Satellites witness truth of Muhammad (pbuh)

[Abu Rago]

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/uZAlLtbGSdM&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/uZAlLtbGSdM&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

[ceire]

That was really interesting, masha Allah. Jazaaka Allah khayran for sharing the video here! (:

[`asiya]

:ahb: :jkk: masha Allah :up:

[THHuxley]

So.... where is the miracle here? Exactly?

[BornArtist]

So.... where is the miracle here? Exactly?

nowhere for YOU

[BornArtist]

:up:Great Post brother :up:

[THHuxley]

nowhere for YOU
Okay. Then how about for you?

[BornArtist]

Okay. Then how about for you?

not botherd to disscuss it with you :zzz:

[THHuxley]

not botherd to disscuss it with you :zzz:
So you (correctly) see no miracle at all?

[`asiya]

So.... where is the miracle here? Exactly?

well u tell us, how do u think Muhammad salAllahu alleyhi wa salam knew how to get a perfectly straight line from the masjid to makka when it would not have been possible 1400 years ago without the use of modern day technology like satelite imaging etc etc.

[BornArtist]

So you (correctly) see no miracle at all?

i Never said that

I said i am not botherd to argue with u about it

I see it ,you dont ,full stop.

[BornArtist]

well u tell us, how do u think Muhammad salAllahu alleyhi wa salam knew how to get a perfectly straight line from the masjid to makka when it would not have been possible 1400 years ago without the use of modern day technology like satelite imaging etc etc.

No use sister

He knows what that video is saying but as always its ''lets bash the muslims time''

[Skavau]

No use sister

He knows what that video is saying but as always its ''lets bash the muslims time''

How would you even pretend to know Huxley's motives? You don't. So do not be so arrogant in presuming you do.

[BornArtist]

How would you even pretend to know Huxley's motives? You don't. So do not be so arrogant in presuming you do.

Because its crystal clear whats shown in that video so why keep asking ??

I am not being arrogant just telling what i can see.

And i can see that after the one and half hour of explanation it still wont have an effect on you guys (Tried and tested Personally) so i am not botherd about it

[tanz]

wasnt sure wher the vid was goin at first...!lol

stuf like this really helps strengthn my imaan.

jazakallah kairan for sharing!

[THHuxley]

well u tell us, how do u think Muhammad salAllahu alleyhi wa salam knew how to get a perfectly straight line from the masjid to makka when it would not have been possible 1400 years ago without the use of modern day technology like satelite imaging etc etc.
Well that's the first problem. It's not a straight line at all. You forget, the surface of the planet is curved, and so the "perfectly straight line" between two points on the surface of the globe does not project as a straight line on flat maps or photographs. Therefore, one thing we know for certain is that the straight line the film maker drew on the map is not the actual line between Sana'a and Mecca. As it passes the mountain it could be off by a kilometer or more.

That said... what makes you think Muhammad would have been a geographical know nothing? He (in case you forgot) had been calculating qibla's (with someone's help I'm sure) for many years... first towards Jerusalem, then later towards Mecca. Knowing the qibla from Sana'a pointed towards Mount Deyn is hardly a miracle. One need only look.

[THHuxley]

i Never said that
Who can tell? You are saying nothing at all. So... I can only conclude you don't believe in any miracle here since you are unwilling even to say what one might be.

I said i am not botherd to argue with u about it
So you leave me no choice but suspect you see nothing at all.

I see it ,you dont ,full stop.
You see what?

[Abu 'Abdullaah]

Huxley, of course the line would be a slight curve against the surface of the globe. I don't get how the line would go 'off course' because of the mountain?

[Fais]

Well that's the first problem. It's not a straight line at all. You forget, the surface of the planet is curved, and so the "perfectly straight line" between two points on the surface of the globe does not project as a straight line on flat maps or photographs. Therefore, one thing we know for certain is that the straight line the film maker drew on the map is not the actual line between Sana'a and Mecca. As it passes the mountain it could be off by a kilometer or more.

That said... what makes you think Muhammad would have been a geographical know nothing? He (in case you forgot) had been calculating qibla's (with someone's help I'm sure) for many years... first towards Jerusalem, then later towards Mecca. Knowing the qibla from Sana'a pointed towards Mount Deyn is hardly a miracle. One need only look.

You wont believe in anything we bring you anyway.

So discussing this or any other topic of its like with you is pointless.

[THHuxley]

Huxley, of course the line would be a slight curve against the surface of the globe. I don't get how the line would go 'off course' because of the mountain?
The mountain has nothing to do with making the line "go off."

And the curve I speak of is not the one "against the surface of the globe."

When you take a straight line drawn on a curved surface (as is the actual qibla) and you project it onto a flat surface (as in the satellite photos or even the computer screen you watched it on) the line will not be straight. It will be curved.

Look for example at the lines of latitude on any map that tries to keep the distortion of land masses under control. On the surface of the globe they are straight lines... on flat maps they are not. This is called map projection distortion. Look it up if you don't believe me.

Now... if the line drawn in that film really was the straight line between the Grande Mosque in Sana'a and the Kaba'a in Mecc, then there is no possible way the film maker could have drawn a straight line on the flat satellite photos that was true.

Therefore... the one thing we can know with certainty is that the real line does not pass through the peak of that mountain.

[THHuxley]

You wont believe in anything we bring you anyway.
Nonsense.

Bring me something true and show me evidence that it is true and I will believe it. I am skeptical, not stupid.

So discussing this or any other topic of its like with you is pointless.
Actually, stick around. You might learn something. That alone would be "a point."

[Mace]

Yes, so whoever made this video clearly didn't take into the account the curvature of the earth. The "straight" line drawn is not straight in reality.

So for example, if you were flying from the masjid to the kabaa, you would quickly realize that line drawn in the video is wrong.

But because the mountain is relatively close to the masjid, the error at that particular point is not that great. By my calculations, the actual path from the masjid to the kaaba runs about 120 meters west of that peak. Or about 50m west of the western most part of that military base.

So if you were at the masjid and faced directly to the peak of the mountain, you would be a little off, but not that far off.

If the mountain were further away from the masjid, along the line drawn in the video, then the error would be much worse.

So the bottom line is the mountain is pretty close to the right place to aim if you are standing in the masjid and wanted to pray towards the kaaba. However, the line as drawn in the video veers quite a bit off that course as it gets past the mountain and on to Mecca.

I hope that makes sense.

[Abu 'Abdullaah]

Is it possible to verify using Google Earth/Maps or are they not deemed to be accurate enough?

[Mace]

Is it possible to verify using Google Earth/Maps or are they not deemed to be accurate enough?

What I did was use google earth to find the locations of the three places (the kaaba, the moutain peak, and the masjid) and then used the flight planning program I use to calculate the bearing and flight paths. (Flight paths obviously are the straightest, shortest line between two points on the globe. And if are praying toward the kaaba from anywhere in the world you would pray along exactly that bearing.)

There should be some online resources for calculating those bearings.

But the point is that a straight line when drawn on a flat map is not straight in 3D space because the earth is not flat. So the line drawn in the video is definitely not straight in reality.

A "straight" line on a flat map always looks curved. For example, if you ever look at flight plans or commercial route maps that airlines publish.

Example:

http://www.qatarairways.com/global/en/route-map.html

[Fais]

Nonsense.

Bring me something true and show me evidence that it is true and I will believe it. I am skeptical, not stupid.


Actually, stick around. You might learn something. That alone would be "a point."

No .. your stupid.

I got a question for you though ... But i dont wanna go off topic

[Abu 'Abdullaah]

I still don't understand Mace's argument.

[Al-Farooq]

What I did was use google earth to find the locations of the three places (the kaaba, the moutain peak, and the masjid) and then used the flight planning program I use to calculate the bearing and flight paths. (Flight paths obviously are the straightest, shortest line between two points on the globe. And if are praying toward the kaaba from anywhere in the world you would pray along exactly that bearing.)

There should be some online resources for calculating those bearings.

But the point is that a straight line when drawn on a flat map is not straight in 3D space because the earth is not flat. So the line drawn in the video is definitely not straight in reality.

A "straight" line on a flat map always looks curved. For example, if you ever look at flight plans or commercial route maps that airlines publish.

Example:

http://www.qatarairways.com/global/en/route-map.html

Hold on, though.

The video is made using Google Earth (or something similar), doesn't that take the 3D aspect of the earth into account, already?

The line isn't drawn on a flat map, it is done using Google Earth (or something similar), so isn't your whole point redundant?

Or am I missing something, here? *scratches head*

[Mace]

Hold on, though.

The video is made using Google Earth (or something similar), doesn't that take the 3D aspect of the earth into account, already?

The line isn't drawn on a flat map, it is done using Google Earth (or something similar), so isn't your whole point redundant?

Or am I missing something, here? *scratches head*

Actually the visual distortion in a program like Google Earth is different (but as bad or sometimes even worse) as a flat map, unless you adjust the view point perfectly as you walk the path, which I didn't see him do in the video. Remember it's a 3D space, but still projected on a 2D screen. So you get a distortion from your chosen viewpoint.

But again, you can just go back to the calculations. If you calculate the bearing from the masjid to the kaaba, you'll see that it doesn't go neatly through that camp as the video shows. It goes to the left. But at that point it's only slightly off. The rest of the line gets progressively worse until of course you start to approach the Kaaba again.

And furthermore if you do it yourself in Google Earth and just draw a "straight" line like that, and then trace along it, you'll see that the bearing to Makkah from various points on that line will change.

In other words if you were fly that line you would require constant changing of bearing, which is a good indication that you aren't flying straight.

Another way to say it is that the video makes the claim that the three points are on one straight flight path which, if you calculate the flight path, is not true. It doesn't line up that neatly. And certainly no pilot would make a flight path of 800km just by eyeballing it in google earth like that.

But again, if you're standing in the masjid and praying, then facing the mountain is very close to the right direction. Probably as close as most people get in practice anyway. But it's not a perfect line like the video shows.

I hope that makes sense.

[Al-Farooq]

Actually the visual distortion in a program like Google Earth is different (but as bad or sometimes even worse) as a flat map, unless you adjust the view point perfectly as you walk the path, which I didn't see him do in the video. Remember it's a 3D space, but still projected on a 2D screen. So you get a distortion from your chosen viewpoint.

But again, you can just go back to the calculations. If you calculate the bearing from the masjid to the kaaba, you'll see that it doesn't go neatly through that camp as the video shows. It goes to the left. But at that point it's only slightly off. The rest of the line gets progressively worse until of course you start to approach the Kaaba again.

And furthermore if you do it yourself in Google Earth and just draw a "straight" line like that, and then trace along it, you'll see that the bearing to Makkah from various points on that line will change.

In other words if you were fly that line you would require constant changing of bearing, which is a good indication that you aren't flying straight.

Another way to say it is that the video makes the claim that the three points are on one straight flight path which, if you calculate the flight path, is not true. It doesn't line up that neatly. And certainly no pilot would make a flight path of 800km just by eyeballing it in google earth like that.

But again, if you're standing in the masjid and praying, then facing the mountain is very close to the right direction. Probably as close as most people get in practice anyway. But it's not a perfect line like the video shows.

I hope that makes sense.

Let's assume your calculations are correct.

Is it possible that the shift in tectonic plates (or another geographical/ geological development) during the period of time from the life of Muhammed salAllahu alayhe wasallam to the present day, may account for the slight inaccuracy (assuming your calculations are correct) in what is witnessed today?

[Mace]

Let's assume your calculations are correct.

Is it possible that the shift in tectonic plates (or another geographical/ geological development) during the period of time from the life of Muhammed salAllahu alayhe wasallam to the present day, may account for the slight inaccuracy (assuming your calculations are correct) in what is witnessed today?

I don't know. It's possible the error could have been worse 1400 years ago. How would we know? We would need precise coordinates for each of the 3 points taken 1400+ years ago. Which is obviously impossible.

But again to put this in perspective, if you're praying in the masjid, you're praying in pretty much the right direction. It's a just a small error. If the mountain had been further away, only then would be error be more significant.

But then if the mountain had been further away, they probably wouldn't have used it as a landmark.

I'm sure you can find greater errors in direction in other masjids. For that matter, some people I know here on the east coast of the US actually stubbornly pray to the SE (because that's how it looks on a typical projected map), which of course is totally wrong. They are not facing anywhere near the kabaa if they do that. But most people get it right and pray to a NE bearing from here.

[Mace]

To further put this in perspective, we're talking about a difference of 120m relative to the peak of the mountain. This is not a very serious issue.

The only reason it has come up is because this video makes the exaggerated claim, based on a faulty methodology, that the 3 points line up perfectly with the line going "directly through" the military camp.

The video claims the aim is perfect (and therefore I guess miraculous). I'm saying the aim is not perfect, but just very good.

[Abu 'Abdullaah]

So how did you calculate this Mace?

Also, I don't understand what you said earlier about flight plans. Surely one could just fly from point A to point B in a straight line?

[Abu Rago]

Just thought I'd let you know the Sheikh who done this research; Sheikh Zindani was the founder and former secretary-general of the Commission on Scientific Signs in the Quran and Sunnah, based in Saudi Arabia and he is a pretty clever bloke.

And who are you? If you want to discredit the Sheikhs research at least bring real proof.

Thanks.

[Mace]

So how did you calculate this Mace?


I just put the coordinates into my flight planner. I could do the calculations by hand to verify. I have not done that yet.




Also, I don't understand what you said earlier about flight plans. Surely one could just fly from point A to point B in a straight line?

Right, you would fly a straight line. But what was drawn in that video was not a straight line in reality.

[Mace]

Just thought I'd let you know the Sheikh who done this research; Sheikh Zindani was the founder and former secretary-general of the Commission on Scientific Signs in the Quran and Sunnah, based in Saudi Arabia and he is a pretty clever bloke.

And who are you? If you want to discredit the Sheikhs research at least bring real proof.

Thanks.

I'm nobody really. Just someone interested in these sorts of things. And as a private pilot and someone with a background in math, this was interesting.

I'd be interested in reading about this sheikh's other work or the findings of that commission. What is his academic background?

[THHuxley]

No .. your stupid.
Actually, I'm not. But if that is the best you can do and it makes you feel better, go for it.

[THHuxley]

Let's assume your calculations are correct.

Is it possible that the shift in tectonic plates (or another geographical/ geological development) during the period of time from the life of Muhammed salAllahu alayhe wasallam to the present day, may account for the slight inaccuracy (assuming your calculations are correct) in what is witnessed today?
Well, in the first place, what does it matter? Muhammad never said the line had to be perfect. That's an invention of the film maker.

But as to tectonic shift, probably not. Mecca, Mount Deyn and San'a all rest on the same Arabian Plate and so would have all experienced the same teconic movement, meaning they would not have moved in relationship to each other.

[THHuxley]

Just thought I'd let you know the Sheikh who done this research; Sheikh Zindani was the founder and former secretary-general of the Commission on Scientific Signs in the Quran and Sunnah, based in Saudi Arabia and he is a pretty clever bloke.
Very clever and yet still often wrong.

He was, for example, the actual author of the embryology text additions that Muslims falsely try to give Keith Moore credit for. And he got almost all of those wrong, too.

This video is only one of his many scientific errors, and not by far his worst.

[THHuxley]

Also, I don't understand what you said earlier about flight plans. Surely one could just fly from point A to point B in a straight line?
Exactly. But the line drawn by Zindani would not have been that line.

The "straight line" between Sana'a and Mecca is not the line that Zaindani drew passing through the mountain peak.

[Abu 'Abdullaah]

Ah, so you are saying that If one was to draw a straight line from Sana'a to Makkah, it would not pass through the mountain as illustrated?

[THHuxley]

Ah, so you are saying that If one was to draw a straight line from Sana'a to Makkah, it would not pass through the mountain as illustrated?
Yes. If one were to draw a straight line from the Grande Mosque in Sana'a to the Kaba'a in Mecca, it would not pass through the mountain "as illustrated." It would be close. But hardly the "miracle" this video pretends.

[Al-Farooq]

I don't know. It's possible the error could have been worse 1400 years ago. How would we know? We would need precise coordinates for each of the 3 points taken 1400+ years ago. Which is obviously impossible.

But again to put this in perspective, if you're praying in the masjid, you're praying in pretty much the right direction. It's a just a small error. If the mountain had been further away, only then would be error be more significant.

But then if the mountain had been further away, they probably wouldn't have used it as a landmark.

I'm sure you can find greater errors in direction in other masjids. For that matter, some people I know here on the east coast of the US actually stubbornly pray to the SE (because that's how it looks on a typical projected map), which of course is totally wrong. They are not facing anywhere near the kabaa if they do that. But most people get it right and pray to a NE bearing from here.

Thank you for the explanation, Mace.

May Allah ta'ala guide you back to the His protection, to the noor and haq of al-Islam. Ameen.

Well, in the first place, what does it matter? Muhammad never said the line had to be perfect. That's an invention of the film maker.

But as to tectonic shift, probably not. Mecca, Mount Deyn and San'a all rest on the same Arabian Plate and so would have all experienced the same teconic movement, meaning they would not have moved in relationship to each other.

OK, thanks.

I really know very little of such matters, I am not scientifically minded in the slightest, so I appreciate the explanation.