At 11:15 AM 12/25/2012, David Roberson wrote:
The recent intense concentration upon religious issues is not very
useful for several reasons. It is apparent that you have a strong
Christian faith and that others within this group favor the Muslim
faith to an equally strong degree.
David is addressing this to Jojo. However, there is a difference
here. I'm the only Muslim on this list, as far as I know. And I have
not used the list to propagandize Islam. But Jojo has used the list
to propagandize a whole series of issues that are not actually
Christian, per se, but specifically Evangelical Christian tropes,
intensely anti-Muslim, in ways that have offended other list members,
apparently non-Muslim. These are not necessirly "favoring the Muslim
faith," rather, they are, first, noting the inappropriateness of such
highly sectarian and abusive expressions here, and, secondly,
supporting a list member who is a relatively long-time participant
here, who has never used the list to promote Islam.
The anti-Muslim material was completely off-topic, not necessary for
any discussion here, on-topic or off-topic, except to establish Jojo
Jaro's thesis, that I'm a liar, and to him, "Muslim" means "liar."
The real thing that is happening is that he argued other topics, like
the whole birther myth, kept up an anti-Obama drumbeat, and on the
birther issue, specifically, I researched his claims and reported
them as being utterly bogus. Not as a prejudgment, but as the result
of research. And he could not tolerate that, and, I believe, that's
where his attack came from.
Essentially, I disagreed with him and provided evidence. That's
intolerable to him, so he then attacked with everything he could muster.
This in itself is a good thing and I say nothing against the
religious beliefs of you or anyone else. The world has enough
conflict over religion already and it is of little practical use for
us to continue that tradition here.
I"d agree, which is why I'd never have brought any of these issues
here. There is nothing wrong with Christian faith, per se, and I
certainly hope I've never attacked it. Evangelical Anti-Muslim
diatribes are not "Christian faith," they are highly political and
very modern interpretations, and often are highly offensive. (I do
*not* want to impeach all "Evangelical Christians," only there are
web sites that pander to the most ignorant of Christians, selling
them books and materials that make these claims about Islam, claims
that are highly ineffective in actual evangelical work, i.e.,
missionary work. Converts from Islam to Christianity are rare, but I
knew one. He'd have laughed at the silliness of this stuff. He
converted, more or less, as a reaction to a highly abusive father,
and, when I had dinner with him at his house, and told him a bit of
what I knew about Islam and the sources, he said, "If you'd have been
my father, I'd never have converted."
I.e., it was very personal. And the views of his father aren't that
uncommon among Muslims. Which goes to show?
It goes to show, in fact, what the Qur'an says, that people claim
religion without having it. We, too often, too many of us, cling to
our ignorance instead of to God.
As I said, neither side to this argument appears to be capable of
giving an inch toward a common resolution. For this reason, all I
see within the arguments presented is a repetition of the same
disgusting issues. Why waste so much energy toward this type of
discussion when it is known ahead of time that nothing will change?
Actually, I see more. Researching these issues has clarified certain
issues for me. It's like the birther thing. It seemed unlikely from
the outset, after all, don't the Republicans have, ah, attornies and
the like? A birth certificate conspiracy would require a series of
state officials to perjure themselves, etc. But, hey, I accept that
cold fusion is real, which indicates that sometimes pigs fly. I.e.,
something we expect is impossible turns out to be possible. But my
acceptance of cold fusion is based on evidence, not on wishful
thinking, and not on mere assertion, nor on interpretation of
isolated, selected evidence.
So I gave Jojo Jaro the benefit of the doubt, and looked up his
claims. Quite simply, they were highly misleading. Jojo stil repeats
the demand that Obama "show the archival certificate." He doesn't
mention that Obama actually has done this. Hawaii does not issue the
archival certificate routinely. What it issues is a birth
certificate, created by computer, from files where the legal
information is recorded. The signatures of the attending physician,
and other legally inconsequential information, are not on it. Obama
had previously requested a certificate from Hawaii, and had shown it,
and that routine certificate is adequate for all legal purposes. It's
the certification of the State of Hawaii that the birth took place as
described, as shown by the archival certificate, which is kept
guarded, that's why it is not routinely accessed.
After birthers repeatedly demanded that the archival certificate be
shown, Obama eventually requested, and got, a copy of the Archival
certificate. I believe that this required the permission of the
Secretary of State of Hawaii. You normally have to show cause for
such. In any case, the State made a copy, and it was certified by an
official as a true copy. Which is under penalty of perjury, by the
way. That copy was sent to Obama, and it was released in a press
conference. That is, the certified copy was shown to reporters, and
images of it were provided, and an image was released on the internet.
Things got really interesting, then, and for a moment, before I
really grasped the whole history and the implications, it had me
going. Because it looked like evidence existed that the copy released
on the internet was *forged.* I mean, it *really looked like that.*
But I kept reading, and I found the explanation, and I know enough
about file structures and formats to know that the explanation was
valid. And then we were back to the fact that if the archival copy
were actually forged, we'd have to have not just one official, but a
few, lying under penalty of perjury. And we'd also have the birth
record information from Hawaaian newspapers and the rest, consistent
with the released birth certificates.
The birthers came up with all kinds of "how come" arguments. Supposed
anachronisms, and all turned out to be highly misleading.
And this is quite relevant to what happens with arguments over cold
fusion or free energy research. People get into a fixed position and
interpret evidence, selectively, according to what they believe.
Certainly the mainstream physics community did this after 1989, with
cold fusion. But it's done by many, on all sides.
It's not true that "nothing will change." Because *I* change, and
others can follow me if they want. I learned about the whole birther
movement, I now understand it, what fueled it, what evidence kept
them going, all that. And also precisely where they went astray. I
didn't know any of this before.
Now, with most of the issues Jojo raised about Islam -- and he raises
them, I don't, for the most part -- I've discussed most of them
before, because I was highly active in Usenet discussions, more than
a decade ago. I don't recall the Moon God trope then, though.
Certainly the claims about prophetic pedophilia are old, female
circumcision has been a popular topic, and the accusation that
cutting off the hands of thieves is "barbaric" is likewise old. I
really don't have an axe to grind on any of these, because my God is
Reality, not Muhammad.
Indeed, if evidence were to surface that the Qur'an was written by a
nine-year old girl (Ayesha?), a tad precious, but *the manuscript is
found, it carbon dates properly, and it is signed, etc.*, *it would
not change my faith at all.* So what? If she wrote it, she did a damn good job!
The Qur'an describes itself as a "story," and then "the best of
stories." What's a story?
Most of the off topic subjects do not result in the amount of
conflict that is seen within the religious type. As you have noted,
there has been awful and unwarranted name calling engaged in and
insults which I find offensive. I would not object if you or anyone
else suggests an off topic subject that encourages discussions as
long as they do not result in that sort of behavior and they were at
least related to science. You will find me objecting if these
unrelated threads begin to become too long or cause serious personal
attacks. The recent discussions concerning global warming came
close to that threshold due to the sometimes heated exchanges that
resulted from what some perceive as a world endangering
situation. I can understand the passion since there are some
convinced that the fate of the world is in the balance unless
something is done quickly. Of course you and I fall on the same
side of this issue where we seek reasonable, cautious, and
thoughtful preparation.
That's not Jojo's position. That's what I suspect you *want* to be
Jojo's position.
In fact, we could probably find a general consensus here on this
proposition: evidence for anthropogenic global warming is widely
accepted, but may not be conclusive. Nevertheless, the possibility of
massive harm may exist, and therefore public policy should
1. Encourage and support research to verify and more accurately
predict the effect of human activity on global climate.
2. Consider measures to reduce the impact of such activity,
considering the possible negative impact of such measures, and
attempting to balance benefit and risk.
But we don't need to debate this here. It is generally off-topic,
though not *entirely* so. The relevance is that cold fusion, in
partcular, has promise as a non-polluting technology that could, by
replacing the use of fossil fuels and dangerous fission power,
address and ameliorate global warming. Much of the mention of global
warming here is in that context.
And then Jojo pops in, calling the discussion "global warmimg
propaganda," calling the scientists who express concern "liars," and
calling list participants, on very thin evidence, "fanatics."
His behavior is the same, regardless of topic, unless it's one he
really doesn't care about at all. I makes rare comments on such
things, and I suspect that he does such only to attempt to defuse the
other-wise completely true claim that trolling is all he does here.
I am attempting to understand the nature of the religious issues
that keep this and other threads like it alive and so
passionate. Do both sides of the argument believe that they must
prevail and have the last word?
Jojo has declared that he'll keep it up, period, until everyone on
the list stops the "off-topic" posting. I was quite willing to leave
the last word to Jojo, and said so, and completely stopped responding
to him. Flat out, it did not work. I forget how long I waited, but it
was enough to see that he'd been lying. He had no intention of
stopping, and he would -- and will, if permitted -- continue to
monitor the list for any off-topic (Or on-topic) post that he thinks
offends his sensibilities. And then he'll turn that thread into a flame war.
Sure, if everyone ignores him, that won't happen. There will just be
an odd post from him. But I've watched this kind of phenomenon since
the 1980s, on the internet. Trolls become expert at attracting
comment. Eventually, they figure out what buttons to push. And the
list will always have newcomers, who don't realize the situation, and
they will dive in, with exactly what the troll wants.
Is God watching the debate and pushing each side forward in a
manner that seems a little less than brotherly? For some reason I
do not believe so. Why don't both parties to this discussion
realize that they will never make headway in convincing the other
side and just stop the insanity? I find both sides equally guilty
and plead for each to abandon the discussion.
Good luck. David, you are expressing, here, a Very Bad Habit. You
judge guilt. And you do so with shallow knowledge, I suspect. I've
written a number of posts here with a detailed history of the Jojo
Affair. Were those posts inaccurate? They are not about religion,
they are about the history here, and they generally provided links to
posts. If they were unfairly chosen, perhaps cherry-picked, anyone
could find that out by checking the history themselves.
I've seen your kind of claim many, many times. I understand the
sentiment, and I sympathize. However, you are judging from a position
of ignorance, that's obvious.
Forgive me if I offended anyone as that was not my intent.
I'm not offended. I mentioned that I've seen this again and again.
You are simply human. I do not blame you, and do not consider you
"guilty." I just described what I see and understand, and I could
easily be wrong.
Notice, below, that Jojo does not accept your position and demands
that you call for the "termination of all off-topic threads." There
is a reason why he demands this. Do you know what it is?
The issue, for myself and others here, is not "off-topic threads." It
is gross incivility, trolling for outraged response, a declared
intention to retaliate until others shut up, and the abuse of the
list for what is actually a corrupt form of religious and political propaganda.
"Retaliate" here means, to him, and he's again been explicit about
this, "escalate." He will say or do whatever he thinks will be as
offensive as possible. It has nothing to do with what he claims he's
doing, "answering off-topic propaganda" here. In a couple of
occasions, some comment here, off-hand, could be interpreted that
way, but the whole Moon God thing did not come from that. He brought
the topic here, same with the wives of the prophet and the matter of
the Prophet's youngest wife, Ayesha. Nobody was asserting that the
Prophet was perfect, here. He bought it all here, and you really
ought to consider, if you want to judge this matter, David, why he
did this. It's quite clear, really, if you follow the history.
But that's a lot of work. Most people won't do that. They just want
the problem to Go Away. Can't people just be nice to each other?
I get it. I've watched this for years. In person, people can be nice
to each other. In a forum where anonymity is easy, *some people will
not be nice.* It's just the way it is. I'm a real person, I use a
real name, that is, I can very personally be identified, someone who
wants to do the work can figure out where I live. Jojo Jaro is
anonymous, and really doesn't care about his reputation, etc., and
that's obvious.
This is not an equal situation, David. I'm fully responsible for what
I write. Jojo thinks he's not. He thinks he can hide.
In fact, he is responsible, and he can't hide, but *that is a
religious position.* Happens to be Qur'an. I know that if I were to
lie, there would be no place I could hide from my own corruption.
(no more original content below)
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Jojo Jaro <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Tue, Dec 25, 2012 4:04 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Yes, you are right of course, but It would even be better if all
off-topic threads be terminated and brought to Vortex-B.
I am doing this is highlight a problem. If you call for the
termination of this thread, you need to call for the termination of
all off-topic threads. I believe that is only fair. For why should
the Vortex-L membership only be subjected to off-topic threads you
consider "interesting". In other words, why are you the arbiter of
what off-topic posts should be discuss or not? They are all
off-topic and should be banished from Vortex-L forever. Isn't that
what I've always asked for only to be insulted, ridiculed and
ignored? No offense intended, just asking your thinking process on this.
I consider this discussion with Lomax interesting. So, on that
aspect, this thread has as much right to be discussed in Vortex as
any other off-topic thread you consider "interesting". Or are you
saying that because you are an longer time member of Vortex-L, that
you opinion carries more weight than mine? Isn't that what the
chronic off-topic posters are essentially saying?
It's all or nothing my friend. No off-topic threads or ALL
off-topic threads allowed. Am I not being fair? Is what I'm saying unfair?
Jojo
PS, Of course, I am ready and prepared to stop all off-topic threads
that I participate in, but only if there is a corresponding
commitment from other chronis off-topic posters to moderate
incessant off-topic posts.
----- Original Message -----
From: <mailto:[email protected]>David Roberson
To: <mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2012 1:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Guys, I would very much prefer it if this thread were to be
terminated. It is apparent that there will never be agreement
between the parties involved in the dispute and highly unlikely that
one or the other will modify his beliefs. Why not just shake hands
(electronically of course) and change the subject to LENR or
something else more interesting.
I suspect that I am not the only one with this opinion.
Dave
