Some Evidence for the Truth of Islam

[yassin]

The science of modern cosmology, observational and theoretical, clearly indicates that, at one point in time, the whole universe was nothing but a cloud of ‘smoke’ (i.e. an opaque highly dense and hot gaseous composition).1 This is one of the undisputed principles of standard modern cosmology. Scientists now can observe new stars forming out of the remnants of that ‘smoke’

Figure 10: A new star forming out of a cloud of gas and dust (nebula), which is one of the remnants of the ‘smoke’ that was the origin of the whole universe. (The Space Atlas, Heather and Henbest, p. 50.)
Figure 11: The Lagoon nebula is a cloud of gas and dust, about 60 light years in diameter. It is excited by the ultraviolet radiation of the hot stars that have recently formed within its bulk. (Horizons, Exploring the Universe, Seeds, plate 9, from Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc.)
The illuminating stars we see at night were, just as was the whole universe, in that ‘smoke’ material.
God has said in the Quran:
Then He turned to the heaven when it was smoke... (Quran, 41:11)
Because the earth and the heavens above (the sun, the moon, stars, planets, galaxies, etc.) have been formed from this same ‘smoke,’ we conclude that the earth and the heavens were one connected entity. Then out of this homogeneous ‘smoke,’ they formed and separated from each other.
God has said in the Quran:
Have not those who disbelieved known that the heavens and the earth were one connected entity, then We separated them?... (Quran, 21:30)
Dr. Alfred Kroner is one of the world’s renowned geologists. He is Professor of Geology and the Chairman of the Department of Geology at the Institute of Geosciences, Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany. He said: “Thinking where Muhammad came from . . . I think it is almost impossible that he could have known about things like the common origin of the universe, because scientists have only found out within the last few years, with very complicated and advanced technological methods, that this is the case.”2 (To view the RealPlayer video of this comment click here ). Also he said: “Somebody who did not know something about nuclear physics fourteen hundred years ago could not, I think, be in a position to find out from his own mind, for instance, that the earth and the heavens had the same origin.”3

Footnotes:
(1) The First Three Minutes, a Modern View of the Origin of the Universe, Weinberg, pp. 94-105.
(2) The reference for this saying is This is the Truth (videotape). For a copy of this videotape, please visit this page.
(3) This is the Truth (videotape).

 

[yassin]

This is just wrong. Mountains don't act as "stabilizers".

In fact, mountains are the result of tectonic activity... IOW, mountains are evidence that the earth shakes, not protection against earthquakes.

so, whats your evidence of what you mentioned?

 

[Meow Mix]

The science of modern cosmology, observational and theoretical, clearly indicates that, at one point in time, the whole universe was nothing but a cloud of ‘smoke’ (i.e. an opaque highly dense and hot gaseous composition).1 This is one of the undisputed principles of standard modern cosmology. Scientists now can observe new stars forming out of the remnants of that ‘smoke’

Figure 10: A new star forming out of a cloud of gas and dust (nebula), which is one of the remnants of the ‘smoke’ that was the origin of the whole universe. (The Space Atlas, Heather and Henbest, p. 50.)
Figure 11: The Lagoon nebula is a cloud of gas and dust, about 60 light years in diameter. It is excited by the ultraviolet radiation of the hot stars that have recently formed within its bulk. (Horizons, Exploring the Universe, Seeds, plate 9, from Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc.)
The illuminating stars we see at night were, just as was the whole universe, in that ‘smoke’ material.

I just wanted to point out here that this is wrong. At no point in time was the universe a giant nebula or anything resembling a giant nebula.

At first, I thought perhaps you were trying to assert something about the (brief) period of time when the universe consisted of a quark-gluon plasma. Even if so, showing pictures of nebulae is inappropriate because they are vastly different things.

Yes, our sun Sol and planet Earth formed from the remnants of a nebula (Sol is a 3rd generation star, meaning it formed from the remnants of 2 stars sequentially before it) but as I said the whole universe was never a nebula. I would be really impressed with the Quran if it incorporated knowledge that Sol is a 3rd generation star, though. That would be impressive. I'm betting instead though that the Quran probably asserts the Earth was one of the first things created though, which is utterly wrong. (I could be wrong -- DOES the Quran say the Earth was made relatively early in creation?)

 

[yassin]

The science of modern cosmology, observational and theoretical, clearly indicates that, at one point in time, the whole universe was nothing but a cloud of ‘smoke’ (i.e. an opaque highly dense and hot gaseous composition).1 This is one of the undisputed principles of standard modern cosmology. Scientists now can observe new stars forming out of the remnants of that ‘smoke’ (see figures 10 and 11).

Figure 10: A new star forming out of a cloud of gas and dust (nebula), which is one of the remnants of the ‘smoke’ that was the origin of the whole universe. (The Space Atlas, Heather and Henbest, p. 50.)
​

​

Figure 11: The Lagoon nebula is a cloud of gas and dust, about 60 light years in diameter. It is excited by the ultraviolet radiation of the hot stars that have recently formed within its bulk. (Horizons, Exploring the Universe, Seeds, plate 9, from Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc.) (Click on the image to enlarge it.)
​

The illuminating stars we see at night were, just as was the whole universe, in that ‘smoke’ material. God has said in the Quran:
Then He turned to the heaven when it was smoke... (Quran, 41:11)
Because the earth and the heavens above (the sun, the moon, stars, planets, galaxies, etc.) have been formed from this same ‘smoke,’ we conclude that the earth and the heavens were one connected entity. Then out of this homogeneous ‘smoke,’ they formed and separated from each other. God has said in the Quran:
Have not those who disbelieved known that the heavens and the earth were one connected entity, then We separated them?... (Quran, 21:30)
Dr. Alfred Kroner is one of the world’s renowned geologists. He is Professor of Geology and the Chairman of the Department of Geology at the Institute of Geosciences, Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany. He said: “Thinking where Muhammad came from . . . I think it is almost impossible that he could have known about things like the common origin of the universe, because scientists have only found out within the last few years, with very complicated and advanced technological methods, that this is the case.”2 (To view the RealPlayer video of this comment click here ). Also he said: “Somebody who did not know something about nuclear physics fourteen hundred years ago could not, I think, be in a position to find out from his own mind, for instance, that the earth and the heavens had the same origin.”3 (View the RealPlayer video of this comment )
Footnotes:
(1) The First Three Minutes, a Modern View of the Origin of the Universe, Weinberg, pp. 94-105.
(2) The reference for this saying is This is the Truth (videotape). For a copy of this videotape, please visit this page.
(3) This is the Truth (videotape).
i'm so sorry to post this thread again but i supported it with more evidences like video and pics

 

[Meow Mix]

1) The universe was never like one large nebula, as I've already pointed out -- so showing pictures of nebulae is inappropriate

2) Even if we consider the Quran is talking about the quark-gluon plasma era, that was long before even stars formed, and Sol (our sun) is a 3rd generation star at that... stars live billions of years, so the question arises: does the Quran teach that the Earth was one of the earliest creations? If so, then it's falsified by the scientific evidence that we're orbiting a 3rd generation star.

3) Stars, planets, moons etc. do come from nebulae but galaxies do not; galaxies formed sometime after the quark-gluon plasma era when things were "cool" enough for baryonic matter to form.

4) Saying that the universe formed from "smoke" is so vague a statement that this seems to be an example of the Forer Effect.

For instance, let me give an example: J.R.R. Tolkien wrote that Arda (including Middle-Earth) was created in a great music.

That's so vague that in the same respect we can note that if we turn on our radios and our TV sets, we'll actually pick up (and thus hear) a certain percentage of something called the cosmic microwave background noise -- remnants of the big bang event.

Someone could just as easily say, "This proves that Tolkien knew advanced secrets about cosmology back in the 40's!"

Do you see how it is most likely just a vague statement being taken too forcefully to make it fit something it was never intended to fit? (See: Forer effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

so, whats your evidence of what you mentioned?

I happen to know it from my geology courses in university. It'd take me a bit to find a source online, but I'm sure you could find some information quickly if you just google "plate tectonics".

 

[LooseEnd]

1) The universe was never like one large nebula, as I've already pointed out -- so showing pictures of nebulae is inappropriate

Didn't protons,neutrons (among other particles) exit in an ionized gas like stage during the formation of universe? (Ex:Hadron epoch and later stages). Why would you say this is not a nebula like state?

It seems to me that between singularity and present date, there could have been a nebula like state.

 

[Meow Mix]

Didn't protons,neutrons (among other particles) exit in an ionized gas like stage during the formation of universe? (Ex:Hadron epoch and later stages). Why would you say this is not a nebula like state?

It seems to me that between singularity and present date, there could have been a nebula like state.

That's just adding ambiguity to ambiguity. We're already lending too much credence to using the word "smoke."

