[MossadConspiracy]

Originally Posted by Serve

i don't care about ancient egyptians. the argument is regarding ISLAMIC intellect (or lackof)

and prior to "ancient egyptians" there were no substantial artifacts, especially on pyramid-level. how do we know that? muslims discovered that. oh wait, no, the west did.

yes there were

[TrentReznor858]

Originally Posted by Serve

the british are so bad? is that why the allow many muslims and other people from all over the world to live and study there?

What the HELL does that have to do with anything? Have you ever BEEN to England before?

Originally Posted by Serve

and who is self-rigteous again?

Um, that would be you.

Originally Posted by Serve

i don't recall the british being on a mission from god to conquer the world for their religion.

Um, I dont recall muslims on any such mission either. Please refrain from using John Mccain as your source of Islamic history thanks.

Originally Posted by Serve

even in british imperialism, islamic countries obviously retained their islamic character by the graces of the brits, while when islam conquered, it allowed no such tolerance for other faiths (see: jews in arabia, zoroastrianism, eastern christianity, etc...)

You just pwned yourself right there. Anyone else want to retort that? I dont have the correct citations right now.

[Serve]

Originally Posted by dreamdeferred

Your argument is presumptuous. In order for your argument (if we can call it that) to work...you would have to show convincingly that Muslims have not contributed to Scientific development generally and Western Scientific development more specifically....and then you'd have to prove that the magnanimous "knowledge for it's own sake" Brits who colonized Egypt to plunder it's resources were able to do so not as a consequence of the benefits of industrialization but as necessary corollary to the superiority of their civilization.

BTW if you do even casual research you'll be able to disabuse yourself of the silly notion that muslims contributed little to science.

Also.....please answer some of the numerous questions I've asked you in earlier posts.

judging by their stagnation that is evident up to day, muslims' own records showing that they TRANSLATED GREEK SCIENCE AND HINDU NUMERALS, the scriptural disdain of inquiry in favor of dogma, and their inability to do in 1000 years what the british did in less than 50, i'd say the evidence for muslims' bluntness is pretty obvious.

brits -- as you said, there is no practical "point" to archaeology, and they had a habit of cataloguiing other cultures' artifacts EVERYWHERE they went, so yea it was a function of their civilization and mentality, and not just an investment that they hoped would pay off.

western scientific development proceeded (after classical roman-greek periods) through a renaissance that started in italy and an enlightenment that started in france. both owed little to muslim intellect, to the extent such a thing existed.

evidently, your assertions are based on CASUAL research. actual research proves me correct

i answered to the extent that I know. also, there are like 5 of you spamming my **** and I can't respond 100% to everyone's wrong rantings all the time. restate them or something, and I'll get to it when i'm good and ready

[dreamdeferred]

Originally Posted by Serve

judging by their stagnation that is evident up to day, muslims' own records showing that they TRANSLATED GREEK SCIENCE AND HINDU NUMERALS, the scriptural disdain of inquiry in favor of dogma, and their inability to do in 1000 years what the british did in less than 50, i'd say the evidence for muslims' bluntness is pretty obvious.

brits -- as you said, there is no practical "point" to archaeology, and they had a habit of cataloguiing other cultures' artifacts EVERYWHERE they went, so yea it was a function of their civilization and mentality, and not just an investment that they hoped would pay off.

western scientific development proceeded (after classical roman-greek periods) through a renaissance that started in italy and an enlightenment that started in france. both owed little to muslim intellect, to the extent such a thing existed.

evidently, your assertions are based on CASUAL research. actual research proves me correct

i answered to the extent that I know. also, there are like 5 of you spamming my **** and I can't respond 100% to everyone's wrong rantings all the time. restate them or something, and I'll get to it when i'm good and ready

It's obvious you're an undergrad soaking up an introductory Enlightenment Era course.....steeped in a eurocentric ahistorical analysis that has been rebutted time and again over the last few decades. Frankly I'm not sure why I've humored your posts this long as your intellectual dishonesty was apparent at the outset.

I won't take the time to repost my questions......read them and respond at your leisure and I'll respond at mine.

[Serve]

Originally Posted by dreamdeferred

It's obvious you're an undergrad soaking up an introductory Enlightenment Era course.....steeped in a eurocentric ahistorical analysis that has been rebutted time and again over the last few decades. Frankly I'm not sure why I've humored your posts this long as your intellectual dishonesty was apparent at the outset.

I won't take the time to repost my questions......read them and respond at your leisure and I'll respond at mine.

good man. i'm out for now. later jihadiz.

