Notices
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 301 to 362 of 362

Thread: Most of the mountains are not from Earth in origin.

  1. #301  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by mormoopid
    I forgive you eanassir

    The forgiveness is up to God alone, Who decided to forgive any sin except the unforgivable sin of the idolatry and associating others [like son, patrons or equals] with Him in the worship.

    Such associating Jesus, saints or imams together with God, is some sort of betrayal or disloyalty to God Almighty; which is contrary to the First Commandment: that God is One and none else should be worshipped, and no statue or idol should be erected and worshipped together with God the Creator.

    This is in the Quran 4: 48
    إِنَّ اللّهَ لاَ يَغْفِرُ أَن يُشْرَكَ بِهِ وَيَغْفِرُ مَا دُونَ ذَلِكَ لِمَن يَشَاء وَمَن يُشْرِكْ بِاللّهِ فَقَدِ افْتَرَى إِثْمًا عَظِيمًا
    The explanation:
    (God pardons not associating [anything] with Him, but pardons anything short of that, to whomsoever He pleases.
    Whoso associates [anything] with God, he has indeed invented a tremendous sin.)
     

  2. #302  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by (Q)
    Quote Originally Posted by eanassir

    The story of Mohammed's ascension to heaven (with his soul, together with Gabriel the angel) is mentioned in the Quran, and it is a true story of this spiritual journey where God showed to him many of His signs in the heavens and in the spiritual world, and revealed to him many revelations concerning the monotheism and devotion to God alone.
    It is a true story in the Quran because it's written in the Quran.

    The spiritual night journey of Prophet Mohammed from Mecca to Jerusalem, then his ascension to heaven accompanied by Gabriel was in order to honor this noble prophet who served God alone and broke up the idols of his people. And Mohammed saw the most marvelous sign of his Lord: the Glorious Throne of God.

    God honored Mohammed by bringing him close to the throne of Glory of the Lord above the seven heavens or paradises (or the kindgom of heavens); he became as close to the throne as the distance of two confronting bows (of the arrows) like these { } , and he stood with politeness, his sight did not deviate any other direction.

    God instructed him, by revelation, the monotheism and exclusive devotion to God alone, like what He had revealed to the porphets before him.

    See something about this marvellous spiritual journey here: in the last question and its answer in the subject of:
    http://man-after-death.t35.com/3.htm#Explanation_

    It was also a trial to people: some of them believed while others disbelieved; as in the Quran 17: 60
    وَمَا جَعَلْنَا الرُّؤيَا الَّتِي أَرَيْنَاكَ إِلاَّ فِتْنَةً لِّلنَّاسِ
    The explanation:
    (We made the vision, which We showed to you, only as a trial for people)


    eanassir
    http://man-after-death.t35.com
    ================================================== ================================================== ======
    ================================================== ===

    Here are the details to anyone who likes to know about this spiritual journey of Prophet Mohammed - salam be to him:

    "Question: If the heavens were ethereal, then how did Prophet Mohammed - peace be on him - go to the heaven on the night of the 'ascension'?

    Answer: His ethereal soul ascended to the heaven; while his body was sleeping in his bed; for it is mentioned in a book called 'The Ascension' that the prophet – peace be on him – went with Gabriel [from Mecca] to Jerusalem, and there he met the prophets, greeted them and led them in prayer at Jerusalem.

    Then he ascended with Gabriel to the heavens, and led the angels in prayer in each heaven, till he reached the seventh heaven.

    I say that the prophets went, by their death, from the material world to the ethereal world, and they became ethereal souls; and souls cannot be seen by the alive beings. In addition to that, angels are ethereal creatures whom people cannot see save under certain conditions. Thirdly, man cannot ascend to heaven with his material body. For this reason, the 'ascension' took place at night.

    Moreover, it is narrated from Aisha, mother of the believers, [the wife of the prophet] that she said: " By God, the body of God's messengers, peace be on him, did not go, but only he ascended with his spirit.' It is also narrated from Muawiah, a similar tradition.

    1) God - be exalted - said in the Quran, 17: 1

    سُبْحَانَ الَّذِي أَسْرَى بِعَبْدِهِ لَيْلاً مِّنَ الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَامِ إِلَى الْمَسْجِدِ الأَقْصَى الَّذِي بَارَكْنَا حَوْلَهُ لِنُرِيَهُ مِنْ آيَاتِنَا إِنَّهُ هُوَ السَّمِيعُ البَصِيرُ .

    The explanation:( Glorified be [God] Who took His servant [Mohammed] in a journey by night from the Inviolable Mosque [at Mecca] to the Remote Mosque [at Jerusalem], the precinct of which We have blessed, to show him some of Our signs; surely, He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing.)

    The 'Inviolable Mosque' means the Kaabah at Mecca; while the 'Remote Mosque' is at Jerusalem.

    Prophet Mohammed - peace be on him - was taken into a night journey from Mecca to Jerusalem; and he was actually taken into such a journey at night; because the soul is annoyed by the noise, and avoids the light, specially the sun-light. For this reason, he went into his travel at night; because people were sleeping, sounds were low, movements were calm and the sun had set off; so that the time was suitable for his journey to Jerusalem, and then for his ascension to the heavens accompanied by Gabriel; because he had become an ethereal creature like his companion.

    And because the ascension was with the ethereal soul, he was able to see the prophets and to lead them in prayer to God, and he was able to see Gabriel, and was able to ascend with him to the ethereal heavens, and was able to see the angels and talk with them, and so on of what was narrated from Prophet Mohammed - peace be on him.

    2) God - be exalted - said in the Quran, 53: 1-18

    وَالنَّجْمِ إِذَا هَوَى . مَا ضَلَّ صَاحِبُكُمْ وَمَا غَوَى . وَمَا يَنطِقُ عَنِ الْهَوَى .إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا وَحْيٌ يُوحَى . عَلَّمَهُ شَدِيدُ الْقُوَى . ذُو مِرَّةٍ فَاسْتَوَى .وَهُوَ بِالْأُفُقِ الْأَعْلَى . ثُمَّ دَنَا فَتَدَلَّى .فَكَانَ قَابَ قَوْسَيْنِ أَوْ أَدْنَى . فَأَوْحَى إِلَى عَبْدِهِ مَا أَوْحَى .مَا كَذَبَ الْفُؤَادُ مَا رَأَى .أَفَتُمَارُونَهُ عَلَى مَا يَرَى .وَلَقَدْ رَآهُ نَزْلَةً أُخْرَى .عِندَ سِدْرَةِ الْمُنْتَهَى .عِندَهَا جَنَّةُ الْمَأْوَى . إِذْ يَغْشَى السِّدْرَةَ مَا يَغْشَى . مَا زَاغَ الْبَصَرُ وَمَا طَغَى . لَقَدْ رَأَى مِنْ آيَاتِ رَبِّهِ الْكُبْرَى .

    The explanation:( 1- By the comet when it will fall down [upon the earth!]

    2- Your comrade [Mohammed] has not misled neither has he seduced [anyone from the way.]

    3- Nor speaks he out of caprice.

    4- It is not but a revelation [from God], that is being revealed [to him by Gabriel, the angel.]

    5- [Mohammed] is taught by [Gabriel: an angel] mighty in power.

    6- To whom is referred for consultation.[xiv]

    7- And [Mohammed] became similar to, and together with, [Gabriel.]

    8- When he [: Gabriel] was at the high horizon [in the sky, teaching Mohammed some religious instructions.]

    9- Then he came closer [to the throne of the Lord,] and was guided [thereto by Gabriel,]

    10- And he was at [a distance of] two [opposing] bows [from the Throne] or [even] nearer.

    11- And [God] revealed to His servant [Mohammed] those [commandments of monotheism and abandoning idolatry] which He had revealed [to the prophets before him.]

    12- His [spiritual] heart lies not of what [surprises] he saw [at heaven.]

    13- Will you then dispute with him concerning what [portents] he saw?

    14- And surely [Gabriel] showed [Mohammed, and acquainted him] yet another time while descending [from the seventh heaven to the first.] By the terminal lote-tree.

    15- Near to which is the Garden of Abode.

    16- When the lote-tree was enshrouded in [lights] that overwhelmed [the eye sight.]

    17- The eye-sight [of Mohammed] swerved not, nor yet did it go faraway [from his object.]

    18- For truly did he see, the greatest of the signs [:the Throne] of his Lord.)

    The interpretation:

    - (By the comet when it will fall down [upon the earth!] ) means: I swear by comets when they will fall down on the earth. This, actually, is a threatening oath. This Quranic revelation had been interpreted in my book 'The Universe and the Quran'.

    - (Your comrade [Mohammed] has not misled neither has he seduced [anyone from the way.] ) means: Mohammed did not go astray from the path of the truth, neither did he misguide anyone, with his preaching and religious way. That is because the associaters said, as it is mentioned in the Quran, 25: 42

    إِن كَادَ لَيُضِلُّنَا عَنْ آلِهَتِنَا لَوْلَا أَن صَبَرْنَا عَلَيْهَا

    The explanation:( 'He [: Mohammed is a misguided one, who] would have misled us faraway from [the worship of] our gods, had we not been steadfast to them.')

    - (Nor speaks he out of caprice) means: What Quran and religious law Mohammed said, had not been taught to him by people; because the associaters said, as it is mentioned in the Quran, 16: 103

    إِنَّمَا يُعَلِّمُهُ بَشَرٌ

    The explanation:( Only a man teaches him)

    - ([Mohammed] is taught by [Gabriel: an angel] mighty in power.) This is a description of Gabriel that he is mighty in power, just as how He described him, too, as did He describe him, too, in the Quran, 81: 19-21

    إِنَّهُ لَقَوْلُ رَسُولٍ كَرِيمٍ .ذِي قُوَّةٍ عِندَ ذِي الْعَرْشِ مَكِينٍ . مُطَاعٍ ثَمَّ أَمِينٍ .

    The explanation:(19- That the [Quran] is the saying of an honorable messenger [: Gabriel.]

    20- Endowed with power, with rank before the Lord of the throne; with authority there.

    21- Obeyed [by angels and messengers] and trusty [concerning the message and the commands of God.] )

    ([Mohammed] is taught by [Gabriel: an angel] mighty in power) means: Gabriel taught Mohammed the Quran and the Islamic law.

    - (To whom is referred for consultation) means: He is a consultant, whom angels consult in their affairs, as do prophets consult in their mission; because of his intelligence, brilliant mind and his high rank.

    [This also is the meaning of the word in the Arab poetry some of which is mentioned by the late Mohammed-Ali Hassan, the interpreter of the Quran and the Bible, in his Arabic book.]

    - (And [Mohammed] became similar to, and together with, [Gabriel.] ) means: Mohammed became equal to Gabriel in the kind, and the ascending up to heaven on the 'night of the ascension', i.e. they became of the same kind; because Mohammed ascended with his ethereal soul, and that Gabriel was also an ethereal creature; and that they ascended together to heaven.

    - (When he [: Gabriel] was at the high horizon [in the sky, teaching Mohammed some religious instructions] ) means: Gabriel was at some height of the earth's atmosphere, when he was teaching Mohammed the religious instructions. [This also is the meaning of the word in the Arab poetry some of which is mentioned by the late Mohammed-Ali Hassan, the interpreter of the Quran and the Bible, in his Arabic book.]

    - (Then he came closer [to the throne of the Lord,] ) means: Mohammed then approached the throne.

    - (and was guided [thereto by Gabriel] ) means: Gabriel guided him to it.

    - (His [spiritual] heart lies not of what [surprises] he saw [at heaven] ) means: The [spiritual] heart of Mohammed did not unbelieve what signs and surprises he had seen in the ethereal heavens on the night of his 'ascension', and he did not doubt about what he had seen; because it had been inscribed [and fixed] in his memory.

    - (And surely [Gabriel] showed [Mohammed, and acquainted him] yet another time while descending [from the seventh heaven to the first.] By the terminal lote-tree.) means: At the end of their tour in heavens, and that was near that lote-tree, which was an ethereal tree and its fruit being the lote-fruit.

    - (Near to which is the Garden of Abode) means: Near that lote-tree, there is the Paradise of Abode, to which souls of prophets, saints, martyrs and the righteous will go, in the Barzakh world, and have shelter and dwelling there. It is the lowermost layer of the seven heavens, and it is not the Paradise of 'Everlasting', into which they will be admitted on Judgment Day.

    For this reason, God - be exalted - said in the Quran, 55: 46

    وَلِمَنْ خَافَ مَقَامَ رَبِّهِ جَنَّتَانِ .

    The explanation: (But such as fears the Station of his Lord, for him shall be two gardens – [: the Garden of Abode and the Garden of Everlasting.] )

    It means: He will be admitted into the first Paradise in the Barzakh world, and he will be admitted into the second Paradise on Judgment Day.

    -( The eye-sight [of Mohammed] swerved not, nor yet did it go faraway [from his object.] ) means: His sight didn't deviate from what he was to see, and did not go far from it. In other words: Mohammed was only looking forward, and did not look right and left; and that was an act of politeness and as a glorification to his Lord.

    - (For truly did he see) means: Mohammed saw in heaven, (the greatest of the signs [:the Throne] of his Lord.) means: He saw the throne of his Lord; because the throne is the greatest sign in the heavens; the indication of that is:

    His saying - be exalted - in the Quran, 23: 86

    قُلْ مَن رَّبُّ السَّمَاوَاتِ السَّبْعِ وَرَبُّ الْعَرْشِ الْعَظِيمِ ؟

    The explanation: (Say[xv], 'Who is the Lord[xvi] of the seven heavens, and the Lord of the Throne [of Glory] Supreme?')"
     

  3. #303  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,191
    Bottom line from me:

    Science is its own protector. The earth itself tells anyone who has an OPEN MIND the story of itself. NO WHERE does it say MOUNTAINS ARE FROM SPACE.

    If you really want to convince me find me PHYSICAL, VERIFIABLE PROOF that mountains came from outerspace.


    oh and as has been pointed out before, ANYTHING coming into earths atmosphere will either burn up or leave a very BIG HOLE!
     

  4. #304  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum
    Bottom line from me:

    Science is its own protector. The earth itself tells anyone who has an OPEN MIND the story of itself. NO WHERE does it say MOUNTAINS ARE FROM SPACE.

    If you really want to convince me find me PHYSICAL, VERIFIABLE PROOF that mountains came from outerspace.


    oh and as has been pointed out before, ANYTHING coming into earths atmosphere will either burn up or leave a very BIG HOLE!

    With OPEN MIND go and make research and consider the subject from the start, and bear in mind these mountains (protions of the destroyed planets) landed on Earth and the planets in their early phases of development, not now.

    So make measurement of the time durations and periods and make comparison between the age of the mountains on Earth and the other planets.

    but exclude some newly formed mountains like those of volcanoes, and you will prove many scientific things more than I can do myself.
     

  5. #305  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,191
    Quote Originally Posted by eanassir
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum
    Bottom line from me:

    Science is its own protector. The earth itself tells anyone who has an OPEN MIND the story of itself. NO WHERE does it say MOUNTAINS ARE FROM SPACE.

    If you really want to convince me find me PHYSICAL, VERIFIABLE PROOF that mountains came from outerspace.


    oh and as has been pointed out before, ANYTHING coming into earths atmosphere will either burn up or leave a very BIG HOLE!

    With OPEN MIND go and make research and consider the subject from the start, and bear in mind these mountains (protions of the destroyed planets) landed on Earth and the planets in their early phases of development, not now.

    So make measurement of the time durations and periods and make comparison between the age of the mountains on Earth and the other planets.

    but exclude some newly formed mountains like those of volcanoes, and you will prove many scientific things more than I can do myself.
    Been there done that They are all "young" to use your terminology.



    You Fail.
     

  6. #306  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    625
    With OPEN MIND go and make research and consider the subject from the start, and bear in mind these mountains (protions of the destroyed planets) landed on Earth and the planets in their early phases of development, not now.
    You astound me. You expect us to consider what you say gospel truth, in the face of all evidence.

    So make measurement of the time durations and periods and make comparison between the age of the mountains on Earth and the other planets
    My dear friend, the mountains are indeed young, as Pal (sorry if I don't type your full name - I can't remeber the spelling. :wink: Please forgive me) said. They are far younger than any debris from any planet we have seen.

    but exclude some newly formed mountains like those of volcanoes, and you will prove many scientific things more than I can do myself.
    Ah, but if volcanoes can form, don't you think its possible that mountains on Earth can form on their own? If so, how can you say that mountains landed on Earth when you yourself consider it possible for mountains to form on their own? You have only words to defend you, and even if they are God's words, words themselves are never good enough when evidence denies their truth.

    Suppose a mutual friend of ours was caught murdering someone. Even if they deny it, surely the fact that there is proof that he has done so is enough to say that he has indeed killed a person. Likewise, if God says that the mountains come from Earth, and yet they do not seem to match any sort of experimental criteria for determining if they are from space, then it is likely that they do not come from outer space.
    In control lies inordinate freedom; in freedom lies inordinate control.
     

  7. #307  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    87
    • Stabilizing the Earth movement,
    already refuted.

    • Inclining the Earth on some axis inclination,
    Asteroids might do so.



    The thing that I said about the Himalaya was from myself (according to my opinion: I may be wrong or correct); the interpreter did not mention the Himalaya (refer to our site http://universeandquran.741.com
    and see there the subject of: http://universeandquran.t35.com/new_....htm#Mountains




    And read there this paragraph:
    "(*In Beirut museum, there are fossils of fishes discovered in one of Beirut mountains, which indicate that, in ancient times, that mountain was under the sea surface; those fishes swam above its ground, then when the earth surface contracted, its surface was broken, so that some of its layers rose up and some others were depressed, because of its contraction, so that the high [layers] formed these mountains.)"



    The interpreter saw those fossils in the Beirut museum, and he wrote this note in his book.

    Moreover, I heard from him that "it may be some fossils and the skeletons of strange creatures like the Dinosaurs might have come embedded in the mountains which once were some portions of the destroyed past planets, and such creatures lived there on those planets and not on the present Earth."



    So what? Himalayas also contains marine fossils (+ some rests of oceanic crust) in the suture.

    Those fossils might be those of E.T. fishes? Your interpreter isn't a paleontologist to make such a remark. How could his claim be credible whereas he confused electrostatic with heating (see his experiment with amber to prove heating ausing gravity).





    I say (this is my opinion): it could be still that these Himalaya mountains came from the space and their layers are the layers of those planets: they might become upside down or any other way.
    Moreover, scientist in fact have not seen such tectonic processes; they postulate this theory; although it may be correct; I don't insist: it is only my idea.
    They didn't SEE this process, so what? There are some clues:


    * Himalayas keeps on raising up according to measurment.

