Nneka - Heartbeat (Chase & Status Remix)

It's curious how what he says could be called Af Soomali I listened to it a few times and could only understand the bit about the flag. Calankeena cirka u ekaa ee xidigta cad lahaa. I liked it though!

Pitbull - I Know You Want Me

Originally posted by Eng.Cadde: Please tell me what is your take on this? Do you think i am too demanding? Keep reading. First of all, I have a long way to go before I completely settle down and tie the knot But hadda i think i should give a description of my ideal woman,the perfect fantasy woman in my head. *My ideal woman doesnt have to be exceptionally beautiful laakin mid iska dhexdhexaad ah. *respectul,Shows an extreme respect for her family and mine. Marriage is built on mutual respect,No respect no marriage. *Doesnt dramatize little trivial things,Absolutely No,I want a wife not a drama queen.!! *Cleanness,This is the most obvious thing inaan sheego xataa maba aheyn.lol but anyways,Everything around me should be clean. also,she is expected to dress modestly except in the bedroom she can walking around in her panties in the bedroom.i dont object *welcomes me with a broad smile whenever i arrive home,kabaha waa in layga siibaa kadibna biyo kulul suuliga lay sii geeyaa inta aan dharka iska siibayo. *Does not object to second wife,she is my first and will always have a special place in my heart but if circumstance change she is required to deal with it. *very submissive in bed and at the same time full of suuro. haye,Do you think i crossed the line? P.S this is not a marriage proposal. Disgusting.

