Religulous (2008) - Documentaty Film

[Khostai]

Your replies that took two months has gotten me terminally ill

Maybe he has a life outside the internet, you know normal people tend to have it.

[کیش]

Oh yea damir9000 conveniently gets "a life" after a call his bluff.

Unless he has been locked inside county jail he had no excuse in bringing his false sources. he knows he is wrong with his blasphemous statements

[khushal]

Yes, I am aware of this verse.

It's not really impressive since its very ambiguous.

Also, Aristotle and The Greeks already had this knowledge about 800 years prior to this verse.

The sad thing is that Atheist like yourself know very little about science. Almost all of Aristotle theories and explanations about the universe were inaccurate because he lacked the necessary tools that were invented later. He actually thought that the earth was the center of the universe and everything revolved around it. The reason he is called the father of modern science is that he put forth the idea that things should be explained with reason and logic rather than superstition.

Because you cant provide the source that Kaish has asked for, we must conclude that you are talking out of your asre.

See what I did there, I used reason and logic.

[Damir9000]

Oh yea damir9000 conveniently gets "a life" after a call his bluff.

Unless he has been locked inside county jail he had no excuse in bringing his false sources. he knows he is wrong with his blasphemous statements

Sorry to be a downer, but like Khostai said, my life doesn’t revolve around responding to your Proselytization. When I do it, it’s because I am bored from other stuff. All you do is repeat old Islamic rhetoric like an indoctrinated chump which is very uninteresting since I’ve heard plenty of it throughout my upbringing. I have better more interesting stuff to read & respond to than your posts.

“The glorious Qu'ran has all the answers. al hum dulillah”

Are you trying to make me laugh?

I didn’t start to get a life because you. I took a hiatus from this forum because it turned into mudslinging forum.
I have become very disenchanted with this forum.

Blasphemous Statement? Please, we’re on the internet, nobody cares about your religious sensibilities.

[Damir9000]

The sad thing is that Atheist like yourself know very little about science. Almost all of Aristotle theories and explanations about the universe were inaccurate because he lacked the necessary tools that were invented later. He actually thought that the earth was the center of the universe and everything revolved around it. The reason he is called the father of modern science is that he put forth the idea that things should be explained with reason and logic rather than superstition.

Because you cant provide the source that Kaish has asked for, we must conclude that you are talking out of your asre.

See what I did there, I used reason and logic.

HA HA HA…You’re a funny guy like Qais, prematurely declaring victory.
Do you remember George W. Bush?
Also, this isn’t a debate. We are just talking on a dead forum.
The ideas that I am sharing aren’t of my own. These debates have already taken place.
You are right that I know very little about science. I haven’t studied science past high school. But I am sure you are not an expert either. Unlike you two, I will trust scientists instead of some sheikh or mullah.

Both you & Qais have a heavy islamic bias.
I never said Aristotle is right.
I am just saying that the “scientific miracle of embryology” in the Quran which Qais likes to boast is inaccurate and presents the same level of information as the works of Aristotle & his fellow ancient Greeks. The rest of world was pretty advance outside of 7th century Arabia.

[Damir9000]

Aristotle & Galen findings have flaws but Quran matches their works. You can even say the Quran paraphrases the Greek & Roman knowledge.


Aristotle (384-322 BC)
Philosopher, performed research with animals
De Generatione Animalium (On the Generation of Animals)
Full Book:

https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/a/aristotle/generation/contents.html

“When the material secreted by the female in the uterus has been fixed by the semen of the male (this acts in the same way as rennet acts upon milk, for rennet is a kind of milk containing vital heat, which brings into one mass and fixes the similar material, and the relation of the semen to the catamenia is the same, milk and the catamenia being of the same nature)— when, I say, the more solid part comes together, the liquid is separated off from it, and as the earthy parts solidify membranes form all round it; this is both a necessary result and for a final cause, the former because the surface of a mass must solidify on heating as well as on cooling, the latter because the foetus must not be in a liquid but be separated from it. Some of these are called membranes and others choria”

Source: On the Generation of Animals: Book 2


“So Nature has first designed the two blood-vessels from the heart, and from these smaller vessels branch off to the uterus. These are what is called the umbilicus, for this is a blood-vessel, consisting of one or more vessels in different animals. Round these is a skin-like integument, because the weakness of the vessels needs protection and shelter. The vessels join on to the uterus like the roots of plants, and through them the embryo receives its nourishment.”

Source: On the Generation of Animals: Book 2

Aristotle - On the Generation of Animals: Book 2

https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/a/aristotle/generation/book2.html

[Damir9000]

Please Compare your "sign from allah" to Galen's work.
The Quran verse is paraphrasing Galen's knowledge which is inaccurate.
The Quran, Aristotle and Galen are not scientificaly correct on embryology.


GALEN (AD 129-200/216)
was a prominent Greek physician, surgeon and philosopher in the Roman empire. Arguably the most accomplished of all medical researchers of antiquity, Galen influenced the development of various scientific disciplines, including anatomy, physiology, pathology, pharmacology, and neurology, as well as philosophy and logic.


