There have been people in the past, who believed that there was no God and that the world was a product of chance, but these were regarded as rather foolish. Things began to change in the Nineteenth century, when Darwin wrote his book “Origin of Species”, in which he concluded, based on similarities between different species that they must have evolved from common ancestors. He proposed a mechanism that could explain the evolution of different life forms and named it “Natural Selection”. This, he proposed, was a very slow and random process, which accumulated small incremental changes over millions of years, to shape the life as we know it. Even with these ideas, Darwin did not explicitly deny existence of God and carefully avoided being termed an atheist. However, his theory became popular and widely accepted by atheists, who had finally found a justification for their belief and became its evangelists. They maintained and propagated that the theory was an absolute fact, supported by scientific findings. With the scientific appeal attached, the idea spread rapidly and fools of past, came to be ranked with intellectuals. Since then, several stories have been written, to explain evolution of species from one-another. These stories are widespread and continue to evolve to this day, with little or no evidence.
Evolutionary evangelicals also found support from those who had rebelled against religions – either due to false beliefs, like multitude of gods, or due to the strict laws and rituals they mandate. For this group, it not only offered an alternative belief, but also freed them of all religious commitments. Together, they waged a war against all religions and against God Himself, producing literature to support their belief and discredit all that opposed it. In years that followed, this belief was adopted by many individuals and nations, and the world witnessed moral decadence and killings like never before.
In spite of all this, there have always been people, both within scientific community and outside it, who debated, critiqued and refuted both the theory and the belief4; but their voice seemed to be drowning in the noise of evolutionary evangelicals. For a sincere seeker of truth, however, the issue becomes clear with little observation and reflection. Below are few points, which will help those with intellect, in clearing the fog around the issue and make the truth stand out, As for those who have closed their eyes and ears, then who can make the dead hear? It is as if they have been blinded by evolution!
1. The Balance
The world is full of different cyclical systems, which are essential for life on earth. These systems are delicately balanced, such that they can repeat without breaking the other systems. Imagine if water always evaporated and never came back as rain! Or the burned oxygen was never recovered from atmosphere! Or if all land was boiling lava, or there was no lava in earth! Or the stars never exploded to form new ones! In any of these scenarios, life as we know it would cease to exist. It defies logical thinking, to assume that all these cycles emerged and converged by sheer chance to make life a possibility. The balance exists not only on earth but also in the universe at large. One, who says that all this is result of random events, is surely lower in intellect than one who says that all the mechanisms in an airplane could come about and be maintained purely due to random events.
Surely, in the creation of the heavens and the earth, succession of the night and the day, and the ship that sails in the sea carrying that which benefits people, and what Allah sends down from sky of water then brings to life with it the earth after its death and had spread in it all kinds of animals and variation of winds and clouds held between sky and earth, are signs for those with intellect.
2. Origin and Repetition
Speaking of life, it’s known that Cells are the building blocks of life and contrary to general understanding are quite complex, filled with nano-machines performing variety of operations including decoding and execution of instructions. How, when, why and where did the first cell originate is unknown to us, but it is certain that the origin of cell was non-evolutionary5.
Even if the first cell formed somehow, how did it come to know about self-replication mechanism? Did the first cell come equipped to sustain its kind? If not, when and how did this mechanism evolve? Being able to clone or reproduce is essential for continuity of species. It is evident, that first cell must be capable to replicate, without which the cell would have degraded to dust and there would be no possibility of further evolution.
It is this complexity of cells that has led to suggestions that, life on Earth must have been implanted by extra-terrestrial beings. They would acknowledge extra-terrestrial beings but not God? What a shame!
3. Shapes and Forms
Cells, fish, animal, reptile, birds, plant, flower, insect… as you keep mentioning these words you able to classify living beings into a distinct set of class; this is primarily due to similarities between living beings within each class. Question is if the process is random, how could it produce such a distinct classification? Ironically, the similarities that Darwin based his theory on, doesn’t bear the signature of a random process, rather seems to be strongly typed to limited forms. It is this strongly typed form, which has enabled us to classify the living beings into different categories; had it not been so, we would not be able to classify them with such ease. Even the body parts are not randomly developed but follow a pattern, which can be recognized across species. Four limbs, fingers, pair of eyes, face, jaws, and teeth... to mention few. What restricted a random process to maintain these shapes and forms?
Also, this observation corresponds to nature of other objects in the universe in general; consider electrons, protons, neutrons, atoms, molecules, etc.… all these have strongly typed forms. What makes all electrons have same properties and behavior? How about protons, atoms of hydrogen, molecules of water? Examples are in abundance, for those with intellect!
4. Intra-dependence
A pair of leg, with muscles of right strength to hold body straight, is not sufficient to be able to walk straight. It also needs proper vision and right balance of fluids in both ears6. And of course, the network of blood vessels, which can energize all those body parts and neural networks, which can transmit signals between them. Body of living beings show remarkable intra-dependance between different systems within. How can a random accumulation of favorable changes, result in such level of co-ordination?
Male and female parts in plants, is another classic example. Both are two different systems in all respect, but complement each other so well in producing seed, as if they are aware of each other!
Dive deeper within these systems to the level of cells. What makes these cells come together and coordinate with each other, as if they’ve agreed on a common purpose? Bear in mind that complex living forms are not composed of only one type of cells.
This degree of organization and harmony between systems within living organisms is ubiquitous. Different parts of body, different systems - circulatory, neural, digestive, respiratory, visual etc. - work together to make a living being! What is more interesting is that, this coordination is not a result of conscious effort on part of the living being itself. In fact, it would’ve been too much of a burden, on any living being to actually control all these things!!
5. Life, Its Abstraction and Death
What is life? Although we experience it, we do not comprehend it fully yet. Consider a single cell, a living being in all respect and an Elephant, composed of trillions of cells, also a living being. Both of them are alive, but at different level of abstraction! Although cells within, continue to live and function, the Elephant is not just a conglomeration of cells, rather has its own life. It is as if cells are bricks plastered together to form an entirely new structure!!
We do observe something similar in non-living world too. Consider for example, carbon atoms, arranged in one way result in graphite and in another way produces diamond. Although made from same element, each has its own distinct properties, different from any other.
6. Resilience to damage
Self-repairable systems, how could that evolve? Imagine if a prick was enough to kill you. Or dust could accumulate in your lungs and suffocate you to death. Living beings do show a high level of resilience to damage, without which, the world would seem hostile. Scratch a tree and it reacts with necessary measures to fix it. We observe this resilience all the way down to each cell. How did this self-repair mechanism develop? Was it before or after sustaining damage? If we go by evolutionary idea, then it cannot be before, as there would be no need for it yet. If it was after, then how did it survive the damage in first instance? How did cells, plants, animals, humans, insects, etc., all with different types of systems within themselves came up with this idea of resilience against damage and continued working on it all along the evolutionary path?!
The fact that the whole medical industry stands on this resilience of living beings, speaks loudly against it being a product of chance.
7. Pair and Gender
Why would many things evolve to be in pairs? For example eyes, nostrils, hands, lungs, kidneys, etc. Arguably, one eye, one lung, one kidney would have sufficiently achieved the purpose, so why would the evolutionary process take the pain of developing a pair? Was evolution of pairs synchronized, occurring simultaneously? Or was it asynchronous, one after another? Both scenarios cannot be results of random incidents. To be able to work in sync to produce pairs or symmetry, is asking too much from a random process. To be able to re-produce an existing structure or function in a symmetrical fashion, again is overburdening this random process.
How did the genders evolve? Again there is no sound explanation, except for evolutionary fairy tales. If cells were to form living organisms through evolution, at what point and why it took a more complicated route of procreation through different genders?! Did the two genders evolve separately? If so how did they synchronize their evolutionary path? Why did one gender evolved to bear child - a clear disadvantage in evolutionary terms. If they evolved as one being with male and female organs, at what point they separated into two? How did they agree on tradeoffs? How did they synchronize further reproductive evolution?
If you were to give enough thought to these questions, the fallacy of this theory and belief will be crystal clear.
8. Interdependence
Another example is that of fruits and animals which eat them and help spreading the seeds. To assume that they evolved together, is to say that, fruit bearing tree is aware of the animal’s likes, dislikes or even dietary needs, is able to devise a mechanism to attract that animal, produce a fruit of suitable composition and implant seeds within those fruits, which cannot be digested by that animal. Now who's telling fairy tales?!
Similar to this, is dependence between some animals, like cow, and bacteria which resides in their digestive system and helps in digestion. Examples are many and they get more interesting as one gets to know more about them.
9. Independence
Another intriguing aspect is that of ability of a seed to grow independent of its parent tree or plant. It is worth noting that, the seed separated from its parent, is of no benefit to the parent itself. This being the case, why would a tree bother creating a seed, with all the complications involved in it? Or are we to believe that the random process is wise enough to not only take care of current generation, but also make sure that it sustains future generations?! Or that the tree itself is concerned about its future generations? Secondly, how did the process or the tree come up with the idea of growing something, which when sown in soil with enough water and right conditions would generate something similar to itself? Interestingly, the tree couldn’t even test7 what it had produced, for it to know that its goal has in fact, been achieved. The feedback loop is simply missing from the equation.Ask a pregnant woman, especially with first child, and she will tell you that it’s a new experience for her, although, she may have seen and lived with many other pregnant women. With all the conscious feedback, she can do little to make things better for herself. And here we are to believe, that a random process could, not only do it better but with amazing precision, even without feedback!
10. Total Dependence
Consider Mother-Child relationship, where the child is totally dependent on mother. At its inception, it is like a parasite in mother's body and after birth if mother fails to nurse, it will die. This dependency is no fun for mother, who is drained of her energy and much more. There is no evolutionary advantage for mother in this case. Many women, especially in our time, have attested to this by opting out, having minimal pregnancies or even aborting the child!11. Discovery precedes Innovation
A discovery must be made before any new functionality can be added to an organism. To understand this, imagine of an organism which existed millions of years ago and did not start seeing yet. Before this organism can start evolving a new organ for vision, it must know that light waves are out there, and that it is possible to utilize these waves to see the world. Needless to say, that after this discovery is made, the process must come up with a strategy to not only develop an organ which can tap on available light, but also send the inverted real images as signals to brain, as well as add capability to brain to process those signals. Even if we ignore all the complexities, we still have very fundamental question unanswered. How were these discoveries made?! Was this process or organism capable of making discovery and gauging potentials? Same argument applies to hearing, smell and other abilities.Consider flight of birds as another example. We've heard the story of dinosaurs that wanted to fly and consequently evolved and became bird! Humans have consciously, longed for flight more than dinosaurs, but alas, were never able to fly. Well, maybe evolution works only for subconscious desires?! Anyhow, humans had to do the hard work in discovering principles involved in flight, along with different experiments and testing. Flight needs expertise in many different fields, as humans have now learned. Did the dinosaur running after insects, had already made all these discoveries?! How did insects discover flight?
12. Ape to Human devolution?
What makes humans distinct and superior to apes or any other living beings is ability to understand, express, explain and learn. How did these intangible abilities evolve?
13. Missing Fossils
Not able to explain evolution of intangible abilities, evolutionists would say that these cannot be preserved in fossils and thus cannot be proved, as if to say that they already have fossils which prove their theory. Well, this is perhaps the best kept secret of evolutionary theory. While evolutionists weave stories and draw hypothetical images around fossils, giving an impression to general audience that they have found all missing pieces of the puzzle, the reality is that there aren't sufficient fossils to support the cause. To understand this, imagine if a whale were to become a bear - how many small incremental steps it will have to go through, before it becomes a bear? Now, if the whale did indeed go through all these changes over millions of years, then there must be transient fossils, which are somewhere between a whale and a bear. Instead, the fossils found have very defined forms and the transient fossils are still evasive. In fact, many of the fossils tossed around as transitional forms, are too similar to either one of the species to be labeled transitional. This was one of the things that Darwin did foresee as a potential problem to his theory8. Search for these missing links have often frustrated evolutionists, some of whom, resorted to forging evidence, while others extrapolated tiniest fossils they found9. When fossil couldn't support the idea, evolutionists manipulated facts and every time a new fossil was found, wove and re-wove their stories around it, masking it as evidence in support of their lies.How could structure of one species transform into another new structure and how did their structure arise in first place, is far from explained.