Muse - Resistance

I am back! It feels like I've been away for ages Hope you believers had a wonderful Eid. I sure did alhamdulillaah Because my jokes and references to popular culture are obviously going to waste here, I'm going to button up my coat and sit straight with an expressionless face. Lets roll out the red carpet for some serious seriousness. Ramsaade wrote: Your current knowledge of dinosaurs comes from the fossil record not what scientists speculate. Deal with the evidence for Evolution! This doesn't make sense. We know dinosaurs were alive because we have the fossil evidence. Beyond that ---> a lot of speculation and suggestions but no real hard evidence. This is what I mean with GG's constant attack on irrelevant issues. Ask yourself this question: does any forgery or "misunderstanding" detract from the fact that modern humans evolved from ape-like ancestors? Fact? You have not been able to provide any fact for your claim. It would be different if a lion was to evolve into a different lion tomorrow. We could perform genetic tests, we could take the new lion and existing lions and compare and contrast. Maybe if it was born in captivity you'd have have the whole thing on tape. You are there to witness new lions emerging from old lions and it's all scientific. But for hominid species that died out hundreds and thousands of years ago, how can we possibly be so scientific? The DNA has degraded and without eye witness, controlled testing, the hypothesis cannot be verified. It's basic science 101. The evidence above (for human evolution) and the other evidence you ignored for the transition between between dinosaurs and birds. There are 2 types of evolutionary scientists. Those who believe birds evolved from dinosaurs, and those who don't. Do you agree or disagree with this claim? So, you see the chances of any false finding being readily accepted by the scientific community is fleetingly small. This was not my point with my sarcastic remarks. If you remember, you originally said that scientists are guilty of using their imagination but that they weren't the only ones. Then you concluded: "Scientists use their imagination to come up with conceptual frameworks that explain observed facts". --> Scientists use their imagination but they use it for good cause. I thought this was conceited and flawed, and whenever this happens, the little devil called sarcasm kicks in. I said at the time when Darwin was fervent abolitionist, Muslims, especially arabs muslims were selling and buying black African slaves with alacrity. Posted by Ramsaade on September 18, 2009 05:01AM: Muslims of his time were dealing in slavery, specially black Negroes like yourself. This is complete non sequitur as it doesn't logically follow from anything previously written. I didn't say anything about Muslim slaves Logically thinking I'm not Muslim? Evolutionary Theory postulates that all currently living organisms evolved from one or few original living organisms. Your source, please (the text in italic) Evolution impacts populations not individuals. Any one individual is irrelevant. At the most basic level, evolution can be defined as the change in gene or allele frequency of a population over many generations. You're probably not familiar with Ernst Mayr's 'What Evolution is'. In the preface Dr. J. Diamond says there isn't a better book about evolution and there won't be. In it, Mayr says the approach of stripping every phenomenon down to a gene and trying to follow up evolutionarily route is doomed to fail. According to 'What Evolution Is', evolution is about the individual, population and species; that it isn't 'change in gene frequency'. The two most important units are the individual which is the actual target of natural selection, and population. Now. Should I believe your explanation of evolutionary theory, or Ernst Mayr's? I'll give you another chance. Explain_to_me_what_e volutionary_theory_i s. This demonstrates to me that you're reading way too much Creationist claptrap. Creationists, because they can't refute the evidence, always engage in dishonest debating tactics. They'll misquote or take out of contexts what scientists say, they'll use long discredited ideas or rely on limited knowledge of scientists 100 years ago. You can bash creationists as much as you want. This doesn't take away the fact that you have no knowledge of the evolutionary theory. I deliberately refrained from using any names, and you gave the core of incidents, to see how you would respond. You were not familiar with some of the best known forgeries in evolution: the Piltdown Man & the Nebraska Man, you did not know SJ Gould's reaction to Archaeopteryx, my dumbing down of words lead you to miss the truth in my X-men remark (saltation). De Vries's Mutation Theory, which is NOT taught in schools Please point out where I claimed it was. (meaning you're reading this nonesense from Creationist websites), has long been discredited and we know have better knowledge about genetics. What is nonesense? The Mutation theory? You see the point isn't that it was discredited. The point is that when I brought it up, you bashed me whilst being very unaware of the fact that this is what early evolutionary scientists believed in. Even T H Huxley, who fiercely defended Darwinism, believed in saltation (to bridge the gaps between a newly arisen taxon and its nearest ancestor). But you didn't realize I was talking about saltation, because I didn't mention it by name. So you couldn't google it. And depend on threads like FINALLY TANGIBLE PROOF OF MACRO-EVOLUTION. Of course, that is what "evolutionists" think and that is what the evidence shows. Whose thinking should we mind? Creationists? People who believe the earth is only 6,000-10,000 years old and the reason dinosaurs are extinct is because they couldn't fit in Noah's Ark... should we be listening to them? And this is why I don't call myself a creationist. I call myself