This is a common argument put forth by creationists, trying to segregate sceince in to observational science and hostorical science. It’s nonsensical. You should read similar arguments by Ken Ham and his outfit. This is a dictinction made only to distort and to bring what scientists do down to the level of what creationists want.
Scientists show knowledge of their field not simply by looking at the fossil record, or historical data. Scientists show mastery of their field by then making exact and precise predictions about it in the future! And it works! Scientists show they know what happened in the past by predicting what will happen in the future! Equally amazing thing that scientists do, when they turn out to be wrong, they go back and reexamine their data, their evidence, their conclusions, their assumptions, and conduct more tests, and try predicting again. Science isn’t static. It doesn’t get it’s feelings hurt. It isn’t stuck in the bronze age.
Influenza used to kill lots and lots of people. Scientists developed a vaccine for it. The virus however changes every year. Scientists not only created a vaccine by understanding the nature of the disease, but they predict what the virus is likely to be like the next season. Does anyone remember how many people died from the H1-N1 ‘pandemic’? How mane people have died from the Avian Flu?
By the way, the Greeks, the Persians, the Indians, and the Chinese knew the universe wasn’t geocentric. Geocentricity was dogma for the Abrahamic religions. Before the advent of those religions, people knew!
I’ll add, not having a counter theory is a demonstration of not having a comprehension of the evidence and data.
The article I provided you is a news story about an actual scientific study, not the study itself.
Here is a better synopsis of the study: The Sonia & Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology | Tel Aviv University
It lists sources, evidence, data, other studies, has footnotes, etc.. I see nothing remotely close for your version, or any other version, of deity.
The operative words: *Here is an alternative theory I just made up. *
Your fantasy and conjecture are not science. Anyone can make things up as they go. That’s what happens in religion, and frankly, it’s your right to do that in religion. That’s not science.
If they were not worshipping God, they were not following any religoin. definition of religion is incomplete without God.
Logically, monotheism preceded polytheism and polytheism was derived from monotheism.
Modification was a must factor and it was as crucial as followers could make polytheism out of monotheism.
how do you know they modified? other than quran, what evidence is there that God sent messengers to Native Americans, native aborignal australians, ancient polynesians? even if they modified certain things (like christian and jews did), other things would have been there at least. how come their story of creation wasn't about adam and eve?
also it seems a bit strange that every single civilization changed/modified Allah's message, except muslims..
By telling back to me what I have done you have not refuted it … My theory is better than evolution because it maps the fossil record better. To refute it tell me how …
if scientists can make predictions then let them predict the next species to evolve … Let them catch the process in action …
how do you know they modified? other than quran, what evidence is there that God sent messengers to Native Americans, native aborignal australians, ancient polynesians? even if they modified certain things (like christian and jews did), other things would have been there at least. how come their story of creation wasn't about adam and eve?
also it seems a bit strange that every single civilization changed/modified Allah's message, except muslims..
Peace bella88
There are reasons that support Native Americans that may have received revelation ... But more interesting than that is ... why don't you ask the same depth of questions from the evolutionists? Why are you more willing to put faith in them, yet require more evidence from the religious?
There are reasons that support Native Americans that may have received revelation ... But more interesting than that is ... why don't you ask the same depth of questions from the evolutionists? Why are you more willing to put faith in them, yet require more evidence from the religious?
its a bit strange how the entire world received revelation yet only muslims were the ones who never modified it?
there is plenty of evidence supporting evolution, yet not 1 evidence to support any religious scripture as being the word of God. the fact that all parts of the world had different belief system is even more evidence that God did not send the same message to the entire world and that every religion is man-made.
its a bit strange how the entire world received revelation yet only muslims were the ones who never modified it?
there is plenty of evidence supporting evolution, yet not 1 evidence to support any religious scripture as being the word of God. the fact that all parts of the world had different belief system is even more evidence that God did not send the same message to the entire world and that every religion is man-made.
Peace bella88
The difference between sight and inner sight is that you see evidence for evolution and we see evidence for Divine ... It's not that there is no evidence for us as you say, it's just that you cannot see it.
When you ask "it's a bit strange" ... That may be so but strangeness is not a scientific reason to negate things ... The rational angle is to say that if Islam is the last chance, if the The Qur'an is the last testimony and the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) is the last Messenger who was sent to the whole of humanity ... It stands to reason that it needs to be the most impervious to change for it to be fair to the people who come at the end like us ... Yes, we believe we are the people at the end ... Near the end of humanity itself ... So it fits ... God sent a messenger to call to the truth and when the message was corrupted another messenger was needed and so on until the last messenger ... Now it would truly be strange that the message of the last messenger (SAW) also becomes corrupted for that would be a cause to blame God... And as strange as it seems at least you have evidence before ... the Qur'an has stood the test of time by being unchanged ... And the methodology for preserving information and understanding was designed by Muslims through the sciences of transmission ... So however strange it is ... You see the evidence is there.
how do you know they modified? other than quran, what evidence is there that God sent messengers to Native Americans, native aborignal australians, ancient polynesians? even if they modified certain things (like christian and jews did), other things would have been there at least. how come their story of creation wasn't about adam and eve?
also it seems a bit strange that every single civilization changed/modified Allah's message, except muslims..
How do you know they didnt modified? Plus posts #124,#126 by brother psyah.
as you do not have evidence against my claim either, here is my argument.
Word polytheism itself implies that it is modified version monotheism. Only one of these two could be true and monotheism preceeded polytheism.
By telling back to me what I have done you have not refuted it ... My theory is better than evolution because it maps the fossil record better. To refute it tell me how ...
if scientists can make predictions then let them predict the next species to evolve ... Let them catch the process in action ...
Brother Psyah,
You can't be serious? You seriously want a discussion about refuting things you made up? My refutation is your own words: You made it up. I don't see the need to refute it further. You have no theory. You have a fantasy. The latter and the former are not the same!
Not only have scientists predicted what species will evolve, there is significant work on the evolution of humans. I encourage you to educate yourself.
Peace bella88
The difference between sight and inner sight is that you see evidence for evolution and we see evidence for Divine ... It's not that there is no evidence for us as you say, it's just that you cannot see it.
When you ask "it's a bit strange" ... That may be so but strangeness is not a scientific reason to negate things ... The rational angle is to say that if Islam is the last chance, if the The Qur'an is the last testimony and the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) is the last Messenger who was sent to the whole of humanity ... It stands to reason that it needs to be the most impervious to change for it to be fair to the people who come at the end like us ... Yes, we believe we are the people at the end ... Near the end of humanity itself ... So it fits ... God sent a messenger to call to the truth and when the message was corrupted another messenger was needed and so on until the last messenger ... Now it would truly be strange that the message of the last messenger (SAW) also becomes corrupted for that would be a cause to blame God... And as strange as it seems at least you have evidence before ... the Qur'an has stood the test of time by being unchanged ... And the methodology for preserving information and understanding was designed by Muslims through the sciences of transmission ... So however strange it is ... You see the evidence is there.
peace psyah,
you have not provided any evidence for any of your statements. yes it is very strange and close to being impossible that every civilization changed God's message except muslims. Once again, quran being unchanged from the time of revelation till Uthman compiled it is not even proven. Secondly, Quran being unchanged hardly proves its divinity. please how me evidence that God/Allah sent messenger to every civilization.
How do you know they didnt modified? Plus posts #124,#126 by brother psyah.
as you do not have evidence against my claim either, here is my argument.
Word polytheism itself implies that it is modified version monotheism. Only one of these two could be true and monotheism preceeded polytheism.
just because quran states they modified, doesn't make it a fact. lets go by historical finding and facts. difference in many ancient belief system and Abrahamic faith is like night and day. strange how no other civilization knew about Adam and Eve even who were the first humans supposedly, except for christians and muslims.. sounds very strange that God kept creation of humans a big secret from all those civilization.
just because quran states they modified, doesn't make it a fact. lets go by historical finding and facts. difference in many ancient belief system and Abrahamic faith is like night and day. strange how no other civilization knew about Adam and Eve even who were the first humans supposedly, except for christians and muslims.. sounds very strange that God kept creation of humans a big secret from all those civilization.
Peace bella88
Did you know that Adam and Eve in our tradition were black or dark skinned ... What does modern biology say regarding human races?
“observing speciation”…not really possible if you have a faint understanding of systematics
but ok, lets try this. what do you think of the different species within the genus homo? pretty recent stuff. not always homo sapiens…what’s you take on it…
Peace psyah,
so now we are going by modern biology? whatever happened to evolution being false?
Peace bella88
Well then make sense of what I said ... How is it that I call evolution false yet still resort to using modern biology in my responses? Surely, it must mean there are parts of it I agree with and other parts I do not ... Did that ever occur to you? If it had ... You surely would not have let on ... as you are convincing me more and more this is not about seeking truth for you, but a battle of wits ... A mere game ... However, for me ... I am telling you this a simple statement of what I find to be true ... And my reasons are sought in science as well as other places, but I will let go of a concept if it is not soundly rooted, but in order to ascertain that I must be sincere in finding out whether it is or not. Trust me I choose Islam because for me my heart and mind become aligned on it ... For other people I cannot argue for them or against them, their path is their own.
peace psyah,
you have not provided any evidence for any of your statements.
Peace bella88
I do apologise ... From now on ... I shall ask you what qualifies as evidence for each statement I make ... If you feel like doing so you can go back to any one of my statements and ask me for the evidence that you require ... Please also tell me what will qualify as evidence for you in that matter ... as it may be that I present something and you will turn around with the same criticism ... i.e. Of providing no evidence ... Thanks.
How old is the oldest possible Homo sapiens skeleton we have found? How old is the oldest other? Homo Erectus or Neanderthal … What is it in these creatures that makes you sure they had a different genetic make up to us? Or what information do we have that allows us to determine the genome of one of those creatures?
Please explain to me systematics and how it would apply in theory to the act of speciation … Key words are genetics and phylogeny.
How old is the oldest possible Homo sapiens skeleton we have found? How old is the oldest other? Homo Erectus or Neanderthal ... What is it in these creatures that makes you sure they had a different genetic make up to us? Or what information do we have that allows us to determine the genome of one of those creatures?
Please explain to me systematics and how it would apply in theory to the act of speciation ... Key words are genetics and phylogeny.
You are aware that biologists have been able to sequence the dna of homo erectus and neanderthal? When compared with our dna, it shows us a fantastic map of how we're related. Moreover, before scientists did this, they predicted what our relationship would be! Guess what...they were right! They did find a few astonishing things, for instance that modern man and neanderthal man cross bred.
I encourage you to look up the work of the Max Planck Institute.
It needs repeating. Evolution isn't religion. It isn't taken on faith. Evolution is a single coherent, verifiable, testable, demonstrable theory.
You are aware that biologists have been able to sequence the dna of homo erectus and neanderthal? When compared with our dna, it shows us a fantastic map of how we're related. Moreover, before scientists did this, they predicted what our relationship would be! Guess what...they were right! They did find a few astonishing things, for instance that modern man and neanderthal man cross bred.
I encourage you to look up the work of the Max Planck Institute.
It needs repeating. Evolution isn't religion. It isn't taken on faith. Evolution is a single coherent, verifiable, testable, demonstrable theory.
Neighbours vs Relatives ... Just because we look similar it does not mean we have the same mothers.
I would be very suspect of any DNA found in specimens older than 2000 years ... The half life of DNA is just over 520 years.
And no ... Evolution is not testable ... We cannot observe horizontal or vertical gene transfer ... We merely make that assumption when trying to map similarities between living organisms ...
The closest DNA to humans are an unlikely group of animals only one ... The chimp could be said to be predictable according to evolutionists ... The others include a fish, a chicken, a rat, a mouse ...
My my argument is just because a variety of creatures occupy some given genetic space it does not necessarily mean their neighbours are relatives ...
