Darwinism religion demolished
-
Peace "almakt",
Ever heard of the "mud skipper"? http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mud_skipper and http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxudercinae. This looks like a pretty clear intermediate between fish and reptiles WHICH IS ALIVE TODAY. Now as for the human intermediate fossils, there are many. Creationists appear to lie quite a lot or theyve not properly looked into the matter. Take a look at
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution
And see all the fossils of "Homo Habilis, ergaster, erectus etc". Also remember that fossilization is a RARE EVENT and hence we cannot find countless intermediate fossils. All scientists who do reserach int e area know this. Moreover intermediates too tend to die out relatively quick since theyr not enough adopted to the environent so the form, which after going through many intermediates, most able to survive in the respective environement lives on and the rest go extinct. Hence it is hard to find alive intermediates between species but i still could give an example. GOD Bless! -
Peace Jonny_K
Your concerns about the human evolution chain is covered in the Atlas of Creation. The link below shows a very interesting and scientific read on human evolution by Harun Yahya
http//www.harunyahya.com/books/darwinism/atlas_creation/atlas_creation_18.php
Here is just a tiny excerpt of what you can expect
By outlining the links in the chain as "australopithecines > Homo habilis > Homo erectus > Homo sapiens", the evolutionists imply that each of these types is the ancestor of the next. However, recent findings by paleoanthropologists have revealed that australopithecines, Homo habilis and Homo erectus existed in different parts of the world at the same time. Moreover, some of those humans classified as Homo erectus probably lived up until very recent times. In an article titled "Latest Homo erectus of Java Potential Contemporaneity with Homo sapiens in Southeast Asia", it was reported in the journal Science that Homo erectus fossils found in Java had "mean ages of 27 ? 2 to 53.3 ? 4 thousand years ago" and this "raises the possibility that H. erectus overlapped in time with anatomically modern humans (H. sapiens) in Southeast Asia"71
Furthermore, HY uses evolutionist scientists as his sources, so claims of biased sources are not valid.
Below is a quote regarding fossil records being uncommon and how Darwin believed that future generations (us) would uncover fossils of intermediary species.
The fossil record also represents a major disappointment for latter-day Darwinists. None of the intermediate form fossils that Darwin expected to be discovered some day in the future has actually been unearthed. The idea that the fossil record is "inadequate" is now no longer part of the Darwinist credo, because the Earth has yielded up almost all existing specimens. A large part of the planet has been investigated, and paleontology reveals that in fact, there is not one single example of a "transition." Living things that existed hundreds of millions of years ago have never changed in all that time.
The late Harvard University evolutionist paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould openly states that Darwin was in fact aware of this. As he wrote, "The fossil record had caused Darwin more grief than joy." 2
The evolutionists Niles Eldredge and Ian Tattershall, of the American Museum of Natural History, have described their position in these terms
... That individual kinds of fossils remain recognizably the same throughout the length of their occurrence in the fossil record had been known to paleontologists long before Darwin published his Origin. Darwin himself, . . . prophesied that future generations of paleontologists would fill in these gaps by diligent search . . . One hundred and twenty years of paleontological research later, it has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin's predictions. <b>Nor is the problem a miserly fossil record. </b>The fossil record simply shows that this prediction is wrong.
Regarding the mud skipper, If it is an intermediate species, why has it not died of, or evolved into something else? It seems to be fully formed for the environment it lives in.
Peace,
Ali -
Salaam Aleikum,
Evolution theory was developed by Muslims. Later on it was picked up by the materialist movement of the West. Harun Yayha is not objective in the studies, in Turkey you have two sides.
The atheist communists and the Muslims. The Atheists of course hold on to evolution theory to debunk Intelligent Design and the Muslims as an answer hold on to Creationism. To believe in Creationism in Turkey is a POLITICAL statement and not a religious scientific one.
Muslims are so out of touch with science and reality, they do not even know it was Muslims themselves that were the first ones to say Man developed from Apes.
Evolution is not a blind process because the Laws involved and the circumstances can only lead to one outcome the creating of intelligent beings. The circumstances are to perfect.
Allah is called our Rabb, which means Who fosters, nourishes, brings up and regulate the things from the crudest state to that of the highest perfection, is such a matter to make it attain one condition after an other until it reaches its goal of completion.
He is also called Al-Bari, the Evolver and Al-Masuwwir, the Bestower of Forms/Fashioner in 5924.
The concept of Evolution was first described by the Greeks, but it was further developed by the early Muslims. Great Muslim scholars and scientists as Al-Kindi, Ibn-Rushd, Ibn Tufayl, Ibn-Arabi, Ibn-Khaldun al described and promoted the concept of Evolution. Before the 1800's, Evolution Theory was known in Europe as the 'Muhammedan Creation Theory' and was described in almost all Muslim Medicine and Science Books. It was also part of normal education in the Muslim schools and Universities.
Ibn Khaldun wrote in his Muqaddimah, an Introduction to History
"One should then look at the world of Creation. It started out from the minerals and progressed, in an ingenious, gradual manner to plants and animals. The last stage of minerals is connected with the first stage of plants, such as herbs and seedles plants. The last stage of plants such as palms and vine sis connected with the first stage of animals, such as snails and shellfish which have only the power to touch. The word 'connection' with regard to these created things means that the last stage of each group is fully prepared to become the first stage of the next group. The animal world then widens, its species become numerous, and, in a gradual process of creation, it finally leads to man, who is able to think and reflect. The higher stage of man is reached from the world of monkeys, in which both sagacity and perception are found, but which has not reached the stage of actual reflection and thinking. At this point we come to the first stage of man ( after the world of monkeys). This is as far as our (physical) observation extends."
This is just one example out of hundreds of opinions and observations made by Muslim scholars in the early centuries of Islam. When Darwin made his own speculations based on the Muslim Theory of Evolution, it was taken up by the Materialist Movement of the West. Because the Theory of Evolution is not supported by the Bible, and also because Darwin's speculations gave room for a Creator-less creation, Darwin's version of the Theory was taken up by the Atheist. Through this Evolution Theory was seen as equal to Atheism, and Muslims, through loss of their knowledge and their aversion of the Materialist Colonial powers of the West that had conquered them, became to reject the Theory of Evolution. And took up together with the Christian world, the concept of Instant Creation. A concept that goes directly against the language of the Quran and its Message as will be shown.
Please see this article on Muslim scientists of the 10th century
Ahmed bin Muhammad Ali Maskawaih (d. 421 A. H.)
His Theory of Life as an Evolutionary Movement
http//www.tolueislam.com/Bazm/Manzoor/LT_031.htmAnd my article on Evolution in the Quran
http//19.org/index.php?id=91,415,0,0,1,0
-
Peace "almakt",
I suggest you first read http//www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html
Now onto your claims.Peace Jonny_K
Your concerns about the human evolution chain is covered in the Atlas of Creation. The link below shows a very interesting and scientific read on human evolution by Harun Yahya
http//www.harunyahya.com/books/darwinism/atlas_creation/atlas_creation_18.php
Here is just a tiny excerpt of what you can expect
By outlining the links in the chain as "australopithecines > Homo habilis > Homo erectus > Homo sapiens", the evolutionists imply that each of these types is the ancestor of the next. However, recent findings by paleoanthropologists have revealed that australopithecines, Homo habilis and Homo erectus existed in different parts of the world at the same time. Moreover, some of those humans classified as Homo erectus probably lived up until very recent times. In an article titled "Latest Homo erectus of Java Potential Contemporaneity with Homo sapiens in Southeast Asia", it was reported in the journal Science that Homo erectus fossils found in Java had "mean ages of 27 ? 2 to 53.3 ? 4 thousand years ago" and this "raises the possibility that H. erectus overlapped in time with anatomically modern humans (H. sapiens) in Southeast Asia"71JK- So what? Evolutionary theory doesn't say that an ancestor and descendant species can't live at the same time. Some overlap is expected and perfectly normal. Those apelike creatures which are relatively perfectly adopted to their environment would still exist alongside the descnedant species which broke away from them. Wheres the prob? Please read
http//www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/gordon.htmlFurthermore, HY uses evolutionist scientists as his sources, so claims of biased sources are not valid.
JK- Christian Creationists ALSO USE evolutionists sources but they TWIST AND MISQUOTE THEM and /or quote them out of context. Please read
http//www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/misquotes.htmlBelow is a quote regarding fossil records being uncommon and how Darwin believed that future generations (us) would uncover fossils of intermediary species.
Quote
The fossil record also represents a major disappointment for latter-day Darwinists. None of the intermediate form fossils that Darwin expected to be discovered some day in the future has actually been unearthed. The idea that the fossil record is "inadequate" is now no longer part of the Darwinist credo, because the Earth has yielded up almost all existing specimens. A large part of the planet has been investigated, and paleontology reveals that in fact, there is not one single example of a "transition." Living things that existed hundreds of millions of years ago have never changed in all that time.JK- This is complete nonsense. Infact you and i, are transitional forms at this very instant. EVERYTHING is in continuous transition, some more some less. Dogs and wolves are a SEPERATE SPECIES in science and even HY would admit that there were some rather significant changes btw the two. Creationists arguments dont hold water unless they show the BARRIER between which cannot be tresspassed by evolution. There is none.
The late Harvard University evolutionist paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould openly states that Darwin was in fact aware of this. As he wrote, "The fossil record had caused Darwin more grief than joy." 2
JK- I told you fossilization is a RARE EVENT so this claim about there being countless fossils is obviously incorrect.
The evolutionists Niles Eldredge and Ian Tattershall, of the American Museum of Natural History, have described their position in these terms
... That individual kinds of fossils remain recognizably the same throughout the length of their occurrence in the fossil record had been known to paleontologists long before Darwin published his Origin. Darwin himself, . . . prophesied that future generations of paleontologists would fill in these gaps by diligent search . . . One hundred and twenty years of paleontological research later, it has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin's predictions. Nor is the problem a miserly fossil record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction is wrong.
JK- I think you should do a bit more study. Here is a list of 29+ evidences for evolution(inc. molecular level too) and the predeictions each evidence made PLUS the falsification test
http//www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
I hope youd take some time and go through this.Regarding the mud skipper, If it is an intermediate species, why has it not died of, or evolved into something else? It seems to be fully formed for the environment it lives in.
Peace,
AliJK- As i told you it is not necessary that all transitional forms die. Infact everything like i said is somewhat more or less in transition. This creature may or may not die out depending on how well it is adopted to the environment. The point is this creature shows a clear link btw fish and reptiles. GOD Bless!
-
Please take time to read the whole article
Article on Evolution in the Quran
http//19.org/index.php?id=91,415,0,0,1,0
-
Peace Arnold Yasin,
Please take time to read the whole article
Article on Evolution in the Quran
http//19.org/index.php?id=91,415,0,0,1,0
Very great article, thank you for sharing it. May God increase your knowledge. I have one question however. What on the issue of Adam choosing Free Will? How did that come into play in your opinion? Forgive me for not knowing the ayat, I cant seem to find it, but it says something to the degree of "the mountains, etc. not choosing free will but the human being was arrogant and chose it".
Wa Salaam
-
Peace "amuslim",
Peace Arnold Yasin,
Very great article, thank you for sharing it. May God increase your knowledge. I have one question however. What on the issue of Adam choosing Free Will? How did that come into play in your opinion? Forgive me for not knowing the ayat, I cant seem to find it, but it says something to the degree of "the mountains, etc. not choosing free will but the human being was arrogant and chose it".
Wa Salaam
JK- Allow me to share my opinion on this issue. We humans evolved a unique consciousness unlike other animals which on one hand can lead us to very scientiifc and rational understandings of the natural world but on the other hand also be extremely chaotic and testing and trying out all sorts of things even if we know they might be dangerous. Spiritualism IMHO is one such behaviour which is deviant rom the laws of nature but due to the also evolved complexity of our brain and the volatility which comes with it at this stage, we tend to also engage in wishful thinking, thus once again deviating from what should rationally be done considering the natural environment which we live in and/or that which may be done in others still be investigated. GOD Bless!
P.s Free will as usually defined by religious people does NOT exist. If free will applies to currently unpredictable behaviour or that which would always be difficult for humans to predict, then the definition is reasoble and valid.
-
Peace Jonny_K,
Peace "amuslim",
JK- Allow me to share my opinion on this issue. We humans evolved a unique consciousness unlike other animals which on one hand can lead us to very scientiifc and rational understandings of the natural world but on the other hand also be extremely chaotic and testing and trying out all sorts of things even if we know they might be dangerous. Spiritualism IMHO is one such behaviour which is deviant rom the laws of nature but due to the also evolved complexity of our brain and the volatility which comes with it at this stage, we tend to also engage in wishful thinking, thus once again deviating from what should rationally be done considering the natural environment which we live in and/or that which may be done in others still be investigated. GOD Bless!
P.s Free will as usually defined by religious people does NOT exist. If free will applies to currently unpredictable behaviour or that which would always be difficult for humans to predict, then the definition is reasoble and valid.
So am I mistaken that the Quran says that Adam chose Free Will?
3372 Verily, We did offer the trust to the heavens, and the earth, and the mountains but they refused to bear it because they were afraid of it. Yet man took it up - for, verily, he has always been prone to be most wicked, most foolish.
Inna AAaradna alamanata AAala alssamawati waalardi waaljibali faabayna an yahmilnaha waashfaqna minha wahamalaha alinsanu innahu kana thalooman jahoolan
Peace
-
Peace "amuslim",
Peace Jonny_K,
So am I mistaken that the Quran says that Adam chose Free Will?
3372 Verily, We did offer the trust to the heavens, and the earth, and the mountains but they refused to bear it because they were afraid of it. Yet man took it up - for, verily, he has always been prone to be most wicked, most foolish.
Inna AAaradna alamanata AAala alssamawati waalardi waaljibali faabayna an yahmilnaha waashfaqna minha wahamalaha alinsanu innahu kana thalooman jahoolan
Peace
JK- This verse doesnt talk about free-will but IMO of taking the responsiblity and so it was granted to us. Free-will as i said needs to be deifined properly before anything can be siad regarding it. What do you mean by it? If you mean "making choices which othe humanss couldnt/cannot predict", well then the higher animals too have free-will. GOD Bless!
-
Peace Jonny_k
Peace "amuslim",
JK- This verse doesnt talk about free-will but IMO of taking the responsiblity and so it was granted to us. Free-will as i said needs to be deifined properly before anything can be siad regarding it. What do you mean by it? If you mean "making choices which othe humanss couldnt/cannot predict", well then the higher animals too have free-will. GOD Bless!
Some say that Free Will is in regards to choosing to follow God or not. Humans seem to be the only ones with this trait, as all other animals/plants/bodies are subservient to God. I do agree however with the notion of responsibility. In the Bible in Genesis, it says that we have dominion over the earth, and from what I read from the original meaning, is that we are guardians over this earth. Your interpretation of that verse makes sense though.
Peace
-
Peace Jonny_k
Some say that Free Will is in regards to choosing to follow God or not. Humans seem to be the only ones with this trait, as all other animals/plants/bodies are subservient to God.
JK- Yes in that sense it is true as humans have evolved to the conscious level where they can recognize GOD, the Light of the heavens and earth, the Quantum Field, and "choose" either to follow Him or not. However ultimately this choice depends on action and reaction of neural firing in the brain, too. GOD Bless!