Posts by Caedes

50

ISIS Want to Clear up Why They Do Terrorism

by cofty in

every time isis commit one of their atrocities, well-meaning folks mumble self-loathing apologies on behalf of "the west".

noam chomsky and his sort lead a chorus of masochistic confessions.

apparently everybody is to blame for islamic terrorism (according to bill nye global warming causes isis) - apart from islamic terrorists of course.

Caedes

It is lone individuals with the vast majority law abiding citizens, hardly a force threatening the world or randomly butchering strangers or critics in the same way.

That is exactly what you have in the muslim community the vast majority are law abiding citizens. The people who commit these acts are lone individuals with tenuous links to ISIS. There are plenty of doctors at abortion clinics who might have a different opinion about the dangers of christian extremists.

There's a difference between tit-for-tat violence and applying justice and enforcing law and order. The rules change when there is an outright war scenario but there comes a point where people cannot be contained or rehabilitated and the only course left is to remove them from the world.

I haven't disagreed that force is needed, I just disagree that the 'kill them all' rhetoric is helpful or conducive to defusing the situation. The situation is not outright war it's terrorism and the terrorists can merge back into the general population at a moments notice and we have no way to counter that short of genocide.

50

ISIS Want to Clear up Why They Do Terrorism

by cofty in

every time isis commit one of their atrocities, well-meaning folks mumble self-loathing apologies on behalf of "the west".

noam chomsky and his sort lead a chorus of masochistic confessions.

apparently everybody is to blame for islamic terrorism (according to bill nye global warming causes isis) - apart from islamic terrorists of course.

Caedes

You're obviously incapable of understanding basic english statements or are willfully misunderstanding and trying to suggest that "they" refers to all muslims and not all militant islamists which was clear from the context.

There has been clear conflation of ISIS and muslims throughout this entire thread which is why I asked the question of how far you think this mass killing should go.

History must be full of examples where the mass killing of insurgent enemies worked out really well as an approach to peace?

As I have said there is no reason to suppose that these terrorists are going to give up solely through negotiation but neither is the answer trying to kill all of them.

50

ISIS Want to Clear up Why They Do Terrorism

by cofty in

every time isis commit one of their atrocities, well-meaning folks mumble self-loathing apologies on behalf of "the west".

noam chomsky and his sort lead a chorus of masochistic confessions.

apparently everybody is to blame for islamic terrorism (according to bill nye global warming causes isis) - apart from islamic terrorists of course.

Caedes

Actually it was Simon who I quoted.

However the point still stands since the main thrust of this thread has been the fact that ISIS are not a rational political force and the strawman that western liberals do not accept that fact.

ISIS also kills Sunni Muslims who transgress Sharia law, and kills Sunnis who reject ISIS. Just because ISIS kills other Muslims doesn't necessarily make it un-Islamic. Muslims have been slaughtering Muslims of different sects for over a millennia.

So have christians, I assume that you don't take the same extreme view about christian extremists? The point is that the actions of ISIS tell a very different story to the simplistic explanation given in the OP and understanding and accepting that people (especially criminals with no respect for human life) might have motivations other than the ones they admit to.

But what about Abu Sayyaf? It is a terrorist group based in the Phillippines. It recently killed two hostages - John Ridsdel and Robert Hall. What Western foreign policy prompted this?

What about them? Have I claimed that western foreign policy is to blame for all terrorism? No, I said it was a contributing factor in the example I gave. Please don't misquote me again.

The second takeaway point for this thread made by supporters of the OP is the conflation of mainstream muslims and ISIS.

You stated that the only good jihadi is a dead one, how far do want to perpetuate the violence? Because the western world is never going to be able to kill all of them. I can't see any difference between your rhetoric and theirs other than the fact that you are of course an armchair hawk.

50

ISIS Want to Clear up Why They Do Terrorism

by cofty in

every time isis commit one of their atrocities, well-meaning folks mumble self-loathing apologies on behalf of "the west".

noam chomsky and his sort lead a chorus of masochistic confessions.

apparently everybody is to blame for islamic terrorism (according to bill nye global warming causes isis) - apart from islamic terrorists of course.

Caedes

If the problem is Islam itself and to quote 'they just need to die' does that mean the answer is the mass slaughter of muslims? If not why not?

My second question is why do ISIS kill muslims? Given that their reason to fight is listed rather simplistically as because they want everyone to be muslim and that they kill more muslims than anyone else it would seem to me that they are sending very mixed messages.

The other problem is that of course not everyone fights for the same reason or with the same level of understanding of the conflict. A western convert is not going to have the same view as an unemployed local from Afghanistan or someone in a leadership position within ISIS.

Whilst I have always accepted that ISIS hate western liberal societies I can also accept that western involvement in the middle east is a contributing factor as is the fact that huge disparities in wealth in the middle east help ISIS recruit. As ever life and politics are not black and white.

The answer to this issue is not going to be won by just more bombs and guns, but that statement doesn't mean that more bombs and gun aren't needed at all. You can attack a problem from more than one direction.

532

I conclude evolution is guided

by KateWild in

your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.

k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.

in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.

Caedes

My own conclusions stem from how conditions during the the short period that the early universe was forming favoured one part of a pair over the other for an infinitely short period of time and this resulted in the differences we see over the longer term. It all boils down to the uncertainty principle formulated by Heisenberg in the 1920s.

Could you let the people at CERN know that you have solved one of the biggest questions in physics, I'm sure they would be delighted. Saves doing all that unnecessary experimentation if you have found out it all boils down to the uncertainty principle.

I would warn you, they are going to want to see your maths. But that shouldn't be a problem, I mean who would go around claiming to have concluded the answer to one of the big scientific questions if all they had was nothing more than the most superficial knowledge of science.

532

I conclude evolution is guided

by KateWild in

your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.

k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.

in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.

Caedes

Wasn't it in the hand, the sleeping black baby?

No, I'm pretty sure it was in his head! ...

err, I'll get my coat

22

I have proof Noah built the Ark just like God told him to

by KateWild in

.

Caedes

Never mind the fact that the construction above wouldn't even survive being floated, that keel wouldn't be capable of supporting that structure in the water if it isn't capable of supporting it on dry land

You can see the huge steel and concrete support structures going up through the entire structure.

Shows a lack of faith!

The irony of Kate posting this after the thread on guided evolution is monumental though.

532

I conclude evolution is guided

by KateWild in

your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.

k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.

in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.

Caedes

It's funny because if I have hard empirical evidence I would really enjoy it if people 'were out to prove me wrong' If all I had was magical thinking and flim-flammery then I would have good reason to be scared of a debate.

71

Evolution is a Fact #38 - The Origin of Complex Cells

by cofty in

in 1966 microbiologist kwang jeon was studying a population of amoebae in the lab when they began to die off unexpectedly.

he noticed thousands of tiny dots in the cytoplasm of each individual which turned out to be a bacterial infection.

most of them weakened and died but surprisingly a small percentage recovered and seemed to be back to normal.

Caedes

Vidqun,

That was hilarious.

114

Evidence for a Young Earth

by Perry in

for additional information:.

Caedes

Perry,

Yet again you are displaying your ignorance to the world, carbon 14 dating is done by measuring the amount of carbon 14 in the sample. After 50000 years the rates of carbon 14 remain constant so Carbon 14 dating is of no use in dating something that is over 50000 years old. On fossils that are millions of years old the carbon 14 results achieved are from contamination. If you are going to accept the carbon 14 dating of those fossils then you have to accept all the other more appropriate scientific dating methods that would show the correct age.