With respect, I think you're making too broad of a generalisation of the scientific community, bhai ji. Many scientists do not believe that the universe is random, with even the existence of randomness being a subject of debate. The concept of something being "alive" or "dead" is more subjective/arbitrary than it may first seem. For example, bacteria are considered alive but viruses aren't. Many ecologists have claimed that Earth can be considered a living organism and some have said the same about the universe. Believing that science and religion are opposing ideologies is a huge mistake! While a larger percentage of scientists are atheist/agnostic than the general public, atheists still account for less than a quarter of all scientists. In fact, the Pew Research Centre published a report that even suggested that younger scientists (18-34) are more likely to believe in God than older scientists: www.pewforum.org/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/. Religious scholars also created the foundations for modern science: Islamic scholars were essential to the development of chemistry, Christian monks made significant contributions to biology and genetics (like Gregor Mendel), and the idea of atoms was conceptualised by Hindu scholars Many vocal anti-theists like Richard Dawkins have been trying to perpetuate the idea of science being against religion, but the fact of the matter is that the scientific community is nowhere near as unified as people make us out to believe, science is more arbitrary and subjective than commonly portrayed (this is why we say that "no single study can prove anything, only suggest that something is the case"), and religion has always coexisted with science to some extent. Please do not let this false stereotype shape your view of science. WJKK, WJKF
@Pappy Tron No, Dawkins was _very_ averse to the idea of God. He was only vocal about Christianity because of his demographic (English-speaking cultures), but he was strongly opposed to the idea of an omnipotent and omniscient God.
He doesn't mean all beleive the same like some scienctist has proposed that universe is not created according to big bang theory they have there alternative theories it's about what most people believe there , but sone religions have opposition to scientific discoveries to a great extent like the same some hindus beleive brahma created universe, and the 4 type of caste people is derived from his body like that
“O mind, love the Lord, as the water loves the milk. The water, added to the milk, itself bears the heat, and prevents the milk from burning. God unites the separated ones with Himself again, and blesses them with true greatness.” SGGSJ page 60 “Just like water, which loves milk so much that it will not let it burn - O my mind, so love the Lord.” SGGSJ page 454 The Miller-Urey experiment[1] (or Miller experiment[2]) was an experiment in chemical synthesis carried out in 1952 that simulated the conditions thought at the time to be present in the atmosphere of the early, prebiotic Earth. It is seen as one of the first successful experiments demonstrating the synthesis of organic compounds from inorganic constituents in an origin of life scenario. The experiment used methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), hydrogen (H2), in ratio 2:2:1, and water (H2O). Applying an electric arc (the latter simulating lightning) resulted in the production of amino acids. the water cool down enough in earth that the milk (amino acids) bears the heat, started life. The miller-urey experiment was done to simulate the conditions after we had lquid water on earth.
You r wrong puri research kia kro!! Quran mai Earth 6000 years old nhi baataya , Hazrat Adam( our First Prophet) um khty dunya ko 6000 saal ho gae . Quran khta hai k Hazrat Adam sy phly insaan kabily zikr nhi tha phr Allah ny Hazrat adam ko chuna un mai rooh dali or un sy phr insaano ki nasal chali . Shyed Un sy phly bhi thy insaan laikin main Hazrat Adam sy shuru hua
Now who created those laws of physics?? The probable answer is: they are just there. They are there just because universe is there. Why is universe there? It is there just because it just there, it just happens to be there?? Do you see the randomness???
actually he means modern day science say its all just coincidence happening all the time like the evolving from fish to human then doing all discoveries are just coincidence and no one didnt plan it earlier or there is no one in charge ..... which differs from spiritual prespective
What is the sikhi stance on evolution? Also can I not receive an answer like " it doesn't matter because evolution is not relevant to your journey to god". Do we have a definitive stance or not?
