Lauren Southern Banned from UK

Discussion in 'Politics' started by machinist, Mar 14, 2018.

  1. Beach Ball Lady Balls

    Beach Ball Lady Balls Banned

    Messages:
    3,255
    Likes Received:
    1,821

    Please show me evidence that Mohammed existed? must be that olive tree that never existed or the word of mouth that spread after he was dead. Ever play the telephone game?

    You need to read more, evolution is still a hypothesis, not a theory after how many years? Theories are formed from hypothesis that have been subjected repeatedly to tests of evidence which attempt to disprove or falsify them. Funny that these test that falsify it get scientists called creationists. don’t challenge that hypothesis!
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2018
  2. unfocusedanakin

    unfocusedanakin The Archaic Revival Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    11,308
    Likes Received:
    3,598
    "Theory" in the context of science does not mean what you think it means. Gravity is also a theory so are you saying it does not exist?
     
  3. Okiefreak

    Okiefreak Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,079
    Likes Received:
    4,937
    Until you can convince me you have a college education and some science courses under your belt, which would be an uphill battle for you, it's pointless to talk to you further.The sad thing is that you don't seem to be aware of your ignorance. Your creationist garbola is pseudoscience. Show us the refereed research.
     
  4. Okiefreak

    Okiefreak Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,079
    Likes Received:
    4,937
    You might try Michael Cook (1996) Muhammad, 73-76 (evdence inependent of Isalamic sources "preclude andy doubt" that Muhammad was a real person"), Patricia Crone (June 10, 2008) Open Democracy (a non-Muslim Greek text provides "irrefutable proof that Muhammad existed); Collin Wells (Februarym 2004) Classical Review; A. Palmer (1993) The Seventh Century in the West Syrian Chronicles, 5-6; R.G. Hoyland (1997) Seeing Islam as Others Saw It, pp. 118-19; S.A. Nigosian, Islam: Its History, Teachings, and Practice, p.6. Surely you understand that the fact some details of legends that grow up around religious founders may be incorrect doesn't disprove they didn't exist. Just because we may have doubts that Jesus turned water into wine, was born of a virgin or walked on water doesn't prove he didn't exist. I don't think the Buddha's mother was impregnated by a white elephant or that he was shielded from the sun by a giant cobra, but I think it's possible he existed. Scholars dispute whether or not Muhammad was from Mecca, or whether the olive trees mentioned were in some more fertile part of the Middle East, like Syria, Lebanon, or Egypt. Possibly the climate was different in Mecca in the seventh century and more conducive to olive growing. There were various dams and irrigation projects in Arabia from time to time, including the Marib dam in Saba which collapsed in 575 CE. I have no desire to get further into the weeds on these off-topic and irreconcilable disputes.

    As for evolution, you are correct that "theories are formed from hypothesis that have been subjected repeatedly to tests of evidence which attempt to disprove or falsify them." Evolution has passed that test with flying colors.
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2018
  5. Beach Ball Lady Balls

    Beach Ball Lady Balls Banned

    Messages:
    3,255
    Likes Received:
    1,821
    First of all I am not a creationist. Odd and Strange that you would recommend authors who are considered anti Islamic and anti Arabic. What is your scientific background since this is important to you. Do share. I work and speak with scientists daily who are not as narrow minded as you are! Micro biologists, biochemists and chemists. Who are open to scientifically and critically reading the Koran, Torah and bible. But doing this with the Koran is met with scorn. Yet you provide authors who are considered anti Islamic.

    As for passing the test with flying colours, I disagree. We do not stem from one, there are different species with different genetic make ups. Again, chimps still exist, that does not make me a descendant of an ape, nor does it mean we came from non living matter. I am as much a chimp as I am a fly or a blade of grass.

    For example, This experiment proves nothing really. I forget who did this, They tested rats which they pretty much starved and impregnated. They birthed smaller than normal rats. This they called proof of evolution. To me this proves that when you are malnourished your bones, during developmental stages are weakened, soft and do not form properly. Which has been known for ages. The baby takes calcium from the mother, further weakening her bones and not providing sufficient nutrients for the baby or babies. The babies are born with weak bones as well. Development of walking etc is slower as well as effecting proper brain development in some. Evolutionists will say that this is proof. Others will say this called starvation and the effects on the body, You are what you eat. Feed the body, feed the mind. There was nomutations at all, yet this is proof!
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2018
  6. Okiefreak

