To all Creationist/Geocentrist/Flat earthist

[McBell]

Quran on Formation of Clouds and Rain

A most excellent example of the Forer Effect.

Thanks for the link!

 

[angellous_evangellous]

***MOD ADVISORY***

Several posts have been removed due to their off-topic and offensive nature.

Please be civil and remember that personal comments are always off-topic and insults will not be tolerated.

Thanks

 

[A Thousand Suns]

Why dont Hindu, Christian etc scientists do the same misinterpretation of their religious texts to imply they've been scientifically proven? you obviously havent done your homework, here are some Hindu examples:

Miracles of Veda and Purana

Science in Vedas

here are some Toaist examples:
The Tao of Physics (Flamingo): Amazon.co.uk: Fritjof Capra: Books

Quantum-Physics and TAO Updated Ancient Wisdom

here are some Christian examples:

Seven Amazing Scientific Discoveries that PROVE Bible's Credibility! - Part 1

SCIENCE AND THE BIBLE

First these articles haven't been published by scientists, so what the credibility it has on first place

Second , if I agree for the sake of argument ,that these scientific facts mention are correct than what about those scientific error and actually no Christian/Hindu I came across could answer those

Can you attribute these mistakes to God??

It seems many religions have the same need to bend the passages for their religious texts to make them seem scientitifc. Islam is no different.
But I repeat sceince is highly specific , religious texts are not.Ill ask the question again, if the Qur'an has a description of the big bang, wny not give us the valeu of the Hubble constant?

Thats according to your limited knowledge , and Quran dosent consists any scientific theory if you are looking for something like that actually its the guidance for the mankind ,containing signs of God

Including

1)How the world was made
2)How the world will end
3)Description of day of judgment
etc

 

[tumbleweed41]

First these articles haven't been published by scientists, so what the credibility it has on first place

 

[tumbleweed41]

maybe iam wrong i will check that

Figured out if you were wrong yet?

 

[Islam432]

You sure do like to talk to yourself:rainbow1:

 

[tumbleweed41]

First these articles haven't been published by scientists, so what the credibility it has on first place

You sure do like to talk to yourself:rainbow1:

Quran on Formation of Clouds and Rain

In A Thousand Suns own words, "First these articles haven't been published by scientists, so what the credibility it has on first place"

 

[Atomist]

maybe iam wrong i will check that

that's sad how the evidence was presented to you so convincingly that there is absolutely no despite and then your retort was the possibility that you're wrong. But atleast it's a step in the right direction vs denial of the evidence.

 

[painted wolf]

Who's egg? The Earth isn't shaped like these eggs.

wa:do

 

[Islam432]

Who's egg? The Earth isn't shaped like these eggs.


wa:do

Ostrich egg

 

[Kathryn]

As a former christian, I should tell you that if you reject the scientific consensus that the earth is round and/or revolves around the earth and/or depute the merit of theory of evolution, that you're doing your cause a disservice. By holding such anti-scientific positions, you alienate many liberal christians and cause them to reevaluate their positions on scientific truths and how that ties into with their religious beliefs. Some of us find it harder to swallow stories like jonah being swallowed by fish, the 6 days creation and noah's arc as literal truths in comparison to the scientific truths (with the mountains of evidence supporting it). Others come to the conclusion that the bible is merely mythology and lose their faith.

I, for one, lost my faith talking to a YEC and thus reevaluating my position on religion. Just looking out.

[youtube]UWmzMNck_z8[/youtube]
YouTube - Napoleon Dynamite

 

[Atomist]

[youtube]UWmzMNck_z8[/youtube]
YouTube - Napoleon Dynamite

awww thats cute.

 

[skydivephil]

First these articles haven't been published by scientists, so what the credibility it has on first place

Second , if I agree for the sake of argument ,that these scientific facts mention are correct than what about those scientific error and actually no Christian/Hindu I came across could answer those

Can you attribute these mistakes to God??

Thats according to your limited knowledge , and Quran dosent consists any scientific theory if you are looking for something like that actually its the guidance for the mankind ,containing signs of God

Including

1)How the world was made
2)How the world will end
3)Description of day of judgment
etc

You clearly didnt even read the links I sent you . the author fo the TAo of Physics was a physicist:
Fritjof Capra - Home
You might want to do some researchon these guys:
Neil Bohr , one of the greatest physicssts who ever lived adopted the ying yang symbol as his family coat of arms:
Review - The Tao of Physics
one of the biggest promoters of traditional Indian beliefs is John Hagelin who was a professional theoretical physicist:
John Hagelin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You might want do a bit more homework, Hugh Ross, A Chrisitan apologist who promotes science in the bible , was a professional astronomer:
Hugh Ross (creationist) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
another scientists promoting the scietific accuracy of the bible is Andrew Parker:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Parker_(zoologist)

So if we are to believe religions becuase there are some scientists who say there ancient texts are accurate , then we have to believe all these other religions, dont we?

