Theos-Talk Archives (November 2002 Message tt00826)

Hey, Thanks for responding, Leon. I knew if I preteded being brianmuehlbach I'd 
have a much better chance of at least getting some discussion started around here.


Speculatively,
Mauri

PS Hee hee, just kidding!

leonmaurer@aol.com wrote:
> 
> Those kinds of theories are just that -- speculations and hypotheses which
> are no better than opinions based on guesses based on observed material
> objects and chemical processes that prove nothing about ontology or origins
> -- since science hasn't the faintest idea what conscious is or came from, let
> alone understanding the roots of matter itself. What science doesn't know
> about the origin of Mankind could fill more books than has ever been written
> or said about anything. Did you ever think that when theosophy talks of
> Mankind, they are not referring to their physical body forms? Or, that the
> word "man" actual means mind-being? Science still can't answer the question,
> Which came first, the chicken or the egg, consciousness or mind, mind or
> matter? When science can answer those questions, we'll start believing their
> theories about mundane things, such as "mind beings" they erroneously label
> "homo sapiens" and their origins. The theory of relativity that contradicted
> all classical physics ideas about space and gravity did not come from direct
> reductive scientific observation. Face it, your denials have no weight
> whatsover, as proof that theosophy is false.

> In a message dated 11/20/02 8:12:21 PM, brianmuehlbach@yahoo.com writes:

> >How to check claims in The Mahatma Letters ? Among a list of others,
============snip