Off Topic Aliens

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
This argument is similar to Marco Polo returnimg to Italy in the 13th Century claiming to have invented spaghetti.

Proud Italians have used it ever since as their national dish and it's famous around the World as a Classic Italian Invention.

The trouble is it isn't Italian at all, he stole the technique from the Chinese and claimed it as his own.

You tell a hot headed Wop his Spaghetti that mama makes him is just a variation on noodles and you'll get a similar response to Muslims being told that much of their book and customs were plagiarised from existing religions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DMD
DUNCAN DONUTS said:
This argument is similar to Marco Polo returnimg to Italy in the 13th Century claiming to have invented spaghetti.

Proud Italians have used it ever since as their national dish and it's famous around the World as a Classic Italian Invention.

The trouble is it isn't Italian at all, he stole the technique from the Chinese and claimed it as his own.

You tell a hot headed Wop his Spaghetti that mama makes him is just a variation on noodles and you'll get a similar response to Muslims being told that much of their book and customs were plagiarised from existing religions.
Click to expand...


Again false premise and ludicrous if you know the topic

Jesus or Muhammad never denied what came before or claimed a new "belief"

Jesus was at pains to show that he was not bringing in a new religion but rather getting people back to the religion of Moses

Muhammad was clearly saying he was bringing people back to tawheed which was from Abraham

Sorry pal but your claims make Marcos seem legit
 
thefanwithnoname said:
I know where you are going and its something I have heard from people like yourself all my life, but as the DMD argument shows it based on false premises

Let's take the rain, sure we have hadith etc saying rain is a mercy from Allah but these in themselves don't purport to explain the rain cycle. Rain in the desert of Arabia is certainly a mercy even if in Manchester we grumble

That said certain aspects of explanations of rain cycle have been discussed using Quran text by some
Click to expand...

My point is, you talk about science being the unsubstantiated fairy tales as much as religion.....but you are wrong.
Science doesn't claim to know everything but it knows a lot.

There are many things Science has taught us.
Gravity for example.
Photosynthesis as well
Biology, we know far more about the human condition and how to treat illnesses, all this is due to science.

its far from on par with religion when it comes to mumbo jumbo hooey.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DUNCAN DONUTS and DMD
thefanwithnoname said:
Again false premise and ludicrous if you know the topic

Jesus or Muhammad never denied what came before or claimed a new "belief"

Jesus was at pains to show that he was not bringing in a new religion but rather getting people back to the religion of Moses

Muhammad was clearly saying he was bringing people back to tawheed which was from Abraham

Sorry pal but your claims make Marcos seem legit
Click to expand...
They may seem legit to you but the Italians are still eating wheat noodles .

Muslims also attempted to take credid for 1000s of Inventions from flying to coffee.

Spoiler alert they lied.

http://www.barenakedislam.com/2012/...e-of-which-were-actually-invented-by-muslims/
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DMD
Bodinki said:
My point is, you talk about science being the unsubstantiated fairy tales as much as religion.....but you are wrong.
Science doesn't claim to know everything but it knows a lot.

There are many things Science has taught us.
Gravity for example.
Photosynthesis as well
Biology, we know far more about the human condition and how to treat illnesses, all this is due to science.

its far from on par with religion when it comes to mumbo jumbo hooey.
Click to expand...

No mate I trying to impress upon you that science and religion are not mutually exclusive

Not maybe the best explanation but science focus is on what is here, religion focus is how we got here

Scientific theories on what religion speaks of in the main are fairy tale and then some

To put it in very simple terms I look to religion to explain how we came about and science to fix my tele
 
thefanwithnoname said:
No mate I trying to impress upon you that science and religion are not mutually exclusive

Not maybe the best explanation but science focus is on what is here, religion focus is how we got here

Scientific theories on what religion speaks of in the main are fairy tale and then some

To put it in very simple terms I look to religion to explain how we came about and science to fix my tele
Click to expand...

I think Bods point was, you are calling science fairytale stuff (or maybe you mean just the evolution and big bang parts) and likening it to religion.

For us non-believers who are skeptical of religion, we put our faith in science as we can see that science is a huge part of our lives and is used everyday whereas to us religion is just a book that someone wrote.

We can see science in action but not religion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DUNCAN DONUTS and DMD
thefanwithnoname said:
Good try but not done with your claims.

Anas quote was posted by you not me and I await evidence for the SAI

You need to back your claims or its not a discussion as agreed in the terms

You have already broken them by being disrespectful with the peter Sutcliffe comment. Please work on your manners, I don't care how you were raised its rude
Click to expand...

I'll ignore your other replies to save you the embaraasment of having them repeated for the world to see.

You seem to keep ignoring the key points of the replies, and drifting all over.

Hvae a go at answering them. Right now, it just looks like you can't.

So, to get you back on track.

Mohammed claiming god revealed it to him, is not a credible argument, it needs external verification.

However, the 'till' bit and the fact that they clearly say they believed it was pagan before mohammed heard voices, and the other evidence in my earlier reply shows its origins are pagan, even your books confirm it, or there'd be no need for the 'revelation'.

Edit. Let me see if I can break it down a bit more.

They believed it was pagan, because that's what their eyes and experience had witnessed. The fact that your books even need to try to explain why it's no longer pagan, says it was in deed pagan up to that point.

They believed their own first hand evidence 'till' mohamed said he'd heard voices. bells or whatever, which he takes to mean that these things were originally for his god, but pagans took them, and now followers of mohamed can take them back.

This claim from mohamed needs some external proof. I'd argue that the fact no abrahimic faiths have similar and that it's unlikely Abraham ever went near mecca, and had probably never heard of it, as it gets little mention in other writing of the time, so wasn't a significant place, and it's unlikely that the kaaba is old enough, all point to it being pagan. There is evidence from historians that the nomadic, pagan arabs would travel to meet up once a year to settle any tribal disputes, and these 'pilgrimages' are the most likely source of the hajj.

Even if you choose to deny any or all of that, your ultimate claim is that it was from the Abrahimic faith, which itself takes its stories from earlier pagan tales.

Someone hearing voices, images or sensations and claiming they're divine, is not proof, as Peter Sutcliffe found out when he tried that one.
 
BobbyD said:
I think Bods point was, you are calling science fairytale stuff (or maybe you mean just the evolution and big bang parts) and likening it to religion.

For us non-believers who are skeptical of religion, we put our faith in science as we can see that science is a huge part of our lives and is used everyday whereas to us religion is just a book that someone wrote.

We can see science in action but not religion.
Click to expand...

I think you have missed the point.

Science is a huge part of my life too, not least as my kids are students of chemistry and physics

What I am saying they are not mutually exclusive

To put it simply, as I said before, the premise of non believers is wrong
 
DMD said:
The clock looks cool. I might have a go at making that. I think Asda sell elephants, Griffins, dragons and cuckoos don't they?
Click to expand...
The sundial may have been knocking about before that contraption.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DMD
DMD said:
I'll ignore your other replies to save you the embaraasment of having them repeated for the world to see.

You seem to keep ignoring the key points of the replies, and drifting all over.

Hvae a go at answering them. Right now, it just looks like you can't.

So, to get you back on track.

Mohammed claiming god revealed it to him, is not a credible argument, it needs external verification.

However, the 'till' bit and the fact that they clearly say they believed it was pagan before mohammed heard voices, and the other evidence in my earlier reply shows its origins are pagan, even your books confirm it, or there'd be no need for the 'revelation'.

Edit. Let me see if I can break it down a bit more.

They believed it was pagan, because that's what their eyes and experience had witnessed. The fact that your books even need to try to explain why it's no longer pagan, says it was in deed pagan up to that point.

They believed their own first hand evidence 'till' mohamed said he'd heard voices. bells or whatever, which he takes to mean that these things were originally for his god, but pagans took them, and now followers of mohamed can take them back.

This claim from mohamed needs some external proof. I'd argue that the fact no abrahimic faiths have similar and that it's unlikely Abraham ever went near mecca, and had probably never heard of it, as it gets little mention in other writing of the time, so wasn't a significant place, and it's unlikely that the kaaba is old enough, all point to it being pagan. There is evidence from historians that the nomadic, pagan arabs would travel to meet up once a year to settle any tribal disputes, and these 'pilgrimages' are the most likely source of the hajj.

Even if you choose to deny any or all of that, your ultimate claim is that it was from the Abrahimic faith, which itself takes its stories from earlier pagan tales.

Someone hearing voices, images or sensations and claiming they're divine, is not proof, as Peter Sutcliffe found out when he tried that one.
Click to expand...

If you are going to ignore replies then the discussion has ended.

You lose
 
thefanwithnoname said:
If you are going to ignore replies then the discussion has ended.

You lose
Click to expand...

Hardly. They were not 'replies' they were just silly comments unrelated to the posts.

The reply you quoted is a full answer, that is still awaiting a full reply.

I'll repeat it, just to save any confusion.



Mohammed claiming god revealed it to him, is not a credible argument, it needs external verification.

However, the 'till' bit and the fact that they clearly say they believed it was pagan before mohammed heard voices, and the other evidence in my earlier reply shows its origins are pagan, even your books confirm it, or there'd be no need for the 'revelation'.

Edit. Let me see if I can break it down a bit more.

They believed it was pagan, because that's what their eyes and experience had witnessed. The fact that your books even need to try to explain why it's no longer pagan, says it was in deed pagan up to that point.

They believed their own first hand evidence 'till' mohamed said he'd heard voices. bells or whatever, which he takes to mean that these things were originally for his god, but pagans took them, and now followers of mohamed can take them back.

This claim from mohamed needs some external proof. I'd argue that the fact no abrahimic faiths have similar and that it's unlikely Abraham ever went near mecca, and had probably never heard of it, as it gets little mention in other writing of the time, so wasn't a significant place, and it's unlikely that the kaaba is old enough, all point to it being pagan. There is evidence from historians that the nomadic, pagan arabs would travel to meet up once a year to settle any tribal disputes, and these 'pilgrimages' are the most likely source of the hajj.

Even if you choose to deny any or all of that, your ultimate claim is that it was from the Abrahimic faith, which itself takes its stories from earlier pagan tales.

Someone hearing voices, images or sensations and claiming they're divine, is not proof, as Peter Sutcliffe found out when he tried that one.
 
DMD said:
Hardly. They were not 'replies' they were just silly comments unrelated to the posts.

The reply you quoted is a full answer, that is still awaiting a full reply.

I'll repeat it, just to save any confusion.



Mohammed claiming god revealed it to him, is not a credible argument, it needs external verification.

However, the 'till' bit and the fact that they clearly say they believed it was pagan before mohammed heard voices, and the other evidence in my earlier reply shows its origins are pagan, even your books confirm it, or there'd be no need for the 'revelation'.

Edit. Let me see if I can break it down a bit more.

They believed it was pagan, because that's what their eyes and experience had witnessed. The fact that your books even need to try to explain why it's no longer pagan, says it was in deed pagan up to that point.

They believed their own first hand evidence 'till' mohamed said he'd heard voices. bells or whatever, which he takes to mean that these things were originally for his god, but pagans took them, and now followers of mohamed can take them back.

This claim from mohamed needs some external proof. I'd argue that the fact no abrahimic faiths have similar and that it's unlikely Abraham ever went near mecca, and had probably never heard of it, as it gets little mention in other writing of the time, so wasn't a significant place, and it's unlikely that the kaaba is old enough, all point to it being pagan. There is evidence from historians that the nomadic, pagan arabs would travel to meet up once a year to settle any tribal disputes, and these 'pilgrimages' are the most likely source of the hajj.

Even if you choose to deny any or all of that, your ultimate claim is that it was from the Abrahimic faith, which itself takes its stories from earlier pagan tales.

Someone hearing voices, images or sensations and claiming they're divine, is not proof, as Peter Sutcliffe found out when he tried that one.
Click to expand...


Anas as per your claim

Your like a woman crying rape after cheating on her boyfriend
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back