DEBATE:
”Faith Freedom International's Ali Sina attempts to contest the solid evidence
for the Quran and Modern Science Debate”
Response
#2 to Ali Sina
[ Intro] [Part 1] [Part 2] [Part 3] [Part 4]
"You obviously feel that ad hominem is a good substitute to reason and
when you are
short of reason you can freely insult your
opponent and thus win the battle."
Simply calling someone a bunch
of insults is not Ad hominem. Rather, Ad hominem is when you say for example,
Because someone is an idiot, therefore, his argument is wrong. There is not a
single case of Ad hominem in my entire debate, and I challenge you to show me
one example. Just one. Nevertheless, I did call you some names, but I was
simply returning fire from your goons in this post who have by writing such
filthy things about Islam, especially calling me a "Muslim Nigger".
That didn’t go to well with me.
So, Ali Sina, you need to call
your attack dogs off, and then I will perhaps spare you from insults you
rightfully disserve.
"This is why Dr. Morey did not think you are worth
responding to"
Oh For God’s sake…… I already
responded to this in my first response!
What am I going to do with
you… ? What am I going to do, with a person, who repeats the same argument I
already addressed? Rather, than responding to what I wrote, you simply restated
your ORIGINAL complaint!! Since this is not the first time you’ve done such a
blunder, I have come to the conclusion that you are not intellectually fit to
debate me. From this point, what I should do is terminate the debate and chalk
this up as another victory, but seeing that Denis Giron mysteriously entered
the debate out of no where, double teaming me, and has came to rescue you from
destruction, I have decided to continue and keep this debate going!
"However since one of my objectives is to prove Islamsists
are savages full of arrogance and bravado I am pleased by your behavior and
encourage you to continue."
So let’s see here, because I
practice the religion of Islam, I am a "savage",
And Ali Sina is the "cultured"
and "refined" one…. I wonder if he lifts up his pinky when he
sips his tea. I also wonder what this "cultured" liar, Ali Sina, thinks of the "goth" crowd with all
their piercing who hang out at the mall every day………
"Scrape together a few post facto miracles of
reinterpretation, ignore the fact that most of the Quran contains complete
idiocy and quite a few errors and inconsistencies (which require tremendous
amounts of doublethink, blissful ignorance and mental gymnastics to swallow)
and claim the divine (!) authorship of that wicked
piece of 'literatuur' has been 'proved'."
First of all I placed the link
where the anyone can see what he wrote, second, NONE
OF THIS HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE ISSUE OF COINCIDENCE which I was trying to
refute.
"This is basically my argument. The question of chance,
guess or genius becomes ludicrous when the entire Quran is full of nonsense,
errors and absurdities. I am afraid your understanding is very limited."
There is no logic in this
statement, and I have already REFUTED this argument in my debate!!!! Lets take you
for example, you have been proved to be a liar, and I think you
are full of nonsense, errors, and absurdities. Like for example, as I stated
above, you repeat your original arguments which I already refuted, rather than
responding to what I wrote! That is pure absurdity. In addition to that, you
are so silly, that I have cited you making false statements about me, and
misquoting me. But, in spite of your ignorance, it is still logically possible
that you can make a good guess or a issues of chance can effect you. But
anyways, I would challenge you or anyone to show one error in the Quran,
absurdity, or nonsense. Perhaps we can do that debate after this.
"What is so scientific about it? Any idiot knows that bees
build their cells in hills, on trees and in human dwellings?"
You have misrepresented my argument, again, the issue here is how did the author of the
Quran know that it was the female bee which did these tasks…
By the way, after seeing what
has transpired in this debate, I don’t think it is wise for you to be calling
anyone an idiot.
"Why such a sentence should be a miracle?"
As I have mentioned, no one
statement can be used to prove a miracle. Rather, it is the collective analysis
of all the statements pertaining to science which will determine that. I have
already mentioned this more than once.
"As I said the word bee in Arabic is feminine. Muhammad had
to use this word because this is an Arabic word and there is no other word that
can substitute it. So if any credit is due it should go to the Arabs who
invented a feminine word for bee."
Let me translate what Ali
wrote from Iranian into English. He is asserting, that there was a 100%
probability of matching the specific role of the bee with the correct gender. In
other words, it was impossible to wrongfully match the gender of the bee with
the correct role. This is of course false. For example, the author of the Quran
could have easily have used a masculine adjective which would make the bee
male. In addition to that, the author of the Quran could have said, "the
female bee sits at home and never leaves the nest" which would be a
scientific error. We would expect a person living in the dessert 1400 years ago
to say exactly this. Therefore, you have not refuted my point, my assertion
stands unrefuted:
The probability of matching
the gender of a bee with the correct role is at least ½ .
You also contradict your
original statement:
"I
did not say those verses are coincidence and good guess. I said most of what Muhammad
said is wrong and the rest is commonsense, things that any ignorant man living
in his time could have known.
Now you are telling me that
the statement about the bees is SCIENTIFICALLY CORRECT. And you didn’t not
state that knowing the female bee doing these tasks was common sense.
"This argument of yours is as ridiculous as saying someone
calling a hen, hen must have divine knowledge because hens are female."
This is a complete
misrepresentation of my argument, I have no idea how this relates back to the
issue of the female bee, and how the author of the Quran gave the CORRECT ROLE
to the female bee.
"In my response that it is not likely for the Arabs to
forget one of their own cities, this gentleman is demanding that I produce a
list of all the lost cities dating back to BILLIONS of years."
First, we have absolutely no
evidence for that, and I have seen no evidence that Iram was a Arab city, you’re not even in the ball park here, because
I have already sited this as a hypothetical possibility. You are telling us
nothing new. But Even if this is true, you can’t escape the Math, if you
haven’t figured it out yet, it is the Math, not the Muslims, which is
your biggest enemy. I will simply restate my question which I asked you in my
last post:
"What is the probability
of SELECTIVELY CHOOSING the name of a city which the world does not know from a book,
only to be discovered 1400 years later through archaeological find... the
number will kill you... :) "
"Mr. Ahmed said that the name Iram did not exist in any
pre-Islamic books. I said what books? Muhammad and his marauding gangs burned
all the pre-Islamic books. They dismissed them as false or redundant because as
Muhammad said anything pre-Islamic was Jahili (ignorance) and there was no need
for them. The history reports the burning of the libraries in virtually all the
countries that Muslims invaded. The most famous one of then was the huge
library of
This has already been
addressed and you have been found to be a liar, I hope you to the right thing
and shut down your website as you promised:
www.ExamineTheTruth.com/Challenge_Sina.htm
"He has learned only one argument and that is the bee, Iram,
iron, sea, orbit argument and that is all he can talk about. That argument is
proven false but he can’t get over it because that is all he knows."
Actually, there are many more
scientific statements mentioned in the Quran, but for the debate I only had
time to talk about those 8. Since you never had the courage to do a public
debate, you would not know.
“I also quote the questions raised by Orenda one of the members
of FFI. Those are also my questions. She wrote:
I have a big problem with this ayah I am hoping you can help me
to understand. To me this ayah is entirely illogical."
There is nothing illogical about this verse, as far as I know,
nothing contradicts the principles of logic.
But it is good to see people from the Faith Freedom
International camp are leaping out of the audience like Denis Giron and Orenda
to help pick Ali Sina off the floor. But I don’t mind to be triple teamed.
In fact, it was Orenda who is the promoter for this
debate. She approached me several times challenging me to debate Ali Sina, so I
asked her to set it up, and I would wipe my ass with him. I finally initiated
Sina and here we are…
Unfortunately for Orenda, she
got the shock of her life, as Ali Sina was exposed as a liar and refuted. Orenda, then come to the rescue of her
fallen hero Ali Sina, and has promised, that she will do some research and she
will find the evidence for Ali Sina’s concocted statement he made against
Islam, and vindicate him, and we here at ExamineTheTruth.com wish her luck.
Man, I wish we had such loyal followers. I can’t even get people to return my
phone calls.
“Why would Allah purposefully send revelations which are
unclear?”
Test mankind perhaps….
“and that he knows that will cause
Fitnah and that he knows people will use the unclear verses for evil. ?”
Mankind was given adequate
instructions on how to approach them, so this will be a test for them. Now, of
course we can ask, why did God create evil? But that would be another
discussion.
“Why would I purposefully give unclear directions to my friend
when I know the chance could mean the loss of her very life?”
False
analogy. This is a
complete misrepresentation. The verse clearly states that clear verses are
given and they are the foundation, therefore, that is what mankind is suppose
to follow. And the unclear verses, leave them alone.
“Why send unclear meanings at all, because Allah says none know
the hidden meaning except Allah.”
Who cares, it has no impact on
my life.… when you die, you can ask God.
“Therefore, it would be useless to study the Qur'an front and
back, in fact the ayah implies that searching for hidden meanings cause fitnah.
Allah has declared that only he knows the hidden meaning.”
As mentioned above, there are
clear verses, and they are the foundations, study them
“Yet, at the same time, Allah expects those people who are
knowledgable to say we believe in it, all of it. The clear
AND unclear. How can they believe in the unclear parts
when they can not know the meaning?!"
It all depends on what to
believe about them. God is simply asking to believe that these verses as well
as the clear verses are revealed from God. There is logical contradiction. If so, please do share with us. Please do not volunteer
any emotional objections or personal preferences.
"Mr. Ahmed quoted the verse 3:7 that says some of the verses
of the Quran are clear and some are not. Can he tell
us why the Quran contradicts itself in other verses
and claims to be:
clear book (5:15)
easy to understand (44:58 , 54:22 , 54:32,
54:40)
explained in detail (6:114),
conveyed clearly (5:16, 10:15)
with "no doubt" in it (2:1)"
There is no contradiction. A
book can contain all the elements and even more than what you have cited above,
and still contain some verses where the meanings are hard to understand. But
even those hard to understand verses, the words can be clear and easy to
understand, it can have detail.. and there is no doubt that it is true. So,
where is the contradiction?
"As for a "barrier
between fresh and salt water" there is no such barrier at all and the
Quran is wrong. The sweet waters enter the sea and eventually mix with the sea
water. Anyone standing on a hill can see that when the water enters the sea
(especially when it is muddy) it pushes the sea water aside and because of its
momentum goes forward. In the mouth of thedelta the
waters seem to be separate but soon they merge. The Quran mentions that there
is a barrier and the Quran is wrong. So the question of probability and chance
is irrelevant because the Quran is wrong."
I have already refuted this in
response #1, once again, Ali was suppose to respond to what I wrote, but he did
not, rather, he just restated, and reworded his initial objection.
"Mr. Ahmed provided a link
to the Islamic site that tries to explain the miracles of the Quran. In that link
there is a picture of the Mediterranean Sea meeting the
No need to name the actual
seas to make a scientific statement, for example, if a person says, "The
brain is used for thinking and decision making", just because he did not
mention which lobe of the brain, does not mean that this is a statement which
does not agrees with modern science, rather, this statements fully agrees with
modern science without mentioning the lobe.
"As the verse 25:53 makes
it clear, Muhammad is talking about two seas one with sweet and palatable and
the other with salty and bitter water. The water in both Atlantic and
Already refuted in response
#1.
"In this case as I said there is no "forbidding
partitions" between the waters and they eventually mix."
I have already refuted this in
my first response, you can go back there and read….please provide for me a
definition from the Quran on what a "forbidding partition" is.
"On one side we have the
fresh waters of the river running into the sea and on the other side we have
the salty water of the sea being pushed away. In between the two we have a
mixture of the two waters."
Yes, that "in
between" is considered a barrier, so, are you now admitting that there is
a barrier between salt and fresh water?
"The Islamic site claims this water in between acts as the
barrier. This statement is simply asinine to say the least. The waters
eventually keep mixing until all the salt water and sweet water become one. The
mixed water between the two waters is not the barrier but the reverse. It is
the mixture of the two."
That specific area of the sea
where the mixing is occurring can be considered a radiating barrier. There are
many different types of barriers.
"When I say that Muhammad must have heard that at estuaries
waters do not mix Mr. Ahmed says " total baseless assumption, show us
proof of what you are saying if you are truthful" Dear Mr. Ahmed. I am not
making any absurd claims about Muhammad."
Yes, you are indeed making an
absurd claim about Muhammed(P), you are claiming that
someone else knew this scientific knowledge, and instead of taking the credit
himself, he tells the Prophet(P). And if you recall, I stated that it is a
hypothetical possibility, and I would then ask for a probability.
And please show us proof for
this assertion.
"It is you who are
claiming Muhammad had never heard about this phenomenon that could have been
observed by anyone and was known universally by all seamen and those who lives
near the deltas."
The barrier between fresh and
salt water, which you first denied above, it seems now you are painfully
admitting, that yes, there is a barrier. As far as I know, this barrier is not
visible to the naked eye, if I’m wrong, perhaps you can provide me a picture.
But what I am claiming, is that we have no proof that this barrier was known to
the world at that time. And if you are going to postulate, that the author of
the Quran did not know that there was a barrier between fresh and salt water as
he clearly stated, and was actually referring to something else, then this can
only be a coincidence or guess, which would involve probability.
Its funny, thus far, Ali would
have us believe that mysterious people told the author of the Quran about the
lost city of "Iram", and a different group of mysterious people told
the author of the Quran about "barriers" between the seas without
taking credit for themselves.
"It is up to you to prove to us that he never had heard what
everyone else already knew."
This argument can be shot down
in a variety of ways, let me first remind you that if you are going to assert
that the author of the Quran copied this knowledge from someone, than you must
provide the evidence, but all I am saying is that we have no evidence in
history of people knowing this great scientific discovery, and there were NO
MEANS OF BEING ABLE TO DO SO, because a person would need sophisticated
technology to get this type of information.
"Once again you affirm
that science has confirmed that there is a barrier between the seas. The only
link you provide is the Islamic site from where you learned the only argument
you have mastered. Please provide one reliable non-Islamic site that says there
is "a barrier and a forbidden partition" between salty water and
sweet water. You sound like that fox who was caught stealing the grapes and
when brought to the judge pleaded innocence and produced his tail as his witness.
Islamic sites are not scientific sites. They all rehash the same nonsense and
their claim that Quran is scientific is no proof to us."
God dang you’re stupid. The
very people who came to this post to rescue your sorry ass, are themselves
trying to tell you that there is a barrier between fresh and salt water here, it is called the pycnocline! Your problem Ali Sina, is that
you overcome with so much hate and venom for Islam, that when the challenge of
Islam faces you, you simply froth at the mouth, choke, and uncontrollably blurt out the
first thing that comes out of that hole in your head, Macbeth probably put Ali
Sina’s condition the best:
A poor player that struts and frets his hour
upon the stage and then is heard no more;
It is a tale told by an idiot,
full of sound and fury,
signifying nothing.
(Macbeth Act V, Scene 5)
now pay attention, here is the
stuff you requested:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Pycnocline+salt+fresh
http://www.geocities.com/freethoughtmecca/water.html (I will refute this stuff later)
In summary, here is Ali Sina’s
response to my 8 pieces of evidence, which I have already refuted above:
Now, one last point to be
mentioned, as for the numbers which I used for the probability, if someone were
to say that anyone of these 8 scientific pieces of evidence were
"coincidences" or "guesswork", I used the Subjective Theory
of Probability which humans do everyday. But, to compromise for the critics, to
the unreasonable point, that, I am willing to go down to 1/100 probability for
all of the scientific evidences, except the bee. For example, I am willing to
say, that AT LEAST, 1 out of every 100 people who write books mention the names
of cities which is not known to the world at that time, only to be discovered
in archaeological digs later on… that phenomenon happens to 1 out of every 100
people in this world. Take for example the story of Lewis Carroll's
Another example, before the
earth was discovered to be round, the people of the past have a 1 out of 100
chance of making the scientifically correct statement that:
"The sun and moon have a orbit."
WITHOUT STATING THAT THE SUN
ORBITS AROUND THE EARTH OR ANY OTHER SCIENTIFIC ERROR RELATED TO THE SUN AND
MOON’S ORBIT. Unfortunately, some critics try to read into the text scientific
errors which are not stated in the text.
After looking at the evidences
collectively, and factoring the probabilities as done so in the Ahmed-Giron
Debate, it will be demonstrated that the Quran is a book which could not have
been authored by a man, rather, a greater power must have been the author. Thus
far, not a single shred of evidence has been presented to contest this fact.
"It is up to him to show us at least one book of history,
philosophy, medicine, astrology, or chemistry dating back to the Jahilia."
Volume 3, Book 31, Number 137:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
The Prophet said, "We are an illiterate nation; we neither write, nor know accounts. The month is like this and this, i.e. sometimes of 29 days and sometimes of thirty days."
Enough said. Someone needs to
call Orenda back from her wild goose chase and let her know the bad news….
"Finally you have not yet
answered the question that I repeatedly asked you in each and every
communication to you. Do you think if you prove that the Quran is miraculous
but fail to disprove the charges of” …….."
Oh, but I believe I have…
if you would so kindly allow me Ali Sina, I would fancy to restate my position:
"And as for your claim, Prophet Muhammed (PBUH)
is a truthful person and not a liar like you Ali Sina, you bum :-) "
Ali Sina of Faithfreedom caught RED HANDED
Lies against Islam
Home
