Do you believe in God?

[G.T.Ace]

That's been covered too. The atheists think humans descend from apes, apes from other less evolved apes, and back you go to mammals, less evolved life forms, no life at all, no Earth, no Universe, nothing.

It's a miracle of sorts

All of this is a logical chain of explanations, like Famine posted above.
Makes all a lot more sense than the miracles you believe in.

 

[Hun200kmh]

We have significant evidence that says that humans and apes have a common, earlier ancestor.

Agreed.

We have significant evidence that says that the human-ape ancestor has a common, earlier ancestor with a monkey ancestor.

Agreed.

We have significant evidence that says that all existing mammalian species have a single common, earlier ancestor species.

Agreed.

We have significant evidence that says that all existing species of life have a common, earlier ancestor species.

Agreed.

That's now biochemistry rather than evolution, but there is strong evidence for abiogenesis.

Agreed.

That's now cosmology rather than biochemistry, but we have significant evidence that says the Earth was formed as the result of an accretion disc.

Agreed.

That's now Big Bang theory rather than cosmology, but we have good evidence that says the universe as it is currently structured arose from a rapid expansion of a singularity region of space-time.

And that's not true.

WHOLEHEARTEDLY Agreed.

Oddly, despite all the opportunity afforded by all time, no evidence has ever been presented that contradicts any of the above evidences.

I'd say scientifically "recorded" would be a better choice of words there. But I will agree, in the knowledge that the scientific method commands you to keep your mind open for any evidence that may still present to you.

 

[CodeName]

Scientists have recently discovered that every mountain on earth has a root that goes into the earth several kilometers. This scientific truth was not known to anyone at the time of the revelation of the Qur'an, but the Qur'an alluded to the words of the Most High:

78:6
Have We not made the earth a resting place?

78:7
And the mountains as stakes?

 

[dylansan]

If you're not going to cite your sources or respond to the arguments against your posts, you might as well say "Science has recently proven that God exists." It would have just as much merit.

 

[MarinaDiamandis]

Scientists have recently discovered that every mountain on earth has a root that goes into the earth several kilometers. This scientific truth was not known to anyone at the time of the revelation of the Qur'an, but the Qur'an alluded to the words of the Most High:

78:6
Have We not made the earth a resting place?

78:7
And the mountains as stakes?

Can you start posting sources with your claims please?

Tree'd - good job, science team!

 

[nealcropper]

Famine, how the hell do you know so much about so much?

When your having a discussion do you google a lot? Lol.

 

[Famine]

Scientists have recently discovered that every mountain on earth has a root that goes into the earth several kilometers.

And this is ridiculous nonsense that flies in the face of geology.

I suspect your source for this unscientific gibberish posed as scientific fact is a Qu'ran study website devoted to proving the factual basis of the Qu'ran...

 

[CodeName]

http://www.kaheel7.com/fr/index.php/image-et-verset/165-les-piquets-des-montagnes

 

[Famine]

Thus verifying my suspicions... Notice how he provides no sources either? Ever wondered why?

It's horsecrap - mountains are formed by plate tectonic activity in the crust and they do not have roots.

 

[Joel]

Thus verifying my suspicions... Notice how he provides no sources either? Ever wondered why?

It's horsecrap - mountains are formed by plate tectonic activity in the crust and they do not have roots.

In before "everyone's entitled to their own opinion"

 

[CodeName]

Thus verifying my suspicions... Notice how he provides no sources either? Ever wondered why?

It's horsecrap - mountains are formed by plate tectonic activity in the crust and they do not have roots.

I know but this activity is also visible in the inside of the earth, explaining why it has root.

 

[Famine]

Funny, because we can't see the outside of the Earth from the inside. And because the crust - where the plates are - are their own layer above the Moho and the Mantle (and the Core and the Inner Core), which play no role in non-volcanic mountain formation.

Mountains don't have roots.

 

[TheDrummingKING]

We're chordates - we're in the Phylum of Chordata.
We're mammals - we're in the Class of Mammalia.
We're primates - we're in the Order of Primates.
We're dry-nosed primates - we're in the Suborder of Haplorrhini.
We're simians - we're in the Infraorder of Simiiformes.
We're downward-nostrilled simians - we're in the Parvorder of Catarrhini.
We're apes - we're in the Superfamily of Hominoidea.
We're great apes - we're in the Family of Hominidae.
We're hominine great apes - we're in the Subfamily of Homininae

There are three genuses in homininae - gorillas (Gorilla), chimpanzees & bonobos (Pan) and humans (Homo) - and while there's several species and subspecies of Gorilla and Pan remaining, Homo sapiens is the only living species of Homo left.

Humans are apes, primates, mammals and animals. So I'd suggest he's smoking "reality".

Thanks for giving a much better answer than I could have.

 

[Hun200kmh]

Thanks for giving a much better answer than I could have.

