Lyes L. Thanks the FFI Staff

Printer-friendly versionSend to friendPDF versionFrom: Leys Louali TO: ffi Jun 28, 2006 8:55 AM subject: your challenge for $50,000 Dear Sina, I had the chance to look at the various questions you addressed Mr Naik with and was really amazed to notice that you are challenging whoever can prove you wrong with $ 50,000 and at the same time you cannot afford a $ 90.00 book to prove that Mr. Naik is wrong in his interpretation on mountain formation. Do you know that Amazon.com offers used books for few dollars. The book EARTH is actually offered at $ 4.00. I think it is worth the investment if you really want to make your point and defy Mr. Naik. Good look in your endless fight against islam... Lyes

---

To Louali: Dear Leys: I have already proven that Dr. Naik is wrong. It is impossible for someone like Dr. Frank Press to say such a stupid thing like what Dr. Naik claims. Do you think I should rush and buy a book written by Professor XYZ who claims that the sky is a dome sustained by invisible pillars? Common Leys, there is no need to prove what is already clear to any sensible person. What? Do you really think that it is possible that mountains are placed on earth to give it stability? I have given a cash course on geology for anyone who knows nothing about geology to understand how mountains are formed. Is it not clear? Now if the price of the book is only $4.00 dollars why don't you buy it and prove me wrong? As for affording to give $50,000 dollars, you can rest assured that that money is going to stay in my pocket for good. This is like saying if someone can make the sky fall on earth I will pay him 50K. It is not possible to make sky fall on earth because sky is empty space and cannot fall anywhere. Challenging anyone to prove Islam is true is just as possible as making sky fall. If I offer you 50 billion dollars to prove 2+2 is anything but 4 you are not going to get that money so don't waste your time. Islam is false and there is no way anyone can prove otherwise. If I had any doubt about it do you think I would have risked facing this demonic and unforgiving Allah that Muhammad depicted for us? Please rest assured that Muhammad was a liar. This is clear as the sun. All the best Ali Sina

---

Hi Ali, Thanks for taking the time to respond. Are you Iranian ? i am only asking because you sound Jewish by not wanting to spend the $ 4.00 !!!! just joking of course ...:) I am willing to buy the book but before i do so i need you to confirm that we can use Dr. Frank Press as a reliable reference to the information that may come out of the book. if you have doubts about Dr. Frank credibility then please let me kow so that i can find out why Dr. Naik referred to him. I have noticed more anger than reasoning in your reply; maybe this is due to the various types of e-mails you get and of course i am sure that you were aware that your fight would require patience and lots of efforts. Are all your assumptions about Islam based on prophet Muhammed being a liar ? What is exactly the psychological profile of prophet Muhammed in your opinion ? I am sure that from a medical point of view he must fit into a certain profil. Finally, one of your statements on your website has grabbed my attention !!! In one of your debates you mentioned that you have read the KORAN and found many gramatical errors but you have not given any reference to this. Can you please be kind enough to show me these gramatical errors ? Regards, Lyes

---

Dr. Ali Sina claims to be originally from Iran. I have never found tight wad jokes about jews to be funny. There is too much blood spilt on their basis for an aware person to desecrate the memory of the innocents butchered over the years. You may buy the book and verify or find if your curiousity compels you to do that, and if you find anything of interest that you think FFI should know, please do let us know. It is true that Ali Sina does get his share of hate filled mails and also from complete blithering idiots. It is often difficult to retain a sense of humor and answer each mail strictly on its own merits. But I think the anger you detected is what I consider to be disbelief that sensible people would take a con men like Zakir Naik or Harun Yayha seriously, and it shows the state of the muslim world more than anything else. Regarding the grammatical errors in the Quran you may look at: http://debate.domini.org/newton/grammar.html http://debate.domini.org/newton/scribal.html http://answering-islam.org.uk/Quran/Contra/ http://www.faithfreedom.org/faq/21.htm regards, doubtless

---

To FFI: Do not use the word innocent unless you know well what it means and how to use it. Since your site content is based mainly on logic and scientific/historical facts, you must know that the law of physics applies to people´s behaviour in society as well. When you say a BAD WORD to someone, you never get a smile him. This means, to each action there is a reaction of the same nature and there is no such thing as innocent jews/people being butchered and there is a saying for that : "WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND". It is not your sympathy for the JEWS that is going to make them earn a better status in our today´s and future society. Lyes.

