i am basing your being 'anti-god' based on the discusion, your approach and your views. You spent hours arguing 'against' god without explaining your beliefs. when you finally put your beliefs forward they were 'the best we have' and based on even more dodgy ground than what you assert religion is. why would 'most' scientists be anything? religion doesnt dictate advantage in science, although the muslims were at the forefront of it what reputable scientists? authourity fallacy now? you can focus on 'clay' as much as you like, scientists accept that god is more likely than abiogenesis. was moore not a reputable scientist? or because he became muslim does his work no longer count to you? anti god again to you? doesnt say anything to you? of course it doesnt/wont as this doesnt suit your argument. right there is the crux of what i have been saying. experts in certain fields believe it to be true, as in moore AGAIN an EXPERT in the field of embroyology muslim scientists did 'find out' about it before anyone else. By definition a muslim is someone that believes the quran is gods word, so 1400 years ago they believed that a 'big bang' ocurred. science just took a lot longer to catch up. and when it did non muslim scientists accepted it. again see moore got to be honest, i find it hard to stop laughing at you now.
thats the point you plum, there is no evidence of abiogenesis none , nada, nothing. it cannot be proven. scientifically unsupportable
We all agree about 99% of what goes on in the world, so the vast majority of my beliefs don't need to be discussed, especially as you claimed to accept evolution. That I don't accept claims of the supernatural and/or any gods is very much part of what I believe to be true about our existence, so discussing those issues is discussing what I believe. You've still yet to explain how I can be anti- something that I don't believe in. Now you're trying to suggest that I shouldn't go with the best explanations that we currently have, as it's on shaky ground, whereas your explanations come from a book of poetry and are basically summed up as "God did it"? Give me a break. Why would most scientists be anything? This should be pretty obvious, even for you. If science backed your beliefs, as you've claimed, then those that study science would see the truth in the claims of Islam, wouldn't they? Scientist clearly don't accept that god is more likely than abiogenesis, either. Where did you get that idea? How have you failed to distinguish between the argument from authority and the argument from authority fallacy again? I just explained it to you! When did I say that Moore's scientific work was in question because he's a Muslim? His theistic claims are in question, for the reasons that I've already stated. Muslim scientists clearly didn't come up with the big bang theory. It doesn't appear that they've been involved in any major advance in the theory either, as far as I can tell. To be honest, I'm glad that you're laughing at me. I'd start to worry if you agreed with me.
how have i misrepresented it? because YOU say so? without any proof/evidence, just an assertion? I couldnt care less what Moore's 'fellow embroyologists' did or did not do. for all you know they may have become muslim, or others since But that is NOT the point. Point is he, Moore, discovered what we know as 'modern embroyology' in terms of foetus development. He himself, that is Moore not me, says 'oh look its in the quran, exactly as it happens' Puin does not claim the scripts contain 'inconsistencies' as in are different from the original texts in meaning. as i said criticise and criticize are indeed spelt differently but mean exactly the same thing. as for not allowed to study, you obviously only briefly read wikki. do some research and you will find that is not the case. microfilm copies exist Back to Moore, there is more than one verse to start with, You have assumed that there were at least 2 translations before it reached him lets accept that for a second. The man is a scientist are you suggesting he would not do further research? are you also suggesting that he would acknowledge readily that his 'discovery' was already there? and he completely changed his life by becoming a muslim ? as for his peers not agreeing, i think you will find some did 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 are too many accuracies and, like Dr. Moore, I have no difficulty in my mind that this is a divine inspiration or revelation which led him to these statements.” 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 - “So that the two hadeeths (the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad ) that have been noted provide us with a specific time table for the main embryological development before forty days. Again, the point has been made, I think, repeatedly by other speakers this morning: these hadeeths could not have been obtained on the basis of the scientific knowledge that was available [at] the time of their writing . . . . It follows, I think, that not only there is no conflict between genetics and religion but, in fact, religion can guide science by adding revelation to some of the traditional scientific approaches, that there exist statements in the Quran shown centuries later to be valid, which support knowledge in the Quran having been derived from God.” Dr. E. Marshall Johnson is Professor Emeritus of Anatomy and Developmental Biology at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA - “Summary: The Quran describes not only the development of external form, but emphasizes also the internal stages, the stages inside the embryo, of its creation and development, emphasizing major events recognized by contemporary science.” Dr. Gerald C. Goeringer is Course Director and Associate Professor of Medical Embryology at the Department of Cell Biology, School of Medicine, - “In a relatively few aayahs (Quranic verses) is contained a rather comprehensive description of human development from the time of commingling of the gametes through organogenesis. No such distinct and complete record of human development, such as classification, terminology, and description, existed previously. In most, if not all, instances, this description antedates by many centuries the recording of the various stages of human embryonic and fetal development recorded in the traditional scientific literature.” I could go on all night, but you get the point
Just a few simple questions for you TFWNN, while I'm here. Did you watch the evolution clip that I linked to earlier? Why won't the Yemeni authorities let people examine the Sana'a Manuscripts any more? Why do you continue to attribute beliefs to me that I claim not to hold?
-No. tbh i didnt. but we never differed on evolution did we? evolution is about what happened after life was created -The yemenis were th epeople who called Puin et al in. i know of a few who have asked for further debate from the muslim community. also if copies do exist who cares what the yemenis say. point is though Puin isnt/never said what you are asserting -based on your arguments
I clearly explained how you've misrepresented it. Try reading my posts. This is how you've misrepresented it. No consensus. If you don't care what Moore's peers think, then why have you tried to quote some of them? Strange. Puin does claim that. Sorry. I'm well aware that microfilm copies exist. The manuscripts aren't allowed to be studied. I meant verse as in the poetic sense, meaning the entire work. I haven't assumed anything. Classical Arabic, Modern Arabic, English. And? People convert to religions and from religions every day. All discoveries are already there. That's why they're called discoveries.
Sorry PNP, I'm on the Android app and it doesn't number the posts. I knew he wouldn't be able to answer it though. They never can.
To summarise, he didn't watch the clip, he didn't answer the second point and he claims that I've argued from an anti-god perspective. About 6 posts up^.
Your patience is astounding and admirable PNP! I had to give up almost immediately because his level of delusion just isn't worth debating with. The stress his brain must be under to supress logic to that extent gives me a headache just thinking about it.
Cheers DT, but I know that I won't make a dent on him. He doesn't even try to understand my comments most of the time. If other people read the discussion and see how astoundingly delusional he is though, then maybe it'll help one of them to understand an alternative view of things? Maybe not, but at least I'll still get a laugh out of it, when he starts going on about believing in genies!
No, I meant MY question, as in if there is a god, why do good people get shat on, why are innocent babies born disabled? The one the religious types can never answer.
Thanks. You're right, but sometimes it's interesting to see how far people will take their mental gymnastics to avoid actually examining what they believe. I think TFWNN is going for the gold, frankly.
