Arab descriptions of early medieval South Asia

[funtoosh]

one thing i understood from last few pages.. we may or may not have evloved from monkeys. but our neighbours certainly evolved from donkeys.

 

[FaujHistorian]

one thing i understood from last few pages.. we may or may not have evloved from monkeys. but our neighbours certainly evolved from donkeys.

Sri Lankans may not like the idea.

..

 

[funtoosh]

Sri Lankans may not like the idea.

..

, nice try.. Srilankans , I believe have not posted in the last few pages. hope you understand it was just in jest

 

[FaujHistorian]

, nice try.. Srilankans , I believe have not posted in the last few pages. hope you understand it was just in jest

Not sure about your jist or jest.

But you may be inching closer and closer to the high-heel missile from an auntie.

 

[Bang Galore]

Well, if you are saying Evolution is true, bring fwd your proof....Not just your yakking...proof or stay out of it!

Says the one who has been yakking about God & has presented no proof of existence. For the rest of us, plenty of proof of evolution is available.

Then they are prob not religion coz the very word religion means:

The word religion is a word of forced application when used with respect to the worship of God. The root of the word is the Latin verb ligo, comes religo, to tie or bind over again, to make more fast - from religo, comes the substantive religo, which, with the addition of n makes the English substantive religion.

Irrelevant what they are called. Islam wasn't defined by a latin word whose origins are obscure anymore than the other "religions". Regardless of what they are called, some of the world's largest & important faiths have shown an acceptance of an argument that questions the existence of God. Buddhism, Jainism & parts of Hinduism are good examples.

You cant even explain what you claim to know (Hinduism) and you want to question Islam? Question your religion 1st before going to the next level

I question everything. Unlike you, there are no "no-go" areas for me. Nobody can ever claim to explain Hinduism fully but it was you with you obviously super limited knowledge of it who insisted on bringing it into the discussion to support some view of yours(gods being male...)

Well, you are the 1 who claims common ancestor....the what happened? No one questions or dares go to the next stage?! How did 1 common gave rise 2 diff species? You tell me since its your theory that you recently claimed is the TRUTH (post 159 on this thread)

Eventually that is indeed what happened though unlike your simplistic idea, it wasn't one individual who had two different species as offspring. That kind of understanding makes me question the sense in even debating it with you.

It is funny that you question that evolution hasn't filled in all the gaps when all you believe in is ..well...just one giant gap. Proof, it seems, is a one way street for the likes of you.

 

[Dubious]

our ancestors were ape like creatures......

wow @Ayush, I am asking what happened? How did they diverge?! Did some mother ape give birth to 1 ape-like ancestor of yours and 1 normal ape?! or did she have 2 apes and 1 fell from the tree and became your ancestor? What happened?!

Maybe you don't even know the meaning of evolution ! It doesn't mean that a dog screws a female dog and a rat is born . It is a very slow process triggered by adaptations to different kinds of environments and surroundings to facilitate survival that takes thousands or even lacs of years . Please go through the darwin's theory of evolution once . You will get all your answers .

@PARAS Mr. Overly intelligent I am doing a PhD in genetics...I am asking you for the missing link for the missing story that Darwin never told and people assumed...

I am asking what happened? How did they diverge?! Did some mother ape give birth to 1 ape-like ancestor of yours and 1 normal ape?! or did she have 2 apes and 1 fell from the tree and became your ancestor? What happened?!

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-history-strategy/248834-arab-descriptions-early-medieval-south-asia-12.html#ixzz2VXcxSn68

 

[Dubious]

Says the one who has been yakking about God & has presented no proof of existence. For the rest of us, plenty of proof of evolution is available.

and I am asking for 1...which no one has provided ONLY CLAIMS!

I am asking what happened? How did they diverge?! Did some mother ape give birth to 1 ape-like ancestor of yours and 1 normal ape?! or did she have 2 apes and 1 fell from the tree and became your ancestor? What happened?!

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...rly-medieval-south-asia-12.html#ixzz2VXcxSn68

Irrelevant what they are called. Islam wasn't defined by a latin word whose origins are obscure anymore than the other "religions". Regardless of what they are called, some of the world's largest & important faiths have shown an acceptance of an argument that questions the existence of God. Buddhism, Jainism & parts of Hinduism are good examples.

Not Islam and latin ....am talking about literature...
Largest as compared to what? Important for whom? Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism is far from being LARGE OR IMPORTANT...Infact on PDF alone, MAJORITY of Indians claim to be atheist!

I question everything. Unlike you, there are no "no-go" areas for me.

when did I say no no-go? I only say that to trolling and lack of evidence or proof...or to chest thumping like an ape...

Nobody can ever claim to explain Hinduism fully but it was you with you obviously super limited knowledge of it who insisted on bringing it into the discussion to support some view of yours(gods being male...)

NO BODY CAN EXPLAIN IT? then what do you follow?! That is like a cult or something! I brought it in thinking maybe you understand based on what you know....But like you said NOBODY CAN explain it meaning even you dont know what Hinduism is....

Eventually that is indeed what happened though unlike your simplistic idea, it wasn't one individual who had two different species as offspring. That kind of understanding makes me question the sense in even debatingit with you.

I have only heard this answer from those who are incapable of providing an answer..What happened to questioning EVERYTHING? Suddenly EVERYONE is convinced in EVOLUTION yet not 1 example or explanation of HOW THIS HAPPENED can be presented?!

It is funny that you question that evolution hasn't filled in all the gaps when all you believe in is ..well...just one giant gap. Proof, it seems, is a one way street for the likes of you.

Well, apparently it is a prick when questioned about a theory which you believe as truth!

No idea . Ask someone who is well versed . All that i know in Hindu Philosophy Adi-Parashakti or Para Brahman is the source of everything . I might even be wrong on that part

And hence, I am...yet not 1 person is capable of keeping on a debate ...IF I ask question it is suddenly offensive and what not...But they can question to whichever level

[

Agreement with a PDF poster doesn't mean she has become a fairy (well you may be one in real life though).

Our mutual agreement means that finally you have come up to the level of my tree house.

Aww man...did I drop to your level?!

I am not at your level, believe me...I only stand for the truth and question what needs to be questioned...unlike you who follow whatever is the "in" thing...

 

[Ayush]

can't say exactly..it was evolution..u can use google to find more..and it is accepted worldwide..

 

[Developereo]

"Military History & Strategy"
"Medieval South Asia"
.
.
.
apes?
evolution?

 

[MilSpec]

Hindu books r not taken as valid sources because if u search history u cant find their substantial validity.

Where as this language yr talking about is already dead in this 21st century.

Let me tell u what this word is n what it means.

Hindustan is the Persian word where Hindu specifically is refereed to people living in the eastern side of river indus. It at its best is a geographical definition. According to it im also a hindu. Rest us-tan means ''sar zameen'' or in English 'Land'.

There is reason why u see central asian states have same names who were part of persian empire once like uzbakistan,tajikistan,kazakistan etc etc.

In old persian language or farsi tan is refereed to land.

If u look at yr neighboring country's name its called Pak-is-tan which means word to word Pure-of- land or land of pure.

The Hind-us-tan means word to word as hindu-for- land or land for hindus.

The word sthan is short for sthanam a sanskrit word.

 

[Thirdfront]

wow @Ayush, I am asking what happened? How did they diverge?! Did some mother ape give birth to 1 ape-like ancestor of yours and 1 normal ape?! or did she have 2 apes and 1 fell from the tree and became your ancestor? What happened?!


@PARAS Mr. Overly intelligent I am doing a PhD in genetics...I am asking you for the missing link for the missing story that Darwin never told and people assumed...

I am asking what happened? How did they diverge?! Did some mother ape give birth to 1 ape-like ancestor of yours and 1 normal ape?! or did she have 2 apes and 1 fell from the tree and became your ancestor? What happened?!

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...rly-medieval-south-asia-12.html#ixzz2VXcxSn68

Sorry to crash discussion, but are just mocking evolution for the sake of it or are you serious?? If you are serious, the solution for some genetic diseases just got delayed by 2-3 years.....

 

[Umair Nawaz]

The word sthan is short for sthanam a sanskrit word.

again same thing.

A word which rhymes with a word in an other language does not become its word.

That is why i say Hindu scriptures r not taken as valid universally because u people even use this reason too.
But again they r accepted as hypothesis/theories by historians not facts.

BTW the word we r talking abt is us-tan not sthan.

 

[Dubious]

Sorry to crash discussion, but are just mocking evolution for the sake of it or are you serious?? If you are serious, the solution for some genetic diseases just got delayed by 2-3 years.....

I am serious be cause we do not even have GENETIC prove that we are descendant from apes...

Why do I say this? Because its my field ...

While many evolutionists proclaim that human DNA is 98% identical to chimpanzee DNA, few would lie by idly and allow themselves to receive a transplant using chimpanzee organs. As a matter of fact, American doctors tried using chimp organs in the 1960s, but in all cases the organs were totally unsuitable. The claim of 98% similarity between chimpanzees and humans is not only deceptive and misleading, but also scientifically incorrect. Today, scientists are finding more and more differences in DNA from humans and chimps. For instance, a 2002 research study proved that human DNA was at least 5% different from chimpanzees—and that number probably will continue to grow as we learn all of the details about human DNA (Britten, 2002).

Just thirteen short years after Watson and Crick received their famed Nobel Prize, the declaration was made “that the average human polypeptide is more than 99 percent identical to its chimpanzee counterpart” (King and Wilson, 1975, pp. 114-115). This genetic similarity in the proteins and nucleic acids, however, left a great paradox—why do we not look or act like chimpanzees if our genetic material is so similar? King and Wilson recognized the legitimacy of this quandary when they remarked: “The molecular similarity between chimpanzees and humans is extraordinary because they differ far more than many other sibling species in anatomy and life” (p. 113). Nevertheless, the results were exactly what evolutionists were looking for, and as such, the claim has reverberated through the halls of science for decades as evidence that humans evolved from an ape-like ancestor.

One year following Watson and Crick’s Nobel ceremony, chemist Emile Zuckerkandl observed that the protein sequence of hemoglobin in humans and the gorilla differed by only 1 out of 287 amino acids. Zuckerkandl noted: “From the point of view of hemoglobin structure, it appears that the gorilla is just an abnormal human, or man an abnormal gorilla, and the two species form actually one continuous population” (1963, p. 247). The molecular and genetic evidence only strengthened the evolutionary foundation for those who testified of our alleged primate ancestors. Professor of physiology Jared Diamond even titled one of his books The Third Chimpanzee, thereby viewing the human species as just another big mammal. From all appearances, it seemed that evolutionists had won a battle—humans were more than 98% identical to chimpanzees. However, after spending a lifetime looking for evidence of evolution within molecular structures, biochemist Christian Schwabe was forced to admit:

Molecular evolution is about to be accepted as a method superior to paleontology for the discovery of evolutionary relationships. As a molecular evolutionist, I should be elated. Instead it seems disconcerting that many exceptions exist to the orderly progression of species as determined by molecular homologies; so many in fact that I think the exception, the quirks, may carry the more important message (1986, p. 280, emp. added).

only about 1.5% of the human genome consists of genes, which code for proteins. These genes are clustered in small regions that contain sizable amounts of “non-coding” DNA (frequently referred to as “junk DNA&#8221 between the clusters. The function of these non-coding regions is only now being determined. These findings indicate that even if all of the human genes were different from those of a chimpanzee, the DNA still could be 98.5 percent similar if the “junk” DNA of humans and chimpanzees were identical.

 

[MilSpec]

again same thing.

A word which rhymes with a word in an other language does not become its word.

That is why i say Hindu scriptures r not taken as valid universally because u people even use this reason too.
But again they r accepted as hypothesis/theories by historians not facts.

Wasn't suggesting but informing.

The suffix, originally an independent noun, but evolving into a suffix by virtue of appearing frequently as the last part in nominal compounds, is of Indo-Iranian and ultimately Indo-European origin: It is cognate with Sanskrit sthā́na (Devanagari: स्था&#2344 – pronounced [st̪ʰaːna] – meaning "the act of standing", from which many further meanings derive, including "place, location", and ultimately descends from Proto-Indo-Iranian *sthāna-.

I am serious be cause we do not even have GENETIC prove that we are descendant from apes...

Why do I say this? Because its my field ...

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/0831_050831_chimp_genes.html

 

[Dubious]

Ok I just realized no one will be reading all that with interest like me sooo:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v463/n7280/full/nature08700.html

Another implication of the finding is that we are more different to our closest living relative, the chimpanzee, than previously assumed from earlier studies. Instead of being 99 per cent similar, we are more likely to be about 96 per cent similar.

The findings, published simultaneously in three leading science journals by scientists from 13 different research centres in Britain and America, were described as ground-breaking by leading scientists.

Jonathan Marks, (department of anthropology, University of California, Berkeley) has pointed out the often-overlooked problem with this “similarity” line of thinking.

Because DNA is a linear array of those four bases—A,G,C, and T—only four possibilities exist at any specific point in a DNA sequence. The laws of chance tell us that two random sequences from species that have no ancestry in common will match at about one in every four sites. Thus even two unrelated DNA sequences will be 25 percent identical, not 0 percent identical (2000, p. B-7).
Therefore a human and any earthly DNA-based life form must be at least 25% identical. Would it be correct, then, to state that daffodils are “one-quarter human”? The idea that a flower is one-quarter human is neither profound nor enlightening; it is outlandishly ridiculous! There is hardly any biological comparison that could be conducted that would make daffodils human—except perhaps DNA. Marks went on to concede:

Moreover, the genetic comparison is misleading because it ignores qualitative differences among genomes.... Thus, even among such close relatives as human and chimpanzee, we find that the chimp’s genome is estimated to be about 10 percent larger than the human’s; that one human chromosome contains a fusion of two small chimpanzee chromosomes; and that the tips of each chimpanzee chromosome contain a DNA sequence that is not present in humans (B-7, emp. added).

Yes, the genetic difference between us and chimps is growing as new discoveries are coming in....from 99 to 96 and recently 95 and it is decreasing as more info is coming in....So take it from a geneticist...

At least I did not evolve from an ape! Maybe you can stick to it...