The Creationist and Muslim deceptions

[gnostic]

Since coming to this forum, I have noticed that both (Christian literalist) creationists and Muslims who post replies or start new topics in the science/religions or evolution/creationism debate forums, they dishonestly attempt to redefine evolution or other science matters to suit their agenda.

The most common instance with creationists over the issue of evolution is that they tried to make evolution about the science of the origin of first life; evolution has nothing to origin of first life, but biodiversity of species, over time. In science, the origin of first life, or how life life was first formed on our planet, is called abiogenesis.

Abiogenesis is an unrelated field of science to evolutionary biology. People who study evolution don't require to know abiogenesis or how life first form.

But creationists make all sort of excuses on how evolution and abiogenesis are the same things.

Muslims, on the other hand, tried to put more meanings into some ambiguous verses, and redefine them so that they fit into modern science, so they can claim Allah knew modern science before modern scientists.

Both sides (some Christians and Muslims) tried to also refine scientific terminology with their religious-biased definitions.

Why should I take any of these two sides seriously? Why shouldn't I call them liars?

 

[David M]

Calling them liars is against the rules of the forums. Pointing out that their arguments are not even wrong is ok.

 

[Thana]

Because, most likely, they're not lying. They just speak from ignorance and misunderstanding.
Treating them with respect and understanding will go a much longer way than accusations and mockery.

 

[Sapiens]

Because, most likely, they're not lying. They just speak from ignorance and misunderstanding.
Treating them with respect and understanding will go a much longer way than accusations and mockery.

I have to disagree. There are possibilities, it's like ignorant being curable but stupidity being lifelong. I can accept ignorant, until shown they are taught reality ... at that time ignorant is corrected or either turns to, "too stupid to learn," or to "willful misunderstanding" ... a polite term for: "liar, lair, pants on fire!"

 

[gnostic]

Although, I have Chinese background because of my parents, I have more Australian culture or Western culture in me than Chinese or Eastern cultures.

Australians have the tendency to be outspoken, so I have a problem of being very blunt...and that got me into trouble few times here. Despite the whole political correctness in Down-Under, I am too old to change.

I just see no reason to beat around the bush, over the issue with science vs religion, or creationism vs evolution.

What I wish for the creationists and Muslims - if they want to discuss or debate about evolution or other scientific fields with us - that they should do some real reading and researches on those subjects from real scientific sources, and not religious-biased pseudoscience websites or YouTube videos.

Some members here cannot learn, no matter how much scientific sources or evidences we show them, so they keep bringing up the same subject again and again. You might call it willful ignorance, but sometimes, I get the feeling that they are trying to deceive us.

 

[DawudTalut]

Since coming to this forum, I have noticed that both (Christian literalist) creationists and Muslims who post replies or start new topics in the science/religions or evolution/creationism debate forums, they dishonestly attempt to redefine evolution or other science matters to suit their agenda.

The most common instance with creationists over the issue of evolution is that they tried to make evolution about the science of the origin of first life; evolution has nothing to origin of first life, but biodiversity of species, over time. In science, the origin of first life, or how life life was first formed on our planet, is called abiogenesis.

Abiogenesis is an unrelated field of science to evolutionary biology. People who study evolution don't require to know abiogenesis or how life first form.

But creationists make all sort of excuses on how evolution and abiogenesis are the same things.

Muslims, on the other hand, tried to put more meanings into some ambiguous verses, and redefine them so that they fit into modern science, so they can claim Allah knew modern science before modern scientists.

Both sides (some Christians and Muslims) tried to also refine scientific terminology with their religious-biased definitions.

Why should I take any of these two sides seriously? Why shouldn't I call them liars?

Peace be on you.
I can say for Ahmadiyya Muslims, they believe in Creation and Guided Evolution from Holy Quran.

Al Islam Ahmadiyya - Media Library - Audio and Video Archiveq=verse+about+evolution&sa=


https://www.alislam.org/library/articles/Guided_evolution_and_punctuated_equilibrium-20081104MN.pdf

The Essential Role of Clay and Photosynthesis in Evolution

The Quran and Cosmology

 

[Sapiens]

Peace be on you.
I can say for Ahmadiyya Muslims, they believe in Creation and Guided Evolution from Holy Quran.
Al Islam Ahmadiyya - Media Library - Audio and Video Archiveq=verse+about+evolution&sa=

In this site a gross misunderstanding of evolution and Darwinism is presented, it is very reminiscent of the IDers at their most foolish.

https://www.alislam.org/library/articles/Guided_evolution_and_punctuated_equilibrium-20081104MN.pdf

The Islamic Quote Mine is open for business:

The true Muslims see the guiding hand of God in the improbabilities involved in the creation of the universe and the life on the planet earth. In the words of the famous biologist Stephen Jay Gould:

"If dinosaurs had not died in this event, they would probably still domi-nate the domain of large-bodied vertebrates as they had for so long with such conspicuous success, and mammals would be small creatures in the interstices of their world. This situation prevailed for 100 million years; why not for 60 million more? . . . In an entirely literalsense, we owe our existence, as large a nd reasoning animals, to our lucky stars."

What he calls our lucky stars, Muslims consider to be God’s Providence!

The Essential Role of Clay and Photosynthesis in Evolution

This starts out with a misunderstanding of inorganic and organic chemistries and goes on to ignorance of the field such as: "The essence of the problem was that all organic compounds were a product of the living. How could they have been prepared in sea or dry land while, during that period, only inorganic compounds were known to have existed?" and the wanders off into an argument against abiogensis based on the hydrolysis of any organic compounds that might have been created. All in all a singularly ignorant treatise.

The Quran and Cosmology

Basically it takes what was current cosmology a few years back and takes credit for if in the name of Allah, without bothering to recognize that now antiqued view has been falsified. Bye, bye Allah.

 

[gnostic]

)

Peace be on you.
I can say for Ahmadiyya Muslims, they believe in Creation and Guided Evolution from Holy Quran.

Al Islam Ahmadiyya - Media Library - Audio and Video Archive


https://www.alislam.org/library/articles/Guided_evolution_and_punctuated_equilibrium-20081104MN.pdf

The Essential Role of Clay and Photosynthesis in Evolution

The Quran and Cosmology

Thank you, Dawud, for those links.

Not all Muslims accept evolution. But even those that do accept evolution, don't actually understand the theory, as those links prove my points in the OP that Muslims misuse scientific theory to elevate their own religion (just as Christians do with Genesis and John 1 (eg. the Logos or Word)), taking credit for modern science, undeservedly.

And I have to say that clay played no parts in link to (human) evolution. What the authors of those webpages, don't seem to understand is that human evolution is not a start of new life (abiogenesis), but according to the Qur'an it went from clay to human, with absolutely nothing in-between. One moment there were no human, then they were there; that magic or supernatural), not science. This is myth.

Evolution required generations of population to change.

Clay itself is clay mineral of just weathering of rock minerals (mica, feldspar, or any sedimentary rock minerals). The clay mineral has molecule compositions of aluminium phyllosilicates (Al2Si2O5). Because clay are always found near water, which hydrate the clay minerals, then then the molecular composition can be re-written to Al2Si2O5(OH)4.

Because of clay mineral can be broken down, it can mix with other element or molecules, which introduce impurity in clay, like iron, magnesium, alkali and any organic matter (from decomposition of plants or animals).

But you must understand that for man to be made out of clay, why are there no compound of aluminium phyllosilicates in our bodies. Sure there are the tiniest of trace elements of aluminium (Al) and silicon (Si) in our bodies, but not the compound or molecule that make up aluminium phyllosilicates.

What I mean is that without binding of Al, Si and O atoms as a molecule (Al2Si2O5), then it is not clay.

Muslims attempting to take credit for the Big Bang, is another deception and misuse of scientific theory, with Qur'anic pseudoscience.

 

[McBell]

Because, most likely, they're not lying. They just speak from ignorance and misunderstanding.
Treating them with respect and understanding will go a much longer way than accusations and mockery.

How many times does one need to be shown they are wrong before their spouting the same falsehoods is lying?

 

[DawudTalut]

)

And I have to say that clay played no parts in link to (human) evolution.

Peace be on you.
True islam basically tells about God and relation of human with God in both ways. It also uniquely ask believers to ponder over natural phenomenon so many time. It gives hints about working of universe. I humbly and personally do not like the approach that when some thing is discovered , some people start saying look it was already written there. Quran states facts and hints, rest is work of believer to find on the lines and paths shown by Quran. Quran saves human wisdom to wander in jungles of open ended doubts and says:

[3:190] And to Allah belongs the kingdom of the heavens and the earth; and Allah has power over all things.

