Maybe they should have dipped the flies into their drinks so the bullet wounds would be cured
i aspire to one day be as much of a hater as u are , making multiple threads about hating on muslims. hero
Why does Muhammad tell you to dip the fly in the drink and that one of the wing has the cure. Wouldn't that be a little bit misleading?
Nigger you don't understand the anger I had when I talked to one. It's like they're ragebaiting 24/7i aspire to one day be as much of a hater as u are , making multiple threads about hating on muslims. hero
Right im retarded
are you christian ?
No
aight, just asking cuz it wouldve been dumb to make multiple threads hating on muslim religion while being christian, both brainwashing..i respect both tho believe in what you want
Yes both retarded
Al-Bukhari isn't quran not every muslim believes it
Sunnis do
Right heres an answer from an atheist SO YOU KNOW ITS NOT BIASED IF ANYTHING ITS BIASED AGAINST THE VERSE
The 1990 paper by Baeshin is dipping flies for 20 seconds (vs floating fly for 20 seconds) and dipping flies thrice for 20 seconds each (vs floating for 60 seconds) in some experiments using the same fly multiple times (!) in some experiments having only one no-dip statistic, ..., no variance is computed, tests are done maximally 6 times, provenance of flies is unclear, the manipulation neccessary for dipping has no clear equal on the no-dip side of things (introduction of antimicrobials via the tool?), counts fluctuate wildly over time and over media - in short, it is a hot mess.
The hypothesis is that the fly carries an antimicrobial factor that is transferred to the water in a higher concentration when dipping, thus counteracting the initially higher microbial input. The data does not bear that out, if the experimental and statistical shortcomings are taken into account.
The microbiologically sound 2019 study by Galal et al looks at bacteria and fungi found on flies by dipping. It finds bacteria and fungi on the flies, does a visual characterisation of the cultures and confirms antimicrobial and antifungal properties on some colonies. The paper has no hypothesis and is purely observational. It is never made clear why the flies are sampled by dipping, but they reference Baeshin(1990) with this: "[...]studied the effect of natural fall and dipping of M. domestica on microbial contamination of distilled water and milk" - thereby omitting any religious overtones or the hypothesis that dipping somehow is better than floating.
The funny 2014 paper by Atta even narrows it down to the wing. As is readily apparent from the picture, an assay sourced from the right wing is totally different from the assay sourced from the left wing. Science People! Sadly the author leaves out why dipping a fly would impact which wing gets more washed.
Baeshin at al resubmitted their 1990 paper with more authors but same data 2021. Why? To prove precedence. Why? Unclear.
And if anything this actually supports Islam
The 2014 wing study is a complete fucking joke
. They had a couple flies and a CLEAR motive to fake the results. That study wouldn't be taken seriously by literally any scientist
My reply was written with that in mindThe 2014 wing study is a complete fucking joke
Yes it's obvious that the fly has antimicrobial properties but there's absolutely no evidence that the wings are different. That wouldn't make ANY sense biologically
He couldve said it metaphorically
Wouldn't that be harmful to his followers?
Well i mean he didnt specify which wing was each so no one would actually eat one of the wings expecting a cure
There is a deeper meaning of it, you are too stupid to understand it
Muslims take it literally and have even tried to prove it
