₦airaland Forum

Are you saying that when militants bombed any oil installation or bombed warri, lagos or Assba, no northener or any other tribe was killed?

I asked you a simple question and you are getting emotional, I am sure you are benefiting from the project one way or the other. The question again, is the Eko Atlantic city going to protect th huge coast line against rising sea levels, stronger ocean currents caused by global warming?

Please explain how Eko Atlantic City can help protect the large expands of coast line between Kuramo beach and Epe?

Swimm against the river is an understatement, they are swimming against ocean tides, ocean waves, rising tides, etc. Imagine what lagos would have been if the money sink into the Atlantic is used to develop the larger expanse of land between Ikorodu and Epe

Who are they going to fight and how are they going to retaliate? If Boko Haram should bomb borno or Abuja, how are they going to retaliate? Bomb oil installations in the Niger delta or bomb northerners living in the Niger Delta?

Wrong move. When the militants were bombing and kidnapping people, did the northern people threaten war? As long as boko haram does not attact their land, they have no case for retaliation. What they should do is to support GEJ to take decisive action and then support him in whatever way if his powers as C IN C
is being compromised.

The problem with Nigeria is its tribalism and nepotism. We praise sing and support people based on ethnic, tribal, religious, ethnic or personal interests. I find it ridiculous that people are criticizing bakare and CPC for criticizing the government's handling of terrorism and other security related issues. Maybe they expect CPC and other opposition parties to praise the GEJ government. if it was other more advanced countries, would the opposition parties praise sing a govenment that has not caught any suspect after so many attcks. Imagine what would have happened to George Bush of he did not attack somebody (anybody) after 9/11 he would not have survived his first term. All we are asking for from GEJ is action, and he is the C in c of the armed forces.

@logic101
The US did not create Al-Qaeda. Yes they were allies with the leader -Osama when they had common interest of driving the invading Russians out of Afghanistan. After that had been achieved, their interests changed and they became bitter enemies. That happens a lot in international politics where there area no permanent friends but permanent interests. France was once a bitter enemy of Germany, but today they are best of friends, even closer than us, Russia and Britain which help liberate them from Germany. I wish our leader can pursue permanent interest of the country instead of parochial egocentric interest. It is only a Nigeria that would spend billions of dollars in "peace keeping" in another country without any benefit whatsoever to the country or its citizens.

Nigerians like to blame every one else but themselves for their woes instead of taking pragmatic actions. They blame western media for misinformation and yet most of us are glued to these western media 24/7. What prevents our own media from providing us with correct information?. The us had been warning us about al-qaeda infiltration in Nigeria for years, yet we all remained blind. Now the chicken has come home to roost and we are blaming the west and western media. Was it the US that trained andulMutallab to bomb a us bound train? Or was he working for CIA? Remember he said he and others Deon nigeria was trained by Al-Qaeda in yemen, maybe OT was CIA
that was doing the training.

As much as hate military governments, they seem to handle security challenges better than their civilian counterparts. Just like IBB asked the then police IG, "my friend where is Anini?" and Anini was caught within days, GEJ should be asking Ringim, director of SSS and military intelligence "where is Boko Haram?" and give them a week to produce the sponsors and leaders or be sacked. After all he issued a directive to ministers to work with madam world bank or he sacked.

We have just had a sneak preview of what Eko Atlantic City would look like. We would need to invite Neptune to govern it and have Ariel (the little mermaid) as princess. O do not forget sponge ball with square pants, he would make a wonderful neighbour.

All those in favour of re- building the lost city of Atlantis, say hi.

Why do u want to awaken your Kundalini? is it going to help you achieve your goals in life? If not leave it alone and let sleeping dogs lie.

The level of dedication and work required of advanced esoteric and metaphysical practices is not worth the trouble in modern western societies. It might take you decades of meditation and learning just to get tangible results, all in a bid to do supernatural feats.

Aunty Dora has a strong case of depression and dementia and so making incoherent and conflicting statements. How can you reconcile these statements in the same letter -

freepeople:
My Dear Friends,


This, of course, is far from the truth. As I have always said – and which I still maintain – there is no way Ngige can beat me in a free and fair electoral contest in Anambra State today.

What took place on Tuesday was nothing but daylight robbery. You may recall that I led with about 1,000 votes before the rerun ballot held in areas where the April 16 voting was declared inconclusive by INEC. For the concluded votes, I had polled 66,273 of the concluded votes, while Ngige got 65,576.


The mournful mood in Anambra State after the announcement of Ngige as winner of the rerun election is strong evidence that the will of the people has not been respected. There would have been spontaneous celebrations across Anambra Central in particular if Ngige actually won the election, but the reverse was the case. I will, however, not be surprised if, in keeping with his tradition, he hires a crowd of celebrants one of these days so as to give the false impression that the people are happy with his stolen mandate.

Before the election aunty claimed that she led by only 1000 votes and yet she asserts that she is fart more popular than Ngige and so are saddened by her loss and Ngige's victory.

Is this delusions or what

I can understand your passion for diesel engines but you are letting your passions get the better of you as you are deaf to other peoples superior arguments against your beloved diesel engines. Many people have told you that it makes no sense to drive a diesel powered private car or even small urban commercial cars in Nigerian cities – especially lagos, where you burn more fuel in traffic than in actual miles travelled.

Diesel in Nigeria is deregulated, which means it can cost anywhere between N110 to N150 and you are not sure of its availability. You can by it at N120/litre today and go back to the same station the next day and you are told it is N150/litre. Means while petrol is fairly stable at N65/litre and it is available everywhere.
Diesel is at best 25% more efficient than petrol in terms of miles/litre. So it makes no sense at all to run on diesel when it cost over 100% more.
The option of using used cooking oil is laughable simply because Nigerians hardly discard cooking oil. They use it again and again until it used and top up with fresh oil when the old oil is very low in volume. Yes we all know that frying food again and again with the same oil has negative health implications, but at over N600/litre of cooking oil, they simply forget. Same with Palm oil, it is currently more that N600/litre also. If you plan to operate your car on used palm or vegetable oils, you will not drive very far.

Using rapeseed or any other seed to produce oil is also unreasonable from so many angles. We have millions of tones of palm kernel seed rotting away simply because we do possess efficient, cultivation, extraction and transportation system, and you think we would be better cultivating and extracting rapeseed oil for engines.
I quarrel with the idea of using cultivatable land for fuel when we are still unable to grow our own food and have to depend on other countries to feed us.

In terms of fossil fuels, we have more than enough gas and crude oil to cater for all our and engines and probable those of West Africa and beyond for at least 50yrs. We should exploit that to the fullest before turning our agricultural lands to growing fuels.

Finally remember that even the processing of oils from seed would involve the use of fossil fuel in one form or the other.

I will not criticize Jonathan for deciding to kneel down before any mortal. My only quarrel is that as he is the president of Nigeria, which has secularism enshrined in our constitution, he should only kneel before other "men of God" like TB Joshua, Anthony cardinal Okogie, Oyedipo, etc, and Sultan of Sokoto, chief imam of Lagos and Abuja. He should not forget the various Ifa, Benin, and Okija priests also.

ajoguegbe:
@Wirinet
I hail your vast understanding of the workings of the natural world. but consider your next statement, You debunked both the geologic and the scientific points of view. so where do you stand? and where did you get your own evidences?Or may be you were alive 250million years ago to have observed it. look at the authoritative statements you make.

It is you that debunk geological and scientific evidence, not me. I concur with established scientific evidences while you promote spiritual evidences as against geological ones.

Sorry, i might not be right on the figure on when the continents broke apart as i gave the figures out of the top of my head, but i am certain that it was  more than 100million yrs ago. I was just trying to correct Ow11 that it was far more than 25 million yrs ago.

See this wikipedia article to have an understanding of continental movements.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pangaea

If you have alternative figures from other sources, let us have it.

ajoguegbe:
Now consider your next statement I really don't know whose neo-cortex is malfunctioning now, when you have no evidences to back up your belief. you dont believe in God and you are very dogmatic about it.another believes in a God with proofs and you say he has brain problem.

You above statement is meaningless. You make an assertion based on your religious dogma, and i reject it for lack of logic and evidence, and you turn around and accuse me of dogmatism. Do i have to believe every belief that is proposed to me?. Also what about others that refuse to accept your brand of religious doctrine, are you going to accuse them of being dogmatic also.

ajoguegbe:
If you say its misleading because its an attempt to evangelize, then you are wrong.Yes it is an attempt to evangelise and there is nothing misleading about that purpose. Why do you think i will spend hours online answering questions about my belifs. You think i'm jobless? NO! The reason is because I want people like you to be saved and come to the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. I belief its the truth you have not known thats why you have failed to embrace Christ. My point is that Religion makes more sense than atheism. And christianity(though not a religion in the true sense) holds the key of knowledge and of life.

I do not condemn your attempt at evangelizing, i only quarrel with your misinformation of others in order to trick them to tow your line of belief using pseudo- science. You will cause more damage by leading many people who seek to understand science astray. Using science to support your religious beliefs is wrong, it would be logical to remain in the realm of the spiritual. I commend the efforts of my brother Mr Olaadegbu, he does a lot of evangelizing here on Nairaland, i only quarrel with him also when he uses voodoo science to preach. He can be forgiven because he does not claim to be a scientist.

Your religion make spiritual sense to you - good, but it does not make logical sense to me and billions of others. Lots of people just want to live their lives and not in need of salvation or threats from any one. You can save those that require salvation.

ajoguegbe:
You say i didnt tell you why the Ark floated, and titanic sank, that is because you didnt read the blog i refered you to in the thread. READ IT, It will help your life. Link once more
http://judewatchman..com/

I am very busy now, but i promise to look at your blog later. But i want you to know that your global flood theory is a very hard sell outside religious dogma. There are way to many problems with it, that i could write a hole volume picking holes in it. Some examples are; how was Noah, his family, plants and animals onboard the wooden ark able to breath in the thin atmosphere of over 29,000ft, they would need to carry oxygen masks and probably pressurize the ark. Also how were they able to cope with sub-zero temperatures at such height. And you have not even answered my questions on where the huge volume of water came from and where it went after.

If you want a more comprehensive story of the mythical flood, read the Epic of Gilgamesh.

ow11:
^^^
I like your enthusiasm to reconcile bible stories and geological facts BUT I would like to ask you to explain just this point.

Now the emboldened says South America is moving away from Africa at the rate of 10cm/yr or 0.0001km/yr and the shortest distance between Africa and South America is approximately 2500 km i.e. Senegal to the outermost part of Brazil(Not taking into account the possible drift point from the mid-Atlantic ridge) . This means according to you, Continental drift started (2500/0.0001) years ago = 25 million years ago!

If we use the Mid Atlantic ridge as the drift point and assume both continents move away at the same rate whilst keeping 10cm/year constant, we still arrive at (4500km/2)/0.0001 = 22.5 million years ago!

Could you help me address this anomaly in your argument?

You are just wasting your time trying to reason scientifically with people who are desperate to spread their dogma using falsehood and lies. I think it gives them a sense of self righteous euphoria convincing people with little understanding of how the natural world works, with their little understanding of science.

The continents did  not drift apart 25million yrs ago, according to geological studies (not by spiritual methods as employed by our spiritual geologist), the continents drifted apart some 180million yrs ago. So except our spiritual geologist and biologist can tell us that Noah or any other mammal for that matter was living 180million years ago.

I think religion affects the smooth functioning of the neo-cortex or else, how can someone postulate in the 21st century that enough water covered the whole planet up to the height of mount Everest. Since the earth is a sphere and mount Everest is up to 29,000ft above sea level, you would require about 30 times more water than is available on earth today. A geologist should know that all the water ( liquid, Ice and vapour) on the earth's surface is constant, so where did 30 times the volume of water come from to flood the planet?, and after the fabled flood, where did it disappear to?

They peddle the ridiculous argument that since most societies in the middle east have flood stories, so it must be true. If we use that logic, then we must accept fire breathing flying lizards or is it snakes called Dragons as being true, since the stories pervades both far east and the whole of Europe. We must also accept santa as true, since most people have heard of santa.

Finally, this tread is very misleading as it is just an attempt at evangelizing and nothing more. The poster did not even tell us why the fabled Noah's ark floated and the Titanic sank. Also he should have gone on to tell us why the Concorde crashed, why challenger crashed, why the twin towers fell, why the atomic bomb fell, and many other grave human tragedies  to support his religious dogma.

Endeavour to use the search facility on Nairaland, it will save you some bandwidth not to talk of time posting topics that had been posted again and again.

Here are threads on the same topic.
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-10204.0.html
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-4993.0.html
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-1752.0.html

Mr Ajoguebge,

You strike me as someone who just got a very large resource like a huge encyclopedia, then you read up a few lines of a few topics and  attempt to relate every subject to fit into your religious dogma no matter how unconnected and irrelevant.

ajoguegbe:
What you dont understand is that the Europeans came in for three reasons: Gold, God and Glory. While the non-religious europeans were concerned about the economic gains, their  godly Christian counterparts had another purpose:to spread the Gospel. The developments and improvements in the quality of life we see today in Africa cannot be removed from European influence. Its impact is seen all over Africa today. If not for Mary Slessor for instance, many twins would still have been standing the danger of death. that is to mentions a few

The first reason Europeans came to Africa and and the Americas, was for exploration and trade.  Merchants wanted to avoid passing through the torturous journey through the desert and the indian subcontinents to get to China, because China was the source of fine silk and spices. The southern part of Africa was discovered while trying to round the huge African continent. Also South America was discovered by mistake, when an explorer swung too far out of cape verde while trying to round the African continent. Later Columbus discovered North America while trying to get to China/India by sailing eastwards.

It was after establishing trade routes, that evangelization start by the established orthodox churches, which was tied to the state anyway, then militarization and colonization.

ajoguegbe:
Only the skeptics like yourself who dont want to hear the truth would disagree. The key players of the then Europe would not

Many Europeans and African scholars believed it was European colonization that lead to the current under development of Africa. Read the books by Ali Mazrui.

ajoguegbe:
As concerning the British Empire, historians have labeled the Victorian Era as “a long period of prosperity for the British people, as profits gained from the overseas British Empire, as well as from industrial improvements at home, allowed a large, educated middle class to develop.”(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victorian_era) Queen Victoria, for whom this era is named, publicly identified the source of their prosperity when she said,
“that book [the Bible] accounts for the supremacy of England.”

The Above reference from Wikipedia did not credit the prosperity of the Victorian Era to the Bible, it says "The reign was a long period of prosperity for the British people, as[b] profits gained from the overseas British Empire[/b], as well as from industrial improvements at home, allowed an educated middle class to develop."  It says clearly that the prosperity was due to the exploitation of the colonies and the industrial revolution.

If you claim the prosperity was due to the Bible what of other prosperous nations before it, like Rome, Greece and Spain. Was it also due to the Bible that they prospered and fell? or are your implying that at the same period as the Victorian era, that the other nations were not carrying the Bible?

ajoguegbe:
Historians refer to America as the 'New World'. go and study history plz. It was called the New World before they changed it to the United States and all that. I used the New World to refer to the America

Please read assimilate and understand a subject before attempting to use the issue as a point of debate. The United State of America is not America, it is part of America, in fact it is only a part of North America. So US is not the new world but part of the New world.

Please refer to the following wikipedia article

The New World is one of the names used for the Western Hemisphere, specifically the Americas. The term originated in the late 15th century, when the Americas had been recently discovered by European explorers, expanding the geographical horizon of the European middle Ages which had thought of the world as consisting of Europe, Asia, and Africa (collectively, the Old World).

Source - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_World

ajoguegbe:
Sir I used a secular source that you can easily verify not a religious one. That makes me believe your mind is made up, and that badly because you have so many false assumptions that lack facts.

Sir i indulge to to highlight any false assumption i might have and provide corrections to the assumptions.

ajoguegbe:
The Bible influenced the Government of all developed nations - What of Japan and china?
I didnt say 'all'.read it again.the right word should have been "most". Even Japan was influenced by a professor from the United States. No time for that now

I assume that the main determinant of a developed Nation is Manpower (education), Industrialization, peace and justice and not the Bible, Koran or any other religion. You might want to correct my "false assumptions" with facts and figures.

ajoguegbe:
Sorry your reasoning is too myopic for an answer, Why did it hit the iceberg?why didnt the Ark hit it?or is it possible it hit it and didnt collapse?Muhamad didnt write the koran. there are so many scientific, historical and philosophical errors in your post

My reasoning Myopic? Your reasoning is dogmatic. Your are attempting to push down your religious dogma as science, history and philosophy when it is just that - Dogma. So you decide to turn science and logic on its head.

Why do you not tell us why the Titanic hit an ice berg, maybe your God wanted to prove that he was unhappy with the building of a ship that is said to rival his anointed prophet, so he had to kill about 1000 people to show his displeasure.

The Ark could not have hit an Ice burg because the story was set in ancient Mesopotamia so there was no ice berg.

Finally, you need to update your knowledge and quit your obsession with the Titanic because of the human tragedy it created. Titanic was an engineering feet in its days, but today it pales into insignificant when compared with modern ships.

Below are size comparism of some modern day ocean liners.
[img]http://2.bp..com/_nFhfvUPu-Tc/SUw0e6M4ykI/AAAAAAAACMU/x1c_95FJywk/s400/largest-ship-6-1.gif[/img]

So how does your mythical ark compare with modern ships that sails the oceans.

Please point out the scientific, historical and philosophical errors in my post so i can learn.

ajoguegbe:
Maybe you misunderstand the use of 'relevance'.By that I mean the principles of the Word of God(the Bible) can be applied to any society.The Europeans applied it to the precolonial world and we are better today for knowing Christ and dropping our barbaric lifestyle. Till tomoro the Word of God can be applied to any society.

You did not elaborate on the principle of the word of God, which was absent in other ancient and contemporary societies until the bible was introduced.

First tell me what aspect of these principles that the Europeans applied to pre-colonial Africa, I hope Slavery was not among them, then tell me how our post colonial Africa is better off today as a result of those principles.

ajoguegbe:
When light disappears any other thing can cause a failure but we may not attribute the grand cause to the absence of light. The Bible was the light of Europe, when they started replacing it with science and reason, the light started fading.Better differentiate between Christianity (as a religion of Roman Catholics) and Christianity (as followers of Christ). The people that escaped to Form America or the New World were those looking for freedom to practice their faith. They were being persecuted by 'religious' christians
The Foundation of the United States is still based on Christianity and it was this foundation that made God bless them in the first place. Just like God protects the Jews because of His covenant with Abraham. Many of them dont know Him today but He cannot abandon His Covenant with Abraham. Read how the Jews have defeated the surrounding Arabs. its an amazing story.

Many people would disagree with you that the Bible was the light of Europe - Including the Europeans themselves. The Bible brought numerous wars, conflicts and instability. In fact Europe was more stable during modern times that when it was under biblical rule.

The Europeans did not colonize the new world (Africa, Australia, etc) because of religious persecution. Colonization was state policy to exploit other Nations of their resources. Please refer me to the history books your are reading.

The people that migrated to the new world - including South America, had strong Christian background, so it was natural to incorporate christianity into the new states.

ajoguegbe:
I am afraid you dont know history. the industrial revolution followed closely the Reformation and John Calvin is a known figure. When the Industrial Revolution started to power its way onto the world stage, it was fueled by what is today known as the Protestant work ethic pioneered by John Calvin a pastor. Go and study the protestant work ethic very well. this is why some call John Calvin the father of the Industrial Revolution.
But let me point out here that Science and Bible are not opposites. they are meant to be complementary. The founding fathers of Science were devoted Christians who believed their work were expression of God. Let me paste this piece from the Encarta Encyclopaedia on the "Scientific Revolution"
Atheism, previously unknown in Christian Europe, gradually became an increasingly popular alternative to religion. Ironically, although all of the major figures in the scientific revolution were devoutly religious and saw their scientific work as a way of proving the existence of an omnipotent creator, the new mechanical philosophies were appropriated by atheists. Those who wished to deny the validity of the religious world-view could use the new philosophies to suggest that the world was capable of functioning in an entirely mechanistic way with no need for supernatural intervention or supervision,
Many of the central beliefs of the Enlightenment and new social sciences developed at that time owed their origins to the powerful stimulus of Newtonian science. But all too often it was a Newtonian science devoid of the God that Newton himself had believed in. Newton was especially devout and explicitly stated that his system was intended to demonstrate the existence of God, but he was powerless to prevent the irreligious interpretation of his science. From then on the secular scientific world-view became increasingly dominant.
Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

You and your quoted source make so many wrong assumptions and speculations that i do not know where to start. But you really need to brush up on the Industrial revolution, where when, how and why it started. It has very little to do with protestants. Except you also want to tell me that the industrial revolution of Japan and China has protestant imprints also.

Nothing concerns Newtonian science of Mechanics, optics and calculus with social sciences, they developed in quite parallel lines.

ajoguegbe:
You may not know how the Bible influenced the Government of Developed Nations. I consider that a topic for another day. But just know that the three arms of government the legislature, the judiciary and the executive were gotten from the Bible where God was seen as the three of them
Isa 33:22
For the LORD is our judge(Judiciary), the LORD is our lawgiver(legislature), the LORD is our king(Executive);
KJV
AMERICA'S FOUNDATION IS STILL CHRISTIAN, THEY MAY HAVE INVENTED SEVERAL INTERPRETATIONS TO WHAT THEY ARE AND WHAT THEY DO

The Bible influenced the Government of all developed nations - What of Japan and china?

Did the Bible influence the Greeks to introduce Democracy to the world?

The Isa 33:22 you quoted above says nothing about Democracy, it is in fact anti democratic. All powers being reposed in the hands of one all powerful God or is it a King or the representation of God, to do and undo.

ajoguegbe:
Do you know that amateurs built Noah’s Ark while professionals built the Titanic? Surprisingly, the Ark rested safely on a mountain (+17,000 feet high) after 370 days of storm with no casualty, whereas the Titanic of 20th Century technology sank (-12,460 feet) down the ocean floor 5 days into its maiden voyage killing 1,516 people on-board. The big question is what made an ignorant Noah, with crude tools succeed where proven experts failed?

To answer that question, let us visit Noah and Sons Engineering Workshop and locate wise nuggets on building a lasting structure. You will find how you can build Your live, career, business, marriage, ministry, etc to survive the storms of life. You will also discover why you should never build your marriage on Hollywood values, nor build your wealth on the unpredictable financial market.

To Visit Noah and Sons Click,  http://judewatchman..com/2009/09/tale-of-two-ships_29.html

Are you Mr Olaadegun alter ego? You make so many false claims, unfounded assumptions and worse still outright lies just to sell your dogma - and you claim to be a geologist.

First Noah without any engineering background, almost single-handedly built the ark with God's help , so it would be misleading to say that it was built by amateurs. Noah was not an amateur ship engineer because he had never built a boat in his life. Just like Mohammad could not claim to be an amateur author as he had never written before writing the Koran. 

I had explain in another post of the same topic that it was impossible for water to flood the whole earth up to 17,000ft (actually up to 29,000ft to be able to cover mount Everest). To do that you need over 30times the quantity of water we have on earth today. Where did the water come from and where did it go after the flood?

The Titanic was a feat of Engineering because it floated and sailed, it sank because it stuck an ice berg. There is no physical evidence that a wooden boat that is capable of accommodating two of every specie of plant, animal and probably fresh water fishes of the world ever floated not to talk of sailing. And besides the ark would have to strike an ice burg or a rock on a mountain before we can conclude that it is unsinkable or unbreakable.

ajoguegbe:
No Sir, the Bible is relevant to every generation. even the Old Testament is filled with stories of how people can become blessed of God and abandon their source. It does not mean the word of God was no longer relevant, but that men abandoned it to seek their own  ways. another man comes,picks it up reads it and applies it and start seeing the results.
"The Lords people grew rich, but rebellious; they were fat and stuffed with food. They abandoned God their Creator and rejected their mighty Saviour" Deut 32:15 (GNB)
When Europe started departing from God they started loosing their status as the most powerful nation. they lost it to an emerging nation who built their country on Biblical values.(America)
Read this Blog, it will bless you
http://judewatchman..com/2009/09/tale-of-two-ships_29.html

How can you say that the Bible is relevant to every generation? The Bible was not relevant to precolonial Africa, the Bible was not relevant and is still not relevant to most nations of Asia, middle east and places without European influence. The Bible is not relevant to at least half the world's 6 billion population.

Europe did not loose it status as the world powerful nations because of the Bible, it was due to adopting new priorities of socialist economies that emphasize social welfare as against Military Armaments. Also at the time of the establishment of The US, Europe was still under the firm grip of the Bible (Christianity)  and heresy was still a capital offense.   Further more, The US has Abandoned Christianity as a state policy and adopted secular religious policies in Government, schools, etc.

As i said earlier, industrialization does not favour the Bible, because the Bible cannot help in tackling industrial related problems, of better and efficient means of production, it does not help in creating new machines and materials -  science does.

Also the form of government of the Bible - Monarchy,  cannot work in Industrial societies, it is best suited for Land and Landlord based agrarian societies. It is Democracy that is suited to an Industrial society. It helps regulate the relationship between the government and the govern, and between the workers and their employers. The needs of industrial societies is democratic power and not an all powerful autocratic God that do and undo.

Try not to think in terms of right and wrong. It has more to do with which one is useful to which society and in which period or age.

The Bible (old testament)  had its usefulness, during the time of the Babylonian exile to the even the present day to the Jews, to create order, justice, maintain cultural and family ties and even help in solving some physical, psychological and social  problem of that time.

Likewise the new testament was able to deal with problems facing the Roman Empire from the time of Constantine to very recently in Europe.

Meanwhile Science came along to deal with different set of problems for different time and  society - the age of industrialization. The Bible can be used to solve the problem of Agriculturisation but will be useless when trying to use it for an industrial society. That is why the Bible is usually abandoned when a society transform from an agrarian one to an industrial one.

There is nothing like Nigerian Jews. If fact no Nigerian tribe heard of the word JEW before christianization of Nigeria by the Europeans. Of course some Igbos attempt to claim Jewish ancestry, based purely on religious sentiments and not on academic studies, just because their history do not go beyond five centuries.

How can anyone claim Jewish ancestry, without any cultural, religious, archeological, historical, language, literary, religious or any other connections.

huxley:
Such a referandum has already been conducted in 1961 at the time the borders were being decided, and the people of Bakassi voted overwhelming in favour of joining Cameroon.  This is an excerpt from the report I posted ealier.  That decision cannot be made null and void by the fact that more Nigerians have over the years migrated and settled there.

Remember, Cameroon ceded a lot of land to Nigeria in the same period.  Supposing that many Cameroonians have now settled in the land Cameroon ceded to Nigeria in the 60s, should we now conduct another referandum now to decide whether such land should remain Nigerian or returned to Cameroon?
:

=============================================================================
12. On February 11th and 12th 1961, a plebiscite was held to " clarify the wishes of the
people living in Northern and Southern Cameroons ". The population of Northern
Cameroons had earlier - in 1959 - "decided to achieve independence by joining the
independent Federation of Nigeria", while the population of Southern Cameroons, whose
plebiscite could not be done in 1959 for security reasons, now[b] "decided to achieve
independence by joining the independent Republic of Cameroon"[/b] (General Assembly
resolution 1608 (XV) of 21 April 1961). Note that there were 21 polling stations on the
Bakassi peninsula itself and that 73% of the people living there voted to "achieve
independence by joining the independent Republic of Cameroon". (Note the blunder here.
By spelling it as "Cameroon", rather than "Cameroun", the UN created an opening for the
people of the "Southern Cameroons" to say they never voted to join "Cameroun" which is
the former French territory.

Huxley, Huxley, Huxley. How many times did i call your name. You are twisting facts to beat a dead rat. Bakassi is in Cameroon as of today, so they is no need to lie and twist facts. We can read too you know. And thanks for providing the link, it has interesting stuff.

Your quote above makes no sense at all. How can you achieve independence by joining one independent federation instead of the other.



Below is the ACTUAL quote from the book;

3. During the Cameroon/Nigeria plebiscite of 1961, 21 polling stations were physically
located in the Bakassi peninsula. UN records clearly show that approximately 73% of the
people living there AT THAT TIME voted NOT to be administered under independent
Nigeria. This is fairly easy to confirm either from the UN itself or Ambassador BA Clark
who was Deputy Permanent Secretary External Affairs in 1970/71. The precise number
of polling booths and their exact locations is a matter of public record. It is fair to assume
that the vote was binding on future generations in the area. The question of whether it
could have been different - as was the case with Northern Cameroons - is one of the more
fascinating but unexamined aspects of Nigeria's history from that period. Whether the
vote meant that the people of Southern Cameroons should form their own country or be
fused with French Cameroun is another curious angle that has recently surfaced.

The people of Bakassi voted to be independent and not join Nigeria, that did not mean they voted to join Cameroon. So because of that you people decided to twist logic by insinuation a no vote to join Nigeria means independence by joining Cameroon. Maybe Cameroon should also declare independence by joining France.


The main issue here is not Bakassi, that is settled, it is Obudu. It would be sensible not to reopen another conflict for now and besides you have not provided  your reason why we should also cede Obudu to you, and after that where else?[quote][/quote]

huxley:
Hello Wirinet,

Nice to see you on this subject.  I wrote in this tone deliberately to provoke a reaction given the vitriol I had noticed on the other threat directed towards Cameroon.  It seemed to me that most Nigerians, instead of asking questions about the validity of the land claim, which would be the thing any reasoning people should do first, were rattling their sabres.  This post was really directed at those who are eager and trigger-happy to pull out the sword, rather than to engage their brain.

That should be expected, given the acrimonious conflict that arose due to the prologue Bakassi dispute, where some  civilians and soldiers lost their lives.  So another inkling of another conflict would trigger a very emotional response.

huxley:
Human beings are capable of being rational if we so desire or if we are conditioned to think rationally at all times. Whether this claim from Cameroon is frivolous or not, and in spite of what happened about Bakassi, this is not the time nor occasion to act emotionally. Rational thinkers do not resort to the slovenness of emotional over-reaction whatever the circumstance.

I disagree with the above statements. Human being are incapable of rationality at all times, especially when there is emotional attachment to the subject matter. That is why it is considered foolish for a Lawyer to handle his own case or for a doctor to operate a close family member. We are emotional creatures, and all our decisions  are in some way are controlled by emotions. The advertising sector preys on emotions so does religion.

huxley:
Rationalism demands that we ask deep and search questions about ourselves and in this case, about the validity of the land claim. I was condamning the almost universal knee-jerk fashion by most people (particularly Nigerians and Cameroonians, I must say) to not engage their BRAINS, but to act rather emotionally.  Emotional rewaction is what usually drive people to WARS.  But if people learn to sit and ask the right questions first and formulate a policy and principle from their deliberation of such questions, they are more likely than not to come to a more rational and peaceful decision.

Validity of Land claims is neither here nor there, if you go back far enough, it always boils down to Military or Political Conquests. Cameroon and Nigeria were not in existence 150million years ago, they were created as a result of Military and Political conquest by European nations. At that time we had a Benin Kingdom that reached former Dahomey. The Benin Kingdom was conquered and also divided up by the Europeans. So should be say that Benin Republic actually belong to Benin Kingdom? I strongly feel it was a crime against humanity the way we were carved up in Africa, where disunity and distrust was unnecessarily created between same people, while the Europeans enjoyed Ethnic Harmony and Homogeneity. That is the main Bane of Africa's development.

Land disputes are always an emotional issue, be it personal, tribal, national or international. People die every in family land disputes. I know because i am in the construction industry.

huxley:
Now, were you speaking about yourself as well when you said Nigerians are still traumatised from the loss of Bakassi?  If you are a rational person, why would that be, particularly if you are not directly connected with people or interests in the area?  For instance, if Cameroon were to cede 10000 hectares of land to Central Africa Republic, and if the inhabitants of this land are not going to be ill-treated and worse off in their new country, and if I have no direct interests there, I would NOT be bothered in the least.

Why are were you emotionally disturbed with Nigerian losing Bakassi to Cameroon?  Have you got connections there who may now find themselves in a different country?  What if these people and resettle in Nigeria and compensated for their loss of land and properties?

Man, put on your thinking cap and learn to think things throught rather than respond in the emotional fashion you have just done.

I said Nigeria as a country and as a people are still trying to recover from loosing Bakassi. It is an emotional topic and even the Nigerian Media avoids discussing it, and when it does you will hear lots of vitriolic abuses being aimed at the Obasanjo Government for ceding our land. Some groups have even threatened to take the former present to Nigerian courts for the action. Believe me when i say most Nigerians have not gotten over ceding of Bakassi, as is seen in the post your mentioned.

huxley:
I am very surprised and disappointed to see you make the above comment.  LAWS do not exist as an entity in nature - they exist as a result of a consensus within and between community to have a principle by which to rule and guide civil life.  Remember, LAWS are the outcome of some sort of universal consensus.  If you say things are not settle in courts, does it mean that Nigeria has not Court of Laws?  Or if it does, why does it need them?  Are all matters that are eventually settled in courts settled in an amicable fashion?

I am surprised, you are surprised by the comment. Maybe you did not take time to read the comment, considering i put it in bold letters so you do not miss it.  so here is it again. I said  Land Issues[b] Cannot Be Settled By International Law[/b].  Even though we have UN, Sovereign nations are still just that - Sovereign. So that means that the Laws of a sovereign state is supreme. If a country decides, not to sign any UN charter or treaty, that is that. The best other Sovereign states can do is to apply punitive measures or at best declare war. If Nigeria decides not to submit to World Court, there is little any one can do. And after, submitting to the World Court and got and unfavourable judgment, she can still decide to ignore the judgments  and await whatever consequences - others have done it before, so it would not be novel.

huxley:
Consider the case of a married couple going to court to settle their divorce, and supposing one of them feels particularly hard-done-by by the settlement.  And suppose divorce is granted in court amid all sorts of acrimony.  Should one or both parties continue to consider sheself/himself married because the court settlement was not done amicably?

Should an armed robber, caught in the act and found guilty in court consider himself innocent because he disputes the verdicts of the courts?
 
Your notion of the law would lead any society into chaos and incivility in a matter of seconds in people were to disregard the courts.  The fact that some countries, notably US and Israel, disregard the verdict of international courts does not mean that there are on the side of justice.  Far from it.

The above examples has no relevance to my statement, except you consider divorce and armed robbery part of international law.

Huxley, I have always respected your intellectual capacity to look at issues as a whole instead of piece meal, and I must say that this post is very disappointing. Not that you do not have a point. But the way you delivered a very sensitive and explosive issue is very insensitive.

Given your level of intelligence, I thought you would understand, the psychological and emotional response to any further land claim by Cameroon, after the trauma of loosing Bakassi, which were are still able to recover from.

And I think Nigerians are even very civilized in their comments so far, if was other countries, that is attempting to start another border dispute immediately after going through a painful one that lasted over 40years, it would be construed as an act of aggression.  Believe me, that your style of writing about this issue could actually raise tension and suspicion between two countries that should be consolidating on the peaceful resolution of a difficult dispute.

Finally, i thought you should be aware that[b] Land Issues Cannot Be Settled By International Law,[/b] at the end it is up the the parties to the dispute to settle amicably or otherwise. Nigeria cannot be forced to abide by World Court judgments if it does not want to. Go and ask Israel or the US, we gave out Bakassi to avoid a possible war with a neighbour. Please do not construe that as an act of cowardice.  Most Land disputes elsewhere are settled on the battlefield.

It depends of what you mean by bible? If what you mean the the 66 or so books that make up the Christian Bible, then it was the Roman Catholic Church under the guidance of Constantine. They got together ancient religious writings from the near east, especially ancient is real and added together some the emerging popular beliefs (said to be writings and letters of the leaders of the new religion). Then everything is labeled word of God and so infallible.

Now if you been the books themselves, then it is a different matter altogether. The old testaments were said to be written by @Prophets" , it is just that the word prophets had changed meaning over the centuries. Prophets then most probably meant Poets or writers engaged by powerful people, most likely kings, to write poems, stories, songs and biographies for them, their families and their gods.The leading characters in these writings were obviously the people, families and gods of the people that commissioned the poets. Sometimes the prophets himself or prophetess becomes rich and powerful and therefore writes for and about himself.

As writing then was a very very expensive venture, very few people could have their stories written. These writings became a treasure for the owners. Over the years, long after the death of the person written about, the stories become part of the folklore and they take a life of their own. Later the story would need to be rewritten or copied, and a different prophet would be employed to copy it by hand and maybe modify, edit or upgrade the story to fit in the new employer.

labalaba4 & erniewhez, you guys chill, this thread should not be allowed to degenerate into a mud fight between pro and anti Fashola people. My main grouse with Fashola is that he usually put the cart before the horse. He programmes are usually not well thought out.

Anyway back to the issue at hand,

An average person would need a least 100litres a day (minimum) to take care of his/her drinking and domestic use. So with a population of 20million, we should speculate that the demand for portable water in Lagos should be a minimum of 2,000,000,000litres or 500,000,000 gallons (and we have not added commercial and industrial water demand).

So Lagos State Govt officials and their Media Consultants should tell us how much of that 500million gallons is the government actually providing and how are they going to make up for the short fall. They should remember that water is as essential as air and not a convenience commodity like electricity (which many Lagosians do without altogether).