What's new

Milky Way Doubles Its Mass

The Dawn Blog Blog Archive The science of farce
BY NADEEM F. PARACHA

As a teenager in the early 1980s, I still remember a conversation I overheard between two cops posted just outside my grandfather’s office. It was in Punjabi and went something like this:

First cop: “Pakistan is about to make an atom bomb.”

Second cop: “No, I think we already have it.”

First cop: “Not yet, because I have heard we still do not have the atoms required to make the bomb.”

Second cop: “We do not have atoms?”

First cop: “No, they are on their way from China.”

Second cop: “Yes, China has a lot of atoms, that’s why America is against Pak-China friendship.”

First cop: “Yes, they do not want China to export atoms to Pakistan.”

Whenever I think about this conversation, I smile. These were simple police constables trying to talk nuclear physics. Lord knows what they thought atoms looked liked; in all probability to them atoms might be steely ball bearings that are fitted in a big metallic shell which then dropped from a plane, explodes.

Nevertheless, even though their chatter conformed to the distinct political paranoia of the Cold War era, they remained simple, half-literate men, somewhat endearingly trying to make sense about what the whole ‘atom bum’ hoopla was all about.

However, what was funnier in this respect did not have to do with simple people, but so-called scientists. The following episode might have dissolved into history had not Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy reminded us about it in his excellent first book, ‘Islam & Science: Religious orthodoxy and the battle for rationality’.

In one of the chapters of this engrossing commentary on the fall of ‘universal science’ and rational thought in the annals of scholarship in Muslim countries, Dr. Hoodbhoy tells us how in the mid-1980s, millions of rupees were dished out by certain oil-rich Arab countries and the Machiavellian Ziaul Haq dictatorship in Pakistan, to hold lavish seminars in Islamabad dedicated to celebrate (or worse, ‘prove’) the validity of ‘Islamic science.’

Before the late 1970s, Islamic science usually meant the exemplary work produced in the fields of mathematics, geometry, astronomy, chemistry and philosophy by a number of noted Muslim academics and scholars between the eighth and fourteenth century CE. In other words, it was about universal science practiced by objective men who also happened to be Muslims.

By the late 1970s however, the whole idea about ‘Islamic science’ began to disintegrate into utter farce. It largely began with a brain wave emitting from the oil-rich and puritanical Saudi monarchy. Suspicious that western education systems and models were producing free thinkers and secularists (or ideas that can threaten the theocratic basis of the monarchy’s power and hold), and repulsed and alarmed by the growth of revolutionary nationalism and socialism in the Muslim world (in the ’60s and ’70s), the Saudi government began pumping in oil dollars in programmes designed to bring Islamic thought at par with western science.

This wasn’t done by putting money into schools, colleges and universities in an attempt to upgrade and modernise their curriculum and teaching standards – instead, the big dollars went into hiring ‘scientists’ whose job it was to generate evidence that ‘secular science and thought’ was inferior to ‘Islamic science.’

As a stream of handpicked western, Pakistani and Arab scientists and doctors, lured in by the promise of big bucks and perks, began making their way into new-found institutions of ‘Islamic science’ in Saudi Arabia, nobody was quite sure as to what ‘Islamic science’ really was.

Renowned cultural critic, author and scientist, Ziauddin Sardar, was one of them, but he soon bailed out after realising that all the Saudis really wanted were ‘cranks’ masquerading as ‘scientists.’

_________________________

The 1977 publication of Maurice Bucaille’s ‘The Bible, Qu’ran and Science’ finally laid out exactly what the new concept of Islamic science meant. The book became a sensational hit in the Muslim world but at the same time left a number of Muslim scientists baffled by what Bucaille was suggesting.

The book is a fascinating read. It claims that various scientific phenomenon discovered by western scientists in the nineteenth and twentieth century had already been predicted and explained in the Quran. One would sit up and take a little more notice of the claims made by Bucaille had he been a bonafied scientist, but he wasn’t.

Maurice Bucaille was a French medical doctor who in 1973 was appointed as the personal physician of Saudi monarch, King Faisal. Unlike an objective scientist, Bucaille’s claims were based not on empirical observation, but rather on his uncritical acceptance of certain Muslim beliefs based on ahadith and theology compiled by one of the most conservative and inflexible ancient Muslim jurists, Imam Ahmed Hanibal and his disciples.