[3:191] In the creation of the heavens and the earth and in the alternation of the night and the day there are indeed Signs for men of understanding;

[3:192] Those who remember Allah while standing, sitting, and lying on their sides, and ponder over the creation of the heavens and the earth: “Our Lord, Thou hast not created this in vain; nay, Holy art Thou; save us, then, from the punishment of the Fire.


[3:193] “Our Lord, whomsoever Thou causest to enter the Fire, him hast Thou surely disgraced. And the wrongdoers shall have no helpers.

[3:194] “Our Lord, we have heard a Crier calling us unto faith, ‘Believe ye in your Lord,’ and we have believed. Our Lord, forgive us, therefore, our errors and remove from us our evils, and in death number us with the righteous.

[3:195] “Our Lord, give us what Thou hast promised to us through Thy Messengers; and disgrace us not on the Day of Resurrection. Surely, Thou breakest not Thy promise.”

In these few words God has solved many problems which troubles minds. He is telling:
= He is Owner,
= Remember Lord in each state, standing lying or reclining. It keeps mind in focus on truth.
= Ponder over creation / natural phenomenon which is not made in vain. Your pondering should not result in making bombs and fires and unrest for each other.
= Believe in Messenger Whom God talks and he will show you paths of success.
= Remember Accountability is truth.

So what is problem here? God is asking believer to ponder and make peaceful approaches.

In addition to that, God provides hints for serious researchers. For example:

Holy Quran [ch32:v8] Who has made perfect everything He has created. And He began the creation of man from clay.
[Ref: ahmadiyya muslim's alislam.org/quran]

One can counter check the wording ' began creation' University of Leeds Language research group UK's
The Quranic Arabic Corpus - Word by Word Grammar, Syntax and Morphology of the Holy Quran

Hence God is giving a hint that creation of human started from clay. What was the route, one has to ponder. It is very naive to say that Quran is saying man came from clay and no intermediate step was mentioned, what one expects? Name of all complex chemicals!

It is also said :
[37:12] So ask them whether it is they who are harder to create, or others whom We have created? Them We have created of cohesive clay.

[55;15] He created man from dry ringing clay which is like baked pottery.

Quran's claim is not alone, other are beginning to think same:
Study Suggests Clay Paved the Way for Evolution of Complex Animals
@ Study Suggests Clay Paved the Way for Evolution of Complex Animals - Scientific American

A role for clay in formation of the first cells @ Harvard Gazette: A role for clay in formation of the first cells

One admires about your knowledge but there is need of giving other room and see what is their actual message.

The evolution was not blind:
"For each chance step that it will take in the right direction, it will have to blunder into millions upon millions of steps in the wrong direction. But by that time, alas, entropy would have left nothing of the universe to evolve into anything, nor of the blind creator itself. Chance will cease to play any role whatsoever in the inert state of an all-pervading death. The figure 10 (power) 248 is most certainly larger than the time needed for entropy to finish off everything."
Source: A Game of Chess or a Game of Chance!


Good wishes.

 

[Revoltingest]

Because, most likely, they're not lying. They just speak from ignorance and misunderstanding.
Treating them with respect and understanding will go a much longer way than accusations and mockery.

I also speculate that their focus on abiogenesis when discussing evolution is about the scientific weakness of the former, & it's being the foundation for the latter. This isn't a rigorous venue, so they skip right to what they see as the fundamental problem.

Rarely do I ever see anything which would make me think "dishonesty". I know I don't like being accused of it, & they deserve the same courtesy. We're here to converse, not badger each other. (No offense intended @oldbadger.)

 

[Secret Chief]

Such people may be not deliberately lying but I do think they are being disingenuous because they typically present an "innocent" topic to debate but clearly already "know" The Answer and this is their (sometimes) unspoken agenda. I do find this tiresome.

Alternatively they are in fact just plain stupid. Sorry, I meant, their assertions are not substantiated by reality.

 

[Thana]

How many times does one need to be shown they are wrong before their spouting the same falsehoods is lying?

It's not that simple. For example, I've been told over and over again that corporal punishment is 'bad', I've been given studies and so on that indicate this and yet I still believe in the effectiveness of coporal punishment. Does that make me disingenuous or a liar? I don't think so. The studies are vague and inconclusive and don't apply to all methods of coporal punishment.

There's enough reasonable doubt that I feel justified. And I'm sure it's the same with them, They feel justified in their beliefs and their understanding of Evolution.
That doesn't make them liars, It just means that they have a different perspective, a different understanding, a different knowledge base.

