Cardiologists losing it

There is a very popular form of apologetic literature among Muslims, based on the notion that modern science and technology is congruent with, or even foreshadowed in, the sacred sources of Islam. It’s bad enough that this species of pseudoscience has a large following among the general public. What is worse is that significant numbers of devout Muslim professionals, particularly in the applied sciences, believe and promote this dreck. (See An Illusion of Harmony.)

One consequence of this, however, is that devout Muslim authors will often submit lower-key versions of this apologetic literature to international applied science journals. (Almost always lower tier journals, as you would expect.) Now, I don’t know much about rejection rates in such journals; my reviewing experience is in entirely different fields. But knowing, as anyone in academia does, about the imperfections of peer review, I’m not surprised a couple occasionally get through.

Interestingly, two cardiology papers of this apologetic nature have just been brought to my attention. One is “The heart and cardiovascular system in the Qur’an and Hadeeth,” by mostly US-based Muslim medical people. The other is less serious, since it’s only a letter to the editor: “Islamic legacy of cardiology: Inspirations from the holy sources” by three Turkish academic cardiologists.

Soon I expect half the Islamic apologists on the Internet will be citing these as Western academic confirmation of the miraculous knowledge contained in the Quran and other sacred sources. So it goes…

Apologetics Infographic #1: Atheism and Nothingness
G&T Rebuttal, Part 6: Chapter 7
Geisler & Turek Rebuttal, Part 7: Chapter 8
What if you Saw a Miracle?
About Taner Edis

Professor of physics at Truman State University

  • Charles Sullivan

    I've noticed a similar phenomenon with some New Age believers, but their focus is more on technology.

    Some argue that the lost island of Atlantis had technology more advanced than ours, and some say similar things about ancient Egypt.

    Often it's extra-terrestrials who are given credit for giving these ancient civilizations their advanced technologies.

    There's a kind of Golden Age mythology that seems to run through these notions.

  • Rose

    I feel really sad for non-believers. My relationship with God and with Yeshua The Christ has given me a great deal of joy and I know the reality of the supernatural world. It's really sad that people can rationalize away love and faith. And no matter what an atheist believes, God still loves them. He believes in us. May God bless you always.

  • onkar4

    God survives in a belief system and in the fear of mortality of living beings but ambit of science is embedded in facts, evidence, rationality and creativity which have provided better life on this planet such as, longevity and cure of many dreaded illnesses.

  • onkar4

    Publishing such a tale-tell has definitely raised the question of the quality (reliability & validity) of this journal. Trying to save face of the diminishing respect of Islam and Muslims to the present-day world of reasons has simply added more mockery to it. The article contradicts how the science is done. The very statement 'revelation' is a misrepresentation of the fact that Islam is one of the three religions that came into being from the same feudal family to compete each other. Also the practices and so called science of the prophet Muhammad described in this article can be transparently considered as plagiarism for it has been described in many early texts for example, 'Manisanghita' about 5 thousand years ago practiced by Aryan monks before the doctrine of Islam came to Middle East. Nevertheless, the authors desecrated the holy books by aligning them with science. Science is the claim from evidence and so a rational domain of human being. I would respect Al-Brunni as the then front line member of scientists from Middle East. Advising with no observations and facts garnered is not a science itself rather than authoritarian views. Science never spews hatred against the nature but just read the comments of a real devout Muslim professor from Australia who has simply cited a few verses to support the terrorism against non-believers. How the authors claim the Quoran and Hadith as per with science? Science is not an absolute but dynamic and skeptical that changes with new findings. Do 'Quoran' and 'Hadith' mandate this nature of science? Dreaded it might be if that is so as we have seen in many incidents that almost knocked the very world peace. take for man example, Taslima Nasreen — a female medical doctor and rational scientist herself is facing the Islamic sword on her neck because she asked for change of 'Quoran' & Islamic practices in view of the present day needs. How then these authors mischievously try to describe the statements from an authoritarian scriptures as science. To me they themselves are complete ignorant of what it is that is called science.

    My advice with these authors would be to avoid this pseudo-science and rather stand strongly against the heinous terrorists to wash the smeared hands of Islam with dignity.

    Dr. Ankut, Professor of Science & Education, USA.