Gratitude, Compulsion, Idiocy or Nobility?

[Mojo]

There can be following logics:

1. Planets directly affect us due to their emitted rays.

Fail.

 

[Kumar]

Fail.

Reflectíon is also an emmitión, I think.

 

[Kumar]

would not fill one European bookshelf.

Yes yes, I know I'm echoing Macauley, and he was not a nice guy. But he had the irritating quality of sometimes being right.

Kumar guru, one big reason why modern man ignores your lore is because it's so BORING. It's based on fruitcake, and it goes only in circles. Nothing can be learned from it. (Rather like homeopathy, nah?) Right now, you're trying to drag astrology into this junkyard of a thread. What next, numerology?

Among today's cults, Jainery is one of the few I can respect -- a little. Ahimsa is a decent principal to live by, and if a small subset of Hinduists genuinely practice it, then good for them. All the aggluinative Sanskrit they contrive to justify it is idle, and quite unecessary.

An exacting Jain doesn't consume dairy, btw, out of a realistic understanding of actual Indian dairying practices. Good for them too.

And Jupiter isn't making them do it.

Btw, what could you get from longest discussions in Proof of Immunity topic?

 

[Kumar]

As does the sun. Gravity is well understood.



Not all effects you imagine are real. In English the words "astronomy" and "astrology" mean very different things. Astronomy is a science and includes the study of gravity. Astrology is fortune-telling with no scientific basis. I realize in India astrology is commonly taken seriously. That does not mean it has a scientific basis.

I think, basis of astronomy would had been astrology at least initiation to stúdy planets.

 

[Kumar]

You keep describing your critics' posts as "one-sided" without really saying what that means or what's so allegedly bad about it. You are posting literal nonsense. It would be dishonest to describe it any other way.

Preception, ego or self interest towards one and opposite towards other bríng one sidedness. It like, you always expect head or tail on tossing a coin, as your need to win suggest..

 

[JayUtah]

Reflectíon is also an emmitión, I think.

No.

Reflection and emission are two very different properties. If by "rays" you mean electromagnetic radiation, the radiation from planets -- whether reflected or emitted -- has a negligible effect on Earth.

 

[JayUtah]

Preception, ego or self interest towards one and opposite towards other bríng one sidedness. It like, you always expect head or tail on tossing a coin, as your need to win suggest..

Some questions actually have right and wrong answers. You have a very casual acquaintance with facts. You don't get to demand that others meet you halfway when the facts are on their side and not yours. If fact-based opposition makes you sad, you are going to have a hard time staying happy while talking to skeptics. Frankly, we don't care how facts make you feel. If you are sad because of facts, you deserve to be sad.

 

[JayUtah]

I think, basis of astronomy would had been astrology at least initiation to stúdy planets.

No. As far as English defines the terms, astrology and astronomy have almost nothing to do with each other. The scientific study of planets is part of astronomy. Astrology is fortune-telling, using elements of astronomy as its pretext.

 

[JayUtah]

Btw, what could you get from longest discussions in Proof of Immunity topic?

The "Proof of Immortality" thread is for one person, the user Jabba, to present and defend his specific theory, which has nothing to do with you or your goals here. It is not for you to interlope and interpolate your own theories and ideas.

 

[Peregrinus]

Btw, what could you get from longest discussions in Proof of Immunity topic?

This is the most obvious and most blatant attempt to derail a thread in many a moon.

 

[sackett]

Really? Truly? Sincerely?

Btw, what could you get from longest discussions in Proof of Immunity topic?

Do you honestly think you're referring to Jabba's proof of immortality thread?

Mahavira, Mahavira,
Go sing someone your song.
It's a long time you been here
And now it's time that you was gone.

(To the tune of "Little Birdy.")

 

[Kumar]

Do you honestly think you're referring to Jabba's proof of immortality thread?

)

Yes.

 

[Kumar]

No.

Reflection and emission are two very different properties. If by "rays" you mean electromagnetic radiation, the radiation from planets -- whether reflected or emitted -- has a negligible effect on Earth.

Ok thanks. In any other way directly or indirectly, can these affect earth and its inhabitants?

