I’m open to be converted to your religion of licking the scientists butt. But first answer me this point:
We must know then for certain that there is a controller; that is the beginning of knowledge. Why should we deny this truth? In every field of activity we find some finite controller, so how can we deny the existence of an infinite controller in this creation?
“The frog in the well” logic illustrates that a frog residing in the atmosphere and boundary of a well cannot imagine the length and breadth of the gigantic ocean. Such a frog, when informed of the gigantic length and breadth of the ocean, first of all does not believe that there is such an ocean, and if someone assures him that factually there is such a thing, the frog then begins to measure it by imagination by means of pumping its belly as far as possible, with the result that the tiny abdomen of the frog bursts and the poor frog dies without any experience of the actual ocean. Similarly, the material scientists also want to challenge the inconceivable potency of the Lord by measuring Him with their froglike brains and their scientific achievements, but at the end they simply die unsuccessfully, like the frog.
[Srila Prabhupada from Srimad Bhagavatam 2.5.10]
THE HARE KRISHNA SAINT TORTURED AND POISONED TO DEATH BY HIS JUDAS DISCIPLES
(Leaders of a Sinister Movement)
http://members.lycos.co.uk/prabhupada/sp_poisoned/sp_poisoned.htm or THE HARE KRISHNA SAINT TORTURED AND POISONED TO "DEATH" BY HIS JUDAS DISCIPLES
Web Sites:
PRABHUPADA Your ever well wisher www.prabhupada.org.uk or http://members.lycos.co.uk/prabhupada/
KRISHNA BHAKTIVEDANTA
WHOLLY COW PROTECTION SOCIETY http://members.lycos.co.uk/prabhupada108/
So science means, which is perfect knowledge. Not perhaps, it may be, that is not science, theory. Theory is not science. Science, the most important items of science is observation and experiment. First of all to study the situation by observation, and then practically, when you are able to make an experiment, then it is science. Otherwise, theoretical knowledge has no meaning.
Energy cannot exist by itself, without an energetic source. Thus the material energy and the Supreme Energetic, Lord Krsna, are in principle one, though the Energetic is far removed from the workings of His energy.
This thread is a certain receipt for a headache.
Darwin’s theory. Wherefrom he begins?
Prabhupada: …philosophy is the ultimate, Vedanta. Vedanta philosophy. And Bhagavata is the commentary on the Vedanta philosophy. (break) …Darwin’s theory. Wherefrom he begins?
Jayatirtha: He begins in the ocean. He says that some fish-type animal climbed out of the ocean and began to breathe the air.
Prabhupada: Then wherefrom the ocean came?
Devotee: He doesn’t say.
Sri Govinda: In the beginning on the planet there was great turbulence and the oceans were stirring, and then there was some lightning charge.
Prabhupada: Wherefrom the lightning came? And wherefrom the ocean came? Where his philosophy is? It is a speculation.
Sri Govinda: It all began from a primeval explosion.
Prabhupada: Then same question, wherefrom the explosion came?
Satsvarupa: They say that explosion began at time zero.
Prabhupada: Huh?
Satsvarupa: Time zero. (laughter)
Prabhupada: Time zero?
Satsvarupa: Time began then, at time zero. And they say that if you ask the question, “What was before that?” that’s not a logical, sensible question.
Prabhupada: Why?
Satsvarupa: They say it’s a question that should not even be asked.
Prabhupada: No, then you are rascal. You are beginning from zero. How you can begin from zero?
Devotee: Everything comes from nothing then.
Prabhupada: So that is not philosophy.
Sri Govinda: They say it all originates from a giant mass of primordial matter.
Prabhupada: Then same comes…, that “Wherefrom the matter comes?”
Harikesa: They say it’s an accident.
Prabhupada: That is another nonsense, another rascaldom. Where is the accident? Nothing is accident, everything is cause and effect. We say that in the beginning there was God or word of God. In Bible they say?
Devotee: Yes.
Prabhupada: So God was there and God’s word was there. That is the beginning, our beginning. Janmady asya yatah. Aham evasam agre. And Bhagavad-gita, aham sarvasya prabhavah mattah sarvam pravartate. This is our philosophy, “Everything begins from God.” Now you can say, “Wherefrom God came?” But that is God. God existing, He is not caused by any other cause, He is the original cause. Anadir adih: “He has no beginning, but He is the beginning of everything.” This is conception of God. Anadir adir govindah. That adi is Govinda, person, Krsna. Krsna says, aham adir hi devanam. We find from the history. Brahma is the beginning. He is deva, one of the demigods. Krsna says, aham adir hi devanam. So He is the cause of Brahma also. So this is our philosophy. We don’t begin from zero or accident. This is not our philosophy.
Harikesa: Darwin never tried to understand the…
Prabhupada: No, no, he admitted that he speculated. He is not a philosopher, he is a speculator. He has admitted that “It is my speculation. I think like this.”
Harikesa: He started his speculation from the creation of life. He didn’t…
Prabhupada: Anywhere, speculation is not science nor philosophy. We don’t admit. No hypothesis.
Satsvarupa: They call the Vedas speculation. They say the Upanisads are speculation.
Prabhupada: No, no, no, not speculation. Isopanisad, isavasyam idam sarvam, everything beginning from isa, the supreme controller… Where is speculation?
Tamala Krsna: They say that the Vedas are written by man so they are imperfect.
Prabhupada: So you are less than a dog. It is written by man. That’s all right. But you are less than a dog. You have no reason, no right. What is your philosophy? What is the value of your philosophy? It is speculation. We don’t say, “It is written by man.” Apauruseya. They may say whatever they…, we don’t say. If somebody says, “Your father name is that,” and I know my father’s name. “What you are? You are not authority to say what is my father’s name. I know very well.” So it is their suggestion like that, “Your father’s name is this.” We don’t say that “My father name is…” Is that very good suggestion? You don’t know anything of my family. How you say that “Your father name is this?” Is it not another rascaldom? You do not know anything about my family, and you say that “Your father’s name is this.” What is this logic? You cannot say what is my father’s name. You do not know about my family.
Harikesa: Darwin’s whole theory rests on the fact, the speculation, that he can show bones. They take these bones and these evidences, archeological…
Prabhupada: Anyway, it is not possible that he has seen all the bones. That is not possible. So taking it that he has studied by seeing the bones, but I can say very easily that it is not possible for a person like you to see all the bones. That is my challenge. How you can say that you have seen all the bones? You say, “Millions and millions of years ago…” You live for fifty years. How you have seen all the bones? That is imperfect. You are a limited person. How it is possible that you have seen all the bones? What is the answer?
Satsvarupa: They say they haven’t found all the bones, but what they’ve found is conclusive evidence.
Prabhupada: But then you cannot do that. If you have seen all the bones, then you can conclude. You say, “Some of the missing.” So how it is fact? You did not see it.
Satsvarupa: Just this year they found a skull that was millions of years older than any human skull they found before.
Prabhupada: That’s all right. But still, you cannot say that you have seen all the skulls. That is not possible.
Devotee: They will say they have not even found one skull from the Vedic culture.
Prabhupada: Oh. No, Vedic culture do not keep skull, they burn it. Therefore there is no opportunity for you to see the Vedic culture. Then you become defective. Because you cannot see the skulls of Vedic culture. We burn it. So therefore your conclusion is defective.
Harikesa: So the only bones they find are the bones of the fifth, sixth, seventh-class men.
Prabhupada: Yes, of the monkey-class men. (laughter) That’s all. Therefore you conclude that the man comes from monkey. That is the conclu… Human being, Vedic culture, they burn it. So they have no opportunity to see the human being skull. The monkeys, they do not burn. So he has seen only the monkey skull, and his conclusion is, “Man is from monkey.”
Brahmananda: Actually they are simply interested in bones, but this is the activity of the dog. (laughter)
Prabhupada: Yes. Yes, he finds, (laughter) like that. So it is dog’s philosophy. Hare Krsna.
Yes when people are fanatically following the scientists dogma, then when real knowledge is presented to them it is a headache certainly. It exposes their ignorance and cheating.
Ugh.
Your posts consist of endless quotes, but it’s us who fanatically follow the dogma?
Moti is definitely shooting for volume (of quotes), but it is MC Master of Ceremonies that gets the prize for quality of quotes! 
And that’s the end of that tune.