I guess I wasn't clear, so I'll elaborate. Whether humans set their clocks to PM or not is a human action. Its not related to what quran says, which is that night cannot outstrip the day. Eclipse proves this verse to be wrong, since in solar eclipses night does outstrip the day. What's your explanation for that?
My point is what makes you think the eclipse represents the night catching up to the day? Since when does 'the moon' mean the same thing as 'the night?'
So are you saying that if the moon isn't in the sky at 11pm, it isn't really night?
The definition of night is: "the time after sunset and before sunrise while it is dark outside". Therefore, night DOES outstrip the day on the north pole, where there is continous 6 months' day and night.
In the north pole, the definition of night is the exact same as you said; the only difference is that "the time after sunset and before sunrise while it is dark outside" is longer than in other places of the world.
That's all. But they still have "night and day." It's just different. Weird even. But their version of night still stays in its appointed place just as their day stays in it's appointed place. It is still 6 months of day and 6 months of night with no variation or random confusion. The North Pole's cycle is the same as it has always been when Allah first set it that way.
#1: If they have to figure out themselves when they should pray, then it will be humans creating their own version of Islam, it wouldn't be from god.
#2: The main point that I'm asking you about is, why did god not give specific instructions to the eskimos living on north pole about when to pray, when he gives them for everyone else? Trivial things such as not entering Mo's house without permission are included in the quran, but instructions to the Eskimos for when to pray isn't? Why?
Okay, I see your point. In that case, remember when Allah said that ALL peoples of earth throughout human history received a messenger? So I'm sure the poor confused eskimos received right guidance in how to best follow their religion.
The difference is that the evidence for Evolution is backed up by 1000s of
qualified scientists, who almost all hold PhDs
in Biology (PhDs in something like computer science isn't related to Evolution, which is a biology topic). Whereas 'Michael Cremo's only qualification is that he is an 'American Hindu creationist' (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Cremo). The 'opinion' of an unqaulified documentary maker does not qualify as 'evidence'.
You realize that "qualified" still represents the opinions of men, right? "Qualified" men have said all kinds of things over the centuries have almost always been proved wrong at some point. Official qualified certifications and degrees represent 'job security' and a certain amount of study. It doesn't mean "infallible mental faculity" or a monopoly on truth. Hypotheses and theories are no more than opinions formed based around what a person thinks a group of facts represent. That is all. Only Allah is the author of absolute Truth.
#
You still haven't given me any details about this supposed controversy, or any links. Mind sharing them?
Believe me, I would love to. But I have to ask you all to be patient with me. I loaned out certain books that have my references and I am currently waiting for a couple of friends to return them. One of them is out of state.
Topic: Peace, All