Richard Dawkins rips into Harun Yahya and Muslim creationism

October 27, 2008

This blog has given Harun Yahya a platform to defend his Islamic version of creationism, so it’s time to show Richard Dawkins tearing him apart. I noticed this video because it’s about the Atlas of Creation, a book that has fascinated me ever since I first saw it in Turkey two years ago. My blog posts on this have sparked amazed reactions from Westerners hearing about it for the first time, and indignant expressions of support from Muslims who agree with Harun Yahya (aka Adnan Oktar).

FaithWorld is interested in following issues of science and atheism, although I have to say I think Dawkins makes a sloppy case for the latter. His book The God Delusion uses parody views of faith like strawmen to knock down. For someone with his intelligence and eloquence, that’s like shooting fish in a barrel. His approach to Islamic creationism also shows a few holes. Two Pakistanis in the audience mentioned Pervez Hoodbhoy, a Pakistani physicist who is a leading critic of Muslim anti-Darwinism, and he didn’t have the slightest idea who they were talking about.

Hat tip to Salman Hameed and his blog Science and Religion News for this.


We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see

You make a good point. This is a common aspect of human psychology of defeat indeed. Why Dawkins need to mock or insult people is that, he tries to give an image of nothing serious happened. On the contrary, something very serious happened and Darwinism took a jab from Harun Yahya. If a person can not beat a view in ideological terms, he strives to cover this defeat by resorting to derisive, libellous statements. Indeed, Richard Dawkins’ avoidance of an ideological discussion and trying to tease and stand up for 40 minutes to discuss in the absence of a counter argument, makes us think that DAWKINS IS REALLY AFRAID…

Posted by FrederickK | Report as abusive

I read both Atlas of Creation and Richard Dawkins comments about it from internet. I saw that Dawkins can not give any answer to Harun Yahya other than a plastic needle picture which is not a good proof for rejecting Harun Yahya. Because whether Dawkins looks a plastic picture or a real picture, this creature is living today without any change.

Posted by mete | Report as abusive

IF “DAWKINS” HAD KNOWN ABOUT DNA m/if_darwin_had_known/if_darwin_had_know n01.php
I wonder how he would be able to reply to this book. A
single cell of him contains an immense amount of intelligence incomparable than Dawkins himself.

Posted by FrederickK | Report as abusive

Could you please visit  /, you can easily see, Harun Yahya destroy Darwinism all over the world!

Posted by Ahmet Secer | Report as abusive

As a professional in IT industry, I am always very up to date with Internet technology. That is how I came across website and had the opportunity to review the Atlas of Creation. It is definitely an amazing piece of work. The basic reason is the courage, eager and strength of the author, in his struggle against Darwinism.

With so many books, articles and websites he is determined to smash this old theory down. In fact he already did this in Europe, the countries of which have received the atlas in schools and governmental bodies. Richard Dawkins has lost his credibility both in UK and Europe. That is what the fuss is about. He even resorts to saying he is proud to be an ape!

If Richard Dawkins dares to speak out, why did he not accept Harun Yahya’s invitation for a public debate. Speaking behind the back is not ethical and appropriate for any scientist. He should behave well and talk to Harun Yahya face to face if he has anything to say. Otherwise, besides his credibility, Richard Dawkins has lost his reputation, too. Sorry for him.

Posted by Steven Barlow | Report as abusive


This discussion would definitely be the final scene of the evolution vs. creation debate. The entire world is looking forward to it. But Richard Dawkins refrained from this participation. He is not ready for it? He has not prepared well? He hesitates in discussing evolution? Why, is he afraid?

We are looking forward to hear what Richard Dawkins has to say when he is with Harun Yahya. Maybe he does not have too much to talk about, otherwise he would respond to the website: ATLAS OF CREATION – FREE TO DOWNLOAD m/atlas_creation_III/atlas_creation_III_ 01.php

Posted by Soner Ayan | Report as abusive

Only thing I know is that Dawkins strictly avoids Harun Yahya let alone ruining him. Harun Yahya invited him to discuss on Darwinism yet he refused it saying he took an oath. I wonder what he took his oath on if he does not believe in a Creator but coincidence. It is ridiculous. It is so obvious that Dawkins is terrible intimidated by him.

