Bro, you are still insisting on propagating the falsehood of evolution which has been EXPOSED, REFUTED AND KILLED. (evolutionists themselves know it although they do NOT ADMIT IT!) My comments as i have said many times have clearly shown it’s scientific invalidity and the consequences it has handed to humanity and which it still does.

I SAID THIS THIS BEFORE:- IT IS ON A LIFE-SUPPORT MACHINE WAITING TO BE SWITCHED OFF AND IT WILL BE FOR DEFINATE WHEN THE MAHDI (as) TURNS UP ON THE SCENE AS PROMISED BY ALLAH.

THEY PROPAGATORS OF FALSEHOOD WILL NOT BE IN CONTROL OF THE MEDIA THEN!

JUST LEAVE IT NOW TO THE SINCERE AND OBJECTIVE HEARTED SEEKER OF THE TRUTH TO SEE WHERE THE TRUTH LIES.

You are right Bro, the Masons infiltrate and disguise themselves as Muslims, Christians, Jews etc to achieve their aims.

Just look at how Adnan Oktar has been sentenced to three years in jail as a result of a Masonic plot.

Anyhow lets us Thank Allah swt that we are aware of their plans and projects and that in the end:-

ALLAH WILL GIVE AS HE HAS DECREED THE FINAL VICTORY TO THE MUSLIMS

ALHAMDULILLAH WA SHUKRULILLAH

I am only interested in FACTS and all my comments from 11th of April downwards will leave NO DOUBT to the sincere and objective Heart and mind to where the TRUTH lies Bro.

I have already told you several times that our differences with the evangelicals are what they are and i do not agree with some of their points - BUT i do agree with the fact that they also reject evolution (from cell and then species changing into species fairy tale!) which is a CORRECT POSITION in light of the scientific evidences of it\’s INVALIDITIES which have become most apparent from the 80\’s onwards - as clearly shown above.

The way they go about is their affair. We confront the issue from a Muslim perspective. Our true enemies though our those in the establishment who have and continue to deceive people with this FALSE SCIENCE and SOCIAL DARWINISM ideology/mentality and the undeniable harm it has done and continues to do to humanity.

Rather than becoming further divided with our co-religionists we should where it is possible seek COMMON TERMS with them. (and this is possible for eg with our shared beliefs of Creation and NOT EVOLUTION)
Otherwise we play further into the hands of anti-reliogionists circles who are at the moment dominant and no doubt would and do encourage such divisions.

If you have not already i reccomend the following books concerning the Dajjal:

Freemasons and Dajjal (The Anti-Christ) - Kamran R\’ad

Dajjal the AntiChrist - Ahmad Thompson

The Next World Order - Ahmad Thompson

From the Shadows - tapes

Good luck and peace and blessing from God Almighty be upon you

The following books contain the refutation of evolution and the propaganda that attempt to keep it alive on the agenda in the interest of ideological (materialism) reasons which are crucial to THE SECULAR WORLD ORDER.

THE DARK SPELL OF DARWINISM - How evolutionists twist the truth to deny God

ATLAS OF CREATION

EVOLUTION DECEIT

DARWINISM REFUTED

HOW FOSSILS OVERTURNED EVOLUTION

THE STONE AGE: A HISTORICAL LIE

THE ERRORS OF NAS

A DEFINITIVE REPLY TO EVOLUTIONIST PROPAGANDA

THE SECRET BEYOND MATTER

THE DISASTERS THAT DARWINISM BROUGHT TO HUMANITY

GLOBAL FREEMASONRY- THE ARCHITECTS OF SECULAR WORLD ORDER

TEMPLARS AND FREEMASONS

DARWINISM-WATCH.CO - To keep updated with the latest propaganda.

Any person that reads these books and many others and is sincere and objective can no longer truly believe in evolution and social darwinism.
It would serve that person as a wake-up call and correct that person’s world-view which is not how the media present it to us.

===========
= DO YOU THINK THAT ALLAH WOULD EVER GIVE DISBELIEVERS/ATHEISTS ETC THE OPOORTUNITY TO SHOW THAT THE UNIVERSE IS POSSIBLY THE RESULT OF CHANCE!
THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION EVER SINCE COMING ONTO THE SCENE HAS ALWAYS BEEN USED IN AN ATTEMPT TO DISPROVE GOD’S EXISTANCE AND MOCK RELIGION.
===========
===========
= In reality though, this theory (Evolution) is nothing more than an attempt by men (whose knowledge is quite limited) to try and explain how they think we might have been created without a Creator!!!

= For this reason, the Big Bang theory goes hand in hand with the theory of Evolution, which is an attempt to do likewise!!!

= Even if the Universe is expanding, speculative theories such as the Big Bang still cannot account for the order and complexity that we see around us. This is because, explosions are never observed to create order, but rather disorder and chaos.

(earthage.org & problems with bigbang)
===========

you and your –one step ahead– spiritual evangelical twin brother are still holding on to the same ignorant/ill-based tirade against credible Science (= Big bang & Evolutionary Creation) mainly because of your this sick-based initial mind-set & perspective.

i think i already tried to explain all the illnesses
in this initial mind-set & perspective many times
in many writings above, and also tried to give the cure for it from the Word of God. (please see some critical writings on this issue above: May 15 6:38 & May 30 1:34)

and here, other than these, i only want to give
some great theistic scientists’ basic/rightful perspective in this Evolution(ary Creation) concept;

here is Dr. Francis Collins,
on CNN commentaries:

*******************
As the director of the Human Genome Project,
I have led a consortium of scientists to read out the 3.1 billion letters of the human genome,
our own DNA instruction book.

As a believer, I see DNA, the information molecule of all living things, as God’s language, and the elegance and complexity of our own bodies and the rest of nature as a reflection of God’s plan.

I had always assumed that faith was based on purely emotional and irrational arguments, and was astounded to discover, initially in the writings of the Oxford scholar C.S. Lewis and subsequently from many other sources, that one could build a very strong case for the plausibility of the existence of God on purely rational grounds.
My earlier atheist’s assertion that “I know there is no God” emerged as the least defensible.”

But reason alone cannot prove the existence of God. Faith is reason plus revelation, and the revelation part requires one to think with the spirit as well as with the mind. You have to hear the music, not just read the notes on the page. Ultimately, a leap of faith is required.

So, some have asked, doesn’t your brain explode?
Can you both pursue an understanding of how life works using the tools of genetics and molecular biology, and worship a creator God?
Aren’t evolution and faith in God incompatible?
Can a scientist believe in miracles like the resurrection?

Actually, I find no conflict (between Evolution and Creator) here, and neither apparently do the 40 percent of working scientists who claim to be believers.

Yes, evolution by descent from a common ancestor is clearly true.
If there was any lingering doubt about the evidence from the fossil record, the study of DNA provides the strongest possible proof of our relatedness to all other living things.

But why couldn’t this (Evolution) be God’s plan for creation?
True, this is incompatible with an ultra-literal interpretation of Genesis, (Evangelical Anti BigBang and Anti Evolutionary interpretation)
but long before Darwin, there were many thoughtful interpreters like St. Augustine, who found it impossible to be exactly sure what the meaning of that amazing creation story was supposed to be.

So attaching oneself to such literal interpretations in the face of compelling scientific evidence pointing to the ancient age of Earth and the relatedness of living things by evolution seems neither wise nor necessary for the believer.

———
i think again based on that –erroneous– evangelical literal interpretation, to assume that:
God may have created all human beings, with His own hands,

= separately,
= instantly,
= immune from all –past or future– evolution,
just like Him,

in the perfect physical Image of Him,
and then sent Jesus as a God Incarnate!! messenger to these Godlike!! humans,

evangelical interpretation is neither wise nor necessary at all for the christian believers. (Mark 12/29 & 10/18 & Matthew 4/10)
i hope that many righteous christians may also see this truth and return to true Jesus (= Honorable Servant of God) in this most critical third Day (= Millennium)
(John 6/44-45) & (Matthew 4/10 & Mark 10/18)
(Aale Imraan 55 & Maaedah 17)
———-

I have found there is a wonderful harmony in the complementary truths of science and faith. The God of the Bible is also the God of the genome.
God can be found in the cathedral or in the laboratory. By investigating God’s majestic and awesome creation, science can actually be a means of worship.
********************

Dr. Francisco Ayala gave a lecture entitled
“Evolution Is a Fact and It Is the Unifying Concept of Biology” USA april 2008:

********************
Ayala first pointed out that evolutionary biology follows the methodology of geology and other sciences.
The fossil record, to some extent, mirrors geological evolution.
As geologists discovered patterns in rock layers showing millennia of change and development, Darwin and subsequent biologists found organisms that reflected these changes over time.

Contrary to Ayala, (evangelical anti-evolutionary instant) intelligent design proponents argue that the theory of evolution is unreliable because the fossil record is missing the intermediates between one species and its evolutionary successor.

Acknowledging this opposing view, Ayala’s presentation included a slideshow with photographs indicating that the intermediate species between a modern fish and its oldest ancestors “show characteristics typical of amphibians.”

The same links between species exist in human development. Ayala pointed out that, “At the time Darwin died in 1882, no hominids were known.”
Since then, scientists have found several human ancestors with intermediates.
Ayala explained the connection between man’s predecessor and modern man by drawing on traits such as bipedalism, the method of walking on rear limbs.

“No traits evolve in a continuous manner …
[but] bipedalism appeared very early on,” Ayala said.

According to Ayala, one skeleton, named “Lucy,” dating back more than three million years, shows bipedalism in the hip structure.

Isolation also has an effect on the development of species. Ayala referred to Darwin’s own research on the Galapagos, where turtles were able to develop to unusually large sizes because the archipelago had few predators.

Similar environment-specific traits exist in all species. Ayala showed a chart of finches, demonstrating that each had traits relative to its environment.
There is evidence that all finches are offshoots of an original finch variety and kept suitable traits as they evolved.

“[The finches] deviated from the beginning;
they are not designed by an (evangelical
anti-evolutionary instant) engineer,” Ayala said.

The study of proteins and enzymes has yielded evidence about the types of amino acids that appear in spheres of the environment.
These findings indicate that evolution sprouted from a single kind of organism. As proof of his argument, Ayala stressed the relatively small number of enzymes present in organisms when compared to the hundreds of organisms that exist.

“Only 20 [enzymes] are used for organisms. … Molecular biology provided the strongest evidence for evolution,” Ayala said.

However, during the question-and-answer portion of his presentation, Ayala focused more on the philosophical side of the argument.
Ayala was careful to note that none of this scientific evidence is mutually exclusive to religion.

“The theory of evolution is better for religion than (evangelical anti-evolutionary instant) intelligent design …
[and] it is not impossible that evolution was guided by God,” Ayala said.

When asked if religion should be removed from science courses, Ayala gave a surprising answer.

Religion is not science, but the fact that
“Science is compatible with Religion”
is an important thing to state in science classes,
Ayala said.
********************

and here (theist scientist) Dr. Francis Collins argues in favor of “existence of a Creator”
before (atheist scientist) Dr. Richard Dawkins:

********************
COLLINS: I don’t see that Professor Dawkins’ basic account of evolution is incompatible with God’s having designed it.

TIME: When would this have occurred?

COLLINS: By being outside of nature, God is also outside of space and time. Hence, at the moment of the creation of the universe, God could also have activated evolution, with full knowledge of how it would turn out, perhaps even including our having this conversation. The idea that he could both foresee the future and also give us spirit and free will to carry out our own desires becomes entirely acceptable.

———-
(please note that Dr. Collins’ these ideas are strikingly similar to our basic monotheistic/islamic belief system in God.)
———-

DAWKINS: I think that’s a tremendous cop-out. If God wanted to create life and create humans, it would be slightly odd that he should choose the extraordinarily roundabout way of waiting for 10 billion years before life got started and then waiting for another 4 billion years until you got human beings capable of worshipping and sinning and all the other things religious people are interested in.

COLLINS: Who are we to say that that was an odd way to do it? I don’t think that it is God’s purpose to make his intention absolutely obvious to us. If it suits him to be a deity that we must seek without being forced to, would it not have been sensible for him to use the mechanism of evolution without posting obvious road signs to reveal his role in creation?

TIME: Both your books suggest that if the universal constants, the six or more characteristics of our universe, had varied at all, it would have made life impossible. Dr. Collins, can you provide an example?

COLLINS: The gravitational constant, if it were off by one part in a hundred million million, then the expansion of the universe after the Big Bang would not have occurred in the fashion that was necessary for life to occur.

When you look at that evidence, it is very difficult to adopt the view that this was just chance.
But if you are willing to consider the possibility of a Designer, this becomes a rather plausible explanation for what is otherwise an exceedingly improbable
event –namely, our existence.
********************

===========
= IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR AN UNCONSCIOUS, BLIND MECHANISM TO HAVE CREATED THE COMPLEX INFO AND DESIGN IN LIVING THINGS. EVOLUTIONISTS, WHO SEEK TO PORTRAY NATURAL SELECTION AS A DIVINE CREATOR OF ALL LIVING THINGS ARE NO DIFFERENT FROM WORSHIPPERS OF IDOLS AND TOTEMS -
THEY ARE TODAYS TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY PAGANS WHO ARE TRYING TO LEGITIMISE IT IN A SO-CALLED SCIENTIFIC MANNER!!!
===========
===========
= In reality though, this theory (Evolution) is nothing more than an attempt by men (whose knowledge is quite limited) to try and explain how they think we might have been created without a Creator!!!

= For this reason, the Big Bang theory goes hand in hand with the theory of Evolution, which is an attempt to do likewise!!!

(earthage.org & problems with bigbang)
===========

yes, brother; i have put here your statement together with your spiritual evangelical twin brother’s statements, that you may see the striking similarity here! but i must admit that your evangelical twin brother is one step ahead of you here, because he is rightfully applying the same –highly erroneous– perspective to Big bang also, in the first place!
and yes, it should not be a big surprise at all that with these –highly erroneous– initial mind-sets,
how can one see any positive EVIDENCE about Big bang or Evolutionary Creation concepts, in the first place?

and by the way, you have not answered yet your evangelical twin brothers’ some rightful objections against Big bang creation concept.
let me put them here again then, and hope for your credible answers. and if you don’t have the right answers for these objections yet, maybe you’d better listen to your evangelical twin brother’s advise also on this issue, and totally refute Big bang creation concept at once & immediately!
because the same standard Scientific (= which is essentially based only on what is perceived with our five senses) rules are exactly applied to this theory also. (that is: coming out and evolving on its own and with certain mechanisms & in randomness & in spontaneousness etc.) this is Scientific standard! because Science cannot reach what is believed to be above our five senses (= inspirational communication/control of every thing/process in universe by our God). (17/44 & 41/11)

===========
1) Even if the Universe is expanding, speculative theories such as the Big Bang still cannot account for the order and complexity that we see around us. This is because, explosions are never observed to create order, but rather disorder and chaos.

2) In effect, astronomers are now saying that many of the closer galaxies are red shifted because they are moving away from us, but the furthest ones are blue shifted —not because they are moving toward us, but— because they are younger. In other words, since the (blue-shift-for-furthest-galaxies) data doesn’t fit with the red shift theory, for objects that are supposed to be moving away from us, and since we are not ready to completely dump the Big Bang, then we’ll simply change the rules a bit!

3) For IF the Universe were indeed expanding, and IF the galaxies were all created as the result of a Big Bang, then they would all have formed at about the same time: meaning that the furthest galaxies should have the highest degree of red shift (and actually be red, as opposed to blue). But since they don’t, astronomers are now saying that the blue color has nothing at all to do with their motion, but is simply a sign of their age.

4) …However, none of these evidences are proof of a big bang, since each can be accounted for by things other than an explosion. In this regard, the editors of New Scientist remarked that:
“Never has such a mighty edifice been built on such insubstantial foundations.” And that: “… the big bang theory will definitely need some major modifications if it is to survive into the future.”

5) The discovery of such a complex and mature structure so early in the history of the Universe is highly surprising. Indeed, until recently it would even have been deemed impossible.
So this observation falsified the Big bang theory. To save the theory (upon which grants and reputations are established) an ad hoc patch must be found.

(earthage.org) big bang problems
===========

and now, in order to be able to see, all together hopefully, the righteous initial mind-set & perspective,
taught to us by our God, regarding these two great Scientific theories (and all the others) of our time,
i want to copy here again some critical/beneficial writings from above:

******************
and in the Scripture we also learn that
when God plans a process (=qada amran),
then He only says to it “be” (=koon)
and then it immediately starts to be (=feyakoonu),
as He wishes.

for example, when God wants to create “iron,”
He plans all the “stage by stage” process thereof beforehand,
and then He says to it “be,”
and thereupon in the stars all the elements start to be
from the simplest to the most complex (hydrogen & helium & lithium…) on its own in this “stage by stage” process,
and then “iron” comes up in the advanced stages of this process, fully under His inspiration & command.
(but this inspiration & command part cannot be observed by our five senses, and for this reason this part is the “belief” part of this scientific phenomenon. (israa 44 & fussilat 11)
but up until here, this is a process scientifically observed and accepted by all theists and atheists together & alike. and because that God’s inspiration & command and communication with all universe and in such processes cannot be observed by humans’ five senses,
all these processes & mechanisms are called “random processes” by scientific standards.
so whoever wants, after this, s/he can believe that these random processes are totally
inspired & controlled –above our five senses– by the Creator;
and whoever wants, after this, s/he can believe that these random processes are only of Natural source,
and does not go further than that. there is no compulsion in our religion (baqara 256) beyond this point.
we can only tell about the magnificence of all these mechanisms & processes and the magnificient final products thereof, and invite people to God based on this knowledge; but then the final decision regarding this important issue always rests with the individuals…
no compulsion beyond this point.

and we can apply this rightful/basic perspective to all the other scientific subjects as well, including big bang and our evolution of course.
********************

yes, if we can get this rightful/basic perspective, as directly recommended to us by our Lord in His wonderful Scripture, in the first place,
perhaps then all the barriers between us and Science will be totally come down, and then perhaps we may also be able to see Big bang and Evolutionary creation concepts and related evidences much more honestly/rightfully.

and i will not again here further get into your
many deliberate, or out of context, or outdated, or flatly wrong “quotations” from your evangelical (skillfully cutting & pasting & distorting) sources.
if i try to copy all the scientific data and research and answers to these ill-based “quotations,” it will take days (maybe weeks) to copy/read them here, to see the full picture.
but again i will only give here some –simple to understand for everyone– basic credible scientific web site addresses that all the sincere persons go and get some credible scientific information & answers & questions to be solved yet
on these issues,
and then they may hopefully understand again why a great
majority of all scientists –theists &
atheists together– are still strongly supporting this
Evolution(ary creation) concept and its related many fundamental evidences today, worlwide.

(and one last important note here may be that:
in these web sites the refutation of “Creationism” always refer to “Evangelical Anti Evolutionary Instant Creation Model.” so the ones who believe in “Evolutionary Creation Model” have nothing to fear or be anxious about the collapse of this “Instant Creation Model” and most of its invalid objections.)

(and also when reading these kind of essential scientific articles –especially related to Big bang and
Evolutin(ary Creation)– the terms like “randomly” & “spontaneously” etc. should always be perceived as “inspirational” actions by God,
by all believers, because in our universe everything do only act via His inspiration/command in our belief, (israa 44 & fussilat 41)
but because this “inspiration” can never be observed by our five senses (israa 44 & fussilat 11),
in scienctific (= which is based only on what we can observe with our five senses) literature only those terms are used.
but all over the world all great theistic scientists and believers who basically believe in and support Big bang and Evolutionary creation concepts always read these scientific articles with this godly perspective in mind.)

===============

Fossil evidence
Homologies
Distribution in time and space
Evidence by example

(evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/artic le/0_0_0/lines_02)

Evolution 101
This in-depth, multi-part course takes you through evolutionary theory and mechanisms, from definitions to details, natural selection to genetic drift, mutations to punctuated equilibrium.

Mechanisms of evolution
Learn about the basic processes that have shaped life and produced its amazing diversity.
This article is located within Evolution 101.

Evolutionary trees and patterns in the history of life
Scientists use many different lines of evidence to reconstruct the evolutionary trees that show how species are related.
This article is located within Evolution 101.

