Pervez Hoodbhoy Fails in Science and in Islam

Pervez Hoodbhoy, the Pakistani secular modernist, has taken this opportunity of “covid crisis” to praise Darwin, Modi, Mohammad bin Salman, and, of course, the Enlightened West. Us Muslims, however, are so backwards because we reject Darwin and we know that Allah controls all affairs.

Pervez’s misunderstanding of Islam is only overshadowed by his ignorance of science.

To keep it brief, Pervez says:

“CHARLES Darwin is a name Pakistanis are taught to hate. School teachers and university professors tasked with teaching his evolutionary theory usually skip the subject or, if they go ahead, first soften it with a ton of scorn.”

This is great news. I’m glad that Pakistan is holding strong against the long-debunked Darwinian delusion. Has Pervez not kept himself abreast of the latest developments within biology, where even evolutionists are admitting that Darwinism plays no appreciable role in the origins and development of life?

Oxford biologist Denise Noble has written extensively on his claim that, “The gene-centric model of neo-Darwinism has failed.” Biologist Kevin Laland and his colleagues confirm this negative appraisal of Darwinian natural selection in the authoritative journal Nature, saying, “Does evolutionary theory need a rethink? Yes, urgently.” Atheist philosopher Jerry Fodor and biologist Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini co-wrote an entire book dedicated to “What Darwin Got Wrong” about ultimately rejecting his theory. Prominent atheist philosopher Thomas Nagel made waves with his short book, “Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False.” Recently, Yale professor and computer scientist David Gelernter made headlines with his essay “Giving Up Darwin.”

And the list goes on. Yet, Prof Hoodbhoy seems to be blissfully unaware of these developments and continues to subject Pakistan to garish displays of devotion to a long-ago fallen idol of atheistic materialism.

Pervez says:

“Darwinian selection is as fundamental to biology as Newton’s Law is to physics. Denying the theory of gravity will not cause gravity to disappear.”

Again, Prof Hoodbhoy is living in the wrong century. Modern physics has demoted Newton’s Law of Gravitation to a useful, but ultimately false model of the gravitational force. General Relativity is now believed to be the true account of the attractive celestial mechanism known as gravity.

Pervez says:

“Without Darwinian selection one can’t even begin to understand microbial-host interaction, the evolution of pathogens, or start developing drug and vaccines.”

Laughably false. A basic review of history will prove that an understanding of inoculation against diseases was known as early as the 10th century in China. Vaccines in their modern conception were invented by physician Edward Jenner against smallpox in 1796, thirteen years before the birth of Darwin. Isn’t it amazing how he was able to effectively wipe out the plague of smallpox without knowing anything about Darwinian selection?

Interestingly, Jenner was not an atheist materialist, but a Christian who remarked: “I am not surprised that men are not grateful to me; but I wonder that they are not grateful to God for the good which He has made me the instrument of conveying to my fellow creatures.”

The inventor of the contemporary vaccine understood God as the Source of all good. How ironic that today’s materialists balk at religious devotion and meekness before God, while pridefully attributing salvation from contagion to themselves and their puny brains.

Pervez says:

“Even ultra-conservative and science-rejecting world leaders are now begging scientists to speed up the rescue work.”

What a transparent projection of his own insecurities onto believers!

Muslims aren’t begging anyone except Allah. Those who have no faith and have no understanding of the Divine Qadr of Allah are the ones who have no choice but to resort to begging mere men to save them. All the science and technology in the world could not stop one of the smallest creatures of Allah from bringing the globe to its knees. If science were such a powerful savior, why could it not prevent this ongoing catastrophe? How flimsy and insecure is this “edifice” of science and modern civilization if a single mutated virus can bring it to the brink of destruction?

More importantly, what other creations of Allah exist or will exist in the future that could obliterate man off the face of the earth and make covid look like a cuddly teddy bear in comparison? Science cannot answer this question because science does not even know what it does not know. Yet, materialists like Hoodbhoy aim to foist this broken, inadequate epistemology onto the world.

No thank you.

Allah says, “Has it ever occurred to man that there were eons of time when he was nothing even to be mentioned?” [76:1]

This “nothing” now has the audacity to pretend like his naturalistic delusions are the end all, be all of existence, as ultimate savior. How fitting for that arrogance and the sinful heedlessness of modern man to be shattered by viral punishment.

