Muslim doctor calls killing homosexuals "compassionate"

You didn't have time to read it, proving my point again you're not actually interested in learning.

There was an argument to be made for flat earth 2,000 years ago, based on science instead of religious argument. That's where it comes from in the Quran, it's not right, but it's not stupidity either. Saying it today is stupid I agree (which is why I never did), but it's wrong and dishonest to say they believed it for religious reasons.

So someone's interest in learning is based purely on whether they bother to read an irrelevant link you've posted? Yup, that's totally logical



It would be dishonest if I'd actually said it.

What I said is that the Muslims who believe today in the flat earth do so because it's written in religious texts, not that it was originally put in the texts for religious reasons.

It's not irrelevant and the fact you won't even take a few minutes to read it to understand my point shows you can't be trusted to comment on things I have no understanding of.

And what is your solution to the issue?

It's not irrelevant and the fact you won't even take a few minutes to read it to understand my point shows you can't be trusted to comment on things I have no understanding of.

The Earth has an equatorial bulge, in other words. It is flattened at the poles. It is an "oblate spheroid" rather than a sphere

I've read the few relevant paragraphs. The argument is that the flat-earth theory was "almost" right (itself a laughable proposition) and that the theory lasted a long time because of this and that it had some justification based on the methodologies they possessed,

I'm sorry but you're simply not very bright if you're incapable of understanding the obvious irrelevance your argument that they had some justification for this belief based on their methodologies and the knowledge they possessed has to the fact that modern Muslims base their belief in the flat earth on religious documents.

We're not talking about a distinction of the finer sort either. You are so desperate to talk about the Asimov theory in that short essay that you've completely lost sight of what the debate was actually about. You really want to talk about that, rather than the actual subject of debate. And when someone doesn't play ball and shift the topic to what you want to talk about, you become hysterical and make laughable claims that this shows the person has "no interest in learning".

The deficit of interest is entirely yours, and it is your lack of interest in discussing the subject at hand.

And funnily enough, Asimov's Relativity of Wrong has these words;

Really?

It's relevant because one of the very first posts I made to you explained the lack of progress in the Arab world is due to lack of development not superstition or values. They believe these things because in the past there has been some basis to it, you can either to try to understand it (as I have done above) or condemn it. Which is more useful?

And the earth We have spread out (like a carpet); set thereon mountains firm and immovable; and produced therein all kinds of things in due balance.

X

Oppose it. That is as much as one can do.

Oh dear, you're still denying that the earth is an oblate spheroid.

You really are quite desperate to justify flat earth theories, aren't you? Embarrassing. I don't perceive any profit in further debating with someone who believes in a flat earth.

Oppose what exactly? And how?

X

there are legitimate scientific arguments to be made for flat Earth

"Islam has a proud tradition of peace and tolerance" - Barack HUSSEIN Obama

I have already said it is an elipsoid, you're like a broken record.

Summary:
- Flat earth was originally based on geographical generalisations of the ancients limited cultures.
- This is why it is accepted in early Arab culture.
- This is not a stupid belief since it was a fairly clever observaiton within their own cultures, i.e they didn't really observe a lot of the things that would later suggest it is sphereical (or not since it isn't)
- History then thought it was spherical - Which you said it was.
- It isn't spherical mathematically speaking since it is not perfectly round.
- An oblate spheroid is not a sphere. It's an elipsoid.
- I point out you are just as ignorant as flat earth theorists for saying it is spherical.
- Suddenly I believe in flat earth theory.

Nice one, excellent logic 10/10

All we really need is this quote of yours



You really are extremely butthurt when it was pointed out the ludicrousness of flat earth theories and so you desperately clutch to any vain hope you have, first denying that the earth is an oblate spheroid and second attacking me for ridiculing that belief.

Your psychological attachment to the flat earth is clear. As GoodBloke said, your credibility is shot. Not going to waste my time further debating with you

X

You know, if in having a debate about Islam you feel you must divert it to a debate about what shape the earth is, it says a lot about how little confidence you have in your views.

What is most ironic is that you are so thick you don't even understand Asimov's essay and the point he makes about comparative beliefs being relatively "more correct". Thus you attack me for colloquially saying the earth is a sphere rather than an oblate spheroid and assert that thus I know less than people who believed in a flat earth.

This is extremely funny insofar as it proves you don't even grasp the essay you cite. Anyway, we're all done now. Go away troll