My theory on Alien intervention on Earth

[Arbitran]

It is not plain at all that this was knowledge from the Gods, the calculations prove that. It was not what we are discovering today, the speed of light was correctly measured (I mentioned this already) by Ole Rømer in 1675, without the benefits of modern instruments. He did not get this from the Gods but from studies revolving around astronomical observations. Man was smarter than you make out. No aliens are required to measure the speed of light.

What we do have with regards to accuracy is that Ole Rømer is closer to todays accepted measurements than the figure given by Sayana. In that Ole Rømer appears to be closer to the mark in his 1675 conclusions. This completely negates the need for outside influence.

Roemer, working at the Paris Observatory, was not looking for the speed of light when he found it. Instead, he was compiling extensive observations of the orbit of Io, the innermost of the four big satellites of Jupiter discovered by Galileo in 1610. By timing the eclipses of Io by Jupiter, Roemer hoped to determine a more accurate value for the satellite’s orbital period. Such observations had a practical importance in the seventeenth century. Galileo himself had suggested that tables of the orbital motion of Jupiter’s satellites would provide a kind of “clock” in the sky. Navigators and mapmakers anywhere in the world might use this clock to read the absolute time (the standard time at a place of known longitude, like the Paris Observatory). Then, by determining the local solar time, they could calculate their longitude from the time difference. This method of finding longitude eventually turned out to be impractical and was abandoned after the development of accurate seagoing timepieces. But the Io eclipse data unexpectedly solved another important scientific problem—the speed of light.

LINK

And as I have pointed out before, Sayana was not the only one looking at this conundrum. Galileo tried to measure the speed of light as well, refusing to accept that it travelled at infinite velocity. Had he been able to measure over a greater distance, he would have beaten Ole Rømer to the punch.

1667 Galileo: at least 10 times faster than sound.

In 1667, Galileo is often credited with being the first scientist to try to determine the speed of light. His method was quite simple. He and an assistant each had lamps which could be covered and uncovered at will. Galileo would uncover his lamp, and as soon as his assistant saw the light he would uncover his. By measuring the elapsed time until Galileo saw his assistant's light and knowing how far apart the lamps were, Galileo reasoned he should be able to determine the speed of the light. His conclusion: "If not instantaneous, it is extraordinarily rapid". Most likely he used a water clock, where the amount of water that empties from a container represents the amount of time that has passed. Galileo just deduced that light travels at least ten times faster than sound.

Now can you explain how Sayana had to rely on the gods, yet these men required only their brains?

Sayanas calc were followed 200 years later by Rømer and then 200 years after Rømer 's observations, Heinrich Hertz generated some electromagnetic waves in his laboratory. He measured their speed and came up with that familiar number, 300,000 kilometers per second. Like everything it is a learning process. And man has the equipment necessary in his head to make these determinations. No Aliens required.

Have you really ignored each one of my statements? I have said, several times, that of course man can discover these things themselves, however the ancients made it clear that they did not.

[psyche101]

Have you really ignored each one of my statements? I have said, several times, that of course man can discover these things themselves, however the ancients made it clear that they did not.

No it is plainly obvious that you are ignoring mine. You cannot explain why the Gods must be factored in. You just insist upon that. Here, I do not think I can put it any simpler than this:

NOTE: Nimisharda= half of a nimisha

The Moksha dharma parva of Shanti Parva in Mahabharata describes Nimisha as follows:

15 Nimisha = 1 Kastha

30 Kashta = 1 Kala

30.3 Kala = 1 Muhurta

30 Muhurtas = 1 Diva-Ratri (Day-Night)

We know Day-Night is 24 hours

So we get 24 hours = 30 x 30.3 x 30 x 15 nimisha

or 409050 nimisha

We know 1 hour = 60 x 60 = 3600 seconds

So 24 hours = 24 x 3600 seconds = 409050 nimisha

409050 nimesa = 86,400 seconds

1 nimesa = 0.2112 seconds

1/2 nimesa = 0.1056 seconds

Unit of Distance: Yojana

Yojana is defined in Chapter 6 of Book 1 of the ancient vedic text “Vishnu Purana” as follows

10 ParamAnus = 1 Parasúkshma

10 Parasúkshmas = 1 Trasarenu

10 Trasarenus = 1 Mahírajas (particle of dust)

10 Mahírajas= 1 Bálágra (hair’s point)

10 Bálágra = 1 Likhsha

10 Likhsha= 1 Yuka

1o Yukas = 1 Yavodara (heart of barley)

10 Yavodaras = 1 Yava (barley grain of middle size)

10 Yava = 1 Angula (1.89 cm or approx 3/4 inch)

6 fingers = 1 Pada (the breadth of it)

2 Padas = 1 Vitasti (span)

2 Vitasti = 1 Hasta (cubit)

4 Hastas = a Dhanu, a Danda, or pauruSa (a man’s height), or 2 Nárikás = 6 feet

2000 Dhanus = 1 Gavyuti (distance to which a cow’s call or lowing can be heard) = 12000 feet

4 Gavyutis = 1 Yojana = 9.09 miles

Calculation:

So now we can calculate what is the value of the speed of light in modern units based on the value given as 2202 yojanas in 1/2 nimesa

= 2202 x 9.09 miles per 0.1056 seconds

= 20016.18 miles per 0.1056 seconds

= 189547 miles per second

Do you agree with the above? If so, why is this math the work of the Gods? Why must this be beyond man, and if so, why did the Gods only give this to Sayana when surely a deity would know that Ole Rømer would come to the same conclusion only two hundred years later and that man would then confirm this for another 400 years after that with lasers? What about Galileo and his experiment? Did the Gods let him in on the secret as well, or was that Satan?

[Arbitran]

No it is plainly obvious that you are ignoring mine. You cannot explain why the Gods must be factored in. You just insist upon that. Here, I do not think I can put it any simpler than this:

NOTE: Nimisharda= half of a nimisha

The Moksha dharma parva of Shanti Parva in Mahabharata describes Nimisha as follows:

15 Nimisha = 1 Kastha

30 Kashta = 1 Kala

30.3 Kala = 1 Muhurta

30 Muhurtas = 1 Diva-Ratri (Day-Night)

We know Day-Night is 24 hours

So we get 24 hours = 30 x 30.3 x 30 x 15 nimisha

or 409050 nimisha

We know 1 hour = 60 x 60 = 3600 seconds

So 24 hours = 24 x 3600 seconds = 409050 nimisha

409050 nimesa = 86,400 seconds

1 nimesa = 0.2112 seconds

1/2 nimesa = 0.1056 seconds

Unit of Distance: Yojana

Yojana is defined in Chapter 6 of Book 1 of the ancient vedic text “Vishnu Purana” as follows

10 ParamAnus = 1 Parasúkshma

10 Parasúkshmas = 1 Trasarenu

10 Trasarenus = 1 Mahírajas (particle of dust)

10 Mahírajas= 1 Bálágra (hair’s point)

10 Bálágra = 1 Likhsha

10 Likhsha= 1 Yuka

1o Yukas = 1 Yavodara (heart of barley)

10 Yavodaras = 1 Yava (barley grain of middle size)

10 Yava = 1 Angula (1.89 cm or approx 3/4 inch)

6 fingers = 1 Pada (the breadth of it)

2 Padas = 1 Vitasti (span)

2 Vitasti = 1 Hasta (cubit)

4 Hastas = a Dhanu, a Danda, or pauruSa (a man’s height), or 2 Nárikás = 6 feet

2000 Dhanus = 1 Gavyuti (distance to which a cow’s call or lowing can be heard) = 12000 feet

4 Gavyutis = 1 Yojana = 9.09 miles

Calculation:

So now we can calculate what is the value of the speed of light in modern units based on the value given as 2202 yojanas in 1/2 nimesa

= 2202 x 9.09 miles per 0.1056 seconds

= 20016.18 miles per 0.1056 seconds

= 189547 miles per second

Do you agree with the above? If so, why is this math the work of the Gods? Why must this be beyond man, and if so, why did the Gods only give this to Sayana when surely a deity would know that Ole Rømer would come to the same conclusion only two hundred years later and that man would then confirm this for another 400 years after that with lasers? What about Galileo and his experiment? Did the Gods let him in on the secret as well, or was that Satan?

