Lately, many people have been bringing up the San'a' palimpsest to prove that the Qur'an wasn't preserved. This "discovery" is supposed to destroy the preservation "myth".

I will be addressing this issue in this thread.

1. Those people are just pointing out that there are variants.

Muslims already know this. No need to keep bringing up this issue.

2. They keep talking about variants which differ from the 'Uthmanic Mushafs.

We already know that.
This concept of readings differing from the standard text existed many centuries ago. Many of these readings are well documented and well known in the Islamic tradition.

3. They keep pointing out that some variants have different meanings.

Yes, and? We have many books written on this subject. Some readings have no impact on the meaning, and others have a minor one. This is ABCD in the science of Qir'aat/'Ulum Al-Qur'an.

4. This is the puzzling part. Look how their logic works:

"Look people. We found variants. We also found variants that differ from the 'Uthmanic Mushafs. Some of them have different meanings. Aha! = The Qur'an is not preserved"!

All of the above have nothing to do with the preservation of the Qur'an.
Muslims scholars explained that the Qurʾan was inherently a multiform recitation, with multiple diverse, equally valid alternate readings to begin with.

What compelling argument do you have that the prophet didn’t teach/approve multiple ways?

This whole argument doesn't work for the preservation of the Qur'an.

Their argument is against having variants. This would work if the Qur'an was only recited in one way and if only lately we discovered that this was not the case.

Everyone knows this is not the case. I think the above argument destroys nothing but basic logic!

Also, people need to stop using YQ's name. This is unethical since he doesn't agree with this nonsense.

For more information on the San'a' palimpsest, please refer to this thread: https://twitter.com/ShAmmarKhatib1/status/1266771565061926914?s=19