ADNAN OKTAR  During the past month, articles appeared in several national and international news outlets, mainly the New Scientist, BBC News and the Independent, claiming that “cesarean section changed the alleged evolutionary process of birth”. An article published on October 26, 2016 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science was used as reference to these claims.


 

The topic of the article was the claim that “human births are difficult due to the incompatibility between the size of the child’s head and the mother’s narrow hip bone” and that “with the cesarean section birth coming into play in the past 50 years, the so-called evolutionary process has been affected and the incompatibility increased.” Based on this article, news outlets ran biased headlines including; “Does the cesarean section [birth] cause babies to evolve into bigger ones?”, “Increasing number of cesarean sections affect human evolution”, “Successful cesarean sections change human evolution process.”

These headlines are usually designed to give the impression that a new scientific finding proved  evolution.  Such reports are often biased and aim to mislead the layman. Their publication in major scientific journals is also for the purpose of making them look credible. However, the scientific journals in question are under the control of the Darwinist dictatorship that tries to keep the theory of evolution alive, which is a completely collapsed theory in terms of science.

A thorough examination of the article shows that the topic is handled entirely ideologically, without any scientific evidence. Let’s now explain why such claims are completely unscientific, do not support the theory of evolution and are purely ideological.

The claim that “over time, baby head – maternal bone structure incompatibility has increased” is unfounded

The basic assertion of the article is that within the past 50 years, from the time the cesarean section has been inaugurated to the present day, head-to-bone inconsistency has increased from 30 to 36 in 1,000 births, which amounts to an increase of 20%. Was this result obtained by evaluating the actual data?

In fact, this article, which was presented by the media as evidence to the so-called theory of evolution, ironically offered its claims with the presumption that evolution is factual. The efforts to prove this claim, were supported not by actual data, but by statistical data derived from purely imaginary models.

The studies conducted showed that the situations of head-bone structure incompatibility resulted from environmental factors, which cannot have any effect on the genetic data.

The main factor in the incompatibility is that the fetuses are bigger. Compared to 50 years ago, there are many factors that can cause fetuses to be bigger today. The birth weight of fetuses may have increased due to reasons such as the better nourishment of the mother during pregnancy period, or owing to the increase in obesity and diabetes. However, this is not a genetic outcome, but rather an environmental outcome. If conditions were reversed, this effect would decrease and the need for cesarean section would decline. In addition, diseases such as hydrocephalus (dropsy in the brain) associated with structural causes may also prevent normal birth. But this does not occur due to a genetic change and is not a gain but a deformation.

In addition, the maternal bone structure, which is the other factor in the said incompatibility, can vary independently of the genetic structure. The studies showed that even in maternal twins, who share the same genetic code, the hipbone size may differ and that the environmental factors play a more pronounced role than genetics. Even as an adult, the bone structures may change shape. Another example relates to the different male and female hipbone structures. Brothers and sisters, although sharing same parents, will have completely different hipbones. A mother with a male-type bone structure could have never given birth to her child.  As the bone structure develops, the cells take shape as if they are conscious whether they are in a male or female body.

Today, social factors also increase the rate of cesarean section births. The fact that the operation conditions are better compared to the past has made the cesarean section safer. This also contributed to the increased diagnosis of the head-bone incompatibility by the doctors. However, it should be noted that the cesarean section is preferred not only for head-bone incompatibility. Expecting mothers prefer cesarean section also to avoid the difficulties of normal birth, even though physicians usually recommend against it.

An unscientific claim without genetic basis

When we examine the article, it becomes evident that no information other than statistical calculations is presented. This shows the unscientific nature of the piece, as the presented statistical data is only related to social preferences. No change in DNA sequence takes place. Furthermore, the accurate development of bone structure requires the harmonious coordination of tens or even hundreds of different gene regions. The difference between the genetic codes of humans is very little if any, and these differences are located at non-coding regions. The immense diversity in the physical appearance of human beings is due to epigenetic and environmental factors. Environmental factors only make some genes dominant and some recessive; they certainly cannot add new information to genetic information. In other words, there is no difference between the genetic code of the first human being that ever lived and those that live today.

No structural change has taken place in the humans, as also shown by the human fossils that have been examined. This also applies to mother’s bone structure as well as the structure and size of the baby’s head. The birth takes place always in the same manner. According to the evolutionist thinking the birth process has to get easier over time through the enlargement of maternal bone structure or the reduction of the size of the baby’s head but such a change has never happened and it cannot happen because the so-called process of evolution is nothing but a deception. Throughout the thousands of years of the history of mankind, difficult births have always existed, but the birth process has always remained the same.

