Excerpted from the conclusion of the book A Historical Lie: the Stone Age
All this knowledge is of utmost importance in human life. And this is definitely not any sort of philosophy or school of thought, but the result of scientific conclusions that are impossible to deny. Most probably, many readers are reflecting on these facts about timelessness and the real nature of time for the first time in their lives.
However, one important thing must be kept in mind: God, in the Qurâ€™an, reveals that â€œonly those who sincerely turn to Godâ€ (Qurâ€™an, 50: 8) take heed. In other words, only those who truly seek the guidance of God and strive to appreciate His infinite might and His greatness will heed these explanations and have a full grasp of these facts.
An individual may be influenced by materialism all his life. Because of this influence, he may not have the opportunity to think about these facts with an open mind. But this does not mean he must continue to lead his life in error. Anyone who sees the truth must no longer insist on error, but listen to and obey the moral voice of his conscience. The Qurâ€™an says that every individual must avoid being the kind of person who sees the truth in his conscience but flees from it:
And they repudiated them wrongly and haughtily, in spite of their own certainty about them. See the final fate of the corrupters.
Those who see the truth and acknowledge it, if God wills, will attain salvation in this world and in the Hereafter:
He who brings the truth and he who confirms itâ€”those are the people who guard against evil.
The Deception of Evolution
Darwinism, in other words the theory of evolution, was put forward with the aim of denying the fact of creation, but is in truth nothing but failed, unscientific nonsense. This theory, which claims that life emerged by chance from inanimate matter, was invalidated by the scientific evidence of clear â€œdesignâ€ in the universe and in living things. In this way, science confirmed the fact that God created the universe and the living things in it. The propaganda carried out today in order to keep the theory of evolution alive is based solely on the distortion of the scientific facts, biased interpretation, and lies and falsehoods disguised as science.
Yet this propaganda cannot conceal the truth. The fact that the theory of evolution is the greatest deception in the history of science has been expressed more and more in the scientific world over the last 20-30 years. Research carried out after the 1980s in particular has revealed that the claims of Darwinism are totally unfounded, something that has been stated by a large number of scientists. In the United States in particular, many scientists from such different fields as biology, biochemistry and paleontology recognize the invalidity of Darwinism and employ the fact of creation to account for the origin of life.
We have examined the collapse of the theory of evolution and the proofs of creation in great scientific detail in many of our works, and are still continuing to do so. Given the enormous importance of this subject, it will be of great benefit to summarize it here.
The Scientific Collapse of Darwinism
Although this doctrine goes back as far as ancient Greece, the theory of evolution was advanced extensively in the nineteenth century. The most important development that made it the top topic of the world of science was Charles Darwinâ€™s The Origin of Species, published in 1859. In this book, he denied that God created different living species on Earth separately, for he claimed that all living beings had a common ancestor and had diversified over time through small changes. Darwinâ€™s theory was not based on any concrete scientific finding; as he also accepted, it was just an â€œassumption.â€ Moreover, as Darwin confessed in the long chapter of his book titled â€œDifficulties on Theory,â€ the theory failed in the face of many critical questions.
Darwin invested all of his hopes in new scientific discoveries, which he expected to solve 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 reviewed under three basic topics:
1) The theory cannot explain how life originated on Earth.
2) No scientific finding shows that the â€œevolutionary mechanismsâ€ proposed by the theory have any evolutionary power at all.
3) The fossil record proves the exact opposite of what the theory suggests.
In this section, we will examine these three basic points in general outlines:
The First Insurmountable Step: The Origin of Life
The theory of evolution posits that all living species evolved from a single living cell that emerged on the primitive Earth 3.8 billion years ago. How a single cell could generate millions of complex living species and, if such an evolution really occurred, why traces of it cannot be observed in the fossil record are some of the questions that the theory cannot answer. However, first and foremost, we need to ask: How did this â€œfirst cellâ€ originate?
Since the theory of evolution denies creation and any kind of supernatural intervention, it maintains that the â€œfirst cellâ€ originated coincidentally within the laws of nature, without any design, plan or arrangement. According to the theory, inanimate matter must have produced a living cell as a result of coincidences. Such a claim, however, is inconsistent with the most unassailable rules of biology.
â€œLife Comes From Lifeâ€
In his book, Darwin never referred to the origin of life. The primitive understanding of science in his time rested on the assumption that living beings had a very simple structure. Since medieval times, spontaneous generation, which asserts that non-living materials came together to form living organisms, had been widely accepted. It was commonly believed that insects came into being from food leftovers, and mice from wheat. Interesting experiments were conducted to prove this theory. Some wheat was placed on a dirty piece of cloth, and it was believed that mice would originate from it after a while.
Similarly, maggots developing in rotting meat was assumed to be evidence of spontaneous generation. However, it was later understood that worms did not appear on meat spontaneously, but were carried there by flies in the form of larvae, invisible to the naked eye.
Even when Darwin wrote Origin, the belief that bacteria could come into existence from non-living matter was widely accepted in the world of science.
However, five years later, Louis Pasteur announced his results after long studies and experiments, that disproved spontaneous generation, a cornerstone of Darwinâ€™s theory. In his triumphal lecture at the Sorbonne in 1864, Pasteur said: â€œNever will the doctrine of spontaneous generation recover from the mortal blow struck by this simple experiment.â€
For a long time, advocates of the theory of evolution resisted these findings. However, as the development of science unraveled the complex structure of the cell of a living being, the idea that life could come into being coincidentally faced an even greater impasse.
Inconclusive Efforts of the 20th Century
The first evolutionist who took up the subject of the origin of life in the twentieth century was the renowned Russian biologist Alexander Oparin. With various theses he advanced in the 1930s, he tried to prove that a living cell could originate by coincidence. These studies, however, were doomed to failure, and Oparin had to make the following confession:
Unfortunately, however, the problem of the origin of the cell is perhaps the most obscure point in the whole study of the evolution of organisms.
Evolutionist followers of Oparin tried to carry out experiments to solve this problem. The best known experiment was carried out by the American chemist Stanley Miller in 1953. Combining the gases he alleged to have existed in the primordial Earthâ€™s atmosphere in an experiment set-up, and adding energy to the mixture, Miller synthesized several organic molecules (amino acids) present in the structure of proteins.
Barely a few years had passed before it was revealed that this experiment, which was then presented as an important step in the name of evolution, was invalid, for the atmosphere used in the experiment was very different from the real Earth conditions.
After a long silence, Miller confessed that the atmosphere medium he used was unrealistic.
All the evolutionistsâ€™ efforts throughout the 20th century to explain the origin of life ended in failure. The geochemist Jeffrey Bada, from the San Diego Scripps Institute accepts this fact in an article published in Earth magazine in 1998:
Today as we leave the twentieth century, we still face the biggest unsolved problem that we had when we entered the twentieth century: How did life originate on Earth?