Science Fanaticism and Anti-Godmen/Anti-Religion Fanaticism of Some Indian Scientists
I thought a little reading of how some top scientists in India, let alone other parts of the world, viewed (and still view, I am quite sure) our dear Lord, Bhagawan Sri Sathya Sai Baba Garu, and Bhagawan's holy miracles/paranormal acts, will show how vital Prof. Haraldsson's new book on Swami is, in setting the record straight about Bhagawan's miraculous powers. [To know more about Prof. Haraldsson's new book you may visit this post, "Notes on Prof. Haraldsson's, Modern Miracles, July 2013, book on Sathya Sai Baba", https://ravisiyer.blogspot.com/2013/08/notes-on-prof-haraldssons-modern.html.]
Here is the article published in The Hindu over two years ago after Bhagawan's Mahasamadhi, by Pushpa M. Bhargava, former Vice-Chairman, National Knowledge Commission, former member, National Security Advisory Board and former founder and Director, Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Hyderabad, "The phenomenon of Satya Sai Baba", http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/open-page/the-phenomenon-of-satya-sai-baba/article2019362.ece.
This top Indian scientist makes outrageous statements that display his ignorance:
a) "There is not a shred of evidence of rebirth; the very idea of rebirth goes against all of science. Every claimed case of rebirth that has been investigated has been shown to be fake."
[Ravi: My God! He is dismissing all the reincarnation evidence gathered by research done by parapsychologists (which, I presume, have been published in parapsychology journal articles) as "shown to be fake" without providing any supporting statements! Some big names in reincarnation research are Prof. Ian Stevenson, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Stevenson, http://www.near-death.com/experiences/reincarnation01.html, Prof. Jim Tucker, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_B._Tucker, http://www.medicine.virginia.edu/clinical/departments/psychiatry/sections/cspp/dops/staff/jimbio-page, and the author of the Sathya Sai Baba book, Prof. Erlendur Haraldsson, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlendur_Haraldsson, https://notendur.hi.is/~erlendur/english/. These are not names to scoff at! If somebody says that all their reincarnation cases have been shown to be fake then they better present some supporting statements.]
b) "In fact, no miracle has ever been performed by any one. All miracles attributed to religious leaders are inventions of the clergy."
[Ravi: What a shameful statement for a top scientist to make! What scientific or other evidence (like reliable witness accounts) does he have for his "fact" that no miracle has ever been performed by any one? How can such scientific or other evidence be given which will cover all humanity and all millenniums of the past? IMHO, what he can safely state is that well established evidence of paranormal events performed under controlled conditions has not been published in mainstream scientific journals. He could state that according to mainstream science there is no validated evidence of paranormal acts/events. And limit himself to that. What a tragedy that our ancient Bharat has such a distinguished scientist making utterly outrageous statements by logical/scientific standards!]
c) "The late Dr. Y. Nayudamma, the former Director-General of CSIR, who died in an Air India crash near Canada years ago, told me of his visit to Sai Baba with a once ardent follower, Dr. S. Bhagavantam, a former Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister. Nayudamma stood in front of Sai Baba with folded hands and most respectfully, requested him to produce a blade of grass between his palms. That would have been a miracle. But, instead, Nayudamma had to leave."
[Ravi: The scientist who folded his hands and spoke respectfully was not given a demonstration of Swami's miraculous powers. So what! Did the distinguished scientist, by dint of his scientific research, have a right to expect a miracle to be performed for him by Swami? What utter arrogance of some distinguished Indian scientists! They expect to be treated like great people by everybody. How wonderfully different was the approach of foreign scientists, Dr. Haraldsson and Dr. Osis? No wonder, Swami treated them with dignity and demonstrated his powers to them (but not under controlled conditions as that perhaps would have been way, way below Swami's dignity).]
--------------
To my mind, some Indian scientists like the distinguished scientist, Pushpa Bhargava, are not worthy to be considered as seekers of the truth. They are science fanatics and anti-religion/anti-Godmen fanatics who cannot see truth beyond their mainstream science journal articles.
Here is the article published in The Hindu over two years ago after Bhagawan's Mahasamadhi, by Pushpa M. Bhargava, former Vice-Chairman, National Knowledge Commission, former member, National Security Advisory Board and former founder and Director, Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Hyderabad, "The phenomenon of Satya Sai Baba", http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/open-page/the-phenomenon-of-satya-sai-baba/article2019362.ece.
This top Indian scientist makes outrageous statements that display his ignorance:
a) "There is not a shred of evidence of rebirth; the very idea of rebirth goes against all of science. Every claimed case of rebirth that has been investigated has been shown to be fake."
[Ravi: My God! He is dismissing all the reincarnation evidence gathered by research done by parapsychologists (which, I presume, have been published in parapsychology journal articles) as "shown to be fake" without providing any supporting statements! Some big names in reincarnation research are Prof. Ian Stevenson, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Stevenson, http://www.near-death.com/experiences/reincarnation01.html, Prof. Jim Tucker, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_B._Tucker, http://www.medicine.virginia.edu/clinical/departments/psychiatry/sections/cspp/dops/staff/jimbio-page, and the author of the Sathya Sai Baba book, Prof. Erlendur Haraldsson, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlendur_Haraldsson, https://notendur.hi.is/~erlendur/english/. These are not names to scoff at! If somebody says that all their reincarnation cases have been shown to be fake then they better present some supporting statements.]
b) "In fact, no miracle has ever been performed by any one. All miracles attributed to religious leaders are inventions of the clergy."
[Ravi: What a shameful statement for a top scientist to make! What scientific or other evidence (like reliable witness accounts) does he have for his "fact" that no miracle has ever been performed by any one? How can such scientific or other evidence be given which will cover all humanity and all millenniums of the past? IMHO, what he can safely state is that well established evidence of paranormal events performed under controlled conditions has not been published in mainstream scientific journals. He could state that according to mainstream science there is no validated evidence of paranormal acts/events. And limit himself to that. What a tragedy that our ancient Bharat has such a distinguished scientist making utterly outrageous statements by logical/scientific standards!]
c) "The late Dr. Y. Nayudamma, the former Director-General of CSIR, who died in an Air India crash near Canada years ago, told me of his visit to Sai Baba with a once ardent follower, Dr. S. Bhagavantam, a former Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister. Nayudamma stood in front of Sai Baba with folded hands and most respectfully, requested him to produce a blade of grass between his palms. That would have been a miracle. But, instead, Nayudamma had to leave."
[Ravi: The scientist who folded his hands and spoke respectfully was not given a demonstration of Swami's miraculous powers. So what! Did the distinguished scientist, by dint of his scientific research, have a right to expect a miracle to be performed for him by Swami? What utter arrogance of some distinguished Indian scientists! They expect to be treated like great people by everybody. How wonderfully different was the approach of foreign scientists, Dr. Haraldsson and Dr. Osis? No wonder, Swami treated them with dignity and demonstrated his powers to them (but not under controlled conditions as that perhaps would have been way, way below Swami's dignity).]
--------------
To my mind, some Indian scientists like the distinguished scientist, Pushpa Bhargava, are not worthy to be considered as seekers of the truth. They are science fanatics and anti-religion/anti-Godmen fanatics who cannot see truth beyond their mainstream science journal articles.
Here is an article on what the late, distinguished Indian scientist and former Director of Indian Institute of Science, Dr. Bhagavantam, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suri_Bhagavantam, said about Swami and the laws of science: http://theprasanthireporter.org/2013/09/7792/.
ReplyDelete"I do not try to find out what law He is breaking and how. When a scientist finds that something happens which cannot be explained or grasped by the laws known already, he just accepts that something that is a not yet known phenomenon. This is how science has grown. So, since what I have seen (and what I am seeing and what shall see hereafter) do not come under any of the known laws of science, I simply enunciate the law that Bhagawan Sri Sathya Sai Baba transcends the laws of science and that becomes a law of science."
The two year old The Hindu article of Pushpa Bhargava referenced in the post above, mentions the name of Bhagavantam but conveniently does not mention what Bhagavantam thought about Swami's miracles. As far as I know, Dr. Bhagavantam did not withdraw such views of his as given above, even when Dr. Bhagavantam's association with Swami's organization lessened.
A correspondent passed on a skeptic site link on Prof. Ian Stevenson which states, 'Some of his UVa colleagues found Stevenson to be an embarrassment, but this was the university that Jefferson had founded with the promise that it would be "based on the illimitable freedom of the human mind. For here we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it." So, not only was Stevenson allowed to continue his spirit studies, he was able to bring in several prominent parapsychologists to work at UVa, ...', http://www.skepdic.com/stevenson.html.
ReplyDeleteMy response: I think most mainstream scientists do not easily accept Parapsychology research results/conclusions.
Here's some info. about Parapsychology from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parapsychology:
Privately funded units in psychology departments at universities in the United Kingdom are among the most active today. In the United States, interest in research peaked in the 1970s and university-based research has declined since then, although private institutions still receive funding from donations.
...
Critics state that methodological flaws can explain any apparent experimental successes and the status of parapsychology as a science has been vigorously disputed. Many scientists regard the discipline as pseudoscience, saying that parapsychologists continue investigation despite not having demonstrated conclusive evidence of psychic abilities in more than a century of research.
...
Some of the more specific criticisms state that parapsychology does not have a clearly defined subject matter, an easily repeatable experiment that can demonstrate a psi effect on demand, nor an underlying theory to explain the paranormal transfer of information.
--- end extracts from wiki ---
I think I can understand this attitude of some mainstream scientists to parapsychology research work. They would want repeatability in a lab. by any qualified/competent scientist with adequate lab. facilities, like in Physics or Chemistry before they will accept something as validated evidence/scientific evidence/scientific fact. Parapsychology deals with matters which are very elusive and so perhaps very, very difficult, if not impossible, to repeat in a lab.
So some mainstream scientists will say that they don't "trust" it or that it is not a science. But I don't think a man with proper scientific temper will say that all of Ian Stevenson and others' parapsychology research presenting evidence of reincarnation has been "shown to be fake" - as that seems to be plainly a false statement. Sure, they probably can state some cases where some parasychology research papers which claim evidence of reincarnation, have been shown as presenting fake/invalid evidence. But I am quite sure that will not extend to all of (or perhaps any of) Ian Stevenson, Jim Tucker, Haraldsson etc. research work giving evidence of reincarnation.
I don't think even Prof. Richard Dawkins would say that (all reincarnation evidence has been shown to be fake). Whatever I have read about him shows him to be pretty factual and logical. Where he does seem to have gone overboard like 'The God Delusion' title of his book, he does have some logic, even if it is somewhat unethical, for such a book title.
I am afraid I have noted that such outlandish statements (printed in Indian newspapers) usually come from some over-the-top Indian 'distinguished scientists' or young Indian scientists with PhDs in mainstream science (like Physics) from elite world institutions like MIT, USA who come back to India to work in prestigious Indian scientific research/academic institutions. Perhaps all the religion they see around them in India makes them lose their balance and go over the top.
Here's the response to Bhargava's article in The Hindu from Prof. G. Venkataraman of Radio Sai and ex-Vice-Chancellor of Sri Sathya Sai Institute of Higher Learning in end May 2011 with the full response as well as the edited response printed in The Hindu. The Hindu printed response can also be viewed here.
ReplyDeleteHere is brother Nitin Acharya's response in end May 2011 which adds to Prof. G. Venkataraman's response.
Prof. Ian Stevenson did not prove reincarnation but provided some evidence (not compelling) for reincarnation.
ReplyDeleteFrom a skeptic site itself, http://www.skepdic.com/stevenson.html :
However, he resented being described by journalists as trying to prove reincarnation. He believed that he had produced a body of evidence for reincarnation that must be taken seriously. But he admitted that "the evidence is not flawless and it certainly does not compel such a belief. Even the best of it is open to alternative interpretations, and one can only censure those who say there is no evidence whatever."
...
Most people are not likely to be too impressed when they realize that all Stevenson had to show for over forty years of research is that it is now false to claim that there is no evidence for reincarnation. It is still quite reasonable, however, to claim that there is no compelling evidence for reincarnation.
--- end skeptic site extracts ---
Some extracts related to a very interesting 1988 published interview of Stevenson from http://reluctant-messenger.com/reincarnation-proof.htm :
Essentially I say that the idea of reincarnation permits but doesn't compel belief. All the cases I've investigated so far have shortcomings. Even taken together, they do not offer anything like proof. But as the body of evidence accumulates, it's more likely that more and more people will see its relevance.
...
My idea of God is that He is evolving. I don't believe in the watchmaker God, the original creator who built the watch and then lets it tick. I believe in a "Self-maker God" who is evolving and experimenting; so are we as parts of Him. Bodies wear out; souls may need periods for rest and reflection. Afterward one may start again with a new body.
...
I wouldn't claim to be free of the fear of death, but it is probably less in me than other people. These children sometimes provide reassurances to adults. We’ve had two or three incidents of children going to, let's say, a woman who has lost her husband and is inconsolable and saying, "You shouldn’t be crying. Death isn’t the end. Look at me. I died and I'm here again."