I can't say that I completely agree with the above. The exact distance of a yojana is not known today. There are multiple interpretations. Again, this is clearly not beyond man. It is simply the fact that the ancients were clear as to the source of their knowledge that makes it rather implausible that they simply discovered it themselves. Or would you, discovering the speed of light, or the exact age of the Earth, or of the universe, completely disassociate yourself from it, and state plainly that a distinct, superior non-human race? Such achievements would surely be notable on one's resume--why indeed would you choose to pass it off to someone else? Of course mathematics is the work of the gods. They had a system of arithmetic vastly beyond ours long before our species arrived on the scene. Why would the gods have knowledge of Ole Rømer? The gods did not possess knowledge of the future. They merely taught the ancients at the time. Ole Rømer and Galileo acquired the knowledge themselves. The ancients made it clear that they did not. Yes, they provided calculations, but these calculations are also said to have been learned from the gods, who doubtless discovered them themselves billions of years ago.

[psyche101]

I can't say that I completely agree with the above. The exact distance of a yojana is not known today. There are multiple interpretations. Again, this is clearly not beyond man. It is simply the fact that the ancients were clear as to the source of their knowledge that makes it rather implausible that they simply discovered it themselves.

If the exact distance of the yojana is not known, how is it Sayana was accurate? Would that not mean nobody knows if he was right or not? If that figure changes what happens to his predictions then? The gods must be crazy? Or is this going to end up like the claim from the Quran? Indian tradition holds the view that a finite speed was associated with the astronomical processes. So again, why would the Gods be required? To tell Sayana that he was on the right track all along? That seems rather pointless don't you think? It is far more implausible to believe that Gods came to earth a mere 200 years before others cottoned onto the same idea to give someone some knowledge that they could not make use of.

Or would you, discovering the speed of light, or the exact age of the Earth, or of the universe, completely disassociate yourself from it, and state plainly that a distinct, superior non-human race? Such achievements would surely be notable on one's resume--why indeed would you choose to pass it off to someone else?

Why did suicide bombers fly planes into the World Trade Centre? Would you do it?

Religion affects some people in some very strange ways and makes them make some very strange claims.

Of course mathematics is the work of the gods. They had a system of arithmetic vastly beyond ours long before our species arrived on the scene. Why would the gods have knowledge of Ole Rømer? The gods did not possess knowledge of the future. They merely taught the ancients at the time. Ole Rømer and Galileo acquired the knowledge themselves. The ancients made it clear that they did not. Yes, they provided calculations, but these calculations are also said to have been learned from the gods, who doubtless discovered them themselves billions of years ago.

Ohh for Petes sakes. What BS! Math is math, nobody owns it, it is a Universal tool. It does not matter the language one uses to express the calculation, 1+1 always =2. Anywhere in the Universe. For gods and lowly hominids alike. Either can look at one star and hold one finger up.

What we have here is no need for Gods, they are useless to us. If Ole Rømer can do what the Gods can do what is the point in them? And that is the best they can do? Give someone some information that will mean no more than an interesting antiquity? Why did the Gods not give Sayana some worthwhile medical advice? Like how to cure cancer. It seems to me much more likely that astrology like in all cultures, was keenly observed and some astute calculations gave some answers to well pondered questions. As we know, the general consensus was that the speed of light was infinite, so if people thought that far, the measurement was the next logical step to prove if this was the case or not. Astronomical observation opened the door so to speak. The progression seems quite logical. Some religious themes seem to have you somewhat confused is all.

[WhyDontYouBeliEveMe]

i m a strong believer of aliens aswell and i also believe in ghost and reincarnation aswell..

so your theory of humans are alien made is a bit to much ...for my mind.

lets say they created us ..

but how did they created our soul ... ?

[Hazzard]

i m a strong believer of aliens aswell and i also believe in ghost and reincarnation aswell..

so your theory of humans are alien made is a bit to much ...for my mind.

lets say they created us ..

but how did they created our soul ... ?

I dont see where the problem lies. You already believe in stuff like reincarnation, ghosts and aliens,... why stop there?

Maybe ET had a soul making thingy?

[DONTEATUS]

I dont see where the problem lies. You already believe in stuff like reincarnation, ghosts and aliens,... why stop there?

Maybe ET had a soul making thingy?

So true Hazzard ! people are a very strange lot ! If one cant understand that we are all we are ,which is a bunch of atoms all made up into a pile of hardware that allows us to make up all sorts of creation Ideas,and what not`s like ghost,Big-Foot,Lochnessy,Aliens,Bugs Bunny. We may just some day need to fall back on searching for that illusive soul thingy.

As for the most of the rational thinking lot on this rock ,Well lets just say Theres always time to really look into things that go bump in the night and question the unknown !

Its what makes us the curious creatures we are. Without the mystries of all the Boggie-man mentality`s and Gods and what ever`s

I like to think we can over come this and actually evolve some day .

[RazielKTB]

Welcome to UM

[Arbitran]

If the exact distance of the yojana is not known, how is it Sayana was accurate? Would that not mean nobody knows if he was right or not? If that figure changes what happens to his predictions then? The gods must be crazy? Or is this going to end up like the claim from the Quran? Indian tradition holds the view that a finite speed was associated with the astronomical processes. So again, why would the Gods be required? To tell Sayana that he was on the right track all along? That seems rather pointless don't you think? It is far more implausible to believe that Gods came to earth a mere 200 years before others cottoned onto the same idea to give someone some knowledge that they could not make use of.

Why did suicide bombers fly planes into the World Trade Centre? Would you do it?

Religion affects some people in some very strange ways and makes them make some very strange claims.

Ohh for Petes sakes. What BS! Math is math, nobody owns it, it is a Universal tool. It does not matter the language one uses to express the calculation, 1+1 always =2. Anywhere in the Universe. For gods and lowly hominids alike. Either can look at one star and hold one finger up.

What we have here is no need for Gods, they are useless to us. If Ole Rømer can do what the Gods can do what is the point in them? And that is the best they can do? Give someone some information that will mean no more than an interesting antiquity? Why did the Gods not give Sayana some worthwhile medical advice? Like how to cure cancer. It seems to me much more likely that astrology like in all cultures, was keenly observed and some astute calculations gave some answers to well pondered questions. As we know, the general consensus was that the speed of light was infinite, so if people thought that far, the measurement was the next logical step to prove if this was the case or not. Astronomical observation opened the door so to speak. The progression seems quite logical. Some religious themes seem to have you somewhat confused is all.

Sayana was not the sole discoverer of the speed of light in antiquity: the Hindu texts, such as the Vedas, speak of it in far more precise terms. The gods discovered the knowledge which was compiled in the Vedas many billions of years ago.

