Response by Randy Desmond to Solomon listening
to Ants
Muslim Response by
Randy
Desmond
Date: Friday, 14 March 1997
Confusing Miracles with
Science
Read the Qur'an. This is associated
with the miracle(s) given to Solomon. Would you say Jesus
raising of the dead was scientifically sound? Or do you
propose that this (refer to the verse below) is also
"scientifically" wrong?
"I have come to you
with a sign from your Lord: I make for you out of clay, as
it were, a figure of a bird, and breathe into it and it
becomes a bird by God's leave. And I heal the blind, and the
lepers, and I raise the dead by God's leave." (Surah 3, Ayat
49)
Or do you propose that Moses'(peace
be upon him) staff turning into a snake is "scientifically"
wrong?
Don't confuse special miracles
given to prophets with "scientific" proofs. A miracle, by
definition, is something which human reasoning (culminated
in science) can not explain, but which the human is made to
feel awe at the power of God!
Entertaining the Proposed
Arguments Anyway
Besides being an illogical
accusation (since the subject matter is a specific miracle
given to Soloman - peace be upon him), it seems that the
Qur'an may actaully be more correct than you assume. I will,
insha'Allah (God willing), explain.
You quote from "The Ants" by
Holldobler and Wilson. You quote them as saying "Two froms
of sound production have been identified, body rapping
against the substratum and stridulation." You then quote the
book out of sequence (I suppose to fit your agenda - but I
will give you the benefit of the doubt and call it an honest
mistake), then you go back a page and quote again, "The
signaling pattern is independent of the triggering stimulus
That is, the ants do not modify the drumming to identify the
category of danger to the nest."
Now, what you have proven (if I can
piece the puzzle back in order) is that a sound is used to
warn the nest (is that true?). If you have shown that, then
thank you! What you try to disprove is that the ant
mentioned in the Qur'an did not specify the type of danger
to warn the nest. I'll hold out for further scientific
studies - just from your quotes I do not know how those
studies were performed. What was used to cause a threatening
danger to the nest? Does the body rapping against the
substratum in conjunction with stridulation specify the type
of danger? There seems to be many logical possiblities.
Especially when we consider that smell is also used as a
means of communication.
Oops! Seems I got caught up in one
of your presuppositions, so let me clear that up before
continuing. The verse is actually talking about an ant
telling the other ants to get into their habitations, not
"look out the nest is in danger" (as you presuppose by your
quote of page 256). You may be quoting somthing irrelevant
to the matter at hand and if so I retrack my thank you
above.
What about the Arabic
The word in Arabic for ant is
naml and the verbal root word is namila
which means "to tingle, to prickle". Could it be that the
name in Arabic denotes something with respect to how ants
communicate? Could it be inferring stridualtion? Or the
sensation of scent? God knows best.
Anyway, the worker ants are female.
Neat. The Qur'an uses the feminine gender when talking about
this ant! (Another knowledge comes from the Qur'an which I
wonder if it was descovered before Muhammad's time - peace
be upon him).
Another note to point out is that
the Qur'an does not use the word for hearing in Solomons
case. It only mentions that the ant "said" and "speech(of
the ant)". Interesting, don't you think? How often do we say
the newspaper said something, but, in fact, the newspaper
never "says" anything.
In conclusion, let me point out
that. (1) you have tried to break a miracle from God into
scientific rational. (2) you have pointed out something
about communication of ants - but not everything and you
have not shown what the communication modality(ies) is for
the specific situation which is described in the
Qur'an.
Other Ant Web Sites
Lastly, anyone interested can do a
net search on ants and find out what they can about their
communication. The link you provided was strictly to suit
your claims. That is not honest scholarship.
Amazing
Ants
"Eyes are not of great
importance to ants because the antennae help ants smell,
communicate and explore."
Department
of Behavioral Physiology and Sociobiology
This site is by one of the authors
of the book quoted above. In it there is a mention of the
Johnston's organ of bees used to pick up sound.
An
Introduction to Insect Morphology and Anatomy
See the section on Antennae. The
point is that the same organ (Johnston's) is associated with
ants as it is with bees. Then if you go to the "Hearing and
other Senses" part of the page, you will find in the "Ears"
section further mention of the Johnston's organ - it is
closely associated with the movement of hairs on the
antennal scape.
Then go on to read out the sense of
smell. Fascinating. Remember I said that the arabic word is
naml and comes from a verbal root which means
"to tingle, to prickle"? That is exactly what happens all
over the bodies of these ants. Let me quote that web
page.
"Most insects
communicate using smell or chemoreception and it is not
surprising that they have evolved a large variety of ways of
detecting the moloecules involved. Insects do not have noses
like us which concentrate all our sense of smell in one
place, instead they have a lot of small sensory bodies
scattered over their body, though they tend to have a
concentration of them on their antennae."
Is smell and touch the tingling and
prickling of molecules against our sensory organs? Can you
imagine the tingling sensation they would get?
Talk
Your Feelers Out
Another Excellent site.
So where is the contradicion? Can
any other religion offer its adherents such comfort in
knowledge and faith?
|