Dan_de_Numeruno:
Mma gi enwekwanu otu. O bu ife ndi bekee na akpo Transexual.

amu nna gi tubakwa nwanne gi nwanyi ime...obu ife ndi bekee na akpo incest

these igbo ppl, una don crase finish.. lmao... makrle mods no ban una o.. lol..

musKeeto: these igbo ppl, una don crase finish.. lmao... makrle mods no ban una o.. lol..

mod suppose understand first. hehe.

Agiliti:
all of the 22 members of the arab league (except for lebanon) have islam as either official, sole, or predominant religion and about 90% of all arabs are muslim so you saying arab is not islam is like saying jewish is not judaism.


next time you want to say something, come with facts and not just emotional rants

How ignorant people are in this world.
Before islam, there were arabs. For centuries. Mohamed imposed islam on arabs through jihad.
If mo didn't bring islam, they'll still be arabs. if they all converted today, they'll still be arabs.

Let me ask you. An arab child born in USA into a christian family, practising christianity all her life invents something. Will you call that invention an islamic invention ?

wiegraf:

You present your case as if islam was primarily responsible for that. Has it occurred to you that that success, which is not as special as you present it, may have been in spite of islam rather than because of it? You see many islamic nobel prize in the sciences winners where? I can only think of one palestinian. Have they contributed anything of worth in hundreds of years? Modern western science has given them more than the al's have, yet they choose to ignore that as well. That would be a better example.

Quite a few of those scholars were only interested in making the koran look good as well. Usually, that is all they are ever interested in actually. They didn't turn their backs on science, it was never important to them. They use science to justify the dogma. Once science violates their principles, it becomes haram, at the least until they can find a way wiggle it in, claim it was predicted etc

http://ptonline.aip.org/journals/doc/PHTOAD-ft/vol_60/iss_8/49_1.shtml?bypassSSO=1

well, Baghdad was ruled by Islamic leaders at a time when it was the centre of knowledge of the world, where everything was being studied by muslims and non-muslims alike. It would not have been so if the Khalifs didn't want it that way. also if there were nobel prizes between 800 and 1100 ad, a large concentration would have come from baghdad because they were the ones restoring works of aristotle while europe was in the dark ages

you are also right with the bolded because that's exactly what they did in the 12th century, people started believing the knowledge was of the devil and their own dark ages started

at the end of the day, it's hard to deny the effects early islam had on todays western education, whether they actively encouraged it, provided a space for it to flourish, or just did it to make their koran look good is irrelevant. As for modern islam, that's a different case

plaetton:

The Crusades changed Islam for the worse.
After the crusades Islam began to redefine itself solely on the basis of the paranoi, distrust, fear and hatred for western civilisation. It began to build barricades around itself to shield it from western corruption, treachery and influence. It gradually became a religion of anger, always under the constant threat of having its values diluted or completely eroded.
As we see very often in history, whenever a group isolate themselves from new influences, ideas and trends, they tend to stagnate and regress over time.

I think that has been the tragedy of the Islamic civilisations.

This may be true, but one could also reason the crusades only hastened the inevitable. Iran for instance was set to become an advanced society by western standards. Next thing we know, khomeini. 13 year old girls are getting shot for going to school. Bh thinks the world is flat.

If they believe they are capable providing a healthy environment for science, one has to note that their inability to modernize does not indicate so. They aren't the only ones that were crushed by the west, we all were. Japan closed its borders for maybe 3-400 years. They eventually got pummeled effortlessly by some western ships. So they opened their borders again and industrialized in roughly one generation. They defeated russian ships less than 50 years later (meanwhile black man was using jazz in warfare). China, it was more or else agreed that it should be left alone. Too much trouble. The west could recognize that theirs was a formidable culture going through rough times, so they left it to its own devices, isolated more or else as well. Communism arguably halted progress but look at them now. Prediction is chinese and indians are soon going to have a sizable amount of nobel laureates. Korea was repressed by all its neighbors, seemingly since the dawn of time. These and other societies have recovered or are recovering quickly from isolation or oppression. But the islamic (and black man) world...

advocate666:

How ignorant people are in this world.
Before islam, there were arabs. For centuries. Mohamed imposed islam on arabs through jihad.
If mo didn't bring islam, they'll still be arabs. if they all converted today, they'll still be arabs.

