August 16, 2022

‘scientist’?

Someone I don’t know tweeted this to me:

Hello my friend Aron. What is your opinion about this short conversation between a Christian & a scientist: ?

Not even an hour later, that person (called Bieber) posted “still waiting”, as if I must be aware of the tweet, but that am perhaps intimidated or otherwise hesitant to respond.  I guess they think I live on Twitter and that I don’t do or see anything else. I rarely even check it, because Twitter is NOT the place to have a discussion.  But I replied:

Me: That conversation was copied wrong. They labeled ‘a Muslim’ as though he was ‘a scientist’, and said things no scientist would say.

Bieber: OK. Lets say: he is a Muslim. What is scientifically wrong with what he said if there is any thing wrong?! 🙂

Me: No scientist should say that *any* prophesy is “100% accurate”, much less “all” of them.

Not only can no alleged prophesy be verified to be correct; a lot of them have been proven wrong, including some Islamic prophesies.

For example, I remember when Muslims argued with P.Z. Myers about embryology, and the Qur’an was wrong.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3T5Pm7qLH50

Hamza Tzortsis later argued with me about isostasy, and the Qur’an turned out to be wrong then too.

Your alleged scientist found coincidental numbers in an unrelated verse and merely imagined a correlation interpreted as prophesy.

Your citation pretends that no one would have believe we’d land on the moon, yet Muslims believed that Muhammad rode a flying horse.

You asked me what’s wrong with it. Now that I’ve answered, let me ask you, what’s right with it?

I only addressed a tiny portion of this absurd conversation that would never take place between any Christian and any scientist, but I’d like to see hows others would address the rest of it.

37 thoughts on “‘scientist’?

  1. That’s similar to the “math” Harold Camping used to “prove” his final date for the Rapture-that-never-was.

  2. The split-moon part is just hilarious. Yes, a scientist said that the moon formed as the result of a collision between two bodies. The Quran says that the moon was split into two pieces, then reformed again. Science proves the Quran!

    There’s even a link where a NASA scientist answers the question, and admits that the moon formed as “the result of a collision with early Earth and a Mars-sized planetessimal between two bodies”!

    Flawless.

    1. Chris J says

      (A NASA scientist (((admits))) that the moon formed as “the result of a collision with early Earth and a Mars-sized planetesimal between two bodies”!)

      Bieber says

      You must read the paragraph again to realize that he didn’t admit that info or agreed with it. Instead, he said that this info is only a theory. But, he really admitted that the moon currently is the result of 2 bodies colliding one another. Exactly like what Islam says about the moon. Isn’t that amazing?!

  3. As a skeptic and hopefully rational thinker….

    Any book o’BS has been shown many time to be WRONG!!!! in major ways.

    So to prove to me that any part (not superficial place names) is correct would require a lot of REAL proof. Numerology is just as BS as astrology and does not count as proof of anything!

  4. Aronra,

    Man I really like your presentations on taxonomy and phylogeny and the fossil record. That stuff fascinates me. I wish to know more and need to pick your brain.

    What drives evolution? If the environment were to stay exactly the same would the need to evolve eventually go away? If the universe is “fine tuned” for life then why isn’t life popping up on everything like the moon, other planets…just everywhere? I don’t have time to study for a degree but man I wish I knew what you seem to know!

  5. @ironchops

    In case Aronra doesn’t have time to answer….

    It is my understanding that the process of evolution is driven primarily (if not completely) by natural selection. If the environment stayed the same, I would imagine some “need” to evolve might go away, but our current environment consists of plants and animals in constant competition with each other for resources, so even if nothing changed, I would expect we might still see evolution at work as each species “tries to one up the others”, so to speak.

    1. It seems that natural selection eliminates while evolution answers problems, two different things in my tiny little mind. I can see your point in that competition amongst the different life forms is a factor. I know, my question is just too simplistic.

  6. What is the difference between prophesy and prediction. If a meteorologist nails his forecast perfectly is he a prophet? Or Does he have to write it down in a book to qualify?

