| Answering FaithFreedom.org |
| Does Dr. Zakir Naik really Fool the Audience? |
On the very front page of Ali Sina’s site. Ali Sina has written a response to Dr.Zakir Naik's presentation in his debate with Dr.
William Campbell. He says that Dr.Zakir Naik is a magician and he fools his audience with words. He calls him a Showman. You
can find his response here
http://www.faithfreedom.org/debates/NaikCampbellintro.htm#content
The Reason arises why does he call him a Showman and a magician? The reason is obvious. Dr.Zakir Naik Alhumdulillah with
the grace of Allah (SWT) winning over people's hearts.. He has delivered more than a thousand public talks worldwide. He has
Alhumdulillah started his new 24 hour Satellite channel "Peace TV". This Channel Promotes the True Picture of Islam. Ali Sina
does not like that.
Here I will be exposing Ali Sina. He not only is unscholarly in his approach but he even lacks ethical values. Any unbiased
person who sees this picture of Dr.Zakir Naik modified by Ali Sina and his clowns will realize that Ali Sina is a loony.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/debates/NaikCampbellintro.htm
Before I respond to the points raised by him. I would like to make few points clear.
1. If Ali Sina Writes a response to Dr.Zakir Naik that doesn't mean that Dr.Naik is fooling his audience. If I use this logic than it
also means that Dr.William Campbell was also fooling his audience when he said falsehood about Islam. It also means that Ali
Sina is also fooling his readers because many Muslims including Brother Umar on this site has responded to false charges of
Ali Sina.
http://www.answering-christianity.com/umar/true_face_of_ali_sina_2.htm
2. It is Dr.William Campbell who actually initiated the debate. Dr.Zakir Naik doesn't go around asking people to have a public
debate with him. Dr.Campbell wrote a book against the Quran. Dr.Naik refuted all the points of Dr.Campbell and pointed out
scientific errors and contradictions in the bible. Ali Sina accuses Dr.Zakir of attacking the bible but doesn't say anything about
Dr.Campbell who actually initiated the debate.
3. The Translations are human handi-work and are bound to contain errors. No Translation per se is error free. The
Translator may not have in-depth knowledge of Science therefore it is highly possible that he makes an error in translating the
scientific statements mentioned in the Quran.
Dr.Maurice Bucaille writes:
"Why do errors in translation exist? They may be explained by the fact that modern translators often take up, rather uncritically
, the interpretations given by older commentators. In their day, the latter had an excuse for having given an inappropriate
definition to an Arabic word containing several possible meanings; they could not possibly have understood the real
sense the word or phrase which has only become clear in the present day thanks to scientific knowledge. In
Other words, the problem is raised of the necessary revision of translations and commentaries. It was possible to do this at a
certain period in the past, but nowadays we have knowledge that enables us to render their true sense "
(The Bible, The Quran, And The Science pg 118-119)
I'll mainly be touching the points which he raised on the Quran. I wont be dealing with each and every small point which is
irrelevant. It was actually Dr.William Campbell who was supposed to reply to these points. Therefore, He should even thank me
for even taking out my time.
Big Bang in the Quran?
Ali Sina Writes:
(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 Big Bang is true then the story of the creation and Adam and Eve must be
false and vice versa. This is elemental.
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 Quran. This fable, like many others, is
borrowed from the Bible.
My Response:
Ali Sina here claims that the Quran is copied from the Bible. The same nonsense, which Christians keep
repeating. Since he has accused Dr.Zakir Naik. I can do no better than let Dr.Zakir Naik reply to it.
http://www.irf.net/irf/dtp/dawah_tech/t18/t18a/pg1.htm.
Ali Sina Writes:
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?
My Response.
In the verse 41.11 Allah (SWT) is not talking about the physical calling of heavens and earth together. He is
talking about coming into existence. Quran is in complete compability with modern science. These verses have
other scientific points in it as well. But since I am only responding to his points I wont go into details right now.
Ali Sina Writes:
Of course both are false. The earth is inside the sky and part of it. They can neither come together nor separate.
Here we have two version that contradict each other and both are scientifically wrong.
My Response:
As I explained above none of the two is wrong. Dr.Zakir Naik explains
“The creation of the universe is explained by astrophysicists in a widely accepted phenomenon, popularly known
as the 'Big Bang'. It is supported by observational and experimental data gathered by astronomers and
astrophysicists for decades. According to the 'Big Bang', the whole universe was initially one big mass (Primary
Nebula). Then there was a 'Big Bang' (Secondary Separation) which resulted in the formation of Galaxies. These
then divided to form stars, planets, the sun, the moon, etc. The origin of the universe was unique and the
probability of it occurring by 'chance' is zero."
Does the Quran say the Sun and the Moon Revolve Around Their Own Axis?
Ali Sina Writes:
(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 íóÓúÈóÍõæäó ysbahun means rotating around its own axis. This is
simply not true. Dr. Naik is fabricating evidence and twisting the meaning of the words. The word here implies
that the Sun and the Moon rotate in circle, i.e. 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. 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 Quran 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 Quranic miracles
you find clarity.
Then again, if the Quran 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?
My Response:
As I explained in the beginning that translations are human handy-work and they are done by people who may not
be having great knowledge of science. And even you if you read the last translation by Sale it says the same
thing what Dr.Zakir Naik explained. It reads " [the celestial bodies] move swiftly, [each] in [its respective] orb.
" see the different meanings of the word "orb"
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/orb
Muslims today have gotten backward because we have deviated away from the teachings of Islam. When we
Muslims were close to the Quran we were on the top of the world. Did Ali Sina forget the discoveries done by
Muslim scientists??? The discoveries done by Western Scientists are only in last few centuries. Western
scientists rehashed many of the discoveries of Muslim Scientists. Did he forget the Muslims scientists who did
brilliant discoveries about 800-1000 years ago?? Did he forget great scientists like Jabbir Ibn Hayyan, Ali Ibn Sina
(Avicenna), Muhammad Zakaria Razi etc. For more detail, refer to this.
http://www.ummah.net/history/scholars/index.html
Ali Sina Writes:
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 Quran why all the Muslims are so miserable?
My Response:
As I explained above. It is because we have deviated away from the word of Allah (SWT). Ali Sina also considers
Bible unscientific. But we have many Christian scientists. Therefore, Religion has nothing to do with discoveries
of science. The followers of many other religions like Hinduism, Buddhism etc. live in third world countries. They
have not done many discoveries either. But Ali Sina doesn't highlight them. He is only concerned about targeting
the Muslims.
Does the Quran say the Universe is Expanding?
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) It was Edvin Hubbel who discovered that the universe is expanding. The Qur’an says in Surah Dhariyat,
Ch. 51, Verse No. 47, that…‘We have created the expanding universe’ - The vastness of space. The Arabic word
‘Mohsiana’ refers to ‘vastness’ – ‘the expanding universe.’
Regarding the topics on Astronomy, which Dr. William Campbell touched, I will deal in the rebuttal, InshaAllah.
(Ali Sina) Dr. Naik claims that the verse 51:47 talks about the expanding universe. This is not so. Muhammad is
simply saying that the universe is vast and not that it is expanding. This verse reads:
Arabic…
See how this is translated:
YUSUFALI: With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of pace.
PICKTHAL: We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof).
SHAKIR: And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample.
The fact that the universe is vast is prosaic and obvious. There is no mention of expanding universe in this
verse. Any illiterate man can look at the sky and see it is vast. To the ancient people even the Earth looked vast.
To us it looks very small.
My Response:
Ali Sina previously quoted atleast 7-8 translations for Quran 21:33. Now he only quoted three. Why?? The reason
is because if he had quoted more he would have been proved to be a liar. Let’s read other translations of the
verse of the Quran 51:47
Dr. Munir Munshey : " With Our power and prowess, We brought into being the universe. And indeed, We expand
it (steadily)!"
Muhammad Al-Hilali & Muhsin Khan: "With power did We construct the heaven. Verily, we are Able to extend the
vastness of space thereof."
Arberry: "And heaven -- We built it with might, and We extend it wide."
Khalifa : "We constructed the sky with our hands, and we will continue to expand it."
And if you read the translation by Muhammad Asad, it uses the same words which Dr.Zakir Naik used "Expanding
Universe". The verse reads
Muhammad Asad : "It is we who have built the universe with [our creative] power; and, verily, it is we who are steadily
expanding it."
"we are expanding it" is the translation of the plural present participle musi'una and of the verb ausa'a meaning "to make
wider, more spacious, to extend, to expand"
Water Cycle in the Quran?
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) In the field of ‘Water cycle’ that Dr. William Campbell pointed out, certain things. The Qur’an describes the water
cycle in great detail. And Dr. William Campbell mentioned 4 stages. In his book he mentions 4 (a) and (b) - the last one he did
not mention in the slide - I don’t know why? It says... ‘The Driplinition’…‘The Water table.’ He missed out here - Maybe
because it was not mentioned in the Bible. He said there is not a single Verse in the Qur’an, which speaks about ‘evaporation.’
Qur’an says in Surah Al-Tariq, Ch. No. 86, Verse No. 11, that….(Arabic)…. ‘By the capacity of the heavens to return.’ And
almost all the commentaries of the Qur’an - they said, that this Verse of Surah Tariq, Ch. No. 86, Verse No. 11, refers to the
capacity of the heavens to return back rain - meaning ‘Evaporation.’
Ali Sina) I don’t know which commentator said such a thing but if anyone has, he is mistaken. Let us read the first part of this
Sura:
My Response :
He is insinuating that only he (Ali Sina) knows the Quran whereas any commentator who says so is mistaken.
Ali Sina continues :
Let us read the first part of this Sura:
086.001 By the Sky and the Night-Visitant (therein);-
086.002 And what will explain to thee what the Night-Visitant is?-
086.003 (It is) the Star of piercing brightness;-
086.004 There is no soul but has a protector over it.
086.005 Now let man but think from what he is created!
086.006 He is created from a drop emitted-
086.007 Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs:
086.008 Surely (Allah) is able to bring him back (to life)!
086.009 The Day that (all) things secret will be tested,
086.010 (Man) will have no power, and no helper.
086.011 By the Firmament which returns (in its round),
The entire Sura is gibberish. It just makes so sense. You can hardly find any text as obtuse as this.
My Response :
Ali Sina considers the Surah to be gibberish. To infidels the whole Quran may sound gibberish. And Ali Sina is one of them.
Therefore, it does not really matter to us if this sounds gibberish to him. I won’t be touching to all six of his so called "errors" in
the Quran. I'll just deal with the first and the last one.
"1) It appears that Muhammad is saying that each person has a star that protects him. This is fairytale fit for children.
Where is the verse saying that star protects the man?? !! The first 3 verses of the Surah are speaking of something different
whereas the verse 4 is speaking about something different. If Ali Sina is dumb and cannot even understand plain English that
does not mean Quran is wrong. Lets now come to the main topic of it which Dr.Naik touched.
"By the Firmament which returns (in its round)" (Quran 86:11)"
Ali Sina then goes on to say there are six “errors” in this Surah. I’ll just be dealing with the last one here which is relevant to
the topic.
Ali Sina Writes:
6) Then he swears “by the Firmament which returns (in its round)”. Firmament is the stars, the sun and the moon, not vapor
and rain. Muhammad saw that every night the stars are coming back and every day the Sun is returning. These heavenly
objects were known as the firmament. This verse has nothing to do with evaporation and rain. Please pay attention how often
Dr. Naik twists the meanings of the words to make his point prevail. The word used is 'sama'. It means sky/heaven and it can
also be interpreted as firmament but it can't be translated as rain.
My Response:
As Ali Sina here rightly says that "sama" means heaven/sky. I want to know where did Dr.Zakir naik translate it as "rain"? He
never did so. Here are the words of Dr.Naik
"By the capacity of the heavens to return.’ And almost all the commentaries of the Qur’an - they said, that this Verse of Surah
Tariq, Ch. No. 86, Verse No. 11, refers to the capacity of the heavens to return back rain - meaning ‘Evaporation.’ "
Can anyone here see Dr.Naik translating "sama" as "rain"??? This is another terrible lie by Ali Sina. See how he is trying to
deceive his reader. Dr.Naik simply explained what it is referring to.
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Dr. William Campbell who knows Arabic, may say…‘Why did not Allah Subhanawa Taala specifically
mention….(Arabic) …. Meaning… ‘The capacity of the heavens to return back rain.’ Why did not Allah mention
specifically? Now we have came to know why did not Allah do that, in His Divine wisdom. Because today we have
came to know that besides - the Ozonosphere… the layer above the earth - Besides returning back rain, it even
returns back other beneficial matter and energy of the Earth, which is required by the human beings. It does not
only return back rain - Today we have come to know, it even returns back waves of Telecommunication, of
Television, of Radio, by which we can see TV, we can communicate, we can hear the radio. And besides that, it
even returns back the harmful rays of the outer space, back on the other side, and absorbs. For example the sun
light… the ultraviolet rays of the Sun light is absorbed by the Ionosphere. If this was not done, life on the Earth
would have ceased to exist. So Allah Subhanawataala is far superior and for more accurate, when He says….
(Arabic)…. By the capacity of the Heaven to return.’ And the remaining things as he mentioned is there in the Qur’
an - You can refer to my Videocassette. The Qur’an describes the ‘Water cycle’ in great detail.
(Ali Sina) Wow! What a great logic. Why the Quran does not talk about the stage of evaporation? …Because
Ozonosphere returns other beneficial matters such as radio waves too. That is why!
Instead of answering the question, Dr. Naik tries to distract his audience by talking about red herring and by
introducing non sequitor arguments.
But wait a minute! Didn't Dr. Naik say that "the Firmament which returns" is about the capacity of heavens to
return back rain? Obviously Dr. Naik could not even convince himself. After assuring us that "almost all the
commentaries of the Qur’an - they said, that this Verse of Surah Tariq, Ch. No. 86, Verse No. 11, refers to the
capacity of the heavens to return back rain - meaning ‘Evaporation’", he goes on to give us the reason why Allah
did not mention this stage in the Quran. Come on Doctor! Don't make this too easy for me.
My Response:
Quran mentions the stage of evaporation in this verse. But since Quran is superior to science. It goes beyond
that. If the Quran mentioned specifically then it would only mean returning of rain. Rain is not the only thing
which the ozonosphere returns. Quran is more scientific!! For more on the returning sky
http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/scientific_22.html
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Regarding what he said about the Bible, he showed stage 1 and stage 3 in the first slide, and in the second stage 1,
3, and then 2. ‘That the rain water is taken up’… he says… ‘and then the rain water comes down on the Earth.’ This is the
philosophy of Phasofmillitas, in 7th century BC. He thought that the spray of the ocean was picked up by the wind, and send
to the interior as rain. There is no cloud mentioned there. In the second quotation Dr. William Campbell gave - First is,
according to him, ‘evaporation’ which we agree. We don’t mind having the concordance approach with the Bible. ‘…Then rain
falls down, and then are the clouds formed.’ - That is not the complete water cycle. Alhamdulillah, the Qur’an describes the
water cycle in great detail, in several places. How does the water rise, evaporates, forms into clouds - the clouds join together,
they stalk up, there is thunder and lightning, water comes down, the clouds move into the interior, they fall down as rain, and
the evaporation of the water table and Alhamdulillah in great detail. The Qur’an speaks about the water cycle in great detail, in
several places. In Surah Nur, Ch. No. 24, Verse No. 43, in Surah Rum, Ch. No. 30, Verse 48, in Surah Al-Zumar, Ch. 39, Verse
21, in Surah Muminun, Ch. 23, Verse 18, in Surah Rum Ch. No. 30, Verse No. 24, in Surah Al-Hijr, Ch. 15, Verse No. 22, in
Surah Araf Ch. No. 7, Verse No. 57, in Surah Rad, Ch. No. 13, Verse No. 17, in Surah Furqan, Ch. 25, Verse No. 48 and 49,
in Surah Fatir, Ch. No. 35, Verse No. 9, in Surah Yasin, Ch. 36, Verse No. 34, in Surah Jathiya, Ch. 45, Verse No. 5, in Surah
Qaf, Ch. No. 50, Verse No. 9, in Surah Al-Waqiah, Ch. No. 56, Verse No. 68 and 70, in several places, Surah Al-Mulk,Ch. 67,
Verse No. 30, the Glorious Qur’an speaks about the ‘Water cycle’, in great detail.
(Ali Sina) Here is where Dr. Naik outperformed himself. His Muslim audience became ecstatic and started applauding and
cheering as if he was a pop singer performing their favorite number. He said all those verses from memory, like pulling one
rabbit after another out his had. Impressive indeed. Let us quote these verses and see if there is anything miraculous in them.
While you are reading, note how often Muhammad forgets that the Quran is supposed to be the word of Allah and Allah
should not refer to himself in third person.
My Response:
Dr.Zakir Naik did not have enough time to explain them. Therefore, to cut short he only gave references. Muslim
audience had every right to be ecstatic because Dr.Zakir Naik was convincingly refuting the falsehood promoted
by Dr.William Campbell. The answer to the shift from first to third person etc. is here
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Grammar/robinson.html
Ali Sina then goes on to quote all the verses and says that it is only observable phenomenon. He doesn't realize
that Quran is 1400 years old. Today it seems to be observable phenomenon to us because all the data on the
subject is with us. Water Cycle seems to be an observable phenomenon.
In the words of Ali Sina "What the Quran describes has been observable by any primitive man since eons."
If Water Cycle is an observable phenomenon then why is it considered only a recent discovery of about 500-600
years old? Why isn't it considered simply to be an observable phenomenon? Why is taught to children in
school?? Dr.Maurice Bucaille knew that there would be people like Ali Sina who will think that water cycle is
merely an observable phenomenon. Moreover, what the Quran mentions is not simply an observable
phenomenon. I'll just provide one example here.
" And He sends down from the sky mountain masses (of clouds) wherein is hail:" (Quran 24:43)
Now if you are traveling by an aeroplane and when the aeroplane goes above the clouds. One can see that
clouds appear like mountain masses. I myself have witnessed it. On which aeroplane did Prophet Muhammad
(pbuh) go to check this??
How come Ali Sina missed out this verse?
“And We send the fecundating winds, then cause the rain to descend from the sky, therewith providing you with water (in
abundance), though ye are not the guardians of its stores.” (15:22)
Dr.Maurice Bucaille writes:
"When the verses of Quran concerning the role of water in man's existence are read in succession today, they all appear to us
to express ideas that are quite obvious. The reason for this is simple: in our day and age, we all, to a lesser or greater extent,
know about the water cycle in nature.
If However, we consider the various concepts the ancients had on this subject, it becomes clear that the data in the Quran do
not embody the mythical concepts current at the time of the Revelation which had been developed more according to
philosophical speculation than observed phenomenon. Although it was empirically possible to acquire on a modest scale, the
useful practical knowledge necessary for the improvement of the irrigation, the concepts held on the water cycle in general
would hardly be acceptable today."
Note: Ali Sina also accuses Dr.Maurice Bucaille and Professor Keith Moore of fooling the people. I'll come to that later.
Do Mountains Stabilize the Earth
Dr.Zakir Naik in his talk provided the source. He said that Dr.Frank Press said that mountains give stability to the
earth and he asked Dr.William Campbell to prove on the contrary. Get any documented proof which says on the
contrary.
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) I have not come across a single Geological book, and I challenge Dr. William Campbell to produce a
single Geological book - Not his personal correspondence with the Geologist. That does not carry weight. His
personal correspondence with Dr. Keith Moore …. Documented proof. And if you read the book ‘The Earth’ which
is referred by almost all the universities, in the field of Geology, one of its authors by the name of Dr Frank Press,
who was the advisor to the former president of USA, Jimmy Carter, and was the president of the Academy of
Science of USA. He writes in his book that…‘The mountains are wedge shaped - It has deep roots within. And he
says that…‘The function of the mountain is to stabilize the earth.’ And the Qur’an says in Surah Ambiya, Ch. No 21,
Verse No. 31, in Surah Luqman, Ch. No. 31 Verse No.10, as well as in Surah Nahl, Ch. No. 16, Verse No. 15, that…
‘We have made the mountains standing firm on the Earth, lest it would shake with them and with you.’
(Ali Sina) I tried to contact Dr. Frank Press and wrote to two sites that had written about him asking to please put
me in touch with him. Neither of them responded. I am not willing to buy his book Earth that costs $95.95 dollars
just to verify this claim. However I doubt Dr. Press could have said such an absurd thing. Muslims are good in
twisting things to make them look something else. I believe Dr. Naik has got this false information form Another
Islamic site islam-guide.com that says: "A book entitled Earth is a basic reference textbook in many universities
around the world. One of its two authors is Professor Emeritus Frank Press. He was the Science Advisor to
former US President Jimmy Carter, and for 12 years was the President of the National Academy of Sciences,
Washington, DC. His book says that mountains have underlying roots. [Earth, Press and Siever, p. 435. Also see
Earth Science, Tarbuck and Lutgens, p. 157.] These roots are deeply embedded in the ground, thus, mountains
have a shape like a peg
My Response:
Does Dr.Frank Press really have time to contact every Tom,Dick and Harry?? Does he have time to contact
people like Ali Sina who hide behind the internet like cowards? Ali Sina hides behind the internet, writes, and
thinks that he is a genius.
How can Ali Sina simply accuse someone with mere assumptions?? He is firstly not willing to buy the book. Then
he is accusing Dr.Naik of copying from this site. Dr.Naik said the same thing much earlier than this debate. He
said so also in his talk "Quran and Modern Science - Conflict or conciliation” in 1996 and he had delivered talks
on the same subjects before also. It reads on the site
"A book entitled Earth is a basic reference textbook in many universities around the world. One of its two
authors is Professor Emeritus Frank Press. He was the Science Advisor to former US President Jimmy Carter,
and for 12 years was the President of the National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC. His book says that
mountains have underlying roots.1 These roots are deeply embedded in the ground, thus, mountains have a
shape like a peg (see figures 7, 8, and 9)."
When Ali Sina quotes this site. He removed the reference to the footnotes. The site further provides us with 3
pictures and Ali Sina on it writes:
“These pictures have nothing to do with science. They are just more Islamic lies. These are taken from The
Geological Concept of Mountains in the Quran a book written by a Muslims El-Naggar and falsely attributed to Dr.
Press.” Source:
May I know where these people attributed the photos taken to Dr.Frank Press?? They even provide the source
of it. Here are the 3 sources mentioned on the same site of pictures 1,2 and 3 respectively.
"Figure 7: Mountains have deep roots under the surface of the ground. (Earth, Press and Siever, p. 413.)"
"Figure 8: Schematic section. The mountains, like pegs, have deep roots embedded in the ground. (Anatomy of
the Earth, Cailleux, p. 220.) "
"Figure 9: Another illustration shows how the mountains are peg-like in shape, due to their deep roots. (Earth
Science, Tarbuck and Lutgens, p. 158.)"
See how Ali Sina lies. He thinks that people will simply believe him without verifying.
Further, Ali Sina doesn't agree with the verses of the Quran 16:15,21:31. And he starts giving his scientific
explanation. Wait a minute, Where is the source of all his wishful explanations?? Dr.Zakir Naik atleast gave the
source. He quoted a non-Muslim scientist Dr.Frank Press, who has no reason to favour the Quran. Nor did he
write the book to bring a compability between the Quran and Science.
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) And in reply to the statement…‘That if mountains prevent earthquakes, how come you find earthquakes
in mountainous regions?’ The reply is, that - If I say that medical doctors, they prevent the sickness and disease
in a human being, and if someone argues…‘If doctors prevent the sickness and diseases in a human being, how
come you find more sick people in the hospitals, where there are more doctors than at home - where there are
no doctors.’
(Ali Sina) What a ridiculous analogy! Patients go to hospitals AFTER they get sick because they are living and
thinking beings and that is where they can get medical attention and get better. They do not become sick in
hospitals (unless the hospital is in an Islamic country with Islamic hygiene). Is Dr. Naik trying to compare
earthquake, a natural phenomenon, to humans? Do the earthquakes happen first elsewhere and then decide to
conglomerate in mountains? This analogy is utterly ridiculous; yet Dr. Naik’s Muslim audience became so elated
that they spontaneously cheered and applauded. One black guy was almost falling off his chair of excessive
laughing. What these people were laughing at? At their own stupidity? Now the world can see them and laugh at
them. It’s as if the more stupid is a statement, the more Muslims enjoy it. This reveals the deplorable intellectual
bankruptcy of the wretched Umma.
My Response:
Dr.Zakir Naik clearly explained the verses of the Quran. He said this just as a joke and to expose the poor
reasoning of Dr.William Campbell. Dr.Zakir Naik explained it very well. Muslim audience cheered because Islam
was being defended and lies of Dr.William Campbell were being exposed. They have every right to be. Islam is criticized a
lot in Western countries. If someone defends it then Muslims have all rights to cheer and applaud. See How Ali Sina in the
ends throws insult at the entire ummah (community) of the Muslims. His foul-mouth never ends.
More insults in the next paragraph
Ali Sina Writes:
Believe me, absurd thinking is the trait of Muslims. Sometime ago I read an essay about a Muslim child asking his
religious teacher that the Quran says Jinns will be sent to hell to be punished but the the Quran also says that
Jinns are made of fire, so how fire can be hurt by fire? The teacher slapped the child and asked him if it hurts?
The poor lad responded yes, with tears in his eyes. "Like that!", responded the teacher. "My hand is flesh and
your face is flesh but it still hurts". Foolish Muslims think this is such a great reasoning. This is the fallacy of
wrong analogy. But the Muslim brain is not equipped with enough rationality to think deep. He WANTS to believe
and any nonsense will do. There are several sites that have written against me. I receive numerous emails from
Muslims who have neither read my articles nor those written by Muslims trying to refute me. And yet these
people tell me that I have already been refuted and give me links to the same silly sites. They WANT to believe
that I am refuted. They will believe anyone who claims he has refuted me without searching the truth of that
claim. The Muslim mind works in bizarre ways.
My Response:
More foul-mouth from Ali Sina.
I put the link above of brother Umar's article which exposes his insults and foul-mouth. I request brother Umer to
add these as well.
Oceanology of the Quran,
Ali Sina writes (In response to Dr.Naik)
(Ali Sina) If the separation of sweet and salt waters is an observable phenomenon, as it seems that everyone
agrees, then how could no one know about it until "the advancement of oceanology" made its knowledge
possible? What Muhammad is referring to is precisely that and nothing more. There is no “invisible barrier”
between two waters, which is “forbidden to be trespassed”. There is no barrier of any kind - no barzakh at all
between waters. Waters don’t mix immediately because of different temperature and density but they eventually
do, just like when you pour cream in a cup of coffee. It takes time to mix; that is why you stir it. Those who saw
this phenomenon must have relayed their observation to others using figurative speech saying waters don’t mix
AS IF there is an invisible barrier between them. Our ignorant Muhammad took this literally and claimed there is
an “invisible barrier” between them, which is “forbidden to be trespassed”. Nothing can be further from the
truth. All waters mix and there is no barrier, invisible or otherwise between them. When two rivers, carrying
sediments of different colors meet, or when sweet water coming from rivers flows into the blue salty water of the
sea, one can see the line of demarcation sometimes stretching for miles until they gradually blend. Where the
waters merge, i.e. what Dr. Naik refers to as the “slanting homogenizing area”, is not a “barrier”. It is the
opposite of it. There the waters are not forbidden to trespass but actually merge.
It is amazing that Muslims emphasize on the flagrant errors of the Quran as its miracles. Who would buy this
nonsense except a totally ignorant person?
My Response:
Wait a minute, Where is the source of all this?? Dr.Zakir Naik atleast quoted one scientist Dr.Hay.
The same site which Ali Sina accused Dr.Naik of copying from explains this as well. It also gives the reference to the book on
oceanology written by Non-Muslim scientists.
http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1-b.htm
Is Islam for All Mankind?
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) As far as this statement of his is concerned, regarding the Bible, I do agree with it totally - Because the
Bible was only meant for the children of Israel , for that time. It is mentioned in the Gospel of Mathew, Ch. No. 10,
Verse No. 5 and 6, Jesus Christ peace be upon him tells his disciples… ‘Go ye not in the way of the Gentiles.’
Who are the Gentiles? The Non-Jews, the Hindus, the Muslims. ‘But rather go to the lost sheep of the house of
Israel .’ Jesus Christ peace be upon him said in the Gospel of Mathew, Ch. No. 15, Verse No. 24… ‘I am not sent,
but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel .’ So Jesus Christ and the Bible were only meant for the children of
Isreal. Since it was meant for them, to analyze the Bible, you have to use the meaning of the word, which was
utilized at that time. But the Qur’an was not meant only for the Arabs of that time. Qur’an is not meant only for the
Muslims. The Qur’an is meant for the whole of humanity, and it is meant to be for eternity.
(Ali Sina) Here again the Muslim audience broke in applause and the sign of joy was visible from their
countenance. To them it was victory after victory. However, had Dr. Naik told them that the Quran says that
Muhammad has come only for the Meccans alone and the people around it they would not have rejoiced that
much.
006.092 And this is a Book which We have sent down, bringing blessings, and confirming (the revelations) which
came before it: that thou mayest warn the mother of cities and all around her.
The mother of cities, Umul Qura, is Mecca. The same thing is confirmed in verse:
042.007 Thus have We sent by inspiration to thee an Arabic Qur’an: that thou mayest warn the Mother of Cities
and all around her.
In other places Allah says to Muhammad that he has come for the people who did not receive guidance yet.
032.003 “Nay, it is the Truth from thy Lord, that thou mayest admonish a people to whom no warner has come before thee: in
order that they may receive guidance.”
036.006 In order that thou mayest admonish a people, whose fathers had received no admonition, and who therefore remain
heedless (of the Signs of Allah).
My Response:
Ali Sina here again quotes the verses and mispresents them. Both the verses 6:92 and 42:7 say "Mother of cities and All
Around her"
ALL around her means the full world. Mecca is the centre of the world and ALL around it is the full world. The verses of the
Quran do not prove that Islam is only for Arabs Alone.
And in other two verses Allah is saying that he has sent Muhammad (pbuh) to admonish the people to whom no guidance has
come before. Does it say that "admonish only those people to whom no Warner had been sent"?? Definitely not !!! Allah
(SWT) sends his final messenger which is for the whole of humanity from those people to whom a messenger had not been
sent before.
Ali Sina Writes:
The people of the Book, i.e. the Jews, the Christians and perhaps the Zoroastrians had their own messengers and their
guidance. The only people who had not received guidance were the Arabs, specifically the Arabs of Mecca and its
surrounding. So, it is clear that Muhammad claimed that he had come only for the Quraish and not for the people of the Book
and the rest of mankind. Of course, as he became powerful, his ambitions grew and he changed his mind later. Few Muslims
know about these verses. What do they say about them? If they truly believe that the Quran is the word of God, they should
stop their da'wa and Jihad. The people of Mecca and its surrounding have already converted to Islam. If Muslims believe that
the Quran is the word of God, how do they dare to disobey Him and make da'wa elsewhere. Even if Muhammad said they
should attack other countries and convert others into Islam, they should not listen to him but do what the Quran says. Whose
word is more important? That of Allah or that of Muhammad? These verses should also convince the non-Arab Muslims,
including the Egyptians, the Syrians, the Iraqis and all others now known as Arabs that Islam is not for them. Islam is only for
the Meccans and its surrounding. They must leave Islam, if they truly believe that the Quran is the word of God.
(Dr. Naik) Qur’an says in Surah Ibrahim, Ch. 14, Verse. 52, in Surah Baqarah Ch. No. 2, Verse 185, and Surah Zumar Ch. 39,
Verses. 41, that the Qur’an is meant for the whole of human kind. And Prophet Mohammed, may peace be upon him, was not
sent only for the Muslims or the Arabs. Allah says in the Qur’an in Surah Ambiya Ch. No. 21, Verse No. 107------(Arabic)----
That We have send thee as a mercy, as a guidance, to the whole of humankind.’
(Ali Sina) Verse 14:52 says “Hatha balaghun lilnnasi”. Nas is people – any number of people. It could be people gathered in a
room. It could refer to the inhabitants of a village, a town, a country and not necessarily ALL Mankind. For example nas is
used in verse 7.116 when talking about the magic performed by the magicians of Pharaoh who bewitched the eyes of the
people ‘nas’. Are we supposed to understand that all mankind were bewitched? The same word is used in 2:185, 39:4 and 21:
107. In all these verses Nas means "people" and not all mankind. If we assume that the word 'nas' used in these verses means
all mankind then we have to admit that there is flagrant contradiction in the Quran for the verses 6:92, 42:7, 32:3 and 36:6
clearly state that the Quran is for the people of Mecca and its surrounding.
My Response:
Most of the Translations translate the word 'nas' as 'mankind' in the verses which Dr.Zakir Naik quoted. But even if Ali Sina
doesn't agree. Still other verses prove that Quran is for entire humanity. Nowhere does the Quran say that it is only for the
Arabs. He deliberately mispresented the verses he quoted to prove that.
More verses confirming Quran to be for entire humanity
"Blessed be He Who sent down the criterion (of right and wrong, i.e. this Quran) to His slave (Muhammad SAW) that he may
be a warner to the Alameen (mankind and jinns)." (Quran 25:1)
"But it is nothing less than a Message to all the worlds." (Quran 68:52)
"Verily this is no less than a Message to (all) the Worlds:" (Quran 81:27)
"And no reward you (O Muhammad SAW) ask of them (those who deny your Prophethood) for it, it(the Quran) is no less than
a Reminder and an advice unto the Alameen (men and jinns)." (Quran 12:104)
The word used in the above 4 verses is "Alameen" meaning "worlds".
Ali Sina Writes:
However, Muhammad also claimed to have been sent to "creatures of both worlds". lilAAalameen. means everything in both
worlds. (That includes dogs and pigs.) That is because he was a megalomaniac narcissist and narcissists talk big. He even
claimed to have come as guidance for Jinns, which are mythical beings.
My Response:
He considers Jinns to be mythical beings. They are mythical for him not for us. Its the matter of belief. Science has not proven
Jinns mythical. They may assume them to be but there are no proves at all. He again insults our beloved Prophet Muhammad
(pbuh) and calls him narcissists (someone who is fascinated with himself). Brother Umar has responded to this false charge. I
too will deal with it in the next para.
Ali Sina Writes:
"Narcissists have grandiose ideas about themselves. In a Hadith Muhammad makes his Allah say to him: “Were it not for you,
I would not have created the universe.” [3]
Muhammad ibn Ali has narrated that Muhammad said: "Among all the people of the world God chose the Arabs; from among
the Arabs he chose the Kinana; from Kinana he chose the Quraish; from the Quraish he chose Bani Hashim; from Bani
Hashim he chose Me. [Tabaqat V. 1 p. 2] This man was full of himself - a true narcissist. So much for the alleged equality in
Islam. Arabs are the chosen race. Arabs have known that always and they treat non Arab Muslims with disdain. If you are a
non-Arab Muslim, you are accepting to be inferior. "
The source of it is given in the footnote
As-Saghaanee (d.650) said, this hadith is "maudu (fabricated)" ['al-Ahaadeeth al-Mawdoo'aat' of as-Saghaanee (pg. 7)] and
likewise al-Albaanee ['Silsilah ad-Da'eefah' (1/450 no.282)] ash-Shaykh Mulla Alee Qaaree (d.1014) said, "maudu, but it's
meaning is correct."
My Response:
All Ali Sina can do is quote fabricated hadith. This hadith is a fabricated one according to scholars. But even if we assume it is
correct. Still it doesn't prove that he is narcissist. Reasons :
1. Muhammad (pbuh) was considered an honest and Truthful man even by the pagan Arabs before his prophethood.
He spoke whatever God Almighty commanded him.
2. It is not only mentioned in the Hadith but it is also said by God Almighty to Adam (pbuh) in the Gospel of Barnabas. Chapter
39. It reads
"'Adam, having sprung up upon his feet, saw in the air a writing that shone like the sun, which said: "There is only one God,
and Mohammed is the messenger of God." Whereupon Adam opened his mouth and said: "I thank thee, O Lord my God, that
thou hast deigned to create me; but tell me. I pray thee, what meaneth the message of these words: "Mohammed is
messenger of God. Have there been other men before me?"
'Then said God: "Be thou welcome, O my servant Adam. I tell thee that thou art the first man whom I have created And he
whom thou hast seen [mentioned] is thy son, who shall come into the world many years hence, and shall be my messenger,
for whom I have created all things; who shall give light to the world when he shall come;"
http://www.barnabas.net/barnabasP39.html
Christians deny the Gospel of Barnabas. The Historians do not deny it. For the authenticity of Gospel of Barnabas refer to :
http://www.natheal.com/NaturalHealingMethodologies/WorldReligions/history_of_the_gospel_of_bar.htm
http://www.barnabas.net/
Paul said about Barnabas.
"If he comes unto you, receive him. (Colossians 4:10)"
Muhammad (pbuh) is not narcissist. But its again allegations and lies by Ali Sina. Refer to Brother Umar article for responses
to all the charges against Muhammad (pbuh) by Ali Sina
http://www.answering-christianity.com/umar/true_face_of_ali_sina_2.htm
Embryology continuation
Ali Sina again claims that Dr.Zakir Naik fooled the audience. According to him Dr.Keith Moore and Dr.Bucaille fooled the
Muslims.
Ali Sina Writes:
(Ali Sina) Are we supposed to believe that Dr. Keith Moore, who was the chairman and the head of the department of
Anatomy, of a major university did not know how human embryo looks? The truth is that Dr. Moore and Dr. Bucaille fooled
Muslims by telling them what they wanted to hear and in this way they ingratiated the Saudi King who in turn lavished them
with a lot of petrodollars
My Response:
Now this is turning out to be funny. In Brief, I will tell you the sick mentality of Ali Sina.
If a Muslim scientist writes something about Science that matches the Quran then he is a liar and a deceiver. If a non-Muslim
scientist does it then he is doing it for the sake of petrodollars. This is turning out to be more and more stupid from Ali Sina.
Ali Sina believes Dr.William Campbell spoke the Truth. Why? Because he opposed the Quran. The reason is obvious.
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) What Dr. William Campbell showed you is the other perspective of it. If I show this book - it looks like a rectangle - If I
show you like that, it is a different perspective. That diagram is given in the book - The diagram which you saw on the slide is
even there - And I’ll deal with it InshaAllah.
(Ali Sina) Here again the gullible audience became euphoric and clapped without realizing that Dr. Naik is engaging in the
fallacy of suppressing the evidence. Dr. Campbell showed the picture of the embryo from the front and from the side. Dr. Naik
wants to convince his audience that they should look at it from one angle only – the angle that it most resembles a leech. Of
course one who is determined to be fooled would be willing to look at things by standing on his head, if that helps him to see
them from the exact angle that would reconfirm his unreasoned faith. That is why Muslims are unable to see the truth. Their
tunnel vision does not allow them to see things from all angles. If only they changed their perspective a little, they would see
that Islam is nothing but a big lie.
My Response:
I told you people its turning out to be more and more funny. This is the photograph, which Dr.Zakir Naik showed.
http://www.islam-guide.com/ch1-1-a.htm
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Professor Keith Moore, after about 80 questions were asked to him, he said… ‘If you would have asked
me these 80 questions, 30 years ago, I would not have been able to answer more than 50 percent - Because
embryology has developed recently in the past 30 years.’ He said this in the eighties.
Now, do we believe Dr. Keith Moore whose statement is available outside in the foyer - his videocassette is
available… ‘This is the truth’...’Anna-ul-Haq’... recorded statement. So will you believe Dr. William Campbell’s
personal conversation with Professor Keith Moore, or the one mentioned in this book, with Islamic edition as
well as the photograph that I had shown to you? And in the videocassette available outside you can see it - He
makes those statements. So you have to choose which is more logical - Personal discussion with Dr. William
Campbell or his statement on Video. Like how Dr. William Campbell showed my video - 100 percent proof what I
said…
(Ali Sina) This is again a false reasoning. What Dr. Moore said to Dr. Campbell and what he said in the videos
intended to be sold to Muslims could be two different things.
My Response:
If Dr.Keith Moore had done such a thing. If someone had caught him then it will completely ruin his reputation
and no more "petrodollars.” Furthermore, his book is used more by non-Muslims than Muslims. More non-Muslim
medical colleges use this book than Muslim medical colleges. Dr.Keith Moore wasn’t an Arab Muslim. Therefore,
we have no reason to doubt him. Since more Non-Muslims refer to his book, he would NEVER write in favor of the
Quran if he was really greedy of “petrodollars.”
Ali Sina Writes:
He would have made a fool of himself telling Dr. Campbell what he says for Muslim consumption. We are not here
to probe whether Dr. Moore is a liar or Dr. Campbell is reporting him erroneously. We must look at the medical
science. We don't need the opinions of the experts when we can easily find the facts on our own. Appealing to
authority is called argumentum ad verecundiam and this is another logical fallacy. We must see whether what the
Quran says is supported by science or not. We must not accept the words of anyone just because they are
authorities. They could have some ulterior motives. They might have lied and misrepresented the truth for some
personal gain. The ultimate authority is science, not Dr. Moore, Dr. Bucaille or Dr. Campbell. Dr. Campbell has
proved his case backing his argument with pictures. Unless someone can produce pictures that tell a different
story, the claims of this doctor or that doctor are irrelevant. Once things are demonstrated to us, we can
dispense with the opinions of authorities.
My Response:
We actually do not need experts to tell us about science but we need Scientists like Ali Sina to tell us that. Dr.
William Campbell showed the slides and Dr.Zakir Naik convincingly answered to them. He did it from the medical
book written by a well-reputed scientist Dr.Keith Moore.
Ali Sina tells us that scientific data is available and we do not need experts to tell us.
Wait a minute, which scientific data? The scientific discoveries done by the world’s greatest scientist Ali Sina??
Which science is he talking about? Who writes the books of science if not the great scientists?? Are they written
in heavens and thrown down to us from there? As I proved above. Dr.Moore was not a Muslim either and he has
no ulterior motives. If he lies then it can simply ruin his reputation. Moreover, he will have no more
"petrodollars.”
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) ‘Moon is reflected light’ - I’ll come to it later on.
And whatever additional information he got from Qur’an and Hadith, it was incorporated later into this book…‘The
Developing Human’ - the 3rd edition and this book got an award for the best medical book written by a single
author in that year.
(Ali Sina) Is Dr. Naik telling us that Dr. Moore got an award for the book he wrote claiming the ridiculous Quran is
scientific? Who gave that award? Al Azhar University or the Grand Mosque in Medina? What is the name of that
award?
My Response:
This is turning to be more and more funny every time. Al-Azhar University and Grand Mosque don't go around
giving awards. It definitely got the award from medical authorities. He considers the Qur'an ridiculous. Thats what ALL
islamophobists do.
Dr. Keith Moore had earlier authored the book, 'The Developing Human'.After acquiring new knowledge from the QUR'AN, he
wrote, in 1982, the 3rd edition of the same book, 'The Developing Human'. The book was the recipient of an award for the
best medical book written by a single author. This book has been translated into several major languages of the world and is
used as a textbook of embryology in the first year of medical studies. In 1981, during the Seventh Medical Conference in
Dammam, Saudi Arabia, Dr. Moore said, "It has been a great pleasure for me to help clarify statements in the QUR'AN about
human development. It is clear to me that these statements must have come to MUHAMMAD---sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam---
from GOD or ALLAH, because almost all of this knowledge was not discovered until many centuries later. This proves to me
that MUHAMMAD---sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam--- must have been a messenger of GOD or ALLAH{The reference for this
statement is the video tape titled 'This is the Truth'.For a copy of this video tape contact the Islamic Research Foundation}
Ali Sina then goes on to tell us about the scientific discoveries done by him. He keeps making a joke and a fool of himself. He
did not give any source of all his crap. Ali Sina always says "this is not true" and "that is not true" without giving us any source
from any medical book.
After explaining all the embryological stages, When Dr.Zakir Naik mentioned that the Quranic stages on embryology are based
on appearance.
Ali Sina writes:
(Ali Sina) Here our good doctor is making a major shift of strategy. Now, he is no longer insisting that the Quranic
description of the embryo is scientific. He says that the Quran talks about the “appearance” that exist between a
clot, a leech and the embryo in its different stages of growth. If so, why claim that the Quran is scientific and
miraculous? In the past, women had miscarriage way more than today. The fetus was aborted and they could see
that it remotely resembled, first to a clot of blood and then to a leech. In the absence of a microscope this is all they
could see. So, where is the miracle? Why make so much ado about it saying “how could Muhammad have known this 1400
years ago?” when such a prosaic knowledge was available to anyone for eons? In fact as Dr. Campbell noted, Hippocrates
described the embryonic growth much more accurately.
My Response:
When did Dr.Zakir Naik ever insist that all the stages are based on function? He always insisted that stages are
based on appearance. The appearance of the embryo in all the stages was not known at that time. How did
Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) know that embryo looks like a leech? (Which I proved above with a photograph which
was shown by Dr.Zakir Naik from the book of Dr.Keith Moore)
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) Professor Keith Moore took plastic seal, and bit between his teeth to make it look like a ‘Mutga’- The
teeth marks resembled the ‘somites.’ Dr. William Campbell said… ‘When the ‘Alaqa’ becomes a ‘Mutga’ the
clinging is yet there - It is there till 8 and a half months- So… the Qur’an is wrong.’ I told you in the beginning, the
Qur’an is describing the appearance. ‘The leech like’ appearance and the ‘clot like’ appearance, is changed to
the ‘chewed’ like appearance. It yet continues to cling till the end - There is no problem. But the stages are
divided on appearance - Not on the function.
(Ali Sina) Alaqa either means something that clings or clot of blood. One word in one sentence cannot have two
different meanings. If alaqa is something that clings, then the fetus should be called alaqa during all its
gestation. Why then the Quran says it becomes mutga? If it’s only the appearance to the clot, then we should
discard Dr. Bucaille’s suggestion who says this word should be translated as “something that clings”. If the
Quran is clear, then why this much confusion?
My Response:
The Quran is speaking about the embryological stages based on appearance. When it describes Alaqa , Also the function
befits here. But even if you ignore the function here. Still the embryo looks like a clot as well like the leech as Dr.Zakir Naik
proved in his talk and Ali Sina agrees that embryo does look like a clot. The Qur'an is not confusing. The Islamophobists will
find it confusing irrespective how clear it is. The translation may be confusing. But the Arabic text is very clear.
Dr.Zakir Naik then spoke about Mudga and formation of muscles and bones. To that Ali Sina writes :
Ali Sina:
(Ali Sina) This description is wrong no matter how many times it is repeated. I quote again what Dr. Campbell said in the
conclusion of his talk on embryo: “There is no time when calcified bones have been formed, and then the muscles are placed
around them. The muscles are there, several weeks before there are calcified bones, rather than being added around
previously formed bones, as the Qur’an states.” This statement is scientific. The Quran is not.
My Response:
Wrong according to who? Scientific discoveries done by Ali Sina? Dr.Zakir Naik responded very convincingly to Dr.
Campbell and Dr.Campbell did not say anything against it.
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) As Professor Keith Moore said that… ‘The stages - that how it is described in modern embryology… stage
1,2,3,4,5, is so confusing, The Qur’anic stage on embryology describing on the base of appearance, and the shape, is
far more superior.’ Alhamdulillah.
(Ali Sina) This is ludicrous. How can the Quran be superior when it is all wrong? Josef Goebbel, Hitler's minister for
propaganda said: "If you tell a big enough lie, frequently enough, it becomes the truth." This is what Dr. Naik wants to
achieve. He wants to repeat a lie frequently enough, until it becomes true. I am sorry. It does not work in this case.
The description of the embryo in the Quran is all wrong. It won’t become true even if it is repeated a billion times.
Bones are not created first to be covered with flesh later. Period!
My Response:
The Qur'an may be all wrong according to the scientific knowledge and discoveries done by Ali Sina. Let me remind
you he has NOT given any source from where he got his information. Now shall we agree with Dr.Keith Moore who is a
reputed scientist or Islamophobists like Ali Sina?? He goes on to quote minister of Hitler. Dr.Zakir Naik didn’t lie
frequently. He quoted all from great scientists like Dr.Keith Moore etc.
Note:
Up till now, Ali Sina has not quoted a single medical book to back any of his claims!
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Therefore he said… therefore he said that… ‘I have no objection in accepting that Prophet Muhammed is
the messenger of God and that this Glorious Qur’an has to be a Divine Revelation, from Almighty God.’
(Ali Sina) If Dr. Naik is speaking of Dr. Moore, it should be noted that he did not convert to Islam. This tells us that his
interests were this-worldly. He did not see any miracles in the Quran. He simply fooled the Muslims and laughed his
way to the bank.
My Response:
What bank? What Money?? Ali Sina has not provided any proof whatsoever. The Quran says
"Those are their (vain) desires. Say: "Produce your proof if ye are truthful." (Quran 2:111)
Dr.Moore did not accept Islam because of other reasons. If he had accepted Islam then Ali Sina would have called him a liar.
Ali Sina considers Muslims to be liars by nature
Source
If he didn’t accept then he fooled the Muslims. In either way, he'll be spoken against. Why?? Because he wrote something
good about the Qur'an.
Did Ali Sina forget about other scientists and learned men who have embraced Islam?? Like Professor Thagada Shaun ,
Jeffery Lang and others.
Ali Sina further goes on to call Allah (SWT) a saddist. He comes up with a ludicruous example of a cat. He is comparing cats
with human beings. He says that he wouldn't do such a merciless thing to a cat. But he wants worse to be done to Muslims. He
says "As long as Muslims are Muslims they do not deserve to be treated in accordance to the Universal Declaration of
Human Right." (Source:)
He further says “They must be colonized and ruled with iron fist” (Source:)
According to Ali Sina "Muslims are not humans" (Source:)
For more insults, refer to
Ali Sina’s foul mouth exposed
He forgot that we human beings are not allowed to do such a thing to any other human being.. Human beings are responsible
for their own actions. The Qur'an says
"...it is not God that hath wronged them, but they wrong themselves." (Quran 3:117)
If Allah (SWT) starts punishing us for good deeds, he will not leave a single of us on earth. On the day of judgement no
human being can claim that he is treated against the mercy of Allah. Allah (SWT) besides being merciful is also just. He will
treat everyone in a just way. Suppose that today someone catches Hitler. What punishment can one give him for the
incinerati
William Campbell. He says that Dr.Zakir Naik is a magician and he fools his audience with words. He calls him a Showman. You
can find his response here
http://www.faithfreedom.org/debates/NaikCampbellintro.htm#content
The Reason arises why does he call him a Showman and a magician? The reason is obvious. Dr.Zakir Naik Alhumdulillah with
the grace of Allah (SWT) winning over people's hearts.. He has delivered more than a thousand public talks worldwide. He has
Alhumdulillah started his new 24 hour Satellite channel "Peace TV". This Channel Promotes the True Picture of Islam. Ali Sina
does not like that.
