You make a great point - that many of the discoveries were not directly or solely 'muslim' - but yet they were.

As you point out, many of of the key cities that fostered discovery were the locus of many ideologies, that were allowed to coexist. And that is the key point, at the height of the Muslim world the Muslim world was tolerant of local ideas, and learned from them, assimilated them, wove them in to their writings and scientific understanding, grew them in to something more.

It is dangerous to view any culture as an island unto itself. At least any culture that isn't isolated on an island. The truth is that Islamic cultures, like others, went through varying times of acceptance and rejection of other ideas. And like other cultures, the times of acceptance led to the times of greatest innovation, while the times of isolation and rejection led to war and stagnation. A number of Karen Armstrong's books lend great insight.

Makes you think a little about where the US is.

I am glad you have peace in your heart and that you think about your faith. All these discussions have happened before, many of them done by people who have PhD in this stuff (I don't think either of us has one). For any argument offered by one side about the evil in the world, the creation, the benevolent god and his/her/its children etc. there's a rebuttle that Christian science has failed to address. You didn't offered any logical explanations to the topics originally discussed and from my side, your arguments did sound preachy. You probably didn't mean it that way, but it definetely came out as such. I think you're feeling personally attacked and I am sorry about that, it's about the concept and not you personally. Whatever belief system makes you a better and happier person is great, we all need one, but I would not admit that Christian theology has basis in science or logic.