With regards to the last question in this session when Dawkins was asked what his thoughts were about how to accomplish breaking into the 'muslim market' with the theory of evolution, I just want to point out for the record that theories of evolution were being developed and taught in islamic societies as early as the 8th century:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicine_in_m...l_Islam#Zoology

Also many muslims are extremely proud of the fact that they believe the Qur'an is in accordance with Evolution, the big bang theory and they quote passages of the Qur'an which allude to these subjects and many others such as embryology and cite them as proof that the Qur'an is divine. Just want to mention that because I think it is forgotten that not only were muslims among the first recorded societies to develop theories of evolution which influenced Darwin and others, many also believe it is quite realistic to believe in them and also the Qur'an.

I think some anti-theists would sometimes like to paint all theists with the same brush and colour in religions and those who follow them (whose beliefs vary widely) as it suits them.

And just look at where your wonderful culture/religion is today. A beacon of peace, scientific breakthroughs, equality and understanding.

Gimme a break.

Even if what you're implying is true, wouldn't that just show everyone that Islam is a backwards, devolving culture? We live in the 21st century and you're patting yourself on the back for the work of a few scholars from the 12th century?

If Islam is so wonderful, enlightening and scientific -- explain the fact that the entire Arab world consistantly publishes less books and offers less Nobel laureates than the tiny speck of land in the middle east known as Israel?

Well, lets face it. In the distant past, certain places in the middle east which are now governed by muslim theocracies developed some of the greatest scientific breakthroughs.... that is until fundamentalist religion and religious politics suppressed all future breakthroughs. Now these same countries are vacuums of scientific advancement, offering next to nothing in modern scientific fields. The reasons for this are quite clear, and so are the outcomes.


As long as a person uses myth to fill a mystery they will be at odds with science. It is that simple, and it is fitting to paint in such bold strokes.


Of course religions will agree that evolution exists. To do otherwise would spell the early death of any religion. Either that, or a person becomes so loosely religious that they become interchangeable with any atheist. We must not forget that there are no holy books cite evolution as an aspect of creation in any creation myth. The interchangeability between religious creation and evolution was a convenient afterthought due to the modern intervention of science, and it has all the trappings of an easy lie. Any religious person who accredits their god of evolution does so outside of their religious teachings.

Besides, science doesn't need religion. Meanwhile, religion needs science. Think about that.

Dawkins is asked at the end of this video clip, how evolution might "break into the muslim market". Dawkins suggest that Islam could have some sort of reformation where the Qur'an is no longer taken literally.

My points are two. Not only do many muslims believe evolution is in accordance with the Qur'an (and referenced in it - one of God's names they translate as 'The Evolver'), theories of evolution were being developed and taught in Islamic societies ten centuries before Darwin 'shocked the world' - that is all the while they were being governed by muslim theocracies.

I also resent the fact that you consider that 'I am patting myself' on the back, labeling me a muslim it seems. Using your logic, you must be an Israeli as you allude to the number of Nobel laureates this country offers.



Here again is the anti-theist position that it is religion which impedes the pursuit of knowledge. They want it to be the truth so they imagine it is. It has on the other hand been suggested that it was Islam which offered a stability in societies which allowed a pursuit of knowledge to thrive.

Here is an incomplete list of of muslim scientists who lived in muslim theocracies at the time they practiced their sciences, among them - the father of chemistry, a pioneer of pharmacology, a pioneer of peer review, a pioneer of obstetrics, a pioneer of neurosurgery, father of modern medicine, father of circulatory physiology, a pioneer of bacteriology, a pioneer of biomedical research in space, the father of robotics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_scientists

You can of course be forgiven for not understanding the contributions muslims have made to the sciences as these contributions are often overlooked or conveniently forgotten in the history books taught in western schools.

Hehe, WOW. Look at all those Muslim scientists! A whole list even! Congrats.

Now compare that to the amount of atheist scientists. Now THAT is a list! Here is one example...

from http://www.nwcreation.net/atheism.html


That is Just biology alone. 5.5%?! Holy shit. That means that the list you posted showing Muslim scientists is dwarfed by the massive amount of atheist biologists in the National Academy of Science ALONE!

... then we go on to every other branch of science.

Easily, the majority of scientists in the west are atheist, and I am afraid that list is too large to take up a wiki page.

Since you like to quote wiki, here is what it says on Muslim science...


Or, perhaps you think wiki is spreading false propaganda about the illustrious findings of Islamic science? Come on man. Here is the rest of the world, free of religious or cultural bias, FACTS remain FACTS.

You are talking about how Islam used to be. In the past Islam embraced Science, at a time when Christianity did not. However that has changed.

http://godbegone.blogspot.com/2008/06/isla...sh-science.html

http://www.scribd.com/doc/10211010/Jewish-vs-Muslims

Whoa. Those numbers are staggering. This one is particularly telling...

Perhaps this is more of the anti-Islamic global conspiracy... or perhaps there is a genuine issue with education and scientific output of Muslim theocracies. Ummmm.... paging Dr.Occum!

Hehe, I knew you would get that Morph.

lol, hahahahaha ahahhhaha. please, dnt go there. You people are HORRIBLE! And the guy who written it, is an idiot. Who the hell writes about these sort of things comparing different religions input on science. especially differing them on a piece of Nobel prize.

How about this for a thought. I do know that Muslims have the least number of Nobel prizes. A prize which was made about a 100 year ago. Imagine if the prize was created in the time of when the Islamic religion was created itself. Now compare it to the contribution made by these Muslim people till DATE. Do you want to count how many MUSLIMS contributed to science. Now imagine, having the Nobel prize to be existed before the time of Islam. sssssssssssssssss, I see a different picture really.

till the 18th century, Scientist living in the west used to discuss their inventions, discoveries and indeed scientific breakthroughs with other MUSLIMS scientist and scholars to get their views on them. Till it was passed through Muslim scientist and scholars who would review it, any scientific breakthrough would not be out nor publish. How about that for kick ass scientific news.

This whole thing is so funny, cause its like looking at 6 year old arguing on who's dad is stronger with each one replying "my dad can kick ur dad ass'. NOBODY talks about these things and especially bringing up certain people belonging, to which religion, has won, how many noble prizes and that would show how smart their religion is, Oh please.

These are my two cents, srry if I broke your heart. The sky-daddy told me to tell the truth.

So here we have from my point that not only were theories of evolution and natural selection being developed and taught in Islamic societies ten centuries before Darwin 'shocked the world' but that many muslims believe evolution is in accordance with Qur'an and alluded to within it. I made these points because Dawkins at the end of his speech decided the only way evolution might 'break into the Muslim market' was if they could be persuaded not to take their book literally any more...not true.

Here we have now instead a discussion that has spiraled off into myriad what-about-ery, which discussions often do when points don't want to be agreed with even while they are true, in order to deflect those points.

It started about which groups have produced the largest number of nobel laureates. First it was that Israel has produced more than muslim countries combined. (They claim nine). Then Jews as a whole were mentioned with a number claimed at 163. What this proves I don't know. Are these figures based on ethnic jews or religious jews? and why to this day is Noam Chomsky not among their number? Why was Lise Meitner denied the prize?

Instead Obama gets one for peace a day after his pentagon announced that it was accelerating delivery of the most lethal weapons in the US arsenal short of nuclear weapons - a 15 ton bomb designed to destroy hidden weapons bunkers buried underground and shielded by 10,000 pounds of reinforced concrete intended to blow up fortified sites like those used by Iran and North Korea. Previously Nobel prizes have been awarded to Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Henry Kissinger, Menachem Begin, Shimon Peres, and Yitzhak Rabin. Of course not everyone will agree that these are notorious warmongers but four of these names are also listed in the list of 163 jewish award winners. But again, what does this prove?

Of the 809 Nobel Laureates - 35 have been women. Of the 809 Nobel Laureates I have found a list of 35 marked as atheists (which I'm sure many will disagree with). But again what does any of this prove and what has it got to do with the fact that muslims were developing theories of evolution ten centuries before Darwin 'shocked the world' and that many muslims believe the theory and that it is not only in accordance with the Qur'an but alluded to within it. This I don't know but I'm sure many will continue to chime in.

The point is Islam is now a bastion of ignorance just as fundamentalist Christianity is today. Creationism is rearing its ugly head within the muslim world as well. Maybe islam was a beacon of (semi) rational thought an age ago, but not so any more.

The point of the matter is that religion is now an extremely damaging force. Fundamentalist religion forces people to believe in an all powerful beardy man, teaching them that the world was created, all without the slightest stitch of evidence. Not only do the religious want their flock to believe this, they try to push these values into mainstream science as though they are valid scientific theories and ideas, thus poisoning the wellspring of knowledge that has been accumulated today.

All of the defenders of Muslim science are enforcing my point here. Muslim theocracies USED TO BE great contributors of science, which everyone here has previously stated. They no longer are. We all agree with this point.

The numbers support this fact. This fact is not debatable. To say that Muslim countries are currently great contributors of science is a non-starter.

This is not anti-Islamic. Any religion could be at fault here, and frankly all religions are completely interchangeable. This is also not Jews vs. Muslims, as ANY first world country would have trumped a middle eastern theocray in terms of scientific output. Stop being so sensitive about people criticizing Islam. There is a lot to be said about positive representation and emotional maturity.

On a personal note, I am just as anti-Islamic as I am anti-Christian as I am anti-religion. I am pro-culture and pro-mythology, and the last thing I want is to remove religion from the world. I just want it out of schools, universities, the legal system, etc. THAT is my level of anti-religion, just so you know. Besides, who cares about making it personal since we are discussing hard facts.

What is important to recognize is there is a clear correlation between religiosity and a lack of education. Or, to put it another way.... show me a country with a high level of religiosity and a high national IQ (besides America which is the clear anomaly). Can high intelligence and region co-exist? Yes, they can... but not as often as not.

Or... perhaps you got a bunch of websites to quote from that differ from the ones posted above? Are there websites that show there are MORE universities per capita in Islamic countries, or perhaps MORE Nobel Peace prizes? Perhaps people have a HIGHER IQ in these countries, or perhaps they offer more technical exports than the average country? Id like to see some of those stats please.

This isn't a my country vs. your country because you don't even know what country I'm in! I could be in downtown New Delhi for all you know. This is about FACTS, and about who wishes to promote them and who wishes to distort them. The truth suits me just fine because it favors my position.

This reminds me of the argument that video games are the cause of violent attitudes among children. Children are becoming more violent. They also play more video games. Therefore video games make children violent.

When it suits you, theistic societies are the cause of a lack of intelligence, when it doesn't suit you - it's an anomaly. You might as well draw a parallel between intelligence and arable land and call it an anomaly when the figures don't match. You have already mentioned the 163 Jews which have won the Nobel prize. Were these ethnic Jews only?

But back to my original point. The fact remains that there is no reason for muslims to treat the Qur'an and evolution as incompatible - not only do many muslims believe the theory of evolution, muslims were developing and teaching theories of evolution as early as the the 8th century - that's ten centuries before Darwin 'shocked the word'.

And still, you're going around in circles. The fact of the matter is that islam is no longer the beacon of knowledge and understanding that it used to be. Creationism is rearing its ugly head within this religion as well. PLUS the fact that just as the majority of other religions, islam is forced upon people either through already installed theocracy or through the religious wanting the majority of any given populace to live under it's rule.

Islam had an idea of evolution but they didn't exactly have a sound theory regarding it. They still believed that a almighty sky daddy created everything as well as the belief that humans are not evolved from anything. Darwins idea is definitely much more comprehensive, and a whole lot more logical.

So, Dawkin's statement near the end still holds a lot of ground as islam today really does not concern itself with rationality and logic (as any religion).

I'm not going around in circles at all. I only had the one point to make. Then came the what-about-ery and the discussion has spiraled into an argument that because of their religious beliefs, theistic societies produce people with with less intelligence than those without religion. You say Islam didn't have a sound theory of evolution and that they held the belief that humans are not evolved from anything. Here is one passage from Ibn Khaldun's 'The Muqaddimah, an introduction to history'




Yes, not the same theory of evolution that we understand today, but staggering that he drew these conclusions from his observations when he did.

I think you are making our point for us MZ3.






Thanks.

Darwin even outlines the history of evolutionary thought in the preface of On the Origin of Species. Starting with the Greeks, that's pre-Muslim. This however is vastly different from Darwins discovery of the mechanism of Natural selection.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_evolutionary_thought


The fact is Creationism is here and Islam is a strong proponent of it, why do I say Islam? Because the religion is the sum part of its believers. Although they may not believe in a literal six day creation, they still think God did it is an answer to the real questions, the how questions.

Creationism, Minus a Young Earth, Emerges in the Islamic World

AMHERST, Mass. — Creationism is growing in the Muslim world, from Turkey to Pakistan to Indonesia, international academics said last month as they gathered here to discuss the topic.

But, they said, young-Earth creationists, who believe God created the universe, Earth and life just a few thousand years ago, are rare, if not nonexistent.

One reason is that although the Koran, the holy text of Islam, says the universe was created in six days, the next line adds that a day, in this instance, is metaphorical: “a thousand years of your reckoning.”

By contrast, some Christian creationists find in the Bible a strict chronology that requires a 6,000-year-old Earth and thus object not only to evolution but also to much of modern geology and cosmology, which say the Earth and the universe are billions of years old.

“Views of scientific evolution are clearly influenced by underlying religious beliefs,” said Salman Hameed, who convened the two-day conference here at Hampshire College, where he is a professor of integrated science and humanities. “There is no young-Earth creationism.”

But that does not mean that all of evolution fits Islam or that all Muslims happily accept the findings of modern biology.

Read more...

We have Islamic scholars to thank for preserving the knowledge of The Greeks etc, but sadly these individuals and their thoughts/beliefs are gravely missing from this world currently. Instead we have crooks like Adnan Oktar aka Harun Yahya spreading lies to the Ummah and they are buying it hook line and sinker.

" Creationist are deeply enamored of the fossil records because they have been taught...by each other.." just realized how funny Richard Dawkins can be....

He has brought sarcasm to a fine art.
Science is finding answers to questions, Religion (especially Creationism) is finding questions to fit the pre-ordained "answer".
Having been a theologian (DSc) for over six decades, I get really pissed off when I hear fundies parroting "All the answers are in the bible", when they don't specify the question.
Religion is man's way of coping with the unknown, Science reveals the workings of the unknown, which is why Religion - especially christianity - demonise science in all its field, as (in their eyes) their "god" is diminished with each discovery.
Personally, I ditched organised religion 24 years ago, which was the best move I ever made.
Religions are for Man, not Man for religion.

Absolutely true on all counts.
Baghdad was built by the Abbasid caliph al-Mansur in 762 on the western bank of the Tigris River, opposite an old Iranian village also named Baghdad. The original city was round, with three concentric walls. The innermost wall enclosed the palace of the caliph, the second wall defined the army quarters, and the homes of the people occupied the outermost enclosure. The merchants' quarters, or bazaars, were located outside the city walls. Within the next half century the city reached a peak of prosperity and influence under the caliph Harun ar-Rashid, whose reign is celebrated in the famous tales of the Arabian Nights. During this period the city expanded to the eastern bank of the Tigris, which later became the heart of Baghdad. Although past its zenith after Harun's time, Baghdad remained an important center of trade and culture for more than four centuries. The decline of Baghdad began when Hulagu, the grandson of the Mongol conqueror Genghis Khan, sacked the city in 1258, putting an end to the Abbasid caliphate.
The reason why Baghdad was built was to be a place of learning and research. ALL were welcome, regardless of religion, race, colour or sex.
After the first Crusade, Islam became radicalised and religion took precedence over the pursuit of knowledge. Thus the advances in all fields of science, mathematics and music, ground firmly to a halt.
Thank you Pope Urban II, the role model of George Wa(l/n)ker Bush.
Before you, Islam lived in total harmony with all other beliefs (and non-belief) and indeed protected them.