the atlas is beautiful - but the text is the rehashing of his usual creationist nonsense. But its actually even worse than that. Richard Dawkins just commented on few of its pages:Given that the entire message of the book depends upon the alleged resemblance between modern animals and their fossil counterparts, I was amused, when I began flicking through at random, to find page 468 devoted to "eels", one fossil and one modern. The caption says,And Dawkins added a postcript:There are more than 400 species of eels in the order Anguilliformes. That they have not undergone any change in millions of years once again reveals the invalidity of the theory of evolution.The fossil eel shown may well be an eel, I cannot tell. But themodern "eel" that Yahya pictures (see left) is undoubtedly not an eel but a sea snake, probably of the highly venomous genus Laticauda (an eel is, of course, not a snake at all but a teleost fish). I have not scanned the book for other inaccuracies of this kind. But given that this was almost the first page I looked at . . . what price the main thesis of the book that modern animals are unchanged since the time of their fossil counterparts?
I have now looked at some more pages of this preposterous book. The double page spreads on page 54-55, 368-369, and 414-415 are all labelled 'Crinoid', and all purport to show how similar ancient fossil crinoids are to modern ones. Crinoids are stalked relatives of starfish, members of the phylum Echinodermata. The threeBut then he concludes:s
preads have almost identical captions. Here's the one on page 54:
The 345-million-year-old crinoid fossil, identical to its living counterparts, invalidates the theory of evolution. Crinoids that have remained unchanged for 345 million years refute the theory of evolution, manifesting the creation of God as a fact.And all three spreads show a beautiful colour photograph of modern crinoids to illustrate the point. Except that, in all three cases, the modern animal pictured is not a crinoid. It isn't even an echinoderm. It isn't even a deuterostome (the sub-kingdom to which the echinoderms, and we, belong). Zoologist readers will recognize it as a tube-dwelling annelid worm, a sabellid.
I am at a loss to reconcile the expensive and glossy production values of this book with the "breathtaking inanity" of the content . Is it really inanity, or is it just plain laziness – or perhaps cynical awareness of the ignorance and stupidity of the target audience – mostly Muslim creationists. And where does the money come from?Read full Dawkins' comment here.
By attributing cynical awareness or laziness, I think he is giving way too much credit to Harun Yahya. If you read some of Yahya's other writings (and I've had to painfully go through some of them recently for an article) you will realize that this simply is the level of his scholarship and his thinking. There are many others in the Muslim world who are writing at the same level - none of them are scientists, let alone biologists. The reason for their success is that they write about exactly what people want to hear (hmm...would a comparison with cheezy-bad but feel-good romantic comedies work??) and throw enough sciency-sounding words to appear credible. Many of them are probably not deliberately misleading people - but they badly want to justify their beliefs through science (and reject evolution, which in their conclusion, may conflict with religion). On my visits to Pakistan, I frequently encounter people who want me (because of my astronomy background) to affirm that there is much modern astronomy in the Quran. While my answer usually (always?) disappoints them, they find the answers they are looking for in books by Maurice Bucaille, Harun Yahya, etc. But I can also totally see some of them going out and writing their own books. The purpose (including Yahya's) is straight forward religious proselitization, rather than any deep thoughts about science or nature. Yahya is the most successful amongst them because he has money for glossy books (this is especially effective as school science textbooks often are printed on low quality paper with poor color reproductions - if at all) and slick websites. You add a message that people already want to hear - and you have a recipe for success.
Also read an earlier post about Harun Yahya and the end of the world.
no doubt the book has many mistakes. However, the cited mistakes are irrelevant to the argument supported by the rest of the book: that many forms of life appear in the fossil record "millions of years ago" nearly identical to their current form. I've not heard a satisfactory response -- only quibbling like dawkins' quibbling here.
ReplyDeleteAlso, the ad hominem against oktar doesn't go very far. I watched dawkins demonstrate complete ignorance of fossil dating methods in front of a college audience on the lecture circuit. People make mistakes.
yes, but Richard Dawkins is particularly responsible for the rise of "anti-evolutionary" sentiment among believers --especially Christians & then Muslims & then Jews etc.--
ReplyDeleteand American Fundamentalist Evangelicals always use him and his ilk for pushing their Crusader agenda by saying:
"look, he is an enemy of God and Church, and he is an Evolutionist!"
but in USA %40 percent of believing Scientists basically support Evolutionary Creation idea.
and most of the other atheist & agnostic etc. Scientists do not use Evolution idea for pushing an "Anti-God" and "Anti-Religion" sentiment, like he and his ilk unfortunately do.
in short, Richard Dawkins is essentially harming Science & Religion & Humanity & Peace...
he is playing into the hands of fanatic anti-evolutionary Evangelical Crusaders and their puppets in other religions.
unless he and his ilk change their hostile attitude against Religion, even if they discredit every page of anti-evolutionary Crusaders publications, it will not change a thing. Crusaders and their puppets will continue to win and deceive and make happen their unscientific Evangelical Imperialistic Agenda
successful throughout the world.
so this Richard Dawkins and his ilk must change their hostile attitudes against Religion first,
unless of course they are "secret agents" of Evangelical Crusaders who are specifically financed by them?
and please visit this site to see a very enlightening debate between
ReplyDeletedr. Francis Collins and dr. Richard Dawkins about Evolution and in general God's existence issue:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1555132-3,00.html
Francis Collins (head of Human Genome project) is among the most respected Scientists in USA and he is also a devout Christian.
He accepts Evolution as God's master Creation plan & tool.
May God bless him and enter him into the "Real Flock of Jesus" in this most critical Third Millennium, if He wills so,
when he (Jesus) -spiritually- rise again. (John 6/44-45) (Quran 3/55)
please also see this crucial information given by "Evangelism Exposed" in this regard at this site, at the comments section (4:49A.M.)
http://sciencereligionnews.blogspot.com/2007/07/first-beckham-and-now-harun-yayha.html
and perhaps Richard Dawkins and his ilk should also learn a lot from him, if they really want a meaningful "Scientific Consensus" among most believers and non-believers in this Evolution(ary Creation) issue.
THOSE WHO SAY OR BELIEVE THAT THERE IS PLENTY OF EVIDENCE FOR EVOLUTION ARE IN A SERIOUSLY DELUDED STATE! AND IN VAIN VAIN CONTINUES TO THUMSUCK PROPAGANDA.
ReplyDeleteAFTER LOOKING INTO MANY OF ADNAN OKTARS WORKS IT IS CRYSTAL-CLEAR THAT IT IS A DISGRACEFUL DECEPTION.
HIS WORKS SHOW VIA MANY ADMISSIONS OF EVOLUTIONISTS THEMSELVES THAT IT IS A FAIRY-TALE KEPT ALIVE ON THE AGENDA FOR IDEOLOGICAL REASONS (MATERRIALISM).
TIME AND TIME AGAIN THE FEW EVIDENCES THAT ARE BEING REFERRED TO TURNS OUT TO BE NO SUCH THING BUT PROPAGANDA THAT NEVER GOES PAST THE HYPOTHESES/SPECULATION STAGE
WHICH IS BASED ON:
IMAGINATION + SPECULATION FUELLED BY WISHFUL THINKING!
EVOLUTION HAS BEEN INVALIDATED AT EVERY LEVEL FROM MOLECULAR ALL THE WAY TO PALEONTOLOGY - AND THERE IS NO WAY BACK. PEOPLE WHOS WORLD-VIEW HAS BEEN RUINED SIMPLY HAVE TO COME TO TERMS WITH THE FACT AND NOT VAINFULLY AND HOPELESSLY HANG ON TO PROPAGANDA AS IF HYPNOTISED.
IF THIS IS INDEED DEMOCRACY THEY SHOULD ALLOW CREATIONISM TAUGHT ALONGSIDE DARWINISM IN SCHOOLS AND LET CHILDREN MAKE UP THEIR OWN MINDS. BUT THEY WONT BECAUSE THEY WILL THEN CLEARLY SEE THAT EVOLUTION IS NO DIFFRERENT THEN THE FAIRY-TALE CARTOONS THAT THEY WATCH!
THEY ARE UNDERSTANDABLY AFRAID BECAUSE WHOEVER DOES RESEARCH INTO THE SUBJECT CAN NO LONGER SINCERELY BELIEVE
IN IT ANY LONGER.
IT IS ALL OVER
DARWINISM-WATCH.COM KEEPS YOU UPDATED WITH THE PROPAGANDA
I am including again on this site a summary from a previous blog
The topics i have spoken about in the previous 2008/04/07 blog:
(1) The pychological aspect - How throughout history atheists, who have out of arrogance and rebellion refused to submit to the Creator and the excuses they seek to justify their atheism. Today they think that science with the evolution scenario has provided them that justification.
(2) How the theory of evolution has been totally disproven and demolished especially from 80s onwards by science (from molecular eg cell to paleontology eg fossils) and countless admissions of disappointed evolutionists themselves
(3) How it is sustained and kept alive by deceptive propaganda via academia, media, hollywood etc.
They stubbornly ignore the evidence and continue propagating the same nonsence to the ignorant masses and come up with so-called evidences which time and time again are shown to be nothing concrete beyond the usual hypothetical and speculative nonsence based upon wishful-thinking
(4) The propaganda methods and techqniques that are employed in the deception carried out in the name of ideological concerns i.e materialism and its unobjective stance and rejection of any supernatural explanation of the universe although it is clear, obvious and irrefutable from a rational, logical, reason and scientific point of view that God and Creation is a most solid and concrete reality.
(5) The 150 years of frauds and scandals committed in the attempt to prove a fairy tale eg Haeckels embryos, piltdown man scandal, stanley millers experiment, missing links deceptions and on and on…
(6) The disasters (wars and conflicts) that Social Darwinism has caused and continues to cause - fascism, communism, neo-capitalism. The subtle indoctrinating (eg competiveness in economic arena to the encouraging of immorality and breakdown of family values) of children from early academia, media(icluding childrens cartoons), hollywood that life is a stuggle, big fish eats little fish, might is right etc, etc
(7) How the architects and maintainers of the current Secular World Order are the Freemasons and how evolution/materialism is a very important tool to their agenda.
An example: The undemocratic nature regarding the teaching of science in schools - the refusal to teach both possibilities - Creationism and Darwinism and leave people to make up their own minds.
The bloodiest era in our history (late 19th century onwards) has occured since the collapse of religious values due in great part to the man-made secular systems which have led to world wars and social moral breakdowns.
This refutes the commonly held notions that religions bring conflict as the truth of the matter is that atheism,fascism, communism and neo-capitalism have statistically made FAR MORE victims physically as well as psychologically in total than all previous recorded history.
Religion when misapplied can and does cause massive damage but in terms of generalities and numbers when compared with secular stytems and the lack of religious values in society at large it remains superior as there is and never can be any superior alternative to the deterrent of genuine belief and fear of God and the Hereafter.
(8) The myth that religion and science are incompatable.That religion has to be materialistic - a erroneous &undemocratically and forcefully imposed dogmatic stance
In truth Science is an investigation into the workings in nature from which you can derive conclusion of a a supernatural creation or a natural one.
In truth science is a investigation of the workings in nature from which you then draw conclusions to how the Universe came into being: Chance-based evolution dressed up as a scientifically imaginary false deity called natural selection(mother nature!) , Guided Evolution or Creation (not by evolution)?
ReplyDeleteThe first is out of the question as Science has shown, the second could have been possible but again science has shown that God did not create it that way and the third is in actual fact the scientifically solid fact of creation NOT via evolution (at least not in living things changing in to different living things, ape and then man scenario)
(9) How history has not been presented to us correctly. How the Muslisms are the founders and creators of modern science( discoveries/ experimential method) and how they led Europe out of their Dark Ages into their Renaissance.
(10) The refutation of evolution in the Quran by weak and apologetic Muslims who do not know or willingly ignore the scientific deception which is evolution and how they load certain verses of the Quran in order to fit it in with their evolutionary preconceptions.
see How Darwinism is incompatable with the Quran
(11) The delusion of the majority opinion. In Galileos time the majority of his contemporaries believed him to be wrong but in fact he was right. Therefore being in the majority is no proof of one being in the right.
How pyschological complexes and academic peer pressure and a long deep-rooted history (over 100years) of deception that religion and science cannot co-exist in scientific and academic circles(institutions/unis) which are nearly all in the hands of evolutionists supported by secular world order machine leads to this scenario wherby Materialism is considered sacrosanct and untouchable.
This again shows how democracy is in fact made a mockery of and how the masses are brain-washed and deceived.
