 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
mansasulu
997 Posts |
 Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 15:36:42
|
Kay, I think you completely miss the point I was making. There is a reason I included the verses of the Quran at the end. Perhaps you did not read that far. So let me try to break it down in simpler terms. The point I am trying to make is that all the advances we are making in science is utterly useless and a complete waste of time if we fail to believe in the omnipotence and power of ALLAH.
The fundamental purpose of all these findings and knowledge we are seeing to day is for us to recognize that true power of Allah. What I see is the quite opposite in many ways. We continue to celebrate the likes of Darwin, when the actual credit belongs to Allah. Darwin said we share the same geniology with Monkeys and Allah is telling us he created the human being with the best of form and with his own hands.
Scientific inventions are use less unless it leads us to Allah, period! I will let you mull over another verse from the quran where Allah says in Sura Al Fatir, verse 28, "…Those truly fear Allah among His servants are those who have knowledge (Ulema). For Allah is Exalted in Might and is Forgiving."
|
"...Verily, in the remembrance of Allâh do hearts find rest..." Sura Al-Rad (Chapter 13, Verse 28)
...Gambian by birth, Muslim by the grace of Allah... |
 |
|
|
kaanibaa
United Kingdom
1169 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 16:28:32
|
For general consumption I quote an excerp from THE ATLAS OF CREATION on some topics raised in this debate Please read on:-
By carrying out a great deal of research and investigation, and by establishing artificial environments in laboratories, they sought to come up with findings that would corroborate Darwin's theory. However, every piece of research and every new finding they obtained, only constituted evidence that refuted evolution rather than confirming it. Science and technology had made rapid progress since the beginning of the 20th century, and refuted the theory of evolution. All the branches of science concerned with the subject–such as microbiology, biomathematics, cell biology, biochemistry, genetics, anatomy, physiology, anthropology and paleontology- -revealed countless proofs that totally undermined the theory of evolution.
The fossil record is perhaps the most important evidence that demolishes the theory of evolution's claims. Fossils reveal that life forms on Earth have never undergone even the slightest change and have never developed into one another. Examining the fossil record, we see that living things are exactly the same today as they were hundreds of millions of years ago—in other words, that they never underwent evolution. Even during the most ancient periods, life forms emerged suddenly with all their complex structures–with the perfect and superior features, just as do their counterparts today.
This demonstrates one indisputable fact: Living things did not come into being through the imaginary processes of evolution. All the living things that have ever existed on Earth were created by God. This fact of creation is once again revealed in the traces left behind them by flawless living things.
One of the major findings that invalidates the theory of evolution is the fossil records, which reveal that the structures of living species remained unchanged for tens of millions of years. Pictured is an insect living in our day and its 50-million-year-old fossil. This species, which remains the same after 50 million years, refutes evolution.
A 125-million-year-old salamander fossil and its today's counterpart.
Ferns have kept their same structure since the day they were created. Ferns that have remained the same for approximately 300 million years are one piece of evidence verifying the invalidity of the evolution theory.
This book will provide you with not only such information as what fossils are and where and how they are found, but also a closer examination of a variety of fossil specimens, millions of years old, that are still able to declare, "We never underwent evolution; we were created." The fossils discussed and illustrated in this book are just a few examples of the hundreds of millions of specimens that prove the fact of creation. And even these few are enough to prove that the theory of evolution is a major hoax and deception in the history of science.
quote ended
Certainly by reading this study one could have another insight into what we are debating about. There is another argument which pursues the none existence of any transitional form in fossils or actual existence; of the alleged species in the fossil finds so far. The fossil collection though covered millions of years by scientific reckoning. When shall they appear ? ;as it seems to baffle Darwin himself when he reportedly said their absence would be the greatest proof against his theory. I too would not accept any one forcing an idea or theorem at me which in effect would by my blind acceptance of it lead me to being defactor lead astray . Until the scientists come up with the species displayed in order of evolutionary chain from ape to half ape to what ever it becomes after this as proofs of their claims I shall stay on this side of River Jordan believing in creation.This they have failed to show from the fossils discovered so far.
