Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  CalendarCalendar  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin  Old ForumOld Forum  Twitter  Facebook
Advertisement:
         

Interfaith Dialogue
 IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum : Religion - Islam : Interfaith Dialogue
Message Icon Topic: ADEENUL ‘AQL – RELIGION IS INTELLECT . Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 58 Next >>
Author Message
minuteman
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member


Joined: 25 March 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1642
Quote minuteman Replybullet Posted: 24 September 2008 at 7:32am
  I do not remember whether I posted it before. I believe that the theory of Evolution has three parts, namely:
 
1. Origin of Speies,
2. Natural Selection
3. Survival of the fittest.
 
  I believe the first and the third are right. BUt the second, the natural Selection is not right (.)
If any one is bad some one must suffer
IP IP Logged
Israfil
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 September 2003
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3984
Quote Israfil Replybullet Posted: 24 September 2008 at 9:46am

A few things to clear up before I start my work day.

S.A.
 
What you quoted from my words:  I never said they were,"
 
You said:
 
Actually you did: "On a geographic level it is fact that human beings, excuse me, our ancestors came from Africa some 200,000 years ago in Africa (although the homo Erectus existed 2.0 million years ago in the Plestocene period). It is fact that migration patters leading out from South Central Africa Northward, lead to the evolutionary change, some humans who migrated outward towards Europe became Homo neanderthalensis Others became Homo rhodesiensis."
 
If you read the first lines our ancestors came from Africa some 200,000 years ago in Africa (although the homo Erectus existed 2.0 million years ago in the Plestocene period).
 
That means, our ancestors came from Africa. I said in that paragraph some migrated outward from Africa and some stayed in Africa. What you probably became confused on was my use of the word humans. I said 'some humans migrated out of Africa and became the Neanderthal' etc.
 
I may have posted one expert in the field, but do a google and you will find the same info in many scientific journals, magazines, etc... 
 
 
I don't like using google because its not a scholarly search engine, try GoogleScholar, but i primarily use the university scholar search engine. FYI, you may find one or two scholarly sources using google but Scholarly journals are better since, they go under peer review and are actual research papers!
 
but so far there is absolutely no proof
 
ok.
 
SO FAR is that contrary to what has been taught until 1997, man did not evolve from neanderthals.
 
 
For the last time, research has pointed to humans being related to the HOMO ERECTUS, not neaderthal.
 
By the way S.A. the post where you listed your sources, I doubt that was your writing so if you would please use quotes, sorry to sound anal but its obvious.
 
IP IP Logged
Israfil
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 September 2003
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3984
Quote Israfil Replybullet Posted: 24 September 2008 at 11:44am
"I believe I am the one who posted the articles about Herto man and the recent DNA testing of the neanderthal fossils which prove no connection to man. Now I am posting info regarding new tests showing discrepancies in the percentage of similarities of chimp and human DNA."
 
 
"Sigh" I wasted a PDF file on you that contained a scholarly research article? Humans according to recent studies and paleontologist, come from African ancestry I again repeat.
 
As a scientist I would think you would keep up with these things.
 
My field is Neuroscience not genetics (although I study genes when doing research of neurodegenerative diseases). Studying natural selection/evolution is more of a "past time" for me so now i dno't subscribe to new research articles on what they say about our ancestors and such most of what I have are previous notes I've taken along with scholarly research I come across. I think the problm with you being a "layperson" especially a novice in genetic research is you don't know what exactly to argue. Sure, anyone can Google search evolution/creationism debates and pull maybe a few files on scholarly work, but unfortunately nobody has told you that most reseacrh articles especially good, scholarly work are not accessible to the public, and if they are you have to subscribe which usually cost. Now, if you're lucky you can go Google Scholar but sometimes you need to know what you are looking for.
 
The reason I know you didn't read the article because it contained "scientific lingo" I'm sure you don't understand due to the lack of understanding of the mathematical methods they used in their research. In order for you to reject something know your opponents position and that is, having to read their references. another reason how I know you didn't read is because you kept repeating what I misstaed, that is, humans come from Neanderthals. the fact that I used to the word humans when referring to sub-species groups was my fault, but, if you read the wasted PDF file I submitted you'd know that among the divided theories concerning human ancestry that article was discussing human ancestry coming from one region (that is Africa) instead of multiregional as pressuposed by other scientist. None of the above you've addressed in your response to me so yes, I would suspect only a layperson would pick and choose what to believe and disbelieve, and such an attitude I find similar to people who choose to disbelieve in Islam they pick and choose versus that may seem to be favorable to theirs without actually understanding the material in its entirety.
 
Now, I'll give you credit for actually at least taking a stand on your position but do I think you know what you're talking about? No. In fact, I'm willing to go on a limb and say you probably know 45% of the material. I couldn't possibly expect you to know what
 
Chromosome 22          age-504,000-2,112,000    Zhao et al, 2000

or what Data analysis and coalescent simulations are. FYI the above was fro several posts back which I listed data concerning evolved genes. The above shows the age of th gene and the reference. So I guess the list where I showed the age of various genes don't count? Or the scholarly work I submitted via PDF which used genetic models? I guess you believe human beings arrived as they are. From a Muslim historical perpective, how do we know Adam didn't exist in a time where he lived among primate looking beings? Perhaps the way he communicated was entirely different we don't know except what is recorded in Hadith and Qur'an. The Qur'an states the Earth was created in a fixed amount of time, but how we know this 'time' did not extend to billions of years or eons? We only go on faith. Oh, and yes I really like this one:

"On a personal level I do not believe that man evolved from a single cell organism, I do believe that Allah created man."
 
