Re: If India is doing this
by Wrig Bastania on Sep 04, 2011 05:55 PM
Dravid was Not Out but see what British Media says. Excerpts from BBCWorld coverage on the 03-Sep ODI:
On-field umpire Billy Doctrove adjudged that Dravid had not made contact as the ball went through to wicketkeeper Craig Kieswetter but, although the "Hotspot" thermal imaging camera concurred, TV umpire Marais Erasmus said there was a sound and that he could see a deflection - a view later backed up by the "Snickometer" which highlighted a clear noise as the ball passed the bat.
BBC Test Match Special summariser Mark Butcher said: "Hot Spot is not something you can completely rely on.
"It's a bad piece of kit for those fine nicks but Dravid's body language told me he was out because the millisecond the ball passed the bat, he jerked his head to see behind."
And after the game, Parthiv Patel admitted: "I heard a noise."
Re: If India is doing this
by Wrig Bastania on Sep 04, 2011 05:56 PM
Dravid was Not Out but see what British Media says. Excerpts from BBCWorld coverage on the 03-Sep ODI:
On-field umpire Billy Doctrove adjudged that Dravid had not made contact as the ball went through to wicketkeeper Craig Kieswetter but, although the "Hotspot" thermal imaging camera concurred, TV umpire Marais Erasmus said there was a sound and that he could see a deflection - a view later backed up by the "Snickometer" which highlighted a clear noise as the ball passed the bat.
BBC Test Match Special summariser Mark Butcher said: "Hot Spot is not something you can completely rely on.
"It's a bad piece of kit for those fine nicks but Dravid's body language told me he was out because the millisecond the ball passed the bat, he jerked his head to see behind."
And after the game, Parthiv Patel admitted: "I heard a noise."
for india, mess up relations with neighbor and world. prevent formation of Asian Union.
another program is underway that wants india to increase cotton production so indian farmer find it more luring than food farming, another program is to increase price of organic food to be exported outside india where prices are higher for organic food. When properly grown organic food is supposed to be cheaper than non-organic. so desh is surrounded by videshi vultures and their vulture brokers in India who are indian citizens.
The fact of the matter is that india and pakis cannot be freinds..this is normal tendency...more so when they have parted away...remmeber if 2 brothers are there they are happy but when they fight out they are the biggest enimies...same applies for india and pakis...poor people on both sides suffer...pakis organize terrorism in india while india promotes terrorism in pakis...this is well known to the politicians as well as the beurocrats and many intelects in the countires..and everyone feels its national security and hence keep the same inthier stomach...now the situation is so spoilt that for every thing they blame each other and dont catch the real culprit and off recent the tendecy of conspiracy has started in big way...the way 9/11 was succesfully conducted by america with the mind of mossad...india ra&w did the same for 26/11....dont beleive...even i didnt beleive till i read many papers, books and tried to corelate...unfortunately there are more than 20 different conspiracy theories arising out of 9/11...but not even one from 26/11...though antule tried to put..but his neck was cut...this shows how backward we are as compared to freedom of speach...26/11 was indeed a indian staged drama with support of Israel as american did for 9/11...but in both cases inncocent died and their relatives sit besides the crimnal and say someone else has done...kasb was the first to seen in tv, kasab was the only catch, we had 24 hr report but no vedio on kasab being caught..many mor
Re: fact
by True Hindustani on Sep 04, 2011 03:46 PM
are you from paki hydrebad, or a guy mussie from indian hyderabd who suppports that ilfated terrorist state porikistan? Indian staged drama? for what? do u still have the hangover from randaan liquor drunk diet? wake manyou idiot. Go and speak to some other guys, which foools only will hear you.
Re: fact
by some one on Sep 04, 2011 04:14 PM
There is no over whelming need or possibility of friendship but it is better if the fight is limited to routine actions, like shelling, infiltration, urban terrorism, etc., but not the expertly carried out dramatic though pointless operations like 26/11/2008.
Escalation to the higher level of nuclear weapons should be done only after strategic calculations and not because someone privately tried to get it started.
India should retaliate in kind, otherwise the perpetrators might get forced to escalate soon. The 26/11/2008 motivators must be arranging a higher intensity operation to overcome their frustration at India's non response.