---

To Lyes: I do not understand what you mean by "When you say a BAD WORD to someone, you never get a smile him". Did you mean smile from him? What bad word did I say to you? I have re-read my reply to you and I do not see that I was writing anything bad to you. I was not being sympathetic to the jews. I was merely stating my personal bias in the sense of humor department. And who said anything about jews needing my sympathy to earn anything? When and where did I offer any jew my sympathy? Are you jewish? And as far as I know, no law of physics applies to people's behavior in or out of society. Laws of physics do not apply to behavior, human or animal; at least in the physics I learnt. You seem to have gotten angry. Why? doubtless.

---

To FFI: i was not referring to you in the example i gave. When I said "When you say a BAD WORD to someone, you never get a smile from him", was to let you know that in life you only get treated the way you treat the others. I was basically referring to the JEWS, whom you referred to as "innocents". There is always a reason why humans get exterminated and in my opinion this has nothing to do with MOTHER NATURE but rather with BEHAVIOUR. The is no reason for me to be angry at you !!!!. And of course the law of physics does apply to people´s behaviour. A bad word is a sound wave and the nature of this sound wave can only generate another wave of the same nature. So a bad word generates another bad word, that generates anger, fight, etc..... I am using the above as example and once again it has nothing to do with our e-mails. I apologise for any misunderstanding. :)

---

To: Lyes You write: "There is always a reason why humans get exterminated and in my opinion this has nothing to do with MOTHER NATURE but rather with BEHAVIOUR." I disagree, and I particularly do not like the use of the word "exterminated". So I may understand clearly, how do you propose to explain the following events. The islamic invasion is thought to be responsible for 80 million deaths of indians of India over the centuries. 3 Million Bangladeshi were killed in 1971 by warriors who were being motivated to save Islam. Over a million people have been killed in Darfur by the Arab janjeweed. I can give other well known examples of genocide or attempted genocide. So what reasons do you give for these "exterminations" and would you consider the victims here innocents or not, and what reasons do you propose for these cases that makes the law that you think govern human behavior applicable: "what goes around comes around"? Doubtless.

---

To FFI: First of all MUSLIMS are not the only one to blame on the INDIAN continent invasions and i also think you are a little bit exagerating with the numbers you have quoted but assuming that you are right, 80 million people dead over a period of 500 years is not something suprising considering that the two atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed around 100,000 people in few weeks; 70,000 in the first day. I come back to my point is although most of the people dead due to the atomic bomb were civilians, they have supported the attack of the japanese army and therefore they are paying the consequences of their support. You could also ask about the 80 million indians ( Hindus ), i would simply say that at that period of time human values in society had plunged to the lowest level and since people accepted such lifestyle , i can only see their death as a result to their silence towards all crimes committed in their society such as slavery, child trade, etc..... I think you should loosen up a little bit on Muslims and include other races and faiths when giving examples of genocides !!!! :)

---

To Lyes July 4, 2006 And why do you say that the muslims are not the only ones to blame on the Indian continent invasions? If you are referring to pre-islamic era, then there is hardly any record of the mass muder and enslavement that the muslims wrecked on the inhabitants, and after the muslims the british came by default as the corrupt mughal empire was crumbling and dying anyway. The british did not enslave and did not kill anywhere near the numbers that the muslim rulers were killing on an ongoing basis. You really should read more history. The numbers are not inflated, and you can ask any bangladeshi who can tell you the zeal of the warriors of muhammed since that butchery in 1971 is still in the living memory of many. You are obviously as ignorant about the American history and the dropping of the atomic bombs as you are of indian history. But why is it that muslim or islamic apologists immediately jump to tu tuquque fallacy. The horrendous Islamic atrocities become justifiable if you can show that some one else did some thing bad as well? Why such deficiency in logic? The magnitude of the atrocities and the associated brutality of Islam stands out even in that period, but more importantly in the present, Islam stands alone that is still beheading and waving severed heads to the sounds of Allah hu Akbar. Doubtless.

