We thank everyone for their prolonged engagement and strongly encourage continued engagement with each other, and with other content on the site, in a manner more constructive and in line with our discussion guidelines.

Listen to the sermon of that Scientist General who has never learnt Science in all his whole life. This person is talking about Buddhism and Physics. He has accepted that he has no sufficient knowledge of Buddhism and Science. This man cannot get rid of this unethical practice of preaching things he does not know.

See his ” NEWTON’S FIRST LAW OF MOTION”.
This foolish man is going to teach Physics again to the forum, which includes a person learned Physics in the University.

I challenge you, PVR/Scientist General, to show what you said about Newton’s Law above is correct.

Knows nothing, wants to talk big! A peculiar character.

(I must remind you that you owe me another explanation, right and wrong- longu and me. Don’t forget that too.)

Ana gannawva, Daha pole ga gannava!

Thanks!

Dingiri’s hypothetical sermon on what Buddha would have told, I think answers your querry! I would like to add “Vaasettya”, instesd of “Pinwathuni!”

And as BalangodaMan says if Buddha could preach about a complicated theory of “a rebirth” without the participation of a soul why not this?

Very enlightening! You ask:

“Now dear longu; Tell me whether you said bacteria is plant in this forum or not?”

I thought youwould quote some reliable source like wikipedia rather than an amature chat group! Anyway that’s up to you if you believe it to be an authentic source!

I didn’t know that you had vision problems too, in addition to irreversible damage in your ‘upstairs’! Why don’t you change your glasses?

This is what I said on 14 Oct @ 11.31 pm:
“….To avoid this problem scientists have classified Bacteria, Blue-Green Algae, and Archia-an ancient form of primitive Bacteria- into a group called Pro-Karyotes depending on the features on their Nucleas and cell wall. The true plants and true animals go into another group and the viruses into another. The viruses don’t belong to plants or animals and they are definitely living things only. The problem became even more complicated when they discovered Prion particles which causes C.J.D or Mad Cow Disease and a rare disease called Kuru. These are just protein crystals which don’t show any signs of “life” until they start multiplying inside a host.”

Do you have a “comprehension problem”, Yaapaa?

May be you can read something more authentic like the following account and improve your knowledge, rather than being a laughing stock of the readers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacteria

Your buddhist sermon really is priceless 🙂
I can actually imagine it being recited in a priestly tone, LOL.

You must be very happily thinking that why I did not ask you to back your claim that so called Prof. Harischandra was right whe he said I was wrong and longu was right. I asked so called Prof and PVR to back their claims. You may be either thinking that I may be afraid to challenge you or I have given you a special privilege. Answers are No and No.

That is because I have well understood you after so much of time wasted in the forum writing to you. I have seen throughout that period that you have never made a single sound argument. I am sure you are not be able to do in the near future too.

Why should I waste my energies asking hair from a tortoise? That was the real reason why I did not ask you to back your claim. Don’t misunderstand me.

Thanks!

“RE: “pinvathuni…, There was a time when there were no human beings on this planet. Our ancestors were but apes.”

Well argued.”

Have you ever known anything other than ” holding the torch” to others.
Back your claims against me, dishonest coward.

Thanks!

In addition to my post of October 28, 2010 @ 6:35 am I would like to show another inconsistency and lack of basic knowledge of Biology of that Bana preaching panditha longu.

I showed you how he preached PVR that Bacterias are not animals but plants. However, I indicated to him in a later post that Bacteria are neither plants nor animals.

However, this ignorant panditha, BIOLIGIST, who has only a short memory, after a few days says Bacteria as animals. Read that in his own words,

“A: When the rain drops form in the clouds from the condensation of water vapour the spors of bacteria get in and they make the nucleus around which the tiny rain drops form and come out of them- in other words “born”.”

A person who once says bacteria, a plant and after a few days says an animal. See his inconsistency and ignorance. Still he wants to create new theories in Biology and teach high sounding things to the forum. He may be thinking that when you don’t know anything preaching others as the best he can do.Now he is behaving like a proverbial dog!

I will show how this panditha’s (Longu thuma’s) knowledge of Buddhism too. Really I could have straight away, give the answer to the “Sansedaja” query he raised, very easily. Even a small Buddhist child knows the answer, But these Pandiths, longu, PVR, B.W?Man did not know that it really was not a question, and I indicated them that it was not a difficult question. But “Longu Thuma” demanded me a quick answer in a tough tone and I let him to jump into the puddle and let himself to have a mud bath. I showed the power of Logic and my arguments, but I will simply show that longu’s question is a non question.

Honda honda sellam elivena jameta. Fire crackers are on the way.

You just wait, Longu Thuma!

Thanks!

RE: “pinvathuni…, There was a time when there were no human beings on this planet. Our ancestors were but apes.”

Well argued. Instead what we get are stories about formless beings calcifying into sexual beings after eating mushrooms and rice (rice??? a domesticated human invention in another world?) and then specializing into 4 castes – kshatriya, vaishya, brahmana, shudra.

And the faithful are excessively eager to interpret this as evolution. This only shows a profound misunderstanding of evolution as mere differentiation, as opposed to complexity accruing from simplicity through a gradual process. This sutta documents the presence of already complicated beings who merely change form and develop sex organs. How is that evolution?

For starters, in evolution, there is a common ancestry, where life began from simple beginnings and rose in complexity. If a domesticated plant like rice was present, that means sexual differentiation had already been achieved. What this sutta is suggesting, is that these complicated being appeared independently out of energy or something, without any common ancestry with anything else. And this is what the faithheads are desperate to interpret as evolution? How balmy can you get?

And the single line: “the world contracts and expands” is interpreted as the big bang. Now let’s see how rational an interpretation that is.

For starters, the world does not “contract and expand”. The idea of the big crunch was superceded sometime ago. The modern evidence is that the universe will continue to expand forever into nothingness. Secondly, if this sentence can be interpreted as the big bang, let me demonstrate how easily Epicurus can be considered even more “enlightened”, based on far more compelling reasons.

For example, in Epicurean physics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicureanism):
“Forms can change, but not their inherent qualities, for change can only affect their shape. Some things can be changed and some things cannot be changed because forms that are unchangeable cannot be destroyed if certain attributes can be removed; for attributes not only have the intention of altering an unchangeable form, but also the inevitable possibility of becoming—in relation to the form’s disposition to its present environment—both an armor and a vulnerability to its stability.”

Well, doesn’t that show that Epicurus had the first law of thermodynamics down pat?

and how about this: “If a limited form lives within an unlimited void, the form could only wander aimlessly about, because what is unlimited is ungraspable; meaning, the limited form would travel forever, for it does not have any obstacles. “

Isn’t Epicurus talking about Newton’s first law of motion?

And this: “Further proof that there are unchangeable forms and their inability to be destroyed, is the concept of the “non-evident.” A form cannot come into being from the void—which is nothing; it would be as if all forms come into being spontaneously, needless of reproduction. The implied meaning of “destroying” something is to undo its existence, to make it not there anymore, and this cannot be so: if the void is that which does not exist, and if this void is the implied destination of the destroyed, then the thing in reality cannot be destroyed, for the thing (and all things) could not have existed in the first place (as Lucretius said, ex nihilo nihil fit: nothing comes from nothing). This totality of forms is eternal and unchangeable.”

Is he talking about a universe from nothing? Get outta town, Lawrence Krauss.

And here we have a far more clearly enlightened person, Epicurus, who independently thought of the middle path, the first law of thermodynamics and the modern cosmological synthesis and no one thinks of worshipping him? Are people daft or something?

What about Mahavira, and the Hindus, who also believed in an eternal universe which went through cycles of birth and death? Were those people enlightened too?

BalangodaMan put it nicely: “All that appears to have happened is, after Darwin some Buddhist fundamentalists suddenly deluding themselves viz. ‘that is what the Buddha was talking about in that sermon’. (Notradamus anyone?)”

All this goes to show the kind of schizophrenic compartmentalization of the brain that religion causes, where people are prepared to kill each other over the unverified beliefs that they were brainwashed into as toddlers by village priests and grandmothers whose totality of knowledge did not extend beyond the tripitaka, bible, koran or whatever other ancestral old wives’ tale they fervently believe in.

And after forming an emotional bond to these concepts in childhood, and after basing it as both their source of morals and the foundational beliefs for the meaning and purpose of life, even an adult can no longer be expected to consider these issues critically, lest their entire world view crumbles into a senseless heap. And these adults then brainwash their own offspring to continue the cycle, confusing morality with baseless beliefs. Such is the cancerous nature of religion.

So should anyone have any doubts that religion will surely continue to be one of the greatest sources of strife and a continuous retardant to rational thought and human progress in the years to come? I don’t think so.

To add to what you said here
“to others who would not understand them?”
Not only that, but passing down 8 to 20 generations who would need to have understood it also until it was written down. Chinese whispers, anyone?