National Geographic Darwin Error

The November issue of National Geographic magazine (NG) posed the question "Is Darwin wrong? In coverage. Naturalist David Quammen, author of the article of the same name, replied "No" to this question from their own point of view, and stated that the theory Darwin's evolution is supported by strong scientific evidence. Quammen repeated the key claims of the book Origin of Species Darwin, but overlooked an important detail.

Darwin added another chapter of his book, one called "Challenges to the theory," and openly admitted the existence difficulties in these terms:

This is the sum of several main objections and difficulties that can justly be urged against my theory … I felt, these difficulties, many years to doubt their weight. 1

The fact is, however, that the NG article did not discuss one of the phenomena that Darwin considered as a problem for his theory, and even ignore their existence. For example, although Darwin refers in his book how the fossil record to safeguard their theory and complexity in the eyes, NG magazine even touch on issues such as the theory of evolution is unable to realize that the Cambrian explosion, the biological complexity and the origin of genetic information.

Quammen, who appears as a more Darwinian than Darwin himself appears as the defender is not a theory that can explain problems, but a "Dogma" that must be protected from criticism.

In this article, the test call is analyzed, and the propaganda carried out by Quammen GN magazine refuted Darwin.

An example of dogmatic position of Turkey GN

The English edition of the GN section "was Darwin wrong? also devoted space to works of Harun Yahya in the theory of evolution. In the section that describes the reactions worldwide against evolution, The following words have appeared in reference to Harun Yahya

Their distress is associated with Islamic creationists such as Harun Yahya, author of a recent book entitled The Evolution of deception, which points to the history of the creation of six days in the Koran as the literal truth and calls the theory of evolution "rather than a deception imposed on us by the dominant global system. "

Interestingly, Harun Yahya was not in GN Turkish version, and this section has been amended, assuming the following way: "This discomfort is shown a parallel between those who support the Islamic idea of creation."

As a person who says their main objective, describe the philosophy and scientific invalidity of Darwinism Harun Yahya has closely followed the Darwinist propaganda in recent years years and has responded to the light of scientific discoveries, writings and programming for the evolution of media, including one GN. (See www.darwinism-watch.com)

If Darwinism really supported by a mass of evidence, as argued in this article, GN, GN-why Turkey is trying to prevent Harun Yahya scientific criticism to be heard? Is it referred to Turkey that NG Darwinism will not be able to withstand scientific criticism? In fact, This attitude by the office of GN, Turkey not only shows that the magazine not to inform their readers of the source of the criticism of current development, but also confirms criticism that tries to keep his feet on the Darwinism as an ideology.

NG does not want to face the facts of modern science

There is no doubt that to give a realistic response to the question "Is Darwin wrong? we look at what Darwin actually said and to compare with modern scientific facts. In his book The Origin of Species, which unveiled his theory of evolution, Darwin has provided a very important criterion to verify his theory. Thus, concrete this criterion is that Darwin's own words, he would "absolutely break down" theory. Darwin wrote:

"If you could prove that any complex organ existed which could not have been formed by numerous, successive modifications, mild, my theory would absolutely break. "2

Darwin argued that bodies evolved in a gradual process. Thinking of this imaginary process in reverse, it seems Darwin assumed that these bodies have reducibility. However, advances in field of biochemistry, particularly during the last 40 years, revealed that the cell has more complexity, such details were not known at the time of Darwin, because that has been likened to a black "box" and that certain structures within the cell actually have the characteristics of "complex irreducible. "

"Irreducible complexity" is a phenomenon based on empirical evidence and is literally the antithesis of the theory Darwin. The most important number to the concept of agenda in the scientific world is the biochemist Michael J. Behe Lehigh University in the United States. In his book 1996 Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to the evolution Behe examines the nature of irreducibly complex cell and some other biological structures, and reveals that absolutely can not be represented in terms of evolution. Behe describes the effect that irreducible complexity has on the claims of Darwinism in the following way:

"For Darwin, the cell was a" black box "- its wheels have been quite mysterious to him. Now, the black box has been opened and we know how it works. Applying the approach of Darwin ultra-complex world of molecular machinery and cellular systems that have been discovered in the last 40 years, we that Darwin's theory has "absolutely broken." 3

Irreducible complexity has demolished Darwinism, and showed that life is the product of a Intelligent design, meaning that God created all living things. NG is how to prevent this from his readers an escape reality.

Biogeographic stories GN

In his article in the NG, Quammen begins his account of the evidence for Darwinism called the biogeography, and may be useful to provide a description of the concept at this time. Biogeography is a branch of science that studies the geographical distribution of species and seeks an answer to the question of how they came to these parts of habitat by assigning your location on Earth.

