Two Ex-GTMO Inmates Appear in AQ Vid

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
161

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
When I bust out a math or physics book, I don’t find many theorems discovered by non-Westerners. Maybe you studied something different in school

Evidently I did study something different in school as I was taught about the huge history of Mathematics developed in Arabia, China and India.

Was this not covered at your school?

Is there another PRCalDude you’re talking to on this thread?

I just posted a direct quote from you where you stated When I bust out a math or physics book, I don’t find many theorems discovered by non-Westerners.

What conclusion was I supposed to draw from that than that?

That some of us made it beyond basic algebra.

But you wouldn’t have without those pesky Arabs.

As for Physics, there has been plenty of development in the field that has come out of China.

So yet again, you make a sweeping statement that is proved to be wrong then you try to sneak out of it.[/quote]

I’m not sneaking out of everything - I just don’t have the built-in Western self loathing that you have. Algebra was an important contribution from the Arabs. That still doesn’t detract from the fact that the overwhelming majority of mathematicians and physicists have been Westerners for the past 5-600 years. Did you notice the modifier “many” in my statement? Still, algebra (as developed by the Arabs), had some origins in the Western tradition that predated its discovery through Diophantus. Still, though, I think most of the credit for the Arab “discovery” belongs to the Hindus, whom the Arabs conquered.

To answer your charge of “sneaking out of it” a bit further perhaps we should look at my original statement regarding Western science in context:

[quote]Has the West, for the past 600 years, been characterized by a ‘retarding of scientific development’?

Almost all of the innovations of the past 500 years at least have been developed by Western men. When I bust out a math or physics book, I don’t find many theorems discovered by non-Westerners. Maybe you studied something different in school. Critical studies, perhaps.[/quote]

You charged Christianity with retarding scientific progress. Christianity was the only game in town in the West until recently. And I was talking about the last 5-600 years, was I not? Didn’t algebra come earlier than the last 5-600 years? Now you’re on some tangent attempting to prove that I’ve somewhere denied the Arab contribution to mathematics.

Meanwhile, you get to wiggle out of your statement regarding the retardation of science that religion causes, yet the list of atheist scientists and mathematicians making groundbreaking discoveries appears to be thin.

162

[quote]and death to apostates.

There is nothing of substance to support this in Islam’s Holy Book. [/quote]

Which Islamic Holy Book? I seem to have found it in Sahih Bukhari:
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/084.sbt.html#009.084.057

Oooh, here it is again:
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/083.sbt.html#009.083.017

Wait a minute, here’s Muhammad ordering immigrants to be killed if they disbelieved (as some of the immigrants had done) and it’s in the Qur’an:
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/quran/004.qmt.html#004.089

Here’s Ibn Kathir’s commentary:
http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=4&tid=11861

Looks like you’re lying again lixy.

163

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
When I bust out a math or physics book, I don’t find many theorems discovered by non-Westerners. Maybe you studied something different in school

Evidently I did study something different in school as I was taught about the huge history of Mathematics developed in Arabia, China and India.

Was this not covered at your school?

Is there another PRCalDude you’re talking to on this thread?

I just posted a direct quote from you where you stated When I bust out a math or physics book, I don’t find many theorems discovered by non-Westerners.

What conclusion was I supposed to draw from that than that?

That some of us made it beyond basic algebra.

But you wouldn’t have without those pesky Arabs.

As for Physics, there has been plenty of development in the field that has come out of China.

So yet again, you make a sweeping statement that is proved to be wrong then you try to sneak out of it.

I’m not sneaking out of everything - I just don’t have the built-in Western self loathing that you have. Algebra was an important contribution from the Arabs. That still doesn’t detract from the fact that the overwhelming majority of mathematicians and physicists have been Westerners for the past 5-600 years. Did you notice the modifier “many” in my statement?

Still, algebra (as developed by the Arabs), had some origins in the Western tradition that predated its discovery through Diophantus. Still, though, I think most of the credit for the Arab “discovery” belongs to the Hindus, whom the Arabs conquered.

To answer your charge of “sneaking out of it” a bit further perhaps we should look at my original statement regarding Western science in context:
Has the West, for the past 600 years, been characterized by a ‘retarding of scientific development’?

Almost all of the innovations of the past 500 years at least have been developed by Western men. When I bust out a math or physics book, I don’t find many theorems discovered by non-Westerners. Maybe you studied something different in school. Critical studies, perhaps.

You charged Christianity with retarding scientific progress. Christianity was the only game in town in the West until recently. And I was talking about the last 5-600 years, was I not? Didn’t algebra come earlier than the last 5-600 years? Now you’re on some tangent attempting to prove that I’ve somewhere denied the Arab contribution to mathematics.

Meanwhile, you get to wiggle out of your statement regarding the retardation of science that religion causes, yet the list of atheist scientists and mathematicians making groundbreaking discoveries appears to be thin. [/quote]

The 5-600 years was part of different unlinked clause. The statement about theorms from non-westerners didn’t contain that modifier.

And I agree that the last 5-600 years hasn’t been a great time of scientific development for the Arab world, mainly due to religious fundementalism replacing real teaching.

You are right to pull me on blaming Christianity for retardation of science, Christians are not alone, other religions have the same issue.

But Christianity has done plenty in the last 600 years to retard science and learning:

1546 Etienne Dolet, French printer and bookseller and passionate advocate of learning, was imprisoned several times for his outspoken criticisms of the Church.

Dolet was condemned for atheism and burnt at Lyons, along with his books, leaving his family destitute.

1553 Michael Servetus, the Spanish physician who discovered pulmonary blood circulation (an advance upon Galen) fled the Inquisition and thought himself safe among Protestants.

Big mistake.

John Calvin, the puritanical “Protestant Pope” of Geneva proved his Christian credentials by having Servetus burned at the stake for heresy. Servetus had criticized the Trinity and infant baptism.

1589 Francis Kett, a tutor at Bene’t (Corpus Christi), Cambridge, expressed doubts that JC may not have been the great moralist Christians believed.

For his audacity the professor was burned to ashes.

1600 Giordano Bruno, Italian philosopher who taught in Paris and Wittenberg, paid the ultimate price for thinking for himself.

After languishing for 7 years in a dungeon of the Inquisition, where he was subjected to repeated torture, he was condemned and burned at the stake.

Bruno had had the audacity to suggest that space was boundless and that the sun and its planets were not unique.

1619 Lucilio Vanini (aka ‘Giulio Cesare’ - ‘Julius Caesar’).

Philosopher, teacher and freethinker, in 1616 the ex-Carmelite monk Vanini imprudently published his thoughts in ?De admirandis naturae reginae deaeque mortalium arcanis? (?of the marvelous secrets of the queen and goddess of the mortal ones, nature."

His ideas included the possibility of human evolution from apes and the denial of an immortal soul.

Vanini rejected Christianity as a fiction invented by priests and argued for natural explanations for miracles. As a result he had to flee from place to place to avoid Catholic persecution.

But he was taken at Toulouse, condemned, his tongue cut out, strangled and burned.

Now I know not too many people are being burned at the stake in the US at the moment, but the general attitude is still there and can be seen any time discussions of prayer in school, teaching of evolution, monuments of the 10 commandments in state buildings etc comes up.

It also goes some way to explain where a number of atheist scientists over the last few hundred years have not been in a hurry to make a big deal out of their atheism.

Also, when you ask about atheists in science you have to bear in mind that a lot of atheists are actually believers on paper. On paper I am Church of England. For years in the UK in legal documents there was no box to tick for atheist you only got to choose which religion you subscribed to (this is still the case here in Mexico.)

When I am asked religion and I state, none, they actually mark me down as protestant.

164

Wrong:

Look at the rest of your dates: they’re all in the 1500 and 1600s. The Roman Catholics were burning thousands more Protestant Christians at the stake than atheists. The Pope marched a Spanish army into the Netherlands and slaughtered 100,000 Protestants during that same time period.

Suffice it to say, I’m not a Roman Catholic.

Anyways, this discussion is probably best left to another thread. Here’s another response:
http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/christianscience.shtml

165

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
When I bust out a math or physics book, I don’t find many theorems discovered by non-Westerners. Maybe you studied something different in school

Evidently I did study something different in school as I was taught about the huge history of Mathematics developed in Arabia, China and India.

Was this not covered at your school?

Is there another PRCalDude you’re talking to on this thread?

I just posted a direct quote from you where you stated When I bust out a math or physics book, I don’t find many theorems discovered by non-Westerners.

What conclusion was I supposed to draw from that than that?

That some of us made it beyond basic algebra.

But you wouldn’t have without those pesky Arabs.

As for Physics, there has been plenty of development in the field that has come out of China.

So yet again, you make a sweeping statement that is proved to be wrong then you try to sneak out of it.

I’m not sneaking out of everything - I just don’t have the built-in Western self loathing that you have. Algebra was an important contribution from the Arabs. That still doesn’t detract from the fact that the overwhelming majority of mathematicians and physicists have been Westerners for the past 5-600 years. Did you notice the modifier “many” in my statement?

Still, algebra (as developed by the Arabs), had some origins in the Western tradition that predated its discovery through Diophantus. Still, though, I think most of the credit for the Arab “discovery” belongs to the Hindus, whom the Arabs conquered.

To answer your charge of “sneaking out of it” a bit further perhaps we should look at my original statement regarding Western science in context:
Has the West, for the past 600 years, been characterized by a ‘retarding of scientific development’?

Almost all of the innovations of the past 500 years at least have been developed by Western men. When I bust out a math or physics book, I don’t find many theorems discovered by non-Westerners. Maybe you studied something different in school. Critical studies, perhaps.

You charged Christianity with retarding scientific progress. Christianity was the only game in town in the West until recently. And I was talking about the last 5-600 years, was I not? Didn’t algebra come earlier than the last 5-600 years? Now you’re on some tangent attempting to prove that I’ve somewhere denied the Arab contribution to mathematics.

Meanwhile, you get to wiggle out of your statement regarding the retardation of science that religion causes, yet the list of atheist scientists and mathematicians making groundbreaking discoveries appears to be thin.

The 5-600 years was part of different unlinked clause. The statement about theorms from non-westerners didn’t contain that modifier.

And I agree that the last 5-600 years hasn’t been a great time of scientific development for the Arab world, mainly due to religious fundementalism replacing real teaching.

You are right to pull me on blaming Christianity for retardation of science, Christians are not alone, other religions have the same issue.

But Christianity has done plenty in the last 600 years to retard science and learning:

1546 Etienne Dolet, French printer and bookseller and passionate advocate of learning, was imprisoned several times for his outspoken criticisms of the Church.

Dolet was condemned for atheism and burnt at Lyons, along with his books, leaving his family destitute.

1553 Michael Servetus, the Spanish physician who discovered pulmonary blood circulation (an advance upon Galen) fled the Inquisition and thought himself safe among Protestants.

Big mistake.

John Calvin, the puritanical “Protestant Pope” of Geneva proved his Christian credentials by having Servetus burned at the stake for heresy. Servetus had criticized the Trinity and infant baptism.

1589 Francis Kett, a tutor at Bene’t (Corpus Christi), Cambridge, expressed doubts that JC may not have been the great moralist Christians believed.

For his audacity the professor was burned to ashes.

1600 Giordano Bruno, Italian philosopher who taught in Paris and Wittenberg, paid the ultimate price for thinking for himself.

After languishing for 7 years in a dungeon of the Inquisition, where he was subjected to repeated torture, he was condemned and burned at the stake.

Bruno had had the audacity to suggest that space was boundless and that the sun and its planets were not unique.