We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?  (The Noble Quran, 21:30)"
 
Single celled organism lived in hot pools, and various other aquatic environments. But I guess this too is fable right?
 
"As a Muslim I am curious as to how you reconcile the Islamic belief that Allah created man with your assertions that evolution is a fact."
 
Well, remember as Nur_Ilahi points out, I'm a "fake Muslim" so why doe sit matter to you what I am or what beliefs I need to reconcile?

 
 
 
 
 
 


Edited by Israfil - 24 September 2008 at 11:45am
IP IP Logged
Ron Webb
Male Humanism
Senior Member
Senior  Member


Joined: 30 January 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1744
Quote Ron Webb Replybullet Posted: 24 September 2008 at 4:53pm

Originally posted by Shasta'sAunt

What do you mean by human civilization?

I mean the things that make us remarkable among other animals: you know, complex social organization, (relatively) sophisticated technology, maybe permanent settlements or at least nomadic shelters of some sort.  It's a vague concept, in keeping with the equally vague term "modern man".  My point was that "modern man" probably existed as a species long before we amounted to anything special in the animal kingdom (which I think is the sense in which you use the term).

I believe I have been stating that man is man all along. I am not the one stating that man evolved from other species. Man is man, and to date there is no proof otherwise.

"Man is man" is not a very helpful definition.  What I'm trying to find out is, where and how do you draw the line between man and non-man?  You have already implied that Herto man was a man 160,000 years ago.  You seem pretty clear that the Neanderthals were not men, even though they are probably closer to us morphologically than Herto.  (And no, no one is claiming that we are descended from Neanderthals, but they are our close cousins.

Have you looked at the link I provided earlier? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_hominina_fossils)  Which of those fossils is "man" and which is not?

If your answer is that you don't know, then at least we agree on that, though probably for different reasons.  The differences (at least among more recent specimens) are subtle, the fossil record is often unclear and interpretations can vary.  We'll probably never have a precise family tree.

But what we do have, beyond any reasonable doubt, is an abundance of evidence that the further back in time you look, the more and more "non-man" the creatures become.  And it's not a fine line -- there's no point at which you can say, "this is the moment when 'man' begins", which is what you would expect if man originated fully formed with no ancestors.

That's my evidence for the theory of evolution.  Israfil has offered other evidence, which is quite interesting but as he says it's not the sort of thing that a layman can easily understand.  But I don't need that.  Anyone can look at the fossil evidence and see the general progression, if not the exact lineage.

As I keep saying (and you keep ignoring), I don't claim "proof", because science doesn't work that way.  (If I can't even prove my own existence, how can I possibly prove my evolutionary past?)  But the available evidence (and there's lots of it) fits the theory perfectly.

So what evidence can you offer in support of the God theory?

Addeenul ‘Aql – Religion is intellect.
IP IP Logged
Chrysalis
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 November 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2041
Quote Chrysalis Replybullet Posted: 25 September 2008 at 5:03am

While we are on the topic of evolution;

My sister, whos a science student told me that her Australian teacher, while mentioning evolution, said in class: "Evolution is a fact, period. There are no two ways about it. You are all in university, and I expect you all to have that level of maturity. If you are st**id enough to believe otherwise, you may leave right now. . . there is no place for you in my class" ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
 Ouch
 
"O Lord, forgive me, my parents and Muslims in the Hereafter. O Lord, show mercy on them as they showed mercy to me when I was young."
IP IP Logged
Israfil
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 September 2003
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3984
Quote Israfil Replybullet Posted: 25 September 2008 at 12:54pm
That professor, however he/she conducted herself regarding that subject did so in poor taste your sister was unfortunately a witness to that. That my friend is what you call an fundamentalist believer in evolution. However that attitude is no different from religionist either.
IP IP Logged
Shasta'sAunt
Female  Islam
Senior Member
Senior  Member


Joined: 29 March 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1930
Quote Shasta'sAunt Replybullet Posted: 25 September 2008 at 2:59pm
Israfil:
 
Instead of addressing your assertions that evolution is fact and that humans did evolve from neanderthal, and that the Africa theory is fact when it is one theory, and that we share 99-98% DNA with apes, which has also been found incorrect, you choose to attack my intelligence.
 
I may not be intelligent, or as intelligent as you believe yourself to be. I am not a scientist, as you also claim to be. But I would like to point out that so far in this discussion you have been wrong about almost every assertion you have made, then backtracked as you so often do when shown to be wrong, claiming you didn't state it, that's not what you meant, etc...
 
Instead of just admitting that you don't know what you are talking about, you try to make me look st**id?  Well, if you are indeed a scientist and you mistate your evidence or backtrack on findings as often as you do here I am appalled. 
 
 
 
Originally posted by Israfil

"I believe I am the one who posted the articles about Herto man and the recent DNA testing of the neanderthal fossils which prove no connection to man. Now I am posting info regarding new tests showing discrepancies in the percentage of similarities of chimp and human DNA."
 
 
"Sigh" I wasted a PDF file on you that contained a scholarly research article? Humans according to recent studies and paleontologist, come from African ancestry I again repeat.
 
As a scientist I would think you would keep up with these things.
 
My field is Neuroscience not genetics (although I study genes when doing research of neurodegenerative diseases). Studying natural selection/evolution is more of a "past time" for me so now i dno't subscribe to new research articles on what they say about our ancestors and such most of what I have are previous notes I've taken along with scholarly research I come across. I think the problm with you being a "layperson" especially a novice in genetic research is you don't know what exactly to argue. Sure, anyone can Google search evolution/creationism debates and pull maybe a few files on scholarly work, but unfortunately nobody has told you that most reseacrh articles especially good, scholarly work are not accessible to the public, and if they are you have to subscribe which usually cost. Now, if you're lucky you can go Google Scholar but sometimes you need to know what you are looking for.
 
The reason I know you didn't read the article because it contained "scientific lingo" I'm sure you don't understand due to the lack of understanding of the mathematical methods they used in their research. In order for you to reject something know your opponents position and that is, having to read their references. another reason how I know you didn't read is because you kept repeating what I misstaed, that is, humans come from Neanderthals. the fact that I used to the word humans when referring to sub-species groups was my fault, but, if you read the wasted PDF file I submitted you'd know that among the divided theories concerning human ancestry that article was discussing human ancestry coming from one region (that is Africa) instead of multiregional as pressuposed by other scientist. None of the above you've addressed in your response to me so yes, I would suspect only a layperson would pick and choose what to believe and disbelieve, and such an attitude I find similar to people who choose to disbelieve in Islam they pick and choose versus that may seem to be favorable to theirs without actually understanding the material in its entirety.
 
Now, I'll give you credit for actually at least taking a stand on your position but do I think you know what you're talking about? No. In fact, I'm willing to go on a limb and say you probably know 45% of the material. I couldn't possibly expect you to know what
 
Chromosome 22          age-504,000-2,112,000    Zhao et al, 2000

or what Data analysis and coalescent simulations are. FYI the above was fro several posts back which I listed data concerning evolved genes. The above shows the age of th gene and the reference. So I guess the list where I showed the age of various genes don't count? Or the scholarly work I submitted via PDF which used genetic models? I guess you believe human beings arrived as they are. From a Muslim historical perpective, how do we know Adam didn't exist in a time where he lived among primate looking beings? Perhaps the way he communicated was entirely different we don't know except what is recorded in Hadith and Qur'an. The Qur'an states the Earth was created in a fixed amount of time, but how we know this 'time' did not extend to billions of years or eons? We only go on faith. Oh, and yes I really like this one:

"On a personal level I do not believe that man evolved from a single cell organism, I do believe that Allah created man."
 
We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?  (The Noble Quran, 21:30)"
 
Single celled organism lived in hot pools, and various other aquatic environments. But I guess this too is fable right?
 
"As a Muslim I am curious as to how you reconcile the Islamic belief that Allah created man with your assertions that evolution is a fact."
 
Well, remember as Nur_Ilahi points out, I'm a "fake Muslim" so why doe sit matter to you what I am or what beliefs I need to reconcile?

 
 
 
 
 
 
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt
IP IP Logged
Shasta'sAunt
Female  Islam
Senior Member
Senior  Member


Joined: 29 March 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1930
Quote Shasta'sAunt Replybullet Posted: 25 September 2008 at 3:08pm
"if you read the wasted PDF file I submitted you'd know that among the divided theories concerning human ancestry that article was discussing human ancestry coming from one region (that is Africa) instead of multiregional as pressuposed by other scientist."
 
Gee, I beat you to it. May not have as many fancy words, but the information is the same. And I posted it BEFORE your enlightening PDF, so are you copying me? Backtrack, backtrack.....
 
 
"Whether the fossils represent an immediate ancestor of modern humans or are indeed the first modern humans, Stringer says that the fossils are a
fantastic find that places the origin of modern humans in Africa.
 
The next question is where in Africa did modern humans evolve?
 
"There might be just one small place where modern humans originated and spread out from there, or did different bits of Africa contribute to the overall modern human pattern?" said Stringer.

Further research and better dating of the African fossils may eventually reveal an answer."

“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt
IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 58 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.

Note: The 99 names of Allah avatars are courtesy of www.arthafez.com

Advertisement:



Sponsored by:
Islamicity Membership Program:
IslamiCity Donation Program  http://www.islamicity.com/Donate
IslamiCity Arabic eLearning http://www.islamiCity.com/ArabAcademy
Complete Domain & Hosting Solutions www.icDomain.com
Home for Muslim Tunes www.icTunes.com
Islamic Video Collections www.islamiTV.com
IslamiCity Marriage Site www.icMarriage.com