← Back to The Journey of Certainty
This content has been automatically translated. View original in Arabic
Peace be upon you. From the beginning of our critique of false science, there has been a recurring objection, summarized as: "Think about one thing, if any of these scholars seriously refutes the theory of evolution, or a part of the theory of evolution, in other words: refutes all the sciences that come with it, why don't they submit their research paper and win the Nobel Prize?! Why?" "Someone! Can someone answer me?" I will answer you today, and I will answer those who ask like you.
According to these people; as soon as I send a solid scientific research supported by evidence, in which I refute the theory of evolution, journals like "Nature" and "Science" will receive it, and the Nobel Prize committee will embrace me, and they will say to me: "Brother, may Allah reward you well, where have you been from us for so long?! You saved us from misguidance, and you proved to us the invalidity of the theory of evolution, so we will reward you for your great work with the Nobel Prize." A great idea! Why don't I do it actually?
Before I waste my time and try the experiment, let's see together the story of the research related to the functions of the hand and published in the journal "Plos One" in 2016, to discuss together the possibility of me winning the Nobel Prize.
(Sound effects)
A team of Chinese researchers conducted detailed experiments that revealed the precision of the hand's work and its suitability for performing the daily activities that humans need. The research is filled with experiments, illustrations, analyses, and equations. However, the researchers dared and used their minds, imagine?! They did not stop at the boundaries set by materialism - as we mentioned in the previous episode - which prevents the mind from drawing the obvious conclusion from "Science" (experimental science), which is that these hands, with their great composition, must have a creator who created them with a will for specific purposes. So the researchers dared and wrote the word "Creator" three times in the research. The Chinese team? Yes! And you will see why!
In the first place, they wrote: "The clear functional relationship - meaning in the hand - indicates that the biomechanical property of this structure of the ligaments, between the muscles and joints, is 'the proper design by the creator' (the appropriate design that the creator has made) so that the hand can perform its daily functions comfortably."
In the second place, they wrote: "There is no doubt that the harmony in the hand indicates 'the mystery of the creator's invention' (the secret of the creator's invention), as if the researchers were amazed at seeing this greatness, and they have the right to be amazed and astonished!"
Open, brother, a book of anatomy, and browse through the chapter on the anatomy of the hand, or get a video about anatomy. And we are talking here about the hand, from the wrist only; because it was the subject of the Chinese team's research. Read about the twenty-seven bones in your hand, and the composition of the eight bones in your wrist that enable your hand to perform different types of movements. Look at the types of muscles in this hand; for example, your thumb; how it needs four muscles to perform its different movements and functions! Contemplate the cartilage that prevents the bones from rubbing against each other! Then contemplate the tendons and ligaments "tendons and ligaments" that connect the different bones, and connect the bones and muscles to allow the hand to perform different movements. Each of them is in its appropriate place, interlaced with a network of blood vessels and nerves!
Contemplate how the hand is connected to the forearm and its muscles with a network of ligaments, and feel this when you clench your fingers and stretch them. This hand covered with skin is a wonderful world! The more you delve into it by one millimeter, the more you discover of the ligaments, muscles, bones, cartilage, nerves, blood vessels, sheaths "sheaths", fatty tissues, the lymphatic system, and others. An interconnected, interwoven, integrated, orderly network, everything in it performs its function. A wonderful world that we rarely think about! So how if you move to the field of physiology "the science of the functions of the organs", to see how this wonderful composition of the hand enables it to perform all that humans need from movements, which is the subject of the research of the Chinese scientists' team. So they have the right to say in their research: "There is no doubt that the harmony in the hand indicates 'the mystery of the creator's invention' (the secret of the creator's invention)."
As for the third place in their research paper, this team said: "In conclusion, we say: our study may help improve our understanding of the human hand, and confirm that this mechanical structure is 'the proper design by the creator' (the appropriate design that the creator has made) for excellent performance, for many functions after the evolutionary redesign that occurred in the hands of our ancestors over millions of years." Ah! So the researchers do not deny the descent of man from animal ancestors and use the word "Evolution" (evolution), but they state that there must be work by the creator in the design of this hand, perhaps they mean that the creator directed this evolution in some way. The important thing is that there is intention and will! And this touches on the atheism that the followers of the theory of evolution cling to.
The Creator? "The Creator"? How dare you, researchers? How dare you, and use your minds in contemplating "Science" to conclude that there must be a will, a Creator who created the hand for specific purposes? How dare you and cross the boundaries set by materialism? -As we explained in the previous episode- Dr. James McInerney "James McInerney" discovered this crime after two months of publishing the research! Dr. McInerney is an expert in molecular evolution at the University of Manchester, meaning one of the beneficiaries of the idolatry of the myth of evolution, who see their fate hanging by the myth; its fall is their fall! -As we explained in the episode (Tarzan)- So McInerney tweeted saying: "PLOS ONE is now a joke! Intelligent design by the Creator?! This makes the journal ridiculous!" And he added: "My original tweet was violent, because the Creator has been bothering me for more than twenty years!" No problem, Dr. it bothers you or you flatten -your honor- we have no invitation with your personal feelings! I wish for a scientific discussion of what was in the paper! Never, no scientific discussion, no understanding, no analysis, but an expression of annoyance and disgust!
And the Darwinists launched a hashtag titled "Creator gate" meaning (The Creator scandal) in the style of the Watergate scandal "Watergate". And the debate began under this hashtag, and the hashtag "hand of God" meaning (The Creator's hand) also launched! The Darwinian inquisitions began, and hundreds of comments and interactions were placed on the publisher's website, condemning, mocking, and demanding the immediate withdrawal of the paper. Of course, the myth's "bodyguard" (bodyguard); the journal "Nature" entered the scene. So "Nature" conducted an investigation with the authors and the journal, and published it the day after the storm began in an article titled: "A paper stating that the human hand was designed by the Creator, ignites concern, a clearly evolutionary research that pushes to self-review the process of editing and reviewing scientific papers."
Meaning the problem now is not in the crime that the researchers used the word Creator; but how this word passed the reviewers who are supposed to review the research, and how it passed the editors of the journal despite it clearly referring to the Creator? How did they not discover the crime of using the word Creator? Within the inquisition, "Nature" contacted "Xiong" -the principal investigator of the scientific research- and asked him how he wrote the word Creator. He said: "In fact, we are not native speakers of English, and we have completely lost the connotations of some words such as (the Creator), I am very sorry for that!" Meaning he is saying "Guys! A linguistic mistake and long live evolution, I did not mean it! I seek forgiveness from evolution which has no creator but it and I repent to it!" Remember that the researchers were believers in evolution but they associated the Creator with it!
And one of the Darwinists, Paul Myers "Paul Myers" commented saying: "There are no mistakes in the research information -as far as I see- but the authors made a sudden leap in the abstract of the research, and in its conclusions"; meaning by referring to a Creator, oh! Remember this well! There is no problem with the information or the experiments, but with the conclusion for the Darwinists. And when the scandal spread, some of the doctors who review the research of the journal "Plos One" usually those who did not pass this research in particular, began to express their acquittal from the crime, and threatened that the journal should withdraw the article otherwise they would resign from the process of reviewing its research. And others threatened that if this research is not withdrawn, then he and his students, and his colleagues in the research will be forced to stop reading all the research of the journal, and to quote all of it and not just this research! Meaning the peak of loyalty and innocence! As long as the shirk with evolution has occurred in one of the researches of this journal, they are innocent of the entire journal; they do not take its right, they leave its wrong, but they drop it all from their calculations, denying it, and disbelieving in the Creator whose name was mentioned in it one day, and loyalty to the gods of evolution. This reminds me of the fact of Abu Jahl and Umayyah ibn Khalaf, and the rest of the pagans while they threaten that they and their clans do not deal with the Banu Hashim, do not marry them or marry them, do not buy from them or sell to them; denying them that they protected the Prophet -peace be upon him-.
This is to inform you -brothers- that the principal investigator "Xiong" is a veteran researcher, currently with sixty-eight published researches, and that the journal (PLOS ONE) is a prestigious journal, which was awarded in 2009 the innovation award in publishing by the Society of Professional and Intellectual Publishers. Nevertheless, as soon as the word "the Creator" was mentioned in the pages of the journal, the journal became the target of anger and ridicule for the Darwinists and must be completely boycotted just as the Jews did with Abdullah ibn Salam when the Prophet -peace be upon him- asked them about him, they said: "The best of us and the son of the best of us, our master and the son of our master, our scholar and the son of our scholar!" When they knew that he had become Muslim, they said: "The worst of us and the son of the worst of us, the ignorant and the son of the ignorant!"
But -brothers- the Darwinist lobby is not without "fair-minded" people, so let's see what the "fair-minded" among them said! Dr. Marc Robinson Rechavi "Marc Robinson Rechavi" of evolutionary biology from the University of Lausanne said: "I agree with almost everyone that it is inappropriate to mention the word Creator. With a capital "C" in the paper"; oh, meaning if the letter "c" was small it could be said that the word Creator here is metaphorical expressing nature and blind selection. But with a capital "C" it is clear that it refers to the Creator whom everyone has a problem with believing in, or even mentioning! And Rechavi continues saying: "There is no human process free of mistakes, but the important thing now is how the journal deals with this mistake." Meaning all the sons of evolution are mistaken, and the best of the mistaken are those who repent from the mistake of mentioning the Creator.
Under this tremendous pressure from all sides and under the influence of this bullying, the journal -on the same day the storm began- published an announcement that it knew about the matter, and that it was investigating it in depth. Then it published again on the same day that it apologizes for the occurrence of the word Creator, and what that indicates is that the language of the article was not paid attention to properly by the reviewers. You can imagine -brothers- the state of terror that these successive statements express?! The journal was like being terrified of the idea that people would abandon it, go bankrupt, and its staff would be thrown into the streets. And the next day on 3/3/2016 the journal announced that it would withdraw the paper! Notice! Not just deleting the word Creator but withdrawing the entire paper! The paper had become a stain of shame for it that must be gotten rid of. And the journal announced again that it apologizes for the mistakes and negligence that led to the publication of this paper!
Of course, for the researchers, the retraction of the paper means the destruction of their efforts, the ruin of their scientific future, and the deprivation of future research grants. It may even mean their bankruptcy and being thrown onto the streets to clean passersby's shoes, and perhaps more, given that they are in China and received support from a Chinese institution. Thus, the researchers tried to convince everyone that the issue was merely a linguistic mistake! That the original Chinese word was mistranslated, otherwise, it meant: "Nature" (the nature)! The head of the research team said: "Our intention was that the hand was designed by nature, meaning a product of evolution! We will change the word 'Creator' to 'nature' in the revised version! We apologize for any issues caused by this misunderstanding! We have spent months conducting experiments, analyzing them, and writing the paper. Please, can you read the paper before making a decision?" Meaning, look at the experiments and the science in the paper before executing it for a linguistic error! However, the investigations indicated that the academic editor mentioned in the paper, Renzhi Han, had previously worked at the Chinese Evangelical Church in the city of Iowa! So, the charge was proven, just like the state security courts in Arab countries; the accused had spoken to someone, greeted someone who accompanied someone believed to have thought of committing the crime!
If you enter now to see the research on the website of the journal "Plos One," you will initially see: "retraction": withdrawal of the paper! And you will see the acknowledgment that the mention of the word "Creator" passed the reviewers. Although the journal repented and improved its repentance evolutionarily, it did not only delete the word "Creator," but it deleted the entire article; showing its loyalty to "the sacred cow of evolution," and its disbelief in the Creator! However, the matter was hung on its reputation; such that if you write about it on Wikipedia, for example, you will see engraved in its record the title: "Creator Gate," meaning (the scandal of the word Creator)! And the journal's impact factor dropped from 4.4 in 2010 to approximately 2.8 in 2018, a factor that indicates the number of times its research is cited.
The pressing and very important question here: Do any of those who attacked the research and the journal discuss it scientifically to prove that the composition and functions of the hand do not need a Creator who creates with knowledge and will? Did any of them publish a scientific proposal to prove that all this can come by chance, randomness, and blind selection? Or, did the majority of them even read the research? Of course not, there is no scientific discussion of this topic from these science charlatans! But only mockery, ridicule, and disgust! (And when Allah alone is mentioned, the hearts of those who do not believe in the Hereafter are filled with disgust, and when those [idols] other than Him are mentioned, behold, they rejoice!) [39:45] Only mockery and attack; how dare you mention the word Creator? It would have been more appropriate to call the story "IdiotesGate" or "IgnorantsGate" (the scandal of the ignorant) rather than (in English): the scandal of the word Creator.
