HARUNYAHYA.COMhttp://harunyahya.comharunyahya.com - Darwinism-Watch - Recently AddedenCopyright (C) 1994 harunyahya.com 1HARUNYAHYA.COMhttp://harunyahya.comhttp://harunyahya.com/assets/images/hy_muhur.png11666Response to Current Biology Magazine: Fang blennies did not evolve, they were createdIn an article published in Current Biology magazine on March 30, 2017, it is claimed that the fang blenny, with the scientific name "meiacanthus grammistes", came into existence by means of so-called evolution. In the article; 

  • Information on the venom systems of this small fish is given,
  • It is alleged that the teeth, which are an important part of the defense system of the fish and emit venom, existed before the venom,
  • Along with this, it is claimed that ‘the research proves the fang blennies surprisingly evolved their needles before their venom’ without ever mentioning the supposed evidence throughout the report.

The fang blenny is a small-size species of fish having quite large teeth compared to its body. About 5 cm in length and living in the ocean, these fish may be considered to be vulnerable at any moment. Yet, our Lord, as a manifestation of His eternal mercy, created these tiny creatures along with a special defense system for protection. The name fang blenny is in fact derived from this defense system of the fish.

How Do Fang Blennies Carry Out Self-Defense?

The fish has two large canine teeth that jut out of its lower jaw. However, these teeth are like a giant factory full of chemical weapons.

When attacked, the fish uses the venom hidden inside its teeth to defend itself.
 This venom, functioning as a chemical defense weapon, pushes the attacker back and allows the fish to move away safely.

Details of the Venom Composition

First, it should be noted that the venom used by the fish is produced in consequence of chemical processes that are too complex to be explained by means of evolution and composed of three special components.

  1. Neuropeptide that occurs in the cone snail (signaling molecules affecting brain activity)
  2. Lipase that is found in scorpions (enzymes involved in the digestion and processing of nutritional lipids)
  3. Opioid-like peptide (molecules that bind to opioid receptors in the brain and producing morphine like effect in the body)

How Does the Venom Work?

When fish prey on the fang blenny, the predator would bite it before swallowing. This allows the fang blenny to inject its venom into the predator’s body. Once the venom is injected, the neuropeptide and opioid components may cause a sudden drop in blood pressure, leaving the blenny's attacker disorientated. The predator’s mouth opens, inadvertently allowing the fang blenny to escape safely. Besides, the predatory fish is not capable of chasing the fang blenny afterwards as the effect of the venom lasts for a while.

There is a very important point here: It wouldn't be possible for the fang blenny to escape safely out of the mouth of the predator if it weren’t for the constituents of the venom that existed from the very first moment of its existence.  Otherwise, it would be impossible for the fang blenny to move out of the predatory fish's mouth unharmed, making it fall to prey at the first instant. For that reason, these three chemical components of the venom should have existed since the very first moment of existence. This demonstrates that the complexity of the venom system of the fang belly undermines any claim of blind coincidence.

Another supposition of the magazine is that the teeth of the fish formed first and allegedly attained venomous qualities through a process of evolution: This is illogical and irrational without a doubt. The idea of having fangs without venom to be injected into the predator’s body makes no sense. This claim clearly contradicts with the reasoning of the theory of evolution. Fang blennies are very small fish. About 4-5 cm in size and with two sharp teeth, this fish is not a deterrent for predators that prey on it. From the very first moment the teeth existed, unless being equipped with the venom to be secreted, they would disappear by turning into vestigial organs of no use in the so-called evolutionary process supposedly lasting for millions of years. This shows that there is an irreducibly complex relationship between the teeth and the venom of the fang blenny fish. It is impossible for one to be functional without the other.

As can be seen, no matter how much millions of dollars or how much time are spent, regardless of all the effort put in to it, there is no evidence to prove evolution. Evolution has not been experienced at any stage of history. This is the reason why no one has yet found an evidence for evolutionary claims so far. Every discovery made to date has proved that living things are created by God; and proofs will continue to show this fact beyond doubt.

God protected this tiny fish and manifested His mercy by giving a wonderful chemical system to it. Moreover, not only the fang blenny, but other species of blenny fish that do not have teeth or do not use any venom are also under the protection of our Lord. God created the fangless blenny species in a way that they look similar (in the same pattern and colors) to the fang blennies, and thereby He provided protection for them as well. The ‘Al-Rahman’ name of our All-Merciful Lord Who grants countless blessings is imparted to us in a verse of the Qur’an as follows:

Say: "Call on God or call on the All-Merciful, whichever you call upon, the Most Beautiful Names are His…" (Surat al-Isra, 110)

Source: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/03/170330142149.htm

http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/247468/response-to-current-biology-magazinehttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/247468/response-to-current-biology-magazinehttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/94-netcevap/meiacanthus_grammistes_2.jpgSun, 14 May 2017 18:29:47 +0300
Zebrafish Can Regenerate Their Spinal Cords, What about People?

Nerves surround every part of our body like a web and enable us to obtain and interpret information about the world around us. They can be considered as the highways carrying information throughout the body. The most important organs of this system are the brain and spinal cord and the electric impulses regarding every emotion, thought and knowledge in our brain reaches our organs via the spinal cord. The spinal cord is also the center of the reflexes, which are vital for our survival. Reflexes triggered in the event of a danger effectively protect us from threats. With these features, the spinal cord can be compared to a very large data control center that is protected by high security systems. 

Disk-shaped vertebrae surround the spinal cord and when the cord is bent, these bones protect it from impacts and move without harming the spinal cord. Furthermore, the spinal cord is encased by three layers of membrane as in the brain, between which is cerebrospinal fluid that protects spinal cord from shock and pressure change.  Despite these intricate protection systems in place to guard the spine, a faulty move or an accident may still cause damage to the spinal cord.  Despite the advanced technology of the 21st Century, such injuries cannot be adequately treated.  The spinal cord is one of the organs that is almost impossible to cure after an injury.

As a result, the part of the body controlled by the nerves in the injured part of the spinal cord will no longer function properly. In severe injuries, fully paralysis might occur. Scientists have been working for years to develop a method that can treat spinal cord injuries. And they found the answer to the question not in medical literature, but in a tiny creature known as the zebrafish. 

This small   fish, about four or five centimeters long, offers an astonishing miracle of creation.

When the spinal cord of the zebrafish is struck, glial cells build a bridge across the severed tissues of the spinal cord. These cells form extensions ten times longer than themselves and build connection roads to bridge the gaps caused by the injury. It will take eight weeks to fill the gap with new nerve tissues. 

Interestingly, even though the human body also has glial cells, such a repair process does not occur in the human body. The scientists who examined this miraculous process of regeneration in the zebrafish found that the answer was hidden in a protein called CTGF or "connective tissue growth factor". Researchers observed that during the regeneration process, twelve genes, seven of which were protein-producing, were strongly activated. They also observed a rapid increase in CTGF protein in glial cells within two weeks after injury.

The human CTGF protein is nearly 90% similar to that of the zebrafish. Even more interestingly, when scientists injected  human CTGF in to a zebrafish, they observed that the spinal cord could still be regenerated. However, when the spinal cord of a human is injured, it is impossible to repair the spinal cord despite the presence of this protein.

Scientists are determined to further study this small creature to understand how to treat spinal cord injuries in humans. God could have created this amazing repair system in humans if He had wished so. However, despite all of our technological advancement, no such treatment is yet available for humans. At the moment, let alone treating such injuries, it is not even fully clear how the zebrafish is able to perform this repair. All the studies done so far reveal the superiority and finesse in God's art of creation and it is our responsibility to reflect on this wonderful features that God created in this small animal and appreciate Almighty God’s greatness.

He is God– the Creator, the Maker, the Giver of Form. To Him belong the Most Beautiful Names. Everything in the heavens and earth glorifies Him. He is the Almighty, the All-Wise. (Surah Al-Hashr, 24)




http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/246387/zebrafish-can-regenerate-their-spinalhttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/246387/zebrafish-can-regenerate-their-spinalhttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/94-netcevap/zebrafish_can_generate_spinal_cord2.jpgTue, 18 Apr 2017 22:59:36 +0300
A Miracle of Creation: Cells programmed to dieMany people know that when cells become unnecessary, old or defective they kill themselves. But how does the process take place?

Many cells produce a number of proteins to use for self-destruction when the need arises. As soon as the cells become sick, malignant or start to threaten the health of the organism in a way, they activate their killer proteins and destroy themselves.

However, it is crucial that the protein is activated at the right time. The system should not be used when there is no problem in the cell and the cell is still useful for the body. As a matter of fact, if the death proteins start to act when the cell is healthy, the healthy cells in the body will die, which will harm the body and may even cause death. Similarly, any delay and/or postponement in the activation of the death program may again result in the death of the organism.

The cell, in an astonishing display of punctuality and determination, activates the aforementioned destruction program at the precise moment and with spectacular intelligence and sacrifice, thereby acting as a means for the survival of the organism.

Another incredible point is the stages that follow once the program is activated. When the cell decides that it should die for the sake of the body, it immediately activates the death proteins, and begins to shrink away from its surroundings. Following this, bubbles begin to form on its surface and the nucleus and then the rest of the cell break down.

In the meantime, healthy cells step in to destroy the remains of the harmful cells that are beginning to die and completely cleanse the body of the dead cell. However, they deliberately refrain from destroying certain dead cells, of which functions in the body have not been completed yet. For example, tissues like skin, nails and the lens in the eye are made up of dead cells, but they are still necessary for the body. For this reason, healthy cells do not destroy such cells that are still useful for the body even though they are dead.

Programmed cell death is also very important for the development of the human body. For example, as a baby grows up in the mother's womb, hands are first paddle-like structures. However, when the cells in the region receive the instructions to form the fingers, the cells in the relevant places start to commit suicide in a very precise manner, as if they are sculptors shaping the hands. Not having the ability of seeing themselves from outside and unaware of concepts like symmetry, cells miraculously sacrifice themselves exactly in required amount and in the required places. As a result, the gaps between the fingers, the lengths and the shapes of the fingers appear perfectly.

This suicide software in the cell also plays an important role in protecting the body against cancer. Cancer occurs when a cell does not die when it is supposed to and cancerous cells begin to damage the body by reproducing. The methods used in cancer treatment have been developed to eliminate these cancerous cells that do not die at the right time.

This wonderful system, active 24/7 for the lifetime of the organism to maintain its health, works without making any mistakes and without the slightest disorder in the chain of command. Each cell stands by to perform this sacrifice when the time comes. They constantly take and carry out orders for the healthy growth and functioning of the body.

Existence of such a well-ordered, organized and planned system in a cell without a brain or the ability to think is surely astounding. 

At this point, it is important to ask the following questions:

Why do the cells, allegedly selfish according to the evolutionists who describe life as a struggle, possess such a system?

How do cells know how to perform all these actions?

How did they learn to make these decisions, which are crucial for the survival of the body?

And how can the trillions of cells in the body all be acting  together in an incredibly harmonious manner to implement these orders?

Needless to say, the intelligence clearly visible in the cell did not come into being by itself. Like all other creation, cells carry out what is commanded to them by God. The intelligence displayed as they carry out their orders is only the manifestation of the infinite wisdom of God.

Every detail of the universe is created for a certain purpose by our Almighty Lord. In the creation of cells that have incredible skills, there is infinite wisdom and art. Learning about, and thinking over these miracles will help us understand our Lord's infinite power, knowledge, wisdom and greatness, and will help us get closer to Him. As God informs us in the following verse, "...Only those of His slaves with knowledge have fear of Allah..." (Surah Fatir, 28)

http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/246385/a-miracle-of-creation-cellshttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/246385/a-miracle-of-creation-cellshttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/94-netcevap/cell_suicide_2.jpgTue, 18 Apr 2017 20:13:24 +0300
NASA's new planetary discoveries are not evidence for the existence of extraterrestrial lifeOn February 22, 2017, NASA announced that the Spitzer Space Telescope discovered 7 planets around a star 39 light-years away named TRAPPIST-1. It was claimed that three of these planets in particular have the so-called necessary conditions for life, and that these planets might have been host to the evolutionary process. Based on this claim, many media outlets, especially the The Telegraph, of England, reported on the discovery. But these were sensational headlines that are completely devoid of scientific evidence, and specifically published to attract readers' attention. When we look at a few paragraphs below the headline, it becomes clear that there is no evidence supporting the so-called evolution of life on the newly discovered planets. Let's examine the reasons why there can't be life on these planets one by one.

1. The definition of the alleged "Habitable Zone" is not sufficient for life

Three of the newly discovered planets have been described as being on the "Habitable Zone" in NASA's statement. What should then be the conditions of this "Habitable Zone", which is also called as the window of life? In order to understand this, it is enough to examine our world, which is created with ideal standards. For example, in order to have "carbon-based" life on Earth, it is necessary for the temperature to remain between very sensitive values. The proteins of humans and many other living beings become denatured and lose their vital properties after 430C. Even though some microorganisms can withstand temperatures of 120-1300C for a while, they can't sustain this for a long time. Again, while many living beings lose their vital properties due to freezing temperatures below 00C, only a few can persist in these temperatures by slowing down their vital activities. In order for their vital activities to return to normal, it is necessary for temperature to be above 00C. In short, in a universe where we encounter varying temperature values ​​between minus 2730 C and millions of degrees, the preservation of very small temperature values ​​of a few tens of degrees without major changes is imperative for the existence and continuation of carbon based life. It is also important that these values ​​correspond to the value at which water remains as liquid. A zone in which these values, which can be characterized as window of life, can be achieved is called the "Habitable Zone".

The habitable zone is absolutely necessary for the existence of life; but that alone cannot be enough in any case. When we consider the conditions on Earth, there are scores of scientifically proven, maybe even hundreds more “absolute must” features that we haven't yet noticed beyond the temperature balance. The absence or disappearance of any one of the many features such as the presence of the atmosphere, its thickness, its gas composition, the speed of the Earth's rotation, the water balance, the magnetic shield, the Moon's presence, and many more, means that life can never exist on Earth or can disappear suddenly.

The supposition that "planets in which life can exist are discovered" is a populist approach to divert people's attention away from scientific facts. NASA's discovery is simply the discovery of some planets with habitable zone temperature values. However, as briefly mentioned above, the presence and continuation of life require the presence of very sensitive values.

2. The conditions on these newly discovered planets do not resemble Earth

These planets that are reported with presumptuous remarks like "new Earths are found in space", in fact have no common features with the Earth except their temperature values ​​and dimensions.

TRAPPIST-1, for example, is a very small and dim star compared to our Sun.  Compared to the Sun, it gives 200 times less heat and light. The surface temperature of the Sun is 5778 K, while TRAPPIST-1 has a temperature of 2550 K. So it only provides a twilight-like brightness.

The reason why these planets have similar temperature values to Earth despite this low energy emission is that these planets have closer orbits around their star. These newly discovered planets are even closer to TRAPPIST-1 than Mercury, the closest planet to the Sun. As a result, the time it takes for them to rotate around their star is also very short. The time it takes for the planet closest to the star to rotate around TRAPPIST-1 is only 1.5 days, and it takes 18.8 days for the farthest sixth planet to fully rotate around TRAPPIST-1.

The distances between these seven planets are also very short; some of them are even closer to each other than Earth's distance from the Moon.

As it turns out, in fact, these planets have nothing in common with Earth's conditions. The fact that they have very fast orbits and are very close to each other are features that will make the surface conditions of the planets quite different. Under these circumstances, no feature that can enable the existence of life shows any similarity to Earth other than the fact that the water that may exist on the planets can remain in liquid state.

3. There is no evidence for the existence of life on these planets

No findings have been discovered about the existence of conditions suitable for life other than the temperature, on the newly discovered planets. Also, there is thus far no data suggesting the existence of water on the planets, which is the most basic characteristic required by the habitable zone. Do the planets have atmospheres? If they have, do they contain oxygen? Does the surface of the planets have a solid crust suitable for life? While there is no information yet on any of these topics, claiming that these planets can be suitable for life based solely on similar temperature values is far from a scientific approach.

4. Mars and Venus are also in the alleged "Habitable Zone" but there is no life on those planets

In fact, there is no need to travel quite so far. Similar to the discovered planets that are claimed to be habitable, there are two more planets even more similar to Earth and close enough to us to be considered as our neighbors:  Venus and Mars. But as we all know, there is no life on these planets.

It is believed that there was water on Venus in the past. However, because the planet does not have an Earth-like magnetosphere protection, it is heavily exposed to solar winds. For this reason, it is thought that hydrogen and oxygen atoms were scattered into space over time. Right now, there is only a small amount of water vapor in its atmosphere. Liquid water does not exist on the surface of Venus because its atmosphere, which consists of dense carbon dioxide, has raised the temperature above 4000C. As you can see, even the absence of the magnetic shield means that conditions that are necessary for life is not possible.

If we look at Mars on the other hand; its atmosphere is 100 times thinner than the Earth's atmosphere and 95% of its atmosphere consists of carbon dioxide. This causes the temperature to be unsustainable for life and day-night temperature differences to vary from 200C to minus 700C. The absence of oxygen and water are already known facts.

On both planets, many constituent factors such as the temperature level and the fact that it must be kept stable, must be precise. However, there is no data on these constituent factors obtained from the discovered planets. Moreover, It is also clear that even if all this data was known and fully viable for life, it is impossible for life to emerge through an evolutionary process based on coincidence.

Darwinists' way of escape: Searching for extraterrestrial life

The darkest point of the theory of evolution is the origin of life. No scientific evidence has been found as yet about how the first cell came into being. Evolutionist scientists can't even hypothesize about how the first cell came into being, let alone finding concrete evidence. Thus, an idea was asserted as the ultimate hope to keep the theory of evolution alive:  "Life has come from space." Based on such suppositions, it would be easier for the evolutionists to camouflage their non-scientific explanations once they would search for the origin of life in space where it is difficult to collect evidence.

Evolutionists can't even explain how life emerged on Earth where conditions are convenient and every place is bursting with life. Nevertheless, the fact that evolutionists claim "there may be life on newly discovered planets" based solely on the fact that the planets are in a zone with appropriate temperature levels, shows how non-scientific their approach is. With this supposition, evolutionists try to consolidate the nonsense that life came from space. However, they know very well that any carbon-based life similar to one on Earth cannot form on those planets. But, because accepting this means the refutation of both themselves and their ideology, they would never admit it.

Downplaying the origin of life, meaning the existence of life as if it is an easy process to occur is an evolutionist perception operation carried out on public opinion. By giving the impression that life can occur even under very simple conditions to people who do not have enough knowledge on the subject, evolutionists try to keep the miraculous aspect of life hidden. However, the existence of life and its continuation necessitates the many of the above-mentioned absolute must conditions to be present at the same time. All this delicate order and perfection can never be explained by coincidence. 

God may create life everywhere and in every circumstance

God may bring about life in every environment by creating the appropriate conditions. The thing we criticize and explain the impossibility of here is the non-scientific and biased approach of evolutionists. While in the light of scientific data it is clear that carbon-based life similar to one on Earth is impossible to exist in the TRAPPIST-1 system, it is a great blunder to try confusing the minds of the public with evolutionist fallacies. If God wills it, life can be created in every circumstance.

Say: ‘He (God) Who made them in the first place will bring them back to life. He has total knowledge of each created thing." (Surah Ya Sin, 79)


  1. www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-telescope-reveals-largest-batch-of-earth-size-habitable-zone-planets-around
  2. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/02/22/nasa-announcement-live/
http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/246024/nasas-new-planetary-discoveries-arehttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/246024/nasas-new-planetary-discoveries-arehttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/94-netcevap/nasa_planet_discovery2.jpgTue, 11 Apr 2017 21:50:07 +0300
Facts about the claims of "Creating human-pig hybrid in the lab" published in National Geographic An article was published in the Cell magazine by Jun Wu on January 26, 2017.  Based on the claims in the article several media outlets, such as National Geographic and Fox News, reported the news that a "Human-pig hybrid is created in a lab." At first, some people who do not examine the details of such news may wrongfully think that "a new species was produced in a lab". For this reason, we have prepared this article to reveal the details of the aforementioned study and the misleading points in the mentioned news.

What was the method and result of the study?

As we know, every living being comes from a group of stem cells formed by the division of a single cell called zygote. While stem cells multiply over time, they begin to differentiate to form various tissues after a while. In this study, human stem cells were injected into the blastocyst of a pig’s embryo at the same development stage with human stem cells. The embryo was then placed in the pig’s uterus and the pregnancy was monitored. At week 4, the pregnancy was terminated to study the pig embryo’s cell structure.

As a result of the research, it was reported that the embryo studied included one human stem cell for every 100 thousand-pig stem cells. But what was more, "the human cells didn't remain in bulk to form an organ, on the contrary, they were scattered in all tissues".

These results were published in many media outlets. However, the interpretation of the results contained some mistakes. Some headlines were used such as, “The Human-Pig Hybrid was Developed in the Laboratory for Organ Transfer!", "The Rise of Chimerism: "Scientists have successfully developed a human-pig hybrid for the first time", which didn't reflect the reality at all. Now let us reveal some of the mistakes on this subject one by one and explain the facts:

What is actually achieved in the hybrid study?

When the article is examined in detail, it will become obvious that the only point in this study that can be called an "innovation" is that the pig embryo remained alive until the 4th gestational week while containing human stem cells. At the 4th week of pregnancy, the embryo is a piece of tissue only a few millimeters in size and the organs can't even be perceived under a microscope. In other words, it's in an early stage of development, and there is no hybrid creature to speak of as the press led people to believe.

The development of the embryo was not healthy

The most important point emerging from the study is that the ratio of human/pig stem cells originally found in the embryo has fallen from high values ​​to very low rates as of 1 in 100 thousand. In other words, human stem cells have undergone much less division when compared with pig stem cells. Therefore, if a longer period of time passed, this ratio would decrease even more in this obviously unhealthy organism. Thus, based on the findings, the experiment shows that with the addition of human stem cells to the pig’s embryo, the development process of the pig has deteriorated. Otherwise, the embryo of the pig would normally develop healthy.

The development slows down

One of the negativities in this study, according to the information disclosed in the article,is the slow development of the pig embryos containing human stem cells, when compared to the development of normal pig embryos. This situation already occurs at the initial stage of development and it is also a sign of a process which leads to death by slowing down the development. Since the foreign cells interfere with the interaction of healthy pig cells, the development process is disturbed.

There is no DNA sharing between the cells of two different species

We already noted that the process carried out in this study was to inject human stem cells into a pig’s embryo when it is at an early stage of development. In other words, in this process, properly functioning pig cells with their own DNA and human stem cells with human DNA have been brought together. This means that there is no change in the initial DNA information. Although the embryo persists living for a while, since no DNA exchange between the two cells have occurred, this cannot be considered as gene integration or gene fusion. Pig cells have remained as pig, while human cells have remained as human.

Human-pig hybrid study does not yield evidence for evolution

The basic claim of evolutionists is that living beings have evolved over time via coincidental mutations and acquired new properties. And so they allege that the different species on earth have emerged through this process. Since Darwinists do not have the fossil or molecular evidence to support this claim, they try to arbitrarily interpret genetic and cellular research to constitute so-called evidence for evolution. Indeed, the same attempt can be seen in this study, too. Because no new genetic information is introduced, this hybrid study can't constitute evidence for evolution.

In multi-celled organisms, full compatibility between cells is essential

The bodies of multicellular organisms require more organization than simply assembled cell populations. As it is known, there are very important structures that allow the coexistence of multi-celled organisms and the organs to remain as a whole. Some of these are "desmosome, tight junction and gap junction" protein complexes. Two adjacent cells are interconnected by at least one of these structures. As seen below, when the proteins of these two cells do not completely match each other, cells will not be able to connect and thus, will not be able to create the tissues essential for organs. The human cells in the pig’s embryo will behave exactly like this, and will not be able to fully partake in the forming of the tissues. So, they will remain as foreign bodies trapped between the tissues of the pig, and even disrupt the structure of the organ where they belong.

In the intercellular organization, remote communication is as important as close communication for the persistence of living being. As in this study, it is not possible for cells of different species to behave in harmony. For example, the only way a hormone signal secreted from the brain can affect the target organism is that the sensor proteins in that organ's cells have key-lock compatibility with the hormone. The information of these proteins is encoded on the DNA for every living being, and is passed down from generation to generation. If the cells belong to different species, this vital harmony will cease, too.  The hormone signal secreted by the pig cell will only affect the pig cells in the targeted organ, but this signal will not mean anything for the human cells. Therefore, the human cell inside a pig's organ will not benefit the function of that organ, but contrarily, degenerate it.

Does the study aim at producing organs for organ transplant?

The main objective of the human-pig hybrid study was described as "producing replacement organs for patients who require organ transplants". However, this is not a very realistic approach. Redeveloping an organ for the replacement of a diseased or missing one will, of course, be the ideal treatment; but such a method has not yet been achieved.  If the stem cells may be controlled and transformed into an organ, the optimal environment for this will be the individual's own body. This way, the organ will develop without any tissue compatibility problems. If the purpose in such a study is to develop tissues, and once stem cells may be controlled one day, then implementing this process in one's own body is a much more feasible method than studies with pig embryos.  Therefore, injecting human cells into pigs to obtain organs is not a very convincing and realistic study.

The claim that "a hybrid organism has been developed for organ transplant" which some headlines showed, is another faulty statement. Because the human cells in the obtained embryos were scattered among the tissues of the pig, a separate organ that only contains human cells did not form. Therefore, no organ that could be used for transplant is existent.

Half-pig-half human (Chimera) dream

The  scientists who conducted this study might be having a dream of obtaining a chimera creature found in fairytales like a half-human-half fish, half-human-half horse hero. However, as a result, they only found some human cells scattered in the pig’s embryo where they were forced to co-exist.. As explained above, it is not possible for even individual cells, let alone tissues, to remain alive in another species’ body in the long term. On the contrary, a process like that would damage the entire organism. Even if we were to assume that tissues or even organs could be formed, these would not be compatible for transplantation. Because these supposed organs would contain more pig tissue than human’s. This means the organ would be rejected in minutes. 

As known, a person can only have organ transplantation from another human being or cadaver with the best tissue compatibility. However, even with minor differences, tissue rejection occurs occasionally after organ transplants. In order to avoid rejection, immunosuppresive chemotherapy drugs have to be administered to the patient. The only way to completely prevent tissue rejection is to make a 100% compatible organ transplant. This is only possible with the transplant of an organ consisting one's own DNA. Despite the efforts, there is not yet any achievement on this matter.

God creates every living being in its most beautiful form

In the embryonic development process, the number of cells and their interactions with each other are very sensitive. It is currently unknown how this process miraculously works in every pregnancy. This is a miracle because all human beings and other living creatures complete their development successfully -except in cases of illness- at all times. It is clear that unconscious cells do not organize a wonderful process, such as the stem cells differentiating in full harmony over time to form various organs.

As it is clear from the above-mentioned study, every living being is manifested in the most beautiful form with God's art of Creation. An alteration artificially made on a living being will disturb the delicate balance in His Creation. While humans and pigs continue their lives with their flawless qualities, intervening in the balance of cells ruins this magnificent system. All these details are an explicit demonstration of God’s perfect Creation in living things. God is our All-Powerful, Almighty Creator.

Is He Who creates like him who does not create? So will you not pay heed? (Surat an-Nahl, 17)


1. Jun Wu et al. Interspecies Chimerism with Mammalian Pluripotent Stem Cells. Cell. Vol. 168, Issue 3, p473–486; 26 January 2017.
3. http://www.foxnews.com/health/2017/01/27/medical-breakthrough-pig-embriyo-hosts-human-cells.html

http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/244881/facts-about-the-claims-ofhttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/244881/facts-about-the-claims-ofhttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/94-netcevap/insan_domuz_hibrit_hakkindaki_yanilgilar_3.jpgTue, 21 Mar 2017 20:59:38 +0300
Can Spider Silk Be Finally Produced Artificially?

Spider silk is a substance with incredible properties that has proven to be quite hard to imitate. Following are a few of these features:

  • Spider silk is five times stronger than steel of the same diameter.
  • It can stretch four times its initial length.
  • It is extremely light in weight. For example; a spider silk strand that could be stretched around the globe would only weigh 320 grams.1

Being able to artificially mass-produce this amazing substance has long been a dream of many scientists. If this dream comes true, many sectors, from the military to healthcare would benefit enormously from spider silk. To give examples to the products planned to be manufactured using spider silk:

  • Bulletproof clothing
  • Wear-resistant lightweight clothing
  • Ropes, nets, seat belts, parachutes
  • Rust-free panels on motor vehicles or boats
  • Biodegradable bottles
  • Bandages, surgical thread
  • Artificial tendons or ligaments, support for weak blood vessels.

Why Spider Silk Cannot Be Produced Through Natural Means?

There are inherent problems that come with the incredibly difficult process of natural spider silk production. It is nearly impossible to breed spiders and farm them for their silk like silkworms; it would be far too arduous a procedure. Moreover, since the silk obtained from spiders is very limited, it does not meet the amount required for mass production. So, all these challenges led scientists to carry out research on the possibility of artificial production of spider silk.   

News From Sweden Caused Excitement In Scientific Circles

A major step has been taken on the issue of spider silk with research recently conducted by the scientists of Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences and the Karolinska Institute. Led by Anna Rising, the research team announced they had developed a new method, which allows them to produce a kilometer-long material that has the same properties with spider silk.

Before being spun into a fiber, spider silk, which is made of proteins, is stored as an aqueous solution in the silk glands. The research showed that there is an impressive pH gradient in the spider silk gland, and that this well-regulated pH gradient affects specific parts of the spider silk proteins. It was seen that this ensures the rapid formation of fiber in a defined place of the silk production apparatus. In this manner, its production has become suitable for industrial use.

"To our surprise, this artificial protein is as water soluble as the natural spider silk proteins, which means that it is possible to keep the proteins soluble at extreme concentrations. This is the first successful example of biomimetic spider silk spinning," says the team leader, Anna Rising.

What truly excites scientists, especially Anna Rising, is that now the industrial production of spider silk will be possible. With its production, this fruitful silk will begin to be used in many of the fields we have listed above.

State-of-the-art technology, hundreds of scientists, hundreds of thousands of dollars spent: What is to be achieved through all these means at hand is the silk flawlessly produced by the tiny body of a spider for millions of years. And the silk that was produced in the laboratory environment could only be obtained after countless hours scientists had spent devising a strategy and making a myriad number of highly complex calculations. Just as we cannot explain the formation stages of this silk with coincidences, so too can we not explain the silk produced by a spider in the same way.

No matter which creature we examine in nature, we definitely come across a "technologically wondrous" superiority they posses. Dozens of articles can be written solely about the silk of a tiny spider. Besides, their silk is not the only amazing aspect of spiders; these creatures exhibit many superior abilities from their hunting techniques to the webs they weave, which are marvels of design. There are millions of similar creatures in nature that we can draw inspiration from and every living organism is equipped with many superior features. Our Lord, Whose creation is flawless, presented every entity, organic or non-organic, for the benefit of us, humans. God informs us about this fact in a verse of the Qur'an as follows:

And there is certainly a lesson for you in your livestock. We give you to drink from what is in their bellies and there are many ways in which you benefit from them, and some of them you eat. (Surat al-Muminun, 21)


  1. "Structure and Properties of Spider Silk", Endeavour, Ocak 1986, sayı 10, s. 42
  2. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/01/170109124957.htm
  3. http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/motm/spider/page4.htm



http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/244259/can-spider-silk-be-finallyhttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/244259/can-spider-silk-be-finallyhttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/6-makaleler/spider_silk_3.jpgSun, 12 Mar 2017 23:09:37 +0300
Newly Discovered Species are the Manifestation of God's Infinite KnowledgeImagine that you set out on a journey through our Solar System. During this journey, you will come across planets with freezing cold or scorching hot temperatures, with atmospheres comprising of toxic gases, with severe storms raging on their surfaces, or without any water at all.  Only the 'blue planet' Earth that we live on was created in a way that is fully hospitable for life with all sorts of ideal balances it maintains, from its atmosphere to its landforms, from its temperature to its magnetic field, from the elements it contains to its distance from the Sun.

One of the primary reasons why the Earth is suitable for life is the amount of water it has. The majority of the earth, about 70%, is covered with water. These waters are home to millions of life forms with distinct colors, biological systems, and fascinating hunting and defense tactics. In fact, if we are to give a percentage, 90% of all living species on Earth live in these waters. The discoveries of new species in life forms increase with each passing day through the researches made possible due to the developing technology.

According to the latest research featured by the December 2016 issue of Scientific Reports journal, six new living species have been discovered in the Indian Ocean near the hydrothermal vents three kilometers below the ocean surface. Researches announced that the newly found species were discovered as a result of a survey carried out via remotely controlled underwater robots that could reach the ocean floor. And the newly discovered marine life forms were stated to be the members of the gastropod snail, a deep-sea worm, limpet, Hoff crab and scale worm species. 

Leading researches in Southampton University, Britain, Dr. Jon Copley and his team explored an area roughly the size of a football stadium on the ocean floor that contains more than a dozen mineral spires. An examination of these spires, also known as hydrothermal vent chimneys, revealed that they are quite rich in copper and gold, and that they can be utilized for undersea mining in the future. It was also stated that these spires are home to many marine species, and that these species are nourished by hot fluids gushing out of the vent chimneys.

