Mountains stabilise earth's crust?
-
I've always heard by Muslim scholars say that mountains have roots and that their function is to stabilise the earth's crust, and how the Qur'an foretold science. But today I found out that yes, mountains have roots, but they don't stabilise the earth.
Can someone please explain?p.s. The Qur'an also says that mountains have pegs/stakes, not roots, which is not correct because the root of a mountain looks like a bulge (according to pictures https//www.google.it/search?q=root+of+mountain&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi_rPnCmIfUAhUELMAKHdcpABYQ_AUICigB&biw=1366&bih=638#tbm=isch&q=mountain+root) and nothing like pegs.
-
I've always heard by Muslim scholars say that mountains have roots and that their function is to stabilise the earth's crust, and how the Qur'an foretold science. But today I found out that yes, mountains have roots, but they don't stabilise the earth.
Can someone please explain?p.s. The Qur'an also says that mountains have pegs/stakes, not roots, which is not correct because the root of a mountain looks like a bulge (according to pictures https//www.google.it/search?q=root+of+mountain&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi_rPnCmIfUAhUELMAKHdcpABYQ_AUICigB&biw=1366&bih=638#tbm=isch&q=mountain+root) and nothing like pegs.
Regarding the pegs, I think what you object is getting too picky. On the other hand, mountains strictly have no roots, even if some people may choose to call roots a part of them. They are not roots, roots properly are for plants. They nurture throught the roots. Mountains do not get nourishments from any root whatsoever that we know, and a peg is a peg not because it has a certainshape, bulges or no bulges (there is variety in that too, even in the pictures you put), but because it gets grounded inside the matter to which it is attached, so that it holds in place. The shape is not of essence. Peg is a cuestion of function not of shape. And in that sense, the qur'anic description, bearing in mind its purpose, is completely correct, could not be more correct.
As to the whole thing what is exactly your queery?
Montains certainly stabilise earth while they form, because the earth folds. What could they do instead of folding? Break up and scatter? Burst into pieces?
Starting from the fact that the earth, like everything else is not static but moves and changes, the way the mountains form and the way they are made certainly guarantee stability in the movement of the landmasses. Bearing in mind that the Qur'an is not a science textbook but something completely different I hardly see what more could be asked of it.
If your query is that the landmasses since they move are not stable, well, as said, they are not meant to me inmovable, nothing is meant to be so. Creation is movement. Existence is movement. So the question is whether without mountains the earth would more stable that it is with them, that is, if the landmasses did not fold.
Salaam
-
Why ?did they translate it as such? For the same reasn many things are mistranslated, because the translator trusts more his prejudices tha what he reads. To the translators mountains do not move and interpret what they can imagine of what it might want to say to prevent you from sh-sh-shaking with them. Imagina. But if we are on amountain obviously we will not notice that we move with them, unless there is an earthquate, because we move with them and the movement is ever so slight with respec to the rest.
That happens with many things. If the y do not imagine something, the cannot translat that something. It is the same reason why nobody can foretell the future. If we cannot imagine something, we cannot know what to foretell, we lack the raw material.
Salaam
-
I've answered the mountains as pegs and stabilisers in a video mentioned in this post
https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9610078.0Richard
-
I didn't know they had mistranslated . Now it makes sense. Why did they translate it as "lest", anyway?
2130-31 do they not see the ones reject they of anna ( ?an inna" that indeed) the heavens and the land be dual sewn of so ripped we them dual and made we of from the water each thing live then so not believing and made we of in the land firm peaks that {choices anna ?an inna" that indeed; an (lest or that); inna/indeed; in (if or not)} shake with them and made we of therein wide/ravine of paths of perhaps they guided being
two very old manuscripts
https//s10.postimg.org/gb3z83z95/MA_VI_165_Quran_ch21v30-43.jpg
https//s10.postimg.org/g9ozhmojt/Ahlwardt_305_ch21v18-32.jpg