We are not discussing religion, we are discussing science and history. Hinduism is not a religion, it is a philosophy, based on science learned from the gods. Your reference to suicide bombers is wholly out-of-place; it holds no even remote semblance to what we are talking about. And since when has science considered the speed of light or the age of the universe "very strange claims"?

Of course math is math; and unowned. What does this have to do with anything? When did I say that mathematics was not a universal tool? I did not.

The gods are not useless when they are explicitly stated to be part of the equation. Would you try to make 1-1=2? No. It required 1+1=2. You cannot simply remove the gods from the equation on your own whim; they cannot be subtracted, in light of the fact that they are plainly stated to have a part in the process. Indeed, Ole Rømer was capable of replicating the gods' work; when was it stated otherwise? This is clear and evident. The gods did indeed have sophisticated medical knowledge: and it was written within the ancient texts, and taught to the ancient peoples. A cure for cancer was among this vast compendium.

[Arbitran]

i m a strong believer of aliens aswell and i also believe in ghost and reincarnation aswell..

so your theory of humans are alien made is a bit to much ...for my mind.

lets say they created us ..

but how did they created our soul ... ?

They did not create our soul. The "soul", the consciousness, is the natural base of reality; the ground of the universe is consciousness. It is a quantum construct. All things which a living, conscious beings possess souls. Consciousness is the soul; the soul is consciousness. The gods did not create this.

Ghosts and reincarnation are fully real. They are a simple natural process, brought about through the same quantum mechanical mechanisms which cause reality to be real. These are the base of the soul, the universe, and the processes of reincarnation.

[psyche101]

Sayana was not the sole discoverer of the speed of light in antiquity: the Hindu texts, such as the Vedas, speak of it in far more precise terms. The gods discovered the knowledge which was compiled in the Vedas many billions of years ago.

What does that matter? Your claim is that the divine beings who are supposed to have departed this information were aliens. You are even trying to take Christian texts and turn them into alien references, you just refuse to accept that such outrageous claims like Ezekiel Aliens have been debunked for a very long time now. It might pay to recognise that the a significant portion of the West uses a religious text as a historical record.

We are not discussing religion, we are discussing science and history. Hinduism is not a religion, it is a philosophy, based on science learned from the gods.

Well the standard accepted definitions disagree with you.

Hin·du·ism (hnd-zm)

n.

A diverse body of religion, philosophy, and cultural practice native to and predominant in India, characterized by a belief in reincarnation and a supreme being of many forms and natures, by the view that opposing theories are aspects of one eternal truth, and by a desire for liberation from earthly evils.

LINK

Hinduism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hinduism is the predominant religion[3][4] of the Indian subcontinent, and one of its indigenous religions.

LINK

For the sake of a logical debate, lets just stick with standard recognised definition as opposed to your own personal viewpoint shall we?

Your reference to suicide bombers is wholly out-of-place; it holds no even remote semblance to what we are talking about.

Yes it does indeed. You just do not like that it is accurate. You asked what would I do? I asked you the same question back. Religion makes people do strange things, and say strange things. Like talking to Gods and so forth. Talking with Gods is not a divine experience, it is a sign that one is likely to have a chemical imbalance. Those men flew those planes into building shouting god is great. A belief in a religious deity can make man do ridiculous things.

And since when has science considered the speed of light or the age of the universe "very strange claims"?

I never said that at all. I said religion makes people make strange claims, like calling an epiphany the work of the gods. I am quite sure you knew exactly what I was saying though, didn't you.

Of course math is math; and unowned. What does this have to do with anything? When did I say that mathematics was not a universal tool? I did not.

The gods are not useless when they are explicitly stated to be part of the equation. Would you try to make 1-1=2? No. It required 1+1=2. You cannot simply remove the gods from the equation on your own whim; they cannot be subtracted, in light of the fact that they are plainly stated to have a part in the process. Indeed, Ole Rømer was capable of replicating the gods' work; when was it stated otherwise? This is clear and evident. The gods did indeed have sophisticated medical knowledge: and it was written within the ancient texts, and taught to the ancient peoples. A cure for cancer was among this vast compendium.

You said exactly and I quote:

Of course mathematics is the work of the gods.

No it is not. Math just exists. One star is one star. Two stars are two stars. That is nt the "work" of anything it is the nature of existence. 1-1 cannot equal 2 and nobody on their right mind would try to make that work. Just like the Gods coming all the way to earth to give India a 2 hundred year head start of discovering the speed of light. What was the point in that? That is what I am trying to get out of you. Why would the Gods feel compelled to travel space and give India information it could not use, and that which man would discover only 200 years later, and which would not affect our development for centuries. Seriously, are the Gods crazy? That seems to me to be the most useless gesture I could imagine from what is described as a divine race. Seriously, I expect divinity to be logical at the very least, This is anything but.

I did not say you said Ole Rømer was not capable of doing what he did, I said he did it within a short time frame from what you feel the Gods must have travelled here to do, and that it makes it a stupid and pointless gesture on the Gods behalf. I expect more from Gods, I really do. If we can replicate their work, just how divine are they, and if we managed to discover what they gave us on our own anyway, how do you know we have not surpassed these so called illogical gods?

And sorry, I do not believe a cure for cancer is in there. People are dying from it every day, you might want to share this secret that would be of use to the human race, with them. When I see someone cured from cancer and the Vedic texts cited aas the cure, I will give your musing a second chance. Right now, it's seems you are just making a lot of claims that cannot be true.

Edited April 4, 2012 by psyche101

[psyche101]

They did not create our soul. The "soul", the consciousness, is the natural base of reality; the ground of the universe is consciousness. It is a quantum construct. All things which a living, conscious beings possess souls. Consciousness is the soul; the soul is consciousness. The gods did not create this.

Ghosts and reincarnation are fully real. They are a simple natural process, brought about through the same quantum mechanical mechanisms which cause reality to be real. These are the base of the soul, the universe, and the processes of reincarnation.

See this is where we differ greatly. I think we are all just worm food. The soul stuff is BS. A person is what a person makes of ones self. Offloading the concern of nonexistence on religion I see as a cop out. I prefer to face my demons.

LOL, and Satan... as you like to put it, much to my mirth.

[psyche101]

I dont see where the problem lies. You already believe in stuff like reincarnation, ghosts and aliens,... why stop there?

Maybe ET had a soul making thingy?

Something like this no doubt

Indeed, why not go all the way. Belief is incredibly flexible.

[Arbitran]

What does that matter? Your claim is that the divine beings who are supposed to have departed this information were aliens. You are even trying to take Christian texts and turn them into alien references, you just refuse to accept that such outrageous claims like Ezekiel Aliens have been debunked for a very long time now. It might pay to recognise that the a significant portion of the West uses a religious text as a historical record.

Well the standard accepted definitions disagree with you.

Hin·du·ism (hnd-zm)

n.

A diverse body of religion, philosophy, and cultural practice native to and predominant in India, characterized by a belief in reincarnation and a supreme being of many forms and natures, by the view that opposing theories are aspects of one eternal truth, and by a desire for liberation from earthly evils.

LINK

Hinduism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hinduism is the predominant religion[3][4] of the Indian subcontinent, and one of its indigenous religions.

LINK

For the sake of a logical debate, lets just stick with standard recognised definition as opposed to your own personal viewpoint shall we?

Yes it does indeed. You just do not like that it is accurate. You asked what would I do? I asked you the same question back. Religion makes people do strange things, and say strange things. Like talking to Gods and so forth. Talking with Gods is not a divine experience, it is a sign that one is likely to have a chemical imbalance. Those men flew those planes into building shouting god is great. A belief in a religious deity can make man do ridiculous things.