Believers reject the materialist’s hubris and return their affairs to the Creator, who can begin and end all crises as He sees fit, how He sees fit.

May Allah rectify our hearts and minds and protect us from His punishment.

MuslimSkeptic Needs Your Support!

45 COMMENTS

  1. This pseudo-intellectual is filled with so much hatred for Islam. The way he distorts facts to disparage Islam and Muslims is disgusting.

    May Allah protect us from the punishment of the Hereafter.

      • He is an ismaili..he aint a muslim anyway..an agent of zionist to destabalize pakistan in every way..This pig headed person is so full of himself, self professed intellectual, seems inspired immensely by Kill Bill Gates. Nobody gives a damn about him…he has very little following. InshAllah losers and sellouts of the lowest order like him can never make their mark…not in countries like Pakistan at least .

  2. He’s probably an atheist for all intents and purposes. But I’m just curious what background he comes from. Specifically, is he an Ismaili or a Qadiani? If so, that will adequately explain his hatred for Islam.

  3. The Modern Synthesis is till this day orthodoxy in evolutionary biology in spite of continued interrogation (not recent) within the field. It’s deeply misleading to question its methodological robustness, let alone to say that it “plays no appreciable role” in evolution, just because certain individuals have stated their opposition.

    Noble’s conception of biological development has not been empirically established and other sceptics in the field have not proposed an acceptable alternative. Philosophers like Nagel and Fodor are welcome to criticise orthodoxy, and anyone should be free to do research and reach their personal conclusion, however nothing you have written diminishes the scientific authority of the Darwinian evolution.

    Additionally, even Denis Noble and other biologists who do not buy into neo-Darwinian orthodoxy, do not contend chimp-human common ancestry; their disagreement has more to do with the mechanism driving biodiversity.

    The vast majority of scientific and educational institutions, i.e. Nature (the official stance, not a single scientists contention in one article), Science, PNAS, Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, MIT, &c., would be in line with Pervez Hoodbhoy’s views on this. This has nothing to do with authority determining what is or isn’t scientific, these institutions employ educated scientists and philosophers who have participated in and analysed the empirical literature in the field.

    • Evolution is a garbage unproven hoax.
      Darwin was closer to a comic book writer than a scientist when he wrote his theory.
      One good thing about him is that he came up with assumptions that should hold true if his theory is true; and every one of his assumptions were proven wrong.
      All his followers are doing is trying to revive an already dead corp by coming up with cleverly named new theories.
      I want you to do me a favor and tell me why darwinism is good for science? How will darwinism help with finding a vaccine for covid-19?

      • brother a7med i agree with u..u nailed it.. however u need to dig deeper in the subject of vaccines its origin and how its destroying humanity. please dont wait for a vaccine for the hoax covid 19..there is so much more than what meets the eye..do ur research..NEVER BELIEVE THE MSM…THEY ARE THE LIARS OF THE HIGHEST ORDERS..HUMANITY NEEDS TO WAKE UP TO THE DECEPTION..fake scinece fake medicine fake media fake history fake education is the gift of western civilaztion that we accept and believe more than the word of Allah..:(((

      • Charles Darwin is responsible for standardising the validity of Evolution with empirical observations. Prior speculations pertaining to speciation and even natural selection existed, but it was Darwin who transposed it into a reliable scientific theory.

        Evolutionary biology enhances our understanding of viruses and individualised medicine.

        https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/medicine_01

      • @A muslimah;
        I am not a big believer in modern medicine and at the same time you shouldn’t fall victim to far fetched conspiracy theory.
        The muslim position is that of moderation.

        We are not like ‘modernists’ that take modern medicine as a god and think that it has the possibility in the future to revive the dead or stop the aging process. Allah sent to them COVID-19, a small organism to show them how weak they are.
        On the other hand, we shouldn’t deny proven and beneficial advancements in real science like vaccine and fall victim to lies and deceptions.

        The anti-vaccine movement was born in the west when doctors replaced the humble attitude of the scientist with arrogance. They started to promote their cure as a magical pill with no side effects and when people discovered the side effects they lost faith in them.
        The reality is much more subtle, every drug has side effects and the doctor position is to weight in the harms and benefits. Overall vaccines have more benefits.

