The Blind Darwinian Belief in Explaining Innate Nature
Peace be upon you
Let's address the question:
Does any innate phenomena
have proven evolutionary causes?
Or do atheists and evolutionists have
blind faith to fill their knowledge gaps?
i.e. when atheists denied the
existence of Allah and consequently denied
the innate nature instilled by the Creator;
they no longer had an explanation for
innate religiosity, morality, sense
of purpose, free will and instincts
— apparently immaterial phenomena—
So they looked for material explanations
that they claimed existed
in the Darwinian evolutionary framework
The cause —according to them—
is a specific gene, a group of genes,
traits related to genes
selected by nature,
or the innate phenomenon developed
somehow due to yet unknown causes
and then got selected
by Darwinian natural selection
The question remains: Is their claim
backed by scientific evidence?
As to the last argument:
referral to the unknown;
atheists do not accept such arguments
from theists as an explanation for things
This leaves us with the link
between innate phenomena
and genes which we'll examine
The claim that a trait in an organism
is related to a specific gene
must be validated
by specific scientific methods
The first method is 'Gene Insertion'
or 'Gene Deletion' into a fertilized egg
then monitoring whether this causes
the appearance or disappearance
of a particular trait.
This is possible in animals
such as 'knockout Mice'
However, it hasn't been done on humans.
Besides, many complex factors
interfere with it
such as 'compensatory mechanisms'
which may compensate for the deleted gene
The only possible way for testing
in humans is to perform genetic scanning
and prove that people with a certain trait
have a gene that is missing in others
who do not have this trait or tendency
or that they have different
'gene expression' from others;
what is known as 'Epigenetics'
for example, which has been used
to link some physical traits
and diseases to genetic causes
We repeat: atheists and Darwinists
'darwinize' everything
including innate phenomena!
There is a long list of books
which are based on this, such as:
"The God Gene"
"Evolutionary Origins of Morality"
"The Evolutionary Origin of Freedom"
"The Truth about Cinderella
A Darwinian View of Parental Love"
"The Evolution of Desire:
Strategies of Human Mating"
and many others...
Now, let's set aside the Darwinist claim
of traits which appeared in 'unknown' ways
then got selected; as the term
'unknown' is not verifiable science
We are left with the gene link
Based on the aforementioned scientific
methods of linking genes to traits;
are any of the claims made
by these books backed
by scientific evidence?
Did they identify the responsible gene
for any innate tendency? Shockingly: No!
These claims have no scientific basis:
It is simply blind Darwinian faith!
These books bypass the question
of a material cause for innate phenomena,
assume that a material cause is
a basic axiom and a foregone conclusion
and move beyond to discuss the
evolutionary benefits of innate phenomena;
in unproductive compositions!
This baseless Darwinization of everything
was criticized even
by some Darwinist atheists
including the atheist Darwinist
Prof. of Ecology and Evolution,
Jerry A. Coyne, in his book titled,
"Why Evolution is True"
Coyne says, “There is an increasing
(and disturbing) tendency
of psychologists, biologists, and
philosophers to Darwinize every aspect
of human behavior, turning its
study into a scientific parlor game
But imaginative reconstructions of how
things might have evolved,
are not science;
they are stories.”
Dean Hamer was an exception
Unlike other authors, he discussed
a specific gene for religiosity in humans
However, Hamer —as we'll see—
is the champion of baseless claims;
refuted even by other researchers
His book, "The God Gene", is based on
one alleged unpublished study;
irreproducible by other researchers,
as clearly stated by Carl Zimmer
Even some atheists mocked his claims
saying: "No god, and no god gene, either!"
In fact, those who claim that a specific
gene is linked to a certain
innate tendency
are either shamefully
ignorant about genetics
—notwithstanding their Ph.D. titles—
or they are deceiving their audience!
Linking genes with traits is a much more
complex process than previously thought;
as in this 2008 paper published
in Nature which showed
that decoding the genetic code in
the Human Genome Project
was a disappointment:
Since we found that even
physical traits (such as height)
and mental illnesses (such as
schizophrenia), which appear to be linked
to heredity, cannot be attributed
to a gene or even to a specific
group of genes and that the matter
was much more complicated than
what's taught in schools and universities
Other studies state that
a single behavioral trait
may be tied to thousands of genes;
each with a slight role in producing it
They also acknowledge the inability
to identify these alleged genes;
even if we concede that there is a link
in the first place
The topic is seemingly
very complex and ambiguous
Yet, the likes of Hamer refer to:
"The God gene"
and Western headlines proclaim:
"This gene might decide
if you vote Republican or Democrat!
An oversimplification of the topic
and treating people like fools
It is not surprising if some young people
outside the scientific community
fall for such laughable claims;
but for anyone with even a minimal
scientific training, doctors or students
in medical and biological fields;
to circulate them is incredible!
Before I go on
I would like to say that
in theory, it is possible
that Allah Almighty created
genes in humans that help in
the formation of innate tendencies
As explained in Episode 4:
If this is true then it
would be further proof of the Existence
and Greatness of the Creator
However, it's very shameful for
materialists to base their explanations
for innate phenomena on the assumption
that such genes exist or on some
yet undiscovered, evolutionary process;
as an alternative to a Creator's existence
without any proof, and counter
—what all evidence points to—
with unproven claims!
It's shameful that atheists deny us our
belief in the Unseen (Allah's existence)
despite all the evidence; while they
have no issue with their faith
in unknown genes and undiscovered
processes; without any evidence
It is shameful
that atheists claim that
our belief in the existence of a Creator
is to bridge gaps in our knowledge; i.e.
we don't know the cause for some things
so we assume a Creator to explain them;
which is not true about
the Islamic belief system;
while atheists exercise
blind 'Darwinian faith'
to explain phenomena
that their materialism failed to explain!
They denied the existence of a Creator so
they needed an alternative: materialism
which denies soul and innate nature, then
spun fairytales around this alternative!
They wrote books and gave lectures
without any basis;
except a great illusion!
Is this 'blind faith'?! Isn't it the
worst example of mind surrender?
Is there any worse example
of bias and prejudice?!
These are the accusations
they throw at Muslims
Is there anybody more deserving of them
than these atheists and Darwinists?!
They claim a conflict between Islam and
reality and between Islam and science
while their claims, including: "Man has
no free will, but is driven by genes,"
expose the huge conflict with reality:
that Man does experience free choice
and their disrespect for science manifests
clearly in their baseless claims on genes
All this follows from denying innate proof
for the existence of Allah Almighty
This brings us close to the end of our
discussion on innate evidence
We do not want to elaborate
or get distracted from the topic but
We'll discuss one example of the deception
practiced by atheists and Darwinists
—in the name of science—the claim
of a genetic basis for homosexuality!
Another example of the result of denying
the innate nature of human instincts
and attempting to explain them
in a purely materialistic manner
This will be discussed in the
next episode Allah willing
Peace be upon you!