Another false dichotomy. The universe couldn't just been transformed from one form into another. The Cyclic Model wouldn't require any creation at all, for example. I'm sure that there are other theories that don't involve creation, too. The fact that we have no evidence of anything being created or destroyed is clear evidence towards the fact that nothing may have ever been destroyed or created. Not sure why you're struggling with that one, to be honest. An incorrect straight answer is not better than no answer at all, as it stops you from looking for a real one or even accepting one when it's found, as you're superb evidence for. The Quran isn't specific at all when it comes to these matters and it's translation is highly debated. I've assumed nothing. You're a Muslim and you believe in Allah, don't you? There's no such thing. Evolution doesn't suggest species jumping. It suggests change over time.
If you're going to go with quantum physics, then we have seen something coming from nothing. Virtual particles, for a start.
No, it doesn't. Nothing in the Qu'ran says anything of the sort except as a consequence of people with modern day knowledge desperately twisting the most tenuous of sentences into what they want them to mean. See ya.
Well it certainly destroys your 'We've never seen matter or energy either created or destroyed.' argument sure enough however the issue of it coming from 'nothing' is not as simple as you try and push you have to take into account force etc
Its not that complicated gambol when talking about the relationship between energy and particles the existence of atoms is a given. Its not energy in nothing from nothing based on nothing. The problem with Quantum Physics is it tries to be all encompassing with all the forces, electromagnetic, nuclear etc. The energy within the atom has always existed, its movement is what is being discussed so its creation/destruction is never really the issue as it has always existed within the atom, put simply its just moved hope that clears it up
Given that atoms are 99% empty, everything is 99% nothing, so why do I care? You or I aren't even here.
That is just a complete fabrication. Are you seriously saying that respected scientists (not those with a religious agenda) have said that the Qu'ran contains information that couldn't possibly be known at the time? No, they haven't. Certain believers have twisted the odd line here and there into something more than it is. They/You also pretend that other very short passages accurately explain things like embryology. No, it doesn't. It takes ideas from the time as in the case of embryology and in very vague language repeats it and unfortunately for you believers, in a form that is demonstrably incorrect based on modern science.
itsthat 1% that matters Put simply You cannot create something from nothing. Something has to exist prior to creation of something else otherwise where would the causes for new phenomena come from?
you keep believing that Yes I am saying that This is why I specifically focused on non muslim experts in their field The embroyology example is very specific, and as was pointed out to PNEawf , Prof Moore has won prizes for his work as late as 2007 He describes the embroyology process as exact and precise and this is backed up by at least 3 scientists from as far as china, who I quoted for you funny how these scientists MUST be wrong as it doesnt suit
here you go AGAIN 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. He is well-known in his field. He is the author or editor of 22 textbooks and has published over 181 scientific papers. In 1991, he received the most distinguished award presented in the field of anatomy in Canada, the J.C.B. Grant Award from the Canadian Association of Anatomists. When he was asked about the scientific miracles in the Quran which he has researched, he stated the following: “The way it was explained to me is that Muhammad was a very ordinary man. He could not read, didn’t know [how] to write. In fact, he was an illiterate. And we’re talking about twelve [actually about fourteen] hundred years ago. You have someone illiterate making profound pronouncements and statements and that are amazingly accurate about scientific nature. And I personally can’t see how this could be a mere chance. 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. Formerly, he was Professor of Ob-Gyn and the Chairman of the Department of Ob-Gyn at the University of Tennessee, Memphis, Tennessee, USA. He was also the President of the American Fertility Society. He has received many awards, including the Association of Professors of Obstetrics and Gynecology Public Recognition Award in 1992. “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. There, for 22 years he was Professor of Anatomy, the Chairman of the Department of Anatomy, and the Director of the Daniel Baugh Institute. He was also the President of the Teratology Society. He has authored more than 200 publications. In 1981, during the Seventh Medical Conference in Dammam, Saudi Arabia, Professor Johnson said in the presentation of his research paper: 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.” Also he said: “As a scientist, I can only deal with things which I can specifically see. I can understand embryology and developmental biology. I can understand the words that are translated to me from the Quran. As I gave the example before, if I were to transpose myself into that era, knowing what I knew today and describing things, I could not describe the things which were described. I see no evidence for the fact to refute the concept that this individual, Muhammad, had to be developing this information from some place. So I see nothing here in conflict with the concept that divine intervention was involved in what he was able to write.”
Which is why you'll never convert me to your heathen Islamic ways. Apathy. My weapon against the world and it's insurgents.
