Rewrite the entire text below, make it sound more coherent and better. Mention everything in great detail, including Hadithes and Quran Verses. Be very sceptical of the author Mohammad Hijab and also add some additional good arguments:

''Hijab claims there are three different interpretations for the verse, with each referring to different anatomical features. However, these interpretations rely on ambiguous translations and cherry-picking information that best fits the intended narrative - a common strategy used to defend controversial Quranic verses. This issue is further exacerbated by the lack of clarity in the Quran itself.
The primary word in question is “sulb,” found in Quran 86:7. While Hijab claims this term can refer to various parts of the human anatomy, classical Arabic texts, such as Lane’s Lexicon, consistently define “sulb” in relation to the back. Furthermore, Quranic verses 7:172 and 6:31 use the word “thahr,” which specifically refers to the back in the context of offspring originating from it. By embracing multiple interpretations for “sulb,” Hijab is effectively disregarding the consistency and contextual usage of the term in classical texts and other Quranic verses.

The problem with the 1st interpretation is that the seminal vesicle is below the ribs and not "in between the ribs and the backbone" so it's out of the window. You literally have to draw a diagonal line from the bottom of the ribs to the bottom of the tailbone to get to the seminal vesicle. Even so, it's not the actual fluid that gives rise to a new human. That's the sperm and it is produced in the testes of a male after puberty, not in the embryonic stage so where the gonads originally were during pregnancy is irrelevant

Hijab’s attempt to connect this verse with modern scientific understanding falls short as he relies on Bucaille and Giraud’s claims that “tara’ib” refers to the female sexual anatomy. Critics have debunked this view, arguing that there is no strong evidence to support such an interpretation, and that this claim simply advances a narrative that aligns with modern knowledge.
The comparison between the processes of human reproduction presented in Quran 86:7 and the theories of Galen, a Greek physician from the 2nd century CE, serves to discredit any claims of miraculous scientific accuracy. Considering that these ideas existed long before the advent of Islam, it is questionable how Hijab’s arguments could serve as a testament to the divine nature of the Quran.
By taking a closer look at Quranic verses and Hadiths, it is evident that the interpretations Hijab proposes simply reinforce a narrative that is aligned with modern scientific understanding. However, these explanations rest on ambiguous translations and cherry-picked evidence, rendering them unconvincing. Thus, the attempts to reconcile Quran 86:7 with scientific knowledge, like Hijab’s arguments, ultimately prove insufficient in addressing the skepticism surrounding the supposed divine origin of the Quran.

86:5. "Now let man but think from what he is created! He is created from a drop emitted. Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs."

First it should be noted that the above passage is not poetic. In its context 86:5 lists a variety of natural wonders which are given as a "sign" of God's goodness for all men to see. With that in mind the author of the above passage from the Quran tells us that sperm (drop emitted) comes from the area of the body "between the backbone and the ribs." In actuality, sperm is produced and stored in the scrotum; more technically, in the system of tubes in the testicles which are located in the scrotum. The scrotum is not located between the back and the ribs. (If yours is, contact us and we'll refer you so somebody.) Can the Quran be the Word of God and be wrong about reproduction, which God created?

Human Reproduction
23:14. "Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood, then of that clot we made a lump; then We made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh; the We developed out of it another creature."

There are four orders of error in this small passage. However, it is no fault of Mohammad, he did not have the technology available to discover the thruth about embriology through observation.

1st error � "congealed blood." The cells which begin to form blood, much less clotting agents, do not begin formation until the fourth week of pregnancy. After the joining of the sperm and egg into a morula, there is not blood or clotting agent yet in formation.

2nd error � "clot." This is mentioned as an additional error since the concept of a clot or collection of blood cells is implied twice in this short passage.

3rd and 4th errors � "bones." The roder presented in the Quran is fertilization, blood (or cell) formation, bones, then flesh. This is untrue. Organs and flesh are actually the first that begin cellular divsion and formation. Later, as the child grows, bone structures begin to develop along with organs and flesh.

Any of these, and the other readily available facts regarding human reproduction can be looked up in an encyclopedia and compared with the Quran. Can the Quran be the Word of God and be wrong about reproduction, which God created?

1)
The verse refers to fluid and not sperm, and the fluid comes from between the backbone or loins and the ribs. Even if the Qur’ān were referring to sperm, the sperm is created in the testes which are located between the loins and the ribs.


2)
The verse refers to the baby emerging from the mother’s womb, which is located between the backbone or loins and the ribs.

3)
The verse refers to the man and woman engaged in sexual intercourse, by which the ejaculatory fluid is issued between them during intercourse.''