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’s dismissal of this Hadith is not justified, as Islamic tradition contains various references to the mythological creature known as the Islamic whale or “al-hoot al-islami” in Arabic.

Although Nun, corresponding to the Arabic letter “n”, has limited mention in the Quran, references to it appear in Hadith and Tafsir as explanations of Quranic verses. Some early Sunni and Shia sources suggest that early Muslims believed the letter “nun” in Surah 68:1 of the Quran represented this massive whale that supports the Earth. This cosmogony aligns with ancient beliefs in which the world is upheld by giant animals and surrounded by an endless body of water.

Mohammad Hijab’s reinterpretation of the Hadith (Sahih al-Bukhari 3329) has raised questions due to its significant deviation from translations by established Islamic scholars. Hijab’s translation seems to align the Hadith with contemporary scientific knowledge, interpreting it as referring to the dominant genes in determining a child’s resemblance to its parents instead of which parent experiences sexual discharge first.

The Hadith in question features the story of Abdullah bin Salam, a Jewish man who meets Prophet Muhammad in Medina. Abdullah asks the Prophet three questions that only a true prophet could answer. The Prophet reveals that Gabriel had just informed him of the answers: (1) the first sign of the Hour would be a fire assembling people from east to west, (2) the people of Paradise would have the extra-lobe of fish-liver for their meal, and (3) a child’s resemblance to its parents would be determined by which parent experienced sexual discharge first. Upon hearing these answers, Abdullah converts to Islam and testifies that Muhammad is Allah’s Messenger. The Jews subsequently slander Abdullah upon hearing of his conversion, accusing him of being evil.

As is evident, the Hadith does not mention dominant genes. Instead, it explicitly states that a child’s resemblance to its parents is determined by the parent who experiences sexual discharge first. Notably, this Hadith aligns with a similar story found in the Talmud, which posits that if a woman emits her semen first, she will bear a male child; if a man emits his semen first, she will bear a female child.

These Hadiths and stories are not consistent with modern scientific understanding of genetic inheritance, and they do not mention genes as a determining factor in determining a child’s resemblance to their parents. Consequently, Hijab’s reinterpretation is problematic and unsupported by both the original text and modern science.

Sahih Muslim 315a also refutes Hijab’s arguments. It states that the fluid of the man is white, and the fluid of the woman is yellow. If the male’s fluid prevails, the child will be male, and if the female’s fluid prevails, the child will be female. This Hadith discusses the sex of the child, rather than resemblance. However, it is important to note that only the male contributes to the determination of the child’s sex; the woman has no impact on this aspect, as she only releases X chromosomes, and the man’s contribution of X or Y determines the child’s sex.

In an attempt to reconcile the Hadith with contemporary scientific understanding, Hijab cites another Hadith (Sahih Muslim 1500c) in which Prophet Muhammad explains that a child’s black complexion can result from ancestral lineage and genetics, even if both parents are not black. However, this idea of a child’s skin color reverting to ancestry is unsupported by modern science. Research demonstrates that skin color is determined by genetic factors inherited from both parents, not exclusively from one parent or a single ancestral line. Thus, the concept of “reversion” to ancestry regarding skin color is scientifically unfounded and inaccurate.

While Hijab cautions untrained readers against misinterpretations due to the mixture of authentic and weak or fabricated narrations in Muslim scholars’ exegetical works, such beliefs have been prevalent in early Islamic thought. Considering that many respected Islamic scholars have mentioned the Islamic whale and its connection to the Quran and the Earth’s cosmogony, issues with the Hadith’s chain of narration may not entirely invalidate its inclusion in these discussions.

Hijab’s assertion that neither the Quran nor the authentic Sunnah lend support to the claim of the Earth resting on a whale’s back may not consider the full range of available interpretations and the evolution of these ideas over time. ‘’