398
edits
Scientific Miracles in the Quran: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Mistranslation: Added a link to the Seven Earths page now it encompasses an analysis on saying the 'heaven/samaa' is the universe.
| [checked revision] | [checked revision] |
Lightyears (talk | contribs) (Just one) |
(→Mistranslation: Added a link to the Seven Earths page now it encompasses an analysis on saying the 'heaven/samaa' is the universe.) |
||
| (10 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category:Miracles]] | [[Category:Miracles]] | ||
[[Category:Islam and Science]] | [[Category:Islam and Science]] | ||
{{QualityScore|Lead=4|Structure=3|Content=3|Language=4|References=3}}In recent times, many Muslim scholars have interpreted certain [[Qur'an|Quranic]] verses as being miraculously predictive of modern scientific discoveries and have presented these interpretations as evidence of the Quran's divine origin. | {{QualityScore|Lead=4|Structure=3|Content=3|Language=4|References=3}}In recent times, many Muslim scholars have interpreted certain [[Qur'an|Quranic]] verses as being miraculously predictive of modern scientific discoveries and have presented these interpretations as evidence of the Quran's divine origin. Tellingly, no verse contained in the Quran has ever prompted a scientific discovery, and modern Muslim scholars have also generally not tried to argue that this has ever been the case. As such, all the purported instances of miraculous scientific foreknowledge in the Quran have been identified as such ''only'' ''after'' the science they are alleged to describe has been discovered by independent and unrelated means. Critics have pointed out this weakness and generally hold these so-called scientific miracles to be the product of theological sophistry whereby science is ''read back into'' the Quran upon discovery. Critics also maintain that there is no instance in the Quran where a scientific subject has been described with sufficient clarity, specificity, and accuracy as to qualify as anything Miraculous. | ||
Even when the Islamic empires led the world in science in parts of the middle ages,<ref>''[https://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/30/science/how-islam-won-and-lost-the-lead-in-science.html How Islam Won, and Lost, the Lead in Science.]'' Dennis Overbye. 2001. New York Times. | |||
''Astronomy and medicine (two fields that are particularly relevant to 'scientific miracles') were relatively advanced for their time (especially astronomy) during the Islamic Empire's, which scientists never credited the Qur'an with prompting discoveries.''</ref> classical Islamic scholars/exegetes on the Quran aware of these facts never put forward theories of scientific foreknowledge.<ref>[https://yalebooks.co.uk/book/9780300177718/islam-science-and-the-challenge-of-history/ ''Islam, Science, and the Challenge of History (The Terry Lectures Series)''.] Dallal, Ahmad. Yale University Press. 2012. Kindle Edition. ''See Kindle locations 1958 - 1972. And Chapter 'The Quran and Science' locations 2618 - 2723 covering this issue.''</ref> Instead when science is inevitably discussed in verses relating to the natural world, they either confirm incorrect scientific worldviews at the time, and/or provide counter re-interpretations as new theories gain traction, ''and never before''. In fact, in many cases the Quran has been cited directly as the reason to support traditional unscientific views against those of e.g. astronomers,<ref>For example, in the debate between traditionalists and non-traditionalists on whether the Earth was flat, see: [https://www.academia.edu/93485940/Against_Ptolemy_Cosmography_in_Early_Kal%C4%81m_2022_ ''Against Ptolemy? Cosmography in Early Kalām (2022).''] Omar Anchassi. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 142(4), 851–881. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.7817/jaos.142.4.2022.ar033</nowiki> | |||
(''This period covers the first five centuries of Islam, though examples of Islamic scholars quoting the Quran. Many more going beyond that period can be found in this Wordpress article: [https://theislamissue.wordpress.com/2019/03/22/scholarly-consensus-of-a-round-earth/ Scholarly Consensus of a Round Earth])''</ref> (which hardly matches the idea of a book of scientific foreknowledge) and is still being used today to deny established scientific facts.<ref>For example: | |||
'''Geo-centrism''' has been supported by Sheikh Bandar al-Khaibari, covered in this ''Daily Mail [https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2957414/Saudi-cleric-online-laughing-stock-telling-student-sun-rotates-Earth-planes-not-able-fly.html article].'' And Sheik al-Fawzan, which can be seen in this [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvG-606KqwU&t=694s ''YouTube video''] at 12:48. | |||
'''Creationism''' has large support over evolution in the Muslim world among Islamic scholars, as we see in this ''Telegraph'' [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/evolution/6587642/Muslim-scholars-rejecting-Darwins-theory-of-evolution-as-unproven.html ''article''] | |||
The prominent modern Islamic scholar Seyyed Hossein Nasr rejects evolution on religious grounds [https://jis.cis-ca.org/on-the-question-of-biological-origins.html ''Journal of Islam & Science, Vol. 4 (Winter 2006) No. 2''], who is one of many.</ref> | |||
In the eyes of historians, the Quran's author(s) almost certainly made no pretensions about predicting modern science. In support of this perspective, there is no Islamic scripture that actually claims that the Quran (or Islamic scripture in general) contain allusions to future scientific discoveries. Consequently, where the Quran makes mention of what are today perceived as topics of scientific interest (such as the wonders of the day and night sky, fauna and flora, or the human spirit), historians suggest that these passages were originally intended to simply inspire awe in their audience by orienting that audience's attention towards the world's many marvels and especially those marvels accessible to individuals living in the harsh, arid, and rocky environment of early 7th century Arabia. | In the eyes of historians, the Quran's author(s) almost certainly made no pretensions about predicting modern science. In support of this perspective, there is no Islamic scripture that actually claims that the Quran (or Islamic scripture in general) contain allusions to future scientific discoveries. Consequently, where the Quran makes mention of what are today perceived as topics of scientific interest (such as the wonders of the day and night sky, fauna and flora, or the human spirit), historians suggest that these passages were originally intended to simply inspire awe in their audience by orienting that audience's attention towards the world's many marvels and especially those marvels accessible to individuals living in the harsh, arid, and rocky environment of early 7th century Arabia. | ||
| Line 19: | Line 31: | ||
===Methodology=== | ===Methodology=== | ||
While modern Islamic theologians have employed the various methods discussed here in order to develop cases of scientific miracles in the Quran, philosophical and/or religious justification for the employment of these methods has been scant if at all forthcoming. Critics who have pointed out the problems inherent in the use of some/all of these methods have generally not been responded to or taken seriously by establishment theologians. | While modern Islamic theologians have employed the various methods discussed here in order to develop cases of scientific miracles in the Quran, philosophical and/or religious justification for the employment of these methods has been scant if at all forthcoming. Critics who have pointed out the problems inherent in the use of some/all of these methods have generally not been responded to or taken seriously by establishment theologians. | ||
==== Mistranslations ==== | |||
In many cases the scientific miracles simply involve mistranslations from Arabic to English, or from Classical Arabic to Modern Arabic. For example, the claim that daḥā/daḥāhā دَحَا /دَحَاهَا means ostrich-egg-shaped, used to make the claim that the author of the Qur'an knew the state the Earth is an oblate sphere, showing it's divinity - when it actually means 'spreading' the earth out, and can also be used for the (flat spread-out) place where an ostrich makes a nest in the ground, but not it's eggs<ref>Lane's Lexicon dictionary on [https://ejtaal.net/aa/#hw4=h328,ll=900,ls=h5,la=h1338,sg=h375,ha=h210,br=h325,pr=h55,aan=h185,mgf=h296,vi=h142,kz=h686,mr=h221,mn=h391,uqw=h509,umr=h357,ums=h289,umj=h236,ulq=h696,uqa=h130,uqq=h102,bdw=h298,amr=h220,asb=h280,auh=h558,dhq=h175,mht=h276,msb=h79,tla=h48,amj=h229,ens=h1,mis=h633 daḥā دَحَا]</ref> (''the shape of an ostrich egg is also not like that of the earth, see: [[Islamic Views on the Shape of the Earth]])''. Or that yasbaḥoona / يَسْبَحُونَ means 'rotating on it's own axis' (applied to the sun in e.g. verse 21:33), of which there is no such meaning (it simply means 'swimming').<ref>[https://quranx.com/Dictionary/Lane/%D8%B3%D8%A8%D8%AD Yasbahoona / سبح] Lane's Lexicon Classical Arabic Dictionary (quranx.com)</ref> Or that sulb / ﺻُﻠﺐ (which means backbone)<ref>[https://quranx.com/Dictionary/Lane/%D8%B3%D8%A8%D8%AD sulb ' ﺻُﻠﺐ] - Lane's Lexicon Classical Arabic Dictionary</ref> or tara'ib / تَّرَآئِب (rib or other chest bones)<ref>[https://www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume1/00000338.pdf Tara'ib تَّرَآئِب] - Lane's Lexicon Classical Arabic Dictionary</ref> means sexual areas of the man or women as to not contradict modern embryology (''see: [[Semen Production in the Quran]]''). | |||
====Dehistoricization==== | ====Dehistoricization==== | ||
The most common practice in making the case for a scientific miracle in the Quran is dehistoricization. Dehistoricization is the process whereby a historical event (in this case a verse of the Quran) is removed from its historical context. Since no Islamic scripture claims to be predictive of modern science, the great majority of scientific miracle cases require a degree of dehistoricization. [[Muhammad]] did not, after all, appeal directly to his companions by telling them he could forecast scientific discoveries that would be made more than a thousand years hence, in a future they would not live to see. Similarly, Muhammad did not appeal to his companions by forecasting historical events would be uncovered by future | The most common practice in making the case for a scientific miracle in the Quran is dehistoricization. Dehistoricization is the process whereby a historical event (in this case a verse of the Quran) is removed from its historical context. Since no Islamic scripture claims to be predictive of modern science, the great majority of scientific miracle cases require a degree of dehistoricization. [[Muhammad]] did not, after all, appeal directly to his companions by telling them he could forecast scientific discoveries that would be made more than a thousand years hence, in a future they would not live to see. Similarly, Muhammad did not appeal to his companions by forecasting historical events would be uncovered by future archaeological research. If he had done either, the miracle would have been ineffective and gone over the heads of his contemporaries who would not have known what Muhammad was talking about. Indeed, if his contemporaries could have verified the scientific or historical remark made by Muhmmad, it would not have been a miracle (as this would mean that Muhammad could also have learned of the fact through similar means). | ||
As a result, verses have to be dehistoricized and subsequently reframed as forecasts of future scientific (or | As a result, verses have to be dehistoricized and subsequently reframed as forecasts of future scientific (or archaeological) discoveries. For instance, when the Quran states the Earth has been 'spread out' as a 'bed' and that mountains have been cast down upon the Earth as stabilizing 'stakes', it intends to inspire its contemporary audience's awe by directing its attention to a common mythological notion that this audience held to be true. Islamic theologians thus take this and similar verses and reframe them as predictions. | ||
In cases where the scientific or historical fact to which Muhammad is alluding is described accurately, modern Islamic theologians are required to engage in a double dehistoricization: firstly, the description must be reconceived as a prediction, and, secondly, the possibility of Muhammad acquiring the relevant fact through other than divine means must be precluded. | In cases where the scientific or historical fact to which Muhammad is alluding is described accurately, modern Islamic theologians are required to engage in a double dehistoricization: firstly, the description must be reconceived as a prediction, and, secondly, the possibility of Muhammad acquiring the relevant fact through other than divine means must be precluded. | ||
| Line 118: | Line 133: | ||
Critics point out that some modern Quran translations have altered the meaning of 51:47 in four ways: | Critics point out that some modern Quran translations have altered the meaning of 51:47 in four ways: | ||
*They have translated the Quranic word “heaven سَّمَاءَ” as “universe”, which is not correct. | *They have translated the Quranic word “heaven سَّمَاءَ” as “universe”, which is not correct ''(see analysis and issues in [[Science and the Seven Earths]])''. | ||
*They have taken the Arabic noun “We are the expanders”, but turned it into the verb “The Universe is expanding,” | *They have taken the Arabic noun “We are the expanders”, but turned it into the verb “The Universe is expanding,” | ||
*And then they added the entirely superfluous adverb “steadily” in an attempt to insert into the Quran additional ideas that are not actually there. | *And then they added the entirely superfluous adverb “steadily” in an attempt to insert into the Quran additional ideas that are not actually there. | ||
| Line 167: | Line 182: | ||
The key to understanding the meaning is the context apparent in the first verse, 21:30, which is about the creation of the world. Gabriel Said Reynolds notes in his academic commentary on the Quran an earlier parallel taught by the Syriac church father Ephrem (d. 373 CE). He writes, "[...] Ephrem, who explains that God created everything through water: 'Thus, through light and water the earth brought forth everything.' Ephrem, ''Commentary on Genesis'', 1:1-10)."<ref>Gabriel Said Reynolds, "The Quran and Bible:Text and Commentary", New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2018 p. 553. This is regarding {{Quran|24|45}}, though on p. 508 Reynolds cross references the same parallel regarding the other verse, {{Quran|21|30}}, which is more clearly a statement in the context of the Genesis creation story, like Ephrem's comment.</ref> Ephrem's comment is in the context of the Genesis creation story, much like the first Quranic verse, 21:30. Ephrem says that when heaven and earth were created there were no trees or vegetation as it had not yet rained, so a fountain irrigated the earth. Tafsirs say that when the heaven and earth were separated rain fell so that plants could grow. There is also a similarity with Ephrem in the other verse (24:45), which mentions creatures that move on two, four or no legs. Ephrem explains that as well as the "trees, vegetation and plants", the "Scripture wishes to indicate that all animals, reptiles, cattle and birds came into being as a result of the combining of earth and water".<ref>[https://faberinstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Ephrem-the-Syrian-Commentary-on-Genesis-2-3-Brock.pdf Ephrem's commentary on Genesis] - Faber Institute.com</ref> For many more parallels between the Quran and Syriac Christian literature see [[Parallelism_Between_the_Qur%27an_and_Judeo-Christian_Scriptures|this article]]. | The key to understanding the meaning is the context apparent in the first verse, 21:30, which is about the creation of the world. Gabriel Said Reynolds notes in his academic commentary on the Quran an earlier parallel taught by the Syriac church father Ephrem (d. 373 CE). He writes, "[...] Ephrem, who explains that God created everything through water: 'Thus, through light and water the earth brought forth everything.' Ephrem, ''Commentary on Genesis'', 1:1-10)."<ref>Gabriel Said Reynolds, "The Quran and Bible:Text and Commentary", New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2018 p. 553. This is regarding {{Quran|24|45}}, though on p. 508 Reynolds cross references the same parallel regarding the other verse, {{Quran|21|30}}, which is more clearly a statement in the context of the Genesis creation story, like Ephrem's comment.</ref> Ephrem's comment is in the context of the Genesis creation story, much like the first Quranic verse, 21:30. Ephrem says that when heaven and earth were created there were no trees or vegetation as it had not yet rained, so a fountain irrigated the earth. Tafsirs say that when the heaven and earth were separated rain fell so that plants could grow. There is also a similarity with Ephrem in the other verse (24:45), which mentions creatures that move on two, four or no legs. Ephrem explains that as well as the "trees, vegetation and plants", the "Scripture wishes to indicate that all animals, reptiles, cattle and birds came into being as a result of the combining of earth and water".<ref>[https://faberinstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Ephrem-the-Syrian-Commentary-on-Genesis-2-3-Brock.pdf Ephrem's commentary on Genesis] - Faber Institute.com</ref> For many more parallels between the Quran and Syriac Christian literature see [[Parallelism_Between_the_Qur%27an_and_Judeo-Christian_Scriptures|this article]]. | ||
Critics of the miracle claim sometimes also point out that the ancient Greek | Critics of the miracle claim sometimes also point out that the ancient Greek philosophers Thales believed that life originated from water,<ref>''[https://teachersinstitute.yale.edu/curriculum/units/1980/5/80.05.11.x.html#:~:text=One%20of%20Thales'%20contributions%20was,died%20when%20deprived%20of%20it. The Origin of Life: A History of Ancient Greek Theories.] Man and the Environment.'' Curricular Resources > 1980 Volume V > Unit 11 (80.05.11) > Section 1. Joyce Puglia. Yale-New Heaven Teachers Institute</ref> and Anaximander proposed that the first living creatures were made from evapourated water.<ref>[https://www.britannica.com/biography/Anaximander Anaximander] - Britannica.com</ref> | ||
===Black holes and pulsars=== | ===Black holes and pulsars=== | ||
| Line 235: | Line 250: | ||
===Lying forelocks=== | ===Lying forelocks=== | ||
Many modern Islamic scholars, all drawing on the work of Saudi-financed researcher and lecturer at King Abdulaziz University Dr. Keith Moore, have argued that the {{Quran|96|16}}'s mention of a 'lying, sinful forelock' contains a scientifically-sound insight regarding the area of the brain that is employed in the activity of lying, namely, it is said, the prefrontal cortex (which lies below one's forelock). Historians and linguists, by contrast, do not view this passage in the Quran as making any pretensions about predicting modern science. They view the phrase 'lying, sinful forelock' as a simple metaphorical and metonymic reference to the individual described in the preceding verse who is being dragged by his forelock rather than a reference to the portion of the brain it resides on top of - the intent of this usage, they suggest, is not that the forelock is literally lying (which is evidently impossible) but simple to say that the person, of whom this forelock is a part, is lying. Critics have also pointed out that there is plenty of modern research utilizing fMRI technology which militates against the idea that lying takes place in the pre-frontal cortex, including the work of Professor Jia-Hong Gao of Peking University (trained at Yale and MIT), Professor Scott H. Faro, Professor Frank A. Kozel (trained at Yale), Professor Daniel D. Langleben of the University of Pennsylvania, and Professor Stephen M. Kosslyn of Harvard University (trained at Stanford). This research shows that the portion of the brain responsible for lying may in fact be the anterior cingulate gyrus, which lies in the medial portion of the brain in frontal-parietal area and not beneath the forelock.{{Quote|{{quran-range|96|15|16}}|Nay! If not he desists, surely We will drag him by the forelock, A forelock lying, sinful.}} | Many modern Islamic scholars, all drawing on the work of Saudi-financed researcher and lecturer at King Abdulaziz University Dr. Keith Moore, have argued that the {{Quran|96|16}}'s mention of a 'lying, sinful forelock' contains a scientifically-sound insight regarding the area of the brain that is employed in the activity of lying, namely, it is said, the prefrontal cortex (which lies below one's forelock). | ||
Historians and linguists, by contrast, do not view this passage in the Quran as making any pretensions about predicting modern science. They view the phrase 'lying, sinful forelock' as a simple metaphorical and metonymic reference to the individual described in the preceding verse who is being dragged by his forelock rather than a reference to the portion of the brain it resides on top of - the intent of this usage, they suggest, is not that the forelock is literally lying (which is evidently impossible) but simple to say that the person, of whom this forelock is a part, is lying. | |||
Critics have also pointed out that there is plenty of modern research utilizing fMRI technology which militates against the idea that lying takes place in the pre-frontal cortex, including the work of Professor Jia-Hong Gao of Peking University (trained at Yale and MIT), Professor Scott H. Faro, Professor Frank A. Kozel (trained at Yale), Professor Daniel D. Langleben of the University of Pennsylvania, and Professor Stephen M. Kosslyn of Harvard University (trained at Stanford). This research shows that the portion of the brain responsible for lying may in fact be the anterior cingulate gyrus, which lies in the medial portion of the brain in frontal-parietal area and not beneath the forelock.{{Quote|{{quran-range|96|15|16}}|Nay! If not he desists, surely We will drag him by the forelock, A forelock lying, sinful.}}Furthermore, the word for 'forelock' is used elsewhere in the Quran as shown on [https://corpus.quran.com/search.jsp?q=con%3Aforelock Quran Corpus], including: | |||
{{Quote|{{Quran|55|41}}|The criminals will be known by their marks, and they will be seized by the forelocks and the feet.}} | |||
{{Quote|{{Quran|11|56}}|Indeed, I have relied upon Allah , my Lord and your Lord. There is no creature but that He holds its forelock. Indeed, my Lord is on a path [that is] straight."}} | |||
However seizing, dragging, or holding someone by the 'prefrontal cortex' would be an odd statement to make. | |||
===Fresh water-salt water barriers=== | ===Fresh water-salt water barriers=== | ||
Many modern Islamic scholars argue that {{Quran|25|53}} contains a scientifically-sound insight regarding the 'separation' of fresh and salt water in estuaries, where fresh water rivers meet the salty ocean. Critics and historians argue that this verse is merely stating what any person viewing the convergence of a river and ocean with their unaided eye would observe - namely, that the two bodies of water maintain distinct coloration. The additional proposition made in the verse regarding the existence of some sort of barrier that causes the maintenance of this difference in coloration, they continue, is simply what a premodern person inclined to believe in metaphysical entities might hypothesize as the cause. Critics point out that there is, in fact, no such 'barrier' present in estuaries and that the persistent distinction between the two bodies of water is due a difference in the density of fresh and salt water - even this distinction, however, can be compromised when other factors, such as wind and stronger tidal forces, are at play which cause the bodies of water to mix with one another at a greater rate. | Many modern Islamic scholars argue that {{Quran|25|53}} contains a scientifically-sound insight regarding the 'separation' of fresh and salt water in estuaries, where fresh water rivers meet the salty ocean. Critics and historians argue that this verse is merely stating what any person viewing the convergence of a river and ocean with their unaided eye would observe - namely, that the two bodies of water maintain distinct coloration. The additional proposition made in the verse regarding the existence of some sort of barrier that causes the maintenance of this difference in coloration, they continue, is simply what a premodern person inclined to believe in metaphysical entities might hypothesize as the cause. Critics point out that there is, in fact, no such 'barrier' present in estuaries and that the persistent distinction between the two bodies of water is due a difference in the density of fresh and salt water - even this distinction, however, can be compromised when other factors, such as wind and stronger tidal forces, are at play which cause the bodies of water to mix with one another at a greater rate. | ||
| Line 318: | Line 341: | ||
==External links== | ==External links== | ||
*[https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLC0D4187BE2661850 The Rationalizer: Top scientists comment on the Quran] (video playlist, Interviews with quote-mined scientists who supposedly approved the so-called scientific miracles: Alfred Kroner, William Hay, Allison Palmer, Tom Armstrong) | *[https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLC0D4187BE2661850 The Rationalizer: Top scientists comment on the Quran] (video playlist, Interviews with quote-mined scientists who supposedly approved the so-called scientific miracles: Alfred Kroner, William Hay, Allison Palmer, Tom Armstrong) | ||
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3ewI1YXc-c Sherif Gaber - Zakir Naik - The Wizard of Scientific Miracles] - ''YouTube Video'' | |||
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvG-606KqwU&t=35s The Masked Arab: Scientific miracles in the Quran? Analysis of Zakir Naik's claims] - ''YouTube video'' | *[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvG-606KqwU&t=35s The Masked Arab: Scientific miracles in the Quran? Analysis of Zakir Naik's claims] - ''YouTube video'' | ||
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyqaohY3gKY Hassan Radwan - Guide to Scientific Miracles in the Qu'ran] - ''YouTube video'' | *[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyqaohY3gKY Hassan Radwan - Guide to Scientific Miracles in the Qu'ran] - ''YouTube video'' | ||
| Line 327: | Line 349: | ||
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyUGc8SGBfQ Hassan Radwan - The Qu'ran's Miracle of Haman] - ''YouTube video'' | *[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyUGc8SGBfQ Hassan Radwan - The Qu'ran's Miracle of Haman] - ''YouTube video'' | ||
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vS1Mn90T2Bc CaptainDisguise: Miracle of the Pharaoh & Maurice Bucaille - Why do we laugh at Dawahgandists? #Dawahganda] - ''YouTube video'' | *[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vS1Mn90T2Bc CaptainDisguise: Miracle of the Pharaoh & Maurice Bucaille - Why do we laugh at Dawahgandists? #Dawahganda] - ''YouTube video'' | ||
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9Voh0xLLUw islamwhattheydonttellyou164 - Waters that Never Mix: The Honest Truth] - ''YouTube | *[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9Voh0xLLUw islamwhattheydonttellyou164 - Waters that Never Mix: The Honest Truth], [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_M-7qh2bko Underwater Waves] and [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-w3Nxh-r8c&t=1360s The Quran and Science] - ''YouTube videos'' | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||