Nadir Ahmed's Response:
"You obviously feel that ad hominem is a good substitute to reason and when you are short of reason you can freely insult
your opponent and thus win the battle." (Ali Sina)
Simply calling someone a bunch of insults is not Ad hominem. Rather, Ad hominem is when you say for example, Because
someone is an idiot, therefore, his argument is wrong. There is not a single case of Ad hominem in my entire debate, and I
challenge you to show me one example. Just one. Nevertheless, I did call you some names, but I was simply returning fire from
your goons in this post who have by writing such filthy things about Islam, especially calling me a "Muslim Nigger". That didn’t
go to well with me.
So, Ali Sina, you need to call your attack dogs off, and then I will perhaps spare you from insults you rightfully disserve.
"This is why Dr. Morey did not think you are worth responding to" (Ali Sina)
Oh For God’s sake…… I already responded to this in my first response!
What am I going to do with you… ? What am I going to do, with a person, who repeats the same argument I already
addressed? Rather, than responding to what I wrote, you simply restated your ORIGINAL complaint!! Since this is not the first
time you’ve done such a blunder, I have come to the conclusion that you are not intellectually fit to debate me. From this point,
what I should do is terminate the debate and chalk this up as another victory, but seeing that Denis Giron mysteriously
entered the debate out of no where, double teaming me, and has came to rescue you from destruction, I have decided to
continue and keep this debate going!
"However since one of my objectives is to prove Islamsists are savages full of arrogance and bravado I am pleased by your
behavior and encourage you to continue." (Ali Sina)
So let’s see here, because I practice the religion of Islam, I am a "savage",
And Ali Sina is the "cultured" and "refined" one…. I wonder if he lifts up his pinky when he sips his tea. I also wonder what this
"cultured" liar, Ali Sina, thinks of the "goth" crowd with all their piercing who hang out at the mall every day………
"Scrape together a few post facto miracles of reinterpretation, ignore the fact that most of the Quran contains complete idiocy
and quite a few errors and inconsistencies (which require tremendous amounts of doublethink, blissful ignorance and mental
gymnastics to swallow) and claim the divine (!) authorship of that wicked piece of 'literatuur' has been 'proved'." (Ali Sina)
First of all I placed the link where the anyone can see what he wrote, second, NONE OF THIS HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH
THE ISSUE OF COINCIDENCE which I was trying to refute.
"This is basically my argument. The question of chance, guess or genius becomes ludicrous when the entire Quran is full of
nonsense, errors and absurdities. I am afraid your understanding is very limited." (Ali Sina)
There is no logic in this statement, and I have already REFUTED this argument in my debate!!!! Lets take you for example,
you have been proved to be a liar, and I think you are full of nonsense, errors, and absurdities. Like for example, as I stated
above, you repeat your original arguments which I already refuted, rather than responding to what I wrote! That is pure
absurdity. In addition to that, you are so silly, that I have cited you making false statements about me, and misquoting me. But,
in spite of your ignorance, it is still logically possible that you can make a good guess or a issues of chance can effect you. But
anyways, I would challenge you or anyone to show one error in the Quran, absurdity, or nonsense. Perhaps we can do that
debate after this.
"What is so scientific about it? Any idiot knows that bees build their cells in hills, on trees and in human dwellings?" (Ali Sina)
You have misrepresented my argument, again, the issue here is how did the author of the Quran know that it was the female
bee which did these tasks…
By the way, after seeing what has transpired in this debate, I don’t think it is wise for you to be calling anyone an idiot.
"Why such a sentence should be a miracle?" (Ali Sina)
As I have mentioned, no one statement can be used to prove a miracle. Rather, it is the collective analysis of all the
statements pertaining to science which will determine that. I have already mentioned this more than once.
"As I said the word bee in Arabic is feminine. Muhammad had to use this word because this is an Arabic word and there is no
other word that can substitute it. So if any credit is due it should go to the Arabs who invented a feminine word for bee." (Ali
Sina)
Let me translate what Ali wrote from Iranian into English. He is asserting, that there was a 100% probability of matching the
specific role of the bee with the correct gender. In other words, it was impossible to wrongfully match the gender of the bee
with the correct role. This is of course false. For example, the author of the Quran could have easily have used a masculine
adjective which would make the bee male. In addition to that, the author of the Quran could have said, "the female bee sits at
home and never leaves the nest" which would be a scientific error. We would expect a person living in the dessert 1400 years
ago to say exactly this. Therefore, you have not refuted my point, my assertion stands unrefuted:
The probability of matching the gender of a bee with the correct role is at least ½ .
You also contradict your original statement:
"I did not say those verses are coincidence and good guess. I said most of what Muhammad said is wrong and the rest is
commonsense, things that any ignorant man living in his time could have known." (Ali Sina)
Now you are telling me that the statement about the bees is SCIENTIFICALLY CORRECT. And you didn’t not state that
knowing the female bee doing these tasks was common sense.
"This argument of yours is as ridiculous as saying someone calling a hen, hen must have divine knowledge because hens are
female." (Ali Sina)
This is a complete misrepresentation of my argument, I have no idea how this relates back to the issue of the female bee, and
how the author of the Quran gave the CORRECT ROLE to the female bee.
"In my response that it is not likely for the Arabs to forget one of their own cities, this gentleman is demanding that I produce a
list of all the lost cities dating back to BILLIONS of years." (Ali Sina)
First, we have absolutely no evidence for that, and I have seen no evidence that Iram was a Arab city, you’re not even in the
ball park here, because I have already sited this as a hypothetical possibility. You are telling us nothing new. But Even if this is
true, you can’t escape the Math, if you haven’t figured it out yet, it is the Math, not the Muslims, which is your biggest enemy. I
will simply restate my question which I asked you in my last post:
"What is the probability of SELECTIVELY CHOOSING the name of a city which the world does not know from a book, only to
be discovered 1400 years later through archaeological find... the number will kill you... :) "
"Mr. Ahmed said that the name Iram did not exist in any pre-Islamic books. I said what books? Muhammad and his marauding
gangs burned all the pre-Islamic books. They dismissed them as false or redundant because as Muhammad said anything pre-
Islamic was Jahili (ignorance) and there was no need for them. The history reports the burning of the libraries in virtually all the
countries that Muslims invaded. The most famous one of then was the huge library of Alexandria." (Ali Sina)
This has already been addressed and you have been found to be a liar, I hope you to the right thing and shut down your
website as you promised:
www.ExamineTheTruth.com/Challenge_Sina.htm
"He has learned only one argument and that is the bee, Iram, iron, sea, orbit argument and that is all he can talk about. That
argument is proven false but he can’t get over it because that is all he knows." (Ali Sina)
Actually, there are many more scientific statements mentioned in the Quran, but for the debate I only had time to talk about
those 8. Since you never had the courage to do a public debate, you would not know.
“I also quote the questions raised by Orenda one of the members of FFI. Those are also my questions. She wrote:
I have a big problem with this ayah I am hoping you can help me to understand. To me this ayah is entirely illogical." (Ali Sina)
There is nothing illogical about this verse, as far as I know, nothing contradicts the principles of logic. But it is good to see
people from the Faith Freedom International camp are leaping out of the audience like Denis Giron and Orenda to help pick
Ali Sina off the floor. But I don’t mind to be triple teamed. In fact, it was Orenda who is the promoter for this debate. She
approached me several times challenging me to debate Ali Sina, so I asked her to set it up, and I would wipe my ass with him. I
finally initiated Sina and here we are…
Unfortunately for Orenda, she got the shock of her life, as Ali Sina was exposed as a liar and refuted. Orenda, then come to
the rescue of her fallen hero Ali Sina, and has promised, that she will do some research and she will find the evidence for Ali
Sina’s concocted statement he made against Islam, and vindicate him, and we here at ExamineTheTruth.com wish her luck.
Man, I wish we had such loyal followers. I can’t even get people to return my phone calls.
“Why would Allah purposefully send revelations which are unclear?” (Ali Sina)
Test mankind perhaps….
“and that he knows that will cause Fitnah and that he knows people will use the unclear verses for evil. ?” (Ali Sina)
Mankind was given adequate instructions on how to approach them, so this will be a test for them. Now, of course we can ask,
why did God create evil? But that would be another discussion.
“Why would I purposefully give unclear directions to my friend when I know the chance could mean the loss of her very life?”
(Ali Sina)
False analogy. This is a complete misrepresentation. The verse clearly states that clear verses are given and they are the
foundation, therefore, that is what mankind is suppose to follow. And the unclear verses, leave them alone.
“Why send unclear meanings at all, because Allah says none know the hidden meaning except Allah.” (Ali Sina)
Who cares, it has no impact on my life.… when you die, you can ask God.
“Therefore, it would be useless to study the Qur'an front and back, in fact the ayah implies that searching for hidden meanings
cause fitnah. Allah has declared that only he knows the hidden meaning.” (Ali Sina)
As mentioned above, there are clear verses, and they are the foundations, study them
“Yet, at the same time, Allah expects those people who are knowledgable to say we believe in it, all of it. The clear AND
unclear. How can they believe in the unclear parts when they can not know the meaning?!"
It all depends on what to believe about them. God is simply asking to believe that these verses as well as the clear verses are
revealed from God. There is logical contradiction. If so, please do share with us. Please do not volunteer any emotional
objections or personal preferences.
"Mr. Ahmed quoted the verse 3:7 that says some of the verses of the Quran are clear and some are not. Can he tell us why
the Quran contradicts itself in other verses and claims to be:
clear book (5:15)
easy to understand (44:58 , 54:22 , 54:32, 54:40)
explained in detail (6:114),
conveyed clearly (5:16, 10:15)
with "no doubt" in it (2:1)" (Ali Sina)
There is no contradiction. A book can contain all the elements and even more than what you have cited above, and still
contain some verses where the meanings are hard to understand. But even those hard to understand verses, the words can
be clear and easy to understand, it can have detail.. and there is no doubt that it is true. So, where is the contradiction?
"As for a "barrier between fresh and salt water" there is no such barrier at all and the Quran is wrong. The sweet waters enter
the sea and eventually mix with the sea water. Anyone standing on a hill can see that when the water enters the sea
(especially when it is muddy) it pushes the sea water aside and because of its momentum goes forward. In the mouth of
thedelta the waters seem to be separate but soon they merge. The Quran mentions that there is a barrier and the Quran is
wrong. So the question of probability and chance is irrelevant because the Quran is wrong." (Ali Sina)
I have already refuted this in response #1, once again, Ali was suppose to respond to what I wrote, but he did not, rather, he
just restated, and reworded his initial objection.
"Mr. Ahmed provided a link to the Islamic site that tries to explain the miracles of the Quran. In that link there is a picture of the
Mediterranean Sea meeting the Atlantic Ocean and the Gibraltar Sill acting as the barrier between the two seas. Then he
claims that this is what Muhammad is talking about? Mr. Ahmed, do you have any proof that Muhammad is talking about this
Gibraltar Sill? It is up to you to present your evidence. Where is your proof? If Muhammad had specified the Seas then I could
accept your claim. Otherwise it is just a vague statement that Muslims could even use if we discover a planet in another solar
system with a barrier between two seas." (Ali Sina)
No need to name the actual seas to make a scientific statement, for example, if a person says, "The brain is used for thinking
and decision making", just because he did not mention which lobe of the brain, does not mean that this is a statement which
does not agrees with modern science, rather, this statements fully agrees with modern science without mentioning the lobe.
"As the verse 25:53 makes it clear, Muhammad is talking about two seas one with sweet and palatable and the other with salty
and bitter water. The water in both Atlantic and Mediterranean are salty. Therefore this verse does not refer to any two seas
but to the waters at estuary where an arm of the sea extends inland to meet the river." (Ali Sina)
Already refuted in response #1.
"In this case as I said there is no "forbidding partitions" between the waters and they eventually mix." (Ali Sina)
I have already refuted this in my first response, you can go back there and read….please provide for me a definition from the
Quran on what a "forbidding partition" is.
"On one side we have the fresh waters of the river running into the sea and on the other side we have the salty water of the
sea being pushed away. In between the two we have a mixture of the two waters." (Ali Sina)
Yes, that "in between" is considered a barrier, so, are you now admitting that there is a barrier between salt and fresh water?
"The Islamic site claims this water in between acts as the barrier. This statement is simply asinine to say the least. The waters
eventually keep mixing until all the salt water and sweet water become one. The mixed water between the two waters is not the
barrier but the reverse. It is the mixture of the two." (Ali Sina)
That specific area of the sea where the mixing is occurring can be considered a radiating barrier. There are many different
types of barriers.
"When I say that Muhammad must have heard that at estuaries waters do not mix Mr. Ahmed says " total baseless assumption,
show us proof of what you are saying if you are truthful" Dear Mr. Ahmed. I am not making any absurd claims about
Muhammad." (Ali Sina)
Yes, you are indeed making an absurd claim about Muhammed(P), you are claiming that someone else knew this scientific
knowledge, and instead of taking the credit himself, he tells the Prophet(P). And if you recall, I stated that it is a hypothetical
possibility, and I would then ask for a probability.
And please show us proof for this assertion.
"It is you who are claiming Muhammad had never heard about this phenomenon that could have been observed by anyone
and was known universally by all seamen and those who lives near the deltas." (Ali Sina)
The barrier between fresh and salt water, which you first denied above, it seems now you are painfully admitting, that yes,
there is a barrier. As far as I know, this barrier is not visible to the naked eye, if I’m wrong, perhaps you can provide me a
picture. But what I am claiming, is that we have no proof that this barrier was known to the world at that time. And if you are
going to postulate, that the author of the Quran did not know that there was a barrier between fresh and salt water as he
clearly stated, and was actually referring to something else, then this can only be a coincidence or guess, which would involve
probability.
Its funny, thus far, Ali would have us believe that mysterious people told the author of the Quran about the lost city of "Iram",
and a different group of mysterious people told the author of the Quran about "barriers" between the seas without taking
credit for themselves.
