Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PlanetEuropa)
    Those discoveries were not in the past 100 years, they were many many centuries ago. I asked what has Islam contributed to knowledge in the past 100 years.
    you should really pose this question better. Religion hasn't contributed to "knowledge" ..... rather it is individuals who have.......
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Isn't this bombing in regards to what happened to the wiki leaks founder?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CullenLoverX)
    Islam laid the foundations for what is being discovered now, centuries later.
    How, exactly?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PlanetEuropa)
    How about the discovery of genetics ? for one. There are too many to mention. Albiet the discoverers are in a secular country not a christian state.
    these scientific discoveries have got **** all to do with christianity.....
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CullenLoverX)
    And I told you that there was no point looking at what Islam has contributed in just the past 100 years, as Islam laid the foundations for what is being discovered now, centuries later.
    That is the worst argument i've seen on here in a while. It's not like the West just sat on their hands prior to that, they contributed just as much of the foundations if not more. One could argue Muslims were just building on advancements made by ancient Greece. And what good are foundations if you don't build on them anyway?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ma2k5)
    Isn't this bombing in regards to what happened to the wiki leaks founder?
    What Sweden gain from Bombing a shopping centre. How is that connected to wikileaks ? Are you thick ?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Diaz89)
    Indeed it doesn't, it doesn't achieve anything, but that isn't the same in the mind of the perpetrators and one must come to understand what that motivations is and the motivation is clear.

    As with your last post, the remainder has no relevance and not worth replying to.
    so what's your point? That we should factor the political - as opposed to merely religious - motivations behind terrorism? The political motivation is that Islamists want to remove competition to themselves in Muslim countries. The fact that they want this doesn't mean that they should get it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PerigeeApogee)
    Hahahaha. Kidding?

    So all of the scientific feats of pre-Christian Europe were not science at all?

    The European people in pre-Christian times were so enlightened. Whenever we see documentaries about science and mathematics, we are always stunned by how much people knew in 600 BC, etc, and how quite sophisticated things that are common knowledge today were common knowledge 2,500 years ago.

    The reason we are shocked is because we look back at the Dark Ages which followed, and see it as a chasm void of all scientific endeavour. Science didn't start when the Dark Ages ended - it RESUMED. The idea that science is impossible without Christianity is total nonsense - science precedes Christianity by some time.

    Trust me, we'd be where we are now, plus a few hundred years on if it weren't for the scourge of Christianity supressing science for as many centuries as it did.
    Christianity never made a concerted effort to suppress science, where are you getting such things from? You claim to have a scientific mind but there is no evidence for your claim whatsoever. How you can blame Christianity for the fall of the Roman Empire which plunged us into relative darkness is beyond me. In previous times science relied on Empire, and without any meaningful empire being built until 1700-1800 there was bound to be very little science. Strangely enough a bunch of people sitting around in mud huts because they have no wealth create very little science - hence the reason Christianityless Africa is responsible for literally zero scientific achievement in the thousands upon thousands of years it has had. I didn't say science is impossible without Christianity, I said Christianity kept science going by financing it through the dark ages.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PlanetEuropa)
    What Sweden gain from Bombing a shopping centre. How is that connected to wikileaks ? Are you thick ?
    How does anyone gain from bombing a shopping centre? It is obviously a spiteful action :rolleyes:.

    How does the wiki leaks founder have nothing to do with Sweden?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    thats fake i dont believe media at all esp on this basis.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PlanetEuropa)
    Muslims born in Europe you mean. By limiting Islamic immigration we limit the amount of Muslims both migrated and born here. Therefore Islamic terrorism can be significantly reduced. Muslims aree Europes largest security risk and terrorist threat, almost europeas sole terrorist threat, therefore it makes sense to stop them coming here.
    We need Muslim immigrants like we need a hole in the head.
    limiting islamic immigration to europe won't make a bit of difference now. The seeds have been sown and with birth rates/conversions etc, the islamic population will continue to grow over the decades....

    only a repatriation policy will reverse the "problem" (only such a policy will never work as it won't get the vote).

    britain has only itself to blame (firstly for getting involved in american invasions of iraq/afghanistan (probably iran....) and not dealing with the core threats (pakistan and the islamic extremist ideology from saudi)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dirac Delta Function)
    so what's your point? That we should factor the political - as opposed to merely religious - motivations behind terrorism? The political motivation is that Islamists want to remove competition to themselves in Muslim countries. The fact that they want this doesn't mean that they should get it.
    If Islamists want to remove competition to themselves in Muslim countries, they would be bombing downtown Cairo and every office of the Mubarak held government after the recent elections.

    This isn't the case

    If you actually watch that video, it's very illuminating and would tell the motivation and goals of these individuals and you can decide from there which one you believe.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jaggedspike)
    First of all you don't know anything about me, how about we raise the standard of the discussion here instead of resorting to language that makes you look pathetically weak. You can check Wikileaks, US and Indian government statements accusing Pakistan of equipping and training militants to send into Jammu and Kashmir to cause instability. The root cause of 26/11. Whether or not it aids Pakistan is irrelevant, they do assist the Taliban. The Taliban attacks US/British/Other troops and also enters into disputed territory, so how can you justify that? You can't, thus your frustration. ISI is rogue, they do make decisions without the governments approval. No country has ever been stupid enough to instigate a nuclear war with a nuclear rival over petty causes.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-S...nd_Afghanistan
    The ISI is completely justified in training fighters to go into Kashmir and taking on the Indians- for most native Kashmiris the fighters are potential liberators and the Indian troops who have murdered 89,000 people since 1989 and tortured and raped many others are the oppressors who are universally hated.

    I can justify the ISI's support for certain Taliban factions purely because it's in the best interests of Pakistan. The intelligence agencies of all countries look to serve their nation's best interest no matter how morally deplorable their actions. This is why RAW tortured innocent Kashmiris on the basis on they might know something, why the CIA supported the gencocidal Khmer Rouge etc.

    And to your last point the government of Pakistan is corrupt, weak and dysfunctional and thus it's good that the army and the ISI are autonomous- ever wondered why they are always referred to as "Pakistan's only properly functioning institutions"?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bunty64)
    limiting islamic immigration to europe won't make a bit of difference now. The seeds have been sown and with birth rates/conversions etc, the islamic population will continue to grow over the decades.
    The Muslim population here in the UK is only around 4%, so I don't think it is too late.

    The optimistic side of me thinks we don't even need to limit immigration. Islam, like Christianity, will not be able to withstand the force of science and reason. Atheism/agnosticism will, hopefully, continue to grow and dominate.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    That is the worst argument i've seen on here in a while. It's not like the West just sat on their hands prior to that, they contributed just as much of the foundations if not more. One could argue Muslims were just building on advancements made by ancient Greece. And what good are foundations if you don't build on them anyway?
    I never said they did. I just said that the Arab world discovered a huge amount at a time when the West was going through a hugely difficult and dark period , and if it wasn't for these advancements in maths and science, we might not be as far along in terms of discoveries right now. I definately agree that the West has contributed a lot to science, but if they didn't have the foundations to start with, how would they have known where to start?

    As for the last part of your comment, frankly that's ridiculous. If I was to start building a house right now, if I laid the foundations on an uneven terrain and maybe put a wall or two up before running out of bricks/cement and not having the means/technology to replenish my supply, and if for example another person walked past the street and saw this half finished house, and they finished building it then their workload would be less, would it not? Rather than starting from scratch which would take more time and effort, it would be easier and quicker for them to finish this house I'd already started building but had to abandon because I didn't have the means to get more bricks etc.

    In any case, this argument is completely off-topic.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wacp)
    I am not talking about terrorism. I am talking about lack of respect for human rights, xenophobia, homophobia, sexism and et cetera, none of which are, unfortunately, 'rare' in the 'Muslim world'.

    For example, if a secular atheist has a negative opinion of Muslims and/or Islam because of the lack of respect Muslims and Islam has for secularism and atheism, would it be fair to say that this secular atheist is no different from the Muslim who has a lack of respect/negative view of atheists and secularism? If so, then you're basically saying that a black person who does not like the KKK is the same as a KKK member who doesn't like black people.
    But you havent been subject to any of those on behalf of a Muslim have you? Your post made it clear that in your view intolerance is okay if you have bee subject to it first? All those things are present in countries that arent Islamic? In fact our own country is guilty of quite a few of them as well. Its easy, when asked for an example to just say "Oh well look at the Muslim world" as if everywhere with an Islamic influence is unified with the same views and beliefs. It is like associating the anti-abortion with "the christian world". Also I ignore the last part of your argument because, like your previous point, you are trying to put words into my mouth which I did not say because it gives you a bridge to carry on your badly constructed argument. I could have said "I like toast" and you would come back with "so you are basically saying that you think black people should be killed." Dont try and use "what I am basically saying" rather what I actually am saying yeah?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Diaz89)
    If Islamists want to remove competition to themselves in Muslim countries, they would be bombing downtown Cairo and every office of the Mubarak held government after the recent elections.

    This isn't the case

    If you actually watch that video, it's very illuminating and would tell the motivation and goals of these individuals and you can decide from there which one you believe.
    The Islamism in Egypt is represented by the Muslim Brotherhood, if it were the Salafis, they absolutely would be bombing government institution . Saudi is at war with Salafist, and it was the Zarqawi's Salafi group that bombed the hotel in Amman
    in 2005.

    I've watched the first 10 mins fo the video, will watch the rest later.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adam_zed)
    But you havent been subject to any of those on behalf of a Muslim have you?
    No, because, thankfully, Muslims aren't a majority in this country.

    (Original post by adam_zed)
    Your post made it clear that in your view intolerance is okay if you have bee subject to it first?
    My view is that a tolerant, liberal society does not have to tolerate the intolerant and the illiberal. It's self-preservation.

    (Original post by adam_zed)
    All those things are present in countries that arent Islamic? In fact our own country is guilty of quite a few of them as well.
    They may be present in other countries, but they are not defended with religious conviction.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Just a reminder to everyone, I won't tolerate offensive comments being made in this thread. If I have to moderate this thread once more, it's going in the bin.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CullenLoverX)
    I never said they did. I just said that the Arab world discovered a huge amount at a time when the West was going through a hugely difficult and dark period , and if it wasn't for these advancements in maths and science, we might not be as far along in terms of discoveries right now. I definately agree that the West has contributed a lot to science, but if they didn't have the foundations to start with, how would they have known where to start?

    As for the last part of your comment, frankly that's ridiculous. If I was to start building a house right now, if I laid the foundations on an uneven terrain and maybe put a wall or two up before running out of bricks/cement and not having the means/technology to replenish my supply, and if for example another person walked past the street and saw this half finished house, and they finished building it then their workload would be less, would it not? Rather than starting from scratch which would take more time and effort, it would be easier and quicker for them to finish this house I'd already started building but had to abandon because I didn't have the means to get more bricks etc.

    In any case, this argument is completely off-topic.
    There was plenty of fundamental science that was left to be discovered, indeed the bulk of it. I do not deny the small contribution made by the Islamic world was helpful, but in the grand scheme of things they only saved us a few years - especially given most of our scientific advancement was made without even knowing the scientific advancements of Islam as they didn't reach the West then. You will find a lot of scientific discovery has been done twice or even three times. A lack of communication between the Soviet and the US means that we have a lot of parallel science. Only Einstein level science is unrepeatable by a common genius.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.