From: dchatterjee@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan,soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.bangladesh
Subject: Re: The Quran and the Modern Science
Date: 31 Dec 92 12:50:33 CST
Distribution: world
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

In article <1992Dec31.112841.13157@topaz.ucq.edu.au>, 
salama@topaz.ucq.edu.au writes:
> In article <1992Dec29.203201.45959@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>, dchatterjee@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes:
>> In article <1992Dec30.103258.13155@topaz.ucq.edu.au>, 
>>>salama@topaz.ucq.edu.au writes:
>>>....... (deleted)...
>>...... (deleted)..... 
>>   He will soon get his "reward" - in front of his Islamic brothers.

   Actually MI has been correctly characterized by Naufal A.Khan and Mirza Ilyas.
   His reward has been duly presented to him by these gentlemen. In turn, MI
   has defined them (Khan and Ilyas) to be in the Organization of Hidden
   Enemies of Islam. I fail to understand how faith in God (Allah) can be
   discriminatory ????? How Khan and Ilyas be enemies of Faith ??? Moreover, I
   am not sure why the Almighty MSA-net has not stopped short of issuing 
   death-threats at the behest of Ayatollah Mustafa Ibrahim ??????

> ... . I think MI is the out cast of the net. Please, don't take
> this as an advice/lesson but a reminder from your brother.
>

  Thanks. I will remember that.  Anyway, I think that once you have said that,
  we need not discuss about the low-life MI. Emulating Jesus Christ (PBUH) is
  impossible. This is because, if emulative process would have been viable,
  then anyone could have been Einstien, Shakespeare, Homer, Goethe etc. and
  etc. That it is not, makes me respect, (at a distance though), Jesus Christ
  (PBUH). That is why I cannot follow the Good Samaritan 8-).
 

> 
>> ...... (deleted)......

> 
>     I think you are not in touch with the mainstream mathematical physicists.
> His work is well disputed though he has done some good work. The trumpet of
>his credibility is blown out of proportion to sell his book, "A brief history 
>...".
> It was money making business.
>

     No, I don't think so. I am of the opinion that there could be difficulties
     (entirely technical) in applying Hawking's theory. However, that does not
     say his work is invalid. Moreover, why is it exactly  that his work is
     disputed ? I mean is it because some phenomena *cannot* be explained via
     use of Hawking's theory ????? What is that the scientists think *cannot*
     be explained by Hawking's theory ??? I remember that Hisenberg (who had
     actually *failed* Ph.D oral, but, Sommerfeld pushed him thru') had the
     same difficulty in getting Uncertainity Principle accepted. Einstien had
     himself stated that. It does not mean that it could be *shown* in a
     mathematical form that Hisenberg was wrong. Same is true for Hawking.

 
>>    go thru' the posting of Milind Saraph (where he quotes Pervez Amirali
>       I have read it. That is irrelevant.
> 
>>    Hoodbhoy). Muhammad (570-632 A.D) made some simplistic observations on the
>>    issue of day and night and etc. . But, they were nothing great. Following 
>>    Muhammad, much later in the 17th century, Jules Verne visualized a very
>>    advanced world - most of which were unheard of in his time. Now, comparing
>>    Muhammad and Jules Verne's capabilities of visualizing the future, whom do
>>    you think a rational person should praise ?????   
>> 
>      It is not the matter of the vision of the future. I have insisted on the
> point that Dr.B's work is NOT a "proof" of the divine nature of the Quran. It
> is a personal testimony.
       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    It is exactly because of this reason we are trying to dig deeper into his
    "personal testimony". Nothing else. Because Science does not accept any
    personal feelings/ emotions.

 


> ....... (deleted)......


   Salam the Mathematical Physicist, *cannot* distinguish between physics and
   metaphysics. No more 8-).
> 
> 
>...... (deleted)..... Don't call me a Islamic
> fundamentalist, call me a fundamentalist because I believe in the fundamental
> of life i.e., a good healthy discussion with a good healthy person, like
> you. :-|)
> 
> I could say,"Bovine yourself", but I wouldn't. :-|)
> 

   Sorry, I take these remarks back.

>     Don't call me Islamic apologist, call me apologist because I don't 
> hesitate to apologise for my mistakes. :-|)
> 

  O.K ! I won't call you an Islamic apologist.

>..... (deleted).....  
>> 
>>>     It will be interesting to see a "mathematical theory of Islam", by D.
>>> Chatt.
>>> 
>>      You know what ? My innermost feelings tell me that Islam cannot be 
>>      understood by logic. All that Islam has done or the manner in which
>>      Islam has been shown to the world is: demolish anything that does not
>>      agree with Islamic faith. (Read the 1990 Amnesty International Report.)
> 
>      Ah! Amnesty International!! This is the organisation which finds all the
> horrors and terrors in the third world and muslim countries and the perfect
> peace and harmony in the first world. A typical of western prejudice. I never
> heard any thing from AI on Bosnia.
> 
>

    Amnesty International is an organization which probably discriminates
    between Mustafa Ibrahim and a pious sufi saint. 8-) I fail to see the
    reason behind your diatribe.


    Happy New Year,

    - deb chatterjee
   (a good samaritan)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan,soc.culture.bangladesh,soc.culture.indian