So, would a Nobel Prize winner for Physics for theoretical physics also be staunchly unbiased when he states that
There is not a single verse in the Quran where natural phenomena are described and which contradicts what we know for certain from our discoveries in Sciences. philosophy-dubai/abdus-salam-nobel-prize-winner-t41151.html
But seriously, the above is the extent to which the Quran is a science manual - i.e. it isn't meant to be primarily as science manual - but it does describe nature. Therefore, if what it describes is false - then it does call into question the claimed authorship of the Quran - science should back up the Quran if it is true, but science can't be used to prove that the Quran is true (much of the Quran deals with spiritual stuff that lies outside of science - life after death, for example).
Now, of course, if the Quran said the sun stopped in the sky for a day - for example - and a Muslim scientist tried to make an argument that this physically could have happened, or that it was a 'miracle' and did happen - then that would be something to write home about. But as Prof Salam says - I don't have to resort to the 'it's a miracle' argument for Quranic descriptions of nature.
Cheers,
Shafique