The Privileged Planet
For preview only. Get it at  #ad.

The Privileged Planet

2004, Mystery  -   175 Comments
Ratings: 7.59/10 from 44 users.

The Privileged PlanetAlthough this documentary is promoting intelligent design view I decided to post it. For centuries scientists and philosophers have marveled at an eerie coincidence. Mathematics, a creation of human reason, can predict the nature of the universe, a fact physicist Eugene Wigner referred to as the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in the physical sciences. In the last three decades astronomers and cosmologists have noticed another, seemingly unrelated, mystery. Contrary to all expectations, the laws of physics seem precisely fine-tuned for the existence of complex life.

Could these two wonders actually be isolated pieces of a wider pattern? Both are prerequisites for science, yet what about the process of scientific discovery itself? What are its necessary conditions? Why is it even possible? Read any book on the history of science, and you'll learn about magnificent tales of human ingenuity, persistence, and dumb luck. But that's only part of the story, and not even the most important part. Our location is much more critical to science than it is to real estate. For some reason our Earthly location is extraordinarily well suited to allow us to peer into the heavens and discover its secrets.

Elsewhere, you might learn that Earth and its local environment provide a delicate, and probably exceedingly rare, cradle for complex life. But there's another, even more startling, fact, described in The Privileged Planet: those same rare conditions that produce a habitable planet-that allow for the existence of complex observers like ourselves-also provide the best overall place for observing. What does this mean? At the least, it turns our view of the universe inside out. The universe is not "pointless" (Steven Weinberg), Earth merely "a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark," (Carl Sagan) and human existence "just a more-or-less farcical outcome of a chain of accidents" (Steven Weinberg). On the contrary, the evidence we can uncover from our Earthly home points to a universe that is designed for life, and designed for discovery.

More great documentaries

175 Comments / User Reviews

  1. It's not 'fine tuning', it's simply the way the universe is evolving. It's the only way it can be 'tuned', or structured, that is, the way it is, the way it evolved. Unless you believe in supernatural powers instead of evolution.......
    Seriously, to think that a perfect god, or superpower, Omniscient, Omnipotent, etc. could even conceive of something as stupid as this world defies imagination. Why? There's no reason to create a mess like this planet is there?

    Myths, my friends, it's all myths and guesswork. Tell me that the greatest power and intelligence in the universe is going to create on this planet dozens and hundreds of tribes and nations of humans who insist of killing each other and stealing each other's stuff. What kind of power and perfection is that. Where is any evidence of the supernatural that anyone can agree upon?

    It's time to grow up and face reality......

    1. Face reality yourself.

  2. God is hardly mentioned in the PP DVD...other than by the ancients (even though many posts here below have brought "God" into their posts). What the PP does do is smack chance down as a operative reason for why you are here and/or even reading this. The DVD should make one question our existence (and the universe) as one of conspiracy rather than coincidence. But if you want to deal with another “Illustria Media” film production then check out “The Case For a Creator” it will mimic over the PP DVD and add to it with biology and Information Science.

  3. The one thing I have discovered in my life is that there has to be ONE universal truth. Call it science, religion, God, god(s) or whatever you like, but you have to admit it is there.

    I suggest the best thing to do is not to believe ANYTHING without HARD CORE proof!

    To have a blind faith that there is a God is foolishness.
    For the Christian: The Bible itself says to "Prove all things" - 1 Thes 5:21
    But so many professing Christians refuse to prove anything.
    They just say "God did it" and they think that's good enough.
    They base their "faith" on something that they were told by their parents!

    ----What if their parents were wrong?----

    God would never rely on word-of-mouth and the ability for parents to teach their children what they know. No. Instead God wrote the Bible.

    I grew up just accepting the existence of God as matter-of-fact (Psalm 19:1). Then one day I realised that this "God" may not be the God of the Bible. IT could be anything...

    Then one day (much to my annoyance) I discovered that the Bible could be proven to be the inspired word of God. Once I had proven this I was finally able to understand THE REAL TRUTH behind the universe and the meaning of life.

    I suggest you look for the answer yourself. There is only one. And it's not 42 :P

    1. Interestung Dan :-)... . I am a Catholic & I have my own beleifs. Oh ya, my articulatinons in type is that of a 5th grader, so bare w/me :-)... . To me its so simple. "G-O-D" or like you said, whatever people want to call *IT* a name. To me, its the "TRINITY". .
      The parents thing is in the bible. The Prophets & Christ Jesus said many things related to putting "God" first over parents in various ways. Parents are human who have to mature & grow in wisdom from a child like anyone else. To me, its, ..."first seek the Kingdom of God", & hopefully all will be known to your inner spirit of knowledge. For whatever reason, I truely believe the "TRINITY" is whats behind the Universe, earth & "US".
      Also the "paranormal" aka: UFO's & the "Spiritual rhelm/Near-Death Expeirences" are so amazing. I have access to the studies of both. I know people who have expeirenced those. Its do extremely overwhelming to them and has a extreme high life changing expeirence to them all. You must see those studies to believe it. I end with this: If a person has not been there or done "that" before. They should hold thier tongues. God Bless :-)... .

  4. Interesting doc.

  5. The problem with science is It is all based on lies, One lie covers up the next lie until the truth emerges then it becomes fact. Nothing found by science does not already exist. You can not "Prove" something to be right in this reality with out it already being the truth. So we as a human race could learn Everything there is to know about the entire Universe, Multiverse, Multidimensions and what ever else Science eventually emerges on as truthful, and in the end it was already there waiting to be discovered. As a believer in God or a complete atheistic view towards the universe believe in Loving one another, Loving the world you have been born into, treat everyone with respect and take care of one another.

    1. But when it comes to Chemistry and the collaborating of two substances to interact to cause a reaction, or to even cause a knew chemical (drug) they are not discovering what is already there, but actually using what was already there to make something knew. So when one of your relatives has an illness, think, who made this medicine? Because, the medicine wasn't brought down to earth from God. The medicine that will save your relatives life was discovered through extensive Scientific research. Yes, plants hold many of our drugs today, but it was Scientists who discovered and made these substances into a practical use.

      What you preached at the end there Nathan, you clearly don't believe.

    2. Sure, aircraft fly on lies and when you get cancer, the doctors will heal it with lies. Makes sense.

  6. This Doc is a MUST SEE. It does allude to 'intelligent design'... but only VERY briefly. But what it does do is show you not only how PRIVILEGED we are as humans to be on this planet and alive... but how PRIVILEGED the PLANET itself is to have its positions in the solar system, sun, neighbors, and galaxy in spiral arm.

    They allude to saying oh this MUST be by design... but do not be put off by this. The information (scientific) puts the Drake Equation into expanded current views and shows just how LUCKY we are to even be in this galaxy type and position let alone solar system and the right chemicals needed.

    Come on people.. leave the bible out. Just watch the facts and understand the science... the whether this is all By Design or By Chance are polar opposites that will never go away. But, this doc shows that either way you cut it... we are DAMN LUCKY to be human and live and conscious at all! That is the point.

  7. 'Although the world is not perfect, it is yet the best that is possible.'
    This quote of G.W. Leibniz is often used by creationists, yet they forget to mention that Leibniz also believed in a multi-verse.
    If this universe is part of a multi-verse, meaning if there are countless numbers of universes, it is not surprising that everything is 'fine-tuned'.
    Then the universe would not be the way it is to make life possible - instead life would exist BECAUSE the universe is the way it is. We would just happen to exist in a universe in which all requirements for intelligent life - life that is able to ponder about its existence - are met.
    And maybe it's not the only one.
    It seems to me that many people are just not able to admit that mankind is nothing special, and not the 'center of the universe', so they always try to find a way to explain why we are. But imho... we are not.
    This is an anthropocentric and pretty arrogant view of the world. If the whole purpose would be our existence, the universe wouldn't need to be that huge.
    Once we accept that we're not the reason for the existence of the universe, and realize that we are part of something much bigger than only mankind, we will make the next step in the evolution of human consciousness - hopefully before we destroyed ourselves.

  8. People need to stop expecting scientific explanations from the Bible. Its a religious book of personal individual growth. People also need to stop expecting science to stand still. Everything is in flux including Darwin, in science even this is not sacred.

    Either we were created or evolved, and, as we learn, popular understanding shifts back and forth. That is our history: popular culture, whether right or wrong, shifts with each generation.

  9. Wow :)

    That was an exhausting read through the comments section.

    What started as a somewhat logical debate quickly declined into countless Quran references and links. Just to top it off with the all too familiar - I believe in it because the holy book says it is so...

    The problem I have with faiths and religion (in general) is this:
    The inability to be proven wrong. It doesn't allow for change...
    It doesn't matter how intelligent or educated you are, if you're faith doesn't allow your beliefs to be contradicted - then you are forever stunted.

    The scientific method 'encourages' new information which may prove it wrong. That's why science is constantly evolving...

    1. The scientific method in its purest and most unadulterated form allows for new information. Unfortunately, science in this day and age is all about suppressing "new information" in favour of continuing the status quo for a variety of reasons, ex. careers and reputations have been built on information that is wrong, if we as a species were actually exposed to new information it'd force us to re-evaluate who we are and our existence...this is not ideal, atleast not for the powerful control system that pervades the earth.

    2. Nathan wrote:

      "The problem I have with faiths and religion (in general) is this:
      The inability to be proven wrong. It doesn't allow for change...
      It doesn't matter how intelligent or educated you are, if you're faith doesn't allow your beliefs to be contradicted - then you are forever stunted."

      Do you realize that you can replace the word "faith" in that comment with "science". What most exclusive science-believers don't realize is just how much their 'science' is touted as a faith of their own, exluding even the possibility of intelligent design. Case in point, as you read through the comments here, you constantly read clauses like, "although this includes the possibility of intelligent design...", "Even though this teaches intelligent design...", "although it comments on intelligent design...".

      Notice that in each of the above clauses, the possibility of intelligent design is refered to apologetically. And this doesn't imply close-mindedness on the part of exclusivel science thinkers??? It's almost ironic in fact ;)

      It's funny how science can almost be viewed as a religion unto itself.

    3. Yes, exactly. The mind sees no truth, it makes models and imagines it knows the truth from these models it constructs. Proof exists when someone else takes on this mind mapping from someone else. If someone doesn't have a religion, they replace it with science, but it is just another word for religion. I find however these atheists are sometimes far more self-righteous than the religious. The only hope for mankind to agree is when we can directly perceive truth.

    4. the word "religion" comes from the root "lig-" as in tie or bind (e.g., ligature) and indicates a rebinding of a follower to a certain, specific mindset. science, however, indicates curiosity and a required ability to recognize a lack of knowledge in certain areas -- scientists are freely able and willing to say "i don't know" when they don't know. religion, however, purports to know all, to have answers to all things, and thus to reassure humanity -- the orphans in the maelstrom of the universe -- that all is, eventually, well. in fact, that is the opposite of science, which relies on questions more than answers, and for which answers there are only more questions, ad infinitum ...

  10. hmmm 'although this documentary promotes intelligent design I decided to post it...' You have a great deal of nerve thinking you have the right to decide what a person should or should not be exposed to. Why do you feel that people shouldn't be informed about beliefs that differ from your own? Are you worried that a person may choose to think for themselves? that they may draw their own conclusions on the matter? You are obviously a fundamentalist atheist, an extremist who cannot be relied upon to offer a balanced opinion on the area of faith.

    1. @Charli309,

      Yes I have the right to decide what to post on MY website. Any problem with that? If yes, you should go an pay a visit to one of the thousands of "intelligent design" websites.

      And no I'm not a fundamentalist atheist. I simply don't believe in intelligent design. Simple as that. Have a nice day @Charli309.

    2. Good for you Vlatko. I Love your website!

  11. I myself as a very tiny child knew within me there is a God. A real in control of all things great,mighty,small,and weak.I knew His wisdom was to be held as Infinite.His Power ultimate.His Love unchanging and unconditional.No one had to tell that,I just Knew! it with my heart and soul. :)
    My two favorite bible stories are: 1; "1 Samuel 5:1-5 (KJV)
    And the Philistines took the ark of God, and brought it from Ebenezer unto Ashdod.
    When the Philistines took the ark of God, they brought it into the house of Dagon, and set it by Dagon.
    And when they of Ashdod arose early on the morrow, behold, Dagon was fallen upon his face to the earth before the ark of…" Thats beautiful,You can't sit a false god up next To God. :) and 2.Luke 19:28-40
    28 After Jesus had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem. 29 As he approached Bethphage and Bethany at the hill called the Mount of Olives, he sent two of his disciples, saying to them, 30 “Go to the village ahead of you, and as you enter it, you will find a colt tied there, which no one has ever ridden. Untie it and bring it here. 31 If anyone asks you, ‘Why are you untying it?’ tell him, ‘The Lord needs it.’”
    32 Those who were sent ahead went and found it just as he had told them. 33 As they were untying the colt, its owners asked them, “Why are you untying the colt?”
    34 They replied, “The Lord needs it.”
    35 They brought it to Jesus, threw their cloaks on the colt and put Jesus on it. 36 As he went along, people spread their cloaks on the road. (From John 12, we discover they came with Palm Branches along with their coats.)
    37 When he came near the place where the road goes down the Mount of Olives, the whole crowd of disciples began joyfully to praise God in loud voices for all the miracles they had seen:
    38 “Blessed is the king who comes in the name of the
    Lord!”“Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!”
    39 Some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to Jesus, “Teacher, rebuke your disciples!”
    40 “I tell you,” he replied, “if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out.” Do u see the if they had not praised The very stones of the earth He created would have cried out to praise Him. <3

    1. your religion verses are not welcome here. we are talking science.
      not 2000 year old fairy tales that you " like"

  12. This has been one of the most engrossing and enlightening discussion(at least the first half)I have encountered on any internet forum, until Yavanna showed up. It's amazing the knack some people have in poisoning an environment.

    Oh well, all good things must come to an end.

  13. Intelligent design... Thanks for the "heads up", I'll pass.

  14. well, that was a lengthy discussion ...

    "Read any book on the history of science, and you’ll learn about magnificent tales of" catholic church burning people who do not adhere to the only true scientific reality according to which god created all. I am happy that the creationists these days aren't in a position to do so ... even catholic church thinks they are crazy. :D

  15. One more thing Id like to point out. And understand I do respect science as well as religion. Religion basically tells us that once we die,we move on or continue to develop in a spiritual plane of some kind ,therfore a neverending cycle.

    Science tells us that everything has a beginning but no real end. At least thats the understanding ive gotten of infinity. If math can expalin it all, and math tells us that infinity is equatable. Then that should imply in some way shape or form all energy just goes on forever. Which has already been stated "energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only transferred from one medium to another.

    So science can take us nearly to the point of the big bang and almost to absoulute zero but cant quite get all the way there. And once it does,then what. So it says there is a beginning and no end but cant provide solid evidence of either.Only theory.

    Point being, take everything youve ever learned out of consideration for a moment and think about what this implies.They both have the same principles and neither gives difinitive evidence.This is what I mean when I say that if we are ever to understand the true nature of the universe and life itself, we must consider both ends of the spectrum in order to develop the whole picture.

  16. @1400
    I find it amusing listening to you rammble on about your beliefs. You want us to think your religion is so good, yet its just as guilty as the christians for the centuries of holy wars. Over and over again you use the term "Westerners" as if we are all evil. Maybe you need to re-evaluate your OWN prejudices.

    Further more. Would you please quit with the Qu'ran and all its knowledge pitch. You certainly dont seem educated on all the facts. Cosmology ,medicine (spiritual and scientific), mathmatics ,agriculture and on and on existed LONG before your book there was wrote. But you go ahead and give all the credit to allah or muhhamed or who ever you worship while slamming anyone elses beliefs and cultures.Because your way is obviously the best way.(And im aware the west stole its knowledge,so did the east)

    I respect all religions but get annoyed when I hear anyone defending one over the other. When will you people see that all religion teaches the same thing. Wait,that would require you to actually learn another religion, cant have that. They all have been watered down and changed to suit certain times and individiuals. But the core messege is always the same. Personally,I feel if you want to mix religion and science together, your reading the wrong book. Study the vedic scripts.

    However, if you REALLY want to educate yourself. You would study all religions and come to the same conclusion the rest of us are starting to see. They all stem from the same place. Yep, 1 religion and 1 culture.

    I still believe science and religion are going to combine someday as they are perfect opposites,each attempting to prove the other wrong yet neither with all the answers.

    So I coin the phrase " Creator Energy"! that about sums it up.

  17. I have always been fascinated, why humans have to give name to the God. Why cant we just go with the universal consciousness since consciousness is a web of energy and universe is a web of energy. By that I stated that conciousness, any consciousness is god and we are god. We have a microcosmos in our mind.

    However we look like, or this universe looks like it doesnt matter, it is just a physical form, a high-frequency energy. People just dont realize that everything is one and rather worship dieties that are used by governments, banks and figures telling us what to do and never question our existence. Everyone should be able to find the truth by themself and not just blindly accept human authorities since most of them are just after power

  18. It doesn't seem to play for me. I'll try looking for alternative sources.

    Also, could everyone just stop bickering whenever a video like this shows up? Neither side is able to convince the other side anyway as everyone believes they are right. So there's really no use... o_O

  19. Based on a new discovery in genetic (see “Adam mtDNA theory”), I advanced a new hypothesis about the “Evolutive Creation”. The main purpose of the Evolutive Creation is to harmonize the quantum of the energy, called human souls, in a big energetically field (see Einstein theory about the unification of electromagnetic fields), called “The Son of Man”. Using a biological reflex klystron (the spermatozoid) it is possible by LMSC (learning management system control) to unify the small bio-electromagnetic waves.
    Abstract of “Adam mtDNA theory”: Brain and soul storming - The necessary and sufficient processes to a well function of the human body are meticulous arranged by specific organizational cells, so called process bio-managers, using interconditioned procedures, transmitted through three ways of communication: chemical or “protein channel”, electrical or “ion channel” and mitochondrial or “EMF wireless channel”. The third type is out of the visible and measurable spectrum and raises a new challenge to the scientists. For this type of bio communication we bring a new theoretical hypothesis, based on the managerial multidisciplinary analysis of a cybernetic model proposed by us, by simulating the human body function with the virtual computerized system based on the management of its total knowledge and its perfect quality way of function. The main bricks used for this virtual construction are: the brain, as main bio-processor, and Eve and Adam mtDNA, as bio-antennas. This assembly of the total knowledge, build with “brain reasoning, biological feeling, and unlimited soul feeling”, is called by us “main decision triangle, IQ-EQ-CQ”. The main principle of the management of the total knowledge imposes us to not neglect any information produced by man during the time, even if it seems creasy at the beginning. Because in the natural fertilization the spermatozoids are naturally equipped with the paternal mtDNA (a veritable main bio-GPS – see the similitude between Adam mtDNA and quantum laser), we consider that the paternal mitochondria DNA are situated in the xiphoid process (called Adam’s rib) and have a very important role in the evolution of the human being life quality and we have developed a new hypothesis, “Adam mtDNA theory”, in addition to “Eve mtDNA theory”. Keywords: mitochondria, maternal, paternal

  20. Astronomers presently set the age of the universe at 13.7 billion years. The earth was formed about 4.6 billion years ago. Evidence of the first life on earth appears to have occured about 3.8 billion years ago. The first multicelled animals that were common in the fossil record was 560 million years ago. After the dinos left 65 million years ago the mammals became dominant. So the earliest monkeys first appeared about 55 million years ago. The very first homonids or human like animals came along maybe 8 million years ago. That date keeps moving back too. The first Homo sapien species appeared about 250,000 years ago. And modern history began only in the last 6 to 8 thousand years ago depending on your definition of modern. In the broad expanse of the history of the universe, humans occupy a very tiny sliver of that time.
    One last point; don't let anyone, evangelical Christians or Intelligent design advocates tell you otherwise. This is the best of hundreds of years of science that has been increasingly refined. Scientists will continue to debate the number of years here and there, but I have laid out here is in the ballpark.

    1. Your are a very very very very inttligent man yomama, I appreciate that you gave us the billion of years of universe history just in a blink of an eye. I wonder from where you got your tiny brain??????

  21. I don't know whether to watch this. On the one hand it might be a laugh, but on the other I'll probably just end up exasporated and depressed at the sheer amount of creationist fail.

  22. science may not be that appropriate considering that its not really mainstream...
    but if it will be too blasphemous to put it under religion..
    the thing is that i (and i believe many others too) associate mystery with things like the secret of blablabla or some paranormal thingy..
    i know many won't agree with this but for lack of better alternative i will say it best fits under science

  23. I don't know @aditya. Where would you put it?

  24. why is this document under mystery anyway?? It just seems weird to me. i don't know about other people's opinions though.

  25. regarding our privileged place:

    that's a question-begging argument - OF COURSE we live in a place marvelously adapted to us, and us to it. otherwise WE WOULDNT BE HERE hehe

    however - i do find myself somewhat aghast at the glibness with which scientist propose to find life around the next corner, wherever there's water, etc.

    and its sobering to consider that it took two billion years on THIS planet, which we know is now such a verdant habitat, to evolve a cell design robust enough to adapt into multicellular organisms, and THAT development took another billion years after.

    so00 - given the trillions upon trillions of other stars (and you might infer the number of planets), there MUST be similar folks to us somewhere. but we might very well be rare as hen's teeth. not unique, though. the odds of that are so small it would be more likely to believe a man could walk on water, vault himself into the sky on the wings of angels, etc.

    regarding all the religious blather that's occured in this thread - have at it, speak amongst yourselves.

  26. for a more exhaustive case of id vs evolution watch the doco about the dover school board.
    very good

  27. one of the central ideas - that mathematics is pure reason, conceived quite apart from nature or material reality, and therefore, that its concordance with that nature is something to marvel at - is wrong

    1 + 1 = 2 is descriptive. it is counting. math is, and can have, no fundamental divergence from the universe it describes because what we call logic are the rules and properties which hold in the universe. rules which don't apply are either ignored entirely or rejected.

    this is just another device to infer a supernatural agency where none is either necessary or apparent.

  28. If we need off planet we need not look in this solor system. If Earth so happens to be perfectly fit for our existence. Theres most likely one somewhere else, no doubt. The real needed secrets of the universe isn't allowed in our hands. Does anyone think for one minute the inhabitance of this planet would even be allowed elsewhere? That's quite evident. Look what greed, government controllers, religion along with very wrong human ideas did to this planet, which restricts all important technology advancments.
    We witness the holders of extreme technology who do own secrets of the universe- they come and go effortlessly. And they witness us struggle with primative methods with no assistence. Religion and greed is so restricting the concentration for us should be focused here on earth, PERIOD. All the effort and diversions wai$ted in odd directions is senceless. Is anyone on the planet really using their mind? I think not. I only hear noise when they talk. First things first, Earth must speak with one voice. But that will never happen.

  29. I am not a creationist, nor do I believe in intelligent design, however, I do find the argument fascinating, and if anything I find that although science will admit to not having total knowledge,what they do have is quite incredible and believable, because with chemistry, biology, physics and mathematics, all sorts of disciplines, they are able to put forth quite an argument, and because of the internet, this information is all available. I can remember coming to Canada, and seeing American television evangelists for the first time, I was only 17, but even then I remember thinking, surely this isn't real, those people are just putting on a show, how naive could I have been? It all boils down to -
    For those who believe, no proof is necessary, for those who doubt, no proof is possible.

  30. I can't start to tell you how shocked i am to see fellow humans argue in such a way, with such a distorted logic and a patholigical disregard for facts. I want One Nation...under Atheism...please oh Allmighy One, or Jesus....or Allah, or maybe Zeus hmmm nah I'm gonna consult with Odin on the matter, surely he, the allpowerfull Odin can help me, or bring Ragnarök about, then you'll see what's the "right" Religion.

  31. @Tyler
    "To think that we actually KNOW anything about the ultimate nature of the universe is laughable. I see atheism as a lack of imagination, just as religious zeal is an over-used imagination. In both cases, I think a little humility is in order."

    Could agree more with you,both lack the evidence yet claim to know everything its quit silly.

  32. bah, just read the whole comments. Please 1400, stop trying to make Quran sounds intelligent, you just make a mockery of yourself. I ask you two questions, if your Allah is so powerful in the first place, why does he needs you and the rest of the muslims to kill His enemies? Why don't He do it Himself? If your Allah is really God, why did He needs 3 tries to deliver His scriptures (jew, christian and muslim)?

  33. Howdy Max, long time no see!

    Had to reread my post to see what you meant! I should of been a comedian!

  34. Achems Razor
    January 9th, 2010 at 21:13


    You should read a book that is almost as old as the Qur’an,”How To Win Friends And Influence People”


  35. I'm surprised and quite happy to see their is such a lively discussion.

    1400 years:

    I'm guessing that you are an Ahmadi Muslim? I am a born Ahmadi, reconsidering where I stand right now in regards to religion and the existence of God. (Richard Owens is not my real name, he was a scientist, a great scientist, but a real jerk)

    You clearly know the Quran better than others, which is a great skill to have. I have read bits and pieces of the Quran with translation. The Quran does tell us about things that were discovered much later, but it tells us in a very broad sense. It literally can mean anything. The Quran can't be the source for everything, it just can't. Its too young. Humans originated 200,000 years ago... did God not want to provide these humans with prophets or books or anything?


    In order to see my perspective, zoom out, significantly. Who crated the concept of the following: Islam, Christianity, and Judaism? Abraham.

    Why is it that we all come from him, but then we break it down to 3 categories? This "God" does not make any sense. There is way too much evidence that science has, that religion lacks.

    There is no way to tell if the Quran was dictated to the prophet by the angel Gabriel. There is no way to tell if it has or hasn't been changed. The Quran is the book that says that its from God... does no one else find that weird?

    Its like a person citing themselves.

    When this topic comes about, people (who I happen to stumble upon) who believe in God give me this analogy:
    "You know the wind/air? You can't see it, but its there... thats how God is.." and then they somehow find a way to fit in the word "faith" somewhere along the way.

    My answer to this, and feel free to use it, is:

    You can't see the air/wind, but you can feel it. We are actually using it. Hold you breath, eventually you'll gasp for... whats the thing callled??.. oh right.. AIR! Now, if you don't breathe, you will die. No doubt about it. Now, try not believeing in God... what will happen? NOTHING. You life changes, I agree. It changes for the better. No imaginary boundaries, nothing holding you back from doing something you want, for example alcohol, marijuana, and other things...

    In my opinion, I think that the concept of "God" was made to bring fear and order to people who needed it. Now that we're (humankind) are on there feet with groundbreaking science and technology, the myth, or lie, or whatever you want to call it, does not need to be applied. We are definitely better off without religion. much less a supernatural being that knows all and hears all and lives above us.

    Once again, you have to see it from a very open mind and from a very basic point of view. Ask yourself, do you really think that there is something that created us, and then have that creation (which loves us) murder and kill each other over who's right about this "source" that refuses to give us a straight answer. More people are dying in the name of God than ever before. (to know more about this topic, watch The Root of All Evil? by Richard Dawkins)

    The things that "He" provides us with on this Earth contradict the stuff he put into several books. These books, confuse and lead people to do things they don't want.

    The fact is that those who were born into a family with religion are more likely to doubt the non-existence of God. As children, we were, and remain as sponges, and soak up everything that scares the living daylight out of us.

    I'm sure I have offended some of you, which was not my intention, the truth, after all does sting. Richard Owens was a real jerk, but he was a great scientist and contributed to the scientific community.

    Mind you, I am not against God, if anything I want God to exist, God is a great idea, but the facts point to the contrary.

  36. also, i saw someone mention say that occham's razor supports intelligent design. this is false. occham's razor does NOT say that the simplest explanation is the most correct. it is the explanation with the LEAST NUMBER OF ASSUMPTIONS. as an intelligent agent is a HUGE assumption, it does not conform to occham's razor.

  37. the argument here is flawed. just because something rare happens doesn't mean that there needed to be an "intelligent agent" in order for this to occur. for example, 150 people die worldwide each year from falling coconuts. out of 6 billion people, this yields a .0025 percent chance for a given person for this to occur in a year. when it does happen do we assume that someone made this happen? no. absolutely not. also, as unimaginably large as the universe is, regardless of how rare life might be, it is still BOUND to occur, over and over.

  38. I've come across many atheists who wonder why creationists try to "defend" their beliefs. The reason mainly lies in the fact that Atheists apparently seem to want to stuff their ideas down the throat of those who believe in a God. One only needs to check out forum threads, youtube video comments, etc to notice how anything that promotes religion or theism is quickly attacked my atheist's comments filled my their hatred for religion or God in general OR trying to prove how the believers are wrong. Most of the people on this page have not shown similar attributes so this isn't a personal attack on anyone here.

    At least from what I've noticed, person following a religion (be it Islam or Christianity or Judaism) is depicted in a very stereotypical manner (in the media) as a weirdo or an alien (figuratively), while a non-believer as regular/normal person. So to answer to those asking why creationists/fundamentalists defend themselves, I think anyone would be forced to when attacked for their personal beliefs.

    P.S - I won't deny that theists too attempt unprovoked attack atheists since it is wrong in both cases, however, I've personally seen atheists generally being one of the first to flame a comment or thread on religion. I'm not trying to be biased but that's by 2 cent on that issue.

    I followed quite a bit of the dialogue between 1400 and a few other people here. Initially, I was impressed by the argument and knowledge 1400 possesses, however, things took a little turn once I came across some of the comments about the authentic books of Islam.

    I'm not gonna go on a huge debate here since I do not have the time for it but I do think that readers here should not blindly believe everything mentioned about Islam and do your own research on it. 1400, and the name signifying the 1400 years of the Sunni-Shia conflict, has seemed to have strayed and portrayed the Shiite "version" of Islam apparently (one can read about the senselessness of "temporary marriage" in it for instance, which promotes prostitution, watch "Divorce Iranian Style").

    For the sake of a proper open understanding on the actual Islam as it was revealed(for those people above who showed interest in reading more) should know that (as stated by the Prophet Muhammed in his last sermon that) Islam is based on the Qur'an and the Sunnah (actions, speech and deeds of the Prophet Muhammed). The Sunnah is derived from the Sahih Bukhari, Muslim and the other four authentic books. A person claiming to be a Muslim and then calling some really major scholars works as a "joke" book needs some guidance.

    P.S - My apologies for offending anyone and going off topic but I hope Vlatko will allow posting this comment since I only intend to clarify the issue and not start an off-topic debate on it.

  39. Think you have got that the wrong way round, a lack of imagination concludes with the premises of "God did it."

    I can quite easily imagine a God, and just as easily imagine fairies and trolls. Thing is I don't put them in charge.

  40. Good point about arrogance, Julian, however I think atheists can be just as arrogant. To think that we actually KNOW anything about the ultimate nature of the universe is laughable. I see atheism as a lack of imagination, just as religious zeal is an over-used imagination. In both cases, I think a little humility is in order.

  41. This is a good documentary, well made, ponderes on interesting questions, but it has one fatal flaw: the message is B.S.
    It employes the flawed backwards logic so characteristic to creationists. Dudes, the Universe and the Earth are not finely tuned to support life. It is the other way around: life is tuned according to the Universe. How much brains do you need to see that?
    The posts above were entertaining, especially on the arguments "the unicorn's wings are blue - no no, they're pink" between the islamic and christian view.
    I can't help myself to adress just one comment to 1400 Years: the religious people claim to be creatures of an allmighty invisible being, claim to serve him, or be friends with him, while the atheists, based on evidence, claim to have evolved from apes... who's beying arrogant?

  42. why r we so curious??? i wanna know everything!!! how the life began, what happenned to Maya, the purpose of Stonehedge, who killed Kennedy n where's my grandma hiding her gems??!!! oooohhh why don't I know it all!!!???

  43. .....and if you do,proove me wrong!

  44. Our known universe is made of atoms.
    The solar systems of our universe are atoms,bilions of bilions of atoms wich togheter form a glas of water,on a table somewere,in a universe in wich the bilions and bilions of solar systems of that universe are the atoms that form a glas of water in a universe.....and so on and so forth!
    Earth is just an electron orbiting it's nucleus!
    Don't take me serious!

  45. As they say, "It's a beautiful mystery."

  46. I like this doc because it gives an interesting perspective. Everyone should consider these questions of our existence.
    I personally think that life is all over the universe, however I also think that humans need to rethink the definition of "life." It seems to me that when people call the Earth a living thing it should be meant not so much metaphorically as practically. And the same applies for stars and galaxies and atoms--if not for any biological reason then at least for the inherent organization and "intelligence" of matter.

  47. TY Mr V

  48. 1400 years

    My intent in the usage of the word "jack" was to imply that there should be a separate "forum" for this discussion - or else this thread would become like a russian doll. This would be disrespectful to people participating on the discussion - vis a vie "privileged-planet"

    I think "the arrivals" deserves its own inclusion as a valid doc on TDF and was suggesting that you promote it as such - and therein we can debate it as such.

    Great comment anyways and I would love to discuss it further but on a "forum" more contextual.

  49. Exactly Squid.

    Creationists use one or more versions of the cosmological argument (with it's inherent finite argument) which is a philosophical idea.

    If things were different (ie earth's qualities to support life) in all probability life and its forms would be different.

    This is similar to a discussion on the doc "how the universe began"

  50. I was expecting to see © Ray Comfort @ the end. There are many issues I have with this doc. Just to name a couple.
    1. When determining probability they go by earths model. Not necessarily a bad thing to do if you are looking for other planets that might have life but not a good basis for a mathematical equation for determining if planets could harbor life. It is entirely possible that life might work completely different given a different set of conditions. In the vastness of the universe there are about as many "different sets of conditions" as one could want. Even here on our own planet we have found a plethora of organisms living in conditions once thought to be too harsh for anything.

    2.The distace of the moon to the earth varies by about %10. This is what causes annular eclipses. Annular eclipses are when the sun and moon are in direct alignment but the moon does not cover the sun. It is far from perfect or miraculous.

    3. Philosophy is not science. If you want to ponder on the philosophical reasons of "why" we are here I don't have a problem with that. If you present your philosophy as science, I have problems with that. Especially when you use flawed probability to back it up.

  51. Absolutely!!

  52. Oh come on now - there is silly amounts of evidence that Madonna is evil incarnate - she kisses girls! she has allowed her bare legs to be shown - she has on occasion worn red dresses. How much evidence do you need?!!!! Get real!!!! Show the logic in your arguments you are clearly a mind control subject of the illuminati!!!!!

  53. I have also watched most of the Arrivals.

    Basically a revamp of stuff I already know about, not to much new, to me anyway. Except about the Quran.

    To much Satan this, and Satan that. Meant to scare people?? You have to be religious to be scared. Madonna a satanist? I do not think so. (LOL)

    And I agree, the Arrivals has nothing to do with this doc.

    I am sorry, but I still class religion as one big fairy tale!

  54. @ Yavanna,

    so then, while The Arrivals has [apparently] got jack to do with the doc it's posted under, at least you have - as you have admitted - a clearer understanding of world events and human existence from a different point of view; and an alternate narrative on the welter and of the why of man's history. (This is, however, not to say that everything that's shown / said / written in The Arrivals is absolute gospel; it just helps comprehend some things better / in a different way now, for many in the world who have watched it ... oh yes, and I confess, me too.) You can continue to disagree with what "Muslims" believe, and maintain your own belief / Agnosticism / Atheism / "Realism"; I don't mind nor aim to "convert" you; not me. Your faith to you; mine to mine.

    My aim, however, has always been to try to convey as clearly I can the point of view this side of the "divide", which - as you have also admitted - "... generally goes against the media concept – ie what we are shown ...". How the world is being / has been indoctrinated to hate religion(s) / the concept of God is clearly by design.

    And yes, I agree with you that there are [embarrassing] extremists in all belief systems.

    And yes, I pronounce that there are extremely silly people and books and commentators even in "Islam" - for example that idiot professor who says the Earth is flat when the Quran says it's a sphere - but please consider and research well before solidifying your opinion about any faith. I often have had to duck in embarrassment when I might have witnessed fanatic "fatwas" being broadcast on TV etc. But what and how much can one do? There are sick, black sheep in every belief system.

    However, I hope you'd agree that contention in society and contrasting ideologies are the basis for mankind's development. Contrasting ideologies are not only the sources of our development, rather opposing forces, the foundations of the universe's order, are considered sources for the advancement of the world.

    If these opposing forces in nature were absent, the order of the universe would fall apart, now wouldn't it?

    After a little phase of incordiality between us, I have a feeling that we have come to respect one another's position; agreed to disagree; to live and let live; and over all, be more tolerant of each other and be hopeful of mutual betterment. [Rather than just lambast and dismiss opposite views with little prior knowledge and understanding of the opposite views.]

    That's co-existence. That's peace[fulness]. That is growth.

    Thank you for creating this peaceful atmosphere.

  55. I have been watching the whole thing in two parts. It is over 7 hours long.

    I entered the link here on the forum on Sunday, Jan. 10th.

    It ain't here???

  56. Watched it all now (just this second finished) - I started making notes for some sort of dissertation (dunno why) but gave up around part 36 as I mostly agreed with some of the premises. (Let's hope this Mahdi bloke gets his act together soon huh?)

    I would argue a great deal of the series but to satisfy and discuss them properly would take 50 times longer than viewing the series.

    I did enjoy the series a great deal and it has raised my understanding of Islam and the muslim mindset. I would say however - if only all muslims presented such moderate thinking. Those I have met personally have. This generally goes against the media concept - ie what we are shown but there are extremists in any religion and for me - far more scary are those fundamentalist Christians within the US.

    Far too much use of "The Matrix" pseudo-pyscho-philiosophicals used in THE ARRIVALS for my taste. A good use of LOTR scenes though. Strange because I had previously considered Tolkien's works as a way to attack religions (as demonstration of concocted fairy stories). I still maintain that LOTR and especially its creation story (Silmarillion) is vastly superior to any so called holy texts and I specifically recommend all those works as must reads. Silmarillion is a must read for a truly beautiful creation story: with all the sadness of it's Satan (version's) antics. (no good story is without a villain.)

    With restraint I wont go further - especially as this has jack to do with the doc its posted under.

  57. 1400

    re: THE ARRIVALS - I`m only up to part 5 so far (of 47 youch) on wakeupproject dot com. SO far it is virtually identical in premise to the illuminati project (YT user FaShoFaSho1212) which has 263 parts! (took me quite a while)

    Possibly one has borrowed from the other - I suspect your one is the origin of a lot of the material though many of the ideas and theories are expounded throughout the Truth Movement.

    In any case - have you considered proposing this series to be included on TDF (Can be done through forums if you wasn't aware) In any case more pro Islam docs would be appreciated so as to provide the possibility of a balanced content. We are all victims of our own bias....

  58. 1400 Years:

    Apology accepted.


    The threads you put on for the forum. that did not show up, still came on my notifications, is what I meant.

  59. Yavanna, may you be blessed, and I wish you a long, healthy, and safe life.

  60. 1400 years

    Thank you for your patience and dignified response. Let me say none of what I said was intended to be personally offensive and I respect your right to belief anything you like. I will be more careful in my references in future and clear in their sources to hopefully prevent future misunderstandings and such exacerbations of ill will.

  61. @ Achems, if you felt the "bozos" was directed at you particularly, like I said earlier, then it's the way you recevied it; but, I tender my apologies anyway. I had remained polite much ever since I started on this web site, but then I guess I got peeved at the brilliant research being dished out - research that is basically based on their rebellion against all religion because of their research on the Bible (and I never wanted to touch this like this in order to avoid offending CBs beliefs.)

    And for the last time, Saudi Arabia, the wahabies, the yazeedis, the salaafis etc etc whose "Islam" is quoted and referred to, DO NOT REPRESENT THE TRUE PRACTICE OF ANY DIVINE RELIGION, LEAVE ALONE "ISLAM".

    I would highly highly highly recommend watching the internet documentary that took the internet by storm:

    THE ARRIVALS by noreagaaa

    All its parts are available on Facebook, Google Video and the wakeupproject dot com; but not very much on youtube because the Youtube admin. has been messing around with the videos.

  62. Ah, FYI, Sahih Bukhari and the other Sihah Sitta - books composed more than 150 or so years *after* the demise of the Prophet (pbuh) under the bandit-rulership of the Ummayids and Abbasids etc, and can sometimes be called joke books; here, let me help you:

    Bukhari, in the Chapter "Kitab-e-Ghusl," and Muslim in Part II of his Sahih (in the Chapter on Virtues of the Prophet Moses), and Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal in his Musnad, Part II, page 315, and others have quoted Abu Huraira as saying: "Among the Bani Isra'il it was customary to
    bathe together without clothes, so that they glanced at the genitals of one another. They did not consider it objectionable. Only the Prophet Moses went into the water alone, so that no one could see his private parts. The Bani Isra'il used to say that the Prophet Moses had defective genitals, so he avoided bathing with them. One day the
    Prophet Moses went to the river to bathe. He took off his clothes, put them over a stone, and went into the water. The stone fled with his clothes. Moses ran after the stone, naked, shouting: 'My clothes! O stone, my clothes.' The Bani Israel saw the naked Moses and said: 'By Allah! Moses has no defect in his genitals. The stone then stopped and Moses retrieved his clothes. Then Moses beat the stone so severely
    that six or seven times the stone shrieked in pain."

    Sahih Bukhari (Vol. I, in the Chapter "Fazla's-Sujud Min
    Kitabu'l-Adhan," page 100; Vol. IV, p.92 of Sahih Muslim, "Babu's-Sira Min Kitabu'r-Riqaq,"and also Sahih Muslim (Vol. I, in the Chapter "Isbatu'l-Ruyatu'l-Mu'minin Rabbahum Fi'l-Akhira," page 86); and Musnad of Imam Hanbal, Volume II, page 275: Abu Huraira says: "The clamor and violent rage of Hell will intensify, it will not calm down
    until Allah puts His leg in it. Then Hell will say, 'Stop, stop! It is enough for me; it is enough for me.'" Abu Huraira also narrates that a group of people asked the holy Prophet, "Shall we see our Creator on the Day of Judgement?" He replied, "Of course. At mid-day when the sky is free of clouds, does the Sun hurt you, if you look at it?" They
    said: "No!" Again he said: "During the nights when you see the full moon when the sky is clear, does it hurt you?" They said: "No!" He continued: "So when you see Allah Almighty on the Day of Judgement, you will not be hurt, just as you are not hurt by seeing these (the sun and the moon). When the Day of Judgement comes, it will be announced by Allah that every community should follow it's god. So everyone who has worshiped idols or anything other than Allah, The One, shall be thrust into Hell fire. So shall everyone of the good and
    bad persons be thrown into it except those who worshipped Allah, the Absolute One. They shall lie in Hellfire. At that time Allah will appear in a particular form before the people so that they can see Him. Then Allah will tell them that He is their Allah. The believers will then say, 'We take refuge in Your Godhead. We are not among those who have worshiped anything except Allah the Absolute.' Allah will say
    in reply, 'Have you any sign between you and Allah so that you may see Him and identify Him?' They will say, 'Yes.' Then Allah will show them His bare leg. Thereupon the believers will raise their heads upwards and will see Him in the same condition as they saw Him for the first time. Then Allah will say that He is their Creator. All of them will
    acknowledge that He is their Allah."

    Bukhari quotes Abu Huraira in his Sahih (Volume I, page 158 and Volume II, page 163) and again in the Chapter "Death of the Prophet Moses" and Muslim also quotes the same authority (Abu Huraira) in his Sahih, Volume II, page 309 in the Chapter "On The Merits of Moses" as saying: "The Angel of Death came to the Prophet Moses and asked him to accept
    the invitation of his Creator. Upon hearing this, Moses gave him such a slap in his face that he lost one of his eyes. So he went back to Allah and complained that he had sent him to a man who did not want to die and who had knocked out one of his eyes. Allah cured his eye and ordered him to go again to Moses and to tell him that if he wanted longer life, he should lay his hand on the back of a bull. He would live for as many years as the number of hairs that would be covered by
    his hand." Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal in his Musnad, Volume II, page 315, and Muhammad Bin Jarir Tabari in his History, Volume I, under the heading "Death of the Prophet Moses," gave the same account from Abu Huraira with the addition that up to the time of Moses, the Angel of Death used to physically separate the soul from the body. But after
    Moses gave him a slap in the face, he came unseen."

    Mesmerised Hassanain's mesmerised like do not hold Sahih Bukhari and the other five "authentic" books of Hadis as authentic; in fact, even Usul-e-Kaafi, which we consider more authentic, also has some weak "quotations of the prohphet", which we do not regard - but you are decided that we are not fair people, so I won't go there; hence, also you might like to understand why a Phd-and-beyond is required in the "Hadis - Sayings of the Prophet" by the villainous Ayatollahs of Qom, Najaf and Damascus, who then use their other PhD in Logic and Rhetoric to hyptnotise the millions of zombies through their unacademic research, books, commentaries and lectures.

  63. Achems

    Sorry mate you have what on all your email notifications? I have to confess I`m getting lost in all the insulting snipes being spewed. Seems like "someone" is incapable of appreciating the difference between the "the exegesis" of ancient religions and personal attacks....

    1400 insults,

    Thank you for finally replying personally, I asked a simple question, essentially; how is it you can say your book is scientifically accurate.

    "Hey, hey, I DO believe in science … it is very very important to me because science only proves what my religion already says."

    I "cherry picked" an obvious and easy to argue example of how wrong your sweeping statement was; that of the seven intestines matter.

    ""A believer eats in one intestine, and a kafir eats in seven intestines."

    (From Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 65, Number 305)"

    I think that was a fair question and you have been getting all upset and making bigoted sideways swipes ever since. I could just have easily have asked about the flat earth "knowledge" of Islam which was later "re-interpreted" to be the ostrich egg shaped earth. Somewhere way up above is a link to a modern Islamic Scholar explaining the earth is still flat.

    You are correct in saying that I do not understand arabic but I`m capable of reading translations and histories. Incapable however of twisting everything beyond literal meanings to just about whatever suits.

    Yes I genuinely spent a week recently examining Islam but I have learnt much more from examining your words and attitude towards others. You are everything that you insinuate non believers to be and nothing of what you ask them to be; e.g free thinking. And yes I am satisfied. Dig?


  64. 1400 years:

    Right! But Bozo is a bad word for us pseudo-intellectuals.

    I have never called you a bad word. :(

  65. Yavanna:

    I have it all on my E-mail notifications.

  66. @ yavanna,

    January 1st, 2010 at 01:25
    Reb I know yr a conspiracy nut and hate all religions – stop trying to educate me – trust me bro we are on the same page."

    January 1st, 2010 at 19:11
    Someone on another discussion said: Judaism, Christianity, Islam. All weeds from the same route. So true and all borrowed in turn from Egypt and Sumeria."

    January 6th, 2010 at 21:07
    ... That is your prerogative but I do put some effort into understanding Islam. In fact recently I spent a whole week doing so….."

    Look at how you are obstinate (and no, no offence intended there); how you are so pre-decided; the sources you pick to quote and how you write; and how you suddenly shift to claim making an "honest" quest ...

    Pardon me, but this seems to be your case:

    "And when they fall in with those who believe, they say: We believe; but when they go apart to their devils they declare: Lo! we are with you; we were only jesting."
    Chapter 2, Verse 14

    Do you think that I am actually going to be inclined to spend time explaining to you? I'm afraid, you are mistaken.

    However, if as you claim to be the "I do put some effort into understanding Islam", then put some effort in getting your "curiosity" cleared as to the contradictions in that bozo's video - that supra-intellectual youtuber who obviously has a bombastic PhD in Arabic and the Quran's Exegesis - from here:

    al-islam dot org/al-mizan/v1/

    Re the seven intestines B.S. that you keep presenting, in all my existence in this realm, in all the five degrees that I've acquired, in all my travels around the world and from all the people that I have ever met, you are the first person to have introduced me to your so-honestly well-researched B.S. about atheists / kafirs having seven intestines!

    I only hope now that you may now sleep in peace.

    Houdini Hassanain is very much a student of those schools of those murderous Mullahs of Iran, Iraq and Syria. And the core commentary on the basis of which he presents his discourse is available on the link I have provided above.


    January 6th, 2010 at 21:07
    ... I notice you never reply to anything I say. ..."

    Yes, I have been following your suggestions to watch videos and read from the link about the massacre of Banu Quraizah, but like I have said above, I am not inclined to spend time explaining that first of all, according to the basic rules of academic and scientific research, you are required to try to verify who the authors are, and who are they quoting, what is their background, what were the circumstances prevalent at the time that they wrote what they wrote, who is quoting them today and how ...

    ... but you are quite satisfied with your cherry-picking, and are so resolutely decided, so I had left you alone to your intellectual and research brilliance. Dig?


  67. @ Achems, how you [and others] pounce at ONLY SOME of the things! If you are not guilty of the pseudo-intellectualism, and the arrogance thereof, you shouldn't get so bothered, now should you?

    Don't you notice how your "friends" pick up random stuff, with literally NO knowledge of the Arabic used in the Quran, the exegesis of the Quran, authentic [Islamic] history etc to establish the veracity and the background of the verses and the history and the historians and the commentary and the commentators, yet they display this wicked audacity to query not out of curiosity to know but with the intent of rendering their "powerful" blows.

    Those whose likeness is as the likeness of one who kindles a fire, and when it sheds its light around him, He takes away their light and leaves them in darkness, where they cannot see ...

    Those are the bozos. If you include yourself among them, then you know your self best.

  68. Bozos??

    You should read a book that is almost as old as the Qur'an,"How To Win Friends And Influence People"

  69. For the intellectual bozos:

    Youtube: "The Qur'an CHALLENGE: Part2" posted by siriusfacts

  70. ... and mark his words (I paraphrase): ... anyone who deviates from the principles of humanity and adjudicates who is hell- or heaven-bound, is not following any divine religion ...

    Just as no one can / should blanket all atheists to be disicples of Stalin etc or rude and intolerant and myopic ...

    One can only hope that the obstinate bigots who have no inkling as to the source of the sources they keep citing to lay out those "ah-ha, and what do you have to say to this!" questions can register at all what Hassanain is saying in the speech.

  71. @ MaxedOutButHappy, hope the following is further able to address your query:

    Youtube: “What Do Muslims Think of Jews Event” posted by ShababAlMehdi

  72. 1400

    Thank you for those debates. It is rare that such can be found where muslim scholars can put their faith to refute. Even so they are all on home ground with totally mind controlled audiences.

    I have become an instant fan of Hassanain Rajabali as a result. He truly is an enormously charismatic individual and a great speaker (till he stops getting his own way and gets rambunctious)

    I notice you never reply to anything I say. Is this because I ask questions of your faith that are too difficult to answer? That is your prerogative but I do put some effort into understanding Islam. In fact recently I spent a whole week doing so..... and it was ouch....

    Please note that I do not attack you but I do reserve the right to point out fallacies in your arguments such as the one I quoted about - iota , blah blah science Quran....

    This might sway your beliefs that it hasn't changed one iota. Maybe after you would kindly answer my polite question about the infidels having 7 intestines issue. However - I do doubt you will - You ask others to be free minded in watching your video's which I have done. The reverse is in no way expected.

    PS re your above comment about people with PHDs - are there any Ayatollahs with PHDs that dont in some way qualify in anything other than islamic / theist views apart fromn Logic?

    I can understand the logic one. You would have to be a genius in that in order to convince oneself and argue the material at hand.... but the one word you dont seem to understand is science.

  73. Even more intense among four:
    Youtube: "Theist Vs Atheist Debate: Does God Not Exist? 2"

  74. Youtube: "Theist Vs Atheist Debate: "Does God Not Exist?" posted by Halomaster7

  75. yavanna:

    Yes, that was on "How Did The Universe Begin"

    December 6th, 2009 at 00:20

  76. Hey, hey, I DO believe in science ... it is very very important to me because science only proves what my religion already says.

    And re the scientific method, the way the exegesis on the Quran is conducted, Achems, is as scientific and thorough as it can get. The Ayatollahs of Iran, Iraq and Syria who do the research and who are so demonized qualify ... now read carefully ... qualify through seven (yep, 7) PhDs after spending 10 years of study in a Bachelors program, 10 in a Masters, in Qom, Najaf and Damascus ... and later those peer-reviewed PhDs are in:
    - Jurisprudence
    - The Laws of Jurisprudence
    - Logic
    - Islamic History
    - Arabic Language and Literature
    - Exegesis of the Quran, and
    - Hadees - Sayings and deeds of the Prophet

    without the scientific qualifications in which they cannot become who they are ...

    (Now wait for the spiteful sarcasm and hate that your supportive posters are going to spew upon reading this!)

    Anyway, it's good that you are fine with me believing in my belief; it's good to see you are not insulting me for my belief; good to note that you seem to acknowledge through your silence on some of my questions that what people might do in the name of faith may not be what the faith actually preaches; and that therefore, you cannot blanket the faith and all its faithful adherents as savages; ... just as you wouldn't want me to accuse all atheists and scientists of being myopic, rude, acerbic, hateful, fangy and downright arrogant even though I find that many write / talk against religions like that, right Achems?

    And I hope now at least you might be bright-minded enough to differentiate between religion; and tradition, distortion, misinterpretation and whims of men who hanker after dominion!

    Wish you likewise for the upcoming new year, which by the way, is based I think - according to the Abrahamic faith of "Christians" - on the year that Jesus was born; somehow, it feels curious how that system of dating years has gone un-hated even though it is based on a religious event. Achems, perhaps scientists should measure their new year according to the year of birth of Dr Charles Darloser or his meritorious servant Dr Rigid Dogkins or Dr Petered-out Atkins?

    Wish the very best to you.

  77. 1400 Years:

    That says it in a nutshell. As you said, you believe in it, because the Holy Quran has said so.

    That is fine with me. You can believe what you want, and it is not my place, nor is it my agenda, to sway you from your belief.

    You apparently believe in the big bang, but you do not believe in science?

    Actually they have gone beyond Planck time to the tune of a lattosecond 10 minus 18th power s, or about 10-26 power of Planck time.

    Anyway, I have no ill feelings toward you, and I wish you the best for the upcoming new year.


  78. Well, for me, I believe in it because the Holy Quran has said so; my evidence is the Quran that has not changed an iota, not a dot ever since it was revealed. It has stood the test of time. What scientists are arriving at today is what the Quran has consistently told through the centuries. So for me, that constant book is more reliable as a Word of evidence; but that's me, the caveman - you and your like have declared me and my like to be delusional - so no more argument on that front.

    You and your like-minded on these fora claim much more enlightenment, so come out with it and explain, my dear.

    And then I ask you, if you cannot define time, why do you not dismiss it?

    If you may not believe in the Big Bang, why haven't you attacked the scientists yet - the great brainy Dr Rigid Dogkins, for instance?

    Planck Time ... hmmm ... have scientists managed to go beyond Planck Time? Correct me if I am wrong, but do they not say they cannot go BEYOND the Planck Time? - so then if it is true, what I am trying to ask is this: Whose limitation is this incapability to go beyond the Planck's Time? What does it explain?

    The non-existence of something that might exist beyond Planck's Time, or your few ounces of cerebrum that has limited comprehension, however fantastic and magnificent and complex it is?

    How does the scientists' incapability to go beyond Planck's Time yet convince the enlightened know-alls of this planet that a Creator who is BEYOND TIME AND SPACE does not exist??

    You have said often with vehement conviction here that you do not believe in the existence of God (am I wrong?); why do you proclaim so when you have no evidence as to His non-existence, when it is you who cannot venture beyond Planck's Time, and whatever else that they will discover that they cannot go beyond when they manage to go beyond Planck's Time??

    Kindly do not give me the argument that "at this point in time, we cannot; may be in future we might be able to go beyond Planck's Time." ...

    ... Because I would ask you, how could all that inanimate cosmos that does not have a brain (/intelligence), manage to create itself into such an extremely complicated system that despite our next-level supercomputers and Artificial Intelligence and space probes and PhDs, we find it so difficult to unravel the universe, and now beyond the Planck's Time???

    ... Because I would ask you, as I have before elsewhere, if in the end you are to explain a process or a fact, DOES THAT EXPLAIN AWAY THE CREATOR OF THAT PROCESS OR REALITY??

    1. It is not the responsibility of anyone to disprove the existence of anything - which cannot be done anyway - it is upon the ones who say something DOES exist to prove it does.
      If I say 'there is a fence at the end of the universe', then it is me who has to prove that claim. It is not the responsibility of you or anyone else to prove that this is not the case.
      Regarding time and all the other things you mentioned which cannot be seen or touched: I might not be able to do so - but I can see their effects on my environment. This environment of course depends wholly on my perception - still it is the only basis of experience I have - or anyone else has for that matter.
      Science is based on observation, logic, and repeatable experiments. Faith is not - you believe - or don't. There might be something, and since I cannot disprove it I am agnostic.
      Prove the existence of an almighty being to me. If you can't - well, it's not my responsibility to disprove it.

  79. 1400 Years:

    How do you know there was a big bang, maybe there was nothing, and there is nothing now.

    All a great big illusion, a big dream.

    Nobody knows what was before the singularity. not now, not ever.

    Beyond our 5 senses, are unlimited multidimensional realities that co-exist with our own, vibrating at Planck time.

    I have no evidence, just as you have no evidence.

  80. @ Achems

    "But time is also eternal" ...

    How can you say this / how can this be said? They said there was a beginning - the Big Bang (which is true, no doubt). If there was a beginning, there may be an end too, no?

    And again, how can you say time is "also" eternal; either it is finite or eternal, but not both.

    And then again, if it is "also" eternal, how do you know it is not finite? What's the evidence? And what's the scientific evidence that it is eternal? Has any scientist proven its infiniteness?

    Or even its finiteness?

    If the Big Bang happened, how did it trigger time when the sun(s) and the moon(s) and the planets didn't exist yet; when those inanimate bodies in space were still deciding what role to take on for themselves in the cosmos; when the earth was still hurtling away towards it present location in space, and when it hadn't yet aligned itself at a tilt, and to so spin as to give us the "day and night", thus perhaps(?) the concept of time?

    When, as you can see, you cannot really lay a finger anywhere on what is time, you have such confident faith in it that you even declare yourself to be its product!!

    You have such faith in such a REALITY yet you write so paradoxically about it, and want "four-year old max." and "unreasonably indoctrinated" existences such as Charles B. and myself (and I do not know if Sarah is now being included by those TDF sages in this our exclusive cavemen's club) to swallow your scientifically-arrived at and scientifically "near"-definite wisdom on time.

    And then you say you do believe in senses beyond the five that you have; now then tell me, how many other senses are there beyond the five that we know that make you convinced that those "beyond-the-five-senses" senses exist. What and where are they?

    And do enlighten me about how YOU developed it / them. What kind of bio-feedback did you or your forefathers give to themselves that they so sharpened those senses beyond the five-senses that you now boast you possess and KNOW they exist?

    And predict for me the development of what next sense you think you would trigger such that over the next few centuries they would become perfect that scientists would do mega PhDs on; I ask this because after all, WE evolved [ourselves], didn't we, on the basis of our changing environment - so then, tell, what are you choosing to have to evolve within you now so that over millennia, you would have off-spring that would have some new and highly-defined and intelligent senses beyond the known senses?

    I really need answers, WITH EVIDENCE, please.

    And mark this: I will only interact with you if you remain polite and respectful; otherwise, enjoy the company of those highly acerbic and extremely rude know-all commentators who you've been gleefully applauding in the discussions on the various posts on this web site; you know those who abhor "religionists" for their massacre of mankind over the millennia, but who themselves are unable to read into their own venomous hatred that so spews their writing.

    Which makes me think: should I now blame atheism for those spiteful, rude characters, or should I blame the respective individuals for their behaviour?

    But anyway ...

    1. I am not too sure if there was a Big bang or not.
      The recent observation that the universe's speed of expansion is increasing seems to show that there was no initial 'explosion'.
      Google 'Thunderbolts of the Gods' - there is also a video on YouTube.

      Thank you btw for your very interesting comments - I think I learned more about Islam reading them than I did all the time before - which is 47 years now.

    2. I am watching it now...seems much more realistic explaination of things...which as most scientists will say the simplest most obvious explaination is usually the correct one.


  81. oh well there my arrogance is showing as I have replied in comment which was not intended for my reply nor adressed to the right individual I am signing off of myself

  82. I utilized both yours and our dear friends comments to illistrate we are not so different as we may believe

  83. I assure we see eye to eye 1400

  84. 1400 Years:

    We are a product of time. To not to believe in time means that we would not be here. At least not in this reality.

    But time is also eternal, we are caught in our "now's", which are static and which move along seemingly as a fluid momentum, one "now" after another, thus it gives us our illusion of time. We do not live in the past nor in the future, only in our "now's". There actually is no past or future. It is always "now" period!

    You think that I do not know that there is much more beyond our 5 senses?
    You think that all I believe are only what my 5 senses can pick up?

    Well I tell you, you have the wrong guy.

    You do not know the answers to life and existence, neither do I.
    Neither does anybody!

  85. I AM is the name given to what is(unfortunately the original aramaic is not translated to this page).
    Acems Razor " It is what it is because of our collective mindsets to coalesce it into our reality" Can we deny the sky is blue? Is the sky blue to us all? Can you define blue? As an indivual we could awnser yes or no to any one of these questions. Does that make the awnser any more or less true? (Forgive me 1400 as I take liberty with your statement) The obstacle is arrogance,the refusal to register that we are ignorant. We see only that which we are capable of seeing in this space, in this time. We choose to believe or disbelive in possibility or impossibility. Was there always a Starry Night? Is that which is painted simply paint to canvas? Is perspective irrelevant? Is intention inconsequenstial or essential to progress? Is hope frivilous or pertinent to purpose? Is faith unfounded by the lack of what could be held in ones hand or seen by the eye? If so could we not deduce that quantum mechanics is as much a fairy tale as "The Princess and the Pea" Who here can base there opinion soley on the inquiries of others? Who can state, I AM THE PEA! as evidenced by our understanding of the molecular world."We are the music makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams" If so Willy Wonka did your oompa loompas magically manifest into existence the cocoa bean , or was it not there from the start, and where were you? What hand did you play that you may so boldly confess a copywright on chocolate? Did you not take what was there, make it your own than decide to share your creation based upon profit? I confess I AM THE PEA. As a pea I was planted by the intention to grow. I am small. I dont know squat. I couldnt tell you if I am green or if and when I will be thrown into a pot. I didnt see who planted me.I dont taste too sweet, but by what is added or witheld as my existance progresses in this time,in this space, my taste and texture may change. I am only a pea but I have a purpose. I can provide. " A little nonsense now and then can educate the wisest men " but I, I am only a pea. I am greatfull to be.

  86. @ Sarah

    So then, you can clearly see how vaguely time has been "defined"; yet they believe in it.

    I ask, if time is undefinable, and time cannot be seen, and time cannot be proved, would it therefore be correct for these enlightened highly scientific minds to declare that time does not exist??

    Then there is this "I think therefore I am" attempted definition of "I am". Show the thinking. If you cannot see it or show it, are you therefore not?

    They say this is my arm. This is my head. In there is my brain. Define "my" i.e., who is that "me" then because only a possessive are indicated for the possessions but who is that "me / my / I"?

    Would our wise commentators who have so seen it all and understood it all, dismiss their own existence?? No, they will never come to that despite the fact that time, the blue sky, "I" are quite undefinable; yet also they never reject / discard any of these entitites.

    Their problem - which their arrogance will not let them register - is that they think and see and believe only in the existence of things that are within this time and space; why don't they think that there may be something beyond time and space; just something else beyond these two entities?

    But they are so resolute, so definite, and so rude in their remarks, so arrogant that they cannot see beyond their illusory, and delusional selves.

    They dismiss the existence of the Creator because He cannot be defined and because He cannot be seen; why not the other things that they cannot define or see?

    Deaf, dumb and blind, they will return not [to The Truth].

  87. Sarah:

    Why is the sky blue?

    It is not blue. For one thing blue means nothing, just a word. We give it a name. We perceive the sky as blue, with our senses.
    It is a prism of colors.

    Blue happens to be a short wavelength that we perceive as blue with our retinas.

    There are all kinds of explanations if you google it. But that is science.

    It is what it is because of our collective mindsets to coalesce it into our reality as blue, therefore we give it a name.

  88. Sarah:

    I think! Therefore I think! "I AM"!!

  89. LOL It is not a question Vlatko, just a little aramaic. Thank you for the opportunity to self educate and debate!

  90. "I AM"????,

  91. Achems Razor "There is no concise answer".... Precisely! Time is defining and yet indefinable, a tangible illusion.Is this not life as we exist? We reference Copernicus, Michio Kaku,Stephen Hawking,William of Occam,Einstein,Carl Jung,Vedic texts,Islamic, Judaic, New Testament scriptures. Are we not but babes of this reality, seekig a truth we have possessed all along. Truth is a personal perspective...... My Dad can beat up your Dad!(religious zealot)From this statement, we can grow from a proud child to a rebellious teen with abandonment issues(atheist).I wonder if it is possible to shed arrogance and mature to our intended purpose,a well balanced reflection supported by goodlight.
    Atheist,Confused,I challenge all to awnser.. Is the sky blue?

  92. Sara:

    Time is an illusion, there is no definite or tangible answer. There is no concise answer. Nobody can give you what you are asking or looking for. BUT!

    There are theories, Google "Julian Barbour" a theoretical physicist
    on his book, "The End Of Time".

    If you want to delve further, Google "Quantum Theory, what is time"

  93. 1400....I now quote for those seeking as we all have and will continue...." I SHALL PROVE TO BE WHAT I SHALL PROVE TO BE "..." TELL ME IF YOU KNOW UNDERSTANDING ".... Again I ask for those who claim to posses an awnser....Define Time.

  94. 1400 Years: Thank you.

    It is divided into 114 chapters. Each chapter, called a Sura / Surah in Arabic, consists of a number of verses, each verse being called an Ayat. Some chapters were wholly or largely revealed to the Holy Prophet during the first 13 years of his mission when he lived in Makka (Mecca), and the rest after his emigration to the city of Madina (Medina). Chapters generally revealed at Makka are called Makki, and those revealed at Madina are called Madani. While the chapters are of varying lengths, the Holy Quran is also divided into 30 almost equal parts, each part being known as a "juz". This division is simply to enable a reader to complete a reading of the Holy Book in one month.

    2. ONLINE
    worldwideweb dot al-islam dot org forward slash Quran

  96. 1400 years: How is the Quran divided? Is it divided into books like the Bible, or is it just one large work? I would like to know just in case I want to look something up you mention from time to time. Is there a Quran on-line as I don't have one myself at the moment?

  97. @ Sarah

    Smart question yours, but ...:

    "13. And when it is said to them: Believe as the people believe they say: Shall we believe as the fools believe? Now surely they themselves are the fools, but they do not know.

    14. And when they meet those who believe, they say: We believe; and when they are alone with their devils, they say: Surely we are with you; we were only mocking.

    15. God shall pay them back their mockery, and He leaves them alone in their inordinacy, blindly wandering on.

    16. These are they who buy error for the right direction, so their bargain shall bring no gain, nor are they the followers of the right direction.

    17. Their parable is like the parable of one who kindled a fire but when it had illumined all around him, God took away their light, and left them in utter darkness - they do not see.

    18. Deaf, dumb (and) blind, so they will not turn back."

    Al-Quran 2: 13-18

  98. Define Time

  99. 1400 Years: That comment reminds me of a cartoon I saw online lampooning the whole banana clip in a similar way. Funny stuff.

  100. On the video link, the comment by “Princeofpot420? is also food [indeed!] for thought for our smart alecs.

  101. You'd better not show that crocoduck to anyone, nick. Remember, the crocoduck is the only thing that can prove evolution, because according to EVILution, crocodile -> crocoduck -> duck.

  102. you athiest bastards, carry on like that and I'm going to set my crocoduck onto you guys

  103. Shame on YOU Danny and Vlatko! Atheist liars removed the first part of that video. If you view it all in its proper context, Ray Comfort is actually showing how a banana is designed like a coke can, fitting perfectly in the human hand with a tab for easy opening. This obviously makes it completely different!

    Nah, just kidding. That guy is hilarious. Right on par with peanut butter creationism.

  104. 1400 Years: Thank you very much for the article and the links. I've read your posts and will look up your links as time allows.

    Charles B. Vanilla bean with strawberry topping.

    Achems Razor: Oh, I see. We've given the stars names based on our own interpretation of them. Ok. I'm thinking about going to visit my mom for a while. We'll see.

    Vlatko: Always a great website as usual!


  105. 1400 years:

    I know many Christian woman who think the same way and enjoy "being a woman" in the traditional housewife sense. It's nice to be able to choose that option if you want it.

    I liked your article as I'm a bit lazy to look up the links as I'm sure 98% of other commenters would be too. I'm sure Vlatko will cut you a little slack.

    Kelly K: Ok smarty pants! I bet you can't tell me my favorite icecream and topping, now can you?!? Everything else is pretty spot on, however about Christmas and the birth of Christ being special. ;-)

  106. @ Vlatko,

    Apologies for the repeated(!) violation of the rules of your web site - posting an entire article from another web site; perhaps you might agree that I may be correct in claiming that I can't help it:

    I have made much of the article bold; an eyesore, I know, but may be somebody might read those parts well!


    Written by Yvonne Ridley
    Tuesday, 31 October 2006

    POLITICIANS AND JOURNALISTS just love to write about the oppression of women in Islam ... without even talking to the females beneath the veil.

    They simply have no idea how Muslim women are protected and respected within the Islamic framework which was built more than 1400 years ago.

    Yet, by writing about cultural issues like child brides, female circumcision, honor killings and forced marriages they wrongly believe they are coming from a point of knowledge.

    And I am sick of Saudi Arabia being cited as an example of how women are subjigated in a country where they are banned from driving.

    The issues above have simply nothing to do with Islam yet they still write and talk about them with an arrogant air of authority while wrongly blaming Islam. Please do not confuse cultural behavior with Islam.

    I was asked to write about how Islam allows men to beat their wives. Sorry, not true. Yes, I'm sure critics of Islam will quote random Qur'anic verses or ahadith but all are usually taken out of context. If a man does raise a finger to his wife, he is not allowed to leave a mark on her body ... this is another way of the Qur'an saying; "Don't beat your wife, stupid".

    Now let's take a glance at some really interesting statistics, hmm. I can almost hear the words pot, kettle, black. According to the National Domestic Violence Hotline, four million American women experience a serious assault by a partner during an average 12-month period.

    On the average, more than three women are murdered by their husbands and boyfriends every day ... that is nearly 5,500 women battered to death since 9/11.

    Some might say that is a shocking indictment on such a civilized society, but before I sound too smug, I would say that violence against women is a global issue. Violent men do not come in any particular religious or cultural category. The reality is that one out of three women around the world has been beaten, coerced into sex or otherwise abused during her lifetime. Violence against women transcends religion, wealth, class, skin color and culture.

    However, until Islam came on the scene women were treated as inferior beings. In fact we women still have a problem in the West where men think they are superior. This is reflected in our promotion and wages structure right across the spectrum from cleaners to career women who make it into the boardroom.

    Western women are still treated as commodities, where sexual slavery is on the rise, disguised under marketing euphemisms, where womens’ bodies are traded throughout the advertising world. As mentioned before, this is a society where rape, sexual assault, and violence on women is commonplace, a society where the equality between men and women is an illusion, a society where womens’ power or influence is usually only related to the size of her breasts.

    I used to look at veiled women as quiet, oppressed creatures and now I look at them as multi-skilled, multi-talented, resilient women whose brand of sisterhood makes Western feminism pale into insignificance. My views changed after the truly terrifying experience of being arrested by the Taleban for sneaking into Afghanistan in September 2001 wearing the bhurka.

    During my 10-day captivity I struck a deal that if they let me go I would read the Quran and study Islam. Against all the odds, it worked and I was released. In return I kept my word but as a journalist covering the Middle East I realized I needed to expand my knowledge of a religion which was clearly a way of life.

    And no. I'm not a victim of Stockholm Syndrome. To be a victim you have to bond with your captors. During my imprisonment I spat, swore, cursed and abused my jailers as well as refusing their food and going on hunger strike. I don't know who was happier when I was released - them or me!

    Reading the Quran was, I thought, going to be a very simple academic exercise. I was stunned to discover that it clearly stated women are equal in spirituality, education and worth. A woman’s gift for child birth and child-rearing is very much recognised as a quality and attribute. Muslim women say with pride they are homemakers and housewives.

    Furthermore The Prophet (pbuh) said that the most important person in the home was The Mother, The Mother, The Mother. In fact he also said that heaven lies at the feet of the mother. How many women make it into the top 100 power lists for simply being a "great mother"?

    With Islam choosing to remain at home and raise children takes on a new dignity and respect in my eyes, similar to those sisters among us who choose to go out to work and have careers and professions.

    I then began looking at inheritance, tax, property and divorce laws. This is where Hollywood divorce lawyers probably get their inspiration from. For instance the woman gets to keep what she earns and owns while the man has to stump up half his worth.

    Isn’t it funny the way the tabloid media gets very excited over the prospect of some pop or film stars pre-nuptial wedding agreement? Muslim women have had wedding contracts from day one. They can choose if they want to work or not and anything they earn is theirs to spend while the husband has to pay for all the household bills and the upkeep of his family.

    Just about everything that feminists strived for in the 70s was already available to Muslim women 1400 years ago.

    As I said, Islam dignifies and brings respect to motherhood and being a wife. If you want to stay at home, stay at home. It is a great honor to be a home maker and the first educater of your children.

    But equally, the Quran states if you want to work, then work. Be a career woman, learn a profession become a politician. Be what you want to be and excel in what you do as a Muslim because everything you do is in praise of Allah (swt).

    There is an excessive, almost irritating concentration or focus on the issue of Muslim womens’ dress particularly by men (both Muslim and non-Muslim).

    Yes, it is an obligation for Muslim women to dress modestly but, in addition, there are many other important issues which concern Muslim women today.

    And yet everyone obsesses over the hijab. Look, it is part of my business suit. This tells you I am a Muslim and therefore I expect to be treated with respect.

    Can you imagine if someone told a Wall Street executive or Washington banker to put on a t-shirt and jeans? He would tell you his business suit defines him during work hours, marks him out to be treated seriously.

    And yet in Britain we have had the former Foreign Secretary Jack Straw describing the nikab - the face veil revealing only the eyes - as an unwelcome barrier. When, oh when, will men learn to keep their mouths shut over a woman's wardrobe?

    We also had Government Ministers Gordon Brown and John Reid express disparaging remarks about the nikab - both these men come from over the Scottish Borders where men wear skirts!!

    Then we had a series of other parliamentarians enter the fray describing the nikab as a barrier for communication. What a load of nonsense. If this was the case can anyone explain to me why cell phones, landlines, emails, text messaging and fax machines are in daily use? Who listens to the radio? No one switches off the wireless because they can not see the face of the presenter.

    The majority of sisters I know who choose to wear the nikab are actually white, Western reverts who no longer want the unwelcome attention of those few leering men who will try and confront females and launch into inappropriate behavior. Mind you, there are a couple of London sisters I know who say they wear the nikab at anti-war marches because they can't stand the smell of spliffs.

    I am afraid Islamophobia has become the last refuge of the racist scoundrel. But the cowardly, chauvinistic attacks launched - largely by men - is unacceptable to Muslimahs (Muslim women) as well as their secular, female sisters from the left.

    I was a feminist for many years and now, as an Islamic feminist, I still promote womens' rights. The only difference is Muslim feminists are more radical than their secular counterparts. We all hate those ghastly beauty pageants, and tried to stop laughing when the emergence of Miss Afghanistan in bikini was hailed as a giant leap for women's liberation in Afghanistan.

    I've been back to Afghanistan many times and I can tell you there are no career women emerging from the rubble in Kabul. My Afghan sisters say they wish the West would drop its obsession with the bhurka. "Don't try turning me into a career woman, get my husband a job first. Show me how I can send my children to school without fear of them being kidnapped. Give me security and bread on the table," one sister told me.

    Young feminist Muslimahs see the hijab and the nikab as political symbols as well as a religious requirement. Some say it is their way of showing the world they reject the excesses of Western lifestyles such as binge drinking, casual sex, drug-taking etc.

    Superiority in Islam is accomplished through piety, not beauty, wealth, power, position or sex.

    Now you tell me what is more liberating. Being judged on the length of your skirt and the size of your cosmetically enhanced breasts, or being judged on your character, mind and intelligence?

    Glossy magazines tell us as women that unless we are tall, slim and beautiful we will be unloved and unwanted. The pressure on teenage magazine readers to have a boyfriend is almost obscene.

    Islam tells me that I have a right to an education and it is my duty to go out and seek knowledge whether I am single or married.

    No where in the framework of Islam are we told as women that we must do washing, cleaning or cooking for men - but it is not just Muslim men who need to re-evaluate women in their home. Check out this 1992 exert from a Pat Robertson speech revealing his views on empowered women. And then you tell me who is civilized and who is not.


    Here is an American man living in a pre-Islamic age who needs to modernize and civilize. People like him are wearing a veil and we need to tear that veil of bigotry away so people can see Islam for what it is.


    P.S. Anybody want me to cut-and-paste her bio as well, or will you care to find it out for yourselves? It's important to read the background of such writers lest it is conjectured that they write under the nozzle of an Ak-47, a dagger or the drooling dick of a violent, domineering "Islamist" male.

  107. Kelly K:

    I will give you the bare minimum, of what I meant, everything is in the Doc.

    The constellations were anthromorpized, or personified as figures or animals. Early civilizations personified elaborate myths in their movements and relationships.

    The Sun was Gods Sun. the light of the World etc: etc: of which through preceding eons there were many.

    Now our latest IE: "Solar Messiah" is astrological, as where all. The star in the east is Sirius, the brightest star in the night sky on Dec. 24th is aligned with the three brightest stars on Orion's Belt, called today what they were called in ancient times, the 3 Kings.

    The three Kings and Sirius all point to the place or sunrise on Dec. 25th. This is why the the 3 Kings follow the star in the east, in order to locate the sunrise. The birth of the Sun-"Gods Sun"

    Do not get me wrong I love Xmas also, I just never classed it as religious.


  108. @ Kelly K, I address you here:

    You have now invited me to express myself bluntly: unfortunately (for you) you continue to make your remarks when you have [may I say "absolutely"?] no knowledge or understanding of God / Quran / the Abrahamic faith / "motivational factors" / virgins / martyrs etc. You base your tidbits on the malignant information / opinions / "knowledge" doled out to you by Fox News and the likes of Rurpert Murdoch's oh-so-objective media, and on your schooling, and on your "mainstream" publishing houses and newspapers.

    While you write "Respectfully, as always", I have to say there is a hint of arrogance in your ignorance.


    Because you continue to ask but don't seem to find the time / (inclination?) first to go through the links / information you request.

    However, for your convenience, here's a fiesty feminist, an educated, British-born British white caucasian woman, journalist, free to travel and party and debauch, who reverted to becoming an idiot, and gave herself up to become one of the future reconditioned virgins of some fanatical "Islamist" martyr.

  109. Yavanna:

    I know you're just making your point from a woman's persective, but Islam is still a "man's world" even if they say it's not. We just have to accept that. The 70 virgins are not for everyone, and espeically not for women. The 70 virgins are for martyers of the faith that give their lives in service of Allah in Jihad. Let's hope they aren't exchanged daily for new ones.