Here I will be exposing Ali Sina. He not only is unscholarly in his approach but he even lacks ethical values. Any unbiased
person who sees this picture of Dr.Zakir Naik modified by Ali Sina and his clowns will realize that Ali Sina is a loony.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/debates/NaikCampbellintro.htm
Before I respond to the points raised by him. I would like to make few points clear.
1. If Ali Sina Writes a response to Dr.Zakir Naik that doesn't mean that Dr.Naik is fooling his audience. If I use this logic than it
also means that Dr.William Campbell was also fooling his audience when he said falsehood about Islam. It also means that Ali
Sina is also fooling his readers because many Muslims including Brother Umar on this site has responded to false charges of
Ali Sina.
http://www.answering-christianity.com/umar/true_face_of_ali_sina_2.htm
2. It is Dr.William Campbell who actually initiated the debate. Dr.Zakir Naik doesn't go around asking people to have a public
debate with him. Dr.Campbell wrote a book against the Quran. Dr.Naik refuted all the points of Dr.Campbell and pointed out
scientific errors and contradictions in the bible. Ali Sina accuses Dr.Zakir of attacking the bible but doesn't say anything about
Dr.Campbell who actually initiated the debate.
3. The Translations are human handi-work and are bound to contain errors. No Translation per se is error free. The
Translator may not have in-depth knowledge of Science therefore it is highly possible that he makes an error in translating the
scientific statements mentioned in the Quran.
Dr.Maurice Bucaille writes:
"Why do errors in translation exist? They may be explained by the fact that modern translators often take up, rather uncritically
, the interpretations given by older commentators. In their day, the latter had an excuse for having given an inappropriate
definition to an Arabic word containing several possible meanings; they could not possibly have understood the real
sense the word or phrase which has only become clear in the present day thanks to scientific knowledge. In
Other words, the problem is raised of the necessary revision of translations and commentaries. It was possible to do this at a
certain period in the past, but nowadays we have knowledge that enables us to render their true sense "
(The Bible, The Quran, And The Science pg 118-119)
I'll mainly be touching the points which he raised on the Quran. I wont be dealing with each and every small point which is
irrelevant. It was actually Dr.William Campbell who was supposed to reply to these points. Therefore, He should even thank me
for even taking out my time.
Big Bang in the Quran?
Ali Sina Writes:
(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 Big Bang is true then the story of the creation and Adam and Eve must be
false and vice versa. This is elemental.
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 Quran. This fable, like many others, is
borrowed from the Bible.
My Response:
Ali Sina here claims that the Quran is copied from the Bible. The same nonsense, which Christians keep
repeating. Since he has accused Dr.Zakir Naik. I can do no better than let Dr.Zakir Naik reply to it.
http://www.irf.net/irf/dtp/dawah_tech/t18/t18a/pg1.htm.
Ali Sina Writes:
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?
My Response.
In the verse 41.11 Allah (SWT) is not talking about the physical calling of heavens and earth together. He is
talking about coming into existence. Quran is in complete compability with modern science. These verses have
other scientific points in it as well. But since I am only responding to his points I wont go into details right now.
Ali Sina Writes:
Of course both are false. The earth is inside the sky and part of it. They can neither come together nor separate.
Here we have two version that contradict each other and both are scientifically wrong.
My Response:
As I explained above none of the two is wrong. Dr.Zakir Naik explains
“The creation of the universe is explained by astrophysicists in a widely accepted phenomenon, popularly known
as the 'Big Bang'. It is supported by observational and experimental data gathered by astronomers and
astrophysicists for decades. According to the 'Big Bang', the whole universe was initially one big mass (Primary
Nebula). Then there was a 'Big Bang' (Secondary Separation) which resulted in the formation of Galaxies. These
then divided to form stars, planets, the sun, the moon, etc. The origin of the universe was unique and the
probability of it occurring by 'chance' is zero."
Does the Quran say the Sun and the Moon Revolve Around Their Own Axis?
Ali Sina Writes:
(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 íóÓúÈóÍõæäó ysbahun means rotating around its own axis. This is
simply not true. Dr. Naik is fabricating evidence and twisting the meaning of the words. The word here implies
that the Sun and the Moon rotate in circle, i.e. 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. 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 Quran 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 Quranic miracles
you find clarity.
Then again, if the Quran 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?
My Response:
As I explained in the beginning that translations are human handy-work and they are done by people who may not
be having great knowledge of science. And even you if you read the last translation by Sale it says the same
thing what Dr.Zakir Naik explained. It reads " [the celestial bodies] move swiftly, [each] in [its respective] orb.
" see the different meanings of the word "orb"
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/orb
Muslims today have gotten backward because we have deviated away from the teachings of Islam. When we
Muslims were close to the Quran we were on the top of the world. Did Ali Sina forget the discoveries done by
Muslim scientists??? The discoveries done by Western Scientists are only in last few centuries. Western
scientists rehashed many of the discoveries of Muslim Scientists. Did he forget the Muslims scientists who did
brilliant discoveries about 800-1000 years ago?? Did he forget great scientists like Jabbir Ibn Hayyan, Ali Ibn Sina
(Avicenna), Muhammad Zakaria Razi etc. For more detail, refer to this.
http://www.ummah.net/history/scholars/index.html
Ali Sina Writes:
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 Quran why all the Muslims are so miserable?
My Response:
As I explained above. It is because we have deviated away from the word of Allah (SWT). Ali Sina also considers
Bible unscientific. But we have many Christian scientists. Therefore, Religion has nothing to do with discoveries
of science. The followers of many other religions like Hinduism, Buddhism etc. live in third world countries. They
have not done many discoveries either. But Ali Sina doesn't highlight them. He is only concerned about targeting
the Muslims.
Does the Quran say the Universe is Expanding?
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) It was Edvin Hubbel who discovered that the universe is expanding. The Qur’an says in Surah Dhariyat,
Ch. 51, Verse No. 47, that…‘We have created the expanding universe’ - The vastness of space. The Arabic word
‘Mohsiana’ refers to ‘vastness’ – ‘the expanding universe.’
Regarding the topics on Astronomy, which Dr. William Campbell touched, I will deal in the rebuttal, InshaAllah.
(Ali Sina) Dr. Naik claims that the verse 51:47 talks about the expanding universe. This is not so. Muhammad is
simply saying that the universe is vast and not that it is expanding. This verse reads:
Arabic…
See how this is translated:
YUSUFALI: With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of pace.
PICKTHAL: We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof).
SHAKIR: And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample.
The fact that the universe is vast is prosaic and obvious. There is no mention of expanding universe in this
verse. Any illiterate man can look at the sky and see it is vast. To the ancient people even the Earth looked vast.
To us it looks very small.
My Response:
Ali Sina previously quoted atleast 7-8 translations for Quran 21:33. Now he only quoted three. Why?? The reason
is because if he had quoted more he would have been proved to be a liar. Let’s read other translations of the
verse of the Quran 51:47
Dr. Munir Munshey : " With Our power and prowess, We brought into being the universe. And indeed, We expand
it (steadily)!"
Muhammad Al-Hilali & Muhsin Khan: "With power did We construct the heaven. Verily, we are Able to extend the
vastness of space thereof."
Arberry: "And heaven -- We built it with might, and We extend it wide."
Khalifa : "We constructed the sky with our hands, and we will continue to expand it."
And if you read the translation by Muhammad Asad, it uses the same words which Dr.Zakir Naik used "Expanding
Universe". The verse reads
Muhammad Asad : "It is we who have built the universe with [our creative] power; and, verily, it is we who are steadily
expanding it."
"we are expanding it" is the translation of the plural present participle musi'una and of the verb ausa'a meaning "to make
wider, more spacious, to extend, to expand"
Water Cycle in the Quran?
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) In the field of ‘Water cycle’ that Dr. William Campbell pointed out, certain things. The Qur’an describes the water
cycle in great detail. And Dr. William Campbell mentioned 4 stages. In his book he mentions 4 (a) and (b) - the last one he did
not mention in the slide - I don’t know why? It says... ‘The Driplinition’…‘The Water table.’ He missed out here - Maybe
because it was not mentioned in the Bible. He said there is not a single Verse in the Qur’an, which speaks about ‘evaporation.’
Qur’an says in Surah Al-Tariq, Ch. No. 86, Verse No. 11, that….(Arabic)…. ‘By the capacity of the heavens to return.’ And
almost all the commentaries of the Qur’an - they said, that this Verse of Surah Tariq, Ch. No. 86, Verse No. 11, refers to the
capacity of the heavens to return back rain - meaning ‘Evaporation.’
Ali Sina) I don’t know which commentator said such a thing but if anyone has, he is mistaken. Let us read the first part of this
Sura:
My Response :
He is insinuating that only he (Ali Sina) knows the Quran whereas any commentator who says so is mistaken.
Ali Sina continues :
Let us read the first part of this Sura:
086.001 By the Sky and the Night-Visitant (therein);-
086.002 And what will explain to thee what the Night-Visitant is?-
086.003 (It is) the Star of piercing brightness;-
086.004 There is no soul but has a protector over it.
086.005 Now let man but think from what he is created!
086.006 He is created from a drop emitted-
086.007 Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs:
086.008 Surely (Allah) is able to bring him back (to life)!
086.009 The Day that (all) things secret will be tested,
086.010 (Man) will have no power, and no helper.
086.011 By the Firmament which returns (in its round),
The entire Sura is gibberish. It just makes so sense. You can hardly find any text as obtuse as this.
My Response :
Ali Sina considers the Surah to be gibberish. To infidels the whole Quran may sound gibberish. And Ali Sina is one of them.
Therefore, it does not really matter to us if this sounds gibberish to him. I won’t be touching to all six of his so called "errors" in
the Quran. I'll just deal with the first and the last one.
"1) It appears that Muhammad is saying that each person has a star that protects him. This is fairytale fit for children.
Where is the verse saying that star protects the man?? !! The first 3 verses of the Surah are speaking of something different
whereas the verse 4 is speaking about something different. If Ali Sina is dumb and cannot even understand plain English that
does not mean Quran is wrong. Lets now come to the main topic of it which Dr.Naik touched.
"By the Firmament which returns (in its round)" (Quran 86:11)"
Ali Sina then goes on to say there are six “errors” in this Surah. I’ll just be dealing with the last one here which is relevant to
the topic.
Ali Sina Writes:
6) Then he swears “by the Firmament which returns (in its round)”. Firmament is the stars, the sun and the moon, not vapor
and rain. Muhammad saw that every night the stars are coming back and every day the Sun is returning. These heavenly
objects were known as the firmament. This verse has nothing to do with evaporation and rain. Please pay attention how often
Dr. Naik twists the meanings of the words to make his point prevail. The word used is 'sama'. It means sky/heaven and it can
also be interpreted as firmament but it can't be translated as rain.
My Response:
As Ali Sina here rightly says that "sama" means heaven/sky. I want to know where did Dr.Zakir naik translate it as "rain"? He
never did so. Here are the words of Dr.Naik
"By the capacity of the heavens to return.’ And almost all the commentaries of the Qur’an - they said, that this Verse of Surah
Tariq, Ch. No. 86, Verse No. 11, refers to the capacity of the heavens to return back rain - meaning ‘Evaporation.’ "
Can anyone here see Dr.Naik translating "sama" as "rain"??? This is another terrible lie by Ali Sina. See how he is trying to
deceive his reader. Dr.Naik simply explained what it is referring to.
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Dr. William Campbell who knows Arabic, may say…‘Why did not Allah Subhanawa Taala specifically
mention….(Arabic) …. Meaning… ‘The capacity of the heavens to return back rain.’ Why did not Allah mention
specifically? Now we have came to know why did not Allah do that, in His Divine wisdom. Because today we have
came to know that besides - the Ozonosphere… the layer above the earth - Besides returning back rain, it even
returns back other beneficial matter and energy of the Earth, which is required by the human beings. It does not
only return back rain - Today we have come to know, it even returns back waves of Telecommunication, of
Television, of Radio, by which we can see TV, we can communicate, we can hear the radio. And besides that, it
even returns back the harmful rays of the outer space, back on the other side, and absorbs. For example the sun
light… the ultraviolet rays of the Sun light is absorbed by the Ionosphere. If this was not done, life on the Earth
would have ceased to exist. So Allah Subhanawataala is far superior and for more accurate, when He says….
(Arabic)…. By the capacity of the Heaven to return.’ And the remaining things as he mentioned is there in the Qur’
an - You can refer to my Videocassette. The Qur’an describes the ‘Water cycle’ in great detail.
(Ali Sina) Wow! What a great logic. Why the Quran does not talk about the stage of evaporation? …Because
Ozonosphere returns other beneficial matters such as radio waves too. That is why!
Instead of answering the question, Dr. Naik tries to distract his audience by talking about red herring and by
introducing non sequitor arguments.
But wait a minute! Didn't Dr. Naik say that "the Firmament which returns" is about the capacity of heavens to
return back rain? Obviously Dr. Naik could not even convince himself. After assuring us that "almost all the
commentaries of the Qur’an - they said, that this Verse of Surah Tariq, Ch. No. 86, Verse No. 11, refers to the
capacity of the heavens to return back rain - meaning ‘Evaporation’", he goes on to give us the reason why Allah
did not mention this stage in the Quran. Come on Doctor! Don't make this too easy for me.
My Response:
Quran mentions the stage of evaporation in this verse. But since Quran is superior to science. It goes beyond
that. If the Quran mentioned specifically then it would only mean returning of rain. Rain is not the only thing
which the ozonosphere returns. Quran is more scientific!! For more on the returning sky
http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/scientific_22.html
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Regarding what he said about the Bible, he showed stage 1 and stage 3 in the first slide, and in the second stage 1,
3, and then 2. ‘That the rain water is taken up’… he says… ‘and then the rain water comes down on the Earth.’ This is the
philosophy of Phasofmillitas, in 7th century BC. He thought that the spray of the ocean was picked up by the wind, and send
to the interior as rain. There is no cloud mentioned there. In the second quotation Dr. William Campbell gave - First is,
according to him, ‘evaporation’ which we agree. We don’t mind having the concordance approach with the Bible. ‘…Then rain
falls down, and then are the clouds formed.’ - That is not the complete water cycle. Alhamdulillah, the Qur’an describes the
water cycle in great detail, in several places. How does the water rise, evaporates, forms into clouds - the clouds join together,
they stalk up, there is thunder and lightning, water comes down, the clouds move into the interior, they fall down as rain, and
the evaporation of the water table and Alhamdulillah in great detail. The Qur’an speaks about the water cycle in great detail, in
several places. In Surah Nur, Ch. No. 24, Verse No. 43, in Surah Rum, Ch. No. 30, Verse 48, in Surah Al-Zumar, Ch. 39, Verse
21, in Surah Muminun, Ch. 23, Verse 18, in Surah Rum Ch. No. 30, Verse No. 24, in Surah Al-Hijr, Ch. 15, Verse No. 22, in
Surah Araf Ch. No. 7, Verse No. 57, in Surah Rad, Ch. No. 13, Verse No. 17, in Surah Furqan, Ch. 25, Verse No. 48 and 49,
in Surah Fatir, Ch. No. 35, Verse No. 9, in Surah Yasin, Ch. 36, Verse No. 34, in Surah Jathiya, Ch. 45, Verse No. 5, in Surah
Qaf, Ch. No. 50, Verse No. 9, in Surah Al-Waqiah, Ch. No. 56, Verse No. 68 and 70, in several places, Surah Al-Mulk,Ch. 67,
Verse No. 30, the Glorious Qur’an speaks about the ‘Water cycle’, in great detail.
(Ali Sina) Here is where Dr. Naik outperformed himself. His Muslim audience became ecstatic and started applauding and
cheering as if he was a pop singer performing their favorite number. He said all those verses from memory, like pulling one
rabbit after another out his had. Impressive indeed. Let us quote these verses and see if there is anything miraculous in them.
While you are reading, note how often Muhammad forgets that the Quran is supposed to be the word of Allah and Allah
should not refer to himself in third person.
My Response:
Dr.Zakir Naik did not have enough time to explain them. Therefore, to cut short he only gave references. Muslim
audience had every right to be ecstatic because Dr.Zakir Naik was convincingly refuting the falsehood promoted
by Dr.William Campbell. The answer to the shift from first to third person etc. is here
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Grammar/robinson.html
Ali Sina then goes on to quote all the verses and says that it is only observable phenomenon. He doesn't realize
that Quran is 1400 years old. Today it seems to be observable phenomenon to us because all the data on the
subject is with us. Water Cycle seems to be an observable phenomenon.
In the words of Ali Sina "What the Quran describes has been observable by any primitive man since eons."
If Water Cycle is an observable phenomenon then why is it considered only a recent discovery of about 500-600
years old? Why isn't it considered simply to be an observable phenomenon? Why is taught to children in
school?? Dr.Maurice Bucaille knew that there would be people like Ali Sina who will think that water cycle is
merely an observable phenomenon. Moreover, what the Quran mentions is not simply an observable
phenomenon. I'll just provide one example here.
" And He sends down from the sky mountain masses (of clouds) wherein is hail:" (Quran 24:43)
Now if you are traveling by an aeroplane and when the aeroplane goes above the clouds. One can see that
clouds appear like mountain masses. I myself have witnessed it. On which aeroplane did Prophet Muhammad
(pbuh) go to check this??
How come Ali Sina missed out this verse?
“And We send the fecundating winds, then cause the rain to descend from the sky, therewith providing you with water (in
abundance), though ye are not the guardians of its stores.” (15:22)
Dr.Maurice Bucaille writes:
"When the verses of Quran concerning the role of water in man's existence are read in succession today, they all appear to us
to express ideas that are quite obvious. The reason for this is simple: in our day and age, we all, to a lesser or greater extent,
know about the water cycle in nature.
If However, we consider the various concepts the ancients had on this subject, it becomes clear that the data in the Quran do
not embody the mythical concepts current at the time of the Revelation which had been developed more according to
philosophical speculation than observed phenomenon. Although it was empirically possible to acquire on a modest scale, the
useful practical knowledge necessary for the improvement of the irrigation, the concepts held on the water cycle in general
would hardly be acceptable today."
Note: Ali Sina also accuses Dr.Maurice Bucaille and Professor Keith Moore of fooling the people. I'll come to that later.
Do Mountains Stabilize the Earth
Dr.Zakir Naik in his talk provided the source. He said that Dr.Frank Press said that mountains give stability to the
earth and he asked Dr.William Campbell to prove on the contrary. Get any documented proof which says on the
contrary.
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) I have not come across a single Geological book, and I challenge Dr. William Campbell to produce a
single Geological book - Not his personal correspondence with the Geologist. That does not carry weight. His
personal correspondence with Dr. Keith Moore …. Documented proof. And if you read the book ‘The Earth’ which
is referred by almost all the universities, in the field of Geology, one of its authors by the name of Dr Frank Press,
who was the advisor to the former president of USA, Jimmy Carter, and was the president of the Academy of
Science of USA. He writes in his book that…‘The mountains are wedge shaped - It has deep roots within. And he
says that…‘The function of the mountain is to stabilize the earth.’ And the Qur’an says in Surah Ambiya, Ch. No 21,
Verse No. 31, in Surah Luqman, Ch. No. 31 Verse No.10, as well as in Surah Nahl, Ch. No. 16, Verse No. 15, that…
‘We have made the mountains standing firm on the Earth, lest it would shake with them and with you.’
(Ali Sina) I tried to contact Dr. Frank Press and wrote to two sites that had written about him asking to please put
me in touch with him. Neither of them responded. I am not willing to buy his book Earth that costs $95.95 dollars
just to verify this claim. However I doubt Dr. Press could have said such an absurd thing. Muslims are good in
twisting things to make them look something else. I believe Dr. Naik has got this false information form Another
Islamic site islam-guide.com that says: "A book entitled Earth is a basic reference textbook in many universities
around the world. One of its two authors is Professor Emeritus Frank Press. He was the Science Advisor to
former US President Jimmy Carter, and for 12 years was the President of the National Academy of Sciences,
Washington, DC. His book says that mountains have underlying roots. [Earth, Press and Siever, p. 435. Also see
Earth Science, Tarbuck and Lutgens, p. 157.] These roots are deeply embedded in the ground, thus, mountains
have a shape like a peg
My Response:
Does Dr.Frank Press really have time to contact every Tom,Dick and Harry?? Does he have time to contact
people like Ali Sina who hide behind the internet like cowards? Ali Sina hides behind the internet, writes, and
thinks that he is a genius.
How can Ali Sina simply accuse someone with mere assumptions?? He is firstly not willing to buy the book. Then
he is accusing Dr.Naik of copying from this site. Dr.Naik said the same thing much earlier than this debate. He
said so also in his talk "Quran and Modern Science - Conflict or conciliation” in 1996 and he had delivered talks
on the same subjects before also. It reads on the site
"A book entitled Earth is a basic reference textbook in many universities around the world. One of its two
authors is Professor Emeritus Frank Press. He was the Science Advisor to former US President Jimmy Carter,
and for 12 years was the President of the National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC. His book says that
mountains have underlying roots.1 These roots are deeply embedded in the ground, thus, mountains have a
shape like a peg (see figures 7, 8, and 9)."
When Ali Sina quotes this site. He removed the reference to the footnotes. The site further provides us with 3
pictures and Ali Sina on it writes:
“These pictures have nothing to do with science. They are just more Islamic lies. These are taken from The
Geological Concept of Mountains in the Quran a book written by a Muslims El-Naggar and falsely attributed to Dr.
Press.” Source:
May I know where these people attributed the photos taken to Dr.Frank Press?? They even provide the source
of it. Here are the 3 sources mentioned on the same site of pictures 1,2 and 3 respectively.
"Figure 7: Mountains have deep roots under the surface of the ground. (Earth, Press and Siever, p. 413.)"
"Figure 8: Schematic section. The mountains, like pegs, have deep roots embedded in the ground. (Anatomy of
the Earth, Cailleux, p. 220.) "
"Figure 9: Another illustration shows how the mountains are peg-like in shape, due to their deep roots. (Earth
Science, Tarbuck and Lutgens, p. 158.)"
See how Ali Sina lies. He thinks that people will simply believe him without verifying.
Further, Ali Sina doesn't agree with the verses of the Quran 16:15,21:31. And he starts giving his scientific
explanation. Wait a minute, Where is the source of all his wishful explanations?? Dr.Zakir Naik atleast gave the
source. He quoted a non-Muslim scientist Dr.Frank Press, who has no reason to favour the Quran. Nor did he
write the book to bring a compability between the Quran and Science.
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) And in reply to the statement…‘That if mountains prevent earthquakes, how come you find earthquakes
in mountainous regions?’ The reply is, that - If I say that medical doctors, they prevent the sickness and disease
in a human being, and if someone argues…‘If doctors prevent the sickness and diseases in a human being, how
come you find more sick people in the hospitals, where there are more doctors than at home - where there are
no doctors.’
(Ali Sina) What a ridiculous analogy! Patients go to hospitals AFTER they get sick because they are living and
thinking beings and that is where they can get medical attention and get better. They do not become sick in
hospitals (unless the hospital is in an Islamic country with Islamic hygiene). Is Dr. Naik trying to compare
earthquake, a natural phenomenon, to humans? Do the earthquakes happen first elsewhere and then decide to
conglomerate in mountains? This analogy is utterly ridiculous; yet Dr. Naik’s Muslim audience became so elated
that they spontaneously cheered and applauded. One black guy was almost falling off his chair of excessive
laughing. What these people were laughing at? At their own stupidity? Now the world can see them and laugh at
them. It’s as if the more stupid is a statement, the more Muslims enjoy it. This reveals the deplorable intellectual
bankruptcy of the wretched Umma.
My Response:
Dr.Zakir Naik clearly explained the verses of the Quran. He said this just as a joke and to expose the poor
reasoning of Dr.William Campbell. Dr.Zakir Naik explained it very well. Muslim audience cheered because Islam
was being defended and lies of Dr.William Campbell were being exposed. They have every right to be. Islam is criticized a
lot in Western countries. If someone defends it then Muslims have all rights to cheer and applaud. See How Ali Sina in the
ends throws insult at the entire ummah (community) of the Muslims. His foul-mouth never ends.
More insults in the next paragraph
Ali Sina Writes:
Believe me, absurd thinking is the trait of Muslims. Sometime ago I read an essay about a Muslim child asking his
religious teacher that the Quran says Jinns will be sent to hell to be punished but the the Quran also says that
Jinns are made of fire, so how fire can be hurt by fire? The teacher slapped the child and asked him if it hurts?
The poor lad responded yes, with tears in his eyes. "Like that!", responded the teacher. "My hand is flesh and
your face is flesh but it still hurts". Foolish Muslims think this is such a great reasoning. This is the fallacy of
wrong analogy. But the Muslim brain is not equipped with enough rationality to think deep. He WANTS to believe
and any nonsense will do. There are several sites that have written against me. I receive numerous emails from
Muslims who have neither read my articles nor those written by Muslims trying to refute me. And yet these
people tell me that I have already been refuted and give me links to the same silly sites. They WANT to believe
that I am refuted. They will believe anyone who claims he has refuted me without searching the truth of that
claim. The Muslim mind works in bizarre ways.
My Response:
More foul-mouth from Ali Sina.
I put the link above of brother Umar's article which exposes his insults and foul-mouth. I request brother Umer to
add these as well.
Oceanology of the Quran,
Ali Sina writes (In response to Dr.Naik)
(Ali Sina) If the separation of sweet and salt waters is an observable phenomenon, as it seems that everyone
agrees, then how could no one know about it until "the advancement of oceanology" made its knowledge
possible? What Muhammad is referring to is precisely that and nothing more. There is no “invisible barrier”
between two waters, which is “forbidden to be trespassed”. There is no barrier of any kind - no barzakh at all
between waters. Waters don’t mix immediately because of different temperature and density but they eventually
do, just like when you pour cream in a cup of coffee. It takes time to mix; that is why you stir it. Those who saw
this phenomenon must have relayed their observation to others using figurative speech saying waters don’t mix
AS IF there is an invisible barrier between them. Our ignorant Muhammad took this literally and claimed there is
an “invisible barrier” between them, which is “forbidden to be trespassed”. Nothing can be further from the
truth. All waters mix and there is no barrier, invisible or otherwise between them. When two rivers, carrying
sediments of different colors meet, or when sweet water coming from rivers flows into the blue salty water of the
sea, one can see the line of demarcation sometimes stretching for miles until they gradually blend. Where the
waters merge, i.e. what Dr. Naik refers to as the “slanting homogenizing area”, is not a “barrier”. It is the
opposite of it. There the waters are not forbidden to trespass but actually merge.
It is amazing that Muslims emphasize on the flagrant errors of the Quran as its miracles. Who would buy this
nonsense except a totally ignorant person?
My Response:
Wait a minute, Where is the source of all this?? Dr.Zakir Naik atleast quoted one scientist Dr.Hay.
The same site which Ali Sina accused Dr.Naik of copying from explains this as well. It also gives the reference to the book on
oceanology written by Non-Muslim scientists.
http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1-b.htm
Is Islam for All Mankind?
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) As far as this statement of his is concerned, regarding the Bible, I do agree with it totally - Because the
Bible was only meant for the children of Israel , for that time. It is mentioned in the Gospel of Mathew, Ch. No. 10,
Verse No. 5 and 6, Jesus Christ peace be upon him tells his disciples… ‘Go ye not in the way of the Gentiles.’
Who are the Gentiles? The Non-Jews, the Hindus, the Muslims. ‘But rather go to the lost sheep of the house of
Israel .’ Jesus Christ peace be upon him said in the Gospel of Mathew, Ch. No. 15, Verse No. 24… ‘I am not sent,
but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel .’ So Jesus Christ and the Bible were only meant for the children of
Isreal. Since it was meant for them, to analyze the Bible, you have to use the meaning of the word, which was
utilized at that time. But the Qur’an was not meant only for the Arabs of that time. Qur’an is not meant only for the
Muslims. The Qur’an is meant for the whole of humanity, and it is meant to be for eternity.
(Ali Sina) Here again the Muslim audience broke in applause and the sign of joy was visible from their
countenance. To them it was victory after victory. However, had Dr. Naik told them that the Quran says that
Muhammad has come only for the Meccans alone and the people around it they would not have rejoiced that
much.
006.092 And this is a Book which We have sent down, bringing blessings, and confirming (the revelations) which
came before it: that thou mayest warn the mother of cities and all around her.
The mother of cities, Umul Qura, is Mecca. The same thing is confirmed in verse:
042.007 Thus have We sent by inspiration to thee an Arabic Qur’an: that thou mayest warn the Mother of Cities
and all around her.
In other places Allah says to Muhammad that he has come for the people who did not receive guidance yet.
032.003 “Nay, it is the Truth from thy Lord, that thou mayest admonish a people to whom no warner has come before thee: in
order that they may receive guidance.”
036.006 In order that thou mayest admonish a people, whose fathers had received no admonition, and who therefore remain
heedless (of the Signs of Allah).
My Response:
Ali Sina here again quotes the verses and mispresents them. Both the verses 6:92 and 42:7 say "Mother of cities and All
Around her"
ALL around her means the full world. Mecca is the centre of the world and ALL around it is the full world. The verses of the
Quran do not prove that Islam is only for Arabs Alone.
And in other two verses Allah is saying that he has sent Muhammad (pbuh) to admonish the people to whom no guidance has
come before. Does it say that "admonish only those people to whom no Warner had been sent"?? Definitely not !!! Allah
(SWT) sends his final messenger which is for the whole of humanity from those people to whom a messenger had not been
sent before.
Ali Sina Writes:
The people of the Book, i.e. the Jews, the Christians and perhaps the Zoroastrians had their own messengers and their
guidance. The only people who had not received guidance were the Arabs, specifically the Arabs of Mecca and its
surrounding. So, it is clear that Muhammad claimed that he had come only for the Quraish and not for the people of the Book
and the rest of mankind. Of course, as he became powerful, his ambitions grew and he changed his mind later. Few Muslims
know about these verses. What do they say about them? If they truly believe that the Quran is the word of God, they should
stop their da'wa and Jihad. The people of Mecca and its surrounding have already converted to Islam. If Muslims believe that
the Quran is the word of God, how do they dare to disobey Him and make da'wa elsewhere. Even if Muhammad said they
should attack other countries and convert others into Islam, they should not listen to him but do what the Quran says. Whose
word is more important? That of Allah or that of Muhammad? These verses should also convince the non-Arab Muslims,
including the Egyptians, the Syrians, the Iraqis and all others now known as Arabs that Islam is not for them. Islam is only for
the Meccans and its surrounding. They must leave Islam, if they truly believe that the Quran is the word of God.
(Dr. Naik) Qur’an says in Surah Ibrahim, Ch. 14, Verse. 52, in Surah Baqarah Ch. No. 2, Verse 185, and Surah Zumar Ch. 39,
Verses. 41, that the Qur’an is meant for the whole of human kind. And Prophet Mohammed, may peace be upon him, was not
sent only for the Muslims or the Arabs. Allah says in the Qur’an in Surah Ambiya Ch. No. 21, Verse No. 107------(Arabic)----
That We have send thee as a mercy, as a guidance, to the whole of humankind.’
(Ali Sina) Verse 14:52 says “Hatha balaghun lilnnasi”. Nas is people – any number of people. It could be people gathered in a
room. It could refer to the inhabitants of a village, a town, a country and not necessarily ALL Mankind. For example nas is
used in verse 7.116 when talking about the magic performed by the magicians of Pharaoh who bewitched the eyes of the
people ‘nas’. Are we supposed to understand that all mankind were bewitched? The same word is used in 2:185, 39:4 and 21:
107. In all these verses Nas means "people" and not all mankind. If we assume that the word 'nas' used in these verses means
all mankind then we have to admit that there is flagrant contradiction in the Quran for the verses 6:92, 42:7, 32:3 and 36:6
clearly state that the Quran is for the people of Mecca and its surrounding.
My Response:
Most of the Translations translate the word 'nas' as 'mankind' in the verses which Dr.Zakir Naik quoted. But even if Ali Sina
doesn't agree. Still other verses prove that Quran is for entire humanity. Nowhere does the Quran say that it is only for the
Arabs. He deliberately mispresented the verses he quoted to prove that.
More verses confirming Quran to be for entire humanity
"Blessed be He Who sent down the criterion (of right and wrong, i.e. this Quran) to His slave (Muhammad SAW) that he may
be a warner to the Alameen (mankind and jinns)." (Quran 25:1)
"But it is nothing less than a Message to all the worlds." (Quran 68:52)
"Verily this is no less than a Message to (all) the Worlds:" (Quran 81:27)
"And no reward you (O Muhammad SAW) ask of them (those who deny your Prophethood) for it, it(the Quran) is no less than
a Reminder and an advice unto the Alameen (men and jinns)." (Quran 12:104)
The word used in the above 4 verses is "Alameen" meaning "worlds".
Ali Sina Writes:
However, Muhammad also claimed to have been sent to "creatures of both worlds". lilAAalameen. means everything in both
worlds. (That includes dogs and pigs.) That is because he was a megalomaniac narcissist and narcissists talk big. He even
claimed to have come as guidance for Jinns, which are mythical beings.
My Response:
He considers Jinns to be mythical beings. They are mythical for him not for us. Its the matter of belief. Science has not proven
Jinns mythical. They may assume them to be but there are no proves at all. He again insults our beloved Prophet Muhammad
(pbuh) and calls him narcissists (someone who is fascinated with himself). Brother Umar has responded to this false charge. I
too will deal with it in the next para.
Ali Sina Writes:
"Narcissists have grandiose ideas about themselves. In a Hadith Muhammad makes his Allah say to him: “Were it not for you,
I would not have created the universe.” [3]
Muhammad ibn Ali has narrated that Muhammad said: "Among all the people of the world God chose the Arabs; from among
the Arabs he chose the Kinana; from Kinana he chose the Quraish; from the Quraish he chose Bani Hashim; from Bani
Hashim he chose Me. [Tabaqat V. 1 p. 2] This man was full of himself - a true narcissist. So much for the alleged equality in
Islam. Arabs are the chosen race. Arabs have known that always and they treat non Arab Muslims with disdain. If you are a
non-Arab Muslim, you are accepting to be inferior. "
The source of it is given in the footnote
As-Saghaanee (d.650) said, this hadith is "maudu (fabricated)" ['al-Ahaadeeth al-Mawdoo'aat' of as-Saghaanee (pg. 7)] and
likewise al-Albaanee ['Silsilah ad-Da'eefah' (1/450 no.282)] ash-Shaykh Mulla Alee Qaaree (d.1014) said, "maudu, but it's
meaning is correct."
My Response:
All Ali Sina can do is quote fabricated hadith. This hadith is a fabricated one according to scholars. But even if we assume it is
correct. Still it doesn't prove that he is narcissist. Reasons :
1. Muhammad (pbuh) was considered an honest and Truthful man even by the pagan Arabs before his prophethood.
He spoke whatever God Almighty commanded him.
2. It is not only mentioned in the Hadith but it is also said by God Almighty to Adam (pbuh) in the Gospel of Barnabas. Chapter
39. It reads
"'Adam, having sprung up upon his feet, saw in the air a writing that shone like the sun, which said: "There is only one God,
and Mohammed is the messenger of God." Whereupon Adam opened his mouth and said: "I thank thee, O Lord my God, that
thou hast deigned to create me; but tell me. I pray thee, what meaneth the message of these words: "Mohammed is
messenger of God. Have there been other men before me?"
'Then said God: "Be thou welcome, O my servant Adam. I tell thee that thou art the first man whom I have created And he
whom thou hast seen [mentioned] is thy son, who shall come into the world many years hence, and shall be my messenger,
for whom I have created all things; who shall give light to the world when he shall come;"
http://www.barnabas.net/barnabasP39.html
Christians deny the Gospel of Barnabas. The Historians do not deny it. For the authenticity of Gospel of Barnabas refer to :
http://www.natheal.com/NaturalHealingMethodologies/WorldReligions/history_of_the_gospel_of_bar.htm
http://www.barnabas.net/
Paul said about Barnabas.
"If he comes unto you, receive him. (Colossians 4:10)"
Muhammad (pbuh) is not narcissist. But its again allegations and lies by Ali Sina. Refer to Brother Umar article for responses
to all the charges against Muhammad (pbuh) by Ali Sina
http://www.answering-christianity.com/umar/true_face_of_ali_sina_2.htm
Embryology continuation
Ali Sina again claims that Dr.Zakir Naik fooled the audience. According to him Dr.Keith Moore and Dr.Bucaille fooled the
Muslims.
Ali Sina Writes:
(Ali Sina) Are we supposed to believe that Dr. Keith Moore, who was the chairman and the head of the department of
Anatomy, of a major university did not know how human embryo looks? The truth is that Dr. Moore and Dr. Bucaille fooled
Muslims by telling them what they wanted to hear and in this way they ingratiated the Saudi King who in turn lavished them
with a lot of petrodollars
My Response:
Now this is turning out to be funny. In Brief, I will tell you the sick mentality of Ali Sina.