In reality the opinion of scientists is not especially relevant in science. Whats relevant is whether a scieitsts ideas makes highly specific claims which can be tested. these should be presented in peer reviewed respectable scientific journals. These claims of scientific miracles do not generally follow this pattern and perhpas that is why the scientific community is jumping into the Islamic faith. Again ill remind you of the real statistics:
Nature, "Leading scientists still reject God"* July 23, 1998
So if we are going by the opinions of elading scientists its non belief all the way .

 

[skydivephil]

The qur'an does not contain ana ccruate description of how the world was made . I have already pointed to you the error in its description of the origin of the Earth, you have given an reasonaly rebbuttal yet .

 

[A Thousand Suns]

You clearly didnt even read the links I sent you .

Yeah true not all, but the ones I saw were Author less and others were written by people like Dr William Campbell who have been debunked by Muslim scholars several times might wanna see debates on youtube

Also ,give me a name of a scientists who after seeing the science in Christianity and Hinduism , converted into that faith , pretty much no one

Also see the perspective of people like Dr Maurice Bucaille , see this book on comparison of Bible and Quran

http://deenrc.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/the-biblethe-quran-science.pdf

P.s you never answered the question about errors in these scriptures, i will say it again does god makes mistakes

 

[McBell]

Also ,give me a name of a scientists who after seeing the science in Christianity and Hinduism , converted into that faith , pretty much no one

Present the names of the scientists who after even making claims of the miracles in the Koran converted to Islam.
Practically no one.


Perhaps it would be a good idea for you to use arguments that do not equally, or better, apply to your own belief system?

 

[tumbleweed41]

Also ,give me a name of a scientists who after seeing the science in Christianity and Hinduism , converted into that faith , pretty much no one

That would be because the Bible, Vedas and Qu'ran are not books containing scientific information.

 

[skydivephil]

I have already given you names of scientists that cnverted to to Toaist beliefs. Why do you ignore this? On the other hand the scientists you mentioned such as Keith Moore did not convert to Islam so your argument falls down.
Moreover if one is going to use the beliefs of scientists as a criteria to form ones own religious beliefs I have already posted you evidence that the implied belief would be no belief. So i presume you are going to declare yourself an agnostic or atheist now right?
As to the point you make about msitakes in the scitpreus, I think you havent understood what I am saying at all. Im not saying these scriptures are right , Im saying many people with sceintiffic credentials belive in them. Their belief does not make them right. Real science isnt done that way. Real science is done in peer reviewed journals with language that is highly specific. None of this is what we see witht the so called miracled of the Qur'an, it is not science.If the Qur'an wanted to mention the big bang why not give su oen numercial value we could actualy check such as the value of the Hubble constant or the cosmological constant or the proprtion of dark energy?

 

[A Thousand Suns]

Present the names of the scientists who after even making claims of the miracles in the Koran converted to Islam.
Practically no one.


Perhaps it would be a good idea for you to use arguments that do not equally, or better, apply to your own belief system?

Lol actually on another thread i gave a long list of names anyways just google it you'll find many

 

[A Thousand Suns]

I have already given you names of scientists that cnverted to to Toaist beliefs. Why do you ignore this? On the other hand the scientists you mentioned such as Keith Moore did not convert to Islam so your argument falls down.
Moreover if one is going to use the beliefs of scientists as a criteria to form ones own religious beliefs I have already posted you evidence that the implied belief would be no belief. So i presume you are going to declare yourself an agnostic or atheist now right?
As to the point you make about msitakes in the scitpreus, I think you havent understood what I am saying at all. Im not saying these scriptures are right , Im saying many people with sceintiffic credentials belive in them. Their belief does not make them right. Real science isnt done that way. Real science is done in peer reviewed journals with language that is highly specific. None of this is what we see witht the so called miracled of the Qur'an, it is not science.If the Qur'an wanted to mention the big bang why not give su oen numercial value we could actualy check such as the value of the Hubble constant or the cosmological constant or the proprtion of dark energy?

I didn't see 'names of scientists that converted to to Taoist belief' might wanna enlighten me again

As for Keith Moore I think the Canadian/Amercian government put alot of pressure on him , maybe that why he didn't converted who knows , you didn't opened his heart whether to see that he believed or not and apart from him there are many top scientist you can find Internet who converted to Islam , just google it

And for other questions I will reply them on a new thread iam going to create , Iam working on it now