Ofcourse, the Greeks did a lot. But the Muslims started a lot as well, without help from the Greeks.
The Greeks, Babylonians and others had already considered early examples of geometric series, quadratic equations, cartesian coordinates, infinitesimal calculus, and even algebra. They didn't go far with these concepts, but they did get an impressively good start on it. Much of that knowledge was lost when the Library of Alexandria got torched but some of it survived and the rest was referred to by other historians of the time.
Just go to the page about Ibn-Haytham then
The article I was linked to by S.A.M. is in serious dispute. Read the talkbacks, the other editors are furious because the author of the article was directly misquoting texts in order to give the false impression that muslims had invented sliced bread and just about everything else we find useful. For instance, the author claimed Bertrand Russell had credited Islam as the foundation of modern science. Yet someone who actually had Russell's text showed that Russell said the opposite, that their contributions were trivial.
I believe the muslims did many great things to advance pre-Galilean science, but much of it was built on the works of earlier cultures and none of it comes directly out of the Quran. The only thing one could credit to the Quran might be that, in some peoples' personal interpretations, it encourages them to be skeptical and inquisitive, which are certainly prerequisites for being a scientist.
Just as much as we would attribute e=mc2 to anyone except Einstein. Did anyone even bother to read my previous post?
I'm sure you give full and due credit to Einstein. What I'm saying is that I've heard many muslims claiming that $$E=mc^2$$ can be derived from the Quran. Same with the Big Bang theory, evolution, heck I'll bet some scholar's even finding String Theory in there right now. I wonder what value they'll compute for the fine structure constant?
Mountain of evidence for what?
I was asking where the mountain of evidence was for the idea that mountains can be moved. Doesn't such an event happen in the Quran, there's a mountain in some location and whammo, next day the same mountain is in a completely different place? If the Quran itself contained an outline of the scientific method, then muslims would have made efforts to scientifically verify that mountains can be moved, or they would seek geological evidence that it had happened in the past.
That Muslims started and continued science when the rest of the world was hunting witches? That people from all over the world came to learn from Muslims? Have you ever read what academics have to say on this subject? There is a mountain of evidence, but I fear simpletons wont get to see it because it is academic material. Shame really
Actually I admire the works of the muslim scientists, and have even committed to learning some of their unique mathematical proofs. We really do owe them a debt of gratitude from bringing their advances over to Europe and kicking off the Renaissance. That I have no problem with whatsoever, in fact I always wonder why the muslims fell out with their own brilliant revolution and failed to keep up with its developments (remember, the Renaissance came long after the crusades).
What I do have a problem with are the people who claim any actual scientific knowledge as originating from the Quran. Yes it's probably true that the Quran might, in various interpretations, tell its readers to be skeptical and inquisitive. But there are those who seek to credit the Quran itself with direct insights into astronomy, biology, geology, optics and other things that were already discovered or whose groundwork had already been laid out long before. Then there are also those quacks who have attempted to re-translate the Quran to make all kinds of ridiculous claims about the Big Bang, quantum physics, etc. etc.
Heck, even if the Quran, in its correct translation, were to say "the universe is expanding", that can mean a million different things. Now if the Quran were to contain a chapter on tensor calculus and differential geometry and were then to describe the spacetime metric of our universe and the Big Bang as a corollary, with proper ages, stellar masses, velocities and other details, now then I would take the argument seriously.
We are only quoting what the scientists who developed new ways and started stuff that wasnt there before said. I know it may be annoying to you, but thats the reality of it
I'm only annoyed with those who attribute such advances directly to factual claims made in the Quran, because it's an obvious attempt at conversion through false propaganda. It would be like Einstein citing Shakespeare as the source for the idea that masses follow the geodesic equation in curved spacetimes.
