I am here to just say one thing? Why do YOU hate islam? and you should really give a valid reason not a shitty one that says 'Because media' and Yes, I am a muslim for those who ask, just tell me, come out of your shell and say why you HATE it, and I could be here to clarify things to you. Also here is something that most people mistake about islam is that "Islam hates other religions" for this I say, Islam does not hate ANY religion, but it suggests to 'invite' them to islam, as slowly, and peacefully, even if they refuse, you can try and try, until it's their choice, you stop. and for all the wars that happened, it's because the other religions decided to come into war on Islam. If you need anything clarified, I am here to answer you, don't be scared, I won't be offended by anyone, also haters, you can reply, I won't care  I can answer this . People hate Islam because of their backwardness still in the society . They are the most undeveloped ones mentally. Heard so many conflict wars among same religion people in Pakistan (Islam religion). They are not able to develop themself financially and as well as socially. They Just like wars. (mostly) They dont know what is peace. Still Ecurrencies like Paypal , skrill is not available for pakistan (an undeveloped backward nation ) So people hate Islams I will tell you why they hate Islam because in this world there are some people in non Muslim who is power full and rich, they do politics only against Islam. And those non Muslim who reads Quran from heart and know the facts they accept Islam. There is majority of people who don't like if any non Muslim accepting Islam so they teaching and informing bad against the Islam to their relatives friends. But there are some non Muslims still like and love the way Muslim lives and preach Islam to their children Meanwhile, Islam preaches to kill any who wants to leave Islam..... Meanwhile, ISIS says convert to "our type Islam" or we cut your head off.....
I will tell you why they hate Islam because in this world there are some people in non Muslim who is power full and rich, they do politics only against IslamKind of looks to me like Islam's problems come from within. |
|
|
|
So... the reaction against Obama is like this. In the beginning the neo-Fascists held the Senate, the House, and the Presidency. First the conservatives took over the Congress. Second the conservatives took over the Senate. Now the conservatives are about to Trump the Presidency. Then the conservatives will have their job cut out for them. Because then...they'll have to take over the Republican party. |
|
|
|
Donald Trump is a joke candidate.
Well, he is a joke i guess.
The joke is in the office. |
|
|
|
.....
4 Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head.
....
Clearly you dishonor your head when you prophesize about the Government Conspiracy behind 911. In the future please take your tinfoil hat off first. |
|
|
|
EXCLUSIVE: NOAA Relies On ‘Compromised’ Thermometers That Inflate US Warming TrendThe National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s reliance on poorly-sited weather stations to calculate surface temperatures is inflating the warming trend of the U.S. and maybe even the rest of the world, according to a landmark study looking at three decades of data. “The majority of weather stations used by NOAA to detect climate change temperature signal have been compromised by encroachment of artificial surfaces like concrete, asphalt, and heat sources like air conditioner exhausts,” Anthony Watts, a seasoned meteorologist and lead author of the study, said in a statement Thursday. These “compromised” weather stations run hotter than stations that are well-sited, and are used by NOAA as a benchmark to make upward adjustments for other weather stations that are part of the agency’s official temperature record. Watts and his fellow researchers found only 410 “unperturbed” weather stations out of the 1,218 stations used by NOAA to determine U.S. climate trends. These “unperturbed” stations don’t need to be adjusted by NOAA because they had not been moved, had any equipment changes, or change in the time temperatures were observed. Watts found well-sited stations show significantly less warming than poorly-sited stations from 1979 to 2008 — the time period was chosen in order to respond to NOAA papers from 2009 and 2010 justifying its weather station adjustments. Now, Watts has years of evidence showing NOAA is relying on shoddy weather stations to make its temperature adjustments. “This study demonstrates conclusively that this issue affects temperature trend and that NOAA’s methods are not correcting for this problem, resulting in an inflated temperature trend. It suggests that the trend for U.S. temperature will need to be corrected.” Watts said. http://dailycaller.com/2015/12/17/exclusive-noaa-relies-on-compromised-thermometers-that-inflate-u-s-warming-trend/I am going to have to report you to the Bureau of Adjustments. |
|
|
|
I am in no way a supporter of Donald Trump, but if it did come down to a general election between Trump and Clinton, Trump would have my vote. Republicans and conservatives wake up Trump can not win in November. If he gets the nomination say hello to President Hillary. Thanks for the wisdom, but the conservatives have already vetoed the Jeb Hillary ticket. |
|
|
|
I am in no way a supporter of Donald Trump, but if it did come down to a general election between Trump and Clinton, Trump would have my vote. My opinion is that the ones to shout xenophobia from the rooftops are the ones who are "pragmatophobes."....
I don't see it that way. My opinion is simply that Clinton(s) have sold out to the higher bidder long ago - the Saudi oil interests. So they are part and parcel of a creeping Islam, such as the Saudis want. They are part of a no-useful-response to ISIS. They have sold out to keeping America weak and making it weaker, keeping us from running a pipeline from Canada, keeping us from having nuclear power. The money flows through their "Foundation." Now take a guess as to who paid for Obama's college education. |
|
|
|
It seems to be the installed capacity. Well, it´s still a microscopic market share and not really economically feasible since it has to be subsidized but maybe that will change.
Government bribes distort the market. IN the absence of those bribes, solar would in fact be installed where it was long term sustainable. In the presence of those factors, you have really stupid and insane decision making. Tropical islands, for example. That's likely a good market for solar. |
|
|
|
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/12/16/greenland-has-lost-a-staggering-amount-of-ice-and-its-only-getting-worse/?postshare=6131450289470412&tid=ss_tw
“We find that 2003–2010 mass loss not only more than doubled relative to the 1983–2003 period, but also relative to the net mass loss rate throughout the twentieth century,” the study notes. It states that mass loss in this most recent period, ending in 2010, was 186 gigatons per year on average, though other estimates have put that number even higher for the most recent years. NASA currently states that Greenland is losing 287 billion tons of ice per year.
The fact that Greenland was losing mass throughout the entirety of the 20th century may seem surprising. But the paper suggests that we are coming out of the Little Ice Age, a cooler period, and so glacier retreat was more or less kicked off around 1900 — and then accelerated as major human-caused global warming kicked in.
Here is a phenomena under observation by scientists. They would ascribe causation to two factors, natural and man made. To the credit of these scientists, they acknowledge the Little Ice Age. James Hanson, and his collaborator in alarmism, Al Gore, tried for a long time to claim that there was no LIA, and no Medival Warming Period, either. These natural variations got in the way of the false hypothesis they wished to put over on people. These scientist state there was a LIA, and it was a big factor in the studied melt of Greenland. But is the man made effect insignificant, moderate, or severe? That is the direct result of what scientists call "climate sensitivity."
|
|
|
|
Due to a small technical issue, like not being a citizen of USA, I can't vote for or against Trump or whoever runs for whatever position there... This said, it's not my business. But if you're experiencing the same technical issue as me, keep posting your opinion, maybe someone who is will give a rat's ass about it... or not.  These small technical issues DID NOT PREVENT overseas donations of > 90M to Obama's 2008 campaign, which were undocumented and never investigated. |
|
|
|
I am a Muslim, and being a Muslim its my responsibilty to told you these millitants groups that do not do that on the name of ISLAM.
So you as a member of one sect of Islam want to tell people that another sect of islam is not islam or something like that. But to westerners this is absolutely no different than Protestants claiming Catholics are "not true Christians." Let's just say that this Kafir does not buy your argument at all. And it's my responsibility to tell you that. Please try to keep your responses brief. There is no need to quote massively from old books to make an argument. One or two verses is usually sufficient. But non believers will not believe the verses, of course. However, I understand why you quote them - nobody argues that most Muslims are not peaceful. meanwhile, let's look at November - www.thereligionofpeace.comJihad Report November, 2015 Jihad Attacks:169 Countries: 30 Allah Akbars: 34 Dead Bodies: 1455 Critically Injured:1706 Whomever is coming up with these numbers is horribly wrong. I follow the Syrian war through various militant groups social media and can tell you there are hundreds of akbars summoned each day. If not thousands. 34 in an entire month? naw dude. I've even made an entire compilation of akbars back in january, check this out (if you can handle it): http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d6e_1391006121The list is world wide. Remember a lot of things do not get news coverage. Pakistan does not, Paris does. Etc. The complete list is on the website. Refute the list, not me.... |
|
|
|
All religion was created by man to control other men.
god didnt create man, man created god. Look, what's a king gonna do? Sure, we made up some rules to get all the women breeding, producing male children so that we could have lots of footsoldiers. But then you send them out to conquer those Evils Peoples to the East, and they get scared. All because they are fixing to get killed off. That just isn't going to work out well, because I want the treasures in that palace to the East. Hey, seriously. They got a whole room full of treasures. So I came up with this scheme, we just tell all those dudes they are going to a Heaven. After they get slaughtered in battle of course. We threw in some cool shit there, too. Like lots of virgins for them, PLUS their wives and families. And lots of wine. But first they have to get killed. So what'd'ya know? These fools run at that enemy like they don't care if they die! Course they mostly do, but maybe ten percent of them get through and take the palace. And they brought back that whole room of treasure. This worked out pretty well, so now I'm thinking, we can get a whole organization built up around this - we can have dudes in black robes, long beards and stuff sternly lecturing them - even from the time they are babies - that God says they need to go fight wars for me, basically. Well, you get the idea. So far it's working out pretty well. |
|
|
|
The problem with this, would be IF IT WERE TRUE that catastrophic global warming were nigh, then this is an admission of guilt by the greenies that it is their fault alone - for stalling or killing every single nuclear plant proposal.
But there is evidence that it is not true, which means they are fools instead of criminals.
There are also lots of evidence that it is true  But let's not get back into this debate as we more or less concluded just before that we were still unable to be sure if it's true or not... We'll maybe settle this in a few years! Though as a French I'm strongly in favor of the "precaution principle". This principle is even written in our constitution! Concerning the nuclear, again as a French I can't say anything against it :3 It's one of our main skill domain, it produces around 75% of our electricity, with the hydro producing 20%. Nuclear is currently a good thing, wether you believe in high CO2 sensitivity or not, CO2 has some proven and undeniable negative effects especially on some species highly sensitive. And again it can't be a bad thing to reduce our emission, just in case because we have no freaking precise and undoubtful idea about their consequences. The problem being that Nuclear is even less renewable than oil. If tomorrow we wanted to produce the electricity of the world with nuclear we would have barely enough uranium for a few decades. Nuclear research is going trough the roof though and we hope to finish the NuclearPlant v2.0 in not long, it will allow us to use the current nuclear waste to produce electricity... Granting the world a few decades of electricity. Security and safety is also a big problem with Nuclear. I believe Nuclear plants should belong to the state only, as private nuclear plants tend to be optimized for profit, most of the time impacting the safety. That was the case in Japan (around 20 incidents that "disappeared" in the years before Fukushima) and that's the case in France: since complete privatisation less and less maintenance time are allowed to rise the productivity of the plants... Creating safety breach. The main problem being that Nuclear is not renewable. It can and should only be considered as a transition state. A necessity but not a solution. Currently the only true renewable energy is hydrolic electricity production. But research concerning solar electricity are on their good way! Recently a scientist managed to reproduce the exact photosynthesis cycle of trees. It produces electricity AND oxygen while consuming CO2, at an even better rate than current solar systems. I think we should develop nuclear to buy us some time, and use this time to develop real renewable energies, not trying to implement unfinished or unrealistic solution such as our current wind and solar energy solution. Let's continue the research, France will sell nuclear to the world while you find something else This I all more or less agree with, IIRC carbon emissions per person in France was about 4T/year, in the USA it is more like 20T/year. However, Uranium reserves are adequate for thousands of years. And (apparently) better than that, Thorium reactors appear cheap and appear to have inherent safety far in excess of U. Thorium, it's all over the place...I have some in my garage, tungsten TIG welding rods are 2% thorium. You are correct about distrusting estimates for fusion power. Particularly when anybody starts showing pictures of Tokamuk style nonsense. |
|
|
|
After COP21 Failure The Terror Begins: Crazed Greenies Eat Their OwnThe Paris COP21 climate summit has gone better than any of us could have hoped. Which is to say so incredibly badly that the disappointed greenies have begun to turn on one another in bitterness and recrimination and Hunger-Games-like kill-or-be-killed savagery. Consider this offering from Harvard History of Science Professor Naomi Oreskes in the Guardian in which, bizarrely, she calls out of some of the green movement’s most fanatically green activists for not being green enough. Better still, she actually uses the worst insult of all in the greenie lexicon: “deniers.” After the signing of a historic climate pact in Paris, we might now hope that the merchants of doubt – who for two decades have denied the science and dismissed the threat – are officially irrelevant. But not so fast. There is also a new, strange form of denial that has appeared on the landscape of late, one that says that renewable sources can’t meet our energy needs. Oddly, some of these voices include climate scientists, who insist that we must now turn to wholesale expansion of nuclear power…. Who are these terrible New Denialists? New members of the climate ‘deniers’ club: James Hansen, Ken Caldeira, Kerry Emanuel, Tom Wigley . . . and Bill Gates. And what is the terrible error of judgement which has provoked the righteous wrath of Oreskes? Basically they have rejected one of the green movement’s most sacred shibboleths: they have come out in favour of nuclear power. Nuclear, these green heretics believe, is the only way that the planet can reduce its CO2 emissions quickly enough to avoid catastrophic global warming..... The problem with this, would be IF IT WERE TRUE that catastrophic global warming were nigh, then this is an admission of guilt by the greenies that it is their fault alone - for stalling or killing every single nuclear plant proposal. But there is evidence that it is not true, which means they are fools instead of criminals. |
|
|
|
I am a Muslim, and being a Muslim its my responsibilty to told you these millitants groups that do not do that on the name of ISLAM.
So you as a member of one sect of Islam want to tell people that another sect of islam is not islam or something like that. But to westerners this is absolutely no different than Protestants claiming Catholics are "not true Christians." Let's just say that this Kafir does not buy your argument at all. And it's my responsibility to tell you that. Please try to keep your responses brief. There is no need to quote massively from old books to make an argument. One or two verses is usually sufficient. But non believers will not believe the verses, of course. However, I understand why you quote them - nobody argues that most Muslims are not peaceful. meanwhile, let's look at November - www.thereligionofpeace.comJihad Report November, 2015 Jihad Attacks:169 Countries: 30 Allah Akbars: 34 Dead Bodies: 1455 Critically Injured:1706 I saw the website, sir, and i also read what you wants to describe. That is what i am saying that i am belong to one sect od Islam whcih is not believe on ANY type of killing at all, Why i belong? because there is a difference between those who practising the actual Islam and those who misunderstand it. ..... The presentation of Islam as a crude and barbaric religion which gives itself the right to cause unwarranted human and material suffering and destruction under the guise of Divine authority, is not the kind of Islam we find in the Holy Quran and in the precepts of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him!) There is a direct analogy here between the Christian Quaker sect, which professes non-violence, and your comparison of your behavior, with that of violent Islamists. Because Westerners know the great variety of Christian sects, it is easy for them to understand how many varieties of Islam can exist. (Although they may not know the intricate details of each sect, of course.) http://journal.ijreview.com/2015/12/251190-islam-religion-peace-came-politicians-need-stop-saying/ |
|
|
|
It is so hard to find talented, absolute chess players...  I have mentioned this before, that Trump and Putin would get along fine. The whole world would likely benefit. At the same time it's understandable how so many find Trump repulsive.... |
|
|
|
They want a piece of his money-making action from the adventure, no doubt. But I think he blew his mouth off about eating part of the other guy and the family got wind of that. He did admit to keeping the body for a week after all.
Look, let's not go after the guy without some evidence. Now was any barbecue sauce bottles found on the boat? Were they empty? |
|
|
|
the left doesnt love islam it loves people who vote for it, 80% of non whites including muslims vote for left wing parties who know they cant rely on the traditional white working class any more
But they will just vote for then until they have their Islamic parties... Does this means Muslims take leftists for fools? Probably... Yes. Non muslims are considered somewhat less than human. |
|
|
|
I am a Muslim, and being a Muslim its my responsibilty to told you these millitants groups that do not do that on the name of ISLAM.
So you as a member of one sect of Islam want to tell people that another sect of islam is not islam or something like that. But to westerners this is absolutely no different than Protestants claiming Catholics are "not true Christians." Let's just say that this Kafir does not buy your argument at all. And it's my responsibility to tell you that. Please try to keep your responses brief. There is no need to quote massively from old books to make an argument. One or two verses is usually sufficient. But non believers will not believe the verses, of course. However, I understand why you quote them - nobody argues that most Muslims are not peaceful. meanwhile, let's look at November - www.thereligionofpeace.comJihad Report November, 2015 Jihad Attacks:169 Countries: 30 Allah Akbars: 34 Dead Bodies: 1455 Critically Injured:1706 |
|
|
|
Off course, he was islamic as hell. His new wife he met some time before whas also evil.
I don't have a problem conceptually with someone being very evil, but also being Islamic. But lots of Muslims would not go for this. For me it's the same as saying "Can someone be totally evil and be Protestant?" Yeah, sure. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