    * This range is inclined according to the direction of the collision of the indian plate (BTW, the movement of the latter is visible with sattelites)

    * The himalayas contains a suture (rest of an ancien ocean).

    * The presence of normal faults (making sense with the models of 'blocks') associatd with plate movements and seisms.


    All that seems to disprove the idea of falling Himalayas.
    You could still say that this is yur opionion, however in empirical knowledge, opinions are baseless and thus useless and weak by nature.



    So when I read the aya about the high mountains that rested on the Earth, I said it may be the Himalaya, or some other high mountains; because you insisted that I should mention the names of some mountains; while in fact the interpreter did not mention any name in particular.

    Point to be noted, Himalayas have the highest mountains in the world.
    The others are volcanic (mt Ararat, kilimandjaro) and associated with subductions (the Andes, and other american mountains).



    You stated that geologists only classified mountains.

    Not only! they also analysed the rocks in mountains to know that none of them came from space.
     

  8. #308  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum
    Quote Originally Posted by eanassir
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum
    Bottom line from me:

    Science is its own protector. The earth itself tells anyone who has an OPEN MIND the story of itself. NO WHERE does it say MOUNTAINS ARE FROM SPACE.

    If you really want to convince me find me PHYSICAL, VERIFIABLE PROOF that mountains came from outerspace.


    oh and as has been pointed out before, ANYTHING coming into earths atmosphere will either burn up or leave a very BIG HOLE!

    With OPEN MIND go and make research and consider the subject from the start, and bear in mind these mountains (protions of the destroyed planets) landed on Earth and the planets in their early phases of development, not now.

    So make measurement of the time durations and periods and make comparison between the age of the mountains on Earth and the other planets.

    but exclude some newly formed mountains like those of volcanoes, and you will prove many scientific things more than I can do myself.
    Been there done that They are all "young" to use your terminology.


    You Fail.
    The past planets were destroyed simultaneously at the same time in the previous Doomsday; then their portions have the same date --> then such portions fell on the newly formed planets (our Earth and the present planets) about the same time.

    So in case the age of the mountains on Earth and the rest of the present planets are about the same age --> this may give clue to their one single source: the broken up past planets.
     

  9. #309  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by Liongold
    if volcanoes can form, don't you think its possible that mountains on Earth can form on their own? If so, how can you say that mountains landed on Earth when you yourself consider it possible for mountains to form on their own?

    "The mountains of Earth are four kinds:

    1- Some of them were formed because of the volcanoes;

    2- Others due to the wearing away and erosion, and due to earthquakes and land depressions;

    3- Others because of land contraction and breaking of its surface: those latter are the Elongated Chained Mountains* [i.e. the long mountain ranges.]

    4- But most of the mountains are due to falling of meteorites upon the Earth; the mountains are still falling now and then in some countries, till the present time."
    http://universeandquran.t35.com/new_....htm#Mountains


    eanassir
    http://universeandquran.t35.com
     

  10. #310  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    625
    1- Some of them were formed because of the volcanoes;
    Which, according to you, were recently formed, and, anyway, how do volcanoes produce mountains? Does the magma somehow solidify, cooling at a superfast rate and appear dozens of miloes away, as if its teleported there?

    No, this one makes no sense.

    2- Others due to the wearing away and erosion, and due to earthquakes and land depressions;
    That would serve to make mountains smaller, and ultimately destroy them, not create them. How do you create mountains with depressions in the surface and by earthquakes? That would serve to get rid of preexisting mountains.

    3- Others because of land contraction and breaking of its surface: those latter are the Elongated Chained Mountains* [i.e. the long mountain ranges.]
    This at the very least is correct, though land does not contract but converge to form fold mountains. Further, the surface does not break but extends upward. There is a difference. This is also the only known and accepted way of making mountains appear.

    4- But most of the mountains are due to falling of meteorites upon the Earth; the mountains are still falling now and then in some countries, till the present time
    So why don't they burn up? Or are they so large that they don't burn up? In which case, we should be able to tell the existence of newly formed mountains by watching them crash into populated areas, killing millions and widely reported by the media.

    Oddly enough, that never happens, meaning either that you are wrong or millions are killed each day by falling mountains, and the government is secretly trying to cover it up, representing a unique cooperation between countries as yet unprecedented in history.

    Also, termina's question has yet to be answered. Why do the Himalayas still rise if they are falling meorites?
    In control lies inordinate freedom; in freedom lies inordinate control.
     

  11. #311  
    (Q)
    (Q) is offline
    Forum Isotope (Q)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,650
    Quote Originally Posted by eanassir
    http://universeandquran.t35.com/new_....htm#Mountains

    "Cause of the Gravity

    Question: Will you acquaint us about the cause of the gravity of the sun ? For when a famous follower of Newton: Lord Kelvin, was asked: “What is the true cause of the gravity?”, he replied: “No scientist can claim that he knows the secret of the cause of the gravity; we are completely ignorant about that; we actually know nothing about it.”

    Answer: With God’s help, I shall answer and explain the secret [cause] of the gravity. That is what my Lord has taught me of the Scripture [:the Book] and the wisdom; His surplus on me has been tremendous.

    Know, then, that the cause of the gravity is the heat, and the cause of the heat is the movement

    Therefore, the movement of the particles in the core of the earth causes the heat and the gravity, and leads to the rotation of the earth around its axis."
    So, why haven't you won the Nobel Prize?
    Religious Fundamentalist Club - Member #1.
     

  12. #312  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    87
    The past planets were destroyed simultaneously at the same time in the previous Doomsday; then their portions have the same date --> then such portions fell on the newly formed planets (our Earth and the present planets) about the same time.

    So in case the age of the mountains on Earth and the rest of the present planets are about the same age --> this may give clue to their one single source: the broken up past planets.

    Measurments on mountains, on the contrary, show that the latters aren't as old as the other planets. Asteroid impacts make craters, not mountains.

    Nothing but pseudoscience...





    http://universeandquran.t35.com/new_....htm#Mountains

    "Cause of the Gravity

    Question: Will you acquaint us about the cause of the gravity of the sun ? For when a famous follower of Newton: Lord Kelvin, was asked: “What is the true cause of the gravity?”, he replied: “No scientist can claim that he knows the secret of the cause of the gravity; we are completely ignorant about that; we actually know nothing about it.”

    Answer: With God’s help, I shall answer and explain the secret [cause] of the gravity. That is what my Lord has taught me of the Scripture [:the Book] and the wisdom; His surplus on me has been tremendous.

    Know, then, that the cause of the gravity is the heat, and the cause of the heat is the movement

    Therefore, the movement of the particles in the core of the earth causes the heat and the gravity, and leads to the rotation of the earth around its axis."



    1° Miscroscopic objects (in your text particles) can't directly make a veeeery macroscopic object rotate.


    2° The phenomenon of tides is provoked by the gravitational attraction of our Moon, and yet it has a cold core.

    If Venus (which hasn't a hot core anymore) didn't have Gravity, its dense atmosphere would go away.



    Thus, heat doesn't cause gravity, obviously.


    Venus and Mercuri do rotate around themselves. Their movement was measured by specialists (we know their velocity and even their directions).
    Plus, cold object, like asteroids rotate around themselves in a about periodical manner (Eros, for instance).

    Therefore, heat isn't responsible for angular momentum of planets, obviously.
     

  13. #313  
    (Q)
    (Q) is offline
    Forum Isotope (Q)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,650
    Quote Originally Posted by termina

    Measurments on mountains, on the contrary, show that the latters aren't as old as the other planets. Asteroid impacts make craters, not mountains.

    Nothing but pseudoscience...
    Maybe Mr. Nassir forgot to put in the phrase "invisible upside-down" when he was referring to mountains created by asteroids.

    Religious Fundamentalist Club - Member #1.
     

  14. #314  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    87
    Maybe Mr. Nassir forgot to put in the phrase "invisible upside-down" when he was referring to mountains created by asteroids.



    Oh! The Himalayas! I ignored that it was so hollow....
     

  15. #315  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by termina
    • Stabilizing the Earth movement,
    already refuted.
    We don't agree with you; the mountains have been useful for this purpose, like the lead weights used for the car wheel balance.


    Quote Originally Posted by termina
    • Inclining the Earth on some axis inclination,
    Asteroids might do so.
    What are asteroids, other than portions of some broken-up planet?

    Quote Originally Posted by termina
    So what? Himalayas also contains marine fossils (+ some rests of oceanic crust) in the suture.
    I don't insist on Himalaya; but evenso such fossils might have come embedded in these mountains when they were portions of the past planets.

    Quote Originally Posted by termina
    I say (this is my opinion): it could be still that these Himalaya mountains came from the space and their layers are the layers of those planets: they might become upside down or any other way.

    Moreover, scientist in fact have not seen such tectonic processes; they postulate this theory; although it may be correct; I don't insist: it is only my idea.
    They didn't SEE this process, so what? There are some clues:


    * Himalayas keeps on raising up according to measurment.

    * This range is inclined according to the direction of the collision of the indian plate (BTW, the movement of the latter is visible with sattelites)

    * The himalayas contains a suture (rest of an ancien ocean).

    * The presence of normal faults (making sense with the models of 'blocks') associatd with plate movements and seisms.


    All that seems to disprove the idea of falling Himalayas.
    You could still say that this is yur opionion, however in empirical knowledge, opinions are baseless and thus useless and weak by nature.
    After the mountains landed and fixed into the ground, they were exposed to the geological factors like denudation and erosion ...etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by termina
    You stated that geologists only classified mountains.

    Not only! they also analysed the rocks in mountains to know that none of them came from space.
    You cannot say that for certain: but actually the mountains on Earth and on the planets are similar.


    eanassir
    http://universeandquran.t35.com
     

  16. #316  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by (Q)
    Quote Originally Posted by eanassir
    http://universeandquran.t35.com/new_....htm#Mountains

    "Cause of the Gravity

    Question: Will you acquaint us about the cause of the gravity of the sun ? For when a famous follower of Newton: Lord Kelvin, was asked: “What is the true cause of the gravity?”, he replied: “No scientist can claim that he knows the secret of the cause of the gravity; we are completely ignorant about that; we actually know nothing about it.”

    Answer: With God’s help, I shall answer and explain the secret [cause] of the gravity. That is what my Lord has taught me of the Scripture [:the Book] and the wisdom; His surplus on me has been tremendous.

    Know, then, that the cause of the gravity is the heat, and the cause of the heat is the movement

    Therefore, the movement of the particles in the core of the earth causes the heat and the gravity, and leads to the rotation of the earth around its axis."
    So, why haven't you won the Nobel Prize?
    We spared it for you.
     

  17. #317  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,191
    Quote Originally Posted by eanassir
    Quote Originally Posted by termina
    • Stabilizing the Earth movement,
    already refuted.
    We don't agree with you; the mountains have been useful for this purpose, like the lead weights used for the car wheel balance.


    Quote Originally Posted by termina
    • Inclining the Earth on some axis inclination,
    Asteroids might do so.
    What are asteroids, other than portions of some broken-up planet?

    Quote Originally Posted by termina
    So what? Himalayas also contains marine fossils (+ some rests of oceanic crust) in the suture.
    I don't insist on Himalaya; but evenso such fossils might have come embedded in these mountains when they were portions of the past planets.

    Quote Originally Posted by termina
    I say (this is my opinion): it could be still that these Himalaya mountains came from the space and their layers are the layers of those planets: they might become upside down or any other way.

    Moreover, scientist in fact have not seen such tectonic processes; they postulate this theory; although it may be correct; I don't insist: it is only my idea.
    They didn't SEE this process, so what? There are some clues:


    * Himalayas keeps on raising up according to measurment.

    * This range is inclined according to the direction of the collision of the indian plate (BTW, the movement of the latter is visible with sattelites)

    * The himalayas contains a suture (rest of an ancien ocean).

    * The presence of normal faults (making sense with the models of 'blocks') associatd with plate movements and seisms.


    All that seems to disprove the idea of falling Himalayas.
    You could still say that this is yur opionion, however in empirical knowledge, opinions are baseless and thus useless and weak by nature.
    After the mountains landed and fixed into the ground, they were exposed to the geological factors like denudation and erosion ...etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by termina
    You stated that geologists only classified mountains.

    Not only! they also analysed the rocks in mountains to know that none of them came from space.
    You cannot say that for certain: but actually the mountains on Earth and on the planets are similar.


    eanassir
    http://universeandquran.t35.com
    If the mountain were from outerspace they woulds all show distinct feature which are not found anywhere on earth the most notable of these being a constant age. however no mountain group on earth shows the same age, they all show multiple ages depending on what layer you look at. Plus those layers are found multiple other places which show no signs of ever being mountains. The fossils found in those layers are found in many other layers and the fossils found on earth show a distinct progression from the Precambrian to modern time. Thus if life came from other world the "mountains" they came from would be obvoisly older then the rest of earth. NONE ARE. and if they were then they would have ALL been eroded into oblivion millions of years ago. The Appalachian mountains are a very old chain, and they show it being big rounded lumps that are not exactly the tallest range around.

    Regarding "docking"

    ANYTHING FALLING FROM SPACE WILL MAKE AN IMPACT CRATER. PERIOD! GRAVITY WILL NOT BE DENIED!!
     

  18. #318  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by Liongold
    1- Some of them were formed because of the volcanoes;
    Which, according to you, were recently formed, and, anyway, how do volcanoes produce mountains? Does the magma somehow solidify, cooling at a superfast rate and appear dozens of miloes away, as if its teleported there?

    No, this one makes no sense.
    Obviously when a volcano erupts, then after some period of time, the lava will cool, and the lava together with all other substance erupted in this way will heap to form - in general - a cone shaped mountain with a hole on its top leading to the core of the earth.
    http://universeandquran.t35.com/new_....htm#Volcanoes


    Quote Originally Posted by Liongold
    2- Others due to the wearing away and erosion, and due to earthquakes and land depressions;
    That would serve to make mountains smaller, and ultimately destroy them, not create them. How do you create mountains with depressions in the surface and by earthquakes? That would serve to get rid of preexisting mountains.
    Some of the present mountains will be eroded, and another newly formed mountain may be created in this way.

    in the Quran 35: 27
    أَلَمْ تَرَ أَنَّ اللَّهَ أَنزَلَ مِنَ السَّمَاء مَاء فَأَخْرَجْنَا بِهِ ثَمَرَاتٍ مُّخْتَلِفًا أَلْوَانُهَا وَمِنَ الْجِبَالِ جُدَدٌ بِيضٌ وَحُمْرٌ مُّخْتَلِفٌ أَلْوَانُهَا وَغَرَابِيبُ سُودٌ
    The explanation:
    (Do you [Mohammed] not see how God sends down [rain] water from the sky, and We bring forth therewith produce of various colors,--and of mountains[, also He brings forth therewith,] newly-formed mountains: white and red, of various colors, --and black brands of coal.)
    ----------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, (and of mountains) is related to (and We bring forth therewith produce).

    The interpretation:
    With the aid of rain water, We made new mountains. That is because the rain will solve the carbon dioxide gas present in the air, so that carbonic acid will be formed, which will solve some parts of the calcium-containing rocks present in the mountains, so it will go down to the low lands and seas, and will once again petrify, and as such will the process go on with the passing of time, until a new mountain will result.

    >> (and black brands of coal.) means: With the aid of rain water We formed black brands of coal. He means: the brands of coal; for it petrifies with the aid of carbonic acid formed by the rain water. Actually, God – be exalted – said غَرابِيبُ i.e. (coals) or (brands of coal) in plural; because the brands of coal are four kinds.

    As regards the earthquake: it may cause some depression and some elevation in different areas causing the appearance of the cleavage in some areas and the mountainous ranges in some other areas.

    Quote Originally Posted by Liongold
    3- Others because of land contraction and breaking of its surface: those latter are the Elongated Chained Mountains* [i.e. the long mountain ranges.]
    This at the very least is correct, though land does not contract but converge to form fold mountains. Further, the surface does not break but extends upward. There is a difference. This is also the only known and accepted way of making mountains appear.
    OK then.

    Quote Originally Posted by Liongold
    4- But most of the mountains are due to falling of meteorites upon the Earth; the mountains are still falling now and then in some countries, till the present time
    So why don't they burn up? Or are they so large that they don't burn up? In which case, we should be able to tell the existence of newly formed mountains by watching them crash into populated areas, killing millions and widely reported by the media.


    Oddly enough, that never happens, meaning either that you are wrong or millions are killed each day by falling mountains, and the government is secretly trying to cover it up, representing a unique cooperation between countries as yet unprecedented in history.

    Also, termina's question has yet to be answered. Why do the Himalayas still rise if they are falling meorites?
    The falling and the landing of the mountains occurred at the early stages of the Earth formation, when there was no people. On the other hand, meteorites are still falling on Earth, but almost they are small, in addition to a large amount of dust.

    The fallen mountains that God cast on Earth: following their landing and settling on Earth, they were exposed to the geological factors of erosion ...etc.
     

  19. #319  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    625
    Obviously when a volcano erupts, then after some period of time, the lava will cool, and the lava together with all other substance erupted in this way will heap to form - in general - a cone shaped mountain with a hole on its top leading to the core of the earth.
    That is a circular definition: a volcano creates a volcano (see the last part of your statement, because that is a volcano) , meaning there is no real cause for them, which is absurd.

    Some of the present mountains will be eroded, and another newly formed mountain may be created in this way.
    So how does erosion cause mountains? Quite seriously, that is a ridiculous concept.

    As regards the earthquake: it may cause some depression and some elevation in different areas causing the appearance of the cleavage in some areas and the mountainous ranges in some other areas.
    Since when did earthquakes cause elevation? By that logic, Japan should have the highest mountains in the world, as it has the largest number of earthquakes each year.

    The falling and the landing of the mountains occurred at the early stages of the Earth formation, when there was no people.
    But there were dinosaurs, yes? And mammals and reptiles and fish before man. Surely they should have died off completely, instead of managing tosurvive.

    On the other hand, meteorites are still falling on Earth, but almost they are small, in addition to a large amount of dust.
    How convenient.

    The fallen mountains that God cast them on Earth, following their landing and settling on Earth they were exposed to the geological factors of erosion ...etc.
    That would make mountains smaller, not bigger.
    In control lies inordinate freedom; in freedom lies inordinate control.
     