Here is the link for texts for Greek

Galen: On Semen (complete book)

http://cmg.bbaw.de/epubl/online/cmg_05_03_01.php

Important Quotes:

"let us divide the creation of the foetus overall into four periods of time.
The first is that in which. as is seen both in abortions and in dissection, the form of the semen prevails. At this time, Hippocrates too, the all-marvelous, does not yet call the conformation of the animal a foetus; as we heard just now in the case of semen voided in the sixth day, he still calls it semen. But when it has been filled with blood, and heart, brain and liver are still unarticulated and unshaped yet have by now a certain solidarity and considerable size,
this is the second period; the substance of the foetus has the form of flesh and no longer the form of semen. Accordingly you would find that Hippocrates too no longer calls such a form semen but, as was said, foetus.
The third period follows on this, when, as was said, it is possible to see the three ruling parts clearly and a kind of outline, a silhouette, as it were, of all the other parts. You will see the conformation of the three ruling parts more clearly, that of the parts of the stomach more dimly, and much more still, that of the limbs. Later on they form "twigs", as Hippocrates expressed it, indicating by the term their similarity to branches.
The fourth and final period is at the stage when all the parts in the limbs have been differentiated; and at this part Hippocrates the marvelous no longer calls the foetus an embryo only, but already a child, too when he says that it jerks and moves as an animal now fully formed."

"... The time has come for nature to articulate the organs precisely and to bring all the parts to completion. Thus it caused flesh to grow on and around all the bones, and at the same time ... it made at the ends of the bones ligaments that bind them to each other, and along their entire length it placed around them on all sides thin membranes, called periosteal, on which it caused flesh to grow."

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

Aristotle & Galen findings have flaws but Quran matches their works. You can even say the Quran paraphrases the Greek & Roman knowledge.


Aristotle (384-322 BC)
Philosopher, performed research with animals
De Generatione Animalium (On the Generation of Animals)
Full Book:

https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/a/aristotle/generation/contents.html

“When the material secreted by the female in the uterus has been fixed by the semen of the male (this acts in the same way as rennet acts upon milk, for rennet is a kind of milk containing vital heat, which brings into one mass and fixes the similar material, and the relation of the semen to the catamenia is the same, milk and the catamenia being of the same nature)— when, I say, the more solid part comes together, the liquid is separated off from it, and as the earthy parts solidify membranes form all round it; this is both a necessary result and for a final cause, the former because the surface of a mass must solidify on heating as well as on cooling, the latter because the foetus must not be in a liquid but be separated from it. Some of these are called membranes and others choria”

Source: On the Generation of Animals: Book 2


“So Nature has first designed the two blood-vessels from the heart, and from these smaller vessels branch off to the uterus. These are what is called the umbilicus, for this is a blood-vessel, consisting of one or more vessels in different animals. Round these is a skin-like integument, because the weakness of the vessels needs protection and shelter. The vessels join on to the uterus like the roots of plants, and through them the embryo receives its nourishment.”

Source: On the Generation of Animals: Book 2

Aristotle - On the Generation of Animals: Book 2
https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/a/ari...ion/book2.html

Okay, here is a question for you: Greek philosophers had thousands of theories. How come the ones "paraphrased" in the Quran according to you, are also the ones matching recent scientific discovery?

[Damir9000]

Okay, here is a question for you: Greek philosophers had thousands of theories. How come the ones "paraphrased" in the Quran according to you, are also the ones matching recent scientific discovery?

What scientific discovery are you talking about?

Can you explain how verse of the Quran is a scientific discovery?

I just said they are incorrect and they paraphrase old incorrect knowledge.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

There are also studies by Chinese and Indian philosophers and medicine men. There are studies by ancient African civilization. Knowledge of the natural world has always fascinated people. Quran is not a book of natural science. The fact that certain things are described in the Quran doesn't mean is proof the books authenticity. Because 1400 years ago many people didn't know much about embryos. So for them, the book didn't prove anything.

However, retroactively, we can argue that some descriptive matters in the Quran which couldn't be verified in the past are now proven to be true thanks to modern scientific methods.

For people who believe in the Quran, this is merely a confirmation of their beliefs. But the true reason why they believe is much more complex. These science related matters might trigger certain people to study Quran and discover other aspects of the faith.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

What scientific discovery are you talking about?

Can you explain how verse of the Quran is a scientific discovery?

I just said they are incorrect and they paraphrase old incorrect knowledge.

I didn't say Quran is a scientific discovery.

[Damir9000]

There are also studies by Chinese and Indian philosophers and medicine men. There are studies by ancient African civilization. Knowledge of the natural world has always fascinated people. Quran is not a book of natural science. The fact that certain things are described in the Quran doesn't mean is proof the books authenticity. Because 1400 years ago many people didn't know much about embryos. So for them, the book didn't prove anything.

However, retroactively, we can argue that some descriptive matters in the Quran which couldn't be verified in the past are now proven to be true thanks to modern scientific methods.

For people who believe in the Quran, this is merely a confirmation of their beliefs. But the true reason why they believe is much more complex. These science related matters might trigger certain people to study Quran and discover other aspects of the faith.

So if the Quran says something scientifically incorrect its still the word of God?

[Damir9000]

I didn't say Quran is a scientific discovery.

I am just responding to Qais's quranic miracle claim.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

So if the Quran says something scientifically incorrect its still the word of God?

Yes. Because what is currently considered scientifically correct may no longer be considered correct in future when scientists make new discoveries.

Faith in science is therefore flawed. Because science is based on human observation. People observe and interpret observation based on their own biases. Once they adopt a different bias, they interpret what they observe in a totally different way.

Likewise, human beings haven't observed everything. We may observe something partially and we may observe the rest of it in future. Partial reception of a a articulate phenomenon combined with biases leads to blind faith in science which is as irrational als belief in divinity of idols.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

I can list at least 100 different scientifically proven facts which are no longer considered as such because recent scientific discovery disproved them.