(12) The scientific reality of the Quran which proves irrefutably its Divine Origin see Scienceislam.com where several non-muslim scientists and their admissions
(13) I have mentioned several books which can be referred to regarding the refutation of evolution and its propaganda deceptions eg Evolution Deceit, The Dark Spell of Darwinism,Global Freemasonry,The Disaters that Darwinism Brought to Humanity, A Definitive Reply to Evolutionist Propaganda etc
THE SCIENTIFIC PROOF THAT GOD EXISTS AND THE QURAN (Last and Final Revelation/Guidance to mankind) IS INDEED HIS WORD
ReplyDeleteThe Qu’ran provides dozens of verses which precede ESTABLISHED modern scientific finding by 12-1400 years! and hence discarding any material explanations as to it’s origin.
see admissions of non-muslim scientists on Scienceislam.com
I will include only a few here which relate to (1) Origin of the Universe (2) Geology/earth
(3) Embryology/man and the Hereafter:
BIG BANG AND EXPANSION OF THE UNIVERSE AND SUB-ATOMIC PARTICLES
21:30-31 “Do not the Unbelievers see how the heavens and the earth were joined together, before We cloved them asunder? And We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?”
51:47 “With power and skill did We construct the firmament and verily it is We who is expanding it.”
34:3 “….by Him who knows the unseen- from Whom is not hidden the least atom in the heavens and the earth: Nor is there anything less than that, or greater, but it is in the record perspicuous.”
GEO-SPHERICAL SHAPE OF EARTH AND FUNCTION OF MOUNTAINS
79:30 “And the earth, moreover, has He made egg shaped.”
78:6-7 “Have We not made the earth as a wide expanse, and the mountains as pegs?”
CREATION OF MAN
86:5-7 ” Now let man but think from what he was created!He is created from a drop emitted, proceeding between the back bone and the ribs.”
32:8 “And We made his progeny from a quintessance of the nature of a fluid despised.”
75:37-39 “Was he not a drop of sperm emitted (i.e ejaculated) in lowly form?”Then did he become a clinging clot: then did (Allah) make and fashion him in due proportion.” And of him He made two sexes, male and female.”
39:6 “He makes you, in the wombs of your mothers, in stages, one after the other, in three veils of darkness.”
23:12-14 “Man did We create from a quintessance (of clay); then We placed him as (a drop of) sperm in a place of rest, firmly fixed; then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood; then of that clot We made a (foetus) lump; then We made of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh; then We developed out of it another creature. So blesses be Allah, the best to create!”
TO THOSE WHO DENY THE HEREAFTER - THE FINGERPRINTS
75:3-4 “Does man think that We cannot assemble his bones? Nay, We are able to put together in perfect order the very tip of his fingers.”
There is no compulsion in religion and i invite those sincere and objective-hearted to the truth.
As for those stubborn,arrogant, rebellious and obstinate-hearted atheists will put the following question: (call it old creationist argument or whatever)
YOU HAVE NEVER DIED BEFORE SO WHAT IS YOUR BACK-UP PLAN?!
THE QU’RAN WHICH IS THE LAST AND FINAL REVELATION/GUIDANCE TO MANKIND PROVES THAT GOD EXISTS AND THAT IT IS HIS WORD
ReplyDeleteWho says so?
ADMISSIONS OF NON-MUSLIM SCIENTISTS THEMSELVES ON: SCIENCEISLAM.COM
AND NO VERBAL ACROBATICS OR REFERRING TO COWBOY SOURCES OR SITES
CAN CHANGE THAT. IT IS A VAIN AND FUTILE ENDEAVOUR
The French Scientist of French Academy of Science Dr Maurice Bucaille ifor eg shows this in his book:
The Bible , the Qu’ran and Science examined in the light of Modern Knowledge
A Christian Dr William Campbell (Usa) wrote an attempted refutation of this book and then challenged live in Chicago 2000 Dr Zakir Naik (India) in a dialogue on:
THE QU’RAN AND THE BIBLE IN THE LIGHT OF SCIENCE - watch how Zakir Naik exposes the many clear-cut errors of the Bible and successfully defends the unassailable Qu’ran.
He has also done two other lectures on the subject:
The Qu’ran and Modern Science, compatable or incompatable?
Is the Qu’ran the God’s word?
These are just a few examples of many people who had heard about the scientific aspects of the Qu’ran and it’s total agreement with ESTABLISHED scientific facts and purposefully learned Arabic to verify it for themselves before confirming that it is indeed the truth.
LITTLE WONDER THEN THAT ISLAM CONTINUES TO BE THE FASTING SPREADING RELIGION (including significantly many people high up in society eg doctors, scientists , engineers etc) as it is the only scripture which has no mistakes, contradictions or scientific errors in it.
As for the theory of evolution, it is pointless to keep debating about it any longer because any sincere hearted person can see that it is a fairy tale kept “alive” by deception and propaganda for ideological concerns (materialism) which is an important tool for the agenda of the architects of the current Secular World secular Order i.e The Freemasons
And before doughnuts start dismissing it as some fanciful conspiracy which has been made up DO SOME RESEARCH INTO THE SUBJECT - eg see Harun Yayha’s Global Freemasonry
For more detail to see how evolutionists engage in propaganda and deceive the public see the following:
The Dark of Darwinism - How Darwinists twist the truth to turn people away from God
A Definitive Reply to evolutionist Propaganda
To keep upto-dated see: Darwinism-watch.co
The fabrication of the myth that Religion and Science cannot co-exist has been fully exposed, refuted and demolished.
It is only awaiting for it’s official announcement on the mainstream which will soon be happening God Willing as:
(1) Many people who have come to know of the deception of evolution have abandoned believing in it eg in US and Europe.
(2) Those who still “believe” in it are not doing so SINCERELY but clinging to it in vain out of sentimental insistance and stubbornness. They do not want to abandon their atheism and adherence to their wishful-thinking.
Unfortunately they are in submission to their whims and desires rather than their Creator - a foolish choice indeed when one considers that the evidence against them is solid and that they are going to die one day.
IT IS MOST HUMILIATING FOR A PERSON WHEN HE KNOWS:
(1)HE IS IN THE WRONG
(2) KNOWS THAT OTHERS KNOW THAT HE IS IN THE WRONG AND MORE IMPORTANTLY THEN THAT:
(3) IF ONE DIES IN SUCH A STATE, HOW CAN HE DENY OR EXPECT THAT HE DESERVES ANYTHING APART FROM GOOD HAPPENING TO HIM AFTERWARDS?
Adana Oktar is in trouble with the Law for alleged financial iregularities due to a Masonic Plot. The Masons have had enough of his many years of being able to operate in the open in Masonically controlled Secular Turkey.
ReplyDeleteHis monumental work of Atlas of Creation has placed the scientific deception of evolution more and more in the open which is a threat to their Secular New World order.
Anyone who has seen What Adnan Oktar’s (see his biography) has had to go through from the beginning of his mission from his enemies (marxists, masons etc) will clearly see what is going on which is
SO BLATANTLY OBVIOUS!
HE IS A TRUE OTTOMAN TURK OF OUR TIMES THAT HAS RUFFLED A FEW FEATHERS IN HIGH PLACES.
BUT IT IS TOO LATE FOR THOSE TO WHOM HE HAS CAUSED DISCOMFORT. HIS WORK IS FREE ON THE INTERNET AND THERE IS NO ESCAPE!
TRUTH AS ALWAYS STANDS FIRM AGAINST FALSEHOOD
perhaps you are again in one of your anti-reality & anti-evolutionary "delusional tirade" episodes brother,
ReplyDeleteplease just get out of the way, that people can come to God --if they freely decide so and want so--
through His magnificent
= Big bang creation (21/30 & 51/47)
= Evolutionary creation (21/30 & 71/13-14 & 6/133 & 76/1 & ...)
= Reality of Matter (14/19 & 88/17-20 & ...)
concepts, and all the other scientific miraculous statements of the Scripture (all of which have been revealed upon some "realistic" humble believers
who in the first place do believe that
= Matter is NOT an "Illusion,"
but a TOTAL "Reality" that is truthfully created by our God, outside of us.
----------
anti-crusader said:
and you should also see this
video, to better understand
the "wolf coming under sheep's clothing" issue.
and how some --worldwide-- respected Islamic Scholars may have already exposed this "wolf" and warned the believers rightfully against his Gnostic & Evangelical Crusader influenced delusional ideology:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-vdG6MdXV0&feature=related
comment by Anti-Crusader
----------
**********
evolutionary creation said:
and as i –and some other friends– may have already answered all your basic ill-based
misled/misleading arguments against
= the Reality of Matter, outside of us, issue,
based on valid Quranic & Scientific proofs and perspective;
(please see later at: Reuters, Faithworld, under “Harun’s …book pops up in Scotland,” topic;
comments section: comments by “Musa-Moses” at (May 16, 6:37) (May 17, 10:09) …
= the factuality of Evolutionary Creation issue,
based on valid Quranic & Scientific proofs and perspective;
(please see later at: Reuters, Faithworld, under “Harun’s …book pops up in Scotland,” topic;
comments section: comments by "Musa-Moses" and then “Evolutionary Creation” at (May 16, 6:37) (May 17, 10:09) …
(May 27, 10:21) (May 30, 1:34) …
(June 16, 9:54) (June 17, 3:58) …
= the hidden (Evangelical) Agenda behind worldwide --pretentious-- anti secular/masonic propaganda,
based on solid quotational proofs and perspective;
(please see later at: Reuters, Faithworld, under “Harun’s …book pops up in Scotland,” topic;
comments section: comments by “Evolutionary Creation” at (June 8, 9:48) (June 7, 9:07) …
and as i have also already expressed before, i will not go into any further argument with you on these subjects here. you can repeat yourself (= your Gnostic & Evangelical influenced ill-based & wrongful & biased arguments) as long as you want…
i may understand your
–pseudo-religious/politic– motives.
may God guide you from the darknesses (= the dark sayings of Gnostic & Evangelical influenced false Mahdees) into the Light (= the bright teachings of God-Sent true Mahdee: Muhammad & Quran), if He ever wills so, in the future. (28/56) & (7/30 & 52/15-16 & 5/17 & …)
comment by Evolutionary Creation
**********
so brother please do not use here so many "realistic" humble believers' valuable discoveries in Nature and Scripture,
just to "exploit" them after that
for the convenience of your Gnostic & Evangelical influenced fanatic "Anti-Reality" & "Anti-Evolutionary" Crusader agenda,
and please do not make our Religion seem "absurd" in the eyes of so many educated & intellectual people by your delusional "anti-reality" & "anti-evolutionary" tirades here.
if you truly love God, please just do not block the way,
that people can come to God, if they freely decide so and want so,
and please pray for the healing of your "Crusader Puppet"
false hero, if it is ever possible! (Maaedah 17& Anaam 112-113) (Aaraf 30 & 186)
and to see the real Gnostic Christian Masters behind this
ReplyDeletepseudo-islamic "crusader puppet" hero,
and their "common" delusional ideology,
you can go to this web-site and carefully read their eccentric
"ANTI-REALITY" arguments first:
http://www.stargods.org/WhatIsReality.html
and you should also see then Musa-Moses brother's critical comments on this issue
at comments section: (May 16, 6:37) (May 17, 10:09)
at this site:
http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/04/07/harun-yahyas-islamic-creationist-book-pops-up-in-scotland/
to better understand the deep MESSIAH DAJJAL connection with this delusional CRUSADER ideology.
*******************
and to see the real Evangelical Christian Masters behind this pseudo-islamic "crusader puppet" hero,
and their "common" misleading ideology,
you can go to this web-site and carefully read their fanatic
ANTI-EVOLUTIONARY arguments first:
http://www.creationresearch.org/about_crs.htm
and you should also see then Musa-Moses brother's critical comments on this issue
at comments section: (May 16, 6:37) (May 17, 10:09)
at this site:
http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/04/07/harun-yahyas-islamic-creationist-book-pops-up-in-scotland/
to better understand the deep MESSIAH DAJJAL connection with this delusional CRUSADER ideology.
and to see the real Evangelical Christian Masters behind this
ReplyDeletepseudo-islamic "crusader puppet" hero,
and their "common" provocative & deceptive ideology,
you can go to this web-site and carefully read their "pretentious"
ANTI-MASONIC tirades first:
http://bibleprobe.com/freemasonry.htm
and you should also see then "Evolutionary Creation" brother's critical comments on this issue, at comments section: (June 8, 9:48)
at this site:
http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/04/07/harun-yahyas-islamic-creationist-book-pops-up-in-scotland/
to better understand the deep MESSIAH DAJJAL connection with this deceptive & provocative CRUSADER ideology.
Calling the Qur’an amazing is not something done only by Muslims, who have an appreciation for the book and who are pleased with it; it has been labeled amazing by non-Muslims as well. In fact, even people who hate Islam very much have still called it amazing.
ReplyDeleteOne thing which surprises non-muslims who are examining the book very closely is that the Qur’an does not appear to them to be what they expected. What they assume is that they have an old book which came fourteen centuries ago from the Arabian desert; and they expect that the book should look something like that - an old book from the desert. And then they find out that it does not resemble what they expected at all. Additionally, one of the first things that some people assume is that because it is an old book which comes from the desert, it should talk about the desert. Well the Qur’an does talk about the desert - some of its imagery describes the desert; but it also talks about the sea - what it’s like to be in a storm on the sea.
Some years ago, the story came to us in Toronto about a man who was in the merchant marine and made his living on the sea. A Muslim gave him a translation of the Qur’an to read. The merchant marine knew nothing about the history of Islam but was interested in reading the Qur’an. When he finished reading it, he brought it back to the Muslim and asked, “This Muhammed, was he a sailor?” He was impressed at how accurately the Qur’an describes a storm on a sea. When he was told, “No as a matter of fact, Muhammed lived in the desert,” that was enough for him. He embraced Islam on the spot. He was so impressed with the Qur’an’s description because he had been in a storm on the sea, and he knew that whoever had written that description had also been in a storm on the sea. The description of “a wave, over it a wave, over it clouds” was not what someone imagining a storm on a sea to be like would have written; rather, it was written by someone who knew what a storm on the sea was like. This is one example of how the Qur’an is not tied to a certain place and time. Certainly, the scientific ideas expressed in it also do not seem to originate from the desert fourteen centuries ago.
Many centuries before the onset of Muhammed’s Prophethood, there was a well-known theory of atomism advanced by the Greek philosopher, Democritus. He and the people who came after him assumed that matter consists of tiny, indestructible, indivisible particles called atoms. The Arabs too, used to deal in the same concept; in fact, the Arabic word dharrah commonly referred to the smallest particle known to man. Now, modern science has discovered that this smallest unit of matter (i.e., the atom, which has all of the same properties as its element) can be split into its component parts. This is a new idea, a development of the last century; yet, interestingly enough, this information had already been documented in the Qur’an which states:
” He [i.e., Allah] is aware of an atom’s weight in the heavens and on the earth and even anything smaller than that…”
Undoubtedly, fourteen centuries ago that statement would have looked unusual, even to an Arab. For him, the dharrah was the smallest thing there was. Indeed, this is proof, that the Qur’an is not outdated.
Another example of what one might expect to find in an”old book” that touches upon the subject of health or medicine is outdated remedies or cures. Various historical sources state that the Prophet gave some advice about health and hygiene, yet most of these pieces of advice are not contained in the Qur’an. At first glance, to the non-Muslims this appears to be a negligent omission. They cannot understand why Allah would not “include” such helpful information in the Qur’an. Some Muslims attempt to explain this absence with the following argument: “Although the Prophet’s advice was sound and applicable to the time in which he lived, Allah, in His infinite wisdom, knew that there would come later medical and scientific advances which would make the Prophet’s advice appear outdated. When later discoveries occurred, people might say that such information contradicted that which the Prophet had given. Thus, since Allah would never allow any opportunity for the non-Muslims to claim that the Qur’an contradicts itself or the teachings of the Prophet, He only included in the Qur’an information and examples which could stand the test of time.”
However, when one examines the true realities of the Qur’an in terms of its existence as a divine revelation, the entire matter is quickly brought into its proper perspective, and the error in such argumentation becomes clear and understandable. It must be understood that the Qur’an is a divine revelation, and as such, all information in it is of divine origin. Allah revealed the Qur’an from Himself. It is the words of Allah, which existed before creation, and thus nothing can be added, subtracted or altered. In essence, the Qur’an existed and was complete before the creation of Prophet Muhammed, so it could not possibly contain any of the Prophet’s own words or advice. An inclusion of such information would clearly contradict the purpose for which the Qur’an exists, compromise its authority and render it inauthentic as a divine revelation.
Consequently, there was no “home remedies” in the Qur’an which one could claim to be outdated; nor does it contain any man’s view about what is beneficial to health, what food is best to eat, or what will cure this or that disease. In fact, the Qur’an only mentions one item dealing with medical treatment, and it is not in dispute by anyone. It states that in honey there is healing. And certainly, I do not think that there is anyone who will argue with that!
If one assumes that the Qur’an is the product of a man’s mind, then one would expect it to reflect some of what was going on in the mind of the man who “composed” it. In fact, certain encyclopedias and various books clam that the Qur’an was the product of hallucinations that Muhammed underwent. If these claims are true - if it indeed originated from some psychological problems in Muhammed’s mind - then evidence of this would be apparent in the Qur’an. Is there such evidence? In order to determine whether or not there is, one must first identify what things would have been going on in his mind at that time and then search for these thoughts and reflections in the Qur’an.
It is common knowledge that Muhammad had a very difficult life. All of his daughters died before him except one, and he had a wife of several years who was dear and important to him, who not only proceeded him in death at a very critical period of his life. As a matter of fact, she must have been quite a woman because when the first revelation came to him, he ran home to her afraid. Certainly, even today one would have a hard time trying to find an Arab who would tell you, “I was so afraid that I ran home to my wife.” They just aren’t that way. Yet Muhammed felt comfortable enough with his wife to be able to do that. That’s how influential and strong woman she was. Although these examples are only a few of the subjects that would have been on Muhammed’s mind, they are sufficient in intensity to prove my point. The Qur’an does not mention any of these things - not the death of his children, not the death of his beloved companion and wife, not his fear of the initial revelations, which he so beautifully shared with his wife - nothing; yet, these topics must have hurt him, bothered him, and caused him pain and grief during periods of his psychological reflections, then these subjects, as well as others, would be prevalent or at least mentioned throughout.
A truly scientific approach to the Qur’an is possible because the Qur’an offers something that is not offered by other religious scriptures, in particular, and other religions, in general. It is what scientists demand. Today there are many people who have ideas and theories about how the universe works. These people are all over the place, but the scientific community does not even bother to listen to them. This is because within the last century the scientific community has demanded a test of falsification. They say, “If you have theory, do not bother us with it unless you bring with that theory a way for us to prove whether you are wrong or not.”
Such a test was exactly why the scientific community listened to Einstein towards the beginning of the century. He came with a new theory and said, “I believe the universe works like this; and here are three ways to prove whether I am wrong!”. So the scientific community subjected his theory to the tests, and within six years it passed all three. Of course, this does not prove that he was great, but it proves that he deserved to be listened to because he said, “This is my idea; and if you want to try to prove me wrong, do this or try that.” This is exactly what the Qur’an has - falsification tests. Some are old (in that they have already been proven true), and some still exist today. Basically it states, “If this book is not what it claims to be, then all you have to do is this or this or this to prove that it is false.” Of course, in 1400 years no one has been able to do “This or this or this, ” and thus it is still considered true and authentic. I suggest to you that the next time you get into dispute with someone about Islam and he claims that he has the truth and that you are in darkness, you leave all other arguments at first and make this suggestion. Ask him, “Is there any falsification test in your religion? Is there anything in your religion that would prove you are wrong if I could prove to you that it exists - anything?” Well, I can promise right now that people will not have anything - no test, no proof, nothing! This is because they do not carry around the idea that they should not only present what they believe but should also offer others a chance to prove they’re wrong. However, Islam does that. A perfect example of how Islam provides man with a chance to verify it authenticity and “prove it wrong” occurs in the 4th chapter. And quiet honestly, I was surprised when I first discovered this challenge. It states:
“Do they not consider the Qur’an? Had it been from any other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancy.”
This is a clear challenge to the non-Muslim.Basically, it invites him to find a mistake. As a matter of fact, the seriousness and difficulty of the challenge aside, the actual presentation of such a challenge in the first place is not even in human nature and is inconsistent with man’s personality. One doesn’t take an exam in school after finishing the exam, write a note to the instructor at the end saying, “This exam is perfect. There are no mistakes in it. Find one if you can!”. One just doesn’t do that. The teacher would not sleep until he found a mistake! And yet this is the way the Qur’an approaches people. Another interesting attitude that exists in the Qur’an repeatedly deals with its advice to the reader. The Qur’an informs that reader about different facts and then gives the advice: “If you want to know more about this or that, or if you doubt what is said, then you should ask those who have knowledge.” This too is a surprising attitude. It is not usual to have a book that comes from someone without training in geography, botany, biology, etc., who discusses these subjects and then advises the reader to ask men of knowledge if he doubts anything.
Yet in every age there have been Muslims who have followed the advice of the Qur’an and made surprising discoveries. If one looks to the works of Muslim scientists if many centuries ago, one will find them full of quotations from the Qur’an. These works state that they did research in such a place, looking for something. And they affirm that the reason they looked in such and such a place was that the Qur’an pointed them in that direction. For example, the Qur’an mentions man’s origin and then tells the reader, “Research it!” It gives the reader a hint where to look and then states that one should find out more about it. This is the kind of thing that Muslims today largely seem to overlook - but not always, as illustrated in the following example. A few years ago, a group of men in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia collected all if the verses in the Qur’an which discuss embryology - the growth of the human being in the womb. They said, “Here is what the Qur’an says. Is it the truth?” In essence, they took the advice of the Qur’an: “Ask the men who know.” They chose, as it happened, a non-Muslim who is a professor of embryology at the University of Toronto. His name is Keith Moore, and he is the author of textbooks on embryology - a world expert on the subject. They invited him to Riyadh and said, “This is what the Qur’an says about your subject. Is it true? What can you tell us?” While he was in Riyadh, they gave him all of the help that he needed in translation and all of the cooperation for which he asked. And he was so surprised at what he found that he changed his textbooks. In fact, in the second edition of one of his books, called Before we are born… in the second edition about the history of embryology, he included some material that was not in the first edition because of what he found in the Qur’an. Truly this illustrates that the Qur’an was ahead of its time and that those who believe in the Qur’an know what other people do not know.
I had the pleasure of interviewing Dr. Keith Moore for a television presentation, and we talked a great deal about this - it was illustrated by slides and so on. He mentioned that some of the things that the Qur’an states about the growth of the human being were not known until thirty years ago. In fact, he said that one item in particular - the Qur’an’s description of the human being as a “leech-like clot” (’alaqah) at one stage - was new to him; but when he checked on it, he found that it was true, and so he added it to his book. He said, “I never thought of that before,” and he went to the zoology department and asked for a picture of a leech. When he found that it looked just like the human embryo, he decided to include both pictures in one of his textbooks. Dr. Moore also wrote a book on clinical embryology, and when he presented this information in Toronto, it caused quite a stir throughout Canada. It was on the front pages of some of the newspapers across Canada, and some of the headlines were quite funny. For instance, one headline read: “SURPRISING THING FOUND IN ANCIENT BOOK!”! It seems obvious from this example that people do not clearly understand what it is all about. As a matter of fact, one newspaper reporter asked Professor Moore, “Don’t you think That maybe the Arabs might have known about these things - the description of the embryo, its appearance and how it changes and grows? Maybe there were not scientists, but maybe they did something crude dissections on their own - carved up people and examined these things.”
The professor immediately pointed out to him that he [i.e., the reporter] had missed a very important point - all of the slides of the embryo that had been shown and had been projected in the film had come from pictures taken through a microscope. He said, “It does not matter if someone had tried to discover embryology fourteen centuries ago, they could not have seen it!”. All of the descriptions in the Qur’an of the appearance of the embryo are of the item when it is still too small to see with the eye; therefore, one needs a microscope to see it. Since such a device had only been around for little more than two hundred years, Dr. Moore taunted, “Maybe fourteen centuries ago someone secretly had a microscope and did this research, making no mistakes anywhere. Then he somehow taught Muhammad and convinced him to put this information in his book. Then he destroyed his equipment and kept it a secret forever. Do you believe that? You really should not unless you bring some proof because it is such a ridiculous theory.” In fact, when he was asked “How do you explain this information in the Qur’an?” Dr. Moore’s reply was, “It could only have been divinely revealed.”!
Although the aforementioned example of man researching information contained in the Qur’an deals with a non-Muslim, it is still valid because he is one of those who is knowledgeable in the subject being researched. Had some layman claimed that what the Qur’an says about embryology is true, then one would not necessarily have to accept his word. However, because of the high position, respect, and esteem man gives scholars, one naturally assumes that if they research a subject and arrive at a conclusion based on that research, then the conclusion is valid. One of Professor Moore’s colleagues, Marshall Johnson, deals extensively with geology at the University of Toronto.
He became very interested in the fact that the Qur’an’s statements about embryology are accurate, and so he asked Muslims to collect everything contained in the Qur’an which deals with his specialty. Again people were very surprised at the findings. Since there are a vast number subjects discussed in the Qur’an, it would certainly require a large amount of time to exhaust each subject. It suffices for the purpose of this discussion to state that the Qur’an makes very clear and concise statements about various subjects while simultaneously advising the reader to verify the authenticity of these statements with research by scholars in those subjects. And as illustrated by the Qur’an has clearly emerged authentic. Undoubtedly, there is an attitude in the Qur’an which is not found anywhere else. It is interesting how when the Qur’an provides information, it often tells the reader, “You did not know this before.” Indeed, there is no scripture that exists which makes that claim. All of the other ancient writings and scriptures that people have, do give a lot of information, but they always state where the information came from.
For example, when the Bible discusses ancient history, it states that this king lived here, this one fought in a certain battle, another one had so may sons, etc. Yet it always stipulates that if you want more information, then you should read the book of so and so because that is where the information came from. In contrast to this concept, the Qur’an provides the reader with information and states that this information is something new. Of course, there always exists the advice to research the information provided and verify its authenticity. It is interesting that such a concept was never challenged by non-Muslims fourteen centuries ago. Indeed, the Makkans who hated the Muslims, and time and time again they heard such revelations claiming to bring new information; yet, they never spoke up and said, “This is not new. We know where Muhammad got this information. We learned this at school.”
They could never challenge its authenticity because it really was new! In concurrence with the advice given in the Qur’an to research information (even if it is new), when ‘Umar was caliph, he chose a group of men and sent them to find the wall of Dhul-Qarnayn. Before the Qur’anic revelation, the Arabs had never heard of such a wall, but because the Qur’an described it, they were able to discover it. As a matter of fact, it is now located in what is called Durbend in the Soviet Union. It must be stressed here that the Qur’an is accurate about many, many things, but accuracy does not necessarily mean that a book is a divine revelation. In fact, accuracy is only one of the criteria for divine revelations.
For instance, the telephone book is accurate, but that does not mean that it is divinely revealed. The real problem lies in that one must establish some proof of the source the Qur’an’s information. The emphasis is on the reader. One cannot simply deny the Qur’an’s authenticity without sufficient proof. If, indeed, one finds a mistake, then he has the right to disqualify it. This is exactly what the Qur’an encourages. Once a man came up to me after a lecture I delivered in South Africa. He was very angry about what I had said, and so he claimed, “I am going to go home tonight and find a mistake in the Qur’an.” Of course, I said, “Congratulations. That is the most intelligent thing that you have said.” Certainly, this is the approach Muslims need to take with those who doubt the Qur’an’s authenticity, because the Qur’an itself offers the same challenge. An inevitably, after accepting it’s challenge and discovering that it is true, these people will come to believe it because they could not disqualify it. In essence, the Qur’an earns their respect because they themselves have had to verify its authenticity. An essential fact that cannot be reiterated enough concerning the authenticity of the Qur’an is that one’s inability to explain a phenomenon himself does not require his acceptance of the phenomenon’s existence or another person’s explanation of it.
Specifically, just because one cannot explain something does not mean that one has to accept someone else’s explanation. However, the person’s refusal of other explanations reverts the burden of proof back on himself to find a feasible answer. This general theory applies to numerous concepts in life, but fits most wonderfully with the Qur’anic challenge, for it creates a difficulty for one who says, “I do not believe it.” At the onset of refusal one immediately has an obligation to find an explanation himself if he feels others’ answers are inadequate. In fact, in one particular Qur’anic verse which I have always seen mistranslated into English, Allah mentions a man who heard the truth explained to him. It states that he was derelict in his duty because after he heard the information, he left without checking the verity of what he had heard. In other words, one is guilty if he hears something and does not research it and check to see whether it is true. One is supposed to process all information and decide what is garbage to be thrown out and what is worthwhile information to be kept and benefited from at a later date. One cannot just let it rattle around in his head. It must be put in the proper categories and approached from that point of view. For example, if the information is still speculatory, then one must discern whether it’s closer to being true or false. But if all of the facts have been presented, then one must decide absolutely between these two options. And even if one is not positive about the authenticity of the information, he is still required to process all of the information and make the admission that he just does not know for sure. Although this last point appears to be futile, in actuality, it is beneficial to the arrival at a positive conclusion at a later time in that it forces the person to at least recognize, research and review the facts. This familiarity with the information will give the person “the edge” when future discoveries are made and additional information is presented. The important thing is that one deals with the facts and does not simply discard them out of empathy and disinterest.
The real certainty about the truthfulness of the Qur’an is evident in the confidence which is prevalent throughout it; and this confidence comes from a different approach - “Exhausting the Alternatives.” In essence, the Qur’an states, “This book is a divine revelation; if you do not believe that, then what is it?” In other words, the reader is challenged to come up with some other explanation. Here is a book made of paper and ink. Where did it come from? It says it is a divine revelation; if it is not, then what is its source? The interesting fact is that no one has with an explanation that works. In fact, all alternatives have bee exhausted. As has been well established by non-Muslims, these alternatives basically are reduces to two mutually exclusive schools of thought, insisting on one or the other. On one hand, there exists a large group of people who have researched the Qur’an for hundreds of years and who claim, “One thing we know for sure - that man, Muhammad, thought he was a prophet. He was crazy!” They are convinced that Muhammad (SAW) was fooled somehow. Then on the other hand, there is another group which alleges, “Because of this evidence, one thing we know for sure is that that man, Muhammad, was a liar!” Ironically, these two groups never seem to get together without contradicting. In fact, many references on Islam usually claim both theories. They start out by saying that Muhammad (SAW) was crazy and then end by saying that he was a liar. They never seem to realize that he could not have been both!
For example, if one is deluded and really thinks that he is a prophet, then he does not sit up late at night planning, “How will I fool the people tomorrow so that they think I am a prophet?” He truly believes that he is a prophet, and he trusts that the answer will be given to him by revelation. As a matter of fact, a great deal of the Qur’an came in answer to questions. Someone would ask Muhammad (SAW) a question, and the revelation would come with the answer to it. Certainly, if one is crazy and believes that an angel put words in his ear, then when someone asks him a question, he thinks that the angel will give him the answer. Because he is crazy, he really thinks that. He does not tell someone to wait a short while and then run to his friends and ask them, “Does anyone know the answer?” This type of behavior is characteristic of one who does not believe that he is a prophet. What the non-Muslims refuse to accept is that you cannot have it both ways. One can be deluded, or he can be a liar. He can be either one or neither, but he certainly cannot be both! The emphasis is on the fact that they are unquestionably mutually exclusive personal traits.
The following scenario is a good example of the kind of circle that non-Muslims go around in constantly. If you ask one of them, “What is the origin of the Qur’an?” He tells you that it originated from the mind of a man who was crazy. Then you ask him, “If it came from his head, then where did he get the information contained in it? Certainly the Qur’an mentions many things with which the Arabs were not familiar.” So in order to explain the fact which you bring him, he changes his position and says, “Well, maybe he was not crazy. Maybe some foreigner brought him the information. So he lied and told people that he was a prophet.” At this point then you have to ask him, “If Muhammad was a liar, then where did he get his confidence? Why did he behave as though he really thought he was a prophet?” Finally backed into a corner, like a cat he quickly lashes out with the first response that comes to his mind. Forgetting that he has already exhausted that possibility, he claims, “Well, maybe he wasn’t a liar. He was probably crazy and really thought that he was a prophet.” And thus he begins the futile circle again.
As has already been mentioned, there is much information contained in the Qur’an whose source cannot be attributed to anyone other than Allah. For example, who told Muhammad about the wall of Dhul-Qarnayn - a place hundreds of miles to the north? Who told him about embryology? When people assemble facts such as these, if they are not willing to attribute their existence to a divine source, they automatically resort to the assumption someone brought Muhammad the information and that he used it to fool the people. However, this theory can easily be disproved with one simple question: “If Muhammad was a liar, where did he get his confidence? Why did he tell some people out right to their face what others could never say?” Such confidence depends completely upon being convinced that one has a true divine revelation. For example, the Prophet (SAW) had an uncle by the name of Abu Lahab. This man hated Islam to such an extent that he used to follow the Prophet around in order to discredit him. If Abu Lahab saw the Prophet (SAW) speaking to a stranger, he would wait until they parted and then would go to the stranger and ask him, “What did he tell you? Did he say, ‘Black.’? Well, it’s white. Did he say, ‘Morning.’? Well, it’s night.” He faithfully said the exact opposite of whatever he heard Muhammad (SAW) and the Muslims say. However, about ten years before Abu Lahab died, a little chapter in the Qur’an was revealed to him. It distinctly stated that he would go to the Fire (i.e., Hell). In other words, it affirmed that he would never become a Muslim and would therefore be condemned forever. For ten years all Abu Lahab had to do was say, “I heard that it has been revealed to Muhammad that I will never change - that I will never become a Muslim and will enter the Hellfire. Well I want to become a Muslim now. How do you like that? What do you think of your divine revelation now?” But he never did that. And yet, that is exactly the kind of behavior one would have expected from him since he always sought to contradict Islam. In essence, Muhammad (SAW) said, “You hate me and you want to finish me? Here, say these words, and I am finished. Come on, say them!” But Abu Lahab never said them. Ten years! And in all that time he never accepted Islam or even became sympathetic to the Islamic cause. How could Muhammad possibly have known for sure that Abu Lahab would fulfill the Qur’anic revelation if he (i.e., Muhammad) was not truly the messenger of Allah? How could he possibly have been so confident as to give someone 10 years to discredit his claim of Prophethood? The only answer is that he was Allah’s messenger; for in order to put forth suck a risky challenge, one has to be entirely convinced that he has a divine revelation.
Another example of the confidence which Muhammad (SAW) had in his own Prophethood and consequently in the divine protection of himself and his message is when he left Makkah and hid in a cave with Abu Bakr during their emigration to Madeenah. The two clearly saw people coming to kill them, and Abu Bakr was afraid. Certainly, if Muhammad (SAW) was a liar, a forger and one who was trying to fool the people into believing that he was a prophet, one would have expected him to say in such a circumstance to his friend, “Hey, Abu Bakr, see if you can find a back way out of this cave.” Or “Squat down in that corner over there and keep quiet.” Yet, in fact, what he said to Abu Bakr clearly illustrated his confidence. He told him, “Relax! Allah is with us, and Allah will save us!”
Now, if one knows that he is fooling the people, where does one get this kind of attitude? In fact, such a frame of mind is not characteristic of a liar or a forger at all. So, as has been previously mentioned, the non-Muslims go around and around in a circle, searching for a way out - some way to explain the findings in the Qur’an without attributing them to their proper source. On one hand, they tell you on Monday, Wednesday and Friday, “The man was a liar,” and on the other hand, on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday they tell you, “He was crazy.” What they refuse to accept is that one cannot have it both ways; yet they refuse to accept is that one cannot have it both ways; yet they need both excuses to explain the information in the Qur’an.
About seven years ago, I had a minister over to my home. In the particular room which we were sitting there was a Qur’an on the table, face down, and so the minister was not aware of which book it was. In the midst of a discussion, I pointed to the Qur’an and said, “I have confidence in that book.” Looking at the Qur’an but not knowing which book it was , he replied, “Well, I tell you, if that book is not the Bible, it was written by a man!” In response to his statement, I said, “Let me tell you something about what is in that book.” And in just three to four minutes I related to him a few things contained in the Qur’an. After just those three or four minutes, he completely changed his position and declared, “You are right. A man did not write that book. The Devil wrote it!” Indeed, possessing such an attitude is very unfortunate - for many reasons. For one thing, it is a very quick and cheap excuse. It is an instant exit out of an uncomfortable situation. As a matter of fact, there is a famous story in the Bible that mentions how one day some of the Jews were witnesses when Jesus raised a man from the dead. The man had been dead for four days, and when Jesus arrived, he simply said, “Get up!” and the man arose and walked away. At such a sight, some of the Jews who were watching said disbelievingly, “This is the Devil. The Devil helped him!” Now this story is rehearsed often in churches all over the world, and people cry big tears over it, saying, “Oh, if I had been there, I would not have been as stupid as the Jews!” Yet ironically, these people do exactly what the Jews did when in just three minutes you show them only a small part of the Qur’an and all they can say is, “Oh, the Devil did it. The devil wrote that book!”. Because they are truly backed into a corner and have no other viable answer, they resort to the quickest and cheapest excuse available. Another Example of people’s use of this weak stance can be found in the Makkans’ explanation of the source of Muhammed’s message. They used to say, “The devils bring Muhammad that Qur’an!” But just as with every other suggestion made, the Qur’an gives the answer. One verse in particular states:
“And they say, ‘Surely he is possessed [by jinn], ‘but it [i.e., the Qur’an] is not except a reminder to the worlds.”
Thus it gives an argument in reply to such a theory. In fact, there are many arguments in the Qur’an in reply to the suggestion that devils brought Muhammad (SAW) his message. For example, in the 26th chapter Allah clearly affirms:
“No evil ones have brought it [i.e., this revelation] down. It would neither be fitting for them, nor would they be able. Indeed they have been removed far from hearing.”
And in another place in the Qur’an, Allah instructs us:
“So when you recite the Qur’an seek refuge in Allah from Shaytaan, the rejected.”
Now is this how Satan writes a book? He tells one, “Before you read my book, ask God to save you from me.”? This is very, very tricky. Indeed, a man could write something like this, but would Satan do this? Many people clearly illustrate that they cannot come to one conclusion on this subject. On one hand, they claim that Satan would not do such a thing and that even if he could, God would not allow him to; yet, on the other hand, they also believe that Satan is only that much less than God. In essence they allege that the Devil can probably do whatever God can do. And as a result, when they look at the Qur’an, even as surprised as they are as to how amazing it is, they still insist, “The Devil did this!” Thanks be to Allah, Muslims do not have that attitude. Although Satan may have some abilities, they are a long way separated from the abilities of Allah. And no Muslim is a Muslim unless he believes that. It is common knowledge even among non-Muslims that the Devil can easily make mistakes, and it would be expected that he would contradict himself if and when he wrote a book. For indeed, the Qur’an states:
“Do they not consider the Qur’an? Had it been from any other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancy.”
In conjunction with the excuses that non-Muslims advance in futile attempts to justify unexplainable verses in the Qur’an, there is another attack often rendered which seems to be a combination of the theories that Muhammad (SAW) was crazy and a liar. Basically, these people propose that Muhammad was insane, and as a result of his delusion, he lied to and misled people. There is a name for this in psychology. It is referred to as mythomania. It means simply that one tells lies and then believes them. This is what the non-Muslims say Muhammad (SAW) suffered from. But the only problem with this proposal is that one suffering from mythomania absolutely cannot deal with facts, and yet the whole Qur’an is based entirely upon facts. Everything contained in it can be researched and established as true. Since facts are such a problem for a mythomaniac, when a psychologist tries to treat one suffering from that condition, he continually confronts him with facts. For example, if one is mentally ill and claims, “I am the king of England,” a psychologist does not say to him “No you aren’t. You are crazy!” He just does not do that. Rather, he confronts him with facts and says, “O.K., you say you are the king of England. So tell me where the queen is today. And where is your prime minister? And where are your guards?” Now, when the man has trouble trying to deal with these questions, he tries to make excuses, saying Uh… the queen… she has gone to her mother’s. Uh… the prime minister… well he died.” And eventually he is cured because he cannot deal with the facts. If the psychologist continues confronting him with enough facts, finally he faces the reality and says, “I guess I am not the king of England.” The Qur’an approaches everyone who reads it in very much the same way a psychologist treats his mythomania patient. There is a verse in the Qur’an which states:
“Oh mankind, there has come to you an admonition [i.e., the Qur’an] from your Lord and a healing for what is in the hearts - and guidance and mercy for the believers.”
At first glance, this statement appears vague, but the meaning of this verse is clear when one views it in light of the aforementioned example. Basically, one is healed of his delusions by reading the Qur’an. In essence, it is therapy. It literally cures deluded people by confronting them with facts. A prevalent attitude throughout the Qur’an is one which says, “Oh mankind, you say such and such about this; but what about such and such? How can you say this when you know that?” And so forth. It forces one to consider what is relevant and what matters while simultaneously healing one of the delusions that the facts presented to mankind by Allah can easily be explained away with flimsy theories and excuses. It is this very sort of thing - confronting people with facts - that had captured the attention of many non-Muslims. In fact, there exists a very interesting reference concerning this subject in the New Catholic Encyclopedia.
In an article under the subject of the Qur’an, the Catholic Church states, “Over the centuries, many theories have been offered as to the origin of the Qur’an… Today no sensible man accepts any of these theories.”!! Now here is the age-old Catholic Church, which has been around for so many centuries, denying these futile attempts to explain away the Qur’an. Indeed, the Qur’an is a problem for the Catholic Church. It states that it is revelation, so they study it. Certainly, they would love to find proof that it is not, but they cannot. They cannot find a viable explanation. But at least they are honest in their research and do not accept the first unsubstantiated interpretation which comes along. The Church states that in fourteen centuries it has not yet been presented a sensible explanation. At least it admits that the Qur’an is not an easy subject to dismiss. Certainly, other people are much less honest. They quickly say, “Oh, the Qur’an came from here. The Qur’an came from there.” And they do not even examine the credibility of what they are stating most of the time. Of course, such a statement by the Catholic Church leaves the everyday Christian in some difficulty. It just may be that he has his own ideas as to the origin of the Qur’an, but as a single member of the Church, he cannot really act upon his own theory. Such an action would be contrary to the obedience, allegiance and loyalty which the Church demands. By virtue of his membership, he must accept what the Catholic Church declares without question and establish its teachings as part of his everyday routine. So, in essence, if the Catholic Church as a whole is saying, “Do not listen to these unconfirmed reports about the Qur’an,” then what can be said about the Islamic point of view? Even non-Muslims are admitting that there is something to the Qur’an - something that has to be acknowledged - then why are people so stubborn and defensive and hostile when Muslims advance the very same theory? This is certainly something for those with mind a to contemplate - something to ponder for those of understanding!
Recently, the leading intellectual in the Catholic Church - a man by the name of Hans - studied the Qur’an and gave his opinion of what he had read. This man has been around for some time, and he is highly respected in the Catholic Church, and after careful scrutiny, he reported his findings, concluding, “God has spoken to man through the man, Muhammad.” Again this is a conclusion arrived at by a non-Muslim source - the very leading intellectual of the Catholic Church himself! I do not think that the Pope agrees with him, but nonetheless, the opinion of such a noted, repute public figure must carry some weight in defense of the Muslim position. He must be applauded for facing the reality that the Qur’an is not something which can be easily pushed aside and that, in fact God is the source of these words. As is evident from the aforementioned information, all of the possibilities have been exhausted, so the chance of finding another possibility of dismissing the Qur’an is nonexistent. For if the book is not a revelation, then it is a deception; and if it is a deception, one must ask, “What is its origin” And where does it deceive us?” Indeed, the true answers to these questions shed light on the Qur’an’s authenticity and silence the bitter unsubstantiated claims of the unbelievers. Certainly, if people are going to insist that the Qur’an is a deception, then they must bring forth evidence to support such a claim. The burden of proof is on them, not us! One is never supposed to advance a theory without sufficient corroborating facts; so I say to them, “Show me one deception! Show me where the Qur’an deceives me! Show me, otherwise, don’t say that it is a deception!” An interesting characteristic of the Qur’an is how it deals with surprising phenomena which relate not only to the past but to modern times as well. In essence, the Qur’an is not and old problem. It is still a problem even today - a problem to the non-Muslims that is. For everyday, every week, every year brings more and more evidence that the Qur’an is a force to be contended with - that its authenticity is no longer to be challenged! For example, one verse in the Qur’an reads;
“Do not the unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together, then We clove them asunder, and made from water every living thing? Will they not then believe?”
Ironically, this very information is exactly what they awarded the 1973 Noble Prize for - to a couple of unbelievers. The Qur’an reveals the origin of the universe - how it began from one piece - and mankind continues to verify this revelation, even up to now. Additionally, the fact that all life originated from water would not have been an easy thing to convince people of fourteen centuries ago. Indeed, if 1400 years ago you had stood in the desert and told someone, “All of this, you see (pointing to yourself), is made up of mostly water,” no one would have believed you. Proof of that was not available until the invention of the microscope. They had to wait to find out that cytoplasm, the basic substance of the cell, is made-up of 80% water. Nonetheless, the evidence did come, and once again the Qur’an stood the test of time. In reference to the falsification tests mentioned earlier, it is interesting to note that they, too, relate to both the past and the present. Some of them were used as illustrations of Allah’s omnipotence and knowledge, while others continue to stand as challenges to the present day. An example of the former is the statement made in the Qur’an about Abu Lahab. It clearly illustrates that Allah, the Knower of the Unseen, knew that Abu Lahab would never change his ways and accept Islam. Thus Allah dictated that he would be condemned to the Hellfire forever. Such a chapter was both an illustration of Allah’s divine wisdom and a warning to those who were like Abu Lahab.
An interesting example of the latter type of falsification tests contained in the Qur’an is the verse which mentions the relationship between the Muslims and the Jews. The verse is careful not to narrow its scope to the relationship between individual members of each religion, but rather, it summarizes the relationship between the two groups of people as a whole. In essence, the Qur’an states that the Christians will always treat the Muslims better than the Jews will treat the Muslims. Indeed, the full impact of such a statement can only be felt after careful consideration of the real meaning of such a verse. It is true that many Christians and many Jews have become Muslims, but as a whole, the Jewish community is to be viewed as an avid enemy of Islam. Additionally, very few people realize what such an open declaration in the Qur’an invites. In essence, it is an easy chance for the Jews to prove that the Qur’an is false - that it is not a divine revelation. All they have to do is organize themselves, treat the Muslims nicely for a few years and then say, “Now what does your holy book say about who are your best friends in the world - the Jews or the Christians? Look what we Jews have done for you!” That is all they have to do to disprove the Qur’an’s authenticity, yet they have not done it in 1400 years. But, as always, the offer still stands open!
All of the examples so far given concerning the I various angles from which one can approach the | Qur’an have undoubtedly been subjective in nature; I however there does exist another angle, among others, which is objective and whose basis is mathematical. It is surprising how authentic the Qur’an becomes when one assembles what might be referred to as a list of good guesses. Mathematically, it can be explained using guessing and prediction examples. For instance, if a person has two choices (i.e., one is right, and one is wrong), and he closes his eyes and makes a choice, then half of the time (i.e., one time out of two) he will be right. Basically, he has a one in two chance, for he could pick the wrong choice, or he could pick the right choice. Now if the same person has two situations like that (i.e., he could be right or wrong about situation number one, and he could be right or wrong about situation number two), and he closes his eyes and guesses, then he will only be right one fourth of the time (i.e., one time out of four). He now has a one in four chance because now there are three ways for him to be wrong and only one way for him to be right. In simple terms, he could make the wrong choice in situation number one and then make the wrong choice in situation number two; OR he could make the wrong choice in situation number one and then make the right choice in situation number two; OR he could make the right choice in situation number one and then make the wrong choice in situation number two; OR he could make the right choice in situation number one and then make the right choice in situation number two. Of course, the(only instance in which he could be totally right is the last scenario where he could guess correctly in both situations. The odds of his guessing completely correctly have become greater because the number of situations for him to guess in have increased; and the mathematical equation representing such a scenario is 1/2 x 1/2 (i.e., one time out of two for the first situation multiplied by one time out of two for the second situation).
Continuing on with the example, if the same person now has three situations in which to make blind guesses, then he will only be right one eighth of the time (i.e., one time out of eight or 1/2 X 1/2 X 1/2). Again, the odds of choosing the correct choice in all three situations have decreased his chances of being completely correct to only one time in eight. It must be understood that as the number of situations increase, the chances of being right decrease, for the two phenomena are inversely proportional.
Now applying this example to the situations in the Qur’an, if one draws up a list of all of the subjects about which the Qur’an has made correct statements, it becomes very clear that it is highly unlikely that they were all just correct blind guesses. Indeed, the subjects discussed in the Qur’an are numerous, and thus the odds of someone just making lucky guesses about all of them become practically nil. If there are a million ways for the Qur’an to be wrong, yet each time it is right, then it is unlikely that someone was guessing. The following three examples of subjects about which the Qur’an has made correct statements collectively illustrate how the Qur’an continues to beat the odds.
In the 16th chapter the Qur’an mentions that the female bee leaves its home to gather food.l2 Now, a person might guess on that, saying, “The bee that you see flying around - it could be male, or it could be female. I think I will guess female.” Certainly, he has a one in two chance of being right. So it happens that the Qur’an is right. But it also happens that was not what most people believed at the time when the Qur’an was revealed. Can you tell the difference between a male and a female bee? Well, it takes a specialist to do that, but it has been discovered that the male bee never leaves his home to gather food. However, in Shakespeare’s play, Henry the Fourth, some of the characters discuss bees and mention that the bees are soldiers and have a king. That is what people thought in Shakespeare’s time - that the bees that one sees flying around are male bees and that they go home and answer to a king. However, that is not true at all. The fact is that they are females, and they answer to a queen. Yet it took modern scientific investigations in the last 300 years to discover that this is the case.
So, back to the list of good guesses, concerning the topic of bees, the Qur’an had a 50/50 chance of being right, and the odds were one in two.
In addition to the subject of bees, the Qur’an also discusses the sun and the manner in which it travels through space. Again, a person can guess on that subject. When the sun moves through space, there are two options: it can travel just as a stone would travel if one threw it, or it can move of its own accord. The Qur’an states the latter - that it moves as a result of its own motion.’3 To do such, the Qur’an uses a form of the word sabaha to describe the sun’s movement through space. In order to properly provide the reader with a comprehensive understanding of the implications of this Arabic verb, the following example is given. If a man is in water and the verb sabaha is applied in reference to his movement, it can be understood that he is swimming, moving of his own accord and not as a result of a direct force applied to him. Thus when this verb is used in reference to the sun’s movement through space, it in no way implies that the sun is flying uncontrollably through space as a result of being hurled or the like. It simply means that the sun is turning and rotating as it travels. Now, this is what the Qur’an affirms, but was it an easy thing to discover? Can any common man tell that the sun is turning? Only in modern times was the equipment made available to project the image of the sun onto a tabletop so that one could look at it without being blinded. And through this process it was discovered that not only are there three spots on the sun but that these spots move once every 25 days. This movement is referred to as the rotation of the sun around its axis and conclusively proves that, as the Qur’an stated 1400 years ago, the sun does, indeed turn as it travels through space.
And returning once again to the subject of good guess, the odds of guessing correctly about both subjects - the sex of bees and the movement of the sun - are one in four!
Seeing as back fourteen centuries ago people probably did not understand much about time zones, the Quran’s statements about this subject are considerably surprising. The concept that one family is having breakfast as the sun comes up while another family is enjoying the brisk night air is truly something to be marveled at, even in modern time. Indeed, fourteen centuries ago, a man could not travel more than thirty miles in one day, and thus it took him literally months to travel from India to Morocco, for example. And probably , when he was having supper in Morocco, he thought to himself, “Back home in India they are having supper right now.” This is because he did not realize that, in the process of traveling, he moved across a time zone. Yet, because it is the words of Allah, the All-Knowing, the Qur’an recognizes and acknowledges such a phenomenon. In an interesting verse it states that when history comes to an end and the Day of Judgment arrives, it will all occurring an instant; and this very instant will catch some people in the daytime and some people at night. This clearly illustrates Allah’s divine wisdom and His previous knowledge of the existence of time zones, even though such a discovery was non-existent back fourteen centuries ago. Certainly, this phenomenon is not something which is obvious to one’s eyes or a result of one’s experience, and this fact, in itself, suffices as proof of the Qur’ans authenticity.
Returning one final time to the subject of good guesses for the purpose of the present example, the odds that someone guessed correctly about all three of the aforementioned subjects - the sex of bees, the movement of the sun and the existence of time zones - are one in eight!
Certainly, one could continue on and on with this example, drawing up longer and longer list of good guesses; and of course, the odds would become higher and higher with each increase of subjects about which one could guess. But what no one can deny is the following; the odds that Mohammed an illiterate, guessed correctly about thousands and thousands of subjects, never once making a mistake, are so high that any theory of his authorship of the Qur’an must be completely dismissed - even by the most hostile enemies of Islam!
Indeed, the Qur’an expects this kind of challenge. Undoubtedly, if one said to someone upon entering a foreign land, “I know your father. I have met him,” probably the man from that land would doubt the newcomer’s word, saying, “You have just come here. How could you know my father?” As a result, he would question him, “Tell me, is my father tall, short, dark, fair? What is he like?” Of course, if the visitor continued answering all of the questions correctly, the skeptic would have no choice but to say, “I guess you do know my father. I don’t know how you know him, but I guess you do!” The situation is the same with the Qur’an. It states that it originates from the One who created everything. So everyone has the right to say, “Convince me! If the author of this book really originated life and everything in the heavens and on the earth, then He should know about this, about that, and so on.” And inevitably, after researching the Qur’an, everyone will discover the same truths. Additionally, we all know something for sure: we do not all have to be experts to verify what the Qur’an affirms. One’s iman (faith) grows as one continues to check and confirm the truths contained in the Qur’an. And one is supposed to do so all of his life.
May God (Allah) guide everyone close to the truth.
SUPPLEMENT
An engineer at the University of Toronto who was interested in psychology and who had read something on it, conducted researched wrote a thesis on Efficiency of Group Discussions. The purpose of his research was to find out how much people accomplish when they get together to talk in groups of two, three, ten, etc. The graph of his findings: people accomplish most when they talk in groups of two. Of course, this discovery was entirely beyond his expectations, but it is very old advice given in the Qur’an:
Additionally, the 89th chapter of the Qur’an mentions a certain city by the name of ‘Iram (a city of pillars), which was not known in ancient history and which was non-existent as far as historians were concerned. However, the December 1978 edition of National Geographic introduced interesting information which mentioned that in 1973, the city of Elba was excavated in Syria. The city was discovered to be 43 centuries old, but that is not the most amazing part. Researchers found in the library of Elba a record of all of the cities with which Elba had done business. Believe or not, there on the list was the name of the city of ‘Iram. The people of Elba had done business with the people of ‘Iram!
“Say, ‘I exhort you to one thing - that you stand for Allah, [assessing the truth] by twos and singly, and then reflect…..’ In conclusion I ask you to consider with care the following:
“And they say, ‘Why are not signs sent down to him from his Lord?’ Say, ‘Indeed, the signs are with Allah, and I am but a clear warner.’ But is sufficient for them that We have sent down to you the Book [i.e. Qur’an] which is rehearsed to them? Verily, in that is mercy and a reminder to people who believe.
I see you have a Joe Morreale infection. He came over to the RD.net site and did exactly the same there. After pasting random crap he then claimed victory. Unfortunately he did so after:
ReplyDelete1. Providing no proof of god, no response to questions about the existence of god or a response to the hypothesis that there are no personal gods
2. Providing no alternative theory for evolution. Refusing to actually read any of the material that was presented to him. Effectively sticking his fingers in his ears and going “La, la, la I’m not listening” when actual evidence is presented
3. Not responding to the hypothesis that his prophet, a medieval camel herder had anything more than an epileptic fit. In any case unable to defend said camel herder against paedophilia
4. Being unable to show that the Muslims of the middle ages did anything more than transmit knowledge that they acquired from Latin and Greek sources
5. Being unable to defend against the fact that Muslim countries are in the main theocracies or dictatorships with poor health, wealth and education
6. Being unable to argue against the fact that secular nations have much better civil rights and better economic prospects
7. Being unable to defend the person whose bitch he is from the fact that he is a rapist and blackmailer
8. Being unable to answer a simple question about the translation of a single Arabic word
9. Quote mining philosophers and scientists. Then not realising that Popper changing his mind about the theory of evolution effectively undermined any other quotes Joe has made on the subject
10. Cutting and pasting material from other sites without attribution, i.e. stealing other peoples work
11. Being unable to give an example of at least one transitional stage of a human being from baby to adult
12. Proving to be a sexist, misogynistic pig after producing some seriously objectionable posts about a female member of the site
13. Being unable to point out where in the Qu’ran the Navier-Stokes equation is described
14. Being unable to point out where in the Qu’ran where koala bears, Brazil or the planet Neptune is described
15. In fact being unable to dispute any claims at all on the Qu’ran
16. Being unwilling to admit that Harun Yahya had selectively misquoted authors time and time again even when presented with the documentary evidence that he had done so.
He also went into complete berserk mode after it was shown that Zakir Naik had made a speech in which he said “If Osama Bin Laden is terrorizing the enemies of Islam, I am with him. If he is terrorizing America, the biggest terrorist, then I am with him. Every Muslim should be a terrorist.”
You can find the quote here - http://www.youtube.com/swf/l.swf?video_id=Bxk5AAA5FbI&rel=1&eurl=&iurl=http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Bxk5AAA5FbI/default.jpg&t=OEgsToPDskKStocKCCs7_0VfyHthAyLv
One of things that Joe did on the RD.net site was to post material from Yahya which purported to show that authors such as Crick, DMS Watson, Karl Popper, T. Neville George, Harold Urey, H.S. Lipson, David Kitts, Steven Stanley and George Gaylord Simpson amongst others were either mistaken or did not support the theory of evolution.
ReplyDeleteWhat in fact had been done was to quote mine these authors, in one particular case choosing two sentences out of a 30 page paper. Now, showing a fishing lure with a hook sticking out of its backside and claiming it to be a caddis fly could be classed as ignorance or incompetence.
But extracting one or two sentences or fragments of sentences out of a whole paper is an act of deliberate deceit and shows a total lack of integrity.
When Joe was shown the quotations in context and was pressed for comments he could make no response.
It is not true that i could not make a response.
ReplyDeleteThese quotations of admissions by evolutionists shown by Adnan Oktar
demonsrate that evolutionists make these admissions and then go on engaging in largely speculation.
What is interesting is that you do not to get to know of these admissions on THE MAINSTREAM.
These admissions stand out as diamonds among the mud.
Also there are dozens more of such admissions.
Look at 'confessions of evolutionists' on Harun Yahya's site.
My responses to the proof that the Qu'ran is indeed the Word of God and can be proven scientifically are actually among my comments here above. (The amazing Qu'ran)
ReplyDeleteAlso see admissions of non-muslim scientists admissions like prof keith Moore on scienceislam.com.
see dr maurice Bucaille who converted to islam because of science in qu'ran and Dr zakir Naik lectures like 'Quran and modern Science' - 'is the qu'ran God's Word - Live Debate in 2000 in
against Dr William Cambell on 'Qu'ran and Bible in the light of SCience.
As for how the Muslims were responsable for originating Modern science i will soon include previous comments of mine from dawkins website.
I WILL LEAVE YOU FOR THIS EVENING WITH PLENTY TO REFLECT UPON AS USUAL
ReplyDeleteI have proved everything i wanted to on this site.
From Harun Yahya's site:
WE CHALLENGE DAWKINS TO A DISCUSSION BEFORE THE PUBLIC
Richard Dawkins, a most ardent supporter of Darwinism, has long accounted for the perfect creation of the universe in terms of the theory of evolution, which has lately suffered a global collapse. In his recent writings and interviews, however, Dawkins has started to express that "life cannot form by chance." It is an absence of sense and reason to support evolution on one hand and to state that life cannot come about by chance on the other. That is due to the fact that according to the theory of evolution, which Dawkins supports, the existence of life is based on entirely random coincidences.
Dawkins has realized that he can get nowhere with the scenario of chance. But, he is now in the logical impasse as he basically claims that "evolution cannot be a result of coincidences, but has occurred by means of coincidences." What he should realize is that demagogy no longer works.
If Dawkins sincerely believes in this theory, we'd like to invite him to Turkey, or else we could come to UK to have a discussion. Dawkins should clarify hundreds of questions, only a few of which are listed below, before the cameras. So we, as well as the public, will be able to hear what he has to say. Obviously, it's no good to engage in unilateral programs. Moreover, with such an attitude Dawkins only deceives himself. Let us send the first 4 volumes of Atlas of Creation to Mr. Dawkins, and let him examine the photographs of the fossils therein which have not changed at all over the hundreds of millions of years. And let him account for them in evolutionary terms according to his much-publicized logic�quot;if he can!
Archeological researches unearthed over a hundred million fossils, proving that life forms were created out of nothing. Still, there is not a single transitional fossil supporting the theory of evolution. If Dawkins is sincere in his claim, he should bring a transitional fossil and announce it to the public as "a transitional form!"
The odds against a functional protein emerging randomly is 10950 to 1�quot;a practical impossibility. (In mathematics, probabilities smaller than 1 over 1050 are accepted as "zero probability.") If Dawkins is honest, he should point at a mass of proteins that formed by chance or by means of the methods he espouses. Let Dawkins explain us how he can account for the origin of life in evolutionary terms, when even a single protein�quot;the building block of life�quot;cannot form by chance!
Let Dawkins explain us how all colorful, lively, three-dimensional and perfectly clear images, shortly life itself, can form in the pitch dark human brain and who sees this image in the brain!
Let Dawkins explain us in evolutionary terms how conversations, music and all other sounds form in the sound-isolated brain; who listens to and enjoys these sounds, who knows their meaning, who reflects on them consciously and who answers back these sounds!
Let Dawkins ask the same questions to us, and let us give our answers. Let us supply our evidence, and let him bring his�quot;if he has any. Then let the public decide who is right. We want the public to know on a larger scale how Darwinism is a false theory and how it is the greatest deception of the world's history. We are confident that the days are soon to come when people will laugh, asking themselves "How could we ever believe this theory?" In near future, people will be wondering with amazement how they could ever have been taken in by it. In fact, this is already occurring, at an ever-increasing momentum. World-wide polls reveal statistical data proving this state of affairs.
Darwinism, tried to be kept alive by engaging in demagogy and propaganda, has been refuted in all spheres and it is now widely recognized that it's no longer possible to defend Darwinism by demagogy. Dawkins' recent statement along the logic that "evolution cannot be a result of coincidences, but has occurred by means of coincidences" is nothing but a laughable misery of reason.
HARUN YAHYA HAS REFUTED EVOLUTION AND IT IS TIME TO HUMILIATE IN PUBLIC THAT MUPPET DAWKINS WHO HAS ALWAYS BEEN HIDING BEHIND THE SECULAR ESTABLISHMENT.
WE ARE WAITING...
Hello Salman Hameed
ReplyDeleteI see that you have got yourself a good old spammer :)
But he's a perfect showcase that people have to take these 'creationists' silly arguments serious. Cause as you can see it's actually convincing some people to believe in these unscientific reasoning; the qur'an says that Adam was made from clay and that his consort was made from him therefore evolution is wrong... .. . People believe in stuff like this. Joe's posts is a perfect example of the institutionlizations of the differnet arguments of religious "truth". Is like watching the 9/11-conspiracymovement or the "the new world order"-movement in work. They build up a complete "'questionary-answer' catalog" and basicly the adherents of these "beliefs" can't do much other than simply quote these "catalogs".
Look for instans at Joe's cites of "miracles" in the qur'an.
"79:30 “And the earth, moreover, has He made egg shaped.”"
First 99 % of arabists would say that this translation 'egg shaped' is wrong. Second the world is not egg shaped. But the notion that most of these muslim creationist is saying is that people believed that the earth was flat in 7th century, and therefore it's a "miracle". Honestly when reading the qur'an I got an impression of a worldview where the earth was flat. And furthermore if the qur'an should contain any reference to a round earth it should not be so surprisingly considering plenty of natural philosophers and astronomers of the ancients thought the earth to be round.
"21:30-31 “Do not the Unbelievers see how the heavens and the earth were joined together, before We cloved them asunder?"
- big bang? :D
These things actually convince people. It's quite scary that people are that easy duped.
All in all Jesusandmo has made a perfect cartoon on the case :)
http://www.jesusandmo.net/2008/05/01/bang/
AN ADMISSION FROM DAWKINS THAT IT IS ALL OVER
ReplyDeleteDawkins Declines to Debate with Creationists, Because He Has No Answer to Give!
Richard Dawkins has responded to our request for a face-to-face debate: "I HAVE VOWED NOT TO DEBATE," he says. What this actually means is, "I have been defeated on the subject of Darwinism. I have no intention of debating with anyone and being humiliated."
But it is not clear exactly what he has vowed by. He has obviously not vowed by Allah, since he says he does not believe in Him. There is no doubt he would lose any debate. It is also clear that he will continue to mislead people with no knowledge of Darwinism. Sooner or later, however, these people come to realise that Darwinism is a deception when they visit Harun Yahya’s web sites and finally see the truth. And they will also continue to do so in the future, by Allah’s leave.
For the last 150 years Darwinists have been utterly terrified of one thing: the exposure of their lies! They strive with all the means at their disposal to prevent the exposure of the fraudulent nature of the theory of evolution, which they have desperately tried to keep alive as an unshakeable ideology, a religion, ever since Darwin’s time. In order to maintain this lie they resort to hoaxes, exhibit fake fossils in museums, hurriedly conceal all fossils unearthed (because these refute the theory of evolution), and employ demagoguery to answer all those many subjects for which the theory of evolution cannot account. In order to maintain this lie, they have bestowed a kind of immunity on the theory of evolution. So much so that evolution has become unquestionable and undeniable in schools, universities, workplaces, institutions of one kind or another, and even in the highest levels of the state. Although it is only a theory, evolution has been made a law which all young people have to know and abide by and which has to be protected by means of official laws and included in the official curriculum.
But what Darwinists most feared has now become a reality, and their deception has been exposed. Darwinist hoaxes have suddenly been exposed through the activities of Harun Yahya, and by his Atlas of Creation in particular. People have realised that Darwinists have attempted to hide more than 100 million fossils, and that all of these are fully-formed and flawless specimens, hundreds of millions of years old, of life forms, most of which are still in existence today. The lifting of the Darwinist spell has had an explosive impact all over the world.
It was under these conditions that Richard Dawkins, one of the most dyed-in-the-wool proponents of the theory of evolution and nicknamed "Darwin’s Rottweiler," was invited to take part in a public debate. He was asked whether or not he was able to refute the evidence demolishing Darwinism and how he would defend the theory in the face of the proofs of Creation.
But Dawkins declined to enter into any debate! We received a response from Dawkins to our request for a face-to-face debate: "I HAVE WOWED NOT TO DEBATE." What this actually means is, "I have been defeated on the subject of Darwinism. I have no intention of debating with anyone and being humiliated."
Of course Richard Dawkins cannot enter into any such debate, because he will be unable to answer the questions put to him:
He will be unable to account for the more than 100 million fossils that have been unearthed and point to the existence of perfect and flawless life forms. He will be unable explain how it is that THEY HAVE REMAINED UNCHANGED FOR HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF YEARS and why THEY HAVE NOT ANY FORERUNNER WITH INTERMEDIATE FORM CHARACTERISTICS.
He will be unable to explain, as he has been unable to in the past, why THERE IS NOT A SINGLE INTERMEDIATE FORM among all the many millions of fossils that have been unearthed.
He will be unable to account for the fossil skulls, millions of years old, that are identical to present-day tigers, horses, elephants, turtles, wolves, birds, rabbits, foxes, zebras, deer and other life forms, in terms of the theory of evolution. He will be unable to explain how it is that life forms appeared MILIONS OF YEARS AGO WITH THE SAME APPEARANCE THEY STILL HAVE TODAY and HOW THEY HAVE NOT CHANGED OVER MILLIONS OF YEARS.
He would have to admit that the horse series, Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, Haeckel’s drawings, dinosaur fossils with feathers stuck on them and peppered moths pinned to tree trunks ARE ALL HOAXES.
He would have to admit that the fossils, numbering no more than a handful, that Darwinists have portrayed as intermediate forms have all been scientifically discredited, THAT THE FOSSIL OF A PERFECTLY FORMED FLYING BIRD CONTEMPORANEOUS WITH ARCHAEOPTERYX, depicted as an example of the transition from land to air, HAS BEEN DISCOVERED, THAT THE COELACANTH, which they cited as an example of the transition from water to land, IS STILL LIVING TODAY, and THAT LUCY HAS GONE DOWN IN HISTORY AS AN APE.
He will have no answer to the question of WHY THEY HID AWAY Cambrian fossils, living fossils that were unearthed subsequently, and finally 100 million fossils that exist today.
He will have nothing to say on the subject of the probability of a single functional protein, the building blocks of life, emerging by chance is just 1 in 10-950, and that in mathematical terms this means zero possibility. He will be unable to explain how life could have formed as a result of coincidences when not even a single cell can be manufactured under laboratory conditions.
HE WILL BE UNABLE TO EXPLAIN WHO ACTUALLY SEES THE IMAGE IN THE BRAIN although there is no light either outside or inside that brain. NEITHER WILL HE BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN WHO HEARS sounds, speech and music within the sound-proof brain. AND HE WILL HAVE NO ANSWER TO THE QUESTION OF WHO IT IS THAT TAKES PLEASURE FROM, INTERPRETS AND REACTS TO THE IMAGES, MUSIC, TACTILE SENSATIONS AND SCENTS IN THE BRAIN.
All these facts make it perfectly clear why Richard Dawkins is reluctant to take part in any debate. Rather than embarrassing himself on subjects regarding which all his claims have collapsed and which he can never answer, he thinks he has found a way out by saying "I have vowed not to debate."
Under such circumstances, the side that resorts to demagoguery because it tells falsehoods employs another demagogic tactic by claiming that the other side is solely concerned with publicising itself. This tradition is still being adhered to today, and Dawkins maintains that Creationists have asked for a debate for reasons of show. What he forgets, however, is this: The desired wide-ranging publicity and presentation HAVE ALREADY TAKEN PLACE THROUGH THE ATLAS OF CREATION. The world has been introduced to 100 MILLION FOSSILS. IT HAS BEEN DEMONSTRATED THAT THESE ARE PROOFS OF CREATION. It is therefore ludicrous to maintain that any minor debate would serve as publicity. The debate is important in terms of showing the whole world, in Dawkins’ own words, that he is mistaken. The world is already well aware that the theory of evolution and Dawkins’ claims have collapsed and been totally uprooted.
The sad truth for Darwinists is that the concrete evidence, fossils in other words, cannot be denied. What they never expected was for all fossils to prove the fact of Creation and that these fossils, hidden away so carefully from the public gaze, would one day be shown to the world and have a truly stunning impact on it. They have been totally silenced by the shock impact of the Atlas of Creation. Demagoguery is now meaningless since the concrete evidence has been brought out into the daylight. That is also the reason for Dawkins’ shock. It certainly seems impossible for him to agree to a debate in the face of all this evidence that all the world has seen
AN ADMISSION FROM DAWKINS THAT IT IS ALL OVER
ReplyDeleteDawkins Declines to Debate with Creationists, Because He Has No Answer to Give!
Richard Dawkins has responded to our request for a face-to-face debate: "I HAVE VOWED NOT TO DEBATE," he says. What this actually means is, "I have been defeated on the subject of Darwinism. I have no intention of debating with anyone and being humiliated."
But it is not clear exactly what he has vowed by. He has obviously not vowed by Allah, since he says he does not believe in Him. There is no doubt he would lose any debate. It is also clear that he will continue to mislead people with no knowledge of Darwinism. Sooner or later, however, these people come to realise that Darwinism is a deception when they visit Harun Yahya’s web sites and finally see the truth. And they will also continue to do so in the future, by Allah’s leave.
For the last 150 years Darwinists have been utterly terrified of one thing: the exposure of their lies! They strive with all the means at their disposal to prevent the exposure of the fraudulent nature of the theory of evolution, which they have desperately tried to keep alive as an unshakeable ideology, a religion, ever since Darwin’s time. In order to maintain this lie they resort to hoaxes, exhibit fake fossils in museums, hurriedly conceal all fossils unearthed (because these refute the theory of evolution), and employ demagoguery to answer all those many subjects for which the theory of evolution cannot account. In order to maintain this lie, they have bestowed a kind of immunity on the theory of evolution. So much so that evolution has become unquestionable and undeniable in schools, universities, workplaces, institutions of one kind or another, and even in the highest levels of the state. Although it is only a theory, evolution has been made a law which all young people have to know and abide by and which has to be protected by means of official laws and included in the official curriculum.
But what Darwinists most feared has now become a reality, and their deception has been exposed. Darwinist hoaxes have suddenly been exposed through the activities of Harun Yahya, and by his Atlas of Creation in particular. People have realised that Darwinists have attempted to hide more than 100 million fossils, and that all of these are fully-formed and flawless specimens, hundreds of millions of years old, of life forms, most of which are still in existence today. The lifting of the Darwinist spell has had an explosive impact all over the world.
It was under these conditions that Richard Dawkins, one of the most dyed-in-the-wool proponents of the theory of evolution and nicknamed "Darwin’s Rottweiler," was invited to take part in a public debate. He was asked whether or not he was able to refute the evidence demolishing Darwinism and how he would defend the theory in the face of the proofs of Creation.
But Dawkins declined to enter into any debate! We received a response from Dawkins to our request for a face-to-face debate: "I HAVE WOWED NOT TO DEBATE." What this actually means is, "I have been defeated on the subject of Darwinism. I have no intention of debating with anyone and being humiliated."
Of course Richard Dawkins cannot enter into any such debate, because he will be unable to answer the questions put to him:
He will be unable to account for the more than 100 million fossils that have been unearthed and point to the existence of perfect and flawless life forms. He will be unable explain how it is that THEY HAVE REMAINED UNCHANGED FOR HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF YEARS and why THEY HAVE NOT ANY FORERUNNER WITH INTERMEDIATE FORM CHARACTERISTICS.
He will be unable to explain, as he has been unable to in the past, why THERE IS NOT A SINGLE INTERMEDIATE FORM among all the many millions of fossils that have been unearthed.
He will be unable to account for the fossil skulls, millions of years old, that are identical to present-day tigers, horses, elephants, turtles, wolves, birds, rabbits, foxes, zebras, deer and other life forms, in terms of the theory of evolution. He will be unable to explain how it is that life forms appeared MILIONS OF YEARS AGO WITH THE SAME APPEARANCE THEY STILL HAVE TODAY and HOW THEY HAVE NOT CHANGED OVER MILLIONS OF YEARS.
He would have to admit that the horse series, Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, Haeckel’s drawings, dinosaur fossils with feathers stuck on them and peppered moths pinned to tree trunks ARE ALL HOAXES.
