Abaddon

Joined

• started 167 topics
• posted 5,219 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Abaddon

• 
  65

  British College: Non-Muslims are "filth", "pigs" and "dogs"

  by Elsewhere in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2142403,00.html.

  the times april 20, 2006 .

  muslim students 'being taught to despise unbelievers as filth'.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Abaddon

  double post
• 
  65

  British College: Non-Muslims are "filth", "pigs" and "dogs"

  by Elsewhere in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2142403,00.html.

  the times april 20, 2006 .

  muslim students 'being taught to despise unbelievers as filth'.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Abaddon

  Hellrider

  ....my point was to stress the urgency in this. If Islam is going to use as long as christianity did, then we`re going to have to live with this medieval version of Islam for 500 years more.

  And your assumption it will take 500 years is based on what exactly? Western secularism was treading a new path. The Islamic world (to be precise the Arabic/Persian Islamic world, as most other major population groups of Muslims are NOT comparable to the Arabic/Persian Islamic world) will not take nearly as long; they way is clear. Look at Turkey; it started with secularism earlier, it didn't get screwed around with like Iran, and although not out of the wood yet is proof a Islamic state can live alongside Christian ones and move towards closer political and trading links.

  That's why the conservative elements of the Arab Islamic world are so threatened, they can see the inevitable is not a matter of Centuries away, but a Generation away unless they achieve their aims and drive the world to a religious war.

  Chopping of limbs on thieves, and stoning of criminals in the name of Allah.

  Judicial executions using methods that could well leave the victim in agony whilst they asphixiate is a practise of a Christian state.

  Hijacking planes in the name of Allah, "the most merciful"...

  Is it any better if it's in the name of the 'Glorious People's Revolution' or 'A million dollars or everyone dies'? Check your history of hijacking, Muslims are a minority group.

  You are falling victim to the panic-mongering. Have you actually counted how many people live in the 'problem' Arabic Islamic countries?

  Yeah, sure, there's billions of Muslims, but there are not billions of problem Muslims; even counting all former Soviet States ending in 'stan' there are only 360 million residences of such states and the number of extremists is FAR lower than the totl population. As the level of millitary advancement and GDP of these countires is on average biugger all - apart from a handful we armed, liked Saudi - there is not this massive risk some might like you to believe. They're too busy trying to stay fed to go to war.

  Sensible Western policies will ensure the non-extremist majorities in those countries don't get sucked into supporting the extremists out of sympathy, and the BIG Muslims countries (486 million people in Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Nigeria) remain disposed as they currently are (with real minorities of extremists ).

  Even if terrorists "took out" one or two major cities (which they have thus far failed to do), the end of extremism is inevitable; the West just has to be careful not to make many allies of the extremists by being heavy-handed or dishonest... we are facing a Generation where there will be tens of thousands of victims of terrorism, but not the escalation to Holy War so desired of the real nut-jobs. It will be a train here, a building there, but Western society (and those who want to share in its riches and freedoms) is simply too powerful force to derail.

  If the West ensures it is fair, and continues to outsource jobs to more and more countires thus 'sharing the wealth', there will be FAR more attractive options to Yussef in Palestine then blowing himself up.

  The danger lies in thinking of this as a religious war, as that will drive the extremeist's co-religionists towards the extremeists, rather than towards us.

  The single biggest thing that can be done to show the West is willing to play fair is peace in Palestine.

  I'm willing to bet my grandchildren's school history books will refer to that as a 'watershed'.
• 
  72

  The Origin-of-Life Foundation, Inc. The Secret $1,000,000 Prize

  by Deputy Dog in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  from http://www.scienceagainstevolution.org/v9i11f.htm

  the secret $1,000,000 prize

  one of the best kept secrets of science is the origin of life prize sponsored by the origin of life foundation, inc. when we first ran across their web site (www.lifeorigin.org), we thought that the offer of one million dollars to anyone who could propose a plausible theory for the origin of life was just a slick creationist trick for showing that the emperor had no clothes.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Abaddon

  ellderwho

  Once again all you've done is danced around several problems with evolution, and why you continue on like evolution is problem free, is rife with ignorance.

  I responded to them; the ones you posted were all arguments from ignorance, not a decent hypothesis or theory showing problems with evolutionary theory, and Behe's claim of irreducable complexity has been proven wrong. If you're too lazy to do the research you could ask and I'd be more than happy to point you in the direction of references.

  Oh - you can look up the phrase 'argument from ignorance' if you like; another term applied to such arguments is 'argument from personal incredulity'. They're fallacious arguments, and that has nothing to do with disagreements about oral sex.

