EVOLUTION: IS IT GRADUAL IN CREATION?
EVOLUTION: IS IT GRADUAL IN CREATION?
Prof. Dr. İsmail KOCAÇALIŞKAN
Yıldız Technical University, Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Istanbul.
The answer to this question is about the perspective. One of the reasons that propose to those who claim that they are formed by an evolution in the form of transformation of living things from one species to another may be the similarities between them despite the rich diversity seen in living things. However, this does not indicate evolution, but the unity of the Creator. Because all living things are similar in that they emerge from a single creator's plan and design.
The second reason is that all living species were created at different times. First, one-celled, then multi-celled, and finally the human species were created. Because the initial conditions of our world were not yet conducive to human life. We see the existence of a gradual change in the final form of our world for some important aims. Initially, geological studies show that climate changes occur alongside earth changes. Parallel to all these, the creation of living species has been gradually. This grading can have two main dimensions; one can say that in every period, living species that are able to live in the climate and earth conditions of that day are created. When the conditions of the world become suitable for human life, man is created.
The second dimension of the grading in creation is; creatures are created according to their place in the food chain. Generally speaking, we can say that first a cell, then plants, then grass eaters, then meat eaters, and finally human beings were created. The food chain in living things generally shows this order of creation. Because the latter need to survive before.
Evolution is one of the words on which the concept confusion is made most. There are those who use the word evolution instead of many words such as growth, development, variation and modification. Whereas, in fact, evolution is the name of a theory or some hypothesis that, in biology, refers to the evolution of one species from another. Theory and hypothesis is a view but is not a proven scientific reality.
In the view of evolution, the origin of all living species is based on a cell. After this cell also came into being by chance from non-living substances, another cell from this cell also came into being by the formation of multicellular organisms, plants and animals, from one species to another. Some have tried to explain this by natural selection (like Darwin) and later by mutations (Neo-Darwinists). 
Some advocates of this view explain the event completely by chance. They claim that living things evolved spontaneously without a creator, for example, from one species of fish, toad, and ape to another and finally to human. Whereas, by chance, the possibility of a living organism, not even a cell, is neither biological nor mathematically possible. Some others say that; “There is such an evolution, but not by chance, but by the will and savings of a creator”. Surely the Almighty is able to do all things. For example, it is possible and easy for him to create toad from fish and human from monkey. However, “every possible thing is not occur” is a famous principle.Now we should examine; Has there actually been such an evolution? Is this how the law of species creation took place?
Data from various branches of the science of biology, such as paleontology, genetics, molecular biology and biochemistry, do not support the occurrence of such an evolutionary event. Since the emergence of species occurred during geological times in history, the first source to be used in this matter should be the science of paleontology that examines fossils. Because if there is an evolution in the form of the emergence a species from another species, it will not happen suddenly. There must be thousands of intermediate forms that bear the similarities of both species. Despite the fact that millions of fossils have been studied so far, no other evidence has been obtained from the few fossils claimed to be intermediate forms. It was later discovered that these were obtained by a manipulative assembly of different fossils. 
On the other hand, religious sources do not support such an evolution. Bediuzzaman Said Nursi a famous scholar all over the world and commentator (alim and mufessir) of the Koran (1876-1960); In his book Isarat-ul-I’caz, he describes this aspect while he described the 21st verse of the sura of baccarat of Koran:
“It has also been demonstrated by zoology and botany that there are more than two hundred thousand sorts of living species (Nev’)  and that each has a progenitor and forefather. These progenitors and forefathers emerged without intermediary directly from the hand of divine power of Allah. Because it is impossible for the species to go chained to infinity. Thus, the supposing that some species emerged from others is invalid. For, since either the offspring are mostly barren or the generation can notcontinues, the individuals born from the mating of individuals belonging to different species can not become the start of new species chains through reproduction. In summary, the chains of human beings and other living species will end up in a son, as they were first start in a father.”
In this regard, Hamdi Yazır-the commentator (mufessir) of the Koran (1977-1942)-says while he described the 12st verse of the sura of mu’minun of Koran: “It is neither natural nor necessary to claim that the species of animals with close proximity are born frome achother. To tell that frogs are born from fish, an observation is needed. Since there is no observable example and a necessity, it cannot be a scientific provision. 
As stated in the above statements, each species has a first ancestor. Some scholars call this the “basic type”. This first ancestor carries the genetic potential and total characteristics of that species. This potential is also the gene pool of that species. A male and female couple, the first ancestor of each species, was created at a suitable geological time. From these ancestors, members of the same species multiplied by mating and they have spread to other parts of the world.
Subsequently, some variations within the species (race, variety, etc.) may occur. However, these subsequent minor changes are permissible to the genetic potential of the first ancestor. In other words, the changes that occur can be within the gene pool of the first ancestor. Otherwise, it is not at a level that will allow the formation of another species. Breeding studies by methods such as sexual hybridization, somatic hybridization, gene transfer or mutation yield new breeds or mutant types, but these are in-species variations.
All these studies show that there is no evolution in the form of the formation of another species. Intra-species variations, on the other hand, are not species evolution, whether in nature or in the laboratory. For example, when the cat species are mentioned, various breeds (Wild cat, Van cat, Siamese cat, etc.) come into it. The genetic potential of all of these is present in the first ancestor cat, and these variations may occur within the boundaries of that genetic potential. Otherwise, the genetic potential of any cat breed is not conducive to forming a dog or lion. Let us give an example of plants in this regard. Since the 1800s, breeding and hybridization studies have been carried out in order to increase sugar yield in beet plant. As a result, a 20% increase in yield was achieved. But the obtained plant varieties are still beets. No new plant species was emerged.
One of the reasons that suggest that living things evolved from one species to another could be diversity and similarities in living things. But this does not mean evolution, but the unity of the great creator (Allah). Because all living things are similar in that they emerge from the will and might of a single creator (the reality of tawheed). The second reason is that the species were created at different times but not at the same time. First, one-celled, then multi-celled, and finally, human beings were created. Because the initial conditions of the world were not yet suitable for human life. Gradually, the world took its final form. Geological investigations show that there are many earth changes such as the rise of the mountains, the collapse of the valleys, the formation of the seas, the separation of the continents, as well as many climate changes such as cold, heat, humidity and oxygen density. Therefore, the creation of living species has been occurred gradual depending on the suitability of environment conditions.
This grading can havetwo main dimensions. Someone; From the outset, in accordance with the gradual changes in the world, we can say that in every period, living species of that era could be created in climatic and earth conditions. But since the world has not yet takenits final form, there have been new changes, and some species have not survived in thesechanges, such as thedinosaurs. When the earth becomes suitable for human life, the human species is created. We can say that in theworld, one-celled creatures were created first. But thisdoes not mean that one celle volved to form multicellular organisms, but that the conditions of that time were more favorable for the life of one cell organisms.
These condreason for the grading in creation is that livingthings were created according to their place in the food chain. To put it very generally; firs to cell organisms, then plants, then grass-eating animals, then meat-eating animals, and finally humans were created. Their food chain shows this order of creation. Because the latter need to survive before.
“Response to needs” principle in creation can obviously be seen. First, one-celled organisms (such as bacteria, amoeba) and then multi-celled organisms (plants and animals) were created. So there is a gradual. But this does not mean that one cell evolved to form multi-celled. Let's look at it from a different dimension. When we examine living things, we see that maximum economy and saving laws occur in all livingthings from a cell to a large organism. We don't come across any waste and absurdity. In other words, every creature has given organs and structures in number and perfection to meet their needs. Because more is wasted. This is called the “need-response” priciple.
When we look at a bacterial cell in the light of this principle; Since the bacteria are a small cell (prokaryotic cell) we see that it is given structures according to its needs. It does not have a real nucleus (nucleus), but it has genetic material (DNA) to meet its needs. Therefore, it does not need nucleus. There is no mitochondria in bacteria as well, but there is a recessed membrane system (mesosome) that produces the enough energy (ATP). Therefore, even without mitochondria, the bacterial cell meets energy needs. Perhaps the capacity to produce energy is low, but that is enough for it. Because this cell is small, more wasted.
The cells that make up animals and plants (eukaryotic cells) are at least ten times larger than bacteria. Therefore, it needs a real nucleus and mitochondria. So it is not possible to explain this with the opinion that eukaryotic cells have evolved from prokaryotic cells. Although today genetic methods have become very advanced and even the engineering of genes has become feasible, it is not possible to turn a prokaryotic cell into a eukaryotic cell. However, by playing with genes, it is possible to change some characteristics of living things and make them more responsive to today's needs. 
In coniferous plants such as pine and fir, water pipes called trachea are not exist. The transport of water from the roots to the leaves is done in these plants only through the transmission cells called tracheid. In broad leaves plants, both trachea and tracheid are present, and water transport is carried out with these two transmission systems. Some scientists suggest that; “Coniferous plants are more simple. Because they have no trachea. Conifers have then evolved into broad leaves plants”. 
Actually, it is understood from the fosil studies that coniferous plants existed on earth earlier than broad leaves. But, is this because they are simpler, so they don't have trachea?
If we look at the event from the perspective of the “need-response” principle, we see that these plants are not in need of tracheas. Since these plants have needles haped leaves, the surface of the leaves is narrow. There is a thick cuticle layer on the leaf surface. They also contain abundant resin materials. For such reasons, the water loss of these plants is very low. Thus, there is no need to carry the water taken from the roots abundantly and rapidly. Therefore, they do not need large diameter water pipes such as trachea. Whereas, in broadleaves plants, the loss of water is high as the leaf surface is wide. There is also a need for a cooling device by evaporating a large amount of water from the leaves as a means of overheating the leaves as the large leaf surface is exposed to sunlight and heat. For this reason, the presence of tracheas in broad leaves besides tracheids is an answer to this need. Thus, it would be wasted if trachea was found in conifers, it would be deficiency if trachea was not found in broad leaves. This shows that every livingthing is answered according to their needs.
In this respect, it is possible to give examples for the number of living things.
We can see to be given exactly what anatomical structure and genetic and physiological features they need for each living species to survive. It doesn't seem logical to refer to the evolutionary mechanisms of living beings equipped to meet their needs. How can know nature, causes or evolutionary mechanisms needs of a living species? Just as a machine emerges from an engineer's plan, we can say that living things point to the existence of a planner and creator.
As a result; Each living species is created independently. However, living speciesare not created at the same time in past, but in different time periods. So creation has been gradual. This graduation mainly depends on the geological and climatic conditions of the world and the place of the species in the food chain. The“need-response” and “maximum economy” principles are clearly seen in living things, both in individuals and in species. In otherwords, what ever organs and structures are necessary for each living thing and for each living species, neither missingn or more, they are given. This cannot be explained by evolution in the form of transformation from species to species. Biological and geological data do not support such an event. Instead, view of gradual creation is more logical.
 Şengün, A.,Evolution (InTurkish), Second Ed., Beta Press, İstanbul, 1985.
 Gish, D.T. (In Turkish, translated from English by A. Tatlı), Fossils and and Evolution, Cihanpress, İstanbul, 1984.
 Nev’: Correspond to species in biology.
 Nursi, B. S. İşarat-ulİ’caz (In Turkish).It is written originally Arabic and translated to English as the name of “Signs of Miraculousness”.
 Yazır, H., Hak Dini Kuran Dili,Vol 1, page 331,Huzur Press, 1971.
 Kocaçalışkan, İ., Bilimlerin Işığında Yaratılış (InTurkish, 2th Press), Usküdar University Press, 493-497, İstanbul, 2017.
 Yentür, S., Bitki Anatomisi (InTurkish), İstanbulUniversityPress, İstanbul, 1984.
 Kocaçalışkan, İ., Bitki Fizyolojisi (InTurkish), Nobel Press, Ankara, 2008.
- BIOLOGICAL OBSTACLES AGAINST INTER-SPECIES EVOLUTION
- THE WONDERFUL DESIGN IN THE WATER TRANSPORT VESSELS OF PLANTS
- DILEMMAS OF THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION
- It has been discovered that the genetic structure of human brain cells does not remain fixed during man's life and that it changes. Is this genetic change not evolution? Is this change in genes not transferred to the next generation?
- What are the viewpoints of Muslim scholars on evolution theory?
- Are the explanations made as “the Evolution Theory has been proved” true to a certain extent? It is said that the receptor gene of the Aldosterone hormone has been detected and all scientists of the West supported the evolution?
- Why do the Majority of Scientists Accept Evolution?
- Does denying Allah lie at the bottom of the theory of evolution?
- BASIC FALLACIES IN THE VIEW OF EVOLUTION: 2 CONFUSION OF CONCEPTS
- Are changes in viruses evidence for evolution? Is the theory of evolution true?