Evolution

Evolution.

Micro-Evolution [the Small Evolution]:

Micro Evolution: (the Small evolution) does not contradict Islamic teachings.

An example of micro-evolution; if there are 2 giraffes – 1 with a small neck and 1 with a long neck – it is more likely that the long necked one will survive in a place where there are taller trees. The shorter necked one will either die out of hunger, or move to another place he can find food.

So this rule of ‘Survival of the fittest/Natural Selection’ does not contradict Islam, as long as you believe that it is a pattern in Allah’s creation.

The Companions of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) would use this type of Evolution to produce the best fruits;

When the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) migrated to Madeenah, he saw the people there pollinating the date-palm trees by hand… [Sahih Muslim #4358]

(i.e. the Companions of Prophet Muhammad would pollinate the healthiest fruits with other healthy fruit pollens – so that the best type of fruit would be produced. This is an example of ‘Survival of the Fittest’/Natural Selection.)

Macro Evolution [the Big Evolution]:

Macro Evolution argues in favour of one species of Animals evolving from another species of animal. i.e. Macro Evolutionists will argue that Birds evolved off Fish many millions of years ago. And if you continuously go back in history – that all species had one original set of parents [a 'Common Ancestor'.]

Hypothetically; This Common Ancestor started off as a Virus or Cell [through Abiogenesis] and ‘survived’ the Earth’s dangerous conditions, it then reproduced itself as it evolved – and had other ‘children’ which evolved into more and more complicated beings (through Random Mutations) as time progressed in history.

The most complicated ‘living’ creature through this process – Evolutionistis argue – is the Human being, and the least complicated is Bacteria.

In regard to the Islamic Perspective on Macro Evolution, all Islamic scholars have clearly mentioned that Adam, and the human race did not evolve from a Common Ancestor to other animals.

IslamToday.com writes;

..with respect to other living things (i.e. non-humans), the Qur’ân and Sunnah neither confirm nor deny the theory of biological evolution or the process referred to as natural selection. The question of evolution remains purely a matter of scientific enquiry. The theory of evolution must stand or fall on its own scientific merits – and that means the physical evidence that either confirms the theory or conflicts with it.

The role of science is only to observe and describe the patterns that Allah places in His creation. If scientific observation shows a pattern in the evolution of species over time that can be described as natural selection, this is not in itself unbelief. It is only unbelief for a person to think that this evolution took place on its own, and not as a creation of Allah. A Muslim who accepts evolution or natural selection as a valid scientific theory must know that the theory is merely an explanation of one of the many observed patterns in Allah’s creation.

Research Committee of IslamToday under the supervision of Sheikh `Abd al-Wahhâb al-Turayrî.

If you do not agree with the view stated above, then the following link may provide more indepth arguments to support your claim against Evolution:

http://seemyparadigm.webs.com/evolution.htm and you can ask questions to the Author of that site HERE.

Human Evolution:

In regard to the Islamic Perspective on Macro Evolution, all Islamic scholars have clearly mentioned that Adam, and the human race did not evolve from a Common Ancestor to other animals.

IslamToday.com writes;

The direct creation of Adam (peace be upon him) can neither be confirmed nor denied by science in any way. This is because the creation of Adam (peace be upon him) was a unique and singular historical event. It is a matter of the Unseen and something that science does not have the power to confirm or deny. As a matter of the Unseen, we believe it because Allah informs us about it. We say the same for the miracles mentioned in the Qur’ân. Miraculous events, by their very nature, do not conform to scientific laws and their occurrence can neither be confirmed nor denied by science…

… As for the fossil remains of bipedal apes and the tools and artifacts associated with those remains, their existence poses no problem for Islamic teachings. There is nothing in the Qur’ân and Sunnah that either affirms or denies that upright, brainy, tool using apes ever existed or evolved from other apelike ancestors. Such animals may very well have existed on Earth before Adam’s arrival upon it. All we can draw from the Qur’ân and Sunnah is that even if those animals once existed, they were not the forefathers of Adam (peace be upon him).