"It is up to you to prove to us that he never had heard what everyone else already knew." (Ali Sina)
This argument can be shot down in a variety of ways, let me first remind you that if you are going to assert that the author of
the Quran copied this knowledge from someone, than you must provide the evidence, but all I am saying is that we have no
evidence in history of people knowing this great scientific discovery, and there were NO MEANS OF BEING ABLE TO DO SO,
because a person would need sophisticated technology to get this type of information.
"Once again you affirm that science has confirmed that there is a barrier between the seas. The only link you provide is the
Islamic site from where you learned the only argument you have mastered. Please provide one reliable non-Islamic site that
says there is "a barrier and a forbidden partition" between salty water and sweet water. You sound like that fox who was
caught stealing the grapes and when brought to the judge pleaded innocence and produced his tail as his witness. Islamic
sites are not scientific sites. They all rehash the same nonsense and their claim that Quran is scientific is no proof to us." (Ali
Sina)
God dang you’re stupid. The very people who came to this post to rescue your sorry ass, are themselves trying to tell you that
there is a barrier between fresh and salt water here, it is called the pycnocline! Your problem Ali Sina, is that you overcome
with so much hate and venom for Islam, that when the challenge of Islam faces you, you simply froth at the mouth, choke, and
uncontrollably blurt out the first thing that comes out of that hole in your head, Macbeth probably put Ali Sina’s condition the
best:
A poor player that struts and frets his hour
upon the stage and then is heard no more;
It is a tale told by an idiot,
full of sound and fury,
signifying nothing.
(Macbeth Act V, Scene 5)
now pay attention, here is the stuff you requested:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Pycnocline+salt+fresh
http://www.geocities.com/freethoughtmecca/water.html (I will refute this stuff later)
In summary, here is Ali Sina’s response to my 8 pieces of evidence, which I have already refuted above:
1. Quran and Bees: Ali agrees that Quran is scientifically correct, but it was a 100% chance of getting it right.
2. City of Iram: A mysterious group of people or book told the author of the Quran.
3. Barriers between salt and fresh water – Ali Sina claimed there is no barrier between salt and fresh water.
4. Barrier between the seas - sailors told the author of the Quran.
5. Iron sent down to earth - my refutation of his rebuttal went unanswered.
6. Darkness of the ocean. - my refutation of his rebuttal went unanswered.
7. Quran and Orbits- my refutation of his rebuttal went unanswered.
8. lowest point on earth - I did not respond yet to his refutation!
Now, one last point to be mentioned, as for the numbers which I used for the probability, if someone were to say that anyone
of these 8 scientific pieces of evidence were "coincidences" or "guesswork", I used the Subjective Theory of Probability which
humans do everyday. But, to compromise for the critics, to the unreasonable point, that, I am willing to go down to 1/100
probability for all of the scientific evidences, except the bee. For example, I am willing to say, that AT LEAST, 1 out of every
100 people who write books mention the names of cities which is not known to the world at that time, only to be discovered in
archaeological digs later on… that phenomenon happens to 1 out of every 100 people in this world. Take for example the
story of Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland, Lewis Carol has a 1/100 chance that a place called "Wonderland" will be
discovered in an archaeological dig in the near future.
Another example, before the earth was discovered to be round, the people of the past have a 1 out of 100 chance of making
the scientifically correct statement that:
"The sun and moon have a orbit."
WITHOUT STATING THAT THE SUN ORBITS AROUND THE EARTH OR ANY OTHER SCIENTIFIC ERROR RELATED TO THE
SUN AND MOON’S ORBIT. Unfortunately, some critics try to read into the text scientific errors which are not stated in the text.
After looking at the evidences collectively, and factoring the probabilities as done so in the Ahmed-Giron Debate, it will be
demonstrated that the Quran is a book which could not have been authored by a man, rather, a greater power must have
been the author. Thus far, not a single shred of evidence has been presented to contest this fact.
"It is up to him to show us at least one book of history, philosophy, medicine, astrology, or chemistry dating back to the Jahilia."
(Ali Sina)
Volume 3, Book 31, Number 137:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
The Prophet said, "We are an illiterate nation; we neither write, nor know accounts. The month is like this and this, i.e.
sometimes of 29 days and sometimes of thirty days."
Enough said. Someone needs to call Orenda back from her wild goose chase and let her know the bad news….
"Finally you have not yet answered the question that I repeatedly asked you in each and every communication to you. Do you
think if you prove that the Quran is miraculous but fail to disprove the charges of” …….." (Ali Sina)
Oh, but I believe I have… if you would so kindly allow me Ali Sina, I would fancy to restate my position:
"And as for your claim, Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) is a truthful person and not a liar like you Ali Sina, you bum :-) "
End of Part 4 ...
[Intro] [Part 1] [Part 2] [Part 3] [Part 4]
Back to the section of Nadir Ahmed
Send Email to Nadir Ahmed
"You obviously feel that ad hominem is a good substitute to reason and when you are short of reason you can freely insult
your opponent and thus win the battle." (Ali Sina)
Simply calling someone a bunch of insults is not Ad hominem. Rather, Ad hominem is when you say for example, Because
someone is an idiot, therefore, his argument is wrong. There is not a single case of Ad hominem in my entire debate, and I
challenge you to show me one example. Just one. Nevertheless, I did call you some names, but I was simply returning fire from
your goons in this post who have by writing such filthy things about Islam, especially calling me a "Muslim Nigger". That didn’t
go to well with me.
So, Ali Sina, you need to call your attack dogs off, and then I will perhaps spare you from insults you rightfully disserve.
"This is why Dr. Morey did not think you are worth responding to" (Ali Sina)
Oh For God’s sake…… I already responded to this in my first response!
What am I going to do with you… ? What am I going to do, with a person, who repeats the same argument I already
addressed? Rather, than responding to what I wrote, you simply restated your ORIGINAL complaint!! Since this is not the first
time you’ve done such a blunder, I have come to the conclusion that you are not intellectually fit to debate me. From this point,
what I should do is terminate the debate and chalk this up as another victory, but seeing that Denis Giron mysteriously
entered the debate out of no where, double teaming me, and has came to rescue you from destruction, I have decided to
continue and keep this debate going!
"However since one of my objectives is to prove Islamsists are savages full of arrogance and bravado I am pleased by your
behavior and encourage you to continue." (Ali Sina)
So let’s see here, because I practice the religion of Islam, I am a "savage",
And Ali Sina is the "cultured" and "refined" one…. I wonder if he lifts up his pinky when he sips his tea. I also wonder what this
"cultured" liar, Ali Sina, thinks of the "goth" crowd with all their piercing who hang out at the mall every day………
"Scrape together a few post facto miracles of reinterpretation, ignore the fact that most of the Quran contains complete idiocy
and quite a few errors and inconsistencies (which require tremendous amounts of doublethink, blissful ignorance and mental
gymnastics to swallow) and claim the divine (!) authorship of that wicked piece of 'literatuur' has been 'proved'." (Ali Sina)
First of all I placed the link where the anyone can see what he wrote, second, NONE OF THIS HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH
THE ISSUE OF COINCIDENCE which I was trying to refute.
"This is basically my argument. The question of chance, guess or genius becomes ludicrous when the entire Quran is full of
nonsense, errors and absurdities. I am afraid your understanding is very limited." (Ali Sina)
There is no logic in this statement, and I have already REFUTED this argument in my debate!!!! Lets take you for example,
you have been proved to be a liar, and I think you are full of nonsense, errors, and absurdities. Like for example, as I stated
above, you repeat your original arguments which I already refuted, rather than responding to what I wrote! That is pure
absurdity. In addition to that, you are so silly, that I have cited you making false statements about me, and misquoting me. But,
in spite of your ignorance, it is still logically possible that you can make a good guess or a issues of chance can effect you. But
anyways, I would challenge you or anyone to show one error in the Quran, absurdity, or nonsense. Perhaps we can do that
debate after this.
"What is so scientific about it? Any idiot knows that bees build their cells in hills, on trees and in human dwellings?" (Ali Sina)
You have misrepresented my argument, again, the issue here is how did the author of the Quran know that it was the female
bee which did these tasks…
By the way, after seeing what has transpired in this debate, I don’t think it is wise for you to be calling anyone an idiot.
"Why such a sentence should be a miracle?" (Ali Sina)
As I have mentioned, no one statement can be used to prove a miracle. Rather, it is the collective analysis of all the
statements pertaining to science which will determine that. I have already mentioned this more than once.
"As I said the word bee in Arabic is feminine. Muhammad had to use this word because this is an Arabic word and there is no
other word that can substitute it. So if any credit is due it should go to the Arabs who invented a feminine word for bee." (Ali
Sina)
Let me translate what Ali wrote from Iranian into English. He is asserting, that there was a 100% probability of matching the
specific role of the bee with the correct gender. In other words, it was impossible to wrongfully match the gender of the bee
with the correct role. This is of course false. For example, the author of the Quran could have easily have used a masculine
adjective which would make the bee male. In addition to that, the author of the Quran could have said, "the female bee sits at
home and never leaves the nest" which would be a scientific error. We would expect a person living in the dessert 1400 years
ago to say exactly this. Therefore, you have not refuted my point, my assertion stands unrefuted:
The probability of matching the gender of a bee with the correct role is at least ½ .
You also contradict your original statement:
"I did not say those verses are coincidence and good guess. I said most of what Muhammad said is wrong and the rest is
commonsense, things that any ignorant man living in his time could have known." (Ali Sina)
Now you are telling me that the statement about the bees is SCIENTIFICALLY CORRECT. And you didn’t not state that
knowing the female bee doing these tasks was common sense.