Deep-sea creatures, without question, comprise only a part of all living species; the estimations regarding the total number of living species on Earth reach as high as 100 million. Professor Edward O. Wilson from Harvard University writes in his book In Search of Nature the following facts about diversity of living species:

Consider first the question of the amount of biodiversity. The number of species of organisms on Earth is unknown to the nearest order of magnitude. About 1.5 million species have been given names to date, but the actual number is likely to lie somewhere between 10 and 100 million... 

With the verse, "… And He creates other things you do not know" (Surat an-Nahl, 8) Almighty God informs us in our Holy Book, the Qur'an, about the diversity of living beings He created. The fact that, despite our highly advanced technology, only 1.5 million species have been so far identified among the 100 million living species is one of the proofs that there are many life forms that 'we do not know' about, as God states in the verse, living on Earth. From the vastly deep locations in oceans where sunlight cannot penetrate, to the summits of polar mountains, countless creatures inhabit everywhere on Earth. Developing technology falls short in identifying all the life forms created by God. Every creature is an unparalleled and flawless manifestation of God's infinite knowledge. God reveals the following in the Qur'an:

In the heavens and earth there are certainly Signs for the believers. And in your creation and all the creatures He has spread about there are Signs for people with certainty. (Surat al-Jathiyya, 3-4)



http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/244257/newly-discovered-species-are-thehttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/244257/newly-discovered-species-are-thehttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/6-makaleler/sea_creatures_harunnyahya_com2.jpgSun, 12 Mar 2017 22:51:18 +0300
Plos One Journal Finally Admitted: "Lucy Is Not An Ancestor Of Man, She Is An Ape"The 3.2 million-year-old fossil discovered in Africa in 1974, popularly known as  "Lucy", has been periodically brought up for propaganda purposes. However, with the ever-growing means of science and technology, it has become evident that this fossil, which had been long alleged to be  "evidence" for the theory of evolution, has actually dealt a devastating blow to the theory.

Although the Lucy fossil is supposedly portrayed as a transitional form specimen representing the so-called evolution from ape to man, it has in fact proven this claim to be a scenario based on mere prejudice.

Today, all the international scientific journals with a board of academics are, one by one, saying their goodbyes to Lucy. Now, let us take a look at some of the confessions about Lucy featured in journals from the past until today:

Evolutionists' Confession in 1999: "ADIEU LUCY"

In May 1999, the well-recognized Science et Vie journal used the title "Adieu Lucy" (Goodbye Lucy) on its cover and wrote that the apes of the Australopithecus genus should be removed from human genealogy. The article, written upon a new Australopithecus fossil discovery code-named St W573, included the following statements:

A new theory states that the genus Australopithecus is not the root of the human race… Australopithecus and Homo (human) species do not appear on the same branch.

However, this farewell was not limited to Science et Vie journal. After that, confessions on the fossil known as "Lucy" kept coming with each passing day.

Science & Vie Journal, Issue May, 1999

Evolutionists' Confession in 2000: "We Should Stop Bringing Lucy Up"

Another article published in 2000 in the journal Nature confessed that Lucy was a member of an ape species. The article wrote that the Lucy fossil, with respect to her "relatively long and curved fingers, relatively long arms, and funnel-shaped chest" was exactly like chimpanzees. Upon the close examination of its hand bones, the confession came that contrary to what had been previously claimed, Lucy was not bipedal, but "knuckle-walked as chimps and gorillas do today."1

The ape-like features of the Lucy fossil are not limited to its way of walking and hand bone structure only. Its chin is U-shaped, identical to those of ape species, and teeth are quite large compared to humans.

Anthropologists from Tel Aviv University have also pointed out that the upward-projecting mandible  (mandibular ramus) on Lucy's lower jaw is very similar to that of gorillas, and thereupon, researchers advocating the theory of evolution have consented that keeping the Lucy fossil on the agenda will not serve their interests.2

Evolutionists' Confession in 2016: "Lucy is a Chimpanzee"

A more recent study on Lucy published in the November 2016 issue of PLOS One gave the same results. Researchers from Johns Hopkins University and the University of Texas, who micro-CT scanned Lucy's skeleton by tomography, admitted that much of Lucy's life had been spent in trees and that, from this aspect, it resembled a chimpanzee more than a human being.3

John Kappelman studying the fossil Lucy

John Kappelman, Professor of Anthropology at the University of Texas at Austin, examined Lucy's skeleton at the National Museum in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, and interpreted it as follows:

"I think that by demonstrating with an independent data set that Lucy very likely spent enough time in the trees that the evidence is preserved in her bones provides additional support for the idea that she may have fallen out of a tree as well... She (Lucy) comes out showing a similarity to chimpanzees which suggests that was due to climbing.”  4

However, these facts revealed by modern technology were already known at the time of the fossil’s discovery. In a speech at the University of Missouri, Kansas City on November 20, 19865, Dr. Johanson claimed they had found a knee bone and asserted their allegations that Lucy is the ancestor of man based on this bone. In response to this claim, one of the participants (Roy Holt) asked Johanson, "How far away from Lucy did you find the knee?" Dr. Johanson answered, "About 200 feet lower and two to three kilometers away." Continuing, when he was asked, "Then why are you sure it belonged to Lucy?" he answered, "Anatomical similarity". But this answer was met with cynicism because of the scientific inconsistency it posed. The scientific world was already aware of the fact that even completely different species such as dogs and bears could bear anatomical similarities.

As is seen, Lucy has been promoted as ‘man's so-called ancestor’ for 43 years through a specially devised, biased propaganda, even though it was widely known that the fossilized skull belonged to an ape since the moment of its discovery. The entire world was indoctrinated as if it was the ‘so-called 'missing link’ between man and ape. However, this unscientific and non-factual supposition has been repeatedly disproved in every means of studying it under the light of advanced science and technology.

To date, circles that advocate evolutionary theory for ideological reasons have made a number of fossil forgeries and fictitious claims. However, not even a single one of these allegations have been proven scientifically, while on the other hand, their fallacy has been consistently demonstrated.

There is only one fact that 21st Century science shows us: Living beings have neither gone through evolution nor gradually transformed from one species to another as a result of blind chance.  

Modern life forms and their millions-year-old counterparts all share the same appearance. They did not undergo even a single change despite the millions of years that have passed in between. They have retained the same features as they have today since the moment they came into existence. Living things did not appear on earth through millions of years of evolution but they came into existence suddenly, with all the features they possess intact in their bodies. In other words, they were created by God.

"We did not create heaven and earth and everything between them to no purpose. That is the opinion of those who deny…" (Qur’an, 38:27)


  1. Mark Collard and Leslie C. Aiello, "From forelimbs to two legs," Nature (March 23, 2000), 404:339–340.
  2. Siegel-Itzkovich, Judy, Israeli Researchers: ‘Lucy’ is not direct ancestor of humans, The Jerusalem Post, http://www.jpost.com/Health-and-Sci-Tech/Science-And-Environment/Israeli-researchers-Lucy-is-not-direct-ancestor-of-humans
  3. Christopher B. Ruff , M. Loring Burgess, Richard A. Ketcham, John Kappelman. Limb Bone Structural Proportions and Locomotor Behavior in A.L. 288-1 ("Lucy")PLOS ONE, 2016 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0166095
  4. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/deadthings/2016/11/30/the-latest-on-lucy-early-hominin-spent-serious-time-in-trees/#.WHfotBuLSUk 
  5. http://spiritualcoretheory.com/lucy-fails-test-as-missing-link/
http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/244244/plos-one-journal-finally-admittedhttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/244244/plos-one-journal-finally-admittedhttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/94-netcevap/lucy_is_not_ancestor_of_humans.jpgSun, 12 Mar 2017 21:44:38 +0300
Living Fossil: The Ginkgo Biloba Tree

The "ginkgo biloba" tree is a living fossil that has remained from the Permian period (270 million years ago) to the present day. In fact, ginkgos were in existence during the eras when dinosaurs still roamed the earth. In November 2016, a scientific article in the "Giga Science" magazine published the gene sequence of ginkgo biloba trees. Scientists from the Beijing Genomics Institute, Zheijiang University and the Chinese Academy of Sciences conducting the research tackled and analyzed an exceptionally large genome (the total of the genetic codes found in the chromosomes of an organism), which consist of a total of 10 billion DNA letters. Despite these challenges, scientists continued to work on this plant, as it is one of the living fossil specimens like the nautilus and the horseshoe crab.  Wenbin Chen of the Beijing Genomics Institute expressed that a huge amount of raw data was generated, as large as 2 TB (1 terabyte: 1 trillion bytes) in the study for the huge amount of data and the computing capability for assembling genomes. An initial analysis of the tree's more than 40,000 predicted genes showed extensive expansion of gene families that provide for a variety of defensive mechanisms. Genes that enable resistance against pathogens (all kinds of organisms and substances that cause disease) are often duplicated in the genome of the tree.

Professor Yunpeng Zhao from Zheijiang University emphasized that the ginkgo represents one of the five living groups of seed plants.  Ginkgo is a completely unique tree that has no relatives. Botanists place Ginkgo in a separate category (Ginkgophyta) in the plant kingdom (Plantea).

It is a unique plant with its fan-shaped leaves that is unparalleled among other tree species.

The fact that they are generally extremely resilient to plant diseases, their consummate self-defense against plant pests, and their capability of forming additional roots and buds on the surface allow the ginkgos to be very long-lived. Ginkgos have dual defense systems that allow them to synthesize chemicals that keep insects, bacteria, and fungi away on one hand, while releasing volatile organic chemicals that specifically attract the enemies of plant-eating insects on the other. Some ginkgo trees can live up to 2,500 years.

An interesting feature of the ginkgo is its being one of the most durable trees in urban environments (in other words it is resistant to air pollution), thriving even in conditions where other trees cannot persist. Ginkgos can grow in all kinds of damp, and even sandy, soil. On the shore, it can also tolerate sea salt.

Extreme examples of the tenacity of  ginkgos were seen in Hiroshima. Four ginkgo trees growing only one or two kilometers distance from the site of atomic bomb’s hypocenter are the only living specimens in the area that survived the blast, albeit partially charred, and have managed to continue their existence to date.

This tenacity has also helped ginkgos endure even during glacial periods in China, which killed most species. The experiments in a recent study have revealed that ginkgo biloba extracts is helpful against the harms of electromagnetic waves emitted by cell phones to the brain.

The Significance of Ginkgo Tree’s Being a Living Fossil

During his research, Darwin was astounded when he discovered a fossilized version of the leaf of a ginkgo tree. The same as a living thing that is in existence today was present in millions-year-old layers in the same shape as it is today. This fossil, which is sufficient to bring Darwin's theory to a deadlock and really had him worried, would be dubbed a ‘living fossil’ by Darwin himself.

If Darwin had been living in the present, his concern in this regard would surely have been much greater because ginkgo, as we have already mentioned, is not the only living fossil that has survived until today. A part of more than 700 million fossils extracted from the earth's strata comprise of complete and perfect extinct species while its great majority are living fossils. Millions of years old fossil samples belonging to most of the currently existing species have been found and put on display. If evolution had occurred as Darwinists claim, there would have been millions of transitional fossil examples on earth, not millions of living fossils that remained unchanged. Evolutionists must have constantly found in the fossil records transitional life forms that have allegedly changed from one living thing to another, and discovered trillions of so-called ‘evolving ones’. Evolutionists, however, have yet to find even a single transitional fossil; they have failed to even present a single organ sample that is undergoing change in a single life form. As seen in the ginkgo leaf below from the Eocene epoch (54-37 million years ago), life forms have not undergone any change despite the millions of years of time difference between them; they were created by God, our Creator in exactly the same form that we see in modern living specimens.

Period: Cenozoic era, Eocene epoch
Age: 50 million years
Area: Canada

The 50 million-year-old ginkgo leaf seen in the image above is one example of the evidence that renders Darwinists scenario of plant evolution invalid. Just like all other fossil samples, this fossil poses a great dilemma for all evolutionists, making it evident that ginkgos have always existed as ginkgos, and they were neither derived from nor evolved into any other plant species.



http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/244240/living-fossil-the-ginkgo-bilobahttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/244240/living-fossil-the-ginkgo-bilobahttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/23-guncel-yorumlar/ginkgo_leaf_fossil_harunyahya_com2.jpgSun, 12 Mar 2017 21:37:52 +0300
From Which Creatures Do Drones Draw Inspiration?

The maneuverability of the dragonfly, the firefly's ability to generate light at one hundred percent efficiency, the owl having the most silent flight among all the bird species: The characteristics many creatures have that are similar to these have long fascinated people for centuries. So much so that these characteristics have been an inspiration to particularly scientists, leading to the emergence of a new scientific field.

Biomimetics (biomimicry) is a term first coined by Janine M. Benyus, an author and scientific observer from the American state of Montana. The term was later assessed and put into practice by many others. Literally meaning "the imitation of living organisms in nature", this scientific field has been mentioned rather frequently, especially lately, in the world of technology and has significantly broadened people's horizons. For example, according to recent studies featured on the December 2016 issue of Interface Focus journal, the flying robots called “Drones”, in other terms, unmanned aerial vehicles, are designed via inspiration received from nature. The following are some of the living beings that have served as a model for the development of drones: 

Birds That Can Fly for Days Without Sleep

During migration, some bird species can fly for days, or even months, without taking a break or nap. Scientists have been researching for years how birds manage to do so. It was previously thought that birds were relying on a method called "one hemisphere sleep". It was believed that employing this method birds would keep one eye open, thus using only one cerebral hemisphere at a time while resting the other. However recent studies showed that frigate birds (Fregata minor) can both maintain flight and rest their brains taking a "micro-nap" at the same time (during soaring or gliding). Thus, scientists continue working on drones that can remain in the air for days, or even months without having to land just like this bird species.

Silent Flight Specialists: Owls

Most of us know that owls are expert nocturnal predators. The primary reason why they are such great hunters is that they are capable of flying without making any sound. Biologists, mathematicians and engineers investigated this amazing aerodynamic performance of owls and discovered that owls incorporate many features required to produce such a silent flight. For example, the features of owls, such as their large wing size, velvety surface texture, and interlocked ragged feather structure allow them to fly silently. The work on applying this silent flight technology to drones continues. 

The Fruit Fly's Ability to Fly Despite Damaged Wings

Although drones are the products of advanced technology, they, too, can certainly be damaged. For this reason, one of the subjects investigated by the scientists who design drones is how these machines can still continue flying despite any sustained damage. To be able to answer this question, this time, researchers focused on fruit flies and examined these living beings which are still able to fly despite a damaged wing with high-speed videography.  The obtained result was eye opening for the scientists: 

They found that fruit flies could manage to maintain flight by modifying their wing beats midair and rolling their bodies toward the damaged wing.

Bees That Do Not Get Affected By Turbulence

One of the major problems both flying animals and flying robots face is unpredictable wind gusts. However, scientists have discovered that bees can even travel in extremely windy conditions to reach their intended pollen sources. To understand how they manage to do so, scientists placed  bees in observable wind tunnels and recorded them during flight. The result of the research was full of calculations that could be considered marvels of engineering.

By changing the amplitude, frequency, and even the symmetry of their wing beats, the bees would gain resilience while flying against wind gusts  they would suddenly encounter. If scientists can apply these techniques employed by bees to drones, it will allow drones to maintain flight through turbulences.

Pigeons That Skillfully Overcome Any Obstacles They Encounter

A hardy journey awaits a bird that flies close to the ground. It needs to swiftly process the visual input from its surroundings and make rapid flight adjustments to dodge any obstacle that might stand in its way. Seeking to investigate this success of  birds that maintain forward momentum while maneuvering through gaps between objects, scientists recorded pigeons' movements in three dimensions. As a result of the research, they discovered that the pigeons adjusted their routes by selecting gaps that closely aligned with the direction they were flying. And a few small adjustments pigeons would make in their wing beats were enough to do so.

Scientists currently aim at applying this skillful orientation and maneuver capabilities of the birds to unmanned aerial vehicles. Thus, drones will be able to avoid any obstacle they might encounter without any damage, as well as swiftly choose the safest route.

The Agility Insects Display When They Fall Will Further Enhance Drones

Interestingly, to gather information on flight, researchers sometimes benefit from insects that do not fly at all. To this respect, scientists have studied many insect species and in their studies they observed that some insects were capable of quickly rotating in midair while falling. For example, tiny stick insect nymphs are wingless, but this insect species can right itself in midair while falling from any height, thereby achieving a safe and proper landing.

