Evolutionists must be forced back to the very first cell (which is as complex as a super-city), and explain how that came into existence?
It could not function without all of its various components, so to suggest a series of accumulation is unfounded. However they will almost always retort with that being a different science altogether – as they deal with life changing over time not how life began. For the origins we need to study abiogenesis – which in simple terms “is life originating from inorganic matter” over time....Yes that’s right! Maybe if you wait long enough your table may turn into a dog.
No one has yet synthesized a "cell" using basic components which would have the necessary properties of life. Instead they have tried the top down approach by stripping back genes of existing cells to try and ascertain the most minimal requirements for life. The alternative and more reasonable view must be biogenesis: that every living thing in creation came from a pre-existing living thing (which began with Allah initiating life). Therefore the best approach is to take it all back to the beginning as opposed to starting mid-way on a base of assumptions.
Evolutionists have a chequered past. Initially using and promoting the arguments of evolution to try and prove the white race as being evolved far greater than the black race – clearly a detestable concept to say the least. Even going as far as fabricating evidence in support of their theories; Archaeoraptor, Piltdown man, Nebraska man and other examples of fraud include the drawings of embryos of Ernst Haeckel and pictures of the peppered moths, which are still in some modern biology textbooks taught as fact.
The Tiktaalik fish was proposed as the missing link between fish and amphibians in the process of evolution towards man: Richard Dawkins, in his book The Greatest Show on Earth, claims “Tiktaalik is the perfect missing link—perfect, because it almost exactly splits the difference between fish and amphibian, and perfect because it is missing no longer.” However footprints found in Poland delivered an almost fatal blow to the theory since the footprints show that there were animals walking upright even before the proposed Tiktaalik fish was making its way onto land. Tetrapod (upright walking animal) footprints found in Poland were “securely dated” at 18 million years older than Tiktaalik, which means that Tiktaalik cannot be part of the fish to legged animal transition.
Another example of the errors of evolution is the belief that birds descended from dinosaurs. This is because recent investigations into Ostrich embryos in various stages of development discovered that while it is known that dinosaurs have digits one, two, three (thumb, index finger, middle finger); birds have digits 2, 3 & 4 (index, middle and ring finger) and that for birds to have come from dinosaurs would therefore be impossible. Couple this with the fact that superficially bird-like dinosaurs appeared some 25 million to 80 million years after the earliest known bird, which is 150 million years old.
Other fossils like that of Sharks (400 million years old), Dragonfly (135 million years old) and starfish (100-150 million years old) show no evolution between the fossil found and the current species.
There are only two theories which compete against Creationism. They are Evolution and Extra-terrestrial life forms.
The first is evolution of species – in this context that we as humans share a common ancestor with chimpanzees. Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and palaeontology (pre-historic life/fossils study) does not provide them. Therefore this seems to be a classical case of pure dogma for which the world of palaeontology has found no transitioning evidence yet in the absence of accepting a Creator they must hold on to this stubbornly. Evolution must be redefined if it is to gain any acceptance in the Islamic ethos since Allah created Adam and hence he has no ancestor and that time does not create or develop creation; Allah does.
The second; that extraterrestrial life forms (Aliens) having created life, stems resolutely from the fact that we cannot accept that ‘over time inanimate things became animate’ by themselves, which is what underpins Evolution. Therefore we now have a huge amount of scientific interest towards outer space in order to establish our beginnings. Now there has never been any conclusive evidence of any living life forms present on any of the meteors that have hit Earth – simply put there is absolutely no living evidence of life forms in outer space. However even if there was, we still go back to the issue of ‘well who created them’, and so on
– ultimately we go back to creationism.
want to read more then get your copy of The methodology of Dawah.
Available free at
Just Dawah.org
