Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I do know it is not for spreading lies and misinformation. When you do lie and attempt to misinform, expect people to tell you the truth, not agree with you. there is no science in the Qur'an, there is no beauty in Islam, and there is no truth in posts like the OP.
How could you convince someone that doesn't want to be convinced ?!! The truth is in front of you .. but if you decide not to see it then you wont !! it's up to you , take it easy
How could you convince someone that doesn't want to be convinced ?!!
The truth is in front of you .. but if you decide not to see it then you wont !!
It is rarely anything to do with WANTING to be convinced however. There simply has been no evidence forthcoming to convince us and so we remain unconvinced.
However I am used to hearing this as a cop out. Often when I ask for back up for a position, the person who can not give such back up will rarely admit that. Instead they make things us like:
“I would give you the evidence but you would not understand it”
“I would give you the evidence but you should really find it yourself”
“I would give you the evidence but you will not accept it anyway because you do not want to”
“I would give you the evidence but you are biased”
“I would give you the evidence but I have no time right now”
“I would give you the evidence but the thing I am claiming is such that no evidence is possible”
“I would give you the evidence but why don’t we forget that and you give me the evidence that what I am saying is NOT true instead”.
Etc. etc. etc.
You either have convincing evidence or you have not got convincing evidence. It is not both. Making up cop out excuses to hide the fact that you do not helps no one.
It is rarely anything to do with WANTING to be convinced however. There simply has been no evidence forthcoming to convince us and so we remain unconvinced.
However I am used to hearing this as a cop out. Often when I ask for back up for a position, the person who can not give such back up will rarely admit that. Instead they make things us like:
“I would give you the evidence but you would not understand it”
“I would give you the evidence but you should really find it yourself”
“I would give you the evidence but you will not accept it anyway because you do not want to”
“I would give you the evidence but you are biased”
“I would give you the evidence but I have no time right now”
“I would give you the evidence but the thing I am claiming is such that no evidence is possible”
“I would give you the evidence but why don’t we forget that and you give me the evidence that what I am saying is NOT true instead”.
.[/u] It is not both. Making up cop out excuses to hide the fact that you do not helps no one.
. Stick to the subject please.It is a clear evidence from nonmuslim scientists.
Stick to the subject please.It is a clear evidence from nonmuslim scientists.
I do not see "moderator" next to your name... nor are you the OP for this thread... so you do not get to tell me what I can write as a reply to someone else on this thread. My reply to that person (a person who was not you) was perfectly on topic for the post I was replying to.
If you think there is evidence from a scientist then tell me what evidence, which scientist and which paper it was written in.
If however you think finding a scientist who thinks the Koran is true is useful then this is false. I want to know WHY a person believes X not WHO the person is that believes X and simply saying "I believe X and some scientists do too" is an appeal to authority and adds no credence to your claims.
I do not see "moderator" next to your name... nor are you the OP for this thread... so you do not get to tell me what I can write as a reply to someone else on this thread. My reply to that person (a person who was not you) was perfectly on topic for the post I was replying to.
If you think there is evidence from a scientist then tell me what evidence, which scientist and which paper it was written in.
If however you think finding a scientist who thinks the Koran is true is useful then this is false. I want to know WHY a person believes X not WHO the person is that believes X and simply saying "I believe X and some scientists do too" is an appeal to authority and adds no credence to your claims.
What were we talking about ?Quran miracles.Quran miracles is the original thread .And what u wrote is also a respond to me because u said there is no evidence.Anyway go back to the topic.The video is word by word from them.And they r not Muslims.This is enough evidence that support Quran Miracles.
what u wrote is also a respond to me because u said there is no evidence.
Please try and read the thread before you reply. What I wrote was not a response to you. Please check your facts:
1) You replied in post #23 to my post #22
2) My post #22 was NOT a reply to you but a reply to squall-lionheart in post #21
Understand now? Really, if you can not even follow the conversation I doubt you have anything to ADD to it either! It does not take much effort to read the thread before you post, and to see who is replying to who. Please try it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muslim22
The video is word by word from them.And they r not Muslims.This is enough evidence that support Quran Miracles.