Bucaille faced stern criticism from both western and Muslim scientists, especially Muslim scientists who accused him of misleading Muslim youth and encouraging them to shun the conventional study of modern science just because everything that they needed to know about physics, chemistry, astronomy and biology was in the Quran.

They also suggested that the Quran was primarily a moral guide that actually persuades people to understand God’s world around them, and that this can only be done by studying the sciences and philosophy.

Though Bucaille’s book is shaky and on a soft and uneven ground if and when put against the rigors of conventional empirical science, it set off a mind altering change in the thinking of a majority of Muslims, as well as laying the foundations for a lucrative publishing and video market and industry in the Muslim world.

Impressed by the fantastical claims made by a French Christian doctor, very few Muslims were bothered by the fact that he was on the payroll of the Saudi monarchy, a regime trying to ward off the threat it had faced from various left-leaning nationalist movements in the Muslim world, and the growing influence of western secularism and Soviet communism among the Muslims.

The idea was, that if politics could be ‘Islamised’ (Mauddudi, Qutab, Khomeini), then so could science and (later), economics (banking). Grudgingly recognizing the economic and political advances made by the Jews after World War-II through education, the Arab world, defeated by Israel in 1967 and 1973, tried to come up with their own notion of advancement.

But as mentioned before, this advancement was not really about producing large numbers of highly educated Muslims but rather, a populace fed on empty, feel-good ‘scientific’ claptrap produced by overpaid groups of crackpots calling themselves scientists and economists. And anyway, the new post-Bucaille Muslim mindset had already begun labeling the ‘secular sciences’ as ‘invented by Jews to subjugate the Muslims.’

Bucaille enthusiasts were also not bothered (rather not aware) about the entirely unoriginal make-up of his theory. Many still believe that proving scientific truths from holy books has been the exclusive domain of Muslims.

Very few seemed to know that before Muslims, certain Hindu and Christian theologians had already laid claim to the practice of defining their respective holy books as metaphoric prophecies of scientifically proven phenomenon. They began doing so between the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, whereas Muslims got into the act only in the twentieth century.

Johannes Heinrich’s ‘Scientific vindication of Christianity (1887)’ is one example, while Mohan Roy’s ‘Vedic Physics: Scientific Origin of Hinduism’ is a good way of observing how this thought has actually evolved from the fantastical claims of the followers of other faiths.

________________________

As hybrid secular ideas in Muslim countries such as ‘Arab socialism,’ ‘Islamic socialism’ and democracy began to wither in the event of the Islamic Revolution in Iran (1979), and the eruption of ‘Islamic jihad’ in Afghanistan, the idea behind Islamic science being the celebration of the achievements of ancient and modern Muslim scientists was gradually replaced by unsubstantiated and fancy convolutions being defined as science.

So it was only natural that Pakistan’s military dictator, General Ziaul Haq, heavily influenced and financed by the Saudis, would be the man to green light a seminar of Muslim ‘scientists’ who met in Islamabad in 1986 to unveil the wonders of Islamic science where so-called learned men actually set about discussing things like how to generate energy and electricity from jinns, or how to calculate the speed of heaven, etc.

The message seemed to be, why read books of science, or enter a lab to understand the many workings of God’s nature and creatures – just read the holy book. Forget about all those great Muslim scientists of yore, or Abdus Salam, Einstein and Stephen Hawking. Just get in touch with your friendly neighborhood jinn for all your energy needs.

Such was the nonsense Muslim governments in the 1980s were ‘investing’ their money and efforts in when a majority of Muslim countries were continuing to struggle to up their literacy rates.

This practice sanctified myopia and an unscientific bent of mind in the Muslim world.

Rationalist Islamic scholars have been insisting throughout the twentieth century that the Qur’an is less a book of laws or science, and more an elaborate moral guide for Muslims in which God has given the individual the freewill to decide for him or herself through exerting their mental faculties and striving to gain more empirical knowledge.

Iranian writer, Vali Reza Nasr, is right to mourn the trend today that though most Muslims are quick to adopt western science, they simply refuse to assume a rational scientific mindset.

No wonder then, for example, most Pakistanis still don’t have a clue about what the country’s only Nobel Prize winning scientist, Dr Abdus Salam, got the award for, but many are quick to quote from books written by Harun Yahya and some others, explaining how things like the Big Bang and others are endorsed in the Holy book.

Though such rubbish is thankfully no more a part of the state’s educating agenda (at least not in Pakistan), one still does come across idiocy in which cranks manage to use mainstream media and forums to crank it out, defining sheer drivel as science.

But not always are such folk mere cranks. Some ‘respected scientists’ have also been known to take the Bucailleian tradition and fuse it with some post-9/11 conspiratorial hogwash, as proven recently by Dr. Attur Rehman.
 
.
i'm sick and tired of this reasoning . All religious books are made up of fairy tales . So don't ever mix science with religions

No one is mixing science and religion. You have to understand that advancements in science help us understand the Quran better. The Quranic disacription of embryological stages of Birth, the stacking of clouds and how they subsequently turn into rain, the barrier between salt and sweet water in the oceans are mere miracles which we have only now been able to understand. As to Quran being fairy tale, the Quran itself issues a challange to all mankind to produce one chapter to match it. Secondly try and prove any of the things in the Quran to be incorrect. I am sure you will fail, as people have been trying for 1400yrs.
So in short we use science to understand the Quran better rather than the other way round. The purpose of both are different and Allahs purpose in qouting some facts is entirely to verify the authenticity of the Quran and also force the human beings of all ages and times to understand what this miracle is. I hope i have been able to convey what other posters have been writing.
Araz
 
.
No one is mixing science and religion. You have to understand that advancements in science help us understand the Quran better. The Quranic disacription of embryological stages of Birth, the stacking of clouds and how they subsequently turn into rain, the barrier between salt and sweet water in the oceans are mere miracles which we have only now been able to understand. As to Quran being fairy tale, the Quran itself issues a challange to all mankind to produce one chapter to match it. Secondly try and prove any of the things in the Quran to be incorrect. I am sure you will fail, as people have been trying for 1400yrs.
So in short we use science to understand the Quran better rather than the other way round. The purpose of both are different and Allahs purpose in qouting some facts is entirely to verify the authenticity of the Quran and also force the human beings of all ages and times to understand what this miracle is. I hope i have been able to convey what other posters have been writing.
Araz

No you haven't convey.
 
.
the thread has been derailed, it started with science & now religions have come up.
 
. .
Science is all about information not knowledge and religion is both Information and knowledge....

Does science includes philosophy ?? I think no

Religion includes philosophy as well as science...

Science can be changed religion cannot be

There are no facts in science all assumptions but religion provide things as facts.

No value for words in science but religion has value for words.
 
.
Science can be changed religion cannot be

There are no facts in science all assumptions but religion provide things as facts.

Science is not all assumptions. Science has a methodical way of proving a theory right or wrong. Although individual scientists may have egos, science as a whole is free from bias. Most religions fail in this regard since their tenets were good for around the time they were founded, but are outdated now. But as you said yourself, religion cannot be changed. This obstinacy is the reason why so many people are dying in riots and terrorist attacks.

Again, religion provides things as facts. Therefore, you have no right to question it. Worse, you can get killed in some societies for doing that. I sometimes wonder why the ever benevolent god gave us all brains if we had to follow someone like sheep.
 
.
No one is mixing science and religion. You have to understand that advancements in science help us understand the Quran better. The Quranic disacription of embryological stages of Birth, the stacking of clouds and how they subsequently turn into rain, the barrier between salt and sweet water in the oceans are mere miracles which we have only now been able to understand. As to Quran being fairy tale, the Quran itself issues a challange to all mankind to produce one chapter to match it. Secondly try and prove any of the things in the Quran to be incorrect. I am sure you will fail, as people have been trying for 1400yrs.
So in short we use science to understand the Quran better rather than the other way round. The purpose of both are different and Allahs purpose in qouting some facts is entirely to verify the authenticity of the Quran and also force the human beings of all ages and times to understand what this miracle is. I hope i have been able to convey what other posters have been writing.
Araz

Araz, religion has its place in society, but a non-negotiable document cannot be called scientific by any stretch. It is not about the Quran specifically. All religious books have some sections which were discovered by science much later. But they also have some sections which will make any logical person uneasy. Besides, who is to say the religious texts were not influenced by the folk lores and other common observations of those times? For the most part, that is what they are - observations with an explanation of "because god willed it so".
 
.
No you haven't convey.

Perhaps you would care to indulge in a debate so that we can learn from you rather than posting one liners.Share the pearls of wisdom that you have so that we can all learn from you.
Araz
 
.
Araz, religion has its place in society, but a non-negotiable document cannot be called scientific by any stretch. It is not about the Quran specifically. All religious books have some sections which were discovered by science much later. But they also have some sections which will make any logical person uneasy. Besides, who is to say the religious texts were not influenced by the folk lores and other common observations of those times? For the most part, that is what they are - observations with an explanation of "because god willed it so".

I dont want to side track this debate. Please feel free to open a parallel thread on which we can discuss religion and science. I assure you that i am not avoiding a debate , but just feel that we will side track. Please also bear with me as current work load is not giving me much of a n opportunity to come on the forum.
Araz
 
.
Science is all about information not knowledge and religion is both Information and knowledge....

Does science includes philosophy ?? I think no

Religion includes philosophy as well as science...

Science can be changed religion cannot be

There are no facts in science all assumptions but religion provide things as facts.

No value for words in science but religion has value for words.

everyone is entiled to opnion but honstly your first state ment "Science is all about information not knowledge and religion is both Information and knowledge.... " has to be one of the most stupid post i came across. Sorry but sereiously how do you even make such ausmption.

"Does science includes philosophy ?"
Philosophy of science - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Science can be changed religion cannot be"

Ah i agree you got that point right and thats the Beutie of Science if new evidence comes in scientists change there mind where as when a scientifc theory contridic relegion people go crazy and rant and what not. Some try to amend there belif's with it. take for example evolotuion you'll see relegious people trying to debunk it while some have mend there belifs and say evolution did happen but god made it happen.

"There are no facts in science all assumptions but religion provide things as facts."

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Sereiously turing water into vine , Parting sees , virgin birth,talking snakes. Thoses are facts for you if so please prove them.

"There are no facts in science all assumptions"
jump of a 10 sotry bulding and if you don't fall to the ground due to gravity i will beleive you. and you won't have any problems doing that since gravity is Just a "thoery" after all.

Also no to the person quoting i am not tring to disrespect you or anything you have your opinion on the matter but when you compare science and relegion and say relegion provides logic,reasoning and critical thinking thats hiporcy. I have talked with many relegious beleivers my self and asked em why they beleive in a god and they told me. "Logic has no place in relegion sometimes you have to be illgocial since relegion isn't based on logic or facts its based on faith".

Good day sir
 
.
Religion without science is ignorance. Much of the content of the major Holy books is parable, allegory, and illustrative story, such as Genesis. People don't believe a snake had vocal cords and talked to Eve. The entire Genesis story is a metaphor for the choice of mankind to disobey God. To truly understand the Message, the Word, you need science.

Science without religion is dangerous. Religion, properly interpreted, provides moral guidance which science, by its very definition, lacks. That doesn't make science evil, science is simply observable fact, without "good" or "bad" assigned to it. But science absent of morality can produce horrific weapons, questionable genetic research, people like Josef Mengele. Harvesting fetuses for body parts. Other questionable activities.

That said, hopefully back OT, the knowledge mankind has gained from astronomy in the last 100 years is almost beyond belief. Consider that 100 years ago, there was no concept of a "galaxy." Now, we understand SO much more, and with that knowledge, it is hard not to marvel at the handiwork we (of faith) attribute to God.

I wish I could live for another 500 years, just to witness the fantastic discoveries that await us. And I hope (in my faith) that after I die, the wonders of the universe, time, and space, will be made known to me. I'd love to go back in time to see dinosaurs. I'd love to go forward and see what the future holds, alien races, and the like.
 
.
:cry:Arent we on the collission course with the andromeda galaxy and we then we will all die :cry:
 
.
:cry:Arent we on the collission course with the andromeda galaxy and we then we will all die :cry:

Don't worry. When you are close to death, you won't be afraid of it. The human feeling is analog, not digital, it can't "bounce" from zero to one, and vice versa.
 
.
Durran3

Ahh the Quran discovered everything... The AC that I sleep in during the scorching summers and Algorithms that we use in Computers...

Seriously grow up

I pity you on such thinking. Quran is not sent to assist you in making of luxurious needs. It is sent to us to give a hint of the "bigger picture" which everyone like you fails to see or comprehend. "There are hints for intellectuals" the Quran says.

Please don't use this insulting language again. Post reported.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom