Atheist Islamophobia... Again

There are 20 comments on the Apr 9, 2013, Religion Dispatched story 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

#2520 Jun 21, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
And how was the carbon dating discredited? There has been a claim that the sample was taken from a medieval 'repair', but the original researchers deny that as a possibility.
Whether the image is from an artist (by far the most likely case) or a corpse (also possible; but a medieval, one if so) is irrelevant if the age is less than 1000 years.
Once again, without further samples being taken and analyzed, it is impossible to go further.
The date has been discredited and one would expect the original researches to deny they made a mistake. It is now accepted by creditable researchers the original dating was in wrong due to a sampling error.

Which is it: An image of a corpse or a painting? Now remember this is the 21st century with 21st century forensics. Are you telling me forensics cannot tell the difference? Do some research and give me a definitive answer.
Uncle Sam

Beckley, WV

#2521 Jun 21, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
The following does not rely on carbon dating to prove the shroud is a fake:" http://www.infidels.org/kiosk/article815.html... ;
Still drinking the Kool Aid.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#2522 Jun 21, 2013
Uncle Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
Still drinking the Kool Aid.
Your Jesus,(were he real) would say to you: "Satan, get thee behind me! I do not know you."

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#2523 Jun 21, 2013
Uncle Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
The date has been discredited and one would expect the original researches to deny they made a mistake.
By who? You?

You are no scientist. You can't even spell "scientist" without a spell-checker.

So who are these "experts" who discredited the fraudulent shroud?

Hmmm?

You keep blathering on-- but you cannot refute the FACT that the shroud, had it been around a person, would have been on a freak.

A giant-head, super-tall man with a limp and one arm freakishly longer than the other.

And?

According to Jewish Law at that time? HE WOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN PERMITTED INTO THE TEMPLE-- such "unclean" as a freak of nature were not allowed into Temple.

So your Jewsus could never have been a Rabbi, either...
Thinking

London, UK

#2524 Jun 21, 2013
Over here, we don't drink the processed krap kalled kool aid.[sic]
kool aid is a believer thing, right?
Uncle Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
Just as I thought, you just make stuff up and think you can sell it. You better try selling it to your kool aid buddies at the skeptic site.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#2525 Jun 21, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Over here, we don't drink the processed krap kalled kool aid.[sic]
kool aid is a believer thing, right?
<quoted text>
Indeed it is. Indeed it is.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#2526 Jun 21, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Over here, we don't drink the processed krap kalled kool aid.[sic]
kool aid is a believer thing, right?
<quoted text>
Why the [sic]? it is called Kool Aid...

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#2527 Jun 21, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Why the [sic]? it is called Kool Aid...
Google "Jonestown massacre"

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#2528 Jun 22, 2013
Uncle Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
The date has been discredited and one would expect the original researches to deny they made a mistake. It is now accepted by creditable researchers the original dating was in wrong due to a sampling error.
Which is it: An image of a corpse or a painting? Now remember this is the 21st century with 21st century forensics. Are you telling me forensics cannot tell the difference? Do some research and give me a definitive answer.
No it was not.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#2529 Jun 22, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Google "Jonestown massacre"
yeah, familiar with it and how they died, but why the [sic] in for Kool Aid what i was asking...

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2530 Jun 22, 2013
Uncle Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
The date has been discredited and one would expect the original researches to deny they made a mistake. It is now accepted by creditable researchers the original dating was in wrong due to a sampling error.
A creditable researcher seems to be one that agrees with your conclusions.
Which is it: An image of a corpse or a painting? Now remember this is the 21st century with 21st century forensics. Are you telling me forensics cannot tell the difference? Do some research and give me a definitive answer.
They cannot tell the difference unless they are allowed to take more samples. Given sufficient material to work with, they could probably come to a definite conclusion. But there are obvious reasons why larger samples are problematic. So the issue will be unresolved.
Uncle Sam

Beckley, WV

#2531 Jun 22, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
A creditable researcher seems to be one that agrees with your conclusions.
<quoted text>
They cannot tell the difference unless they are allowed to take more samples. Given sufficient material to work with, they could probably come to a definite conclusion. But there are obvious reasons why larger samples are problematic. So the issue will be unresolved.
There is plenty of data out there to determine if the image is that of a human corpse or a painting. Now do a little research and post the current consensus of forensic scientists.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#2532 Jun 22, 2013
Uncle Sam wrote:
<quoted text>
There is plenty of data out there to determine if the image is that of a human corpse or a painting. Now do a little research and post the current consensus of forensic scientists.
It is not the image of a corpse, that is the conclusion all data has offered.
LNC Llin

United States

#2533 Jun 22, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not the image of a corpse, that is the conclusion all data has offered.
Carbon dating has been used?

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#2534 Jun 22, 2013
LNC Llin wrote:
<quoted text>
Carbon dating has been used?
They only allowed it done once, which produced ages in the period of the Dark Ages, if I remember the period correctly. The people holding onto it won't allow any more tests done to it, which on it's own is telling that it's a scam. However, the inconsistencies with the stories and anthropology have shown it's no more reliable than ... well ... any of the "relics," really they are all idols, ironically
Amused

Lowell, MA

#2535 Jun 22, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Over here, we don't drink the processed krap kalled kool aid.[sic]
kool aid is a believer thing, right?
<quoted text>
Google "Reverend Jim Jones" and you will understand the reference.
LNC Llin

United States

#2536 Jun 22, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
They only allowed it done once, which produced ages in the period of the Dark Ages, if I remember the period correctly. The people holding onto it won't allow any more tests done to it, which on it's own is telling that it's a scam. However, the inconsistencies with the stories and anthropology have shown it's no more reliable than ... well ... any of the "relics," really they are all idols, ironically
Thats is what I remember as well. 12 century?

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#2537 Jun 22, 2013
LNC Llin wrote:
<quoted text>
Thats is what I remember as well. 12 century?
I believe so, as I said, I'm probably wrong on the specific time it was found to be, I don't need more evidence than their unwillingness to have it tested to know it's a fraud.
Thinking

London, UK

#2539 Jun 22, 2013
The [sic] was to cover my use of "krap" and "kalled".
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>yeah, familiar with it and how they died, but why the [sic] in for Kool Aid what i was asking...
Thinking

London, UK

#2540 Jun 22, 2013
Leave Jephtah’s daughter's ashes alone you sicko.
LNC Llin wrote:
<quoted text>
Carbon dating has been used?

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 Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 16 min Eagle 12 238,075
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 2 hr Zog Has-fallen 18,670
News Who is an atheist? (May '10) 2 hr Richardfs 9,319
News Atheists open up: What they want you to know 3 hr Liam R will return 31
News The Consequences of Atheism 3 hr Liam R will return 1,311
News Confessions of a black atheist 3 hr Peaks 399
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 18 hr thetruth 2,059
More from around the web