Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Apologies for Typo
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Moghul)
    I suggest you read: "A History of Western Philosophy" by Bertrand Russell.
    I have it with me, how does this book help your argument?

    The word "seem" again implies that you acknowledge that their is some margin for error in what you are saying. The amount of scientific references in the Qur'an is vast, I again, suggest you do some research. Dr. Zakir Naik, on YouTube would be a good place to start.
    The man is an idiot.

    Actually, thats not fair, but he's a liar and makes many false claims about subjects he has absolutely no knowledge about.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ForeverIsMyName)
    I have it with me, how does this book help your argument?
    Read the first page. It states something about religion covering a pothole of ratinal thought or something.



    The man is an idiot.

    Actually, thats not fair, but he's a liar and makes many false claims about subjects he has absolutely no knowledge about.
    :rolleyes:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Moghul)
    :rolleyes:
    I listened to some lectures by about evolution and the sciences in Arabia at the time of Muhammed, and they were riddled with errors.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ForeverIsMyName)
    I listened to some lectures by about evolution and the sciences in Arabia at the time of Muhammed, and they were riddled with errors.
    I don't think you're qualified enough to make such a sweeping statement.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Moghul)
    I don't think you're qualified enough to make such a sweeping statement.
    I know factual errors when I hear them.

    "how can you reconcile the Qur’an, with Darwin’s ‘Theory of Evolution’? Sister, I have not come across any book which says… ‘Fact of Evolution’. All the books say ‘Theory of Evolution’ - there is no book I have come across saying fact of evolution. If you read the book by Charles Darwin ‘The Origin of Species’ - It says that… “Charles Darwin went on an island by the name of ‘Keletropist’ on a ship named as ‘HMS Beagel’ and there he found birds pecking at niches. Depending upon the Ecological niches they peck, the beaks kept on becoming long and short. This observation was made in the same species - not in different species”. Charles Darwin wrote a letter to his friend Thomas Thomtan, in 1861 saying ‘I do not believe in ‘Natural Selection’- the word that you use - I don’t believe in ‘Theory of Evolution’ because I haven’t got any proof. I only believe in it because it helps me in classification of Embryology, in Morphology, in rudimentary organs’. Charles Darwin himself said that , there were missing links. He did not agree with it - He himself said that there were missing links. Therefore , if I have to insult someone that if you were present at Darwin’s time this theory would been proved right, trying to insinuate that he looks like an Ape. It is a joke we make. The reason that this theory in most parts of the world - it is taught as good as fact - You know why? Even I was in school - I learnt about Darwin’s theory - and even today they are taught - You know what the reason is sister? The reason is because, that if you analyse, the Church… the Church was against Science previously - and you know the incidence that they sentenced Galileo to death. They sentenced Galileo to death - Why? Because he said certain statements in the Astronomy, etc., which went against the Bible - So they sentenced him to death , for which the Pope apologized now. So when Charles Darwin came up with a theory which goes against the Bible, they did not… they did not want any sufficient proof - An enemy of my enemy is my friend. So all the Scientists… most of them - they supported the theory, because it went against the Bible - not because it was true. They only supported it because it went against the Bible`. All the stages you have mentioned sister… all the stages… ‘Lucy’ - there were four ‘Homonites’. Science tells us today that there were four ‘Homonites’ - first is ‘Lucy’ along with its guy ‘Dosnopytichest’, which died about 3 and a 1/2 million years - the Ice Age. Then next came the ‘Homosepians’, who died about 5 hundred thousand years ago. Then came the ‘Neanderthal Man’, who died hundred to forty thousand years ago. Then came the fourth stage, ‘the Cromagnon’. ‘There is no link at all between these stages’ - According to P. P. Grasse in 1971 who held the Chair of Evolutionary Studies in Paris, in Sojerion University. He said… ‘It is absurd - We cannot say who were our ancestors based on fossils’. I can give you a list of hundreds of scientists and Noble Prize winners who speak against Darwin’s theory… Hundreds. If you know of Sir Albert George who got the Noble prize for inventing… for inventing the Vitamin ‘C’ - He wrote the book ‘The Can’t Ape and Man’, against Darwin’s Theory. Again if you read, Sir Fred Hoyle’s work - he wrote several works against Darwin’s Theory. If you know about Ruperts Albert, this person wrote a new theory of evolution against Darwin’s Theory. Its unthinkable… you cannot think that we are created from the Apes. If you know of Sir Frank Salosbury… he was a biologist. He said… ‘It is illogical to believe in Darwin’s theory’. If you know about Whitmeat… Sir Whitemeat, he wrote a book against Darwin’s Theory - He was also a Biologist. Several ! you can give a list of hundreds. Today it is taught in the schools - Why? … I told you - Media is in their hands. Otherwise there is no proof at all.

    There are certain proofs at lower level - an Ameba, at lower species level… Ameba can change to Paremishia. Qur’an does not say…‘Ameba cannot change to Paremishia’ - Qur’an does not say. If they have got proof… It cannot be possible… It is not against the Qur’an. But there is no proof at all. People talk about Molecular Biology Theory - they talk about Genetic coding. According to Henses Crake who is a authority in this field - he said… ‘It is unimaginable’. Again if you do that ratio, the probability of one DNA forming, ‘from Ape to Human being, is again Zero’.
    Darwin’s theory has not been proven…‘We have not been created from Ape’. There are hundreds of Scientists who speak against that and Qur’an speaks against that also. Qur’an says the first man was Adam (Peace be upon him). InshaAllah they will discover it 100 years afterwards, or may be a 1000 years afterwards.

    Today there are researches showing, that human being have been created from one pair again - It is just a theory. It supports the Qur’anic verse that human beings have been created from one pair, male and female – It is just a theory, therefore I do not quote that in my talk. InshaAllah it will be established 50 years afterwards, or 100 years afterwards. Then we will know that Qur’an conciliates with this part - So far it is not conflicting – It is not conflicting with established Science, at all."

    As Kolya stated on the other thread, this level of knowledge wouldn't pass rigorous scientific checks. It's infantile.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Moghul)
    Retreating to what frankly is, the pathetic defence of "sarcasm" is indicative of the sad state of argumentative affairs you find yourself in. :rolleyes:
    Retreating to sarcasm in this case is actually indicative of my incredulity at your response. You argue that banning someone from xbox is equivalent to threatening torture. This is utterly stupid, even the law recognises this.


    (Original post by Moghul)
    Like you eloquently stated previously, just because you say its true, does not necessarily make it so. Illogical, no? :rofl:
    So you think that parents would rather teachers threaten their child with torture than a detention?

    (Original post by Moghul)
    If I use your logic, threatening a child with banning them from Xbox use, could too be considered a form of torture. :yes:
    Explain how. How does saying that threats of torture and banning from xbox are not equivalent, imply that banning a child from xbox is equivalent to torture? It doesn't.

    (Original post by Moghul)
    Do you have a statistic to back this point up? :rolleyes:
    http://myrightword.blogspot.com/2008...e-bombers.html

    So this counts almost 300 and this is just in palestine, ie Iraq and afghanistan are not included.

    Show me the story about the xbox and another almost 299 more stories about xbox banning killings.

    (Original post by Moghul)
    Well no, not necessarily. See, Islam, is not just a religion, its a way of life, and is engrained amongst many cultures. By not teaching children the mere mannerisms of Islam, one not only prohibits them from learning about their own culture, but also, it prevents children from following the righteous path. By preventing the teachings of Islam, one inadvertently excludes their culture, which, if promoted by you, verges on racism to be honest.
    Stops them from following the righteous path? How do you know it is the righteous path? How does it stop them from deciding for themselves whether to become a muslim? Religion should not be accepted due to culture, it should be accepted because a person has read, understood and decided to believe in it. If i'm verging on racism then you are verging on fascism by forcing children to be muslims.

    (Original post by Moghul)
    Well, at least you've admitted it.
    Idiotic. If you truly believe that the whole of education is unfounded then you need help.

    (Original post by Moghul)
    I suggest you read: "A History of Western Philosophy" by Bertrand Russell.
    I've read it. It doesn't say that Newton's laws cannot be proven experimentally. Yet again more evidence of your inability to reply.

    (Original post by Moghul)
    The word "seem" again implies that you acknowledge that their is some margin for error in what you are saying. The amount of scientific references in the Qur'an is vast, I again, suggest you do some research. Dr. Zakir Naik, on YouTube would be a good place to start.
    I say seems because quite frankly it's unbelievable that you take such an idiotic stance. In my mind i'm hoping that you are not and are just unable to make your true stance known in a coherent manner.

    But ok. You suggest that science is the same as religion as if they are both competing theories. That is absolute rubbish. Many scientific theories have been proven to be facts, the same cannot be said about religious theories.

    As for scientific references, do you mean the references that caused a muslim scholar in Saudi Arabia to claim in 1993 that the world is flat?

    http://khalas.wordpress.com/2007/03/...c-perspective/

    (Original post by Moghul)
    Bertrand Russell......
    Again, Bertrand Russell doesn't tell us that Newton's laws cannot be experimentally proven, that lightening and thunder are not part of the same event, that dna does not exist and that electricity cannot power a motor. What is your point?




    (Original post by Moghul)
    Still does not deal with the issue of factual credibility and bias. For example, in the 1940s, the US Govt claimed to have made a ship invisible, yet, this is widely disputed. Just because someone says something happened, does not necessarily mean it did
    So the French revolution, Russian revolution, ww1, ww2, the boer war, franco-prussian war didn't occur? These are things people are taught about. In regards to bias, that is the first thing a person is taught when looking at sources.

    (Original post by Moghul)
    If you go to the core origins of Mathematics, you'll find that Maths, is very much a human phenomenon. Some argue it is a figment of homosapienic imagination.......
    So what? As i said there are axioms, however every theorem is thoroughly proved from these axioms and the system has been shown to be consistent in many applications. When using pythagoras' theorem, i don't have to have faith that it will work, i know that it will work because i can prove that it will within our axiomatic framework. This is good enough as given any right angled triangle i know the result will be consistent.

    I know you'll probably reply with some rubbish trying to suggest that mathematics has to be taken on faith like religion.

