Hamza Leaves a Message


Uploaded by StopSpamming1 on 01.01.2012

Transcript:
Hi guys
I have received a message from Hamza, who says I "have nothing to offer". Yet he comes
to MY page and leaves a comment and then removes it again, so nobody but me can see it and
it does not become public. I can't reply as I am blocked on his page and it does not show
up on mine, so I'll do it here.
Let's see what he has to say. He starts off with an irrelevant statement, nonsensical
as such and what I would generally call typical Muslim inept formulation.
StopSpamming:
I know you are banned.
Useless
Banned from what? From where? By whom? From heaven by him? I call this typical vague and
ambiguous language. He could have skipped it entirely or he could have demonstrated
the intellectual honesty he expects of others by saying: I banned you from my discussion
page on Facebook, because ...
And then he could have added: "but I need to insult you which is why I am writing this
here"
But if you are reading this I am afraid I have to accuse you of insincerity.
Your current video is an intellectual joke. You have misquoted and misunderstood your
references.
Insult
IF I am reading this? Looks as though he watches too many movies. He says I am insincere. How
is quoting sources which contradict his claim being insincere?
My current video is a different one than the one he is most probably referring to, so why
not say very clearly: Your video xyz is wrong because: ...
Instead I am just told off that I am doing everything wrong - without being told what
the wrong actually is. Because I don't see how showing that Greek
medicine was translated into Arabic before the 7th century by quoting historical sources
and books written by scholars on the topic can be misquoted and misunderstood.
Let me get personal for a minute: Man! Get one quote, show how it relates to your claim
and then show what is wrong with it! Don't engage in this childish blanket accusation
mode you're are in right now. You're making a fool out of yourself. Have you learnt nothing
at varsity? Here, the process of first building a skeleton by using catchwords and then filling
it in, is actually a valid and highly recommended practice - but then, this is not nature.
You produce a general ambiguous quote that mentions Syriac and Arabic together and assume
that the earliest date is an Arabic translation. This is historically inaccurate, the first
ever translation of Greek medicine was in the late 7th century (and this is contested),
and Hellenic embryology in the 8th century. This is a fact.
Nonsense
Yes, scholars show that Greek texts were indeed translated into the prominent languages of
the era and the region. And those were Greek, Latin, Egyptian, the Semitic languages and
endless dialects.
So yes, texts were translated into Syriac, which is a subset of Aramaic and the emerging
Arabic. What exactly is ambiguous about this?
He says the first translation is in the 7th century and then says this is contested. What
is contested and by whom?
I have shown that Greek medicine, and the Greek philosophers as they were called at
the time, influenced Arabic cultures since the Stone Age. Arabs were following Greek
medicine all along and when Galen published his works it was quickly adapted by Arabs.
And this is what I show by quoting historians who have found these texts and have reconstructed
them chronologically.
In spite of all the evidence I have presented, he stubbornly stomps his feet with folded
arms and declares about HIS version: This is a fact. And he declares my video a joke?
You are using sophistry again to obviously prove you are right.
Why don't you read and be more nuanced?
Superfluous
Ah, he learnt a new word: sophistry: 1. a subtle, tricky, superficially plausible,
but generally fallacious method of reasoning. 2. a false argument
3. subtly deceptive reasoning or argumentation
Is Hamza showing what I am doing where? Nope! Just blanket accusations and childish whining.
Does he tell me what would be considered as sophistry or what to read? Nope! Is this an
example of what most educated people apply today: constructive criticism? Nope!
The other quotes you mention refer to Jundishapur, didn't you read the essay that breaks down
the Jundishapur link (under the al-Harith bin Kalada section)?
The "essay" what "essay"? What Hamza is referring to is a collection of claims and some quotes
which he misinterprets as meaning: no medical knowledge in Gandishapur at the time - when
everybody, even his own quote, mentions the medical knowledge there. Hamza is deluding
himself by way of self gratification and confirmation bias. By distorting the facts and then claiming
he's made a point. No Hamza, you have not. Live with it. And your fan-boys should keep
you honest and check you claims before clicking on "Like" indiscriminately.
You have built a straw man. This is exactly why no one should engage with
people like you as your are the propagator of misinformation.
Shame on you.
Insult
Now we go back to insult mode. Hamza does not really know how to address me. He can't
use facts, because he knows he does not have any and I do. He can't use any form of special
pleading because he knows I will expose that. He can't use insults because that will achieve
nothing so he uses censorship when he is in a position to do so and a mixture of all tactics
the rest of the time.
Strawman? Me? Where? With what? By what?
What is strange is that actually, I am the one calling this entire discussion about what
was translated when from what into what as being irrelevant and futile. I was actually
working on a video showing the historical background of Islamic texts when I was so
rudely interrupted by this little skirmish. If I transmit misinformation, take one, just
one example and show me: this is wrong because ....
But I suppose that is expecting too much. And to think that a year ago I had high hopes
for a fresh and new version of Muslim apologist, as I had somehow seen an intelligent man with
a knack for gripping presentations. Sadly, and yes, I have to admit it: I was wrong.
It is sad, as you are creating barriers between people of religion and atheists, no one should
stereotype, but your actions just reinforce what many Muslims believe, that atheists don't
care and are arrogant, and are not nuanced. I don't believe this, and I teach people in
our dawah courses not to superimpose intellectual and emotional baggage on others, especially
atheists, but you are making it hard for everyone.
Your actions are intellectually irresponsible.
You obviously still haven't read the essay, which deals with everything.
Much of the same with blanket accusations without any substantiation or examples or
proof.
All I am doing is pointing out the obvious lies and unwarranted claims. What do Muslims
realistically expect from atheists? Should we abandon reality and simply believe some
superstitious nonsense? Should I now deny gravity or evolution? Should I accept the
explanation that some invisible force is holding up birds or what Bernoulli tells me? Should
I accept that an angel pushes clouds along or the wind following isobaric gradients?
How, when I am addressing specific points in his drivel he calls "essay", he can still
claim I have not read it is beyond me and I am unable to place it into a specific category
of behaviour. Specific denial? Selective denial? No idea.
You are in a position of responsibility and you should no better. Atheists who follow
your videos, due to their current perspective, will agree with everything you said as it
is against religion, even if it is inaccurate and misplace.
Special pleading
I think he overestimates my level of influence. OK yes, I have quadrupled views and subscribers
in a short time period, but I am not distributing or actively advertising my opinions. Hamza
is. Hamza is paid for his "essay". Is this piece of paper worth money? Will it persuade
anyone who is not gullible and uncritical? If no, what is the point? If you generalise
atheists, I think one will find that they lack belief in something without proof, which
is exactly the opposite of what theists do. Now why should atheists suddenly abandon this
rational thinking approach when it comes to my videos? Theists however ....
Let me get personal again:
Hamza, if you want to chat and discuss nonsensical statements, call me on Skype. I have given
links for what I claimed to show what I think and why I think so. I have then stated how
this is relevant to your points and I have shown what is irrelevant to your points.
I have told you in comments, on your blog when it was still a blog, in videos and in
comments what is wrong with your method and why. What more can I do? You don't want to
accept or listen. You insist on pumping your moronic, primitive, egregious nonsense into
unsuspecting, gullible Muslim brains and you ask ME whether I have any shame? No, sorry,
you explicitly tell me: shame on you. What obnoxious audacity.
You should be aware by now that you can't just barge the Koran into being accepted as
reality and you can't wriggle your way in either. So why in god's name don't you leave
the Koran where it was a century ago? In the realm of religion?
Let's take water. It is real, measurable and tangible. But if you believe that Neptune
controls it, James Bond drove a car through it, Jesus walked on it and mermaids live in
it you are deluded and mixing fact with fiction. You live in a make-belief world and think
movies are real. It might be comfortable and cosy, but not real and not honest.
If you look at this page, you will see the reason why at least 80% of Earth's population
laugh about these gullible Muslims. You will see all the stupidity and superstitious beliefs
in one long list. THAT should be your target, not people who use rational thinking every
day and who don't need an invisible, super-natural being to get them through the day.
You need to realise this if you are a man of conscience."
And finally, to end your little rant with such pathos, such emotional pleading I find
horribly false and totally disingenuous.
YOU are the one who has to believe that a god exists due to faith, without evidence,
let alone proof and that the "arguments" you put forward in favour of a god or your favourite
god are not even that.
YOU have to believe that this very god, which does not even have any credible proof for
its existence, authored a book, again, without proof.
You are the one who tells others that the moon was recently split in half and that a
piece of steak can temporarily raise a corpse and that this is real and the truth. God's
truth.
And YOU appeal to MY conscience?
Oh boy!