Jump to content
Islamic Forum
atheism101

Does God Exist?

Recommended Posts

I would like to know your most convincing argument that God exists. I would prefer if you thought up arguments by yourselves instead of throwing quotes of the Quran at me.

 

I used to be a Muslim for 17 years of my life but then decided that there was insufficient reason to believe that God exists. Before you proceed to tell me an argument for the existence of God, please take the time to define God, so we know what it is you are arguing for the existence of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll tell you a story :sl:

 

One day an atheist make a rendesvouz with a religious scholar to prove and discuss whether God existed. They set the appointment time to be at afternoon, on the riverside. The atheist is waiting, but the scholar doesn't come - he's late. 20 minutes later, the scholar showed up sailing with his raft. "dude, you're not just late, you're so very late! what take you so long, you've made me almost die waiting!" the atheist miffed.

 

the scholar answered, "sorry my friend. but a strange event happened today. when I wanted to cross this river, I realized the bridge has fallen down, hit by the wind. So I just sat and waited, and some strange event happened. Suddenly the trees beside me fell down, its woods are chopped themselves into pieces, and then they arranged themselves in a row. Suddenly, a wind came brought the rope, and the rope was moving accidentally, binding itself to the woods....and it's made a raft themselves. You see this raft I've used to sail here? It's made by a series of accidents!"

 

atheist : "dude, you're out of your mind" the atheist answered, "how come the trees magically transformed themselves into a well-made raft by accidents? Someone's hands must have created the raft! In order to create this raft, someone have to cut down a tree, chopped its woods, arrange them, and bind these woods together by rope"

 

scholar : "what happened if this raft is truly made by accidentally strange events?"

 

atheist : "you'll be lucky if you can sail by a trunk. you'll be drowned before you could even sail"

 

scholar : "my friend. if even creating the raft requires a series of intended action to make it well-made, how about the Universe that is million times more complex than merely a piece of raft? why can Universe live to million years with its planetary systems stood still, not colliding each other? if Universe is so fragile, we won't even live and able to stand here right now, will we?"

 

 

My friend, if I may ask, can you tell me the reason why you became atheist in the first place? No judgment meaning at all, really. I'm just curious....would you? :sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll tell you a story :sl:

 

One day an atheist make a rendesvouz with a religious scholar to prove and discuss whether God existed. They set the appointment time to be at afternoon, on the riverside. The atheist is waiting, but the scholar doesn't come - he's late. 20 minutes later, the scholar showed up sailing with his raft. "dude, you're not just late, you're so very late! what take you so long, you've made me almost die waiting!" the atheist miffed.

 

the scholar answered, "sorry my friend. but a strange event happened today. when I wanted to cross this river, I realized the bridge has fallen down, hit by the wind. So I just sat and waited, and some strange event happened. Suddenly the trees beside me fell down, its woods are chopped themselves into pieces, and then they arranged themselves in a row. Suddenly, a wind came brought the rope, and the rope was moving accidentally, binding itself to the woods....and it's made a raft themselves. You see this raft I've used to sail here? It's made by a series of accidents!"

 

atheist : "dude, you're out of your mind" the atheist answered, "how come the trees magically transformed themselves into a well-made raft by accidents? Someone's hands must have created the raft! In order to create this raft, someone have to cut down a tree, chopped its woods, arrange them, and bind these woods together by rope"

 

scholar : "what happened if this raft is truly made by accidentally strange events?"

 

atheist : "you'll be lucky if you can sail by a trunk. you'll be drowned before you could even sail"

 

scholar : "my friend. if even creating the raft requires a series of intended action to make it well-made, how about the Universe that is million times more complex than merely a piece of raft? why can Universe live to million years with its planetary systems stood still, not colliding each other? if Universe is so fragile, we won't even live and able to stand here right now, will we?"

My friend, if I may ask, can you tell me the reason why you became atheist in the first place? No judgment meaning at all, really. I'm just curious....would you? :sl:

 

I've heard this too many times. It is an extremely shallow view of the question.

You couldn't possibly believe what the "scholar" just said. First and foremost is the problem that what the scholar describes is against the laws of nature. In order for the raft to form like this it would have to bypass several forces which is not unlikely, it is impossible. This sounds more like a magic trick, like when the prophet Moses would throw his stick and it would become a snake. Interestingly enough you yourself are condemning "magical" events like that.

The universe does not break the laws of nature. We understand a great deal of how the universe got here. And even if we didn't, the best you could do would be an argument from ignorance, a God of the gaps.

Why don't the planets collide? Gravity. The universe may as well be "fragile" though I don't know what you mean by that. However this is proof of nothing. Just because we exist doesn't mean we HAD to. If I handed you a shuffled deck of 52 cards would you be amazed? Would you think, hey this very arrangement of cards had a probability of 1/(52!). No, you would see no reason why the deck was what it was, it just randomly happened to be. In the same way, we didn't HAVE to exist. Our existence is as much of a miracle as a shuffled deck of cards.

Finally and perhaps most importantly, would you say that a human is more complex than a raft - and therefore a human could create a raft? Using similar reasoning would you say that God is more complex than the universe (if He is simpler how did he create the universe)? I will respond to this point once you answer that question.

 

I am an ex-Muslim, and I decided there is insufficient evidence to believe anything supernatural the Quran or any religious book or any religion claims, and until there is sufficient evidence presented to support these extraordinary claims, the default state is disbelief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is so many scientific information in quran wich only could come from God, and not from humans, beacuse there was no technology during that time, no micrscopes, no telescopes, no computers, and so on

 

 

THIS IS EVIDENCE WHY QURAN IS FROM GOD AND NOT HUMANS

 

 

God tells us in the quran about cow's milk formation

 

######you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetwata.cc/forums/imgcache/2328.imgcache.jpg[/img]

 

God said:

 

"And in the livestock there is a lesson for you: we provide you with a drink from their bellies. From the midst of digested food and blood, you get pure milk, delicious for the drinkers. (The Noble Quran, 16:66)"

 

what science says about this:

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetfoodsci.uoguelph.ca/dairyedu/biosynthesis.html"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetfoodsci.uoguelph.ca/dairyedu/biosynthesis.html[/url]

 

Milk Biosynthesis

Milk is synthesized in the mammary gland. Within the mammary gland is the milk producing unit, the alveolus. It contains a single layer of epithelial secretory cells surrounding a central storage area called the lumen, which is connected to a duct system. The secretory cells are, in turn, surrounded by a layer of myoepithelial cells and blood capillaries.

The raw materials for milk production are transported via the bloodstream to the secretory cells. It takes 400-800 L of blood to deliver components for 1 L of milk.

 

Proteins: building blocks are amino acids in the blood. Casein micelles, or small aggregates thereof, may begin aggregation in Golgi vesicles within the secretory cell.

Lipids:

C4-C14 fatty acids are synthesized in the cells

C16 and greater fatty acids are preformed as a result of rumen hydrogenation and are transported directly in the blood

Lactose: milk is in osmotic equilibrium with the blood and is controlled by lactose, K, Na, Cl; lactose synthesis regulates the volume of milk secreted

 

from wikipedia:

 

"The carbohydrate lactose gives milk its sweet taste and contributes about 40% of whole cow milk's calories. Lactose is a composite of two simple sugars, glucose and galactose. In nature, lactose is found only in milk and a small number of plants (McGee 17).Other components found in raw cow milk are living white blood cells, mammary-gland cells, various bacteria, and a large number of active enzymes (McGee 16).

how can anyone in 6th century know without microscope and other modern equipment that white milk forms from red blood ?????