1619 Lucilio Vanini (aka ‘Giulio Cesare’ - ‘Julius Caesar’).

Philosopher, teacher and freethinker, in 1616 the ex-Carmelite monk Vanini imprudently published his thoughts in ?De admirandis naturae reginae deaeque mortalium arcanis? (?of the marvelous secrets of the queen and goddess of the mortal ones, nature."

His ideas included the possibility of human evolution from apes and the denial of an immortal soul.

Vanini rejected Christianity as a fiction invented by priests and argued for natural explanations for miracles. As a result he had to flee from place to place to avoid Catholic persecution.

But he was taken at Toulouse, condemned, his tongue cut out, strangled and burned.

Now I know not too many people are being burned at the stake in the US at the moment, but the general attitude is still there and can be seen any time discussions of prayer in school, teaching of evolution, monuments of the 10 commandments in state buildings etc comes up.

It also goes some way to explain where a number of atheist scientists over the last few hundred years have not been in a hurry to make a big deal out of their atheism.

Also, when you ask about atheists in science you have to bear in mind that a lot of atheists are actually believers on paper. On paper I am Church of England. For years in the UK in legal documents there was no box to tick for atheist you only got to choose which religion you subscribed to (this is still the case here in Mexico.)

When I am asked religion and I state, none, they actually mark me down as protestant.[/quote]

Pardon me, but haven’t more died under regimes claiming state atheism?

166

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
When I bust out a math or physics book, I don’t find many theorems discovered by non-Westerners. Maybe you studied something different in school

Evidently I did study something different in school as I was taught about the huge history of Mathematics developed in Arabia, China and India.

Was this not covered at your school?

Is there another PRCalDude you’re talking to on this thread?

I just posted a direct quote from you where you stated When I bust out a math or physics book, I don’t find many theorems discovered by non-Westerners.

What conclusion was I supposed to draw from that than that?

That some of us made it beyond basic algebra.

But you wouldn’t have without those pesky Arabs.

As for Physics, there has been plenty of development in the field that has come out of China.

So yet again, you make a sweeping statement that is proved to be wrong then you try to sneak out of it.

I’m not sneaking out of everything - I just don’t have the built-in Western self loathing that you have. Algebra was an important contribution from the Arabs. That still doesn’t detract from the fact that the overwhelming majority of mathematicians and physicists have been Westerners for the past 5-600 years. Did you notice the modifier “many” in my statement?

Still, algebra (as developed by the Arabs), had some origins in the Western tradition that predated its discovery through Diophantus. Still, though, I think most of the credit for the Arab “discovery” belongs to the Hindus, whom the Arabs conquered.

To answer your charge of “sneaking out of it” a bit further perhaps we should look at my original statement regarding Western science in context:
Has the West, for the past 600 years, been characterized by a ‘retarding of scientific development’?

Almost all of the innovations of the past 500 years at least have been developed by Western men. When I bust out a math or physics book, I don’t find many theorems discovered by non-Westerners. Maybe you studied something different in school. Critical studies, perhaps.

You charged Christianity with retarding scientific progress. Christianity was the only game in town in the West until recently. And I was talking about the last 5-600 years, was I not? Didn’t algebra come earlier than the last 5-600 years? Now you’re on some tangent attempting to prove that I’ve somewhere denied the Arab contribution to mathematics.

Meanwhile, you get to wiggle out of your statement regarding the retardation of science that religion causes, yet the list of atheist scientists and mathematicians making groundbreaking discoveries appears to be thin.

The 5-600 years was part of different unlinked clause. The statement about theorms from non-westerners didn’t contain that modifier.

And I agree that the last 5-600 years hasn’t been a great time of scientific development for the Arab world, mainly due to religious fundementalism replacing real teaching.

You are right to pull me on blaming Christianity for retardation of science, Christians are not alone, other religions have the same issue.

But Christianity has done plenty in the last 600 years to retard science and learning:

1546 Etienne Dolet, French printer and bookseller and passionate advocate of learning, was imprisoned several times for his outspoken criticisms of the Church.

Dolet was condemned for atheism and burnt at Lyons, along with his books, leaving his family destitute.

1553 Michael Servetus, the Spanish physician who discovered pulmonary blood circulation (an advance upon Galen) fled the Inquisition and thought himself safe among Protestants.

Big mistake.

John Calvin, the puritanical “Protestant Pope” of Geneva proved his Christian credentials by having Servetus burned at the stake for heresy. Servetus had criticized the Trinity and infant baptism.

1589 Francis Kett, a tutor at Bene’t (Corpus Christi), Cambridge, expressed doubts that JC may not have been the great moralist Christians believed.

For his audacity the professor was burned to ashes.

1600 Giordano Bruno, Italian philosopher who taught in Paris and Wittenberg, paid the ultimate price for thinking for himself.

After languishing for 7 years in a dungeon of the Inquisition, where he was subjected to repeated torture, he was condemned and burned at the stake.

Bruno had had the audacity to suggest that space was boundless and that the sun and its planets were not unique.

1619 Lucilio Vanini (aka ‘Giulio Cesare’ - ‘Julius Caesar’).

Philosopher, teacher and freethinker, in 1616 the ex-Carmelite monk Vanini imprudently published his thoughts in ?De admirandis naturae reginae deaeque mortalium arcanis? (?of the marvelous secrets of the queen and goddess of the mortal ones, nature."

His ideas included the possibility of human evolution from apes and the denial of an immortal soul.

Vanini rejected Christianity as a fiction invented by priests and argued for natural explanations for miracles. As a result he had to flee from place to place to avoid Catholic persecution.

But he was taken at Toulouse, condemned, his tongue cut out, strangled and burned.

Now I know not too many people are being burned at the stake in the US at the moment, but the general attitude is still there and can be seen any time discussions of prayer in school, teaching of evolution, monuments of the 10 commandments in state buildings etc comes up.

It also goes some way to explain where a number of atheist scientists over the last few hundred years have not been in a hurry to make a big deal out of their atheism.

Also, when you ask about atheists in science you have to bear in mind that a lot of atheists are actually believers on paper. On paper I am Church of England. For years in the UK in legal documents there was no box to tick for atheist you only got to choose which religion you subscribed to (this is still the case here in Mexico.)

When I am asked religion and I state, none, they actually mark me down as protestant.

Pardon me, but haven’t more died under regimes claiming state atheism?[/quote]

Probably in total not, and also when you have a leader that demands a religious following of his beliefs and deification of himself then it is not really atheism.

The argument was about retardation of education though, not putting to death.

167

Christianity (if I may speak generally), when gone astray, has a wonderful model to turn back to when it needs to right itself again.

168

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
John Calvin, the puritanical “Protestant Pope” of Geneva proved his Christian credentials by having Servetus burned at the stake for heresy. Servetus had criticized the Trinity and infant baptism.

Wrong:

Look at the rest of your dates: they’re all in the 1500 and 1600s. The Roman Catholics were burning thousands more Protestant Christians at the stake than atheists. The Pope marched a Spanish army into the Netherlands and slaughtered 100,000 Protestants during that same time period.

Suffice it to say, I’m not a Roman Catholic.

Anyways, this discussion is probably best left to another thread. Here’s another response:
http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/christianscience.shtml
[/quote]

Interesting about Calvin, thanks. I happily concede that Protestants are on the whole less bonkers than RC but then again, all things are relative.

169

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Pardon me, but haven’t more died under regimes claiming state atheism?

Probably in total not, and also when you have a leader that demands a religious following of his beliefs and deification of himself then it is not really atheism.

The argument was about retardation of education though, not putting to death.[/quote]

Why isn’t it atheism? That’s a cop out.

As far as education, how can one say either way? Perhaps without religion man, historically, would have been even busier killing each other. I mean, the reality of history is that religion, not atheism, often brought people together into larger societies.

Or, at least made societies cohesive. It can’t be denied that religion has played a huge role in bringing order, law, and a common thread among groups of people, allowing for more time for intellectual inquiry.

170

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Interesting about Calvin, thanks. I happily concede that Protestants are on the whole less bonkers than RC but then again, all things are relative.[/quote]

We’re (RC) not bonkers, we just have to recruit from the same human race as anyone else.

171

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Pardon me, but haven’t more died under regimes claiming state atheism?

Probably in total not, and also when you have a leader that demands a religious following of his beliefs and deification of himself then it is not really atheism.

The argument was about retardation of education though, not putting to death.

Why isn’t it atheism? That’s a cop out.

As far as education, how can one say either way? Perhaps without religion man, historically, would have been even busier killing each other. I mean, the reality of history is that religion, not atheism, often brought people together into larger societies.

Or, at least made societies cohesive. It can’t be denied that religion has played a huge role in bringing order, law, and a common thread among groups of people, allowing for more time for intellectual inquiry. [/quote]

I can and I will deny it. The law and order brought people together, the fact that most groups chose to dress up the law and order as being orders from God might indicate a necessary evolutionary step or it might indicate a block that slowed development.

Without having an available control group that had no religion it is hard to tell.

As for calling Stalinism etc Atheist, that is hardly a cop out. Just because you have a living God that you have to worship instead of an invisible one, doesn’t mean that it is not a religion.

172

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
As for calling Stalinism etc Atheist, that is hardly a cop out. Just because you have a living God that you have to worship instead of an invisible one, doesn’t mean that it is not a religion.[/quote]

That’s an “I win button” if I ever saw one.

173

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

I can and I will deny it.[/quote] Yet, you didn’t, really. [quote]The law and order brought people together, the fact that most groups chose to dress up the law and order as being orders from God might indicate a necessary evolutionary step[/quote]but that’s saying law and order were provided through religions[quote] or it might indicate a block that slowed development.[/quote]
“Might.”

However, there is only one path history did take, no? Where were/are the great shining atheist societies? Why didn’t atheism suffice? Why did law and order have to be “dressed up?”

That lack of, might speak to something.

Cop out. You might as well say “just because (insert any thing you can possibly think of) doesn’t mean that it is not a religion.” Big boss has people killed, it’s a religion. Though, if he doesn’t, he worships peace? So, that too is religion?.

Kill for freedom? You worship freedom, thus it’s a religion. Kill for tyranny? You worship tyranny, therefore, a religion. Kill to defend yourself? You worship yourself, thus you’re religious.

174

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
As for calling Stalinism etc Atheist, that is hardly a cop out. Just because you have a living God that you have to worship instead of an invisible one, doesn’t mean that it is not a religion.

That’s an “I win button” if I ever saw one. [/quote]

Atheism is as much a religion as not collecting stamps is a hobby.

175

[quote]lixy wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
As for calling Stalinism etc Atheist, that is hardly a cop out. Just because you have a living God that you have to worship instead of an invisible one, doesn’t mean that it is not a religion.

That’s an “I win button” if I ever saw one.

Atheism is as much a religion as not collecting stamps is a hobby.[/quote]

And, if you’re devout in remaining stamp non-collector, then you have a religious hobby of not collecting stamps?

176

The way I see it, the athiest Idealist, Existentialist and Socialist Philosophers from the 18th to the 20th Centuries tried to reason God out of the equation.

Hense, what was left was concepts such as Fascism, Communism, Marxism, ect, which proved to be equal or worse than the religions which they sought to destroy.

180

[quote]Sloth wrote:
lixy wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
As for calling Stalinism etc Atheist, that is hardly a cop out. Just because you have a living God that you have to worship instead of an invisible one, doesn’t mean that it is not a religion.

That’s an “I win button” if I ever saw one.

Atheism is as much a religion as not collecting stamps is a hobby.

And, if you’re devout in remaining stamp non-collector, then you have a religious hobby of not collecting stamps?[/quote]

Cheney? Is that you?