THEDARKSPELLOFDARWINISM HowDarwinistsTwisttheTruthtoTurnPeople AwayfromAllah

ARKAKAPAKYAZISI
T hegoalofDarwinismistogetpeopletorejecttheobviousfactofCreation,whichisclearly
evidentandassured,andtobelieveinthemythembodiedinthetheoryofevolution.When someonefallsunderthespellofDarwinism,healsocomesunderthecontrolofthosewho supportthetheoryofevolution.Darwinism,andthetheoryofevolution,areincredibleand illogicalbeliefs;theyarelikethepropositionthatblackisachancebyproductofthechanges that white undergoes, over time. But over the past 150 years, countless individuals have adoptedtheseideaspassionately,andnothingcanconvincethemtogivethemup.Allthe scientificevidenceandplainfactsintheworldhaven'tbeenabletofreethemfromthisspell's influence.Itisasifthey'vebeenbewitchedtobelievethatitisrainingwhenthesunisout andtoinsistthattheyaregettingwet. ThepurposeofthisbookistorescuepeoplefromDarwinism'sinfluencebyrevealingthe exactwaysinwhichiteffectsitspersuasionsandbyuncoveringtheeffortsthatDarwinists maketopreventthisillusionfromlosingitspower.Atthesametime,itguidesthereadersto employtheirownconscienceandintelligencetoconsiderandunderstandtheselfevident factofCreation. Anyonewho'sbeenrescuedfromthespellofDarwinismandgraspstherealityofCreation willalsounderstandthatAllah,theLordofalltheworlds,hascreatedhimaswell.Thisfactis thegreatestimport,becausethesolepurposefortheworld'scomingintoexistenceissothat forpeoplemaycometoknowAllahandserveHim.

ABOUTTHEAUTHOR AdnanOktar,whowritesunderthepennameHarunYahya,wasborninAnkarain1956.Sincethe1980s,the authorhaspublishedmanybooksonfaithrelated,scientificandpoliticalissues.Heiswellknownastheauthor ofimportantworksdisclosingtheimpostureofevolutionists,theirinvalidclaims,andthedarkliaisonsbetween Darwinismandsuchbloodyideologiesasfascismandcommunism. Alloftheauthorsworksshareonesinglegoal:toconveytheQur'an'smessage,encouragereaderstoconsider basicfaithrelatedissuessuchasAllah'sexistenceandunityandtheHereafter;andtoexposeirreligioussystems' feeblefoundationsandpervertedideologies.Hismorethan300works,translatedinto63differentlanguages, enjoyawidereadershipacrosstheworld.

BythewillofAllah,thebooksofHarunYahyawillbeameansthroughwhichpeopleinthetwentyfirstcentury willattainthepeace,justice,andhappinesspromisedintheQur'an.

TotheReader

Aspecialchapterisassignedtothecollapseofthetheory ofevolutionbecausethis theoryconstitutesthebasisofallantispiritualphilosophies.SinceDarwinismrejectsthefact ofcreationandtherefore, Allah'sexistenceoverthelast150yearsithascausedmany peopletoabandontheirfaithorfallintodoubt.Itisthereforeanimperativeservice,avery importantdutytoshoweveryonethatthistheoryisadeception.Sincesomereadersmay findthe opportunity toreadonlyoneofourbooks,wethinkitappropriatetodevote a chaptertosummarizethissubject. Alltheauthor'sbooksexplainfaithrelatedissuesinlightofQur'anicverses,andinvite readerstolearnAllah'swordsandtolivebythem.AllthesubjectsconcerningAllah'sverses areexplainedsoastoleavenodoubtorroomforquestionsinthereader'smind.Thebooks' sincere,plain,andfluentstyleensuresthateveryone ofeveryageandfromevery social groupcaneasilyunderstandthem.Thankstotheireffective,lucidnarrative,theycanberead atonesitting.Eventhosewhorigorouslyrejectspiritualityareinfluencedbythefactsthese booksdocumentandcannotrefutethetruthfulnessoftheircontents. Thisandalltheotherbooksbytheauthorcanbereadindividually,ordiscussedina group.Readerseagertoprofitfromthebookswillfinddiscussionveryuseful,lettingthem relatetheirreflectionsandexperiencestooneanother. In addition, it will be a great service to Islam to contribute to the publication and readingofthesebooks,writtensolelyforthepleasureofAllah.Theauthor'sbooksareall extremelyconvincing.Forthisreason,tocommunicatetruereligiontoothers,oneofthe mosteffectivemethodsisencouragingthemtoreadthesebooks. Wehopethereaderwilllookthroughthereviewsofhisotherbooksatthebackofthis book.Hisrichsourcematerialonfaithrelatedissuesisveryuseful,andapleasuretoread. Inthesebooks,unlikesomeotherbooks,youwillnotfindtheauthor'spersonalviews, explanations based on dubious sources, styles that are unobservant of the respect and reverenceduetosacredsubjects,norhopeless,pessimisticargumentsthatcreatedoubtsin themindanddeviationsintheheart.

THEDARKSPELL OFDARWINISM
HowDarwinistsTwisttheTruthto TurnPeopleAwayfromAllah

HARUNYAHYA (ADNANOKTAR)

TranslatedbyRonEvans EditedbyTamMossman

Publishedby: GLOBALPUBLISHING TalatpasaMah.EmirGaziCad. IbrahimElmasIsmerkeziABlokKat.4 OkmeydaniIstanbul/Turkey Phone:+902122220088

PrintedandboundbyKelebekMatbaacilikinIstanbul LitrosYolu,NevzatFikretKoruHoldingBinas No:4/1ATopkapstanbul Tel:(0212)6124359

AlltranslationsfromtheQur'anarefromTheNobleQur'an:aNewRenderingofitsMeaninginEnglishbyHajj AbdalhaqqandAishaBewley. PublishedbyBookwork, Norwich,UK.1420CE/1999AH.

Website:www.harunyahya.com

Email:info@harunyahya.com

THEDARKSPELL OFDARWINISM

HowDarwinistsTwisttheTruthto TurnPeopleAwayfromAllah

HARUNYAHYA (ADNANOKTAR)

AbouttheAuthor

NowwritingunderthepennameofHARUNYAHYA,AdnanOktarwasborninAnkarain1956. HavingcompletedhisprimaryandsecondaryeducationinAnkara,hestudiedfineartsatIstanbul's MimarSinanUniversityandphilosophyatIstanbulUniversity.Sincethe1980s,hehaspublishedmany books on political, scientific, and faithrelated issues. Harun Yahya is wellknown as the author of importantworksdisclosingtheimpostureofevolutionists,theirinvalidclaims,andthedarkliaisons betweenDarwinismandsuchbloodyideologiesasfascismandcommunism.

HarunYahyasworks,translatedinto63differentlanguages,constituteacollectionforatotalof morethan55,000pageswith40,000illustrations. HispennameisacompositeofthenamesHarun(Aaron)andYahya(John),inmemoryofthetwo esteemed Prophetswhofoughtagainsttheir peoples' lackoffaith.TheProphet'ssealonhisbooks' coversissymbolicandislinkedtotheircontents. ItrepresentstheQur'an(theFinalScripture)and ProphetMuhammad(saas),lastoftheprophets.UndertheguidanceoftheQur'anandtheSunnah (teachingsoftheProphet[saas]),theauthormakesithispurposetodisproveeachfundamentaltenetof irreligious ideologies and to have the "last word," so as to completely silence the objections raised againstreligion.HeusesthesealofthefinalProphet(saas),whoattainedultimatewisdomandmoral perfection,asasignofhisintentiontoofferthelastword. AllofHarunYahya'sworksshareonesinglegoal:toconveytheQur'an'smessage,encouragereaders to consider basic faithrelated issues such as Allah's existence and unity and the Hereafter; and to exposeirreligioussystems'feeblefoundationsandpervertedideologies. Harun Yahya enjoys a wide readership in many countries, from India to America, England to Indonesia,PolandtoBosnia,SpaintoBrazil,MalaysiatoItaly,FrancetoBulgariaandRussia.Someof his books are available in English, French, German, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Urdu, Arabic, Albanian, Chinese, Swahili, Hausa, Dhivehi (spoken in Maldives), Russian, SerboCroat (Bosnian), Polish,Malay,UygurTurkish,Indonesian,Bengali,DanishandSwedish. Greatly appreciated all around the world, these works have been instrumental in many people recoveringfaithinAllahandgainingdeeperinsightsintotheirfaith.Hisbooks'wisdomandsincerity, togetherwithadistinctstylethat'seasytounderstand,directlyaffectanyonewhoreadsthem.Those whoseriouslyconsiderthesebooks,cannolongeradvocateatheismoranyotherpervertedideologyor materialisticphilosophy,sincethesebooksarecharacterizedbyrapideffectiveness,definiteresults,and irrefutability.Eveniftheycontinuetodoso,itwillbeonlyasentimentalinsistence,sincethesebooks refutesuchideologiesfromtheirveryfoundations.Allcontemporarymovementsofdenialarenow ideologicallydefeated,thankstothebookswrittenbyHarunYahya. ThisisnodoubtaresultoftheQur'an'swisdomandlucidity.Theauthormodestlyintendstoserve asameansinhumanity'ssearchforAllah'srightpath.Nomaterialgainissoughtinthepublicationof theseworks. Thosewhoencourageotherstoreadthesebooks,toopentheirmindsandheartsandguidethemto becomemoredevotedservantsofAllah,renderaninvaluableservice. Meanwhile, it would only be a waste of time and energy to propagate other books that create confusioninpeople'sminds,leadthemintoideologicalconfusion,andthatclearlyhavenostrongand preciseeffectsinremovingthedoubtsinpeople'shearts,asalsoverifiedfrompreviousexperience.Itis impossibleforbooksdevisedtoemphasizetheauthor'sliterarypowerratherthanthenoblegoalof savingpeoplefromlossoffaith,tohavesuchagreateffect.Thosewhodoubtthiscanreadilyseethat thesoleaimofHarunYahya'sbooksistoovercomedisbeliefandtodisseminatetheQur'an'smoral values.Thesuccessandimpactofthisservicearemanifestedinthereaders'conviction. Onepointshouldbekeptinmind:Themainreasonforthecontinuingcruelty,conflict,andother ordealsenduredbythevastmajorityofpeopleistheideologicalprevalenceofdisbelief.Thiscanbe ended only with the ideological defeat of disbelief and by conveying the wonders of creation and Qur'anicmoralitysothatpeoplecanlivebyit.Consideringthestateoftheworldtoday,leadingintoa downwardspiralofviolence,corruptionandconflict,clearlythisservicemustbeprovidedspeedilyand effectively,oritmaybetoolate. Inthiseffort,thebooksofHarunYahyaassumealeadingrole.BythewillofAllah,thesebookswill be a means through which people in the twentyfirst century will attain the peace, justice, and

happinesspromisedintheQur'an.

Contents
Introduction:Whatis"theSpellofDarwinism"?10

WhyDoDarwinistsCastTheirSpells?12

DarwinistsBelievetheUnbelievable20

MethodsofPersuasionUsedintheSpellsof Darwinism74

Conclusion:TheSpellofDarwinismisQuickly LosingitsEffect126

TheDeceptionofEvolution128

Introduction:Whatis"theSpellofDarwinism"?

Imagineyourselfmeetingapersonwhoseemsveryreasonableandcultured.You'dnaturallythinkthat whateverthispersonsaysisareflectionofthecultureandintelligenceyouassumehimtohave.Butwhenhe beginstospeak,eventhoughyouperceivenootherchangeinhisreasonabledemeanor,hestartlesyouwith hisincrediblenonsense.Hemayinsistthatwhiteisjustalightershadeofblack,forexample,orclaimthatthe cloudsintheskyaresimplyhugebunchesofcotton.Hebelievesthingsthatnoreasonablepersonwith normalawarenessandjudgmentcouldbelieve.Heclaimsitisrainingeventhoughthesunisshining;andif youtakehimoutsideandshowhimtheevidentsunlight,stillhepersistsinhisclaimthatrainisfallingandhe evendeclaresthathe'sgettingwet!Ifyousawsuchaperson,youcoulddescribehiminseveralways.You mightsayhewasbeingillogical,deluded,oreventhathe'dlosthismind,oreventhathewascrazy.You mightevensaythatheseemedtobeunderaspellandtohavenoclearviewofreality. Thisterm"underaspell"isverysignificant.Someordinarypeopleresorttovariouskindsofmagicspells andincantationstomakeothersdosomethingtheywouldn'tordinarilywanttodo;tocontrolthem;make thembelieveirrationalthings,getthemtoharmanotherperson;andtoputthemintosomethingakintoastate ofhallucinationwheretheyremainunawareofwhatthey'redoing.Inshort,thewholepurposeofaspellisto bringsomeoneunderanother'scontrolandtomakehimbelievethemostunlikely,irrationalthings. Thisbook'stitle,TheDarkSpellofDarwinism,comesfromthisveryanalogy.ThegoalofDarwinismisto getpeopletorejecttheobviousfactofCreation,whichisclearlyevidentandassured,andtobelieveinthe mythembodiedinthetheoryofevolution.WhensomeonefallsunderthespellofDarwinism,healsocomes underthecontrolofthosewhosupportthetheoryofevolution.Darwinism,andthetheoryofevolution,are incredibleandillogicalbeliefs;theyarelikethepropositionthatthatblackisachancebyproductofthechanges thatwhiteundergoes,overtime.Butoverthepast150years,countlessindividualshaveadoptedtheseideas passionately,andnothingcanconvincethemtogivethemup.Allthescientificevidenceandplainfactsinthe worldhaven'tbeenabletofreethemfromthisspell'sinfluence.Itisasifthey'vebeenbewitchedtobelievethat itisrainingwhenthesunisoutandtoinsistthattheyaregettingwet. Atthispoint,perhapsyouthinkitmightbemoreappropriatetodescribetheDarwinists'innercondition asadeficiencyofmentalorconceptualability,insteadofasaspell.ButthosewhobelieveinDarwinism includeeducatedindividuals,professorsandevenNobelPrizewinners.Ratherthanindicatinganylackof conceptualability,theirattachmenttoDarwinismshowsthattheyareundersomekindofspell.

ThepurposeofthisbookistorescuepeoplefromDarwinism'sinfluencebyrevealingtheexactwaysin whichiteffectsitspersuasionsandbyuncoveringtheeffortsthatDarwinistsmaketopreventthisillusion fromlosingitspower.Atthesametime,we'llhelpyouemployyourownconscienceandintelligenceto considerandunderstandtheselfevidentfactofCreation. Anyonewho'sbeenrescuedfromthespellofDarwinismandgraspstherealityofCreationwillalso understandthatAllah,theLordofalltheWorlds,hascreatedhimaswell.Thisfactisthegreatestimport, becausethesolepurposefortheworld'scomingintoexistenceissothatforpeoplemay cometoknow AllahandserveHim.

WhyDoDarwinistsCastTheirSpells?
Throughouthistory,menandwomenhavesoughtanswerstobasic,essentialquestions: Howdideverythinglivingandnonlivinginthisuniversecometoexist?Whoarewe, andwheredidwecomefrom?Theyhavemadephilosophicalinquiriesintothesesubjects andcomeupwithvariousnotions.However,thereisoneclearanswertothesequestions thatrequiresnolonginvestigation.Apersonwholookswithoutprejudiceateverythingin theuniverse,bothanimateandinanimatebeginningwithhisownbodycanrealizethat all things have been created by a single Creator Who has superior power, wisdom and knowledge.Suchapersonwillunderstandthatfromtheharmonybetweenhisownbody andtheEarthheliveson;tothebalanceamongthestars,galaxiesandothercelestialbodies; fromtheabundanceofthewaterheneedstosurvivetothecolorfulworldaroundhimand allthebeautifullivingthingsinitallthisclearlyrevealstheexistenceofamercifuland protectiveCreator. ThatsupremeCreatorisAlmightyAllah,theLordofalltheWorlds.Hehasrevealed theFactofCreationinsuchawaythathumanbeingscandiscoveritusingtheirfacultyof reason,andHehasannouncedittoallpeoplethroughthemediationofmessengerswhom Hehaschosenfromamongthem.Throughouthistory,however,therehavebeenmanywho rejectedthesefacts.DespitealltheproofsfortheexistenceofAllahthathavebeensetbefore them,andeventhoughAllahhasshownthemobviousmiracles,stilltheypersistinrejecting Hisexistence.IntheQur'an,Hisfinalrevelation,Allahtellsusofsuchpeople:
TheyhaveswornbyAllahwiththeirmostearnestoathsthatifaSigncomestothemtheywill believeinit.Say:"TheSignsareinAllah'scontrolalone."Whatwillmakeyourealizethat evenifaSigndidcome,theywouldstillnotbelieve?Wewilloverturntheirheartsandsight, justaswhentheydidnotbelieveinitatfirst,andWewillabandonthemtowanderblindlyin theirexcessiveinsolence.EvenifWesentdownangelstothem,andthedeadspoketothem, andWegatheredtogethereverythinginfrontofthemrightbeforetheireyes,theywouldstill not believe unless Allah willed. The truth is that most of them are ignorant. (Surat Al An'am:109111)

StillanothergroupofpeopleclaimstobelievethatAllahexistsbutascanbeseen fromtheirbehaviortheydonotacknowledgeHispowerandeternalmight.Theyknow thatHehascreatedeverythingthatexists,yetstilltheyignoreHismessengersandrejectthe truththesemessengersproclaim.IntheQur'an,Allahrevealstousthespiritualconditionof suchpeople:

ItisHeWhohascreatedhearing,sightandheartsforyou.Whatlittlethanksyoushow!Itis HeWhodispersedyouabouttheEarthandyouwillbegatheredtoHim.ItisHeWhogives lifeandcausestodieandHisisthealternationofthenightandday.Sowillyounotuseyour intellect?However,theysaythesameaspreviouspeoplessaid.Theysay,"Whenwearedead andturnedtodustandbones,shallwethenberaisedagain?"Weandourforefatherswere promisedthisbefore.Thisisnothingbutthemythsofpreviouspeoples!"Say:"Towhomdoes theEarthbelong,andeveryoneinit,ifyouhaveanyknowledge?"Theywillsay:"ToAllah." Say:"Sowillyounotpayheed?"Say:"WhoistheLordoftheSevenHeavensandtheLordof theMightyThrone?"Theywillsay:"Allah."Say:"Sowillyounotguardagainstevil?"Say:"In whosehandisthedominionovereverything,HeWhogivesprotectionandfromWhomno protectioncanbegiven,ifyouhaveanyknowledge?"Theywillsay:"Alah's."Say:"Sohow haveyoubeenbewitched?"ThefactisthatWehavegiventhemthetruthandtheyareliars. (SuratAlMuminun:7890)

Fromtheseverses,wecanseethateventhoughthesepeopleknowthatAllahisthe CreatorofallthingsandtheJudgeofheavenandEarth,stilltheyrejectreligiousmorals. TheyalsorejecttherevelationsmadebyAllah'smessengersconcerningtheresurrectionand theafterlifeandevenregardthesetruthsassimplymythsfromthepast. HowcanthesepeoplebesoresoluteindenyingtheexistenceofAllah,eventhough theyhaveseenandacknowledgedtheproofsforit? Theanswertothisquestioniscontainedintheversequotedabove:"Sohowhaveyou beenbewitched?"Withthisverse,Allahrevealsthatthesepeoplearebewitched,inthatthey behaveasifundertheinfluenceofaspellcastuponthem. Why do some people employ such false suggestions and sorcery to deceive both themselvesandothers? AnyonewhobelievesinAllah'sexistenceandeternalpowerandwhodoesn'tpretend hecannotunderstandthistruthalsorealizesthatinaddition,heisresponsibletoAllah. Allahhascreatedhim,likeeveryotherhumanbeing,fromnothingandhasputamultitude ofthingsintheuniverseathisservice.Anyonewhounderstandsthathisbirth,lifeand deathallliewithinthepowerofAllah'swill,mustusehiswholelifetopleasetheCreator Whocreatedhimfromnothingandendowedhimwithsomanyblessings. Thosewho,intheirarrogance,donotbelieve,alsorefusetosubmittoAllahorgainHis favor.TheyturnadeafeartoHiscommandsandprohibitions.Theyhavemadeitaprinciple tostayunfetteredandnottograntobediencetoanyauthority:Thisiswhatleadstheminto disbelief.Alahshowsusthishumancharacteristicinverse36ofSuratalQiyama:
"Doesmanreckonhewillbelefttogoonunchecked?"

And in another verse, He reveals that human beings in their arrogance reject these

truths,eventhoughtheyunderstandthem.
And they repudiated them [Allah's signs] wrongly and haughtily, in spite of their own certaintyaboutthem.Seethefinalfateofthecorrupters.(SuratanNaml:14)

ThosewhoDoNotBelieveSeekProofstoSupporttheirDisbelief
EversincehumanbeingsfirstappearedonthisEarth,largenumbersofthemhave rejectedtheexistenceofAllahforthereasonsenumeratedabove.Therefore,theyhave alwayslookedforproofsthatmightvalidatetheirdenial,buthaveneversucceeded becauseoftheveryclearproofsforHisexistence. In the nineteenth century, a man appeared on the scene who had rejected religious morals and refused to see himself as responsible to his Creator. His claims had a spellbinding effect on other unbelievers. This was an amateur biologist by the name of CharlesDarwin.Workingundertheprimitivescientificlimitationsofthenineteenthcentury, heproposedsomeuntenableideasontheoriginsoflifethatrejectedthefactofCreationand assembledtheseideasinabookheentitled TheOriginofSpecies.Thusthetheoryofevolution wasborn. Actually,therootsofDarwin'stheorycanbetracedbacktoancienttimes.Originally, theideawasproposedbyseveralatheistandpolytheistphilosophersofancientGreece.But thankstoscientistswhobelievedinaCreatorWhocreatedthewholeuniverse,theideasof these ancient philosophers had no lasting effect. But with the advance of the nineteenth century'smaterialistthinking,whichrejectedtheexistenceofAllahandclaimedthatonly matterwasabsolute,evolutionistideaswererevivedonceagain. Darwinbasedhistheoryonafewgroundlesssuppositions.ThosewhorejectedAllah used it as a means to bolster their own superstitious ideas and to establish them on a supposedlyscientificfoundation.What,then,didthistheoryclaimthatwassoattractiveto thosewhodeniedtheexistenceofAllah? Briefly,thetheoryofevolutionclaimsthatlifelesspiecesofmattercametogetherby chance, organizing themselves to produce living organisms. That as a result of chance occurrences,theseorganismschangedinresponsetonaturalconditionsanddivergedfrom oneanotherinstructureandappearance.Accordingtothisclaim,livingthingswerenot created. Why,then,dosomanyapproveofDarwin'stheoryofevolution?Becausetheybelieve thattheformationoflifecanbeexplainedwithoutreferencetoaCreator.Ifyouexaminethe theory of evolution with scientific objectivity only, without regard for its ideological purpose,youcanseethatit'scontrarytoscienceandlogic.Moreover,thetotalityofavailable dataon the originsofliving thingspointsto thistheory being invalid.Indeed, wehave reachedthepointwheremodernsciencehasdemonstratedtheextremelycomplexstructure of every living creature, in all its magnificence. Facts authenticated by presentday's scientificresearchshowtheimpossibilityoflivingthingsarisingbychance.Theycouldhave cometoexistonlyastheresultofaSuperiorPower;Whoseflawlesscreationispresentand

evidentineverycreature. Everyday,somenewdiscoverycomestolighttoprovetheinvalidityofthetheoryof evolution.Yetstillitssupporterswillnotgiveuptheirallegianceandshowanevenmore fanaticalattachmenttotheirbelief.Theirmotive,aswesaidbefore,isevident:Atheistsand materialistsneedasocalledscientificsupportfordenyingtheexistenceofAllah.Forthis reason,Darwinistsaredeterminedtoholdonverytightlytotheirtheory,atanycostand regardlessofscience.Andtheyaredeterminednottogobackonthatpromise. D. M. S. Watson, the wellknown English zoologist, explains why his fellow evolutionists stilldefend their theory soadamantly, even though there isn'tthe slightest proofforthetheoriestheyespouse:
Thetheoryofevolutionitselfisatheoryuniversallyacceptednotbecauseitcanbeprovedby logicallycoherentevidencetobetruebutbecausetheonlyalternative,specialcreation,isclearly incredible.1

On the same topic, the evolutionist anthropologist, Dr. Michael Walker of Sydney University,writes:
OneisforcedtoconcludethatmanyscientistsandtechnologistspaylipservicetoDarwinian theoryonlybecauseitsupposedlyexcludesaCreator...2

Bytheirownadmission,evolutionistsaresoattachedtoDarwin'stheoryofevolution forthesinglereasonthatitrejectstheexistenceofAllah.Butinorderforthemtoacceptthe theoryofevolutioneventhoughitgoesagainstallscientificproof,evolutionistsmustdoa lotofhardwork.Increasingly,scientificdevelopmentsinvalidatethetheoryofevolution, andwhenthematterisviewedwithreasonandawarenessevolutioncanberevealedasalot ofnonsense. ItisatthispointthatthespellofDarwinismcomesintoplay.Darwinistshavetomakea discredited theory appear true. To do so, they use all their skills, trying everything to prevent people from falling away from Darwinism. They try to get them to believe the unbelievable, to thinkthe unthinkable andto state the unspeakable. Andthose whofall under the influence of this spell gradually come to the point where they are unable to perceiveandconsidertheclearlyevidentfacts. Throughout history, actually, there have been several examples of just this kind of enchantment.Inthepastalbeitunderverydifferentcircumstancesgodlesspeoplehave triedtoignoreornottounderstandtheevidenceforCreationshowntothembymessengers andsincerebelievers.IntheQur'an,Allahexplainsthesimilaritybetweenthesepeopleand peopleoftoday:
We sent Messengers before you among the disparate groups of previous peoples. No Messenger came to them without their mocking him. In that way We insert it into the evildoers'hearts.Theydonotbelieveinit,eventhoughtheexampleofthepreviouspeoples hasgonebefore.EvenifWeopeneduptothemadoorintoheaven,andtheyspenttheday ascendingthroughit,theywouldonlysay,"Oureyesightisbefuddled!Orratherwehave beenputunderaspell!"((SuratalHijr:1015)

Those who espouse Darwinism today come at the head of these spellbound individuals.TheycountertheevidenceofCreationwiththemythofevolution,andtrytotell thewholeworldthatthetheoryisvalid.Andthemassesaretrulysospellboundbytheir intimationsandfalseinformationthatnolongercantheyperceivethetruth.Underthese circumstances,thoseconscientiousindividualswhorecognizethefactofCreationhavea dutytoworktowardsliftingthisspellsothatmorepeoplecanseethetruth.Thetruepathis doubtlessthewayofAllah,theCreatoroftheheavensandtheEarth:
AllahismyLordandyourLordsoworshipHim.Thatisastraightpath.(SurahAlImran:51)

DarwinistsBelievetheUnbelievable
Aswesaidinthelastchapter,evolutionisatheorythatfliesinthefaceoflogicand commonsense.Sciencehasinvalidatedit.Butbecauseitsuppliesatheistphilosophieswitha supposedly scientific foundation, it has found support among many scientists, and its propagandahasinfluenced masses ofpeople. Thisinfluence, whichwecharacterizeasa "spell,"issopowerfulthatevenintelligent,informedpeoplehavenotbeenabletoescapeit. Many have come to accept incredibly illogical propositions that even a child could see throughandtheydefendthesepropositionswithgreatfervor. OnenotedcriticofthetheoryofevolutionisPhillipE.Johnson.Inhisbook Defeating DarwinismbyOpeningMinds,hesaysthatevolutionistsacceptDarwin'spropositionswithout havingthoughtaboutthembeforehandandhaveneverconsideredwhattheymean.
Myexperiencespeakinganddebatingonthistopicatuniversitieshastaughtmethatscientists, andprofessorsingeneral,areoftenconfusedaboutevolution.Theymayknowalotofdetails, buttheydon'tunderstandthebasics.Theprofessorstypicallythinkthatevolutionfrommolecule tomanisasingleprocessthatcanbeillustratedbydogbreedingorfinchbeakvariations,that fossilevidenceconfirmstheDarwinianprocessofstepbystepchange,thatmonkeyscantype Hamletiftheyareaidedbyamechanismakintonaturalselection 3

Johnson'swordsoutlinetheconfused,conflictedspiritualstateinwhichevolutionists findthemselves.Andinhisbook, Evolution:ATheoryinCrisis,notedAustralianmolecular biologistMichaelDentondrawsattentiontothesamepoint.HedescribestheDarwinists' strange view that the extremely complex structures of living things came to be through chanceoccurrences:
Totheskeptic,thepropositionthatthegeneticprogrammesofhigherorganisms,consistingof somethingclosetoathousandmillionbitsofinformation,equivalenttothesequenceoflettersin asmalllibraryof1,000volumes,containinginencodedformcountlessthousandsofintricate algorithms controlling, specifying, and orderingthegrowth anddevelopmentofbillions and billionsofcellsintotheformofacomplexorganism,werecomposedbyapurelyrandomprocess

issimplyanaffronttoreason.ButtotheDarwinist,theideaisacceptedwithoutarippleofdoubt theparadigmtakesprecedence!4

To demonstrate Darwinism'smindboggling andpowerful hold onpeople andhow dangerousitisforhumanity,thischapterexaminessomeoftheDarwinists'preposterous claimsthatnooneofordinaryintelligencecouldeverbelieve.We'llbrieflyexplainhowthese claimsareinvalidfromascientificpointofview.(Fordetailsonthetechnicalsubjectsinthis chapter,seeHarunYahya'sDarwinismRefuted:HowtheTheoryofEvolutionBreaksDowninthe LightofModernScience,GoodwordBooks,2003).

EvolutionistsBelievethatLifeless,UnconsciousAtomsCameTogether byThemselvestoFormLiving,ConsciousHumanBeings
The most absurd of evolutionists' beliefs is that lifeless matter, on its own accord, formedlivingthingsbyaseriesofactsofblindchance.Theyassertthatthematerialrequired forlivingbeingscametogetherbyaseriesofaccidents,injusttherightproportionsand underidealconditions,toformlife'sfirstbuildingblocksaminoacids.Theseaminoacids, supposedlyformedbychanceandwithoutsufferinganydamageundertheharshconditions oftheprimordialEarth,somehowencounteredotheraminoacids,formedbychancelike themselves.(Scientistsunanimouslyagreethatnolivingorganismcouldsurviveunderthe conditions thought to have existed millions of years ago.) But this encounter was not random:Everyaminoacidbondedtoothersinadefinitesequenceandwithnoerrors.Inthis processwhosechanceofoccurrenceislessthanoneinonetrilliontimesonetrilliontimes one trillion times one trillion times one trillion, proteins were formed. (For further information,pleaseseethechapter"MolecularBiologyandtheOriginofLife"in Darwinism Refuted:How the Theory of Evolution Breaks Down in the Light of Modern Science by Harun Yahya,GoodwordBooks,2003) Buttheevolutionaryscenariodoesn'tendhere:Chancealonewasnotsufficientforlife tooccur.Inorderforcellstoform,appropriateproteinshadtowaitformillionsofyears (whileremainingundamagedandunaffectedbysunlight'sultravioletrays,heatandcold andlightning)untiltheotherrequisiteproteinscamealong.Andwhentheseproteinsfinally cametogether,theyformedcellsoneofthemostcomplexstructuresintheworldtoday. Evolutionists extend this scenario to the formation of human beings. But all of the separate stages described above have been proven wrong by scientific discoveries, demonstratingthattheeventstheyportraycouldneverhavehappened.Inlaterpages,we willoutlinetheimpossibilityofcellsandproteinscomingaboutbychance.Weshallfocus especiallyonevolutionists'illogicalclaimthatlifelessmatterdevelopedintolivingthingson itsown. Infact,theideathatlifesprangspontaneouslyfromlifelessmatterdatesbacktothe MiddleAges.Whenpeoplesawlivingcreaturessuddenlygatheredtogetherinoneplace maggotsinrottingmeat,forexampletheysupposedtheyhadarisenthroughtheprocess nowknownasspontaneousgeneration.Peoplebelievedthatgeesewerebornfromtrees, lambsfromwatermelons,andthatfrogsformedinraincloudsandfellintopondsonthe

ground.5 Inthe1600s,aBelgianscientistbythenameofJanVanHelmontdecidedtotestthe theory of spontaneous generation. He sprinkled wheat on a dirty shirt and waited for creaturestoformonit.Threeweekslater,VanHelmontsawseveralmicefeedingonthe grains.Fromhisobservations,heconcludedthatthecombinationofadirtyshirtandwheat givesbirthtomice. AGermanscientist,AthanasiusKircher,cametothesameconclusionbyanotherroute. Hepouredhoneyoveranumberofdeadfliesandshortlyafterward,observedotherflies swarmingoverthedeadones.WhereuponKircherbelievedthathehadproventhatdead fliesandhoneyproducelivingflies! But experiments by the Italian scientist Francesco Redi and, after him, the French scientistLouisPasteurshowedthatmicedidnotarisefromdirtyshirts,andthatfliesarenot generatedfromamixtureofhoneyandflycorpses.Theselivingcreaturesdidnotarisefrom lifelessmatter,butarrivedfromsomewhereelse.Forexample,livingfliesareattracted by the honey on the corpses of other flies and perhaps even lay their eggs there. Shortly afterwards,bothlivingfliesandmaggotsaresuddenlyobserved.Thatis,lifeneverarose fromsomethinglifeless,butfromlifeitself. Thislawthatlifearisesonlyfromlifeisone ofthebasicfoundationsofmodernbiology. That such incredibly strange ideas were accepted at all may seem excusable, consideringtheignoranceofthatperiod'sscientistsandthelimitationsoftheirinstruments andexperiments.Butit'shighlysurprisingthattoday'sevolutionistsstilldefendsuchideas, eventhoughscienceandtechnologyhaveadvancedtotheirpresentstateandafterseveral experimentsandobservationshaveproventhatlifecannotdevelopfromlifelessmatter. For years, evolutionists have worked in their most advanced laboratories, trying to provetheseunreasonableideasbyproducingevenasinglecellfromassemblagesoflifeless material.Theyhaveconductedcountlessexperimentsusingthebesttechnologyandunder the supervision of experienced scientists, but have never been successful. It is absurd to claimthatanoccurrencethatcannotbeconductedinevenacontrolledenvironmentcould haveoccurredrandomly,unconsciously,inaprimevalworld,underconditionsinimicalto life. Interestingly,evolutionistsknowquitewellthatlifecannotcomefromlifelessmatter. But though they often admit being aware of this truth, they continue to trust in happenstanceasifitthiswerenotthebasisofthetheoryofevolution. SirFredHoyle,thenotedEnglishastronomer,givesanexampletodemonstratethat mattercannotproducelifebyitself:
Iftherewereabasicprincipleofmatterwhichsomehowdroveorganicsystemstowardlife,its existence should easily be demonstrable in the laboratory. One could, for instance, take a swimmingbathtorepresenttheprimordialsoup.Fillitwithanychemicalsofanonbiological natureyouplease.Pumpanygasesoverit,orthroughit,youplease,andshineanykindof radiationonitthattakesyourfancy.Lettheexperimentproceedforayearandseehowmanyof those2,000enzymes[proteinsproducedbylivingcells]haveappearedinthebath.Iwillgivethe

answer,andsosavethetimeandtroubleandexpenseofactuallydoingtheexperiment.You wouldfindnothingatall,exceptpossiblyforatarrysludgecomposedofaminoacidsandother simpleorganicchemicals.6

AndrewScott,anevolutionistbiologist,alsoadmitsthatlifecannotcomefromlifeless matter:
Take some matter, heat while stirring and wait. That is the modern version of Genesis. The "fundamental"forcesofgravity,electromagnetismandthestrongandweaknuclearforcesare presumedtohavedonetherest...Buthowmuchofthisneattaleisfirmlyestablished,andhow muchremainshopefulspeculation?Intruth,themechanismofalmosteverymajorstep,from chemical precursors up to the first recognizable cells, is the subject of either controversy or completebewilderment.7

Aspointedoutearlier,evolutionistsdoknowthis,butcontinuetoassertthatlifewas formedfromthechancecombinationoflifelessmatter.Likeasorcererwhocombinessome materialstogetherandtriestocastaspellwithafewmagicwords,soevolutionistsbelieve thatlifewasformedinaprimordialsoupexistingintheworld'searliestages. Butcombineatomslikephosphorus,potassium,magnesium,oxygen,ironandcarbon, whicharerequiredforlife,andallyou'llgetisalifelessmass.Nevertheless,evolutionists claimthatthismassofatomscametogetherandorganizeditself,witheachoneforming bondswiththeothersinjusttherightproportions,intheproperplace,andundertheright conditions.Evolutionistsclaimthatthisorganizationalprocessresultedinaseeing,sensate, speaking, feeling, thinking, loving, compassionate human being who could smile, feel pleasure,painandsorrow,havefun,laughandfeelexcitement.Thisbeinghadasenseof musicalrhythm,prepareddeliciousmeals,foundedcivilizationsandcouldconductscientific experiments! Surelythereisnodifferencebetweenthisstorytoldbyevolutionistsandasorcerer's tale.

LikePaganTribes,EvolutionistsMakeNatureintoaAllah
Anotheroftheevolutionists'absurdsuppositionsisthatnaturepossessesacreativepower. Theybelievethisstrangepropositionandmobilizealltheirforcesintryingtogetotherstobelieve ittoo.Forexample,intelevisiondocumentaries,books,magazinesornewspapers,youmusthave seensuchcommentsas,"Thisisagiftofnaturetohumanbeings,""amiracleofMotherNature," "Naturehasgivenbeaverstheabilitytoconstructwonderfuldams."ButwhoisthisMother Naturethatevolutionistsputforwardasacreator?Likepagans,evolutionistshavedivinizedthe conceptofMotherNature."She"isacombinationoftrees,rivers,flowers,rocks,stones,soil,fish, cats,dogsinshort,everythinginthenaturalworld,animateandinanimate,thathasno awarenessorcreativepowerofitsown. Thenhowcanitbe thatthesecreatures,lackingeventheabilitytothink,cancome togetherandachievethingsthatrequireagreatdealofconsciousawareness?Surely,this wouldbeimpossible.Allthesignsofconsciousnessandawarenessweseearoundusare

creationsoftheinfiniteknowledgeofAllah. Inthelanguageofsociology,evolutionists'acceptedbeliefinnatureiscalled"animism." Animismistheattributionofspiritandconsciousnesstoinanimatethingsinnature;andthe animistbeliefsfoundinsomeuncivilizedtribesareproductsofaprimitivementality.Today, youcanfindanimistideasincartoonsandchildren'sstories.Evolutionists'scenariosand theirbeliefinMotherNatureisnodifferentfrombelievinginacartoonhero,oratalking tree,asadriver,oramountainfightingtoprotectgoodpeoplefromevilintheforest.

NaturalSelection: AssistantoftheImaginary"MotherNature"
Naturalselectionisevolutionists'favoritemechanism,towhichtheymostfrequently attributecreativepower.Thisactuallyisaprocessthatcanbeobservedinthenaturalworld amonglivingthings.Butitcertainlycannotadvancethedevelopmentofanylivingthing, muchlesscreateanewspecies,asevolutionistsimagineitcan. ThisnaturalprocesswasknownlongbeforeDarwin,buthewasthefirsttoassertthatit had"creativepower."Histheory isfounded onhisbeliefthatthemechanismofnatural selectionhasthepowertofuelevolution.Butnaturalselectionisbasedonthepremisethat livingthingscancontinuetosurviveonlyiftheyconformwiththenaturalconditionsin which they find themselves. Those individuals not equipped with attributes that ensure harmonywiththeirenvironmentwillperish.Inotherwords,naturalselectionhasnopower tocauseordirectevolution. One example can illustrate this point. Suppose that two dogs live in the same geographical area. One has long hair, and the other's is comparatively short. If the temperatureintheirareashouldfallsignificantlyasaresultofecologicalchange,thelonger haireddogcouldbetterresistthecoldthantheshorterhairedone.Inthissituation,thelong haireddoghasthegreateradvantage;itwouldbehealthier,livelongerandthus,beableto siremorepuppies.Withinashorttime,thenumberofshorthaireddogswouldnoticeably decrease;theywouldeithermigratetoawarmerclimate,ortheirstrainwoulddieout.Soas aresult,longerhaireddogswouldbe"naturally"selectedandenjoytheadvantage. Butnoticethatnonewspeciesofdogappearedduringthisprocess.Naturalselection merelychosebetweentwodifferentalreadyexistingbreedsofdog.Longhaireddogsdid notsuddenlycomeintoexistencebynaturalselection,atatimewhenlonghaireddogsdid notalreadyexist.Itisabsolutelyimpossiblethatthesedogscouldevolveintoanentirely newspecieswiththepassageoftime. Inshort,naturalselectioncannotproducenewspeciesornewcharacteristics;itonly "selects" from among the attributes of creatures that already exist. And because no new speciesorcharacteristiciseverproduced,wecannotsaythatany"evolution"occurs.Inother words,naturalselectionbyitself,doesnotcauseevolution.

Nevertheless,evolutionistsusenaturalselectiontopullthewoolover people'seyes, resortingtoillusionstodistortthefacts.Theycreditnaturalselectionwithamuchgreater effectivenessthanitactuallyexhibits.Theybelievethatnaturalselectionnotonlygetsridof theweak,butalsocreatescountlessnewlivingspecies.Itisaccuratetosaythatevolutionists wanttobelieveinthisprocessbecausethey'venothingelsetorelyon.Darwinists'hopesand aspirationsplayamajorrolehere;theyaredescribedbyoneofthebestknownevolutionist paleontologiststhelateStephenJayGould:

The essence of Darwinism lies in a single phrase: natural selection is the creative force of evolutionarychange.Noonedeniesthatselectionwillplayanegativeroleineliminatingthe unfit.Darwiniantheoriesrequirethatitcreatethefitaswell. 8

But Darwinists have been unable to prove their aspirations, because not one single examplehaseverbeenobservedofnaturalselectioncausingnewlifeformstoevolve.Colin Patterson,anotedEnglishevolutionistandpaleontologist,admitsassuch:
Noonehaseverproducedaspeciesbymechanismsofnaturalselection.Noonehasevergot nearitandmostofthecurrentargumentinneoDarwinismisaboutthisquestion.9

Surprisingly, even though Darwinists know that natural selection cannot have any creativepowers,theycontinuetobelieveit.(Justlikethebewitchedmanwedescribedinour introduction,whobelievesheisgettingwetonasunnyday.)Modernevolutionistsadmit thatamechanismlikenaturalselectionremovesonlyweakindividuals;itcannotcreatea complexcreaturelikeahumanbeingwithhissuperiorqualities,capableofbuildingentire civilizations.Butinterestingly,suchadmissionsdonotchangewhattheybelieve.Itisplain toseethatevolutionarytheoryisincrisis;theywitnessthisforthemselves,butwon'tgiveup their obsessive preconception that human beings came into being through a process of evolution. Undertheweightofthiscontradiction,anthropologistJ.Hawkesstates:
Ifinditdifficulttobelievethattheextravagantgloriesofbirds,fish,flowersandotherliving formswereproducedsolelybynaturalselection;Ifinditincrediblethathumanconsciousness was such a product. How can man's brain, the instrument which created all the riches of civilization,whichservedSocrates,Shakespeare,Rembrandt,andEinstein,havebeenbrought intobeingbyastruggleforsurvivalamonghuntersofwildgameinthePleistocenewilderness? 10

Hawkes'wordsunderscoreaveryimportantpoint.Nomatterhowevolutionistsmay not want to believe it, no intelligent human being or any other living creature with its amazing qualities could ever have arisen by the mechanism of chance. Similarly, Cemal Yildirim,aleadingevolutionistinTurkey,admits,despitehisloyaltytothetheory,thatitis verydifficulttobelievethatnaturalselectionhasanycreativeforce.Ashewrites:
Athirdandmoreimportantcriticismisdirectedatnaturalselectionasanadequateexplanatory principle.Livingthingsatallstagesoflife,fromamoebaeupthroughhumanbeings,exhibitan extraordinary order, and a teleological [purposeoriented] tendency that do not allow any physicalandchemicalanalysis.Themechanicalmechanism of chance,ornaturalselection is unlikelytoexplainthis.Taketheexampleofhumaneye.Couldanorgan,withstructureand functionsofsuchcomplexity,delicacyandperfection,havebeenformedmechanically,without the purposeful involvement of any creative power? Could human being, who form entire

civilizations along with works of art, philosophy and science, have evolved through natural selection?Canweexplaintheloveamotherfeelsforheryoungthrougha"blind"mechanism embracingnospiritualelementwhatsoever?Nodoubt,biologists(letaloneDarwinists)findit hardtooffersatisfactoryanswerstosuchquestions.11

Despiteallthis,evolutionistskeep onbelievingthatnature andcertainmechanisms within it, such as natural selection, can create a sentient human being who can make discoveries,establishnations,andproduceworksofart.Theytrulydeceivethemselvesby expectingthatoneday,sciencewillsupporttheirbeliefs. Theseworldrenownedscientists,withtheirwhitelabcoatsandseriousexpressions, appearculturedandeducated.Buttoseewhattheyreallybelieve,tounderstandtheirview oflife,wehavetotakeabroadlookatthesesubjects.Theymaywellbeintelligentandwell trained, but they believe stories and legends reminiscent of Greek mythology that even childrenwouldmistrust.

Evolutionists Believe that MutationsDeteriorations and Alterations inDNACanProduceNewSpecies

Aswe'vementioned,Darwinbelievedthatnaturalselectionisthechiefmechanismin theprocessofevolution.ButonceMendel'slawsofgeneticinheritancewereaccepted, evolutionistssawthatnaturalselectiondidn'tsufficientlyexplaintheoriginsoflife.They thereforeaddedtotheirevolutionarymechanismstheconceptofmutations.Thisnew evolutionistmodel,knownasNeoDarwinism,proposedthatevolutioncameaboutthrough thetwofoldoperationofnaturalselectionandmutation.However,claimingthatmutation cancausespeciestodevelopintonewonesisnomorescientificthantheclaimsfornatural selection. Mutationsarisefromreplacementsandinterruptionsthatoccurduetochemicaleffects andradiationontheDNAmolecule,locatedinthenucleusoflivingcellsandwhichcontains all the genetic information relevant to an organism. DNA information is formed by the orderedsequenceoffournucleotidesknownbythelettersA,T,CandG.Theleasterrorin thesequenceofthesenucleotideswillruinagivenstructurecompletely.Forexample,ifa singleletterweredisplacedina46volumeencyclopedia(whosecontentswouldcorrespond totheinformationcontainedinDNA),noreaderwouldcareandprobablynotevennotice. Butthedisplacementofonlyone"letter"atanypointinaDNAmoleculeforexample,at the2,435,268thlinkoftheDNAchaincouldcauseseriousconsequencesforahumanbeing. Asjustoneexample,childhoodleukemiaiscausedbythewrongarrangementinoneof the letters in the DNA. As a result of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima and the radiation leak in Chernobyl, children were born handicapped or developed leukemia becauseofthedangerouseffectsofmutationsintheirbodies. Mutationsasaresultofradiationorchemicalreactionscauseoneofthesebillionsof letterstochangeplacesintheDNAchainwithanother,ortodisappearcompletely.So, livingcreaturescansufferdamageasaresultoftheleastalterationinthisarrangement. Throughouttheyears,manylaboratoryexperimentshaveshownbeyonddoubtthedamage

thatmutationscanwreakonlivingcreatures. B.G.Ranganathan,anAmericangeneticist,describesthedangerouseffectsofmutation:
First,genuinemutationsareveryrareinnature.Secondly,mostmutationsareharmfulsincethey arerandom,ratherthanorderlychangesinthestructureofgenes;anyrandomchangeinahighly orderedsystemwillbefortheworse,notforthebetter.Forexample,ifanearthquakewereto shakeahighlyorderedstructuresuchasabuilding,therewouldbearandomchangeinthe frameworkofthebuildingwhich,inallprobability,wouldnotbeanimprovement. 12

The noted evolutionist, Pierre Paul Grass, admits that mutation cannot cause any developmentinalivingcreatureorchangeitintoanotherspecies.Hesaysthattobelieve suchathingispurefantasy:
Theopportuneappearanceofmutationspermittinganimalsandplantstomeettheirneedsseems hardtobelieve.YettheDarwiniantheory is evenmoredemanding:Asingle plant,asingle animal wouldrequire thousands and thousands oflucky, appropriate events.Thus, miracles wouldbecometherule:eventswithaninfinitesimalprobabilitycouldnotfailtooccurThereis nolawagainstdaydreaming,butsciencemustnotindulgeinit. 13

James F. Crow is professor emeritus of genetics and zoology at the University of Wisconsinandanexpertinthefieldofradiationandmutation.Hepreparedareportthat comparedmutationsthatrandomlytargetDNAtotherandomalterationofconnectionsina televisionset,showingplainlythatrandomchangesdon'timprovethequalityofthepicture onatelevisionscreen.14 Fromthis,clearly,theevolutionists'claimthatmutationscausespeciestodevelopand turnintootherspeciesislikebelievingthat,ifapersontookahammerandstartedchopping randomly at a computer, the computer would develop into a more advanced version. Indeed,makingsuchaclaimishighlyunreasonable.Evolutionistsspeakofstrangerand moreillogicalthingsthanthemanwhoassaultshiscomputerwithahammerinthehopesof developinganewone.Butinspiteofthis,manypeoplebelievethem.Sometimesignorance liesatthebottomofthisnaivet,butmoreoften,theeffectofthespellofDarwinismisto blame. As we shall see in the following chapters, because of the evolutionists' various inculcation methods, people believe most of their claims at face value, ignoring how impossibleandunscientifictheyare.

TheMyththatProteins,theBuildingBlocksofLife,WereProducedby BlindChance
Lifefromtheproteins,buildingblocksoflife,uptothehumanbodyisbasedon countlessdelicatebalances.Evolutionistsrejecttheideathatlivingthingswerecreatedby Allah,sowhentheyareaskedhowallthesebalancescanbeestablishedandperpetuated withouttheexistenceofanyconsciousness,theyreplythatitisonlytheresultofchance. However,sodelicateandsonumerousarethesebalancesthatitgoescontrarytocommon sensetoassertthattheywereformedbychance.Canevenoneofthemillionsof fundamentalelementsoflife(forexample,proteins,thebuildingblocksofcells)bethe

productofchance?Theprobabilityisnil. Inthislight,weseeoncemorehowevolutionistscanbelievetheimpossible. First,wewilldescribebrieflywhatproteinsare.Agreatpartofwhatmakesupour bodies is proteins, but of several different kinds. For example, the protein that changes consumed sugar into energy is called hexokinase. Skin isformed by great amounts of a proteincalledcollagen.Whenlightstrikestheretinainoureye,itfirstreactswithaprotein calledrhodopsin.Proteinshavemanydifferentfunctionsinthebody,andeachonedoes onlyitsownwork.Rhodopsin,forexample,doesn'tformskin,andcollagenisnotsensitive tolight.Therefore,anysinglecellcontainsthousandsofproteinsresponsibleforcarryingout theactivitiesthatoccurwithinthatcell. Any protein is a string of molecules, constructed out of the combination of much smaller molecules called amino acids. There are many kinds of proteins, from those containingonly50aminoacidstootherscontainingthousands. Here,wemustbecarefultonoticethatintheproductionofproteins,aminoacidsdo notorganizethemselvesrandomly.Onthecontrary,eachproteinhasaspecificsequenceof aminoacids,andifevenoneaminoacidshouldbeoutofplace,theproteinbecomesuseless. Wecancompareproteinstoawrittentext:Ifanaminoacidisaletter,aproteinisa paragraphcomposedofafewhundredletters.Wecancomposecomprehensiblesentences byarranging29letterssideby side;similarly,ifwecombine20aminoacidsindifferent sequences, we'll form different proteins. But one absolute requirement is that the arrangementisdoneconsciously.Toproduceawrittentextwithrealmeaning,thelettersof whichthetextiscomposedmustbeconsciouslyselectedandarranged. Abasicexperimentwillillustratethis.Sitatacomputer,closeyoureyesandpressthe keysonthekeyboardtwohundredtimesatrandom.Whenyouopenyoureyes,youwillsee youhaveproducedanincomprehensibledisorderofletters,perhapssomethinglikethis:
EmakuekkmukeaaeyHELILnumugotttekczug48ugieuauemzuyueaitfgueaulllllllgipufgiofgiutlmu ttttd3n4olguxqmktuuglu;mntf3h8ieuueafgohnkfgido039meuueubomkuhukhununiuk0gi9orrrfgu eimcikhagnro89f7469rkahK;Fi>zcgo8

Inthisway,youcannevergenerateashortphrase,muchlessasentence,thathasany meaning.Youmayrepeattheexperimentamilliontimes,buttheresultswillbealwaysthe same.Youmaycontinuetopressthekeysforbillionsofyears,butallyouwillgetistrillions of meaningless pages. You will never compose a comprehensible paragraph. Just as no understandabletextcanbegeneratedinthisway,sonostringofproteinscanbeformedbya randomarrangementofaminoacids.Butevolutionistsmaintainthatproteinsdidcomeinto being by a random combination of amino acids. This is as absurd as claiming that comprehensibleparagraphscanbecomposedbypressingakeyboardatrandom. Actually, the production of proteins is far more complicated than this illustration suggests.Awrittentextistwodimensional,whereasaminoacidsareformed inathree dimensionalspace.Theyarenotformedinastraightlinelikethelettersinaword;amino acids bond with each other at different points and form an entire threedimensional

structuremaking it all the more impossible that proteins could have "evolved" by any chancearrangement. In this matter, evolutionist scientists make some interesting explanations and admissions. Professor Ali Demirsoy, one of Turkey's leading evolutionists, admits that cytochromeC,justoneoftheproteinsneededfortheformationoflife,couldn'tpossibly havebeenproducedbychance:
ThelikelyprobabilityoftheformationofacytochromeCsequenceiszero.Thatis,ifliferequires acertainsequencetoarise,thisprobabilityislikelytoberealizedonlyonceintheentireuniverse. To accept the alternativethat some metaphysical powers beyond our definition must have effecteditsformationisn'tappropriatetothegoalsofscience.Therefore,wehavetolookinto thefirsthypothesis.15

Afewlineslater,Demirsoyadmitsthisfirstpossibilitybecauseitismore"appropriate tothegoalsofscience"butadmitsthatitisunreasonable:
The probability of the chance formation of CytochromeC, an essential protein for life, is as unlikelyasthepossibilityofamonkeywritingthehistoryofhumanityonatypewriterwithout makinganymistakes.16

Fromtheforegoing,wecanplainlyseehowproteinsandenzymescannothavebeen producedbychance;andthisprovesthatlivingthingswerecreatedbyAllah.Butthosewho havemadeevolutiontheircreedfindthisfactunacceptablefromthepointofviewoftheir own scientific goals. Therefore, they prefer to accept the preposterous alternative that a monkeycouldsitdownatakeyboardandwritethehistoryofhumanitywithoutasingle error. ThefactofCreationisselfevident,evenintheformationofasingleprotein.Anyone wholooksatthewondersoflifewithcommonsenseandhonestywilleasilyseethis.The reasonwhytherearestillsomanyatheistscientists,however,isbecausetheyaredevotedto thetheoryofevolutionasifitwereareligion.Nomatterwhatproofstheysee,theyhave conditionedthemselvesnottobelieveintheexistenceofaCreator. AstronomerSirFredHoyle,himselfanevolutionist,explainswhyevolutionistsbelieve inchance:
Indeed,suchatheory[thatlifewasassembledbyanintelligence]issoobviousthatonewonders whyitisnotwidelyacceptedasbeingselfevident.Thereasonsarepsychologicalratherthan scientific.17

The psychological explanation, or spell, that Fred Hoyle gives here is actually the subject of this book. By preventing people from thinking, questioning, considering and seeingthetruth,thespellofDarwinismoppressestheirminds.Andthoseunderitsinfluence canbelievemythsthataretotallycontradictorytoscience.

TheyBelieveThataSeriesofChanceEventscanFormaDataBankas

ComplexasDNA
Inthenucleusofeverycellisamoleculethatstoresthecodeofallinformationpertinent tothelivingthingthatenclosesit.WhenwetakealookatDNA'sorderandcomplexity,we canbetterunderstandtheabsurdityoftheevolutionists'talkaboutthechanceformationof thismolecule. TobetterunderstandtheimmensityofthestoreofinformationcontainedinDNA,we needtomakesomecomparisons.DNAiscomposedoffourdifferentnucleotidessymbolized bythelettersA,T,GandC;andthese"letters,"arrangedinacertainsequence,encodethe informationrelevanttothatparticularlivingcreature.Inthisaspect,DNAcanbecompared toahugelibrary:ifsomeoneweretowriteabookcontainingtheinformationstoredinone singleDNAmolecule,hewouldcreatealibraryholding900volumesof500pageseach. InhisbookTheRootsofLife,Dr.MahlonB.Hoaglandillustrateshowmuchinformation theformationofalivingthingrequires:
Abacterium,oneofthesimplestoflivingcreatures,hasabout2000genes;eachgenehasabout 1000letters(links)init.Sothebacterium'sDNAmustbeatleast2millionlettersinlength. Ahumanbeinghasover500timesasmanygenesasabacterium,sotheDNAmustbeatleast1 billionlettersinlength. Thebacterium'sDNAwouldbeequivalentto20averagenovels,eachof100,000words,andthe human'sto10,000suchnovels!18

Howlarge,then,istheDNAmoleculethatcontainssomuchinformation? ThelateCarlSagan,oneoftheproponentsofcontemporary evolution, referstothe immensityofthestoreofinformationDNAcontains:

Theinformationcontentofasimplecellhasbeenestimatedataround10 12 bits,comparableto aboutahundredmillionpagesoftheEncyclopediaBritannica.19

ButwemustalsopointoutthatSagan,despitethatfactthathehasopenlystatedthis important truth, still believes the impossible: that the DNA code has come into being throughsomecompletelyrandomnaturalprocesses. Locatedinthenucleusofthecell,DNAhasanextraordinarilylong,thinstructure.But despiteitslength,ithasbeenfoldedactuallypackedintothenucleus.Ifwemagnifieda cellnucleus100times,itwouldbeaboutthesizeoftheheadofapin.Yetifwestretchedout theDNAfoldedintothistinynucleusandmagnifieditatthesamescale,itwouldbeabout thesizeofafootballfield.20 BywhatpowerwassomuchinformationputintotheDNA,andDNAintothenucleus of a cell? And how? The answer evolutionists give to this question shows their blind allegiancetotheirtheory.Theyclaimthatthebillionsofbitsofinformationrelevanttoa livingcreaturehavebeenencodedinDNAbyachanceevolutionaryprocess;theDNAthen putitselfbychanceandbythesamenaturalprocessintothecell'snucleus.Think,for example,oftheinformationbankofanyairlinecompany:ItisprimitivecomparedtoDNA.

Whowouldstatethatsuchaninformationbank,withallitslettersandnumbers,cameinto existenceastheresultofachanceoccurrence?Couldanyonewhomadesuchaclaimbe thinkingclearly? ThenotedFrenchzoologist,PierreGrass,isbothamaterialistandanevolutionist,and anoutspokenauthorityonthismatter.ButheopenlyconfessesthattheDarwinisttheory cannot explain the origins of life. He believes that one major fact renders the Darwinist explanationuntenable:theinformationthatgoesintotheformationoflife.Inhisbook, The EvolutionofLivingOrganisms,Grasswrites:
Any living being possesses an enormous amount of "intelligence," very much more than is necessary to build the most magnificent of cathedrals. Today, this "intelligence" is called information,butitisstillthesamething.Itisnotprogrammedasinacomputer,butratheritis condensedonamolecularscaleinthechromosomalDNAorinthatofeveryotherorganellein eachcell.This"intelligence"isthe sinequanon oflife.Wheredoesitcomefrom?...Thisisa problemthatconcernsbothbiologistsandphilosophers,and,atpresent,scienceseemsincapable ofsolvingit...21

TheimplicationfromwhatGrass writesisquiteclear:Evensomeevolutionistsare awarethatDNAcouldnothave been formed bychance.ButbeingundertheDarwinist spell,theyrejecttheseplainfactswithopeneyes.Mostimportantofall,wheredoesthis great supply of information come from? What is its source? Lifeless, unconscious atoms cannotproduceit.So,whoproducedtheinformationinDNA?Suchinformationcancome only from a Being Who has knowledge, and no power in nature has the knowledge to produceinformationandputittouse.OnlyAllahhasknowledgeandpower.Thestructure ofDNAaloneisenoughtodemonstratethatAllahhascreatedeverythingfromnothingwith Hisendlessknowledgeandeternalpower.IntheQur'an,Hetellsusthatallknowledge belongstoHim:
DoyounotknowthatAllahknowseverythinginheavenandEarth?ThatisinaBook.Thatis easyforAllah.(SuratalHajj:70)

They Believe that Such a Complex Organism as aCell Could Be ProducedbyChance

Thetheoryofevolutionmaintainsthatlifecameintobeingthroughthechance assemblyofonecell.Thisisevenmoreabsurdthansayingthattheworld'sfirstindustry camefromafactorythatappearedbyaccidentinthemiddleofacityandstartedup productionagainbychance. Thetheoryofevolutionclaimsthatfourbillionyearsago,afewchemicalsubstances reactedwithoneanotherintheEarth'sprimordialatmosphereandthen,withtheeffectsof lightning,earthtremorsandotheroccurrences,cametogethertoformthefirstlivingcell. Such a scenario might have been somewhat convincing in Darwin's day, given the primitivelevelofscienceatthetime.Whenheproposedhistheory,microscopescouldview acellonlyasablackspot,andthescientificworldknewnothingaboutitsinternalstructure.

For example, Ernst Haeckel believed that cells were simply "homogeneous globules of plasm;"22 that is, he knew nothing of their function or complex structure. Over the past century,however,therapiddevelopmentoftechnologymadeitpossibletoinvestigateall aspectsofacell'samazinglycomplexstructure,whichprovedtobeoneofthetwentieth century'smostimportantdiscoveries.Today,itisunderstoodthatthecellisoneofthemost complexstructuresknown. As in a factory, a cell has various sections where different processes occur, with "workers"entrustedwithdifferentduties.Amongthesesectionsarepowerplants,factories thatproducetheenzymesandhormonesnecessaryforlife,adatabankstoringinformation neededforalltheproductstobeproduced,complextransportationsystemstomoveraw materialsandfinishedproductsfromoneareatoanother,pipelines,advancedlaboratories and refineries to break down imported raw materials into usable components and cell membranesthatexpertlycontrolwhatmaterialistakeninandsentout.Thesemakeuponly oneaspectofthecell'scomplexstructure. W. H. Thorpe, an evolutionist scientist, says that "The most elementary type of cell constitutesa'mechanism'unimaginablymorecomplexthananymachineyetthoughtup,let aloneconstructed,byman."23 Anotheraspectofthestructureofacellmakestheword"chance"meaningless.Aswe saidbefore,allthefunctionsofacelloccurinaccordancewithinformationencodedinthe DNA,andthisinformationistheevidentresultofaHigherCreation.Thisappliesnotonly toDNA;alltheorganellesinacellaretheresultofsuperiorcreation.Inthisregard,the wordsofAmericanscientistJohnMorrisareveryenlightening:
Butdesigninalllivingthingsisobvious.Eventhesinglecelledorganismiscomplexbeyondthe abilityofscientiststounderstand,letaloneduplicate.Alloflifeisgovernedbythemarvelously complex genetic code, which contains not only design and order, but what is equivalent to writteninformation.ThisDNAcodemustnotonlybewrittencorrectly,therestofthecellmust beabletoreaditandfollowitsinstructions,ifthecellistometabolizeitsfood,carryoutits myriadofenzymereactions,and,especially,toreproduce.Thiscodehadtobepresentatthe originoflife.Howcouldithavewrittenitself?Andhowcouldallthevariousorganelleslearn howtoreadandobeyit?24

In his book Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, Professor Michael Denton explains this complexitywithanexample:
Tograsptherealityoflifeasithasbeenrevealedbymolecularbiology,wemustmagnifyacellathousand milliontimesuntilitistwentykilometersindiameterandresemblesagiantairshiplargeenoughtocovera greatcitylikeLondonorNewYork.Whatwewouldthenseewouldbeanobjectofunparalleledcomplexity andadaptivedesign.Onthesurfaceofthecellwewouldseemillionsofopenings,liketheportholesofavast spaceship,openingandclosingtoallowacontinualstreamofmaterialstoflowinandout.Ifweweretoenter oneoftheseopenings wewouldfind ourselves inaworldofsupremetechnologyandbewildering complexity...Isitreallycrediblethatrandomprocessescouldhaveconstructedareality,thesmallestelement ofwhichafunctionalproteinorgeneiscomplexbeyondourcreativecapacities,arealitywhichisthevery antithesisofchance,whichexcelsineverysenseanythingproducedbytheintelligenceofman?25

As Denton suggests, this mechanism "is the very antithesis of chance"; so then why do evolutionistsinsistitistheresultofhappenstance?Whensuchaflawlessmodelpointssoclearlytothe

realityofanincomparablecreation,howcantheybelieveinthiskindoffairytale? Here,onceagain,weseetheinfluenceofDarwinism'sspell.Thosewhobelieveinevolutionare likethebewitchedmanwedescribedattheoutsetofthisbookwhoinsisteditwasrainingeventhough thesunwasout;theydefendanimpossibleideathatcellscametobebychance.And,despitethefact thattheycanfindnoprooffortheirclaims,theydon'trenouncetheirbeliefs,butcontinueoninthe hopesoffindingit.Somescientistsandresearchershaveevendevotedtheirlivestothispursuit.That theyspendtheirbesteffortstoverifyacompletelyimaginaryscenariotheyhaveinventedisnothing morethantheeffectofthespelltheyareunder.

Darwinists Still Refuse to Accept that the Fossil Record Shows No ProcessofEvolution
Evolutionists'biggestproblemistoexplainhowonespeciesevolvedfromanother. Mutationsandnaturalselection,theyclaim,canexplainthesmallandgradualchangesthat livingcreaturesundergo,andthatasaresultoftheaccumulationofthesechanges,these creaturesdevelopintootherspecies.Theybelievethatsomeofthesesmallchangescanbe identifiedincreaturesthatmusthavelivedinthepast,whichtheycall"transitionalforms." Forexample,theyclaimthatfishevolvedfrominvertebrate,orbonelessseacreatures. In line with thisclaim, they maintain that aninvertebrate suchas the starfish gradually acquiredfinsandabackboneandunderwentagreatnumberofchanges. If such were the case, there must have been many transitional forms showing the gradualevolutionbetweenthesetwodifferentgroups.Thatistosay,thereshouldhavebeen severalspecieswiththecharacteristicsofbothfishandinvertebrates.Andifsuchcreatures had really existed, why have we never found a single fossil belonging to them? So far, however,countlessfossilshavebeenunearthed,andmanyspecieshavebeendiscovered thatlivedinthepastandlaterbecameextinct,butnotonefossilofa"transitionalform"to validatetheevolutionists'claimshaseverbeendiscovered. Inthisregard,itwillbeusefultoexaminethechartonthefacingpage,whichclearly showsthatevolutionisnotavalidtheory. What does a chart like this tell us? Every living class you see on Earth today invertebrates,fish,reptiles,birds,mammalshasleftafossilrecordfromthepast.Thereare, however,alsosomeimaginarycreatures,whichhaveofcourseleftnofossilrecord.Whatif someonecametoyouandsaid,"There'snoproofthatthesecreatureseverlived,butIwant tobelievetheycouldhave.So,let'ssupposetheydidliveandlater,findthefossilslaterto proveit"?Youwouldcertainlyfindthisillogical.Butevolutionistshavebeenmakingthis claimfor150years,asiftheyhavebeenunderarealenchantment. However,moderncreatureshadthesamecharacteristicsinthepastastheyhavetoday; they have undergone no evolutionary process. Evolutionists claim there must be "transitional forms" showing the evolution of one life form into another, but there is no evidenceofthisinthefossilrecord.Andwithoutanyrecordofsuchforms,thereisnoproof

thatevolutionhaseveroccurred. Anyone ofalogical,scientificbentandanalyticalability willeasilyunderstandthat evolutionhasneverhappened.But,inspiteoftheabsenceofscientificevidenceinthefossil record,evolutionistscontinuetoinsistthatitdidoccur. EvenDarwinrealizedthatthefossilrecordfailedtosupporthistheory,buthehoped thatinthecourseoftime,therecordwouldbecomericherwiththediscoveryofintermediate forms.Buttoday,nosuchhoperemainsforevolutionists.Astheythemselvesadmit,the veryextensivefossilrecordissufficienttodemonstratethehistoryoflife.Withregardtothe fossilrecord,Prof.N.HeribertNilssonofLundUniversity,anotedSwedishbotanist,writes thefollowing:
Myattemptstodemonstrateevolutionbyanexperimentcarriedonformorethan40yearshave completelyfailed....Thefossilmaterialisnowsocompletethatithasbeenpossibletoconstruct newclasses,andthelackoftransitionalseriescannotbeexplainedasbeingduetothescarcityof material.Thedeficienciesarereal,theywillneverbefilled. 26

Despite the very extensive fossil record, Glasgow University paleontologist, Prof. T. NevilleGeorge,admitsthatthetransitionalformsthatevolutionistshavebeenseekinghave notyetbeenfound:
Thereisnoneedtoapologizeanylongerforthepovertyofthefossilrecord.Insomewaysithas becomealmostunmanageablyrich,anddiscoveryisoutpacingintegrationThefossilrecord neverthelesscontinuestobecomposedmainlyofgaps. 27

Although some evolutionists realize that intermediate forms have never been discoveredatanyperiod,stilltheyrefusetoabandontheirtheory.Instead,theyresortto variousmethodsoffalsification.Takinggreat carenot tobreak theDarwinistspell,they produce bogus proofs by extrapolating from existing fossils and making opinionated interpretationsofthem.

SomeEvolutionistsevenBelievethataBirdCanHatchfromaReptile's Egg
Thefossilrecordhasdefinitivelyshownthatevolutionnevertookplace.Butthishasn't interruptedthezealofevolutionists,someofwhomcontinuetoimaginetheexistenceof transitional forms as a way out. Others try to defend evolution with highly improbable explanations. Oneoftheevolutionists'strangestclaimswastheirtheoryofthe"hopefulmonster." Because no transitional forms have been discovered, evolutionists have been under increasingpressureandsomeclaimedthatthereisnoneedfortransitionalforms,because thechangeshappenednotingradualstages,butallatonce. Inthe1930's,anevolutionistscientistbythenameofOttoSchindewolfclaimedthatthe firstbirdhatchedfromareptileegg.This,hethought,explainedthetransitionofreptiles

intobirds.Accordingtohisirrationalclaim,thiskindofsuddenchangewouldleaveno fossiltraces,sotheproblemofhavingtocomeupwithanyproofwasovercome.Onewould expect that such an embarrassing claim had to be covered up, but in later years, some evolutionists accepted it and even elaborated on it. In 1940, the Berkeley University geneticistRichardGoldschmidtannouncedhisnewtheory:amegaevolutioninwhichone life form suddenly emerged completely out of adifferent one. Hecalledthese suddenly emergingnewcreatures"hopefulmonsters."Withthistheory,heshowedhisacceptanceof Schindewolf'sextremeexampleofthefirstbirdhatchingfromareptileegg.28 Accordingtothe"hopefulmonster"theory,afeatheredcreaturehatchedfromanegg laidbyareptile,andthusbecamethefirstbird.Buttheproponentsofthistheorygiveno prooforlogicalexplanationwhatsoeverforthisstory;theysimplyacceptit. Let'sassumethatthefirstchapterofthisimpossiblestoryactuallytookplace.Letusaccept thepropositionthat,onedayandfornoreason,abirdhatchedoutofareptile'segg.Couldit surviveundersuchconditions?Therewouldbenootherbirdsaroundtofeeditandlookafterits needs.Butevensupposingthisdidoccur,couldabirdthathatchedbychancefromareptileegg becometheancestorofallsubsequentgenerationsofbirds?Forthistohappen,forourstoryto continue,yetanothersuchchanceeventhastotakeplace:Thisfirstbirdmustfindamatealso hatchedsuddenlybychancefromanotherreptileegg.Otherwise,the"bird"characteristicswould becomerecessive,andeventually,bebredoutofexistencebyconstantcrossbreedingwithpure reptiles.Onlythentheycanmateandproducenewbirds.Thereisnodifferencebetweenwhatwe havedescribedaboveandthefantasticeventsinachildren'scartoon.Andtobelievesuchfantasy showsaseriousbreakdowninone'sreasoningability. Actually, such faulty reasoning is the inheritance Charles Darwin left to modern evolutionists.Darwinclaimedthatinthecourseoftime,bearsthatswamagreatdealturned intowhalesthussolvinginapracticalway,asfarashewasconcerned,theproblemofhow seamammalsfirstcameintobeing.Inhisarticleentitled"RoadblockstoWhaleEvolution," biologistFrankSherwinwrites:
Indeed, one encounters many bizarre explanations for the origin of the species when such strangefictiongripsbiology.Apopularcontemporary"justso"storytellshowlandmammals venturedbackintotheancientseasandbecamewhales.TheideawasfirstpresentedbyDarwin inthefirsteditionofhisbook, OriginofSpecies.Thenaturalist[i.e.,Darwin]stated:"Icanseeno difficultyinaraceofbearsbeingrendered,bynaturalselection,moreandmoreaquaticintheir habits,withlargerandlargermouths,tillacreaturewasproducedasmonstrousasawhale." Interestingly,Darwinretractedthisexampleinalllatereditionsofhisbook. Thishasnotstoppedlaterevolutionists.Forexample,theancientancestorsofwhales,writesthe lateSirGavindeBeer,"...haddentitionsenablingthemtofeedonlargeanimals,butsometook topreyingonfishandrapidlyevolvedteethlikesharks....Next,somewhalespreyedonsmall cuttlefish and evolved a reduced dentition. Finally the whalebone whales, having taken to feedingonenormousnumbersofsmallshrimps,alsoevolvedrapidly." 29

The only difference between Schindewolf and Goldschmidt on the one hand and Darwinontheotheristhatthefirsttwosaythatadifferentspecieshatchedsuddenlyfrom anegg,whilethelatterclaimedthatabearwhogoesinandoutofthewatergraduallyturns intoawhale.Although150yearsseparatesthem,there'sbeennodevelopmentorprogressin theirinformationorthelogicwithwhichtheyshapethosefacts.

Doyoubelievethistheoryhasanythingtodowithscience?Orifnot,arethesestories derived from Greek mythology or fairy tales? What is worrisome is that some scientists sincerely believe these evolutionist tales and think that they solve all objections to "evolution."TheseexamplesonlyshowhowdeeplytheyareunderDarwinism'sspell.

Some Prominent Evolutionists Have Pinned their Last Hope on CreaturesfromOuterSpace

Once some evolutionist scientists saw that it was impossible for life to form spontaneously,theycreatedcertainscenariosinordertokeeptheirallegiancetothetheory. ThisisactuallyoneofthemostnoticeableeffectsoftheDarwinistspellonthem:Theywill easilybelieveanyproposal,nomatterhowillogical,toexplainadifficultyinthetheory.But theyvehementlyrejectthemostevidentproofsofCreation,justasiftheywereunderaspell. Justoneexamplewillshowhowharmfulthisspell'seffectcanbeonaperson.Francis CrickwasoneofthetwoscientistswhodiscoveredthestructureofDNAduringthe1950s. Certainlyanimportantdiscoveryinthehistoryofscience,thiscameafterlengthyresearch andagreatpoolingofinformationandexpertise.CrickwontheNobelPrizeforhiswork. Inthecourseofhisinvestigationofthecell,hewasamazedbyitsinternalstructureand model. Even though he was a committed evolutionist, after witnessing the wonderful structureofDNA,hestatedthisscientificfactinoneofhiswritings:
Anhonestman,armedwithalltheknowledgeavailabletousnow,couldonlystatethat,insome sense,theoriginoflifeappearsatthemomenttobealmostamiracle. 30

Crickbelievedinevolutionand,therefore,thatlifewastheresultofchance.Butafter seeingwhatmadeupthestructureofacell,hemadetheabovestatement.Evolutionists, however, accept no explanation apart from chance; if they did, they would have to acknowledgetheexistenceofAllah.ButwhenCricksawthewonderandperfectionofacell, hewassoimpressedthathewasforcedtomakethisadmission,eventhoughitwentagainst hisideology.Heknewthatthecell'screationcouldn'tbeamatterofchance,butrequireda superiorintelligence.AndsincehecouldnotaccepttheexistenceofAllah,heclaimedthat creatures from outer space were responsible! Crick actually believed that extraterrestrial creaturesbroughtthefirstDNAtoEarthandcausedlifetobeginhere. Actually,thissamestrangeproposalwasfirstmadein1908bytheSwedishchemist, SvanteArrhenius.Hedeclaredthattheseedsoflifecouldhavecomefromanotherplanet,by way of the pressure created by radiation. Despite the fact that this claim was found unscientificandunworthyofconsideration,Crickpersuadedpeopletobelieveit.Inhisbook LifeItself,publishedin1981,hesaidthatcreaturesfromanothersolarsystembroughtthe seedsnecessaryforlifetolifelessplanetsand,thankstotheirkindintervention,lifebegan here. Look carefully, and notice that this claim, put forward by evolutionists as an explanationfortheoriginsoflife,doesn'treallyexplainanything.Inthisscenario,thereisno answertothequestionofhowlifefirstappeared.EvolutionistslikeCricksaythatcreatures

fromouterspacebroughtlifetoEarth,butinsosaying,theysimplybegthequestionofhow theseouterspacecreatures originated. Thisquestioncannotbeanswered byevolutionist logic!TheonlyanswerliesinacceptingAllahastheCreatorofalllife,Himselfuncreated andexistingeternally.Inotherwords,theonlyvalidanswertothisquestionisthatAllah createdalllife. HowcouldwellknownscientistslikeFrancisCrickbelieveinastoryaboutcreatures fromouterspace,suchasyoumightseeinasciencefictionfilm?YetCrick'sstoryisquite tenablenexttoanotherevolutionistthesis,accordingtowhichthefirstlivingcellappeared onEarth3.7millionyearsagoproducedbybiologicalengineers! Buthow?Theanswertothisquestionismostinteresting.Evolutionistswhoacceptthis thesissaythatthefirstcellwasdesignedbyhumanbeingsfromthefuturewhoboardeda spaceshipandmadeajourneybackthroughtime.31 Onedoesnotneedtobeageniustoseehowcontrarythisis.Thereisnoanswertothe questionofhowagenerationofhumanbeingsmighthavecomeintoexistenceiftheyhadto create their own ancestors. This thesis is so obviously absurd that one wonders how evolutionistscouldevenmentionit.YettheMarch1994issueof ScientificAmerican,oneof themostrespectedsciencemagazines,doesnothesitatetosayofthistheory:
Farfrombeingalogicalabsurdity...thetheoreticalpossibilityoftakingsuchanexcursioninto one'searlierlifeisaninescapableconsequenceoffundamentalphysicalprinciples. 32

Some materialistminded people fall into contradictions thatfor themare unavoidablebecausealthoughthesepeopleareclearlyawareofthetruth,theytrytohideit. Allahrevealsthefollowingaboutthestatethatsomematerialistsfallinto:
ByHeavenwithitsoscillatingorbits,youcertainlyhavedifferingbeliefs.Avertedfromitis he who is averted. Damned will be the conjecturers: those who flounder in a glut of ignorance,(SuratadhDhariyat:711)

Thesepeoplebehavelikethatbewitchedindividualmentionedearlier.Becauseofthe spellhewasunder,hethoughtsunnyskywascloudyandevenclaimedthatitwasraining. InordertorejectthefactofCreation,theyhaverecoursetoimaginaryspacecreaturesor timetravelingsciencefictionheroes,withnotashredoflogicalorscientificproof.

ProfessorswhoBelievethatRunning Dinosaurs SuddenlyStartedto Fly

Evolutionistshavetoexplainhoweverylivingspeciescametobeinshort,whichone evolvedfromwhich.Oneofthemostdifficultquestionstheystrivetoanswerishow dinosaursweresuddenlyabletofly.Accordingtotheevolutionistscenario,scaly,cold bloodeddinosaurssomehowgrewwingsoneday,begantoglide,andthusbecamebirds.Of course,explaininghowthisoccurredwaslefttotheevolutionistswiththemostvivid imaginations.Tounderstandthelogicofthoserespected,seriouslookingscientists,whose intelligenceandknowledgeyoumayhaveassumedwasbeyondyourreach,youneedonly

lookatthescenariostheyhavedevisedaboutflyingdinosaurs. Therearetwoevolutionisttheoriesabouthowdinosaursstartedtofly:the"arboreal" theoryandthe"cursorial"one.Accordingtothefirst,theancestorsofbirdswerereptilesthat livedintreesandwhoseforelimbsdevelopedintowingsoverthecourseoftimeasthey jumpedfrombranchtobranch.Thesecondtheoryproposesthatlanddwellingdinosaurs openedandclosedtheirfrontlegswhilechasinginsectsand,asaresultofthismovement, theirlegsdevelopedintowingsthatletthedinosaurs"takeoff."Theauthorofthistheoryis JohnOstrom,anevolutionistprofessoremeritusatYaleUniversity'sDepartmentofGeology andGeophysics. Youmayimaginethatthiskindoftransformationscouldhappenonlyincartoonsor fairy tales, but amazingly, very intelligent individuals who have become highranking professorsintheirparticulardisciplineshaveproposedsimilarscenarios.Wecanillustrate thelogicaldeficiencyoftheirideaswithanotherexample:Inanagebeforesciencehadnot developed, a number of people believed that sheep grew from a plant! Today, this is certainlynothingbutsuperstition,andtheclaimthatacreaturegrewwingsfromjumping fromtreetotreeorfromchasingafterfliesisjustasmuchofasuperstition. Moreover,thecursorialtheoryhasoneveryimportantaspectthat'sgoodtokeepin mind.Itproposesthatadinosaurgrewwingsfromrunningafterinsects.Butaninsectcan flyperfectly well;so,where did it come from?If theoriginofflightliesinadinosaur's chasingafly,whatistheoriginofflies?Aboutthis,evolutionistssaynothing.Aflymoves itswingsbetween500and1000timesasecondandcansuddenlymaneuverinanydirection itwants.Askanyevolutionistscientisthowthisabilitycouldhavecomeintoexistenceby chance.Butbecausethereisnothinghecouldanswer,he'llavoidgivinganexplanation.If thistheorycannotevenexplainatinyfly,whydoscientistsresorttofairytalescenariosto makemuchlargercreaturestaketotheair?Whatmakesthembelievetheunbelievableis surelytheeffectthattheDarwinistspellhasoverthem.

TryingtoExplainMammals'ProductionofMilkbytheDevelopment ofSweatGlands
As stated at the outset, the evolutionist scenario proposes that various creatures "evolved" into different creatures by the operation of pure chance. According to evolutionists, reptilesfor exampleare the ancestors of birds and mammals. However, reptiles: 1arecoveredwithscales, 2arecoldbloodedand, 3reproducebylayingeggs. Mammals,ontheotherhand: 1havehairontheirbodies,

2arewarmblooded,and 3givebirthtolivingyoung. Inshort,betweenmammalsandreptilesthereisagreatstructuralchasmthatcannotbe crossed.Onechiefdifferenceisthemilkproducedbymammals.Inordertoclaimthata reptileevolvedintoamammal(ifsuchaclaimwerepossible),itisnecessarytoexplainhow anycreaturesuddenlybeginsproducingmilktonourishitsyoung.Seehowanevolutionist inventsafairytaletoexplainhowareptilesuddenlybegantoproducemilk:

Someofthereptilesinthecolderregionsbegantodevelopamethodofkeepingtheirbodies warm.Theirheatoutputincreasedwhenitwascoldandtheirheatlosswascutdownwhen scalesbecamesmallerandmorepointed,andevolvedintofur.Sweatingwasalsoanadaptation toregulatethebodytemperature,adevicetocoolthebodywhennecessarybyevaporationof water.Butincidentallytheyoungofthesereptilesbegantolickthesweatofthemotherfor nourishment. Certain sweat glands began to secrete a richer and richer secretion, which eventuallybecamemilk.Thustheyoungoftheseearlymammalshadabetterstartinlife. 33

Theideathatacreaturecouldgetrich,wellbalanced,milklikenourishmentbylicking itsmother'sbodymightbeacceptedbythescientistsoftheMiddleAgesorbylistenersofa fairytale.Butthesweatingprocessisverycomplexandisneededtokeepthetemperatureof the body stable. Reptiles do not sweat, and evolutionists have not been able to explain logicallyhowitisthatmammalsdo. Thisandsimilarscenariosfrequentlyappearinevolutionisttexts, showingjusthow distantthetheoryofevolutionisfromscience.Whatdeservesattentionhere,however,is how any scientist can believe them. As Phillip Johnson stated in his book, Objections Sustained,itisclearthat"ForDarwinists,justbeingabletoimaginetheprocessissufficientto confirmthatsomethingsimilarmusthavehappened."34

TheyBelievethatComplexStructuressuchastheEyeCameintoBeing inGradualStages
Evolutionists claim that all living beings and all their complex organs came into existence piecemeal, by slow, gradual evolutionary development. But, if we look at the structureandfunctionofanyorganinthehumanbodyalone,weseethatithasbeencreated byaSuperiorPower.Evolutionists,however,proposethateventhemostcomplexorgans cametobebychance.Inordertoseetheirfaultylogic,wewillconsiderwhattheyclaim aboutthedevelopmentoftheeye. Oneofthebody'smoststructurallycomplexorgans,theeyeiscomposedofabout40 differentpartsthatformanirreduciblecomplexity.Inotherwords,theeye'sstructurecannot besimplified,becauseifonlyoneofits40elementsweremissing,theeyewouldnotbeable tofunction. Couldsuchacomplexorganhavecometobebychance?Thetheoryofevolutionstates thatcreaturesexistedbeforetheeyewasformed;thesecreatureswerewithoutsightandhad

noconceptofvision.Howcouldsuchacreaturehavedevelopedaneyeastheresultofsome randomprocess?Nocreaturecouldhaveevenattemptedtodevelopaneyeforitself,ifitdid notknowtheconceptof"seeing."Evenifthiscreaturedidhavesuchawish,clearlyitcould nothaveformedaneyeallbyitself. So, how could an eye be formed in a creature without any? What series of chance processeswouldbenecessaryforsuchadevelopmenttooccur? First,couldtwocavitieshavebeenformedbychanceintheskulltocontaintheeyes? Then,couldtwoglobesfilledwithfluidtoadmitlighthaveformed bychance within thesetwocavities? Then,couldtwolenseshavebeenformed bychance infrontofthisfluidtorefractthe lightandfocusitontheeye'sinteriorwall? Then,couldtheeyemuscleshavebeenformedspontaneously bychancesothattheeye couldturninitssocket? Then,couldtheretinahavebeenformed bychance atthebackoftheeyeinorderto perceivelight? Then,couldthenervesconnectingtheeyetothebrainhavecomeintoexistenceby themselves,suddenlyandbychance? Then,couldtearductsprotectingtheeyehavecomeintobeingbychance? Then,couldlidsandlashestoprotecttheeyefromdustandotherforeignmatterhavebeen formedbychance? Of course, not one of these things could occur by chance. Besides, according to the evolutionists'claim,thegeneralstageswehaveoutlined abovemustoccurseriallywithinone samelivingbeing.Thisisbecauseaccordingtoevolutionists,thenonfunctionalorgansofthe bodywillatrophyovertime.Butevenifonepartoftheeyehadbeenformedbychance(whichis impossible),itwouldsoondisappearagainbecauseitwouldhavenouse.Inorderfortheeyeto function,allitspartsmustexistatonce,asawhole,andworktogetherinconcert.Forexample,if therewasnofilmoftears,thecorneawoulddryandbecomeopaque,causingtheeyetoloseits abilitytosee. Allevidenceshowsthattheeye'screationisfartooflawlesstobeexplainedawayasa productofchance.Thefirsteyethateverexistedcameintobeingperfectlyandcompletelythat is,itwascreated.Althoughevolutionistsareawareofit,theyignorethisplainfactandchooseto believe that the eye, and all other complex organs like it, came into being by a process of evolution. This belief is the same as their asserting that a highly advanced camera found on the roadside assembled itself out of the random agglomeration of stones, soil, rain and glass. Obviouslyacamera,withthetechnologyitcontains,isaproductofengineering;buttheeyehas qualitiesfarsuperiortothosefoundinacamera.Sohowcouldsomeone,knowingacameraisthe

product of design and intelligence, claim that the eye's superior attributes were formed by chance? Weseethatthisclaimisabsurd,ofcourse.CharlesDarwinhimselfmayhavebeenawareof theabsurditywhenhewrote,
Tosupposethattheeyewithallitsinimitablecontrivancesforadjustingthefocustodifferentdistances, foradmittingdifferentamountsoflight,andforthecorrectionofsphericalandchromaticaberration, couldhavebeenformedbynaturalselection,seems,Ifreelyconfess,absurdinthehighestdegree35

AsDarwinhimselfadmitted,claimingthatnaturalselectioncancauseanewspeciesto emergeisabsurdinthehighestdegree.

TheyBelievethatApesTurnedintoSpeaking,ThinkingandDecision MakingHumans
Oftheevolutionists'claims,oneofthemostsenselessisthatananimallikeanape, lackingintelligence,reason,andjudgment,lackingtheabilitytospeak,couldturnintoa humanbeingbytheoperationofchance. Whatunconsciousnaturalmechanismcouldhavegivenananimaltheabilitytothink? What mechanism could have given human beings intelligence, and the ability to acquireknowledgeandfoundcivilizations? Whatpowerofnaturecouldhavetaughtananimaltoproducemasterpiecesofpainting andmagnificentarchitecturethatdazzletheeyewiththeiruseofcolors,shapes,perspective, shadeandlight? What natural mechanism could have enabled an animal to make a lightbulb and discoverthestructureofanatom,thelawofgravityandtheinnerworkingsofacell? Orwhocouldhaveendowedamonkeywiththesuperiorintelligenceneededtoinvent amicroscope,televisionoracomputer? Couldanyforceinnaturegiveamonkeysuchspiritualqualitiesastheabilitytodraw conclusions from experiences, form feasible solutions, take pleasure, feel regret, act with forethoughtandfeelproudorembarrassed? Ofcourse,nomonkeycanpossessthesequalities.Evenifalltheelementsofnature weretocombine,theycouldn'tmanagetoendowamonkeywithspiritualqualities.In The Scars of Evolution, the evolutionist paleontologist Elaine Morgan admits the situation in whichthetheoryofevolutionfindsitself,whenconfrontedbythesequestions:
Fourofthemostoutstandingmysteriesabouthumansare:1)whydotheywalkontwolegs?2) whyhavetheylosttheirfur?3)whyhavetheydevelopedsuchlargebrains?4)whydidthey learntospeak?

Theorthodoxanswerstothesequestionsare:1)"Wedonotyetknow";2)"Wedonotyetknow"; 3)"Wedonotyetknow";4)"Wedonotyetknow."Thelistofquestionscouldbeconsiderably lengthenedwithoutaffectingthemonotonyoftheanswers.36

Evolutionistshaveleftthesequestionsunanswered,becausetheyrealizetheiranswers willdonothingtoshowthatasuperiorcreaturelikeahumanbeingisaproductofchance. Eveniftheworldwereaquadrillionyearsold,nochanceoperationscouldcreatethehuman spirit.TheCreatorofthehumanspirit,aswellastheheavensandtheEarthandeverything inbetween,isAllah,theLordofall.Justponderingthehumanspiritshowshowabsurdly misguidedaretheevolutionists'talesofchance.(Formoreinformationonthe"Scenarioof HumanEvolution,"seeHarunYahya's TheEvolutionDeceit, 8thEdition,TahaPublishing, London,2003)

TheDilemmainWhichEvolutionistsFindThemselves
Uptothispoint,wehaveseenthatevolutionistsholdabsurdandunreasonabletenets thatevenpeoplewithnormalintelligenceandordinaryknowledgewouldnotbelieve; moreover,theyblindlyaccepttheoriesthatarecontrarytoscience. There may be two explanations why anyone could believe claims so strange and irrational.Thefirstislackofknowledge:Someonewhohasneverconsideredevolutionand knowsverylittleaboutit,mayatfirstbedeceivedbyitsscientificguiseintoacceptingwhat he is told, especially if he has never examined or researched its claims. But when he is presentedwiththefactsandallowedtoconsiderthem,thisindividualwilleasilyseehow absurdandimpossiblethetheoryofevolutionreallyis.Ashorthandbookoratwotothree hourlecturewillbeenoughtodemonstratethetheory'sinvalidity.Apersonwithnormal intelligence will easily see the fact that evolution is nonsense. Therefore, ignorance is a deficiencythatiseasilydisposedof. Astheresultofafewyears'work,manypeople'slackofknowledgeaboutevolution hasbeenremedied,andthosewithcommonsensehaveseentherealfaceofthetheoryof evolution.Today,evenaprimarystudentwillbeabletolistproofsshowingtheinvalidityof thetheoryandstatehownonsensicalitis. Thesecondreason,quitedifferentfromthefirst,concernsthosewhoarenotignorant. Generally,thesepeoplearequiteculturedandsomeareevenexpertsinevolutionarytopics relevanttosuchfieldsasbiology,paleontologyandmicrobiology.Youmaypresentthem withasmanyclearproofsasyouwishfortheinvalidityofevolution;youmaygivethem examples to convince them of their unreasonableness. But they'll be determined not to abandonthetheory,justlikethemanwementionedatthebeginningofthischapterwho insistedthatcloudsintheskyweremassesofcotton.Forexample,theyshowyouafossilas aproofofevolution,butyouprovetothemscientificallythatitcannotbeso.Asiftheyhad notheardyou,theypulloutthisfaultyevidenceagainandagainastheirmostimportant proofforevolution. Ifthesepeoplehavetheintelligenceandknowledgetounderstandwhatistoldtothem, so,howcantheystillcontinuetoputforwardtheirclaims?Thereisonlyoneexplanation:

Theydon'twanttobereleasedfromtheirspell.Becausetheypersistinrejectingtheexistence ofAllah,Darwinistscontinuetoexertaninfluenceoverthemselvesandothers.Ofcourse, theymay know that evolutioncannotbetrue; buttodeny it wouldmeanacceptingthe existenceofAllah.Forthisreason,theyarecarefultoacceptthespellwholeheartedlysothat theydon'thavetoexaminethetruth. AvoidingseeingthesignsofAllah,theycannotcomprehendthetruths.IntheQur'an, Allahdescribestheirsituation:
WecreatedmanyofthejinnandmankindforHell.Theyhaveheartstheydonotunderstand with.Theyhaveeyestheydonotseewith.Theyhaveearstheydonothearwith.Suchpeople arelikecattle.No,theyareevenfurtherastray!Theyaretheunaware.(SuratalA'raf:179) Ifyoucallthemtoguidance,theydonothear.Youseethemlookingatyou,yettheydonot see.(SuratalA'raf:198)

Darwiniststodayaretryingtodeny,concealorignorethetruthinordertokeepthe myth alive. Yes this is a false road;by doing so they are deceiving and also belittling themselves.Darwinists,too,shouldlearnfromtheverserevealedbyAllahintheQur'an:
Donotmixuptruthwithfalsehoodandknowinglyhidethetruth.(SuratalBaqara:42)

Afterseeingthetruth,thecorrectthingtodoistoceaseresistingandturntowardsit. Hitherto,apersonmayhavebelievedinthemythofevolutionoutofalackofinformation, orthepropagandatowhichhehasbeensubjected.Ifthatpersonissincere,however,hewill research and find the truth and abide by it, rather than following deceptions that will humiliatehiminthisworldandthenext.Itmustnotbeforgottenthatsincerityandhonesty willbewellrewardedinthisworldandintheHereafter.

Methods of Persuasion Used in the Spells of Darwinism

Inearliersections,weshowedhowthetheoryofevolutionaffectspeoplelikeaspell, handingthempreconceivednotionsonwhichtheybaseirrational,illogicalbeliefsbeyond the realm of possibility. How can educated people who appear to be intelligent, with establishedcareers,accepttheseunrealscenarios?Howcantheymanage,withnodefinite proofs,toadvocatethistheorysovehementlyandpersuadeotherstobelieveittoo?Inshort, howcantheyperpetuatetheDarwinistspell?Theanswersliewithevolutionists'methodsof suggestionandpersuasion.

Advanced science and technology have shown clearly that claims put forward by Darwinismarebaselessandwithoutproof,buttheproponentsofDarwinismstillresortto variousmethodstosupporttheirtheory.Butifyouaskhowthetheoryofevolutionhasbeen so widely espoused despite its scientific invalidity, their attempts to answerare nothing morethanpowerful,delusivepropaganda. Weseethispropagandaatworkineveryareaofdailylife.Butnotonlytoday:Sincethe timeevolutionistsfirstproposedtheirtheory,theyhavealwaysusedthesamemethodsto getpeopletobelievetheunbelievable.Inotherwords,thistheory'sbeingaccepteddoesn't implythatithasanyscientificcontent.ThisisalsopointedoutbyDavidJeremiahinhis foreword to The Long War Against God by Henry M. Morris, noted for his works demonstratingtheinvalidityofthetheoryofevolution:
How did belief in Darwinism become so widespread when it was developed mainly by an apostate divinity student (Darwin), a lawyer (Lyell), an agriculturist (Hutton), a journalist (Chambers),andothernonscientists?37

Thereisonlyoneanswertowhythetheoryofevolutionhasbecomesowidespread: becauseofspecialtechniques,tacticsandillusionsofpropaganda. Inordertomakethemselvesandothersbelievethisidea,theycastakindofspellusing methodsthatwe'llexamineindetailinthefollowingpages.Justlikespellcasters,theyuse "magic" words toimpresstheirdelusions on people's minds; andhypnotize peoplewith picturesandwrittentextsthatareimpossibleforlaymentounderstand.Withallthis,they keeppeoplefromthinking,investigatingandresearchingforthemselves.Justasasorcerer looksforassistanceinthevariousexoticprops,complicatedwordsandminiaturetextsused incastingaspell,evolutionistslooktochanceevents,fossilbonestructuresandtheimpactof authoritativewordsandsentences.Inthisway,theyattempttoinfluencepeopletoaccept preposterousinferencesandtoplacethemunderthepowerofsuggestion. Darwinists do everything in their power to perpetuate this dark spell. Afraid that peoplewillseethetruththatthetheoryofevolutionisamythandchangetheirminds,they employ apersuasive imagetoconvincepeoplewith whatthey sayandwrite, howthey appearandhowtheyact.Aspointed out earlier, thisspell'ssuggestivenessspreadsinto every moment of our daily lives: in the morning newspaper, on billboards, in school textbooks,infilmsandtelevisiondocumentaries. Itwillbeusefultoshowalltheaspectsofthesemethodsofpersuasioninordertobring themtopeople'sattention;tohelpindividualsbecomeawareofthevariousscenesinthe scenarioenvelopingtheworldtheylivein.Inthefollowingpages,we'lloffersomeexamples ofthemainrulesgoverningtheevolutionists'useofthepowerofsuggestion.

Method # 1. They depict evolutionist scientists as very learned, superhumanindividuals

AnimportantmethodamongDarwinistsisthesuggestionthatevolutionistscientists aresuperiortoordinaryhumanbeingsverytalented,withstrongconceptualabilities,able

tounderstandeventsandphenomenamuchbetterthanmost.ItisvitalforDarwiniststo assumeasenseofthissuperioritybecausepublicopinionisgenerallyinfluencedbypeople whoareviewedassuperior. Justassomesocietiesbelievesorcererstobesuperhumanbeingswithsecretpowers,so inmodernsociety,Darwinistscientistsarethoughttobetooloftyforordinarypeopleto question.Most,forexample,consideritagreataccomplishmenttolookatfossilizedremains andbeabletosaytowhateraandtowhatcreatureagivenbonebelonged.Peoplebelieve thatanytheoryadvocatedbysuchaccomplishedindividualsmustalwaysbetrueandvalid. Forthisreason,anyonesentencewrittenbyanevolutionaryscientisthasamesmerizing effect and therefore, many people do not ponder the origins of life or investigate the pertinentfacts.Theyassumethatevolutionistscientistshavegiventhemallthedatathey need,andthattheirstatementsareabsolutelytrue.Theyask,"WhoamItoquestionwhat theysay?I'dneedtostudyformanyyearstounderstandthem."Indeed,peoplelistenwith amazementtothese"superhuman"individualsand,eveniftheydonotunderstandthem, theygoonlisteningasiftheydid. ProponentsofDarwinismwanttousethisdarkpowertosuppressthosewhobecome awareofitserrors.Theyinsistthatnomatterwhattheydo,theseindividualswillnever attain the level of knowledge achieved by these superhuman individuals. Advocates of evolutionsaythatnothingcanbeaccomplishedbycallingattentiontothecontradictionsand errorsofDarwin'stheory,andtheytrytointimidatethosewhotry. This influence is very strong in some scientific quarters. Turkish Darwinists, for example, regard foreign professors and all scientists who have worked on evolution throughouthistoryassuperiorhumanbeings.Theyclaimitamajoraccomplishmentifthey canunderstandonlypartsofthelecturespresentedbythem.Theyareproudiftheycan demonstrate some understanding of even a few paragraphs within this complex and incomprehensiblemass.Iftheydomanagetoachievethis,thentheyenterintodiscussions, writepapersandgivetalksaboutthelittletheywereabletounderstand. TurkishDarwinistsalsobelievethatworldfamousprofessorshavethousandsofpieces of evidence about human evolution, as well as information about fossils, mutations and naturalselection,thatprovethevalidityofevolution.Theythinkthatevolutionistscientists donotrevealalltheproofstheyhavesimplybecauseordinarypeoplecouldn'tunderstand theseabstrusescientificfacts;andthatproofsreleasedtothepublicareonalevelsimple enoughforthemtounderstand. However,thetruthisotherwise.Withthedevelopmentofscience,ithasbecomeclear that theseindividuals,presented asrespected scientists,have no evidence toprove their theory apart from a handful of false evidence and fabrications. The invalidity of these misleading interpretations has been shown hundreds of times by scientific investigation. (Fordetailedinformationinthissubject,seeHarunYahya's DarwinismRefuted,Goodword Books,2003andTheEvolutionDeceit,8thEdition,TahaPublishing,2003.) In conclusion, it is obvious that the evolutionist scientists perceived as superior are really trying to promote an imaginary scenario with their handful of false proofs and boundlesssuppositions.Fromthispointofview,theseindividuals'knowledge,intelligence

andlearninglosetheirimportance.Theymaywellhavealotoflearning,buttheydon't perceivethetruthinitordrawfromittherightconclusions.IntheQur'an,Allahspeaksof thosewhoareledastraybytheirknowledge,unabletoseetheplainfacts:

Have you seen him who takes his whims and desires to be his godwhom Allah has misguidedknowingly,sealinguphishearingandhisheartandplacingablindfoldoverhis eyes?WhothenwillguidehimafterAllah?Sowillyounotpayheed?Theysay,"Thereis nothingbutourexistenceinthisworld.Wedieandweliveandnothingdestroysusexceptfor time."Theyhavenoknowledgeofthat.Theyareonlyconjecturing.(SuratalJathiyya:2324)

In these verses, Allah describes the state of those people who, in spite of their knowledge,areunabletoconceiveofHisexistenceortheexistenceoftheafterlife,andwho claimthatthereisnolifebeyondthisworld.Evolutionistsarejustlikethesepeople,inthat theyarelimitedbytheirknowledgetoafewideasandarefarremovedfromreality.Because ofthespelltheyareunder,theyarelikethepeopleAllahstatesintheseverseswhoreally cannotfeel,seeorunderstand.

Darwinists'Disappointment
ThegreatadmirationforDarwinandevolutionistscientistsfeltbytheproponentsof the theory of evolution is one important result of the power of suggestion we spoke of earlier.Forthisreason,ineverythingwrittenaboutDarwin,thescientificdefeatofhistheory ofevolutioniscoveredup,andhiserrorsconcealed.Darwinisoftenpraisedasthegeniusof thecenturyevenofthemillennium.Heisvariouslycalledthe"LordoftheSpecies,""a uniquehumanbeing,"andpresentedasa"valuedscientist"wholoyallyadvocateshistheory inspiteofallthedifficultiesitpresents. Actually, however, Darwin is the architect of one of the most serious errors in the historyofscience.Histheoryrestsonnoconcreteevidence;itisonlyalogicalproposalashe himselfacknowledged.Inonelongchapter,"DifficultiesonTheory"in TheOriginofSpecies, Darwinadmittedthathistheorycouldnotaccountforsomeimportantquestions.Hehimself madefrequentmentionoftheproblems,insomeofthecommentshemade:
Longbeforehavingarrivedatthispartofmywork,acrowdofdifficultieswillhaveoccurredto thereader.SomeofthemaresogravethattothisdayIcanneverreflectonthemwithoutbeing staggered.38

Healsovoicedhisconcernsinlettershewrotetohisfriends:
PraydonotthinkthatIamsoblindasnottoseethattherearenumerousimmensedifficultiesin mynotions.39

Fromthesecomments,itisclearthathistheoryhadcometoamajorimpasse,andnot only Darwin became aware of this. After Darwin's death, his son, Francis, made this evaluationofhisfather'swork:
Myfather'smindwasnotscientific,andhedidnottrytogeneralizehisknowledgeundergenerallaws;yethe formedatheoryforalmosteverythingwhichoccurred.IdonotthinkIgainedmuchfromhimintellectually.40

Francis Darwin's statement contains an important truth. The Origin of Species is trumpetedasoneofthemostimportantworksinthehistoryofhumanity,butanyonewho hopedtofindinitsolidscientificproofforevolutionwouldbesurprisedandcomeaway empty handed. There isno solid proof anywhere in The Origin of Species to support the theoryofevolution;itnamesnonewspeciesthatevolvedthroughtheprocessofnatural selection;itdemonstratesnotransitionalformanddocumentsnoevolutionarymechanism. The onlyinterestingthinginthewholebook, actually,isitsbeingcompletespeculation, foundedonprobability,imagination,conjectureandsupposition. Therefore,thisbookshouldnothaveexertedsuchaninfluenceonpeople'slivesand ideas.Manyscientistshaveexpressedtheirsurpriseonreading TheOriginofSpecies,for example,theAmericanphysicistH.S.Lipson:
OnreadingTheOriginofSpecies,IfoundthatDarwinwasmuchlesssurehimselfthanheisoften represented to be; the chapter entitled "Difficulties of the Theory," for example, shows considerableselfdoubt.Asaphysicist,Iwasparticularlyintriguedbyhiscommentsonhowthe eyewouldhavearisen.41

Despite the scientific inadequacy of Darwin's theory, the most intelligent people disregardthisfactbecausetheyareunderthespellofDarwinism.

Method#2.Thosewhoacceptthetheoryofevolutionarepresentedas respected scientists; those who do not accept it are branded as conservatives
ProponentsofDarwinismpresentthemselvesasintelligent,modernandcontemporary individualspossessingvaststoresofinformation,andbrandthosewhobelieveinCreation asbackward,conservativebigots.Thiskindofmentalityappearsfrequentlyinevolutionist booksandpublications. Statements based on no concrete proof are made everywhere, to the effect that the theoryofevolutionisnowascientificfact,aprovenlawthateveryoneaccepts.Thisbeing thecase,anyonewhorejectsevolutionistreatedasanignoramusinthosequarterswhereit is accepted. Henry Morris tells how evolutionists regard those respected scientists who acceptCreation:
Infact,socommittedtoevolutionismaremostmodernpsychologistsandphilosophers(with whom they have a close kinship) that they now tend to regard biblical Christianity itself especiallycreationismasaformofmentaldisorder.Infact,anyformofreligionisconsidered bymanyevolutioniststobeunhealthy,avestigeofsociologicalpressuresintheanimalsocieties fromwhichtheyclaimhumansdeveloped.42

Ashesays,evolutionistspresenttheirtheorytothepublicwithanauraofscientific acceptance,accusingas"dogmatic"scientistswhodrawtheirattentiontothefactofCreation. However,inassumingthisstance,theyaredisplayingtheirowndogmatism,pretendingnot toseetheproofsforCreationinallthescientificfactsthatcreationistscientistssetout.Outof blind allegiance to their theory, they take no account of the concrete evidence their

opponentspresent,andtrytodefendtheirideasnomatterwhat. Inthisregard,wecangiveanexamplefromstatementsthatevolutioniststhemselves have made. In his book, Origins: A Skeptic's Guide to Creation of Life on Earth , the noted evolutionist,RobertShapiro,writesofhisdogmaticattachmenttothetheoryofevolution:
Somefuturedaymayyetarrivewhenallreasonablechemicalexperimentsruntodiscovera probableoriginforlifehavefailedunequivocally.Further,newgeologicalevidencemayindicate asuddenappearanceoflifeontheearth.Finally,wemayhaveexploredtheuniverseandfound notraceoflife,orprocessleadingtolife,elsewhere.Insuchacase,somescientistsmightchoose toturntoreligionforananswer.Others,however,myselfincluded,wouldattempttosortout thesurvivinglessprobablescientificexplanationsinthehopeofselectingonethatwasstillmore likelythantheremainder.43

WhatShapirowantstosayisquiteclear.Thefactthatheandmanyotherevolutionists areattachedtoDarwinismasifspellbound,leadsthemtorejecttheexistenceofAllah.This iswhat'sindicatedbythelogicof"Nomatterwhatproof wesee,wewillnotbelievein Creation."Butthismentalityisnotconfinedtopresentdayevolutionists;thoseinthepast alsosharedthesamedogmaticapproach.IntheQur'an,Allahtellsussomeimportantthings aboutsuchpeoplewhoconditionthemselvestorejectHim.Forexample,thesamementality isdemonstratedbysomepeoplewho,afterMosesshowedthemmanymiracles,saidtohim,

"NomatterwhatkindofSignyoubringustobewitchus,wewillnotbelieveinyou."(Surat alAraf:132)

They accused Moses (peace be upon him) of wanting to bewitch them, but did not realizethattheywerealreadyunderaspellthatmadethemdenyAllah.Today,thereare peoplewiththesamementality,undertheDarwinistspell,forwhomtherejectionofAllahis amatterofprinciple.Theyaresofargonethattheydonotevenrealizewhattheyaredoing. Forthisreason,theyliketheircounterpartsinthepastaccuseproponentsofCreationof dogmatism.

TheDelusionof"Majority"
In addition to what we said above, evolutionists claim that most people believe in evolutionandthatitplayedaroleintheoriginsoflife.Theyareconstantlysuggestingthat theyareinthemajority,andthatthemajorityisalwaysright.Theytrytoputpsychological pressureonotherswithsuchcommentsas,"Everyonebelievesinevolution,whydon'tyou?" OneTurkishevolutionistacademichasadmittedthatthesemethodsofsuggestionare wrong. According to Arda Denkel, a professor of philosophy at Bogazici University, evolutionistssuggestthattheirtheorymustbetruebecausesomanypeopleacceptit.But,he said, this means nothing from a scientific point of view. In an article published in the Cumhuriyet scientificsupplementary journal Bilim ve Teknik (Science and Technology), he writes:
Simplybecausemanyrespectedpeopleandinstitutionsadoptthetheoryofevolution,doesthat proveitsauthenticity?Or,willajudicialverdictconfirmitsvalidity?...[Theysay;]"Inourcountry

too, the theory of evolution is supported by all prominent scientists, the chairmen of TUBA [TurkishAcademyofSciences]andTUBITAK[TheScientificandTechnicalResearchCouncilof Turkey], rectors and deans." The support of such respected people is doubtlessly gratifying. However, can the truth be confirmed bythe approval ofrespected authorities? Let's remind ourselvesofahistoricalfact;Allalone,GalileoGalileiopposedtherespectedpeopleandjurists andespeciallythescientistsofhisday(therewerenowomenamongthem,sincewomenwere notinvolvedinsuchscientificendeavors).Butwasn'tGalileoGalileitellingandadvocatingthe truth?DidtheInquisitioninvalidatehisclaims?Thesupportoftherespectedandwidespread members of society does not convey authenticity, nor does it directly ensure that abelief is scientific.44

Denkel says that, even though Turkish evolutionists resort to such methods of suggestion,theycanproducenodefinitescientificproofinsupportofDarwinism.Hesays furtherthatTurkey'smostinfluentialcriticofDarwinism,theBilimArastirmaVakfi(Science ResearchFoundation),hasthemostconcretescientificproofagainstit:
Evolutionist scientists, while stressing the type of "excuses" I criticized above, say, "Besides, many scientists and institutions have published thousands of articles and books refuting Creationists'myths."Canoneexpectaseriousresultfromwordsthatareutteredthoughtlessly? Here,inmyopinion,iswheretheheartofthematterlies...Atrulyscientificattitudewould revealwhatthese"thousandsofarticlesandbooks"assert.Itshoulddisplayoroutlinetothe reader,atleastafewoftheirdataandarguments.Withthisgroupofscientists,however,suchis notthecase.Onthecontrary,handoutscirculatedbytheScienceResearchFoundation(SRF), continuallyputforwardcriticaljustificationswrittenfromtheirownstance.Ihavenoideawhat denialIcouldofferifanyoneweretosaythatthemembersofthegrouphadfallenbehindthe SRFintermsofbeingscientificbypublishingamanifesto...Unlesssomescientistswithagood graspofthisissueprovidescientificrefutationsforthejustificationsputforwardbytheSRF, appealingtoauthoritiesorhopingpatrioticliteraturetogetresultswillbeonlyadaydream. 45

Denkelisascientistwhosupportsthetheoryofevolution,butheisalsopreparedto admitthatDarwinistshavenoscientificresourcestorebutevidencethatinvalidatestheir theoryandrelyonlyontheeffectivenessofbaselesspropaganda.Evolutionists'majorrefuge isinthehackneyedsuggestionthatDarwinismisacceptedbythewholeworld. Today, however, it is evident that this isn't so. Those who care to look at science objectivelymusttakeintoaccountthegreatnumberofscientistswhohaveabandonedthe theoryoverthepast20to30years.Toavoiddoingthisisdepartingfromobjectivity.Today, asinthepast,manyscientistshavecomeoutfromundertheevolutionistspelltoseethe reality of Creation in the world; and have produced a great deal of work to show the invalidity of evolution. Neither philosophers nor theologians, these are wellseasoned academicsandexpertsinfieldssuchasbiology,biochemistry,microbiology,anatomyand paleontology; andcomefrom countries like America,England, IsraelandAustralia. (For more detailed information, see Harun Yahya's The Qur'an Leads the Way to Science, NickleodeonBooks,2002.)Onlysomescientistsacceptevolution,andnottheentirescientific world. Moreover,wemustmakeitclearthatthere'snovalueinbeinginthemajority;and evolutionistsarenottheonlyonestomakethissuggestion.Throughouthistory,manyof thosewhohaverejectedthesuperiorcreationofAllahhaveadvocatedthattheyarecorrect because they represent the majority. With such suggestions as "Look, everyone rejects

religion;cansomanypeoplebewrong?"they'vetriedtodivertpeoplefromthepaththat Allah invites them to follow. Allah cautions his faithful servants against these kinds of individuals,andwarnsthatconformingtothemajoritywillonlybringthemharm:
If you obeyed most of those on earth, they would misguide you from Allah's Way. They follownothingbutconjecture.Theyareonlyguessing.(SuratalAnam:116)

Inotherverses,Allahtellsusthatmanypeopleinthepastignoredthewarningsthey weregiven,declaringthattheywereinthemajority,butthatthiswasofnousetothem.He saysthatthosewhoattainedsalvationwerethosewhobelieved:

Weneversentawarnerintoanycitywithouttheaffluentpeopleinitsaying,"Werejectwhat youhavebeensentwith."Theyalsosaid,"Wehavemorewealthandchildren.Wearenot goingtobepunished."Say:"MyLordexpandstheprovisionofanyoneHewillsorrestrictsit. Butthemajorityofmankinddonotknowit."Itisnotyourwealthoryourchildrenthatwill bringyouneartoUsonlyinthecaseofpeoplewhobelieveandactrightly;suchpeoplewill haveadoublerecompenseforwhattheydid.TheywillbesafefromallharmintheHigh HallsofParadise.(SurahSaba':3437)

Method#3:Theytrytoinfluencepeoplebyusingscientifictermsand conceptsthatlaymencannotunderstand
Onemajortoolinthepowerofpersuasionusedbysupporters ofDarwinismisthe suggestion that an ideais incomprehensible. These demagogues try to impressby using terms and Latin names that many people cannot understand; their impenetrable style employsdizzyinglogicandstrange,irrelevantexamples.Themethodbehindallofthisisthe bewitchingprincipleof"incomprehensibility." Their writings and lectures string words together in such a way that many cannot understandthem;theireffectonpeopleisjustlikethatofasorcererusingstrangemagic wordsasheconjuresaspell.Theirincomprehensibilityisevenacceptedasasignofthe authors' breadth of knowledge, power and virtue; and this impact increases with the obscurityoftheirwords.Thescientistwhospeaksorwritesinthemostopaquemanneris toutedasthemostbrilliant. This ploy that evolutionistsuse especially in titles of their articles, iswhy so many peoplesayfromthestartthattheycouldnotpossiblyunderstandsuchloftyknowledge.As examples,herearethetitlesofsomeoftheirarticles: "Crystal structure of the hereditary haemochromatosis protein HFEcomplexed with transferrinreceptor" "An electroneutral sodium/bicarbonate cotransporter NBCn1 and associated sodium channel" "GlycosylationofNucleocytoplasmicProteins:SignalTransductionandOGlcNAc"

Allthesubjectsindicatedinthetitlesaboveareofcourseserioustopicsdeservingof scientific investigation. It may be quite appropriate to use such terms in an appropriate place.Butusingsuchwordswon'thelpevolutionistsgetaroundtheirgreatimpasse,for many other basic questions stand in the way of their theory that evolutionists have to answer,butcannot. Evolutionistsmustespeciallyanswerhowthefirstcellsandfirstlivingcreaturescame intobeing.Wheredidthemindbogglinglysophisticatedsystemswithinacellcomefrom? And how did the imaginary transition from sea to land occur? Alternatively, they must explainwhatclearproofsthereareforsuchmattersasthesupposedevolutionofhuman beings,theoriginoftheextraordinarycharacteristicsinanimals,thesourceofselfsacrifice andintelligent behaviorin livingcreatures. They mustalsogiveconcrete proof for their claims about the gradual formation of structures like DNA, eyes and wings; about the developmentovertimeofcells'abilityoftosynthesizeproteinsflawlessly,andofbloodto clot.Asyet,noevolutionisthascomeforwardtopresentanyclear,concreteproofofthese most basic matters regarding the formation of living creatures. When you examine their lectures,booksandarticles,youwillseethat,whenrequiredtoexplainthesematters,they trytodivertattentionbyhidingthembehindcountlessscientificterms,Latinwordsand sentencesthatordinarypeoplecannotunderstand. Takingthispointofview,wecanseethatthetheoryofevolutionisawordgamebased on empty talk, interesting inferences, guesses and suppositions. It relies on long philosophical excursions and repetition of words that serve only to keep people from thinking.Fromthefewtitlesofarticleslistedabove,youcanseethatitisawordgamebased onincomprehensibility. Evolutionistsbelievethattheywillreachtheirgoalsbyusingsuchmethods,thinking they'vegiventheimpressionofstatingsomethinginahighlyscientificstyle.However,they arebenefitingonlyfromthefactthatthegeneralpublicknowsverylittleaboutscientific matters. Tobringevenmoreclaritytothematter,wecanciteGeorgeStavropoulos,aproponent ofthetheoryofevolution,fromanarticlehewroteinthejournalAmericanScientist:
Yet,underordinaryconditions,nocomplexorganicmoleculecaneverformspontaneously,but willratherdisintegrate,inagreementwiththesecondlaw.Indeed,themorecomplexitis,the moreunstableitwillbe,andthemoreassured,soonerorlater,itsdisintegration.Photosynthesis andalllifeprocesses,andevenlifeitself,cannotyetbeunderstoodintermsofthermodynamics oranyotherexactscience,despitetheuseofconfusedordeliberatelyconfusinglanguage. 46

Bookswithcoldandincomprehensibleappearance
AccordingtoDarwinistprinciples,tolendascientificappearancetoagiventopic, thefirstattributeis"coldness."Evolutioniststrytomaketheirbooksseemheavy,gloomy andcold.Theyarrangetheirbooks'coverdesignsandcontentsoastomakethemseemhard to read and understand. Their illustrations and pictures are usually incomprehensible drawings and vague pictures consisting of abstract shapes, incomprehensible bone

fragmentsandstones.Plentyofcomplexgraphicsandnumericalcalculations,theybelieve, will make their works appear more sophisticated. In this way, they hope to convey the impressionthatevolutionis"scientific,"butthatpeoplecannotcomprehendthis,duetotheir lackofknowledge. Stavropoulosclearlystatesthatsomeexplanationsgivenbyevolutionistscientistsare complexanddeliberatelyconvoluted.Moreover,heopenlyadmitsthatnobranchofscience cancastlightontheprocessesoflife. Uncovering theseDarwinistgamesand tactics isno doubtimportant forthosewho don'tknowmuchaboutthematterandputsaheavyresponsibilityonthosewhoareaware ofhowevolutionistsusethepowerofsuggestion.Carryingoutthisresponsibilityisone obviouswaytoremovetheliesandfabricationsblockingadvancesinthescientificworld.

Method # 4: In order not to break the spell of Darwinism, they themselves do not read, nor do they want their followers to read anythingthatcriticizesthem
ThosecaughtunderthedarkspellofDarwinismdonotwanttodispelit.Iftheycan helpit,theydonotreadbooks,papersorscientificreportsdebunkingDarwinismbecause theybelievesuchliteratureisverydangerous.Theybecomeveryupsetiftheyhearofbooks and activities that go against what they believe. News of the publication of a book demonstrating the collapse of Darwinism is the worst news they could receive, because peoplemightbuyandreadit.Forthosewhowanttopreservethespell,theirgreatestfearis thatpeoplewillreadopposingideas,evaluatethemandthencometoknowthetruth. They hesitate to let their followers to read this kind of literature, because they themselveshaveneverreadit.Attheirlectures,intheirbooksandintheirconferences,the salient message they give is people should not read this literature. They fear not for themselves,butthatotherDarwinistswilllosetheirfaith.They'reespeciallyupsetatthe prospectthatyoungpeoplewillcometoknowthatDarwinismisafabrication,sincethey trustthatyouthwillbedefendersofthetheoryinthefuture.Seeingthemasaguaranteefor the future, they want to make sure that youngsters never lose the suggestions about Darwinism put into their minds. In order to protect them from supposedly dangerous influencesthatis,frompeoplewhotellthemthefactsofCreationtheymakeeveryeffort toinsulatetheirpupilsfromtheoutsideworld. Toachievethis,theyfirstgatheryoungpeopletogetherincampsandcoursestheyhave organized and instill strong suggestions in their minds. They educate them with incomprehensiblewords,complexnarrativesanddepictions;thiseducationcontinueswhile theyeat,playsports,readbooksandconverse.Theymeettogethersoofteninthebeliefthat inorderfortheDarwinist"trance"nottobebroken,youthneedtobekeptunderconstant observation and under the power of suggestion. Even the shortest break could let some suspicionentertheirmindsthatthetheoryofevolutionisamyth. Theywanttopreventyouthfromreadingworksabouttheinvalidityofevolutionand

thefactofCreationoutoffearthattheirtrancewillbebroken,thespellwillloseitseffect, andthatyoungpeoplewillentertaindoubtsaboutthetheory.Toremovesuchdoubts,the onlythingtheycandoisexaggeratetheideaofthesignificanceandthepowerofevolution. TeilharddeChardinwasoneoftheleadersofUniversalHumanisminFrance;thesewords hewroteareaclearexampleofthiskindofevolutionistdiscourse:

Isevolutionatheory,asystem,orahypothesis?Itismuchmoreitisageneralpostulateto whichalltheories,allhypotheses,allsystemsmusthenceforthbowandwhichtheymustsatisfy inordertobethinkableandtrue.Evolutionisalightwhichilluminatesallfacts,atrajectory whichalllinesofthoughtmustfollowthisiswhatevolutionis. 47

From this quote, we can see that Chardin is blindly attached to evolution, even if scientificevidencepointsintheoppositedirection.And,inatacticusedgenerallybyall evolutionists, he proclaims his faith in no uncertain terms. Against the possibility that supportersmayreadandbeinfluencedbyotherideas,evolutionistsalwaysspeakwithtotal certainly. If they read anything that says that logic and evidence from science have invalidated evolution, they take measures to keep their followers from abandoning the theorybysuchreasoningasthis:"Evenifthereisnoproofforevolution,neverthelessithas happened." Umit Sayin, a longtime writer for the evolutionist journal Bilim Utopya (Science Utopia), expresses this blind allegiance with the words, "Let's assume that we have not foundanyfossilsyet;thenthisshowsthatalllifeformshavedisappeared,oramalgamated into nature," or "Let's say that allfossils had not ended up as we hoped! Even such an incidentdoesnotmakethetheoryofevolutioncollapse." 48So,inorderthatnosupportermay beinfluencedbyanyworkexplainingthescientificinvalidityofevolution,hetookmeasures onhisowntopreventthebreakingofthespell.

Method#5:InorderthatthespellofDarwinismmaynotbebroken, evolutionistskeeptheirsupportersfromthinking
Darwinists'mainaimistopreventtheirsupportersfromthinking,becauseanyperson ofconsciencewouldtakeverylittletimetorealizehowmuchevidencepointstowardsthe theorybeinginvalid.So,makinguseofeverymeansattheirdisposal,theybombardtheir followers with propaganda, leaving them no time to think for themselves. They use advertisements,movies, music videos, song lyrics, cartoons, books, articlesandanything elsetheycanfindtoperpetuatethespell'seffect.Theirpurposeistohavepeoplememorizea fewwordsandcatchyphrasesandbecomefamiliarwithimages.Theyoccupyourevery moment with imaginary transitions from apes to human beings, fossil images and reconstructionsofprimitiveman.Newspapersandmagazinesbelaborthesubjectwhether inpassingorcomprehensively,withasinglewordorentiretexttoensurethatallisin ordernottobreakthespell. Evolutionistsknowperfectlywellthatdoubtingtheirtheoryleadstoreligionandthe acceptance of Creation. Therefore, they try to perpetuate the spell in daily conversation, whichisthereasonbehindalltheirantireligiousanecdotes,conversations,caricaturesand writings. Themotivebehindtheirantireligioushumorandalmostinsultingcommentsisto

dissuadeindividualsfromtheslightesttendencytowardreligionandtodestroyalldoubts thatariseintheirmindsabouttheoriginsoflife. Theevolutionistdesigntoforestallpeoplefromthinkingcanbeillustratedbyarecent occurrencein1999,whenourbookentitledTheEvolutionDeceitwasdistributedinallpartsof Turkey.Readerssawallthefactsprovingthattheideaofevolutionwasfullofdeceptions. This created anatmosphere ofpanicamongTurkey's evolutionistandmaterialistcircles; theywerethreatenedthat TheEvolutionDeceit wasinformingpeopleabouttheirtheory's scientific invalidity. What upset them most was the chapter entitled "The Secret Beyond Matter,"whichdemolishedthematerialists'philosophicalideathateverythingiscomposed ofmatter. ThepersonwhoexpressedmostclearlytheworryandpanicexperiencedinTurkey's evolutionistmaterialistcircleswasRennanPekunlu,alecturerandwriterfor BilimUtopya (ScienceUtopia),ajournalwhosemandateistopromotematerialism.Bothinarticlesforthe journal and in comments on a number of panel discussions, Pekunlu indicated that The EvolutionDeceitwasamajorthreat.BesidethechaptersdebunkingDarwinism,whatworried himmostwasthesectionentitled"TheSecretBeyondMatter."Pekunlusentamessagetohis readersandtohisfewlistenerstellingthemnottobetakeninbytheseideasandtoremain loyal to materialism. For his thesis, he found support in Vladimir I. Lenin and advised everyone to read Materialism and EmpirioCriticism, the book Russia's bloody communist leaderwroteacenturyearlier.ButtheonlythingPekunlumanagedtoaccomplishwasto repeat Lenin's warning to his readers not to think about this subject, or they would be carriedawaybyreligion.Inhisarticle,PekunluquotedthesewordsofLenin's:
Onceyoudenytheobjectivereality[thatis]givenusinsensation,youhavealreadylostevery weapon against fideism [reliance on faith alone], for you have slipped into agnosticism or subjectivismandthatisallthatfideismrequires.Asingleclawensnared,andthebirdislost. AndourMachists[anadherentofMachism,amodernpositivistphilosophy],haveallbecome ensnaredinidealism,thatis,inadiluted,subtlefideism;Theybecameensnaredfromthemoment theytook"sensation" notasanimageoftheexternalworld,butasaspecial"element."Itis nobody'ssensation,nobody'smind,nobody'sspirit,nobody'swill. 49

ThesewordsrevealthattherealitywhichLeninhimselffearedandwantedtoerase from his mind as well as his comrades'is the same thing that worries evolutionist materialiststoday.ButPekunluandothermaterialistshavemuchmoretoworryaboutthan didLenin:Comparedtoahundredyearsago,thetruthhasbecomeclearer,strongerand moredefinite.Forthefirsttimeinhistory,thistruthisbeingdiscussedinaverychallenging wayposingagreatdangerfortheDarwinistspellthatmaterialistshavetakensuchpains to perpetuate. (For adetailed discussionof this matter, seeHarun Yahya's TheEvolution Deceit,8thEdition,TahaPublishing,2003.)

Method#6:Theypassoverquestionsaboutevidenceforthecollapseofthetheory ofevolutionwithdismissiveresponsesandlater,givetheimpressionthatthey answeredthem

Scientistswhosupportthetheoryofevolutionpretendtoansweraquestionwithout reallydoingso.Whenconfrontedwithaquestiontheycan'tanswer,theyweavelongand complicated sentences,sothatpeople whoknow littleaboutthe subjectwilldoubt their abilitytounderstandit.They'llthinktheyareinthepresenceofa"great"scientist.And,no matterwhatnonsensecomesoutofhismouth,theywillbeinfluencedbythewayhestrings sentencestogetherinawaythatsoundsbeautiful. Oneexampleconcernsthetransitionalformsthatevolutionistpaleontologistscannot accountfor.FollowingisaquotationfromaDarwinist'sbookonthesubjectoftransitional forms.Afterdeclaringthatthere'sabasicexplanationforthem,authorRichardMilnergives thefollowingstrangeexample:
Transitionalfossils("links"betweenmajorgroups)arenotablyrarebecausemostspeciesremain stableforlongperiods.Whenchangeoccurs,itisfairlyrapid(inrelationtothegeologicaltime), andoftenbeginsamongsmall,isolatedpopulations.Imagineamultilevelparkinggaragefrozen intime.Large"populations"ofcarswouldbefoundonthevariousfloors,butonlyafewonthe ramps.Thetimethecarsspentintherampsisshortcomparedtotimetheyremainedparked,yet eachmusthavetraveledtheramp.50

To briefly consider the reasons for the irrationality of this answer: First, there are millions of living species in the world today. According to evolutionists, each of them evolvedinslowstagesfromanothercreature.Forexample,wecanlookattheimaginary changeofastarfishintoafish.First,therewasastarfish;thentwoarmsofthestarfishbegin to take the shape of fins. Then it develops a backbone. Later, other changes in its body becomenoticeable.Andinthefinalstage,thereisnomorestarfish;thereisafish.Nowletus look at the relation between this example and the imaginary claims of evolutionists. Of course, there is no relation between the above analogy of a parking garage and the imaginarystagesintheformationoflivingcreatures.Thatis,carscanaffordtobeparkedin agarageforlongperiodsoftime,butthosecreaturesthataresaidtohaveevolvedhaveno timetowait. According to the evolutionist claim, any species had to undergo this evolutionary change within a specific period of time. This means that there must have been many transitionalforms.So,itisnolongeraquestionoflifeformsinstasis,similartothecars parkedinagarage,withveryrareepisodesofsuddentransformation.Onthecontrary,there mustbemillionsuponmillionsoftransitionalstagesforeveryoneofthemyriadofspecies aliveintheworldtoday.Howstrangethatthereisnotoneextantexampleofthesemillions oftransitionalforms! Now it becomes apparent just how meaningless and deceptive such examples are. Actually,evolutioniststhemselvesmaybeawarethattheirexamplesdon'tcorrespond to reality,buttheywanttogivetheimpressionthattheyhaven'tremainedmutebutgiven thoughtfulanswerstosuchquestions.Inthisway,theyhopetopreservethefaithoftheir supporters. To answer questions posed by the fact of Creation, evolutionists give courses, hold panel discussions, and write books containing the kind of logic we saw in the above examples.Withtheseinitiatives,theytrytoindicatethatthespellhasnotbeenbrokenand thattheyarecontinuingasusual.Theywanttosendthemessagethatthattheyarestill

standingontheirtwo feet,andtohavethatmessagereachtherightpeople,theypublish booksandjournalsthatonlyillustratethehopelessnessoftheirposition.Theirpublications arenothingmorethanworksofrhetoricdesignedtoconsoleoneanother,butdonotgive anyresponsetobasicscientificevidencethatinvalidatestheirtheory.Theytalkrepeatedly aboutthesamesubjectsasifnoproofhadbeengiventocausetheirtheory'scollapse. Oneofthemostseriousimpassesforevolutionisthemolecularstageintheappearanceoflife onEarth.Fromamolecularpointofview,thetheoryofevolutionhasnotbeenabletoexplainhowlife beganorhowproteinsandcellsthebuildingblocksoflifecameintobeing.Disregardingallsuch objections,evolutionistsopttoconcentrateonquestionsofsecondaryimportance. Forexample,asMichaelJ.Behestatesinhisbook, 80%ofthearticlesonmolecular evolution published in the Journal of Molecular Evolution (JME), the world's best known molecularbiologyperiodical,havetodowiththecomparisonofaminoacidsequences.For example,alltheaminoacidsoftwoproteinsarearrangedandexaminedinaseriesorthe nucleotidesonaDNAmoleculearecompared.Behesaysthatthiscomparisondoesnothing toremovetheimpasseconfrontingmolecularevolution.Hewrites:
Buttherootquestionremainsunanswered:Whathascausedcomplexsystemstoform?Noone haseverexplainedindetailed,scientificfashionhowmutationandnaturalselectioncouldbuild thecomplex,intricatestructuresdiscussedinthisbook.51

TherealitystatedinBehe'swordsisquiteclear:Evolutionistsgivenoclearanswerto questionsaboutlife'srealorigins,becauseit'simpossibletoanswerthesequestionsinterms ofevolutionaryprocessesandrandomstagesofdevelopment.Forthisreason,theyignore theirdeficienciesandcontinuetoperpetuatetheDarwinistspell.Theyfilltheirpublications withirrelevancies,decorativeillustrationsandLatinwordsthathavenothingtodowith provingevolution.Inthisway,theyobscuretheirexplanationsofbasicsubjectsandtrust thattheyhavedeceivedpeople.

Method#7:Darwinistsresorttoeverykindofrhetoricaldevicetogetpeople undertheirinfluence
Aswehaveoftenpointedout,oneofDarwinists'maincharacteristicsistheirskillin rhetoricaldemagoguery.Theyareverydeftintheiruseoflanguageandwordgames.Itmay seemasiftheyaresayingalot,whereastheyareactuallystatingnothingofsubstance.In spite of the hours they spend in their conferences, they cannot utter a single word to substantiatetheirtheory.Theyaimtomakepeoplebelievethembyreleasinganavalanche of complicated words and explanations, thereby creating the illusion that what they say followsalongscientificlines. Darwinistsgointodetailaboutgeology,genetics,medicineandotherareasthathave nothingtodowiththebasicsofevolution.Theydiscusstheseissuesatsuchlength,insucha weighty manner that they put their listeners into a stupor. They insert evolutionist explanationsintosubjectsthathavenothingtodowiththeirtheory,creatingtheimpression thattheyareactuallyrelevanttotheirtopicandsupporttheirpropositions.Forinstance, theydeliverlongwindedspeechesaboutrecentdevelopmentsingenetics.Butinwhatthey

say,thereisnothingtosupportthetheoryofevolution.Despitethis,theyendtheirarticles orlecturesbysaying,"Yousee,thescienceofgeneticsprovidesimportantevidenceforthe theoryofevolution,"inthisway,givingtheimpressionthatgeneticscorroboratesevolution. Theyalsogetpeopleundertheirdarkspellbysuchdeceptionsas:"Wedohavealotof evidence,butnothaveenoughtimetoconsideritall,so,we'lltalkaboutsomethingelse."Or, "Thisbookorevenanencyclopediaisn'tbigenoughtocontaintheproofsforevolution, soIwilltalkonlyaboutoneortwo,"or,"Icouldexplainproofsforthetheoryofevolution, but you wouldn't understand, so never mind." This way, they never resolve the basic questionsthattheirtheoryshould.TheevolutionarybiologistChristopherWillsresortsto thesamemethodinoneofhisbooks:
Itwillbenecessaryfirsttotakeaquickglanceatsomeoftheevidencethathasaccumulatedsince thetimeofDarwinabouthowevolutionworks.Iwilltrytomakethisaspainlessandinteresting aspossible.Thereisinanycasenowayabookthissizecouldcoveritall.Afriendofminehas beenworkingonanencyclopedicevolutionbookforyearsandIwishhimluck. 52

However,whatWillssaysherehasnorelationtoreality.Aswesaidearlier,evolutionist claims are totally incredible since they clearly go against scientific discoveries. So he is completelywrongtostatethereismoreproofthancanbefittedintoanencyclopedia.He repeatsthisexplanationsooftentocoverupwhyevolutionistsalwayspresentthesame supposedproofsineverybookandineverylecture.Theprooftheyofferhasinfactbeen frequentlyrefutedinmanyantievolutionistpublications.Evolutionistsrealizethatifthey acknowledgethesefacts,they'llbeforcedtoadmittheinvalidityoftheirtheory.Forthis reason,itseems,theyactasifnoonehasrefutedtheirproofs. PhillipE.Johnsonstatesthatthetheoryofevolutionissupportedonlybydemagoguery andthepowerofpersuasion:
Thetheoryissustainedlargelybyapropagandacampaignthatreliesonalltheusualtricksof rhetoricalpersuasion:hiddenassumptions,questionbeggingstatementsofwhatisatissue,terms that are vaguely defined and change their meaning in midargument, attacks on straw men, selectivecitationofevidence,andsoon.Thetheoryisalsoprotectedbyitsculturalimportance. 53

ItispossibletogivemanyexamplesoftherhetoricthatJohnsonmentions.Onegood example of the word games that evolutionist scientists play to deceive people is the followingstatementbytheTurkishDarwinist,UmitSayin:
LifeoriginatedintheEarth'sseaorlakes;orthemolecularinformationlikelytoformlifecame frommeteoritesorcometsfallingfromspace. 54

Here,Sayinaccountsforthebeginningsoflifeinaveryunclearway,andbasedonno scientificevidence.Healwaysusesequivocalexpressionssothat,ifevolutionisnottenable intermsofthisworld,hecanleaveadooropentoouterspace.Fromstatementslikethese, it'sclearthatevolutionistshavenothingtosayabouttheoriginsoflife. AnothermethodDarwinistsemployistoselectexamplesthathavenothingtodowithlogicorreason andproposethemasiftheyindicatedsomemajorscientificreality.Evolutionistsmisleadthepublicbygiving examplesfromdailylifetomakeillogicalideasseemreasonable.Welookedatoneexampleofthis comparingatransitionalfossiltoacarinaparkinggarageearlier,butitwillbeusefultogivefurther

examples. ApertinentexampleisonethatUmitSayintookfromanevolutionistbythenameofTimM.Berra. Inhisbook,Berrashowedaseriesofpicturesofthe1953,1962,1978and1990modelsofaCorvetteand suggestedthat"thedescentwithmodificationisoverwhelminglyobvious"inthisprocess andthat"thisiswhatpaleontologistsdowithfossils."55 It'seasytoseehowirrationalandunrealisticthisexampleis.Theauthorspeaksabout the"evolution"ofaCorvette,neverattributingittothelong,coordinatedworkofengineers, designers,andcomputersasifitwerewhollyaresultofthechanceeffectsofmountain winds, lightening, rain and sunlight. However, no Corvette appeared by chance. It is a beautiful sign of creation. So Berra's example proves not the theory of evolution, but Creation. The public in general has never considered these matters to any great extent, however,becausetheiropportunitiestodosoarelimited,andsoevolutionistscanexploit themfortheirownends.Inwhattheysayandwrite,theyhidebehindtheirpositionsas scientistsandemploymanysenselessexplanations. Books by Richard Dawkins, one of the world's most noted evolutionist scientists, frequentlyfeatureexamplesdesignedtoportrayevolutionarytheoriesinacomprehensible andrationallight.Inhisbook, TheSelfishGene,hewritesthatgenesmaybecomparedto Chicagogangsters:
Theargumentofthisbookisthatwe,andallotheranimals,aremachinescreatedbyourgenes. LikesuccessfulChicagogangstersourgeneshavesurvived,insomecasesformillionsofyearsin ahighlycompetitiveworld.56

Dawkins cannot explain how even one gene came into being, but does make the preposterouscomparison,suggestingthatgenessurviveastheresultofchanceevents.But whatapitythatreaderswhoknownothingaboutthesubjectmayacceptthisaslogicaland convincing,justbecauseDawkinsisaprofessor. Aswecanseefromtheexamplessofar,Darwinistshavenothingelsetodobuttryto persuadepeoplewithabsurdanalogiessuchasChicagogangsters,Corvettesandparking garages.Apartfromsuchemptyexamples,theyhavenoacceptedscientificfindingstoprove theirassertions.

Method # 8: By continually repeating empty words asin a hypnotic spell,theytrytoputpeople'slogictosleep

Another point to stress in relation to the evolutionists' suggestive rhetoric is their continueduseoftheiremptywordsandformulasinplaceofscientificproof.Throughsuch persuasive methods, these "magic" words and formulas occur dozens, even hundreds of timesineverybooktheywrite,soastoimplanttheminreaders'minds.Theyloadtheir sentences with expressions such as, "If human beings exist today, evolution must have happened,""Humansarethemosthighlydeveloped animals,""Amongallthespeciesof animals,onlyhumanbeings...,""Finally,evolution'smissinglinkhasbeenfound,""Inthe transitionfromprimitivetomodernman,""definitelyproven,unquestionablefacts,has

been proven once again, there is no doubt." Allthese expressionsintend to insinuate in people'smindstheideathattheireverystatementhasascientificfoundation.Intheirbook Hamlet's Mill:An Essay Investigating the Origins of Human Knowledge and Its Transmission ThroughMyth,GiorgiodeSantillanaandHerthavonDechendstatethatevolutionistsuse thismethod:
Gradually,wearetold,stepbystep,menproducedtheartsandcrafts,thisandthat,untilthey emergedinthelightofhistory...Thosesoporificwords"gradually"and"stepbystep"repeated incessantly,areaimedatcoveringanignorancewhichisbothvastandsurprising.Oneshould liketoinquire:Whichsteps?Butthenoneislulled,overwhelmedandstupefiedbythebythe gradualnessofitall,whichisatbestaplatitude,onlygoodforpacifyingthemind,sincenoone iswillingtoimaginethatcivilizationappearedinathunderclap. 57

Actually, if any ordinary person used the terms mentioned in the above quote, he wouldn'tbeconsideredreliable.Butwhensomeoneactingsureofhimselfandlookinglikea seriousscientistusesthisstyle,peoplelistenwithamazement. The word "programmed" Dawkins uses has the kind of magical effect we've been talkingabout.Heusesthiswordfrequentlyinhisbooks;in TheSelfishGene,forexample,he analysesthephenomenonofaltruismfromanevolutionarypointofview:"Itmayjustbe moredifficulttolearnaltruismthanitwouldbeifweweregeneticallyprogrammedtobe altruistic."58 Throughout his book, Dawkins speaks constantly of creatures being programmedandanalyzestheirbehaviorbasedonthisidea.Buthecannotanswerquestions aboutwhodidtheprogramming,howcreatureswereprogrammedandwhatthepurposeof thisprogrammingis.AccordingtoDawkins,thereisaprogramofwhichtheprogrammeris unknown.IfsomeoneaskedDawkins,andthosewhosharehismindset,whocreatedthe program,theywouldprobablyreplytoperpetuatetheDarwinistspellthatit'sa"miracle ofnature." Someonewhoseawarenessisn'tcloudedbyDarwinism'sspellcaneasilyunderstandthat naturecouldnotencodeinthegenesoflivingcreaturesthemillionsofbitsofinformationit contains;nocreatureinnaturepossessesonebitofthisinformationbyitsownwillthatitcan encodeinanotherbeing. Obviously, it is Allah, with His supreme power and knowledge, Who created the geneticinformationineverycreature.Butsomeoneundertheinfluenceoftheevolutionist spelldoesnotunderstandthis.Theveiloverhiseyesmeanshecannotseetheplaintruth.In theQur'anAllahgivesusmanyexamplesofthisspiritualstate.Ittellsusthatthroughout thecourseofhistory,therehavebeenthosewhocouldnotseetheobviousfactofCreation. Allahrevealsthisoutrightinabilitytounderstandinthefollowingverse:
Asforthosewhodisbelieve,itmakesnodifferencetothemwhetheryouwarnthemordonot warnthem,theywillnotbelieve.Allahhassealeduptheirheartsandhearingandovertheir eyesisablindfold.Theywillhaveaterriblepunishment.(SuratalBaqara:67)

Method#9:Theytrytoproveevolutionontheevidenceofirrelevant topicsanddiscoveries

AnothermethodDarwinistsusetoperpetuatetheirspellistopresenttopicsthathave nothingtodowith evolution as"evidence" forthe validity oftheirtheory. Forexample, they'llwritepagesaboutthemarvelousexamplesofCreationtobefoundinthebodiesof humans and animals, but end their treatise by saying, "Here is a beautiful product of evolution."Butlearninghowasystemfunctionsisnotenoughtounderstandhowandwhy itcameintobeing.Byobservation,forexample,wecanlearnhowthesolarsystemworks, howtheplanetsinteractwithoneanother,andhowfasttheyrotate.Thatdoesnotrelateto howand whythe solarsystemcameto bebut this is what evolutionistsdo. They talk endlessly about matters of genetics, space research, biology, anatomy, geology and sociology;butneverdodealwiththebasicquestionofhoworwhythesethingscameinto existence. According to the noted American professor of biochemistry, Michael J. Behe, evolutionistsstrivetoexplaineverysubject,relevantorirrelevant,intermsofevolution:
The theory has even been stretched by some scientists to interpret human behavior: why desperatepeoplecommitsuicide,whyteenagershavebabiesoutofwedlock,whysomegroups dobetteronintelligenceteststhanothergroups,andwhyreligiousmissionariesforgomarriage andchildren.Thereisnothingnoorganoridea,nosenseorthoughtthathasnotbeenthe subjectofevolutionaryrumination.59

JulianHuxley,oneoftheleadingevolutionistsofthetwentiethcentury,explainshow theywanttohavetheirtheoryacceptedasaprincipleencompassingthewholeuniverse:
TheconceptofDarwinismwassoonextendedintootherthanbiologicalfields.Inorganicsubjects suchasthelifehistoryofstarsandtheformationofthechemicalelementsontheonehand,and on the other hand subjects like linguistics, social anthropology, and comparative law and religion, began to bestudied from an evolutionary angle, until today we areenabled to see evolutionasauniversalandallpervadingprocess. 60

Astheaboveexamplesshow,theirgoalistopersuadethepublicthatevolutionisa universal principle and a process that encompasses everything. Therefore, they rate everythingfromeconomytothemarriageasamatterofevolution.Atthesametime,this methodletsevolutionistscasttheirspellovereveryareaoflife.Forexample,whenspeaking abouttechnologicaloperationsorthedevelopmentofcomputers,atanymomenttheycan stopwhattheyaresayingtomakeacommentdevoidofallscientificmeaningsuchas,"This isafineexampleoftheprocessofevolution."Anythinkingperson,freeoftheevolutionist spell,caneasilyunderstandthatthiscommentislikeaCommunistideologuesaying,"Marx wasrightagain:ThedollarhaslostvalueinrelationtotheGermanmark."Surely,Marxist ideology has nothing to do with the dollarand the German mark, just as the supposed processofevolutionhasnothingtodowithcomputers.

Method # 10: They use scientifically unwarranted topics and discoveriesasproofsofevolution

Darwinistsloyaltotheirtheorypresentscientificallyunwarrantedtopicstothepublic as if they were facts. For example, a presenter takes a simple fossil bone; for hours he

discussesthecomplexinformationrevealedbyvariousmarkingsonthebone;hegivesthe boneaLatinnamethatmostpeoplecannotpronounce,togetherwithexhaustiveinformation abouttheancestorsandthelifestyleofthepersontowhomthebonebelonged.Ordinary peopleareveryimpressedbyhispresentation.Listenersassumeheknowsalotaboutthe bone'sprovenanceandauthenticityandthateverythinghesaysrestsonscientificevidence. Butthetruth isotherwise;thepresentationisnothingotherthanadeceptivegamewith supposedproofs. Justlikeasorcerer,anevolutionisttakesbonesintohishandandcreatestheillusion thatitcanrevealmanysecretsabouttheevolutionaryprocess.Butactually,hehasnoproof thatcanlethimmakeanyassertions. Inordertounderstandthismatterbetter,itwillbeusefultoexamineabookexplaining theoriginsofhumanlifeandtheprocessofevolution,writtenbyafossilexpertwhoisa proponentofthetheoryofevolution.Themostimportantaspectofanybookwrittenbyan expertwouldbeindescriptionsrelevanttothegeographicalregionwhereheconductshis studies.Asinalegendoratale,thewriterdescribestheregion'sclimate,floraandfauna, mountains,lakesandmeadows,inordertoputthereaderoutoftouchwithhispersonal realityandusherhimintoanimaginaryworld.Becausehehasnosubstantialevidence,he mustresorttoobfuscationandtellingoffairytalesinordertoinfluenceandpersuadethe public. But when the topic of discussion comes to the fossils that have already been discovered, we see something very interesting: His account of fossils begins with long descriptionsofanenvironmentthatsupposedlyexistedmillionsofyearsago.Basedonno informationordiscoveries,hemakesstatementssuchas,"Thesearetheplaceswhereour ancestorslived."Somestatementscontaininterestingadmissionsforexample,inhisbook ThePeopleoftheLake,theworldfamousfossilexpertRichardLeakeyadmitsthatitisactually notpossibletolearnverymanydetailsfromapieceofbone:
Now,ifweareabsolutelyhonest,wehavetoadmitthatweknownothingabout Ramapithecus; wedon'tknowwhatitlookedlike;wedon'tknowwhatitdid;and,naturally,wedon't knowhow itdidit!Butwiththeaidofjawandtoothfragmentsandoneortwobitsandpiecesfromarms andlegs,allofwhichrepresentsacoupleofdozenindividuals,wecanmakesomeguesses,more orlessinspired.61

Theimportantsentencestoreadhereinclude,"wehavetoadmitthatweknownothing" and "we can make some guesses, more or less inspired." The man who wrote these statementsisoneoftheworld'sbestknownfossilexperts,whosesuppositionsarehighly respected and regarded as scientific proof. So just what kind of suppositions does this scientistmakethroughouthisbook? Whenexpertsfirstdiscoverafossil,generallytheymakesurprisingsuppositionsabout the creature's size, environment, what land areas it inhabited, how and what it ate, its physicalstructureinrelationtootherindividuals,itshabits,whetheritwastwoorfour footed,itssociallifeandreproductionpatterns,whetheritwashairy,itscolorsandlevelof intelligence.AlookatRichardLeakey'sinterpretationsinhis TheOriginofHumankindofthe fossils he discovered will be useful in understanding the kind and extent of experts' suppositions.
Forinstance,agroupofearlyhumans,mighthavespentsometimebeneathatreesimplyforthe

shade it afforded, knapping stones for some purpose other than butchering carcassesfor example, they might have been making flakes for whittling sticks, which could be used to unearthtubers.Sometimelater,afterthegrouphadmovedon,aleopardmighthaveclimbedthe tree,haulingitskillwithit,asleopardsoftendo.Gradually,thecarcasswouldhaverotted,and theboneswouldhavetumbledtothegroundtolieamidthescatterofstoneslefttherebythe toolmakers.How couldanarcheologist excavating thesite1.5millionyearslaterdistinguish betweenthisscenarioandthepreviouslyfavoredinterpretationofbutcheringbya groupof nomadichuntersandgatherers?Myinstinctwasthatearlyhumansdidinfactpursuesome versionofhuntingandgathering,butIcouldseeIsaac'sconcernoverasecurereadingofthe evidence.62

Inthesestatements,Leakeyclearlysaysthatthesedetaileddescriptionsarebasednot onscience,buton"instinct."Inasimilarstatement,Leakeyindicatestheimportanceofthe powerofdreaminginthescienceoffossils:

Althoughwecanneverknowforcertainwhatdailywaslikeintheearliesttimesof HomoErectus, wecanusethericharcheologicalevidenceofsite50,andourimagination,torecreatesucha scene,1.5millionyearsago...63

Aftersayingthis,Leakeygoesonforfivepagestoconstructadreamlikefantasy.The details create the impression that he has seen and is reporting what he has gone and observed.Anyonereadingitwouldn'tthinkthatitwastheproductofafossilscientist's imagination, but that, every description was based on clear evidence. From Leakey's statements,however,wecanseethathisdescriptionisnothingmorethanhallucinations causedbythespellofDarwinism.Hisexplanationsdoexpressnoscientificreality,butare basedtotallyonhisbroadimaginativepower.

Method # 11: They try to spread the Darwinist spell by suggestions madebyvisualeffects
Darwinistsarecarryingonaseriouscampaignofsuggestiontopersuadeasignificant numberofpeopletoaccepttheideathathalfhuman,halfapecreatureslivedatonetime. Visualmethodsareanimportantpartofthiscampaign;peoplemayforgetwhattheyhear, butdorememberwhattheysee. Evolutionists'mostwidespreaduseofvisualsuggestionistobeseeninreconstructions from fossils. Pictures or models can be made of a creature from which only one bone fragmenthasbeenfound.Allthe"apemen"youhaveseeninnewspapers,magazinesand filmsarereconstructions. The fossil record of human origins is fragmentary and incomplete, and any suppositionsmadeonthebasisofitarelargelyimaginary.Thatis,reconstructionsclaiming todescribetheoriginsofhumanbeingsreflectonlytheimaginationofthefossilexpert,the illustrator,orthesculptor.Forthisreason,reconstructionsthatevolutionistsmakeonthe basisofthefossilrecordaredesignedsolelytoconformtotherequirementsoftheirown ideology. Someone lookingatadepictionofahalfhuman,halfapecreaturewillgetthe impressionthatheisseeingsomethingthatreallyexisted.Manymuseumsdisplaythese

models,andthepublicisledtobelievethattheyhaveacloseupviewoftheirtrueancestors. Butthesedrawingsandmodelshavenoscientificvalidity.Reconstructionsbasedonbone remains can reveal only a creature's most general characteristics, since all the really distinctivemorphologicalfeaturesofananimalaresofttissueswhichquicklyvanishafter death.Therefore,duetothespeculativenatureoftheinterpretationofthesofttissues,the reconstructed drawings or models totally depend on the imagination of the person producingthem.Infact,allsuchreconstructionshavebeenproducedtoconvinceobservers thathalfhuman,halfapecreaturesoncelivedinthepast. AsecondmethodofvisualeffectsisusedtoperpetuatetheDarwinistspellandmislead thepublic:colorfulmagazinesandstrikingpagedesigns.Atthestartofthischapter,we mentioned the great importance Darwinists give to appearances in order to portray a scientificaura.Peopleareveryinfluencedbyouterappearancesandformtheirideasonthat basis. Therefore, Darwinists make the most of technology and all other means at their disposaltopersuadethepublic. From thepointofviewofcontent, thesepublicationsareoftenfilledwithcomplete misinformationbutdocontainstrikinglayoutsdesignedtomislead.Everydetailhasbeen considered in their formation. For example, the general appearance, cover design, page layout,colorsusedonthecoverandthepages,thephotographsandthestyleoflanguage areallpreparedwithqualitiesthatthereaderwillfindattractive.Theinformationandtopics arepresented inanattractivepackagetoawakentrustinthereader.Hidingbehindthis mask of striking beauty, the spell will combine with the other elements to produce the desiredeffect.Thereaderwon'tsuspectthatsuchamagazineorbookwithitshighquality, authoritative appearance could propose a theory with no scientific foundation. For this reasonalone,hewon'tfeelitnecessarytoexaminethetruthofthetheoryofevolutionfor himself. Onceagain,however,wemustpointoutthattherhetoricalaccountsofevolutionists decoratedwithhundredsoffragmentsofbonelabeledinLatin,andvolumesfilledwith photographs can be completely invalidated by one plain and concise explanation. For example,adensethreevolumebookwithasupposedlyscientificappearancecanbeproven wrong by a few paragraphs with true scientific value. In fact, as said before, all the informationandaccountspresentedasscientificproofsineveryevolutionistbookareweak andinsubstantialenoughtobeinvalidatedbyapamphletyoucouldfitintoyourpocket.

Method # 12: They try to make the public believe that to be a real scientist,onemustacceptthetheoryofevolution
Inourtime,certaincirclesinthescientificworlduseDarwinismasameansofapplying pressure.Variousmethodsareusedtointimidatescientistswhodon'tacceptthistheory's validity.Inorderforascientisttobeacceptedincertainacademiccirclesmostofwhichare evolutionisthemustsupportthetheoryandevenpublisharticlesdealingwithit.Those who do not are rejected by other scientistsalso evolutionistsin that academic environment.EspeciallyintheWest,ifascientistwantstoadvancehiscareerandbecomean associateorfullprofessor,hemustpublishhisarticlesaccordingtoacertainstandard.Asits

most important element, this standard includes the absolute acceptance of the theory of evolution and the rejection of religion. In an article titled, "Scientists and Religion in America"publishedintheSeptember1999 ScientificAmerican,RodneyStark,asociologist fromWashingtonUniversity,pointsoutthispressureputonscientists,"There'sbeen200 yearsofmarketingthatifyouwanttobeascientificpersonyou'vegottokeepyourmind free of the fetters of religion." In research universities, "the religious people keep their mouthsshut,"Starksays,"Andtheirreligiouspeoplediscriminate.There'sarewardsystem tobeingirreligiousintheupperechelons."64 Oneofthemostseriousproblemsfacedbythesescientistssubjectedtopressureoccurs duringthepublicationoftheirarticlesinscientificperiodicals.Mostwellknownjournalsare controlledbypeopleundertheinfluenceoftheDarwinistspell,andtheydonotacceptfor publication articles by proCreationist scientists, so they cannot circulate their evidence againstthetheoryofevolution. Besidesthis,proCreationistscientistsmeetwithmanydifficultiesintheuniversities wheretheyteach.Tobecomeaprofessorortowieldanyinfluenceinuniversitieswherethe majorityofthefacultyisDarwinist,anindividualmustacceptthetheoryofevolution.Those whodonot acceptthisprecondition are givennoconsideration or respect.Furthermore, attemptsareevenmadetointimidateandderidethem. Thisisoneoftheevolutionists'mosteffectivemethodsofsuggestionusedtoperpetuate theDarwinistspell.Forthatreason,itwillbeusefultoexamineitinalittlemoredepth.

TheDarwinists'Weaponof"Defamation"
Defamation isamorally evilattempt to harm another person andto humiliate him beforehispeers.Thosewhopracticeitalsohopetoelevatethemselvestotheforefrontand receivetherespectofothers.ForDarwinistswhoseektowinrespectfortheirtheoryand harmtheirproCreationistcolleagues,defamationisanindispensabletool.Forthisreason, it'stheverybasisoftheDarwinistspell. Everythingthatissaidandwritteninevolutionistcircles,theirfacialexpressionsand the way they look, is peppered with defamatory statements. Knowing that they cannot succeedonascientificplatform,theytreatproCreationistscientistssoastodestroythem psychologically.WhenproofsforthefactofCreationarepresentedtothem,theymaketheir punystatementstwistingtheirmouths,eyesandeyebrowsintoscornfulexpressions.Inthis way,theyhopetocoveruptheirdeficienciesandlackofknowledge.Forexample,oneofthe main proponents of the theory of evolution today is Richard Dawkins, who also makes frequentuseofthisdisparagingstyle.Inthesewords,hedescribesthosewhodonotaccept evolution:
Itisabsolutelysafetosaythat,ifyoumeetsomebodywhoclaimsnottobelieveinevolution,that personisignorant,stupidorinsane.65

Aswecanseefromwhathesays,Dawkinscloseshiseyestoscientificproofspresented tohimbyanyoneelse,adoptingaprejudicedstanceinordernottobreaktheDarwinistspell

underwhichhelabors,hopingtoinstillthissameprejudiceinothers. Inthisarea,anothermethodevolutionistsuseistolistentoapresentationonthefacts ofCreationandthen,inanactivelyaggressiveway,toassertthatthoseinfluencedbyitare deficientinsomemanner.Theybelievethatthesepeopleareonthewrongpathandthey don'thesitatetocallthemnamesandassaulttheirsacredvalues. Anothermethodevolutionistsuseistomakesnidecommentsaboutbooksandarticles criticalofDarwinism.Insteadofrespondingwithscientificevidence,theytrytopassover thematterwithadismissivesmile.PeterVanInwogen,professorofphilosophyatNotre Dame University, in his review of Michael J. Behe's famous book, Darwin's Black Box commentsontheprejudicedattitudeofevolutionistscientists:
IfDarwiniansrespondtothisimportantbookbyignoringit,misrepresentingit,orridiculingit, thatwillbeevidenceinfavorofthewidespreadsuspicionthatDarwinismtodayfunctionsmore asanideologythanasascientifictheory.66

Thus, werealizethatthe reason whyDarwinistsreactsnidelytoscientificproofsis totallyideological.Evolutionistsespouseitjustinorderthattheycanrejectreligionandthe factofCreation.Andaswehavesaidsofar,stilltheyusetheDarwinistspelltoperpetuate thisrejection.Atthebasisofthismethodistreatingopposingideaswithdisdain.Usingthis behavior,theyattempttoinstillthesuggestionthatthewayofevolutionistheonlyway,and thatbelievinginCreationwillmakepeopleappearridiculous.ButDarwinistsaremakinga greaterroranddeceivingthemselves.

Conclusion: The Spell of Darwinism is Quickly LosingitsEffect

Throughoutthisbook,wehaveexaminedindetailthestateintowhichthe"DarkSpell" ofDarwinismhasledpeople.Itturnssomepeopleintoagroupofunthinking,unreflective individuals unable to judge or evaluate for themselves, preferring to close their eyes to reality.Theyhaveabandonedtheirpowerofjudgmentasiftheywereimmobilizedbya spell;theireyesdonotseeandtheirearsdonothear. So,isthereanyescapeforthem? Atthispoint,itisuptoeveryconscientious,intelligentpersonwhocanthinkandseeto callonDarwinistsandtheirfollowerstolistentothevoiceofreasonandtoconsiderthe scientificfacts.Itis,afterall,thepeoplethemselveswhowillbreakthisspell.Thosewho heedthecallandconsiderthefactswithoutprejudice,andwithanopenmind,willcertainly

perceivetheplaintruth;andthespelltheyareunderwillbebroken.Thiscallwillremoveall theDarwinistspells,justastheProphetMoses(pbuh)tookawaythemagicperformedby Pharaoh'ssorcerers. IntheQur'an,AllahtellsushowtheProphetMoses(pbuh)didit:

Theysaid,"Detainhimandhisbrotherandsendoutmarshalstothecities,tobringyouallthe skilledmagicians."ThemagicianscametoPharaohandtheyasked,"Willwereceiveareward ifwearethewinners?"Hesaid,"Yes,andyouwillbeamongthosebroughtnear."Theysaid, "Moses,willyouthrowfirstorshallwebetheonestothrow?"Hesaid,"Youthrow."And whentheythrew,theycastaspellonthepeople'seyesandcausedthemtofeelgreatfearof them.Theyproducedanextremelypowerfulmagic.WerevealedtoMoses,"Throwdownyour staff."Anditimmediatelyswallowedupwhattheyhadforged.SotheTruthtookplaceand whattheydidwasshowntobefalse.Theyweredefeatedthenandthere,transformedinto humbledmen.(SuratalA'raf:111119)

These verses tell us that the Prophet Moses' (pbuh) staff swallowed everything the sorcerers conjured up. It will be enough to destroy the power of this spell if believers proclaimthetruththatAlmightyAllahhascreatedtheuniverseandeverythingitcontains, andshowpeoplewhattheDarwinistspellhasproducedandthemethodsitemploys. ThiswillhavethesameeffectastheProphetMoses'(pbuh)staff.Allthosewhohave been misled for years by outdated tales of evolution, been brainwashed by atheist and materialistmyths,andhavehadeveryaspectoftheirlivesaffectedbythisdarkspell,must nowwakeupandridthemselvesofitsinfluenceonceandforall.Ifapersonthinksonly abouthowhecameintoexistencefromadropofwater,orconsidersjustoneofthemany wonderfulfeatureswithwhichAllahendowedanyofHiscreatures,hewilleasilygraspthe factofCreation. Thenumberofpeoplecomingtorealizethistruthisincreasingeveryday.Thosewhohavelosttheir abilitytothinkundertheinfluenceoftheDarwinistspell,andhadtheirawarenessdulledbyblindlybelieving deceitfulfabrications,constituteadangerforhumanity.Butourworldneedsintelligentandawareyoung peoplewhohaveshakenofftheinfluenceofdarkspells,whocanthinkfreely,andwhoexercisestrong facultiesofjudgmentanddiscernment.ThefactthattheDarwinistspellisbeingquickly removedisanimportanthistoricaldevelopment,signalingabrightandprosperousfuture forthewholeworld.

TheDeceptionofEvolution
Darwinism,inotherwordsthetheoryofevolution,wasputforwardwiththeaimof denyingthefactofCreation,butisintruthnothingbutfailed,unscientificnonsense. This

theory,whichclaimsthatlifeemergedbychancefrominanimatematter,wasinvalidated bythescientificevidenceofmiraculousorderintheuniverseandinlivingthings,aswell asbythediscoveryofabout300millionfossilsrevealingthatevolutionneverhappened. In this way, science confirmed the factthat Allah created the universe and the living thingsinit.Thepropagandacarriedouttodayinordertokeepthetheoryofevolutionalive isbasedsolelyonthedistortionofthescientificfacts,biasedinterpretation,andliesand falsehoodsdisguisedasscience. Yetthispropagandacannotconcealthetruth.Thefactthat thetheoryofevolutionisthe greatest deception in the history of science has been expressed more and more in the scientificworldoverthelast2030years.Researchcarriedoutafterthe1980sinparticular hasrevealedthattheclaimsofDarwinismaretotallyunfounded,somethingthathasbeen statedbyalargenumberofscientists.IntheUnitedStatesinparticular,manyscientistsfrom suchdifferentfieldsasbiology,biochemistryandpaleontologyrecognizetheinvalidityof DarwinismandemploythefactofCreationtoaccountfortheoriginoflife. WehaveexaminedthecollapseofthetheoryofevolutionandtheproofsofCreationin greatscientificdetailinmanyofourworks,andarestillcontinuingtodoso.Giventhe enormousimportanceofthissubject,itwillbeofgreatbenefittosummarizeithere.

TheScientificCollapseofDarwinism
AsapagandoctrinegoingbackasfarasancientGreece,thetheoryofevolutionwas advancedextensivelyinthenineteenthcentury.Themostimportantdevelopmentthatmade itthetoptopicoftheworldofsciencewasCharlesDarwin's TheOriginofSpecies,published in1859.Inthisbook,heopposed,inhisowneyes,thefactthatAllahcreateddifferentliving speciesonEarthseparately,forheerroneouslyclaimedthatalllivingbeingshadacommon ancestorandhaddiversifiedovertimethrough smallchanges. Darwin'stheorywasnot basedonanyconcretescientificfinding;ashealsoaccepted,itwasjustan"assumption." Moreover, as Darwin confessed in the long chapter of his book titled "Difficulties on Theory,"thetheoryfailedinthefaceofmanycriticalquestions. Darwininvestedallofhishopesinnewscientificdiscoveries,whichheexpectedtosolve these difficulties. However, contrary to his expectations, scientific findings expanded the dimensions of these difficulties. The defeat of Darwinism in the face of science can be reviewedunderthreebasictopics: 1)ThetheorycannotexplainhowlifeoriginatedonEarth. 2) No scientific finding shows that the "evolutionary mechanisms" proposed by the theoryhaveanyevolutionarypoweratall. 3)Thefossilrecordprovestheexactoppositeofwhatthetheorysuggests. Inthissection,wewillexaminethesethreebasicpointsingeneraloutlines:

TheFirstInsurmountableStep:TheOriginofLife
Thetheoryofevolutionpositsthatalllivingspeciesevolvedfromasinglelivingcellthat emerged on the primitive Earth 3.8 billion years ago. How a single cell could generate millionsofcomplexlivingspeciesand,ifsuchanevolutionreallyoccurred,whytracesofit cannotbeobserved inthefossilrecord aresomeofthequestionsthatthetheory cannot answer.However,firstandforemost,weneedtoask:Howdidthis"firstcell"originate? SincethetheoryofevolutionignorantlydeniesCreation,itmaintainsthatthe"first cell"originatedasaproductofblindcoincidenceswithinthelawsofnature,withoutany plan or arrangement. According to the theory, inanimate matter must have produced a livingcellasaresultofcoincidences.Suchaclaim,however,isinconsistentwiththemost unassailablerulesofbiology.

LifeComesFromLife
Inhisbook,Darwinneverreferredtotheoriginoflife.Theprimitiveunderstandingof scienceinhistimerestedontheassumptionthatlivingbeingshadaverysimplestructure. Sincemedievaltimes,spontaneousgeneration,whichassertsthatnonlivingmaterialscame togethertoformlivingorganisms,hadbeenwidelyaccepted.Itwascommonlybelievedthat insectscameintobeingfromfoodleftovers,andmicefromwheat.Interestingexperiments wereconductedtoprovethistheory.Somewheatwasplacedonadirtypieceofcloth,andit wasbelievedthatmicewouldoriginatefromitafterawhile. Similarly, maggots developing in rotting meat was assumed to be evidence of spontaneousgeneration.However, itwaslaterunderstoodthatwormsdidnotappearon meatspontaneously,butwerecarriedtherebyfliesintheformoflarvae,invisibletothe nakedeye. EvenwhenDarwinwroteTheOriginofSpecies,thebeliefthatbacteriacouldcomeinto existencefromnonlivingmatterwaswidelyacceptedintheworldofscience. However,fiveyearsafterthepublicationofDarwin'sbook,LouisPasteurannounced hisresultsafterlongstudiesandexperiments,thatdisprovedspontaneousgeneration,a cornerstoneofDarwin'stheory. InhistriumphallectureattheSorbonnein1864, Pasteur said:"Neverwillthedoctrineofspontaneousgenerationrecoverfromthemortalblow struckbythissimpleexperiment."67 Foralongtime,advocatesofthetheoryofevolutionresistedthesefindings.However,as thedevelopmentofscienceunraveledthecomplexstructureofthecellofalivingbeing,the ideathatlifecouldcomeintobeingcoincidentallyfacedanevengreaterimpasse.

InconclusiveEffortsoftheTwentiethCentury

Thefirstevolutionistwhotookupthesubjectoftheoriginoflifeinthetwentieth centurywastherenownedRussianbiologistAlexanderOparin.Withvarioustheseshe advancedinthe1930s,hetriedtoprovethatalivingcellcouldoriginatebycoincidence. Thesestudies,however,weredoomedtofailure,andOparinhadtomakethefollowing confession: Unfortunately,however,theproblemoftheoriginofthecellisperhapsthemostobscure pointinthewholestudyoftheevolutionoforganisms.68 EvolutionistfollowersofOparintriedtocarryoutexperimentstosolvethisproblem.The bestknownexperiment wascarriedoutbytheAmericanchemistStanleyMillerin1953. CombiningthegasesheallegedtohaveexistedintheprimordialEarth'satmosphereinan experiment setup,andaddingenergy tothe mixture, Millersynthesizedseveral organic molecules(aminoacids)presentinthestructureofproteins. Barelyafewyearshadpassedbeforeitwasrevealedthat thisexperiment,whichwas then presented as an important step in the name of evolution, was invalid, for the atmosphereusedintheexperimentwasverydifferentfromtherealEarthconditions. 69 After a long silence, Miller confessed that the atmosphere medium he used was unrealistic.70 Alltheevolutionists'effortsthroughoutthetwentiethcenturytoexplaintheoriginof lifeended in failure. The geochemist Jeffrey Bada,from theSan Diego Scripps Institute acceptsthisfactinanarticlepublishedinEarthmagazinein1998:
Todayasweleavethetwentiethcentury,westillfacethebiggestunsolvedproblemthatwehadwhen weenteredthetwentiethcentury:HowdidlifeoriginateonEarth?71

TheComplexStructureofLife
Theprimaryreasonwhythetheoryofevolutionendedupinsuchagreatimpasse regardingtheoriginoflifeisthateventhoselivingorganismsdeemedtobethesimplest haveoutstandinglycomplexstructures.Thecellofalivingthingismorecomplexthanallof ourmanmadetechnologicalproducts.Today,eveninthemostdevelopedlaboratoriesof theworld,alivingcellcannotbeproducedbybringingorganicchemicalstogether. The conditions required for the formation of a cell are too great in quantity to be explainedawaybycoincidences.Theprobabilityofproteins,thebuildingblocksofacell, being synthesized coincidentally, is 1 in 10950 for an average protein made up of 500 aminoacids.Inmathematics,aprobabilitysmallerthan1over10 50 isconsideredtobe impossibleinpracticalterms. TheDNAmolecule,whichislocatedinthenucleusofacellandwhichstoresgenetic information, is a magnificent databank. If the information coded in DNA were written down, it would make a giant library consisting of an estimated 900 volumes of

encyclopediasconsistingof500pageseach. Averyinterestingdilemmaemergesatthispoint:DNAcanreplicateitselfonlywiththe helpofsomespecializedproteins(enzymes).However,thesynthesisoftheseenzymescan berealizedonlybytheinformationcodedinDNA.Astheybothdependoneachother,they havetoexistatthesametimeforreplication.Thisbringsthescenariothatlifeoriginatedby itselftoadeadlock.Prof.LeslieOrgel,anevolutionistofreputefromtheUniversityofSan Diego,California,confessesthisfactintheSeptember1994issueofthe ScientificAmerican magazine:

It is extremely improbable that proteins and nucleic acids, both of which are structurally complex,arosespontaneouslyinthesameplaceatthesametime.Yet italsoseemsimpossibleto haveonewithouttheother.Andso,atfirstglance,onemighthavetoconcludethatlifecould never,infact,haveoriginatedbychemicalmeans.
72

Nodoubt,ifitisimpossibleforlifetohaveoriginatedspontaneouslyasaresultofblind coincidences,thenithastobeacceptedthatlifewas "created."Thisfactexplicitlyinvalidates thetheoryofevolution,whosemainpurposeistodenyCreation.

ImaginaryMechanismofEvolution
ThesecondimportantpointthatnegatesDarwin'stheoryisthatbothconceptsput forwardbythetheoryas"evolutionarymechanisms"wereunderstoodtohave,inreality,no evolutionarypower. Darwinbasedhisevolutionallegationentirelyonthemechanismof"naturalselection." The importance he placed onthismechanismwasevident in thenameofhisbook: The OriginofSpecies,ByMeansofNaturalSelection Naturalselectionholdsthatthoselivingthingsthatarestrongerandmoresuitedtothe naturalconditionsoftheirhabitatswillsurviveinthestruggleforlife.Forexample,inadeer herd under the threat of attack by wild animals, those that can run faster will survive. Therefore, thedeer herd willbe comprised offaster and stronger individuals. However, unquestionably,thismechanismwillnotcausedeertoevolveandtransformthemselvesinto anotherlivingspecies,forinstance,horses. Therefore,themechanismofnaturalselectionhasnoevolutionarypower.Darwinwas alsoawareofthisfactandhadtostatethisinhisbookTheOriginofSpecies:
Naturalselectioncandonothinguntilfavourableindividualdifferencesorvariationsoccur. 73

Lamarck'sImpact
So,howcouldthese"favorablevariations"occur?Darwintriedtoanswerthisquestion fromthestandpointoftheprimitiveunderstandingofscienceatthattime.Accordingtothe

FrenchbiologistChevalierdeLamarck(17441829),wholivedbeforeDarwin,living creaturespassedonthetraitstheyacquiredduringtheirlifetimetothenextgeneration.He assertedthatthesetraits,whichaccumulatedfromonegenerationtoanother,causednew speciestobeformed.Forinstance,heclaimedthatgiraffesevolvedfromantelopes;asthey struggledtoeattheleavesofhightrees,theirneckswereextendedfromgenerationto generation. Darwinalsogavesimilarexamples.InhisbookTheOriginofSpecies,forinstance,he saidthatsomebearsgoingintowatertofindfoodtransformedthemselvesintowhalesover time.74 However,thelawsofinheritancediscoveredbyGregorMendel(182284)andverifiedby thescienceofgenetics,whichflourishedinthetwentiethcentury,utterlydemolishedthe legendthatacquiredtraitswerepassedontosubsequentgenerations.Thus,naturalselection felloutoffavorasanevolutionarymechanism.

NeoDarwinismandMutations
Inordertofindasolution,Darwinistsadvancedthe"ModernSyntheticTheory,"orasit ismorecommonlyknown,NeoDarwinism,attheendofthe1930s.NeoDarwinismadded mutations,whicharedistortionsformedinthegenesoflivingbeingsduetosuchexternal factorsasradiationorreplicationerrors,asthe"causeoffavorablevariations"inadditionto naturalmutation. Today,themodelthatDarwinistsespouse,despitetheirownawarenessofitsscientific invalidity,isneoDarwinism.Thetheorymaintainsthatmillionsoflivingbeingsformedasa resultofaprocesswherebynumerouscomplexorgansoftheseorganisms(e.g.,ears,eyes, lungs,andwings)underwent"mutations,"thatis,geneticdisorders.Yet,thereisanoutright scientificfactthattotallyunderminesthistheory: Mutationsdonotcauselivingbeingsto develop;onthecontrary,theyarealwaysharmful. The reason forthis isvery simple: DNA hasaverycomplexstructure,andrandom effectscanonlyharmit.TheAmericangeneticistB.G.Ranganathanexplainsthisasfollows:
First,genuinemutationsareveryrareinnature.Secondly,mostmutationsareharmfulsincetheyare random,ratherthanorderlychangesinthestructureofgenes;anyrandomchangeinahighlyordered systemwillbefortheworse,notforthebetter.Forexample, ifanearthquakeweretoshakea highly ordered structure such as a building, there would be a random change in the frameworkofthebuildingwhich,inallprobability,wouldnotbeanimprovement. 75

Notsurprisingly,nomutationexample,whichisuseful,thatis,whichisobservedto develop the genetic code, has been observed so far. All mutations have proved to be harmful. It was understood that mutation, which is presented as an "evolutionary mechanism," is actually a genetic occurrence that harms living things, and leaves them disabled.(Themostcommoneffectofmutationonhumanbeingsiscancer.)Ofcourse,a destructivemechanismcannotbean"evolutionarymechanism."Naturalselection,onthe otherhand,"candonothingbyitself,"asDarwinalsoaccepted.Thisfactshowsusthat there

isno"evolutionarymechanism"innature. Sincenoevolutionarymechanismexists,nosuch anyimaginaryprocesscalled"evolution"couldhavetakenplace.

TheFossilRecord:NoSignofIntermediateForms
Theclearestevidencethatthescenariosuggestedbythetheoryofevolutiondidnot takeplaceisthefossilrecord. Accordingtotheunscientificsuppositionofthistheory,everylivingspecieshassprung fromapredecessor.Apreviouslyexistingspeciesturnedintosomethingelseovertimeand allspecieshavecomeintobeinginthisway.Inotherwords,thistransformationproceeds graduallyovermillionsofyears. Hadthisbeenthecase,numerousintermediaryspeciesshouldhaveexistedandlived withinthislongtransformationperiod. For instance, some halffish/halfreptiles should have lived in the past which had acquiredsomereptiliantraitsinadditiontothefishtraitstheyalreadyhad.Orthereshould haveexistedsomereptilebirds,whichacquiredsomebirdtraitsinadditiontothereptilian traitstheyalreadyhad.Sincethesewouldbeinatransitionalphase,theyshouldbedisabled, defective,crippledlivingbeings.Evolutionistsrefertotheseimaginarycreatures,whichthey believetohavelivedinthepast,as"transitionalforms." Ifsuchanimalseverreallyexisted,thereshouldbemillionsandevenbillionsofthem innumberandvariety.Moreimportantly,theremainsofthesestrangecreaturesshould bepresentinthefossilrecord.InTheOriginofSpecies,Darwinexplained:
Ifmytheorybetrue,numberlessintermediatevarieties,linkingmostcloselyallofthespeciesofthe samegrouptogethermustassuredlyhaveexisted...Consequently,evidenceoftheirformerexistence couldbefoundonlyamongstfossilremains.76

However,Darwinwaswellawarethatnofossilsoftheseintermediateformshadyet beenfound.Heregardedthisasamajordifficultyforhistheory.Inonechapterofhisbook titled"DifficultiesonTheory,"hewrote:

Why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhereseeinnumerabletransitionalforms?Whyisnotallnatureinconfusioninstead ofthespeciesbeing,asweseethem,well defined?But,asbythistheoryinnumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbersinthecrustoftheearth?Whythenisnoteverygeologicalformationandevery stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduatedorganicchain;andthis,perhaps,isthemostobviousandgravestobjectionwhichcanbe urgedagainstmytheory.77

Darwin'sHopesShattered

However,althoughevolutionistshavebeenmakingstrenuouseffortstofindfossils sincethemiddleofthenineteenthcenturyallovertheworld,notransitionalformshaveyet beenuncovered.Allofthefossils,contrarytotheevolutionists'expectations,showthatlife appearedonEarthallofasuddenandfullyformed. OnefamousBritishpaleontologist,DerekV.Ager,admitsthisfact,eventhoughheisan evolutionist:

Thepointemergesthatifweexaminethefossilrecordindetail,whetheratthelevelofordersorof species,wefindoverandoveragainnotgradualevolution,butthesuddenexplosionofone groupattheexpenseofanother.78

Thismeansthatinthefossilrecord,alllivingspeciessuddenlyemergeasfullyformed, without any intermediate forms in between. This is just the opposite of Darwin's assumptions.Also,thisisverystrongevidencethat alllivingthingsarecreated. Theonly explanationofalivingspeciesemergingsuddenlyandcompleteineverydetailwithoutany evolutionaryancestoristhatitwascreated.Thisfactisadmittedalsobythewidelyknown evolutionistbiologistDouglasFutuyma:
Creationandevolution,betweenthem,exhaustthepossibleexplanationsfortheoriginoflivingthings. Organismseitherappearedontheearthfullydevelopedortheydidnot.Iftheydidnot,theymusthave developedfrompreexistingspeciesbysomeprocessofmodification.If theydidappearin afully developedstate,theymustindeedhavebeencreatedbysomeomnipotentintelligence. 79

Fossilsshowthatlivingbeingsemergedfullydevelopedandinaperfectstateonthe Earth. That means that "the origin of species," contrary to Darwin's supposition, is not evolution,butCreation.

TheTaleofHumanEvolution
Thesubjectmostoftenbroughtupbyadvocatesofthetheoryofevolutionisthesubject oftheoriginofman.TheDarwinistclaimholdsthatmanevolvedfromsocalledapelike creatures.Duringthisallegedevolutionaryprocess,whichissupposedtohavestarted45 millionyearsago,some"transitionalforms"betweenpresentdaymanandhisimaginary ancestorsaresupposedtohaveexisted.Accordingtothiscompletelyimaginaryscenario, fourbasic"categories"arelisted: 1.Australopithecus 2.Homohabilis 3.Homoerectus 4.Homosapiens Evolutionistscallman'ssocalledfirstapelikeancestorsAustralopithecus,whichmeans "SouthAfricanape."Theselivingbeingsareactuallynothingbutanoldapespeciesthathas

become extinct. Extensive research done on various Australopithecus specimens by two worldfamousanatomistsfromEnglandandtheUSA,namely,LordSollyZuckermanand Prof. Charles Oxnard, shows that these apes belonged to an ordinary ape species that becameextinctandborenoresemblancetohumans.80 Evolutionists classify the next stage of human evolution as "homo," that is "man." According totheirclaim,theliving beingsin theHomo seriesaremore developed than Australopithecus.Evolutionistsdeviseafancifulevolution schemebyarranging different fossilsofthesecreaturesinaparticularorder.Thisschemeisimaginarybecauseithasnever been proved that there is an evolutionary relation between these different classes. Ernst Mayr,oneofthetwentiethcentury'smostimportantevolutionists,contendsinhisbookOne LongArgumentthat"particularlyhistorical[puzzles]suchastheoriginoflifeorofHomo sapiens,areextremelydifficultandmayevenresistafinal,satisfyingexplanation."81 ByoutliningthelinkchainasAustralopithecus>Homohabilis>Homoerectus>Homo sapiens,evolutionistsimplythateachofthesespeciesisoneanother'sancestor.However, recentfindingsofpaleoanthropologistshaverevealedthatAustralopithecus,Homohabilis, andHomoerectuslivedatdifferentpartsoftheworldatthesametime.82 Moreover,acertainsegmentofhumansclassifiedasHomoerectushavelivedupuntil verymoderntimes.HomosapiensneandarthalensisandHomosapienssapiens(present dayman)coexistedinthesameregion.83 Thissituationapparentlyindicatestheinvalidityoftheclaimthattheyareancestorsof oneanother.ThelateStephenJayGouldexplainedthisdeadlockofthetheoryofevolution althoughhewashimselfoneoftheleadingadvocatesofevolutioninthetwentiethcentury:
Whathasbecomeofourladderiftherearethreecoexistinglineagesofhominids(A.africanus,the robustaustralopithecines,andH.habilis),noneclearlyderivedfromanother?Moreover,noneofthethree displayanyevolutionarytrendsduringtheirtenureonearth. 84

Putbriefly,thescenarioofhumanevolution,whichis"upheld"withthehelpofvarious drawingsofsome"halfape,halfhuman"creaturesappearinginthemediaandcourse books,thatis,frankly,bymeansofpropaganda,isnothingbut atalewithnoscientific foundation. LordSollyZuckerman,oneofthemostfamousandrespectedscientistsintheU.K.,who carried out researchon thissubject foryearsandstudied Australopithecus fossilsfor15 years,finallyconcluded,despitebeinganevolutionisthimself, thatthereis,infact,nosuch familytreebranchingoutfromapelikecreaturestoman. Zuckerman also made an interesting "spectrum of science" ranging from those he considered scientific to those he considered unscientific. According to Zuckerman's spectrum, the most "scientific"that is, depending on concrete datafields of science are chemistryandphysics.Afterthemcomethebiologicalsciencesandthenthesocialsciences. Atthefarendofthespectrum,whichisthepartconsideredtobemost"unscientific,"are "extrasensory perception"conceptssuchastelepathyandsixthsenseandfinally"human evolution."Zuckermanexplainshisreasoning:

Wethenmoverightofftheregisterofobjectivetruthintothosefieldsofpresumedbiologicalscience, like extrasensory perception or the interpretation of man's fossil history, where to the faithful [evolutionist]anythingispossibleandwheretheardentbeliever[inevolution]issometimesableto believeseveralcontradictorythingsatthesametime.85

Thetaleofhumanevolutionboilsdowntonothingbuttheprejudicedinterpretationsof somefossilsunearthedbycertainpeople,whoblindlyadheretotheirtheory.

DarwinianFormula!
Besidesallthetechnicalevidencewehavedealtwithsofar,letusnowforonce, examinewhatkindofasuperstitiontheevolutionistshavewithanexamplesosimpleasto beunderstoodevenbychildren: Thetheoryofevolutionassertsthatlifeisformedbychance.Accordingtothisirrational claim,lifelessandunconsciousatomscametogethertoformthecellandthentheysomehow formedotherlivingthings,includingman.Letusthinkaboutthat.Whenwebringtogether theelementsthatarethebuildingblocksoflifesuchascarbon,phosphorus,nitrogenand potassium,onlyaheapisformed.Nomatterwhattreatmentsitundergoes,thisatomicheap cannotformevenasinglelivingbeing.Ifyoulike,letusformulatean"experiment"onthis subjectandletusexamineonthe behalfofevolutionistswhattheyreallyclaimwithout pronouncingloudlyunderthename"Darwinianformula":
Let evolutionists put plenty of materials present in the composition of living things such as phosphorus,nitrogen,carbon,oxygen,iron,andmagnesiumintobigbarrels.Moreover,letthemadd inthesebarrelsanymaterialthatdoesnotexistundernormalconditions,buttheythinkasnecessary. Letthemaddinthismixtureasmanyaminoacidsandasmanyproteinsasingleoneofwhichhasa formationprobabilityof1in10 950astheylike.Letthemexposethesemixturestoasmuchheatand moistureastheylike.Letthemstirthesewithwhatevertechnologicallydevelopeddevicetheylike.Let themputtheforemostscientistsbesidethesebarrels.Lettheseexpertswaitinturnbesidethesebarrels forbillions,andeventrillionsofyears.Letthembefreetouseallkindsofconditionstheybelievetobe necessaryforahuman'sformation. Nomatterwhattheydo,theycannotproducefromthese barrels a human, say a professor that examines his cell structure under the electron microscope.Theycannotproducegiraffes,lions,bees,canaries,horses,dolphins,roses,orchids,lilies, carnations, bananas, oranges, apples, dates, tomatoes, melons, watermelons, figs, olives, grapes, peaches,peafowls,pheasants,multicolouredbutterflies,ormillionsofotherlivingbeingssuchasthese. Indeed,theycouldnotobtainevenasinglecellofanyoneofthem.

Briefly,unconsciousatomscannotformthecell bycomingtogether.Theycannottakea new decision and divide this cell into two, then take other decisions and create the professors who first invent the electron microscope and then examine their own cell structureunderthatmicroscope. Matterisanunconscious,lifelessheap,anditcomesto lifewithAllah'ssuperiorcreation. Thetheoryofevolution,whichclaimstheopposite,isatotalfallacycompletelycontrary toreason.Thinkingevenalittlebitontheclaimsofevolutionistsdisclosesthisreality,justas intheaboveexample.

TechnologyintheEyeandtheEar
Anothersubjectthatremainsunansweredbyevolutionarytheoryistheexcellent qualityofperceptionintheeyeandtheear. Beforepassingontothesubjectoftheeye,letusbrieflyanswerthequestionofhowwe see.Lightrayscomingfromanobjectfalloppositelyontheeye'sretina.Here,theselight raysaretransmittedintoelectricsignalsbycellsandreachatinyspotatthebackofthe brain,the"centerofvision."Theseelectricsignalsareperceivedinthiscenterasanimage afteraseriesofprocesses.Withthistechnicalbackground,letusdosomethinking. Thebrainisinsulatedfromlight.Thatmeansthatitsinsideiscompletelydark,andthat nolightreachestheplacewhereitislocated.Thus,the"centerofvision"isnevertouchedby lightandmayevenbethedarkest placeyouhaveeverknown.However,youobservea luminous,brightworldinthispitchdarkness. Theimageformedintheeyeissosharpanddistinctthateventhetechnologyofthe twentiethcenturyhasnotbeenabletoattainit. Forinstance,lookatthebookyouare reading,yourhandswithwhichyouareholdingit,andthenliftyourheadandlookaround you.Haveyoueverseensuchasharpanddistinctimageasthisoneatanyotherplace?Even themostdevelopedtelevisionscreenproducedbythegreatesttelevisionproducerinthe worldcannotprovidesuchasharpimageforyou.Thisisathreedimensional,colored,and extremelysharpimage.Formorethan100years,thousandsofengineershavebeentryingto achievethissharpness.Factories,hugepremiseswereestablished,muchresearchhasbeen done,plansanddesignshavebeenmadeforthispurpose.Again,lookataTVscreenandthe bookyouholdinyourhands.Youwillseethatthereisabigdifferenceinsharpnessand distinction.Moreover, the TV screen showsyou a twodimensionalimage, whereaswith youreyes,youwatchathreedimensionalperspectivewithdepth. Formanyyears,tensofthousandsofengineershavetriedtomakeathreedimensional TV and achieve the vision quality of the eye. Yes, they have made a threedimensional televisionsystem,butitisnotpossibletowatchitwithoutputtingonspecial3Dglasses; moreover, it is only an artificial threedimension. The background is more blurred, the foregroundappearslikeapapersetting.Neverhasitbeenpossibletoproduceasharpand distinctvisionlikethatoftheeye.Inboththecameraandthetelevision,thereisalossof imagequality. Evolutionistsclaimthatthemechanismproducingthissharpanddistinctimagehasbeen formedbychance.Now,ifsomebodytoldyouthatthetelevisioninyourroomwasformed asaresultofchance,thatallofitsatomsjusthappenedtocometogetherandmakeupthis devicethatproducesanimage,whatwouldyouthink?Howcanatomsdowhatthousands ofpeoplecannot? Ifadeviceproducingamoreprimitiveimagethan theeyecouldnothavebeenformed bychance,thenitisveryevidentthattheeyeandtheimageseenbytheeyecouldnothave beenformedbychance.Thesamesituationappliestotheear.Theouterearpicksupthe

availablesoundsbytheauricleanddirectsthemtothemiddleear,themiddleeartransmits thesoundvibrationsbyintensifyingthem,andtheinnerearsendsthesevibrationstothe brainbytranslatingthemintoelectricsignals.Justaswiththeeye,theactofhearingfinalizes inthecenterofhearinginthebrain. Thesituationintheeyeisalsotruefortheear.Thatis, thebrainisinsulatedfromsound justasitisfromlight.Itdoesnotletanysoundin.Therefore,nomatterhownoisyisthe outside,theinsideofthebrainiscompletelysilent.Nevertheless,thesharpestsoundsare perceivedinthebrain.Inyourcompletelysilentbrain,youlistentosymphonies,andhear allofthenoisesinacrowdedplace. However,werethesoundlevelinyourbrainmeasured byaprecisedeviceatthatmoment,completesilencewouldbefoundtobeprevailingthere. Asisthecasewithimagery,decadesofefforthavebeenspentintryingtogenerateand reproduce sound that is faithful to the original. The results of these efforts are sound recorders, highfidelity systems, and systems for sensing sound. Despite all of this technology and the thousands of engineers and experts who have been working on this endeavor,nosoundhasyetbeenobtainedthathasthesamesharpnessandclarityasthe sound perceived by the ear. Think of the highestquality hifi systems produced by the largestcompanyinthemusicindustry.Eveninthesedevices,whensoundisrecordedsome ofitislost;orwhenyouturnonahifiyoualwayshearahissingsoundbeforethemusic starts. However, the sounds that are the products of the human body's technology are extremelysharpandclear.Ahumanearneverperceivesasoundaccompaniedbyahissing soundorwithatmosphericsasdoesahifi;rather,itperceivessoundexactlyasitis,sharp andclear.Thisisthewayithasbeensincethecreationofman. Sofar,nomanmadevisualorrecordingapparatushasbeenassensitiveandsuccessful inperceivingsensorydataasaretheeyeandtheear.However,asfarasseeingandhearing areconcerned,afargreatertruthliesbeyondallthis.

ToWhomDoestheConsciousnessthatSeesandHearswithintheBrain Belong?
Whowatchesanalluringworldinthebrain,listenstosymphoniesandthetwitteringof birds,andsmellstherose? Thestimulationscomingfromaperson'seyes,ears,andnosetraveltothebrainas electrochemicalnerveimpulses.Inbiology,physiology,andbiochemistrybooks,youcan findmanydetailsabouthowthisimageformsinthebrain.However,youwillnevercome acrossthemostimportantfact:Whoperceivestheseelectrochemicalnerveimpulsesas images,sounds,odors,andsensoryeventsinthebrain?Thereisaconsciousnessinthe brainthatperceivesallthiswithoutfeelinganyneedforaneye,anear,andanose.To whomdoesthisconsciousnessbelong?Ofcourseitdoesnotbelongtothenerves,thefat layer,andneuronscomprisingthebrain.ThisiswhyDarwinistmaterialists,whobelieve thateverythingiscomprisedofmatter,cannotanswerthesequestions. For thisconsciousnessisthespiritcreatedbyAllah, whichneedsneithertheeyeto

watchtheimagesnortheeartohearthesounds.Furthermore,itdoesnotneedthebrainto think. EveryonewhoreadsthisexplicitandscientificfactshouldponderonAlmightyAllah, andfearandseekrefugeinHim,forHesqueezestheentireuniverseinapitchdarkplaceof afewcubiccentimetersinathreedimensional,colored,shadowy,andluminousform.

AMaterialistFaith
The information we have presented so far shows us that the theory of evolution is incompatible with scientific findings. The theory's claim regarding the origin of life is inconsistentwithscience,theevolutionarymechanismsitproposeshavenoevolutionary power,andfossilsdemonstratethat therequiredintermediateformshaveneverexisted. So,itcertainlyfollowsthatthetheoryofevolutionshouldbepushedasideasanunscientific idea. Thisishowmanyideas,suchastheEarthcentereduniversemodel,havebeentaken outoftheagendaofsciencethroughouthistory. However,thetheoryofevolutioniskeptontheagendaofscience.Somepeopleeventry torepresentcriticismsdirectedagainstitasan"attackonscience."Why? Thereasonisthatthistheoryisanindispensabledogmaticbeliefforsomecircles.These circlesareblindlydevotedtomaterialistphilosophyandadoptDarwinismbecauseitisthe onlymaterialistexplanationthatcanbeputforwardtoexplaintheworkingsofnature. Interestingly enough, they also confess this fact from time to time. A wellknown geneticistandanoutspoken evolutionist, RichardC.Lewontin fromHarvard University, confessesthatheis"firstandforemostamaterialistandthenascientist":
Itisnotthatthemethodsandinstitutionsofsciencesomehowcompelusacceptamaterialexplanation ofthephenomenalworld,but,onthecontrary,thatweareforcedbyouraprioriadherencetomaterial causestocreateanapparatusofinvestigationandasetofconceptsthatproducematerialexplanations, no matter how counterintuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialismisabsolute,sowecannotallowaDivine[intervention]... 86

TheseareexplicitstatementsthatDarwinismisadogmakeptalivejustforthesakeof adherence to materialism. This dogma maintains that there is no being save matter. Therefore,itarguesthatinanimate,unconsciousmatterbroughtlifeintobeing.Itinsiststhat millionsofdifferent livingspecies(e.g., birds,fish,giraffes,tigers,insects,trees, flowers, whales,andhumanbeings)originatedasaresultoftheinteractionsbetweenmattersuchas pouringrain,lightningflashes,andsoon,outofinanimatematter.Thisisapreceptcontrary bothtoreasonandscience.YetDarwinistscontinuetoignorantlydefenditjustsoasnotto acknowledge,intheirowneyes,theevidentexistenceofAllah. Anyonewhodoesnotlookattheoriginoflivingbeingswithamaterialistprejudicesees thisevidenttruth:AlllivingbeingsareworksofaCreator, WhoisAllPowerful,AllWise, and AllKnowing. This Creator is Allah, Who created the whole universe from non existence,inthemostperfectform,andfashionedalllivingbeings.

TheTheoryofEvolution:TheMostPotentSpellintheWorld
Anyonefreeofprejudiceandtheinfluenceofanyparticularideology,whousesonly hisorherreasonandlogic,willclearlyunderstandthatbeliefinthetheoryofevolution, whichbringstomindthesuperstitionsofsocietieswithnoknowledgeofscienceor civilization,isquiteimpossible. Asexplainedabove,thosewhobelieveinthetheoryofevolutionthinkthatafewatoms andmoleculesthrownintoahugevatcouldproducethinking,reasoningprofessorsand universitystudents;suchscientistsasEinsteinandGalileo;suchartistsasHumphreyBogart, FrankSinatraandLucianoPavarotti;aswellasantelopes,lemontrees,andcarnations. Moreover,asthescientistsandprofessorswhobelieveinthisnonsenseareeducatedpeople, itisquitejustifiabletospeakofthistheoryas"themostpotentspellinhistory."Neverbefore hasanyotherbelieforideasotakenawaypeoples'powersofreason,refusedtoallowthem tothinkintelligentlyandlogically,andhiddenthetruthfromthemasiftheyhadbeen blindfolded.Thisisanevenworseandunbelievableblindnessthanthetotemworshipin somepartsofAfrica,thepeopleofSabaworshippingtheSun,thetribeoftheProphet Abraham(as)worshippingidolstheyhadmadewiththeirownhands,orsomeamongthe peopleoftheProphetMoses(as)worshippingtheGoldenCalf. Infact,AllahhaspointedtothislackofreasonintheQur'an.Inmanyverses,Hereveals thatsomepeoples'mindswillbeclosedandthattheywillbepowerlesstoseethetruth. Someoftheseversesareasfollows:
Asforthosewhodonotbelieve,itmakesnodifferencetothemwhetheryouwarnthemor donotwarnthem,theywillnotbelieve.Allahhassealeduptheirheartsandhearingand overtheireyesisablindfold.Theywillhaveaterriblepunishment.(SuratalBaqara,67) Theyhaveheartswithwhichtheydonotunderstand.Theyhaveeyeswithwhichthey donotsee.Theyhaveearswithwhichtheydonothear.Suchpeoplearelikecattle.No, theyareevenfurtherastray!Theyaretheunaware.(SuratalA'raf,179) EvenifWeopenedupto them adoorinto heaven,andthey spent theday ascending throughit,theywouldonlysay:"Oureyesightisbefuddled!Orratherwehavebeenput underaspell!"(SuratalHijr,1415)

Wordscannotexpressjusthowastonishingitisthatthisspellshouldholdsuchawide community in thrall, keep people from the truth, and not be broken for 150 years. It is understandablethatoneorafewpeoplemightbelieveinimpossiblescenariosandclaims full of stupidity and illogicality. However, "magic" is the only possible explanation for people from all over the world believing that unconscious and lifeless atoms suddenly decided to come together and form a universe that functions with a flawless system of organization, discipline, reason, and consciousness; a planet named Earth with all of its featuressoperfectlysuitedtolife;andlivingthingsfullofcountlesscomplexsystems. Infact,intheQur'anAllahrelatestheincidentoftheProphetMoses(as)andPharaohto show that some people who support atheistic philosophies actually influence others by

magic.WhenPharaohwastoldaboutthetruereligion,hetoldtheProphetMoses(as)to meet with his own magicians. When the Prophet Moses (as) did so, he told them to demonstratetheirabilitiesfirst.Theversescontinue:
Hesaid:"Youthrow."Andwhentheythrew,they cast aspellonthepeople'seyesand causedthemtofeelgreatfearofthem.Theyproducedanextremelypowerfulmagic.(Surat alA'raf,116)

Aswehaveseen,Pharaoh'smagicianswereabletodeceiveeveryone,apartfromthe ProphetMoses(as)andthosewhobelievedinhim.However,hisevidencebrokethespell,or "swallowedupwhattheyhadforged,"asrevealedintheverse:

WerevealedtoMoses:"Throwdownyourstaff."Anditimmediatelyswallowedupwhat theyhadforged.SotheTruthtookplaceandwhattheydidwasshowntobefalse.(Surat alA'raf,117118)

Aswecansee,whenpeoplerealizedthataspellhadbeencastuponthemandthatwhat theysawwasjustanillusion,Pharaoh'smagicianslostallcredibility.Inthepresentdaytoo, unlessthosewho,undertheinfluenceofasimilarspell,believeintheseridiculousclaims under their scientific disguise and spend their lives defending them, abandon their superstitiousbeliefs,theyalsowillbehumiliatedwhenthefulltruthemergesandthespellis broken.Infact,worldrenownedBritishwriterandphilosopherMalcolmMuggeridge,who wasanatheistdefendingevolutionforsome60years,butwhosubsequentlyrealizedthe truth, revealsthepositioninwhichthetheory ofevolution wouldfinditselfinthe near futureintheseterms:
Imyselfamconvincedthatthetheoryofevolution ,especiallytheextenttowhichit'sbeenapplied, willbeoneofthegreatjokesinthehistorybooksinthefuture. Posteritywillmarvelthatso veryflimsyanddubiousanhypothesiscouldbeacceptedwiththeincrediblecredulitythatithas. 87

Thatfutureisnotfaroff:Onthecontrary,peoplewillsoonseethat"chance"isnota deity, and will look back on the theory of evolution as the worst deceit and the most terriblespellintheworld. Thatspellisalreadyrapidlybeginningtobeliftedfromthe shouldersofpeopleallovertheworld.Manypeoplewhoseeitstruefacearewondering withamazementhowtheycouldeverhavebeentakeninbyit.

Theysaid,"GlorybetoYou!WehavenoknowledgeexceptwhatYouhave taughtus.YouaretheAllKnowing,theAllWise."(SuratalBaqara:32)

NOTES

1.D.M.S.Watson,"Adaptation,"Nature,Vol.123,1929,p.233. 2.MichaelWalker,Quadrant,October1982,p.44. 3.PhilipE.Johnson,DefeatingDarwinismbyOpeningMinds(USA:InterVarsityPress,1997),p.11. 4.MichaelDenton,Evolution:ATheoryinCrisis,(London:BurnettBooks,1985),p.351. 5.BillyAronson,ScientificGoofs:AdventuresAlongtheCrookedTrailtoTruth,(NewYork:WHFreeman&Co,1994),p.33. 6.FredHoyle,TheIntelligentUniverse(London:MichaelJoseph,1983),pp.2021,23. 7.AndrewScott,"UpdateonGenesis"NewScientist,Vol.106,May2,1985,p.30. 8.StephenJayGould,"TheReturnofHopefulMonsters"NaturalHistory,Vol.86,JulyAugust1977,p.28. 9.ColinPatterson,"Cladistics"InterviewwithBrianLeek,interviewerPeterFranz,March4,1982,BBC. 10.JacquettaHawkes,"NineTantalizingMysteriesofNature"NewYorkTimesMagazine,1957,p.33. 11.CemalYildirim,EvrimKuramiveBagnazlik(TheTheoryofEvolutionandBigotry),(Ankara:BilgiPublishingHouse,January 1998),p.185. 12.B.G.Ranganathan,Origins?(Pennsylvania:TheBannerofTruthTrust,1988),p.7. 13.PierrePaulGrass,EvolutionofLivingOrganisms (NewYork:AcademicPress,1977),p.103. 14.JamesF.Crow,"GeneticEffectsofRadiation"BulletinofAtomicScientists,No:14,1958,pp.1920. 15.AliDemirsoy,KalitimveEvrim(InheritanceandEvolution)(Ankara:MeteksanPublications,1984),p.61. 16.Ibid.,p.61. 17.FredHoyle,ChandraWickramasinghe,EvolutionFromSpace(NewYork:Simon&Schuster,1984),p.130. 18.MahlonB.Hoagland,TheRootsofLife:ALayman'sGuidetoGenes,Evolution,andtheWaysofCells (Boston:HoughtonMifflin Company,1978),p.18. 19.CarlSagan,"Life"inEncyclopediaBritannica:Macropaedia(1974),pp.893894. 20.LeeM.Spetner,NotByChance!(NewYork:TheJudaicaPressInc.,1998),p.30. 21.PierreP.Grass,TheEvolutionofLivingOrganisms:EvidenceforaNewTheoryofTransformation ,(NewYork:AcademicPress, 1978),p.168. 22.ErnstHaeckel,TheWondersofLife,translatedbyJ.McCabe(London:Watts,1905),p.111. 23.W.R.Bird,TheOriginofSpeciesRevisited(Nashville:ThomasNelsonCo.,1991),pp.29899. 24. John D. Morris, "Natural Selection Versus Supernatural Design" Institute For Creation Research, "Vital Articles on Science/Creation"January1993,ImpactNo.223. 25.Denton,Evolution:ATheoryinCrisis,(London:BurnettBooks,1985),pp.328,342.

26.HeribertNilsson,SynthetischeArtbildung(SyntheticKindFormation)(Lund,Sweden:VerlagCWKGleerup,1953),pp.1185and 1212. 27.T.NevilleGeorge,"FossilsinEvolutionaryPerspective"ScienceProgress,Vol.48,January1960,pp.13. 28.StevenM.Stanley,Macroevolution:PatternandProcess,(NewYork:WHFreeman&Co,1980),p.159. 29.CharlesDarwin,TheOriginofSpecies:AFacsimileoftheFirstEdition (Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress,1964),p.184,andSir GavindeBeer,AtlasofEvolution(London:ThomasNelsonandSonsLtd.,1964),citedbyFrankSherwin,"ScientificRoadblocksto WhaleEvolution"InstituteforCreationResearch,"VitalArticlesonScience/Creation"October1998,ImpactNo:304. 30.FrancisCrick,LifeItself:ItsOriginandNature(NewYork:Simon&Schuster,1981),p.88. 31.MichaelJ.Behe,Darwin'sBlackBox(NewYork:FreePress,1996),p.249. 32.Ibid.,p.249. 33.GeorgeGamow,MartynasYcas,Mr.TompkinsInsideHimself(NewYork:TheVikingPress,1967),p.149. 34.PhillipE.Johnson,ObjectionsSustained(USA:InterVarsityPress,1998),p.23 35.CharlesDarwin:TheOriginofSpecies,Internetedition,ChapterVI.DifficultiesonTheory. 36.ElaineMorgan,TheScarsofEvolution(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,1994),p.5. 37.DavidJeremiah,ForewordtoHenryMorris'TheLongWarAgainstGod(Michigan:BakerBookHouse,1996),p.10. 38.CharlesDarwin,TheOriginofSpecies,Internetedition,ChapterVI.DifficultiesonTheory. 39.FrancisDarwin,TheLifeandLettersofCharlesDarwin,Internetedition,CharlesDarwin'sLettertoL.Jenyns(Rev.L.Blomfield). Down,[1845?]. 40.Ibid.,Chapter1I.,TheDarwinFamily. 41.H.S.Lipson,"APhysicist'sViewofDarwin'sTheory"EvolutionTrendsinPlants,Vol.2,No.1,1988,p.6. 42.Morris,H.M.,TheLongWarAgainstGod,p.34. 43.RobertShapiro,Origins:ASkeptic'sGuidetotheCreationofLifeonEarth(NewYork:SummitBooks,1986),p.130. 44.ArdaDenkel,CumhuriyetBilimTeknik(ScientificSupplement),February27,1999,p.15. 45.Ibid. 46.GeorgeP.Stavropoulos,"TheFrontiersandLimitsofScience"AmericanScientist,Vol.65,NovemberDecember1977,p.674. 47.PhilipE.Johnson,DarwinonTrial,2.ed.(Illinois:IntervarsityPress1993,p.132. 48.UmitSayin,BilimUtopya(ScienceUtopiaJournal),November1998,Vol.53,p.28. 49.V.I.Lenin,MaterialismandEmpiriocriticism(Moscow:ProgressPublishers,1970),pp.334335,citedbyRennanPekunlu, Bilim Utopya(ScienceUtopiaJournal),December1998,Vol.54,p.15. 50.RichardMilner,CharlesDarwin:EvolutionofaNaturalist(NewYork:FactsonFile,Inc.,1994),p.75 51.Behe,Darwin'sBlackBox,p.176. 52.ChristopherWills,TheWisdomoftheGenes:NewPathwaysinEvolution(NewYork:BasicBooks,1991),p.8.

53.Johnson,ObjectionsSustained ,p.9. 54.BilimUtopya(ScienceUtopiaJournal),October1998,p.28. 55.TimM.Berra, EvolutionandtheMythofCreationism:ABasicGuidetotheFactsintheEvolutionDebate (Stanford,California: StanfordUniversityPress,1990),p.117. 56.RichardDawkins,TheSelfishGene,2.ed.(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,1989),p.2. 57.GiorgiodeSantillana,andHerthavonDechend, Hamlet'sMill:AnEssayInvestigatingtheOriginsofHumanKnowledgeandIts TransmissionThroughMyth(Boston:GambitInc.,1969),p.505. 58.Dawkins,TheSelfishGene,p.3. 59.Behe,Darwin'sBlackBox,p.4. 60.JulianHuxley,"EvolutionandGenetics,"Chapter8in WhatisScience?,(J.R.Newman,ed.NewYork:SimonandSchuster, 1955),p.272 61.RichardE.LeakeyandRogerLewin,PeopleoftheLake,MankindandItsBeginnings(NewYork:AvonBooks,1979),p.37. 62.RichardLeakey,TheOriginofHumankind(NewYork:BasicBooks,1994),p.65. 63.Ibid.,pp.7374. 64.EdwardJ.Larson,andLarryWitham,"ScientistsandReligioninAmerica"ScientificAmerican,September,1999,p.81. 65.CitedbyPhillipE.Johnson,DarwinOnTrial,p.9. 66.PetervanInwagen,ReviewaboutMichaelBehe'sDarwin'sBlackBox,BackCover. 67.SidneyFox,KlausDose,MolecularEvolutionandTheOriginofLife ,W.H.FreemanandCompany,SanFrancisco,1972, p.4. 68.AlexanderI.Oparin,OriginofLife,DoverPublications,NewYork,1936,1953(reprint),p.196. 69.NewEvidenceonEvolutionofEarlyAtmosphereandLife,BulletinoftheAmericanMeteorologicalSociety,vol63, November1982,13281330. 70.StanleyMiller,MolecularEvolutionofLife:CurrentStatusofthePrebioticSynthesisofSmallMolecules ,1986,p.7. 71.JeffreyBada,Earth,February1998,p.40. 72.LeslieE.Orgel,TheOriginofLifeonEarth,ScientificAmerican,vol.271,October1994,p.78. 73.CharlesDarwin,TheOriginofSpeciesbyMeansofNaturalSelection,TheModernLibrary,NewYork,p.127. 74.CharlesDarwin,TheOriginofSpecies:AFacsimileoftheFirstEdition,HarvardUniversityPress,1964,p.184. 75.B.G.Ranganathan,Origins?,Pennsylvania:TheBannerofTruthTrust,1988,p.7. 76.CharlesDarwin,TheOriginofSpecies:AFacsimileoftheFirstEdition,p.179. 77.CharlesDarwin,TheOriginofSpecies,p.172. 78.DerekA.Ager,TheNatureoftheFossilRecord,ProceedingsoftheBritishGeologicalAssociation,vol87,1976,p.133. 79.DouglasJ.Futuyma,ScienceonTrial,PantheonBooks,NewYork,1983,p.197.

80.SollyZuckerman,BeyondTheIvoryTower,ToplingerPublications,NewYork,1970,7514;CharlesE.Oxnard,The PlaceofAustralopithecinesinHumanEvolution:GroundsforDoubt,Nature,vol258,389. 81.Couldsciencebebroughttoanendbyscientistsbeliefthattheyhavefinalanswersorbysocietysreluctancetopay thebills?ScientificAmerican,December1992,p.20. 82.AlanWalker,Science,vol.207,7March1980,p.1103;A.J.Kelso,PhysicalAntropology,1sted.,J.B.LipincottCo.,New York,1970,p.221;M.D.Leakey,OlduvaiGorge,vol.3,CambridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge,1971,p.272. 83.JeffreyKluger,NotSoExtinctAfterAll:ThePrimitiveHomoErectusMayHaveSurvivedLongEnoughToCoexist WithModernHumans,Time,23December1996. 84.S.J.Gould,NaturalHistory,vol.85,1976,p.30. 85.SollyZuckerman,BeyondTheIvoryTower,p.19. 86.RichardLewontin,TheDemonHauntedWorld,TheNewYorkReviewofBooks,January9,1997,p.28. 87.MalcolmMuggeridge,TheEndofChristendom,GrandRapids:Eerdmans,1980,p.43.

RESMALTIYAZILARI
s.15 CharlesDarwin,founderofthetheoryofevolution,whichmodernscientificdiscoverieshave invalidated. s.16 "Andtheyrepudiatedthem[Allah'sSigns]wronglyandhaughtily,inspiteoftheirowncertainty aboutthem.Seethefinalfateofthecorrupters." (SuratanNaml:14) s.18 "AllahismyLordandyourLordsoworshipHim.Thatisastraightpath." (SurahAl'Imran:51) s.20 PhilipE.Johnsonandthecoverofhisbookcriticizingthetheoryofevolution. s.21 MichaelDentonandhisbook,Evolution:ATheoryinCrisis. s.22 Facingpage:arepresentationoftheevolutionists'definitionofprimitiveatmosphere.Right:a chart depicting the amino acids and other elements supposedly formed in that primitive atmosphere.Nodoubtthatthescenariothatthematerialsseenherecametogethertoproducea livingcellistotallyirrationalandcontrarytoscience. s.24 Earlyviewsontheoriginoflifeincludedonethatsuggestedsheeparosefromaplant.Obviously,

thismisconceptionisn'tvastlydifferentfrommodernevolutionistideas. s.25 Accordingtomedievalbelief,lifecouldarisefrominanimatematter.Forexample,itwasbelieved thatmaggotscameintobeingspontaneouslyonuncoveredmeat.ButdiscoveriesmadebyF.Redi andlaterbyL.Pasteurshowedthistobefalse.Above,weseeexperimentsrelevanttothissubject conductedbyRedi.Despiteallthesescientificfacts,someevolutionistsstillsupport(albeitina differentway)thisclaim,whichisnothingmorethanasuperstitionfromtheMiddleAges. TheFrenchscientist,LouisPasteur,whodisprovedtheclaimsofevolutionistswithdiscoveries thatlaidthefoundationsofmodernbiology. s.27 Facingpage:Seventeenthcenturyscientistsatwork.Duringthatperiod,mostoftheclaimsand theoriesputforwardwerefarfromscientific.Consideringtheirlackofinformation,scientistsof thetimemaybeexcusedfortheirstrangeclaims.Butitishardlyexcusablefortoday'speopleto bestillmakingclaimslikethoseputforwardduringtheMiddleAges.Evolutionistsareamong thosewhomakesuchclaims,whoseinvalidityhasbeenprovenintoday'slaboratories. s.28 Ifeveryelementthatevolutioniststhinknecessaryforlifeweremixedinapotliketheoneonthe left, and if it were heated, subjected to electric current, and frozenin short, if the pot was subjectedtoeveryprocedurethatevolutionistprofessorsdeemessentialandlefttostandfor millions,eventrillionsofyears,nolivingcellwouldbeformed,letaloneanylivingcreature. amino acids Evolutionists claim that amino acids and proteins formed spontaneously by their chance combinationintheprimevalatmosphereandintheliquidcalledthe"primordialsoup."They illustratetheseclaimswithfantasticillustrationsliketheoneabove.Butitisalladeception.Such scenariosabouttheformationoflifeonEarthneveroccurred. s.29 Natureisacomprisedofair,rocks,soilandwater.Itisnotpossibleforthisentitytoproducea livingorganism,althoughevolutionistsattributemanysuchclaimsto"Nature"intheirimagined fairytales. s.32 ThelateevolutionistauthorStephenJayGould. s.33 "EverythingintheheavensandeverythingintheEarthbelongstoHim.AllahistheRichBeyond Need,thePraiseworthy."(SuratalHajj:64) s.35 Ever since the Austrian priest and botanist Gregor Mendel discovered the laws of genetics, evolutionistshavecomeupagainstadefiniteimpasse.

adenine guanine cytosine thymine DNAmoleculescarryallthegeneticinformationalivingcreatureneedstodevelop.Itisevident factthatsuchperfectioncannotbeattributed,asevolutionistsdo,totheoperationsofchance. Allahhasencodedthisinformationintolivingcells. s.36 SomeofthehandicappedchildrenbornafterChernobyl.Evolutionistsclaimthatmutationisa drivingforceintheevolutionoflivingcreatures,butthesephotographsareenoughtoshowits harmfuleffectsinhumanbeings. s.38 To dramatize the damage that mutationeither stoppages or changes in location in genetic informationcanwreakonanorganism,thefollowingexamplemaybeinstructive.Aboveisthe DNAcodeoftheBetaglobingene,whichformsapartofthehemoglobingenecarryingoxygen throughtheblood.Thecodesarereadfromlefttoright,asinanEnglishtext.Ifjustoneofthe elementsinthiscodeiswrong,thefunctionoftheresultingproteinwillbecompletelyvitiated. Clearly,anyrandominterferencewillruinsuchastructure.Let'simaginethatthelettersinthe aboveillustrationformedameaningfultext.Ifweremoveanyletteratrandomorchangeits location,wewillnotbeabletoimprovethetext.Thesameappliestomutations,whichcannot produceevolutionary"development"throughthiskindofnegativeinfluence. s.39 Right:thecomplex,threedimensionalstructureofaprotein. s.40 Aminoacidscombineinvariousplaceswithinaprotein'scomplexthreedimensionalstructure. Every protein has its own special arrangement of amino acids. This structure completely invalidatestheevolutionists'claimaboutproteins'randomformation. s.42 TheevolutionistprofessorAliDemirsoy(left)issodeeplyundertheDarwinistspellthatinstead ofacceptingevidentproofsfortheexistenceofAllah,hebelievesthatamonkeycouldwritea historyofhumanity. s.43 SirFredHoyle s.44 CarlSagan DNAisadatabankcontainingalltheinformationrelevanttoalivingcreature.Oureveryaspect, fromouroutwardappearancetoourinnerorgans,isencodedinDNA.

s.46 Golgiapparatus Cellmembrane Nucleus Vacuoles Diagramofchromosome DNAstrands Condensedchromosomestructure DNA Adenine SugarphosphatebackbonePhosphate Cytosine Thymine Guanine Hydrogenbonds EvenevolutionistsareawarethatthecomplexstructureofDNA(above)couldn'thavecomeinto being by chance. They often admit this, but because they are under the Darwinist spell, are unabletoacceptDNAasproofofAllah'sartistry. s.48 InErnstHaeckel'stime,primitivemicroscopesliketheonepicturedcouldprovideinformation aboutonlytheoutersurfaceofacell.Thatclaimsbasedonthislevelofknowledgecanstillbe supportedinthescientificenvironmentofthetwentyfirstcenturycanbeexplainedonlybythe Darwinistspell. s.49 JohnMorris'workshavebeenvaluableinshowingthedifficultiesthatthetheoryofevolutionhas encountered. s.50 1Nucleus 2Chromosomes 3Mitochondria 4Ribosomes 5Chloroplast 6Vacuoles

7Endoplasmicreticulum 8Cellmembrane Left:Thecomplexstructurewithinacell,comparedtoafactory.Below:anactualcell.Sucha structure,inwhicheveryorganellehasitsownspecificfunction,couldnothavecomeaboutby chance.Thesetwoillustrationsareenoughtoillustratewhythestructureofacellhasbroughtthe theoryofevolutiontoanimpasse. s.53 Species FossIl CountlessSPECIMENS Invertebrates Fossilammonite Fossilstarfish CountessSPECIMENS Fish Fossilfish Fossilshark CountlessSPECIMENS Reptiles Fossilcrocodile Fossilreptile CountlessSPECIMENS Birds Fossilbird CountlessSPECIMENS Mammals Fossilbat Fossildeer

NOSPECIMENs Halfinvertebrateandhalffish NOSPECIMENs Halffishandhalfreptile NOSPECIMENs Halfreptileandhalfmammal NOSPECIMENs Halfreptileandhalfbird s.55 "ThatisAllah,yourLord,theTruth,andwhatisthereaftertruthexceptmisguidance?Sohow haveyoubeendistracted?"(SurahYunus,10:32) s.57 From this illustration of the evolutionists' "hopeful monster," their theory seems no more convincingthanimaginarycartoonsorchildren'sstories. s.58 Darwinwassofarremovedfromscientificrealityastoproposethatbearsthatspentmuchof theirtimeswimmingeventually,overeons,developintowhales. s.60 ThedarkspellofDarwinismhadsuchaninfluenceonFrancisCrickthat,insteadofacceptingthe existenceofAllah,hechosetobelievethatlifefirstbeganonourworldfromDNAbroughthere byspacebeings. s.62 Toexplainhowbirdsfirstcameintoexistence,imaginativeevolutionistsproposedthatreptiles climbedintotreesandwereforcedtodevelopwingsastheyjumpedfromonebranchtoanother. Theiralternativesolutiontothisquestionisthatanimaginaryrunningdinosaurgrewwingsto helpitcatchinsects. s.65 Givenallthedifferencesbetweenreptilesandmammals,howdidareptilebegintoregulateits bodytemperaturebyaperspiratorymechanism?Isitpossiblethatitreplaceditsscaleswithfur orhairandstartedtosecretemilk?Inorderforthetheoryofevolutiontoexplaintheoriginof mammals,itmustfirstprovidescientificanswerstothesequestions. s.67 1 43

37 42 40 36 39 41 35 2 34 38 33 32 3 4 31 30 5 6 29 7 28 8 27 11 9

26 10 12 25 13 24 14 23 20 22 19 15 21 18 16 17 The figure above illustrates the components of the eye revealing its complex structure. Evolutionistsaresodeeplyundertheinfluenceofaspellastoproposethattheeye'sperfectand complexstructurecouldhavearisenbychance. s.69 Itissurelyunreasonabletobelievethatmonkeys,createdwithouttheabilitytothinkandmake rationaldecisionsinthewayhumansdo,couldunderanyconditionsdevelopovertimethe superiortalentsrequiredtoinventtechnology. s.73 Evolutionist propaganda represents a serious threat to spiritual and moral values. The conferencesofTheScienceandResearchFoundationofTurkey,inspiredbytheworksofHarun Yahya,havehelpedagreatmanypeopletobecomeawareoftheissueandtounderstandthe seriousnessofthisthreat. s.77 Every fossil expert can look at a petrified bone and suggest information about it. But when

evolutionistsengageinthisordinaryscientificactivity,theygivetheimpressionofbeingengaged insomethingenigmaticandincomprehensible. s.80 OnechapterinCharlesDarwin'sTheOriginoftheSpeciesdealswiththeproblemsconfrontedby the theory of evolution. This chapter, entitled, "Difficulties on Theory," reveals the unsound reasoningonwhichthetheoryisfounded. s.81 HenryMorrisandhisbook,TheLongWarAgainstGod. s.82 RobertShapiro s.84 In an article in Cumhuriyet Bilim Teknik (a Turkish scientific supplementary), Arda Denkel explainshowevolutionistintimationshavenoscientificmeaning. Science,CreationistsandEvolution IhavenoideawhatdenialIcouldofferifanyoneweretosaythatthemembersofthegrouphad fallenbehindtheSRFintermsofbeingscientificbypublishingamanifesto. Atrulyscientificattitudewouldrevealwhatthese"thousandsofarticlesandbooks"assert.It shoulddisplayoroutlinetothereader,atleastafewoftheirdataandarguments.Withthis groupofscientists,however,suchisnotthecase.Onthecontrary,handoutscirculatedbythe ScienceResearchFoundation(SRF),continuallyputforwardcriticaljustificationswrittenfrom theirownstance. s.89 To give their theory a scientific tone, evolutionists adorn their unsubstantial writings with incomprehensiblewords,asthesetextsshow. s.91 One common feature of books promoting evolution is their austere appearance and incomprehensiblecontents.Thepurposeistomakethesebookslookasiftheycontainedabstruse scientificknowledge.Complicatedgraphicsandobscuremathematicalcalculationsonlyaddto thisillusion. s.94 Everyoneisfamiliarwiththeillustrationsinnewspapersandmagazines,depictingtheevolution ofahumanbeingfromanape.Suchillustrations,frequentlyemployedbyevolutionists,haveno basisinfact.TheirpurposeistoperpetuatetheeffectoftheDarwinistspell. s.95 FALSE Above:Variousfilmstillsfamiliartoeveryone.Depictinghalfhuman,halfapecharactersisa classicmethodtopreventbreakingtheevolutionistspell.

s.96 FactspresentedinthebookTheEvolutionDeceitweretraumatizingformaterialistslikeRennan Pekunlu. s.97 "DonotcallonanyotherdeityalongwithGod.ThereisnogodbutHim.Allthingsarepassing exceptHisFace.JudgmentbelongstoHim.YouwillbereturnedtoHim."(SuratalQasas:88) s.98 Theevolutionists'imaginationislivelyenoughtotransformastarfishintoafish. s.100 MichaelBeheandhisbook,Darwin'sBlackBox. s.102 ChristopherWills s.104 RichardDawkins s.106 AnEvolutionist'sPloy Anotherexampleofevolutionists'demagoguerycamefromUmitSayin,againinthemagazine Bilim Utopya. After providing a brief list of a few books printed in the past and criticizing evolution,Sayin'sarticlewentontogivealongerlistoftwentyorsobooksundertheheading"A fewbookswrittenbyscientistsinresponsetoCreationists."Hethenresortedtoaninfantilelogic, "Evolutionistshavemanymorepublications,soevolutionmustbetrue."Thefactisthatevenin the last few years, a large number of works and studies by American, German, Israeli and Australianscientistshaveappeared,showingwithscientificdataandmethodsthatthetheory ofevolutionisahypothesiswhosevalidityhasbeendisprovedbyallbranchesofscience.These books have left not a single evolutionary scenario unanswered and undemolished. There is, therefore,noneedforthousandsofbooksandstudiestostatethatthemythofevolutionistotally fictitious.Justonesmallpaperbackcanunderminemanyvolumespromulgatingevolution.The simplefactthatnotevenasingleproteincouldevermaterializebychanceisenoughtorefute evolutioncompletely. SomeoftheBooksPublishedbyCreationists SomeoftheBooksScientistsWroteinResponsetoCreationists s.109 Oneclassictechniquethatevolutionistsuseistotitleanarticletogivetheimpressionthatit's about evolution, when it gives only general information on the subject or is about a totally irrelevanttopic.Forexample,theheadlineofthearticleentitled"NewZealand,"containssuch stereotypedtermsas,"fringeoftheevolutionaryraft."Therestofthecoverageincludesgeneral informationandphotographsaboutthenaturalbeautiesofNewZealand.Asimilartacticisused intheotherarticles.Thistechniqueseemsintendedtogivetheimpressionthatthearticlehas

somethingtodowithevolution,althoughthetextcontainsnothingtoproveevolution. s.110 MISLEADINGTITLESANDCOVERAGE These journals' reports contain tiny references tucked away in a corner or else make covert evolutionarysuggestionsbyusingtheterms"naturalselection,"or"theevolutionofamodern brain."However,insteadofofferingproofsregardingevolution,alltheyactuallycontainisfacts confirmingcreationsuchastheextraordinaryfeaturesofcreatureswhichusecamouflage.Even if the pageslong coverage is about the signs of creation, such journals still include strained referencestoevolutionwithnosubstanceintheirreports. s.113 Wheninterpretingfossils,RichardLeakey,notedevolutionist,didnotrelyonproof,nordidhe abstainfromusinghisinstincts. s.114 EVOLUTIONISTINCULCATIONSINMEDIA s.115 Onetacticthatevolutionistsfrequentlyuseistopresentscientificallyworthlessarticleswithlarge headlines claiming to offer proofofevolution.Theseheadlines, far frombeing scientific, can sometimesbeactuallycomical.Readingthem,youcanimmediatelyseetheirlogicalspeciousness andfairytalelikequality.Withthistechnique,however,peoplewhoreadonlytheheadlinesand notthearticlescangettheimpressionthatthereissuchathingasevolution.Examplesinthese pages show how, using illustrations of a few bone fragments, conjectural illustrations, and sensationalistic headlines, evolutionists try to givetheir articles credibility, even though they containnoscientificreality. s.116 FALSE s.117 FALSE Themanpicturedbelowuseshisimaginationtomakeartisticreconstructions.Allthehalfman andhalfapecreaturesyouseeinfilms,newspapersandmagazinescomefromtheimaginations ofpeoplelikethis.Butnosuchintermediatecreatureseverexisted. s.118 Above: Reconstruction of an imaginary halfhuman, halfape. The article below bears an interestingheadlinesuggestiveofevolution,butcontainsnothingbutalotofstrangenonsense. s.119 Onexamination,thiseyecatchingpictureismeaningless.Itsonlypurposeistoattractpeople's attentionwithitsvisualeffectsandtoinstillthesuggestionofevolution. s.120 EVOLUTIONISTINCULCATIONSINMEDIA

The media have exerted the greatest influence in getting the theory of evolution, with no scientificfoundation,tobeviewedasscientificreality.Variousperiodicalshavekeptthetheory inthepubliceyebypublishingregulararticlesaboutit.Apartfromthemedia,wecanseemass "selling" of evolution in scientific journals, encyclopedias and even biology texts. Books and magazinesarepublished withstrikingcovers,interesting pagedesignsandcolorpictures,to attractattentionwiththeirvisualeffectsandinstillthesuggestionthat"evolutiondoesexist." s.121 Evolutionistsoftencreateaspellwiththeirvisualpresentations.Theirillustrationsofprimitive human beings, cavemen and human ancestors are all imaginary. The sole purpose of the attractivepagelayoutsandillustrationsistopublicizetheideaofevolution. s.123 ScientificAmerican September1999 s.129 CharlesDarwin s.131 Through his experiments, Louis Pasteur invalidated the idea that life can emerge from inanimatematter,onwhichthetheoryofevolutionisbased. s.132 Russianbiologist AlexanderOparin s.133 Oneexampleofevolutionists'attemptstoaccountfortheoriginoflifeistheMillerexperiment.It wasgraduallyrealizedthatthisexperiment,initiallyheraldedasamajoradvanceonbehalfofthe theoryofevolution,wasinvalid,andMillerwasevenforcedtoadmitthatveryfacthimself. s.134 Oneofthefactsnullifyingthetheoryofevolutionistheincrediblycomplexstructureoflife.The DNAmoleculelocatedinthenucleusofcellsoflivingbeingsisanexampleofthis.TheDNAisa sortofdatabankformedofthearrangementoffourdifferentmoleculesindifferentsequences. Thisdatabankcontainsthecodesofallthephysicaltraitsofthatlivingbeing.Whenthehuman DNAisputintowriting,itiscalculatedthatthiswouldresultinanencyclopediamadeupof900 volumes. Unquestionably, such extraordinary information definitively refutes the concept of coincidence. s.136 FrenchnaturalistLamarck s.137 antenne leg eye

mouth Sincethebeginningofthetwentiethcentury,evolutionarybiologistshavesoughtexamplesof beneficialmutationsbycreatingmutantflies.Buttheseeffortshavealwaysresultedinsickand deformedcreatures.Thetoppictureshowstheheadofanormalfruitfly,andthepictureonthe leftshowstheheadofafruitflywithlegscomingoutofit,theresultofmutation. s.139 LIVINGFOSSILSREFUTEEVOLUTION Fossilsareproofthatevolutionneverhappened.Asthefossilrecordshows,livingthingscame intobeinginasinglemoment,withallthecharacteristicstheypossessandneveralteredinthe leastforsolongasthespeciessurvived.Fishhavealwaysexistedasfish,insectsasinsectsand reptilesasreptiles.Thereisnoscientificvaliditytotheclaimthatspeciesdevelopgradually. AlmightyAllahcreatedalllivingthings. A54to37millionyearoldfossilsunfish A295millionyearoldfossilseaurchin A125millionyearoldfossilcicada A50millionyearoldfossilsequoialeaf s.142 FALSE Evolutionistnewspapersandmagazinesoftenprintpicturesofprimitiveman.Theonlyavailable sourceforthesepicturesistheimaginationoftheartist.Evolutionarytheoryhasbeensodented byscientificdatathattodayweseelessandlessofitintheseriouspress. s.145 Allitscomponentsneedtofunctiontogetherandperfectlyiftheeyeistoseeatall. s.151 Movement Thought Touch Speech Sight Taste Hearing

Smell Weliveourwholelifeinourbrains.Peoplewesee,flowerswesmell,musicwehear,fruitwe taste,themoisturewefeelwithourhandsalltheseareimpressionsthatbecome"reality"inthe brain. But no colors, voices or pictures exist there. We live in an environment of electrical impulses.Thisisnotheory,butthescientificexplanationofhowweperceivetheoutsideworld.