Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

Society Religion & Philosophy
141

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

I don't know about Kaala jaadu ...but the way Harun Yahya has shown that Qur'an and science are compatible is well taken by me ... I can't find the places in the Qur'an where evolution can be signalled. I would expect it to be fairly fundamental for the creation of life to be present in the Qur'an.

142

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

not it doesn't. evolution is happening as we speak. speciation...may take millions of years. =)

143

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

You have to figure out how to square the Koran with evolution. All the evidence points towards evolution being the truth.
Either all that evidence was put their to fool us (why?) or Evolution is a fact.

144

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

Yes, the likes of Harun Yahya are very generous towards science so long as it doesn't conflict with their world view. As soon as something comes into a perceived conflict, well now the Science is baseless and all the Scientists are involved in a grand conspiracy!

145

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

First of all don't compare apples with oranges. We are talking about evolution which does not explain the origin-creation-initialtion of life on this planet. It only explains the fact which is evident from the geological history of this planet that life forms have changed. Evolution explains how this fact has occurred.. and evolution has nothing to do with origin of life on this planet.. which you call "creation"..

I think before glorifying people like Harun Yahya you should do some back ground research. The guy posted pictures from the web site of a "bait" manufacturing company after removing the hook using photo-shoping techniques in his book "Atlas of Creations".. he has made a joke out of himself by comparing the fossils of one family of species with the picture of another family of species. His book is a laughing stock amongst the science communities which is full of lies, deceptions and depicts a total lack of any knowledge for Biological Sciences.

Moreover the whole argument in his book is entirely different from what you have been posting previously. As far as I can recall you have admitted that the life forms are different in different geological eras on this planet. You don't think they have changed from one specie to another but you have admitted (during past discussions) that scientific evidences show the life forms from one geological era are different from life forms from another geological era. While the whole argument of Mr. Harun Yahya is that the life forms have not changed at all.. and for this he compared fossils with present day animals through pictures in his book. Most of the time he is comparing one specie with entirely another specie.. extensively using photo shopping to make them look alike. These deceptions are very easy to find on a lot of web sites which show the original photos (which incidentally were taken from different web-sites) and Harun Yahya's photo shopped versions from his book.

I don't know. I thought you were an intellectual. When we talked about credentials.. against the testimony of National Academy of Sciences whose members include 2,200 highest achievers in the field of sciences.. with 300 Nobel Laureates.. you have presented a quack like Harun Yahya to endorse your views.. How could you compare a known liar, deceiver, and a nobody in science world with credible science community like NAS..

Aha.. all these so called reputed and acclaimed scientists are conspiring against you, Harun Yahya and Zakir Naik..!!!

146

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

Peace philosophy

Ok I'm not getting this ...

Speciation is part of evolution ... So evolution is greater ... However you say evolution is happening as we speak ... but then claim speciation to take millions of years ...

That does not make any sense ... If Procreation is the category and copulation, fertilisation, gestation, birth are the sub-categories ... then it makes sense that the birth process is far shorter than the procreation process ... However ... speciation is part of evolution yet evolution is shorter than speciation in duration ...

In fact you have made speciation so long i.e. millions of years there is no way it can be speciation ... Things speciate over a single generation ... There is no way things can speciate gradually ... it doesn't even make sense.

If you were to consider species x and species y ... and the species x has over millions of years become x++ ... where + indicates species x strongly progresses towards y ... We can also say that y has the forms y-- which are precursors within species y that are close x ... It therefore means:

x--, x-, x, x+, x++, y--, y-, y, y+, y++

the closest two entities for speciation are x++ and y-- these are a single generation ... the offpsring effectively being another creature to the parent animal ...

147

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

evolution:

change in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift.

=)

wanna make it even simpler?

evolution:

change.

148

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

You have a tremendous talent. You take the simplest of concepts, turn them up side down, inside and out, till by the end even Picasso would be left scratching his head.

Lets step back and look at what your saying.

Evolution is the name of the overall process. It happens in increments. Addition of new mutations, of selection for those mutations etc etc. Speciation is the rise of new species from older ones through the process of evolution.

149

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

Please can you rephrase the above highlighted to ...
the fact which is evident from the geological history of this planet that life forms have been different throughout time

Evolution claims the difference is due to them changing from one form to another due to a propensity to change

Creationists will claim that the differences is due to competition for common habitats and food sources, predatory extinction, etc

150

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

So evolution is the process of gradual mutation? And speciation is a summation of gradually evolved bits strung together such that the beginning creature is species x and end creature is species y ... ???

Is it fair to say that over a single evolution cycle - speciation will occur once?

151

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

Evolution is the name of the science that encompasses all the process that go into changing species over time. Over shorter periods we have what you might call micro Evolution, but after a while, micro evolution adds up to Macro evolution. Macro Evolution occurring over many many years, is when a species that for whatever reason, has diverged to such an extent from its parent species, that it can no longer be considered among the same species as from whence it came.

There are no preset cycles of evolution. its only the natural consequence of the environmental circumstances of the species. Sometimes it can happen quickly, as might occur through selective breeding (dogs, horses), or may take much longer as through natural forces slowly separating a species from its own kind and putting them in drastically different environments, such as the case of old world and new World monkeys who were separated by the Atlantic ocean and ended up on opposite sides of the earth. Or it may not happen at all, if the two separated groups of the same species end up in similar environments and are subject to uniform selective forces. You see that with Aborigines, who still retain African features, or pygmies of Indonesia who also have retained their African features.

152

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

May be, even if it is not original.

153

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

It's good you are not defending Harun Yahya any more whom you presented as a Science scholar to the forum. The guy is a total history-science denier which is not the case with you. You are partial history-science denier who agrees that life forms are different from different geological era, and who agrees that genital drift and micro evolution does take place but can not result in speciation while Mr. Yahya thinks the life forms have never been different during the geological history of this planet and all the scientific evidence from the geological history is just a conspiracy of modern day scientists.

Now coming back to the questions you have raised.. either you are very naive who doesn't understand the fact of evolution at all.. or you are pretending intentionally just to drag on the discussion in a useless direction. Evolution does not say that one specie can give birth to another specie and thus suddenly from one generation to another the speciation occurs. Micro evolution occurs from one generation to another and say may be after one million generations the original ancestor and the millionth generation can become so much apart that they no longer can be classified as a single specie. Speciation does not occur suddenly at once like you are portraying. None of the immediate parent specie is a diversified specie from the immediate offspring. I request you to study the University of Michigan experiment which is going on for last 25 years with an open mind. After 45,000 generations of a bacteria so much genetical drift and anatomical differences have occurred in a laboratory environment that clearly indicate how evolution occurs through natural selection.

Speciation as you are trying to portray does not occur between immediate parent and offspring species suddenly at once. According to evolution speciation occurs after a lapse of sufficient geological time between ancestors and offsprings after a number of generations, and also between the offspring of the same ancestors when kept apart for a certain geological time.. assuming the offsprings are going through different survival pressures..

If you want to discuss evolution, at least you have to put things in right prospective about evolution. You can not continue to attack evolution for what evolution does not say. Your typical modus ope***** is that you attribute wrong facts to evolution and start criticizing the fact of evolution. It's a very dishonest way of discussion.. isn't it..???

154

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution … Or unkind dismissal?

Well if that is the case - Mr. yazdi I don’t understand how speciation occurs gradually … We have a whole load of specimens all of which are offspring from a common ancestor say … so if this common ancestor is a different species from us we have no way to confirm this, because the candidate for common ancestor has long perished, together with his DNA … he is all but fossil. Also, at what point will these intermediate forms become so diverse from their ancestor to be called a new species and at which point will a new species stem from something so unlike it that it is referred to as being part of the ancestor species?

I understand local straightness - For example in mathematics if we zoom in on a curve the line will appear straight, and zooming in on different parts of that curve will give us straight lines of different gradients … To me this is what speciation is being said to behave like …

What I can’t fathom is the nature of species that are current today … if we genetically compare variant forms within a species and then genetically compared outside that species there is a chasm … unless it can be shown that there are examples of genetic tigers that are closer to their lion cousins than their main tiger group and vice-versa.

Evolution does not answer certain question about variant forms (sub-species) within the species die off and others survive … (yes it says survival of the fittest), but in reality it should conclude that some of the sub-species have evolved to become other creatures, but it continues to say so and so has died off … If the fittest survive this should be a tendency to repeat the pattern, it is not a cause for change. Instead it should be the least fittest that evolve, because their forms are not sufficient enough to compete. So there is a gap to be bridged here too … that on one hand we have to believe that animals evolve to adapt, which means they were not fit enough in the first place … on the other hand we have to conclude those that survive will make more of themselves without variation … so we are forced to conclude that those animals that die off have evolved to become other animals … and if that is the case of speciation then it should happen far quicker than we think … and not be a gradual process that occurs in all creatures.

I find this to be a really interesting article
PLoS Biology: Phylogeography and Genetic Ancestry of Tigers (Panthera tigris)

But I would find it even more interesting to see how it stands against lions or other animals within the panthera group.

155

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

Coming back to the thread topic ... does this approach to mechanism of life not compromise the idea of Creation?

156

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

Why would it? God created the first modern humans through the process of evolution. Call them Adam and Eve.
Adam itself means simply "Man," and isn't specifically a name, at least as far as I know.

157

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution … Or unkind dismissal?

So what do you make of this?

So begins the story of Adam, the first man, the first human being; God created him from a handful of soil containing portions from all its varieties on Earth. Angels were sent to earth to collect the soil that was to become Adam. It was red, white, brown, and black; it was soft and malleable, hard and gritty; it came from the mountains and the valleys; from infertile deserts and lush fertile plains and all the natural varieties in between. The descendants of Adam were destined to be as diverse as the handful of soil from which their ancestor was created; all have different appearances, attributes and qualities.
Throughout the Quran, the soil used to create Adam is referred to by many names, and from this we are able to understand some of the methodology of his creation. Each name for soil is used at a different stage of Adam’s creation. Soil, taken from the earth, is referred to as soil; God also refers to it as clay. When it is mixed with water it becomes mud, when it is left to stand the water content reduces and it becomes sticky clay (or mud). If it is again left for some time it begins to smell, and the color becomes darker – black, smooth clay, from this substance God molded the form of Adam. His soulless body was left to dry, and it became what is known in the Quran as sounding clay. Adam was molded from something akin to potter’s clay. When it is rapped it produces a ringing sound.

The Creation of Prophet Adam - Messengers - Reading Islam - OnIslam.net

158

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

Now I don't know if your being purposely obtuse. I was pointing out the error in your thought when you said that it was impossible for God to explain evolution to Arabs as Arabs were too dumb. Now you change your line of thought to simply that God left out any details of man's origins.

[quote]
Yet I would argue that God has left a HUGE amount of information pertaining to our existence out of the Koran! Why? I can name multiple things God choose not to mention.

But no, you think God would have definently explained Evolution in all its intricacies to the Arabs, even though he completely ignored other equally important things!
[/quote]

I don't know the intentions behind God's actions, apparently only someone like you who is so gifted as to have a direct line to God's thoughts has that ability. I only know that God said he created the first man from dust (and the first woman from Adam) while evolution of the scientists tells us that we arose from a species that also gave rise to other apes.

[quote]
The problem with you is that your a literalist, for whom simplistic ideas are the core of your belief. *But the Universe is not so simple. *

Its ridiculous to the extreme. if this came out a childs mouth I would think it were cute, but i assume you are an adult, and yet you believe people are made out of dust and water?!?! Can you prove it? This is what we call magical thinking.
I don't know whether I should laugh at you or weap over your staunch and blind belief.
[/quote]

This line of reasoning makes no sense and I'll point it out clearly to you. You state that attributing something to God is magical thinking because it is unprovable and I assume you look down upon this 'simple' mode of thought. Now tell me how this not so simple Universe was created and prove it. If you can't prove it then you are your self a magical thinker. And please don't explain to me the big bang, I mean prove the origin of the universe. If your going to bring up the big bang then you will have to prove the origins of that as well. I simple believe God created the universe.

[quote]
No there is a way to harmonize the two, and its simply to understand that the Koran is not meant to be Science text book. When god says man is made of "dust and water" aka mud, he means we are off this earth. He could refer to the primordial soup from which life sprang.

The lack of a middle ground is only in your mind. Its a lack of flexibility of mind, its this binding off one self to a certain world view which is dangerous. You are desperately clinging to the edges here just to prop up this ideology that you yourself have constructed. You are living in denial and ignornce. Its like the inmates of an asylum telling everyone outside that they are the crazy ones!

Now Evolution is a fact. Its supported by evidence. That it wasn't mentioned in Koran, I assume is because God wouldn't explain something that wasn't relevant to the intention of the message, or wasn't something he felt the Arabs could grasp at that time, or perhaps he wanted to leave it to prosperity to divulge. But you would assume evidence is all an illusion, that its all a lie.

Atleast we avail ourselves of our mental capacities, you guys are living in perpetual denial of reality.
[/QUOTE]

The only way you can reach a middle ground is if you are a gold medalists in mental gymnastics to be able to entertain the cognitive dissonance of evolution stating humans arose from a previous species while God saying he created the first man from dust while creating the first woman from Adam (taken to be one of Adam's ribs).

159

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution … Or unkind dismissal?

Either your concepts about evolution are not clear.. or you are purposely attributing wrong analogies towards evolution.

  1. Speciation can not occur between you and your parents or your children. But according to evolution probably your one millionth ancestors were so different from you that you would classify them as another specie. Why is this concept so difficult for you to understand. Even if we take your religious belief about Adam and Eve as a true scientific fact, we see a diversity amongst our human race. There are clear anatomical differences between different geographical communities such as the color of skin, facial features, and body structures. Oriental race has shorter arms than Caucasian race. So these genetical drifts are occurring.. just take a composite of these genetical drifts over millions of generations.. and you will arrive to sufficient variations to be truly classified as speciation provided the genetic isolation remains intact due to geographical or any other reasons.

  2. It’s so absurd when you say with fossils you can not predict with precision the DNA composition of these ancient specimen. Let me give you some news buddy.. the scientific advancement has come to a stage where the genetic composition can be precisely predicted looking at anatomical-other changes.. But for that you have to come out of the stone ages and start living in the modern scientific age which seems like an impossible task for you.

  3. Not all the ancient species have evolved in to modern species. Many have become extinct with no modern lineage. Extinction and evolution have happened simultaneously in the geological past of our planet. Evolution also indicates that not all the evolutionary changes are perfect for survival. For example strength and size would give some species a protection against predators.. but on energy conservation values may perform very poorly and specie may become extinct because of it’s inability to find sufficient food. These imperfect genetical drifts along with major geological accidents are reasons for extinctions..

Buddy..

I don’t know what you stand for. You started with glorifying Harun Yahya.. whose position on the subject is totally different from yours. You started his praise by saying that you have found the ultimate guru who has explained everything in a very impressive way without actually reading what he stands for. Just because you read a headline somewhere that Harun Yahya is against the fact of evolution.. you said Aha.. he must be the ultimate scientist. You did not investigate his deceptions, lies, and total lack of knowledge on the subject. You even did not bother to investigate that he does not agree with any genetical drift.. micro evolution and believes the fossils are all modern species and the rest is all conspiracy.

Any way.. your posting indicate clearly that you are a very confused gentleman.. who is driven by the fixed conclusions in the mind. Your inability to study sciences with an open mind makes you a very poor analyst. Just by reading a heading that Harun Yayha is against evolution you declared him the most impressive scientist of modern times without actually exploring what he is talking about..

I hope the forum readers have seen with clarity the discrepancies in your way of studying-exploring sciences. I hope every can see clearly how exposed you stand today as a very naive scientist..

P.S. I think with your level of expertise you should stick to your favorite religious topics.. instead of adventuring science related areas..

160

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

Yazdi bhai ... Would it be fair to postulate that people of one race are genetically less compatible with members of another race? If we have become divergent enough to appear different, then it follows that we should be different sexually speaking ...

In times to come the offspring of blacks will be unable to have children with the offspring of whites ... Is that true?

My focus is speciation here ...