Muslim call to adopt Mecca time

61 posts / 0 new
Last post
Snuckles
Muslim call to adopt Mecca time

 

Snuckles

quote:


Muslim scientists and clerics have called for the adoption of Mecca time to replace GMT, arguing that the Saudi city is the true centre of the Earth.

Mecca is the direction all Muslims face when they perform their daily prayers.

The call was issued at a conference held in the Gulf state of Qatar under the title: Mecca, the Centre of the Earth, Theory and Practice.

One geologist argued that unlike other longitudes, Mecca's was in perfect alignment to magnetic north.

He said the English had imposed GMT on the rest of the world by force when Britain was a big colonial power, and it was about time that changed.

Mecca watch

A prominent cleric, Sheikh Youssef al-Qaradawy, said modern science had at last provided evidence that Mecca was the true centre of the Earth; proof, he said, of the greatness of the Muslim "qibla" - the Arabic word for the direction Muslims turn to when they pray.

The meeting also reviewed what has been described as a Mecca watch, the brainchild of a French Muslim.

The watch is said to rotate anti-clockwise and is supposed to help Muslims determine the direction of Mecca from any point on Earth.

The meeting in Qatar is part of a popular trend in some Muslim societies of seeking to find Koranic precedents for modern science.


Read it [url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7359258.stm]here[/url].

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Who says Islam is incompatible with science?

Here they've been able to prove that Mecca is the centre of the Earth, where Western scientists have failed. This is indeed a testament to the scientific power of Islam.

Ghislaine

quote:


Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]Who says Islam is incompatible with science?

Here they've been able to prove that Mecca is the centre of the Earth, where Western scientists have failed. This is indeed a testament to the scientific power of Islam.[/b]


Science was responsible for this being proven, not any religion. Those capable of proving this may be Muslim, but there is nothing within any religion that has any scientific power.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

But that's not what they are claiming:

quote:

The meeting in Qatar is part of a popular trend in some Muslim societies of seeking to find Koranic precedents for modern science.

It is called "Ijaz al-Koran", which roughly translates as the "miraculous nature of the holy text".

The underlying belief is that scientific truths were also revealed in the Muslim holy book, and it is the work of scholars to unearth and publicise the textual evidence.


N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

[url=http://gsc.nrcan.gc.ca/geomag/nmp/northpole_e.php]Since the North Magnetic Pole is in Canada, [/url]a much better choice would be for the world to adopt Canada time. Furthermore, was it not Canadian Sir Sandford Fleming that invented Standard Time as well?

Jingles

That would indeed make Toronto the center of the world.

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

Nonsense. It's moving towards lining up with the true geographic center of Canada, in terms of longitude, and, therefore, should be named after the nearest major center in Manitoba.

"Winnipeg time" would be an excellent choice, although I would be willing to go with "Gimli time" just to appease the hobbit and dwarf fans, and to honour Manitoba's Icelandic heritage.

[url=http://www.waymarking.com/waymarks/WM26XV]Longitudinal Centre of Canada[/url]

[img]http://img.groundspeak.com/waymarking/b003ea6a-a2b0-4d97-914d-b90638106a...

[ 24 April 2008: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

Mind you, Quito, Ecuador is the [i]Mitad del Mundo[/i] or "middle of the world", eh ...

[img]http://img.groundspeak.com/waymarking/4be08e12-82e4-4a6b-a9ac-173cdbbb30...

The marker is a little off, according to a local use of GPS, so maybe the following would be a better choice ...

[img]http://img.groundspeak.com/waymarking/display/15a39c6e-1078-48a5-b867-04...

quote:

Self proclaimed Center of the Universe is located in center of the intersection of Bank Street and Sixth Street in Wallace, Idaho.

[url=http://www.waymarking.com/waymarks/WM24T4]The centre of the UNIVERSE in Wallace, Idaho.[/url]

martin dufresne

I find that this thread is mere Islam-bashing. As the BBC often does, it takes an uttering by some Muslims and presents it to snickering non-Muslims as representative of the alleged excesses of this religion and its adherents.
I find it typical that the OP kept out of the picture the final paragraph of the story:

quote:

...But the movement is not without its critics, who say that the notion that modern science was revealed in the Koran confuses spiritual truth, which is constant, and empirical truth, which depends on the state of science at any given point in time.

Meanwhile, the bombing runs on Iraquis and Afghans are still set to Greenwich time.

[ 24 April 2008: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Who needs time zones when there's [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swatch_Internet_Time]Swatch time?[/url] Under the Swatch decimal time system, the time is the same all over the world.

You can download a [url=http://widgets.yahoo.com/widgets/swatch-internet-time]free desktop widget[/url] to display Swatch Time.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

quote:


Originally posted by martin dufresne:
[b][quoting the BBC] But the movement is not without its critics, who say that the notion that modern science was revealed in the Koran confuses spiritual truth, which is constant, and empirical truth, which depends on the state of science at any given point in time.[/b]

But apparently you would not welcome such critics here on babble...

[img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]

martin dufresne

Au contraire, I just allowed them voice against the West's caricature of Islam.

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

[url=http://angryarab.blogspot.com/]The Angry Arab [/url]addresses this issue in a [url=http://www.democracynow.org/2006/2/7/freedom_of_speech_or_incitement_to]... [/url]over at Democracy Now! with [url=http://www.irshadmanji.com/]Irshad Manji. [/url] The debate took place in the context of the cartoons mocking/ridiculing the Muslim Prophet Muhammed.

quote:

As’ad AbuKhalil: I would like to say, right at the outset, where I stand. First, I’m very much in favor, and I relish the opportunity to mock every and other religion. What I think is very bothersome to many Arabs and Muslims is exactly what the other guest does, which is selective condemnation and mocking of one religion over others. I mean, I think if you mock all religion, that is consistent, free thinking, in support for the enlightenment, as well as secularism, but what comes out of many in the West is selective secularism, the notion that you can mock one religion, but all others have to be treated with reverence and sacredness. And this is why this entire defense, in the name of freedom of speech, doesn’t sell very much in the Arab world.

RosaL

People are naturally more sensitive to the mocking of what is sacred to them so comparisons are difficult but the idea that Christianity, for example, is treated with respect and reverence in the West while Islam is mocked, is not quite right, I think. I'm not justifying anti-Muslim hate speech and I'm not blind to it, either - I follow a number of right wing blogs and I'm well aware of it. I'm just wondering if the Angry Arab is aware of the extent to which Christianity is "mocked" in the West.

martin dufresne

I don't know if he is, but I am not. Benedict XVI just got the royal treatment from North American media and pooliticians during a week. I didn't hear much "mocking" in the mainstream media, either leveled at him or, God forbid!, Christianity. As for Muslim crusaders invading Christianist countries and shooting up civilians to liberate them from Xtian obscurantism, I have yet to see that happen.

[ 24 April 2008: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]

RosaL

quote:


Originally posted by martin dufresne:
[b]I don't know if he is, but I am not. Benedict XVI just got the royal treatment from North American media and pooliticians during a week. I didn't hear much "mocking" in the mainstream media, either leveled at him or, God forbid!, Christianity. As for Muslim crusaders invading Christianist countries and shooting up civilians to liberate them from Xtian obscurantism, I have yet to see that happen.

[ 24 April 2008: Message edited by: martin dufresne ][/b]


Yes, I was astonished at the coverage of the Benedict XVI visit! It was bizarre! Nonetheless, Christianity is frequently "mocked" in commercials, comedy shows, movies, books, internet sites, etc. And so is Islam. I am not saying that it is mocked more frequently or more offensively. My point is only that it is not true that Christianity is not mocked.

Moreover, you must know that at various points in history, Islamic armies have invaded Christian countries. Of course, that doesn't justify the invasion of Iraq. It has nothing to do with it. Are you implying that this was done for religious reasons? Religion has been used to rationalize and justify it but the reasons for the invasion and occupation are economic and political. America invaded out of perceived self interest, not out some kind of concern for the salvation of Iraqis!

Anyway, that is irrelevant. My sole point was that I suspect Angry Arab probably underestimates the extent to which Christianity is "mocked" in the West. That's all.

[ 24 April 2008: Message edited by: RosaL ]

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

quote:


RosaL: I'm just wondering if the Angry Arab is aware of the extent to which Christianity is "mocked" in the West.

The Angry Arab is a lecturer or professor who teaches over here in North America. And, judging by his remarks, he [i]relishes[/i] mocking religions.

I think he was just incensed by Manji's shallow shilling for FOX-TV and went a little overboard in his attacks on her in the debate. He might have prefaced his remarks, by not only noting his own willingness to mock religions but, by taking account of the different experiences of religion between a young lesbian undergrad like Manji and an older male professor like himself. I've got to admit that I was in agreement with his main points, however.

The visit of the Pope would have been a perfect time for religious mockery in the MSM. Where is it? The visit of the Dalai Lama would have also been a perfect time for religious mockery. Where is it?

RosaL

quote:


Originally posted by N.Beltov:
[b]

The Angry Arab is a lecturer or professor who teaches over here in North America. And, judging by his remarks, he [i]relishes[/i] mocking religions.

I think he was just incensed by Manji's shallow shilling for FOX-TV and went a little overboard in his attacks on her in the debate. He might have prefaced his remarks, by not only noting his own willingness to mock religions but, by taking account of the different experiences of religion between a young lesbian undergrad like Manji and an older male professor like himself. I've got to admit that I was in agreement with his main points, however.

The visit of the Pope would have been a perfect time for religious mockery in the MSM. Where is it? The visit of the Dalai Lama would have also been a perfect time for religious mockery. Where is it?[/b]


Irshad Manji (who is 40 this year) probably did provoke him! I wish she had taken some of the critical positions she does without going over to "the Fox side". She's lost any credibility she might have had as an internal critic of Islam.

I was repelled by CNNs fawning coverage of Benedict XVths visit but I don't think I've ever seen a major network actually mock a major religion while covering one of its events!

I'm quite surprised that you think Christianity is generally treated with respect (even reverence) in the Western media. (I could have written Martin's response for him but yours surprises me.) I wonder if maybe you have to be a somewhat "traditional" (if "Liberationist") Christian to perceive Christianity as pervasively "mocked". I'm not one of those people who complains about or protests this. (I'd like to get rid of the notion that this is a Christian society, so, in a sense, the mocking is a positive.) But I do notice it and, though I don't protest, to have what is sacred to you treated in this way is painful, as practicing Muslims will also attest.

A minor example: The car ad. A long-haired, bearded man comes in, in a white suit and gold platform shoes, surrounded by a halo of light. He inquires about the "period of grace". The payment plan is described to him. "Why, that's glorious" he says, as the music swells and a dove flutters over his head. This is grossly offensive. It's a very minor example but I mention it because I've seen it several times this week.

A final note: I've been reading the transcript and The Angry Arab's initial statement (which you quoted), before he was irked beyond measure by Irshad Manji, is nuanced:

quote:

what comes out of many in the West is selective secularism, the notion that you can mock one religion, but all others have to be treated with reverence and sacredness.

I agree with that! This is true of "many" in the West - not the Danes, I think, who have been mocking Christianity for some time - but certainly there are "many" and some of these wield power in Washington.

Moreover, much of what he had to say was about Western sensitivities to anything that could conceivably be construed as anti-semitism as opposed to the treatment of Muslims and Islam in the media. His points are well taken there as well.

In short, I don't know that I disagree with the guy and he has a good blog.

[ 24 April 2008: Message edited by: RosaL ]

martin dufresne

quote:


I could have written Martin's response for him (...)

You've got yourself a deal. I could use the extra time...

mahmoud

Canada should for sure implement this. If people want this, then give people what they want. Muslims deserve mecca time if they need it

Snert Snert's picture

I should think that Canadians are welcome to break the day into 100 decimal-hours, or to believe that it's eleventeen o'clock, or to mark time with a sundial under a desk lamp, if they wish.

But how is the entire nation supposed to "implement this"?  And more importantly, given that Muslims are a minority in Canada (and I'm assuming most non-Muslims aren't in favour of 'Mecca time') why should Canada??

Cueball Cueball's picture

Good to see that the same ole same ole, are still piling onto the any old media bandwagon that appeals to popular prejudice when it suits their "apparent" purpose even when the band is playing to the refrain of "Tomorrow Belongs to Me". And to think that they claim they are doing it in the name of fighting "ignorance".

[img]ROFL.gif" border="0[/img]

 

Snert Snert's picture

Was that a soliloquy?

bagkitty bagkitty's picture

Let's be scientific about this. Given that cats are the ultimiate solipsists in the universe, surely the center of the universe must be that place where the greatest concentration of felines is to be found. In all likelihood, an animal hoarder will be involved.Laughing

Cueball Cueball's picture

 

Snert wrote:

Was that a soliloquy?

It is to point out, as our audacious Muslim "scientists" intend, that it makes as much sense to base everything on Mecca Time, as it does to base it on the time that British Railway Barons at the heart of the British Empire used to set their watches too, on the premise that the whole world should set time to the Royal Observatory in Greenwich, London UK. It is the obvious point.

Is it really so clever and mysterious?

It is to say: "who really gives a fuck", and just why are we talking about it in terms that treat those who don't particularly cleave to the notion that the whole world should be run to the tune of "Railway Time" are ignorant superstitious boobs? What is this the Rudyard Kipling hour?

 

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:
It is to point out, as our audacious Muslim "scientists" intend, that it makes as much sense to base everything on Mecca Time, as it does to base it on the time that British Railway Barons at the heart of the British Empire used to set their watches too

If we were starting from scratch, I'd agree that both are arbitrarily equal choices. But at this point, most of the world is kind of set around the way we've got. If we were to all undo that and start from scratch again, I'd hope it would be for some kind of objective and rational (ie: non-superstitious) reason at the very least.

This kind of reminds me of the movement, small though it is, to have the globe turned upside down. It's argued that by placing North, and thus North America and Europe, at the top, we've created some kind of bias against states in the southern hemisphere. The earth, being just a ball in the middle of a vast expanse of space, could certainly go either way, but are we all really expected to destroy our atlases, maps, globes and compasses over it? I guess my thinking is that if you really want to mount your globe upside down, help yourself. The writing will be upside down too, but you'll figure it out. And meanwhile, the rest of us can stick with globes such as they've been for centuries. Same with time. Set your watch to whatever you want, but don't count on everyone else doing the same, particularly if they don't share your reasons for wanting to.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

PLEASE post more Cueball.

Cueball Cueball's picture

What "we" have "today" is largely the result of empire. That is the point. Why people should be ridiculed for making this point on a so called progressive board, isn't really clear to me. There is a message there. Indeed the fact that it appeals to a cultural tradition that exists outside of the British imperial tradition, and the vanity of those who asserted it on the principle of the essential superiority -- as proved, so they opined, by the ability to exact compliance through "scientifically enhanced" blood thirsty rampages of brutal repression -- of that tradition is also part and parcel of that message.

The snerking at their "backwardness" is merely an echo of that sad legacy, and a pathetic reminder of our own ignorance of history, as revealed by the prejudices that "we" express "today".

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:
What "we" have "today" is largely the result of empire. That is the point. Why people should be ridiculed for making this point on a so called progressive board, isn't really clear to me.

 

You feel that that's their point? Uh, did you actually read the article? Is it your genuine belief that they chose Mecca in order to somehow challenge "empire", and not, oh, I don't, know... maybe for some kind of religious reason??

 

Sorry, but this is about as compelling as Stockwell Day proposing that we move from the (equally arbitrary) Base-10 numbering system to a Base-12 numbering system, to honour the Apostles.

 

Quote:
PLEASE post more Cueball.

 

Or, if you can't do more, try for better.

 

 

Caissa

This thread was 18 months old until mahmoud posted in it yesterday. I wonder what the point of this belated resuurection was?

Oh, and good to see you Cueball.

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:
Did you read the article?

 

Of course. And I even noted the brief reference to Britain. But I didn't believe for a moment that that was the meat and potatoes of this.

 

If it is, let's use Tokyo as the new reference standard. If this is about challenging the British empire, that should be more than sufficient. Do you think they'd go for that, or do you maybe think they have their hearts set on Mecca for some reason?

Cueball Cueball's picture

Snert wrote:

Quote:
What "we" have "today" is largely the result of empire. That is the point. Why people should be ridiculed for making this point on a so called progressive board, isn't really clear to me.

 

You feel that that's their point? Uh, did you actually read the article? Is it your genuine belief that they chose Mecca in order to somehow challenge "empire", and not, oh, I don't, know... maybe for some kind of religious reason??

Did you read the article? From the article:

 

Quote:
One geologist argued that unlike other longitudes, Mecca's was in perfect alignment to magnetic north.

He said the English had imposed GMT on the rest of the world by force when Britain was a big colonial power, and it was about time that changed.

It is also right there in the opening post. He, the geologist, assserted a scientific basis relating to Mecca's relationship to magnetic north.  I don't know if that is true or not. What is "religious" about that?

But all of that was so effectively wrapped up in a bunch of third rate "compartive theology" demogoguery that you missed the point about GMT, "colonialism" and the massacre of millions. It was so smooth that you yourself started blathering on about the Qu'ran.

Some people are born obtuse, others strive to be obtuse and some have obtuseness thrust upon them. On the other hand some people just make shit up and talk about shit they know nothing about, care less about, and don't even bother to find out about. It's called "shit talk" in the vernacular, or "talking shit" if you prefer.

Others just let their personal prejudices, ignorance and closed minded predisposed beliefs blind them to what is right in front of their face.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Because its the historic capital of their own civilization, as opposed to British civilization? Maybe? Why don't you brood on these fascinating cunundrums for a while. See if any light breaks. I am going to do something useful.

Maybe this will help.

Roots

I agree that the middle east is the centre of the earth....

[Offensive image removed by moderator]

 

kropotkin1951

Root I think you have stumbled into the wrong chat forum.  

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:
Because its the historic capital of their own civilization, as opposed to British civilization?

 

Well, that sounds like an excellent reason for the world to switch! Very compelling indeed!

 

I'm now forced to agree that any opposition to this awesome idea can only be the thinly veiled result of crass, blatant Islamophobia. To anyone who doesn't see the obvious merits of this proposition, FOR SHAME!

 

Quote:
I am going to do something useful.

 

Is someone smirking at a Creationist somewhere? To the batcave!

 

 

Cueball Cueball's picture

Roots wrote:

I agree that the middle east is the centre of the earth....

[Offensive image removed by moderator]

 

 

Iran isn't in the "Middle East".

In anycase. Now that we have a direct example of precisely the kind of fascist and racist bandwagon that some of the "good" citizens of Babble have attached themselves in the name of fighting "ignorance", for the sake of "rationalism", perhaps we can close this thread since it is really just a breading ground for racist scumbags who win a "Get Into Babble" free card, authorized by the supposed legitimacy of the BBC, as a "news" source.

"Humanities and science"? My ass.

And what about the troll who is consistently droping these insightful little turds here? Hasn't everyone had enough of that?

Cueball Cueball's picture

Snert wrote:

Quote:
Did you read the article?

 

Of course. And I even noted the brief reference to Britain.

The briefness of the mentioning of Britain, colonialism and the massacre of millions in the name of civilizing qualities of "rationalism", was entirely the choice of the author who wrote the article.

They certainly wasted no time in mystfying that point by contextualizing the whole discussion in the musings of some cleric or other. The cleric comes complete with an direct attribution to by name, and then some other appropriately "foreign sounding" exotic terminology, framed as "comparative theology" whereas the Geologist who made certain "scientific" assertions disappears into the gloam, nameless.

A great example of the use of indigenous terminology to accentuate the foreigness and strangness of "the other" as a tool for mystifying the mother fucking obvious was that term "Loya Jirga", which was much in use by the cognesenti when the whole Afghanistan debacle began. Loya Jirga actually means "big meeting" in Pashtu, what we would commonly call a "conference" or a "national assembly". Far be it from possible that those strange, exotic and backward Afghans could possibly have a "conference"or a "national assembly".

Not on your life! That is just too normal.

They certainly kept you going! Now you are babbling on about religion and a book which you haven't even read, and know about only by reputation. But I digress. Sorry... back to the point...

The author easily might have skipped the cleric part and instead chosen the statement of the unnamed Geologist, about Britain colonialism and the GMT as starting point for a discussion about Winston Churchill's recomending using Mustard gas on Kurdish rebels. "The Tribes" as Sir Winston pejoratively referred to them.

But yeah, quoting the woolly headed cleric is always a good device distracting away from any substance that might result in critical thinking on our part, while giving us a fine opportunity to smugly reassure ourselves of our righteous superiority.

HeywoodFloyd

I'd like to know the science behind the claim that Mecca is in perfect alignment to magnetic north as opposed to other longditudes.

Michelle

Oh my lord, people, when someone who is obviously about to be banned posts an offensive image, please don't quote it in a subsequent post...

Buh-bye, Roots.  Buh-bye image.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Why ban the image? It's like game set and match.

HeywoodFloyd

HeywoodFloyd wrote:

I'd like to know the science behind the claim that Mecca is in perfect alignment to magnetic north as opposed to other longditudes.

To answer my own question, apparently a line drawn from Mag North to Geo North and carried onward will end up near mecca. A line from GN through MN ends up near (among other places) Akron Ohio. So, either Mecca or Akron are the centre of the world, at least until MN moves.

Ghislaine

Yes, this is obviously all irrelevant, because in 2012 the poles will shift.

Caissa

Maybe we should use Warsaw then.Wink

Cueball Cueball's picture

Ghislaine wrote:

Yes, this is obviously all irrelevant, because in 2012 the poles will shift.

It's pretty fun actually. Even a little tremor of an idea that challenges hegemony in such a minor way elicits such astounding amounts of riducule, as if the mere suggestion that such an inconsequential thing as what time zone sets 0 hour might be changed.

Maybe some people struck a nerve? How sensitive are we to spend so much time finding ways to derride, obscure and make fun off even the slightest little critique, or suggestion that maybe the center of our cultural heritage might not be universally accepted as the base point of all things, even time itself.

Judging by the reaction you'd think the world was about to end. "Oh my god! The sky is falling! They are challenging not only the empire, but time, and rationality itself -- they are crazy or '2012' apocalypse theorists."

HeywoodFloyd

Mariners, of their own choice, adapted both GMT and 0 longitude because the British had done the most research and that reseach was conducted at the Greenwicn observatory. The French had their own maps, 0 longitude ( the rose line) for years.

 

There is nothing stopping Muslims from adapting their own measurement systems for navigation & time. Have at it I say.

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:
Maybe some people struck a nerve?

 

That's exactly it. I'm very sensitive about my timekeeping. Also, I'm so incredibly British that I just naturally think anything British has to be better than anything not British, so switching to a non-British reference is a non-starter with me! I shall go to my grave denying their fearsome truth!

 

But here's the thing. If you think that Muslims are proposing Mecca as the new reference standard because a line drawn from Magnetic North passes near Mecca, you're hopelessly naive. What a lucky, lucky coincidence that this line just happens to pass near their most holy city! And ya, I'm sure if that line passed closer to Tokyo, they'd be pushing for Tokyo. Whatever's closest to that line is all that's important.

HeywoodFloyd

Cueball wrote:
Apparently a Muslim guy talks about British colonialism, and magnetic north, and then suggests that this is good cause to shift the base time to capital city of his own civilization, and you immediatly associate that with Islam, even though no one but the stock village Imam charachter, and yourself made that association.

The original article made the association

Quote:

The meeting in Qatar is part of a popular trend in some Muslim societies of seeking to find Koranic precedents for modern science.


So.....Muslim + Mecca + Koran = reasonable deduction that Islam may have something to do with the idea.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Is that what I think? Where is the evidence that I believe that, in what I said. There you go, not reading for content. Its exactly the thing that produced this howler, when I proposed that the essential concept was laden with anti-imperialist intent:

Quote:
You feel that that's their point? Uh, did you actually read the article? Is it your genuine belief that they chose Mecca in order to somehow challenge "empire", and not, oh, I don't, know... maybe for some kind of religious reason??

The fact that the whole issue of the historical legacy of GMT and colonialism appeared in paragraph two of the OP and the original article, just wizzed over your head, while you were dodging the facts on your way to finding the stock village Imam quote so that you could ridicule it.

And once again you are so busy trying to get to that village Imam punch line that you are even trying to pull it on me. Don't pull that bullshit with me. Unlike the guys being quoted (or misquoted as it may be) in the press, I am present, here and accounted for, and so I can defend myself from your imposing the idiotic dribble that you say I am saying: I didn't affirm anything about "magnetic north".

Nor did the geologist. Are you dreaming?

The unamed, and paraphrased geologist did not in any way shape or form associate a religious significance with Magnetic north. That is your bagage. And where is that coming from? Apparently a Muslim guy talks about British colonialism, and magnetic north, and then suggests that this is good cause to shift the base time to capital city of his own civilization, and you immediatly associate that with Islam, even though no one but the stock village Imam charachter, and yourself made that association.

Nor did I. What I proposed, not two posts above was this:

Quote:
"Because its the historic capital of their own civilization, as opposed to British civilization?"

But your so busy stumbling around with your blindfold on that it was easy for the BBC analyst to get you to pin the village idiot on the geologist, through freely associating them because they both happen to be both Muslim, and happen to have a peculiar interest in the sigifigance of Mecca.

Odd, isn't it this weird "coincidence" of Muslim people having an interest in Mecca?

Cueball Cueball's picture

Exactly Heywood. You got it. Muslims meet with muslims. They have meetings. They talk. They "associate".

 Islam is actually a civilization. Mecca, has particular signifigance to Muslims.And. Just like London and England have specific cultural and political importance to people British europeans extraction. Wow! The idea that they would attempt to assert there cultural and ethnic independence, however that is justified, by explicitly rejecting the centering of the world on London England, and proposing that it be centered at the heart of their own society is truly bizzarre, don't you think?

As for the assertion that this trend is "popular", as far as my research shows, is entirely supported by a looping google hit that 9 out of 10 times ends up back referencing this article.

Pages