so the first type of dial is what I called the intellectual type of doll okay now usually this
confirm the scientific community right or people who like science because we live in an age of
scientific rationalism by the way Islam love science according to Western historians even L
hate them the first scientist of the Muslim his name was even and hate them if you read
the biographical works even and hate them he had a big beard most automatic Allah and he
prayed and he was a pious man and he said only do the science because I want to find
out the will of Allah subhana was that in the creative world so you know with nothing to be
ashamed of but science has become like almost a social phenomenon now that is like it's become
a yardstick for everything you know it could get you married pay your taxes brush your teeth
all right if they come back the religion of the white coat from a social perspective because it
works right now which is the scientific academic community they know just because something works
doesn't mean is true and they know that science doesn't need to certainty they know this because
ever-changing a shifting is the shifting sands of mine for example read any book on the philosophy
of science by few goats for example right Hugo joy even Alex Rosenberg or status pillows all
the philosophy Elliott sober these are all mainstream philosopher finds that you read
on a post grad and undergrad level and they say there's no certainty here if you want said today
go somewhere else it's not in a science science is great it works is beautiful we love it right
that's the nature finds the useful tool but what happens these days is just because we
hear sometimes a scientific conclusion we go crazy the amount of emails I get from Muslims oh brother
they found the god particle my Iman is low and I'm like oh my god what is this guy talking about
you know the popular magazine yes God's heart to co-found right it's called the Higgs boson right
and therefore it shattered his iman he wasn't bothered to read the scientific paper he read
it in a newspaper in a popular magazine he has no idea what the Higgs boson is just because someone
said you know a scientist said they found the good particle therefore his iman is low this
is ridic absolutely ridiculous and it shows that we've suspended our level of thinking
you know the hidden boson was the higgs boson was a particle right that they found that made up the
higgs field the higgs field was switched on in the early universe to give particles mass apart
from the photon that's for the old someone right according to them switched on the higgs field and
it gave particles mass apart from the photon and what they found was the particle that made
up the Higgs field that's it doesn't deny gold does not affirm but nothing to do with theology
accretion right nothing and the reason it could it the god particle is because historically it
was so hard to find the quotient that goddamn particle and because they were lazy then they
coated the god particle that's the point he has nothing to do with it with theology so the reason
I'm mentioning different it's a good example but to show that science will never ever deny
Allah ever I can't if you study the sort of your science he has no job because fine according to
Elliott's over professor alias over restricts its attention to that which observations can solve by
the very definition of Allah he's a metaphysical concept right meaning it is not empirical later
chemically shake a lie is inside or outside the universe outside of the universe if I make the
table I don't become the table right if I I'm a carpet I make the table do I become the table
I am distinct and destroyed from the table as it maintaining it says that creation is distinct and
disjoint from a loss a panel or to Allah later chemistry he shape I look as Adi said the same
thing already follow all of our lms with the same thing the mainstream or lemma so science can never
affirm directly or deny directly Allah subhana WA Ta'ala why because it can only address that
which observations can solve for it now to start discussing the existence of Allah is outside of
its methodology it's like having to roll I know what's in this room but I don't know what's in
the next room and just because I see a cop in this room I cannot conclude logically therefore
there is no carpet in the other room so if you came to be a scientist and you came to deny God
based on science its equivalent of having two room you don't know what's in the other room
you're in one room and just because you can see a cop in this room you now conclude there's no
carpet in the next room this is a logical fallacy there's no logical Italy doesn't follow it's non
sequitur meaning it doesn't logically follow and this is why I think it was Hugh goat he says he
basically suggests that fine suppose atheism you get high marks for enthusiasm low marks for logic
right and I need to say academic fine scientists go go to Qatar Foundation go to Education City
go to Oxford go to Cambridge ass-kissing see a scientist and a philosophy of science as
philosopher science and awesome can find evidence directly denied God know the current because the
metaphysical concept nothing which you observe can deny all of the panel water Anna so what
science can do is a few things number one stay silent on the topic or number two maybe suggest
evidence that you can use to infer that there is a disease there's a designer but it can't
directly denial lots of carnal water at anyone who knows their science anyone who knows the
philosophy of science can never deny God no matter what they say you had some guy I think
is Invictus Stenger I think that's his name he wrote a book got the failed hypothesis how
science disproves God or something the ridiculous book science can never deny God all it can do is
maybe suggest alternatives models to explain how creation develops well that's a different
story right that's denying a creation stories denying how species were evolved other affirming
a different kind of narrative or different theory for how species evolved as a difference of but to
outright deny a creator for the universe this is impossible science can't deal with that at all and