Discover Islam, - Evolution forgeries

There is no concrete fossil evidence to support the “ape-man” image, which is unceasingly indoctrinated by the media and evolutionist academic circles. With brushes in their hands, evolutionists produce imaginary creatures, yet the fact that these drawings have no matching fossils constitutes a serious problem for them. One of the interesting methods they employ to overcome this problem is to “produce” the fossils they cannot find. 'The Piltdown Man' -- the biggest scandal in the history of science, is a typical example of this method.
Piltdown Man: An orang-utan's jaw and a human skull!
A well-known doctor and amateur paleoanthropologist, Charles Dawson, came out with an assertion that he had found a jawbone and a cranial fragment in a pit inPiltdown,Englandin 1912 CE. ُُEven though the jawbone was more ape-like, the teeth and the skull were like a man’s. These specimens were labeled the “Piltdown Man.” Alleged to be 500,000 years old, they were displayed as an absolute proof of human evolution in several museums. For more than 40 years, many scientific articles were written on the “Piltdown Man,” many interpretations and drawings were made and the fossil was presented as an important evidence of human evolution. No less than 500 doctoral theses were written on the subject.
The famous American paleo-anthropologist Henry Fairfield Osborn said: “…we have to be reminded over and over again that Nature is full of paradoxes and this is an astonishing finding about early man…” while he was visiting the British Museum in 1935 CE.
In 1949 CE, Kenneth Oakley from theBritishMuseum’s paleontology department attempted to try the method of “fluorine testing,” a new test used for determining the date of some old fossils. A trial was made on the fossil of the Piltdown Man. The result was astounding. During the test, it was realised that the jawbone of the Piltdown Man did not contain any fluorine. This indicated that it had remained buried no more than a few years. The skull, which contained only a small amount of fluorine, showed that it was only a few thousand years old.
The latest chronological studies made with the fluorine method have revealed that the skull is only a few thousand years old. It was determined that the teeth in the jawbone belonging to an orang-utan had been worn down artificially and that the “primitive” tools discovered with the fossils were simple imitations that had been sharpened with steel implements. In the detailed analysis completed by Weiner, this forgery was revealed to the public in 1953 CE. The skull belonged to a 500-year-old man and the mandibular bone belonged to a recently dead ape!
The teeth were thereafter specially arranged in an array and added to the jaw and the joints were filed in order to resemble that of a man. Then all these pieces were stained with potassium dichromate to give them a dated appearance. These stains began to disappear when dipped in acid. Le Gros Clark, who was in the team that disclosed the forgery could not hide his astonishment at this situation and said that “the evidences of artificial abrasion immediately sprang to the eye. Indeed so obvious did they seem it may well be asked – how was it that they had escaped notice before?” In the wake of all this, “Piltdown Man” was hurriedly removed from theBritishMuseumwhere it had been displayed for more than 40 years.
NebraskaMan: The phantom who was born from a pig’s tooth!
In 1922 CE, Henry Fairfield Osborn, manager of theAmericanMuseumof Natural History, declared that he had found a fossil molar tooth inWest Nebraskanear Snake Brook belonging to the Pliocene period. This tooth allegedly bore the common characteristics of both man and ape. Deep scientific arguments began, in which some interpreted this tooth to be of Pithecanthropus erectus while others claimed it was closer to human beings. This fossil which aroused extensive debate was called the “Nebraska Man.” It was also immediately given a “scientific name”: Hesperopithecus haroldcooki.
Many authorities gave Osborn their support. Based on this single tooth, reconstructions of the Nebraska Man’s head and body were drawn. Moreover, the Nebraska Man was even pictured along with his wife and children, as a whole family in a natural setting.
All of these scenarios were developed from just one tooth. Evolutionist circles accredited this “ghost man” to such an extent that when a researcher named William Bryan opposed these biased decisions relying on a single tooth, he was harshly criticized.
In 1927 CE, other parts of the skeleton were also found. According to these newly-discovered pieces, the tooth belonged neither to a man nor to an ape. It was realized that it belonged to an extinct species of wild American pig called Prosthennops. William Gregory entitled his article published in Science magazine where he announced this fault as: “Hesperopithecus: Apparently not an ape nor a man.” Then all the drawings of Hesperopithecus haroldcooki and “his family” were hurriedly removed from evolutionary literature.
Ota Benga: The African in the cage
AfterDarwinadvanced the claim with his book The Descent of Man that man evolved from ape-like living beings, he started to seek fossils to support this contention. However, some evolutionists believed that “half-man half-ape” creatures were to be found not only in the fossil record, but also alive in various parts of the world. In the early 20thcentury CE, these pursuits for “living transitional links” led to unfortunate incidents, one of the cruelest of which is the story of a Pygmy by the name of Ota Benga.
Ota Benga was captured in 1904 CE by an evolutionist researcher in theCongo. In his own tongue, his name meant “friend”. He had a wife and two children. Chained and caged like an animal, he was taken to the USA where evolutionist scientists displayed him to the public in the St Louis World Fair along with other ape species and introduced him as “the closest transitional link to man.” Two years later, they took him to the Bronx Zoo inNew Yorkand there they exhibited him under the denomination of “ancient ancestors of man” along with a few chimpanzees, a gorilla named Dinah and an orang-utan called Dohung. Dr. William T. Hornaday, the zoo’s evolutionist director gave long speeches on how proud he was to have this exceptional “transitional form” in his zoo and treated caged Ota Benga as if he were an ordinary animal. Unable to bear the treatment he was subjected to, Ota Benga eventually committed suicide.
The ‘Piltdown Man’, the ‘NebraskaMan’, Ota Benga…. These scandals demonstrate that evolutionist scientists do no hesitate to employ any kind of unscientific method to prove their theory. Bearing this point in mind, when we look at the other so-called evidence of the “human evolution” myth, we confront a similar situation. Here, there is a fictional story and an army of volunteers ready to try everything to verify this story.

Regads, :-
NAJIMUDEEN M :-

[Editor & Publisher]

↓TRANSLATE THIS BLOG↓

* Bulgarian ** Bengali ** Arabic ** Afrikaans ** Gujarati ** Greek ** German ** Georgian ** Italian ** Irish ** Hungarian ** Hebrew ** Hindi ** Hebrew ** Chinese (Traditional) ** Chinese (Simplified) ** Marathi ** Maltese ** Latin ** Lao *






Share
Follow Us

*:- More than
Thousand(10,000) {Masha Allah}Most Useful Articles!, In Various Topics!! :- Read And Get Benifite!
{Improve Your GK & IQ} :- * Visit :-click here

Discover Islam, - Origin of birds and mammals

Evolutionists embark on flights of fancy of their own, while trying to justify how birds and mammals developed from amphibians
According to the theory of evolution, life originated and evolved in the sea and was then transported onto land by amphibians. This evolutionary scenario also suggests that amphibians evolved into reptiles, creatures living only on land. This scenario is implausible, due to the enormous structural differences between these two classes of animals. For instance, the amphibian egg is designed for developing on land. A “step by step” evolution of an amphibian is out of the question, because without a perfect and fully-designed egg, it is not possible for a species to survive. Moreover, as usual, there is no evidence of transitional forms that were supposed to link amphibians with reptiles. Evolutionist paleontologist and an authority on vertebrate paleontology, Robert L. Carroll has to accept that ‘the early reptiles were very different from amphibians and that their ancestors could not be found yet.'
Yet the hopelessly doomed scenarios of the evolutionists are far from over. There still remains the problem of making these creatures fly! Since evolutionists believe that birds must have somehow evolved from lower life-forms, they assert that they were transformed from reptiles. However, none of the unique mechanisms of birds, which have a completely different structure from land-dwelling animals, can be explained by gradual evolution. First of all, the wings -- which are the exceptional traits of birds -- pose a great impasse for evolutionists. One of the Turkish evolutionists, Engin Korur, confesses the impossibility of the evolution of wings:
"The common trait of the eyes and the wings is that they can only function if they are fully developed. In other words, a half-developed eye cannot see; a bird with half-formed wings cannot fly. How these organs came into being has remained one of the mysteries of nature that needs to be enlightened."
The question of how the perfect structure of wings came into being as a result of consecutive haphazard mutations remains completely unanswered. There is no way to explain how the front arms of a reptile could have changed into perfectly functioning wings as a result of a distortion in its genes )mutation(.
Moreover, just having wings is not sufficient for a land organism to fly. Land-dwelling organisms are devoid of many other structural mechanisms that birds use for flying. For example, the bones of birds are much lighter than those of land-dwelling organisms. Their lungs function in a very different way. They have a completely different muscular and skeletal system and an extremely specialized circulatory system. These features are pre-requisites for flying, at par in their importance with wings. All these mechanisms had to exist simultaneously, they could not have formed gradually by being “accumulated”. This is why the theory asserting that land organisms gradually evolved into aerial organisms is completely fallacious.
All of these bring another question to mind: even if we suppose this impossible story to be true, why are evolutionists unable to find any “half-winged” or “single-winged” fossils to back up their story?
Another alleged transitional form:Archaeopteryx
Evolutionists pronounce the name of a single creature in response. This is the fossil of a bird calledArchaeopteryxwhich is one of the most widely-known so-called transitional forms among the very few that evolutionists still defend. Considered the ancestor of modern birds by evolutionists,Archaeopteryxlived 150 million years ago. The theory holds that some of the small-scaled dinosaurs namedVelociraptororDromeosaurevolved by acquiring wings and then starting to fly. Thus,Archaeopteryxis assumed to be a transitional form that diverted from its dinosaur ancestors and started to fly for the first time.
However, the latest studies ofArchaeopteryxfossils indicate that this creature is absolutely not a transitional form, but a bird species bearing some characteristics distinct from today’s birds.
The thesis thatArchaeopteryxwas a “half-bird” that could not fly perfectly was popular among evolutionist circles until not long ago. The absence of a sternum )chest bone( in this creature, or at least the structural difference from flying birds, was held up as the most important evidence that this bird could not fly properly. )The chest bone is a bone found under the thorax on which the muscles required for flight are fastened. In our time, this chest bone is observed in all flying and non-flying birds, and even in bats – a flying mammal which belongs to a very different family(.
However, the seventhArchaeopteryxfossil found in 1992, caused great astonishment among evolutionists. The reason was that in this recently foundArchaeopteryxfossil, the chest bone that was assumed to be long missing by the evolutionists actually existed. This recently-found fossil was described inNaturemagazine as follows:
"The recently discovered seventh specimen of theArchaeopteryxpreserves a partial rectangular sternum, long suspected but never previously documented. This attests to its strong flight muscles."
This discovery invalidated the mainstay of the claims thatArchaeopteryxwas a half-bird that could not fly properly.
On the other hand, the structure of the bird’s feathers became one of the most important pieces of evidence verifying thatArchaeopteryxwas a flying bird in the real sense. The asymmetrical feather structure ofArchaeopteryxis indistinguishable from modern birds, indicating that the animal could fly perfectly. As the famous paleontologist Carl O. Dunbar states: “because of its feathersArchaeopteryxis distinctly to be classed as a bird”.
Another fact that was revealed by the structure ofArchaeopteryx’s feathers was the bird’s warm-blooded metabolism. As it is known, reptiles and dinosaurs are cold-blooded animals that are affected by environmental temperatures and are incapable of regulating their body heat independently. A very important function of the feathers in a bird is the maintenance of the animal’s body heat. The fact thatArchaeopteryxhad feathers showed that it was a real, warm-blooded bird that needed to maintain its body heat in contrast to the dinosaurs.

Regads, :-
NAJIMUDEEN M :-

[Editor & Publisher]

↓TRANSLATE THIS BLOG↓

* Bulgarian ** Bengali ** Arabic ** Afrikaans ** Gujarati ** Greek ** German ** Georgian ** Italian ** Irish ** Hungarian ** Hebrew ** Hindi ** Hebrew ** Chinese (Traditional) ** Chinese (Simplified) ** Marathi ** Maltese ** Latin ** Lao *






Share
Follow Us

*:- More than
Thousand(10,000) {Masha Allah}Most Useful Articles!, In Various Topics!! :- Read And Get Benifite!
{Improve Your GK & IQ} :- * Visit :-click here

