If you look at a map of the spread of Islam prior to the Industrial era, it seems to follow the deserts and dry areas. Could this be something to do with the cleanliness rules being more useful in these areas?

Are you really this stupid, or are you just pretending?

freediver wrote on Feb 11^th, 2009 at 10:49am:

If you look at a map of the spread of Islam prior to the Industrial era, it seems to follow the deserts and dry areas. Could this be something to do with the cleanliness rules being more useful in these areas?

FD,

I came across this info a few years ago,

Apparently, the land which constituents the state of Israel was once very fertile and forested.

But it was the custom of muslim overlords to tax land on the basis of the number of trees on the land.

Hence the canny landowners, wishing to minimise taxes.......


Another example of 'clever' ISLAMIC culture again.




I don't have a ready link available [for this info], but i am sure a little Googling would yield results.

I've seen similar types of theories around. Some blame it on goat herdng etc. Some put it all down to climate change. Some blame deforestation for a drying out of the whole eastern mediteranean area. I suspect it is the climate change theory that is dominant, but chopping down the trees no doubt contributed to it. There is a very similar story with the Anasazi Indians in the arid southwest of North America. They used a lot of timber very quickly, but then it all went dry and the society collapsed, and people are arguing about whether they caused it or whether they were simply the victims of climate change.

Quote:

If you look at a map of the spread of Islam prior to the Industrial era, it seems to follow the deserts and dry areas

I don't know when exactly you consider to be the industrial era, but I always thought it was from the late 18th. century. Islam didn't really spread much after the commencement of the industrial era (in fact it mostly shrunk, geographically speaking) so I don't even see the point in mentioning pre/post industrial era??

Is the Iberian peninsula desert and dry? Is Pakistan/India desert and dry? Is central asia desert and dry? Is Anatolia desert and dry? Are the Balkans desert and dry? Is the Caucasus desert and dry? All these regions were part of the Islamic world, WELL before the Industrial era (unless of course you've got a different idea on when the industrial era is than most other people). Perhaps you're just not actually aware of the lands that were part of the Islamic world pre-industrial era?? Have you actually examined a map to come to these conclusions?

Most of the Middle east has been pretty much desert for a lot of it's known history. The word desert is mentioned 42 times in the Bible, right from the very early books of the Pentateuch. The Arabs are also mentioned as being desert dwellers, long before the advent of Islam.


Quote:

Could this be something to do with the cleanliness rules being more useful in these areas?

Yeh I'm sure when Muslim generals debated whether or not to open a land, they'd sit and debate how much use the 'cleanliness rules' would be utilised in that particular land....

Are you normal fd? Have you just run out of arguments, and this was the best you could come up with?

Bottom of the barrel eh..

Quote:

I don't know when exactly you consider to be the industrial era, but I always thought it was from the late 18th. century. Islam didn't really spread much after the commencement of the industrial era (in fact it mostly shrunk, geographically speaking) so I don't even see the point in mentioning pre/post industrial era??

Because you always go an about how Islam is spreading so rapidly in the west. I didn't want to confuse you. The point is that we have much better medicine and healthcare these days and people understand the value of cleanliness and what they need to do to avoid getting sick.


Quote:

Yeh I'm sure when Muslim generals debated whether or not to open a land, they'd sit and debate how much use the 'cleanliness rules' would be utilised in that particular land.... Are you normal fd? Have you just run out of arguments, and this was the best you could come up with?

You seem to be having trouble understanding the logic Abu. Disease had on of the strongest impacts on historical patterns of war and colonisation. It is what prevented Europeans settling central Africa as effectively as they did South Africa. They did not 'sit around and debate' whether disease would prevent them from colonising central Africa. They went ahead and tried to colonise it. They died of tropical diseases. If you still have trouble comprehending the impact of disease on geopolitics, try reading Jared Diamond's book, 'Guns, Germs and Steel'.

Muslims expanded into all of north Africa, and some of central Africa, so that probably destroys your argument then and there.

I'd say if you look at a map of Islamic expansion, it stretches out quite evenly in ALL directions from where it began, just so happens most of the lands close to it are also desert.

Proximity.. proximity.

I think the fact that the big three, Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, all had their beginnings in the same small area, is a very good reason to wish that area had never existed.
But as the cradle of civilisation, I suppose it is understandable that primitive men created systems to try and provide answers for the things they didn't understand.
The big problem is that we cling to these primitive belief systems when we no longer need to create magical answers for questions we now have had answered, or  for those we now know we cannot answer.

Quote:

I think the fact that the big three, Christianity, Judaism, and Islam

I hardly think Judaism could be considered one of the 3 largest religions in the world. Sure it 'sprouted' Christianity, but that doesn't make it big.

However, considering you're Euro-centric view of the world mozza, I guess it's not that surprising you'd be thinking in this kind of mindset. You're views are probably much more influenced by Christianity than you'd care to admit.

Judaism is actually 12th. on the list, size wise. Just behind Juche and Spiritism, and I'm sure you know a lot about them.

Islam and Christianity are the only 2 religions in the top 10, that come from the Middle East. Most of them come from much further east on the other side of Asia... nevermind it sounded good in theory anyway.

I was thinking more along the lines of influence Abu.
You know Judaism came first, which sprouted both Christianity, and Islam from it.

Of course you probably reject that, but it is true, all the same.

mozzaok wrote on Feb 12^th, 2009 at 8:35pm:

I was thinking more along the lines of influence Abu.

Yes...of course you were.

:D:D:D

Quote:

I was thinking more along the lines of influence Abu.

Hence my statement about sprouting Christianity.


Quote:

You know Judaism came first, which sprouted both Christianity, and Islam from it.

Although it's true Christianity was originally just a sect within Judaism, even for the first 50 or so years of it's existence, Islam was never like that. Just because it shares some of the traditions means nothing.


Quote:

Of course you probably reject that, but it is true, all the same.

Well in a sense we don't reject it. We just believe they were once guided on the straight path and were submitters to their Lord (in Arabic: Muslims), but after rejecting the Messiah (pbuh) they began to formulate a new religion which we know today as "Judaism". In fact nowhere in the OT is the word Judaism ever used. It wasn't until after the advent of Christianity that it began to be used.

Quote:

Muslims expanded into all of north Africa, and some of central Africa, so that probably destroys your argument then and there.

Not really Abu. I'm talking about hygeine here, not brick walls.


Quote:

I'd say if you look at a map of Islamic expansion, it stretches out quite evenly in ALL directions from where it began, just so happens most of the lands close to it are also desert.

That's not what I see in the map.

Why are you so hostile to this idea? I thought you'd leap at the chance to say that Islam beat science based medicine to these ideas, like when you tried to claim Islam came up with round earth theory first.

Quote:

Not really Abu. I'm talking about hygeine here, not brick walls.

I'm sorry, I'm really lost. you just said Europeans didn't colonise central Africa because of the tropical climate, disease factor etc. (and that bolsters your idea that people don't colonise areas where cleanliness/disease can be a problem) Yet when I mentioned that Muslims did expand into central Africa, you can't see the relevance of my comment???


Quote:

That's not what I see in the map.

Ok, care to explain a little further? In which directions does it appear Muslims didn't expand (starting with Madinah) because they're non-desert areas? Islam had no trouble spreading into Indonesia, Malaysia and Philipines well before the Industrial era, and these islands are pretty much all tropical forests, no deserts at all. We'd think Muslims would've left them and headed for Australia instead if we followed your theory, since Australia is one big desert, excellent place for practising all those cleanliness rituals.

Really, I'm quite surprised you've 'gone out on a limb' like this fd, and just made such a fool of yourself. Can't you see how ridiculous this 'theory' appears?


Quote:

Why are you so hostile to this idea?

Apart from the fact it's just plain daft?


Quote:

I thought you'd leap at the chance to say that Islam beat science based medicine...

Contrary to popular myth, massive Arab populations didn't move into the new areas that became part of the Caliphate. The people who'd already been living there (and were acclimatised to the region) stayed there... so the whole idea just makes no sense at all.


Quote:

like when you tried to claim Islam came up with round earth theory first

I did? Care to link to that one?

Quote:

I'm sorry, I'm really lost. you just said Europeans didn't colonise central Africa because of the tropical climate, disease factor etc. (and that bolsters your idea that people don't colonise areas where cleanliness/disease can be a problem) Yet when I mentioned that Muslims did expand into central Africa, you can't see the relevance of my comment???

Actually, Europeans did too. It was not a brick wall. This is not about absolute ecological determinism.


Quote:

We'd think Muslims would've left them and headed for Australia instead if we followed your theory

But that is not what the theory is about.

It does seem a bit of a strange theory FD.

Surely they just started in the desert, then expanded to wherever they could get the most booty?
They did raid into central africa to take slaves, but as they were not big on actually developing areas as anything but trade routes to tax, because they obviously preferred the more piratical option of just taking the wealth that others had already made.
Therefore it seems logical that they would just attack and loot existing kingdoms.
Both India, and Spain, are far more than just desert, as were many parts of Eurasia, that they took over, so I really do not see the big "desert" link thing, as anything more than being a natural outcome of expanding from the desert area, where they actually began.

Since most lands that came under Islam became much better economically once becoming part of the Caliphate, your little theory is about as daft as fd's mozza.

Yes, they did well out of trading Abu, and they let the locals carry on their commerce so they could tax the heck out of them.

However, did they actually develop any nations, like we saw with say, the colonial powers of europe?

You know, promote industry, build railroads, generally contribute to the advancement of civilisation, that sort of thing?

I don't know that they didn't, but I have never heard of any examples of them doing that sort of thing, just lots about dividing up the booty from their invasions.

Quote:

so they could tax the heck out of them.

Do you actually know anything about tax under the Islamic Caliphate mozza? This just sounds pretty ignorant to me.

The Islamic Caliphate throughout most (if not all) of it's history had MUCH MUCH better tax rates than ANY other empire on earth.


Quote:

You know, promote industry, build railroads, generally contribute to the advancement of civilisation, that sort of thing?

Yes industry was developed quite well under the Islamic Caliphate. Railroads weren't really around until the dying days of the Caliphate, but yes it still built them across the main lands. As for advancement of civilisation, Islam WAS the centre of civilisation in it's peak.


Quote:

just lots about dividing up the booty from their invasions.

That speaks more about your ignorance of Islam than it does about the achievements of Islamic civilisation.

As I said, Abu, I don't know, but I was hoping for more than just the typical platitude, that Islam is the best, and instead get some examples of what Islam did for the countries it invaded.
What did they do, because some sources infer that they merely oversaw the slow decline of the existing industries, of the states they conquered.

I know that you think they did everything, from inventing cars, to cameras, a thousand years before the west, but that is just ridiculous fantasy to non-muslims, so if you could try and restrict your reply to actual stuff they really did, would be nice.

I know that they were big on promoting the trade routes from the east, but I thought that, that, was pretty much it, so please inform me of what else they are famous for.

Quote:

and instead get some examples of what Islam did for the countries it invaded.

Ok, let's start with healthcare. In the Islamic Caliphate, hospitals began being built from the very early days (beginning of the 8th. century) and after not long almost every single Islamic city throughout the Caliphate had a hospital, which offered state-funded FREE healthcare to the sick.


Quote:

In the medieval Islamic world, the word "bimaristan" was used to indicate an establishment where the ill were welcomed and cared for by qualified staff. In this way Muslim physicians distinguished between a hospital and a hospice, assylum, lazaret or leper-house, all of which were more concerned with isolating the sick and the mad from society than offering them a cure. Some thus consider the medieval Bimaristan hospitals as "the first hospitals" in the modern sense of the word. The first free public hospital was opened in Baghdad during the Caliphate of Haroon-ar-Rashid. The first hospital in Egypt was opened in 872 AD and thereafter public hospitals sprang up all over the empire from Spain and the Maghrib to Persia. As the system developed, physicians and surgeons were appointed who gave lectures to medical students and issued diplomas to those who were considered qualified to practice - in essence the first medical schools.

Wikipedia: Hospital

But of course they only built those hospitals so they could make the people well again, so they could get more taxes out of them...

Islam also carried the industry of paper production to all corners of it's empire:


Quote:

After further commercial trading and the defeat of the Chinese in the Battle of Talas in 751, the invention spread to the Middle East. Production was started in Baghdad, where the Arabs invented a method to make a thicker sheet of paper. The first paper mills were built in Baghdad from 794 CE, which helped transform papermaking from an art into a major industry.

Wikipedia: History_Of_Paper

The paper industry in fact became the basis of Islamic guilds, which developed all across the Islamic Caliphate, and which facilitated the rapid spread of knowledge throughout all the lands of Islam.


