Transcript TheFallofDarwinism - Baytul

THE FALL
OF
DARWINISM
Science Shatters
The Greatest Myth of
The Modern Age
Ali Sadun Engin
HARUN YAHYA INTERNATIONAL
“Man is the result
of a purposeless
and natural
process that did
not have him in
mind.”
George Gaylord Simpson,
The Meaning of Evolution , rev. ed.
Yale University Press, 1967, p. 34445.
The Alleged
‘Tree of Life’
According to
Darwinism, life
should have
diversified over
time.
Phyla: The Most Distinct Categories
Richard Monastersky:
A half-billion years ago, the remarkably
complex forms of animals we see today
Suddenly appeared. This moment, right at the
start of the Earth's Cambrian Period, some
530 million years ago, marks the evolutionary
explosion that filled the seas with the earth's
first complex creatures. …
The large animal phyla of today were present
already in the early Cambrian and they were
as distinct from each other as they are today.
Richard Monastersky, "Mysteries of the Orient,” Discover, April 1993, p. 40.
Darwinian theory predicts a ‘cone of increasing
diversity’…
“The animal fossil record more resembles
such a cone turned upside down, with the
phyla present at the start and thereafter
decreasing.”
Phillip E. Johnson, Darwinism: Science or Philosophy, Foundation for Thought and Ethics, 1994, p. 12
THE TRILOBITE FOSSIL
“The trilobites used an optimal design
which would require a well trained and
imaginative optical engineer to develop
today.”
Richard Dawkins:
The Cambrian strata of rocks
are the oldest ones in which
we find most of the major invertebrate groups.
And we find many of them already in an
advanced state of evolution, the very first time
they appear.
It is as though they were just planted there,
without any evolutionary history.
•Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker, London, 1986, p. 229.
“Why, if species have
descended from other species
by fine gradations, do we not
everywhere see innumerable
transitional forms?…
As by this theory innumerable
transitional forms must have
existed, why do we not find
them embedded in countless
numbers in the crust of the
earth?…
This difficulty for a long
time quite confounded me.”
Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species,
The Modern Library, New York, p. 124-125.
Robert Carroll:
“Despite more than a hundred years of
intense collecting efforts since the time of Darwin’s
death, the fossil record still does not yield the picture
of infinitely numerous transitional links that he
expected…
Most groups appear to originate and diversify over
geologically very short durations, and to persist for
much longer periods without major morphological
change.”
Living Fossils: No Evolution At All
135 MYR. OLD DRAGONFLY
50 MYR. OLD BAT
100 MYR. OLD ANT
400 MYR. OLD COELACANTH
Why do
people
believe in
evolution
Beware
of the
icons
ICON 1
Haeckel’s
Embryos
Science, 5 September 1997
“The impression [Haeckel’s drawings] give, that the
embryos are exactly alike, is wrong, says Michael
Richardson, … ‘The embryos often looked
surprisingly different.’
Not only did Haeckel add or omit features, but he
also fudged the scale to exaggerate similarities
among species, even when there were 10-fold
differences in size.
In reality, even closely related embryos such as
those of fish vary quite a bit in their appearance and
developmental pathway.
‘It looks like it's turning out to be one of the most
famous fakes in biology’ Richardson concludes.”
Elizabeth Pennisi, "Haeckel's Embryos: Fraud Rediscovered,” Science, 5 September, 1997
ICON 2
Peppered
Moths
Bernard Kettlewell
“Evolution experts are quitely admitting that
one of their most cherished examples of
Charles Darwin's theory, the rise and fall of
the peppered moth, is based on a series of
scientific blunders.
Experiments using the moth in the 1950's
and long believed to prove the truth of
natural selection are now thought to be
“Flawed
worthless, having been designed to come up
science,
with the ‘right’ answer. Scientists now admit
dubious
that they do not know the real explanation
methodology, for the fate of Biston betularia, whose story
and wishful is recounted in almost every textbook on
thinking…” evolution.”
Natural History
Museum, London
ICON 3
‘Vestigial’
Organs
“Since it is not possible to
unambiguously identify useless
structures, and since the
structure
of the argument used is not
scientifically valid, I conclude
that ‘vestigial organs’ provide no
special evidence for the theory
of evolution.”
R. Scadding, "Do 'Vestigial Organs' Provide Evidence for Evolution?",
Ultimate Icon: ‘Human Evolution’
Dogma-based artistry…
Australophithecus
"We, like many others, interpret the
anatomical
evidence to show that
Homo habilis
early H. sapiens [H. erectus and H.
ergaster] was significantly and
dramatically
different
from
earlier
Homo erectus & ergaster
[species]."
Homo sapiens
(Hawks, J., Hunley, K., Sang-Hee, L., Wolpoff, M., "Population Bottlenecks and Pleistocene
Evolution," Journal of Molecular Biology and Evolution, 17(1):2-22, January, 2000)
Bernard Wood:
“When I went to medical school in
1963, human evolution looked like a
ladder. The ladder stepped from monkey
to man through a progression of
intermediates, each slightly less ape-like
than the last. Now human evolution looks
like a bush.
We have a menagerie of fossil hominids...
How they are related to each other and
which, if any of them, are human
forebears is still debated.”
Why do
scientists
believe in
evolution
“There's no doubt about it, that in the
past, and I think also in the present,
for many evolutionists, evolution has
functioned as something with
elements which are, let us say, akin
to being a secular religion...
And it seems to me very clear that at
some very basic level, evolution as a
scientific theory makes a commitment
to a kind of naturalism.”
Michael Ruse, "Nonliteralist Antievolution”, AAAS Symposium:
The New Antievolutionism, Boston, February 13, 1993
•“And Allah has created
from water every living
creature: some of them
walk upon its belly, and
some of them walk
upon two feet, and
some of them walk
upon four.
Allah creates what He
pleases; surely Allah
has power over all
things.”
•
Learn more at:
harunyahya.com