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 Hijab and also add some additional good arguments:

''Before we start, one must notice that it is very clear that Hijab is trying to cherry pick a interpretation that does make more sense than the plain Text written in the Quran. This alone further proves how confusing and unclear the Quran really is, despite its claim to be easy to understand.

Now Hijab's arguments: The correct translation of Quran 86:6 isn't disputed by many. The only variation among translations lies in the interpretation of the word "maa". Most opt for the literal translation of "water", which aligns with the Arabic text, rather than the more general "fluid". The use of "water" as a euphemism for "semen" in standard Arabic is widely accepted among scholars, and several translations have even included this fact in their verse annotations.

What Hijab refers to is the Word "Sulb" and its Translation In the Quran, the word "sulb" appears in verse 86:7 and is often translated as "loins" in Islamic translations. This choice of translation can lead to a misinterpretation of the word, as it may be interpreted as the euphemistic term for the reproductive organs of a male. However, this secondary meaning of the English word "loins" is not its primary definition. The primary sense of the word refers to the lower part of the back, as evidenced by its relationship to the term "sirloin," which refers to a cut of meat from the top part of the back legs or the back near the tail. The Oxford English Dictionary acknowledges both definitions of "loins".
This ambiguity in the translation of "sulb" as "loins" is sometimes utilized by modern Islamic speakers trying to reconcile the verse with modern science. Clarity on the matter can be found in Lane's Lexicon of Classical Arabic, which provides a definition of "sulb" that clearly relates to the primary, literal sense of "loins" as it pertains to the back. Lane also cites an Arab saying that uses "sulb" and translates and explains it as "the sons of their loins" because the semen of a man is believed to come from the "sulb" of the man.

Confirmation of "Sulb" referring to the Back or Spine Further evidence that the word "sulb" in the Quran refers to the back or backbone is found in another verse discussing the same topic, but using a different Arabic word for back. In Quran 7:172, it states that the offspring of Adam's children come "from their backs (loins)" using the word "thahr", which specifically means the back. This definition is consistent with its usage in other verses, such as Quran 6:31.

Another verse in the Quran, 4:23, features the word "sulb", but this time, it doesn't include the mention of "tara'ib". It serves as an instance of a straightforward Arabic expression referenced in Lane's Lexicon (as mentioned above), reflecting the belief that the offspring of men stem from their backs.
The classical viewpoint, which was embraced by Al-Tabari and became widely accepted, posits that "al sulb" in Quran 86:7 refers to a man's backbone and "al tara'ib" to a woman's ribs. This is evident in Ibn Kathir's commentary, where he refers to the "sulb of the man" in reference to the man's backbone on multiple occasions.
The notion that the combination of male and female sexual secretions (maniy) leads to conception, as espoused by Ibn Kathir, traces its roots back to the teachings of the Greek physician Galen of the 2nd century CE. This concept is also evident in the Talmud. It can be observed in numerous hadiths and may even be hinted at in the Qur'an (as explored in the article "Sources of Islamic Theories of Reproduction").
Critics have challenged the claim that the term "tara'ib" refers to the vagina, as there is no solid evidence to support it. Bucaille and Giraud assert that "tara'ib" refers to the female sexual anatomy, but they do not provide any convincing justification for this interpretation. Additionally, critics argue that even if "tara'ib" were to mean what Bucaille and Giraud claim it does, the interpretation of it as "sexual areas of the woman" is too vague and lacks scientific accuracy, making it difficult to consider it as a miraculous component of the Qur'an.''