British MPs vote 274-12 to call for recognition of Palestine - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Bobie;46226367]so your scientific contribution amounts to uh.. nothing?[/QUOTE] I really don't understand what you're trying to get at, but whatever it is, it's stupid.

[QUOTE=draugur;46226334]Just like how Europe didn't recover from the plunge into the Dark ages huh?[/QUOTE] I don't think the middle east is going to be behind the curve forever (at all, hopefully it'll progress quickly), but it's not really fair to call the middle ages the dark ages.

[QUOTE=draugur;46226375]People said the same thing about Europe during the dark ages. It recovered just fine. Europe literally plunged from being mostly part of the large Roman Empire, to being a collection of roaming barbarians and feudal lords in the span of about 500 years, which lasted until around the collapse of the Islamic empire. The Middle East is essentially experiencing their dark ages right now, it'll recover. Just as it took Europe many hundreds of years, it may well take the Middle East a few hundred years, maybe less, we don't know. Modern technology can accelerate many things that once took hundreds of years to a few decades.[/QUOTE] Okay sure, it has a chance to recover. but you have to agree that currently, their innovation in science is non-existent

[QUOTE=draugur;46226302]Dicking about in their own filth in a time known as the dark ages.[/QUOTE] This is so wrong its painful to read.

[QUOTE=nataS;46226382]I really don't understand what you're trying to get at, but whatever it is, it's stupid.[/QUOTE] if you're critical of the arab world for having no recent scientific achievements, it is only fair you should have at least one scientific achievement. not having a single one makes your argument a little bit pointless, it means you may as well be one of those arabs you talk of so highly.

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;46226385]I don't think the middle east is going to be behind the curve forever (at all, hopefully it'll progress quickly), but it's not really fair to call the middle ages the dark ages.[/QUOTE] The dark ages is actually the proper hisoriographic way to refer to a great portion of the middle ages from roughly the 3rd to 13th century. (before just recently, the entire middle ages, up until the 17th century was commonly called the dark ages or the middle ages, they were the same thing) It is called the dark ages because it was the time after the "light of rome" died out and thus it was "dark". It is actually quite fair to call the middle ages the dark ages. [QUOTE=nataS;46226387]Okay sure, it has a chance to recover. but you have to agree that currently, their innovation in science is non-existent[/QUOTE] Uhm, IIRC Iran built the first vertical desalination plant, which has shown something like a 40% efficiency increase over the common horizontal design. The figure may not be correct, but I'm sure it was Iran who did it. That aside, I honestly do not know for sure, thus I will not agree they are non-existent. I am a history major, not a science major. [editline]13th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Poben;46226394]This is so wrong its painful to read.[/QUOTE] Care to prove me wrong or are you just going to continue failing at making zing worthy remarks?

[QUOTE=nataS;46225969]There hasn't been a single person that won a Nobel prize in anything from the Arab world. While the ratio between the amount of Israeli-born people to the amount of Nobel prizes is pretty high. This has however nothing to do with recognizing a country.[/QUOTE] Because nobel prizes were awarded since the beginning of modern civilisation, right? This thread really brought out some thick cunts Anyway, great news. Good to see that parliament isn't comprised of entirely uncompassionate arseholes

[QUOTE=Morbo!!!;46226465]Because nobel prizes were awarded since the beginning of modern civilisation, right? This thread really brought out some thick cunts[/QUOTE] In modern times, right now it's dead. I'm fully aware of their contributions in the past, but right now it's just sad. [editline]13th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Bobie;46226408]if you're critical of the arab world for having no recent scientific achievements, it is only fair you should have at least one scientific achievement. not having a single one makes your argument a little bit pointless, it means you may as well be one of those arabs you talk of so highly.[/QUOTE] You're not following the steps correctly [url]http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1411725[/url]

[QUOTE=draugur;46226444]The dark ages is actually the proper hisoriographic way to refer to a great portion of the middle ages from roughly the 3rd to 13th century. (before just recently, the entire middle ages, up until the 17th century was commonly called the dark ages or the middle ages, they were the same thing) It is called the dark ages because it was the time after the "light of rome" died out and thus it was "dark". It is actually quite fair to call the middle ages the dark ages.[/QUOTE] No reputable historian ever calls it the dark ages, and it is a term which fell out of use years ago because of ignorance of that period. The correct term is also "Historiographic". [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolingian_Renaissance[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance_of_the_12th_century[/url] The developments in Medieval Europe (and the eventual end of Medieval Europe and its transition into the Early Modern Period) are too important to deny because they were integral to the creation of the modern world, and to call it a "dark age" is a misunderstanding at best of that period. This isn't to discount the achievements of the Islamic scholars (my favourites being Avicenna and Ibn Khaldun) but the Islamic "Golden Age" ended by the 13th century, and they weren't the guys who invented the printing press.

So your argument falls upon correcting a spelling mistake and implying it was intentional. And, it is the proper term for the early beginning of the middle ages. Dark ages has nothing to do with whatever stupid definition of "dark ages" you have made up for this argument. Just because important shit happened during it doesn't make it any less of a decline from what the area experienced before (Which is where the fucking term comes from). The dark ages/early middle ages saw the rise of feudal government which is a massive thing, but that doesn't make the horrible living conditions for the commoners any less of an experience of "dicking around in filth." when their commoner ancestors were able to access nearly 100 gallons or more of water a day in Rome for bathing and drinking. [editline]13th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Poben;46226565] but the Islamic "Golden Age" ended by the 13th century, and they weren't the guys who invented the printing press.[/QUOTE] This just in, unless your golden age lasts some arbitrary number of years, none of your achievements count for anything, especially if you didn't invent the printing press. The decline of the Islamic empire, and the Decline of Rome don't void their historic achievements respectively. Every construct crumbles eventually. The fact that Europe developed out of the Dark ages into the middle ages is part of the cycle of civilizations (I.E. where the Middle East is now, having to develop out of the "dark ages" and into the "middle ages" and beyond, which it is doing rather well all things considered). You cannot build where something already stands after all. [editline]13th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Poben;46226565] The developments in Medieval Europe are too important to deny [/QUOTE] Good thing I never denied them then huh? Of course shit still happened during that time that was amazing and important, but when you reference the dark ages, you're not saying that everything that was achieved isn't really important, you're comparing the relative decline in massive progress and quality of life that was common in the Roman empire. We went from Rome, a beacon of progress, scientific and cultural achievement, massively wealthy and a generally good quality of life (sans slaves of course), to feudal Europe. The decline is what the dark ages refers to, not a lack of achievement.

[QUOTE=draugur;46226804]And, it is the proper term for the early beginning of the middle ages. Dark ages has nothing to do with whatever stupid definition of "dark ages" you have made up for this argument.[/quote] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_(historiography)#Modern_academic_use[/url] It's misleading to use it as a term, because it glosses over centuries of history with an inaccurate pejorative label. [quote]The fact that Europe developed out of the Dark ages into the middle ages is part of the cycle of civilizations (I.E. where the Middle East is now, having to develop out of the "dark ages" and into the "middle ages" and beyond, which it is doing rather well all things considered).[/quote] The "cycle of civilizations" has little credible academic standing and grossly misinterprets how societal complexity operates. To say that the Middle East is in a "Dark Age" right now is an embarrassing and racist statement to make. [quote]We went from Rome, a beacon of progress, scientific and cultural achievement, massively wealthy and a generally good quality of life (sans slaves of course), to feudal Europe.[/quote] You're talking about an fiercely militaristic Empire built upon the backs of millions of slaves and bodies. They copied almost every aspect of their civilization from Greece and had criminals fight to the death in public areas for entertainment. Soldiers were stoned to death by their comrades for desertion, while Christians were nailed to wooden crosses. Their entire economic system was built upon invading and looting countries before enslaving their peoples and forcing them to work in mines or agricultural estates. More than half of the population was illiterate, and they lived in a deeply unequal society with a small number of people owning most of the Empires wealth and monies. The Empire collapsed under the strain of keeping itself alive, by which point it had passed laws making it illegal for common people to travel without permission.

[QUOTE=Snowmew;46226234]See: Also, keep in mind that Nobel prizes are not awarded posthumously (with some exceptions in extreme circumstances). For example, we owe [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_numerals"]our entire numeric system[/URL] to "the Arab world". That sentence makes absolutely no sense. At least you're right on one front.[/QUOTE] Arabs did not invent the numeric system, thid is a common misconception, they helped spread it however Hindu Indians invented it. [url]http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numeral_system[/url] [editline]14th October 2014[/editline] [quote]The numeral system and the zero concept, developed by the Hindus in India slowly spread to other surrounding countries due to their commercial and military activities with India. The Arabs adopted it and modified them. Even today, the Arabs call the numerals they use "Rakam Al-Hind" or the Hindu numeral system. [/quote]

[QUOTE=Poben;46226953][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_(historiography)#Modern_academic_use[/url] It's misleading to use it as a term, because it glosses over centuries of history with an inaccurate pejorative label. The "cycle of civilizations" has little credible academic standing and grossly misinterprets how societal complexity operates. To say that the Middle East is in a "Dark Age" right now is an embarrassing and racist statement to make. You're talking about an fiercely militaristic Empire built upon the backs of millions of slaves and bodies. They copied almost every aspect of their civilization from Greece and had criminals fight to the death in public areas for entertainment. Soldiers were stoned to death by their comrades for desertion, while Christians were nailed to wooden crosses. Their entire economic system was built upon invading and looting countries before enslaving their peoples and forcing them to work in mines or agricultural estates. More than half of the population was illiterate, and they lived in a deeply unequal society with a small number of people owning most of the Empires wealth and monies. The Empire collapsed under the strain of keeping itself alive, by which point it had passed laws making it illegal for common people to travel without permission.[/QUOTE] By the end, yes, but to use your argument against you, it's misleading to use that as an argument because Rome wasn't entirely that. There was a time when anyone could travel through Rome if they were a citizen, and blah blah, Roman golden age. It's misleading to say the entire middle ages are the dark ages yes, I addressed that, that is why it isn't any longer called the dark ages. The term dark ages refers to the early period after the collapse of the Roman empire, as I have said.

So what in terms of correcting a 70 year old mistake is this actually going to do except inflate palistines ego, last time they got recognition, they made some really stupid decision because of it, like allying with hamas [editline]13th October 2014[/editline] Not saying they shouldn't be recognised , its about time but the groundwork for the last conflict was caused by the UN recognition only last year

[QUOTE=Poben;46226953] The "cycle of civilizations" has little credible academic standing and grossly misinterprets how societal complexity operates. To say that the Middle East is in a "Dark Age" right now is an embarrassing and racist statement to make. [/QUOTE] Hence the quotations? It's not a literal thing there, loose comparison to give meaning to people. Saying that the Middle East is currently sitting in a position of lower relative social development than the "western world" is probably more correct (though again, that entire idea is debatable and really generalizes a very large portion of the world), yes, but I meant to convey a similar relationship between the two times, not a literal "they are exactly the fucking same" relationship that you are interpreting it as. [editline]13th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Sableye;46227081]So what in terms of correcting a 70 year old mistake is this actually going to do except inflate palistines ego, last time they got recognition, they made some really stupid decision because of it, like allying with hamas [editline]13th October 2014[/editline] Not saying they shouldn't be recognised , its about time but the groundwork for the last conflict was caused by the UN recognition only last year[/QUOTE] Well, it sets more groundwork for actual solutions to be presented as it is recognized by a world power as a nation. That's a start, though a rather small one. The situation will probably last at least another decade if not more before we get any real solutions moving I think. Sad really.

ignoring the shithole of an argument going up above we need to democratize and stabilize palestine before we recognize it as a country. while I doubt this'll happen any time soon, I don't see much good coming out of recognizing a hamas-run country.

[QUOTE=Monkah;46227539]ignoring the shithole of an argument going up above we need to democratize and stabilize palestine before we recognize it as a country. while I doubt this'll happen any time soon, I don't see much good coming out of recognizing a hamas-run country.[/QUOTE] So many things wrong with that last part.

[QUOTE=Sprockethead;46225751]Israel contributes more science than the entire islamic world combined for instance.[/QUOTE] Wow.

[img]http://cl.ly/Y0zH/Image%202014.10.14%2010%3A38%3A44.png[/img] the rebels

[QUOTE=codenamecueball;46229595][img]http://cl.ly/Y0zH/Image%202014.10.14%2010%3A38%3A44.png[/img] the rebels[/QUOTE] That's missing a couple and includes the tellers, both of whom actually supported the measure but are recorded as a no vote for procedural reasons

I hope that one day Israel will have further separation of state and religion so that stupid decisions based on contradictions will be voided, and greater decisions will come forth to fruition.