the message board for Dubai English speaking community
DFT wrote:Most of what is written in religious books has no hard evidence to back up the facts so may be considered fiction.
Bibble, Torah, Bhagavad Gita and other religious scriptures are no exceptions.
shafique wrote:Can you show where a Quranic description of a historical event differs from the Biblical and the archaeological record shows that the Biblical description is correct? Give us specific examples to back up your claim.
shafique wrote:I guess the answer is 'no, I can't back up my claim' then. I thought so.
Flying Dutchman wrote:Here I disagree. The Bible has proven to be an important historical book backed up by archeology to at least 2000 B.C. An amazing feat. The Quran on the other hand is worthless as a historical book.
Flying Dutchman wrote:Interesting enough, there is no archealogical evidence of the precense of the Hebrews or Israelites in Egypt. Not saying that it didn't happen, but many large groups of slaves left something something behind, not the Israelites. Our only reference is the OT and should we use that as a histrical book?
shafique wrote:You are right FD - that is why I referred to Biblical accounts. A lot of the archaeological investigations done in the area have been based on Biblical accounts - trying to find evidence of the places and peoples mentioned in the Bible. ...
herve wrote:In his latest book, Robert Spencer states that prophet muhammad did not even exist
Resolving the Palestinian issue? It's as simple as one, two, three.
Well, relatively simple when we strip-away Israeli rhetoric and look clearly at the key legalities of the situation.
Israel cynically portrays the issues as being deeply complex, part of its long game of evading international criticism while trying to break the Palestinians. Alongside the perpetuated myths of 'Palestinian intransigence' that followed Oslo, Olmert and his predecessors have sought to foster the notion of fiendishly difficult peace details bogging-down negotiations, requiring some kind of Olympian effort on their part to resolve it.
shafique wrote: 'BS' written by the anti-Israeli side.
Flying Dutchman ,Here I disagree. The Bible has proven to be an important historical book backed up by archeology to at least 2000 B.C. An amazing feat. The Quran on the other hand is worthless as a historical book.
What I write is not about islam, it's about all religions and the idea of god in general. If you can not handle this, I am sorry but that is what I think. As somebody wrote "Internet is the place where religions come to die" and I think it's accurate.Yosef wrote:It is very annouying many people here enjoy to attack Islam in every topic in this forum.
shafique wrote:If someone showed me a table and chairs and said it was created by random events over millions of years - I'd say 'yes that is possible, however I don't believe you
Thats not technically - thats subjectivellyshawagma wrote:technically a thing comes into "Existence" when you become "aware" of it , meaning when, you perceive it with your senses, so when one dies, the universe perishes for that person
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjectivity wrote:Subjectivity frequently exists in theories, measurements or concepts, against the will of those attempting to be objective, and it is a goal in most fields to remove subjectivity from scientific or mathematical statements or experiments. Many fields such as physics, biology, computer science, and chemistry are attempting to remove subjectivity from their methodologies, theories and results and this is a large part of the process of experimentation in these fields today.
She deffinitely isshawagma wrote:I think Alizee is still hot
shafique wrote:When someone can show me that a 'simple' protein membrane can be spontaneously constructed from underlying elements, then I'll consider it plausible that proteins then spontaneously came together with other proteins and somehow a basic life form was formed.
Yes, a possible path. The complexity you see in the modern cells is probably due to billion years of evolution of the very basic protocells that were formed in the beginning.shafique wrote:What the TED talk did was highlight a possible path, not the liklihood that this was how life was created. Just my opinion.
Then intelligence and ability to create is also not a concept that applies outside the universe.shafique wrote:Complexity is not a concept that applies outside the universe.
DFT , The idea of god only complicates the true understanding of universe.
How do you know that proteins even exist, that they are maid of amino-acids, and all amino-acids in most life forms on earth are left-handed? Is it written in Quran? I don't think so. You selectively put your faith in a scientific theory to prove your other faith, yet you choose to ignore other theories in science, like evolution, that are based on the same scientific method. While this is a normal human behavior, to choose facts that enforce your beliefs, it does not imply "deep thinking".Berrin wrote:I always enjoy sharing this article philosophy-dubai/teleological-causality-t40819.html with everyone who doubts a perfect creator. It's only when you start deep thinking...
1.) The amino acids that are used in life, like most other aspects of living things, are very likely not the product of chance. Instead, they likely resulted from a selection process. A simple peptide replicator can amplify the proportion of a single handedness in an initially random mixture of left- and right-handed fragments (Saghatelian et al. 2001; TSRI 2001). Self-assemblies on two-dimensional surfaces can also amplify a single handedness (Zepik et al. 2002). Serine forms stable clusters of a single handedness which can select other amino acids of like handedness by substituting them for serine; these clusters also incorporate other biologically important molecules such as glyceraldehyde, glucose, and phosphoric acid (Takats et al. 2003). An excess of handedness in one kind of amino acid catalyzes the handedness of other organic products, such as threose, which may have figured prominently in proto-life (Pizzarello and Weber 2004).
2.) Amino acids found in meteorites from space, which must have formed abiotically, also show significantly more of the left-handed variety, perhaps from circularly polarized UV light in the early solar system (Engel and Macko 1997; Cronin and Pizzarello 1999). The weak nuclear force, responsible for beta decay, produces only electrons with left-handed spin, and chemicals exposed to these electrons are far more likely to form left-handed crystals (Service 1999). Such mechanisms might also have been responsible for the prevalence of left-handed amino acids on earth.
3.) The first self-replicator may have had eight or fewer types of amino acids (Cavalier-Smith 2001). It is not all that unlikely that the same handedness might occur so few times by chance, especially if one of the amino acids was glycine, which has no handedness.
4.) Some bacteria use right-handed amino acids, too (McCarthy et al. 1998).
What if the 'beings' had the ability to invent stuff about the programmer and the rules? It's a fact we can invent fictional stuff. And it's a fact that during the history rulers have invented myths and stories to rule their people. Now considering these facts what is more probable? That the creator of the universe came to a selected few that happened to be the leaders of a group of people or that these leaders invented this?shafique wrote:What if within the computer programme you had some 'beings' who did interact with the programmer. Also some beings would find rules/instructions that were communicated to some of the beings. The Programmer, you'd agree, would be able to communicate to who ever in the simulation she chooses to communicate.