Dharma Wheel

A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism
It is currently Tue Dec 23, 2014 1:14 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 5:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 3:47 am
Posts: 1434
Location: Globe
Hi,



,Kevin

_________________
ओं मणिपद्मे हूं

http://www.dalailama.com/webcasts/post/336-je-tsongkhapas-great-stages-of-the-path
http://www.ripple.org
http://caretoclick.com/save-the-rainforests/donate-clicks-likes-and-tweets-to-fight-climate-change-and-deforestation


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 5:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 3:47 am
Posts: 1434
Location: Globe


Kevin

_________________
ओं मणिपद्मे हूं

http://www.dalailama.com/webcasts/post/336-je-tsongkhapas-great-stages-of-the-path
http://www.ripple.org
http://caretoclick.com/save-the-rainforests/donate-clicks-likes-and-tweets-to-fight-climate-change-and-deforestation


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 6:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:58 pm
Posts: 1428
Hi Virgo

Didn't watch the whole thing yet, but it makes sense so far, considering that I already knew that the Sun is not stationary.

And it's said that our Sun (and all the Stars in our galaxy) revolve around a Central Sun that is at the center of the Milky Way galaxy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 6:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 3:47 am
Posts: 1434
Location: Globe
Lhug-Pa wrote:
Hi Virgo
And it's said that our Sun (and all the Stars in our galaxy) revolve around a Central Sun that is at the center of the Milky Way galaxy.

Our Sun revolves around the center of the Milky Way, completing it's orbit once every 230 million years.

Kevin

_________________
ओं मणिपद्मे हूं

http://www.dalailama.com/webcasts/post/336-je-tsongkhapas-great-stages-of-the-path
http://www.ripple.org
http://caretoclick.com/save-the-rainforests/donate-clicks-likes-and-tweets-to-fight-climate-change-and-deforestation


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 6:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:39 pm
Posts: 1270
Location: Gone Bush
Nassim Haramein represents pseudoscience at its worst. What is this doing on a Buddhist forum?

_________________
May all beings be happy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 6:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:58 pm
Posts: 1428
That part I wasn't aware of, Virgo. But it's an interesting apparent fact that I'd like to look into.

Which part are you referring to Dharmagoat?

Like I've said, I didn't watch all of both vids yet, but I'm curious about what you're referring to specifically here.

Might as well watch the rest real quick here....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:39 pm
Posts: 1270
Location: Gone Bush
Lhug-Pa wrote:
Which part are you referring to Dharmagoat?

Of course the planets revolve around the sun, and of course the sun is moving through space. The rest is baloney.

_________________
May all beings be happy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:58 pm
Posts: 1428
Perhaps, Dharmagoat.

But I wouldn't necessarily write it off just like that.

For example, there are things which 'official science' accepts which are bullpucky; and there are things that 'official science' rejects that are actually true.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 9:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:39 pm
Posts: 1270
Location: Gone Bush
Lhug-Pa wrote:
For example, there are things which 'official science' accepts which are bullpucky; and there are things that 'official science' rejects that are actually true.

What? You mean science is fallible?

_________________
May all beings be happy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 9:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 6:18 am
Posts: 1596
dharmagoat wrote:
Lhug-Pa wrote:
For example, there are things which 'official science' accepts which are bullpucky; and there are things that 'official science' rejects that are actually true.

What? You mean science is fallible?

Science tends to discard things it cannot grasp, so the end view is somehow narrow.

_________________
Say what you think about me here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 9:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:39 pm
Posts: 1270
Location: Gone Bush
oushi wrote:
Science tends to discard things it cannot grasp, so the end view is somehow narrow.

Science has not discarded general relativity or quantum physics.

I will politely decline yet another "yes it is, no it isn't" styled religious debate.

_________________
May all beings be happy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 4:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 6:18 am
Posts: 1596
dharmagoat wrote:
oushi wrote:
Science tends to discard things it cannot grasp, so the end view is somehow narrow.

Science has not discarded general relativity or quantum physics.

No, science created it.
Quote:
I will politely decline yet another "yes it is, no it isn't" styled religious debate.

Nothing to argue about. If you think that science is honest, then why shouldn't you believe in it?

_________________
Say what you think about me here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 6:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2012 12:44 pm
Posts: 220
Location: UK
oushi wrote:
dharmagoat wrote:
oushi wrote:
Science tends to discard things it cannot grasp, so the end view is somehow narrow.

Science has not discarded general relativity or quantum physics.

No, science created it.
Quote:
I will politely decline yet another "yes it is, no it isn't" styled religious debate.

Nothing to argue about. If you think that science is honest, then why shouldn't you believe in it?


You don't 'believe' in science. Science is just verifiable facts. I can't stand this idea that science and religion are somehow playing on the same field. The heliocentric solar system wasn't invented by some heiratic cabal of 'scientists,' it was pieced together from the results of many, many years of meticulously gathered information and observation.

Sorry to go off on one but I've recently had this nonsense parroted by one of my kids' teachers - who isn't even a creationist, just someone who doesn't know what 'theory' means.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 8:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:58 pm
Posts: 1428
Now I'm not saying that everything Nassim Haramein is saying here is true; nonetheless, the western mindset tends to get dominated by left-brain-hemisphere thinking which tries to separate everything into neat little compartments. This is why contemporary materialistic science isn't as objective as it would like to think.

For example the Scientific Method is great, and can be applied to both the Microcosm and the Macrocosm; however 'official science' often leaves many factors/variables out their hypothesis & experiments, either intentionally because of money, or simply out of sheer close-mindedness.

More balanced cultures didn't/don't separate Religion and Science, as both are related to Self-Knowledge, not only some external reality 'out there' somewhere. More open-minded scientists are starting to see that ancient Eastern science has more to it than materialists would like to think.

Some examples of Science and Religion going hand-in-hand:

Tibetan Medicine, Ayurveda, Indian Astrology, Tibetan Astrology, Kalachakra Astrology, etc.

Cultures who didn't separate Science and Religion knew that the Earth rotated around the Sun long before Europeans figured it out.

And look how advanced Ancient Khemet was in architecture, mathematics, medicine, surgery, writing, philosophy, astrology & astronomy, etc. They certainly didn't separate Religion and Science.


Last edited by Lhug-Pa on Sun Sep 09, 2012 8:19 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 8:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:36 pm
Posts: 343
You simply do not understand what science is.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 8:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 6:18 am
Posts: 1596
Lhug-Pa wrote:
Now I'm not saying that everything Nassim Haramein is saying here is true; nonetheless, the western mindset tends to get dominated by left-brain-hemisphere thinking which tries to separate everything into neat little compartments. This is why contemporary materialistic science isn't as objective as it would like to think.

For example the Scientific Method is great, and can be applied to both the Microcosm and the Macrocosm; however 'official science' often leaves many factors/variables out their hypothesis & experiments, either intentionally because of money, or simply out of sheer close-mindedness.

More balanced cultures didn't/don't separate Religion and Science, as both are related to Self-Knowledge, not only some external reality 'out there' somewhere. More open-minded scientists are starting to see that ancient Eastern science has more to it than materialists would like to think.

Some examples of Science and Religion going hand-in-hand:

Tibetan Medicine, Ayurveda, Indian Astrology, Tibetan Astrology, Kalachakra Astrology, etc.

Cultures who didn't separate Science and Religion knew that the Earth rotated around the Sun long before Europeans figured it out.

And look how advanced Ancient Khemet was in architecture, mathematics, medicine, surgery, writing, philosophy, astrology & astronomy, etc. They certainly didn't separate Religion and Science.

:good:

_________________
Say what you think about me here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 8:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:58 pm
Posts: 1428
Norwegian wrote:
You simply do not understand what science is.


It literally means "To Know", and is basically defined by the Scientific Method.

The Gnostics called themselves Gnostics because they knew that Gnosis includes both inner and outer Knowledge, and that the two are not separate. The Phoenician Tree of Life for example has Malkuth (the physical dimension) in the middle, with the more material forces 'below' (Klipoth), and the Spiritual forces 'above'; and as can be seen by looking at the Tree of Life, Malkuth is just as much a part of the Tree of Life as Kether (the Spiritual Crown of the Tree of Life) is. So there's no reason to try to separate the mundane and the supramundane.

Anyone who studies Dependent-Origination can at least appreciate this.

And I'm not saying that Kabbalah and Gnosticism are perfect, but what the Ancients in general had going on—at least before the onset of the Kali Yuga—was a lot better than the pollution, materialism, big pharma, nuclear bombs, military-industrial-complex, Monsanto, etc. that we have now.

It is a fact that much of official science leaves factors & variables out of its hypothesis' and experiments due to pressure & money from the corporations, bankers, big-pharma, military-industrial-complex, governments, etc. If this were not the case we would be using cleaner energy; and would not be bathing in, drinking, & eating synthetic-chemicals.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 10:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2012 12:44 pm
Posts: 220
Location: UK
Quote:
And I'm not saying that Kabbalah and Gnosticism are perfect, but what the Ancients in general had going on—at least before the onset of the Kali Yuga—was a lot better than the pollution, materialism, big pharma, nuclear bombs, military-industrial-complex, Monsanto, etc. that we have now.


Organized humanity has always had all those things if you think in terms of equivalents. It's just been a question of scale. read, for example, the Old Testament as a historical document.

Anyway, why is are people so keen for Gnosticism etc to explain the material world, when they reject the attempts of science to explain the spiritual world?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 10, 2012 4:40 am 
Offline
Former staff member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:20 am
Posts: 2995
Location: British Columbia
Whoop de doo, he seems to have discovered that phenomena look different when viewed from different frames of reference. Pretty elementary stuff really.

_________________
Sergeant Schultz knew everything there was to know.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 10, 2012 1:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 5:04 pm
Posts: 248
dharmagoat wrote:
Lhug-Pa wrote:
For example, there are things which 'official science' accepts which are bullpucky; and there are things that 'official science' rejects that are actually true.

What? You mean science is fallible?

Science just like any other area of human activity is prone to mistakes and mistaken notions even, and I am sorry to say, but it seems to me that some branches of science - physics and astrophysics - have become a bit like religion lately. For example the dark matter hypothesis - so much money is thorwn at it, yet the other scientific hypothesis dealing with gravity and structure of our universe alternative to the dark matter hypothesis are in general ignored and laughed at by the establishment. Yes, it MUST be a dark matter and dark energy and dark whatever - eventhough there is actualy no proof of its existence.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group