(March 26, 2017 at 9:37 pm)Crunchy Wrote:(March 24, 2017 at 11:29 pm)Minimalist Wrote: It's the difference between history and religion, I guess. I don't give a shit about religion. History is a passion.
In that case, it would be best to treat History like Science and respect the consensus of historians while setting aside any personal dislike of religion. So in this case, that consensus is that Muhammad was a real person who founded a religion just like Joseph Smith or L Ron Hubbard did.
No. I want to see the evidence. You see, when I ask for evidence on "jesus" all I ever seem to get is bible bullshit. Not surprisingly, when I ask about the evidence for mohammed all I ever seem to get is the fucking koran. Again. I want to see the evidence not listen to some alleged bullshit consensus.
If scientists reach a consensus on no evidence they should quit.