The Quran and Mountains: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

The Quran and Mountains (view source)

Revision as of 00:07, 28 February 2021

648 bytes added ,  28 February 2021
→‎Discussions regarding the proposed miracle
[checked revision][checked revision]
Line 78: Line 78:


Thus, elevation above sea-level tends to correlate positively with the thickness of the Earth's crust at any given place. The reason why the crust tends to exist in this manner is compared to the same physics of floatation whereby the majority of an iceberg suspended in water extends below sea level and, at the same time, it is the case that the taller the portion of ice above sea level, the deeper the iceberg dips down below. [[File:Anatomy_of_the_Earth-_Cailleux-_p_220.jpg|alt=|thumb|425x425px|Description of figure found on p. 220]]Advocates of the scientific miracle argue that isostasy affirms the peg-like nature of mountains and that Muhammad could not, in the 7th century, have come to realize this without divine aid. Critics respond to this by arguing that the caption associated with the diagram found in Cailleux's book explicitly points out that the visual representation has had its 'vertical scale greatly exaggerated'.<ref>Click [[:File:Anatomy of the Earth- Cailleux- pp 220-221.jpg|here]] for a more complete view of the page scan.</ref> As a result, critics argue, the peg-like nature of mountains is not so plainly evident as the exaggerated representation found in the diagram would make it seem.  
Thus, elevation above sea-level tends to correlate positively with the thickness of the Earth's crust at any given place. The reason why the crust tends to exist in this manner is compared to the same physics of floatation whereby the majority of an iceberg suspended in water extends below sea level and, at the same time, it is the case that the taller the portion of ice above sea level, the deeper the iceberg dips down below. [[File:Anatomy_of_the_Earth-_Cailleux-_p_220.jpg|alt=|thumb|425x425px|Description of figure found on p. 220]]Advocates of the scientific miracle argue that isostasy affirms the peg-like nature of mountains and that Muhammad could not, in the 7th century, have come to realize this without divine aid. Critics respond to this by arguing that the caption associated with the diagram found in Cailleux's book explicitly points out that the visual representation has had its 'vertical scale greatly exaggerated'.<ref>Click [[:File:Anatomy of the Earth- Cailleux- pp 220-221.jpg|here]] for a more complete view of the page scan.</ref> As a result, critics argue, the peg-like nature of mountains is not so plainly evident as the exaggerated representation found in the diagram would make it seem.  
==== Accurate representations of isostasy and exceptions ====
[[File:Ch1-1-b-img1.jpg|alt=|thumb|425x425px|A depiction of isostasy with a more accurate vertical scale]]Other visual representations with less exaggerated and more accurate vertical scales, some of which are cited by the advocates themselves, do not depict mountains as so plainly resembling pegs.<ref name="A Brief Illustrated Guide to Understanding Islam"></ref> Advocates respond by suggesting that when viewed in this more accurate representation, the mountains resemble 'blunt pegs'; critics disagree. [[File:Ch1-1-b-img3.jpg|alt=|thumb|425x425px|Another depiction of isostasy with a more accurate vertical scale]]
[[File:Ch1-1-b-img1.jpg|alt=|thumb|425x425px|A depiction of isostasy with a more accurate vertical scale]]Other visual representations with less exaggerated and more accurate vertical scales, some of which are cited by the advocates themselves, do not depict mountains as so plainly resembling pegs.<ref name="A Brief Illustrated Guide to Understanding Islam"></ref> Advocates respond by suggesting that when viewed in this more accurate representation, the mountains resemble 'blunt pegs'; critics disagree. [[File:Ch1-1-b-img3.jpg|alt=|thumb|425x425px|Another depiction of isostasy with a more accurate vertical scale]]
Critics hold that the 'roots' of the mountains described by isostasy do not resemble pegs in either form or function. Firstly, isostasy, while often observed, is by no means universal and there are several outstanding examples of mountains and other elevated geological structures which have no such roots.
Critics hold that the 'roots' of the mountains described by isostasy do not resemble pegs in either form or function. For instance, isostasy, while often observed, is by no means universal and there are several outstanding examples of mountains and other elevated geological structures which have no such roots.


Examples include structures formed by the geological processes of extension and faulting, such as the Nevada Basin and Range, as well as those formed thrust and fold belts, such as the Appalachians, Eastern Bolivian Andes, Zagros Mountains, and the Calcareous Alps. Indeed, even the Himalayas are underlaid by a crust structure shaped like a broad wedge and which does not resemble a peg.<ref>Dèzes, Pierre (1999) - [http://comp1.geol.unibas.ch/~zanskar/zanskar_geology.pdf Tectonic and metamorphic Evolution of the Central Himalayan Domain in Southeast Zanskar (Kashmir, India)] - Mémoires de Géologie. Doctoral thesis (Universite de Lausanne) 32: 149. ISSN 1015-3578</ref> The same is true for the Pyrenees.<ref>Jaume Vergés, Manel Fernàndez, Albert Martìnez - [{{Reference archive|1=http://www.virtualexplorer.com.au/article/2002/58/the-pyrenean-orogen/tert.html#figure.08|2=2011-10-02}} The Pyrenean orogen: pre-, syn-, and post-collisional evolution] - Journal of the Virtual Explorer, Electronic Edition, ISSN 1441-8142, volume 8, paper 4, doi:10.3809/jvirtex.2002.00058</ref>
Examples include structures formed by the geological processes of extension and faulting, such as the Nevada Basin and Range, as well as those formed thrust and fold belts, such as the Appalachians, Eastern Bolivian Andes, Zagros Mountains, and the Calcareous Alps. Indeed, even the Himalayas are underlaid by a crust structure shaped like a broad wedge and which does not resemble a peg.<ref>Dèzes, Pierre (1999) - [http://comp1.geol.unibas.ch/~zanskar/zanskar_geology.pdf Tectonic and metamorphic Evolution of the Central Himalayan Domain in Southeast Zanskar (Kashmir, India)] - Mémoires de Géologie. Doctoral thesis (Universite de Lausanne) 32: 149. ISSN 1015-3578</ref> The same is true for the Pyrenees.<ref>Jaume Vergés, Manel Fernàndez, Albert Martìnez - [{{Reference archive|1=http://www.virtualexplorer.com.au/article/2002/58/the-pyrenean-orogen/tert.html#figure.08|2=2011-10-02}} The Pyrenean orogen: pre-, syn-, and post-collisional evolution] - Journal of the Virtual Explorer, Electronic Edition, ISSN 1441-8142, volume 8, paper 4, doi:10.3809/jvirtex.2002.00058</ref>
Line 85: Line 87:
Another important example is the Andes mountain range, whose 'roots', as observed in a true-scale cross-section of the range, do not resemble a peg and which do not serve any 'peg-like' purpose.
Another important example is the Andes mountain range, whose 'roots', as observed in a true-scale cross-section of the range, do not resemble a peg and which do not serve any 'peg-like' purpose.


Therefore it appears likely that they are mistaken when claiming mountains are pegs in the literal sense. They base their claims on a single, greatly exaggerated, schematic diagram and not from a more comprehensive survey of mountain types and genuine geological data.
==== Critical and historical perspectives ====
Critics conclude that what may at most be said regarding the roots of those mountains that possess them is that they resemble pigs in some minimal metaphorical sense and that it is not the case that all mountains are literal pegs, as described in the Quran, which have been 'cast down' into the earth in order to stabilize this. If the advocates opt to transition to a metaphorical interpretation here, the critics continue, they have made an arbitrary decision, as the relevant scripture appears to take its own description quite literally (as is generally the case with verses in the Quran describing the step-wise creation of the Earth and heavens).


For these reasons, it can be conceded that mountains are pegs only in the metaphorical sense, but definitely not in the literal sense.  
Historians circumvent the debate and simply hold that since there is no reason to believe that Muhammad was receiving revelation from some deity, or even that such a deity exists, Muhammad likely either inferred the existence of some subsurface structure beneath mountains on the basis of basic visual comparisons between the side of a mountain and the bottom of a tree or adapted the beliefs of predecessors who had made such observations before his time.  


They also seem incredulous that Muhammad should have known that mountains have 'roots', arguing that since the bulk of the mountain is below ground it is unobservable. Muhammad could only have referred to mountain roots (like pegs) from a divine source. However, this may not be true since ancient people already knew mountains have roots. For example, the ancient Hebrews seemed to have acquired this knowledge.  
Historians point out, for instance, that the ancient Hebrews held similar ideas regarding the 'roots of mountains'. It is not at all inconceivable and to some extent certain that such ideas had been passed down to and adapted by Muhammad.


{{Quote|1=[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jonah%202:6&version=NIV Jonah 2:6 NIV]|2=To the roots of the mountains I sank down; the earth beneath barred me in forever. But you brought my life up from the pit, O LORD my God.}}
{{Quote|1=[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jonah%202:6&version=NIV Jonah 2:6 NIV]|2=To the roots of the mountains I sank down; the earth beneath barred me in forever. But you brought my life up from the pit, O LORD my God.}}
IbnPinker
Editors, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers
6,633

edits

Retrieved from "http://wikiislamica.net/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/129839"

Navigation menu