I never said that at all. I said religion makes people make strange claims, like calling an epiphany the work of the gods. I am quite sure you knew exactly what I was saying though, didn't you.

You said exactly and I quote:

Of course mathematics is the work of the gods.

No it is not. Math just exists. One star is one star. Two stars are two stars. That is nt the "work" of anything it is the nature of existence. 1-1 cannot equal 2 and nobody on their right mind would try to make that work. Just like the Gods coming all the way to earth to give India a 2 hundred year head start of discovering the speed of light. What was the point in that? That is what I am trying to get out of you. Why would the Gods feel compelled to travel space and give India information it could not use, and that which man would discover only 200 years later, and which would not affect our development for centuries. Seriously, are the Gods crazy? That seems to me to be the most useless gesture I could imagine from what is described as a divine race. Seriously, I expect divinity to be logical at the very least, This is anything but.

I did not say you said Ole Rømer was not capable of doing what he did, I said he did it within a short time frame from what you feel the Gods must have travelled here to do, and that it makes it a stupid and pointless gesture on the Gods behalf. I expect more from Gods, I really do. If we can replicate their work, just how divine are they, and if we managed to discover what they gave us on our own anyway, how do you know we have not surpassed these so called illogical gods?

And sorry, I do not believe a cure for cancer is in there. People are dying from it every day, you might want to share this secret that would be of use to the human race, with them. When I see someone cured from cancer and the Vedic texts cited aas the cure, I will give your musing a second chance. Right now, it's seems you are just making a lot of claims that cannot be true.

First of all, I believe in extremely little of the biblical texts. The Ezekiel passage is at best a curiosity. However, I will ask you to cite a definitive debunking of it as an extraterrestrial phenomenon.

Hinduism is considered to be a religion by many in the West; an actual follower of the teachings and philosophy of Hinduism knows better.

The gods are not "religious deities". You have a deplorably inaccurate knowledge of the gods. The Abrahamic religions, granted, are absurd. These believe in imaginary beings--however beings which were originally inspired by the true gods; real, tangible beings. By "work of the gods", I should thought you would have understood my meaning: the gods had it long before us, and originally taught advanced mathematics to our ancestors. Earth is their world--they came here long before humans existed. They did not come here for us. They gave knowledge to the ancients because they wished humanity to be educated, and to one day be integrated into their civilization. How would they possibly have knowledge when, where, or whom would rediscover this knowledge after they bestowed it, and it was forgotten? As I have said, the gods cannot know the future any more than we humans can. How is knowledge of the speed of light, the ages of the universe and the Earth, the number of species living on our planet, advanced medical knowledge, astronomical prowess, genetics, technology, etc. a useless gesture? Is it useless to teach primitive Amazonian tribes of our own culture? Or to bestow knowledge of medicine and technology upon once-primitive African tribes? Do you really suggest that science is worthless to us? This is the insinuation of your previous post--whether intentional or not. Of course we can replicate their work. Why would we be incapable of replicating the work which they themselves once had to discover as well? The cure for cancer is plain, and is present in the ancient writings. The same method which nullifies cancer also results in immensely-extended lifespans--the gods are capable of living for hundreds of thousands of years at a time. We have the technology today to cure cancer; we have simply failed to implement it.

[Arbitran]

See this is where we differ greatly. I think we are all just worm food. The soul stuff is BS. A person is what a person makes of ones self. Offloading the concern of nonexistence on religion I see as a cop out. I prefer to face my demons.

LOL, and Satan... as you like to put it, much to my mirth.

The soul is very real. Are you not conscious at this very moment? Then you have a soul. Or, perhaps if you are without a mind, then you may have some ground in saying that the soul does not exist. I personally would like to think that you have a functional mind, and are a conscious being--therefore, you have a soul. It's very simple. And what part of this has anything to do with facing or not facing our own inner demons?

When was "Satan" ever brought up?

[psyche101]

First of all, I believe in extremely little of the biblical texts. The Ezekiel passage is at best a curiosity. However, I will ask you to cite a definitive debunking of it as an extraterrestrial phenomenon.

Yes, I noticed that you pick and choose what appeals to you with regards to what you regards as proof.

Already done that. Here is the link again - LINK - The Spaceships of Ezekiel by Tim Callahan

The link pertains to the Ezekiel aspect obviously, the entire Bible would require many more links. For goodness sakes, the great flood claim shows us that it is fictitious in some aspects at the very least.

Hinduism is considered to be a religion by many in the West; an actual follower of the teachings and philosophy of Hinduism knows better.

Again it seems I need to repeat myself. Could you just read the posts and save the double ups?

I do not care for your personal interpretation, I insist that for the sake of debate at the very least that we restrict the conversation to known and accepted terminology. Your personal viewpoint means little to me no matter how "enlightened" you consider yourself to be. I am in the real world.

The gods are not "religious deities". You have a deplorably inaccurate knowledge of the gods. The Abrahamic religions, granted, are absurd. These believe in imaginary beings--however beings which were originally inspired by the true gods; real, tangible beings. By "work of the gods", I should thought you would have understood my meaning:

I do not find Abrahamic religions absurd, I think they have been interpreted in an absurd way. As I have said before the West uses a religious text as a historical record, and the middle east uses a historical record as a religious text.

Gods comprises a great many "advanced" species if you prefer that term. From the Christian God to the Pagans Gods at the beginning of civilisation. Every religions has at least one. If you have a preferred term, just spit it out and save all this waffle would you please?

the gods had it long before us, and originally taught advanced mathematics to our ancestors.

What a load of BS. Nobody owns a planet. It owns us. We are a product of it. If the human race died out tomorrow, and in say another million years some other species arises, is it stil our planet? No, it is not.

What taught man math was the need for it. The onset of agriculture and storage required mathematical practises to account for resources. Prehistoric peoples also recognised how to count abstract quantities, like time – days, seasons, years. Mathematics arises from many different kinds of problems. Not Gods. Or whatever term you wish to use. Necessity is the mother of invention, you didn't know that?

Earth is their world--they came here long before humans existed. They did not come here for us. They gave knowledge to the ancients because they wished humanity to be educated, and to one day be integrated into their civilization.

They educated humanity yet humanity came to the same conclusions al by themselves as these aspects were broached? What a load of BS. There is no advantage to these "gifts" we have received. And they gave this information out 400 years ago, we caught up and made the calculations ourselves (which I believe was the case all along) so where are they?

Sounds more like a hippy trip to be perfectly honest. If we managed to come up with the same conclusions that the supposed Gods did, it stands to reason that no Gods existed in the first place, just the concept which did explain things like lightning bolts for a long time. Mans curiosity is his saviour from the dreamland of the gods.

How would they possibly have knowledge when, where, or whom would rediscover this knowledge after they bestowed it, and it was forgotten? As I have said, the gods cannot know the future any more than we humans can.

Astronomical knowledge came from observation. I will believe there is a cure to cancer when I see it. No gods are required here. Curing cancer would be convincing, when will someone be getting around to that?

How is knowledge of the speed of light, the ages of the universe and the Earth, the number of species living on our planet, advanced medical knowledge, astronomical prowess, genetics, technology, etc. a useless gesture? Is it useless to teach primitive Amazonian tribes of our own culture? Or to bestow knowledge of medicine and technology upon once-primitive African tribes?

Of course it is useless to give this information to one continent when another was on the verge of discovering it. Why would an alien give a primitive race the speed of light? what did these numpties actually expect Sayana to do with it? Why are these so called enlightened advanced beings so darn stupid? Yes, it is indeed useless to travel into the amazon and find a tribe and teach them quantum mechanics. How is that going to better their lives? What they need is medicine, and resources. Science will come when man can survive without having to worry about surviving. Such is the nature of mans curiosity.

Do you really suggest that science is worthless to us? This is the insinuation of your previous post--whether intentional or not.

That is just plain insulting. How on earth pray tell did you manage to distort my post into this rubbish? I have not insinuated such at all, I have asked the value of giving out information that man canot use at the time when man was to discover this anyway (which makes these gods pretty unobservant and not very intuitive at all) as opposed to information that man can actually use. That man managed to come up with these calculations is impressive as I have said, but you want to take that achievement away and give it to some imaginative being. That is what I see as treating science as worthless.

Of course we can replicate their work. Why would we be incapable of replicating the work which they themselves once had to discover as well? The cure for cancer is plain, and is present in the ancient writings. The same method which nullifies cancer also results in immensely-extended lifespans--the gods are capable of living for hundreds of thousands of years at a time. We have the technology today to cure cancer; we have simply failed to implement it.

This species is billions of years old, travels space, lived through the big bang, and the best they can give us is some information we also came up with ourselves? Such does not indicate divine intelligence, such indicates a level of technology similar to our own, this fledgling 200,000 year old species. As such, no gods are required. If they are not required I need more to go on than your assurances to accept that they so much as exist.

You say they can cure cancer, I do not believe you, all I see is that you think man is a whole lot dumber than he is. I want to see this cure for cancer and watch it implemented. When is someone going to just use this information that you say exists? Private enterprise would use it if it existed. Same with the extension of life, if man could get at the fountain of youth, man would. For some, money would be no object, yet even rich people grow old and die.

Edited April 5, 2012 by psyche101

[DONTEATUS]

I hate the part about rich people getting old and dyeing I have some quite wealthy chaps here and Im always dyeing there Fine Connally Hides to freshen up the seats ! Well Its another way to Look at it right ?

[psyche101]

The soul is very real. Are you not conscious at this very moment? Then you have a soul.

That is the chemical machine at work. A soul transcends death. We are alive. As such, simply being alive explains naught about the mythical soul.

Or, perhaps if you are without a mind, then you may have some ground in saying that the soul does not exist.

Just cannot help yourself with the insults can you? It is quite common when one is backed into a corner I suppose. A losing battle tends to grasp at emoticons, bolded coloured writing and insult. Why is that pray tell?

I personally would like to think that you have a functional mind, and are a conscious being--therefore, you have a soul. It's very simple. And what part of this has anything to do with facing or not facing our own inner demons?

When was "Satan" ever brought up?

I find a persons "soul" is what a person is while that person is here. Did you read yesterday the thread about the Soldier who died saving a little Afghan girl? THAT is soul. That is a man who will live on - in the memories of many. That is an existence one can be proud of. What you do here and now matters. Not in a past life, not in a future life, and not in some hazy realm. That mans "soul" was powerful and strong enough to give his life for that of a child. What greater gift could one give but the gift of life?

I believe the afterlife is a cop out to distract us form the fact that we are no more than chemical machines which merely deposit minerals back into the earth as we decompose. I mean, who the hell wants to hear that?? I also think you might be in the wrong forum for soul talk. Metaphysics or philosophy forums would be more suited to this hippy stuff. This is the ET forum. Aleinz and stuff, yaknow?

[psyche101]

I hate the part about rich people getting old and dyeing I have some quite wealthy chaps here and Im always dyeing there Fine Connally Hides to freshen up the seats ! Well Its another way to Look at it right ?

Not only awesome posting, but impeccable timing Big D!

Even dyes die out!

[Arbitran]

Yes, I noticed that you pick and choose what appeals to you with regards to what you regards as proof.

Already done that. Here is the link again - LINK - The Spaceships of Ezekiel by Tim Callahan

The link pertains to the Ezekiel aspect obviously, the entire Bible would require many more links. For goodness sakes, the great flood claim shows us that it is fictitious in some aspects at the very least.

Again it seems I need to repeat myself. Could you just read the posts and save the double ups?

I do not care for your personal interpretation, I insist that for the sake of debate at the very least that we restrict the conversation to known and accepted terminology. Your personal viewpoint means little to me no matter how "enlightened" you consider yourself to be. I am in the real world.

I do not find Abrahamic religions absurd, I think they have been interpreted in an absurd way. As I have said before the West uses a religious text as a historical record, and the middle east uses a historical record as a religious text.

Gods comprises a great many "advanced" species if you prefer that term. From the Christian God to the Pagans Gods at the beginning of civilisation. Every religions has at least one. If you have a preferred term, just spit it out and save all this waffle would you please?

What a load of BS. Nobody owns a planet. It owns us. We are a product of it. If the human race died out tomorrow, and in say another million years some other species arises, is it stil our planet? No, it is not.

What taught man math was the need for it. The onset of agriculture and storage required mathematical practises to account for resources. Prehistoric peoples also recognised how to count abstract quantities, like time – days, seasons, years. Mathematics arises from many different kinds of problems. Not Gods. Or whatever term you wish to use. Necessity is the mother of invention, you didn't know that?

They educated humanity yet humanity came to the same conclusions al by themselves as these aspects were broached? What a load of BS. There is no advantage to these "gifts" we have received. And they gave this information out 400 years ago, we caught up and made the calculations ourselves (which I believe was the case all along) so where are they?

Sounds more like a hippy trip to be perfectly honest. If we managed to come up with the same conclusions that the supposed Gods did, it stands to reason that no Gods existed in the first place, just the concept which did explain things like lightning bolts for a long time. Mans curiosity is his saviour from the dreamland of the gods.

Astronomical knowledge came from observation. I will believe there is a cure to cancer when I see it. No gods are required here. Curing cancer would be convincing, when will someone be getting around to that?

Of course it is useless to give this information to one continent when another was on the verge of discovering it. Why would an alien give a primitive race the speed of light? what did these numpties actually expect Sayana to do with it? Why are these so called enlightened advanced beings so darn stupid? Yes, it is indeed useless to travel into the amazon and find a tribe and teach them quantum mechanics. How is that going to better their lives? What they need is medicine, and resources. Science will come when man can survive without having to worry about surviving. Such is the nature of mans curiosity.

That is just plain insulting. How on earth pray tell did you manage to distort my post into this rubbish? I have not insinuated such at all, I have asked the value of giving out information that man canot use at the time when man was to discover this anyway (which makes these gods pretty unobservant and not very intuitive at all) as opposed to information that man can actually use. That man managed to come up with these calculations is impressive as I have said, but you want to take that achievement away and give it to some imaginative being. That is what I see as treating science as worthless.

This species is billions of years old, travels space, lived through the big bang, and the best they can give us is some information we also came up with ourselves? Such does not indicate divine intelligence, such indicates a level of technology similar to our own, this fledgling 200,000 year old species. As such, no gods are required. If they are not required I need more to go on than your assurances to accept that they so much as exist.

You say they can cure cancer, I do not believe you, all I see is that you think man is a whole lot dumber than he is. I want to see this cure for cancer and watch it implemented. When is someone going to just use this information that you say exists? Private enterprise would use it if it existed. Same with the extension of life, if man could get at the fountain of youth, man would. For some, money would be no object, yet even rich people grow old and die.

Please read each and every one of my prior posts again if you wish to continue this conversation. You have succeeded so far in misunderstanding all of them.