Research Committee of IslamToday under the supervision of Sheikh `Abd al-Wahhâb al-Turayrî

Furthermore, the fact that Humans and the Monkey family have similar DNA is not proof that we descended from the same Common Ancestor. Because even according to Creationism – God created ALL animals and Humans from similar materials of this Earth. (Many Atheists who believe in Abiogenesis also believe everything originated from the materials of the Earth.)

Further Reading:
http://www.islam21c.com/theology/2127-the-prophet-adam-and-human-evolution
Go to Top^

Alleged Intermediate Ape & Human Species:

Many of the alleged intermediate species between ape and human, are argued to be Apes or Humans afterall. Here are some proposed missing links of Intermediaries:

* Australopithecus anamensis 4.2 to 3.9 million years ago.

* Australopithecus afarensis 4 to 2.7 million years ago.

* Australopithecus africanus 3 to 2 million years ago.

* Australopithecus robustus 2.2 to 1.6 million years ago.

The false claims from Richard leakey and Donald C Johanson that the Australopithecus walked erected has been refuted and it seems the Australopithecus is closely related with urangutans which according to evolutionists is from a different branch than the one mankind originated from.

* Homo habilis 2.2 to 1.6 million years ago (proposed in the 60′s as first humanoid that walked erect and used tools). New discoveries in 80′s showed a different picture and Bernard Wood and C. Loring Brace said that this was in fact nothing more then An Australopithecus habilis. So it’s just another extinct african ape.

* Homo rudolfensis 1.9 to 1.6 million years ago. It refers to a single fragmented skull found in Kenia. However most scientists have accepted it again as nothing more then Australopithecus habilis [an extinct African ape].

* Homo erectus 2.0 to 0.4 million years ago. Although this skeleton is exactly the same as human, evolutionists have classified it as a transendiery specie, based on the small skullcontents (900-1100 cc) and because of the big eyebrows (of the skull). However, there are humans alive today with that skullcontents (i.e. Pygmees), and that have such eyebrows (i.e. Australian Aboriginals)! So there is no reason to assume these skelletons are a missing link, they are just humans. In fact the New Scientists of 1998 14 march even wrote an excelent article of how Homo erectus had the technology to build and use transport ships.

* Homo sapiens archaic 400 to 200 thousand years ago. Again there’s no reason to assume they weren’t human, in fact many researchers have even concluded that they are exactly the same as Australian aboriginals. They even found skeletons of them showing that they lived up to recently in villages in Italy and Hungary. The dramatic pictures of hary human-like apes you found in schoolhandbooks are just indulgance into imagenation, remmeber we’ve only found skelletons.

* Homo sapiens neandertalensis 200 to 30 thousand years ago. Erik Trinkus, paleontologist of university of mexico writes: detailed study of the skelleton of the remains of the Neandertalensis with modern man show that nothing in the anatomy of the Neaderthalensis such as movement, manipulation, intelect and linguistic capabilities are inferior to that of modern man. [i.e. it is the skeleton of modern man].

http://seemyparadigm.webs.com/evolution.htm

Now I’m not going to claim there’s some sort of crazy conspiracy going on here, and that evolutionists purposely create false intermediate species. But perhaps people are just looking so hard for these unfound missing links that they start to see things that aren’t there.
Go to Top^

Similar Looks is Proof of Common Ancestry?

Humans looking similar to Chimpanzees’, monkeys and Apes is not a proof that they Evolved off a similar Common Ancestor.

Non-Evolutionists can just aswell argue that we are similar in looks because we are created by the same God!

Are monkeys related to humans because they have a similar immune system?

Humans are more vulnerable to pig diseases as opposed to monkey diseases, so are we closer to pigs than to monkeys on the alleged tree of evolution? Or is their a flaw in that argument? *

Also immune system is only partially DNA-Dependant, part of the immune system grows as we develop based on our environment. So any similarities could just as well be environment-based as opposed to DNA based. This shows again you cannot really debate evolution unless you’re looking at DNA. Problem is though, we still haven’t figured out DNA, we might have already decoded it, but there’s so many genes we don’t know the function of, so many things we haven’t figured out. The science is way to immature to have this debate.

*Pig DNA is closer to Human DNA than the DNA of Monkeys:

The DNA of pigs is more similar to the DNA of monkeys, and this is why scientists are studying Pig organs to see how they can use them in Human transplants.

* Reseachers study human, pig genomes

URBANA, Ill. (AP) — While it’s easy to see that pigs and humans are very different, beneath the skin are striking similarities, researchers at the University of Illinois are finding.

The researchers say their work comparing the two species’ genomes, or DNA maps, eventually could give medical researchers information they need to develop treatments for clogged arteries, cancer or other human diseases.

“When we look at the DNA sequence, we’re a lot alike,” said Jonathan Beever, an animal geneticist at the university’s Urbana-Champaign campus who spent nearly two years compiling the genome comparison with UI colleague Lawrence Schook and graduate student Stacey Meyers. “The pig is just a spectacular model for humans.”

A genome is the complete set of genetic instructions for making an organism — a master plan of sorts. The components of that plan, genes, are carried on DNA molecules that organize themselves into chromosomes, according to a primer on genetics published by the Human Genome Project.

A side-by-side comparison shows at least 173 places on pig and human chromosomes where the genes match , Beever said.

…

Those answers could help researchers understand and treat diseases of both species because genetic diseases might look the same in a pig as in a human , Schook said.

For instance, side-by-side comparison of a gene that predisposes a person to develop cardiovascular plaque would allow researchers to look at the variation that contributes to the disease and compare it to the same genetic sequence in the pig and test treatments , he said.

http://illinois.edu/lb/article/1564/18483/page=1/list=list

Also see: BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Cloned pigs raise transplant hopes

Go to Top^

ERV Disease

Claim: We have a similar Virus in our genes to to Chimpanzees – so we must have a Common Ancestor similar to theirs.

Response:

The first problem with this argument is that it’s hard to tell what an ERV is when you meet one. It doesn’t come with a tag attached saying: ” This is an ERV “. It could be that some genes which we expect to be ERV’s aren’t ERV’s at all but something completely different. It could even be junk genes, byproduct. Or it could be something we don’t yet understand the purpose off. The difficulty in recognizing an ERV, is that it’s usually deformed from it’s origenal virus form. That is because if a virus is embedded in it’s complete form, its almost impossible to pass it down to further generations. To explain this, let my use a simplified example.

Imagine a man who has a virus. This virus will not infect every last cell of his body, and even if it would, he would most likely die and that would be the end of the story. Now for this man to pass this embedded ERV down to a child, the virus needs to be embedded in a spermcell. Only then will the ERV be present in every cell of the childs DNA. Since all cells have their DNA copied from there on. If however the virus isn’t deformed, the child would have a flu in every single cell of his body . His cells would constantly reproduce this virus, and spread it throughout it’s body. You can imagine this fetus doesn’t have a fighting chance from the start on . No, for an ERV to be passed down through generations, it has to be rendered harmless first. So how do you recognize it as a virus – after it has been rendered as harmless junk (over the generations) – in the DNA?

A second problem of the argument, is the slippery slope fallacy again. What if both chimps and humans were infected by the virus, and both got ERV’s in a similar fashion? After all, given their similar physiology, that seems reasonable enough right? Well the reply from evolutionists is, that the ERV is specific in a certain locus (place on the genes) and it is improbable for both chimps and humans to create an ERV at the exact same spot. However, I disagree. There is a recent discovery at the university of Pennsylvania US that shows a human DNA-associated protein that would dictate where on the DNA that AIDS is to be inserted. The protein called LEDGF would travel along with the retrovirus in it’s mantel and then modulate where in the human genome the virus is inserted. So if retroviruses can be locus specific, then loci-specific ERV’s is no longer a problem for this counterargument. It is then a matter of simple causality; chimps and humans have ERV at similar loci due to similar proteins. In other words similar results by similar processes.

Humans and Monkeys can’t produce their own Vitamin C – did they evolve off each other?

Claim: Monkeys and humans can’t make their own vitamin C, whereas alot of other animals can make their own vitamin C. So we evolved off each other.

Response:

1 – I don’t see why it is significant that we have it in common. There are many things we have in common with primates. There are also many things that a bridge and a tunnel have in common, that doesn’t mean one evolved from another, it just means they are based on a similar design.

2 – In order for humans to make their own vitamin C, we’d have to give up other traits that we have. In order to make Vitamins C, we’d need an enzyme that destroys Uric acids. However these uric acids have a function in our body, they [Uric acids] are anti-oxidants. Without them, our lifespan would be alot shorter. So I guess the problem is choice. This is the gist of the main flaw in the “imperfect design-argument from atheists. They claim that the human body could have been designed in a form that is closer to perfection, but whether or not this allegedly mroe perfect form is actually plausible remains to be proven.

3 – Because God wanted us to have a larger life span, He did not give us the ability to produce Vitamin C naturally . Again, it’s not just primates, many large mammals don’t have this ability. And as you can see, most of them are animals with (relative) long life spans. That is because for such creatures with have long life spans, combatting oxidation is a much more critical challenge, and therefore the necessity of having antioxidants outweighs the luxury of being able to produce vitamin C by ones self.

4 – Also, it is Not a disadvantage, as we have been given abundant sources of Vitamins [including Vitamin C] in nature (i.e. in fruits), and have the capabilities to find and eat it, and the digestive system to extract the vitamin C from it.

A Question of Instinct:

If we look at Evolution from an Abiogenesis historical perspective, it seems extremely likely that if there was a first being (i.e. a Cell) [although we have discussed in the Abiogenesis section that there is no Scientific explanation through which Process this being came into Existence)].

This cell had an extremely hard time surviving in an extremely chaotic world in which it could be destroyed through many, many factors i.e.; Lightning, Hot Lava, Toxins, overheating/overcooling, too much acidity/alkalines in an atmosphere, being targetted by UV Rays which could destroy it etc.

Yet despite all this, this first cell did not have an Instinct by which it could know that it has to Survive within such a chaotic world. But let’s just say that it did somehow Survive and Reproduce, the following Question does come to mind in regard to Instincts;

Where does Animal Instinct originate from?

a – If one was to argue that the baby is Born with it – It does not answer How beings originally got their Instinct.
b – If one was to argue that a baby Learns the Instincts of its Parent, then How does this baby learn from a Parent who doesn’t suck Milk?

The Answers to these questions are extremely important because without these Instincts – the baby animal would die.

1 – So how did Instinct Originate?
2 – How did future generations gain instinct so that they could Survive generation after generation for millions of years?

Islamic Perspective: According to Islamic belief, Allah has inspired the different animals with different Instincts.
i.e. Bees produce honey [Quran 16:68-69], Turmites build tall towers in an organised way while being blind, while Beavers build Dams/homes on Rivers.

Conclusion:

1 – We learn that Micro Evolution and Survival of the Fittest do not contradict Islamic teachings.
2 – We learn that Macro Animal Evolution may not necessarily contradict Islamic teachings (according to the scholar of IslamToday.com).
3 – We learn that Prophet Adam did not have any Ancestor. He was created specifically by Allah as an honor for him and the human race.
4 – We learn that ALL Animals & Plants have similar DNA because they are originated from the same Earth.
5 – We learn that alot of the Alleged Intermediate species Proposed by Scientists to be a ‘Common Ancestor’ for Humans and Apes were infact Humans or Apes!
6 – We learn that Apes and Humans looking alike does not necessarily have to be Evolution, but can just be Design by the same God (because it is an excellent design [allowing you to Walk, Run, Crawl, Swim, Build, Eat, etc.]).
7 – We learn that Pigs are closer to Humans in DNA than Monkeys are.
8 – We learn that Humans and Monkeys (and many mammals) do not produce Vitamin C naturally so that their Lifespan is longer, and because they can find Vitamin C in fruits to Eat and Digest anyway.
9 – We learn that the atheist paradigm cannot provide any reasonable explanation for Instinct.

Pingback: Important Articles on Evolution + Islam's position
Pingback: Evolution