Muslim Response by Randy
Desmond
Date: Friday, 14 March 1997
Read the Qur'an. This is associated with the miracle(s) given to Solomon. Would you say Jesus raising of the dead was scientifically sound? Or do you propose that this (refer to the verse below) is also "scientifically" wrong?
"I have come to you with a sign from your Lord: I make for you out of clay, as it were, a figure of a bird, and breathe into it and it becomes a bird by God's leave. And I heal the blind, and the lepers, and I raise the dead by God's leave." (Surah 3, Ayat 49)
Or do you propose that Moses'(peace be upon him) staff turning into a snake is "scientifically" wrong?
Don't confuse special miracles given to prophets with "scientific" proofs. A miracle, by definition, is something which human reasoning (culminated in science) can not explain, but which the human is made to feel awe at the power of God!
Besides being an illogical accusation (since the subject matter is a specific miracle given to Soloman - peace be upon him), it seems that the Qur'an may actaully be more correct than you assume. I will, insha'Allah (God willing), explain.
You quote from "The Ants" by Holldobler and Wilson. You quote them as saying "Two froms of sound production have been identified, body rapping against the substratum and stridulation." You then quote the book out of sequence (I suppose to fit your agenda - but I will give you the benefit of the doubt and call it an honest mistake), then you go back a page and quote again, "The signaling pattern is independent of the triggering stimulus That is, the ants do not modify the drumming to identify the category of danger to the nest."
Now, what you have proven (if I can piece the puzzle back in order) is that a sound is used to warn the nest (is that true?). If you have shown that, then thank you! What you try to disprove is that the ant mentioned in the Qur'an did not specify the type of danger to warn the nest. I'll hold out for further scientific studies - just from your quotes I do not know how those studies were performed. What was used to cause a threatening danger to the nest? Does the body rapping against the substratum in conjunction with stridulation specify the type of danger? There seems to be many logical possiblities. Especially when we consider that smell is also used as a means of communication.
Oops! Seems I got caught up in one of your presuppositions, so let me clear that up before continuing. The verse is actually talking about an ant telling the other ants to get into their habitations, not "look out the nest is in danger" (as you presuppose by your quote of page 256). You may be quoting somthing irrelevant to the matter at hand and if so I retrack my thank you above.
The word in Arabic for ant is naml and the verbal root word is namila which means "to tingle, to prickle". Could it be that the name in Arabic denotes something with respect to how ants communicate? Could it be inferring stridualtion? Or the sensation of scent? God knows best.
Anyway, the worker ants are female. Neat. The Qur'an uses the feminine gender when talking about this ant! (Another knowledge comes from the Qur'an which I wonder if it was descovered before Muhammad's time - peace be upon him).
Another note to point out is that the Qur'an does not use the word for hearing in Solomons case. It only mentions that the ant "said" and "speech(of the ant)". Interesting, don't you think? How often do we say the newspaper said something, but, in fact, the newspaper never "says" anything.
In conclusion, let me point out that. (1) you have tried to break a miracle from God into scientific rational. (2) you have pointed out something about communication of ants - but not everything and you have not shown what the communication modality(ies) is for the specific situation which is described in the Qur'an.
Lastly, anyone interested can do a net search on ants and find out what they can about their communication. The link you provided was strictly to suit your claims. That is not honest scholarship.
"Eyes are not of great importance to ants because the antennae help ants smell, communicate and explore."
Department of Behavioral Physiology and Sociobiology
This site is by one of the authors of the book quoted above. In it there is a mention of the Johnston's organ of bees used to pick up sound.
An Introduction to Insect Morphology and Anatomy
See the section on Antennae. The point is that the same organ (Johnston's) is associated with ants as it is with bees. Then if you go to the "Hearing and other Senses" part of the page, you will find in the "Ears" section further mention of the Johnston's organ - it is closely associated with the movement of hairs on the antennal scape.
Then go on to read out the sense of smell. Fascinating. Remember I said that the arabic word is naml and comes from a verbal root which means "to tingle, to prickle"? That is exactly what happens all over the bodies of these ants. Let me quote that web page.
"Most insects communicate using smell or chemoreception and it is not surprising that they have evolved a large variety of ways of detecting the moloecules involved. Insects do not have noses like us which concentrate all our sense of smell in one place, instead they have a lot of small sensory bodies scattered over their body, though they tend to have a concentration of them on their antennae."
Is smell and touch the tingling and prickling of molecules against our sensory organs? Can you imagine the tingling sensation they would get?
Another Excellent site.
So where is the contradicion? Can any other religion offer its adherents such comfort in knowledge and faith?