Fossil Research Proves Creation

Given the above facts, scientific advances show that natural selection and mutation have no evolutionary force. Since no evolutionary mechanism exists, no evolution could have taken place in the past. However, evolutionists continue to insist that all living things evolved from one another by means of a gradual process that occurred over hundreds of millions of years. Their error is concealed within this logic, for if their scenario were true, countless transitional forms belonging to the timeframe in question should have emerged. Moreover, we should have found their fossil remains.

For example, evolutionists claim that starfish evolved into real fish over millions of years. According to that claim, there must exist many transitional forms between the two species. However, not one fossil belonging to any such transitional form has ever been found. There are starfish and fish in the fossil record, but no forms between the two.

The evolutionists' illogical claims are apparent in every case. Let's consider the emergence of fish, which evolutionists say evolved from invertebrates, such as the starfish or marine worms. If this were the case, numerous examples of transitional forms must have existed in order to allow a gradual evolution. In other words, we should be able to see the fossil remains of many species having both fish and invertebrate characteristics. However, despite the many fish and invertebrate fossils found by scientists, no fossil of any transitional form that might confirm their claim has ever been found. Such an absence, in turn, means that evolution never took place. (In fact, the first fish on Earth appear in the same geological period with the first known complex invertebrates. Fish fossils go back to 530 million years.15 During that time, known as the Cambrian age, all major groups of invertebrates abruptly appeared on Earth.)

Although evolutionists are well aware of this, they resort to such methods as demagogy and faked evidence to make people believe in evolution.16 Even Darwin knew that the fossil record did not back up his theory; he merely hoped that it would grow richer over time and that the missing transitional forms would be found. Present-day evolutionists, however, are left with no such hope. As even they have admitted, the fossil record is exceedingly rich and of a sufficient degree to reveal the history of life. Professor N. Heribert Nilsson, a well-known Swedish evolutionist botanist from Lund University, says this about the fossil record:

My attempts to demonstrate evolution by an experiment carried on for more than 40 years have completely failed… The fossil material is now so complete that it has even been possible to construct new classes, and the lack of any transitional series cannot be explained as being due to the scarcity of material. The deficiencies are real, (and) they will never be filled.17

T. Neville George, a professor of paleontology of Glasgow University, states that although the fossil record is very rich, the long-sought transitional forms have not yet been found:

There is no need to apologise any longer for the poverty of the fossil record. In some ways, it has become almost unmanageably rich and discovery is outpacing integration... The fossil record nevertheless continues to be composed mainly of gaps.18

Not one fossil of any transitional forms posited by evolutionists has ever been found. Throughout history, fish have always existed as fish, birds as birds, and human beings as human beings.

Evolutionists even go so far as to admit that in addition to denying evolution, the fossil record provides scientific proof for the truth of creation. For example, the evolutionist paleontologist Mark Czarnecki confesses:

A major problem in proving the theory has been the fossil record; the imprints of vanished species preserved in the Earth's geological formations. This record has never revealed traces of Darwin's hypothetical intermediate variants - instead species appear and disappear abruptly, and this anomaly has fueled the creationist argument that each species was created by God…19

As we have seen, evolutionists have suffered a terrible disappointment on the subject of transitional forms. No excavation from anywhere in the world has rendered the slightest trace of any transitional forms since Darwin first proposed them. Those discoveries have all been of a kind as to dash evolutionists' hopes, and show that living things on Earth emerged suddenly, fully developed, and flawless.

However, even though they know that transitional forms never existed, evolutionist scientists refuse to abandon their theory. They offer prejudiced commentaries on a number of fossils. In his work In Search of Deep Time, Henry Gee, editor of the world-famous magazine Nature, describes just how scientific such fossil commentaries really are:

.... we arrange fossils in an order that reflects gradual acquisition of what we see in ourselves. We do not seek the truth, we create it after the fact, to suit our own prejudices... To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story - amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific.20

That is why believers in God must not be deceived by the word games and falsehoods dressed up in scientific garb. It is a great mistake to believe that people, just because they are scientists, are telling the truth and that they should be believed. Evolutionist scientists have no compunctions about concealing the truth, distorting scientific facts, and even producing forged evidence for the sake of their ideology. The history of Darwinism is full of such examples.

When we consider even the most basic main lines of Darwinism, its invalidity and totally rotten foundations are immediately apparent. When we look at the details, the situation becomes even clearer. (See The Evolution Deceit, Taha Publishers, London, 1999 and Darwinism Refuted, Goodword Publishers, New Delhi, 2003 for more information).

Contrary to what evolutionists claim, we see a great design and planning in the features of all living and non-living things wherever we look. That is a sign that God has created them all. Evolutionists continue to wage their hopeless struggle because they do not want to accept this fact. As truly committed materialists, they are trying to bring a dead body to life.

All of this leads to just one conclusion: Darwinism turns people away from reason, science, and the truth and directs them toward irrationality. People who believe in evolution refuse to follow the path of reason and science, and are taken in by the superstitious nonsense that has come down from the 1800s when Darwin was alive. Finally, they begin to believe that chance can play a divine role, even though the whole universe is full of the signs of creation. It is enough to look at just one of the flawless mechanisms in the sky and the sea, in animals and plants, in order to see this. To say that these are all the work of chance is an insult to reason, logic, and science. What is needed is a confession of God's might and greatness, and a subsequent surrendering to Him.

It is a Mistake to Think Charles Darwin was Religious

A large part of those religious people who support the theory of evolution suggest that Charles Darwin was religious. However, they are definitely mistaken, for during his life Darwin revealed his negative views of God and religion.

Darwin and the Darwinian Revolution, by the Darwinist historian Gertrude Himmelfarb.

Darwin did believe in God during his youth, but his belief gradually faded and was replaced by atheism during middle age. However, he did not publicize this fact, for he did not want to attract any opposition from his devout wife in particular, as well as from his close relatives and the religious establishment. In her book Darwin and the Darwinian Revolution, Darwinist historian Gertrude Himmelfarb writes: "The full extent of Darwin's disbelief, therefore, can be seen neither in his published work nor even in his published autobiography, but only in the original version of that autobiography."21 Her book also reveals that when Darwin's son Francis was about to publish his The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, Darwin's wife Emma fiercely opposed the project and did not want to give her permission, fearing that the letters might give rise to a scandal after his death. Emma warned her son to take out those sections that made open references to atheism. The entire family feared that such statements would damage Darwin's prestige.22

According to biologist Ernst Mayr, a founder of neo-Darwinism; "It is apparent that Darwin lost his faith in the years 1836-39, much of it clearly prior to the reading of Malthus. In order not to hurt the feelings of his friends and of his wife, Darwin often used deistic language in his publications, but much in his Notebooks indicates that by this time he had become a 'materialist.'"23

Ernst Mayr

Darwin always bore his family's reactions in mind, and throughout his life carefully concealed his ideas on religion. He did so, in his own words, because,

Many years ago I was strongly advised by a friend never to introduce anything about religion in my works, if I wished to advance science in England; and this led me not to consider the mutual bearings of the two subjects. Had I foreseen how much more liberal the world would become, I should perhaps have acted differently.24

As we can see from the final sentence, if Darwin had felt confident he would have attracted no reaction, he might not have been so cautious. When Karl Marx (1818-83) proposed to dedicate his Das Kapital to Darwin, Darwin firmly refused the honor on the grounds that it would hurt certain members of his family if he were associated with such an atheistic book.25

However, we can still find Darwin's attitude to spiritual concepts and beliefs in these words to his cousin: "I look upon all human feeling as traceable to some germ in the animals."26

Darwin also opposed religious instruction for children out of his belief that they should be freed from religious belief.27

These antireligious views have come down to present-day evolutionists as a kind of legacy. Just as Darwin did not want children to learn about God while they were being educated, modern evolutionists fiercely oppose teaching creationism in schools. They engage in active lobbying all over the world to have creation removed from the educational curriculum.