He would have to admit that the fossils, numbering no more than a handful, that Darwinists have portrayed as intermediate forms have all been scientifically discredited, THAT THE FOSSIL OF A PERFECTLY FORMED FLYING BIRD CONTEMPORANEOUS WITH ARCHAEOPTERYX, depicted as an example of the transition from land to air, HAS BEEN DISCOVERED, THAT THE COELACANTH, which they cited as an example of the transition from water to land, IS STILL LIVING TODAY, and THAT LUCY HAS GONE DOWN IN HISTORY AS AN APE.
He will have no answer to the question of WHY THEY HID AWAY Cambrian fossils, living fossils that were unearthed subsequently, and finally 100 million fossils that exist today.
He will have nothing to say on the subject of the probability of a single functional protein, the building blocks of life, emerging by chance is just 1 in 10-950, and that in mathematical terms this means zero possibility. He will be unable to explain how life could have formed as a result of coincidences when not even a single cell can be manufactured under laboratory conditions.
HE WILL BE UNABLE TO EXPLAIN WHO ACTUALLY SEES THE IMAGE IN THE BRAIN although there is no light either outside or inside that brain. NEITHER WILL HE BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN WHO HEARS sounds, speech and music within the sound-proof brain. AND HE WILL HAVE NO ANSWER TO THE QUESTION OF WHO IT IS THAT TAKES PLEASURE FROM, INTERPRETS AND REACTS TO THE IMAGES, MUSIC, TACTILE SENSATIONS AND SCENTS IN THE BRAIN.
All these facts make it perfectly clear why Richard Dawkins is reluctant to take part in any debate. Rather than embarrassing himself on subjects regarding which all his claims have collapsed and which he can never answer, he thinks he has found a way out by saying "I have vowed not to debate."
Under such circumstances, the side that resorts to demagoguery because it tells falsehoods employs another demagogic tactic by claiming that the other side is solely concerned with publicising itself. This tradition is still being adhered to today, and Dawkins maintains that Creationists have asked for a debate for reasons of show. What he forgets, however, is this: The desired wide-ranging publicity and presentation HAVE ALREADY TAKEN PLACE THROUGH THE ATLAS OF CREATION. The world has been introduced to 100 MILLION FOSSILS. IT HAS BEEN DEMONSTRATED THAT THESE ARE PROOFS OF CREATION. It is therefore ludicrous to maintain that any minor debate would serve as publicity. The debate is important in terms of showing the whole world, in Dawkins’ own words, that he is mistaken. The world is already well aware that the theory of evolution and Dawkins’ claims have collapsed and been totally uprooted.
The sad truth for Darwinists is that the concrete evidence, fossils in other words, cannot be denied. What they never expected was for all fossils to prove the fact of Creation and that these fossils, hidden away so carefully from the public gaze, would one day be shown to the world and have a truly stunning impact on it. They have been totally silenced by the shock impact of the Atlas of Creation. Demagoguery is now meaningless since the concrete evidence has been brought out into the daylight. That is also the reason for Dawkins’ shock. It certainly seems impossible for him to agree to a debate in the face of all this evidence that all the world has seen
Dawkins Declines to Debate with Creationists, Because He Has No Answer to Give!
ReplyDeleteRichard Dawkins has responded to our request for a face-to-face debate: "I HAVE VOWED NOT TO DEBATE," he says. What this actually means is, "I have been defeated on the subject of Darwinism. I have no intention of debating with anyone and being humiliated."
But it is not clear exactly what he has vowed by. He has obviously not vowed by Allah, since he says he does not believe in Him. There is no doubt he would lose any debate. It is also clear that he will continue to mislead people with no knowledge of Darwinism. Sooner or later, however, these people come to realise that Darwinism is a deception when they visit Harun Yahya’s web sites and finally see the truth. And they will also continue to do so in the future, by Allah’s leave.
For the last 150 years Darwinists have been utterly terrified of one thing: the exposure of their lies! They strive with all the means at their disposal to prevent the exposure of the fraudulent nature of the theory of evolution, which they have desperately tried to keep alive as an unshakeable ideology, a religion, ever since Darwin’s time. In order to maintain this lie they resort to hoaxes, exhibit fake fossils in museums, hurriedly conceal all fossils unearthed (because these refute the theory of evolution), and employ demagoguery to answer all those many subjects for which the theory of evolution cannot account. In order to maintain this lie, they have bestowed a kind of immunity on the theory of evolution. So much so that evolution has become unquestionable and undeniable in schools, universities, workplaces, institutions of one kind or another, and even in the highest levels of the state. Although it is only a theory, evolution has been made a law which all young people have to know and abide by and which has to be protected by means of official laws and included in the official curriculum.
But what Darwinists most feared has now become a reality, and their deception has been exposed. Darwinist hoaxes have suddenly been exposed through the activities of Harun Yahya, and by his Atlas of Creation in particular. People have realised that Darwinists have attempted to hide more than 100 million fossils, and that all of these are fully-formed and flawless specimens, hundreds of millions of years old, of life forms, most of which are still in existence today. The lifting of the Darwinist spell has had an explosive impact all over the world.
It was under these conditions that Richard Dawkins, one of the most dyed-in-the-wool proponents of the theory of evolution and nicknamed "Darwin’s Rottweiler," was invited to take part in a public debate. He was asked whether or not he was able to refute the evidence demolishing Darwinism and how he would defend the theory in the face of the proofs of Creation.
But Dawkins declined to enter into any debate! We received a response from Dawkins to our request for a face-to-face debate: "I HAVE WOWED NOT TO DEBATE." What this actually means is, "I have been defeated on the subject of Darwinism. I have no intention of debating with anyone and being humiliated."
Of course Richard Dawkins cannot enter into any such debate, because he will be unable to answer the questions put to him:
He will be unable to account for the more than 100 million fossils that have been unearthed and point to the existence of perfect and flawless life forms. He will be unable explain how it is that THEY HAVE REMAINED UNCHANGED FOR HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF YEARS and why THEY HAVE NOT ANY FORERUNNER WITH INTERMEDIATE FORM CHARACTERISTICS.
He will be unable to explain, as he has been unable to in the past, why THERE IS NOT A SINGLE INTERMEDIATE FORM among all the many millions of fossils that have been unearthed.
He will be unable to account for the fossil skulls, millions of years old, that are identical to present-day tigers, horses, elephants, turtles, wolves, birds, rabbits, foxes, zebras, deer and other life forms, in terms of the theory of evolution. He will be unable to explain how it is that life forms appeared MILIONS OF YEARS AGO WITH THE SAME APPEARANCE THEY STILL HAVE TODAY and HOW THEY HAVE NOT CHANGED OVER MILLIONS OF YEARS.
He would have to admit that the horse series, Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, Haeckel’s drawings, dinosaur fossils with feathers stuck on them and peppered moths pinned to tree trunks ARE ALL HOAXES.
He would have to admit that the fossils, numbering no more than a handful, that Darwinists have portrayed as intermediate forms have all been scientifically discredited, THAT THE FOSSIL OF A PERFECTLY FORMED FLYING BIRD CONTEMPORANEOUS WITH ARCHAEOPTERYX, depicted as an example of the transition from land to air, HAS BEEN DISCOVERED, THAT THE COELACANTH, which they cited as an example of the transition from water to land, IS STILL LIVING TODAY, and THAT LUCY HAS GONE DOWN IN HISTORY AS AN APE.
He will have no answer to the question of WHY THEY HID AWAY Cambrian fossils, living fossils that were unearthed subsequently, and finally 100 million fossils that exist today.
He will have nothing to say on the subject of the probability of a single functional protein, the building blocks of life, emerging by chance is just 1 in 10-950, and that in mathematical terms this means zero possibility. He will be unable to explain how life could have formed as a result of coincidences when not even a single cell can be manufactured under laboratory conditions.
HE WILL BE UNABLE TO EXPLAIN WHO ACTUALLY SEES THE IMAGE IN THE BRAIN although there is no light either outside or inside that brain. NEITHER WILL HE BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN WHO HEARS sounds, speech and music within the sound-proof brain. AND HE WILL HAVE NO ANSWER TO THE QUESTION OF WHO IT IS THAT TAKES PLEASURE FROM, INTERPRETS AND REACTS TO THE IMAGES, MUSIC, TACTILE SENSATIONS AND SCENTS IN THE BRAIN.
All these facts make it perfectly clear why Richard Dawkins is reluctant to take part in any debate. Rather than embarrassing himself on subjects regarding which all his claims have collapsed and which he can never answer, he thinks he has found a way out by saying "I have vowed not to debate."
Under such circumstances, the side that resorts to demagoguery because it tells falsehoods employs another demagogic tactic by claiming that the other side is solely concerned with publicising itself. This tradition is still being adhered to today, and Dawkins maintains that Creationists have asked for a debate for reasons of show. What he forgets, however, is this: The desired wide-ranging publicity and presentation HAVE ALREADY TAKEN PLACE THROUGH THE ATLAS OF CREATION. The world has been introduced to 100 MILLION FOSSILS. IT HAS BEEN DEMONSTRATED THAT THESE ARE PROOFS OF CREATION. It is therefore ludicrous to maintain that any minor debate would serve as publicity. The debate is important in terms of showing the whole world, in Dawkins’ own words, that he is mistaken. The world is already well aware that the theory of evolution and Dawkins’ claims have collapsed and been totally uprooted.
The sad truth for Darwinists is that the concrete evidence, fossils in other words, cannot be denied. What they never expected was for all fossils to prove the fact of Creation and that these fossils, hidden away so carefully from the public gaze, would one day be shown to the world and have a truly stunning impact on it. They have been totally silenced by the shock impact of the Atlas of Creation. Demagoguery is now meaningless since the concrete evidence has been brought out into the daylight. That is also the reason for Dawkins’ shock. It certainly seems impossible for him to agree to a debate in the face of all this evidence that all the world has seen
RICHARD DAWKINS SEEMS TO HAVE CAUGHT THE HOOK!
ReplyDeleteHarun Yahya’s including a picture of a model insect alongside a fossil caddis fly in his Atlas of Creation was an excellent thing from his point of view. The insect, a model of which appears in the Atlas, is in any case still living today. Living specimens are identical in appearance to the model. There are pictures of the living insect all over the internet. There is also no such picture in other editions of the book, and original pictures of the insect are provided instead. Dawkins seized in this as an error and published it on his web site. In the wake of that, various newspapers and websites that imagined this to be a great discovery immediately carried the report on Dawkins’ web site. The fact is, however, that contrary to what Dawkins thinks, the issue is not one that works against Harun Yahya. The Atlas of Creation was about how an insect living today, pictures of which can be obtained from a great many sites on the internet, has never changed over the last 25 million years. THANKS TO DAWKINS, MILLIONS OF PEOPLE HAVE NOW VISITED THE ATLAS OF CREATION WEB SITE, AND HAVE LEARNED HOW THIS ORGANISM HAS REMAINED UNCHANGED FOR MILLIONS OF YEARS.
Joe Morreale, you're just a spambot that can only cut and paste your lord and master's ignorance.
ReplyDeleteYou need to read some actual science books. Better still go in for some learning in zoology, biology (epecially molecular biology) and evolution.
Adnan oktar, your cult leader, has no knowledge of science whatsoever, or he wouldn't be making claims that a junior student in biology could refute. Oktar wants Muslims to accept him as a new messiah, a Mahdi, but Oktar doesn't even write the books attributed to him. He has to get a team of dupes to cut and paste American creationist articles for him.
Zaki Badawi:)
Anonymous Harun Yahya cultist wrote:
ReplyDelete"AN ADMISSION FROM DAWKINS THAT IT IS ALL OVER
Dawkins Declines to Debate with Creationists, Because He Has No Answer to Give!"
Joe/ Jamshed/ Frederik or whatever name you give yourself, You can read what Dawkins really thinks of Adnan Oktar's ignorance by reading Dawkins' book The Greatest Show on Earth. You will also learn some real evolutionary science from the book too!
And here is why Dawkins doesn't debate those who are ignorant of science:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhmsDGanyes&feature=related
Robert Lenski.
Dawkins needs a doctor anyway. Find a real scientist to get the book checked.
ReplyDeleteI cannot remember reading such utter drivel in any forum before. The levels of delusion here are at maximum.
ReplyDeleteWhat I love about Dawkins is the amount of venom he can generate in his opponents - all stemming from fear of the truth. I doubt any of the negative commenters here has ever read or would ever have the balls or intellignece to read one of Dawkins' works.
Zaki's comment is on the money and ironic in its similarity to the writing of the Quran - No doubt Mohammed had his scribes cut and paste creationist fables just as the bible authors did before him.
I believe that we should respect all beliefs equally. Therefore I respect believers in religion and creationism just as much as I respect adults who believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy (peace be upon them).
ReplyDelete