Eve ? Who is that girl ?
-
Thanks, Chimp, I always welcome good laugh. You are so comic.
I did not read it all. But just the few first lines of your message made my day.
Keep it up, boy.
Salaam
Sure . . . but the only problem for you is stunts like this are well recognized admission of "defeat". You couldn't answer back . . . hence the attempt at humour.
See - I got you . . .
Well . . . it ain't the first time and you're not the 1st person either. Your brethren fall the same way.
-
You vs. them - ain't that a classic?
God speed
-
salaam Student Of Allah
I have a scientific backround (with diplomas) and i know very well the discourse you are holding.
it doens't impress me. It is what we can call science philosophy and not science. it leads to discussions with no end.we are here in free-minds.org. Quite all articles leads with quran and tryng to understand message of God.
in this forum, there is an all category talking about science. You can ask if you want administrators to remove this "illegal" category according to your beliefs thats spirituality and science are totally separated.we are here in a thread talking about eve. You are talking abot scientific methodology.
Capacity of science "philosophers" to get out the subject and preach their creed is incredible.Really dear student of Allah, if someone is at the wrong place, it is not me.
it would be very funny to discuss about "scientifc" methodology and how scientist philosophers are the fist ones to avoid apply them.
for example, proof that a theory should be falsibiable has not yet be done. it is only a good practice.no matter however. Sorry if i am making heresy towards great Priest Karl Popper. A guy who, of course, discovered nothing in science but just played with words and definitions and came as a prophet to teach scientists how to do.
Fortunately, all major discoveries have been done before philosophers have built their church in the middle of science.Shalom Aleikhem,
I think it will serve you better if you stick to the idea that Qur'an is your book for guidance/wisdom whatever and not try and bring science into the picture. Qur'an is religious text which makes numerous claims that are not falsifiable along with claims of various supernatural things. So it is better to avoid science unless you are willing to be honest and not pick and choose parts of the document one is allowed to apply the scientific method for validation.
Peace
---------------- Student of Allahto contradict me about what i say about eve, you have just to "pick parts" you want in Quran or science.
You would be then really be welcomed in this thread as a contributor with "falsication" proofsif you want to speak about philosophy, falsification and other subjects, please open another thread.
i will then pray Allah to guide there the chimp and earthdom. they also seems not interested by Eve subject.Peace.
-
Peace noshirk,
Do not bother about such opposition. Science can be easily integrated into spirituality as it all roots to God.
God bless you
-
I have a scientific backround (with diplomas) and i know very well the discourse you are holding.
I do not think you do.
it doens't impress me. It is what we can call science philosophy and not science. it leads to discussions with no end.
I don't agree with him at all. But his discourse - of what I have read - does impress me. Probably, because you are too afraid to admit . . . his scientific knowledge is more than yours. Hence the line above - when you said you have science background - I think that was for effect.
You have to give reason WHY you are dismissing him and the merit is in the argument - it is such dismissals that are not impressive. Anyone can do those. The merit is in taking his arguments and refuting them.
no matter however. Sorry if i am making heresy towards great Priest Karl Popper. A guy who, of course, discovered nothing in science but just played with words and definitions and came as a prophet to teach scientists how to do.
What an ignorant baloney. He was great philosopher of science . . . and the "scientific method" is corner stone of modern empirical science. See this is why your earlier claim about having "science" background sounded so false. No person with genuine "science background" would write that.
i will then pray Allah to guide there the chimp and earthdom. they also seems not interested by Eve subject.
You people are quite nasty! On one hand you rant about "tension" and the cause it! Look . . .
If after 578 posts just on this forum - you have not even learnt that discussion have habit of going in all sort of different direction...
-
-
Peace.
-
If there is a thread and the thread is joined by the chimp, the thread always turns into circus with chimpanzees.
-
salaam Allah
let's forget a little the lost "advanced truth seeker" earthdom who seeks in what he call lies, let's forgot the doctoring and great teacher who claim to be just a student of Allah, and let's forgot the power of the arguments of the chimp.
The fact is that there is absolutely no EVE in Quran.
197 ?O Zachariah, We give you glad tidings of a son whose name is Yahia. We have not given that name before to anyone.?
In arabic, Eve is called HAWAA and derivate from same root that Yahia. (a root that mean alive).
