Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Muhammed Ali

Veteran Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Muhammed Ali

  1. The little details do make a difference. Many worldviews are composed of an accumulation of flawed supporting points. If all or many of those supporting points are flawed, then the whole worldview is in trouble. Even many atheists will agree with you that there are some people working towards a religiously prophesied system. One they will disagree with you about is the actual power and influence of these people.
  2. There are some websites which give very long explanations about how these bars equal 666. The problem is their justifications are far-fetched to say the least. However even if the bars did equal 666 it doesn't justify the belief in a mass-controlling NWO because: 1, It may be a simple coincidence. If you can find 666 in a majority of similar patterns or codes (QR codes, encryption algorithms, phone numbers etc) then you have an argument worthy of consideration, but if 666 is only in a minority of patterns then it's wrong to derive any meaning from it. Most people who prescribe to such beliefs find a pattern in a few things and ignore the fact that the pattern does not exist elsewhere. Numerologists do this type of thing all the time. To be clearer: If 666 was in barcodes but 345 was in QR codes and 786 was in some WiFi ISO standards then you would have no right to only use the bar codes as justification for your claim. 2, It could be a joke. Someone thought it was funny to put 666 in the barcode. 3, Even it was done with evil intent, it does not mean the NWO control our lives. Some evil people putting 666 in barcodes doesn't mean they have the power that some people think they do.
  3. Can you please explain how two bars equals 6?
  4. No, it's exactly what you would expect. How can the expected be considered exceptional? It would be odd if the virus killed the young and spared the old. For you religious conspiracy theorists: Maybe God wants to kill the old so that wealth gets transferred to the young and conservative voting old people have less influence in the next elections. It's not my belief, but you can theorize in many ways.
  5. This pandemic makes Trump look bad. He has been gloating about the stock market since his first few weeks in office and now it's lost all its gains. This along with numerous other things has been bad for Trump's agenda. To attribute an act of God to humans could be a sin under some conditions.
  6. Those countries don't have places like Qom, where a virus can spread a lot faster. Hence less testing for cases.
  7. I will let you have the last say and leave it at that. God bless.
  8. Why have they waited so long? Do you think they will come after you and other exponents of truth?
  9. Why don't they shut down that website?
  10. What if you are one of them and you are here to divert us from the bigger truth? You are part of the conspiracy. Or maybe they have fooled you into worrying about this virus when there is another hidden attack coming. Maybe I am one of them.
  11. Here are some of the different theories that I have been told so far: The Chinese created it to kill the the poor (I think he also mentioned African nations in particular). The Americans to kill the Iranians and Chinese. The democrats to besmirch Trump (this one I wasn't told but I read it on Twitter). The Russians because they have a low number of infections. The Chinese for population control. God wants to punish the Chinese for their oppression of the Uyghurs, and he believes the forwarded WhatsApp message that the Uyghurs are immune to it. People like to create theories to fit into the own worldview.
  12. I don't think you understood my post. Read my response to this post: I think you misunderstood. I don't deny the moral depravity of the world leaders. There are many evil people in power. However, I object to two things: 1, The refusal to even consider alternate explanations, even when those explanations are more plausible. 2, The attribution of excessive ability on behalf of the powerful. Addressing point No. 2 first: If you wish to argue your case from an Islamic perspective, then consider that Allah has never given the bad people abilities which would render them capable of mass control. Shakir 4:76: "Those who believe fight in the way of Allah, and those who disbelieve fight in the way of the Shaitan. Fight therefore against the friends of the Shaitan; surely the strategy of the Shaitan is weak." This goes against all these mass-control conspiracy theories. There is no way Allah would give the evil people so much power. Conspiracies do happen and the evil do plot, but their power is limited. People love these theories for two reasons: 1, They are more interesting than the mundane and boring more plausible theories. 2, They need a way to justify the failings of their own group. E.g. I know a Sunni who thinks that Iran is secretly allied with Israel because he can't understand why the Sunni nations are so weak compared to them. He thinks all animosity between Iran and the USA is nothing but a performance of fiction. History taught to us by Islamic scriptures shows us that the evil leaders were never that powerful. And even among them were righteous individuals who lived with them. E.g. Prophets Musa and Yusuf (pbut). The powerful were not even capable of discovering that Prophets lived with them who knew of their workings. It would take a tremendous amount of ability for a government to create and transmit a virus. The hardest part would be keeping it a secret (because of the number of people involved). If they have such grand abilities then why do they not stop people like you posting online? Why not kill all those that oppose them? Why show much skill in one area and sheer incompetence in another? And if they are willing to create a virus to kill Iranians (or whoever), then why didn't they make it target only certain races? Or make it time or region limited? If this virus is man-made then it is more likely to be done by a very small rouge group rather than a large one. Because it is harder for a large group to keep this type of secret. Although I don't believe it is man-made. Point No. 1: When other explanations are possible then we shouldn't rule them out. Especially if they require fewer assumptions. If you are inclined to believe that it is man-made, then don't completely rule out that it isn't. Be open-minded.
  13. They had the ability to make this virus but the inability to stop you exposing them?
  14. I am so sorry, I don't have the time right now and I don't think it is a priority. What you just quoted from him in no way necessitates biblical creationism. As I said in a previous post, not believing in intermediate forms doesn't necessitate not believing in common descent. E.g. saltation is an explanation. He may not believe in common descent but I don't see it in those quotes. Now the real question is: Does Meyer consider Behe a proponent of ID? If he does then uncommon descent is for him not a requisite of ID.
  15. You know that isn't a valid argument. In many multi-faceted theories there are differences of opinion. And that itself doesn't allow you to reject the whole theory. Agreed. But those credentials don't have to be formal degrees; and having them doesn't imply knowledge.
  16. @iCenozoic There are two fundamental problems with how you speak about the subject: 1, You are doing what a certain author described as unspeak. People who believe in God have for millennia used words such as creation and intelligence in terms the relation of God to the universe (and whatever else that is created). God is the creator and He is intelligent. You and some of the neo-Atheists are wanting people to give these words negative connotations by limiting their use to certain Biblical narratives. 2, By disparaging the ID movement, you are not allowing people to take anything from them. It shouldn't be all or nothing.
  17. Could you quote Meyer himself, instead of quoting someone who is interpreting Meyer? I don't really know if Meyer believes that God intervened in the universe and caused the Cambrian explosion to occur. And if that was his belief, then it doesn't rule out belief in evolution in other areas of speciation. It is possible to believe in both. In fact a person could believe that the creatures of the Cambrian did not have any ancestors, but also believe that they were created naturalistically without divine intervention (and God set the initial conditions of the universe). Or they could believe that they evolved via saltation. Or they evolved very rapidly via numerous pre-planned mutations which could not have occurred randomly. Believing that the Cambrian explosion is evidence for intelligent design and evidence against neo-Darwinian (successive random mutations) evolution, doesn't imply biblical style creationism.
  18. It's irrelevant. He doesn't need to have any formal qualifications or write any papers for us to consider his arguments. Just like you don't need to be a Muslim scholar to disagree with Islam. Do you keep using formal qualifications as some sort of proof? If that is really the case then why did you deceptively choose one particular interpretation and attribute it to all ID believers?
  19. Misleading quote. Even the most prominent ID proponents reject your claim: http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/intelligent-design-is-not-anti-evolution-2/
  20. You know very well that many scientists reject neo-Darwinian evolution (e.g. Michael Behe - who does believe in evolution). A philosopher or any sufficiently informed person has every right to reject weak theories, especially when they are ideologically motivated. E.g. many non-psychiatrists rightfully disagree with the excessive use of mediation for mental illnesses. I mentioned Nagel so that those reading would look him up. He is one of the world's most prominent atheist philosophers. Whatever he or any scientist believes should never be an infallible authority over intelligent humans. Having a degree doesn't make someone any good at their subject: https://medium.com/incerto/the-intellectual-yet-idiot-13211e2d0577
  21. You cannot appreciate design unless you see examples of 'imperfection'. These 'imperfections' reciprocate the existence of design. You cannot have mountains without valleys. "Imperfections" create a perfect world. You could have asked this question about anything, e.g. death, genetic illnesses, natural disasters etc. Since when has imperfection indicated non-design? When you play a video game with bugs, do say it wasn't deigned? Even if I was an atheist, I wouldn't believe in the nonsense of neo-Darwinian evolution. Even Thomas Nagel doesn't. And there is a lot more that could be said.
  22. The books of rijal are used to authenticate the ahadith. What is used to authenticate the accounts of rijal?
  • Create New...