Australian researchers verified that people suffering from obesity are exposed to changes in the structure of the Heart muscle which affect its proper functioning, even if they did not have any heart disease. These changes might lead to later fall in the heart.
These are main factors that cause obesity and consequently cause dangerous disease like heart diseases, diabetes, blood pressure and cancer. But what about the Islamic teachings which was revealed 1400 years ago?
Allah, the Almighty, had specified a golden rule in diet as He said: " and eat and drink but waste not by extravagance, certainly He (All?h) likes not Al-Musrif?n (those who waste by extravagance)" (31:Al A'raf.). The most dangerous thing is extravagance and as long as the person is moderate he will be at the safe side, this is what stated by the western scientists!
Even, the prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, had given us a remarkable rule in diet which explains Allah's saying (but waste not by extravagance), he peace be upon him says: (the son of Adam had filled a bowl not worse than a belly! Enough for the son of Adam are small mouthfuls to stand him up, but if he was beaten by himself then a third for the food, a third for drink and a third for breath) (the right sequence 2265). The prophet alienated his companions from overeating and said (the son of Adam had not filled a bowl worse than a belly) in order to have in front of their sight while eating that this food might be harmful to them if they fill their bellies with it!
If you need Muhammad to be validated by Western scientists then you must not have much faith in him. Also the teaching of "moderation is good" is far older than Muhammad.
__________________
Graffiti outside Latin class.
Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
A juvenal prank.
Well I for one can totally agree with that Islamic doctrine 100%.
I eat hard, workout hard, work hard, and study hard. I bring forth a hell of a lot energy to the day. And when the day is finished, you'll never see someone so calm and relaxed. I work my stresses away, burn through them, and when it's over I indulge myself, but not too much. Most of the time I'm just happy to be fit, healthy, safe, and physically at rest at the moment, with my mind free to ponder.
__________________ "Compounding these trickster aspects, the Joker ethos is verbally explicated as such by his psychiatrist, who describes his madness as "super-sanity." Where "sanity" previously suggested acquiescence with cultural codes, the addition of "super" implies that this common "sanity" has been replaced by a superior form, in which perception and processing are completely ungoverned and unconstrained"
When it comes to religious claims, "evidence" is at best a loose term. Anything can be spun into "evidence" for the existence of God. It's all about sentiment.
Strawman alert.
__________________
“Where the longleaf pines are whispering
to him who loved them so.
Where the faint murmurs now dwindling
echo o’er tide and shore."
-A Grave Epitaph in Santa Rosa County, Florida; I wish I could remember the man's name.
Juridically speaking evidence isn't the same as proof.
If you find a note in a forest saying "Astner was here" you could use that note in court as a piece of evidence for that I've been in said forest. But it isn't proof.
No it's not a straw man. It wasn't even an argument against any of his positions.
There are several philosophies of science and statistics. Most of them do not involve certainty. The now traditional Neyman-Pearson/Fischer significance testing paradigm gets a lot of heat for effectively treating evidence as proof.
__________________
Graffiti outside Latin class.
Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
A juvenal prank.
Then what's the difference? I tend to use the words interchangeably; I'd like to be accurate. The impression I'm getting is that evidence "suggests," while proof is "in your face."
__________________
Shinier than a speeding bullet.
I don't know that there is a strict difference but proof tends to imply certainty. Once you have proven something it can never be dislodged, it is an absolute truth. Mathematicians and logicians publish proofs. Theoretician may sometimes also publish proofs but they don't necessarily reflect reality.
Evidence is another term for data. Scientists collect evidence then analyze it either inferentially (Bayes) or deductively (Frequentist) and draw conclusions. Technically these conclusions are always provisional but that phrasing is weak from a rhetorical standpoint and science popularizers have to dodge it all the time. There are many ways of talking about strength of evidence but even things held to the most stringent standards (declaring a particle to exist require higher evidence than anything else I know) can always be dethroned by adding new evidence to the pile.
__________________
Graffiti outside Latin class.
Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
A juvenal prank.
There's no proofs in the natural sciences, only evidence. And a piece of evidence is any interpretation of an observation that supports a model.
Without bringing up too complex examples, dropping a marble at a flat plate, and then dropping it to have it fall against the earth could be used as evidence for that the earth is flat.
Concussively, evidence in scientific terms doesn't really mean much.
Well, one example could work as follows. Since the plate doesn't screen out the "gravitational" influence of the marble, so wouldn't a flat earth. Hence evidence for why the earth could be flat.
Gender: Male Location: Drifting off around the bend
I agree, much of existence is based in a form of faith to some degree. I also believe that we must be open to the possibility that we are wrong to a point. However, I do believe that if reality does not necessitate that a belief is wrong, the possibility that it is right exists. I believe that the choice to follow one belief or another must be based in the results. Regardless of your belief system, I think this Biblical maxim is a good one to use in deciding which beliefs to cling to and which to let go of:
Cling to those things that make life better for the whole and the individual and improve or maintain the general propagation of the species. Now, where the discussion leads is to which beliefs best satisfy this, which is, generally, the discussion of which religion.
KMC Community Forums
Mar 7th, 2013 04:02 PM
