Question 8: It is claimed through DNA analyses that humans are relatives with Neanderthals, Denisovans and Homo Heidelbergensis. How should we view those developments? Has evolution been proved?

The Answer

Dear Brother / Sister,

Answer: Evolution in the sense that is claimed by atheists who accept evolution as a religion and reject a creator has not taken place; how can something that does not exist be proved? In other words, man was created directly as a human being, not by the changing of lower living beings. If Allah had wanted, he could have created man from another being but He states that He created the first man, Hz. Adam, our ancestor out of dust.

Science says the same thing too. Science declares that each living group has its own genetic structure, and that this genetic structure cannot change and create a living being with a different structure.

Since atheists will not be able to experiment the creation of the first man in the laboratory, the opinions to be put forward regarding the issue will always remain as speculations. Moreover, science does not say that man emerged from lower living beings. Atheists who support positivist philosophy make science say it so that they will break off the ties of the young people with the heavenly religions.

Neanderthals mentioned above were found in Neanderthal valley in 1856. The famous geneticist Dobzhansky said 50 years ago in 1967 and the evolutionist atheist Ivanhoe in 1970 that Neandertalwas actually a man who had rickets, that is a bone disease, and whose back was bent and that he was no different from today’s man. See the following works for the issue: Dobzshansky, T.Changing Man. Science, 1967, Vol.155, p. 410 and F. Ivanhoe; Neanderthals Had Rickets. 1970, Nature, 8 Aug.

As it is seen Neanderthals came to the fore about 150 years ago. They present it again as if they have found something new in order to settle their philosophical thoughts about evolution in the minds of people. As it can be noticed, a fossil is brought up every four or five months, and this fossil is advertised so much that you hear statements that reflect the idea of ​​a completely ideological mindset expressing that it is superior to all fossils found up to now and that the human history is fully enlightened by it. As a matter of fact, they made a fuss five months ago that Homo Naledi was the ancestor of man. When they saw that it did not become popular, they immediately brought this issue to the agenda.

Get ready for a new fossil advertisement in a few months to refresh the image that it is man’s ancestor. This perception advertising has tired us so much for the last 50 years that we are sick of it. We are tired of following their atheism-based evolutionary ideologies but they are not tired of this fuss. The regularity of these persistent ideological advertisements in the name of science implies an impression that this is done in return for great material interests. Otherwise, it is not possible to understand so much insistence on a false philosophy that includes no truth.

DNAs, which constitute the genetic structure of living beings, are basically composed of certain elements. In other words, all living beings actually have many common structures and characters, especially the cell structure. This similarity shows that they are the work of the same creator. Unlike what the atheists suggest, itdoes not that show that they emerge from one another.

It is also doubtful that the claims put forward by those evolutionists are true. The society has always been deceived and cheated by a series of deliberately

distorted comments made on this issue up to now and by being presented bones and skeletal parts belonging to different living beings as if they belong to one living being.It has been observed that none of the pieces they put forward as fossil evidence is true. However, they misled people by misinterpreting some data each time.

For nearly 150 years, not a single fossil piece to confirm the view that living beings emerged from one another in the form of a chain, which they always put forward, has been presented. Living beings did not emerge from one another as they claim; so how can a transitional fossil be found? If you propose the existence of something that is not present today, it will be understood to be wrong after a while. It has always been like that. Do not doubt that it will be like that from now on too.

Questions on Islam

Was this answer helpful?
In order to make a comment, please login or register