blind man scoring a bullseye?

**scifes** · 02-21-11, 10:32 PM

i usually discard any scientific mathematical relations "discovered" in the quran, because with such a large text, you play around with letters, words, numbers and a little imagination to make any "prediction" you want, but...
the consensus is 70.8% (71%) of the surface is water, 29.2 % is land. Other figures suggest the percentage of water (on Earth) is 71.11% and the percentage of land (on Earth) is 28.89%.
AND,
the word "seas" has been mentioned 32 time in the quran, "land" was mentioned 13 times.
and so, with simple math, of the times "seas" and "land" were mentioned in the quran, "land" was mentioned 71.11% of the time[use a calculator

] and "land" was mentioned 28.89%!

my mind is boggled...i mean, to the hundredths????!!!

oh and i just checked sites to compare the two percentages, 71.11% seems more prominent, wikipedia just said 71%..

man i feel all tingly inside

**spidergoat** · 02-21-11, 11:59 PM

Your link doesn't say how those numbers were derived, and it sounds far too precise to be anything other than figures provided by a Quranic apologist.

**Rav** · 02-22-11, 02:36 AM

The word "ocean" also seems to be mentioned 13 times. Did you factor that into your calculation? Or are we going to quibble over semantics?

**scifes** · 02-22-11, 03:07 AM

Originally Posted by spidergoat

Your link doesn't say how those numbers were derived, and it sounds far too precise to be anything other than figures provides by a Quranic apologist.

and i thought you were a scientist

Originally Posted by Rav

The word "ocean" also seems to be mentioned 13 times. Did you factor that into your calculation? Or are we going to quibble over semantics?

you mean in arabic?
you sure?

**spidergoat** · 02-22-11, 09:21 AM

Originally Posted by scifes

and i thought you were a scientist

Just a fan. But that is a scientist's role, to double check the figures that others supply. So far there is no legitimate source. If you can find one, I would agree it is an amazing coincidence.

**faheemk** · 02-23-11, 04:05 PM

just amazing

**spidergoat** · 02-23-11, 04:10 PM

In fact these numbers do not correspond to those exact measurements:
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2001/DanielChen.shtml

...and the source is listed. I don't think it's even possible to determine this with such a degree of precision, since the ocean levels are always changing, and land is always being eroded away.