R&D neglected in Muslim countries

[Banglar Lathial]

1. The nobel organization is globally renowned, and is considered the ultimate prestige. You cannot smear an organizations credibility due to your inability to win awards according to the set criteria.

Nobel Prize is a western award. Globally renowned means nothing in this regard because you are equating the 'fame' of an organization to its validity of selection procedure for laureate awards and/or lack of bias. You can not use an organization's 'fame' as a measure of its credibility, lack of bias or transparency. So long as the selection procedure remains Western-biased, opaque, subjective and prone to human errors, this procedure has to be questioned.

- Note Jews have a lot of winners in the sciences. Jews also are overrepresented in the top institutions in the states. The pattern is consistent. You can contact the Nobel organization to ask questions via another Jewish creation "google".

Note, Jews are/were not the topic of our discussion, so it's irrelevant.
1. How can you contact the Nobel "organization" via "Google"? That's news. But if you are talking about search engines, almost every country has made something. Arabs have created "kngine.com", which is faster than Google, but I don't see the relevance of search engines to the question of fake data issued by Western nonsensical media.

Iran may be doing well according to its regional average in the scienes. But let me ask you, who were the scientists who came up with the equations that Iran is using? Not Iranians themselves.

Sciences were originally developed in those places where civilization originally flourished. That region would have to be the Middle East (Iraq, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, Tunisia, Iran, Afghanistan, and other places like China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, south east Asia, subsequently).

One look at patents per capita will show Iran is nowhere near the top. Look at the recently published scientific papers. Again Iran is not at the top.

Iran is the fastest growing scientific power as measured by publications in mostly Western journals despite embargo, sanctions, political pressure, refusal to allow access to many Iranian scientists and students to most Western institutes, journals for publications and so on. Iran's growth rate of scientific publications is more than the entire infidel world (times 10) combined.

I'm sorry, Iranians as much as I admire them have a habit of exaggerating their achievements.

If you are truly sorry, it's because Iranians' achievements outdo the entire infidel world (times 10) when it comes to scientific publications growth rate.

 

[Roybot]

Wikipedia?

Well most of the information available on wikipedia are referenced and verifiable. I did cross check the figures from other sources, fairly accurate.

http://www.rdmag.com/uploadedFiles/RD/Featured_Articles/2010/12/GFF2010_FINAL_REV_small.pdf

 

[Banglar Lathial]

Well most of the information available on wikipedia are referenced and verifiable. I did cross check the figures from other sources, fairly accurate.

There is not a single Muslim country on that list of 40 countries (except "European" Turkey), where tiny Iceland with 0.3 billion GERD PPP is listed. That is a noncredible source. I criticize Saudi Arabia (and other Arab and Muslim countries') leaders for their wrong decisions all the time, but why is Saudi Arabia not listed there. Only the KACST alone spent more than 0.3 billion GERD PPP in 2009, so how could Saudi GERD not be listed?

Again, just a bogus Western list.

 

[Banglar Lathial]

Using or relying on Wikipedia only lowers one's own credibility. A good example of the uselessness of Wikipedia can be seen here.

List of countries by number of mobile phones in use - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A simple list such as this is also **** up.

18 Turkey 66,000,000 71,517,100 92.2 2009[29]
19 France 58,730,000 65,073,842 90.2 Dec. 2008[30]
20 Thailand 69,000,000 65,001,021 105 2010[31]
21 Iran 68,000,000 75,078,000 91.2 2011[32]

Does the above ranking make any sense assuming that the source information is correct? Is 66 million greater than 69 or 68 million? Why is Turkey ahead of Thailand and Iran then? Is 58 million> 69 million, or is 58 mil>68 mil? Why is France ahead of Thailand or Iran then?

 

[Wright]

That means you do not have any evidence just like most Western BS claims throughout history? Again, when were national IQ tests carried out in Bangladesh? Who carried it out? Where are the results? What is the statistical validity? Over what time period were those tests carried out? What corrections were made for various social, political and other factors to account for these variations across countries?

There are many books on the topic, each has its own set of bibliographies please consult the information if you truly are interested. Denial via semantics does not change anything. There were no corrections made, only a standard IQ test given to various samples all over the world.

IQ and Global Inequality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You may consult this book among others. Each has its own bibliography.

All you post are 'simple observations' because you have nothing more than simple observations. If you do not possess the intelligence to make anything other than 'simple observations', how can you think of making accurate, scientific calculations based upon precise observations across time and location?

An observation that is consistent is known as a rule. Many books have been written trying to point out the innate faults in the means of accurately measuring intelligence, and sample size dynamics. However at this point it is pretty much established that different groups of people tend to score differently.

Is designing a car a sign of intelligence? Then, how would this design affect your calculation of Bangladeshi IQ?

Exceptions prove the rule. That car was designed using CAD, on a computer, with a conventional auto mobile layout and aerodynamic knowledge. All developed outside the Muslim world.

Pretty much every country with a few years of stability and a few million people in the middle class or higher have produced or designed some car, appliance, electronic device or similar 'simple device'. Only people that are limited in intelligence to making 'simple observations' would think that designing these devices has much to do with national IQ.

And what caused the stability and healthy middle-class in the first place?
Could that be influenced by IQ?

Also, I am not surprised that you do not have the intelligence to separate Western tripe from reality. A good example of that is you having to rely on Wikipedia.

Most data on global dynamics is western. Wikipedia has references. Feel free to check them out.

 

[Roybot]

There is not a single Muslim country on that list of 40 countries (except "European" Turkey), where tiny Iceland with 0.3 billion GERD PPP is listed. That is a noncredible source. I criticize Saudi Arabia (and other Arab and Muslim countries') leaders for their wrong decisions all the time, but why is Saudi Arabia not listed there. Only the KACST alone spent more than 0.3 billion GERD PPP in 2009, so how could Saudi GERD not be listed?

Again, just a bogus Western list.

Jeez you are one paranoid human being! Do you even know the meaning of bogus? Just because some Muslim countries weren't part of the list it makes all the data bogus?

I posted that list so that you could cross check the wikipedia figures.

 

[Wright]

There is not a single Muslim country on that list of 40 countries (except "European" Turkey), where tiny Iceland with 0.3 billion GERD PPP is listed. That is a noncredible source. I criticize Saudi Arabia (and other Arab and Muslim countries') leaders for their wrong decisions all the time, but why is Saudi Arabia not listed there. Only the KACST alone spent more than 0.3 billion GERD PPP in 2009, so how could Saudi GERD not be listed?

Again, just a bogus Western list.

You obviously carry a heavy bias, and are quick to dismiss based on claims of selective bias.

Please show us a Muslim encyclopaedia that is used globally in developed nations.

 

[Roybot]

Slightly dated figures.

http://www.sesric.org/files/article/394.pdf

You are going to like this one, its from a Muslim organization Seriously with such victim mentality( Oh the West is out to get the muslims) you lots are going to be stuck like this forever.

 

[Banglar Lathial]

There are many books on the topic, each has its own set of bibliographies please consult the information if you truly are interested. Denial via semantics does not change anything. There were no corrections made, only a standard IQ test given to various samples all over the world.

IQ and Global Inequality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have no proof for Wikipedia claims. I knew that all along. What made you think that I have not read the books? The simple rule of any argument, debate, any logical method of determination of truth is that whoever makes a claim backs it up with proof. The burden of proof is on you. You need to provide the book which lists those information. Again, when were those tests taken? Trying to avoid responsibility for your botched claims can not save you any face.

You may consult this book among others. Each has its own bibliography.

That is not a book but a Wikipedia link, which shows your low credibility.

An observation that is consistent is known as a rule. Many books have been written trying to point out the innate faults in the means of accurately measuring intelligence, and sample size dynamics. However at this point it is pretty much established that different groups of people tend to score differently.

I never heard that an 'observation that is consistent is known as a rule'. We may legislate that no animals are allowed inside a cricket club, that would be a rule, but there would be little to no consistent or nonconsistent observations prior to the enforcement of the rule needed. Again, you do not even know what you are responding to. Where were those tests taken? When was a national IQ test taken in Bangladesh? Who took them? Where are the scores and results?

I know that you do not know any of those answers because you believed Wikipedia.

Exceptions prove the rule. That car was designed using CAD, on a computer, with a conventional auto mobile layout and aerodynamic knowledge. All developed outside the Muslim world.

This proves that you do not know what you are talking about. That car was not designed using CAD. If you do not know what you are talking about, it only shows that you lack not only intelligence and logical deductive ability but also access to basic or simple information.

And what caused the stability and healthy middle-class in the first place?
Could that be influenced by IQ?

That is a question that deviates from the original discussion. That could be caused by MANY factors, some of which include corruption, entrepreneurial spirit, 'connection' with political elites, etc.

Most data on global dynamics is western. Wikipedia has references. Feel free to check them out.

Wikipedia is BS. Check it out.

 

[Wright]

[

QUOTE=Banglar Lathial;2901578]Nobel Prize is a western award. Globally renowned means nothing in this regard because you are equating the 'fame' of an organization to its validity of selection procedure for laureate awards and/or lack of bias. You can not use an organization's 'fame' as a measure of its credibility, lack of bias or transparency. So long as the selection procedure remains Western-biased, opaque, subjective and prone to human errors, this procedure has to be questioned.

It is an institution older than your nation. Harvard, MIT, Columbia, Oxford are also famous institutions. Are you suggesting we can discount their studies and merit because of their fame? Every human procedure is subject to error. You are too broad in your attempt to discredit.

You could look up their procedures as I mentioned previously.

Nomination and Selection of Medicine Laureates

Note, Jews are/were not the topic of our discussion, so it's irrelevant.
1. How can you contact the Nobel "organization" via "Google"? That's news. But if you are talking about search engines, almost every country has made something. Arabs have created "kngine.com", which is faster than Google, but I don't see the relevance of search engines to the question of fake data issued by Western nonsensical media.

Google was a pioneer and continues to innovate, in all fields of tech. That is the difference.

Sciences were originally developed in those places where civilization originally flourished. That region would have to be the Middle East (Iraq, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, Tunisia, Iran, Afghanistan, and other places like China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, south east Asia, subsequently).

I have to disagree. The present population of those places is not the same as it was 4000 years ago in the fertile crescent.
Even if it were they were not Muslim back then were they?

Iran is the fastest growing scientific power as measured by publications in mostly Western journals despite embargo, sanctions, political pressure, refusal to allow access to many Iranian scientists and students to most Western institutes, journals for publications and so on. Iran's growth rate of scientific publications is more than the entire infidel world (times 10) combined.

Source?

If you are truly sorry, it's because Iranians' achievements outdo the entire infidel world (times 10) when it comes to scientific publications growth rate.

[/QUOTE]

I doubt it, CERN is located in Europe. NASA's monstrous facilities are located in USA. Without the means you cant do much.

 

[Banglar Lathial]

Jeez you are one paranoid human being! Do you even know the meaning of bogus? Just because some Muslim countries weren't part of the list it makes all the data bogus?

I posted that list so that you could cross check the wikipedia figures.

Stop making personal accusations and acting like a fool. No need to write "Jeez" or any other emotive words. I know better than you what is "bogus", it is you who need to know what bogus means. Otherwise, you would not have destroyed your credibility by posting a link that does not include Saudi R&D spending, as an example.

Relying on Wikipedia destroys your credibility.

You obviously carry a heavy bias, and are quick to dismiss based on claims of selective bias.

Please show us a Muslim encyclopaedia that is used globally in developed nations.

Why should I enlighten you? If you are ignorant but make broad based ignorant statements, then it is your fault that you have to correct? Why did you restrict the usage of the 'encyclopedia' to "developed nations" ( a term that is not uniformly applied around the world).

Slightly dated figures.

http://www.sesric.org/files/article/394.pdf

You are going to like this one, its from a Muslim organization Seriously with such victim mentality( Oh the West is out to get the muslims) you lots are going to be stuck like this forever.

Again, stop making yourself look like a fool by making personal accusations. Whatever idiotic mentality you have that anybody with even a two digit IQ can decide, but there is no need to write that. For the same reason, whatever misimpressions you gain with your low IQ about others on the internet, should not be published here.

Just show whatever true and accurate figures you can provide. Those Turkish institutes (SESRIC) are lower than Western institutes in credibility because they use outdated Western statistics.

 

[Roybot]

Stop making personal accusations and acting like a fool. No need to write "Jeez" or any other emotive words. I know better than you what is "bogus", it is you who need to know what bogus means. Otherwise, you would not have destroyed your credibility by posting a link that does not include Saudi R&D spending, as an example.

Relying on Wikipedia destroys your credibility.

Lmao, you are the fool if anyone is here. Bogus means fake. Now just because Muslim countries were not part of the study makes the data bogus?

And obviously wikipedia has discrepancies, which I why I said that, one should try and verify, cross check the information available on wikipedia. Any one with an ounce of brain should be able to do that.

Just cause some figures published on wiki are wrong doesnt make the R&D figures wrong too. If you think R&D figures for some Muslim countries are wrong/outdated and misreported as part of the evil conspiracy by the infidels against the muslimslol, then provide alternate sources to back up your claim.

And jeez whats wrong with jeez Loosen up a bit eh.

 

[Banglar Lathial]

Wright, stop wasting my time.

Just show your national IQ studies for Bangladesh and about 200 other countries. When were they carried out? Who carried them out? Where are the verifiable public results? If you are proven false because of your low intelligence and lack of knowledge, you should not hide behind a rigmarole of lengthy response to hide it.

Provide the information, or admit your ignorance.

The same is true about Nobel prizes. You are only quoting Nobel sources without even reading them. That only shows your ignorance and proves me right about the false idea of secularism. Secularism is an illness. All the question marks about Nobel selection procedures are valid. When they have been answered, only then can you use it as a reliable indicator.

Lmao, you are the fool if anyone is here. Bogus means fake. Now just because Muslim countries were not part of the study makes the data bogus?

And obviously wikipedia has discrepancies, which I why I said one should try and verify, cross check the information available on wikipedia. Any one with an ounce of brain should be able to do that.

Just cause some figures published on wiki are wrong doesnt make the R&D figures wrong too. If you think R&D figures for some Muslim countries are wrong then provide alternate sources to back up your claim.

And jeez whats wrong with jeez Loosen up a bit eh.

The fool is you who used Wikipedia and uses "Jeez" as an argument. You do not have an ounce of brain to understand that whoever makes a claim should back up his claim. If you claim something, the onus is on YOU to back it up.



Idiots, infidels, Indians - probably synonyms. They either do not have the brains to understand, or they pretend not to understand that Wikipedia is BS. Anybody can write anything there, and it is a Western "open source" encyclopaedia after all.



You can see "sources" to the right, but does that mean 66 m>69 m? Does it mean 66m> 68m? Does it mean 58.73m>69m? Does it mean 58.73m?68m?

As I have said, three synonyms: Idiots, Indians, Infidels.

Again,
Just show your national IQ studies for Bangladesh and about 200 other countries. When were they carried out? Who carried them out? Where are the verifiable public results? If you are proven false because of your low intelligence and lack of knowledge, you should not hide behind a rigmarole of lengthy response to hide it.

Provide the information, or admit your ignorance.

The same is true about Nobel prizes. You are only quoting Nobel sources without even reading them. That only shows your ignorance and proves me right about the false idea of secularism. Secularism is an illness. All the question marks about Nobel selection procedures are valid. When they have been answered, only then can you use it as a reliable indicator.

 

[Roybot]

The fool is you who used Wikipedia and uses "Jeez" as an argument. You do not have an ounce of brain to understand that whoever makes a claim should back up his claim. If you claim something, the onus is on YOU to back it up.

lmao I did provide you two alternate sources. But apparently they are not good enough

First one was a anti Muslim White conpiracy.

Second one was a Turkish Muslim organization, also not good enough.

So please do tell what source would be acceptable to you. I judged you wrong I think, you are just another pseudo intellectual with a hint of conpiracy theorist.

Wasted good ten minutes of my life.

 

[Banglar Lathial]

You wasted my time with your BS. You make your own assumptions, and start hysterical 'online' laughter based on that. Maybe you are unemployed or a student whose only recourse is to quote Wikipedia on online fora to prove yourself a fool time and time again.

Wikipedia