Most books in the field of biogeography are full of facts that say nothing, for or against the theory of evolution as maps of the areas of habitat of living species, the characteristics of these areas, issues the spread of organisms and species grouping based on geographical … 4

When their distribution on Earth is examined, one can see that species tend to worldwide distribution. Some species are rather scattered in large groups in areas with climatic and environmental conditions. Since Darwin, evolutionists sought to account for this double as evidence for evolution, but in regard to "the basic categories of life" distribution geographic scope of their efforts have failed to find a consistent scenario of evolution.

In his book Systematics and biogeography, G. and N. Nelson Platnick Museum of American History of New York Natural reviews studies in this area and establish its conclusion:

We conclude, therefore, that biogeography (or geographical distribution of organisms) has not shown that evidence for or against evolution in all directions. 5

If you really want evolutionists to test his theory, then they should do is leave their fairy tales about "whether this living thing is here, then it must have evolved here, and if this thing is life there, so must have changed, "and instead scientifically document their own answers to the question of how living things are born, first. (This an undeniable fact that the mechanisms of random mutation and natural selection can not explain the origin of species.)

The fact that the statements of biogeography evolutionary myths without any scientific evidence clearly indicates paleontology Claims Inspection NG. The fossil record clearly shows that the idea that transmitted by living beings, evolution is a myth.

Paleontology deception GN

NG allows a generalization about the fossil strata, saying his readers that the species close to call family members usually are side by side in successive strata, and a lifestyle that dates back millions of years in one stratum is followed by a similar but not identical, one in the next layer. As an example of this generalization, cites the equine sequence Evolutionists even abandoned for years, argues that the modern horse appeared at the end of the sequence, and Epihippus Orohippus Hyracotherium Mohippus, fossils of which are found in consecutive strata.

What is NG is here is a blatant deception. The equine sequence is an unfounded whose disability has been demonstrated. If the setting is the case, send a generalization about the fossil record can not be described as nothing more than an attempt to test the generalization of a misleading example.

Forms evolution of life arose without parent, but in a moment, and with impeccable body structures

Darwin, who argued that living things arose through the level of development and expects that the fossil record to confirm that the application be obtained in future excavations, I was wrong. The fossils obtained from excavations out by the endless paleontologists around the world have yielded results that openly contradict the idea of a gradual change in successive strata. These facts relate to the phenomena sudden onset of stasis.

The species appear suddenly, without ancestors, but with the evolution flawless body structures. In his 1999 book The fossils and evolution, Tom Kemp, curator of the Zoological Collection of the Oxford University Museum of Natural History, admits:

In almost all cases, a new taxon appears for the first time in the fossil record with most definitive features already present, and practically no known forms of the mother group. 6

Fossils of the hundreds of million years without
follow the evolution of neo-Darwinism invalidate

In addition, species may have no gradual change, as suggested by the widespread GN. The species with a natural history of hundreds of millions of years have a "stable" showing continuously over geological layers. The shark, the coelacanth, ants, salamanders and other species, fossils have been discovered and which have remained unchanged for hundreds of millions of years, paleontologists led to accept as one of stasis the most striking aspects of the study of fossils. This refutes Darwinism is prediction of gradual changes and invalidates the theory. Geology Professor Peter J. Williamson described in the journal Nature:

The main problem is stasis morphology. One theory is only as good as its predictions, and conventional neo-Darwinism, which claims to be a full explanation of the evolutionary process, did not predict widespread long-term morphological stasis now recognized as one of the most striking aspects of the study of fossils. 7

In short, the demand for GN change through geological layers of the cup is a myth supported in the face of the science of paleontology. How GN which aims to support that myth with the sequence equine matters worse.

Truth in the sequence, the horse tries to hide GN readers

The equine sequence is based on fossils found in different place in North America. Define these Darwinists to establish a sequence, the characteristics of fossil teeth and the number of fingers feet, and for years the term as a test of Darwinism. paleontological excavations continued, however, definitely revealed inconsistencies in this series. GN, known for his blind devotion to Darwinism, do not hesitate to hide this evolution of its readers and the writing that the ancestors of the alleged horse evolution success in consecutive layers.