      • Which of the “assumptions that should hold true [ if Darwin’s] theory is true” were proven wrong?
        To take only two examples, the great physicist William Thomson, Baron Kelvin showed that its core temperature meant the earth could not have been inhabitable by life for anything like enough time for evolution to take place on the scale Darwin hypothesised.
        Animal breeders pointed out that beneficial mutations would quickly disappear in their descendants as they were overwhelmed by other inheritances.
        It turned out that Darwin’s assumptions about the age of the earth and the nature of heredity, not what everyone knew, were true.

    • Bilal,
      Tell me what empirical observations did Darwin make? Did he observe monkeys changing to humans?!
      All he did was coming up with a scenario that works for a bad comic book based on his imagination.
      As for your link, in the first sentence they say: ‘we can better take advantage of these advances by taking evolution into account.’

      Which does prove the point Daniel made and I am making ; vaccines were developed without ever taking the myth of evolution into account.

  4. Everyone knows that the official stance in most cases is pro-Darwin. But that doesn’t prove Darwinism right; it just shows that the naturalist/atheist scientific establishment is reluctant to discard a theory that supports their ideology, even if it goes against what their own research reveals. Just like the church once refused to accept basic facts about the physical world due to bias. But in the end, they had to bow down to reality. The same will be the case with this modern denial of reality (Darwinism). Every passing day, it becomes harder for materialists to justify their Darwinian delusions, as more and more research confirms what should be obvious to anyone who’s not a chimp himself – that life is not purposeless and arisen out of chance as implied by Darwin. Instead of looking at the official stances of universities, you should perhaps delve into the actual biological literature to see how scientists are becoming increasingly sceptical of Darwinism. Many of them, though, don’t come out with their dissent openly, due to fear of backlash from the orthodoxy. But that might not last long as the facts are becoming increasingly undeniable. Darwinism will one day just be another rejected theory, a relic of the past and a reminder of how human beings will always stray in the dark if they don’t accept the guidance of Allah Almighty.

    • Sure, but the empirical observations in wide ranging fields from genetics, paleontology, biogeography, to the fossil record, has established Darwin’s conception of evolution. Darwin himself preceded newer developments in the field (Modern Synthesis). Journals like Nature and Science have an extensive and rigorous peer-review system that the general public should trust, these people aren’t lying to you. It’s incredible how, on one hand you invoke doubt in our trust in these institutions but concomitantly suggest that newer research is disproving Darwinian evolution. Which new research?

  5. I am humbled to witness this discussion. I too have an opinion, but more general in some sense.
    You might find my words scattered since I wrote it in hurry. Apologies for that. Assume my knowledge about Darwin’s theory is that it is most credible explanation that biology has come up so far, though I don’t shy from saying it might just be approximation of some fundamental theory, or it may even fail completely… this is the beauty of science. It would never get stuck at a point.
    While the writer has tried to capture the position of Dr Hoodbhoy and the like vis-a-vis religion to a fair level( I would agree to a great extent), but he hasn’t been able to appreciate what makes some people to get so hard against religion. If you think it is just ignorance or any bias that makes scientists blind in recognizing “truth” of religion, you might have done a wrong estimation…
    since I am myself privileged to work on some foundational questions in physics in my humble capacity, I am quite familiar about the atheistic or agnostic position of many noted figures in my field. Not all of them have any a priori bias against faith. Even some of them are highly religious. Prof. Salam is an epitome of that (though some might see him as apostate). They have been very open to any line of argument and evidence. In my understanding, they believe the sole line of probing our existence(“search for truth”) is the brain, which never stops questioning. On contrary, religion has gone very far and claims totality and yet unable to withstand few questions… if God hypothesis solves any issues , it is only by paving way for further questions which religion can’t answer explicitly, or even discourages to ask them.
    By religion(and here Islam), I mean whole baggage of 14 centuries scholarship as well… I better call it religious thought, since it is human endeavor to comprehend that Heavenly will. If you separate the message given by the Creator to the Prophet(PBUH) per se from the whole course of evolution of comprehending that message(centuries old scholarship), I can safely say that I have no logical or rational position to talk about that original message(only God knows that).. I can only remark at the this centuries old tradition.
    Let me tell you that this tradition has been incompetent to give a coherent world view.. if you happen to see only the beautiful side of this tradition( which indeed is beautiful in many ways) you probably will miss to appreciate the kind of “fallible stuff” it carries with it… let me tell you with confidence that the kind of nonsense people do in the name of islam worldwide , has got everything to with this tradition. The claim of peaceful “islam” , “universal truth” and many other labels are just a fallacies coated with fancy words…Further, there is no uniformity in the religious camp over many issues, which they claim is just merely a disagreement of opinions… but when they extrapolate things too far, they get radically opposite conclusions… science on the other hand mostly comes to same conclusion that fits the observation.
    You talked about Newtonian gravity being wrong. I agree with that partially. But Newtonian gravity has its own regime of application where it works incredibly well with utmost satisfaction. Same true for Einstein theory of gravity. I am sure what Hoodbhoy means when he says “ Darwin’s theory is as important to biology as Newtonian gravity is to physics”. No theory is perennial, yet every theory definitely has an element of certainty and satisfaction in it which people call being “fundamental” in nature. So the take home message is that science and religion can never be friends with each other though they definitely have some intersecting lines.. sometimes they would seemingly agree with each other,while at times they would wrestle with each other in full strength.
    Hope I have not killed your precious time.

