Do these 9.7 million-year-old teeth suggest EUROPE is the cradle of humanity? Controversial discovery could 'rewrite the history of mankind'

by Guest Sat Oct 21, 2017 8:59 am

The discovery of a set of 9.7-million-year-old teeth has led archaeologists to raise questions about the commonly believed 'out-of-Africa' theory of human origins.

The teeth, which were discovered in a former bed of the Rhine river, don't resemble those of any other human species found in Europe or Asia.

The find suggests that contrary to popular belief, Europe may be the cradle of humanity.

The researchers claim they were so baffled by the findings, that it has taken them a year to announce the discovery.

The teeth are currently being examined in detail by a team of scientists and the first paper to report on the finding will be published next week.

The discovery of a set of 9.7-million-year-old teeth has led archaeologists to raise questions about the commonly believed 'out-of-Africa' theory of human origins
KEY FINDINGS

The set of teeth were discovered near the town of Eppelsheim.

The teeth resemble those belonging to Lucy – a 3.2 million-year-old skeleton of a human ancestor found in Ethiopia.

But they don't look like those of any other species found in Europe or Asia.

This raises questions about whether humans originated in Africa, as is commonly believed.

In September 2016, researchers from the Mainz Natural History Museum in Germany discovered the set of teeth near the town of Eppelsheim.

In their study, published on ResearchGate, the researchers, led by Dr Herbert Lutz, wrote: 'Both teeth, the crowns of an upper left canine and an upper right first molar, are exceptionally well preserved and obviously come from the same body of unknown sex.'

The molar was found to share characteristics with other species, including Lucy – a 3.2 million-year-old skeleton of a human ancestor found in Ethiopia.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5000800/9-7m-year-old-teeth-suggest-EUROPE-cradle-humanity.html

by Guest Sat Oct 21, 2017 9:33 am

Very interesting.

This is what is so great about archeology. In that new finds are found, that question previously held views on the history of hominins .

Its a great mystery to investigate further.

by Guest Sat Oct 21, 2017 11:13 am

Possibly something else you've got wrong didge.

I wonder when they will debunk climate change

by Guest Sat Oct 21, 2017 11:13 am

Possibly something else you've got wrong didge.

I wonder when they will debunk climate change

by Eilzel Sat Oct 21, 2017 11:42 am

I don't think didge or anyone got anything wrong here, smelly. Available evidence dictates humanity spread from Africa. This new evidence will be evaluated and added to what we know, and may or may not alter our understanding of human history. No one was 'wrong'. Human history isn't observable, so it is an ongoing puzzle which scientists are gradually putting together. Climate change is an observable phenomenon. Don't be too quick to jump on one sensational headline and decry the science you don't like.

by Guest Sat Oct 21, 2017 12:10 pm

Eilzel wrote:I don't think didge or anyone got anything wrong here, smelly. Available evidence dictates humanity spread from Africa. This new evidence will be evaluated and added to what we know, and may or may not alter our understanding of human history. No one was 'wrong'. Human history isn't observable, so it is an ongoing puzzle which scientists are gradually putting together. Climate change is an observable phenomenon. Don't be too quick to jump on one sensational headline and decry the science you don't like.

+1

Exactly Eilzel

I would have no problem, if this turns out to disprove the "Out of Africa" Theory.

I think this is smelly being desperate, using a strawman standard.

That if I turn out wrong on this theory, then for some absurd reason, this makes human influence on climate change wrong. I mean its thoughtful that smelly has made me the standpoint on climate change, but its also hilarious his desperate need to be right on something for a change.

Smile

by Eilzel Sun Oct 22, 2017 1:35 am

Didge wrote:
Eilzel wrote:I don't think didge or anyone got anything wrong here, smelly. Available evidence dictates humanity spread from Africa. This new evidence will be evaluated and added to what we know, and may or may not alter our understanding of human history. No one was 'wrong'. Human history isn't observable, so it is an ongoing puzzle which scientists are gradually putting together. Climate change is an observable phenomenon. Don't be too quick to jump on one sensational headline and decry the science you don't like.

+1

Exactly Eilzel

I would have no problem, if this turns out to disprove the "Out of Africa" Theory.

I think this is smelly being desperate, using a strawman standard.

That if I turn out wrong on this theory, then for some absurd reason, this makes human influence on climate change wrong. I mean its thoughtful that smelly has made me the standpoint on climate change, but its also hilarious his desperate need to be right on something for a change.

He has a habit of making fellow posters out to be the sole arbiters of things like climate change, liberalism etc Laughing

by 'Wolfie Sun Oct 22, 2017 3:32 am

smelly-bandit wrote:
Possibly something else you've got wrong didge.

I wonder when they will debunk climate change

So then, Smelly'ScienceIsBunkum'TrollingBumster...

You don't believe that climate changes..

Good luck with that idiocy !

by Guest Sun Oct 22, 2017 6:18 pm

Eilzel wrote:I don't think didge or anyone got anything wrong here, smelly. Available evidence dictates humanity spread from Africa. This new evidence will be evaluated and added to what we know, and may or may not alter our understanding of human history. No one was 'wrong'. Human history isn't observable, so it is an ongoing puzzle which scientists are gradually putting together. Climate change is an observable phenomenon. Don't be too quick to jump on one sensational headline and decry the science you don't like.

Errrrrr I take it you missed didge banging on relentlessly about how we are all Africans??

by Guest Sun Oct 22, 2017 6:35 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Eilzel wrote:I don't think didge or anyone got anything wrong here, smelly. Available evidence dictates humanity spread from Africa. This new evidence will be evaluated and added to what we know, and may or may not alter our understanding of human history. No one was 'wrong'. Human history isn't observable, so it is an ongoing puzzle which scientists are gradually putting together. Climate change is an observable phenomenon. Don't be too quick to jump on one sensational headline and decry the science you don't like.

Errrrrr I take it you missed didge banging on relentlessly about how we are all Africans??

Well what is known as mitochondrial eve was certainly African.

by Guest Sun Oct 22, 2017 6:38 pm

Eilzel wrote:
Didge wrote:

+1

Exactly Eilzel

I would have no problem, if this turns out to disprove the "Out of Africa" Theory.

I think this is smelly being desperate, using a strawman standard.

That if I turn out wrong on this theory, then for some absurd reason, this makes human influence on climate change wrong. I mean its thoughtful that smelly has made me the standpoint on climate change, but its also hilarious his desperate need to be right on something for a change.

He has a habit of making fellow posters out to be the sole arbiters of things like climate change, liberalism etc

Its hilarious and just more of smellys attention seeking, bless him.

Cool

by Guest Sun Oct 22, 2017 9:43 pm

Didge wrote:
Eilzel wrote:I don't think didge or anyone got anything wrong here, smelly. Available evidence dictates humanity spread from Africa. This new evidence will be evaluated and added to what we know, and may or may not alter our understanding of human history. No one was 'wrong'. Human history isn't observable, so it is an ongoing puzzle which scientists are gradually putting together. Climate change is an observable phenomenon. Don't be too quick to jump on one sensational headline and decry the science you don't like.

+1

Exactly Eilzel

I would have no problem, if this turns out to disprove the "Out of Africa" Theory.

I think this is smelly being desperate, using a strawman standard.

That if I turn out wrong on this theory, then for some absurd reason, this makes human influence on climate change wrong. I mean its thoughtful that smelly has made me the standpoint on climate change, but its also hilarious his desperate need to be right on something for a change.

You've missed the point didge (shock)

The point is that you banged on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on about how humans originated from Africa.

You posted reams of facts and proof and data supporting your view, now new evidence has come to light which might prove your stance wrong.

You bang on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on about climate change presenting reams and sheets and pages after pages of facts and data about it.

Just saying you don't have a great track record for being right

by Guest Sun Oct 22, 2017 9:50 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Didge wrote:

+1

Exactly Eilzel

I would have no problem, if this turns out to disprove the "Out of Africa" Theory.

I think this is smelly being desperate, using a strawman standard.

That if I turn out wrong on this theory, then for some absurd reason, this makes human influence on climate change wrong. I mean its thoughtful that smelly has made me the standpoint on climate change, but its also hilarious his desperate need to be right on something for a change.

You've missed the point didge (shock)

The point is that you banged on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on about how humans originated from Africa.

You posted reams of facts and proof and data supporting your view, now new evidence has come to light which might prove your stance wrong.

You bang on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on about climate change presenting reams and sheets and pages after pages of facts and data about it.

Just saying you don't have a great track record for being right

Hilarious

So you are making me the standard for climatge change evidence, not the actual evidence and basing this off something that has not been disproven yet.

Priceless

Its an absurd way to deny countless evidence on climate change

by Guest Sun Oct 22, 2017 10:06 pm

MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING?

Based on what Lutz's team has published, however, outside experts say that the teeth hardly “force us to reexamine the theory that humans originated from Africa,” as ResearchGate’s interview with Lutz attests.

For one, we must be careful not to confuse modern humans with hominins, the bigger lineage containing humans and our closest extinct relatives, or hominoids, the even bigger group containing hominins, chimpanzees, gorillas, and other apes.

Overwhelming fossil and genetic evidence points to an African origin for modern humans, who left Africa no earlier than 120,000 years ago and most likely between 50,000 and 80,000 years ago. The Eppelsheim teeth are roughly a hundred times older. If the Eppelsheim teeth say anything about human evolution, they help to clarify where and how the earliest hominoids lived and evolved.

But some experts in the field question if the teeth really belong to a hominoid.

The canine tooth described in the paper has an unusual, intriguing shape, says University of Toronto paleoanthropologist Bence Viola, an expert on the teeth of humans' extinct relatives. However, the molar—which he says is the more important tooth for classification purposes—contradicts any case for a human connection.

“I think this is much ado about nothing,” he says by email. “The second tooth (the molar), which they say clearly comes from the same individual, is absolutely not a hominin, [and] I would say also not a hominoid.”

Instead, most experts we contacted say that the molar probably belongs to a species of pliopithecoid, an extinct, primitive branch of primates that lived in Europe and Asia between roughly seven and 17 million years ago.

Pliopithecoids are very distant relatives of humans. Some paleontologists argue that this group diverged from the common ancestors of Old World monkeys and apes before those two branches even split from one another. In other words, it's likely that modern humans are more closely related to baboons than to the species represented by these teeth.

And as Lutz's team acknowledges in its paper, the molar closely resembles those of Anapithecus, a species of pliopithecoid known from a jawbone dug up in Hungary, says University of Toronto paleoanthropologist David Begun.

“The molar is important, because it validates an idea proposed by several researchers that a femur known from Eppelsheim since the 1820s actually does most likely belong to a pliopithecoid and not a hominoid,” says Begun.

Sergio Almécija, an anthropologist at George Washington University who also studies pliopithecoids, agrees. As for the supposedly hominin-like canine, the experts’ opinions range from interest to dismissal. Begun even doubts that it's a canine.

“The 'canine' looks to me like a piece of a ruminant tooth,” Begun says by email. Ruminants are cud-chewing, plant-eating mammals such as cows and sheep. “It has a funny break that makes it look a bit like a canine, but it is definitely not a canine, nor is it [from] a primate.”

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/10/ancient-teeth-found-germany-dont-rewrite-human-history-science/

by Guest Sun Oct 22, 2017 10:39 pm

Didge wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

You've missed the point didge (shock)

The point is that you banged on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on about how humans originated from Africa.

You posted reams of facts and proof and data supporting your view, now new evidence has come to light which might prove your stance wrong.

You bang on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on about climate change presenting reams and sheets and pages after pages of facts and data about it.

Just saying you don't have a great track record for being right

Hilarious

So you are making me the standard for climatge change evidence, not the actual evidence and basing this off something that has not been disproven yet.

Priceless

Its an absurd way to deny countless evidence on climate change

You're were adamant about the origins of mankind, looks. Like you are wrong about that

You're adamant about climate change,how long till you're proved wrong.

You're a narrow minded fool didge, you couldn't possibly conceive of being wrong until you are

by Guest Sun Oct 22, 2017 10:45 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Didge wrote:

Hilarious

So you are making me the standard for climatge change evidence, not the actual evidence and basing this off something that has not been disproven yet.

Priceless

Its an absurd way to deny countless evidence on climate change

You're were adamant about the origins of mankind, looks. Like you are wrong about that

You're adamant about climate change,how long till you're proved wrong.

You're a narrow minded fool didge, you couldn't possibly conceive of being wrong until you are

Does it look like I am wrong smelly? Laughing

Again I do not mind if when I am sometimes wrong.

You though cannot even conceive you could be wrong

MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING?

Based on what Lutz's team has published, however, outside experts say that the teeth hardly “force us to reexamine the theory that humans originated from Africa,” as ResearchGate’s interview with Lutz attests.

For one, we must be careful not to confuse modern humans with hominins, the bigger lineage containing humans and our closest extinct relatives, or hominoids, the even bigger group containing hominins, chimpanzees, gorillas, and other apes.

Overwhelming fossil and genetic evidence points to an African origin for modern humans, who left Africa no earlier than 120,000 years ago and most likely between 50,000 and 80,000 years ago. The Eppelsheim teeth are roughly a hundred times older. If the Eppelsheim teeth say anything about human evolution, they help to clarify where and how the earliest hominoids lived and evolved.

But some experts in the field question if the teeth really belong to a hominoid.

The canine tooth described in the paper has an unusual, intriguing shape, says University of Toronto paleoanthropologist Bence Viola, an expert on the teeth of humans' extinct relatives. However, the molar—which he says is the more important tooth for classification purposes—contradicts any case for a human connection.

“I think this is much ado about nothing,” he says by email. “The second tooth (the molar), which they say clearly comes from the same individual, is absolutely not a hominin, [and] I would say also not a hominoid.”

Instead, most experts we contacted say that the molar probably belongs to a species of pliopithecoid, an extinct, primitive branch of primates that lived in Europe and Asia between roughly seven and 17 million years ago.

Pliopithecoids are very distant relatives of humans. Some paleontologists argue that this group diverged from the common ancestors of Old World monkeys and apes before those two branches even split from one another. In other words, it's likely that modern humans are more closely related to baboons than to the species represented by these teeth.

And as Lutz's team acknowledges in its paper, the molar closely resembles those of Anapithecus, a species of pliopithecoid known from a jawbone dug up in Hungary, says University of Toronto paleoanthropologist David Begun.

“The molar is important, because it validates an idea proposed by several researchers that a femur known from Eppelsheim since the 1820s actually does most likely belong to a pliopithecoid and not a hominoid,” says Begun.

Sergio Almécija, an anthropologist at George Washington University who also studies pliopithecoids, agrees. As for the supposedly hominin-like canine, the experts’ opinions range from interest to dismissal. Begun even doubts that it's a canine.

“The 'canine' looks to me like a piece of a ruminant tooth,” Begun says by email. Ruminants are cud-chewing, plant-eating mammals such as cows and sheep. “It has a funny break that makes it look a bit like a canine, but it is definitely not a canine, nor is it [from] a primate.”

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/10/ancient-teeth-found-germany-dont-rewrite-human-history-science/

by Guest Sun Oct 22, 2017 10:51 pm

Just saying didge

You were wrong about Islam, could be wrong about the origins and are most certainly wrong about climate change.

Anything you been right about??

by Guest Sun Oct 22, 2017 10:55 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:Just saying didge

You were wrong about Islam, could be wrong about the origins and are most certainly wrong about climate change.

Anything you been right about??

You mean I reverted to my original views on Islam

So this is your only pendant for you to decry climate change.

That I reverted back to the views I onced held on sky.

Score

Please do continue though smelly, as I am having a great laugh at your expense.

Laughing

by Guest Sun Oct 22, 2017 11:35 pm

Didge wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:Just saying didge

You were wrong about Islam, could be wrong about the origins and are most certainly wrong about climate change.

Anything you been right about??

You mean I reverted to my original views on Islam

So this is your only pendant for you to decry climate change.

That I reverted back to the views I onced held on sky.

Score

Please do continue though smelly, as I am having a great laugh at your expense.

Errrrrr no

You didn't revert. You admitted you were wrong and I was right.

Don't lie didge, we all know you admitted that you are wrong

by Eilzel Mon Oct 23, 2017 12:49 am

I don't recall didge saying we are all African, smelly. But I guess the point there was thatin the end all humans are really the same, which is true regardless of whether we all started in Africa or Europe.

It isn't comparable to climate change, which we regularly see the effects if and has the only real questions being 'how much' is affected by human actions and what we can do to slow/stop it being too damaging.

And just to really show how skewed your logic is evsn if didge was 'wrong', if I say the moon is made of cheese and the Earth is round, my latter is statement isn't called into doubt by the falsehood of the first.

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 1:25 am

Eilzel wrote:I don't recall didge saying we are all African, smelly. But I guess the point there was thatin the end all humans are really the same, which is true regardless of whether we all started in Africa or Europe.

It isn't comparable to climate change, which we regularly see the effects if and has the only real questions being 'how much' is affected by human actions and what we can do to slow/stop it being too damaging.

And just to really show how skewed your logic is evsn if didge was 'wrong', if I say the moon is made of cheese and the Earth is round, my latter is statement isn't called into doubt by the falsehood of the first.

Fuck me that's he ever bangs on about whenever the issue of race is up for discussion

And no im not suggesting climate change and mankind's origins are related, why would they be??

I simply made a comment that didge might yet be proved wrong about the origins of man when he has so adamantly insisted he is right, and wondered if perhaps his fanatical adherence to the theory of man made climate change could also be proved wrong in time??

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:28 am

smelly-bandit wrote:
Didge wrote:

You mean I reverted to my original views on Islam

So this is your only pendant for you to decry climate change.

That I reverted back to the views I onced held on sky.

Score

Please do continue though smelly, as I am having a great laugh at your expense.

Errrrrr no

You didn't revert. You admitted you were wrong and I was right.

Don't lie didge, we all know you admitted that you are wrong

I was wrong in how I once defended the religion but you had nothing to do with me changing to being critical.

What does that say about how bad you are at getting your views across?

Also I do not agree with all your views on Islam either

But then as you recently admitted you are a Muslim, what can I say

The reality is your are not very smart at all smelly. YOu plagerize the views of others, trying to pass them off as yourself.

You normally cock that up and why people really do not taken anything you say seriously.

The funniest thing on this is have you ever asked yourself if you are wrong on Christianity?

Let me know when you take the outsider test on faith and how you get on.

Cool

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:32 am

Eilzel wrote:I don't recall didge saying we are all African, smelly. But I guess the point there was thatin the end all humans are really the same, which is true regardless of whether we all started in Africa or Europe.

It isn't comparable to climate change, which we regularly see the effects if and has the only real questions being 'how much' is affected by human actions and what we can do to slow/stop it being too damaging.

And just to really show how skewed your logic is evsn if didge was 'wrong', if I say the moon is made of cheese and the Earth is round, my latter is statement isn't called into doubt by the falsehood of the first.

Why are you even bothering Eilzel

He wont even attempt to take the outsider test, as he is afraid to look critically at his own religion as he would for Islam.

I mean I can admit if I am wrong on something, its smelly who claims he cannot change his views on something. Making up some bollocks, that its like being born that way.

He is nothing more than a child who plagerizes the arguments of others.

I can admit to the reality of I could be wrong on something.

He cannot even concieve he could be.

What it shows is he is shit scared of looking at the evidence for climate change. He said to me he did not want to look at the evidence.He is trying desperately to denounce it by some other warped means.

Its hilarious to watch

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:02 am

Didge wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

Errrrrr no

You didn't revert. You admitted you were wrong and I was right.

Don't lie didge, we all know you admitted that you are wrong

I was wrong in how I once defended the religion but you had nothing to do with me changing to being critical.

What does that say about how bad you are at getting your views across?

Also I do not agree with all your views on Islam either

But then as you recently admitted you are a Muslim, what can I say

The reality is your are not very smart at all smelly. YOu plagerize the views of others, trying to pass them off as yourself.

You normally cock that up and why people really do not taken anything you say seriously.

The funniest thing on this is have you ever asked yourself if you are wrong on Christianity?

Let me know when you take the outsider test on faith and how you get on.

Well you admitted you were wrong and I was right........

As for me being a Muslim, perhaps if once again your knowledge of Islam wasn't so far beneath my own you would understand the significance of that statement.

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:18 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Didge wrote:

I was wrong in how I once defended the religion but you had nothing to do with me changing to being critical.

What does that say about how bad you are at getting your views across?

Also I do not agree with all your views on Islam either

But then as you recently admitted you are a Muslim, what can I say

The reality is your are not very smart at all smelly. YOu plagerize the views of others, trying to pass them off as yourself.

You normally cock that up and why people really do not taken anything you say seriously.

The funniest thing on this is have you ever asked yourself if you are wrong on Christianity?

Let me know when you take the outsider test on faith and how you get on.

Well you admitted you were wrong and I was right........

As for me being a Muslim, perhaps if once again your knowledge of Islam wasn't so far beneath my own you would understand the significance of that statement.

Great, so this is bog standard then that everything else must be wrong. As they unlike you, I can admit that I was wrong on something?

You think that makes someone then collectivelly wrong on everything?

Take your time on that.

You thinking you are Muslim, is music to the ears of many Muslims smelly. Laughing

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:52 pm

Didge wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

Well you admitted you were wrong and I was right........

As for me being a Muslim, perhaps if once again your knowledge of Islam wasn't so far beneath my own you would understand the significance of that statement.

Great, so this is bog standard then that everything else must be wrong. As they unlike you, I can admit that I was wrong on something?

You think that makes someone then collectivelly wrong on everything?

Take your time on that.

You thinking you are Muslim, is music to the ears of many Muslims smelly.

What is a Muslim didge??

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:54 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Didge wrote:

Great, so this is bog standard then that everything else must be wrong. As they unlike you, I can admit that I was wrong on something?

You think that makes someone then collectivelly wrong on everything?

Take your time on that.

You thinking you are Muslim, is music to the ears of many Muslims smelly.

What is a Muslim didge??

Someone who follows or practices Islam smelly

They consider the Quran their holy book, do you?

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:57 pm

I suppose you are going to say something really dumb like,you are going off submitting to God, which in Arabic is what Muslims means. Which would you mean you submit to their God, Allah, but you would still need to believe in the Quran.

So lets see what you say lol

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:06 pm

Didge wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

What is a Muslim didge??

Someone who follows or practices Islam smelly

They consider the Quran their holy book, do you?

That's cute

You think a Muslim is a "Muslim" like OBL or SEXY MAMA is a Muslim

Wrong

What does Muslim mean didge??

What does Islam mean??

Once again you gave shown the depths of your ignorance

When you can explain what the linguistical definition of Muslim is, you will understand why I say I'm a Muslim.

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:08 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Didge wrote:

Someone who follows or practices Islam smelly

They consider the Quran their holy book, do you?

That's cute

You think a Muslim is a "Muslim" like OBL or SEXY MAMA is a Muslim

Wrong

What does Muslim mean didge??

What does Islam mean??

Once again you gave shown the depths of your ignorance

When you can explain what the linguistical definition of Muslim is, you will understand why I say I'm a Muslim.

I have already given you the answer in the previous post, but its not just what it means in Arabic, you complete dummy. Which means to submit to god. Well many religions submit to a God, but they are very different in many ways, mainly based on what they follow

They follow the Quran, are you telling me you follow and practice the beliefs in the Quran?

Again poor smelly goes off the arabic meaning of a word and not what an actual Muslim is or does. That they follow Islam.

Do you need help getting off the Ropes you poor inept child?

Laughing

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:53 pm

I see smelly has gone silent

Lets make him look very simple

What box did you tick in the 2011 uk census smelly

Muslim or Christian?

Did you tick both boxes?

Then explain to me why the Uk census does not simply have Muslim as a tick box for all Abrahamic believers?

Laughing

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:46 pm

Didge wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

That's cute

You think a Muslim is a "Muslim" like OBL or SEXY MAMA is a Muslim

Wrong

What does Muslim mean didge??

What does Islam mean??

Once again you gave shown the depths of your ignorance

When you can explain what the linguistical definition of Muslim is, you will understand why I say I'm a Muslim.

I have already given you the answer in the previous post, but its not just what it means in Arabic, you complete dummy. Which means to submit to god. Well many religions submit to a God, but they are very different in many ways, mainly based on what they follow

They follow the Quran, are you telling me you follow and practice the beliefs in the Quran?

Again poor smelly goes off the arabic meaning of a word and not what an actual Muslim is or does. That they follow Islam.

Do you need help getting off the Ropes you poor inept child?

Ooooooo so close didge

It's within tasting distance.

Come on didge, think think!!!!

Why do I call myself a Muslim??

It's not because I believe in Allah or the qu'ran, we know this and yet a Muslim I remain.

Why am I a Muslim didge??

I'll let you try again and then I'll educate you

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:52 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Didge wrote:

I have already given you the answer in the previous post, but its not just what it means in Arabic, you complete dummy. Which means to submit to god. Well many religions submit to a God, but they are very different in many ways, mainly based on what they follow

They follow the Quran, are you telling me you follow and practice the beliefs in the Quran?

Again poor smelly goes off the arabic meaning of a word and not what an actual Muslim is or does. That they follow Islam.

Do you need help getting off the Ropes you poor inept child?

Ooooooo so close didge

It's within tasting distance.

Come on didge, think think!!!!

Why do I call myself a Muslim??

It's not because I believe in Allah or the qu'ran, we know this and yet a Muslim I remain.

Why am I a Muslim didge??

I'll let you try again and then I'll educate you

You will never educate me as you have no views of your own, it means you are owned by others who sway your thinking. You will never be an original.

I have no need to think about it smelly

I just dealt you a sucker punch and you are on the ropes

What box did you tick in the 2011 uk census smelly

I already told you what a Muslim means in Arabic, which means you must think we must change the Uk census altogether.

Muslim or Christian?

Did you tick both boxes?

Then explain to me why the Uk census does not simply have Muslim as a tick box for all Abrahamic believers?

Laughing

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:56 pm

Since you don't have any idea of what I'm talking about because you don't know what you're talking about, let me educate you.

Islam means submission to the will of a SINGLE God. This translates directly to the theological concept of MONOTHEISM

Muslim means One who submits to the will of a SINGLE God. This translates directly to the theological concept of a MONOTHEIST.

Hence before before Muhammad was even born there were "Muslims" aka Jews and Christians.

Muslims as we know them today have arrogantly appropriated the word Muslim to mean a only those who follow muhhamd and his qu'ran

By the correct definition of the word Muslim any jew or Christian is automatically a Muslim.

Everyday is a school day didge,though I doubt you will use this new found information immediately or even accept it publicly, one public humiliation was more than enough for you, no I suspect you will slip it into your ranting several months later.

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:09 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:Since you don't have any idea of what I'm talking about because you don't know what you're talking about, let me educate you.
Well this will be interesting
A simpleton educating me
Is this your own words?

Islam means submission to the will of a SINGLE God. This translates directly to the theological concept of MONOTHEISM #
Hang on, you said Muslim and what it means of which I provided

So now you change this to Islam and its meaning.

Make your mind up mate.

So what you are saying is that you have adpoted the Islamic principle of Monotheistic religion then?
So you are subverting all previous meanings to the word and elevating the Arabic form to now bow down to Allah then?

So how many Jews and Christians call themselves Muslims smelly?

Muslim means One who submits to the will of a SINGLE God. This translates directly to the theological concept of a MONOTHEIST.
Oh so you do not take your view from the bible but the Quran then?

You must do and thus take a later view on what Arabs called submission to a myth?
Hence before before Muhammad was even born there were "Muslims" aka Jews and Christians.
Ah so you take the view all people are Muslims then

So did you tick tghe box saying you were a Muslim then in the 2011 census?

Muslims as we know them today have arrogantly appropriated the word Muslim to mean a only those who follow muhhamd and his qu'ran

So let me get this straight.
The Arabic word conceived after Muhammad, origionally derived from Judaism and Christianity, thus a borrowed word, is now somethiong you stand by. Something Arabic in meaning?

Come again?

By the correct definition of the word Muslim any jew or Christian is automatically a Muslim.
So you take your stance by the definition of Arabic then
Not Greek, Latin, or even English. That we must all follow the will of Allah in Arabic then?

You want to think that one through again

Everyday is a school day didge,though I doubt you will use this new found information immediately or even accept it publicly, one public humiliation was more than enough for you, no I suspect you will slip it into your ranting several months later.

Indeed it is. I have loved to learn how much of an imbicillie you are here, that you now place Arabic and its meanings above Afrikaans and English

By the way, you never answer my questions my little friend

You will never educate me as you have no views of your own, it means you are owned by others who sway your thinking. You will never be an original.

I have no need to think about it smelly

I just dealt you a sucker punch and you are on the ropes

What box did you tick in the 2011 uk census smelly

I already told you what a Muslim means in Arabic, which means you must think we must change the Uk census altogether.

Muslim or Christian?

Did you tick both boxes?

Then explain to me why the Uk census does not simply have Muslim as a tick box for all Abrahamic believers?

Laughing

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:17 pm

You do know Arabic is just a language It's nothing to do with religion??

*chuckles*

Good chat didge

by Vintage Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:21 pm

Well, Muslims do talk about people reverting as opposed to converting and Mohammed being the last of the great line of prophets, which includes all the biblical prophets.

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:21 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:You do know Arabic is just a language It's nothing to do with religion??

*chuckles*

Good chat didge

Yes I do know its a language smelly

Is that why you bowed out like the coward you are when you know you have just been shown up poorly?

Laughing

Look mate, i actually read books, even religious ones.

You dug yourself a hole here and proven yet again, you cannot admit when wrong.

If you are right, you would have to believe truely in Islam/Allah/Quran

That is what you fail to grasp

Come see me again, when you have something intelligent to post mate

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:33 pm

Lol

You're so desperate, we are talking linguistics not religion didge.

Try to keep up.

Jews are Muslims because the word Muslim means "monotheist"

Christians are Muslims because the word Muslim means "monotheist"

Anyone who believes in a SINGLE God is by the definition of the word Muslim, a Muslim.

You're getting confused by your lack of knowledge, you think Muslim means follower of Muhammad and his qur'an

How cute.

Its funny because you're so serious

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:39 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:Lol

You're so desperate, we are talking linguistics not religion didge.

Try to keep up.

Jews are Muslims because the word Muslim means "monotheist"

Christians are Muslims because the word Muslim means "monotheist"

Anyone who believes in a SINGLE God is by the definition of the word Muslim, a Muslim.

You're getting confused by your lack of knowledge, you think Muslim means follower of Muhammad and his qur'an

How cute.

Its funny because you're so serious

If we are talking linguistics smelly, then why on earth is Jews and Christians seperate from Muslim?

What you are saying is that you elevate the Arabic meaning over everything else on monothestic belief

That is hilarious

So now your stand point to being a Muslim is not based on belief, but a later word invented in Arabic to be your stand point. Making you thus a real believer in Islam. It means you would have to believe Muhammad was a Prophet and a messenger.

As why else abide to something you do not believe in?

The only exception wpould be, if you were an Arabic Christian

So I ask again, why is it that the Uk has only 3 million Muslims and not more on your view, millions more?

Mate you are simple not smart, this is evident here.

Laughing

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:46 pm

It's all about the linguistics didge.

You're attempting to associate language with religion, I'm talking pure linguistics.

Muslim means monotheist, it doesn't mean follower of Muhammad and his qur'an.

Sorry buddy, but the facts are on my side.

by Victorismyhero Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:46 pm

I reckon those teeth were actually smellys dentures....... Razz

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:53 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:It's all about the linguistics didge.

You're attempting to associate language with religion, I'm talking pure linguistics.

Muslim means monotheist, it doesn't mean follower of Muhammad and his qur'an.

Sorry buddy, but the facts are on my side.

So if that is the meaning smelly

Then why did you not tick the box of being a Muslim in the last census?

I mean if those were the facts, why was there different boxes?

Take yout time on that, as long as you like.

by Guest Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:54 pm

Lord Foul wrote:I reckon those teeth were actually smellys dentures.......

by veya_victaous Tue Oct 24, 2017 5:50 am

smelly-bandit wrote:It's all about the linguistics didge.

You're attempting to associate language with religion, I'm talking pure linguistics.

Muslim means monotheist, it doesn't mean follower of Muhammad and his qur'an.

Sorry buddy, but the facts are on my side.

it doesn't mean monotheist it means 'submits to laws of God' and specifically Abrahamic god

https://www.quora.com/How-did-the-word-Muslim-originate
The word ISLAM is the most well known, and means peace through submission to God.

Next, we need to know the Arabic prefix “mu-”.

Put simply, prefixing a word with “mu-” is the same as adding “-er” to a word in English. Both word parts designate “one who”. (One who farms is a farmER.) One who practices Islam is a MU-Islam, which contracts to Muslim.

If we want to track S-L-M back through history we will find its cousins in Hebrew שלם (shalom) and Aramaic ܫܠܡ (shalam).

by veya_victaous Tue Oct 24, 2017 5:54 am

ANYWAY
this does contradict all of the Abrahamic religions creations stories.

And as they all say their stories are the word of an all knowing god, it proves their god doesn't exist.

by 'Wolfie Wed Oct 25, 2017 4:33 am

smelly-bandit wrote:
Just saying didge

You were wrong about Islam, could be wrong about the origins and are most certainly wrong about climate change.

Anything you been right about??

This arrogant load of bullshit from SmellyBumster only goes to demonstrate his mindset :

"I'm always right, even when I'm clearly wrong;
And anybody who doesn't agree with me must naturally be wrong -- even if they're quite correct, and all the facts support them, and prove that I (Smelly) am a clueless dolt..".

And Smelly' obviously still doesn't believe in the climate -- that's all a scam, according to his wonderful and supreme geniusnessosity.. Razz

by 'Wolfie Wed Oct 25, 2017 4:40 am

veya_victaous wrote:ANYWAY
this does contradict all of the Abrahamic religions creations stories.

And as they all say their stories are the word of an all knowing god, it proves their god doesn't exist.

I shall now await Raggs', VoD's and SmellyBum's pseudo-religious views on that rationale...

by Sponsored content