a Muslim. I don't believe the earth is 6000 years old, as that's what Christians believe, as they did some maths based on certain verses of the Bible and that's the number they came up. I don't have to sweat that. The planet can be 600 billion years for as much as I care. The Quran doesn't mention dinosaurs, so your argument is void. And why would you do that? Didn't you ask for evidence? If you were sincere in your request, the first think you should do should've been check out each species. I told you my reason - and what makes you think I didn't? I gave a list of those transitional fossils. And you accuse me of copy and pasting. You're a joke and charlatan. Your list was from a thread titled "Finally tangible PROOF of MACRO-EVOLUTION". If you don't understand why "giving a list" from a thread called that is wrong, then I possibly can't do anything for you. It's official! You're a complete dolt. Before I thought you were a mere dilettante but your case is worse. How could you write Australopithecus was the ancestor of modern chimpazees and expect to be taken seriously? "Expect to be taken seriously" by whom? Who are you referring to? The readers? You see many people are being taken seriously undeservingly, and many people are ridiculed wrongfully. I'm not concerned with such things. Who preceded Australopithecus? For the record, Australopithecus is NOT the ancestor of modern chimpazees. Just answer the above question. Are you doing this on purpose? You can't be this daft. Yes, the older the fossils, the more likely -- given everything else -- they're the ancestors of the younger fossils. Just like you're descendant of your great-grandfather who lived long time ago. At first I wondered why you left out my question which was essential, but then I realized you needed to throw in a few more ad hominems to sound more convincing. I asked you for conclusive and irrefutable evidence (originally your words, not mine) for the claim that Australopithecus is human's ancestor. You replied by telling me that it's brain was about the same size as chimpanzee, its teeth looked more human than apes and the date of the fossils predated fossils for modern humans. This to you is "conclusive" and "irrefutable" evidence, apparently. The fact that something looks more human than chimp and came earlier. But never-mind that. I asked you a specific question to make a point: which came earlier; the floresiensis or the neanderthal and which resembles more the modern human? Which had bigger head? Radiometric dating. And how reliable is radiometric dating? For example, could one misestimate by hundreds of thousands of years, even over a million years? Is it possible? Mutation, along with Theory, means different thing to a scientists than to a layman Which one are you? This is what I've been trying to tell you all along and it seems you have missed or ignored it completely. Please state where. Otherwise I take it you are lying. Mutations in genetics means mistakes in the genome arising from the copying process. It' is a mistake that happens all the time and contributes to the genetic diversity present in many organisms. I take it you are the layman. The cell's machinery detects the errors and fixes them. Some errors slip through and that's how many cancers begin. The only mutations that matter for evolution are the ones that occur in the DNA of gametes as the DNA in these cells will be passed on to the next generation. I'll let the readers see what a nincompoop you are... the Wikipedia passage you provide disagrees with you and yet you're blissfully unaware. Genome and genes are like apples and oranges to our hapless GG. You're very desperate to show everyone around you, aren't you? To prevent you from committing ad hominem in your future posts, I will continue the list of all the things GG is, for you: a bonehead, dork, jerk, nitwit, twit, half-wit, dimwit, fathead, silly, goof, imbecile, pinhead, moron, simpleton, fool. Now that that is established and out of the way, we can continue without further speculations of my lack of intelligence. You originally wrote: "Mutations are merely mistakes from copying the genetic material during cell division (reproductive cells). These mutations add to the genetic diversity by adding new mutations on top of inherited mutations." Mutations do occur but the cells machinery fixes them, as I explained earlier, therefore we don't really have mutations. It's like a burglar trying to brake into your house but your home security making it impossible. He keeps trying, but that doesn't mean you have a burglar in the house. If mutations do slip through, we are not a new specie but a new patient. As a general rule of thumb, if a mutation is passed on to offspring, they will suffer accordingly. These questions are irrelevant to Evolution Theory since the theory assumes the existence of one or few living organisms. Read my question again, this time with thought. You said there are single celled organisms today, I asked you where they came from/whether they were the origin of life. Now read your response. How does it make sense? What do you mean free will is not real for Him? Are you saying God doesn't have free will? God does what He pleases, your free will is real for you (it exists for you) but not for Him (He has predetermined what happens to you). The reason why we are servants of Allah is because we accept He is greater than us, we accept we are nothing without Him and we can never be as great as Him, so we surrender to Him and pray and hope He will be good to us, for He has the power to destroy any flourishing empire and turn its streets into mere dust, just like He has the power to create that flourishing empire. We have no power, He alone has all power. I feel this is appropriate: And most of them do not follow (anything) but conjecture; surely conjecture will not avail aught against the truth; surely Allah is cognizant of what they do. Surah 10:36

