Identifying Muslims
Comprox
*chortle*Canada Join Date: 2002-01-23 Member: 7Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, NS1 Playtester, NS2 Developer, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Silver, Subnautica Developer, Subnautica Playtester, Pistachionauts
*chortle*Canada Join Date: 2002-01-23 Member: 7Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, NS1 Playtester, NS2 Developer, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Silver, Subnautica Developer, Subnautica Playtester, Pistachionauts
in Discussions
This is absolutely scary. I knew the prejudice was bad in the us, but this is <a href="http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=inDepthNews&storyID=2006-12-01T142541Z_01_N30158201_RTRUKOC_0_US-USA-MUSLIMS-FEAR.xml&WTmodLoc=Home-C5-inDepthNews-2&rpc=92" target="_blank">frightening</a>.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Generalization & discrimination FTL <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":(" border="0" alt="sad-fix.gif" />
Also the poll is probably terribly inaccurate. You can't get a good percentage estimate of public support by dialing a few randoms.
Also the poll is probably terribly inaccurate. You can't get a good percentage estimate of public support by dialing a few randoms.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
well, Gallup has a pretty solid reputation when conducting polls, and I would say that anything over 500 is a good number to get a clear indication of the larger picture (typically the ratio of accuracy to study size peaks at 500, decreases as study size increases to around 1000, and after that has such deminishing returns as to not warrent further study). So the study size of over a 1000 seems fair enough to me.
as for the method of conducting a study via random digit dialing, this is now how most of Gallups polls are conducted, so its not like this is a strange new method, it is in fact the normal procedure.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Since it was all a hoax it doesn't really mean anything apart from that some people go along with whatever comes out of their favourite channel. I thought we all knew this already <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":(" border="0" alt="sad-fix.gif" />
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Dont pretend that if the channel had advocated marking all black or hispanic people within the US, there wouldnt have been a massive outcry, and yes I realise they were talking about religion and not race, but the issue here is prejudice in general.
Its clear to me that this broadcast, while a hoax, has brought to light some incrediably worrying viewpoints out there, and you cant just dismiss them as being entirely brought about because of what they heard that day.
There is an underlying theme of 'us and them' being played out in the media at the moment (certainly in the UK, and im sure more so in the US), and there are alot of people who genuinly believe that the marking of Muslims would be a good thing.
Now im loath to Godwin this discussion so early, and ill fully admit that this is still no where near as bad as what happened in the 30's. <i>But its well on the way to being</i>. Just as the first step towards facism is public apathy, this is a genuinly frightening example of the early stages of concent towards a dark future.
History repeats itself, and ive heard it said alot lately that people could never understand how the German people could stand by and allow what happaned back then to occur, but given the current climate, I am beginning to understand.
Ill end on a more general note, and that is that hate only breeds further hate, we cannot hope to survive without fostering an atmosphere of trust, and understanding that Muslims are real people, the vast majority of whom have been caught up and conflated, unfairly with the issue of terrorism, and this is most definatly a giant step in the wrong direction.
well, Gallup has a pretty solid reputation when conducting polls, and I would say that anything over 500 is a good number to get a clear indication of the larger picture (typically the ratio of accuracy to study size peaks at 500, decreases as study size increases to around 1000, and after that has such deminishing returns as to not warrent further study). So the study size of over a 1000 seems fair enough to me.
as for the method of conducting a study via random digit dialing, this is now how most of Gallups polls are conducted, so its not like this is a strange new method, it is in fact the normal procedure.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I still don't think it's accurate. There is no way 39% of America believes that. Either Gallup has phrased the question badly or the question is misleading, or something.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Dont pretend that if the channel had advocated marking all black or hispanic people within the US, there wouldnt have been a massive outcry, and yes I realise they were talking about religion and not race, but the issue here is prejudice in general.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree 100% with this part downwards.
I'm not pretending that at all. I'm just saying some people follow their favourite host to the bitter end. I 100% agree with you that the media has fanned the fire (or started it, even) in hopes of separating religious and racial groups even further. I have seen the evidence of this a great deal on American news programs. And yes, it is worrying; but there's nothing new here. As it is a hoax, there is no event and therefore no progression. We all know that there is religious tension, but there has not been any buildup or breakdown caused by the radio host's actions (provided people listen all the way to the end). So nothing's happened. Instead of focusing on the news articles that say "Hey guys look at this we have a problem now" there should be more focus on the news articles that actually cause the problems.
The Gallup study, on the other hand, is a little more disturbing. Anyone have a link to the actual study results? Or do we have to rely on the sensationalistic reporting of the same guy worried about this talk radio prank?
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Wave" target="_blank">Give this a read</a>.
While it's not a generally excepted or proved idea, I certainly believe in it.
I still don't think it's accurate. There is no way 39% of America believes that. Either Gallup has phrased the question badly or the question is misleading, or something.[...]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Be careful with reasoning like this. This is basically an argument from incredulity.
I'm no statistician (is there such a thing?), so I don't know how true the things Melatonin said about diminishing returns beyond a sample size of 500 to 1000 are, but maybe a study with as disturbing results as this one warrants repetition with a larger sample?
As for The Third Wave, I read Todd Strassers book in school. Powerful stuff, and something that helped me understand my own country's past.
Be careful with reasoning like this. This is basically an argument from incredulity.
I'm no statistician (is there such a thing?), so I don't know how true the things Melatonin said about diminishing returns beyond a sample size of 500 to 1000 are, but maybe a study with as disturbing results as this one warrants repetition with a larger sample?
As for The Third Wave, I read Todd Strassers book in school. Powerful stuff, and something that helped me understand my own country's past.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sure, it MAY BE accurate, I'm just saying I don't think it is. That's my opinion thanks. I said I THINK, not that it definitely is not accurate. I've been wrong before. There's no way of knowing.
People are familiar with Islam's classification of the world into the Dar-ul-Solh, the house of peace, meaning the house of Islam-and the Dar-ul-Harb-the house of war, meaning the house of non-Islam. Ironically, the self-proclaimed house of peace, from its early years, has waged war against the house of war.
Also there is a little-known third "house" according to Islam-Dar-ul-Aman, the non-Islam house of safety where Muslims find refuge. We already know which of the three houses America is to Al Qaeda, the Iranian mullahs, the Taliban, the Muslims Brotherhood and their ilk. We are posing this question to the rank and file Muslims, particularly to the arrivals of recent years who are finding refuge in the non-Islamic world, including the United States of America:
Which house America is to you?
America and other welcoming and generous non-Islam Dar-ul-Aman have given you refuge with opportunities for a decent life denied to you in your own Dar-ul-Solh by the ruthless and deceptive holy men of Allah who rule it.
Dear Muslim, reciprocity is a high human virtue. The kind people of Dar-ul-Aman deserve your in-kind response. You physically left the Dar-ul-Solh because it was and is an abject failure in delivering its promises about a good life in this world. What guarantee is there that Islam's the "pie-in-the-skies" promises about the next world - a world of virgins for the faithful male with rivers of milk and honey to energize him - are any more reliable?
What about the Muslim women? Are they going to be compensated for their enslavement by the men of Allah? Or, women, even in Allah's paradise, remain in perpetuity "objects" of entertainment for men?
Now that you have seen for yourself the misery of Islamic system and you have sought a better life in the Dar-ul-Aman of the "infidels," you need to take other steps: bid farewell to the Islamic mindset, abandon Ummehism, and enlist yourself in the rank of the democratic and tolerant people. Once freed from the oppressive and discriminating yoke of fundamentalist Islam, you can lend a hand to the protection and nurturance of democracy - a system of peoples' rule with a proven record of being the best instrument for the realization of humanity's aspirations.
The democratic rule of Dar-ul-Aman is not a void system invented by the infidels, as your devious self-serving theocrats leaders claim. Democracy is the best product of humanity's caring and decent people: the rule of the people, by the people, for the people.
Democracy, by its accommodating and benign nature is susceptible to corruption and even destruction by forces from within and from without. With this realization in mind, the founding fathers of the United States enshrined the Constitution to safeguard and protect the rule of the people.
Dear Muslim, being born human comes with a precious gift: the gift to think and decide for yourself. Islam has rubbed you of this gift from birth. Parents, aided by relatives and brainwashed by slaveholder imams and mullahs, colluded and did the thinking for you when you were still in no position to exercise your right. They branded you as Muslim, simply because you were born in a Muslim family. Cattle are branded, not humans. Cattle are owned by others. Humans are not. Having branded you "Muslim," those who robbed you of your gift of self-determination dared you to leave their bondage under the threat of death as apostate.
Dear Muslim, you have been intelligent enough to forsake failed Islamic lands for a better life elsewhere. Dar-ul-Aman has given refuge. Now that you are in a free society, you want to reclaim your stolen gift of liberty and freedom of choice. You want to shatter the shackles of Islam that has enchained you from birth. You want to take your place in the ranks of the supporters and promoters of liberty that democracy provides and Islam destroys.
Dear Muslim, you know full well that it is Islam's dysfunctional doctrine with its stone-age rule of the Shariah that is responsible for the abominable conditions of the Islamic countries.
Contrary to the preachers of hate - the Islamic clergy of vested interests - the "infidels" are not your enemies: they demonstrate their goodwill by giving you refuge; your deadly enemy is the interpretation of the doctrine of Islam that keeps you captive even in freedom.
Religion is a powerful force. And as is the case with any force, it can do work of the good or that of the evil. And when there is multiplicity of religions at loggerheads with one another the forces clash and any benefit that religion offers is offset by potentially huge costs.
Given that the formerly vast and largely segregated planet earth has shrunk into a "global village," the disparate peoples isolated from one another for millennia are now a village community. The-thrown-together diverse people are in urgent need of adopting a social compact that would allow individuals as well as groups maximum latitude of faith, coupled with responsibility, and free of any practices that infringe on the rights of others or demonize them.
Regrettably, Islam as too often practiced is incompatible with such a harmonious compact. As an article of faith, Islam considers all non-Muslims, even the so-called people of the book, as infidels - people who are to be subjugated or cleansed from Allah's earth.
Dear Muslim, you have taken a great step by coming to the Dar-ul-Aman in search of self-betterment. Now, you need to take the next step of purging your mind of the Psychosocial Virus of fundamentalist Islam you contracted unwillingly: you want to do all you can to give your children their gift of humanity by not doing to them what your parents did to you, so that they can, unencumbered by the dogma of hate, become emancipated human beings.
America is not perfect. No human enterprise ever is. Yet, America is the closest country to a true Dar-ul Aman in the broadest sense. And it is Americans, overwhelmingly "infidels", who make America what it is. While America opens its doors to the poor, the hungry and the oppressed of the world, Americans open their hearts to the less fortunate people of various lands by their unsurpassed generosity. No nation gives more aid to international charities, as percentage of its gross domestic products, than the American people.
This "Refuge," a nation of all nations called America, is indeed the harbinger of the not too far away world of the future. A future world where liberty rules supreme and fascisms of all forms, including Islamofascism, will be remembered as horrific impediments to humanity's ever-forward-march toward the goal of making this presently darksome village earth a reflection of heaven.
<i>Amil Imani is an Iranian-born American citizen and pro-democracy activist residing in the United States of America. Imani is a columnist, literary translator, novelist and an essayist who has been writing and speaking out for the struggling people of his native land, Iran. He maintains a website, </i><a href="http://www.amilimani.com/index" target="_blank">AmilImani.com</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Be careful with reasoning like this. This is basically an argument from incredulity.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
An Argument from incredulity isn't necessarily a fallacy, by the way. Especially in the realm of statistics. Statistics does not tell us what things ARE, just what they are LIKELY to be. Incredulity also tells us what things are LIKELY to be. Both can be wrong. But when they offer competing conclusions, that suggests that more study may be required.
When Incredulity runs into a repeatable, testable result, incredulity has to be cast aside in favor of the new evidence. When Incredulity runs into a single result, incredulity properly dictates that more results are required before accepting them. After all, any study may contain errors, even purely scientific experiments that don't use statistics at all.
For example, I could measure acceleration due to gravity and come up with 7 m/s/s--that probably means that I made a mistake in measurement, rather than that the gravitational constant changed overnight. How did I reach that conclusion? Argument from Incredulity. Its incredulous that the gravitational constant would be 30% smaller today than yesterday, and so I repeat my experiment again, and this time I get 9.8.
So be careful when dismissing arguments from incredulity out of hand.
I'm searching for it now, but haven't found anything yet.
Edit: I found the link to Gallup's own archives, but you can't access the document unless you are a subscriber (which I'm not):
<a href="http://brain.gallup.com/content/default.aspx?ci=24073" target="_blank">Gallup Poll Data</a>--<a href="http://brain.gallup.com/search/results.aspx?SearchTextAll=&SearchTextExa=&SearchTextAny=&SearchSiteInd=13,14,15,16,77,78,79,80,81&SearchConType=0" target="_blank">Search Page Results</a>
I also found probably dozens of copies of the exact same article posted at the top, almost word for word, with no new information whatsoever. Can anyone do better than that?
Look, if your some guy coming in from Lebanon. Chances are we are going to spend a good deal of time screening you for a history. It's just part of the game.
In the middle east, they love to identify Christians and Jews.
Look, if your some guy coming in from Lebanon. Chances are we are going to spend a good deal of time screening you for a history. It's just part of the game.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Probably, but that's all behind the scenes. The less I know about the black stuff my intelligence services do, the happier I can be.
However, by 'identifying,' we're talking about actually pointing out Muslims in public with cards, or bands, or some such, so that they can be scrutinized and nationally hated more easily. That's very un-American. I'd rather see them displaced then forced to reveal themselves everywhere they go - that'd be like walking around naked. What we'd be basically doing is assigning a target for all our aggressions. Something goes wrong, "it's not because of anything <i>we</i> did. <i>We</i> don't make mistakes. It's the fault of those damned Muslims!"
There could have been legitimate military reasons for the displacement and encampment of, say, the Japanese citizens of America in WWII. Aside from any moral objections, no-one can really argue whether or not the displacement saved serviceman's lives. That's all lost in history. What we do know is that we didn't have them parade around wearing stickers that say "I'm a Jap. It's my fault."
Even the Irish, one of the most ridiculed and persecuted minorities during the dawning of our great nation, were not subjugated in such a cruel fashion. Whatever singular activists and political cartoonists make of national public opinion of a minority, it must <i>never</i> be reinforced by government policy. Especially not in a nation tauted as a "cultural melting pot." It could mean civil war.
We fight wars against organizations and governments, not races.
In the middle east, they love to identify Christians and Jews.
Look, if your some guy coming in from Lebanon. Chances are we are going to spend a good deal of time screening you for a history. It's just part of the game.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Because they do it, we can too, lol amirite?
I think we should screen people from Ireland because they might have IRA connections. Or Malaysia, since it's a predominantly Muslim country and people there are obviously more likely to be terrorists. And China, to weed out communists.
The people of Germany, which was considered an educated, enlightened, civilized nation, stood by as the Nazis took over and systematically eliminated the Jews during the 1940s. I wouldn't be surprised if the same thing happened in the US, but nobody cares about the Muslims because they didn't lose millions of people in the Holocaust and don't have a powerful lobbying group in Congress.
<!--coloro:yellow--><span style="color:yellow"><!--/coloro-->If you can't express your opinion without this sort of biting sarcasm and venom, then please, just keep it to yourself. -Rob<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
We aren't a Nazi Germany, and likewise I tend to avoid conversations who have nothing but "oooh nazis did this" as their argument.
You know why I don't care about Muslims? Because I don't care about Christians, Jews, or any other race religion or political philosophies when they start to tell me how to live my life under the threat of violence. I don't want American citizens treated in this manner, but if your a alien in this country. I want to know who you are. Where your from. Do you have a criminal history? Do you come from a country that has a history of supporting violence against ours. ect. ect.
An Argument from incredulity isn't necessarily a fallacy, by the way. Especially in the realm of statistics. Statistics does not tell us what things ARE, just what they are LIKELY to be. Incredulity also tells us what things are LIKELY to be. Both can be wrong. But when they offer competing conclusions, that suggests that more study may be required.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Except that in this case, an individual's 'feeling' about how the results are means absolutely nothing. Seriously you might as well say that Thor has willed that these numbers are wrong. It means nothing. On the basis that these numbers 'feel' wrong, you could repeat the experiment. Or you could sit here and speculate with no numbers and nothing but personal anecdote to back you up. Which is about as pointless as it gets.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->When Incredulity runs into a repeatable, testable result, incredulity has to be cast aside in favor of the new evidence. When Incredulity runs into a single result, incredulity properly dictates that more results are required before accepting them. After all, any study may contain errors, even purely scientific experiments that don't use statistics at all.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This might be true, but even then, your personal perceptions of how things are, probably are inaccurate a lot more of the time than you think (and are certainly inaccurate a hell of a lot more than a survey). I'm not saying this number is 100% rock solid, hell I don't care either way (I think it's a shame). But I do hate it when random people on internet forums *SPECULATE* about *scientific* (I assume, I don't care to look) polls.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->For example, I could measure acceleration due to gravity and come up with 7 m/s/s--that probably means that I made a mistake in measurement, rather than that the gravitational constant changed overnight. How did I reach that conclusion? Argument from Incredulity. Its incredulous that the gravitational constant would be 30% smaller today than yesterday, and so I repeat my experiment again, and this time I get 9.8.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You wouldn't be wrong because of incredulity, you'd be wrong because Earth's gravity has been measured countless times and they have all shown one number. You *wouldn't* be wrong because someone says "I can't fathom that!" You'd be wrong because mountains of evidence in 1 direction is not overturned by 1 result. That's not even close to the case here.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So be careful when dismissing arguments from incredulity out of hand.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're right speculation is so much more accurate. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":(" border="0" alt="sad-fix.gif" />
I find it sad that people feel so free to speculate about how wrong the surveys are. Obviously your 5 (10?) anecdotal experiences with this subject, if that, give you far more expertise in the field. Give me a break
Probably, but that's all behind the scenes. The less I know about the black stuff my intelligence services do, the happier I can be.
However, by 'identifying,' we're talking about actually pointing out Muslims in public with cards, or bands, or some such, so that they can be scrutinized and nationally hated more easily. That's very un-American. I'd rather see them displaced then forced to reveal themselves everywhere they go - that'd be like walking around naked. What we'd be basically doing is assigning a target for all our aggressions. Something goes wrong, "it's not because of anything <i>we</i> did. <i>We</i> don't make mistakes. It's the fault of those damned Muslims!"
There could have been legitimate military reasons for the displacement and encampment of, say, the Japanese citizens of America in WWII. Aside from any moral objections, no-one can really argue whether or not the displacement saved serviceman's lives. That's all lost in history. What we do know is that we didn't have them parade around wearing stickers that say "I'm a Jap. It's my fault."
Even the Irish, one of the most ridiculed and persecuted minorities during the dawning of our great nation, were not subjugated in such a cruel fashion. Whatever singular activists and political cartoonists make of national public opinion of a minority, it must <i>never</i> be reinforced by government policy. Especially not in a nation tauted as a "cultural melting pot." It could mean civil war.
We fight wars against organizations and governments, not races.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Regarding the displacement of Japanese citizen, I have relatives who were in fact detained. The reasoning they had was that it was to protect them. Opinions differ from different citizens regarding the Japanese detainment. What is mutually agreed upon is that many people lost alot of money out of the whole ordeal and practically anyone can understand that the government should compensate them for their losses.
He joined the marines at the time. Because it was his belief that he could show that he was a American by doing the American thing. Enlisting.
Hence the $20,000 compensation detainee?
You wouldn't be wrong because of incredulity, you'd be wrong because Earth's gravity has been measured countless times and they have all shown one number. You *wouldn't* be wrong because someone says "I can't fathom that!" You'd be wrong because mountains of evidence in 1 direction is not overturned by 1 result. That's not even close to the case here.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No no no, you see, my experiment didn't prove that everyone else was wrong about Earth's Gravity. They were perfectly correct. <i>Yesterday</i>.
But today, its different. While we were sleeping, the fundamental constants of the universe changed, and now EVERY SINGLE EXPERIMENT thats EVER been run on todays date showed the new, superior value of 7. It doesn't go against any evidence at all, because no one has ever run a gravitation experiement on today's date before. So how do they know the constant didn't change overnight?
Incredulity. Thats how they know. Because it would be phenomenally, mindbogglingly stupid to believe that, despite the fact that not even ONE experiment proves it to be false.
--------------
So whats my point? My point, after all that, is burden of proof: Even though every experiment run today supports me, because my result is so incredulous, the burden of proof is on me to show my experiment is repeatable, and to show that my methods are accurate--not on everyone else to run counter experiments to prove me wrong. They dont have to prove me wrong, I have to prove myself right.
Likewise, I want to see the details behind this study, and see some repeatability, with another study that says the same thing. After all, even a study with 95% confidence has a 5% chance of missing the mark.
So is anyone going to offer some more evidence for us to debate? Or do we have to keep talking with incomplete information?
No no no, you see, my experiment didn't prove that everyone else was wrong about Earth's Gravity. They were perfectly correct. <i>Yesterday</i>.
But today, its different. While we were sleeping, the fundamental constants of the universe changed, and now EVERY SINGLE EXPERIMENT thats EVER been run on todays date showed the new, superior value of 7. It doesn't go against any evidence at all, because no one has ever run a gravitation experiement on today's date before. So how do they know the constant didn't change overnight?
Incredulity. Thats how they know. Because it would be phenomenally, mindbogglingly stupid to believe that, despite the fact that not even ONE experiment proves it to be false.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, there are ways (looking at distant galaxies and the microwave background for example) that we know that certain things have been the same in the distant past as they are today, and we have no reason to suspect that the gravitational constant changes overnight. You're wrong because of the evidence, claiming some stupid semantical thing about how its a different day so its a different constant is just dumb. Not to mention ridiculously egocentric but that's for another post.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So whats my point? My point, after all that, is burden of proof: Even though every experiment run today supports me, because my result is so incredulous, the burden of proof is on me to show my experiment is repeatable, and to show that my methods are accurate--not on everyone else to run counter experiments to prove me wrong. They dont have to prove me wrong, I have to prove myself right.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Your result is not incredulous. Your result runs counter to thousands and thousands of other results that have been verified quite well. That's why nobody believes you.
People don't disbelieve in infinite energy machines because they personally find it incredulous, they do so because, as we understand the laws of physics today, it's impossible. It's the same thing for your argument. You're wrong because of past experiment.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Likewise, I want to see the details behind this study, and see some repeatability, with another study that says the same thing. After all, even a study with 95% confidence has a 5% chance of missing the mark.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So would I. I said I wasn't super attached to this number, it's not even of particular interest to me at all. I just really don't like it when people sit at their computer and speculate about the results of surveys. What the hell are you basing it on? Absolutely nothing. You should either tentatively accept the results or find a flaw in the survey.
So is anyone going to offer some more evidence for us to debate? Or do we have to keep talking with incomplete information?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think your being a little unreasonable, such cynasism is a dry rot of the brain <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />, why not denounce the very nature of reality while your at it. for the sake of this discussion can we assume that, a considerable percentage of the US population feels some ill will? It comes back to my earlier point, that Gallup didnt get its long standing reputation by asking slanted questions. So it seems more reasonable to trust them then to not, when the only factor against them is a vague distrust of surveys in general.
My appologies to <b>Coleman</b> if I came across as a little agressive earlier, it just seemed a good place to start saying what needed to be said in this thread is all.
<b>Spooge</b>, do you have anything you want to contribute yourself to this thread, or will you just snipe in now and then with other peoples hateful, and severly confused philiosophies? The author of that piece seems to talk in such generatilties that it would read almost identically if you swapped the words 'Islam' and 'America', that is, if you could take a dispasionate viewpoint. It left a bitter taste.
[/offtopic]
I think the main point that people are overlooking is that to confuse the <i>vast</i> majority of Muslims, with the <i>negliagable</i> percentage of violent fundamentalists is to over-simplify a complex issue in a particularly dangerous way [somthing Amil Imani doesnt seem to understand].
No, there are ways (looking at distant galaxies and the microwave background for example) that we know that certain things have been the same in the distant past as they are today, and we have no reason to suspect that the gravitational constant changes overnight. You're wrong because of the evidence, claiming some stupid semantical thing about how its a different day so its a different constant is just dumb. Not to mention ridiculously egocentric but that's for another post.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What do you think you're arguing against here? I'm not saying its likely to happen. I'm AGREEING that its phenomenally UNLIKELY to happen. But evidence that it didnt change yesterday doesn't mean it couldn't change tomorrow, does it? There are already a few theories running around saying some of our constants may have changed slightly over the course of time. Not 30% in a day, of course, but a little bit. (The number I saw was something like 4% over the last 10 billion years, if I remember correctly).
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Your result is not incredulous. Your result runs counter to thousands and thousands of other results that have been verified quite well. That's why nobody believes you.
People don't disbelieve in infinite energy machines because they personally find it incredulous, they do so because, as we understand the laws of physics today, it's impossible. It's the same thing for your argument. You're wrong because of past experiment.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Incorrect. The laws of physics do not, as far as we know, absolutely prohibit the changing of universal constants. Its just that, so far, no one has seen it actually happen. But theres no theoretical reason it <i>couldn't</i> happen, as illustrated by the emergence of the theory mentioned above.
So since no other gravitational experiments have been conducted yet today, theres no experimental reason to believe the gravitational constant couldnt have changed since yesterday. Past experiments can't tell me how much gravity is today, only how much it was yesterday. We can only assume its the same on both days. But until you test it, you don't really know, now do you?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So would I. I said I wasn't super attached to this number, it's not even of particular interest to me at all. I just really don't like it when people sit at their computer and speculate about the results of surveys. What the hell are you basing it on? Absolutely nothing. You should either tentatively accept the results or find a flaw in the survey.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And what are YOU basing YOUR replies on? The exact same nothing.
Finding a flaw in the survey is difficult when no one here has actually SEEN the survey. Hence why I keep calling for someone to find it, so we can discuss it with more facts instead of mere speculation. I've even looked for it myself, but I'm not willing to pay for a subscription to Gallup's poll archives ($90) so I couldn't find a copy.
I stopped reading there. That's about as ignorant and condescending an essay as I've ever read.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This concept applies to pretty much all religion.