I never claimed they were Muslim. I am saying that merely saying that they are scientists does not make what they are claiming any more true. The whole video is "for" showing people that scientists agree with you. Nothing more.
If you think there is some evidence for god or Islam in that video then please tell me what it is because I watched it 3 times and I see none at all.
1.Dr. T. V. N. Persaud is Professor of Anatomy, Professor of Pediatrics and Child Health, and Professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences at the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. There, he was the Chairman of the Department of Anatomy for 16 years
2) Dr. Joe Leigh Simpson is the Chairman of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, and Professor of Molecular and Human Genetics at the Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA. Formerly, he was Professor of Ob-Gyn and the Chairman of the Department of Ob-Gyn at the University of Tennessee, Memphis, Tennessee, USA.
3.Dr. E. Marshall Johnson is Professor Emeritus of Anatomy and Developmental Biology at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. There, for 22 years he was Professor of Anatomy, the Chairman of the Department of Anatomy, and the Director of the Daniel Baugh Institute.
4.Dr. William W. Hay is a well-known marine scientist. He is Professor of Geological Sciences at the University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
5.Dr. Gerald C. Goeringer is Course Director and Associate Professor of Medical Embryology at the Department of Cell Biology, School of Medicine, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.
6. Dr. Yoshihide Kozai is Professor Emeritus at Tokyo University, Hongo, Tokyo, Japan, and was the Director of the National Astronomical Observatory, Mitaka, Tokyo, Japan.
7) Professor Tejatat Tejasen is the Chairman of the Department of Anatomy at Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand. Previously, he was the Dean of the Faculty of Medicine at the same university.
More camel dung....A criticism made of the commission is that in its enthusiasm to prove that evidence in favor of Qur'anic scientific miracles “is clear and obvious" and that "a group of eminent non-Muslim scholars in several fields” has testified to this, the commission has spread misleading, out-of-context statements by several of these non-Muslim scholars.
In 1984, a member of the commission, Mustafa Abdul Basit Ahmed, moved to the United States to recruit non-Muslim Western scientists to verify the miraculous signs of the Quran. However, in a 2002 story in the American newspaper Wall Street Journal, several non-Muslim scientists spoke of questionable practices used by the commission to coax statements from them, such as hard-sell interviews by Sheikh Abdul Majeed al-Zindani, and false promises to be “completely neutral.”
The commission drew the scientists to its conferences with first-class plane tickets for them and their wives, rooms at the best hotels, $1,000 honoraria, and banquets with Muslim leaders — such as a palace dinner in Islamabad with Pakistani President Mohammed Zia ul-Haq shortly before he was killed in a plane crash. Ahmed also gave at least one scientist a crystal clock.
Marine scientist William Hay complained of having fallen into a "trap" in interviews, while embryologist Gerald Goeringer claimed "mutual manipulation" between the scientists and conference organizers. Embryologist Keith L. Moore who had an edition of his textbook financed by Saudi Bucailleists and "concluded that God had revealed the Quran to Muhammad," declined to be interviewed telling the newspaper, “it’s been 10 or 11 years since I was involved in the Quran.
He has let loose the two seas, converging together, with a barrier between them they do not break through. (Qur'an, 55:19-20)
Sounds like a rewording of the cosmology described in Genesis. There's water below the earth and water above it, with the sky as a solid dome holding the waters above the earth from falling down.
Or it could mean any number of other things. That's the problem with tearing thousand-year old fiction out of context, translating it to another language, and trying to turn it into a science textbook.
My question - if there's really any science in the Qur'an, why do we have to wait until scientists discover the facts and then later try and shoehorn verses to fit those facts? If there really was a lot of science in there, why not publish specific claims first and beat them to the punch.
mmmm
you are very good in finding an answers for every problem you may face
Yep. You make outlandish claims about some miraculous Islamic historical capabilities, and then you wither when the commentaries come back, categorically refuting the nonsense. Typical.