    Here is my prophesy: On some unknown day in the future someone will launch a rocket or attack into Israel or there will be some natural disaster that will destroy (either on purpose or accidentally) the Dome of the Rock mosque and set into motion the events that bring about the war of Armageddon which will be fought on plain of Megiddo and have nothing to do with us unless we can’t help ourselves to get involved.

    1. #6 Even though Aron Ra has taught himself a lot about taxonomy and palaeontology, it is not certain that evolutionary biology, in the sense of population genetics, is his specialty. I myself studied biology, specializing in the former and I don’t feel like an expert on the latter myself, even though the subject was treated a number of times.

      An important point is that evolution is both fact and theory. The fact of evolution is based on the evidence that life positively “looks evolved”, i.e. it conforms to the outcome of life forms having gone through utter millions of years of evolution, as evident from fossils and systematics (tree of life). The theory of evolution by means of natural selection explains HOW this went about, i.e. it provides the mechanism. The components of evolutionary theory, selection, mutations, population genetics, can be observed to occur in present day nature. providing yet another level of confirmation.

      BTW my understanding is that natural selection mainly works on large populations. In small populations, random genetic drift has a bigger impact.

  7. Wow, that was some of the weakest apologetics that I have ever seen, worthy of true airheads like Hamza Tzortzis. Also, the idea that this is a conversation with a scientist is clearly nothing but a transparent charade.

    My favourite bit was right at the start, when the “scientist” says “Not like the foggy words of Nostradamus and others which can fit many events by coincidence” shortly followed it by “The chapter of the Moon has only 55 verses. (5/5). And between the beginning of this chapter and the last verse in the Koran (1389) verses exactilly, while the exact date of the landing was (5/5/1389) in the Sunni Islamic calendar”; i.e. a no name or specific description, but a plain old coincidence.

  8. It is fun to have these imaginary conversations so that your opponent is astounded and converted to your viewpoint. Wonder what A. Scientist would have said if countered?

    A Scientist: When the Koran talked about the Moon in the chapter of the Moon (Surah(t) Al-Qamar) (which is the chapter number 54 in the Koran), we noticed that the main numbers of this chapter fit the exact date of the Apollo 11 landing on the Moon in the Islamic calendar, NOT in the Gregorian calendar. Isn’t that amazing?l

    Me: Amazing? Sounds more like the Texas sharpshooter fallacy to me, but let’s see what you’ve got. So, we start with the fact that the Chapter about the moon is numbered 54?

    A Scientist: No, that has nothing to do with it. We ignore that.

    Me: Oh, is that a rule? If that’s the case, then there shouldn’t be anything more about how the Iron chapter was a prophecy for later discoveries about iron. You know–the one that goes on about the 57th sura and iron’s atomic mass is 57. I wish you would ask yourself why you ignore the chapter number about the moon, but go on.

    A Scientist: OK. The chapter of the Moon has only 55 verses. (5/5). And between the beginning of this chapter and the last verse in the Koran (1389) verses exactilly, while the exact date of the landing was (5/5/1389) in the Sunni Islamic calendar

    Me: Yep. Texas sharpshooter. First, if you used only the numbers relating to the chapter of the moon, you’d get 5/4/55 in the Islamic calendar, which would obviously be ridiculous in relation to Apollo 11. Second, if you began with the first verse of the chapter of the moon instead of the first verse of the next chapter “The Mercy Giving”, you’d have 5/4/1444, which means there shouldn’t be a moon landing until 31/10/2022. Happy Halloween! Do you have anything better?

    A Scientist: Apollo 11 was the spaceflight that landed the 1st humans on the Moon on July 20, 1969, at 20:18 UTC

    A Scientist: We can convert this date to the Islamic calendar through several websites such as this one from the (Home-Page of the Institute of Oriental Studies at Zurich University) in Germany: http://www.oriold.uzh.ch/static/hegira.html

    Me: I figured you’d try to tie 5/5/1389 to 20/7/1969. That might have been impressive if anyone had trumpeted this sometime before the moon landing. Especially if they’d said it anywhere in the first 960 years, then written about the need for adjustment later.

    A Scientist: Why 960 years and why adjustment?

    Me: Well, you’re the one that went on to match it to Pope Gregory XIII’s calendar, and he didn’t initiate that in Catholic countries until 1582. Those of us following the Gregorian calendar followed the Julian calendar before that. Heck, George Washington changed his birthday to February 22, 1732 from February 11, 1731 because it took until 1752 for Great Britain to adopt it. At Washington’s time, it was 11 days out of date with the Julian calendar. By the Apollo 11 landing in the 20th century, it was 13 days out of date. It’s unfortunate for you that your 5/5/1389 wouldn’t have matched a 7/7/1969.

    A Scientist: The unfailing nature of the Koran makes up for the fallibility of man. [Note: this is the only “scientist” reply that I didn’t copy. I did try to imagine what he would have said on the topic that was “science,” but I couldn’t come up with anything.]

    Me: The fallibility was a correction of only 0.002% in the length of a year, and it was done to correct the drift of Easter away from the vernal equinox. Can’t have that Christian rebirth imagery spoiled one year by winter darkness or another by too much burgeoning before you get to use its symbolism, you know. And speaking of the fallacy of man, since walking on the moon is an event in astronomy, I’d say that you ought to be using the Solar Hijri calendar for accuracy. Unfortunately, the SH year 1389 spans 21 March 2010 through 19 March 2011, doesn’t it, sharpshooter?

  9. BTW my understanding is that natural selection mainly works on large populations. In small populations, random genetic drift has a bigger impact.

    actually, you can’t really build a firm consensus as to what the largest general factors are, since you will get artifacts in the data because the populations you most commonly see drift in are microbial and rather isolated.

    frankly, I’ve always been happy to take it on a population by population basis, in situ, and not make generalizations about what is driving the frequency of specific allele frequencies in general. It just doesn’t make sense to me to make those kinds of generalizations…. we’ll simply NEVER be able to have enough information at hand, at any given time, to say with any reasonable certain what the generalities really are, since most populations and the pressures on them are typically in a state of flux anyway.

  10. The rest of the conversation between Bieber’s Secret News & Aron-Ra on Twitter:

    Aron-Ra:

    No scientist should say that *any* prophesy is “100% accurate”, much less “all” of them.

    Not only can no alleged prophesy be verified to be correct; a lot of them have been proven wrong, including some Islamic prophesies.

    For example, I remember when Muslims argued with P.Z. Myers about embryology, and the Qur’an was wrong.

    Bieber:

    I watched that video before, more than once. P.Z. Myers is wrong & u can see that by searching for the key words of that issue here: http://scholar.google.com

    AronRa:

    Hamza Tzortsis later argued with me about isostasy, and the Qur’an turned out to be wrong then too.

    Bieber:

    Brother Hamza may make mistakes, but Quran has no mistakes. So, could u tell me what verse or verses u r reffering to in the Quran?

    BTW, this video from discovery channel agrees with what Islam says: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ra27VYIEk9Q

    AronRa:

    Your alleged scientist found coincidental numbers in an unrelated verse and merely imagined a correlation interpreted as prophesy.

    Bieber:

    one simple number or two could be coincidental. But several complicated numbers in related places in Quran cannot be coincidental.

    So the info on this page http://justpaste.it/Christ cannot be coincidental because of the several complicated numbers in related places in Quran

    AronRA:

    Your citation pretends that no one would have believe we’d land on the moon, yet Muslims believed that Muhammad rode a flying horse.

    Bieber:

    God knows why He didn’t mention that by name. Maybe there is another reason. Maybe He wanted to make it as a surprise to NASA & others. Maybe He wanted to make this prophecy as a surprise to NASA after they finish their mission 🙂

    AronRa:

    You asked me what’s wrong with it. Now that I’ve answered, let me ask you, what’s right with it?

    Bieber:

    No single Islamic prophesy had been proven wrong at all ever 🙂

    ur answers didn’t prove that there is any thing wrong inside this webpage: http://justpaste.it/Christ . And everything is right as u see 🙂

    Bieber’s Secret News @abkoma · May 20

    @Aron_Ra Thanks. And, I hope you would add my new replies to the same blog and watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcNOaePZT68

    Note: I will not reply except to AronRA because it is difficult for one person to reply to many people. Sorry for that. But, maybe I will choose to reply to some replies sometimes when I have free time, God Willing.

    1. P.Z. was not wrong. Hamza and Adnan said that the The Qur’an described the developmental sequence of embryos in a manner that was beyond the knowledge of scholars of that time, that Muhammad couldn’t possibly have known about this sequence except by divine revelation. However the description given in the Qur’an had already been given by human authors who Muhammad should have known about. Not only that, but (as P.Z. explained) the sequence described was wrong.

      Did you notice that once Hamza realized that P.Z. knew embryology, then he wanted to change the subject to geology? I didn’t hear what he was saying when we were standing on the street, but he repeated that same argument on the Magic Sandwich Show later on. He said that the Qur’an described mountains as being like weights on a map that keep the earth from moving. I pointed out that isostacy actually means that the mountains float on fluid tectonic plates which move beneath the mountains. So the Qur’an is wrong again. We know how Muslims like to cite scientists when they think they support them, or more accurately when they misrepresent the science to make it seem supported. This is something a friend of mine exposed on his channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJUu1wfUzec

      The thing about prophesies is that they’re supposed to be FOREtold, and people should go about wondering how and when a given prophesy will eventually be fulfilled. But there are no discernible prophesies in the Qur’an of the type you’re talking about. There is no statement made in advance of things that men can watch unfold as foretold. Instead, all you have are reverse extrapolations where you have to take something that has already happened and try to squeeze that into a contrived interpretation that could never have served as a prophesy in the first place. And I think you even did THAT wrong. For example, look at what athyco said:

      “if you used only the numbers relating to the chapter of the moon, you’d get 5/4/55 in the Islamic calendar, which would obviously be ridiculous in relation to Apollo 11. Second, if you began with the first verse of the chapter of the moon instead of the first verse of the next chapter “The Mercy Giving”, you’d have 5/4/1444, which means there shouldn’t be a moon landing until 31/10/2022.”

      So if the Qur’an actually did contain any prophesies then those who read them should have known what was foretold BEFORE it happened. But we know that never happens when all you really do is a reverse extrapolation of a contrived interpretation. Phil Hellenes demonstrated that brilliantly referring to another alleged prophesy that was imagined to be in the Qur’an. Enjoy.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3KoWsNK3ww

      So if you want to claim that any prophesies exist in the Qur’an at all, then show me where anyone ever wrote that they expected a given thing to happen BEFORE it happened.

        1. 1st: P.Z. Myers is a low profile academic figure working at a low profile university as you can see over here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PZ_Myers. 2nd: He is a fanatic Atheist even after knowing the truth and he is an anti-Islam figure. 3rd: I tried to talk to him on twitter long time ago about Islam politely several times through several accounts of mine and he kept blocking me every time without even a single reply from him to me. This proves to me that he is a hater of Islam and a fanatic Atheist without enough scientific knowledge. So, his statements against Islam will not be excepted without mentioning true clear evidence(s) and reliable scientific sources and references for his false claims. BTW, he authored only one book and it is not about science or Embryology but about atheism. His book is only propaganda for Atheism to market Atheism to fools. Embryology is NOT his field at all. His field is general biology. So, he is nothing on embryology comparing to these high profile neutral scientist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJRRhfk5xUI . If you don’t have enough time to watch the full video you may watch the conclusion over here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cr9knjaOvnE&feature=youtu.be&t=24s .

          You complained that P.Z. is “low profile”!? What level is YOUR profile, Beibers Secret News? That’s not even a name! You’re an anonymous internet nobody admittedly trolling professional scientists and educators with a collection of sock accounts. You’re in no position to comment on anyone else’s credibility as you have none of your own, and neither does your compilation of sacred fables.

          But it doesn’t matter what P.Z.’s profile is, and it doesn’t matter what his opinion of religion is. He is perfectly justified in hating any belief-system which imposes required beliefs and prohibited beliefs, whether for the purpose of yoking ignorant innocents for political gain, or to oppress them with atrocious social practices. He is perfectly justified for hating religion simply on the grounds that all of them are inherently dishonest and rely on faith, which is a wholly dishonest and crippling impairment of cognizance.

          You also told me that his book wasn’t about science, but atheism. I guess you didn’t notice that I’m the narrator of his audiobook. So I obviously already know that.

          So you’re saying that P.Z. Myers’ expertise in embryology can be rejected despite his doctoral education in that field, and despite his being a University professor in that subject – unless we can prove he is right? OK, I’ll accept that. Done.

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMT_kNtOTIs

          As you can see, Muhammad must have known about Galenic science before he wrote the Qur’an; he just didn’t know about all of the mistakes that were in it.

          Mountains are compacted areas of lithosphere, created by uplift or collision of tectonic plates, and float on the denser athenosphere. So whether the Qur’an describes mountains as wedges, pegs, or paper weights, doesn’t matter. It’s not analogous or even fundamentally correct; it’s just wrong. You said the correct translation was ‘wedge’, something intended to split or separate one or more other things. But your own link says that the ‘roots’ of the mountains diminish as the mountains are eroded –by the movement of the still-continuous athenosphere beneath them. So either the author of the Qur’an didn’t know what a mountain is, or they didn’t know what a wedge is.

          Next you rejected the testimony of Allison Palmer because he testified that he is Allison Palmer, but did not PROVE that he is. Why don’t you do that then? Email him. Find out for yourself that’s who he really is? Or are you one of those people who thinks Paul McCartney died in 1966 and was replaced by an exact double?

          You also said you would accept the testimony of a non-Muslim if it supports you and reject it if it doesn’t. You said was logical. No, that is not logic; that is a logical fallacy called ‘Confirmation Bias’. Just to show how bad your delusion is, you admitted that a prophesy should logically be accurate and unambiguous, but then you said that it could also mysterious and unintelligible and that would be logical too. And you dared to say that the rules of logic themselves are illogical! You sir are either a disingenuous troll or you have a significant learning disability, or you’re a product of debilitating mental conditioning. So it’s not surprising that you think your best argument is how you can go back after the fact and try to find numbers or letters that coincidentally correlate to other things. You think that’s amazing? No more than the odd occasion where you can interpret your fortune cookie to be talking about something other than what it actually says. Just read between the lines, and ignore the lines.

          So I asked you to produce an example of a clear and unambiguous prophesy, something we can show was actually expected in advance, and occurred as foretold. You provided something that cannot be confirmed because it happened in Muhammad’s own alleged life-time. You also gave a second citation here: http://justpaste.it/israel But that is not a prophesy. It talks about events that have already taken place, and where it says something will happen, it doesn’t say when. So there is no way to know when that prophesy has either been fulfilled or failed.

          It says things we can prove are not true. For example, [No one despairs of Allah’s soothing Mercy except those who have no faith.] (12: 87)

          Referring to Allah as ‘soothing mercy’ is as much an oxymoron as referring to YHWH as ‘loving’. It isn’t just apistevist atheists who feel this way; it’s not just those who have no faith, but Christians, Hindus, and Sikhs, as well as other people of faith. So you’ve achieved a perfect failure rate in this conversation thus far. I advise that you quit now, because you’re not capable of doing any better.

        2. “Embryology is not his field at all” Excuse me!?!

          Right there on the wikipedia page that you link to it says “Fields: Evolutionary developmental biology”.

          Do you know what “Development biology” is? It’s that field of which “embryology” is a SUBSET.

          You are completely out in the deep and have no idea what you’re dealing with.

  11. Until I reply, I want to add this amazing info:

    Quran tells before about 1400 years that Earth moves

    Quran and prophet Muhammad said that the Sun moves quickly, but they never said in Islam that the Sun goes around the Earth

    Also, Quran tells that God will make Earth stop moving on the day of judgement. And, that means: Earth is moving now. Quran says: “And among His Signs (on the day of judgment) is that the sky (the Atmosphere) and the Earth stop (moving) by His Command, then afterwards when He will call you by a single call, you will come out (from the Earth) (i.e from your graves for reckoning and recompense)”. Quran 30-25

        1. When you see false claims like this against Islam make sure 1st that the info is really related to an authentic Islamic reference such as Quran by making your own research over here for example: http://quran.com

          On this link you will find 6 famous translations of the holy Quran and will never find the word flat on it at all.

          1. Yeah, the Qur’an doesn’t say “the world is flat”. What it does do is describe the world as though it were a map, where the mountains are like pegs or paperweights holding the map down. Of course that means that the author thought that world was flat -especially once you throw in passages saying that the sun and moon both orbit the earth, each in their turn, but that the earth itself never moves.

  12. Quran didn’t say that the mountains are like pegs or paperweights holding the map down. But it said “the mountains are wedges” and this is a normal description for mountains. Nothing is wrong with it at all

    Quran didn’t say that (the sun orbits the earth, each in their turn, but that the earth itself never moves). at all.

    If you say: it did. Then, show me the verse or the verses

    1. I already link a video with multiple examples of when the Qur’an says that the sun and moon orbit the Earth, and how each comment is phrased. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ih2ks_yx13k

      As for the mountains being described as pegs, weights or wedges to hold the earth still, I did already explain why that apologetic doesn’t work, because mountains are compacted areas of lithosphere, created by uplift or collision of tectonic plates, and float on the denser athenosphere. So whether the Qur’an describes mountains as wedges, pegs, or paper weights, doesn’t matter. It’s not analogous or even fundamentally correct; it’s just wrong.

      Read more: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/reasonadvocates/2015/05/20/scientist/#ixzz3caIVwCnG

      You said the correct translation was ‘wedge’, something intended to split or separate one or more other things. But your own link says that the ‘roots’ of the mountains diminish as the mountains are eroded –by the movement of the still-continuous athenosphere beneath them. So either the author of the Qur’an didn’t know what a mountain is, or they didn’t know what a wedge is.

      Read more: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/reasonadvocates/2015/05/20/scientist/#ixzz3caHzgEnr

      http://wikiislam.net/wiki/The_Quran_and_Mountains

  13. Censorship?!

    anyway…

    The conclusion

    if any 1 lies to you by saying that Islam contradicts any scientific fact, make sure 1st that his info is really related to an authentic Islamic reference such as Quran by making your own research and make sure also that the translations you read are accurate enough then take (the key words of his lie + Islam) and search for them together here: http://scholar.google.com to find a trusted scientific reply to his lie and to see if the info he claimed is a scientific fact or only a scientific theory.

    1. A lie isn’t just a statement you disagree with; a lie is misinformation, or information misrepresented -with deliberate intent to deceive. This would be a fair way to describe Keith Moore’s comments under patronage, which he now recants and you still cite, even though you know better.

      You also don’t know what a scientific theory is and how it relates to facts. So let me help you out with that.

      Fact: A point of data which is either not in dispute, or is indisputable in that it is objectively verifiable.

      Evidence: Factual circumstances which are positively indicative of, and/or exclusively concordant with only one available explanation over any other.

      Hypothesis: A potentially-falsifiable explanation, one which includes predictions as to what different test results should imply about it.

      Law [of nature]: A general statement in science which is always true under a given set of circumstances. Example: That “matter attracts matter” could be described as a law of gravity, although most of the laws of gravity are expressed mathematically.

      Theory: (1) A body of knowledge including all known facts, hypotheses, and natural laws relevant to a particular field of study. A proposed explanation of a set of related facts or a given phenomenon. Example: *How* “matter attracts matter” is the theory of gravity.

  14. According to the “scientist” in the dialogue, NASA believes the Moon was formed by collision of 2 bodies (in agreement with the Qur’an) but does not know how long ago.

    Here is what NASA says on one website (http://sservi.nasa.gov/articles/nasa-scientist-jen-heldmann-describes-how-the-earths-moon-was-formed/)

    “The moon was formed ~4.5 billion years ago, about 30–50 million years after the origin of the Solar System, out of debris thrown into orbit by a massive collision between a smaller proto-Earth and another planetoid, about the size of Mars.”

    Notice:

    1 NASA thinks it does know when the Moon was formed, and it was billions of years ago, not 1400.

    2 According to NASA, the collision was between the Earth and a smaller object. The collision would have wiped out all life on Earth (check the video on my link). I think it’s safe to say that NASA and the Qur’an are not talking about the same event.

  15. Don’t mix between a fact and a theory.

    The Moon now is the result of 2 bodies colliding with one another is a FACT

    (When did that collision happened) is only a theory according to NASA

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Back to top