19-7 can also be undersood that that root was never used before Yahia and then, cannot be used for Eve (it is more obvious in arabic version of 19-7).Second remark is about the forbidden tree.
is it a real tree or an allegoric tree ?in 14-24 to 14-26, good words are opposed to bad words in a tree allegory.
in these verses
3762 Is that a better destination, or the tree of Zaqqoum/Bitterness?
4443 Surely, the tree of Zaqqoum/Bitterness,
5652 ?Will eat from the tree of Zaqqom/Bitterness,?description of fruits of this tree is like this
3764 It is a tree that grows in the midst of Hell.
3765 Its shoots are like the devils? heads.and we know that devils produce only lies about Allah. That is their only mission.
The forbidden tree is then probably the tree of lies. The tree from wich eat the so called scholars.
Then, it is possible to undestand the "fault" of adam and his "zawj" (associated jinn or imagination) as a trial to become ? rabb (a scholar who teachs his own teachnings) in the middle of the "humanoids" people he was sent to.
20121 So they both ate from it, and their saw'aat/bodies became apparent to them, and they began to place leaves on themselves from the Jenna/paradise. Adam had disobeyed his Lord, and had gone astray.
there also an allegoric understanding here. Leaves can be understood as "thelogical arguments" badly used. It is what "scholars" do nowadays and in all the history. They use true teaching to justify their bad teachnings.
726 O Children of Adam, We have sent down for you garments to alleviate your saw'aat/bodies, and feathers; and the garment of righteousness is the best. That is from the signs of God, perhaps they will remember.
this shows the "allegoric" meaning of "saw'aat" and the garment of righteousness.
my conclusion is then that adam was not probably the first human but the first human who received "deen"and spirituel teachings from the true Rabb.
Adam preached in the middle of his people. He committed the "shirk" fault by mixing own teachings with teachings of his rabb. He was punished and the people with him for that.i have then absolutely no problem to believe in Australopithecus and all derivates until the neandertalians as pre-adamic forms of humans.
Adam is just the beginning of deenThere is so much to say about this subject. Science leads us to update some olds beliefs and, by miracle, it is still allowed by quran.
I am affraid however that it is not possible in this forum because of some "intruders" and pollutors.
The level 0 of believer science is to consider universe as a "work" of God.
Every time a believer wish to go up to higher stages, intruders and pollutors call him to level 0.
There is no way to visit higher floors with such people in the elevator.4153 We will show them Our signs in the horizons, and within themselves, until it becomes clear to them that this is the truth. Is it not enough that your Lord is witness over all things?
All science is from GOD.
All science is teachings from GOD.
All science have a spiritual aim. Only the siritual aim to teach that God is truth. Science of Matter don't exists for herself as a gadget for reason.
This is level 0 i wish some believers definitively surpass.Peace
-
Greetings and Peace, all group
This is a science thread, amirite? hmm Then this is a place to discuss scientific theory.
We are talking about the wife/mate of Adam (Peace upon ALL Prophets and Messengers), commonly known as Eve? It is true that Eve is not mentioned in AQ by name--maybe her name is unimportant to the Deen.
Does anybody believe that the Eve being discussed is the MRCA?
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve
ALLAH knows best.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
-
Greetings and Peace, all group
This is a science thread, amirite? hmm Then this is a place to discuss scientific theory.
We are talking about the wife/mate of Adam (Peace upon ALL Prophets and Messengers), commonly known as Eve? It is true that Eve is not mentioned in AQ by name--maybe her name is unimportant to the Deen.
Does anybody believe that the Eve being discussed is the MRCA?
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve
ALLAH knows best.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
Thank you abdul hadi to recenter debate
if there is one mitochondrial eve then it would mean probably that Adam had only one wife he choose in the population of that "eva".
here http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_language
it is spoken about the probability that there is one mutation and only one that make articulated language appears. it would be around 100 000 years ago. Same conclusion seems to have been reached based on theory of lowering the larynx mutation.it would not be the only "mutation" that spreaded into an entire population.
There also is a scientific enigma about why "intermediary" species between apes and humans disappeared. If they were more "evoluted" than apes, then ...to resume, something "very exceptionnal" seem to have happened 100 000 (200 000) years ago.
the birth of our specie.
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatomically-modern_humansso probably, adam lived 100 000 to 200 000 years ago.
it seems that all that happened around ethiopia, not far from yemen. http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omo_remainsPeace
-
Greetings and Peace, all group
It also makes sense that the story/hadith about the rib is not in AQ. It seems likely that Adam (Peace upon ALL Prophets and all Messengers) was the first of Homo sapiens and that his mate was a pre-existing species/subspecies. If Eve came from Adam, this would not be possible--she would be H. sapiens just like Adam.
