Comedy Nights with Narendra Modi

by Guest Mon Nov 11, 2013 5:56 pm

http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/the-real-truth/entry/comedy-nights-with-narendra-modi

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Mon Nov 11, 2013 6:29 pm

Rashmun wrote:http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/the-real-truth/entry/comedy-nights-with-narendra-modi

Modi ji has learnt well from the CONmen that when a lie is repeated over and over it becomes a fact. That is how CONmen continuously labeled BJP as communal - despite records, stats, and facts point out that it is the CONGRESS which is communal.

Hey..why are CONmen suddenly complaining about half facts and lies ?

They are the ones who taught the Indian voters that "Facts are for Farts."

P.S. Have you found evidence to your "Factful claim" that muslims made up 15% of the population in 1951? Since you are so very worried about lies...

by Guest Mon Nov 11, 2013 7:17 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/the-real-truth/entry/comedy-nights-with-narendra-modi
Modi ji has learnt well from the CONmen that when a lie is repeated over and over it becomes a fact. That is how CONmen continuously labeled BJP as communal - despite records, stats, and facts point out that it is the CONGRESS which is communal.

Hey..why are CONmen suddenly complaining about half facts and lies ?

They are the ones who taught the Indian voters that "Facts are for Farts."

P.S. Have you found evidence to your "Factful claim" that muslims made up 15% of the population in 1951? Since you are so very worried about lies...

No, but I found some evidence that according to the latest stats Muslims comprise only 13.5% of the Indian population. I wish to know why the Muslim population in India is shrinking relative to the total population. Earlier I had given a graph depicting this.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Mon Nov 11, 2013 7:43 pm

Rashmun wrote:
No, but I found some evidence that according to the latest stats Muslims comprise only 13.5% of the Indian population. I wish to know why the Muslim population in India is shrinking relative to the total population. Earlier I had given a graph depicting this.

You just demonstrated how to "establish" facts.

by goodcitizn Mon Nov 11, 2013 9:19 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
No, but I found some evidence that according to the latest stats Muslims comprise only 13.5% of the Indian population. I wish to know why the Muslim population in India is shrinking relative to the total population. Earlier I had given a graph depicting this.
You just demonstrated how to "establish" facts.

Wiki doesn't support Rashmun's claim.

India

Because of higher birthrates, the percentage of Muslims in India has risen from about 9.91% in 1951 to 13.45% in 2001 to 14% in 2010.^[7] The Muslim population growth rate is higher by more than 10% of the total growth compared to that of Hindus.^[8] The ratio of young children (aged 0–6) to the total population is also significantly higher among muslims than among hindus in India.^[9]

Demographers have put forward several factors behind high birthrates among Muslims in India.Sociologists point out that religious factors can explain high Muslim birthrates. Surveys indicate that Muslims in India have been relatively far less willing to adopt family planning measures and that Muslim girls get married at a much younger age compared to other Indian girls.^[10] According to Paul Kurtz, Muslims in India are much more resistant to modern contraceptive measures compared to other Indians and as a consequence, the decline in fertility rate among non- muslim women is much higher compared to that of Muslim women.^[11]^[12] According to a 2006 committee appointed by the Indian Prime Minister, by the end of the 21st century India's Muslim population will reach 320 to 340 million people (or 18% of India's total projected population)

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Mon Nov 11, 2013 9:25 pm

goodcitizn wrote:
Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
No, but I found some evidence that according to the latest stats Muslims comprise only 13.5% of the Indian population. I wish to know why the Muslim population in India is shrinking relative to the total population. Earlier I had given a graph depicting this.
You just demonstrated how to "establish" facts.
Wiki doesn't support Rashmun's claim.

Rashmunullah "claimed" some super-farting facts, to which I cited the wikilink you just gave. He said he was SURE of the 15% and when challenged to show evidence he promised to FIND it - saying it might take 1 week, 1 month or 1 year. Of course he is sure of his fact about 1951. Now, that Rashmunullah conviction. It is like his PhD.. "I know the conclusion" but, I will show proof and methodology in 2, 5, 10, 25 years....

Now you know my about humble daily reminder to him...

by goodcitizn Mon Nov 11, 2013 9:41 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
No, but I found some evidence that according to the latest stats Muslims comprise only 13.5% of the Indian population. I wish to know why the Muslim population in India is shrinking relative to the total population. Earlier I had given a graph depicting this.
You just demonstrated how to "establish" facts.
Wiki doesn't support Rashmun's claim.
Rashmunullah "claimed" some super-farting facts, to which I cited the wikilink you just gave. He said he was SURE of the 15% and when challenged to show evidence he promised to FIND it - saying it might take 1 week, 1 month or 1 year. Of course he is sure of his fact about 1951. Now, that Rashmunullah conviction. It is like his PhD.. "I know the conclusion" but, I will show proof and methodology in 2, 5, 10, 25 years....