    (Original post by Moghul)
    The fact that there IS a dispute over whether Global Warming is actually occurring or not, means that even Geographic literature is questionable.
    Explain how. Disputes are encouraged in academia, people often discuss and argue each side, look for evidence etc. I know that might seem alien to you as Islam is a dictation, which cannot be questioned and where there is isn't any evidence, but i actually think these disputes are part of healthy science. They'll go on until there is conclusive proof, and much evidence does point towards a warming of the planet.



    (Original post by Moghul)
    Statistics, can never be entirely rperesentative, unless EVERY single person is asked. thereby reducing statistical credibility.
    What is your point? Economics, sociology etc should be abandoned? It is all fantasy? None of the conclusions drawn are accurate? Statistical methods have been devised which significantly reduce errors and make samples more representative. 100% no, 95% or so yes. You also ignore the point that many of these subjects say "it would seem that xyz based on evidence abc". Where as religion says "this is the truth, based on it is written here".


    (Original post by Moghul)
    I am not disputing that religion is about faith, I wholeheartedly agree that it is.
    Then why are you claiming it is as much based on fact as science, maths and the social sciences? None of the these subjects require unquestioning faith, in fact they discourage it.


    (Original post by Moghul)
    Like I said, Islam is not only a religion, it is a way of life, a culture, in many respects. Thus, one is mereley imposing culture. If you dispute this, then your views certainly verge on racism.
    Again, if your culture insists you impose your beliefs on children then you're a fascist. Not all cultures should be respected. In some countries beating ones wife is part of culture, should i accept that as ok? In others female circumcision is part of ones culture, should i accept that? In some cultures human sacrifice was practiced, should i accept that?

    No, i will not accept those things because they are part of a culture, they are against decency, as is imposing your beliefs which cannot be proven upon children.

    (Original post by Moghul)
    I think you are confused. The "burning in hell" part, is merely a consequence. Its like, if you break the law, by muredering someone, you will go to prison. The thought of going to prison therefore, according to your own logic, is torture. Therefore, every citizen of the UK is being tortured.

    Great logic......man. :rolleyes:
    Prison actually exists, it can be proven to exist. Telling a child about prison is telling the truth. If you tell a child about hell you can't know whether you are actually telling the truth.

    Plus there is the fact that you tell them they'll go to hell for trivial things such as a girl showing her hair. This is cruel and immoral.

    (Original post by Moghul)
    This is an ill-informed pint, and is separate, if you wish to delve deeper into this subject, PM me.
    So muslims who convert to christianity have not been put to death by other muslims? Sounds like free will.

    (Original post by Moghul)
    The entire English Legal System draws its morals from
    Again, tell me a moral that cannot be justified without religion? The fact you haven't so far suggests you can't.


    (Original post by Moghul)
    You again misinterpreted my point. First, Islam does not condone corruption, or lying, or cheating. Thereby, hypothetically, if considered a constitution, Baroness Uddin is a bad Muslim, if one at all.

    Second, the current Awami League Party, which rules Bangladesh, is secular, and thereby your point regarding religion is irrelevant.

    Third, Pakistan is experiencing a period of political, economic and social turbulence. Islam does not condone these allegations of corruption, thus, by virtue, it could be argued that Pakistan is not the epitome of Islamic morals and jurisprudence. Yet, due to the reasons outline earlier, such allegations o corruption are understandable, as Pakistan at the moment is a ferule breeding ground for corruption.

    This, can hardly be said for that of the UK.
    You said that the MP scandal was proof that people in the UK are taught to lie and cheat. So considering muslim countries are more corrupt and a muslim MP is under investigation for corruption, by your logic this means they were taught to lie and cheat. Their culture you say is Islam, so Islam as part of their culture taught them to lie and cheat. If you make spurious jumps then i'll show you the conclusions i can draw making those same jumps.

    (Original post by Moghul)
    Well, you needn't be restricted to books, reality and history will also assist you.
    You told me to read a book and this would tell me that americans are taught to lie and cheat. You then say i won't find this in books. Basically you're talking rubbish again and have been caught out.

    (Original post by Moghul)
    Baiscally, you think it is wrong to tell children that there is a consequence which will result, if they do bad acts. Nice......are you an anarchist by any chance?
    No, it is ok to tell children there is a consequence, however that consequence must be able to be shown to exist. Scaring children with hell is equivalent to telling them that they will be abducted by aliens and fed to monster sharks if they misbehave, then reinforcing this with endless repetition and quotations from a book that i say to them is unquestionably true. They'll believe me, they might even behave, but the ends does not justify the means. I would be responsible for the psychological distress caused and the feeling of fear that would be imposed.
    Offline

    10
    (Original post by ForeverIsMyName)
    ... intelligent retort
    It is impossible to logically argue with someone who is blind to the facts, has never used logic and refuses to believe that what he believes could be wrong. That's the difference between you and him. You'd change your beliefs if facts proved otherwise; he won't change his beliefs even if you get all the scientists and experiments in the world to pile up against what he's saying.
 
 
 
Poll
Do protests make a difference in political decisions?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.