← Back to The Journey of Certainty
This content has been automatically translated. View original in Arabic
Peace be upon you. It is common for the flattering media to attribute all the credit in the country to the leaders. If the land produces crops and roads are paved, the credit goes to His Excellency the President. If a building is constructed and a project is completed, the credit goes to His Excellency the President. And inevitably, after the completion of everything, he must cut the ribbon and inaugurate the project. All of this is true even if His Excellency the President did not contribute even a millimeter to the progress of his country. In fact, even if his corruption and the corruption of his entourage hindered much of the progress and destroyed many projects in their infancy.
However, since there are blessings that have occurred during the tenure of His Excellency the President, there is no doubt that the credit is his, according to the flattering media. And no one has the right to ask: What if His Excellency the President was not present, would it not have been possible for the country and the people to progress much more than they are now? Are these achievements not expected from the progress of time and the accumulation of human experience?
The media relies on what is known in (the science of logical fallacies) as "With this, therefore because of this" (With this, therefore because of this). The fallacy that (coincidence means causation). That is, claiming that the occurrence of two events together indicates that one is the cause of the other. And this fallacy in its most absurd forms is laughable, such as when someone says: I noticed that every time I drink a glass of milk, the sun rises, which indicates that my drinking of milk causes the sun to rise. Therefore, it is always emphasized that coincidence and the existence of a relationship do not imply causation (Correlation does not imply causation).
What does all of this have to do with the myth of evolution? In exactly the same way, the followers of the myth emphasize the importance of their myth, attribute to it the credit for discoveries, and mention it in a funny way even though it is completely valueless, and indeed, it has harmed scientific research, as we will see.
Let us look at (6) prominent models, it is claimed that the myth of evolution has great merit in them, and we will take them from the most prominent scientific sites: the American National Academy of Sciences, the "Scientific American" website, and the Nobel Prize website.
These six models are:
On the website of the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, you will find a book titled: "Science, Evolution, and Creation." It emphasizes that the theory of evolution has become a fact, and that creation is not science. Then, it proceeds to explain the importance of the theory of evolution for science: The book mentioned two achievements of the theory, and the abridged version added - briefly - a third achievement. Let's see these achievements and their relation to the honorable president.
Under the title "Evolution in Medicine: Combating New Infectious Diseases," the book tells the story of the SARS virus that emerged in China and spread elsewhere, killing hundreds. Then, the book said: "Using a new technique known as DNA Microarray, researchers were able to identify the virus as a previously unknown member of a specific family of viruses within 24 hours; this result was also proven by other researchers using different techniques. Immediately, work began on producing a blood test that could identify people infected with the disease for them to be quarantined, on treatments for the disease, and on vaccines to prevent infection."
Of course, up to this point, it's a beautiful story and an excellent scientific achievement. Here, the honorable myth must be brought in to take a picture with the discoverers. (Sound of camera) The book continues: "Understanding evolution was essential for identifying the SARS virus; the genetic material in the virus was similar to that in other viruses because they evolved from the same common virus."
We can ask here: What is the relation of his honor to the discovery? The SARS virus resembles other viruses; this enabled the discoverers to produce modified treatments and vaccines based on understanding this similarity. What is the relation of all this to your belief about what was in the past? Whether you believe that these organisms evolved from one another randomly and coincidentally as the myth says, or that there is a Creator who brought some out of others with knowledge and wisdom, or that the Creator created each of them independently? You are now facing organisms that have similar things, and you can exploit this similarity for the benefit of humanity. What is the relation of the cause of the similarity to the matter?
And do not forget, my brothers, that in the previous episodes, the claim that "similarity means common ancestry" was completely demolished - by the grace of God - which the book mentions as an assumed fact by saying: "The genetic material in the virus was similar to that in other viruses because they evolved from the same common virus." We explained the comedy of such claims in the episode "That tail you know nothing about." Or perhaps the followers of his honor think that he deserves credit for the concept of vaccines from the beginning? History does not support them; the first known vaccine (smallpox vaccine) was by Edward Jenner in 1796, meaning 60 years before the Darwin myth.
Then, the book moves on to the second achievement of his honor, under the title: Evolution in Agriculture: Domestication of wheat, meaning cultivating and improving its characteristics, instead of being satisfied with what grows in the wild. The book explained how farmers have been working since ancient times to improve the characteristics of wheat and other crops, and to crossbreed similar species of animals. Then, how researchers identified genes responsible for desirable characteristics. Beautiful! What is the relation of this to his honor?
The book tells you: "People were thus using evolutionary changes" and concludes by saying: "These advances depend on understanding evolution to analyze the relationships between plants and search for characteristics that can be used to improve crops." Wait a minute! When our ancestors and the ancestors of our ancestors - before Darwin was born - when they were grafting apple trees with pears, and when they were crossbreeding similar species of animals to obtain improved offspring, were they acting based on Darwinian convictions about random changes and blind selection? Was the first mule born from the mating of a donkey and a horse before the birth of the Darwin myth?
Then, what is the relation of his honor to identifying the genes responsible for desirable characteristics in wheat and crops? What service did his honor - specifically - provide in this achievement? What is the relation of my beliefs about the origin of genes to my exploitation and utilization of them for the benefit of humanity? No relation. But, a picture must be taken of his honor with this achievement as well. (Sound of camera)
Thirdly - bacterial resistance to antibiotics: There are many types of bacteria that have undergone genetic changes, making them more resistant to antibiotics; and thus more deadly to humans. True, what does this have to do with his excellency? They said: "Knowing how evolution leads to increased bacterial resistance is important in controlling the spread of infectious diseases." Evolution?! What does evolution have to do with the subject?! What is its relation to bacterial resistance? What is the relationship of random mutations and blind selection to the mechanisms that amazed you, yourselves, making you describe bacteria as intelligent, and attribute to them divine descriptions such as knowledge and will?! As we explained in the episode (Worshippers of Microbes).
If we take, for example, the ability of bacteria to resist the first known antibiotic, penicillin "Penicillin," how did bacteria manage to do that? Through various means, each of which is highly complex and precise, such as the production of the enzyme beta-lactamase "Beta-lactamase." This enzyme is composed of hundreds of amino acids arranged in a precise order, with no room for randomness, and undergoes modifications in the final stages of its production at very specific locations; to take a three-dimensional shape; for this enzyme to perform a specific task, which is targeting the weakest point in the antibiotic; to neutralize its effect. Where is the randomness and chance in all of this?!
This scientific paper, for example, talks about one of the types of beta-lactamase consisting of (263) amino acids. Have you seen in bacteria random failed attempts to manufacture chains longer and shorter than this length? (50), (100), (200), (300) with random arrangements of amino acids before bacteria - by chance - reach this enzyme? If the matter were left to randomness - as you say - then the land and sea, the earth and the sky would be filled with these failed attempts before bacteria reach the production of this enzyme. So, did bacteria reach the production of this enzyme specifically through random evolution? Repeatedly, without seeing with it countless random attempts?
Then, researchers produce a new antibiotic that resists this enzyme; so bacteria produce another type of beta-lactamase. They produce another antibiotic, and it produces a third, fourth, and fifth type of beta-lactamase until you feel that you are dealing with a being that has research centers and massive research, not with microscopic creatures that gather millions of them on the head of a pin. All of this is in just one mechanism out of the many mechanisms of bacterial resistance. What does this have to do with randomness or chance?!
By the way, some of the prominent figures in the field of antibiotics have expressed their displeasure at involving his excellency in the picture of discoveries in this field. Dr. Ernst Chain "Ernst Chain" is one of the three who produced penicillin and won the Nobel Prize with Alexander Fleming "Alexander Fleming" and Howard Florey "Howard Florey." He is found describing the myth of random mutations as an unfounded hypothesis, with no evidence to support it, and incompatible with the facts, and wonders at the acceptance of scientists for it without criticism.
Similarly, Dr. Selman Waksman "Selman Waksman," the discoverer of streptomycin "Streptomycin," the first effective antibiotic against tuberculosis, and also a Nobel Prize winner, described the application of Darwinian principles in the struggle for survival in the world of antibiotics as a fabrication of imagination "Figment of the imagination."
Similarly, Professor Philip Skell "Philip Skell," who contributed to the production of antibiotics, and who is described as the father of carbene chemistry, wrote in the year (2005) in the journal The Scientist "The Scientist" an article titled (Why Do We Harass Darwin?!) Why do we harass Darwin?! In it, he said: "There is no doubt that my own research in antibiotics during World War II did not receive guidance from Darwinian evolution, nor did Alexander Fleming when he discovered 'the inhibition of penicillin on bacteria.'"
And Skell says: "Recently, I asked more than seventy prominent scientists; would they have done their work differently if they saw Darwin's theory as incorrect? And their answers were all the same: no. And he says that he examined the outstanding discoveries in biology during the past century and found that - as always - Darwin's theory did not provide tangible guidance, but it was brought in after the discoveries as a literary sparkle that attracts attention; meaning: exactly as his excellency the president is brought in to cut the project's ribbon. And Skell says: "From my conversations with distinguished researchers, it has become clear that modern experimental biology derives its strength from the availability of new tools and methods, not from delving into historical biology."
Professor Skell was bold in criticizing Darwinism, and when the (National Academies of Sciences) issued the book we are discussing, Skell - who was one of the members of the academy, by the way - responded to them with an article in the journal (Policy and Life Sciences) - and note the title - and among what he said in it: "People must look seriously at the unnecessary and misleading involvement of historical, philosophical, and religious ideas from various sources in the worlds of experimental science, including this recent edition of the National Academies of Sciences." With the reminder - brothers - that we have clarified the relationship of religion to experimental science in the episode (The Hostage). Of course, Skell did not escape the attacks of the myth's followers after this bold criticism, who described him as a cowardly creationist, a liar, or ignorant. This - in brief - is what concerns the ratio of achievements in the field of bacterial resistance to his excellency.
The third achievement mentioned by a book of a major American organization: (NASA) "NAS" reminding us of the saying: The mountain gave birth to a mouse.
Come with us to another site, Scientific American, which is concerned with educating Americans about scientific issues. You will find this article titled: "Why Everyone Should Learn the Theory of Evolution." Yes, let us understand why, if you will. It says to you: "Evolution should be taught as a practical means of understanding drug resistance and the price of fish." It continues: "The most important thing is that Darwin's legacy is directly related to the way society formulates public policies and sometimes the way we choose to manage our lives. Overfishing of large, mature fish will reduce their numbers and lead to the proliferation of smaller ones instead, thereby increasing the price of fish in the market.
Wow! What a great achievement! What a great achievement for his eminence! If we continue to catch large fish, their numbers will decrease, and small fish will become more numerous. We would not have known this truth unless we believed in evolution, unless we called this process (in English): selection. This truth is not known to the inhabitants of the Eskimo outskirts and the jungles of Africa, who have never heard of his eminence. (Camera sound) Of course, brothers, human selection in dealing with food is documented historically before the birth of the myth by more than 800 years, as in the book of the Muslim scholar Al-Biruni about India, which recorded the behavior of farmers in selecting the best grains and branches, and excluding the weak.
The article (Scientific American) moves on to the second achievement of his eminence, which concerns bacterial resistance to antibiotics, and we have already addressed this. Then it mentions the third and final achievement in the article. Come on, brothers, and listen with us. (Scientific American) says to you: "Many modern diseases such as obesity and diabetes are partially the result of the mismatch between our genes and the environment, which changes faster than the genetic material's ability to evolve. Understanding this mismatch may help convince the patient to make changes in his diet that are compatible with the inability of his genes to adapt to large amounts of modified carbohydrates and saturated fats from the continuous consumption of Alfredo linguine and its likes. Alfredo linguine, for those who do not know, is a dish similar to fettuccine, and fettuccine, for those who do not know, is a dish similar to Alfredo linguine... In any case, according to the article (Scientific American), if you go to a diabetic obese patient and say to him: Do you know the cause of your problem? Alfredo meals and donuts, or knafeh and mansaf if you are Arab, all of these are called: environmental changes and random mutations in your genetic material - even if they have taken you out of the lineage of an animal - but unfortunately, they are not fast enough to produce mechanisms suitable for dealing with these environmental changes. The solution is to adjust your diet to suit your genetic material.
If you tell him this, he will be convinced; and he will change his diet, and the problem of obesity and diabetes will be solved, and his eminence will come to take pictures with them after they have enjoyed health and well-being; and we will live in a happy world. Did you know "Why everyone should learn the theory of Evolution" (Why everyone should learn the theory of evolution)? I, honestly, brothers, if I came to write a symbolic satirical article in the name of the supporters of the myth, I would not have come up with anything more comedic than this.
We have the sixth achievement attributed to His Excellency: the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for the year 2018, which was awarded about a month and a half ago to three researchers. What did they do specifically? Let's start by explaining what Frances Arnold did. Arnold wanted to improve the properties of enzymes found in nature. Enzymes are proteins produced by living cells to accelerate specific biological reactions. Arnold's most famous research in this field is the one she did on subtilisin, an enzyme produced by a type of bacteria. We want to change its composition to enable it to work at higher temperatures and in organic solvents, allowing it to be used in cleaning and many other processes.
So, what did Arnold do? She couldn't produce an improved enzyme from its primary elements, so she extracted the genetic material from the bacteria that produces subtilisin, which is translated into this enzyme. She exposed the genetic material to specific factors in measured amounts and durations to induce mutations, meaning changes in its primary elements. Then, she placed this altered genetic material into live bacterial cells that have mechanisms ready to read the genetic material, so these cells produce new enzymes from this genetic material. Then, she compared the resulting enzymes in terms of their ability to perform the required specific task. Arnold selected the enzymes that work in the organic solvent and at high temperatures and excluded the enzymes that couldn't do so, as well as those that were damaged by the changes. Then, Arnold made improvements to the successful enzymes, and so on. A beautiful achievement in the field of genetic engineering. What the other two researchers did is based on the same main principles: making changes to improve the efficiency of proteins - in this case, antibodies - and selecting them based on specific criteria to improve their binding to their targets.
Do you know, brothers, what the researchers did with these experiments? It's as if they came to His Excellency, the myth, and said, "Why are you sad?" He said, "People are laughing at me; they don't believe that all living creatures in the universe are from my achievements." Okay, prove it to them with practical evidence. - I need time. - How much time? - About a billion years. - Just that? No problem, we will help you. Aren't you, Your Excellency, random mutations and blind selection without goals over billions of years? Okay, we will help you in all your points of weakness. We won't leave you to randomness; we won't let you wait for a random mutation in the genetic material from ultraviolet rays, then another mutation years later from a chemical substance. No, no, we will expose specific locations in the genetic material to groups of simultaneous mutations with a very high density, reaching a million times the expected rate in nature. And we won't leave your selection blind; no! We will take you by the hand and guide you with our eyes. We won't leave useless proteins to accumulate in the cells from mutations; we will get rid of the useless proteins ourselves. And we won't leave you without a goal; we will define the goal ourselves and design the experiments based on it. So, Your Excellency, we have emptied you of your content completely and solved all your problems completely. So, no random mutations, no blind selection, no unknown goal. And with all this, you won't need billions of years. What took billions of years according to Your Excellency can now be completed in a few weeks or a year, as Professor Sara Linse, a member of the committee awarding the Nobel Prize in Chemistry this year, said during the award ceremony: "What they did is speed up evolution. Nature had billions of years, but now we want this process to be possible in a few weeks or a year in the lab."
We have shown your muscles, Your Excellency! Can you, if you please, produce billions of forms of living creatures as they exist now, to silence those who laugh at you? His Excellency tried and couldn't. Okay, can you create a single fly for us? His Excellency tried and couldn't. Okay, can you transform one type of creature into another? His Excellency tried and couldn't. Okay, can you create a single cell for us? Okay, can you produce a single enzyme for us, knowing that a single living cell contains millions of enzymes? You have been disappointed, Your Excellency. Okay, can we, as researchers, try on behalf of Your Excellency? They couldn't. Therefore, when Professor Sara was asked why the researchers didn't manufacture the enzyme themselves instead of modifying the enzymes found in nature, she said, "So far, we cannot, with our knowledge, produce an enzyme from the beginning." So, she tells you, "So far, we cannot, with our knowledge, produce an enzyme from its primary units."
All that the researchers did was change the properties of proteins found in nature. Subtilisin remained subtilisin but with different properties, and the antibodies remained antibodies but with different properties. This is what could be done in a time that shortens, according to Professor Sara Linse, billions of years of evolution. Therefore, we expect the title of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry this year to be: the prize for showing the failure of the theory of evolution and closing its file completely after its long ridicule, especially since, as Professor Sara Linse also clarified, the differences between what was done and evolution are: "In nature, it is a random process because mutations happen by chance from UV rays or something else, while in the lab, the process was based on knowledge. You must have an idea of which subjects to change in the genetic material, then we add some randomness to that." She also clarified the difference in terms of having a goal: "In nature, there is no goal, while in directed evolution, the scientist defines the goal. All of this was in her answers to the questions raised by the journalist.
With all of this, the outcome is merely a change in the properties of proteins, not the transformation of one type into another, nor the creation of something from nothing. So, what if the matter is left to His Majesty? For all of this, we expect - of course - that part of the prize is for researchers to prove the inability of His Majesty. Let's see how the Nobel Prize is announced: The Nobel Prize website was titled: "They Controlled the Power of Evolution." And the Nobel Prize website used this image to express this year's prize. Thus, Arabic-speaking websites published the news, such as the "Midan" site affiliated with Al-Jazeera; it published the news under the title: "Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2018: Evolution Theory Treats Humans." Thus, experiments that prove the inability of His Majesty are turned into one of His achievements. Thus, they make the achievements of experiments charged with design, conscious choice, and goal setting into random, accidental achievements, and blind selection without purpose or doer. No problem! The important thing is that His Majesty appears in the picture.
A vulgar, laughable gathering of the majesty of superstition that a group of prominent researchers are afraid of and criticized, including doctors in high positions in America such as Dr. Matti Leisola, Dr. Douglas Axe, and Dr. Anne Gauger. You will find them with strong scientific statements, other than those mentioned in this article for our brothers in "Muslim Researchers." Has His Majesty contributed anything to this research? Did the researchers need him in any way? The researcher - one of the Nobel Prize winners - Arnold, was asked by the British newspaper "The Guardian": "The Nobel Prize was awarded to you for the directed evolution of enzymes, what is this concept?" She replied: "It is simply hybridization; similar to the mating of different types of cats or dogs to produce desired traits, but we did this at the molecular level." Therefore, Arnold was inspired by what happens before her in hybridization, and the subject has nothing to do with what was in the first time, nor with the majesty of superstition.
This is how the myth is introduced, and this is how they try to convince people that their lives would not have been possible without the grandeur of the myth. For example, in this amusing lecture titled: "Medicine Without Evolution is Like Engineering Without Physics," the speaker repeats logical fallacies and regurgitates old lies about useless body parts and design flaws, which we have refuted in episodes such as "Embarrassing You," "Sleep Health," and "The Cocktail." He suggests that if creatures were created with intelligence, women would have umbrellas to open during childbirth instead of the suffering they endure. In English: "What do women really need? An umbrella... I mean... this whole idea about pushing the baby's head through the bones... this is madness!" Have you seen the science of his followers?!!
After this, can the followers of the myth come up with a single useful scientific research based on the conviction that creatures came about randomly and by chance? Has it ever happened that his grandeur has included a researcher and said to him: "My son, this world you see is the work of randomness and chance, not by an actor, nor the will of a willer"; so this researcher went forth with these inspiring ideas to his grandeur; and was able to bring us a discovery that is beneficial to humanity? The scientific method is not to gather for me the names of scientists who are claimed to believe in evolution, but the question here is: Has the myth been credited with any of the beneficial discoveries? In fact, we have shown in the episode "The Hostage" that any scientist who comes up with any useful science has only done so after renouncing the stupidity of materialism and the claims of randomness and chance in their practical scientific practices. If they were truly convinced that there are phenomena that came about by randomness, useless body parts, and genetic junk, then the research would stop at this point and there would be no need for exploration, as we have shown in the episode "The Atheists' God of the Gaps."