 

[LooseEnd]

That's just adding ambiguity to ambiguity. We're already lending too much credence to using the word "smoke."

My point is that you cannot say universe was never like a large nebula.

 

[Kerr]

The science of modern cosmology, observational and theoretical, clearly indicates that, at one point in time, the whole universe was nothing but a cloud of ‘smoke’ (i.e. an opaque highly dense and hot gaseous composition).1 This is one of the undisputed principles of standard modern cosmology. Scientists now can observe new stars forming out of the remnants of that ‘smoke’

Figure 10: A new star forming out of a cloud of gas and dust (nebula), which is one of the remnants of the ‘smoke’ that was the origin of the whole universe. (The Space Atlas, Heather and Henbest, p. 50.)
Figure 11: The Lagoon nebula is a cloud of gas and dust, about 60 light years in diameter. It is excited by the ultraviolet radiation of the hot stars that have recently formed within its bulk. (Horizons, Exploring the Universe, Seeds, plate 9, from Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc.)
The illuminating stars we see at night were, just as was the whole universe, in that ‘smoke’ material.
God has said in the Quran:
Then He turned to the heaven when it was smoke... (Quran, 41:11)
Because the earth and the heavens above (the sun, the moon, stars, planets, galaxies, etc.) have been formed from this same ‘smoke,’ we conclude that the earth and the heavens were one connected entity. Then out of this homogeneous ‘smoke,’ they formed and separated from each other.
God has said in the Quran:
Have not those who disbelieved known that the heavens and the earth were one connected entity, then We separated them?... (Quran, 21:30)
Dr. Alfred Kroner is one of the world’s renowned geologists. He is Professor of Geology and the Chairman of the Department of Geology at the Institute of Geosciences, Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany. He said: “Thinking where Muhammad came from . . . I think it is almost impossible that he could have known about things like the common origin of the universe, because scientists have only found out within the last few years, with very complicated and advanced technological methods, that this is the case.”2 (To view the RealPlayer video of this comment click here ). Also he said: “Somebody who did not know something about nuclear physics fourteen hundred years ago could not, I think, be in a position to find out from his own mind, for instance, that the earth and the heavens had the same origin.”3

Footnotes:
(1) The First Three Minutes, a Modern View of the Origin of the Universe, Weinberg, pp. 94-105.
(2) The reference for this saying is This is the Truth (videotape). For a copy of this videotape, please visit this page.
(3) This is the Truth (videotape).

To my knowledge the universe started as a signularity. It exploded. What came after that... I do not remember that well, it was a long time ago I read about it, but I think it may have been made out of basic particles or maybe basic atoms. It should also be noted that, assuming you mean "gas" by "smoke", it was more likely a plasma then a "gas".

 

[Kerr]

Didn't protons,neutrons (among other particles) exit in an ionized gas like stage during the formation of universe? (Ex:Hadron epoch and later stages). Why would you say this is not a nebula like state?

It seems to me that between singularity and present date, there could have been a nebula like state.

To my knowledge gas is formed by atoms and molecules, not particles like protons and neutrons. Assuming we are talking about the scientific term "gas" and not some arbitrary term for describing anything with loose bounds? In that case it should be pointed out that the term would become so general it would be entierly useless.

 

[LooseEnd]

To my knowledge gas is formed by atoms and molecules, not particles like protons and neutrons.

To the best of my knowledge,

A proton can be considered as a positively charged hydrogen atom. An ionized hydrogen gas cloud can be made of protons(hydrogen nuclei).

It is assumed that within few minutes of the expansion(about 1 billion kelvin temperature), protons started to combine with nuetrons and started forming helium. So at that point universe was mainly made up of gases of hydrogen, helium, and other particles. This is a similar state to a nebula, where you'll find mostly ionized gases.

The key word here is like. A nebula like state.

Assuming we are talking about the scientific term "gas" and not some arbitrary term for describing anything with loose bounds? In that case it should be pointed out that the term would become so general it would be entierly useless.

I think I understood your point. What I felt was if we know the exact definition of a term used, we should be more considerate to understand why it has been used. I do not see the use of 'nebula' as too general in this case.

 

[Kerr]

To the best of my knowledge,

A proton can be considered as a positively charged hydrogen atom. An ionized hydrogen gas cloud can be made of protons(hydrogen nuclei).

True, but I am not sure if that would make it a gas cloud or if it would be playing around with terms to be able to call it a gas cloud (lol, I first wrote "glas cloud").

It is assumed that within few minutes of the expansion(about 1 billion kelvin temperature), protons started to combine with nuetrons and started forming helium. So at that point universe was mainly made up of gases of hydrogen, helium, and other particles. This is a similar state to a nebula, where you'll find mostly ionized gases.

The key word here is like. A nebula like state.

And as stated before, the young universe was probably not a gas cloud. It would be too hot. Plasma is far more likely, and plasma is a different state then gas (even though there are some similarities).

I think I understood your point. What I felt was if we know the exact definition of a term used, we should be more considerate to understand why it has been used. I do not see the use of 'nebula' as too general in this case.

The question is then if a nebula is a huge gas cloud in space or if it take something more then gas to make it a nebula (I really need to refresh my memory on astronomy, lol).

EDIT:

Ok, according to wikipedia it is an " interstellar cloud of dust, hydrogen gas, helium gas and other ionized gases". So there was nothing more to it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The science of modern cosmology, observational and theoretical, clearly indicates that, at one point in time, the whole universe was nothing but a cloud of ‘smoke’ (i.e. an opaque highly dense and hot gaseous composition).1 This is one of the undisputed principles of standard modern cosmology. Scientists now can observe new stars forming out of the remnants of that ‘smoke’

Figure 10: A new star forming out of a cloud of gas and dust (nebula), which is one of the remnants of the ‘smoke’ that was the origin of the whole universe. (The Space Atlas, Heather and Henbest, p. 50.)
Figure 11: The Lagoon nebula is a cloud of gas and dust, about 60 light years in diameter. It is excited by the ultraviolet radiation of the hot stars that have recently formed within its bulk. (Horizons, Exploring the Universe, Seeds, plate 9, from Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc.)
The illuminating stars we see at night were, just as was the whole universe, in that ‘smoke’ material.
God has said in the Quran:
Then He turned to the heaven when it was smoke... (Quran, 41:11)
Because the earth and the heavens above (the sun, the moon, stars, planets, galaxies, etc.) have been formed from this same ‘smoke,’ we conclude that the earth and the heavens were one connected entity. Then out of this homogeneous ‘smoke,’ they formed and separated from each other.

That's not what "smoke" is. Smoke is a mixture of gases, water vapour and particulate matter produced by combustion. Space gas is not smoke. A big cloud of plasma is not smoke.

"The heaven was smoke", when taken literally, is factually wrong. You're trying to twist things around to interpret the passage as something more like "the heaven was something that looked kinda like smoke", but that's not what the verse actually says.

 

[yassin]

God has said in the Quran about one of the evil unbelievers who forbade the Prophet Muhammad

from praying at the Kaaba:

No! If he does not stop, We will take him by the naseyahnaseyah (front of the head)! (front of the head), a lying, sinful

(Quran, 96:15-16)
Why did the Quran describe the front of the head as being lying and sinful? Why didn’t the Quran say that the person was lying and sinful? What is the relationship between the front of the head and lying and sinfulness?
If we look into the skull at the front of the head, we will find the prefrontal area of the cerebrum (see figure 12). What does physiology tell us about the function of this area? A book entitled Essentials of Anatomy & Physiology says about this area, “The motivation and the foresight to plan and initiate movements occur in the anterior portion of the frontal lobes, the prefrontal area. This is a region of association cortex...”1 Also the book says, “In relation to its involvement in motivation, the prefrontal area is also thought to be the functional center for aggression....”2

​

Figure 12: Functional regions of the left hemisphere of the cerebral cortex. The prefrontal area is located at the front of the cerebral cortex. (Essentials of Anatomy & Physiology, Seeley and others, p. 210.) (Click on the image to enlarge it.)
​

So, this area of the cerebrum is responsible for planning, motivating, and initiating good and sinful behavior and is responsible for the telling of lies and the speaking of truth. Thus, it is proper to describe the front of the head as lying and sinful when someone lies or commits a sin, as the Quran has said, “...A lying, sinful naseyah (front of the head)!”
Scientists have only discovered these functions of the prefrontal area in the last sixty years, according to Professor Keith L. Moore.3

Footnotes:
(1) Essentials of Anatomy & Physiology, Seeley and others, p. 211. Also see The Human Nervous System, Noback and others, pp. 410-411.
(2) Essentials of Anatomy & Physiology, Seeley and others, p. 211.
(3) Al-E’jaz al-Elmy fee al-Naseyah (The Scientific Miracles in the Front of the Head), Moore and others, p. 41.

