<< Table of content

Sometimes the plates get caught on each other and starts sliding - During this period, great forces are built up. When the forces of friction are overcome, the piece of plate that was stuck, lurches forward, causing a shock wave of a thrust quake, and then all of a sudden it goes  ‘dumm’ like this.

In a recent earthquake, it was calculated that the Cocos Plate in Mexico , suddenly jumped forward 3 meters. Well if your house suddenly jump 3 meters, there will be a Catastrophe.

Another type of mountain is that formed by volcanoes. Lava and ash from inside the earth are thrown out and piled up, until a high mountain is formed - Even from the bottom of the sea. And we can see this kind of action in this picture. I hope you can see it - Not clear is it? The ocean crust is right here and the continental crust is there, and the oceanic crust is going down under the continental crust, and mountains have been found here. Here is the volcano, and here is the magma of the molted rock, going up through the volcano, and here is another volcano with magma going up. And so this is how the mountains are formed and earthquakes are formed.

In the case of some igneous mountains, molten rock intrudes into the probe of the volcano’s opening and cools, to form a relatively dense intrusion, which extends below the surface of the earth. So this… if this gets stuck and sealed, then it would be like a plug - However it is not a root. It does not bear the weight of the mountain - It is really a plug. Therefore at occasions, pressure builds up under the plug, and the volcano explodes as happened in the South Pacific at Crackato, in 1883 when the whole island was blown away. And it happened at Mount Saint Halena in our days, when a mountain was blown away.

We can conclude from this information, that mountains were formed originally with movement and shaking, and that now in the present, earthquakes are caused by their continued formation. When the plates buckle over each other, there are earthquakes - When the volcanoes erupt there can bring earthquake. However it is clear that the followers of Mohammed were understanding these Verses, to say that Allah threw the mountains down, as a tent peg or anchors, to keep the Earth from shaking. Throwing the mountains down under the Earth may be poetry, but to say that mountains keep the Earth from shaking is a severe difficulty, which is out of step with modern science.

Now we are going to take a little look at … what the Qur’an says about the ‘Sun.’ In the Surah of the Kahf, 18:86, it says… ‘Until when Zulqarnain… that is Alexander the great, reached the setting of the sun, he found it set in a spring of murky water.’ I’m sorry - In 20^th Century Science... the Sun does not set in a spring of murky water.

And then in ‘The Criterion’, Al Furqaan, 25:45 to 46, it says… ‘Hast thou not turned thy vision, to thy Lord - how He prolongs the shadow! If He willed, He could make it stationary!  Then do We (God) make the sun its guide.” What about this? Has the sun… if we think of the sun overhead, you have no shadow or a little tiny shadow, and then as the sun goes down, your shadow gets longer on the other side. Well the sun is stationary in relation to the Earth - It is not what causes the shadow to shift. The rotating Earth guides the shadows. So if you demand 20^th century accuracy, the Surah should say… ‘The rotating earth causes the shadows to change.

I would look at a different subject… ‘Solomon’s death.’ Whether this is Science, I don’t know -Maybe sociology. Solomon’s death – He is propped up on his staff. Says… ‘The jinn worked for him, as Solomon desired. ‘Then when We decreed death upon Solomon, nothing showed them his death, except a little creeping creature of the earth, which gnawed away his staff. And when he fell, the jinn saw clearly how - If they had known the unseen, they would not have continued in the humiliating penalty of work.’ So here Solomon… he’s dead, propped up on his staff, like a walker from Morocco overseeing only a road guy, and no cook comes to ask him…what he wants for dinner. And no General comes for orders, and none of his Nobles comes to say… ‘Lets go hunting.’ No one notices. I’m sorry - I do not believe this story and it won’t fit 20^th century Sociology, or 7^th century Sociology, where the king will never be left alone like that.

Now finally let us look at ‘Milk.’ It says in the Surah of ‘The Bee’, Nahl, 16:66… ‘We pour out to you from what is within their (the cattle’s) abdomen, between excretions and blood – milk, pure and agreeable to the drinkers.’ The abdomen where the intestines are…. Sorry - In 20^th century medical science, the abdomens where the intestines are… is where the intestines are - the mammary glands are under the skin. In humans they are under the skin here - In cattle they are under the skin between the legs. No connection - There is no connection between the breasts and the intestines, and their feces, in any way. Feces though in the body, it really is outside of the animal - Animals has finished with it. It is not connected to milk or to anything else.

And finally going to look at ‘Communities.’ The Surah of ‘The Cattle’, Al – Anam 6:38, ‘There is not an animal on the earth, nor a being that flies on two wings, but forms communities like you’…. Speaks about no animal on earth, not a being that flies, and then it says, that every one of them is communities like you - And I assume that the Qur’an is speaking about we humans. Well, in some Spiders, when they finish mating, the mother eats the father. Well I’m glad that my wife did not eat me. Even in Bees, the extra male drones are thrown out to die. Well I’m glad also that after we had four children, that my wife did not push me out of the house too. Finally, the Lions. When the lion gets old, the male lion gets old, a young lion comes along and drives him away from his own wives, and the young lion takes over the wives. But what he does with the cubs?  The cubs of the old lion – he kills them all. So I do not think that this stance is true all other communities and all other animals do not live as communities like us.

In conclusion it is clear that the Qur’an has many scientific errors. As a generality the Qur’an meets and reflects the science of its time - the science of the 7^th century AD. We came here to seek truth - I’ve done my best to present valid information. If you want to see all the references, my book… ‘The Qur’an and the Bible in the light of History and Science’, is for sale outside that door, at a bargain price, tonight. May the God of all truth, guide you - Thank you.

(Dr. Mohammed) Thank you Dr Campbell for your presentation. Now we have Br. Sabeel Ahmed presenting an introduction of our next speaker, Dr. Zakir Naik.

(Br Sabeel Ahmed) As Salaam Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah. It is my pleasure to introduce one of the best scholars of our time, Dr. Zakir Abdul Karim Naik. Age 34 years old, he is the president of Islamic Research Foundation, Bombay , India . Though a medical doctor by professional training, Dr. Zakir Naik is known as a dynamic international orator in Islam and comparative Religion. Dr. Zakir Naik clarifies Islamic view points, and clears misconceptions about Islam based upon the Qur’an, Hadith and the other Religious Scriptures, as well as adhering to reason logic and scientific facts.

He is popular for his critical analysis and convincing answers to challenging questions posed by audiences, after his public talks. In the last four years itself, Dr. Zakir Naik has delivered more than 400 public lectures world wide, in addition to many public talks in India. He appears regularly on many international TV and Satellite TV channel programs in several countries of the world. He has authored books on Islam and comparative Religion. He has also participated in several symposiums and dialogues, with prominent personalities of other Religious faiths.

(Dr. Mohammed)  May I announce, after the talks by both the speakers and the response session, we would be having an open Question and Answer session. So those who have come late, kindly note, we’ll have questions on the mikes, followed by questions on index cards. Ladies and gentlemen, may I call upon Dr. Zakir Naik to present his talk.

(Dr. Naik)   …(Arabic)… Respected Dr. William Campbell, Dr. Maracuss, Dr. Jamal Badavi, Br. Samuel Nauman, Dr. Mohammed Naik, my respected elders and my dear brothers and sisters, I welcome all of you with the Islamic greetings… ‘As Salaamo Alaikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barkatahu. May peace mercy and blessings of Allah Subhanawataala be on all of you.

The topic of today’s dialogue is ‘The Qur’an and the Bible in the light of Science.’ The Glorious Qur’an is the last and final Revelation which was revealed to the last and final Messenger Prophet Mohammed, peace be upon him. For any book to claim that it is a Revelation from Almighty God, it should stand the test of time.  

Are Miracles Real?

(Dr. Naik) Previously in the olden days, it was the age of miracles - Alhamdulillah, the Qur’an is the miracle of miracles. Later on came the age of literature and poetry, and Muslims and Non Muslims alike, they claim the Glorious Qur’an to be the best Arabic literature available on the face of the Earth. But today is the age of science and technology.

(Ali Sina) Right from the onset, Dr. Zakir Naik makes two assumptions that are both false. The first is the claim that  “in the olden days, it was the age of miracles”. We do not have any proof for such claim except the fairytales of the ancient people passed to us as "holy scriptures". Even then we see that Muhammad disclaimed being able to perform any miracles. Unable to perform miracles, he claimed that the Quran is his miracle. But the Quran is no miracle at all as you'll come to see in this paper. 

Dr. Naik makes another false statement and says that "both Muslims and Non Muslims claim the Glorious Qur’an to be the best Arabic literature available on the face of the Earth". This is not true. Only Muslims make this claim. If Non-Muslims believed in this why they don't convert? Non-Muslims have found many errors in the Quran, not only scientifically and logically but also grammatically. Many actually believe this book is the most asinine book ever written, not only because it is violent but also because it is confused and very tedious to read. Some of the earlier verses rhyme, but there is no beauty in this book. Ali Dashti in his Book 23 years of Prophetic Career gives us a list of such errors. Also M. Rafiqul-Haqq and P. Newton show more than a dozen of grammatical errors of his book  here

Einstein's Religiosity

(Dr. Naik) Let us analyze whether the Qur’an is compatible or incompatible with modern science. Albert Einstein said… ‘Science without Religion is lame, and Religion without Science is blind’.

(Ali Sina) For one thing Einstein did not believe in a personal God but advocated cultivating Good, the True, and the Beautiful in humanity itself. He wrote:  “I do not believe in the God of theology who rewards good and punishes evil. My God created laws that take care of that. His universe is not ruled by wishful thinking, but by immutable laws.” [1]

And when he spoke of religion he did not have religions such as Islam in mind. He wrote: “I have found no better expression than "religious" for confidence in the rational nature of reality, insofar as it is accessible to human reason. Whenever this feeling is absent, science degenerates into uninspired empiricism.[2]

Elsewhere he wrote: “The sense of the religious, which is released through the experience of potentially nearing a logical grasp of these deep-lying world relations, is … a feeling of awe and reverence for the manifest Reason which appears in reality. It does not lead to the assumption of a divine personality—a person who makes demands of us and takes an interest in our individual being. In this there is no Will, nor Aim, nor an Ought, but only Being.

Einstein’s religion was a sense of veneration of the subtleties, the intangible, and the inexplicable that lay behind all the discernible concatenations of natural phenomena. It was not the “revealed” religions that he spoke of.  He called his religion a "cosmic religious sense". "What I see in Nature” he wrote, “is a magnificent structure that we can comprehend only very imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of 'humility.' This is a genuinely religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism."

Therefore it is misleading and hypocritical to quote Einstein who opposed the idea of a personal and demanding god as taught in Islam to take advantage for a kind of religion that he detested. Einstein's idea of religion was completely distinct from what Islam stands for. Islam is not in harmony with science. It is against it and therefore it is not the kind of natural religion that Einstein was talking about. It is the opposite of it. When Einstein said science without religion is lame he was not speaking of Islam which is a blind religion that opposes science. 

(Dr. Naik)  Let me remind you that the Glorious Qur’an is not a book of Science…S-C-I-E-N-C-E, It is a book of signs S-I-G-N-S… It is a book of Ayats. And there more than 6000 signs… Ayats in the Glorious Qur’an out of which more than a thousand speak about science. As far as my talk regarding Qur’an and Science is concerned, I will only be speaking about scientific facts, which has been established. I will not be speaking about scientific hypothesis and theories, which are based on assumption without any proof, because we all know many a times science takes U-turns.

Dr. William Campbell who wrote a reply to the book of Dr. Maurice Bucaille… ‘The Qur’an and the Bible in the light of history and science’ - He says in his book, that there are two types of approaches. One is a concordance approach - Which means a person tries to bring compatibility between the Scripture and science. And the other is the conflict approach, in which a person tries to bring a conflict between Scripture and science, like how Dr. William Campbell has done very well. But as far as the Qur’an is concerned, irrespective whether a person uses a conflicting approach, or a concordance approach – As long as you are logical, and after a logical explanation is given to you, not a single person will be able to prove a single Verse of the Qur’an, in conflict with established modern science.

Dr. William Campbell has pointed out various alleged scientific errors in the Qur’an, and I am supposed to actually refute in the rebuttal. But since he chose to speak first, I will be refuting a few points in my talk - I will reply to the major part of his talk, mainly dealing with Embryology and with Geology. The remaining InshaAllah, InshaAllah, I will try my level best to reply in the rebuttal.

I have to do both - I cannot do injustice to the topic. The topic is… ‘Qur’an and Bible in the light of Science.’ I cannot only speak about one Scripture - Dr. William Campbell hardly spoke about one or two points about the Bible, which I will deal with InshaAllah. I will speak about both InshaAllah, - I want to do justice to the topic.  

(Ali Sina) Up to here is introduction and promises. From hereon he begins with his response:

The Big Bang in the Quran?

(Dr. Naik) As far as Qur’an and modern Science is concerned, in the field of ‘Astronomy’, the Scientists, the Astronomers, a few decades earlier, they described, how the universe came into existence - They call it the ‘Big Bang’. And they said… ‘Initially there was one primary nebula, which later on it separated with a Big Bang, which gave rise to Galaxies, Stars, Sun and the Earth, we live in.’ This information is given in a nutshell in the Glorious Qur’an, in Surah Ambiya, Ch. 21, Verse No. 30, which says…. (Arabic).... Do not the unbelievers see…? …. (Arabic)…. ‘That the heavens and the earth were joined together, and we clove them asunder?’ Imagine this information which we came to know recently, the Qur’an mentions 14 hundred years ago.

(Ali Sina) In his fervor to make the Quran look scientific Dr. Naik overlooks the fact that the theory of Big Bang precludes the concept of creation. If the Big Bang is true then the story of the creation and Adam and Eve must be false and vice versa. 

Dr. Naik should have at least studied the theory of the Big Bang before commenting about it. 

The theory of the Big Bang stipulates that about 13.7 billion years ago a tremendous explosion started the universe. Prior to that event all of the energy that was later transformed into matter was contained at one infinitely small point (not nebula). This explosion, not only gave birth to the particles that gave birth to the matter, but also to space and time.

The Big Bang actually consisted of an explosion of space within itself unlike an explosion of a bomb were fragments are thrown outward. The galaxies were not all clumped together, but rather the Big Bang lay the foundations for the universe. Therefore the notion of “separating the heaven and the earth” is meaningless. 

This is how the Big Bang took place

Furthermore, how can this tiny planet of ours be separate from the universe? Our Earth is a planet of one of the billions of galaxies that comprise the universe. In the following photo you can see a small portion of the universe. The galaxies are scattered everywhere. Each galaxy contains several hundred billion stars. The earth is a planet revolving around one of the stars that comprise our galaxy, known as The Milky Way.  Where is the separation between the heavens and the Earth? 

This is what the Qur'an says:

21:30, ‘The heavens and the earth were joined together, and we clove them asunder’ 

This is not an allusion to the Big Bang. It is  the rehashing of the Genesis:  

 ⁶ And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." ⁷ So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. ⁸ God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day. Gen 1: 6-9

So if this is a miracle, the credit should go to the Bible and not to the Qur'an. This fable, like many others, is borrowed from the Bible. 

However, the origin of this tale dates back to pre biblical stories of Babylonians and Mesopotamians. 

The Qur'an is full of legends borrowed from the Bible and the fables of the Pagan Arabs. These in turn were based on the myths of ancient Sumerians, Babylonians, Canaanites, etc. Muhammad’s cosmology is the cosmology of the ancient people. In pre-Hebrew Semitic myth two watery tumultuous beings, one male and one female, Apsu (sweet water) and Tiamat (salt water) give birth to a variety of sea monsters and gods. In the ensuing chaos Tiamat, the female creator, tries to take control. Her descendants unite against her, choosing one of their number - Marduk, the god of Babylon to lead them. Armed with a hurricane and riding a tempest drawn by four fiery steeds, Marduk meets Tiamat and her evil accomplice Kingu in battle. He kills them both.  

After the death of Tiamat her conqueror forms the heavens and the earth by cutting her body open "like a cockleshell"  and lifting up one half to form the sky while leaving the bottom half as the earth:  

"The lord rested; he gazed at the huge body, pondering how to use it, what to create from the dead carcass. He split it apart like a cockleshell; with the upper half he constructed the arc of sky, he pulled down the bar". http://cc.usu.edu/~fath6/worldview.html

So clearly Muhammad is not talking about the big bang. He is rehashing a biblical tale that was borrowed from ancient mythology.

You can read more on this subject here http://www.faithfreedom.org/debates/alAssadip5.htm  

21:30 presents also another problem. It contradicts with the verse 41.11

"Moreover He comprehended in His design the sky, and it had been (as) smoke: He said to it and to the earth: "Come ye together, willingly or unwillingly." They said: "We do come (together), in willing obedience."

So which story is the right tale of the creation? Were the heaven and the earth joined together and Allah clove them asunder or were they apart and Allah told them to come together?

Of course both are false. The earth is inside the sky and part of it. They can neither come together nor separate. The Qur'an gives us two versions of the creation that contradict each other and both are scientifically wrong. 

Does the Quran say the Sun and the Moon Revolve Around Their Own Axis?  

(Dr. Naik) When I was in school, I had learned that the Sun in respect to the Earth - it was stationary - the Earth and the Moon, they rotated about in axis, but the sun was stationary. But when I read a Verse of the Qur’an saying, in Surah Al–Ambiya, Ch. . 21 Verse No. 33, it says…. (Arabic). … ‘It is Allah who has created the night and the day.’…. (Arabic)…. The sun and the moon…. (Arabic)…. Each one traveling in an orbit with its own motion. Now Alhamdulillah, modern science has confirmed the Qur’anic statement. The Arabic word used in the Qur’an is ‘Yasbahoon’, which describes the motion of a moving body. When it refers to a celestial body, it means it is rotating about its own axis. So Qur’an says the sun and the Moon, they revolve as well as rotate about their own axis. Today we have come to know that the Sun takes approximately 25 days to complete one rotation.

(Ali Sina) Dr. Naikr claims that the verse 21:33 which says the sun and the moon follow their orbits means they rotate around their axis because the word يَسْبَحُونَ ysbahun means rotating around its own axis. This is simply not true. Dr. Naik is fabricating evidence and twisting the meaning of the words. Yasbahoon means swimming. The word here implies that the Sun and the Moon float in the sky  around the Earth and not around their own axis. This is what Muhammad observed and this is what he said. He stated what was obvious to him and to everyone else in his time who had no understanding of how the solar system works. See how this word is translated.

As one can see, Dr. Naik is in error. By bundling the Moon and the Sun together, it is clear that Muhammad thought they are alike with one being brighter than the other.

Attempts such as this, to twist the apparent meaning of the words reveal the desperation of Muslims to find miracles and science in the absurdities of the Qur'an and hide its errors. Why none of these so called miracles attributed to Muhammad are in clear language? Why Allah did not say the Earth is round and it is rotating around the Sun and the Moon is rotating around the Earth? Simple and clear! In none of the so called Qur'anic miracles you find clarity.  

Then again, if the Qur'an is full of science why the Islamic countries are most wretched? Muslim's response to this is that Muslims do not practice Islam, that is why. But how is it that the Kafir countries that do not practice Islam at all are better than Muslim countries that practice it a little? Why virtually all the kafir countries are more advanced than virtually all the Islamic countries? The more Islamic a country gets the more backward, barbaric and poor it becomes. Is there in this a lesson for us all?  

This is what Dr Farrukh Saleem in Jang.com wrote:[3]

Fifty-seven Muslim majority countries have an average of ten universities each for a total of less than 600 universities for 1.4 billion people; India has 8,407 universities, the U.S. has 5,758. From within 1.4 billion Muslims Abdus Salam and Ahmed Zewail are the only two Muslim men who won a Nobel Prize in physics and chemistry (Salam pursued his scientific work in Italy and the UK , Zewail at California Institute of Technology). Dr Salam in his home country is not even considered a Muslim.

Over the past 105 years, 1.4 billion Muslims have produced eight Nobel Laureates while a mere 14 million Jews have produced 167 Nobel Laureates. Of the 1.4 billion Muslims less than 300,000 qualify as 'scientists', and that converts to a ratio of 230 scientists per one million Muslims. The United States of America has 1.1 million scientists (4,099 per million); Japan has 700,000 (5,095 per million).

A quick calculation reveals that the likelihood that a Jew wins the Noble Prize is 2088 times higher than a Muslim winning it. If all the science is in the Qur'an why all the Muslims are so backward?  

One of these eight "Muslim" Noble Prize winners is the Egyptian novelist Naguib Mahfouz. One of his best known works, Children of Gebelawi (1959), has been banned in Egypt for alleged blasphemy. In 1994 at the age of 82 yrs Mahfouz was stabbed by a man of Allah. When asked if he has ever read any of Mahfouz's books, the servant of Allah responded:  "I never read any of his filthy books".  

<  back     next  >