To Be Freed From Prejudice
Most people accept everything they hear from scientists as strictly true.
It does not even occur to them that scientists may also have various philosophical
or ideological prejudices. The fact of the matter is that evolutionist
scientists impose their own prejudices and philosophical views on the
public under the guise of science. For instance, although they are aware
that random events do not cause anything other than irregularity and confusion,
they still claim that the marvellous order, plan, and design seen both
in the universe and in living organisms arose by chance.
For instance, such a biologist easily grasps that there is an incomprehensible
harmony in a protein molecule, the building block of life, and that there
is no probability that this might have come about by chance. Nevertheless,
he alleges that this protein came into existence under primitive earth
conditions by chance billions of years ago. He does not stop there; he
also claims, without hesitation, that not only one, but millions of proteins
formed by chance and then incredibly came together to create the first
living cell. Moreover, he defends his view with a blind stubbornness.
This person is an "evolutionist" scientist.
If the same scientist were to find three bricks resting on top of one
another while walking along a flat road, he would never suppose that these
bricks had come together by chance and then climbed up on top of each
other, again by chance. Indeed, anyone who did make such an assertion
would be considered insane.
"An embarrased silence surrounds
the stark complexity of the cell"
How then can it be possible that people who are able to assess ordinary
events rationally can adopt such an irrational attitude when it comes
to thinking about their own existence?
It is not possible to claim that this attitude is adopted in the name
of science: scientific approach requires taking both alternatives into
consideration wherever there are two alternatives equally possible concerning
a certain case. And if the likelihood of one of the two alternatives is
much lower, for example if it is only one percent, then the rational and
scientific thing to do is to consider the other alternative, whose likelihood
is 99 percent, to be the valid one.
Let us continue, keeping this scientific basis in mind. There are two
views that can be set forth regarding how living beings came into being
on earth. The first is that all living beings were created by God in their
present complex structure. The second is that life was formed by unconscious,
random coincidences. The latter is the claim of the theory of evolution.
When we look at the scientific data, that of molecular biology for instance,
we can see that there is no chance whatsoever that a single living cell-or
even one of the millions of proteins present in this cell-could have come
into existence by chance as the evolutionists claim. As we will illustrate
in the following chapters, probabilistic calculations also confirm this
many times over. So the evolutionist view on the emergence of living beings
has zero probability of being true.
This means that the first view has a "one hundred percent" probability
of being true. That is, life has been consciously brought into being.
To put it in another way, it was "created". All living beings have come
into existence by the design of a Creator exalted in superior power, wisdom,
and knowledge. This reality is not simply a matter of conviction; it is
the normal conclusion that wisdom, logic and science take one to.
Under these circumstances, our "evolutionist" scientist ought to withdraw
his claim and adhere to a fact that is both obvious and proven. To do
otherwise is to demonstrate that he is actually someone who is sacrificing
science on behalf of his philosophy, ideology, and dogma rather than being
a true scientist.
The anger, stubbornness, and prejudices of our "scientist" increase more
and more every time he confronts reality. His attitude can be explained
with a single word: "faith". Yet it is a blind superstitious faith, since
there can be no other explanation for one's disregard of all the facts
or for a lifelong devotion to the preposterous scenario that he has constructed
in his imagination.
The faith that we are talking about is the materialistic
philosophy, which argues that matter has existed for all eternity
and there is nothing other than matter. The theory of evolution is the
so-called "scientific foundation" for this materialistic philosophy and
that theory is blindly defended in order to uphold this philosophy. When
science invalidates the claims of evolution-and that is the very point
that has been reached here at the end of the 20th century-it then is sought
to be distorted and brought into a position where it supports evolution
for the sake of keeping materialism alive.
A few lines written by one of the prominent evolutionist biologists of
Turkey is a good example that enables us to see the disordered judgement
and discretion that this blind devotion leads to. This scientist discusses
the probability of the coincidental formation of Cytochrome-C, which is
one of the most essential enzymes for life, as follows:
The probability of the formation of a Cytochrome-C sequence is as likely
as zero. That is, if life requires a certain sequence, it can be said
that this has a probability likely to be realised once in the whole universe.
Otherwise, some metaphysical powers beyond our definition should have
acted in its formation. To accept the latter is not appropriate to the
goals of science. We therefore have to look into the first hypothesis.2
This scientist finds it "more scientific" to
accept a possibility "as likely as zero"
rather than creation. However according to the rules of science, if there
are two alternative explanations concerning an event and if one of them
has "as likely as zero" a possibility of
realisation, then the other one is the correct alternative. However
the dogmatic materialistic approach forbids the admittance of a superior
Creator. This prohibition drives this scientist-and many others
who believe in the same materialist dogma-to accept claims that are completely
contrary to reason.
People who believe and trust these scientists also become enthralled
and blinded by the same materialistic spell and they adopt the same insensible
psychology when reading their books and articles.
Richard Dawkins, busy with propagating evolution
This dogmatic materialistic point of view is the reason why many prominent
names in the scientific community are atheists. Those who free themselves
from the thrall of this spell and think with an open mind do not hesitate
to accept the existence of a Creator. American biochemist Dr Michael J.
Behe, one of those prominent names who support the theory of "intelligent
design" that has lately become very accepted, describes the scientists
who resist believing in the "design" or "creation" of living organisms
Over the past four decades, modern biochemistry has uncovered the secrets
of the cell. It has required tens of thousands of people to dedicate the
better parts of their lives to the tedious work of the laboratory… The
result of these cumulative efforts to investigate the cell- to investigate
life at the molecular level-is a loud, clear, piercing cry of "design!".
The result is so unambiguous and so significant that it must be ranked
as one of the greatest achievements in the history of science… Instead
a curious, embarrassed silence surrounds the stark complexity of the cell.
Why does the scientific community not greedily embrace its startling discovery?
Why is the observation of design handled with intellectual gloves? The
dilemma is that while one side of the [issue] is labelled intelligent
design, the other side must be labelled God.3
This is the predicament of the atheist evolutionist scientists you see
in magazines and on television and whose books you may be reading. All
the scientific research carried out by these people demonstrates to them
the existence of a Creator. Yet they have become so insensitised and blinded
by the dogmatic materialist education they have absorbed that they still
persist in their denial.
People who steadily neglect the clear signs and evidences of the Creator
become totally insensitive. Caught up in an ignorant self-confidence caused
by their insensitivity, they may even end up supporting an absurdity as
a virtue. A good case in point is the prominent evolutionist Richard Dawkins
who calls upon Christians not to assume that they have witnessed a miracle
even if they see the statue of the Virgin Mary wave to them. According
to Dawkins, "Perhaps all the atoms of the statue's arm just happened to
move in the same direction at once-a low probability event to be sure,
but possible." 4
The psychology of the unbeliever has existed throughout history. In the
Qur'an it is described thus:
Even if We did send unto them angels, and the dead did
speak unto them, and We gathered together all things before their very
eyes, they are not the ones to believe, unless it is in God's plan. But
most of them ignore (the truth). (Surat al-Anaam : 111)
As this verse makes clear, the dogmatic thinking of the evolutionists
is not an original way of thinking, nor is it even peculiar to them. In
fact, what the evolutionist scientist maintains is not a modern scientific
thought but an ignorance that has persevered since the most uncivilised
The same psychology is defined in another verse of the Qur'an:
Even if We opened out to them a gate from heaven and
they were to continue (all day) ascending therein, they would only say:
"Our eyes have been intoxicated: Nay, we have been bewitched by sorcery."
(Surat Al-Hijr : 14-15)
Mass Evolutionist Indoctrination
As indicated in the verses cited above, one of the reasons why people
cannot see the realities of their existence is a kind of "spell" impeding
their reasoning. It is the same "spell" that underlies the world-wide
acceptance of the theory of evolution. What we mean by spell is a conditioning
acquired by indoctrination. People are exposed to such an intense indoctrination
about the correctness of the theory of evolution that they often do not
even realise the distortion that exists.
This indoctrination creates a negative effect on the brain and disables
the faculty of judgement. Eventually, the brain, being under a continuous
indoctrination, starts to perceive the realities not as they are but as
they have been indoctrinated. This phenomenon can be observed in other
examples. For instance, if someone is hypnotised and indoctrinated that
the bed he is lying on is a car, he perceives the bed as a car after the
hypnosis session. He thinks that this is very logical and rational because
he really sees it that way and has no doubt that he is right. Such examples
as the one above, which show the efficiency and the power of the mechanism
of indoctrination, are scientific realities that have been verified by
countless experiments that have been reported in the scientific literature
and are the everyday fare of psychology and psychiatry textbooks.
theory of evolution and the materialistic world view that relies on it
are imposed on the masses by such indoctrination methods. People who continuously
encounter the indoctrination of evolution in the media, academic sources,
and "scientific" platforms, fail to realise that accepting this theory
is in fact contrary to the most basic principles of reason. The same indoctrination
captures scientists as well. Young names stepping up in their scientific
careers adopt the materialist world view more and more as time passes.
Enchanted by this spell, many evolutionist scientists go on searching
for scientific confirmation of 19th century's irrational and outdated
evolutionist claims that have long since been refuted by scientific evidence.
There are also additional mechanisms that force
scientists to be evolutionist and materialist. In Western countries,
a scientist has to observe some standards in order to be promoted, to
receive academic recognition, or to have his articles published in scientific
journals. A straightforward acceptance of evolution is the number-one
criterion. This system drives these scientists so far as to spend their
whole lives and scientific careers for the sake of a dogmatic belief.
American molecular biologist Jonathan Wells refers to these pressure mechanisms
in his book Icons of Evolution published in 2000:
...Dogmatic Darwinists begin by imposing a narrow interpretation on the
evidence and declaring it the only way to do science. Critics are then
labeled unscientific; their articles are rejected by mainstream journals,
whose editorial boards are dominated by the dogmatists; the critics are
denied funding by government agencies, who send grant proposals to the
dogmatists for "peer" review; and eventually the critics are hounded out
of scientific community altogether. In the process, evidence against the
Darwinian view simply disappears, like witnesses against the Mob. Or the
evidence is buried in specialized publications, where only a dedicated
researcher can find. Once critics have been silenced and counter-evidence
has been buried, the dogmatists announce that there is scientific debate
about their theory, and no evidence against it.5
This is the reality that continues to lie behind the assertion "evolution
is still accepted by the world of science". Evolution is kept alive not
because it has a scientific worth but because it is an ideological obligation.
Very few of the scientists who are aware of this fact can risk pointing
out that the king isn't wearing any clothes.
In the rest of this book, we will be reviewing the findings of modern
science against evolution which are either disregarded by evolutionists
or "buried in specialized publications", and display of the clear evidence
of God's existence. The reader will witness that evolution theory is in
fact a deceit-a deceit that is belied by science at every step but is
upheld to veil the fact of creation. What is to be hoped of the reader
is that he will wake up from the spell that blinds people's minds and
disrupts their ability to judge and he will reflect seriously on what
is related in this book.
If he rids himself of this spell and thinks clearly, freely, and without
any prejudice, he will soon discover the crystal-clear truth. This inevitable
truth, also demonstrated by modern science in all its aspects, is that
living organisms came into existence not by chance but as a result of
creation. Man can easily see the fact of creation when he considers how
he himself exists, how he has come into being from a drop of water, or
the perfection of every other living thing.