I can understand the awe in which we have to look at the discoveries by scientists recently and in the past . Their contributions were of great use to mankind and some though were dangerous too. If the extent of human knowledge is boundless I dare say that we would have made greater strides in all areas of study but alas what we have is a slow progression of knowledge ; so we have the continous search process that is called research or studies etc.Once in a while snippets are revealed to who ever it pleases the Lord to enrich with insight, thus gets a breakthrough. |
|
|
|
kaanibaa
United Kingdom
1169 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 17:17:51
|
Another related quotation from the wonderful ATLAS OF CREATION:-
The Perception of Time
What we call "time" is in fact a method by which one moment is compared to another. For example, when a person taps an object, he hears a particular sound. If he taps the same object five minutes later, he hears another sound. Thinking there is an interval between the two sounds, he calls this interval "time." Yet when he hears the second sound, the first one he heard is no more than a memory in his mind, merely a bit of information in his imagination. A person formulates his perception of time by comparing the moment in which he lives with what he holds in memory. If he doesn't make this comparison, he can have no perception of time either.
Similarly, a person makes a comparison when he sees someone enter through a door and sit in an armchair in the middle of the room. By the time this person sits in the armchair, the images of the moment he opened the door and made his way to the armchair are compiled as bits of information in memory. The perception of time takes place when one compares the man sitting on the armchair with those bits of recalled information.
Briefly, time comes about as a result of comparisons of information stored in the brain. If man had no memory, his brain could not make such interpretations and therefore, he would never form any perception of time. One determines himself to be thirty years old, only because he has accumulated in his mind information pertaining to those thirty years. If his memory did not exist, then he could not think of any such preceding period and would be experiencing only the single "moment" in which he was living.
The Scientific Explanation of Timelessness
We can clarify this subject by quoting various scientists' and scholars' explanations. Regarding the idea of time flowing backwards, François Jacob, a famous intellectual and Nobel laureate professor of genetics, states the following in his book Le Jeu des Possibles (The Play of Possibilities):
Films played backwards let us imagine a world in which time flows backwards. A world in which cream separates itself from the coffee and jumps out of the cup to reach the creamer; in which the walls emit light rays that are collected in a light source instead of radiating out from it; a world in which a stone leaps up to a man's hand from the water where it was thrown by the astonishing cooperation of innumerable drops of water surging together. Yet, in such a time-reversed world with such opposite features, our brain processes, and the way our memory compiles information, would similarly function backwards. The same is true for the past and future, though the world will appear to us exactly as it does currently.205
But since our brain is accustomed to a certain sequence of events, the world does not operate as related above. We assume that time always flows forward. However, this is a decision reached in the brain and is, therefore, completely relative. In reality, we never can know how time flows—or even whether it flows or not! This is because time is not an absolute fact, but only a form of perception.
That time is a perception is also verified by Albert Einstein in his Theory of General Relativity. In his book The Universe and Dr. Einstein, Lincoln Barnett writes:
Along with absolute space, Einstein discarded the concept of absolute time—of a steady, unvarying inexorable universal time flow, streaming from the infinite past to the infinite future. Much of the obscurity that has surrounded the Theory of Relativity stems from man's reluctance to recognize that sense of time, like sense of color, is a form of perception. Just as space is simply a possible order of material objects, so time is simply a possible order of events. The subjectivity of time is best explained in Einstein's own words. "The experiences of an individual," he says, "appear to us arranged in a series of events; in this series the single events which we remember appear to be ordered according to the criterion of 'earlier' and 'later'. There exists, therefore, for the individual, an I-time, or subjective time. This in itself is not measurable. I can, indeed, associate numbers with the events, in such a way that a greater number is associated with the later event than with an earlier one.206
As Barnett wrote, Einstein showed that, "space and time are forms of intuition, which can no more be divorced from consciousness than can our concepts of color, shape, or size." According to the Theory of General Relativity: "time has no independent existence apart from the order of events by which we measure it."207
Our subjective perception of time arises from comparing and contrasting one moment with another. For example, we imagine that specific intervals of time pass between the sowing of a seed, the blooming of flowers from the resulting plant, and those flowers being cut and arranged in a bouquet—and we call this "time." But in reality, time is a perception that arises from contrasting what is occuring "at this moment" to specific events that have happened before.
