Why Is The Theory Of Darwinist's Evolution Not Scientifically Valid?

[mohammad]

By Harun Yahya

The theory of evolution maintains that life on Earth came about as the
result of chance and emerged by itself from natural conditions. This
theory is not a scientific law or a proven fact. Underneath its
scientific facade it is a materialist worldview that Darwinists are
trying to impose on society. The bases of this theory, which has been
disproved by science in every field, are suggestions and propaganda
methods consisting of deceptions, falsehood, contradiction, cheating,
and sleight of hand.

Imaginary Hypothesis

The theory of evolution was put forward as an imaginary hypothesis in
the context of the primitive scientific understanding of the nineteenth
century, and to this day it has not been backed up by any scientific
discovery or experiment. On the contrary, all the methods employed to
confirm the theory have merely proven its invalidity. However, even
today many people think that the theory is a proven fact, like the
force of gravity or the law of buoyancy. Because, as stated at the
beginning, the true nature of the theory of evolution is very different
from what is usually supposed. For this reason, some people do not know
what rotten foundations this theory has, how it is disproved by science
at every turn, and how evolutionists are trying to keep it alive in its
death throes. Evolutionists have no other support than unconfirmed
hypotheses, biased and unrealistic observations, and imaginary
drawings, methods of psychological suggestion, countless falsehoods,
and sleight-of-hand techniques.

Natural Conditions

Today, such branches of science as paleontology, genetics,
biochemistry, and molecular biology have proven that it is quite
impossible for life to come about as a result of chance and to emerge
by itself from natural conditions. The living cell, it is commonly
agreed by the world of science, is the most complex structure that
mankind has so far encountered. Modern science has revealed that just
one living cell has a much more complex structure and mutually
interconnected complicated systems than a large city. Such a complex
structure can only function if all its separate parts emerge at the
same time and in full working order. Otherwise, it will serve no
purpose, and will fall apart over time and disappear. We cannot expect
that its parts developed by chance over millions of years as claimed by
the theory of evolution. For that reason, the complex design in just
one cell clearly shows that God created life. (For more details, see
Harun Yahya, The Miracle in the Cell)

Ideological Reasons

However, those who defend materialist philosophy do not want to accept
the fact of creation for various ideological reasons. That is because
the existence and spread of societies living in the light of that
beautiful morality that true religion offers to man by means of God's
commands and prohibitions is not in these materialists' interests.
Masses devoid of any spiritual and moral values suit these people far
better, since they can manipulate them for their own worldly interests.
For this reason, they try to impose the theory of evolution, which
encourages the lie that mankind was not created but rather emerged by
chance and evolved from animals, and to keep it alive at whatever
costs. Despite all the clear scientific proof that destroys the theory
of evolution and confirms the fact of creation, they abandon all reason
and logic and defend this nonsense at every available opportunity.

The Emergence Of The First Living Cell

It has actually been proved that it is impossible for the first living
cell, or even just one of the millions of protein molecules in that
cell, to have come about by chance. This has been demonstrated not only
by experiments and observations, but also by mathematical calculations
of probability. In other words, evolution collapses at the very first
step: that of explaining the emergence of the first living cell. Not
only could the cell, the smallest unit of life, never have come about
by chance in the primitive and uncontrolled conditions in the early
days of the Earth, as evolutionists would have us believe, it cannot
even be synthesized in the most advanced laboratories of the twentieth
century. Amino acids, the building blocks of the proteins that make up
the living cell, cannot of themselves build such organelles in the cell
as mitochondria, ribosomes, cell membranes, or the endoplasmic
reticulum, let alone a whole cell. For this reason, the claim that
evolution brought about the first cell by chance remains the product of
a fantasy based entirely on imagination. The living cell, which still
harbours many secrets that have not been explained, is one of the major
difficulties facing the theory of evolution.

The DNA Molecule

Another terrible dilemma from the point of view of evolution is the DNA
molecule in the nucleus of the living cell, a coding system with 3.5
billion units containing all the details of life. DNA was first
discovered using X-ray crystallography in the late 1940s and early
1950s, and is a giant molecule with a superb plan and design. For many
years, Francis Crick, a Nobel-prize laureate, believed in the theory of
molecular evolution, but eventually even he had to admit to himself
that such a complex molecule could not have emerged spontaneously by
chance, as the result of an evolutionary process: An honest man, armed
with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that, in
some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a
miracle.
1-The Turkish evolutionist Professor Ali Demirsoy was forced to make
the following confession on the issue: In fact, the probability of the
formation of a protein and a nucleic acid (DNA-RNA) is a probability
way beyond estimating. Furthermore, the chance of the emergence of a
certain protein chain is so slight as to be called astronomic.
2-Homer Jacobson, Professor Emeritus of Chemistry, makes the following
admission regarding how impossible it is for life to have come about by
chance: 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…

No Trace Of Intermediate Forms

The fossil record represents another crushing defeat for the theory of
evolution. Among all the fossils discovered over the years, there is
not one trace of the intermediate forms that would be necessary if
living things were to have evolved stage by stage from simple species
to more complex ones, as the theory of evolution claims. If such
creatures 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. If these intermediate forms had
ever really existed, their numbers would be even greater than the
number of animal species we know today, and everywhere the world should
be full of their fossil remains. Evolutionists look for these
intermediate forms in all the feverish fossil research that has been
carried out since the nineteenth century. However, there has been no
trace of these intermediate forms, despite all the eager searching for
the last 150 years.

Conclusion

In short, the fossil record shows that living species emerged suddenly
and perfectly formed, not by following a process from primitive forms
to advanced ones as evolution claims.Evolutionists have tried very hard
to find evidence for their theory or so, but have actually proved by
their own hand that no evolutionary process could have been possible.
In conclusion, modern science reveals the following indisputable fact:
Living things did not emerge as the result of blind chance, but God
created them.

Source: Harunyahya.com
URL:http://www.harunyahya.com/refuted4.php