 

[McBell]

talk about grasping at straws.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Yassin, Forum rule require you to source and link your copy and pastes.

7. Plagiarism
Plagiarism is illegal and never permitted. To quote another author you must always identify the Title, Author, and Publisher. You may insert a short paragraph or one or two sentences from it into your post, showing a link to the source. When using material in this way, you must indicate the significance of the material in your own words. Posts that just show a link and source material will be removed. This rule will be enforced with in our understanding of intellectual property rights and fair use.
Forum Rules

 

[yassin]

God has said in the Quran:

Or (the unbelievers’ state) is like the darkness in a deep sea. It is covered by waves, above which are waves, above which are clouds. Darknesses, one above another. If a man stretches out his hand, he cannot see it....

(Quran, 24:40)
This verse mentions the darkness found in deep seas and oceans, where if a man stretches out his hand, he cannot see it. The darkness in deep seas and oceans is found around a depth of 200 meters and below. At this depth, there is almost no light (see figure 15). Below a depth of 1000 meters there is no light at all.1 Human beings are not able to dive more than forty meters without the aid of submarines or special equipment. Human beings cannot survive unaided in the deep dark part of the oceans, such as at a depth of 200 meters.

Figure 15: Between 3 and 30 percent of the sunlight is reflected at the sea surface. Then almost all of the seven colors of the light spectrum are absorbed one after another in the first 200 meters, except the blue light. (Oceans, Elder and Pernetta, p. 27.)
​

Scientists have recently discovered this darkness by means of special equipment and submarines that have enabled them to dive into the depths of the oceans.
We can also understand from the following sentences in the previous verse, “...in a deep sea. It is covered by waves, above which are waves, above which are clouds....”, that the deep waters of seas and oceans are covered by waves, and above these waves are other waves. It is clear that the second set of waves are the surface waves that we see, because the verse mentions that above the second waves there are clouds. But what about the first waves? Scientists have recently discovered that there are internal waves which “occur on density interfaces between layers of different densities.”2 (see figure 16).

Figure 16: Internal waves at interface between two layers of water of different densities. One is dense (the lower one), the other one is less dense (the upper one). (Oceanography, Gross, p. 204.)
​

The internal waves cover the deep waters of seas and oceans because the deep waters have a higher density than the waters above them. Internal waves act like surface waves. They can also break, just like surface waves. Internal waves cannot be seen by the human eye, but they can be detected by studying temperature or salinity changes at a given location.3

Footnotes:
(1) Oceans, Elder and Pernetta, p. 27.
(2) Oceanography, Gross, p. 205.
(3) Oceanography, Gross, p. 205.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Yassin, Forum rule require you to source and link your copy and pastes.

7. Plagiarism
Plagiarism is illegal and never permitted. To quote another author you must always identify the Title, Author, and Publisher. You may insert a short paragraph or one or two sentences from it into your post, showing a link to the source. When using material in this way, you must indicate the significance of the material in your own words. Posts that just show a link and source material will be removed. This rule will be enforced with in our understanding of intellectual property rights and fair use.
Forum Rules

Here, allow me...
Islam Guide: The Quran on Deep Seas and Internal Waves



Next time, do it yourself and provide some commentary besides your cut and past jobs.

 

[yassin]

Scientists have studied cloud types and have realized that rain clouds are formed and shaped according to definite systems and certain steps connected with certain types of wind and clouds.
One kind of rain cloud is the cumulonimbus cloud. Meteorologists have studied how cumulonimbus clouds are formed and how they produce rain, hail, and lightning.
They have found that cumulonimbus clouds go through the following steps to produce rain:
1) The clouds are pushed by the wind: Cumulonimbus clouds begin to form when wind pushes some small pieces of clouds (cumulus clouds) to an area where these clouds converge (see figures 17 and 18).

​

Figure 17: Satellite photo showing the clouds moving towards the convergence areas B, C, and D. The arrows indicate the directions of the wind. (The Use of Satellite Pictures in Weather Analysis and Forecasting, Anderson and others, p. 188.) (Click on the image to enlarge it.)
​

​

Figure 18: Small pieces of clouds (cumulus clouds) moving towards a convergence zone near the horizon, where we can see a large cumulonimbus cloud. (Clouds and Storms, Ludlam, plate 7.4.) (Click on the image to enlarge it.)
​

2) Joining: Then the small clouds join together forming a larger cloud1 (see figures 18 and 19).

