Re: selective citation

Having introduced us to the Muslim creationist Harun Yahya and mentioned reviews of his writings which have appeared in scientific journals, David remarks, "No mention of what those reviews said about Harun Yahya, nor what type of interest they were received with."

I personally doubt whether such reviews would have anything good to say about Harun Yahya (pen name of Adnan Oktar whose biographical details may be found at http://www.harunyahya.com/theauthor.php), for this man typically writes "The theory of evolution is nothing but a deception imposed on us by the dominators of the world system." Just recently, I have been particularly interested in his "The Dark Spell of Darwinism" - its eye-catching title succinctly expressing my own view of current realities. This, together with other examples of his creationist writings, may be freely downloaded from http://www.harunyahya.com/c_refutation_darwinism.php.

In order that members may experience something of the flavour of this book, here are two short excerpts:

1) "There may be two explanations why anyone could believe claims so strange and irrational. The first is lack of knowledge: Someone who has never considered evolution and knows very little about it, may at first be deceived by its scientific guise into accepting what he is told, especially if he has never examined or researched its claims. But when he is presented with the facts and allowed to consider them, this individual will easily see how absurd and impossible the theory of evolution really is... A person with normal intelligence will easily see the fact that evolution is nonsense.Therefore, ignorance is a deficiency that is easily disposed of.

"The second reason, quite different from the first, concerns those who are not ignorant. Generally, these people are quite cultured and some are even experts in evolutionary topics relevant to such fields as biology, paleontology and microbiology. You may present them with as many clear proofs as you wish for the invalidity of evolution; you may give them examples to convince them of their unreasonableness. But they'll be determined not to abandon the theory... For example, they show you a fossil as a proof of evolution, but you prove to them scientifically that it cannot be so. As if they had not heard you, they pull out this faulty evidence again and again as their most important proof for evolution. If these people have the intelligence and knowledge to understand what is told them, how can they still continue to put forward their claims? There is only one explanation: They don't want to be released from their spell. Because they persist in rejecting the existence of God, Darwinists continue to exert an influence over themselves and others. Of course, they may know that evolution cannot be true; but to deny it would mean accepting the existence of God. For this reason, they are careful to accept the spell wholeheartedly so that they don't have to examine the truth... Avoiding seeing the signs of God, they cannot comprehend the truths." [Emphases mine - I thought this latter statement particularly appropriate in view of the peculiar behaviour of certain list members when presented with facts that overwhelmingly demand a supernatural explanation. VJ].

2) "Actually, however, Darwin is the architect of one of the most serious errors in the history of science. His theory rests on no concrete evidence; it is only a logical proposal as he himself acknowledged. In one long chapter, 'Difficulties on Theory' in The Origin of Species, Darwin admitted that his theory could not account for some important questions. He himself made frequent mention of the problems, in some of the comments he made: 'Long before having arrived at this part of my work, a crowd of difficulties will have occurred to the reader. Some of them are so grave that to this day I can never reflect on them without being staggered.' He also voiced his concerns in letters he wrote to his friends: 'Pray do not think that I am so blind as not to see that there are numerous immense difficulties in my notions.'
"From these comments, it is clear that his theory had come to a major impasse, and not only Darwin became aware of this. After Darwin's death, his son, Francis, made this evaluation of his father's work: 'My father's mind was not scientific, and he did not try to generalize his knowledge under general laws; yet he formed a theory for almost everything which occurred. I do not think I gained much from him intellectually.'

"Francis Darwin's statement contains an important truth. The Origin of Species is trumpeted as one of the most important works in the history of humanity, but anyone who hoped to find in it solid scientific proof for evolution would be surprised and come away empty handed. There is no solid proof anywhere in The Origin of Species to support the theory of evolution; it names no new species that evolved through the process of natural selection; it demonstrates no transitional form and documents no evolutionary mechanism. The only interesting thing in the whole book, actually, is its being complete speculation, founded on probability, imagination, conjecture and supposition."

Vernon

www.otherbiblecode.com

   
----- Original Message -----
From: "bivalve" <bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com>
To: "ASA" <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 11:32 PM
Subject: selective citation

> "Profile on Harun Yahya:A leading Muslim intellectual from Turkey, Harun Yahya is the author of many books concerning the world of Islam such as the relationship of
> science and Islam, interfaith dialogue, and the importance of unity among believers of all faiths. Harun Yahya enjoys a wide readership from all nations, languages and religions, and many of his books have been translated into more than 40 languages. His works have also been received with interest by Western scientific circles, and some of his scientific texts have been reviewed in various scientific journals as the most important expositions of Islamic creationism. These journals include The New Scientist, Science, NCSE (National Center for Science Education) Reports, and The Cladistics."
>
>
>
> Dr. David Campbell
> Old Seashells
> University of Alabama
> Biodiversity & Systematics
> Dept. Biological Sciences
> Box 870345
> Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0345 USA
> bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com
>
> That is Uncle Joe, taken in the masonic regalia of a Grand Exalted Periwinkle of the Mystic Order of Whelks-P.G. Wodehouse, Romance at Droitgate Spa
>
>
Received on Thu Feb 17 03:39:01 2005