How muslims destroy temples.

Mononoke

Member
Sep 12, 2009
443
7
0

This is nonsense, you can find numerical correlation with just about any thing. Case in point:

Numerical patterns in holy books have been used by religionists
as proof to convince people of a book's divine status and mysticism.

Infact, I just found a numerical magic in the above paragraph. There are 22 words and 2 lines. 22/2 = 11. Also, there are 110 letters in above para (not counting spaces). And 110/11 = 10. And hence this proves that 10 is a magic number which is why god has been kind enough to give us exactly 10 fingers ... blah blah ...

I hope you get the drift
 
Last edited:

Idi Amin

Banned
Oct 14, 2008
717
11
0
Mahavamsa is old and the history before 2nd history BC is not accepted as true any more. (but accounts after 2nd century BC is fairly accurate).

And the news on 3000 year old Anuradhapura ruins were published very recently and දිවයින news paper reported it. The TV program on Swarnawahini මහා සිංහලයේ වංශ කතාව, Dr. Shiran Deraniyagala (the chief archeologist of the excavations) first broke the news.

Interesting position.....Mahavamsa is not credible ....:lol:
 

hafizsaad

Member
Dec 17, 2008
728
13
0
like this there are many things proved correct in quran.and no single mistake.
so as u said there were people that time with differnt opinions regard all these issues but how prophet mentioned all which only is accurate.

its mentioned in bible that the world is flat but its mentioned in quran that


Earth is geo-spherical in shape

The Quran mentions the actual shape of the earth in the following verse: “And we have made the earth egg shaped”. [Al-Quran 79:30]

The Arabic word Dahaha means egg shaped. It also means an expanse. Dahaha is derived from Duhiya which specifically refers to the egg of an ostrich which is geo-spherical in shape, exactly like the shape of the earth.

Thus the Quran and modern established science are in perfect harmony.


Mountains

In geology, modern science has recently discovered the phenomenon of folding which formed the mountain ranges. The earth's crust is like a solid shell, while the deeper layers are hot and fluid, and thus inhospitable to any form of life. It has also been discovered that the stability of mountains is linked to the phenomenon of folding. The process of mountain formation by folding drove the earth's crust down into the lower layers and provided foundations for the mountains.

Let us now compare modern ideas with one verse among many in the Qur'an that deals with this subject. It is taken from chapter an-Naba':

"Have We not made the earth an expanse and the mountains stakes?"

Qur'an, 78:6-7

Stakes ( awtaad ), which are driven into the ground like those used to anchor a tent, are the deep foundations of geological folds.

Here, as in the case of all the other topics presented, the objective observer cannot fail to notice the absence of any contradiction to modern knowledge.


THE THING THAT WE SHOULD BELIEVE OF EXISTENCE OF GOD IS BECAUSE PROPHET WAS AN ILLITERATE PERSON. SO THERE IS NO WAY HE MADE A QURAN ON HIS OWN WITHOUT A SINGLE MISTAKE.

if u want to get some idea of this u can watch one dialogue between dr william campbel and zakir naik.even u dont believe it will be interesting for u to watch.
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=william+campbell&emb=0#
Francis Bacon, the famous philosopher, has rightly said that a little knowledge of science makes man an atheist, but an in-depth study of science makes him a believer in God. Scientists today are eliminating models of God, but they are not eliminating God. If you translate this into Arabic, it is La illaha illal la, There is no god, (god with a small ‘g’ that is fake god) but God (with a capital ‘G’).

intresting and informative. Jazak Allah
 

Wal Bada

Well-known member
  • Interesting position.....Mahavamsa is not credible ....:lol:
    It's not a religious text to believe in every word of it. As sny other book, it's open for criticism. Modern historians only believe what they can cross check. the cross checking sources are rock inscriptions, texts from other countries from same era etc. However about 75-80% of things that are described in mahavansa is credible and correctly correlates with evidence. But the grey area is the time before 2nd century BC
     
    Oct 19, 2009
    709
    14
    0
    Quranic Embryology is two things. Firstly, it is inaccurate. Secondly, it is blatant plagiarism.