    Okiefreak Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,079
    Likes Received:
    4,937
    Again, your thinking is scrambled. I don't give a rats ass whether you're creationist or not, but your earlier comments and the ones here indicated an abysmal ignorance of science. Do you talk to these scientists in the hall at work or over the backyard fence, and do you talk to them about science or the weather? I'm sure they're just being polite. Your description of the irrelevant rat experiment is ludicrous, indicating complete misunderstanding of evolutionary theory. Perhaps you could provide us a citation to the peer reviewed journal in which it was published? I think it's unlikely you've taken much if any science. In fact, I don't see how you could have graduated from college. Not that that's a big deal, but it usually is when discussing scientific theory or the history of religion. As for Islam, are we talking about the truth of Islam or the existence of Muhammad? The authors I cited are reputable scholars, neither pro nor anti- Islam. What makes you think they're anti-Islamic? The same thought processes that led you to conclude that my cartoon was anti-Islamic, or anti-British? Muslims don't like Cook and Crone because they advance an alternative theory of how Islam began--called Hagarism. The reason I cited these authors is that none of them can be accused of a pro-Muslim outlook. And yet they all conclude Muhammad did exist. The bottom line is they did provide evidence of Muhammad's existence, as you requested. Check it out. And you're way off topic. Discussing anything with you any further is a waste of time.
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2018
  7. 6-eyed shaman

    6-eyed shaman Sock-eye salmon

    Messages:
    10,378
    Likes Received:
    5,149
    When your analogies are so sloppy that they don’t even match the real situation at hand, I cannot give a yes or no answer. I’ve already explained to you why your comparison with Bob to L. Southern doesn’t work.

    Lauren is not insighting violence. She’s starting a conversation, and revealing double standards that should be addressed. That it’s ok to satarize one prophet, but not the other.

    And it doesn’t matter how many times you repeat this analogy with Bob either. I support freedom of speech for people of all stripes. Including the bigots with the ugliest of opinions from Black Lives Matter to the Klan. Even free speech for foreigners who are just visiting.


    Being offended, is not an argument
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2018
    Beach Ball Lady Balls likes this.
  8. Beach Ball Lady Balls

    Beach Ball Lady Balls Banned

    Messages:
    3,255
    Likes Received:
    1,821
    Okie,

    Try reading Hagarism; The making of the Islamic World (1977) by micheal cook and Patricia Crone : after that was published it was met with claims the book being anti Arabic and anti Islamic. After the reception of this he decided to stick with the text and not present any questions as to its origins or validity. As with Christianity and Judaism, contemporary historical, philogical and archeological data is gathered, but to do that with Islam it is met with anti Islamic accusations. Not looking at traditions and writings long after the events. Do not question it!

    So now he just provides lip service. And is patted on the back for it!

    We are now descendants of rats by the way.

    These Rodent-Like Creatures Are the Earliest Known Ancestor of Humans, Whales and Shrews

    Don’t question this!

    But as usual you have taken this off topic and insulted people, me with assumptions of education, to which you are off on, in order to elevate yourself as some sort of authority.

    It is obvious that you believe what you read without question which is all too common amoungst some.
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2018
  9. Okiefreak

    Okiefreak Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,079
    Likes Received:
    4,937
    You realize, I hope, that you've moved the goal posts. You asked for evidence of Muhammad's existence. I gave you that, distasteful as the authors might be to Muslims. Patricia Crone writes:
    "There is no doubt that Muhammad existed, occasional attempts to deny it notwithstanding. His neighbours in Byzantine Syriagot to hear of him within two years of his death at the latest; a Greek text written during the Arab invasion of Syria between 632 and 634 mentions that “a false prophet has appeared among the Saracens” and dismisses him as an impostor on the ground that prophets do not come 'with sword and chariot.' It thus conveys the impression that he was actually leading the invasions." What do we actually know about Mohammed? Hoyland believes the manuscript of Thomas the Presbyter contains what Hoyland believes is the "first explicit reference to Muhammad in a non-Muslim source:" Yes, Muslims tend typically to be less open than westerners to scholarship that contradicts their cherished beliefs. Too bad. Hope they get over it.

    As for the rats, I think rodent-like would be a better description. Does that shock you? Do you realize that your reaction and that of the creationist crew is not that different from that of Muslims being told a version of their history that is different from the one in the Qur'an? And we should always question.
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2018
  10. Meliai

    Meliai Banned

    Messages:
    25,868
    Likes Received:
    18,279
    Thats actually really cool about finding one of the earliest mammal ancestors
     
    Okiefreak likes this.
  11. Okiefreak

    Okiefreak Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,079
    Likes Received:
    4,937
    Both Beach Ball Lady Balls and Six-eyed to deflect criticism of their positions by employing standard propaganda techniques that work only on unsophisticated audiences. BBBLB's efforts at this are the most lame--suggesting that I am both pro-Muslim (holding hands along the Gaza strip) and anti-Muslim (including a cartoon showing a woman in a head covering), and anti-British, as well, for --what? posting a cartoon of an American mass murderer holding a gun (apparently we are to believe the sight of a gun in a cartoon hurts Brits to their very fiber). Neither of course makes any sense at all, since the thrust of my post and the cartoon is to defend the right of Brits to keep Lauren out and to defend Muslims from a bigoted outside agitator. In Six-eyed's case, he asks whether or not Balbus is homophobic for suggesting that distributing a pamphlet "Allah is Gay" in neighborhoods experiencing tension with Muslims justifies banning her from the country. Of course Sixeyed and all intelligent readers know that this is a bogus irrational inference. The Muslims in the audience, if devout and fundamentalist, are likely to believe that gay is not okay, just as devout fundamentalist Christians do. So linking gays to the sacred is likely to be majorly offensive to them, possibly triggering a violent response. Six-eyed is all about pushing people's buttons in the name of "free speech", e.g., approving sending ostensibly gay folks into Muslim bakeries in hopes they react. Six-eyed thinks the Muslims should just grin and bear it, but that may not be what the are likely to do. At least that's what Lauren is hoping for. Is it wrong for Muslims to feel that way about gays? I think so. Is it sensible for British authorities to keep a foreigner wanting to stir Muslims up out of their country? I think so.
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2018
    Balbus likes this.
  12. lode

    lode Banned

    Messages:
    21,697
    Likes Received:
    1,677
    Are you trying to argue against the historicity of an Abrahamic religion and evolution in the same post?

    Might want to stick with one theme.
     
    Meliai and Okiefreak like this.
  13. Okiefreak

    Okiefreak Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,079
    Likes Received:
    4,937
    I agree. I was responding to her challenge for evidence that Muhammad existed and also to a claim that evolution was not a scientific theory. I guess the easy response, and probably the one I should have made, was that both matters are way off topic, and to yoke them together suggests an effort to throw everything at the wall and hope something sticks!
     
  14. lode

    lode Banned

    Messages:
    21,697
    Likes Received:
    1,677
    The only constant theme you could even remotely begin to evoke between the two, is: "Don't trust experts. What do they know?"

    It's the opposite of appeal to authority logical fallacy. Appeal against authority.
     
    Okiefreak likes this.
  15. Balbus

    Balbus Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,152
    Likes Received:
    2,672
    6

    Of course it doesn’t match perfectly it wouldn’t be an analogy otherwise, but to me is more of a parable a simple story to examine a larger and more complex issue, it was to see what you would do in a personal situation.

    You have admitted you are the kind of person that would let into your home a person like Bob to verbally abuse you wife and just let it happen and do nothing.

    On a personal level people would likely bring out an injunction or restraining order against someone like Bob I’m presuming you would be against that?

    Oh and I hope you show this sequence of posts to any future partners you might have so they are pre-warned.

    Anyway the second part of the story is to highlight that while you might be unaffected by Bob abusing your wife, other might be – those in defence of your wife and her right not to be abused and those that might wish to abuse her (or worse).

    You seemed to indicate that in your opinion someone like Bob is completely innocent of incitement and instead blame your kids for all the trouble, although that trouble would never have happened if you had not let Bob into your house?

    Personally I’d try and talk to Bob first and find out what his problem is and try and get it sorted but if I then found out he had no actual rational reasons for his behaviour and was just a jerk who enjoyed trying to provoke reactions because it gained him kudos and notoriety amongst his sad friends then I’d have no problem barring him from my house.
     
  16. Balbus

    Balbus Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,152
    Likes Received:
    2,672
    6

    LOL she is a professional troll who goes out of her way to try and provoke a reaction so she can gain personal publicity.

    To me there is a difference between wanting honest debate and just trying to start a fight.

    Yes but you have admitted you are the kind of person that would let a character like Bob viscously abuse you wife verbally (and try to incite other to do the same and even worse) and do nothing about it. You wouldn’t bar Bob from you house, wouldn’t call the police, and wouldn’t bring an injunction or restraining order against him.

    Basically you are happy, even supportive, of anyone that wish to be cruel toward your wife so the likelihood that you would be opposed to hate speech or those that would verbally try and spread hate (and worse) against those that you don’t care about is unlikely.
     
  17. Balbus

    Balbus Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,152
    Likes Received:
    2,672
    6

    Oh and once again far right wish to compare the KKK and Black Lives Matter, the KKK is a white supremacist group BLM is not a black supremacist group, BML is about try to highlight the problems the USA has with racism against black people – the KKK is about trying to promote racism.

    Yes there are idiots attracted to BLM (there are in any movement) but the KKK is made up wholly of idiots.

    It seems to me that the kind of casual racism that many in the BLM movement is trying to bring to people’s attention is being displayed by those that like to try and equate the KKK with the BLM.
     
  18. Balbus

    Balbus Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,152
    Likes Received:
    2,672
    Okie

    Thing is that this has been discussed several time on the forums. The Nazis brown shirts didn’t march through Jewish areas because they wanted to cause offence and provoke a reaction oh no is was all about wanting to start a conversation - oh yeah and if someone believes that, I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn I like to sell them.
     
    Okiefreak likes this.
  19. Irminsul

    Irminsul Valkyrie

    Messages:
    62
    Likes Received:
    105
    What bridge is that?
     
  20. fraggle_rock

    fraggle_rock Member

    Messages:
    1,202
    Likes Received:
    557
    So it seems that some conservatives are so desperate to believe they're oppressed that they are actually willing to claim a far right sociopath and Nazi in all but name as one of their own.

    Then again, these are the same people who want to believe that Stalin, Hillary Clinton, Obama, all Democrats, SJWs and Kim Jong Un are also exactly the same.
     
    Okiefreak likes this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice