Yes if you read more than just the chart, you would find it. But you seem to be content with a chart that has very little support.
Last edited by usmarine (2008-04-07 11:11:26)
Poll
Will Islam Take Over Europe?
| Yes | 27% | 27% - 26 | ||||
| No | 72% | 72% - 70 | ||||
| Total: 96 | ||||||
Like Jord said, firstly there's not enough of them. Secondly, the number of them that would want such a thing is an even smaller percentage. So it's unlikely. Besides, less people are embracing the supposedly "Native" (massive quotation marks) religion of Christianity, So what makes you think that people will be willing to convert to Islam, or that 3rd/4th+ generation people from Islamic backgrounds would even want to follow Islam?
I know so many 2nd/3rd Generation Muslims (ok not Muslims but people with Islamic backgrounds) who couldn't give a fuck about Islam, "Fuck that Arab shit" - I lol'd when someone said that...
I think, if anything, religion of all types will continue to get smaller in Europe as people realise that it's bollocks
I know so many 2nd/3rd Generation Muslims (ok not Muslims but people with Islamic backgrounds) who couldn't give a fuck about Islam, "Fuck that Arab shit" - I lol'd when someone said that...
I think, if anything, religion of all types will continue to get smaller in Europe as people realise that it's bollocks
^usmarine wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_E … _in_Europesergeriver wrote:
Where's your link to what Professor Bigdick said?usmarine wrote:
Well go blame wiki or dont let people post wiki. either way.
It is the main page where you got your pretty little chart from.
I'd have to say he proves a point, and even so he provided you with a name. It was easy to use a google / wikipedia on the name, and you probably would get the link.
inane little opines
If the muslims have twice the number of kids europeans have, it will take 7 generations (roughly 170 years) before they are the majority in my country. Today there's 2 muslims for every 98 europeans.
Like this:
EU Muslim
1. gen 98 2
2. gen 98 4
3. gen 98 8
4. gen 98 16
5. gen 98 32
6. gen 98 64
7. gen 98 128
Hopefully we can convert them to ateism.
I think they will take over if they become the majority.
Like this:
EU Muslim
1. gen 98 2
2. gen 98 4
3. gen 98 8
4. gen 98 16
5. gen 98 32
6. gen 98 64
7. gen 98 128
Hopefully we can convert them to ateism.
I think they will take over if they become the majority.
Last edited by Freke1 (2008-04-07 11:14:50)
Voted no, but I'm not sure this is the case for all parts of Europe. Take Kosovo. The Albanians are multiplying way faster than their neighbors. Already they're seeking for more breathing space. Also Turkey will play a big part. Of course even in the worst science fiction scenario that I can come up with Sharia laws and the like are not an option.
ƒ³
To expand on Marine's quote.
"But Jenkins admits this figure does not take account of the large birthrates amongst Europe's immigrant Christians.[13]"
I'm wondering why...
Also, I'll add this to Jenkins estimate.
"Jenkins also doesn't account for how further generations of Muslims don't reproduce as much as Muslims that emigrate to Europe, or, first generation Muslims."
"But Jenkins admits this figure does not take account of the large birthrates amongst Europe's immigrant Christians.[13]"
I'm wondering why...
Also, I'll add this to Jenkins estimate.
"Jenkins also doesn't account for how further generations of Muslims don't reproduce as much as Muslims that emigrate to Europe, or, first generation Muslims."
No, but you could have still posted a link because people were only interested in the chart because thats what the whole link was about.usmarine wrote:
Yes if you read more than just the chart, you would find it. But you seem to be content with a chart that has very little support.
I wasn't going to quote the whole damn thing. Nobody knows for sure now do they? But I guess you know more than the professor. And so do I right?
Last edited by usmarine (2008-04-07 11:15:30)
You should always read where the chart comes from. You know, to get the whole picture.Bf2-GeneralArnott wrote:
No, but you could have still posted a link because people were only interested in the chart because thats what the whole link was about.usmarine wrote:
Yes if you read more than just the chart, you would find it. But you seem to be content with a chart that has very little support.
But as usual, we turn this into a cut and paste wiki-thon.
No not the whole damn thing...just the bits that support your argument.usmarine wrote:
I wasn;'t going to quote the whole damn thing. Nobody knows for sure now do they? But I guess you know more than the professor. And so do I right?
I haven't posted anything to do with wikipedia today.usmarine wrote:
You should always read where the chart comes from. You know, to get the whole picture.Bf2-GeneralArnott wrote:
No, but you could have still posted a link because people were only interested in the chart because thats what the whole link was about.usmarine wrote:
Yes if you read more than just the chart, you would find it. But you seem to be content with a chart that has very little support.
But as usual, we turn this into a cut and paste wiki-thon.
But you have.
That's not the link I provided. Thanks for the new link.usmarine wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_E … _in_Europesergeriver wrote:
Where's your link to what Professor Bigdick said?usmarine wrote:
Well go blame wiki or dont let people post wiki. either way.
It is the main page where you got your pretty little chart from.
Probably.usmarine wrote:
But I guess you know more than the professor.
Make any good cartoons lately?dayarath wrote:
Talks about christianity here - not a word.Kmarion wrote:
Identity politics is worldwide. Don't fool yourself.
American politics is pretty cut throat. Obama's gain in popularity came after the shameless accusations of a Muslim background. The majority of Americans saw through the transparent and empty attacks.
buddhism - not a word.
any other religion - not a single word.
Did you miss the part where I said identity politics is worldwide? It matters to some degree, but nowhere near what it has been portrayed as. It is that idea of propaganda driven "popular media" that allows people like you to accept the garbage they spew as gospel. Do I have to spell it out to you and CNN? Obama (He's black ftr) is currently winning the Democratic parties nomination. Is his race a major factor? Get it?dayarath wrote:
I was using CNN as a reference for making a documentary on wether race matters in the presidential run. Popular media doesn't make programs on subjects which few people care about / would watch. Meaning, that race probably is an issue which they could profit of.Kmarion wrote:
You miss the point. If anything these vague attacks on religion have opened more eyes to the insignificance of it. Just because you see them being reported overseas it does not necessarily mean it has effected popular opinion. During election season the news will report the smallest of controversies, irregardless of it's relevance. I suggest you form your opinion around common sense and not CNN.
Now tell me, if Obama came out as a muslim in the presidential race, he would be considerably less succesfull and wouldn't get as much votes as he does now - correct?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I know that is not the link you...........oh fuck it. wiki away and have a good day.sergeriver wrote:
That's not the link I provided. Thanks for the new link.usmarine wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_E … _in_Europesergeriver wrote:
Where's your link to what Professor Bigdick said?
It is the main page where you got your pretty little chart from.
Anyone who thinks it will is a retard.
/thread
/thread
You asked for numbers, I provided 'em for ya. What's your fucking point?usmarine wrote:
You should always read where the chart comes from. You know, to get the whole picture.Bf2-GeneralArnott wrote:
No, but you could have still posted a link because people were only interested in the chart because thats what the whole link was about.usmarine wrote:
Yes if you read more than just the chart, you would find it. But you seem to be content with a chart that has very little support.
But as usual, we turn this into a cut and paste wiki-thon.
I wanted to know where the numbers came from....so I read the main article where it came from. I would have hoped you did the same. guess not.sergeriver wrote:
You asked for numbers, I provided 'em for ya. What's your fucking point?usmarine wrote:
You should always read where the chart comes from. You know, to get the whole picture.Bf2-GeneralArnott wrote:
No, but you could have still posted a link because people were only interested in the chart because thats what the whole link was about.
But as usual, we turn this into a cut and paste wiki-thon.
It's supposed to be be nice day... lol
no
marine's a troll. he has a dissenting opinion
Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2008-04-07 11:20:33)
Well, I'm at work with a lot of things to do. Yet I took the time to search for you the numbers you asked for. You hurt my feelings dude. I did it coz you know how much I appreciate you.usmarine wrote:
I wanted to know where the numbers came from....so I read the main article where it came from. I would have hoped you did the same. guess not.sergeriver wrote:
You asked for numbers, I provided 'em for ya. What's your fucking point?usmarine wrote:
You should always read where the chart comes from. You know, to get the whole picture.
But as usual, we turn this into a cut and paste wiki-thon.
No, marine's not a troll but you are.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
marine's a troll. he has a dissenting opinion
Well if all you want is numbers. 90% of statistics are made up.Bf2-GeneralArnott wrote:
Yes, you did guess right because i was interested in the actual numbers.