The Atheist Blogger » islam

Bin Laden as a “Symbol of Islam”

Adrian Hayter — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 23:00:59 +0000

The popular web-comic “Indexed” has a somewhat controversial Venn diagram out today, listing Osama Bin Laden (and Santa) as a “symbol of a popular religion”.

Santa? Rarely seen? Surely not!

Now Santa is hardly a symbol of a popular religion, a symbol of a certain holiday usually associated with a popular religion maybe, but not of actual Christianity itself. However, is Bin Laden a symbol of Islam? The first thing that comes to mind when I hear the name Bin Laden is “terrorist”, or “9/11″, but it was Islamic terrorists who committed that atrocity (as well as many others). It seems almost too easy to associate terrorists with Islam, and vice-versa; the religion certainly encourages followers to kill unbelievers, even if the “moderates” deny it.

Proponents of Islam will often refer to it as the “religion of peace”, and yet you have to take a step back and look at what this so called peace has brought. I have to admit, every time I hear Islam described in such a way, I just stare in disbelief. It all boils down to a couple of things; namely, whether it is right to judge a religion by its extremists, and whether the religious beliefs of the terrorists were the influencing factor in their decision to carry out their plans.

Religion being an influencing factor is, in my opinion, undeniable. The hijackers died as martyrs for Islam, and we all know what their last words were, so the factor that remains is whether religious extremism is a good indicator of the actual religion. There are extremists in all religions; many simply twist the words of prophets to force their own agenda, but others are quite the opposite. Islam rewards those who kill infidels in battle, whilst Christianity makes no such promise. When considering the religion of Islam purely from scripture, I’d say it is more of a religion of hate than of peace.

As a religion of hate, Bin Laden is a good a symbol as any, although he is one of many, including the hijab (symbol of the Islamic oppression of women), and the scores of young Islamic girls who know all too well the religion’s position on child molestation.

I noticed we haven’t had a poll recently, so this is a good point to have one. Simple yes or no question: Do you think of Osama Bin Laden as a symbol of Islam? Leave a comment on why you voted, or if you think I’m talking complete nonsense.

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

Possibly Related Posts:

More Atheists Under Attack!

Adrian Hayter — Fri, 29 May 2009 21:47:47 +0000

Over a year ago I wrote about how my “atheist union” posters were ripped down and vandalized by unknown religious students, but whilst I was annoyed and angry at the attacks, they simply do not scale in comparison with the actual death threats that some students have received. The Leeds University Atheist Society runs an annual “rationalist week” to promote freethinking, atheism, skepticism, etc. During the event, a member of the society was threatened by a suspected Muslim student. The death threat took place outside the main festival tent, and was a face to face encounter.

The society has received death threats before from a Muslim student group, and nobody has been harmed. The victim this time has decided not to go to the police, possibly because the last threats were not followed through. It seems like the Muslim society is using the scare tactics that religions have used for thousands of years, and such tactics tend not to work on the rationally minded. Nevertheless, this is completely unacceptable behaviour, and a sure sign that the Muslim groups are participating in a campaign to destroy freedom of speech.

Further evidence of this can be seen in the attempts made by the Southampton Atheist Society to hold a debate on freedom of speech that contained a viewing of the “controversial” movie Fitna. It took two months to organize after the Muslim society continually objected to it, and the debate was finally held under the condition that police were there, and every student was searched by security. What exactly are Muslims afraid of? That we will expose their religion for the fraud it is? If so, they needn’t be afraid; we’ve known that ever since it was formed. If Islam was really the most truthful religion, then what harm can some atheists do? Why not come along to the debate and refute the claims made by the atheists? My guess is that the atheist’s claims are completely accurate, and the Muslim is simply too indoctrinated to accept anything other than what the Qur’an tells them.

Chloë Clifford-Frith of the AHS (National Federation of Atheist, Humanist, and Secular Student Groups) noted that there were an increasing number of examples of prejudice against atheists.

Leeds have experienced death threats, vandalism, theft and SU discrimination in the past. Warwick Atheists were also stripped of their ‘Best New Society’ award and prize money in 2008 after a complaint that a poster for one of their talks was offensive. The award, but not the prize money was returned some months later. Some societies have experienced problems with their SUs refusing to ratify their existence. Again, this is symptomatic of a wider suspicion of people who profess to be atheists – as if there is something threatening about not believing in a god or gods. Even Prof Richard Dawkins, when attempting to set up the charitable educational foundation ‘The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science’, had his forms returned to him with the suspicious question: ‘Please explain how “science” has benefited humanity’!

We shall have to see what lies ahead for my student group when we try to hold events this year. I’ve already emailed the Muslim society asking for a debate, but I doubt they will respond to my request.

Possibly Related Posts:

On Debating Christians

Adrian Hayter — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 23:46:59 +0000

Just over one week ago, a fellow atheist friend named Dan and I were in the student bar, drinking vodka-laced beverages and reading long pages of notes. In less than an hour, we would be debating two members of the Christian Union; a fundamentalist student society that believes the Bible is accurate, it just needs to read the correct way. The debate was entitled “Is God a Delusion?” , and team atheism had sorted out our lines of attack; Dan would be handling the fine-tuned universe fallacy, as well as the vicious nature of nature itself. I would be talking about the Theory of Evolution, illusions in nature, and our predisposition for seeing patterns that aren’t really there. We had conquered the writing of the speeches, we had even conquered the timing, getting everything into a 5 minute presentation each. The final thing we had to conquer were our nerves, hence the copious amounts of vodka.

This was the first time either of us had done something like this, and it didn’t help that only one other atheist had so far turned up to support us. Luckily, as the debate was about to start, 6 of our secular student group turned up to sit in the front row, which gave us that boost of morale to get us into the spirit. First up was a Christian who was reading Physics, so I expected him to go on about how the universe was such a wonderful place, fine-tuned to perfection. What I didn’t expect was for him to waffle for 4 of his 5 minutes, trying to explain what he considered “God” to be. As the chair banged her gavel to signify 1 minute remaining, my first opponent stumbled and quickly said something about how the presence of evil was proof of God. Whatever he said, I didn’t understand it at all, and I think my stomach gave a huge sigh of relief.

I was up next, and I managed to get my speech within the time limit, covering all the points I wanted to raise. The full transcript of both mine and Dan’s speeches are included below the fold on this blog post if you want to read them in full. Next up was the second Christian, who rejected a few of my reasons for why people believe in the supernatural, saying he didn’t believe for those reasons. This of course is a fallacy, as it can only be true on a personal level, and there are many people who believe in the supernatural for precisely the reasons I stated. His speech concerned Jesus and the power of prayer (which when I last checked was powerless). Not suprisingly, he criticised the scientific “prayer tests” and held them as an inaccurate way to determine whether prayer works (probably because the results determined prayer didn’t). Dan concluded the speeches with an attack of the fine-tuned universe view, quoting David Attenborough on his recent criticism of Christians, and pointed to the destructive force of nature as evidence against a loving caring God.

So then the floor was open to questions, and boy did we get them. I had to explain why Protazoa were still around “even though we evolved from them” as an American girl put, and how fish could develop arms when a mutation is required to create useless stumps first (clue: fish already have stumps…they are called fins). I also explained a rudimentry version of how we think the eye evolved, although on most of these questions I encouraged people to not take what I was saying without question, but to read up on it themselves (the last part of my speech was an appeal for people to start thinking freely). Luckily, my atheist friends asked the Christians a few questions about their beliefs, including a nice one about whether the discovery of multiple universes with different “tuning” would alter their belief in God.

An interesting couple of questions came from some Islamic students, one of whom asked me if I would mind if he came at me with a knife and killed me. I was expecting at least one question like this, and luckily I have a great response to it:

Let me get this straight. You are asking an atheist, someone who doesn’t believe in gods, the afterlife, or any kind of supernatural events, whether he would mind giving up what he believes is his only life? Of course I would mind! I happen to like life, and I’m not suddenly going to throw it all away because it is the one shot I have.

The same group of muslims asked us how we explained the revealed knowledge in the Koran, like the fact that salty water is separate from fresh water, and the Earth is shaped like an Ostrich egg. I didn’t correct his Earth shape hypothesis, because I wanted to attack the root of this question. I aked him plainly if he would read to me the passages of the Koran that said those things. He told me he didn’t have them on him, and so I told him I was sorry, but I couldn’t answer his question. I mentioned that these “revealed truths” are often simply very complex interpretations that are often extracted after the facts are known to science. The same logic can be applied to the Christian claim that the Bible talks about atoms, when all it says is “so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear” (Hebrews 11:3).

All in all, I guess the theists reckon they won, and the atheists reckon we won. The debate was concluded and no vote was held (we agreed it would be good to just let people leave with their own opinions). A girl did come up and thank us for talking about what we believed, and that she would look into certain things more, and that’s always a good thing. Dan and I decided that we rather like debating, so we’re going to do some more in the future, and perhaps organise an “Ask an atheist” evening in March. Another friend wants to debate with me against the Islamic society, so I’m trying to get in touch with them. Stay tuned for more!

Adrian’s speech transcript

The question in tonight’s debate is whether God is a delusion or not. When I say “God” I am speaking about the whole “God” idea; that there is some kind of intelligent mind behind the universe, who has concerns for how we live our lives.

It is this idea that I believe is a complete delusion, because whilst it all sounds very nice, it is utterly ridiculous. Almost every religion today puts humanity in a special “chosen” position by their God. We have dominion over all the animals, simply because we have free will and are made in his image. This was all very well for people to believe hundreds of years ago, but the arrival of modern science changed this completely.

We began to realise that so called “revealed” truth contradicted the natural world, and the best way to find out what actually constitutes reality is via the scientific method. Slowly but surely, revealed truth was replaced by observed truth, things that you could actually test for validity, and form scientific theories to explain. The acts of gods that supposedly took a matter of days suddenly became natural processes that took millions upon billions of years; and whilst people still held humanity as divinely chosen, 150 years ago, a man named Charles Darwin changed that view forever.

Evolution is a natural process that tells us where we come from, and how. Through the fossil record, we have seen how millions of species died out, and that we are one of the many branches on the so-called “Tree of Life” that made it. So in some respect, we are “special”, as we are the result of a 4 billion year old struggle to survive. However, every single species of animal still alive today is a survivor too, and they are equally as special as we.

People will object to this though, and say that the evidence points to divine intervention by God on some occasions. The town of Lourdes in France is a major tourist attraction for Christians, some of whom believe that the water from a local spring has healing properties. Only 66 declared miracles have happened in the last 150 years, and when you take into consideration that 80,000 pilgrims come to Lourdes each year, that number seems utterly insignificant. None of those “miracles” involved the sudden regrowth of limbs, or any other permanent affliction being cured, and since a medical bureau was established in 1947, the average number of “cures” people have reported per year has dropped repeatedly. As the popular skeptic Michael Shermer would say, you have to count the misses as well as the hits.

The Lourdes fiasco all started with an apparition of the Virgin Mary, who supposedly spoke to a 14 year old peasant girl on 18 separate occasions. Her eyewitness testimony is all we have to go on, but it is interesting to note that neither her sister or friend saw the apparition, even though they were with her. In the opinion of skeptics, she is either delusional or lying, and the closed nature of the Catholic church on this issue makes investigating harder. Apparitions of various forms have been reported ever since, some turn up on pieces of toast, whilst others are more complex.

There is a great video on YouTube of an apparition of Jesus on a wall, although any sane person watching the video will understand that it is formed by the shadows of tree branches. As such, it isn’t detailed, and it really just looks like a man in a white robe. Only when you have religious people claiming it looks like Jesus does your brain interpret the figure as such. This of course is the key to the whole thing. Our brain is wired so that we notice patterns very quickly, and if you lie on the grass on a moderately cloudy day, you will start to see all kinds of objects in the clouds. They aren’t really there of course, and I don’t notice religious groups claiming them as miracles, so I fail to see how a similar illusion that happens to take the form of a man in a robe means that it is Jesus Christ. The fact is, that patterns occur everywhere, and all it takes is a human brain to recognise them.

What I want to argue is called free-thinking, and it involves throwing all dogma out of the door and looking at the world for what it is, not for what we are told it is. Once you understand that there is a natural explanation for everything, the need for dogma and revealed truth promptly vanishes. While I am sure that a belief in the supernatural was probably important for our survival in the past, and it gives people hope even to this day, I look at a universe for which we can explain some things, and utter “I have absolutely no idea” on others, and that makes it even more wonderful to live in. I think it is time for people to accept that there are unknowns, and things that we may never know, but before we delegate them out of this world, we should make sure they are in this world.

Dan’s speech transcript

There’s been a lot of talk these kinds of debates about the beauty and complexity of nature. I get a familiar response from religious people when I tell them I don’t think there’s any evidence for a god, they sort of stick there arms out and gesture at the nearest groups of trees and flowers like its completely obvious they must have been designed. David Attenborough has been in trouble recently. He’s started a new series called Charles Darwin and the Tree of Life, and said he’s had an upsurge in messages from people saying he just hasn’t been acknowledging God’s handiwork enough in his programs. He said:

“They always mean beautiful things like hummingbirds. I always reply by saying that I think of a little child in east Africa with a worm burrowing through his eyeball. The worm cannot live in any other way, except by burrowing through eyeballs. I find that hard to reconcile with the notion of a divine and benevolent creator.”

What goes for worms burrowing through eyeballs follows for everything else unfortunately. I really love his nature programs though; the BBC series Planet Earth which he narrated was amazing, attracting something like nine million viewers when it was first shown in this country. It’s gone all around the world since.

The thing which people tend to overlook when they look at pictures of wildlife is the unbelievable brutality of what they’re looking at. Everyone of those animals you see are in almost permanent terror for there lives, frightened of starving, of disease, frightened of getting an injury which is almost always a slow death sentence in the wild, and mostly frightened of just being eaten. Ultimately, all animals which aren’t kept as pets, and stroked, housed and fed their whole lives; die in one of those ways. They get old and weak and can’t get food or get too slow and get torn to pieces by predators. Think of the endless struggle out on the African plains between the zebras and antelope and the packs of wild hyenas and lions; one side can only be safe if the other starves without food, and the other can only survive by chasing down the weaker of the opposition and killing them. The system is psychopathic; it’s impersonal and totally apathetic to the suffering that’s going on. Any creator that built a system like that would have to be out of their mind.

People in favour of there being a God also like to point out the amount of ‘fine tuning’ in the universe. That the laws of things like gravity and thermodynamics have been ‘tuned’ ideally to create a universe full of life. The thing that really strikes me is that all that ‘fine tuning’ has created a universe that is almost completely empty space. You being present in 99.9 recurring percent of the universe will kill you instantly. We exist on one piece of space allotted to us in all that emptiness, in a thin film of life, on a climactic knife-edge, on a speck of dust.

And even there we aren’t safe. This is a world where more than 200,000 people can be swept off the beaches of the Indian Ocean, one day after Christmas. In fact the people of the western hemisphere were still celebrating, still eating mince pies and pulling crackers as the Asian Tsunami struck in 2004. There were families in America just sitting down and saying grace at their Christmas tables, as thousands of towns and villages were annihilated, and millions turned into widows, orphans and refugees. The universe really isn’t sentimental about its timing. But the devil is in the detail with these things, and one that gets me is some of the eyewitness reports. When tsunamis are coming in, the sea naturally draws out along the coast; people reported the small children from the local villages running out onto the miles of open beaches and laughing at all the stranded fish, totally oblivious to what was coming at them at nearly the speed of sound. The reason why things like that don’t drive us mad is because we know it isn’t personal, natural disasters just happen. We accept that the universe wasn’t designed with us in mind. But if there is a God, every bad thing that ever happens to us suddenly becomes something malicious, an all powerful, all knowing God cannot not be responsible for things like tsunamis and earthquakes, plague and the AIDS virus.

So really, to those of you who see God’s handiwork everywhere in nature what I say is, yes, look around you, but really look and be honest with yourself about what your seeing. To understand that there cannot be a God, and certainly not a benevolent one, is like a realisation of the obvious, it’s just so clear.

Possibly Related Posts:

London Atheists Meetup

Adrian Hayter — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 11:55:21 +0000

I came across the site MeetUp again through random clicking of links earlier this week. I randomly did a search to see if there were any atheist groups near to where I live (Egham), but nothing showed up. However, I did find a few groups operating within London, which is only 30 minutes on the train for me.

One of them, called the “London Atheists Meetup” is having a meeting later today (Saturday) to discuss Britain’s response to Islam. I’ve decided to go along and see what it’s like…if I can find the place of course. I may have to call upon my GPS enabled phone to get me some of the way.

I’ve also signed up to the showing of the film “The God Who Wasn’t There” with the Humanist Group of Central London on the 17th December. Whether I can actually attend that one will be a toss up on the day, but I’m hoping I’ll be able to make it down.

So I’ll be writing about how the discussion goes later today, and hopefully I’ll meet some nice people whilst doing it. If any of you can make it down to the 17th December showing, I’m sure it’ll be a great event.

Possibly Related Posts:

Wearing White On Monday

Adrian Hayter — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 14:58:39 +0000

I’ve been invited by some of my Hindu friends to a event on facebook, asking people to “wear a white shirt on monday” to show respect to the 150+ people who died in the Mumbai terrorist attacks that happened earlier this week. When perusing the event details, I came across an interesting section on t-shirt ideas.

Front: 150+ Dead in Mumbai…
Back: Why?

I guess the “Why?” is more a metaphysical question concerning why so many people could have died, but to me, the actual answer to the question seems quite obvious. Islam. The terrorists who slaughtered over 150 people did so because they were deluded by the idea that it was somehow the will of Allah. Reports have already confirmed that the terrorists went after American and British passport holders, letting a British man who claimed to be Italian live.

The event coordinators have already made it very clear they don’t want to answer the question themselves, even though deep down they know the answer.

****ANYTHING HATEFUL TARGETING ANY SPECIFIC PERSON, GROUP, RELIGION, ETCETERA WILL BE DELETED AND REPORTED.
this event is to not target and attack certain people/etc but to create UNITY & SUPPORT.

So you can create “unity and support” groups, keeping people happy by blaming the governments and police for the mistakes they made, without caring at all about the real problem. Groups like these simply push the problem under the rug, and instead of trying to stop the problem at the root, they work on the premise that these things are going to happen and that we should work on preventing them from ever reaching a climax.

That is a ridiculous view to take. Police do not work on the premise that racial attacks are bound to happen, they go around actively trying to promote harmony between people of different races. Instead of going after the terrorists before they strike, we should be working to stop people from joining terrorist organizations in the first place. Unfortunately, for as long as we have religious doctrine, we will have people who resort to killing in its name.

Here is a better idea for a t-shirt:

Front: 150+ Dead in Mumbai.

Back: Why? Islam. Religion Kills.

People will probably call it hate speech, but I don’t care. It’s the truth, and that should be all that matters.

Possibly Related Posts:

Another Petition Against Saudi Britain

Adrian Hayter — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 01:39:37 +0000

The original government petition had a very short deadline, but it still managed to get 5,543 signatures in the short run it had. A new petition has been made, and Pat Condell tells us why we should sign it (if you need more reasons).

The new deadline is 1st January 2009, so get signing!

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/shariastop/

Possibly Related Posts:

I’m Rich!

Adrian Hayter — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 17:42:13 +0000

Dear Mr. Oktar,

I hereby present Tiktaalik, a “intermediate-form fossil” as you call it, illustrating the evolution of fish into reptiles.

Apparently worth £4,400,000,000,000

If you need to get in contact with me in order to send me the money, you can do so here.

Kind Regards,

Adrian Hayter

Possibly Related Posts:

Petition Against Sharia Law In The UK

Adrian Hayter — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 12:59:57 +0000

Chicken Girl made me aware of this Times article on Sharia Law in the UK, which is a despicable attempt at getting Sharia law set up for Muslims. The UK is not a Muslim country, it is a secular country, and as such every person should follow the same set of laws. We do not allow Rastafarians to smoke cannabis simply because it is in their religion to do so, so why should it be any different for Muslims? Laws should be made for the good of the people, not for the good of religion. That is why we have legalized abortion, despite the outcry of various Christian groups, and why we scrapped the blasphemy laws.

Pat Condell posted this video on YouTube, highlighting why we shouldn’t bow to Islam.

If you are a citizen of the UK, and you disagree with Sharia Law being imposed in our courts, then please sign this e-petition to our government.

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/sharialawuk

Possibly Related Posts:

British Christianity Is Slowly Dying

Adrian Hayter — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 18:00:32 +0000

According to a recent poll organised by a Jewish organisation, Christianity could die out within a century. Only a third of those asked thought that religions like Christianity and Judaism would be practiced in 100 years time, whilst over 50% of people think the religions would have died out in the UK.