---

To FFI: Dear Ali, Having Looked at the comparison you have made between the Quranic verses revealed in Mecca and in Medina, i must tell you that you have not been fair in your evaluation. http://www.faithfreedom.org/debates/NaikCampbellp9.htm#inconsistency You have mistranslated the following : 1) Verse 9:123 : The verb "QATEL" from "QÁTALA"( with HARF AL MAD after Q) means fight and not kill or murder. Why do you conclude that death is always the result of a fight ?. 2) Verse 8:12 : You are being very unfair here as you well know that the meaning of the verse is not what you are saying. This verse shows the rules of combat that´s all. I do not know if you are a military man, but if you were, you would know that when a person is in combat, he/she has to strike the weakest points of the adversary and therefore the verse refers to the neck ( weak point ) and the fingers (used to carry the weapon). The way you explain it lets the reader think that muslims should capture the enemy and then chop their fingers OFF. Come ON !!!!! 3) 109:06 : I am sure you know why this verse was revealed and therefore, you know well that it has no connection with verse 3:85 4) 2:191 : You know well that this verse is connected to the previous ones in the same chapter. So do not take it as a single verse to try to make you point. 5) 2:62 and 9:30 : You know well that the verses refer to two different categories of the people of the book. Why do you consider these verses as similar ? Of course we can go on and on exchanging messages in an endless fashion which of course is not my intention. I am not bothered by the content of your website although i am a MUSLIM. However, i think you are being unfair in the way you speak about ISLAM. It seems that MUSLIMS are the only evil people on this planet !!!! Furthermore, what are you trying to prove by going after a man who died 1400 years ago and cannot come back to defend himself. If you really want to support JUSTICE, MORALITY, TRUTH, etc.... why don´t you go after MURDERERS who are still alive ???? Some of them like the BUSH clan, are clearily motivated by religious beliefs ...SCOFIELD BIBLE .... DON´T YOU THINK THAT THIS CAN ALSO MAKE A GOOD CONTENT FOR YOUR WEBSITE ?? OR IS YOUR OBSSESION ONLY WITH ISLAM ? :)

