The Quran and Mountains: Difference between revisions

The Quran and Mountains (view source)

Revision as of 21:26, 1 March 2021

1,277 bytes added , 1 March 2021

no edit summary

[checked revision]

IbnPinker

Editors, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers

6,633

edits

@@ Line 142: / Line 142: @@
 {{Quote|[{{Reference archive|1=http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/world/events/1960_05_22_articles.php|2=2011-10-02}} Historic Earthquakes]<BR>U.S. Geological Survey, March 29, 2010|Chile<BR>1960 May 22 19:11:14 UTC <BR>Magnitude 9.5 <BR>The Largest Earthquake in the World <BR><BR>More than 2,000 killed, 3,000 injured, 2,000,000 homeless, and $550 million damage in southern Chile; tsunami caused 61 deaths, $75 million damage in Hawaii; 138 deaths and $50 million damage in Japan; 32 dead and missing in the Philippines; and $500,000 damage to the west coast of the United States.}}The Andes Mountains did not prevent or stabilize this earthquake. On the contrary, later research revealed that the collision of tectonic plates that caused the earthquake also caused the Andes mountains to be raised. Similar earthquakes in the past are responsible for the existence of Andes in the first place. This collision even serves as a textbook example of the general phenomena, as can be seen below.{{Quote|[{{Reference archive|1=http://www.moorlandschool.co.uk/earth/tectonic.htm|2=2011-10-02}} Plate tectonics]<BR>Earth Science From Moorland School|This is a convergent plate boundary, the plates move towards each other. The amount of crust on the surface of the earth remains relatively constant. Therefore, when plates diverge (separate) and form new crust in one area, the plates must converge (come together) in another area and be destroyed. An example of this is the Nazca plate being subducted under the South American plate to form the Andes Mountain Chain.}}[[File:Platetecmap.gif|alt=|center]]
-===Mountains stabilize the earth through isostacy===
+===Mountains and isostatic stabilization===
-This is a classical misconception of George Airy’s model of Isostacy and the logical fallacy of “Composition” (i.e. generalization of the specific case to the general). Just because the mountains are themselves stabilized by isostacy does not mean that the mountains stabilize the earth or the crust by isostacy. Every element in the earth’s crust is governed by the same physical laws – in fact the crust ‘floats’ on the upper mantle and is thus self-stabilizing according to its own isostacy, not that of mountains.
+Advocates of the miracle point to George Airy's model of isostasy, which supports the idea that isostasy occurring below mountains causes mountains themselves to be more stable than if isostasy were not occurring below. This, they argue, is another point of evidence that mountains stabilize the Earth as described in the Quran. Critics respond to this argument by stating that George Airy's model says nothing special of mountains, per se, and simply demonstrates that isostasy - that is the extension of the earth's crust below the surface to a degree correlated to the height of the surface at any given point - generally causes the crust of the earth to be stable, whether or not a a given area is mountainous. Moreover, they point out, the fact that a mountain's isostasy causes the mountain to stabilize 'itself' - that is, just as the isostasy of any region causes that same region to be stable - does not mean that the mountain is in any way stabilizing the Earth in general or even the surrounding region in any meaningful way. They summarize this counterargument by suggesting that, on the basis of Airy's model, it can be said that if there were a region possessing a mountain and subject to isostasy, there is no reason to believe that region would be more stable than another, similar region that did not have a mountain but was also subject to isostasy to the same, natural extent.
 {{Quote|[{{Reference archive|1=http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2004-03/1079354119.Es.r.html|2=2011-10-02}} Do plates with high moutains float higher then thosewithout moutains]<BR>David Smith, Director of Professional Development, MadSci Network, Earth Sciences, March 14, 2004|Isostacy, which says that any vertical column of the earth above some deep level of "compensation" must have the same mass. This has to do with bouyancy forces and with the tendency of deep materials (the asthenosphere, for example) to flow in response to pressure differences.}}
-Therefore, isostacy stabilizes mountains. Isostacy also stabilizes the earth's crust.
+Another way the critics put it is that the phenomenon of isostasy is itself responsible for the stability of the crust - whether or not the crust is host to mountains in any given region. Isostasy stabilizes mountains, even terrain, and even indented regions on the Earth's surface. The Mountains do not cause this isostasy any more than isostasy causes mountains, as isostasy is co-occurrent with any variety of terrain - mountainous or otherwise. The co-occurrent isostasy is, however, responsible for the stability of the mountains as well as the crust, and not the other way around - that is, a region excepted from the norms of isostasy (as many are) will not be as stable, whether this region is mountainous or not. Isostasy is best understood as a phenomenon separate from the mountains altogether, as it is no more bound in the simple fact of its existence to the presence of mountains than it is to region of simple, flat crust (even if the specific form it takes in either of these cases is).
-However, mountains do not stabilize the crust through isostacy. The crust stabilises itself through its own isostacy. Therefore, the stability of the crust, through 'crustal' isostacy, has nothing to do with mountains. It is only wishful thinking to extend this 'mountain-specific' isostacy to the crust (which has its own isostacy) because isostacy is an independent 'force or phenomenon' acting on the mountains as it independently does on the crust.
-===The term ‘tameeda’ does not refer to earthquakes but to shaking or disturbances===
+===Earthquakes and the meaning of ''tameeda''===
 When shown evidence that collisional-type mountains are associated with earthquakes some Muslims will then claim that the Qur'anic verses do not refer to earthquakes at all. They will claim that tameeda also means stagger, roll, sway, or tilt, and that there's significant difference between them and the short sharp shock of an earthquake (i.e. tameeda refers to some phenomenon, assumed to be associated with geological timescale, that is presently unknown to and undefined by our present understanding of geological science).