Retaliation will satisfy the blood lust of Pakistani motivators, give them a sense of pride and achievement, and permit their military to strengthen their political power.
Although ultimately the two sides have to destroy each other, India is not geared up for a full fight and the "Final Solution of the India Pakistan Question" has to be postponed for now.
Like one Mr. Neville Chamberlain, let there be "Peace in our Time" ( and devil take our successors in life ).
Re: ///
by rupesh ravi on Sep 03, 2011 12:40 PM
With that logic.. India should also hold referendum in Kashmir and allow the people to decide their future....
@french cuisine, Are u a fool?? on one hand you decided the yardstick to be philosophical and spiritual conyents and then you are rating them based on noble prizes and contribution to modern science? MAy I remind you that most of the guys who got nobl prizes were athiests. And to second that there are no treatises or books on spirituality better than buddhist and so called hindu texts.
Re: ///
by French Cuisine on Sep 02, 2011 10:12 AM
I think people who believe in religion are fools and living under some illusion. The challenge as I see it is how to be modern and arrive at a mature understanding of religion. So I am counting the contributions to modernity as scientific contributions made by people from different faiths. Think about it - is religion too different from science. If science answers everything you dont need religion, therefore things we dont understand are often portrayed with religion. For example the very nature of consciousness. From your comments atheism seems to be the best policy, but comparing religions still hold and with all the religious malice around the world specially our country I think it is best to understand which religion is better comparatively. After all when we vote for political parties we vote for the less harmful one and the concept of voting for a good political party has almost vanished. Also look at all the ill-feelings in the blogs - so I think religions should be ranked and should be ranked by atheists and neutral observers. Which religion is the least harmful - let us put it that way.
Re: Re: ///
by freewill on Sep 02, 2011 12:54 PM
French cuisine, well, but your analysis is flawed as it does not take into consideartion the fact the people of the native culture of india did not believe in killing people for the sake of war.No other rlgn ever had this concept. I cannot agree with you on the rating .Inshort the analysis is lopsided.
Re: ///
by Wrig Bastania on Sep 04, 2011 05:57 PM
Dravid was Not Out but see what British Media says. Excerpts from BBCWorld coverage on the 03-Sep ODI:
On-field umpire Billy Doctrove adjudged that Dravid had not made contact as the ball went through to wicketkeeper Craig Kieswetter but, although the "Hotspot" thermal imaging camera concurred, TV umpire Marais Erasmus said there was a sound and that he could see a deflection - a view later backed up by the "Snickometer" which highlighted a clear noise as the ball passed the bat.
BBC Test Match Special summariser Mark Butcher said: "Hot Spot is not something you can completely rely on.
"It's a bad piece of kit for those fine nicks but Dravid's body language told me he was out because the millisecond the ball passed the bat, he jerked his head to see behind."
And after the game, Parthiv Patel admitted: "I heard a noise."
no doubt that religion is not doing what it is supposed to do, like imrpving our self and the others at a higher level. Hinduism has no caste system, even Gita says every individual is born with some traiits according to the traits his caste establishes. Lets say we have unions of muncipal corporation and things lke that, say banklers say teachers and so on. Some selfish people took advantage of t there is no doubt about it. Hnduism has some iinherent qualiitiies for survival, because of whch Hindus are still majority even after getng iinvaded by so many aliien relgoins. caste system is not as prevelant as say about hundred years back. See a catholic will not go to protestant church, shiia will not go to sunni mosque. there is only in hinduism you can go to any temple you want that is the greatness.you could only point to caste system but forgot, because of the nature of hinduism there were so many off shoots came and hinduism still takes them with oepn arms. Hindu wiill go to Sikh Gurudwara or a Jain temple or go to any other place. but all others are just stuck to theie stand my way or highway. if Hinduism was not so open there would be so many off shoots but stll being respected. in all other religions once offshot they fight amog themselves. That is the basic fact u need to understand
Re: french cuisine
by freewill on Sep 02, 2011 08:56 AM
He is living in misconception that hindus are tighly adherent to their religion.Infact the most liberal rlgn is hinduism ar whatever it is called.
Re: Re: french cuisine
by French Cuisine on Sep 02, 2011 09:18 AM
I am under no misconceptions. I am born in Hindu system myself and am fully aware of what I am talking about.
Re: Re: french cuisine
by dilip kumar mishra on Sep 03, 2011 12:44 PM
The more important question is the content of the religious texts, not the conduct of the present practitioners. Taliban Jihadists are in a way adherering to their religion, killing because killing in the name of religion has sanction in the texts. That adherence is not necessarily going to sustain. People can change, but ancient religious texts will be there forever, to be read, analysed and judged. Who knows where human beings, who are fundamentally free willed, will put their faith in future, this a part of evolution of the human race.Budhhism spread deep into China, Japan and south east asia because of its intrinsic appeal, without any force,inducement, institutional support, or wars of expansion. Same cannot be said about Islam and Christianity, both of which even today are more organised and institutionalised religions than Hinduism and Buddhism. You can't judge the merit of the religions by the present educational, financial or cultural status of the practitioners. The practicing regions have been economically backward historically, unlike the regions where Christianity and Islam flourish, which have a history of war mongering and exploitation which greatly helped their rise to prosperity.
Re: french cuisine
by Wrig Bastania on Sep 04, 2011 05:58 PM
Dravid was Not Out but see what British Media says. Excerpts from BBCWorld coverage on the 03-Sep ODI:
On-field umpire Billy Doctrove adjudged that Dravid had not made contact as the ball went through to wicketkeeper Craig Kieswetter but, although the "Hotspot" thermal imaging camera concurred, TV umpire Marais Erasmus said there was a sound and that he could see a deflection - a view later backed up by the "Snickometer" which highlighted a clear noise as the ball passed the bat.
BBC Test Match Special summariser Mark Butcher said: "Hot Spot is not something you can completely rely on.
"It's a bad piece of kit for those fine nicks but Dravid's body language told me he was out because the millisecond the ball passed the bat, he jerked his head to see behind."
And after the game, Parthiv Patel admitted: "I heard a noise."
By now you should be convinced that there is something wrong with this thing - religion. No religion will be shown free of prejudice and hostile mentality. Therefore one has to approach this question from a neutral (perhaps) atheistic point of view. The top religions according to the number of followers:
1. Christianity - 2.1 Billion 2. Islam - 1.2 Billion 3. Hinduism - 880 Million 4. Buddhists - 382 Million 5. Sikhs - 25 Mil 6. Jews - 14.82 Mill 7. Others - 815 Mill (will include Zoroastrianism, Jainism, European pagan and African religions).
Time is ripe to rate these religions - first 6 will do since all the others are dying. How do we rate religion - mostly looking at its ideas and followers. The spiritual and philosophical contents are the most important concepts, as well as the amount of pain its followers were able to inflict on others. Jainism, which has non-violence as its main tenet, is almost completely dead and cannot be among competitive religions. So here it goes:
1. Buddhism (best religion IMO) - mainly addresses question of suffering and brilliantly combines Hindu ideas with Buddha's teachings to enable mind control and discovery of inner self. Believes in non-violence and was spread peacefully. Criticisms are - adherence to poverty, in a way self-immolation to rid of desire, unnecessary use of Buddha's cult and dogmatic ascetic practices. 2. Judaism (second best) -
Re: The question of religion
by antoniopope on Sep 02, 2011 12:58 AM
BUT AFTER COUNVERSION YOU STILL CALL THEM DALIT CATOLIC AND DON'T EVEN LET THEM INSIDE THE COUNVERTED CATOLIC CHURCH? LIKE IN AMERICA THEY DON;T LET YOU IN THEIR CHURCH BECAUSE OF YOUR COLOUR AND SMELL? SO YOU GO TO MALAYALLEE CHURCH?
Re: Re: The question of religion
by French Cuisine on Sep 02, 2011 01:08 AM
yeah - once converted you simply get into another unstated caste system. Just proves religion is sick and not meant to emancipate anybody
Re: Re: Re: Re: The question of religion
by abdul gani on Sep 04, 2011 03:31 PM
Only Islam is the best,no caste system,no differences on the basis of colour,caste,creed,people while pilgrimage take on similar clothes,rich and poor,black and white and offer everyday together the prayer to the sustain-er,shows how to behave with others,love humans,respect other religious faiths,and hit back if you are dishonoured and disgraced,be a man with back bone and character and dont let the black sheeps of community to ruin the religion..
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The question of religion
by True Hindustani on Sep 04, 2011 03:39 PM
abdul, who said so? what about sufism, and sunnism, and shia'tsm. Why sunnis are killing shiats? your religion rules are only in books and for big talks, but practiced just opposite.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The question of religion
by free trade on Sep 04, 2011 03:50 PM
Hi Abdul, u r so sweet to ignore that there are shias, sunnis, ahmedias and others where each sect is for blood of others. In saudi & bahrain, shias are not even given a free move everywhere!
We all know the equation between Iran & Saudi. Between Kurds & Sunnis in Iraq.
My friend, blacks, and poorer guys are clearly discriminated during haj in mecca. why you want to put everything under the bed and declare supremacy of your religion?
say the truth, you'll have a better life.
every religion has some goods and some bads. let's accept it.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The question of religion
by jahesh khan on Sep 04, 2011 03:56 PM
@True Hindustani, Shia,Sufi, sunni are not caste. they are just opinion on matter. there is no problem for marry each otehr and pray in mosques. they r not castes. Atleast you can google it to know the difference. also these are not mentioned in quran as well. what u have to look into the basics and the book? can you show me these names in q u r a n? can show the casteism in q u r a n?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The question of religion
by free trade on Sep 04, 2011 04:05 PM
Hey Jahesh Khan,
I think you replied your question. If no division is in quran, why shias & sunnis are after each other's blood? why iran & saudi have a clear extrication plan of each other? you always take the convenient route. in one hand you'll follow word by word in quran and try to suppress/kill anyone who has his difference. be it in your religion or other. on the other hand you want to simplify any misdeed of your fellow religious guys, by saying them 'miscreants'.
take it or not, a religion couldnt have got 1.2 billion people in 1500 years, without hate, war, killing, rape or forced conversions. Dont tell me, people join islam out of love. I'm not surprised that your forefathers also took the brunt.
Re: The question of religion
by Wrig Bastania on Sep 04, 2011 05:58 PM
Dravid was Not Out but see what British Media says. Excerpts from BBCWorld coverage on the 03-Sep ODI:
On-field umpire Billy Doctrove adjudged that Dravid had not made contact as the ball went through to wicketkeeper Craig Kieswetter but, although the "Hotspot" thermal imaging camera concurred, TV umpire Marais Erasmus said there was a sound and that he could see a deflection - a view later backed up by the "Snickometer" which highlighted a clear noise as the ball passed the bat.
BBC Test Match Special summariser Mark Butcher said: "Hot Spot is not something you can completely rely on.
"It's a bad piece of kit for those fine nicks but Dravid's body language told me he was out because the millisecond the ball passed the bat, he jerked his head to see behind."
And after the game, Parthiv Patel admitted: "I heard a noise."
By now you should be convinced that there is something wrong with this thing - religion. No religion will be shown free of prejudice and hostile mentality. Therefore one has to approach this question from a neutral (perhaps) atheistic point of view. The top religions according to the number of followers:
1. Christianity - 2.1 Billion 2. Islam - 1.2 Billion 3. Hinduism - 880 Million 4. Buddhists - 382 Million 5. Sikhs - 25 Mil 6. Jews - 14.82 Mill 7. Others - 815 Mill (will include Zoroastrianism, Jainism, European pagan and African religions).
Time is ripe to rate these religions - first 6 will do since all the others are dying. How do we rate religion - mostly looking at its ideas and followers. The spiritual and philosophical contents are the most important concepts, as well as the amount of pain its followers were able to inflict on others. Jainism, which has non-violence as its main tenet, is almost completely dead and cannot be among competitive religions. So here it goes:
1. Buddhism (best religion IMO) - mainly addresses question of suffering and brilliantly combines Hindu ideas with Buddha's teachings to enable mind control and discovery of inner self. Believes in non-violence and was spread peacefully. Criticisms are - adherence to poverty, in a way self-immolation to rid of desire, unnecessary use of Buddha's cult and dogmatic ascetic practices. 2. Judaism (second best) -
Re: The question of religion
by French Cuisine on Sep 02, 2011 12:32 AM
2. Judaism (second best) - it is the first semitic religion and believes in an absolute God. Therefore shares all the violent problems of the monotheistic religions. Based on bogus stories of Moses and Egyptian slave it achieved great success among the oppressed initially before taking the sword. Jews were universally persecuted before at last seeing some good fortunes recently. IMO best monotheistic religion since its followers have demonstrated that inspite of almost being totally annihilated, stuck to their faith and produced undoubtedly the best scientific minds of modern era. No lesser than 169 Jewish nobel laureates are there. . Sikhism (no ranks) - I dont know anything about this religion, but they have been severely persecuted. Originated to preserve Hindu practices in face of Islamic annihilation. 3. Christianity (third best religion) - it might have been the best because most of modern world was built out of Christian reformation. Rich Christian history makes it attractive faith coupled with the loving (and also bigoted) preachings of Jesus. This is probably the most violent religion and has perfomed ferocious violence all across the world. Although much of Christianity has been revised and it is more open-minded now. 4. Hinduism (second worst religion) - most ancient religion and derives out of classical vedic texts. Rich with deep philosophy and mingling cultures, although it spread peacefully bigotry and blindness is inherent in its philosophy.
Re: The question of religion
by French Cuisine on Sep 02, 2011 12:43 AM
Hinduism deprived most indigeneous people of ancient India and threw them into lower castes, and categorized every individual using racist arguments. It is also riddled with variety of superstitions and religious symbolism is often interpreted as meaningless rituals and sacrifices. Ancient Hindus contributed to science but in modernity Hindus have made very small contributions when compared to Judeo-Christian traditions.
5. Islam (worst religion) - completely faith based religion and has very little space for spirituality. It emancipated the deprived of Arabia to India and inherited rich cultural and artistic traditions making it a lively culture. Unfortunately, judging by the followers of the faith this got to be the one. Spread across the world by the sword it made rich contributions in the first 200 years of its being after being taken over by Mullas. Very violent and narrow-minded inherently, and only a few of the enormous number of followers can be termed as modern. Their contributions to modernity has been close to zero.
I apologise since I disgusted everyone, but frankly I am trying to distinguish between the fantastic claims each religion makes for itself. Aurevoir
Re: Re: The question of religion
by javeed jalal on Sep 02, 2011 01:17 AM
Dear,u seem to be among those people who if told earth is flat wud believe with eyes closed.dont make judjements without having any knowledge.Do u remember how so called west killed innocent children in iraq in the garb of weapons of mass destruction claim which later proved hoax.for ur information chemistry,astronomy,algebra,medicine,mathematics,geometry,etc originated from muslim world or muslims made major contributions there.do u know who father of chemistry is.itz ibni sinna(a muslim) whose name is twisted by west as avisenna.at a time when europe was living in dark age,it was the muslim world particularly muslim spain,turkey,iraq where all the sciences were thriving.the europeans took the books from the muslim world & got them translated in their respective languages.they developed their science from the contributions of muslims.about ur thought that islam was spresd by sword,i ask u who spread islam by sword in south east asia,india,pakistan,iran,afganistan.have u forgotten that around 10 crore people were killed during the two world wars.it is ur no one buddhism(japan),christianity,jews who were involved.the crux of islam is spirituality.u cannot judge a relegion by its followers.go & read movlana roumi,u wud come to understand real spirituality.itz now or few decades ago that u came to know about big bang,stages of embronic development,stars,black holes,etc.but these things are already mentioned in quran since 1400 yrs back.
Re: Re: Re: The question of religion
by freewill on Sep 02, 2011 09:34 AM
javeed, STFU where in the book is bigbang mentioned?? are you saying that musis knew about the bigbang from 1400 years then why they never claimed about it?? Do not have false conceptionsabout the book my friend.The book is one bunch of rubbish like all the other religious books.
Re: Re: Re: Re: The question of religion
by French Cuisine on Sep 02, 2011 10:25 AM
freewill - there you go. You see what I am talking about. All religions are making huge claims for themselves which make them superior while in reality they are probably the inferior ones.
