1 – Is Professor Moore a known personality when it comes to Embryology?
Personality is an odd word to choose. Expert is what I'd say. And yes, he is.
2 – Did he say that whatever is there in Quran agrees with modern knowledge?
Yes, he did.
3 – Do you believe that he did not know about what Galen and others said?
That Moore didn't know? I don't know for certain. I would suspect that he probably would, but there's no necessity to learn about outdated theories to be an expert on the current ones.
4 – Finally if he did all this because of money as suggested by Naomi, then is there any direct statement from him clarifying that either way? Or perhaps Naomi is his book-keeper.
Keep your ad hominems (Mr "I don't do fallacies") about Naomi to yourself. If you have questions or comments for her, I suggest you direct them to her. She's perfectly capable of answering you herself.
However, Moore's work on the Quran and embryology occured during a three year period when he was working at King Abdulazziz University in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. I hardly think that it requires a great deal of imagination to realise that he would have been well rewarded for his work there.
Whether a direct quote exists, I have no idea. I'm sure you'll see this as vindication.
By the way, can you tell me whether there is any direct statement from your best friend's father clarifying that either way whether he enjoyed sex with goats? Please be assured that I do not mean to really suggest that your best friend's father had sex with goats; obviously I have no idea who your best friend is, let alone his father and would not wish to be misinterpreted as though I actually meant to suggest this was anything other than a means of making a point hypothetically about necessarily inferring too much value from direct statements.
5 – Why his work is being taught today in the medical colleges if the gut is not so credible?
I presume you mean 'guy' not 'gut'. His work on embryology is fine (though possibly some is out of date now. He's an emeritus prof., long since retired.)
Where we have an issue is where he has made statements to the effect that vaguely phrased, incorrect claims in the Quran that are clearly based upon earlier, also incorrect Greek claims are scientifically accurate by the standards of our modern understanding, when they are not.
As before, don't take my word for it. If you wish to test this claim, simply read what the Quran says and compare it to an actual scientific text on the subject. Open a book. Read what it says and think about it. The Great and Terrible McFroog demands that you test his claims (FX. Puff of red smoke and fire over portentious booming and clashing sounds)
For additional fun, you might like to read up on how certain words in the relevant passages Quranic claims have been re-interpreted over time to fit newly discovered scientific evidence. Funny how the words can change in meaning over time, isn't it?
Then look up the term 'retcon' and see if you can think of any ways it might apply in this situation.