Is the myth of the radical Muslim minority really a myth?

>>2844452
It is pretty accurate. While personally I have a lot of Muslim friends and they are just normal Americans who smoke weed and don't even pay attention to this shit, there are millions of Muslims who are radical. The daily terrorist attacks at mosques and churches should show you that Radical Islam is no joke in the middle east.

File: 1493655973560.jpg (76KB, 800x820px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 800x820px

>I'm not a /pol/, but ...

This is not a humanities question.

This is a politics question.

I understand that discussion on /pol/ sucks, but it sucks because of people like you.

>>2844465

There's no policies involved, it is a religion question.

>is X really surely positively absolutely infallibly true? Don't worry I'm not (insert group that uses source video to justify agenda) I'm just "curious"

>>2844452
>"I'm gonna tell you things, not give you sources to the research I looked at, and hope you believe me."

>>2844519
Why would you comment on a video you haven't watched? He cites his sources in the video.

>>2844496
>Asking questions that challenge my world views are wrong.

Muslims are weirdo fucks, they're all beta nerd types who go on about how they love cheeseburgers and smoke weed like everyone else but go home to their muslim neighborhoods where all of their sisters wear the veil and they're waiting on an arranged marriage, even the most degenerate ones still go to mosque once a week, I can't trust them sorry.

>>2844535
>posing questions with an answer in mind while attempting to get responses that validate your belief is right

>>2844547
>You can't ask this question because it would get responses that I don't like.

>>2844465
>>2844496
>>2844461

Why are you people so afraid to discuss potential negatives related to Islam?

If you resort to some strawman argument, you are disqualified.

>>2844547

Posing a question while you yourself already hold a certain viewpoint is the starting point of pretty much all discussion ever.

>>2844496
Just as an FYI the guy in the video is a jewish neoconservative who hates trump, /pol/ isn't too fond of him; here's him responding to alt right trolls
https://youtu.be/IzMb40OVII4

>>2844452
You can think of it like how Trump supporters and Republicans are made out to be incorrigible racists and bigots, Nazis and white nationalists, authoritarians and alt-right, when really you're talking about a huge demographic which for the most part are just following family traditions, feel alienated, neglected, or ridiculed by modern culture and economic prosperity, and are highly susceptible to the influence of anti-establishment and counter-culture ideologues, propaganda efforts by rich donors, populist media figures appealing to their insecurities, and even just attention where no one else would give them the time of day.

So it all comes down to how you define radicalism. Anti-Islam ideologues like the narrator of OP's video do so by grouping together the activities of political radicals, religious radicals, and religious conservatives.

>>2844452
He can't follow the script.

>>2844452
go back to pol

>>2844641
Fuck off, I'm not from that shithole. I don't believe in da joooooos or white supremacy just because I am curious about Islamism faggot

>>2844631

´just following family traditions´ or feeling alienated by ´modern culture´ or any of the other things you mention are no justification for supporting the killing of unbelievers or throwing gays off of buildings. Being a racist or a bigot or `alt-right' is a lot more harmless than being a radical muslim.

>>2844655
I don't think you or Ben Shapiro know what radicalism is.

Imho moderate muslims will always defend or try to condone radical elements way before they openly fight or condemn them, muslims aren't exactly volunteering information to the FBI in droves and consider even passive surveillance of mosques to be a violation of their rights, I don't even blame muslims per se it's simply in group/out group dynamics and is inescapable.

>>2844660

Enlighten me.

>>2844452
Muslims are not a problem in Eurabia because of Islam, they are a problem because they have higher crime rates than native Europeans. Most German crimes nowadays are commited by Syrian migrants not even native Germans, and Sweden is the rape capital of Europe due to Syrian migrants commiting so much crime.

>>2844655
Supporting the killing of unbelievers or throwing gays off buildings aren't family traditions or the result of alienation, but instead the result of media and education initiatives by Islamist organizations the way conservative talk radio drives much of American anti-establishment agitation or views on the use of deadly force by the police and military.

/his/ is so fucking stupid. I'm going back to /pol/. Thanks for the fishes lads

File: 20170521_121711.png (52KB, 1080x300px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 1080x300px

Action taken is what defines religious radicalism. By the same logic that Ben Shapiro uses, you can say that 37% of Christians in the US are radical for being anti-gay. Another 24% believe women should be subordinate to men. So they are radical too, right? Same Pew Research by the way.

>>2844694

Nah mate, these things are the results of individuals deciding to do so or think so. Saying that muslims have no personal responsibility for the things they do and they do things only as a result of the actions of others, is treating them like less than human.

>>2844698

So a significant number of Americans are radical Christians. Doesn't invalidate the same claim about muslims.

>>2844452
Ordinary muslims have world view similar to western people 100-200 years ago.
And then there is wahhabism. It's like Cromwellians were still ruling Britain.

>>2844452
It's not a myth in a literal sense. As in, 9x%+ of Muslims are not interested in blowing anyone up. Unfortunately they will always side with the radical minority.

>>2844742
*It's a myth in a literal sense

>>2844724
I didn't say these things absolve personal responsibility, I'm saying the purposeful spread and solidarity of talking points is being driven by concerted effort. A Muslim man feeling revolted by and even violent towards homosexuality is his own responsibility. Several Muslim men just happening to march in the streets with banners all reading the same slogans and shouting the same demands hours after a radio sermon by a preacher/politician with ties to politically backed donations? That's something more than simple, personal animus.

>>2844698

Well a lot of them support military attacks on random Muslim countries and deliberate targeting of Muslim civilians so yes they are radicalised.

>>2844570
simply because it's politically incorrect, I can find no other reason besides the dumb fear of being called racist

>>2844789
>simply because it's politically incorrect
If only there was a board for that. We could call it /pol/ for short.

>>2844570
>Why are you people so afraid to discuss potential negatives related to Islam?
They are afraid of their innermost thoughts.
There's always full-blown nazi in every liberal. They are constantly fighting to keep it down.

>>2844814
yeah but there's no imageboard for that in real life, if you make an argument for the negative aspects of Islam you are automatically called racist and nazi for no aparent reason apart from having legitimate concerns

>>2844452
video is bullshit

t. exmuslim

Anyone who is Muslim will tell you Islam is too fucking confusing to make blanket statements about..

>>2844645
Go back to /pol/ faggot, regardless where you stand the OP is a /pol/ post

File: 1491695145939.jpg (14KB, 220x301px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 220x301px

>>2844465
>it sucks because of people like you
What an open minded person you are. OP was simply asking a question, although it may be controversial for some people it's not a terrible one to ask.

>>2844452
To help answer OP, the shittes and the sunnis have been fighting for a very very long time with these tactics. Then you have the moors going into modern Spain and moving into Europe, the crusade was essentially a response to this growth through the Islamic caliphate.
But yes, the vast majority of Muslims are not going to go out and join the jihad. But there will always be a population of the more radical branches of islam, like the Wahhabi (which falls under sunni), because their text calls and permits for violence.

>>2844655
I doubt you've ever talked to a Muslim. An overwhelming majority of Muslims are against ISIS. Hell, even Saudi Arabia, the hub of Wahabbism, has 89% of it's people saying they're wholly against ISIS according to the Arab Opinion Index.

People like to cherry pick stats to fit their agendas. Islamophobia is a thriving industry and people have taken advantage of it

>>2844452
>Shapiro

Literally don't care what your video says, it's guaranteed to be 100% bullshit.

File: tamerlan-tsarnaev-dzhokhar-tsarnaev.jpg (65KB, 635x507px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 635x507px

>>2844460
>I have a lot of Muslim friends and they are just normal Americans who smoke weed and don't even pay attention to this shit
Not saying you're wrong, but "regular guy" Muslims aren't always so regular, deep down inside. Pic related.

>>2846127
>one Islamic state wants to derides another islamic state only because they're in the middle of war and earning bad boy points
Pffft whatever, there is little difference between the average city in KSA and Raqqa. If anything the Saudis are even more oppressive than ISIS because they're not in a war for their existence and can dedicate more resources to the religious police.

>>2846127
Nice meme, saying most Muslims are against isis is meaningless when nearly everybody is against isis.

>>2846190
Why is it meaningless? The other guy said that Muslims support the killing of gays and unbelievers when that is clearly not the case among the majority of Muslims. Saudi Arabia does not represent Islam. Stop trying to use it as your evidence against Islam

>>2844452
>Ben Shapiro
Shapiro is a literal and unironic Zionist Jew. asking him about Muslims and Islam is like asking Antifa about the Alt-Right, he won't be neutral and objective.

>>2844452
>Ben saphiro
>Why jews vote left?
>Women Are Winning the War on Women
If you are not /pol/ why you watch /pol/ tier videos?

>>2846553
Because I'm a conservative and it sometimes overlaps. Read this: >>2844600

File: trump-riad.jpg (44KB, 531x373px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 531x373px

>F-fucking terrorist subhumans financed by KILLARY KIKE CLITON
>Hehe I redpilled I'll vote trump he's an alpha male he will kick terrorist asses heh heh heh
>*trump sucks saudi cock*
>FUCKING IRAN

Jesus crist you guys deserved 9/11 so much

>>2844452
fuck off ben

>>2844452
I don't really care about Muslims and Islam, but you people are completely and utterly delusional if you think more than one Billion people in this world hold ISIS-tier views.

Ben Shapiro is the closest I can get to redpilled but this video was kind of meh compared to many of the rest.

>>2846604
He states in the video that he defines radical as incompatible with Western society. Supporting Shari'a in any way automatically adds you to the list.

>>2844452
He is just butthurt and intolerant. Many Muslim migrants are hard workers and contribute a great deal to the economy.

>>2844452
>shapiro

He's a hack

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYp_6DcUzbU

>>2846611
Any country that doesn't have Liberal Hedonistic Materialism as its established ideology is ''incompatible with Western society'' so spare me the attempt at convincing me that more than one Billion have ''Radical'' views, it won't work.

File: 1495087104350.png (508KB, 566x482px) Image search: [Google]

508KB, 566x482px

>>2844570
>>2844814
>>2845743
>>2844827
>>2845743
>>2846075


I think I speak for a few of the regular posters here who're aggravated with the explosion of thinly-veiled shitposting, memedropping, and generally caustic personal attacks.

A big part of the annoyance comes from mods leaving cancerous threads and posts up, so people feel like they need to swat away the flies. A large reason behind both concerns might be the fact that this board is a lot slower than /pol/, so people might be simply trying to bump threads with minimal effort. I think a lot of us would prefer to have a slow and enjoyable discussion than a shitfest though.

Please stay a while, and be considerate

>>2846553
The main appeal for Ben right now is that he criticizes the president in a level headed way (ie. not just screaming "HE'S A LITERALLY HITLER" over and over) and that he hates abortion. Pretty much everything else about him is wrong, but at least he's very good at explaining his incorrect beliefs.

>>2846880
This.

He's articulate, honest, and completely wrong.

>>2846075
>Then you have the moors going into modern Spain and moving into Europe, the crusade was essentially a response to this growth through the Islamic caliphate.

But that's wrong. The Umayyad Caliphate went belly-up three centuries before the First Crusade, and the Abbasids were collapsing throughout the century leading up to it.

File: info_islam_terrorism_polls.png (2MB, 1312x5245px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1312x5245px

>>2844452
>Support Sharia Law
>"Radicalized"
I wonder how many Christians support following Biblical law. Nevermind how many enter politics just to ensure the law follows the word of God.

I suppose there's a lot more debate among Christians as to exactly what God's Law is, but it seems they are nearly all radicalized by this definition.