​

Figure 19: (A) Isolated small pieces of clouds (cumulus clouds). (B) When the small clouds join together, updrafts within the larger cloud increase, so the cloud is stacked up. Water drops are indicated by ·. (The Atmosphere, Anthes and others, p. 269.) (Click on the image to enlarge it.)
​

3) Stacking: When the small clouds join together, updrafts within the larger cloud increase. The updrafts near the center of the cloud are stronger than those near the edges.2 These updrafts cause the cloud body to grow vertically, so the cloud is stacked up (see figures 19 (B), 20, and 21). This vertical growth causes the cloud body to stretch into cooler regions of the atmosphere, where drops of water and hail formulate and begin to grow larger and larger. When these drops of water and hail become too heavy for the updrafts to support them, they begin to fall from the cloud as rain, hail, etc.3

Figure 20: A cumulonimbus cloud. After the cloud is stacked up, rain comes out of it. (Weather and Climate, Bodin, p.123.)

Figure 21: A cumulonimbus cloud. (A Colour Guide to Clouds, Scorer and Wexler, p. 23.)
​

God has said in the Quran:
Have you not seen how God makes the clouds move gently, then joins them together, then makes them into a stack, and then you see the rain come out of it.... (Quran, 24:43)
Meteorologists have only recently come to know these details of cloud formation, structure, and function by using advanced equipment like planes, satellites, computers, balloons, and other equipment, to study wind and its direction, to measure humidity and its variations, and to determine the levels and variations of atmospheric pressure.4
The preceding verse, after mentioning clouds and rain, speaks about hail and lightning:

....And He sends down hail from mountains (clouds) in the sky, and He strikes with it whomever He wills, and turns it from whomever He wills. The vivid flash of its lightning nearly blinds the sight.

(Quran, 24:43)
Meteorologists have found that these cumulonimbus clouds, that shower hail, reach a height of 25,000 to 30,000 ft (4.7 to 5.7 miles),5 like mountains, as the Quran said, “...And He sends down hail from mountains (clouds) in the sky...” (see figure 21 above).
This verse may raise a question. Why does the verse say “its lightning” in a reference to the hail? Does this mean that hail is the major factor in producing lightning? Let us see what the book entitled Meteorology Today says about this. It says that a cloud becomes electrified as hail falls through a region in the cloud of supercooled droplets and ice crystals.

As liquid droplets collide with a hailstone, they freeze on contact and release latent heat. This keeps the surface of the hailstone warmer than that of the surrounding ice crystals. When the hailstone comes in contact with an ice crystal, an important phenomenon occurs: electrons flow from the colder object toward the warmer object. Hence, the hailstone becomes negatively charged. The same effect occurs when supercooled droplets come in contact with a hailstone and tiny splinters of positively charged ice break off. These lighter positively charged particles are then carried to the upper part of the cloud by updrafts. The hail, left with a negative charge, falls towards the bottom of the cloud, thus the lower part of the cloud becomes negatively charged. These negative charges are then discharged as lightning.6 We conclude from this that hail is the major factor in producing lightning.
This information on lightning was discovered recently. Until 1600 AD, Aristotle’s ideas on meteorology were dominant. For example, he said that the atmosphere contains two kinds of exhalation, moist and dry. He also said that thunder is the sound of the collision of the dry exhalation with the neighboring clouds, and lightning is the inflaming and burning of the dry exhalation with a thin and faint fire.7 These are some of the ideas on meteorology that were dominant at the time of the Quran’s revelation, fourteen centuries ago.

Footnotes:
(1) See The Atmosphere, Anthes and others, pp. 268-269, and Elements of Meteorology, Miller and Thompson, p. 141.
(2) The updrafts near the center are stronger, because they are protected from the cooling effects by the outer portion of the cloud.
(3) See The Atmosphere, Anthes and others, p. 269, and Elements of Meteorology, Miller and Thompson, pp. 141-142.
(4) See Ee’jaz al-Quran al-Kareem fee Wasf Anwa’ al-Riyah, al-Sohob, al-Matar, Makky and others, p. 55. (5) Elements of Meteorology, Miller and Thompson, p. 141.
(6) Meteorology Today, Ahrens, p. 437.
(7) The Works of Aristotle Translated into English: Meteorologica, vol. 3, Ross and others, pp. 369a-369b.
A Brief Illustrated Guide To Understanding Islam, Muslims, and the Quran