Message-Id: <199606280456.AAA05578@pinky.ac.duke.edu>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 96 01:00:02 -0700
From: Smedley <jk7@acpub.duke.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
To: Jahnu@wineasy.se
Subject: Re:VEDANTA
References: <61b7cc$91f3a.35f@news>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


Ok, once again I respond to Jahnu...point by point:

--------------------------------------------------------
I called Jahnu a lunatic.  Here is his reponse:

>
>Pointless and unecessary accusations.

Pointless?  There is a point.  I am pointing out that 
you are a lunatic.  You believe in mass atheist conspiracies
to hide the "truth" of the Vedas and to fabricate
Armstrong's walk on the moon.  Such ideas are lunacy.  Period.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Here Jahnu attempts to prove that the very word "atheist"
is proof of the existance of god.  Yeah, i know, i know...
Here it goes...make sure you are not eating while reading 
what he considers to be logical:


>Let's see how Webster defines this creature:
>
>"The person who denies or disbelieves the existence of supreme person
>or persons." So the verbs "denies" or "disbelieves" express a
>negation. The negation obviously comes as a reaction on something
>existing - there is no use to negate something which doesn't exist,
>right?

Shall I respond to this?  I mean, if somone actually writes that,
is it even possible that they are intelligent enough to understand
how stupid it is?  Oh what the heck...Ok, new word:  Asmurfist (a la
McCoy).  I guess since we have defined the word: Asmurfist, smurfs
now exist.  Well maybe they do according to the Vedas...

------------------------------------------------------------------
Here Jahnu tries to rehash an argument used over and over
by the fundamentalist christians on this board:

>So you have to have some idea of God in your mind which you negate.
>My question is: what is that idea and why do you negate it? Give some
>reasonable evidences, please.

Can you say IPU?  I have seen no evidence for invisible pink unicorns
so I don't believe in them.  I have seen no evidence of invisible
pink Krishna's either, so I don't believe in them.  I have seen 
no evidence of ANYTHING that is god-like, so i disbelieve in gods.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Now Jahnu really goes off the deep end.  I know of no other way
to explain such deeply incorrect thinking:

>If afterlife is not necessary then why do all the living entities have
>their inborn instinct to live as long as possible? Why do you so
>carefully maintain and protect your body (food, medicare, old age
>insurances of all kinds etc.)? 

I don't believe in an afterlife, so I want to do as much as I can
in this life.  To do that requires living a long time.
What is so difficult to understand about this?  You really have
to wonder sometimes whether or now we are even speaking the 
same language....

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here I'm convinced that we are NOT speaking the same language:

>And would you like to die just now?
>No sane person would agree with that. In modern so-called science it
>got an extreme form known as a cryonics. What a belief in "omnipotent"
>science"!!

Is there a linguist in the house?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

At this point Jahnu makes it clear that further discussion is pointless.
He declares that just because there is absoutley no evidence
for a phenomena, we should still accept that phenomena.  What?  You
don't believe someone could actually think this way??? Read on...

>Lack of evidence doesn't
>prove anything. In medieval ages the people didn't know about nuclear
>reaction (although in Vedic times they did) but that can't prove its
>nonexistence.

No, but in the medieval ages no one claimed the existance of
nuclear reations.  Duh.  Can you give an example of something
for which there was no evidence that someone claimed existed, and
ended up being shown to exist?  Don't bother...there are no examples
of this.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Here Jahnu again reveals why he is a krishna. It is because:
For HIM, without gods there is no point to life other
than physical gratification:

>The analogy of a vulture speaks for itself:
>A vulture may rise very high in the sky--seven or eight miles--and it
>is wonderful to see him fly in this way. He also has powerful eyes,
>for he can spot a carcass from a great distance. Yet what is the
>object of all these great qualifications? A dead body, a rotting
>carcass. His perfection is just to discover a dead piece of meat and
>eat it. 
>
>That's all. Similarly, we may have a very high education, but what is
>our objective? Sense enjoyment; the enjoyment of this material body.
>We may rise very high with our spaceships, but what is the purpose?
>Sense gratification, that's all. This means that all the striving and
>all this high education are merely on the animal platform.

I guess it should come as no surprise that you have not been able
to feel the enjoyment of discovery, of giving, of loving 
unconditionally, of earning respect for youself, of earning
respect from your peers, of creating art and music, of making
someone else a little happier, of telling a good joke, of hearing
a good joke....and so on and so on.  All of these are far 
more important to me than "sense gratification" is.

Heck, if I were devoid of all these experiences, I might
search for a god to give me some happiness too.  

---------------------------------------------------------------

Jahnu accused me of "believing everything you hear" when I told
him that people are taller now than a hundred years ago.  He
said there was no proof of this.  I pointed out the exitance
of 1. medical records, 2. dead bodies, and 3. photographs.

Here is his response:


>This would need a bit longer explanation and still I'm not sure that
>you, stuck as you are in the darwinistic evolution paradigm, would get
>it.


Could this be more irrelevant?

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, for fun here's some more atheist-conspiracy theory for you...

>Just shortly:
>
>Time range of human existence in which medern science operates is very
>limited in comparison with Vedic view. So by exploring a history of
>merely a few thousand years you can't really learn much about people
>millions of years before. There are documented cases of that, which
>were carefully filtered out by the "scientific" establishment. I can
>supply a few examples on a request.


----------------------------------------------------------------
Unsupported "facts" follow:

>It's true that 500, 1000 or 2000 years ago people were smaller than
>now but they were basically the same until the half of this century.
>But you don't know about previous age, called Dvapara-yuga, which
>ended 5000 years ago. At that time people lived longer and were taller
>than present day people. Then they gradually became smaller.
>Recently they started to "grow" because of drastic changes of
>lifestyle and environment as well as food. Now you can enjoy genetic
>manipulated food which allows you to grow very much but at the same
>time suffer many unapalatable consequences of it.
>
>The more sophisticated the medicine becomes the more "sophisticated"
>diseases emerge (mad cow disease is a typical example).
>Therefore it is an endless battle. 

-------------------------------------------------------------

It weird...he really thinks that I am going to believe 
unsubstantiated claims by someone who has made such 
little sense thus far...

>One who has a real knowledge can see behind the beauty of life and
>wonders of nature. Although they are amazing (nature works under the
>control of amazing Krishna) their function is to cover our eyes by
>maya, the illusion of temporary enjoyment, so that we become enamored
>and attached. Thus you can rot in this world life after life if you
>wish.
>
>Knowledgeable persons however understand that this material nature is
>just a reflection or shade of spiritual nature which is perfect and
>which is really worthy of admiration. Our program is to return there,
>back to Godhead.
>
------------------------------------------------------------------

Jahnu said that the goal of an athiest is to rot and die.  I tried
to explain this is not so...appartently it was a fruitless
effort.

>> I have  many goals in life.  None of them include roting away
>> with no purpose.

>Many goals without being Krishna conscious will  merely keep you in
>the material world life after life. 

Yeah, ok.

>How can you avoid rotting away?

I didn't say I can't, but it isn't one of my goals either.
You can't seem to avoid making claims no one will believe, but
is that your goal?

>There is no other solution to the the material problems of life than a
>spiritual one.

I've solved many of my problems.  No spirits have come to help me 
yet.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Now it gets ugly:

>Science in your hands will not help anyone--that's for sure. 

It's "for sure" is it?  Do you know what I do?  How can you
be sure?


-----------------------------------------------------------------
>You should scientifically explain
>the difference between the living and the dead body. If you can't,
>then the real Vedic science is beyond you because to explain that is
>just the first step in it.

Ok, so you made up an answer and I didn't.  That makes you right
i guess.  Christians think they know all the answers too...Funny,
their answers are different from your answers and your answers are 
different from the answers provided by the Moonies.  

------------------------------------------------------------

Here I get flamed: 

>I guess I explained this point sufficiently. Who can help you to get
>it? Well, you have no idea about the Vedas. Never checked out
>anything, right? ( except the TV guide) 

I never checked the Vedas out, but in the past few days
I have learned alot about
the stupidity of those who believe in them.  


------------------------------------------------------------------

I was asked what an atheistic mindset could do to motivate someone who
was born with a disability (as if that is proof of something):

>>Alot.  It can give someone the will to make the most of their position
>>because they may not get another chance.
>
>Weak solace. It can't help anyone to deal with the cause of his
>situation. He can only try to be comforted by the idea that he could
>suffer even more. Some, due to ignorance of the law of karma, blame
>their suffering on God. That's not very intelligent though.

Dwelling on how shitty one's situation is and what caused it
never helped anyone.


--------------------------------------------------------------

I tried to make a point:

>>It really does not matter.  Just because life sucks for some people
>>does not mean that gods exist.    


But he just doesn't get it...

>Maybe it doesn't matter for you now but it matters for those suffering
>persons. And who knows, maybe you or some of your folks can be among
>them soon too. Advantage of those suffering people in comparison with
>you is that they at least realize they're suffering but you don't.
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------


>Why do you never give any proof for your assertions? Talking is cheap.


Which assertion?  

-------------------------------------------------------------------

>>Really, I
>>have to say that your true colors are finally showing:
>>
>>JAHNU BELIEVES IN GODS BECAUSE HE IS AFRAID OF LIFE
>>WITHOUT THEM.
>
>I wonder how you will behave in your last hour. Then your clueless
>arguments won't help you. You have to bow down before Krishna --either
>voluntarily or involuntarily as you are being cut down by Him in the
>form of death.
>

Yeah, yeah...heard it before.
Apparently you will be begging Christ for forgivness for
believing in Krisha BS.  

-----------------------------------------------------------------
It goes on and on...i doubt anyone is still reading this...


>And we have to suffer the consequences. Scientism is just accelerating
>the destruction of all life on the earth. Who can deny it? 
>What was actually the purpose of going [to the moon]
> (provided they went)?
>How did it benefits us all? See the vulture analogy above. That's my
>point.

All sceintific accomplishments would have been impossible without
the accomplishments of others who discover for the sheer love
of discovery.

----------------------------------------------------------------

I am skipping over the part about how the entire space program
is a sham to scam us out of our tax money.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

>The real point is
>that our scientific advancement has not stopped or even mitigated the
>real problems of life; disease, birth, death, old age. People still
>get sick like anything, despite your lame examples, and they still
>die.

I guess this guy doesn't ever take antibiotics.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

jahnu claims that western medical research CAUSED most of 
the diseases...

>You again missed the point--who caused these terrible conditions to
>occur in the first place? This just shows that science is out of
>control of the situation--they opened Pandora's box but they can't get
>rid of the consequences. Isn't that pretty obvious?

Regardless of which culture (if any) is responsible for
the worlds problems, how is this related to the supposed existance
of god?

>>In India human beings go starving while food is given to feed
>>fatally ill cows and chickens. Such inhumane practices
>>are not the result of atheistic thinking.
>
>You speak about something you have no idea of. This only makes you
>look pretty foolish.

I saw a special about it on television recently.  It was
a program which discussed animal rights and animal research.
Now what exactly makes me look foolish?  The fact that you
say i look foolish?

-----------------------------------------------------------------

We discuss science...

>>The scientific method is based on collecting evidence to support
>>or contradict a theory or hypothesis.  Blind faith is not part of
>>the scientific method.
>
>You forgot to mention the information filter involved. This makes the
>whole show a farce. Blind faith is required from the people who are
>indoctrinated over and over again. If one rejects to conform he is
>labelled by different not very savory names.

Show me the science text where it teaches how to properly use:
"the information filter method" please.
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------

I wrote:

>>There are some theists who believe in gods because they think that
>>without them life would suck.  My hypothesis, based on considerable
>>evidence from your writings to this newsgroup, is that
>>You are one of these.

He apparently was responding to a different question:

>I wonder which evidence against the existence of God you mean.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

>Yet you resist to learn about the Bhagavad-gita and other Vedic texts.
>So where is your eagerness for knowledge then?
>Knowing the truth leads to happiness--that is a time proven fact.

Given an infinate amount of time, I will check out all texts.  But
since I don't believe i have an infinate amount of time, I 
unfortunatly will have to skip many many texts.
Based on what I have heard from the Krishnas here, I think
the Vedas may be one of the last books on my list.

---------------------------------------------------------

Well, its been fun.  But I cannot spend so much time
debating such ridiculousness.  Don't bother 
responding to this post on my account.  I honestly
was not sure whether or not the eastern philosophies
had more to offer than the bs Christianity has to 
offer.  But I thank you for showing me that religion
is BS regardless of which hemisphere it comes from.

Thank you for this insight,
Smedley



-- End --