返回总目录
Rebuttals to "Islamic Information" : Science in the Quran - 2 : The Fusing and Separating of the Heavens and the Earth
Responses to "Islamic Information"
Science in the Quran
Chapter 2 : "The Fusing and Separating of the Heavens and the Earth"
Shabir:
How do modern scientists explain the formation of the universe?
Dr. Maurice Bucaille explains it in his book, The Bible, the Qur'an
and Science, as follows:
The basic process in the formation of the universe . . . lay in the
condensing of material in the primary nebula followed by its division
into fragments that originally constituted galactic masses. The latter
in their turn split up into stars that provided the sub-product of
the process, i.e. the planets" (p.149).
Shabir, and Dr. Bucaille, are attempting to suggest that the Qur'an
correctly describes the origins of the Universe according to the
"Big Bang Theory" which, they believe to be universally accepted
by modern science. There are several problems with this approach
which, in the end, defeat Shabir's claims for the Qur'an:
1. Some scientists question the "Big Bang Theory"
There is no unanimous opinion among the scientific community that
the "Big Bang Theory" explains the origins of the universe.
Astronomer Fred Hoyle tells us:
"I have little hesitation in saying that a sickly pall now hangs
over the big-bang theory. When a pattern of facts becomes set
against a theory, experience shows that the theory rarely recovers."
Fred Hoyle, "The Big Bang Under Attack," Science Digest,
May 1984, p. 84.
Shabir:
Does the Qur'an say anything about this condensing and separation
of the primary material to result in the formation of our universe?
Let's have a look. Our creator, Allah, says in his final book:
"Do not the unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were
joined together, then we clove them asunder . . ." (Qur'an 21:30).
This could also be translated as follows:
"Do not the unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were
fused together, then we separated them . . ." (Qur'an 21:30).
Dr. Bucaille sees this as "the reference to a separation process
of a primary single mass whose elements were initially fused
together" (p.143).
Thus the Qur'an gives an accurate account of the formation of
the universe to call upon humankind to recognise the power of
their creator.
2. Problems with the "Theory"
The main problem with this passage is: How do we "see"
that the universe was fused together and separated, as the Qur'an,
and "Big Bang Theory", suggests? We need to have some evidence,
do we not? Or do we have to take the Qur'anic explanation without
observation or experimentation - the hallmarks of science?
There are several observations which are presented as "proof" of
this explanation, but how do these observations stand up to
scientific scrutiny?
Proof 1: Cosmic Background Radiation (CBR)
All matter in the universe radiates heat. Throughout the Universe,
we can detect an extremely uniform type of radiation, known as
Cosmic Background Radiation (CBR). Apparantly, this radiation
comes from matter whose temperature is 2.73 Kelvin, or very near
absolute zero. "Big Bang" proponents tell us that this is left
over from the big bang, and incorrectly believe that the big bang
theory predicts this radiation. (See: Tom Van Flandern, "Did the
Universe Have a Beginning?," Meta Research Bulletin,
Vol. 3, No. 3, 15 September 1994, p. 33.)
The problem with using the CBR as proof of the "Big Bang" is that
CBR is uniform throughout the Universe, therefore, the matter
[from which it originated] must also be uniformly distributed
throughout the universe. However, if matter were uniformly
distributed, it would not gravitate in any given direction - never!
Galaxies, stars, and planets would never have evolved.
Matter is concentrated in the universe in the form of
galaxies, therefore, the CBR cannot be a remnant of a big bang.
Proof 2 : The Amount of Helium in the Universe
Proponents of the "Big Bang Theory" often cite the amount of Helium
in the Universe as proof for their theory. However, on closer
examination, the amount of helium in the universe is not explained
by the "Big Bang Theory". In fact, this theory was modified, into
the "Inflationary Big Bang", in order to "explain" the amount
of helium in the Universe. (See Alan H. Guth, "A Possible Solution
to the Horizon and Flatness Problem" in Physical Review, D,
Vol. 23, 15 January 1981, pp. 348-356.). Even this modified "Big
Bang Theory" is contradicted by of the lack of helium in some types
of stars - B type stars for example. (See: Margaret J. Geller and
John P. Huchra, "Mapping the Universe," Science, Vol. 246,
17 November 1989, pp. 897-903. and M. Mitchell Waldrop, "Astronomers
Go Up Against the Great Wall," Science, Vol. 246,
17 November 1989, p. 885.)
Proof 3: Redshift
The redshift of distant starlight is often explained by scientists
as a Doppler effect - stars that are moving away from earth, are
stretching out (or "reddening") the wave lengths of light that we
observe on the earth. Therefore, this expansion is proof of the
"Big Bang Theory". There is no argument concerning the existence
of Redshift, however, the "Big Bang Theory", and its assumptions
concerning an expanding Universe, are not supported by the facts.
First, there are many objects in space, with have high redshifts,
which appear to be connected with other objects which have low
redshifts. Obviously, these objects cannot be traveling at such
radically different velocities and remain connected. For example,
there are some quasars which have very high redshifts, and they
are clustered with galaxies which have low redshifts. (See:
Halton M. Arp, Quasars, Redshifts, and Controversies
(Berkeley, California: Interstellar Media, 1987).
Second, there are observations [of the Redshift] which are inconsistent
with the Doppler effect. For example, if redshifts are produced by
objects moving away from the earth, we would expect the redshifting
of all of these objects to have continuous values. However, we
observe that redshifts cluster at specific, evenly-spaced values.
(See: William G. Tifft, "Properties of the Redshift," The
Astrophysical Journal , Vol. 382, 1 December 1991, pp. 396-415.)
Conclusion
Clearly, there is no scientific evidence which conclusively
supports the theory that the universe was "clove asunder" as the
Qur'an, or "Big Bang Theory" suggests. Therefore, until we "see"
such evidence, we have no reason to believe the Qur'an, unless we
simply accept whatever it says without investigation - which is not
scientific!
3. Assuming that the "Big Bang Theory" is correct, how does the
Qur'an fit this Model?
Let us assume, purely for the sake of argument, that the "Big Bang
Theory" is true. How does the Qur'an fit this Theory?
Big Bang: Earth formed long after stars
Qur'an : Sura 41:10 tells us that Allah place mountains on
the earth; then, Sura 41:11 describes how the Earth and the rest
of the Universe, which was composed of "smoke", were called together
by Allah; and Sura 41:12 tells us that Allah created the "seven
firmaments". This implies that the Earth is older than the stars!
Big Bang: Plants evolved after the sun
Qur'an:
Once again, Sura 41:10 tells us:
And He made in it mountains above its surface, and He blessed
therein and made therein its foods, in four periods: alike for the
seekers. (Shakir)
Yet, the rest of the Universe was created in Sura 41:11-12 when
Allah called the already formed Earth, complete with plants (and
possibly animals since they are also "foods"), together with the
"smoke" with which He formed the stars. Therefore, according to
the Qur'an, plants (and possibly animals) came before the stars.
Clearly, the Qur'an's account of the origins of the Universe do
not fit the "Big Bang Theory" - nor does the Bible's account.
Therefore, it is philosophical suicide to appeal to the "Big Bang
Theory" to prove the Divine origins of the Qur'an because, if you
use this theory to judge the veracity of the Qur'an, the Qur'an
fails the test of truth.
Shabir:
This raises an interesting question: How could a man living in
the seventh century invent these ideas which could not be
confirmed until modern times? And how could he in so doing
avoid the mythical and fanciful ideas prevalent in human history?
1. There were similar ideas in other cultures
Other cultures have similar tales. The Hindu Rig Veda
says that the universe was created when the golden "cosmic egg"
was split. The Vedic, as well as the Qur'anic account, are nice
stories, however, they do not fit the "Big Bang Theory".
2. Does the Qur'an "avoid the mythical and fanciful ideas"?
How do you explain Sura 27:18-19 in which Solomon overhears
a conversation of ants? (Cf. e.g. Talking Ants,
A Fancy for Fables.)
Andrew Vargo
Responses to "Islamic Information"
Answering Islam Home Page