vdayal@castle.net (Virender Dayal) wrote:
>dturina@geocities.com (Danijel Turina) wrote:
>>The computer I'm working at right now is the evidence that the science...
>
>Again, let me repeat my point again.  

You can repeat a lie ten times, it won't become the truth.

>If you hypothesize B for
>explaining phenomena A, it does not prove B no matter what the
>results.  

Obviously, you haven't read what I wrote about the scientific method,
so I'll repeat and rephrase.

-First you choose a field of observation

-Then you perform the initial observation, and form a hypothesis to
explain the observation. That is the inductive part of the method.

-Based on the hypothesis as a basic premise, you make a prediction.
That is the deductive part of the method.

-To test the accuracy of the prediction, you make observations and
compare the results to the prediction.

-If the theory is capable of predicting the reality, it is accepted as
valid. If not, it is obviously false because it is not in alignment
with the reality.

So, it's not what Prabhupada thought it is, and what you just repeat
like a parrot. It's something far more sophisticated and accurate.
Prabhupada thought that scientific method could be simplified and
ridiculed by examples based on his understanding of the induction. But
it's not all, the science uses the hypothesis obtained by induction,
and then uses it as a premise in deduction to verify its validity.
Very, very competent minds have been developing the method for
centuries, and its results are excellent.

>I can say Lord Krsna is giving the intelligence to the
>scientists to build the computer.  So this new explanation C is also
>compatible with data A.  

No, actually it is not compatible with anything, it can be compatible
only with your conception of how computers are made, but accidentally
I have a brother who repaired my monitor when some transistors went
bye-bye, and I know that maybe Krsna did give him "intelligence" to do
it, but I also know how he learned to do it, it took him years of
training, learning about the electronic parts available on the market
and their performance, as well as maths and other stuff. For you maybe
it's some magic that happens somewhere, but for me it's more
down-to-earth, because my friends are mostly engineers and hackers, I
move in those circles, and I don't need deus ex machina to explain
their skill. It's pure science, and its application to the specific
field. In some cases, my brother for instance, science turns to art;
the CD player, amplifier and the speakers he made are something that
sounds so wonderful, that nobody who has ever listened to it has heard
anything better anywhere. It is partially his spirit in the equipment,
but mostly it is his knowledge and precision, and choice of the high
quality parts. 

>Got it?  This is the 3rd time I am explaining
>this to you.

You can explain your misconceptions as many times as you like, but
that won't change things a bit.

>Now from this, you have find out which is the superior model C or B?

Occam's Razor.

>I am saying that by following the methods of Krsna consciousness, the
>Absolute Truth is revealed to us.  

And why doesn't that include the science?

>This includes how the scientists
>are coming out with their theories.  

That would make sense, if I didn't know how you see science and how
you attempt to force it into your limited conceptions.

>So don't think we miss out on
>anything.  Also, you should note that the computers have been UPDATING
>ever since they came out which PROVES that you don't have the correct
>explanation for the phonemon which you are making by trial-and-error.

:))))
Computers have been improved because it's how science applied to the
engineering works. First you understand the basics and you make
something simple. Then you learn from the process and improve your
initial concepts. Then you try again and improve. That's why today's
cars are better than Ford model T. That's why today's pocket
calculators are more powerful than the best computers from the 40's.
It's called the learning curve. It's the reason why science is so
effective, because it adapts and learns - it is based on the reality.

>>Of course I am. I can't explain that stuff to a 3 yr old, ...
>
>ad-hominem attacks being ignored.

Ad hominem has to be applied if the human factor becomes limiting in
the process of understanding, which is the case with you. You
obviously overestimated the abilities of your mind, and that creates
the most absurd situations where I demonstrate something and you don't
understand the proof, and where you state something that's full of
holes, and you don't even understand that you're making a flawed
statement. I don't see much sense in discussing with an inferior mind,
because it makes me get feel too good about my own mental
capabilities, which isn't healthy, I prefer talking to the folks
smarter than myself, that's how I learn things. Unfortunately from the
other messages posted here, I think that you're not some strange
exception, and that your flawed logic (I don't even think it's yours,
it's Prabhupada's, he made all those faulty statements before and
you're just repeating it because if you're not in agreement with them,
your world will end) is some sort of a rule here.

-- 
Web (Kundalini-yoga): http://danijel.cjb.net