Sam Harris

One of the most popular verse of Quran used by anti Islamists to prove
scientific errors in the Quran is the the following.

[27:18] When they approached the valley of the ants, one ant said, “O you ants, go into your homes, lest you get crushed by Solomon and his soldiers, without perceiving.”

This is noted as an absurdity in the skeptics annotated bible/quran.

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/27/abs_list.html

Also Twenty first century atheists at Secular Web (infidels.org) state this ‘error’ in a 7th century scripture is understandable

“What is even worse is the verses cited have this man hearing the speech of ants! It is a scientific fact that ants have no speech patterns. They communicate through chemical trails, and other forms of odor. In otherwords
they communicate via smell, not sound! This blunder is understandable, as the average desert Arab in the seventh century would not know this. However this lack of knowledge of the animal kingdom proves human origin of the text, and disputes theories of a divine origin.”

What’s more, Christians didn’t fail to miss this too. AnsweringIslam.org has this to say under the title ‘A Quran Difficulty: Ants Cannot Talk’

“But then there are these amazing facts about Ants that in contradiction to the Qur’an, ants do communicate using smells, not modulation of sounds. Solomon could not have heard any talk since ants do not produce any.”

However, all these losers have only succeeded in make a laughing stock out of themselves as very recent research proves that Ants can and do talk and specifically use complex speech patterns to warn other ants of danger
exactly as Solomans ants did in the Quran.

“Research several decades ago had shown that ants were able to make alarm calls using sounds, but only now has it been shown that their vocabulary may be much bigger and that they can “talk” to each other. “

full article

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article5672006.ece

“Soon will We show them our Signs in the (furthest) regions (of the earth), and in their own souls, until it becomes manifest to them that this is the Truth. Is it not enough that thy Lord is witness over all things?” 41:53

Zit Boy - 12 April 2009 10:31 AM

However, all these losers have only succeeded in make a laughing stock out of themselves as very recent research proves that Ants can and do talk and specifically use complex speech patterns to warn other ants of danger
exactly as Solomans ants did in the Quran.

“Research several decades ago had shown that ants were able to make alarm calls using sounds, but only now has it been shown that their vocabulary may be much bigger and that they can “talk” to each other. “

I see, so then it makes perfect sense that soloman was fact fluent in ant talk, (as well as bird talk) and in fact listened to the ants and heard the warning of being tromped on.

ZB, why do you even bother?  It is so patently absurd to try and defend ancient religious texts on modern scientific grounds.

Zit Boy - 12 April 2009 10:31 AM

very recent research proves that Ants can and do talk and specifically use complex speech patterns to warn other ants of danger
exactly as Solomans ants did in the Quran.

“Research several decades ago had shown that ants were able to make alarm calls using sounds, but only now has it been shown that their vocabulary may be much bigger and that they can “talk” to each other. “

While that’s an amazing find, it does nothing to show that ants could speak in human language, or that human brains could perceive ant language as human language.

Carstonio - 13 April 2009 04:36 PM

Zit Boy - 12 April 2009 10:31 AM

very recent research proves that Ants can and do talk and specifically use complex speech patterns to warn other ants of danger
exactly as Solomans ants did in the Quran.

“Research several decades ago had shown that ants were able to make alarm calls using sounds, but only now has it been shown that their vocabulary may be much bigger and that they can “talk” to each other. “

While that’s an amazing find, it does nothing to show that ants could speak in human language, or that human brains could perceive ant language as human language.

Oh, Carst! You’re so skeptical! Isn’t it clear that soloman and Dr. Doolittle are one and the same!

What is most ridiculous here is that it completely ignores the fact that for thousands of years there have been teaching stories in the Middle East that use talking animals in illustrative means with no implication that this is an actual reality.

burt - 13 April 2009 05:15 PM

for thousands of years there have been teaching stories in the Middle East that use talking animals in illustrative means with no implication that this is an actual reality.

I know of some from the Greek myths. Do you have other examples? The burden here is on believers in scriptures to show that such stories in their books are any different.

eucaryote - 13 April 2009 05:10 PM

Oh, Carst! You’re so skeptical! Isn’t it clear that soloman and Dr. Doolittle are one and the same!

Now I imagine Rex Harrison and Eddie Murphy dressed as sheiks singing “Walk with the Animals” to an Arabian beat.

Carstonio - 13 April 2009 05:57 PM

burt - 13 April 2009 05:15 PM

for thousands of years there have been teaching stories in the Middle East that use talking animals in illustrative means with no implication that this is an actual reality.

I know of some from the Greek myths. Do you have other examples? The burden here is on believers in scriptures to show that such stories in their books are any different.

Well, one long example is Fariduddin Attar’s 12th century Conference of the Birds, but that was intentionally composed as allegory.  But I’ve come across very short tales where, for example, somebody overhears a bird or other animal talking and misunderstands what is said to their detriment.  We also have stories like this: that song about the woman who takes in a freezing snake; brer rabbit tales, whinny the pooh, etc.  And Amerindian tales of animals as well.  Why would one believe that such tales showing up in sacred scriptures would be any different?  (But, of course, literalists certainly do.)

Jefe - 14 April 2009 12:11 AM

Confirmation Bias.

Plain and simple.  Z.B. is a poster-child for confirmation bias.

Well, yeah, but it’s not like he’s alone among religious believers ...

Byron

Wow!

I’m new to the forums, and when I saw the titles of ZB’s posts I of course assumed they were ironic.  I am delighted to find that they are not!

My favorite part is where he says the “anti-Islamists” have made laughing stocks of themselves.  Surely this is the worst fate imaginable for we infidels.

P.S. does Sam ever post?