Quran has indeed - changed, and/or altered.

If I understood Pro's sole argument correctly, it was that we have no manuscripts prior to 671 CE and because it was only transmittedas orally by men and men are fallible then men probably made mistakes here or there during transmission which does not gurauntee 100% accuracy.There are several problems here:(1) We do have manuscripts prior to 671 CE such as the birmingham manuscript which is surprisngly dated to within the lifetime of the Prophet to maximum a decade after his death with 95.4% confidence [1a] and the manuscript has 100% accuracy to modern text. David Thomas, professor of Christianity and Islam at the University of Birmingham is quoted as saying: The tests carried out on the parchment of the Birmingham folios yield the strong probability that the animal from which it was taken was alive during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad or shortly afterwards. This means that the parts of the Qur’an that are written on this parchment can, with a degree of confidence, be dated to less than two decades after Muhammad’s death. These portions must have been in a form that is very close to the form of the Qur’an read today, supporting the view that the text has undergone little or no alteration and that it can be dated to a point very close to the time it was believed to be revealed. [1a] There are literally no differences whatsoever from this manuscript which dates within possibly the lifetime of the Prophet and the one we have now. [1b] This is a pretty significant piece of evidence and should be pretty obviously that it could just end this debate right now once and for all.So we can establish the perfect textual preservation of the Quran to within the lifetime of the prophet (which would grant perfect preservation) to within maximum of 10 years after the death. You can not do that in ancient historiography with any document.(2) The text prior to 671 CE was not transmitted verbally alone but was also written down. Recall that Abu Bakr ordered the compilation within two years of the death of the Prophet. [2] So there was a written codex at the time. Not to mention the written Codex that the birmingham manuscript came from.(3) Pure conjecture. The conjecture brought up by Pro is a sheer "what if?" situation where he is merely asserting that maybe it is likely that the reciters altered the Text since men are fallible but he does not provide any actual evidence that the Qu'ran is corrupted.I will now provide a small sliver of evidence for the preservation of the Qu'ran We know that the the Quran was perfectly compiled due to eyewitness testimony and scribal authentication from contemporaries of the Propher such as those from Ibn Abbas and Muhammad bin Al-Hanafiyya. [3] So Now what we have established is that the Qu'ran Abu Bakr compiled from cover to cover is perfectly preserved according to testimony from eyewitness contemporary scribes of The Prophet Muhammad himself. So now comes the next era which is the transitionary from Abu Bakr to Uthman which we have good manuscript evidence from that period too which all align 100% with the Qu'ran we have today and have no differences. [4] [5] Now comes the next era which is Uthman to the present and we have the complete entire Quranic Codex from the time of Quran which is kept in Samarkand, Uzebakistan Radio-carbon dating showed a 95.4% probability of a date between 595 and 855. [6]. We have another that comes later [7] though Uthmanic yet with no changes outside the framework of the seven ahruf. [8]Rebuttals:- There were no diatrical marksThis is trivial and not of significant importance since it does not change the meaning at all. [9]- Al-Hamd and different pronounciations.Recall the seven ahruf. [8] Notes:I will have to ask Pro to refrain from using Wikipedia for obvious reasons and amateur forums like Quora.I did not provide much evidence because the BOP is ultimately not on me anyways.Sources:[1a] - https://www.birmingham.ac.uk...;[1b] - http://ilmfeed.com...;[2] - Sahih Bukhari, Kitabul Tafir, Hadith 4603 [3] - Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 6, Book 61, Hadith 537[4] - http://www.historyofinformation.com...;[5] - https://www.uni-tuebingen.de...;[6] - http://www.worldlibrary.org...;[7] - http://www.topkapisarayi.gov.tr...;(link to museum which contains the manuscript)[8] - Sahih Bukhari, 3047; Sahih Muslim, 819[9] - http://www.nbcnews.com...;