Do you believe Darwin's Evolution?

Question:I browsing the web and I've accidentally gone to http://harunyahya.com and many of its articles catches my attention. It said that if evolution happen why are their many animals? And if we came from a single-celled organism, what could have created it? it won't exist on its own? right? And Finally Darwin is an atheist (for me) because if he believed in his theory, it means that he trying to tell that the universe existed on its own, which contradicts to the recent findings the the universe somehow started from a big explosio, Big Bang

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: I browsing the web and I've accidentally gone to http://harunyahya.com and many of its articles catches my attention. It said that if evolution happen why are their many animals? And if we came from a single-celled organism, what could have created it? it won't exist on its own? right? And Finally Darwin is an atheist (for me) because if he believed in his theory, it means that he trying to tell that the universe existed on its own, which contradicts to the recent findings the the universe somehow started from a big explosio, Big Bang

Thank you very much! I knew there had to be an Islamic branch of Creationism!

1. There are many animals because there are many environmental niches that support the special features unique to every species.

2. Single celled organisms are ultimately a product of elemental diversity at the planet's surface and the laws of chemical equilibria.

3. Believing that God made the universe by more sophisticated if not more intelligent processes than potting around with mud is not an indication of Atheism - only that the holder of this belief thinks God created the universe via a different process. In the case of Darwin, it matters not whether he was an Atheist, a Theist, or a raving lunatic. His theory is supported by the vast body of evidence in the geological record. Consider, there is not one single sedimentological younging indicator that contradicts the younging direction indicated by Faunal Progression within the strata.

3. In my view, the big bang theory works well in a universe that exists in three dimensional space, but Einstein's Special Relativity dictates a minimum of four space dimensions such that an object travelling in what appears to the 3D vision of the human eye a straight line, will eventually return to it's point of origin. If you include this in your big bang theory, you may well get a four dimensional orbital system rather than the conventional expanding universe.

Also, the geological record is one of the closest things we have to the "Word of God". Words of men, no matter how devoutly people claim their divinity are alas still the words of men because they are constrained to the overly simplistic language of men. The "Word of God" if it exists as such cannot possibly be expressed by limited and finite human language without a very great deal of corruption.

When Jesus tried to explain religious fundamentalism to the Aramaic speaking crowds, most of them thought he was promoting cannibalism - Read John 6:66 and then read the chapter to figure out why people turned away from Christ in this instance. It is very easy to discuss religious fundamentalism in English but well nigh impossible in ancient Aramaic; requiring the use of nested allegories in order to define the terms that have no words in ancient Aramaic. Imagine the words of God for which even sophisticated and extensive languages such as English (with it's extended vocabulary of some 3 million words) cannot translate! Every major scientific discovery requires us to invent a new term because we have discovered in the evidence, something inconceivable in our own earthly language yet useful enough to talk about.

Also, evolution may only be a theory, but it is a working theory that can be relied upon to produce results. This is why successful petroleum companies hire palaeontologists and often require that their exploration geologists have a good understanding of biostratigraphy {eg. Mason & Partners (1996) advertised for an exploration geologist with "[...]a good understanding of biostratigraphy[...]" in the "Appointments section of the Weekend Australian}

It is a fact that Faunal Progression not only correlates strata between geological columns across the world but also in accordance with radiometric dating of rocks within those columns that likewise correlate the strata. This fact makes the theory of evolution at least as sound as the theory of gravity. It is not a matter of belief, but a matter of science. If you've the mind to do a bit of work in the field, it is a theory you can test and confirm for yourself. Just as you need only drop the ball to confirm the theory of gravity, you need only log a few dozen kilometres of outcrop across strike (in various settings) to confirm the theory of evolution. Testability is the very essence of science, and of all Christ's Apostles, Thomas was indeed the scientist!

PS:
There is nothing random about natural selection, and the earth is not a closed system so the second law of thermodynamics does not apply to natural processes occuring on the earth.

no there is nothing to believe it is not a religion and its just a theory

yh I love his programmes you can see them on TV sometimes on Islamchannel (sky: 813) or peace tv (sky: 823)
I find them really interesting and as being a Muslim myself i always totaly agree what he says on his programmes! :)
And no I don't believe what Darwin says, Its just another stupid theory, i mean come on, humans evolving from apes?

Theory is by definition uncertain. So, even to this day, its anyones best guess on so many prevailing questions such as our evolution. For me, I say why not. Not that I approach life in an aloof state of mind, but if someone such as Darwin dedicates so much of their life and energy giving us a logical answer, I'll go with it until someone with good intentions and passion as Dawin showed gives another reason for me to think differently. I refuse to listen to egotistical scientists who base their finds solely on disproving another. Why not spend their time and energy on a discovery they can make their own.

No,not a believer. Darwin speculated on evolution, but when he found a friend had some similar ideas, he manufactured a quick scientific symposium to make it "his" idea. He screwed over Alfred Wallace. You are talking about two different subjects here. Evolution is one, show me the proof, and Atheism is the other, your personal choice. No one can prove the "Big Bang" theory , nor has evolution shown itself since Darwin( via Wallace) proposed its theory. Faith in science is increasingly pointing to intelligent design, a eupheism for God. These are the great thinkers of our time. Pick up Bill Bryson's Short History of Nearly Everything. A layman asks world reknown scientists for kid level explanations for why things are they way they are. Fascinating.

No one can really say w/c one is true, it's up to you whether u believe them or not.

There is a relatively famous science experiment that shows that gods are not necessary for the creation of 'life'.

A scientist combined some basic chemicals that are beleived to be present during the early times. He then applied an electrical current -- similar to lightning and this created amino acids. Amino acids being the 'building blocks' of life.

Now we can come up with a creation myth and thousands of years of human suffering under religion, or simply acknowledge that these things can and do happen in nature without evolution or religion.

Just as Einstein made errors, so too did Darwin.

It's just a theory, but as it doesn't work with religion! I think religion is more powerful specialy for muslims, christians and jewish as we believe in one god.

And we know that this is real that god creates as and all the world, and such theory is not correct as humain have not always a complete vision for the univers.. we still limited and this why we believe in god and what he said for us.

It's clear that species adapt to their environment. What I tend to disagree with is that the change or mutation is random. Nothing else seems random.

I wouldn't be upset if i found out our bodies evolved from ape-like ancestors. We are not our bodies, we are Spirit.

I agree! I do not understand it, and it has as many holes as swiss cheese. It is lunacy to believe that from one cell we evolved, and would we not be seeing the evolution of new single cell originating right now?

To answer the questions you posed:

"It[is] said that if evolution happen[ed] why are their [sic] many animals?"

The short answer is that there are many animals because evolution happened. The very diversity of life on earth, and the evidence of previous life forms that are now extinct but exist as fossils who are the ancestors of current life forms are a validation of evolution.

Evolution is a genetic process of DNA mutation that over millions of years produces different species, which is why we have so many different animals on earth.

Thus, humans and apes are genetically and and structurally similar becuase they evolved from a single ancestor.ther is ample evidence to prove that

"And if we came from a single-celled organism, what could have created it?"

Evolution itself does not and cannot answer that question; because Evolution is concerned with life as it exists and existed, not on how it was created.

"Finally Darwin is an atheist (for me) .."

The fact is Darwin himself was a devout and practising Christian, and remained so his entire life, but he was also a scientist. Many scientists are religious, and many religious people, including priests and clergy believe in both science and Evolution. All the major religions hwve publically stated that Evolution is not inconsistent with their religious doctrines.

Evolution is a process, it deals with the progression of life, not its creation.

Your premise is faulty: atheism denies the existence of God, Evolution neither denies or confirms the exsitence of God, just outlines a naturally occurring process of nature.

"...which contradicts to the recent findings the the universe somehow started from a big explosio[n], Big Bang."

You are confusing Evolution with Cosmology, which is the study of the universe and it origins. Evolution does not even address the Big Bang and the creation of the Universe, so your assumptions are based on a misunderstanding and misinterpretation.

You obviously have not studied science enough to know about its different disciplines, or taken the time to study evolution objectively enough to know what its principles really are.

I suggest you do more reading than just one biased opinion. Read the many books on Evolution written for laymen or students by actual scientists before jumping to any more conclusions.

"A million people can call the mountains a fallacy, yet it need not concern you as you stand atop them."

You can disbelieve as much as you like, minds far more intelligent than yours understand evolution, accept it, and move on, you're just hurting yourselves.

You can challenge the laws of physics as much as you care, but they will still win every time.

I am awestruck at how many people STILL in 2008 say "it's just a theory"

Stephen Jay Gould explains it this way:
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts do not go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's, but apples did not suspend themselves in mid-air, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from apelike ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other, yet to be discovered"

Moreover, "fact" does not mean "absolute certainty." The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only because they are not about the empirical world. Evolutionists make no claim for perpetual truth, though creationists often do (and then attack us for a style of argument that they themselves favor). In science, "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent."

There is nothing to 'believe' in - it is a fact. It is not Darwin's anyway - he was just one of the scientists in the chain of study.

So, if there is a god, as you seem to hint in your 'question':

Who created him?
Why did he produce so many different creatures (several thousand kinds of beetles)?
Why do people still believe in the myth of god? After all it is only a myth.

So, what do you take as truth? A theory which takes into account every proven fact and produces a working explanation or some superstitious guess work hacked together by some bronze age scribble with a power axe to grind.

Evolution is ridiculous. How can species evolve by mutations?! Mutations are never good. There's also no proof of it in the fossil records. It's impossible to prove by the scientific method or the legal historical method.