Since time consists of perception, it depends entirely on the perceiver—and is therefore relative.
The speed at which time flows differs according to the references we use to measure it, because the human body has no natural clock to indicate precisely how fast time passes. As Barnett wrote, "Just as there is no such thing as color without an eye to discern it, so an instant or an hour or a day is nothing without an event to mark it."208
The relativity of time is plainly experienced in dreams. Although what one perceives in a dream seems to last for hours, in fact, it only lasts for a few minutes, and even a few seconds.
The relativity of time is plainly experienced in dreams. Although what we perceive in a dream seems to last for hours, in fact, it only lasts for a few minutes, and often even a few seconds.
An example will clarify the point. Assume that you were put into a room with a single window, specifically designed; and were kept there for a certain period of time. A clock on the walls shows you the amount of time that has passed. During this "time," from the room's window, you see the sun setting and rising at certain intervals. A few days later, questioned about the amount of time spent in the room, you would give an answer based on the information you had collected by looking at the clock from time to time, as well as by counting how many times the sun had set and risen. Say, for example, you estimate you'd spent three days in the room. However, if the person who put you in there says that you spent only two days in there; that the sun you saw from the window was falsely produced; and that the clock in the room was especially regulated to move faster, then your calculation would be erroneous.
This example dramatizes that the information we have about the rate of time's passing is based only on references that change according to the perceiver.
That time is relative is a scientific fact, also proven by scientific methodology. Einstein's Theory of General Relativity maintains that the speed of time changes depending on the speed of the object and its distance from the centre of gravity. As speed increases, time is shortened—compressed—and slows down until it approaches to the point of stopping entirely.
Einstein himself gave an example. Imagine two twins, one of whom remains on Earth while the other goes into space at a speed close to the speed of light. On his return, the traveller will find that his brother has grown much older than he has. The reason is that time flows much more slowly for the person who travels at near-light speed. What about a space-travelling father and his son who stays behind on Earth? If the father were 27 years old when he set out, and his son was only three, the father, when he comes back 30 years later in Earth time, will be only 30, whereas his son will be 33 years old!209
This relativity of time is caused not by clocks slowing down or running fast. Rather, it's the result of the differentiated operational periods of the entire material system, as deep as sub-atomic particles. In such a setting where time stretches out, one's heartbeat, cell replications, and brain functions all operate more slowly. The person continues with his daily life and does not notice the slowing of time at all.
Perhaps this perspective would lay to rest the question of time raised in the debate for though we the earthlings can argue about the length of day the relative differential at play when one considers who the perceiver is; to wit GOD the creator, cancels the dark spot or clears the doubt as far as the duration of creation goes.I recommend we read this interesting book on line and get deeper insights on the subject of evolution and of course decide if we are being hoaxed or educated , the arguments though are as far as i can see backed by references to scientists who can be cross checked by any one.
Talking about shifting goal posts and so on and so forth does not hold sway here because the study deals with topics in the Koran where statements are made about things that are to happen in future eg Judgment day etc and the statement reports things asif they have already happened rather than going to happen. The Lord sees the ruler from both ends and knows what was at the beginning and what is at the end.The alpha and the omega , who is not bound by time as we human beings are so tightly constrained.Time is not of the essence here but for us to know ,it is mentioned for our reckoning ; that is for those who can reckon or those enlightened to do so. |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 23:02:47
|
Kaanibaa, please read the biography of Harun Yahya and see for yourself how uneducated and fake that writer-activist is. He is a mere sensationalist and an amateur mixing socio-religious ideology and science. If he had listened to educated people, he might have received proper knowledge about many things. Please find a better teacher to listen to.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harun_Yahya
You know Mansasulu there is a difference between a fact and a personal opinion. I thought we were discussing matters of fact not subjective personal opinions. But thanks for sharing your views with me  . |
Edited by - kayjatta on 20 Feb 2009 23:18:23 |
|
|
|
kaanibaa
United Kingdom
1169 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 23:29:24
|
I am surprised that you are taking that particular stance, if as you say you are dealing with facts so too am I. The quotations posted were gleaned from a source I clearly reported here and it among other things discussed issues relevant to my case , so I pointed these out to buttress my case. If how ever you now feel that all what is here posted is my personal view, I do not accept the credit as that surely belongs to the author of 'The Atlas of Creation' I just happen to use it and like I said to answer a query or queries you raised before.An intelligent discussion here was what you started and you offered some relevant references like I did. Coming to opinions as they stand any one could very well have them and keep to one's self but issues bordering on religion when read by others tickle them to respond , either to support the views or defer as the case may be.This is not a crusade but I guess you know that this debate is not new in the world we just do our bit and move on. I as I said before respect your views , seeing that ;that is the civilized way of living nowadays . If I offended you in any way brother please accept my sincere apologies . Peace be on to you and your family and may we come to a proper understanding of each other with much love. |
|
|
|
mansasulu
997 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2009 : 06:58:06
|
| May I submit that Allah's creation of humans with his own hands may be an opinion to you but it is a well established fact. I think it was Darwin who merely expressed opinions when he tried to delve into issues he had no knowledge of. Is it that the facts I am presenting are too hot for you to handle than you brand them as "personal subjective opinions"? |
"...Verily, in the remembrance of Allâh do hearts find rest..." Sura Al-Rad (Chapter 13, Verse 28)
...Gambian by birth, Muslim by the grace of Allah... |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2009 : 23:42:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by kaanibaa
I am surprised that you are taking that particular stance, if as you say you are dealing with facts so too am I. The quotations posted were gleaned from a source I clearly reported here and it among other things discussed issues relevant to my case , so I pointed these out to buttress my case. If how ever you now feel that all what is here posted is my personal view, I do not accept the credit as that surely belongs to the author of 'The Atlas of Creation' I just happen to use it and like I said to answer a query or queries you raised before.An intelligent discussion here was what you started and you offered some relevant references like I did. Coming to opinions as they stand any one could very well have them and keep to one's self but issues bordering on religion when read by others tickle them to respond , either to support the views or defer as the case may be.This is not a crusade but I guess you know that this debate is not new in the world we just do our bit and move on. I as I said before respect your views , seeing that ;that is the civilized way of living nowadays . If I offended you in any way brother please accept my sincere apologies . Peace be on to you and your family and may we come to a proper understanding of each other with much love.
Hey Kaanibaa, please do not get me wrong. The part of my response you seem to be responding to is addressed to Mansasulu. That is why I used his name in that second part of response just like I used your own name in the first part of the response. I truly valued your arguments and contributions to this age old debate.
My purpose (of course after being pushed by you) is to share my own experience and perspective and of those (whose ideas) I have learned from concerning this important (but controversial) topic. My purpose is in no way otherwise. Peace be onto both you and Mansasulu. 
Always,
Kayjatta. |
|
|
|
kaanibaa
United Kingdom
1169 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2009 : 22:39:50
|
| I am so sorry about this mix up, I actually read your posting and in the first instant there was no name but you might have edited the psoting which definitely cleared the air about whom you were addressing. Please accept my apologies for being shall I say discourtious and with that close my discussion of this topic, with much respect. Thanks |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| Bantaba in Cyberspace |
© 2005-2024 Nijii |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
