Science Forums 2

[Rizwan Bin-Qasim]

Sorry about this I should have clarified a little more. This other individual I am having a debate with is a follower of the Dharmic faith and I am a follower of the Abrahamic faith, i.e he is a Sikh and I am a Muslim.

He posted:

Originally Posted by Rakash Singh

dots why dont you state a topic? shall we discuss the "dharmic vs abrahamic" debate? i really dont care what we discuss.

I posted:

Originally Posted by ...

You make the first post on "dharmic vs abrahamic" and I will debate you. As long as you make the initial post I am not bothered. We can debate anything.

He posted:

Originally Posted by Rakash Singh

OK, so your argument is this
1) Allah created the unvirse? - [I want you to Prove it! now]
2) Adam & Eve were the first two people on earth
3) Noah saved mankind from a flood
4) the child-fucking prophet is the only true & last messenger
5) And gay Jesus (the stupid Jew) got his ass nailed to a cross

Okkkkkkkkkkkayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!

I posted:

Originally Posted by ...

Firstly I want to bring the attention of the admins to the insulting/racist behavior of some individuals on this forum

Anyway...
Various people who have heard of the “theory of evolution" may believe that these concepts only concern the field of ecology and that they have no implication in their daily lives. This is a big misunderstanding for the reason that far more than a biological perception, the hypothesis of evolution constitutes the underpinnings of a deceitful philosophy that has held sway over an enormous amount of people.

That philosophy is "materialism", which holds a number of phony views about why and how we came into being. Materialism maintains that there is nothing but the matter and that matter is the fundamental nature of all, be it organic or inorganic. Opening out from this argument, it denies the continuation of a celestial Creator, that is, Allah. Reducing all to the level of matter, this concept transforms man into a creature that heeds only matter and turns away from moral principles of whatever category. This is the commencement of big disasters that will occur in a man's life.

The detriments of materialism are not only partial to persons. Materialism also seeks to eradicate the crucial morals on which the state and society rest and produce a dismal and tactless society that pays concentration only to matter. Since the members of such a society can never have idealistic philosophy such as love for one's people, righteousness, fidelity, integrity, altruism, respect, or good morals, the social order established by these folks is predestined to be traumatized in a short while. For these reasons, materialism is one of the severest menaces to the fundamental principles of the political and social order of a nation.

The conjecture of evolution also constitutes the ostensible scientific foundation of materialism that the communist ideology depends on. By taking the theory of evolution as an allusion, communism seeks to validate itself and to present its ideology as sound and accurate. This is why the founder of communism, Karl Marx, wrote for Darwin's book, “The Origin of Species” which laid the foundation for the theory of evolution as "this is the book which contains the basis in accepted history for our observation".

In point of fact, materialist philosophy of every type, Marx's ideas being primary among them, have absolutely collapsed for the reason that the hypothesis of evolution, which is in fact a 19th century doctrine on which materialism rests, has been absolutely invalidated by the findings of modern science. Science has disproved and continues to contradict the materialist hypothesis that recognizes the existence of nothing but matter and it demonstrates that all beings are the yield of creation by a superior being.

The purpose of this post is to divulge the scientific facts that refute the theory of evolution in all fields and to notify people about the ulterior, core, and real principle of this so-called "science", which is in fact a deception.

It should be pointed out that evolutionists like Saka Dragon, Wankstar, and others have no answer to give to the post you are now reading. And they will not even endeavor to answer it for they are aware that such an act will merely help everyone to a better understanding that evolution is basically a lie.

He posted:

Originally Posted by Rakash Singh

I never insulted you personally. And how the hell can I be a racist? I am brown my self.
From what you have written it does not in anyway justify Adam and Eve unless Adam and Eve were Dinosaurs??? and humans have misread the word of of God. I mean humans have misread many things only later to find out the True the meaning. After we thought the world was triangle!!!! only later to find out the truth.

Adam and Eve is flawed. Another reason for Adam and Eve is evil those who don't beleive in Adam and Eve i.e Dharmic people like myself are children of the devil. Again showing haterd towards another Race of people and haterd to their beliefs. Muslims want to kill everyone and take over the world like thier brothers the Jews and the Christians - I love it when thay kill each other lol

I posted:

Originally Posted by ...

Adam and Eve is flawed. Another reason for Adam and Eve is ewll those who don't beleive in Adam and Eve i.e Dharmic people like myself are children of the devil. Again showing haterd towards another Race of people and haterd to their beliefs.

Lie, Racism whether upon open or hidden, is an evil aspect of life which Islams seeks to eradicate. It is clear from the versus of the Quran, the book of the muslims, and many sayings of our final prophet which have narrated by his companions, that differences in colour, tribes, races, or traditions are not to be excuses for unjust behaviour or treatment. The Quran rehearses the words of the almighty Allah which reasons against racial discrimination and puts an end to it in Islam.

"O Mankind, we created you from a single pair of a male and a female, and made you in to tribes and nations so that you may know each other (not that you despise each other). Verily, the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is he who is most righteous of you." (Al-Quran, Chapter 49, Verse 13)

Allah explains the reason behind why he created mankind and then put them in to alternative tribes and nations. It is made clear and all doubts are seized when the most merciful Allah states:

"that you may know each other"
.[/quote]

He posted:

DNA. every organsims is built up on it. if organisms did not have common ancestors why would they share such a complex molecule?
why would they share so many identical codons on that molecule?
the reason evolution is accepted as fact is because:
1) there is no evidence that falsifies it
2) every piece of evidence and every observation in fact supports the theory and makes it stronger

I posted:
[quote="..."]

DNA dosnt prove that we evoloed that is a pretty stupid

Darwin (he is an evolutionist) had never undergone a formal schooling in ecology. He took only an amateur curiosity in the subject of nature and living things.

Darwin was impressed by various living species, particularly by certain finches that he saw in the Galapagos Islands.

He thought that the variations in their beaks were caused by their adjustment to their habitat. With this idea in mind, he supposed that the derivation of life and variety lay in the notion of "adaptation to the environment". According to Darwin, singular living species were not produced independently by Allah but rather came from an ordinary ancestor and became differentiated from each other as a consequence of natural forces.

Darwin called this development "evolution by natural selection". He thought he had found the "origin of species":

the origin of one species was an additional species. He published these views in his book titled The Origin of Species, By Means of Natural Selection in 1859.

Darwin was well conscious that his hypothesis faced lots of problems. He confessed these in his book in the chapter "Difficulties of the Theory". These difficulties principally consisted of the fossil confirmation, multifaceted organs of living things that could not possibly be explained by coincidence (e.g. the eye), and the instincts of living beings. Darwin hoped that these difficulties would be prevail over by new discoveries; yet this did not stop him from coming up with a number of very laughable explanations for some. The American physicist Lipson made the following remark on the "difficulties" of Darwin:

On understanding The Origin of Species, I found that Darwin was much less certain himself than he is often represented to be; the subdivision entitled "Difficulties of the Theory" for illustration, shows substantial self-doubt. As a physicist, I was predominantly intrigued by his explanation on how the eye would have arisen.

As procedure of nature, natural medley was recognizable to biologists before Darwin, who defined it as a "system that keeps species static without being degraded". Darwin was the first person to put forward the declaration that this development had evolutionary authority and he then erected his complete theory on the underpinning of this statement. The name he gave to his book indicates that expected variety was the basis of Darwin's hypothesis: The Origin of Species, by means of Natural Selection...
Yet since Darwin's time, there has not been a solitary shred of verification put forward to show that natural selection causes living beings to change. Colin Patterson, the higher-ranking paleontologist of the Museum of Natural History in England, who is also a famous evolutionist by the way, stresses that natural selection has never been pragmatic to have the power to cause things to evolve:
[Quote]No one has ever created a species by mechanisms of natural selection. No one has ever got close to it and most of the present dispute in neo-Darwinism is about this issue.
Natural selection holds that those living things that are more suitable to the natural circumstances of their habitat will triumph by having offspring that will continue to exist, whereas those that are unfit will ebb. For example, in a deer flock under the danger of wild animals, naturally those that can run quicker will endure. That is true. But no matter how long this procedure goes on, it will not change those deer into another living variety. The deer will forever remain deer.

Whilst we look at the few incidents the evolutionists have put forward as pragmatic examples of natural selection, we see that these are nothing but a straightforward attempt to deceive.

He posted:

Dharmic faiths, generally dont go on about the creation of the universe. There are mentions to it in the Vedas, but it is considered less important than actually being here and realising your duties whilst here.

Sikhism, in particular, refers to the birth of Guru Nanak as "Guru Nanak Parkash utsav", which means that the birth of Guru Nanak into this world was a ray of light in what was previously darkness.

We're here now. We were not here THEN. That is common theme of all dharmic faiths. And keeping with that stance, and with how hinduism is very pro-animal (in most cases, animal worship), it is generally pro-evolution and not in anyway, averse to natural scientific theory - unlike Christianity and Islam.

I posted:

Dharmic faiths, generally dont go on about the creation of the universe.

Because they can’t, hence why Dharmic faiths don’t appeal to most individuals, if there is no rationalization to the establishment of the universe then how can you consider the scriptures to be divine when some elementary principals are omitted like how the world was formed/created? Essentially what this means is Dharmic faiths cannot elucidate on the subject of creation so the scriptures move on to other things that can be effortlessly explained by anyone or even be fabricated. For the reason that they are explained hypothetically, witch really doesn’t give explanation to anything and generally leaves people at a loss of what the conjecture was theoretical trying to prove or explain fundamentally it’s a waste of time you don’t really learn anything.

And going by your analogy, I think its perfectly OK to do a 2-step jump at the base of the staircase and take it from there.

It’s not, “perfectly OK” when you drive a car you don’t jump from first to 5th do you? Or from 3rd to 1st you do it in a sequential array. So for the debate to flow properly you must start from the beginning. The universe was created before people were put on it, you can't be selective in your debate and just disregard the fundamental and that is the creation of the universe. And jump on to how Adam and Eve go on earth.

That if no one can offer an explanation as to how the universe was created, then Allah created it. If Allah created the universe, then Allah created day and night. If Allah did that, then Allah put Adam&Eve on the planet.

In the solitary book exposed by Allah that has survived absolutely intact, the Quran, there are statements about the formation of the universe from nothing as well as how this came about that are corresponding to 20th-century comprehension and yet were revealed fourteen centuries ago.
Foremost of all, the creation of this universe from emptiness is exposed in the Quran as follows:
He(Allah) is the Originator of the heavens and the earth…(Surat al-Anam: 101)
an additional important characteristic revealed in the Quran fourteen centuries before the modern finding of the Big Bang and answer related to it is that when it was created, the universe occupied a very minuscule volume:
Do those who are disbelievers not see that the heavens and the earth were sewn together and then We unstitched them and that We made from water every living thing? So will they not have faith? (Surat al-Anbiya': 30)
Also note what every living this is made of water!
Devoid of water, you get dehydrated, and when you are dehydrated you are out of dear energy and before you know it, you're dead! Your body is about 80% made out of water; without water we wouldn't be living, breathing, walking! Or reading this post!

--------

This is were I am at the moment. I hope you all understand now...