233 states that Adam informed the angels of the names/nature of things...this indicates that he can talk/communicate.
http//www.nytimes.com/2012/01/31/science/gains-in-dna-are-speeding-research-into-human-origins.html?_r=0
Mitochondrial DNA is also used to discover things about more modern ancestry.
http//www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/37821/title/Genetic-Roots-of-the-Ashkenazi-Jews/
ALLAH knows best.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
-
Salaam All.
359 The example of Issa with God is similar to that of Adam; He created him from dust, then He said to him ?Be? and he was.
When Allah make comparisons, he is not joking. He respect the form . In this case , there is 25 occurrences for adam and Issa.
My opinion on 359, it is the style of "Author of the Quran" to avoid giving direct and clear answer to the proposed question. The same style of answer has been shown on question relating to other topics, such as 'soul' / 'life and death'.
Due to certain reason it's best for human (at that time) to not knowing the details.Today,
Virgin birth is not a miracle nowadays, we know how it can be done.
The origin of human is a 'work in progress', and the progress is moving at accelerating rate towards 'ultimate explanation'.Mother of Adam was probably an insan (why not a neandertalian ?) and of course, not a bani adam.
What exactly has begun with adam ?
Humanity ?
Conscience ?
Language ?
Religion ?The question relate to "WHAT MAKES A BEING HUMAN"?
I have doubt on 'Adam is the first being to develop language', because 'language' is a mean of communication through audio signal among individual, thus it must have been developed 'collectively' on earth where air (as medium to convey audio signal) is in abundant.
Although communicating complex thought through audio signal is also something which differentiate human with other animal today.Conscience raised from empathy, and human is not alone in this area.
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_cognition
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathy#Evolution_of_empathy
And again it's important to note, that NOT ALL HUMAN possess the skill of empathy, Psychopath is a good example of human without or lacking of empathy thus raising doubt on their level of "Consciousness".
Yet it's undeniable that it is 'the conscience' that prevent human to do horrible deed.Religion is something which human developed later.. a social grouping phenomenon more advanced than family and tribe. Used as something to differentiate between 'them' and 'us' across different families and tribal relationship.
Things to add is ART.
Human is known to do something and appreciate things related to 'beauty' which is 'subjective' and have 'no functional value whatsoever'.Among those which are ancient are Paintings, Jewelry (e.g. necklace and stuff)
The oldest Cave Paintings is known to be around 40,800 years old found in Northern Spain.
The oldest Necklace is pretty much around the same era around 40,000 years ago found in a cave at South Africa.
No other animal today possess similar thing or have the urge or need to paint or create jewelry.According to Quran, Adam is the first who felt ashamed of his own genital part thus covering it.
Covering their own genital part (penis for men and vagina for women) is something consistent to be found in all human today and no other animal besides human felt the same way.admitting that adam was "injected" in a existing kind of human people has the merit to avoid the problem of incest in adam family. Sons of adam have probably married normally with women from that people
According to science, whatever have done ancient form of humans, it seems that all actual humans in this earth have a common ancestor around at most 150 000 years ago.This lead to the question of
from wich kind of paradise Adam was expulsed ?from (7-20 ; 20-120), we know that "chaytan" promised eternity to adam.
from
20116 And We said to the angels ?ASJID to Adam.? They all SAJADOU except for Satan, he refused.
20117 So We said ?O Adam, this is an enemy to you and your Zawj. So do not let him take you out from the Jenna, else you will have hardship.?
20118 ?You will have in it that you will not go hungry nor need clothes.?
20119 ?And you will have in it that you will not go thirsty nor suffer from heat.?is that a paradise on the sky or a paradisiacal garden on earth ?
And who is zawj in 20117 (zawj mean litteraly couple)
is it wife of Adam or adam jinn, his spiritual dual ?
if we read 20116, seems that the zawj of Adam was there when Allah spoke to angels.Most definitely this 'Adam's paradise' is here on Earth.
All aspect of human anatomy shows that it was designed, shaped and built to fit earth living condition.
If it's a 'paradise', then it must have been somewhere in Tropical region, where everything grew all year long without the disruptive winter.
The strongest candidate today is somewhere around Tanzania, Ethiopia / Tropical region in Africa.DNA trace has proved that there is a common male ancestor and a common female ancestor of all human living today, although not necessarily the common male ancestor was living at the same era as the common female ancestor.
If Adam is the first being who developed this sense of urgency to cover his own penis thus wear clothes, then we need to include
Homo Neanderthal
http//www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/images/neanderthal.jpgAs "Children of Adam".
Albeit their 'ape like' appearance, they do wear clothes.
They're known to extinct since 30,000 years ago although their gene still alive and well among Non-Sub Saharan African today (Caucasian, Asian etc..) showing that they're among the forefather of all Non-Sub Saharan African modern human.
Thus this "Adam" since he's among the 'forefather of Neanderthal', his appearance must be more primitive (read 'ape-like' than Homo Neanderthal.
Salam / Peace
-
salaam Jaafar
720 But the devil whispered to them, to reveal to them what was not apparent to them of their bodies; and he said ?Your Lord did not prohibit you from this tree except that you would become angels, or you would be immortal.?
20120 But the devil whispered to him, he said ?O Adam, shall I lead you to the tree of immortality and a kingdom which will not waste away??we can deduce from these verses that Adam was not immortal before eating from the tree.
it is difficult to deduce that that paradise was the trie Jenna.another funny question How Adam knew that he was not immortal ?
the claim "we will all die" is a "theory" that is not refutable and even not falsiabale (as student of Allah would say). It is an empirical Theory. To proove it is false, we should find a guy who live eternity. It is impossible, even if a such guy came since we would have to wait eternity to make the proof.So adam knew that he will die probably because he was not the only human there. He could compare himself to others and "deduce", like others, that he will die.
now let look at this
20117 So We said ?O Adam, this is an enemy to you and your mate. So do not let him take you out from the paradise, else you will have hardship.?
20118 ?You will have in it that you will not go hungry nor go naked?
20119 ?And you will have in it that you will not go thirsty nor suffer from heat.?so adam, before "eating from tree", was already eating and then "evacuating". Is there toilets in Jenna ?
20117 to 20119 show that Adam was totally bilogical before "eating from tree".i have to say that i am not agree with this part
According to Quran, Adam is the first who felt ashamed of his own genital part thus covering it.
Covering their own genital part (penis for men and vagina for women) is something consistent to be found in all human today and no other animal besides human felt the same way.in the litteral sense, 20118 seems to indicate that adam was wearing clothes.
20121 So they both ate from it, and their bodies/sawaa't became apparent to them, and they began to place leaves on themselves from the paradise. Adam had disobeyed his Lord, and had gone astray.
is saw'aat means "genital parts" ? saw'at is plural of sou'e who mean bad thing (used many times in quran).
531 So God sent forth a raven to scratch the land and show him how to deal with the body (SAW'ATI) of his brother. He said ?Woe to me! Am I not even able to be like this raven and deal with the body of my brother?? So he became of those who regretted.
from 5-31, SAW'ATI seems to indicate the entire body. And it is logical to think that the body of the killed brother was wearing clothes. So Saw'ati don't mean a naked body neither genital parts.
how then to understand the leaves allegory ?
20118 ?You will have in it that you will not go hungry nor go naked?
20119 ?And you will have in it that you will not go thirsty nor suffer from heat.?the parasidiacal conditions in which Adam lived have gone away (god punition). After his sin (eating the lies from tree of zaqqoum), Adam discoverd the bilogical needs of his body and that his deeds has consequences.
Leaves of Jenna means, for me, theological arguments. Adam tried to justify his actions with arguments (leafs and not fruits). I imagine him saying things like "it was to became an angel, nearest from you my god" as Shaytan promised him in 720. The sin commited by adam was shirk and saying about Allah things he was not allowed to say.the spiritual deduction is that using leaves from Jenna will not help moshrikins (mixers, liers) to avoid judgement of Allah. "I wanted to became an angel" will not work as an argument.
Peace
-
salaam Jaafar
720 But the devil whispered to them, to reveal to them what was not apparent to them of their bodies; and he said ?Your Lord did not prohibit you from this tree except that you would become angels, or you would be immortal.?
