Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 ... 21
Send Topic Print
Islam stifles basic science (Read 52070 times)
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #15 - Mar 9th, 2013 at 2:17pm
 
freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 1:39pm:
Assuming that such a vague reference can be interpreted as evidence in favour of something so unlikely and extraordinary


For God's sake! What is so unlikely or extraordinary about it?? We know this guy existed, and that he made many engineering innovations. That a scientifically minded guy who is obviously very curious about engineering would make an attempt at flying is nothing unlikely or extraordinary. Thats part of what makes it so likely that it happened. We have a contemporary of his saying that he did something that would have been right up his alley - that at the very least is enough to reject the claim that it was "obviously fabricated". You simply don't have a leg to stand on FD.

freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 1:39pm:
Sure. The trick is to figure out which bits are true.


yes, and which bits are "obviously fabricated". Just look at this objectively, if you can: on the one hand I am saying we have documented evidence that it happened, there is no real reason to assume that it didn't (certainly nothing "extraordinary" or "unbelievable" about it) - given that it was a known innovator and experimentor - therefore, there is no reason to assume it was "obviously fabricated". You on the other hand are an emphatic "it was obviously fabricated, end of story". Just pretend to look at this objectively, and tell me which position is the more tenable

freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 1:39pm:
Furthermore you appear to imply that this is not the only source over a period of 700 years. I will also go out on a limb and claim that this source is not a single line in a poem.


oh you want to talk about secondary sources? Well let me assure you there are other secondary sources to the flight story than just al Maqqari's account:

Quote:
‘Abbas Ibn Firnas' precedence in flying is documented in more than a poem. We have a relatively detailed narrative in Al-Muqtabis min anba' ahl al-Andalus by Abū Marwān Hayyān ibn Khalaf Ibn Ḥayyān al-Qurtubi (987–1075). The book was lost for a long time and was found only a few decades ago.[4] However, even before it was found, the account of Ibn Hayyan was quoted by other ancient Arabic historians, such as the Andalusian historian Ibn Sa'id al-Maghribi (d. 1286 CE) and the 17th-century Moroccan historian Al-Maqarri.

http://www.muslimheritage.com/features/default.cfm?ArticleID=1297

So please don't think we are only talking about one source in total.

freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 1:39pm:
Can you elaborate on this please?


a non-sequitur? A logical fallacy: in your case assuming that because islam didn't contribute significantly to modern science, it necessarily means that islam actively "stifles" science.
Back to top
 

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
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #16 - Mar 9th, 2013 at 2:27pm
 
freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 2:09pm:
So you will argue ad nauseum that a contribution to maths is relevant to whether Islam stifles basic science.


Its relevant to the fact that islam contributed positively to science - obviously.

freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 2:09pm:
Can you explain why the absence of any Muslims on the top 100 scientists list is completely unrelated to Islam and science?


The list itself is irrelevant - since its an entirely subjective lists comparing scientists and their contributions that can never be compared. As I said, I despise such lists. I don't care if its a list of 100 muslim scientists - its just as meaningless to me.

freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 2:09pm:
It was a continuation of a previous discussion in a thread with a few other unrelated (even more so) topics going on. You know this. If you can think of a more appropriate title, feel free to suggest it.


Dear me, is it really so hard to understand? You start a thread called "islam stifles basic science" - so one would reasonably expect the OP to, I don't know, maybe expand on that claim?

Here's a starter for you:

islam stifles basic science because of x y and z... is that so difficult??
Back to top
 

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: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #17 - Mar 9th, 2013 at 5:33pm
 
Quote:
For God's sake! What is so unlikely or extraordinary about it??


There are many extraordinary things about this claim:

1) That he managed to build a working hang glider out of the materials available to him at the time (vulture feathers apparently).

2) That he managed to get it all figured out by himself, when later developers with better materials had to build on a long timeline of incremental improvements and knowledge.

3) That he managed to fly at all the first time, without a series of trials in suitable 'near-flight' conditions.

4) That all the knowledge he gained vanished without a trace, despite the attention that being able to fly would have attracted, leaving only a single record in a poem mentioning the vultures feathers he stuck to himself.

5) That he bothered with the vulture feathers at all. I am not aware of anyone ever successfully flying with a machine reliant on bird feathers.

6) That you take any of the claims seriously.

