Do Palaeontologists think Dinosaurs backwards?

Submitted by Amin Riaz (United Kingdom), Dec 22, 2011 at 18:19

You are getting close to matching Dhimmi_No_More. ... You have some way to go. But I so wouldn't want to be you.

Amin, You say Arabic is not weak just Arabs. Arabic is the tool of language used by Arabs, and Arabs are choose not to use it because it is weak.

You are no linguist - you cannot tell what an English Adjective is - hence you are NOT qualified to make that statement. So I keep asking you to give expert evidence and you fail MISERABLY. You have not even come up with ONE name yet.

Arabic is a tool shaped by Arabs and its failure as a tool is obvious. The reason they do not use it for science is that it is weak, the reason Arabs have gotten behind the rest of the world Academically is that Arabic is a weak and backward language.

Again ILLOGICAL argument...... you do not speak understand or know ANYTHING about the language. Virtually all expert opinion point to Arabic being a strong Semitic language. A linguistically strong language .... unlike English - whose fellow language Latin would be more appropriate for comparison.

The proof is its lack of ability to change, the basics of Arabic may be great for poetry, but that is its limit because the Language has stagnated. You say ever language has its ups and down, true, but usually it goes up then down, I do not see any revival of Latin or Ancient Egyptian.

I have never once said language has its up and down.... else quote me and give the the comment where I have said it. You ability to make up things is fascinating and ridiculous.

Although Arabic poetry is great and all that. It is known for its prose. Arabic is perfect scientific language - given its logical root system and they way it branches out. It has the strongest of all lexicon - hence it can carry all of its history with it.

Name me one other language of that caliber? With reasoning and with evidence.

YOU TALK ABOUT A SUBJECT WITH WHOM YOU ARE TOTALLY UNFAMILIAR WITH. YOU FAIL TO SPELL WORDS CORRECTLY AND DO NOT EVEN KNOW WHAT AN ADJECTIVE IS.

HOW CAN YOU COMMENT ON ARABIC - WITHOUT EVEN READING A SINGLE BOOK ABOUT IT? I KNOW THIS BECAUSE I HAVE REPEATEDLY ASKED YOU THIS

YOU HAVE BASED YOUR OPINION ON PREJUDICE.

Once a language has become outdated, it is very difficult for it to catch up and modernize. Arabic is especially hamstrung do to classical Arabic being the Language of the Qu'ran, and Muslims sticking to Arabic as the language of their God and only Arabic.

Oh is that the case. You dont know what you are talking about. Arabic has modern and colloquial forms. You have absolutely know knowledge of anything about Arabic at all. Chinese, Hindi, Benglai, Hebrew, African languages.... what except English and few Europeans languages are they all out of date.

And where did you get this notion that Arabic is somehow out of date?

Your total defence is that Arabic Scholars think Arabic is great, well Amin flint knappers think flint is great too, but the world has moved on.

You keep repeating your views over and over and then you lie over and over to protect them. I have EXPOSED you thoroughly and completely ..... When has that been my defense. That is precisely the reason I gave you and asked of you views and works of Western Scholars - and you lied over that as well.

Where? Quote me with reference to my previous posts..... ....

The limitations of Arabic are obvious as it stagnated in the 1400s, it does not cope with the demands of a modern society, even advertising in Arab countries has difficulties in using classical Arabic to suit the modern concepts of advertising.

HUH? Arabs DO NOT use classical Arabic outside religion. Again this is your PREJUDICE and HATE talking. Arabic has modern form and they used that. It has lexicon UNMATCHED except for English. It also has region colloquial forms.

If you bother to read up about it .... well you might learn something.

You clinging to the notion that scholars think Arabic is not weak is a silly argument. No specialist derides their speciality, do Palaeontologists think Dinosaurs backwards?

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha - I laugh and laugh .. . Is this a sane logical argument. I bet you have not read ten books this past year... you English is poor - your arguments are even worse. THey are right down idiotic and senseless.

Robert Spencer - whom you probably do read.... claims to be an expert of Islam - yet he is anti- the religion. ... this is why I asked you to bring

A job of an academics is to present evidence - without personal bias. There are Historian, Anthropologist, scientist, Sociologist and etc. NOT JUST LINGUIST - who you could have brought up ......

No they think they are wonderful. But like Arabic, they failed to adapt to a changing environment. The Muslim breeding argument is even more weak, what happens when the Arabic speaking world does not have oil to buy food any more? The lack of Education, Industry and Agriculture means your uncontrolled breeding will turn into another Arab mess for the rest of the world to clean up after.

Again - adding 2 and 2 to get 7. You didn't even understand what I said.... or deceitfully present more of your ignorant bias.

The mass migration of Arabic speaking peoples to the west is proof of they failure of Arabic and Muslim societies to provide a standard of living for its peoples.

Mass migration? Again making BASELESS arguments.... have you got figures?

The uncontrolled population growth of North Africa and the Middle East is nothing to be proud of Amin, when the whole Arabic world resembles Somalia, who will be laughing then? I guess you have already fled the backward Arabic world, but you still cling to the illusions.

There we have it - I told you from start you are speaking from IGNROANCE and HATE. And the above is evidence.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".