If you're talking about physical evidence to support the fact that jinn exist, you would be hard-placed to find any. Do you even know what jinn are? If you did, you would realize that they lack alot of the animalistic qualities you mentioned above (i.e. hair, blood, footprints).
In other words, you have NO evidence that you can actually show for the existence of the Djinn
Based on the Quran, God states the following:
“And the jinn, We created aforetime from the smokeless flame of fire.” [al-Hijr 15:27]
You can't exactly contain smoke now can you?
As a matter of fact, you can. In fact, you can contain a vacuum, or an electrical charge, both of which are far less substantial than smoke.
Also, I can't exactly show you a photograph of one because that would qualify as seeing them and humans can't see jinn. The word "jinn" itself comes from the Arabic root "janna" which means 'to conceal'. The jinn's true forms are concealed from mankind and so we can't see them walking and talking like we see each other.
Try to understand this: I could claim that there is a giant pink elephant in my back yard. When you demand proof of this, I tell you that the elephant is invisible, so you can't see it, floats in the air, so it leaves no footprints, doesn't eat or poop, so it leaves no stool, makes no sound so you can't hear it, has no body heat, so it can't be detected by infrared cameras, and is insubstantial so you can't touch it. At some point, if there is no possible proof, there is no functional difference between there being a pink elephant and there NOT being a pink elephant. It's existence or non-existence are indistinguishable, so it cannot be a factor in a court case.
However, one point to note is that although you can't see them in their true forms, it has been proven that they are capable of taking on other forms, such as those of humans and animals. This fact has been verified by the Prophet Muhammad
HOW was it verified by Muhammad? If it was verified by him, then this verification should be able to be shown to other people. Or did he simply SAY that the Djinn existed, and that he had verified them?
Just like Muslims believe Adam is the father of mankind, we also believe that Iblis (Satan) is the father of the jinn.
It is entirely possible that you do believe it, and it's entirely possible that it is true. However, what you BELIEVE, or claim that you believe, and what you can PROVE are two entirely different things. Things that you merely 'believe' have no place in a court room, however strongly you may 'believe' them, even if, in fact, they are true, unless, and until, the time, that you can actually PROVE them. Muhammed's say-so is not proof. My own say so, even if I am sure I am telling the truth, is not proof.
Understand this, if you run a court room based on just what you 'believe', even if you are sure it is true, even if it actually IS true, there is no real way to prove someone guilty, and as I said before, there is no real way for the person to prove they are not guilty.
When you run a court on that basis, what you now have is a blank check, for killing anyone you dislike. All you must do is accuse them of this 'black magic'. Since there is no proof of this black magic, there is no way for them to prove that they have not done it. It's an automatic death sentence for anyone who is disliked, regardless of whether they are guilty or not, because without proof, they cannot prove their innocence.
Again, capturing them on camera would require seeing them and they're pretty much out of humanity's visual range of focus. That being said, individuals all over the world have managed to capture "strange sightings" at times and call them a variety of names, some of which are "ghosts, spirits, demons, etc." These would definitely be remnant of the jinn somehow as in Islam, we do not believe in the aforementioned terms, except that it is a jinn causing mischief. Regarding changes in temperature and humidity, there are those who go "hunting" for ghosts and will bring along equipment that will detect the very changes you speak of. They sometimes do discover the changes in environment and temperature that you mentioned and attribute them to the presence of ghosts. .
I happen to believe in a variety of spirits myself. However, I cannot *PROVE* them. The only things that belong in a court room are those which can be proven or disproven somehow. Case in point: I was given a dream once by my own patron diety in which I was given information which proved to be accurate, when I looked it up at the library. I know this to be true, I know what I dreamed, and that I had not known this before. BUT - I have no way of proving this. I cannot open my skull and take out my dream and show it to people. Nor can I prove that I did not know this information before my dream. In fact, it's possible I am mistaken, maybe I did know it before and forgot about it! At any rate, since it is something I cannot prove, regardless of how strongly I believe in it and know it to be true, I have no right to bring it into a court room.
Regarding lab rats being tested for the "curse" of jinn, that's preposterous. That suggests that jinn are experimental variables that can be used in control and experimental groups, quantified and measured, something completely farfetched.
Yet the basis of the charge of 'black magic' in Saudi courts, is that the Jinn CAN be controlled, and used to do things like cause illness in people. It seems a little bit 'convenient', shall we say, that these Jinn can supposedly be deliberately controlled by certain people to do black magics, and you now have a nice justification for killing people you dislike, yet they suddenly are unable to be controlled, when I ask you to duplicate this effect of black magic in a laboratory for me.
This is, I imagine, why Westerners regard their methods in court as superior. We can, at least, consistently SHOW the proof of what happened. If a court here says that somebody died of poison, we can show you a test that detects the poison in their body, we can show that the same test will be able to accurately detect the same poison in test animals we fed the poison to. We can show you the same poison and the same test results 50 or 100 or 1000 times, we do not claim that we strongly 'believe' someone was killed with poison, but then the poison suddenly mysteriously vanished from their body, leaving no trace at all, even under a microscope, or won't kill animals in a laboratory, or that there is otherwise no 'proof' but our 'beliefs'.
Without proof, only beliefs, you do not have a court of law, you have a lynch mob killing a scapegoat.
It's an entirely independent species of beings, who would most likely not appreciate being used as experimental guinea pigs. Nor would they volunteer as such.
Again, very convenient, an excuse for no proof.
Like I said, the basis for their existence comes from the Quran and Hadith. If you're intent on disbelieving in them, then there's nothing one can really say to dissuade you.
My belief in the Quran is irrelevent. Writing about a creature in a book is not proof that it exists, with no other evidence. Mind you, the fact that there is no other evidence doesn't mean that it DOESN'T exist, either. But you can't bring it into a court room until you have more evidence than just a mention in a book.
Shariah has a means of proof. It's called the Quran and Hadith. Evidence to support both have been found in reality. I've mentioned instances of them. And any argument you present me with would be countered by evidences from Islamic sources.
A book, in and of itself, cannot be proof, even if it is true. Let me give you an example: The ancient Aztecs believed that the sun would go out, unless numerous people were sacrificed on top of an altar by having their hearts cut out of their bodies. Suppose someone were to start killing people in this fashion, and offer as justification for their actions, an ancient Aztec manuscript, and claim that the fact that this manuscript said that the sun would go out if such sacrifices were not performed was 'proof' that they were right in killing these people.
Would you be very sympathetic? Especially if they said that there was no other proof than the Aztec manuscripts, like problems with the sun being seen with a telescope, because the sun knew when telescopes were pointed at it, and only had the problems when no telescopes were watching?
Well, it's possible. But highly unlikely. Far more likely, than magical Aztec dieties making the sun go out, but working their mischeif only when no telescopes are looking at the sun, is that the person is evil or insane, and wants an excuse to kill people.
And if you question our beliefs, then believe that we have faith in what we believe to be the True Word of God. That is what these systems govern on and that is what non-Believers don't understand.I believe that you have faith, and it's probably right in it's own way. It's probably stronger than my own particular faith. However, neither your faith, nor my faith, has a place in a court room, without proof. I am not saying that you absolutely cannot bring Jinn into a court room, simply because they are an Islamic concept, and everything Islamic is bad. I am saying that you must have proof of these Jinn that you can actually show, not just 'belief' or a writing in a book, however much you might regard the book, before you can bring them into a court room.
I should point out, that there are western beliefs that should not be brought into a court room, for the same reason, such as the belief in angels, leprechauns, and goblins.
Questioning why we can't perceive certain things will ultimately lead you to ask the question of how God can even exist because we can't physically perceive Him. If that's the case, you are on a COMPLETELY different tangent, my friend, and there is zero point in having this discussion.
Actually, I have my own ideas as to how God can exist without having physical form (as we know it). But they are incredibly complex, somewhat mathematical in nature, and it would take much too long to explain it in this post. If you want to hear about them, you can PM me and I will TRY to explain them to you. I expect proof of my ideas (or disproof of them) to be found eventually. However, until such time as there is proof, my ideas, even if they are right, have no place in a court room. And I should also point out, that should everyone in the world who has the same ideas as I do merely sit around arrogantly saying 'we KNOW we are right, we believe it, and need no proof', there is never going to be any proof.
Let me tell you something I read in a book once, this was fiction, but incidents like this may well have happened.
There was a man in the book, which was set in Poland in the year 1231. The entire left half of his body was paralysed, he could not move that half his body, or feel anything. The people in the book were certain that this was caused by black magic.
No... it was caused by a stroke. But they didn't know what a stroke was in the year 1231.