It was discovered that the insects in question rapidly rotated to turn right side up by coordinating leg movements with airflow, and turning completely around within 0.3 seconds.  Researchers think that if the said technique employed by the insects is applied to drones, it will further improve their midair agility.

How Birds Can Maintain Flight When Molting?

Imagine you are flying in an airplane and in mid-flight, the bits and pieces of its wings start to break off.  Such a catastrophic situation might sound unthinkable, but this is exactly what birds experience during their molting season.

During seasonal molting, birds replace their worn out feathers while still having to continue flying, regardless of how dangerous it is. Seeking to find out how birds manage to do so, researchers examined a jackdaw, a bird in the crow family.

They investigated the flight aerodynamics of birds during different molt stages. At the end of their research, they found that the birds' flight efficiency was indeed reduced during molting but miraculously, the birds adjusted their wing posture to make up for gaps in their wings where feathers were missing, and thus they managed to continue flying. If scientists can apply this strategy as well to drones, it is likely that drones will be able to continue flying even if their wings encounter damage during flight.

It is God Who Created the Superior Features of All Living Beings

As we mentioned at the beginning of the article, humanity derives many substantial benefits by imitating nature, be it in terms of time and effort, or simply making good use of  physical resources. Every single one of the living beings given as an example in this research is equipped with vastly superior features. Almighty God has created all living beings with these features. God, the Lord of the heavens and the earth, is the Originator. This truth is revealed in the Qur’an as follows:

"He is the Originator of the heavens and earth. When He decides on something, He just says to it, ‘Be!’ and it is." (Surat al-Baqara, 117)



http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/242446/from-which-creatures-do-droneshttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/242446/from-which-creatures-do-droneshttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/6-makaleler/drone_biomimetic.jpgWed, 22 Feb 2017 13:14:03 +0300
The Perfect Distribution of Organelles in the Cell

The basic structural unit of creatures, the cell, is incredibly complex enough to leave people amazed. Just like the existence of a single cell, the harmony and cooperation in the cell is very impressive. As the structure of the cell and systems in it are further investigated and new details are found, this perfect order is seen more clearly.

A single cell may be said to resemble a large city with its operation systems, communication networks, transportation and administration. The power plants generate the power used by cells; the plants generate the enzyme and hormones which are essential for life; the data bank including all information regarding the products to be manufactured; the complex transportation systems and pipelines transferring the raw materials and products from one region to the other; the laboratories and refineries separating the raw materials taken from outside into the useful parts; the expert cell membrane proteins executing the enter and exit controls of materials to be taken in or sent out of the cell create only a part of this structure.

Just like cities, there is a dense traffic flow caused by the molecules like “moving on the boats”, “walking” and “taking hands” like people and by the “trucks carrying the organelles” in the cells. However, there is a great order in cells against the traffic congestion in these cities.

An investigation demonstrating this smooth order was made in Exeter University in recent days and the results were published in the journal Nature Communications. This study has shown one more time that the dispersion of organelles in the cell is not random at all, and is caused by a motion depending on energy.

As is known, organelles are specialized functional units of cells. The organelles for the cell are the same as organs in the body. Each organelle has special duties to ensure the sustaining of the cell. The order in the arrangement of organelles inside the cell is also exceptional. Let us review the results of the research showing how this positioning occurs in the cell.

The distribution of organelles is executed by a special molecule named  ATP (adenosine triphosphate). The energy attained from food items is first packaged in ATP. Later on, this energy is used in all the production and transportation processes that take place inside the cell. Actually, ATP is like the fuel for molecular motors, which transport its cargo along the fibers of the cytoskeleton. Just like  trucking rigs carrying a load, organelles are also carried by means of this fuel from one place to the other as to the needs. During the transportation process, other organelles are also both dragged and kept under the impact of a turbulence increasing their motion. However, these motions never occur randomly. Organelles do not get clustered in a certain part of the cell, or become dispersed randomly; in short, their distribution does not cause any disorder.  Quite the contrary, such organization of the cell’s components is essential to ensure their interaction and persistence of the cell. Lead researcher Professor Gero Steinberg, Chair in Cell Biology and Director of the Bioimaging Centre at the University of Exeter, said the following on this matter:

"Many people had previously assumed that organelles are randomly-distributed, as that's how they appear. Our research has revealed a new fundamental principle of the way cells organize themselves -- that they use energy to create this seemingly random, even distribution. This allows the organelles to interact with each other throughout the cell.”[i]

If organelles were distributed randomly during their transportation as claimed prior to this research, certain diseases would arise. In fact, organelle clustering without proper distribution inside the cell is found in some human disorders, such as Zellweger Syndrome, which is a fatal disease. Children born with this disorder may only live until the age of one”.[ii]

While evolutionists cannot even explain the origin of a single protein molecule, they keep up with their allegations that the cell came into existence through coincidences. The impasse of evolutionists is not limited with their not being able to explain how the protein and cell originated: Just like the order in the distribution of organelles in the cell, they are obliged to give an account for the existence of thousands of other mechanisms, and how inorganic molecules could give structure to such organizations that necessitate confounding consciousness, information and intelligence.

This new scientific research carried out by Exeter University makes evident that organelles in the cell are not dispersed randomly and they cannot be moved from one place to another without an intelligence that directs them. There is no doubt that this perfect order in the cell is not the coincidental ability of organelles that lack intellect or consciousness. On the contrary, that is one of the most profound instances of Almighty God’s infinite power and His artistry in Creation. God reveals the following in a verse:

“That is God, your Lord. There is no god but Him, the Creator of everything. So worship Him. He is responsible for everything.” (Surat al-An’am, 102)


[i] University of Exeter. "How to organize a cell: Novel insight from a fungus." ScienceDaily, 2 June 2016. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/06/160602083246.htm
[ii] Femke C. C. Klouwer, Kevin Berendse, Sacha Ferdinandusse, Ronald J. A. Wanders, Marc Engelen and Bwee Tien Poll-The. “Zellweger spectrum disorders: clinical overview and management approach.” Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, 2015; 10: 151

http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/242444/the-perfect-distribution-of-organelleshttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/242444/the-perfect-distribution-of-organelleshttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/94-netcevap/cell_organelles.jpgWed, 22 Feb 2017 13:07:50 +0300
Science Magazine and the Tale about Rapid Repeated Evolution of FishAn article published in the Science Magazine on December 8, 2016 was presented as a so-called proof of evolution. This article claims that some populations of killifish (Fundulus heteroclitus) living in the northeastern coasts of the US have adapted to the severe pollution, which was the result of toxic wastes (aromatic hydrocarbons) mixing with seawater due to recent increases in industrialization, presumably through the process of evolution.  Again, it is alleged that this so-called evolutionary process developed rapidly and was repeated independently in different regions and produced the same results. Obviously in light of scientific facts, these claims of an evolutionary process have no grounds.

The killifish were collected from eight locations along the 300 km coastline adjacent to the city of New York. The fish were paired in two populations: sensitive and tolerant to toxins. In these pairings, the distance between the specimens was as short as a few kilometers. In the article, it is suggested that tolerance to aryl hydrocarbon receptor-based (AHR) signaling pathways were rendered ineffective and caused this tolerance. As part of this claim, the Atlantic killifish supposedly lived in a location that was quite convenient to adapt to this fast and lethal change through a so-called process of evolution.

Now let's respond to the inconsistencies and false conclusions in this article.

As we have mentioned above, the fish samples are taken only from a very small range: In fact, the locations where the presumed sensitive and tolerant fish populations are said to be living are very close to each other. It is not possible for two killifish groups that live so close together to be isolated from each other. Fish that live in one area can be found in the other area after a while. Since they are not isolated, the sampled fish are but individuals of the same species that manifest different physical characteristics (phenotypes). This also demonstrates that the study was conducted erroneously right from the start. In fact, no matter where the samples are taken from which part of the world, the results will not change. Each individual killifish carries all the characteristics of the species but different individuals may have different phenotypes. These physical expressions can also lead to lethal outcomes in a variety of difficult situations.

We can explain this with the following example. Every year millions of people catch the flu, which is an infection. A small proportion of these people lose their lives while most get through the disease alive. The reason some people die is due to the weaknesses stemming from their immune system or other factors.  However, in general, those who remain alive or die due to the disease all have the same DNA structure. The human genome has the same structure in all human beings. The resulting difference is caused by phenotypes, which is, in turn, caused by the expression of the genes. The offspring of those ones who lived on after the disease may also be infected with the same virus. The situation is similar with the killifish; it doesn't mean that those tolerant to toxins are superior to those that are genetically sensitive.

AHR Signaling Pathways Have Vital Functions

One of the claims in the article is that the AHR signaling pathways supposedly differs between sensitive and tolerant fish. While the AHR function is reduced in tolerant fish, it continues at normal levels in the sensitive ones. There is absolutely no evolutionary mechanism at work here. All killifish have AHR genes; the difference stems from the regulation of these genes. The important point here is that the AHR signaling pathways are also responsible for the continuation of many vital cellular activities. The immune system, cell division and hypoxia alarm are among these functions. While providing resistance against toxicants, these vital functions should also be regulated in equilibrium. Since the obstruction of AHR pathways would result in the failure of other vital functions and eventually death, it needs to be adjusted precisely. A conscious entity is imperative in achieving this.

Claims of Rapid and Repeated Change are Against the So-Called Concept of Evolution

The basic assertion of evolutionists is that new features are being added to living organisms as a result of coincidental mutations, which occur in long periods of time. In this sense, to prove the allegations of evolution, it should be demonstrated that living beings have developed from simple to complex organisms. However, throughout the years, no evidence has been found to prove that life emerged through such small changes over the years. For such development to occur there should have been numerous intermediary forms between the initial state and the final state of living organisms but there is not even one intermediary form among the more than 700 million fossils discovered up until this day. Any member of a species appears on the fossil records as complete organisms, bearing every trait of that species, and maintains its existence along with its characteristics for millions of years.  If the natural surroundings were not suitable for the persistence of that species, it would die out and become extinct, otherwise continue to exist up to our day.

Feeling compelled to explain every biological phenomenon with so-called claims of evolution, evolutionists tend to explain any finding that is against their claims with the same prejudice. This allows us to notice once again the ideological grounds of evolutionary ideas, as these are not scientific at all. A person, who sees that life  emerged instantaneously, should also accept that there is no such thing as evolution, and living beings have come into existence through Creation. However, in face of this truth, evolutionists try to account for the existence of a living being with terms like "evolutionary leap, spontaneous generation." These definitions are completely contradictory to the basic rationale of evolution, as we mentioned at the beginning. These are hollow terms and they never explain through which mechanism the life emerged because they can't. Evolutionary theory has no mechanism it can resort to, since life is created.

Another fictitious term is "repeated evolution". Again, according to the allegations of evolution, if two living beings share a common feature, they must have come from a so-called common ancestor. However, there are numerous examples that contradict this. A similar evolutionist definition used is "convergent evolution" which makes the groundless claim that living beings with different features manifest a common feature over time. By defending that living beings diversified from a common origin over time (divergent), while at the same time defending a "convergent" structure, evolution in fact refutes itself. For example, Richard Dawkins says that the eye went through 40 independent evolutions. A theory, which cannot explain how a complex system such as the eye and vision formed as a result of coincidences, claims that such impossibility has been repeated 40 times. This only leads evolutionary claims to a deeper dead end for the theory. There is only one explanation for the fact that a magnificent system like vision appeared on different living organisms and at 40 different times; Creation. In fact, there is no "divergent" or "convergent" development; there is even not single evidence found which proves that living beings underwent a change over time. Evolutionists, as a requirement of their ideology, sink to dodging this fact by saying it is "repeated evolution."

If we are to examine this article; it is another logical error to claim that the adaptation of killifish to the pollution, which arose in the last short 30-40 years in the New York region is indicated as a "rapid and repetitive evolution". The adjustment here is an example of adaptation, not evolution. The living being has encountered an environment that enables it to use a feature that it already genetically possesses. When faced with pollution, if these fish do not have the physical ability to cope with this difficult situation they will die, or otherwise, if they can cope with it, they will sustain their lives.

Adaptation and Variation are not Evidence for Evolution

We frequently come across evolutionist circles' attempts at utilizing the adaptability to various natural conditions, examples of which we encounter in many living beings, as Darwinist propaganda material. Variation, which means that individuals within a species manifest some minor differences from birth, is not caused by changes in the DNA, but from differences in working speed of existing genes. For example, if the growth hormone over-performs its function, the person will be taller and more burly; if it under-performs, the person will be shorter. If melanin pigment producing cells over-produce, the skin color will be darker; if the pigment production is lacking, the skin color will be lighter. As you can see, DNA structure is the same in all cases. It cannot be considered as an evidence for so-called evolution.

Adaptation, on the other hand, is the ability to adapt to changing natural conditions within the limits allowed by genes. When a white-skinned person is exposed to the sun, skin cells try to protect the skin from harmful sunrays by starting to produce more melanin; thus the skin darkens.  When the sun's effect is eliminated, the cells return to their old production speed and the skin color lightens. In the same way, the strength of an athlete increases with the increasing amount of protein in muscle cells. In this way, the athlete can lift three or four times more weight than before yet his children will not be born with strong muscles, because his genes have not changed. If the requirements of natural conditions exceed the limits of adaptation of the living beings, the consequence will be death; there is no spare time to wait. If you remove a fish from the sea, it will die after three or four minutes at most if it does not return to the water. No matter how many times you repeat this, it will not adapt to living on land, and the subsequent generations will not have the ability to survive more out of water. To claim that it can develop lungs over time is a ridiculous suggestion that raises a problem with claimer's mental faculties.

Yet, the ability to adapt is an indication of God’s perfect Creation. Being able to respond to the changing natural conditions via changes in the organism is a proof of the manifestation of God’s wisdom in the cells of that living being. One has to ponder on: Who made the decision to increase the melanin production; moreover, Who possesses the knowledge that Sun has harmful effects on the organism? Or where is that power, which regulates the metabolism of the killifish in accordance to the changing lethal environment in the cell? In a dark environment, rendering some metabolic pathways more active in line with the knowledge of changes in the surroundings, while rendering others less active can only be undertaken under the control of an Intelligent Mind.     


As one can see, the ability of killifish to adapt to adverse conditions is not  evidence for evolution. The fact that we are all created with the ability to adapt to the natural conditions is a gift from God to us all and to all living beings.

Is He Who creates like him who does not create?  So will you not pay heed? If you tried to number God’s blessings, you could never count them.  God is Ever-Forgiving, Most Merciful. (Surat an-Nahl, 17-18)



http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/241670/science-magazine-and-the-talehttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/241670/science-magazine-and-the-talehttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/94-netcevap/fundulus_heteroclitus2.jpgThu, 09 Feb 2017 15:42:08 +0300
Darwinist Tales Are Repeated on CNN: Homo Naledi

Science is an important road to truth. But, on the condition that the methods used are impartial and scientific facts are not distorted. However, when comparison is made between various animal and human species in many Darwinist studies and researches, in fact, rough methods are applied rather than scientific facts. For example, a so-called ancestral relationship between species is constructed within the framework of a method called "Topographic anatomy" used by Darwinists based on observational data such as  skull size, bone length and thickness, curve-flat formation of bones, tooth size and placement. In sorting the skulls of monkeys, which they allege to be the so-called common ancestor of man according to their sizes, Darwinists attempt:

  • Forming a perception that there is common descent and brain size grew in time,
  • Thus, intelligence and social living progressed further gradually,
  • And as a result of these, the present day is attained.

Sometimes, a single tooth or a few bone fragments were turned into a whole body with modeling irrelevant to reality. What is more, that living being was even illustrated in an imaginary social life in order to increase its persuasiveness. At times, species completely different from one another that lived in the same period were arrayed from small to large just to present these to be on a so-called line of common descent. In fact, just out of ideological reasons, certain forgeries were invented to spread false news as if a "missing-link is found." Based on such fabrications, counterfeit scientific articles were published, and fake fossils were exhibited in museums for years.

Some media organs have also supported all this deception, and even had no shame in presenting some old fraudulent claims to be new discoveries as part of their classical Darwinist tactic. The last example of this is a fossil discovery made in 2013 in South Africa, but announced to the world only in 2015. Recently, this matter was brought to the agenda in certain websites such as the CNN, Scientific American, and The Daily Mail on the pretense of being a new discovery.

We have occasionally responded to similar claims intended to indoctrinate people with the Darwinist mindset that there were presumably half-man half-ape living beings, which had lived before. Yet, in this article, what this fossil actually is and the non-scientific allegations related to it will be briefly explained.


More than 1,500 bone-remains claimed to belong to 15 different individuals were discovered in a cave in South Africa in 2013. Along with these bones named "Homo Naledi", Darwinist circles came up with their so-called "missing link" scenarios in 2015 and these fossils were introduced as "a newly discovered so-called hominid species".

The findings comprised of not a complete skull, but what they had were worn-out parietal bones placed adjacently without full contact as if hanging in the air. Despite that, it was claimed that this living being had a brain size of 500 grams, with a volume the size of an orange. The allegation was that the Homo Naledi could have lived 2-2.5 million years ago. In addition, it was suggested to be a mosaic form "that could climb trees with curled finger bones, but had hominid wrists and long thigh bones." On top of all these, the pelvis bone found in fractured pieces was assembled to this construct just with the pretense that it could walk upright.

It was also a matter of debate how these fossils found in a barely accessible cave, 1,450 meters below the earth, came there. The story told these could have been consciously thrown or buried by other members of the species, because there were no tools or other living remains with them.

Certainly, 3D images and comparisons made with human beings were not left out in order to instill evolutionary ideas in people’s memory. The soft tissues such as eyes, ears, nose, skin and hair, which do not leave any residue in fossils, were fabricated as fictitious reconstructions. Although the maxillary and nasal bones were missing, the positions of the bones were determined by assumptions.

Whether the pieces of bones brought together belong to the same individual or to different ones, if they lived in the same period or not, and if the body parts of other species ended up mixed with these remains or not, are some of the points waiting to be clarified about Homo Naledi.

As it is seen, Darwinists persist with their unscientific attitude and ideological approach in presenting the fossils as well as their interpretation of the findings.


While there is much discussion about the fossils found, it is bewildering that their age has not been dated yet since 2013. Scientific American says the following on this issue:

“One other crucial fact missing was naledi's age. Without this, it is difficult to pinpoint where exactly the species fit into the evolutionary scheme of things…” i

American paleontologist Lee Berger, who personally conducted the study in 2013, says in respect thereof, “But where it comes from, where it descends from, and what it gives rise to -- if anything -- we don't know." ii

This means if the fossils are older or younger than they are predicted, the missing link scenario written by Darwinists up until today will become totally meaningless.

All these expound that stories told about Homo Naledi have no scientific foundation, but solely rest upon Darwinist prejudice.


Lee Berger, the lead researcher on Homo Naledi, admits that the fossil findings do not correspond to any known human race. For that reason, Darwinist scientists have resorted to inventing a "new species" for the remnants of a fancy. For instance, while claiming that the fossil is a so-called intermediary hominid species filling the gap between Australopithecus and human beings, Berger’s assertions were partial and prejudiced in the face of research made on the bone discovery.

This assembled skeleton bears the traits of chimpanzees with all features. The shoulder joints and curved finger bones are the same with apes hanging from branches of trees. The large innominate bones and the downwardly expanding chest cage are particular to the Australopithecus, an extinct ape species. Despite claims of similarity with human feet, the foot bones of this living being are unlike humans having a lower nominal curve with a different orientation.

Although Australopithecus Afarensis is alleged to be the first ancestor in the so-called evolutionary tree of Darwinists, the thumbs of this being were longer than today’s chimpanzees or apes. This feature is utterly contrary to claims of evolution. In fact, Homo Naledi's thumb is even longer than that of Australopithecus Afarensis. This finding once again disproves the imaginary progress in the supposed evolutionary tree. Having no parallels with human thumb, Homo Naledi remains are also quite different from the other fake “hominid” species in the imaginary evolution family tree.

In addition, Homo Naledi's hand bears no similarity with the human hand in any way, its curved finger bones and other apelike features are further evidence that it is an ape moving around and swinging through tree branches. Even if Darwinists attempt at make-believe methods to draw parallels between chimpanzees and humans, it is impossible for this hand structure to grasp and use any tool as a human being does. What is more, no tools or artifacts belonging to human culture were found in this cave where the bones were found.

Moreover, the teeth discovered Dinaledi cave does not bear a resemblance like human teeth at all. Those approximate to a smaller ape species when compared with the Australopithecus series, thus have no parallels or similarities to human beings.


Findings about the history of man are based on fossil discoveries. However, since findings are often interpreted according to presuppositions of evolutionary theory, attaining scientific results is generally not probable. Even if a finding is contrary to evolutionary ideas, certain scientists approach such discoveries with prejudiced questions like, "How did evolution achieve this?" in order to keep the evolution theory alive. Or, they come up with irrational claims such as the "punctuated evolution".

Henry Gee, an author writing in the Nature magazine, summarizes this bias of Darwinists with striking remarks:

“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.” iii

For clarification, let us explain this with an example:

Today we see people with different physical characteristics due to the genetic diversity God has granted us as a splendid variety. For instance, traits like being short or tall, eye and skin color, and many others are at a great variety although we are basically the same human being. Such differences were prevalent in the past as well. Evolutionists come up with numerous inconsistencies by distorting this fact with their false claims of human evolution. They array human skulls of different volumes in contradiction and make up an imaginary diagram. Hence, the skull volume of Neanderthals alleged to be the so-called "primitive ancestor of man" is in fact larger than average humans today, and thus contradicts with evolutionary claims.

With today's technology, the physical structure and buildup of the brain may be examined in detail even at microscopic level. The human brain has an average weight of 1,200-1,400 grams in different individuals. Functional differences have not been detected even though male and female brains weigh differently. Moreover, neural connections in the brains of intelligent people also display no disparity under the microscope. Albert Einstein, regarded to be one of the most intelligent people known, had a normal brain volume.

Thus, all these inconsistencies show that neither a larger brain size is a sign of excessive development, nor a smaller skull volume is a deficiency. All of these are a part of the variety already existing in the human gene pool. Physical measurements based on bone sizes, and making predictions about a living being based on such calculations is distancing from science and will lead to very wrong conclusions.


Research made on the brains of living beings makes it clear that brain size and tissue are not proportionate to the intelligence or social development of individuals. In a similar way, it is nonsensical to conjecture guesswork on animals that lived in the past based only on anatomical measurements. While the dating of fossil findings cannot be made precisely, drawing conclusions based on these is only an ideological venture to impose the evolution deceit on societies.

When we examine fossil findings, the striking outcome is always the fact of Creation. Every living being appears suddenly in the fossil record and bears all the features necessary for living right from its origin. This is a requisite for the organism to sustain its life. The fossil records show that living species have undergone no changes in the course of their lives, while some have gone extinct and others have persisted until today.


i - http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/03/health/homo-naledi-human-species-lee-berger/
ii – Ibid.
iii- Henry Gee, In Search of Deep Time, New York, The Free Press, 1999, p. 116-117

Adnan Oktar's piece in News Rescue:


http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/241668/darwinist-tales-are-repeated-onhttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/241668/darwinist-tales-are-repeated-onhttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/6-makaleler/news_rescue_adnan_oktar_darwinist_tales_are_repeated_on_CNN_homo_naledi2.jpgThu, 09 Feb 2017 15:26:50 +0300
Ribosomal Quality ControlThere are several million ribosomes in a single cell. Ribosomes, which are protein production plants, have active roles in all the cells of the body. For example, combining the proteins in the cell to form larger macromolecular structures is among the tasks of the ribosomes. However, not all the functions of ribosomes, which are considered to be the "black box" of molecular biology, have been fully understood yet, and therefore new research has been frequently conducted on the ribosome. The study, the results of which were published in Cell Reports and The EMBO magazines in September 2016, is among these. With this new study, Würzburg University and Max Planck Institute researchers have shown that ribosomes also take on the role of  being "a quality control point" as well as assuming  protein production, which is the already known assignment of ribosomes.

Playing LEGO at the Molecular Level

 Professor Utz Fischer from the University of Würzburg has been researching for years how proteins called "macromolecular machines" are assembled in the cell. Fischer likens this assembly process to LEGO blocks and describes it in the following way:

"Think of it as LEGO bricks at the molecular level: One brick is attached to the next until the product is finished. If only one defective or wrong brick is used, the entire building may be compromised as a result."

Prof. Fischer's research focuses on the structures called "spliceosomes". These large RNA-protein complexes are an essential part of gene expression within cells (gene expression: the process by which genes with DNA sequences become functional protein constructs).  Their job is to remove the sections in the messenger RNA that do not contain any protein-encoding information and unite the relevant sections carrying the information. Fischer's team, together with colleagues from the Max Planck Institute, identified a hitherto unexpected player in this process: The ribosome.

Contrary to the conventional view, the ribosome does not release individual proteins directly into the cytosol after synthesis (left). Instead, it holds the protein back until chaperones deliver the matching counterparts (right). In this way, the ribosome assures that only the one intended structure is formed thereby adopting the role of a quality inspector.

The Role of Ribosomes

Ribosomes use the DNA copy that comes from the nucleus as the messenger RNA (mRNA) in protein production. Two large protein-RNA subunits constitute the ribosome; proteins and helper factors. Hundreds of structures comprised of RNA molecules contribute to this operation. The mRNA is commissioned with conveying the genetic code of the DNA from the nucleus in complete form. The mRNA, which is the information band, carries the genetic code to the ribosome. This task is then read by the ribosome and a new amino acid (building block of proteins) is added to the protein chain. At the same time, another RNA molecule, called transfer RNA (tRNA), presents amino acids one by one to the ribosome and this is how protein synthesis takes place in accordance with the genetic code. But at this point, one important question comes to mind: If proteins are released randomly into cytosol (part of the cytoplasm composed of water and water-soluble molecules) by the ribosome after the synthesis, how do the proteins that roam alone assemble correctly in order to constitute macromolecular machines?

Ribosomes Only Guarantee the Formation of Intended Protein Structure

It is impossible for proteins that were released individually into the cell interior by ribosomes, where they roam about, to find their matching counterparts "by chance". "The interior of cells is much too crowded for this," says Ashwin Chari, project group leader at the Max Planck Institute for Biophysical Chemistry.

Even if the protein succeeds in finding its matching counterpart, this encounter would take far too long . The reason for this is that the protein would have to find its matching counterpart by means of trial and error. It is inexpedient for the protein to find the right match and pair off. For this reason, most encounters will result in the formation of erroneous structures and this, in turn, would cause severe diseases such as Alzheimer´s.

Elham Paknia, who experimentally headed-up the entire project, points out the necessity of a perfect order that governs these processes: "Therefore, a mechanism has to exist in living cells, which protects the newly synthesized proteins at the ribosome and only allows them to associate with their correct counterpart."

Obviously, a ribosome does not randomly release the proteins into the cytosol after synthesis. It holds proteins back until specific helpers, called the chaperones (accompanying proteins that take part in the process of folding proteins into three-dimensional forms) deliver the matching counterparts. In doing so, the ribosome assures that only the one intended structure is formed. Therefore, the ribosome adopts the role of a "quality inspector" in addition to production.

If The Ribosome Does Not Carry Out The Task Of Quality Control...

This event, summarized in general terms above, is actually the result of very complex intermediate processes. The miraculous processes that are uncovered as we dive more in details are beyond human comprehension. This is because any errors during the assembly of spliceosomes may also cause diseases. For instance, spinal muscular atrophy is one of these diseases. That disorder is characterized by the loss of motor neurons, especially in the spinal cord, causing muscle wasting and paralysis in affected individuals. Protein misfolding is also believed to cause various other diseases from diabetes to Alzheimer's. In other words, even a slight error that occurs during these complex operations causes permanent damage and diseases.

At this point, many questions come to mind:

- By which discretion can the cell, which is made up of unconscious molecules that cannot be seen with the eye, decides to produce certain structures? Since decision-making is an ability that is entitled to conscious beings who can think and evaluate.

- Who created the protein equipped with qualifications that enables it to recognize this match-up in the following steps?

- With which sense of responsibility and reasoning does the ribosome not release the protein until it carries out the correct matching process?

- How does the protein know that is has accomplished the right match-up?

The answers of these questions are clear: Almighty God, Who is the Creator of all living beings, has created this perfect system, placed every detail where it is supposed to be, and ensured all processes work in harmony.

Humans have no conscious or unconscious effect in this magnificent organization, which is placed into our bodies; in fact, scientists have not yet managed to comprehend and fully explore the functions of this system. This mechanism certainly cannot have formed out of a chance-based trial-and-error venture. It is absolutely impossible for coincidences to build up such a magnificent and systematic construction. Making any such claim points to a serious deficit in logic. Each one of these structures and awe-inspiring systems is created perfectly and magnificently, complete and error-free, by Almighty God. Our Lord reveals in one verse:

... He (God) created everything and determined it most exactly. (Surat al-Furqan, 2)


University of Würzburg. (2016, October 6). Ribosomal quality control. ScienceDaily. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/10/161006122726.htm

http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/241584/ribosomal-quality-controlhttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/241584/ribosomal-quality-controlhttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/6-makaleler/ribosome2.jpgTue, 07 Feb 2017 15:11:40 +0300
The 360 Million-Year-Old Acanthostega Fossil Refutes Again the Evolutionary Claims Of Transition to Land

Acanthostega is an aquatic organism with gills. It is estimated to be 360 million years old. As a result of the research conducted by Jenny Clack, a paleontologist at the Cambridge University in 1987, it was suggested that this fossil, having one limb and eight digits, was allegedly a transitional form between fish and tetrapods (four-limbed land vertebrates). Based on this claim and the fossil, evolutionists allege that fish first developed limbs and then made a transition to land, rather than moving over to land and then developing feet. However, this argument is totally inconsistent. First of all, Clack clearly states that she does not know whether Acanthostega was living on land or not, even though she is an evolutionist. It is a grave misconception to claim that an aquatic organism is a transitional form that supposedly came from water to land due to some bone-like tissue in the fin. This mistake of the evolutionists shows that they have quickly forgotten their misconception of the Coelacanth that lived 65 million years ago.

The evolutionists portrayed the Coelacanth as a transitional form until the end of the 1930s. It was claimed that the bones in the fin of the 200-million-year fossil had transformed into limbs and could sustain the weight of the fish when it moved to the land. However, it was found out in 1938 that the Coelacanth was still living and the evolutionists were surprised. When the Coelacanth caught by the fishermen off the shores of Madagascar was examined, it was seen that the animal had not undergone any mutation for 200 million years and it was a bottom dwelling fish, let alone moving to the land. Furthermore, the organs interpreted by evolutionists as primitive lungs in the fossil were fat sacs. The Coelacanth was also caught several times after this date. Eventually, evolutionists had to stop claiming that the Coelacanth was a transitional form.

As seen in the example of the aforementioned Coelacanth, aquatic creatures like Acanthostega, which have bones, are shown as transitional forms not because they have the structure to live on land but due to the prejudice of the evolutionists. 

New Evidence Showing That Acanthostega Is A Transitional Form: Cartilage In The Limbs

According to the news in the journal Nature, a team of researchers from Uppsala University in Sweden, the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF) in France and the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom decided to carry out a detailed search in the bones of the humeri -the bones of the forelimb- of the fossils of the 360 million-year-old Acanthostega. In the search, the limb bones of the fossils were examined by using high-resolution synchrotron X-ray scanning (a circular accelerator used for the acceleration of charged particles into high energy). By means of this, the fossils of Acanthostega fossil underwent a very detailed analysis without being damaged. 

The microscopic structures in the bones of these fossils of the Devonian times (419-359 million years ago) were almost perfectly preserved. The X-rays used throughout this analysis revealed an important fact about this aquatic creature, the Acanthostega: The forelegs of Acanthostega were cartilaginous which provided a significant scientific proof that it was not a transitional form between fish and the tetrapods since cartilage is a non-mineralized tissue and it is flexible. Therefore, it is far too weak to allow the forelegs to sustain the weight of the animal's body out of the water and allow it maintain life on land. That is why this scientific fact makes it physiologically impossible for Acanthostega, an animal living in the sea, to be a so-called transitional form that would move from water to land.

As we can see, the studies carried out by evolutionary paleontologists across the world have only ended in failure and the missing links they search for cannot be found in any way. All this clearly demonstrates that an evolutionary process has never existed.

Other Obstacles To Transition From Water To Land
Considerable physiological differences between land and aquatic creatures constitute one of the fundamental dead-ends of the evolutionary theory. These differences may be addressed in five main categories:

1. Weight bearing: Sea-dwelling creatures have no problem in bearing their own weight in the sea. Their body structures are not intended to such a function. However, most land-dwelling creatures consume 40 percent of their energy just in carrying their bodies around. However, for any aquatic creature to make an alleged transition to land, it would have to develop a totally different musculature and skeletal system to take on a load-bearing function. It is unfounded to claim that such complex structures could arise out of random mutations.

2. Heat retention: Temperature changes very quickly and at a large scale on land. A land-dwelling animal’s metabolism is capable of withstanding under such drastic temperature differences. On the other hand, temperature changes occur only slowly in the sea and this difference is not extensive as seen on the land. A living organism with a body regulated according to the essentially constant temperature of the sea would need to acquire a protective system to ensure minimum harm from the temperature changes on land. It is preposterous to claim that a fish acquired such a system by random mutations as soon as they stepped onto land.

3. Use of water: As an indispensable need for all living beings, water is at a meager supply on land. For that reason, water and even moisture need to be used economically. For instance, the skin has to be able to permit a certain amount of water loss, while also preventing excessive evaporation; that is why land-dwelling creatures experience thirst, something that sea-dwelling creatures do not. For this reason, the skin of sea-dwelling animals is not suitable for a non-aquatic habitat.

4. Kidneys: Sea-dwelling organisms discharge waste materials, especially ammonia, by means of their aquatic environment. But water should be used at minimum level on the land. Therefore, terrestrial animals have kidneys. The kidney is mostly a device for maintaining water balance in the animal by transforming ammonia into urea, which uses minimum amount of water in its excretion. Therefore, in order for the so-called passage from water to land to occur, those animals not possessing kidneys would have to develop a kidney system all at once. 

5. Respiratory system: Fish ‘breathe’ by taking in oxygen dissolved in water that they pass through their gills. They cannot live more than a few minutes out of water. In order to persist their lives on land, they would have to acquire a perfect lung system all of a sudden.

It is absolutely impossible that one animal can go through all these physiological changes as a result of mere coincidences and do so instantaneously. It is not possible for the evolution theory to overcome all these obstacles or provide scientific evidence for the mentioned allegations. The claims of a so-called transitional form can never go beyond mere speculation based entirely on imagination.


European Synchrotron Radiation Facility. (2016, September 7), ScienceDaily.

http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/240929/the-360-million-year-oldhttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/240929/the-360-million-year-oldhttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/6-makaleler/acanthostega_fossil2.jpgSat, 28 Jan 2017 15:14:49 +0300
In Response to Michael Skinner: Epigenome DOES NOT PROVIDE NEW INFORMATION to the DNAOn the website of AEON digital magazine, Darwinist Professor Michael Skinner came forth with a new evolutionary account. In his article dated November 9th, 2016, Skinner suggested that neo-Lamarkism and neo-Darwinism should be combined under “Unified Theory of Evolution” and the alleged effect of epigenetics analyzed from this perspective. Trying to incorporate the obsolete theories from the 1800’s into the science of epigenetics is a futile attempt. Epigenetics is a field that demonstrates the perfection in the functioning of the DNA in a more comprehensive way, and it is such a complex as well as precise mechanism, which no evolutionary claims of “chance” could ever account for.  

In this article, we will elaborate once again on what epigenetics is, and we will show that environmental factors do not add any new genetic information to the organism by presenting scientific proofs.

DNA Code System in Which Information is Written

Today, based on advancing technology, we can better understand DNA and how it works.  The content of human DNA is a sea of ​​knowledge that we can barely fit in a thousand-volume encyclopedia. Intermolecular reactions, how interactions between chemicals occur are all written in this giant databank.  Of course, the smallest piece of information available, whether it is a letter, a sign, or half of a sentence, is interpreted as the message from an intelligent individual.  When one sees three pieces of stone in a desolate desert placed on top of one another or arranged in an orderly fashion, the person immediately realizes that it is a message left by an intelligent individual. DNA encoded by molecules also points to the existence of a superior intelligence.  Just as any sign that is a product of intelligence excites the explorers and motivates them to seek out the owner of that information, the scientist is also obliged to search for and find the intelligence that wrote the DNA. DNA is a living code system operating so perfectly that it cannot be explained by the materialist philosophy through blind coincidences.

Selective Use of Information

There is a nonstop flow of information from the DNA into the cell. What is surprising, however, is that the coded information is selectively transmitted within DNA. For example, in the human body there are about 1 trillion cells forming different tissues and organs.  What renders cells different from each other despite having exactly the same DNA is that different genes in the DNA are turned on based on the tissue they are located in. For this purpose, when necessary, the DNA keeps certain genes activated, and when not, it keeps them inactivated. Genes are regions of the DNA that encode proteins. The production of different proteins causes the cell to behave differently, acting as cells with completely distinct roles such as neurons or in other words nerve cells, liver, pancreas, muscle or skin. This control mechanism, which is aware of the environment, conditions and needs of the cell, keeps the required genes turned on while keeping the others off. Here, we come across once again God’s artistry in His creation of this system with atomic precision.

Let us examine the delicate work here with an example. A neuron in the brain does not produce insulin secreted by the pancreatic cell; on the other hand, the pancreas cell does not produce electrical signals like a neuron, either. So, what determines this? Why is the gene encoding insulin production suppressed in all other cells? How is a pancreatic cell aware of the fact that it is not located in the brain, but in the ventral cavity? How does it know in the dark among 25.000 genes that a specific gene is the one encoding insulin production and how can it turn on and read that gene? Now let us briefly examine how this mechanism which is the topic of epigenetics function.

Epigenome: the molecular brain ruling the DNA

Today it is understood that what determines life is not merely the DNA codes. The field of genetics that study the DNA has come to the following significant conclusion: There is a system over the DNA that governs it. Today, this system called the ‘epigenome’ is studied by epigenetics, the branch of science that makes research on it. In fact, 'epi' means ‘above’, which refers to the governing mechanism that has influence over the genome, in other words the DNA.

Epigenome:  Decision-Selection-Production

The epigenome concept, in short, means the activation of the genes needed according to time and environmental needs, and the production of the relevant proteins by deciphering the information written there. For example, during the development of the embryo inside the mother’s womb, stem cells multiply ceaselessly but in the meantime every single cell knows what type of a cell it will turn into. Some are turned into nerve cells, others become red blood cells in the form of a disc, while some others are formed into long filaments acting as muscle cells.

How is it possible for the DNA molecule to direct a stem cell in the darkness of a billionth of a meter size spot to turn into a heart cell which has the capacity to pump a 10-thousand tanker loads of blood and produce its own electricity through its lifetime?

Scientists initiated the Human Genome Project with a budget of millions of dollars just to carry out research for revealing this marvelous development in the human body. However, the secret of how an embryonic cell gets decided to turn into a heart cell is not revealed yet. The part that is unraveled brings forth the amazing details of God’s artistry in His creation.

Every cell contains the information of the entire body in its DNA. And a cell may function as part of the heart, pancreas or brain according to the directives it receives. During the development of the embryo, trillions of cells are aware of their roles without any complication and the entire body is formed perfectly through an astounding planning. How do the embryonic cells, turn into other types of cells? This is the topic of research of epigenetics.

How blood is to be pumped, how kidneys will filter the blood, how insulin will balance the glucose levels in the body, and all other information pertinent to the functioning of our organs are coded on the DNA. Yet, once a stem cell turns into a red blood cell, it only uses the information that describes how it will transport oxygen and carbon dioxide. The red blood turns off all the other data that are present in its DNA but are of no use. What activates certain parts of the DNA, but keeps others inactive is some chemicals found outside the DNA helix. These chemical compounds that are made up of carbon and hydrogen atoms are extended along the DNA helix. Their duty is to turn on and off the various parts of the DNA to allow for the activation of the related information on the DNA. In this process, the DNA is in place of a computer uploaded with 920-volume encyclopedia data, while the epigenome is a superb computer program that is capable of activating this stunning information on the DNA. Without the epigenome, DNA is of no use while without DNA, the epigenome is of no use either.

God has created genetics as such an intricate and breathtaking system that every step of this process functions without flaw. There is no place for even a single error or random decision in this process. However, evolutionists claim that all this punctilious operation occurs out of “coincidence.” There is no rationality in alleging that such a mechanism of superior intelligence and precision came to happen through evolution. Claims of evolution can never account for the biochemical information found on the epigenome, or the accurate pinpointing of this data to take part in the production process.

The allegation that the information in DNA appeared out of “coincidence” as claimed by evolutionists has now been completely confuted by the astonishing evidence conferred by science. In fact, what is question here is a mechanism that understands what the organism needs at that moment and then knows in which codes that need is written. This mechanism is capable of finding those codes in the wrapped up, double helix DNA chain to decipher them later. This delicate molecular process, of course, cannot be explained in any way by unconscious mechanisms that function randomly. It is very clear that the correct decision, the correct choice and the correct production steps that we observe in the epigenome constitute explicit evidence for the existence of the All-Knowing Intelligence and Power that encompasses everything. That power and intelligence belongs to God, our Almighty Lord, the Creator and Protector of all the worlds.

Can Epigenome Create New Information?

By means of the epigenome, it was discovered that the genes of an organism turned on depending on the conditions might remain activated for 10 to 100 generations. But it should not be forgotten that no new information is created here. The epigenome is merely a regulation process regarding the inclusion of the genes that already exist in the production or their withdrawal from it. However, the evolutionists claims that, in the face of changing conditions, the organism invents new solutions, and it does this by producing new genes. However, the science of genetics has shown us that no such mechanism exists.  Variations resulting from the turning on and off of genes lead to changes only within the existing genetic information of that species. In no way does this mean that the species goes through change. Although the species undergoes variations based on environmental conditions, they are still able to mate with the members of the same species and bear new offspring. However, a member of the current species is formed through this reproduction, a new species does not occur.  

CONCLUSION: Another Blow on Evolution Through the Epigenome

The epigenome is nothing more than the turning on and off of the existing genes in the DNA. In this case, epigenetics as a branch of science falsifies the claims of evolution, to the argument that organisms improve themselves over time.  The genetic information is just as perfect as it was in the moment the organism first emerged, and related parts of this data is turned on for use when required. This means that the DNA code ensures that the organism operates itself in changing conditions through an intelligent system found in the epigenome. In this context, it is clear that epigenome is a program created by our Almighty Lord.

Michael Skinner has taken the groundless arguments of Lamarck and Darwin in 1900’s based on the old-fashioned understanding of science of the time as reference and made a serious mistake with his unified theory of evolution. What is more, he attempted exploiting genetics and epigenetics, the branches of science that prove God’s creation of all livingness with clear-cut evidence, as a basis of his blunder. However, Dr. Francis Collins, one of the leading geneticists of our world who was the director of the Human Genome Project and made the most comprehensive research on the DNA, stated in his own words that his discoveries made him “feel closeness to the Creator.” His words are another testament that there is no place for coincidence in genetics, and this perfect regulation seen in the epigenome.



http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/240844/in-response-to-michael-skinnerhttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/240844/in-response-to-michael-skinnerhttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/94-netcevap/epigenom_DNA_ya_bilgi_saglamaz2.jpgThu, 26 Jan 2017 18:45:41 +0300
Darwinism is a supersititous belief that disparages women

The alleged scientific support that Social Darwinism provided for racism, fascism and imperialism, as well as communism, is a widely known subject that has been much written about. But one lesser known fact is that a great many Darwinists, including Charles Darwin himself, have believed in the fallacy  that women are both biologically and mentally inferior to men.

As the evolutionist scientist John R. Durant also acknowledges, racism and sexual discrimination are the two main consequences of the theory of evolution. Durant verbalized the fallaciousness in Darwin’s stance regarding women as follows:

… Darwin extended this placement by analogy to include not only children and congenital idiots but also women, some of whose powers of intuition, of rapid perception, and perhaps of imitation were "characteristic of the lower races, and therefore of a past and lower state of civilization."[i]

The errors made by Darwin that Durant referred to appear in The Descent of Man, as follows:

It is generally admitted that with women the powers of intuition, of rapid perception, and perhaps of imitation, are more strikingly marked than in man; but some, at least, of these faculties are characteristic of the lower races, and therefore of a past and lower state of civilisation. [ii]

It is clearly obvious that Darwin looked down on women even while he explains why marriage is useful:

… children—constant companion, (friend in old age) who will feel interested in one, object to be beloved and played with—better than a dog anyhow—Home, and someone to take care of house—Charms of music and female chit-chat. These things good for one's health.[iii]

Darwin states that he – in his twisted way - regards marriage as necessary using the reasoning which predicates that "a woman's friendship is better than a dog's,"  yet his statements about marriage made no reference at all to features such as friendship, affection, love, devotion, loyalty, closeness, sincerity and trust between two people who spend their lives together. About marriage, Darwin also had this to say:

… loss of time—cannot read in the evenings—fatness and idleness—anxiety and responsibility—less money for books, etc.,—if many children, forced to gain one's bread ... perhaps my wife won't like London; then the sentence is banishment and degradation with indolent idle fool. [iv]

In The Descent of Man, Darwin also claims that men are superior to women:

The chief distinction in the intellectual powers of the two sexes is shown by man's attaining to a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can women—whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands. If two lists were made of the most eminent men and women in poetry, painting, sculpture, music, ... history, science, and philosophy ... the two lists would not bear comparison. We may also infer, from the law of the deviation from averages, so well illustrated by Mr. Galton, in his work on "Hereditary Genius" that if men are capable of a decided pre-eminence over women in many subjects, the average of mental power in man must be above that of women. [v]

Of course, all of Darwin’s negative opinions regarding women and the misogynistic discourses of some other Darwinists, the samples of which will be given as we proceed, are diametrically opposed to the moral values described in the Qur’an. In the Qur’an, God commands us to be very compassionate, respectful and protective towards women. Furthermore, He cites women with superior morality such as Mary and the wife of the Pharoah as role models.  Superiority in the Sight of God is not according to one’s race, gender or rank but according to their closeness to God and their faith. In many verses of the Qur’an God informs us that all those who believe- without any discrimination between man and woman- will be rewarded with what they have done:

Anyone who acts rightly, male or female, being a believer, We will give them a good life and We will recompense them according to the best of what they did. (Surat An-Nahl, 97)

Examples of the nonsensical remarks of Darwinism regarding women

Darwin’s misogynistic statements are very clear and many scientists are well aware of this fact. Dr. Jerry Bergman, who is against the evolution theory and who explains the negative impacts of Darwinism on social life in his more than 800 published works and more than 20 books, says the following in his book titled The Dark Side of Charles Darwin:

Darwin himself concluded that the differences between human males and females were so large that it was surprising “such different beings belong to the same species” and that “even greater differences” had not evolved. Natural and sexual selection were at the core of Darwinism, and human female inferiority was both a major proof and a chief witness of this theory.

Darwin concluded that men shaped women’s evolution the male’s liking by sexual selection, just as animal breeders shaped animals to the needs of humans. Conversely, war tended to prune the weaker men, allowing only the more fit to return home and reproduce. Men were also the hunters, another activitiy that pruned weaker men. Women, in contrast, were not subject to these selection pressures because they “specialized in the ‘gathering’ part of the primitive economy” that did not require the strength or stamina of war or hunting.” [vi]

The major (and mistaken) justifications Darwin gave for his female inferiority conclusions are summarized in his classic work, The Descent of Man. In this book, Darwin argued that adult females of most species resembled the young of both sexes and that “males are more evolutionarily advanced than females.” He (mistakingly) concluded that since female evolution progressed at a slower rate than male evolution, a woman was “in essence, a stunted man”. This degrading view of women rapidly spread to Darwin’s scientific and academic contemporaries.

For example, Darwin’s contemporary and disciple, anthropologist  McGrigor Allan, states that women are less evolved than men and that “physically, mentally and morally, woman is a kind of adult child… it is doubtful if women have contributed one profound original idea of the slightest permanent value to the world.” [vii]

Of course, Darwin had no scientific basis for proposing these fallacies, but his biased and prejudiced claims about women spread rapidly among his scientific contemporaries.

For example, the materialist Carl Vogt, a professor of natural history at the University of Geneva, accepted all the conclusions drawn by Darwin, without subjecting them to any scientific analysis, and claimed that "the child, the female, and the senile white" all had the intellectual features and personality of the "grown -up Negro,” and that consequently they were inferior. [viii]

Herr Vogt went even further and brought forward the lie that they were actually closer to animals than men. According to Vogt, a woman was "a stunted man" whose development had been obstructed because her evolution had come to a premature halt. [ix] Vogt even claimed that the gap between males and females increases with civilization's progress and is greatest in the advanced societies of Europe. [x] Darwin was greatly influenced by Vogt's rantings, and stated that he was honored to count him among his most important supporters. [xi]

Evolutionist Paul Broca (1824-1880) of the Faculty of Medicine in Paris was particularly interested in the skull differences between men and women.  Broca misconstrued the relatively smaller brain in women and came up with the fallacy that women were intellectually inferior to men. Of course, that is a very irrational claim; today it has been concluded that there is no relationship between human intelligence and the size of the brain. It is absolutely impossible to come to a truthful conclusion simply by looking at the weight of the brain.

Many other evolutionists following the fallacies of Darwin and continued to claim that women are biologically and intellectually inferior to men. Furthermore, some evolutionists even classified men and women as two different psychological species. According to this fallacy, men are classified as homo-frontalis and women as homo-parietalis. Again an evolutionist writer, Elaine Morgan stated that Darwin encouraged men to work on the reasons why women were "manifestly inferior and irreversibly subordinant."( EIaine Morgan, The Descent of Woman, New York: Stein and Day, 1972, p. 1)

Being a woman or a man would not make one superior to the other

Obviously, Darwin's theses were based not on science, but on the culture and primitive scientific understanding of the Victorian Era he lived in. These theses gave way to harmful behavior, violence towards women and caused women to be regarded as inferior beings in many societies. Philosophies such as fascism and communism that disparage women, basically embrace Darwin’s misguided understanding regarding women. 

The intellectual characteristics that Darwinists use as criteria are abilities given by Allah, irrespective of gender. In one verse, God reveals: "You who believe! If you fear [and respect] God, He will give you a standard (of right and wrong)..." (Surat al-Anfal, 29) As this verse reveals, judgment-and thus, intellect-develops not according to gender, but according to fear of God. 

According to the Qur'an, men and women are equal, and superiority is defined by heedfulness.

God has imposed equal responsibilities on both, and holds both responsible for the same matters. Whether one is a male or female does not make a person superior in the Sight of God, but fear and deep love of and devotion to Him, and proper moral values do. In one of His verses, our Lord reveals that regardless of gender, those who exhibit the best behavior will receive the best reward for their moral values:

Anyone, male or female, who does right actions and is a believer, will enter the Garden. They will not be wronged by so much as the tiniest speck. (Surat an-Nisa', 124) 

Their Lord responds to them "I will not let the deeds of any doer among you go to waste, male or female..." (Surah Al 'Imran, 195)


[i] John R. Durant, "The Ascent of Nature in Darwin's Descent of Man" in The Darwinian Heritage, Ed. by David Kohn, (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1985), p.295
[ii] Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex, New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1871 (1896 print), p.326
[iii] Charles Darwin, The Autobiography of Charles Darwin 1809-1882 (Ed. by Nora Barlow), New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1958, p. 232-233
[iv] Charles Darwin, The Autobiography of Charles Darwin 1809-1882 (Ed. by Nora Barlow), New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1958, p. 232-233
[v] Jerry Bergman, The Dark Side of Charles Darwin, Master Books, 2011, p. 246
[vi] Jerry Bergman, The Dark Side of Charles Darwin, Master Books, 2011, p. 246
[vii] Jerry Bergman, The Dark Side of Charles Darwin, Master Books, 2011, p. 249
[viii] Carl Vogt, Lectures on Man: His Place in Creation, and the History of Earth, edited by James Hunt, London: Paternoster Row, Longman, Green, Longman, and Roberts, 1864, xv, 192
[ix] Stephanie A. Shields, "Functionalism, Darwinism, and the Psychology of Women; A Study in Social Myth," American Psychologist, no. 1 (1975): 749
[x] Evelleen Richards, "Darwin and the Descent of Women," in David Oldroyd and Ian Langham (Eds.), The Wider Domain of Evolutionary Thought (Holland: D. Reidel, 1983), 75
[xi] Evelleen Richards, "Darwin and the Descent of Women," in David Oldroyd and Ian Langham (Eds.), The Wider Domain of Evolutionary Thought (Holland: D. Reidel, 1983), 74 49

http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/240843/darwinism-is-a-supersititous-beliefhttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/240843/darwinism-is-a-supersititous-beliefhttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/6-makaleler/darwinism_is_a_supersititous_belief_that_disparages_women2.jpgThu, 26 Jan 2017 18:36:57 +0300
New Scientist and BBC News’ Lies about Birth with Cesarean Section

During the past month, articles appeared in several national and international news outlets, mainly the New Scientist, BBC News and the Independent, claiming that "cesarean section changed the alleged evolutionary process of birth". An article published on October 26, 2016 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science was used as reference to these claims.

The topic of the article was the claim that "human births are difficult due to the incompatibility between the size of the child’s head and the mother's narrow hip bone” and that “with the cesarean section birth coming into play in the past 50 years, the so-called evolutionary process has been affected and the incompatibility increased." Based on this article, news outlets ran biased headlines including; "Does the cesarean section [birth] cause babies to evolve into bigger ones?", "Increasing number of cesarean sections affect human evolution", "Successful cesarean sections change human evolution process."

These headlines are usually designed to give the impression that a new scientific finding proved  evolution.  Such reports are often biased and aim to mislead the layman. Their publication in major scientific journals is also for the purpose of making them look credible. However, the scientific journals in question are under the control of the Darwinist dictatorship that tries to keep the theory of evolution alive, which is a completely collapsed theory in terms of science.

A thorough examination of the article shows that the topic is handled entirely ideologically, without any scientific evidence. Let’s now explain why such claims are completely unscientific, do not support the theory of evolution and are purely ideological.

The claim that "over time, baby head - maternal bone structure incompatibility has increased" is unfounded

The basic assertion of the article is that within the past 50 years, from the time the cesarean section has been inaugurated to the present day, head-to-bone inconsistency has increased from 30 to 36 in 1,000 births, which amounts to an increase of 20%. Was this result obtained by evaluating the actual data?

In fact, this article, which was presented by the media as evidence to the so-called theory of evolution, ironically offered its claims with the presumption that evolution is factual. The efforts to prove this claim, were supported not by actual data, but by statistical data derived from purely imaginary models.

The studies conducted showed that the situations of head-bone structure incompatibility resulted from environmental factors, which cannot have any effect on the genetic data.

The main factor in the incompatibility is that the fetuses are bigger. Compared to 50 years ago, there are many factors that can cause fetuses to be bigger today. The birth weight of fetuses may have increased due to reasons such as the better nourishment of the mother during pregnancy period, or owing to the increase in obesity and diabetes. However, this is not a genetic outcome, but rather an environmental outcome. If conditions were reversed, this effect would decrease and the need for cesarean section would decline. In addition, diseases such as hydrocephalus (dropsy in the brain) associated with structural causes may also prevent normal birth. But this does not occur due to a genetic change and is not a gain but a deformation.

In addition, the maternal bone structure, which is the other factor in the said incompatibility, can vary independently of the genetic structure. The studies showed that even in maternal twins, who share the same genetic code, the hipbone size may differ and that the environmental factors play a more pronounced role than genetics. Even as an adult, the bone structures may change shape. Another example relates to the different male and female hipbone structures. Brothers and sisters, although sharing same parents, will have completely different hipbones. A mother with a male-type bone structure could have never given birth to her child.  As the bone structure develops, the cells take shape as if they are conscious whether they are in a male or female body.

Today, social factors also increase the rate of cesarean section births. The fact that the operation conditions are better compared to the past has made the cesarean section safer. This also contributed to the increased diagnosis of the head-bone incompatibility by the doctors. However, it should be noted that the cesarean section is preferred not only for head-bone incompatibility. Expecting mothers prefer cesarean section also to avoid the difficulties of normal birth, even though physicians usually recommend against it.

An unscientific claim without genetic basis

When we examine the article, it becomes evident that no information other than statistical calculations is presented. This shows the unscientific nature of the piece, as the presented statistical data is only related to social preferences. No change in DNA sequence takes place. Furthermore, the accurate development of bone structure requires the harmonious coordination of tens or even hundreds of different gene regions. The difference between the genetic codes of humans is very little if any, and these differences are located at non-coding regions. The immense diversity in the physical appearance of human beings is due to epigenetic and environmental factors. Environmental factors only make some genes dominant and some recessive; they certainly cannot add new information to genetic information. In other words, there is no difference between the genetic code of the first human being that ever lived and those that live today.

No structural change has taken place in the humans, as also shown by the human fossils that have been examined. This also applies to mother’s bone structure as well as the structure and size of the baby's head. The birth takes place always in the same manner. According to the evolutionist thinking the birth process has to get easier over time through the enlargement of maternal bone structure or the reduction of the size of the baby's head but such a change has never happened and it cannot happen because the so-called process of evolution is nothing but a deception. Throughout the thousands of years of the history of mankind, difficult births have always existed, but the birth process has always remained the same.

Birth is a miracle.

The timing of birth is perfect. The pregnancy, which lasts about 38 weeks, ends with birth at a very delicate time. If the birth takes place a few weeks earlier, the baby may have a life-threatening condition because she has not completed her development. If birth occurs one to two weeks late, this time there is not enough room for the baby, nutritional problems arise, and the baby can get too big to fit into the birth canal. Neither the mother nor the fetus are aware of these processes. The birth pangs begin at the right time, the cervix opens up and the tissues become more flexible. Moreover, the fetus has to make some movements such as rotation, flexion, and extension to enter the birth canal in the most suitable manner. Nearly every fetus makes these moves  completely and in the right order. Instead of seeing the intricate balances and perfection in the process, trying to find faults and focusing on illogical conclusions, is nothing but a serious lapse of reason.

As seen in this article as well, Darwinists constantly seek to use the fallacy that ‘’life emerged by chance’’ to keep their theory alive. In an attempt to do this, they try to ignore the miraculous structures of human beings and other living beings, and seek to give the impression that there are deficiencies. In this way they try to proselytize the idea that they have has and could have been more perfect. However, these people who know the subject in depth are actually well aware that living things, and most notably the human body, are perfectly equipped with the most flawless structures. However these people insist on ignoring this fact. As they are aware that talking about this fact, will completely destroy the theory of evolution.

The birth process is one of the prominent examples of the miracle in man's creation. Numerous mechanisms, all of which are indispensable, come into play at the same time. Neither the fetus nor the mother can live in the absence of even one of them. For this reason, these features must have existed since the first birth. While even a single birth is a miracle in itself, billions of miraculous births have taken place until today. The fact that some births are difficult does not mean that this miracle should be ignored. The glorious art of creation of God becomes even more evident as one examines further the details of the birth.

Our Almighty Lord said in a verse: “Did We not create you from a base fluid? Then place it in a secure repository for a recognized term? It is We who determine. What an excellent Determiner!(Surah Al-Mursalat, 20-23)

In conclusion; no cesarean section, nor any other kind of intervention during birth, is a situation that will lead to the formation of larger babies in future generations. Just as the increase in the knowledge and the skills in this age of science cannot lead the new-generation with higher IQ levels than previous generations, the cesarean section, too, cannot change the physical structure of the mother or the baby. The main reason for the increase in cesarean section rates is the change in environmental and social effects. And environmental factors can only affect to the extent that our genetic structure permits.


  1. http://www.pnas.org/content/113/51/14680.full
  2. DumontA, deBernisL, BouvierColleMH,Bre ́artG,MOMAStudyGroup(2001)Caesarean section rate for maternal indication in sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic review. Lancet 358(9290):1328–1333.
  3. Sharma K (2002) Genetic basis of human female pelvic morphology: A twin study. Am J PhysAnthropol117(4):327–333.
  4. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/success-caesarean-sections-altering-course-human-evolution-babies-bigger-heads-a7458066.html
  5. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2115103-are-caesareans-really-making-us-evolve-to-have-bigger-babies/?utm_source=NSNS&utm_medium=ILC&utm_campaign=webpush&cmpid=ILC%257CNSNS%257C2016-GLOBAL-webpush-BIGBABY
  6. http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-38210837
http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/240425/new-scientist-and-bbc-newshttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/240425/new-scientist-and-bbc-newshttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/6-makaleler/sezaryen_dogum2.jpgWed, 18 Jan 2017 19:56:42 +0300
A Made-up ‘Hominid’ Tale from Science Mag: Denisovans

Nowadays there is a common mobility in some scientific journals and internet sites that are set to work on Darwinism’s advocacy. Some remains of living things that were found in the past years, the insufficiency and invalidity of which were proven, are being brought back to the agenda again to be presented as evidence of evolution.

One of the latest examples of this has been published on sites such as Sciencemag and Dailymail. Stories revealing Darwinist imagination has been made the topic of articles one more time, by bringing a small piece of a finger bone and a few teeth to the fore.

How Was Denisovan Humans Generated?

As it is known, in an article published in Nature magazine in December 2010, it was announced that a newly discovered, "one more extinct 'hominid line' was found". Since this finding was attained through the information obtained from the fossil remains found in Denisova Cave in Altay Mountains of Siberia, this so-called new species was named Denisovan Human (or Homo Altai). The Denisovans - despite there is no available evidence at all - were introduced as a human being of a supposedly different type from today's man and a sub-species of modern man.

Darwinists claimed that the extinct Denisovans, like the Neanderthals, left Africa 400-500 thousand years ago. And supposedly, while the Neanderthals were spreading to Europe, the Denisovans immigrated to Asia.

Again, according to this claim, about 40-50 thousand years ago the Denisovans exchanged genes with the ancestors of today's people who had subsequently migrated from Africa. From this point of view, 4% of the genes of the people living in the Papua New Guinea region today were shown as belonging to the Denisovans. However, the Denisovans had neither transferred genes to people in other parts of Asia nor to other Southeast Asian peoples from Australia, New Zealand, or Indonesia.



To which fossil discovery this so-called new hominid species whose life stories were told was based on, as it became the subject of scientific researches and articles? How were genetic maps formulated over these fossils, and what is more, how were man’s immigration routes over the Earth and their genetic exchanges explained through it? Let’s now see that all these are not founded on any evidence at all and they are mere conjecture:

The cave where the fossils were found actually hosted many human communities even animals from ancient times. Hand tools and ornaments were also found in the same layers. It was claimed that a bone fragment of 0.5 cm in diameter found amongst the fossil remains in this cave belonged to the medium phalange tip of the right hand of this so-called new hominid. Later on, two molar teeth were added to this allegation. The diameter of the molar teeth were slightly wide, and their roots were inclined outward. Darwinists who commented on this in their way of suppositions suggested that the found remains could belong to modern man.

First of all, claiming that the bone fragment found represents a different species when it is even doubtful whether in terms of its shape it belongs to a finger or another region of the body is moving away from reason and scientific method. The fact that this molar tooth does not resemble today's people with subtle differences does not indicate that these remains are of a different living species. When we are to compare people living in different countries, it is possible to come across various morphological differences. This can vary according to the age, gender, circumstnaces of the living environment the intensity of the physical work done, eating habits, or the food consumed, again to the extent permitted by the genes. It is also possible to encounter severe structural disorders in a variety of gene or bone diseases.

The irrationality of attempting to write history based on generalizations made on a few fossil fragments belonging to one or two individuals is blatant at this stage. Moreover, even if we assume that these fossils are genuine, there is no proof that shows these do not belong to a person with a genetic, hormonal or bone disease. For that reason, making generalizations built on a single individual would overtly be an unscientific method to follow.


In order to reinforce their so-called evidence, scientists who have studied the Denisovan fossils claimed they had charted the genetic map of found fossil fragments. According to their presumptions, they had developed new techniques for obtaining genetic sequences from fossil remains, and they alleged;

  • The Denisovan fossil contained some differences from the human genome.
  • Today’s Papua New Guinea man had 4% of Denisovan genes in their genetic makeup.
  • 50,000 years ago, Denisovans interacted with their human ancestors in social life and then immigrated to the Papua region in Southeast Asia.
  • The most interesting of all of these was the assertion that Denisovan genes were not transferred to any other human being living today.

Before scientifically refuting these claims, it is important to make a crucial reminder at this point: All these assumptions are propounded only by interpretation of the studies made on fossil remains. Therefore, such comments have no scientific basis or credibility.


As it is known, the Human Genome Project gave its first results in 2003. The human DNA, received from living individuals was relatively easy to process and intact, and it was revised several times within the next 13 years for the correction of deficiencies and mistakes. Until today, genetic maps of only 7 to 8 individuals could be charted. It was seen that the human genome consisted of about 3.4 billion bases, and the difference between individuals was only smaller than one in a thousand. And yet, these differences did not occur in gene coding regions, but mostly in regions where such a difference is necessary as a requirement of the immune system, like the MHC gene.

When we consider the necessity of advanced techniques even studying the DNA sampled from living human beings, it is obvious there arise many difficulties in DNA research of fossil remains.

We can briefly summarize these obstacles as follows:

1- Contamination (mixing of other organic wastes) problem

The reliability of the technique used during the purification of the DNA to be examined is highly essential to prevent any mistakes. In fact, the biggest problem with DNA research on fossils is the likelihood of its mixing with other organic wastes. As we have stated at the beginning, the region where Denisovan fossils were unearthed hosted many human beings and animals. Therefore, the DNA of these living things is blended with the DNA of the fossil findings. When the DNA of microorganisms and various insects are added to these, a completely intermixed pool of DNA is encountered. In this case, it is almost impossible not to make mistakes on studying the fossil DNA. In point of fact, the magazine mentions that the part of the DNA sample that belongs to the Denisovan fossil is only 0.17%.

