I don't think any of the old civilizations were "backward."
I'm referring to a prior argument between OzzieGt and I, where he claims that people in the 7th century (when the Quran was written by a SUPPOSEDLY illiterate Muhammed - which is a hotly debated topic, by the way, and isn't fact) weren't all that knowledgable about science. I say bullshit. Just look at the evidence, the pyramids, the observatories and ruins of Mayan culture, Stonehenge, the Sphinx, and so on. Scientists are STILL scratching their heads over these things. "How could they have known how to do these things?" they say.
We are discovering things about past civilizations all the time, and one of the common themes we find is that they were smarter than we give them credit for. I refuse to believe that they were directed to do these things by a higher power. That's the lazy thinker's response.
Ohh, okay. I'd have to agree with you then. As another example, look at the architectural achievements of the Romans...the Coliseum, the aqueducts, thousands of miles of roads. They built their structures so well they are still (mostly) standing today. If many of them hadn't been destroyed in the countless wars since then, I'm sure they'd still be standing and functional to this day.
There are some things they knew, and there are some thigns they couldn't have known because we are just discovering them now. It's a matter of distinguishing between the two. This was a clever solution to a problem which is actually pretty basic...moving heavay stones doesn't take much science. Look how basic this guys proposed solution is...there is no complicated math or engineering involved here. And I never said the pyramids are a sign of a higher power
If you think that people in the 7th century had knowledge about deep oceanography, fetal biology, the expansion of the universe, and plate tectonics, I will disagree with you until you have proof otherwise...but you are free to your opinion.
[Comment was edited by OzzieGT on August 02, 2003 at 10:32:25 AM]
No it's not that amazing. Scientists knew they had some easy way of moving the stones...they just couldn't figure out what it was. As we can see here, their theories that it was actually a pretty simple solution hold true.
If you can point me to some debates about whether Muhammad was illiterate or not I would appreciate it. And no, Muslims don't believe Muhammad wrote the Quran. Also, he never actually wrote a word himself...he would recite and others would write it down. But this is not a proper medium for discussion like this...it's a waste of time arguing here.
I wouldn't doubt that he was considering most people couldn't read or write during that time.
http://www.submission.org/illiteracy.html
http://www.islamicproductions.com/mo-write.htm
Damn, I found a really good link yesterday about this, but I can't find it again!
"But this is not a proper medium for discussion like this...it's a waste of time arguing here."
If it's a waste of time arguing here, then why continue arguing? I've asked this several times and you've yet to answer it.
"And I never said the pyramids are a sign of a higher power"
I never said you said that, however, if you believe that the Quran was written with the help of a higher power, then you are claiming something along the same lines. You're claiming that there's no possible way anyone in the 7th century could have known certain things, therefore, a higher power told them all about it.
Let's say a guy in his garage discovers how to create fusion which creates far more energy than the energy requires to create it. He writes down his research in a journal, then dies.
Two thousand years in the future, some archeologist finds his journal, and exclaims "Look! He's written down the formula for fusion, how the hell could he have known that! We're just learning how to create it now! He must have been instructed on how to do this by a higher power!"
See the logic problem?
[Comment was edited by fpp on August 02, 2003 at 03:20:00 PM]
No. Your logic is based on the fact that
A) this man never discussed his discovery to anyone (not likely if the knowledge was going to benefit lots of people)
B)you are forgetting that discovering fusion would require some scientific equipment and knowledge prerequisites as well.
C)you are describing someone discovering a phonemonon that can be observed very easily(bam, you see fusion take place...you don't need a broader scope of things to see it)...not all scientific knowledge can be observed so easily.
[Comment was edited by OzzieGT on August 02, 2003 at 04:27:06 PM]
"If it's a waste of time arguing here, then why continue arguing? I've asked this several times and you've yet to answer it."
If you are going to voice your opinion why can't I voice mine? That's not necessarily discussion.
Great! Now you're thinking logically.
"A) this man never discussed his discovery to anyone (not likely if the knowledge was going to benefit lots of people)"
He could have discussed it, but knowledge gets lost over time. It may not happen so easily now, when information gets spread across the planet quickly, but it's still possible, depending on the documenation methods used and how much that documentation is repeated.
"B)you are forgetting that discovering fusion would require some scientific equipment and knowledge prerequisites as well."
True, but are we truly aware of how much equipment and prerequisite knowledge they had in the 7th century? We could debate this endlessly, but the fact is (taking an example from the Quran) many things could have been discovered a long time ago, forgotten and re-discovered, such as the fact that only female bees leave the hive to collect pollen. Just because this is something we've discovered recently doesn't mean the knowledge never existed prior to that.
"C)you are describing someone discovering a phonemonon that can be observed very easily(bam, you see fusion take place...you don't need a broader scope of things to see it)...not all scientific knowledge can be observed so easily."
Actually, fusion is not all that simple to witness. That's why we had these scientists a couple of years ago who claimed they had created fusion, when in fact they had not.
Anyway, I understand your point, that yes, not all scientific knowledge can be observed easily. However, I believe we continue to underestimate the knowledge of past civilizations. Lacking what we have today, they were probably very creative in finding ways to observe the world around them.
[Comment was edited by fpp on August 02, 2003 at 05:52:17 PM]
"If you are going to voice your opinion why can't I voice mine? That's not necessarily discussion."
OK, but your point was this whole thing is a waste of time. I don't consider it a waste of time at all; I find your arguments about the scientific knowledge in the Quran quite interesting, and in the short time since I've learned about them, I've been thinking about it. That's what skeptics do, they like to research people's claims until they find rational explanations for them, and it's just a matter of time until they do.
"They hate me because I have skewered ancient Egypt on them," he said with a chuckle."
Scientists do not get angry at new discoveries. They embrace change. They are contacting him because they want to hear what he has to say.
Bleh. It's not that difficult to build something like that when you have tens of thousands of slave peons, a government that considers them dispensable and doesn't care if they die, and a government willing to bankrupt a great empire trying to build them.
Actually they had better labor than slave: Reglious laborers.
The technologies of many civilizations was very successfully wiped out by many a holy crusade from many a holy religion. Each, of course, needing to properly make way for it's own dark age, from which it could ignorantly emerge as the "first and only" civilized people.
fpp
Isn't it amazing that scientists (and non-scientists) are just now figuring out things that were built or figured out centuries ago? Maybe people in the past weren't as backwards as we think they were.
Wouldn't you say that's amazing, OzzieGT?