@Aegerine dont you know that the crust stabilize itself under the principle of isostacy. read it up pls

Xmuslim:
TALKING of isostacy. dont you know that mountain is not always required for crust stabiliity in the principle of isostacy?

Again, I dont like back and forth on the same point. I have noted your point and audience have seen my point too. let them decide and let us move on. PEG is a wrong term . a creator of the unverser should have known what best term to use. THE VERSE IS VAGUE. YOU ONLY READ YOUR MEANING INTO IT.

It seems scientific, no objection. nut it is not 100% correct

I am fine since it seems scientific. Muhammad could not have figured that out all by himself many centuries ago in the Arabian desert.

Stability is closely linked to the downward trending roots of the mountains which requires the help of sophisticated geophysical survey very recently to discover.



Finally, you can fasten a wood to a surface with a nail, and there will still be some degree of movement. A peg is not the same as a nut or screw. Therefore, the usage is in order in that verse.

Should I bring the next verse or you do?

Aegerine:



I am fine since it seems scientific. Muhammad could not have figured that out all by himself many centuries ago in the Arabian desert.

Stability is closely linked to the downward trending roots of the mountains which requires the help of sophisticated geophysical survey very recently to discover.



Finally, you can fasten a wood to a surface with a nail, and there will still be some degree of movement. A peg is not the same as a nut or screw. Therefore, the usage is in order in that verse.

Should I bring the next verse or you do?

please do

Xmuslim:
the same way you read meaning into quran, christian can read same meaning to those verses. who define metaphorical and non metaphorical bible verses. what is your criteria

It is very clear to any discerning mind that all those biblical verses were talking in the metaphorical sense. Such metaphorical expression abounds a lot in the Qur'an as well, and would never be interpreted in the face value.


If you think that the "mountains as pegs" herein under cross examination should be taking as an analogy or a metaphor, then kindly supply the likely plausible literary interpretations that they can assume.

For those bible verses, many different understandings and interpretations can be imparted into them.

You are definitely arguing from a biased background, but I am ready for you

Aegerine:



I am fine since it seems scientific. Muhammad could not have figured that out all by himself many centuries ago in the Arabian desert.

Stability is closely linked to the downward trending roots of the mountains which requires the help of sophisticated geophysical survey very recently to discover.



Finally, you can fasten a wood to a surface with a nail, and there will still be some degree of movement. A peg is not the same as a nut or screw. Therefore, the usage is in order in that verse.

Should I bring the next verse or you do?

let;s move on sha. but the bolded has been debunked even by muslim scholars. i posted video about it yesterday. muhammad mixed with othe civilization. He was not isolated in the desert.

Aegerine:



It is very clear to any discerning mind that all those biblical verses were talking in the metaphorical sense. Such metaphorical expression abounds a lot in the Qur'an as well, and would never be interpreted in the face value.


If you think that the "mountains as pegs" herein under cross examination should be taking as an analogy or a metaphor, then kindly supply the likely plausible literary interpretations that they can assume.

For those bible verses, many different understandings and interpretations can be imparted into them.

You are definitely arguing from a biased background, but I am ready for you

lol @ bolded. I dont deny my biase. but I am trying as much as possible to be unbiase which I want you to do too.

you believe firmly in Islam and you will want to defend it. I am in the opposite, so we cant rule out biase completely

Xmuslim:
please do

Qur'an 35 vs 27 ( Discussion on coloured mountains)
What do you have on that?

Aegerine:



Qur'an 35 vs 27 ( Discussion on coloured mountains)

What do you have on that?

perhaps you should quote the text. Though I will be able to reply tomorrow. Kind of bust now

Modified

I just checked the verse. Nothing scientific unless you point out the scientific aspect. Mountain colours are visible to everyone na.

Xmuslim:
perhaps you should quote the text. Though I will be able to reply tomorrow. Kind of bust now

Like wise me.

Tomorrow it is then

Aegerine:



Like wise me.

