From WikiIslam, the online resource on Islam
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
|
|
| Line 184: |
Line 184: |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| <option weight="1">{{Pictorial-Islam|1=Setting the Record Straight: The Non-Miracle of Islamic Science|2=[[File:The Miracle of Islamic Science.jpg|180px|link=Setting the Record Straight: The Non-Miracle of Islamic Science]]|3=This is a refutation of Dr K. Ajram's Setting the Record Straight: The Miracle of Islamic Science. The purpose of this analysis is to put the achievements of Golden Age Muslim scientists in the proper perspective; neither denigrating their achievements nor inflating them. All scientific and technological progress is accomplished in progression; Muslim achievements are but links in the chain. Few of the great Muslim scientific achievements stood alone, but were derived by Muslim scientists standing on the shoulders of those who came before them. This analysis also highlights the fatal flaw of the Islamic Golden Age. There were few ‘follow-up’ breakthroughs on the backs of the works of the great Muslim scientists. In effect, the Ummah allowed or encouraged these works to wither on the vine or die stillborn, even before the rise of mysticism at the expense of rational thinking, an event often attributed to al-Ghazzali around the turn of the 12th century. Indeed, it would seem orthodox Islam utterly stifles intellectual reasoning. Therefore, Islam is not the cause of scientific progress during the Golden Age. Many people would say that the Golden Age scientific progress was made in spite of Islam, not because of it. A prime example is the great philosopher-physician Ibn Sina (Avicenna) whose work is constantly referenced by Dr K. Ajram. ([[Setting the Record Straight: The Non-Miracle of Islamic Science|''read more'']])}}</option> | | <option weight="1">{{Pictorial-Islam|1=Setting the Record Straight: The Non-Miracle of Islamic Science|2=[[File:The Miracle of Islamic Science.jpg|150px|link=Setting the Record Straight: The Non-Miracle of Islamic Science]]|3=This is a refutation of Dr K. Ajram's Setting the Record Straight: The Miracle of Islamic Science. The purpose of this analysis is to put the achievements of Golden Age Muslim scientists in the proper perspective; neither denigrating their achievements nor inflating them. |
| | |
| | All scientific and technological progress is accomplished in progression; Muslim achievements are but links in the chain. Few of the great Muslim scientific achievements stood alone, but were derived by Muslim scientists standing on the shoulders of those who came before them. |
| | |
| | This analysis also highlights the fatal flaw of the Islamic Golden Age. There were few ‘follow-up’ breakthroughs on the backs of the works of the great Muslim scientists. In effect, the Ummah allowed or encouraged these works to wither on the vine or die stillborn, even before the rise of mysticism at the expense of rational thinking, an event often attributed to al-Ghazzali around the turn of the 12th century. ([[Setting the Record Straight: The Non-Miracle of Islamic Science|''read more'']])}}</option> |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
Revision as of 22:19, 31 January 2014
Also see: Template:Pictorial-Islam
Meeting of Fresh and Salt Water in the Qur'an
|
|
Error creating thumbnail: Unable to save thumbnail to destination
|
|
Muslim apologists claim that Surah 25:53 of the Qur’an is scientifically accurate. They conclude that since the process was unknown to humankind during the time of Muhammad, this verse (and the Qur’an as a whole) is revealed by Allah. This article will prove the verse in question is scientifically wrong. Also it will prove that a layman could make a better guess than the allegedly divine author of the Qur'an. In summary, we will: briefly introduce you to a real river-estuary-ocean system, make logical deductions based on the verse and see how far only common sense can take us, explain what the verse claims on the meeting of fresh and salt water, explain what elementary science tells us about the process, explain what modern science tells us about the process, show you how apologists "prove" this “scientific miracle”, and state our analysis on the “scientific miracle”. (read more)
|
|
|