20120 But the devil whispered to him, he said ?O Adam, shall I lead you to the tree of immortality and a kingdom which will not waste away??we can deduce from these verses that Adam was not immortal before eating from the tree.
it is difficult to deduce that that paradise was the trie Jenna.another funny question How Adam knew that he was not immortal ?
the claim "we will all die" is a "theory" that is not refutable and even not falsiabale (as student of Allah would say). It is an empirical Theory. To proove it is false, we should find a guy who live eternity. It is impossible, even if a such guy came since we would have to wait eternity to make the proof.So adam knew that he will die probably because he was not the only human there. He could compare himself to others and "deduce", like others, that he will die.
720 addressed plural subject (huma) so indeed Adam was not 'alone'.
Adam and his friends knew before hand that they're not immortal, perhaps by observing that some of their own kind died.
So you're right that he was not the only human.
The question now comes to
- Why the Devil want to to reveal to THEM what was not apparent to THEM of THEIR "SAWA'AT"?
now let look at this
20117 So We said ?O Adam, this is an enemy to you and your mate. So do not let him take you out from the paradise, else you will have hardship.?
20118 ?You will have in it that you will not go hungry nor go naked?
20119 ?And you will have in it that you will not go thirsty nor suffer from heat.?so adam, before "eating from tree", was already eating and then "evacuating". Is there toilets in Jenna ?
20117 to 20119 show that Adam was totally bilogical before "eating from tree".Correct..
i have to say that i am not agree with this part
in the litteral sense, 20118 seems to indicate that adam was wearing clothes.20118 is strange,
And I do not agree with you, NOT NAKED/OPENED (TA'RA) doesn't translate to "Wearing Clothes".
It can also mean "He'll not feel being NAKED/OPENED".Evidence from modern human living today
Is this "Children of Adam" below being "Naked" / "Opened"?
It depends on one perspective and most importantly his own perspective.http//farm4.static.flickr.com/3302/3229894266_f526c3c8a5_m.jpg
To me he's naked, but he himself doesn't feel naked / opened.
This evidence above is the one which puzzled me, what's the intention of this guy wearing merely a PENIS GOURD?
The Penis Gourd doesn't serve other purposes other than covering his own Penis.
(As can be seen the scrotum can still be clearly visible).He's covering his own penis thus he feels he's not naked.
So it seems the (initial) motive for man on wearing something on his body was to conceal his own penis.
The dude above is living in tropical area, wearing 'clothes' (other than penis gourd) is not 'comfortable' for him, since the climate there is hot and humid.The habits of wearing 'clothes' also give other disadvantage of the additional hassle for cleaning it. (Laundry).
The man above clearly doesn't suffer from such disadvantage.20121 So they both ate from it, and their bodies/sawaa't became apparent to them, and they began to place leaves on themselves from the paradise. Adam had disobeyed his Lord, and had gone astray.
is saw'aat means "genital parts" ? saw'at is plural of sou'e who mean bad thing (used many times in quran).
531 So God sent forth a raven to scratch the land and show him how to deal with the body (SAW'ATI) of his brother. He said ?Woe to me! Am I not even able to be like this raven and deal with the body of my brother?? So he became of those who regretted.Correct.. saw'aat can mean "shame", "bad" and also "evil".
from 5-31, SAW'ATI seems to indicate the entire body. And it is logical to think that the body of the killed brother was wearing clothes. So Saw'ati don't mean a naked body neither genital parts.
It depends on the context, Saw'aat can also mean "Shame", "Bad" and also "Evil".
how then to understand the leaves allegory ?
To me the leaves means Adam cover his "Shame" with leaves..
See the above photo which shows exactly just that.
That specific "Bani Adam" has invented something to cover his "Shame", he invented a "Covering for his Shame" from a gourd. (which can also be considered as 'leaves'.The Covering
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KotekaThe Raw Material
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GourdSalam / Peace
-
Shalom Aleikhem Hoppean,
Let me apologise for taking my sweet time to come back to this site and respond to your post. I hope you and others here are doing fine and leaving a peaceful life.
SoA,
While you make excellent points about consistency, and you have many valid points. I would like to bring some criticisms against "the scientific method", which you may not have considered.
Let's see. Always happy to learn more. ;D
Now it would seem that you are in favour of this "scientific method" as highlighted above. Therefore, I ask Was this method itself determined to be true by a "falsifiable hypothesis which you then test and gather evidence"; that is to say, a "falsifiable evidence based methodology"? If you understand the nature of my question, then I believe you will see that if one were to answer "yes", it would be obvious that, by its very nature, it may be true or it may not be true. It might well be true today and false tomorrow, since it is conceivably falsifiable. In that case, it cannot be accepted as an epistemological standard. However, if the answer is "no" then it is not falsifiable and therefore contradicts its very premise.