  It is you claim this argument is put forward by 'my camp'. Exactly the dishonest tactics used by ID-ers in their 'wedge' startegy. How one website can represent 'my camp', I don't know, but it's typical of the quality of your claims.

  I say I don't care who put bad arguments forward as it is the quality of the argument not the attributation that is important. Your lack of genuine interest in discussiing this topic is shown by you STILL having failed to respond to my analysis of the claims you posted, your honesty is shown by you claiming I didn't address them. If you didn't understand the responses, ask for help.

  Just 'cause a bunch of self-described Evolutionists say x and y you act like there's a problem with evolution or that the current state of abiogenesis means something.

  Don't you think it is outstanding intellectually lazy and complacent of yourself to just accept their claims at face value?

  Didn't you learn ANYTHING from getting out of a cult? Like to investigate claims people make rather than choosing the claim you like and following it blindly, without regard to whether the claim is right or not?

  Spectrum

  Serious answers to serious questions; silly answers to silly questions (although I suspect you think you're making some clever point).

  Thus in answer to your question; Ni!
• 
  72

  The Origin-of-Life Foundation, Inc. The Secret $1,000,000 Prize

  by Deputy Dog in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  from http://www.scienceagainstevolution.org/v9i11f.htm

  the secret $1,000,000 prize

  one of the best kept secrets of science is the origin of life prize sponsored by the origin of life foundation, inc. when we first ran across their web site (www.lifeorigin.org), we thought that the offer of one million dollars to anyone who could propose a plausible theory for the origin of life was just a slick creationist trick for showing that the emperor had no clothes.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Abaddon

  Spectrum

  I take it you mean 'imagine'. You can easily find out if it has lungs and legs if you really don't know, and if you don't know anything about it I'm curious you're making run-on speculations about what Evolutionists think about it.

  I take it that you have some questions over transitionals or macro evolution. Be more clear or specific in your question and I'd be happy to answer in brief and direct you to resources. Are you asking why the Lungfish is not an evolutionary Holy Grail? Or what?
• 
  72

  The Origin-of-Life Foundation, Inc. The Secret $1,000,000 Prize

  by Deputy Dog in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  from http://www.scienceagainstevolution.org/v9i11f.htm

  the secret $1,000,000 prize

  one of the best kept secrets of science is the origin of life prize sponsored by the origin of life foundation, inc. when we first ran across their web site (www.lifeorigin.org), we thought that the offer of one million dollars to anyone who could propose a plausible theory for the origin of life was just a slick creationist trick for showing that the emperor had no clothes.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Abaddon

  ellder who

  Deary dreary you; asking someone to repeat a sentence that wasn't comprehensible (or a sentence) is one thing, spellchecking when the word meant is obvious (even to a Creationist) is another. And I actually made points and arguments (unlike you) none of which you've responded to in any meaningful fashion. Other people can see you've evaded responding to anything meaningful, pity you don't have the will, guts or means to get down and enagage in a discussion.

  hooberus

  Any insights on the process of abiogodesis yet? Or do you use special pleading to avoid responding to a request for your theory of how god arrose? You could always use a quote from a website that confuses people with bad science and make them think Creationism is credible, all the while running a nice profit to swell the pockets of its Executive Officers with twice the salary of a comparable charitable institution. Or make excuses why you haven't refuted falsifications of Biblical chronolgy that show the Flood or Creation could not be literal accounts. Or blame wicked godless scientists for a cover-up?

  Consider my breath baited...
• 
  65

  British College: Non-Muslims are "filth", "pigs" and "dogs"

  by Elsewhere in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2142403,00.html.

  the times april 20, 2006 .

  muslim students 'being taught to despise unbelievers as filth'.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Abaddon

  Don't forget Mary, I am 'mostly harmless'

  So agreeing to disagree is fine by me;

  However, I don't believe it's only a cultural, social and political problem, I believe it's also a religious problem simply because their culture and political structure are based so heavily on their religion, or their interpretation of their writings. Christianity and Christian lands have, for the most part advanced out of the Dark Ages, whereas Islam, at present, seems to be stuck there.

  Bar the sweeping statement (not ALL of Islam is stuck in the dark ages) and semantics (the cultural and political dimensions ALLOW religion to be problematical, but if those same backward political or cultural groups were Christians or Jews (or whatever) largely the same problems would arise so discussion of the religious dimension is actually far less important than the cultural and political one) we do actually agree on a lot. Try getting me started on how fundamentalism of any sort is largely a misogynistic reaction against the liberation of women from traditional roles and change in general and I think you'll find we agree even more

  I just get worried when sane people go down the road of Islam this and Islam that; if you agree Christians did the same thing at the same point of cultural and political development, why is the religion so worthy of interest? Surely attacking the religion will only alienate those peaceful Muslims we need as allies?
• 
  19

  Is there a 3rd option to explain the origin of life?

  by nicolaou in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  the creation / evolution debate has raged for 150 years with almost everyone coming down on one side or another (although creation has never offered an explanation for the origin of life).

  my question is; 'is there another way of explaining the existence of life in the universe'?.

  it's tangential and difficult to imagine but can we drag our perceptions away from the well established religious and evolutionary grooves to arrive at something .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Abaddon

  Why do you have to choose?

  What if we are evolution becoming aware of itself, and of developing a civilisation which has characteristics celebrated by the world's great religions. Make worrying about the origin silly with something as wonderful happening around your ears.

  Alternately we are Lisa Simpson's Science Project...
• 
  65

  British College: Non-Muslims are "filth", "pigs" and "dogs"

  by Elsewhere in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2142403,00.html.

  the times april 20, 2006 .

  muslim students 'being taught to despise unbelievers as filth'.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Abaddon

  Mary
  

  
  Nice to see you're not willing to engage in debate Mary. The fact that some Islamic Clerics interpret passages in the QUran to justify their pathological hatred of those different to them, and to change, is of no more surprise than Churches in South Africa interpreted the Bible in a way to justify their hatred of those different to them, and to change.

  In you eagerness to attack the bad people of one faith you ignore the bad people of your faith who also quote scripture and oppress and harm.

  It isn't the religion; most Christians in 1800 were as pig ignorant as the problem Muslims today as regards human rights.

  It is the culture; it is the social and political environment.

  But hey, you're unwilling to defend your assertions, so enough said.

  Your attitude of religious belligerence is exactly the same as that of problem Muslim's. It's just by accident of birth your culture is a hundred or more years advanced in many ways (nothing to do with technology), and you can see the great wrongs that extremist Muslims do; just as our great-great-grand fathers did things we now see as wrong. The problem Muslims don;t see what they do as wrong and justify themselves religiously - just as out great-great grandfathers. And that's not to say our Great-grandfathers, grandfathers or even fathers always did the 'right thing' viewed in a modern light.

  If it hadn't been for Western greed and interference, Iran could have a democratic government celebrating it 50th year, liberal and secular, vastly educated and developed due to the massive natural wealth of their land, a beacon and example to the rest of the Islamic world. And you wonder why the bigot clerics can gain an audience? Pwwwwwwh...

  Hellrider

  It`s not just as simple as your analysis, because a religion is not just the religions holy texts, it is the religions history, the current and previous practices within the religion, the current (and previous) interpretations and commentaries of the religious texts.

  Granted, which is why it is funny someone (not you) saying the Quaran says x about Jews when (a) in modern textual analysis any specific condemnation of Jews is not supported, and (b) traditional interpretations of any religious text through history are so diverse that at any point what anyone says it means is totally irrelevant as the meaning is NOT possible to determine (i.e. some Christian's quote scripture and do wrong, so what if some Muslims do too?).

  katiekitten

  Sorry if its a bit off topic - church schools do get better results, but its not because the kids are believers and get taught a set of morals, its because the schools are allowed to interview prospective parents and therefore are able to do a backdoor academic selection.

  Yup!
• 
  72

  The Origin-of-Life Foundation, Inc. The Secret $1,000,000 Prize

  by Deputy Dog in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  from http://www.scienceagainstevolution.org/v9i11f.htm

  the secret $1,000,000 prize

  one of the best kept secrets of science is the origin of life prize sponsored by the origin of life foundation, inc. when we first ran across their web site (www.lifeorigin.org), we thought that the offer of one million dollars to anyone who could propose a plausible theory for the origin of life was just a slick creationist trick for showing that the emperor had no clothes.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Abaddon

  DD

  If you note I actually addressed the points raised and their validity; I don't care if the people making the points self-describe themselves as evolutionists. The arguments were poor and in some cases quoted arguments that have been comprhensively refuted. I'm not interested in arguments from authority, I am interested in what can be proved.

  My tone derives from the fact that if you can find the arguments you've quoted, you certainly are competent enough to find the refutations of those arguments. Instead, you make a mountain out of a molehill. Maybe you genuinely think they have a valid point, but you obviously haven't even checked-up on me informing you that Behe's arguments are false; his examples or irreducable complexity have been shown to be reducable (i.e. the components are still functional seperately as well as when working together in the claimed irreducable forms Behe concentrated on).