The gods are the owners of this planet, based on their protocols dealing with territory. Just the same as Portland is a city in the state of Oregon in the nation of the United States of America. Earth is a world in their territory. It is as simple as that.

While I am still of course skeptical that the account in Ezekiel is a genuine record of a sighting of extraterrestrials, the article you linked proved absolutely nothing. Its only conclusion was that the account was of "angels", not aliens. There is no distinction. To make a distinction is absurd. Though I do not believe that Ezekiel's account was of alien beings, I reserve judgment, rather than deem the notion to be somehow disproved: which it has not been.

As for your denial of a great flood; there is little fiction to be found. Or do you deny that sea levels rose at the end of the last ice age?

Your "real world" is one of any number of viable alternatives which are held by different cultures. Your culture however foolishly deems its own viewpoint as being the only valid option; Hinduism, to those who actually practice it, is not a religion. Of course necessity is the mother of invention, normally. But when a man says that he learned something from someone else, what right have you to try to tell him that he's lying, and actually discovered it on his own? Yes, as I have said, man could have learned these things independently; this, however, is not what the ancients said happened. They knew more about their own time than I do: I choose to believe what they said--particularly when it is not challenged by any available evidence, and in fact is harmonious with all available evidence. In Western culture, true, knowledge of astronomy came from observation--through men such as Copernicus and Galileo. However, the ancients tell of how they acquired knowledge of the stars: from the gods. Asking why the gods would teach the ancients in science is like asking why we teach science in our schools today. Would you rather science classes were left out? Is it too "impractical" for you? Indeed, I insist that the achievement of the ancients having knowledge of the speed of light be awarded to the gods; but sheerly because they themselves so insisted. It is you who insist upon awarding them an honor which they themselves denied. I am uncertain whether or not the gods lived through the Big Bang--it seems evident that they developed within our own timespan; they only know of previous incarnations of the universe through science. They have information far beyond our own, I can assure you. When you direct me to the man who discovered how to travel at super-luminal speeds, or extend the lifespan to hundreds of thousands of years, or effectively terraform a planet, or build a civilization inside of a super-massive black hole--then perhaps we can say that man is equal to the gods. I am unaware of such achievements in the catalogue of humanity. Indeed, no gods are finally required--this is not to say that they do not exist, particularly when the evidence is in support of their existence. The Spanish were not required to arrive in the New World--this is not however any indication that they did not. Is it? I have stated repeatedly that man is indeed very intelligent, and our civilization has managed to discover a great deal on our own--and can discover more. However, the ancients did not say that they discovered these things on their own.

True, the cure for cancer in the texts has not yet been used--not since the gods' departure has it been used, because the level of technology was insufficient in their absence to effectively utilize the knowledge. Again, the knowledge of life-extension technology has been available (in some parts of the world, at least) for millennia. However, due to the cultural and technological regression of the Middle Ages, the capacity to make use of the information was unavailable. Only in our modern times are we beginning to recover the adequate technological and intellectual level necessary to utilize the advanced knowledge of the gods left in the ancient texts.

[Arbitran]

That is the chemical machine at work. A soul transcends death. We are alive. As such, simply being alive explains naught about the mythical soul.

Just cannot help yourself with the insults can you? It is quite common when one is backed into a corner I suppose. A losing battle tends to grasp at emoticons, bolded coloured writing and insult. Why is that pray tell?

I find a persons "soul" is what a person is while that person is here. Did you read yesterday the thread about the Soldier who died saving a little Afghan girl? THAT is soul. That is a man who will live on - in the memories of many. That is an existence one can be proud of. What you do here and now matters. Not in a past life, not in a future life, and not in some hazy realm. That mans "soul" was powerful and strong enough to give his life for that of a child. What greater gift could one give but the gift of life?

I believe the afterlife is a cop out to distract us form the fact that we are no more than chemical machines which merely deposit minerals back into the earth as we decompose. I mean, who the hell wants to hear that?? I also think you might be in the wrong forum for soul talk. Metaphysics or philosophy forums would be more suited to this hippy stuff. This is the ET forum. Aleinz and stuff, yaknow?

I apologize if you found my previous post insulting; I did not intend it to be offensive. It was simply an (apparently failed) attempt at humor.

Indeed our bodies are chemical machines, our minds are not. Consciousness is not a chemical substance. Consciousness does indeed transcend death, because consciousness is grounded in the quantum realm--which is unaffected by, and indeed creates--the tangible realm we inhabit. Indeed, the man who saved the girl had a certain compassion which will be remembered by some. He however, also possesses a soul. A soul which doubtless was the source of his decision to do what he did. A lifeless chemical process does not choose of its will and mind to act. Life cannot be found in chemicals alone; quantum mechanical processes must be factored-in. A conscious mind is the basis of reality, as quantum mechanics shows. Without a mind, there is no reality, and without reality, of course there are no chemicals or processes which might produce beings such as humans or gods.

[psyche101]

Please read each and every one of my prior posts again if you wish to continue this conversation. You have succeeded so far in misunderstanding all of them.

No, there is a difference between not agreeing and not understanding. That is the distinction you are failing to make.

The gods are the owners of this planet, based on their protocols dealing with territory. Just the same as Portland is a city in the state of Oregon in the nation of the United States of America. Earth is a world in their territory. It is as simple as that.

BS, no they are not and I refuse to believe that this galactic territory nonsense exists. Nobody owns space. Some proof please. Who is here an now are the inhabitants of a planet. Your Gods seem to be at odds with Indigenous Australian Gods who say nobody owns anything, the earth is to be respected in it's own right.

While I am still of course skeptical that the account in Ezekiel is a genuine record of a sighting of extraterrestrials, the article you linked proved absolutely nothing. Its only conclusion was that the account was of "angels", not aliens. There is no distinction. To make a distinction is absurd. Though I do not believe that Ezekiel's account was of alien beings, I reserve judgment, rather than deem the notion to be somehow disproved: which it has not been.

Had you read the entire link you would have read that the "angels" were depicted in many Churches. It's art, not Gods.

As for your denial of a great flood; there is little fiction to be found. Or do you deny that sea levels rose at the end of the last ice age?

I deny that the earth was ever completely covered in water. If all the ice in the arctic circles was to melt, the highest extrapolation depicts a rise of 65 meters globally. That is a long way from covering the earth.

Your "real world" is one of any number of viable alternatives which are held by different cultures. Your culture however foolishly deems its own viewpoint as being the only valid option;

No, you have that wrong to, my "real world" is one where empirical knowledge is taken to be the truth, not fanciful tales with no proof.

Hinduism, to those who actually practice it, is not a religion.

Am I Hindu? Is this a Hindu forum? No, so lets stick with recognised definitions and leave your spiritual self at the door thanks.

Of course necessity is the mother of invention, normally. But when a man says that he learned something from someone else, what right have you to try to tell him that he's lying, and actually discovered it on his own? Yes, as I have said, man could have learned these things independently; this, however, is not what the ancients said happened. They knew more about their own time than I do: I choose to believe what they said--particularly when it is not challenged by any available evidence, and in fact is harmonious with all available evidence. In Western culture, true, knowledge of astronomy came from observation--through men such as Copernicus and Galileo. However, the ancients tell of how they acquired knowledge of the stars: from the gods.

And I know that man uses allegory to explain concepts. Why is this definitely not the case here? Because you believe an old myth? Such is one of mans achievements, being able to investigate claims for truth.

