Embryology in the Quran? Surah 23:14, NOT scientific Embryologist PZ Myers
-
Bold 1 Okay, there is no need for you being sarcastic since you didn't like it when i questioned modern science.
When did I not like it. The very foundation of science is to question it. If you prove a well established theory wrong you'll get the Nobel prize.
Let's test you critical thinking skills. The graph below shows that deaths from measles were in decline well before the vaccine was introduced. Therefore we can conclude that the measles vaccine wasn't needed.
http//2.bp.blogspot.com/-RXRGd-_ZFy4/U6IWzEJOe2I/AAAAAAAABCU/eN6Cfc1i-a4/s1600/Measles+Mortality+1900-1984+-+NonLog+Scale.jpg
Why is my conclusion wrong?
-
When did I not like it. The very foundation of science is to question it. If you prove a well established theory wrong you'll get the Nobel prize.
Let's test you critical thinking skills. The graph below shows that deaths from measles were in decline well before the vaccine was introduced. Therefore we can conclude that the measles vaccine wasn't needed.
http//2.bp.blogspot.com/-RXRGd-_ZFy4/U6IWzEJOe2I/AAAAAAAABCU/eN6Cfc1i-a4/s1600/Measles+Mortality+1900-1984+-+NonLog+Scale.jpg
Why is my conclusion wrong?
Nobel Prize? Who cares about it. Most important about it is saving innocent lives from bad unnatural stuff.
Plus about this measles vaccine, i found this
From
https//vaccinationdilemma.com/parents-want-the-truth/
Parents want the truth
Have you been led to believe that vaccination was the magic bullet that saved us from the scourges of the past?
This is the most convincing argument made by those who market vaccines to us. Chances are it has influenced your decision at a fundamental, and perhaps even subconscious, level. It certainly did mine.
Many thousands of children in industrialised countries died from measles during the 1800s and early 1900s. The death rate steadily declined from the late 1800s. The following graph shows the decline in Australia from 1870 to 1970. The arrow indicates the point at which measles vaccine was introduced.
http//vaccinationdilemma.com/graphs/Chapter1/Fig1_measles.gif
One thing is clear the vaccine had little if anything to do with the demise of measles as a killer. Why? Because it wasn?t around.
All other infectious diseases of the time, diphtheria, whooping cough, scarlet fever, typhoid fever, etc went through a similar decline during the same period. Some of these diseases had vaccines introduced for them. Others didn?t. Their death rates all declined just the same, over the same period.
https//vaccinationdilemma.com/historical-death-rates-diseases-vaccination.html/
The simple fact is vaccination had little, if anything, to do with the overall decline in deaths from infectious diseases.
In their effort to increase vaccination our trusted health advisors have misinformed us at a fundamental level ? the truth would have done.
Have you been led to believe that being vaccinated means you are protected from getting the disease?
When disease outbreaks occur we tend to think unvaccinated children are the ones who get sick. In my Human Rights hearing a professor from the Royal Childrens Hospital stood by his belief that disease outbreaks only affect unvaccinated children. When asked for evidence he said he didn?t need any because it was a ?fundamental doctrine of holy writ in medicine?.
However, it is not true. In fact, most of the victims of these diseases are those who have been vaccinated for them.
In 1989 the U.S. health department documented 170 measles outbreaks in the country and found that 89% of the victims had been vaccinated for measles. School outbreaks were reported where ALL the victims had been vaccinated.
In the same year a 20 month study of whooping cough in Nova Scotia was published revealing 96% of the victims had been vaccinated for whooping cough.
In Australia in 1996, the South Australian Heath Commission released seven years of data on whooping cough showing 87% of the victims had been vaccinated. More recent Australian data shows the vast majority of children with whooping cough have been appropriately vaccinated.
https//vaccinationdilemma.com/whooping-cough-australian-children-how-many-were-vaccinated
Statistics such as these are normal in the medical literature. Supporters of vaccination provide a simple mathematical explanation for it. Opponents argue we can no longer assume we have useful vaccines.
In addition to this, for ethical reasons, proper clinical trials have not been carried out to establish the value of our vaccination programs.
Vaccination is thought to protect us from disease. The truth is this is questionable.
Have you been led to believe that the chance of being harmed by a vaccine is very remote?
Once again, I was. Vaccination is marketed as one of the safest interventions of medicine. It is said to have an impeccable safety record after being used for decades in the global community.
Opponents point out that the reporting system for collecting the data for these conclusions is so poorly designed that some experts estimate only 1% of negative outcomes from vaccination actually reach the database.
They also point out that a United States Institute of Medicine study concluded that although vaccination is probably responsible for a long list of negative outcomes including blood disorders, infections, paralysis, behavioural problems and death, the frequency of these cannot be estimated due to insufficient research.
The truth is vaccines pose a risk ? one that is yet to be quantified.
-
A reason for most of the people ho get diseases being vacinated may be that almost all people are vaccinated, so if there are no people not vaccinnated logically they are not hoing to be sick.
I am not defending one thing or the other and personally I think that today information on science if politically controlled. That is, the freedom of information regarding science is non existent. We get whatever they want to give us, true or false does not matter.
So much for science or not science.
In the same way that "history" is a weapon used to destroy countries by creating remorse and lack of self-esteem, science is also used as a weapon. Of course it is not science, but the instrumentalisation of science, just like history is not history but its instrumentalisation.
In shorthand we are going to be given the truth.
Salaam
-
Plus about this measles vaccine, i found this
Sardar you are just finding articles that fit your narrative. You are not reading them critically.
Please re-read my post again. I posted a graph that AGREED with YOUR point of view and then I asked you to think why that graph's conclusion might be wrong.My Question Again is
Q. Looking at the graph and the conclusions drawn can you think of any reason why the conclusion is wrong?HINT is "death from measles" the only metric we should be looking at?
Also, Please don't cut and paste whole articles ... just the link thanks.
-
Sardar you are just finding articles that fit your narrative. You are not reading them critically.
Please re-read my post again. I posted a graph that AGREED with YOUR point of view and then I asked you to think why that graph's conclusion might be wrong.My Question Again is
Q. Looking at the graph and the conclusions drawn can you think of any reason why the conclusion is wrong?HINT is "death from measles" the only metric we should be looking at?
Also, Please don't cut and paste whole articles ... just the link thanks.
My narrative? I just suspicious about the vaccine of chemical usages. Now to your question, i sadly don't have a answer since i don't know sadly much about graph stuff. And why do you think i believe that your conclusion is wrong? What is your conclusion exactly? Because i sadly don't follow you because i don't where this is leading to.
-
My narrative? I just suspicious about the vaccine of chemical usages. Now to your question, i sadly don't have a answer since i don't know sadly much about graph stuff. And why do you think i believe that your conclusion is wrong? What is your conclusion exactly? Because i sadly don't follow you because i don't where this is leading to.
I have engaged with you a few times and you just bombard me videos and blogs to support your point.
I was trying to get you to look at them critically. If you don't understand graphs and statistics then why did post a link to a blog that uses it.
If you are unable evaluate the correctness of a video or blog then you shouldn't post it.It seems like you want other people to do the thinking for you rather bring your own arguments. This is what Sunni do when they just refer you to their sheikh rather engage in a meaningful conversation.
So, where does your suspicion about vaccines come from? Is it personal experience or what you read on the internet.
-
I have engaged with you a few times and you just bombard me videos and blogs to support your point.
I was trying to get you to look at them critically. If you don't understand graphs and statistics then why did post a link to a blog that uses it.
If you are unable evaluate the correctness of a video or blog then you shouldn't post it.It seems like you want other people to do the thinking for you rather bring your own arguments. This is what Sunni do when they just refer you to their sheikh rather engage in a meaningful conversation.
So, where does your suspicion about vaccines come from? Is it personal experience or what you read on the internet.
Bold 1 Actually I have only given you 2 blogs & 2 videos in the conversation. Last time we spoke, you made comments on Ibrahim smashing idols to make criticism against Quran which i responded to you
https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9610209.msg416495#msg416495
Bold 2 Because at the time, i thought you were defending vaccines of chemical usages since you didn't react well since when i showed that video with Rupert Sheldrake.
Bold 3 Want others to do thinking for me? What? When & why do i want others to think for me? That wouldn't help me at all.
Bold 4 No i have not experience it but i have seen videos on children that were vaccinated had horrible effects on them, like this poor girl
https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8CVmWsGFZA
Here are from the published studies from US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3878266/
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25377033
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24995277
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12145534
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21058170
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22099159
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3364648/
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17454560
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19106436
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3774468/
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3697751/
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21299355
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21907498
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11339848
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17674242
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21993250
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15780490
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12933322
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16870260
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19043938
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12142947
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24675092
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25198681 -
Bold 3 Want others to do thinking for me? What? When & why do i want others to think for me? That wouldn't help me at all.
Then why refer to the Rupert Sheldrake video. Can you summarize his strongest argument?
My point is if you don't fully understand what Sheldrake is claiming then how can you ever know he's wrong.
Bold 4 No i have not experience it but i have seen videos on children that were vaccinated had horrible effects on them, like this poor girl
Are you sure it was the vaccine that did the damage. Do you have the girl's medical history?
Is your strongest argument against vaccines a few videos on youtube?
Billions of children are vaccinated. It would be odd if a small percentage didn't react well to them.
You've bombarded me loads of links again.
Have you read all those papers you linked. Do you understand them.Do you know the process of how a study is published.
US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health is not an authority ... it's just a library. Just like a normal library that may house books from Salman Rushdie to Hitler.
All I am asking is you challenge yourself. Try to debunk yourself. See if you can refute your own arguments.
-
Then why refer to the Rupert Sheldrake video. Can you summarize his strongest argument?
My point is if you don't fully understand what Sheldrake is claiming then how can you ever know he's wrong.
Are you sure it was the vaccine that did the damage. Do you have the girl's medical history?
Is your strongest argument against vaccines a few videos on youtube?
Billions of children are vaccinated. It would be odd if a small percentage didn't react well to them.
All I am asking is you challenge yourself. Try to debunk yourself. See if you can refute your own arguments.
Bold 1 He explained it in that video. Did you not watched the video?
Bold 2 I am not sure what exactly what you mean. He simply claims that many scientist have been basing on assumptions and guesses. If i remember correctly. he did made that statement in his banned Ted Talk.
Bold 3 It was explained at the early minutes of the video. Again didn't you watched it?
Bold 4 How do you know billions of children are vaccinated? Where did you get that information? And how do you know it's a small percentage is negatively?
Bold 5 The same thing for you Burhan. I do not want this to be a heated argument because i don't like making fights and all.
If you wish, you can check here https//thevaccinereaction.org/ Sorry if that was sudden.
By the way, i am sadly not expert on science. Especially on modern science and i found out that corporations have a history of corrupting it.
https//www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/legacy/assets/documents/scientific_integrity/how-corporations-corrupt-science.pdf
-
You've bombarded me loads of links again.
Have you read all those papers you linked. Do you understand them.Do you know the process of how a study is published.
US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health is not an authority ... it's just a library. Just like a normal library that may house books from Salman Rushdie to Hitler.
Bold 1 Well i apologize if you do not like it if i am trying answer your questions. And i will not be dishonest to you, i have sadly not and that i will apologize for it. I am currently reading them while we are speaking.
Bold 2 I believe that studies must be peer-reviewed. Correct me if i am wrong.
Bold 3 Since when are US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health is a authority? They are simply research the health issues.
And no they are not anti-vaccines nor pro vaccine.There is a question though i wondered is why were vaccines were introduced when there are natural medicine like herbs & fruits which in it contains healing for us.
Why for a time has it became a obligation in modern times to vaccinate people when these kind vaccines with chemical usages didn't exist before the modern age?
-
I just realized that we have been going off topic.
-
Bold 1 He explained it in that video. Did you not watched the video?
Bold 2 I am not sure what exactly what you mean. He simply claims that many scientist have been basing on assumptions and guesses. If i remember correctly. he did made that statement in his banned Ted Talk.
Bold 3 It was explained at the early minutes of the video. Again didn't you watched it?
You have watched it, but do you fully understand it. Have you verified his claims?
Sardar, this is problem. You watch these sensationalist videos and then believe them to be true.
He wasn't banned from TED otherwise you they wouldn't have released his talk. All TED said was that Rupert was spreading misinformation and his talk should carry a warning.It's click-bait.
"Banned Talk" "The truth about ..." "Debunked" ... these are all click-bait titles to attract your attention. It's all pseudoscience.
Bold 4 How do you know billions of children are vaccinated? Where did you get that information? And how do you know it's a small percentage is negatively?
Do you even know the history of vaccines. How they work? what they do?
Today we have 85% coverage globally. That's about 100mil infants vaccinated. We've been doing this for decades. You do the maths.
http//www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/immunization-coverageInshallah we will have 100% coverage and no child will die from these horrible diseases.
Vaccines are the human race greatest achievement. All the countries working together for a common good.
Bold 5 The same thing for you Burhan. I do not want this to be a heated argument because i don't like making fights and all.
Hey man, I'm not arguing. Written communication always seems rude so just read everything with a smile.
By the way, i am sadly not expert on science. Especially on modern science and i found out that corporations have a history of corrupting it.
My friend you are mixing science, popular science, pseudoscience, research and propaganda.
Nobody can corrupt science. Water will always be H2O and E will always equal mc2.
What some corporations do is spread misinformation to sell their products - they don't do science. You are mixing up everything and getting yourself in a mess.
Bold 1 Well i apologize if you do not like it if i am trying answer your questions. And i will not be dishonest to you, i have sadly not and that i will apologize for it. I am currently reading them while we are speaking.
You are not answering questions. You just post links to other websites that you think answer the question. That's lazy.
Bold 2 I believe that studies must be peer-reviewed. Correct me if i am wrong.
Sadly these days any nonsense can be published under free speech. If they don't allow publication then people like Rupert complain that he has been "banned".
It is up to us the reader to first understand the subject matter and then verify the claims.There is a question though i wondered is why were vaccines were introduced when there are natural medicine like herbs & fruits which in it contains healing for us.
Why for a time has it became a obligation in modern times to vaccinate people when these kind vaccines with chemical usages didn't exist before the modern age?
My friend you are confusing vaccines with drugs (antivirals, antibiotics etc). Learn what vaccines are. How they work and what they do.
I agree with you 100% on drugs and much of modern medicine. I don't even take paracetamol. Good diet, exercise and a healthy happy mind is the best cure.
I'll leave you with the wise words of Neil Degrasse Tyson
You have enough knowledge to know why you are right but not enough to know why you are wrong.
-
I just realized that we have been going off topic.
The answer to the graph question. By using mortality rate the anti-vaccine crew are being deceptive. That's the hallmark of pseudoscience which cherry picks evidence.
https//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ed/Measles_US_1944-2007_inset.png
This really good article will help you. Take time to read it.
https//www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/pseudoscience-is-bullshit-science-not/ -
Embryology in the Quran? Surah 2314, this is NOT scientific at all, Embryologist PZ Myers article at the end
Embryologists today, using millions of dollars of scientific equipment, tell us that that the bones, muscles and flesh form SIMULTANEOUSLY, meaning everything is forming at the SAME TIME.
The Quran however has something else in mind, Surah 2314
"Then we make the embryonic lump into bones, THEN (FA) we clothed the bones with flesh"
"Fakhalaqnal mudghata izaman FA kasawnal izama lahman"
FA in Arabic is a resumption particle, indicating a pause, I'm not impressed.
So clearly muhammads idea was of a baby skeleton, then being clothed with muscles and flesh. How can Muslims not see this?
Embryologist Professor PZ Myers article,
http//scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/11/23/islamic-embryology-overblown-b/Both have not been able to fully comprehend and appreciate the information shared in Qur'aan. The information about man's sexual creation is elaborate and points out the delicacies which are still ahead of the scientific explanations of today.
-
He wasn't banned from TED otherwise you they wouldn't have released his talk. All TED said was that Rupert was spreading misinformation and his talk should carry a warning.
It's click-bait.
"Banned Talk" "The truth about ..." "Debunked" ... these are all click-bait titles to attract your attention. It's all pseudoscience.
Click bait titles? Do you have debunked it? How exactly Rupert is spreading misinformation & pseudoscience? Plus his Ted Talk is somewhat thought provoking about modern science like how Nature is purposeless why i honestly do not think that makes sense. Why would Nature be purposeless is beyond me.
-
Today we have 85% coverage globally. That's about 100mil infants vaccinated. We've been doing this for decades. You do the maths.
http//www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/immunization-coverageInshallah we will have 100% coverage and no child will die from these horrible diseases.
Vaccines are the human race greatest achievement. All the countries working together for a common good.
If vaccines are really the "greatest" achievement of the human race then why are there damages from vaccines like that poor girl and why are there compensations for those who were damaged by vaccines? https//www.gov.uk/vaccine-damage-payment
Vaccines were not supposed to damage but to protect. But sadly with chemical usages, that will not help a lot.
Also which countries are working together?
-
My friend you are mixing science, popular science, pseudoscience, research and propaganda.
Nobody can corrupt science. Water will always be H2O and E will always equal mc2.
What some corporations do is spread misinformation to sell their products - they don't do science. You are mixing up everything and getting yourself in a mess.
How can no one corrupt science exactly? And corporations like Monsanto can bribe scientists to falsify many studies and vaccine studies are not immune against corruption.
-
You are not answering questions. You just post links to other websites that you think answer the question. That's lazy.
What questions have i not answered? Plus i did apologized about that. By the way you seemed to not answer my own questions
There is a question though i wondered is why were vaccines were introduced when there are natural medicine like herbs & fruits which in it contains healing for us.
Why for a time has it became a obligation in modern times to vaccinate people when these kind vaccines with chemical usages didn't exist before the modern age?
-
My friend you are confusing vaccines with drugs (antivirals, antibiotics etc). Learn what vaccines are. How they work and what they do.
I agree with you 100% on drugs and much of modern medicine. I don't even take paracetamol. Good diet, exercise and a healthy happy mind is the best cure.
But there are vaccines that do contain drugs like antibiotics like the vaccine for Rabies (RabAvert) which contains neomycin which is a antibiotic used for creams, ointments, and eyedrops and if you use with another drug called amphotericin B, this can have problems with kidneys or nerves.
Where did i got the info?
Here https//www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/B/excipient-table-2.pdf and here https//www.healthline.com/health/neomycin-oral-tablet
