First Muslim College in California

[APA]

Yet another thread derailed by religion-bashing. This is getting to be far too regular an occurrence in these forums.

It's always the same 2 people. Fucking heathens.

[golddigger14s]

For the most part, I like what you post here to the forum. My only reservation is that you have a cat.

My cat is a badass cat. Ask Soldier Citizen.

I don't doubt that your cat is badass. I just find people with cats....shifty sometimes.

I have three cats, so I'm 3X shifty?

[kf7mjf]

For the most part, I like what you post here to the forum. My only reservation is that you have a cat.

My cat is a badass cat. Ask Soldier Citizen.

I don't doubt that your cat is badass. I just find people with cats....shifty sometimes.

I have three cats, so I'm 3X shifty?

[joao01]

[snozzberries]

Having been to the middle east, most Muslims just want to raise their family and put food on the table....same as the rest of us. Most "muslims" I believe are fairly secular, as many Christians are also fairly secular.

Radicalism, regardless of the source, rarely leads to good things (i.e. ISIS).

Let us hope that Muslim colleges are not a source of radicalism.

[joao01]

For the most part, I like what you post here to the forum. My only reservation is that you have a cat.

My cat is a badass cat. Ask Soldier Citizen.

I don't doubt that your cat is badass. I just find people with cats....shifty sometimes.

Dan has a cat.

Cats are fine if you have a farm or live someplace with limited space.

[TINCANBANDIT]

http://islam.about.com/od/activism/tp/charities.htm Islam is a minority in this country. Their charitable actions and organizations are of limited scope and reach here, and not always apparent.

As far as I can tell, the moderate Muslims are as charitable as the modern Christians in their own dominant culture.

I call BS....why is it we are called on to help the people of Africa every F'ing time there is a famine....If Islam is such a big, charitable religion, they could handle these problems by themselves.


I just don't understand why you continue to defend people who want you dead

[kf7mjf]

The Islamic world is not a food exporting world for the most part. The US is.

And because I think the average Muslim cares as little about wanting me or any other Westerner dead as the average Christian wants to kill gays/Muslims/pagans/whatever

[solyanik]

why is it we are called on to help the people of Africa every F'ing time there is a famine...

Everything you need to know about religion of love thy neighbor(C)(TM) is right here, in this one sentence. Well, one can also not help noticing the cheer every time a criminal is killed/executed. Very, very Christian feelings here.


"Mr. Gandhi, though you quote the words of Christ often, why is that you appear to so adamantly reject becoming his follower?"

Gandhi replied:
"Oh, I don't reject Christ. I love Christ. It's just that so many of you Christians are so unlike Christ."

(http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/quest ... christians)

[solyanik]

BTW, speaking of foreign aid. Here's the list of the most generous countries. All, except Ireland, have extremely low religion participation rates. US is nowhere near.
http://www.aneki.com/most_generous_coun ... &cntdn=asc

[solyanik]

Yet another thread derailed by religion-bashing. This is getting to be far too regular an occurrence in these forums.

"Yet another thread bashing Islam is derailed by bashing Christianity."

I need Doc Nugent's opinion, as a professional, whether this is complete lack of self-awareness, or whether there is another name for Guns4Libertys condition.

[CurtisLemansky]

Yes! A thread that I agree with pretty much everything kf7 and soly have to say! It's been a while. Thank you OP.




Sent from my UAV using Disposition Matrix 2.0

[solyanik]

Both evolutionists

Sorry, but this is called "scientists". "Evolutionist" is not a term. Continuing...

and creationists select different "facts"

Sorry, but creationists see absolutely no "facts". They have a book. What's written in the book has absolutely NO empirical evidence. Something that has no empirical evidence for it is not called a "fact". But continuing...

when coming to the conclusion. Both are beliefs.

Conclusions based on empirical evidence are not called "beliefs". They are called "scientific theories" - because, you know, they are backed by observable facts. Conclusions based on no empirical evidence whatsoever are called "beliefs". Continuing...

None of us were there.

And none of us can see atoms, or light waves, or supernovas. That does not mean that the theory that the matter is made from atoms is somehow equivalent to "belief" that the matter is made from unicorns. Sorry. Faux "News" may create the sense of false equivalence because they then can exploit it for their own purposes (which are to try and make Republican official position on science, - specifically on evolution and climate, - less moronic), but it's a FALSE equivalence.

Regardless, saying that someone believes the earth to be 6,000 years old seems completley irrelevant to me.

Ok, let me explain why I keep harping on science.

We have this awful state of affairs in the US where majority of the population is completely inadequate when it comes to basic science (see this thread: viewtopic.php?f=52&t=53398).

People think that most scientific advancements that their life depends on - from antibiotics to aerospace to computers - is somehow magically concocted by a few semi-mad geniuses working in makeshift garages. This may have been true in 18th Century (and so the results of science in 18th Century were very, very different), but this is (luckily) not how it works today.

Science is a huge (multi-tens-of-billions) industry that depends on tens of thousands or researchers working through thousands of directions to eliminate vast majority but a very few, using scientific methods. More or less everything you see around you is the result of this work. More and more of the money flows into this work, through both government and private corporations.

This work has many stages, from fundamental science (where most of the false leads have not yet been eliminated) to applied science (where most is already known, and we're just looking for ways to apply the findings of fundamental science to real-world problems). Both are required: fundamental science is useless without applied science, applied science is impossible without fundamental science, because it is wholly based on it.

As you can imagine, fundamental science is extremely speculative. People may work all their lives just on eliminating false leads - and it is still very useful since others won't have to research this directions again. Throughout human history it was proven that the best way to fund extremely speculative research is through government funding. Private companies cannot - should not - tolerate this level of risk. It is clearly not in the interests of their shareholders.

Now, why it is important that the population, and especially the policy makers have basic command of science and how it works? Because their support is needed to fund it. When we have morons such as this http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense ... video.html in charge of said funding, how can it possibly work? Cue xkcd cartoon mentioned upstream...

[WaJim]

Yes! A thread that I agree with pretty much everything kf7 and soly have to say! It's been a while. Thank you OP.




Sent from my UAV using Disposition Matrix 2.0

[WaJim]

Wasnt this thread about some muslim college?