Birth is a miracle.

The timing of birth is perfect. The pregnancy, which lasts about 38 weeks, ends with birth at a very delicate time. If the birth takes place a few weeks earlier, the baby may have a life-threatening condition because she has not completed her development. If birth occurs one to two weeks late, this time there is not enough room for the baby, nutritional problems arise, and the baby can get too big to fit into the birth canal. Neither the mother nor the fetus are aware of these processes. The birth pangs begin at the right time, the cervix opens up and the tissues become more flexible. Moreover, the fetus has to make some movements such as rotation, flexion, and extension to enter the birth canal in the most suitable manner. Nearly every fetus makes these moves  completely and in the right order. Instead of seeing the intricate balances and perfection in the process, trying to find faults and focusing on illogical conclusions, is nothing but a serious lapse of reason.

As seen in this article as well, Darwinists constantly seek to use the fallacy that ‘’life emerged by chance’’ to keep their theory alive. In an attempt to do this, they try to ignore the miraculous structures of human beings and other living beings, and seek to give the impression that there are deficiencies. In this way they try to proselytize the idea that they have has and could have been more perfect. However, these people who know the subject in depth are actually well aware that living things, and most notably the human body, are perfectly equipped with the most flawless structures. However these people insist on ignoring this fact. As they are aware that talking about this fact, will completely destroy the theory of evolution.

The birth process is one of the prominent examples of the miracle in man’s creation. Numerous mechanisms, all of which are indispensable, come into play at the same time. Neither the fetus nor the mother can live in the absence of even one of them. For this reason, these features must have existed since the first birth. While even a single birth is a miracle in itself, billions of miraculous births have taken place until today. The fact that some births are difficult does not mean that this miracle should be ignored. The glorious art of creation of God becomes even more evident as one examines further the details of the birth.

Our Almighty Lord said in a verse: “Did We not create you from a base fluid? Then place it in a secure repository for a recognized term? It is We who determine. What an excellent Determiner!(Surah Al-Mursalat, 20-23)

In conclusion; no cesarean section, nor any other kind of intervention during birth, is a situation that will lead to the formation of larger babies in future generations. Just as the increase in the knowledge and the skills in this age of science cannot lead the new-generation with higher IQ levels than previous generations, the cesarean section, too, cannot change the physical structure of the mother or the baby. The main reason for the increase in cesarean section rates is the change in environmental and social effects. And environmental factors can only affect to the extent that our genetic structure permits.

References

  1. http://www.pnas.org/content/113/51/14680.full
  2. DumontA, deBernisL, BouvierColleMH,Bre ́artG,MOMAStudyGroup(2001)Caesarean section rate for maternal indication in sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic review. Lancet 358(9290):1328–1333.
  3. Sharma K (2002) Genetic basis of human female pelvic morphology: A twin study. Am J PhysAnthropol117(4):327–333.
  4. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/success-caesarean-sections-altering-course-human-evolution-babies-bigger-heads-a7458066.html
  5. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2115103-are-caesareans-really-making-us-evolve-to-have-bigger-babies/?utm_source=NSNS&utm_medium=ILC&utm_campaign=webpush&cmpid=ILC%257CNSNS%257C2016-GLOBAL-webpush-BIGBABY
  6. http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-38210837

ADNAN OKTAR  One of the classical tactics of Darwinists is to bring old fossils back to the agenda and to make up new stories about the same fossil. This is because evolutionists do not want to admit their defeat, yet there is nothing left in their hands to put forth. 


 

One of the classical tactics of Darwinists is to bring old fossils back to the agenda and to make up new stories about the same fossil. This is because evolutionists do not want to admit their defeat, yet there is nothing left in their hands to put forth. The most recent example is the news reports coming through media organizations such as National Geographic and the Washington Post regarding the fossils known as Homo Naledi. Although new claims and attempts are being made about the fossil in question almost every year since 2013, all of these efforts have been in vain.

As it could be remembered, about 1,500 bone fragments were found inside a 1,450- meter deep cave in South Africa in 2013, which are claimed to belong to 15 separate individuals. The information initially disclosed to the public was that the skull volume of these individuals was the size of an orange and that their finger bones were curved; it was thus claimed that the fossils showed “the characteristics of an ape”. Actually, there was no proper skull;, four worn out parietal pieces were placed in way that they were suspended in the air without touching each other. Despite this, the claims continued that the creature had a brain weighing some 500 grams and a cranial capacity about the size of an orange.

homo naledi_scenario

We have documented in our previous articles that the news reports regarding this fossil do not reflect the truth and that the prejudiced evolutionist comments were made without fully determining the age and characteristics of the fossils. You can read our responses – given in 2015 and 2016 – in two separate articles on the fact that the so-called evolutionary gradation cannot be made according to the volume of the skull.

(The Evolutionist Scenario over “Homo naledi” Has Come to Nothing and Darwinist Tales Are Repeated on CNN: Homo Naledi) However, since  speculative news continues to be published in 2017 regarding the Homo Naledi fossils, it will be useful to bring the issue back to the agenda and to decipher the Darwinists’ schemes:

Homo naledi doesn’t belong to 2.5 million-year-old species, but to a 250,000 -year-old species

The Homo Naledi fossils were first presented to the public as 2.5 million-years-old when first discovered. Moreover, the gradation was made to fit this scenario of evolution according to this age, and imaginary evolutionary trees of life were thus drawn up. It was so exaggerated that it was alleged that the creature was the so-called “missing link” that existed between Australopithecus and H. erectus. In many media outlets, these claims were presented to the public as if they were scientific. However, as a result of the latest age determination measures it was understood that H. Naledi fossils were between 236,000 and 335,000  years-old. This result shocked evolutionist circles and it was once again understood that the scenario of an intermediate form on Naledi’s age was simply  a fictional story, far from being scientific. These are important in showing that it is necessary to adopt a suspicious approach to all so-called evolutionary grading carried out by the evolutionists through anatomical measurements such as skull volume.

According to evolutionary scenarios before 2017, H. Naledi was presented as an intermediate form in the so-called evolutionary gradation of mankind. However, it became clear that H. Naledi, with its 250,000 year-old age as verified by the latest studies, existed almost in the same period with a human species which is estimated to date back about 200,000 years ago. This is important in demonstrating how wild the evolutionists’ imagination gets when there is no scientific evidence.

Age determination methods are far from providing exact results

Today, two main methods are used for age determination. One of these is the comparison method based on the idea that the fossils, lying in the same stratum, existed in the same period, which is determined through conducting an age determination of various strata. The second is a radioactive dating method based on the decomposition of radioactive atoms, such as carbon and uranium, found in the collagen tissue samples of fossil remains. Both methods have an intrinsic margin of error.

The age determination of strata is only applicable for volcanic and sedimentary rocks. Even if the age determination of the strata is carried out, one cannot be certain whether the strata changed place after the fossil formation. In places such as caves, where stratification is limited or in places washed by rivers, the margin of error in information provided by the strata increases.

Likewise, the methods based on radioactive decomposition are far from providing precise information. The radioactive method should be a “closed system” in order to be used in age determination. The closed system is conducted assuming that the transfer of radioactive material is stopped after the fossil remains are buried in the soil and there is no subsequent exchange of new material. The “open system”, in which the material exchange continues, won’t be used for age determination as the amount of decomposition will not be accurate. However, since there is no method that can detect whether a fossil is exposed to a closed or open system, no definitive conclusion can be reached to state that “the fossil was not exposed to an open system.”

Another limiting case, questioning the reliability of age determination methods, is that samples taken from different regions of the same fossil can give different ages. The aforementioned open system exposure that causes different effects in different tissues, is shown as the reason of this.

As a matter of fact, the age determination range estimated for the Naledi fossils offers an extended period of time, as much as 100,000 years. This is an indication of the fact that the method is not entirely reliable. In spite of such a wide range regarding the dating of the fossil, it is not certain that Naledi is younger or older than calculated.

Comments made without any knowledge of DNA are unscientific

All of the comments based on the anatomical features on  ancient fossils, as in the case of Naledi, are speculative. The interspecies and intraspecies phenotypic differences only allow interpretations concerning which species the discovered fossil belongs to be based on evolutionist belief rather than being scientific. As a matter of fact, history is full of pseudo-scientific misconceptions and frauds based on topographic features.

Definitively proving which species a fossil belongs to is only possible with the knowledge of the DNA sequence of the concerned fossil. But since the DNA cannot remain intact for many years due to its structure, it is not possible to obtain DNA sequences in fossils. DNA studies, conducted by evolutionist circles on fossils from time to time, cannot give definitive results because these studies are based on statistical calculations and the DNA can be mixed with other species’ DNA or degenerate and decompose. The comments made without the knowledge of DNA are bound to be far from being scientific.

A new scenario is written for Naledi after our knowledge regarding its age is corrected

After the discovering that H. Naledi, which was presented as a 2.5 million-year-old so-called intermediate form, was only about 250,000 years old, the whole evolutionist scenario collapsed. However, the Darwinists would not rest. The intermediate form claim is revised; another scenario is put forward. This time, they claimed that Homo Naledi, having lived with Homo sapiens 250,000 years ago, was a so-called “hominid” that came into existence 2 million years ago and remained unchanged until 250,000 years ago.

Just as the first scenario was groundlessly put forward, this scenario is not based on any scientific basis either. There is no fossil of a H. Naledi which existed 2 million years ago. The only thing that exists is the boundless and non-scientific imagination of evolutionists.

The effort to associate an ape to human is in vain.

Only based on its brain size, H. Naledi was assumed to have lived 2.5 million years ago. Since humans suddenly appeared in the fossil records, there should have been intermediate forms according to the so-called evolution scenario. Darwinists, who considered H. Naledi open to speculation, tried to use H. Naledi for this purpose, but this lasted but a short time. When Naledi’s real age was discovered, these claims became invalid.

It is understood from the obtained fossil structures that H. Naledi is an ape species with a small brain volume and curved phalanges. Naledi existed in the same period with humans. In this case, Darwinist claims that H. Naledi was the “ancestor of humans”, became meaningless. Moreover, even if Naledi had existed 2.5 million years ago, this would not place it in the intermediate form category  because Naledi was a fully developed living being with all its organs and functions. As is, it has nothing to serve the purposes of evolutionists.

Infinite number of scenarios can be produced when there is no need for scientific evidence. However they would have no importance as delusions can never cover the truth.  Having existed in one stage of history and gone extinct, H. Naledi is an ape species and just like every other life form was created by God.

References:

  1. http://darwinism-watch.com/lie-of-human-evolution/darwinist-tales-are-repeated-on-cnn-homo-naledi/
  2. http://darwinism-watch.com/lie-of-human-evolution/the-evolutionist-scenario-over-homo-naledi-has-come-to-nothing/
  3. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/05/09/humanitys-strange-new-cousin-is-shockingly-young-and-shaking-up-our-family-tree/?utm_term=.e492420cbe60
  4. https://elifesciences.org/articles/09561#fig6
  5. https://elifesciences.org/articles/09560
  6. https://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/dating-rocks-and-fossils-using-geologic-methods-107924044

ADNAN OKTAR  The book “Sapiens – A Brief History of Humankind”, which was released in 2012 and had its first Turkish edition published in 2015, came out with the claim that “it describes a brief history of humanity”.


 

Similar to many scientific and philosophical publications with an atheistic background, this book begins to describe the history of humanity through the so-called evolutionary process. The title “Sapiens” is deliberately chosen to highlight the claims of evolution, rather than emphasizing historical, political and social aspects of humans. It is obvious that this book, written by Harari, a professor of history at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, is not a history book. In the book, the description of the so-called evolutionary development of men, and subsequently, the propagation of an atheist ideology that depicts social Darwinism is prevalent.

The book claims to provide the history of mankind from an academic point of view, but a Darwinist mentality pervades the book at every turn. Moreover, Darwinism is presented to the reader as a presupposition without any scientific evidence. The so-called development of the history of mankind, built upon this presupposition, is portrayed in a fiction-like narrative. For this reason, the book cannot be regarded as a history book, nor does it posses any scientific value in respect of biology, because it is based on the so-called evolutionary rationale which has no scientific evidence backing it up. The book, written under the complete influence of the author’s atheistic mentality, is no more than a book of philosophy.

The only positive aspect of the book is that it refers to the fact that following Darwinian logic in society would lead the world into a turmoil.

Even though the fact that the corrupt social structure caused by wild capitalism, fascism and communism – the consequences of the Darwinist mentality – would bring unhappiness is explained in the book, no solution is offered for this problem.

Since the book is based on the evolutionist philosophy rather than historical facts, it is extremely important to respond to the so-called evolutionary interpretations it contains. Clearly putting forth the fact that the mankind came into existence through Creation by God, not through evolution, will destroy the entire philosophy of the book. This way, people will also be reminded once again that the only way to get rid of the unhappy and distorted societal order that took the world by storm, is to make the belief in God prevalent in the world.

Answers to all the claims the book contains are included in detail in Harun Yahya’s works and websites. Since it is not possible to answer all the claims here, only the main ones have been answered.

The claim of “a common ancestor that lived six million years ago”

In evolutionist reasoning, the idea that “man is not different from other animals” is suggested and the tale depicting that “man has a common ancestor with animals” is imposed. Likewise, Harari has presented this claim in a tale-like narrative on the first pages of his book:

“Like it or not, we are members of a large and particularly noisy family called the great apes... Just six million years ago, a single female ape had two daughters. One became the ancestor of all chimpanzees, the other is our own grandmother.” (Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens- A Brief History of Humankind, McClelland and Stewart, 2014, p.11)

This claim, which is put forward with a fiction-like narrative in a manner far removed from being scientific, is written with an evolutionist presupposition without any proof. First of all, not even a single intermediate fossil has been found to this day that proves the Darwinists’ claim. It is impossible to find one, and more than 700 million fossils obtained so far belong to living creatures that have never changed, that is, never gone through any evolutionary process. The source of these superstitious beliefs of evolutionists, who have no scientific evidence proving the existence of a “common ancestor”, is the similar physical features found in different species known as “homology”. According to evolutionists, the reason why apes have hands like ours is that they are our so-called “evolutionary relatives”.

Evolutionists try to present living creatures that they observe as similar as the relatives of one another, or as relatives coming from a common ancestor. This claim, which is not supported by scientific evidence, can only be considered as a superstition. Having homologous organs does not equate to having a common ancestor. Structural similarities between different species are called homology in biology and for the evolutionist claim about homology to be taken seriously, these similar organs should have been coded by similar DNA codes, however similar organs mostly have very different genetic codes. Similar genetic codes in the DNA of different living beings correspond to very different organs.  In addition to that, intermediary forms must be found in the fossil records in order for the common ancestor claim to be valid. However, the living organisms encountered in the fossil records are species that have come to exist with perfect organs and survived for generations unchanged. This is the greatest proof for the fact that no evolutionary process has taken place and that life has been created.

The so-called mechanism of evolution must progress from commonality to diversity (divergent). However, even in evolutionary tree scenarios that the evolutionists themselves have prepared, it has been observed that some species showed similar characteristics with species they have no relation to. This is utterly in conflict with the logic that stipulates evolution must be divergent. Having all their, theories reach an impasse, evolutionists at this point came up with an another imaginary hypothesis, “convergent evolution” (from diversity to commonality). This is the point where the logic of evolution collapses. Richard Dawkins argues that the eyes have evolved 40 times, the absurdity of which is obvious for everyone. An organ cannot evolve 40 times based on coincidence, and reach the same point. This is only possible if it was created by a conscious superior mind.

One of the major problems for evolutionists who try to prove their theories by basing them on similarities in living organisms is the manifestation of the same physical characteristics in completely different gene structures. For example, many creatures who can camouflage themselves adapt perfectly to the environment they inhabit. The genetic sequencing of an insect species we see in the pictures is different from the genetic sequencing of the plant on which it resides. The fact that such identical physical characteristics can emerge from different genetic structures is, indeed, awe-inspiring. It is not possible for such an artistic marvel to exist without also the existence of a superior Creator Who has full control over gene structures of both the plant and the bug. These creatures that camouflage also refute the homology-based common ancestor hypothesis of evolutionists.

Constructing a homology-based evolutionary hypothesis was only acceptable in Lamarck’s or Darwin’s times, where the technology was inadequate and the existence of genetic information was unknown. Insisting on a claim like this today, where the advanced science allowed us to examine the structures of DNA, RNA, and protein in detail and understand that the development of living organisms progress under very delicate balances, can only be interpreted as the stubborn continuation of the evolutionist beliefs of the past.

The claim that “100,000 years ago 6 different human species lived”

One of the mechanisms that classical Darwinist thinkers put forth as triggering the so-called evolution is natural selection. Natural selection requires diversity in society. Evolutionists are always striving to find variety and genetic diversity as natural selection’s claim of “the survival of the fittest” fails in an environment where there is no diversity in the social structure. The environment for which these efforts are carried out finds basis in the fossil findings of the past, which evolutionists consider to be open to speculation and difficult to refute. The emergence of humankind is also one of the subjects that is often speculated on. Since the inception of the idea of evolution, claims about the existence of so-called humanoid intermediate forms or new human species have been put forward based on speculations, even frauds -which do not reflect the truth- on the fossil records of human and ape species. At the beginning of his book Harari claims that 100,000 years ago, six different human species have lived at he same time and that Homo sapiens dominated the others, thus survived as the only hominid species on earth. Humans that are claimed to be different species of humans are in fact different races of humans, namely, H. Neanderthalensis, H. Erectus, H. Soloensis, H. Floresiensis, H. Denisovan and H. Sapiens. Just as how today we have different races of humans such as Eskimos, Chinese, and Turks, there have been different human races during that period too. The characteristics of human races of that time are:

Neanderthals:

A bulky and muscular human race that lived between the years 200,000  and 30,000  BC in Europe and Asia.  Even though they were initially introduced as an “intermediate species that cannot walk upright” when their fossils were first found, it is later proven that this claim is false. When the claims that suggest they were an intermediate species or an ancestor to humans fizzled, evolutionists came up with another claim which suggests that they were a species that lived at the same time as Sapiens, but was then eliminated by them, as Harari himself claims. Knowing that anatomical differences are not enough to prove that Neanderthals constitute another species, evolutionist circles have also added genetic studies to their so-called scientific evidence. Supposedly, modern humans carried 1-4% Neanderthal DNA, meaning that they weren’t actually eliminated, they were assimilated. However, this claim is completely illogical:

It is impossible to find intact DNA from 100,000 years ago, separate it from other organisms and microorganisms, and to determine its correct genetic sequence. Claiming that Neanderthals share only 1-4% of their genes with humans while also claiming apes and humans have 95-98% similarity in genetic structure is another eclipse of reason. Both Homo Sapiens and Neanderthals are different races of the same species; efforts to create different species in laboratories and pseudo-scientific journals are futile attempts to prove evolutionist claims.

(For further reading: He Claim That “Neanderthals Are The Ape-Like Ancestors Of Man” Is Fraudulent)

Soloensis:

Fossil remains found in Kenya, made up of 12 skulls with missing faces. Initially, evolutionists couldn’t decide what the Soloensis skulls are but eventually the skulls are identified as tiger (!), Neanderthal man and finally “modern man” skulls. The names given to the solo skulls are significant in reference to the state the evolutionists are in. These skulls are named: Homo (Javanthropus) soloensis. Homo soloensis, Homo primigenius asiaticus, Homo neanderthalensis soloensis, Homo sapiens soloensis, Homo erectus erectus, Homo erectus, and finally Homo sapiens.

This is a clear indication of the unreliability of anthropology, which examines the scenario of the imaginary evolution of humans.

Floresiensis:

Floresiensis, one of the 18,000-year-old fossil remains belonging to some eight to twelve humans found in Flores, Indonesia, was about one meter tall and had a 380cc brain volume; it displayed different characteristics from “normal” Homo sapiens in terms of jaw and wrist anatomy. Evolutionists distorted and interpreted these characteristics as ape-like features and identified the remains as a separate species from Homo sapiens in the so-called evolution of man. In later studies, however, it has been determined that this individual has a disease called “Cretinism” caused by congenital deficiency of thyroid hormone which severely stunts physical and mental growth. So H. Floresiensis is not a separate species, but a human with a disease. (Homo Floresiensis And The Facts Emerging About The Evolution Myth)

Denisovan:

These are the last fossils that are revealed. In fact, we can’t exactly say there is a fossil. Findings consist of only a 0.5cm piece of phalanx (finger) bone and two teeth. Evolutionists have tried to rewrite human history and gene transfer based on these tiny fossil pieces. Like Neanderthal, Denisovan was also tried to be supported with so-called genetic studies. However, there was no evidence supporting the existence of a different human species, in this scenario either. (A Made-up ‘Hominid’ Tale from Science Mag: Denisovans)

As is seen, Harari’s “six different species of man” claim is incompatible with scientific facts. Some of those mentioned fossils are fabricated and derived fossils and some belong to humans with certain diseases and others to individuals with different physical characteristics. Just as how different human races differ physically from each other today, they also displayed physical differences 100,000 years ago. This proves that they are individuals with different phenotypes. Since their creation, humans have always existed as one species.

Big brain, high intelligence misconception

One of the main points that evolutionists base their efforts to identify different species as ancestors of one another on is brain volume. Allegedly, as the brain volume increased in time, intelligence increased as well and reached its highest point with the modern man.

The factor that enables evolutionists to freely compose unreal scenarios is the lack of evidence, especially fossil evidence, in this area. Brain consists of soft tissues. Soft tissues are more difficult to fossilize except under certain special conditions. That is why, there is no fossil record for the structure of the human brain. Harari has made this baseless claim one of his anchor points. The story-like narrative in Harari’s book says the following:

“ The earliest men and women, 2.5 million years ago, had brains of about 600 cubic centimeters. Modern Sapiens sport a brain averaging 1,200–1,400 cubic centimeters. Neanderthal brains were even bigger.” (Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens : a brief history of humankind, McClelland & Stewart, 2014, p.14)

However, Homo habilis, which was put forth as the first man, with a 600 cc brain, actually belongs to the ape class called Australopithecus. It has the same long-armed, short-legged and ape-like skeletal structure as the Australopithecus. Its phalanges are suitable for climbing. In short, Homo habilis, which is presented as a separate species by some evolutionists, is actually a species of ape, like all other Australopithecines. (http://harunyahya.com/en/Evrim-Sozlugu/16417/Homo-habilis)

When we consider that Neanderthal brain is 1600 cc, attempting to portray Neanderthals as less advanced than modern humans leads to the collapse of this brain volume-based claim. However, the Neanderthals were just a bulkier human race. The average female brain today has a volume of 1200 cc while the male brain has 1400 cc. Differences in human brain size are caused by phenotypic changes based on growth factors and hormonal differences. Despite the differences between brain volumes of males and females, no difference was found between the two genders in regard to  IQ and brain function in the studies conducted. Besides, obviously there are big differences between the IQ levels of people with the same brain volume. In the light of this information, evidently evolutionists’ attempts to classify and sort humans by brain volume alone are unfounded.

With their ability to see and perceive images, to think and comment of them, to speak, to reason and judge, humans are completely different from other living beings. Just as how it is impossible to attribute the order in a bee hive or an ant colony to the little brains of these creatures, it is also impossible to explain these characteristics humans possess with the structure of their brains. The most important difference between human beings and other beings is that humans have consciousness and awareness. Other creatures act instinctively within the limits of inspiration God granted to them.

Darwinists get excited over some human-like behaviors of apes and think that apes are humans’ evolutionary relatives. Nowadays, the studies conducted on ape and human brains haven’t revealed a difference that can explain the aforementioned characteristics when examined in terms of structural anatomy. Therefore, it is not possible to explain human characteristics such as intelligence, consciousness and reasoning, which distinguish humans from other living beings, based on their anatomical and physiological characteristics. The most fundamental characteristic that separates humans from other living beings is that it has a “soul”. That soul belongs to Almighty God, the Creator of all beings.

The claim that, “in the past, humans produced very little” is not true

Another claim from Harari and other evolutionists is that “past generations produced very little.” The main purpose behind this claim is to prove that humanity has undergone a process from simple to complicated in terms of intelligence and culture. Darwinists argue that early humans had so-called primitive brains with thinking skills similar to animals, and that with the development of their brains, they were able to produce more. As evidence, they present the fact that there are no tools other than a few sticks and a knives made from flint found in the imaginary period simply referred to as the “Stone Age”. Such evidence, however, is far from providing reliable information on how life was in the past.

It is known by everyone that even objects from as little as 300 to 500  years ago undergo deterioration due to natural processes. Sometimes even protecting old objects from deterioration under special conditions is not good enough. It is evident that under natural conditions deterioration will accelerate. We know that it is not possible for metal objects to remain intact for more than 1,500 years. Even stones erode in time and lose their properties. The structure of the 3,000 year old pyramids is severely eroded. Therefore, it is very clear that a few pieces of stone objects obtained from well-preserved environments, which evolutionists try to present as proofs of their claims, will not reflect the living conditions of 100,000  or even 10,000  years ago.

Therefore the claim that there had been a stone age’ during which the so-called “primitive people” lived is a fallacy. In no period of history, had there been ‘primitive humans’, and there had been no primitive period in which only stone tools were made. Every period of human history hosts great civilizations. So much so that we are far from accomplishing some of the discoveries of ancient civilizations.

The physical structure of humans has always been the same since the creation of the first human. The earlier humans had the same level of reasoning and consciousness as the people today. There was no societal structure that progressed from primitive to advanced, it only displayed fluctuations like today. In different periods of history, many advanced civilizations were established and disappeared after a while. During these disappearances, the knowledge accumulated until that time has also disappeared, and cultures and scientific developments have had to be experienced again and again. Just as how today societies living in the space age exist simultaneously with societies that have a simple lifestyle, removed from science and technological possibilities, there had been culturally, scientifically and technologically advanced societies in the past.

The lie that “the ability to walk upright has developed over time”

One of the tale-like narrations in Harari’s book is the following:

“Standing up, it’s easier to scan the savannah for game or enemies, and arms that are unnecessary for locomotion are freed for other purposes, like throwing stones or signaling. The more things these hands could do, the more successful their owners were, so evolutionary pressure brought about an increasing concentration of nerves and finely tuned muscles in the palms and fingers.” (Yuval Noah Harari. Sapiens: A Brief History Of Humankind, McClelland & Stewart, 2014, p. 15)

This tale-like narration belongs to the times of Lamarck, the times when the existence of genetic information was unknown. However, as we know very well today, our capabilities are determined by the knowledge inside the genes influencing our physical structure. But the opposite, that is, our actions and behaviors affecting our genes, is simply out of the question. At a time when the existence of genes was unknown, an observer watching people lifting weights, doing sports, may have made such an incorrect deduction by observing that muscle/bone structure is strengthened only when lifting weights. Actually, even in that period, if the fact that the musculo-skeletal structure of children of athletes wouldn’t look like their parents’ if they, themselves, do not exercise had been observed, no such claim would have been made.

Robin Crompton, a British engineer who did research in 1996 on humans’ upright gait, as a result of computer simulations he made, found out that there is no intermediate movement style between apes’ gait and humans’. Crompton’s work showed that a living being could either walk upright on two feet, or move bent forward on four feet. A intermediary walking model between these two is extremely inefficient.

Moreover, the fossil records shows that no living being has ever had a movement style between the gait of an ape and that of a human. Detailed examinations on the fossil records demonstrate that the living beings classified under Australopithecus and Homo Habilis walk bent forward on four legs like an ape while human races like Homo Erectus and Neanderthal walk upright just like we do. In other words, the two-legged upright gait emerged suddenly and for the first time on earth with humans.


The Danger of Social Darwinism

Following the discourse intended to support the theory of evolution, the book also features the philosophy built upon the atheistic mentality extensively. An analysis of the twisted systems removed from religion that our world has been  drawn into and may continue to be stuck in, has been made. What is striking here is that the author of the book saw that the dangerous Darwinist messages, either clearly stated or veiled, would have an even more intensifying effect on this erroneous order:

“According to the science of biology, people were not “created” (may God forbid the thought). They have evolved. And they certainly did not evolve to be ‘equal’. The idea of equality is inextricably intertwined with the idea of creation. … if we do not believe in the Christian myths about God, creation and souls, what does it mean that all people are “equal”? .. There are no such things as rights in biology. There are only organs, abilities and characteristics… But “liberty”? There is no such thing in biology. Just like equality, rights and limited liability companies, liberty is something that people invented and that exists only in their imagination.. From a biological viewpoint, it is meaningless to say that humans in democratic societies are free, whereas humans in dictatorships are unfree.” (Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens: A Brief History Of Humankind, McClelland & Stewart, 2014, pp. 97-98)

Even reading these few lines is very important in terms of understanding how brutal the world can be with a Darwinist mindset. In a society shaped by evolutionist thought, without belief of God, it is obvious how extreme and boundless people can get. When the moral values ​​of religion are destroyed, virtues such as solidarity, sacrifice, compassion, protection of the poor and the weak, equality and love which exist in the essence of religion would be replaced with a dangerous and cruel way of life filled with oppression, torture, selfishness, lovelessness, enslavement and murder. Concepts such as rights, justice, equality and freedom will lose their meanings; an environment in which the strong and rich oppress the weak and the poor will emerge and become intolerable in a very short time. Since struggle is essential to the theory as evolutionist thought regards this way of life as a part of so-called “natural selection”; it is claimed that in this way the strong, healthy and intelligent generations would contribute more to the advancement of so-called evolution.

We have many times experienced the examples of this cruel mentality in the 20th Century, when the Darwinist mentality dominated the world. The whole world witnessed the cruelty of dictators such as Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot, how they slaughtered millions of people, how Hitler killed people whom he regarded as “inferior races” in gas chambers; how hundreds of thousands of people in many Western countries have been forcefully sterilized or left to die just because they were sick, disabled or old. Everybody knows that people were oppressed and exploited all over the world due to ruthless competition; that racism has become the state ideology of some countries and that some races are not even considered human; that there have been conflicts, hot and cold wars between the communists and the capitalists, the right and left; that even the peoples of the same country, brothers, become hostile to each other.

An atheist who has an evolutionist mindset is actually aware that a world based the moral values of religion would offer a much better life. However, saying “let’s live according to the moral values ​​of religion” will not change their ideology all of a sudden, and the desired result will not be achieved. At this point, a good explanation of the invalidity of the so-called theory of evolution will undermine and destroy the mindset Harari described in his book and other atheistic systems. Proving the fact that the claims of the theory of evolution and of a life emerging from evolutionary processes are invalid with scientific evidence, will make everyone realize that the universe could only be created by a conscious power. When a belief in God becomes prevalent in a society, the moral values of religion that constitute the origin of love, quality, freedom, democracy, respect and all kinds of beauty, will pervade the society; the world will thus be like heaven on earth.

So far we have responded to some of the evolutionist claims Harari included in his book Sapiens. There are many other topics in the book that we can refute, but we didn’t think it was necessary to go into so much detail here. You can find our answers to other claims in our website www.harunyahya.com and in Mr. Adnan Oktar’s other books and articles.

 

Sign up via our free email subscription service to receive notifications when new information is available.