Granted, supporting death for apostates and support for terrorists might be a better measure. You wouldn't hit a majority that way, but you'd still have fuckloads.

Not that Christianity can't get nasty as fuck during the worst of times, as can any religion - people are people, and even Buddhist will muderhobo if push comes to shove - but as to the state of things at this moment...

>>2847125
Not many Christians follow biblical law because for hundreds of years now the rules of the Church and the State have been separated. There are no countries on earth that follow biblical law, they all have completely separate law codes that were at a time long ago based on religious law. Old Testament law is also completely ignored because of the New Testament. I'm not an expect but Christians have that one saying that enforces the separation of Church and Sate too. "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's"


Islam is religious law written thousands of years ago, its cannot be changed or adapted because it was written by a prophet personally, changing his words, reinterpreting his words is heresy. Islam would be a great religion if it wasn't so brutal because its rules cannot change.

Christianity can be used to act in brutal ways because its so open to interpretation. However the rules of Islam are clear and brutal and will always be brutal.


They can both be awful but one is awful 24/7 and the other is awful because it can be used however the reader wants.

What's the deal with "secular" Muslims a la Bosnia, Turkey, etc.?

File: 1377040834118s.jpg (7KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 250x250px

>>2844452
>I'm an orthodox jew, but believers in those particular texts aren't mutilating female genitalia
Well no, they're mutilating male genitalia

>>2847261
>reinterpreting his words is heresy
Books don't interpret themselves. Many peoples have interpreted Muhammad's words in different ways and, much like the Christians, they've killed each other over those various interpretations.

Further, separation of church and state is not a universal rule in Christian nations, and several nations have laws regarding "unchristian" behavior (in some cases, even witchcraft), and nearly all of them have one or more laws that have no basis outside of biblical doctrine.

They both have periods where they relax a bit and become increasingly secular, as well as those where extreme fundamentalists take over and theocracy, be it direct or indirect, becomes the rule of the day.

For most of the Islamic world, that day just happens to be today.

Granted, in regards to the Middle East, at least, given everything that's been going on down there, I suspect even if they were secular humanists sworn to pacifism, they'd still be blowing shit up.

But fundamentalists fuck everything up - whether they are religious or not, and when things are already fucked up, fundamentalists rise to power.

File: moderate islam sample size.png (333KB, 729x1416px) Image search: [Google]

333KB, 729x1416px

>>2846264

>>2847367
>religion is political, not humanities
Must everything that triggers you be banned?

>>2847448
>For most of the Islamic world, that day just happens to be today
You mean every day since the foundation of the religion? It isn't just the ME. Muslims are hostile in the Caucasus. Muslims are hostile in China. Muslims are hostile in SE Asia. Muslims are hostile in Africa, in Europe, in South America.

The only times when Islamic cultures have been relatively peaceful is when they have subjugated everyone else in their region and made Islamic law the law of the land. Throughout its existence Islam has been unable to exist alongside other religions without fighting for control.

>>2847457
Not him, but both /rel/igion and /phi/losophy really need to be their own boards. It's not as if we don't get enough shitposts masquerading as both to keep them both active, not only on this board, but across all the boards.

/his/tory would be pretty slow, but I'm sure enough of /pol/ would still be making holocaust and Africa related posts to keep it alive.

>>2847451
Wait, so they sampled a couple of a hundred Muslims and said that they represent all the 1.2 Billion Muslims? this ''evidence '' isn't evidence, its just bullshit.

File: cathar_heretics.jpg (75KB, 300x506px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 300x506px

>>2847469
>Throughout its existence Islam has been unable to exist alongside other religions without fighting for control.
True of pretty much every religion... Even when it's simply different flavors of the same religion.

...and there are plenty of Islamic nations out there that haven't seen a war in the past half millennia.

>>2847476
>couple of hundred
>~27,000
It is rare to find a poll or study with that many respondents

>>2847494
I don't give a shit if it's hundreds or thousands, you don't ask people that represent less than 1% of a group their views then say that they represent the rest of the group. The Infograph that you posted is complete and utter bullshit.

>>2847476
How else are you supposed to do a survey? As a rough estimate, it's fine.

>>2847516
> it's fine.
No it isn't, its literally putting words in peoples mouths. I said it once and i will say it twice, the Infograph that you posted is complete and utter bullshit.

>>2847515
You need to take a statistics class senpai

>>2847515
>you don't ask people that represent less than 1% of a group their views then say that they represent the rest of the group
1% of 1.2 billions is 12 millions. So there is group of people bigger than state of Israel that support totally everything Isis has done, and that's fucking scary. It wouldn't be a bad idea to ensure that absolutely not single one of them ever visits my neighborhood.

>>2847457
I'm not trying to ban it. It just doesn't belong ON THIS BOARD. You understand the difference?

If it was just one thread I really wouldn't give a shit, but the problem is that people keep bringing borderline /pol/ discussions here (understandably, because /pol/ sucks) and if it keeps up, pretty soon this board is going to be the Islamic Immigration and Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study Discussion Board ... with a side of history.

File: letterman yuks it up.gif (559KB, 140x173px) Image search: [Google]

559KB, 140x173px

>>2847515
topkek so this is the great mind of the humanities at work. Good to know that every single report, thesis and study that relies on less than 1% of a group is bullshit.

>>2847555
Waste of trips

Religion is humanities, yes or no?

>>2847549
>1% of 1.2 billions is 12 millions. So there is group of people bigger than state of Israel that support totally everything Isis has done, and that's fucking scary. It wouldn't be a bad idea to ensure that absolutely not single one of them ever visits my neighborhood
I don't give a shit. Don't try to group those 12 million with the other 1.2 Billion to make easier for you to villainize Muslims and Islam as a whole.

>>2847549
>1% of 1.2 billions is 12 millions. So there is group of people bigger than state of Israel that support totally everything Isis has done, and that's fucking scary.

That may or may not be true but how you are getting that from the post you replied to or the stats being discussed is a mystery.

>>2847556
>Good to know that every single report, thesis and study that relies on less than 1% of a group is bullshit.
Yes, absolutely. If a report, thesis or study tries to determine the views of a whole group by asking less than 1% of its members, than its complete and utter bullshit.

>>2847560
It can be. It isn't in this case.

Discussing actual theology? You're probably okay. Talking about contemporary trends in a given religion, particularly trends completely dominate political discourse? It's fine if you want to discuss that, but take it elsewhere.

The difference isn't hard to grasp, and conflating the two makes you a disingenuous fuck.

>>2847586

1% would be a huge sample, the Pew research we are talking about hasn't interviewed even 0.01% of Muslims.

>>2847572
>>2847586
see >>2847536
This is why Humanities is the laughingstock of universities.

>>2847572
You're a retard. That's the process by which we gather much of our statistics. As long as it is a balanced sample size it can be expected to be a roughly accurate number.

>>2847608
>That's the process by which we gather much of our statistics
Then our process is complete and utter bullshit.
>You're a retard
*Yawn* Ad Hominem, nothing of substance, as would be expected.

>>2847608

This.

That's why pollsters using a much larger sample size have accurately predicted the outcome of all the recent elections in the West.

>>2847482
>True of pretty much every abrahamic religion
ftfy

>>2847621
>That's why pollsters using a much larger sample size have accurately predicted the outcome of all the recent elections in the West.
I truely hope that you were being sarcastic...

>>2847388
Those places were forcefully kept secularized by the regime which was against islamic law.

>>2846589

Why in every photo I see of him does Trump look totally fucking unaware of what is going on?

>>2847630

Obviously.

>>2847620
In all seriousness you owe it to yourself to learn about statistics, how they are used, why they are used, and their benefits and drawbacks. Most of what you think you know is based on them.

>>2847620
>Then our process is complete and utter bullshit.
Right, I'm sure some dumb fuck on an anonymous image board with no education and whose entire argument is "it's bullshit!" histrionics has a better idea than hundreds of years of statistical science and math.
Kill yourself you slackjawed mouthbreather.

>>2847647
Trump is a 70 year old reality tv star billionaire from Jew York. I will never understand why people think this guy gives a toss about the plight of the common man.

>>2847661
>Right, I'm sure some dumb fuck on an anonymous image board with no education and whose entire argument is "it's bullshit!" histrionics has a better idea than hundreds of years of statistical science and math.
>Kill yourself you slackjawed mouthbreather.
Spare me the attempt at ridicule and Ad Hominem, it won't work.

>>2847620
He's absolutely right - the reliability of a survey depends on how large the sample size in absolute terms, not relative terms. Increasing the sample size from e.g. 500 to 1000 will make the survey significantly more reliable, further increasing it yields diminishing returns each time. It is absolutely possible to take a reasonably accurate survey by polling around one thousand people. It's counterintuitive - it doesn't seem like it should work that way - but it does, and that's well-attested.

Also, you don't know what an ad hominem argument is, look it up. Calling you a retard is just an insult, not a logically fallacious argument.

>>2847672
>but it does, and that's well-attested.
Yes, all those poll about the recent western elections were completely reliable.
>Also, you don't know what an ad hominem argument is, look it up. Calling you a retard is just an insult, not a logically fallacious argument.
>Ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person', short for argumentum ad hominem, is now usually understood as a logical fallacy in which an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.
Him calling me a ''retard'' is absolutely Ad Hominem.

>>2847671
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margin_of_error
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_(statistics)
lol
where's your thesis against all this exactly? Hmm yes, ah I see, the magnificent paper "noooo it's bullshit!" by Anonymous /his/ Poster. Mhm... yes, reading it now... oooooooh, quite scientific indeed, I can see much effort has been put in and... OH MY, the years of expertise and research here is astounding, truly a masterpiece in the sciences. I congratulate you Great Anon. You are the brightest mind of this generation, no question about it.

>>2847684
>now usually understood
I don't think anything after this is even relevant but whatever
>a logical fallacy in which an argument is rebutted
You haven't made a single argument, therefore no argument is being rebutted through attacking of character. Ergo - no ad hominems made against you. Just observations of your shitty character.

>>2847684
Ad Hominem is different from an insult. So you don't understand basic logical fallacies, you don't understand statistics, but you're willing to argue about both.

>>2847658
I know enough about statistics to know that the infograph that you posted is complete and utter bullshit. I'm not going to use 27 thousand Muslims as the representatives of the other 1.2 Billion.

>>2847703
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_(statistics)

There's been no information given about the methodology used for sampling by Pew in this thread, this entire page is irrelevant.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margin_of_error

This specifically says the sample fraction i.e the the size of the sample in proportion to the population you are trying to measure is very relevant in terms of calculating the margin of error.

>>2847729
>I'm not going to use 27 thousand Muslims as the representatives of the other 1.2 Billion
>I know enough about statistics
no you don't.

>>2847684
>Yes, all those poll about the recent western elections were completely reliable.
Yes, they were. Most of the polls predicted the results to within a few percentage points. When an election comes down to the wire (as two-party elections in particular often do) it is pretty easy for the polls to be basically accurate and still fail to predict the result correctly. You'll notice the surveys in the image linked have margins of error of approx 5 points.

Or, in other words: if most of the polls show Clinton winning with 50% of the vote, that doesn't necessarily mean she's not going to lose with 48%. It does mean, though, that she's immensely unlikely to win with 70%, or lose with 30%.

I realize this is probably going over your head at this point, but to connect the analogy, if the survey suggests that 1.1 billion Muslims think that "Sharia should rule", maybe that number is actually 1.2 billion or 900 million, but either way, it's pretty damn certain to not be a MINORITY opinion.

>Him calling me a ''retard'' is absolutely Ad Hominem.
Nope. Because him calling you a retard wasn't an attempt to rebut your argument. It was just him calling you a retard. Then he went on to address your argument, separately from the insult.

This is an ad hominem: "You're wrong because you're a retard."
This is not an ad hominem: "You're a retard. [TWO UNRELATED SENTENCES IN WHICH HE ADDRESSES THE SUBSTANCE OF YOUR ARGUMENT]"

His post was the 2nd kind.

>>2847703
>where's your thesis against all this exactly? Hmm yes, ah I see, the magnificent paper "noooo it's bullshit!" by Anonymous /his/ Poster. Mhm... yes, reading it now... oooooooh, quite scientific indeed, I can see much effort has been put in and... OH MY, the years of expertise and research here is astounding, truly a masterpiece in the sciences. I congratulate you Great Anon. You are the brightest mind of this generation, no question about it
HAHAHAHA. You got so angry that you are starting to use sarcastic mockery against me, Lol. You know what Anon? you are right. There are absolutely 1.2 Billion people in this world that have ISIS-tier views and want to cut my head off. Are you satisfied now? now shoo shoo.

>>2847733
Here you go, dig in and tell us why the methodology was wrong. This pdf is sourced in the image above.
http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/04/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf

>>2847765

I've looked at it many times before, it's your evidence, give us a rundown of the methodology and why you think it is correct and what you think it shows.

>>2847741
>>Yes, all those poll about the recent western elections were completely reliable.
>Yes, they were. Most of the polls predicted the results to within a few percentage points. When an election comes down to the wire (as two-party elections in particular often do) it is pretty easy for the polls to be basically accurate and still fail to predict the result correctly. You'll notice the surveys in the image linked have margins of error of approx 5 points.
>Or, in other words: if most of the polls show Clinton winning with 50% of the vote, that doesn't necessarily mean she's not going to lose with 48%. It does mean, though, that she's immensely unlikely to win with 70%, or lose with 30%.
>I realize this is probably going over your head at this point, but to connect the analogy, if the survey suggests that 1.1 billion Muslims think that "Sharia should rule", maybe that number is actually 1.2 billion or 900 million, but either way, it's pretty damn certain to not be a MINORITY opinion.
>>Him calling me a ''retard'' is absolutely Ad Hominem.
>Nope. Because him calling you a retard wasn't an attempt to rebut your argument. It was just him calling you a retard. Then he went on to address your argument, separately from the insult.
>This is an ad hominem: "You're wrong because you're a retard."
>This is not an ad hominem: "You're a retard. [TWO UNRELATED SENTENCES IN WHICH HE ADDRESSES THE SUBSTANCE OF YOUR ARGUMENT]"
>His post was the 2nd kind.
My God., the mental gymnastics are priceless.

>>2847772
That's ... just not how it works. "Give us a rundown of why the methodology is correct?" To do that he'd have to list all of the things that AREN'T wrong with it, i.e. you're basically asking him to condense a semester's worth of Statistics 101 into a single 4chan post for you (and honestly it'd probably have to be more than a post since so far you've shown a complete lack of familiarity with the entire field). He's provided a citation from a source that's generally considered very reliable (Pew is well thought-of and is nonpartisan; it does not take any political stances). The onus is on YOU at this point to look over the evidence he provided and point out where it's flawed.

I mean, we both know you're not going to do that, because 1. it'd be a lot of work and 2. you're not remotely qualified to do so, but ... ball's in your court, dude.

>>2847777
And at this point I'm pretty sure I've been successfully trolled. If so, good job, I guess?

>>2847790

I have much more than a semesters knowledge of stats and I don't believe you have done much more than take a quick glance at Wikipedia to get yours to be honest,

No need to sugarcoat it for me anon, give me a rundown of your evidence that you are presenting to us and why you find it so appealing and what conclusions you are drawing from it.

>>2847799
>I'm not going to use 27 thousand Muslims as the representatives of the other 1.2 Billion
>I have much more than a semesters knowledge of stats
No you don't.

>>2847806

I have never said anything along those simplistic lines in this thread. Please learn how to use greentext.

>>2847799
>>2847832
>I have much more than a semesters knowledge of stats
You haven't taken so much as a single intro-level stats course. You're not fooling anybody.

That's assuming this isn't bait, of course. And IF it isn't, you're gonna have to put more than 10 seconds' worth of effort into your posts if you want anybody to reply to you after this. Until you do, I'm certainly done.

>>2847832
Don't worry yourself Anon. he thinks both you and i are the same person.
my God these people are hilarious. Do they actually believe the drivel that comes out of their mouths?

>>2847848

You are correct that you are done.

>>2847850
>>2847853
>I am right
>Pew is wrong
gg

>>2847448
You joking?

Islam leaves so little room for interpretation that it doesn't matter. That is the difference. The largest separate branch of Islam is the result of a difference of opinion relating to succession of Muhammad. Not to what what written by him. That is not an issue of the interpreting writing but one of things that has happened after the mans death. This separate sect is still a tiny minority of the Islamic world.

The difference between laws based on biblical law can often be superseded by laws made by the state. Christian nations also have a plethora of laws not written as a result of biblical law. I would like to know which countries and laws "nearly all of them have one or more laws that have no basis outside of biblical doctrine." Because biblical law is nearly ignored entirely in Christian countries.

In a Christian nation
The Law > Biblical Law

In an Islamic nation
The Law < Religious Law


Islam has never relaxed a bit, it is expansionist and aggressive since conception. The worst example of Christian extremism was the 30 years war and it was against other Christians. Even among Catholics the Pope never had direct control over monarchs of Europe.

The Islamic world has not changed at all, that is the nature of its writing, it cannot change. The rules were written and cannot change, why can't you understand this?

The writing of Islam makes every issue a fundamental issue because it cannot be edited, reinterpreted or changed. Even Catholics can change their rules because the Pope talks to God.


Imagine learning from a text book written 100 years ago, that is what Islam is, old ideas that are never allowed to change.

>>2844452
Shapiro is obviously biased and pushing his own agenda here.

File: hijab wont cut it here.jpg (136KB, 730x310px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 730x310px

>>2847958
The imam's debate interpretation and application of the text regularly, to this day. They've been known to call out fatwas on each other when disagreements can't be resolved. There's a whole subsets of sacred documents dedicated to these debates, in much the same way the rabbi's have rabbinic texts, and which are and aren't canonic varies from region to region - and sometimes within regions. Sunni's vs. Shiites maybe the biggest point of contention today, but it is far, far from the only one.

>The Law > Biblical Law
This is an anti-Christian policy unique to the most secular of the Christian nations (the Bible making it clear that all authority comes from God, and even kings, rule by God's grace, for he is the King of Kings - and further, "render unto Caesar" doesn't mean what you think it means). The more secular Muslim nations have much the same policy - not every majority Muslim nation enforces Sharia law, and in such nations, where state and religious law conflict, the state wins (which sometimes turns out to be true, even in Muslim nations where they do otherwise enforce Sharia law).

Books neither interpret themselves, nor enforce their own laws. Every document is a living document.

>>2848017
>This is an anti-Christian policy unique to the most secular of the Christian nations
i.e. literally all Western christian nations.
>where state and religious law conflict
Such a statement carries little weight when there's very little difference between the two.

>>2847607
Humanities use a lot of statistics though, especially in sociology.

>>2847451
This graph is obviously inaccurate, because i'm sure somewhere there is a muslim who believes leaving islam should be punished by death but doesn't believe the wife should obey her husband.

>>2849219
>what is statistical significance

>>2849222
I doubt they even bothered to measure that otherwise they would have represented the graph differently. Looks like they automatically assumed each smaller group was included in the large one.

>>2844827
>There's always full-blown nazi in every liberal. They are constantly fighting to keep it down.
This. They are just overcompensating for the evil feelings they have deep down.

File: 1494910039630.png (301KB, 520x678px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 520x678px

>>2844452
'
>trusting an orthodox jew that looks like bumpityboo

>Islam is a religion of peace

This is not wrong.
However people are idiots concerning the word "peace". Everyone likes peace, no one wants to live in a state of constant warfare.
But no one is okay with JUST peace. You can have peace and be a slave. You can have peace under sharia law. You can be at peace five feet under.
I fucking hate the word peace and how people treat it like it means so much.

>>2849248

What? Obviously they just asked 4 questions and the circles show how many people answered yes to each respective question. What you are saying doesn't make sense.

>>2844452
Radical muslims are genuinely an extreme minority that's not really a problem until there's a genuine crisis that puts the majority in a position where they become more susceptible to extreme ideas. Being hungry or tired or feeling like you have experienced unreasonable amounts of misfortune makes people angry and stupid and that's the point where shit gets out of hand. I'm saying radicalism is something that can be safely contained.

The actual thing that worries me is islam itself. The islamic way of life is not appealing or desirable, and of the major religions it has probably the strongest built-in mechanisms to spread and perpetuate itself and resist reforms. All the progress within islam depended on there being an 'outside' from which muslims adopted stuff or had to compete against. A religion like christianity initially resembled islam in this but ultimately didn't remain as stagnant as islam, despite aggressively stamping out paganism and controlling culture and morality. It's specifically because of their different structure that I don't find comparisons between islam and christianity appropriate or accurate.

>>2847515
The margins of error are right there in the image retard

>>2849293
They're that way for comparison you fucking idiot. How many people believe you should have your belly cut open, guts tied to a pole and forced to run circles around a post 'till you die for being gay, how that number compares to the number that just think you should be stoned to death, etc.

>>2850137
Misquoted.

File: reddit shill.jpg (59KB, 645x412px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 645x412px

>>2844452
>NOTE: I'm not /pol/.

Why do you have to put a disclaimer? /his/ is an extension of /pol/. Are you afraid of the butthurt redditors and a bunch of crazy tranny abominations that chimp out every time /pol/ is mentioned? They are the foreign element here not /pol/acks

>>2844452
>wanting to implement Sharia law makes you "radical"

Does wanting Halakha law also makes you a radical? I don't get why the guy who claims to be an Orthodox Jew doesn't love Sharia, Halakha is almost indistinguishable from Sharia (the only difference between them is that Sharia slightly less violent and barbaric) and many ultra-Orthodox Jews I've spoken to said that they have a more or less positive view of Islamic law.

>thinking that targeting of civilians may sometimes be justified makes you "radicaL"

That's a commonsensical belief. Does this kike think that anyone who claims that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were justified is also a "radical"?

>>2847476
>>2847515

Jesus christ dude take one class in statistics. Sampling is a perfectly valid and reliable way to acquire information about a population. They even give the margin of error in the image.

>>2847729
>I know enough about statistics

You really don't mate. You are embarrassing yourself in front of everyone here who is actually educated.

File: mudslimes inbred.png (269KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

269KB, 1080x1920px

>>2847476
I guess they don't have time to teach basic statistics when they have to teach 40 hours of the adventures of Muhhamad (piss be upon him) a week in Dukra Durkastan

>>2850241
>Sampling is a perfectly valid and reliable way to acquire information about a population

Top kek, how retarded do you have to be to unironically believe this? Statistics is a joke

File: ahmed 4.jpg (63KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 600x450px

>>2850256
t.ahmed

I mean the average Arab has an IQ of 85 barely higher than that of n*ggers so it makes sense. Google representative sample and confidence interval. This is high school tier stuff.

>>2850197
>/his/ is /pol/
>/pol/ regularly btfo'd here on the holocaust
now that's just sad

>>2846178
You mean like white poeple yeah?

>>2850261
>t.ahmed

Jokes on you, I'm a Christian from Belarus. The truth is, sampling is a joke, no matter how much buttblasted statistician will try to deny this.

File: jew autistic screeching.jpg (95KB, 566x622px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 566x622px

>>2850272

Posting links from wikipedia and the nizkor project is not winning more like autitic screeching

>>2844460
I don't see why acknowledging this as a thing is such an issue. Christianity during the 30 Years War (and to a surprisingly lesser extent most of the crusades) had this nasty murderous streak until it settled the fuck down. It's not wrong to point out that any particular religion is or has spiraled into badwrongnowdie mode. If anything, ignoring the situation makes reform practically impossible.

>>2850284
/his/torians actually post primary source material rather than youtube links

File: commie autistic screeching.jpg (19KB, 216x234px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 216x234px

>>2850292
>/his/torians

You mean those 2-3 super autistic redditors spergs who think they are intellectual powerhouses but just chimp out every time /pol/ is mentioned? Face it /his/ is an extension of /pol/ sprinkled with a few butthurt redditors and lefty/pol/ neckbeards who desperately try to take over and control a slow board

>>2850304
i see you don't even deny it. the sources you shills use are no better than creationists: youtube links. although i am not one of them, i am proud to say that we have a number of posters that will post primary sources related to the holocaust to debunk your claims. how many times have you seen the cremation argument debunked? although you'll deny it, I'll imagine at least dozens because of the small number of dedicated shills repeatedly posting those threads. i doubt the sincerity of your holocaust denial. you of all people should know how wrong it is from your exposure to counter arguments. i can only imagine that you types are purposefully trying to manipulate people like what you claim thr jews do or you suffer the same cognitive dissonance of a creationist repeating the anthem "no one has seen a dog turn into a duck"

File: 1495070071212.jpg (64KB, 651x654px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 651x654px

>>2850280
somebody deserves a spanking

>>2844465
>It sucks because of people like you
How DARE you try to criticize Islam and the Prophet Mohammed (pbuh)

>>2846190
thats the point, "most muslims are normal people"...not "most muslims are actually super-anti-terrorist and totally better than other people!!!!"

>>2847729
>use 27,000 muslims to represent 1.2 billion muslims
vs
>use my own opinions based on absolutely no evidence to draw conclusions about 1.2 billions muslims
You're legitimately broken in the head

>>2844452
Islam niggers just bombed Manchester
Religion of peace my ass

(((Shapiro)))

>>2851851
>White people a good boy he dindu nuffin

Meanwhile, in the Middle East

>>2847533
I don't think you understand how statistically representative polls work...

Literally every infographic you've ever read and believed is conducted in a similar way. A sample group is surveyed, there are multiple controls implemented, a margin of error is calculated and for the most part barring gross manipulation of the data the info is roughly accurate.

As someone else said it's rare to see a study of this nature with a sample size so big. This is probably more accurate than most other infographics you've read regardless of topic with the exception of a mandatory national census.

But I'll simplify it: don't say something is bullshit just because you don't understand it

>muh sample size

This is literally how all statistical surveys are done

>>2847475
We just need to get rid of humanities. People have been saying that since the board was made and it's still true. Does anyone have the /his/ vs humanities pic?

>>2844452
I never understand this question.

Take the number of Islamic militants and divide it by the total number of Muslims in the world. If this number is greater than 50℅, then you can say that a majority of Muslims are "radical".

The answer should be pretty clear.

>>2847475
People already talk about religion and philosophy on /lit/.

why are you telling OP its pol? its not pol
its a conducted research, and it draws a rather scary picture who you live with

and uneducated retards saying you cant poll anything based on sample must live in a cage

from marketing to voting, companies, countries, institutions all around the word, use it and successfully determine results for a long time now

catch this, your country has a statistics institute, with actual ppl working there full time

>>2853531
Is /lit/ smarter than /his/?

>>2851858
Start shit get hit

>>2853554
Well, they actually read books instead of just Wikipedia.

>>2853554
No, the only smart board on 4chan is /g/. Even /sci/ is fucking retarded.

>>2853562
Next you'll say something else stupid like "/v/ actually plays video games"

>>2853594
They actually do read books though.

>>2853594
stop repeating this tired ass meme already

>>2853554
>e/lit/ists vs /his/terics

Both are losers

>>2853597
They don't. Go post a reasonably popular book you've actually read on /lit/. They'll tell you it's shit and when you ask why it will become painfully obvious that they've never actually read it. They just parrot.

>>2853602
Such as? I don't know man, I haven't been on there much but they knew about all the books I had read.

>>2853569
This. I love how /sci/ hates /g/ and /g/ doesn't even know they exist.

>>2853612
>they knew about all the books I had read
Try and go into greater detail. Again, they just parrot.

>>2853602
>They just parrot.
Just like /his/ then

>>2853622
You seem to be catching on.

>>2853612
They know literary stuff but they hate genre fiction tbqhwy

>>2853636
To be fair, most genre fiction is trash.

>>2853637
Go back to your containment board, you pretentious faggot.

>>2853640
I've never been on /lit/ before lmao

>>2853636
Ok, gotcha.

>>2853637
I lowkey agree.

>>2853637
You're right. I can only enjoy a few of them. I always end up preferring literary or non-fiction.

>>2844452
>I'm not /pol/
Why did you have to write this in the first place

anyone else think Shapiro reminds them of a bizarro Whil Wheaton?

>>2846127
There's no such thing as Islamophobia.

>>2853710
How?

>>2844452
>Indonesia has 205 million people
>50 percent of them believe 9/11 a false flag
>that makes 143 million people radical

goddamn this is so stupid

also
>>>>>>>cites pewresearch

I wonder why a Jew wants to paint Muslims as the bad guy.

>>2853863

to be frank, the moslem is very very good at being the bad guy

File: 1495296624698.gif (559KB, 200x150px) Image search: [Google]

559KB, 200x150px

Ah yes he cited PewResearch the 'research' that polls less than 0.02% of a population then projects it on 1.6 Billion people.

fuck this gay shit

>>2844452
>ben shapiro

opinion discarded

>>2853882
Ah yes, he thinks saying "polls are gay!" counts as an argument.
Do you know anything related to statistics applied to social sciences? If so please tell us why you think the method of Pew Research is faulty

>>2853721
Just like there is no such thing as antisemitism, homophobia or misogyny

>>2853882
oh look another american retard who doesnt know who was gallup

Only 1 in 3 Muslims in Britain would contact the police if someone they knew were involved with Jihadists.

52% want homosexuality criminalized

24% want Sharia Law

35% think Joos have too much power

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7861/british-muslims-survey

Muslims are incompatible with western society. Even Muslims I've talked to that seem normal at first get really fucking weird on certain subjects.

>>2854041
>I asked john if he thinks that jason is a nigger
he said yes
>then all of john's friends and family must also think that jason is a nigger because STATISTICS xDD

This is what statisticians unironically believe

polling 0.0001% of a population doesn't mean the rest also think the same

>>2846127
>we're wahhabis against ISIS, all is fine
kys

>>2847729
pewresearch is pretty legit senpai, you might as well reject statistics entirely as a tool if you're gonna imply their methodology is wrong.

File: 1477626984617.png (66KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 200x200px

>>2850279
>tsarnaev
>caucasian chechen-georgians
>white

>>2854065
2 in 3 people in the states wouldn't the cops if they discovered someone was an illegal immigrant.

48% of Christians want Homosexuality outlawed.

92% believe national laws should reflect God's will.

47% of Americans think the Joos have too much power and we send to much aid to Israel.

Christians are incompatible with western society. Even Christians I've talked to that seem normal at first get really fucking weird on certain subjects.

there is undeniably a serious problem with Islam

and America's unconditional support of Saudi Arabia and starting pointless wars like Iraq where we killed half a million iraqis to get the rights to explore Iraq's oil fields for 30 years have only made the situation worse

>>2854163
Classic false equivalence argument. You have to go back Mohammed.

>>2844570
Why are you posting politics on /his/?

>>2854079
That's true, there are literally two separate kinds of Wahhabi and they're almost entirely different

>>2854071

>This is what statisticians unironically believe

No it's not.

I strongly suggest you stop posting and invest your time in learning a few things about statistics. Right now you are making yourself look incredibly stupid, as you not only show your ignorance but even seem to take pride in your own ignorance.

File: IMG_0904.jpg (152KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 1024x1024px

>>2854150
Chechens and Georgians are white. Here is a senior ISIS commander of Chechen-Georgian origin

>>2854065
>52% want homosexuality criminalized
>35% think Joos have too much power

Are you implying there is anything wrong with this, you leftard?

>>2854177
How is this false equivalence?

>>2854163
>Christians are incompatible with western society.
lol
Christianity IS Western society, Shlomo!

File: IMG_0905.png (1KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

1KB, 400x400px

>>2854205

>>2854178

>This board is dedicated to the discussion of history and the other humanities such as philosophy, religion, law, classical artwork, archeology, anthropology, ancient languages, etc.
>religion

>>2854210
No I got the point, you were trying to draw false equivalency between Islam and Christianity.

>>2854193
>Chechens and Georgians are white
sure thing Mahmud Churka Mazhdeb

>>2854346
Why is it a false equivalence? He used the same criterias for his comparison.

>>2854678
>he used the same criteria
Wrong.
He used criteria that are only equivalent in only the most glibly superficial manner.

Christians believe that homosexuals couples should not marry or adopt.

Muslims believe that homosexuals should be flung from rooftops and stoned.

It's like making the claim that Islam and Christianity are equivalent because they both believe theft is immoral, while ignoring the fact that Christians believe it is a sin whose punishment is best left to secular authorities, while Muslims believe the offending thief should have a limb amputated.

Not.
Equivalent.

>>2854807
or to put it another way, it's like those dishonest people who believe nuns voluntarily wearing a headscarf are the equivalent of Islam mandating that all women be veiled at all times when in public.

>>2854193
>chechen women
hnnnnnng
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mxA9i7zFGKA

>>2844742
Tacit support is still a factor. Lots of people like meat but don't want to personally make it. They'd still side with meat producers though.

See: all vegan jokes ever.

>>2847388
Turkey recently fell to nonsecularism and lasted less than 100 years despite a very impressive military structure willing to coup those that try that.

Basically you need instant and constant potential portential for violence to keep it at bay, and that's also goes against the general liberal democracy idea.

>>2850291
>I don't see why acknowledging this as a thing is such an issue. Christianity during the 30 Years War (and to a surprisingly lesser extent most of the crusades) had this nasty murderous streak until it settled the fuck down. It's not wrong to point out that any particular religion is or has spiraled into badwrongnowdie mode. If anything, ignoring the situation makes reform practically impossible.
I'm new to /his/ but let me jump in here

I agree with your later points, but the crusades were for lack of a better analogy, jihads - they were attempting to claw back formerly Christian lands (All North Africa and the Levant) from the violent expansion of early Islam.
Supposedly the Roman Catholics supported these expansions as it helped their hegemon among christians (most of NA was not catholic)
But the muslims became very strong and started encroaching on catholic territory, even getting up to a proverbial stones throw from Rome.

30 Years war was essentially a continuation of the struggle for catholic hegemony, but bolstered by HEFTY amounts of local squabbling among first the member states of the HRE, then the rest of the European powers.
It killed 8 million by current estimates.

It's an issue now though as their are people with various and often conflicting interests who are all after 'the pie' that is western economic success.
It's the same old geo-politics, just on steroids as the options available and the speed and depth of employment has exploded.
That paired with western sense of morality, responsibility, and guilt for things we have no reason to be guilty for.