    It's a motivational factor for young men to bravely "give it all" and therefore cowardly Muslims or those that die otherwise are not permitted such indulgence and "reward". I've never heard such promised to women, even if they are themselves martyrs also. You're right one man's enough. 70 sound a bit "messy" as you say. They would never pick up their own socks and underware for all of eternity! ;-) That's no reward for me!

    1400 years: Correct my understanding of the situation (briefly) if I missed something, sans the girl talk.


    P.S. Hey! I just realized something; I don't know what happens to "coweredly" Muslims when they die. Do they burn in Hell? What concept does Islam have for punishment of the cowardly or of infidels in the afterlife?

    Respectfully as always,


  110. Achems Razor:

    The birth of Christ is not Christmas which did come later. I've heard that for years. But if you believe that the birth of Jesus was a special event planned by God, as Charles B. certainly does, then proof of the historic Biblical star is very significant if indeed something out of the ordinary happened then. He's excited because he feels it backs up the Biblical account and also proves Jesus' special place in the cosmos. I think.

    It seems easy enough to research if an extraordinary happening happened (from ther perspective of Earth only) at that time. If nothing happened, then nothing happened. If if did, then it did.

    I've not yet seen Zeitgeist The Movie.“Anthropomorphized"? Break it down for me if you can. Isn't that like a talking duck in a cartoon? How can you make "human-like" a star? Can you let me know briefly without watching the Zeitgeist doc which would now be like the 12th on my "to watch" list!

    Not much time to post, but I will check back later today.


  111. Charles B:

    Your info. about Bethlehem Star is not new. it is in Zeitgeist The Movie.

    It is "Anthropomorphized".

    Christmas is a pagan holiday Charles, in reverence to Saturn, IE: "Saturnalia". Nothing at all to do with Jesus or his birth, according to sources.

    In 375 A.D. The Church of Rome under Pope Julius 1, merely announced that the birth of Christ had been "discovered" to be Dec. 25th. So that people could both worship Mithra and Jesus at the same time.

  112. 1400 years: Thank you very much. I'm on the run today.


  113. Nothing compares to our earth in the universe- How does he know? Space time is the reason we have had no proof yet. Anthropic Principle + Fermi Paradox + Panspermia = we(life) are everywhere.

    2/3 of the Universe is missing, or Antimatter, dark energy....could 2/3 of the universe be the 5th dimension? Could these thousands of 'ufo' sightings actually be from the 5th dimension trying to break through to our reality, whatever they may be, communication device, remote aircraft, dimensional transferance machine?

    'Illusions of Reality' will promote pondering also.

    Thanks Vlatko, hope you have a Merry Christmas, you deserve it. Peace, Sean.

  114. No worries @1400 Years. Comments are there. Cheers.

  115. 1400 years: If you post a post with a link, it goes for review. It might take a day for a link message to appear (or less). If you've posted something check to see if you youself can still see it with a message that it is pending review. I can't imagine anything you could say that would block it from being posted when everyone else is having a free-for-all cyber brawl and still get their posts posted.

    You're polite. I don't see why Vlatko wouldn't let them pass. There are lots of pro-Islam docs here. I wouldn't worry about your comments.

  116. 1400 Years:

    Thank you for your posts and links. I admitt that I don't know much about Islam. Does your links have information specifically about women's rights like I was hoping to hear about? I know there are plenty of Muslim women, and they are just as committed as the men to their faith, but the second class citizenship that many Westerners believe Muslim women have to experience is a hard steriotype to shake.



  117. Thank you deeply to the participants of this forum. I learned a lot just reading your posts. Peace be upon all of you.

  118. 1400 Years: Didos from me.

  119. 1400 Years:

    Thank you also, for your explanations on my Queries.

  120. Charles B:

    Thank you, for your explanations on my Queries.

  121. @ ID, re "Interesting how the quran borrows from the Bible.", ... so does the Bible follow from the Torah. Like I've already said, the Quran is the sequel; the fourth edition, after the Bible, and Muslims MUST ALSO believe in the one, true, unadulterated, original Bible, without the belief in which they CANNOT be considered to be within the folds of Islam; without absolute belief in Jesus the son of Mary (may peace be upon him and his mother), one CANNOT be considered / one CANNOT "become" Muslim; without complete belief in the prophethood of Moses (may peace be upon him) and the original, unadulterated singular version of the Torah, one CANNOT enter the folds of "Islam" - one CANNOT proclaim himself to be a Muslim. I don't understand why despite the clarification I have made in a prior post / response, you must still have quipped: "Interesting how the quran borrows from the Bible."

    @ Kelly K., (1) these recent lines can also be used to explain briefly, for now, why Islam would be considered the last edition of God's manual for mankind: because it encompasses all the previous religions, and as is evident to those who have their eyes - both internal and external - open that GRADUALLY - yes, everyone, read carefully: GRADUALLY - the entire world is arriving at what Islam (and previous Abrahamic religions) have been teaching for centuries.

    (2) Re your curiosity about the Mormon / Brigham Young's faith, ask them how UNIVERSAL is that faith; much of the good things it teaches have already been encompassed in the teachings of Abraham, Moses, Solomon, David, Jesus and Muhammad (may peace be upon them all); the Mormon faith has not brought anything "new", or furthered human existence at the spiritual, individual and societal levels. So creating offshoots of A (ONE) STRAIGHT PATH - that of the One Author, is not going to sort out matters that the human existence faces; it will not sort out the purposes of the human existence, which is nothing but complete growth at all levels of existence - spiritual, intellectual and physical.

    Number three, in order for a Book (or faith) to claim itself to be The Truth, it must stand the test of time WITHOUT any conflict within its verses and tenets. (Now don't bring in the deeds of greedy men claiming to be of certain faiths then marauding mankind in the name of their religion as your argument for blaming the religions, please!)

    Number four, the Quran - a book that has stood the test of time and remains in its original unadulterated singular version (translations may be another matter, please!) - has stated most clearly that there will be no prophet - no PROPHET - appointed by God for the guidance of mankind after Muhammed (pbuh). Every other prophet of God - from Adam and on through the 123,999 other prophets until Jesus (may peace be upon them all) - informed their peoples that after their tenure were over - after they retired - there would come another prophet from God at an appointed time and that they should then follow him. This is just like when someone retires and announces the next in line before leaving office. I can assure you that Jesus was (and still is - he is very much alive, and waiting for God's command to return to save mankind) - again - I can assure you that Jesus was a very responsible man. He wouldn't just have left his people without telling them who would come after him to be their guide. He was a responsible man like loving fathers are: they leave a will - a set of instructions to be FOLLOWED by their loved ones to the letter - after their death. Jesus would not NOT have announced who his people should have followed after he transitioned from this realm of existence. He never disobeyed the commandments of God. He only left after he had fulfilled his duties during that tenure; and one of those duties was to leave his people with instructions on who would be the next responsible hands. (I can't repeat this enough, can I!)

    @ Achems Razor, this might also help me save time by touching upon your query as well: Islam absorbs and encompasses and fine tunes the teachings of all previous wisdoms. In fact the dramatic growth of the first Muslims - who rose from total savagery and ignorance to building the fastest, most-smoothly grown empire in history - occurred when besides the teachings of the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) and the Quran, they ALSO made use of the scientific books written by Greek and other scholars. Muslims were openly encouraged to take the good knowledge from wherever they could.

    Note the following sayings of the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh):
    1. "It is incumbent upon every Muslim MAN and WOMAN to acquire knowledge."

    2. "Seek knowledge even if you have to go [all the way] to China."

    (Now if the inhabitants of Muslim lands of today do not acquire knowledge like they should, don't blame the religion please.)

    Read here some of the second chapter of the Quran!:
    "1. Alif. Lam. Mim.
    2. This is the Scripture whereof there is NO DOUBT, A GUIDANCE unto those who ward off (evil).
    3. Who believe in the Unseen, and establish worship, and spend of that We have bestowed upon them;
    4. And who believe in that which is revealed unto thee (Muhammad) and that WHICH WAS REVEALED BEFORE THEE, and are certain of the Hereafter.
    5. These depend on guidance from their Lord. These are the successful.
    6. As for the Disbelievers, whether thou warn them or thou warn them not it is all one for them; they believe not.

    - Al-Quran, Chapter 2, Verses 1-6.

    (Achems Razor & ID, I dedicate the capitalised bits of the aforementioned verses to you.)

    Thus is Islam, on the basis of the Quran, the book that stands the test of time, a claimant of Universal Truth and encompasses the teachings and scientific knowledge, among others, the petals of whose verses gradually open as the sun shines and man continues to evolve towards spiritual (and bodily) perfection.

    @ MaxedOutButHappy, I'm maxed out now; I'll resume my other reply to you. Thank you for your patience.

  122. I'll be a way from my desk for the weekend.

    1400 years: Preemptively, I admitt that I know very little about Islam. Is there any preclusions for reading the Quran? How about for a woman? Can she touch it and teach from it? I just want to know the ettiquette. It seems in Muslim countries women are poorly educated and I would say even "oppressed" at least to my Western eyes, such as in Afganistan. It this cultural, or does it have something to do with Islam's core teachings? Please explain if you will.


  123. True. Faith is not useless.
    Try thinking nothing at all, for a moment. If you can manage it, you are having an experience akin to faith.

  124. I wouldn't agree that faith is entirely useless, but it's definitely overrated. Many believe that they cannot truly live without it. They will never be swayed.

  125. I would do away with faith, Tim, its a useless commodity and only leads to confusion. Why trust in faith when you can have direct experience? Look inward. The truth of your divinity is there.

  126. Axel, can you expand on what you mean you talk about experience? Also, I think your example of faith is a gross oversimplification. There's a world of difference between hoping that someone understands what I'm saying and having absolute faith in anything. Hope or faith is as vague a concept as love. You can love pizza, you can love your friend, you can love your wife, but these are vastly different things. Just as all kinds of love are not equal, all kinds of faith are not equal.

  127. Tim, who needs faith when you have experience?! : ) You too can experience the truth. Forget about God. It´s already in you. And as for faith.... well, you hope you are understood in the forum, right? Isn´t that.... faith? : )

  128. ID: Of course the Quran borrows from the Bible. It's part of the same tradition. But I disagree that there is "no question as to God being the author of the heavens and the earth." There may be no question for you, but there obviously is for many of us. Remember that faith is only possible when there is uncertainty. If we could know the truth, there would be no need for faith. Also, I ask that out of respect for the ideas you and others hold sacred you try to minimize typographical errors. It takes only a few extra moments, and I think Christ would appreciate a little bit of effort from his followers.

  129. Interesting how the quran borrows from the Bible. Theres no question as to God being the author of the heavens and the earth but there only one medeator between God and man and man is Jesus the Christ. There is no other name by which man cane be saved.

  130. Razor: Ok. I'll look at the links, but another night. I have a bad headache and my wife is pretty sick . . . I sure hope we didn't catch the A H1N1 Novel influenza virus! Kids are fighting as normal, so they feel fine! :-)

  131. Mr. Razor: You asked:

    Charles B. What is your give and take on this? What time spans are in the Bible or is there any, I believe it was written, the new testament at least, 70 AD.

    Hum. Good question. I am very conservative about timing and authorship. No surprise, eah? I think the Old Testament Pentateuch (the Torah) or the first five books of the Bible were written by Moses and therefore sometime shortly after their Exodus around 3000 years ago roughly. I'm guesstimating roughly. Of course the part about Moses dying and beign burried by God had to be added later, unless Moses wrote about his own death prophetically.

    The history sections had to be after the times of the kings that were recorded, I would logically assume. It does seem logical that they woudl date to about the time of the Babylonian exile to include all the stories.

    After adding the other prophetic books were timing is more clear like Jerimiah and Isaiah, then for about 400 years there is zilch. This is the time when the Maccabees, etc. were making history, but their exploints are not contained in cannonized athoritative texts.

    The time of Christ came about 400 years later at roughly 2,000 years ago as our current timeline indicates. Jesus died about 35 A.D. (which is an oximoron as A.D. stands for "afer death") so that is a fuzzy period.

    But, after saying all that, Yes! Very good! The New Testament was being penned about 70 A.D. by those that realized that it need to be written down and recorded. John and the Book of Revelation is one of the last, and of course Paul's writings right before he was beheaded.

    Of course we don't have any 1st century copies of the texts, but we do have some very old fragments dating several hundreds of years after the fact, and I've been told we can piece the whole New Testament together entirely from quotes in early church works if we had no texts of the early Biblical scripts themselves. It was that widely quoted in early church history.

    1400 years:

    You sound like the real deal when it comes to a Muslim believer. Very interesting.

    I've been reading what you've been writing but I just wish a person of such passion such as yourself were a Christian such as myself. I've always had respect for passion. What an ally you would make if you would but rethink your understanding of who Jesus was, and still is.

    You have to understand that many people, including myself are very ignorant of the Quran, and then you have to consider just like child molesting priests give Catholic clergy a bad image to the rest the world, so to do the Muslims that blow up city buses and the such with kids and old women doing their shopping on Saturday morning.

    Be understanding of such, so people may not be really out for a fight, but some are scared and others are angry and in at least their own minds, they have good reason to be.


    1. AD stands for 'anno domini' = 'year of the Lord'

  132. 1400 Years:

    Just to let you know, I did watch all your ten links on The Divine Book to gain more insight.

    I liked the 4th one, about the Emperor Constantine, that was something that I believed. I was amazed this corresponded to my belief. To Christianity it would be, and is, considered blasphemy.

    Charles B:

    Why don't you look at the links and give me and us, your input?

  133. hmm.. to deny the existence of god... the existnce of a power more powerful than you... i would suggest look at your body. has it not grown? and tell me....did you make it so?
    god is all things. it is a magnificent and wonderful reality for all beings, sentient and inconscient alike.
    " every particle, molecule, atom, cell of matter there live hidden and work unknown all the omniscience of the Eternal and all the omnipotence of the infinite." - Sri Aurobindo
    look within. with love. : ) o what wonders there abide! : )

  134. Correction: *punishment is NOT there to attain pleasure.*

    So then, returning to whether and why Jews and Christians are to be "most mercilessly massacred" by God:

    No, that is not true.

    But again, before I explain the Jews / Christians part, let me introduce you to a chapter in the Quran called The Hypocrites - Al-Munafiqoon (Chapter 63), i.e. referring to the hypocrites among "Muslims".



    Okay, people, I'm fuzzy with sleep at the moment after a long day; and I'll return late tomorrow too; and Kelly K. is already having kittens that I have skipped her / his question. :-P

    Kelly K. and Achems Razor, I shall respond to your queries / remarks soon as I can, and as best I can; and MaxedOut- I shall continue to address the remaining part of your post. Please be patient with me ...

    Zzzzz ...

  135. @ MaxedOutButHappy:

    1. Re "Are you sure that the Jews and the Christians are not the correct word of God?":

    The practising Jews and the practising Christians, practicing the true word of the ["Say: He is Allah (God), the One!; Allah (God), the eternally Besought of all!; He begetteth not nor was He begotten; And there is none comparable unto Him.] God, are very much the correct word of God. Please see the series The Divine Book.

    2. Re "It seems the image of God from the Bible and the image of Allah in the Quran are different."

    Incorrect. The Muslims and the Jews do not consider Jesus as the son of God; only the Christians do so. Therefore, do challenge the Judaic image of God / Allah / Elohim; if you notice a discrepancy between the "God" of Judaism and the "God" of Islam, do enlighten me.

    Re what the Quran says (and so what Muslims understand about Jesus and the Virgin Mary, please read the Quran, particularly the Chapter called Maryam (Mary).)

    3. Re "I know some people feel the God of the Jewish Torah and the Christian New Testament are not compatable either, but in the Torah, the God who comes in judgement also shows great mercy and in the New Testament, the God of mercy promises ultimate judgement for the evil, but we are not asked to do the judgment ourselves. It’s left to God to control and decied."

    I would reiterate that you read the Quran as well to find out the exact "compatibility" between the God-concept in the Torah and the Quran.

    Re the "Islamic God" being merciless, oh please!
    (a) The VERY FIRST statement that a Muslims proclaims before proceeding with doing any(good)thing is: In the name of God, the Merciful, the Beneficent.

    (b) It is incorrect to assume that Islam asks Muslims to pass judgements about who is heaven- or hell-bound. That is a judgement for God to pass; not any of us.
    Those who do so, are responsible for their deed. Not the religion itself. If you are convinced that the Taliban and their like are representations of Islam, I'd ask you to stop reading and watching stuff off Rupert Murdoch's media, and fast mentally for a while to shed the toxins of media indoctrination. I'm sure you know better!

    4. Re "With the Quran, it seems like Allah is very violent. Why would he want to destroy the Jews and the Christians whom he previously worked through before Islam?"

    Read the Quran please.

    Where does it say that Muslims are absolved of sin and punishment? In fact, now at the risk of sounding confrontational, I'd venture to say that it is "Christianity" that seems to purport that Christians are absolved (I studied Christianity in High School) and are heaven-bound because Jesus shed his blood and died for the(ir) sins, thus saving (them).

    Islam has no such notion. Each individual is responsible for themselves; hence the appropriation of reward and punishment according to a person's deeds.

    This too, needs much clarification. It seems that that violent God revels in sadistic pleasure, doesn't it? That's what people say. Unfortunately, they refuse to first of all believe in life in the Hereafter, the concept of death, the interim period between death and the next resurrection and Judgement Day, and what all that procedure and process entails.

    It's a long subject, isn't it; so I'll just address it briefly: Punishment is there to attain pleasure; it is wash the soul of the damage it commits upon itself. Think of it like a grandmaster training his disciple in the art of the samurai. They have to undergo intense, rigorous discipline - which is painful and painstaking; but ultimately, what you get is a highly polished individual.

    Much also like the black, crude substance extracted from mines; which when polished and washed and polished and washed becomes a sparkling diamond.

    Therefore, in order to attain the nearness of God, Who is Pure and Chaste, one has to undergo the purification / polishing process. The process may be much less painful if one abstains from blasphemy and debauchery and misdeeds in this most brief exitance in their apparent realm.

    ... continued ...

  136. 1400 Years: You missed my question about what precludes Islam from being replaced by something new just as it has replaced the older edition of Christianity. If you want to persuade others in this forum, that is a good place to start for clarification.


  137. @ MaxedOutButHappy, I ask you the following questions instead (and before I might answer your questions):

    1. Have YOU ACTUALLY read the Quran yourself and found out if the "God of the Quran" is "just violent" and "so different from the God of the Torah and the Bible"?

    2. Do you ask me your questions because you want to learn (another / an extended point of view of a major world religion), or is it because you just want to score a point?

    3. Have you ACTUALLY looked through the series The Divine Book I recommended to Charles B. and Achems Razor?

    4. Have you actually ever tried to consider the common ground among the religions of the world, particularly among "Judaism", "Christianity" and Islam?

    If you have at all, perhaps you would be putting your questions differently.

    P.S. 1: Before you think I am shunning your questions because you might assume that I do not have the answers, please know that I am not skirting your questions ( - my afore-given responses, at least thus far, should manifest that I am not too incapable to respond); I would only like to enter into a healthy discussion and sharing of knowledge, rather than enter into a just-kick-ass ping pong match. If at all there's an intention for the latter, please count me out. I'm not interested.

    P.S. 2: I must appreciate everyone on this thread, so far, for making comments, so far, that maintain mutual respect and decency.

  138. 1400 years:

    I agree with one thing you have said. That Science thinks it has discovered new Paradigms. When in reality it has been discovered or at least thought of in ages long past.

    Re: "Pythagoras" (582-500) the first person to realize that the Earths Moon, and planets are all spheres. But even that was superseded by Vedic Texts, namely, Shalapatha Brahman which are thousands of years old, which suggests that the Heavens are spheres that move.

    And then along came the new "age thinkers".
    I just have to throw in the wording, "new age" because it is such an aberrant subject for some religions.

    "Thales" (624-546)-came with the idea of "panpsychism" that the Universe is conscious.

    "Parmenides" (540-470) said what we believe to be a World of things and motion and change is just an illusion.

    "Leucippus" (F.C. 440) Will be remembered as the man who invented the ideas of the "Atom", empty space, and cause-and-effect.
    Even the Soul, he said, is made up of Atoms, which in this day and age could be referred to as Quantum.

    Now since the Quran's first revelations was in the year 610 CE,
    could you fill me in as how the time spans correlate to one another.

    Charles B:

    What is your give and take on this? What time spans are in the Bible or is there any, I believe it was written, the new testament at least, 70 AD.

  139. 1400 years:

    Are you sure that the Jews and the Christians are not the correct word of God? It seems the image of God from the Bible and the image of Allah in the Quran are different. I know some people feel the God of the Jewish Torah and the Christian New Testament are not compatable either, but in the Torah, the God who comes in judgement also shows great mercy and in the New Testament, the God of mercy promises ultimate judgement for the evil, but we are not asked to do the judgment ourselves. It's left to God to control and decied.

    With the Quran, it seems like Allah is very violent. Why would he want to destroy the Jews and the Christians whom he previously worked through before Islam?

    I know it may sound like splitting hairs, but Jesus was the "fulfillment" of the Jewish Torah prophecies and promises, not the replacement. The Quran seems to argue for the harshest of the harshest punishments for both Jews and Christians. If I am not mistaken. How do you explain that? Why does Islam seem to have so many contemporary really scary people advocating it? Do you believe I for one should be killed as I am an "infidel" by the right that I am a Judao Christian rather than a Muslim? I'm not criticizing your faith. I really do want to know the answers to these questions.

  140. 1400 Years: You hinted, and the clips above have hited that Islam is the final "installment" of the revelation of God's will to mankind. If Islam replaces the old "editions" of the Hebrew Torah and the Christian Bible, then what is there to say that there will not yet be a further replacement of Islam say, next year? Logically speaking.

    I am not Mormon, but I have Mormon friends who basically say the same thing in essence, and their faith was only establish a few hundred years ago. Perhaps, by your argument, they now have the correct "edition" of the revelation of God.

    I'm just playing the "devil's advocate" and don't really hold to that view, and I understand your point, but it would be interesting to hear your response.


  141. 1400 Years:

    Thank you for your clarification.

  142. 1400 Years:

    Thank you for the links. There is reference in the links again to "WE"

    Again, I ask you, who is "WE"?

    It seems to me there is, or was, more than one God.

  143. 1400 Years: Interesting link. I thought it interesting that the view that Islam has been taught from the beginning of creation via God speaking to the Old Testament Jewish prophets and then Jesus, but ultimately by Muhammad in its fullest extent. The argument assumes that the latter is the most accurate revelation of Allah replacing the former, revelations, correct? That is how I understood the brief clip. The reference to the Heavens and the Earth being "cleved" sounded happenstancial mostly to me. Thanks for the link, nonetheless.

  144. 1400 Years: Is your penname in reference to the length of time the Quran has been written?

  145. I must say, I really find the name Achems Razor to be ironic if you don't believe in God. I only say this because if Achem is supposed to be Occam, the main idea of Occam's Razor is that the simplest solution is most likely the correct one. Therefore, an Intelligent Designer would be the simple solution. To quote Voltaire, "If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent Him." Just my two cents though, take it or leave it. By the way, there is an awesome Documentary out there about 'the scientific wonders of the Qur'an,' or something to that effect. Very interesting stuff, definitely worth checking out.

  146. this documentary would be better if it was a soft core..

  147. 1400 years:

    I basically know nothing of the Quran.

    A question... when you say we, who exactly is "we". Is, or was, there more than one God?

    Thank you.

  148. That's a magnificent revelation in the Quran. Now its truth has been verified by science. Wonderful, isn´t it?

  149. One of the most subtle problems in science concerns the expansion of the universe, its tendency constantly to extend its boundaries. This was something completely unknown to the human being until the last century. This mystery is, however, mentioned by the Quran in the following terms, which again bear witness to its remarkable profundity when discussing such matters:

    "Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?"
    - Al-Quran, Chapter 21 (Sura Anbiya), Verse 30.

    "We created the heavens with Our strength and power, and are constantly expanding them."
    - Al-Quran, Chapter 51 (Sura Dhariyat), Verse 47.

    This was revealed 1,300 YEARS - yes, that's one thousand three hundred; yep, 13 C.E.N.T.U.R.I.E.S. - BEFORE Hubble discovered that the universe was actually constantly expanding, and that it had originated as a single "point".

    Why must it be that when a "Western" scientist realises something that it is propounded to be scientific indeed and to have got "discovered for the first time"?

  150. Razor: P.S. When I bake a pumpkin pie (yes I can bake), there's a lot of mixing and baking and even cooling before I add the highly delicate and easily destroyed whipped cream right before you serve it. Let's consider at least the possibility that God is wise enough to know "when" to add the "whipped cream of life" to planet Earth for just the perfect touch to His magnificent creation.

  151. Mr. Razor: God is such a woderful mathmatician, isn't He? What a lovely planet He's made for us. I'm glad He's got it all figured out from a long time ago.

    About the timing of the "singularity", especially down to the micro second, let's not forget to give Him credit for the wonderful and yet unknown details, shall we? ;-)

  152. very interesting, alot of good facts i never knew, we truly are very special, :D.

  153. godmath:

    Yes it is unreal, the information out there by reputable scientists on the information highway called World Wide Web.

    Why, they even mathematically deduced, up to the micro second of the singularity, imagine that!

  154. I refer to comments by Achems Razor.

    I'm fascinated by your knowledge of situations that existed millions and even a billion years ago such as the distance between the earth and the moon. We need to stop and take a really deep breath sometimes to understand the astronomical assumptions that underlie such statements...

  155. I am not sure if this Doc. is about intelligent design or creationism.
    I will go with creationism.

    Creationists will try anything to prove there beliefs.

    They are talking about the Earth as it is now, not as it was millions or billions of years ago, it was much different then. Even our Galaxy was in a different configuration. We are actually part of the Dwarf Sagittarius Galaxy that is slowly being devoured by the Milky Way Galaxy.

    They make much ado about eclipses in this Doc. Just the right sizes relative to the distances.

    But that is now! It certainly was not, say one billion years ago. The Moon then did not fit perfectly over the Sun, it was bigger then the Sun, relative to the distances.

    The Moon was much closer, some 200,000 kilo's away, much bigger relative to the Earth. The Moon then took 20 days to orbit the Earth, Earth day was 18 hours.

    To me this nullifies their weak arguments about intelligent design or creationism.

    Stronger tides, because the Moon was closer. But oh! wait! I forgot, the Earth and Universe is only 6000 years old! How silly of me.

  156. But of course its intelligent design...duh! the same one that designed you and made you intelligent! : )

  157. "Although this documentary is promoting “intelligent design” view I decided to post it."

    Oooh, Vlatko, what a vicious, blasphemous deed you have committed!