Salaam
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 524
- Reaction score
- 56
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
dinosaurs in islam?
- Thread starter ranma1/2
- Start date
- Replies 56
- Views 15K
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Halal Food Gastronomy | vBulletin 4 php 8.0 patch
ranma1/2
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 1,095
- Reaction score
- 43
Creation is literal. God created us in the way He said He did.
There is nothing direct or explicit in Islam to say how long ago the earth was created. I did once come across an article putting together different kinds of figures from here and there to come up with an estimate of how long ago Adam as created (and I can't find it any more!!) but as for the universe, earth and dinosaurs, we know nothing.
why is it to be taken literal? is the entire quran to be taken literal or do you pick and choose? are there rules to say what is literal or not?
Also why was god so vague in his description "specifically what length days? Human or god days? "
ranma1/2
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 1,095
- Reaction score
- 43
well said. Simply put, if Dr "doin time for his crime" Hovind is your source, you need to read a book. Dr Hovind reminds me of Dr willy in mega man. "except not smart"
ranma1/2
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 1,095
- Reaction score
- 43
i might be confusing my hadiths with the quran but doesnt it somewhere say the sun rested in a pond? Or ant speak?
Malaikah
IB Legend
- Messages
- 6,351
- Reaction score
- 907
- Gender
- Female
- Religion
- Islam
I thought the sun one was a metaphor? Some one correct me if I am wrong. It should be obvious for a scholar of the Arabic language, especially when added with back up from other verses and from the sayings of the prophet, to differentiate between metaphors, similes and the like, and stuff that is meant to be taken literally.
As for the ant speaking, it is called a miracle.
As for the ant speaking, it is called a miracle.
Trumble
IB Expert
- Messages
- 3,275
- Reaction score
- 389
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Buddhist
Missed this earlier. I'm certainly no Biblical scholar but this seems like yet another example of taking something that makes perfect sense in the context it is presented and turning it into something that doesn't in an attempt to fit science - much like many of the Quran'ic 'scientific' miracles.
Both alternative explanations are far more plausible. The first is that the Behemoth is a mythical, primeval land beast; the water based equivalent of Leviathan (described in the next passage). The other is that it was an actual beast (note the reference to the river Jordan) such as a hippopotamus. Does a hippo have "tail stiff like a cedar?" No, but sauropods did not "eat grass like an ox", either. They had no molars and could not chew. Needless to say, on the time scale suggested by paleontological evidence, grass didn't evolve until long after the last of the sauropods was dead. Again this 'evidence' is such that only someone already committed to creationism would take it seriously.
There is a big difference between dragons mentioned before the Medivel Ages and those mentioned afterwards.
The ones mentioned before as just really large serpents. The dogfaced dragons with feet, arms and sometimes wings dont get popular until the Medivel Ages thru paintings.
To compare a giant Serpant to a dinosaur is crude.
islamirama
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 4,194
- Reaction score
- 608
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Science101
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 242
- Reaction score
- 22
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Agnosticism
Thanks Islamirama,
It is now obvious that Quran is in accord with scientific theory. After reading threads in the forum that claim otherwise, the information Muslims are reading is primarily coming from Christian Creationists who are posting their viewpoints all over the internet. There is no scientific debate like they are claiming there is, the scientific community is in agreement (except for a few who have religious or other reasons for ignoring the scientific facts). Ironically, not even the Bible actually supports these claims. They come from another passage in another part of the Bible where it says a day to God is like a thousand years. Long ago someone multiplied a thousand years by the number of days of creation in Genesis and used that as the age of the Earth. The problem is that the two passages are not even related to each other, and if anything, actually suggests that creation did not occur in six literal days and was much longer than that.
It is now obvious that Quran is in accord with scientific theory. After reading threads in the forum that claim otherwise, the information Muslims are reading is primarily coming from Christian Creationists who are posting their viewpoints all over the internet. There is no scientific debate like they are claiming there is, the scientific community is in agreement (except for a few who have religious or other reasons for ignoring the scientific facts). Ironically, not even the Bible actually supports these claims. They come from another passage in another part of the Bible where it says a day to God is like a thousand years. Long ago someone multiplied a thousand years by the number of days of creation in Genesis and used that as the age of the Earth. The problem is that the two passages are not even related to each other, and if anything, actually suggests that creation did not occur in six literal days and was much longer than that.
islamirama
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 4,194
- Reaction score
- 608
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
When it comes to time, it's all relative. We know very well that hot summer days are longer than the cold winter days. No one can deny that. Then there's also the fact, how do you measure a day?
One earth day is measured by the time it takes the earth to rotate on its axis (24hrs), and 1year is equal to time it takes rotate around the sun. A year on Jupiter is almost twelve Earth years. A day on Jupiter, which is the amount of time it takes to spin around once, is much shorter than a day on Earth. The giant planet's day is only about ten hours long, less than half as long as a Earth day.
So when some 12yr old from jupitar says he is only 1yr old, you will have hard time believing him. So again, what is time really and how is it measure and how relative is it? You are thinking in human time frame that it took 6 days rather then on a more grand scale.
So before we can say how long it takes to create earth or universe, the question first begs to be asked is, how long is a day?
So now that we have an idea of how long is a day, lets look at other things.
Well i think that answers that question. But then you say and the books say that it took "millions" of years to create all that. That is being taught as a fact when it is only a theory.
Based on recent observations (see link above), it appears the 2nd theory holds more water stating it would take only thousands of years rather than "over millions of years" for such an event to occur.
But then you might say did God create everything at once? No, everything was done in stages. Look at earth for example...
Notice how it says "four days equal", that shows that the days are not always equal, and God can stretch them as long as He wants or shorten them as much as He wants like our summer/winter days.
So anyways, based on the above Quranic verses, that is what we believe islamically and it seems science is slowly getting there but still has lot to learn and perfect it's theories before it can be as sure as we are with the Quran.
Last edited:
Science101
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 242
- Reaction score
- 22
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Agnosticism
Other cultures no doubt found dinosaur fossils and wondered what they were. That does not mean they were alive back then. That would be like someone using a modern book on dinosaurs as proof that dinosaurs (besides birds) are still alive today.
I own a tracksite where hundreds of footprints have been found in many layers. Never once was a human found. The Paluxy River tracks that were claimed to have been of humans only have three toes and are of a dinosaur that has already been identified. All claims that human prints have been found with dinosaurs have been proven to be a hoax, they are not true.
Kent Hovind suffers from a mental illness that makes him a very poor source of information. Please stay away from anything he has been claiming. He, like others, are claiming that the Bible describes dinosaurs (often as a way to claim that humans and dinosaurs coexisted) but well researched Biblical scholars will tell you this:
http://www.gracecathedral.org/enrichment/brush_excerpts/brush_20050802.shtml
You are a bright person. Take a very good look at the evidence, you will find that what scientists say is true. And never once was human skeletons found mixed with dinosaurs. Never, ever, did that happen.
Science101
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 242
- Reaction score
- 22
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Agnosticism
Islamirama, I'll try to explain another way so we get in the ball-park without needing fancy science to take a good guess at the age.
Millions of years makes sense, using simple logic on what can be seen in my area. For example in my yard is almost 200 million (according to scientists using dating techniques) year old lake mud that slowly accumulated in thin layers until it was over a kilometer deep into the ground, the depth needed to press it into stone. The Earth's crust was pulling apart making a giant crack that slowly got wider, and the mud that was in it was able to sink ever deeper as new mud from surrounding mountains filled this basin. Here's a side view of just a small portion of this accumulation of lake mud. Are maybe 1000 layers of different thickness in just the small area shown in this picture.
There are dinosaur footprints on almost every layer we looked at, so this took a very very long time to accumulate. Much longer than thousands of years if each layer is a seasonal flooding event.
After accumulating to an incredible depth, the crust started tilting which slowly raised what was deep underground and pressed into stone into the air. Glacial cycles (each taking thousands of years) kept scraping away what was on top further north (rocks from here are found further north to prove this) and some into the sea. Scrape marks that are made by glaciers are common here, so we know that glaciers were doing the scraping.
All of these events can be seen by studying the local geology. They are "scientific facts" which indicate that dinosaurs were here millions of years ago, not several thousand. And when other dinosaur tracksites in the area are included there were many thousands of footprints found, but never once was any evidence of a human ever found. Also, my location may have been where the only source of water was when it got hot, so humans would have probably been here if they existed back then, but there is no trace of them. My tracksite is one of many lines of evidence that humans did not coexist with dinosaurs, and the Earth has to be millions of years old (not thousands). This can be seen with our eyes, do not need fancy dating techniques to infer this.
Millions of years makes sense, using simple logic on what can be seen in my area. For example in my yard is almost 200 million (according to scientists using dating techniques) year old lake mud that slowly accumulated in thin layers until it was over a kilometer deep into the ground, the depth needed to press it into stone. The Earth's crust was pulling apart making a giant crack that slowly got wider, and the mud that was in it was able to sink ever deeper as new mud from surrounding mountains filled this basin. Here's a side view of just a small portion of this accumulation of lake mud. Are maybe 1000 layers of different thickness in just the small area shown in this picture.
There are dinosaur footprints on almost every layer we looked at, so this took a very very long time to accumulate. Much longer than thousands of years if each layer is a seasonal flooding event.
After accumulating to an incredible depth, the crust started tilting which slowly raised what was deep underground and pressed into stone into the air. Glacial cycles (each taking thousands of years) kept scraping away what was on top further north (rocks from here are found further north to prove this) and some into the sea. Scrape marks that are made by glaciers are common here, so we know that glaciers were doing the scraping.
All of these events can be seen by studying the local geology. They are "scientific facts" which indicate that dinosaurs were here millions of years ago, not several thousand. And when other dinosaur tracksites in the area are included there were many thousands of footprints found, but never once was any evidence of a human ever found. Also, my location may have been where the only source of water was when it got hot, so humans would have probably been here if they existed back then, but there is no trace of them. My tracksite is one of many lines of evidence that humans did not coexist with dinosaurs, and the Earth has to be millions of years old (not thousands). This can be seen with our eyes, do not need fancy dating techniques to infer this.
islamirama
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 4,194
- Reaction score
- 608
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Science101,
I just noticed something from your postings and my postings. My last posting says (Quran) that earth and heavens were created in 6 days, so the posting speaks of how long it took to create all that. Based on recent discovery (also included in my last post), the 2nd theory is more close to fact that it would take 1000s of years to create a planet rather then millions of years. So it seems my post and recent scientific observations of galaxies forming seem to parallel with each other rather than contradict.
You might be right as well when you say millions of years old dinosaurs or what not. Because my post discussed how long it took to create, not how long has it been since creation. We don't now actually how long as the earth been around or our own galaxy. In fact, the universe is so vast and yet it is still expanding as we speak. So many galaxies are just a few days old while others maybe millions of years old. As for dinosaurs being on earth same time as humans, no one honestly knows. We just don't have enough evidence to say they were there or they were not there together. What we do know is that Quran says Allah created ALL forms of Beasts and scattered them all over earth. We humans are a young race, it's very possible that the dinosaurs came before our time came to reside on the earth or it could equally be possible that we co-existed with the dinosaurs. In other words, at this point in time, we can't not say one way or the other for certain. One thing I will say is that Humans were not tiny little creatures compared to dinos as science depicts us like little cavemen.
I just noticed something from your postings and my postings. My last posting says (Quran) that earth and heavens were created in 6 days, so the posting speaks of how long it took to create all that. Based on recent discovery (also included in my last post), the 2nd theory is more close to fact that it would take 1000s of years to create a planet rather then millions of years. So it seems my post and recent scientific observations of galaxies forming seem to parallel with each other rather than contradict.
You might be right as well when you say millions of years old dinosaurs or what not. Because my post discussed how long it took to create, not how long has it been since creation. We don't now actually how long as the earth been around or our own galaxy. In fact, the universe is so vast and yet it is still expanding as we speak. So many galaxies are just a few days old while others maybe millions of years old. As for dinosaurs being on earth same time as humans, no one honestly knows. We just don't have enough evidence to say they were there or they were not there together. What we do know is that Quran says Allah created ALL forms of Beasts and scattered them all over earth. We humans are a young race, it's very possible that the dinosaurs came before our time came to reside on the earth or it could equally be possible that we co-existed with the dinosaurs. In other words, at this point in time, we can't not say one way or the other for certain. One thing I will say is that Humans were not tiny little creatures compared to dinos as science depicts us like little cavemen.
Science101
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 242
- Reaction score
- 22
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Agnosticism
You made some good points that relate to the religious aspects. How much time passed since the "creation" is not mentioned. So that is good question for science to answer. And in no way would that hurt religion. Even Christians have adapted to the modern science, only a relatively small number are fighting it. Evolution is taught at local Catholic schools.
Scientists are now gathering evidence from fossils and genomes that indicate humans came about 60 million years after dinosaurs. You are correct that there is a lot we still don't know, but I think science has a good idea on that timeline. And since birds are actually small dinosaurs I guess we could say that the two coexist together. But the giants with claws instead of wings are all gone which is a good thing because they would have long ago eaten us!
From what has already been discovered, mammals (have fur and glands that secrete milk) took over the planet after the large dinosaurs died out. With dinosaurs around they ruled the planet but after their extinction mammals took over for them. It's a very striking mass extinction, in fact paleontologists actually measure time from one mass extinction event to another because it's so easy to see in the strata around the world. Below a certain point it's all dinosaur remains. Then there is a layer that contains the metal iridium which suggests an asteroid impact that filled the sky with dust and debris. Then right above that are no dinosaurs at all, instead mammals are found and they are quickly evolving to fill the niches (places where there is a way to get food) that the dinosaurs once filled. Then way above that, in the uppermost layers, there are the primates (five finger with thumb for grasping, flat nails instead of claws, unique bone structure, etc) and at the very topmost layers are early human remains. It's a progression that is hard to argue against but those who do not want to accept this evidence are trying to confuse us about what scientists have already found.
Here's a good website that biologists around the world contribute their data to. It shows the relationship of extant (still alive) animals:
http://www.tolweb.org/tree/
Scientists are now gathering evidence from fossils and genomes that indicate humans came about 60 million years after dinosaurs. You are correct that there is a lot we still don't know, but I think science has a good idea on that timeline. And since birds are actually small dinosaurs I guess we could say that the two coexist together. But the giants with claws instead of wings are all gone which is a good thing because they would have long ago eaten us!
From what has already been discovered, mammals (have fur and glands that secrete milk) took over the planet after the large dinosaurs died out. With dinosaurs around they ruled the planet but after their extinction mammals took over for them. It's a very striking mass extinction, in fact paleontologists actually measure time from one mass extinction event to another because it's so easy to see in the strata around the world. Below a certain point it's all dinosaur remains. Then there is a layer that contains the metal iridium which suggests an asteroid impact that filled the sky with dust and debris. Then right above that are no dinosaurs at all, instead mammals are found and they are quickly evolving to fill the niches (places where there is a way to get food) that the dinosaurs once filled. Then way above that, in the uppermost layers, there are the primates (five finger with thumb for grasping, flat nails instead of claws, unique bone structure, etc) and at the very topmost layers are early human remains. It's a progression that is hard to argue against but those who do not want to accept this evidence are trying to confuse us about what scientists have already found.
Here's a good website that biologists around the world contribute their data to. It shows the relationship of extant (still alive) animals:
http://www.tolweb.org/tree/
Science101
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 242
- Reaction score
- 22
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Agnosticism
And here is the current cladogram of dinosaurs that scientists now have.
Early dino's (found at my tracksite) are at top, what they evolved into shown below that.
This is the link in case it's easier to see, but it's still a big graphic!
http://www.gavinrymill.com/dinosaurs/Cladogram/CladogramComplete.jpg
http://www.gavinrymill.com/dinosaurs/cladogram.html
Early dino's (found at my tracksite) are at top, what they evolved into shown below that.
This is the link in case it's easier to see, but it's still a big graphic!
http://www.gavinrymill.com/dinosaurs/Cladogram/CladogramComplete.jpg
http://www.gavinrymill.com/dinosaurs/cladogram.html
Last edited:
