Muslim claims of scientific accuracy in the Quran

[OnceConvinced]

In another thread:

Actually look through the Book(it's online I provide the link below lol) before you discredit it. I know the Title may throw you off, and you'll probably click the exit right then and there... but go through it.. check the table of contents and see whats most interesting...

http://www.sunnahonline.com/ilm/quran/qms.pdf

*~In reality what is in it could not have been known 1,400 years ago. So it proves God exists... and if you don't think so, well it lessens the chances that he doesn't... If you think one is vague go on to the next one, I assure you most of the verses are direct statements that meet up with what is now known.

Does this document prove that the Quran contains knowledge of the world that primitive man couldn't possibly have known? Does it prove that Allah is the one true God? Please justify your response.

[TrueReligion]

Only this point you mean that blood is leech like clot,? on what basis you made your conclusion about this? and what meaning you take from leech like clot?

Its proven already, that embryo in initial stages resembles leech-like substance, .So still I can;t understand, how you claim its wrong in Quran

Nope, nothing of the like has been proven. There is nothing similar between an embryo and a leech. Since you made the claim please show from a scientific site how they are similar.

Check online, you will find plenty of proofs, because its now a practice on our debates, that the source provided to you, you will reject it always

[Goat]

Only this point you mean that blood is leech like clot,? on what basis you made your conclusion about this? and what meaning you take from leech like clot?

Its proven already, that embryo in initial stages resembles leech-like substance, .So still I can;t understand, how you claim its wrong in Quran

Nope, nothing of the like has been proven. There is nothing similar between an embryo and a leech. Since you made the claim please show from a scientific site how they are similar.

Check online, you will find plenty of proofs, because its now a practice on our debates, that the source provided to you, you will reject it always

Really?? I showed the claim from the Quran, yet I have not seen any verifiable evidence presented anyplace that an embryo is like a leech. Do you have any non-religious sources? Any good biology book will do.

[Wyvern]

Only this point you mean that blood is leech like clot,? on what basis you made your conclusion about this? and what meaning you take from leech like clot?

Its proven already, that embryo in initial stages resembles leech-like substance, .So still I can;t understand, how you claim its wrong in Quran

Nope, nothing of the like has been proven. There is nothing similar between an embryo and a leech. Since you made the claim please show from a scientific site how they are similar.

Check online, you will find plenty of proofs, because its now a practice on our debates, that the source provided to you, you will reject it always

You are projecting, I have never rejected your use of online resources, the same can not be said of you though. Now instead of attacking me care to provide a link to a medical web site that shows or states that an embryo is similar in any way to a leech. It's not my job to do your research for you, you made a claim now it's time for you to prove or retract it.

[Tiberius47]

If any religion can show that its holy tet contains clear, unambiguous scientific information that the people of the time could not possibly know, I'll convert to that religion.

I do believe my atheism is safe....

Religious scriptures can show you signs as guidance only, it wont give you totaly formulaes etc etc so what kind of scientific proof you want in any kind of religion friend?

A passage in a holy text that said something like...

And the Earth moved in a great circle around the sun, held in place by the sun's mass. And the circle was not perfect, but was longer in one direction than the perpendicular, and the passage of the Earth swept out equal areas in equal times. And the sun shone with the light of its tiniest parts coming together.

That neatly describes a heliocentric solar system, elliptical orbits, Kepler's second law of planetary motion, gravity (as well as what causes it) and references the nuclear fusion which keeps the sun burning.

A god would be perfectly capable of communicating that knowledge to ancient people, and it is something that could not possibly be known to those people.

Any religious text with knowlege like this - clear, unambiguous and unknowable to the people of the time - would be very strong evidence for the validity of that religion.

And yet, when we look, we never find anything like this!

I may quote you few verses, and their detail, to make it understand, if this is what you are refering.


Consider the following
Quraanic verse: It is He Who created The Night and the Day, And the
sun and the moon: All (the celestial bodies) Swim along, each in its
Rounded course. [Al-Quraan 21:33]

That's a very vague description of elliptical orbits that sweep out equal areas in equal times, with the sun at one focus of the ellipse, doncha think?

The Arabic word used in the above verse is yasbahn . The word yasbahn is
derived from the word sabaha. It carries with it the idea of motion that comesfrom any moving body. If you use the word for a man on the ground, it would
not mean that he is rolling but would mean he is walking or running. If you
use the word for a man in water it would not mean that he is floating but
would mean that he is swimming.
Similarly, if you use the word yasbah for a celestial body such as the sun it
would not mean that it is only flying through space but would mean that it is
also rotating as it goes through space. Most of the school textbooks have
incorporated the fact that the sun rotates about its axis. The rotation of the sun
about its own axis can be proved with the help of an equipment that projects
the image of the sun on the table top so that one can examine the image of the
sun without being blinded. It is noticed that the sun has spots which complete
a circular motion once every 25 days i.e. the sun takes approximately 25 days
to rotate around its axis.
In fact, the sun travels through space at roughly 150 miles per second, and
takes about 200 million years to complete one revolution around the center of
our Milky Way Galaxy.

Unfortunately, NONE of that information is included in the passage from the Koran! So how do we know that the people who wrote that passage were aware of all that nifty information?

It is not permitted To the Sun to catch up The Moon, nor can The Night
outstrip the Day: Each (just) swims along In (its own) orbit (According to
Law). [Al-Quraan 36:40]This verse mentions an essential fact discovered by modern astronomy, i.e.
the existence of the individual orbits of the Sun and the Moon, and their
journey through space with their own motion. The fixed place towards,
which the sun travels, carrying with it the solar system, has been located
exactly by modern astronomy. It has been given a name, the Solar Apex. The
solar system is indeed moving in space towards a point situated in the
constellation of Hercules (alpha Layer) whose exact location is firmly
established.
The moon rotates around its axis in the same duration that it takes to revolve
around the earth. It takes approximately 29 days to complete one rotation.
One cannot help but be amazed at the scientific accuracy of the Quraanic verses. Should we not ponder over the question: What was the source of
knowledge contained in the Quraan?

Again, the passage you quoted reveals NONE of this information. All you are doing is interpreting passages in a certain way, without knowing that that is how the original writers of those passages intended for them to be interpreted.

I told you earlier before I refered to the verses, that no religious scripture will give you full formula, or full detail, they give you SIGNS, and it say that people with sense and understanding will get the perfect idea.
Like in embryology, at that ancient time 1400 or before, people dont know completly the process of child birth and etc.
And its given as well , that there are 3 layers of darkness, and whats the formation in stages etc etc, whch is proven by science as well.
Lastly I provided you with the link as well, you can browse in your free time, and get the idea of your field of interest.

Hope it answer your question.

In other words, these passages are easily explainable by saying that they are words written by men ignorant of the way the world worked, simply written with enough vagueness for people to be able to come along much later and say, "Well, gee, if you interpret it this way, it could be taken as meaning this fancy science thingy we've just worked out. And that proves that they knew this way back then! The Bible/Koran/other holy text MUST be true!"

I'm sorry, but real evidence doesn't work that way.

[TrueReligion]

Only this point you mean that blood is leech like clot,? on what basis you made your conclusion about this? and what meaning you take from leech like clot?

Its proven already, that embryo in initial stages resembles leech-like substance, .So still I can;t understand, how you claim its wrong in Quran

Nope, nothing of the like has been proven. There is nothing similar between an embryo and a leech. Since you made the claim please show from a scientific site how they are similar.

Check online, you will find plenty of proofs, because its now a practice on our debates, that the source provided to you, you will reject it always

You are projecting, I have never rejected your use of online resources, the same can not be said of you though. Now instead of attacking me care to provide a link to a medical web site that shows or states that an embryo is similar in any way to a leech. It's not my job to do your research for you, you made a claim now it's time for you to prove or retract it.

Its not hard to find, anyway here it iss,

http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/Isla ... _Quran.pdf

My point was not of providing the link and lettin you people do research, basic thing is that people never accept any source. So wats the point of providing?

[Wyvern]

Only this point you mean that blood is leech like clot,? on what basis you made your conclusion about this? and what meaning you take from leech like clot?

Its proven already, that embryo in initial stages resembles leech-like substance, .So still I can;t understand, how you claim its wrong in Quran

Nope, nothing of the like has been proven. There is nothing similar between an embryo and a leech. Since you made the claim please show from a scientific site how they are similar.

Check online, you will find plenty of proofs, because its now a practice on our debates, that the source provided to you, you will reject it always

You are projecting, I have never rejected your use of online resources, the same can not be said of you though. Now instead of attacking me care to provide a link to a medical web site that shows or states that an embryo is similar in any way to a leech. It's not my job to do your research for you, you made a claim now it's time for you to prove or retract it.

Its not hard to find, anyway here it iss,

http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/Isla ... _Quran.pdf

My point was not of providing the link and lettin you people do research, basic thing is that people never accept any source. So wats the point of providing?

Does paying attention cost too much? I ask for a medical link that shows you are correct in that embryo's are leech like and instead you link an e-book about the koran. You do understand don't you that the koran is not a medical textbook?

Maybe if you would pay attention and actually supply what is being asked for we would not have these problems. You show me a link to a medical site that states an embryo is leech like and I will be happy to accept it. You actually took half a step in the right direction by going to an education web site but then it's like you can't help yourself and instead link an e-book and secondly it's about the koran not medicine as requested and even so you will probably complain that we don't accept what you give us. It would be like if you went to a restaurant and ordered a steak but instead got a ham steak, would you be satisfied? Would you accept it?

[TrueReligion]

Only this point you mean that blood is leech like clot,? on what basis you made your conclusion about this? and what meaning you take from leech like clot?

Its proven already, that embryo in initial stages resembles leech-like substance, .So still I can;t understand, how you claim its wrong in Quran

Nope, nothing of the like has been proven. There is nothing similar between an embryo and a leech. Since you made the claim please show from a scientific site how they are similar.

Check online, you will find plenty of proofs, because its now a practice on our debates, that the source provided to you, you will reject it always

You are projecting, I have never rejected your use of online resources, the same can not be said of you though. Now instead of attacking me care to provide a link to a medical web site that shows or states that an embryo is similar in any way to a leech. It's not my job to do your research for you, you made a claim now it's time for you to prove or retract it.

Its not hard to find, anyway here it iss,

http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/Isla ... _Quran.pdf

My point was not of providing the link and lettin you people do research, basic thing is that people never accept any source. So wats the point of providing?

Does paying attention cost too much? I ask for a medical link that shows you are correct in that embryo's are leech like and instead you link an e-book about the koran. You do understand don't you that the koran is not a medical textbook?

Maybe if you would pay attention and actually supply what is being asked for we would not have these problems. You show me a link to a medical site that states an embryo is leech like and I will be happy to accept it. You actually took half a step in the right direction by going to an education web site but then it's like you can't help yourself and instead link an e-book and secondly it's about the koran not medicine as requested and even so you will probably complain that we don't accept what you give us. It would be like if you went to a restaurant and ordered a steak but instead got a ham steak, would you be satisfied? Would you accept it?

It this writen by a muslim? does garry miller sounds to you as a muslim?
PPay attenntion buddy, stop the habbit of always finding the faults and not paying attention on the source, just read it,, it provides all the biological evidence of what you are asking.
Thanks

More statements of non-muslim scientists for Quran.

http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1-h.htm



http://www.sultan.org/articles/QScience.html

Now ive provided enough proofs, its ur time to show, if any of these scientists statements are wrong.

[Wyvern]

It this writen by a muslim? does garry miller sounds to you as a muslim?
PPay attenntion buddy, stop the habbit of always finding the faults and not paying attention on the source, just read it,, it provides all the biological evidence of what you are asking.
Thanks

More statements of non-muslim scientists for Quran.

http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1-h.htm



http://www.sultan.org/articles/QScience.html

Now ive provided enough proofs, its ur time to show, if any of these scientists statements are wrong.

Are you not allowed to go to a medical website? I'm really wondering now, I have asked twice now for you to provide a link from a medical website stating the embryo is like a leech and both times you throw out links which just restate what you have already said. You say medical science considers what you say to be a fact but you are either unwilling or unable to provide anything that would prove your claims.

You make a medical claim you had better be able to prove it with a link to a medical website. You on the other hand have made a medical claim and don't seem to understand that a religious website isn't a medical website. Most major universities have medical schools and embryology is a relatively popular subject. It took me less than two minutes to find a decent overview complete with pictures and descriptions of an embryos developement. If what you say is true it should be a quick and easy process to provide a medical link that states what you say.

[TrueReligion]

It this writen by a muslim? does garry miller sounds to you as a muslim?
PPay attenntion buddy, stop the habbit of always finding the faults and not paying attention on the source, just read it,, it provides all the biological evidence of what you are asking.
Thanks

More statements of non-muslim scientists for Quran.

http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1-h.htm



http://www.sultan.org/articles/QScience.html

Now ive provided enough proofs, its ur time to show, if any of these scientists statements are wrong.

Are you not allowed to go to a medical website? I'm really wondering now, I have asked twice now for you to provide a link from a medical website stating the embryo is like a leech and both times you throw out links which just restate what you have already said. You say medical science considers what you say to be a fact but you are either unwilling or unable to provide anything that would prove your claims.

You make a medical claim you had better be able to prove it with a link to a medical website. You on the other hand have made a medical claim and don't seem to understand that a religious website isn't a medical website. Most major universities have medical schools and embryology is a relatively popular subject. It took me less than two minutes to find a decent overview complete with pictures and descriptions of an embryos developement. If what you say is true it should be a quick and easy process to provide a medical link that states what you say.

Who prepare the medical websites? politicians? spors man? ofcourse medical professors of medical personalities prepare them riight?
All in these links, who are the authors or the professors? Islamic scholars or Medical Scholars?

The site does'nt matter whhere its from, the material in the website matter, and all these websites, the material is all from non-muslim medical professors, You realy are not paying attention, and just trying to avoid the main topic and links.

[Tiberius47]

True religion, who is best qualified to make an accurate claim about the development of embryos? Muslims studying the Koran or people who have trained for years in medecine?

And will you answer my question or not?