 

this is truly amazing proof that quran only can be from God and nobody else.

 

 

I ASK YOU ATHEISM, HOW COULD ANYBODY KNOW IN 6TH CENTURY WITHOUT MICROSOPE THAT WHITE MILK WAS CREATED FROM RED BLOOD?

CAN YOU ANSWER THAT QUESTION, THIS IS MY EVIDENCE OF EXISTENCE OF GOD, BEACUSE ONLY GOD HAD SUCH MICROSCOPIC INFORMATION AND THERE IS NO CHANCE THAT A HUMAN COULD KNOW IN ARABIAN DESERT WITHOUT MICRSOPE WHAT IS GOING ON ON MICROSCOPIC LEVEL.

 

CAN YOU ANSWER THAT ?

 

Who Created God?..FUNNY Hamza Tzortzis...

Edited by andalusi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is so many scientific information in quran wich only could come from God, and not from humans, beacuse there was no technology during that time, no micrscopes, no telescopes, no computers, and so on

THIS IS EVIDENCE WHY QURAN IS FROM GOD AND NOT HUMANS

 

Considering you also believe in devils, angels, magicians, etc., there is no way you could demonstrate that some sort of magician did not acquire this information. Even if certain claims were shown to be correct it does not add credibility to the rest of the claims.

Also don't talk about science if you're going to cheat with it. You can't accept some science and then reject other science (such as evolution).

 

God tells us in the quran about cow's milk formation

...

God said:

 

"And in the livestock there is a lesson for you: we provide you with a drink from their bellies. From the midst of digested food and blood, you get pure milk, delicious for the drinkers. (The Noble Quran, 16:66)"

 

what science says about this:

 

...

 

Milk Biosynthesis

Milk is synthesized in the mammary gland. Within the mammary gland is the milk producing unit, the alveolus. It contains a single layer of epithelial secretory cells surrounding a central storage area called the lumen, which is connected to a duct system. The secretory cells are, in turn, surrounded by a layer of myoepithelial cells and blood capillaries.

The raw materials for milk production are transported via the bloodstream to the secretory cells. It takes 400-800 L of blood to deliver components for 1 L of milk.

 

Proteins: building blocks are amino acids in the blood. Casein micelles, or small aggregates thereof, may begin aggregation in Golgi vesicles within the secretory cell.

Lipids:

C4-C14 fatty acids are synthesized in the cells

C16 and greater fatty acids are preformed as a result of rumen hydrogenation and are transported directly in the blood

Lactose: milk is in osmotic equilibrium with the blood and is controlled by lactose, K, Na, Cl; lactose synthesis regulates the volume of milk secreted

 

from wikipedia:

 

"The carbohydrate lactose gives milk its sweet taste and contributes about 40% of whole cow milk's calories. Lactose is a composite of two simple sugars, glucose and galactose. In nature, lactose is found only in milk and a small number of plants (McGee 17).Other components found in raw cow milk are living white blood cells, mammary-gland cells, various bacteria, and a large number of active enzymes (McGee 16).

how can anyone in 6th century know without microscope and other modern equipment that white milk forms from red blood ?????

 

this is truly amazing proof that quran only can be from God and nobody else.

I ASK YOU ATHEISM, HOW COULD ANYBODY KNOW IN 6TH CENTURY WITHOUT MICROSOPE THAT WHITE MILK WAS CREATED FROM RED BLOOD?

CAN YOU ANSWER THAT QUESTION, THIS IS MY EVIDENCE OF EXISTENCE OF GOD, BEACUSE ONLY GOD HAD SUCH MICROSCOPIC INFORMATION AND THERE IS NO CHANCE THAT A HUMAN COULD KNOW IN ARABIAN DESERT WITHOUT MICRSOPE WHAT IS GOING ON ON MICROSCOPIC LEVEL.

 

CAN YOU ANSWER THAT ?

Nope, nothing miraculous. What the Quran said was extremely superficial, along the lines of well cows eat stuff and milk comes out. It would be impressive if the whole process was fully described like you described from outside sources. Of course this is not the case. If the verse was truly magnificent you would not need to explain how it vaguely resembles what actually happens.

 

Who Created God?..FUNNY Hamza Tzortzis...

...

 

This isn't even vaguely relevant to the rest of the post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

scientific evidence that quran is from God

 

for example Big bang and expansion of Universe

 

God said this in quran.

 

Big bang

 

21:30- Do not these disbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were an integrated mass, which We then split, and from water We made all living things? Will they not believe even then?

 

EXPANDING UNIVERSE

 

51:47- With power did We construct heaven. Verily, We are expanding it.

 

Nummerical miracles in quran, programmed book, evidence of divine construction of quran

 

 

Testing the Mathematical Miracles in the Quran - 1 of 2

 

Testing the Mathematical Miracles in the Quran - 2 of 2

 

 

and here is my evidence from nature that God exists

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

scientific evidence that quran is from God

 

for example Big bang and expansion of Universe

 

God said this in quran.

 

Big bang

 

21:30- Do not these disbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were an integrated mass, which We then split, and from water We made all living things? Will they not believe even then?

 

It's inaccurate to say the heaven and earth were "split", because the earth did not even come into existence until roughly 10 billion years after the big bang. Also, there are similar accounts in the bible, for instance:

http://www.reasons.o...taught-it-first

 

EXPANDING UNIVERSE

 

51:47- With power did We construct heaven. Verily, We are expanding it.

 

A similar claim for the bible:

Isaiah 40:22

It is He who sits above the circle of the earth,

And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers,

Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain,

And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.

 

Nummerical miracles in quran, programmed book, evidence of divine construction of quran

Of the infinite possibilities of what to count, it is unimpressive that you can find numerical coincidences. The probability is simply not that impressive. You can find similar coincidences in the bible. You can find similar coincidences in any text large enough, if you have the tools and willpower to check through the possibilities. If you counted two sets of synonyms or antonyms and found nothing interesting, it obviously would not have been mentioned. And of all of these possibilities, you are certainly expected to have some interesting patterns, which, if highlighted separately rather than in context of all the failed possibilities, could seem marvelous.

 

 

Testing the Mathematical Miracles in the Quran - 1 of 2

 

Testing the Mathematical Miracles in the Quran - 2 of 2

I'm uninterested in testing them, because I'm willing to grant you that all of them are true.

 

 

and here is my evidence from nature that God exists

It's pretty unimpressive that someone attributed sperm to cause birth. Something more interesting would have been to mention the role of the female reproductive system.

As for the argument from design, that is intellectually weak and already explained by evolution. There also seems to be an equivocation on the word "motor". Furthermore, it's also been proven that flagellum could have different functions and evolution could bring them about. The video is anti-evolution which clearly demonstrates that it has a creationist agenda. There is no intellectual opposition to evolution. If you actually look up the facts, you will learn that essentially no serious biologist denies evolution. The DNA evidence, fossil record, geographical evidence, etc all point to evolution and nothing has contradicted it.

Edit:

I have a post regarding evolution here:

http://www.gawaher.com/topic/737899-the-theory-of-evolution/

Edited by atheism101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's inaccurate to say the heaven and earth were "split", because the earth did not even come into existence until roughly 10 billion years after the big bang. Also, there are similar accounts in the bible, for instance:

http://www.reasons.o...taught-it-first

 

 

 

Of the infinite possibilities of what to count, it is unimpressive that you can find numerical coincidences. The probability is simply not that impressive. You can find similar coincidences in the bible. You can find similar coincidences in any text large enough, if you have the tools and willpower to check through the possibilities. If you counted two sets of synonyms or antonyms and found nothing interesting, it obviously would not have been mentioned. And of all of these possibilities, you are certainly expected to have some interesting patterns, which, if highlighted separately rather than in context of all the failed possibilities, could seem marvelous.

 

 

 

I'm uninterested in testing them, because I'm willing to grant you that all of them are true.

 

 

 

It's pretty unimpressive that someone attributed sperm to cause birth. Something more interesting would have been to mention the role of the female reproductive system.

As for the argument from design, that is intellectually weak and already explained by evolution. There also seems to be an equivocation on the word "motor". Furthermore, it's also been proven that flagellum could have different functions and evolution could bring them about. The video is anti-evolution which clearly demonstrates that it has a creationist agenda. There is no intellectual opposition to evolution. If you actually look up the facts, you will learn that essentially no serious biologist denies evolution. The DNA evidence, fossil record, geographical evidence, etc all point to evolution and nothing has contradicted it.

Edit:

I have a post regarding evolution here:

http://www.gawaher.c...y-of-evolution/

 

 

 

It's inaccurate to say the heaven and earth were "split", because the earth did not even come into existence until roughly 10 billion years after the big bang. Also, there are similar accounts in the bible, for instance:

 

you dont think correctly here beacuse, this evrse is talking about origin of earth and universe

 

Let me give you an example:

 

If i told you, that you were in your fathers balls, and you reply to me, HOW CAN I BE IN MY FATHERS BALLS, WITH FLESH, BONES, AND BLOOD, AND MAN 1:80m

 

but you forgot that you were a sperm, and was not like you were today. Same it is with th earth, earth was not like this during big bang, but atoms were presents or created during big bang and from those atoms earth and evertyhing else were created.

 

 

A similar claim for the bible:

Isaiah 40:22

 

for the sake of argument , i accept that. But how could bible and quran know that, i will tell you that. God gave information to prophets, prophets told it to people, and people wrote some parts of it in bible while in quran is direct speach to Muhammed.

 

But bible is corrupted book, and changed , that is why we cant trust bible unless you have reference to correct it, like scanner to detect errors and true, our scanner is Quran.

 

In quran is a lot of scientific stuff, like Pulsars, black holes, geomtry of universe, and many many other stuff wich were unknown until last 150 years when we could discover it with modern techonlogy.

 

 

 

Of the infinite possibilities of what to count, it is unimpressive that you can find numerical coincidences. The probability is simply not that impressive.

 

 

 

you cant see the miracle, but the inrtesting thins is that quran is programmed that text and verse numbers, and chapter number are in corelation with nature and universe

 

These stuff are mentioned in quran:

 

 

This world 115 times ----Next word (hereafter) 115 times

 

Malaikat (angels) 88 - Shaytan (Satan) 88

 

Life 145 - Death 145

 

Tongue 25-- Sermon 25

 

jesus 25- adam 25 times (and in another verse it says that Jesus and Adam are equal in sight of God)

 

Man 24 -- Woman 24

 

And amazingly enough have a look how many times the following words appear: Salat (Prayer ) 5 (this is how many prayers muslims should do every day)

 

Month 12 times

 

Day 365 times

 

Seven heavens - 7 times

 

Moon mentiond 28 times in 27 verses, wich correspond to phases of Moon

 

Neutron mentioned in verse 18:39, neutron is 1,839 times heaver than electron

 

Proton mentioned in verse 18:37, proton is 1,839 times heavier than electron

 

Venus mentioned in one verse, second time it is mentioned 243 verses after it is mentioned first time, wich correspond to revolving 243 days around its own axis

 

Word Mekka is positioned in verse ,exactly wich correspond to position of Mekka from north to south pole

 

and there is a lot of these nummerical miracles in quran.

 

HOW CAN THIS BE coincidence, AND THERE I MUCH MORE SUCH STUFF.

 

 

 

You can find similar coincidences in the bible. You can find similar coincidences in any text large enough,

 

i dont think so, if that is true, show us then.

 

 

I'm uninterested in testing them, because I'm willing to grant you that all of them are true.

 

what, are you afraid of something?? :D i am telling you to watch the video when they show you nummerical miracle in quran, and you reject that.

 

So how can i convince you if you shut your eyes in front of eviedences?? impossible.

 

 

 

As for the argument from design, that is intellectually weak and already explained by evolution.

 

not true, if so, then explain to us what is the evolutionary mechanism wich gives instructions to cells so they can connect different parts of the engine?

 

 

The DNA evidence, fossil record, geographical evidence, etc all point to evolution and nothing has contradicted it.

 

 

DNA is the evidence for inteligent design not evolution

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

you dont think correctly here beacuse, this evrse is talking about origin of earth and universe

 

Let me give you an example:

 

If i told you, that you were in your fathers balls, and you reply to me, HOW CAN I BE IN MY FATHERS BALLS, WITH FLESH, BONES, AND BLOOD, AND MAN 1:80m

 

but you forgot that you were a sperm, and was not like you were today. Same it is with th earth, earth was not like this during big bang, but atoms were presents or created during big bang and from those atoms earth and evertyhing else were created.

I've responded to this exact point before, in a different thread. *I* was never in my father's balls, not was anyone in any of their fathers balls. Just because there was sperm which then could fertilize and become me, does not mean the whole of me was in there. That's ridiculous. And you know it's ridiculous. No one would seriously say they were in their father's balls. I am defined in this physical sense which simply does not reduce to a sperm cell.

 

 

 

for the sake of argument , i accept that. But how could bible and quran know that, i will tell you that. God gave information to prophets, prophets told it to people, and people wrote some parts of it in bible while in quran is direct speach to Muhammed.

 

But bible is corrupted book, and changed , that is why we cant trust bible unless you have reference to correct it, like scanner to detect errors and true, our scanner is Quran.

I am willing to bet you know very little about the origins of the bible. The bible was written centuries after Jesus died. There are no biblical records from the time of Jesus. What's worse is, a lot of Quranic descriptions of the biblical stories actually come from accounts written even centuries after the gospels in the current bible - accounts that have been universally accepted as historically inaccurate especially due to how late they were written. So you have yet to explain how these "miracles" show up in the bible.

 

In quran is a lot of scientific stuff, like Pulsars, black holes, geomtry of universe, and many many other stuff wich were unknown until last 150 years when we could discover it with modern techonlogy.

Sure. Then why didn't Muslims claim these things BEFORE they were discovered?

you cant see the miracle, but the inrtesting thins is that quran is programmed that text and verse numbers, and chapter number are in corelation with nature and universe

I've heard these exact claims with the bible.

what, are you afraid of something?? :D i am telling you to watch the video when they show you nummerical miracle in quran, and you reject that.

So how can i convince you if you shut your eyes in front of eviedences?? impossible.

Do you read? I said I am willing to grant you all of the supposed numerical coincidences and am uninterested in the actual counts. ALL of them. I'm not disputing ANY of them. My argument does not rely on the authenticity of these claims.

 

 

 

 

 

 

not true, if so, then explain to us what is the evolutionary mechanism wich gives instructions to cells so they can connect different parts of the engine?

There is no literal engine. We call these things such by analogy.

 

 

 

 

DNA is the evidence for inteligent design not evolution

I'm not going to waste my time bickering with you about the design argument. Like I said, it is intellectually weak. If conditions were not right for us, we wouldn't have been here! It's just that simple. We are here, so of course the conditions are right for us!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've responded to this exact point before, in a different thread. *I* was never in my father's balls, not was anyone in any of their fathers balls. Just because there was sperm which then could fertilize and become me, does not mean the whole of me was in there. That's ridiculous. And you know it's ridiculous. No one would seriously say they were in their father's balls. I am defined in this physical sense which simply does not reduce to a sperm cell.

 

 

 

I am willing to bet you know very little about the origins of the bible. The bible was written centuries after Jesus died. There are no biblical records from the time of Jesus. What's worse is, a lot of Quranic descriptions of the biblical stories actually come from accounts written even centuries after the gospels in the current bible - accounts that have been universally accepted as historically inaccurate especially due to how late they were written. So you have yet to explain how these "miracles" show up in the bible.

 

 

Sure. Then why didn't Muslims claim these things BEFORE they were discovered?

 

I've heard these exact claims with the bible.

 

Do you read? I said I am willing to grant you all of the supposed numerical coincidences and am uninterested in the actual counts. ALL of them. I'm not disputing ANY of them. My argument does not rely on the authenticity of these claims.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is no literal engine. We call these things such by analogy.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not going to waste my time bickering with you about the design argument. Like I said, it is intellectually weak. If conditions were not right for us, we wouldn't have been here! It's just that simple. We are here, so of course the conditions are right for us!

 

 

 

*I* was never in my father's balls, not was anyone in any of their fathers balls. Just because there was sperm which then could fertilize and become me, does not mean the whole of me was in there. That's ridiculous.

 

cant you see the irony here??? that is exactly what i am saying to you but you dont understand that, you accused quran that quran say earth was present during big bang is like a would say you were in your fathers balls.

 

just like earth was not present during big bang like it is today you were also not present in you fathers balls like you are today.

 

 

 

 

I am willing to bet you know very little about the origins of the bible. The bible was written centuries after Jesus died. There are no biblical records from the time of Jesus. What's worse is, a lot of Quranic descriptions of the biblical stories actually come from accounts written even centuries after the gospels in the current bible - accounts that have been universally accepted as historically inaccurate especially due to how late they were written. So you have yet to explain how these "miracles" show up in the bible.

 

Old testament was written before jesus, new testament was written after jesus.

 

 

Sure. Then why didn't Muslims claim these things BEFORE they were discovered?

 

beacuse God talked about it with easy explanations so you cant understand it properlly until you discover it with modern technology

 

let me give you an example

 

 

Pulsars/neutron stars in Quran

 

PULSARS

 

283511main_fermigrop_pulsarmodel_HI.jpg

 

God says in quran:

 

V 1- By the heavens and The Knocker.

V 2- How will you comprehend what the The Knocker is?

V 3- It’s a piercing star.

86-The Knocker, V1-V3 [86 SURE AT-TALIQ, V1-V3]

 

The word “Tariq” stems from the root “TaRaQa” meaning “knocking, striking.” In many translations of the Quran this word was taken for a name and left untranslated. The word may also mean “to pulsate” like a beating heart, from which the word “pulsar” is derived, denoting an object that is far away in space, and like a star produces a regular radio signal.

 

LITTLE GREEN MEN OF THE UNIVERSE

 

In 1967 Jocellyn Bell accidentally stumbled on a gravity time warp a million times greater than that produced by the sun. The object she detected was emitting regular pulses. These pulses were reminiscent of heart-beats. At the time, such a pulsating object was not known to exist in space. At first, it was concluded that these signals might well have been propagated by intelligent beings, inhabitants of other planets. Invitation cards were printed, the media were notified and a seminar was arranged. LGM (Little Green Men) signified that intelligent creatures had been detected and were contacted by radio signals. Not long after, the source of the signals in question was discovered: it was a spinning neutron star, an object whose velocity was incommensurably great. The neutron star had another name: “pulsar.” Bell’s discovery failed to establish contact with the inhabitants of space, but she had found pulsars. The words “pulsar” and “pulsating” seem to accord with the word Tariq of the Quran, which means “knocker.”

 

CAN YOU COMPREHEND WHAT A PULSAR IS?

 

In the second verse of the sura, The Knocker, we read: “How will you comprehend what The Knocker is?” A spoonful of matter taken from a pulsar would weigh one billion tons. Were we to depose a small particle of it on earth, the particle would pierce it and end up in its center. Just think of it, a spoonful of any matter on earth hardly weighing more than a few grams! This shows how difficult it is to conceive of a pulsar. A pulsar is produced by the compression of stars a couple of times bigger than the sun. The diameter of a pulsar can be about 15-20 km. Were we to compress our world in a like manner, we would have a sphere of 100 meters of diameter. It takes the earth 24 hours to rotate around its own axis, whereas the pulsar rotates around its own axis many times per second; all these things show how difficult it is to comprehend this striking, pulsating star.

 

LET’S SEE IF YOU CAN WORK A MIRACLE

 

Some have tried to identify the star mentioned in the verse and have claimed it to be a certain celestial body, like Saturn or Venus. Mustafa Mlivo, who claims these assumptions are not correct and that “Tariq” is none other than a pulsar, says the following:

 

Characteristics of the celestial object mentioned in 86:1-3 are:

 

1- It pulsates (knocks);

2- It is a star;

3- It penetrates, pierces, drills.

 

None of the solar system planets meets all those criteria because:

 

A- None of the planets produces pulsations that give the impression of knocking, beating.

B- None of them is a star. They are cold celestial bodies.

C- None of them produces such an intensive radiation.

 

As one can see, the Quran had already mentioned a star that was to be discovered. This star was indeed discovered, but in the year 1970. Since the concept of a “pulsating star” could not be imagined at that time, it was rendered in translation as it stood, i.e., “Tariq,” the meaning of it being explained in footnotes, in dictionaries and interpretations.

 

The Quran whose every sentence, every word is based on the finest of meanings, wherein lie hidden realms still to be discovered. The more we study the Quran, the more we are enlightened, the more we learn.

 

sounds of pulsars

http://www.jb.man.ac...nds/sounds.html

 

PSR B0329+54

This pulsar is a typical, normal pulsar, rotating with a period of 0.714519 seconds, i.e. close to 1.40 rotations/sec.

 

listen here how it Knocks

http://www.jb.man.ac...Sounds/B0329.au

 

PSR B0833-45, The Vela Pulsar

This pulsar lies near the centre of the Vela supernova remnant, which is the debris of the explosion of a massive star about 10,000 years ago. The pulsar is the collapsed core of this star, rotating with a period of 89 milliseconds or about 11 times a second.

 

listen here how it Knocks

http://www.jb.man.ac.../Sounds/vela.au

 

HOW COULD MUHAMMED OR ANYBODY ELSE KNOW THE CARACTERISTICS OF PULSARS WHEN THEY HAD NOT TELESCOPES , COMPUTERS AND AMPLIFIERS?

 

 

so God used simple language to explain pulsars with 3 key words: (Knocking/Pulsating, Piercing, Star)

 

 

I've heard these exact claims with the bible.

 

i hear a lot of crazy stuff but without any evidence for it, like there is no evidence for that claim that bible contain nummerical miracles. But in my case, i provide you evidence that quran contains nummerical miracles, wich you obviously dont want to look at.

 

 

I said I am willing to grant you all of the supposed numerical coincidences and am uninterested in the actual counts. ALL of them. I'm not disputing ANY of them. My argument does not rely on the authenticity of these claims.

 

why do you call it coincidences? how can you call somthing coincidens when you can create somhing like that even today with modern computers?

 

 

There is no literal engine. We call these things such by analogy.

 

yes there is natural engine/motor

flagellum.jpg

 

 

 

I'm not going to waste my time bickering with you about the design argument. Like I said, it is intellectually weak. If conditions were not right for us, we wouldn't have been here! It's just that simple. We are here, so of course the conditions are right for us!

 

Ateists says:

from this B, D, F, A, C, E to this----> (ABCDEF)

No creator is needed

 

I say

from B, D, F, A, C, E to this---->; (ABCDEF)

you need a thinking creator

 

so what is more logical, judge for yoursefl?

 

car engine like engines of bacterias and spermcells

car-and-driver-engine-001.jpg

 

evidence that someone constructed it

 

atheists says:

 

from this

legos.jpg

 

 

to this

Ultimate-LEGO-Building-Set003.png

 

No creator is needed, it creates itself

 

 

religious people say

 

from this

legos.jpg

 

 

to this

Ultimate-LEGO-Building-Set003.png

you need a thinking creator

 

 

So who is more logical here????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quran miracle, do you know that quran mention televsion, neutron , protons by name and other stuff from future? LOOK THIS

 

2v29uyq.jpg

 

21od168.jpg

 

1zy77s.jpg

 

2pts7ev.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2hec590.jpg

 

http://www.ehow.co.u....on-proton.html

 

Neutron

Located in the nucleus of atoms, neutrons have mass slightly lower than those of protons. This indivisible particle gets its name for the fact that it has no electrical charge. It is 1,839 times the size in mass of an electron.

 

Proton

Elements get their atomic number based on the number of protons found in each atom. This indivisible particle in the nucleus of an atom carries a positive charge, referred to as "1" on the atomic weight scale. A proton has a mass 1,837 times greater than that of an electron.

 

 

When was neutron discovered?

 

It is remarkable that the neutron was not discovered until 1932 when James Chadwick used scattering data to calculate the mass of this neutral particle.

 

http://hyperphysics.....eutrondis.html

 

 

Who discovered the neutron and when?

 

Answer:

The British experimental physicist James Chadwick discovered the neutron in 1932. Of the three fundamental particles that make up atoms, the electron, the proton and the neutron, the neutron was the last to be discovered. It's lack of a charge made it more elusive than its companions. Links can be found below.

 

The existence of a "neutral element" within the atom was suggested by Ernest Rutherford in 1920 and was proposed by Santiago Antunez de Mayolo at the Third Scientific Pan-American Congress in 1924.

 

(see related links)

James Chadwick 1932

 

Read more: http://wiki.answers.....#ixzz1vmnfwvl6

 

How can you explain, that you can find word NEUTRON in a book from 6th century wich claims it is reveleation from God who knows future and past, and not only that, verse is 18:39, wich is (1,839) mass of neutron greater than an electron?

 

Remember also, Word Neutron was not even invented yet....

 

 

What was Allah's intention when he put all these numerical miracles in the quran? what was to be gained by it?

 

Allah answers in Quran:

 

38:87 The Qur'an is nothing but a Reminder for all peoples.

88 And after a time shall ye surely know its message.

 

[41:53] We will show them our proofs in the horizons, and within themselves, until they realize that this is the truth. Is your Lord not sufficient as a witness of all things?

 

21:37 Man was created hasty: I will show you My signs soon, so do not ask Me to hasten them.

 

those miracles in quran are proofs that this book is is from the Lord of Universe, Allah, creator of everything, who knows everything.

 

Intresting this is that Allah says in same chapter this

 

Allah says this:

 

18:29...‘Now the truth has come from your Lord: let those who wish to believe in it do so, and let those who wish to reject it do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TELEVISION IN THE QURAN, A BOOK WICH IS 1400 YEARS OLD

1.jpg

 

33mstx2.jpg

 

IS THIS NOT PROOF THAT QURAN WAS REVEALED BY SOMEONE WHO KNOWS FUTURE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cant you see the irony here??? that is exactly what i am saying to you but you dont understand that, you accused quran that quran say earth was present during big bang is like a would say you were in your fathers balls.

 

just like earth was not present during big bang like it is today you were also not present in you fathers balls like you are today.

I don't think you understood my point. I said you *can't* say that I was in my father's balls. That is ridiculous. I am not defined in that way.

 

Honestly, the unnecessary length of your posts takes away from any potential substance. I really wish you would just stop copy pasting things that you think prove something, and instead just read them for yourself. If you find something convincing, how hard would it be to summarize it yourself?

 

There are vague descriptions in the Quran which Muslims then claim refer to things we actually find in reality. There is nothing extraordinary about that. What would be impressive would be an accurate specific description of something as advanced as the things you mention. Vague descriptions are unimpressive simply because you could fit them to anything.

 

HOW COULD MUHAMMED OR ANYBODY ELSE KNOW THE CARACTERISTICS OF PULSARS WHEN THEY HAD NOT TELESCOPES , COMPUTERS AND AMPLIFIERS?

The Quran did not display any understanding of the characteristics of this. In fact, it only says "piercing star." It sounds a lot less impressive than you want it to sound.

On the other hand, what about factual inaccuracies? For example, the Quran describes literal creation whereas we now know that we evolved from other species. Why are you only using science when it supposedly agrees with the Quran?

 

i hear a lot of crazy stuff but without any evidence for it, like there is no evidence for that claim that bible contain nummerical miracles. But in my case, i provide you evidence that quran contains nummerical miracles, wich you obviously dont want to look at.

I've granted you every single numerical pattern you claim exists. I don't know how I can make that any clearer.

 

why do you call it coincidences? how can you call somthing coincidens when you can create somhing like that even today with modern computers?

You don't understand the point I am making. If you take any text large enough, it has enough words that you are bound to find interesting mathematical patterns. That is all I am saying. You can do this for any text. There is no particular reason why one would expect certain similar words to follow a pattern but not others. Due to the large number of words, some are bound to be used the same number of times. The difference is that no one does stuff like this for anything outside of sacred books. These patterns are mathematically unappealing. What would you think if I showed you a list of similar words in the Quran that are NOT used the same number of times?

 

yes there is natural engine/motor

I said there is no *literal* engine.

 

Ateists says:

from this B, D, F, A, C, E to this----> (ABCDEF)

No creator is needed

 

I say

from B, D, F, A, C, E to this---->; (ABCDEF)

 

you need a thinking creator

This is simply a strawman argument. First of all, what do you define as order? Most of the universe is chaotic and inhospitable. We are a very small part of the entire universe. In a universe so large, it is hard to imagine that such regions as ours where there is life would not exist. This is how random events occur. For example, if I take a random whole number with ten trillion digits, I am essentially guaranteed that I will find the string '0123456789' somewhere in the ten trillion digits. Can I then look at the string and claim that the number is not random? I say that is absurd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Response to DNA miracle:

1865 had very little to do with DNA. You can tell that this is a total stretch. The guy coming up with this one had to spend a lot of time trying to make it seem relevant.

Response to Halley's Comet miracle:

Comet has nothing to do with a star. Also, the orbital period is closer to 75 years.

Response to hemoglobin miracle:

I'm sure this is less impressive if you actually consider what it says in Arabic. Would you consider anything that used that phrase to be miraculous? Because this seems only dependent on the words used.

Response to sand dunes/mars miracle ... and the rest:

Again, I really don't see why this and similar would be a rare coincidence, because it is dependent on the Arabic words being used.

 

Once again, I have to say the length of your post took away from any substance. I have seen all of these claims before, and I am unimpressed. Given enough time and effort, Shakespeare's books could be shown to have an inner secret code describing the future. If you get vague enough, and get a text large enough, who knows what you can do?

I take it you are a sunni Muslim? What is your response to the word "imam" showing up 12 times in the Quran? 12 imams sounds familiar, doesn't it? What does this prove?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you understood my point. I said you *can't* say that I was in my father's balls. That is ridiculous. I am not defined in that way.

 

Honestly, the unnecessary length of your posts takes away from any potential substance. I really wish you would just stop copy pasting things that you think prove something, and instead just read them for yourself. If you find something convincing, how hard would it be to summarize it yourself?

 

There are vague descriptions in the Quran which Muslims then claim refer to things we actually find in reality. There is nothing extraordinary about that. What would be impressive would be an accurate specific description of something as advanced as the things you mention. Vague descriptions are unimpressive simply because you could fit them to anything.

 

 

The Quran did not display any understanding of the characteristics of this. In fact, it only says "piercing star." It sounds a lot less impressive than you want it to sound.

On the other hand, what about factual inaccuracies? For example, the Quran describes literal creation whereas we now know that we evolved from other species. Why are you only using science when it supposedly agrees with the Quran?

 

 

I've granted you every single numerical pattern you claim exists. I don't know how I can make that any clearer.

 

 

You don't understand the point I am making. If you take any text large enough, it has enough words that you are bound to find interesting mathematical patterns. That is all I am saying. You can do this for any text. There is no particular reason why one would expect certain similar words to follow a pattern but not others. Due to the large number of words, some are bound to be used the same number of times. The difference is that no one does stuff like this for anything outside of sacred books. These patterns are mathematically unappealing. What would you think if I showed you a list of similar words in the Quran that are NOT used the same number of times?

 

 

I said there is no *literal* engine.

 

 

This is simply a strawman argument. First of all, what do you define as order? Most of the universe is chaotic and inhospitable. We are a very small part of the entire universe. In a universe so large, it is hard to imagine that such regions as ours where there is life would not exist. This is how random events occur. For example, if I take a random whole number with ten trillion digits, I am essentially guaranteed that I will find the string '0123456789' somewhere in the ten trillion digits. Can I then look at the string and claim that the number is not random? I say that is absurd.

 

 

For example, the Quran describes literal creation whereas we now know that we evolved from other species. Why are you only using science when it supposedly agrees with the Quran?

 

no we did not evolved

 

 

fossil

Dragonfly.jpg

 

Blue+dragonfly.jpg

 

0001.jpg

 

GARFISH

 

Age: 54 to 37 million years old

Size: 39 centimeters (15.3 in) in length; matrix: 29 centimeters (11 in) by 40 centimeters (15 in)

Location: Lincoln County, Wyoming

Formation: Green River Formation

Period: Eocene

 

Hundreds of garfish fossils that have been collected give evidence that these still-living fish have remained unchanged for millions of years. The garfish pictured, between 54 and 37 million years old, is no different from those living in our seas today. This exact similarity is an inexplicable situation for Darwinists and once again proves the fact of creation.

 

0003.jpg

 

0005.jpg

 

HERRING

 

Age: 54 to 37 million years old

Size: 9.3 centimeters (3.7 in)

Location: Kemmerer, Wyoming

Formation: Green River Formation

Period: Eocene

 

"Living fossils" reveal that species have not evolved, but are created. Species have not attained their present body structure by chance, as evolutionists claim. They are all created flawlessly by Almighty God and have lived throughout their existence in the form they were created.

 

The herring fossil pictured also proves this. Herrings have remained the same for millions of years, preserving the form and structure with which they were initially created. Like all other fossils, this herring reveals that the theory of evolution is based on lies.

 

0014.jpg

 

JUVENILE RABBIT

 

Age: 30 million years old

Location: Lusk, Wyoming

Formation: White River Formation

Period: Oligocene

 

30-million-year-old fossils that are identical with creatures living today refute the theory of evolution. Fossil discoveries reveal that rabbits have always been rabbits.

 

0022a.jpg

 

SUNFISH

 

Age: 54 to 37 million years old

Size: 17.2 centimetrs (6.8 in)

Location: Kemmerer, Wyoming

Formation: Green River Formation

Period: Eocene

 

Seas in our day have many species of sunfish. The fossil pictured shows that sunfish have not evolved. For millions of years their physiology has remained the same. The appearance and structure of sunfish that lived about 55 million years ago are the same as those alive today.

 

0027.jpg

 

CRANE FLY

 

Period: Cenozoic Era, Eocene epoch

Age: 48 to 37 million years old

Location: USA

 

As with all other species, stasis observed throughout the course of crane fly's existence is proof that evolutionary claims are false. The theory of evolution was proposed under the scientifically primitive conditions of the 19th century, adopted merely by ignorance, yet collapsed in the face of the 20th- and 21st-century science

 

0132.jpg

 

SHRIMP

 

Age: 145 million years old

Location: Eichstâtt, Bayern, Germany

Size: matrix: 10.5 centimeters(4.1 in) by 15.2 centimeters (5.9 in)

Period: Jurassic, Malm Zeta

 

The shrimp is an arthropod belonging to the sub-phylum Crustaceae. Its body is covered in armor composed largely of calcium carbonate. Various species of shrimp live in both salt and fresh water. The earliest known shrimp fossil dates back some 200 million years.

 

The fossil shrimp pictured is around 145 million years old. Shrimps, which have maintained their structure for millions of years with no change, are proof that living things never underwent evolution.

 

0142.jpg

 

0148.jpg

 

0150.jpg

 

DRAGONFLY LARVA

 

Age: 10 million years old

Size: 42 millimeters (1.6 in) by 35 millimeters (1.3 in)

Location: Vittoria d'Alba, Cuneo, Italy

Perio: Upper Miocene

 

0183.jpg

 

0209.jpg

 

SPIDER

 

Age: 156 to 150 million years old

Size: 1.5 centimeters (0.6 in) (leg to leg ), 0.7 centimeters (0.28 in) (body )

Location: Beipiao, Liaoning Province, China

Period: Upper Jurassic

 

The oldest known fossil spider is of a water spider, 425 million years old. The fossil pictured is 156 to 150 million years old. Such fossils show that spiders have been the same for hundreds of million years. Darwinists have no consistent and scientific answer for these findings.

 

is this evolution?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You don't understand the point I am making. If you take any text large enough, it has enough words that you are bound to find interesting mathematical patterns. That is all I am saying. You can do this for any text.

 

dont guess, just show us where such thing can be found in bible for example beacuse you claim bible has also something like quran.

 

Show us now with proof.

 

show me something like this or at leats a little one from bible

 

 

Golden ratio in Quran

 

In this example we see clearly nummerical miracle, between odd and even numbers and how the correspond to sum of chapters and verses

25jjnmo.jpg

15gb8e8.jpg

24ys6rr.jpg

 

Here, we have repetetive nummerical values from the table above

for example chapters 85 and 99 have same nummerical value 107, we summerize all repetitive nummerical values

1z1wpyp.jpg

 

Here, we have non-repetitive nummerical values, and we summerize them also

259j3pj.jpg

 

We can clearly see golden ratio between Reptitive and non-repetitive nummerical values from this table

166k5z6.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

0214.jpg

 

WOLF SKULL

 

Age: 20 million years old

Size: 25 centimeters (10 in)

Location: Asia

Period: Miocene

 

Fossils of mammals also deny evolution. The fossil wolf skull pictured is 20 million years old. Wolves have preserved their structures for 20 million years, proving that the theory of evolution is invalid

 

0215.jpg

 

JUVENILE TURTLE

 

Age: 120 million years old

Size: 18 centimeters (7 in)

Location: Sihetun, Shangyuan, Beipiao City, Liaoning Province

Formation: Lower Yixian Formation

Period: Lower Cretaceous

 

0226.jpg

 

 

TIGER SKULL

 

Age: 20 million years old

Size: 29 centimeters (11.5 in)

Location: Asia

Period: Miocene

 

The tiger is a mammal of the Felidae family. 80 percent of the tiger species live in the Indian Peninsula.

 

The fossil tiger skull in the picture is 20 million years old and displays the same features as tigers living today. For millions of years, their bone structure has remained the same, refuting the theory of evolution

 

ek_13.jpg

 

Age: 73 million years old

Location: Dai Lin, Yun Nan, China

Period: Cretaceous

 

ek_16.jpg

 

LEOPARD SKULL

 

Age: 73 million years old

Location: Qi Pan, Yun Nan, China

Period: Cretaceous

 

ek_24.jpg

 

Age: 65 million years old

Location: Meng Gu, China

Period: Cretaceous

 

DO YOU SEE ANY EVOLUTION HERE

 

 

no evolution, just forgeries from atheistic scientist propaganda

 

587.jpg

 

5. “Lucy” is the name given to the fossil discovered by anthropologist Donald Johanson in 1974. Many evolutionists claimed that Lucy was the transitional form between the humans and their so-called hominid ancestors. However further analysis on this fossil revealed that Lucy is only the member of an extinct ape species, known as Australopithecus. The brain size of the Australopithecus is similar to chimpanzees. Many other characteristics—such as details in their skulls, the closeness of their eyes, their sharp molar teeth, their mandibular structure, their long arms and short legs—constitute evidence that these creatures were no different from today’s chimpanzees. Even the pelvis is similar to that of chimpanzees.5

 

582.jpg

 

Some races living today, like the Malaysian native to the side, have the large eyebrow projections and the foreheads that are inclined backwards—features peculiar to Homo erectus skulls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THE MYTH OF HUMAN EVOLUTION IS

FILLED WITH HOAXES

 

More than 6,000 species of ape have existed at one time or another. The great majority of them have since become extinct and vanished, leaving only some 120 species alive today. But the fossils belonging to these nearly 6,000 extinct species represent a rich source of hoaxes for evolutionists. Unable to point to any concrete evidence, evolutionists surround fossils of extinct apes with biased analyses and then present them as evidence for evolution.

 

For years now, evolutionists have been employing such methods in order to gather supporters and mislead the public. However, they now need to see that these methods are of no use. The false evidence used by evolutionists to make their tall tales of the alleged human evolution seem more credible—and the debunking of that evidence—are summarized below. However, there are many more evolutionist hoaxes than the few considered here. All the “ancestor of man” reports in the media, as well as the illustrations accompanying them are completely fictitious. Concrete scientific discoveries have now demolished the story that human beings became human by means of a gradual course of development.

 

1953_iptal.jpg

 

Piltdown Man: A fossil skull was discovered in 1912 and described as belonging to a half-human, half-ape species. For the next 40 years or so, evolutionists used this fossil as one of their supposedly strongest pieces of evidence, making countless analyses and illustrations of it in a statement issued on 21 November 1953, however, Piltdown Man was finally declared to be a hoax. A dating test performed 40 years after its discovery revealed that the jawbone and the skull did not actually belong to each other.

 

More detailed examination revealed that the “Piltdown Man” skull had been assembled by adding an orangutan jaw to a human skull, which was then aged using potassium dichromate. The way that the skull had been displayed in London’s Natural History Museum for 40 years and that no permission had been given for detailed scientific studies to be carried out during that time has gone down as a major scientific scandal.

 

1939_iptal.jpg

 

Fossils discovered on the islands of Java in 1891 and 1892 were given the name Java Man (Pithecanthropus erectus).

Fossils discovered near Pekin in 1923-1927 were given the name Pekin Man (Sinanthropus pekinensis). In 1939, however, two experts, Ralph von Koenigswald and Franz Weidenreich, revealed that both were actually normal

human beings.(1) And Ernst Mayr from Harvard University had classified both as human in 1944.(2)

 

1970_iptal.jpg

 

ALL THE SKULL THOUGHT TO REPRESENT EVIDENCE FOR EVOLUTION HAVE BEEN DECLASSIFIED!

 

Nebraska Man: A single tooth, discovered in 1922 by Henry F. Osborn of the American Museum of Natural History, was depicted as belonging to an intermediate life form between apes and human beings. However, in an article published in Science magazine in 1927, Osborn’s colleague William Gregory stated that the tooth actually belonged to a wild boar—whereupon all evolutionist claims regarding the fossil were quietly laid aside. The illustration to the side, produced on the basis of a single tooth by evolutionists of the time, was published in the press.

 

This attempt by evolutionists to reconstruct a living thing on the basis of a single tooth is a striking instance of how biased and misleading they can be when it comes to defending and imposing their theories.

 

amud1.jpg

 

The illustration above shows the Homo sapiens neanderthalensis Amud 1 skull discovered in israel. Its owner has been estimated to be 1.80 meters. tall, and its brain volume is the greatest so far discovered: 1740 cubic centimeters

 

Neanderthal Man: After the first specimens were discovered in the Neander Valley in 1856, evolutionists suggested that Neanderthals were primitive ape-men. Subsequent archaeological discoveries, however, revealed that there was no scientific basis to that claim. Erik Trinkhaus, an expert on the subject of the Neanderthals and also an evolutionist, has admitted that, “Detailed comparisons of Neanderthal skeletal remains with those of modern humans have shown that there is nothing in Neanderthal anatomy that conclusively indicates locomotor, manipulative, intellectual, or linguistic abilities inferior to those of modern humans.”(4)

In addition, the size of the Neanderthal Man skull—200 cubic centimeters greater than that of present-day humans—reveals the invalidity of the claim that it was an intermediate form between humans and apes.

 

taung.jpg

 

The Taung Child: A fossil skull discovered by Raymond Dart in South Africa in 1924 was initially depicted as a supposed ancestor of man. However, contemporary evolutionists can no longer maintain that it represents such an ancestor—because it subsequently transpired that the skull belonged to a young gorilla! The famous anatomist Bernard Wood stated that this fossil constitutes no evidence in favor of evolution in an article published in New Scientist magazine. (5)

 

1999_iptal.jpg

 

Lucy: This fossil, discovered in Africa in 1974, was widely esteemed by evolutionists and was the subject of some of the most intensive speculation. Recently however, it has been revealed that Lucy (A. afarensis) had an anatomy ideally suited to climbing trees and was no different from other apes we are familiar with.(6) The French scientific journal Science et Vie covered the story in 1999 under the headline “Adieu, Lucy.” One study, performed in 2000, discovered a locking system in Lucy’s forearms enabling it to walk using the knuckles, in the same way as modern-day chimps.(7)

 

In the face of all these findings, many evolutionist experts declared that Lucy could not have been a forerunner of man.(8)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ek_16.jpg

 

LEOPARD SKULL

 

Age: 73 million years old

Location: Qi Pan, Yun Nan, China

Period: Cretaceous

Darwinists’ ruses and the techniques they use to mislead people are now totally futile. Faced with atlases that make the fact of Creation crystal-clear—and countless fossils that demonstrate how living things have never changed in the slightest—Darwinists have seen that all life forms were created out of nothing. Their ruses have been exposed and effectively neutralized.

By itself, this 73-million-year-old leopard skull is sufficient evidence to show that all tales regarding the changes supposedly undergone by life forms are totally invalid. They show that leopards living 73 million years ago had exactly the same characteristics as leopards living today.

 

The jaw structure and teeth of this fossil can be seen in great detail

 

 

ek_17.jpg

 

ZEBRA SKULL

 

Age: 45 million years old

Location: Xi An, China

Period: Eocene

God has created all living things with their different appearances and forms. In the same way that their lifestyles and needs differ, so there are profound differences in their body structures. This means it is not difficult to describe the fossils that are unearthed, making it possible to establish the anatomical features of a living thing whose fossil remains have been discovered. The 45-million-year-old zebra fossil illustrated makes this distinction. It’s evident that there is no difference between the fossil’s characteristics and those of a present-day zebra’s skull.

 

There is no doubt that this is one of God’s divine miracles. The scientific evidence to hand is too definitive for scientists to be able to deny, even if they are evolutionists. It’s a scientific fact that species have not changed, and they have undergone no evolutionary process.

 

ek_20.jpg

 

CAMEL SKULL

 

Age: 3.9 million years old

Location: Gan Su, China

Period: Pliocene

According to evolutionist claims, the camel’s large skull, long neck and humps must be the result of a large sequence of mutations. As a result, there should have been innumerable mammals with semi-lengthened necks, odd-shaped heads and incipient humps. These imaginary life forms should be encountered frequently in the fossil record, and there should be no trace of fully-formed camels dating back millions of years, like the one shown here. But data from the fossil record show that such imaginary transitional forms never existed. Camels never passed through any intermediate stages, and have always existed as fully-formed camels.

 

ek_18.jpg

 

ASIAN WILD HORSE SKULL

 

Age: 33 million years old

Location: Yun Nan, China

Period: Oligocene

The myth of the horse evolution is one of Darwinism’s best-known frauds. This scenario—which many contemporary evolutionists admit is untrue—is still defended by a number of fanatical Darwinists. However, this claim is full of extraordinary inconsistencies and lacks any scientific evidence, and has been totally refuted. Horses have remained unchanged over millions of years. The 33-million-year-old Asian wild horse skull illustrated shows that horses lived in exactly the same way then as they do now. This by itself is sufficient to demolish all Darwinist claims about the alleged horse evolution

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fisk2.jpg

fisk3.jpg

 

PERFECT EXAMPLE INTELIGENT DESIGN

 

REAL small EYE hidden with black string, while bigger false eye drawn at the tail so predators going to be scared and not attack.

 

does this little fish know that it should covered her little eye and draw bigger false eyes to scare predators??? i dont think so wink.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

or this one

 

i have confirmed myself that Mekka is indeed in golden ratio between south pole and noreth pole

 

evidence from google earth

 

qxsbgo.jpg

 

dh651y.jpg

 

Mekka golden ratio in the world

 

12348,32 / 7631,68 = 1,618.......

 

same as position od word mekka in Quranic verse

2a9paon.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You obviously did not care to listen to my statement that the length of your posts is taking away from any substance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If something remains unchanged, there was no reason for it to change because there were no dramatic changes in living conditions. If I accept all of your premises (I expect some are most likely false), it is a fascinating thing to study, but in no way falsifies evolution... If you think it does, you don't know what evolution is. In fact, it is pretty clear that you do not know much about evolution:

Species have not attained their present body structure by chance, as evolutionists claim.

If you understood that evolution is just natural selection, you'd understand that this is ridiculous.

This exact similarity is an inexplicable situation for Darwinists and once again proves the fact of creation.

This is an argument from ignorance. Even if evolution was proven wrong today, it would not add an ounce of credibility to the creation hypothesis. You would still have to demonstrate the validity of the creation hypothesis. It would not just win by default.

I'm curious as to what you think evolution even is. I'm certain you don't have a good idea of what it is.

 

Show us now with proof.

I'm simply giving a thought experiment. Anyone can reason through with me that in a large body of text, you are essentially guaranteed to have strange patterns. I obviously do not have proof for any Shakespeare text or similar because no one spends time trying to find divine patterns in Shakespeare's work. As far as the bible is concerned, try this:

http://www.answering-Islam.org/Religions/Numerics/11struct.html

 

does this little fish know that it should covered her little eye and draw bigger false eyes to scare predators??? i dont think so

Sigh, that fish is a great example of evolution. You obviously don't have a clue what evolution really is.

 

Yes, I have seen the golden ratio claim before, and upon checking it, found what many others found - it is pretty far from the exact golden ratio points. The point chosen returns a value close to the golden ratio points, but this is true for very large regions of the earth. If you want precise golden ratio points, a golden ratio point turns out to be Rio de Janeiro - what does this prove?

 

I haven't seen you respond to my claim that the word Imam appears 12 times in the Quran (though I may have glossed over it due to your unnecessarily lengthy posts). What do you think this proves?

 

P.S. The question of evolution is irrelevant to whether or not God exists. If evolution were proven wrong, it would not add any credibility to God or creationism. The claims would be equally unjustified. If you want to discuss evolution, I have a separate topic for it:

http://www.gawaher.com/topic/737899-the-theory-of-evolution/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×