There was an article entitled ‘Functioning ‘Mechanical Gears’ seen in Nature for the First Time’. It began as follows:
“This image shows cog wheels connecting the hind legs of the plant hopper, a plant-hopping insect found in gardens across Europe – has hind-leg joints with curved cog-like strips of opposing ‘teeth’ that intermesh, rotating like mechanical gears to synchronise the animal’s legs when it launches into a jump.
The finding demonstrates that gear mechanisms previously thought to be solely man-made have an evolutionary precedent. Scientists say this is the “first observation of mechanical gearing in a biological structure“.
Through a combination of anatomical analysis and high-speed video capture of normal Issus movements, scientists from the University of Cambridge have been able to reveal these functioning natural gears for the first time. The findings are reported in the latest issue of the journal Science…” CONTINUED >
I commented: “These gears are not designed; they are evolved” … Or rather- “These gears are ‘evolved’… by The Designer…”
An interesting phenomenon that I’ve noticed keeps occurring is how there are Islamic injunctions that Muslims are pretty familiar with. And then lo and behold, some extraneous discovery occurs in the secular world that ends up supplying further proofs of the benefits of the practice of Qu’ran, Sunnah from the Traditional Islamic milieu.
SHORT ANSWER: What exactly is the issue that some have with the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his marriage with Aisha (May Allah be pleased with her)? Quite simply, it is that she was allegedly a child when he consummated his marriage with her. But this assertion is wrong. She wasn’t a child. She was someone who was appropriately able to marry. This is the misunderstood point.
End of discussion. Next question.
“Wait, wait!” someone might say. “This isn’t a sufficient explanation!”
O.K. Let me elaborate:
Theo Hobson identifies that though there is a stronger secular liberalism, which he acknowledges as more aggressive, he does spell out the existence of a softer, more inclusive one too. He asks the Muslim panel if they recognise and acknowledge the latter, softer type. I sense it is this question that is perceived as being (apparently) ‘skirted’: an accusation from the non Muslim party. The way the Muslim panel respond is as though this softer type of secular liberalism either doesn’t exist or doesn’t matter even if it existed. Presumably, this is because of soft liberalism’s perceived irrelevance given the current context of tighter measures around freedom and self autonomy ostensibly against terrorists but actually against mainstream practicing British Muslims. I sense the non Muslim cannot fathom the motivation for the Muslim panel’s defensiveness. They are accused of ‘playing the victim’. They respond: they’re merely representing reality.
QUESTION: Are children inclined to believe God to:
a) Be three-in-one persons;
b) Be One; or
c) Not exist?’
Be honest. Which are they more likely to naturally incline towards?
Filed under Atheism, Islam
Goodbye ‘Religion Causes War’ Argument.
A brilliant debate. A must watch video.
Public Debate: Is Humanity Better Off Without Religion? Dr Robert Stovold vs Abdullah al Andalusi – http://wp.me/p3k8xr-3dq