RunUO Community
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Scientific/Philosophical/Religious Debate.
- Thread starter moemakki
- Start date
This information is gathered from the studies of Harun Yahya and his Books, Darwinism Refuted, The Evolution Deceit, The Collapse of the Theory of Evolution, and Disasters Darwinism Brought to Humanity. You can also read his books online for free at, http://www.harunyahya.com/index.php
According to the theory of evolution, every living species has emerged from a predecessor. One species which existed previously turned into something else over time and all species have come into being in this way. According to the theory, this transformation proceeds gradually over millions of years.
If this were the case, then innumerable intermediate species should have lived during the immense period of time when these transformations were supposedly occurring. For instance, there should have lived in the past some half-fish/half-reptile creatures which had acquired some reptilian traits in addition to the fish traits they already had. Or there should have existed some reptile/bird creatures, which had acquired some avian traits in addition to the reptilian traits they already possessed. Evolutionists refer to these imaginary creatures, which they believe to have lived in the past, as "transitional forms".
If such animals had really existed, there would have been millions, even billions, of them. More importantly, the remains of these creatures should be present in the fossil record. The number of these transitional forms should have been even greater than that of present animal species, and their remains should be found all over the world. In The Origin of Species, Darwin accepted this fact and explained:
If my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking most closely all of the species of the same group together must assuredly have existed... Consequently evidence of their former existence could be found only amongst fossil remains.
Even Darwin himself was aware of the absence of such transitional forms. He hoped that they would be found in the future. Despite his optimism, he realised that these missing intermediate forms were the biggest stumbling-block for his theory. That is why he wrote the following in the chapter of the The Origin of Species entitled "Difficulties of the Theory":
…Why, if species have descended from other species by fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion, instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined?… But, 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?… But in the intermediate region, having intermediate conditions of life, why do we not now find closely-linking intermediate varieties? This difficulty for a long time quite confounded me.
The only explanation Darwin could come up with to counter this objection was the argument that the fossil record uncovered so far was inadequate. He asserted that when the fossil record had been studied in detail, the missing links would be found.
Believing in Darwin's prophecy, evolutionist paleontologists have been digging up fossils and searching for missing links all over the world since the middle of the 19th century. Despite their best efforts, no transitional forms have yet been uncovered. All the fossils unearthed in excavations have shown that, contrary to the beliefs of evolutionists, life appeared on earth all of a sudden and fully-formed. Trying to prove their theory, evolutionists have instead unwittingly caused it to collapse.
A famous British paleontologist, Derek V. Ager, admits this fact even though he is an evolutionist:
The point emerges that if we examine the fossil record in detail, whether at the level of orders or of species, we find-over and over again-not gradual evolution, but the sudden explosion of one group at the expense of another.
Another evolutionist paleontologist Mark Czarnecki comments as follows:
LIVING FOSSILS
Living Fossils The theory of evolution claims that species continuously evolve into other species. But when we compare living things to their fossils, we see that they have remained unchanged for millions of years. This fact is a clear evidence that falsifies the claims of evolutionists.
The living honeybee is no different than its fossil relative, which is millions of years old.
The 135 million year old dragon fly fossil is no different than its modern counterparts.
A comparison of ant fossil aged 100 million years and an ant living in our day clearly indicates that ants do not have any evolutionary history.
THE EYE OF THE TRILOBITE
The trilobites that appeared in the Cambrian period all of a sudden have an extremely complex eye structure. Consisting of millions of honeycomb-shaped tiny particles and a double-lens system, this eye "has an optimal design which would require a well-trained and imaginative optical engineer to develop today" in the words of David Raup, a professor of geology.
This eye emerged 530 million years ago in a perfect state. No doubt, the sudden appearance of such a wondrous design cannot be explained by evolution and it proves the actuality of creation.
Moreover, the honeycomb eye structure of the trilobite has survived to our own day without a single change. Some insects such as bees and dragon flies have the same eye structure as did the trilobite.* This situation disproves the evolutionary thesis that living things evolved progressively from the primitive to the complex.
A major problem in proving the theory has been the fossil record; the imprints of vanished species preserved in the Earth's geological formations. This record has never revealed traces of Darwin's hypothetical intermediate variants - instead species appear and disappear abruptly, and this anomaly has fueled the creationist argument that each species was created by God.
These gaps in the fossil record cannot be explained by saying that sufficient fossils have not yet been found, but that they one day will be. Another American scholar, Robert Wesson, states in his 1991 book Beyond Natural Selection, that "the gaps in the fossil record are real and meaningful". He elaborates this claim in this way:
The gaps in the record are real, however. The absence of a record of any important branching is quite phenomenal. Species are usually static, or nearly so, for long periods, species seldom and genera never show evolution into new species or genera but replacement of one by another, and change is more or less abrupt.
Can Life Result from Coincidences as Evolution Argues?
The theory of evolution holds that life started with a cell that formed by chance under primitive earth conditions. Let us therefore examine the composition of the cell with simple comparisons in order to show how irrational it is to ascribe the existence of the cell - a structure which still maintains its mystery in many respects, even at a time when we have just set foot in the 21st century - to natural phenomena and coincidences.
With all its operational systems, systems of communication, transportation and management, a cell is no less complex than any city. It contains power stations producing the energy consumed by the cell, factories manufacturing the enzymes and hormones essential for life, a databank where all necessary information about all products to be produced is recorded, complex transportation systems and pipelines for carrying raw materials and products from one place to another, advanced laboratories and refineries for breaking down imported raw materials into their usable parts, and specialised cell membrane proteins for the control of incoming and outgoing materials. These constitute only a small part of this incredibly complex system.
With all its operational systems, systems of communication, transportation and management, a cell is no less complex than any city.
Far from being formed under primitive earth conditions, the cell, which in its composition and mechanisms is so complex, cannot be synthesised in even the most sophisticated laboratories of our day. Even with the use of amino acids, the building blocks of the cell, it is not possible to produce so much as a single organelle of the cell, such as mitochondria or ribosome, much less a whole cell. The first cell claimed to have been produced by evolutionary coincidence is as much a figment of the imagination and a product of fantasy as the unicorn.
The English mathematician and astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle made a similar comparison in one of his interviews published in Nature magazine dated November 12, 1981. Although an evolutionist himself, Hoyle expressed that the chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein.53 This means that it is not possible for the cell to come into being by coincidence and therefore, it definitely should have been "created".
Proteins Challenge Coincidence
And it is not just the cell that cannot be produced: the formation, under natural conditions, of even a single protein of the thousands of complex protein molecules making up a cell is impossible.
Proteins are giant molecules consisting of amino acids arranged in a particular sequence in certain quantities and structures. These molecules constitute the building blocks of a living cell. The simplest is composed of 50 amino acids; but there are some proteins that are composed of thousands of amino acids. The absence, addition, or replacement of a single amino acid in the structure of a protein in living cells, each of which has a particular function, causes the protein to become a useless molecular heap. Incapable of demonstrating the "accidental formation" of amino acids, the theory of evolution founders on the point of the formation of proteins.
We can easily demonstrate, with simple probability calculations anybody can understand, that the functional structure of proteins can by no means come about by chance.
There are twenty different amino acids. If we consider that an average-sized protein molecule is composed of 288 amino acids, there are 10300 different combinations of acids. Of all of these possible sequences, only "one" forms the desired protein molecule. The other amino-acid chains are either completely useless or else potentially harmful to living things. In other words, the probability of the coincidental formation of only one protein molecule cited above is "1 in 10300". The probability of this "1" occurring out of an "astronomical" number consisting of 1 followed by 300 zeros is for all practical purposes zero; it is impossible. Furthermore, a protein molecule of 288 amino acids is rather a modest one compared with some giant protein molecules consisting of thousands of amino acids. When we apply similar probability calculations to these giant protein molecules, we see that even the word "impossible" becomes inadequate.
The same fact is confessed by many evolutionists. For example, Harold F. Blum, a famous evolutionist scientist states that "the spontaneous formation of a polypeptide of the size of the smallest known proteins seems beyond all probability."54
Evolutionists claim that molecular evolution took place within a very long period of time and that this long period made the impossible possible. Nevertheless, no matter how long the given period may be, it is not possible for amino acids to form proteins by chance. William Stokes, an American geologist, admits this fact in his book Essentials of Earth History writing that this chance is so small "that it (protein) would not occur during billions of years on billions of planets, each covered by a blanket of concentrated watery solution of the necessary amino acids."55
So what does all this mean? Perry Reeves, a professor of chemistry, answers this question:
When one examines the vast number of possible structures that could result from a simple random combination of amino acids in an evaporating primordial pond, it is mind-boggling to believe that life could have originated in this way. It is more plausible that a Great Builder with a master plan would be required for such a task 56
If the coincidental formation of even one of these proteins is impossible, it is billions of times more impossible for about one million of those proteins to come together properly by chance and make up a complete human cell. What is more, a cell is at no time composed of a mere protein heap. In addition to the proteins, a cell also includes nucleic acids, carbohydrates, lipids, vitamins, and many other chemicals like electrolytes arranged in a specific proportion, harmony, and design in terms of both structure and function. Each of them functions as a building block or co-molecule in various organelles.