Now, if we were to make clearly outlandish claims about Islam, you'd be all over us. Like, for example, "Allah was a midget Jewish lesbian woman. I have it on good authority! Just accept it!!"
Quote:
Originally Posted by salaita1
I think that the forum for dialogue and civilized debate and not for the insults and Almspat Thank you
Well then, try posting information that has some smattering of honesty, and is not just another proselytizing, nonsense-filled post.
As In: Why do you guys keep trying to claim some sort of superior ancient Islamic scientific competency outside of rigorous modern Western scientific principles? As if Allah/Mohammed simply sat in the desert and spouted simplistic, ambiguous phrases that somehow now confirm the masses of deliberate, research-generated scientific information?
Q: Do you have even the most basic, elementary school level of understanding of how The Scientific Method as developed, and is utilized in answering questions? Apparently not, and you're too frightened to learn. your colleagues would surely "censure" you, probably in a rather rough manner. Frightening, indeed! Better to go along with it and yowl in unison!
Islamic Scientific Accomplishments? What tripe.
Have ANY of you EVER read an actual scientific journal publication? Have you ventured into, say, a modern introductory text on quantum physics? Or modern bio-genetics? The depth of information and supporting biographical references now considered necessary and basic to enable a simple conclusion in a credible journal?
Apparently not. Some illiterate dehydrated simpleton's bumbling and translated quotation about "The seas shall part in the middle" proves nothing at all about ancient scientific competency.
BTw, I Googled™ your Professor T.V. N. Persaud. Stopped there, but what comes up is this little site:
Which comes up on my computer as "Supporting The Prophet Mohammed", a clearly biased site.
Sorry; the OP's point is an EPIC FAIL.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodpasture
I do know it is not for spreading lies and misinformation. When you do lie and attempt to misinform, expect people to tell you the truth, not agree with you. There is no science in the Qur'an, there is no beauty in Islam, and there is no truth in posts like the OP.
Nicely put, GP. In addition, I'll just add the obvious: the current state of cultural and social affairs in the hotbed and homeland of Islam, the general Middle East (ME) rather categorically confirms the utter LACK of scientific acumen (ability, capacity, knowledge, etc.) present in that endlessly backwards culture, where street violence and mass chanting is the expected norm. Individualism is cursed; parroting those ancient chants is expected.
I heard this morning on BBC Radio International that there is currently a flurry of bombings and murders directly and proudly attributed to Islam against Christians all over the ME. Yep; such a peaceful scientific, tolerant culture.
As well, I recently watched two documentaries on the Military Channel. One was on the newest US Aircraft carriers, and one was on the latest US Attack Sub class. Not to puff up or proselytize and philosophize about the US military and it's abilities, but just to point out, as a Technology Demonstrator: both of these amazing devices literally drip with the results of advanced US and Allied true scientific rigor and process. Their ability to stealthily proceed around this world, to listen in, to process information and to then to act on it, reeks of true scientific capability.
Meantime, Iran recently and proudly claimed to have shot down a pair of US spy drones, and are now "back engineering" them in order to produce their own. (Of course, even if they do make up a simplified balsa-wood version, we'll just summarily shoot them down the first morning they're up there...)
1) but anyhow, it just ain't gonna happen, since they simply do not possess the accumulated engineering skills (i.e.: scientific ability, modern free-thinking universities and design/engineering facilities) to do so effectively, unless they hand it all over to the Russians or Chinese, (neither of whom are fundamentalist Muslims, by the way), and...
2) why haven't they had such über-modern devices and technology all along, given their claimed vast and historic scientific superiority? Why do they simply continue to buy it ALL from the Ruskies and Chinese, who evolved in the cold and are thus rather more resourceful and sturdy of mind and soul? [And, all that technology was simply purchased with US$$$ profits from the sale of hydrocarbons taken out of the desert sands entirely with US and British petroleum technologies and marketing...]
3) BTW, where's the Internet (your hero Bin Laden's favorite com device, and arguably the most outstanding invention of the last century) incontrovertibly and accurately mentioned in the Q'Ran? [This I gotta hear...]
4) The Islamic space Station? Even a component of it on the International, Joint Space Station? Is there even a copy of The Q'ran up there I wonder? Or a free-floating prayer rug? Even the Chinese have an enthusiastic lunar landing program in the works. Where's the Muslim version again? After all, the moon's largely sand; you guys have an edge already in understanding the possible engineering problems, right?
All God-driven? The hand of Allah, and so forth? The Scimitar of God's Will, yada yada yada? You guys are far too busy designing better suicide bombs and plans to attack the West.
It's all Balderdash. You present tripe, you're gonna get called on it.
Islam is a Scam.
(Hey; it rhymes! It might just catch on, in which case, I'll claim it was always mine! Like The Q'ran does!)
BTW, a tiny part of me realizes that, given some hacker in the ME searching endlessly, I could be in personal danger for bad-mouthing Islam. Tough for me, huh? But, it's obviously the way you people operate, isn't it? Scare the innocents and the children and women into submission. Badger them into believing it's the best and only path, and that EVERYTHING in this world is conveniently, concisely and accurately contained in one silly old book that's been so often disproven, just like the bible, which it plagiarizes often?
You do see how ridiculous it all is, on it's face, do you not?
(BTW, when did all of you Islamic defenders here begin your Islamic "education"? A what age? Just curious.)
1.Dr. T. V. N. Persaud is Professor of Anatomy, Professor of Pediatrics and Child Health, and Professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences at the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. There, he was the Chairman of the Department of Anatomy for 16 years
2) Dr. Joe Leigh Simpson is the Chairman of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, and Professor of Molecular and Human Genetics at the Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA. Formerly, he was Professor of Ob-Gyn and the Chairman of the Department of Ob-Gyn at the University of Tennessee, Memphis, Tennessee, USA.
3.Dr. E. Marshall Johnson is Professor Emeritus of Anatomy and Developmental Biology at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. There, for 22 years he was Professor of Anatomy, the Chairman of the Department of Anatomy, and the Director of the Daniel Baugh Institute.
4.Dr. William W. Hay is a well-known marine scientist. He is Professor of Geological Sciences at the University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
5.Dr. Gerald C. Goeringer is Course Director and Associate Professor of Medical Embryology at the Department of Cell Biology, School of Medicine, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.
6. Dr. Yoshihide Kozai is Professor Emeritus at Tokyo University, Hongo, Tokyo, Japan, and was the Director of the National Astronomical Observatory, Mitaka, Tokyo, Japan.
7) Professor Tejatat Tejasen is the Chairman of the Department of Anatomy at Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand. Previously, he was the Dean of the Faculty of Medicine at the same university.
I quickly goggled some of those scientist, who are on record as saying they were taken out of context.
Quote:
Second, Dr. Simpson says in an article in the Wall Street Journal (by Daniel Golden, January 23rd, 2002):
Dr. Simpson now says he made some comments that sound "silly and embarrassing" taken out of context, but no matter: Mideast television shows, Muslim books and Web sites still quote him as saying the Quran must have been "derived from God," because it foresaw modern discoveries in embryology and genetics.
... Prof. Simpson -- who attended conferences in Saudi Arabia, Cairo and Islamabad -- recalls being asked to analyze an anecdote from the Sunnah, an Islamic holy book recording the acts and words of the prophet, in view of modern genetics.
In this passage -- apparently intended to discourage unjustified accusations of adultery -- a Bedouin complained to Muhammad that his wife had given birth to a black child. Muhammed inquired about the nomad's camels, and was told that some were tinged with red, but one was dusky in color. The prophet then likened the child to the dusky camel, saying both could have inherited their hues from ancestors.
At the urging of conference organizers, Prof. Simpson attested that this passage was consistent with the way recessive genes pass on traits not obvious in parents. But he says that the parallels -- while striking -- aren't necessarily evidence of divine inspiration
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Pernaud's commentary is highly biased.
