Showing posts tagged religion
I’m afraid of no one - Malala Yousufzai View high resolution

I’m afraid of no one - Malala Yousufzai

(Source: azaadi)

(Reblogged from arabswagger)
jtotheizzoe: Requisite Higgs hilarity. View high resolution

jtotheizzoe:

Requisite Higgs hilarity.

(Reblogged from jtotheizzoe)
Alternatives … LOL View high resolution

Alternatives … LOL

(Reblogged from redbeardnofear)
So true.

So true.

(Reblogged from teeny-hummingbird)

Anti-science trend gets more scary

Same thing can be seen in Malaysia. :(

The United States is experiencing an anti-science resurgence not seen since the 1920s. This spring the Tennessee House of Representatives passed a bill supporting creationism to be taught in science classes. Presidential candidates Rick Perry and Michelle Bachmann are on record for denying climate change and doubting evolution.

Bachmann suggests “putting all science on the table and then letting students decide,” while Perry believes teachers should “teach both creationism and evolution.” […]

That approach is not science. It does not differentiate between knowledge derived at through the scientific method from that of the Socratic method (discovering truth, not through experimentation, but debate).

By telling students that they can “believe in evolution” if they so choose, teachers reduce a scientific theory to mere opinion. Not teaching this difference encourages students to think that scientific theories can be debated in the same way people debate politics or sports.

Science must be debated, but unlike personal or political opinions, scientific theories must be debated on the veracity of data and the results a theory predicts: results that conform to rigorous, measurable standards. Theories are accepted only after data generated from exhaustive, repetitive, controlled experimentation suggests that a particular hypothesis is the most likely candidate to explain the phenomenon in question.

Therefore it is not only incorrect but also unethical to suggest that scientific theories are mere opinions to “believe in” based on personal or faith-based preferences. For example, should a teacher suggest that heliocentric theory (a sun centered solar system) is false because it conflicts with the Biblical account of Joshua halting the movement of the sun?

Moreover, should superceded theories have equal time with consensus theories? Should teachers give equal time to flat earth theory or suggest the miasma theory of disease (the idea that disease is caused by bad air) is as effective at explaining illness as germ theory? What of the alleged merits of astrology?

The above theories have a place in education but should rather be used as examples of how science works to root out untruths and discard false ideas. […]

(Reblogged from theamericanbear)
Science flies you to the moon, religion into skyscrapers

Science flies you to the moon, religion into skyscrapers

(Reblogged from carukia)

Muslims must be free to debate issues such as evolution without fear

Problem with a big segment of the Muslim population - rejecting scientific facts. It’s kinda funny that issues of Islamic jurisprudence is only around 150 verses compared to 750 verses of scientific direction in the Quran.

“
Last week, David Cameron gave a speech telling British Muslims – rightly – that they had to support “equal rights regardless of race, sex or sexuality… This is what defines us as a society. To belong here is to believe in these things”. Yet he has been a key defender behind the scenes of retaining the bishops in parliament, even though they explicitly oppose “equal rights regardless or race, sex, or sexuality.” They refuse to allow women to hold the top jobs in their organisation. They demanded an opt-out from laws banning discrimination against gay people, to allow individuals to express their “conscience” – a loophole so large it would render the law meaningless. Using Cameron’s logic, they oppose “what defines us as a society” and do not “belong here”, yet he is keeping them in a position of great unelected power. It seems his “muscular liberalism” only applies to people with brown skins.
Johann Hari: Get bishops out of our law-making
Which one will Egypt choose? View high resolution

Which one will Egypt choose?

Religion can't explain tide? Science can :)

  • O'REILLY: I'll tell you why [religion's] not a scam, in my opinion: tide goes in, tide goes out. Never a miscommunication. You can't explain that.
  • SILVERMAN: Tide goes in, tide goes out?
  • O'REILLY: See, the water, the tide comes in and it goes out, Mr. Silverman. It always comes in, and always goes out. You can't explain that.
More Poverty = More Religion p/s: Look where so called Muslim countries are. (Malaysia, Indonesia, Saudi etc.) View high resolution

More Poverty = More Religion

p/s: Look where so called Muslim countries are. (Malaysia, Indonesia, Saudi etc.)

Fringe Elements: Piecing together some parallels

From Newsweek

“When the Viaduct de Millau opened in the south of France in 2004, this tallest bridge in the world won worldwide accolades. German newspapers described how it “floated above the clouds” with “elegance and lightness” and “breathtaking” beauty. In France, papers praised the…

(Reblogged from fringeelements)

Regarding the Church bombing incident..

Sad, terrible and disgusted.

  1. As a Muslim, I have NO problems with other religions using the term “Allah”.
  2. As a Muslim, I do have problems with those who bombed/burned places of worships
  3. Malaysians need to learn to live like Sabahans.
  4. It was a great example from the Christians for forgiving the perpetrators.
  5. I on the other hand, may these terrorists rot in hell.

p/s: I’ve said more about it in twitter (@edham_arief), feel free to follow/engage me there.

p/s: I’m Muslim, but this video is funny, just enjoy if for the sake of laughing okay ;)