Tomorrow it is then

OK. Tomorrow. Perhaps you will another verse or point out the scientific aspect of the verse mentioned

Xmuslim:
perhaps you should quote the text. Though I will be able to reply tomorrow. Kind of bust now

Modified

I just checked the verse. Nothing scientific unless you point out the scientific aspect. Mountain colours are visible to everyone na.

Be sincere to yourself. How much do you know about rainbow mountains even as a present day geologist?

I see no need to waste time on this as your reaction is as I had expected. On the surface, it doesn't look much of a scientific discovery, but you cannot a water down the fact that such geological information at that time can never be tied to a guess work

You can as well point out supposed similar information in the bible as you did with the first since you claimed that the Qur'an is copied from there.

By the way, help yourself with these on both issues arising so far:


https://www.google.com/url?q=https://medium.com/%40Marytn/mountains-in-quran-8893ab543d72&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwiwu7Gt0-PrAhVRsaQKHQmGD8IQFjAMegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw0aca3wzqJvYY0S815grs5p


https://www.google.com/url?q=https://lifeinsaudiarabia.net/rainbow-colored-mountains-mentioned-in-the-holy-quran/&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwiwu7Gt0-PrAhVRsaQKHQmGD8IQFnoECAgQBA&usg=AOvVaw0zzdy7O_0E_G3cIHK6UsCj

.

Aegerine:


Be sincere to yourself. How much do you know about rainbow mountains even as a present day geologist?

I see no need to waste time on this as your reaction is as I had expected. On the surface, it doesn't look much of a scientific discovery, but you cannot a water down the fact that such geological information at that time can never be tied to a guess work

You can as well point out supposed similar information in the bible as you did with the first since you claimed that the Qur'an is copied from there.

By the way, help yourself with these on both issues arising so far:


https://www.google.com/url?q=https://medium.com/%40Marytn/mountains-in-quran-8893ab543d72&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwiwu7Gt0-PrAhVRsaQKHQmGD8IQFjAMegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw0aca3wzqJvYY0S815grs5p


https://www.google.com/url?q=https://lifeinsaudiarabia.net/rainbow-colored-mountains-mentioned-in-the-holy-quran/&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwiwu7Gt0-PrAhVRsaQKHQmGD8IQFnoECAgQBA&usg=AOvVaw0zzdy7O_0E_G3cIHK6UsCj

Where did the Qur'an mention rainbow Mountain?

Mountains with multiple colours are everywhere. Haven't you gone for any fieldwork?

How is saying rock have different colours a scientific miracles.

And your references and Islamic blogs. Is that where you take your scientific knowledge from?

I have told you here that mountains doesn't necessarily stabilise the crust. The isostacy theory is against your conclusion about the function of mountain.

Anyway you did as I expected. Look for something that seems scientific ; look for a verse that is vague and insert your interpretation into it.

Dr zakir naik usually make the same erroneous claims

Xmuslim:


Where did the Qur'an mention rainbow Mountain?

Mountains with multiple colours are everywhere. Haven't you gone for any fieldwork?

How is saying rock have different colours a scientific miracles.

And your references and Islamic blogs. Is that where you take your scientific knowledge from?

I have told you here that mountains doesn't necessarily stabilise the crust. The isostacy theory is against your conclusion about the function of mountain.

Anyway you did as I expected. Look for something that seems scientific ; look for a verse that is vague and insert your interpretation into it.

Dr zakir naik usually make the same erroneous claims

.

Xmuslim:


Where did the Qur'an mention rainbow Mountain?

Mountains with multiple colours are everywhere. Haven't you gone for any fieldwork?

How is saying rock have different colours a scientific miracles.

And your references and Islamic blogs. Is that where you take your scientific knowledge from?

I have told you here that mountains doesn't necessarily stabilise the crust. The isostacy theory is against your conclusion about the function of mountain.

Anyway you did as I expected. Look for something that seems scientific ; look for a verse that is vague and insert your interpretation into it.

Dr zakir naik usually make the same erroneous claims

No point going any further with you. I deemed that a waste of time as your close mindedness rose to the heaven. You are only out to waste my time with nothing to offer

Tell me in which of your field work you came across mountains of such colours.

On the mountains as pegs issues, your attempt at discrediting it would hold only if you can proof that mountains roots do not exist. I think you have difficulties in comprehending what a peg is.

Renowned earth scientists regardless of their believes have attested to that. I can only marvel at how much important you think that you are to disproof that .

Peace out.

Aegerine:



No point going any further with you. I deemed that a waste of time as your close mindedness rose to the heaven. You are only out to waste my time with nothing to offer

Tell me in which of your field work you came across mountains of such colours.

On the mountains as pegs issues, your attempt at discrediting it would hold only if you can proof that mountains roots do not exist. I think you have difficulties in comprehending what a peg is.

Renowned earth scientists regardless of their believes have attested to that. I can only marvel at how much important you think that you are to disproof that .

Peace out.

your knowledge of geology is flawed. You are only copying from Islamic blogs.

You keep repeating mountain as peg as if there is a general geologic conclusion that without mountains crust will collapse.

I challenge you to bring an evidence from geologic text (not Islamic blog) that support your claim. You keep going to those blogs looking imaginary miracles. Lol. The verse is vague but you keep breathing your own meaning into it.

On the second point. I now realise that I have wasted my precious time on you. As a geologist, you have never seen rocks with different shades from very dark, to very light, to pink and so on. You have never seen pegmatite vein. How is what is observable in the Arabian anywhere a miracle. You and your Islamic blogs quickly put your words in Allah's mouth and claim he mentioned rainbow Mountain. Can't the author of the Qur'an mention rainbow Mountain if that is what he intend.

Your cowardice and lack of geologic knowledge is outstanding. So it's these two points that you claim are geologic miracles of your sọ called Qur'an? Seek more knowledge outside Islamic blog bro

Xmuslim:
your knowledge of geology is flawed. You are only copying from Islamic blogs.

You keep repeating mountain as peg as if there is a general geologic conclusion that without mountains crust will collapse.

I challenge you to bring an evidence from geologic text (not Islamic blog) that support your claim. You keep going to those blogs looking imaginary miracles. Lol. The verse is vague but you keep breathing your own meaning into it.

On the second point. I now realise that I have wasted my precious time on you. As a geologist, you have never seen rocks with different shades from very dark, to very light, to pink and so on. You have never seen pegmatite vein. How is what is observable in the Arabian anywhere a miracle. You and your Islamic blogs quickly put your words in Allah's mouth and claim he mentioned rainbow Mountain. Can't the author of the Qur'an mention rainbow Mountain if that is what he intend.

Your cowardice and lack of geologic knowledge is outstanding. So it's these two points that you claim are geologic miracles of your sọ called Qur'an? Seek more knowledge outside Islamic blog bro

You made the proposition for us to expounds on Quranic verses of geological implications, and I accepted despite the vividness of your insincerity.

I knew that you are only out to argue and try to disproof them using your own flawed reasons, but i preferred that your hypocrisy be laid bare for all. With your self acclaimed status of an erstwhile Islamic scholar, my erroneous belief was that you are well acquainted my many of such verses as they are almost countless, but you appeared clueless about them as you kept urging me to bring them on. A situation which has casted a big question mark on your acclaimed "Xmuslim" status. If you are a former muslim, and you know as much as you are trying to make us belief, then you should have faired better.

With your acclaimed knowledge of geology, you have faltered by been clueless about a basic concept as mountain roots. Your first argument is nulify the relationship between mountains formations and pegs which a layman can visualise just by understanding that mountains have downward extensions which can be as many times as their suface height, which resembles nailing a peg to a surface.

In one breathe, you said it agrees with present day knowledge of geology, it is scientific but not 100%. In another breathe, you were asking for the relationship between mountains formations and pegs. You earlier claimed about some imaginary civilizations talking about before the Qur'an, and came with some bible verses in parables as the said civilizations that you were talking about. You only withdrew that after your lies have been bursted.

Now tell me, the need to continue with someone like you.


As for the second, I wouldn't say much about. All I can is that your knowledge of geology is remarkable as evident from your inability to differentiate between rocks and mountains. Very pathetic. So pegmatites, Quartz veins, small body of rock exposures is equivalent to brightly coloured mountains to you.

Continue in your delusion of grandeur.

Aegerine:




.

again all your points are imagnaries and according to the meaning you are reading into the Qur'an. I agree that the verse seems scientific but not 100%. Why can't your Qur'an be extremely perfect in it claim. Why is it so verge that anyone can read any meaning into it.

As a geologist you should know that crust is never stable. Claiming peg or whatever is it that Qur'an mention is the perfect description of the relationship between mountain and crust is a fallacy. I still challenge you to bring scientific write up from science source that support your claim.

Go and read the theory of isostasy again. I over hyped you. Was thinking you were going to showcase your geology knowledge, little did I know that your geology knowledge is from Islamic blogs.

I asked you several questions which you successfully ignored. I asked you to describe what you mean by stability. You ignored it. I asked you if the mountain moves or static. How can you say something that's moving is a peg and you are claiming this is 100% perfect description? Why are you intellectually dishonest just to support Qur'an.

my last advice for you is this. Stop learning your science from Islamic blog. It will mislead your scientific understanding. Don't take this advice lightly.

Now to finally burst your burble. The author of the Qur'an does not understand how the earth works at all.

Mountains are usually formed at the convergent zones when oceanic plate get subdued under continental plate. Why was the earth not shaking before the formation of that particular mountain? So saying mountain is the sole reason why the crust seems stable (not shaking like minor earthquake) is not correct.

There are many reasons why there is no random tremor everywhere all the time. Part of it is the balance maintained by the crust itself by complementing the weight all over. Mountain formation is only a part of what temporarily stop the tremor or bigger shaking of the crust crust.

How can you expect me to take your vague verse as a perfect explanation for all these. All these write up are from my head and I'm sure I can't remember everything about geology. What if I open book about it and dig deep. Perhaps your verse would even lost relevancy totally in this aspect of mountain and crust stability

The most funniest part is the rainbow mountain you brought and supported it with another unrelated verse.

Even if the verse mentioned rainbow Mountain, it is nothing fantabulous. If such mountain is not in Saudi, Muhammad and his people travelled a lot, they could have seen similar rock or heard of it from other traders.

Why are you fighting hard to prove that Qur'an is scientifically correct when even learned Muslim scholars have widthraw from this endeavour. It is a rabbit hole my friend. By the time you started seeing verse that clearly contradict science, you will start saying SCIENCE CAN CHANGE or what would you say.

Let me give you one that comes to mind. Qur'an claim that sún set into a mucky mud and hadith also expantiate this. Tell me which of the muds? The sun that is stationary.

Enough said. I can't reply all your erroneous claims. Enjoy your delusion and the brothel paradise Muhammad promised you in advance

I'm tempted to add my own two cents to this topic.

On the subject of earthquake and mountains.

I don't see any correlation between mountains and earth stability. Actually what I see is more of a negative correlation, where landscapes that have the biggest mountains are more prone to earthquakes.

Places like West Africa that experience next to no earthquakes are as a result of being situated away from the tectonic fault lines.
Not unless I'm missing something.

1st image: mountain ranges and elevation in the world.
2nd image: Locations of recorded earthquakes
3rd image: tectonic plate fault lines.

IMAliyu:
On the subject of earthquake and mountains.

I don't see any correlation between mountains and earth stability. Actually what I see is more of a negative correlation, where landscapes that have the biggest mountains are more prone to earthquakes.

Places like West Africa that experience next to no earthquakes are as a result of being situated away from the tectonic fault lines.
Not unless I'm missing something.

1st image: mountain ranges and elevation in the world.
2nd image: Locations of recorded earthquake in
3rd image: tectonic plate fault lines.

you are not missing much. What you brought forward is what we term ring of fire which I mentioned and our Muslim friend ignored the point. He started pouring his own thought into the verge verse of the Qur'an.

Even though mountain is part of the factors that is THEORISED as a temporary stabilising factor to the crust. This stability is not the one Qur'an meant. Qur'an meant the ground would be SHAKING if there's no mountain which our friend could not prove geologically.

Once again. The verse seems scientific but not 100%. Our friend (like other scientific miracles of the Qur'an fans) only wished the verse is correlated.

One question he could not answer is why there is much earthquake in the ring of fire that is more mountaineous than any other part of the world.

Xmuslim:
you are not missing much. What you brought forward is what we term ring of fire which I mentioned and our Muslim friend ignored the point. He started pouring his own thought into the verge verse of the Qur'an.

Even though mountain is part of the factors that is THEORISED as a temporary stabilising factor to the crust. This stability is not the one Qur'an meant. Qur'an meant the ground would be SHAKING if there's no mountain which our friend could not prove geologically.

Once again. The verse seems scientific but not 100%. Our friend (like other scientific miracles of the Qur'an fans) only wished the verse is correlated.

One question he could not answer is why there is much earthquake in the ring of fire that is more mountaineous than any other part of the world.

You are the one going around in cycle and speaking from both sides of your mouth all in a desperate attempt at bringing down the Qur'an and Islam.


I try to keep it simple, but it seems that your mission is bamboozle the wider audience

Xmuslim:
you are not missing much. What you brought forward is what we term ring of fire which I mentioned and our Muslim friend ignored the point. He started pouring his own thought into the verge verse of the Qur'an.

Even though mountain is part of the factors that is THEORISED as a temporary stabilising factor to the crust. This stability is not the one Qur'an meant. Qur'an meant the ground would be SHAKING if there's no mountain which our friend could not prove geologically.

Once again. The verse seems scientific but not 100%. Our friend (like other scientific miracles of the Qur'an fans) only wished the verse is correlated.

One question he could not answer is why there is much earthquake in the ring of fire that is more mountaineous than any other part of the world.

.

Xmuslim:
you are not missing much. What you brought forward is what we term ring of fire which I mentioned and our Muslim friend ignored the point. He started pouring his own thought into the verge verse of the Qur'an.

Even though mountain is part of the factors that is THEORISED as a temporary stabilising factor to the crust. This stability is not the one Qur'an meant. Qur'an meant the ground would be SHAKING if there's no mountain which our friend could not prove geologically.

Once again. The verse seems scientific but not 100%. Our friend (like other scientific miracles of the Qur'an fans) only wished the verse is correlated.

One question he could not answer is why there is much earthquake in the ring of fire that is more mountaineous than any other part of the world.

You are the one going around in cycle and speaking from both sides of your mouth all in a desperate attempt at bringing down the Qur'an and Islam down.


I try to keep it simple, but it seems that your mission is to bamboozle the wider audience with your geology texts. All what you kept on spilling are basics of plate tectonics. A very sound greenhorn of geology would not consider all those a big deal.


Back to the issue in contention:

"Mountains as pegs"


If you nail a peg to a surface, how does it look like? A height above the surface and the part driven below the surface. Do mountains in relation to the earth look like this or not? Until you can confidently answer No to that before we can dig it any further.


You keep on shouting ring of fires since as if we don't know that rings of fires are areas of their own peculiarities, but I decided not to give it much of an attention since your mission is glaring, but let me lecture you a bit.

Even in your rings of fires, scientific researches have proven the stabilizing roles of mountains, with the aids of the mountain's roots in reducing the speed of lithospheric movements. Thereby, reducing the impact of collision, which in turn reduce the severity of the earthquakes. Now, that is reduction in intensity. Logically, frequency of the earthquakes occurrences will also be reduced because the slower the lithospheric movements, the longer it takes for two plates collide.

Let me reason ahead of you. Your next arguement will be "why didn't your allah use mountains to prevent earthquakes altogether?"

Then, I answer you that those are of their own nature, and the stabilizing roles of mountains in reducing both the INTENSITY and FREQUENCY of occurrences is still a way of the creator taking care of his creation (since you are trying to be smarter than the Creator).