Darwin's Atheism and Efforts to Conceal it

He makes the following reference to his own lack of belief, "disbelief crept over me at a very slow rate, but was at last complete…"28

The same book describes how Darwin's father took him aside when he was about to get married and recommended that he conceal his religious doubt from his wife. However, Emma was aware of his ever-decreasing faith right from the first. When his Descent of Man was published, she confessed to her daughter regarding the book's anti-religious sentiments:

I shall dislike it very much as again putting God further off.29

In a letter he wrote in 1876, Darwin stated how his belief became weaker:

… This conclusion (theism) was strong in my mind about the time, as far as I can remember, when I wrote the "Origin of Species"; and it is since that time that it has very gradually, with many fluctuations, become weaker…30

At the same time, he found it odd that anyone else should have religious beliefs, and stated that people, who he believed had evolved from primitive animals, could not trust those beliefs:

(C)an the mind of man, which has, as I fully believe, been developed from a mind as low as that possessed by the lowest animals, be trusted when it draws such grand conclusions?31

The fundamental reason why Darwin denied God's existence was pride. We can see this in the statements below:

Charles Darwin's wife Emma

In the sense that an omnipotent and omniscient Deity must order and know everything, this must be admitted; yet, in honest truth, I can hardly admit it.32

In a short hand-written appendix to the story of his life, he wrote:

I feel no remorse from having committed any great sin.33

Darwin's statements denying God's existence and religion actually follow a classical atheist logic. A Qur'anic verse describes how those who deny Allah actually realize that He exists but still deny Him out of arrogance:

And they repudiated them wrongly and haughtily, in spite of their own certainty about them. See the final fate of the corrupters. (Qur'an, 27:14)

The most important point here is this: Darwin's atheism had the greatest influence on shaping his theory. He twisted facts, observations, and proofs in order to maintain his prejudice that life was not created. When one reads The Origin of Species, one clearly sees how Darwin was at pains to reject all evidence for creation (e.g., the complex structures in living things, how the fossil record points to sudden emergence, and facts pointing to the limits of how far living things can differ from each other in nature), and the way he postponed those things he could not immediately explain by saying: "Perhaps this matter will be resolved one day in the future." Had he been a neutral scientist, he would not have displayed such dogmatism. His own style and methods show that Darwin was an atheist who grounded his theory in atheism.

In fact, atheists have supported Darwin for the last 150 years and irreligious ideologies have backed Darwinism precisely because of his atheism. Thus, given the fact of Darwin's atheism, Muslims must not make the mistake of thinking that he was religious, or at least not opposed to religion, and continue to support him, his theory, and those who think like him. If they do, they place themselves alongside the atheists.

Darwin admitted to being an atheist in his letters and autobiography.

Darwinism Has Led Humanity from Disaster to Disaster

At the beginning of this book, we saw how evolutionist Muslims portray Darwinism as a scientifically proven fact and ignore its true face. Darwinism, which provided "scientific" support for fascism and communism, the twentieth century's bloodiest ideologies, has an even darker "true" face.

These ideologies, which reached their violent peaks during the last century, were responsible for communist revolutions and fascist coups d'etat, as well as fighting, conflict, civil war, and the division of the world into two blocs. Such bloody dictators as Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Hitler, Mussolini, and Franco all left their marks. Some 120 million people died as a result of the cruelty inflicted by communist regimes alone, and the two world wars alone cost some 65 million lives. World War II, which began with Hitler's invasion of Poland in 1939, was a true disaster for humanity. (For details see Harun Yahya, The Disasters Darwinism Brought to Humanity, Al-Attique Publishers Inc., Ontario, 2001 and Fascism: Bloody Ideology of Darwinism, Arastirma Publishing, Istanbul, 2002)

Darwinism can be found at the ideological root of all of these political, economic, and moral catastrophes, for it nourishes and strengthens all of them.

Communism, Fascism, and Darwinism

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, the founding fathers of communism, mentioned in their works how much Darwinism influenced them. Marx showed his sympathy for Darwin by presenting to him a copy of his book Das Kapital, in which he had written a personal note. The German edition even carried the following message in his own hand; "To Charles Darwin, from a true admirer, from Karl Marx."

Darwinism was of such importance to communism that as soon as Darwin's book was published, Engels wrote to Marx: "Darwin, whom I am just reading, is simply splendid."34

The prominent Russian communist Georgi Valentinovich Plekhanov regarded Marxism as "Darwinism in its application to social sciences."35

Lenin Stalin Mao Mussolini Franco Hitler

Hitler's Mein Kampf.

Hitler's most important ideological mentor, the racist German historian Heinrich von Treitschke, said: "Nations could not prosper without intense competition, like the struggle for survival of Darwin,"36 thus indicating the origin of the violence at Nazism's roots. Hitler himself was a Darwinist. Taking his inspiration from the concept of "the fight for survival" employed by Darwin, he called his own famous work Mein Kampf (My Fight). At a 1933 Nuremberg party rally, Hitler proclaimed that: "A higher race subjects to itself a lower race… a right which we see in nature and which can be regarded as the sole conceivable right, because it was founded on science."37 This shows just how much he was influenced by Darwin.

Mussolini, the leader of Italian fascism, also favored Darwinism as a worldview and tried to use it to justify Italy's invasion of Ethiopia. Franco, the Spanish dictator at that time, also reflected Darwinist ideology both in theory and in practice. (See Harun Yahya, Fascism: Bloody Ideology of Darwinism, Arastirma Publishing, Istanbul, 2002)

By saying that life is a fight that the strong were destined to win and that the weak were condemned to lose, Darwin opened the way to brute force, violence, war, conflict, and massacre on a grand scale. Dictators who oppressed people, whether at home or abroad, were so inspired by Darwinism that they dressed themselves in its teachings. In their view, the law of nature demands that the weak be crushed and destroyed and that people do not necessarily have any inherent value, since they had evolved from animals.

Defending Darwinism Facilitates Communism's Spread

Communism is a hostile ideology, both in terms of the materialist philosophy upon which it is based and the historical analysis it proposes. It begins by denying God's existence, and its historical analysis, which describes religion as the "opiate of the masses," calls for the eradication of religion in order to erect its envisioned communist society.

Marx wanted to dedicate his Das Kapital to Darwin.

Thus all communist regimes fight religion, attack religious values, destroy places of worship, and outlaw the observance of religious obligations. Regimes in such places as the former Soviet Union, China, Cambodia, Bulgaria, and Albania have followed policies that are so anti-religious that they border upon, and sometimes lead to, genocide.

Darwinism plays an important role in Marxist ideology's hatred of religion. Darwin provided Marxist atheism with a so-called scientific basis, which explains why Marx and Engels felt such gratitude for him. Engels' praise is particularly striking:

Friedrich Engels, one of the originators of communism.

"He (Darwin) dealt the metaphysical conception of Nature the heaviest blow by his proof that all organic beings, plants, animals, and man himself, are the products of a process of evolution going on through millions of years."38

Conflict lies at the heart of Marxist philosophy (dialectical materialism), which asserts that the universe functions according to the law of clashes between opposites. In other words, Darwin's asserted fight for survival in nature was now applied to human societies. Darwinism was the greatest support for communist ideology, which saw human history as a battleground and prepared the ground for further conflict.

The evolutionist P. J. Darlington explains that violence is a natural consequence of belief in this theory:

The first point is that selfishness and violence are inherent in us, inherited from our remotest animal ancestors…. Violence is, then, natural to man; a product of evolution.39

Marxists believe that societies will accept their ideology if they bring them to believe in Darwinism. They attach so much importance to Darwin's principle that "violence and conflict are unchanging natural laws." This is why all communist-oriented terrorist organizations give their militants months of training in communism, dialectical materialism, and Darwinism. Darwin's theory encourages these people to believe that they are actually animals, and that just like animals, people must fight for survival. Thus many young people become monsters quite capable of killing and even ruthlessly slaughtering children and babies.

In this way, communist ideology led to guerrilla and civil wars and bloody acts of terrorism in numerous countries throughout the twentieth century. That is why the intellectual struggle against Darwinism is so important: If Darwinism is exposed as the fallacy that it is and then collapses, Marxist philosophies based upon it will crumble. Since Darwinism has such an important role to play in anti-religious communist ideology, supporting one means supporting the other. Trying to justify Darwinism by reconciling it with religion and claiming that God used evolution to create living things means justifying communism. The communists know that religion and Darwinism are incompatible, but remain silent when confronted with religious people who accept evolutionary creation so that both ideologies can spread easily and even further afield. The important thing is to first open a door to the acceptance of Darwinism.

The communists' belief in evolution stems from their blind devotion to their ideology. For instance Robert Shapiro, an evolutionist professor of chemistry and DNA expert, says that the theory's basic claim that inanimate substances organized themselves and formed DNA and RNA is based on no scientific fact at all. He continues:

Robert Shapiro

Another evolutionary principle is therefore needed to take us across the gap from mixtures of simple natural chemicals to the first effective replicator. This principle has not yet been described in detail or demonstrated, but it is anticipated, and given names such as chemical evolution and self-organization of matter. The existence of the principle is taken for granted in the philosophy of dialectical materialism...40

As Shapiro has stated, evolutionists continue to defend the theory of evolution due to their dogmatic adherence to materialist philosophy. This indicates that any support given to this theory also means direct support for materialist philosophy, the spread of which inevitably prepares the ground for communist ideology's entrance into a given society. This link reveals how communist ideology draws its strength from Darwinism.

Muslims who support the theory of evolution need to think about this truth. They must not share a common perspective with communists, who have been and remain the fiercest enemies of religion, and/or support a view that is the "scientific" basis of communism. This becomes even more important when we consider that communism has not died, but is still holding out in authoritarian regimes like North Korea and, most dangerously, still dominating the political system and political culture of China, despite her superficial "capitalist" outlook.

Darwin's Racism

One of the most important and yet least-known aspects of Darwin is his racism: Darwin regarded white Europeans as more "advanced" than other human races. Presuming that man evolved from ape-like creatures, he surmised that some races developed more than others and that the latter still bore simian features. In his book, The Descent of Man, which he published after The Origin of Species, he boldly commented on "the greater differences between men of distinct races."41 In his book, Darwin held blacks and Australian Aborigines to be equal to gorillas and then inferred that these would be "done away with" by the "civilized races" in time. He said:

Racist neo-Nazi movements are spreading to many countries. At the root of such movements is a fascistic hatred of peoples of other nations. Behind this idea lies Darwinism, according to which, the inferiority of some races in comparison to others is very natural.

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes... will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.42

Darwin's nonsensical ideas were not only theorized, but also given a degree of scientific and social respectability that enabled them to provide the most important "scientific ground" for racism. Supposing that living beings evolved in the struggle for life, Darwinism soon was applied to the social sciences. Known as "Social Darwinism," this new ideology contends that existing human races are located at different rungs of the "evolutionary ladder," that the European races are the most "advanced" of all, and that many other races still bear "ape-like" features.

Moreover, Darwinism does not rest with preparing the ground for racist attacks, for it also allows all kinds of separatist and destructive actions. This "life is a fight" principle has created an argument that justifies putting other people living peacefully in the same country into concentration camps, as well as the use of violence and brute force, war, death, and murder.

However, Muslims who realize that Allah has created them and everything else, that Allah has breathed His soul into them, that the world is a place of peace and brotherhood, that all people are equal, and that each person will be punished in the hereafter for whatever he or she has done in this world cannot harm others. Only those who believe that they came into existence by chance, have no responsibility to anyone, will never have to account for their actions, and believe that the world is a place of conflict can engage in such activities.

That is why Muslims should listen to their consciences before accepting Darwinism, and why they should understand the true price of backing a theory that science itself refutes. The damage Darwinism has done to humanity is clear. The tragedies, suffering, and conflict it leads to also are well known. As we have seen throughout this chapter, the way in which people are brought to believe in irrational and illogical ideas and concepts should convince us that Darwinism is a grave danger.