To all you Atheists part two.

The last thread turned into a god exists thread which wasn't really what I was trying to do.

I want you all to give me an explanation on this question and this question only.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bN1ctKIwqSs

How did a book that was written over 1500 years ago know about embryology in such specific detail when there was no technologies back then as compared to now. Humans have come to know about things that the quran mentioned over 1500 years ago only recently as technology came along.

Stay on topic, or I will report your post as spam.

 

Fatih, it didn't.

He chose one specific section of the koran and twisted it.

In any case, even if it did specifically explain embryology, how is that proof that god exists?

It's proof embryology exists, nothing else.

Stop posting this rubbish and then ignoring any criticism.

 

Don't turn this into a god discussion.

My question was simple.
Explain to me, how did he twist it? Since I'm assuming your a doctor and you are qualified to give explanations of the quran. lol

 

A doctor deals in facts, not in fabricated books.

As for embryology, could you please post the passage of the koran which specifically explains the science to the standard we understand today? Then we can have a proper debate.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47N37nC01WI&feature=related

 

i am a muslim to and i am proud once you get to understand the Quran you will get the idea there will be no one to explain it until you read it yourself

 

That's not a passage, that's a ten minute video. Frankly I have better things to do than watch any more of this rubbish.

 

That's what I thought.

And if anyone else is reading this, give me facts on why what the people in the videos are saying is wrong. The people in the videos are qualified Doctors that are admitting the Qur'an had these things in it. :embar:

 

Fatih, I watched the other videos, and they were both absolute crap.

Either post the passage from the Koran here, or end this ridiculous argument because you have nothing to show.

 

Watch the video, it is full of passages.

You have time to sit on sythe, you can watch a video, and if you can't, don't post on the thread; simple. >_<

 

The video is rambling crap, and the actual quotation is nowhere to be seen.

 

You posted within two minutes, the video is ten minutes long. This clearly shows that you didn't watch the whole video.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embryology#History

People weren't that stupid back then.

 

According to epigenesis, the form of an animal emerges gradually from a relatively formless egg.

That's all it says on the issue, nothing in detail. He just thought that humans came form eggs, even a 5 year old kid can come to that conclusion. A kid sees that other animals hatch from eggs so he assumes that so do we until explained otherwise. The fact that this guy thought we came from an egg means nothing whatsoever and his thought on embryology doesn't even compare to the detail of the subject in the Qur'an.

Also, don't compare humans with animals, please. I'm talking about human embryology here, not animals.

 

First of all, you do realize that we humans are animals? We're nothing more than animals who became more intelligent for our own good. Second, why does it matter if it's human or animal embryology? They differ, but obviously embryology was known about at the time. Aristotle studied human embryology also.

http://www.bookrags.com/research/embryology-the-history-of-developme-wog/

 

There is no worse troll than an idiot.

You are trying to make a claim, but are requiring us to spend more of our time on something that has little to no importance to us. The fact that you are using YouTube to begin a debate makes this seem even more childish. But hell, I will bite. (BTW, I stayed on topic on the last thread, it was you who strayed from the topic. A debate does not always follow the original post, as they evolve as new information is brought to light, which was what we were trying to show you when you completely ignored everything we said and continued advertising your retarded video).

No, I will not watch the video. Yes, you will give me quotations from the video, write out a script if you have to. If you do not, you're clearly not committed to your point, and this is obviously just you attempting to get people to view the video.

So, I'm guessing he points out that in the Qur'an there are things referencing things that haven't happened yet? Yet it would seem that the events were predicted? Easy to solve the mystery. There was a History channel special on Nostradamus who people tried to claim was a profit. However, psychology, no matter how messed up it is, will show repeatedly that people will paint a target around an arrow to make a point.

Just because the Qur'an told a story, and the story happened to be similar to a story that happened many years later, does not mean it was predicted. I know, as a theist, you have troubles accepting that while there are patterns in nature, there's just too much data for everything to be predeterminable. While you can narrow down the realm of future possibilities, you still have a mass amount of probability weighing in on your possible outcomes.

People over a thousand years ago didn't have the technology, brain power, or life span to calculate specifically what might happen in the future. Hell, we don't have that ability in today's world, even if all the worlds computers and minds were linked as one. So what do these 'profits' do? They think up something perverse like:

"The sun will set
on a full moon
and when the moon turns red
so will its silk covers"

And then wait a few thousand years, narrow down all the lunar eclipses (the moon turns red during a lunar eclipse). Go through each one over the centuries, find one in which a person died on silk sheets during such time. When that happens, the above will be true, even though it's really just a random guess, with enough of a passage of time, the probability of it happening increases.

Let's estimate that there are roughly, what 10 lunar eclipses at least a decade? That means there are 100 lunar eclipses every 100 years. Lets assume someone comes back and reads this 1000 years from now. That's 1000 lunar eclipses. Lets assume silk sheets last half that long.

So a window of 500 lunar eclipses in which we have to find one person that bled out on silk sheets. Since thousands of people die on a daily basis, hospitals use silk sheets, etc. let's say, just a small number, that 1000 people every year die on silk sheets. Since there's usually roughly 1-2 lunar eclipses a year, 365 days are in a year. So you take 1000*365*500. (deaths, days in a year, total number of years). That's 182,500,500 deaths on silk sheets in 500 years. Given that there are 500 lunar eclipses in our base calculation. I'll divide the number of deaths by the number of eclipses. While it is a smaller number, it is still significant. 365,000 people that die on silk sheets, die on them while the moon is red because of a lunar eclipse. Every year, that number increases. After just 1 year, my prediction has a (based on the above number) 74% chance of coming true. .

With enough work, valid data, proper numbers, etc, you can easily create an abstract statement that could predict a future event, even if you don't know about the event before hand.



(Sorry for long reply, that was fun)... lol. Hope I helped you realize that logic can be used to disprove mysteries.

 

Deacon got that real talk.

 

The Qu'ran isn't the only thing in the world to ever predict something that turned out to be true.. I don't see the relevance between Atheism and the Qu'ran. I know you've said that the point of the thread isn't that God exists, but what other point could this serve? You're singling out Atheists to try to prove them wrong.. or at least that is the feeling you're giving me. I see no other reason for you to be like "Hey Atheists, the Qu'ran is right and you aren't."

 

You don't compare animals to humans, and if you believe that you're an animal, then so be it. :nuts: Also, even if we did compare the two, not all animals are alike and their bodies work differently than ours.

Aristotle actually favored the theory of epigenesis, which assumes that the embryo begins as an undifferentiated mass and that new parts are added during development.

He thought that we started as something and more parts got added to that something, wow, he is a genius, LOL.

Aristotle thought that the female parent contributed only unorganized matter to the embryo. He argued that semen from the male parent provided the "form," or soul, that guided development and that the first part of the new organism to be formed was the heart.

Aristotle's theory of epigenetic development dominated the science of embryology until the work of physiologist William Harvey (1578-1657) raised doubts about many aspects of classical theories.


Also, Aristotle's theory of epigenetic development dominated the science of embryology until the work of physiologist William Harvey (1578-1657) raised doubts about many aspects of classical theories. His theories were incorrect.


Now to top it off, none of his work compares to the quran which explains everything in detail.

 

Once again, read the first post. This wasn't a prediction, it was a fact about the human body, Discuss the topic at hand only please.