  20. #320  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by Liongold
    Obviously when a volcano erupts, then after some period of time, the lava will cool, and the lava together with all other substance erupted in this way will heap to form - in general - a cone shaped mountain with a hole on its top leading to the core of the earth.
    That is a circular definition: a volcano creates a volcano (see the last part of your statement, because that is a volcano) , meaning there is no real cause for them, which is absurd.
    I didn't say that; but the volcano will form a mountain.

    Quote Originally Posted by Liongold
    Some of the present mountains will be eroded, and another newly formed mountain may be created in this way.
    So how does erosion cause mountains? Quite seriously, that is a ridiculous concept.
    The erosion will decrease the mountain, but another mountain may be formed elsewhere; as does the interpreter explain and I show you in a previous reply because of CO2 dissolved by rain water --> H2CO3 and this will disslove the Calcium carbonate, and CaO may result which will be carried to depressions and by time a new mountain may result.


    Quote Originally Posted by Liongold
    As regards the earthquake: it may cause some depression and some elevation in different areas causing the appearance of the cleavage in some areas and the mountainous ranges in some other areas.
    Since when did earthquakes cause elevation? By that logic, Japan should have the highest mountains in the world, as it has the largest number of earthquakes each year.
    As long as there is some cleavage and depression, there should be some elevation elsewhere.

    Quote Originally Posted by Liongold
    The falling and the landing of the mountains occurred at the early stages of the Earth formation, when there was no people.
    But there were dinosaurs, yes? And mammals and reptiles and fish before man. Surely they should have died off completely, instead of managing tosurvive.

    It occurred before there was any life. Later on life appeared from those mountains which carried the seed or germ of life. Then life spread to other parts of the Earth. And it cannot be that life originated from the fire.
     

  21. #321  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    87
    We don't agree with you; the mountains have been useful for this purpose, like the lead weights used for the car wheel balance.

    Sorry, but impacts of heavenly objects as large as mountains would, on the contrary, make the Earth unstable (from slowing down its rotation to modifying its angular momentum).

    The only object that could serve as balancer (or wheel-weight) is the torque of the Moon; without it, Earth's rotation would have ben chaotic.



    termina wrote:
    Quote:
    • Inclining the Earth on some axis inclination,


    Asteroids might do so.


    What are asteroids, other than portions of some broken-up planet?
    Or portions of non-formed planets...




    I don't insist on Himalaya; but evenso such fossils might have come embedded in these mountains when they were portions of the past planets.
    This is an mere opinion.



    termina wrote:
    Quote:
    I say (this is my opinion): it could be still that these Himalaya mountains came from the space and their layers are the layers of those planets: they might become upside down or any other way.

    Moreover, scientist in fact have not seen such tectonic processes; they postulate this theory; although it may be correct; I don't insist: it is only my idea.






    After the mountains landed and fixed into the ground, they were exposed to the geological factors like denudation and erosion ...etc.

    Err.. this factor act as 'destoyers' of mountains, not 'raisers'.
    And, again, if those old fallen mountains existed, they wouldn't be there today, for contrary to what you claimed, they would be eroded a long time ago.




    termina wrote:
    You stated that geologists only classified mountains.

    Not only! they also analysed the rocks in mountains to know that none of them came from space.



    You cannot say that for certain: but actually the mountains on Earth and on the planets are similar.
    Just look at the sediments and igneous rocks on Earth's mountains.
    that doesn't make us think that mountains came from space, I'm afraid.

    However, YOU cannot claim, for certain, that mountains litteraly fallen from space without evidences.
     

  22. #322  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum
    If the mountain were from outerspace they woulds all show distinct feature which are not found anywhere on earth the most notable of these being a constant age. however no mountain group on earth shows the same age, they all show multiple ages depending on what layer you look at. Plus those layers are found multiple other places which show no signs of ever being mountains. The fossils found in those layers are found in many other layers and the fossils found on earth show a distinct progression from the Precambrian to modern time. Thus if life came from other world the "mountains" they came from would be obvoisly older then the rest of earth. NONE ARE. and if they were then they would have ALL been eroded into oblivion millions of years ago. The Appalachian mountains are a very old chain, and they show it being big rounded lumps that are not exactly the tallest range around.

    Regarding "docking"

    ANYTHING FALLING FROM SPACE WILL MAKE AN IMPACT CRATER. PERIOD! GRAVITY WILL NOT BE DENIED!!

    Some remarks about the mountain origin from the space:

    1- If there is a big lorry or trailer (: the Earth) moving at a high speed, and there came a motorcycle (: the mountains or meteorites) following the trailer then the motorcycle touched the trailer from behind; will its impact on the trailer be so severe, when both objects are moving in the same direction?

    Moreover, if there is some elastic pads that will absorb the impact, then the effect will be less than expected; because at the start, the crust was not so hard.

    In addition to that the Earth was very hot and was spinning so quickly at the start, then the centrifugal force will moderate the landing of such mountains.

    2- In addition its heavy mass made it dip to some extent under the ground level. So the mountains were nailed inside the earth crust; as in the Quran 78: 6-7
    أَلَمْ نَجْعَلِ الْأَرْضَ مِهَادًا . وَالْجِبَالَ أَوْتَادًا
    The explanation:
    (Have we not made the earth well-prepared for you [people]?
    And the mountains [as] pegs?)

    [It means like the pegs of the tent, that are nailed in the ground]

    3- This process of the settling of the mountains on the Earth took place in the past; then the dust from the space (which till now is falling daily by tons on the Earth), and other geological factors caused the base of the mountains to bury at some considerable depth under the ground.

    Therefore, when considering the age of the mountain, it should be compared to the ground where it fell at the start of its impact, i.e. under the ground near its base or root, but not at the level of the ground now at the present time.

    4- The fossils may indicate the various forms of life that were present on the past planets. In fact the meteorites that carried the seed of life to our Earth came from four broken up planets.
    http://universeandquran.t35.com/new_..._Transmissible

    5- We have to compare the age of the mountains of the Earth and the age of the mountains on the rest of the planets: If they are about the same age: it may give indication about their same origin or source.


    eanassir
    http://universeandquran.t35.com
     

  23. #323  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    197
    Our science and knowledge is only relative

    If we know a clever doctor: a physician who is skilled at examining, diagnosing and treating patients; should he know necessarily about the origin of life or how man was created?

    Similarly, even though geologists and scientists studied and made many researches: it is not necessary that they know certainly an absolute knowledge about the origin of mountains, the Earth and the planets.

    Whatever man knows of the science, it is relatively very very little in comparison to the absolute knowledge of God.

    Moreover, God gives somewhat of His knowledge to people as does He please, to let man profit and have advantage in his Worldly life.

    God – be glorified – said in the Quran 17: 85
    وَمَا أُوتِيتُم مِّن الْعِلْمِ إِلاَّ قَلِيلاً
    The explanation:
    (And [whatever knowledge you are given; in fact] you [people] are given only a little knowledge [thereof.]")


    eanassir
    http://universeandquran.t35.com
    http://man-after-death.t35.com
    http://quranandhebrewbible.t35.com
     

  24. #324  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,191
    Quote Originally Posted by eanassir
    Our science and knowledge is only relative

    If we know a clever doctor: a physician who is skilled at examining, diagnosing and treating patients; should he know necessarily about the origin of life or how man was created?

    Similarly, even though geologists and scientists studied and made many researches: it is not necessary that they know certainly an absolute knowledge about the origin of mountains, the Earth and the planets.
    The geologist know lightyears more then those who abhor science and attempt explanations based off a text from before people even conceived of the idea there were other planets, thinking the sky was just a giant bowl with points of light in it and the land was flat.

    Quote Originally Posted by eanassir
    Moreover, God gives somewhat of His knowledge to people as does He please, to let man profit and have advantage in his Worldly life.
    So in other words the translator is given knowledge to take advantage of and profit from others. This sounds very much like what is happening here.


    Quote Originally Posted by eanassir
    God – be glorified – said in the Quran 17: 85
    وَمَا أُوتِيتُم مِّن الْعِلْمِ إِلاَّ قَلِيلاً
    The explanation:
    (And [whatever knowledge you are given; in fact] you [people] are given only a little knowledge [thereof.]")
    Without YOUR inserted words the quote is actually: "And you are given only a little knowledge."

    This sums you up very well.


    SCIENCE!!

    If you really want to prove this idea you will ONLY succeed if you provide SCIENTIFIC proof.

    Right now you have no more evidence then the folks in England who insist the world is flat and the round earth is just a massive conspiracy. Massive, ingrained, paranoia which blinds the individual to anything other then what they want to see
     

  25. #325  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    414
    not sure if this has been pointed out yet but the first few pages I've read it wasn't mentioned. Mountains aren't only formed by volcanoes. There are numerous ways mountains can form. One being plate boundaries and the collision of continental plates.
    "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt" - Bertrand Russell
     

  26. #326  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    Quote Originally Posted by BumFluff
    not sure if this has been pointed out yet but the first few pages I've read it wasn't mentioned. Mountains aren't only formed by volcanoes. There are numerous ways mountains can form. One being plate boundaries and the collision of continental plates.

    of course it has.
     

  27. #327  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    625
    I didn't say that; but the volcano will form a mountain.
    Prove it. How can you say so?

    By the way, a moutain does not have a hole at the top leading to the centre, which, according to you, is what volcanoes would form.

