Well, right now I'm watching "Inside Job" its on Starz5 ,but after that I would be honored to give you my two bits. O'yeah ,I almost forgot, I gotta feed my Dog, but after that OK.

Great job buddy.... so far they seem like nice fellas... I hope it lasts as I watch more segments hahaha

Tend to think the right way to respond to this guy would have been to ask him for empirical proof of divine intervention that matches the rigour of the data supporting the evolutionary theory he claims to accept. What is the man's standard for evidence? Essentially he makes an argument from complexity and his introduction of quantum theory seemed designed to allow him to posit mysteries within fundamentals that can be labelled 'god'. 

If all cellular biochemical processes are natural and take place in this space time and are composed of known molecules and compounds then it makes sense the processes involved are simply very complex, not divine. 

Felt you argued past each other a bit - I guess not unexpectedly. Giving him the opportunity to claim an arab wellspring for the whole European enlightenment, while showing there were plenty of empiricist arabs, seemed to allow him to veer further off topic.

He seemed a decent chap all in all and very comfortable with pushing his central yet wholly unsupported assertion. I admit that I like it when theists retreat all the way to an unprovable external agency as prime mover and instigator of abiogenesis. There's nowhere to go once they are in this corner and their argument is inevitably based on what is not known, not what can be proved using testable explanation. 

But yeah - he punked you at the outset by claiming to accept all the evidence bar first cause. All you can do there is call the fallacy and ask him to admit his position is an unsupported personal hypothesis that flouts the very scientific process he claims to respect. 

I'm surprised he claimed to speak for all muslims yet claimed he accepted evolutionary theory right up to the point of RNA strand replication. Do muslims really all think this way? 

I like Dr Shah, but after reading this article I'm again struck by his stout defense of biogeography and molecular biology as proof of a single origin of species - just as we'd all believe - but with an immaterial first cause only comprehensible through embracing the supernatural through 'metaphysics'. How Dr Shah defines metaphysics is uncertain but personally, I'd rank the quantum physicist more highly than the theologian as a metaphysician. This guy's position is very like my big brother's - 'science knows everything except first cause - and somehow I can personally know an external agency'. Again, it seems to me that his standard of evidence is fundamentally inconsistent.  

                                 Clearly you did not see the videos at all.   The ONLY thing Dr.Shah and I disagreed on was the GOD concept.  I did not disagree on his science,  and I said as much at least three times.  How an educated man, like Dr.Shah,  could seperate his education and experience from a god concept, baffles me  -  no end. My mother  had a medical degree and she did the same thing and I do not understand their point of view. 

                                  Further to that my mother told me back in about 1969,   "don't let anyone prey for me if I end up here!!!" (ICU Unit) She was an ICU specialist [20 years or so].  ICU = Intensive Care Unit.  She saw with her own eyes  exactly what the Templeton foundation found out 20+ years later,  preying for a patient WAS detrimental to recovery.  Basicly they have  the ideal that God will cure them so they do not have to worry about recovery.

                                  She even laughed about the fact that "the  effing atheist"  did better then "REAL people".  I was about 14 then,  less then a year later she realized that I was an 'effing'  atheist.  But she could still NOT reconcile her science from her beliefs. Mom never did give me a hard time about my disbelief, which was sort of a left handed recognition {for her} that I was right.  I am left-handed,  in spite or her best effort to make her 7 children RIGHT handed.

                                  Just as an aside  there are 3 types of people in this world.   Right-handed,   Left-Handed,  and cross-handed.  I am,  -by licence -, a machanical engineer, but my specialty is human Mechanics.   After 30+ years of study and experience I can say that there is no such thing as a AMBIDEXTEROUS human being.    Ambidexterous means 'do all things EQUALY with eather hand' ,  I have never seen THAT.  I HAVE seen people who do certain things with Left hand and certain things with their right hand.     Imagine if you would a baseball player who - throws righthanded BUT bats lefthanded or switch hits,  that person IS ,  by nature, left handed BUT raise right handed.

                                    Put it another way; like it or not mother nature creates half the babys born in this world female;  the other half are male;  it's a 50/50 proposition.  The same damn thing applys to handedness.   Do I have your curiosity yet or am I just blowing in the wind?

                           For those with the interest.   The videos are of Prof.John Jackson's TV debate with Dr.Shah. Taped on the same day my show was. Jackson was debating Humanist morality vs. Muslim morality.  I have all 5 parts.  Yet I still can't find part 5 of 5 for my segment.

                           http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUShoqU-6HY

                           http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUdQ9_MsVY4

                          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrmbW5gfSoE

                          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQL-ULeA9xU

                           http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hum5sRUE9F8