The former editor of the BBC science Gordon Rattray Taylor describes how the equine sequence evidence for Darwinism:

But perhaps the most serious weakness of Darwinism is the failure of paleontologists to find convincing phylogenies or sequences of organisms to show evolutionary change important … The horse is often cited as an example well developed. But the fact is that the line Eohippus of Equus is very erratic. It is alleged that show a steady increase in size but the truth is that some smaller variants Eohippus not more so. Samples from different sources can be combined in a convincing-looking sequence, but There is no evidence that lined the reality in this order in time. 8

At a meeting in November 1980 at the Museum of Natural History in Chicago, attended by 150 evolutionists, a speakerphone, Boyce Rensberger, said there was no basis in fossil records for the scenario of horse evolution, and progressive equine and never took place:

Example commonly spoken of horse evolution, suggesting a gradual sequence of changes of the creatures of four fingers Fox Business live near 50 million years to become much more of a horse of his fingers, has long been known to be incorrect. Instead of a gradual change, fossils of each intermediate species appear completely different, remain unchanged, and then disappeared. transitional forms are unknown. 9

Discoveries beings including living in the imaginary order of horse evolution has actually lived in the same time, and together, totally refutes Quammen. One of the most striking examples of this occurred in 1981. The fossils of thousands of living creatures 10 million years, which had been buried under the lava after a volcanic eruption and whose skeletons has been preserved until today, have been unearthed U.S. in the state of Nebraska. With this discovery, it appears that three-toed horses and only supposed to have lived in different times and has ancestral relationship between them in the context of the evolutionary sequence of equine imagination, lived side by side. Interestingly, the source of this information NG's magazine. 10

The myth of the evolution of whales

I see no difficulty in a race of bears being rendered, by natural selection, more aquatic in their structure and habits, with a mouth larger and larger, until there was a creature as monstrous as a whale. 11

Fishery is searching along a River, Darwin expounded his ideas on the origin of whales in these terms in his book The Origin of Species, but decided to delete the article later editions of the book. However, evolutionists who came after Darwin has not hesitated to the adoption of this myth, with several minor changes that fell as a monument to the unlimited nature of his imagination. Continued to propagate the myth that whales evolved from bears, but no other land mammals, as if it were a scientific fact.

Now you can see that NG, one of the leading representatives of the Darwinian mythology, do not behave differently, and tries to account of this great myth, supported by reasons of the doctrine of evolution, as the representation of the evidence for evolution.

There are huge differences in terms base such as conservation of the physiological characteristics of water, light and communication between whales and land mammals that have been their ancestors. Now consider the dilemma facing the scientific myth of evolution by examining the design of whales:

The special design conservation water bodies of whales

Despite living in the water, whales can not meet their water needs of sea salt water. They need fresh water to live. Even if you do not know exactly how to meet their water needs, we believe that much of the latter is obtained by eating sea creatures that contain salt concentrations are 30% below the ocean water.In this environment, where freshwater is scarce, the maximum water retention in the living bodies of things and a minimum consumption the latter are essential. Water levels are important to whales, why, like camels, whales do not perspire. Your kidneys regulate the concentration urine, so that the water supply.

Why did the whale fat milk?

Another delicate balance in requirements for water appears in the content of fat in the milk of the female whale. The mother whale feeds her baby with a very thick milk, cheese consistency. This milk is ten times more fat than human milk. There is a reason why this chemical in milk contains a high level of fat. The water occurs in products such as fat is processed after being consumed by baby. In this way, the mother responds to the needs of their children through the water with minimal water loss.

The design in the eyes of whales

There are complex arrangements in the design of the eye Whales and communications systems, there are no examples of which are found in terrestrial mammals. terrestrial mammals have lids to protect against dust and impact. Whales, however, have a hard coating to protect against a different risk, the pressure under the sea On the other hand, refractive index in the design of the eye allows a killer whale jumping to catch a fish to six feet above the water level in an amusement park with great precision. In addition, the eyes of whales are on both sides of the head, unlike terrestrial mammals, protecting and current. Thanks to the rod and cones of the eye, their level of sensitivity to light, color and other details are high. In addition to this relationship, the presence of phosphorus in the eyes is a design that facilitates their ability to see in the dark depths of the oceans.

The mathematics used by the whales

The sense used by whales to the location of sources food and one is a no real purpose, but rather hearing. Many whaling dark regions at the bottom of the sea thanks to a kind of natural sonar. brain of the whale emits clicking sounds in a manner not yet well understood by scientists. The distance of an object is determined by a mathematical calculation. The whale brain increases the speed at which the sounds hit an object and bounce for the time necessary for this, and divide the result by two. The result is the distance from the object same. In addition, the whale also has the ability to focus sound waves with his brain on a specific point and the issue of a pulse, as the light. The waves are analyzed and interpreted in the brain of the animal. This interpretation determines how the body deals with it, its size, speed and position. animal skull soundproofed to protect against the bombing of the powerful sound waves emitted constantly and can even seriously damage the brain itself. The sound system of the animal is incredibly sensitive, so the U.S. Navy radar design mimics of marine mammals in the development of proprietary technology. 12

Designs Special whale

Designs perfect whales are by no means limited to these. The shape of the mouth of a calf is designed so that they are perfectly suited to attend his mother's breasts, while the calf is able to suckle without losing a drop of milk and not having a drop of sea water also have lungs that store high levels of oxygen for long dives and slopes of the cone designed to protect high pressure.

These arrangements, each of which denotes a design clear, including whales and not to be found in all terrestrial mammals. GN, however, he expects readers to put aside reason and believe these came by chance. GN deny that whales have been intelligently designed, maintaining instead that one day, a mammal Land has decided to live in the sea and the whale has been developed as a result of unconscious mechanisms like random mutation and natural selection.

However, what may cause changes in sonar mammal was the ancestor of the whale? Having into account the effect of the mutations and the importance of the brain to the survival of the whale, it is clear that mutations damage brain, paralyzing or killing the whale. Could the brain, which produces sound waves, being able to focus these on a particular point and determine the location of Objects Using a mathematical calculation, the acquisition of sound in a perfect area to be damaged in this process to chance? As coincidence would produce a sound of quality units that even the United States Navy 's technological development could not match? What changes might in turn is a mammal Land feet and tail fins capable of propelling several tons of weight?

There is no doubt that these questions can do about systems that use water wisely production, milk the system and protection systems in the eye and ear. However, NG has a reasonable answer to these questions. There is only one answer. Whales were created fully formed at one time. God created the whale to be impeccable, with all systems to their needs, as did all living things. In a verse of Qur'an reveals that:

The humanity! Remember that God's blessings for you. Is there any creator God to give you of heaven and earth? No God save Him So how have you been perverted? (Qur'an, 35: 3)

(For a more detailed response to the story of the whale http://www.harunyahya.com/70national_geographic_sci29.php GN fantastic view)

GN error regarding embryology

Another error in the article in NG Quammen is the repetition of a myth formerly known as the "law of recapitulation." This belonged to the German biologist Ernst Haeckel and its application to the embryology Darwin largely "inspired" by Haeckel. Recapitulation law holds that the embryonic development of living things, repeat steps imagined that suffered during the descent of the ancestors is evolution.

The fact that Quammen devotes considerable space to this point in his article reveals a knowledge gap on their side. Complaints that the claims of Haeckel lacked scientific justification and evidence that was forged 136 years ago13 offered begun, and the end of the law of recapitulation that the object of scientific debate came from as far as 80 14. Even George Gaylord Simpson, one of the founders of neo-Darwinism, has admitted this fact 42 years ago in the words:

Haeckel Bad Beginning the evolution question. It is now clearly established that ontogeny does not repeat phylogeny. 15

Moreover, the myth of recapitulation, which has no qualms about the GN's own summary, which is a British embryologist mentioned in 1997 as "the best known fraud in the history of biology." In his book Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte (Natural History of Creation), written in 1868, Haeckel had deliberately distorted the image of man, monkey and dog embryos so that the support of his claim.

A striking aspect of this fraud is that it is also a monument "Centennial" Darwinian dogmatism. Until recently, a Darwinian number of sources, including textbooks, resulting from use of the drawings that they were counterfeit, or repeat the myth of recapitulation. Harvard University professor and evolutionist Stephen Jay Gould published a great common sense and offered the following critique:

… [W] e do, I think, have the right to be both surprised and embarrassed by the stupidity of recycling century that led to the persistence of these drawings in many if not most, of textbooks modern! 16

NG did not use counterfeit designs. However, he has no doubt about the wrap using a vacuum that has arisen at least 80 years, as support for Darwinism.

We urge consideration GN words of Stephen Jay Gould.

GN errors regarding the morphology

Quammen shows an attitude of this article based on Darwin which handles complaints on the subject of morphology. The way a zoo is organized in birds, monkeys, great cats, crocodiles and fish in the aquarium is interpreted as evidence of evolution. As Quammen, the fact that living beings can be classified in a hierarchical system in families, orders and kingdoms must be the product of an evolutionary process.

However, Quammen ranking stereotypes of evidence for evolution is absurd. This is because the fact that life forms can be classified hierarchically is not a prediction of the first proposed by evolutionists, then subsequently confirmed. The Swedish scientist Carl Linnaeus, the father of the modern system of classification is a scientist who believes in the creation of anything, and considered that the classification as the product of intelligent design. This is consistent with what we see with our own eyes and based on common sense. The ability to be classified hierarchy is a well known feature of intelligent design. The means of transport, for example, can be considered as land, sea and vehicles air, and can be decomposed into sub-categories and sub-groups small. However, this classification does not indicate that the modes of transport in question has arisen through evolution.

In fact, in an article in New Scientist magazine, the eminent evolutionist Mark Ridley made the following statement:

The mere fact that the species can be classified hierarchically into genera, families, and so on, is not an argument for evolution. It is possible classify any set of objects in a hierarchy if the variation is adaptive or not. 17

Quammen before conception

Similarly so Quammen writes is far from supporting his application, it also reveals the way in which it is based on prejudice and not on evidence Scientists:

This pattern of levels similarities? The groups of similar species nested within larger groupings, and all descendants of a single source? not naturally present in other collections objects. You will not find anything remotely like if you try to classification of rocks or musical instruments or jewelry. Why not? Because rates rock and jewelry styles steady fall no common ancestors. Biodiversity ago. The number of common characteristics between species and another indicates how long ago two species split from a common ancestry. (P. 13)

Quammen placed hierarchical categorization of living in a separate location and reflecting a continuous chain of descent from a common ancestor. This term, however, is powerless labeling Quammen desperate attempts to agree Darwin.

As explained above, there are no fossils that could be offered as evidence of an evolutionary link between categories of life. The words of the eminent evolutionary paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould as "the evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks are given only the tip and the nodes of their branches" are a recognition that actually there is no evidence for evolution of links assumed to exist in living organisms. 18

In summary, the origin of the evolutionary chain claims Quammen descent between the different categories of life is not a scientific fact, like fossils, but rather its own dogmatic mentality.

The skeleton structure of five-digit error

Quammen argues that the form of several vertebrates such as bats, dolphins and humans share a feature common to have five fingers on the descent from a common ancestor. This assertion is based on that, although not the same basic plan in the front and rear limbs Live concerned, they can still be easily differentiated (demand homology). This assertion of Quammen obviously can confuse readers who do not know the facts of modern science. Progress in molecular biology, definitely refute this claim on the basis of morphology. One surprising discovery that led production of these organisms, which is a legacy from a common ancestor, is in fact controlled by different genes in different creatures.

Biologist evolutionary William Fix describes the collapse of the evolutionary thesis about pentadactylism (having five digits) in the area of this agreement with this finding:

Textbooks on developments older than most of the idea of homology, pointing out the obvious similarities between members of different animal skeletons. Therefore, the branch pentadactyl model 'is in the arms of a man, wing of a bird and a whale Flipper, which is required to indicate their common origin. However, if these different structures have been transmitted by the same gene couples, varied from time to time by mutations and selection requested by the environment, theory would be common sense. Unfortunately, this is not the case. homologous organs are now known to be produced by totally different gene complexes in species different. The concept of homology in terms of similar genes transmitted from a common ancestor has broken. 19

GN Vestigial Darwinism

Quammen shows a desire not to enter surprising that Darwin's arguments have been demolished by modern science. An example of this is repetition of the request for organs vestigial, a claim that is totally unrealistic. Is maintained in the article that agencies like the male nipple, said structures to be the remains of hind legs in some snakes, and wings covered with beetles that are actually used, are redundant, no function bodies left by the evolutionary process. Quammen is clearly ignore the final results of scientific progress:

List 180 supposed vestigial organs in the 20th century was finally reduced to almost nothing in the face of discoveries scientists. One by one, it is clear that many organs including the appendix and the escrow lunate once supposed vestigial organs, has functions.20 "The science "is in any case, the process by which humans come to know what was previously unknown. The gradual emergence of organ functions previously considered relics shows that, of course, the functions of the past several organs whose functions are unknown others will be released soon.

Of In fact, many evolutionists have admitted today that the myth of bodies "vestigial" is an argument rooted in ignorance. In an article entitled "Do vestigial organs represent evidence of evolution? published in the journal Evolutionary Theory, evolutionary biologist SR Scadding acknowledge this fact:

As is not possible to unambiguously identify structures and unnecessary since the structure of the argument used is not scientifically valid, I conclude that "bodies vestigial "n'apportent no specific evidence for the theory of evolution. 21

Evolutionists claim relics of the organs do not come vestigialism any of these organs, but the nature of the remains of their own perspectives. The existence of any living being, proves the existence of God, his creator. And inanimate and unconscious atoms combine to produce a sound, smell, touch and see the human being is the proof of God's perfect creation. Whether it is impossible for atoms, which can not feel, hear or see, want to be perceived and unite for this purpose. For collection of material to get up and look in front of a mirror, or matter of taste and touch, has no place in the logic of evolution. These feelings can not be explained in terms of a superior creation, ie the existence of God and His creation, no default. Despite this truth itself, evolutionists maintain irrational and blind belief, which are the product of matter and blind chance, indicating that his request for vestigial organs is based on biased and dogmatic perspective.

The realization that the bodies concerned by evolutionists as a vestige of the functions have a test. For example, the structures appear as the remains of hind legs in some species of snakes are now known to help understand one another during mating. As for male nipples as the product of an evolutionary process is also based on a distorted logic. If the male nipples or nipples were a relic of an evolutionary process, then men should have evolved from a population composed entirely of women, a scenario unimaginable when evolutionary thought he could not accept. Coleoptera, an Another example cited by Quammen, there is also evidence of evolution. species of insects that do not develop functional wing is usually seen in open habitats, with strong winds, ocean and islands. In an environment where strong winds and surrounded by large bodies of water, insects can fly is not an advantage, and can even be dangerous. This is because the insects that fly in the air are exposed to the effects of wind and trees can be placed on or rocks, are found dead or maimed. It may, therefore, have tended to move toward a lifestyle floor. Over time, populations of insects that live near the ground consists of people who do not develop full wings. This is because, unlike flying insects, mutations that prevent the insects that live near ground level for wing development can not be harmful to the insect (the provision that do not cause total disruption of its physiology).

Mutation that prevented development of the wings in a flying insect living in a habitat affected by the winds would be harmful and perhaps even fatal. Because, normally, an insect that uses their wings to feed and avoid predators do not have wings because the function of this change and would be unable to survive and therefore eliminated from the population.

Moreover, in insects that live in a habitat affected by wind and is used to move your feet the same as flightless insects, a mutation in the wings could not be fatal. This is due to insects and are accustomed to a lifestyle that does not use the wings, and will not make any difference if their wings are in good health, or lose its function because mutation (if the mutation in question is not one that affects the general physiology of the insect). In short, a mutation that causes loss destruction of the wings of an insect can be fatal in an environment in which the wings are in any case does not matter.

However, you can not say beetles that are supposed to have undergone such a process is proof of evolution. The theory of evolution proposes that the courts in a more gradual complex. The genetic changes proposed in support of this claim must be such as to add new DNA Genetics creatures. "It is clear, however, that the beetle has not received any new genetic information during this process, and instead, suffer a loss of information in the genes that control development the wing.

It is the purchase genetic information, which is not seen in beetles, are respected in any other living being? Of course not. Evolutionists were unable to demonstrate the emergence of a new body, or even a new protein, through random mutations.

In short, the theory of evolution maintains that living things acquire new organs with the addition of new genetic information on their DNA, but the vestigial organ argument is related to a loss function, ie a loss of genetic data. Therefore, vestigial organs provide no scientific support to the theory of evolution. The reason by the will of the evolutionists to put this claim in the scientific program is psychological rather than scientific. His screen blind devotion to materialism perspective leads them to take waste to the evident truth of creation. (You can read the article by Harun Yahya that destroys the vestigial evolutionary perspective here. Http: / / www.darwinism-watch.com/hurriyet_science0407.php)

Jacques P. Gills, MD, founder and laser cataract St. Luke's Institute in Tarpon Springs, Florida is a scientific creationist. It is also a world renowned ophthalmologist. In his book Darwin under the microscope, a number of tests Gills appointment of creation which seriously undermine evolution, and wrote that the only reason why scientists continue to insist on changes Cataract is the spiritual thought of themselves as the product of blind chance. 22

The error of thinking that antibiotics and DDT resistance is evidence of evolution

Section aims to show that immunity to antibiotics and GN insect resistance to pesticides such as DDT is evidence of evolution. On the issue of resistance the microbes seem to develop drugs Quammen trust states:

There is no greater or more immediate evidence to support the Darwinian theory of this transformation overstretched our enemy germs. (P. 21)

However, the enthusiasm Quammen in the representation of the bacterial immunity as evidence for evolution is totally out of place. It then explains why these two phenomena are not evidence for Darwinism.

The first of these molecules "Mortal" against microorganisms used was penicillin, discovered by Alexander Fleming in 1928. Fleming discovered a molecule that has killed Staphylococcus bacteria mold after which antibiotics taken from microorganisms have been used against various bacteria. Although it seems at first glance that the final results were obtained the truth later emerged: the bacteria develop resistance antibiotics gradually. The vast majority of bacteria exposed to antibiotics die, but since a small minority who remain assigned to multiply rapidly and finally by the entire population. Therefore, the entire population becomes resistant to antibiotic.

However, it is not a question of development of bacteria through mutation that here, because the bacteria already possess the characteristics concerned before being exposed to antibiotics. Despite being an evolutionist publication, Scientific American magazine has recognized these facts in its edition of March 1998:

Many bacteria possess resistance genes even before commercial antibiotics came into use. Scientists do not know exactly why these genes have evolved and maintained. 23

Insects develop resistance to pesticides such as DDT in the same way, and again the same way, this is not proof of evolution.

The eminent evolutionary biologist Francisco Ayala accepts the truth of these words:

The genetic variants required for resistance various types of pesticides were apparently present in each population exposed to these compounds by humans. 24

One of those to do research more details on this issue is the biophysicist Dr. Lee Spetner Israelis. In his book is not an accident, published in 1997 showed that bacterial immunity should Spetner two different mechanisms, but these are not compatible with the theory of evolution. For more details on this topic, see http://www.harunyahya.com/20questions05.php Q19 # and http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/embryology_01.html)

Another piece of evidence known to the NG article, as well as the resistance of bacteria and insects, genetically similar concerns.

The disappointment of that evolution can be observed

NG asserts that evolution can indeed see in nature and laboratory. This, however, is a frivolous lawsuit without merit. In an article titled "How many new species form?" published in the edition of June 14, 2003, issue of New Scientist, George Turner made the important "admission"

Not long ago, we thought we knew how species formed. It was felt that the process began almost always a complete separation of the population. It has often occurred after a population has experienced a severe "genetic bottleneck", as can happen after a pregnant woman was taken on a remote island and their offspring mated each other. The beauty of this founder effect "called" model is that it could be tested in the laboratory. In reality, simply does not hold. Despite efforts by evolutionary biologists "Nobody has even approached the creation of a new species of a founder population. Moreover, as far as we know, no new species are formed as a result of the liberation of human beings a small number of organisms in extraterrestrial environments. 25

As we have seen, evolutionists do not actually know how new species are formed. In other words, Quammen's claim of being able to witness evolution in action, without foundation. The fact that the long years of study grants to the length of the beak finches on the Galapagos Islands is cited in support of Darwinism is the result changes represent a deformation of the test itself. (For more information, see http://www.harunyahya.com/nas04.php)

Conclusion

As we have seen, Darwin was wrong. National Geographic to raise the question of whether it was wrong is as ridiculous as asking "Is Freud wrong? Or" Marx wrong? This is because, like Freudianism and Marxism, Darwinism is a theory that has reached the end of his life. We call NG magazine to abandon its support for this outdated myth and accept that creation is the true origin of life.

GN What you should do is put aside their prejudices and stop supporting Darwinism as a dogma, and make face of scientific evidence that undermines this theory. Discoveries in the past 40 years, in particular, have definitely proved the invalidity of philosophy naturalist in the heart of Darwinism. If GN is responsible for this fact will be that the complexity of organized life and genetic information that depend on intelligent design that is, that life evolved on their own by chance and natural phenomena, but has "created."

NG – and all Darwinists others – have avoided so far against this, and therefore can be used to hide the difficulties of the theory. However, they must be aware that this escape is not used for maintenance of his theory of life. Because a major development in the world of science is that the age of sweeping issues under the carpet ended.

How intelligent design movement, which has been sweeping the United States in the last 10 years, has discovered one by one the principles of Darwinism, has been of great interest. The intellectual foundation of this movement is the theory of intelligent design. " The theory in question holds that complex biological structures containing large amounts of information can not be explained in terms of causes based on intelligence, and that these causes can be studied empirically in the field of biology. 26

An indication that the movement Intelligent design may represent the dynamics of cultural change is how big that is effective and shows a generalized the evidence of long taught as a test of Darwinism in schools is actually composed of myth, deception and fraud, even. California Teacher University of Berkeley Phillip E. Johnson, leader of the movement, said that Darwinism going on in the dustbin of history during this century. 27

It will be useful GN recall damage determines the persistence in his criticism of Darwinism defense policy. We recall that the GN has announced the discovery of fossils Archaeoraptor discovered in China as proof that birds evolved from dinosaurs, without having to wait until it is described in scientific journals on the list. Later however, we realized that the fossil does not represent a missing link at all, but it was counterfeiting "product" by a Chinese peasant.26 by their blind devotion to Darwinism NG did not hesitate to embrace the first fossil "Evidence" unscientific methods, and later found in "The modern paleontology greatest shame. "29

According to Dr. Storrs Olson, an ornithologist, "National Geographic has reached an historic low for the exercise of sensationalistic, unsubstantiated, tabloid journalism. "30

The representation of the application of the recapitulation, who died at least 80 years, as evidence of evolution in Article NG "Darwin was wrong" shows that it lacks the seriousness of science and continues his unfounded tabloid journalism. "GN does not behave intelligently. Maintaining this approach does not provide support for Darwinism. On the contrary, NG is the documentation for your own dogmatism increasingly evident.

NG invite to examine these points and to accept that creation is the true origin of life.

There is no doubt that the Lord of all living beings on Earth in the sky, and between God. In a verse of the Qur'an, Allah reveals:

Your God is one God. There is no god but He, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. (Qur'an, 2: 163)

Under the pseudonym Harun Yahya Adnan Oktar has written about 250 works. His books contain a total of 46,000 pages and 31,500 illustrations. Of these books, 7,000 pages and 6,000 illustrations deal with the collapse theory of evolution. Are available free of charge, all the books Adnan Oktar has written under the pen name Harun Yahya on these websites www.harunyahya.com

1. Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species by Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, Center for Electronic Text Library of the University of Virginia.
2. Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species: A facsimile of the first edition, Harvard University Press, 1964, p. 189.
3. Michael Behe, Darwin's Black Box, 1996
4. For more information about thesis on the evolutionary biogeography Please see Walter J. Remini, "The Biotic Message: Evolution versus Theory messages, "St. Paul Science, First Edition ed, 1993. page 538.
5. G. Nelson and N. Platnick, Systematics and biogeography: cladistics and vicariance, Columbia University Press, 1981, p. 223.
6. Evolution Fossils, Dr TS Kemp – Curator of Zoological Collections, University of Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1999, p. 246.
7. Peter G. Williamson, "a morphological stasis, and constraints for development: real problems for neo-Darwinism," Nature, vol 294. November 19, 1981, p. 214, Stephen E. Jones, Sihon http://members.iinet.net.au/ ~ /
8. Gordon Rattray Taylor, The Mystery of great change, Abacus, Sphere Books, London, 1984, p. 230.
9. Boyce Rensberger, Houston Chronicle November 5, 1980 15.
10. MR Voorhies, "Create an ashfall animal ancient Pompeii prehistoric, "National Geographic, vol. 159, No. 1, January 1981 pp.67-68, 74," Horse Search defy evolution "Creation Ex Nihilo 5 (3): January 15, 1983, http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/3723.asp
11. Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species: A Facsimile of the first edition, Harvard University Press, 1964, p. 184.
12. Detecting mines scienceNOW Dolphin Sonar 1998: 2
13 L. Rutimeyer, "Referate," Archiv für Anthropologie, 1868
Keith S. 14 Thompson, ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny and "American Scientist, vol. 76, May / June 1988, p. 273
15 GG Simpson, W. Beck, Introduction to Biology, Harcourt Brace & World, New York, 1965, p. 241.
16 Stephen Jay Gould, "Abscheulich! – Atrocious! – The precursor of the selection theory Natural, Natural History, March 2000, p. 45.
17 Mark Ridley who doubts evolution? "New Scientist, vol. 90 (June 25, 1981), p. 832.
18 SJ Gould, "The irregular development progress," History Nature, May 1977, p. 13-14.
19 William Fix, hawkers Bone: Evolution sales, Macmillan Publishing Co., New York, 1984, p. 189.
20 J. Bergman & G. Howe vestigial organs are fully functional, CRS Books, Terre Haute, IN, 1990.
21 SR Scadding, "Do" The evidence of vestigial organs "expect this trend? Evolutionary Theory, vol. May 5, 1981, p. 173.
22 James P. Gills, MD and Thomas Woodward, Ph.D., the Darwinism in the microscope, Charisma House, 2002, P. 39.
Stuart B. 23 Levy, "The challenge of resistance to antibiotics, "Scientific American, March 1998, p. 35
24 Francisco J. Ayala, "Mechanisms of Evolution, Scientific American, vol. 239, September 1978, p. 64
25 George Turner: "How are new species formed?", New Scientist, Vol 178, No. 2399, June 14 2003, p. 36
26 http://www.arn.org, Http: / / www.discovery.org/csc/
Phillip E. 27 Johnson, 'freezing Science, Touchstone Magazine, December 2003
28 For more information on Archaeoraptor false, please see # Q7 http://www.harunyahya.com/20questions03.php
29 Tim Friend, said the "link lost "fossil that has not been," U.S. Today, 01.02.2000
30 Open Letter to National Geographic Society by Storrs L. Olson, curator of birds, the Museum Natural History, Smithsonian Institution

About the Author

ABOUT THE AUTHOR, HARUN YAHYA
Born in Ankara in 1956, Adnan Oktar writes his books under the pen name of Harun Yahya. Ever since his university years, he has dedicated his life to telling of the existence and oneness of Almighty Allah, and to disseminating the moral values of the Qur’an. He has never wavered in the face of difficulties and despite oppression, still continues this intellectual struggle today exhibiting great patience and determination. For mor information pls visit: http://www.harunyahya.com/theauthor.php

Deformation of the Crust – Lesson 10 – Part 1 of 6