2- Problem of finding DNA in fossils in fragmented form

Human DNA is an enormous library comprised of 3.4 billion base pairs. It is possible to determine the sequence and the chromosome mapping of the DNA obtained from a living human being. However, DNA discovered in a fossil is in a fragmented state by influence of tens of thousands of years passed so far. Most have a maximum sequence of 50-70 bases. When DNA is considered as a whole, this would mean 50-100 million pieces. It would not be wrong to compare this to a puzzle consisting of 100 million pieces. Moreover, you have no template in hand that shows how to solve this puzzle.

It is stated in the article that in order to overcome this problem, genomes of human beings living today and chimpanzees were used as a template. Then, how will the intrusive DNA blended together to it from other living things be distinguished? To start with, the use of the human genome as a template in a research that attempts at revealing differences from the human genome is not, of course, right as a scientific method and the results of such a study is not reliable.

3- Chemical and enzymatic problems

The chemical changes that the fossilized DNA has undergone all through the years in its natural environment may also cause modifications in the base chain. In addition, enzymes such as Uracil-DNA glycosylase and endonuclease which are used in preparation of DNA may also disrupt the structure of the sequence. Again, the PCR technique used to amplify the DNA is also open to errors.

4- General error margin set to be 1.5%

Besides all these problems, the error margin set to be 1.5% as stated in the article is also another problem. Because again, according to their claims, the difference between the gene sequences of Denisovan fossils and contemporary human beings is exactly the same amount. In this case, it will remain as an uncertainty whether this discrepancy reflects the truth or is due to an error. To sum up, all these are divorced from scientific method, and misdirect science for ideological reasons.


If scientific findings support a certain theory, it should be accepted as true. But, if the results have no advocacy for that theory, it should be rejected. This is a binding rule for evolution as well. As in the case of Denisovan humans, since Darwinists unquestionably adopt evolution and do research upon this presupposition, we are faced with a purely ideological steering, far away from principles of science.

It is possible to encounter this fact in every Darwinist publication, in every university, and every book. There is, of course, no scientific basis for explanations based on Darwinist presuppositions. The scientific method inquires research to be held with no prejudice or ideological bias, and without any limitations.

The outcome of all fossil research made up until today as well as the complex structure of life demonstrate that life emerged instantaneously and in perfection. This is, too, one of the clearest proofs that evolution has never happened.


The efforts of evolutionists to produce evidence for the so-called theory of evolution also persist with statistical calculations they employ with computer technology. The attempt to bring forth a difference regarding gene sequence of Denisovan fossils sources from this. Because, according to the so-called theory of evolution, living things require genetic sequence changes emerging from a common ancestor gradually in time. According to the imaginary evolutionary tree that Darwinists have drawn with their conjecture, there must be a little discrepancy in genetic sequence between close relatives. Thus, the divergence of genes needs to increase as the kinship moves apart. This is described as "divergence" in statistical terms. Darwinists even take these accounts further. They venture to determine when the common ancestor was singled out, according to the degree of divergence between genes of two living beings. For example, based on claims that there is a 95-98% similarity between human and the chimpanzee genes, it is assumed that their common ancestor lived 6 million years ago. Again, attempts to date back Neanderthals’ exit from Africa to 400-500 thousand years ago were also carried out with such statistical calculations.

Yet there is not even a single evidence that proves of a common ancestor. However, those who read these writings in some scientific journals rely on scientists and think that these assumptions are correct. This is how evolution propaganda is made with assertions based on methods of indoctrination exploiting computations only.

There is also criticism from evolutionist circles about this kind of work. Richard E. Green of the Leipzig Institute and David Reich of Harvard Medical made these comments:

“[T]heir work depends heavily on complex mathematical statistics that make their arguments hard to follow. And the statistical insights, however informative, do not have the solidity of an archaeological fact.” (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/07/science/07neanderthal.html)


The data obtained from the work done is far from proving that Denisovan fossils belong to a different species. On the contrary, there is evidence in the article demonstrating that they are the same as the present day human beings.

In the said article, it is speculated that Denisovan humans entered into relationship with their so-called human ancestors, who had supposedly lived 40-50 thousand years ago. However, even if we were to assume this speculation to be true, that would indicate another evidence revealing the fact that the Denisovan fossil is the same species as human beings. As it is known, only individuals of the same species have the ability to breed and reproduce. And the genes should possess the equal number of chromosomes and identical genes in order to recombine and be inherited in a healthy way.

Stanford University paleontologist Richard Klein said the following on this topic:

 “[T]he authors’ theory of an early interbreeding episode did not seem to have taken full account of the archaeological background. They are basically saying, ‘Here are our data, you have to accept it.’ But the little part I can judge seems to me to be problematic, so I have to worry about the rest.” (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/07/science/07neanderthal.html)


The genetic structure of all people who live today and lived from the past to present is the same. The main factors that enable people to develop different appearances, and height, eye-skin color, etc. are the differences in the working time and speed of their genes. What genes will be activated in which cells, when, and for how long, are determined through markings made on DNA with molecules such as acetyl and methyl. This situation is known as the turning on and off of the genes according to changing conditions and needs. This magnificent regulation and active control system, ongoing at any moment, is again managed by certain DNA regions. Giving an account of this control mechanism, which requires a very precise arrangement, only through genetic sequencing is beyond the bounds of possibility.

The features of DNA codes, such as offering intelligent solutions and taking initiatives, cannot be attributed to DNA itself. There must be an intelligence that directs and knows how to regulate various regions.

As we mentioned above, according to the first data of the Human Genome Project, the difference of genetic sequences between human beings is less than 0.1%. Much of these differences stem from modifications that cause genetic diseases, and the differences in sequences that differentiate us from each other and cause us to be perceived as foreign entities, such as the MHC protein gene. Other than this, the genes that keep our vital functions operating are the same in all of us. As is known, a single letter change in the DNA sequence or the addition or deletion of a base causes the degradation of the protein to be produced. Even very small mutations may cause diseases or fatal outcomes. For this reason, there is no place for random mutations in explaining the differences among human societies. The emergence of different human types is because of the turning on and of of genes, and the variation within species.


As you can see, the idea of evolution is attempted to be upheld for ideological reasons, but not in the light of scientific principles.

Darwinist ideology, which is the mainstay of the separatist and divisive movements that feed racist ideas in society, invented a tale of a family tree from primitive to modern man. In order to keep their fairytale alive, there was need for a “hominid” animal species that lived in the past but have not yet become human, or in other words have not completed their evolution. That is why Darwinists time to time invent such so-called primitive "hominid" species. The Denisovan human was thus fabricated as a figure fitting into this myth of the so-called primitive man.

It is clear that even if such a person had ever lived, he is a complete human being and bears no difference from us. Even if that were an extinct human race, there has never been any 'primitive man' at all. Human beings have always existed as perfect man in every corner of the world from Africa to America, from Europe to Asia. Human beings have always existed as man on Earth.


1. http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/03/our-ancestors-may-have-mated-more-once-mysterious-ancient-humans
2. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v468/n7327/full/nature09710.html
3. http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_01
4. Richard E. Green, , 710 (2010)
5. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/07/science/07neanderthal.html

Adnan Oktar's piece in News Rescue:


http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/239965/a-made-up-‘hominid-talehttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/239965/a-made-up-‘hominid-talehttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/6-makaleler/news_rescue_adnan_oktar_made_up_hominid_tale_from_science_mag_denisovans2.jpgTue, 10 Jan 2017 15:28:27 +0300
Tales About The Beginning Of Life On The Discovery Science Tv ChannelThe Discover Science TV channel presented space as the source of organic molecules, and featured the assertion that life might have  originated on other planets. In this article, we will focus on the fact that the existence of the chemicals in question does not point to life, and we will lay bare another distortion for the sake of evolution, which is far from explaining the origin of life.

What Does the Discovery of Sugar-like Chemicals in Space Signify?

Chemical substances can form anywhere in the universe. Particularly large stars and nebulae are special high-energy environments where heavy metals can form.  Space is also home to dust and gas clouds and these gases act as reaction mediums in which various chemical compounds form, and atoms make compounds. Evolutionists attempt to use this fact for their 'life from space' claims.

High-energy stars and nebulae are natural sources of molecules used in living things and the transportation of these molecules to earth via meteors is a natural process. When the Murchison meteorite, which fell to Earth in Australia in 1969 was analyzed, many chemicals were detected.  Simple sugar-like chemicals were also found among these. However, these chemicals, which are labeled as 'polyols', do not imply the existence of living organisms.  Polyol chemicals, although named 'sugar alcohols', do not contain sugar or alcohol as we know them.

Dr. George Cooper and his colleagues, who  conducted analyses on the Murchison meteorite, also stumbled upon dihydroxyacetone, a small sugar molecule, along with glycerol, also known as the fat molecule.1 However, it is impossible to claim that the existence of these molecules indicates living organisms  because in 1861, Alexander Butlerov showed that these simple molecules could be synthesized inorganically from formaldehyde.2

The existence of formaldehyde clouds in the interplanetary space is an astronomical fact. With a mechanism called the formose reaction, when the molecular gas clouds composed of high-energy formaldehyde in the space are catalyzed with a base and metal atom, the reaction can produce the said sugar-like molecules.

Formaldehyde, which when alone is poisonous for living beings, is not a source of life. Although presented as an organic molecule, formaldehyde is actually a toxic chemical that results when carbon-monoxide ices found in space enter into reaction with hydrogen atoms.

H + CO → HCO, HCO + H → CH2O

Breslow also showed in 1959 the detailed steps of the formose reaction.  According to this, the by-products of this chain reaction are glycolaldehyde, glyceraldehyde, dihydroxyacetone, and tetrose sugars.3

The formose reaction begins with 2 formaldehyde molecules condensing to form Glycolaldehyde (1), which then produces Glyceraldehyde through the aldol reaction (2). An aldose-ketose isomerization forms 2 Dihydroxyacetone (3) which will then react with the 1st step to form Ribulose (4), and through another isomerization forms Ribose (5). The molecule 3 reacts again with formaldehyde to form Tetrulose (6) and then Aldol-tetrose (7).

As is seen, these molecules are inorganic, i.e. inanimate compounds and emerge in inanimate conditions, as a result of the electron exchange between molecules. These also include ribose sugar, which cannot be interpreted as 'RNA came from space' just because ribose also exists in the structure of the RNA of living beings.

Of course, other stars and galaxies are sources of many chemicals found on earth.  However, unlike other celestial bodies, our planet is a unique place where these inanimate molecules spring to life inside living organisms.

What Does the Discovery of Amino Acids on a Meteorite Signify?

The Murchison meteorite led to another interesting discovery.  Various amino acids were also found in this meteorite  but this should not come as a surprise, because the amino acids the meteorite contains are the same as the amino acids that can be obtained in vitro through reaction of inorganic molecules. All the chemicals that can be produced by supplying electrical current to Methane, Nitrogen, Water and Ammonia molecules in a special closed vacuum environment are likewise present in this meteorite as well. However, the amino acid mixture obtained in both the meteorite and a laboratory is a racemic mixture, consisting of equal amounts of left- and right-handed amino acids.4 Since the structure of living beings requires only left-handed amino acids, it is impossible for the said amino acids to be used by living organisms.

Moreover, and most importantly, the presence of amino acids alone is in no way an indication of life. Amino acids are merely the building blocks of the nano-machines that are proteins.  In living organisms, these amino acids are also selected among themselves.  The amino acids used in protein construction must always be left-handed.  There is absolutely no place for right-handed amino acids in living organisms: In this sense, protein construction is a process that has no room for error. Today, the fact that all amino acids used in proteins are only left-handed still remains an extremely fine atomic detail, the reason of which is yet to be fully understood. However, the production of a protein depends on the presence of a hundred different proteins. Without the help of these proteins, it is impossible for amino acids to come together and form proteins. For protein production, the code in the DNA and the presence of ribosome, which is essentially a factory, are required.  The ribosome is already largely composed of protein and RNA. Therefore, the fact that the factory that generates proteins is also composed of proteins completely shatters the meteorite theory proposed by the Darwinists. During the protein production in the ribosome, amino acids are picked in a specific order determined by genetic codes and are linked together. Therefore, it is impossible to talk about life without a perfect and complete cell with its DNA, proteins and all organelles. 

Even if one assumes that an amino acid molecule has come to earth via a meteorite, this molecule will simply disappear by binding to the surrounding sugar molecules and free radicals that are highly destructive.

The Claim of a "Proto-Cell" that Came Before Cell

Evolutionists are also aware that the peptide bonds that link amino acids should not be exposed to ultraviolet rays coming from the Sun. For this, Darwinists wish to believe that the imaginary ‘first cell’ formed in an environment  sufficiently sheltered from the Sun, yet containing the right amount of energy. Therefore, they believe that the geothermal hot water sources in the depths of the ocean constitute a suitable environment. Another narrative describes geothermal rock pools on the surface that had been somehow sheltered from the Sun and provided a suitable environment for the cells. According to this fiction, 'independent fat molecules' came together to form bubbles, thus making up the first 'proto-cells'.

But there is a very fundamental fact that is forgotten - or intentionally omitted. The source of fat molecules is only - and always - a living cell.  Fat cannot come into being in nature by itself; it can only be produced by proteins in a living cell. Phospholipids that make up the cell membrane are produced by the cytosol organelle bound to endoplasmic reticulum, all inside a living cell. Further, dozens of special proteins are required for its production. Some of these are GPAT and LPAAT acyl-transferases, phosphatase, choline phosphotransferase, flippase and floppase. The source of the fat molecules on Earth had been first the algae, then the land plants. Therefore, it would be completely wrong to show fat molecules as simple, inorganic chemicals. As can be seen, for the fat molecules to be produced, proteins and the cell of an organism where proteins can operate, need to exist first.

The Claim that Life Came from Outer Space

As the imaginary evolutionary mechanisms are refuted one by one, the evolutionists look for a solution in remote places, i.e., in space. The statement "life first began in space" is a new deception evolutionists resort to, after the lie "life began on earth on its own" was scientifically refuted.  This explanation is based neither on evidence nor on any scientific finding.  According to this claim, which Darwinists call "Panspermia," the first cells came from the outer space, and that meteorites called "alien hitchhikers" bombarded the Earth's surface with these organisms.  Again, according to this tale, life began on Mars first, then a powerful impact on the surface of Mars blasted away  rocks full of bacteria into space, and those rocks, in turn, carried life in forms of meteorites to Earth!

We have explained under the previous heading that the tale 'life was brought to earth via meteorites' held no scientific merit. Beyond this, there are other scientific answers and explanations we expect from Darwinists. We expect evolutionists to prove, with evidence, through what mechanism inanimate chemicals came to life, wherever they claim it happened in the universe. However, a scientific explanation for this has yet to be made; it is impossible for it to be made anyway. Such fictional explanations only attest to the imagination of the evolutionists. These unscientific claims, which are supposed to be based on observations and experiments, are merely an attempt to buy  time for the evolutionists and keep the theory of evolution  alive, despite its being on the brink of collapse. These are nothing more than entertaining scenarios. 

The final chapter of the documentary features the following confession:

'We do not know how life first appeared on Mars, so the first question remains unanswered.  How did life begin? We currently do not know whether life came from space, or began in the depths of the world's oceans.'


Life originates only from life. Inanimate matter, on its own, cannot come together and give rise to a living cell even if it takes millions of years. But the Earth is a planet where these chemical compounds were bestowed life.  Life comes into being by the creation of Almighty God, the All-Powerful, Who animates and directs those atoms and molecules.  As long as Darwinists refuse to see this fact, they will continue to constantly humiliate themselves with such humorous explanations.

Our Lord informs in His verses:

Praise belongs to God Who created the heavens and the earth and appointed darkness and light. Then those who are unbelievers make others equal to their Lord! It is He who created you from clay and then decreed a fixed term, and another fixed term is specified with Him. Yet you still have doubts! (Surah al-An'am, 1-2)


1. https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2001/ast20dec_1
2. A. Boutlerow, "Formation synthétique d'une substance sucrée" Comptes rendus 53: 145-147. Reprinted in German as: Butlerow, A., 1861
3. Breslow, R. (1959). "On the Mechanism of the Formose Reaction". Tetrahedron Letters. 1 (21): 22-26
4. Miller SL. et al, Nonprotein amino acids from spark discharges and their comparison with the murchison meteorite amino acids, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1972 Apr;69(4):809-11

http://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/239230/tales-about-the-beginning-ofhttp://harunyahya.com/en/Darwinism-Watch/239230/tales-about-the-beginning-ofhttp://imgaws1.fmanager.net/Image/objects/94-netcevap/canlilik_uzaydan_gelmedi_2.jpgWed, 04 Jan 2017 21:20:58 +0300