Karambir Matharu . knowledge is your defence. As far as I know, Darwin himself said, evolution has missing links, these missing links was the Only clear evidence that prove that we evolved directly from apes. until 1 of those links are found, we cannot prove that. Also 2) . Lets examine a bacteria. it reproduces veru effectively and evolve to become greater. scientists say that humans have what is known as concious. abd they say that this cannot be explained by evolution or survival of fittest to get from bacteria to intellectual. infact, if you try to apply survival of fittest or Darwinism to how we got from what they say bacteria to humans, u will find that there is a huge contradiction between what they said and we we see. unless they are trying to say that we are a mutation gone bad? why? because all bacteria must do is reproduce. reproduce. reproduce and in most cases, bacteria can do that better than us thats why is a genetic, bad mutation, IF u apply dawinism or the other. i hope that help. i gave u two. missiing links and that bacteria reproduces better than us so we evolved backwards. oh and 3, 25% of the genes in a cow are in a snake...
MrSkePtical hi there. As a sikh who has read Guru Granth Sahib, I would try my best to answer your question. But, I reckon you also read it to get your questions answered in the best way possible. Let me just not take much of your time and say that yes, Sikhism believes in the big bang as an event that lead to the creation of the universe, in fact it clearly talks about it and how then the gases created all the planets, water, plants, etc. and then out of water, biological life originated (amoeba a single celled organism and later multi cell organisms) which then evolved into different beings, animals, birds, etc. and eventually, humans came into existence. You'll be surprised to know that it also talks about gravity. Not only that, it explains it in a way that is being taught in schools now. It talks about an experiment where you fill a bucket with water and then tie it with a rope, then you start to spin it with force and the water will not fall. This is what keeps us rooted to ground and not fall off the earth, this is centrifugal force. Guru Granth Sahib talks about it. How cool is that. You won't believe that it also talks about smaller particles than what we can see with naked eye, atoms and molecules, etc. There's just so much more it talks about which science has only discovered a few years ago. I mean the treasure of knowledge in Guru Granth Sahib is amazing. Even I didn't know this until 2-3 years ago when I started taking interest in my religion. But, don't believe what I say and read Guru Granth Sahib yourself. I guarantee you, that you will find answer to every such question of yours. It's a shame that Sikhs have not been able to preach about it on a mass level, it's really a shame or more like a crime hiding such enlightening knowledge from the world. Hope I could be of service. Stay blessed.
@@Raja-mv3ih Are you being serious? Can't tell if you're trolling or not... The SGGS doesn't support the big bang theory or Darwinism. The centrifugal "force" is not what keeps humans down on earth... It actually acts in the opposite direction from the axis of rotation. The centrifugal "force" isn't even a real force (it's a fictitious force). And where the hell does it explain gravity the way it's being taught in schools now?
Moreso than teaching me about science predicted in Sikhism this video showed me why people consider Sikhism,Buddhism and Jainism part of Hinduism: all 4 religions don't clash with science (belief in dharma) as well as a belief in karma
@@permvirsingh Hinduism is roughly 7000 years old. The fifth Vedas is the Mahabharat and that's ~5000 years old (~3000 years BC). There were excavations at Kurukshetra and Dwarka. Ramayan is even older than Mahabharat and the Babri Masjid is where Ram was born in Ayodhya: Ram Setu bridge connect India to Sri Lanka. Buddhism is nowhere near that old. I'm 'Hindu' but I prefer Buddhism and Sikhism so it's easier to call me Hindu.
@@ronki23 If you have any proof, go and debate with Science Journey RU-vid channel which openly ridicules Hinduism. As far as Sikhi is concerned, it completely discards Islam and Hinduism.
@@permvirsingh beta study kar excavation hua hai Buddhist se pehle log sanatani thay pta kar le Japan china indonesia South Korea North Korea Cambodia magnolia Sare journey of science RU-vid channel runn by jihadi gangs
They are not gonna give you the answer ... Cuz they are just blindly folded by religion and guru nanak himself said if you cannot question you are stupid
Science is beyond religion 🙏🏻 We believe in reason not in faith So you can't convince a scientist with these words I'm sorry ... Science is everything 🙏🏻🙏🏻
@@SourabhKumar-ot1ki If science is everything, why can't it create a life out of lifeless. Your argument is so stupid. By the way, do you know abc of the science or just here to make stupid remarks.
@@karandhaliwal3907 Religion never claimed it. Infact it says death is inevitable. So called Ultra rationalists claim that Science can do anything. I am a scientist and researcher in wireless communication. BTW who you are Mr. Jat. You seem to be too proud of Jat System. That is why you are using your jat caste with your name. Shudar Jat.
Universe is not random it is governed by laws, reliogion and science are two different things. Scientific method is based on proof and relgion is based on belief and feelings :)
I am just saying pls do Somme reserch on Islam the qoran fully matches 100 % with science I hope god gives light in your heart because on the of judgement you wil remember
@@yobroabdel7427 if you truly believe that dear..... then you are a sikh... n believe me actual sikhi has very little to do with turbans n hairs. the word itself means learner.
Please do not say that the Sikh faith (or eastern theologies) does not contradict science. It says that a man (Guru Nanak) was underwater, alive, for three days, amongst making many other claims, such as God's voice speaking to Gurus (a fallacy by no means exclusive to Sikh religious texts) during meditation. Let me address these two examples from a scientific perspective: 1. We know that humans cannot survive underwater for more than a few minutes. These is impossible as we would die from hypoxia. This is therefore a lie and an example of Sikhism contradicting science 2. If an individual told a medical professional that God had communicated with them and given them instructions (to do whatever...), that individual would be diagnosed with some kind of psychotic disease characterised by auditory hallucinations. This diagnosis would be made on the back of SCIENTIFIC evidence acquired in the field of neuropsychology, ipso facto demonstrating that Sikhism (and most other major world religions) does in fact contradict science. I invite any counterpoints in this debate, as well as constructive criticism!
This story is not found in the Guru Granth Sahib and is likely a hagiographic account. This is some story not written by the Gurus, but people afterward.
the stories of nanak and his revelation are only stories and have no factual base. nanak actual writing do not talk of such silly ness. nanak talks about the internal god. the internal weakness of men, greed ego, sexual obsetion. The sikh faith believes in the internal god not the external. all things are born all things die.
But most religions have stories of their founders defying science: that's WHY people follow that particular religion whether it be Moses parting the sea, Jesus turning water into wine, Gabriel talking to Muhammad, Buddha becoming enlightened or Krishna showing Arjun the Universe (sorry, I'm a Hindu but I'm not very well versed in what Krishna actually did ). People follow the religion because the founders defy science- it's faith
Are you sure that you've studied whole physics ??? You don't even know what is Physics 😜 I respect guru nanak But you are not allowed to comment on science 😏 So stop making these kinds of videos 🙏🏻 Ok wait ... Give me the equation of God I will leave science 😏 There is nothing permanent ...
you are an offshoot of Vedic knowledge you should also give credit to the Hindu vedas simply saying that Karma Bhakti did did not came from the Gurus it came from the vedic civilization
Shajajh Bshdhdh I have alot of respect for vedic scriptures and knowledge that it can provide. I understand how much in depth it goes into in explaining workings of spiritual realms. But sorry to say, giving all the credits to Vedas for all the knowledge is like giving all the credits to scientists for telling us that sun is hot and round. The non-dual teachings of Vedas has been known to many many cultures (Africans, native Americans, Sufies etc) for long time who had not known about Indian culture. This is something known and realized by truly speritual being when gone inside the self beyond ego. Gurus did not learn from Vedas and teach others about it. That is not how social reformation and spirituality works. A Guru has to have a true realization of reality and divine to earns the title of Guru, be one with it. Just reading ancient books don't do it. If that was the case we should have billions of Guru through out Indian history. Also, please don't mind but calling others offshoot of your beliefs is purely an egotistical statement same as "I got it better than you, so bow down". Such mindset doesn't work very well in spiritual realms.
Us “off shoots” 9th Guru gave his head for the Kashmiri Pandits. He didn’t have too. But he chose to. Just know that. Keep your offshoot terms in your ass. You andh bhakt.
Have some respect fool.. Sikhism is a divine journey, a divine way of life.. even if you call it an aspect of a form of the Sanatan Dharma that too is justified.. use the correct terminology..