Robert Shapiro, a professor of chemistry at New York University and a DNA expert, calculated the probability of the coincidental formation of the 2000 types of proteins found in a single bacteria (There are 200,000 different types of proteins in a human cell). The number that was found was 1 over 1040000.57 (This is an incredible number obtained by putting 40,000 zeros next to 1)
A professor of applied mathematics and astronomy from University College (Cardiff, Wales), Chandra Wickramasinghe, comments:
The likelihood of the spontaneous formation of life from inanimate matter is one to a number with 40,000 noughts after it... It is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence.58
Sir Fred Hoyle comments on these implausible numbers:
Indeed, such a theory (that life was assembled by an intelligence) is so obvious that one wonders why it is not widely accepted as being self-evident. The reasons are psychological rather than scientific.59
The reason Hoyle used the term "psychological" is the self-conditioning of evolutionists not to accept that life could have been created. These people have determined the rejection of Allah's existence as their main target. For this reason alone, they go on defending unreasonable scenarios which they also acknowledge to be impossible.
The Failure of Evolutionary Scenarios on the Origin of Life
The theory of evolution faces no greater crisis than on the point of explaining the emergence of life. The reason is that organic molecules are so complex that their origin cannot possibly be explained as being coincidental and it is manifestly impossible for an organic cell to have been formed by chance.
Evolutionists confronted the question of the origin of life in the second quarter of the 20th century. One of the leading authorities of the theory of molecular evolution, the Russian evolutionist Alexander I. Oparin, said this in his book The Origin of Life, which was published in 1936:
Unfortunately, the origin of the cell remains a question which is actually the darkest point of the complete evolution theory.60
Since Oparin, evolutionists have performed countless experiments, conducted research, and made observations to prove that a cell could have been formed by chance. However, every such attempt only made clearer the complex design of the cell and thus refuted the evolutionists' hypotheses even more. Stanley Miller's experiment of 1953 was once regarded as an evidence for evolution in the molecular level, but after the 1970's, the Miller experiment and similar evolutionary studies lost all their credibility due to the findings about the early athmosphere. It was discovered that the early atmosphere was very unsupportive of the formation of organic molecules.
In a 1988 article, Professor Klaus Dose, the president of the Institute of Biochemistry at the University of Johannes Gutenberg, stated:
More than 30 years of experimentation on the origin of life in the fields of chemical and molecular evolution have led to a better perception of the immensity of the problem of the origin of life on Earth rather than to its solution. At present all discussions on principal theories and experiments in the field either end in stalemate or in a confession of ignorance.61
In a 1998 article, a statement came from the the renowned evolutionary geochemist Jeffrey Bada of the San Diego Scripps Institute, which summarized the Darwinist failure on the origin of life:
Today as we leave the twentieth century, we still face the biggest unsolved problem that we had when we entered the twentieth century: How did life originate on Earth?62
What evolutionists are trying to do is to display that life can randomly arise from non-living matter. But all experiments and research indicate that this is only a fantasy which has no reality in the real world. Evolutionist biologist Andrew Scott admits the same fact:
Take some matter, heat while stirring and wait. That is the modern version of Genesis. The 'fundamental' forces of gravity, electromagnetism and the strong and weak nuclear forces are presumed to have done the rest... But how much of this neat tale is firmly established, and how much remains hopeful speculation? In truth, the mechanism of almost every major step, from chemical precursors up to the first recognizable cells, is the subject of either controversy or complete bewilderment.63
In fact, all studies in the subject point to the same law: Life only comes from life. This simply means that the first life on Earth has been originated by Allah.
The Miraculous Molecule: DNA
The theory of evolution has been unable to provide a coherent explanation for the origin of the molecules that are the basis of the cell. Furthermore, developments in the science of genetics and the discovery of the nucleic acids (DNA and RNA) have produced brand-new problems for the theory of evolution.
In 1955, the work of two scientists on DNA, James Watson and Francis Crick, launched a new era in biology. Many scientists directed their attention to the science of genetics. Today, after years of research, scientists have largely mapped the structure of DNA.
Here, we need to give some very basic information on the structure and function of DNA:
The molecule called DNA, which is found in the nucleus of each of the 100 trillion cells in our body, contains the complete construction plan of the human body. Information regarding all the characteristics of a person, from the physical appearance to the structure of the inner organs, is recorded in DNA by means of a special coding system. The information in DNA is coded within the sequence of four special bases that make up this molecule. These bases are specified as A, T, G, and C according to the initial letters of their names. All the structural differences among people depend on the variations in the sequence of these bases. There are approximately 3.5 billion nucleotides, that is, 3.5 billion letters in a DNA molecule.
The DNA data pertaining to a particular organ or protein is included in special components called "genes". For instance, information about the eye exists in a series of special genes, whereas information about the heart exists in quite another series of genes. The cell produces proteins by using the information in all of these genes. Amino acids that constitute the structure of the protein are defined by the sequential arrangement of three nucleotides in the DNA.
At this point, there is an important detail that deserves attention. An error in the sequence of nucleotides making up a gene would render the gene completely useless. When we consider that there are 200 thousand genes in the human body, it becomes more evident how impossible it is for the millions of nucleotides making up these genes to be formed by accident in the right sequence. An evolutionist biologist, Frank Salisbury, comments on this impossibility by saying:
A medium protein might include about 300 amino acids. The DNA gene controlling this would have about 1,000 nucleotides in its chain. Since there are four kinds of nucleotides in a DNA chain, one consisting of 1,000 links could exist in 41000 forms. Using a little algebra (logarithms), we can see that 41000=10600. Ten multiplied by itself 600 times gives the figure 1 followed by 600 zeros! This number is completely beyond our comprehension.64
The number 41000 is equivalent to 10600. We obtain this number by adding 600 zeros to 1. As 10 with 11 zeros indicates a trillion, a figure with 600 zeros is indeed a number that is difficult to grasp.
Evolutionist Prof. Ali Demirsoy was forced to make the following admission on this issue:
In fact, the probability of the random formation of a protein and a nucleic acid (DNA-RNA) is inconceivably small. The chances against the emergence of even a particular protein chain are astronomic.65
In addition to all these improbabilities, DNA can barely be involved in a reaction because of its double-chained spiral shape. This also makes it impossible to think that it can be the basis of life.
Moreover, while DNA can replicate only with the help of some enzymes that are actually proteins, the synthesis of these enzymes can be realised only by the information coded in DNA. As they both depend on each other, either they have to exist at the same time for replication, or one of them has to be "created" before the other. American microbiologist Jacobson comments on the subject:
The complete directions for the reproduction of plans, for energy and the extraction of parts from the current environment, for the growth sequence, and for the effector mechanism translating instructions into growth - all had to be simultaneously present at that moment (when life began). This combination of events has seemed an incredibly unlikely happenstance, and has often been ascribed to divine intervention.66
The quotation above was written two years after the disclosure of the structure of DNA by James Watson and Francis Crick. Despite all the developments in science, this problem remains unsolved for evolutionists. To sum up, the need for DNA in reproduction, the necessity of the presence of some proteins for reproduction, and the requirement to produce these proteins according to the information in the DNA entirely demolish evolutionist theses.
Two German scientists, Junker and Scherer, explained that the synthesis of each of the molecules required for chemical evolution, necessitates distinct conditions, and that the probability of the compounding of these materials having theoretically very different acquirement methods is zero:
Until now, no experiment is known in which we can obtain all the molecules necessary for chemical evolution. Therefore, it is essential to produce various molecules in different places under very suitable conditions and then to carry them to another place for reaction by protecting them from harmful elements like hydrolysis and photolysis.67
In short, the theory of evolution is unable to prove any of the evolutionary stages that allegedly occur at the molecular level.
To summarise what we have said so far, neither amino acids nor their products, the proteins making up the cells of living beings, could ever be produced in any so-called "primitive atmosphere" environment. Moreover, factors such as the incredibly complex structure of proteins, their right-hand, left-hand features, and the difficulties in the formation of peptide bonds are just parts of the reason why they will never be produced in any future experiment either.
Even if we suppose for a moment that proteins somehow did form accidentally, that would still have no meaning, for proteins are nothing at all on their own: they cannot themselves reproduce. Protein synthesis is only possible with the information coded in DNA and RNA molecules. Without DNA and RNA, it is impossible for a protein to reproduce. The specific sequence of the twenty different amino acids encoded in DNA determines the structure of each protein in the body. However, as has been made abundantly clear by all those who have studied these molecules, it is impossible for DNA and RNA to form by chance.
The Fact of Creation
With the collapse of the theory of evolution in every field, prominent names in the discipline of biochemistry today admit the fact of creation and have begun to defend the view that everything is created by a conscious Creator as part of an exalted creation. This is already a fact that people cannot disregard. Scientists who can approach their work with an open mind have developed a view called "intelligent design". Michael J. Behe, one of the foremost of these scientists, states that he accepts the absolute being of the Creator and describes the impasse of those who deny this fact:
The result of these cumulative efforts to investigate the cell - to investigate life at the molecular level - is a loud, clear, piercing cry of "design!" The result is so unambiguous and so significant that it must be ranked as one of the greatest achievements in the history of science. This triumph of science should evoke cries of "Eureka" from ten thousand throats.