Eid Mubarak! I'm off SOL for a couple of days. Have a great time, everyone!

Thank you for this Blessed. I have always been under the impression that the Quran doesn't specifically mention the covering of hair, I never read what you said even in footnotes of translations. Even my father always spoke of 'jilbab' and never 'khimar'. I know there are plenty of hadiths about what should be visible. But I wholeheartedly accept what you say. About wigs: I have heard that wearing fake looking wigs is not haram. One sheihk concluded that it is similar to wearing a ponytail - as long as it is very clear/visible that it's not part of your hair. Eid Mubarak!!

Originally posted by Fu-Fu: she looks so good ….much more beautiful than Lady Gaga I second that.

Blessed, I seem to cause confusion everywhere I go! Makes me wonder whether I present my thoughts as clearly as I think I do! My dear, the Quran doesn't specifically ask the woman to cover her hair, it only talks about modesty, therefore I can't really present you the evidence. I'm not saying women shouldn't cover their hair (hair, like you said, is aura), I'm just saying that don't say it says in the Quran that women should cover their hair. Do you notice the difference? Because then, you are adding hadiths to the Quran. And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; That they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; That they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty Quran 24:31 Hope you got my point. P.S Do you think all wigs are not permissible?

Originally posted by Arac: ^Have you ever heard of DNA fingerprinting? If you and your older sibling were the only suspects in a crime, would it be possible to distinguish between the two of you based on a DNA sample found at the scene of the crime? What about you and your mother or father? You and your identical twin sibling? You and the Dalai Lama? Or would that be only possible if the two of you are "retards" or have a genetic disorder? Do you deliberately misread or do you suffer from dyslexia? I can't see how those questions follow. The fact that we have different DNA from our parents (or anyone else) is due to our genetic make-up, which is not the same thing as mutation. DNA changes, and sometimes (rarely) these changes result in mutation. I can't believe you too can be arguing we all have mutations in our genes. Originally posted by Arac: Are all mutations deleterious? Is it possible to have a mutation that's beneficial to an organism, or a mutation that is neutral? Ever heard of a "silent mutation"? What is the process by which bacteria and viruses become resistant to antibiotics/antivira ls? This is irrelevant. Mutation is rare - an exception and not the rule.

I've seen a few interesting people on the train. Unfortunately I nearly always read on the train, so I quickly have a glance and then I do not pay any more attention to the very superbly gorgeous person sitting across. I can't see how people could actually pursue each other while on the train.

RAMSAADE WROTE: "Sorry to burst your bubble but science relies on objective and verifiable facts not on cartoons and drawings. The fossil record is REAL and deadly for Creationism." I guess you just didn't read my post well. What "objective and verifiable facts" have you got on the skin colour of dinosaurs? Or the shape of the iris? That's what I meant. Oh and by the way, about cartoons and drawings: I applaud evolutionary theorists for their excellent and groundbreaking scientific visualization abilities, as they managed to sketch a whole pre-human and his family (complete with skin and hair - in colour) from 2 teeth. Which then unfortunately had to belong to a stopid pig. This wasn't of course forgery, this was a serious misunderstanding (I'm seriously not being sarcastic). If the teeth had been human, it would have made all the difference. "Creationists are fond of employing red herrings and straw man arguments. I guess when you can't handle the evidence and powerful arguments for Evolution you try your luck at anything." I know, the evidence is just overwhelming. Wait, what evidence? (Btw I really don't like being called a creationist) "For the same reason Theists fabricate bogus evidences for their believes." I agree, evoscientists are as reliable as the writers of the Bible. Are they related?? That's the new hot question, my friend! "Again, why would I? You know I reject the whole notion of prophet-hood. Mohammed was just 7th century arab leader albeit extraordinary one. His conduct can only be judged by the moral standards of his time not ours. Since I'm not a person calling for people to emulate Mohammed in the 21st century, I don't need to find faults with his actions and believes; it's actually you who has to defend him. " Fair enough. "Muslims of his time were busy dealing in slavery, specially black Negros like yourself. " Muslims can't be slaves, soz bruv. "Since that is NOT what Evolution theory postulates, let me know when you're interested in discussing the facts" I think I already asked you; please explain/clarify to me what evolutionary theory is. See, I even asked you nicely "I'm not gonna respond to this but let it hang there. It will come in handy later in showing us GG's entire understanding of genetics and mutations is cartoon-ish as it is gleaned from cartoons." Thanks! I agree with you, that is pretty cartoonish! Thank you for agreeing with me. Unfortunately that was actually what De Vries suggested in early 20th century. And he was the developer of mutation theory of evolution. :'( That's why my knowledge of genetics is so cartoonish and naive. I blame him, it was the swieetie man. Fooking Dutch and his prawnmen! Nonsense. Whales have vestigial hind limbs that are leftovers from when they walked on land. That's what evolutionists think. I just read today in the Guardian that T-rex has a tiny older brother, and it has just been found: "The discovery overturns scientists' thinking about how Tyrannosaurus rex evolved. Many of the most striking features of the beast, such as its puny forearms, were thought to be a trade-off during the evolution of its enormous size, but Raptorex shows these features had already evolved more than 60m years earlier." Scientists sure seem to think a lot. "Here is non-exclusive list: Eoraptor, Herrerasaurus, Ceratosaurus, Allosaurus, Compsognathus, Sinosauropteryx, Protarchaeopteryx, Caudipteryx, Velociraptor, Sinovenator, Beipiaosaurus, Sinornithosaurus, Microraptor, Archaeopteryx, Rahonavis, Confuciusornis (my favorite), Sinornis, Patagopteryx, Hesperornis, Apsaravis, Ichthyornis, and Columba." You know what, I actually googled that list in that exact order and guess what came up? A thread called "Finally, tangible PROOF of MACRO-EVOLUTION". Let me guess your search words: "TANGIBLE PROOF OF MACRO-EVOLUTION, HELP!" Now what did you say about copy&paste, you old hypocrite? Shame on you. I doubted you knew anything, because even in spite of your eloquent use of fancy words, you dangerously confuse things and are not even familiar with the basics. "There were different kind of species of Australopithecus, which one are you referring. Lets take, for arguments sake, Australopithecus Afarensis. This species was clearly an intermediate between apes and humans. For instance, its brain was about the size of chimpanzee but it was bipedal and had anatomical features resembling more closely humans as opposed to apes. Furthermore, its teeth looked more human than apes." This is exactly what I mean with "confusing things". Australopithecus (both aferensis and africanus) is (supposedly) the forefather of modern chimpanzees. The fact that you say they resemble more humans than apes just sealed it for me. "And the date of the fossils predate fossils for modern humans" And this is your explanation? Because they came earlier, they must be their ancestors? Let me ask you something in that case: who came first the floresiensis or the neanderthal? And now: which resembles more the modern human? And by the way, how does one get the date of fossils? Yes, they did not have bones since most animals are insects. This is why most fossils consist of hard stuff like bones, teeth, claws. We rarely find skin or tissue. The species that leave best and most fossils are those that: lived for long time, had hard body parts, were numerous and lived over large geographical area. Plant fossils are discovered, far less than animals, precisely because they're more ubiquitous and live in many different ecosystems Please read what you wrote. "They didn't have bones since most animals were insects"? That is utter nonesense. The reason fossils are discovered rarely is because their remains decompose. It has nothing to do "bodies made of hard stuff" but everything to do with the body being covered with sediment in order to preserve. "This is what I meant when earlier I said GG's conception of Genetics and mutations is cartoon-ish." Yay! I know, right?! "Mutations are merely mistakes from copying the genetic material during cell division (reproductive cells). These mutations add to the genetic diversity by adding new mutations on top of inherited mutations." Dear God. Delete this post before you start regretting it. It's really embarrassing. You haven't got the faintest of idea of what you're talking about. it's not even funny. We don't all carry mutant genes, if we did we'd be facking retards. (No offense to those who have inherited diseases) "Perhaps GG should stop watching X-Men and start reading High School biology textbook. " Perhaps you should cut the pseudo-intellectual crap, and have a look at that biology book. Mutations add to the genetic diversity... on top of inherited mutations... Lol. "Second, Archeopteryx were their own species (as are all species) but they had features that were not completely dinosaur or completely bird, hence their status as intermediate species." So a group of guys had a look at this bird that looked funny, and in their all-powerful wisdom, they declared it an intermediate? Yeah, sure, sounds good by me. "They're not? Please, enlighten us. For example, tell us where we look for those mutations?" Why genetic make up and mutation are not the same thing: Mutations are changes in the DNA sequence of a cell's genome and are caused by radiation, viruses, transposons and mutagenic chemicals, as well as errors that occur during meiosis or DNA replication. Due to the damaging effects that mutations can have on cells, organisms have evolved mechanisms such as DNA repair to remove mutations. This is from Wikipedia. You could have just typed 'mutation' and saved me the trouble and yourself the embarrassment. You're clueless, aren't you" I am. "There are still single celled organisms." And where did they come from? Or have they always been, and we've solved the mystery of life, and these single celled organisms are the origin of all life, our forefathers? "Yes, like in the X-Men cartoons. " Totally. I like the films better though. "Because omniscient, omnipotent creator knows the outcome before the test on earth. Before God creates you, He already knows your destiny otherwise he's not omniscient. He chose, out of His free will, to create you knowing ahead of time where you will end up." Of course He does. It's no secret, you know? "Thus, the test on earth is meaningless and free will is an illusion." Life on Earth (material pursuits etc) is meaningless and ultimately an illusion. The test however is real. The realness of free will can be seen in our discussion: you don't believe in God, I do. Because God has created you so that you will never be able to predict tomorrow; knowing your future is impossible for you. Therefore free will is real for you and not for Him. Just like this world is the reality for you and not for Him.

^ Ibtisam, exactly. Funnily enough they are both repped by the same talent agent, Dave Wirtschafter. Publicity stunt, anyone?

Originally posted by Indhoos: Ilaahay haku soo hanuuniyee, bal hadde kuwaana eeg, Oo fadlan akhri. Embryonic Development Mountains Origin of the Universe Adiguse hadda ma infidel baad isku xisaabisay waa adiga soo xiganayee, mise wali you are in a questioning the religion state of mind? Walaal qofkaan uma maleenaayi in uu soomaliya yahay. Marka hada kabacdi af soomali lee an ugu hadalno, haduu rabane soomaali uu ku soo jabaabaa.

Originally posted by Honesita: quote:Originally posted by Daandurreey: Is this different from wearing gold, pretty hijab, nice perfume, or driving a nice car? They all bring attention to the woman and her beauty. Subhanna Allah, this statement reminded me of the tafseer for the verse in Surat alBaqara in which Allah prohibits Riba... those who consume it will try to defend themselves by saying: trade is just like riba... While they know it is not; but they only say this because they are no longer sane... May Allah guide us to the straight path.. Ameen. The discussion was about Riba... these people jump to say well Trade is JUST LIKE Riba... you can almost hear them add: why don't you make it haraam yaa Allah. Do you see why they are lost? Let's focus on the topic in hand... Allah said wear Hijab... he did not say O' Women; stay away from Attention! The statement above sounds like this: A nice car is JUST LIKE nice hair? Sometimes I wonder why people who want to raise arguments against Allah and the Quran are not creative? Fi Amaani'Laah Although I basically agree with what you're saying, I don't think, however, that one should make false claims. The Quran (Allah swt) doesn't specifically ask the female to cover her hair. Please don't misunderstand - covering hair is very important, just be sure about the source, ok?

Originally posted by A.Z: quote:Originally posted by G G: Never heard of that movie. It's great. You should see it

This is a non-Muslim born kafir. A real Somali would make social commentaries, not get their information from websites such as infidel.org There are countless of other websites refuting the article and everything from said website. It would turn into a copy&paste discussion. Instead. Why don't you reply to me on behalf of Raamsade regarding the evolutionary theory, Mr. Smith, and engage in a real debate where copy& paste would not be possible?

Is there another word for qaran?

"The Somali Exorcist" Halima, a 40-year-old woman is struck down by an evil demon. Only Hassan, with 30 years of experience in exorcism, can help her, but he haunted by demons of his own past... Will he be able to save Halima? This is a joke, if you didn't get it.

You had to make sure you're first, eh? Early Eid Mubarak to you too.

Muslims and truly religious Jews have always co-existed peacefully. It's the Zionists and Lucifer worshippers that are causing trouble.

Qofkaan marka soomali ma ahan?

You wanna hear something weird? Everytime I play with Vimto, ie I spill it in my hands to make it look like it's blood, and cry theatrically, the following day I get a cut. I swear. Vimto freaks me out.

My hero.