You do understand, however, that there is a difference between humans and non-humans, don't you?

I only say this because, just by reading what Famine wrote, you don't even start to grasp what REALLY makes us different from all other living beings.


PS - Including vegetables.

 

[CodeName]

Funny, because we can't see the outside of the Earth from the inside. And because the crust - where the plates are - are their own layer above the Moho and the Mantle (and the Core and the Inner Core), which play no role in non-volcanic mountain formation.

Mountains don't have roots.

The word root is maybe too much ... In anyway, the verse of Quran doesn't mention root, but the website has wanted maybe to say that. In the case of mountains, root can also be your form of answear by saying that its up the Moho and the mantle.

 

[Hun200kmh]

The word root is maybe too much ... In anyway, the verse of Quran doesn't mention root, but the website has wanted maybe to say that. In the case of mountains, root can also be your form of answear by saying that its up the Moho and the mantle.

I think you should focus on the word "layer", when talking about Moho and Mantle.

Check this out. Layers, not roots:

 

[nealcropper]

Maybe he doesn't know the differnce between a mountain and a volcano.

One could be forgiven for thinking that a volcanoes conduit that is connected to the magma chamber, which in turn may/may not be connected to a few other volcanoes could be misconstrued as a "root".

A mountain however has no magma chamber, but is made by two tectonic plates pushing against each other and pushing each other up. No "root".

 

[MisterWhiskers]

So, I'm homo? Way to make my day, jerks!

 

[Famine]

 

[nealcropper]

So, I'm homo? Way to make my day, jerks!

Errrrrrm.

 

[Hun200kmh]

Ok, if you're not an ape, and not an homo sapiens then you are the missing link!

 

[Doth1s]

So, I'm homo? Way to make my day, jerks!

I wasn't going to scold you thinking you were a young teen, but then I saw that you are well into your twenties. You should know better.

 

[MisterWhiskers]

I wasn't going to scold you thinking you were a young teen, but then I saw that you are well into your twenties. You should know better.

Lighten up, bro! Why so serious?

 

[Azuremen]

Lighten up, bro! Why so serious?

Because it was a joke in incredibly poor taste that didn't seem to be a joke at all.

 

[SagarisGTB]

Funny, because we can't see the outside of the Earth from the inside. And because the crust - where the plates are - are their own layer above the Moho and the Mantle (and the Core and the Inner Core), which play no role in non-volcanic mountain formation.

Mountains don't have roots.

A staunch believer in Pratt's hypothesis, eh?

But even Pratt's hypothesis allows for the existence of low density "roots" in mountainous regions (just a different kind of root). And nevertheless, Airy's hypothesis is still valid in explaining how the crust maintains regional isostatic equilibrium, in fact it is considered a far better model when explaining continental mountain ranges.

So yes, mountains do have "roots". Have you ever studied geology?

Edit: Not that I'm defending the one who says tectonic activity is visible within the earth. Such a claim is obviously preposterous.

 

[CodeName]

Edit: Not that I'm defending the one who says tectonic activity is visible within the earth. Such a claim is obviously preposterous.

I didn't want to say it is visible inside the earth but only that there is a root visible.

 

[SagarisGTB]

I didn't want to say it is visible inside the earth but only that there is a root visible.

Edit: Maybe that's not what you are trying to say. Either way, nothing is "visible" when it comes to the deep earth interior, even when it's not relatively deep. I don't believe it's known how the moho "looks" at depth and whether the change in composition is "visible", and we will likely never know in my lifetime.

 

[CodeName]

Edit: Maybe that's not what you are trying to say. Either way, nothing is "visible" when it comes to the deep earth interior, even when it's not relatively deep. I don't believe it's known how the moho "looks" at depth and whether the change in composition is "visible", and we will likely never know in my lifetime.

Of course but this also I didn't want to say, to understand, I've wanted to say that all these things are known today inside the earth. Not that it's visible by our eyes, but that it is visible by our science

 

[Azuremen]

Of course but this also I didn't want to say, to understand, I've wanted to say that all these things are known today inside the earth. Not that it's visible by our eyes, but that it is visible by our science

Have you actually read any of the posts by Famine on this topic? Because all you are doing is saying you know of these "roots" because you read it on a clearly biased site that doesn't cite sources?

Blind faith indeed.

 

[SagarisGTB]

Have you actually read any of the posts by Famine on this topic? Because all you are doing is saying you know of these "roots" because you read it on a clearly biased site that doesn't cite sources?

Blind faith indeed.

His link is obvious bogus pseudoscience. But Famine isn't technically right either. Orogens do have "roots", as in a thicker crust for the sake of isostatic compensation. In geology, it not uncommon to refer to such thickening as roots.

I didn't look at his link before, it is clearly not geologically valid. That is not the kinds of "roots" I was referring to.