But, no bottles have been uncorked, no hands clapped. Instead, a curious, embarrassed silence surrounds the stark complexity of the cell. When the subject comes up in public, feet start to shuffle, and breathing gets a bit laboured. In private people are a bit more relaxed; many explicitly admit the obvious but then stare at the ground, shake their heads, and let it go like that. Why does the scientific community not greedily embrace its startling discovery? Why is the observation of design handled with intellectual gloves? The dilemma is that while one side of the elephant is labelled intelligent design, the other side must be labelled God.68
Today, many people are not even aware that they are in a position of accepting a body of fallacy as truth in the name of science, instead of believing in Allah. Those who do not find the sentence "Allah created you from nothing" scientific enough can believe that the first living being came into being by thunderbolts striking a "primordial soup" billions of years ago.
As we have described elsewhere in this book, the balances in nature are so delicate and so numerous that it is entirely irrational to claim that they developed "by chance". No matter how much those who cannot set themselves free from this irrationality may strive, the signs of Allah in the heavens and the earth are completely obvious and they are undeniable.
Allah is the Creator of the heavens, the earth and all that is in between.
The signs of His being have encompassed the entire universe.
This should be enough Information for you, but if its not, or you have an argument or counter then please share. I could post more information but that will take a lot more time....
According to the theory of evolution, every living species has emerged from a predecessor. One species which existed previously turned into something else over time and all species have come into being in this way. According to the theory, this transformation proceeds gradually over millions of years.
If this were the case, then innumerable intermediate species should have lived during the immense period of time when these transformations were supposedly occurring. For instance, there should have lived in the past some half-fish/half-reptile creatures which had acquired some reptilian traits in addition to the fish traits they already had. Or there should have existed some reptile/bird creatures, which had acquired some avian traits in addition to the reptilian traits they already possessed. Evolutionists refer to these imaginary creatures, which they believe to have lived in the past, as "transitional forms".
If such animals had really existed, there would have been millions, even billions, of them. More importantly, the remains of these creatures should be present in the fossil record. The number of these transitional forms should have been even greater than that of present animal species, and their remains should be found all over the world. In The Origin of Species, Darwin accepted this fact and explained:
If my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking most closely all of the species of the same group together must assuredly have existed... Consequently evidence of their former existence could be found only amongst fossil remains.
Even Darwin himself was aware of the absence of such transitional forms. He hoped that they would be found in the future. Despite his optimism, he realised that these missing intermediate forms were the biggest stumbling-block for his theory. That is why he wrote the following in the chapter of the The Origin of Species entitled "Difficulties of the Theory":
…Why, if species have descended from other species by fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion, instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined?… But, 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?… But in the intermediate region, having intermediate conditions of life, why do we not now find closely-linking intermediate varieties? This difficulty for a long time quite confounded me.
The only explanation Darwin could come up with to counter this objection was the argument that the fossil record uncovered so far was inadequate. He asserted that when the fossil record had been studied in detail, the missing links would be found.
Believing in Darwin's prophecy, evolutionist paleontologists have been digging up fossils and searching for missing links all over the world since the middle of the 19th century. Despite their best efforts, no transitional forms have yet been uncovered. All the fossils unearthed in excavations have shown that, contrary to the beliefs of evolutionists, life appeared on earth all of a sudden and fully-formed. Trying to prove their theory, evolutionists have instead unwittingly caused it to collapse.
A famous British paleontologist, Derek V. Ager, admits this fact even though he is an evolutionist:
The point emerges that if we examine the fossil record in detail, whether at the level of orders or of species, we find-over and over again-not gradual evolution, but the sudden explosion of one group at the expense of another.
Another evolutionist paleontologist Mark Czarnecki comments as follows:
LIVING FOSSILS
Living Fossils The theory of evolution claims that species continuously evolve into other species. But when we compare living things to their fossils, we see that they have remained unchanged for millions of years. This fact is a clear evidence that falsifies the claims of evolutionists.
The living honeybee is no different than its fossil relative, which is millions of years old.
The 135 million year old dragon fly fossil is no different than its modern counterparts.
A comparison of ant fossil aged 100 million years and an ant living in our day clearly indicates that ants do not have any evolutionary history.
THE EYE OF THE TRILOBITE
The trilobites that appeared in the Cambrian period all of a sudden have an extremely complex eye structure. Consisting of millions of honeycomb-shaped tiny particles and a double-lens system, this eye "has an optimal design which would require a well-trained and imaginative optical engineer to develop today" in the words of David Raup, a professor of geology.
This eye emerged 530 million years ago in a perfect state. No doubt, the sudden appearance of such a wondrous design cannot be explained by evolution and it proves the actuality of creation.
Moreover, the honeycomb eye structure of the trilobite has survived to our own day without a single change. Some insects such as bees and dragon flies have the same eye structure as did the trilobite.* This situation disproves the evolutionary thesis that living things evolved progressively from the primitive to the complex.
A major problem in proving the theory has been the fossil record; the imprints of vanished species preserved in the Earth's geological formations. This record has never revealed traces of Darwin's hypothetical intermediate variants - instead species appear and disappear abruptly, and this anomaly has fueled the creationist argument that each species was created by God.
These gaps in the fossil record cannot be explained by saying that sufficient fossils have not yet been found, but that they one day will be. Another American scholar, Robert Wesson, states in his 1991 book Beyond Natural Selection, that "the gaps in the fossil record are real and meaningful". He elaborates this claim in this way:
The gaps in the record are real, however. The absence of a record of any important branching is quite phenomenal. Species are usually static, or nearly so, for long periods, species seldom and genera never show evolution into new species or genera but replacement of one by another, and change is more or less abrupt.
Can Life Result from Coincidences as Evolution Argues?
The theory of evolution holds that life started with a cell that formed by chance under primitive earth conditions. Let us therefore examine the composition of the cell with simple comparisons in order to show how irrational it is to ascribe the existence of the cell - a structure which still maintains its mystery in many respects, even at a time when we have just set foot in the 21st century - to natural phenomena and coincidences.
With all its operational systems, systems of communication, transportation and management, a cell is no less complex than any city. It contains power stations producing the energy consumed by the cell, factories manufacturing the enzymes and hormones essential for life, a databank where all necessary information about all products to be produced is recorded, complex transportation systems and pipelines for carrying raw materials and products from one place to another, advanced laboratories and refineries for breaking down imported raw materials into their usable parts, and specialised cell membrane proteins for the control of incoming and outgoing materials. These constitute only a small part of this incredibly complex system.
With all its operational systems, systems of communication, transportation and management, a cell is no less complex than any city.
Far from being formed under primitive earth conditions, the cell, which in its composition and mechanisms is so complex, cannot be synthesised in even the most sophisticated laboratories of our day. Even with the use of amino acids, the building blocks of the cell, it is not possible to produce so much as a single organelle of the cell, such as mitochondria or ribosome, much less a whole cell. The first cell claimed to have been produced by evolutionary coincidence is as much a figment of the imagination and a product of fantasy as the unicorn.
The English mathematician and astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle made a similar comparison in one of his interviews published in Nature magazine dated November 12, 1981. Although an evolutionist himself, Hoyle expressed that the chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein.53 This means that it is not possible for the cell to come into being by coincidence and therefore, it definitely should have been "created".
Proteins Challenge Coincidence
And it is not just the cell that cannot be produced: the formation, under natural conditions, of even a single protein of the thousands of complex protein molecules making up a cell is impossible.
Proteins are giant molecules consisting of amino acids arranged in a particular sequence in certain quantities and structures. These molecules constitute the building blocks of a living cell. The simplest is composed of 50 amino acids; but there are some proteins that are composed of thousands of amino acids. The absence, addition, or replacement of a single amino acid in the structure of a protein in living cells, each of which has a particular function, causes the protein to become a useless molecular heap. Incapable of demonstrating the "accidental formation" of amino acids, the theory of evolution founders on the point of the formation of proteins.
We can easily demonstrate, with simple probability calculations anybody can understand, that the functional structure of proteins can by no means come about by chance.
There are twenty different amino acids. If we consider that an average-sized protein molecule is composed of 288 amino acids, there are 10300 different combinations of acids. Of all of these possible sequences, only "one" forms the desired protein molecule. The other amino-acid chains are either completely useless or else potentially harmful to living things. In other words, the probability of the coincidental formation of only one protein molecule cited above is "1 in 10300". The probability of this "1" occurring out of an "astronomical" number consisting of 1 followed by 300 zeros is for all practical purposes zero; it is impossible. Furthermore, a protein molecule of 288 amino acids is rather a modest one compared with some giant protein molecules consisting of thousands of amino acids. When we apply similar probability calculations to these giant protein molecules, we see that even the word "impossible" becomes inadequate.
The same fact is confessed by many evolutionists. For example, Harold F. Blum, a famous evolutionist scientist states that "the spontaneous formation of a polypeptide of the size of the smallest known proteins seems beyond all probability."54
Evolutionists claim that molecular evolution took place within a very long period of time and that this long period made the impossible possible. Nevertheless, no matter how long the given period may be, it is not possible for amino acids to form proteins by chance. William Stokes, an American geologist, admits this fact in his book Essentials of Earth History writing that this chance is so small "that it (protein) would not occur during billions of years on billions of planets, each covered by a blanket of concentrated watery solution of the necessary amino acids."55
So what does all this mean? Perry Reeves, a professor of chemistry, answers this question:
When one examines the vast number of possible structures that could result from a simple random combination of amino acids in an evaporating primordial pond, it is mind-boggling to believe that life could have originated in this way. It is more plausible that a Great Builder with a master plan would be required for such a task 56
If the coincidental formation of even one of these proteins is impossible, it is billions of times more impossible for about one million of those proteins to come together properly by chance and make up a complete human cell. What is more, a cell is at no time composed of a mere protein heap. In addition to the proteins, a cell also includes nucleic acids, carbohydrates, lipids, vitamins, and many other chemicals like electrolytes arranged in a specific proportion, harmony, and design in terms of both structure and function. Each of them functions as a building block or co-molecule in various organelles.
Robert Shapiro, a professor of chemistry at New York University and a DNA expert, calculated the probability of the coincidental formation of the 2000 types of proteins found in a single bacteria (There are 200,000 different types of proteins in a human cell). The number that was found was 1 over 1040000.57 (This is an incredible number obtained by putting 40,000 zeros next to 1)
A professor of applied mathematics and astronomy from University College (Cardiff, Wales), Chandra Wickramasinghe, comments:
The likelihood of the spontaneous formation of life from inanimate matter is one to a number with 40,000 noughts after it... It is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence.58
Sir Fred Hoyle comments on these implausible numbers:
Indeed, such a theory (that life was assembled by an intelligence) is so obvious that one wonders why it is not widely accepted as being self-evident. The reasons are psychological rather than scientific.59
The reason Hoyle used the term "psychological" is the self-conditioning of evolutionists not to accept that life could have been created. These people have determined the rejection of Allah's existence as their main target. For this reason alone, they go on defending unreasonable scenarios which they also acknowledge to be impossible.
The Failure of Evolutionary Scenarios on the Origin of Life
The theory of evolution faces no greater crisis than on the point of explaining the emergence of life. The reason is that organic molecules are so complex that their origin cannot possibly be explained as being coincidental and it is manifestly impossible for an organic cell to have been formed by chance.
Evolutionists confronted the question of the origin of life in the second quarter of the 20th century. One of the leading authorities of the theory of molecular evolution, the Russian evolutionist Alexander I. Oparin, said this in his book The Origin of Life, which was published in 1936:
Unfortunately, the origin of the cell remains a question which is actually the darkest point of the complete evolution theory.60
Since Oparin, evolutionists have performed countless experiments, conducted research, and made observations to prove that a cell could have been formed by chance. However, every such attempt only made clearer the complex design of the cell and thus refuted the evolutionists' hypotheses even more. Stanley Miller's experiment of 1953 was once regarded as an evidence for evolution in the molecular level, but after the 1970's, the Miller experiment and similar evolutionary studies lost all their credibility due to the findings about the early athmosphere. It was discovered that the early atmosphere was very unsupportive of the formation of organic molecules.
In a 1988 article, Professor Klaus Dose, the president of the Institute of Biochemistry at the University of Johannes Gutenberg, stated:
More than 30 years of experimentation on the origin of life in the fields of chemical and molecular evolution have led to a better perception of the immensity of the problem of the origin of life on Earth rather than to its solution. At present all discussions on principal theories and experiments in the field either end in stalemate or in a confession of ignorance.61
In a 1998 article, a statement came from the the renowned evolutionary geochemist Jeffrey Bada of the San Diego Scripps Institute, which summarized the Darwinist failure on the origin of life:
Today as we leave the twentieth century, we still face the biggest unsolved problem that we had when we entered the twentieth century: How did life originate on Earth?62
What evolutionists are trying to do is to display that life can randomly arise from non-living matter. But all experiments and research indicate that this is only a fantasy which has no reality in the real world. Evolutionist biologist Andrew Scott admits the same fact:
Take some matter, heat while stirring and wait. That is the modern version of Genesis. The 'fundamental' forces of gravity, electromagnetism and the strong and weak nuclear forces are presumed to have done the rest... But how much of this neat tale is firmly established, and how much remains hopeful speculation? In truth, the mechanism of almost every major step, from chemical precursors up to the first recognizable cells, is the subject of either controversy or complete bewilderment.63
In fact, all studies in the subject point to the same law: Life only comes from life. This simply means that the first life on Earth has been originated by Allah.
The Miraculous Molecule: DNA
The theory of evolution has been unable to provide a coherent explanation for the origin of the molecules that are the basis of the cell. Furthermore, developments in the science of genetics and the discovery of the nucleic acids (DNA and RNA) have produced brand-new problems for the theory of evolution.
In 1955, the work of two scientists on DNA, James Watson and Francis Crick, launched a new era in biology. Many scientists directed their attention to the science of genetics. Today, after years of research, scientists have largely mapped the structure of DNA.
Here, we need to give some very basic information on the structure and function of DNA:
The molecule called DNA, which is found in the nucleus of each of the 100 trillion cells in our body, contains the complete construction plan of the human body. Information regarding all the characteristics of a person, from the physical appearance to the structure of the inner organs, is recorded in DNA by means of a special coding system. The information in DNA is coded within the sequence of four special bases that make up this molecule. These bases are specified as A, T, G, and C according to the initial letters of their names. All the structural differences among people depend on the variations in the sequence of these bases. There are approximately 3.5 billion nucleotides, that is, 3.5 billion letters in a DNA molecule.
The DNA data pertaining to a particular organ or protein is included in special components called "genes". For instance, information about the eye exists in a series of special genes, whereas information about the heart exists in quite another series of genes. The cell produces proteins by using the information in all of these genes. Amino acids that constitute the structure of the protein are defined by the sequential arrangement of three nucleotides in the DNA.
At this point, there is an important detail that deserves attention. An error in the sequence of nucleotides making up a gene would render the gene completely useless. When we consider that there are 200 thousand genes in the human body, it becomes more evident how impossible it is for the millions of nucleotides making up these genes to be formed by accident in the right sequence. An evolutionist biologist, Frank Salisbury, comments on this impossibility by saying:
A medium protein might include about 300 amino acids. The DNA gene controlling this would have about 1,000 nucleotides in its chain. Since there are four kinds of nucleotides in a DNA chain, one consisting of 1,000 links could exist in 41000 forms. Using a little algebra (logarithms), we can see that 41000=10600. Ten multiplied by itself 600 times gives the figure 1 followed by 600 zeros! This number is completely beyond our comprehension.64
The number 41000 is equivalent to 10600. We obtain this number by adding 600 zeros to 1. As 10 with 11 zeros indicates a trillion, a figure with 600 zeros is indeed a number that is difficult to grasp.
Evolutionist Prof. Ali Demirsoy was forced to make the following admission on this issue:
In fact, the probability of the random formation of a protein and a nucleic acid (DNA-RNA) is inconceivably small. The chances against the emergence of even a particular protein chain are astronomic.65
In addition to all these improbabilities, DNA can barely be involved in a reaction because of its double-chained spiral shape. This also makes it impossible to think that it can be the basis of life.
Moreover, while DNA can replicate only with the help of some enzymes that are actually proteins, the synthesis of these enzymes can be realised only by the information coded in DNA. As they both depend on each other, either they have to exist at the same time for replication, or one of them has to be "created" before the other. American microbiologist Jacobson comments on the subject:
The complete directions for the reproduction of plans, for energy and the extraction of parts from the current environment, for the growth sequence, and for the effector mechanism translating instructions into growth - all had to be simultaneously present at that moment (when life began). This combination of events has seemed an incredibly unlikely happenstance, and has often been ascribed to divine intervention.66
The quotation above was written two years after the disclosure of the structure of DNA by James Watson and Francis Crick. Despite all the developments in science, this problem remains unsolved for evolutionists. To sum up, the need for DNA in reproduction, the necessity of the presence of some proteins for reproduction, and the requirement to produce these proteins according to the information in the DNA entirely demolish evolutionist theses.
Two German scientists, Junker and Scherer, explained that the synthesis of each of the molecules required for chemical evolution, necessitates distinct conditions, and that the probability of the compounding of these materials having theoretically very different acquirement methods is zero:
Until now, no experiment is known in which we can obtain all the molecules necessary for chemical evolution. Therefore, it is essential to produce various molecules in different places under very suitable conditions and then to carry them to another place for reaction by protecting them from harmful elements like hydrolysis and photolysis.67
In short, the theory of evolution is unable to prove any of the evolutionary stages that allegedly occur at the molecular level.
To summarise what we have said so far, neither amino acids nor their products, the proteins making up the cells of living beings, could ever be produced in any so-called "primitive atmosphere" environment. Moreover, factors such as the incredibly complex structure of proteins, their right-hand, left-hand features, and the difficulties in the formation of peptide bonds are just parts of the reason why they will never be produced in any future experiment either.
Even if we suppose for a moment that proteins somehow did form accidentally, that would still have no meaning, for proteins are nothing at all on their own: they cannot themselves reproduce. Protein synthesis is only possible with the information coded in DNA and RNA molecules. Without DNA and RNA, it is impossible for a protein to reproduce. The specific sequence of the twenty different amino acids encoded in DNA determines the structure of each protein in the body. However, as has been made abundantly clear by all those who have studied these molecules, it is impossible for DNA and RNA to form by chance.
The Fact of Creation
With the collapse of the theory of evolution in every field, prominent names in the discipline of biochemistry today admit the fact of creation and have begun to defend the view that everything is created by a conscious Creator as part of an exalted creation. This is already a fact that people cannot disregard. Scientists who can approach their work with an open mind have developed a view called "intelligent design". Michael J. Behe, one of the foremost of these scientists, states that he accepts the absolute being of the Creator and describes the impasse of those who deny this fact:
The result of these cumulative efforts to investigate the cell - to investigate life at the molecular level - is a loud, clear, piercing cry of "design!" The result is so unambiguous and so significant that it must be ranked as one of the greatest achievements in the history of science. This triumph of science should evoke cries of "Eureka" from ten thousand throats.
But, no bottles have been uncorked, no hands clapped. Instead, a curious, embarrassed silence surrounds the stark complexity of the cell. When the subject comes up in public, feet start to shuffle, and breathing gets a bit laboured. In private people are a bit more relaxed; many explicitly admit the obvious but then stare at the ground, shake their heads, and let it go like that. Why does the scientific community not greedily embrace its startling discovery? Why is the observation of design handled with intellectual gloves? The dilemma is that while one side of the elephant is labelled intelligent design, the other side must be labelled God.68
Today, many people are not even aware that they are in a position of accepting a body of fallacy as truth in the name of science, instead of believing in Allah. Those who do not find the sentence "Allah created you from nothing" scientific enough can believe that the first living being came into being by thunderbolts striking a "primordial soup" billions of years ago.
As we have described elsewhere in this book, the balances in nature are so delicate and so numerous that it is entirely irrational to claim that they developed "by chance". No matter how much those who cannot set themselves free from this irrationality may strive, the signs of Allah in the heavens and the earth are completely obvious and they are undeniable.
Allah is the Creator of the heavens, the earth and all that is in between.
The signs of His being have encompassed the entire universe.
This should be enough Information for you, but if its not, or you have an argument or counter then please share. I could post more information but that will take a lot more time....
Ok, I'll have my input here.
Many people don't think that I can have a religion and be scientific at the same time. I just want to make clear that it is possible to be able to have both, and here's why.
1.) Why is it that God cannot have facilitated evolution? If God really does work in mysterious ways, then evolution makes perfect sense. Why would God leave clues about his works? You must remember that God did not write the Bible himself- they are the works of what his chosen people wrote from his words. When it is said that he made man from the Earth, then couldn't it have meant that the first organic molecules took form, to eventually become humanity?
2.) Why is God's time based on our calendar? In the time he made the universe, it could have been 15 billion years. And the Earth is 4.6 billion years old; It easily could have been in the beginning where he created the Earth, where the Earth was to be made after the preliminaries of the
Big Bang. This is my belief of a Big Bang; please do not use it as a contrary for this part of my argument. When he made the Earth, he did his works over the course of 4.6 billion years. So on the 7th day he rests. He is resting now, but he does things for us, and shows us paths to belief. His final act, I believe, will be Judgement Day.
So there's two major conflicts which I believe are united. I don't know if tis is my own little belief, or if anyone thinks it's this way too, or whatever.
BTW since you seem to be Islamic and I am Christian, I don't know if some of my argument is invalid, but that's what I have to say. Feel free to tell me anything else.
Many people don't think that I can have a religion and be scientific at the same time. I just want to make clear that it is possible to be able to have both, and here's why.
1.) Why is it that God cannot have facilitated evolution? If God really does work in mysterious ways, then evolution makes perfect sense. Why would God leave clues about his works? You must remember that God did not write the Bible himself- they are the works of what his chosen people wrote from his words. When it is said that he made man from the Earth, then couldn't it have meant that the first organic molecules took form, to eventually become humanity?
2.) Why is God's time based on our calendar? In the time he made the universe, it could have been 15 billion years. And the Earth is 4.6 billion years old; It easily could have been in the beginning where he created the Earth, where the Earth was to be made after the preliminaries of the
Big Bang. This is my belief of a Big Bang; please do not use it as a contrary for this part of my argument. When he made the Earth, he did his works over the course of 4.6 billion years. So on the 7th day he rests. He is resting now, but he does things for us, and shows us paths to belief. His final act, I believe, will be Judgement Day.
So there's two major conflicts which I believe are united. I don't know if tis is my own little belief, or if anyone thinks it's this way too, or whatever.
BTW since you seem to be Islamic and I am Christian, I don't know if some of my argument is invalid, but that's what I have to say. Feel free to tell me anything else.
J
Jibrael
Guest
Well, what can I say, evolution I can believe in, as for human evolution I don't think we came from apes, there are way to many pieces missing.
I think any kind of genetic engineering or tampering of humans is wrong, humans are evolving and tampering of our code is defeating that purpose. One day when the younger people here have children and they can choose a custom made child, rather opt for the old nature knows best.
I don't know where humans came from, I just think we didn't come from the apes to many missing pieces.
Religon? Well I think God and other deitys exsist, why not, as for one God in particular? No I don't think so, why would there be other religions if there were not other gods. I am however a christian, I don't think humans were made to cope without a God to help them.
People who discredit religion and the supernatural are just people in denial, the same as people who discredit evolution. They are both there.
I think any kind of genetic engineering or tampering of humans is wrong, humans are evolving and tampering of our code is defeating that purpose. One day when the younger people here have children and they can choose a custom made child, rather opt for the old nature knows best.
I don't know where humans came from, I just think we didn't come from the apes to many missing pieces.
Religon? Well I think God and other deitys exsist, why not, as for one God in particular? No I don't think so, why would there be other religions if there were not other gods. I am however a christian, I don't think humans were made to cope without a God to help them.
People who discredit religion and the supernatural are just people in denial, the same as people who discredit evolution. They are both there.
J
Jibrael
Guest
Oh if anyone wants to prove humans are not evolving, don't be thick, humans first occured in africa, slowly these people migrated they moved north into Palastine, these people the decendants of the arabs, their skin lightened and their hair straigtened. The people moved further into Europe. Europians slowly changed over the years, their skin became pale, their hair became blonde. The people who moved east changed once again, the arabs who moved into India once again grew dark skins, the Mongol decendants evolved once again, starting the look of the chinese, although their skin did not pale, the chinese however grew pale and they got the Indian hair aswell as the slanted eyes. Now crossing over to North America the mongol people once again evolved as the moved south through America, their skin picked up a red tint, they lots the slanted eyes, and as they moved further south the changed once again, into the Aztecs.
Now you tell me evolution does not exist. :?:
Now you tell me evolution does not exist. :?:
Xenon said:
I would have to disagree here. In the three main religious scriptures it mentions that the first humans where placed in heaven before they where sentenced to a short peroid on the Earth. After disobeying God, Adam and Eve where placed on earth with full knowledge of what they had done. Thus, we can not say they where a part of this evolutionary process.
Xenon said:
I couldn't agree with you more on this. In the Quran it is written how time differs between the time on Earth and the time in God's Realm.
....God caused him to die for a hundred years, then raised him up (again). He said: "How long didst thou tarry (thus)?" He said: "(Perhaps) a day or part of a day." He said: "Nay, thou hast tarried thus a hundred years...." (Surat Al-Baqara, 2:259)
Also in other verses, there are many of them, it states that one day in hell is like 1000 years on the Earth. This makes it clear that our time and theirs is much different.
Jibrael said:
Evolution is when one spieces completly changes into another spieces, I would not consider Blacks as a different speices from whites. We are all still humans, with slight variations in our skin and hair.
What you are reffering to is Adaption, where change occures so that we can adapt to our environment, not change into a completly different spieces.
Xenon said:
Earlier you said that you are Christian. If you are Christian than surly you know the story of Eden.
If not then basically, there was a apple tree in Heaven and God told Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree. Then, Eblis(Satan, Shaytan, Lusifer....) told them to eat from the tree and so they did, disobeying what God had told them. The tree made them realise that they were naked so they began to cover themselves with leaves from the tree. For disobeying God, God sentanced mankind to the Earth, where they are there tested to see how well they will follow God's rules. Those who pass will see paradise, those who fail will see a misrable ending.
C
Chaos
Guest
I have a simple belief.
I dont believe in religion because 90% of all wars are based on it.
Secondly, I dont believe in anything I cannot see, touch, feel, or communicate with. The special people I have lost in my life force me not to care whether god is real or not. For all Im concerned, if I die a horrible death, cool, whatever.
Just my opinion, I dont expect you to agree, or disagree with me, just to accept that.
I dont believe in religion because 90% of all wars are based on it.
Secondly, I dont believe in anything I cannot see, touch, feel, or communicate with. The special people I have lost in my life force me not to care whether god is real or not. For all Im concerned, if I die a horrible death, cool, whatever.
Just my opinion, I dont expect you to agree, or disagree with me, just to accept that.
Well then justify what real consciousness is. How is it possible that random events could lead to a complex system such as life?
If you think about it, our very existence is either extremely likely or unlikely. If you think about what defines us being alive, it's actually the cooperation of organ systems maintaining chemical and electrical stimulation in an organ filled with synapses. If the exchange of these signals and chemicals occur in a certain frequency, a sentient being takes form. What is your consciousness defined as? If it's strictly what you see then, there, now, then how come we can use our body to justify the difference between solid and a seemingly void media? Now think about actual thought. It's pretty hard to do becuase you may be thinking in the wrong way, if you knew exa, you'd get it. Why do you think? What makes stimulation of sensory functions justify what happens to your consciousness? However, what is consciousness itself? What makes you think here, now? It's not easily understood, because we do not have an answer. If we did, we could make A.I. A computer is not aware; it simply does what it's told.
Now with that said, and assuming you know what I meant above, is life self-evident? If it is, then there does not have to be a God. If consciuousness is defined, then it should happen anyways. However, why is there no more life as we know of past Earth? This means a God probably made us an exclusion, something not to be defined by the universe. Now look at the other possibility. It is justified in the same manner as the contradiction above.
With those two things in mind, can you say there is no God? You must know for sure what I meant about the thought of consciousness.
If you think about it, our very existence is either extremely likely or unlikely. If you think about what defines us being alive, it's actually the cooperation of organ systems maintaining chemical and electrical stimulation in an organ filled with synapses. If the exchange of these signals and chemicals occur in a certain frequency, a sentient being takes form. What is your consciousness defined as? If it's strictly what you see then, there, now, then how come we can use our body to justify the difference between solid and a seemingly void media? Now think about actual thought. It's pretty hard to do becuase you may be thinking in the wrong way, if you knew exa, you'd get it. Why do you think? What makes stimulation of sensory functions justify what happens to your consciousness? However, what is consciousness itself? What makes you think here, now? It's not easily understood, because we do not have an answer. If we did, we could make A.I. A computer is not aware; it simply does what it's told.
Now with that said, and assuming you know what I meant above, is life self-evident? If it is, then there does not have to be a God. If consciuousness is defined, then it should happen anyways. However, why is there no more life as we know of past Earth? This means a God probably made us an exclusion, something not to be defined by the universe. Now look at the other possibility. It is justified in the same manner as the contradiction above.
With those two things in mind, can you say there is no God? You must know for sure what I meant about the thought of consciousness.
S
soundwav
Guest
ok evolution works on many levels and are both mutations and adaptions that become a prodomanint thing in a type of creature it may not on the outside look like a new creature but on the genetic level is it very different.
now with that said i will explain the universe to you as i see it
(cant spell so dont coment about it)
in the begaining there was a place where everything that we can understand was gethered (looked much like a VERY large planet) in the center was the purest form of energy that can be achived ever this energy has a colective understanding of everything and one day it expanded causeing the planet to explode and also spreading it self out. and yes there was an out tho i cant explain what was out side of the planet because i dont beleave we can understand what nothing is because nothing is infact something in it self. but anyway there you have the big bang. now "god" is this colective understanding of everything. and this thing can shape other things how it sees fit so it made 4 thing the atome and evolution aka adam and eve. the other 2 things are away to keep things in a constent motion one is a black hole takes all matter and breaks it down and sends it to the colective understanding (found in galexys). the other one is (for lack of better term) a white hole takes thing out of the colective and forms them into matter and spreds them out (ie. nebulas) now i do think that the first intelegent life was affected directly by this colective but after that it was left to its own. what i mean by this is a race was made and it grew to a point and then the colective left it alone to travel what was made (ie. angels as we call them) they enturn created a race and they grew and then the angels left them alown and they also when and made a new race and so forth and so on till we got here.
it took me years to come to this but i thing there is a "god" but what is a god i am leaving that open cause i cant answer it. and yes there are "little green men" and yes evolution works.
i predicted years ago that in egypt they would find 4 more pyramids to for the contolation orian they found 2 of them after i said that. i think this and many other thing on earth show who and where ower creators live and if one went there i bet you could find clues to thiers as well all the way back to the begaining. (assuming none of the places have gone into a black hole yet)
there is alot more to my thoughts then this but i dont really feel like going back to find exact quotes and picture of the things i have put together over the years. maybe one day i will but not today. anyways thats the short version of my thoughts.
EDIT:
PS i just got done doing home work for my classes so (reading a boring book) so forgive all spelling and grammer cause my brain is half dead now and i cant spell anyways but atleast i know it.
now with that said i will explain the universe to you as i see it
(cant spell so dont coment about it)
in the begaining there was a place where everything that we can understand was gethered (looked much like a VERY large planet) in the center was the purest form of energy that can be achived ever this energy has a colective understanding of everything and one day it expanded causeing the planet to explode and also spreading it self out. and yes there was an out tho i cant explain what was out side of the planet because i dont beleave we can understand what nothing is because nothing is infact something in it self. but anyway there you have the big bang. now "god" is this colective understanding of everything. and this thing can shape other things how it sees fit so it made 4 thing the atome and evolution aka adam and eve. the other 2 things are away to keep things in a constent motion one is a black hole takes all matter and breaks it down and sends it to the colective understanding (found in galexys). the other one is (for lack of better term) a white hole takes thing out of the colective and forms them into matter and spreds them out (ie. nebulas) now i do think that the first intelegent life was affected directly by this colective but after that it was left to its own. what i mean by this is a race was made and it grew to a point and then the colective left it alone to travel what was made (ie. angels as we call them) they enturn created a race and they grew and then the angels left them alown and they also when and made a new race and so forth and so on till we got here.
it took me years to come to this but i thing there is a "god" but what is a god i am leaving that open cause i cant answer it. and yes there are "little green men" and yes evolution works.
i predicted years ago that in egypt they would find 4 more pyramids to for the contolation orian they found 2 of them after i said that. i think this and many other thing on earth show who and where ower creators live and if one went there i bet you could find clues to thiers as well all the way back to the begaining. (assuming none of the places have gone into a black hole yet)
there is alot more to my thoughts then this but i dont really feel like going back to find exact quotes and picture of the things i have put together over the years. maybe one day i will but not today. anyways thats the short version of my thoughts.
EDIT:
PS i just got done doing home work for my classes so (reading a boring book) so forgive all spelling and grammer cause my brain is half dead now and i cant spell anyways but atleast i know it.
L
Lost User
Guest
Some of you guys make some very interesting points, I dont beleave in a God, but that is only because I do not "feel" that one is there. I dont really have a good reason other then I just dont think there is one.
Reincarnation is more my thing.
Oh and for an interesting read, have a read of this:
http://www.gaianet.fsbusiness.co.uk/gaiatheory.html
- Dark Konoko
Reincarnation is more my thing.
Oh and for an interesting read, have a read of this:
http://www.gaianet.fsbusiness.co.uk/gaiatheory.html
- Dark Konoko
soundwav said:
Miracles of the Qur'an
This information is gathered from the studies of Harun Yahya and his Book, Miracles of the Qur'an. You can also read his books online for free at, http://www.harunyahya.com/index.php
This is a very interesting, and probably logical way to explain what God is and the origin of life. But I can not agree with you on this one. There are verses in the Quran which would make this prediction false, at least in the Muslim point of veiw.
"He is the Originator of the heavens and the earth."(The Qur'an, 6:101)
This information given in the Qur'an is in full agreement with the findings of contemporary science. The conclusion that astrophysics has reached today is that the entire universe, together with the dimensions of matter and time, came into existence as a result of a great explosion that occurred in no time. This event, known as "The Big Bang" proved that the universe was created from nothingness as the result of the explosion of a single point. Modern scientific circles are in agreement that the Big Bang is the only rational and provable explanation of the beginning of the universe and of how the universe came into being.
Before the Big Bang, there was no such thing as matter. From a condition of non-existence in which neither matter, nor energy, nor even time existed, and which can only be described metaphysically, matter, energy, and time were all created. This fact, only recently discovered by modern physics, was announced to us in the Qur'an 1,400 years ago.
The sensitive sensors on board the COBE space satellite which was launched by NASA in 1992, captured evidentiary remnants of the Big Bang. This discovery served as evidence for the Big Bang, which is the scientific explanation of the fact that the universe was created from nothing.
In the Qur'an, which was revealed 14 centuries ago at a time when the science of astronomy was still primitive, the expansion of the universe was described like this:
"And it is We who have constructed the heaven with might, and verily, it is We who are steadily expanding it."
(The Qur'an, 51:47)
The word "heaven", as stated in this verse, is used in various places in the Qur'an with the meaning of space and universe. Here again, the word is used with this meaning. In other words, in the Qur'an it is revealed that the universe "expands". And this is the very conclusion that science has reached today.
Until the dawn of the 20th century, the only view prevailing in the world of science was that "the universe has a constant nature and it has existed since infinite time". The research, observations, and calculations carried out by means of modern technology, however, have revealed that the universe in fact had a beginning, and that it constantly "expands".
At the beginning of the 20th century, the Russian physicist Alexander Friedmann and the Belgian cosmologist Georges Lemaitre theoretically calculated that the universe is in constant motion and that it is expanding.
This fact was proved also by observational data in 1929. While observing the sky with a telescope, Edwin Hubble, the American astronomer, discovered that the stars and galaxies were constantly moving away from each other. A universe where everything constantly moves away from everything else implied a constantly expanding universe. The observations carried out in the following years verified that the universe is constantly expanding. This fact was explained in the Qur'an when that was still unknown to anyone. This is because the Qur'an is the word of God, the Creator, and the Ruler of the entire universe.
From the moment of the big bang, the universe has been constantly expanding at a great speed. Scientists compare the expanding universe to the surface of a balloon that is inflated.
"Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before We clove them asunder, and We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?"
(The Qur'an, 21:30)
The word ratq translated as "sewn to" means "mixed in each, blended" in Arabic dictionaries. It is used to refer to two different substances that make up a whole. The phrase "we unstitched" is the verb fataqa in Arabic and implies that something comes into being by tearing apart or destroying the structure of ratq. The sprouting of a seed from the soil is one of the actions to which this verb is applied.
Let us take a look at the verse again with this knowledge in mind. In the verse, sky and earth are at first subject to the status of ratq. They are separated (fataqa) with one coming out of the other. Intriguingly, when we remember the first moments of the Big Bang, we see that a single point included all the matter in the universe. In other words, everything, including "the heavens and earth" which were not created yet, were included in this point in a condition of ratq. This point exploded violently, causing its matter to fataqa and in the process created the structure of the whole universe.
When we compare the expressions in the verse with scientific findings, we see that they are in perfect agreement with each other. Interestingly enough, these findings were not arrived at until the 20th century.
The picture represents the Big Bang, which revealed once again that God created the universe from nothingness. The Big Bang is a theory that has been proven with scientific evidence. Although some scientists tried to advance alternative theories against the Big Bang, scientific evidence caused the theory to be completely accepted by the scientific community.
"It is He Who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon. They swim along, each in an orbit. "
(The Qur'an, 21:33)
It is mentioned in another verse, too, that the Sun is not static but moves in a definite orbit:
"And the sun runs to its resting place. That is the decree of the Almighty, the All-Knowing. "
(The Qur'an, 36:38)
These facts communicated in the Qur'an have been discovered by astronomical observations in our age. According to the calculations of experts on astronomy, the Sun is traveling at the enormous speed of 720,000 kilometers an hour in the direction of the star Vega in a particular orbit called the Solar Apex. This means that the sun travels roughly 17,280,000 kilometers a day. Along with the Sun, and all planets and satellites within the gravitational system of the Sun also travel the same distance. In addition, all the stars in the universe are in a similar planned motion.
That the entire universe is full of paths and orbits such as this one, is written in the Qur'an as follows:
"By the sky full of paths and orbits."
(The Qur'an, 51:7)
There are about 200 billion galaxies in the universe, consisting of nearly 200 billion stars in each. Most of these stars have planets, and most of those planets have satellites. All of these heavenly bodies move in very precisely computed orbits. For millions of years, each has been "swimming" along in its own orbit in perfect harmony and order with all the others. Moreover, many comets also move along in the orbits determined for them.
The orbits in the universe do not only belong to celestial bodies. The galaxies also travel at enormous speeds in computed, planned orbits. During these movements, none of these celestial bodies cuts across another's path, or collides with another.
Surely at the time the Qur'an was revealed, mankind did not possess today's telescopes or advanced observation technologies to observe millions of kilometres of space, nor the modern knowledge of physics or astronomy. Therefore, at that time, it was not possible to determine scientifically that space is "full of paths and orbits" as stated in the verse. However, this was openly declared to us in the Qur'an that was revealed at that time:-because the Qur'an is the word of God.
Like many other comets in the universe, Halley's comet, seen above, also moves in a planned orbit. It has a specific orbit and it moves in this orbit in a perfect harmony with other celestial bodies.
All celestial bodies including planets, satellites of these planets, stars, and even galaxies have their own orbits that have been determined with very delicate computations. The One Who established this perfect order and maintains it is God, Who created the entire universe.
"He has created the Heavens and the Earth for Truth. He wraps the night up in the day, and wraps the day up in the night."
(The Qur'an, 39:5)
In the Qur'an, the words used for describing the universe are quite remarkable. The Arabic word that is translated as "to wrap" in the above verse is "takwir". In English, it means "to make one thing lap over another, folded up as a garment that is laid away". (For instance, in Arabic dictionaries this word is used for the action of wrapping one thing around another, in the way that a turban is put on.)
The information given in the verse about the day and the night wrapping each other up includes accurate information about the shape of the world. This can be true only if the earth is round. This means that in the Qur'an, which was revealed in the 7th century, the roundness of the world was hinted at.
It should be remembered, however, that the understanding of astronomy of the time perceived the world differently. It was then thought that the world was a flat plane and all scientific calculations and explanations were based on this belief. The verses of the Qur'an, however, include information that we have learned only in the past century. Since the Qur'an is God's word, the most correct words were used in it when it comes to describing the universe.
In the Qur'an, God calls our attention to a very interesting attribute of the sky:
"We made the sky a preserved and protected roof yet still they turn away from Our Signs.."
(The Qur'an, 21:32)
This attribute of the sky has been proved by scientific research carried out in the 20th century.
The atmosphere surrounding the earth serves crucial functions for the continuity of life. While destroying many meteors big and small as they approach the earth, it prevents them from falling to earth and harming living things.
In addition, the atmosphere filters the light rays coming from space that are harmful to living things. Interestingly, the atmosphere lets only harmless and useful rays- visible light, near ultraviolet light, and radio waves pass through. All of this radiation is vital for life. Near ultraviolet rays, which are only partially let in by the atmosphere, are very important for the photosynthesis of plants and for the survival of all living beings. The majority of the intense ultraviolet rays emitted from the sun are filtered out by the ozone layer of the atmosphere and only a limited-and essential-part of the ultraviolet spectrum reaches the Earth.
The protective function of the atmosphere does not end here. The atmosphere also protects the earth from the freezing cold of the space, which is about minus 270° C.
The atmosphere only lets rays required for life reach the Earth. Ultraviolet rays, for example, make it to the world only partially. This is the most appropriate range to allow plants to make photosynthesis and eventually for all living things to survive.
This illustration shows meteors that are about to crash into the earth. The celestial bodies wandering in space could pose a serious threat to the Earth. Yet, God, He Who creates most perfectly, has made the atmosphere a protective roof. Thanks to this special protection, most meteoroids do not harm the Earth, as they fall to pieces in the atmosphere.
Most people looking at the sky do not think about the protective aspect of the atmosphere. They almost never think what kind of a place the world would be like if this structure did not exist. The above photo belongs to a giant crater caused by a meteor that fell in Arizona, in the USA. If the atmosphere did not exist, millions of meteoroids would fall to the Earth and the Earth would become an inhabitable place. Yet, the protective aspect of the atmosphere allows living things to survive in safety. This is certainly God's protection of people, and a miracle proclaimed in the Qur'an.
The energy released in a Sun burst is so powerful that the human mind would hardly comprehend it: A single burst is equivalent to 100 billion atomic bombs similar to the one dropped on Hiroshima. The world is protected from the destructive effects of this energy by the atmosphere and the Van Allen Belts.
As we move from the Earth, which is perfectly fitted for human life, beyond the atmosphere into the space, we come across a freezing cold. The world is protected from the freezing cold of space, which is around -270 degrees, by the help of the atmosphere.
The magnetosphere layer, formed by the magnetic field of the Earth, serves as a shield protecting the earth from celestial bodies, harmful cosmic rays and particles. In the above picture, this magnetosphere layer, which is also named Van Allen Belts, is seen. These belts at thousands of kilometres above the earth protect the living things on the Earth from the fatal energy that would otherwise reach it from space.
All these scientific findings prove that the world is protected in a very particular way. The important thing is that this protection was made known in the Qur'an in the verse "We made the sky a preserved and protected roof" 1,400 years ago.
It is not only the atmosphere that protects the Earth from harmful effects. In addition to the atmosphere, the Van Allen Belt, a layer caused by the magnetic field of the Earth, also serves as a shield against the harmful radiation that threatens our planet. This radiation, which is constantly emitted by the Sun and other stars, is deadly to living things. If the Van Allen belt did not exist, the massive outbursts of energy called solar flares that frequently occur in the Sun would destroy all life on Earth.
Dr. Hugh Ross has this to say on the importance of Van Allen Belts to our lives:
In fact, the Earth has the highest density of any of the planets in our Solar System. This large nickel-iron core is responsible for our large magnetic field. This magnetic field produces the Van-Allen radiation shield, which protects the Earth from radiation bombardment. If this shield were not present, life would not be possible on the Earth. The only other rocky planet to have any magnetic field is Mercury - but its field strength is 100 times less than the Earth's. Even Venus, our sister planet, has no magnetic field. The Van-Allen radiation shield is a design unique to the Earth.
The energy transmitted in just one of these bursts detected in recent years was calculated to be equivalent to 100 billion atomic bombs similar to the one dropped on Hiroshima. Fifty-eight hours after the burst, it was observed that the magnetic needles of compasses displayed unusual movement and 250 kilometers above the earth's atmosphere, the temperature suddenly increased to 2,500° C.
In short, a perfect system is at work high above the Earth. It surrounds our world and protects it against external threats. Scientists only learned about it recently, yet centuries ago, God informed us in the Qur'an of the world's atmosphere functioning as a protective shield.
The verse 11 of Sura Tarik in the Qur'an, refers to the "returning" function of the sky.
"By Heaven with its cyclical systems."
(The Qur'an, 86:11)
This word interpreted as "cyclical" in Qur'an translations also has meanings of "sending back" or "returning".
As known, the atmosphere surrounding the Earth consists of many layers. Each layer serves an important purpose for the benefit of life. Research has revealed that these layers have the function of turning the materials or rays they are exposed to back into space or back down to the Earth. Now let us examine with a few examples of this "recycling" function of the layers encircling the Earth.
The troposphere, 13 to 15 kilometers above the Earth, enables water vapor rising from the surface of the Earth to be condensed and turn back as rain.
The ozone layer, at an altitude of 25 kilometers, reflects harmful radiation and ultraviolet light coming from space and turns both back into space.
The ionosphere, reflects radio waves broadcast from the Earth back down to different parts of the world, just like a passive communications satellite, and thus makes wireless communication, radio, and television broadcasting possible over long distances.
The magnetosphere layer turns the harmful radioactive particles emitted by the Sun and other stars back into space before they reach the Earth.
The fact that this property of the atmosphere's layers, that was onlt demonstrated in the recent past was announced centuries ago in the Qur'an, once again demonstrates that the Qur'an is the word of God.
The presence of water is essential for life on Earth. One of the factors acting in the formation of water is the Troposphere, one of the layers of the atmosphere. The troposphere layer enables water vapour rising from the surface of the Earth to be condensed and turn back down to the Earth as rain.
The atmosphere layer that blocks the rays that might be fatal to life on Earth is the Ozonosphere. The Ozonosphere turns harmful cosmic rays like ultraviolet back to space, hence preventing them from reaching the Earth and harming life.
Each layer of the atmosphere has beneficial attributes for human beings. The Ionosphere layer, one of the upper layers of the atmosphere, for example, reflects radio waves broadcast from a certain centre back down to the Earth, thus enabling broadcasts to be received from long distances.
One fact about the universe revealed in the verses of the Qur'an is that the sky is made up of seven layers.
"It is He Who created everything on the earth for you and then directed His attention up to heaven and arranged it into seven regular heavens. He has knowledge of all things."
(The Qur'an, 2:29)
"Then He turned to heaven when it was smoke. In two days He determined them as seven heavens and revealed, in every heaven, its own mandate."
(The Qur'an, 41:12)
The word "heavens", which appears in many verses in the Qur'an, is used to refer to the sky above the Earth, as well as the entire universe. Given this meaning of the word, it is seen that the Earth's sky, or the atmosphere, is made up of seven layers.
The Earth has all the attributes that are needed for life. One of them is the atmosphere, which serves as a shield protecting living things. Today, it is an established fact that the atmosphere is made up of different layers lying on top of one another. Just as it is described in the Qur'an, the atmosphere is made up of exactly seven layers. This is certainly one of the miracles of the Qur'an.
Indeed, today it is known that the world's atmosphere consists of different layers that lie on top of each other. Furthermore, it consists, just as is described in the Qur'an, of exactly seven layers. In a scientific source, the subject is described as follows:
Scientists have found that the atmosphere consists of several layers. The layers differ in such physical properties as pressure and the types of gasses. The layer of the atmosphere closest to Earth is called the TROPOSPHERE. It contains about 90% of the total mass of the atmosphere. The layer above the troposphere is called the STRATOSPHERE. The OZONE LAYER is the part of the stratosphere where absorption of ultraviolet rays occurs. The layer above the stratosphere is called the MESOSPHERE. The THERMOSPHERE lies above the mesosphere. The ionized gases form a layer within the thermosphere called the IONOSPHERE. The outermost part of Earth's atmosphere extends from about 480 km out to 960 km. This part is called the EXOSPHERE. (2)
If we count the number of layers cited in this source, we see that the atmosphere consists of exactly seven layers, just as stated in the verse.
1. Troposphere
2. Stratosphere
3. Ozonosphere
4. Mesosphere
5. Thermosphere
6. Ionosphere
7. Exosphere
Another important miracle on this subject is mentioned in the statement "(He) revealed, in every heaven, its own mandate.", in verse 12 of Sura Fussilet. In other words, in the verse, God states that He assigned each heaven its own duty. Truly, as seen in previous chapters, each one of these layers has vital duties for the benefit of human kind and all other living things on the Earth. Each layer has a particular function, ranging from forming rain to preventing harmful rays, from reflecting radio waves, to averting the harmful effects of meteors.
One of these functions, for example, is stated in a scientific source as follows:
Earth's atmosphere has 7 layers. The lowest layer is called troposphere. Rain, snow and wind only take place in the troposphere.(3)
It is a great miracle that these facts, which could not possibly be discovered without the technology of the 20th century, were explicitly stated by the Qur'an 1,400 years ago.
14 centuries ago, when the sky was believed to be one unified body, the Qur'an miraculously stated that it consisted of layers, and what is more, "seven" layers. Modern science, on the other hand, discovered the fact that the atmosphere surrounding the Earth is made up of "seven" basic layers only very recently.
The Qur'an draws attention to a very important geological function of mountains.
"We placed firmly embedded mountains on the earth, so it would not move under them"
(The Qur'an, 21:31)
As we have noticed, it is stated in the verse that mountains have the function of preventing shocks in the Earth.
This fact was not known by anyone at the time the Qur'an was revealed. It was in fact brought to light only recently as a result of the findings of modern geology.
According to these findings, mountains emerge as a result of the movements and collisions of massive plates forming the Earth's crust. When two plates collide, the stronger one slides under the other, the one on the top bends and forms heights and mountains. The layer beneath proceeds under the ground and makes a deep extension downward. That means that mountains have a portion stretching downwards, as large as their visible parts on the Earth.
In a scientific text, the structure of mountains is described as follows:
Where continents are thicker, as in mountain ranges, the crust sinks deeper into the mantle.(4)
In a verse, this role of the mountains is pointed out by a comparison with "pegs":
"Have We not made the earth as a bed and the mountains its pegs?"
(The Qur'an, 78:6-7)
Mountains, in other words, clench the plates in the Earth's crust together by extending above and beneath the Earth's surface at the conjunction points of these plates. In this way, they fix the Earth's crust, and prevent it from drifting over the magma stratum or among its plates. Briefly, we may liken mountains to nails that keep pieces of wood together.
This fixing function of the mountains is described in scientific literature by the term "isostasy". Isostasy means the following:
Isostasy: general equilibrium in the Earth's crust maintained by a yielding flow of rock material beneath the surface under gravitational stress.(5)
This vital role of mountains, that was discovered by modern geology and seismic research, was revealed in the Qur'an centuries ago as an example of the supreme wisdom in God's creation.
"We placed firmly embedded mountains on the earth, so it would not move under them..."
(The Qur'an, 21:31)
With extensions that mountains extend out towards under the ground as well as over the ground, they clench different plates of the earth together like a peg. The Earth's crust consists of plates that are in constant motion. This clenching property of mountains prevents shocks to a great extent, by fixing the earth's crust, which has a very movable structure.
There is much much more, I will try to add it in later.
You have to keep in mind what life is. We carry out our functions by using organic material. Life had to start with simple organic molecular structures. This is already highly obscure, because the conditions to form these compuonds is rather unlikely of any planet. As molecules become more and more complex, they carry out more complex functions. Now think about this- does the formation of a more complex structure over a gradual interval sound unreasonable? Organisms get larger (larger as in prokaryotes), with simple protien cillia and a code base made of penta-sugars, phosphates (PO[4] -1), and for each sugar on the base, a nitrogenic base, either purine or pyrimidine, and then the next cooresponding nitrogenic base (adenine to thymine, or cytosine to guanine). This represents a code base to produce amino acids. As the cell becomes more and more complex, it carries out more functions. Eventually, cells start to do smething specific, and groups of cells make the very simplest multicellular organisms. Now the organism can carry out more functions with the help of the other cells. Eventually, the cells make their tasks more and more specific, and very rudimentary brains show up. The incipient nervous system takes form to control the cells in activity, and make the organism carry out much more advanced functions. Here's where God starts the evolution of sentient organisms. As he directs them to evolve to develop consciousness, the organism also takes form to dominate above other creatures. Eventually, this almost ensures that man would be formed- developing of better cognition and development of the body. This seems to make evolution logical.
Xenon said:
But as we all know by now, the earth is too young to create a protien strand as complex as the Human protien strand. Scientists estimate that it wont be for another billion or so years before the Earth will be capable to begin producing such protien strands. This alone proves that we must have been placed here.
My reply about the Miracles of the Quran was not about evolution, it was to show those interested in this topic the knowledge that the Quran holds. Knowledge that Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) could not have known without God revieling it to him through Gabriel, nor anybody at that time could have. The knowledge in the Quran is vast, it contains sciences, discoveries, information that was not known untill the past 200 years. Even knowledge that was unknown to us untill 20 or so years ago.
Yes, but why couldn't have God expedited the process of evolution to form humanity? I like how the Quran holds knowledge about the Big Bang. I don't know why fellow Christians regard the Big Bang as a topic of infidelity. Same with evolution. Predestination also seems very... depressing.I think all science was facilitated under God's power, and that there is no mysticism of the universe (I also do not believe in things like magic, luck, or to a degree, extrasensory perception). This may not seem like a faith at all, it's kind of like the Bible with physics in it.
Mortis
Knight
Has anyone even considered Intersteller intervision?
I mean we muck around with DNA now? Who is not to say in the vast ranges of intersteller space that there is a race that likes to seed planets.
Can you even think of your self as a experiment?
What if "Godly"creation and evelution are both nonsence?
My beliefs are that we are here do to another race no GOD no evelution.
The appearances of different species can easily be the work of intersteller travelors. They could all come from different worlds or test tubes.
That could make GOD a BEM (bug eyed monster) and every thing most of the world believes false.
Superstition allways leads to a "GOD" must have been responcible.
Science claims evelution is the key.
I really expect to be flamed for this post. But I do not care. Because I can believe what ever I want even if I am wrong as you can too.
I mean we muck around with DNA now? Who is not to say in the vast ranges of intersteller space that there is a race that likes to seed planets.
Can you even think of your self as a experiment?
What if "Godly"creation and evelution are both nonsence?
My beliefs are that we are here do to another race no GOD no evelution.
The appearances of different species can easily be the work of intersteller travelors. They could all come from different worlds or test tubes.
That could make GOD a BEM (bug eyed monster) and every thing most of the world believes false.
Superstition allways leads to a "GOD" must have been responcible.
Science claims evelution is the key.
I really expect to be flamed for this post. But I do not care. Because I can believe what ever I want even if I am wrong as you can too.
