Re: Why are Muslims against Evolution?!?
Peace Ranjhaa
It is highly deceptive of people to use adaptation genetic or otherwise to argue the case for evolution. Despite all the resisting that bacteria can eventually be able to do ... it nonetheless remains bacteria - not only that but it remains the type of bacteria it was before the mutations - it is merely a more resilient form. It is like putting a whole lot of pale humans in a hot climate they will become darker and some of them will get cancer and die. The ones who got darker and no cancer will have offspring some of which will die to the climate and after many generations ... the remaining people will be dark skinned. By treating many organisms as a single whole as we do with bacteria is a deception. The bacteria does not "adapt" to its surrounding necessarily. Many cells die in hostile climate. Others that may be variants in genetic structure survive, these normally reproduce and the result is a different type of the SAME creature. Not "adaptation" but "filtering" - when we become darker and lighter stronger and weaker we adapt because it is within our own lives. Next generation of the same type as us is not adaptation, it was only because those who died and could not reproduce were unable to do so because of the climate. The survivers did not learn from those who died. Adaptation implies this is the case - What we observe with bacteria is a filtering - it is natural selection. It is not adaptation. That goes for the blood pressure thing too.
And even if it was ... when did one bacteria type become another? When have we seen a single celled organism become a multi-celled organism?
The eye is an amazing thing indeed. The question sounds absurd. If it is so unintuitive for the eye to be built up as it is yet still work then at any stage going by the process of gradual development the eye would not function and would have never evolved to the current state. It is upsidedown and backwards to make us realise that it had to be designed entirely as a whole. You cannot gradually develop the eye. Furthermore despite this illogical structure of the eye it is clearer than any camera, doesn't fog up or give red-eye, adapts to various hues and gives a vision in a variety of angles at tremendous speed. ** Evolution as stated i.e. when one organism becomes another is not a fact** ... Natural selection does occur, but this is not the same thing and although the theory of evolution utilises natural selection to attempt justifying that given enough mutation a species jump occurs it does not prove this in any way. Hence evolution is not fact - aspects of change, alteration, mutation, etc do occur these are not synonymous to evolution.
Peace brother psyah,
I see you have done a lot of googling and falling for the catholic propaganda about evolution. a lot of copy paste work out there.
i also see either you are unintentionally using misinformation or half knowledge to justify your stand.
I suggest you should should believe in God. believing in god and having faith is the only answer. in my world some simple facts about real world wont threaten existence of god. if you already believe in god then may i suggest you to strengthen your faith and accept this world as god made it instead of imagining it as you wish.
May gods be with you.
PS. The question regarding the evolution of eye is answered a long time ago. Also evolution doesnt say that one species evolves to become another. a donkey cannot evolve to become a lion. living beings rather evolve in to something more adoptive in their enviroment.
