I dread finding email in my inbox from someone with a Muslim name nowadays, because I know exactly what it’s going to about. Apparently I am notorious among Islamic fundamentalists because I said that the prophet Mohammed’s account of developmental biology is not accurate, and not at all substantial, so every once in a while someone gets it in their head to prove me wrong, that the Quran is precise, accurate, and complete. It is not, of course.

Here we go again.

Dear Professor PZ Myers,

I hope you are doing well. I am a Muslim medical student, and I recently watched your debate on embryology in Islam from 12 years ago. Unfortunately, the brothers debating you lacked in-depth knowledge of embryology[That’s a poor description to narrow it down. They were all bad, every one. Maybe this one with the appropiately named Nadir?], but I am here to offer a more informed perspective[Doubtful.]

I have written an entire book about embryology in Islam, detailing its basis and nuances. I noticed you are seeking detailed embryological descriptions in the Quran[No, I’m not. The Quran has a pitifully short description, I don’t need a whole book making excuses for it], and I believe you may have overlooked the significant details present in the verses of Surah Al-Muminun or other surah. While I understand you are an atheist and do not believe in God, I hope to provide you with some insights before it is too late[Too late…for what?].

I am willing to share passages from my book with you, completely free of charge, in the spirit of honest inquiry and the pursuit of truth. The first passages I will provide cover:

1. The formation of bones and flesh.
2. The claim that the Quran copied from the works of Galen and Aristotle.

Additionally, my book includes other topics such as:

3. Embryology classification at the microscopic level and its correlation with the Quran.
4. Sex determination in the Hadiths of the Prophet and the Quran.
5. Correcting misinterpretations of verses in Chapter 86 of the Quran: Surah At-Tariq (regarding the ejaculated fluid coming from between the backbone and ribs).

To start, I will send you the first two topics. All you need to do is read these to conclude that the knowledge contained in the Quran is not primitive and could not have been known by everyone at that time[I’ve read a complete translation of that section — it’s very short — and it’s primitive]. If you continue to claim otherwise, I would appreciate evidence that someone made similar statements as the Prophet did at that time[I feel no obligation to correspond further].

I apologize for not being able to share the entire book now, as it has not yet been released. However, I am happy to provide the first two passages, and if you are interested in more, please let me know and I will see what I can do.

Have a good day.

Best regards,

Are you ready for this? OK, let’s take a look at the excerpt about “bones and flesh”. The Quran claims Allah makes bones first, then clothes them with flesh. Is that what happens?

What comes after this is
ع ِ ظ َ ام ً ا
الْع ِ ظ َ ام َ ف َ ك َ س َ و ْ نَا
” لَح ْ م ً ا
which means “We made [from] the chewed substance, bones, and We covered the bones with flesh.” So, after this, we have bones, and many atheists claim that this is a contradiction because the flesh is formed before bones (or it is a simultaneous step). I will respond to this right now from many credible sources of embryology, such as “Medical Embryology” by Thomas W. Sadler. You can find this book in libraries. On page 134, under the topic of limb development, it states:

Oh joy. Commence the quote mining from medical textooks.

-‘’At the end of the fourth week of development limb buds become visible’’.
-’’Initially, the limb buds consist of a mesenchymal core…that will form the bones and connective tissues of the limb’’.
-’’By the sixth week of development, the first hyaline cartilage models, foreshadowing the bones of the extremities, are formed by these chondrocytes (figs. 9.15 and 9.16). Joints are formed in the cartilaginous condensations….’’
Here is another source, Cunningham’s Manual of Practical Anatomy, published by Oxford
University Press:
-‘’The ossification centers in the bodies of the long bones (primary ossification centers) appear at approximately 8 weeks’’
Back to Sadler:
‘’Primary ossification centers are present in all long bones of the limbs by the 12th week of development’’
‘’ the first indication of limb musculature is observed in the seventh week of development as a condensation of mesenchyme ’’

That’s all fine. The key point is that limbs start as a mass of undifferentiated tissue (mesenchyme) that progressively forms muscle and bone. But let’s see how the medical student interprets it:

Mesenchyme refers to a population of undifferentiated cells. It’s important to note that these cells are in their initial stage and have not yet formed any specific structures. At this early stage of development, the bones are the first solid structures to appear, with bone cells emerging by the end of the fourth week. Conversely, the appearance of the mesenchyme occurs around the seventh week of gestation.

Nothing in his quoted material says anything close to that. Limb buds becoming visible at the end of the fourth week is not synonymous with bone cells emerging by the end of the fourth week Those limb buds are bags of mesenchyme. Likewise, it doesn’t say that mesenchyme doesn’t show up until the seventh week. It says it’s there in the 4th week! It’s like he read those excerpts and didn’t understand a thing that they said.

But don’t worry! He’s going to go fishing in another textbook.

You don’t believe me? It’s okay. Here is another source, which is the Atlas of Human Embryology by Frank H. Netter, an American surgeon:

Chapter 8 MUSCULOSKELETAL SYSTEM:
At the 5th week: Mesenchymal precartilage condensations appear for the axial skeleton.
At the 6th week: Mesenchymal condensation for appendicular skeleton bones, and after this
somite myotomes (simply means the early building blocks of muscles in our body.)
After two months (8 weeks): individual muscles develop.

That says nothing about bones. It says “mesenchyme”. He must know what mesenchyme is, since he defined it correctly up above, but then he goes on to misinterpret every preconception he’s got.

Conclusion: The passages consistently indicate that bone formation begins before muscle formation. Mesenchymal cells form the initial structures for bones by the fourth week, cartilage models form by the sixth week, and ossification centers appear by the eighth week. Muscle formation, indicated by mesenchymal condensation, starts around the seventh week, and individual muscles develop after eight weeks. Thus, bones form before muscles, not simultaneously.

Wait, wait, wait. He doesn’t understand his own words! He says there that ossification starts in the eighth week, and muscle formation around the seventh week, so muscles before bones? I hope he understands that 7 comes before 8.

Look, this is all nonsense that is a consequence of trying to force developmental processes into a simple sequence. They’re gradual, progressive, and they occur in parallel. The medical student is replicating Mohammed’s error in trying to force a slow incremental series of events into two binary categories that happen discretely, one after the other, when they simply don’t. It’s all more complicated than that.

Hold unto your seat. Here comes an amazing claim.

Even the latest studies cannot compare to the descriptions found in the Quran. Just two lines in the Quran summarize many books. So, ask yourself, if you don’t believe in religion, how could an illiterate man speak such words? La wallah (No, by Allah), this is the word of God.

So now he claims that the linesWe made [from] the chewed substance, bones, and We covered the bones with flesh summarizes all of our modern biology texts. I guess developmental biology research is all done, covered by a few words of poetry written in the 7th century.

Remember, I am not saying that the Quran is a scientific book.

Good, because it definitely isn’t. It’s more like a children’s book. So why try to defend its science with such obnoxious persistence?

No, it is a book that demonstrates the power of Allah, completes people’s religion, and answers their questions. Moreover, the Quran does not stop at describing an embryo. I encourage you to read more and learn more about Islam and the Quran if you seek to discover the truth. I am not suggesting only reading the Quran; you can read all books, including the Bible. You will notice many contradictions in them because they are not the word of God anymore; they are authored by anonymous people. And this is my challenge for you: if you find just one contradiction in the Quran, I will leave Islam.

I don’t think it demonstrates much of anything, other than the gullibility of its followers, and the willingness of the more deluded to pester me with their comical efforts to defend it with bullshit. If its description of embryonic development is any example, I have zero efforts in reading further.

I am amused that he tells me it’s OK to read all those other holy books, but only the Quran is flawless and perfect. How about if we just treat the Quran as another human-written text, just like all the others?

The excerpt from his book continues on for seven more pages, and, to quote his own words back at him:

We are tired of you, wallah. Try something else, please.

Unless there’s popular acclaim that I should address his nonsense further, I’ll stop here.