Teaching Science Badly – and Well
Pervez Hoodbhoy March 1, 2007
#245 Posted by Artur on January 2, 2009 3:29:00 pm
I share your concerns. The Western world, once the bastion of Christianity, now find themselves in a post-Christian world. This is because the enemy has become our friend. The enemy that has caused this to happen is the atheistic evolutionary views forced upon our science curriculum by the materialists who have taken over our education system.
In Europe it began with Charles Lyell and his uniformatarian geology followed by Lyell's most famous pupil, Charles Darwin.
I write this with much regret as I have always loved science, and at the City University of New York, I earned degrees in Physics, Math, Electrical Engineering, and History.
Science, as taught in schools today, is set upon a pedestal. Nearly all hold it in high regard and none ever thinks it a danger, and we give up our children to it freely. And after all, look what is has done for us. Television, airplanes, movies, games, high tech devices, advances in medicine, medical treatment, and fighting diseases.
Yet, the enforced evolutionary curriculum teaches something else that few are aware of or even think about. It requires students are taught that all we see, hear, feel, and observe occurred by chance effects. That God does not exist, or if He does exist, He is irrelevant. It teaches that God has no place in the education system, that all life and all non-life events have arisen by chance occurences. That all human beliefs have risen anthropologically, that belief in a god or many gods were merely the early efforts of humans to make sense out of a world they did not understand, and that this led to many supestitions that were taught to offspring as fact.
Because of the great advances, gadgets and conveniences science has brought into our lives, particulaly over the past century, we trusted all science. So we give our children up to twenty years of Schooling at public institutions without a blink of the eye, and it is there that our children are learning that God does not exist and that all human beliefs and values are equivalent and man made. That man is the ultimate authority in the universe. If God does exist, then He is irrelevant, for we already know how humans and everything else came into existence by chance molecular events. That humans are the highest authorities that exist in our local portion of the universe. Even Parochial Schools teach the materialistic evolutionary theories as fact.
Charles Lyell, Author of the Theory of Uniformitarian Geology, founded this theory with the goal of overthrowing the then current widely held Biblical Geology of the great flood. His training was as a Lawyer, but upon graduation, he was filled with a passion to overthrow this Geology of the Bible. His aim was to remove God from having anything to do with the origin of the Earth and its' geological formations.
In His encyclopedic "Principles of Uniformatarian Geology" Charles Lyell not only undermined the bible's Mosaic geology, he also come very close to describing the slow evolution of life over long ages through natural selection. Some biographers even questioned why Lyell failed to come to the conclusions that Charles Darwin arrived at some thirty years later. The reason was quite simple, Lyell was overjoyed how his plot to overthrow Biblical geology was advancing and being accepted and feared that an attempt at this time (early 1830's) to remove God from being the author of life would jeopardize the growing acceptance of his alternate to Biblical geology.
Charles Lyell was Charles Darwin's mentor. Charle's Darwin confessed well after the wide acceptance of his theory that he never gave Lyell enough credit in the founding of his theory, that much of it came out of the mind of Lyell. It was Darwin's Theory that removed God from being the author of life, and Darwin very adamant about God having nothing to do with it. Charles Darwin believed Christianity to be a damnable and destable religion. Now his anti-God evolutionary views are taught as fact in public schoools and even in Christian schools.
The following are excerpts From http://www.khouse.org/articles/2001/365/
The successes of Lyell, Darwin and Thomas Huxley emboldened the atheistic 'Humanists' to take over the school systems in England and Europe in the 19th Century.
In America, starting in 1933, American President Franklyn Delano Roosevelt, Gave control of the American School Systems to the atheistic humanists, led by the prominent educator John Dewey. He pushed Christianity out of the Public School System and replaced it with his atheistic 'Pragmatism'.
At that time, another leading atheists wrote:
"Education is thus a most powerful ally of humanism. What can the theistic Sunday schools, meeting for an hour once a week, and teaching only a fraction of the children, do to stem the tide of a five-day program of humanistic teaching?"
-1933, Charles Francis Potter, Humanism, A New Religion 1
Kaboom! A rousing first shot across the bow had been fired. Humanists declared their intention of transforming western culture and moving it from its Christian base into the enlightened religion of humanism. In 1933, when Humanist Manifesto I appeared, its co-author John Dewey was made honorary president of the National Education Association (US). The manifesto itself stated that:
There is no God and no soul. Hence there are no needs for the props of traditional religion. With dogma and creed excluded, the immutable truth is also dead and buried. There is no room for fixed, natural law or permanent moral absolutes. 2 ...
... In the early part of the battle, humanists did not meet a lot of resistance, since Christians for the most part remained oblivious to the fact that there even was a battle or that spiritual battles play out in the physical arena. As a group, Christians were more than happy to walk off the battlefield in the name of "just teaching the Bible" or doing the "work of the Kingdom," as if there would be no moral consequences to their dereliction of duty. The consequences, however, have been staggering - from abortion to the loss of faith in millions of children.
In 1932, William Z. Foster, head of the Communist Party USA, published a book entitled Toward Soviet America , where he predicted that:
....
Class ideologies of the past will give place to scientific materialist philosophy. Among the elementary measures the American Soviet government will adopt to further the cultural revolution are the following: the schools, colleges and universities will be coordinated and grouped under the National Department of Education and its state and local branches. The studies will be revolutionized, being cleansed of religious, patriotic and other features of the bourgeoisie ideology. The students will be taught on the basis of Marxian dialectical materialism [now the absolute basis of consensus use in all government procedures], internationalism [today called "globalism"] and the general ethics of the new socialist society [which virtually all English-speaking countries have become]…Freedom will be established for anti-religious propaganda…Science will become materialistic…God will be banished from the laboratories as well as from the schools. 4
By mid-century, humanists had gained a chokehold on most institutions of higher learning. By 1938, the New York Herald Tribune reported a speech by Dr. Goodwin Watson, professor of Education at Teachers College, Columbia University, where he "begged the teachers of the Nation to use their profession to indoctrinate children to overthrow 'conservative reactionaries' directing American government and industry."6
In his 1951 book, God and Man at Yale , William F. Buckley, Jr. commented that:
"The teachings of John Dewey and his predecessors have borne fruit. And there is surely not a department at Yale that is uncontaminated with the absolute that there are no absolutes, on intrinsic rights, no ultimate truths. The acceptance of these notions, which emerge in courses in history and economics, in sociology and political science, in psychology and literature, make impossible an intelligible conception of an omnipotent, purposeful, and benign Supreme Being, who has laid down immutable laws, endowed his creatures with inalienable rights, and posited unchangeable rules of human conduct .7"
And what of the Church during this time? There were a limited number of Protestant and Catholic voices fighting the war, but generally the Church droned on mechanically with its disconnected Biblical or catechistic studies as the humanist juggernaut rolled forward. History was rewritten and Christian contributions to history, especially freedom and self rule, were eliminated or denigrated. Other events were rewritten and Christian or other religious ideas were ridiculed and banned. Patriotism was banned. Marxist, socialist, and humanist ideas took solid root as Christianity was chased out of the marketplace of ideas with little resistance. Christian morals were publicly denigrated and rejected. The Church seemed oblivious that this radical change in public education was putting the faith of millions of its youth in dire peril. "Let's just have another Bible study" was the cry.
The second half of the 20th century bore witness to the danger, as humanism took over the major organs of education, media and politics, and the youth began to fall away from even Bible-believing churches in droves after receiving years of humanist indoctrination in government schools. Those who remained, while not totally abandoning their faith, began to have a belief system which was an admixture of conflicting worldviews.
Absolute truth was replaced by relative truth. Indeed, the belief in no absolutes has remained the greatest challenge to faith because it totally undermines any basis for belief in a God, His Word, His Law or His salvation. As a matter of fact, if there are no absolutes, how can we know anything absolutely? How is it possible to even say absolutely there are no absolutes if nothing can be known absolutely? It's an absurdity. Nevertheless, millions of Christians have adopted this into their belief systems.
The problem we have in America is that 93% of the members of the National Academy of Sciences do not believe in God. They control the textbooks and how science ought to be taught to students in the public schools. And they insist on teaching a falsfied Theories of Evolution as a fact,and they do this because they do not believe any God exist, thus they reason, Evolution must be a fact. This reasoning is very unscientific and, in fact, it is a religiously held position on their part.
Pakistan ought to update their science and engineering curriculums, but do not let any religiously held views, be they atheism, humanism, Christianity, or Islam control the curriculum. Let Science be Science, math be math, etc. and let it be fun and awe inspiring for the students. Beware of the evolutionists!
In Europe it began with Charles Lyell and his uniformatarian geology followed by Lyell's most famous pupil, Charles Darwin.
I write this with much regret as I have always loved science, and at the City University of New York, I earned degrees in Physics, Math, Electrical Engineering, and History.
Science, as taught in schools today, is set upon a pedestal. Nearly all hold it in high regard and none ever thinks it a danger, and we give up our children to it freely. And after all, look what is has done for us. Television, airplanes, movies, games, high tech devices, advances in medicine, medical treatment, and fighting diseases.
Yet, the enforced evolutionary curriculum teaches something else that few are aware of or even think about. It requires students are taught that all we see, hear, feel, and observe occurred by chance effects. That God does not exist, or if He does exist, He is irrelevant. It teaches that God has no place in the education system, that all life and all non-life events have arisen by chance occurences. That all human beliefs have risen anthropologically, that belief in a god or many gods were merely the early efforts of humans to make sense out of a world they did not understand, and that this led to many supestitions that were taught to offspring as fact.
Because of the great advances, gadgets and conveniences science has brought into our lives, particulaly over the past century, we trusted all science. So we give our children up to twenty years of Schooling at public institutions without a blink of the eye, and it is there that our children are learning that God does not exist and that all human beliefs and values are equivalent and man made. That man is the ultimate authority in the universe. If God does exist, then He is irrelevant, for we already know how humans and everything else came into existence by chance molecular events. That humans are the highest authorities that exist in our local portion of the universe. Even Parochial Schools teach the materialistic evolutionary theories as fact.
Charles Lyell, Author of the Theory of Uniformitarian Geology, founded this theory with the goal of overthrowing the then current widely held Biblical Geology of the great flood. His training was as a Lawyer, but upon graduation, he was filled with a passion to overthrow this Geology of the Bible. His aim was to remove God from having anything to do with the origin of the Earth and its' geological formations.
In His encyclopedic "Principles of Uniformatarian Geology" Charles Lyell not only undermined the bible's Mosaic geology, he also come very close to describing the slow evolution of life over long ages through natural selection. Some biographers even questioned why Lyell failed to come to the conclusions that Charles Darwin arrived at some thirty years later. The reason was quite simple, Lyell was overjoyed how his plot to overthrow Biblical geology was advancing and being accepted and feared that an attempt at this time (early 1830's) to remove God from being the author of life would jeopardize the growing acceptance of his alternate to Biblical geology.
Charles Lyell was Charles Darwin's mentor. Charle's Darwin confessed well after the wide acceptance of his theory that he never gave Lyell enough credit in the founding of his theory, that much of it came out of the mind of Lyell. It was Darwin's Theory that removed God from being the author of life, and Darwin very adamant about God having nothing to do with it. Charles Darwin believed Christianity to be a damnable and destable religion. Now his anti-God evolutionary views are taught as fact in public schoools and even in Christian schools.
The following are excerpts From http://www.khouse.org/articles/2001/365/
The successes of Lyell, Darwin and Thomas Huxley emboldened the atheistic 'Humanists' to take over the school systems in England and Europe in the 19th Century.
In America, starting in 1933, American President Franklyn Delano Roosevelt, Gave control of the American School Systems to the atheistic humanists, led by the prominent educator John Dewey. He pushed Christianity out of the Public School System and replaced it with his atheistic 'Pragmatism'.