Discover Islam, - The imaginary mechanism of evolution

*

The neo-Darwinist model, which we shall take as the “mainstream” theory of evolution today, argues that life has evolved through two naturalistic mechanisms: “natural selection” and “mutation”. The basic assertion of the theory is as follows: Natural selection and mutation are two complementary mechanisms. The origin of evolutionary modifications are random mutations that take place in the genetic structure of living things. The traits brought about by mutations are selected by the mechanism of natural selection and this is the means by which living things evolve.
When we further probe into this theory, we find that there is no such evolutionary mechanism at all, because neither natural selection nor mutations make any contribution to the claim that different species have evolved and transformed into one another.
Natural selection is a natural process
As process of nature, natural selection was familiar to biologists beforeDarwin, who defined it as a “mechanism that keeps species unchanging without being corrupted”.Darwinwas the first person to put forward the assertion that this process had evolutionary power, and on the basis of this assumption he erected his entire theory of evolution. The name he gave to his book indicates that natural selection was the basis ofDarwin’s theory:''The Origin of Species, by means of Natural Selection… ''
However sinceDarwin’s time, there has not been a single shred of evidence put forward to show that natural selection causes living beings to evolve. Colin Patterson, senior paleontologist at theMuseumofNatural HistoryinEngland, who is also a prominent evolutionist, stresses that natural selection has never been observed to have the power to cause things to evolve:
''No one has ever produced a species by mechanisms of natural selection. No one has ever got near it and most of the current argument in neo-Darwinism is about this question.''
Natural selection holds the view that those living things which are more suited to the natural conditions of their habitats will prevail by having offspring that will survive, whereas those that are unfit will disappear. For example, in a deer herd under the threat of wild animals, naturally those that can run faster will survive. That is true. But no matter how long this process goes on, it will not transform those deer into another living species. The deer will always remain deer.
When we look at the few incidents the evolutionists have put forth as observed examples of natural selection, we see that these are nothing but a simple attempt to hoodwink.
“Industrial melanism”
In 1986, Douglas Futuyman published a book,The Biology of Evolution, which is accepted as one of the sources explaining the theory of evolution by natural selection in the most explicit way. The most famous of his examples on this subject is about the colour of the moth population, which appeared to darken during the Industrial Revolution inEngland.
According to the account, around the outset of the Industrial Revolution inEngland, the colour of the tree barks aroundManchesterwas quite light. Because of this, dark-colored moths resting on those trees could easily be noticed by the birds that fed on them and therefore they had very little chance of survival. Fifty years later, as a result of pollution, the barks of the trees had darkened and this time light-colored moths became the most hunted. As a result, the number of light-colored moths decreased whereas that of the dark-colored ones increased since the latter were not easily noticed. On the one hand, evolutionists use this as an important evidence to prove their theory. On the other hand, they take refuge in obscurantism by window-dressing the questions regarding how the light–colored moths “evolved” into dark-colored ones.
It should be quite clear that this example can in no way be used as evidence for the theory of evolution, because natural selection gave rise to a new form that had not existed before. Dark colored moths existed in the moth population before the Industrial Revolution. Only the relative proportions of the existing moth varieties in the population changed. The moths had notacquired a new trait or an organ, which would cause a ‘speciation'. In order to have a moth turn into another living species, a bird for example, new additions would have had to be made to the genes. That is, an entirely separate genetic program would have had to be loaded to include information about the physical traits of the bird.
Briefly, natural selection does not have the capability to add a new organ to a living organism, remove one, or change the organism into another species – quite contrary to the image that evolutionists conjure up. The “greatest” evidence put forward sinceDarwinhas been able to go no further than the “industrial melanism” of the moths inEngland.
Can natural selection explain complexity?
There is nothing that natural selection contributes to the theory of evolution, because this mechanism can never increase or improve the genetic information of a species. Neither can it transform one species into another: a starfish into a fish, a fish into a frog, a frog into a crocodile or a crocodile into a bird. The biggest defender of punctuated equilibrium, Gould, refers to this deadlock of natural selection as follows:
"The essence of Darwinism lies in a single phrase:natural selection is the creative force of evolutionary change. No one denies that natural selection will play a negative role in eliminating the unfit. Darwinian theories require that it create the fit as well. "
Another of the misleading methods that evolutionists employ on the issue of natural selection is their effort to present this mechanism as a 'conscious designer'. However, natural selection has no consciousness. It does not possess a will that can decide what is good and what is bad for living beings. As a result, natural selection cannot explain biological systems and organs that have the feature of “irreducible complexity”. These systems and organs are composed of the co-operation of a great number of parts and they are of no use if even one of these parts is missing or defective. )For example, the human eye does not function unless it exists with all its details(. Therefore, the will that brings all these parts together should be able to figure the future in advance and aim directly for the benefit that is to be acquired at the last stage.
Since natural mechanism has no consciousness or will, it can do no such thing. This fact which demolishes the foundations of the theory of evolution, also worriedDarwin: “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.''
Natural selection only selects out the disfigured, weak or unfit individuals of a species. That is, it cannot make anything evolve.Darwinaccepted this reality by saying: “Natural selection can do nothing until favourable variations chance to occur.” This is why neo-Darwinism has had to elevate mutations next to natural selection as the “cause of beneficial changes.” However as we shall see, mutations can only be “the cause for harmful changes.”

