Syed's Mega-Thread

[Syed]

what did quran 'borrowed' from galen?

Medical information from the Greek Physician Galen...including his errors. Which shows that the Quran is not a divinely inspired work, but a collection of information, ideas and concepts, from surrounding cultures and various time periods, including Judaism.

''Many have written about the remarkable similarities between Qur'anic embryology and that taught by Galen. He was a highly influential Greek physician (b. 130 CE), whose works were studied in Syria and Egypt during Muhammad's time[2]. Some of the most obvious links with Galen (and also with the Talmud) are in statements about the nutfah stage of embryology in the Qur'an, and even more so in the hadith. See the article Greek and Jewish Ideas about Reproduction in the

can you steal well known einstein theories and write a book about it and say that those theories are yours?

if galen was well known scientist / theorist in middle east at that time, nobody would believe prophet a man claiming he got a book from god........stolen materials from well known scientist galen


Quran on Embryology - Professor Keith L. Moore
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_Dllu42eEA

 

[Methinx]

Medical information from the Greek Physician Galen...including his errors. Which shows that the Quran is not a divinely inspired work, but a collection of information, ideas and concepts, from surrounding cultures and various time periods, including Judaism.

''Many have written about the remarkable similarities between Qur'anic embryology and that taught by Galen. He was a highly influential Greek physician (b. 130 CE), whose works were studied in Syria and Egypt during Muhammad's time[2]. Some of the most obvious links with Galen (and also with the Talmud) are in statements about the nutfah stage of embryology in the Qur'an, and even more so in the hadith. See the article Greek and Jewish Ideas about Reproduction in the

can you steal well known einstein theories and write a book about it and say that those theories are yours?

if galen was well known scientist / theorist in middle east at that time, nobody would believe prophet a man claiming he got a book from god........stolen materials from well known scientist galen


Quran on Embryology - Professor Keith L. Moore
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_Dllu42eEA

There are no scientific miracles in the Quran. Let a Muslim (who spent years trying to prove Qur'anic embryology) tell you.

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

Not very long, do watch it. Cure yourself from ignorance.

 

[Syed]

can you steal well known einstein theories and write a book about it and say that those theories are yours?

if galen was well known scientist / theorist in middle east at that time, nobody would believe prophet a man claiming he got a book from god........stolen materials from well known scientist galen


Quran on Embryology - Professor Keith L. Moore
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_Dllu42eEA

There are no scientific miracles in the Quran. Let a Muslim (who spent years trying to prove Qur'anic embryology) tell you.

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

Not very long, do watch it. Cure yourself from ignorance.

did you watch professor keith moore quran on embryology?

Quran on Embryology - Professor Keith L. Moore
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_Dllu42eEA

 

[Methinx]

I did watch, of course it was not Professor Moore speaking.

Professor Moore confessed to receiving lots of money from the Saudis to make vague references to Quran embryology.
The whole thing was subsequently exaggerated by Saudi paid media.



Awake! Syed, for Morning in the Bowl of Night

Has flung the Stone that puts the Stars to Flight:

And Lo! the Hunter of the East has caught

The Sultan's Turret in a Noose of Light.

 

[Syed]

I did watch, of course it was not Professor Moore speaking.

Professor Moore confessed to receiving lots of money from the Saudis to make vague references to Quran embryology.
The whole thing was subsequently exaggerated by Saudi paid media.

dont lie for atheism

 

[another1]

oxymoronic

 

[atrib]

Even the professional Theologians, the Doctors of Divinity, use cherry picking and quite sophisticated rationalisation to diminish the cruel, vindictive god of war, Yahweh the god of Israel, while promoting the universal God of Love of the new testament....and even then ignoring the underlying vindictive, shallow nature of this deity in terms of selection criteria, punishment, etc. It's quite astonishing in its dishonesty.

I wouldn't want to diminish God's righteous exercise of His prerogative to wrath and punishment.

I don't call it "vindictive" but I certainly wouldn't resile from the hard facts. Neither do I accept that there is an Old Testament version of God who is somehow not the same God of the New Testament.

That would be like a child whose father was a police officer being unable to reconcile the fact that their parent at one time saves people from burning cars and other times uses a tazer on people who steal cars.

What is it with theists and their lame analogies? The police officer in your example is not all knowing and all powerful. If he was, he would not need to hurt or kill people, he could simply restrain them through his will. Nor is the police officer a genocidal tyrant who kills off the entire human and animal population on this planet, except for a select handful, because it was pissed off at them.

If you want to sell your god as an all powerful entity that can create universes, don't keep comparing it to humans. Which, ironically, is exactly what the Bible does. Biblegod gets pissed off at various infractions to the rules that exist in its head and murders hapless humans left and right. It also delights in the aroma of burning flesh, despite apparently not having any need to eat to sustain its metabolism. Biblegod is simply a creation of our goat-herder ancestors who knew very little of the universe they found themselves in, a myth like so many others. You live in the 21st century but you are seemingly unable to grasp this concept.

 

[Keith&Co.]

dont lie for atheism

Even if that were a lie, why not?
You don't seem terribly attached to honesty-for-theism, you haven't got a leg to stand on to judge others.

 

[Atheos]

*** Moderator Notice

Offsetting penalties, replay the down.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

PZ Meyers on the Quran and embryology

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4X9VZZv9O8A

For what its worth.

 

[Syed]

PZ Meyers on the Quran and embryology

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4X9VZZv9O8A

For what its worth.

he is a hardcore atheist cant be honest

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

PZ Meyers on the Quran and embryology

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4X9VZZv9O8A

For what its worth.

he is a hardcore atheist cant be honest

Wrong. PZ Meyers notes that Aristotle had written about embryology that has the same information as in the Quran. Aristotle was well known, and obviously, there is nothing new in the Quran.

He is in fact, honest. Aristotle and the Quran can be compared easily. Calling Meyers dishonest is wrong and not acceptable.

 

[Syed]

he is a hardcore atheist cant be honest

Wrong. PZ Meyers notes that Aristotle had written about embryology that has the same information as in the Quran. Aristotle was well known, and obviously, there is nothing new in the Quran.

He is in fact, honest. Aristotle and the Quran can be compared easily. Calling Meyers dishonest is wrong and not acceptable.

if time of muhammed aristotle's embryology was well known to the arabs then how can prophet tell arabs that embryology revelation came from god to them?

Calling Meyers dishonest is wrong and not acceptable.

to all atheists?

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Wrong. PZ Meyers notes that Aristotle had written about embryology that has the same information as in the Quran. Aristotle was well known, and obviously, there is nothing new in the Quran.

He is in fact, honest. Aristotle and the Quran can be compared easily. Calling Meyers dishonest is wrong and not acceptable.

if time of muhammed aristotle's embryology was well known to the arabs then how can prophet tell arabs that embryology revelation came from god to them?

Calling Meyers dishonest is wrong and not acceptable.

to all atheists?

If Mohammad said what he knew about embrology was a direct revelation, he is not credible.

P.Z. Meyers is credible because he can point to Aristotle's writings and the fact that nothing new is found in the Quran. Meyer's claims can be checked.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Calling Meyers dishonest is wrong and not acceptable.

to all atheists?

If you're judging him, or all strong-atheists, a liar because of his lack-of-belief, yes. It should be unacceptable to anyone who pretends to honor the truth.

 

[Syed]

if time of muhammed aristotle's embryology was well known to the arabs then how can prophet tell arabs that embryology revelation came from god to them?

Calling Meyers dishonest is wrong and not acceptable.

to all atheists?

If Mohammad said what he knew about embrology was a direct revelation, he is not credible.

P.Z. Meyers is credible because he can point to Aristotle's writings and the fact that nothing new is found in the Quran. Meyer's claims can be checked.

why dont you write a book with all einstein and darwin theories in it and say you received this book from god and see how many people believe you

 

[Atheos]

Syed, you've been presented with plenty of information that would demonstrate how wrong you are about this subject. Science has discovered a very great deal about biological physiology and how things work. There may be mysteries yet to solve but what it is that keeps us alive and what is the difference between a living body and a corpse is not one of those things.

This thread even included a pretty much unchallenged propagation of the urban legend that some scientists conducted experiments and determined that at the moment of death a person's body becomes lighter. Syed has taken that one step further with this baseless assertion that there is a soul providing some sort of power to the body.

This "theory" (which is nothing of the sort) is immediately suspect because of actual evidence which we have available. Evidence such as life support machines that can keep a body alive long after brain death has occurred. Evidence such as how brain damage can result in complete changes in personality, knowledge, etc. If the mind is the same as the soul then it would be reasonable to expect that brain damage wouldn't result in the inability to remember experiences, only the ability to communicate those memories. What we call the "mind" is clearly a product of the electro-chemical activity of a functioning brain, even if it is damaged in some way.

Every life form on this planet depends on electro-chemical activities to take place in order to remain in a living state. Greater organic complexity can result in longer life spans but also engender greater opportunities for failure of one component of the system to cascade into an overall failure of the entire organism.

We have reached the point where science has the ability to determine with near perfect precision the exact cause of every death. There is an entire field of scientists called "Coroners" (in case Syed wasn't aware) whose job it is to make those determinations when called upon to do so. Not once in the entire history of this field of expertise has a coroner came to the conclusion that the dude was getting along just fine and all of a sudden an angel came along and yanked the soul out of his body.

Not once. That's a pretty big 0-fer. Evidence always refutes theistic claims. The only way the claims can avoid refutation is to become more and more vague and unfalsifiable. The problem with unfalsifiable claims is that they cannot be confirmed by evidence. They can (as is being done in this case) only be baselessly asserted.

 

[Syed]

Evidence such as life support machines that can keep a body alive long after brain death has occurred. .

i dont believe that death of a organ makes us die, body may not be functionable but person still alive

Every life form on this planet depends on electro-chemical activities to take place in order to remain in a living state.

i agree, that electro-chemical is our soul keep us alive

something we agree on

 

[Bronzeage]

i dont believe that death of a organ makes us die, body may not be functionable but person still alive

Every life form on this planet depends on electro-chemical activities to take place in order to remain in a living state.

i agree, that electro-chemical is our soul keep us alive

something we agree on

This means Georg Ohm is a prophet.

 

[Atheos]

i dont believe that death of a organ makes us die, body may not be functionable but person still alive

Every life form on this planet depends on electro-chemical activities to take place in order to remain in a living state.

i agree, that electro-chemical is our soul keep us alive

something we agree on

I do not agree that there is any evidence a soul exists, but there is certainly plenty of evidence of the electro-chemical activities that take place in living organisms. Interestingly these electro-chemical activities can always be traced to nutrients and catalysts consumed by the organism, the processing of those materials to manufacture the necessary enzymes to continue the cycle and the generation of commensurate waste products from this process.

Without exception the amount of materials and energy taken in always equals the amount of materials and energy expended, stored or excreted. There is no place for the input of any energy from this "soul" of which you speak. The catalytic activities involved can be replicated outside of a living organism, so no "soul" is necessary for these reactions to take place. Your "soul" is not part of the equation anywhere.

Find a gap in this equation and you have room to insert a soul. Until such time all you have is baseless assertion. You can be certain that if such a gap actually existed and could be demonstrated Christians (and Muslims) would be all over that like stink on excrement, crediting their invisible friends with it.

You have nothing but untestable baseless assertion. That's where mythology always comes from.