Honesty Rocks! truth rules.

Does God Exist?

HOME      >>       Science and Technology


Hello everyone,
Many people do not believe in in God anymore. There religion became 'Darwinism', hanging on the evolution theory, thinking that it is based on science.
Now I would like to turn the situation, proving the existance of God by using the Quran and starting with this funny but a serious video of an ex-priest. So take a look and have pleasure.

Click here to see the video 'Science proves Quran is from Allah' from Yusuf Estes

Many people have not believed in a god at all times in history, and whether they have or not is of little significance. Other things are of much greater importance. "God" is after all a word and so of far more significance is what this word signifies to them when we say that they do or do not believe that what it represents exists. Thus in some ways this comparison of "those that do" and "those that don't" is a somewhat meaningless comparison.

This juxtapostion with science and the theory of evolution is also very "interesting". Those who actually work in real science rather than merely paying lip service to it (whether to claim it proves their god or gods exist or do not exist) have a dedication to discovering the truth about things. That is something I certainly think is more important than this "God" pretend-issue. I certainly know that people other than scientists can also have a dedication to discovering the truth about things, however those that put themselves in opposition to science cause me to seriously doubt whether this is true in their case. For in their case, I suspect that what they are doing is fighting for their "truth" -- willfully trying to impose what they have accepted or decided is the truth on the world rather than honestly or humbly seeking to discover the truth. But the same is quite often true of those that uphold science as a source of truth, for paying lipservice to science, they often see it as a means to push what they have accepted or decided is the truth on others. Thus a far more significant distinction than that between "those that do believe in God" and "those that don't believe in God" is between the seekers after truth and the pushers of truth.

I suspect that one of the main differences between many of "those that do" and "those that don't" is whether the truth and the search for truth has any part of the meaning they give to this word "God". Many differ in they type of experiences they have had with "believers in God", such as whether the believers in God that they have encountered were "seekers" or "pushers". Another big part of this question, however, is methodology. How do we discover the truth? Experiment and observation? Reading old texts? Prayer? Staring at ones belly button and proper breathing? Babbling over drinks in a bar? Debating with others over the internet? Using your imagination? Working in a creative endeavor like art, writing a book or making a movie?

Well the effectiveness of a methodology depends very much on what one is seeking the truth about. For all that people of today have become enamoured of science because of its effectiveness in discovering the truth, the fact is, and I tell you this as scientist myself, the method of modern science is based on premises and assumptions which the scientists themselves can clearly see limit the kind of things that it can discover the truth about. One of the most fundamental priciples of modern science is an objectivity that is obtained by making itself oberserver independent by requiring that its data be obtainable by anyone following a certain proceedure. This is one of its most important techniques for getting past the beliefs and assumptions of individuals to the actual truth about things. However this method has a fundamental flaw in that it makes itself blind to any aspect of reality where the observer necessarily has an impact on what he observes -- such is most clearly the case when the subject of discussion is the observer himself and the nature of his own existence.

The point here is that we use different methodologies because we are interested in different things, and it is my conclusion, from my observation of the discussion between people that a vast portion of the differences between peoples beliefs about things is a difference in the sort of things they are interested in. I have seen so many arguments/debates on the internet where when you look at it carefully they are mostly just ignoring each other in order to continue talking about what they are most interested in.


Now for myself. I am a Christian as well as a scientist, but not only was I not raised a Christian but I was a scientist before I was a Christian. This made me rather immune to all the anti-scientific trends within religion, because it could never have been a choice for me between science and religion. The question was always one of whether there was any value for religion or a belief in God when the value and truth of science is a given. Modern science has become a fundamental part of my perceptual process by which I see the universe which I inhabit for what it is and so I could no sooner disregard or reject it than I could choose not to see or hear.But perhaps you can see why the important question for me was never "whether God exists" but "what is God", because it made no sense to ask whether something exists when you do not know what it is. Or more importantly, the idea that people spent so much time talking about something that did not exist seemed a bit absurd to me. The question was thus always one of understanding what they were talking about. Is God a myth, a person, a fairy tale, the creator, a story book character, a ruler, a delusion, a parent, or what? I had no answer to this handed to me on a platter, certainly no answer that was very coherent, and definitely not an answer which I found acceptable. I remember comparing the ideas of many different religions on the topic. But what finally gave the word meaning to me was a decision that a "faith in God" was somehow equivalent to a faith that life was worth living. What this means is, that you cannot have a faith in God without a faith that life is worth living and more importantly that if you have a faith that life is worth living, then in some sense, no matter what words you might use for it, or what you might call the object of your faith, you essentially have a faith in God. You see part of the problem is that the word "God" has a history of use and abuse and thus this gives rise to situations where an individual may be forced to repudiate "God" with all the life-denying baggage it has been loaded down with in their life, in order that they can make a real and effective affirmation of life - but a true affirmation of life is an affirmation of the true God, for as I have now come to believe, life is God's creation and you might say His "obsession". It is for life that God created the physical universe and it is for life that God has always worked and acted, encouraging living things to reach out for the potentiality that is within them and for life in general to reach out for the infinite potential that it is ultimately capable of. And so what are my conclusions now about what God is? Is God a myth? yes. Is God a person? yes. Is God a fairy tale? yes. Is God the creator? yes. Is God a story book character? yes. Is God a ruler? yes. Is God a delusion? yes. Is God a parent? A big yes. Yes for some people God is a delusion and a part of their psychopathology. Yes God is a fairy tale to the simple minded of both the believers and the non-believers. But for me God is the creator and parent of life, for life is by its very nature is not something that a moral (or rational) being would create as a tool (because living things do not make good tools), but would only create life with the interests of a parent as an end in itself. Thus I have come to see God as the infinite being whose perfection and lack of limitation provides Him with only one rational motivation and that is to give of His abundance to others in perfect self-less love.


i personally beleive in god 100%. i think evolution in bullshi%. someone figured out the odds of evolution happening. it's 100,000,000,000,000,000,000 to one. so odds are ahhhhhhhhhhhNA.evolution has failed many mathematical  test, and cannot be proven.


I do not know, but miracles happened and the church claims it as it is true. It happens for a purpose.


Consider this : An archaeologist digs deep into the desert sand and finds a piece of an old clay pot. After his investigations, this archaeologist can tell us, from this little old piece of dusty clay, so much about the civilisation that existed thousands of years ago that produced it; he can tell us about the types of ovens, temperatues, and dyes that they worked with, the raw materials that they used, and thus assess the level of their artistic skill and technological ability, etc. All this from a small piece of clay lying in the desert.Did this archaeologist ever see the civilisation that produced this pot ?How does he know that it ever existed ?He knows because he saw that the piece of clay was produced by someone who designed it, and shaped it, and had the intelligence to be able to heat it and produce the pot, and not only that, they also had the ability to colour it and make it look beautiful.Design ==> Designer.To the archaeologist the existence and intricacy of the piece of pottery is conclusive proof of the existence, intelligence and ability of the people who made it.Look around you: at the beautiful sunset on a summer evening, at the moon and the stars on a cloudless night, at the water that you drink, at the trees and how they grow from tiny seeds.Think about yourself: your eyes with which you see, your ears with which you hear, your tongues with which you taste and talk, your hands and your feet, your heart and your brain.Consider how these things are so complex in themselves and yet work together in such perfect harmony.From the movement of the galaxies to the complexities of the interaction of molecules, from the dynamics of eco-systems to the intricacies of DNA, all lead to the obvious fact of the existence of the great Wisdom, Knowledge and Power that allows our Universe to exist and function.To any perceptive person the existence and intricacy of creation is conclusive proof of the Existence, Knowledge and Wisdom of the One who creates, organises and sustains it.Most people naturally recognise the existence of the Creator, and we find reference to the Creator in all cultures and religions. Even the atheists, communists and (disbelieving) scientists cannot avoid this reality, but avoid the term 'creator', for phrases like 'Mother Nature' and 'the amazing way nature has designed...'How strange in the face of this, that many today reject the belief in the existence of the Creator. Perhaps this is due more to fashion and the desire to justify a materialistic attitude to life rather than real observation and comprehension of reality.Something stranger still, and perhaps another reason for the trend to deny the Creator, are those who claim that a man, or men, who walked on the earth, breathed air, who had bodies and souls subject to the Laws of the Universe, are the Creator, or manifestations of the Self-Subsistent One.This is of course a complete contradiction in terms. Something cannot be the Creator and created at the same time, needing air, food and drink and being self-sufficient, being temporary and eternal!If you are one of those who believe that a man such as Buddha, or Krishna, or Jesus is the Creator and Controller, then think again.We were created from a drop of despised fluid, in which was a microscopic sperm, which in turn fertilised a microscopic egg and we grew in our mother's womb in stages predetermined, over which we had no control. We came from our mother's womb, urinating and defecating, needing constant attention and care. Without food we will die, without air we will die ... and then such a one is God?Indeed any intelligent person would recognise exactly how dependant life, the universe and everything is on its Creator. Our dire need for His help makes itself plain in times of great distress.Imagine yourself in an aeroplane and you know it is going to crash...Who do you turn to for help then ?Or on a ship in the sea, thrown helplessly up and down by towering waves ...There will have been a situation at one time or the other in your life when you called upon your Creator alone, forgetting everyone and everything else, hoping, trusting, wishing that the Being you know in your heart and soul that has power and control over all things would help you. The only One you know can save you!Therefore i beleive that there is god and you should also believe.


The most important question in a man’s life is Does God exist? This is a crucial question because what a person believes about human origin and destiny will condition that person’s life style and affect one’s ultimate destiny. Sir Isaac NewtonSir Isaac Newton had skilled craftsman that built him a scale model of our solar system which was then displayed on a large table in Newton's home. Not only did the excellent workmanship simulate the various sizes of the planets and their relative proximities, but it was a working model in which everything rotated and orbited when a crank was turned.One day while Newton in his study, a friend came by who happened to be also a great scientist. Examining the model with enthusiastic admiration, he exclaimed: "My! What an exquisite thing this is! Who made it?" Without looking up from his book, Sir Isaac answered, "Nobody."Stopping his inspection, the visitor turned and said: "Evidently you misunderstood my question. I asked who made this."Newton, no doubt enjoying the chance to teach his friend a lesson, replied in a serious tone, "Nobody. What you see here just happened to assume the form it now has.""You must think I'm a fool!" retorted the visitor. "Of course somebody made it, and he's a genius. I want to know who he is."Laying his book aside, Newton arose and laid a hand on his friend's shoulder, saying:“This thing is but a puny imitation of a much grander system whose laws you know, and I am not able to convince you that this mere toy is without a designer and maker; yet you, as an atheist, profess to believe that the great original from which the design is taken has come into being without either designer or maker! Now tell me by what sort of reasoning do you reach such an incongruous conclusion.”The Creator of Life There are overwhelming evidences to believe that the unseen God does indeed exist, because one can observe the signs and the physical results of His creation. One can see these signs in the technical perfection and intricacy of the structure of atoms, solar systems, galaxies, and living cells. They all have a similar design of a nucleus and objects rotating around it. This similarity or repetition in their design reveals that the Designer or Creator of these physical objects is the same, regardless of their size or function. Humans, animals, and birds have many repetitive features because they all share the Earth’s common environment. On the outside they have symmetrical organs - two hands, two or four legs, two eyes, two ears - all arranged symmetrically. Hair, feathers, and scales are also arranged symmetrically. Even the colored designs on the wings of the butterfly are arranged symmetrically! The internal organs of humans and animals are arranged to use the space inside efficiently. The human left lung has fewer lobes so that it can accommodate the heart, which nestles inside it. Nearly every species, from cow to chicken to human, has its heart on the left. No one really knows the exact mechanism that pushes the cells of the heart to the left during the embryonic stage. No one really knows the exact mechanism that pushes the cells of the ears to each side of the head during the embryonic stage. Etc. Developing an embryo is more complex than building a skyscraper. In a skyscraper, a supervisor reviews the drawings and instructs workers where to go and which construction material to use. Bit by bit, from the foundation up, the building takes shape. In a living body, the workers are the construction materials, and both are living cells. Each cell has a copy of the master plan inserted into its nucleus in the form of the DNA. Just as the construction supervisor cannot send the roofers before the foundation is poured, cells have to appear at the right time in the right place. Depending on its function, each cell reads a different part of the genetic code from the DNA. Some cells become specialized as proteins, fat or muscle. Others act like conduits signals, carrying messages to other cells. Such signals play a big role in establishing the structure and location of any organ. This is not a simple process, but a very complex one that embryologists have no detailed answer as to why and how. A human being develops from a single cell, the zygote, which forms when a female egg is fertilized by a male sperm. Immediately after fertilization, the zygote also rotates about the center of the egg. No one knows why! Is it possible that this Law of Repetition represents an act of worship or submission to the Will of God? How else can anyone explain this phenomenon that is valid for the tiny atom and zygote, the midsize solar system as well as the colossal galaxy? The practice of pilgrimage in Islam follows the same above Law of Repetition. Two million Muslims perform pilgrimage in Mecca each year by circling the Kaabah (the house of Allah) and praising God. Thereby the Kaabah can be looked at as a nucleus and the Muslims are the smaller creatures that rotate around it. Life is as complex as the universe, and if the last chapter provided you with a dose of spiritual experience, this chapter will supply you with another dose. The factories, inside your 100 trillion cells, will bewilder you. The length of the DNA in your body, which exceeds the distance between the Earth and the Sun, is incomprehensible. The optimal structural design of the birds’ bones attests to an Omnipotent Creator. Yet the evolutionists want to convince everyone that we have gone from hydrogen to human! In doing that, they are introducing the following definition of the hydrogen gas: “Hydrogen as an odorless, tasteless, flammable, invisible gas which, if given enough time (say 10 billion years), becomes people!” Again, as you read this chapter, keep asking questions: Who, Why, and How, you will have only one logical answer: “God is the Mighty Creator and He made it His Way." What exactly is life, and how and where did it begin. Scientists’ answers to these questions are changing as discussions and theories pour in from fields as diversified as oceanography and molecular biology, geochemistry and astronomy. Did life start as organic soup in a warm pond, or under the hellish skies of a planet, unknown to us, racked by volcanic eruption and threatened by comets and asteroids. Then the intruders from outer space may have delivered the raw material necessary for life. The basic concept of evolution is that life started spontaneously, here on Earth or on an unknown planet, and took a very slow process to evolve from atoms to amino acids to proteins, to cells, to fish, to amphibian, to reptile, to mammal, and finally to human. This idea is very similar to some monster like Frankenstein, pieced together from different dead elements and jolted into life by lightening bolts. Proteins are the building blocks of living organisms. They make up much of the structure of all life forms. At the atomic level, a protein molecule consists almost entirely of a handful of elements - hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus, sulfur, and most importantly carbon. Because carbon easily forms multiple bonds with as many as four other atoms at once, it acts as a kind of glue cementing together the pieces of life’s complex molecules. The reason that carbon bonds so easily is that it has relatively few electrons. In a carbon atom, electrons orbit a nucleus in what may be thought as concentric shells. In all atoms, each shell may hold certain number of electrons. The inner shell accommodates as many as two, while the next one can hold eight electrons. But a carbon atom has only six electrons; two electrons in the inner shell and four in the next, leaving four vacancies in the outer shell. Proteins are large complex organic compounds, made up of twenty different kinds of smaller compounds called amino acids. Large protein molecule consists of hundreds of thousands of amino acids. One protein differs from another in its number, sequence, kind, and arrangement of amino acids. A peptide is a two or more amino acids kept together by a chemical bond called the peptide bond. Hair and fingernails are proteins that differ because of amino acids. Hemoglobin is a blood protein made of 4 chains of amino acids. The twenty different kinds of the amino acids can form an almost endless number of proteins, 2.5E18 or 2.5 billion billion. It is estimated that the number of kinds of proteins in a human body ranges from 10,000 to 50,000. It is hard to imagine that a human being starts as one single fertilized egg. It grows and develops inside its mother until birth. At birth, a baby is made up of over 60 trillion cells. As early as 1900, scientists knew that chromosomes were located inside the nucleus of a cell. They also knew that chromosomes carried hereditary information in complex molecule called DNA, short for deoxyribonucleic acid. DNA is named for the sugar deoxyribose, which it contains. However, the structure of the DNA was not known until 1953, when scientists suggested a model for DNA. That model looks like a twisted ladder with rungs, made up of four nitrogen bases. One molecule of DNA may contain 20,000 pairs of these bases. When a cell is divided and replicates itself, by a process called mitosis, the DNA molecule must also make exact copies of them. First, the DNA molecule comes apart like a zipper being unzipped. The two halves of the DNA separate between the base pairs. Then new bases, from the contents of the nucleus, attach to each half like puzzle pieces. Thus two identical DNA molecules are formed. Like a biological librarian, DNA preserves the information needed to fashion the protein molecules. A similar compound called RNA, short for ribonucleic acid, helps turn these instructions into reality. No evolutionist can be sure how or when DNA and RNA first emerged on Earth. The key to the DNA-RNA partnership is a shared language, spelled out along the DNA strands in three-letter “words” called codons. A codon is made up of the bases of three successive DNA nucleotides. The most common codons simply specify a particular amino acid. If codons are words, genes are the sentences they form, beginning with a special initiator codon and ending with a terminator. A gene’s message consists of a list of required amino acids, arranged in an order needed to make a particular protein. DNA’s genetic messages are readily duplicated by messenger RNA, a molecule that effectively assembles itself during the copying process. Incorporating DNA’s instructions in its own structure, the messenger RNA then travels out to the machinery of the outer cell, where it begins the manufacturing of a specific protein molecule by following the recipe it carries. To translate genetic information into proteins, living organisms follow a complex manufacturing process. Work begins as a strand of messenger RNA enters the cell’s protein assembly area, carrying a genetic code for a particular protein. The messenger RNA goes on its way through the watery interior of the cell in search of a structure called the ribosome. Typically a millionth of an inch across, these sophisticated protein assembly machines are equipped both to read the messenger RNA’s orders and to carry them out.Once the messenger RNA docks at a given ribosome, the ribosome looks for the beginning of the RNA message, then attaches there. Messenger RNA proceeds to wiggle through the ribosome, allowing it to read the RNA codons in sequence. For each codon, the ribosome chemically signals to the transfer RNA, a type of RNA, whose job is to deliver a single amino acid. When the transfer RNA arrives, carrying the required amino acid, it touches down just long enough to unload its amino acid. Then, the ribosome links the incoming amino acid to a growing peptide chain. This process is remarkably efficient even in a bacterium; one ribosome can attach twenty separate amino acids to a peptide chain every second! After the final codon has been read and its message obeyed, the ribosome releases a finished peptide chain into the cell. The peptide’s electrochemical properties will quickly wrap it and other peptides into the folded arrangement that forms a particular protein molecule. The molecule’s work will depend on its identity: the protein known as collagen provides structural support in bone and ligaments, for example, while proteins called antibodies fight disease. Assuming that all of the above was self-developed without the Hand of a Mighty Creator is analogous to believing that a monkey randomly throwing pieces of brick, iron, wood, and glass over a long span of time to make a magnificent high-rise building!It is extremely hard to believe that a biology teacher explaining the above process without getting excited. This is not a simple process. Yet, this is a simple proof that God exists, and He is the Only One that can design this process. The Creator of Universe From time immemorial, people have wondered at the starry heavens. On a clear night, the beautiful stars hang like shining jewels against the vast darkness of space. The parade of sunrise and sunset, the changing phases of the moon, and the silent convoy of the stars across the black dome of heaven have long proven a spectacle and a puzzle. The spectacle has inspired the artist, the musician, and the poet. The puzzle has intrigued philosophers and scientists. Just what is out there in the space? What is the meaning of it all? How did it start? Is there life out there? We don't know. But, who has any idea of what God can do? The spectacle of the heaven above charges the believers with humility and faith. They realize that they are a grain of dust on a grain of dust on a grain of dust. Yet, God gives us the intellect to contemplate all of this. The recent Hubble telescope discovery increased the estimates for the known galaxies from 10 billion to 100 billion, with each galaxy containing billions of stars, and perhaps planetary systems. When we discover new galaxies, stars and planets, this should make us aware of how great God is, and how little we know. God simply revealed some of his magnificence. One does not really need to understand the cosmic or biological Big Bang to believe in God. Any simple-minded person can arrive at the same conclusion by asking who, why, what, and how about the simple things that he encounters in his daily life. For example, why the world does not get very hot or very cold for people to perish by burning or by freezing. Who is adjusting the weather on Earth? Why trees come out after planting small seeds? What makes my heart beat? How can I face the frustration of life?



Science proofs the existence of God

All Praise be to Allah. We praise Him, ask for His Help and repent to Him. We seek Allahâs protection from the evils of our souls and the bad of our deeds. Whomever Allah guides will never be misguided and whomever Allah misguides will never be guided. I testify that there is no deity but Allah, with Whom thee is no associate. I testify that Muhammad is His servant and Messenger. May Allah bless him, his family, his Companions and those who follow them until the Day of Resurrection.

Koran 45:3. Verily in the heavens and the earth, are Signs for those who believe.
4. And in the creation of yourselves and the fact that animals are scattered through the earth, are Signs for those of assured Faith.

We live in a time where the schools and colleges teach our children, that we are descendents of monkyes and frogs and that there is no proof for the excistence of a Creator. When we were, in kindergarten they taught us that a frog, turning into a prince was a nurseryfairytale, but when we got to college they told us that a, frog turning into a prince was science! So our children think that the Evolution Theory is a fact and that science supports it, while in reality, this is not the case. The Evolution Theory is not proven, that's why we still call it a 'Theory'. We will proof with one singel cell, that there is a Almighty Creator, Insha'Allah.

Your body contains more than cells, some so small that 1.000.000 of them brought together would fit on the tip of a needle. Despite this tiny size, however, the cell is considered by the scientific community as the most complex structure man has ever come across. W. H. Thorpe, an evolutionist scientist, acknowledges that, 'The most elementary type of cell constitutes a 'mechanism' unimaginably more complex than any machine yet thought up, let alone constructed, by man'. (W. R. Bird, The Origin of Species Revisited, Thomas Nelson, Page 298 and 299). Charles Darwin said, 'If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down'. (Origin of Species, Charles Darwin, 6th edition, NYU, 1988, p154). So let us look at the odds and let us reason if the 'Evolution Theory' is a fact or a hoax.

Koran 13:16. Say, 'Allah is the Creator of all things, He is the One, the Supreme and Irresistible'.

Is there a chance?
Its a common fact among the scientists, that a cell is more complex than New York City. Some scientists compared the cell with the Space Station of Nasa. Suppose, you are walking in the desert and some stones in the sand, spell your name. Would you think that it is done by chance? No, we don't think like that. So, if i ask you, 'Is it possible that New York comes into existence by chance?' You would surely say, 'No, that's not possible'. Because we all know that all those traffic lights, the streets, the buildings, the windows, the water supplies etc. need to be done by someone. But a cell is more complex than New York City. If a few letters cannot come in the sand, by chance, then how can New York City come into existence by chance? This is the logic we use, this is the reason that there must be a Creator.

The footsteps in the sand are proof enough, that somebody walked there. We don't need to see the person, we know that he walked there, because of his footsteps. Do you know of any building that didn't have a builder? Do you know of any painting that didn't have a painter? Do you know of any car that didn't have a maker?

So go outside and look at the world around you, all the animals, all the plants and trees, all that water and other things around the world. Who is the builder of that? Think about it.

One second of energy from the sun is 13.000.000Ă the average amount of electricity used each year in the United States. The total amount of fossil fuel used by humans since the start of civilization is equivalent to less than 30 days of sunshine. It is only a small sun among billions in the universe. The fact that it has been perfectly placed 93,000,000 miles from the earth, is only one of an ever growing number of parameters we are discovering as being necessary for the maintenance of life on the earth as we know it. Did you know if the polar ice would melt it is estimated that the sea level would rise high enough to reach the 20th floor of the Empire State Building?

The earth rotates on its axis 1.000 miles an hour at the equator, if it turned at 100 miles an hour, our days and nights would be ten times as long as now, and the hot sun would likely burn up our vegetation each long day, while in the long night any surviving sprout might well freeze. Again, the sun, source of our life, has a surface temperature of 10,000 degrees Fahrenheit, and our earth is just far enough away so that this eternal fire warms us just enough and not too much! If the sun gave off only one half its present radiation, we would freeze, and if it gave half as much more, we would roast.

The slant of the earth, tilted at an angle of 23 degrees gives us our seasons, if the earth had not been so tilted, vapors from the ocean would move north and south, piling up for us continents of ice. If our moon were, say, only 50,000 miles away instead of its actual distance, our tides might be so enormous that twice a day all continents would be submerged; even the mountains could soon be eroded away.

If the earthâs crust had been only ten feet thicker, the metallic elements in the crust would have combined with all the free oxygen in the atmosphere, ruling out the possibility of all animal life. On the other hand, if the oceans were merely a few feet deeper, they would absorb so much carbon dioxide from the air that plants could not exist.

The physical size of the earth is just right to support life as we know it. If the earth were as small as the moon, its gravity would only be 1/6 its present force and unable to hold either atmosphere or water. If its diameter were doubled, the force of gravity would be doubled and the atmosphere would be so compressed that its pressure would be increased from 15 to 30 pounds per square inch. This would seriously affect all life. If our earth were increased to the size of the sun, while retaining its present density, gravity would be increased some 150 times. This would increase atmospheric pressure to over a ton per square inch. Life would be virtually impossible under such conditions.

The moon is 240,000 miles away, and the tides twice a day are usually a gentle reminder of its presence. Tides of the ocean run as high as fifty feet in some places, and even the crust of the earth is twice a day bent outward several inches by the moon's attraction. The moon is about 239,000 miles away from earth. If it were only 50,000 miles away the tides, which are now harmless, would completely submerge the continents twice a day. The earth would crack with the turmoil and the tides in the air would create daily hurricanes.

Though the moon is only relatively close to earth, its surface temperature varies each fifteen lunar days from a high of 214 degrees Fahrenheit above zero, to a low of 243 degrees Fahrenheit below zero!

The atmosphere of the earth serves a protective blanket to shield us from deadly radiation. If the radiation reached the earth, it would be impossible for humankind to exist. In addition, our atmosphere is just dense enough to protect the earth from some 20.000.000 meteors that enter it daily. These meteors, which travel at speeds of about thirty miles per second, would otherwise strike the earth with such impact that all life would be endangered.

The famous scientist Dr. Richard Brennan said, 'The term used in science for this energy is the solar constant, which is defined as 1.99 calories of energy per minute per square centimeter. If Earth received much more or less than 2 calories per minute per square centimeter, the water of the oceans would be vapor or ice, leaving the planet with no liquid water or reasonable substitute in which life could evolve. It is only because Earth is 93.000.000 miles away from a Sun that produces 5.600. (5,600 million, million, million, million) calories per minute that life is possible'. (Richard Brennan, 1997, Pages 244 and 245).

Even more difficult to solve is the mystery of the eels. These amazing creatures migrate at maturity from ponds and rivers everywhere (Those from Europe cross thousands of miles of ocean) all bound for the same abysmal deeps near Bermuda. There they breed and die. The little ones, with no apparent means of knowing anything except that they are in a wilderness of water, nevertheless, start back and find their way not only to the very shore from which their parents came, but thence to the selfsame rivers, lakes or little ponds. No American eel has ever been caught in Europe, no European eel in American waters. Nature has even delayed the maturity of the European eel by a year or more to make up for its longer journey. Where does the directing impulse originate?

Could I convince you that I dropped 50 play marbles onto the ground and they by chance fell into ten rows of five play marbles? The logical conclusion is that someone with an intelligent mind put them there. The odds that ten play marbles would fall by accident into a straight line are mind boggling, let alone ten rows of five.

Neutrons are and must be 0.138% more massive than protons. If neutrons were an additional 0.1% more massive, there wouldn't be enough of them to make heavy elements necessary for life. If neutrons were 0.1% less massive, protons would more rapidly decay into neutrons and all the stars in the universe would have collapsed.

The number of electrons must be equal to the number of protons. If the number of protons and electrons aren't balanced, galaxies, stars and planets would have never formed because electromagnetic forces would have overcome gravitational forces.

The rate of expansion of the universe is how it must be to support life. If the universe expanded more quickly, matter would disperse and not form into galaxies, stars or planets. If the universe expanded too slowly, matter would clump too much and the universe would collapse in a super-dense lump.

There must be one sun (or parent star) to support life. If more than one sun in planetary system, tidal interactions would disrupt planetary orbits. If no sun in planetary system, heat produced would be insufficient for life.

The distance from the earth to the sun is just as it must be to support life. If the earth was farther from the sun, the planet would be too cool for a stable water cycle. If the earth was closer to the sun, the planet would be too warm for a stable water cycle.

The atmosphere has the correct mixture of gases: 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, .93% Argon, .035% carbon dioxide and .035% other gases. If the atmosphere had 25% oxygen or more, spontaneous fires would break out because oxygen is flammable. If the atmosphere had 15% oxygen or less, air breathing creatures would suffocate. If the atmosphere had more carbon dioxide, the earth may become warmer (greenhouse effect). If the atmosphere had less carbon dioxide, plants would starve.

The surface gravity escape velocity is as it must be to support life. If just a few percent stronger, the atmosphere would retain methane and ammonia (molecular weights 16 and 17). If just a few percent weaker, the planet's atmosphere would lose too much water (molecular weight 18).

Tilt of earth's axis (23.5 degrees) gives us our moderate seasons. If the tilt was greater-for example, Uranus has a 98 degree tilt- such a tilt on earth would cause periodic continental flooding and long periods of darkness. If the earth's tilt was less - for example, Venus has no tilt -the lack of tilt would cause equatorial areas to grow hotter and the ice caps to expand.

If no close moon, the earth would wobble, as does Mars, causing vast irregularities of tilt, thus extreme variations in climate.

Rate of earth's rotation is correct. If 1/10th the present rate, plant life would burn during the day and freeze at night. If faster, wind velocities would rise to catastrophic levels. For example, Jupiter has a 10 hour rotation period and thousand mph winds.

Thickness of the earth's crust is correct. If the crust was thicker, too much oxygen would be transferred from the atmosphere to the crust. If the crust was thinner, volcanic and tectonic activity would be too great.

The water vapor level in the atmosphere is as it should be. If the water vapor level was greater, runaway greenhouse effect would develop. If water vapor level was less, rainfall would be too meager for advanced life on the land.

The atmosphere of the earth serves a protective blanket to shield us from deadly radiation. If the radiation reached the earth, it would be impossible for humankind to exist. In addition, our atmosphere is just dense enough to protect the earth from some 20.000.000 meteors that enter it daily. These meteors, which travel at speeds of about thirty miles per second, would otherwise strike the earth with such impact that all life would be endangered.

Dust in our atmosphere is necessary to help form rain drops. Scientific investigation has shown that if there were no dust in the air, not a drop of rain or snowflake would fall on the earth, and no clouds or fog would form.

If planet earth were some what larger, oh perhaps 9,500 miles in diameter instead of 8,000 , it would double the weight of air. With twice as much as oxygen, the amount of water would be greatly increased, so much so that the entire surface of the planet would be covered with an ocean. If earth were some what lighter that it is, its gravitational pull would be less, so that it would not be able to hold as much air as we now have. The lighter gases would escape first and heavier gases, like carbon dioxide, would remain, so the combination of gases in the air would be affected as well as its volume and density thus life as we know it would no longer be possible on earth. Condition on earth would then be quite similar as those on the moon.

Color of the sun is correct. If the sun was more red, the photosynthetic response would be insufficient. If the sun was more blue, the photosynthetic response would be insufficient. Is all this done by chance?

Dividing DNA has a very special way of dividing and combining. The ladder literally unhooks and rehooks. When cells divide, the DNA ladder splits down the middle. There are then two single vertical strands, each with half of the rungs. Both now duplicate themselves instantly and there are now two complete ladders, where a moment before there was but one! Each new strip has exactly the same sequence that the original strip of DNA had. This process of division can occur at the amazing rate of 1000 base pairs per second! If DNA did not divide this quickly, it could take 10,000 years for you to grow from that first cell to a newborn infant.

Human cells can divide more than 50 times before dying. When they do die, they are immediately replaced. Every minute cells die in your body and are immediately replaced. The human body has about cells. In the nucleus of each cell are 46 chromosomes. In the chromosomes of each cell are about of those DNA ladders. Without your DNA, you could not live. Without its own DNA, nothing else on earth could live. If you were to put all the coded DNA instructions from just ONE single human cell into English, it would fill many large volumes, each volume the size of an unabridged dictionary! If a few letters in sand cannot form your name by chance, then how can such big dictionaries come by chance? This is what you have to ask yourself.

Sir Fred Hoyle, a mathematician and astronomer, said, 'The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way (Evolution) is comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein'. (Nature magazine, November 12, 1981). The reason why Fred Hoyle compared it to a Boeing 747, is because a Boeing 747 is a collection of 4.500.000 million non flying parts, arranged in an intricate design such that it can fly. A typical cell contains several billion non living molecules such as proteins, DNA, and RNA all arranged in intricate design. According to Dr. Micheal Denton a typical cell contains atoms. Its life depends on the integrated activity of ten or even hundreds of thousands of different proteins.

Suppose we are standing at an airport, watching a big jet coming in for a landing. I say to you, 'A lot of people think that plane is the result of someone's carefully designed plans, but I know better. There was really no intelligence at work on it at all. In some strange way the metal just came out of the ground, and fashioned itself into flat sheets. And then these metal sheets slowly began to grow together and formed the body and wings and tail. Then after a long while the engines slowly grew in place, and one day some people came along and discovered the plane, all finished and ready to fly'. You would probably consider me a lunatic and move farther into the crowd to escape my senseless chatter. Why? You know that where there is a design there must be a designer, and having seen other products of the human mind just like the plane in question, you are positive that it was planned by human intelligence and built by human skill.

Dr. Dawkins said, 'There is enough information capacity in a single human cell to store the Encyclopaedia Britannica, all 30 volumes of it, three or four times over. There is enough storage capacity in the DNA of a single lily seed or a single salamander sperm to store the Encyclopaedia Britannica 60 times over. Some species of the unjustly called primitive amoebas have as much information in their DNA as 1.000 Encyclopaedia Britannicas'. (Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker, Pages 116 and 117).

George Sim Johnson said, 'Human DNA contains more organized information than the Encyclopedia Britannica. If the full text of the encyclopedia were to arrive in computer code from outer space, most people would regard this as proof of the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence. But when seen in nature, it is explained as the workings of random forces'. (George Sim Johnson 'Did Darwin Get it Right?' October 1999).

Let me ask you again. Can your name be written on the beach by chance? If not, then how can DNA come into existence which is better organised than all the volumes of the Britannica Encyclopedia (100.000 pages)? Or how can New York come into existence by chance? So the only logical explanation is Creation, because chance would not succed, as we will see below.

The world famous scientist Stephen Hawking has calculated that if the rate of the universe's expansion one sceond after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million ( the universe would have collapsed into a fireball. Dr. John Leslie said, 'If the rate of expansion were decreased by only one part in a million when the Big Bang was a second old, the universe would have recollapsed before temperatures fell below 10,000 degrees (i.e. before it could cool off enough for life to be able to form)'. (Leslie 1989, Page 29). British physicist P.C. Daves also estimated that if the strength of gravity were changed by only one part in 10^100, life could never have developed. So who calculated all this so perfect? Can you say that this is just luck and chance? Honestly?

This is the reason why Dr. Edwin Conklin said, 'The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop'. (Dr. Edwin Conklin, evolutionist and professor of biology at Princeton University).

Before we are going to work with numbers, i will show you how i write them, because the real numbers go beyound our imaginations. If i write 10^9, that means a 1 followed by 9 zeros. We call it a billion and we write it down like So if i write 10^200, i mean a 1 followed by 200 zeros and 10^16 is a 1 followed by 16 zeros.

Now let us look at molecules. A single drop of blood has 35,000,000 red blood cells. A single red blood cell has 280,000,000 hemoglobin molecules, each molecule having 10,000 atoms. Molecules are so small that Âź teaspoon of water has of them. Dr. De Nouy provides another illustration for arriving at a single molecule of high dissymmetry through chance action and normal thermic agitation. He assumes 500. (Trillion) shakings per second plus a liquid material volume equal to the size of the earth. For one molecule it would require '10^243 billions of years'.

So according to Dr. De Nouy it would take

Years before 1 molecule could come into existence by chance, (That's a 1 followed by 243 zeros). The earth is not more than 4.6 billion years old, so how is that possible? De Nouy continued, 'Even if this molecule did somehow arise by chance, it is still only one single molecule. Hundreds of millions are needed, requiring compound probability calculations for each successive molecule'. His logical conclusion is that 'It is totally impossible to account scientifically for all phenomena pertaining to life'. (Cited in Evan Shute, Flaws in the Theory of Evolution Nutley, NJ Craig Press, 1971, Page 23).

So is this not proof enough for the existence of God? To those who still think, that there is a chance, i want to quote Dr. J. P. Moreland for them, when he said, 'If the mass of a proton were increased by 0.2% hydrogen would be unstable and life would not have formed'. (1987, Page 53). Just a small thing like that, and we were not here. How can all this have been done by chance?

That's why Harold F. Blum, a prominent evolutionist scientist, sait, 'The spontaneous formation of a polypeptide of the size of the smallest known proteins seems beyond all probability'. (241 H. Blum, Time's Arrow and Evolution, 158, The Origin of Species Revisited, Thomas Nelson Co, Nashville, 1991, p. 304). Even the Evolutionists agree with this calculations. But they say, 'A chance is a chance'.

Its more likely that you throw a stone with your arm and it lands on the other side of the moon, than that life came into existence in dirty water. They agree with that and they still call this a chance, but we know better.

According to Evolutionists, the life has emerged by chance in dirty water. A single living cell may contain atoms, but each atom will be arranged in a specific order. If university trained scientists, working in multimillion dollar equipped and stocked laboratories, cannot make DNA and RNA, how can random action of sand and dirty water produce it in the beginning?

Dr. Robert Shapiro, a professor of chemistry at New York University and a DNA expert, calculated the probability of the coincidental formation of the 2.000 types of proteins found in a single bacterium. The number that was found was 1 over 10^40.000. (Robert Shapiro, Origins, A Sceptics Guide to the Creation of Life on Earth, New York, Summit Books, 1986. Page 127). This is an incredible number obtained by putting 40,000 zeros after the 1! So if you wrote a 3 followed by 39.999 zeros, then you had the number of how many attempts would fail to create one bacterium and 1 attemt would succeed. Can we call this chance? Its not logical to call this chance as you will agree with me.

David J. Rodabough, Associate Professor of Mathematics at the University of Missouri, estimated the more realistic chance that life would spontaneously generate (Even on 10^23 planets) as only one chance in 10^2.999.940 (This is a 1 followed by 2.999.940 zeros). (David J. Rodabough, 'The Queen of Science Examines the King of Fools', Creation Research Society Quarterly, June 1975, Page. 12). I showed you a one followed by 40.000 zeros, think about the calculations of David J. Rodabough.

Dr. Harold Morowitz, a Yale University physicist, gave a far more realistic 'Probability' for a single bacterium. He calculated the odds of a single bacterium emerging from the basic building blocks necessary were 1 chance in 10^ [Cited in Mark Eastman, Chuck Missler, The Creator Beyond Time and Space, Costa Mesa, CATWFT, 1996, Page 61]. This is a 1 followed by zeros! This number is so large it would require a library of approximately 100,000 books just to write it out!

What are the odds of you winning the lottery every week for 80 years straight without missing once? The chances are 1 chance in 10^22.120 (A one followed by 29.120 zeros behind it). What are the odds of 1 bacterium coming into existence by chance? 10^ according to Harold Morowitz. So the chance that you win the lottery, every week for the next 80 years by chance, is 2.420.796Ă greater than the chance that 1 bacterium comes into inxistence by chance.

Koran 7:40. To those who reject Our signs and treat them with arrogance, no opening will there be of the gates of heaven, nor will they enter the garden, until the camel can pass through the eye of the needle, Such is Our reward for those in sin.

Emile Borel said, 'If anything is ten to the 50th power (A 1 followed by 50 Zeros) or less chance, it will never happen, even cosmically, in the whole universe'. (Emile Borel, Nobel Prize Winner, Probabilities and Life. New York Dover 1962. Ch. 1 to 3). So what about zeros? What about that number brothers and sisters? As you see, this scientists have different calculations, but all of this calculations proof that live cannot come into existence by chance. Life is too complex for chance.

Here's an amazing illustration to help us with all these large numbers. Fill the state of Texas with silver dollars two feet deep. Having only one dollar marked with the letter X, ask a blind man to find the marked dollar with one try. He would have one chance out of 1017 chances to find it, (one with 17 zeros behind it). Now imagine the odds for forming a simple cell, one with 40,000 zeros? You would have to fill an area the size of our sun with quarters and find one with the mark while being blindfolded, and on just the first try! So, how can someone reject the existence of his Creator? Now, we all know that there must be a Creator, which is God.

Koran 6:39. Those who reject our sings are deaf and dumb, in the midst of darkness profound. Whom Allah willeth, He leaveth to wander. Whom He willeth, He placeth on the way that is straight.
Koran 8:23. If Allah had found in them any good, He would indeed have made them listen. As it is, if He had made them listen, they would but have turned back and declined Faith.

How is it possible that with all our laboratories and all our scientific knowledge we cannot create a cell, and chance did it? Its not logical to think like that. A past president of the New York Scientific Society cited this example as a reason why he believes there is a God, 'Take ten identical coins and mark them one to ten. Place them in your pocket, and then take one out. There is one chance in ten that you will get number one. Now replace it and take another. The chances that number two will follow number one are not one in ten, but one in one hundred. With each coin drawn the chances that it will follow in the right order are multiplied by ten, so that the chance of all ten following in sequence is one chance in ten billion. I cannot accept the reality which we see as the result of mere chance'.

The psychist, Dr. Robert Millikan said, 'To me it is unthinkable that a real atheist could be a scientist'. (Physicist, Nobel Prize Winner).

Dr. A. Cressy Morrison said, 'There is not one chance in billions that life on our planet is an accident'. (Dr. A. Cressy Morrison, former president of the New York Academy of Sciences, Reader's Digest, Dec. 1946).

According to Emile Borel, an expert in the area of probability, an event on the cosmic level with a probability of less than 1 out of 10, to the 50th power, will not happen. The probability of producing one human cell by chance is 10, to the 119,000 power. So how is that possible? Some people reading these lines who have so far accepted the theory of evolution as a scientific explanation may suspect that these numbers are exaggerated and do not reflect the true facts. That is not the case, these are definite and concrete facts. No evolutionist can object to these numbers. They accept that the probability of the coincidental formation of a single protein is as unlikely as the possibility of a monkey writing the history of humanity on a typewriter without making any mistakes'. (Inheritance and Evolution, Meteksan Publishing 1984, Page 64).

Sir Fred Hoyle similarly dismisses the notion that life could have started by random processes, 'Imagine a blindfolded person trying to solve the Rubik cube. The chance against achieving perfect colour matching is about 50,000,000,000,000,000,000 to 1. These odds are roughly the same as those against just one of our bodyâs 200,000 proteins having evolved randomly, by chance'.

To give you another example, an American physiologist, Dr. Andrew Conway Ivy writes, 'It is many times more absurd to believe that this causal chain came from nothing, and was due to chance, than it would be to believe that you could get a map of the world by spilling a glass of water on the floor'. (In the book, 'The Evidence of God', See page 293).

Hugh Ross estimates that the chances of ONE planet in the universe developing life is one in ten to the 282nd power (10^282) (million trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion).

The Nobel Prize Winner, Francis Crick said, 'An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going'. (Dr. Francis Crick, biochemist, Life Itself, Its Origin and Nature, Page 88).

Every day, more and more scientists become believers in God. Charles Townes said, 'Many have a feeling that somehow intelligence must have been involved in the laws of the universe'. (Charles Townes, 1964 Nobel Prize winner in physics, 'Science Finds God', 20 July, 1998).

Dr. Michael Denton, in his book 'Evolution, A Theory in Crisis' describes the intricate organization of nerve cells in the brain. He says, 'There are nerve cells in the brain. Each of the cells sprouts between 10,000 to 100,000 fibers to contact other nerve cells in the brain, creating approximately 1, connections, or, 10 to the 15th power. It is hard to imagine the multitude that 10^15 represents (A 1 followed by 15 zeros). Take half of the United States, which is 1.000.000 square miles, and imagine it being covered by forest, with 10,000 trees per square mile. On each of the 10,000 trees, which are on each of the one million square miles, there are 100,000 leaves. That's how many connections are crammed inside your brain. And they're not just haphazardly thrown together. They form an incredibly intricate network system that has no parallel in the industrial world.

That's why Dr. Isaac Asimov said, 'And in man is a three pound brain which, as far as we know, is the most complex and orderly arrangement of matter in the universe'. Fred Hoyle wrote in the November 19, 1981 issue of New Scientist, that there are 2,000 complex enzymes required for a living organism, yet not a single one of these could have been formed on earth by shuffling processes in even years!

As you will agree with me, it doesn't make sence to say that this perfect creation come into existence by chance. Isaac Newton said, 'Atheism is so senseless. When I look at the solar system, I see the earth at the right distance from the sun to receive the proper amounts of heat and light. This did not happen by chance. The true God is a living, intelligent and powerful being'. (Isaac Newton, regarded as the greatest scientist ever).

So proof for the existence of God is there, like Allah says in the Qur'an. We muslims believe in God, like a blind man believes in the sun. Not because he sees the sun, but because he feels it. Allah's signs are there, Allah's guidens is in our hearts and the straight path is in front of us. So how come, some people reject the existence of God and believe in just a theory which is not proven en will never be proven? Dr. Watson said, 'Evolution is a theory universally accepted, not because it can be proved to be true, but because the only alternative, 'special creation,' is clearly impossible'. (D.M.S. Watson, Professor of Zoology, London University).

Dr. George Gallup said, 'I could prove God statistically, take the human body alone, the chance that all the functions of the individual would just happen, is a statistical monstrosity'. (George Gallup, the famous statistician). Look at your eyes, ears, nose and hands. Who designed this? If your nose was turned 180 degrees around, you would drown in a small rainfall. So, praise be to Allah, the best of Creators!

Thomas Edison said, 'No one can study chemistry and see the wonderful way in which certain elements combine with the nicety of the most delicate machine ever invented, and not come to the inevitable conclusion that there is a Big Engineer who is running this universe'.

How well did Stephen Hawking spoke, when he said, 'The universe and the Laws of Physics seem to have been specifically designed for us. If any one of about 40 physical qualities had more than slightly different values, life as we know it could not exist, Either atoms would not be stable, or they wouldn'tcombine into molecules, or the stars wouldn't form heavier elements, or the universe would collapse before life could develop, and so on'. (Stephen Hawking, considered the best known scientist since Albert Einstein, Austin, American Statesmen, October 19, 1997). There must be a Creator, we bear wittnes to that.

Allan Sandage said, 'The world is too complicated in all parts and interconnections to be due to chance alone. I am convinced that the existence of life with all its order in each of its organisms is simply too well put together. Each part of a living thing depends on all its other parts to function. How does each part know? How is each part specified at conception? The more one learns of biochemistry the more unbelievable it becomes unless there is some type of organizing principle an architect'. (Scientist Allan Sandage).

Is the monkey theory proven?

Its just a theory, its not proven. The evolution theory even contradicts the fossils that we have found. Dogs don't have kittens, cows don't have lambs, and pigs don't produce rabbits. Birds produce birds. Fish produce fish. Each species brings forth after its own kind. That's no theory. That's a fact. Why then should we believe that man originates from another species? Those who believe in evolution think that everything came into existence by chance, and they do not believe in God. We as Muslims, reject that and believe that the first human being was Adam and then his wife, Eve, peace be upon them.

We can ask the evolutionists, which was first? The chicken or the egg? We can also ask them, which came first? The males or females? The male needs the female to reproduce, and female needs the male to reproduce. One cannot carry on life without the other. Which then came first according to the evolutionary theory? If the males came before the females, how did the males of each species appear without the females? They cannot answer that. There must be a Creator, as we have proven above. There is no chance that life could have been developed by chance. Like Dr. James Coppedge said, 'Chance renders evolution impossible'. (Dr. James Coppedge).

They have used many onlogical arguments, to proof their views. They captured a black man from africa and they put him in a cage in a zoo, because they wanted to proof that we are ancestors of monkeys. They said that this man was a monkey. This man commited suicide because of what they did to him. This gives you an idea, to which extremes they go, to proof this theory. They also think that black people are not fully transformed and are half monkeys. This is not true, all human beings are brothers of each other. We cannot answer all their lies here, if you want to see what the fossil archif says about Darwinism, then read the books of Harun Yahya, may Allah guide him.

Click here to read many books online: Darwinism refuted

Scientists about the Evolution Theory
Dr. Johnathan Wells said, 'I think in fifty years, Darwinian evolution will be gone from the science curriculum. I think people will look back on it and ask how anyone could, in their right mind, have believed this, because it'sso implausible when you look at the evidence'. (Dr. Johnathan Wells, author of the book, 'Icons of Evolution').

Nils Heribert Nilson said, 'My attempts to demonstrate evolution by an experiment carried on for more than 40 years have completely failed. It is not even possible to make a caricature of an evolution out of paleobiological facts. The idea of an evolution rests on pure belief'. (Dr. Nils Heribert Nilsson, noted Swedish botanist and geneticist, of Lund University).

Newton Tahmisian said, 'Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever! In explaining evolution we do not have one iota of fact'. (Dr. Newton Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission).

Robert A said, 'The pathetic thing about it is that many scientists are trying to prove the doctrine of evolution, which no science can do'. (Dr. Robert A. Milikan, physicist and Nobel Prize winner, speech before the American Chemical Society.)

Karl Popper said, 'I have come to the conclusion that Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical research programme'. (Karl Popper, called by Nobel Prize winner Peter Medawar, 'Incomparably the greatest philosopher of science who has ever lived).

Dr. Edward F. Blick said, 'The fossil gap appears to be a very serious crises for the theory of evolution'.

Dr. Niles Eldredge is the chairman and curator of invertebrates at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City said, 'One hundred and twenty years of paleontological research later, it has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwinâs predictions. Nor is the problem a miserably poor record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction was wrong'. (Stephen Jay Gould, 'The Return of Hopeful Monsters', Natural History, June and July, 1977. Page. 22 to 24).

Wolfgang Smith said, 'A growing number of respectable scientists are defecting from the evolutionist camp, moreover, for the most part these 'Experts' have abandoned Darwinism, not on the basis of religious faith or biblical persuasions, but on strictly scientific grounds, and in some instances, regretfully'. (Dr. Wolfgang Smith, physicist and mathematician).

Louis Bounoure said, 'Evolution is a fairy tale for grown ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless'. (Prof. Louis Bounoure, Director of Research, National Center of Scientific Research).

Ambrose Flemming said, 'The evolution theory is purely the product of the imagination'. (Dr. Ambrose Flemming, Pres. Philosophical Society of UK).

Michael Denton said, 'The great cosmologic myth of the twentieth century'. (Michael Denton, molecular biochemist, Evolution, Theory in Crisis).

Dr. Ethredge said, 'Ninety percent of the talk of evolution is sheer nonsense not founded on observation and wholly unsupported by fact. This Museum is full of proof of the utter falsity of their view'. (Dr. Ethredge, British Museum of Science.)

Dr. Louist T said, 'Evolution is faith, a religion'. (Dr. Louist T. More, professor of paleontology at Princeton University).

John Ambrose said, 'Evolution is baseless and quite incredible'. (Dr. John Ambrose Fleming, President, British Association for Advancement of Science, in 'The Unleashing of Evolutionary Thought').

Dr. David Berlinsky said, 'There are gaps in the fossil graveyard, places where there should be intermediate forms, but where there is nothing whatsoever instead. No paleontologist, denies that this is so. It is simply a fact, Darwin's theory and the fossil record are in conflict'.

Colin Patterson said, 'The only competing explanation for the order we all see in the biological world is the notion of special creation'. (Dr. Colin Patterson, evolutionist and senior Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History, which houses 60 million fossils).

The four scholars about the existence of God
Abu Hanifah
Imam Abu Hanifa organized a meeting with Atheists to discuss the existence of Allah. On purpose, Imam Abu Hanifa joined the gathering late which lead the Atheists to believe that Imam Abu Hanifa had no argument. Finally when he arrive he told them, 'I came to cross the river and no boats were there to take me across then a tree fell down and formed planks of wood all by itself and I waited and the rest of the boat was formed right before my eyes and that's why I am late'. Of course they didn't believe him and told him it couldn't just happen like that. Imam Abu Hanifa replied, 'Then how can the universe form all by itself?'.

Imam Shafi
Imam Shafi was asked what the proofs are of the existance of God and he replied, 'The leaves of Toot (berries) are all but one. Each leaf tastes exactly the same. Insects, honey bees, cows, goats, and deer live off of it. After eating these the insects produce silk; bees produce honey; deer give musk (a special kind of scent), cows and goats deliver off-springs. Is this not clear evidence that one kind of leaf has so many qualities, and who created these qualities? It is the Creator who we call Allah. Who is the Inventor and the Creator."

Ahmad ibn Hanbal
Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal reflected on the question in the following way. He said, 'There is an incredibly strong fort, it has no doors, there is no way to get in. In fact, there is not even a hole in it. From outside it glows like the moon and from inside it shimmers like gold. It is sealed from all sides, matter of fact it is air tight. Suddenly one of its doors breaks down, a living thing with eyes and ears, a beautiful looking animal appears yelling and wandering all over. So is not there a creator who made it possible for life to take place in this secured and closed fort? And is not this Creator better than humans? This Creator has no limit'. Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal was referring to an egg which is closed from all sides but Allah The Creator puts life in it and a chick pops out.

Imam Malik
Once Khalifa Haroon Rasheed asked Imam Malik, 'What is the evidence pointing to the existence of Allah?' Imam Malik replied, 'Difference in languages, difference in pitches of voice, difference in singing are proof that Allah exists!'.

This is suficient prove that God does exist, because not even an atom can come into being by chance. So who Created it? The only answer is Allah, the Almighty Creator of the heavens and the earth. There is no doubt about this. There can be only one God, because God is the strongest. There cannot be 2 or 3 strongest. So if another being is stronger than you, then you cannot be God. This is what Islam teaches, and this is the truth, accept Islam and all your sins will fall away from the day you accept Islam. You will be born again like a baby, without sins.

Now we have proven that God exists, we have to show you that all the other religions beside Islam are not on the truth and only Islam is the straight path to the Gardens of Paradise. There are thousands of Contradictions in the Bible, we can proof that by quoting a few.

2 Kings 8:26. Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Athaliah, the daughter of Omri king of Israel.
2 Chronicles 22:2. Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother's name also was Athaliah the daughter of Omri.

2 Kings 25:8. And in the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month, which is the nineteenth year of king Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan, captain of the guard, a servant of the king of Babylon, unto Jerusalem: and he burnt the house of the LORD, and the king's house, and all the houses of Jerusalem, and every great man's house burnt he with fire.
Jeremiah 52:12. Now in the fifth month, in the tenth day of the month, which was the nineteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan, captain of the guard, which served the king of Babylon, into Jerusalem, and burned the house of the LORD, and the king's house; and all the houses of Jerusalem, and all the houses of the great men, burned he with fire.

2 Kings 25:19. And out of the city he took an officer that was set over the men of war, and 5 men of them that were in the king's presence, which were found in the city, and the principal scribe of the host, which mustered the people of the land, and threescore men of the people of the land that were found in the city.
Jeremiah 52:25. He took also out of the city an eunuch, which had the charge of the men of war; and 7 men of them that were near the king's person, which were found in the city; and the principal scribe of the host, who mustered the people of the land; and threescore men of the people of the land, that were found in the midst of the city.

Some brothers and sisters will say that this are only a few number changings, they don't change the message of the Bible. OK, i agree with you. But a book that claimes to be from God, must be free from every kind of Contradictions. Let me give you another three examples.

Exodus 33:20. Thou canst not see my face, for there shall no man see me and live.
Exodus 33:11. And the Lord spake to Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend.

1 Samuel 15 : 29. The Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent, for He is not a man, that he should repent.
Genesis 6 : 6. And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

Ezekiel 18:20. The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
Deuteronomy 5:9. I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation.


Please, when you post copied text, put THE WHOLE TEXT between quote tags. And please do not forget to mention where the text is copied from.
I guess that your post has been copied from http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/, but it probably already exists in many other places.
By the way, in these kind of topics, we are interested by your own experience. We are not at all interested by texts already published somewhere else. So, please, be careful, your posts will probably be removed, and too spammy posts would lead to a ban.


i quoted the text but i am new to vbulletin so it will take me a little time


i quoted the text but i am new to vbulletin so it will take me a little time

You select the text (using the mouse for instance) and you hit the "quote" button.


ok got it that means first putting text and then clicking quote button.


Yes, God exists. I know this for myself. And that's the key - finding out for yourself. Becasue someone can give you the science behind evolution, and someone else can give you the evidence of miracles.. but until you discover for yourself, none of that really matters. On the note of evolution - has anyone seen the movie Expelled with Ben Stein? Awesome show! I highly recomend it. (sorry if someone already mentioned that movie)So how do you find out for yourself? ... It's really a matter of faith, and not science. So I'm not sure it belongs in this forum. But my advice is to start with prayer. Michelle Z.


Does God Exist?

I think that this is the wrong question to be asking on the grounds that there is no way to prove for or against any position on the grounds that there is no direct evidence to support either claim. However, i think a better question might be:

Should i believe in a God if one does exist?

I think for this question there is at least a rational answer and one that can be worked out mathematically. Pascal's Wager makes an attempt at answering this very question: SEE: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pascal-wager/ for original text, there are many other sites which deal with the subject of Pascals Wager.