If a Muslim scientist writes something about Science that matches the Quran then he is a liar and a deceiver. If a non-Muslim
scientist does it then he is doing it for the sake of petrodollars. This is turning out to be more and more stupid from Ali Sina.
Ali Sina believes Dr.William Campbell spoke the Truth. Why? Because he opposed the Quran. The reason is obvious.
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) What Dr. William Campbell showed you is the other perspective of it. If I show this book - it looks like a rectangle - If I
show you like that, it is a different perspective. That diagram is given in the book - The diagram which you saw on the slide is
even there - And I’ll deal with it InshaAllah.
(Ali Sina) Here again the gullible audience became euphoric and clapped without realizing that Dr. Naik is engaging in the
fallacy of suppressing the evidence. Dr. Campbell showed the picture of the embryo from the front and from the side. Dr. Naik
wants to convince his audience that they should look at it from one angle only – the angle that it most resembles a leech. Of
course one who is determined to be fooled would be willing to look at things by standing on his head, if that helps him to see
them from the exact angle that would reconfirm his unreasoned faith. That is why Muslims are unable to see the truth. Their
tunnel vision does not allow them to see things from all angles. If only they changed their perspective a little, they would see
that Islam is nothing but a big lie.
My Response:
I told you people its turning out to be more and more funny. This is the photograph, which Dr.Zakir Naik showed.
http://www.islam-guide.com/ch1-1-a.htm
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Professor Keith Moore, after about 80 questions were asked to him, he said… ‘If you would have asked
me these 80 questions, 30 years ago, I would not have been able to answer more than 50 percent - Because
embryology has developed recently in the past 30 years.’ He said this in the eighties.
Now, do we believe Dr. Keith Moore whose statement is available outside in the foyer - his videocassette is
available… ‘This is the truth’...’Anna-ul-Haq’... recorded statement. So will you believe Dr. William Campbell’s
personal conversation with Professor Keith Moore, or the one mentioned in this book, with Islamic edition as
well as the photograph that I had shown to you? And in the videocassette available outside you can see it - He
makes those statements. So you have to choose which is more logical - Personal discussion with Dr. William
Campbell or his statement on Video. Like how Dr. William Campbell showed my video - 100 percent proof what I
said…
(Ali Sina) This is again a false reasoning. What Dr. Moore said to Dr. Campbell and what he said in the videos
intended to be sold to Muslims could be two different things.
My Response:
If Dr.Keith Moore had done such a thing. If someone had caught him then it will completely ruin his reputation
and no more "petrodollars.” Furthermore, his book is used more by non-Muslims than Muslims. More non-Muslim
medical colleges use this book than Muslim medical colleges. Dr.Keith Moore wasn’t an Arab Muslim. Therefore,
we have no reason to doubt him. Since more Non-Muslims refer to his book, he would NEVER write in favor of the
Quran if he was really greedy of “petrodollars.”
Ali Sina Writes:
He would have made a fool of himself telling Dr. Campbell what he says for Muslim consumption. We are not here
to probe whether Dr. Moore is a liar or Dr. Campbell is reporting him erroneously. We must look at the medical
science. We don't need the opinions of the experts when we can easily find the facts on our own. Appealing to
authority is called argumentum ad verecundiam and this is another logical fallacy. We must see whether what the
Quran says is supported by science or not. We must not accept the words of anyone just because they are
authorities. They could have some ulterior motives. They might have lied and misrepresented the truth for some
personal gain. The ultimate authority is science, not Dr. Moore, Dr. Bucaille or Dr. Campbell. Dr. Campbell has
proved his case backing his argument with pictures. Unless someone can produce pictures that tell a different
story, the claims of this doctor or that doctor are irrelevant. Once things are demonstrated to us, we can
dispense with the opinions of authorities.
My Response:
We actually do not need experts to tell us about science but we need Scientists like Ali Sina to tell us that. Dr.
William Campbell showed the slides and Dr.Zakir Naik convincingly answered to them. He did it from the medical
book written by a well-reputed scientist Dr.Keith Moore.
Ali Sina tells us that scientific data is available and we do not need experts to tell us.
Wait a minute, which scientific data? The scientific discoveries done by the world’s greatest scientist Ali Sina??
Which science is he talking about? Who writes the books of science if not the great scientists?? Are they written
in heavens and thrown down to us from there? As I proved above. Dr.Moore was not a Muslim either and he has
no ulterior motives. If he lies then it can simply ruin his reputation. Moreover, he will have no more
"petrodollars.”
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) ‘Moon is reflected light’ - I’ll come to it later on.
And whatever additional information he got from Qur’an and Hadith, it was incorporated later into this book…‘The
Developing Human’ - the 3rd edition and this book got an award for the best medical book written by a single
author in that year.
(Ali Sina) Is Dr. Naik telling us that Dr. Moore got an award for the book he wrote claiming the ridiculous Quran is
scientific? Who gave that award? Al Azhar University or the Grand Mosque in Medina? What is the name of that
award?
My Response:
This is turning to be more and more funny every time. Al-Azhar University and Grand Mosque don't go around
giving awards. It definitely got the award from medical authorities. He considers the Qur'an ridiculous. Thats what ALL
islamophobists do.
Dr. Keith Moore had earlier authored the book, 'The Developing Human'.After acquiring new knowledge from the QUR'AN, he
wrote, in 1982, the 3rd edition of the same book, 'The Developing Human'. The book was the recipient of an award for the
best medical book written by a single author. This book has been translated into several major languages of the world and is
used as a textbook of embryology in the first year of medical studies. In 1981, during the Seventh Medical Conference in
Dammam, Saudi Arabia, Dr. Moore said, "It has been a great pleasure for me to help clarify statements in the QUR'AN about
human development. It is clear to me that these statements must have come to MUHAMMAD---sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam---
from GOD or ALLAH, because almost all of this knowledge was not discovered until many centuries later. This proves to me
that MUHAMMAD---sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam--- must have been a messenger of GOD or ALLAH{The reference for this
statement is the video tape titled 'This is the Truth'.For a copy of this video tape contact the Islamic Research Foundation}
Ali Sina then goes on to tell us about the scientific discoveries done by him. He keeps making a joke and a fool of himself. He
did not give any source of all his crap. Ali Sina always says "this is not true" and "that is not true" without giving us any source
from any medical book.
After explaining all the embryological stages, When Dr.Zakir Naik mentioned that the Quranic stages on embryology are based
on appearance.
Ali Sina writes:
(Ali Sina) Here our good doctor is making a major shift of strategy. Now, he is no longer insisting that the Quranic
description of the embryo is scientific. He says that the Quran talks about the “appearance” that exist between a
clot, a leech and the embryo in its different stages of growth. If so, why claim that the Quran is scientific and
miraculous? In the past, women had miscarriage way more than today. The fetus was aborted and they could see
that it remotely resembled, first to a clot of blood and then to a leech. In the absence of a microscope this is all they
could see. So, where is the miracle? Why make so much ado about it saying “how could Muhammad have known this 1400
years ago?” when such a prosaic knowledge was available to anyone for eons? In fact as Dr. Campbell noted, Hippocrates
described the embryonic growth much more accurately.
My Response:
When did Dr.Zakir Naik ever insist that all the stages are based on function? He always insisted that stages are
based on appearance. The appearance of the embryo in all the stages was not known at that time. How did
Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) know that embryo looks like a leech? (Which I proved above with a photograph which
was shown by Dr.Zakir Naik from the book of Dr.Keith Moore)
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) Professor Keith Moore took plastic seal, and bit between his teeth to make it look like a ‘Mutga’- The
teeth marks resembled the ‘somites.’ Dr. William Campbell said… ‘When the ‘Alaqa’ becomes a ‘Mutga’ the
clinging is yet there - It is there till 8 and a half months- So… the Qur’an is wrong.’ I told you in the beginning, the
Qur’an is describing the appearance. ‘The leech like’ appearance and the ‘clot like’ appearance, is changed to
the ‘chewed’ like appearance. It yet continues to cling till the end - There is no problem. But the stages are
divided on appearance - Not on the function.
(Ali Sina) Alaqa either means something that clings or clot of blood. One word in one sentence cannot have two
different meanings. If alaqa is something that clings, then the fetus should be called alaqa during all its
gestation. Why then the Quran says it becomes mutga? If it’s only the appearance to the clot, then we should
discard Dr. Bucaille’s suggestion who says this word should be translated as “something that clings”. If the
Quran is clear, then why this much confusion?
My Response:
The Quran is speaking about the embryological stages based on appearance. When it describes Alaqa , Also the function
befits here. But even if you ignore the function here. Still the embryo looks like a clot as well like the leech as Dr.Zakir Naik
proved in his talk and Ali Sina agrees that embryo does look like a clot. The Qur'an is not confusing. The Islamophobists will
find it confusing irrespective how clear it is. The translation may be confusing. But the Arabic text is very clear.
Dr.Zakir Naik then spoke about Mudga and formation of muscles and bones. To that Ali Sina writes :
Ali Sina:
(Ali Sina) This description is wrong no matter how many times it is repeated. I quote again what Dr. Campbell said in the
conclusion of his talk on embryo: “There is no time when calcified bones have been formed, and then the muscles are placed
around them. The muscles are there, several weeks before there are calcified bones, rather than being added around
previously formed bones, as the Qur’an states.” This statement is scientific. The Quran is not.
My Response:
Wrong according to who? Scientific discoveries done by Ali Sina? Dr.Zakir Naik responded very convincingly to Dr.
Campbell and Dr.Campbell did not say anything against it.
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) As Professor Keith Moore said that… ‘The stages - that how it is described in modern embryology… stage
1,2,3,4,5, is so confusing, The Qur’anic stage on embryology describing on the base of appearance, and the shape, is
far more superior.’ Alhamdulillah.
(Ali Sina) This is ludicrous. How can the Quran be superior when it is all wrong? Josef Goebbel, Hitler's minister for
propaganda said: "If you tell a big enough lie, frequently enough, it becomes the truth." This is what Dr. Naik wants to
achieve. He wants to repeat a lie frequently enough, until it becomes true. I am sorry. It does not work in this case.
The description of the embryo in the Quran is all wrong. It won’t become true even if it is repeated a billion times.
Bones are not created first to be covered with flesh later. Period!
My Response:
The Qur'an may be all wrong according to the scientific knowledge and discoveries done by Ali Sina. Let me remind
you he has NOT given any source from where he got his information. Now shall we agree with Dr.Keith Moore who is a
reputed scientist or Islamophobists like Ali Sina?? He goes on to quote minister of Hitler. Dr.Zakir Naik didn’t lie
frequently. He quoted all from great scientists like Dr.Keith Moore etc.
Note:
Up till now, Ali Sina has not quoted a single medical book to back any of his claims!
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Therefore he said… therefore he said that… ‘I have no objection in accepting that Prophet Muhammed is
the messenger of God and that this Glorious Qur’an has to be a Divine Revelation, from Almighty God.’
(Ali Sina) If Dr. Naik is speaking of Dr. Moore, it should be noted that he did not convert to Islam. This tells us that his
interests were this-worldly. He did not see any miracles in the Quran. He simply fooled the Muslims and laughed his
way to the bank.
My Response:
What bank? What Money?? Ali Sina has not provided any proof whatsoever. The Quran says
"Those are their (vain) desires. Say: "Produce your proof if ye are truthful." (Quran 2:111)
Dr.Moore did not accept Islam because of other reasons. If he had accepted Islam then Ali Sina would have called him a liar.
Ali Sina considers Muslims to be liars by nature
Source
If he didn’t accept then he fooled the Muslims. In either way, he'll be spoken against. Why?? Because he wrote something
good about the Qur'an.
Did Ali Sina forget about other scientists and learned men who have embraced Islam?? Like Professor Thagada Shaun ,
Jeffery Lang and others.
Ali Sina further goes on to call Allah (SWT) a saddist. He comes up with a ludicruous example of a cat. He is comparing cats
with human beings. He says that he wouldn't do such a merciless thing to a cat. But he wants worse to be done to Muslims. He
says "As long as Muslims are Muslims they do not deserve to be treated in accordance to the Universal Declaration of
Human Right." (Source:)
He further says “They must be colonized and ruled with iron fist” (Source:)
According to Ali Sina "Muslims are not humans" (Source:)
For more insults, refer to
Ali Sina’s foul mouth exposed
He forgot that we human beings are not allowed to do such a thing to any other human being.. Human beings are responsible
for their own actions. The Qur'an says
"...it is not God that hath wronged them, but they wrong themselves." (Quran 3:117)
If Allah (SWT) starts punishing us for good deeds, he will not leave a single of us on earth. On the day of judgement no
human being can claim that he is treated against the mercy of Allah. Allah (SWT) besides being merciful is also just. He will
treat everyone in a just way. Suppose that today someone catches Hitler. What punishment can one give him for the
incinerati