"This argument of yours is as ridiculous as saying someone calling a hen, hen must have divine knowledge because hens are
female." (Ali Sina)
This is a complete misrepresentation of my argument, I have no idea how this relates back to the issue of the female bee, and
how the author of the Quran gave the CORRECT ROLE to the female bee.
"In my response that it is not likely for the Arabs to forget one of their own cities, this gentleman is demanding that I produce a
list of all the lost cities dating back to BILLIONS of years." (Ali Sina)
First, we have absolutely no evidence for that, and I have seen no evidence that Iram was a Arab city, you’re not even in the
ball park here, because I have already sited this as a hypothetical possibility. You are telling us nothing new. But Even if this is
true, you can’t escape the Math, if you haven’t figured it out yet, it is the Math, not the Muslims, which is your biggest enemy. I
will simply restate my question which I asked you in my last post:
"What is the probability of SELECTIVELY CHOOSING the name of a city which the world does not know from a book, only to
be discovered 1400 years later through archaeological find... the number will kill you... :) "
"Mr. Ahmed said that the name Iram did not exist in any pre-Islamic books. I said what books? Muhammad and his marauding
gangs burned all the pre-Islamic books. They dismissed them as false or redundant because as Muhammad said anything pre-
Islamic was Jahili (ignorance) and there was no need for them. The history reports the burning of the libraries in virtually all the
countries that Muslims invaded. The most famous one of then was the huge library of Alexandria." (Ali Sina)
This has already been addressed and you have been found to be a liar, I hope you to the right thing and shut down your
website as you promised:
www.ExamineTheTruth.com/Challenge_Sina.htm
"He has learned only one argument and that is the bee, Iram, iron, sea, orbit argument and that is all he can talk about. That
argument is proven false but he can’t get over it because that is all he knows." (Ali Sina)
Actually, there are many more scientific statements mentioned in the Quran, but for the debate I only had time to talk about
those 8. Since you never had the courage to do a public debate, you would not know.
“I also quote the questions raised by Orenda one of the members of FFI. Those are also my questions. She wrote:
I have a big problem with this ayah I am hoping you can help me to understand. To me this ayah is entirely illogical." (Ali Sina)
There is nothing illogical about this verse, as far as I know, nothing contradicts the principles of logic. But it is good to see
people from the Faith Freedom International camp are leaping out of the audience like Denis Giron and Orenda to help pick
Ali Sina off the floor. But I don’t mind to be triple teamed. In fact, it was Orenda who is the promoter for this debate. She
approached me several times challenging me to debate Ali Sina, so I asked her to set it up, and I would wipe my ass with him. I
finally initiated Sina and here we are…
Unfortunately for Orenda, she got the shock of her life, as Ali Sina was exposed as a liar and refuted. Orenda, then come to
the rescue of her fallen hero Ali Sina, and has promised, that she will do some research and she will find the evidence for Ali
Sina’s concocted statement he made against Islam, and vindicate him, and we here at ExamineTheTruth.com wish her luck.
Man, I wish we had such loyal followers. I can’t even get people to return my phone calls.
“Why would Allah purposefully send revelations which are unclear?” (Ali Sina)
Test mankind perhaps….
“and that he knows that will cause Fitnah and that he knows people will use the unclear verses for evil. ?” (Ali Sina)
Mankind was given adequate instructions on how to approach them, so this will be a test for them. Now, of course we can ask,
why did God create evil? But that would be another discussion.
“Why would I purposefully give unclear directions to my friend when I know the chance could mean the loss of her very life?”
(Ali Sina)
False analogy. This is a complete misrepresentation. The verse clearly states that clear verses are given and they are the
foundation, therefore, that is what mankind is suppose to follow. And the unclear verses, leave them alone.
“Why send unclear meanings at all, because Allah says none know the hidden meaning except Allah.” (Ali Sina)
Who cares, it has no impact on my life.… when you die, you can ask God.
“Therefore, it would be useless to study the Qur'an front and back, in fact the ayah implies that searching for hidden meanings
cause fitnah. Allah has declared that only he knows the hidden meaning.” (Ali Sina)
As mentioned above, there are clear verses, and they are the foundations, study them
“Yet, at the same time, Allah expects those people who are knowledgable to say we believe in it, all of it. The clear AND
unclear. How can they believe in the unclear parts when they can not know the meaning?!"
It all depends on what to believe about them. God is simply asking to believe that these verses as well as the clear verses are
revealed from God. There is logical contradiction. If so, please do share with us. Please do not volunteer any emotional
objections or personal preferences.
"Mr. Ahmed quoted the verse 3:7 that says some of the verses of the Quran are clear and some are not. Can he tell us why
the Quran contradicts itself in other verses and claims to be:
clear book (5:15)
easy to understand (44:58 , 54:22 , 54:32, 54:40)
explained in detail (6:114),
conveyed clearly (5:16, 10:15)
with "no doubt" in it (2:1)" (Ali Sina)
There is no contradiction. A book can contain all the elements and even more than what you have cited above, and still
contain some verses where the meanings are hard to understand. But even those hard to understand verses, the words can
be clear and easy to understand, it can have detail.. and there is no doubt that it is true. So, where is the contradiction?
"As for a "barrier between fresh and salt water" there is no such barrier at all and the Quran is wrong. The sweet waters enter
the sea and eventually mix with the sea water. Anyone standing on a hill can see that when the water enters the sea
(especially when it is muddy) it pushes the sea water aside and because of its momentum goes forward. In the mouth of
thedelta the waters seem to be separate but soon they merge. The Quran mentions that there is a barrier and the Quran is
wrong. So the question of probability and chance is irrelevant because the Quran is wrong." (Ali Sina)
I have already refuted this in response #1, once again, Ali was suppose to respond to what I wrote, but he did not, rather, he
just restated, and reworded his initial objection.
"Mr. Ahmed provided a link to the Islamic site that tries to explain the miracles of the Quran. In that link there is a picture of the
Mediterranean Sea meeting the Atlantic Ocean and the Gibraltar Sill acting as the barrier between the two seas. Then he
claims that this is what Muhammad is talking about? Mr. Ahmed, do you have any proof that Muhammad is talking about this
Gibraltar Sill? It is up to you to present your evidence. Where is your proof? If Muhammad had specified the Seas then I could
accept your claim. Otherwise it is just a vague statement that Muslims could even use if we discover a planet in another solar
system with a barrier between two seas." (Ali Sina)
No need to name the actual seas to make a scientific statement, for example, if a person says, "The brain is used for thinking
and decision making", just because he did not mention which lobe of the brain, does not mean that this is a statement which
does not agrees with modern science, rather, this statements fully agrees with modern science without mentioning the lobe.
"As the verse 25:53 makes it clear, Muhammad is talking about two seas one with sweet and palatable and the other with salty
and bitter water. The water in both Atlantic and Mediterranean are salty. Therefore this verse does not refer to any two seas
but to the waters at estuary where an arm of the sea extends inland to meet the river." (Ali Sina)
Already refuted in response #1.
"In this case as I said there is no "forbidding partitions" between the waters and they eventually mix." (Ali Sina)
I have already refuted this in my first response, you can go back there and read….please provide for me a definition from the
Quran on what a "forbidding partition" is.
"On one side we have the fresh waters of the river running into the sea and on the other side we have the salty water of the
sea being pushed away. In between the two we have a mixture of the two waters." (Ali Sina)
Yes, that "in between" is considered a barrier, so, are you now admitting that there is a barrier between salt and fresh water?
"The Islamic site claims this water in between acts as the barrier. This statement is simply asinine to say the least. The waters
eventually keep mixing until all the salt water and sweet water become one. The mixed water between the two waters is not the
barrier but the reverse. It is the mixture of the two." (Ali Sina)
That specific area of the sea where the mixing is occurring can be considered a radiating barrier. There are many different
types of barriers.
"When I say that Muhammad must have heard that at estuaries waters do not mix Mr. Ahmed says " total baseless assumption,
show us proof of what you are saying if you are truthful" Dear Mr. Ahmed. I am not making any absurd claims about
Muhammad." (Ali Sina)
Yes, you are indeed making an absurd claim about Muhammed(P), you are claiming that someone else knew this scientific
knowledge, and instead of taking the credit himself, he tells the Prophet(P). And if you recall, I stated that it is a hypothetical
possibility, and I would then ask for a probability.
And please show us proof for this assertion.
"It is you who are claiming Muhammad had never heard about this phenomenon that could have been observed by anyone
and was known universally by all seamen and those who lives near the deltas." (Ali Sina)
The barrier between fresh and salt water, which you first denied above, it seems now you are painfully admitting, that yes,
there is a barrier. As far as I know, this barrier is not visible to the naked eye, if I’m wrong, perhaps you can provide me a
picture. But what I am claiming, is that we have no proof that this barrier was known to the world at that time. And if you are
going to postulate, that the author of the Quran did not know that there was a barrier between fresh and salt water as he
clearly stated, and was actually referring to something else, then this can only be a coincidence or guess, which would involve
probability.
Its funny, thus far, Ali would have us believe that mysterious people told the author of the Quran about the lost city of "Iram",
and a different group of mysterious people told the author of the Quran about "barriers" between the seas without taking
credit for themselves.
"It is up to you to prove to us that he never had heard what everyone else already knew." (Ali Sina)
This argument can be shot down in a variety of ways, let me first remind you that if you are going to assert that the author of
the Quran copied this knowledge from someone, than you must provide the evidence, but all I am saying is that we have no
evidence in history of people knowing this great scientific discovery, and there were NO MEANS OF BEING ABLE TO DO SO,
because a person would need sophisticated technology to get this type of information.
"Once again you affirm that science has confirmed that there is a barrier between the seas. The only link you provide is the
Islamic site from where you learned the only argument you have mastered. Please provide one reliable non-Islamic site that
says there is "a barrier and a forbidden partition" between salty water and sweet water. You sound like that fox who was
caught stealing the grapes and when brought to the judge pleaded innocence and produced his tail as his witness. Islamic
sites are not scientific sites. They all rehash the same nonsense and their claim that Quran is scientific is no proof to us." (Ali
Sina)
God dang you’re stupid. The very people who came to this post to rescue your sorry ass, are themselves trying to tell you that
there is a barrier between fresh and salt water here, it is called the pycnocline! Your problem Ali Sina, is that you overcome
with so much hate and venom for Islam, that when the challenge of Islam faces you, you simply froth at the mouth, choke, and
uncontrollably blurt out the first thing that comes out of that hole in your head, Macbeth probably put Ali Sina’s condition the
best:
A poor player that struts and frets his hour
upon the stage and then is heard no more;
It is a tale told by an idiot,
full of sound and fury,
signifying nothing.
(Macbeth Act V, Scene 5)
now pay attention, here is the stuff you requested:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Pycnocline+salt+fresh
http://www.geocities.com/freethoughtmecca/water.html (I will refute this stuff later)
In summary, here is Ali Sina’s response to my 8 pieces of evidence, which I have already refuted above:
1. Quran and Bees: Ali agrees that Quran is scientifically correct, but it was a 100% chance of getting it right.
2. City of Iram: A mysterious group of people or book told the author of the Quran.
3. Barriers between salt and fresh water – Ali Sina claimed there is no barrier between salt and fresh water.
4. Barrier between the seas - sailors told the author of the Quran.
5. Iron sent down to earth - my refutation of his rebuttal went unanswered.
6. Darkness of the ocean. - my refutation of his rebuttal went unanswered.
7. Quran and Orbits- my refutation of his rebuttal went unanswered.
8. lowest point on earth - I did not respond yet to his refutation!
Now, one last point to be mentioned, as for the numbers which I used for the probability, if someone were to say that anyone
of these 8 scientific pieces of evidence were "coincidences" or "guesswork", I used the Subjective Theory of Probability which
humans do everyday. But, to compromise for the critics, to the unreasonable point, that, I am willing to go down to 1/100
probability for all of the scientific evidences, except the bee. For example, I am willing to say, that AT LEAST, 1 out of every
100 people who write books mention the names of cities which is not known to the world at that time, only to be discovered in
archaeological digs later on… that phenomenon happens to 1 out of every 100 people in this world. Take for example the
story of Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland, Lewis Carol has a 1/100 chance that a place called "Wonderland" will be
discovered in an archaeological dig in the near future.
Another example, before the earth was discovered to be round, the people of the past have a 1 out of 100 chance of making
the scientifically correct statement that:
"The sun and moon have a orbit."
WITHOUT STATING THAT THE SUN ORBITS AROUND THE EARTH OR ANY OTHER SCIENTIFIC ERROR RELATED TO THE
SUN AND MOON’S ORBIT. Unfortunately, some critics try to read into the text scientific errors which are not stated in the text.
After looking at the evidences collectively, and factoring the probabilities as done so in the Ahmed-Giron Debate, it will be
demonstrated that the Quran is a book which could not have been authored by a man, rather, a greater power must have
been the author. Thus far, not a single shred of evidence has been presented to contest this fact.
"It is up to him to show us at least one book of history, philosophy, medicine, astrology, or chemistry dating back to the Jahilia."
(Ali Sina)
Volume 3, Book 31, Number 137:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
The Prophet said, "We are an illiterate nation; we neither write, nor know accounts. The month is like this and this, i.e.
sometimes of 29 days and sometimes of thirty days."
Enough said. Someone needs to call Orenda back from her wild goose chase and let her know the bad news….
"Finally you have not yet answered the question that I repeatedly asked you in each and every communication to you. Do you
think if you prove that the Quran is miraculous but fail to disprove the charges of” …….." (Ali Sina)
Oh, but I believe I have… if you would so kindly allow me Ali Sina, I would fancy to restate my position:
"And as for your claim, Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) is a truthful person and not a liar like you Ali Sina, you bum :-) "
End of Part 4 ...
[Intro] [Part 1] [Part 2] [Part 3] [Part 4]
Back to the section of Nadir Ahmed
Send Email to Nadir Ahmed
| Answering FaithFreedom.org |
| DEBATE: Nadir Ahmed VS Ali Sina |
| ”Faith Freedom International's Ali Sina attempts to contest the solid evidence for the Quran and Modern Science Debate” Response # 2 to Ali Sina www.ExamineTheTruth.com |