Just a question bit out of topic pls:

Can we cause such directional changes in molecules of any object that reflected radiations/spectrum from it do not come directly to an observer? In other sense, either that do not give true picture or become invisible to observer?

 

[sackett]

Really? Truly? Sincerely?

Yes.

And if I point out that "immunity" and "immortality" are two completely different words, will you pay any attention?

Mind now, I think that you and jabba deserve each other. Let me not to the marriage of true minds and all that.

 

[JayUtah]

Ok thanks. In any other way directly or indirectly, can these affect earth and its inhabitants?

No.

 

[Kumar]

None of this nonsensical rant addresses anything I wrote.

May be but I felt to mention above in some different emotion.

Reg. your addressing you. I felt I already addressed. But since you rejected those and claimed Jainism(other religions also) are nothing but just made stories, it become your duty to prove it. Actually, It is sinful/unhealthful to doubt religion by its followers. But you could had easily got in tonnes on google:
About 6,51,000 results (0.46 seconds) scientific basis of jainism
https://www.google.co.in/search?q=s...ome..69i57.16272j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Just for one example:

ainism rejects the idea of a creator deity responsible for the manifestation, creation, or maintenance of this universe. According to Jain doctrine, the universe and its constituents (soul, matter, space, time, and principles of motion) have always existed. All the constituents and actions are governed by universal natural laws and perfect soul, an immaterial entity cannot create or affect a material entity like the universe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_in_Jainism

The above quote perfectly justify, nature law, science, universal law logic, true religion or otherwise in absolute sense.

Its Anekantvada theory somewhat matches with Theory of relativity.

Jain Cosmology also there:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jain_cosmology
Also check Albert Einstein on Jainism

the eternal mystery of the world is its intelligibility. True religion fastens to this element of intelligibility and creates a system of thought and action which leads to true harmony and bliss. And it is indeed so with Jainism.
– Albert Einstein

I read somewhere, he wished, if rebirth exists, he would like to be born as Jain in his next birth.

So this religion justify true universal natural & somewhat scientific unique religion. [Do not go much deep into it, otherwise probably it may become your option. ]

 

[Kumar]

No.

Not wishing, but if anyone out of it is damaged partly or destructed, then?

 

[Kumar]

Not in so many words, but you're trying to connect behavior you find morally reprehensible to effects like cancer. The insinuated argument is that by avoiding those behaviors you avoid the effects and thereby have a net gain. What's being pointed out to you is that your proposed correlations are diluted with other causes, such that one is not guaranteed an improvement by ceasing the alleged immoral behavior.

Radon gas accumulates in confined spaces. The solution you're dancing around is that we shouldn't live in confined spaces. That's well and good for people who live in the very small regions of Earth where almost no shelter is required. But you neglect the evolutionary advantage of being able to spread out the species so that one cataclysmic event doesn't wipe it out. You neglect the advantage of being able to tame environments that are inhospitable to others competing for resources.

Yes it is other side of coin. Are you suggesting we should prefer those toxic exposures which can bring evolutionary advantages(secondary naturalism)? One great topic "Big Question?", I posted relevant to somewhat this sense recently(do not know where lost) where I felt, can secondary acquisitions, evolutions, predispositions, adaptation, resistances, tolerances, compromising etc. be really healthful?

Because you cannot perform the actual calculus of why people do what they do, you have a very narrow and very naive sense of morality. Therefore you're not a good candidate for teaching others what correct behavior is.

Can't say under current time & environment, whether teaching should be based on bit bitter real sense or on good hypnotizing interpretation?

 

[Kumar]

You're trying to ruin a perfectly good pie fight by dragging facts into the matter.

Secondary naturalism is making me bit doubtful, whether of veg or non veg or otherwise is really beneficial and healthful to us or not. Probably, Basic nature's principles hold the true validity eg walking.

 

[Kumar]

Reality doesn't care what you think.


The genetic evidence suggests otherwise.


More natural than what? It's certainly not more natural than meat, if that's what you're trying to imply. It's hard to argue that something only one species does is more natural than something many species do.

Whatever but all secondary naturalism is making me bit doubtful whether these are truly beneficial and healthful or not? Nothing can truly compensate, covering distance by walking.