Re: Re: Re: Re: The question of religion
by md shahelal on Sep 04, 2011 03:59 PM
Regarding Big bang in mussie book REPLY_________The science of modern cosmology, observational and theoretical, clearly indicates that, at one point in time, the whole universe was nothing but a cloud of 'smoke' (i.e. an opaque highly dense and hot gaseous composition). This is one of the undisputed principles of standard modern cosmology. Scientists now can observe new stars forming out of the remnants of that 'smoke'. The illuminating stars we see at night were, just as was the whole universe, in that 'smoke' material. God said in the Quran: Then He turned to the heavens when it was smoke..[Quran 41:11] Because the earth and the heavens above (the sun, moon, stars, planets, galaxies, etc.) have been formed from this same 'smoke' we conclude that the earth and the heavens were one connected entity. Then out of this homogeneous 'smoke', they formed and separated from each other. God said in the Quran: Have not those who disbelieved known that the heavens and the earth were one connected entity, then We separated them?..[Quran 21:30] Professor Alfred Kroner is one of the world's well-known geologists of University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany. He said, "Thinking where Muhammad came from .. I think it is almost impossible that he could have known about things like the common origin of the universe, because scientists have only found out within the last few years with very complicated and advance technological methods that this is the case.
Re: Re: The question of religion
by javeed jalal on Sep 02, 2011 01:18 AM
Dear,u seem to be among those people who if told earth is flat wud believe with eyes closed.dont make judjements without having any knowledge.Do u remember how so called west killed innocent children in iraq in the garb of weapons of mass destruction claim which later proved hoax.for ur information chemistry,astronomy,algebra,medicine,mathematics,geometry,etc originated from muslim world or muslims made major contributions there.do u know who father of chemistry is.itz ibni sinna(a muslim) whose name is twisted by west as avisenna.at a time when europe was living in dark age,it was the muslim world particularly muslim spain,turkey,iraq where all the sciences were thriving.the europeans took the books from the muslim world & got them translated in their respective languages.they developed their science from the contributions of muslims.about ur thought that islam was spresd by sword,i ask u who spread islam by sword in south east asia,india,pakistan,iran,afganistan.have u forgotten that around 10 crore people were killed during the two world wars.it is ur no one buddhism(japan),christianity,jews who were involved.the crux of islam is spirituality.u cannot judge a relegion by its followers.go & read movlana roumi,u wud come to understand real spirituality.itz now or few decades ago that u came to know about big bang,stages of embronic development,stars,black holes,etc.but these things are already mentioned in quran since 1400 yrs back.
Re: Re: Re: The question of religion
by Rajanikant on Sep 02, 2011 04:53 AM
No religion is good or bad, we must respect all religions as they carry our culture and civilization with them. I don't know why people are always angry with each other and try to dominate. Whites, Arabs, Chinese, Christians, Hindus, Muslims.. where are Humans.. I see just insecure people, is this what religion teaches us?
Re: Re: Re: Re: The question of religion
by freewill on Sep 02, 2011 09:35 AM
Rajani, buddhism & jainism are far better than all the religions.Truth is truth.accept it rather than saying no religion is bad.
Re: Re: Re: The question of religion
by Amarakbarantony on Sep 02, 2011 12:32 PM
javeed,
Though these things are mentioned in the quran(I don't know but for your happiness and mental satisfaction I agree for a while) crude came to earth after americans and europeans hardwork over there.The infrastructure you can see in middle east have been erected because of americans and europeans and in return they goat crude.But the 'key' is the brain behind that development.we can blabber anything,but there should be some proof to project it.The same way Hindus may claim for the patent of aircraft by correlating it with 'pushpakaviman'!!!So idiotic thoughts are avilable always from all corners by interpreting some useless wordings from holy books.
Re: Re: Re: The question of religion
by Rajanikant on Sep 02, 2011 05:05 AM
Malayallee are not treated well in Church as not only did they left their religion but also they left their civilization. Its not just Malayallee but I feel people now a days consider West as the best. They try to show they are mod by speaking English and wearing their clothes, eating their food. You need to retain your culture and your identity to be respected..
Re: Re: Re: Re: The question of religion
by Amarakbarantony on Sep 02, 2011 12:15 PM
hi rajni,
I don't think that microsoft or anyother top notch multinational will give a job for anyone those who are so fluent in sub continent languages!!!! Otherwise MNCs should implement reservation for their Indian operation!!!!
Re: Re: Re: The question of religion
by Amarakbarantony on Sep 03, 2011 06:57 PM
antoniopope,
hehehehehe,dude,I don't care about church or temple or mosques.My area of interest is totally different than your's and I cannot correlate it with your area of interest as well due to technological and strategic difference.Try hard to uplift your current status,technically or logically and come and have a healthy discussion and prove your word's worth!!! Better read cecero's thoughts that will worth a million!!!
Re: Re: The question of religion
by jahesh khan on Sep 04, 2011 04:10 PM
Judaism was presented as ISLAM. At that time it was called ISLAM. Then people manipulated it and made it to JUDAISM. Christianity was as ISLAM. At that time it was called as ISLAM. Then people manipulated it. Then at last ISLAM presented as ISLAM. People never changed it. Still couldnot change it. nobody can change it and will never change it. How we can say others changed ? check their basic boooks. u can see lot of contradictory and they themself will agree its not in pure form. K o r a n hasnt changed for past 1400 yrs.It presented the ISLAM- a complete way of life.
Re: The question of religion
by Wrig Bastania on Sep 04, 2011 05:59 PM
Dravid was Not Out but see what British Media says. Excerpts from BBCWorld coverage on the 03-Sep ODI:
On-field umpire Billy Doctrove adjudged that Dravid had not made contact as the ball went through to wicketkeeper Craig Kieswetter but, although the "Hotspot" thermal imaging camera concurred, TV umpire Marais Erasmus said there was a sound and that he could see a deflection - a view later backed up by the "Snickometer" which highlighted a clear noise as the ball passed the bat.
BBC Test Match Special summariser Mark Butcher said: "Hot Spot is not something you can completely rely on.
"It's a bad piece of kit for those fine nicks but Dravid's body language told me he was out because the millisecond the ball passed the bat, he jerked his head to see behind."
And after the game, Parthiv Patel admitted: "I heard a noise."
By now you should be convinced that there is something wrong with this thing - religion. No religion will be shown free of prejudice and hostile mentality. Therefore one has to approach this question from a neutral (perhaps) atheistic point of view. The top religions according to the number of followers:
1. Christianity - 2.1 Billion 2. Islam - 1.2 Billion 3. Hinduism - 880 Million 4. Buddhists - 382 Million 5. Sikhs - 25 Mil 6. Jews - 14.82 Mill 7. Others - 815 Mill (will include Zoroastrianism, Jainism, European pagan and African religions).
Time is ripe to rate these religions - first 6 will do since all the others are dying. How do we rate religion - mostly looking at its ideas and followers. The spiritual and philosophical contents are the most important concepts, as well as the amount of pain its followers were able to inflict on others. Jainism, which has non-violence as its main tenet, is almost completely dead and cannot be among competitive religions. So here it goes:
1. Buddhism (best religion IMO) - mainly addresses question of suffering and brilliantly combines Hindu ideas with Buddha's teachings to enable mind control and discovery of inner self. Believes in non-violence and was spread peacefully. Criticisms are - adherence to poverty, in a way self-immolation to rid of desire, unnecessary use of Buddha's cult and dogmatic ascetic practices. 2. Judaism (second best) -
Re: The question of religion
by antoniopope on Sep 02, 2011 12:59 AM
BUT AFTER CLOUNVERSION YOU STILL CALL THEM DALIT CATOLIC AND DON'T EVEN LET THEM INSIDE THE COUNVERTED CATOLIC CHURCH? LIKE IN AMERICA THEY DON;T LET YOU IN THEIR CHURCH BECAUSE OF YOUR COLOUR AND SMELL? SO YOU GO TO MALAYALLEE CHURCH?
Re: The question of religion
by Wrig Bastania on Sep 04, 2011 06:00 PM
Dravid was Not Out but see what British Media says. Excerpts from BBCWorld coverage on the 03-Sep ODI:
On-field umpire Billy Doctrove adjudged that Dravid had not made contact as the ball went through to wicketkeeper Craig Kieswetter but, although the "Hotspot" thermal imaging camera concurred, TV umpire Marais Erasmus said there was a sound and that he could see a deflection - a view later backed up by the "Snickometer" which highlighted a clear noise as the ball passed the bat.
BBC Test Match Special summariser Mark Butcher said: "Hot Spot is not something you can completely rely on.
"It's a bad piece of kit for those fine nicks but Dravid's body language told me he was out because the millisecond the ball passed the bat, he jerked his head to see behind."
And after the game, Parthiv Patel admitted: "I heard a noise."