---

To Lyes: [color=maroon]Well you are wrong mostly.[/color] On 7/4/06, Lyes Louali wrote: Dear Ali, Having Looked at the comparison you have made between the Quranic verses revealed in Mecca and in Medina, i must tell you that you have not been fair in your evaluation. http://www.faithfreedom.org/debates/NaikCampbellp9.htm#inconsistency You have mistranslated the following : 1) Verse 9:123 : The verb "QATEL" from "QÁTALA"( with HARF AL MAD after Q) means fight and not kill or murder. Why do you conclude that death is always the result of a fight ?. [color=maroon] This is from someone who is a native speaker of Arabic and it is confirmed by my arabic dictionary: KaTaLa is the Verb for Murder. Katl is the Noun for Murder. Katel (noun) is the Murderer KaTel (Verb) (as used in the Koran) is a passive imperative tense (Order someone to get involved in the act of giving Katl and Taking Katl) Ektel is an active imperative tense (Order to perform Katala) And then "fight" by Muhammed always led to muder of the kaafirs by the thousands and hence is it surprising that for Kaafirs when muslims use the word fight it invariably means 'murder' because actions do speak louder than words. So Ali's translation is honest and accurate, and does not confuse with the Kaafir use of the possiblle benign "fight". [/color] 2) Verse 8:12 : You are being very unfair here as you well know that the meaning of the verse is not what you are saying. This verse shows the rules of combat that´s all. I do not know if you are a military man, but if you were, you would know that when a person is in combat, he/she has to strike the weakest points of the adversary and therefore the verse refers to the neck ( weak point ) and the fingers (used to carry the weapon). The way you explain it lets the reader think that muslims should capture the enemy and then chop their fingers OFF. Come ON !!!!! [color=maroon] This surah was revealed after the battle of badr. After and not before. And are you simply lying as muslims do when you are claiming that it merley rules of combat? You may educate yourself and read some tafsirs of some learned muslim scholars who disagree with you. Can you provide some references to a tafsir and the scholar who agrees with you?[/color] 3) 109:06 : I am sure you know why this verse was revealed and therefore, you know well that it has no connection with verse 3:85 [color=maroon] Why in the heavens name would you make a ridiculous claim like that? Here is what Maualana Mawdudi's commentry on 109:06 says: one finds that it was not revealed to preach religious tolerance as some people of today seem to think, but it was revealed in order to exonerate the Muslims from the disbelievers religion, their rites of worship, and their gods, and to express their total disgust and unconcern with them and to tell them that Islam and kufr (unbelief) had nothing in common and there was no possibility of their being combined and mixed into one entity. Although it was addressed in the beginning to the disbelieving Quraish in response to their proposals of compromise, yet it is not confined to them only, but having made it a part of the Quran, Allah gave the Muslims the eternal teaching that they should exonerate themselves by word and deed from the creed of kufr wherever and in whatever form it be, and should declare without any reservation that they cannot make any compromise with the disbelievers in the matter of Faith. And Ali is taking the liberal view and accepting the lies of most muslims who claim that 109:06 is a verse of tolerance, and not as Mawdudi points out a complete and total rejection of any possible or conceivable tolerance of the Kaafirs, and in effect carries the same message as 3:85. YUSUFALI: If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter He will be in the ranks of those who have lost (All spiritual good). So I agree that Ali Sina may be wrong here but he errs on the side of giving the quran the benefit of doubt of humanity. [/color] 4) 2:191 : You know well that this verse is connected to the previous ones in the same chapter. So do not take it as a single verse to try to make you point. [color=maroon] Are you retreating into the standard Taqqiya standard of the muslims about the clear commands of the quran. It is the same standard lies that the muslims ply today when we read that islam does not condone killing of "innocent" civilians and the jihadis are not following the quran. The problem is that the jihadis argue that the civilians they are beheading are not innocents. No one ever beheads innocents under Islam, except kaafir do end up getting beheaded and cries of Allah hu Akbar do get broadcast as they are being beheaded. Similarly, Muhammed always claimed an inside knowledge and attacked and broke treaties to go kill. So Ali is again absolutely right in using the plain language of the verse to show the evolution of muhammed into a monster.[/color] 5) 2:62 and 9:30 : You know well that the verses refer to two different categories of the people of the book. Why do you consider these verses as similar ? [color=maroon] The verses deal with christians and jews. What different categories are you talking about? [/color] Of course we can go on and on exchanging messages in an endless fashion which of course is not my intention. I am not bothered by the content of your website although i am a MUSLIM. However, i think you are being unfair in the way you speak about ISLAM. It seems that MUSLIMS are the only evil people on this planet !!!! [color=maroon] Well as the saying goes, not all muslims are terrorists but these days 99.9% of the terrorists are the followers of muhammed and his quran. That is a simple fact. And you are mistaken. FFI and Ali would not be striving so hard if they really felt that Muslims are evil people. Islam is evil. Muslims are primarily the victims of that evil. Muslims will defend Islam but the humanity within them survives enough that when faced with the truth about Islam, most of them choose to discard Islam and walk away from worshipping the 7th century beduoin barbarian.[/color] Furthermore, what are you trying to prove by going after a man who died 1400 years ago and cannot come back to defend himself. If you really want to support JUSTICE, MORALITY, TRUTH, etc.... why don´t you go after MURDERERS who are still alive ???? Some of them like the BUSH clan, are clearily motivated by religious beliefs ...SCOFIELD BIBLE .... DON´T YOU THINK THAT THIS CAN ALSO MAKE A GOOD CONTENT FOR YOUR WEBSITE ?? OR IS YOUR OBSSESION ONLY WITH ISLAM ? [color=maroon] FFI does intend to save as many muslims as possible. And of course you will rail agains Bush. That is not surprising at all. But FFI will not stop attempting to reach out to as many muslims as possible and telling them the simple and unvarnished truth about Islam.[/color] :) [color=maroon] Doubtless.[/color]

---

To FFI: THAT´S RIGHT .....YOU GUYS SEEM TO DOMINATE EVERY SUBJECT ........

---

To Lyes: I did attempt to reply as accurately as possible. You do not like the facts, you should argue with the quran and allah. Allah chose to use the word "Katela" and its derivative in the Quran over a hundred times. Probably it is the favorite word of Allah, when it comes to dealing with kaafirs. You do seem to lose your temper easily. Doubtless.

---

To FFI: AFTER HAVING EXCHANGED FEW E-MAILS, IT HAS BECOME VERY CLEAR TO ME WHAT IS THE REAL PURPOSE OF YOUR WEBSITE .....I THOUGHT IT WAS ABOUT RELIGION BUT OF COURSE IT IS NOT ..... THANKS FOR TAKING THE TIME TO RESPOND ....

---

To Lyes: I guess typing in all capital letters makes it more emphatic? The purpose of the website is clearly stated on the site. There is a " read this first" link and then right below is "about FFI" link. You can always look it up. Even in my exchange, I have been telling you that FFI tells the truth about Islam. Being ex-muslims we are very intimately familiar with Islam and the various techniques used by it to silence any questioning of it. Doubtless.