At that time, another leading atheists wrote:
"Education is thus a most powerful ally of humanism. What can the theistic Sunday schools, meeting for an hour once a week, and teaching only a fraction of the children, do to stem the tide of a five-day program of humanistic teaching?"
-1933, Charles Francis Potter, Humanism, A New Religion 1
Kaboom! A rousing first shot across the bow had been fired. Humanists declared their intention of transforming western culture and moving it from its Christian base into the enlightened religion of humanism. In 1933, when Humanist Manifesto I appeared, its co-author John Dewey was made honorary president of the National Education Association (US). The manifesto itself stated that:
There is no God and no soul. Hence there are no needs for the props of traditional religion. With dogma and creed excluded, the immutable truth is also dead and buried. There is no room for fixed, natural law or permanent moral absolutes. 2 ...
... In the early part of the battle, humanists did not meet a lot of resistance, since Christians for the most part remained oblivious to the fact that there even was a battle or that spiritual battles play out in the physical arena. As a group, Christians were more than happy to walk off the battlefield in the name of "just teaching the Bible" or doing the "work of the Kingdom," as if there would be no moral consequences to their dereliction of duty. The consequences, however, have been staggering - from abortion to the loss of faith in millions of children.
In 1932, William Z. Foster, head of the Communist Party USA, published a book entitled Toward Soviet America , where he predicted that:
....
Class ideologies of the past will give place to scientific materialist philosophy. Among the elementary measures the American Soviet government will adopt to further the cultural revolution are the following: the schools, colleges and universities will be coordinated and grouped under the National Department of Education and its state and local branches. The studies will be revolutionized, being cleansed of religious, patriotic and other features of the bourgeoisie ideology. The students will be taught on the basis of Marxian dialectical materialism [now the absolute basis of consensus use in all government procedures], internationalism [today called "globalism"] and the general ethics of the new socialist society [which virtually all English-speaking countries have become]…Freedom will be established for anti-religious propaganda…Science will become materialistic…God will be banished from the laboratories as well as from the schools. 4
By mid-century, humanists had gained a chokehold on most institutions of higher learning. By 1938, the New York Herald Tribune reported a speech by Dr. Goodwin Watson, professor of Education at Teachers College, Columbia University, where he "begged the teachers of the Nation to use their profession to indoctrinate children to overthrow 'conservative reactionaries' directing American government and industry."6
In his 1951 book, God and Man at Yale , William F. Buckley, Jr. commented that:
"The teachings of John Dewey and his predecessors have borne fruit. And there is surely not a department at Yale that is uncontaminated with the absolute that there are no absolutes, on intrinsic rights, no ultimate truths. The acceptance of these notions, which emerge in courses in history and economics, in sociology and political science, in psychology and literature, make impossible an intelligible conception of an omnipotent, purposeful, and benign Supreme Being, who has laid down immutable laws, endowed his creatures with inalienable rights, and posited unchangeable rules of human conduct .7"
And what of the Church during this time? There were a limited number of Protestant and Catholic voices fighting the war, but generally the Church droned on mechanically with its disconnected Biblical or catechistic studies as the humanist juggernaut rolled forward. History was rewritten and Christian contributions to history, especially freedom and self rule, were eliminated or denigrated. Other events were rewritten and Christian or other religious ideas were ridiculed and banned. Patriotism was banned. Marxist, socialist, and humanist ideas took solid root as Christianity was chased out of the marketplace of ideas with little resistance. Christian morals were publicly denigrated and rejected. The Church seemed oblivious that this radical change in public education was putting the faith of millions of its youth in dire peril. "Let's just have another Bible study" was the cry.
The second half of the 20th century bore witness to the danger, as humanism took over the major organs of education, media and politics, and the youth began to fall away from even Bible-believing churches in droves after receiving years of humanist indoctrination in government schools. Those who remained, while not totally abandoning their faith, began to have a belief system which was an admixture of conflicting worldviews.
Absolute truth was replaced by relative truth. Indeed, the belief in no absolutes has remained the greatest challenge to faith because it totally undermines any basis for belief in a God, His Word, His Law or His salvation. As a matter of fact, if there are no absolutes, how can we know anything absolutely? How is it possible to even say absolutely there are no absolutes if nothing can be known absolutely? It's an absurdity. Nevertheless, millions of Christians have adopted this into their belief systems.
The problem we have in America is that 93% of the members of the National Academy of Sciences do not believe in God. They control the textbooks and how science ought to be taught to students in the public schools. And they insist on teaching a falsfied Theories of Evolution as a fact,and they do this because they do not believe any God exist, thus they reason, Evolution must be a fact. This reasoning is very unscientific and, in fact, it is a religiously held position on their part.
Pakistan ought to update their science and engineering curriculums, but do not let any religiously held views, be they atheism, humanism, Christianity, or Islam control the curriculum. Let Science be Science, math be math, etc. and let it be fun and awe inspiring for the students. Beware of the evolutionists!
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#244 Posted by echoboom on July 24, 2007 7:39:12 pm
Maroc Liberté, Radio Islam, Ahmed RAMI, Faisal Al Kasim, AL JAZEERA TV CHANNEL,
- radioislam.org , radioislam.net , abbc.net .
Morocco. Maghreb, Monde arabe. Palestine. Islam. Farrakhan. Judaïsme, Sionisme.
Pour: un Front Islamique de liberation du Maroc. Pour une
révolution islamique pourlaliberté au Maroc. Pour un mouvement islamique uni auMaroc.Pour plus de liberté
et moins d´interdits! Dansl´Islam: la liberté
estla régle, l´interdit est l´exception.Islam.Islam.Islam.Islam.Islam.Islam.Islam.Islam.Islam.Islam.Isl am.Islam.Islam.Islam.Islam.Islam.Islam.Islam.Islam.Islam.Islam.Islam.Islam.
Les grands ne sont grands que parce que
nous sommes à genoux. - Levons-nous!
You
are what you know and what
you do with what you know
No hate. No
violence
Races? Only
one Human race
United We
Stand, Divided We Fall
Freedom of
Speech - Use it or lose it!
--Know
Your enemy!
--No
time to waste. Act now!
Tomorrow it
will be too late
What You
Don´t Know Can Kill You!
This Site is owned by a group of freedom fighters from different
countries in support of
Ahmed
Rami 's struggle
(Email)
Choose
a language:
French
Deutsch
Swedish
Russian
Spanish
Italian-
Nederlands
Indonesian
SSerb
Polish
Norsk
Arabic
Suomi
Danish
Roman
Slovakien
Czech
Hungarian
Portugues
Croat
Bulgar
Latest
additions:
English
French
Russian
German
Svenska
Nederlands
Portugues
Italian
Arabic
Spanish
Suomi
Danish
Czech
Slovakien
www
radioislam.org
Some chosen
topics
When...
Jewish children
send 'love'
messages
< b>(Jewish Photos)
US
War Without End for Israel ?
رسالة
مفتوحة الى
محمد السادس
أحمد
رامي يتحدث لجريدة الأيام
What
is
Islam?
La
tragédie marocaine
Act
now
إنها
كارثة أمة
تتآكل أمامنا ونحن لاهون أو ساكتون
!
ما الحل
وما
العمل؟< /b>
مقالات للكاتب فهمي هويدي
المعبرة عن نبض وهموم الأمة
A
plot against Radio
Islam
French
|
English
|
German
|
Swedish
|
Portug
|
Italian
Caricatures
Photos
This
Site
Quotes
Letters
Forum
Myrdal
Islam
Authors
Khamenei
Nasser
Ben
Bella
Rami
Farrakhan
Franklin
Thion
Yassine
Witness
Sindi
Intifada
Faurisson
Marx
Luther
Hitler
Shahak
Garaudy
Koestler
Remer
Ford
Yahya
Bush
Graf
Medias
Newspapers
Who?
Conspiracy
Revisionism
Victims
Books
Catechism
Protocols
US-Congress
Talmud
Israel
Judaism
Nazism
Capitol
War
Peace
Crime
Enemy
Right
Jews
Mossad
Khazar
Drugs
ADL
History
When
Zion
Islamism
Links
USA
Russia
Germany
England
France
Turkey
Maroc
Morocco
Tragédie
Lebanon
Sweden
Sverige
Suisse
Time
Massacres
Iran
Domination
Democracy
False
Money
Resistance
Nätverk
Ahmed
Rami on Al Jazeera:
What is
going on in Morocco?
L´ensemble
du Monde Arabe occupé par les
juifs!?
Abdeslam
Yassine:
Sorti de la petite à la grande
prison: sa lettre
au nouveau
gardien de la prison
|
French
|
English
|
Deutsch
|
Spanish
|
Arabic
|
|
U.S.Interest
|
Media
|
"Peace"|< b>
Zionism
|
Intifada |
Quotes |Sanctions
|
|
Crime |
Lebanon
|
|
Resources
|
Books
|
Domination |
External Links
|
USA´s Rulers:
All Are
Jews!
Palestinians won't get their independence
until Americans get
theirs!
Jewish
Power in
Russia
Farrakhan on
Jewish
Racism
The
Ideology behind
Massacres
Heros
Farrakhan
|
Franklin
Freedom
fighters
|
Yassine
|
Rami
|
Marx
on Jews
|
french
| English
|
Svenska
|
Garaudy:
The Resistance
|
English
|
French |
Deutsch
|
Svenska
|
Christianity:
The Resistance
|
English
|
French
|
Deutsch
|
Svenska
|
Portug
|
Islam:
The Resistance
|
English
|
French
|
Deutsch
|
Svenska
|
Portug
|
Portug
|
Russian
|
Did
Six Million Really Die?
|
English
|
French
|
Deutsch
|
Svenska
|
Danske
|
Russian
|Portug.|
Judaism, Nazism, Islam
Read, compare and judge
yourself
Judaism
The
Protocols of Zion
|English
|
French
|
Deutsch
|
Svenska
|
Portug
|
Russian
|
Spanish
|
Italian |
Danish
|
Arabic
|
Hungarian
|
Serb
|
Polish
|
Croat
|
Racism,Domination,Occupation
|
English |
French |
Deutsch
|
Svenska |
Portug |
Russian |
Spanish
|
Nazism
The
testament of Adolf
Hitler
|
French |
English |
German |
Italian |
Spanish |
Norsk
|
Mein Kampf
|
French |
English |
German |
Svenska
|
Nederlands
|
Hungarian
Bulgarian
Portugues
Czech Spanish
Russia
Finnish
pdf-files
English
German
Italian
Nederland's
Polish
Slovak
Bulgarian
Islam
What
is
Islam?
Rami
and
Rushdie.
Islam
et liberté
The
moral and political
Legitimacy
of Criticizing
Jewry
The
Jewish war against
Islam
and
the Islamic Resistance
It
is time to see the REAL enemy
!
We
should step up strugle against
Zionism
It
is not just enough to know that we are
right
The Jewish
"Peace Talks"
Jewish
Grip
on
American Film and
Television Promotes
Bias
Against
Muslims
By
Abdullah
Mohammad Sindi
Jewish
medias
The
Jewish Lies: Jewish Propaganda
Islam and the West
By
Dr.
Abdullah Mohammad Sindi
Shahak about: Judaism
FrenchLes
Juifs sans
masque
SwedishShahak
om judar
GermanJüdische
Religion
The
Jewish
Laundry
of
drug
Money
TheIdeology Behind
Massacres
JewishHistory, Jewish
Religion
AboutShahak´s "Jewish
History..."
Jewishhatred towards
Christianity
From Hebrew-LanguageNewspapers
WhoRun USA
?
IsraelVersus Iran chapter
IsraeliPolicies Toward Iran and
Syria
Israel'sStrategic Aims and Nuclear
Weapons
SyrianCities and Relations with
Irak
IsraeliForeign Policy after the
Oslo
IsraeliForeign Policies, August
1994
Israeland the Organized American
Jews
JewishLobby in the US and the Iran
Affair
Our
weakness
We must know that
our weakness is Israel's strength.
The regimes that are in
power in our countries are like dead bodies, our "leaders"
are politically finished. Instead of stepping down in honor,
they cling bitterly to power and try to drag their peoples
along into the precipice.
In the first
place, we must conquer tyranny, decadence and corruption in
our own hearts and in our countries! Instead of giving up,
we must work seriously to create the economic, political,
military and social conditions for the future victory of the
Justice.
The future belongs
to the forces of Islam. The Hezbullah, Hamas and the Jihad
are the Islamic response to the Zionist challenge. The Islam
began in the 6th century as a cultural, and spiritual
movement against the superpowers of that
time.
The military
strength of the Islam grew as a consequence of its spiritual
strength. Today, capitulating before the jewish arrogance is
not a solution; it is betraying the future
generations.
If we can not
create victory today, we muste not create defeat ourselves.
The least We can do is to capitulate without resisting.
Any
"solution" violently extorted, any unjust "peace"
(capitulation) will be rejected by the future generations.
The only real solution of the Palestinian question lies in
the return of the Palestinian people to their
fatherland.
Ahmed
Rami
Nos
voleurs!
Il y a des
problèmes extrêmes où nous nous
debattons et que nous avons trop tardé à
regarder en face. A la différence des pays
occidentaux, nos "pays musulmans" ne connaissent que peu de
hold-up de banques.
C'est que les
voleurs d'envergure savent qu'aujourd'hui, dans nos pays, la
source d'enrichissement la plus sûre, la plus rapide,
la seule à vrai dire, est le pouvoir.
À titre
d´exemple : le systeme féodal (makhzen) - qui
n´a rien à voir avec l´Islam - que Hassan
II a pérpétué anachroniquement au Maroc
en plein XXe siècle - fait de la corruption
généralisée un systhème de
gouvernement. Le régime de Hassan II constitue, pour
notre pays, pour notre peuple et pour notre avenir un danger
mortel réel.
Face à ce
danger et à son défi, il n y a, devant nous,
qu´une seule alternative et une seule réponse:
une révolution islamique radicale,
éclairée, intelligente, tolérante et
liberatrce! En Islam, la liberté est
la
régle.
L´interdit est l´exception.
Il s´impose,
AUJOURD´HUI,
urgence et nécessité vitale de créer un
FRONT
ISLAMIQUE UNI POUR
LA LIBERATION
DU MAROC.
Les
grands ne sont grands que parce que nous sommes
à genoux. Levons-nous!
Ahmed
Rami
"
War is
ugly, but to be dominated is still uglier
"
Imam
Khomeini
"The
Old and New Testaments had collided. The rabbi's dad had
taught him about an eye for an eye - or 20 homes for a
stone, in this case - whereas my dad had taught me about
turning the other cheek. Judaism and Christianity had
collided. So was it any surprise that Judaism and Islam were
colliding"
R.
Fisk, The Independent, 29 août
2001
"Everyone
has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this
right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference
and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas
through any media and regardless of
frontiers."
Article
19. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on December
10, 1948,
Pay
attention!
This web Domain is on a freedomserver, which works against
censorship.
The contents of this Site are
the responsibility of its creators, not of the Server Provider.
©
NO
COPYRIGHT.-
All
texts
published or put
online
in this Site may be freely republished, reproduced or
translated
as long as
Radio Islam where they are located is
mentioned.
This
Site is owned by a group of freedom fighters from
different countries in supportof
Ahmed
Rami
's
struggle.
(Email)
#243 Posted by khuram on March 20, 2007 10:36:58 am
[...] ... ``II. Second, good teachers must emphasize learning rather than teaching. The two are different. Learning is a process that progresses from the concrete to the abstract as cognitive abilities slowly improve. But students first need to get acquainted with the things around them such as devices, organisms, materials, shapes, and numbers. They must observe them, collect them, handle them, describe them, become puzzled by them, ask questions about them, argue about them, and then to try to find answers to their questions. Abstractions develop after these experiences, not before.`` ... [...]
Sir, in my assessment, science study is really boring because above mentioned things are really missing in our science education.
Perhaps the reason for it lies in an internal contradiction of science itself. Which is following:
[...] ... There cannot be airy-fairy discussions of things. Science refuses to offer an opinion on things that are unobservable, or whose existence is impossible to verify even in principle. What you cannot see may still actually be there, but science is going to be mum about it. It’s as simple as that. ... [...]
My opinion is that Galileo was able to perform experiments on projectile motion and falling objects of different weights mainly because the first phase of this process i.e. ``airy-fairy`` discussions about characteristics of falling objects already had taken place in ancient Greece. Galileo`s achievement was only that he tried to test those ``airy-fairy`` ideas using experimental techniques. My own ``airy-fairy`` idea is that in order to do any experiment whatsoever, at first we need an ``idea`` that may need confirmation, clarification, comprehension or better to say, ``experimental verification``. You have discussed ``hypothesis`` as one of the roots of scientific method. How this ``hypothesis`` is different from an ``airy-fairy`` idea? I think the only difference is that ``hypothesis`` is such ``airy-fairy`` idea which is intended to be experimentally verified. Science is really boring because it is unduly narrowing down its own field/scope. It is denying the importance of subjective ideas. Attitude of science towards subjective ideas is like as if subjective ideas do not exist at all. On the other hand, science claims to be the knowledge of those entities that exist. Science says what cannot be measured, cannot be studied. What cannot be studied, should be ignored and only those entities should be studied that will be left after having ignored many existing entities. Science avoids seeing things in their totality. It emphasizes on ``measurements`` which means that science deals only with ``parts`` of things. Science makes some ``amazing`` attempts to ``measure`` some non-measurable entities as well. Science claims to measure let`s say, ``intelligence``. According to science, this person has this particular number of IQ, and that person has that particular number of IQ. Why? Because those two persons performed differently in a similar nature test...!!! Science says those two persons should have been given similar nature test because they were having same age. In all this process, science ignores many other processes simply because science doesn`t want to study them, may be by calling those processes ``non-measurable``. Science has no explanation that how a lower IQ person can have some edge over higher IQ person in any particular field. Science does not even want to study these matters. Why study of science be not boring...???
Regards!
Sir, in my assessment, science study is really boring because above mentioned things are really missing in our science education.
Perhaps the reason for it lies in an internal contradiction of science itself. Which is following:
[...] ... There cannot be airy-fairy discussions of things. Science refuses to offer an opinion on things that are unobservable, or whose existence is impossible to verify even in principle. What you cannot see may still actually be there, but science is going to be mum about it. It’s as simple as that. ... [...]
My opinion is that Galileo was able to perform experiments on projectile motion and falling objects of different weights mainly because the first phase of this process i.e. ``airy-fairy`` discussions about characteristics of falling objects already had taken place in ancient Greece. Galileo`s achievement was only that he tried to test those ``airy-fairy`` ideas using experimental techniques. My own ``airy-fairy`` idea is that in order to do any experiment whatsoever, at first we need an ``idea`` that may need confirmation, clarification, comprehension or better to say, ``experimental verification``. You have discussed ``hypothesis`` as one of the roots of scientific method. How this ``hypothesis`` is different from an ``airy-fairy`` idea? I think the only difference is that ``hypothesis`` is such ``airy-fairy`` idea which is intended to be experimentally verified. Science is really boring because it is unduly narrowing down its own field/scope. It is denying the importance of subjective ideas. Attitude of science towards subjective ideas is like as if subjective ideas do not exist at all. On the other hand, science claims to be the knowledge of those entities that exist. Science says what cannot be measured, cannot be studied. What cannot be studied, should be ignored and only those entities should be studied that will be left after having ignored many existing entities. Science avoids seeing things in their totality. It emphasizes on ``measurements`` which means that science deals only with ``parts`` of things. Science makes some ``amazing`` attempts to ``measure`` some non-measurable entities as well. Science claims to measure let`s say, ``intelligence``. According to science, this person has this particular number of IQ, and that person has that particular number of IQ. Why? Because those two persons performed differently in a similar nature test...!!! Science says those two persons should have been given similar nature test because they were having same age. In all this process, science ignores many other processes simply because science doesn`t want to study them, may be by calling those processes ``non-measurable``. Science has no explanation that how a lower IQ person can have some edge over higher IQ person in any particular field. Science does not even want to study these matters. Why study of science be not boring...???
Regards!
#242 Posted by Afreina on March 8, 2007 12:56:02 am
It`s mostly because the teachers who teach science at school lack the passion themselves. I remember having a Physics teacher from PINSTECH and she loved her subject. We called her a nutty professor but at the end of the day it was her passion and zeal for her subject which intrigued us and we started to see Physics with the same fascination as she did.
Such teachers are rare, and we were extremely lucky.
However I personally do NOT think there is anything wrong with the Pakistani curriculum, the fault lies in the examination criterion and style.
Such teachers are rare, and we were extremely lucky.
However I personally do NOT think there is anything wrong with the Pakistani curriculum, the fault lies in the examination criterion and style.
#241 Posted by krishna_abcd on March 7, 2007 11:49:01 pm
#240 by SR
[Man`s capacity to delude himself and his willingness to be deluded is limited only by his imagination.
You should know this by now, your pseudonym has the answer embeded in it. i.e., ``abcd``
These are the four kinds of people (based on their belief structure).
a) atheists and agnostics ... those who don`t buy into any of it. ....]
One small correction:
Agnostics are defined as follows:
Agnosticism (from the Greek a, meaning ``without`` and gnosis, ``knowledge``, translating to unknowable) is the philosophical view that the truth value of certain claims—particularly theological claims regarding metaphysics, afterlife or the existence of God, god(s), or deities—is unknown or (possibly) inherently unknowable.
Agnostics claim either that it is not possible to have absolute or certain knowledge or, alternatively, that while certainty may be possible, they personally have no knowledge. Agnosticism in both cases involves some form of skepticism.
The second category of Agnostics are the most honest - they profess not to know.
[Man`s capacity to delude himself and his willingness to be deluded is limited only by his imagination.
You should know this by now, your pseudonym has the answer embeded in it. i.e., ``abcd``
These are the four kinds of people (based on their belief structure).
a) atheists and agnostics ... those who don`t buy into any of it. ....]
One small correction:
Agnostics are defined as follows:
Agnosticism (from the Greek a, meaning ``without`` and gnosis, ``knowledge``, translating to unknowable) is the philosophical view that the truth value of certain claims—particularly theological claims regarding metaphysics, afterlife or the existence of God, god(s), or deities—is unknown or (possibly) inherently unknowable.
Agnostics claim either that it is not possible to have absolute or certain knowledge or, alternatively, that while certainty may be possible, they personally have no knowledge. Agnosticism in both cases involves some form of skepticism.
The second category of Agnostics are the most honest - they profess not to know.
#240 Posted by SR on March 7, 2007 5:42:58 pm
Re: # 190 krishna-abcd {``...To each his own, eh? No right and wrong, no fact and fiction? Believe what you want? ... how, ... you can still believe what you want to believe. How do you do it? ...`` }
Man`s capacity to delude himself and his willingness to be deluded is limited only by his imagination.
You should know this by now, your pseudonym has the answer embeded in it. i.e., ``abcd``
These are the four kinds of people (based on their belief structure).
a) atheists and agnostics ... those who don`t buy into any of it.
b) borderline ... those who think they don`t believe, but relapse when in crisis or those who think they do believe but when the chips are down and it comes time to take action they opt for the rational.
c) conservatives ... those who fully believe and have faith.
d) die-hards ... those who fit the media generated poster-boy steriotype for the ``jihadis``
And now if you`ll excuse me, my alien visitors are waiting, their flying saucers on the ready, they want me to go witness their making of Crop Circles in the wheatfields.
...SR
Man`s capacity to delude himself and his willingness to be deluded is limited only by his imagination.
You should know this by now, your pseudonym has the answer embeded in it. i.e., ``abcd``
These are the four kinds of people (based on their belief structure).
a) atheists and agnostics ... those who don`t buy into any of it.
b) borderline ... those who think they don`t believe, but relapse when in crisis or those who think they do believe but when the chips are down and it comes time to take action they opt for the rational.
c) conservatives ... those who fully believe and have faith.
d) die-hards ... those who fit the media generated poster-boy steriotype for the ``jihadis``
And now if you`ll excuse me, my alien visitors are waiting, their flying saucers on the ready, they want me to go witness their making of Crop Circles in the wheatfields.
...SR
#239 Posted by SR on March 7, 2007 5:28:24 pm
Re: # 219 ranjit {``...most ... realize that there is a ... 99% chance that there is nothing after death. Your neurons stop firing and thats that!! Yet that 1% possibility ... is what keeps us plodding along with religion...``}
It was perfect sunny weather the other day (ah, that rare British delight) so I went walking along this minor rural road in Straffordshire. Shortly before noon I stopped at the Nag`s Head for a chicken tikka sandwich when I noticed three passably good looking women at the table behind me. They were eagerly scratching numbers off some kind of lottery tickets they`d bought. No fan of lottery tickets myself, it made me curious, so I approached their table, excused myself and pulled up a chair.
I was intrigued by their zeal and excitement. Why were they so enthusiastic about something that had only the most remote chance and was virtually impossible for all practical purposes? At the end of a fifteen minute question and answer session I realised that it was yet another face of ``religion`` in a way. All logic suggested otherwise, but the power of wishful thinking kept them going on. So is it with all sorts of faith based systems. They defy reason, yet their hold on the human imagination is like a vice-grip. It is far stronger than any rationally derived conclusion could ever hope for.
...SR
It was perfect sunny weather the other day (ah, that rare British delight) so I went walking along this minor rural road in Straffordshire. Shortly before noon I stopped at the Nag`s Head for a chicken tikka sandwich when I noticed three passably good looking women at the table behind me. They were eagerly scratching numbers off some kind of lottery tickets they`d bought. No fan of lottery tickets myself, it made me curious, so I approached their table, excused myself and pulled up a chair.
I was intrigued by their zeal and excitement. Why were they so enthusiastic about something that had only the most remote chance and was virtually impossible for all practical purposes? At the end of a fifteen minute question and answer session I realised that it was yet another face of ``religion`` in a way. All logic suggested otherwise, but the power of wishful thinking kept them going on. So is it with all sorts of faith based systems. They defy reason, yet their hold on the human imagination is like a vice-grip. It is far stronger than any rationally derived conclusion could ever hope for.
...SR
#238 Posted by PewResearch on March 7, 2007 12:09:00 pm
Re: # 237 Tahmed32
``...keeps demanding an India-Pakistan mudslinging match,...``
Not at all. I just want you to come clean and explain your position. Why don`t you address the specific issues rather than hiding and parrying on unrelated nonsense?
``...keeps demanding an India-Pakistan mudslinging match,...``
Not at all. I just want you to come clean and explain your position. Why don`t you address the specific issues rather than hiding and parrying on unrelated nonsense?
#237 Posted by tahmed32 on March 7, 2007 10:32:52 am
#234 zeemax: pewresearch keeps demanding an India-Pakistan mudslinging match, excuse me, a ``discussion``. And I keep telling him ``bhai jan, jao maaf karo. kisi aur ka sar kkhao.`` :-)
As for the disease, that is what I am trying to figure out, with help from Dr. BJKumar. See #231 below.
As for the disease, that is what I am trying to figure out, with help from Dr. BJKumar. See #231 below.
#236 Posted by tahmed32 on March 7, 2007 10:29:41 am
arjun #232/233: I already noted as much in #231, you idiot.
#235 Posted by arjun2 on March 7, 2007 9:48:59 am
#234 by zeemax on March 7, 2007 8:32am PT
welfare queen: time to go collect your welfare check from her majesty`s government...shoo...
welfare queen: time to go collect your welfare check from her majesty`s government...shoo...
#234 Posted by zeemax on March 7, 2007 8:32:53 am
tahmed32,
What did you do to light up pukeResearch`s tail like an agarbatti?
And here .. the head_macaca aka dhotilal_googlemal states he googles day and night for dirty diapers and displays the findings meticulously on each of Chowk`s forums without fail every single day .....
.... what`s this disease called?
What did you do to light up pukeResearch`s tail like an agarbatti?
And here .. the head_macaca aka dhotilal_googlemal states he googles day and night for dirty diapers and displays the findings meticulously on each of Chowk`s forums without fail every single day .....
.... what`s this disease called?
#233 Posted by arjun2 on March 7, 2007 8:23:50 am
#221 by tahmed32 on March 6, 2007 8:05pm PT
i don`t hate pakis any more than I ``hate`` dirty diapers...disgust is not the same as hate...it`s the whole support for islamic terrorism I hate...without that, for most Indians, pakis would just be west bangladesh...
i don`t hate pakis any more than I ``hate`` dirty diapers...disgust is not the same as hate...it`s the whole support for islamic terrorism I hate...without that, for most Indians, pakis would just be west bangladesh...
#232 Posted by arjun2 on March 7, 2007 8:19:53 am
#231 by tahmed32 on March 7, 2007 6:55am PT
It`s the jihad, stupid(pbuhsrr)...
You mean when arjun writes that all Pakistanis are terrorists or liars
I said there are two kinds of pakis: pakis who say they support terrorism and pakis who say they don`t support terrorism(i.e. liars)
It`s the jihad, stupid(pbuhsrr)...
You mean when arjun writes that all Pakistanis are terrorists or liars
I said there are two kinds of pakis: pakis who say they support terrorism and pakis who say they don`t support terrorism(i.e. liars)
#231 Posted by tahmed32 on March 7, 2007 6:55:31 am
bjkumar #227: Thank you sir for an illuminating response. Your 4-point diagnosis (ignoring the 5th one, per your instructions), and some thoughts/questions they raise therefore is as follows:
You say these indivduals:
(1) do not REALLY hate Pakistanis,
Maybe so. But if they dont hate Pakistanis, they are either 2. indifferent; or 3. love and admire pakistanis but dont want to show it. 2. cannot be true, since of all the billions of web pages on the internet, they spend their precious time on chowk, and of the millions of topics, they spend their precious time discussing Pakistanis and muslims. That leaves 1. and 3. (that is, love-hate). hmmmmmmm....this is obviously a complicated malady.
(2) do not believe that - despite all the rhetoric - that all Pakistanis are terrorists and hypocrites
You mean when arjun writes that all Pakistanis are terrorists or liars, he doesnt really mean what he says!! In other words....he is...he is...er...a gas balloon!! I get it!! :-)
(3) do still retain hope that not ALL reason is gone AWOL,
Given 1. and 2. above, I am not sure if Hope and Reason will find safe haven with these individuals. :-)
(4) do believe that ``discussions`` - even animated ones - are better than doing NOTHING
I beg to differ sir. Discussions with quotes around them are not discussions, animated or otherwise. They are merely exchanging insults and putdowns, and therefore not better than nothing.
You say these indivduals:
(1) do not REALLY hate Pakistanis,
Maybe so. But if they dont hate Pakistanis, they are either 2. indifferent; or 3. love and admire pakistanis but dont want to show it. 2. cannot be true, since of all the billions of web pages on the internet, they spend their precious time on chowk, and of the millions of topics, they spend their precious time discussing Pakistanis and muslims. That leaves 1. and 3. (that is, love-hate). hmmmmmmm....this is obviously a complicated malady.
(2) do not believe that - despite all the rhetoric - that all Pakistanis are terrorists and hypocrites
You mean when arjun writes that all Pakistanis are terrorists or liars, he doesnt really mean what he says!! In other words....he is...he is...er...a gas balloon!! I get it!! :-)
(3) do still retain hope that not ALL reason is gone AWOL,
Given 1. and 2. above, I am not sure if Hope and Reason will find safe haven with these individuals. :-)
(4) do believe that ``discussions`` - even animated ones - are better than doing NOTHING
I beg to differ sir. Discussions with quotes around them are not discussions, animated or otherwise. They are merely exchanging insults and putdowns, and therefore not better than nothing.
#230 Posted by PewResearch on March 7, 2007 5:32:01 am
Re: # 224 bjkumar
Subject #223 Tahmed32
Again, this is less about what `Pakistani terrorists are doing in India` or any other grandiose designs that Pakistan may have over India. It also has less to do with your `classification` of Pakistanis. It has everything to do with exposing the self-righteous (and now shown to be hypocritical) Tahmed32 for all to see. There is also another element: a lack of a call to arms when General Musharraf sends murderous gangs into Afghanistan or India speaks volumes of where Tahmed32`s true sympathies lie (your and my words notwithstanding). Note: he is quick to resort to such calls when these neighbors offer to pay back in the same coin. That is a MATERIAL difference. So, be fooled at your own risk - you saw his reaction to your post in #224.
Also, notice: he is equating this material public exposure of his positions with `hate (for) pakistanis and consider them to be terrorists and hypocrites and so forth`. Where is the connection? Also, if there is a connection at all, ask who is doing the infiltration? and who THEN is likely afflicted by `hate`? All this, the self-righteous Tahmed glosses over.
He could easily have distanced himself from these well-known jihadi efforts by Musharraf with equal vigor, but rather he chose to use racial epithets. What does that tell you about the man?
Krishna_abcd; Arjun: Although reasoning directly with the man may not help him, exposing him for the self-righteous positions that he takes will help clarify for others on Chowk what his ilk stand for.
Subject #223 Tahmed32
Again, this is less about what `Pakistani terrorists are doing in India` or any other grandiose designs that Pakistan may have over India. It also has less to do with your `classification` of Pakistanis. It has everything to do with exposing the self-righteous (and now shown to be hypocritical) Tahmed32 for all to see. There is also another element: a lack of a call to arms when General Musharraf sends murderous gangs into Afghanistan or India speaks volumes of where Tahmed32`s true sympathies lie (your and my words notwithstanding). Note: he is quick to resort to such calls when these neighbors offer to pay back in the same coin. That is a MATERIAL difference. So, be fooled at your own risk - you saw his reaction to your post in #224.
Also, notice: he is equating this material public exposure of his positions with `hate (for) pakistanis and consider them to be terrorists and hypocrites and so forth`. Where is the connection? Also, if there is a connection at all, ask who is doing the infiltration? and who THEN is likely afflicted by `hate`? All this, the self-righteous Tahmed glosses over.
He could easily have distanced himself from these well-known jihadi efforts by Musharraf with equal vigor, but rather he chose to use racial epithets. What does that tell you about the man?
Krishna_abcd; Arjun: Although reasoning directly with the man may not help him, exposing him for the self-righteous positions that he takes will help clarify for others on Chowk what his ilk stand for.
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- SureshM: Re: # 36 God Bless... Uneven Democracy : The
- SureshM: Re: # 59 "kuwait... I Want Jinnah's Pakistan
- ahmedmadani: Re: # 35 this... Uneven Democracy : The
- jayp: Re: # 55 Good muslim... I Want Jinnah's Pakistan
- jayp: Re: # 53 thanks madani... I Want Jinnah's Pakistan
- Pardesi: Breaking News for ahmedmadani... Uneven Democracy : The
- a_r_j_u_n325: #94 Posted by... The Strange Case of
- a_r_j_u_n325: #95 Posted by... The Strange Case of
