Welcome to Resource Zone.

Criticism of Islam/Quran/Sceintific_Accuracy Category

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter #1
Joined
Jun 8, 2007
I checked all of the sites in the above mentioned category and here is what I found (without URLs):

Most of the sites share a common pattern : Very poor design.
But there are much much more things to say about them:

For example, about one of the sites: The site is moved to a new URL! Your linked site just redirects you to the new site. And when I go to the link they give (http://www.rationalreality.com/) what I found is a site totally unrelated with Quran&Science at all. There even are articles about "Israel & Democracy" and "Iraq War" in the new site. What is this? A joke?

Let's look at another one: It is a poorly written site with no original content. There are infact only 4 articles about Quranic Science and all of them are just copy-and-paste from original internet sites.

Just another one : It is just a one page copy-and-paste work? Why don't you list the original sites but these cheap and poor quality web sites.

And the the WORST : It has only 2 absurd artciles : One is a copy-and-paste work of a crazy claim orginally found in the net (Search for "Microsoft Excel reveals the Quran Miracle" non-sense). The other article is of same quality! Here is a quotation from that GREAT page: "This is a recently discovered phenomenon in a forest near Sidney. As you can see, the bottom half of the tree trunk is bowed in such a way that it resembles a person in a posture of Islamic prayer - the 'ruku'. Looking closer you can see the 'hands' resting on the knees." Do you think that this site deserves a listing in DMOZ?

One more : again a cheap copy!

Even one MORE : cheap, copy, no rich content, no original content.

Do you think that one of the largest religions of the world deserve all these?

please be sure about the quality of your listings...

Sorry, thanks anyway.
 
Moderator #2

shadow575

kEditall/kCatmv
Curlie Meta
Joined
Jul 26, 2004
It would have been easier to find if we had the actual URL in question or a clickable link to the real category. After some searching I found the site and category though. I have removed the redirect link pending a reevaluation of the new content. It was no joke, it was a hijack. The site that was originally listed has changed, either just the URL, actual ownership, or simply changed content focus. It will now wait for an editor experienced in that area to re-review it and make a decision on where (if any place) the site will belong and send it along.

As for the other problems, we have a thread dedicated to fixing problems if you want to point them out:
https://www.resource-zone.com/forum/showthread.php?p=242794#post242794

Be sure to give us all the information we will need in order to process the request.

<add> Closing this thread as we prefer that members utilize the appropriate thread to make these types of requests. <end>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom