As soon as you open an account Bet365 will send you a 10 digit Offer Code via email. Receive Your £200 bet365 Welcome Promo Bonus plus £50 Mobile Promo

JERRY BERGMAN  Much is in the news lately about the University of California at Berkeley, where riots have prevented planned guest speakers from appearing. The university claimed in an email about their decision to cancel a talk by Ann Coulter that they uphold the First Amendment, but canceled her talk out of “safety concerns”. As evidence, they referred to the recent riots at colleges over conservative speakers, such as a talk by Milo Yiannopoulos that was canceled in February. Coulter is a strong supporter of creation as documented in her book, Godless.


 

Much is in the news lately about the University of California at Berkeley, where riots have prevented planned guest speakers from appearing.[i] The university claimed in an email about their decision to cancel a talk by Ann Coulter that they uphold the First Amendment, but canceled her talk out of “safety concerns”. As evidence, they referred to the recent riots at colleges over conservative speakers, such as a talk by Milo Yiannopoulos that was canceled in February. Coulter is a strong supporter of creation as documented in her book, Godless. [ii]

In another case, when Ben Shapiro was scheduled to speak at several colleges, demonstrations rose up to stop him. Benjamin Aaron Shapiro (born January 15, 1984) comes from a Jewish family, partially from Russia. He is a conservative Republican, and a creationist.[iii] And yet the absurd reason they gave for preventing him from speaking is the claim that “Orthodox Jew Ben Shapiro Is A ‘White Supremacist’” and a “Fascist”. It’s becoming increasingly common for protestors to use ad hominem tactics to block a variety of guests from speaking at college campuses, especially creationists. [iv]

To stop the censorship, an Academic Freedom bill of Rights has been proposed in various American states and in several other countries, in order to rectify the loss of freedom in many colleges and universities. Most young people today look forward to attending college. Few, though, are aware of the trends at universities that have resulted from the “political correctness” movement. Since I have been a professor at various colleges and universities for over forty years now, I am very attuned to issues related to censorship in the academic environment.

Abridgement of speech—as part of the political correctness movement—is now epidemic at universities. Historical attempts by universities to block the freedom of speech of professors have been well documented, but never before have they been so blatant as recently. Colleges have even established what are called “free speech zones,” and only in these places is freedom of speech allowed!

A classic example, becoming all too typical, was the case of University of New Hampshire sophomore Timothy Garneau. On September 3, 2000, 17 years ago, Garneau posted flyers in the elevator of Stoke Hall Dormitory making light of common frustrations that students experience in riding elevators. The elevators tend to be overcrowded because, instead of taking the stairs, many students take the elevator to go up only one or two floors.

In a hastily produced flyer, corrected here for grammar, he said, “nine out of ten freshmen girls gain ten to fifteen pounds. But there is something you can do about it. If you live below the sixth floor, take the stairs. Not only will you feel better, but you will also be saving time and will look better.”  This comment was deemed by some to be both “sexist” and “discriminatory” toward obese people (one of the latest of many “victim” groups in our society that the government has ruled deserving of special rights.)

Garneau was confronted about his message. He become fearful that he would be punished for his expression of free speech. His fear turned out to be valid. At first, he tried to deny his involvement, but was eventually forced to admit his “mistake” of having expressed a politically incorrect opinion. Charged with violation of “affirmative action” policies, harassment, and “conduct which (sic) is disorderly and lewd,” Garneau was expelled from student housing, given extended disciplinary probation, required to meet with a psychologist to discuss “his problem,” write a three-thousand-word reflection paper, and to publish an apology in the newspaper. Forced out of student housing, he was then compelled to live in his 1994 Ford Contour for three weeks.

Garneau appealed his punishment within the university, but lost. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) took his case, claiming that the university violated his constitutionally protected free speech rights. FIRE attorneys argued that the university had no business investigating constitutionally protected free speech in the first place. Thanks to FIRE and their aggressive stand against the university (and FIRE’s long record for winning scores of similar cases when universities attempt to deny free speech as they often do nowadays), Garneau was eventually allowed to move back into a dormitory – but a different one, because it was deemed that someone so insensitive to the “rights of minorities” must be relocated.

Ironically, many universities tend to ignore behavior that many of us common folk regard as inappropriate—such as foul language or sexual immorality, and focus instead on what most people regard as trivial. My guess is, after this experience, Mr. Garneau will be afraid to say almost anything to anybody around the university.

The problem is so great that the President of the Study of Popular Culture, David Horowitz, has drafted a bill titled “Academic Bill of Rights” to defend the basic constitutional rights of students and faculty. While not a perfect bill, it will go a long way to ensure that the freedom most Americans take for granted in our daily life will also exist in our colleges. Unfortunately, since this 17-year-old case, things have only gotten worse, much worse, in America today.

Dr. Jim Nelson Black, in his 2012 book Freefall of the American University: How Our Colleges are Corrupting the Minds and Morals of the Next Generation, says that a major problem now is that “faculty members take great pains to exclude not just conservative ideas but also religion” from the college environment.[v]  The substance of his concern is that students are not allowed to “articulate a point of view that might be considered by another party as exclusivist.” Black argues that the liberal view concludes that “we have no grounds for determining what is true; therefore, any claim to truth must be discounted and disavowed. This means, of course, that religious beliefs which rely on revelation and absolute standards of truth, have no home in the academy.”

Expressing hesitation about Darwin is considered irretrievable intellectual suicide, the unthinkable doubt, the unpardonable sin of academia. —Richard Halvorsen

In an article for the Harvard Crimson, Richard Halvorson expressed the same concern, namely that “bias against conservative religious beliefs on campus, and particularly the bias against any view that does not support the reigning Darwinian orthodoxy” is a major problem.[vi]  In his critique, Halvorson said, “intellectual honesty requires rationally examining our fundamental premises—yet expressing hesitation about Darwin is considered irretrievable intellectual suicide, the unthinkable doubt, the unpardonable sin of academia.”[vii]

He went on to conclude that, “Although the postmodern era questions everything else—the possibility of knowledge, basic morality, and reality itself—critical discussion of Darwin is taboo … the basic premise of evolution remains a scientific Holy of Holies, despite our absurd skepticism in other areas.”  The university, which has made a fetish of skewering sacred cows, is now in the position of giving what Black calls “an unproven theory of origins by uncertain nineteenth-century students of natural history the status of Holy Writ. The modern university has no religion but Darwinism.” Halvorson concluded that, “We must reject intellectual excommunication as a valid form of dealing with criticism: the most important question for any society to ask is the one that is forbidden.” That’s exactly what liberals used to believe 50 years ago.

In a study done before the 2016 elections, five people were interviewed. One,

Kaylee, a structural biologist at Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut, stays quiet when her colleagues talk about politics and religion. As a Catholic with conservative tendencies, she feels that her beliefs are unwelcome in academic institutions, where liberal views often prevail. The strain is particularly acute this year: Kaylee favors Donald Trump for US president.[viii]

The problem Kaylee feared (with good reason, it turns out) is that “supporting Trump could harm her job prospects.” For this reason, Kaylee—a postdoc—asked Nature to refer to her by a pseudonym. Her fears do not surprise Colby College (Waterville, Maine) sociologist Neil Gross, because surveys have documented

that conservative faculty members are a minority in US universities, although the proportion varies by field. “My sense is that the candidacy of Donald Trump has really intensified disputes that were there already in academic life,” Gross says. “If Republicans in academia and science felt uncomfortable before, I think the candidacy of Mr. Trump has made them all the more uncomfortable.”[ix]

Another scientist agrees. “‘The current status quo seems like it’s not working for a lot of Americans,’ says one Trump-supporting chemist at the University of Pittsburgh in Pennsylvania, who asked for anonymity. ‘I’m hopeful for a modest improvement, and that’s about as much as I can hope.’”[x] In short, as the November 8th, 2016 election drew near, some “scientists who support Trump worry that political discussions in the lab will not only harm their careers in the long term, but also hinder current collaborations with colleagues, and waste time.”[xi]

The basic premise of evolution remains a scientific Holy of Holies, despite our absurd skepticism in other areas…. The modern university has no religion but Darwinism. —Halvorsen

[i] Holly Epstein Ojalvo. Do controversial figures have a right to speak at public universities? 2017. USA Today College Edition.

[ii] Godless: The Church of Liberalism. Crown Forum, New York. 2006. See pages 198 to 281.

[iii] Behold the mental gymnastics: Ben Shapiro On the Creation Story Vs The Big Bang Theory. Reddit.com https://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/54ffzh/behold_the_mental_gymnastics_ben_shapiro_on_the/

[iv]Berkeley Agitators Say Orthodox Jew Ben Shapiro Is A ‘White Supremacist’. The Daily Caller, 9/10/17. http://dailycaller.com/2017/09/10/berkeley-agitators-say-orthodox-jew-ben-shapiro-is-a-white-supremacist/

[v] Dr. Jim Nelson Black, Freefall of the American University: How Our Colleges are Corrupting the Minds and Morals of the Next Generation (2012), p. 230.

[vi] Halvorson, Richard. 2003. “Confessions of a Skeptic.” The Harvard Crimson, April 7, 2003, p. 4.

[vii]  Halvorson, p. 4.

[viii] Sara Reardon. 2016. The scientists who support Donald Trump Science policy fades into background for many who back Republican candidate in US presidential race. Nature. 298(538):298-299, 2016, p. 298.

[ix] Reardon, 2016, p. 298

[x] Reardon, 2016, p. 299.

[xi]  Reardon, 2016, p. 299.


JERRY BERGMAN  To our chagrin, mosquitoes can and do fly, even though scientists have said they can’t. Our response is understandably, “I wish science was true in this case! No one likes mosquitoes.” Actually, scientists have just recently figured out how they are able to fly, and now realize that it involves a very complex designed system.


 

To our chagrin, mosquitoes can and do fly, even though scientists have said they can’t. Our response is understandably, “I wish science was true in this case! No one likes mosquitoes.” Actually, scientists have just recently figured out how they are able to fly, and now realize that it involves a very complex designed system. Solving this problem is important because it could have major applications to many other areas of technology, such as designs for micro-scale flying devices. An example is quadcopters, commonly called drones. To produce small micro-drones to fly into very small spaces looking for life, such as in buildings toppled by earthquakes, we need to understand how mosquitoes fly. This technology can then be used to produce micro-drones.

Bernoulli Effect. Credit: Miami University of Ohio

Many animals rely on the Bernoulli effect in order to be able to fly. The Bernoulli effect is the law that fluid pressure falls as the velocity of the fluid movement increases. Thus, the fluid pressure is inversely related to the velocity of the fluid. The Wright brothers discovered this effect by extensive experiments with birds and wind tunnels. They then used what they learned to build their first heavier-than-air flying machine powered by an onboard engine.

Airplane wings are shaped to force air to move faster over the top of the wing, causing the air pressure on the top of the wing to decrease. As a result, the pressure on the top of the wing is less than that on the bottom of the wing. The difference in pressure creates lift that literally pushes the airplane upward, at least enough to counter the effects of gravity.

This mechanism is used by not only airplanes, helicopters, and birds, but also by most insects – but not mosquitoes, surprisingly. Mosquitoes have small nearly flat planar wings, thus they produce very little lift. For this reason, how they were able to fly has for decades mystified entomologists (biologists who study insects).

Scientists solved the mystery of mosquito flight by using both super high-speed cameras and computer analysis.[i] They were then able to “understand the unique mechanisms the insect uses to stay airborne.”[ii] It is only now that science has been able to “explain how mosquitoes managed to flap their wings through such a short angle and still produce enough lift.”[iii] Mosquitoes move their wings around an arc of only about 40 degrees, lower than any other insect group.

Credit: Bomphrey/Nakata/Phillips/Walker, Oxford U.

Imaging a small creature with large antennae and legs that mask the view of its wings flapping at 800 beats per second, 4 times faster than many other insects of a similar size, was a great challenge. The solution was to use infra-red LEDs, a custom lighting rig, and eight cameras shooting at 10,000 frames per second. The eight cameras were set at difference angles to produce 3-dimensional pictures to help remove the blocking caused by the insects’ antennae and legs.

Image credit: Bomphrey/Nakata/Phillips/Walker, Oxford U.

The researchers found that mosquitoes use three aerodynamic techniques to fly.[iv] The first is the leading edge vortex that is also used by most other insects. The second and third are a trailing edge vortex and rotational drag, both which, as far as is known, are novel to mosquitoes. Both of these mechanisms rely on subtle, but very precise, wing rotations. The trailing-edge vortex is a type of ‘wake capture’, that requires mosquitoes to align their wings with the air flows they created during the previous wingbeat. The result is they can exploit energy that would normally be lost. For this complex system to function requires not only the hardware, including the wing and neuromuscular design, but also the software, in this case the brain. A major problem for evolution is that, until the entire system was designed and built, mosquitoes could not fly. Consequently, they could not reach their food, which is plant nectar, and, in the case of female mosquitoes that are ready to breed and lay eggs, proteins and lipids—both of which are obtained in animal blood.

The common reason mosquitoes bite humans is because when their preferred food source, small mammals, is in short supply, humans are often a target. Mosquitoes become aware of the presence of humans by sensing carbon dioxide (CO2), and the average human exhales more CO2 than most all small mammals. Thus, humans make a bigger impression on a hungry female mosquito’s senses and an easier overall target. The human body also produces strong odor chemicals that, while unpleasant or undetectable to us, are very detectable to female mosquitoes.

The design of just the system that allows a small insect to fly is a wonder to behold. It took some of our brightest Oxford University scientists, and the latest technology, to unlock its secret. Nature awaits us with a seemingly endless supply of other wonders yet to be discovered.


[i] Richard J. Bomphrey, Toshiyuki Nakata, Nathan Phillips, Simon M. Walker. 2017. Smart wing rotation and trailing-edge vortices enable high frequency mosquito flight. Nature. 544(6):92-95.

[ii] Leon Siciliano. 2017. Oxford scientists just solved the mystery of how mosquitos fly using super high-speed cameras. Business Insider, Apr. 19.

[iii] Siciliano, 2017.

[iv] Mary Beth Griggs. 2017. We may finally know how mosquitoes fly, but we’re still not sure why. Popular Science, March 29.

Creation out of Water

ADNAN OKTAR Those who defend the evolutionary creation deceit, try to show that the statements in many verses that man was created out of water are evidence that all living things emerged from water. When we examine the verse of the Quran where the stages of human creation are discussed, the fundamental error in these comments is clearly revealed.


 

We created man from a mingled drop to test him, and We gave him (the gifts) of hearing and sight. (Surat al-Insan, 2)

Those who defend the evolutionary creation deceit, try to show that the statements in many verses that man was created out of water are evidence that all living things emerged from water.

When we examine another verse where the stages of human creation are discussed, the fundamental error in these comments is clearly revealed:

Mankind! If you are in any doubt about the Resurrection, know that We created you from dust, then from a drop of sperm, then from a clot of blood, then from a lump of flesh, formed yet unformed, so We may make things clear to you. We make whatever We will to stay in the womb until a specified time, and then We bring you out as children so that you can reach your full maturity. Some of you die and some of you revert to the lowest form of life so that, after having knowledge, they then know nothing at all. And you see the ground dead and barren; then when We send down water onto it it quivers and swells and sprouts with luxuriant plants of every kind. (Surat al-Hajj, 5)

In this verse, the stages of the creation of a human being are described.

Dust, i.e., substances both organic and inorganic, which are found in their elementary forms on and in the Earth, is the raw material that includes the basic minerals and elements in the human body.

The second stage is the coming together of these materials in the seminal fluid, which is described in the Qur'an as a mingled drop. This drop contains the sperm that possesses the genetic information and structure necessary to fertilize the egg inside the mother's womb. In short, the raw material for a human being is (dust of) the Earth, the essence of which is collected in a drop of seminal fluid in a manner that will bring about a human being. Following the water stage, a human being's developmental stages inside the mother's womb are described in the Qur'an. The theory of evolution, on the other hand, assumes the existence of millions of hypothetical stages (the first cell, single-celled creatures, multi-celled creatures, invertebrates, vertebrates, reptiles, mammals, primates, and countless similar stages) between the so-called spontaneous origination of life in water to a human being's formation. In the sequence presented by the verse, however, it is clear that there is no such logic or description, for a human being takes on the form of an 'alaq after he or she is in the form of a drop of water.

For this reason, it is clear that the verse is not describing the different evolutionary stages undergone by a human being, but rather the stages of creation from before and inside the mother's womb right up to old age.

Some Qur'anic commentators think that "the creation of living things from water" contains a meaning that parallels the theory of evolution. However, this view is seriously flawed. The verses reveal that water is the raw material for living things by saying that all living things were created from it. In fact, modern biology has revealed that water is the most fundamental component of all living bodies, for the human body is approximately 70 percent water. Water permits movement inside the cell, between cells, and between tissues. Without it, there would be no life. Other verses stating that human beings and other living things were created from water also contain no meaning that could be used to support evolution. The following verses are among those that contain such statements:

Do those who disbelieve not see that the heavens and Earth were sewn together and then We unstitched them, and that We made from water every living thing? So will they not believe? (Surat al-Anbiya', 30)

The verses below clearly state that the "drop of water" is semen:

He created the two sexes – male and female – out of a sperm-drop when it spurted forth (min nutfatin idha tumna); that He is responsible for the second existence. (Surat an-Najm, 45-47)

Min

:from

Nutfatin

:nutfah, sperm-drop

İdha

:when …

tumna

:be spurted forth

Was he not a drop of ejaculated sperm? (nutfatan min maniyin yumna) (Surat al-Qiyama, 37)

nutfatan

:nutfah, a drop of water

min

:from

maniyin

:sperm

yumna

:being ejaculated

Man has only to look at that from which he was created. He was created from a spurting fluid (Khuliqa min ma'in dafiqin), emerging from between the backbone and the breastbone. (Surat aTariq, 5-7)

khuliqa

:was created

min

:from

ma'in

:water

dafiqin

:suddenly erupting, spurting, being caused to flow

The Error That Creatıon Fırst From Dust And Then From Water Indıcates Evolutıonary Creatıon

... Do you then disbelieve in Him Who created you from dust, then from a drop of sperm, and then formed you as a man? (Surat al-Kahf, 37)

Omer Nasuhi Bilmen's commentary on the same verse states:

Do you deny the Almighty God Who created the Prophet Adam, the origin of your race and the cause of your creation, (from dust), Who then created you and (formed you as a man after creating you) from a nutfah and a drop of sperm, Who brought you into being as a complete human being as a result of different stages of life? Because denying the afterlife means denying the Almighty God, Who gives you the news that it will happen and Who has the power to make it happen.

The expression creation from dust describes the creation of Prophet Adam, and creation from water refers to the development of a human being, starting with the sperm. It is indicated in the verse below that God created a human being directly from dried clay. This verse, which describes the Prophet Adam's (pbuh) creation, does not speak of a stage:

When your Lord said to the angels: "I am creating a human being out of dried clay formed from fetid black mud. When I have formed him and breathed My Spirit into him, fall down in prostration in front of him!" (Surat al-Hijr, 28-29)

If the Qur'anic account of creation's stages is read carefully, bearing in mind the consecutive processes, it will be realized immediately that such an evolutionary view is incorrect.

The Qur'an contains many verses indicating that Prophet Adam, peace be upon him, was not created through an evolutionary stage. One of them reads:

The likeness of Jesus in God's Sight is the same as Adam. He created him from earth and then He said to him, "Be!" and he was. (Surah Al 'Imran, 59)

The above verse states that God created the Prophet Adam (pbuh) and the Prophet Jesus (pbuh) in the same way. As we stressed earlier, the Prophet Adam (pbuh) was created with no parents, from the Earth, at God's command "Be!" the Prophet Jesus (pbuh) also was created without father, by God's Will expressed through the command "Be!"

In the other verses that refer to creation from water and earth, it is not man's evolutionary stages that are being described, but the stages of human creation before the womb, during it, and after birth.

Mankind! If you are in any doubt about the Rising, know that We created you from dust, then from a drop of sperm, then from a clot of blood, then from a lump of flesh, formed yet unformed, so We may make things clear to you. We make whatever We will to stay in the womb until a specified time and then We bring you out as children so that you can reach your full maturity. Some of you die and some of you revert to the lowest form of life so that, after having knowledge, they then know nothing at all. And you see the ground dead and barren; then when We send down water onto it it quivers and swells and sprouts with luxuriant plants of every kind. (Surat al-Hajj, 5)

The Error That The Qur'an Contains Signs Of The Evolutionary Process

There surely came over man a period of time when he was a thing not worth mentioning. (Surat al-Insan, 1)

The same people also use this verse as evidence for evolution. In translations based on personal interpretation, the expression "when he was a thing not worth mentioning" is expressed as a statement of "previous states before man became man." However, this claim is just as far the truth as the first one.

The Arabic part of the underlined section runs as follows:

lam yakun shay'an madhkuran

lam yakun

: was not

shay'an

: a thing

madhkuran

: mentioned

Trying to use this expression as evidence for evolution is really forcing the words. In fact, Qur'anic scholars do not interpret this verse as indicating an evolutionary process. For example, Hamdi Yazir of Elmali makes the following comments:

In the beginning were elements and minerals, then vegetable and animal nutrients–"a kind of clay" (Surat al-Muminun, 12) were created out of them in stages. Then, something emerged very slowly and by stages from the sperm that was filtered from them. But that was not something called a human being. Just as mankind is not eternal, nor is his substance; that emerged later. Man came into being long after the beginning of time and the creation of the universe.

Omer Nasuhi Bilmen explains the verse in this way:

These verses announce that God created man to see and hear out of a drop of water when he was not, and that He has set a test for him.… Mankind did not exist in the beginning, but was created later as a figured body out of a drop of water, soil, and clay. That person was not known at that time, his name and why he had been created were a mystery to the inhabitants of Earth and sky. He then began to be reminded that he has a soul.

As clearly stated by Islamic scholars, there is no reference in the Qur'an to "creation through evolution". The creation that is told in the Qur'an is "creation out of nothing" by God's command "Be!".

The Error That The Prophet Adam (Pbuh) Was Not The First Man

Another claim put forward regarding the error of evolutionary creation is that the Prophet Adam (pbuh) may not have been the first man and may not even have been a human being. (We absolve the Prophet Adam (pbuh)). The following verse is presented as evidence for this:

When your Lord said to the angels, "I will create a vicegerent on Earth," they said, "Why put on it one who will cause corruption on it and shed blood when we glorify You with praise and proclaim Your purity?" He said, "I know what you do not know." (Surat al-Baqara, 30)

Those who support this claim say that the Arabic verb ja'ala in the expression "I will create a vicegerent" means "to appoint." In other words, they wrongly suggest that the Prophet Adam (pbuh) was not the first man, but that that he was "appointed" as a vicegerent among many people. However, in the Qur'an, this verb has the following meanings:

To create, invent, translate, make, place and render

Some examples of Qur'anic verses where ja'ala is used are:

He created you from a single self, then produced (ja'ala) its mate from it, and sent down livestock to you – eight kinds in pairs… (Surat az-Zumar, 6)

Say: "He brought you into being and gave (ja'ala) you hearing, sight and hearts. What little thanks you show! (Surat al-Mulk, 23)

As can be seen from the above verses, ja'ala means "creation" in this verse. Furthermore, several verses state that the Prophet Adam (pbuh) was created from dust. These verses make it clear that the Prophet Adam (pbuh) was not just one man among many, but that he possessed a special and different creation.

The Error That The Prophet Adam (Pbuh) Was Created On Earth

In the Qur'an God reveals another important fact about the Prophet Adam (pbuh): his removal from the Garden of Eden. It says in the verses:

Children of Adam! Do not let satan tempt you into trouble, as He expelled your parents from the Garden, stripping them of their covering, and disclosing to them their private parts. He and his tribe see you from where you do not see them. We have made the demons friends of those who do not believe. (Surat al-Mursalat, 27)

We said: "Adam, live in the Garden, you and your wife, and eat freely from it wherever you will. But do not approach this tree and so become wrongdoers." But satan made them slip up by means of it, expelling them from where they were. We said: "Go down from here as enemies to each other! You will have residence on Earth and enjoyment for a time." (Surat al-Baqara, 35-36)

The verses' statements are perfectly clear. God created the Prophet Adam (pbuh) from dust. The Prophet Adam (pbuh) is a special creation that emerged first from his existence in the Heaven and then from his removal from it. Yet Muslims who have been deceived by evolution ignore this evident truth and maintain that "Heaven" here refers not to the Heaven in the Hereafter but to a beautiful area on Earth, despite the fact that the Qur'an specifies many features of the Heaven in which the Prophet Adam (pbuh) was created. For example, that Heaven contains both angels and the devil, and the angels speak with God. It is a mistake to produce forced interpretations and seek evidence of evolution when the verses are so clear on this matter.

Many verses state that all people are descended from the Prophet Adam (pbuh). As it is revealed in the Qur'an:

When your Lord took out all their descendants from the loins of the children of Adam and made them testify against themselves "Am I not your Lord?" they said: "We testify that indeed You are!" Lest you say on the Day of Rising: "We knew nothing of this." Or lest you say: "Our forefathers associated others with God before our time, and we are merely descendants coming after them. So are You going to destroy us for what those purveyors of falsehood did?" (Surat al-Mursalat, 172-173)

Adnan Oktar's piece in News Rescue (USA):

http://newsrescue.com/error-creation-water-indicates-evolutionary-creation/#axzz4xanX4Cvl

ADNAN OKTAR The nation of Turkey recently made a decision to remove references to evolution from the high schools’ curricula, in a move that is contrary to how the world generally approaches the subject.


 The news spread very quickly via the European pro-evolutionist press. Turkey’s bold move stunned evolutionist circles because until now, the theory of evolution has been enjoying a protected status all around the world.

But what was the motive behind this unexpected maneuver and why does evolution cause so much controversy?

Science or Ideology?

Although the theory is proclaimed as science, it is, in fact, an ideological assertion that has failed to obtain a scientific basis despite persistent efforts of the past 150 years. Even the strong propaganda machine of the Darwinist dictatorship couldn’t compensate for the missing scientific evidence. Billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of hours have been spent to prove the notion of evolution scientifically, but one and a half centuries later, the theory is at its lowest and weakest point.

In the meantime, the ever-advancing science offered over and over again indisputable evidence of creation. Different disciplines of science like biology, genetics and paleontology consistently pointed to creation. For example, science has shown that in order for a single protein to come into existence, 60 different proteins have to be already present and help the synthesis of this new protein. Clearly, this means that there had to be a time when all these proteins required to produce new ones, came into existence all of a sudden out of nothingness. In other words, they were created and there could be no gradual, evolutionary development in their production.

Moreover, more than 700 million fossils that have been unearthed so far have demonstrated that living beings have remained unchanged for millions of years. In other words, no evolutionary process took place and caused gradual changes in living things. If it had, we would have found the fossils of creatures showing those gradual changes.

The Propaganda of Darwinism

However, despite the clear and loud statements of science, the formidable Darwinian empire continued to exist because letting go of Darwinism would mean letting go of the hope of scientifically justifying materialism and atheism. So much so that countries, academicians, even leaders were forced to state that they believed and supported evolution. Even Pope John Paul II was compelled to sanction the theory, while the Vatican held meetings in favor of evolution.

No world leader could until this point publicly decry and refute evolution. Even when it inspired harmful and dangerous ideas like communism, fascism and anarchism (Marx, Engels, Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot among others clearly admitted that Darwinism provided so-called scientific basis for their theories) and gave a mistaken intellectual foundation for slavery, colonialism, ethnic conflicts, genocides, the relentless propaganda and Darwinist dictatorship survived.

Resistance to the Teaching of Evolution

Other than Turkey, the strongest resistance to evolution has been and is in the US. Individual cases in various parts of the country clearly reveal the people’s irritation with the idea. For instance, in Kentucky the word ‘evolution’ was changed to ‘change over time’ in state school standards. As of 2008, teachers in Louisiana are allowed to teach evolution as a controversy rather than a scientific theory. Tennessee similarly gave protection to its teachers that ‘explored the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of evolution’.

However even though these incidents clearly show the reluctance to accept the notion as science, it is also clear that there is no room for anything more than these little acts of defiance. Academicians feel compelled to subscribe to evolutionist views or risk being shunned, even lose their careers. So many scientists and academicians have lost their jobs as a result that many scientists are now filing lawsuits like this NASA specialist, to gain back their credibility. As a matter of fact, Ben Stein, after learning about the horrific social and historical impact of Darwin on Jews, made a documentary about the faulty notion and about the numerous academicians whose careers suffered due to their rejection of evolution.

The situation is even more surprising in Europe. Most European countries, including the Catholic countries, readily submit to evolutionist thinking. Except for a Serbian minister who wanted to remove education from the curriculum, and who was forced to resign as a result, European countries have almost stopped trying to fight the Darwinist dictatorship. Central and South America also seem to have given up any resistance and surrendered to the iron grip of the Darwinist dogma. This widespread submission continues in Central and South America, in most of Asia, a majority of the Middle East, and most surprisingly in Iran.

Evolution as Science

This dictatorship is so strong, in the age of freedoms, particularly the freedom of expression, that the Council of Europe believes that saying that there might be design in nature could be a human rights offense. The black propaganda works so strongly, although the debate has to be about science, any idea that goes against evolution is quickly shunned as unscientific and dogmatic. Scientists who dare to speak up against it are ignored as pseudo-scientists and are not shown due respect.

Apparently, according to a Scientific American article, Europeans should see the challenge presented by creation proponents as mere “tricks”: “Unaware of all the tricks developed by American creationists, however, European journalists far too often jumped to the standard “balanced perspective,” looking at the case from both sides.¨ It seems that according to Scientific American, in what should be a scientific debate, trying to look at theories from both sides and trying to achieve a balanced perspective is wrong. However, science should be about discussing everything, examining theories from every perspective, examining the evidence regardless of what one wants to believe.

If God wanted, He could have created everything by using evolution as a process. However, if that had been the case, we would have seen its proofs in the Holy Books and in science. As a matter of fact, if the Holy Books and the science showed us creation via evolution, then, we would have been its foremost defenders. However, we see both in the Holy Books and in nature that such an evolutionary process never took place.

Conclusion

I believe that Darwinism should continue to be taught in all schools in a separate lesson, as long as the scientific evidence is accurately presented. There is no problem in teaching Darwin’s theories of evolution as a matter of general knowledge. Until now, schools in Turkey have taught only the theory of evolution and have not included a discussion of the clear and irrefutable signs of creation. Yet, students should be presented with the scientific facts in an objective manner, being allowed to make up their own minds because only an educational system based on scientific evidence and freedom of thought will help raise brilliant, open-minded generations for our world.

I hope that the other nations of the world will follow Turkey’s bold example and spare their youth from the deceit of a Darwin-only school curriculum.

Adnan Oktar (aka Harun Yahya) is an influential Turkish author and opinion leader. He has authored more than 300 books translated into 76 languages on politics, religion and science. 

ADNAN OKTAR  From the day it was brought forward by Darwin, the theory of evolution has remained perhaps the most hotly debated topic in the world. In fact, this debate goes on across the world not only in the field of biology, but on philosophical, political, sociological and even artistic platforms as well.


 

Never before has a "factual" scientific theory been a matter of such controversy and polemic in so many fields related and unrelated, direct and indirect.

As it is known, the emergence of new supporting evidence in time renders a theory stronger and helps it gain recognition. When refuting evidence surfaces, on the other hand, the theory in question is abandoned and classified as "invalid and insubstantial."

However, this standard procedure has never been employed for Darwinism, a compilation of fallacies that lack scientific evidence and are based on illogical postulates, for Darwinism has always been favored and defended at all costs by academic, ideological and political circles, where an atheistic-materialistic world view reigns supreme. Those who rejected the theory were declared anti-scientific, ignorant, fanatical and outdated, because keeping the theory of evolution alive was a factor vital for the survival of the atheistic-materialistic worldview.

Yet, since its introduction by Darwin, the theory of evolution has been refuted by all related fields of science:

— The branches of science such as biomathematics and statistics proved the improbability of even the smallest protein molecule comprising a cell, the building block of life, forming "by itself" under natural conditions.

— Paleontology brought to light more than 700 million ancient fossils, many of them tens of millions of years old, revealing that at no point of history did life forms evolve. The entire fossil record unearthed so far shows that since their first appearance on earth to date, life forms did not undergo any evolutionary processes.

— The imaginary transitional forms - interconnecting species claimed to have existed by evolutionists - have yet to turn up in any fossil record. On top of that, all of the life forms that have been presented as transitional forms to keep the theory alive have since been proven to be perfect living beings with complex anatomies and systems that have existed at certain points in history before going extinct. As a matter of fact, Darwin himself admitted this predicament that renders his theory utterly invalid in his book as follows:

Why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms?… Innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?... Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links?... and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory." (Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, p. 172, 280)

— On the other hand, observations not only revealed that mutations, which are claimed to be one of the two so-called driving mechanisms behind the evolution, are completely incapable of transforming and improving species, but that the only clear impact they have on organisms is simply to bring about permanent damage and devastation. The definition of the laws of inheritance resulted in the revelation that it is scientifically impossible for natural selection, the second so-called evolutionary mechanism, to bring about new species.

In short, when normal scientific standards are followed, Darwinism is nothing but a fallacy that should have been discarded decades ago, as a requisite of rationality, logic and common sense. In other words, Darwinism is the greatest and most organized scientific hoax in the history of science.

But this truth is covered up by the ideological powers behind the scenes. In an attempt to keep the atheistic-materialistic philosophy alive, they resort to unimaginable methods to conceal the debacles of Darwinism and to give it a scientific veneer. Yet this entity, too, is getting weaker with each passing day -due in no small part to the confessions Darwinists have had to make themselves.

Particularly, the scientific activities we have carried out since the early 2000’s to the present day that unmask and lay bare the scientific predicaments of the theory of evolution have proved most effective in this regard. The information showing the invalidity of Darwinism that originated from Turkey - and spread throughout the world - has helped humanity wake up from this mass hypnosis. During these years, hundreds of books have been written and translated into numerous languages, revealing the invalidity of Darwinism with the help of scientific fields such as microbiology, paleontology and genetics. Hundreds of scientific conferences have been held worldwide, and about 100 documentary films have been prepared, featuring top-quality visuals and striking scientific data. Through the fossil exhibits held in numerous countries from the USA to the UK, from Holland to Hong Kong, people have witnessed the scientific basis of creation. In a dark environment, our endeavors pulled the curtain aside and let the light of knowledge shine on people, helping them know for certain that "the sun exists."

This fact can also be verified via several surveys conducted in the Western world in recent years. For example, according to a survey carried out in previous years, 50% of the Britons stated that they are either STRONGLY opposed to the theory or are confused about it. Among the rest, only 25% believe in evolution while the remaining 25% expressed doubts about the theory, saying that the theory is "probably true."  For Britain, a country regarded as the cradle of Darwinism, these statistics are quite striking. The issue also found its way into the September issue of the well-known evolutionist science magazine New Scientist under the title "A third of UK adults question evolution. The news article notes the followings, "Nearly 30% of adults in the UK say evolution can’t explain the origin of humans” “Unexpectedly, 44% (UK adults) felt that evolutionary processes cannot explain the existence of human consciousness." According to the survey, even those who express their belief in evolution state that evolution fails to account for the soul.

The recent public opinion polls conducted by Pew and Gallup revealed that almost half of the citizens of the USA do not believe in evolution.

A US-based news channel reported in August, 2017 the news that 99% of the Muslim Turkish people do not believe in Darwinism, but rather believe in Creation

Similar research and surveys show a gradual decline on the rates of belief in Darwinism among Western societies, particularly in the last 10 years whereas the rates of belief in God are seen to be on the rise worldwide. Researches and statistics explicitly reveal an indisputable truth that cannot be covered up by demagogueries: People no longer believe in evolution. An increasing number of people reject evolution because they believe in science, clearly see the scientific evidence, and act on rationality and conscience. The more they are enlightened and obtain extensive knowledge on the subject, the more they come to realize that Darwinism is the greatest scientific hoax in the history of the world. Humanity has now begun to awaken from a century long deep hypnosis.

Adnan Oktar's piece in BERNAMA (Maleysia):

http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v8/newsindex.php?id=1404267

ADNAN OKTAR  The alleged scientific support that Social Darwinism provided for racism, fascism and imperialism, as well as communism, is a widely known subject that has been much written about. But one lesser known fact is that a great many Darwinists, including Charles Darwin himself, have believed in the fallacy  that women are both biologically and mentally inferior to men.


 

As the evolutionist scientist John R. Durant also acknowledges, racism and sexual discrimination are the two main consequences of the theory of evolution. Durant verbalized the fallaciousness in Darwin’s stance regarding women as follows:

… Darwin extended this placement by analogy to include not only children and congenital idiots but also women, some of whose powers of intuition, of rapid perception, and perhaps of imitation were "characteristic of the lower races, and therefore of a past and lower state of civilization."[i]

The errors made by Darwin that Durant referred to appear in The Descent of Man, as follows:

It is generally admitted that with women the powers of intuition, of rapid perception, and perhaps of imitation, are more strikingly marked than in man; but some, at least, of these faculties are characteristic of the lower races, and therefore of a past and lower state of civilisation. [ii]

It is clearly obvious that Darwin looked down on women even while he explains why marriage is useful:

… children—constant companion, (friend in old age) who will feel interested in one, object to be beloved and played with—better than a dog anyhow—Home, and someone to take care of house—Charms of music and female chit-chat. These things good for one's health.[iii]

Darwin states that he – in his twisted way - regards marriage as necessary using the reasoning which predicates that "a woman's friendship is better than a dog's,"  yet his statements about marriage made no reference at all to features such as friendship, affection, love, devotion, loyalty, closeness, sincerity and trust between two people who spend their lives together. About marriage, Darwin also had this to say:

… loss of time—cannot read in the evenings—fatness and idleness—anxiety and responsibility—less money for books, etc.,—if many children, forced to gain one's bread ... perhaps my wife won't like London; then the sentence is banishment and degradation with indolent idle fool. [iv]

In The Descent of Man, Darwin also claims that men are superior to women:

The chief distinction in the intellectual powers of the two sexes is shown by man's attaining to a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can women—whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands. If two lists were made of the most eminent men and women in poetry, painting, sculpture, music, ... history, science, and philosophy ... the two lists would not bear comparison. We may also infer, from the law of the deviation from averages, so well illustrated by Mr. Galton, in his work on "Hereditary Genius" that if men are capable of a decided pre-eminence over women in many subjects, the average of mental power in man must be above that of women. [v]

Of course, all of Darwin’s negative opinions regarding women and the misogynistic discourses of some other Darwinists, the samples of which will be given as we proceed, are diametrically opposed to the moral values described in the Qur’an. In the Qur’an, God commands us to be very compassionate, respectful and protective towards women. Furthermore, He cites women with superior morality such as Mary and the wife of the Pharoah as role models.  Superiority in the Sight of God is not according to one’s race, gender or rank but according to their closeness to God and their faith. In many verses of the Qur’an God informs us that all those who believe- without any discrimination between man and woman- will be rewarded with what they have done:

Anyone who acts rightly, male or female, being a believer, We will give them a good life and We will recompense them according to the best of what they did. (Surat An-Nahl, 97)

darwinism is_a_supersititous_belief_that_disparages_women

Examples of the nonsensical remarks of Darwinism regarding women

Darwin’s misogynistic statements are very clear and many scientists are well aware of this fact. Dr. Jerry Bergman, who is against the evolution theory and who explains the negative impacts of Darwinism on social life in his more than 800 published works and more than 20 books, says the following in his book titled The Dark Side of Charles Darwin:

Darwin himself concluded that the differences between human males and females were so large that it was surprising “such different beings belong to the same species” and that “even greater differences” had not evolved. Natural and sexual selection were at the core of Darwinism, and human female inferiority was both a major proof and a chief witness of this theory.

Darwin concluded that men shaped women’s evolution the male’s liking by sexual selection, just as animal breeders shaped animals to the needs of humans. Conversely, war tended to prune the weaker men, allowing only the more fit to return home and reproduce. Men were also the hunters, another activitiy that pruned weaker men. Women, in contrast, were not subject to these selection pressures because they “specialized in the ‘gathering’ part of the primitive economy” that did not require the strength or stamina of war or hunting.” [vi]

The major (and mistaken) justifications Darwin gave for his female inferiority conclusions are summarized in his classic work, The Descent of Man. In this book, Darwin argued that adult females of most species resembled the young of both sexes and that “males are more evolutionarily advanced than females.” He (mistakingly) concluded that since female evolution progressed at a slower rate than male evolution, a woman was “in essence, a stunted man”. This degrading view of women rapidly spread to Darwin’s scientific and academic contemporaries.

For example, Darwin’s contemporary and disciple, anthropologist  McGrigor Allan, states that women are less evolved than men and that “physically, mentally and morally, woman is a kind of adult child… it is doubtful if women have contributed one profound original idea of the slightest permanent value to the world.” [vii]

Of course, Darwin had no scientific basis for proposing these fallacies, but his biased and prejudiced claims about women spread rapidly among his scientific contemporaries.

For example, the materialist Carl Vogt, a professor of natural history at the University of Geneva, accepted all the conclusions drawn by Darwin, without subjecting them to any scientific analysis, and claimed that "the child, the female, and the senile white" all had the intellectual features and personality of the "grown -up Negro,” and that consequently they were inferior. [viii]

Herr Vogt went even further and brought forward the lie that they were actually closer to animals than men. According to Vogt, a woman was "a stunted man" whose development had been obstructed because her evolution had come to a premature halt. [ix] Vogt even claimed that the gap between males and females increases with civilization's progress and is greatest in the advanced societies of Europe. [x] Darwin was greatly influenced by Vogt's rantings, and stated that he was honored to count him among his most important supporters. [xi]

Evolutionist Paul Broca (1824-1880) of the Faculty of Medicine in Paris was particularly interested in the skull differences between men and women.  Broca misconstrued the relatively smaller brain in women and came up with the fallacy that women were intellectually inferior to men. Of course, that is a very irrational claim; today it has been concluded that there is no relationship between human intelligence and the size of the brain. It is absolutely impossible to come to a truthful conclusion simply by looking at the weight of the brain.

Many other evolutionists following the fallacies of Darwin and continued to claim that women are biologically and intellectually inferior to men. Furthermore, some evolutionists even classified men and women as two different psychological species. According to this fallacy, men are classified as homo-frontalis and women as homo-parietalis. Again an evolutionist writer, Elaine Morgan stated that Darwin encouraged men to work on the reasons why women were "manifestly inferior and irreversibly subordinant."( EIaine Morgan, The Descent of Woman, New York: Stein and Day, 1972, p. 1)

Being a woman or a man would not make one superior to the other

Obviously, Darwin's theses were based not on science, but on the culture and primitive scientific understanding of the Victorian Era he lived in. These theses gave way to harmful behavior, violence towards women and caused women to be regarded as inferior beings in many societies. Philosophies such as fascism and communism that disparage women, basically embrace Darwin’s misguided understanding regarding women. 

The intellectual characteristics that Darwinists use as criteria are abilities given by Allah, irrespective of gender. In one verse, God reveals: "You who believe! If you fear [and respect] God, He will give you a standard (of right and wrong)..." (Surat al-Anfal, 29) As this verse reveals, judgment-and thus, intellect-develops not according to gender, but according to fear of God. 

According to the Qur'an, men and women are equal, and superiority is defined by heedfulness.

God has imposed equal responsibilities on both, and holds both responsible for the same matters. Whether one is a male or female does not make a person superior in the Sight of God, but fear and deep love of and devotion to Him, and proper moral values do. In one of His verses, our Lord reveals that regardless of gender, those who exhibit the best behavior will receive the best reward for their moral values:

Anyone, male or female, who does right actions and is a believer, will enter the Garden. They will not be wronged by so much as the tiniest speck. (Surat an-Nisa', 124) 

Their Lord responds to them "I will not let the deeds of any doer among you go to waste, male or female..." (Surah Al 'Imran, 195)

 


[i] John R. Durant, "The Ascent of Nature in Darwin's Descent of Man" in The Darwinian Heritage, Ed. by David Kohn, (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1985), p.295
[ii] Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex, New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1871 (1896 print), p.326
[iii] Charles Darwin, The Autobiography of Charles Darwin 1809-1882 (Ed. by Nora Barlow), New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1958, p. 232-233
[iv] Charles Darwin, The Autobiography of Charles Darwin 1809-1882 (Ed. by Nora Barlow), New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1958, p. 232-233
[v] Jerry Bergman, The Dark Side of Charles Darwin, Master Books, 2011, p. 246
[vi] Jerry Bergman, The Dark Side of Charles Darwin, Master Books, 2011, p. 246
[vii] Jerry Bergman, The Dark Side of Charles Darwin, Master Books, 2011, p. 249
[viii] Carl Vogt, Lectures on Man: His Place in Creation, and the History of Earth, edited by James Hunt, London: Paternoster Row, Longman, Green, Longman, and Roberts, 1864, xv, 192
[ix] Stephanie A. Shields, "Functionalism, Darwinism, and the Psychology of Women; A Study in Social Myth," American Psychologist, no. 1 (1975): 749
[x] Evelleen Richards, "Darwin and the Descent of Women," in David Oldroyd and Ian Langham (Eds.), The Wider Domain of Evolutionary Thought (Holland: D. Reidel, 1983), 75
[xi] Evelleen Richards, "Darwin and the Descent of Women," in David Oldroyd and Ian Langham (Eds.), The Wider Domain of Evolutionary Thought (Holland: D. Reidel, 1983), 74 49

ADNAN OKTAR Depression is a widespread disease in today's societies and is called the "plague of our age" due to its destructive power. It is a state of psychological collapse affecting everyone without distinguishing between rich or poor, ignorant or enlightened, young or old, men or women.


 Damaging the spiritual and physical health of the person, disturbing one's work life, social and familial relations, it is a problem that makes it extraordinarily difficult for people to function in daily life. It is a disturbance that negatively affects every aspect of one's life from thoughts to emotions and behaviors, nutrition to sleeping habits, and from work to relationships. It is a state of psychological collapse affecting everyone without distinguishing between rich or poor, ignorant or enlightened, young or old, men or women.

Depression can turn the life of a well-educated, good-humored, optimistic, kind and a beautiful woman who is a mother of two, respected by her family and those around her, who values art, avoids unrest, and who has everything she needs out of life, into a nightmare.

Or it can take the life of a young businessman who is intelligent, successful, rich, hardworking, ambitious, career-savvy, open-minded, strong in social relations, multi-faceted, and who regularly exercises, and turn it upside down.

Most people may think that it is impossible for individuals with such favorable attributes to suffer from such a psychological disorder. In reality, it is entirely possible to come across such people among those who suffer from depression and tell their stories about their experiences with the disorder.

According to a recent World Health Organization (WHO) report from 2017, 322 million people worldwide suffer from depression, in other words, 4.4 percent of the world population. This figure is so significant that it means depression is the most common disease of our world. That's why the WHO designated April 7 as World Health Day with depression being the theme of this year, to draw attention to the seriousness of the issue.

Again, some statistical data on the report is important in terms of understanding the magnitude of the issue. Depression seems to be a rising trend around the whole world, including the most modern societies and developed countries of our age. So much so that the rate of increase between 2005 and 2015 is 18.4%, which is a significant jump. Depression is more common among women (5.1%) than men (3.6%). Women are affected more by the negative consequences of this disease. Additionally, the incidence rate of this disease is higher in the elderly than in young people; the most affected people are between 55-74 age range. Again, according to the report, among the non-fatal diseases, the group of diseases causing the greatest loss of health is the depressive disorders.

In addition to this, another alarming development is the record increase in the use of depressants and the rising trend to consume these medicines as if they are a part of one’s daily diet. According to a study conducted by the US National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), when the periods between 1988-1994 and 2005-2008 are compared, the rate of increase in antidepressant usage in all age groups in the US is approximately 400%.  Among the most commonly used prescription drugs in the US, antidepressants are at the top.

Depression is often accompanied by feelings of sadness, grief, discomfort, exhaustion, indifference, restlessness, desperation, hopelessness, nervousness, tension, emptiness, worthlessness and guilt, along with excessive worry, anxiety and also various physical disturbances. The most dangerous among these is, indeed, the thought of suicide, which begins to occupy the patient's mind at later stages of the disease. The gravity of the situation can be understood more clearly especially if we consider the fact that millions of people try to commit suicide every year, about 800,000 of them lose their lives as a result, and according to the WHO report, depression is the main driver of suicidal thoughts.

In the fight against depression, regular exercise, healthy nutrition, regular sleep, positive lifestyle changes, antidepressant drug usage under the supervision of a specialist physician and psychological treatment support may be useful to some extent. But as a definitive solution, the conditions that lay the groundwork for depression must be eliminated.

Today, societies are under the influence of a strict, cold and loveless atmosphere. Most people have a tremendous tendency towards selfishness, insensitivity, hatred, intolerance, heartlessness and cut-throat competition. Most people prefer to do what suits their interests, not their conscience. The resulting trend for self-interest brings unrest, tediousness and tension. These feelings are not the kind of feelings that the human body can endure. Having a mood contradictory to human nature causes disorders in the health of the mind, spirit and body. In other words, as people move away from love, moral and spiritual values, they get closer to depressive disorders and psychological problems. The human soul has a disposition that only remains satisfied as long as it is in pursuit of goodness, beauty and love.

Making a child in need happy with a gift instead of ignoring him or helping a poor man instead of staying indifferent to him are the real sources of the most wonderful joy and happiness. The human soul must constantly be fed with self-sacrifice, love, moral and spiritual beauty. In every respect, a high quality life can only be achieved in this way. A self-centered life that is constantly dominated by anger and hatred is not how a real lifestyle should be. The fact that the majority of people make this mistake shouldn't deceive anyone. People can easily make love and peace rule over their hearts. It is not the conflicts or contradictions of the materialist world that will bring a superior lifestyle to humanity; on the contrary, it is the sacrifices that people make. In a society that understands that the world is not a place of conflict but love, disorders such as depression will disappear altogether.

Adnan Oktar's piece in American Herald Tribune & Riyadh Vision:

http://ahtribune.com/world/1691-depression.html

http://www.riyadhvision.com.sa/2017/06/06/the-leading-health-problem-worldwide-on-the-rise-depression/

More Articles ...