Bangladesh: Shariah court kills 14 year old girl. For the crime of being raped

by Kal El on February 3, 2011 · View Comments

Do you like this story?

Here we go again, with islam and women’s (lack of) rights. Waiting on feminists to sound off on this one, but not holding my breath. Also, I fully expect the islamists and their leftard butt buddies to defend the court, and insist that we are taking the poor kids death out of context.

Sharia Brutality on a Raped Girl in Bangladesh

by Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury
February 2, 2011 at 4:15 am

A girl named Hena, age 14, was murdered by local Sharia Committee at Shariatpur in the southern part of Bangladesh. The daughter of poor farmer named Darbesh Kha, Hena was forcefully abducted and raped on January 30, 2011 during late at night by Mahbub, age 40. During this abuse, villagers arrived in response to the cries of Hena. At the same time, the imam of the local mosque, a man named Mofiz Uddin, and a few teachers of Madrassa [Koranic School] led by Saiful Islam, also arrived; instead of taking any action against the rapist, the Muslim clergymen took Hena inside the Madrassa and locked her in a room. The following day, the same imam and some of members of the Sharia Committee in the village sat for a trial of Hena on charges of “immoral sexuality” before marriage. Later the committee decided to punish Hena with 200 lashes, and took financial penalty of only TK. 10,000 [US$ 150] from the rapist.

During the lashing, Hena became unconscious; when she was rushed to the nearby village hospital, the attending doctors declared her dead.

After lodging a murder case with the local police station, a few influential members of the local mosque committee, as well as Sharia Law Committee, are telling members of media that Hena was involved in “immoral activities,” and the villagers caught her red-handed while she was having physical relations with a villager; and that later the Sharia Law Committee punished Hena for such anti-Islamic and immoral activities. They denied admitting that Hena died during being lashed. Further, a few political leaders in the area are frantically trying to save the rapist and the members of the Sharia Law Committee.

Sharia Law Committees are becoming influential in a number of Muslim nations. Although the committees are illegal under local laws, there has never been any action against such groups by any government: these Sharia Law Committees are comprised of influential leaders of the locality as well as members of various political parties and fronts.

On average, in Bangladesh, several hundred rural females fall victim to such rulings and lashings, as well to other forms of “Islamic Penalties,” as Shariah Law Committees become increasingly prevalent

Related posts:

  1. Saudi court DENIES 8 year old girl divorce from 58 year old man.
  2. Bangladeshi muslims gang-rape 13 year old Pastor's daughter
  3. Bangladesh: Catholic schools popular with muslims
  4. Crocodile eats Bangladesh man who sought its blessing
  5. Man says will wait to consummate marriage with 10-year-old Hail girl
  • JEWHAWK

    Islamism should be BANNED for it’s something totally against the most basic human rights.
    At least, muslims should be expelled from western countries, otherwise they will pollute them with their murderous ideology until nothing good will be left.
    MUSLIMS = TERMITES

  • JEWHAWK

    Islamism should be BANNED for it’s something totally against the most basic human rights.
    At least, muslims should be expelled from western countries, otherwise they will pollute them with their murderous ideology until nothing good will be left.
    MUSLIMS = TERMITES

  • SirWilhelm

    This is the justice of men looking out for other men so they can do whatever they want to do with any woman they want to do it with. The only law that allows that kind of behavior is sharia law. Why would any woman want to live under that law? Muslimahs? Care to respond?

  • SirWilhelm

    This is the justice of men looking out for other men so they can do whatever they want to do with any woman they want to do it with. The only law that allows that kind of behavior is sharia law. Why would any woman want to live under that law? Muslimahs? Care to respond?

  • Anonymous

    These muslim cunts use taqiyya and say this doesn’t happen all the time. But we fkn know it does. We need a vaccine to rid this planet of muslim cancer spreading excrement. NO FKN SURRENDER. ROLL ON LUTON!!!

  • Anonymous

    These muslim cunts use taqiyya and say this doesn’t happen all the time. But we fkn know it does. We need a vaccine to rid this planet of muslim cancer spreading excrement. NO FKN SURRENDER. ROLL ON LUTON!!!

  • Tonto

    That’s what inbreeding and sexual repression gets you. Do you know that Google says that the HIGEST requests in searches in the World for rape porn, animal rape porn and violence porn come from Pakistan. It seems as if muslims have a real need to express their sexuality with rape and bestiality, mixed in with a large dollop of DENIAL. Pitiful critters ain’t they? I don’t call them shiites any more…..I just drop the “e”.

  • Tonto

    That’s what inbreeding and sexual repression gets you. Do you know that Google says that the HIGEST requests in searches in the World for rape porn, animal rape porn and violence porn come from Pakistan. It seems as if muslims have a real need to express their sexuality with rape and bestiality, mixed in with a large dollop of DENIAL. Pitiful critters ain’t they? I don’t call them shiites any more…..I just drop the “e”.

  • sane

    this such insane inhuman move…..so it ay that the 40yrs old is innocent and the 14 yrs old is culprit……its really disgusting…..these people shoul hve been lashed…….****shit guys

  • sane

    this such insane inhuman move…..so it ay that the 40yrs old is innocent and the 14 yrs old is culprit……its really disgusting…..these people shoul hve been lashed…….****shit guys

  • Anonymous

    I honestly think this country, Pakistan, Somalia, and a few others, should be wiped out …airborne birth control, maybe?
    by 2050, Pakistan, Bangladesh and India will have a combined population of 2 billion people… thats insane, the sad thing is, these are the retards of the world, having the most kids.

  • Anonymous

    I honestly think this country, Pakistan, Somalia, and a few others, should be wiped out …airborne birth control, maybe?
    by 2050, Pakistan, Bangladesh and India will have a combined population of 2 billion people… thats insane, the sad thing is, these are the retards of the world, having the most kids.

  • SirWilhelm

    I’m suprised to see you include India with Pakistan and Somalia. India is a Hindu country, by a very large majority, and is inately opposed to Islam. Their large population, and correspondingly large army, could come in handy in dealing with Pakistan some day. It’s Muslims that are the retards, from centuries of inbreeding due to their “culture”. The Hindus have been prolific too, but not in the same way. I think you will get some of your wish though. I think there are events coming that are going to see a lot of people dieing just about everywhere.

  • SirWilhelm

    I’m suprised to see you include India with Pakistan and Somalia. India is a Hindu country, by a very large majority, and is inately opposed to Islam. Their large population, and correspondingly large army, could come in handy in dealing with Pakistan some day. It’s Muslims that are the retards, from centuries of inbreeding due to their “culture”. The Hindus have been prolific too, but not in the same way. I think you will get some of your wish though. I think there are events coming that are going to see a lot of people dieing just about everywhere.

  • Anonymous

    True, fact still remains, India will have one and a half billion people by 2050… thats almost twice as much as all countries in the Americas, combined.
    I’m against this world super overpopulation… we don’t need the poor having 68 per 1 educated person, which is the reality of today.
    A large portion of fish will be extinct by 2075, due to us… same for wildlife preservation.

    As far as dealing with Pakistan, if Muslims were the enemy, we would not need the Indian Army, in fact we would not need foot soldiers, since 99% of Pakistan is Muslim, we can just bomb the crap out of everyone in that country.

    I rather have countries in this world that provide medicine, IT, information mathimatical advancement to this world, than those just bitching and being a thorn to this world, and no, I don’t want to wait 50 years for them to get 25% of thier population up to date, like India, the problems is solve when it occurs… like Somalia, I swear to God, I wish someone deals with their ethnic group…..permanently

    I think also a series of event will happened in our lifetime Wilhelm, a civil war between the Muslims and Europeans about 30 years from now when…..feel sorry for Europe, even more for the Europens that say it will never happened, when Mohhamed is the most popular baby name in Brussels, and Ali is number 4, and they still say it will never happened.
    I look forward to that civil war, I’ll probably join it

  • Anonymous

    True, fact still remains, India will have one and a half billion people by 2050… thats almost twice as much as all countries in the Americas, combined.
    I’m against this world super overpopulation… we don’t need the poor having 68 per 1 educated person, which is the reality of today.
    A large portion of fish will be extinct by 2075, due to us… same for wildlife preservation.

    As far as dealing with Pakistan, if Muslims were the enemy, we would not need the Indian Army, in fact we would not need foot soldiers, since 99% of Pakistan is Muslim, we can just bomb the crap out of everyone in that country.