Quote:
That a scientifically minded guy who is obviously very curious about engineering would make an attempt at flying is nothing unlikely or extraordinary.


Plenty of people attempted to fly throughout history. Gluing bird feathers to yourself is probably one of the most obvious ideas. If this is all you are attributing to him, I have no quarrel. However, you previously argued that he flew successfully with some kind of hang glider.

Quote:
yes, and which bits are "obviously fabricated"


The bit where he succeeded in flying. Perhaps you are mixing up falling at high speed with flying.

Quote:
oh you want to talk about secondary sources? Well let me assure you there are other secondary sources to the flight story than just al Maqqari's account:


What do you mean by a secondary source? All of the accounts in that link seem to contradict each other, and none of them actually quote what the original source actually says. It just looks like more Muslims making up crap.

Quote:
a non-sequitur? A logical fallacy: in your case assuming that because islam didn't contribute significantly to modern science, it necessarily means that islam actively "stifles" science.


No gandalf, this is what I want to you elaborate on:

Quote:
Even if islam made no significant contribution to science, that in no way means that islam stifles science.


Quote:
At best you have argued that islam hasn't made significant contributions, but thats obviously not the same.


Quote:
The list itself is irrelevant - since its an entirely subjective lists comparing scientists and their contributions that can never be compared.


Do you mean that Islamic contributions could never compare?

Quote:
As I said, I despise such lists. I don't care if its a list of 100 muslim scientists - its just as meaningless to me.


All I am asking is that you provide a few examples of Islamic scientists who you think ought to be on the list. Pick the best examples. I am not asking for a thesis. It is strange that you go to such lengths to contradict me and argue over contributions that most likely never even happened, when all it would take for you to show that I am wrong is to give a few examples.

Quote:
Dear me, is it really so hard to understand? You start a thread called "islam stifles basic science" - so one would reasonably expect the OP to, I don't know, maybe expand on that claim?

Here's a starter for you:

islam stifles basic science because of x y and z... is that so difficult??


Because it is hard to stand on the shoulders of giants whilst propping up midgets.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Mar 9th, 2013 at 6:37pm by freediver »  

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #18 - Mar 9th, 2013 at 9:17pm
 
freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 5:33pm:
Plenty of people attempted to fly throughout history. Gluing bird feathers to yourself is probably one of the most obvious ideas. If this is all you are attributing to him, I have no quarrel.


You have changed your story. here you rejected the entire story:

Quote:
in Islam a made up story about a guy jumping off a building and plunging to his death counts as a scientific contribution, regardless of the complete absence of any actual contribution.


You reject not just the claim he succeeded, but the claim he attempted it in the first place.

freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 5:33pm:
The bit where he succeeded in flying. Perhaps you are mixing up falling at high speed with flying.


He did the same as what Eilmer of Malmesbury attempted over a century later in England. He is reported to have flown 200 metres. The primary source on Firnas's attempt was a poet who was apparently a strong critic of his - yet he states that he "flew" successfully.

I stated at the outset that its possible that he failed, but I am also open to the possibility that he succeeded too - just like what the sources say. I don't know why you would paint yourself in a corner so badly by stating so dogmatically it was an "obvious fabrication". 

freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 5:33pm:
What do you mean by a secondary source?


A secondary source is someone writing about an event that they did not personally experience, usually some time after the event happened. Like Herodotus writing on the Persian wars some 40-50 years after the event - which we rely so heavilly on. In fact a primary source like this poem is actually relatively rare in history as far back as this.

freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 5:33pm:
It just looks like more Muslims making up crap.


Well thats your agenda to attribute evil conspiracies to muslims. But to any objective observer, the weight of evidence is pointing heavilly towards an attempted flight which had at least limited success. You said yourself, its the art of deciding which evidence is true. The fact is, we have multiple sources *ALL* of which say an attempt was made, and all say he flew for at least some distance. Funny how there is no evidence suggesting that it is a case of "muslims making up crap".

freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 5:33pm:
No gandalf, this is what I want to you elaborate on:

Quote:
Even if islam made no significant contribution to science, that in no way means that islam stifles science.


Quote:
At best you have argued that islam hasn't made significant contributions, but thats obviously not the same.


The absense of any significant achievement in a field of knowledge is not any sort of proof for an active program of suppression of that field. Surely you can see that?

But of course as we all know, the question is moot - since that absense of achievement is simply a figment of your imagination.

freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 5:33pm:
All I am asking is that you provide a few examples of Islamic scientists who you think ought to be on the list.


At first I was confused why you would be asking about something that is so freely available on the most simple google search for anyone trully interested. But then I realised you are not interested at all. But anyway, here you go. Oops - better avert your eyes from those mathematicians in that list listed under "notable scientists"  Grin

freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 5:33pm:
Because it is hard to stand on the shoulders of giants whilst propping up midgets.


Ah the camel urine argument again. By the way, any luck yet with the Abu/"some muslims" quotes "propping up" the camel-urine drinking midgets? I think its fair enough that if you insist on persisting with this line you fess up and show us who has been propping up these "midgets".

Of course, back on planet earth, muslims are not propping up midgets to promote islam's scientific achievements at all - but are propping up all the great mathematicians, physicists, physicians, astronomers etc etc - who everyone accept freediver *KNOWS* made significant contributions to the advancement of science.
Back to top
 

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: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #19 - Mar 9th, 2013 at 10:37pm
 
Quote:
You have changed your story. here you rejected the entire story:


I reject every story I hear about him that involves him flying. What exactly do you think you have proven Gandalf? That I was wrong about exactly how full of crap you are?

Quote:
I stated at the outset that its possible that he failed, but I am also open to the possibility that he succeeded too


LOL, and you accuse me of changing my mind. Here is an example of the claims you have been making:

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 3rd, 2013 at 7:17pm:
you must be referring to Abbas ibn Firnas, who invented the first known flying machine. Yeah lets make a mockery of the guy who invented the first hang glider, and achieved what the Europeans were still attempting to do... about 10 centuries later.  Tongue Never mind the fact that his invention actually worked.


You fell for the Islamic propaganda machine hook, line and sinker, didn't you Gandalf? Now, consider the impact this might have on a later Muslim vs a later non-Muslim trying to invent a flying machine. The Muslim would be mislead by his fellow Muslims into believing there was something of value in what this guy did. Just like you. Without the benefit of non-Muslims to point the obvious out to them, there is no limit to the extent of the collective self delusion.

Quote:
Well thats your agenda to attribute evil conspiracies to muslims.


This one is more absurd than evil. Stupid even. I mean, if you are going to make stuff up, why make it so obvious that you are full of crap? It is Muslims deluding themselves. They harm themselves more than anyone else. Like I said, it is hard to stand on the shoulders of giants when you are propping up midgets.

Quote:
Funny how there is no evidence suggesting that it is a case of "muslims making up crap".


What would such evidence look like? People mocking Muslims for believing this crap? You, a Muslim, making up crap about Firnas, or swallowing the crap made up by other Muslims about him?

Quote:
The absense of any significant achievement in a field of knowledge is not any sort of proof for an active program of suppression of that field. Surely you can see that?


It is if it occurs over many centuries, during a 'golden age' of relative wealth, the accumulation of knowldge, the establishment of learning centres, developments in other areas like warfare and agriculture etc etc. Plus it continues to this day. Your own interest in perpetuating myths about this guy inventing the first hang glider is just another example of the mental blocks that Islam puts on people's minds.

Quote:
At first I was confused why you would be asking about something that is so freely available on the most simple google search for anyone trully interested. But then I realised you are not interested at all. But anyway, here you go. Oops - better avert your eyes from those mathematicians in that list listed under "notable scientists"


Funny thing is, the guy at the top of that list had this written about him: There is considerable uncertainty as to the actual provenance of many works that are ascribed to him.

Ironic hey?

Are there any that you think deserve to be on the list of the top 100? I got some of the way down it, but it looks like most of them are noted at least partly for translating the works of others.

Quote:
Ah the camel urine argument again.


And the hang glider argument.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Mar 9th, 2013 at 10:52pm by freediver »  

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91855
Gender: male
Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #20 - Mar 9th, 2013 at 11:03pm
 
Abu - check.

Camel urine - check.

Malaysian Prime Minister on homosexuality - pending.

Stay reading friends.

For all your healthy needs, come to Fatima Pharmacy, 1039 Karl Marx Avenue, Kabul.. Medicines, vitamins, surgical saws. Health-giving urines of camel. Everything you can buy.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #21 - Mar 9th, 2013 at 11:16pm
 
Muslim overlords allowed some Christian and Jewish converts to translate some Greek text 800 years ago because they thought these texts supported Islam.

What else has Islam ever done for us?


Come on Reggie, tell us.





Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91855
Gender: male
Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #22 - Mar 9th, 2013 at 11:22pm
 
Well. It would seem they invented some sort of flying stick. You know, been here 800 years or so...
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #23 - Mar 9th, 2013 at 11:43pm
 
That sounds positively aboriginal - 800 years and only a stick to show for it. (Not up you, shurely?)


Anything else?

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #24 - Mar 10th, 2013 at 12:01am
 
freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 10:37pm:
LOL, and you accuse me of changing my mind. Here is an example of the claims you have been making:


Hearing about it for the first time, this was my initial impression after a quick google. Note though in my very next post I conceded:

Quote:
Sure, his machine and test might not have even existed


Even so, the weight of evidence still points to the likelihood that my original claim is probably correct.

Contrasting with you, who has been maintaining that everything about the story was made up - that is until today. Your sudden turn-around is presumably because the idea of a muslim embarassing himself by dressing up in feathers - with some added embelishments of your own like the claim that he broke his neck and the baseless assumption he dropped straight to the ground - obviously suits your agenda.

freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 10:37pm:
You fell for the Islamic propaganda machine hook, line and sinker, didn't you Gandalf?


If you call wikipedia islamic propaganda - then yeah I guess  Tongue

freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 10:37pm:
This one is more absurd than evil. Stupid even. I mean, if you are going to make stuff up, why make it so obvious that you are full of crap?


Indeed. Its almost as if there's no reason to believe it was made up in the first place.

freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 10:37pm:
What would such evidence look like? People mocking Muslims for believing this crap?


Was Firnas the historical person made up? No. Was the fact that he was a brilliant scientist and inventor made up? No. Does any evidence exist that contradicts the core facts of the event (and no difference estimates of how far he flew doesn't count)? No. In short, is there any reason at all to assume the story isn't true? No.

freediver wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 10:37pm:
It is if it occurs over many centuries, during a 'golden age' of relative wealth, the accumulation of knowldge, the establishment of learning centres, developments in other areas like warfare and agriculture etc etc. Plus it continues to this day.


why don't we stop desperately grasping at straws using association fallacies and just cut to the chase? I think you owe it to this thread to actually start making a case for how islam actively works to stifle science.

Back to top
 

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
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #25 - Mar 10th, 2013 at 12:10am
 
Soren wrote on Mar 9th, 2013 at 11:16pm:
What else has Islam ever done for us?


Come on Reggie, tell us.


gave us the numeric system we use today, algebra, the scientific method, hospitals, understanding of fever, understanding of human anatomy, disinfecting wounds... etc etc

...now here's your line soren:
"but *APART* from the numeric system, algebra, the scientific method..."
Back to top
 

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
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #26 - Mar 10th, 2013 at 12:19am
 
Yes,  all that 800 years ago.

What has Islam ever done for us since then?

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91855
Gender: male
Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #27 - Mar 10th, 2013 at 12:45am
 
Quite right. Apart from the flying stick, algebra, the minaret, the toothbrush, coffee drinking, etc, etc, etc, your Muselmen pioneered the marvellous health-giving properties of camel urine.

Which is really quite a coincidence, given we have in this very thread, the world’s foremost advocate for the dietary qualities of the human stool.

Yes indeed, the old boy has one with every meal - sometimes two if he has an apetite. Put simply, he just can’t get enough of them.

You’ll often seem him on these pages offering his own up, generously sharing them with anyone who chooses to partake in his succulent delicasies - quite a treat!

I usually have a polite nibble, you know, so as not to be rude. The old boy can be quite persistant.

FD refuses to impose health regulations - I imagine he’s waiting until all the research is in. The old boy insists it’s all above board, but one does wonder at times, particularly when the old boy grins at you with his mouth full.

Still, I’ve been assured it’s completely scientific. Who am I to question?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #28 - Mar 10th, 2013 at 1:12am
 
You stupid poof.

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91855
Gender: male
Re: Islam stifles basic science
Reply #29 - Mar 10th, 2013 at 1:27am
 
Thanks, old chap. I’ve eaten.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 ... 21
Send Topic Print