  If you really want to figure stuff out, judge a tree by it's fruits, not by its label. The fruits of Creationism and ID-ism are rotten, regardless of who makes them. Of course, someone may come up with a decent argument that falsifies Evolution or otherwise impacts significantly on 'conventional wisdom'. Then science will have to change.

  This is no problem; it is in science's nature to change, as it's based on evidence, and new evidence is discovered or existing evidence is re-analysed in light of other new knowledge or techniques. This means it has to change; but the 'new light' has new, hard evidence; not 'new light' coming from someone finding a new way to read a static text that allows them to retain existing beliefs, which is the basic modus-operandi of Creationism and in a dilluted form, ID-ism.

  But no one HAS come up with such arguments. Bring them on, please, but make the effort to check you're not presenting arguments that cannot be disected and disregarded in fifteen minutes of web-based research. The knowledge you gain from this and the satisfaction you gain from that are well worth the effort, and you won;t have the obvious pointed out to you time and again.

  I think you might not be aware of the ID-ism's founding principle, "The Wedge". This stratagy might seem a commendable defence of belief, but it is worrying. For a start, it is a stratagy to discredit or dispose a paradigm when it has no equivalently rigourous paradigm to replace it. It's not like they can say "Evolution is wrong, we can prove it like THIS". They try, but far not one argument advanced by the Creationist and ID community has gained even minor acceptence. They have produced some brilliant science - the refutations of Behe's irreducable complexity being prime examples of some beautiful science.

  But evolution is esentially still the most valid theory for the development of life.

  The start of life itself just has interesting theories, nothing is proved or demonstrated.
  
  But cover-up? Here's some facts;

  1/ Some scientists believe in god in a way which moves them to speculate that god is the guiding hand in evolution and the instugation of life.

  2/ Everytime one of these scientists says they have an argument which proves their beliefs, their argument is shown to be flawed by the scientific community.

  3/ Most of it is so bad it isn't published outside of Creationist and ID-ist circles.

  4/ People who present flawed arguments get bad reputatiuons, especially if they do it frequently.

  5/ Bodies of opinion (Creationists, Phrenologists) who as a group present flawed arguments get a bad reputation.

  6/ As any professional with flawed work thoroughly deserves a bad reputation, be they plumber or biologist, there is nothing wrong with 4/ and 5/.

  7/ Most scientists as per 1/ are more than bright enough to realise that because Creationism and ID has never come up with ONE good argument EVER, there will be a natural assumption by scientists in general that any more arguments in that vein will be of similar quality, and that the credibility of anyone making those arguments is will suffer. They are reluctant to go public due to the damage doing so will do to their reputations. Flat Earther geologists have EXACTLY the same problem.

  8/ Thus they come up with 'clever' stratigms.

  Now, to be blunt, this is THEIR problem. All it needs is ONE decent theory. Why general science gets attacked for Creationism and ID's failure to come up with decent theories is quite beyond me. It's almost as though they haven't got anything better to say.

  To see through their "wicked godless scientists strangle promosing new science" propoganda requires a little study; it'n not about being smart, it is about knowing stuff.

  You see, it has NOTHING to do with god.

  Many people, scientists as well, believe in a more expansive god than the one at the heart of ID and Creationisms agendas.

  Which god is bigger, a god like a potter, casting each thing by hand, or one who 'throws the dice' at the Big Bang just the right way to have things end up like this, or one who having set things along as they would be raises a hominid species to sentiency? A god that is part of all of us and everything? Unfortunately accepting god might be far grander than imagined by the goatherds means giving up on other stuff imagined by the goatherds.

  This is why Creationism and ID exist. They're the defence mechanism of dogmatic, literalistic, organised and controlling religion. They might just be stopping many people thinking about god as it might be, rather than as they were bought up or would like to believe.

  As I think we would all like to see the back of such religions, maybe we can find a common ground and I can suggest stuff to read so you can examine the arguments you've made yourself. Of course, if at the end of the day you're trying to prove Biblegod, we ain't gonna agree, but that's fine. Just as long as you understand this discussion has nothing to do with god's existence either way. Abiogenesis would not disprove god, just ideas of god that required god for life to start.
• 
  65

  British College: Non-Muslims are "filth", "pigs" and "dogs"

  by Elsewhere in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2142403,00.html.

  the times april 20, 2006 .

  muslim students 'being taught to despise unbelievers as filth'.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Abaddon

  Hey Robdar, same back at you; we seem to have been typing our posts up at the same time...

  nice one too sad emo...