    Dear How only facts can be copied, as you know there was many theories those days.how come only facts are being copied to quran,,,morover ,ONLY
    In 1677, Hamm and Leeuwenhoek were the first scientists to observe human sperm cells (spermatoza) using a microscope. They thought that a sperm cell contained a miniature human being that grew in the uterus to form a newborn. This was known as the perforation theory. When scientists discovered that the ovum was bigger than the sperm, it was thought by De Graf and others that the foetus existed in a miniature form in the ovum. Later in the 18th century, Maupertuis propagated the theory of biparental inheritance.


    For the inadequacies watch this, I assume someone like 'Wal Bada', who is doctor will give you a more indepth analysis.

    Ask Walbada Whether he know Professor Keith Moore, of course he would have Studied his book.

    Now for the plagiarism. Embryology is nothing new. Greeks, Romans, Indians and Persians all studied embryology by studying aborted fetuses. Quranic embryology is just mindless aping of that knowledge.

    Hey dont just tell.Only in 18th century it was studied in details....Keep in mind Quran already told this 1400 years ago.

    Here is some work done by Galen of Pergamum(AD 129-200/217). Pay close attention to the highlighted bits and their Quranic analogues
    And Now for the Qur'an


    Shame, Shame!
    ON YOU??
    Read this...

    Professor Keith Moore took a piece of plaster seal and made it into the size and shape of the early stage of foetus and chewed it between the teeth to make it into a mudghah. He compared this with the photographs of the early stage of the foetus. The teeth marks resembled the 'somites' which is the early formation of the the spinal column.
    This Mudghah is transformed into bones (idhaam). The bones are clothed with intact flesh or muscles (lahm). Then Allah makes it into another creature.
    Professor Marshall Johnson is one of the leading scientists in the USA, and is the head of the Department of Anatomy and Director of the Daniel Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, USA. He was asked to comment on the verse of the Qur'an dealing with embryology. He said that the verse of the Qur'an describing the embryological stages cannot be a coincidence. He said it was probably that Muhammed (Pbuh) had a powerful microscope. On being reminded that the Qur'an was revealed 1400 years ago and that microscopes were invented centuries after the time of Prophet Muhammed (Pbuh), Professor Johnson laughed and admitted that the first microscope invented could not magnify more than 10 times and could not show a clear picture.
    Later he said.'' I see nothing here conflict with the concept that Divine intervention was involved when Muhammed (Pbuh) recited the Qur'an. According to Dr. Keith Moore, the modern classification of embryonic development stages that is adopted throughout the world is not easily comprehensible, since it identifies stages on a numerical basis. i.e. stage I, stage II, etc. The divisions revealed in Qur'an are based on distinctand easily identifiable forms or shapes, which the embryo passes through. These are based on different phases of prenatal development and provide elegant scientific descriptions that are comprehensible and practical
    Finally,Keith Moore said, ‘I have got no objection, in accepting that Prophet Muhammed (Peace be upon him) is the… the messenger of God Almighty, and that the Holy Qur'an has to be a Divine Revelation’.

    The Developing Human'… and in his new edition, the 3rd edition, he has incorporated the new things which he found from the Qur'an and the Hadith - for which he got an award for the best medical book written in that year by any single author

    You must be one stupid race of people to think that you need a divine revelation to figure out the water cycle. Sri Lankans knew about the water cycle along time before the Quran, and without any divine guidence. The water cycle is also prominent in Greek studies. I guess some people really do need miracles.
    SEEMS TO BE YOU ARE NOT SURE WHAT YOU R TELLING..DONT BE IGNORANT.
    WATER CYCLE was first described by Sir Bernard Palestine, in 1580. And he said - how does water evaporate from the ocean, forms clouds, the cloud move in the interior - how do they fall as rain, the rain water flows into the ocean and the cycle is completed. Previously people thought - in the 7th century BC Phase of Meletus - he said that ‘the spray of the ocean was picked up by the wind and it fell into the interior as rain’. People did not know - how did the underground water, the springs, where did they come from. So they thought that due to the pressure of the winds on the water, the thrust of the winds on the water - it fell into the interior as rain, and this rain water seeped into the soil, and returned to the ocean through a secret passage, ‘the Abyss’ which was known at the time of the Plato as ‘Tartarus’. People believed in this theory of Descartes, even till as late as 17th century. And philosophers like - Aristotle's theory was believed till as late as 19th century, that water vapor evaporated from the soil, it condensed in mountain caverns, and these mountain caverns formed lakes which fed the spring water. Today we know that the underground water, the springs, it is due to the seepage of the rain water. And the Qur'an says that in Surah Al-Zumur, Ch. No. 39, Verse No 21… ‘Sees't thou not that it is Allah who sends down rain from the sky, and seeps it in the sources in the ground - in the springs in the earth, and causes sown seed of various colours to grow’.


    Another act of gross plagerism. The Greeks knew the world was spherical a full 1000 years before your prophet was born, they even knew the distance between the sun and earth to within Kilometers. The Indians knew about the spherical earth from the time of the Veda's way back in 1000BC.
    How did they know these things. Not through divine postulating but through observations and simple maths.

    Mohammed being a trader obviously came into contact with elements of greek and indian culture. Having heard these stories from them Mohammed decided to fool a bunch of desert nomads. Brilliant plan I must say.

    I MUST SAY YOU ARE BRILLIANTLY MAKING LIE STORY..IF ALL ARE INVENTED IN GREEK'S TIME.WAT FOR SCIENCE NOW?????..!! BASELESS TALK FROM YOU.
     
    Last edited:

    Wal Bada

    Well-known member
  • see again my reply

    we can say you budhish are are here becuase muslim's ruler protected your ancestors in tibet and all part of the sub continents...they have burn all of you because their war is only with resistars...can i also repeat your words that this is the shameful way you have replied.
    Here means where? in SL? Sorry, your rely does not make sense. Sri lanka never depended on Muslims to protect Buddhism. SL never had ancestors (Buddhist or Sinahalese) from Tibet. tibet observes Mahayana tradition of Buddhism and SL observes "Theravada" tradition. If SL Buddhists need some assistance, historically they have turned to Myanmar or Thailand, not Tibet. learn your history first dude.

    are you accept muslim has rules all over sub continent and on the budhish regions.
    They have not ruled Sri Lanka, Burma, Thailand, China, Japan, Vietnam, Cambodia or Korea.

    my mean was in the last post was that they have not give loss to all general budhish and other hindu peoples.if they did like you think there will be no budhish in tibet and in sub-continent as you are mentioning for siri lankan muslims.
    Muslims did not rule Tibet, but Dhalai Lama did, and he is a Buddhist. Muslims are a tiny minority in Tibet as well. Your argument of Muslim rulers in tibet protecting Buddhism is one of your imaginations.

    see your favourite wikipedia at what place of the world the muslim fighter has come and fight that also include tibet and budhish regions and places....
    Proves what? Nothing. Check it out your self.
     

    Wal Bada

    Well-known member
  • Try telling that to the Portugese,Dutch and the British...:lol:
    They won because of the internal conflicts that Kings had. Still then, Portugese (Mulleriya battle - 2600 dead), Dutch (Balana battle - 700+ dead) and English (1st invasion in 1802, 1000+ dead) had copped there heaviest defeats in history by an oriental nation. No one was able to kill these Europeans like Sri Lankans. If SL had a Sinhalese king, instead of a Tamil one, Kannasami aka Sri Wickrama Rajasinha, English would have never ruled us for 150 years.
     

    Idi Amin

    Banned
    Oct 14, 2008
    717
    11
    0
    It's not a religious text to believe in every word of it. As sny other book, it's open for criticism. Modern historians only believe what they can cross check. the cross checking sources are rock inscriptions, texts from other countries from same era etc. However about 75-80% of things that are described in mahavansa is credible and correctly correlates with evidence. But the grey area is the time before 2nd century BC

    Can you please advise on the religous scripture of Buddhism and forward the link of an online version of an english translation..
     

    Idi Amin

    Banned
    Oct 14, 2008
    717
    11
    0
    ff

    They won because of the internal conflicts that Kings had. Still then, Portugese (Mulleriya battle - 2600 dead), Dutch (Balana battle - 700+ dead) and English (1st invasion in 1802, 1000+ dead) had copped there heaviest defeats in history by an oriental nation. No one was able to kill these Europeans like Sri Lankans. If SL had a Sinhalese king, instead of a Tamil one, Kannasami aka Sri Wickrama Rajasinha, English would have never ruled us for 150 years.

    So who appointed a tamil king.....? Did the tamils do that?
     

    Wal Bada

    Well-known member
  • Can you please advise on the religous scripture of Buddhism and forward the link of an online version of an english translation..
    Dhamma Portal
    The site is not complete, but nearly 60% of suthras are translated to English. If you can understand Sinhalese, 99% are translated. But I warn you, the fonts quality is atrocious in Sinhala translation.
     
    Oct 19, 2009
    709
    14
    0
    Wal Bada;5715831]Dhamma Portal
    The site is not complete, but nearly 60% of suthras are translated to English. If you can understand Sinhalese, 99% are translated. But I warn you, the fonts quality is atrocious in Sinhala translation.[/QUOTE]

    WALBADA,
    in Buddhist scriptures how can i locate this versus
    1-Chakkavatti Sinhnad Suttanta D. III, 76
    2-East volume 35 pg. 225

    "where It is said that I am not an only Buddha upon whom the leadership and order is dependent. After me another Buddha maitreya of such and such virtues will come. I am now the leader of hundreds, he will be the leader of thousands."

    I am trying to locate this, not user friendly to search.please help me out.
     
    Last edited:

    Wal Bada

    Well-known member
  • WALBADA,
    in Buddhist scriptures how can i locate this versus
    1-Chakkavatti Sinhnad Suttanta D. III, 76
    2-East volume 35 pg. 225

    "where It is said that I am not an only Buddha upon whom the leadership and order is dependent. After me another Buddha maitreya of such and such virtues will come. I am now the leader of hundreds, he will be the leader of thousands."

    I am trying to locate this, not user friendly to search.please help me out.
    Unfortunately it is not translated to English. But Sinhala version is available.

    Try this one
     

    Wal Bada

    Well-known member
  • So who appointed a tamil king.....? Did the tamils do that?
    The king was appointed by the poll by "Nilame"s. And there were quite a number of Tamil "Nilame" in that period. Actually Tamil (more precisely "Waduga") kings ruled the country for about 100 years after embracing Buddhism. By the time of 1800 there were so many Tail Nilames and Sinhalese Nilames were divided. Prince Kannasamy leapfrogged over prince Mutthusamy to the throne because it was a part of a conspiracy by a set of Sinhalese nilames who got support of the Tamil ones. Sl wouls have been a much different place if Prince Mutthusamy became the King, who was known to be a great tactician.
     

    Mononoke

    Member
    Sep 12, 2009
    443
    7
    0
    I MUST SAY YOU ARE BRILLIANTLY MAKING LIE STORY..IF ALL ARE INVENTED IN GREEK'S TIME.WAT FOR SCIENCE NOW?????..!! BASELESS TALK FROM YOU.

    Of course the greek knew a lot of things. But not everything.

    For all your blabbering you haven't made single point.

    1) Moore is clearly a convert who wants to give meaning to fairly tales that are not there. If he was so confident about his work why didn't he publish his work in the new England journal of medicine or any other mainstream journal.

    Just to give you an idea of how much of a stretch he makes:
    "And he gave you hearing and sight and feeling and understanding."

    This part of Sura 32:9 indicates that the special senses of hearing, seeing, and feeling develop in this order, which is true. The primordial of the internal ears appear before the beginning of the eyes, and the brain (the site of understanding) differentiates last.
    Surah 32:9 said:
    YUSUFALI: But He fashioned him in due proportion, and breathed into him something of His spirit. And He gave you (the faculties of) hearing and sight and feeling (and understanding): little thanks do ye give!
    PICKTHAL: Then He fashioned him and breathed into him of His Spirit; and appointed for you hearing and sight and hearts. Small thanks give ye!
    SHAKIR: Then He made him complete and breathed into him of His spirit, and made for you the ears and the eyes and the hearts; little is it that you give thanks.

    Firstly, in this Surah god claims to have fashioned a man in 'due proportions' or 'complete' and then give him faculties, clearly contradicting every Islamic argument about staged embryonic development. Moore has also clearly misinterpreted what is said here. The Qur'an talks about sensory awareness when it says sight, hearing, etc, while Moore talks about the organs. There is clearly a dissonance here. I am sorry to say this but the man is reaching.

    More importantly you didn't say anything about the unusual resemblance between Galen's work and Surah 23:14 which Moore repeatedly cites.

    2) The greeks did discover all of those things, and most developed societies had a decent understanding of where the rain comes from and what happens to the rain. Just as the same way that horse and dog breeders from hundred of years ago understood about the heritability of traits. The difference between what we know now is that we are able to provide a mechanism at almost molecular level. The Quranic water cycle doesn't give any specific details to consider it scientific.

    3) The Quran is woefully confused about alot of things. Take the origin of man. Now you would assume that god would have nailed that but no.
    Could it be from earth?
    11:61 It is He Who hath produced you from the earth
    Or dry clay (Arabic Salsaal)?
    15:26,28,33 We created man from sounding clay
    17:61 ... Thou didst create from clay
    32:7 He began the creation of man from clay
    Did we come from nothing?
    19:67 We created him before out of nothing
    No, we did not!
    52:35 Were they created of nothing?
    Did we come from mud?
    23:12 We created man from a product of wet earth (loam) (Pickthall)
    23:12 Man We did create from a quintessence (of clay)
    38:71 I am about to create a mortal out of mire
    Or water?
    25:54 It is He Who has created man from water (see also 21:30, 24:45)
    Could it be dust?
    3:59 He created (Jesus) out of dust
    30:20 He created you from dust
    35:11 Allah did create you from dust ....
    Perhaps we arose from the dead or from one person?
    30:19 It is He who brings out the living from the dead
    39:6 He created you from a single Person (see also 4:1)
    4) The Qu'ran is wrong about alot of things
    "When he reached the setting place of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring and found a people thereabout. We said: ‘O Dhul-Qarneyn! Either punish or show them kindness"’ (18:86).
    setting sun in a muddy spring? WTF

    "We have placed in the earth firm hills lest it quake so as not to sway and hurt people" (21:31).
    Hmm.....

    And there is also that creation story about a dust cloud, that is also a lie. I think I've already told you that. I can continue but this is enough

    5) Why do all these divine scientific claims have to be so damn ambiguous and incomplete. If he's god he should have been clear about what he says without using word like 'chewed gum' or 'clinging leech'. Oh and does your Quran mention that we are born with a tail.
     

    hafizsaad

    Member
    Dec 17, 2008
    728
    13
    0
    Of course the greek knew a lot of things. But not everything.

    For all your blabbering you haven't made single point.

    1) Moore is clearly a convert who wants to give meaning to fairly tales that are not there. If he was so confident about his work why didn't he publish his work in the new England journal of medicine or any other mainstream journal.

    Just to give you an idea of how much of a stretch he makes:


    Firstly, in this Surah god claims to have fashioned a man in 'due proportions' or 'complete' and then give him faculties, clearly contradicting every Islamic argument about staged embryonic development. Moore has also clearly misinterpreted what is said here. The Qur'an talks about sensory awareness when it says sight, hearing, etc, while Moore talks about the organs. There is clearly a dissonance here. I am sorry to say this but the man is reaching.

    More importantly you didn't say anything about the unusual resemblance between Galen's work and Surah 23:14 which Moore repeatedly cites.

    2) The greeks did discover all of those things, and most developed societies had a decent understanding of where the rain comes from and what happens to the rain. Just as the same way that horse and dog breeders from hundred of years ago understood about the heritability of traits. The difference between what we know now is that we are able to provide a mechanism at almost molecular level. The Quranic water cycle doesn't give any specific details to consider it scientific.

    3) The Quran is woefully confused about alot of things. Take the origin of man. Now you would assume that god would have nailed that but no.
    4) The Qu'ran is wrong about alot of things
    setting sun in a muddy spring? WTF

    Hmm.....

    And there is also that creation story about a dust cloud, that is also a lie. I think I've already told you that. I can continue but this is enough

    5) Why do all these divine scientific claims have to be so damn ambiguous and incomplete. If he's god he should have been clear about what he says without using word like 'chewed gum' or 'clinging leech'. Oh and does your Quran mention that we are born with a tail.


    Brother if we prove all the thing you have mentioned are your misunderstanding...what you will do.....?


    .
     
    Oct 19, 2009
    709
    14
    0
    Of course the greek knew a lot of things. But not everything.

    For all your blabbering you haven't made single point.

    1) Moore is clearly a convert who wants to give meaning to fairly tales that are not there. If he was so confident about his work why didn't he publish his work in the new England journal of medicine or any other mainstream journal.

    As per you prof.Moore is Convert give me proof...OK. then why This Award for him by America, The American Association of Clinical Anatomists awarded Dr. Moore with their Honored Member Award (in 1994).[3][4] In 2007, the American Association of Anatomists awarded him with the first Henry Gray/Elsevier Distinguished Educator Award.

    even for a sake of argument leave the Moore, pls see the list of Christian Scientists who agreed with Quran's science...check the link http://www.scienceislam.com/scientists_quran.php

    Just to give you an idea of how much of a stretch he makes:


    Firstly, in this Surah god claims to have fashioned a man in 'due proportions' or 'complete' and then give him faculties, clearly contradicting every Islamic argument about staged embryonic development. Moore has also clearly misinterpreted what is said here. The Qur'an talks about sensory awareness when it says sight, hearing, etc, while Moore talks about the organs. There is clearly a dissonance here. I am sorry to say this but the man is reaching.

    More importantly you didn't say anything about the unusual resemblance between Galen's work and Surah 23:14 which Moore repeatedly cites.

    2) The greeks did discover all of those things, and most developed societies had a decent understanding of where the rain comes from and what happens to the rain. Just as the same way that horse and dog breeders from hundred of years ago understood about the heritability of traits. The difference between what we know now is that we are able to provide a mechanism at almost molecular level. The Quranic water cycle doesn't give any specific details to consider it scientific.

    Funny to hear that Greeks discovered all at that time.I prefer you to go & read the history once again.about water cycle I told you in my previous reply it was established only in the 18th century not during the Greek's time...perhaps u want to confuse me.!!

    3) The Quran is woefully confused about alot of things. Take the origin of man. Now you would assume that god would have nailed that but no.

    Quran never confused us, u confused your self while u copy & paste from a islam critics(should be christian missionary) website.you put all Quotation without reference number. I still want to reply to u..
    Surah Hajj, Ch. No. 22, V. No. 5, that… ‘We have created the human beings from a quintessence of dust’. Today Science tells us that all the elements that are there in the human body - they are present in lesser or greater quantity, in the soil in the earth. So the statement that human beings have been created from earth is scientifically proven. That whatever components are there in the human body - the constituent, the elements - they are present in the Earth, in the soil, in lesser or greater proportion. Your may ask Isn’t it a contradiction? One place the Qur’an says… ‘Man is created from sperm’ - one says… ‘from dust’ - Isn’t it a contradiction? See, a contradiction is two statements which are conflicting with each other, which cannot take place simultaneously. The Qur’an does not only say… ‘Man has been created from sperm’… and the other place… ‘from dust’- it also says in Surah Furqaan, Ch. No. 25, V. No. 54, that… ‘Man has been created from water’. You will tell me there are three contradictions. See, Science has proved that man has been created from dust, as well as from sperm, as well as from water. If I tell you in one statement, that to make a cup of tea, I require water. In the second statement, I say to make a cup of tea I require tea leaves or tea powder. It is not a contradiction - I require both. If I want to make sweet tea, I add sugar to it - If I want to make ‘sugar less’ tea, I add less water and more milk. If I want to make ‘plain’ tea I add only water. So there is no contradiction

    4) The Qu'ran is wrong about alot of things
    setting sun in a muddy spring? WTF
    And there is also that creation story about a dust cloud, that is also a lie. I think I've already told you that. I can continue but this is enough

    Hmm..... Wat Hmmm i know abt wat u r asking..read below for answer..
    Allah said in the Quran:

    Or (the unbelievers' state) is like the darkness in a deep sea. It is covered by waves, above which are waves, above which are clouds. Darkness, one above another. If a man stretches out his hand, he cannot see it... [Noble Quran 24:40]

    This verse mentions the darkness found in deep seas and oceans, where if a man stretches out his hand, he cannot see it. The darkness in deep seas and oceans is found around a depth of 200 meters and below. At this depth, there is almost no light. Below a depth of 1,000 meters there is no light at all [Oceans Elder and Pernetta p.27].

    Human beings are not able to dive more than forty meters without the aid of submarines or special equipment. Human beings cannot survive unaided in the deep dark part of the oceans, such as at a depth of 200 meters.

    Scientists have recently discovered this darkness by means of special equipment and submarines that have enabled them to dive into the depths of the oceans.

    We can also understand from the following sentences in the previous verse, "..in a deep sea. It is covered by waves, above which are waves, above which are clouds,..." that the deep waters of seas and oceans are covered by waves, and above these waves are other waves.

    It is clear that the second set of waves are the surface waves that we see, because the verse mentions that above the second waves there are clouds. But what about the first waves? Scientists have recently discovered that there are internal waves which "occur on density interfaces between layers of different densities." [Oceanography, Gross, p. 205].

    The internal waves cover the deep waters of seas and oceans because the deep waters have a higher density than the waters above them. Internal waves act like surface waves. They can also break just like surface waves. Internal waves cannot be seen by the human eye, but they can be detected by studying temperature or salinity changes at a given location.




    5) Why do all these divine scientific claims have to be so damn ambiguous and incomplete. If he's god he should have been clear about what he says without using word like 'chewed gum' or 'clinging leech'. Oh and does your Quran mention that we are born with a tail.
    There is no single verse is incomplete,so far many peoples(like u) have brought mistake from Quran but all proved to be wrong.Allah in the Quran he challenges the human being to bring a single world like Quran or to show any wrong.no one succeeded yet.
    Quran never said we are born with tail.I dont have tail...DO u have? if u have u can argue with me why Quran didnt tell this....hope you are clear now.
     
    Last edited:

    Mononoke

    Member
    Sep 12, 2009
    443
    7
    0
    I did some reading about the Qur'anic water cycle. unsurprisingly it is inaccurate and rather unimpressive in its description.

    [Shakir 24:43] Do you not see that Allah drives along the clouds, then gathers them together, then piles them up, so that you see the rain coming forth from their midst?
    This is a completely wrong description of rain cloud formation. Rain clouds form singly, not by other cloud joining together or stacking together. Hot water vapor rises up until it hit an inversion layer where the water condenses to form a singular rain cloud.

    And He sends down of the clouds that are (like) mountains wherein is hail, afflicting therewith whom He pleases and turning it away from whom He pleases; the flash of His lightning almost takes away the sight.
    Ha this is an old wives tale. Clouds that are like mountains, WTF.

    God describes the rain as pure and recent science proved the rain to be pure distilled water.

    [Shakir 25:48] And He it is Who sends the winds as good news before His mercy; and We send down pure water from the cloud,
    Ever heard of acid rain, it seems your god hasn't.

    [Shakir 56:70] If We pleased, We would have made it salty; why do you not then give thanks?
    This is impossible, vaporization of water molecules leaves salt behind.

    The rest of that article tells us nothing more than what a 10 year old boy could deduce through observations, way to go Einstein. There is not even a simple description of precipitation in here. Who are you trying to fool?
     
    Last edited:

    safdyn

    Member
    Nov 23, 2007
    3
    0
    0
    නෑ තම්බින්ට නෙමෙයි හෙන ගහන්න ඕනේ....
    අපිටයි හෙන ගහන්න ඕන. ඔව් අපිට. මේව බලාගෙන මොකුත් නොකර හිටියට. මේව බලාගෙන ගල් ඉබ්බො වගේ ඉන්නවට.

    මම සිංහලයෙක්. කොහෙවත් යන ජාතියක් ජම්මයක් නැති වේස හැත්තකට මගේ රට විනශ කරන්න දෙන්න මම සූදානම් නෑ... මට බෑ කවද හරි මගේ ඊළඟ පරම්පරාවට කියන්න, "දැන් මේ රටේ සිංහල ජාතියක් නෑ, ඉන්න උන්ට ඉතිහාසයක් නෑ" කියල.

    ජාතික සමගිය යකාට ගියාවේ. උඹල හිතල බලපල්ල උඹලගේ රට බේර ගන්න උඹල ඉදිරිපත් උනේ නැත්නම් කව්ද ඉදිරිපත් වෙන්නේ කියල? දේශපාලුවො එහෙම කරාවිද? තමන්ගෙ බලය රැක ගන්න උන් හම්බයන්ගෙ අත විතරක් නෙමේ, *කත් ඉඹිවි.

    දැන් මට කියාපල්ල, තොපිට ජාතියක් තියෙනව නේද? තොපිට ආගමක් තියෙනව නේද? සිංහලයෙක් වෙන්නෙ උපතින් නෙමෙයි යකුනේ, හැසිරෙන විදිහෙන්, ගති සිරිතෙන්.... ඉස්සර රජවරු ලංකාවට ආපු හම්බයන්ට ලංකාවෙ ඉන්න දුන්නේ සිංහලයන් වගේ ඉන්න කියලයි. මේ මුන් සිංහලයන් වගේ ඉන්න හැටිද?

    අපි මේව දැක දැක නිකම් ඉන්න ගියොත් ලංකාව බලාගන්න හතර වරම් දෙවිවරු අපිට සාප කරාවි යකුනේ..... අපේ ජාතිය ආගම බේරගන්න අවුරුදු දාස් ගානක් සටන් වැදල මැරුණු අපේ මුතුන් මිත්තන්න්ට අපි මොනවද කියන්නෙ....?

    තමන්ගේ රට ජාතිය ආගම වෙනුවෙන් සටන් නොකරන එකා අවජාතකයෙක් නෙමෙයිද? හම්බයො ඒ අතින් කොච්චර හිතනවද? මොකද උන් කොහොම හරි තමන්ගේ ආගම ප්‍රචාරය කරනවා.. උන්ට හරි හමං ජාතියක් නෑ......... තියෙන්නෙ ඉස්ලාම් ආගම විතරයි.

    අපි මැරුනත් අපේ අනිත් පරම්පරාවට ඉන්න තැනක් තියල මැරෙමු. අපේ නම් ගම් ඊලඟට ඉපදෙන උන් දැන නොදත්තට කාරි නෑ...... අපේ නම් රන් අකුරෙන් නොලියවුනාට කාරි නෑ... අපි දියසෙන් කුමාරය ඉපදෙනකම් බලන් හිටියොත් ඒ මොන ගොබ්බ වැඩක්ද? අපි හැමෝම දියසෙන් කුමාරවරු... අපි හැමෝම ලංකාවේ දූපුත්තු. අපි හැමෝම රිටිගල ජයසේනල.

    පොදු සතුරා විනාශ කරල අපේ අවුල් විසඳගම්මු. පොදු සතුරාට විරුද්ධව එකාසේ නැගී සිටිමු.



    < macho, hariya word use karapan, mamath sinhala girl kenekwa tamai mary karala inne..but im muslim ..so koheda yako itihasayak tiyanna, issra rajawaru antak pura tiyagena hitiye,,hema month ekema sigiri kasapa ganiyewa rape karanawa, koheda yako ubalata jatiyak tiyenne,,jatiyak jammayak natte katada kiyala hoyala balala kata karapan,


    Ma sri lankikayek kiyala hitapan,,,jatiwadiyek wenna epa yako,,mamath sinhala gewal wala watigena inna ekek, to wage ekekwa bihi karapu unatai gahanna una,,eka wage idapan,,ubata tambiyan hari yanne nathnum asaraya nokara idapan..

    demmalu ape hamudawata gahana kota mage egeth La rath wenawa yako,,,coz im a sri lankan,,be proud abt it..

    mage jatiwadi kamak neha,,

    pls.dont mistake me