  6. Explaining evolution or natural selection exists is like explaining the flat earther that earth is a globe. You may reject darwins conclusions and observations but still it will not mean that evolution doesn’t exist it would only mean that darwins theory doesn’t explain the fact conclusively. For example if i present a theory that gravity exists because earth revolves around the sun and if someone disproves it … that doesn’t mean that gravity does not exist. It just means that my theory failed to explain the fact and did not explain the causation. It will mean that there must be a different phenomenon happening for this particular fact. Similarly even if darwins theory disproves, still it will not change the evolution as a fact. It will just mean that there is a different phenomenon happening and causing evolution. And Darwins was not the first one who proposed natural selection, its early muslim scientists who proposed the theory of evolution and natural selection. Evolution, adaptation and natural selection is observable phenomenon ..for starter look around how people of a particular region look similar but different then the people from other region. Why in africa people have more melanin (skin pigment) than the people in Siberia ? It is because over the period of time their body adapted and changed to their respective environment now spread this phenomenon over billions of years and you will see how one living being evolved into other.

    • These people horribly misinterpret Thomas Kuhn’s ‘paradigm shift’ as an accessory to disregard any finding they don’t like. “Oh! But what about Einstein’s general relativity replacing Newtonian mechanics?” This fundamental conflation between the fact of evolution and theory of natural selection spurs ignorance, epistemic arrogance, and bad faith arguments.

      The fact that evolution occurred is not disputed. The theory of natural selection as the principal mechanism driving biodiversity, however, can be overturned. Just as Newton’s conception of gravity was overturned by Einstein. Apples didn’t suddenly stop suspending from the air.

      • Hi bilal,

        I don’t know where you read that Newtonian mechanics have been replaced by General Relativity and even if you have read it i am sure it must have meant in a different way. Newton tells us that everything is attracting every other thing in universe but how and why is it happening Newton himself didn’t know that. General relativity tells us how and why it is happening. if an object attracts other object it is happening because of the bending of the space, due to the mass of an object and the heavier the object the greater bending of the space. General Relativity is an extension of Newtonians mechanics. There is no clash, Newtons ideas explains a phenomenon and einstein explained the causation. Its like if you ask me how a car is being driven i will say that just igninte the engine, pull gear and give acceleration but if you ask a mechanic he will tell you that thats not even a 1 % of how a car is being driven. There’s alot happening at the back. Now whose explaination would you say is correct ? Both are correct in thier respective ways. But here we are discussing evolution. Brother what is your argument or scientific justification that natural selection is not happening and living beings have not been evolved from single cell ? Simple refutation is not enough what is the scientific or logical argument behind it ? Looking forward to it
        Thank you

  7. “Has Pervez not kept himself abreast of the latest developments within biology, where even evolutionists are admitting that Darwinism plays no appreciable role in the origins and development of life?”

    People like this do not support Darwinism because of its, suppposed, inherent truth but because it supports their atheism. It’s an accessory, a tool that can assist them reach their objective.

    ““Even ultra-conservative and science-rejecting world leaders are now begging scientists to speed up the rescue work.””

    False dichotomy. Conservatism doesn’t equal rejection of science. It does however often reject the atheists scientism and politicizing of science.

    World leaders will use science when it suits them and not use it when it doesn’t. Many secular countries (France, Germany, Austria, et cetera) forbade islamic practices. Now they are enforcing those same exact practices.

    • There are many religious people that accept Darwinian evolution. For example, the Catholic Church. Denis Noble’s idea of evolutionary development would be no less controversial to religion. He doesn’t reject the fact that species evolve! His disagreement is regarding the mechanism by which it occurs, i.e. natural selection.

      • “There are many religious people that accept Darwinian evolution.”

        So what? We don’t base our beliefs on what “many religious people” philosophize about or think. What is authoritative is the Quran and the Sunnah. The Catholic church (Christianity in itself) is a deviation. They are building falsehood upon falsehood.

        Ps. most of them have been infiltrated by atheist materialist thought many decades ago – Eastern Orthodoxy might be an exception. This is one of the major reasons churches are empty in many parts of the West.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kMgiliTBU4

  8. Another desi spineless, bottom feeding, white worshipping, boot licker. This is the consequence of adopting other people’s identity. You become a slug. And then you get trampled.

    • What does race (desi) have to do with it? Plus it’s equally wrong to mention whites as the ones being worshiped by his kind.

      Do these kind of Islamophobic “Muslims” ever look up to fair skinned, blond haired, green eyed Bosnians or Algerians or Turks?

      It’s about adopting the dominant western values and cultures (which are predominantly based on Judeo-Christian values and now atheistic liberal secularism). To these kind of people, Bill Cosby is just as worthy of emulation as Joe Biden or whoever else.

  9. lol

    Common descent is an undisputed fact, regardless of the truth of natural selection.
    www youtube com/watch?v=F3f_4VYfIYg

    This is what academics think of Subboor Ahmad, who you’re probably a big fan of.
    sites hampshire edu/scienceandislamvideoportal/video/islam-evolution-and-darwinism/
    sites hampshire edu/scienceandislamvideoportal/video/discussion-darwinism-speakers-corner/

  10. He converted to Sunni Islam and became an Atheist after reading Bertrand Russell and Charles Darwin. This revelation came in an interview. It is true he was born Shia Ismaili family but he said that he converted to Sunni Islam after doing research on the origins of that religion. I urge Daniel to present an honest assessment of evolution and Hoodbhoy.

    • I would take that with a serious grain of salt – see family background and ages of conversion. Hoodbhoy never was a muslim, timeline simply doesn’t add up

      “Pervez: I was born in an Ismaili family. My maternal grandfather was from a place near Hyderabad, which is now called Sultanabad. He was very dedicated to Agha Khan. He had a lot of land in the village. He gave that land as a donation to Agha Khan and became a waris. My paternal grandfather was also a very religious man; in fact he built the first Jamaat Khana in Karachi with his own money, as a consequence of which Sultan Mohammad Shah named him mukhi. The name Hoodbhoy comes from Hood (brother of Hood). Hood was one of the minor prophets of Koran. So I grew up in this family, which had very deep connection to Ismaili-ism.

      My father, however, was not very comfortable with this. He considered the Agha Khani System as exploitative. His rebellious nature influenced all the children so we did not grow up as traditional as our cousins did. At the age of twelve I began to feel the first elements of rebellion within me. My elder sister was quite uncomfortable with the tradition of praying and fasting. Her discomfort was passed on to me and I rebelled against Ismaili-ism. I remember declaring in my home that Agha Khan was a fraud. That outraged my parents. One day while they were away, I took down all the photographs of Agha Khan from the whole house and smashed them and after smashing them I ran away from home for one day. I was forgiven later on as they were upset about my being away. This was my conversion into proper Islam and I started going to masjid. I got quite involved in Islamic teachings until the age of 14 when, fortunately or unfortunately, I started reading the plays of Bernard Shaw and later on, the works of Bertrand Russell. That had such an impact on me that it bowled me over and by the time I was 15, I was lost, lost to “all good things”.

      https://archive.org/stream/TheUntoldStoryOfDr.PervezHoodbhoy-06.06.2017/PERVEZ_djvu.txt

  11. Dear brothers & sisters

    As Muslims, the only thing that concerns us is the origin of HUMAN LIFE – namely that the first human, the first prophet, and our father Adam (alaihis salam) was created directly in human form and was initially in heaven, and later on he was sent to earth. For this we have a nass (text) from the Quran, and denial of this is unambiguous kufr.

    As for the rest of the things (flora and fauna), evolutionary biology doesn’t concern us one way or another. You can appraise it positively or negatively all you want (even though the biological and life sciences are generally not as definitive and conclusive as the physical and mathematical sciences).

  12. “even evolutionists are admitting that Darwinism plays no appreciable role in the origins and development of life”
    Darwinists – and other evolutionists – have never said that Darwinism plays any role in the origin of life. Evolutionary theory applies to the way that life forms develop and change over time after life has begun.
    In fact, biologists agree completely about the truth of Darwin’s thory of “descent with modification through natural selection”, what they disagree about are the precise mechanisms and the importance of different aspects, but those disagreements are less important (and much less murderous) than the disagreements among different branches of islam. Incidentally, what makes you think Denise Noble, a sociologist at the University of Birmingham, is an Oxford biologist?
    Very few modern physicists would say that “Modern physics has demoted Newton’s Law of Gravitation to a useful, but ultimately false model of the gravitational force.” What they would say is the Newton’s theory is true, but not completely true. (In fact, no scientific theory can be known to be completely true, even if it were to be.) Most of the time Newton’s theory applies; so too does Darwin’s. The difference is in the range of the theories. Newton’s is completely accurate except at the extremes of scale; Darwin’s rests on millions of smaller theories of evolution applying to the development of millions of forms of life. If even one can be shown to have developed without evolution, then Darwin’s theory falls.
    Dr. Hoodbhoy is perfectly accurate to say “Without Darwinian selection one can’t even begin to understand microbial-host interaction, the evolution of pathogens, or start developing drug and vaccines.” The fact that vaccination and certain drugs worked against certain illnesses was known much earlier, but why they worked on some and not others and how they worked was not known. Just as people built bridges which did not always collapse before Newton propounded the laws of gravitation, trial and error – and partly true or even untrue theories – sometimes produced beneficial results. It is only since the use of genetic analysis and close examination of DNA and RNA using theories derived from Darwin’s work that effective vaccination for many more diseases amd “targetted” drugs have been developed.
    When muslims are not begging for help from scientists, they are accusing scientists of spreading Covid-19 – with or without G5 phone masts – as part of a Firndish Plot. It’s revealing that Mr Haqiqatjou does not object to muslims grovelling in humiliated cowardice rather than seeking ways to deal with Covid-19. It’s just a matter of who or what they grovel to and he wants the rest of us to join them

  13. @oolon colluphid
    ***QUOTE***
    When muslims are not begging for help from scientists, they are accusing scientists of spreading Covid-19 – with or without G5 phone masts – as part of a Firndish Plot. It’s revealing that Mr Haqiqatjou does not object to muslims grovelling in humiliated cowardice rather than seeking ways to deal with Covid-19. It’s just a matter of who or what they grovel to and he wants the rest of us to join them
    ***UNQUOTE***

    I don’t quite follow your invective.

    This is a website meant for Muslims to uphold their religious theology and values and not let it succumb to yours.

    So you’re not really being a rocket scientist here by trying to suggest that we grovel and beg to Allah in humiliation to seek out of our problems, covid or otherwise (if that is indeed what you implied). I loved your choice of words – “groveling” and “humiliated”. Seriously, loved it. And it is testament to the fact that this site and its owner is doing something right!

    Three big cheers for Daniel here! He has conveyed to his readership full well that Muslims only worship Allah.

    Why? Because the very definition of “worship”, for us at least, is the utmost and extreme act of humility displayed in front of The One most worthy of it – our Creator, Allah. So we are intensely proud of the fact that we worship Allah. Yes, indeed, we beg and plead and grovel in front of Him with as much humility as we can possibly display. Your choice of “cowardice” isn’t on the ball though. Cowardice is to be scared of someone or something that we are actually capable of confronting. We as creation are incapacitated to fight against our Creator or His Will. Anyone who thinks he can stand up against The Creator, is immensely stupid, ignorant and deluded.

    Coming to covid and scientists.

    Our religion does not forbid us from seeking cure for diseases, or buying it. We acknowledge the cause-effect correlation in this created worldas part of Allah’s Will & Creating.

    But it’s nonsense to suggest that we are either begging to scientists or accusing them of conspiracies.

    It’s just that we are not dumb sheep like you people to fall for all idiotic theories without applying any critical thinking.

    I’m speaking here at a metaphysical and epistemic level so don’t bother explaining evolution theories to me.

    Fact of the matter is that biologists are not done yet merely counting the number of species of flora and fauna existing in the world today. New species are routinely discovered everyday. Life and biological sciences can’t yet explain simple things like allergies or why certain people are resistant to certain drugs and some others are not. And yet, they expect us to “believe” with our hands on our hearts that they know with full certainty how life evolved millions of years ago.

    Like I said in my previous comment, the rest of flora and fauna really isn’t a creedal bother to us as Muslims, regardless if those evolutionary theories are accurate or not. Allah is The Creator of all causes and all effects, and all correlations between them. Viruses mutating or elephants and mammoths having common ancestors or not, doesn’t bother us from a creedal point of view, regardless if the evolutionary paradigm is true or false.

    We are only concerned with the origin of human life, for our theological purposes – and in this case we know by Divine revelation that humans did NOT descend from other species, apes or otherwise. PLUS the theory itself gets shredded to bits and is rightly called a comic book nonsense in this case. We know for a fact biological and life scientists for the life of them can never prove this theory to be true because of the lacking foundational and epistemic background on rational judgments and the nature of empiricism as well as the so many gaping holes in the theory itself that evolutionists choose not to look at.

    • Too bad that’s just a comic book fantasy in your head, and you can’t prove it for the life of you.

      But hey, you’re welcome to consider yourself a chimp.

      The day the likes of you can explain some basic biological phenomenon from our own times we will MAYBE think of replying to your bogus theories on how life functioned millions of years ago. Cellular biology has a long list of unanswered questions from current times and yet wants us to accept its fairy tales about what happened a few million years ago as facts! You’re welcome to pull the wool over your eyes, but don’t preach your pseudo-religion to us.

      • As the likes of you reject what is known of basic biological phenomena from our own times when it doesn’t fit your fairy tales about what happened a few thousand years ago, the rest of us will continue to laugh at you – or would, if it didn’t inspire you to murderous attempts to impose your superstitions on the rest of us.

    • Murderous attempts? Like the millions of people the likes of Stalin, Hitler and Mao Zadong murdered? All of whom were inspired by the concept of Darwinism and survival of the fittest in some form. You’re just exposing your innate biases against Muslims with such nonsense. And no we do not impose our beliefs on anyone, “there is no compulsion in religion” it’s there in the Quran. Believe it or not, we have more important things to worry about than forcing our beliefs on idiots like you.

      Evolution is a working theory, all well and good. It does not necessarily agree with the Islamic viewpoint but that’s perfectly fine. Science changes over time as we observe and learn more, and science is never going to allow us to discover absolute truths, since anytime in the future something can potentially be discovered that completely changes the entire story.

      If the Muslims of the past were as blind and moronic as you they would have rejected Islam based on the scientific understanding at that time that the universe was static, and not expanding as the Quran seemed to suggest. Yet, lo and behold, now science suggests that the universe is in fact expanding, it changed OMG!

  14. This guy was already exposed by Hamza tzortzis in a debate were he walked off and he was also exposed by Javed Ahmad Ghandi in a TV show . I see a lot of these Hindus who support him in the comment section , the irony is these Hindus who are killing Indian Muslims and their religion to be precise is the superstitious religion in the entire world , he praises Modi who hasn’t even studied high school science and his Hindu nationalistic government who are anti science , pseudoscientific anti intellectuals and Superstitious stone worshiper . Pakistani government needs to take action against this man before he brainwashes his students . Brother Daniel wrote a beautiful article to expose his lies and even I would recommend to read brother Subboor Ahmad’s article on this Islamophobic wanna be Richard Dawkins guy .

    • Many people also may now know that Hoodbhoy was a violent Marxist in the 1970s. I tried giving him the benefit of the doubt but he really is a pseudo-intellectual at best.

  15. See this article on his life and views. Most telling is his objection to some guy called Iqbal Ahmed allowing a Muslim woman to read Quran whilst Mr Ahmed was dying. Any Muslim with a grain of imaan would realised that the person is about to depart to the Akhirat, and that everyone present should be praying for maghfirat for the dying Muslim. But this Hoodbhoy person demanded she stop. The words of Mr Ahmed insisting she carry on are humbling. Just as certain misguided extremisst do not represent us, nor does this NMr Hoodbhoy.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here