- Joined
- Jun 2, 2006
- Messages
- 3,216
- Reaction score
- 1,021
- Location
- Houston, TX
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Little tip in debate. Don't accuse someone of using a non-verifable link when you didn't even bother to:Little tip in debate. You actually bring your evidence with you. You don't claim its in some link then run away.
- click the link
- check to see if it was verifable (which I clearly demonstrated it was above since you are too lazy or pathetic to click a link)
Mine is a legitimate book from an actual author with a FIRST and LAST name who attended college. The one I quote below I will show why it is not a:Finally. Now I get to destroy your claims by giving you the real facts about the "golden age" of the Middle East.
I do love how your only evidence is a summary of someone else's opinion but I expected no less from you.
- legitimate source
- not verifiable
First, your pathetic source is Jihad Watch. This would be like me using ElectronicIntifada as a source. No way is your source credible or legitimate. It does not even cite any secondary sources it used to create the article, LIKE MY BOOK DOES. Next, your author is Robert Spencer. Come back when you can use a credible, objective source, who does not write material with an obvious agenda. Jihad Watch :lamoBut in fact, much of the most common claims about the great achievements of Islamic culture have been exaggerated, often for quite transparent apologetic motives. The astrolabe was developed, if not perfected, long before Muhammad was born. The zero, which is often attributed to Muslims, and what we know today as "Arabic numerals" did not originate in Arabia, but in pre-Islamic India. Aristotle's work was preserved in Arabic not initially by Muslims at all, but by Christians such as the fifth century priest Probus of Antioch, who introduced Aristotle to the Arabic-speaking world. Another Christian, Huneyn ibn-Ishaq (809-873), translated many works by Aristotle, Galen, Plato and Hippocrates into Syriac. His son then translated them into Arabic. The Syrian Christian Yahya ibn 'Adi (893-974) also translated works of philosophy into Arabic, and wrote one of his own, The Reformation of Morals. His student, another Christian named Abu 'Ali 'Isa ibn Zur'a (943-1008), also translated Aristotle and others from Syriac into Arabic. The first Arabic-language medical treatise was written by a Christian priest and translated into Arabic by a Jewish doctor in 683. The first hospital was founded in Baghdad during the Abbasid caliphate -- not by a Muslim, but a Nestorian Christian. A pioneering medical school was founded at Gundeshapur in Persia -- by Assyrian Christians.
The point here is simply that the great achievements of Islamic culture are being exaggerated for political and apologetic reasons today. For this sort of thing to go on at jihad-justifying Islamic websites is one thing, but an academic should know better. Emphasis on "should."
If anyone makes Dr. Adamson's lecture and he takes questions, these would be some facts that one might politely and respectfully ask him about.
Breaking news: the Muslims saved civilization! - Jihad Watch
Except they have no citations and are written by someone who did not attend an accreditted institute of education. Of course texmaster would use a non-objective source and think it is credible (even though it has no citations to the sources used to obtain the "information" in the article).See these are real dates, real people and real facts. Not summaries by another author. Go ahead, try and recover from that beat down. I'll bet you had no clue who those people were. You were so locked into your fantasy about the great Middle East Golden Age you had no idea where they really got their ideas or should I say stole them from
Now watch carefully as a real debater destroys your pitiful attempts at justification for blaming Europe for the inadequacy of the Middle East.
British Mandate of Palestine 1920–1948
French Mandate of Syria and Lebanon 1920–1946
British Mandate of Mesopotamia 1920–1932
"Golden Age" of Middle East:
Now I'll be real nice here and give you an extra 400 years even though its factually incorrect 750 to 1500 A.D
First "Mandate" you cited: 1920
Thats 420 YEARS of NOTHING. Where is the European onslaught that kept Islamic nations back in the Middle East all this time? Where are they Degreez?
Seeing as how in that time period Arabs were not ruling over themselves, so you absolutely have no point.
This coming from the poster that still remains ignorant of history. This coming from a poster who uses JihadWatch as a source, but disregards a book as a source because it doesn't fit his bias. You are the definition of pathetic.As usual, your arguments are so pathetic you don't even bother to research your own arguments before embarrassing yourself.
The only one who has engaged in any fallacies here is you.Do you blame the Europeans even today for the pitiful poor in the middle east? You are a one trick pony. Short on actually thinking about your facts and huge on emotional fallacies.
Reading comprehension fail? You're posting as if I am defending the Ottoman Empire. What you choose to remain ignorant of, is that Arabs helped the British expel Ottoman rule. What you fail to acknowledge is that Arabs were promised independence if they helped the British in overthrowing the Ottoman Empire. What you are too slow to realize is that it was Allenby's and Hussein's forces that fought the Ottomans. But please, continue misinterpretating posts and using JihadWatch. ROFLMAOOnce again you fail to read your own article. NO WHERE in any of that BS you cited does it even discuss weapons. Am I supposed to be shocked that a country from far away used local people to fight on their behalf? Have you ever read any history on warfare? Mercenaries have been used throughout history for thousands of years. How can you not be aware of such basic historical knowledge?
You claimed this proved the British did not have superior weapons. WHERE IS THAT PROOF? Where is the discussion of the weapons? Don't worry, I'll provide it and show you how sad your claims really are.
One more thing. Citing "foreign imperialism" is just another excuse for someone lacking superior weaponry. Your own works don't back your ridiculous claims.
The real reason the Ottoman's LOST world war one? Superior firepower.
I don't understand basic history? LOL. What you posted above is a clear demonstration of a kid who does not know one bit about history.You're damn right. Too bad you don't understand basic history.
Um, YEAH! LOL
Sigh... This is just embarrassing for you. I feel like I am teaching a 14 year old middle school student who's been held back once too often. You are equating being more advanced militarily with being more advanced as a civilization. They are not the same thing, and it is pathetic for you to even suggest they are. America is more advanced militarily than Japan. Japan is more advanced technologically. That doesn't automatically make one more advanced as a civilization, despite what your puny brain may think. America is more advanced militarily than Russia, but would never win a conventional war against Russia. Same with China and India.Sigh. Your lack of understanding basic history just grows and grows.
Let's take the Germans and Poland for just a second. How about the invasion of Poland?
Polish lancers on horseback were slaughtered as they bravely, but ineffectually, charged columns of German tanks.
SUPERIOR FIREPOWER. The Polish didn't have tanks. It doesn't matter if they were given 10 years to prepare, the Germans had the superior technology.
How about France?
In 1940 it defeated the French army, which had the necessary weapons (tanks, aircraft, radio), but of lesser quality, and it didn't know how to use it because it totally neglected mobile warfare after World War 1
Blitzkrieg
So once again your incredible ignorance of basic history and the use of superior firepower to win wars is staggering.
No, I'm merely point out your straw man logical fallacy as if you using deflection is somehow something I had said.LOL You deny women are still treated as property in Islamic countries in the middle east?
Turkey isn't a Muslim country boy genius. It is a secular country. What's hilarious is Pakistan has had a woman President before America has.Quiz time. How many Muslim Countries in the middle East or even next door have equal rights for men and women? ONE. Turkey.
You have no idea what knowledge is.Your incredible lack of basic knowledge continues to amaze.
That's exactly what you've been doing throughout this entire thread. It's very elementary texmaster.ah yes the classic tactic of the defeated. Pretend to falsely classify your opponent's argument when you can't argue the point.
Fixed. The part I underlined is where you engaged in another logical fallacy. Stop making this so easy.You were the one who made the argument Islam has greatly improved the treatment of women in Arabia and you cited babies are no longer being buried alive while ignoring the fact that women are still not treated as equals and are even allowed to be beaten according to certain clerics who cite Islamic jurisprudence
What you read is your interpretation. Your interpretation contradicts what I actually said. Whether accidental or on purpose, you misrepresent my statements.LOL a Beck reference? Now I know you are in trouble. There is no interpretation. There is what you present and what you ignore. You make your own grave.
You disregarded my source which you were too lazy to click and ended up using YouTube videos and JihadWatch as sources. Great job! I'm sure my 8 year old nephew could do the same.Not only have I demolished your generalization from one book I've cited exactly where the Muslim "golden age" came from and who gave them the knowledge. Something you could never do.
Another misinterpretation above. You really have to brush up on proper reading comprehension. I suggest taking English classes over from junior high. It's obvious you must have failed them and dropped out of school.Then I destroyed your pathetic excuse for trying to blame Europe for the Middle East living in the Dark Ages some 420 years after this supposed "golden age" was to have happened.
ROFL. So you are admitting foreign imperialism is the reason for Middle East colonization. I knew it would only take time for you to say something truthful.The Middle East was colonized because it lacked the superior knowledge and technology. Your sad attempts to equate the 1920s as an excuse for this inability to modernize despite being next door to it is really amazing.
It had more to do with imbeciles like Chamberlain using appeasement to keep Hitler satisfied. All the way disregarded treaties and alliances made with nations that were basically given to Nazi Germany.And then my personal favorite your inability to understand how the Polish and France were conquered or even what weaponry they had and didn't have. Hell, your understanding of how World War II was won is hysterical alone.
You mean America's use of state terrorism against the Japanese? All to get the Emperor to agree to an unconditional surrender, which he did not end up doing. Truman was an idiot and a war criminal. Only you would praise something like that.*hint* it had something to do with a big boom. Google that in google books