Makkah is the oldest city in the world?

Originally posted by Centrix Vigilis Excellent resource...and synopsis.

yep... The problem with Muslim tradition (won't call it history) is that it is full of wishful thinking and major logical fallacies. It's very difficult to even believe that such tradition was actually used to give Makkah its historical prestige. Anyhow, it's clear that there is a substantial lack of historicity for the entire region pre-dating the 7th century.

Originally posted by Baal Melqart Are you serious? Pomegranate, grapes, olives and figs only grow in the mediterranean... It is impossible for these plants to grow in Makkah or anywhere near for that matter! Nor has nayone witnessed the growth of such plants in the region in the past 14 centuries. Well, I have never seen or heard of these ''biblical cities with ancient churches''. Got any pictures? Where is the destroyed people of Lot, you agree that they are in Palestine, right? Also don't forget that the Quran made them an Ayah (sign) for the people of the prophet and for everyone for that matter. Why does Abraham who is supposedly living 1200km away from Lot (for whatever unknown and very questionable reason btw) talk about the town of Lot by addressing it with ''Hathihi-al-qarya'' (this town) which in Arabic is clear that the place is close and cannot be used for something far away otherwise Abraham would have said ''Tilka-al-qarya'' (that town). Also, I would like to see you explain how the people of the prophet pass by the destroyed town of Lot by day and by night... Notice that the arabic verb used is ''Tamurrun'' which insinuates something one does daily and not after a journey. This is evident from the use of the verb in the Quran. I'll show you an example: ١١:٣٨  ويصنع الفلك وكلما مر عليه ملا من قومه سخروا منه قال ان تسخروا منا فانا نسخر منكم كما تسخرون And he constructed the ship, and whenever an assembly of the eminent of his people passed by him, they ridiculed him. He said, "If you ridicule us, then we will ridicule you just as you ridicule. the verb is the same in the singular form ''yamurr'' which means to pass by something. The people of Noah passed by him regularly and they surely didn't do this after travelling 1200km. The Quran doesn't say Palestine because it doesn't need to, this should be quite evident and was quite evident to the people addressed by Muhammad. It should also be to everyone who is studying the Quran with an open mind.

Then why are those things mentioned in hadiths? and why did the prophet eat them as part of his diet? it is very well depicted

The area between Madinah and Makkah is very fertile, every thing grows there, I have seen this by my own eyes

The rest of argument is again bogus, you have no proof to disprove what I am saying

I also doubt the existance of Mecca as one of the very first cities in the world. I rather think cities as Ur, Jericho or Uruk are more likely to be given the title: first city in the world.

Thank you for your reply Ollios.

I am actually well aware of climate change and how drastic it can be. Yet it seems you are a little bit confused as to the geological time this change requires. We are talking about at least 10,000 years or more for a very slight change to occur. It would not be reasonable nor scientifically accurate to claim that in 1400 years Makkah changed from being fertile into being a desert. It might have been semi-arid some time before 20,000 years or more, perhaps, but not in the past thousands of years.

Secondly, the produce mentioned can only grow around the Mediterranean basin even if we assumed that your claim was true. For example, Yemen is semi-arid and contains a few rivers and oases which allow for planting of various plants. But olives, pomegranate, figs and grapes never grew in that region.

Thirdly, all historical records assure us that Makkah was as deserted and arid as it is nowadays. So why should we assume it wasn't when there is enough evidence that it wasn't fertile at all? That's not an academic research, that is wishful thinking. Proof against your claim is found in all the accounts I have previously mentioned which described the region as being arid and desolate. This is one of the main reasons why the Roman campaign into Arabia failed, it was due to lack of water and supplies from nearby towns and villages.

I would also like to quote from the link that you provided which is actually quite interesting might I say.

''In the new project, a multidisciplinary team of researchers will study the effects of environmental change in the Arabian Peninsula over the last two million years. The systematic study of the Pleistocene to Holocene periods will be unique in its length and level of detail.''

''Once the Arabian peninsula was a verdant place where rivers flowed and giant prehistoric animals flourished. Among these animals was an ancestor of the elephant — a mammoth creature with four tusks. And in the desert sands of present day Abu Dhabi, Dr Mark Beech found a tusk from one of these ancient animals.'''


This is referring to much older geological periods than the one I am discussing...

If you are Christian and believe that Abraham existed search for where he headed when he left his tribe with his wife and child