Introduction Major Milestone in the History of Humanity

 

Today is the day of a major milestone in history. The materialist philosophy, once imposed on the mass of humanity under the guise of science, is ironically being defeated today by science itself.
Materialism, the philosophy which holds that everything is composed of matter and which denies the existence of God, is actually the contemporary version of paganism. Ancient pagans used to worship non-living beings like wooden or stone totem poles and considered them divine beings. Materialist philosophy, on the other hand, bases its claim on the belief that man and all other beings are created by atoms and molecules. According to this superstitious view, non-living atoms somehow organized themselves and over time acquired life and consciousness finally bringing man into being.
This superstitious belief of materialism is called "evolution". The belief in evolution, first introduced in the pagan cultures of the ancient Sumerians and then the ancient Greeks, was in a way revived in the 19^th century by a group of materialist scientists and brought onto the world agenda. Charles Darwin is the best known of these scientists. The theory of evolution he advanced wasted the time of the world of science for 150 years, and despite its widely acknowledged flawed nature, has been hitherto sustained for purely ideological reasons.

The pre-Socratic Greek philosophers evidently received their concepts of evolutionary cosmogony from the even more ancient religious leaders of Egypt and Babylonia or Sumeria. The Sumerian tablets at the left are based on the superstitious belief of that time and refer to the imaginary stages in man's creation.

However, as mentioned earlier, today, materialism is collapsing with a big boom. It is often stated that there were three important materialist theorists who steered the 19^th century: Freud, Marx and Darwin. The theories of the first two were examined, tested, and, proving to be invalid, subsequently rejected in the 20^th century. Nowadays, the theory of Darwin is also collapsing.
Some important developments in June 2000 accelerated this great collapse of materialism.
First, scientists carrying out experiments to exceed the speed of light made a discovery which turned all scientific premises upside down. In an experiment in which the speed of light was exceeded many times, the scientists observed with astonishment that the effect of the experiment occurred before its cause. This was the defeat of the claim of "causality" that was put forward on the basis of materialist views, in the 19^th century. The subject was outlined in a newspaper under the headline "It has been proved that effect without cause is possible and that the end of an event can happen before its beginning". Indeed, the occurrence of the effect of an action before the action that seems to be its cause, is scientific evidence that all events are created individually. This totally demolishes the materialist dogma.
A few weeks later, it was revealed that Archaeopteryx, a fossil bird presented as "the most important fossil evidence" by Darwinists for more than a century, was actually not evidence for, but a blow to the theory. When another fossil, some 75 million years older than this fossil which was allegedly the "primitive ancestor of birds", and no different from modern birds, was discovered, evolutionists were shocked. On June 25th, 2000, even a journal which used to present Archaeopteryx as the "primitive ancestor of birds" was obliged to report the news item headlined "The Ancestor of Birds Proved to be a Bird".

Finally, the Human Genome Project, an attempt to draft a rough map of the human genome, was concluded and the details of the "genetic information", which highlighted how superior God's creation of living beings is, have been revealed to mankind. Today, everyone who considers the results of this project and finds out that a single human cell contains enough information to be stored in thousands of encyclopaedia pages, grasps what a great miracle of creation this is.

Charles Darwin Sigmund Freud Karl Marx

Nevertheless, evolutionists try to misinterpret this recent development, which, in truth, works against them, and present it as evidence for "evolution". Unable to explain even how the DNA chain of a tiny bacterium originated, evolutionists try to deliver messages such as "human genes resemble animal genes". Such messages are inaccurate and have no scientific value. They are designed to mislead society. Meanwhile, some press institutions, both because of their ignorance on the subject and their prejudiced approach, suppose that the Human Genome Project provides "evidence of evolution" and try to present it that way.

In this website, the abovementioned evolutionist misconceptions are explained and the irrational and shallow nature of the objections raised to creation are clarified. In addition, the severity of the blow the recent findings have struck against Darwinism is explicitly revealed.

When you read this website, you, too, will see that materialist philosophy which rejects God is about to meet its end and that in the 21^st century, humanity will return to the real purpose of their creation by being relieved of deceits such as evolution.

The data Bank of Life: DNA

The progress of science makes it clear that living beings have an extremely complex structure and an order too perfect to have come into being by coincidence. This is evidence to the fact that living beings are created by an All-Powerful Creator with superior knowledge. Recently, for instance, with the unravelling of the perfect structure in the human gene which became a prominent issue due to the Genome Project, the unique creation of God has once more been revealed for all to see.

From the U.S.A. to China, scientists from all over the world have given their best efforts to decode the 3 billion chemical letters in DNA and to determine their sequence. As a result, 85% of the data included in the DNA of human beings could be sequenced properly. Although this is a very exciting and important development, as Dr. Francis Collins, who leads the Human Genome Project states, so far, only the first step has been taken in the decoding of the information in DNA.

In order to understand why the decoding of this information takes so long, we have to understand the nature of the information stored inDNA.

The Secret World of DNA

The DNA, which is found in the nucleus of each of the 100 trillion cells in our body, contains the complete construction plan of the human body. It is evident that such a complex molecule could not be formed by coincience spontaneously, as a result of an evolutionary process.

In the manufacture or management of a technological product or plant, the greatest tool employed is the experience and accumulation of knowledge that man has acquired over many centuries. The necessary knowledge and experience needed for the construction of the human body, the most advanced and sophisticated 'plant' on earth, is stored in DNA. The important point to note here is that DNA has always existed since the first human being in all its present perfection and complexity. As you read the lines below, you will also come to see clearly how unreasonable it is to claim, as evolutionists do, that such a molecule, with all its mind-blowing structure and properties, originated as a result of coincidences.

DNA is delicately protected in the nucleus located in the center of the cell. When it is recalled that human cells – numbering up to 100 trillions – have an average diameter of 10 microns(A micron is 10^-6 m.), the smallness of the area in question is better understood. This miraculous molecule is a clear evidence of the perfection and extraordinary nature of God's art of creation. It is so much so that even a special branch of science has been set up to explore the secrets of this molecule, many of which still remain hidden. The name of this branch of science is "Genetics". Recognized as the science of the 21^st century, genetics is still in the phase of crawling, as far as solving the mystery of DNA is concerned, despite all the technological means at its disposal.

Life in the Nucleus

If we compare the human body to a building, the body's complete plan and project down to its minute technical detail is present in DNA, which is located in the nucleus of each cell. All the developmental phases of a human being in the mother's womb and after birth take place within the outlines of a predetermined program. This perfect order in the development of man is stated as follows in the Qur'an:

Does man reckon he will be left to go on unchecked? Was he not a drop of ejaculated sperm, then a blood-clot which He created and shaped. (Surat Al-Qiyama, 36-38)

Right at the phase of a newly fertilized egg cell in the mother's womb, all the characteristics we will bear in the future have been determined within a certain destiny and coded in our DNAs in an orderly fashion. All our characteristics, such as our height, skin colour, blood type, facial features that we will bear when we come to our thirtieth year are encoded in the nucleus of our inaugural cell thirty years nine months beforehand, starting from the moment of insemination.

The body of information in DNA does not only determine the physical properties we have mentioned above; it also controls thousands of other operations and systems running in the cell and the body. For instance, even the highness, lowness, or normality of a person's blood pressure depends on the information stored in DNA.

The Huge Encyclopedia in the Human Cell

The information stored in DNA must by no means be underestimated. Though hard to believe, in a single DNA molecule of a human being, there is enough information to fill exactly one million encyclopedia pages. Do consider it; exactly 1,000,000 encyclopedia pages… This is to say that the nucleus of each cell contains so much information as to fill a one-million-page-encyclopedia, which is used to control the functions of the human body. To draw an analogy, we can state that even the 23-volume-Encyclopedia Britannica, one of the greatest encyclopedias of the world, has 25,000 pages. Therefore, before us lies an incredible picture. In a molecule found in a nucleus, which is far smaller than the microscopic cell wherein it is located, there exists a data warehouse 40 times bigger than the biggest encyclopedia of the world that includes millions of items of information. This means a 920-volume huge encyclopedia which is unique and has no equal in the world. Research puts it that this huge encyclopedia would be estimated to contain 5 billion different pieces of information. Were one piece of information present in human genes to be read every second, non-stop, around the clock, it would take 100 years before the process was completed. If we imagine that the information in DNA were put in the form of a book, then, these books put on top of each other would reach 70 meters high.

Let us repeat these two words just mentioned above; 'contain information'…

We should stop here and consider these two words which we pronounce so simply. It is simple to say that a cell contains billions of pieces of information. Yet, this is far away from being a detail that can be casually dropped as a remark. This is because what we talk about here is not a computer or a library, but just a cube that is 100 times smaller than a millimeter, simply made up of protein, fat and water molecules. It is an extremely amazing miracle for this infinitesimal piece of flesh to contain and store even a single bit of information-let alone millions of it.

The information necessary to specify the design of all the species of organisms which have ever existed on the planet, a number of approximately one thousand million, could be held in a teaspoon and there would still be room left for all the information in every book ever written.

In the modern era, people use computers to store information. The computer technology is today considered as the most advanced technology that paves the way to all other technologies. A body of information, which, 20 years ago, could be stored in a computer the size of a room, can today be stored in small "microchips", yet even the latest technology invented by human intelligence after centuries of accumulated knowledge and years of hard work is far from reaching the information storage capacity of a single cell nucleus. We think that the following comparison would be sufficient to give a sense of the smallness of DNA, which has such an immense capacity:

The cell resembles a big factory which contains conveyor systems, information storing centers, special compartments where chemical processes are made, energy generating power stations, and packaging centers. The only difference between the cell and such a factory is the cell's microscopic size.

The information necessary to specify the design of all the species of organisms which have ever existed on the planet, a number according to G.G. Simpson of approximately one thousand million, could be held in a teaspoon and there would still be room left for all the information in every book ever written.¹

How can a chain invisible to the eye, made up of atoms arranged sideways, with a diameter the size of a billionth of a millimeter, possess such an information capacity and memory? And also add the following to this question: While each one of the 100 trillion cells in your body knows one million pages of information by heart, how many encyclopedia pages can you, as an intelligent and conscious human being, memorize in your entire life?

The Wisdom in the Cell

In this case, you must admit that any cell in your stomach or ear is much more learned than you, and since it makes use of this information in the most correct and perfect way, it is much more wise than you.

What, then, is the source of this wisdom? How come every one of the 100 trillion cells in your body has come to possess such an incredible wisdom? These are, after all, piles of atoms, and they are unconscious. Take the atoms of all the elements, combine them in different forms and numbers, obtain different molecules, still you can never obtain wisdom. Whether these molecules are big or small, simple or complex does not matter. You can never obtain a mind that will consciously organize any process and accomplish it.

Then how can it be that DNA, which is composed of the arrangement of a certain number of unwise and unconscious atoms in certain sequences, and enzymes, working in a harmonious way, is able to achieve much work and organise countless complicated and diverse operations in the cell in a perfect and complete manner? The answer to this is very simple; wisdom is not in these molecules or in the cell that contains them, but in the self who has brought these molecules into being, programming them to function as they do.

Shortly put, wisdom is present not in the work done, but in the creator of that work. Even the most developed computer is the product of a wisdom and intellect that has written and installed the programs to operate it, and then used it. Likewise, the cell, DNA and RNAs in it, and the human being made up of these cells are nothing but the works of the One Who created them as well as what they do. No matter how perfect, complete and striking the work is, the wisdom always lies with the owner of the work.

One day, if you found a diskette on the table in the computer laboratory, and after looking inside, discovered that it contains billions of items of information about you, the first question that would come to your mind would be who has written these pieces of information and why.

So, why don't we ask the same question for the cell? If the information in the diskette was written by someone, then by whom DNA, which has a much more superior and advanced technology, is designed in the most perfect manner, created, and placed in the tiny cell, which, by itself, is another miracle. Besides it has not lost any of its properties for thousands of years until our day. (Bear in mind that the brain of the human being who makes the diskette and saves the data in it, is also made up of these cells.) What can be more important for you than to question by whom and why these cells, that function non-stop for you to read these lines, see, breathe, think, in brief, to exist and continue to exist, have been brought into being?

Is not the answer to this question that which, in life, you must wonder about most?

A Few More Examples

It is a well-known method: the travellers, who get stuck in an isolated land as a result of a plane crash, draw a big 'X' to show their places to the rescue team that looks for them from the air. Using their belongings or the objects they have collected, they make a big cross-shaped sign. In this way the rescue team that sets out on reconnaissance from the air, sees this sign which is a 'product of wisdom' and understands that there are conscious living beings, that is, human beings in that place.

While travelling along on Turkish highways, you sometimes see inscriptions made of white stones on the slopes of the hills like; 'Everything is for the motherland'. How these writings have come to form on those hills is quite clear. In most cases, there is a military unit around and they write such inscriptions with white stones on the hill while clearing the zone.

The complex structure of a living cell was unknown in Darwin's day and at the time, ascribing life to "coincidences and natural conditions" was thought by evolutionist to be convincing enough. However, the probability of the formation of a cell by chance is as unlikely as the chance printing of a book caused by an explosion in a printing house. This means that it is not possible for the cell to come into being by coincidence and therefore, it definitely should have been "created".

Well, can anybody come up and say that these inscriptions are not written by a conscious mind, in this case the soldiers, and instead formed by coincidence? Can anybody say that 'these stones came side by side by chance while rolling down the hill and formed the sentence 'Everything is for the motherland'"?

Or if a 'scientist' comes up and says 'there are trillions of stones in the world and they have been rolling over for millions of years, so it is possible that some of these stones came together by coincidence as to make this meaningful sentence', would he not be ridiculed even by children? In addition to this, if he uses a scientific style, makes some scientific explanations, and puts forward some probability calculations, would everybody not further doubt about his mind?

The main idea we would like to give with these examples is this: If there is even the slightest sign of something planned somewhere, there certainly lies the traces of an owner of wisdom in that place. No product of wisdom would form by chance. If you roll white stones down the mountain billions of times, you would never obtain even a proper 'H', let alone a sentence such as "Everything is for the motherland". If there is a letter somewhere, everybody accepts that that letter is written by somebody. There would be no letter without a writer.

The human body is trillions of times more complicated than the sentence 'Everything is for the motherland', and it is definitely impossible for this complex structure to have been formed on its own, or by sheer "coincidence". Therefore, there is a Creator Who has planned and designed both the human and his cell and his DNA excellently and perfectly. To claim the contrary would be the most unwise thing possible, and moreover a greatest insincerity and insolence. This would be a great disrespect against the owner of that wisdom and power.

Nevertheless, many people, who would readily say that it is impossible for stones to be arranged within themselves and form even three little words, can listen without objection the deceit that it was all as a result of "coincidences" that billions of atoms came together one by one in a planned sequence and formed a molecule such as DNA, which performs such a super-complex task. This is just like a hypnotized person's submitting to the hypnotist and accepting by suggestion that he is a door, tree or a lizard…

The Language of the DNA Encyclopedia

The life of societies is based on information flow, and communication. The most important tool in the information flow between individuals and generations is language. Language is represented by specific codes, which are letters. English is a language made up of 26 letters or we may say 26 codes. These codes make up words and words in turn make up sentences. The information flow and storage is realised by means of these codes.

The language in the cell is similar to this. All the physical traits of a human being are stored in the cell nucleus being coded by this language, and it can be used by the cell again by way of this language. This language is that of the master molecule, called DNA. The DNA language is made up of 4 letters; A, T, G and C. Every letter represents one of the four special bases called 'nucleotides'. Millions of these bases line up in a meaningful sequence and make up the DNA molecule.

That is how the information in the data bank in the nucleus is stored. While we describe the coding system in this data warehouse, we will continue to use this letter analogy for the nucleic acid molecules which constitute DNA. These letters match in twos each forming a base pair in this way. These base pairs add on top of each other to form the genes. Each gene, which comprises one portion of DNA molecule, determines a particular feature of the human body. Countless properties like height, eye colour, the material and the shape of the nose, ear, and skull are formed by the command of the related genes. We can compare every one of these genes to the pages of a book. On thepages there are scripts made up of the letters A – T – G – C.

There are approximately 200,000 genes in the DNA of a human cell. Every gene is composed of a special sequence of nucleotides, the number of which ranges between 1000 and 186,000 according to the type of the protein it correlates. These genes hold the codes of nearly 200,000 proteins that function in the human body and control the production of these proteins.

The information stored in these 200,000 genes constitute only 3 %of the total information in DNA. The remaining 97 % still maintains its mystery today. The recent studies showed that this 97 % unknown part includes vital information about the survival of the cell and the mechanisms that control the highly complex activities within the body. Yet there is still a great distance to go.

The genes are located in the chromosomes. There are 46 chromosomes in the nucleus of every human cell (except for the reproduction cells). If we compare every one of the chromosomes to a book volume made up of gene pages, we may say that in the cell lies a 46-volume "cell encyclopedia" which covers all the characteristics of a human being. Remembering the previous encyclopedia example, this cell encyclopedia is equivalent to the knowledge contained in a 920-volume 'Encyclopedia Britannica'.

The sequence of letters in the DNA of every human is different. This is the basic reason why the billions of people who have ever lived on earth look different from each other. The basic structure and functions of organs are the same in every person. However, every person is created in such a detailed and special manner with such subtle differences that even though all people are created from the division of a single cell and have the same basic structure, billions of different people have come into existence.

Everyone in the world is unique - biochemically and pysically - thanks to a wondrous molecule (DNA), which includes a three-billion word set of biochemical instructions for building a human from scratch.

All the organs in our body are constructed within a plan outlined by our genes. To give a few examples, according to a gene map completed by scientists, in the human body, skin is controlled by 2,559, brain by 29,930, eye by 1,794, salivary glands by 186, heart by 6,216, chest by 4,001, lung by 11,581, liver by 2,309, intestine by 3,838, skeletal muscle by 1,911 and blood cells by 22,902 genes.

The sequential order of the letters in DNA determines the structure of a human being down to his slightest details. In addition to features like height, eye, hair and skin colours, the DNA of a single cell also contains the design of 206 bones, 600 muscles, a network of 10.000 auditory muscles, a network of 2 million optic nerves, 100 billion nerve cells, and 100 trillion cells in the body.

Now let us think in the light of the above information: Since even a letter cannot form without a writer writing it, how did billions of letters in the human cell originate? How did these letters queue up in a meaningful sequence so as to make up the unique plan of such a perfect and complex body? If there were any break downs in the order of these letters you could have your ear on your abdomen or your eyes in your heels. You could have born with your hands stuck on your back, and lived as a freak. The secret of your living as a proper human currently lies in the 'flawless' sequence of the billions of letters in the 46-volume encyclopedia in your DNA.

DNA Challenges Coincidence

Today mathematics has proved that coincidence does not play a role in the formation of the coded information within DNA, let alone the DNA molecule made up of millions of base pairs. The probability of the coincidental formation of even a single gene out of the 200,000 genes making up DNA is so low that even the notion of impossible remains weak. Frank Salisbury, an evolutionist biologist, makes the following statement about this 'impossibility':

A medium protein might include about 300 amino acids. The DNA gene controlling this would have about 1,000 nucleotides in its chain. Since there are four kinds of nucleotides in a DNA chain, one consisting of 1,000 links could exist in 4¹⁰⁰⁰ forms. Using a little algebra (logarithms) we can see that 4¹⁰⁰⁰=10⁶⁰⁰. Ten multiplied by itself 600 times gives the figure 1 followed by 600 zeros! This number is completely beyond our comprehension.²

That is to say that even if we assume that all the necessary nucleotides are present in a medium, and that all the complex molecules and enzymes to combine them were available, the possibility of the these nucleotides being arranged in the desired sequence is 1 in 4¹⁰⁰⁰, in other words, 1 in 10⁶⁰⁰. Briefly, the probability of the coincidental formation of the code of an average protein in the human body in DNA by itself is 1 in 1 followed by 600 zeros. This number, which is beyond even being astronomical, means in practice 'zero' probability. This means that such a sequence has to be effected under the control and knowledge of a wise and conscious power. There is zero probability of it happening by 'accident', 'chance', or 'coincidence'.

The probability of the coincidental formation of the code of an average protein in the human body in the DNA by itself is 1 in 10600. We can write this number which is formed by putting 600 zeros next to 1 as follows: 10600 = 1, 000, 000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000

Think of the book you are reading right now. How would you regard someone who claimed that letters (by using a different printing stamp for every letter) have come together by chance on their own to form this writing? It is evident that it was written by an intelligent and conscious person. This is no different from the status of DNA.

Francis Crick

Francis Crick, the biochemist who discovered the structure of DNA, won a Nobel prize with respect to the research he had made on the subject. Crick, who was an ardent evolutionist, stated the following scientific opinion in a book he has written after testifying the miraculous structure of DNA:"An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that, in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle."³ Even in Crick's view, who was one of the biggest experts on DNA, life could never originate on earth spontaneously.

The data in DNA, which is made up of 5 billion letters, is composed of a special and meaningful sequence of letters A-T-G-C. However, not even a single letter error should be made in this sequence. A misspelled word or a letter error in an encyclopedia may be overlooked and ignored. It would not even be noticed. However, even a single mistake in any base pair of DNA, such as a miscoded letter in the 1 billion 719 million 348 thousand 632^nd base pair, would cause terrible results for the cell, and therefore for the person himself. For instance, haemophilia (child leukemia) is the outcome of such an erroneous coding.

In truth, it would be incorrect to call this "erroneous coding", because like every other thing that exists, the human DNA, too, is created by God and even the seldom occurring mistakes come about with respect to a hidden cause (divine purpose). The coding mistake which causes cancer is a specially created disorder. It is created specially for a certain hidden cause to show man his own weakness and impotence, remind him of the delicate balances man's creation depends on, and of what kind of troubles he may face in case of the slightest disturbance in these balances.

Self-Replication of DNA

As known, cells multiply by dividing. While the human body is initially composed of a single cell, this cell divides and reproduces by folds with a ratio of2-4-8-16-32...

The DNA molecule shown here is in the process of replication, separating down the middle. When strands separate, each attracts base pairs in the same sequence carried by its opposite half.

What happens to DNA at the end of this dividing process? There is only one DNA chain in the cell. However, it is evident that the newly formed cell will also require a DNA. In order to fill this gap, DNA completes an interesting series of operations, every phase of which is a different miracle. Finally, soon before the cell divides, it makes a copy of itself and transfers this to the new cell.

The observations regarding the cell division show that the cell has to reach a specific size before dividing. The moment it exceeds this particular size, the division process automatically starts. While the shape of the cell begins to get smoother so as to accommodate the division process, DNA starts to replicate itself as mentioned earlier.

This means that the cell 'decides' to divide as a whole and the different parts of the cell start to act in accordance to this decision of dividing. It is evident that the cell is devoid of the consciousness to accomplish such a collective action. The division process starts with a secret order and the entire cell, foremost DNA, acts by this order.

First, DNA divides into two to replicate itself. This event takes place in a very interesting manner. The DNA molecule which resembles a spiral ladder divides into two like a zip from the middle of the rungs of the ladder. From now on, DNA divides into two portions. The missing halves (replicates) of both of the two portions are completed with the materials present in the milieu. In this way, two new DNA molecules are produced. In every phase of the operation, expert proteins called "enzymes" that function like advanced robots take part. Though it seems simple at first sight, the intermediary processes taking place throughout this operation are so many and so complicated that to describe the whole event in detail would take pages.

The new DNA molecules that emerge during replication are checked repeatedly by inspector enzymes. If there is any mistake done - which can be quite vital, it is immediately identified and corrected. The erroneous code is removed and replaced by the correct one. All these processes take place at such a dazzling speed that while 3.000 base pairs are produced in a minute, on the other hand, all these pairs are checked repeatedly by the enzymes in charge and the necessary amendments are made.

In the newly produced DNA molecule, more mistakes can be done than normal as a result of external factors. In this case, the ribosomes in the cell start to produce DNA repair enzymes upon the order given by DNA. Thus, as DNA protects itself, it also guarantees the preservation of the generation.

The cells are born, they reproduce and die just like human beings. Yet the life spans of cells are much shorter than the life of the human they constitute. For instance, the majority of the cells that used to make up your body six months ago do not exist today. However, you are now able to survive because they have divided on time to leave their places to the new ones. For this reason, highly complex operations like multiplication of the cells and replication of DNA are vital processes which cannot tolerate even a minor mistake in regards to man's survival. However, the multiplication process runs so smoothly that the rate of error is only one in 3 billion base pairs. And this one error is eliminated by the higher control mechanisms in the body without causing any problems.

All through the day, while you are unaware, numerous operations and controls are made, many measures are taken in your body in an incredibly fastidious and responsible manner for you to lead your life without any problem. Every single thing carries out its duty successfully and completely. God has given to your service countless atoms and molecules, from the biggest to the smallest, from the simplest to the most complex, so that you may live a good and healthy life. Is even this blessing and favour alone not sufficient for you to give thanks? Or should one always wait for problems to occur in this perfect system before coming to one's senses?

The most interesting point is that these enzymes which help the production of DNA and control its composition are actually proteins produced according to the information coded in DNA and under the command and control of DNA. There is such an intertwined, perfect system at work that it is by no means possible for such a system to have attained this state by gradual coincidences. Just as DNA has to exist for the enzyme to exist, so the enzyme has to exist for DNA to exist, and for both to exist, on the other hand, the cell has to exist completely, down to its membrane and all other complex organelles it contains.

The theory of evolution asserting that living beings evolved 'step by step' as a result of 'beneficial coincidences' is explicitly refuted by the above mentioned DNA-enzyme paradox. This is because both DNA and the enzyme have to exist at the same time. And this shows the existence of a conscious Creator, that is, God.

Evolutionists Cannot Explain How the Information in DNA Originated and How It Differs in Every Species

While evolutionists can in no way bring any explanation to the subject of how DNA originated, there is yet another point where they reach an impasse. How come fish, reptiles, birds, human beings etc. have come to possess different DNAs and different types of information?

Evolutionists answer that question by saying that the body of information in DNA developed and diversified over time by means of coincidences. The coincidences they refer to are "mutations". Mutations are changes which take place in DNA as a result of radiation or chemical action. Sometimes radioactive radiation happens to fall on a DNA chain and destroys or displaces several base pairs therein. According to evolutionists, living things have reached their present perfect state as a result of the diversification of a single DNA due to these mutations (i.e., accidents).

Mutations are defined as breaks or replacements taking place in the DNAmolecule. These breaks or replacements are the result of external effects such as radiation or chemical action. Every mutation is an "accident" and either damages the nucleotides making up the DNA or changes their locations.

To show that this claim is unreasonable, let us compare DNA to a book again. We have already mentioned that DNA is made up of letters lined up sideways just like in a book. Mutations are like the letter errors that occur during the type-setting of this book. If you like, we can do an experiment on this subject. Let us ask for a thick book about the history of the world to be type-set. During the type-setting, let us intervene several times and tell the type-setter to press one of keys blindfolded and at random. Then let us give this text containing letter errors to someone else and have him do the same thing over again. Using this method, let us have the book type-set from the beginning to the end several times, thus having a few more letter errors added to it at random each time...

Could this history book ever develop by this method? For instance, would an additional chapter named "The History of Ancient China", which previously was not present, emerge?

To be sure, the letter errors we have added to the book would not develop it, but rather ruin it and distort its meaning. The more we increase the number of faulty copying processes, the more spoiled our book will be.

Yet the claim of the theory of evolution is that "letter errors help develop a book". According to evolution, mutations (errors) occurring in DNA have led to beneficial results by accumulating and thus furnishing living beings with perfect organs such as eyes, ears, wings, hands and consciousness-related qualities such as thinking, learning, and reasoning.

Unquestionably, this claim is even more unreasonable than the above example of the addition of the chapter called "The History of Ancient China" to a book on world history as a result of the accumulation of letter errors. (Moreover there is no mechanism in nature that causes regular mutations as in the example of the type-setter making regular mistakes. The mutations in nature take place much more rarely than the letter errors that would occur during the type-setting of a book.)

Left: A normal fruit fly (drosophila) Right: A fruit fly with its legs jutting from its head; a mutation induced by radiation.

Every "explanation" put forward by the theory of evolution on the origin of life is unreasonable and unscientific. One outspoken authority on this issue is the famous French zoologist Pierre Grassé, the former president of the French Academy of Sciences. Grassé is also an evolutionist, but he states clearly that Darwinist theory is unable to explain life and makes his point about the logic of "coincidence", which is the backbone of Darwinism:

The opportune appearance of mutations permitting animals and plants to meet their needs seems hard to believe. Yet the Darwinian theory is even more demanding: A single plant, a single animal would require thousands and thousands of lucky, appropriate events. Thus, miracles would become the rule: events with an infinitesimal probability could not fail to occur… There is no law against daydreaming, but science must not indulge in it.⁴

Indeed, the theory of evolution, which claims that lifeless matter came together by itself and formed living beings with such glorious systems as DNA, is a scenario totally contrary to science and reason. All this leads us to an evident conclusion. Since life has a plan (DNA) and all living beings are fashioned according to this plan, it is evident that there is a superior Creator Who devised this plan. This simply means that all living beings are created by God, the All-Powerful, All-Wise. God states this fact in the Qur'an in this way:

He is God – the Creator, the Maker, the Giver of Form. To Him belong the Most Beautiful Names. Everything in the heavens and earth glorifies Him. He is the Almighty, the All-Wise. (Surat al-Hashr: 24)

Today, what people have achieved by means of technology can at best be described as 'an approach to the understanding of a tiny fragment of God's knowledge, as manifested in human DNA.'

On the other hand, the theory of evolution which tries to explain the origin of life as a series of coincidences, loses all validity in face of the question: "How then, did DNA originate?"

The Question That Demolishes the Theory of Evolution: How did the DNA Originate?

The question of how such an extraordinarily designed molecule as DNA originated is one of the thousands of impasses evolutionists reach. Seeking to explain life by means of "coincidence", the theory of evolution can never explain the source of the extraordinary information so perfectly and meticulously encoded in DNA.

Moreover, the question is not only that of how the DNA chain originated. Even the existence of the DNA chain with the extraordinary information capacity it contains, means nothing by itself. In order to refer to life, it is essential that the enzymes that read this DNA chain,copy them and produce proteins, also exist. (Enzymes are large molecules that have certain functions in the cell which they carry out with the precision of a robot.)

Simply put, in order to talk of life, both the data bank we call DNA, and the machines to carry out production by reading the data in the bank have to co-exist.

To our surprise, enzymes, which read DNA and carry out production accordingly, are themselves produced according to the codes in DNA. This means that there is a factory in the cell that both makes many different types of products, and also manufactures the robots and machines that carry out this production. The question of how this system, which would be of no use with a minor defect in any of its mechanisms originated, is by itself enough to demolish the theory of evolution.

German evolutionist Douglas R. Hofstadler, states his despair in the face of this question:

'How did the Genetic Code, along with the mechanisms for its translation (ribosomes and RNA molecules), originate?' For the moment, we will have to content ourselves with a sense of wonder and awe, rather than with an answer.⁵

Another evolutionist authority, world renowned molecular biologist Leslie Orgel, is more outspoken on the subject:

It is extremely improbable that proteins and nucleic acids, both of which are structurally complex, arose spontaneously in the same place at the same time. Yet it also seems impossible to have one without the other. And so, at first glance, ONE MIGHT HAVE TO CONCLUDE THAT LIFE COULD NEVER, IN FACT, HAVE ORIGINATED BY CHEMICAL MEANS.⁶

Saying "life could never have originated by chemical means" is the equivalent of saying that "life could never have originated by itself". Recognition of the truth of this statement results in the realization that life is created in a conscious way. For ideological reasons, evolutionists, however, do not accept this fact, clear evidence of which is before their eyes. To avoid accepting the existence of God, they believe in nonsensical scenarios, the impossibility of which they are also convinced of.

In his book "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis," about the invalidity of the theory of evolution, renowned molecular biologist Prof. Michael Denton explains the unreasonable conviction of Darwinists:

To the skeptic, the proposition that the genetic programmes of higher organisms, consisting of something close to a thousand million bits of information, equivalent to the sequence of letters in a small library of one thousand volumes, containing in encoded form countless thousands of intricate algorithms controlling, specifying, and ordering the growth and development of billions and billions of cells into the form of a complex organism, were composed by a purely random process is simply AN AFFRONT TO REASON. BUT TO THE DARWINIST, THE IDEA IS ACCEPTED WITHOUT A RIPPLE OF DOUBT - THE PARADIGM TAKES PRECEDENCE!⁷

Indeed, Darwinism is nothing but a totally unreasonable, superstitious belief. Anyone with any reason would see the evidence for that great fact by looking at DNA, or any other part of the universe. Human beings and all living things are created by God, the All-Mighty, Who is the Lord of all the worlds.

 

"The RNA World"

The discovery in the 70s that the gasses originally existing in the primitive world atmosphere rendered amino acid synthesis impossible was a big blow to the molecular evolutionary theory. It then was understood that "primitive atmosphere experiments" of evolutionists such as Miller, Fox and Ponnamperuma were invalid. For this reason, in the 80s new evolutionist attempts were put forth. As a result, the scenario of the "RNA World" was advanced, which proposed that it was not the proteins that were formed first, but RNA molecules that contained the information for the proteins.

According to this scenario advanced by Walter Gilbert, a chemist from Harvard in 1986, billions of years ago an RNA molecule that somehow managed to self-replicate, formed by coincidence. Then this RNA molecule started to produce proteins being activated by external effects. Thereafter, it became necessary to store this information in a second molecule, and somehow the DNA molecule emerged.

CONFESSIONS FROM EVOLUTIONISTS Probabilistic calculations make it clear that complex molecules such as proteins and nucleic acids (RNA and DNA) could not ever have been formed by chance independently of each other. Yet evolutionists have to face the even greater problem that all these complex molecules have to coexist simultaneously in order for life to exist at all. Evolutionary theory is utterly confounded by this requirement. This is a point on which some leading evolutionists have been forced to confession. For instance, Stanley Miller's and Francis Crick's close associate from the University of San Diego California, reputable evolutionist Dr. Leslie Orgel says: It is extremely improbable that proteins and nucleic acids, both of which are structurally complex, arose spontaneously in the same place at the same time. Yet it also seems impossible to have one without the other. And so, at first glance, one might have to conclude that life could never, in fact, have originated by chemical means.1 The same fact is also admitted by other scientists: DNA cannot do its work, including forming more DNA, without the help of catalytic proteins, or enzymes. In short, proteins cannot form without DNA, but neither can DNAform without proteins.2 How did the Genetic Code, along with the mechanisms for its translation (ribosomes and RNAmolecules), originate? For the moment, we will have to content ourselves with a sense of wonder and awe, rather than with an answer.3 1 Leslie E. Orgel, "The Origin of Life on Earth", Scientific American, vol. 271, October 1994, p. 78 2 John Horgan, "In the Beginning", Scientific American, vol. 264, February 1991, p. 119 3 Douglas R. Hofstadter, Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, New York, Vintage Books, 1980, p. 548

Being made up of a chain of impossibilities in each and every stage, this hardly imaginable scenario only magnified the problem and brought up many inextricable questions rather than providing any explanation for the origin of life:

1. When it is impossible to explain the coincidental formation of even one of the nucleotides making up RNA, how can it be possible for these imaginary nucleotides to form RNA by coming together in a proper sequence? Evolutionist biologist John Horgan admits the impossibility of the chance formation of RNA as follows;

As researchers continue to examine the RNA-world concept closely, more problems emerge. How did RNA arise initially? RNA and its components are difficult to synthesize in a laboratory under the best of conditions, much less under plausible ones.⁸

2. Even if we suppose that it formed by chance, how could this RNA made up of simply a nucleotide chain have "decided" to self-replicate and with what kind of a mechanism could it have carried out this self-replicating process? Where did it find the nucleotides it used while self-replicating? Even evolutionist microbiologists Gerald Joyce and Leslie Orgel express the desperateness of the situation in their book titled "In the RNA World":

This discussion... has, in a sense, focused on a straw man:the myth of a self-replicating RNA molecule that arose de novo from a soup of random polynucleotides. Not only is such a notion unrealistic in light of our current understanding of prebiotic chemistry, but it should strain the credulity of even an optimist's view of RNA's catalytic potential.⁹

3. Even if we suppose that there was a self-replicating RNA in the primordial world, that numerous amino acids of every type ready to be used by RNA were available and that all of these impossibilities somehow took place, the situation still does not lead to the formation of even a single protein. For RNA only includes information concerning the structure ofproteins. Amino acids, on the other hand, are raw materials. Nevertheless, no mechanism exists to produce proteins. To consider the existence of RNA sufficient for protein production is as nonsensical as expecting a car to be self-assembled and self-manufactured by simply throwing its design drawn on paper on thousands of its parts piled upon each other. In this case, too, production is out of the question since no factory or workers are involved in the process.

Transfer RNA. It binds to amino acids and move them into place on the ribosome as needed. Each type of tRNA binds only a single one of the 20 different amino acids. Amino acids attach to the appropriate tRNA at one end, which has folded into a three-dimensional L-shape. Such a perfect harmony taking place in an area one billionth of a millimeter is clear evidence for Creation.

A protein is produced in the ribosome factory with the help of many enzymes and as a result of extremely complex processes within the cell. Ribosome is a complex cell organelle made up of proteins. Therefore, this situation also brings up another unreasonable supposition that ribosome, too, should have come into existence by chance at the same time. Even Nobel prize winner Jacques Monod, who is one of the most fanatical defenders of evolution, explains that protein synthesis can by no means be underestimated so as to depend merely on the information in the nucleic acids:

The code is meaningless unless translated. The modern cell's translating machinery consists of at least fifty macromolecular components which are themselves coded in DNA: the code cannot be translated otherwise than by products of translation. It is the modern expression of omne vivum ex ovo. When and how did this circle become closed? It is exceedingly difficult to imagine.¹⁰

How could an RNA chain in the primordial world take such a decision and what methods could it have employed to realize protein production by undertaking the job of fifty specialized particles only on its own? Evolutionists have no answer to these questions.

Dr. Leslie Orgel

Dr. Leslie Orgel, one of the associates of Stanley Miller and Francis Crick from the University of San Diego California, uses the term "scenario" for the possibility of "the origination of life through the RNA world". Orgel described what kind of features this RNA had to have and how impossible this was in her article titled "The Origin of Life" published in American Scientist in October 1994:

This scenario could have occured, we noted, if prebiotic RNA had two properties not evident today: A capacity to replicate without the help of proteins and an ability to catalyze every step of protein synthesis.¹¹

As should be clear, to expect these two complex and extremely essential processes from a molecule like RNA is only possible by an evolutionist's power of imagination and viewpoint. Concrete scientific facts, on the other hand, make it explicit that the thesis of the "RNA World", which is a new model proposed for the chance formation of life, is an equally implausible fable.