Asking why the gods would teach the ancients in science is like asking why we teach science in our schools today. Would you rather science classes were left out? Is it too "impractical" for you? Indeed,

No it is not at all, it is like introducing quantum mechanics in pre school. That is indeed impractical. You need to give a student the capabilities to understand what you have given him, and what to do with it. You know, providing the tools to work with what you have. That all comes under teaching. You do not provide a snippet of information and say "here - do something with this!"

I insist that the achievement of the ancients having knowledge of the speed of light be awarded to the gods; but sheerly because they themselves so insisted. It is you who insist upon awarding them an honor which they themselves denied. I am uncertain whether or not the gods lived through the Big Bang--it seems evident that they developed within our own timespan; they only know of previous incarnations of the universe through science. They have information far beyond our own, I can assure you. When you direct me to the man who discovered how to travel at super-luminal speeds, or extend the lifespan to hundreds of thousands of years, or effectively terraform a planet, or build a civilization inside of a super-massive black hole--then perhaps we can say that man is equal to the gods. I am unaware of such achievements in the catalogue of humanity. Indeed, no gods are finally required--this is not to say that they do not exist, particularly when the evidence is in support of their existence. The Spanish were not required to arrive in the New World--this is not however any indication that they did not. Is it? I have stated repeatedly that man is indeed very intelligent, and our civilization has managed to discover a great deal on our own--and can discover more. However, the ancients did not say that they discovered these things on their own.

If the Gods insist they take the credit, I want to hear it from the gods, not some bloke who heard it from some blokes mothers uncles aunt who found a book that someone thinks is something that it is not.

Once again, you assurances fall a long way from a convincing mark. I do not believe in the afterlife, I do not believe in reincarnation, I do not believe in Gods. You seem to think I should. It is your conviction, and god speed to you, it is not mine, and I see no reason to adopt it. The information that I have seen is not beyond our own, and as I have pointed out, man has equaled the achievements that you claim were given to India, for whatever reason that seems to escape us both. Provide empirical proof and we will be going somewhere. That a man in India provided close calculations that were repeated on other continents is in no way proof of outside assistance. It impresses you, that is great, personally, I see man doing what you claim is the work of the gods all on his own. If we do not need these Gods and can mirror their "gifts if knowledge", I see no reason to believe in them. Bet hey, knock yourself out, just don't drag me down with you. Just let me know when the Gods arrive here so you can then validate your ideals.

True, the cure for cancer in the texts has not yet been used--not since the gods' departure has it been used, because the level of technology was insufficient in their absence to effectively utilize the knowledge. Again, the knowledge of life-extension technology has been available (in some parts of the world, at least) for millennia. However, due to the cultural and technological regression of the Middle Ages, the capacity to make use of the information was unavailable. Only in our modern times are we beginning to recover the adequate technological and intellectual level necessary to utilize the advanced knowledge of the gods left in the ancient texts.

We do not use the cancer cure, but we all marvel over how the Gods gave us the speed of light 200 years before man did it all by himself.

Can you explain the logic in that? I do not see that there is any. If the record is there, the record is there, we have nanotechnology, lets start curing cancer shall we?

Edited April 5, 2012 by psyche101

[psyche101]

I apologize if you found my previous post insulting; I did not intend it to be offensive. It was simply an (apparently failed) attempt at humor.

I just find jokes about ones mind to be somewhat distasteful in particular when you keep saying that "I do not understand". Fact is I do, I simply disagree with you. That is my right.

Indeed our bodies are chemical machines, our minds are not. Consciousness is not a chemical substance. Consciousness does indeed transcend death, because consciousness is grounded in the quantum realm--which is unaffected by, and indeed creates--the tangible realm we inhabit. Indeed, the man who saved the girl had a certain compassion which will be remembered by some. He however, also possesses a soul. A soul which doubtless was the source of his decision to do what he did. A lifeless chemical process does not choose of its will and mind to act. Life cannot be found in chemicals alone; quantum mechanical processes must be factored-in. A conscious mind is the basis of reality, as quantum mechanics shows. Without a mind, there is no reality, and without reality, of course there are no chemicals or processes which might produce beings such as humans or gods.

I believe that chemicals allow our super computer brain to function efficiently enough to achieve sentience. Just consciousness existing is not enough to convince me that it is above death. The above is your belief, and you are entitled to it. It is not mine. I see not proof for an after life, I do see animals and people die never to be seen or heard from again. I have seen animals decompose. We are all made of star stuff. That tells me that if there is more to life than the here and now, that absolutely no indication of afterlife exists outside of imagination. To me a soul is a persons morals, their fortitude and their character. The here and now. The brain works on electricity, we know this, we generate our own electricity, we know this. We do not know that this life extends beyond he here and now. You believe that. Such is the great difference. I need to know. Someones idea is just not good enough for me. And neither are assurance, no matter how sincere. If you have a link that shows how consciousness is a quantum process, I would be much obliged if you would share it.

[Arbitran]

No, there is a difference between not agreeing and not understanding. That is the distinction you are failing to make.

BS, no they are not and I refuse to believe that this galactic territory nonsense exists. Nobody owns space. Some proof please. Who is here an now are the inhabitants of a planet. Your Gods seem to be at odds with Indigenous Australian Gods who say nobody owns anything, the earth is to be respected in it's own right.

Had you read the entire link you would have read that the "angels" were depicted in many Churches. It's art, not Gods.

I deny that the earth was ever completely covered in water. If all the ice in the arctic circles was to melt, the highest extrapolation depicts a rise of 65 meters globally. That is a long way from covering the earth.

No, you have that wrong to, my "real world" is one where empirical knowledge is taken to be the truth, not fanciful tales with no proof.

Am I Hindu? Is this a Hindu forum? No, so lets stick with recognised definitions and leave your spiritual self at the door thanks.

And I know that man uses allegory to explain concepts. Why is this definitely not the case here? Because you believe an old myth? Such is one of mans achievements, being able to investigate claims for truth.

No it is not at all, it is like introducing quantum mechanics in pre school. That is indeed impractical. You need to give a student the capabilities to understand what you have given him, and what to do with it. You know, providing the tools to work with what you have. That all comes under teaching. You do not provide a snippet of information and say "here - do something with this!"

If the Gods insist they take the credit, I want to hear it from the gods, not some bloke who heard it from some blokes mothers uncles aunt who found a book that someone thinks is something that it is not.

Once again, you assurances fall a long way from a convincing mark. I do not believe in the afterlife, I do not believe in reincarnation, I do not believe in Gods. You seem to think I should. It is your conviction, and god speed to you, it is not mine, and I see no reason to adopt it. The information that I have seen is not beyond our own, and as I have pointed out, man has equaled the achievements that you claim were given to India, for whatever reason that seems to escape us both. Provide empirical proof and we will be going somewhere. That a man in India provided close calculations that were repeated on other continents is in no way proof of outside assistance. It impresses you, that is great, personally, I see man doing what you claim is the work of the gods all on his own. If we do not need these Gods and can mirror their "gifts if knowledge", I see no reason to believe in them. Bet hey, knock yourself out, just don't drag me down with you. Just let me know when the Gods arrive here so you can then validate your ideals.

We do not use the cancer cure, but we all marvel over how the Gods gave us the speed of light 200 years before man did it all by himself.

Can you explain the logic in that? I do not see that there is any. If the record is there, the record is there, we have nanotechnology, lets start curing cancer shall we?

Once again, your replies hold no bearings whatsoever on the meaning of mine. From your posts, all I can gather with certainty is that you have failed to understand any of what I have said. Yes, you've misunderstood, not merely disagreed. You don't seem to grasp any of the concepts I've introduced to you, which is perhaps why I've been forced to repeat the bulk of what I've said. Your faith is disturbing to me. Yes, faith. You have at least enough faith to state that my claims are "BS", as you say--despite the fact that if you had actually studied the evidence, and read the ancient texts, you would quite plainly find that the ancients were correct. You claim that I am belittling mankind by saying that their claims of the gods teaching them instead of learning themselves are truth; I say that you are belittling mankind far more by claiming that all that they said was imaginary.

I was hoping at the start that this conversation would be enlightening, or at the very least somewhat informative. Indeed, perhaps it is. It has informed me that those who subscribe to the religion of orthodoxy cannot be reasoned with any more than a Christian zealot. Hinduism is not a religion--religion relies on faith and miracles. The Hindu thought is however a scientific theory. And a theory which has not been debunked, even after millennia--and in fact has only been confirmed over and over again. At the very least I should have expected that you would believe in gods the same as the eminent Stephen Hawking and Carl Sagan--it is from them that I got my start. Even NASA today is beginning a search for physical artifacts of the gods on Earth, and in our solar system. I however choose, at this time, to study their records, their information, and their culture. If you choose to believe that your ancestors were primitive ignoramuses who conjured up imaginary deities to explain the world, I will not try to sway you any further. Faith like that can seldom be repaired. I simply choose to believe that my ancestors were, for the most part, intelligent, honest human beings.

[psyche101]

Once again, your replies hold no bearings whatsoever on the meaning of mine. From your posts, all I can gather with certainty is that you have failed to understand any of what I have said. Yes, you've misunderstood, not merely disagreed. You don't seem to grasp any of the concepts I've introduced to you, which is perhaps why I've been forced to repeat the bulk of what I've said.

Is it just me, or are the teaching if Hinduism failing to help you with the inner peace required to support your position here? Ohh, yes, good example you are showing there LOL.

You can believe what you want, so as such you are entitled to believe that I fail to understand. The only failure to understand that I am witnessing here is that you are struggling to understand that this is a two way conversation. I have as much right to protest your claims of gods as you have to make them, and no matter how much you wish to appear thoughtful, knowledgable and caring, it is plainly obvious that it is your way or the highway. Hrrmz, those gods did not leave you with the tools to deal with skepticism at all. Kinda let you all down there I think.

I refuse your concepts, that is the problem here. You seem to think refusal is misunderstanding. Face it, your argument is not as strong as you believe it to be.

What do I get from you? Some ancient texts speak of higher beings, so that is game over. If it is mentioned somewhere it must be completely true and human interpretation is just not to be considered as far as you are concerned. Your interpretation is the be all and end all, and you struggle with rejection.

Your faith is disturbing to me. Yes, faith. You have at least enough faith to state that my claims are "BS", as you say--despite the fact that if you had actually studied the evidence, and read the ancient texts, you would quite plainly find that the ancients were correct. You claim that I am belittling mankind by saying that their claims of the gods teaching them instead of learning themselves are truth; I say that you are belittling mankind far more by claiming that all that they said was imaginary.

You really just canot wrap your head around the concept of empirical proof can you? You think even repeated results are faith? I state your claims are BS because I do not believe the gods referred to are alien beings.

Well and good, you say I am belittling mankind, I say you most definitely are. Feel better now? That will not change my mind, evidence will. What you have provided in bulk is your assurances. Such is worthless. And I can see that upsets you. I really think it is something you should start to get used to. Surely I am not the first person who thinks your ideal of Gods is completely incorrect? You have provided no references or reasons why another should accept your word, and asking someone to accept your version is a big ask. Once you realise that, your debates will be more fruitful.

I was hoping at the start that this conversation would be enlightening, or at the very least somewhat informative. Indeed, perhaps it is. It has informed me that those who subscribe to the religion of orthodoxy cannot be reasoned with any more than a Christian zealot. Hinduism is not a religion--religion relies on faith and miracles. The Hindu thought is however a scientific theory. And a theory which has not been debunked, even after millennia--and in fact has only been confirmed over and over again.

You thought you would change the way I think and make me agree with you. It is harder work to do that than assure someone that you are right and hold the answers.

At the very least I should have expected that you would believe in gods the same as the eminent Stephen Hawking and Carl Sagan--it is from them that I got my start.

I think you might be best refresh yourself with Hawking. He says he does not oppose the concept of God, but God is not necessary for the Universe and everything in it.

LINK - Stephen Hawking: God was not needed to create the Universe

“It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the Universe going.”

You have his quote from A Brief History of Time confused where he said:

"If we discover a complete theory, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason — for then we should know the mind of God.”

As for Sagan ever seen this quote?

The idea that God is an oversized white male with a flowing beard who sits in the sky and tallies the fall of every sparrow is ludicrous. But if by God one means the set of physical laws that govern the universe, then clearly there is such a God. This God is emotionally unsatisfying... it does not make much sense to pray to the law of gravity. [Carl Sagan]

Or from his book Contact?

What I'm saying is, if God wanted to send us a message, and ancient writings were the only way he could think of doing it, he could have done a better job. [Dr. Arroway in Carl Sagan's Contact (New York: Pocket Books, 1985), p. 164.]

You see, the religious people -- most of them -- really think this planet is an experiment. That's what their beliefs come down to. Some god or other is always fixing and poking, messing around with tradesmen's wives, giving tablets on mountains, commanding you to mutilate your children, telling people what words they can say and what words they can't say, making people feel guilty about enjoying themselves, and like that. Why can't the gods leave well enough alone? All this intervention speaks of incompetence. If God didn't want Lot's wife to look back, why didn't he make her obedient, so she'd do what her husband told her? Or if he hadn't made Lot such a shithead, maybe she would've listened to him more. If God is omnipotent and omniscient, why didn't he start the universe out in the first place so it would come out the way he wants? Why's he constantly repairing and complaining? No, there's one thing the Bible makes clear: The biblical God is a sloppy manufacturer. He's not good at design, he's not good at execution. He'd be out of business if there was any competition. [sol Hadden in Carl Sagan's Contact (New York: Pocket Books, 1985), p. 285.]

Now about this not understanding bit, I am just going to have to pass the ball over to you

Yes the quotes refer to the Christian Gods.

Even NASA today is beginning a search for physical artifacts of the gods on Earth, and in our solar system.

Really now? Can you offer a link to one of these missions?

I however choose, at this time, to study their records, their information, and their culture. If you choose to believe that your ancestors were primitive ignoramuses who conjured up imaginary deities to explain the world, I will not try to sway you any further. Faith like that can seldom be repaired. I simply choose to believe that my ancestors were, for the most part, intelligent, honest human beings.

You still think empirical proof is faith? Again, that lack of understanding falls upon yourself. What I choose to believe is man is a brilliant creature that fought his way to the apex predator on this planet and through his ingenious process developed intelligence that sends his species to the moon. Actual real time achievements, not tales from the pages of a book. I also recognise that man is imaginative, and that has served him well on his path to intelligence and that man is a product of natures evolutionary processes detailed in the fossil record.

And really, I would rather not be saved from that, you are welcome to your path, I will continue to go with empirical evidence. I think believing in stories is a diservice to this remarkable achievement. Man discovered the speed of light, man is still struggling to cure cancer. The Gods are superfluous and have had no noticeable impact on human evolution. If I do not need them, and they left me no proof, I see no reason to pursue this fruitless pursuit. It might make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside, but I do not need that.

Edited April 5, 2012 by psyche101