48,466
edits
Islam and Science: Difference between revisions
m
no edit summary
| [checked revision] | [checked revision] |
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 128: | Line 128: | ||
{{Main|Flat Earth and the Qur'an}} | {{Main|Flat Earth and the Qur'an}} | ||
Islam stifles scientific progress and nothing demonstrates this as well as the modern-day belief that the Earth is flat. As recently as 1993 the supreme religious authority of Saudi Arabia ''Sheik Abdul-Aziz Ibn Baaz'' declared "The earth is flat. Whoever claims it is round is an atheist deserving of punishment."<ref> Sheik Abdul-Aziz Ibn Baaz, supreme religious authority of Saudi Arabia, 1993 - printed in "Muslim Edicts Take on New Force", NY Times, February 12, 1995.</ref> and in a televised debate aired on Iraqi Al-Fayhaa TV (October 31, 2007), Muslim Researcher on Astronomy Fadhel ''Al-Sa'd'' also declared that the Earth is flat as evidenced by Qur'anic verses and that the sun is much smaller than the Earth and revolves around it. <ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7F5kYWceTsI The Earth Is Flat and Much Larger than the Sun] - Youtube</ref> As devout Muslims, they have good reason to conclude the Earth is flat; the Qur'anic verses 15:19, 20:53, 43:10, 50:7, 51:48, 71:19, 78:6, 79:30, 88:20 and 91:6 all clearly state this. While many have attempted to explain away this oddity, they prey on their listeners ignorance of the Arabic language. As such, their apologetic claims have been easily refuted by native Arabic speakers. There is no escaping the fact that, according to the Qur'an, the earth is flat. | |||
===The Motionless Center - Planet Earth=== | ===The Motionless Center - Planet Earth=== | ||
| Line 164: | Line 164: | ||
{{Main|Arab Transmission of the Classics}} | {{Main|Arab Transmission of the Classics}} | ||
The ''Arab transmission of the classics'' is a common and persistent myth that Arabic commentators such as Avicenna and Averroes 'saved' the work of Aristotle and other Greek philosophers from destruction. According to the myth, these works would otherwise have perished in the long European dark age between fifth and the tenth centuries. Thus the versions of | The ''Arab transmission of the classics'' is a common and persistent myth that Arabic commentators such as Avicenna and Averroes 'saved' the work of Aristotle and other Greek philosophers from destruction. According to the myth, these works would otherwise have perished in the long European dark age between fifth and the tenth centuries. Thus the versions of Aristotle used in the West were translations from the Arabic, which came from the South West of Europe in the reconquest of Spain from the Muslims during the twelve and thirteenth centuries<ref>The myth persists even on 'scholarly' websites. See e.g. [http://www.engr.sjsu.edu/pabacker/history/islam.htm here]. "It was only through the transfer of Greek knowledge (including Aristotle's philosophy, Ptolemy's geography, Hippocrates' medicine) by Islam Spain that this information ''ever'' got to Western Europe." [our emphasis]</ref>. This is incorrect. It was actually the Byzantines in the East who saved the ancient learning of the Greeks in the original language, and the first Latin texts to be used were translation from the Greek, in the 12th century, rather than, in most cases, the Arabic, which were only used in default of these. | ||
It is nevertheless true, and no myth, that the work of the Arabic commentators, particularly Averroes, had a profound influence on the scholastic philosophers of the Latin West in the thirteenth century. Aristotle's Greek is terse and very difficult to understand. The work of the Arabic commentators helped in explaining and clarifying Aristotle's dense and apparently obscure thought. Thus Western intellectual tradition owes a great debt to the Arabic scholars in terms of ''understanding'' Aristotle's thought. In terms of the ''texts'', however, these would have survived had the Arabic commentators never existed. | It is nevertheless true, and no myth, that the work of the Arabic commentators, particularly Averroes, had a profound influence on the scholastic philosophers of the Latin West in the thirteenth century. Aristotle's Greek is terse and very difficult to understand. The work of the Arabic commentators helped in explaining and clarifying Aristotle's dense and apparently obscure thought. Thus Western intellectual tradition owes a great debt to the Arabic scholars in terms of ''understanding'' Aristotle's thought. In terms of the ''texts'', however, these would have survived had the Arabic commentators never existed. | ||
| Line 171: | Line 171: | ||
{{Main|Islamic Inventions? How Islamic Inventors Did Not Change The World}} | {{Main|Islamic Inventions? How Islamic Inventors Did Not Change The World}} | ||
These past few years have seen many inventions falsely claimed and attributed to Islamic inventors, which in fact either existed in pre-Islamic eras, were invented by other cultures, or both. However, this detail has not halted Muslim, and non-Muslim apologists alike, from perpetuating these false claims. | These past few years have seen many inventions falsely claimed and attributed to Islamic inventors, which in fact either existed in pre-Islamic eras, were invented by other cultures, or both. However, this detail has not halted Muslim, and non-Muslim apologists alike, from perpetuating these false claims. Such claims, which are basically altering the world's history in order to show Islam in a better light, have even been forced upon the unsuspecting public in a nationwide tour which opened with an exhibition at the Museum of Science and Industry in Manchester and the University of Manchester, England. To celebrate this 'momentous' series of events, an article titled “How Islamic inventors changed the world” was written by Paul Vallely and published in ''The Independent''. This inaccurate piece of propaganda has received much praise from Muslims and is still being widely circulated on Islamic websites, forums and blogs. This article lists and examines all twenty of these “Islamic inventions that changed the world”, and in doing so, it reveals their actual inventors and the true role of Islam/Muslims, if any, behind the inventions. In short, we find that Paul Vallely's article is fundamentally misleading. It omits, distorts, and makes blunders concerning the most basic of historical facts to give the reader a false impression. It leaves you wondering what could have possibly motivated him into writing such a deceptive piece of journalism? This exhibition claimed to have shown 1001 Islamic inventions. If the best twenty are proven false, what of the other 981? | ||
===Islamic Science in Wikipedia Articles=== | ===Islamic Science in Wikipedia Articles=== | ||