"I cannot and will never believe that" So many people think that way (whether they will be honest enough to admit it or not) and then they'll start talking about how open minded they are, just never made much sense to me, people who are truly open minded rarely deal in absolutes. But enough about that, I don't want to get into the whole "who's really open minded and who isn't" thing haha. You said you believe in karma, how can you believe in that but then call the idea of "God" or a "creator" absurd? The idea that we will all get our "just desserts" in the end and that good breeds more good and bad does likewise has just as little "scientific evidence" as God. Yet many feel this to be true. However, I don't believe in the christian conception of creation either. I don't think some bearded white man came down, waved his wand, and "poofed" everything into existence. I believe it was a much more beautiful undertaking than that I eagerly await the day where science and spirituality can truly accept one another and work together to start explaining the real mysteries surrounding life. From the sound of it mystics have been trying to do this for quite some time. Maybe I'll be fortunate enough to come across one of these "mystics" in my travels, or better yet live to see the day where this sort of thing becomes publicly available
You are just arguing semantics here. Surely you can understand that force has more than just the strictest physics definition. You are agreeing with me. This "capacity to produce change" IS the driving force behind what happens in the universe. The minimization of energy is generally the "motivation" (you aren't going to argue with me that most systems aren't conscious and therefore can't have motivation, are you?) behind the reactions that take place in our universe. Why is this pure crap? People ascribe non-physical mystical associations with energy because of it's significance in our universe, and thus it's significance in their lives and experiences. Besides, science falls short of denouncing any sort of mysticism. When you understand that mysticism, religion, and the supernatural are beyond the natural world that science describes, then you'll realize that science doesn't have the ability to disprove these ideas, and it's important not to try to quiet them by wielding science with a power it doesn't have. The more you misrepresent science the more it will turn people away from it. All science does is describe the natural world. If you don't acknowledge that something could be beyond this world, then you need to open your mind up to greater possibilities. The kind of God described in Christianity, for example, would not bat an eyelash at our scientific rules. He could intercede and manipulate the world how he wants. As humans inside this universe WE have to follow the rules of science (or at least that's the general consensus), but that doesn't mean anything outside our universe would need to. Now this is where many atheistic/agnostic people would say, well who would want to live in a world where God does whatever he wants and manipulates us etc. blah blah blah? Well I agree that doesn't sound to great depending on what God chooses to do, but that doesn't mean it's not possible and its not something I'd have control over. If that scares you and you can't acknowledge that possibility then someone has some work to do on their ego.
You seem to have slightly misunderstood the quote. You only "forget" the words, when you have fully grasped the concept. When you have "snared" the rabbit. Therefore he could communicate in a much deeper and more meaningful way than just making sounds which his vocal chords and then waiting for the other to do the same. They would be able to talk without speaking, which is as beautiful a thing as it is rare.
I think it might be just a little pompous of us to say that just because we have never seen and don't currently have the capability to create/destroy matter/energy that it truly cannot be created or destroyed. As far as we know energy can only be transferred but we just may not have the capability to create/destroy matter. That's just one example of what people talk about when they say science also requires a certain degree of "faith" behind many of the conclusions drawn from their observations.