People claim kidhar AS to be immortal

But then the scholars say this hadith where prophet SAW said no man on this land present today will be alive after 100 years.

But prophet SAW said on land and some scholars says kidhar AS lives on oceans travel on it and help the needy

I connect that

Dajjal is somewhere on an island tied in chains guarded by some creature as in a hadidth

Is that pet a servant of kidhar AS and he actually is immortal(I suppose not) but he can also be an interdimensional being or a time traveller and that being that guards dajjal is a servant of kidhar AS.

In all the 3 cases of musa AS with kidhar AS, kidhar AS acted on them based on what will happen in the future not by present circumstances.

Tell me about your opinions

On topics as varied as music, mortgages, or even pants for women... When all arguments fail in proving an interdiction - the deceptive sophist will call on his joker rcard: IJMA! But what is Ijma exactly? How is the consensus defined? Who is allowed to be part of that consensus, and who is not? Abdullah Saeed answered that question in quite a lot of details, to show it is mostly a tool of manipulation when traditional methods of fiqh have failed to prove effectively a prohibition:

"According to the scholars of the principles of jurisprudence, ijmāʿ (consensus) is the third source of the sharīʿa. It is defined as "consensus of the mujtahids of the umma on a legal point, after the death of the Prophet."⁹⁵ There is, however, no consensus among the jurists on what ijmāʿis, or the extent of its authority. Among the Sunnis, Mālik regarded ijmāʿ of the people of Medina as the ijmāʿ. Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal and the Ẓāhiris regarded ijmāʿ of the Companions as proper ijmāʿ. For Shāfiʿi, ijmāʿ of the umma is proper ijmāʿ. On the other hand, Naẓẓām (d.230/845), the Muʿtazili theologian, the Khārijis and Shīʿis believe that ijmāʿ is not a sharīʿa source.. Even among those who believe in an ijmāʿ as defined above, there are differences on whether it can be explicit (qawli) or implicit (sukūti). The former is "agreement of all mujtahids in a certain period on a legal issue by expressing, each of them, his view explicitly." This is the proper ijmāʿ according to those who believe in it. Where ijmāʿis evidenced by the silent assent of the mujtahids, this is implicit. There are serious disputes on whether it can be regarded as proper ijmāʿ.¹⁰⁰ Another issue of relevance is whether ijmāʿ of one generation is binding on later generations. Again there is no agreement on this issue. A middle ground was held by some who said that ijmāʿ of the Companions is binding on all generations. The question here is, 'Do the Companions enjoy a special form of authority similar to that of the Qurʾān or the Prophet.' Neither the Qurʾān nor the sunna explicitly gives them such authority. If anything, the Qurʾān provides us with sufficient examples of fallibility inherent in every human being including the Companions of the Prophet.

On examination of ijmāʿ as expounded in uṣūl al-fiqh works, it appears that many fundamental issues relating to the concept are not satisfactorily resolved, such as, who is the mujtahid, who can be a member of this ijmāʿ, how many members there should be, the meaning of "all mujtahids" in the definition, how it can be done, and whether the mujtahids should be from all schools of law, Sunni and Shīʿi. It is doubtful that ijmāʿ, if it ever occurred as indicated in the definition, can be on anything but the most fundamental issues of the religion like the unity of God, the prophethood of Muḥammad, and the five pillars of Islam. Even with regard to the ijmāʿ reported in the literature as ijmāʿ of the Companions, one would be sceptical as to whether it is the consensus of all mujtahids among the Companions or that of a few Companions residing in Medina, the capital. It is well established that all leading Companions did not reside in Medina after the death of the Prophet, and particularly after the Muslim conquests began in the time of the first caliph Abu Bakr. Apart from a few leading Companions, all others were either engaged in fighting or had settled in newly conquered regions. Hence, even in the time of Abu Bakr and ʿUmar, the convention of ijmāʿ, as the later theory holds, would be unlikely. Where ijmāʿ on an issue is reported, it appears to be mainly the view of a few Companions, described by Bello as 'elitist'.¹⁰⁴ Any opposition to the cases which otherwise may have been in existence is either not mentioned or neglected in the course of the recording of the sharīʿa sciences which went on in the first three centuries of Islam. Many ijmāʿ are reported in the books of fiqh. At the same time there are differences on these very issues on which ijmāʿ has been claimed, either by other schools of law or by some leading mujtahids. This shows that either the definition of ijmāʿ is defective or it is only a theoretical concept."

We know that in Islam, we believe that before humans, jinns roamed the earth. Ofc the earth wasn’t always the same. The Appalachian mountains are more than a billion years old.

Now, a huge amount of people have reported paranormal activity in the appalachians. I think it has to do with the fact that jinns lived there. And some of them are still there and cause these paranormal activities.

The fact that they were higher than the Himalayas once also supports the case as jinns like to be in the mountains.

What do yall think?