You were ALL MUSLIM before

[abrar]

Very first man on this earth, father of Humainty, ADAM AS was messenger of Allah, and was first Muslim. We all are his children. So our root is Islam.

[ZZ]

We were all monkeys before.

(maybe bacterias before that)

[This message has been edited by ZZ (edited June 25, 1999).]

[abrar]

I don't believe in that theory. I have Quran, book of Allah, which tells me that We were allcame from Adam ( human being, not from Monkey). If you think your roots come from MONKEY that's fine with me. Should I suggest that add son of monkey with your name.

[This message has been edited by abrar (edited June 25, 1999).]

[KK]

[Hey, stop that, will ya? - Roman]

[This message has been edited by Roman (edited June 25, 1999).]

[Roman]

abrar: Following is a link to an article on evolution:

http://www.chowk.com/UniversityAve/sshafqat_oct2898.html

The writer, Dr. Shafqat is a Muslim himself, working as a neurologist at Harvard. I’m adding some of the more relevant excerpts from the article here

Biological evolution is a certainty, indeed as much of a certainty as gravity, atoms, and planetary motion. To deny evolution is to deny credible, convincing evidence - it is as ludicrous as saying that the Earth is flat.

…

And

I am a Muslim and I accept the theory of biological evolution. At the same time, I can see how this idea can offend and how it can be misconstrued as being in conflict with Quranic statements. Nevertheless, I would submit, with respect, that denying the phenomenon would be irrational. I am not going to refer you to parts of the Quran or Hadees that contradict evolution, or parts that uphold it. I think it is pointless to take recourse to words in a religious text in order to validate or invalidate the observation of natural phenomena. Different people can always find different meanings in the same words, which is why observations that pass the rigors of the scientific method must supersede any convictions based on the interpretations of language. The burden of proof, in other words, is no longer on Charles Darwin.

However, the whole article itself is very informative and interesting to read. I think it also serves to clear the ever-existing misunderstanding and misinformation of evolution theory that some of the people might have, who base their relevant belief strictly on religious interepretations… no offense, I am speaking purely at a general level.

[Mr_Xtreme]

Roman and others,

The Theory of Evolution is exactly that…a theory. It is certainly not a provable scientific fact.

Here is another web-site about Evolution which is very comprehensive and gives an alternative viewpoint. Anybody interested should visit this site as Evolution theory has beenused to undermine all religions. The URL is:
http://www.srf-tr.org/evolution/evdintro.html

[ZZ]

Definitely that theory has more proofs and evidences than 'adam aur hauwa dono jannat mein rehte the.' kinda fairy tales.

[Mr_Xtreme]

Did you visit the web-site I mentioned ZZ?

Any comments?

[queer]

Xtreme,

I did visit the site and read thru most of the stuff. It is a site to promote a book that was supposed to make controversy out of the Theory of Evolution.

Nowhere in the site did i find any concrete evidence that the author provides to oppose the theory. All his arguments are "such an animal's fossil was never found, hence it couldn't have existed". In fact, in places, he himself displays his ignorance about what the Theory of evolution says, and interprets the theory to his convineance.

In BOOK II, the author quickly turns to social and religious aspects, probably because he wants to show that he does actually know something, if not about evolution. He falters pathetically when he tries to draw in church and religion into science.

This site is a particularly good illustration of the fact that free thinking is horribly limited by religion and by people who like to interpret holy books literally.

Roman,

that was superb.

[queer]

Xtreme,

one more thing, please do read the article in the link given by Roman. It is a must read for people who are misinformed about the theory.

[Mr_Xtreme]

Queer,

Yes I did read the article recommended by Roman. It didn’t prove anything. There was nothing in there that could be proved in black and white and passed as a scientific fact as opposed to theory.

Theories are fine as long as they are not passded off as facts which I am afraid in the case of evolution that is definitely the case.

The web-site I provided here;
http://www.srf-tr.org/evolution/evdintro.html

is a pretty detailed critique of the evolution theory; far more comprehensive than the one you are eulogising.

If you have a specific criticism about any of the findings in the site I mentioned then by all means bring it up. General rubbishing of the arguments does not carry the same weight. Maybe you can highlight a specific argument by the author and show us why you believe it is false. If you can prove it scientifically then that is even better for your argument. Otherwise we can sit and speculate till the cows come home. It doesn’t mean anything.

I suggest everybody visit the site for themselves and make their own minds up.

Why risk being mis-informed by either myself or Queer?

[Roman]

This thread has gone too long. I am closing it and starting the new one under 'Religion and theory of evolution'. Please continue the discussion there.