Now you know my about humble daily reminder to him...

LOL! True. A closed mouth gathers no feet.

by Guest Tue Nov 12, 2013 1:46 am

Wikipedia cannot be the last word on any contentious issue. Any Wikipedia article concerning Hindu-Muslim issues cannot be trusted now that we know that an army of more than 2,000 IT professionals is working on behalf of Modi ( presumably to vitiate and polarize the atmosphere in the cyber world).

This recent article blows the myth of high growth rate amongst Muslims:

http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cursor/entry/muslim-population-myths

Note this graph ( from the article whose link I give) in particular:

Comedy Nights with Narendra Modi Image14

Comedy Nights with Narendra Modi Image14

by goodcitizn Tue Nov 12, 2013 5:33 pm

Rashmun wrote:Wikipedia cannot be the last word on any contentious issue. Any Wikipedia article concerning Hindu-Muslim issues cannot be trusted now that we know that an army of more than 2,000 IT professionals is working on behalf of Modi ( presumably to vitiate and polarize the atmosphere in the cyber world).

This recent article blows the myth of high growth rate amongst Muslims:

http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cursor/entry/muslim-population-myths

Note this graph ( from the article whose link I give) in particular:

If Wiki is unreliable and Modied in your view, do you trust the Economist? Excerpt from March, 2013 article:

Higher fertility rates among Muslims might be seen as politically sensitive. Private studies guess that India has about 177m Muslims, comprising 14.6% of the total population. It marks a rise of nearly 40m, or a percentage point, on a decade before. Higher fertility will ensure the upward trend continues. Overall, India’s fertility rate is falling, but among Muslims it is dropping most slowly. Old habits persist. Few Muslim women work outside the home. Contraception is not much used.

http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21572785-steadily-rising-muslim-population-continues-fall-behind-growing-and-neglected

by Guest Tue Nov 12, 2013 6:02 pm

goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:Wikipedia cannot be the last word on any contentious issue. Any Wikipedia article concerning Hindu-Muslim issues cannot be trusted now that we know that an army of more than 2,000 IT professionals is working on behalf of Modi ( presumably to vitiate and polarize the atmosphere in the cyber world).

This recent article blows the myth of high growth rate amongst Muslims:

http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cursor/entry/muslim-population-myths

Note this graph ( from the article whose link I give) in particular:

If Wiki is unreliable and Modied in your view, do you trust the Economist? Excerpt from March, 2013 article:

Higher fertility rates among Muslims might be seen as politically sensitive. Private studies guess that India has about 177m Muslims, comprising 14.6% of the total population. It marks a rise of nearly 40m, or a percentage point, on a decade before. Higher fertility will ensure the upward trend continues. Overall, India’s fertility rate is falling, but among Muslims it is dropping most slowly. Old habits persist. Few Muslim women work outside the home. Contraception is not much used.

http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21572785-steadily-rising-muslim-population-continues-fall-behind-growing-and-neglected

The Economist is quoting outdated data. Just google for "falling fertility rates of Muslims in India".

by goodcitizn Tue Nov 12, 2013 11:28 pm

Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:Wikipedia cannot be the last word on any contentious issue. Any Wikipedia article concerning Hindu-Muslim issues cannot be trusted now that we know that an army of more than 2,000 IT professionals is working on behalf of Modi ( presumably to vitiate and polarize the atmosphere in the cyber world).

This recent article blows the myth of high growth rate amongst Muslims:

http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cursor/entry/muslim-population-myths

Note this graph ( from the article whose link I give) in particular:

If Wiki is unreliable and Modied in your view, do you trust the Economist? Excerpt from March, 2013 article:

Higher fertility rates among Muslims might be seen as politically sensitive. Private studies guess that India has about 177m Muslims, comprising 14.6% of the total population. It marks a rise of nearly 40m, or a percentage point, on a decade before. Higher fertility will ensure the upward trend continues. Overall, India’s fertility rate is falling, but among Muslims it is dropping most slowly. Old habits persist. Few Muslim women work outside the home. Contraception is not much used.

http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21572785-steadily-rising-muslim-population-continues-fall-behind-growing-and-neglected
The Economist is quoting outdated data. Just google for "falling fertility rates of Muslims in India".

So the Economist is outdated and you rely on some blog. Show me proof that the muslim population growth rate is slower than the rest of India's population growth. At the very least show me proof that the percentage of muslim population to the total is dropping over the last decade. I have nothing against the muslims. Pointing out the growth trend of muslims isn't being pro-Modi either.

by Guest Wed Nov 13, 2013 7:02 am

goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:Wikipedia cannot be the last word on any contentious issue. Any Wikipedia article concerning Hindu-Muslim issues cannot be trusted now that we know that an army of more than 2,000 IT professionals is working on behalf of Modi ( presumably to vitiate and polarize the atmosphere in the cyber world).

This recent article blows the myth of high growth rate amongst Muslims:

http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cursor/entry/muslim-population-myths

Note this graph ( from the article whose link I give) in particular:

If Wiki is unreliable and Modied in your view, do you trust the Economist? Excerpt from March, 2013 article:

Higher fertility rates among Muslims might be seen as politically sensitive. Private studies guess that India has about 177m Muslims, comprising 14.6% of the total population. It marks a rise of nearly 40m, or a percentage point, on a decade before. Higher fertility will ensure the upward trend continues. Overall, India’s fertility rate is falling, but among Muslims it is dropping most slowly. Old habits persist. Few Muslim women work outside the home. Contraception is not much used.

http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21572785-steadily-rising-muslim-population-continues-fall-behind-growing-and-neglected
The Economist is quoting outdated data. Just google for "falling fertility rates of Muslims in India".
So the Economist is outdated and you rely on some blog. Show me proof that the muslim population growth rate is slower than the rest of India's population growth. At the very least show me proof that the percentage of muslim population to the total is dropping over the last decade. I have nothing against the muslims. Pointing out the growth trend of muslims isn't being pro-Modi either.

The blog is by TK Arun, the Opinion Editor of the Economic Times. The graph given in the blog constitutes the proof.

by Guest Wed Nov 13, 2013 7:17 am

This is from 2002 but still worth reading:

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/mag/2002/11/10/stories/2002111000610300.htm

by goodcitizn Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:59 am

Rashmun wrote:This is from 2002 but still worth reading:

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/mag/2002/11/10/stories/2002111000610300.htm

You continue to sidestep the real facts. It is one thing to say that the fertility rate of muslims is falling but quite another when, despite the falling rates, their growth rate outpaces that of the rest of the Indians. Even the link you posted does NOT deny that the muslim population is ahead in growth, just that the gap has narrowed. Why is an increase from 9.8% in 1961 to 13.8% in 2011 a small increase? One way is to say it is only 4%. But the right way is to say that it is 41% over the base.

Of course I don't buy into the ridiculous claim that India will have more muslims than hindus by 2050 as some articles claim. However that population will be significantly higher.

by Guest Wed Nov 13, 2013 1:02 pm

goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:This is from 2002 but still worth reading:

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/mag/2002/11/10/stories/2002111000610300.htm
You continue to sidestep the real facts. It is one thing to say that the fertility rate of muslims is falling but quite another when, despite the falling rates, their growth rate outpaces that of the rest of the Indians. Even the link you posted does NOT deny that the muslim population is ahead in growth, just that the gap has narrowed. Why is an increase from 9.8% in 1961 to 13.8% in 2011 a small increase? One way is to say it is only 4%. But the right way is to say that it is 41% over the base.

Of course I don't buy into the ridiculous claim that India will have more muslims than hindus by 2050 as some articles claim. However that population will be significantly higher.

Here you go:

Arokiasamy said growth rate of Muslims in Kerala and J&K is lower than the average Hindu community growth. “It is attributed to their better education and socio-economic status in these states. For similar reasons, the fertility rate among Hindus in the less developed states of UP and Bihar, among others, is higher.”

Professor at Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) Abdul Shaban said, “The 2001 census affirms that decline in the growth rate of Muslims is faster than the majority community’s.

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-rashtriya-swayamsevak-sangh-exaggerated-fear-of-demographic-imbalance-experts-1910512

by goodcitizn Wed Nov 13, 2013 1:20 pm

Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:This is from 2002 but still worth reading:

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/mag/2002/11/10/stories/2002111000610300.htm
You continue to sidestep the real facts. It is one thing to say that the fertility rate of muslims is falling but quite another when, despite the falling rates, their growth rate outpaces that of the rest of the Indians. Even the link you posted does NOT deny that the muslim population is ahead in growth, just that the gap has narrowed. Why is an increase from 9.8% in 1961 to 13.8% in 2011 a small increase? One way is to say it is only 4%. But the right way is to say that it is 41% over the base.

Of course I don't buy into the ridiculous claim that India will have more muslims than hindus by 2050 as some articles claim. However that population will be significantly higher.
Here you go:

Arokiasamy said growth rate of Muslims in Kerala and J&K is lower than the average Hindu community growth. “It is attributed to their better education and socio-economic status in these states. For similar reasons, the fertility rate among Hindus in the less developed states of UP and Bihar, among others, is higher.”

Professor at Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) Abdul Shaban said, “The 2001 census affirms that decline in the growth rate of Muslims is faster than the majority community’s.

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-rashtriya-swayamsevak-sangh-exaggerated-fear-of-demographic-imbalance-experts-1910512

Just listen to yourself. The decline in growth rate of muslims is faster as compared to other communities is not the same as saying that the muslim community growth rate is lower compared to the rest.

Cherry picking two or more states as evidence of your overall argument that the muslim growth rate is less than the rest of India is equally ridiculous.

by Guest Wed Nov 13, 2013 1:27 pm

goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:This is from 2002 but still worth reading:

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/mag/2002/11/10/stories/2002111000610300.htm
You continue to sidestep the real facts. It is one thing to say that the fertility rate of muslims is falling but quite another when, despite the falling rates, their growth rate outpaces that of the rest of the Indians. Even the link you posted does NOT deny that the muslim population is ahead in growth, just that the gap has narrowed. Why is an increase from 9.8% in 1961 to 13.8% in 2011 a small increase? One way is to say it is only 4%. But the right way is to say that it is 41% over the base.

Of course I don't buy into the ridiculous claim that India will have more muslims than hindus by 2050 as some articles claim. However that population will be significantly higher.
Here you go:

Arokiasamy said growth rate of Muslims in Kerala and J&K is lower than the average Hindu community growth. “It is attributed to their better education and socio-economic status in these states. For similar reasons, the fertility rate among Hindus in the less developed states of UP and Bihar, among others, is higher.”

Professor at Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) Abdul Shaban said, “The 2001 census affirms that decline in the growth rate of Muslims is faster than the majority community’s.

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-rashtriya-swayamsevak-sangh-exaggerated-fear-of-demographic-imbalance-experts-1910512
Just listen to yourself. The decline in growth rate of muslims is faster as compared to other communities is not the same as saying that the muslim community growth rate is lower compared to the rest.

Cherry picking two or more states as evidence of your overall argument that the muslim growth rate is less than the rest of India is equally ridiculous.

Do you agree that according to the article the Muslim growth rate in Kerala, Jammu and Kashmir, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar is lower than the Hindu growth rate?

by goodcitizn Wed Nov 13, 2013 1:35 pm

Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:This is from 2002 but still worth reading:

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/mag/2002/11/10/stories/2002111000610300.htm
You continue to sidestep the real facts. It is one thing to say that the fertility rate of muslims is falling but quite another when, despite the falling rates, their growth rate outpaces that of the rest of the Indians. Even the link you posted does NOT deny that the muslim population is ahead in growth, just that the gap has narrowed. Why is an increase from 9.8% in 1961 to 13.8% in 2011 a small increase? One way is to say it is only 4%. But the right way is to say that it is 41% over the base.

Of course I don't buy into the ridiculous claim that India will have more muslims than hindus by 2050 as some articles claim. However that population will be significantly higher.
Here you go:

Arokiasamy said growth rate of Muslims in Kerala and J&K is lower than the average Hindu community growth. “It is attributed to their better education and socio-economic status in these states. For similar reasons, the fertility rate among Hindus in the less developed states of UP and Bihar, among others, is higher.”

Professor at Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) Abdul Shaban said, “The 2001 census affirms that decline in the growth rate of Muslims is faster than the majority community’s.

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-rashtriya-swayamsevak-sangh-exaggerated-fear-of-demographic-imbalance-experts-1910512
Just listen to yourself. The decline in growth rate of muslims is faster as compared to other communities is not the same as saying that the muslim community growth rate is lower compared to the rest.

Cherry picking two or more states as evidence of your overall argument that the muslim growth rate is less than the rest of India is equally ridiculous.
Do you agree that according to the article the Muslim growth rate in Kerala, Jammu and Kashmir, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar is lower than the Hindu growth rate?

Assuming that you believe in making well-researched conclusions, is it prudent of you to take a select few statistical samples to hypothesize on the entire population when the statistics on the entire population themselves are to the contrary?

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Wed Nov 13, 2013 1:41 pm

goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:Do you agree that according to the article the Muslim growth rate in Kerala, Jammu and Kashmir, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar is lower than the Hindu growth rate?
Assuming that you believe in making well-researched conclusions, is it prudent of you to take a select few statistical samples to hypothesize on the entire population when the statistics on the entire population themselves are to the contrary?

Please continue...

by Guest Wed Nov 13, 2013 1:51 pm

goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:You continue to sidestep the real facts. It is one thing to say that the fertility rate of muslims is falling but quite another when, despite the falling rates, their growth rate outpaces that of the rest of the Indians. Even the link you posted does NOT deny that the muslim population is ahead in growth, just that the gap has narrowed. Why is an increase from 9.8% in 1961 to 13.8% in 2011 a small increase? One way is to say it is only 4%. But the right way is to say that it is 41% over the base.

Of course I don't buy into the ridiculous claim that India will have more muslims than hindus by 2050 as some articles claim. However that population will be significantly higher.
Here you go:

Arokiasamy said growth rate of Muslims in Kerala and J&K is lower than the average Hindu community growth. “It is attributed to their better education and socio-economic status in these states. For similar reasons, the fertility rate among Hindus in the less developed states of UP and Bihar, among others, is higher.”

Professor at Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) Abdul Shaban said, “The 2001 census affirms that decline in the growth rate of Muslims is faster than the majority community’s.

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-rashtriya-swayamsevak-sangh-exaggerated-fear-of-demographic-imbalance-experts-1910512
Just listen to yourself. The decline in growth rate of muslims is faster as compared to other communities is not the same as saying that the muslim community growth rate is lower compared to the rest.

Cherry picking two or more states as evidence of your overall argument that the muslim growth rate is less than the rest of India is equally ridiculous.
Do you agree that according to the article the Muslim growth rate in Kerala, Jammu and Kashmir, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar is lower than the Hindu growth rate?
Assuming that you believe in making well-researched conclusions, is it prudent of you to take a select few statistical samples to hypothesize on the entire population when the statistics on the entire population themselves are to the contrary?

Two things to consider. UP and Bihar by themselves constitute more than 30% of the Indian population. Second, the population growth rate of these two states is the highest in all of India ( and by a significant margin). So the fact that Hindus have a higher growth rate than Muslims in these two states is something I consider significant.

by goodcitizn Wed Nov 13, 2013 2:11 pm

Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:Here you go:

Arokiasamy said growth rate of Muslims in Kerala and J&K is lower than the average Hindu community growth. “It is attributed to their better education and socio-economic status in these states. For similar reasons, the fertility rate among Hindus in the less developed states of UP and Bihar, among others, is higher.”

Professor at Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) Abdul Shaban said, “The 2001 census affirms that decline in the growth rate of Muslims is faster than the majority community’s.

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-rashtriya-swayamsevak-sangh-exaggerated-fear-of-demographic-imbalance-experts-1910512
Just listen to yourself. The decline in growth rate of muslims is faster as compared to other communities is not the same as saying that the muslim community growth rate is lower compared to the rest.

Cherry picking two or more states as evidence of your overall argument that the muslim growth rate is less than the rest of India is equally ridiculous.
Do you agree that according to the article the Muslim growth rate in Kerala, Jammu and Kashmir, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar is lower than the Hindu growth rate?
Assuming that you believe in making well-researched conclusions, is it prudent of you to take a select few statistical samples to hypothesize on the entire population when the statistics on the entire population themselves are to the contrary?
Two things to consider. UP and Bihar by themselves constitute more than 30% of the Indian population. Second, the population growth rate of these two states is the highest in all of India ( and by a significant margin). So the fact that Hindus have a higher growth rate than Muslims in these two states is something I consider significant.

What you consider significant is irrelevant in light of the fact that the muslim population growth rate has been and continues to be higher than the growth rate of the rest of the population. Even if a third of the muslim population according to you is growing at a lesser rate than the rest in India, that doesn't negate the higher overall growth rate of the muslims in the rest of India. I don't think your links have resuscited the dead horse despite all your beating.

by Petrichor Wed Nov 13, 2013 2:18 pm

I like the slow burn and roast here. Patient evisceration!

Civility - *****
Informative - ****
Progression - ****
Response Time - *****

by Guest Wed Nov 13, 2013 3:08 pm

Besides Kerala, Jammu and Kashmir, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, the growth rate of Muslims is also lower than hindus in the state of Tamil Nadu. For the reference see here:

http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Hyderabad/hum-do-hamare-do-concept-catching-up-among-muslims/article4414697.ece

by goodcitizn Wed Nov 13, 2013 3:11 pm

Rashmun wrote:Besides Kerala, Jammu and Kashmir, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, the growth rate of Muslims is also lower than hindus in the state of Tamil Nadu. For the reference see here:

http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Hyderabad/hum-do-hamare-do-concept-catching-up-among-muslims/article4414697.ece

Another swallow does not a summer make.

by Guest Wed Nov 13, 2013 3:12 pm

A senior official from the United Nations Population Fund also junked the RSS idea. “Population growth rate has been higher in rural, tribal and poor families irrespective of their religion. Besides, rich from all communities have lesser children,” the official said.

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-rashtriya-swayamsevak-sangh-exaggerated-fear-of-demographic-imbalance-experts-1910512

by goodcitizn Wed Nov 13, 2013 3:26 pm

Rashmun wrote:A senior official from the United Nations Population Fund also junked the RSS idea. “Population growth rate has been higher in rural, tribal and poor families irrespective of their religion. Besides, rich from all communities have lesser children,” the official said.

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-rashtriya-swayamsevak-sangh-exaggerated-fear-of-demographic-imbalance-experts-1910512

Illogical, irrelevant and immaterial.

by Guest Wed Nov 13, 2013 3:28 pm

goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:A senior official from the United Nations Population Fund also junked the RSS idea. “Population growth rate has been higher in rural, tribal and poor families irrespective of their religion. Besides, rich from all communities have lesser children,” the official said.

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-rashtriya-swayamsevak-sangh-exaggerated-fear-of-demographic-imbalance-experts-1910512
Illogical, irrelevant and immaterial.

GC you're no Perry Mason.

by goodcitizn Wed Nov 13, 2013 3:50 pm

Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:A senior official from the United Nations Population Fund also junked the RSS idea. “Population growth rate has been higher in rural, tribal and poor families irrespective of their religion. Besides, rich from all communities have lesser children,” the official said.

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-rashtriya-swayamsevak-sangh-exaggerated-fear-of-demographic-imbalance-experts-1910512
Illogical, irrelevant and immaterial.
GC you're no Perry Mason.

Hahaha. True. Perry Mason wouldn't have had this much patience with you either. No light of reason can penetrate that blackhole of obstinacy.

by Petrichor Thu Nov 14, 2013 8:26 am

Devolving....Looking for a strong argument to counter P Mason's weak position working with second order derivatives - "decline in growth rate". I am sure there are statistics and 'studies' out there...if only 'he' reached out - so near, yet so far.

Civility dropped to *** (name-calling detected)
Progression dropped to * (grinding to a halt)
Response Time to * (No posts since yesterday afternoon)

by goodcitizn Thu Nov 14, 2013 5:45 pm

Rashmun:

Here's where it's at.

You have not shown any evidence so far to support your claim that the muslim population growth rate in India is lower than the overall Indian population growth rate. The answer is simple - there is no census data to support your claim.

All you have done is to show:

The TFR (total fertility rate) of the muslim population has fallen over the years. That's fine.

The Indian muslim population growth rate is lower than the general Indian population in a handful of states. No problem there.

But the fundamental claim of yours is just plain bogus.

FYI I am not a supporter of BJP or Modi. Nor am I against muslims. Nor do I buy into the idiotic theory that the muslim population would outnumber the rest in India in the next 20 or 30 years.

by Guest Thu Nov 14, 2013 5:54 pm

goodcitizn wrote:Rashmun:

Here's where it's at.

You have not shown any evidence so far to support your claim that the muslim population growth rate in India is lower than the overall Indian population growth rate. The answer is simple - there is no census data to support your claim.

All you have done is to show:

The TFR (total fertility rate) of the muslim population has fallen over the years. That's fine.

The Indian muslim population growth rate is lower than the general Indian population in a handful of states. No problem there.

But the fundamental claim of yours is just plain bogus.

FYI I am not a supporter of BJP or Modi. Nor am I against muslims. Nor do I buy into the idiotic theory that the muslim population would outnumber the rest in India in the next 20 or 30 years.

I have shown that the Muslim population growth rate is lower than the corresponding growth rate of the general population in the states of Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Kerala, Jammu and Kashmir, and Tamil Nadu. Furthermore this list of states is not exhaustive.

Arokiasamy said growth rate of Muslims in Kerala and J&K is lower than the average Hindu community growth. “It is attributed to their better education and socio-economic status in these states. For similar reasons, the fertility rate among Hindus in the less developed states of UP and Bihar, among others, is higher.”

Professor at Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) Abdul Shaban said, “The 2001 census affirms that decline in the growth rate of Muslims is faster than the majority community’s.

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-rashtriya-swayamsevak-sangh-exaggerated-fear-of-demographic-imbalance-experts-1910512

by goodcitizn Thu Nov 14, 2013 5:59 pm

Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:Rashman:

Here's where it's at.

You have not shown any evidence so far to support your claim that the muslim population growth rate in India is lower than the overall Indian population growth rate. The answer is simple - there is no census data to support your claim.

All you have done is to show:

The TFR (total fertility rate) of the muslim population has fallen over the years. That's fine.

The Indian muslim population growth rate is lower than the general Indian population in a handful of states. No problem there.

But the fundamental claim of yours is just plain bogus.

FYI I am not a supporter of BJP or Modi. Nor am I against muslims. Nor do I buy into the idiotic theory that the muslim population would outnumber the rest in India in the next 20 or 30 years.
Ham Burger,
I have shown that the Muslim population growth rate is lower than the corresponding growth rate of the general population in the states of Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Kerala, Jammu and Kashmir, and Tamil Nadu. Furthermore this list of states is not exhaustive.

Arokiasamy said growth rate of Muslims in Kerala and J&K is lower than the average Hindu community growth. “It is attributed to their better education and socio-economic status in these states. For similar reasons, the fertility rate among Hindus in the less developed states of UP and Bihar, among others, is higher.”

Professor at Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) Abdul Shaban said, “The 2001 census affirms that decline in the growth rate of Muslims is faster than the majority community’s.

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-rashtriya-swayamsevak-sangh-exaggerated-fear-of-demographic-imbalance-experts-1910512

I have seen this copy paste before. Enough of this nonsense already. Just show me proof that backs up your claim that the overall growth rate of muslims in India is lower than the rest of India.

by Guest Thu Nov 14, 2013 6:23 pm

goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:Rashman:

Here's where it's at.

You have not shown any evidence so far to support your claim that the muslim population growth rate in India is lower than the overall Indian population growth rate. The answer is simple - there is no census data to support your claim.

All you have done is to show:

The TFR (total fertility rate) of the muslim population has fallen over the years. That's fine.

The Indian muslim population growth rate is lower than the general Indian population in a handful of states. No problem there.

But the fundamental claim of yours is just plain bogus.

FYI I am not a supporter of BJP or Modi. Nor am I against muslims. Nor do I buy into the idiotic theory that the muslim population would outnumber the rest in India in the next 20 or 30 years.
Ham Burger,
I have shown that the Muslim population growth rate is lower than the corresponding growth rate of the general population in the states of Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Kerala, Jammu and Kashmir, and Tamil Nadu. Furthermore this list of states is not exhaustive.

Arokiasamy said growth rate of Muslims in Kerala and J&K is lower than the average Hindu community growth. “It is attributed to their better education and socio-economic status in these states. For similar reasons, the fertility rate among Hindus in the less developed states of UP and Bihar, among others, is higher.”

Professor at Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) Abdul Shaban said, “The 2001 census affirms that decline in the growth rate of Muslims is faster than the majority community’s.

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-rashtriya-swayamsevak-sangh-exaggerated-fear-of-demographic-imbalance-experts-1910512
I have seen this copy paste before. Enough of this nonsense already. Just show me proof that backs up your claim that the overall growth rate of muslims in India is lower than the rest of India.

The short answer is that the overall growth rate of Muslims in India is slightly greater than the overall growth rate of the total Indian population. But the gap is rapidly reducing. This article has more details:

http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/the-real-truth/entry/muslim-fertility-rate-drops-blunts-bjp-s-charge-against-community

by Guest Thu Nov 14, 2013 6:29 pm

Comedy Nights with Narendra Modi Image15

Source: http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?282269

So, the Muslim fertility rate is about the same as the fertility rates of SC/ST people.

by goodcitizn Thu Nov 14, 2013 8:03 pm

Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:Rashman:

Here's where it's at.

You have not shown any evidence so far to support your claim that the muslim population growth rate in India is lower than the overall Indian population growth rate. The answer is simple - there is no census data to support your claim.

All you have done is to show:

The TFR (total fertility rate) of the muslim population has fallen over the years. That's fine.

The Indian muslim population growth rate is lower than the general Indian population in a handful of states. No problem there.

But the fundamental claim of yours is just plain bogus.

FYI I am not a supporter of BJP or Modi. Nor am I against muslims. Nor do I buy into the idiotic theory that the muslim population would outnumber the rest in India in the next 20 or 30 years.
Ham Burger,
I have shown that the Muslim population growth rate is lower than the corresponding growth rate of the general population in the states of Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Kerala, Jammu and Kashmir, and Tamil Nadu. Furthermore this list of states is not exhaustive.

Arokiasamy said growth rate of Muslims in Kerala and J&K is lower than the average Hindu community growth. “It is attributed to their better education and socio-economic status in these states. For similar reasons, the fertility rate among Hindus in the less developed states of UP and Bihar, among others, is higher.”

Professor at Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) Abdul Shaban said, “The 2001 census affirms that decline in the growth rate of Muslims is faster than the majority community’s.

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-rashtriya-swayamsevak-sangh-exaggerated-fear-of-demographic-imbalance-experts-1910512
I have seen this copy paste before. Enough of this nonsense already. Just show me proof that backs up your claim that the overall growth rate of muslims in India is lower than the rest of India.
The short answer is that the overall growth rate of Muslims in India is slightly greater than the overall growth rate of the total Indian population. But the gap is rapidly reducing. This article has more details:

http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/the-real-truth/entry/muslim-fertility-rate-drops-blunts-bjp-s-charge-against-community

I am glad you have finally accepted the truth.

by goodcitizn Thu Nov 14, 2013 8:13 pm

Rashmun wrote:

Source: http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?282269

So, the Muslim fertility rate is about the same as the fertility rates of SC/ST people.

Interesting graph. This is another subject altogether.

by Guest Thu Nov 14, 2013 8:13 pm

Rashmun wrote:

Source: http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?282269

So, the Muslim fertility rate is about the same as the fertility rates of SC/ST people.

GC, any comments on the above graph?

by Guest Thu Nov 14, 2013 8:33 pm

goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

Source: http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?282269

So, the Muslim fertility rate is about the same as the fertility rates of SC/ST people.
Interesting graph. This is another subject altogether.

Come on. It is not a totally different subject. It is a related subject. If SC/ST's are experiencing a growth rate almost equal to the Muslim growth rate and if muslim growth rate has been undergoing a greater rate of decline over the years then there is no reason for Sanghis to fear that by 2050 India will have a Muslim majority.

by goodcitizn Thu Nov 14, 2013 8:42 pm

Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

Source: http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?282269

So, the Muslim fertility rate is about the same as the fertility rates of SC/ST people.
Interesting graph. This is another subject altogether.
Come on. It is not a totally different subject. It is a related subject. If SC/ST's are experiencing a growth rate almost equal to the Muslim growth rate and if muslim growth rate has been undergoing a greater rate of decline over the years then there is no reason for Sanghis to fear that by 2050 India will have a Muslim majority.

You are preaching to the choir. I told you already that it is an idiotic theory that muslims would be the majority in Indian population in the next 30 or so years.

by bw Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:03 pm

who/what is a "ham burger"?

thx.

by confuzzled dude Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:11 pm

Rashmun wrote:

Source: http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?282269

So, the Muslim fertility rate is about the same as the fertility rates of SC/ST people.

This is a common knowledge no need for graphs, and it is also true that majority of muslims are poor just like the other groups in the graph.

by Guest Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:13 pm

bw wrote:who/what is a "ham burger"?

thx.

Have you read any Perry Mason book ?

by bw Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:15 pm

Rashmun wrote:
bw wrote:who/what is a "ham burger"?

thx.
Have you read any Perry Mason book ?

i read a few a long time ago - only remember della street now. is that a character from those books?

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:21 pm

Rashmun wrote:
bw wrote:who/what is a "ham burger"?

thx.
Have you read any Perry Mason book ?

But...but...but.... Have you found evidence to support your "factual, and 100% truthful statement" that Muslims were 15% of the Indian population in 1951?

by Guest Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:22 pm

bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
bw wrote:who/what is a "ham burger"?

thx.
Have you read any Perry Mason book ?
i read a few a long time ago - only remember della street now. is that a character from those books?

Yes. She is Mason's secretary. In most of these books, Mason is the defense attorney and Hamilton Burger ( Ham Burger) is the district attorney.

by Guest Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:24 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
bw wrote:who/what is a "ham burger"?

thx.
Have you read any Perry Mason book ?
But...but...but.... Have you found evidence to support your "factual, and 100% truthful statement" that Muslims were 15% of the Indian population in 1951?

No, I retract that statement. The Muslim population in India has increased as a percentage since independence. The main reason for this seems to be large scale immigrations into India of Muslims particularly from Bangladesh.

by Guest Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:27 pm

goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

Source: http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?282269

So, the Muslim fertility rate is about the same as the fertility rates of SC/ST people.
Interesting graph. This is another subject altogether.
Come on. It is not a totally different subject. It is a related subject. If SC/ST's are experiencing a growth rate almost equal to the Muslim growth rate and if muslim growth rate has been undergoing a greater rate of decline over the years then there is no reason for Sanghis to fear that by 2050 India will have a Muslim majority.
You are preaching to the choir. I told you already that it is an idiotic theory that muslims would be the majority in Indian population in the next 30 or so years.

Samiyaar, would you agree that GC just called your theory idiotic and by implication you being an idiot? Time to unleash the deadliest weapon in your armory and start calling him a mullah/Maulana/jehadi, etc. if you fail to do so because he is a fellow tamil I will be obliged to call you a hypocrite.

by bw Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:40 pm

Rashmun wrote:
bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
bw wrote:who/what is a "ham burger"?

thx.
Have you read any Perry Mason book ?
i read a few a long time ago - only remember della street now. is that a character from those books?
Yes. She is Mason's secretary. In most of these books, Mason is the defense attorney and Hamilton Burger ( Ham Burger) is the district attorney.

ah, thanks. i should revisit these books and check if they are appropriate for my kids.

by Sponsored content