THE EVIDENCE OF REALITY my friend!! That is the short answer to the thought provoking things you have mentioned above. Don't worry, I will elaborate. The scientific "method" is in fact validated by something external. That external validating thing is reality. You asked
Was this method itself determined to be true by a "falsifiable hypothesis which you then test and gather evidence"
My response OF COURSE. The method wasn't something that we got from some old book and all scientists got together to bear witness and testify. It wasn't revealed to ignorant dessert dwellers "in private" when no one else could verify. This method isn't promoted on the grounds that the alternative is to burn for an eternity in a lake of fire. We stumbled upon this method through the process of gathering data and understanding reality. Throughout the ages, we have tried out many different methods of approaching the truth and only this method stood the test of time. The method where we gather evidence and try to avoid fallacies and theorize concepts that are testable in nature.
The slap that a reality check will give you once you realize the hypocrisy in trying to make science sound like something that doesn't work and is something one may casually disregard is the falsifiable experiment that you are looking for. You can also better understand why this method is so much revered by not indulging in hypocrisy and therefore disregard the assumptions of the scientific method and just jump from the roof of a skyscraper!! Obviously, you won't do that, for I am sure that someone with your intelligence already probably KNOWS that science works and is testable and is probably defending the opponents of the scientific method for some some kind of emotional bias towards religion ( not sure though).
However, if we are honest we can realize that this "scientific method" (in reality, empiricist/positivist method) is not propagated as a "possibly true" epistemology that may be false. Rather, it is promoted as an axiomatic epistemological truth, and thus is fundamentally contradictory to its very epistemological claims.
Well, for all practical purpose, it makes sense why we live life as though the scientific method is an axiomatic epistemological truth. Nobody is arguing here that we can't be one day proven wrong or that we are 100% certain about anything, let alone everything. The point is, even you kneel before the power of the method. Everyone does. Did you not assume the following before posting the reply to me
- The universe exists
- You and I exist
- The laws of nature exists
- The laws of nature will remain unchanging thereby making the technology involved ( our computers, internet, network infrastructure, electricity,etc) useful and predictable enough for us to hold the conversation.
For the sake of a deep philosophical dialogue, both of us have to be agree that it is not possible to prove that anything exists at all. However, that is not how we live our lives. Otherwise, I'd like to see you stand in the way of a moving train and deny the evidence of reality and talk about how the proponents of the scientific methodology are misleading people into thinking that this method is better than it is. Don't get me wrong here, I agree with what you said. However, that doesn't resolve ANYTHING. Especially in the context of the dialogue between me and "noshirk". No matter what, it is never wise or honest to pick and choose verses and phrases from anywhere to portray something as scientific especially when you aren't willing to put the entire work to the test. That on itself demonstrates your awareness about the inherent dishonesty involved in your methodology. We know it as Confirmation Bias.
Actually, both are based on axioms, as it stands "science" is based on a self-contradictory axiom. It cannot prove its own epistemological method to be based on the very epistemology it claims.
It may be that the people ridiculing and laughing do not understand their own presuppositions, axioms, or their lack of a coherent epistemology.
The bottom line is that Science WORKS!! Science provides us with utilitarian models through its unbiased methodology that doesn't start with the conclusion like religion does. I do understand the limitations of the methods I apply and the assumptions I make. However, it is preposterous in the highest order that you are making it sound like the scientific method is something somehow comparable to the theistic methods based on virtually every fallacy in the book, if not worse. The scientific method WORKS!!! There lies the difference that for some reason you can not see. This method is feeding the global population as we speak. This method is what gave us our modern medicine. It is the method that sent man to the moon. It is the method that provided us with the lifeblood of modern civilization. The food that you eat, the water that you use, the transportation, the medicine, the architecture, technology,etc. all owes their modern state of existence to the superiority of this method over any other method concocted by the minds of men throughout human history.
I can promise you that when we do find the cure for the next disease or send man to Mars, it will not be based on religious faith-based methodology. Just like always, the scientific method will triumph in reality and you will witness its glory and be reaping the benefits of the conveniences it provides while simultaneously wondering why people laugh at religious methods.
It is always fun to see how hopelessly people can depend on the fruits of a methodology they can dismiss so easily at the same time.
Peace
---------------------- Student of Allah