Nevertheless, the followers of the myth, as usual, practice deceiving people and ridiculing their ideas to pass on the fallacy of "In the era of His Excellency the President." Yes, the myth has no benefit of any kind, but rather the opposite; the myth of evolution has harmed scientific research, caused a great deal of money, time, and effort to be wasted in futile attempts to answer questions such as: When did humans and chimpanzees evolve from their common ancestor? What types of random mutations caused humans to evolve from primitive creatures? Go and review the research databases, such as "PubMed"; and write phrases, such as: in English, "Human," "Chimpanzee," "Evolution," "Genome," and look at the thousands of researches worked on that, then bring me a single benefit from the researches based on the illusion of the myth.
When you look at the evidence of the myth, you see nothing but lies and logical fallacies, which we have detailed in the previous episodes, then you see his grandeur wandering in the streets of science, looking for any new discovery to rush towards it, and insert himself and have a picture taken with this discovery that has nothing to do with him; then you realize the extent of his tragedy and misery. And with that, you see from our own people who say: [For the immense and extended influence that the theory has exerted - and continues to exert - in different and very diverse scientific fields; from anatomy, tissue, organ functions, neuroscience and the brain, to pharmacology and drug preparation, in addition to biology and natural history - its original and noble field - to psychology; especially evolutionary psychology, sociology, history, and the philosophy of ethics; the philosophy of ethics, and political philosophy, and other fields and disciplines of science and the arts].
Indeed! Its effect appears in all these sciences, but what is this effect? [It is an important theory. A person in this era cannot deal with these sciences and arts seriously, with a wide and flexible understanding and comprehension, without understanding this theory." And I think you have realized - brothers - after this episode that the reality of the influence in these sciences is simply: (It happened in the era of the grandeur of the myth) not that you need it - as he says - to understand these sciences. Yes, the myth has left its mark in many fields, but it is a corrupting and destructive effect as we have detailed in the episode "Darwin's Bullet on Humanity," when it led people to believe that they are more evolved than others, and incited them to annihilate and enslave other races that they considered less evolved, and put them in zoos to display them like animals! And when it led to the justification of crimes by claiming that they are the result of the return of animalistic traits in humans who evolved from these savage animals, and when it justified all moral corruption, as we have shown in the episode "Science Forgery: Homosexuality as an Example" And the myth did not bring any benefit of any kind except for one benefit, which is that when it cast doubt in the hearts of people, it was an excuse for lovers of science to uproot it from the hearts and purify science from its falsehood.
So when we extract it, we extract with it an evil that was attached to it that would not have appeared; so the certainty of God's signs, both visible and hidden, will grow in our hearts, and the pages of science will be purified in accordance with God's saying - may He be exalted: {He will remove what Satan throws in} [Al-Hajj: 52] Then God will establish His signs and God is Knowing, Wise} [Al-Hajj: 52] and His saying - may He be exalted: {And that those who have been given knowledge may know that it is the truth from your Lord, and they believe in it, and their hearts submit to it, and God indeed guides those who believe to a straight path} [Al-Hajj: 54]
Thus, we have discussed - brothers - the fourteenth fallacy of the fallacies of promoting the myth, which is the fallacy: (With him then because of him.. it happened in the era of the grandeur of the myth). The question that is often repeated: If the myth is such a failure, why do all these scientists show conviction in it? Why do they accept that the credit for their discoveries is attributed to it? Is it true that (99%) of scientists believe in the theory of evolution? Questions we will answer in the next episode, God willing, so follow me.
Of course, I will continue from where I stopped:
The question that is often repeated: If the myth is such a failure, why do all these scientists show conviction in it? Why do they accept that the credit for their discoveries is attributed to it? Is it true that (99%) of scientists believe in the theory of evolution? Questions we will answer in the next episode, God willing, so follow me.