Let me ask you. An arab child born in USA into a christian family, practising christianity all her life invents something. Will you call that invention an islamic invention ?

Let me ask you. The alternating current that we use everyday was designed by a serbian who moved to america, but would you call it a serbian invention or an american invention?
If America was ruled by a pope who created an environment for engineers to flourish, would you call electricity a christian invention?
do you even know the religion of the inventor?

Agiliti:
all of the 22 members of the arab league (except for lebanon) have islam as either official, sole, or predominant religion and about 90% of all arabs are muslim so you saying arab is not islam is like saying jewish is not judaism.


next time you want to say something, come with facts and not just emotional rants

you go to south arabia, Yemen border, Hadhramut, etc. and you will find remnants of pre-islamic cultures and religions among the BEdouin Tribal full-blooded Arabs. therefore im against equating ALL Arabs with islam.

Agiliti:
at the end of the day, it's hard to deny the effects early islam had on todays western education

So did say, even the egyptians. They probably influenced others who influenced the greek. That's how progress works. But I am not arguing this anyways.

My point is (or one of them is) islam itself probably had little to do with their scientific success, and in fact care little for those achievements except that it makes them look good. So when you assume they are hypocritically enjoying nice things from that era, they aren't being hypocrites because they don't really place value on that. They don't think them as nice a thing as reverting to 7th century arabia, which is their ultimate aim. Science? Pfft. Unless it can aid the koran or something similar it's valueless

How ignorant people are in this world.
Before islam, there were arabs. For centuries. Mohamed imposed islam on arabs through jihad.
If mo didn't bring islam, they'll still be arabs. if they all converted today, they'll still be arabs.

Let me ask you. An arab child born in USA into a christian family, practising christianity all her life invents something. Will you call that invention an islamic invention ?

such a child would be lebanese, or simply white.

ditto for western arab inventions.

steve jobs was half arab, his inventions arent called arab.


as per the rest of your post, that's a "what if".

soccerinfo9ja: Hey science has giving you the comfortable life you have today. Why do religious people talk cheap about most scientific theories that proves that most of life's so called "wonders" are logically explainable and not the work of their "God" ? they go bitter when you tell them that "wonder A" is explainable and its available for everyone to read. No they wont agree instead they start hating on science ? Really?

your post is full of errors and disputable claims anyway.

wiegraf:

So did say, even the egyptians. They probably influenced others who influenced the greek. That's how progress works. But I am not arguing this anyways.

My point is (or one of them is) islam itself probably had little to do with their scientific success, and in fact care little for those achievements except that it makes them look good. So when you assume they are hypocritically enjoying nice things from that era, they aren't being hypocrites because they don't really place value on that. They don't think them as nice a thing as reverting to 7th century arabia, which is their ultimate aim. Science? Pfft. Unless it can aid the koran or something similar it's valueless

depends on the era or region you're referring to.

dubai, for example, doesnt fit your description.

Agiliti:

Let me ask you. The alternating current that we use everyday was designed by a serbian who moved to america, but would you call it a serbian invention or an american invention?
If America was ruled by a pope who created an environment for engineers to flourish, would you call electricity a christian invention?
do you even know the religion of the inventor?

I can see that you are good at dodging simple questions.

Let me answer yours.
1- I will certainly call it an American invention. (note that your question is like comparing apples to oranges because neither America nor Serbia were a religion, but I indulge you)
2- No, it will not be a christian invention but american invention. (Or else it would be like calling ipad a republican invention as it was conceived when GW Bush was in power.)
3- Religion of inventors is irrelevant. That's what I've been trying to tell you.

tpia1:

such a child would be lebanese, or simply white.

ditto for western arab inventions.

steve jobs was half arab, his inventions arent called arab.


as per the rest of your post, that's a "what if".

You must be another one who confuses islam with arab.

ignorant and gullible is the problem of the religious people. Acquiring and proven wonder is like a gift from the Satan in their eyes even if they can't do without it. the greatest inventors are still the greatest enemy of the religious people,just because they believe vast knowledge which leads to invention is devilish so that they can control and fool you around forcing you to believed they are the only one that have the right knowledge about the earth by their teaching 5000 years ago.

advocate666:

You must be another one who confuses islam with arab.

you can insert "Islamic" in place of "Arab" in my post, if it makes you feel better.

however, context of usage of one word is more sensitive than the other.

soccerinfo9ja: Hey science has giving you the comfortable life you have today.

Okay. Just note that science was birthed in a most religious era. The Middle Ages.

soccerinfo9ja: Why do religious people talk cheap about most scientific theories that proves that most of life's so called "wonders" are logically explainable and not the work of their "God" ?

Not all these wonders have been explained by science. Religion is not even based on that but mainly on the fact that there must be a cause for the universe we live in.

soccerinfo9ja: they go bitter when you tell them that "wonder A" is explainable and its available for everyone to read.

How do they go bitter ? Who goes bitter ? Are you forgetting that many religious people are people of science ?

soccerinfo9ja: No they wont agree instead they start hating on science ? Really?

Plain nonsense in light of questions I asked previously.

PAGAN 9JA:


you go to south arabia, Yemen border, Hadhramut, etc. and you will find remnants of pre-islamic cultures and religions among the BEdouin Tribal full-blooded Arabs. therefore im against equating ALL Arabs with islam.

i never said all arabs were muslim, even my post that you qouted clarifies that. however, i don't have a problem interchanging both words because there is a blurry line between the arabic people and the islamic religion.

for example, if a christian arab says salam alaikum or allah which is simply their native greeting and word for god, everyone would think that person is muslim. so how would you not correlate arabs to muslims when all muslims learn arabic and pray to arabia every single day?

advocate666:

I can see that you are good at dodging simple questions.

Let me answer yours.
1- I will certainly call it an American invention. (note that your question is like comparing apples to oranges because neither America nor Serbia were a religion, but I indulge you)
2- No, it will not be a christian invention but american invention. (Or else it would be like calling ipad a republican invention as it was conceived when GW Bush was in power.)
3- Religion of inventors is irrelevant. That's what I've been trying to tell you.

wiegraf:

So did say, even the egyptians. They probably influenced others who influenced the greek. That's how progress works. But I am not arguing this anyways.

My point is (or one of them is) islam itself probably had little to do with their scientific success, and in fact care little for those achievements except that it makes them look good. So when you assume they are hypocritically enjoying nice things from that era, they aren't being hypocrites because they don't really place value on that. They don't think them as nice a thing as reverting to 7th century arabia, which is their ultimate aim. Science? Pfft. Unless it can aid the koran or something similar it's valueless

I don't care about the religion of any of the inventors or scientists and i do not think that it matters, after all the beauty of baghdad at that time was that people of different religions and races came together from all over the world out of a shared desire for knowledge.
HOWEVER, they were ruled by muslim leaders, and islam was the law of the land, that's why is is called the golden age of ISLAM and not the golden age of baghdad....and whatever advancements in knowledge happened because the leaders allowed it. Again, why they did is irrelevant.

at the end of the day, the irony i am trying to point out is that 1000 years ago, people from the west who were going through their dark ages came to the islamic world to learn, but today, the same muslims claim that this knowledge is haram.

tpia1:


depends on the era or region you're referring to.

dubai, for example, doesnt fit your description.

Why not? From the article I linked earlier

"A useful, if imperfect, indicator of scientific output is the number of published scientific research papers, together with the citations to them. Table 1 shows the output of the seven most scientifically productive Muslim countries for physics papers, over the period from 1 January 1997 to 28 February 2007, together with the total number of publications in all scientific fields. A comparison with Brazil, India, China, and the US reveals significantly smaller numbers. A study by academics at the International Islamic University Malaysia2 showed that OIC countries have 8.5 scientists, engineers, and technicians per 1000 population, compared with a world average of 40.7, and 139.3 for countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (For more on the OECD, see http://www.oecd.org.) Forty-six Muslim countries contributed 1.17% of the world's science literature, whereas 1.66% came from India alone and 1.48% from Spain. Twenty Arab countries contributed 0.55%, compared with 0.89% by Israel alone. The US NSF records that of the 28 lowest producers of scientific articles in 2003, half belong to the OIC.3"

http://ptonline.aip.org/journals/doc/PHTOAD-ft/vol_60/iss_8/49_1.shtml?bypassSSO=1

Agiliti:


at the end of the day, the irony i am trying to point out is that 1000 years ago, people from the west who were going through their dark ages came to the islamic world to learn, but today, the same muslims claim that this knowledge is haram.

They unquestionably contributed, but you overstate their case. You make it sound like they were the greek. And the knowledge was haram even then, they just hadn't gotten to the troublesome bits yet. As they pursued science it eventually clashed with islam irreconcilably, the rest is history.

tpia1:

you can insert "Islamic" in place of "Arab" in my post, if it makes you feel better.

however, context of usage of one word is more sensitive than the other.

That's what I thought. You are one of those.

Islamic and Arabic are not interchangeable. Not the same thing. One is a race, the other is a religion.

Uyi Iredia:

Okay. Just note that science was birthed in a most religious era. The Middle Ages.

The number of misstatements flying around in nairaland is amazing.

Even according to your religion, science started in the garden of eden.

But the reality is that science precedes religion. Mankind has been practicing science since its beginning.

Some ideas can be funny as senseless.

advocate666:

The number of misstatements flying around in nairaland is amazing.

Even according to your religion, science started in the garden of eden.

But the reality is that science precedes religion. Mankind has been practicing science since its beginning.

Ode ! Where does the Bible state that science started in Eden ?

soccerinfo9ja: Hey science has giving you the comfortable life you have today. Why do religious people talk cheap about most scientific theories that proves that most of life's so called "wonders" are logically explainable and not the work of their "God" ? they go bitter when you tell them that "wonder A" is explainable and its available for everyone to read. No they wont agree instead they start hating on science ? Really?

i dont know any "religious people" that fought science, many scientist were religious people.

Ubenedictus: i dont know any "religious people" that fought science, many scientist were religious people.

Maybe you need to do more research ... There were and are loads of religious folks who fought science!

Table Leg :

Maybe you need to do more research ... There were and are loads of religious folks who fought science!

is science a human being that can b fought by odas?

Ubenedictus: is science a human being that can b fought by odas?

Dont be daft, "fought" was used in a context!
Let me help you, how about "challenged"? Can you relate?

Table Leg :

Dont be daft, "fought" was used in a context!
Let me help you, how about "challenged"? Can you relate?

now it is interesting! What is science? Simply put it is d art of knowing. (nt a complete definition) if it is not challenged then it can't be science, it must be challenged and pass d test be4 it is regarded as fact. So y do u hv a problem wit science been challenged?

Ubenedictus: now it is interesting! What is science? Simply put it is d art of knowing. (nt a complete definition) if it is not challenged then it can't be science, it must be challenged and pass d test be4 it is regarded as fact. So y do u hv a problem wit science been challenged?

And where did i say i have a problem with science being challenged?

Table Leg :

And where did i say i have a problem with science being challenged?

d thread reads y religious pipo fight science, it almost makes it sound like challenging science is a disservice to science. Sorry i thought u embraced dat view.