Posted by Eduardo Calinto | Report as abusive

Steven Barlow writes about Dawkins “He even resorts to saying he is proud to be an ape!”

Humans are an ape species and normal people don’t have a problem with that. The religious hicks who believe in magical creation would become mentally disturbed if they thought they were nothing more than apes.

To the creationist retards: Grow up and educate yourselves. Your refusal to face facts makes you look like cowards.

Posted by bobxxxx | Report as abusive

Why should scientists have to debate any on comers with crack-pot ideas? The best forum for serious debate is that used by genuine scientists – peer-review. If Harun Yahya believes so strongly in creationism (vs. evolution) then let him submit some technical papers for submission into the reputable Western science journals for review instead of relying on expensive glossy publications to fool the gullible.

Posted by Alex at Alex’s Heresies | Report as abusive

Dawkins has highlighted the blatant dishonesty of Yahya (see Wiki for more about him), who is not even a scientist, so why debate him?

Evolution is easy to disprove – simply find a fossil mammal in the pre-Cambrian. Until such solid evidence is found there is nothing to debate.

Watch out for Dawkins’ book next year detailing some of the overwhelming evidence for Evolution, or see for refutations of creationist claims.

Posted by Alan C | Report as abusive

Ah, I remember the Atlas of Creation. Richard Dawkins really delivered the smackdown to Harun Yahya. Not only proving that the entire Atlas of Creation is a massive pile of deciet, but Harun Yahya’s decietful creationist tactics.

Posted by Fireball | Report as abusive

its false. Harun Yahya is brave.Harun Yahya real muslim in?aAllah and he finished evolution theory. God bless you Harun Yahya

Posted by oktay | Report as abusive

I share Richard Dawkin’s disdain for Harun Yahya, but Dawkins is just as ignorant about Islam and the Muslim world as Harun Yahya is about zoology and evolution.

Posted by Yakoub | Report as abusive

Alan C has got it right. All the ludicrous claims of creationism have been debunked on, in considerable detail. Please start submitting peer-reviewed papers please – this is not a parlor game.

Real scientists have found face to face debates worse than useless (see Kent Hovind et al). In this format the creationist throws out a rapidfire list of long-discredited criticisms of evolution which the scientist has no time to answer (while not demonstrating any evidence of creationism at all) and declare themselves victor.

What the creationists refuse is an online debate, where adequate time is given to provide links and sources refuting their nonsense.

Whatever points the Turkish loon makes, I guarantee that they are covered on talkorigins. They never change. Get educated, creationists, and do the world a favor.

Posted by john hackworth | Report as abusive

Maybe Harun Yahya can write some technical papers while he’s serving his jail sentence

Posted by Paul M | Report as abusive

Where is the evidence for evolution?

It is a classic for the supporters of evolution theory to insult, slander against the ones who do not think like themselves. They easily start talking behind, or using slang which shows their internal defeat against the fact of creation.

Let us make a small test:
– Give you a puzzle with 1000 pieces. Throw it on the ground, and wait for billions of years so that the puzzle is completed and each piece is in its exact position.
Now another try:
– Give you 1000 atoms of carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen etc. Throw it anywhere and wait for billions of years so that the protein is completed and each atom is in its exact position to give you a cytochrome-c.

Nobody could accept that a puzzle could form by itself. But evolutionists accept that a cytochrome-c protein molecule is formed by coincidence.

Let your mind, intelligence, conscience, reasoning abilities talk. Only “intelligence” is required for design, order and creativity. The owner of this intelligence throughout the universe is God, the Lord of the Heavens and the Earth.

Don’t miss

Posted by Steven Barlow | Report as abusive

Steven Barlow. you say “evolutionists accept that a cytochrome-c protein molecule is formed by coincidence.”
That is not true. If you knew the first thing about evolution you would know that it is NOT a random process, so your (very bad) analogy is not applicable. I suggest you find out what biologists ACTUALLY say, and what the evidence is, instead of demonstrating your ignorance.

It is interesting that the “evidence” you use to disprove evolution is equally applicable to the existence of god. Double standards, I think.

Posted by Alan C | Report as abusive

I note none of the creationoists deal with the essential points about the presentation, pointing out that no-one is clear where the guy’s money comes from, the falsified pictures, the lack of knowledge about the science being talked about, the strange threats to freedom of speech.

Dawkins is quite right when he says there is no point in debating with such people, and there’s no much point in trying to debate with these posters either. They have an alternative reality.

Posted by S England | Report as abusive

I really hope to hear some scientific facts from Mr. Dawkins. But all I heard was pinning Harun Yahya. I want to have an explanation about unchanged fossils, about failure of producing even a single cell under laboratory conditions. When does Mr. Dawkins plan to reply those questions? Because I do not find mocking as a scientific reply.

Posted by Beatrice RYALL | Report as abusive

If a popular Islamic Creationist can’t tell the difference between a fishing lure and a real animal, he’s pretty ignorant. Not a sound basis for overthrowing evolution – the keystone concept modern biology. But a very sound basis for pedalling Creationism.

Posted by Robert Stovold | Report as abusive

I’ve read Harun’s books. There’s not a single shred of a coherent argument anywhere. A truly infantile mind for an infantile subject. A few years ago, as I was growing up, the kind of statements he makes in these books would have been more likely to have appeared as lines in a comedy show. It is very disturbing that grown adults choose to remain ignorant and accept such insults to their intelligence. And, who is giving them a public voice and why?

Posted by Bill | Report as abusive

It does seem that those against evolution seriously do not understand it, and that is understandable as education on evolution around the world is woeful.

Evolution is a proven theory based on evidence from all over the world in several fields of scientific study – geology, genetics, paleontology, zoology, biology and physics.

It does not state how proteins began. It does not state how life began – anyone who presents evolution in this light is misrepresenting it. It explains what we see today in extant life and extinct fossil life.

Harun Yahya uses many well-discredited arguments in his book and websites, Dawkins really doesn’t need to defend evolution against them as people may find the counter-arguments and proofs out there if they only took the time to look. As another poster has already said, contains most if not all of his claims and refutes them with the fruits of scientific research.

All the best.

Posted by Dave G | Report as abusive

What does evolution intend to explain then? How can evolution explain the following:

– How did the first protein come into existence
– How did the first mitochondria originate
– How is it that there is information in the DNA of every human cell, and this information is coded with the 4 letter alphabet of nucleotides
– Who has the knowledge to encode the DNA with this immense information that defines every function in organisms
– How did the first molecules form
– How did some molecules in fruits, flowers, etc. arise to establish sense of smell in organisms
– How did the retina decide to turn light into electricity
– How did the ear learn to turn sound waves into electricity
– How does electricity in the brain perceived and differentiated as taste, smell, sound, vision etc.

Natural selection? Mutation? Or what?
Evolution is a non-existing, imaginary claim that has no basis, no logic, no reason or no mechanism. This is the conclusion any thinking person could attain.

Posted by Soner Ayan | Report as abusive

Why do people even bother refuting idiots like Yahya. He has proved beyond a shadow of doubt that he is nothing more than a second rate con artist trying to peddle ludicrous lies, that only the stageringly ignorant, or religiously blinded would entertain. I’m astounded that a news agency of Reuters’ standing (even if only via a blog), would give credence to this nonsense. Have standards really declined that much since the Thomson takeover?

Posted by John Dale | Report as abusive

Soner you’re mixing issues in acting as if evolution should answer those questions.
But it shouldn’t and never will.

Evolution just shows how creatures mutate and change to create new yet similar creatures. Basically stating that the cats or dogs you see today are descendants of creatures back in the day, even though they appear much different today than they did then.

It doesn’t explain how life started or any of it’s “inner workings”.
Nor is it supposed to. Acting as if it should as an argument against evolution is kind of pointless.

Evolution is a proven theory. There are all sorts of evidence supporting evolution.

Now keep in mind that I am an Atheist. Evolution and creationism, could go hand in hand.

For those believers out there, if God is real and created all life, do you not think he gave life the ability to adapt and change to its environments?
I mean that is evolution. So therefore evolution doesn’t prove anything about a “God” one way or another.

It’s simply a way to understand how and why life has changed throughout the millenia.

Posted by Dave | Report as abusive

There is no denying that Haroon Yahyah has a case , and a very strong one , where are all the so called naturalists who are hell bent on pursuing and keep on insisting on the Darwin theory, which like i said is still a theory ,could it be that if Haroon was Henery Yank he would have been better recognised!

Posted by akhter | Report as abusive

To John Dale,
there is no question about declining standards since the Thomson takeover. If you’re “astounded” that Reuters is interested in Harun Yahya, maybe that’s because you don’t see the full story here. Many people like yourself flatly reject Harun Yahya as a con artist unworthy of attention. If he were just another con artist, we’d say the same thing. But there’s a flip side to this story that explains why a news agency of Reuters’ standing should be interested in him.

As I wrote after interviewing him a few months ago, “Harun Yahya is one of the most widely distributed authors in the Muslim world… His glossy books and DVDs on religion and science sell in Islamic bookshops around the globe. He gives away thousands of expensive volumes and lets readers download much of his work from his websites for free.” I travel a lot and make it a habit to stop in any Islamic bookshop I come across to see what they are selling. Wherever I go, I find shelves of Harun Yahya books that are far more attractive than the dreary imports from Saudi Arabia or Pakistan. This guy probably sells more books than many best-selling authors in the West and gives lots more away to boot.

Instead of just writing him off, I wanted to talk to him and see if I could learn more about the Harun Yahya phenomenon. I also wanted to see if I could answer many of the questions about him that have circulated on the web since I first wrote about him two years ago. I presented what I found in the interview so that anyone interested in Harun Yahya can see what answers he gives to a journalist trying to get explanations for this publishing phenomenon. People can read it and make up their own minds about him.

That interview included comments from his critics but did not include a point-by-point criticism of the content of Atlas of Creation. That was not the purpose of the article — and many other authors have done that already anyway. Also, we included critical comments from others, so you can’t say we “gave credence” to his views — we would have done that if we had only printed his views.

So when the Dawkins video appeared, I thought it was a useful contribution that readers would like to see. If you think about it, it’s actually Dawkins who is bothering to refute Harun Yahya, not us. And he isn’t doing it because of our article, he’s doing it because the Atlas is being mailed to schools around the world. So if you think that refuting Harun Yahya is a sign of “declining standards,” maybe you should level the charge at Dawkins.

Posted by Tom Heneghan | Report as abusive


Evolution cannot answer any one of my questions.

As to the suggestions received from evolutionists or atheists, there is no need for questioning how things are what they are. According to them, there is no need to see how the intricate systems operate in the universe. One should be deaf and blind to the perfect delicacies all around in the universe.

This is totally opposite to what belief in God requires. Because the basis of divine faiths is search for the truth, quest for understanding the creation by God. You can do this through questioning what you see in the heavens and the earth just like Abraham did. He finally reached God and had great faith in His creation.


Darwinism is an ideology, Harun Yahya is telling the truth for so many years. We have seen this fact and saved ourselves from the evolution deceit. I am thanking him for his courage to speak out, the world should wake up to the truth!! (


Posted by Soner Ayan | Report as abusive

Harun Yahya is a role model for the entire Muslims globally.

His (Adnan Oktar’s) openness to discussion, his tolerance and eagerness for brotherhood with all Muslims as well as Christians and Jews, his love towards his nation as well as all creation by God, his modernism and enthusiasm for innovation and technology, his understanding and appreciation of arts and beauty, his struggle for peace all around the world are all apparent before the global community thanks to his books, interviews, and the Internet.

Obviously there are some groups who are not happy with this message of peace and brotherhood. Mostly freemasons have been putting out obstacles and threats against him for decades, but his sincerity and faith in God has protected him from all evil. Satan’s plot is weak and doomed to failure.

As he acclaims in his interviews at (in English), the world is expecting the Mahdi and Jesus with great joy and endeavor, and the entire world of faith will prevail in our century.

Darwinism is intended to bring anarchy and terror among humanity behind the mask of being scientific. Darwinism is the root of terror really with intentions of racism, superiority, inferiority, survival of the fittest but the elimination of the weakest. What kind of a world would appear with this ideology, we saw this in Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Lenin already. Isn’t this enough? Freemasonry is a servant of Satan in his ambition to astray people from God and the good. From the Qur’an:

Satan makes them promises, and creates in them false hopes; but Satan’s promises are nothing but deception. (Women (An-Nisa) / 120)

Posted by Aykut Koksoy | Report as abusive

It terrifies me that the world is filled with people whose blind irrationality matches soner ayan.

Posted by Zirrad | Report as abusive

Interesting comments from Steven Barlow:
“As a professional in IT industry” ie not a scientist yet apparently an expert on evolutionary biology

“If Richard Dawkins dares to speak out, why did he not accept Harun Yahya’s invitation for a public debate.” Hard to do now as Harun Yayha is in jail for creating an illegal organization for personal gain.

And clearly Aykut Koksoy needs a new role model.

Posted by Paul M | Report as abusive

Satan is a figment of the Church’s imagination.
God is a figment of the Church’s imagination.

Religion is nothing more than the building blocks to form societies.
There is no more truth to any one religion than there is to Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, or any other fable.

The idea of life after death was created so that living intelligent humans could better cope with death and have a belief that they “didn’t really die” because the “spirit” lives on.

Nice fantasy, but it just isn’t reality. But hey, if it allows you to sleep better at night…

Posted by Dave | Report as abusive

Evolutionism is only being kept “alive” because it is defended undemocratically like a dictatorhip by secular establishment in the name of materialist ideology.

Scientist Richard Lewontin admitted in what is the typical mentality/mindset of those in control of the scientific establishment and academia:

” It is not that the methods of and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a materialist explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by OUR PRIORY ADHERENCE TO MATERIAL CAUSES to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations no matter how counter-intuitive , or mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, so WE CANNOT ALLOW A DVINE FOOT IN THE DOOR.”


Many people have understood what is going on:

So to all those who start referring to so-called peer papers or talkorigin sites – please do not waste anybodies time with thst as the deception has been exposed and made clear to all those sincere and objective minded people who seek and discover the truth.

Posted by Joe Morreale | Report as abusive

loser Richard Dawkins…He is just mocing,he wrongway for science… He has to explain to how is come into being to protein from by coincidence….

Posted by muratalp | Report as abusive

In order to create, God has no need to design

It’s important that the word “design” be properly understood. That God has created a flawless design does not mean that He first made a plan and then followed it. God, the Lord of the Earth and the heavens, needs no “designs” in order to create. God is exalted above all such deficiencies. His planning and creation take place at the same instant.
Whenever God wills a thing to come about, it is enough for Him just to say, “Be!”
As verses of the Qur’an tell us:
His command when He desires a thing is just to say to it, “Be!” and it is. (Qur’an, 36: 82)
[God is] the Originator of the heavens and Earth. When He decides on something, He just says to it, “Be!” and it is. (Qur’an, 2: 117)

Posted by Nanda Ratko | Report as abusive

Dawkins Declines to Debate with Creationists, Because He Has No Answer to Give!
Richard Dawkins has responded to our request for a face-to-face debate: “I HAVE VOWED NOT TO DEBATE,” he says. What this actually means is, “I have been defeated on the subject of Darwinism. I have no intention of debating with anyone and being humiliated.”
But it is not clear exactly what he has vowed by. He has obviously not vowed by Allah, since he says he does not believe in Him. There is no doubt he would lose any debate. It is also clear that he will continue to mislead people with no knowledge of Darwinism. Sooner or later, however, these people come to realise that Darwinism is a deception when they visit Harun Yahya’s web sites and finally see the truth. And they will also continue to do so in the future, by Allah’s leave.

For the last 150 years Darwinists have been utterly terrified of one thing: the exposure of their lies! They strive with all the means at their disposal to prevent the exposure of the fraudulent nature of the theory of evolution, which they have desperately tried to keep alive as an unshakeable ideology, a religion, ever since Darwin’s time. In order to maintain this lie they resort to hoaxes, exhibit fake fossils in museums, hurriedly conceal all fossils unearthed (because these refute the theory of evolution), and employ demagoguery to answer all those many subjects for which the theory of evolution cannot account. In order to maintain this lie, they have bestowed a kind of immunity on the theory of evolution. So much so that evolution has become unquestionable and undeniable in schools, universities, workplaces, institutions of one kind or another, and even in the highest levels of the state. Although it is only a theory, evolution has been made a law which all young people have to know and abide by and which has to be protected by means of official laws and included in the official curriculum.

But what Darwinists most feared has now become a reality, and their deception has been exposed. Darwinist hoaxes have suddenly been exposed through the activities of Harun Yahya, and by his Atlas of Creation in particular. People have realised that Darwinists have attempted to hide more than 100 million fossils, and that all of these are fully-formed and flawless specimens, hundreds of millions of years old, of life forms, most of which are still in existence today. The lifting of the Darwinist spell has had an explosive impact all over the world.

It was under these conditions that Richard Dawkins, one of the most dyed-in-the-wool proponents of the theory of evolution and nicknamed “Darwin’s Rottweiler,” was invited to take part in a public debate. He was asked whether or not he was able to refute the evidence demolishing Darwinism and how he would defend the theory in the face of the proofs of Creation.

But Dawkins declined to enter into any debate! We received a response from Dawkins to our request for a face-to-face debate: “I HAVE WOWED NOT TO DEBATE.” What this actually means is, “I have been defeated on the subject of Darwinism. I have no intention of debating with anyone and being humiliated.”

Posted by Nanda Ratko | Report as abusive

I think Dawkins is more a comedian, rather than scientist. He is talking a lot of nonsense, but when in one tv or radio program, I don’t remember, was asked to give an example for favorable mutation, the existence of which he defend, there was a several minute silence and he didn’t give any. As we see on the video above the question about the defeat of Darwinism also was followed by silence. Why do you think?
So the conclusion we can make is that he can’t give any reasonable proof of evolution, but he can say a lot of insults. Maybe this is the way he think he can defeat Harun Yahya. Who we can see from his interviews is a very polite and respectful man. And obviously more clever than so called scientist Richard Dawkin.

Posted by Dan | Report as abusive

I remember very clearly the images of intermediate living forms shown to us in the school. And must say that they are not different from these shown in the video. But I think Dawkins himself must have realised how ridiculous they are, and he claimed that these are not the real intermediate forms. So which are the real one? Please Mr. Dawkins, show us!

Posted by Bora | Report as abusive

? watched this video, in there,dawkins is humiliated by the truths of yahya’s books.
look at the dawkins side, there is no proofs expect making fun of harun yahya
dawkin acts like a child,it seems and with many other his supporters.
Like many other evolutionists, dawkins did same thing as he cheated people by showing false evidences to audiences.?t obviously seem that Dawkins got fear of is so clear!!.. WHAT IS YOUR ANSWER DAWKINS TO CREATIONISTS EXCEPT MOCK?NG PEOPLE?????

Posted by clark rowson | Report as abusive

Harun Yahya is a big powre against evoluiron theory. He has finished this evolution lie with the scientific truths not Richard Dawkins truths. I can feel the anxiety, fear in Richard Dawkins’ words. In this video he could not tell even a single scientific proof of evolution. But he could just talk about the great 700 pages book of Harun Yahya. Of course ?n such a large book there can be one or two mistakes, and Dawkins could only talk about this little few mistakes.

Posted by hande | Report as abusive

I consideration to all events that occur between Dawkins AND HARUNYAHYA And I thank HARUNYAHYA that it is open our eyes ..AND THERE ARE IS Something that Dawkins could not prove either by the fact that he is trying to prove leads me to believe something that all the time we lived in as the blind do not see a total that everything is created by God. I do not understand how most people can follow such a build in public Dawkins as the theory of Evolutionism which brings misery to world.Even from his speach can see that he even not sure what he is trying to explaine..I am really sure that our society does not matter what nationality shall not follow such a ridiculous ideology as Davkina.NO PROFF FOR DAWKINS NO EVEN ONE NOTHING !!!! AND HE is still trying to tell us something witch actually we have never seen If its truth so is very very clear that why a monkeys still life at zoo???they got no changes to be human…Is really finy or why there are no EVEN half developed animals?? OR MAY BE EVOLUTION think that on the ground already enough and stopped the development ?unimaginable lie.Everything is so obvious and simple, even if we take on so much simpler example our body nor those of us either have no notion of what is happening inside us … And from beginning of our inception no one ,not we are ,not our mothers may know how we grow …Or take example about Fruits. As the fruit full of beneficial to health vitamins. When a tree gets out of the land only water and minerals .So how a tree never mix test of fruits??is a tree has a some kind of factory??IS REALLY FINY TO BELIVE TO Dawkins.

Posted by OLGA RUSSIA | Report as abusive

Finally, an answer to that utter fraud Harun Yahya who’s pretension prima facie is resoundingly evoked by his adopted name. Upon reading the utter rubbish of the Atlas of Creation I found it difficult to stomach the sheer cheek and ignorance of such a desecration and lascivious perversion of scientific principle, reason and thought. I can finally rest easier knowing that something is done about this total and unmitigated crime against humanity.

Posted by David Osz | Report as abusive

Dawkins and other evolutionists just use sarcasm. When they are asked something about evolution instead of answer the question they attack a religion and dodge the question. The book is 800 page but Dawkin only picked a few page is to “prove” that the book is false.

I suggest that instead of following dawkins blindly you should see the book for yourself.

Posted by MM | Report as abusive

Yes, perhaps I should write a book about an invisible pink unicorn named Toby. Can you disprove that Toby – ‘the invisible pink unicorn’ – exists?

Or maybe perhaps there is a logical fallacy in here somewhere: to which I am demanding you to commit to?

Oh I know, it’s just Atheists being ‘sarcastic’…

Reason and logic quite clearly does not prevail when it comes to religion, MM?

Posted by David Osz | Report as abusive

David Osz’s comment is the poster child for why such discussions are important and ongoing.
David demonstrates utter ignorance of natural theology: science and philosophy imply a creator and even some of the creator’s characteristics.
Employing Atheism Sunday School atheology only succeeds in discrediting the atheist whilst leaving theism unscathed.

Posted by Mariano | Report as abusive

The comment below looks a bit defamatory. However, in these circumstances it would look like the person in question’s reputation is being raised as opposed to lowered: much to the detriment of the very narrow minded would be defamer :)

The theological and ideological fascists (now this is defamatory) would choose to silence any expression of reasonable thought. This demonstrates exactly why Atheists choose not to enter into these sorts of ‘important discussions’.

To cite an ignorance of science on the logic demonstrated by the tale of the pink unicorn, celestial tea cup or if you prefer the flying spaghetti monster would be to overlook one of the most important downfalls of all religion: their inherent and obvious lack of reason and logic.

What these tales importantly illustrate, as is correctly desrcibed in the comments below, is the foundational and structural problems of not only deity-based theology but the whole discourse of religious scripture.

These are problems common to the Old and New Testament, and let’s not even begin with the Koran: It’s flagrant misrepresentation of science is appalling.

Hang the supposed poster child up for all to see say I, a job well done for raising the issue…

Posted by OneGodDown | Report as abusive

The distinction between “theology” and “natural theology” is a tenuous one to maintain. Scripture based theology makes up a deity ‘a priori’ whilst natural theology is supposed to offer an ‘a posteriori’ (after the fact) argument for the attributes of God. The reason the distinction is tenuous is because the constant remains: a deity.
On the opinion that a deity is a fictitious entity, we can comfortably discard the charlatans charade claiming ‘reasonableness’ and ‘objectivity’ which all the while disseminates misinformation through bad science sneaking falsehoods by the droves under its tattered showman’s cloak.
It follows, this view maintains that, anyone who is impressed by a rebranding of an ancient superstition and attributing to it a veneer of renewed respectability is really no more intelligent, and perhaps even less so, than the millions of unquestioning devotees that follow scripture based theology.
The very simple reasoning for this being, at least with revealed religion, one is accepting a premise however haphazardly created and building an argument on it, whereas with natural theology, acting after the fact, they fail to examine the veracity of their very own premise and thus cannot build an argument that will ever amount to anything.
Notwithstanding, neither of these flaws really matter in the end, because both accept a premise that is fictitious.
Watch this spot carefully now, a fair wager will assure that there will be vitriolic outrage in the form of ‘corrections’ which are equally contradictory and confusing. So without saying anything further on the matter: if there is anything to be gained here is: examine the premise! If it involves a God of any kind: where is the evidence? If evidence is given: how does it prove the existence of God? Is the nexus of causation sufficient to maintain the claim? Do the sources contain bias? What are the controls? Are you required to accept an assumption ab initio?
Finally, one should ask, is the stance theistic or is it deistic? If it is theistic, it will inevitably suffer from flaws in the test phase of the hypothesis. If it is deistic: it is NOT a religious argument and its claim on ‘god’ is more Einstein-ian than anything.

Posted by David O | Report as abusive

Harun Yahya made Islam look like a religion for an idiot, we. the moslems not that dumb

Posted by ata | Report as abusive

Darwinism is a pagan religion and Harun Yahya destroyed this pagan religion worldwide..

Posted by richard | Report as abusive

May Allah bless Harun Yahya, he is the only person at present time being a shield against Evil and insane Darwinists, actually they are naming themselves apes… what can we say more.. lol

Posted by Rahmat | Report as abusive

I didn’t know evil started with a capital letter: maybe it’s a pronoun like ‘Allah’ and share something in common.

Posted by OneGodDown | Report as abusive

The claims made by Dawkins in the piece are not a scientific response, but merely childish and ludicrous claims that merely discredit himself. In particular, it is evident that he expressed his claims regarding the caddisfly in a spirit of terrible panic, out of the pitiful situation resulting from the collapse of Darwinism. Dawkins highlighted the photograph of caddisfly in Mr. Adnan Oktar’s opus, Atlas of Creation as a great discovery. However this is the photograph of a model particularly put in the book. Whether the photograph is of a model or not does not change the fact that this living being is still alive in our day. Desperate, speechless and bored in the face of the extraordinary evidences of Creation in the Atlas of Creation that invalidate evolution, Dawkins takes every opportunity to express this photograph of a model particularly put in the book as a great discovery. By this attitude Dawkins, in fact, reveals the pathetic situation in which Darwinism finds itself. Caddisfly lives in our time with the same appearance its millions of years old fossil has. That is, it has not undergone any change. That is why Dawkins feels offended. You can read detailed information: V/productId/17945/DAWKINS_HAS_TAKEN_THE_ BAIT

Posted by Hazirahkatrina | Report as abusive