There exists a scientific miracle in the Qur'an [#2]

I say, The Qur’an is impossible to match linguistically. And this proposition so easy to be disproved. Just produce a chapter alike or better than Quran (producing three verse is not so hard). If my opponent does so, then he proves his point, and all muslims will refuse Islam and God. And world will be "better" place, without "Extremist Islamic Terrorists".My opponent showed the source from Aristotel's book, to disprove my point on baby gender, but he did not cite anything from this book. (Aristotle, De Generatione Animalium, Book II, p. 1148.) - I read it, here is link http://catalog.hathitrust.org...;, I invite everyone to read it, and make their decision whoi is right , and who is wrong. I am not idiot, I always check and read all source, do not try to decieve me and fellow debate.org members. Now Hindu Vedas is not impossible to imitate (replicate in the same linguistic pattern). The hindu priests did it through out the history, and that is how vedas were produced. Same for Avesta.P3- Qur'an is the greatest work of Arabic literature because nothing could be like it or better. [Baseless assertion - subjective opinion] If only I said it, or only muslims said it, I would totally agree with you. But non-muslims also said same thing: "That the best of Arab writers has never succeeded in producing anything equal in merit to the Qur’an itself is not surprising. In the first place, they have agreed before-hand that it is unapproachable, and they have adopted its style as the perfect standard; any deviation from it therefore must of necessity be a defect. Again, with them this style is not spontaneous as with Muhammad and his contemporaries, but is as artificial as though Englishmen should still continue to follow Chaucer as their model, in spite of the changes which their language has undergone. With the Prophet, the style was natural, and the words were those in every-day ordinary life, while with the later Arabic authors the style is imitative and the ancient words are introduced as a literary embellishment. The natural consequence is that their attempts look laboured and unreal by the side of his impromptu and forcible eloquence." - E H Palmer (Tr.), The Qur’an, 1900, Part I, Oxford at Clarendon Press, p. lv. "…the Meccans still demanded of him a miracle, and with remarkable boldness and self confidence Mohammad appealed as a supreme confirmation of his mission to the Koran itself. Like all Arabs they were the connoisseurs of language and rhetoric. Well, then if the Koran were his own composition other men could rival it. Let them produce ten verses like it. If they could not (and it is obvious that they could not), then let them accept the Koran as an outstanding evident miracle." - H A R Gibb, Islam – A Historical Survey, 1980, Oxford University Press, p. 28. If you want more source open google and type "non-muslims on quran".Con did not answer my definition of "miracle," so he agrees. Con, instead of answering my points, counted the number of characters I used. Congratulations, you can count, also.Quran was revealed in 7th century, and 8th century scholar, interpreted the verse 51.47 as " we are able to expand it as we want." and 11th century scholar interpreted as "we are able to make the heaven expanding more that it is already expanded.", so your interpretation of the word "waasi'a" or "mousi'oona" is baseless. You cannot speak and understand 7th century arabic better than 8th century arab scholar whose job was to study arabic especially arabic of Quran. Even dummies and idiots know that.I have almost 1400 characters left, incase Con counts them. I answered every point Con made. And about the rules that Con made or invented. I am not SUBJECTED to anyone's rule or rules (but only, God's rules). I am higher than and more honorable any man-made rule.