There is no scientific proposal, but rather based on an introduction as if it were an axiom, it is never permissible to mention the Creator! It is never permissible to doubt the gods of chance, non-intentionality, and absurdity! It is never permissible to doubt evolution! (Have they made the gods one God? Indeed, this is a surprising thing!) [38:5] Okay, why is it surprising? Discuss it scientifically! (And the chiefs among them went forth, [saying], "Proceed and be patient over your gods.") [38:6] Come on! The gods of evolution are in trouble! (Indeed, this is a matter [worthy of] desire.) [38:6] There is a conspiracy against the gods!
After all of this, esteemed guests, let us revisit the question with which we began: [Put aside your thoughts for a moment. Any of these scholars, if they seriously disprove the theory of evolution or a part of it, in other words: disprove the sciences that come with it (in English), is there anyone? Can anyone answer me?] One might say: But the objectors ask you to publish a paper that disproves the theory of evolution or a part of it, not a paper that mentions the Creator. We have already explained in detail that the theory of evolution simply means: no creation, and that it has been completely emptied of its content, and its pillars have collapsed one by one. Nevertheless, its followers redefine it every time and do not seek an explanation except under its umbrella; because its complete exclusion means simply acknowledging creation. Publishing a paper stating the invalidity of evolution means a paper acknowledging creation, exactly!
There are researchers from the drains themselves who have doubted its pillars; they have doubted the randomness of changes, and the protection of selection, and in their published research in "Nature" and others. But what they cannot tolerate is one thing: the claim of randomness, and that there is no Creator! If you agree with us on this amount, then come and criticize the theory, redefine it, and propose another form of it, and publish it as you wish. The main thing is that you write at the end: "Evolution", because this is the word that means no creation, no purpose, no wisdom, but pure randomness. -Okay, since you have doubted even randomness, there must be a will! -No problem! It could be "microbial intelligence", cellular intelligence, bacteria choose, bacteria decide, viruses are intelligent. Attribute the will to anything! But do not mention the Creator!
Brother Ahmed Ibrahim, a specialist in pharmacy, wrote a scientific paper that proves in its details the existence of intention and will in the existence of creatures, using the phrase "Conscious intervention" (conscious intervention) without declaring the disproving of the theory of evolution, or declaring the existence of a Creator. And he sent it to one of the scientific journals, but it was rejected by the reviewer, Dr. James McNairy, who tweeted on his Twitter account: "I was sent a paper to review this (in English) weekend, a strange paper! Then I discovered that it was creationist, talking about conscious intervention, it seems scientific but it is confusing when scrutinized! With the existence of fake journals, we should expect the publication of many creationist papers in the future." Brother Ahmed tried to discuss with him on Twitter, but he did nothing but block him!
Notice, esteemed guests, they say: "The existence of a Creator is something outside the natural world 'Supernatural', metaphysical 'metaphysical', untestable 'Untestable', and they claim to reject it for this reason. As if the random evolution is an idea from the natural world and testable. As if a cell becomes by chance, then evolves into all forms of living beings - by chance - is something witnessed in nature, and succeeds in the test. And we have explained in the previous episode the corruption of limiting science to the natural world, and that the existence of the Creator is what reason indicates, and rejecting the implications of reason means rejecting 'Science' itself, while the fabrications of pseudoscience are not indicated by reason or science.
Of course, we emphasize - esteemed guests - that these global journals contain - on the other hand - beneficial science from which we benefit, and indeed, the follower of the journey of certainty knows that we cite research from "Nature", "Science", and other major journals; we present these researches to those who have not put their minds in the prison of materialism; to indicate to them the Creator, regardless of whether these researches have indicated to their owners or not. We infer from the discoveries, information, and experiments in "Nature" and others, but the conclusions that need a mind do not prevent us from following whim, or the psychological complexes present in the enemies of the Creator; we take the right and leave the wrong! As for the psychologically defeated, they want us to take what the West has as a (in English) "bundle" and say: "How do you cite papers from 'Nature' and 'Science' to disprove evolution, and the researchers themselves believe in evolution?" As if these people work by the saying of the Turkish secularist Zia Gokalp when he said: "We want to quote everything the West has, even the germs in their bellies." We say to them: "No thanks", leave the germs and intellectual dirt to you, but we have minds that Allah has honored us with, and we are also - without a doubt - with the principle: (Peer review of scientific papers by peers) "peer review" before publishing them. And I personally publish in scientifically peer-reviewed journals in the field of pharmaceutical sciences, and I have participated in the peer review process for scientific research.
Does this mean that Darwinists completely control the publication in global journals? -No; however, the most famous journals such as "Nature," "Science," and "Cell" are controlled by them, and most journals as well! And the Nobel Prize is also controlled by them! You might say, "Okay, isn't this evidence of the validity of the theory of evolution and the soundness of the materialistic approach?" I would say to you, "In recent years, sexual deviance has gained control and dominance to the extent that those who reject it are criminalized, imprisoned, and persecuted. Does this indicate the soundness of deviance and that deviance is right, while the opposition of humanity to them was previously invalid? Or does this indicate that humanity is now living a stage of regression of innate disposition and a disturbance of standards on the moral, scientific, and all levels?" (Say, "Not equal are the evil and the good, even if the abundance of the evil dazzles you. So fear Allah, O you of understanding, that you may be successful.") [Al-Ma'idah: 100].
Your argument that they control the most famous journals and the Nobel Prize is a known logical fallacy called "Appeal to Authority." If we argue the validity of something by the number of its followers or their control, we will enter a growing snowball built on illusion! The multitude of followers dazzles imitators, which increases the followers, and so on! We have not yet spoken about the politicization of the Nobel Prize and its lack of neutrality, but what we have detailed for you is sufficient; how the researchers who were awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry last year had their research actually prove the failure of the theory of evolution with merit! Nevertheless, the Nobel Prize website was titled: "They ruled on the power of evolution," and the Nobel Prize website used this image to express the prize, and they turned the facts upside down - as we have detailed for you. This is in addition to the politicization of other branches of the Nobel Prize, such as the Nobel Prize in Literature, which is awarded to those who excel in attacking Islam, mocking the Quran, and the Prophet (peace be upon him). And the Nobel Peace Prize, which is awarded to the most notorious criminals: Menachem Begin, Shimon Peres, Yitzhak Rabin, and other major criminals. Therefore, the title of the episode: "Give me the Nobel Prize" is only for mockery! Otherwise, we would not be honored to receive this tarnished name: "Nobel Prize"!
Again, there is no doubt that many of those who have received the Nobel Prize in science have made real contributions, but obtaining this prize is not a criterion of truth! And how excellent is what Dr. Hussam Abu Al-Bukhari - may Allah prolong his life - said: "The most dangerous and greatest thing that has happened to the Muslim mind in the past two centuries is that it has come to view itself and the Muslims around it through the eyes of its enemies and their religion." We now have groups of Muslims who evaluate everything by the standards of their enemies and do not accept the validity of anything unless it is stamped by them. Imagine if it was said to the Muslims at the beginning of their call: Instead of addressing the common people, go and ask the leaders of Quraysh to allow you to ascend the Ka'bah to address everyone, prove to them with evidence the triviality of Al-Lat and Al-Uzza, and invite them to the worship of Allah. Do that, otherwise, your call is not convincing.
Those who say, "Publish a study that disproves the theory of evolution"... Oh, come on, there isn't any published research in this field, is there?! Well, what about the list published by the Discovery Institute? I have reviewed many of their studies, and we have filtered them; some are not explicit enough in criticizing evolution, while there are - on the other hand - a good number of them published in accepted journals, within the observational-experimental scientific community, with a respectable impact factor, and they explicitly state criticism of random evolution or the existence of intent, or design in organisms. However, they do not dare to mention the word "the Creator" as the Chinese team did! So, do those who parrot: "Go, publish a study that disproves evolution," know about these studies mentioned, and have they read them? Or do they not even know of their existence, but rather align themselves with the louder current, which they call the scientific community, "neither in the herd nor in the chase," and have never entered a research laboratory in their lives.
Here is an important note - brothers - we agree with many of these studies that the universe and life did not come about by chance, but we do not imitate them in the term "intelligent design." Our principle is not to imitate, nor to rent out our minds. The one we used with the Darwinists, we also use with the followers of intelligent design. Even the word "design" is a technical term that expresses a process with its known stages and steps, which begins with preparing a small model, then goes through stages of review, correction, testing, and feedback, until the designer reaches the selection of the best alternatives or design solutions. Design is a human process resulting from not being fully aware of the outcomes of things and does not suit the absolute divine science. It is a process that goes through two stages: the concept and the execution. That is what design is! While we believe in a Lord who says: "Our command is but one word to a thing when We intend it, that is, We say to it, 'Be,' and it is" [16:40]. The universe and life point; not to intelligent design, but to a Creator who is All-Aware, All-Powerful, Wise. We take the useful information from the supporters of intelligent design, but we do not imitate them, not even in their terminology. Our approach with everyone is: "Those who listen to the word and follow the best of it" [39:18].
For all of the above - esteemed ones - the one who says, "Publish a paper that disproves the theory of evolution"; this objection assumes that the problem with the followers of false science is a problem of evidence, such that if we provide them with convincing evidence through scientific research, then the problem is solved, the knockout blow to the theory of evolution has been delivered, and the "Scientific Community" (the observational-experimental scientific community) will be forced to acknowledge its downfall, and its followers will be ashamed to speak of it after this knockout blow. What we have done in these episodes is that we have shown you how all the scientific facts in the universe point the rational person to the Creator and His attributes, but the rejectors deny this indication. Among them are those who use these very facts to argue for absurdity and randomness! How will you convince them of the invalidity of the theory of evolution or other falsehoods of false science that they use to fill the gap of their denial of the Creator! What evidence will make the theory wrong in their eyes, which they have made infallible? That is, there is no element of "falsifiability" in it in any way, but no matter how much its foundations collapse, they assume new, more comedic assumptions to keep the name of evolution "Evolution."
What is the image that I am supposed to show to the blind so that they acknowledge beauty?! When (their hearts are sealed) [47:24]; do you expect that as soon as we present them with the facts, they will (fall down on their chins weeping and it will increase their humility) [17:109]? Their problem is not a problem of evidence. They do not discuss the evidence with detached minds, free from desires, prejudices, and heart diseases. Therefore, the evidence is not evidence to them! Rather, it may be evidence of the opposite, and the saying of Allah applies to them: "They will not believe even if every sign comes to them until they see the painful torment" [10:96-97].
It is very important to understand this - brothers - so that we do not fall into the mistake that some who respond to atheism fall into, but unfortunately, without knowledge! He says, while talking about what he considers myths about atheism: "The fifth myth is the myth of the knockout blow; where many believe that one can deal with atheists with the logic of Muhammad Ali Clay, and that there can be a crushing, annihilating response to everything they say and argue with, simply this is not possible, at least not with all the arguments." So, he sees that there are arguments with the atheists that we do not have a crushing, annihilating response to - we believers! While we read in the Quran: "And those who argue about Allah after a response has been given to their argument, their argument is nullified with their Lord" [42:16]. And we read in the Quran: "But we cast the truth upon falsehood, and it crushes it, and behold, it is vanished" [21:18]. When you see that the atheists do not believe, this is not because we do not have a crushing, annihilating response that annihilates their falsehood, but because this response does not benefit them - no matter how clear it is - as they are not seekers of the truth. As long as they are like this, it is not only the cosmic signs but as Allah says: "And even if We sent down to them the angels and the dead spoke to them and We gathered for them every thing present, they would not believe unless Allah willed. But most of them do not know" [6:111].
"And that there can be a crushing, annihilating response to everything they say and argue with, simply this is not possible, at least not with all the arguments! The prophets themselves could not do that, so why do we assume that we can?!" The prophets - peace be upon them - could not guide the polytheists because the polytheists do not follow the evidence. Otherwise, the prophets would have had the crushing, annihilating response to all the falsehoods of the polytheists, and even the sensory miracles: a staff that turns into a clear serpent, a sea that splits; so that "every difference is like a great mass," a table that descends from the sky, a she-camel that comes out of a rock, and a moon that splits! And yet: "Nor do the signs and warnings benefit a people who do not believe" [10:101].
So, when you say to me, "Publish a scientific study that proves the invalidity of the theory of evolution, or other false science theories," I say to you: For the rational, everything that is published originally from real science by evolutionists or others disproves the myth of evolution. And what I have published from research in my fields disproves it, for what every useful research - whatever its field - indicates of precision, systematic nature, and order in the phenomena of the universe and life. As for those who are not rational, the sick of heart, it is as if you say: publish a study that convinces those who do not want to be convinced, and submit to the truth (whoever takes his desire as his god) [25:43], and has closed himself off, and is biased towards his ignorance. We can only say: "And say to those who do not believe, 'Do your work; we are doing ours. And wait; we are waiting. And to Allah belongs the unseen of the heavens and the earth, and to Him the matter will be returned in its entirety. So worship Him and rely upon Him. And your Lord is not unaware of what you do'" [11:121-123]. Peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah.