Atheist Islamophobia... Again

Atheist Islamophobia... Again

There are 3765 comments on the Religion Dispatched story from Apr 9, 2013, titled Atheist Islamophobia... Again. In it, Religion Dispatched reports that:

Sparked by a Richard Dawkins tweet , in which he drew a parallel between Islamists and Nazis, Nathan Lean recently suggested on Salon.com that the most famous representatives of the new atheism "flirt with" Islamophobia [echoing Chris Stedman's prescient warning to fellow atheists on RD this past August]. As the article explains, Dawkins, Hitchens ... (more)

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Religion Dispatched.

Uncle Sam

Beckley, WV

#2401 Jun 19, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
His wrong---WHAT?
Oh!
You **meant** to write "you are"....!
But you are too ignorant to know the difference between "your" and "you're"....!
How very cliche...
Like I said before: "Little things amuse little minds." Is your life so meaningless that correcting Topix posts is all you have to do? Are you paid to correct Topix posts?
Uncle Sam

Beckley, WV

#2402 Jun 19, 2013
emperorjohn wrote:
The fact that you cite a piece of cloth as proof shows how pathetic you are. <quoted text>
Proof is proof. The scientific evidence presented in the Shroud of Turin proves the Gospels and that Christianity is the one true faith.

“gun control takes two hands”

Since: Mar 13

outdoors

#2403 Jun 19, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>nope, never said anything like that at all, just pointed out your lacking in intelligence.
as proven by your own posts...
best to let the cult think for you, you are not capable.
Uh huh, I'm not versed on a topic that you are so that's your yardstick for intelligence. Like I said, you're living in your own lit-tle cult, pal. "Believe as I do, know what I know"- pretty much cult mentality according to the bobclones, and that is you.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#2404 Jun 19, 2013
Uncle Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
Proof is proof. The scientific evidence presented in the Shroud of Turin proves the Gospels and that Christianity is the one true faith.
Um, no it doesn't.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-21572...

It just proves that you're gullible.
Uncle Sam

Beckley, WV

#2405 Jun 19, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Um, no it doesn't.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-21572...
It just proves that you're gullible.
That's funny, just opinions. The scientific evidence proves the Shroud of Turin is not a fake and cannot be explained by any manmade or natural occurrence. Please keep current on the science before posting.
Dak-Original

Belfast, UK

#2406 Jun 19, 2013
Uncle Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
Proof is proof. The scientific evidence presented in the Shroud of Turin proves the Gospels and that Christianity is the one true faith.
Fraudulent trick from middle ages has been exposed. so, why are you using a discredited matter as scientific proof?
Dak-Original

Belfast, UK

#2407 Jun 19, 2013
Uncle Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
That's funny, just opinions. The scientific evidence proves the Shroud of Turin is not a fake and cannot be explained by any manmade or natural occurrence. Please keep current on the science before posting.
Humbug posted by doesnot become "truth".
Uncle Sam

Beckley, WV

#2408 Jun 19, 2013
Dak-Original wrote:
<quoted text>
Humbug posted by doesnot become "truth".
Facts are facts. The scientific community can only say the Shroud of Turin's image is not made by man or of natural origin.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#2409 Jun 19, 2013
Uncle Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
That's funny, just opinions. The scientific evidence proves the Shroud of Turin is not a fake and cannot be explained by any manmade or natural occurrence. Please keep current on the science before posting.
Um, no it doesn't. Read the article again.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#2410 Jun 19, 2013
Uncle Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
Facts are facts. The scientific community can only say the Shroud of Turin's image is not made by man or of natural origin.
What? Are you really this deluded?

I'm calling Poe.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2411 Jun 19, 2013
Uncle Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
That's funny, just opinions. The scientific evidence proves the Shroud of Turin is not a fake and cannot be explained by any manmade or natural occurrence. Please keep current on the science before posting.
There *is* no current science about the shroud because there have not been additional samples taken from it in years. The samples previously taken show that the shroud is not 2000 years old, so it could not have been the burial shroud of Jesus (even if Jesus existed). Now, there are criticisms of the dating, but since without further samples, no firm date can be determined.

Also, the proportions on the shroud are not 'normal' proportions. Images very similar to what is found on the shroud have been made with medieval technologies. This, along with the age determined from samples taken, suggests that the shroud was made in the middle ages as an object of worship (something commonly done in Byzantine culture).

Finally, even if the shroud was dated to the time period of Jesus, it would in no way prove that the Gospels are correct. At *most* it would show that someone died in the manner described by some of the Gospels. It would not show the validity of the resurrection, or the validity of any of the teachings seen in the Gospels. Until we understand exactly how the image was formed, it cannot prove that Jesus was divine or resurrected.
Dak-Original

Belfast, UK

#2412 Jun 19, 2013
Uncle Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
Facts are facts. The scientific community can only say the Shroud of Turin's image is not made by man or of natural origin.
Lie! Where is your link? I saw a TV documentary where carbon dating indicated early middle ages - time when "witches" were burnt at stake.
Uncle Sam

Beckley, WV

#2413 Jun 19, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
There *is* no current science about the shroud because there have not been additional samples taken from it in years. The samples previously taken show that the shroud is not 2000 years old, so it could not have been the burial shroud of Jesus (even if Jesus existed). Now, there are criticisms of the dating, but since without further samples, no firm date can be determined.
Also, the proportions on the shroud are not 'normal' proportions. Images very similar to what is found on the shroud have been made with medieval technologies. This, along with the age determined from samples taken, suggests that the shroud was made in the middle ages as an object of worship (something commonly done in Byzantine culture).
Finally, even if the shroud was dated to the time period of Jesus, it would in no way prove that the Gospels are correct. At *most* it would show that someone died in the manner described by some of the Gospels. It would not show the validity of the resurrection, or the validity of any of the teachings seen in the Gospels. Until we understand exactly how the image was formed, it cannot prove that Jesus was divine or resurrected.
Since you believe in impossible odds, DNA synthesis by luck, then the statics showing the Shroud of Turin being the shroud of Jesus should be no problem with you in accepting. The odds of another person undergoing the same torture as depicted in the Gospels are meniscal.

There are many techniques for dating material other than carbon dating. Other techniques date the shroud to the first century. There is no need for me to post them hear since if you were a true objective scientist you would be able to discover this for yourself.

In the documentary that reproduced the face of Jesus from the shroud had no problem with proportions that could not be explained by normal stretching of the cloth.
Uncle Sam

Beckley, WV

#2414 Jun 19, 2013
Dak-Original wrote:
<quoted text>
Lie! Where is your link? I saw a TV documentary where carbon dating indicated early middle ages - time when "witches" were burnt at stake.
That is outdated findings and no longer accepted as valid by the scientific community. Do some research on new studies performed on the shroud.
Uncle Sam

Beckley, WV

#2415 Jun 19, 2013
Dak-Original wrote:
<quoted text>
Lie! Where is your link? I saw a TV documentary where carbon dating indicated early middle ages - time when "witches" were burnt at stake.
Do you know the definition of 'lie'?
Amused

Oakham, MA

#2416 Jun 19, 2013
Uncle Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you know the definition of 'lie'?
Lie: the sound that comes out when a fundamentalist or creationist opens his mouth.
LNC Llin

United States

#2417 Jun 19, 2013
FYI- How right wing circumvents Prayer in School

Nobody has yet studied the phenomenon, but there are some illustrative examples:
1• Student ministries that started before the school prayer ban, or just after, have expanded to reach tens of thousands of public school students. Since the mid-1960s, the Fellowship of Christian Athletes has established itself on more than 8,000 junior and high school campuses, many of them public. And Campus Crusade for Christ, founded in 1951 as a Christian ministry to college students in California and now known as Cru, has helped high school students start some 200 Christian clubs, almost all of them in public schools. Youth for Christ, an evangelical missionary organization in which broadcast-evangelist Billy Graham worked in the 1940s, began reaching out to high school and middle school students in the 1960s and '70s. It now has on- and off-campus clubs at 1,200 schools, most of them public.
2• At the elementary school level, religious instruction sometimes takes place right on campus in after-school programs. By far the most widespread and controversial, Good News Clubs hold Sunday school-like classes in some 3,200 public elementary schools. After-school Good News Clubs have grown from fewer than 17,000 participants in 2001 to more than 156,000 enrolled in 2012.
• "See You at the Pole" began in Texas with 10 Christian students praying around their school flagpole in 1990. It has blossomed into a yearly ritual involving 1 million to 2 million public school students nationwide meeting on a designated September morning before class.
• Informal Bible study groups have proliferated, judging from anecdotal reports, sometimes meeting on campus, sometimes at a coffee shop or someone's home.
• Over the past 10 to 15 years, Muslim and Jewish student clubs as well as clubs espousing agnostic, humanist perspectives have appeared on public school campuses. Among the oldest, the Hindu Student Association of Bellaire High School in suburban Houston attracted 700 people of many faiths at its Holi celebration in April.
• Students in interfaith groups like Youth LEAD in Sharon, Mass., may meet off-campus, but stage workshops and programs at school.
• Students are also carving out time to pray, whether Muslims fulfilling a religious obligation or Christians delivering on prayer requests during lunchtime.
• Some schools allow released-time programs: During class hours, students leave campus for Christian, Jewish, Mormon, or Islamic instruction – some even earn academic credit.
• Schools are increasingly including Christianity, Buddhism, Sikhism, Islam, and, in some cases, the Bible in their curricula because of concern over Americans' religious illiteracy.(A 2007 study found that only 10 percent of American teens could name the five major religions.)
Many welcome the growing presence of religion.
"If the public school is to prepare people to participate in a democracy," says Mike Waggoner, editor of Religion & Education, "students are going to require an understanding of Hindus, Muslims, atheists, various forms of Christians, and so forth."
Mr. Haynes concurs, noting, "It is on public school campuses that young people learn to live with and address differences." But, he warns, if religion is going to come on campus, it has to enter "through the First Amendment door."
This means that public schools and their staffs cannot violate the Establishment Clause of the US Constitution by fostering religious beliefs. But neither can they stifle students' constitutionally protected freedom of speech and free exercise of religion.
http://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/Family/2...
Uncle Sam

Beckley, WV

#2418 Jun 19, 2013
Amused wrote:
<quoted text>
Lie: the sound that comes out when a fundamentalist or creationist opens his mouth.
That was a bigoted statement. Look it up.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2419 Jun 19, 2013
Uncle Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
Since you believe in impossible odds, DNA synthesis by luck,
Who said I believe that? I believe in DNA synthesis from the laws of chemistry and physics. Those are not the same a 'luck'.
then the statics showing the Shroud of Turin being the shroud of Jesus should be no problem with you in accepting.
Statics? Statistics? What are you attempting to say here?
The odds of another person undergoing the same torture as depicted in the Gospels are meniscal.
On the contrary, it would be fairly common given the frequency of crucifixion in that area at that time. Also, it is quite possible that the
legend started with a real person, but grew to encompass miracles and supernatural aspects. I find it much more likely that the carbon dates are correct and that it is a medieval icon made for purposes of worship.
There are many techniques for dating material other than carbon dating. Other techniques date the shroud to the first century. There is no need for me to post them hear since if you were a true objective scientist you would be able to discover this for yourself.
I've seen them. I don't find them that convincing, especially since the carbon dates have such a small margin of error.
In the documentary that reproduced the face of Jesus from the shroud had no problem with proportions that could not be explained by normal stretching of the cloth.
The face isn't the issue. it is length of legs and arms.
Uncle Sam

Beckley, WV

#2420 Jun 19, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Who said I believe that? I believe in DNA synthesis from the laws of chemistry and physics. Those are not the same a 'luck'.
<quoted text>
Statics? Statistics? What are you attempting to say here?
<quoted text>
On the contrary, it would be fairly common given the frequency of crucifixion in that area at that time. Also, it is quite possible that the
legend started with a real person, but grew to encompass miracles and supernatural aspects. I find it much more likely that the carbon dates are correct and that it is a medieval icon made for purposes of worship.
<quoted text>
I've seen them. I don't find them that convincing, especially since the carbon dates have such a small margin of error.
<quoted text>
The face isn't the issue. it is length of legs and arms.
It's apparent you are not familiar with the research done on the Shroud of Turin and so cannot intelligently discuss it. You are just parroting what skeptics are saying and not looking at the scientific results. I suggest you study all the research done on the Shroud and get back with me.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 5 min The Northener 52,191
News Quotes from Famous Freethinkers (Aug '12) 21 min Eagle 12 1,671
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 23 min IB DaMann 492
News Louisiana Christians reclaim safe space by runn... 35 min Eagle 12 165
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 52 min scientia potentia... 24,885
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 1 hr IB DaMann 5,811
Merry Christmas!!! 2 hr Bayesian 32
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 2 hr Bible Believer 11,445
More from around the web