriksen
<henri...@fjernhotmail.com> wrote:
>Du kommer med et tal. Du bruger dette tal til at teoretisere over, og
>drager nogle - i dine egne �jne - fremragende konklusioner.
>
>Man p�peger at tallet er forkert.
>
>Dit svar er "whatever"...!
>
>M� jeg g�tte p�, at du stadig mener dine teorier er korrekte, p� trods
>af at udgangspunktet viste sig at v�re forkert?
Min teori er, at videnskbsfolk tager information fra Vedaerne, om fx,
<henri...@fjernhotmail.com> wrote:
>Du kommer med et tal. Du bruger dette tal til at teoretisere over, og
>drager nogle - i dine egne �jne - fremragende konklusioner.
>
>Man p�peger at tallet er forkert.
>
>Dit svar er "whatever"...!
>
>M� jeg g�tte p�, at du stadig mener dine teorier er korrekte, p� trods
>af at udgangspunktet viste sig at v�re forkert?
jordens alder, universet der kommer ud af et punkt, det udvidende
univers osv. og s� glorificerer sig selv for at have fundet ud af det.
Men lad os h�re, hvordan, du tror, videnskaben er kommet frem til at
jorden er 4 milliarder �r gammel? Lad os h�re om du kan forklare det.
https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu#5860559352190193202
Martin Andersen
Apr 1, 2013, 1:00:30 PM4/1/13
to
On 30-03-2013 12:21, J�rgen Farum Jensen wrote:
> Har du noget som helst begreb om, hvilke metoder man bruger for at finde
> ud af universets alder? Og hvor i vedaerne finder du den faktiske alder
> p� 13,7 milliarder �r bekr�ftet.
Relateret til dette:
> Har du noget som helst begreb om, hvilke metoder man bruger for at finde
> ud af universets alder? Og hvor i vedaerne finder du den faktiske alder
> p� 13,7 milliarder �r bekr�ftet.
Indtil d. 21. i sidste m�ned var det bedste estimat p� universets alder
13,772 milliarder �r +/- 59 millioner �r.
Beregninger baseret p� nye observationer bestemmer universets alder til
at v�re 13,798 milliarder �r +/- 37 millioner �r. En alder der vel og
m�rke ligger inden for det forrige estimats usikkerhed.
Fremskridt! :)
Jørgen Jensen
Apr 1, 2013, 1:23:23 PM4/1/13
to
Den 31-03-2013 23:57, Jahnu skrev:
> Min teori er, at videnskbsfolk tager information fra Vedaerne, om fx,
> jordens alder, universet der kommer ud af et punkt, det udvidende
> univers osv. og s� glorificerer sig selv for at have fundet ud af det.
>
> Men lad os h�re, hvordan, du tror, videnskaben er kommet frem til at
> jorden er 4 milliarder �r gammel? Lad os h�re om du kan forklare det.
Det ville da v�re bedre om Jahnu kommer frem med, hvorledes han med
> Min teori er, at videnskbsfolk tager information fra Vedaerne, om fx,
> jordens alder, universet der kommer ud af et punkt, det udvidende
> univers osv. og s� glorificerer sig selv for at have fundet ud af det.
>
> Men lad os h�re, hvordan, du tror, videnskaben er kommet frem til at
> jorden er 4 milliarder �r gammel? Lad os h�re om du kan forklare det.
baggrund i vedaerne kan p�vise Jordens alder til at v�re 4 milliarder
�r. Det er jo ikke nok at det st�r skrevet. De metoder, man har anvendt,
skal selvf�lgelig ogs� beskrives.
Den moderne videnskab bruger forskellige metoder til at fastsl� Jordens
alder. Den jeg kender bedst handler om geologi og indholdet af
forskellige radioisotoper i forskellige lag af sediment og klippe. Flere
fysikb�ger har udm�rkede redeg�relser for det sidste. Jeg vil ogs� tro
at man i naturfagene h�rer om geologi og pladetektonik.
--
J�rgen Jensen
Jahnu
Apr 1, 2013, 7:55:07 PM4/1/13
to
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 19:23:23 +0200, J�rgen Jensen <atei...@733.dk>
wrote:
>Det ville da v�re bedre om Jahnu kommer frem med, hvorledes han med
>baggrund i vedaerne kan p�vise Jordens alder til at v�re 4 milliarder
>�r. Det er jo ikke nok at det st�r skrevet. De metoder, man har anvendt,
>skal selvf�lgelig ogs� beskrives.
Selvf�lgelig er det nok, at det st�r skrevet.. Men man har brugt
Shabda metoden.
>Den moderne videnskab bruger forskellige metoder til at fastsl� Jordens
>alder. Den jeg kender bedst handler om geologi og indholdet af
>forskellige radioisotoper i forskellige lag af sediment og klippe. Flere
>fysikb�ger har udm�rkede redeg�relser for det sidste. Jeg vil ogs� tro
>at man i naturfagene h�rer om geologi og pladetektonik.
In the modern culture children are brought up to believe that the
world has evolved from a heap of chemicals to the complicated world we
know today. In school children are taught that this present western
civilization is the epitome of all human learning, knowledge, progress
and understanding. In school, I remember learning about the ancients -
the Greeks, the Romans, the Egyptians, Mesopotamia - never once did we
hear so much as a squeak about the Vedic culture, the most ancient,
advanced, glorious culture to ever grace the planet.
Our teachers neglected to tell us, that at the time when people in
Europe carried clubs and lived in caves, or in the middle-ages when
people were burned for saying that the earth is round - in the Vedic
culture they had already described advanced mathematics, and the
universe and its planets in minute detail.
Instead, children are taught to believe that before the advent of
modern science, people lived in caves in darkness and ignorance - a
disease riddled bunch who believed in myths and fairy-tales, had weird
values , who didn't know about proper cleanliness, etc. etc.. Modern
people in general think that the only legitimate way to view and
understand the world is through science.
In essence, science means empirical knowledge, ie. knowledge based on
sensory perception. But who decided that this is the best way to
gather knowledge? We get knowledge from many other sources, like
learning from authorities. That's why children go to school - to learn
from authorities. In fact, we wouldn't know much at all, if someone
hadn't taught us to begin with. We wouldn't even know that 2 and 2 is
four, hadn't somebody taught us. We might know that 4 apples is double
as many as 2 apples, but If someone hadn't taught us, we wouldn't even
know the language and the concepts to express mathematics.
Thus it is a direct observable fact that knowledge from authority is
the most important way of learning anything - exactly as predicted by
the Vedic sages, who hold that of the different methods of gathering
knowledge - pratyaksha, anumana, shabda - shabda (by sound) is the
most important. And it holds true whether the subject is spiritual or
material.
Direct sensory perception would be more or less useless if we hadn't
learned from someone how to process and make sense of the sensory
input. Even the idea, that language evolved from some ape-like
grunting to reciting Shakespeare is so ludicrous, that it's amazing
they've gotten the majority of people in the global culture to believe
in it. I mean, how do you make a whole world believe in nonsense? A
very effective propaganda-machine, indeed�
Take Einstein, for instance. If you had given Einstein a pen-drive and
told him - there are 3000 books on this stick, and pictures of your
mother as well - he would have been left completely flabbergasted and
mystified. In fact, he would have had no way of understanding the
working principles behind the pen-drive. He would be in complete
darkness, because he would have had no reference to judge his sensory
experience by. This goes to show that even the most intelligent person
in the world would be foolish to rely only on empirical knowledge.
Atheists, with their limited mental and intellectual faculties, are in
the same position as Einstein in front of a disc-drive, when trying to
understand Krishna . Now, if you give the same pen-drive to a modern
teenager - he can tell you all about what makes a pen-drive work.
Similarly, Hare Krishna can tell you everything about how God, the
body, the mind, and the world work. The reason for this is, that in
Hare Krishna the right framework for understanding the world is given.
This process of knowledge has descended into the world via the
disciplic succession going back to Krishna Himself 5000 years ago,
when He spoke Bhagavad Gita to Arjuna.
Jiva Goswami, a Hare Krsna from the 1500s, had this to say about
understanding God - the first thing you have to understand, to know
God - Krishna, is to understand that He is inconceivable.
