[Ilaubuas]

http://www.hamzatzortzis.com/?page_id=61

New research was done on embryology in the Quran and is found the article above

[Sleflanna]

Where can we get the entire article with complete footnotes and references?



I guess I found it

http://www.iera.org.uk/downloads/Emb...n_18112011.pdf

[zueqhbyhp]

PZ Myers rejoinder at (1) Free Thought Blogs and (2) Science Blogs

And it irritates me when SFers spend a life time in theological hair splitting and ignore the scientific matters altogether. So have your go.
Wassalam

[zueqhbyhp]

Title of Response : Overblown Balderdash

From Oxford Dictionary:

Overblown
adjective

(1) made to seem more impressive or important than is the case; exaggerated or pretentious: his most rhetorically overblown screenplay

(2) (of a flower) past its prime: an overblown rose

Balderdash
noun
[mass noun]

senseless talk or writing; nonsense: she dismissed talk of plots as ‘balderdash’

[zueqhbyhp]

The First Paragraph
I have read the entirety of Hamza Andreas Tzortzis’ paper, Embryology in the Qur’an: A scientific-linguistic analysis of chapter 23: With responses to historical, scientific & popular contentions, all 58 pages of it (although, admittedly, it does use very large print). It is quite possibly the most overwrought, absurdly contrived, pretentious expansion of feeble post hoc rationalizations I’ve ever read. As an exercise in agonizing data fitting, it’s a masterpiece. Clearly PZM was not satisfied with the polemic in the title. Here are more epithets.
*************
Overwrought

adjective

(1) in a state of nervous excitement or anxiety:

she was too overwrought to listen to reason

(2) (of a piece of writing or a work of art) too elaborate or complicated in design or construction:

a pseudo-Gothic church far too overwrought for such a small town overwrought prose
*************
Absurd
adjective

wildly unreasonable, illogical, or inappropriate: the allegations are patently absurd
arousing amusement or derision; ridiculous:

short skirts and knee socks looked absurd on such a tall girl

*************
Contrived
adjective

deliberately created rather than arising naturally or spontaneously.
created or arranged in a way that seems artificial and unrealistic:

the ending of the novel is too pat and contrived

**************
pretentious

adjective

attempting to impress by affecting greater importance or merit than is actually possessed:

pretentious art films the pretentious jargon of wine experts

**************
post hoc rationalization

This will mean that an attempt is being made to justify something that was not meant to be serious in the first place.
**************

Christopher Hitchens, who expired last month, got this remark from somebody that words simply fell out with ease to serve his purpose. Clearly even in the vocal west this facility with the words is a fascinating ability. In the present case we have got another similar vocal person whose efforts are directed against Islam. To be fare, like the other person, he too has got a series of other pet peeves. Unlike Hitchens here the insults are more of linguistic or temperamental work outs rather than being any attempt to describe the reality. Indeed more epithets follow in the rest of the rejoinder. Now one could be curious about this excessive use of epithets. Is it to cover the lack of confidence in his ideas? Is it merely the bad American etiquette? Is it sign of Islamophobia? It may never be determined except for the fact that the argument is intemperate particularly for a provocation that is dry as an academic is supposed to be.

When he says :
As an exercise in agonizing data fitting, it’s a masterpiece. then also he is indulging in a back handed complement not realizing that he ends up in giving a real complement. This is a pitfall of excessive negativity - an even number of negations end up in a complement.

And when he says that:
I have read the entirety of Hamza Andreas Tzortzis’ paper, ..., all 58 pages of it ... then this too has to be taken as a complement. Reason is that Muslims are taken to be scientifically illiterate and hence anything written by them is not to be taken seriously. Myers is playing to this gallery but this is also the opportunity to call his bluff. No wonder when Hamza Tzortzis came to this response he had his field day. The reason is the very same assumption - oh these Muslims know nothing. In all probability Myers readers will not be in a hurry to read brother Hamzah's article - hasn't the presiding deity done the reading already?

[zueqhbyhp]

Second Paragraph
Here, let me give you the short version…and I do mean short. This is a paper that focuses with obsessive detail on all of two verses from the Qur'an. You heard me right: the entirety of the embryology in that book, the subject of this lengthy paper, is two goddamned sentences, once translated into English.
We created man from an essence of clay, then We placed him as a drop of fluid in a safe place. Then We made that drop of fluid into a clinging form, and then We made that form into a lump of flesh, and We made that lump into bones, and We clothed those bones with flesh, and later We made him into other forms. Glory be to God the best of creators. Seriously, that's it. You have just mastered all of developmental biology, as taught by Mohammed. This intemperate western attitude is something that they have to do something about. We also have a duty to keep telling them. They understand such things when they know that there is no way out. This is what happens when moral degradation sets in. And if that is filtered out then the content of this paragraph is really negligible. When he says short then we should be indeed thankful for he really writes too much. His first objection is that there are only two Verses in the Holy Qur'an about embryology. Since the focus of these posts are the SFers only one thing has to be kept in mind that we are responsible for ourselves only. To communicate to the people at large is also our duty but that is confined to communication only. Whether they accept and believe or not is their responsibility and they shall be accountable for that on the day of judgement. Their judgment does not become superior to ours just because Allah(SWT) has given them some excessive worldly blessings. (And coming to think of them the Gulf people have them more than our frioends from the west.) So why are there only two Verses on embryology in the whole of the Qur'an? Most important answer first - because Allah(SWT) wished it so. And then the mundane answers. Why should one expect The Origin of Species to be a part of the Holy Qur'an? Then physics people will expect Newton's Principia and Optics to be there. Other people would demand their own share of space in the book. Who would like to be left out? None. The Holy Qur'an is book of Signs (of Allah) and not a book of science. Let us take the Psychological perspective. Till some time back the Psychologists identified that there could be eight different kinds of intelligences. And then came journalist who asserted that people miss one more, and that is more important, called Emotional Intelligence. And after that some of them started talking about Spiritual Intelligence is even more important. The least one can conclude from it that questions of spirituality and morality are the most important ones for us and these are precisely the issues that are dealt with in the book of God. People of science do realize that using science they can not reach morality but they refuge to accept that all morality should flow from God. In any case seriousness of the moral issues and spiritual issues is something that they can not afford to deny and those are the once that get their due focus. And if Myers at all insist that they shall take their morality from Dante then that is no argument against the Holy Qur'an. In short to expect a treatise on different topics of Zoology, Botany, Biochemistry and Medical Sciences in the Holy Qur'an is a bit naive. It gels rather well with those who make fun of God, religion, Islam and Muslims but the idea is not reasonable by any stretch of imagination.

Finally there is one more assumption in the background that atheistic scientific establishment conveniently uses. This is switching between the views that the Holy Qur'an is a book of God or a book prepared by beloved Prophet (PBUH) - may Allah(SWT) forbid such lies.

[SkHukV3N]

The main point should be that nothing in the Quran contradicts what we can observe in the natural world...not that the Quran provides detailed explanations of certain natural phenomena.

[zueqhbyhp]

The main point should be that nothing in the Quran contradicts what we can observe in the natural world...not that the Quran provides detailed explanations of certain natural phenomena.

Indeed we should not claim that. The problem is to tell our detractors that we are not making any such claim. Either there is some bad communication on our part or our friends are determined to put a spin on our assertions.

[Ilaubuas]

Some of these kuffar make a living from being atheist; what is to be expected from them? PZM claims the whole paper is post hoc rationalisation but he doesn't prove any of his claims. For example, if I read a book by Dawkins and proceed to say that the book contains nothing but faulty logic, I must explain in what way... it is not enough to make a claim without proof. PMZ also goes on to make fun of the fact that the paper is about two verses of the Quran and that we claim the entirety of embryological science can be implied into those sentences. He does not take into account the fact that the paper talks about numerous hadith as well as verses of Quran, nor does he take into account the fact that arabic words are so specific they can convey a whole books worth of meanings in a sentence. In fact, to dismiss the entire paper on the basis that it talks about two specific verses in itself is illogical... the article must be refuted, not mocked for mockery is not refutation from a logical standpoint in this case