Evolution at different scales: Micro to macro
Microevolution and macroevolution encompass change at very different scales, but both work through the same basic processes.

Phylogenetic systematics, a.k.a. evolutionary trees
Learn about phylogenetic systematics, the study of the evolutionary relationships among organisms, and how the field is shaping biological research today.

Evolution and the fossil record
Evolution is a fundamental concept in modern biology. Review the basics of how evolution works with a special focus on evidence and examples from the fossil record.
This article appears at the American Geological Institute website.

(evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/searc h/topicbrowse2.php?topic_id=41)

==============================

Evolution - Definition

Natural Selection - Definition

Beneficial Mutations

Beneficial Mutations in Humans

Natural Selection Has Been Observed in Nature Many Times

The Adaptive Evolution Database (TAED) - BioMed Central

Genetic Basis of Evolution - Studies that are attempting to determine the physical effects of genetic differences between closely related species.

Gene Duplication Adapts To Changing Environment - University of Michigan - How “new information” is added to an organism’s DNA through duplication and divergence of genes. (Evangelical Creationists claim that this is impossible.)

Gene Duplication Separates Vertebrates from Invertebrates - Washington University In St. Louis

Speciation & Macroevolution

Observed Instances of Speciation by Joseph Boxhorn

Some More Observed Speciation Events by Chris Stassen, James Meritt, Anneliese Lilje, and L. Drew Davis

Plagiarized Errors and Molecular Genetics by Edward E. Max, M.D., Ph.D.

UC Riverside Study Suggests Placentas Can Evolve In 750,000 Years Or Less; Guppy-Like Fish Help Fill In The Gaps In The Evolution Of Complex Organs
Press release from the Univesity of California, Riverside.

Gondwana Split Sorts Out Mammalian Evolution Press release from the Univesity of California, Riverside announcing that the evolutionary relationships of the placental mammals have been worked out using comparative molecular methods.

29 Evidences for Macroevolution by Douglas Theobald

====================

The Fossil Record

Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ by Kathleen Hunt

Evolution and the Fossil Record: by John Pojesta, Jr. and Dale A. Springer

The Fossil Record: Evolution or Evangelical Creation
by Clifford A. Cuffey (hosted by GCSSEPM). I highly recommend the page that document the fossil evidence of the evolution of mammals from early reptiles”

Taxonomy, Transitional Forms, and the Fossil Record by Keith B. Miller

Evidence of Evolutionary Transitions by Michael Benton, Ph.D.

Smooth Change in the Fossil Record by Don Lindsay from his Creation/Evolution pages (another very good resource for evolution evidence).

Transitional Features in Archaeopteryx by Dr. Gallo of By Bayou U.,

Fossil Record 2 - A database of fossil information at the family level and higher.

Limb Evolution

==============================

Evidence for Human and Ape Common Ancestry

Chromosomal Evidence for Common Ancestry of Humans and Apes

Retroviruses from Kimball’s Biology Pages This article is an introduction to retroviruses, which will be helpful when reading the following articles on endogenous retroviruses.

Constructing primate phylogenies from ancient retrovirus sequences by Welkin E. Johnson and John M. Coffin

Many human endogenous retrovirus K (HERV-K) proviruses are unique to humans by Madalina Barbulescu, et. al.

Primate Genetic Distances

How to Compare Genetic Distance Among Species

Fossil Hominids: the evidence for human evolution by Jim Foley

(www.gate.net/~rwms/EvoEvidence.html)

FURTHER ADMISSIONS CONCERNING THE JOKE OF EVOLUTION

In an Scientific American article published in 1994 , Gould says:
“Natural selection is therefore a principle of local adaptation, NOT GENERAL ADVANCE OR PROGRESS.”

Roger Lewin says:
” ….Natural Selection does NOT PROMOTE SPECIATION. It is NOT A CREATIVE FORCE as many people have suggested.”

Parasitology - a book by four evolutionary biologists:
“Natural Selection can only act on those biologic properties that ALREADY EXIST. IT CANNOT CREATE PROPERTIES in order to meet ADAPTATIONAL NEEDS.”

PIERRE-PAUL GRASSE’ - renowned French Zoologist says:
“….. A comparative study of sera, hemoglobins, blood proteins, interfertility, etc, PROVES that the strains REMAIN THE SAME SPECIFIC DEFINITION. This is not a matter of opinion or subjective classification, but a MEASURABLE REALITY.”

RESORTING TO TAUTALOGICAL/ CIRCULAR REASOING

British Geneticist J.B.S Haldane says:
“…the phrase ’survival of the fittest’ is something of a tautology.”

Prof of Ecology R.H Peters from Canada’s McGill Uni says:
“…These theories are actually tautologies and, as such CANNOT make empirically TESTABLE PREDICTIONS. THEY ARE NOT SCIENTIFIC AT ALL.”

Prof Steven Stanley of John Hopkins Uni says:
“I tend to agree with those who have viewed natural selection as a tautology rather than a true theory.”

The philosopher Arthur Koestler says:
“In the meantime, the educated public continues to believe that Darwin has provided all the relevant answers by the magic formula of random mutations plus natural selection - quite unaware of the fact that random mutations have turned out to be IRRELEVANT and natural selection a TAUTOLOGY.”

IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR AN UNCONSCIOUS, BLIND MECHANISM TO HAVE CREATED THE COMPLEX INFO AND DESIGN IN LIVING THINGS. EVOLUTIONISTS, WHO SEEK TO PORTRAY NATURAL SELECTION AS A DIVINE CREATOR OF ALL LIVING THINGS ARE NO DIFFERENT FROM WORSHIPPERS OF IDOLS AND TOTEMS -
THEY ARE TODAYS TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY PAGANS WHO ARE TRYING TO LEGITIMISE IT IN A SO-CALLED SCIENTIFIC MANNER!

Regarding mutations i have covered the subject extensivley on previous occasions and therefore will only give one example.

I.L Cohen, a member of the New York Academy of Sciences says:
“To propose and argue that mutations even in tandem with ‘natural selection’ are the root-causes for 6,000,000 viable species, is to MOCK LOGIC, DENY THE WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE, and REJECT the fundamentals of MATHEMATICAL PROBABILITY.”

No example of beneficial mutation whether micro or macro has ever been observed and any example/s of “beneficial mutation” that is put forward are CERTAINLY DISTORTIONS and deceptive propaganda.

SPECIATION AND VARIATION

In his book Sudden Origins: Fossils, Genes and the Emergence of Species, published in 2000, Jeffrey Schwartz, prof of Anthropology at Uni of pittsburgh says:
“…It was and still is the the case that,with the exception of Dobzhanksky’s CLAIM about a new species of fruit fly, the formation of a NEW SPECIES, by ANY MECHANISM, has NEVER BEEN OBSERVED.”

In order to demonstrate speciation, fruit flies have been bred for last 70 YEARS or so and have been constantly exposed to mutations and NEVER has there been any EVOLUTIONARY CHANGE EXPERIENCED or SPECIATION ENCOUNTERED. Fruit flies have remaine fruit flies and needless to say this would apply to the rest of LIVING THINGS.

Kevin Kelley, evolutionist editor of WIRED magazine says:
“Despite a close watch, we have witnessed NO NEW SPECIES EMERGE in the wild in recorded history. Also, most remarkably, we have seen no new animal species emerge in DOMESTIC BREEDING. That includes new species of fruitflies in hundreds of millions of generatioins in fruitfly studies, where both soft and harsh PRESSURES have been deliberately applied to the fly populations to induce speciation…In the wild, in breeding, and in artificial life we see the emergence of variation.
BUT by the ABSENCE of GREATER CHANGE , we also clearly see the LIMITS of VARIATION appear to be NARROWLY BOUNDED and often BOUNDED WITHIN SPECIES.”

I have extensively covered the fossil record which has NEVER unearthed a SINGLE GENUINE TRANSITIONAL FORM(let alone the absurd claim of many!) beyond the alleged few which have all proven to be nothing of the kind
and as always nothing but stubborn ongoing propaganda.

I have also covered the DNA scenarion extensively.

HOMOLGY ERROR

(1) Evolutionists portray homology (common structures)
as proof of descent from a common ancestor and in typical tautalogical fashion describe it as descent from a common ancestor. Needless to say nothing to do with any scientific proof.

(2) There are also common structures among living things for which evolutionists do not claim an evolutionary relationship - like those between marsupial and placental mammals for example. This means that the reason for COMMON STRUCTURE IS NOT A COMMON ANCESTOR.

(3) Similar structures in many living things are NOT CAUSED by SIMILAR GENES and this shows that they do not have a common evolutionary origin.

(4) In living things with homologous organs, the DEVELOPMENTAL STAGES of these organs are VERY DIFFERENT and again this shows that these organs do not come from a common ancestor.

Michael Denton says:
“The validity of the evolutionary interpretation of HOMOLGY would have been greatly strenghened if EMBRYOLOGICAL and GENETIC research could heve shown that homologous structures were specified by homologous genes and followed patterns of embryological development…
But it has BECOME CLEAR that the principle CANNOT be extended THIS WAY. HOMOLOGOUS STRUCTURES ARE OFTEN SPECIFIED BY NON-HOMOLOGOUS GENETIC SYSTEMS AND THE CONCEPT OF HOMOLOGY CAN SELDOM BE EXTENDED BACK INTO EMBRYOLOGY.”

Richard Milton in 1997 says:
“In the 1950’s, when molecular biologists began to decipher the genetic code, there was a single glittering prize enticing them. When they found the codes for making proteins out of amino acids, they naturally ASSUMED that they were on the brink of discovering at the MOLECULAR LEVEL the same homologies that had been observed at the mascroscopic level of comparative anatomy.
If gthe bones of the human arm could be traced back to the wing of the bat and the hoof of a horse, then the miraculous new science of molecular biology would trace the homologies in DNA codes that expressed these physical characteristics… YET when biologists did begin to acquire an understanding of the molecular mechanism of genetics, THEY FOUND THAT APPARENTLY HOMOLOGOUS STRUCTURES IN DIFFERENT SPECIES ARE SPECIFIED
BY QUITE DIFFERENT GENES.”

IT NEEDS TO BE MADE CLEAR THAT HAD GOD WANTED OF COURSE, HE COULD HAVE CREATED LIVING THINGS VIA THE CHANGING FROM ONE SPECIES INTO ANOTHER - BUT HE DID NOT AS SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE FROM THE MOLECULAR ALL THE WAY TO PAEOLONTOLOGY HAS CLEARLY AND CONCLUSIVELY SHOWN.

Had evolution been true the scientific evidences for it would have been shown in ABUNDANCE BY NOW (we are now 150YRS down the line!) at every level.
It is CRYSTAL-CLEAR that it has not happened and it is an absolute DISGRACE that it has not been relegated to the trash heap of history where it belongs.

ANYTHING THEREFORE THAT IS REFERRED TO AS SO-CALLED EVIDENCE FOR EVOLUTION IN MEDIA,ACADEMIA, HOLLYWOOD ETC IS CLEARLY NO MORE THAN HOPEFUL SPECULATION AND DECEPTIVE PROPAGANDA THAT CAN ONLY CONTINUE TO HAVE INFLUENCE OVER THOSE WHO ARE IGNORANT OF THE FACTS OR THOSE WHO DO NOT WANT TO LET GO OF THEIR WORLD-VIEW BECAUSE IT CONFORMS TO THEIR WISHFUL-THINKING i.e their whims and desires.

brother joe, you said above:
===========
ANOTHER VAIN ATTEMPT IN ORDER TO MAKE UP FOR THE POVERTY OF THE FOSSIL RECORD i.e THE ABSENCE OF TRANSITIONAL FORMS -PUNCTUATED EQUILIBRIUM-
===========

perhaps it may not be a vain attempt at all. but on the contrary, it may be a miraculous prediction of our wonderful Scripture, as one of the main God-chosen evolution(ary creation) mechanisms, as i tried to explain a little bit in my above writing:

***************
yes, the evolution(ary creation) path/pace must be much quicker and more immediate, than once thought. (= as “punctuated equilibrium” proposed) rather than only gradualism. because this is also what our God may have indicated to us in His marvelous Word:

———-
..and if He wants, He will make you vanish first, and then He will bring a “new creation” (= halqan cadeedan). (14/19)
———-

in this verse, our God may have given us wonderful hints/clues about evolutionary progressive steps (as of a major morphological change in a species, or appearance of a totally new species):

= first (a population of) a species may have been put in an unfavorable environment by our God, and thus have been made vanish (= yuzhebkum) initially (at least many or most of them)…

= and in this tough environment, a new –more suitable– evolved body or a totally new –more suitable– evolved species (= halqan cadeedan) must have descended from this vanishing (population of) species, quickly and wondrously by the mysterious inspiration/command of our God.

and perhaps this may be the basic and unchangable formula (= sunnatu Allah, 35/43) for evolutionary creation path/progress, by His will.
and this is also what Science may have come close (via punctuated equilibrium evolutionary idea) right now.
***************

for more essential scientific information on “punctuated equilibrium” and “gradualism” as mechanisms of
evolution(ary creation), please visit:

punctuated equilibrium:
(evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/V IIA1bPunctuated.shtml)

possible genetic evidence for punctuated equilibrium:
(www.the-scientist.com/news/display/2502 3/)

and for more information on “transitional forms” as evidence of evolution(ary creation) & evidences from vertebrate fossil record for evolution(ary creation), please visit:

(www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transition al/part2c.html#conc)

===========
MUTATIONS AS WE KNOW CONSIST OF CHANCE CHANGES IN GENETIC CODES AND NEVER HAVE A BENEFICIAL INFLUENCE ON AN ORGANISM’ DATA.
===========

as i tried to explain in some of my above writings,
all mutations –beneficial or harmful– in all of the living beings should totally be seen as “INSPIRATIONAL CHANGES” under the command of our Lord, by all believers, in the first place. (israa 44 & fussilat 11)
because for the believers nothing is by chance, or random, or spontaneous, but everything is absolutely “INSPIRATIONAL PROCESSES” under the command of our Lord;
even the forming of all “fallen leaves” from all the trees on earth, and forming of every “masses of clouds” in the skies, whether there is a
specific-pattern in them –by our God’s will, or there is not any specific-pattern in them –by our God’s will. (6/59 & 24/43) but because this INSPIRATION part can never be observed by our five senses (17/44 & 41/11) they are only called as random, or spontaneous, or chance processes by Scientific (= what is based only on our five senses) standards.

and so yes, mutations can also be “harmful” by our God’s will; and they can also be “beneficial” by our God’s will, whenever He wishes/wished so.

for some evidences of beneficial mutations, please see:
(www.gate.net/~rwms/EvoEvidence.html)

===========
THE BIGGER THE MUTATION (macro-mutations) THE BIGGER THE DAMAGE!
===========

not always! whenever our God wishes/wished even the biggest mutations can do the biggest benefit.

for 29+evidences for macro evolution, please see:
(www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/sectio n4.html)

and also our God may have already miraculously indicated in His wondrous Scripture to us that:

He may even change a species perfectly into another species easily (= macro evolution, probably via macro mutations) whenever He wishes/wished;
backwards or forwards. (2/65) X (6/133 & 2/30)

===========
To believe that such a drastic mutation would produce a viable new type, capable of occupying
a new adaptive zone, is equivalent to BELIEVING IN MIRACLES…
===========

yes, this is why we see the Evolutionary Creation technique –via punctuated equilibrium, together with
gradualism– of our Lord as a pure MIRACLE,
and we are calling all the people on earth to our almighty God via this biggest MIRACLE on earth, together with Big bang (evolutionary) creation technique
in heaven. (21/30 & 71/13-14 & 6/133 & 76/1 & …) (21/30 & 51/47)

===========
Remeber that such admissions of the lack of scientific evidences of such proposed mechanisms are being made by those WHO HOPE AND WISHED that evolution were true.
They are not at all happy at the fact that they know (inside themselves) that it is not.
===========

most of the “quotations” you referred in your writing belong to scientists –theist or atheist– who basically believe Evolution(ary Creation) method,
mainly because of many fundamental evidences
supporting it, in the first place,

= orderly fossil record (from primitive to complex),

= many transitional forms,

= DNA evidences & comparison of all living beings,

= homology and anology in living beings,

but they are only questioning here some new proposed mechanisms (= especially “punctuated equilibrium” because of its MIRACULOUS nature, as i tried to explain a little bit above).
and also this is perhaps Science is all about: question and you will find the answer in the end (by God’s will).
(and this is all true for Big bang (creation) method and all of its mechanisms.)

so if you believe that at least %95 of all scientists on earth –theists and atheists together– are believing in and supporting Evolution(ary Creation) technique, though they absolutely know it is not true, perhaps you should check yourself –the credibility of your (mostly evangelical) sources– one more time, please, brother.

for a humble & smooth beginning, you may see:
why evolution is not a hoax;
why majority of scientists –theists & atheists–
do support evolution(ary creation) concept today, worldwide:
(www.thetech.org/genetics/ask.php?id=215  )
(www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/03/collins.comme ntary/index.html)

===========
Observation and experiment eg on countless generations of fruit flies both show that mutations do not enhance genetic data, but rather damage it.
===========

yes, duplication of genes may sometimes enhance the genetic data, whenever our God inspired/inspires to it, without touching a hand, fully under His command. (36/82 & 14/19 & 7/69)

for some encouraging scientific Signs from our God (21/37) on this issue, please see:

How “new information” is added to an organism’s DNA through duplication and divergence of genes. (evangelical instant creationists claim that this is impossible!!)
http://www.gate.net/~rwms/EvoEvidence.ht ml

===========
Actually Punctuated equilibrium via macro-mutations (causes bigger damage) is worser than proposing GRADUAL CHANGES!
===========

yes, brother; i can understand why it (= punctuated equilibrium evolutionary idea, together with gradualism) seems in your eyes so “worse.”
but in the eyes of our God it may not be worse, but easy, miraculous and “best” maybe… (14/19)

===========
Neither of the two are true. The problem (from evolution point of view)
of the fossil record REMAINS and proves again CONCLUSIVELY THE SOLID FACT OF CREATION.
===========

yes, in your last sentence i agree with you %100,
except if we –a little bit– could correct the last word:

…THE SOLID FACT OF “EVOLUTIONARY CREATION.”
(21/30 & 71/13-14 & 6/133 & 76/1 & …)

===========
punctuated equilibrium… theory will no doubt continue to be proposed and presented as if they were facts (via deceptive effective propaganda machine) and MANY ‘DOUGHNUTS’ because of pschological reasons will continue to blindly ‘believe’ in it!
===========

yes, among those “DOUGHNUTS” are many great Theistic Scientists of our time, who are working for God and for also the benefit of all humanity,
and they are calling to God hundreds of thousands of people worldwide via Evolutionary Creation method of God,
and guess what: none of them are “BLIND,”
but they are all actually “SEEING” the clear Signs of Evolutionary Creation in their laboratories & excavations etc.

to see a good example of these kind of some righteous Scientists
(= %40 of all Theistic Scientists even in this fanatic Anti-Evolutionary Evangelical Stronghold (= some parts of U.S.)
(and this should also tell us something about the solid credibility of Evolution(ary Creation) concept.)
please visit again:

(www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/03/collins.comme ntary/index.html)

brother joe, you said above:
===========
Bro for the last time look at “Darwinism is incompatable with the Qu’ran” which refutes all the verses in which in line with your preconceptions and complexes you LOAD UP and ERRONEOUSLY see evolution.
===========

not only me, but many believers –including many renowned islamic expert scholars– worldwide see these verses in the way i tried to explain a little bit above,
but if you prefer not to believe, it is your decision, there is no compulsion in our religion. (2/256)

and i know all the books & arguments you recommended against those understandings, don’t worry.
we are aware of them…

===========
Bro i want you to reflect seriously how dangerous what you are doing is. Allah says in the Qu’ran that He can Guide as well as Misquide people by certain of it’s Verses.
The verses which you see evolution in are an example of this and only a sincere heart can liberate itself of this sickness i.e interpretating the Qu’ran in line with one’s own whims and desires.
===========

i may be thinking the same things about your position brother…
gnostic and evangelical based “anti-reality” and “anti-evolutionary” dangerous whims and desires!
(please see again some critical & informative writings on this issue, from May 11 to May 21)

===========
You keep ignoring all the EVIDENCE and the ADMISSIONS of evolutionsts which means anything you point out to therefore obviously DOES NOT AND CANNOT go beyond speculation and hypothesis which rest upon wishful-thinking and deceptive propaganda.
===========

brother, in fact you keep ignoring all the EVIDENCE presented about Evolution(ary Creation) above in many writings,
and all the theist or atheist scientists who sincerely accepted and working on it, and finding new and amazing evidences/clues about it every day and worldwide.
but you hold on your evangelical based futile tactic:
to exploit the “not well understood yet” areas of
evolution(ary creation) and thus try to discredit it completely.

but let me tell you honestly, it may not work,
because the foundation may be very strong for both Big bang and Evolution, as our God may wondrously have mentioned and basically supported both of them, together, in one verse in His Scripture. (21/30)

so perhaps we may modify our understanding in some areas and we may learn lots of –not well understood yet– things in many areas in both of these two great scientific theories of our time, but unfortunately (for you) they may never go away, after so much fundamental proofs.

but if you that much dislike it, you can of course go and freely work together with these your anti-evolutionary evangelical friends (their Deceptive Propaganda), and they may also show you lots of “gaps & unsolved problems” in Big bang today.
you may love it. and i am sure especially their “anti-evolutionary” tirade may make you more than happy.
so perhaps this site may be a “must-see” for you:

(www.earthage.org)
please, especially see = Evolution and Big bang problems.

and unless you change your mindset & perspective against these kind of scientific theories from the very start, it is of course impossible for you to see any EVIDENCE regarding them.
here is one of your evangelical friend’s mistaken mindset & perspective (and of course yours, at least for the first part) from the very start:

*****************
= In reality though, this theory (Evolution) is nothing more than an attempt by men (whose knowledge is quite limited) to try and explain how they think we might have been created without a Creator!!!

= For this reason, the Big Bang theory goes hand in hand with the theory of Evolution, which is an attempt to do likewise!!!

= Small wonder that those who promote the Big Bang are also, more often than not, believers in Evolution!!!

(earthage.org & problems with bigbang)
*****************

see, a guy in such a mood from the very start…
can he really see any EVIDENCE regarding Big bang or Evolutionary Creation? or can you (for the second one)?
i don’t think so. sorry again.

===========
WHY IS THIS SO DIFFICULT FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND?

BUT once a person has been made aware of the DECEPTION that is evolution there is no doubt that that person
can NO LONGER SINCERELY believe in it any longer.
===========

i think i may have already made it a little bit clear “WHY IT MAY BE SO DIFFICULT FOR YOU TO SEE IT.”
yes, i wish you could only see that EVANGELICAL DECEPTION that is:

“Unevolutionary, Instant Creation Model”

which our God may definitely be rejecting in His Word
from the start. (21/30 & 71/13-14 & 76/1)

==========
SEE “THE DARK SPELL OF DARWINISM - HOW DARWINISTS TWIST THE TRUTH TO TURN PEOPLE AWAY FROM GOD”
==========

today there are millions of believing people (scientists & scholars & believers) on earth from every religion
–especially Christian & Muslim & Jews– who basically believe in and support Evolutionary Creation concept.

and guess what: they even may convince many atheists to come close to God by this wondrous Evolutionary Creation concept.

===========
There is no doubt that you are in utter confusion and it clearly shows with your all over the place “explanations”.
===========

utter confusion & all over the explanations!!

every time i write about some basic Evidences for Evolutionary Creation and the related miraculous Verses that support them, and examples of

= many theist or atheist scientists who sincerely accepted it and working on it, and still finding many powerful/credible evidences on it everyday, worldwide,

= and how this Evolutionary Creation concept may bring all righteous Christians & Muslims & Jews & Others in this most critical age together under

= worshipping one true God,
(do not worship Jesus as God Incarnate –against his will (Mark 10/18)– anymore…)

you are just as if trying to fill here –at least with three back to back– deliberate, or out of context, or flatly wrong misleading “quotations” from your evangelical sources…

and also here i give all the examples of some remarkable Christian Scientists of our time and other Christian believers who turned to “worship God alone” (like Jesus rightfully commanded to all Christians, Mark 12/29-30) via help of this Evolutionary Creation concept and all the related basic supportive proofs,

you “amazingly” never even mention or congragulate these kind of righteous Christian believers in the first place (aale imraan 55), but instead you are always siding with the anti-evolutionary Evangelicals (maaedah 17) who emphatically advocate

= worshipping Jesus as God Incarnate!!

via this “anti-evolutionary instant creation model,”
which is devoid of any credible proof;

and then you are asking us:

==========
Bro i want you to reflect seriously how dangerous what you are doing is.

What is the matter with you?
==========

brother, i think we should be asking to you these questions, in the first place.
so please, think again, very CAREFULLY! (maaedah 17)

===========
You know it is all over but PRIDE is preventing you from admiting it and this is unbecoming of a good Muslim.
===========

===========
BRO IT IS CLEAR AT THIS STAGE THAT YOU MUST BE UNDER A SPELL. THE ONLY SOLUTION THEREFORE IS THE FOLLOWING:

TURN TO ALLAH WITH A SINCERE HEART AND SEEK REFUGE IN HIM FROM SATAN THE ACCURSED.
===========

I may just be thinking the same things about your position, brother.
and i wish the same solution for you, brother, SERIOUSLY & WHOLEHEARTEDLY.

yes, brother. i will not go further into your other deliberate & out of context & flatly wrong evangelical anti evolutionary “quotations” right now.
and i will not copy here all the scientific long “quotations” that answers most of your ill-based questions/quotations.

but i will only give here some –simple to understand for everyone– credible scientific web site addresses for the ones who may want to receive credible answers & the latest developments & the questions waiting to be solved in Evolutionary research against these kind of biased & deliberate attempts to discredit this wondrous
God-chosen Evolutionary Creation (21/30 & 71/13-14 & 7/69 & 6/133 & 76/1 & …) concept basically:

common ancestry & DNA & evolution:
(www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/03/collins.comme ntary/index.html)

punctuated equilibrium:
(evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/V IIA1bPunctuated.shtml)

possible genetic evidence for punctuated equilibrium:
(www.the-scientist.com/news/display/2502 3/)

29+evidences for macro evolution:
(www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/sectio n4.html)

evidences of biological evolution:
(www.nap.edu/html/creationism/evidence.h tml)

evidences of molecular evolution:
(evolution-101.blogspot.com/2006/03/mole cular-evidence-1-protein.html)

*** when reading these kind of essential scientific articles –especially related to Big bang and
Evolutin(ary Creation)– the terms like “randomly” & “spontaneously” etc. should always be perceived as “inspirational” actions by God,
by all believers, because in our universe everything do only act via His inspiration/command in our belief, (israa 44 & fussilat 41)
but because this “inspiration” can never be observed by our five senses (israa 44 & fussilat 11),
in scienctific (= which is based only on what we can observe with our five senses) literature only those terms are used.
but all over the world all great theistic scientists and believers who basically believe in and support Big bang and Evolutionary creation concepts always read these scientific articles with this godly perspective in mind.

and lastly, let me give here some (young earth) Evangelical objections against Big bang theory,
and let me see your answers for these
questions (according to them these questions & objections basically discredit this Big bang creation concept completely!! like they already basically discredited Evolution(ary Creation) concept
totally!!