Krishna is as far away from the materially conditioned mind of modern
man, as a computer is from, say, George Washington. You don't have the
slightest way of understanding God before and unless you accept that
God is inconceivable, that He can act in mysterious, inconceivable
ways. To maintain that every experience - the sum total of reality,
can be expressed entirely in physical, scientific terms is so
amazingly dumb that it shows the efficiency of the modern propaganda
machine.
The propaganda-machine conditions and indoctrinates everyone into
thinking that they are the enjoyers, and that they can be happy by
gratifying the bodily senses. In fact, there are no other goals in the
Coca-cola culture except growing up, getting an education, so you can
get a job in order to make money so you can spend it. There is nothing
beyond that. How hopeless is that? It may seem ok for the successful
people, who, due to their good karma, are getting their desires
fulfilled, but for the scores of people who live in poverty and
suffering, how is it beneficial to tell them that this life is the
only chance you'll ever get to have your desires fulfilled? After that
- nothing.
Or like the Church tells you - too bad, God cast you down into a life
of poverty and misery, while He casts another person down into a life
in fame and glory. It's a sick world-view, whichever way you look at
it, and it conditions people to a life of misery and disappointment.
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)
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)
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
wrote:
>Det ville da v�re bedre om Jahnu kommer frem med, hvorledes han med
>baggrund i vedaerne kan p�vise Jordens alder til at v�re 4 milliarder
>�r. Det er jo ikke nok at det st�r skrevet. De metoder, man har anvendt,
>skal selvf�lgelig ogs� beskrives.
Shabda metoden.
>Den moderne videnskab bruger forskellige metoder til at fastsl� Jordens
>alder. Den jeg kender bedst handler om geologi og indholdet af
>forskellige radioisotoper i forskellige lag af sediment og klippe. Flere
>fysikb�ger har udm�rkede redeg�relser for det sidste. Jeg vil ogs� tro
>at man i naturfagene h�rer om geologi og pladetektonik.
world has evolved from a heap of chemicals to the complicated world we
know today. In school children are taught that this present western
civilization is the epitome of all human learning, knowledge, progress
and understanding. In school, I remember learning about the ancients -
the Greeks, the Romans, the Egyptians, Mesopotamia - never once did we
hear so much as a squeak about the Vedic culture, the most ancient,
advanced, glorious culture to ever grace the planet.
Our teachers neglected to tell us, that at the time when people in
Europe carried clubs and lived in caves, or in the middle-ages when
people were burned for saying that the earth is round - in the Vedic
culture they had already described advanced mathematics, and the
universe and its planets in minute detail.
Instead, children are taught to believe that before the advent of
modern science, people lived in caves in darkness and ignorance - a
disease riddled bunch who believed in myths and fairy-tales, had weird
values , who didn't know about proper cleanliness, etc. etc.. Modern
people in general think that the only legitimate way to view and
understand the world is through science.
In essence, science means empirical knowledge, ie. knowledge based on
sensory perception. But who decided that this is the best way to
gather knowledge? We get knowledge from many other sources, like
learning from authorities. That's why children go to school - to learn
from authorities. In fact, we wouldn't know much at all, if someone
hadn't taught us to begin with. We wouldn't even know that 2 and 2 is
four, hadn't somebody taught us. We might know that 4 apples is double
as many as 2 apples, but If someone hadn't taught us, we wouldn't even
know the language and the concepts to express mathematics.
Thus it is a direct observable fact that knowledge from authority is
the most important way of learning anything - exactly as predicted by
the Vedic sages, who hold that of the different methods of gathering
knowledge - pratyaksha, anumana, shabda - shabda (by sound) is the
most important. And it holds true whether the subject is spiritual or
material.
Direct sensory perception would be more or less useless if we hadn't
learned from someone how to process and make sense of the sensory
input. Even the idea, that language evolved from some ape-like
grunting to reciting Shakespeare is so ludicrous, that it's amazing
they've gotten the majority of people in the global culture to believe
in it. I mean, how do you make a whole world believe in nonsense? A
very effective propaganda-machine, indeed�
Take Einstein, for instance. If you had given Einstein a pen-drive and
told him - there are 3000 books on this stick, and pictures of your
mother as well - he would have been left completely flabbergasted and
mystified. In fact, he would have had no way of understanding the
working principles behind the pen-drive. He would be in complete
darkness, because he would have had no reference to judge his sensory
experience by. This goes to show that even the most intelligent person
in the world would be foolish to rely only on empirical knowledge.
Atheists, with their limited mental and intellectual faculties, are in
the same position as Einstein in front of a disc-drive, when trying to
understand Krishna . Now, if you give the same pen-drive to a modern
teenager - he can tell you all about what makes a pen-drive work.
Similarly, Hare Krishna can tell you everything about how God, the
body, the mind, and the world work. The reason for this is, that in
Hare Krishna the right framework for understanding the world is given.
This process of knowledge has descended into the world via the
disciplic succession going back to Krishna Himself 5000 years ago,
when He spoke Bhagavad Gita to Arjuna.
Jiva Goswami, a Hare Krsna from the 1500s, had this to say about
understanding God - the first thing you have to understand, to know
God - Krishna, is to understand that He is inconceivable.
Krishna is as far away from the materially conditioned mind of modern
man, as a computer is from, say, George Washington. You don't have the
slightest way of understanding God before and unless you accept that
God is inconceivable, that He can act in mysterious, inconceivable
ways. To maintain that every experience - the sum total of reality,
can be expressed entirely in physical, scientific terms is so
amazingly dumb that it shows the efficiency of the modern propaganda
machine.
The propaganda-machine conditions and indoctrinates everyone into
thinking that they are the enjoyers, and that they can be happy by
gratifying the bodily senses. In fact, there are no other goals in the
Coca-cola culture except growing up, getting an education, so you can
get a job in order to make money so you can spend it. There is nothing
beyond that. How hopeless is that? It may seem ok for the successful
people, who, due to their good karma, are getting their desires
fulfilled, but for the scores of people who live in poverty and
suffering, how is it beneficial to tell them that this life is the
only chance you'll ever get to have your desires fulfilled? After that
- nothing.
Or like the Church tells you - too bad, God cast you down into a life
of poverty and misery, while He casts another person down into a life
in fame and glory. It's a sick world-view, whichever way you look at
it, and it conditions people to a life of misery and disappointment.
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)
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)
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
Jahnu
Apr 1, 2013, 7:56:59 PM4/1/13
to
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 19:00:30 +0200, Martin Andersen <d...@ikke.nu>
wrote:
>Relateret til dette:
>
>Indtil d. 21. i sidste m�ned var det bedste estimat p� universets alder
>13,772 milliarder �r +/- 59 millioner �r.
>
>Beregninger baseret p� nye observationer bestemmer universets alder til
>at v�re 13,798 milliarder �r +/- 37 millioner �r. En alder der vel og
>m�rke ligger inden for det forrige estimats usikkerhed.
>
>Fremskridt! :)
Ja, fremskridt mod g�tterri og uvidenhed :)
wrote:
>Relateret til dette:
>
>Indtil d. 21. i sidste m�ned var det bedste estimat p� universets alder
>13,772 milliarder �r +/- 59 millioner �r.
>
>Beregninger baseret p� nye observationer bestemmer universets alder til
>at v�re 13,798 milliarder �r +/- 37 millioner �r. En alder der vel og
>m�rke ligger inden for det forrige estimats usikkerhed.
>
>Fremskridt! :)
Ja, fremskridt mod g�tterri og uvidenhed :)
Jørgen Farum Jensen
Apr 2, 2013, 3:27:07 AM4/2/13
to
Den 02-04-2013 01:55, Jahnu skrev:
> On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 19:23:23 +0200, J�rgen Jensen <atei...@733.dk>
> wrote:
>
>> Det ville da v�re bedre om Jahnu kommer frem med, hvorledes han med
>> baggrund i vedaerne kan p�vise Jordens alder til at v�re 4 milliarder
>> �r. Det er jo ikke nok at det st�r skrevet. De metoder, man har anvendt,
>> skal selvf�lgelig ogs� beskrives.
>
> Selvf�lgelig er det nok, at det st�r skrevet.. Men man har brugt
> Shabda metoden.
Og hvad er s� Shabda metoden?
>> Den moderne videnskab bruger forskellige metoder til at fastsl� Jordens
>> at man i naturfagene h�rer om geologi og pladetektonik.
Og hvad er s� Shabda metoden?
> In the modern culture children are brought up to believe that the
> world has evolved from a heap of chemicals to the complicated world we
> know today. In school children are taught that this present western
> civilization is the epitome of all human learning, knowledge, progress
> and understanding. In school, I remember learning about the ancients -
> the Greeks, the Romans, the Egyptians, Mesopotamia - never once did we
> hear so much as a squeak about the Vedic culture, the most ancient,
> advanced, glorious culture to ever grace the planet.
Most non-scientists seem to be quite confused about precise
definitions of biological evolution. Such confusion is due in large
part to the inability of scientists to communicate effectively to the
general public and also to confusion among scientists themselves
about how to define such an important term. When discussing evolution
it is important to distinguish between the existence of evolution
and various theories about the mechanism of evolution. And when
referring to the existence of evolution it is important to have a
clear definition in mind. What exactly do biologists mean when
they say that they have observed evolution or that humans and
chimps have evolved from a common ancestor?
One of the most respected evolutionary biologists has defined
biological evolution as follows:
"In the broadest sense, evolution is merely change, and so is
all-pervasive; galaxies, languages, and political systems all
evolve. Biological evolution ... is change in the properties
of populations of organisms that transcend the lifetime of a single
individual. The ontogeny of an individual is not considered
evolution; individual organisms do not evolve. The changes in
populations that are considered evolutionary are those that
are inheritable via the genetic material from one generation
to the next. Biological evolution may be slight or substantial;
it embraces everything from slight changes in the proportion
of different alleles within a population (such as those
determining blood types) to the successive alterations that
led from the earliest protoorganism to snails, bees, giraffes,
and dandelions."
- Douglas J. Futuyma in Evolutionary Biology,
Sinauer Associates 1986
It is important to note that biological evolution refers to
populations and not to individuals and that the changes must
be passed on to the next generation. In practice this means
that, Evolution is a process that results in heritable changes
in a population spread over many generations.
This is a good working scientific definition of evolution;
one that can be used to distinguish between evolution and
similar changes that are not evolution. Another common short
definition of evolution can be found in many textbooks:
"In fact, evolution can be precisely defined as any change
in the frequency of alleles within a gene pool from one
generation to the next."
- Helena Curtis and N. Sue Barnes, Biology, 5th ed. 1989
Worth Publishers, p.974
One can quibble about the accuracy of such a definition
but it also conveys the essence of what evolution really is.
When biologists say that they have observed evolution,
they mean that they have detected a change in the frequency
of genes in a population. (Often the genetic change is
inferred from phenotypic changes that are heritable.)
When biologists say that humans and chimps have evolved
from a common ancestor they mean that there have been
successive heritable changes in the two separated
populations since they became isolated.
> On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 19:23:23 +0200, J�rgen Jensen <atei...@733.dk>
> wrote:
>
>> Det ville da v�re bedre om Jahnu kommer frem med, hvorledes han med
>> baggrund i vedaerne kan p�vise Jordens alder til at v�re 4 milliarder
>> �r. Det er jo ikke nok at det st�r skrevet. De metoder, man har anvendt,
>> skal selvf�lgelig ogs� beskrives.
>
> Selvf�lgelig er det nok, at det st�r skrevet.. Men man har brugt
> Shabda metoden.
Og hvad er s� Shabda metoden?
>> Den moderne videnskab bruger forskellige metoder til at fastsl� Jordens
>> alder. Den jeg kender bedst handler om geologi og indholdet af
>> forskellige radioisotoper i forskellige lag af sediment og klippe. Flere
>> fysikb�ger har udm�rkede redeg�relser for det sidste. Jeg vil ogs� tro
>> forskellige radioisotoper i forskellige lag af sediment og klippe. Flere
>> at man i naturfagene h�rer om geologi og pladetektonik.
Og hvad er s� Shabda metoden?
> In the modern culture children are brought up to believe that the
> world has evolved from a heap of chemicals to the complicated world we
> know today. In school children are taught that this present western
> civilization is the epitome of all human learning, knowledge, progress
> and understanding. In school, I remember learning about the ancients -
> the Greeks, the Romans, the Egyptians, Mesopotamia - never once did we
> hear so much as a squeak about the Vedic culture, the most ancient,
> advanced, glorious culture to ever grace the planet.
definitions of biological evolution. Such confusion is due in large
part to the inability of scientists to communicate effectively to the
general public and also to confusion among scientists themselves
about how to define such an important term. When discussing evolution
it is important to distinguish between the existence of evolution
and various theories about the mechanism of evolution. And when
referring to the existence of evolution it is important to have a
clear definition in mind. What exactly do biologists mean when
they say that they have observed evolution or that humans and
chimps have evolved from a common ancestor?
One of the most respected evolutionary biologists has defined
biological evolution as follows:
"In the broadest sense, evolution is merely change, and so is
all-pervasive; galaxies, languages, and political systems all
evolve. Biological evolution ... is change in the properties
of populations of organisms that transcend the lifetime of a single
individual. The ontogeny of an individual is not considered
evolution; individual organisms do not evolve. The changes in
populations that are considered evolutionary are those that
are inheritable via the genetic material from one generation
to the next. Biological evolution may be slight or substantial;
it embraces everything from slight changes in the proportion
of different alleles within a population (such as those
determining blood types) to the successive alterations that
led from the earliest protoorganism to snails, bees, giraffes,
and dandelions."
- Douglas J. Futuyma in Evolutionary Biology,
Sinauer Associates 1986
It is important to note that biological evolution refers to
populations and not to individuals and that the changes must
be passed on to the next generation. In practice this means
that, Evolution is a process that results in heritable changes
in a population spread over many generations.
This is a good working scientific definition of evolution;
one that can be used to distinguish between evolution and
similar changes that are not evolution. Another common short
definition of evolution can be found in many textbooks:
"In fact, evolution can be precisely defined as any change
in the frequency of alleles within a gene pool from one
generation to the next."
- Helena Curtis and N. Sue Barnes, Biology, 5th ed. 1989
Worth Publishers, p.974
One can quibble about the accuracy of such a definition
but it also conveys the essence of what evolution really is.
When biologists say that they have observed evolution,
they mean that they have detected a change in the frequency
of genes in a population. (Often the genetic change is
inferred from phenotypic changes that are heritable.)
When biologists say that humans and chimps have evolved
from a common ancestor they mean that there have been
successive heritable changes in the two separated
populations since they became isolated.
Jahnu
Apr 2, 2013, 10:47:46 AM4/2/13
to
On Tue, 02 Apr 2013 09:27:07 +0200, J�rgen Farum Jensen
<farum...@mailme.dk> wrote:
>Og hvad er s� Shabda metoden?
At h�re fra autoriteter. Alt hvad du ved eller tror du ved og kan, har
du l�rt fra andre.
"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
<farum...@mailme.dk> wrote:
>Og hvad er s� Shabda metoden?
At h�re fra autoriteter. Alt hvad du ved eller tror du ved og kan, har
du l�rt fra andre.
"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
Jørgen Farum Jensen
Apr 2, 2013, 11:16:27 AM4/2/13
to
Den 02-04-2013 16:47, Jahnu skrev:
> On Tue, 02 Apr 2013 09:27:07 +0200, J�rgen Farum Jensen
> <farum...@mailme.dk> wrote:
>
>> Og hvad er s� Shabda metoden?
>
> At h�re fra autoriteter. Alt hvad du ved eller tror du ved og kan, har
> du l�rt fra andre.
>
Mine autoriteter er Edwin Hubble � der i 1929 stod fadder til
Hubble-konstanten, der beskriver den accelererende �ndring af universets
st�rrelse � og Allan Sandage, der i 1958 m�lte denne konstant og med
baggrund heri fastslog universets alder til t�t ved de 13,72 milliarder
�r, der er den accepterede alder i dag.
Man skal v�re forsigtig med hvem man udn�vner til autoriteter. Du kan
ikke i samme �ndedr�t citere Fred Hoyle og afvise Hubble og Sandage.
> On Tue, 02 Apr 2013 09:27:07 +0200, J�rgen Farum Jensen
> <farum...@mailme.dk> wrote:
>
>> Og hvad er s� Shabda metoden?
>
> At h�re fra autoriteter. Alt hvad du ved eller tror du ved og kan, har
> du l�rt fra andre.
>
Mine autoriteter er Edwin Hubble � der i 1929 stod fadder til
Hubble-konstanten, der beskriver den accelererende �ndring af universets
st�rrelse � og Allan Sandage, der i 1958 m�lte denne konstant og med
baggrund heri fastslog universets alder til t�t ved de 13,72 milliarder
�r, der er den accepterede alder i dag.
Man skal v�re forsigtig med hvem man udn�vner til autoriteter. Du kan
ikke i samme �ndedr�t citere Fred Hoyle og afvise Hubble og Sandage.
Jahnu
Apr 2, 2013, 8:43:37 PM4/2/13
to
On Tue, 02 Apr 2013 17:16:27 +0200, J�rgen Farum Jensen
<farum...@mailme.dk> wrote:
>Mine autoriteter er Edwin Hubble � der i 1929 stod fadder til
>Hubble-konstanten, der beskriver den accelererende �ndring af universets
>st�rrelse � og Allan Sandage, der i 1958 m�lte denne konstant og med
>baggrund heri fastslog universets alder til t�t ved de 13,72 milliarder
>�r, der er den accepterede alder i dag.
S� du har MAO tro p� disse mennesker. Ideen om det udvidende univers
er i�vrigt en anden ide, som videnskaben har stj�let fra Vedaerne.
>Man skal v�re forsigtig med hvem man udn�vner til autoriteter. Du kan
>ikke i samme �ndedr�t citere Fred Hoyle og afvise Hubble og Sandage.
Pointen er, at hvad end videnskabsfolk har at sige om universets alder
og fremkomst, s� kan det aldrig v�re andet end spekulationer og
formodninger, og det har intet med videnskab at g�re. Bem�rk at folk
intelligente mennesker, der kender alt til videnskab og emperi tror p�
ID. Men skal med andre ord v�re snotdum for at v�re ateist.
<farum...@mailme.dk> wrote:
>Mine autoriteter er Edwin Hubble � der i 1929 stod fadder til
>Hubble-konstanten, der beskriver den accelererende �ndring af universets
>st�rrelse � og Allan Sandage, der i 1958 m�lte denne konstant og med
>baggrund heri fastslog universets alder til t�t ved de 13,72 milliarder
>�r, der er den accepterede alder i dag.
S� du har MAO tro p� disse mennesker. Ideen om det udvidende univers
er i�vrigt en anden ide, som videnskaben har stj�let fra Vedaerne.
>Man skal v�re forsigtig med hvem man udn�vner til autoriteter. Du kan
>ikke i samme �ndedr�t citere Fred Hoyle og afvise Hubble og Sandage.
Pointen er, at hvad end videnskabsfolk har at sige om universets alder
og fremkomst, s� kan det aldrig v�re andet end spekulationer og
formodninger, og det har intet med videnskab at g�re. Bem�rk at folk
intelligente mennesker, der kender alt til videnskab og emperi tror p�
ID. Men skal med andre ord v�re snotdum for at v�re ateist.
P.N.
Apr 3, 2013, 4:30:29 PM4/3/13
to
"Jahnu" skrev i meddelelsen
news:ho1fl8dhe21vuo6li...@4ax.com...
>En meget interessant ting er, at videnskaben sætter universets alder til
>at være mellem 13 og 15 milliarder år. Ikke fire.
>Det er _jordens_ alder der er ca. 4.5 milliarder år.
>
>Whatever. Det er under alle omstændigheder total spekulation. Har
>intet med videnskab at gøre.
>
>Siden den engelske invasion af Indien, begyndende med de kristne
>missionærer, der fulgte i kølvandet på det østindiske kompagni, er der
>Siden den engelske invasion af Indien, begyndende med de kristne
>foregået en systematisk kampagne for minimere og underkende
>betydningen af den vediske kultur og de vediske skrifter.
Jamen hvorfor prøve at forstå moderne videnskab, du lever jo som en øgle i
fortidens mørke. Sai Baba var et menneske der pegede fremad mod fremtiden og
ikke imod fortiden.
Jahnu
Apr 4, 2013, 12:26:27 AM4/4/13
to
On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 22:30:29 +0200, "P.N." <9...@get2net.dk> wrote:
>Jamen hvorfor pr�ve at forst� moderne videnskab, du lever jo som en �gle i
>fortidens m�rke. Sai Baba var et menneske der pegede fremad mod fremtiden og
>ikke imod fortiden.
After a long time living in the material world, you begin to
understand that you don't belong here. As you become older in this
life you realize that without exception everything turns into misery,
sorrow and frustration. Even if you are enjoying to the max, disease,
old age and death always gets you in the end.
This would be a depressing realization if there were no positive
alternative. But there is. When you add Krishna to your life and begin
practicing devotion to Him, all this other stuff - family, friends,
society, all your loved ones become as significant as the autum leaves
rattling in the wind, for the security and bliss you discover in
Krishna's service makes everything else pale in comparison.
-- but, but, that's being defeatist and irresponsible, I hear someone
object.
On the contrary, it is defeatist and irresponsible to surrender to
disease, old age and death. To explain it away by saying, there is
nothing you can do about it anyway, when God Himself tells you, you
can get out of the ocean of birth and death - now THAT's defeatist and
irresponsible.
It is defeatist because you surrender to nature's powers, and it is
irresponsible, because the sole prerogative of the human life-form is
for the soul to get out of samsara - the endless cycle of birth and
death. To not take advantage of that rare opportunity is
irresponsible.
--but, but who will take care of the family, if everyone just goes
off, dress in sheets and chants mantras?
Family? First of all, one doesn't exclude the other. To practice
devotion to Krishna does not mean you can't take care of your family.
Rather, you can take better care, it's just not the ultimate goal in
life anymore. And secondly, everyone in the material world takes care
of their family. Ants, cockroaches, cats and dogs and cows take care
of their families. Family is being taken care of in any life-form. In
the modern culture, it is being hailed as some noble, unassailable,
holy principle - the ultimate goal in life you must stick to, no
matter what. Family is God.
The fact is, though, that if humans are just another lifeform that
popped out of the evolutionary cycle, there is nothing more noble or
exquisite about a mother strolling her infant down 5th Avenue in a
pushchair, than an ant carrying an egg home to its nest.
Therefore 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)
>Jamen hvorfor pr�ve at forst� moderne videnskab, du lever jo som en �gle i
>fortidens m�rke. Sai Baba var et menneske der pegede fremad mod fremtiden og
>ikke imod fortiden.
After a long time living in the material world, you begin to
understand that you don't belong here. As you become older in this
life you realize that without exception everything turns into misery,
sorrow and frustration. Even if you are enjoying to the max, disease,
old age and death always gets you in the end.
This would be a depressing realization if there were no positive
alternative. But there is. When you add Krishna to your life and begin
practicing devotion to Him, all this other stuff - family, friends,
society, all your loved ones become as significant as the autum leaves
rattling in the wind, for the security and bliss you discover in
Krishna's service makes everything else pale in comparison.
-- but, but, that's being defeatist and irresponsible, I hear someone
object.
On the contrary, it is defeatist and irresponsible to surrender to
disease, old age and death. To explain it away by saying, there is
nothing you can do about it anyway, when God Himself tells you, you
can get out of the ocean of birth and death - now THAT's defeatist and
irresponsible.
It is defeatist because you surrender to nature's powers, and it is
irresponsible, because the sole prerogative of the human life-form is
for the soul to get out of samsara - the endless cycle of birth and
death. To not take advantage of that rare opportunity is
irresponsible.
--but, but who will take care of the family, if everyone just goes
off, dress in sheets and chants mantras?
Family? First of all, one doesn't exclude the other. To practice
devotion to Krishna does not mean you can't take care of your family.
Rather, you can take better care, it's just not the ultimate goal in
life anymore. And secondly, everyone in the material world takes care
of their family. Ants, cockroaches, cats and dogs and cows take care
of their families. Family is being taken care of in any life-form. In
the modern culture, it is being hailed as some noble, unassailable,
holy principle - the ultimate goal in life you must stick to, no
matter what. Family is God.
The fact is, though, that if humans are just another lifeform that
popped out of the evolutionary cycle, there is nothing more noble or
exquisite about a mother strolling her infant down 5th Avenue in a
pushchair, than an ant carrying an egg home to its nest.
Therefore 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.
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)
Jørgen Farum Jensen
Apr 5, 2013, 6:29:28 AM4/5/13
to
Den 03-04-2013 02:43, Jahnu skrev:
> On Tue, 02 Apr 2013 17:16:27 +0200, Jørgen Farum Jensen
>> Hubble-konstanten, der beskriver den accelererende ændring af universets
>> størrelse — og Allan Sandage, der i 1958 målte denne konstant og med
>> baggrund heri fastslog universets alder til tæt ved de 13,72 milliarder
>> år, der er den accepterede alder i dag.
>
> Så du har MAO tro på disse mennesker. Ideen om det udvidende univers
> er iøvrigt en anden ide, som videnskaben har stjålet fra Vedaerne.
Jeg tror på disse autoriteter, blandt andet fordi deres teorier er
efterkontrolleret utallige gange siden de oprindelige målinger.
Derimod tror jeg ikke på at de har stjålet noget fra vedaerne.
Hvis du mener det, må du henvise til de konkrete afsnit der beskriver
det vi faktisk kan iagttage.
>> Man skal være forsigtig med hvem man udnævner til autoriteter. Du kan
>> ikke i samme åndedræt citere Fred Hoyle og afvise Hubble og Sandage.
> formodninger, og det har intet med videnskab at gøre. Bemærk at folk
> intelligente mennesker, der kender alt til videnskab og emperi tror på
> ID. Men skal med andre ord være snotdum for at være ateist.
Hvad har ateisme at gøre med kosmologi. Universet er indrettet som
universet er indrettet, ganske uafhængigt af om en guddommelig styrelse
står bag eller der ikke er nogen guddommelig styrelse der står bag.
Du kan ikke lyve doppler-effekten væk.
> "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."
Hvad handler det citat om? Hvilke tal, hvilken konklusion?
--
Jørgen Farum Jensen
> On Tue, 02 Apr 2013 17:16:27 +0200, Jørgen Farum Jensen
>> Hubble-konstanten, der beskriver den accelererende ændring af universets
>> størrelse — og Allan Sandage, der i 1958 målte denne konstant og med
>> baggrund heri fastslog universets alder til tæt ved de 13,72 milliarder
>> år, der er den accepterede alder i dag.
>
> Så du har MAO tro på disse mennesker. Ideen om det udvidende univers
> er iøvrigt en anden ide, som videnskaben har stjålet fra Vedaerne.
Jeg tror på disse autoriteter, blandt andet fordi deres teorier er
efterkontrolleret utallige gange siden de oprindelige målinger.
Derimod tror jeg ikke på at de har stjålet noget fra vedaerne.
Hvis du mener det, må du henvise til de konkrete afsnit der beskriver
det vi faktisk kan iagttage.
>> Man skal være forsigtig med hvem man udnævner til autoriteter. Du kan
>> ikke i samme åndedræt citere Fred Hoyle og afvise Hubble og Sandage.
>
> Pointen er, at hvad end videnskabsfolk har at sige om universets alder
> og fremkomst, så kan det aldrig være andet end spekulationer og
> Pointen er, at hvad end videnskabsfolk har at sige om universets alder
> formodninger, og det har intet med videnskab at gøre. Bemærk at folk
> intelligente mennesker, der kender alt til videnskab og emperi tror på
> ID. Men skal med andre ord være snotdum for at være ateist.
Hvad har ateisme at gøre med kosmologi. Universet er indrettet som
universet er indrettet, ganske uafhængigt af om en guddommelig styrelse
står bag eller der ikke er nogen guddommelig styrelse der står bag.
Du kan ikke lyve doppler-effekten væk.
> "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."
--
Jørgen Farum Jensen
Jahnu
Apr 5, 2013, 9:15:01 AM4/5/13
to
On Fri, 05 Apr 2013 12:29:28 +0200, J�rgen Farum Jensen
<farum...@mailme.dk> wrote:
>Jeg tror p� disse autoriteter, blandt andet fordi deres teorier er
>efterkontrolleret utallige gange siden de oprindelige m�linger.
>Derimod tror jeg ikke p� at de har stj�let noget fra vedaerne.
>Hvis du mener det, m� du henvise til de konkrete afsnit der beskriver
direkte iagtages i de naturlige micrprocesser.. Der er bred enighed om
dette i videnskaben. Der er en ny trend p� vej. Det er kun inkarnerede
ateister, der ben�gter direkte observerbare fakta, fordi de hader Gud
- n�jagtigt som det er forudsagt i Vedaerne, der siger at sj�len
oprindeligt faldt ned til den materielle verden, fordi den var
misundelllig p� Gud.
Nothing about Molecular Machines Makes Sense without Intelligent
Design
The researchers recognized these protein machines as performing
functions analogous to automobile engines. Even though cars and trucks
are orders of magnitude larger, the functions are the same: ignition,
energy conversion, controlled movement.
Continue reading . . .
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=q7CdmkvnK-7YZSbGvU-xrg
John Lennox and Paul Nelson at Patrick Henry College on April 8
EVENT ALERT
Pensmore Dialogue on Science and Faith
Patrick Henry College, Purcellville, VA
April 8, 2013, 2:30-9:00 pm
Featuring: Paul Nelson (Discovery Institute/Biola University), John
Lennox (Oxford University), and Vern Poythress (Westminster
Theological
Seminary).
You are invited to an afternoon and evening of lectures about
science and faith featuring Discovery Institute Fellow Paul Nelson,
Oxford
University mathematics professor John Lennox, and Westminster
Theological
Seminary theologian Vern Poythress on Monday, April 8.
This is a FREE event. For more information or to register, check out
the event website.
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=Slh3V1TD07mu9q1RA0kyQw
Dr. John Lennox is a Professor of Mathematics at Oxford University who
has debated prominent "New Atheists" including Richard
Dawkins. He is the author of numerous books, including God's
Undertaker: Has Science Buried God?, God and Stephen Hawking, Gunning
for God, and Seven Days that Divide the World.��
Dr. Paul Nelson is a Fellow with the Center for Science and Culture at
Discovery Institute. He holds a Ph.D. in the philosophy of biology
from the University of Chicago. He is the author of numerous technical
and popular articles on the Darwin-intelligent design debate. He also
is featured prominently in several documentaries, including Darwin's
Dilemma, Metamorphosis, and Flight: The Genius of Birds (forthcoming
summer 2013).�
Dr. Vern Poythress is Professor of New Testament Interpretation at
Westminster Theological Seminary. He is the author of numerous books,
including Redeeming Science. He holds a Ph.D. in mathematics from
Harvard University and a Th.D. in New Testament from the University of
Stellenbosch, South Africa.
What will you learn by reading Darwin's Doubt?
Opabinia
Did
you know that the bizarre arthropod
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=tftUUnkLMsYl--0NZLC08Q
Opabinia --� with its
fifteen articulated body segments, twenty- eight gills, thirty
flipper-like
swimming lobes, long trunk-like proboscis, intricate nervous system,
and five
separate eyes -- appears suddenly, fully formed during the Cambrian
Explosion,
also known as Biology's Big Bang?
Find out about amazing fossil discoveries
from the Cambrian era 530 million years ago when you read
Darwin's Doubt: The
Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design,
the new
book from Dr. Stephen C. Meyer.
Darwin's Doubt
Pre-order right now at www.darwinsdoubt.com as we are able to
offer an amazingly good deal. The hardback book's cover price is
$28.99 (plus
applicable taxes and shipping if you order online).
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=a66GjgORvi-adMjF2GS4aQ
However, we are able to
offer the hardback for $16.49, or $14.99 for the Kindle or Nook e-book
version.
That's a whopping 43% off of the listed retail price for the
hardcover, and it
includes tax and shipping within the United States!
This special,
limited-time offer also includes 4 free digital books: Science and
Human
Origins; Metamorphosis; Signature of Controversy; and Alfred Russel
Wallace: A
Rediscovered Life. Unfortunately, we are not able to take or fulfill
orders from outside the United States. Be sure to pre-order your copy
today at www.darwinsdoubt.com.�
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=t9M-VFrLqSkqzcFF2N3ucA
Will Open-Access Publishing Break the Darwinist Stranglehold?
Many things are changing. How will the publishing revolution affect
the scientific debate over intelligent design?
Continue reading . . .
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=uDb9HmhSxlNGsNNuX5EztQ
Our Ears Are Amazing! They Must Have Evolved
The ease with which Darwinists attribute near-perfect structures to
blind evolution is astonishing. Case in point: the cochlea in the
human inner ear, with its "amazing" sensitivity.
Continue reading . . .
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=hrH1o7l8z5t2O3mg8wXNvQ
Upcoming Events
April 5 - 6, 2013
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=G9Vf3-vor8bjMgU1wHhK0g
�
How Did it All Begin?
Covenant Fellowship Church - Greater Philadelphia, PA
April 8, 2013�
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=jAn5FClHap7wictrujVZTw
Pensmore Dialogue on Science and Faith
Featuring John Lennox, Vern Poythress, and Paul Nelson - Greater
Washington, D.C.
April 12, 2013
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=1hn0hFzC7FuM1IvWsGkdZg
�
Why Science Needs Religion: Science's Untold Conflict with Atheism
An Evening with Renowned Thinker Alvin Plantinga - Seattle, WA
In This Issue
Nothing about Molecular Machines Makes Sense without Intelligent
Design
#nothing-about-molecular-machines-makes-sense-without-intelligent-design
John Lennox and Paul Nelson at Patrick Henry College on April 8
#john-lennox-and-paul-nelson-at-patrick-henry-college
What will you learn by reading Darwin's Doubt?
#what-will-you-learn-by-reading-darwin-s-doubt
Will Open-Access Publishing Break the Darwinist Stranglehold?
#will-open-access-publishing-break-the-darwinist-stranglehold
Our Ears Are Amazing! They Must Have Evolved
#our-ears-are-amazing-they-must-have-evolved
Upcoming Events
#upcoming-events
�
ID The Future
Featured Podcast
IDTF logo image
#
Is Darwinian Evolution a Theory, Fact, or Hypothesis?
IDTF green play button
�
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=chyCpqFCnWrskB9dVbwznA
�Click here to listen
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=WZIFoZTEwC58AwrgOS_CyQ
�
Follow the CSC
Facebook
�
Twitter
�
YouTube
�
RSS
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=yu2N8JUtHcddxTuPnNn3bw
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=sSoGYfpnMy9C61Uu5DWiHA
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=iZU5GnWTCDxpTvIB0l8pmA
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=kvSPXQtU0ETNJkps7MF7Lg
�
�
The Magician's Twin
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=LT0tDJO3kksl8YxZ1YB7tg
Visit C.S. Lewis Web to download a free chapter
from
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=ZUP4n2rrioOF9eMVYD3uRQ
The Magician's Twin.
�
Subscribe to Newsletters
http://support.discovery.org/site/CO?i=cVEkEve4_1YKZf-mVPq5NxLgL84NpCqa&cid=1055
�
Join our network of financial supporters
Nota Bene is sent as an outreach of Discovery Institute's Center for
Science and Culture.If you appreciate this newsletter and the
scientific, scholarly, and educational work of the CSC, please
consider giving a donation today.
Donate Button
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=t1ZI-SqQS4esAzG2RWTh6Q
�
Forward to a friend!
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=Cy9btwyo8eQGG6NM5HyLxQ
This email was sent by csc...@discovery.org.
Update Profile/Email Address | Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy.
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=Rb9QB6p8SOtC7iZMRIi49g
http://support.discovery.org/site/CO?i=sOH247Kn5zm6Srbq8dMMutZjWB3YvmJH&cid=1055
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=rVlhQYl-lnoy5438HJLBcg
�
Discovery Institute | 208 Columbia Street | Seattle | WA | 98104
<farum...@mailme.dk> wrote:
>Jeg tror p� disse autoriteter, blandt andet fordi deres teorier er
>efterkontrolleret utallige gange siden de oprindelige m�linger.
>Derimod tror jeg ikke p� at de har stj�let noget fra vedaerne.
>Hvis du mener det, m� du henvise til de konkrete afsnit der beskriver
>det vi faktisk kan iagttage.
Pointen er, at alle intelligente videnskabsm�nd anerkender ID. ID kan
direkte iagtages i de naturlige micrprocesser.. Der er bred enighed om
dette i videnskaben. Der er en ny trend p� vej. Det er kun inkarnerede
ateister, der ben�gter direkte observerbare fakta, fordi de hader Gud
- n�jagtigt som det er forudsagt i Vedaerne, der siger at sj�len
oprindeligt faldt ned til den materielle verden, fordi den var
misundelllig p� Gud.
Nothing about Molecular Machines Makes Sense without Intelligent
Design
The researchers recognized these protein machines as performing
functions analogous to automobile engines. Even though cars and trucks
are orders of magnitude larger, the functions are the same: ignition,
energy conversion, controlled movement.
Continue reading . . .
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=q7CdmkvnK-7YZSbGvU-xrg
John Lennox and Paul Nelson at Patrick Henry College on April 8
EVENT ALERT
Pensmore Dialogue on Science and Faith
Patrick Henry College, Purcellville, VA
April 8, 2013, 2:30-9:00 pm
Featuring: Paul Nelson (Discovery Institute/Biola University), John
Lennox (Oxford University), and Vern Poythress (Westminster
Theological
Seminary).
You are invited to an afternoon and evening of lectures about
science and faith featuring Discovery Institute Fellow Paul Nelson,
Oxford
University mathematics professor John Lennox, and Westminster
Theological
Seminary theologian Vern Poythress on Monday, April 8.
This is a FREE event. For more information or to register, check out
the event website.
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=Slh3V1TD07mu9q1RA0kyQw
Dr. John Lennox is a Professor of Mathematics at Oxford University who
has debated prominent "New Atheists" including Richard
Dawkins. He is the author of numerous books, including God's
Undertaker: Has Science Buried God?, God and Stephen Hawking, Gunning
for God, and Seven Days that Divide the World.��
Dr. Paul Nelson is a Fellow with the Center for Science and Culture at
Discovery Institute. He holds a Ph.D. in the philosophy of biology
from the University of Chicago. He is the author of numerous technical
and popular articles on the Darwin-intelligent design debate. He also
is featured prominently in several documentaries, including Darwin's
Dilemma, Metamorphosis, and Flight: The Genius of Birds (forthcoming
summer 2013).�
Dr. Vern Poythress is Professor of New Testament Interpretation at
Westminster Theological Seminary. He is the author of numerous books,
including Redeeming Science. He holds a Ph.D. in mathematics from
Harvard University and a Th.D. in New Testament from the University of
Stellenbosch, South Africa.
What will you learn by reading Darwin's Doubt?
Opabinia
Did
you know that the bizarre arthropod
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=tftUUnkLMsYl--0NZLC08Q
Opabinia --� with its
fifteen articulated body segments, twenty- eight gills, thirty
flipper-like
swimming lobes, long trunk-like proboscis, intricate nervous system,
and five
separate eyes -- appears suddenly, fully formed during the Cambrian
Explosion,
also known as Biology's Big Bang?
Find out about amazing fossil discoveries
from the Cambrian era 530 million years ago when you read
Darwin's Doubt: The
Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design,
the new
book from Dr. Stephen C. Meyer.
Darwin's Doubt
Pre-order right now at www.darwinsdoubt.com as we are able to
offer an amazingly good deal. The hardback book's cover price is
$28.99 (plus
applicable taxes and shipping if you order online).
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=a66GjgORvi-adMjF2GS4aQ
However, we are able to
offer the hardback for $16.49, or $14.99 for the Kindle or Nook e-book
version.
That's a whopping 43% off of the listed retail price for the
hardcover, and it
includes tax and shipping within the United States!
This special,
limited-time offer also includes 4 free digital books: Science and
Human
Origins; Metamorphosis; Signature of Controversy; and Alfred Russel
Wallace: A
Rediscovered Life. Unfortunately, we are not able to take or fulfill
orders from outside the United States. Be sure to pre-order your copy
today at www.darwinsdoubt.com.�
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=t9M-VFrLqSkqzcFF2N3ucA
Will Open-Access Publishing Break the Darwinist Stranglehold?
Many things are changing. How will the publishing revolution affect
the scientific debate over intelligent design?
Continue reading . . .
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=uDb9HmhSxlNGsNNuX5EztQ
Our Ears Are Amazing! They Must Have Evolved
The ease with which Darwinists attribute near-perfect structures to
blind evolution is astonishing. Case in point: the cochlea in the
human inner ear, with its "amazing" sensitivity.
Continue reading . . .
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=hrH1o7l8z5t2O3mg8wXNvQ
Upcoming Events
April 5 - 6, 2013
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=G9Vf3-vor8bjMgU1wHhK0g
�
How Did it All Begin?
Covenant Fellowship Church - Greater Philadelphia, PA
April 8, 2013�
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=jAn5FClHap7wictrujVZTw
Pensmore Dialogue on Science and Faith
Featuring John Lennox, Vern Poythress, and Paul Nelson - Greater
Washington, D.C.
April 12, 2013
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=1hn0hFzC7FuM1IvWsGkdZg
�
Why Science Needs Religion: Science's Untold Conflict with Atheism
An Evening with Renowned Thinker Alvin Plantinga - Seattle, WA
In This Issue
Nothing about Molecular Machines Makes Sense without Intelligent
Design
#nothing-about-molecular-machines-makes-sense-without-intelligent-design
John Lennox and Paul Nelson at Patrick Henry College on April 8
#john-lennox-and-paul-nelson-at-patrick-henry-college
What will you learn by reading Darwin's Doubt?
#what-will-you-learn-by-reading-darwin-s-doubt
Will Open-Access Publishing Break the Darwinist Stranglehold?
#will-open-access-publishing-break-the-darwinist-stranglehold
Our Ears Are Amazing! They Must Have Evolved
#our-ears-are-amazing-they-must-have-evolved
Upcoming Events
#upcoming-events
�
ID The Future
Featured Podcast
IDTF logo image
#
Is Darwinian Evolution a Theory, Fact, or Hypothesis?
IDTF green play button
�
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=chyCpqFCnWrskB9dVbwznA
�Click here to listen
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=WZIFoZTEwC58AwrgOS_CyQ
�
Follow the CSC
�
�
YouTube
�
RSS
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=yu2N8JUtHcddxTuPnNn3bw
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=sSoGYfpnMy9C61Uu5DWiHA
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=iZU5GnWTCDxpTvIB0l8pmA
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=kvSPXQtU0ETNJkps7MF7Lg
�
�
The Magician's Twin
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=LT0tDJO3kksl8YxZ1YB7tg
Visit C.S. Lewis Web to download a free chapter
from
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=ZUP4n2rrioOF9eMVYD3uRQ
The Magician's Twin.
�
Subscribe to Newsletters
http://support.discovery.org/site/CO?i=cVEkEve4_1YKZf-mVPq5NxLgL84NpCqa&cid=1055
�
Join our network of financial supporters
Nota Bene is sent as an outreach of Discovery Institute's Center for
Science and Culture.If you appreciate this newsletter and the
scientific, scholarly, and educational work of the CSC, please
consider giving a donation today.
Donate Button
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=t1ZI-SqQS4esAzG2RWTh6Q
�
Forward to a friend!
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=Cy9btwyo8eQGG6NM5HyLxQ
This email was sent by csc...@discovery.org.
Update Profile/Email Address | Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy.
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=Rb9QB6p8SOtC7iZMRIi49g
http://support.discovery.org/site/CO?i=sOH247Kn5zm6Srbq8dMMutZjWB3YvmJH&cid=1055
http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=rVlhQYl-lnoy5438HJLBcg
�
Discovery Institute | 208 Columbia Street | Seattle | WA | 98104
Jørgen Jensen
Apr 5, 2013, 12:55:06 PM4/5/13
to
Den 05-04-2013 15:15, Jahnu skrev:
> Pointen er, at alle intelligente videnskabsmænd anerkender ID. ID kan
> ateister, der benægter direkte observerbare fakta, fordi de hader Gud
> - nøjagtigt som det er forudsagt i Vedaerne, der siger at sjælen
>
Pointen er, at ingen videnskabsmænd anerkender ID. Evolution kan
direkte iagttages i de naturlige processe. Der er bred enighed om
dette i videnskaben. Der er en ny trend på vej. Det er kun forvildede
religiøse fundamentalister, der benægter direkte observerbare fakta,
fordi de hader den rationelle tanke.
> Nothing about Molecular Machines Makes Sense without Intelligent
> Design
Dit problem er, at du er fuldstændig forblændet af dit had til alt
vesterlandsk og moderne, og kun blindt kan kopiere hvad et meget meget
lille mindretal af /kristne/ fundamentalistiske og højreradikale
amerikanske ID-tilhængere kan lægge op på nettet.
> The researchers recognized these protein machines as performing
> functions analogous to automobile engines. Even though cars and trucks
> are orders of magnitude larger, the functions are the same: ignition,
> energy conversion, controlled movement.
Det er altså staveplade biologi.
redigere i dem. Hvad i alverden kan du håbe at opnå med det?
> Have a look at my art -
Nej tak.Jeg har set det. Det er kvantitetens ultimative sejr over
kvaliteten.
> 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
>
--
Jørgen Jensen
> Pointen er, at alle intelligente videnskabsmænd anerkender ID. ID kan
> direkte iagtages i de naturlige micrprocesser.. Der er bred enighed om
> dette i videnskaben. Der er en ny trend på vej. Det er kun inkarnerede
> ateister, der benægter direkte observerbare fakta, fordi de hader Gud
> - nøjagtigt som det er forudsagt i Vedaerne, der siger at sjælen
> oprindeligt faldt ned til den materielle verden, fordi den var
> misundelllig på Gud.
>
Pointen er, at ingen videnskabsmænd anerkender ID. Evolution kan
direkte iagttages i de naturlige processe. Der er bred enighed om
dette i videnskaben. Der er en ny trend på vej. Det er kun forvildede
religiøse fundamentalister, der benægter direkte observerbare fakta,
fordi de hader den rationelle tanke.
> Nothing about Molecular Machines Makes Sense without Intelligent
> Design
vesterlandsk og moderne, og kun blindt kan kopiere hvad et meget meget
lille mindretal af /kristne/ fundamentalistiske og højreradikale
amerikanske ID-tilhængere kan lægge op på nettet.
> The researchers recognized these protein machines as performing
> functions analogous to automobile engines. Even though cars and trucks
> are orders of magnitude larger, the functions are the same: ignition,
> energy conversion, controlled movement.
> Continue reading . . .
> http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=q7CdmkvnK-7YZSbGvU-xrg
>
> John Lennox and Paul Nelson at Patrick Henry College on April 8
Det er da ultimativt dumt at kopiere websider uden overhovedet at
> http://support.discovery.org/site/R?i=q7CdmkvnK-7YZSbGvU-xrg
>
> John Lennox and Paul Nelson at Patrick Henry College on April 8
redigere i dem. Hvad i alverden kan du håbe at opnå med det?
> Have a look at my art -
kvaliteten.
> 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
>
Jørgen Jensen
Jahnu
Apr 5, 2013, 9:17:55 PM4/5/13
to
On Fri, 05 Apr 2013 18:55:06 +0200, Jørgen Jensen <atei...@733.dk>
wrote:
>Pointen er, at ingen videnskabsmænd anerkender ID.
Hørte du ikke hvad jeg lige sagde? Er du blevet døv nu på dine gamle
dage, Jensen?. Det måd være hårdt for dig at blive både senil og døv.
>Evolution kan
>direkte iagttages i de naturlige processe. Der er bred enighed om
>dette i videnskaben. Der er en ny trend på vej. Det er kun forvildede
>religiøse fundamentalister, der benægter direkte observerbare fakta,
>fordi de hader den rationelle tanke.
Her er hvad videnskaben siger om din latterlige skabelsesmyte:
"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 -
wrote:
>Pointen er, at ingen videnskabsmænd anerkender ID.
dage, Jensen?. Det måd være hårdt for dig at blive både senil og døv.
>Evolution kan
>direkte iagttages i de naturlige processe. Der er bred enighed om
>dette i videnskaben. Der er en ny trend på vej. Det er kun forvildede
>religiøse fundamentalister, der benægter direkte observerbare fakta,
>fordi de hader den rationelle tanke.
"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 -
Jørgen Farum Jensen
Apr 6, 2013, 3:16:30 AM4/6/13
to
Den 06-04-2013 03:17, Jahnu skrev:
> On Fri, 05 Apr 2013 18:55:06 +0200, Jørgen Jensen <atei...@733.dk>
> wrote:
>
>> Pointen er, at ingen videnskabsmænd anerkender ID.
>
> Hørte du ikke hvad jeg lige sagde? Er du blevet døv nu på dine gamle
> dage, Jensen?. Det måd være hårdt for dig at blive både senil og døv.