    The erosion will decrease the mountain, but another mountain may be formed elsewhere; as does the interpreter explain and I show you in a previous reply because of CO2 dissolved by rain water --> H2CO3 and this will disslove the Calcium carbonate, and CaO may result which will be carried to depressions and by time a new mountain may result.
    So, when did carbon dioxide become part of a mountain? Has anyone here heard of carbon dioxide being an essential part of a mountain?

    By the way, carbon dioxide is a gas. Not a solid, unless you consider dry ice, in which case I would like to ask where dry ice is found on mountains. Your statements make no sense.

    Also, I definitely do not think calcium carbonate is found on mountains.

    As long as there is some cleavage and depression, there should be some elevation elsewhere.
    No. If the land is depressed, the surrounding area is not elevated; that will remain the same.

    It occurred before there was any life. Later on life appeared from those mountains which carried the seed or germ of life. Then life spread to other parts of the Earth. And it cannot be that life originated from the fire.
    Then how come none of the mountains are older than that? In fact, to the extent of my knowledge, the oldest known mountain was formed sometime after life has been estimated to have formed.

    Our science and knowledge is only relative
    Here you remind me of a certain albert chong, who believed much the same thing.

    Of course it is relative. But that we have not found evidence as of yet for what you say -in fact, evidence appears to be against you at the moment- is certainly enough to debate what you say, and attempt to convince you as to what you say is false.
    In control lies inordinate freedom; in freedom lies inordinate control.
     

  28. #328  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Liongold
    Also, I definitely do not think calcium carbonate is found on mountains.
    I am becoming quite bitchy. I don't know if it is age, worries about finance, a medical condition, or just a desire for change. I mention this by way of an apology. Now to your post:
    Bollocks and Balderdash. Calcium carbonate, the primary constituent of limestones is found on many mountains, all over the planet. You might wish to consider Mount Everest, which has thick limestones close to the summit. Or the Dolomites, in the Italian Alps, which - as the name suggests - also contain extensive calcium magnesium carbonates.

    No. If the land is depressed, the surrounding area is not elevated; that will remain the same.
    Look up any elementary textbook on tectonics that includes a section on isostasy, then appreciate how wrong you are. Or read up some of the research on the rebound of the British Isles after the retreat of the ice with the associated depression of the southern ice free portion.

    the oldest known mountain was formed sometime after life has been estimated to have formed.
    If you mean the oldest mountain that remains today as a mountain, then you are correct. We certainly know of mountains that were formed and eroded before life began which today do not form mountains (unless included within a later mountain range).

    I just happen to believe that in rightly dismissing the nonsense that eanassir is posting, that it would be helpful if you did not add more of your own.
     

  29. #329  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    87
    If we know a clever doctor: a physician who is skilled at examining, diagnosing and treating patients; should he know necessarily about the origin of life or how man was created?

    Similarly, even though geologists and scientists studied and made many researches: it is not necessary that they know certainly an absolute knowledge about the origin of mountains, the Earth and the planets.




    About the doctor: he doesn't waste his time to emet theories on the 'creation' of the man; his works mainly consist to 'fight' against diseases.

    The geologist can make researchs (as you said); but he is also able to make theories on mountains and Earth formation.

    And, the theories of those geologists are credible, because they are founded on many clues.


    Again, the rocks present in the mountains tend to show that they are from earth, not from space. Plus, the story of erosion seem to disprove your theory, as I explained.

    The problem with your theory is that it's baseless and (if you reject the conclusion of geologsits analyses) unverifiable and claims to be an absolute knowledge. In other words, from a scientific viewpoint, your theory is less sure than geologists'.

    Your stuff isn't science, i'm afraid.
     

  30. #330  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    87
    1- If there is a big lorry or trailer (: the Earth) moving at a high speed, and there came a motorcycle (: the mountains or meteorites) following the trailer then the motorcycle touched the trailer from behind; will its impact on the trailer be so severe, when both objects are moving in the same direction?
    Depends on the velocity of these objects.



    Moreover, if there is some elastic pads that will absorb the impact, then the effect will be less than expected; because at the start, the crust was not so hard.

    Depends. The asteroids which hit the Earth to form the Moon did damage the Earth during its early epoch.



    3- This process of the settling of the mountains on the Earth took place in the past; then the dust from the space (which till now is falling daily by tons on the Earth), and other geological factors caused the base of the mountains to bury at some considerable depth under the ground.

    Therefore, when considering the age of the mountain, it should be compared to the ground where it fell at the start of its impact, i.e. under the ground near its base or root, but not at the level of the ground now at the present time.
    Some piece of the mountains base reached the surface. The analyses of them rather shows that they are part of continents proving the model of 'blocks'.

    Anyway, these mountains, if they were so old, wouldn't be there anymore due to erosion.




    5- We have to compare the age of the mountains of the Earth and the age of the mountains on the rest of the planets: If they are about the same age: it may give indication about their same origin or source.
    You make a theory; so you must provide those measurement yourself. Apparently, you have already a conclusion BEFORE the facts.

    Anyway, on Earth, measurement shows that mountains aren't very old, due to erosion.
     

  31. #331  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    Isn't it kind of funny that the younger and less eroded a mountain range is, the taller they tend to be?

    For example, that appalachians are older than the rockies and the rockies are older than the himalayas.

    Any guesses as to which range is the highest and which range is the shortest (on average)?

    Hint: You won't find the answer in the Quran
     

  32. #332  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by Liongold
    the volcano will form a mountain.
    Prove it. How can you say so?

    By the way, a moutain does not have a hole at the top leading to the centre, which, according to you, is what volcanoes would form.
    There are many mountains all over the world, which are in facts some volcanoes inactive now or even still active.

    In Japan, there is the Fugi montain which is a typical cone-shaped mountain, and there is a large number of volcanoes in many other countries that formed many mountains.
    http://www.wikimapia.org/7061/Mt-Fuji


    Quote Originally Posted by Liongold
    The erosion will decrease the mountain, but another mountain may be formed elsewhere; as does the interpreter explain and I show you in a previous reply because of CO2 dissolved by rain water --> H2CO3 and this will disslove the Calcium carbonate, and CaO may result which will be carried to depressions and by time a new mountain may result.
    So, when did carbon dioxide become part of a mountain? Has anyone here heard of carbon dioxide being an essential part of a mountain?

    By the way, carbon dioxide is a gas. Not a solid, unless you consider dry ice, in which case I would like to ask where dry ice is found on mountains. Your statements make no sense.
    We didn't say CO2; we said calcium carbonate and other carbonates, and similar salts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Liongold
    Also, I definitely do not think calcium carbonate is found on mountains.
    Read the reply of John Galt, next to your reply, posted: Tue Jan 27, 2009 7:15 pm.
    And see more details here:
    http://universeandquran.t35.com/new_...l_Be_Dispersed


    Quote Originally Posted by Liongold
    As long as there is some cleavage and depression, there should be some elevation elsewhere.
    No. If the land is depressed, the surrounding area is not elevated; that will remain the same.
    Read the reply of John Galt, next to your reply, posted: Tue Jan 27, 2009 7:15 pm.
    And see more details here:
    http://universeandquran.t35.com/new_....htm#Mountains

    Quote Originally Posted by Liongold
    It occurred before there was any life. Later on life appeared from those mountains which carried the seed or germ of life. Then life spread to other parts of the Earth. And it cannot be that life originated from the fire.
    Then how come none of the mountains are older than that? In fact, to the extent of my knowledge, the oldest known mountain was formed sometime after life has been estimated to have formed.
    This is a definite proof that life came embedded in these mountains which were some portion of the destroyed planets in the past; these fossils are the fossils of creatures that had lived in the very past on those planets.
    http://universeandquran.t35.com/new_..._Transmissible


    eanassir
    http://universeandquran.t35.com
     

  33. #333  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,191
    OK I have to say it


    STOP WITH THE LINK SPAM!!!!.


    If you have an argument make it here! DO NOT link every other line in your responses to your website.

    The last post had 5 links 4!!! of which were to your website.

    I really am starting to think this is just about driving up page views on you website.

    If you continue I will start reporting this as Spam!
     

  34. #334  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum
    OK I have to say it


    STOP WITH THE LINK SPAM!!!!.


    If you have an argument make it here! DO NOT link every other line in your responses to your website.

    The last post had 5 links 4!!! of which were to your website.

    I really am starting to think this is just about driving up page views on you website.

    If you continue I will start reporting this as Spam!
    I was going to make a much colder worded reply to him but heistated lest people think I'm a jerk. Turns out, my sentiments were totally right! Also thanks paleo for posting my thoughts in my stead.

    Edit: also, come the hell on, 23 pages of this? Really? Why hasn't this guy been shut down yet? Look at how paleo practically begs him to be a rational person and is telling him to make an arguement. I've been watching this for a while now, and honestly, this is exactly the kind of shit that shouldn't fly by any scientists standards. Link spamming is reasonable if you are citing your source- if your source is your own personal webpage with some rather radical views, I'd say that it's spam.
     

  35. #335  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by mormoopid
    I'd say that it's spam.
    It is ignorant nonsense. eanassir continuously chooses to overlook the fact that the character of the rocks forming the mountains are wholly consistent with their formation according to established tectonic models. He further refuses to acknowledge that this same character is inconsistent with the 'arrival' of this material from outer space.
    This is deliberate ignorance. I sometimes think deliberate ignorance should be a capital offence.
     

  36. #336  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    Concurred, this guy is probably trolling at any rate.
     

  37. #337  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by mormoopid
    Edit: also, come the hell on, 23 pages of this? Really? Why hasn't this guy been shut down yet?
    Maybe that's why the thread is in pseudoscience?
     

  38. #338  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    it's not even pseudoscience, it's more like nonsense.

    Plus, scientific ideas made from holy books belong in religion subforums IMO.
     

  39. #339  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    625
    it's not even pseudoscience, it's more like nonsense.

    Plus, scientific ideas made from holy books belong in religion subforums IMO.
    Quite agree with you, mormoopid.
    In control lies inordinate freedom; in freedom lies inordinate control.
     

  40. #340  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum
    OK I have to say it


    STOP WITH THE LINK SPAM!!!!.


    If you have an argument make it here! DO NOT link every other line in your responses to your website.

    The last post had 5 links 4!!! of which were to your website.
    The four links that I stated out of our website are essential to explain the idea; each idea needs explanation about one to two pages. These ideas are like:

    • The seed of life came to Earth embedded in mountains.
    • The fate of the mountains on Earth in the future.
    • The future changes in the mountains of Earth can be demonstrated by observing the changes that already are taking place on Mercury and Venus.


    And so on: such points need referring for further explanation.
    I can simply say: it is at our website:

    http://universeandquran.t35.com

    Then go to the list of contents at the start of the website, then click on the required link; but this will complicate the matter, and the member may not know what I mean exactly.

    But why is all this; the reader is intelligent and scientific, and cannot be cheated, or should anyone [and this certainly is not any scientific attitude] intend to hinder or impede anything by any pretext?
     

  41. #341  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,191
    Quote Originally Posted by eanassir
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum
    OK I have to say it


    STOP WITH THE LINK SPAM!!!!.


    If you have an argument make it here! DO NOT link every other line in your responses to your website.

    The last post had 5 links 4!!! of which were to your website.
    The four links that I stated out of our website are essential to explain the idea; each idea needs explanation about one to two pages. These ideas are like:

    • The seed of life came to Earth embedded in mountains.
    • The fate of the mountains on Earth in the future.
    • The future changes in the mountains of Earth can be demonstrated by observing the changes that already are taking place on Mercury and Venus.


    And so on: such points need referring for further explanation.
    I can simply say: it is at our website:

    http://universeandquran.t35.com

    Then go to the list of contents at the start of the website, then click on the required link; but this will complicate the matter, and the member may not know what I mean exactly.

    But why is all this; the reader is intelligent and scientific, and cannot be cheated, or should anyone [and this certainly is not any scientific attitude] intend to hinder or impede anything by any pretext?
    As th creator of the website you should have enough knowledge to answer the questions posed WITHOUT needing to link.

    Right now you are providing 1 to 2 sentences per question with the directive to "Follow the link for more information. Even in your response here you tell me to go to the website.

    This is blatant link spamming for your websites page view pumping.
     

  42. #342  
    (Q)
    (Q) is offline
    Forum Isotope (Q)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,650
    Quote Originally Posted by eanassir
    And so on: such points need referring for further explanation.
    I can simply say: it is at our website:

    http://universeandquran.t35.com
    I would agree that Mr. Nassir is spamming the forum with his links.

    And, if Mr. Nassir is pointing us to his website for explanations instead of discussing the issues, this thread should be closed for both that and his spamming.
    Religious Fundamentalist Club - Member #1.
     

  43. #343  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    197
    Now it has become so clear the motives of some repliers here:

    Like "Q" who is an enemy of God, the Islam, Prophet Mohammed and the Quran;
    he inserted some avatars of ridiculing Prophet Mohammed,
    then he inserted another avatar saying beware of the Islam and the Quran, and the administrators did not shut this guy out; this guy thinks that his hiding behind the internet will let him be concealed and he thinks he may be pardoned.

    The administrators obviously see what this "Q" writes on his avatar, but they pretend not seeing! While for some of my posting, they object!

    Another one said "What is such a subject about the mountains coming as meteorites?"

    But why is all this rancor? Is this the science that some speak about or is it only their rancor which they wrap with their science claim?

    And some for a similar reason agree with such replies.


    I tell some guys here: If you try to impede the word of truth and conceal the truth before others, by some way or another, for some purpose; you will not be able to do so; most of people now are educated and they seek after the truth wherever it be.

    Discuss the idea scientifically, which is better than all this, and I say this not for such rancorous guys (who only oppose by any way), but I say this only to some science-pertaining people here like Paleoichneum and Harold14370 and many others.



    eanassir
    http://universeandquran.t35.com
     

  44. #344  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    Rancorous

    Quote Originally Posted by eanassir
    But why is all this rancor



    Poor poor you, someone insulted your faith on a science forum. The world is weeping for you inability to defend your ideas past posting links, saying we cannot see the truth and then crying.

    Another one (mormoopid) says "how do you allow this subject about the mountains coming as meteorites?"
    I didn't say that specifically, what I said was that you've been unable to demonstrate your ideas in a way that make any sense and continue to 'counter' any arguements with absolute nonsense that often has no rational logic behind it. You are a tool. You are basically here trying to get everyone to admit we are so wrong with your myriad of self made links, when the point of a debate is TO ADMIT WHEN YOU ARE BESTED AND HUMBLY BE ACKNOWLEDGED WHEN YOU ARE RIGHT

    You fail at admitting when you are bested, you certainly aren't humble and you have not been right yet; back up your ideas with something that makes sense and isn't 5 links from your personal website or get the fuck out.
     

  45. #345  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    197
    Moormopid is the same one as "Q". I mean he is the same one coming under another name. 8)
     

  46. #346  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    Quote Originally Posted by eanassir
    Moormopid is the same one as "Q". I mean he is the same one coming under another name. 8)
    Yes we are. I request mods do an IP trace to confirm.


    Just because two people think you're an idiot for the same reason doesn't mean they are the same person. Nobody enjoys your shenanigans here.
     

  47. #347  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    okay just because you think we are all picking on you and you have a 'poor me' attitude:

    http://www.thescienceforum.com/viewt...r=asc&start=15

    Since I know you don't post elsewhere in the site, I assume you don't lurk either. Read up that whole thread, you'll see WVBIG being at odds with every other person ideaologically- however, he does what a person who is trying to do science should do. He is altering his views, opinions and ideas to fit evidence that is being presented. He is learning alot, at least I think he is, about what is going on in the subject from people with experience.

    You'll notice nobody is looking down on him, nobody is calling him a tool, and nobody is wanting anyone to go away. Take a look at what you are doing and compare it to him. He is an example of a good poster that nobody has agreed with yet, because he is putting an honest effort into things and not just trying to be 'right about everything'.

    Take some notes from what he is doing; you'll get more positive attention to your zaney idea here and people will WANT to engage you in active debate.
     

  48. #348  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by mormoopid
    Quote Originally Posted by eanassir
    Moormopid is the same one as "Q". I mean he is the same one coming under another name. 8)
    Yes we are.
    Yes, you are the same one "Q" and mormoonpid at the same time, and you may come under two different IPs.

    It seems that you were fond of cartoons when you were a child, and you could not get rid of such hobby of your childish cartoons
     

  49. #349  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt
    eanassir continuously chooses to overlook the fact that the character of the rocks forming the mountains are wholly consistent with their formation according to established tectonic models. He further refuses to acknowledge that this same character is inconsistent with the 'arrival' of this material from outer space.

    The past planets, that had broken up in the past, were earths like our Earth. The indication of such broken up planets lies in the large number of meteoritic rocks that fell and are still falling on the Earth and the other planets.

    Those past planets were earths, with a relatively cold crust and a hot core, with mountains, rivers, plants and animals, and they were inhabited by people just as do we inhabit the present Earth now.

    The portions of the broken up past planets (that fell on the Earth and settled to form most of the mountains here and on the rest of the present planets); such portions or mountains had the same layers of their mother planets, which are also somewhat similar to the layers of our Earth.

    Therefore, what layers you may see included in the mountains resemble the layers of the past planets, as are the fossils the remnants of some creatures that lived there.

    Moreover, following the settling of the mountains on the Earth, they were and still are vulnerable to various geological factors and alterations and changes, from their settling and fixing on the ground till now.



    eanassir
    http://universeandquran.t35.com
     

  50. #350  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    See, you are now talking and explaining things and you are going to get legitimate replies because of it. Good work!

    Were those other Earth's made up of other Earth's too? If not, how can you be so sure those were the originals?

    How can you confirm that these planets were just like Earth if they are so deeply fragmented?

    Are the fossils we find in every mountain range the remains of past life from the other planets? If so, how come they are so identical? I'm assuming you're going to say a divine creation from Allah or some such thing, which is a copout.

    Why would your God, I'm assuming what that is all about cause you keep referencing the Quran, make so many identical Earths and then just break them all apart to make one? Or is there more than one Earth right now?



    I could go on and on and on with questions from your one post, but I really don't want to overwhelm you. Plus I really want to leave enough for Paleoichneum to take a run at you too
     

  51. #351  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by BumFluff
    not sure if this has been pointed out yet but the first few pages I've read it wasn't mentioned. Mountains aren't only formed by volcanoes. There are numerous ways mountains can form. One being plate boundaries and the collision of continental plates.

    If you read some of our replies, when we said:

    "The mountains of Earth are four kinds:
    1. Some of them were formed because of the volcanoes;
    2. Others due to the wearing away and erosion, and due to earthquakes and land depressions;
    3. Others because of land contraction and breaking of its surface: those latter are the Elongated Chained Mountains [i.e. the long mountain ranges.]
    4. But most of the mountains are due to falling of meteorites [: portions of the broken-up past planets] upon the Earth; the meteorites are still falling now and then in some countries, till the present time."


    eanassir
    http://universeandquran.t35.com
     

  52. #352  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    now he's just replying to threads that he overlooked a while ago...

    and ignoring other, more pertinent ones.
     

  53. #353  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,191
    Quote Originally Posted by eanassir
    Quote Originally Posted by BumFluff
    not sure if this has been pointed out yet but the first few pages I've read it wasn't mentioned. Mountains aren't only formed by volcanoes. There are numerous ways mountains can form. One being plate boundaries and the collision of continental plates.

    If you read some of our replies, when we said:

    "The mountains of Earth are four kinds:
    1. Some of them were formed because of the volcanoes;
    2. Others due to the wearing away and erosion, and due to earthquakes and land depressions;
    3. Others because of land contraction and breaking of its surface: those latter are the Elongated Chained Mountains [i.e. the long mountain ranges.]
    4. But most of the mountains are due to falling of meteorites [: portions of the broken-up past planets] upon the Earth; the meteorites are still falling now and then in some countries, till the present time."


    eanassir
    http://universeandquran.t35.com
    I would point out that this is NOT what mormoopid (who is NOT the same person as "Q") asking.

    I will repost his questions:

    Were those other Earth's made up of other Earth's too? If not, how can you be so sure those were the originals?

    How can you confirm that these planets were just like Earth if they are so deeply fragmented?

    Are the fossils we find in every mountain range the remains of past life from the other planets? If so, how come they are so identical? I'm assuming you're going to say a divine creation from Allah or some such thing, which is a copout.

    Why would your God, I'm assuming what that is all about cause you keep referencing the Quran, make so many identical Earths and then just break them all apart to make one? Or is there more than one Earth right now?

    Not none of them is asking about the different types of mountains found on earth now.

    I will again point out that Erosion does in NO WAY produce mountains, it only reduces them in size.

    Along those same lines many volcanos do NOT produce mountains either. The Columbia, Deccan Traps, Siberian, South African, and Brazilian flood basalts all produced vast plains of basalt without a mountain in site and covered much large areas in doing so.
     

  54. #354  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum
    Were those other Earth's made up of other Earth's too? If not, how can you be so sure those were the originals?

    Whenever an old solar system is destroyed, another new solar system will issue instead of the old one.

    The old sun will break up into many pieces → new planets.
    The resulting new planets will be attracted by the nearest sun around which they will circle; and by this way a new solar system will be formed.
    http://universeandquran.t35.com/new_...he_New_Planets

    And this is the standard way in general:

    • The sun will cool by time, then break up into → new planets.

    • The old planets will also break up resulting in → many portions and meteorites that will fall on the newly formed planets to form → the mountains on the new planets.

    • The mountains of the old planets will be smashed into → scattered dust.


    In other words:

    Seven solar systems were destroyed before, and the present solar system is the eighth.

    Seven suns were destroyed before, and the present sun is the eighth.

    And seven Doomsdays occurred in the past, and the coming Doomsday will be the eighth.



    eanassir
    http://universeandquran.t35.com
     

  55. #355  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    I get the impression that eanassir is in fact more than one person. The posting style and grammar is not consistent IMO. Can you confirm this eanassir?

    The thing is, eanassir, that even if you are able to come up with explanations for all of the challenges levied against your claims, you would still never have any actual evidence to prove that you are right and all of the world's geologists are wrong. Also, the only justification you present for your case is your subjective interpretation of the Quran. Am I wrong?
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
     

  56. #356  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,191
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER
    Also, the only justification you present for your case is your subjective interpretation of the Quran. Am I wrong?
    That has been what I have observed. Interpretation of one or two lines from the Quran and then a link to his site with a comment along the lines of "visit the site for more information".
     

  57. #357  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    87
    The past planets, that had broken up in the past, were earths like our Earth. The indication of such broken up planets lies in the large number of meteoritic rocks that fell and are still falling on the Earth and the other planets.

    Those past planets were earths, with a relatively cold crust and a hot core, with mountains, rivers, plants and animals, and they were inhabited by people just as do we inhabit the present Earth now.

    The portions of the broken up past planets (that fell on the Earth and settled to form most of the mountains here and on the rest of the present planets); such portions or mountains had the same layers of their mother planets, which are also somewhat similar to the layers of our Earth.

    Therefore, what layers you may see included in the mountains resemble the layers of the past planets, as are the fossils the remnants of some creatures that lived there.

    Moreover, following the settling of the mountains on the Earth, they were and still are vulnerable to various geological factors and alterations and changes, from their settling and fixing on the ground till now.


    How can you be so certain that past planets were like our Earth (plus, with people, animals, plants and rivers!!) ?

    The presence of ancient solar-sytems proves nothing.

    Obviously, this baseless claim is made to justifiy the presence of similar composition in mountains and in the crust.
    By using this kind of claims, you're avoiding from being refutable, which isn't scientific!

    And as I said, if these mountains were settled billions years ago, why do they still exist today? Erosion doesn't exist for them?
     

  58. #358  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,191
    Quote Originally Posted by eanassir
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum
    Were those other Earth's made up of other Earth's too? If not, how can you be so sure those were the originals?

    Whenever an old solar system is destroyed, another new solar system will issue instead of the old one.

    The old sun will break up into many pieces → new planets.
    The resulting new planets will be attracted by the nearest sun around which they will circle; and by this way a new solar system will be formed.
    http://universeandquran.t35.com/new_...he_New_Planets

    And this is the standard way in general:

    • The sun will cool by time, then break up into → new planets.

    • The old planets will also break up resulting in → many portions and meteorites that will fall on the newly formed planets to form → the mountains on the new planets.

    • The mountains of the old planets will be smashed into → scattered dust.


    In other words:

    Seven solar systems were destroyed before, and the present solar system is the eighth.

    Seven suns were destroyed before, and the present sun is the eighth.

    And seven Doomsdays occurred in the past, and the coming Doomsday will be the eighth.



    eanassir
    http://universeandquran.t35.com
    Again posting the rest of the question that you DODGED!

    How can you confirm that these planets were just like Earth if they are so deeply fragmented?

    Are the fossils we find in every mountain range the remains of past life from the other planets? If so, how come they are so identical? I'm assuming you're going to say a divine creation from Allah or some such thing, which is a copout.

    Why would your God, I'm assuming what that is all about cause you keep referencing the Quran, make so many identical Earths and then just break them all apart to make one? Or is there more than one Earth right now?

    Not none of them is asking about the different types of mountains found on earth now.

    I will again point out that Erosion does in NO WAY produce mountains, it only reduces them in size.

    Along those same lines many volcanos do NOT produce mountains either. The Columbia, Deccan Traps, Siberian, South African, and Brazilian flood basalts all produced vast plains of basalt without a mountain in site and covered much large areas in doing so.
     

  59. #359  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    87
    I saw his website: the writer is non-credible and isn't scientifically rigorous, and is an ignorant; indeed he claims (for certain!) that:

    * Life existed on Venus.
    * The gravity and angular momentum of any planets/stars is caused by heat.
    * The revolution of planets are caused by the axial rotation of the Sun.
    * Tides aren't caused by Moon's attraction.
    * Mars contents people.
    * Asteroids, revolving around the Sun between Mars and Jupiter, are nothing but sattelites of planets.




    Pure pseudoscience...
     

  60. #360  
    (Q)
    (Q) is offline
    Forum Isotope (Q)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,650
    Quote Originally Posted by eanassir

    Like "Q" who is an enemy of God, the Islam, Prophet Mohammed and the Quran;
    he inserted some avatars of ridiculing Prophet Mohammed
    I would suppose the Rules of War in the Quran now give you the right to hack off my head?

    then he inserted another avatar saying beware of the Islam and the Quran, and the administrators did not shut this guy out; this guy thinks that his hiding behind the internet will let him be concealed and he thinks he may be pardoned.
    We'll most likely both be seeing each other in Christian hell.

    The administrators obviously see what this "Q" writes on his avatar, but they pretend not seeing! While for some of my posting, they object!
    You're spamming the forum with links, running a religious agenda with a scientific facade and avoiding questions in favor of posting propaganda. Big difference, pal.

    I tell some guys here: If you try to impede the word of truth and conceal the truth before others, by some way or another, for some purpose; you will not be able to do so; most of people now are educated and they seek after the truth wherever it be.
    Are you threatening people, now?

    Discuss the idea scientifically
    You are pushing a religious agenda that has nothing to do with science. Islamic propaganda of this type is rampant over the internet and Muslims are free to do so. But, don't try and threaten people with your pathetic god on a forum where your idiocies have been called out for what they are.
    Religious Fundamentalist Club - Member #1.
     

  61. #361  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    Quote Originally Posted by (Q)
    don't try and threaten people with your pathetic god on a forum where your idiocies have been called out for what they are.

    Just gonna quote myself here guys and say how funny and true I think it is.

    By my count, my questions have been asked three times and only one was answered, poorly.



    I think we've all had enough, can someome just put this thread out of it's misery?
     

  62. #362  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    And (Q) and mormoopid get the last word!

     

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •