Harun Yahya

Part 3 - Darwinists' Methods of Deception of the World 3/5

5. Darwinists Portray the Theory of Evolution as "Undeniable"

A scientific theory is generally formulated and then scientifically confirmed or refuted. It is scientifically agreed to or else rejected. The Big Bang theory is a scientific one, and has been confirmed. The invalidity of ideas put forward in the face of the evidence corroborating the theory is evident. Nobody admits the possibility of any diametrically opposed ideas being corroborated because there is concrete scientific proof. And concrete evidence has confirmed this scientific theory against the other possibilities.

The theory of evolution has also been proposed as a scientific thesis, and countless pieces of evidence have proved that it is utter nonsense. Not a single piece of evidence exists to support it. All scientific findings prove again and again, with every passing day, that the theory was proposed as a hypothesis and possesses no validity whatsoever. Under normal circumstances this theory should long since have been discredited and consigned to the waste bin. But for some reason that has not happened. On the contrary, the theory of evolution is now espoused, as if were a genuinely scientific one, with false evidence in text books, on TV channels and in publishing organs. The Council of Europe has determinedly sought to defend the theory, and reacted with horror to the release of evidence proving that the theory was not scientific at all. Courts in various countries have strongly rejected proposals in opposition to the theory of evolution and its place in school curricula. Recently, a U.S. federal judge went so far as to state that criticism of Darwinism was a violation of the Constitution.142 The idea of the inclusion in the curriculum of the "difficulties of evolution" that Darwin himself referred to has appalled Darwinist circles. In short, Darwinism is a supposedly scientific theory protected by all states and generally propped up with official state backing. These circles make enormous efforts to prevent the fact of Creation being taught in schools, as this would expose the nonsensical nature of evolution. According to the laws of this superstitious religion, Darwinism is "undeniable." In the same way, Darwinism is under the protection of a fascist Darwinist dictatorship right across the world.

The writer Ann Coulter sets this fact out as follows:

To avoid discussing the theory of evolution, Darwinists keep slipping irrelevant little facts into the debate like spare parts, leaving the impression that to deny evolution is to deny that the sun rises in the east.143

According to the Darwinist dictatorship, it is literally a crime to deny Darwinism. This is literally regarded as treason in countries that have adopted Darwinism as a superstitious religion and are trying to impose it. Nobody can explicitly state that the scientific evidence has discredited the theory, and that it no longer possesses any validity. The acceptance of Darwinism as an indisputable fact is literally obligatory. Professor of Mathematics Wolfgang Smith sets this out as an evolutionist himself:

We are told dogmatically that evolution is an established fact; but we are never told who has established it, and by what means. We are told, often enough, that the doctrine is founded upon evidence, and that indeed this evidence 'is henceforward above all verification, as well as being immune from any subsequent contradiction by experience;' but we are left entirely in the dark on the crucial question wherein, precisely, this evidence consists."144

Rejection of Darwinism is forestalled, because otherwise the adherents of the false religion that is Darwinism would have no means of keeping the theory propped up. Lies are told in loud voices, but to claim that these are lies is regarded as an offense. A theory which began as ostensibly scientific has been turned into a superstitious, dogmatic system of belief far removed from science that cannot be questioned or denied. The really noteworthy point here is that this was done in plain sight, and with no compunctions.

This has reached such a scale that even the Pope has had to stage conferences supporting Darwinism in his own home, The Vatican. Churches have had to apologize to Darwin. University professors have lost their jobs, and been excluded from their professions, because of publications questioning evolution. This imposition has been hugely successful in many countries, and evolution has become unquestionable, especially at senior levels.

Darwinists may resort to all means to ensure that Darwinism remains undeniable. They cover up evidence that refutes the theory of evolution, distort proofs of its invalidity, and deceive people into thinking that there is actually evidence for evolution, in the same way that Charles Doolittle Walcott kept the Cambrian fossils hidden away for 70 years.

Darwinists preconceptions and conditioning obliges them to defend the most illogical things and to express those sophistries from time to time. In the passage above an evolutionary biologist openly states that he will never doubt the veracity of evolution, even if it lacks any scientific and logical evidence. This once again goes to show that the theory of evolution is not espoused because of scientific data and findings. That being the case, there is an evident truth here that has to be accepted; evolution is a perverse, false and deceptive faith.


It is Almighty Allah Who creates the earth, the sky and all that lies between.
Allah's creation is magnificent and matchless. Allah created the heavens and the earth with truth. There is certainly a Sign in that for the believers.
(Surat al-Ankabut, 44)

The mathematician and philosopher William A. Dembski sets out how Darwinists portray evolution as irrefutable thus:

"Doubting Darwinian orthodoxy is comparable to opposing the party line of a Stalinist regime. What would you do if you were in Stalin's Russia and wanted to argue that Lysenko was wrong? You might point to paradoxes and tensions in Lysenko's theory of genetics, but you could not say that Lysenko was fundamentally wrong or offer an alternative that clearly contradicted Lysenko. That's the situation we're in."145

The impossibility of denying Darwinism, under the pressure of the Darwinist dictatorship, has given some people the impression that it is an accurate and scientifically accepted theory, because the great majority of people mistakenly think that television and the press could never support a deception. They imagine that if it were a deception, someone would have by now exposed the fact. Yet every voice that is raised is silenced in one of various ways.

The dictatorial tradition that persisted with pressure and imposition during the 20th Century is still continuing today. Many scientists are still unable to stand up against the theory of evolution out of fear of losing their jobs, and families are subjected to pressure and threats in the event they and their children oppose the teaching of evolution But no matter how much the theory of evolution is taught in schools, no matter how much scientists who speak out against evolution are silenced, no Darwinist pressure will be unable to stop the enlightenment taking place in the minds of those seeing that evolution is a lie. The Council of Europe has today made the teaching of evolution compulsory in schools. Non-evolutionary interpretations are banned from the curriculum in many states of the USA. The theory of evolution has become an inseparable part of the curriculum in China, Russia, almost all Asian countries, and even in some Muslim ones.

It needs to be made clear that what is being described and criticized here is the oppressive and prohibitory Darwinist mindset. Students could be told about evolution in schools as part of their history classes, but the scientific and rational thing to do is also for them to be taught the hundreds of pieces of evidence that prove the theory of evolution is false. Young people must not be forced to undergo an oppressive and biased education. The scientific facts should be set out before them in an impartial manner, and they must enjoy the right to see and learn the truth through their own intelligence and conscience.

It will also be of use to remember this; no matter how great a victory Darwinists might imagine this state affairs to represent, it is in fact an expression of terror and panic. This is the first time that a body such as the European Council, with its Darwinist mindset, has been so alarmed at Darwinism's collapse. Works about Creation and discussing the invalidity of the theory of evolution have been published in Europe for years now, conferences have been held, and various other activities organized. But none has had such a significant impact as Harun Yahya's giant Atlas of Creation did when it reached Europe. The reason for that impact is that the scientific findings contained in the Atlas reveal the falsity of evolution in a way that cannot be disputed. All students in Europe now know that the theory of evolution has been demolished by more than 500 million fossils. From a single, easily accessible internet page they can see pictures of countless living fossils dating back millions of years, and thus conclude for themselves that living things never evolved. They have learned, through countless works and articles, about Darwinist frauds and that there is not a single piece of scientific evidence to corroborate the theory of evolution. They can easily access the true facts about Darwinism. The measures and approaches currently being adopted on behalf of Darwinism now have no effect at all. Darwinists are resorting to the same rotten tactics in the hope they will have the same impact they did one hundred years ago. But they forget that the true face of the trickery of the dajjal has finally been exposed. Almighty Allah reveals in one verse:

Or do those who do bad actions imagine they can outstrip Us? How bad their judgment is! (Surat al-'Ankabut, 4)

6. Darwinists Try to Silence the Opponents of Evolution

One undeniable fact about Darwinism is that Darwinists always seek to silence every opponent of evolution that might have an influence on people. The superstitious religion that is Darwinism, which has settled across the world, and its adherents implement such an oppressive policy that even suggesting doubts about evolution leads to that person experiencing very grave difficulties. According to this fascist imposition, harboring doubts about evolution is a crime. Expressing them is a crime. Even suggesting that evolution is an unproven theory, or that it is only a theory, is also a crime. It is impossible for a scientist opposed to Darwinism to teach in the biology department of any university. It is impossible to find a picture of a fossil refuting evolution in any pro-Darwinist newspaper. It is a huge mistake for a high school biology teacher to express any doubts about the theory, even in error. In all likelihood, that teacher's employment will soon come to an end.

For example, in the documentary Expelled: "No Intelligence Allowed," Professor of Biology Caroline Crocker describes how she was removed from George Mason University for questioning evolution:

My supervisor invited me to his office and he said I am going to have to discipline you for teaching creationism… At the end of the semester I lost my job.146

In a statement to the Washington Post on February 5th, 2006, Crocker said:

"I lost my job at George Mason University for teaching the problems with evolution. Lots of scientists question evolution, but they would lose their jobs if they spoke out.147

Caroline Crocker was blacklisted after losing her job, and has not been permitted to find employment anywhere by the Darwinist dictatorship.148


Dr. Richard von Steinberg lost his job at the National History Museum for questioning evolution and issuing statements opposed to it. Steinberg's statements on the subject read:

(When the subject of Creationism is brought up) People were so upset about it, they were so upset that you can see their, they had physical and emotional reaction.. The way that chair of the department has put it, is that I was viewed as an intellectual terrorist.149

Brain surgeon Michael Egnor describes the reaction his saying that people have no need to learn about the theory of evolution in order to be doctors as follows:

A lot of people on a lot of blogs called me unprintable names and a lot of very nasty comments. All the people suggested the people called the university I work at and suggested me to retire. I realized when I kind of what public with my doubts about the ... theory... criticism what has amazed me was the viciousness and sort of baseness.150

In the same way, Professor Robert Marks' research site at Baylor University was closed because he questioned Darwinism and the funding given to him for his research demanded back.

The documentary concerned considers the experiences of a great many anti-Darwinist scientists, whether they were willing to divulge their names or not, and these people described in their own words how their academic careers were totally ended because of their rejection of Darwinism.

The journalist Larry Witham summarizes the essence of Darwinism and the methods employed by the Darwinist dictatorship:

Once you're thick in Science, you can question the paradigm. But if you want to get grants, if you want to be elected to high positions, if you want to get awards as a promoter of public education of Science, you can't question the paradigm.

I interviewed dozens and dozens of scientists and, when they're amongst each other or talking to a journalist who they trust, they'll speak about 'It's incredibly complex' or 'Molecular Biology is in a crisis', but, publicly, they can't say that.151

Pamela Winnick, another journalist, describes how her career was put to an end after writing a piece on the subject of Creation and says:

If you give any credence to it [Creationism] -- whatsoever -- which means 'just writing about it', you are just finished as a journalist.152

When the philosopher Stephen Meyer published his opinion that the information in DNA cannot be explained in terms of chance and that it is rather the work of a superior intelligence, Darwinists attempted to wreck the career of the journal's editor.153 The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) brought legal charges because of stickers carrying warnings about evaluating evolution "with an open mind in a careful and critical manner" placed on text books in the town of Cobb in the U.S. state of Georgia. Families representing the organization brought charges against schools simply for suggesting teaching on the subject of evolution and Creation. A small group in Dover, Pennsylvania, supported by the ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and State, filed a legal suit in order to prevent the discussion of Creation in ninth year biology classes. The judge ruled in their favor, and the school has been told to pay compensation to the plaintiff. That sum is likely to EXCEED ONE MILLION DOLLARS.154

The writer Ann Coulter offers this analysis;

After Dover, no school district will dare breathe a word about "creationism", unless they want to risk being bankrupted by ACLU lawsuits. The Darwinists have saved the secular sanctity of their temples: the public schools. They didn't win on science, persuasion, or the evidence. They won the way liberals always win: by finding a court to hand them everything they want on a silver platter. This isn't science...155

These repressive methods employed by Darwinist have a high deterrent effect on some people. Faced with a $1 million fine, a school will be hugely intimidated. A teacher who refuses to back down risks losing his or her job. As William A. Dembski says, this system resembles a dictatorial regime. Nobody can even open his mouth to breathe a word against it.

As a scientist, the evolutionist and professor of physics H. S. Lipson says that science points to Creation, and describes how hard it is to sign up to that fact because of the pressure from the Darwinist dictatorship:

If living matter is not, then, caused by the interplay of atoms, natural forces, and radiation, how has it come into being? . . I think, however, that we must go further than this and admit that the only acceptable explanation is Creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a theory that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it.156

As Lipson says, many scientists, academics and teachers frequently face the threat of Darwinist excommunication. When the principal of a high school in Detroit wished to place various books critical of Darwinism in the library in 1999, the NCSE fiercely opposed the move, using all kinds of intimidation.157

Jonathan Wells describes this policy of intimidation thus:

The NCSE tells school boards that "evolution isn't scientifically controversial," so "arguments against evolution" are "code words for attempt to bring non-scientific, religious views into the science curriculum." Since U.S. courts have declared it unconstitutional to teach religion in public schools, this amounts to a warning that the school board is contemplating something illegal. If the warning doesn't work, the NCSE calls on the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) for backup, and the ACLU sends a letter to the school board threatening an expensive lawsuit. Since every school district in the country is already struggling to make ends meet, this bullying by the NCSE and ACLU has been quite successful in blocking overt criticism of Darwinian evolution in public school classrooms.158


Following moves aimed at putting an end to the teaching of evolutionary biology in the state of Kansas, where there has been a huge campaign for Creation to be taught in schools, the education system in the state came in for widespread intimidation and pressure. In a piece sent to Science magazine, Herbert Lin, president of the National Research Council, announced that American colleges and universities should not regard the biology classes taught in Kansas schools as academic. The following month, Scientific American magazine editor John Rennie asked university admission committees to tell the Kansas schools administration that they would "examine the qualifications of students applying to them from the state of Kansas with the greatest care " and asked them to issue "an open letter to families in Kansas declaring that this bad decision would have severe consequences for their children's futures."159 The meaning of the threat was clear. It is a crime to oppose the theory of evolution, and those committing such an offense must be annihilated at once.

In one recent case, a researcher from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute by the name of Nathaniel Abraham announced that he had lost his job for denying the theory of evolution. A letter written to Abraham in 2004 by a Woods Hole scientist said he had been removed from his post because Abraham said he did not accept the "evolutionary aspects" of the National Institutes of Health grant, even though the project clearly required scientists to use the principles of evolution in their analyses and writing.160 In other words, a scientist was officially excommunicated for denying the theory of evolution. The fact that the subject achieved prominence as the result of a suit brought by Nathaniel Abraham in 2007 definitely stems from people finding the courage to stand up to the Darwinist dictatorship.

Phillip Johnson relates the story that in 1981, the British Museum of Natural History celebrated its centennial with an exhibition on Darwin's theory of evolution.

A sign at the entrance read: "Have you ever wondered why there are so many different kinds of living things? One idea is that all the living things we see today have evolved from a distant ancestor by a process of gradual change. How could evolution have occurred? How could one species change into another? The exhibition in this hall looks at one possible explanation – the explanation of Charles Darwin."

An adjacent sign read: "Another view is that God created all living things perfect and unchanging." An accompanying brochure admitted, "the concept of evolution by natural selection is not, strictly speaking, scientific.""

The response from the scientific community was outrage. An editorial in the journal, Nature, asked rhetorically: "Can it be that the managers of the museum, which is the nearest thing to a citadel of Darwinism, have lost their nerve, not to mention their good sense? … Nobody disputes that, in the public presentation of science, it is proper whenever appropriate to say that disputed matters are in doubt. But is the theory of evolution still an open question among serious biologists? And if not, what purpose, except general confusion, can be served by these weasel words?".161

That is the technique of the Darwinist dictatorship. Words written against the theory of evolution are heralded as "aggression," and the appropriate measures are immediately taken under the influence of Darwinist scientist and globally respected journals. Under pressure from the Darwinist dictatorship all anti-Darwinist statements are hurriedly silenced.

This despotism of course serves one single purpose. It is essential for Darwinists to portray the theory of evolution as a proven one and thus spread it across the world. They imagine that they can do this by keeping the fact of Creation from people, by never mentioning the fact that Allah created all things and by indoctrinating people with evolution alone. But there is another fact that Darwinists have never considered. There is no need for people to be educated in order to see and realize that living things are created. Anyone who uses his reason just a little can clearly see that there is something extraordinary, a perfection, intelligence, consciousness, artistry and glory in life. And he will also conclude that all these could never come into being as the result of unconscious, unthinking and unaware coincidences bereft of any ability to think, reason, reflect, make judgment or distinguish between right and wrong. It is not hard for someone who thinks for such a few seconds to realize all this. Allah reveals in verses that the miracles He creates are obvious to people who think:

In the heavens and earth there are certainly Signs for the believers. And in your creation and all the creatures He has spread about there are Signs for people with certainty. And in the alternation of night and day and the provision Allah sends down from the sky, bringing the earth to life by it after it has died, and the varying direction of the winds, there are Signs for people who use their intellect. (Surat al-Jathiyya, 3-5)

Darwinists have actually begun to realize that the measures they have taken are all in vain. The conditioning they used to maintain with oppressive methods and false evidence will have no effect on the more aware people around today.

Jonathan Wells says that an increasing number of scientists have begin doubting Darwinism and have set about making their voices heard:

The truth is that a surprising number of biologists quietly doubt or reject some of the grander claims of Darwinian evolution. But – at least in America – they must keep their mouths shut or risk condemnation, marginalization, and eventual expulsion from the scientific community. This happens infrequently, but often enough to remind everyone that the risk is real. Even so, there is a growing underground of biologists who are disenchanted with the Darwinists' censorship of opposing viewpoints. When isolated dissidents begin to realize how many of their colleagues feel the same way, more and more of them will begin to speak out.162

7. Darwinists Use Science and Put on a Scientific Show

Science is Darwinists' most important disguise. Darwinism first emerged under the guise of "science." Darwinists also appeared saying, "We are scientists." Every reaction against Darwinism has been misrepresented as "an attack on science." All forms of doubt regarding the theory of evolution are depicted as a kind of "backwardness or assault on science." Darwinists have misrepresented all kinds of false evidence as if it were a scientific finding. To put it another way, Darwinism has misused science for the last 150 years.

So is Darwinism really science?

Darwinism is a deception. There is nothing scientific about it. Darwinism is simply as false endeavor aimed at getting people to believe a lie. Science is Darwinism's last refuge. Darwinism makes itself immune by the use of science. It defends frauds that it calls science. It describes Darwinists, who produce false evidence and tell fairy tales, as scientists. But it accuses the people who realize that Darwinism is a deception, and strive against it, of a betrayal of science. Science is Darwinism's greatest weapon. It has deceived countless people to date by wearing a scientific mask. And it is still using science to perpetuate that deception. That is why Darwinist scientific journals, Darwinist documentary channels and Darwinist scientists use it.

ilkel atmosfer

The primeval atmosphere alleged by evolutionists never existed.

The British paleontologist and evolutionist Derek V. Ager says this on the subject:

We all know that many apparent evolutionary bursts are nothing more than brainstorms on the part of particular paleontologists. One splitter in a library can do far more than millions of years of genetic mutation. ....163

This is so very true. Evolutionist myths such as the supposed primordial Earth, the living species that emerged through mutations and natural selection, the mythical common ancestors and the strange-looking creatures that had not yet completed their development that appear in school text books and in newspapers, journals and on television are all the product of Darwinist scientists' own imaginations. They have never arrived at any assumed end over the years by way of natural selection. As Derek Ager says, genetic mutations also failed to produce that result. But they still imagine that to deny these scientific facts and continue to propagate the same false claims will increase the likelihood of the deception that is Darwinism spreading across the world. That is why Darwinists use scientific words, in order to make the Darwinist deception look more scientific. There are no scientific experiments or evidence that have been proven and corroborate evolution. All we have are frequently used scientific terms and formulae. One can often encounter such interesting terminology or chemical formulae in books by any Darwinist author. When someone ignorant of the subject looks at such books, he may really imagine that it contains a scientist's scientific knowledge. But appearances are deceptive. The only thing described in such a book is the myth that living things emerged and assumed their present forms as the result of blind chance. No Darwinist author has anything new to say, nor any scientific evidence to present. The chemical terminology and formulae are merely in order to complete the Darwinist deception and, in their eyes, give it a realistic air.

The evolutionary paleontologist S. M. Stanley provides an example of Darwinist methods of misusing science:

Evolution happens rapidly in small, localized populations, so we're not likely to see it in the fossil record.164

These words are misleading. The extract refers to evolution taking place in local populations, but there is no evidence. It is even admitted that no evidence will be found, but even this is given a scientific gloss. The fact of the matter is this; no evolution can be seen in the fossil record, because no evolution ever happened.

National Center of Science Education (NCSE) director Eugene C. Scott made the following statement on the subject:

Many high school (and even, unfortunately, some college) textbooks describe theories as tested hypotheses, as if a hypothesis that is confirmed is somehow promoted to a theory, and a really, really good theory gets crowned as law. Unfortunately, this is not how scientists use these terms, but most people are not scientists and scientists have not done a very good job of communicating the meanings of these terms to students and the general public.165

Under these conditions, someone whose experience is limited to what is shown and told to him may well form the impression that Darwinism is valid, if he has no power to think and reflect in an unprejudiced manner because with its conditioning technique, Darwinism somehow responds to the reader's expectations. It offers a simplistic account of life, in its own foolish eyes, and says this is "scientific." It says, "There is no need to question it, as it is true and proven." "Scientists confirm it," it says. "This is the only scientific explanation for life, and no other accounts are scientific," it says. "The whole world agrees," it says. And through these lies, one of the worst deceptions in history has been built up. And that is all it takes to convince someone who knows nothing about Darwinism, or what a gross deception it is, and whose entire experience is limited to these accounts.

The fact is however, that such people are misled at every stage of this conditioning. Darwinists kept the more than 500 million fossils that definitely refute Darwinism and prove the fact of Creation carefully hidden away; the fact that it is mathematically impossible for a single protein, the building blocks of life, to form by chance was carefully kept hidden away. So it has also been impossible to make out the scale of the deception. What people who have been deceived in this way do not know is this: Darwinism is neither science, nor scientific. Darwinism has been questioned, and it has been proved that it is untrue and unsupported by any scientific evidence. The scientists who espouse Darwinism are people who are dogmatically and fanatically devoted to this superstitious faith. The only explanation that science provides for life is Creation. All scientific findings show that living things were created in a single moment in all their perfect states. It is again this false conditioning and indoctrination that lies behind the manner in which Darwinism enjoys acceptance across the world. Therefore, the subjects that convince such people are no more than sleight of hand. Even scientists may sometimes be taken in by this deception. The British paleontologist and evolutionist Colin Patterson makes an interesting confession on this subject:

Then I woke up and realized that all my life I had been duped into taking evolution as revealed truth in some way. I feel that the effects of hypotheses of common ancestry in systematics has not been merely boring, not just a lack of knowledge, I think it has been positively anti-knowledge"166

Brian Leith, a documentary film producer, gives another example of gradual awareness of the subject:

In the past ten years there has emerged a new breed of biologists who are considered scientifically respectable, but who have their doubts about Darwinism.167

Another important piece of evidence confirming the accuracy of the American economist Jeremy Rifkin's words that " Evolutionary theory has been enshrined as the center-piece of our educational system, and elaborate walls have been erected around it to protect it from unnecessary abuse."168 is the way that they turn a blind eye to these frauds by Darwinist scientists and are not even embarrassed or offended when the true facts emerge. The best-known scientists in the world deliberately maintain this deception in order to be able to mislead people. Jonathan Wells cites an example:

What about Stephen Jay Gould, a historian of science who has known for decades about Haeckel's faked embryo drawings? All that time, students passing through Gould's classes were learning biology from textbooks that probably used Haeckel's embryos as evidence for evolution. Yet Gould did nothing to correct the situation until another biologist complained about it in 1999. Even then, Gould blamed textbook-writers for the mistake, and dismissed the whistle-blower (a Lehigh University biochemist) [Michael J. Behe] as a creationist. Who bears the greatest responsibility here- textbook-writers who mindlessly recycle faked drawings, people who complain about them, or the world-famous expert who watches smugly from the sidelines while his colleagues unwittingly become accessories to what he himself calls the 'academic equivalent of murder'?

The revelation that the peppered moth story is flawed came only recently compared to the truth about Haeckel’s embryos , so perhaps some textbook-writers can be excused for continuing to use it. Yet every biologist who works on peppered moths has known for over a decade that moths don’t rest on tree trunks and the textbook photographs have been staged. Many biology textbooks carry photographs of light and dark peppered moths on tree trunks to illustrate this famous story. Yet biologists have known for over a decade that the story has problems.169

The way that Darwinists misappropriate science and, furthermore, give the impression they are maintaining and preserving it, is in and of itself a huge deception. In fact, contrary to what it claims, Darwinism acts in complete violation of science. It tries to cover up the scientific evidence. It makes claims that contradict the results of laboratory experiments. Even though the fossil record proves that transitional forms never existed, they still propagate the lie that living things evolved in such a way as to leave countless intermediate forms behind them. Scientific fraud is a concept born with Darwinism. Darwinists misuse science museums and scientific publications and deliberately present frauds to people. They use scientific books and journals to spread the myth of evolutionary history, something that never happened. They draw a picture of a life form that never existed and try to give the impression that "this is our past." This religion, diametrically opposed to science, tells one of the worst lies ever under a scientific mask.

The reason why Darwinists support such a terrible lie is without doubt their blind devotion to the way of the dajjal. The system of the dajjal is a perverse one that leads people to untruth.


This is Allah's creation. Show me then what those besides Him have created! The wrongdoers are clearly misguided.
(Surah Luqman, 11)



141. Jonathan Welss, The Politically Incorrect: Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design, Regnery Publishing Inc., Washington, 2006, s. 181

142. Ann Coulter, Godless The Church of Liberalism, Crown Forum Publishing, 2006, s. 201

143. Wolfgang Smith, Teilhardism and the New Religion, A Thorough Analysis of the Teachings of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Rockford IL, Tan Books and Publishers, Inc. 1988, s. - 8 Nicholas Comninellis, Creative Defense, Evidence Against Evolution, Master Books, 2001, s. 221

144. Jonathan Welss, The Politically Incorrect: Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design, Regnery Publishing Inc., Washington, 2006, s. 182

145. Ben Stein, Expelled "No Intelligence Allowed", 2008

146. Jonathan Welss, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design, Regnery Publishing Inc., Washington, 2006, sf.192

147. Ben Stein, Expelled "No Intelligence Allowed", 2008

148. Ben Stein, Expelled "No Intelligence Allowed", 2008

149. Ben Stein, Expelled "No Intelligence Allowed", 2008

150. Ben Stein, Expelled "No Intelligence Allowed", 2008

151. Ben Stein, Expelled "No Intelligence Allowed", 2008

152. Jonathan Welss, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design, Regnery Publishing Inc., Washington, 2006, sf.95

153. Ann Coulter, Godless The Church of Liberalism, Crown Forum Publishing, 2006, s. 200

154. Ann Coulter, Godless The Church of Liberalism, Crown Forum Publishing, 2006, s. 200

155. H. S. Lipson, "A Physicist Looks at Evolution", Physics Bulletin, vol. 31, 1980, s. 138 - Nicholas Comninellis, Creative Defense, Evidence Against Evolution, Master Books, 2001, s. 201

156. Jonathan Wells, Evrimin İkonları, Gelenek yayınları, Ocak 2003, s. 218

157. Jonathan Wells, Evrimin İkonları, Gelenek yayınları, Ocak 2003, s. 218

158. Jonathan Wells, Evrimin İkonları, Gelenek yayınları, Ocak 2003, s. 220


160. http://butler-harris.org/archives/21

161. Jonathan Wells, Evrimin İkonları, Gelenek yayınları, Ocak 2003, s. 220

162. Nicholas Comninellis, Creative Defense, Evidence Against Evolution, Master Books, 2001, s. 158

163. Henry M. Morris, The Long War Against God, Master Books, 2000, s. 27

164. Eugenie C. Scott, Evolution vs. Creationism, University of California Press, London, 2005, s. 14

165. Colin Patterson, "Evolution and Creationism", Speech at the Museum of Natural History, New York, Kasım 1981, s. 2 - Nicholas Comninellis, Creative Defense, Evidence Against Evolution, Master Books, 2001, s. 224

166. Brian Leith, The Descent of Darwin: A Handbook of Doubts about Darwinism, Collins, 1982, s. 11 - Nicholas Comninellis, Creative Defense, Evidence Against Evolution, Master Books, 2001, s. 229

167. Jeremy Rifkin, Algeny, New York, Viking Press, 1983, s. 112 - Nicholas Comninellis, Creative Defense, Evidence Against Evolution, Master Books, 2001, s. 224

168. Jonathan Wells, Evrimin İkonları, Gelenek yayınları, Ocak 2003, s. 213-214

Chapters of the Book

Desktop View



iddialaracevap.blogspot.com ahirzamanfelaketleri.blogspot.com ingilizderindevleti.net