    I rather have countries in this world that provide medicine, IT, information mathimatical advancement to this world, than those just bitching and being a thorn to this world, and no, I don’t want to wait 50 years for them to get 25% of thier population up to date, like India, the problems is solve when it occurs… like Somalia, I swear to God, I wish someone deals with their ethnic group…..permanently

    I think also a series of event will happened in our lifetime Wilhelm, a civil war between the Muslims and Europeans about 30 years from now when…..feel sorry for Europe, even more for the Europens that say it will never happened, when Mohhamed is the most popular baby name in Brussels, and Ali is number 4, and they still say it will never happened.
    I look forward to that civil war, I’ll probably join it

  • Istanbul_chick

    “I rather have countries in this world that provide medicine, IT, information mathimatical advancement to this world,”

    India is part of that. Despite it’s huge population and low literacy rate it exports ALOT of brain power in the form of engineers, doctors and “it guys.” Bad for India good for us. I’ve worked with Hindu geeks and they are far smarter, harder working, less likely to bitch about working overtime than their American counterparts. That’s why they get paid more. If only the hateful American geeks would pull their heads out of their asses…

    India’s government has been trying to deal with over population and illiteracy and poverty. A daunting task with an already existing population of 1 billion. On top of that, being a democracy, the gov. is being lobbyed by special interest groups all the freaking time. A lobby group of hermaphrodites (who are one very powerful lobby group) managed to get some changes and improvements to the phone systems.

    Yet despite all all of this chaos and a brutal history of British imperialism, India, and it’s non-mohammadan citizens do not have grand designs of world conquest, “payback for colonialism,” or an abject hatred of the west. I’ve heard more than one Desi declare that the Raj was the best thing to happen to India because it put the mohammadans in their place and built India’s infrastructure. And Desis revel in trying to assimilate. Sure, they keep their Indian culture but they are sincere and in some cases comical in their efforts to “fit in” in their business and social lives.

    porkistan, bangledesh, somalia export illiterate, uneducated, sometimes “educated”, hateful, twisted trolls with no intention of ever assimilating who would harm their host countries in a New York minute.

    So, do NOT EVER, lump India in with festering islamic shit holes like porkistan, bangledesh and somalia.

  • Istanbul_chick

    “I rather have countries in this world that provide medicine, IT, information mathimatical advancement to this world,”

    India is part of that. Despite it’s huge population and low literacy rate it exports ALOT of brain power in the form of engineers, doctors and “it guys.” Bad for India good for us. I’ve worked with Hindu geeks and they are far smarter, harder working, less likely to bitch about working overtime than their American counterparts. That’s why they get paid more. If only the hateful American geeks would pull their heads out of their asses…

    India’s government has been trying to deal with over population and illiteracy and poverty. A daunting task with an already existing population of 1 billion. On top of that, being a democracy, the gov. is being lobbyed by special interest groups all the freaking time. A lobby group of hermaphrodites (who are one very powerful lobby group) managed to get some changes and improvements to the phone systems.

    Yet despite all all of this chaos and a brutal history of British imperialism, India, and it’s non-mohammadan citizens do not have grand designs of world conquest, “payback for colonialism,” or an abject hatred of the west. I’ve heard more than one Desi declare that the Raj was the best thing to happen to India because it put the mohammadans in their place and built India’s infrastructure. And Desis revel in trying to assimilate. Sure, they keep their Indian culture but they are sincere and in some cases comical in their efforts to “fit in” in their business and social lives.

    porkistan, bangledesh, somalia export illiterate, uneducated, sometimes “educated”, hateful, twisted trolls with no intention of ever assimilating who would harm their host countries in a New York minute.

    So, do NOT EVER, lump India in with festering islamic shit holes like porkistan, bangledesh and somalia.

  • Careto_comment

    Love you for this my dear, love you for this.

  • Careto_comment

    Love you for this my dear, love you for this.

  • Dr4joy

    How can they even look at each other in the eye? How can they really believe this is right in the sight of God.My heart breaks for this poor young girl of 14, dying at the hands of adult men after being abducted, raped by a 40 year old and then brutally beaten either by or on the orders of religious leaders. Men of God? I think not, Rather it is an organization of hate, punishment, vindictiveness, allowed by the governing men, and it takes it all out on the least empowered. What a dark, repressed, loathesome existence.

  • Dr4joy

    How can they even look at each other in the eye? How can they really believe this is right in the sight of God.My heart breaks for this poor young girl of 14, dying at the hands of adult men after being abducted, raped by a 40 year old and then brutally beaten either by or on the orders of religious leaders. Men of God? I think not, Rather it is an organization of hate, punishment, vindictiveness, allowed by the governing men, and it takes it all out on the least empowered. What a dark, repressed, loathesome existence.

  • Trago

    I don’t understand why people are still converting to such organization that inflict harship amongs other human beings. I trully feel bad fr those individuals. It is just too bad that they don’t have enough education and sence to realize the potential of a human mind and what it is capable of. Your mind is the only element of your body that you have total control of. Once somebody else takes control of it with their own beleives and false promises, you can kiss your world good bye…

  • Trago

    I don’t understand why people are still converting to such organization that inflict harship amongs other human beings. I trully feel bad fr those individuals. It is just too bad that they don’t have enough education and sence to realize the potential of a human mind and what it is capable of. Your mind is the only element of your body that you have total control of. Once somebody else takes control of it with their own beleives and false promises, you can kiss your world good bye…

  • Kal El

    The main reason is because people fail themselves at life, and look for something that makes them feel like they can both belong,. and have a better life, either in the future, or in the supposed afterlife. Basically it boils down to the universal truth that most people are dumb sheep.

  • Kal El

    The main reason is because people fail themselves at life, and look for something that makes them feel like they can both belong,. and have a better life, either in the future, or in the supposed afterlife. Basically it boils down to the universal truth that most people are dumb sheep.

  • Beejj

    Well said, Trago. Your final sentence cuts to the guts. We live in a world in which it is acceptable – laudable, even – that parents, no matter who; no matter how dim; no matter how uneducated, are given free rein to indoctrinate their offspring as they wish. The results are horrendous and lasting. Just look at the United States: it is legal in that country for “Intelligent Design” to be taught as a viable alternative to Reason. No doubt a thousand years from now things will not have changed. If such is the case in the world’s most advanced country, what hope is there for those brought up under the suffocating influence of Islam?

    I recently had dealings with a Christian Burmese girl who had sat her her final school exams – the results of which have an enormous bearing upon her future. I was mortified when she told me that she was unable to answer any questions in her biology paper dealing with Evolution. She explained that she disagreed with it: that it contradicted her Christian beliefs. She refused even to contemplate it. Think: an 18 year-old girl disputing Darwin and all the cutting edge biologists on the planet! Yup, it’s easy to do if you have god on your side!

    Once the god virus takes control of your brain there is no hope for you. No matter if you are Baptist or Papist or mohammedan, you are lost to Reason. Switch from one to other as you please, but you remain beyond the pale.

  • Beejj

    Well said, Trago. Your final sentence cuts to the guts. We live in a world in which it is acceptable – laudable, even – that parents, no matter who; no matter how dim; no matter how uneducated, are given free rein to indoctrinate their offspring as they wish. The results are horrendous and lasting. Just look at the United States: it is legal in that country for “Intelligent Design” to be taught as a viable alternative to Reason. No doubt a thousand years from now things will not have changed. If such is the case in the world’s most advanced country, what hope is there for those brought up under the suffocating influence of Islam?

    I recently had dealings with a Christian Burmese girl who had sat her her final school exams – the results of which have an enormous bearing upon her future. I was mortified when she told me that she was unable to answer any questions in her biology paper dealing with Evolution. She explained that she disagreed with it: that it contradicted her Christian beliefs. She refused even to contemplate it. Think: an 18 year-old girl disputing Darwin and all the cutting edge biologists on the planet! Yup, it’s easy to do if you have god on your side!

    Once the god virus takes control of your brain there is no hope for you. No matter if you are Baptist or Papist or mohammedan, you are lost to Reason. Switch from one to other as you please, but you remain beyond the pale.

  • Hellosnackbar

    What a tragic story Beejj!
    You should post on richarddawkins.net !

  • Hellosnackbar

    What a tragic story Beejj!
    You should post on richarddawkins.net !

  • SirWilhelm

    You complain about “indoctrination”, but isn’t supressing a competing idea, “Intelligent Design”, a form of indoctrination? If ID is as untenable as you say it is, it should hardly be a threat to Evolution, should it? What are you and the supporters of Evolution afraid of?

    On the other hand, even if that Burmese girl did not believe in Evolution, she should learn enough about it to be able to dispute it as reasonably as possible. If ID deserves to be heard, so does Evolution, even if it threatens her Christian beliefs.

    Yes, and for many, Darwin has become godlike, (“an 18 year-old girl disputing Darwn”!) and nearly as indisuptable, in their minds, and in yours, perhaps?

  • SirWilhelm

    You complain about “indoctrination”, but isn’t supressing a competing idea, “Intelligent Design”, a form of indoctrination? If ID is as untenable as you say it is, it should hardly be a threat to Evolution, should it? What are you and the supporters of Evolution afraid of?

    On the other hand, even if that Burmese girl did not believe in Evolution, she should learn enough about it to be able to dispute it as reasonably as possible. If ID deserves to be heard, so does Evolution, even if it threatens her Christian beliefs.

    Yes, and for many, Darwin has become godlike, (“an 18 year-old girl disputing Darwn”!) and nearly as indisuptable, in their minds, and in yours, perhaps?

  • Beejj

    Where did I say I was suppressing it? If people want to teach, or be taught, Intelligent Design/Creationism or that the Moon is made of cheese or that leprechauns have a high metabolic rate or that the Sun is coal-fired, let them go ahead, but don’t include it in a science course, because it is not science. ID, unlike science, is not open to testing by experiment. It is set in concrete. I would similarly object to time allocated in a school for the teaching of mathematics being devoted to madrigal singing or eiderdown production. Clearly, your understanding of indoctrination differs from mine. I have no intention of suppressing the notion of ID: I ignore it, just as I ignore the claim that breaking a mirror brings seven-years of bad luck. Why waste time discussing it?

    The Burmese girl had not been taught ID at school. She had been exposed to it from infancy at home and at church. So thorough was the job done on her that she steadfastly refused to listen to the Darwinian view or even to open her biology book to the relevant chapters. Now THAT’S indoctrination for you! Was she scared of something?

    Darwin has become god-like? That’s news to me. And if you are going to quote me, Sir W, please do it properly. I referred to an 18 year-old girl disputing Darwin AND ALL THE CUTTING EDGE BIOLOGISTS ON THE PLANET. Cheap tricks don’t work, here. You find it strange that I expressed myself in such terms? Would you have found it as strange if I had shaken my head in amazement had this 18 year-old dismissed Einstein’s general theory out of hand? Of course not. Why, then, quibble with what I wrote? Is it because you are one of those who, not knowing the first thing about DNA, feel you have every right to express a view based upon nothing? You feel confident to do this because evolution stuff is non-mathematical while the general theory is dauntingly mathematical?

    Don’t dare suggest that Darwinian thinking is indisputable in my mind. Unlike you, I am a scientist, and have been educated to evaluate experimental evidence; to welcome change; to maintain a healthy scepticism, and to keep an open mind. I see crackpots for what they are and know they can never shake the foundations of science, no matter how much filthy lucre they take from the ignorant and gullible.

  • Beejj

    Where did I say I was suppressing it? If people want to teach, or be taught, Intelligent Design/Creationism or that the Moon is made of cheese or that leprechauns have a high metabolic rate or that the Sun is coal-fired, let them go ahead, but don’t include it in a science course, because it is not science. ID, unlike science, is not open to testing by experiment. It is set in concrete. I would similarly object to time allocated in a school for the teaching of mathematics being devoted to madrigal singing or eiderdown production. Clearly, your understanding of indoctrination differs from mine. I have no intention of suppressing the notion of ID: I ignore it, just as I ignore the claim that breaking a mirror brings seven-years of bad luck. Why waste time discussing it?

    The Burmese girl had not been taught ID at school. She had been exposed to it from infancy at home and at church. So thorough was the job done on her that she steadfastly refused to listen to the Darwinian view or even to open her biology book to the relevant chapters. Now THAT’S indoctrination for you! Was she scared of something?

    Darwin has become god-like? That’s news to me. And if you are going to quote me, Sir W, please do it properly. I referred to an 18 year-old girl disputing Darwin AND ALL THE CUTTING EDGE BIOLOGISTS ON THE PLANET. Cheap tricks don’t work, here. You find it strange that I expressed myself in such terms? Would you have found it as strange if I had shaken my head in amazement had this 18 year-old dismissed Einstein’s general theory out of hand? Of course not. Why, then, quibble with what I wrote? Is it because you are one of those who, not knowing the first thing about DNA, feel you have every right to express a view based upon nothing? You feel confident to do this because evolution stuff is non-mathematical while the general theory is dauntingly mathematical?

    Don’t dare suggest that Darwinian thinking is indisputable in my mind. Unlike you, I am a scientist, and have been educated to evaluate experimental evidence; to welcome change; to maintain a healthy scepticism, and to keep an open mind. I see crackpots for what they are and know they can never shake the foundations of science, no matter how much filthy lucre they take from the ignorant and gullible.

  • Psbeeker

    Hey I know,get the 40 year old relative and nail his balls to a plank in the same location the girls was whipped.Then get his penis nice and hard.Take a very dull rusty knife, soak it in pig blood and cut off his penis an inch at a time.Now grind him up and feed his rotting remains to a herd of swine!

  • Psbeeker

    Hey I know,get the 40 year old relative and nail his balls to a plank in the same location the girls was whipped.Then get his penis nice and hard.Take a very dull rusty knife, soak it in pig blood and cut off his penis an inch at a time.Now grind him up and feed his rotting remains to a herd of swine!

  • Psbeeker

    Hey I know,get the 40 year old relative and nail his balls to a plank in the same location the girls was whipped.Then get his penis nice and hard.Take a very dull rusty knife, soak it in pig blood and cut off his penis an inch at a time.Now grind him up and feed his rotting remains to a herd of swine!

  • Psbeeker

    Hey I know,get the 40 year old relative and nail his balls to a plank in the same location the girls was whipped.Then get his penis nice and hard.Take a very dull rusty knife, soak it in pig blood and cut off his penis an inch at a time.Now grind him up and feed his rotting remains to a herd of swine!

  • Hellosnackbar

    Sir W, Charles Darwin was a diffident English gentleman who having spent many years as an honest very very perceptive scientist eventually published the earth shattering book”The origin of species by natural selection.”
    That was more than 150 years ago.
    At the time various contemporary scientists like Huxley and Hooker read it and realised that Darwin’s “theory”
    was supported by the evidence available.(and became lifetime friends)
    Since then mountains of supporting evidence from genetics, paleontology and nuclear biology have placed evolution in
    a position were it is accepted fact.(only mad religious dimwits contest it without any evidence whatsoever).
    Intelligent design to quote Richard Dawkins is creationism in a cheap tuxedo.
    Darwin would be insulted if he was referred to as God;he simply made logical deductions from his observations.
    That said he effectively cast aside all the mumbo jumbo of organised religion and has been reviled by the God squad ever since;calcified as they are in their own carapace of bullshit.
    As Christopher Hichens has often said “Religion poisons everything”as exemplified by the Islamic retards that we talk about on this site.(Believe or else!)
    Beejj has given us an example of a mind poisoned teenager whose mind has been corrupted by the fanciful
    nonsense imbued by her parents,
    Catholics these days now accept evolution as FACT.
    I have no problem with altruistic Christians,Hindhus,Buddhists,Zoarastrians etc, because my only issue with them is that I believe(with evidence)that the have been mislead;but represent no or very little danger to scientific progress(there was in recent times some half witted Scottish bishop who was against stem cell research).
    Science,technology and engineering are the backbone of civilised developement;and will continue to be so.
    It’s only the bleatings of the religious and ill educated politicians who stand in its way.
    But ongoing discovery and progress will eventually consign them to the dustbin they deserve.

  • Hellosnackbar

    Sir W, Charles Darwin was a diffident English gentleman who having spent many years as an honest very very perceptive scientist eventually published the earth shattering book”The origin of species by natural selection.”
    That was more than 150 years ago.
    At the time various contemporary scientists like Huxley and Hooker read it and realised that Darwin’s “theory”
    was supported by the evidence available.(and became lifetime friends)
    Since then mountains of supporting evidence from genetics, paleontology and nuclear biology have placed evolution in
    a position were it is accepted fact.(only mad religious dimwits contest it without any evidence whatsoever).
    Intelligent design to quote Richard Dawkins is creationism in a cheap tuxedo.
    Darwin would be insulted if he was referred to as God;he simply made logical deductions from his observations.
    That said he effectively cast aside all the mumbo jumbo of organised religion and has been reviled by the God squad ever since;calcified as they are in their own carapace of bullshit.
    As Christopher Hichens has often said “Religion poisons everything”as exemplified by the Islamic retards that we talk about on this site.(Believe or else!)
    Beejj has given us an example of a mind poisoned teenager whose mind has been corrupted by the fanciful
    nonsense imbued by her parents,
    Catholics these days now accept evolution as FACT.
    I have no problem with altruistic Christians,Hindhus,Buddhists,Zoarastrians etc, because my only issue with them is that I believe(with evidence)that the have been mislead;but represent no or very little danger to scientific progress(there was in recent times some half witted Scottish bishop who was against stem cell research).
    Science,technology and engineering are the backbone of civilised developement;and will continue to be so.
    It’s only the bleatings of the religious and ill educated politicians who stand in its way.
    But ongoing discovery and progress will eventually consign them to the dustbin they deserve.

  • SirWilhelm

    What’s the difference between “accepted fact” and dogma? Why do you demonize those that question evolution by calling them “mad religious dimwits”? Isn’t that using a Leftist tactic? And don’t you and Dawkins do that with ID and Creationism? Doesn’t that really indicate that this is an ideological struggle between atheism and religion? All evidence is subject to interpretation, and interpretation is susceptible to prejudice. I see both sides of this debate doing the same thing with the evidence.

    Science, technology, and engineering are tools that can contribute to civilised developement, or contribute to it’s destruction. Those three tools have also created the weapons and delivery systems that may rain death and destruction on us in the very near future. Do “religious and ill educated politicians” stand in civilisation’s way, or are they leading us to it’s destruction, because of the way they use those tools?

  • SirWilhelm

    What’s the difference between “accepted fact” and dogma? Why do you demonize those that question evolution by calling them “mad religious dimwits”? Isn’t that using a Leftist tactic? And don’t you and Dawkins do that with ID and Creationism? Doesn’t that really indicate that this is an ideological struggle between atheism and religion? All evidence is subject to interpretation, and interpretation is susceptible to prejudice. I see both sides of this debate doing the same thing with the evidence.

    Science, technology, and engineering are tools that can contribute to civilised developement, or contribute to it’s destruction. Those three tools have also created the weapons and delivery systems that may rain death and destruction on us in the very near future. Do “religious and ill educated politicians” stand in civilisation’s way, or are they leading us to it’s destruction, because of the way they use those tools?

  • SirWilhelm

    That’s an admirable sentiment, to let ID/Creatinism be taught, but, supporters of Evolution are trying very hard to suppress that in the US. As an aside, I believe the Sun is a z-pinch effect in an electric current, and would like to see Plasma Universe theory get some recognition. And, where else would it be taught but in a science course, if ID’s to compete with Evolution? And the evidence for ID is the same evidence, and can be obtained in the same way, as that for Evolution, in fact, Evolution scientists are the ones uncovering much evidence for ID in their research, because much of what they find contradicts Evolution theory. Of course, that’s open to interpretation, or “explanation”, depending on how you interpret it. Isn’t ignoring it, suppressing it? We all ignore things that irritate us, or cause us pain, but that doesn’t make it go away, does it? And I think ID is a bigger issue than a superstition like a broken mirror, but I understand why you see it that way.

    And if the Burmese girl had learned both ID and Evolution at school, wouldn’t she have had a better perspective with which to compare to her religious teachings? Even with all the evidence, and all points of view, we can still make bad judgements, but, don’t we have a better chance when we have it all?

    Yes, Darwin has become god-like to many who believe in Evolution and treat it as dogma and brook no competition. And I’m sorry you aren’t aware of that. ” AND ALL THE CUTTING EDGE BIOLOGISTS ON THE PLANET.”, isn’t that science by consensus? Is science supposed to work that way? Was Darwin in the majority when he wrote his book? How many discoveries in science were made by mavericks, or amatuers? And you have no idea, as I have none about your knowledge about it, what I know about DNA, but I would never express a view based on nothing. Logic can be applied to all things, even things that are “dauntingly mathematical”.

    You may be a scientist, but calling anyone a “crackpot” is not very scientific, to my way of thinking. Of course, from my way of thinking, the “foundations of science”, all science, is shaky at best. And it’s the scientists, not you necessarily, but all too many, that are milking the ignorant and gullible public for the “filthy lucre”.

  • SirWilhelm

    That’s an admirable sentiment, to let ID/Creatinism be taught, but, supporters of Evolution are trying very hard to suppress that in the US. As an aside, I believe the Sun is a z-pinch effect in an electric current, and would like to see Plasma Universe theory get some recognition. And, where else would it be taught but in a science course, if ID’s to compete with Evolution? And the evidence for ID is the same evidence, and can be obtained in the same way, as that for Evolution, in fact, Evolution scientists are the ones uncovering much evidence for ID in their research, because much of what they find contradicts Evolution theory. Of course, that’s open to interpretation, or “explanation”, depending on how you interpret it. Isn’t ignoring it, suppressing it? We all ignore things that irritate us, or cause us pain, but that doesn’t make it go away, does it? And I think ID is a bigger issue than a superstition like a broken mirror, but I understand why you see it that way.

    And if the Burmese girl had learned both ID and Evolution at school, wouldn’t she have had a better perspective with which to compare to her religious teachings? Even with all the evidence, and all points of view, we can still make bad judgements, but, don’t we have a better chance when we have it all?

    Yes, Darwin has become god-like to many who believe in Evolution and treat it as dogma and brook no competition. And I’m sorry you aren’t aware of that. ” AND ALL THE CUTTING EDGE BIOLOGISTS ON THE PLANET.”, isn’t that science by consensus? Is science supposed to work that way? Was Darwin in the majority when he wrote his book? How many discoveries in science were made by mavericks, or amatuers? And you have no idea, as I have none about your knowledge about it, what I know about DNA, but I would never express a view based on nothing. Logic can be applied to all things, even things that are “dauntingly mathematical”.

    You may be a scientist, but calling anyone a “crackpot” is not very scientific, to my way of thinking. Of course, from my way of thinking, the “foundations of science”, all science, is shaky at best. And it’s the scientists, not you necessarily, but all too many, that are milking the ignorant and gullible public for the “filthy lucre”.

  • Hellosnackbar

    There’s a big difference between accepted fact and dogma when related to substantiating evidence.
    Water is a molecule combining two hydrogen and one oxygen atom covalent in very pure form(conductivity water);but usually in partial ionic form of hydronium and hydroxyl ions.(and a liquid at earth temperatures due to hydrogen bonding)
    This can be proven by electrolysis; whereby oxygen and hydrogen are released at the anode and cathode respectively.
    On the other hand we are told by some Christians that God is composed of three entities Father,Son and Holy spook???
    There is not a scrap of evidence to substantiate this assertion and falls under the heading of dogma.
    Millions believe this fairy story and Muslims believe that Mo journeyed to heaven(where is that precisely?)on an exotic space travelling horse.
    Creationism and intelligent design are simply absurd suggestions by the believers who cling on to their inculcated
    mythology and condemn those who doubt.
    As HL Mencken said; Religion is an attempt by the rational to believe the impossible!
    Should impressionable children be taught to believe nonsense? absolutely not!
    Education is based on empiricism; not on the mad ramblings of religious head cases.
    If you go on youtube?; watch and listen to thunderfoot “why do people laugh at creationists?”there are 32 separate episodes.
    Lots of fun,
    HSB

  • Hellosnackbar

    There’s a big difference between accepted fact and dogma when related to substantiating evidence.
    Water is a molecule combining two hydrogen and one oxygen atom covalent in very pure form(conductivity water);but usually in partial ionic form of hydronium and hydroxyl ions.(and a liquid at earth temperatures due to hydrogen bonding)
    This can be proven by electrolysis; whereby oxygen and hydrogen are released at the anode and cathode respectively.
    On the other hand we are told by some Christians that God is composed of three entities Father,Son and Holy spook???
    There is not a scrap of evidence to substantiate this assertion and falls under the heading of dogma.
    Millions believe this fairy story and Muslims believe that Mo journeyed to heaven(where is that precisely?)on an exotic space travelling horse.
    Creationism and intelligent design are simply absurd suggestions by the believers who cling on to their inculcated
    mythology and condemn those who doubt.
    As HL Mencken said; Religion is an attempt by the rational to believe the impossible!
    Should impressionable children be taught to believe nonsense? absolutely not!
    Education is based on empiricism; not on the mad ramblings of religious head cases.
    If you go on youtube?; watch and listen to thunderfoot “why do people laugh at creationists?”there are 32 separate episodes.
    Lots of fun,
    HSB

  • Beejj

    Granted, all evidence is subject to interpretation, but where is the evidence for the existence of god from which all the ID stuff sprouts? There is none. And granted, also, that human frailty and pride can affect one’s interpretation of experimental evidence – but not for long; truth will out. Why? Because incorrect interpretation, wilful or otherwise, of experimental evidence invariable leads to subsequent false predictions.

    Why does HSB demonise, as you put it, those that question evolution? He does not need me to speak on his behalf, but I think it is true to say that he pours scorn and contempt upon those who do so out of blind and determined ignorance born of vested interest and/or fear. What is the basis of their refusal to accept evidence for evolution? Simply this: I do not believe it because my mother told me otherwise when I was a little child. You see both sides of this debate? What debate? There is no debate.

    Science is not a tool. It is an exploration of the natural world – of the universe. It reveals. It has no morality. What one does with its findings is up to us. We can use its revelations as we wish. For good; for evil. Science, however, is not FOR anything. To give just one example, many people (the majority?) mistakenly believe that the atom bomb was a product of science. It was the product of the use to which a scientific discovery was put. Its construction was a feat of engineering, not science. Really, Sir W, you have the strangest notions about science.

  • Beejj

    Granted, all evidence is subject to interpretation, but where is the evidence for the existence of god from which all the ID stuff sprouts? There is none. And granted, also, that human frailty and pride can affect one’s interpretation of experimental evidence – but not for long; truth will out. Why? Because incorrect interpretation, wilful or otherwise, of experimental evidence invariable leads to subsequent false predictions.

    Why does HSB demonise, as you put it, those that question evolution? He does not need me to speak on his behalf, but I think it is true to say that he pours scorn and contempt upon those who do so out of blind and determined ignorance born of vested interest and/or fear. What is the basis of their refusal to accept evidence for evolution? Simply this: I do not believe it because my mother told me otherwise when I was a little child. You see both sides of this debate? What debate? There is no debate.

    Science is not a tool. It is an exploration of the natural world – of the universe. It reveals. It has no morality. What one does with its findings is up to us. We can use its revelations as we wish. For good; for evil. Science, however, is not FOR anything. To give just one example, many people (the majority?) mistakenly believe that the atom bomb was a product of science. It was the product of the use to which a scientific discovery was put. Its construction was a feat of engineering, not science. Really, Sir W, you have the strangest notions about science.

  • Beejj

    Wrong, Sir W. They are trying to suppress its being taught as part of de rigueur science curricula. And why shouldn’t they? Where else might it be taught? Anywhere you like, but not as part of a science course. A science course deals with science. ID is a science in the same way as flower arranging is sumo wrestling.

    Science by consensus. You seem to be frowning as you typed those words. Consensus: general agreement. Are members of the scientific fraternity to be condemned for accepting the seeming truth of the second law of thermodynamics? Is science supposed to work this way? I’ll set aside your unfortunate choice of words about science “working this way” and reply with a question: if rigorous scientific endeavour unearths what appears to be an abiding truth, would it not be crass stupidity to deny it? Should there be those who, out of sheer bloody-mindedness, proffer contradictory theories in the hope that one day in the dim and distant future evidence might just come along to torpedo the present beliefs? What would this achieve? Bedlam. Scientists do not behave so foolishly. Pseudo-scientists of the Velikovsky persuasion might, but not scientists.

    So the foundations of science are shaky at best, are they? That’s an alarming – nay, MONUMENTAL – statement. What foundations are you referring to? Indeed, tell me just what are the “foundations of science.” While I await your answers and justification I will quietly marvel at how lucky we have been for the past few centuries building a colossal edifice of spectacular triumphs upon a “shaky foundation.” Hell, I’m terrified that it might all come tumbling down about my ears at any moment.

  • Beejj

    Wrong, Sir W. They are trying to suppress its being taught as part of de rigueur science curricula. And why shouldn’t they? Where else might it be taught? Anywhere you like, but not as part of a science course. A science course deals with science. ID is a science in the same way as flower arranging is sumo wrestling.

    Science by consensus. You seem to be frowning as you typed those words. Consensus: general agreement. Are members of the scientific fraternity to be condemned for accepting the seeming truth of the second law of thermodynamics? Is science supposed to work this way? I’ll set aside your unfortunate choice of words about science “working this way” and reply with a question: if rigorous scientific endeavour unearths what appears to be an abiding truth, would it not be crass stupidity to deny it? Should there be those who, out of sheer bloody-mindedness, proffer contradictory theories in the hope that one day in the dim and distant future evidence might just come along to torpedo the present beliefs? What would this achieve? Bedlam. Scientists do not behave so foolishly. Pseudo-scientists of the Velikovsky persuasion might, but not scientists.

    So the foundations of science are shaky at best, are they? That’s an alarming – nay, MONUMENTAL – statement. What foundations are you referring to? Indeed, tell me just what are the “foundations of science.” While I await your answers and justification I will quietly marvel at how lucky we have been for the past few centuries building a colossal edifice of spectacular triumphs upon a “shaky foundation.” Hell, I’m terrified that it might all come tumbling down about my ears at any moment.

  • SirWilhelm

    There is as much evidence that the Universe was created, as there is that it began by accident, none. You choose to believe that it was not created, where is your evidence for that? Your belief it was accidental is as great as those who believe it was created, because that is all it is, a choice based on faith in your beliefs.

    There is no debate, because you choose to allow no debate.

    Is not the proper term for science, the scientific method? Is not a method a tool? Exploration of the natural world is the result of the use of the method. You’re right, the construction of the atom bomb was a feat of engineering, not science. As I see it, it was achieved despite science, not because of it, as engineers and engineers often do, because they go with what works. And yes, my ideas about science appear strange to you because I see through the facade that science has erected to conceal it’s true nature, that is main stream science, which is mostly not true science, because it rarely uses the method it is supposed to be based on, the scientific method. If you saw things the way I do, I’m sure you’d appreciate the irony of that. But, I doubt you’ll ever see things my way.

  • SirWilhelm

    There is as much evidence that the Universe was created, as there is that it began by accident, none. You choose to believe that it was not created, where is your evidence for that? Your belief it was accidental is as great as those who believe it was created, because that is all it is, a choice based on faith in your beliefs.

    There is no debate, because you choose to allow no debate.

    Is not the proper term for science, the scientific method? Is not a method a tool? Exploration of the natural world is the result of the use of the method. You’re right, the construction of the atom bomb was a feat of engineering, not science. As I see it, it was achieved despite science, not because of it, as engineers and engineers often do, because they go with what works. And yes, my ideas about science appear strange to you because I see through the facade that science has erected to conceal it’s true nature, that is main stream science, which is mostly not true science, because it rarely uses the method it is supposed to be based on, the scientific method. If you saw things the way I do, I’m sure you’d appreciate the irony of that. But, I doubt you’ll ever see things my way.

  • SirWilhelm

    You make a very good distinction between accepted fact in science, and dogma in religion. But I was referring to accepted fact and dogma in science. For example, are not Black Holes accepted fact in cosmology? But, do they really exist? To being with, the original theory for them propsoed that their gravity was so great, nothing could escape from them. When supposed Black Holes were observed, phenomenon were found that did not fit this theory, so event horizons were invented to explain them. Is that scientific? Do you accept those explanations? Would not the proper scientific method have been to accept the falsification of the theory and begin anew? On the other hand, are not Event Horizons “accepted facts” now, as are Black Holes themselves? I could give many other examples of such problems in science today. What’s the difference between this accepted fact and your example of the Trinity? As far as I’m concerned, they are equally valid. As you should well know, I belong to no religion, which I feel allows me to observe all beliefs objectively, and much of science, as I observe it, is as belief based as any religion. On the other hand, we all have to decide, in the end, to believe in something. You have chosen to believe in no god, no creator, correct? And you defend that belief as stongly as any other believer, as is your right.
    Lots of fun to you too.
    SirWilhelm

  • SirWilhelm

    You make a very good distinction between accepted fact in science, and dogma in religion. But I was referring to accepted fact and dogma in science. For example, are not Black Holes accepted fact in cosmology? But, do they really exist? To being with, the original theory for them propsoed that their gravity was so great, nothing could escape from them. When supposed Black Holes were observed, phenomenon were found that did not fit this theory, so event horizons were invented to explain them. Is that scientific? Do you accept those explanations? Would not the proper scientific method have been to accept the falsification of the theory and begin anew? On the other hand, are not Event Horizons “accepted facts” now, as are Black Holes themselves? I could give many other examples of such problems in science today. What’s the difference between this accepted fact and your example of the Trinity? As far as I’m concerned, they are equally valid. As you should well know, I belong to no religion, which I feel allows me to observe all beliefs objectively, and much of science, as I observe it, is as belief based as any religion. On the other hand, we all have to decide, in the end, to believe in something. You have chosen to believe in no god, no creator, correct? And you defend that belief as stongly as any other believer, as is your right.
    Lots of fun to you too.
    SirWilhelm

  • SirWilhelm

    Eventually, there should be cosensus in science, but only if it’s reached by the scientific method, wouldn’t you agree? Unfortunately, what I see is a great amount of abuse of that method in what passes for science today. The peer review process, in particular, has become corrupted, the very process that leads to the consensus you are defending. Many experiments and supporting evidence never see the light of day in peer review journals, if they go against consensus. But I find your reference to an “abiding truth” disturbing in a debate about science. Is there supposed to be “abiding truth” in science? Isn’t one of the principles of science is that everything is open to new evidence? If “working this way” is an unfortunate choice of words, I don’t claim to be perfect, but by using “abiding truth” you seem to have inadvertently confirmed a nearly religious bias towards science. It’s interesting that you see contradictory theories as arising out of “sheer bloody-mindedness”, and that they might “torpedo the present beliefs”, and that that might achieve “bedlam”. That seems to be just what main stream science fears, and that, as individuals, they would suffer in the “bedlam” the destruction of their “beliefs” would cause.

    The foundations of science I see as shaky are the Big Bang theory, coincident with the gravity dominated universe dominated by Black Holes, the weakness of the Theory of Evolution, the problems with the dating systems which are the foundations of Geology, The inablilty of science to discover what gravity is, despite experiments lasting over 40 years, which were designed to find it. Einsteins faulty, and disproved, theories, are enough to begin with. And yes, I too marvel at how lucky we’ve been to do what we’ve done based on such shaky foundations. And your sarcasm does you no justice in your last statement, because it may be prophetic.

  • SirWilhelm

    Eventually, there should be cosensus in science, but only if it’s reached by the scientific method, wouldn’t you agree? Unfortunately, what I see is a great amount of abuse of that method in what passes for science today. The peer review process, in particular, has become corrupted, the very process that leads to the consensus you are defending. Many experiments and supporting evidence never see the light of day in peer review journals, if they go against consensus. But I find your reference to an “abiding truth” disturbing in a debate about science. Is there supposed to be “abiding truth” in science? Isn’t one of the principles of science is that everything is open to new evidence? If “working this way” is an unfortunate choice of words, I don’t claim to be perfect, but by using “abiding truth” you seem to have inadvertently confirmed a nearly religious bias towards science. It’s interesting that you see contradictory theories as arising out of “sheer bloody-mindedness”, and that they might “torpedo the present beliefs”, and that that might achieve “bedlam”. That seems to be just what main stream science fears, and that, as individuals, they would suffer in the “bedlam” the destruction of their “beliefs” would cause.

    The foundations of science I see as shaky are the Big Bang theory, coincident with the gravity dominated universe dominated by Black Holes, the weakness of the Theory of Evolution, the problems with the dating systems which are the foundations of Geology, The inablilty of science to discover what gravity is, despite experiments lasting over 40 years, which were designed to find it. Einsteins faulty, and disproved, theories, are enough to begin with. And yes, I too marvel at how lucky we’ve been to do what we’ve done based on such shaky foundations. And your sarcasm does you no justice in your last statement, because it may be prophetic.

  • Hellosnackbar

    There is a great deal of evidence to support the existence of black holes.
    The fact that they can’t be seen prevents direct visual evidence;but in the centre of the milky way is an entity of about a billion solar masses(which can’t be seen!).
    However the fact that nearby stars are hurtling along at fantastic speed indicates a body of massive gravity.
    The event horizon is a feature that Stephen Hawking conjectures from the data available using maths;which
    Stephen is pretty good at.
    Stephen also conjectures that black holes eventually disappear by Hawking radiation.(over billions of years.)
    Scientists write papers which are subject to peer review(minute scrutiny by fellow scientists).
    There is no foolish speculation in these areas; all discoveries are subjected immense scrutiny before publishing.
    There is of course much more to know;but the search continues.
    An example of this is the dark matter/ dark energy problem a very knotty problem indeed.
    Scientists are serious people attempting to unravel the mysteries of nature.(with supporting evidence)
    Theologists to quote HL Mencken again try to explain the unknowable in terms of the not worth knowing.

  • Hellosnackbar

    There is a great deal of evidence to support the existence of black holes.
    The fact that they can’t be seen prevents direct visual evidence;but in the centre of the milky way is an entity of about a billion solar masses(which can’t be seen!).
    However the fact that nearby stars are hurtling along at fantastic speed indicates a body of massive gravity.
    The event horizon is a feature that Stephen Hawking conjectures from the data available using maths;which
    Stephen is pretty good at.
    Stephen also conjectures that black holes eventually disappear by Hawking radiation.(over billions of years.)
    Scientists write papers which are subject to peer review(minute scrutiny by fellow scientists).
    There is no foolish speculation in these areas; all discoveries are subjected immense scrutiny before publishing.
    There is of course much more to know;but the search continues.
    An example of this is the dark matter/ dark energy problem a very knotty problem indeed.
    Scientists are serious people attempting to unravel the mysteries of nature.(with supporting evidence)
    Theologists to quote HL Mencken again try to explain the unknowable in terms of the not worth knowing.

  • Beejj

    Gosh.

  • Beejj

    Gosh.

  • Beejj

    Ah.

  • Beejj

    Ah.

  • Beejj

    Sir W, this might be the last time (please god) I will correspond with you about matters of science. Why should I? You have not the faintest notion of science, so any opinion you expound is as worthy as the virginal Mother Superior’s views on the relative enjoyments of sex with and without condoms. Christ, words are cheap, aren’t they? You come forth with such choice bullshit as “the facade of science” and “eventually there should be consensus in science, but only if it’s reached by the scientific method” and “I see a great amount of abuse of that method in what passes for science today” and “many experiments and supporting evidence never see the light of day in peer review journals” and “a near religious bias towards science” and “mainstream (whatever the hell that is supposed to mean) science” fearing something or other, and “the peer review process has become corrupted”. Then you go on to say, oh so loftily, “The foundations of science I see ……” You don’t see Jack Shit. You are blind and ignorant. Einstein’s faulty and DISPROVED (!!!) theories????? Are you mental? Yes, you are. When has Relativity been proved wrong? It has passed every test set for it – after suggesting ways in which it can be tested!!!!! Do you get that? See its significance????? (Do you know HOW the general theory might be in need of modification, one day?)

    OK, Sir W, try to prove you are not full of shit: Tell me where the weaknesses in Relativity theory lie. Tell me where the experimentation that has supported it is suspect. No bullshit, mind: Hard science. None of your AS I SEE IT crap. You don’t see anything. Good Christ, your views on what you call “the foundations of science” are juvenile. PLEASE ……… cease reading Readers Digest and Watchtower upon the instant.

    Why am I corresponding with such an goddamned half-wit? When you step out of your depth, as is your wont, you are a monumental pain in the butt. Know your limitations. Jesus, can you even solve a quadratic? Christ, you even believe in space invaders who made rocket ships out of bricks! Stop smoking that stuff. It’s not good for you.

    Finally, please do everyone a favour and learn to distinguish between ITS and IT’S.

  • Beejj

    Sir W, this might be the last time (please god) I will correspond with you about matters of science. Why should I? You have not the faintest notion of science, so any opinion you expound is as worthy as the virginal Mother Superior’s views on the relative enjoyments of sex with and without condoms. Christ, words are cheap, aren’t they? You come forth with such choice bullshit as “the facade of science” and “eventually there should be consensus in science, but only if it’s reached by the scientific method” and “I see a great amount of abuse of that method in what passes for science today” and “many experiments and supporting evidence never see the light of day in peer review journals” and “a near religious bias towards science” and “mainstream (whatever the hell that is supposed to mean) science” fearing something or other, and “the peer review process has become corrupted”. Then you go on to say, oh so loftily, “The foundations of science I see ……” You don’t see Jack Shit. You are blind and ignorant. Einstein’s faulty and DISPROVED (!!!) theories????? Are you mental? Yes, you are. When has Relativity been proved wrong? It has passed every test set for it – after suggesting ways in which it can be tested!!!!! Do you get that? See its significance????? (Do you know HOW the general theory might be in need of modification, one day?)

    OK, Sir W, try to prove you are not full of shit: Tell me where the weaknesses in Relativity theory lie. Tell me where the experimentation that has supported it is suspect. No bullshit, mind: Hard science. None of your AS I SEE IT crap. You don’t see anything. Good Christ, your views on what you call “the foundations of science” are juvenile. PLEASE ……… cease reading Readers Digest and Watchtower upon the instant.

    Why am I corresponding with such an goddamned half-wit? When you step out of your depth, as is your wont, you are a monumental pain in the butt. Know your limitations. Jesus, can you even solve a quadratic? Christ, you even believe in space invaders who made rocket ships out of bricks! Stop smoking that stuff. It’s not good for you.

    Finally, please do everyone a favour and learn to distinguish between ITS and IT’S.

  • SirWilhelm

    The evidence that you refer to that supposedly supports the existence of Black Holes, is only valid if you accept the ad hoc explanations made to the original theory, which is why I pointed out that those “explanations” had to be added almost immediately after the theory was formulated. If you accept the scientific method, a theory is supposed to be falisfied when observations contradict it. Your claim, that there are a billion solar masses, cannot be comfirmed by observation, as you say “they can’t be seen”.

    Your statement concerning “fantastic speeds” does not answer the problem that neither gravity waves, or the Higgs-Bosun “gravity” particle, have been found after over 40 years of searching using hugely expensive experiments designed to detect them.

    All of Hawkins “conjectures” are just that, conjectures, and they too, were formulated in an effort to save the original theory, because the evidence that has been found, contradicts that theory. The original theory postulated that nothing could escape the gravity of a Black Hole, but radiation was observed in the vicinty of supposed Black Holes. Hawkings conjectured his radiation to “explain” it. Is that the way scientific method is supposed to work?

    Have you seen the problems SJ Crothers has had getting his papers reviewed? He claims he proves that Einstein was wrong, that his math was flawed. Of course there are those that dispute him, but refuse to have the debate in peer reviewed journals, is that right?

    Dark matter and dark energy are easily explained as unnecessary fabrications by Plasma Universe theories. Electrical forces are many times stronger than gravity, if they’re taken into account, there is no need for “dark” explanations. Why isn’t there debate about that in the journals? Especially since neither dark matter, or dark energy, can be found, again, despite great efforts to do so.

    Many scientists today are constrained to trying to confirm what they think they already know to maintain the status quo in the name of job security, i. e.: to make a living.

    I would ask Mencken, how do we know what is unknowable, or worth knowing, if we don’t ask?

  • SirWilhelm

    The evidence that you refer to that supposedly supports the existence of Black Holes, is only valid if you accept the ad hoc explanations made to the original theory, which is why I pointed out that those “explanations” had to be added almost immediately after the theory was formulated. If you accept the scientific method, a theory is supposed to be falisfied when observations contradict it. Your claim, that there are a billion solar masses, cannot be comfirmed by observation, as you say “they can’t be seen”.

    Your statement concerning “fantastic speeds” does not answer the problem that neither gravity waves, or the Higgs-Bosun “gravity” particle, have been found after over 40 years of searching using hugely expensive experiments designed to detect them.

    All of Hawkins “conjectures” are just that, conjectures, and they too, were formulated in an effort to save the original theory, because the evidence that has been found, contradicts that theory. The original theory postulated that nothing could escape the gravity of a Black Hole, but radiation was observed in the vicinty of supposed Black Holes. Hawkings conjectured his radiation to “explain” it. Is that the way scientific method is supposed to work?

    Have you seen the problems SJ Crothers has had getting his papers reviewed? He claims he proves that Einstein was wrong, that his math was flawed. Of course there are those that dispute him, but refuse to have the debate in peer reviewed journals, is that right?

    Dark matter and dark energy are easily explained as unnecessary fabrications by Plasma Universe theories. Electrical forces are many times stronger than gravity, if they’re taken into account, there is no need for “dark” explanations. Why isn’t there debate about that in the journals? Especially since neither dark matter, or dark energy, can be found, again, despite great efforts to do so.

    Many scientists today are constrained to trying to confirm what they think they already know to maintain the status quo in the name of job security, i. e.: to make a living.

    I would ask Mencken, how do we know what is unknowable, or worth knowing, if we don’t ask?

  • SirWilhelm

    Which is it? Is this your last correspondence to me on this subject, or do you want me to respond so we can continue? I’m not the one who has dispproved Einstein’s theories, but, I doubt you would care to review the papers of he who has, and I have previously provided the link to the site of SJ Crothers, who claims to have done that. I have never attacked you personally, and I don’t see the need for you to say “You don’t see Jack Shit”, or “You are blind and ignorant.” You should be able to disagree with what I say without getting upset about it, as I try to do with what you say. Am I mental? Because I think Einstein is wrong? Why? Is he your “mother superior”, who’s word is not to be questioned because he is a famous scientist? I have seen evidence that those tests of Relativity were based on false assumptions, and the results misinterpreted, but then, I have also read Crothers papers which prove Relativity was wrong in the first place. The General Theory has been dispproved, it needs replaced, and without General Relativity, there can be no Special, there cannot be one without the other.

    http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/ this is the link I have previously supplied in other posts that were never acknowledged. I look forward to your thoughts on these papers, if you care to review them, and comment on them.

    Why are you corresponding with me if you think I am a “goddamned half-wit”? Am I out of my depth, or do I ask questions you find hard to answer? I do know my limitations, I know I don’t know all the answers, but, I will keep looking for answers until I die. No, I don’t know how to solve a quadratic. And no, I don’t believe “in space invaders who made rocket ships out of bricks!” But, I do believe they made launch and landing pads out of huge blocks of stone. I don’t smoke anything, or take any drugs, except for prescription heart medications, and I don’t drink alchohol, either. My one, and only addiction, is Earl Grey.

    I do know the difference between ITS and IT’S, as I’ve mentioned before, I occaisionally make typos.

    If you find corresponding with me disturbing, just say so, and I will cease any and all correspondence with you. I am at fault for not realizing how upsetting it would be to challenge your most precious paradigms. For that, I do apologize.

  • SirWilhelm

    Which is it? Is this your last correspondence to me on this subject, or do you want me to respond so we can continue? I’m not the one who has dispproved Einstein’s theories, but, I doubt you would care to review the papers of he who has, and I have previously provided the link to the site of SJ Crothers, who claims to have done that. I have never attacked you personally, and I don’t see the need for you to say “You don’t see Jack Shit”, or “You are blind and ignorant.” You should be able to disagree with what I say without getting upset about it, as I try to do with what you say. Am I mental? Because I think Einstein is wrong? Why? Is he your “mother superior”, who’s word is not to be questioned because he is a famous scientist? I have seen evidence that those tests of Relativity were based on false assumptions, and the results misinterpreted, but then, I have also read Crothers papers which prove Relativity was wrong in the first place. The General Theory has been dispproved, it needs replaced, and without General Relativity, there can be no Special, there cannot be one without the other.

    http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/ this is the link I have previously supplied in other posts that were never acknowledged. I look forward to your thoughts on these papers, if you care to review them, and comment on them.

    Why are you corresponding with me if you think I am a “goddamned half-wit”? Am I out of my depth, or do I ask questions you find hard to answer? I do know my limitations, I know I don’t know all the answers, but, I will keep looking for answers until I die. No, I don’t know how to solve a quadratic. And no, I don’t believe “in space invaders who made rocket ships out of bricks!” But, I do believe they made launch and landing pads out of huge blocks of stone. I don’t smoke anything, or take any drugs, except for prescription heart medications, and I don’t drink alchohol, either. My one, and only addiction, is Earl Grey.

    I do know the difference between ITS and IT’S, as I’ve mentioned before, I occaisionally make typos.

    If you find corresponding with me disturbing, just say so, and I will cease any and all correspondence with you. I am at fault for not realizing how upsetting it would be to challenge your most precious paradigms. For that, I do apologize.

  • Beejj

    I just came across this gem, HSB: “Debating creationists on the topic of evolution is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon – it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory.”

    SD Weitzenhoffer.

  • Beejj

    I just came across this gem, HSB: “Debating creationists on the topic of evolution is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon – it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory.”

    SD Weitzenhoffer.

  • Guest

    When the actions of Sharia Law occur as part of Islam, it only further reinforces the realism that Islam is more of a political-religious cult than it is a religion. That position is further reinfoced by religious leaders (or more appropriately called religious dictators) keeping Moslems in backward nations of poverty and illiteracy. It is a sad state for millions of Moslems who seek better. Until the cultism is removed and the acceptance that all people should be able to believe as they wish, Islam will be a plague on modern civilization.

  • Guest

    When the actions of Sharia Law occur as part of Islam, it only further reinforces the realism that Islam is more of a political-religious cult than it is a religion. That position is further reinfoced by religious leaders (or more appropriately called religious dictators) keeping Moslems in backward nations of poverty and illiteracy. It is a sad state for millions of Moslems who seek better. Until the cultism is removed and the acceptance that all people should be able to believe as they wish, Islam will be a plague on modern civilization.

  • Alphapendragon

    Any logical, thinking person has to discount the theory of evolution. Alien civilisations have been vistiting this planet since the beginning of “evolution” and before that too. There is no “natural selection” there is only genetic engineering. As far as these murdurous Islamic pigs go, kill every Islamic male over the age of five, and every Islamic female that opposes such measure.

  • Alphapendragon

    Any logical, thinking person has to discount the theory of evolution. Alien civilisations have been vistiting this planet since the beginning of “evolution” and before that too. There is no “natural selection” there is only genetic engineering. As far as these murdurous Islamic pigs go, kill every Islamic male over the age of five, and every Islamic female that opposes such measure.

  • Alpahapendragon

    Evidence. If we take all the available evidence into account the theory of evolution is supplanted by extraterrestrial intervention. Only an ignoramous would still think we evolved on this planet accidentally.

  • Alpahapendragon

    Evidence. If we take all the available evidence into account the theory of evolution is supplanted by extraterrestrial intervention. Only an ignoramous would still think we evolved on this planet accidentally.

  • Beejj

    You are a very funny man, Alphapendragon. Do you do children’s parties, too?

  • Beejj

    You are a very funny man, Alphapendragon. Do you do children’s parties, too?

  • Istanbul_chick

    E.T and Alf visiting and tinkering with our DNA is as silly and far fetched a belief system as a big sky daddy creating us from clay.

    Do you have any idea how far the closest inhabitable planet is to Earth?

    Do you realize the level of technology it would take for E.T. and Alf to get here? And why would they bother with us? If such creatures with such advanced technology exist why in the hell would they go so far out of their way to tinker with the evolutionary equivalent of cows?

    Actually, big sky daddy making us from clay seems more logical and likely than E.T. bending space and usurping the theory of special relativity.

  • Istanbul_chick

    E.T and Alf visiting and tinkering with our DNA is as silly and far fetched a belief system as a big sky daddy creating us from clay.

    Do you have any idea how far the closest inhabitable planet is to Earth?

    Do you realize the level of technology it would take for E.T. and Alf to get here? And why would they bother with us? If such creatures with such advanced technology exist why in the hell would they go so far out of their way to tinker with the evolutionary equivalent of cows?

    Actually, big sky daddy making us from clay seems more logical and likely than E.T. bending space and usurping the theory of special relativity.

  • Beejj

    Patience, IC!!! I am sure Alphapendragon is going to tell us all about his almer mater, his degrees and the focus of his post-grad work. He will also tell us if the Darth Vaders brought the dinosaurs with them, or only their fossils. It is exciting to think that such an intellect is going to lower himself to our meagre level so that we might learn THE TRUTH. Gosh, he must be no end of a biologist to describe the likes of Richard Dawkins as ignoramuses – or even ignoramouses!

  • Beejj

    Patience, IC!!! I am sure Alphapendragon is going to tell us all about his almer mater, his degrees and the focus of his post-grad work. He will also tell us if the Darth Vaders brought the dinosaurs with them, or only their fossils. It is exciting to think that such an intellect is going to lower himself to our meagre level so that we might learn THE TRUTH. Gosh, he must be no end of a biologist to describe the likes of Richard Dawkins as ignoramuses – or even ignoramouses!

  • Istanbul_chick

    Oy vey! Silly me! I thought dinosaur fossils were from when the planet of the dinosaurs, Dinotopia, slammed into the earth! I forgot about the Darth Vaders. :) LOL You owe me another cup of tea, damn you!

    I was shocked, actually. Nine times out of ten these “troofers” are pro-islam and all mohammadans are die hard troofers. Just ask any of them, they all believe cell phones can pop popcorn. It’s on jihad(you)tube so it’s true!

  • Istanbul_chick

    Oy vey! Silly me! I thought dinosaur fossils were from when the planet of the dinosaurs, Dinotopia, slammed into the earth! I forgot about the Darth Vaders. :) LOL You owe me another cup of tea, damn you!

    I was shocked, actually. Nine times out of ten these “troofers” are pro-islam and all mohammadans are die hard troofers. Just ask any of them, they all believe cell phones can pop popcorn. It’s on jihad(you)tube so it’s true!

  • Beejj

    OK, woman, it’s a deal: I owe you another cup of tea. Now here is the most astonishing thing ……..

    As every Brit knows, Americans are clueless about tea. They drink that other stuff – what’s it called? Yet, the finest tea BY FAR that I ever drank in my life was in America. It was a Darjeeling: Makaibari Second Flush. Trust the bloody Yanks!!

  • Beejj

    OK, woman, it’s a deal: I owe you another cup of tea. Now here is the most astonishing thing ……..

    As every Brit knows, Americans are clueless about tea. They drink that other stuff – what’s it called? Yet, the finest tea BY FAR that I ever drank in my life was in America. It was a Darjeeling: Makaibari Second Flush. Trust the bloody Yanks!!

  • Hellosnackbar

    Tell us if you’ve ever been abducted by aliens? if you have? then clearly you’re party to information we don’t have.
    And Darwin NOT a logical thinking person?that’s a laugh!
    Evaluating evolution, from the evidence gathered by himself and others, was clearly the product of a very intelligent and logical man.
    Have you read “The origin of species”?;still in print after 160years.It’s a very good read(pardon me whilst I giggle at your little green men theory!).
    Evolution is cold hard FACT supported by a mountain of evidence.
    But then again if you have contact with Aliens who can travel faster than light;then do yourself a favour and ask
    them how they do it.
    You’d become instantly a famous and wealthy person.

  • Hellosnackbar

    Tell us if you’ve ever been abducted by aliens? if you have? then clearly you’re party to information we don’t have.
    And Darwin NOT a logical thinking person?that’s a laugh!
    Evaluating evolution, from the evidence gathered by himself and others, was clearly the product of a very intelligent and logical man.
    Have you read “The origin of species”?;still in print after 160years.It’s a very good read(pardon me whilst I giggle at your little green men theory!).
    Evolution is cold hard FACT supported by a mountain of evidence.
    But then again if you have contact with Aliens who can travel faster than light;then do yourself a favour and ask
    them how they do it.
    You’d become instantly a famous and wealthy person.

  • Hellosnackbar

    That’s a good one Beejj.
    It is maddening when some oaf tells you he/she is right ;purely on the basis that he/she believes so.
    It’s like me telling them that I believe that they’re a murderer and they should be hanged.
    Just the same as idiotic Mohammedans enacting the principles of their death cult.

  • Hellosnackbar

    That’s a good one Beejj.
    It is maddening when some oaf tells you he/she is right ;purely on the basis that he/she believes so.
    It’s like me telling them that I believe that they’re a murderer and they should be hanged.
    Just the same as idiotic Mohammedans enacting the principles of their death cult.

  • Hellosnackbar

    Well IC if aliens visit us, as though going to the Zoo?then one look at Mohammedans would convince them that
    our developement has far to go!
    They don’t teach SR at the local madrassa I believe?(Allah is piss poor at science)

  • Hellosnackbar

    Well IC if aliens visit us, as though going to the Zoo?then one look at Mohammedans would convince them that
    our developement has far to go!
    They don’t teach SR at the local madrassa I believe?(Allah is piss poor at science)

  • Istanbul_chick

    Oh, but they do teach science in the jihadi factories: islamic sciences as per mein kuranmpf.

    You know, that sperm comes from your backbone and flies have one poisonous wing and the antidote is the other wing (that one has been “proven” by a very long and laughable paper written by a mohammadan).

  • Istanbul_chick

    Oh, but they do teach science in the jihadi factories: islamic sciences as per mein kuranmpf.

    You know, that sperm comes from your backbone and flies have one poisonous wing and the antidote is the other wing (that one has been “proven” by a very long and laughable paper written by a mohammadan).

  • Istanbul_chick

    Ah but you are unaware that I’m a yank spawned by an English father and Irish mother. I only drink that other stuff in a pinch. My dentist loves me because I am putting his kids through college on his efforts to keep my teeth clean.:) The more oxidized the better is my motto. I just bought some Russian white Earl Gray to mix with my black breakfast and while heavy on the bergamot it’s too light on the earthy tea flavour for my taste.

    I just found a website selling your colonial recommended darjeeling and will promptly order some. If it’s good as you claim I will let you off the hook for causing me to spew tea, twice, with your witty and cutting written rapartee. :)

  • Istanbul_chick

    Ah but you are unaware that I’m a yank spawned by an English father and Irish mother. I only drink that other stuff in a pinch. My dentist loves me because I am putting his kids through college on his efforts to keep my teeth clean.:) The more oxidized the better is my motto. I just bought some Russian white Earl Gray to mix with my black breakfast and while heavy on the bergamot it’s too light on the earthy tea flavour for my taste.

    I just found a website selling your colonial recommended darjeeling and will promptly order some. If it’s good as you claim I will let you off the hook for causing me to spew tea, twice, with your witty and cutting written rapartee. :)

  • Anonymous

    re velikovsky, the psychaiatrist who was studing social amnesia, not the facts of unsubstantiated events…which shows how far the contructs we use are from those of the originators intensions and reasons…for a second example try “social darwinism.”

  • Anonymous

    re velikovsky, the psychaiatrist who was studing social amnesia, not the facts of unsubstantiated events…which shows how far the contructs we use are from those of the originators intensions and reasons…for a second example try “social darwinism.”

  • Anonymous

    well, the same corruption and changing is and has always been greater in religious theories!!!!!

  • Anonymous

    well, the same corruption and changing is and has always been greater in religious theories!!!!!

  • SirWilhelm

    I belong to no religion, which is one reason why see how disturbing it is, that science has usurped so much of religion’s authority, even if it doesn’t claim, or admit, it’s psuedo religious qualitites, these days. And, what is the source of corruption and “changing” in both science and religion? Both science and religion are being used to enrich and enpower some people who are interested in only that, and there are “useful idiots” in both fields that are only too easlily led into abetting them.

  • SirWilhelm

    I belong to no religion, which is one reason why see how disturbing it is, that science has usurped so much of religion’s authority, even if it doesn’t claim, or admit, it’s psuedo religious qualitites, these days. And, what is the source of corruption and “changing” in both science and religion? Both science and religion are being used to enrich and enpower some people who are interested in only that, and there are “useful idiots” in both fields that are only too easlily led into abetting them.

  • Anonymous

    At least the religiously motivated are up-front about having agenda, even if
    they say they are not imposing it. The scientist too often tries to pretend
    there is something audacious in asking about such things, since , as a
    scientist, he is “above” such things as- how his science is employed etc,
    pidgeonholing himself in a fake cocoon of impartiality. Then we have the
    abusers of science, to witt the social darwinists, and the really nasty
    sides over “is alt sexual orientation social or biological?” pretending
    there is a rational, scientific answer to which everyone should nod and
    …accept their side as eternal (revealed?) truth

    People are people, and that is the source of our problems.

  • Anonymous

    At least the religiously motivated are up-front about having agenda, even if
    they say they are not imposing it. The scientist too often tries to pretend
    there is something audacious in asking about such things, since , as a
    scientist, he is “above” such things as- how his science is employed etc,
    pidgeonholing himself in a fake cocoon of impartiality. Then we have the
    abusers of science, to witt the social darwinists, and the really nasty
    sides over “is alt sexual orientation social or biological?” pretending
    there is a rational, scientific answer to which everyone should nod and
    …accept their side as eternal (revealed?) truth

    People are people, and that is the source of our problems.

blog comments powered by Disqus