Jeg læser hvad du skriver. Du lider af den illusion at alt hvad du
> On Fri, 05 Apr 2013 18:55:06 +0200, Jørgen Jensen <atei...@733.dk>
> wrote:
>
>> Pointen er, at ingen videnskabsmænd anerkender ID.
>
> Hørte du ikke hvad jeg lige sagde? Er du blevet døv nu på dine gamle
> dage, Jensen?. Det måd være hårdt for dig at blive både senil og døv.
skriver er rigtigt. Der ikke plads til andre virkelighedsopfattelser end
Jahnus.
>> Evolution kan
>> direkte iagttages i de naturlige processe. Der er bred enighed om
>> dette i videnskaben. Der er en ny trend på vej. Det er kun forvildede
>> religiøse fundamentalister, der benægter direkte observerbare fakta,
>> fordi de hader den rationelle tanke.
>
> Her er hvad videnskaben siger om din latterlige skabelsesmyte:
fuldstændigt irrelevante.
Du er og forbliver en indbildsk snylter og bølle, der er ude af stand
til at forholde sig til virkeligheden, og som skjuler sin uforstand med
meningsløse og evigt gentagne skriftsteder fra nogle oldindiske skrifter
og de samme fordrejede citater fra bøger han aldrig har læst.
--
Med venlig hilsen
Jørgen Farum Jensen
Jahnu
Apr 6, 2013, 5:36:36 PM4/6/13
to
On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 09:16:30 +0200, Jørgen Farum Jensen
<farum...@mailme.dk> wrote:
>Du er og forbliver en indbildsk snylter og bølle, der er ude af stand
>til at forholde sig til virkeligheden, og som skjuler sin uforstand med
>meningsløse og evigt gentagne skriftsteder fra nogle oldindiske skrifter
>og de samme fordrejede citater fra bøger han aldrig har læst.
Hvem af os to der forholder sig til virkeligheden, Jensen, vil meget
<farum...@mailme.dk> wrote:
>Du er og forbliver en indbildsk snylter og bølle, der er ude af stand
>til at forholde sig til virkeligheden, og som skjuler sin uforstand med
>meningsløse og evigt gentagne skriftsteder fra nogle oldindiske skrifter
>og de samme fordrejede citater fra bøger han aldrig har læst.
snart blive gjort smerteligt klart for dig. Indtil da må du lade dig
nøje med den meningsløse, udsigtsløse kaffe-og-kage tilværelse du
tuller rundt i.
Hvordan var det nu lige igen?
--men, men verden har aldrig været et bedre sted.
hahaha )
Se, du er forudsagt i Bhagavad Gita - Krishna siger:
De, der er dæmoniske, ved ikke, hvad der bør gøres og hvad der ikke
bør gøres. Hverken renlighed, korrekt opførsel eller sandhed findes
hos dem. (Bg 16.7)
De siger, at verden er uvirkelig, uden fundament, ingen Gud ved
magten. De siger, den er et resultat af sexbegær uden nogen anden
årsag end lyst. (Bg 16.8)
I det de følger sådanne konklusioner, engagerer de dæmoniske, der ikke
kender sig selv, og som er uden intelligens, sig i ugavnlige,
forfærdelige handlinger, der er beregnet på at ødelægge verden. (Bg
16.9)
Absorberede i indbilsk, falsk prestige, og således vildledte,
tiltrukkede som de er af det midlertidige, sværger de dæmoniske altid
til urene handlinger. (Bg 16.10)
P.N.
May 11, 2013, 10:11:04 AM5/11/13
to
"Jahnu" skrev i meddelelsen
news:ue3dl85palgqj6r44...@4ax.com...
Jeg l�ste lige i avisen, at videnskaben har beregnet de fire ringe
omkring Saturn til at v�re 4 milliarder �r gamle, og de kan hj�lpe os
til at forst� universets oprindelse.
Min ide er, at den vediske kundskab med vilje bliver undertrykt at de
ateist kr�fter, der styrer verden i �jeblikket.
Jamen jeg troede at din s�kaldte gud regerede, men det har vi alts�
ateist kr�fter, der styrer verden i �jeblikket.
misforst�et!!.
N�r du og dine kommer til fadet vil det uden tvivl blive ulovligt at
promovere ateisme.
Jahnu
May 11, 2013, 11:43:04 AM5/11/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 16:11:04 +0200, "P.N." <2...@get2net.dk> wrote:
>Jamen jeg troede at din s�ｿｽkaldte gud regerede, men det har vi alts�ｿｽ
>misforst�ｿｽet!!.
>N�ｿｽr du og dine kommer til fadet vil det uden tvivl blive ulovligt at
>promovere ateisme.
Krishna siger:
Denne materielle natur, der er en af Mine energier, fungerer if�ｿｽlge
Min styring, O Kuntis s�ｿｽn, og den frembringer alle bev�ｿｽgelige og
ubev�ｿｽgelige v�ｿｽsener. If�ｿｽlge dens regler bliver denne manifestation
skabt og tilintetgjort igen og igen. (Bg.9.10)
T�ｿｽber h�ｿｽner Mig, n�ｿｽr Jeg �ｿｽbenbarer Mig i en menneskelig skikkelse. De
kender ikke Min transcendentale natur som den Suver�ｿｽne Hersker over
alt, der er til. (Bg. 9.11)
De, der s�ｿｽledes er forvirrede, tiltr�ｿｽkkes af d�ｿｽmoniske og ateistiske
anskuelser. I denne vildledte tilstand, bliver alle deres h�ｿｽb om
befrielse, deres frugtstr�ｿｽbende handlinger, og deres udvikling af
viden altsammen forpurrede. (Bg. 9.12)
Have a look at my art -
http://youtu.be/K6y-GNCHgow - Buddha Bar
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5QIX5h8y1w&feature - TOVP
>Jamen jeg troede at din s�ｿｽkaldte gud regerede, men det har vi alts�ｿｽ
>misforst�ｿｽet!!.
>N�ｿｽr du og dine kommer til fadet vil det uden tvivl blive ulovligt at
>promovere ateisme.
Krishna siger:
Denne materielle natur, der er en af Mine energier, fungerer if�ｿｽlge
Min styring, O Kuntis s�ｿｽn, og den frembringer alle bev�ｿｽgelige og
ubev�ｿｽgelige v�ｿｽsener. If�ｿｽlge dens regler bliver denne manifestation
skabt og tilintetgjort igen og igen. (Bg.9.10)
T�ｿｽber h�ｿｽner Mig, n�ｿｽr Jeg �ｿｽbenbarer Mig i en menneskelig skikkelse. De
kender ikke Min transcendentale natur som den Suver�ｿｽne Hersker over
alt, der er til. (Bg. 9.11)
De, der s�ｿｽledes er forvirrede, tiltr�ｿｽkkes af d�ｿｽmoniske og ateistiske
anskuelser. I denne vildledte tilstand, bliver alle deres h�ｿｽb om
befrielse, deres frugtstr�ｿｽbende handlinger, og deres udvikling af
viden altsammen forpurrede. (Bg. 9.12)
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/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
https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu
http://www.facebook.com/groups/138462029613179/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5QIX5h8y1w&feature - TOVP
tkruse
May 25, 2013, 5:15:27 PM5/25/13
to
den indsigt burde forstå korset,,,men du foragter korset
så er din indsigt mangelfuld
Jahnu
May 26, 2013, 4:36:36 AM5/26/13
to
On Sat, 25 May 2013 14:15:27 -0700 (PDT), tkruse <tkr...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>vil Jeg hermed give dig denne mest
>fortrolige kundskab og indsigt.
>hvor er så den kundskab og indsigt
>den indsigt burde forstå korset,,,men du foragter korset
>så er din indsigt mangelfuld
Krishna siger:
Opgiv alle former for religion og overgiv dig blot til Mig. Jeg vil
udfri dig fra alle syndefulde reaktioner. Frygt ikke. (Bg 18.66)
Have a look at my art -
wrote:
>vil Jeg hermed give dig denne mest
>fortrolige kundskab og indsigt.
>hvor er så den kundskab og indsigt
>den indsigt burde forstå korset,,,men du foragter korset
>så er din indsigt mangelfuld
Opgiv alle former for religion og overgiv dig blot til Mig. Jeg vil
udfri dig fra alle syndefulde reaktioner. Frygt ikke. (Bg 18.66)
Have a look at my art -
0 new messages