Hairtrigger : What is the Muslim population at present?
OK! It seems like it numbers about 2,2% which makes it about 500,000 out of a population of 25 million.
But in my opinion, its the wrong question, the better question should be, "How many radicalised moslems are there in Australia?"
But an accurate answer is unlikely to be forthcoming. But it could be that there are only a few thousand. But only one is needed to commit an act of terror.
You may find this undercover story interesting:
fulltimestudent
JoinedPosts by fulltimestudent
-
14
Fewer christians (and other religions) and more with NO RELIGION in Australia
by fulltimestudent inthe results of the last australian census are trickling out, and the results offer an insight into the changing concepts of contemporary aussies.. in 1966 only 0.8 % marked 'no religion' on their census form.. in 2001 those marking 'no religion" had grown to 16%.. and in 2016 those marking 'no religion" had grown to 29.6%.. so more non-believers than any other group.
catholics (the previous largest group) were now only 22.5% of australians.. ________________________.
the other interesting change is language,.
-
-
fulltimestudent
-
14
Fewer christians (and other religions) and more with NO RELIGION in Australia
by fulltimestudent inthe results of the last australian census are trickling out, and the results offer an insight into the changing concepts of contemporary aussies.. in 1966 only 0.8 % marked 'no religion' on their census form.. in 2001 those marking 'no religion" had grown to 16%.. and in 2016 those marking 'no religion" had grown to 29.6%.. so more non-believers than any other group.
catholics (the previous largest group) were now only 22.5% of australians.. ________________________.
the other interesting change is language,.
-
-
fulltimestudent
The results of the last Australian census are trickling out, and the results offer an insight into the changing concepts of contemporary Aussies.
In 1966 only 0.8 % marked 'No religion' on their census form.
In 2001 those marking 'No Religion" had grown to 16%.
And in 2016 those marking 'No Religion" had grown to 29.6%.
So more non-believers than any other group. Catholics (the previous largest group) were now only 22.5% of Australians.
________________________
The other interesting change is language,
Of course, English remains the most spoken language at home- 2016 - 72.7% of the population, but the second most spoken language (Mandarin Chinese) is now 2.5% (against 1.6% in 2011) reflecting a major change in the ethnic background of Australians.
If more results are of interest to you, they can be found at this Guardian (Australian web edition) at:
-
18
Sometimes I am very puzzled ...!!!
by fulltimestudent inrecently the extremely smart (so he tells us) but comparatively inexperienced person, elected by the very smart people who live in the usa, to be their president, announced that he was limiting ties with qatar (a small arab state in the middle east) on the grounds that they were supporting terrorism.. and yet, the very next day, he authorises the sale of twelve billion us dollars worth of modern american fighters (f15s) to that small state, in which is located ... .
" ... the biggest us military base in the middle east, al udeid.
ten thousand american personnel are there, many of them prosecuting the air war against isis in syria and iraq.
-
-
fulltimestudent
_Morpheus : _Hmmmm whats more passe.... fulltime students posts regarding how great communist china is or his new found hatred of trump....
What an interesting insight into your mind, _Morpheus. Apparently you think that asking a question, is an expression of hatred? Why do you think that? Most of the world is genuinely puzzled by this man, so why cant I be puzzled? Particularly so, when there seems little evidence to back his claim
You link that statement with an observation that I post "how great communist China is." Aside from the fact that China can hardly be called 'communist,' (except in the name of the governing Party) do you think that everyone should ignore the rise of China? The USA certainly does not. Just two examples:
Ford have just announced that the factory they cancelled in Mexico (when Trump leaned on them), will not be built in the USA, but that they will now expand one of their factories in China and ramp up production of cars there, and also ramp up production of another car in Europe and both those factories will export to the USA.
The second example is Boeing. Boeing have not (it seems) ever produced planes outside of the USA, but the Chinese aviation market is forecast to be so large and Boeing risked being left behind by Airbus, who have been making planes in China for some years, So Boeing have agreed to start making planes in China, a factory site has been purchased, and I understand construction of the factory is underway.
You suggest in your post, that noting such events is somehow wrong. Why so?
No other country has ever lifted so many out of poverty in such a short time. China just cannot be ignored.
-
18
Sometimes I am very puzzled ...!!!
by fulltimestudent inrecently the extremely smart (so he tells us) but comparatively inexperienced person, elected by the very smart people who live in the usa, to be their president, announced that he was limiting ties with qatar (a small arab state in the middle east) on the grounds that they were supporting terrorism.. and yet, the very next day, he authorises the sale of twelve billion us dollars worth of modern american fighters (f15s) to that small state, in which is located ... .
" ... the biggest us military base in the middle east, al udeid.
ten thousand american personnel are there, many of them prosecuting the air war against isis in syria and iraq.
-
-
fulltimestudent
just fine: You tried to insult the intelligence of millions of American people with a false narrative about how Trump made the deal to sell weapons to Qatar.
First, there is no 'false narrative" about Trump.
I posted:
"And yet, the very next day, he authorises the sale of twelve billion US dollars worth of modern American fighters (F15s) to that small state"
The only possible error in that comment, is just when Trump authorised the sale to Qatar. As I previously posted, he could've refused to honor the deal, just as he has refused to let other deals go ahead. So if the Qatar government is aiding 'terrorists,' why not refuse to let the deal stand?
On his recent visit to Saudi Arabia, Mr Trump negotiated a huge arms deal with the Saudi Arabia. But in an Australian newspaper owned by one of Mr. Trump's wealthy media friends in the USA, (Mr Rupert Murdoch), Saudi Arabia is named as the source of funds to build Jihadi schools in Indonesia.
So why doesn't Mr Trump name Saudi Arabia as a supporter of terrorism? And, if the Saudi's are building and financing Jihardi schools in Indonesia, why sell them so many arms? Is it because the Saudis are the source of so much western oil?
2. Your claim that I insulted the intelligence of the American people.
Umm! I'm sure you understand that 'intelligence' is not distributed evenly through any population group. Hence in the USA there will be people with a high IQ (Intelligence Quotient) some with an average IQ and some with a below average IQ.
I should clarify the term IQ. Here's one definition:
intelligence quotient
noun: a number representing a person's reasoning ability (measured using problem-solving tests) as compared to the statistical norm or average for their age, taken as 100.I do not know the statistical average IQ of Trump voters. Do you? But if we think of the words, reasoning ability, problem-solving skills, and perhaps cognitive skills. Do you imagine that the people who voted for Mr Trump, would fit into a 'high IQ level, an average IQ level, or a low IQ level?
-
36
What is the biggest sexual scandal to hit the top of JW tree ?
by Chook inelders ,co ,do ,branch overseers ,gb ,missionaries has "sinful" lust got the better of them..
-
-
fulltimestudent
There's always something to gossip about. ....
My favourites - as briefly as I can state the details that I knew.
1. Long ago in Sydney (while I was a young man), a Stuart Edwards was the congregation servant in Sydney Central cong., and also city servant. He was running a financial fiddle , asking brothers to give him their money to invest, with the promise that the WTS would get a proportion of the interest (apparently with the tacit knowledge of the WTS - btw Teddy Jarascz was the Branch Overseer at the time) and he would still pay an above bank interest rate to the investors. Well, of course, the whole thing came unstuck and he was disfellowshipped. His wife divorced him and married one of the Slarke brothers who was later appointed as a Circuit Overseer.
A brother (whose name escapes me) was appointed as cong. servant in his (Edwards') place, but fast forward some years and this brother leaves his wife and runs away with his wife's sister, the wife of the cong. servant of Granville Congregation.
Their illicit love affair had been going on for 20 years, but YHWH's holy spirit had never got to learn of their adulterous escapades. (Does the holy spirit go to sleep sometimes?)
2. North of Sydney, in Brisbane, the sleepy capital of Queensland, a young catholic man, by the name of Vince Mcnee was converted and became a zealous witness. Gifted with the usual glib Irish tongue and charm, he quickly became a pioneer and then Circuit Overseer etc.
Invited to Gilead, everyone thought he'd have a wonderful career in YHWH's ever-expanding theocratic org. But look!.Halfway through the Gilead course, Vince lands back in Australia in disgrace. Never found out clearly why. Soon pioneering again though and then again on the circuit and then as a district overseer. And, apparently YHWH forgives him again and off to Gilead for a second time. And whaddayaknow he's sacked from Gilead a second time. Still no clarity on what he had done wrong.
This time it took longer for him to pioneer again and then become an elder etc. But now a hint of what was the possible reason for his sacking twice from Gilead. One day his wife came home early from the field, to find Vince and a younger male friend (a former Sydney Bethel brother) naked in the shower together, with some obvious white substance on their bodies that was not soap. And this time (as far as I know) there was no more (smile) forgiveness.
-
18
Sometimes I am very puzzled ...!!!
by fulltimestudent inrecently the extremely smart (so he tells us) but comparatively inexperienced person, elected by the very smart people who live in the usa, to be their president, announced that he was limiting ties with qatar (a small arab state in the middle east) on the grounds that they were supporting terrorism.. and yet, the very next day, he authorises the sale of twelve billion us dollars worth of modern american fighters (f15s) to that small state, in which is located ... .
" ... the biggest us military base in the middle east, al udeid.
ten thousand american personnel are there, many of them prosecuting the air war against isis in syria and iraq.
-
-
fulltimestudent
I asked a question, since Trump has felt free to cancel other agreements made by a previous administration, why did he not cancel this one?
Is there an answer to my question?
Beyond that, is there any genuine evidence that Qatar really does support terrorism?
-
18
Sometimes I am very puzzled ...!!!
by fulltimestudent inrecently the extremely smart (so he tells us) but comparatively inexperienced person, elected by the very smart people who live in the usa, to be their president, announced that he was limiting ties with qatar (a small arab state in the middle east) on the grounds that they were supporting terrorism.. and yet, the very next day, he authorises the sale of twelve billion us dollars worth of modern american fighters (f15s) to that small state, in which is located ... .
" ... the biggest us military base in the middle east, al udeid.
ten thousand american personnel are there, many of them prosecuting the air war against isis in syria and iraq.
-
-
fulltimestudent
Mr Trump has 'cancelled' some 'deals' made by previous American regimes. Why not this one? Particularly if Qatar does support terrorism, as Trump claims? Which claim is not at all clear.
Many claims have been made that Saudi Arabia supports terrorism also. Does it? If it does, why does Trump create the impression that Saudi Arabia does not support terrorism? And why does he sell arms to the Saudi's?
-
18
Sometimes I am very puzzled ...!!!
by fulltimestudent inrecently the extremely smart (so he tells us) but comparatively inexperienced person, elected by the very smart people who live in the usa, to be their president, announced that he was limiting ties with qatar (a small arab state in the middle east) on the grounds that they were supporting terrorism.. and yet, the very next day, he authorises the sale of twelve billion us dollars worth of modern american fighters (f15s) to that small state, in which is located ... .
" ... the biggest us military base in the middle east, al udeid.
ten thousand american personnel are there, many of them prosecuting the air war against isis in syria and iraq.
-
-
fulltimestudent
Recently the extremely smart (so he tells us) but comparatively inexperienced person, elected by the very smart people who live in the USA, to be their President, announced that he was limiting ties with Qatar (a small Arab state in the Middle East) on the grounds that they were supporting terrorism.
And yet, the very next day, he authorises the sale of twelve billion US dollars worth of modern American fighters (F15s) to that small state, in which is located ...
" ... the biggest US military base in the Middle East, Al Udeid. Ten thousand American personnel are there, many of them prosecuting the air war against Isis in Syria and Iraq. "
Quoted from the UK magazine, The Spectator. (Reference: https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/06/donald-trumps-big-trouble-in-little-qatar/ )
How did this man fool so many Americans into thinking that he was so 'smart?'
Footnote: My original source was a news story in the UK Independent: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-qatar-weapons-deal-12-billion-day-accuse-terrorism-saudi-arabiaqatar-signs-loa-for-the-a7790956.html?cmpid=facebook-post
-
16
Human origins pushed back further into the past
by fulltimestudent inscience is a self-correcting journey.
any error in thought will be corrected by later research or discoveries, so the common concept that we humans (homo sapiens) developed something like 200,000 years ago is undergoing a major correction.
the discovery of fossilised bones of at least five individuals have been recovered from an old mine in morocco.
-
-
fulltimestudent
Anyone interested in a more technical understanding of the discoveries mentioned in this thread, may like to read the overview in an issue of Nature Journal ( a leading UK scientific publication).
https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v546/n7657/full/nature22336.html
Quote: "Fossil evidence points to an African origin of Homo sapiens from a group called either H. heidelbergensis or H. rhodesiensis. However, the exact place and time of emergence of H. sapiens remain obscure because the fossil record is scarce and the chronological age of many key specimens remains uncertain. In particular, it is unclear whether the present day ‘modern’ morphology rapidly emerged approximately 200 thousand years ago (ka) among earlier representatives of H. sapiens1 or evolved gradually over the last 400 thousand years2. Here we report newly discovered human fossils from Jebel Irhoud, Morocco, and interpret the affinities of the hominins from this site with other archaic and recent human groups. We identified a mosaic of features including facial, mandibular and dental morphology that aligns the Jebel Irhoud material with early or recent anatomically modern humans and more primitive neurocranial and endocranial morphology. In combination with an age of 315 ± 34 thousand years (as determined by thermoluminescence dating)3, this evidence makes Jebel Irhoud the oldest and richest African Middle Stone Age hominin site that documents early stages of the H. sapiens clade in which key features of modern morphology were established. Furthermore, it shows that the evolutionary processes behind the emergence of H. sapiens involved the whole African continent."
You may be able to gain access to the full article through your local library.
-
16
Human origins pushed back further into the past
by fulltimestudent inscience is a self-correcting journey.
any error in thought will be corrected by later research or discoveries, so the common concept that we humans (homo sapiens) developed something like 200,000 years ago is undergoing a major correction.
the discovery of fossilised bones of at least five individuals have been recovered from an old mine in morocco.
-
-
fulltimestudent
zeb: I saw a doco sorry cant recall the details of graves found in Spain which were Neanderthal. This was proven by artefacts' etc. The finders took some samples and tested for DNA and found guess what? Not human.
Hi zeb, I guess I shouldn't comment without reading the article you referred to, but I'll hazard some guesswork.
I think your reference may have been to a claimed discovery of DNA from soil samples, which was an interesting claim as ancient DNA is usually found in small quantities that are often fragmentary and damaged, as this extract from a Smithsonian Institute discusses:
Quote: "Organisms decompose after death. Water, oxygen and microbes break down DNA. Within 100,000 years, all DNA is destroyed. Ancient DNA tends to be found in small quantities. The DNA that is extracted is generally fragmentary and damaged. Some damage results in changes to the DNA sequence. Cytosine can change to uracil, which is read by copying enzymes as thymine, resulting in a C to T transition. Changes from G to A also occur. DNA errors are very common at the ends of molecules."
That's not to say the skilled technicians can't come up with a result by making allowances for 'known' potential changes. But before I (personally) would include that information in my thinking, I will wait for further research.
The above Smithsonian article also stated that Neanderthal and humans share some DNA (but not all) sequences.
Quote: "Researchers have developed ways to analyze the results of ancient DNA sequencing efforts to determine whether contamination is likely and how much has occurred. Analysis of the results and efforts to keep labs and specimens free of modern DNA is very important as some researchers believe that the early studies of Neanderthal DNA included modern contaminants."
Here's the link to the above article:
http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics/ancient-dna-and-neanderthals/sequencing-neanderthal-dna
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Earnest: It is also quite significant that these fossils were found in Morocco. Previously it had been thought that early man developed in East and Southern Africa. The identification of such old fossils so closely related to modern man in an area far from the "cradle of mankind" suggests palaeontologists simply have no idea where homo sapiens came from. Clearly they will have to revise their current assumptions.
Not sure Earnest, what point you're inferring, outside of your final sentence, quote:
"Clearly they will have to revise their current assumptions."
But that's what happens all the time in the 'scientific method.' And most of the media references to the discovery mention the change to previous thinking, in their conclusions.
I suggest that at this stage, there is no need to postulate a change to the 'supposed' beginnings/origins of humans. If the Moroccan discovery conclusions are sustainable in the long run, then all it means is that the spread of proto-humans (if that's the best descriptive term) occurred earlier than previously thought, and in a different direction to what was previously thought. And, I'm sure you will agree that humans could walk a long, long way in a few thousand years.
The discovery doesn't really change (to any great extent) current thinking about human origins. If as this 2002 discussion in the New York Times states, human origins may be far older than 300,000 years BP.
Quote: "The first human ancestors appeared between five million and seven million years ago, probably when some apelike creatures in Africa began to walk habitually on two legs. They were flaking crude stone tools by 2.5 million years ago. Then some of them spread from Africa into Asia and Europe after two million years ago."
Reference: www.nytimes.com/2002/02/26/science/when-humans-became-human.html