——————–
1) Even if the Universe is expanding, speculative theories such as the Big Bang still cannot account for the order and complexity that we see around us. This is because, explosions are never observed to create order, but rather disorder and chaos.

2) In effect, astronomers are now saying that many of the closer galaxies are red shifted because they are moving away from us, but the furthest ones are blue shifted —not because they are moving toward us, but— because they are younger. In other words, since the (blue-shift-for-furthest-galaxies) data doesn’t fit with the red shift theory, for objects that are supposed to be moving away from us, and since we are not ready to completely dump the Big Bang, then we’ll simply change the rules a bit!

3) For IF the Universe were indeed expanding, and IF the galaxies were all created as the result of a Big Bang, then they would all have formed at about the same time: meaning that the furthest galaxies should have the highest degree of red shift (and actually be red, as opposed to blue). But since they don’t, astronomers are now saying that the blue color has nothing at all to do with their motion, but is simply a sign of their age.

4) …However, none of these evidences are proof of a big bang, since each can be accounted for by things other than an explosion. In this regard, the editors of New Scientist remarked that:

“Never has such a mighty edifice been built on such insubstantial foundations.” And that: “… the big bang theory will definitely need some major modifications if it is to survive into the future.”

5) The discovery of such a complex and mature structure so early in the history of the Universe is highly surprising. Indeed, until recently it would even have been deemed impossible.
So this observation falsified the Big bang theory. To save the theory (upon which grants and reputations are established) an ad hoc patch must be found.

(earthage.org) big bang problems
———————

yes, how it is basically similar with the approach against Evolution(ary Creation), isn’t it?
if you have such a mindset & perspective of an Evangelical kind from the very start, is it ever possible that you may see any positive EVIDENCE regarding Big bang or Evolution(ary Creation) concept on the way ahead..?

******************************
say: roam the earth and find out
HOW HE INITIATED THE CREATION? (29/20)

do the disbelievers not see that (in the beginning)

= the heaven and earth used to be one SINGLE-ENTITY
and WE EXPLODED IT,
(= forming of first heavenly beings out of “bang” and then their continuous evolutionary path…) (51/47)

= and then we did from WATER EVERY LIVING THING,
(= forming of first living beings out of “water” and then their continuous evolutionary path…) (71/13-14 & 76/1 & …)

will they still not believe? (21/30)
******************************

ANOTHER VAIN ATTEMPT IN ORDER TO MAKE UP FOR THE POVERTY OF THE FOSSIL RECORD i.e THE ABSENCE OF TRANSITIONAL FORMS -

PUNCTUATED EQUILIBRIUM - A theory proposed in an attempt to answer the question “How can one imagine an evolutionary period so rapid as n ot to leave any fossils behind it?”

In it’s present state this theory holds that that living populations show no changes over long periods of time, but stay in a kind of equilibrium. According to this viewpoint, evolutionary changes take place in short time frames and in very restricted populations.
Because thye population is very small, Macro-mutations i.e large mutations
are chosen by natural selection and thus enable a new species to emerge.

MUTATIONS AS WE KNOW CONSIST OF CHANCE CHANGES IN GENETIC CODES AND NEVER HAVE A BENEFICIAL INFLUENCE ON AN ORGANISM’ DATA.
THE RESULT OF MUTATIONS HAVE ALWAYS VERIFIED SERIOUS ILNESSES FOR EG CANCER, DEFORMITIES AND EVEN DEATH.

THE BIGGER THE MUTATION (macro-mutation) THE BIGGER THE DAMAGE!

Ernst Mayr, the doyen of Darwinism says:

The occurence of genetic monstrosities by mutation…is well substantiated, but they are such EVIDENT FREAKS that these can be designated only as hopeless. They are so utterly unbalanced that they would not have the slightest chance of ESCAPING ELIMINATION through STABILIZING SELECTION…. the more drastically a mutation affects the phenotype, the more likely it is to REDUCE FITNESS. To believe that such a drastic mutation would produce a viable new type, capable of occupying
a new adaptive zone, is equivalent to BELIEVING IN MIRACLES…The finding of a suitable mate for the ‘hopeless monster’ (i.e punctuated equilibrium) and
the establishment of reproductive isolation from the normal members of the parental population seem to me INSURMOUNTABLE DIFFICULTIES.”

Remeber that such admissions of the lack of scientific evidences of such proposed mechanisms are being made by those WHO HOPE AND WISHED that evolution were true.
They are not at all happy at the fact that they know (inside themselves) that it is not.

Geneticist Lane Lester and population biologist Raymond Bohlin have this to say:

“….However, though macromutations of many varieties produce drastic changes, the vast majority will be INCAPABLE OF SURVIVAL , let alone show the marks of INCREASING COMPLEXITY… At present the thesis that mutations, whether great or small, are capable of producing limitless biological change is MORE AN ARTICLE OF FAITH THAN FACT.”

Observation and experiment eg on countless generations of fruit flies both show that mutations do not enhance genetic data, but rather damage it.

THE RESTRICTED POULATION PART OF IT

In restricted populations individuals must continually MATE within a NARROW GENETIC POOL. So normally heterozygous individuals become increasingly homozygous which means that DEFECTIVE GENES which are normally recessive become DOMINANT, with the result that genetic DEFECTS and sickness INCREASE WITHIN THE POPULATION.

AN EXAMPLE: A 35 year study of a small, inbred population of chickens was carried out. It was found that the individual chickens became PROGRESSIVELY WEAKER
from the GENETIC POINT OF VIEW over time. Their egg production fell from 100 to 80 percent and their fertility declined from 93 percent to 74 percent. But when chickens from other regions were added to the population, this trend toward genetic weakening was HALTED and even REVERSED.
WITH THE INFUSION OF NEW GENES FROM OUTSIDE THE RSTRICTED GROUP, EVENTUALLY THE INDICATORS OF THE HEALTH OF THE POPULATION RETURNED TO NORMAL.

Actually Punctuated equilibrium via macro-mutations (causes bigger damage) is worser than proposing GRADUAL CHANGES! Neither of the two are true. The problem (from evolution point of view)
of the fossil record REMAINS and proves again CONCLUSIVELY THE SOLID FACT OF CREATION.

In spite of this evidence ,punctuated equilibrium like with the rest of the hopeless hypothetical and INVALIDATED parts to the theory will no doubt continue to be proposed and presented as if they were facts ( via deceptive effective propaganda machine) and MANY ‘DOUGHNUTS’ because of pschological reasons will continue to blindly ‘believe’ in it!