# blind man scoring a bullseye?

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by scifes, Feb 22, 2011.

1. ### scifesheckle the snobsValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,558
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

to hide all adverts.
3. ### spidergoatmonosyllabic dictionaryValued Senior Member

Messages:
48,979
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.

Last edited: Feb 23, 2011

to hide all adverts.
5. ### Rav∞Valued Senior Member

Messages:
2,422
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?

to hide all adverts.
7. ### scifesheckle the snobsValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,558
and i thought you were a scientist

you mean in arabic?
you sure?

8. ### spidergoatmonosyllabic dictionaryValued Senior Member

Messages:
48,979
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.

Messages:
1
truly

just amazing

10. ### spidergoatmonosyllabic dictionaryValued Senior Member

Messages:
48,979
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.