 

Life is a Concept Beyond Mere Heaps of Molecules

Let us forget all the impossibilities for a moment and suppose that a protein molecule was formed in the most inappropriate, most uncontrolled environment such as the primordial earth conditions. The formation of only one protein would not be sufficient; this protein would have to wait patiently for thousands, maybe millions of years in this uncontrolled environment without sustaining any damage, until another molecule was formed beside it by chance under the same conditions. It would have to wait until millions of correct and essential proteins were formed side by side in the same setting all "by chance". Those that formed earlier had to be patient enough to wait, without being destroyed despite ultraviolet rays and harsh mechanical effects, for the others to be formed right next to them. Then these proteins in adequate number, which all originated at the very same spot, would have to come together by making meaningful combinations and form the organelles of the cell. No extraneous material, harmful molecule, or useless protein chain may interfere with them. Then, even if these organelles were to come together in an extremely harmonious and co-operative way within a plan and order, they must take all the necessary enzymes beside themselves and become covered with a membrane, the inside of which must be filled with a special liquid to prepare the ideal environment for them. Now even if all these "highly unlikely" eventsactually occurred by chance, would this molecular heap come to life?

God... There is no god but Him, the Living, the Self-Sustaining... Everything in the earth belongs to Him... He is the Most High, the Magnificent. (Surat al-Baqara: 255)

The answer is No, because research has revealed that the mere combination of all the materials essential for life is not enough for life to get started. Even if all the essential proteins for life were collected and put in a test tube, these efforts would not result with producing a living cell. All the experiments conducted on this subject have proved to be unsuccessful. All observations and experiments indicate that life can only originate from life. The assertion that life evolved from non-living things, in other words, "abiogenesis", is a tale only existing in the dreams of the evolutionists and completely at variance with the results of every experiment and observation.

Chandra Wickramasinghe

In this respect, the first life on earth must also have originated from other life. This is a reflection of God's epithet of "Hayy" (The Alive, The Ever Living). Life can only start, continue, and end by His will. As for evolution, not only is it unable to explain how life began, it is also unable to explain how the materials essential for life have formed and come together.

Chandra Wickramasinghe describes the reality he faced as a scientist who had been told throughout his life that life had emerged as a result of chance coincidences:

From my earliest training as a scientist, I was very strongly brainwashed to believe that science cannot be consistent with any kind of deliberate creation. That notion has had to be painfully shed. At the moment, I can't find any rational argument to knock down the view which argues for conversion to God. We used to have an open mind; now we realize that the only logical answer to life is creation-and not accidental random shuffling.¹²

THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS INVALIDATES THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION

The Second Law of Thermodynamics, which is accepted as one of the basic laws of physics, holds that under normal conditions all systems left on their own will tend to become disordered, dispersed, and corrupted in direct relation to the amount of time that passes. Everything living or non-living wears out, deteriorates, decays, disintegrates, and is destroyed. This is the absolute end that all beings will face one way or another and according to this law, this unavoidable process has no return.
This is something that all of us have observed. For example if you take a car to a desert and leave it there, you would hardly expect to find it in a better condition when you came back years later. On the contrary, you would see that its tyres had gone flat, its windows had been broken, its chassis had rusted, and its motor had decayed. The same inevitable process holds true and even more quickly for living things.

The Law of Thermodynamics holds that natural conditions always lead to disorder. Evolutionary theory, on the other hand, is an unscientific theory that utterly contradicts with this law.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics is the means by which this natural process is defined with physical equations and calculations.
This famous law of physics is also known as "the Law of Entropy". Entropy is the range of the disorder involved in a system in physics. A system's entropy is increased as it moves towards a more disordered, dispersed, and unplanned state from an ordered, organised, and planned one. The higher a system's disorder, the higher is its entropy. The Law of Entropy holds that the entire universe unavoidably proceeds towards a more disordered, unplanned, and disorganised state.
The validity of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, or the Law of Entropy, is experimentally and theoretically established. The most important scientists of our age agree on the fact that The Entropy Law will preside as the ruling paradigm over the next period of history. Albert Einstein, the greatest scientist of our age, said that it is the "premier law of all of science". Sir Arthur Eddington also referred to it as the "supreme metaphysical law of the entire universe".1
Evolutionary theory is an assertion that is advanced by totally ignoring this basic and universally true law of physics. The mechanism offered by evolution totally contradicts this law. The theory of evolution says that disordered, dispersed, and lifeless atoms and molecules spontaneously came together in time in a certain order and plan to form extremely complex molecules such as proteins, DNA, and RNA after which they gradually brought about millions of different living species with even more complex structures. According to the evolutionary theory, this supposed process that yields a more planned, more ordered, more complex and more organised structure at each stage has formed all by itself under natural conditions. The Law of Entropy makes it clear that this so-called natural process utterly contradicts the laws of physics.
Evolutionist scientists are also aware of this fact. J.H. Rush states:
In the complex course of its evolution, life exhibits a remarkable contrast to the tendency expressed in the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Where the Second Law expresses an irreversible progression toward increased entropy and disorder, life evolves continually higher levels of order.2
The evolutionist scientist Roger Lewin expresses the thermodynamic impasse of evolution in an article in Science:
One problem biologists have faced is the apparent contradiction by evolution of the second law of thermodynamics. Systems should decay through time, giving less, not more, order.3
Another evolutionist scientist, George Stravropoulos states the thermodynamic impossibility of the spontaneous formation of life and the unfeasibility of explaining the existence of complex living mechanisms by natural laws in the well-known evolutionist magazine American Scientist:
Yet, under ordinary conditions, no complex organic molecule can ever form spontaneously but will rather disintegrate, in agreement with the second law. Indeed, the more complex it is, the more unstable it is, and the more assured, sooner or later, is its disintegration. Photosynthesis and all life processes, and life itself, despite confused or deliberately confusing language, cannot yet be understood in terms of thermodynamics or any other exact science.4
As acknowledged, the Second Law of Thermodynamics constitutes an insurmountable obstacle for the scenario of evolution in terms of both science and logic. Unable to put forth any scientific and consistent explanation to overcome this obstacle, evolutionists can only defeat it in their imagination. For instance, science writer Jeremy Rifkin notes that evolution is belived to overwhelm this law of physics with a "magical power":
The Entropy Law says that evolution dissipates the overall available energy for life on this planet. Our concept of evolution is the exact opposite. We believe that evolution somehow magically creates greater overall value and order on earth.5
These words very well indicate that evolution is totally a dogmatic belief.

THE MYTH OF THE "OPEN SYSTEM"
Confronted by all these truths, evolutionists have had to take refuge in a mangling of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, saying that it holds true only for "closed systems" and that "open systems" are beyond the scope of this law.
An "open system" is a thermodynamic system in which energy matter flow in and out, unlike a "closed system", in which the initial energy and matter remains constant. Evolutionists hold that the world is an open system: that it is constantly exposed to an energy flow from the sun, that the law of entropy does not apply for the world as a whole, and that ordered, complex living beings can be generated from disordered, simple, and inanimate structures.
However, there is an obvious distortion here. The fact that a system has an energy inflow is not enough to make that system ordered. Specific mechanisms are needed to make the energy functional. For instance, a car needs a motor, a transmission system, and related control mechanisms to convert the energy in gasoline to work. Without such an energy conversion system, the car will not be able to use the energy in gasoline.
The same thing applies in the case of life as well. It is true that life derives its energy from the sun. However, solar energy can only be converted into chemical energy by the incredibly complex energy conversion systems in living things (such as photosynthesis in plants and the digestive systems of humans and animals). No living thing can live without such energy conversion systems. Without an energy conversion system, the sun is nothing but a source of destructive energy that burns, parches, or melts.
As may be seen, a thermodynamic system without an energy conversion mechanism of some sort is not advantageous for evolution, be it open or closed. No one asserts that such complex and conscious mechanisms could have existed in nature under the conditions of the primeval earth. Indeed, the real problem confronting evolutionists is the question of how complex energy converting mechanisms such as photosynthesis in plants, which cannot be duplicated even with modern technology, could have come into being on its own.
The influx of solar energy into the world has no effect that would on its own bring order. No matter how high the temperature may become, amino acids resist forming bonds in ordered sequences. Energy by itself is not enough to make amino acids form the much more complex molecules of proteins or for proteins to form the much complex and organised structures of cell organelles. The real and essential source of this organization at all levels is conscious design: in a word, creation.

THE "CHAOS THEORY" EVASION

Quite aware that the Second Law of Thermodynamics renders evolution impossible, some evolutionist scientists have made speculative attempts to close the gap between the two so as to render evolution possible. As usual, even those endeavours show that the theory of evolution faces an inescapable impasse.
One person distinguished by his efforts to marry thermodynamics and evolution is the Belgian scientist Ilya Prigogine.
Starting out from the Chaos Theory, Prigogine proposed a number of hypotheses in which order forms from chaos (disorder). Despite his best efforts however, Prigogine has been unable to pull off the wedding. This is clearly seen in what he says:
There is another question, which has plagued us for more than a century: What significance does the evolution of a living being have in the world described by thermodynamics, a world of ever-increasing disorder?6
Prigogine, who knows quite well that theories at the molecular level are not applicable to living systems, such as a living cell, stresses this problem: The problem of biological order involves the transition from the molecular activity to the supermolecular order of the cell. This problem is far from being solved.7
This is the point most recently arrived at by Chaos Theory and related speculations. No concrete outcome has been attained that would support or verify evolution or eliminate the contradiction between evolution, entropy, and other physical laws.
Despite all these evident facts, evolutionists try to take refuge in simple subterfuges. Plain scientific truths show that living things and the ordered, planned, and complex structures of living things could in no way have come into being by coincidence under normal circumstances. This situation makes it clear that the existence of living beings can only be explained by the intervention of a supernatural power. That supernatural power is the creation of God, who created the entire universe from nothing. Science has proven that evolution is still impossible as far as thermodynamics is concerned and the existence of life has no explanation but Creation.

---

1 Jeremy Rifkin, Entropy: A New World View, New York, Viking Press, 1980, p.6
2 J. H.Rush, The Dawn of Life, New York, Signet, 1962, p 35
3 Roger Lewin, "A Downward Slope to Greater Diversity", Science, vol. 217, 24.9.1982, p. 1239
4 George P. Stravropoulos, "The Frontiers and Limits of Science", American Scientist, vol. 65, November-December 1977, p.674
5 Jeremy Rifkin, Entropy: A New World View, p.55
6 Ilya Prigogine, Isabelle Stengers, Order Out of Chaos, New York, Bantam Books, 1984, p. 129
7 Ilya Prigogine, Isabelle Stengers, Order Out of Chaos, p. 175 36

The Theory of Information and the end of Materialism

The materialist philosophy lies at the basis of the theory of evolution. Materialism rests on the supposition that everything that exists is matter. According to this philosophy, matter has existed since eternity, will continue to exist forever, and there is nothing but matter. In order to provide support for their claim, materialists use a logic called "reductionism". Reductionism is the idea that things which are not observable like matter can also be explained by material causes.

To explain this, let us give the example of human mind. As evident, human mind is not something "touched by the hand, and seen with the eye". Moreover, there is no "center of mind" in the human brain. This situation, unavoidably leads us to the conclusion that mind is a concept beyond matter. Therefore, the being we call "I", who thinks, loves, gets nervous, worries,takes pleasure or feels pain is not a material being such as a sofa, a table or a stone.

Materialists, however, claim that mind is "reductional to matter". According to the materialist claim, our thinking, loving, worrying and all our mental activities are nothing but some chemical reactions taking place between the atoms in our brain. Our loving someone is a chemical reaction in some cells in our brain, and our feeling fear because of a certain event is another chemical reaction. Famous materialist philosopher Karl Vogt stressed this logic with his famous words "Just as liver secretes gall, so do our brains secrete thought". Gall, however, is matter, whereas there is no evidence that thought is matter.

Reductionism is a logical deduction. However, a logical deduction can be based on sound grounds as well as shaky grounds. For this reason, the question that stands forth for us for the time being is this: What would be the result if reductionism, the basic logic of materialism, is compared to scientific data?

The 19^th century materialist scientists and thinkers thought that this question could be easily answered away as "science verifies reductionism". 20^th century science, however, revealed a very different fact.

This fact is "information", which is present in nature and can never be reduced to matter.

 

Difference between Matter and Information

A watchmaker determines how to use these materials to produce a watch. He pours the information in his mind to form this watch from materials which do not mean anything by themselves. Wouldn't it be illogical to claim that these pieces came together and formed this watch? The claim of evolutionists on the origin of life is far more illogical than this.

We have earlier mentioned that there is an incredibly comprehensive information in the DNAs of living beings. In a place as small as one hundred thousandth of a millimeter, there is some sort of a "data bank" that specifies all the physical details of the body of a living being. Moreover, there exists a system in the body of a living being that reads this information, interprets it and makes "production" according to it. In all living cells, the information in DNA is "read" by various enzymes and protein is produced according to this information. The production of millions of proteins every second in the required type for the required place in our body becomes possible with this system. Owing to this system, our dying eye cells are replaced again by eye cells, and our blood cells again by blood cells.

At this point, let us think of the claim of materialism: Could it be possible that the information in DNA be reduced to matter as materialists say? Or, in other words, can it be accepted that DNA is merely a heap of matter and the information it contains came about as the random interactions of matter?

All the scientific research, experiments and observations carried out in the 20^th century show that this question must definitely be answered as "no". The director of the German Federal Physics and Technology Institute, Prof. Dr. Werner Gitt has the following to say on the issue:

A coding system always entails a nonmaterial intellectual process. A physical matter cannot produce an information code. All experiences show that every piece of creative information represents some mental effort and can be traced to a personal idea-giver who exercised his own free will, and who is endowed with an intelligent mind.... There is no known law of nature, no known process and no known sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter...¹³

The words of Werner Gitt are the conclusions of "The Information Theory", which developed in the last 20-30 years and which is accepted as a part of thermodynamics. The Information Theory investigates the origin and nature of the information in the universe. The conclusion reached by the information theoreticians as a result of their long research is that "Information is something different from matter. It can never be reduced to matter. The origin of information and physical matter must be investigated separately."

For instance, let us think of the source of a book. A book is made up of paper, ink, and the information it contains. Paper and ink are material elements. Their source is again matter: Paper is made of cellulose, and ink is made of certain chemicals. However, the information in the book is nonmaterial and it cannot have a material source. The source of the information in each book, is the mind of the writer who wrote that book.

Is it possible to believe that "coincidences" and "natural conditions" can produce a house like this with all its materials, carpenty, and installations intact? Anyone with a sound mind would know that a house like this is a product of a conscious design, and not chance happenings. There is always a designer and an information where there is design. Unquestionably, the design in life is incomparably superior to the design of a house.

Moreover, this mind determines how paper and ink will be used. A book initially forms in the mind of the writer who writes that book. The writer builds a chain of logic in his mind, and lines up the sentences. As a second step, he puts them into a material form, which is to mean that he pours the information in his mind into letters by using a type-writer or a computer. Later, these letters are printed in a printing-house and take the shape of a book made up of paper and ink.

Thereupon we can end up with the following general conclusion: "If a physical matter contains information, then that matter ought to have been designed by a mind that possesses the information in question. First there is the mind. That mind pours the information in it into matter and then there is the design."

 

The Origin of the Information in Nature

When we adapt this conclusion reached by science to nature, we meet a very important result. This is because nature, as in the example of DNA, overflows with an immense body of information and since this information cannot be reduced to matter, it therefore comes from a source beyond matter.

One of the foremost advocates of the theory of evolution, George C. Williams admits this reality, which most materialists and evolutionists are reluctant to see. Williams has strictly defended materialism for years, but in an article he wrote in 1995, he states the incorrectness of the materialist (reductionist) approach which holds everything to be matter:

Evolutionary biologists have failed to realize that they work with two more or less incommensurable domains: that of information and that of matter. These two domains can never be brought together in any kind of the sense usually implied by the term "reductionism.". The gene is a package of information, not an object... In biology, when you're talking about things like genes and genotypes and gene pools, you're talking about information, not physical objective reality... This dearth of shared descriptors makes matter and information two separate domains of existence, which have to be discussed separately, in their own terms.¹⁴

Therefore, contrary to the supposition of materialists, the source of the information in nature cannot be matter itself. The source of information is not matter but a superior Wisdom beyond matter.This Wisdom exists prior to matter. Matter has come to exist with Him, molded into a shape and became organized with Him. The owner of this Wisdom is God, the Lord of all the worlds.

The Ape-Man Similarity is A Fabrication

The completion of the human's gene map today does not yield the result that man and ape are relatives. One need not be deceived by evolutionists' attempts to exploit this new scientific development just as they have done with all others.

As known, the recent completion of the human gene map within the scope of the Human Genome Project was a very important scientific advance. However, some results of this project are being distorted in some evolutionist publications. It is claimed that the chimpanzee genes bear a 98% similarity to human genes and this is promoted as an evidence for the claim that apes are related to humans, and therefore, to the theory of evolution. In truth, this is a "fake" evidence put forward by evolutionists who take advantage of the lack of knowledge about this subject in society.

 

98 % Similarity Claim is a Misleading Propaganda;

First, it should be stated that the concept of 98% similarity between human and chimpanzee DNA frequently advanced by evolutionists is deceptive.

In order to claim that the genetic make-up of man and chimpanzee bear a 98% similarity, the genome of the chimpanzee also has to be mapped, just like that of man, the two have to be compared, and the result of this comparison has to be obtained. However no such result is available, because so far, only the human gene has been mapped. No such research has yet been done on the chimpanzee.

In reality, the 98 % similarity between human and chimpanzee genes, which now and then enters the agenda, is a propaganda-oriented slogan deliberately invented years ago. This similarity is an extraordinarily exaggerated generalisation grounded on the similarity in the amino acid sequences of some 30-40 basic proteins present in man and the chimpanzee. A sequence analysis has been made with a method named "DNA hybridization" on the DNA sequences that are correlated with these proteins and only those limited number of proteins have been compared.

However there are about one hundred thousand genes, and therefore one hundred thousand proteins encoded by these genes in humans. For that reason, there is no scientific basis for claiming that all the genes of man and ape are 98% similar just because of the similarity in 40 out of 100,000 proteins.

On the other hand, the DNA comparison carried out on these 40 proteins is also controversial. This comparison was made in 1987 by two biologists named Sibley and Ahlquist and published in the periodical named Journal of Molecular Evolution.¹⁵ However another scientist named Sarich who examined the data obtained by these two scientists concluded that the reliability of the method they used is controversial and that the data has been exaggeratedly interpreted.¹⁶ Dr. Don Batten, another biologist, also analysed the issue in 1996 and concluded that the real similarity rate is 96.2%, not 98 %.¹⁷

 

Human DNA is also Similar to that of the Worm, Mosquito and Chicken!

Moreover, the above-mentioned basic proteins are common vital molecules present in various other living things. The structure of the same kinds of proteins present not only in chimpanzee, but also in completely different living creatures, is very similar to that in humans.

For example, the genetic analyses published in New Scientist have revealed a 75 % similarity between the DNAs of nematode worms and man.¹⁸ This definitely does not mean that there is only a 25% difference between man and these worms! According to the family tree made by evolutionists, the Chordata phylum, in which man is included, and the Nematoda phylum were different from each other even 530 million years ago.

On the other hand, in another finding which also appeared in the local media, it was stated that the comparisons carried out between the genes of fruit flies belonging to the Drosophila species and human genes yielded a similarity of 60%.¹⁹

A headline from a popular newspaper in Turkey:"It is discovered that we are relatives with flies!". A fruit fly, whose genetic code has been mapped surprised scientists. The genes of the fly are similar to those of man's by 60%.

In another case, analyses done on some proteins show man as closely linked to some very different living things. In a survey carried out by researchers in Cambridge University, some proteins of land-dwelling animals were compared. Amazingly, in nearly all samples, human beings and chickens were paired as the closest relatives. The next closest relative was the crocodile.²⁰

Another example used by evolutionists on "the genetic similarity between man and ape", is the presence of 48 chromosomes in chimpanzees and gorillas versus 46 chromosomes in man.Evolutionists regard the closeness of the number of chromosomes as indication of an evolutionary relationship. However, if this logic used by evolutionists were valid, then man would have an even closer relative than the chimpanzee: "the potato"!. Because the number of chromosomes in potatoes is the same as that of man: 46

These examples confirm that the concept of genetic similarity does not constitute evidence for the theory of evolution. This is because the genetic similarities are not in line with the alleged evolutionary schemes, and on the contrary, yield completely opposite results.

 

Genetic Similarities Upset the "Evolution Scheme" that is Sought to be Constituted;

On the earth, there are distinctively designed systems of enormous perfection within the bodies of millions of living beings. The vast diversity and detailed design in all living beings from the smallest to the biggest shows us the infinite Power of our Creator.

Unsurprisingly, when the issue is evaluated as a whole, it is seen that the subject of "bio-chemical similarities" does not constitute evidence for evolution, but rather leaves the theory in the lurch. Dr. Christian Schwabe, a biochemistry researcher from the Medical Faculty of South Carolina University, is an evolutionist scientist who has spent years searching for evidence for evolution in the molecular domain. In particular he carried out research on insulin and relaxin-type proteins and tried to establish evolutionary relationships between living beings. However, he had to confess many times that he could not find any evidence for evolution at any point in his studies. In an article published in a scientific journal, he said;

Molecular evolution is about to be accepted as a method superior to palaeontology for the discovery of evolutionary relationships. As a molecular evolutionist I should be elated. Instead it seems disconcerting that many exceptions exist to the orderly progression of species as determined by molecular homologies; so many in fact that I think the exception, the quirks, may carry the more important message.²¹

Based on the recent findings obtained in the field of molecular biology, the renowned biochemist Prof. Michael Denton made the following comments;

Each class at molecular level is unique, isolated and unlinked by intermediates. Thus, molecules, like fossils, have failed to provide the elusive intermediates so long sought by evolutionary biology… At a molecular level, no organism is "ancestral" or "primitive" or "advanced" compared with its relatives… There is little doubt that if this molecular evidence had been available a century ago… the idea of organic evolution might never have been accepted.²²

 

Similarities are not Evidence for Evolution but for Creation

It is surely natural for the human body to bear some molecular similarities to other living beings, because they all are made up of the same molecules, they all use the same water and atmosphere, and they all consume foods consisting of the same molecules. Certainly, their metabolisms and therefore genetic make-ups would resemble one another. This, however, is not evidence that they evolved from a common ancestor.

This "common material" is not the result of an evolution but of "common design", that is, their being created upon the same plan.

It is possible to explain this matter with an example; all construction in the world is done with similar materials (brick, iron, cement, etc.). This, however, does not mean that these buildings "evolved" from each other. They are constructed separately by using common materials. The same holds for living beings as well.

Life did not originate as the result of unconscious coincidences as evolution claims, but as the result of the creation of God, the Almighty, the possessor of infinite knowledge and wisdom.

 

Conclusion

In addition to all the information we have detailed so far, we think it would be helpful to emphasize another fact.

Other than the superficial similarity between them, apes are no closer to human beings than other animals. Moreover, when intelligence is used as a point of comparison, the bee, which produces the geometrical wonder of the honeycomb, or the spider, which produces the engineering wonder of the web, are closer to man than the ape. We can even say that they are superior in some aspects.

Your Lord said to the angels, Iam going to create a human being out of clay. When Ihave formed him and breathed into him of My Spirit, fall down in prostration to him! (Surah Sad: 71-72)

Between man and ape, however, there is a tremendous gap, never to be closed by fairy stories. After all, an ape is an animal no different from a horse or a dog in terms of consciousness. Man, however, is a being who has consciousness and will, who can think, talk, reason, decide, and judge. All these qualities are functions of the "spirit" he possesses. The most important difference that causes this huge gap between man and other living beings is this "spirit". No physical resemblance can close this gap between man and other living beings. The only being that has "spirit" in nature is man.

In the Qur'an, this superior quality which man possesses and which differentiates him from other living things is referred to as follows:

Then He formed him and breathed His Spirit into him and gave you hearing, sight and hearts. What little thanks you show! (Surat as-Sajda: 9)