4 in 10 people say they would choose to be Christian which is countered by roughly the same amount saying they would choose to practice no religion at all. Surprisingly, 9% of people preferred to be Buddhist over Islam and Judaism.

Although the poll doesn’t mention atheism directly, it is safe to assume that a fair proportion of those people who choose to practice no religion are atheist, as well as those who subscribe to Buddhism. Apparently the drop in church attendance in both Church of England and Catholic denominations means that soon both will become financially unviable.

Whilst this is good news for rationalism and freethinking in Britain, the fall of Christianity is having a completely opposite effect on Islam. It is expected that the active Muslim population will double within the next 27 years, proving that Islam really is the more controlling and persuasive religion in the world today.

The Jewish organisation behind this survey commented:

…we know that Judaism provides real meaning and enrichment to one’s life. Whilst we have attracted many disinterested Jews back to Jewish identity it is clear there is much work to be done.

Which begs the question, if Judaism provided such real meaning to someone’s life, why are there so may abandoning it?

Possibly Related Posts:

Final Conversations With The Deluded

Adrian Hayter — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 21:59:59 +0000

This is going to be the last (I promise!) in my current “series” of conversations with the deluded muslim “Abu”. I have a total of 19 emails from him, the vast majority of which I have responded to. He has however been increasingly rude even though I ask him not to be, and his general level of ignorance has become too much for me to bear, considering I have been spending and hour or more each day replying to each one.

I’ve had enough of him constantly repeating his arguments even though I’ve already explained to him how they don’t work, so I’ve cut off my contact with him. I have no desire to repeat myself, especially as neither side is going to conceed a point. For the last time then, Abu:

Islam is not a religion but a way of life which emcompasses all the prophets and the scriptures (which since have been manipulated and changed).

A way of life that encompasses the teachings of Jesus, Moses, Buddha, the billion or so Hindu gods, the FSM, Michael Travesser?, Joseph Smith, (I could go on). Forget that all these prophets and religions contradict each other, but Abu claims that all these religions were manipulated and changed, and that Islam is the only one true religion…now where have I heard that before?

Even if there are no alternative theories to human evolution from apes there are alternative OPINIONS by opposing scientists. This in itself proves that the theory is not factual and if full of hypothesis still left to be resolved.

As I mentioned before, this is equivalent to someone saying they don’t like rain so it can’t be factual. Opinion has nothing to do with scientific accuracy; if people have evidence that contradicts Evolution, they can submit it (in fact they are encouraged). So far, all evidence that has been submitted has turned out to be wrong in light of investigation.

The Koran was given ad the FINAL scripture to the FINAL prophet (Muhammad) the nation we are currently living under, that of the final prophet will be the last and thus we are fast approaching the end if the earth -doomsday, Armageddon.

I was waiting for a comment about so-called “doomsday”, but as a popular quote says:
“Since the Bible and the church are obviously mistaken in telling us where we came from, how can we trust them to tell us where we are going?”

mountains offer the cool to the earth which it needs to neutralise the general warmth from the sun. You being a science man will agree with me when I say the mountains play an important part on the earth.

The only part mountains play on the Earth is providing some animals with a habitat, and some nice ski resorts for humanity. Abu often seems to get science the wrong way around. Mountains are cold because the Sun heats the Earth up from the ground upwards, they aren’t natural refrigerators of some kind. He used this argument to try and prove why there wasn’t life in other parts of the Solar System, forgetting momentarily that the largest mountain ever discovered is on Mars.

The ovveriding point to your argument about a past species was that their brains have had to develop in order for them to develop better tools. You are unbelievable! The tools used in modern natives tribes in the amazon have changed very little if any.

Rocks -> Sharp Rocks -> Sticks with sharp rocks -> Spears with deadly points -> Bows and Arrows -> Poisonous Arrows -> Poison Darts

I personally think they’ve changed quite a bit. Yes, they haven’t developed guns, but there was (a) no need (they don’t hunt game big enough) and (b) no resources to develop them anyway. The Amazonian tribes are masters of hunting with arrows, darts, spears etc. They have served well for centuries, and I doubt they will change much in the next 1000 years (assuming the tribes still exist in their current habitat).

Before this doomsday there will be the returning of Jesus to fight and defeat the one eyed ‘anti-Christ’ who will endeaveiur the weak in terms of faith with a series of dazzling tricks which he will perform. Jesus will be aided by a person who will cone called imam mehdi who will be born into thus world under his real name that will be Muhammad. This is the future that will occur.

So the Zombie Jesus will return from the dead (again) as some sort of uber-Zombie, and will fight some kind of Cyclops (who I assume will appear at the same time). He will perform magic tricks and impress a load of people (I doubt James Randi would be fooled), and his beautiful assistant will be called “Muhammad” which is lucky because that seems to be a popular name for people and teddy bears at the moment. Of course all this happens after the point where Abu claims Allah will forgive those who want to be forgiven, so this entire façade is pretty much just for show.

This quote is just brilliant:

The unseen that science can’t explain. I tend to refer to witchcraft when I mention the unseen. (voodoo, black magic etc) witchcraft is and has been common since the start of time hence yue hanging of these witches during medieval England. Please don’t say you don’t believe in witchcraft because I’ve seen it with my very eyes! This man who was suffering from witchcraft was sat on the couch, and a witch like voice bellowed out of him spouting off things like ‘I will never leave him’ ‘yes I have put the spell’ and so on. And then after treating it with reading some passages from the Koran the witch increased in her agony begging us to stop reading until after a couple of hours it stopped and the person was back to normal (although we hadnt cured the person of witchcraft, the spell’ remained) ive witnessed many other cases of witchcraft similar to this.

Hahahahahahaha…that’s all I can say. Really.

Well then you can laugh at your near ancestors who included legislatures in witches, who made it a social duty to kill all the witches. Then you deny your ancestors! Have you heard if the voodoo doll? It is one form of witchcraft which involves sticking needles in a doll which us thus reflected into the real human being who was the target.

The test for witchcraft involved putting the accused in a position where they couldn’t possibly end up alive afterwards. Any person who survived this torture was found guilty of witchcraft and burned. I don’t laugh at my ancestors. I am deeply ashamed at my ancestors.

Voodoo dolls have never been used to cause harm on people other than in movies, which is where the entire misconception about them was born. Voodoo dolls are usually used as representations of spirits that you can “call upon” to perform miracles, although this has never been proven either.

Did you know king henry the eighth changed certain passages in the bible and forced due acceptance by the Vatican etc just in order to bed Anne Boleyn!

No he didn’t. He created an entirely new church system based on the same book, just interpreted differently. The Vatican opposed this and never agreed to it (as far as I am aware they never have either).

Now finally, once I told him I remained unconvinced and didn’t want to hear anymore of his arguments:

ok then Adrian today marks a definitive day for you remember the date 19/06/2008. You had a personal warner yet you declined. You succumbed to falsehood you chose no affilliation but atheism a cult which has no substance or deity or anything You believe in chance You contested my arguments with pathetic Arguments of your own which on many occasions I could hardly believe what you had stated. your arrogance AND ignorance veils you as mentioned in the Koran. simply you DIDNT want to believe eventhough you’d admit I never contradicted myself and did defy atheism. Maybe I hurt your pride; I put an end to the atheist theory of yours and your responses has been defensive rather than offensive. Adrian I guess only time will tell who was right me or you. But every hour that ticks off your life is bringing you nearer to eternal doom. Hellfire forever and ever and ever a life of circles. There will be no respite and nor will you be punished in he’ll to cleanse yourself for the ultimate paradise. God says in the koran ‘enjoy yourself for a while’ and then I’m sorry to say Adrian endless repercussions.

Abu if you are reading, I will never admit that you didn’t contradict yourself because you did, and you didn’t defy atheism since you can’t prove god does exist anymore than I can prove he doesn’t. My responses were defensive since you were attacking my belief, although I did attack yours on multiple occasions so I would hardly call my arguments purely defensive anyway.

So that wraps this conversation with a very deluded person up. If anyone else wants to try and convert me to their religion, I have a contact form where you can submit your first attempt, and if I am interested in what you have to say I will respond. Please note that I hold the right to post anything you say on this site, but no details other than your first name will be used in reference (so use a fake name if you wish).