The Qur'an is not the word of God, it contains too many scientific mistakes.

Well you simply ignored alot of what i said, just see how detailed i was in round 3 and how every part of your reply was taken bit by bit and refuted. On the other hand, you just pick a handful of things from what i say and choose to reply to. While the rest was simply ignored. Since this is the final round any how, so there is no more room for a rebuttal to what your saying since you provided no arguments at all to refute. You failed to use any argument except copy and paste from a website that i kept replying to every time and you kept repeating what you said over and over. "What proof do you have of such? What purpose would it serve the person in that source? " I already gave the proof of what i said, if you cared to read what i wrote. You will find that he used an example stating that "Nafsen waheda" was Adam of some sort even though the Ayah is talking about the "soul" not adam and eve. Read what i wrote, and read the Ayah from the internet and i am sure you will not find it is talking about Adam and Eve. http://quran.com...Otherwise which i surely suspect is that you have not even read what he wrote about how the word "Thumma" is used for presentation. By the way here is what i refuted from your website, http://islamicstudies.info...; Now honestly have you read this? His purpose is to try and make an excuse for the Qur'an that it is correct even if it is not. Instead of being honest and saying this verse has nothing to do with reality he goes to great lengths of trying to justify that the word "Thumma" simply doesn't mean "Then". I would like you to go to any Arabic speaking person and ask him what does "Thumma" means, and i guarantee you will find no other answer than it means "then" AND it has to be used in a chronological order. I woke up THUMMA i went to school. So simply the proof: Deliberate deception to try to change the Ayah's meaning to try and prove that "Thumma" can be used for presentation and not a chronological order which i debunked already. Purpose: To try to correct the Qur'an fallibility because he cannot admit that the Ayah is completely wrong and is not in conformity with modern science but infact quite the opposite. "Also, you brought up the length of time again, when you clearly said that you didn't want to debate such twice. I already said the exact time is not known to us." I am not talking about how long it took, i am talking about conformity with science. I don't care how long is a day in this Ayah. My point is how can the Earth take twice as much time as the universe? Earth took 4 days and the universe took only 2 days? I asked this question two times already and was not replied to twice. Universe is 13.7 billion years and earth is only 4 billion years. This Ayah has it upside down, which supports the geocentric view that i proposed and still had no reply whatsoever. "You gathered all that from just a few verses about creation? You said Heavens or the universe. Is Heaven a part of the universe we are in? Heaven is a place people go in the afterlife so I am a bit confused here. "Janna is in the afterlife. I did not even come close to this so i am not sure what and why you are talking about it here. The Qur'an uses many times the word heavens "Samawat" as the universe and this is what my argument has been all about. I was talking about the creation of the universe. Well there are tons of other reasons, but the verses about the creation are completely spot on about how whoever wrote this book is simply someone with the idea that the earth is the center of the universe. I gave my verses that prove this and till now you have failed to reply to my arguments or prove otherwise. I have shown how the Qur'an clearly states that the stars are in the lower heavens (Not Janna) and the moon is in their midst. So infact the stars are closer to us than the moon which is something an omniscient God would not say, but simply 7th century Arabs who had no understanding of the universe as we do today. ""It is also recorded authentically that the Arabs themselves were surprised by the language of the Quran because the Prophet was not known to have composed any literature before its revelation. Clearly, the language of the Quran was not from Muhammad’s own tongue. Even in translation non-Arabic speaking people can see a difference between the Quran and the Hadith." Off topic, not what i was discussing in any sort of way. Has nothing to do with the debate. I can debate the linguistics of the Qur'an and how it is not really that eloquent but that is a debate of itself. My debate here is about science and the Qur'an, not Qur'an and linguistics and eloquency. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The only argument you presented here is that antibodies and bacteria are a pair. You dodged what i said before, since i clearly replied that you cannot say that a plastic bag and a human being are a pair in any sort. If you think this is ridicilous because it is and that is exactly your argument. "Me" and an Iphone are not a pair and will never be. Me and my wife are a normal "zawjayne" or a pair and that is completely fine. Just try it out with anyone saying that you and a dead object are a zawjayne and see if ti really makes any sense. You can go to any biologist even a muslim biologist and ask him are antibodies and bacteria a pair and see his reply. Just don't tell him its from the Qur'an and he will laugh at you. Because it is nonesense. And we can add anything to the equation and make it a triad. Ok an antibody and a bacteria are a pair, but if we add RNA into the mix then its a triad, thus the Qur'an is false. Really nonesense that has taken too long. Why you came up with flowers, i have no idea. I haven't given one plant example, i gave you the snake and whiptail lizard and neither were replied to. So this is a diversion and doesn't really refute anything i said. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Final words: I have shown time and time again that the Qur'an is simply not in conformity with science and it got it absolutely wrong about the universe creation and the only argument i got from con was a really weak proof that the word "then" does not mean "then" somehow. I gave evidence about how the Qur'an supports the Geocentric universe and still got no reply. Then my opponent went on to talk about the Qur'an linguistics which was not a topic of discussion in the first place. My opponent only tried to reply by copy pasting from an Islamic website which is definitely biased and wanted me to read the entire website and from her replies, she seems to have not read it ENTIRELY herself. Even still i debunked the website and it's really silly claims and shown its deceptiveness and my opponent still asked me for proof about its deception which proves to me she did not read the website claims about how the word "thumma" is used for presentation. Again which i debunked clearly. Anybody reading this will surely see how argument after argument were simply ignored and only cherry picked what my opponent wanted to reply to. My second example, my opponent had only one argument. That antibodies and bacteria are a pair. Which any biologist will claim as nonsense because, it is. This is what i was trying to prove from the first place that adherers of Islam have a blind spot toward the fallibility of their holy book. I have shown how incorrect the Qur'an is about the creation of the universe and how it really got wrong that everything is created in pairs. Thank you for your time and good luck.