Regads, :-
NAJIMUDEEN M :-

[Editor & Publisher]

↓TRANSLATE THIS BLOG↓

* Bulgarian ** Bengali ** Arabic ** Afrikaans ** Gujarati ** Greek ** German ** Georgian ** Italian ** Irish ** Hungarian ** Hebrew ** Hindi ** Hebrew ** Chinese (Traditional) ** Chinese (Simplified) ** Marathi ** Maltese ** Latin ** Lao *






Share
Follow Us

*:- More than
Thousand(10,000) {Masha Allah}Most Useful Articles!, In Various Topics!! :- Read And Get Benifite!
{Improve Your GK & IQ} :- * Visit :-click here

Qur'an Related, - Our Prophet (saas) predicted his own death

Another of our blessed Prophet's (saas) miracles was that all of his predictions came true (or will come true) in time. One of the events he predicted was his own death.
The Messenger of Allah (saas) looked at us and said: "You suggest that I shall be the last to die. Be warned, I shall die before all of you! You will die after me." 85
Narrated 'Uqbah ibn 'Amir (ra):
The Prophet went out and offered the funeral prayer for the martyrs of the (battle of) Uhud. He then ascended the minbar and said: "I will precede you (in death), and I am a witness against you, and – by Allah! – I am at this moment gazing upon my pond. I have been given the keys of the treasuries of Earth" – or "the treasuries of Earth" – "and – by Allah! – I do not fear that you will become idolaters after me, but I fear that you will compete for them [the treasuries]." 86
In another hadith, our Prophet (saas) reveals that he is going to die:
Abu Muwyahibah narrated: The Messenger of Allah called for me in the middle of the night and said to me: "O Abu Muwayhibah, I have been ordered to pray for forgiveness for the people of Baqi' [graveyard], so come with me." So I went with him. When he stood among them, he said: "Peace be upon you, O dwellers of the graves. May the situation you are in be more comfortable than the situation the people are in, for tribulations have approached like dark patches of night, one following another, and each one is worse than the one before it." Then he drew near to me and said: "O Abu Muwayhibah, I have been given the keys to the treasures of the world and to lasting life in it, followed by the Garden. I was given a choice between this and the meeting with my Lord and the Garden, so I chose the meeting with my Lord." 87
Our Prophet (saas) gave many details about his death, and this greatly increased and deepened the believers' faith. For example:
I was born on a Monday. The revelation began on a Monday. I migrated [to Madinah] on a Monday, and shall die on a Monday. 88
Ibn Hanbal and al-Bayhaqi relate from Ibn Abbas (ra):
Ibn Abbas narrated: "The Prophet (saas) was born on a Monday, became a prophet on a Monday, migrated from Mecca on a Monday, and entered Madinah on a Monday. Mecca was opened [to Islam] on a Monday, and he died on a Monday."89
In some of the hadiths, he revealed where he would die:
The place to which I migrated and where I shall lie – where I shall be buried when I die – is Madinah. 90Madinah is where I emigrated. I shall die there and there be raised up. 91

Regads, :-
NAJIMUDEEN M :-

[Editor & Publisher]

↓TRANSLATE THIS BLOG↓

* Bulgarian ** Bengali ** Arabic ** Afrikaans ** Gujarati ** Greek ** German ** Georgian ** Italian ** Irish ** Hungarian ** Hebrew ** Hindi ** Hebrew ** Chinese (Traditional) ** Chinese (Simplified) ** Marathi ** Maltese ** Latin ** Lao *






Share
Follow Us

*:- More than
Thousand(10,000) {Masha Allah}Most Useful Articles!, In Various Topics!! :- Read And Get Benifite!
{Improve Your GK & IQ} :- * Visit :-click here