Convert Me

I appreciate your response. Since organization is clearly deficient, I'll just quote my opponent after providing a tagline and then provide my response. Extensions will be made afterwards. === TAGLINE: UNKNOWN === //the subject of scientific inaccuracies in the Q'uran is saturated with propaganda against said religion which, based on the inclusion of Turkish and Ummayad in the language filter is almost exclusively to gain converts.\ I'm not sure what this means. === TAGLINE: PHARAOH PROPHECY === //Although a body was found (it is in a Youtube video but my current device does not allow me to imbed the video name is pharaohs body found in red sea.) this website, (http://answers.yahoo.com......) a comment in said video, and the book kingfisher's mummy's says that the body was from pre- dynastic Egypt, not identified with any pharaoh and found in the ground as the pots and dirt surrounding the body prove in the video. Yes bodies can last as long as that due to natural mummification.\Assuming the first video I provided is the one my opponent was referring to, 1) This is not the body I referred to, or that the Qura'an prophecized. Look at the second video. http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... === TAGLINE: BIG BANG THEORY === //The description of the big bang in the video is not only vague (the heaven and the earth joining together) but has been mentioned in several other religions including the Judeo-Christian Tradition and the Ancient Egyptian religion. Also two bodies joining together had absolutely nothing to do with the big bang's theory of expansion from nothingness.\ Holy Qura'an [21:30] "Do the unbelievers not realize that the heaven and the earth used to be one solid mass that we exploded into existence? And from water we made all living things. Would they believe?" === TAGLINE: REFLECTED MOONLIGHT === //As for the moon reflecting light this theory has been known since Greek times and any idiot would know this because if it gave off full light it wouldn't be in phases. I learned this fact in school but could not find a source but the lack of a name for an inventor of this theory will show how old it is.\ My opponent has no source to verify this; moreover, I would argue that it's difficult to claim the moon has reflected light if I don't know what the moon is. === TAGLINE: EARTH SHAPE === //You underestimate the ancients understanding as for example Aristotle knew the earth was round due to the curvature of the moon.\ 1) My opponent has provided no source. 2) Non-sequitur; from the Earth, the moon looks flat. Here is a source; turns out that, yes, Aristotle believed the Earth was round and based on justifiable observations. http://en.wikipedia.org... The thing is, Aristotle believed in a God, but Islam had not existed yet. His beliefs do not rule out Islam. Moreover, hard science had not yet proven that the Earth was round; medieval Europe believed it was flat when Columbus was sailing to North America. The Muslims, though, had their scripture a millennium before the Europeans finally figured it out, and before Astronauts finally saw the earth even later. === TAG: OSTRICH-EGG SHAPE === //I am afraid that god would have had a better word for earth than an ostrich egg as if you google search the word ostrich egg you will find pictures that are similar to chicken eggs and I doubt when he did compare it he didn't mean an exact shape but probably a metaphor but the exact text given to me might help.\ Here's the exact text. Go to verse 30; but remember, this is an English *translation*. It will never be the exact equivalent to Arabic. http://www.submission.org... === TAGLINE: REVOLUTION OF THE SUN === //Not to mention for the mention made of the earth revolution, did I hear him say the Sun revolves? It does not revolve and the Copernican theory was developed by Philolaus which you can learn more about here.\ The first paragraph of this article is sufficient. http://www.smh.com.au... === TAGLINE: EXPANDING EARTH === //As for the expanding earth this creation is also in the Greek religion and was followed by Anatolian pagans who probably were converted with this idea being similar to the Christian adoption of pagan ideas.\ My opponent has provided no source, and this does not rule out Islam. Again, my opponent continues to misunderstand- the Qura'an has this knowledge AND predates a scientific VALIDATION of it's text. This is miraculous indeed. === TAGLINE: PLANT SEX === //The plant sex argument could hold ground as I found no reference of the discovery of that fact I know that monks around the year 1000 bred plants such as peas with no wonder at the fact that plants have sexes and plants do not have individual sexes but both.\ The year 1000 was, unfortunately, after the conception of Islam. Moreover, this does not refute the argument. === TAGLINE: WATER BORDER === //Also your video says that there is a barrier between sweet and salty water. I have never encountered "sweet water" and wonder if he means fresh water. Perhaps I shall ponder this one with some sweet water at my local convenience store.\ Yes, sweet water does in fact mean fresh water. Extend this argument, along with the ones I plan to extend at the beginning of the round; moreover, this page on Googlebooks will help explain better. http://books.google.com... === TAGLINE: MOUNTAINS === //Mountains do not keep the earth from shaking and the earth upon creation with no landmasses but smooth earth at no point shook uncontrollably.\ My opponent misunderstands. http://www.answering-christianity.com... === TAGLINE: WATER CREATION === //As for everything being created from water this is an ancient philisophical idea of ancient Greece and china, water being considered the base element.\ Again, this argument goes unrefuted. Science did not verify this until after the Qura'an; moreover, my opponent is self-refuting inasmuch as he tells us that Greece and China believed water is a base element. Water is NOT an element; it is a molecule. So, his argument fails on 3 grounds. 1) My argument is unrefuted. 2) The Greeks and Chinese were wrong. 3) Yet again, my opponent has no source. === TAGLINE: LIFE OF INSECTS === //When the man in the video talks about the life of insects I must ask, Why is this significant? These creatures are not unobservable and if the Q'uran made some life altering discovery about their lives he would have logically told us them.\ Seeing as branches of science deal with insects (e.g. entomology), clearly this is significant enough for us to study. === TAGLINE: EMBRYOLOGY === //And finally, embryos are not made of a leech like substance.\ This statement is also from Sura 23:14. The Arabic word "mudghah" means "chewed substance or chewed lump." Toward the end of the fourth week, the human embryo looks somewhat like a chewed lump of flesh (Fig. 3). The chewed appearance results from the somites which resemble teeth marks. The somites represent the beginnings or primordia of the vertebrae. http://www.islam101.com... My opponent concludes by saying that, had he been given actual proof, he would be open minded. I provided the faith; he should be able to do the *research*. Extend the "Perfect Book" argument, and the ones mentioned above. Out of characters. Thank you, I urge a con vote.