Mr. Adnan Oktar's Response to Mr. Franz Magnis-Suseno

Mr. Adnan Oktar responded Franz Magnis-Suseno's claims published on Jakarta Post in response to his article published in the same media a week before 

 http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2014/11/07/the-papacy-s-great-responsibility.html

Franz Magnis-Suseno is advocating the papacy’s opinion supporting Darwinism and the theory of evolution. Regrettably, he is unaware of the scientific facts debunking the theory. We have to demonstrate the fact that any field of science proves creation by God’s saying ‘BE’ and then there they are.

Paleontology as a branch of science, documenting the history of life with the help of fossils, shows that species arose promptly with their complete bodies. Complexity is present from the very moment they appear on Earth. This is a total impasse for Darwinism, which assumes complexity began to arise gradually with fine gradations. Actually, it was Charles Darwin himself who first admitted this as a great problem for his hypothesis.

‘If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."(Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, 1964, p. 189)

In accordance with this explanation, paleontology reveals that species appeared on Earth without any ancestors resembling them. Fifty separate phyla, including the 35 alive today, emerged suddenly in the Cambrian Period. This is a period before which there was only some multicellular organisms, which can not be assumed to be ancestors of such complex body plans, organs and systems. It is defined as the ‘Cambrian Explosion’ in paleontology. 

Richard Dawkins explains the situation as follows:

The Cambrian strata of rocks, vintage about 600 million years, are the oldest ones in which we find most of the major invertebrate groups... It is as though they were just planted there, without any evolutionary history” (Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker, London: W. W. Norton, 1986, p. 229)

Pre-Cambrian fossil beds have yielded no specimens revealing any transition to the species of the Cambrian. In the Cambrian Period, a stunning complexity and variety emerged all of a sudden. This scientific fact has been very well known since Darwin’s time. As renowned Darwinist paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould says:

The fossil record had caused Darwin more grief than joy. Nothing distressed him more than the Cambrian explosion, the coincident appearance of almost all complex organic designs. (Stephen Jay Gould, The Panda’s Thumb, 1980, pp. 238-239)

Today’s ideologists like Franz Magnis-Suseno, while trying to explain the spread of wide variety of organisms on Earth by evolution, have to take this ‘Cambrian Explosion’ into consideration before advocating Darwinism.

The Burgess Shale Formation in the Canadian Rockies of British Columbia, the Sirius Passet in northern Greenland and the Chengjiang in southern China are fossil beds that reveal the astonishing variety of animals that lived in the Cambrian Period. Therefore, the proposed family tree of evolution is ‘upside down’. This is a fact widely accepted in scientific circles but not promoted to the public.

According to a recent scientific paper published by The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the US:

‘Contrary to popular belief, not all animal groups continued to evolve fundamentally new morphologies through time. The majority actually achieved their greatest diversity of form (disparity) relatively early in their histories. Lead researcher from the Department of Biology & Biochemistry, Dr Matthew Wills said: "This pattern, known as 'early high disparity', turns the traditional V-shaped cone model of evolution on its head.’ (http://phys.org/news/2013-07-scientific-evolution.html)

Darwinian theory predicts a “cone of increasing diversity,” as species gradually and continually diversified to create the higher levels of taxonomic order. The fossil record resembles more to such a cone turned upside down, with all the phyla (57 of them) present at the start and thereafter decreasing.

Moreover, there is no transition in between species - which is another fact - but  there are still fictitious drawings of imaginary family lines. This is the entertaining part of Darwinism. Based on physical similarities, some species are claimed to be the ancestors of others and thus species are linked to one another with no scientific foundation.  One authority to express this openly is Colin Patterson, senior paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History in London. In an interview, Patterson said:

If you ask, "What is the evidence for continuity?" you would have to say, "There isn’t any in the fossils of animals and man. The connection between them is in the mind." (L.D. Sunderland, Darwin’s Enigma: Fossils and Other Problems, Master Book Publishers: El Cajon CA, revised edition, 1988, p. 90)

Henry Gee, an evolutionist paleontologist and senior editor of the journal Nature, in his book In Search of Deep Time, confesses that the chains of ancestry and descent are ‘a completely human invention created after the fact, shaped to accord with human prejudices.’  He defines the scientific value of such imaginary family lines to be none at all:

‘To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story—amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific.’ (Henry Gee, In Search of Deep Time, New York: The Free Press, 1999, pp. 32, 116, 117, 202)

Biochemistry on the other hand reveals the fact that no protein can form by chance. Atoms cannot organize themselves to form proteins as working molecular machines. It needs DNA to tell which amino-acids should follow one another in which order and other specialized proteins to combine these amino-acids with each other in a specific order, and then other specific proteins to pack it into its highly specific 3D shape to work and interact correctly for its foretold mission written in the DNA; thus, a protein can not form by itself as evolutionists claim. Here, the probability calculations are meaningless, because synthesis of a single protein needs at least 100 other functioning proteins of different types. This needs a complex organization at the cellular level, which is directed each and every millisecond, which in turn obviously proves creation by an All-Knowing, All-Wise, Sublime Power and Will.

If we talk about Genetics, all the available information leads us to the Owner of this written information of science. Every living cell has been loaded with specific information written in a universal language using four molecular letters: Adenine, Thymine, Cytosine and Guanine. At a single cellular level, all reactions at the molecular level are described in this library of DNA. However, this information again needs the work of at least 100 different proteins for its translation, quality checks and protein production, all of which can only operate in a finely pH controlled environment. So, a living cell can only exist with all its working organelles intact; mitochondria, DNA, proteins and cell membrane, only if all of them are intact from the very beginning. This is life at the microscopic level. Such innumerable interactions show us a level of complexity which cannot be reduced to a less primitive level lacking one single part.

This is why we come across with this highest complex microcellular life in  history, again appearing abruptly. Rock strata in the Apex Chert region of Australia contain the first cyanobacteria fossils, dating back 3.9 billion years. (The Cyanobacteria. Molecular Biology, Genetics and Evolution. Edited by Antonia Herrero & Enrique Flores. p. 217) Cyanobacteria are rich in chlorophyll which enables them to make photosynthesis—a chain of finely moderated molecular reactions at the nuclear level—a process no advanced laboratory can yet imitate.

Who would defend evolution?

Some people, mainly materialists who think that it is a scientifically proven fact, fiercely support the fallacy of evolution and reject all ideas opposed to it. 

A second group consists of people who are not well-informed about the claims of the theory of evolution, or do not realize the harm that Darwinism has done to humanity over the last century and a half. The fact is; all the bloodshed and cruelty humanity has experienced thus far is the result of disbelief and Darwinism is the foundation of all bloody ideologies and disbelief. The deceits of this theory must nevertheless be disclosed to eradicate the ideology of disbelief intellectually.

A third group consists of those who, under the influence of materialist suggestion and propaganda, imagine that this theory is a scientific fact and look for a "middle way," in their own eyes, between it and belief in God. They accept Darwinism's account of the origin of life word for word, yet try to build a bridge between the theory of evolution and religious belief by maintaining that this account operates under God's control.

Each and every single one of these views is mistaken. That is because the theory of evolution cannot reasonably be portrayed as scientific fact, passed off as unimportant, or contorted to be "adapted to religion." The theory's very ideological framework consists of ideas put forward to strengthen atheism and to give it a firm foundation. Yet, all these mentioned ideas are strictly incompatible with religious thought. Darwinism claims life to be a product of unplanned, undesigned, blind processes. This ideology is only aimed at omitting a Creator, causing people to be unguided, having no moral values, no different than an animal species who will not have to give an account for what they do in this worldly life in the Hereafter.

Moreover, the theory of evolution is constructed on materialist philosophy and offers a materialist commentary on the world. From the time it was first put forward by Charles Darwin and right up to the present day, it has brought humanity nothing but conflict, exploitation, war, and degeneration. Given this, it is essential that we acquire a sound understanding of the subject and launch a serious fight against it on the ideological level.

Any attempt to reconcile Darwinism with religion is based on ignorance of scientific data demonstrating observed complexity in the living things or their history of life on earth.