It's easy enough, With the right attitude and the right amount of empathy and respect, To show them another perspective. But calling them liars won't get you anywhere.

 

[DawudTalut]

To Whom It May Concern
"
In the Quran, dry dust or wet clay are also repeatedly mentioned as stages through which life passed in ancient times. In Surah Al-'Imran, it states:

... He created him (Adam) out of dust (turab)... 4

On the same subject we read the following:

... He created you from clay (humid or moist earth)... 5

Clay is also mentioned in Surah Al-Rahman, but this time it is not wet clay which is referred to for it is clearly stated:

He created man from dry ringing clay like pieces of pottery. 6

Here its quality is described as having a plate-like appearance dry enough to create ringing sounds, like broken pieces of pottery. Again in Surah Al-Hijr, clay is mentioned three times with the added qualification that man is created from dry ringing clay, formed out of dark fermenting mud.*

The overall scenario as presented by the Holy Quran envisions life as having been advanced step by step from dust, from water, from clay and also from fermenting blackish mud which subsequently turned into dry, ringing clay. These last two stages attract particular attention. No man of the era when the Quran was revealed could even remotely relate the creation of man to dry ringing clay made out of stagnant mud.*

Source:Life in the Perspective of Quranic Revelations—A Brief Introductory Chapter

 

[McBell]

It's not that simple. For example, I've been told over and over again that corporal punishment is 'bad', I've been given studies and so on that indicate this and yet I still believe in the effectiveness of coporal punishment. Does that make me disingenuous or a liar? I don't think so. The studies are vague and inconclusive and don't apply to all methods of coporal punishment.

There's enough reasonable doubt that I feel justified. And I'm sure it's the same with them, They feel justified in their beliefs and their understanding of Evolution.
That doesn't make them liars, It just means that they have a different perspective, a different understanding, a different knowledge base.

It's easy enough, With the right attitude and the right amount of empathy and respect, To show them another perspective. But calling them liars won't get you anywhere.

I am not talking about the subjectivity of something being good or bad.
I am talking about when creationists spout flat out false information after being repeatedly shown they are factually wrong.

 

[Sapiens]

It's not that simple. For example, I've been told over and over again that corporal punishment is 'bad', I've been given studies and so on that indicate this and yet I still believe in the effectiveness of coporal punishment. Does that make me disingenuous or a liar? I don't think so. The studies are vague and inconclusive and don't apply to all methods of coporal punishment.

Can't speak to corporal punishment more that to say that in my experience with raising children, training marine mammals and training dogs, and observing others doing the same, pain in not a good training tool. If you can produce a body of reputable literature that suggests that it is, then you've got a point, if you can't then you've self described your situation.

There's enough reasonable doubt that I feel justified. And I'm sure it's the same with them, They feel justified in their beliefs and their understanding of Evolution.

Placing "feeling justified in their beliefs" on a scale with demonstrable science and expecting it to weigh even heavier than peer reviewed science is delusional, as it the pretense at peer review that has become the au courant practice of many IDers.

Getting the creationist thumb on the scale is the entire raison d'être for attempting to present atheism as a religion or evolution as a belief system, etc., the false establishment of of equal starting positions. That is demonstrably a lie. You have at one end of the spectrum a choice between confusing delusion or dis-ingenuousness with reality and at the other end conscious duplicity in the service of a greater good (e.g., a deity), sure there's a poorly conceived argument, confusion and moments of doubt and faith in the middle, but it is long past time to get over it.

That doesn't make them liars, It just means that they have a different perspective, a different understanding, a different knowledge base.

I beg to differ with you. These people are trying to argue that scraps of over-analysized, mistranslated, mistranscribed folk tales should have the same place at the table as competent science, when all they have to offer as evidence is either that science has yet to fully explain something, or some miasma of sophomoric logical fallacies.

It's easy enough, With the right attitude and the right amount of empathy and respect, To show them another perspective. But calling them liars won't get you anywhere.

By and large "they" are too far gone to "get anywhere" with "them." "Their" issues, views and problems can only be dealt with through psychiatry. The discussion is, in reality, more for the edification and education of those still on the fence. The best way to help these fence sitters to seek knowledge for themselves is an open question, each of us must find the best ground that we can for the present situation and times.

 

[LuisDantas]

Because, most likely, they're not lying. They just speak from ignorance and misunderstanding.
Treating them with respect and understanding will go a much longer way than accusations and mockery.

That is often true. However, there is such a thing as enabling liars as well.

One must play by ear, I think, and hope for the best.

 

[gnostic]

Because, most likely, they're not lying. They just speak from ignorance and misunderstanding.
Treating them with respect and understanding will go a much longer way than accusations and mockery.

While what you saying is true, I do need to respond with patience and courtesy, I must say that my patience have their limitations when creationists aren't willing to learn from their mistakes.

That they will keep writing the same false claims, over and over again, even when people have already addressed those issues before, it is no longer a matter of ignorance or that they should have known better, but they do, then I have to say that they are lying not to us, but to themselves.

If creationists want to refute evolution, then they should by all mean, do so. But they must - and should - understand that evolution was never about "when" and "how" life began.

The "when" and "how" life first began, in science, have to do with a field of biochemistry, called abiogenesis.

So, if they really want to start debates on "when" and "how" life first began, then it should be addressed to abiogenesis, not to evolution.

I don't know how many times I and others like me have told creationists that they have addressed the wrong theory, but they still don't learn.

And it is the with issues about "law" and "theory". I have lost count how many times that I have told their definitions were wrong or flawed, but they don't listen or learn, so they would bring up again and again.

To bring up the same subject, repeatedly, without learning from their mistakes, point to their stupidity or to their lying deceiving selves. (It could be both, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was so.)

How patience do I need to be, before I say "enough is enough"?

 

[Sapiens]

While what you saying is true, I do need to respond with patience and courtesy, I must say that my patience have their limitations when creationists aren't willing to learn from their mistakes.

That they will keep writing the same false claims, over and over again, even when people have already addressed those issues before, it is no longer a matter of ignorance or that they should have known better, but they do, then I have to say that they are lying not to us, but to themselves.

If creationists want to refute evolution, then they should by all mean, do so. But they must - and should - understand that evolution was never about "when" and "how" life began.

The "when" and "how" life first began, in science, have to do with a field of biochemistry, called abiogenesis.

So, if they really want to start debates on "when" and "how" life first began, then it should be addressed to abiogenesis, not to evolution.

I don't know how many times I and others like me have told creationists that they have addressed the wrong theory, but they still don't learn.

And it is the with issues about "law" and "theory". I have lost count how many times that I have told their definitions were wrong or flawed, but they don't listen or learn, so they would bring up again and again.

To bring up the same subject, repeatedly, without learning from their mistakes, point to their stupidity or to their lying deceiving selves. (It could be both, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was so.)

How patience do I need to be, before I say "enough is enough"?

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein

 

[Thana]

I am not talking about the subjectivity of something being good or bad.
I am talking about when creationists spout flat out false information after being repeatedly shown they are factually wrong.

You do realize that's how they see Evolution though, With subjectivity. That's usually their problem.

They don't think their information is false. And they don't take the 'evidence' they've been given because they don't trust the source (Atheists). They view Evolution with bias and I assume they think Atheists do too. Truth is subjective and they use that.

Either way, I highly doubt they're lying wilfully. They just don't see what you see, Like I said, perspective.

While what you saying is true, I do need to respond with patience and courtesy, I must say that my patience have their limitations when creationists aren't willing to learn from their mistakes.

That they will keep writing the same false claims, over and over again, even when people have already addressed those issues before, it is no longer a matter of ignorance or that they should have known better, but they do, then I have to say that they are lying not to us, but to themselves.

If creationists want to refute evolution, then they should by all mean, do so. But they must - and should - understand that evolution was never about "when" and "how" life began.

The "when" and "how" life first began, in science, have to do with a field of biochemistry, called abiogenesis.

So, if they really want to start debates on "when" and "how" life first began, then it should be addressed to abiogenesis, not to evolution.

I don't know how many times I and others like me have told creationists that they have addressed the wrong theory, but they still don't learn.

And it is the with issues about "law" and "theory". I have lost count how many times that I have told their definitions were wrong or flawed, but they don't listen or learn, so they would bring up again and again.

To bring up the same subject, repeatedly, without learning from their mistakes, point to their stupidity or to their lying deceiving selves. (It could be both, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was so.)

How patience do I need to be, before I say "enough is enough"?

I'm sorry but, Who gave you the super important mission to 'fix' creationists?
You don't have to listen to them and you certainly don't have to engage them.
And you definitely, definitely don't have to call them liars.

You do not need to respond with patience and courtesy, And if that's how you feel, Then just don't respond at all.
As I'm sure you were told when you were a child, If you have nothing nice to say, Don't say anything at all.