That's quite a bizarre argument you've got going there.

Bizarre, you serious? dont you know this is confirmed by scientists, who learnt arabic and studied the revelation?? they were the leading authorities in their field. example professor Keith Moore

Yeah I've heard of those guys who got paid to attend a conference in Saudi. There are 101 threads on the 'argument from authority', and how pointless it is. You could find more scientists that disagree with the 'confirmed science of the revelation' than those that agree with it, quite considerably more.

I know exactly who Keith Moore is because he is one of a very small pool of scientists that Muslims like to invoke when scrambling for validation.
The information Prof. Moore validated had been known for centuries before the 'revelation', and I would bet our learned friend knew this and was quite happy to take money from the Arabs for telling them what they wanted to hear.

Where is he now? Has he converted? Have all the other biologists?

You say there are more scientists who don't agree. If you accept that as an argumetn, then you should accept the argumetn that there are more people who believe in God then those who don't.


Then please let us know which things were know before the revelation, and please let us know which of them were known to the Arabs of that ime.

Also, as an atheist you don't have a reason to be moral, so your accusation and ad hominem do not wonder me.

By the way, a vast of the greatest scientists in the history believed in God: Newton, Descartes, Faraday, Boyle, Mendel, Pasteur, Pascal, Linnaeus etc.

I do not say that only because there existed some great scientists who believed in God we have a proof of His SWT existence. But, you used pretty the same methodology.

by us not knowing whethere they have converted or not, dont you realise that this is actually a confirmation that they did not get paid. otherwise the first thing they would have done if they were to get paid is to say they have converted!

can you tell me the name of at least 1 scientist who have refuted their claims?

Well that was my point, it's a flawed argument to say that because this important person or this many people say something is true then it must be true.
I suppose if you like that sort of thing then you'd agree with me that Islam is not true since 80% of people think it is false.
There have been many threads about this already, search for 'Galen'. (edit: It's even in this thread! Forgot about that)
I think perhaps you should be worried for yourself if you believe one cannot be moral without religion. You believe that you could not live a moral life if you were not guided by the Quran, but I know that I can. I live a reasonably good, moral life while surrounded by muslims who would go to prison if anyone found out what they were doing.

"I have gained this from philosophy: that I do without being commanded what others do only from fear of the law." - Aristotle

I've added emphasis to some parts.

That might make perfect sense to someone who believes in God and believes in the divine nature of the Quran without having any proof either way.
To say that because we have no knowledge of one thing it confirms something else is logically ridiculous.

Besides, don't you think the muslims who make all these videos and websites of Keith Moore quotes would let us know? Wouldn't it be the ultimate icing on the cake if he had converted?

If he truly believed that these works were the direct word of God, what other option would he have but to convert, there would be no question. What he doesn't say speaks as loudly as what he does.

Very few people do any serious research on anything without being paid! Like us, they have families to feed.

Moore, whom nobody denies is a very distinguished expert in the area, was employed (i.e. paid) by the Saudi government, having a faculty position at King Abdul Aziz University and working for the embryology commission at that university with a brief to interpret the statements in the Qur'an that refer to embryology. There was nothing 'under the counter' about it, and he has never denied it. There was therefore no reason to claim he had converted to Islam when he had not and there is no suggestion anybody tried to persuade him, financially or otherwise, to claim he had done so. The purpose of the embrology commission was/is serious research (although what in is debatable), not to gain converts to Islam with cheap tricks.

If Moore ever subsequently converted to Islam he has never said so, and for the last ten years or so has just avoided all questions on both issues. From which most sensible people draw their own conclusions.