[TrentReznor858]

Originally Posted by Serve

judging by their stagnation that is evident up to day, muslims' own records showing that they TRANSLATED GREEK SCIENCE AND HINDU NUMERALS, the scriptural disdain of inquiry in favor of dogma, and their inability to do in 1000 years what the british did in less than 50, i'd say the evidence for muslims' bluntness is pretty obvious.

wow. English must not be your first language, or you try to use words that are too big for your limited vocabulary and end up sounding like a fob. Anyway, without those translations, those texts would have been lost forever to the rest of the world. Also, with the advancement of weapons technology over the past 50 years, not to mention the world arming itself to the teeth, NO RACE OR COUNTRY could repeat any sort of "colonialism" on a scale of the british empire. As if robbing 3rd world countries of their resources while creating baseless social classes is something to envy

Originally Posted by Serve

brits -- as you said, there is no practical "point" to archaeology,

So tell us why you are using it as a tentpole for academic scholarship?

Originally Posted by Serve

and they had a habit of cataloguiing other cultures' artifacts EVERYWHERE they went, so yea it was a function of their civilization and mentality, and not just an investment that they hoped would pay off.

I am sorry who made you the resident expert on what the "function" and "intentions" of the british empire were?

Originally Posted by Serve

western scientific development proceeded (after classical roman-greek periods) through a renaissance that started in italy and an enlightenment that started in france.

WOOOOOW you paid attention is 6th grade social studies!!! Want a cookie?

Originally Posted by Serve

both owed little to muslim intellect, to the extent such a thing existed.

Actually both were GREATLY indebted to muslim libraries, as they were the sanctuaries for many important Greek and roman scriptures after europe suffered through the black plague.

Originally Posted by Serve

evidently, your assertions are based on CASUAL research. actual research proves me correct

Evidently, you are full of ****, and you have no point whatsoever.

Originally Posted by Serve

i answered to the extent that I know. also, there are like 5 of you spamming my **** and I can't respond 100% to everyone's wrong rantings all the time. restate them or something, and I'll get to it when i'm good and ready

Wah wah wah. You have no point, no references, no nothing except your personal opinion. Also, why have you been ignoring certain questions, such as what religion you follow and some of Dreamdeferred's questions?

[LEGALEAGLE]

Originally Posted by IbnMardhiyah

anyone wanna play whack-a-troll?

how about whack a truer lineage ?

we're meant to argue so hard against truer lineage's attacks that we end up supporting him...yeah right...

[IbnMardhiyah]

ummmm ..... Serve? where the hell did you run away to?

You asked for a list of scholars, I delivered, and now I was awaiting your scholarly response on that list. WTF man!!! You had me all pumped up!!! You know more about Islam than you're actually letting on!!!

ENLIGHTEN US DAMMIT

[nooni]

Originally Posted by Serve

good man. i'm out for now. later jihadiz.

[TrentReznor858]

Originally Posted by IbnMardhiyah

ummmm ..... Serve? where the hell did you run away to?

You asked for a list of scholars, I delivered, and now I was awaiting your scholarly response on that list. WTF man!!! You had me all pumped up!!! You know more about Islam than you're actually letting on!!!

ENLIGHTEN US DAMMIT

He was either an alter ego, or he realized that he had NO room to stand on whatsoever and he just gave up

[Bluestar]

Search, it's your friend

[jinnzaman]

I was going to post in this thread but I guess its somewhat moot.

[SaidAbdullahofDarfur]

"The slave inherits his master's property and marries his daughter. The majority of the Pashas had been slaves. Many of the grand viziers, all the Mamelukes, Ali Ben Mourad Beg, had been slaves. They began their lives by performing the most menial services in the houses of their masters and were subsequently raised in status for their merit or by favour. In the West, on the contrary, the slave has always been below the position of the domestic servants; he occupies the lowest rug. The Romans emancipated their slaves, but the emancipated were never considered as equal to the free-born. The ideas of the East and West are so different that it took a long time to make the Egyptians understand that all the army was not composed of slaves belonging to the Sultan al-Kabir."[25]

-Napololeon B.

[Variable]

Originally Posted by TrentReznor858

Jinnzaman, you really need to get a life

Anyway, without Islam the world would be even worse off than it was today, as they lead the world out of the dark ages (Simple way to put it, but I am too lazy to trot out Islam's history).

Speaking of Jinnzaman, that's kind of a Eurocentric point of view. The world wasn't in a dark age - Europe was in a 'dark age' - or more specifically, Western Europe was.