---

To FFI: I must admit that you made me laugh when you used the word TRUTH .... Please keep up the good work because when you think about it, your site is doing a great favour to ISLAM .....

---

To Lyes: Good. Laughter is good for your health. And you see when you have not lost your reasoning in anger, you can see that FFI is doing a great favor to Islam. Muslims always tell us that it increases their faith in Muhammed and Allah. I hope your faith was increased as well. So please tell all the muslims around you to visit FFI and have their faith in Islam increased as well. And yes, truth has its magic; All it needs is a small opening to a closed mind and then it can and does do wonders. doubtless.

---

To FFI: SINCE OUR FIRST E-MAIL, YOU KEEP REPEATING THE WORD ANGRY. i DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY YOU KEEP THINKING THAT I AM GETING UP SET. I AM CIVILISED AND DO BELEIVE THAT PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT TO EXPRESS THEIR THOUGHTS AND POST WHATEVER CONTENT THEY WANT ON THE WEB. I JUST DON´T LIKE IT WHEN THEY DO NOT ACCEPT THAT THEY ARE WRONG AND BEHAVE LIKE THEY KNOW IT ALL ........ AS TO MY FAITH, IT DOES NOT REALLY NEED TRUTH TO GET STRONGER !!! IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN AT THE SAME LEVEL ....IT IS EITHER BELIEVING OT NOT, THERE IS NOTHING IN BETWEEN ..... WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO AS FAVOUR IS THAT FACT THAT YOUR WORK HELPS TRIM ISLAM FROM HYPOCRITS AND I DO NOT THINK THAT IT WILL SOMEHOW HELP INCREASE THE FAITH OF TRUE BELIEVERS.

---

To Lyes: If you do not know why I think you are angry then you should look at your posts agains. And replying in all capitalized words usually suggests yelling over the net. I am willing to accept when I am wrong, and I have told you why I do not think I am wrong given your critique of Ali's post. I quoted Islamic scholars who disagree. So I do not see why I should be saying I am wrong ... just to be sociable on such a topic would be really silly. I think you define the true believers well .. "It is either believing or not, there is nothing in between"... such nice sharp and crisp boundaries between light and dark with no room for grays ... all doubts banished for ever ... a perfect true believer. And yes we do aim to provide courage to the 'munafiqs' to leave Islam behind, and we do encourage all who can think to think about Islam. The true believers of Islam are indeed most welcome to their Islam. Hopefully, the world of the kaffirs will know about Islam well, and hence will be in a better position to evaluate and know the "true believers".

---

To FFI: NO NEED TO GET DEEPER INTO THIS SUBJECT ......BECAUSE YOU KNOW WELL THAT THIS VERB "KÁTALA" WITH HARF AL MAD, IS ALSO USED WHEN ALLAH TALKS ABOUT JIHAD FI SABIL ALLAH "WA KATILOU FI SABIL ALLAH". IN THIS CASE ALLAH IS NOT REFERRING TO AL KUFARS BUT IN GENERAL AND THE VERB OF COURSE DOES NOT REFER TO KILL BUT RATHER TO FIGHT AND EFFORTS. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH ADMITING ERRORS ........

---

To Lyes: July 6, 2006. And that is precisely why many scholars of Islam scoff at people who attempt to paint jihad as an "inner struggle". You may want to read Hassan Banna or even Mawdudi on it. Mawdudi has a whole book on Al-Jihad fi sabil allah, and he does connect "Katilou" to the fact that man does not like what is assigned to him, a quranic injuction, of using the sword of Islam on kaafirs who do not submit to islam. Have you never wondered why some Islamic nations have the sword of Islam on their national flags? doubtless

---

To FFI: October 9, 2006 Dear Ali, I was going to buy the U$ 4.00 book and then i saw a link on your website for donations. What do you think would be better, donate the U$ 4.00 for FFI or buy the book ? Amazing how you can challenge people with a USD 1 Million and you beg for donations to keep your webserver going !!!!! Just keep in mind that you need to raise more the USD 400 billions because the US still has not scratched the upper layer of the ISLAMIST resistance with over USD 350 billions waisted in Iraq and Afganistan. Amazing how the KORAN is correct and precise on a very specific humand kind ....:) All the best ....

---

To Lyes: You compare what the US is doing to what FFI is doing? Now why would you do that? FFI is attempting to expose Islam. Bush calls Islam a peaceful religion. But your victim mentality does not allow you to see the difference. FFI tells the truth about the pedophile prophet while the US government holds an iftar party. But in the end it will be the few thousand of dollars spent by FFI that will be far more effective than the billions spent by the US. Grass root movements do depend upon membership support, and we are indeed lucky to have very dedicated and very talented members. The errors in the Quran are so nuemerous that you will be better off saving your $4.00 really. The mountains as pegs is really a lost cause. But it is surprising that your zeal has not compelled you to spend your $4.00 so far to satisfy your curiousity. regards, doubtless.

---

To FFI: I am doubtless like yourself...no need to satisfy my curiosity !!! Intelligent people do not use the statements or acts of insane people like Bush as a reference !!! You see, now how can i take you seriously ? Lyes

---

To Lyes: It is absolutely amazing how muslims respond so very differently than the kaafirs to "doubtless". Never fails. You are indeed doubtless. I am not. best wishes, doubtless

---

To FFI: unless the kaafirs have their own dictionary !!! of course this is possible if we consider all the false translations you use on your website ...

---

To Lyes: No dear lyes, proper comprehension does not rely upon a private dictionary. It does need an open mind and familiarity with various cultures. Unfortuantely you have demonstrated amply that you cannot access either. So you are stuck with the hysteria you display. Sorry, my sympathies. best wishes, doubtless.

---

To FFI: Your boring task of responding to people´s comments has turned you into a stereotyped person. Your replies are all similar and show a serious complex of superiority and arrogance.

---

To Lyes: Dear Lyes, I was neither trying to be arrogant nor superior. I merely called it as I saw it. I am not sure what you mean by a stereotyped person. However, if you do ever spend that four dollars and do get to the root of the "root of mountains" that have been planted as pegs by Allah, please let Ali know. with regards, doubtless

---

To FFI: I will try to do so ... So in your opinion all statements made by the various scientists such as Gerald C. Goeringer, Siaveda, Joe Leigh Simpson, Keith L. Moore, Durja Rao and E. Marshall Johnson on the scientific facts in the KORAN, is just Crap !!!!

---

To Lyes: Lyes, That argument is very much like saying were all the tens of thousands of really big name and recognised Philosphers and Scientists from the dawn of humanity till 1930's wrong and full of crap when they considered space to be independent of matter? Why are you reciting names when you should be talking about particular facts about geology? Ofcourse the people that you name were wrong about many things and were right about many things. Or are you suggesting that they could never be wrong? Why do you not tell exactly what facts did they recite that you think validated that Quran is error free, and then I can tell you whether I think they are full of crap or not? doubtless.

---

To FFI: Doubtless, These are two statements from Dr. F. Press and Dr. Siaveda. I am not interested in your personal opinion or the opinion of Ali Sina, since you guys are not scientists in this field, but rather in the comments of a reliable scientist who can claim the below statements are totally wrong. "The fundamental difference between continental mountains and the oceanic mountains lies in its material. Continental mountains are made essentially by sediments, whereas the oceanic mountains are made of volcanic rocks. Continental mountains were formed by compressional forces, whereas the oceanic mountains were formed by extensional forces. But the common denominator on both mountains are that they have roots to support the mountains. In the case of continental mountains, light-low density material from the mountain is extended down into the earth as a root. In the case of oceanic mountains, there is also light material supporting the mountain as a root, but in the case of oceanic mountain this material is not light because the composition is light, but it is hot, therefore expanded somewhat. But from the viewpoint of densities, they are doing the same job of supporting the mountains. Therefore, the function of the roots are to support the mountains according to the law of Archimedes." Professor Siaveda described the shape of all mountains whether they are on land or in the sea as being in the shape of a wedge. Could anyone imagine that the solid massive mountain that he sees before him actually extends deep into the earth and has a root as scientists assure? Professor Siaveda was asked whether the mountains have a function in establishing the crust of the earth. He said that this has not yet been discovered and established by scientists. Frank Press illustrates the mountains in a wedge-like shape where the mountain itself is but a small part of the whole whose root is deeply entrenched in the ground. Dr. Press states that they play an important role in stabilizing the crust of the earth.

---

To Lyes: Lyes, Now you say: "I am not interested in your personal opinion or the opinion of Ali Sina, since you guys are not scientists in this field, but rather in the comments of a reliable scientist who can claim the below statements are totally wrong.". Seriously, if you are not interested in our opinion, then why ask it? If you want the comments of a reliable scientist then I suggest that you approach one and ask. If you are serious about learning and finding out, you will do your homework about the topic sharpen your questions and then approach couple of professional geologists and ask. I have done enough science in my life to know what I want to pursue, and I am convinced that the quranic arguments about mountains as pegs is silliness just as shooting stars are to ward off jinns, etc. I am not interested in wasting time trying to chase every silly idea that muslims come up with an attempt to save the infallibility of the quran as the word of God. It is clear that you do not and you think that there is merit in the notion that Quran has to be consistent with all modern science. I am sure you can find very reputable geologist near where you are and you can go and talk to them about the two opinions. To help you out in sharpening your questions for the geologists, I have found a link that you may find useful: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Regents_Earth_Science_(High_School) It explains the notion of "roots" of mountains and gives a brief idea of why it arose in the 1950's and then later why plate tectonics resolved many of the issues and the notion of pegs stabilising the earth is resolved by as the article ends: "We have inherited some of the old terminology, but the underlying concept is as radical and simple as "The Earth moves" was in astronomy.". It is at the high school level and hence even if you are not very familiar with geological concepts it should be accessible to you. Best of luck. regards, doubtless.

---

To FFI: This is a response from top deep geologists in the UK. And for your information this topic is not for any georlogist ...OK. You don´t ask questions about cancer to an Ophtalmologist !!!!!!! This is the problem of Kafirs who only believe in science and they think that modern science has finally come up with all the answers ...Amazing how you make your arguments so simple which of course reflects the simplicity of the mind of the kafir Do you have the slightest idea on how top scientists are really lost in string therory after they have though it was finally the beakthrough from quantum mecanics ?????? Read the comments and you will notice that this subject is not that easy to comment on !!! So you better keep the link you have sent me to yourself or Ali ... ********************************************************************** Please see response from one of the BGS deep geologists. I hope it helps. Yours sincerely Anthea Anthea Brown BGS Central Enquiries KW "The first statement is somewhat simplified but is largely correct. Quite readily demonstrated by deep geophysical data. Regarding the second statement - it is difficult to understand what Siaveda and Press actually envisage. Low-angle shear-zones and wedge-like geometries are consistent with mountain building, but not all mountains are wedge shaped." -----Original Message----- From: ask_about_geology@mailr-s.nerc.ac.uk [mailto:ask_about_geology@mailr-s.nerc.ac.uk] Sent: 10 October 2006 18:04 To: enquiries@bgs.ac.uk Subject: Ask-about-Geology question The fundamental difference between continental mountains and the oceanic mountains lies in its material. Continental mountains are made essentially by sediments, whereas the oceanic mountains are made of volcanic rocks. Continental mountains were formed by compressional forces, whereas the oceanic mountains were formed by extensional forces. But the common denominator on both mountains are that they have roots to support the mountains. In the case of continental mountains, light-low density material from the mountain is extended down into the earth as a root. In the case of oceanic mountains, there is also light material supporting the mountain as a root, but in the case of oceanic mountain this material is not light because the composition is light, but it is hot, therefore expanded somewhat. But from the viewpoint of densities, they are doing the same job of supporting the mountains. Therefore, the function of the roots are to support the mountains according to the law of Archimedes." Professor Siaveda described the shape of all mountains whether they are on land or in the sea as being in the shape of a wedge. Could anyone imagine that the solid massive mountain that he sees before him actually extends deep into the earth and has a root as scientists assure? We asked Professor Siaveda whether the mountains have a function in establishing the crust of the earth. He said that this has not yet been discovered and established by scientists. Among some scientists are the authors of this book, entitled The Earth. This book is considered as a basic reference text in many universities throughout the world. One of the authors of this book is Frank Press. He is currently the President of the Academy of Sciences in USA. He illustrates the mountains in a wedge-like shape where the mountain itself is but a small part of the whole whose root is deeply entrenched in the ground. Dr. Press writes on the functions of the mountains and states that they play an important role in stabilizing the crust of the earth. ========================================================================= This Email has been automatically generated in response to the submission of a question to the Ask-about-Geology service at BGS. =========================================================================

---

Lyes, Not a resounding corroboration of the Quran is it? "somewhat simplified?" "difficult to understand what Siaveda and Press actually envisage"? Do you really believe that the plates do not move on the planets surface? So what are the mountains being used to peg? Why does the quran say the mountains are like pegs? To peg what down? doubtless.