Australian Politics Forum - Islam stifles basic science

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

Forum rules, Recent posts (with text), RSS, Search options, Browse all uploaded images
Home, Articles, Green Tax Shift, Evolution,

Australian Politics Forum › Member Run Boards › Islam › Islam stifles basic science

(Moderator: polite_gandalf)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 ... 21

Islam stifles basic science (Read 53586 times)

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 21612
A cat with a view

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #105 - Mar 17^th, 2013 at 8:54pm

ISLAM is just a fraud upon mankind.

Quote:

No wonder that Sina (2008) concluded: “No matter how you look at Islam it turns out to be a foolish religion.”

Although Muslims have sold their soul to Muhammad, can they logically clear the above doubts? The Sana’a episode had put them in such an awkward position that even circular reasoning or absurd logic will not help. Isn’t it time for prudent Muslims to give a second thought to their cherished faith? Instead of trying hard to reason out the above doubts, isn’t it more sensible to agree that the entire Muslim ummah had been fooled by a vulgar imposter named Prophet Muhammad? Isn’t it time for Muslims to care truth? As poet Thomas Gray (cited Sagan, 1997, p. 12) wrote, “… where ignorance is bliss, “Tis [It is] folly to be wise”.

To protect the Quran from more humiliation, Yemeni authorities already debarred Puin and Bothmer from further examination of those manuscripts. In fact, now they do not allow anyone to see those manuscripts anymore except some very carefully selected non-Quranic parchments, which are at display at the ground floor of Dar al-Makhtutat Library. But this is not going to help; the bird is out of the cage already; it is useless closing the door now. More than thirty-five thousand microfilms are out of Yemen before the authorities came to know; and already, several duplicates have been made. The present author is sure that, at this very moment, in some undisclosed location in Germany, a group of experts are endlessly working on those microfilms and Puin is burning enough midnight oil to complete his book, which, once published, will hammer another nail in the coffin of Islam. Islam is in real danger now.

http://www.islam-watch.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=46

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 21612
A cat with a view

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #106 - Mar 17^th, 2013 at 9:07pm

ISLAM is just a fraud upon mankind. #2

Quote:

Today, when the divinity of the Quran is shattered by the Sana’a manuscripts, the spiritual nature of Islam is also exposed. Islam is nothing but a pure Arab political movement. The Divinity was attached to the Quran, when Arabs started conquering the surrounding nations, and Islam was imposed on them by force. Arabs not only imposed Islam on others, but also imposed this irrational belief of Quranic divinity to the minds of their victims, so that once Arabs are gone, the conquered people cannot come out from this mental enslavement, and return back to their original faith. It is a rare political skill. Many companions of Muhammad clearly knew that the Quran was fake, but they remained with their prophet to share the booty and to enjoy the women. We all know, after Muhammad’s death, several Arab tribes returned back to their original belief, and idolatry flourished, but were forced back to Islam with the sword and bloodbath.

With much shock to Muslims, modern study on Psychology had spoken out the truth that Muhammad was an imposter, a madman, who was suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Narcissists are such self-absorbed persons, who are pathological liars. It means, either they are unaware of their lies or feel completely justified and at easy in lying to others. Their mental condition is such that they have that rare capability to believe their own lies (Vaknin, 1999, p. 24).

http://www.islam-watch.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=46

The Sana’a manuscripts, expose a truth [about ISLAM, Mohammed, and the 'perfect' religion of Allah] which the the moslem mind refuses to confront.

Why so ?

Because moslems, are so mentally entrenched, engrossed, within the lies which ISLAM fosters and promotes, that moslems can no longer bring themselves to confront any truth which challenges their warped and fraudulent worldview.

It would be too 'hurtful' to the psyche of moslems, for moslems to acknowledge that ISLAM is, and always has been, a fraud upon all of mankind.

And ISLAM remains, a false religion, for a false people.

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

Karnal Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 95297 Gender:	Re: Islam stifles basic science Reply #107 - Mar 18^th, 2013 at 8:14am Yes, Y, but you have to admit, they’re quite nice in Malaysia, no?
Back to top	IP Logged

aquascoot Gold Member Online Australian Politics Posts: 34372 Gender:	Re: Islam stifles basic science Reply #108 - Mar 20^th, 2013 at 6:30am south korean rock sensation and current you tube record holder for the most veiws ever on youtube has retitled his song gangman style in case it offends muslims what a fing softc#ck so at least it stifles dumb rappers from korea http://news.yahoo.com/psy-revise-song-over-worry-may-offend-arabs-070637494.html
Back to top	IP Logged

Postmodern Trendoid III Gold Member Offline Posts: 10259 Gender:	Re: Islam stifles basic science Reply #109 - Mar 20^th, 2013 at 8:22am Postmodern trendyism reaches Korea. Then again, it could be a tactical marketing ploy. More hits on you tube from the Arabs states.
Back to top	IP Logged

aquascoot

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 34372
Gender: male

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #110 - Mar 20^th, 2013 at 8:55am

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 8:22am:

Postmodern trendyism reaches Korea.
Then again, it could be a tactical marketing ploy. More hits on you tube from the Arabs states.

he had actually done a rap song early in his career saying "kill the mother fing americans"
then he was booked for obamas christmas ppagent. (the daughters a huge fan) and then this came out.

they will pander to whoever they feel is popular nowdays. obama is such a vain man

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48834
At my desk.

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #111 - Mar 24^th, 2013 at 12:10pm

Quote:

Again, this is something totally unique to the muslim world, and absolutely never would have happened in "non-science-stifling" societies.

Not unique, but apparently common.

Quote:

Who? Where? Show me.

Sorry not sure where I read that. This is what I found in the wikipedia article on Hayyan:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C4%81bir_ibn_Hayy%C4%81n

In total, nearly 3,000 treatises and articles are credited to Jabir ibn Hayyan.[19] Following the pioneering work of Paul Kraus, who demonstrated that a corpus of some several hundred works ascribed to Jabir were probably a medley from different hands,[10][20] mostly dating to the late 9th and early 10th centuries, many scholars believe that many of these works consist of commentaries and additions by his followers,[citation needed] particularly of an Ismaili persuasion.[21]

Quote:

I asked for a scientific consensus disputing the idea that islamic science had a significant influence on modern science.

Isn't this like asking for a mathematical proof of God's existence? You have a strange habit of setting the bar absurdly high for anyone who disagrees with you, and doing the opposite for yourself.

Quote:

But you won't find one, because none exists.

Of course it does not exist. Now for the difficult question: what does that mean?

Quote:

But of course there is no real debate about the contribution of the likes of Al Haytham in contributing the knowledge we now have of optics, as well as developing the scientific method

Except of course on the wikipedia page about him:

G. J. Toomer expressed some skepticism regarding Schramm's view, arguing that caution is needed to avoid reading anachronistically particular passages in Alhazen's very large body of work

Quote:

Everyone except Freediver acknowledges these great contributions. I wonder why you never want to talk about these guys.

What do you think we have been doing Gandalf? Chatting about the weather?

Quote:

Much more fun to nitpick the obscurities rather than to acknowledge the big picture I guess Undecided

The big picture is that Islam contributed very little to science, despite the otherwise fertile environment it created. I am not surprised that the two examples you now focus on are of scientists who were placed under house arrest by the all powerful caliph. Ironically enough this house arrest is credited with enabling some of the work. In addition to this, there is a lot of evidence that a lot of what is attribued to him actually came from several other people.

Quote:

I must be. Please bear with me and remind me again - how does the existence of the greatest cultural and learning centres the world had ever seen equate to "stifling" science?

This is one of the great ironies.

Quote:

I really hope I don't miss this again, because it will be most interesting to solve this seeming paradox.

I never missed it. In fact I raised it. You must have missed that.

Quote:

Who says its not possible? Another imaginary scientific "consensus" is it? I'm calling bullshit on that one.

Can you give a single example of someone achieving flight by attaching wings to their arms? Have you seen how large a hang glider is? Think about it.

Quote:

I guess I have. But you keep concentrating on these little details FD, don't you worry yourself with the important things like the consensus regarding islam's contribution to modern science.

What consensus? The 'scientific' consensus you were demanding of me?

Quote:

No, I have shown you all the sources that clearly state his flight was successful.

You also claimed that you made up the bit about the hang glider, even though this little fantasy is all over the internet. You have never maintained a consistent and coherent story on what he invented and what he achieved. Of course, no one would expect you to given that the only evidence over a period of 7 centuries is the one line reference to a phoenix in a poem from a guy who liked to mock him. Muslims could invent any story they wanted to around that. They did. They invented many stories. You seem happy to pick and choose which one is most convenient to you, while demanding the highest standards of anyone who disagrees with you.

Quote:

The idea that he jumped off a roof and fell straight to the ground is entirely your invention

No Gandalf, I do not take credit for the fabrications of other people. There are all sorts of stories about what actually happened. That is because there is no real evidence for what happened.

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #112 - Mar 24^th, 2013 at 2:47pm

freediver wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 12:10pm:

Not unique, but apparently common.

Yup - 2 known instances in a 600 year period. Sounds common enough. Cheesy

freediver wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 12:10pm:

As always you miss the point. The important point is that there were these groundbreaking scientific works, that we know existed, and they were produced by muslims in the islamic world. Your quote merely reaffirms this fundamental point. Or to put it another way - arguing that the works ascribed to one muslim during the islamic golden age - was actually the work of a different muslim during the islamic golden age - doesn't exactly refute my overall argument that important scientific works were produced in the muslim world does it?

freediver wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 12:10pm:

Isn't this like asking for a mathematical proof of God's existence? You have a strange habit of setting the bar absurdly high for anyone who disagrees with you, and doing the opposite for yourself.

The bar was set by you, believe it or not, when you stated repeatedly (again in your last post) that islam definitely contributed nothing to modern science. You see, the argument against your claim is the undeniable consensus amongst both historians and scientists that states the exact opposite. This consensus is clear from the most cursory investigation into the matter - and I have provided you with enough quotes already to give you a good enough idea. But here's another one from the respected economist magazine:

Quote:

The caricature of Islam’s endemic backwardness is easily dispelled. Between the eighth and the 13th centuries, while Europe stumbled through the dark ages, science thrived in Muslim lands. The Abbasid caliphs showered money on learning. The 11th century “Canon of Medicine” by Avicenna (pictured, with modern equipment he would have relished) was a standard medical text in Europe for hundreds of years. In the ninth century Muhammad al-Khwarizmi laid down the principles of algebra, a word derived from the name of his book, “Kitab al-Jabr”. Al-Hasan Ibn al-Haytham transformed the study of light and optics. Abu Raihan al-Biruni, a Persian, calculated the earth’s circumference to within 1%. And Muslim scholars did much to preserve the intellectual heritage of ancient Greece; centuries later it helped spark Europe’s scientific revolution.

Not only were science and Islam compatible, but religion could even spur scientific innovation.

http://www.economist.com/news/international/21570677-after-centuries-stagnation-science-making-comeback-islamic-world-road

So here we have it - I have provided you with more than enough evidence to suggest that islamic science has made significant contributions to modern science. Yet you continue with your insistence that this is not the case. In the face of the evidence I have provided, the onus is on you to firstly demonstrate that the consensus I refer to doesn't exist, and secondly that in fact there is a consensus amongst the experts pointing the opposite direction.

Of course if you think the bar of substantiation is now too high, then by all means feel free to abandon your untenable position that islam contributed nothing to modern science.

freediver wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 12:10pm:

Of course it does not exist. Now for the difficult question: what does that mean?

It means you don't have a leg to stand on.

freediver wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 12:10pm:

he two examples you now focus on are of scientists who were placed under house arrest

again FD - just the simple things... if you can't even get my argument right, how do you expect to have any chance of refuting it? In my last post I "focused" on 3 great scientists - only one of whom was placed under house arrest.

freediver wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 12:10pm:

a lot of what is attribued to him actually came from several other people.

other muslims yes. Other muslims working in the apparent "stifling" environment of the Islamic golden age.

freediver wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 12:10pm:

This is one of the great ironies.

Ignoring all the evidence and concensus that there was no great scientific advancement during that time - would make it ironic, yes.

freediver wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 12:10pm:

Can you give a single example of someone achieving flight by attaching wings to their arms?

Eilmer of Malmesbury did exactly that according to the only source we have on him.

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48834
At my desk.

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #113 - Mar 24^th, 2013 at 5:53pm

Quote:

Yup - 2 known instances in a 600 year period. Sounds common enough.

They are your examples Gandalf, not mine - the first two I looked into after you gave them as examples to demonstrate that Islam does not stifle basic science.

Are you suggesting they are the only two?

So far your first two examples of how Islam does not stifle basic science consist of one guy who deliberately wrote gibberish to prevent the spread of knowledge to all but the 'true believers', who claimed to be able to invent humans and scorpions in the lab, whose actual contributions are seriously questioned by historians, and whose name literally came to mean gibberish. His father was executed by Muslims for political reasons and he had to flee for his life at a young age. His political connections later lead to his house arrest. The second guy had to feign madness and was also placed under house arrest by the all powerful Caliph. Ironically this house arrest is credited with created the conditions for a lot of the scientific work.

Not looking real good is Gandalf? Is that why you are not willing to give a single example of a scientist who you think should be on the top 100 list.

Quote:

The bar was set by you, believe it or not, when you stated repeatedly (again in your last post) that islam definitely contributed nothing to modern science.

You don't understand what you are asking for do you gandalf? You are demanding a 'scientific' consensus on a question of history. Do you realise how absurd that is? Do you realise that stating that Islam stifles basic science is not the same thing as demanding such an absurd standard of evidence? Do you understand the difference between "islam definitely contributed nothing to modern science" and what I actually posted?

Quote:

Of course if you think the bar of substantiation is now too high

It is not too high Gandalf. It is nonsensical. Gibberish even.

Quote:

In my last post I "focused" on 3 great scientists

Of course, you keep coming up with more examples after it is pointed out to you how silly your previous examples were. Would you care to suggest one single Muslim scientist who you think deserves to be on the top 100 list? Do you think that Hayyan deserves to be on the list for his contributions to the field of gibberish? Or perhaps for his ability to invent humans and scorpions in the lab?

Quote:

Eilmer of Malmesbury did exactly that according to the only source we have on him.

What about the guy who flew too close to the sun and melted the glue on his wings? Would you believe that based on a single story? At what point does common sense kick in? I have suggested you look into whether this is even possible but you continue to dig yourself in deeper.

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #114 - Mar 24^th, 2013 at 10:13pm

freediver wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 5:53pm:

Not looking real good is Gandalf?

if you say so. I guess we'll just have to take your word that in both instances big bad islam came along and said "gar! science.. knowledge... imprison them! garr!" And I guess we'll also have to accept that this sort of practice was systematic and endemic - even though we only have two instances in an entire 600 year period (not that thats a problem - we'll just respond with 'oh you think they were the only two??").

And then I guess we'll just conveniently ignore contradictory facts - like, you know, all the great achievements I keep referring to like algebra, hospitals, optics, astronomy etc etc - which you'd think if islam really did stifle science, would never have existed.

By the way, what are your thoughts of the claims made in the economist article I quoted? Did you get a chance to look into the scientific advances cited - such as Ibn Sana's (Avicenna) canon of medicine which was used as a standard medical text in Europe for hundreds of years? Or al Biruni who accurately calculated the earth's circumference? Khwarizmi's development of algebra? Would you say they were significant contributions to modern day science?

Or are we going to keep pretending that Mr Gibberish and house arrest guy are the only representatives of islamic science? Undecided

freediver wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 5:53pm:

Do you realise that stating that Islam stifles basic science is not the same thing as demanding such an absurd standard of evidence?

hmm yeah, silly me. Why don't you enlighten me - what would you consider adequate proof for the (what I would consider) rather ambitious claim that islam during the golden age "stifled" science - given all that we know that was achieved that seems to contradict this claim? Two guys being imprisoned? disputing the flight claims of Ibn Firnas? making up stuff about what muslims say about camel urine? All very compelling I'm sure, but you'll forgive me if I think thats not quite enough.

freediver wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 5:53pm:

Do you understand the difference between "islam definitely contributed nothing to modern science" and what I actually posted?

Apologies FD, what you actually posted was "Islam contributed very little to science". I really don't know what I was thinking. Roll Eyes

freediver wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 5:53pm:

Of course, you keep coming up with more examples after it is pointed out to you how silly your previous examples were.

Nope. All there in the very first list I gave you. I think there are about 17. Please feel free to look into the others for yourself without me having to spoon feed them to you.

freediver wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 5:53pm:

Would you care to suggest one single Muslim scientist who you think deserves to be on the top 100 list? Do you think that Hayyan deserves to be on the list for his contributions to the field of gibberish? Or perhaps for his ability to invent humans and scorpions in the lab?

Add any of them to your top 100 list if it makes you feel better. I've stated repeatedly that I'm not participating in any such list making, so I really don't know why you keep asking me to.

As for Hayyan, his contribution to our understanding of chemistry is well known. If making great discoveries through pursuing flawed ideas disqualifies the discoverer from being recognised for his or her contributions - then you better take out a fair chunk from your western list.

But of course its not only about individuals, its also about the advances that evolved as a result of the environment that was fostered for learning and discovery. Like the great learning centres of Baghdad and Cordoba amongst others, where the trading of knowledge between different cultures and civilizations was encouraged. And which even extended to tolerating the propagation of ideas that can only be identified as blasphemous to islam - as Baron so kindly pointed us to. This is the thing that should most be acknowledged for producing the great minds that made the great discoveries. A real culture of learning.

Really, your "stifling science" thought bubble is just hilarious.

freediver wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 5:53pm:

I have suggested you look into whether this is even possible but you continue to dig yourself in deeper.

Here's a suggestion from me: why don't you look into whether its definitely NOT possible. Surely that will settle this once and for all?

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48834
At my desk.

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #115 - Mar 25^th, 2013 at 10:48am

Quote:

Or are we going to keep pretending that Mr Gibberish and house arrest guy are the only representatives of islamic science?

Like I keep saying gandalf, I am waiting for you to propose an example that does not make Islam look bad.

Quote:

hmm yeah, silly me. Why don't you enlighten me - what would you consider adequate proof for the (what I would consider) rather ambitious claim that islam during the golden age "stifled" science

I think the justified absence of any Muslims from the list of the top 100 scientists is a good start, given the context of the 'golden age.' Your unwillingness to suggest any who should be is not helping your case.

Quote:

Add any of them to your top 100 list if it makes you feel better. I've stated repeatedly that I'm not participating in any such list making, so I really don't know why you keep asking me to.

I keep asking because it puts Islam's contributions into perspective. It does not make sense to attempt to measure Islam's contributions without comparing them to something else. Otherwise you just have a convoluted version of "how long is a piece of string".

Quote:

If making great discoveries through pursuing flawed ideas disqualifies the discoverer from being recognised for his or her contributions

I think that deliberately preventing the spread of scientific knowledge for religious reasons is yet another example of Islam stifling basic science (in addition to the house arrest, the execution of his father, the life in exile etc). I'm sure he was a genius and did great things, despite all the gibberish. But in the end his example supports my argument, not yours.

Quote:

Here's a suggestion from me: why don't you look into whether its definitely NOT possible. Surely that will settle this once and for all?

Because you can't prove a negative Gandalf. Think about it. Also, if you insist this guy invented something (and please make up your mind what it is you think he invented) then it is up to you to provide evidence. Given that you have changed your mind again and gone back to the hang glider story there does not appear to be much point.

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18312
Gender: male

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #116 - Mar 25^th, 2013 at 10:58am

freediver wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 5:53pm:

Muslims might believe that one FD, he could have been in the right place at the right time to get close enough to the sun according to the Allah of the Quran.

Quote:

Allah speaking-

Until, when he reached the setting place of the sun, he found it setting in a spring of dark mud,......

www.quran.com/18/86

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18312
Gender: male

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #117 - Mar 25^th, 2013 at 11:24am

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 10:13pm:

By the way, what are your thoughts of the claims made in the economist article I quoted? Did you get a chance to look into the scientific advances cited - such as Ibn Sana's (Avicenna) canon of medicine which was used as a standard medical text in Europe for hundreds of years? Or al Biruni who accurately calculated the earth's circumference? Khwarizmi's development of algebra? Would you say they were significant contributions to modern day science?

hmm yeah, silly me. Why don't you enlighten me - what would you consider adequate proof for the (what I would consider) rather ambitious claim that islam during the golden age "stifled" science -

When did the Economist become a respected scientific journal Gandalf?

Ibn Sina was an atheist apostate and kafir according to Al Ghazali yet that does not stop muslims from claiming he was a muslim.
Al Ghazali wrote a book that was very critical of Ibn Sina called the Incoherance of the philosophers.
You can download al Ghazalis book in pdf why dont you read that before asserting Ibn Sina was a muslim.
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Incoherence_of_the_Philosophers

Islam stifles basic science and has done since Al Ghazali put an end to rational thought, nothing of use has come from the Islamic world since the days of Al Ghazali.
Quote:

Al Ghazali has sometimes been referred to by historians as the single most influential muslim after prophet Mohammad.
Others have cited his movement from science to faith as a detriment to Islamic scientific progress
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Ghazali

Eratosthenes calculated the circumference of the earth accurately before Mohammad invented Islam, he lived from 276BC-195BC which is long before Biruni copied the works of Aryabhata and passed them off as Islamic.
Muslims will ignore the previous work of non muslims to falsely claim Islam did it first.
Eratosthenes was the first to accurately calculate the circumference of the earth.
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes

Biruni copied the works of Aryabhata who was doing algebra before Mohammad invented Islam.
The persian Al Biruni even mentions Aryabhata in his works.
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryabhata

There are bugger all arabs in the list of scientists from the Islamic world the vast majority of them are Persians who follow that deviant twelver shia Islam.

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #118 - Mar 25^th, 2013 at 2:38pm

freediver wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 10:48am:

Like I keep saying gandalf, I am waiting for you to propose an example that does not make Islam look bad.

An example of what? A great scientist? I've given you a list of 17 - only two of which you think you can use to trash islam. Great acheivements? I've repeatedly given you an array of great scientific achievements - from the scientific method, to astronomical discoveries, optics, medicines, hospitals etc. A culture of learning that is the very antithesis of "stifling" science and learning? I give you the greatest learning centres of their time - Baghdad and Cordoba, as well as in Cairo - by the same caliph who imprisoned Al Haytham. Learning centres that encouraged the importation of different ideas and cultures from outside the islamic world, and who even gave a platform for non-islamic ideas - even blasphemous ideas.

How can you possibly say with a straight face that in this environment islam stifled science? You can't, its a joke of a claim. You can't even make a convincing case for islamic science not contributing much to modern science - let alone that islam actively "stifles" science.

freediver wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 10:48am:

I think that deliberately preventing the spread of scientific knowledge for religious reasons...

Stop there, and explain to me exactly where that happened during the islamic golden age.

freediver wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 10:48am:

Also, if you insist this guy invented something (and please make up your mind what it is you think he invented) then it is up to you to provide evidence.

picture me with a massive facepalm.

Baronvonrort wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 11:24am:

When did the Economist become a respected scientific journal Gandalf?

It didn't. But it is a highly regarded international magazine who would be putting their reputation on the line if they made statements that were patently false.

The important part about the quote I posted is the examples it cites. The scientists and achievements it lists are not disputed from a historical point of view, nor are the conclusions it draws about their significance from a scientific point of view.

Baronvonrort wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 11:24am:

Ibn Sina was an atheist apostate and kafir according to Al Ghazali yet that does not stop muslims from claiming he was a muslim.
Al Ghazali wrote a book that was very critical of Ibn Sina called the Incoherance of the philosophers.

Yes we call this freedom of speech here. What sort of society is this that allows Ibn Sina to propagate such blasphemous ideas without having those ideas suppressed?

Baronvonrort wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 11:24am:

You can download al Ghazalis book in pdf why dont you read that before asserting Ibn Sina was a muslim.

my God you are a bafoon Baron - no offence - you really just need to think your arguments through a little better. Nowhere did I claim he was a muslim. He was however a great thinker living in the islamic world. The fact that there were (apparently) atheists and apostates walking around in the heart of the muslim world freely propagating their blasphemous ideas - and having them challenged and debated in a civilized manner only supports my argument - not yours. Silly billy Tongue

Baronvonrort wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 11:24am:

There are bugger all arabs in the list of scientists from the Islamic world the vast majority of them are Persians who follow that deviant twelver shia Islam.

Well I trust that in the spirit of "stifling" science and different ideas, those Persians were promptly rounded up and executed. Whats that? They weren't?? The Abbassids actually encouraged cultural and knowledge exchange and allowed the Persian thinkers to flourish??? What a bizarre thing to happen. Its almost as if the islamic world... um... encouraged science and learning. You might even call it "enlightened". Huh

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48834
At my desk.

Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #119 - Mar 25^th, 2013 at 7:02pm

Quote:

An example of what? A great scientist? I've given you a list of 17 - only two of which you think you can use to trash islam.

They were the first two you provided. I did not pick and choose which ones to look at. They were merely the first ones on whatever lists you gave. I recall one of the lists had a lot of translators on it. Is that the list you think proves your case?

Quote:

Great acheivements? I've repeatedly given you an array of great scientific achievements - from the scientific method, to astronomical discoveries, optics, medicines, hospitals etc. A culture of learning that is the very antithesis of "stifling" science

Except of course for the bit where they put the scientists under house arrest, made them feel like their only option was to feign madness, lead them to believe that deliberately writing gibberish and trying to prevent the spread of knowledge was the right ting to do in God's eyes, killed their family members, made them flee the country, and then ascribed developments to them that were from other people etc. And this is just from the first two examples you gave (I am ignoring the imaginary invention of the hang glider).

Quote:

How can you possibly say with a straight face that in this environment islam stifled science? You can't, its a joke of a claim.

It is actually quite easy. We have the outcome clearly communicated in the list of the top 100 scientists. And the more you attempt to provide counter-examples, the more evidence you give of the various ways Islam achieved that outcome, despite the superficially fertile ground for scientific development.

Quote:

Stop there, and explain to me exactly where that happened during the islamic golden age.

Do you want the entire history, or will a shortened version suffice?

Quote:

The scientists and achievements it lists are not disputed from a historical point of view, nor are the conclusions it draws about their significance from a scientific point of view.

Who do you think is the best example of Islam not stifling science? Now that I have demonstrated how your first two examples undermine your argument you seem afraid to single anyone out.

Quote:

Yes we call this freedom of speech here. What sort of society is this that allows Ibn Sina to propagate such blasphemous ideas without having those ideas suppressed?

Actually gandalf, if you check the list of the top 100 scientists, you will see that many of them were religious, just not Muslim. Not one. It is not just that these societies tolerated non-believers tinkering away with ideas. It is also that for many scientists, uncovering the fabric of the universe was an expression of their religious devotion (as oppose to say, fasting, walking round magic rocks, praying five times a day, trying to gather 4 wives, slaughtering the infidel etc).

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 ... 21

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

« Forum

‹ Board

Top of this page