Evil Genius

Actually its quite more embarrassing to suck so much at sarcasm (your posts werent even 1% sarcastic), then be just a moron.

^ Whatever.

I'm kind of surprised that nobody has done the public service of offering educational links:

The Most Comprehensive Evolution Education Site on the Web: http://www.talkorigins.org/

Index of All Known Arguments against Evolution and their Refutations (from Talk Origins): http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html

Growing Up in the Universe Lecture Series: http://richarddawkins.net/growingupintheuniverse

Starnum wrote: [The Bible] is a document of God’s will

Why acknowledge that the Bible was written by and altered by men but stick to the divinely inspired bit?
Read this deconstruction of the Bible by Thomas Paine if you feel so inclined: http://www.infidels.org/library/histori ... of_reason/

Buzkashi wrote: The Quran supports or is the first example of the Big Bang Theory. It speaks of the formation of the fetus in the mothers stomach, the formation of clouds, plate tectonics, etc.

I've read the Quranic verses (in English, granted) that supposedly relate to or primitively describe the discoveries of modern science. I think only a Muslim would interpret those verses so charitably. Through my eyes they appear incredibly vague and hardly constitute proof of the scientific pedigree of the Quran. Not to be inflammatory, mind you.

I'm sure to your ears it sounds wrong. But to the countless scientists who back it, who are still non-muslim that, I learned this from, it sounded right. Thats why they wrote articles on it and thats why they wrote books on it. As a matter of fact, I believe one of the scientists is a devout christian. If I find the book I'll hook it up with the authors name.

There was an international scientists/theologians convention relating to this, sharing studies and having dialogues about that exactly. Quite alot of reputable (western) scientists, just having a chat and sharing their thoughts about it. Many of them were amazed and found it to be more then just vague and convenient coincidence (and some of them are naturally cynical/sceptic). They wouldnt have backed it otherwise (relating to to how Quran mentions some elements of modern science quite detailed enough).

Not too sound too propogandish, but I found it fascinating, there is some things we cant explain.

Shaka Zulu wrote:There was an international scientists/theologians convention relating to this, sharing studies and having dialogues about that exactly. Quite alot of reputable (western) scientists, just having a chat and sharing their thoughts about it. Many of them were amazed and found it to be more then just vague and convenient coincidence (and some of them are naturally cynical/sceptic). They wouldnt have backed it otherwise (relating to to how Quran mentions some elements of modern science quite detailed enough).

Not too sound too propogandish, but I found it fascinating, there is some things we cant explain.

Really? I'd like to know where you saw/read this.

Although not that hard to believe considering these culture's are where many of the basic priciples for mathematics as we know it originate from. Too bad religious fundamentalism has a way of quelling scientific inquiry. As it seems nowadays people are more concerned with their 72 virgins and Madhi's climbing out of wells.

What you need to consider, though, is whether the Quran is the only ancient document that contains "predictions" of modern scientific discoveries. That is definitely not the case. De Rerum Natura by Lucretius is arguably more "inspired" by this criterion (because its correct predictions are arguably clearer and greater in number).

De Rerum Natura analysis link:
http://www.secweb.org/index.aspx?action ... set&id=362

Bbqsauze?

Oh well, can't get the youtube code to work. Korn Evolution.

Because you need to add the 'www.' --arke

Israfel74 wrote:What you need to consider, though, is whether the Quran is the only ancient document that contains "predictions" of modern scientific discoveries. That is definitely not the case. De Rerum Natura by Lucretius is arguably more "inspired" by this criterion (because its correct predictions are arguably clearer and greater in number).

De Rerum Natura analysis link:
http://www.secweb.org/index.aspx?action ... set&id=362

Thanks for the link. Many of the professors I read/saw in the documentary, were counter argumented in these links.