Quote:

Islamic civilization extended the notion of guilds to the artisan as well — most notably to the warraqeen, or "those who work with paper." Early Muslims were heavily engaged in translating and absorbing all ilm ("knowledge") from all other known civilizations as far east as China. Critically analyzing, accepting, rejecting, improving and codifying knowledge from other cultures became a key activity, and a knowledge industry as presently understood began to evolve. By the beginning of the 9th century, paper had become the standard medium of written communication, and most warraqeen were engaged in paper-making, book-selling, and taking the dictation of authors, to whom they were obliged to pay royalties on works, and who had final discretion on the contents.[2] The standard means of presentation of a new work was its public dictation in a mosque or madrassah in front of many scholars and students, and a high degree of professional respect was required to ensure that other warraqeen did not simply make and sell copies, or that authors did not lose faith in the warraqeen or this system of publication. Thus the organization of the warraqeen was in effect an early guild. Local guilds also served to safeguard artisans from the appropriation of their skills: The publication industry that spanned the Muslim empire, from the first works under the warraqeen system in 874 and up to the 15th century, produced tens of thousands of books per year.[2] A culture of instructional capital flourished, with groups of respected artisans spreading their work to other artisans elsewhere, who could in turn copy it and perhaps "pass it off" as the original, thereby exploiting the social capital built up at great expense by the originators of techniques. Artisans began to take various measures to protect their proprietary interests, and restrict access to techniques, materials, and markets.

Wikipedia: Guilds

The concept of state provided welfare was quite well developed in the Islamic Caliphate. Even from the time of the 2nd. Caliph Omar (ra) who instituted pensions, for all citizens, Muslims and Dhimmis alike (contrary to the false claims they were just second class citizens who were taxed into poverty):


Quote:

The concepts of welfare and pension were introduced in early Islamic law as forms of Zakat (charity), one of the Five Pillars of Islam, since the time of the Abbasid caliph Al-Mansur in the 8th century. The taxes (including Zakat and Jizya) collected in the treasury of an Islamic government was used to provide income for the needy, including the poor, elderly, orphans, widows, and the disabled. According to the Islamic jurist Al-Ghazali (Algazel, 1058-1111), the government was also expected to store up food supplies in every region in case a disaster or famine occurs. The Caliphate was thus one of the earliest welfare states, particularly the Abbasid Caliphate.

Wikipedia: Islamic economics in the world

TBC..

The Islamic Caliphate spread literacy and a high level of education all across the lands that came under it's control. The literacy standards became the highest and most widespread in all the world during that time.


Quote:

The ability to read and write was far more widely enjoyed in the early medieval Islamic empire and in fourth-century-B.C.E. Athens than in any other cultures of their times.

Education benefitted all communities across the Islamic Caliphate, not just Muslims (as is sometimes claimed). In fact some of the greatest scientists of Islamic civilisation were Jews.


Quote:

One of the most dramatic examples of how education markets have permitted the peaceful coexistence of disparate groups is the case of early medieval Islam. Skeptics and agnostics coexisted with orthodox Muslims, and both in turn were generally tolerant of Hebrews and Christians. Historian Abraham Blinderman observes that: “Perhaps few other periods in the tragic history of the Jewish people have been as meaningful to them as this period of Judaeo-Arabic communion. The renaissance of Jewish letters and science in Arab lands is a glorious testimonial to the cultural cosmopolitanism of the Arabs at a time when Jews in Europe were being burned as witches, plague-begetters, and ritualistic murderers.”

(Andrew J. Coulson, Delivering Education, Hoover Institution)

In the Agricultural industry, Islam brought about the most fundamental changes seen perhaps since the beginning of setttled farming. The first 500 years of Islam were known as the Muslim Agricultural Revolution.


Quote:

As early as the 9th century, an essentially modern agricultural system became central to economic life and organization in the Arab caliphates, replacing the largely export driven Roman model. Cities of the Near East, North Africa, and Moorish Spain were supported by elaborate agricultural systems which included extensive irrigation based on knowledge of hydraulic and hydrostatic principles, some of which were continued from Roman times. In later centuries, Persian Muslims began to function as a conduit, transmitting cultural elements, including advanced agricultural techniques, into Turkic lands and western India.

The fruits of this Agricultural revolution were certainly never limited to the capital of the Caliphate, nor to the birthplace of Islam. They were spread to every single part of the Islamic Caliphate, enhacing the lives of those living there:


Quote:

The two types of economic systems that prompted agricultural development in the Islamic world were either politically-driven, by the conscious decisions of the central authority to develop under-exploited lands; or market-driven, involving the spread of advice, education, and free seeds, and the introduction of high value crops or animals to areas where they were previously unknown. These led to increased subsistence, a high level of economic security that ensured wealth for all citizens, and a higher quality of life due to the introduction of artichokes, spinach, aubergines, carrots, sugar cane, and various exotic plants; vegetables being available all year round without the need to dry them for winter; citrus and olive plantations becoming a common sight, market gardens and orchards springing up in every Muslim city; intense cropping and the technique of intensive irrigation agriculture with land fertility replacement; a major increase in animal husbandry; higher quality of wool and other clothing materials; and the introduction of selective breeding of animals from different parts of the Old World resulting in improved horse stocks and the best load-carrying camels.

(Zohor Idrisi (2005), The Muslim Agricultural Revolution and its influence on Europe)

The sugar industry as we know it was largely pioneered by the early Islamic Caliphate. It's for this reason the English word "sugar" actually comes from the Arabic "sukkar" which is originally Persian.


Quote:

During the Muslim Agricultural Revolution, sugar production was refined and transformed into a large-scale industry by the Arabs. The Arabs and Berbers diffused sugar throughout the Arab Empire from the 8th century. Many other agricultural innovations were introduced by Muslim farmers and engineers, such as new forms of land tenure, improvements in irrigation, a variety of sophisticated irrigation methods, the introduction of fertilizers and widespread artificial irrigation systems, the development of gravity-flow irrigation systems from rivers and springs the first uses of noria and chain pumps for irrigation purposes, the establishment of the sugar cane industry in the Mediterranean and experimentation in sugar cultivation, numerous advances in industrial milling and water-raising machines (see Industrial growth below), and many other improvements and innovations.

The list goes on and on. If you read through some of the wiki articles provided you'll find plenty of references to scholarly articles that detail all of these industrial achievements and more.

Thanks Abu, that does tend to discredit the thrust of other articles I have read about Islamic occupations generally overseeing a gradual decline in the productivity of the countries they invaded.

I have to admit to still being a bit cautious about much of the pro Islamic stuff I see, which views every thing to do with islam, through rose coloured glasses, but at least it gives me another point of view to consider.

mozzaok wrote on Feb 14^th, 2009 at 10:24pm:

because they obviously preferred the more piratical option of just taking the wealth that others had already made. Therefore it seems logical that they would just attack and loot existing kingdoms.

We could be forgiven for thinking you were discussing the gold laden fleets of Spanish ships returning from South America or the English Navy and their pirate allies attacking and raiding those ships as they lumbered their way across the Atlantic. Apparently many ships were made so unseaworthy by the sheer weight of plundered treasure that they sank even during a mild storm.

Or the thousands of black slaves on ships transported to the new world to produce untold wealth for Christian Europe.

And all this talk about hygiene... Does someone want to talk about shaved groins again?

Islamophine anyone?

Quote:

Thanks Abu, that does tend to discredit the thrust of other articles I have read about Islamic occupations generally overseeing a gradual decline in the productivity of the countries they invaded.

It''s quite ironic, because the same people claiming this, also claim the only reason Islam was able to conquer any lands is because all the empires bordering them were in such a decline already, and therefore weak and easy to conquer.

The Persian empire was certainly in decline, but the Byzantine was not. It still had a good 500 years left in it after the arrival of Islam. And if Islam hadn't taken over it's lands, probably could've lasted longer.

There's no doubting the Islamic empire, like ALL empires, of course ended in decline, but this is just the nature of empires, they usually rise, peak, decline then fall. However, the detractors of Islam would have us believe the Islamic empire was all decline... doesn't even make sense logically, an empire just in perpetual decline.

Pretty much all the lands under Islam, witnessed their highest points in history under the Islamic Caliphate. Greece might be an exception though. Arabia certainly never witnessed anything like it's time under Islam, neither did the Levant nor Persia. North Africa and Spain certainly had their highest points under Islam, as did the Indian sub-continent (The word Mughal today in English still refers to someone with such massive riches and power because of the wealth of Indian society under the Mughal empire), who left us the Taj Mahal "the jewel of Muslim art in India and one of the universally admired masterpieces of the world's heritage.".


Quote:

I have to admit to still being a bit cautious about much of the pro Islamic stuff I see, which views every thing to do with islam, through rose coloured glasses

Well, of course people like to view their cultural heritage in a positive light. So it's no surprise Muslims view it with rose coloured glasses. I don't see anything wrong with that. It doesn't mean we deny nor condone the excesses that occured in our history, Muslims were always critical of themselves, but if you think we're going to sit here bagging ourselves for your benefit, then think again. That's just plain wrong to expect that.

But the facts speak for themselves, for anyone who actually wishes to examine them. There is now a wealth of information available about Islamic civilisation and the benefits it brought to all the lands it encompassed. I don't like to use the word occupied, because an occupation is usually a temporary foreign imposed rule, Islam was not like that at all. All parts of the Caliphate were considered just as valuable as others, and that's why today, even long after tthe destruction of the Caliphate, most of the lands it encompassed are still culturally Islamic, and in many cases culturally Arab.

Anyway, even if you're not happy with the Muslim accounts, there's quite a few documentaries and books around nowadays by non-Muslims who've studied Islamic culture and civcilisation extensively. Here's a few of them:

Islam in Europe - When Muslims Ruled in Europe
Islam: Empire of faith
What The Ancients Did For Us: The Islamic World

Quote:

Pretty much all the lands under Islam, witnessed their highest points in history under the Islamic Caliphate.

In other words, they have not progressed much in the last 500 to 1000 years. Why is that?

freediver wrote on Feb 16^th, 2009 at 6:52am:

Quote: Pretty much all the lands under Islam, witnessed their highest points in history under the Islamic Caliphate. In other words, they have not progressed much in the last 500 to 1000 years. Why is that?

So your asking why Spain, who witnessed its highest point in history under the Caliphate, has not progressed in the last 500 years?

You tell us.

I think Spain has. I thought it was odd that he included Spain in the list, as it was saved from the long downward spiral. Spain even had it's own empire, of sorts.

freediver,


Quote:

In other words, they have not progressed much in the last 500 to 1000 years. Why is that?

As stated all empires decline, that doesn't detract one iota from their authenticity as once great civilisations. Just because Italy and Greece haven't done much in the recent past, doesn't mean they weren't once the centres of great civilisations.

The issue wasn't about  whether there is a great Islamic civilisation today, without a doubt there is not. The issue was whether during IT'S TIME the Islamic civilisation merely occupied and sapped lands dry, or advanced and bettered them. I think this point has been clearly proven.


Quote:

I think Spain has. I thought it was odd that he included Spain in the list, as it was saved from the long downward spiral. Spain even had it's own empire, of sorts.

Spain had a brutal colonialist venture into the new world. Which resulted purely in the destruction of civilisations, not in the advancement of civilisation. The eradication of several different civilisations (who were much further behind anyone from Eurasia), and the shipping of all their riches back to Spain, can hardly even begin to compare to the civilisation that existed in Andalus. Unless of course that's your standard for what civilisation is? which wouldn't surprise me.. since it was generally the European modus operandi.

Quote:

The issue was whether during IT'S TIME the Islamic civilisation merely occupied and sapped lands dry, or advanced and bettered them.

Actually that's not the original issue I raised. I said nothing about Islam causing deserts. I think the issue of Muslim goat herders stripping the countryside dry, and the chopping down of all the forests, was raised on another thread.

Well it wasn't really in reponse to your original post, it was in response to the tangent that mozzaok formed out of your original theory:


Quote:

Surely they just started in the desert, then expanded to wherever they could get the most booty? They did raid into central africa to take slaves, but as they were not big on actually developing areas as anything but trade routes to tax, because they obviously preferred the more piratical option of just taking the wealth that others had already made. Therefore it seems logical that they would just attack and loot existing kingdoms.

Perhaps it should've been split off to a seperate thread.

freediver wrote on Feb 16^th, 2009 at 4:41pm:

Actually that's not the original issue I raised. I said nothing about Islam causing deserts. I think the issue of Muslim goat herders stripping the countryside dry, and the chopping down of all the forests, was raised on another thread.

Over-grazing, deforestation, introduction of destructive animals into the ecosystem, extinction of native animals by deliberate eradication... name a colonising power that has not done these things.

Over-grazing, deforestation, introduction of destructive animals into the ecosystem, extinction of native animals by deliberate eradication... name a third world country that would not do these things if the price from corporations and foreign governments is right.

helian,

We're talking about Muslims here. It's permitted for others, but I don't know  about the sub-human Muslims.

Also the fact that Arabia and other parts of the middle east were described as desert long before the rise of the Islamic Caliphate should've made fd realise that argument was a load of bollocks. anyway his original argument was that Muslims didn't necessarily make the desert (That was Yadda's tangent) but that we selectively only colonised desert regions, because of our cleanliness rituals..

Quote:

Also the fact that Arabia and other parts of the middle east were described as desert long before the rise of the Islamic Caliphate should've made fd realise that argument was a load of bollocks.

Why would you say this, then go on to acknowledge that it is wrong?

??

Which argument should I have realised was a load of bollocks?

The one of Yadda's that you latched onto about Muslims causing the desertification of the Middle east.

By 'latching on', do you mean how I contradicted his argument?