Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
Stoppit, Were you hoping i would disagree with you? Lol, I totally agree with you! People in general don't care enough to think about this stuff. I really feel that children are so conflicted in their belief system, they don't know who to believe: religious scholars/parents that want their kids to believe in the word of god or science that doesn't claim to have all answers but challenges you to think critically.
Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
^I haven't had a chance to go through the entire thread but it's my understanding that most Muslims don't even understand or attempt to understand evolution.They outright deny it without even exploring the idea. However, I have come across Muslims that do believe in evolution but' they have their own interpretations of how evolution works.
Peace Theorist
It shows that you theorise about things without doing the ground work ... **go through the thread **and you will see Muslims of another position:
Those that have studied and understood evolution and then rejected it for one of two reasons:
a) Being a valid scientific theory - it's construction is non-falsifiable and it's ideas cannot be tested to absolutely ends
b) Hence, not being a fact - whereas some who claim the theory might not be accurate, but still claim that evolution is a fact.
The argument goes on to show what is a belief and what is a fact and the supporters of evolution want the believers of Islam to prove it to them, but we never claim it is a fact that can objectively demonstrated - it is a belief and all it needs to be able to do is withstand criticism it does not have to positively show us facts ... like a scientific law has to be able to do.
Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
I am not a scholar **by any means but this is my understanding of evolution and it **makes more sense than any religious version of the genesis. Evolution in the simplest terms is all about mutations. In my opinion evolution has been scientifically proven over and over again but some people just dont get it. There's no missing link as a lot of you claim. Let's think about one thing here: there are more than 6 billion people on this planet. So you really believe that a of us are the same? Is it really that hard to imagine that some of us have special qualities **that set us apart? There is a man that can withstand extreme temperature change without affecting his body temperature. Now let's take global warming as an example of a catastrophe on earth: if climate changes for the worst and people all over th globe start dying fast, this man will survive. if he reproduces, some of his kids will inherit his genes and will have the same special quality. Gene mutation has to start somewhere to set off this new mutant group of specie so it doesn't reject the idea of god but contradicts with most scriptures. It doesn't get any simpler than this. I also think **Einstein was an evolved human being, different from the rest of us. I bet you if he were **alive today **and we ran some tests on him, we would find that he was a mutant. :D
By you words I can tell at least you are truthful ... you are not scholar in this subject.
Mutation is not favourable in species - it is a hindrance in life forms ... some positive aspects of mutation occur for bacteria and viruses where they learn to adapt to their surroundings, but they don't become another type of creature they remain what they are.
You say there is no missing link, yet the pro-evolutionists keep finding new missing links - it is not us it is them who say this ... perhaps you know more than the experts.
The rest of you post sounds like you have watched X-men recently ... did you like it? I hope you did ...
Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
^ ok, I understand your position now. Thanks for summarizing it for me; it's impossible for me to go through each and every response. I understand where you are coming from. You say it can't be tested, I say it's been tested a million times and you can test it today if you'd like in a lab with x-radiation and tiny insects such as flies. I also know that this is the only reasonable exPlaination of our existence until another theory replaces evolution that can better explain how we came to be. What part of evolution do you feel cannot be tested?
Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
Psyah, it may sound like science fiction to you but it really is how evolution works. Science fiction today is tomorrow's possible future. Who says mutations are not favorable in species? It's by natural selection that species keep the positive mutations and do not pass on the ones that make them weaker. I don't know what you believe to be the evolution theory but if you seriously consider it, it's the best possible explanation accepted by the experts. How does it even compare to the genesis? Believing in evolution cannot be compared to having a faith because evolution does not reject the idea of god, it simply contradicts religious scriptures
Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
Peace Theorist
I hope you are okay to continue this conversation with me … I would like to present to you this link …
It is about X-rays being used with flies … they became sterile … that means they can’t have babies … how a species can continue to propagate as a superior or fitter one by radiation poisoning is beyond me!!!
Perhaps there is a different reference you can provide … Secondly … by subjecting flies to radiation we are altering the test conditions for evolution … mutation based on radiation is not the same as evolution and we are doing it intelligently … the test will need to be undertaken over several generations to look for genetic drift and then to see if speciation occurs. That is if we can get two types of flies from one type of common predecessor. The only two factors we can play with is life cycle time to speed up the results process and let’s say we put in a hotter temperature in one strain.
Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
Psyah, it may sound like science fiction to you but it really is how evolution works. Science fiction today is tomorrow's possible future. Who says mutations are not favorable in species? It's by natural selection that species keep the positive mutations and do not pass on the ones that make them weaker. I don't know what you believe to be the evolution theory but if you seriously consider it, it's the best possible explanation accepted by the experts. How does it even compare to the genesis? Believing in evolution cannot be compared to having a faith because evolution does not reject the idea of god, it simply contradicts religious scriptures
Peace Theorist
Ok Sci-Fi I can handle ... When it comes to sci-fi trust me I'm in both feet first ... However I understand the difference ... Mutations are of two types ... radioactive genetic mutations are quick and these mutations effects are seen on the offspring of the next generation, these are deformed offspring and they 99.9% of the time cannot have children. Then there is the second kind of mutation - which is not quick it is very slow and it is supposed to create improvements not problems ... this is the version that evolution depends on, but I have not seen an example of this kind.
Where sci-fi blurs the picture is that they often get the two types of mutation confused ... it is fun to think that some evil professor with an x-ray gun can fire it at someone to make him really strong and go green, but the fact is this does not happen ... most people get cancer from radioactive material for another example they don't become stronger or fitter.
Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
Aha ... so you are saying that the life forms available today are DIFFERENT from the life forms available many years ago ... Yes, it is all semantics ... You see when I see the words "changed" to me it seems you are saying that the species changes - but you are not saying that ... what you are saying however is that animals alive today are DIFFERENT from the past ...
Yes ... yes I can agree with that ... In the UK there used to be red squirrels around everywhere and then over the recent 100 years or so grey squirrels that were introduced to compete with the red have totally dominated and taken over ... Now with the bones in the soil we will see that the red squirrels came first and then the grey ones ... so the thing we know for sure in this case is that the two species are different and competed and didn't evolve from one another, but with fossils we don't even know what they are because we can't analyse their DNA.
We have more complex life forms today that is for sure ... but we still have the basic ones as well ... and when we look at the new life forms that are being discovered they are not complex they are quite simple ... complex life forms feed off simpler ones so it makes sense that simple life forms come first. It would be impossible for a new animal to survive if it didn't have a food source. Then when there are more complex creatures around they will compete for the same food source and hence some will be wiped out and others will prosper ... we can see this happen in front of us ... however when it comes to fossils why do we conclude that the story is any different? Why do we say that one animal evolved to another? Just because the fossil record allows this interpretation - what makes that interpretation "highly likely"? Why is it more likely than the non-evolution equivalent.
My point is not argue with you about evolution ... but even in the aspects that are "proven" we have multiple reasons for them ... there is no reason why my version can't be true ... according to the current level of research and understanding regarding fossils and zoology.
Looking back at your posts I can quote where you have presented a preference for evolution - you have presented it as a probability - highly likely ... I'm not being close minded to it ... I just need to understand how it all works as a man of science I have a need to understand the theories that are being presented.
Ok .. Now you have admitted to the changing/different life forms../more complex life forms with passing geological times.. we can move on with the discussion.. (I have used word "Different" in my previous posts also.. but I began to feel that you unnecessarily began to beat the bush to avoid the discussion to go any further)..
Now let me come straight to the point where I find problem with the attitude of literal religionist like you..
I always presented evolution as a probability, possibility never as a conclusive reality. When we know the changing life forms we try to explore the reasons for these changing life forms with scientific explanations. By far evolution is the best possible answer put forward by humans to explain these changing life forms in geological times. The problem with you is when you accept evolution is a possibility.. You have to accept that species superior to humans are possible in future. This is against your literal scripture belief... Thus because of your short coming as a literal religionist you can not pursue scientific investigation with an open mind. Your example is of a detective investigating a murder who has already made up his mind.. and would not like to study any forensic/superficial/testimonial evidence except what will reconcile with his already pre assumed position. By the way theoretically speaking we can achieve improvements in human anatomy by artificial selection of genes in a very short span of time with present day technologies available to us.. while evolution uses natural selection to achieve these changes... if these anatomical changes are achievable in a very short time using artificial selection.. why bigger changes are not possible when nature uses natural selection in a very long geological time span.. It will be very foolish to discount it as no possibility for any science student... unless someone is pursuing some fixed agenda..
Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
It's my understanding that most non-Muslims believe in evolution without understanding it. Because science or Dawkin's tell them they should.
There is nothing wrong with Richard Dawkin's work to present evolution as a possibility.. In fact if you read his books "The selfish genes" and "The greatest show on earth" it will help you understand the concept more clearly. The problem for muslims or other literal religionist is his book "The God delusion" which is more political than scientific.. it's better to accept or reject individual ideas rather than making a sweeping statements about a particular person..
I think literal religionist reject evolution without understanding it.. opposite of your view..!!!
Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
Evolution theory is a theory, merely a figmant of imagination of some zealous and passionate 'science' lovers.
Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
Do you hear yourself? I think you just are being stubborn to a point where it’s getting hard to take you seriously. That’s fine with me if you want to hold fast to your beliefs but your counterargument is pathetic. As a scientific person you claim to be, you should know that a theory is a theory and not a fact because of the fact that it cannot produce same results in every experiment trial. Obviously, if you purposely search for steril fly experiment thats what you would get. Even if I agreed with you, there are million other examples you could look at and compare the results and draw the conclusion that instead of the planet being introduced to new kind of species every second, perhaps we all came from the first form of life. Is it really ridiculous to believe th evolution theory but it’s completely reasonable to believe that a woman was made from a mans rib? Also, if you aren’t one of the people that believe the earth was made in 6 days or is only 6000 years old, then won’t you agree that our plante and the extinct/evolved species have come in contact with radiation and so many other geological changes? Wh is it ok for you to believe that mutations can occur and survive artificially but not naturally? At some point actually more than one point, our Planet had favorable conditions for the mutated species to survive, and the ones that continued to live continued mutating. This obviously occurs over millions of years. A single mutation took several thousand years and generations to become fully apparent.
Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
Evolution theory is a theory, merely a figmant of imagination of some zealous and passionate 'science' lovers.
Really? Do you even know what it is or you don't want to know it? It's the same scientists that come up with cures, new inventions, and technolOgy! How hypocritical of you to bash them but continue taking advantage of their inventions, discoveries. Everything goes as long as they don't contradict your scripture no matter how logical it sounds. Great! Good job! That's the reason religious scientists will never accomPlish anything beyond nuclear weapons
Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
Ok .. Now you have admitted to the changing/different life forms../more complex life forms with passing geological times.. we can move on with the discussion.. (I have used word "Different" in my previous posts also.. but I began to feel that you unnecessarily began to beat the bush to avoid the discussion to go any further)..
Now let me come straight to the point where I find problem with the attitude of literal religionist like you..
I always presented evolution as a probability, possibility never as a conclusive reality. When we know the changing life forms we try to explore the reasons for these changing life forms with scientific explanations. By far evolution is the best possible answer put forward by humans to explain these changing life forms in geological times. The problem with you is when you accept evolution is a possibility.. You have to accept that species superior to humans are possible in future. This is against your literal scripture belief... Thus because of your short coming as a literal religionist you can not pursue scientific investigation with an open mind. Your example is of a detective investigating a murder who has already made up his mind.. and would not like to study any forensic/superficial/testimonial evidence except what will reconcile with his already pre assumed position. By the way theoretically speaking we can achieve improvements in human anatomy by artificial selection of genes in a very short span of time with present day technologies available to us.. while evolution uses natural selection to achieve these changes... if these anatomical changes are achievable in a very short time using artificial selection.. why bigger changes are not possible when nature uses natural selection in a very long geological time span.. It will be very foolish to discount it as no possibility for any science student... unless someone is pursuing some fixed agenda..
Peace yazdi
I do not accept evolution as a probability because in order to measure probablistic ends we need to know the ends results ... we can merely say that it is possible and that too not very possible because again we have no example to show for it.
When it comes to my position I agree with you I do favour my scripture in a somewhat close minded way ... that is what faith is all about, but my problem is with evolution trying to be scientific when indeed it too is a faith based approach to the origins of life. I favour my religion over the religion of evolutionism and if it turns out that something from evolution is true then I'll modify my understanding from scripture, but until that point I believe it to be a stronger bet to remain where I am ...
With regards to the difference in species the explanation given by religious scripture is that He causes some things to thrive and others to die, kingdoms are replaced with new ones ... examples of how this happens can be seen in our own experiences ... we can see how the grey squirrel took over the red - we do not conclude that the red squirrel evolved into grey ones, we know that grey squirrels came from some other place and resettled in the area where there were red ones. This is the history of all things readily proven ... as before dinosaurs did NOT evolve into other creatures ... they died off. It would be insincere to say that on one hand dinosaurs were killed by an asteroid, yet on the other hand say that modern creatured evolved from dinosaurs that could not be possible because they would be dead. Unless that is those creatures that survived were the ancestors of the modern creatures, but then we need to demonstrate that we can prove which creatures survived the asteroid and then what route they offspring took to become modern creatures.
For me it is vital to my belief on many levels to say "God says to it Be and it is" - immediate creation from nothing. This statement is a literal one and cannot hold any metaphoric meaning. With a stretch you can say that "Be" means starting off the process of evolution ... which makes me shudder in my boots to such a degradation to the Might of Allah (SWT). It simply does not fit. As a Muslim I cannot compromise scripture because the understandings are calibrated together with each other - by messing with that calibration unwittingly in order to serve scientific ends we can create calamities with other aspects of the faith. What we need to do is be biased to our faith and have a small space for discovery to add new dimensions to our understanding ... I strongly believe that you will not find evolution to be satisfactory on a scientific level in years to come and it certainly isn't there today.
Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
Do you hear yourself? I think you just are being stubborn to a point where it's getting hard to take you seriously. That's fine with me if you want to hold fast to your beliefs but your counterargument is pathetic. As a scientific person you claim to be, you should know that a theory is a theory and not a fact because of the fact that it cannot produce same results in every experiment trial. Obviously, if you purposely search for steril fly experiment thats what you would get. Even if I agreed with you, there are million other examples you could look at and compare the results and draw the conclusion that instead of the planet being introduced to new kind of species every second, perhaps we all came from the first form of life. Is it really ridiculous to believe th evolution theory but it's completely reasonable to believe that a woman was made from a mans rib? Also, if you aren't one of the people that believe the earth was made in 6 days or is only 6000 years old, then won't you agree that our plante and the extinct/evolved species have come in contact with radiation and so many other geological changes? Wh is it ok for you to believe that mutations can occur and survive artificially but not naturally? At some point actually more than one point, our Planet had favorable conditions for the mutated species to survive, and the ones that continued to live continued mutating. This obviously occurs over millions of years. A single mutation took several thousand years and generations to become fully apparent.
I think you have mistaken me to be of the Christian faith ...
Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
Peace yazdiI do not accept evolution as a probability because in order to measure probablistic ends we need to know the ends results ... we can merely say that it is possible and that too not very possible because again we have no example to show for it.When it comes to my position I agree with you I do favour my scripture in a somewhat close minded way ... that is what faith is all about, but my problem is with evolution trying to be scientific when indeed it too is a faith based approach to the origins of life. I favour my religion over the religion of evolutionism and if it turns out that something from evolution is true then I'll modify my understanding from scripture, but until that point I believe it to be a stronger bet to remain where I am ... With regards to the difference in species the explanation given by religious scripture is that He causes some things to thrive and others to die, kingdoms are replaced with new ones ... examples of how this happens can be seen in our own experiences ... we can see how the grey squirrel took over the red - we do not conclude that the red squirrel evolved into grey ones, we know that grey squirrels came from some other place and resettled in the area where there were red ones. This is the history of all things readily proven ... as before dinosaurs did NOT evolve into other creatures ... they died off. It would be insincere to say that on one hand dinosaurs were killed by an asteroid, yet on the other hand say that modern creatured evolved from dinosaurs that could not be possible because they would be dead. Unless that is those creatures that survived were the ancestors of the modern creatures, but then we need to demonstrate that we can prove which creatures survived the asteroid and then what route they offspring took to become modern creatures.For me it is vital to my belief on many levels to say "God says to it Be and it is" - immediate creation from nothing. This statement is a literal one and cannot hold any metaphoric meaning. With a stretch you can say that "Be" means starting off the process of evolution ... which makes me shudder in my boots to such a degradation to the Might of Allah (SWT). It simply does not fit. As a Muslim I cannot compromise scripture because the understandings are calibrated together with each other - by messing with that calibration unwittingly in order to serve scientific ends we can create calamities with other aspects of the faith. What we need to do is be biased to our faith and have a small space for discovery to add new dimensions to our understanding ... I strongly believe that you will not find evolution to be satisfactory on a scientific level in years to come and it certainly isn't there today.
Even if all dinosaurs became extinct at once, other smaller creatures did survive whatever caused dinosaurs extinction. Evolution is not a faith because it's always being tested and modified. You cannot compare a faith to a theory. No, I thought you were a Muslim. Don't Muslims also believe the earth was created in 6 days? I threw in 6000 years for someone of christian faith. Also, Muslims too believe eve was created from Adams left side. I googled it and it's true, lol
Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
There is nothing wrong with Richard Dawkin's work to present evolution as a possibility.. In fact if you read his books "The selfish genes" and "The greatest show on earth" it will help you understand the concept more clearly. The problem for muslims or other literal religionist is his book "The God delusion" which is more political than scientific.. it's better to accept or reject individual ideas rather than making a sweeping statements about a particular person..
I think literal religionist reject evolution without understanding it.. opposite of your view..!!!
So is his selfish gene theory the most dominant and widely accepted one amongst evolutionary biologists or are there other theories as well? He just carried on from Hamilton-Price. Hamilton's equations were based on logic and viewing humans to be the same as machines.
Anyway, I was just giving an example that there are many people who have not read his books but because he is (was) considered to be an expert on this subject, people believe in what he says without understanding it. Kind of like religion!
Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
Stoppit are your husband always sad??
because you have brain 
Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
^ I agree, there are people like that and I personally know some. They don't question anything mr. Dawkins says or proposes. Though I have much respect for mr. Dawkins, I pretty much agree with his views almost 99% of the time, he comes across as rude and arrogant. He is what he is - an unapologetic atheist. The only difference between Dawkins and other tableeghi religious folks is that he makes logical sense and is not hypocritical. I trust his judgement but I do my own research too unlike religion where you must agree with your scripture- ^no question asked.
Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
^ I agree, there are people like that and I personally know some. They don't question anything mr. Dawkins says or proposes. Though I have much respect for mr. Dawkins, I pretty much agree with his views almost 99% of the time, he comes across as rude and arrogant. He is what he is - an unapologetic atheist. The only difference between Dawkins and other tableeghi religious folks is that he makes logical sense and is not hypocritical. I trust his judgement but I do my own research too unlike religion where you must agree with your scripture- ^no question asked.
Peace Theorist
Just like you have swept in to this conversation without reading this thread in the same way you paint religious adherence with the same brush ... you disregard the scholastic approach to scripture in Islam or do not know about it ... It is a duty for us to listen to people but we should also verify what we are given ... this is a scientific method, but I have taken it from the Qur'an ...
[TABLE="width: 100%"]
And he took a muster of the Birds; and he said: "Why is it I see not the Hoopoe? Or is he among the absentees?
[TABLE="width: 100%"]
"I will certainly punish him with a severe penalty, or execute him, unless he bring me a clear reason (for absence)."
[TABLE="width: 100%"]
But the Hoopoe tarried not far: he (came up and) said: "I have compassed (territory) which thou hast not compassed, and I have come to thee from Saba with tidings true.
[TABLE="width: 100%"]
(Solomon) said: "Soon shall we see whether thou hast told the truth or lied!
[TABLE="width: 100%"]
"Go thou, with this letter of mine, and deliver it to them: then draw back from them, and (wait to) see what answer they return"...
Also in the Qur'an is a reference to "days" -
[TABLE="width: 100%"]
The angels and the spirit ascend unto him in a Day the measure whereof is (as) fifty thousand years:
*The word "yawm" actually means period of time - it should be understood as a stage or phase of regular activity before a significant change in that activity takes place ...
*
Regarding the difference between Muslims and Dawkins - you say he is not hypocritical and is logical ... so by that token you say Muslims are hypocritical and illogical ... You should realise that he has everything to gain from his stance ... the irony is that he doesn't believe in religion and has no need to be truthful yet you believe him and our religion requires us to avoid hypocrisy and be truthful yet you blame us for doing just that - we fear the punishment and he has no belief in the consequence of lies. Perhaps you just don't understand our take and confuse it for hypocrisy?
Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
I will indulge inshaAllah ... I'll buy R. Dawkins books and read them and I will list out a series of questions that any scientist should ask ... they will around the basis of:
a) What are the assumptions?
b) How about other interpretations?
c) How can we verify or cross-examine the data?