Dissection of Evolution Theory

S Owais has tried his best to dissect the evolution theory. It certainly demonstrates his stamina. He has quoted several important and interesting refrences.

I hope that other people interacting here would shun their killing instinct. I believe Owais has the talent and will to become a good writer in future.

A Nadir

S. Owais sahab,

This is a marathon effort, and for that you are to be commended. It would have been better received I think,if you had limited yourself to pointing out deficiences in the theory of evolution (such as the missing links in the fossil record), and provoked the biologists into trying to come up with explanations. Instead, you reveal a passionately partisan, close-minded and creationist agenda which is a turn-off. In effect, what you are saying is - since creationists are CORRECT, any other theory to explain the diversity of life MUST NECESSARILY BE INCORRECT. You can only win an argument with that kind of logic with the Taliban and their ilk.

A few general points-

In decrying the Age of Reason, you equate ``I was a chimp, therefore I am`` with a pessimistic and shallow world view. How so? To me this implies just the opposite - look where we started and where we have arrived. The potential for constant improvement - how can that be pessimistic?

Science advances by the process of falsification. Scientists accept the theory of evolution because it is to date the most rational explanation for the diversity of life - however, if it is demonstrably falsified, then scientists will no longer accept it. By the same token, scientific understanding of evolution continues to (yes, you guessed it) evolve, as new data become available. Why should one expect otherwise? This is the nature of science (pun intended). No scientist claims that science is perfect - it can be arduous, frustrating, conflicting, and slow, even plain drudgery at times - but it inexorably moves forward, asking questions, exploring further, refining our sense of the world.

A few specific points:

I do not know where you get your molecular genetic facts from. They are simply wrong. Any molecular biology text review would be extremely helpful. New genes can be created easily. We do it in the lab all the time!

The fossil record is incomplete in many ways, but it still provides overwhelming evidence for evolution in that life is organized from simple to more complex forms through millenia. So for example, fossils preserved from 3 to 4 billion years ago show only simple unicellular organisms, those from 500 million years ago show more complex organisms, those from 10 million years ago, still more complex, and so on. The same genetic code has been retained through all this time. With increased complexity, you have subtle changes in the way the code is organized, so that a chimpanzee is more closely related to humans than a rat, a rat more closely related than a frog etc. In fact, we can exactly time how long ago a primitive species diverged from its common ancestor by looking at an organism`s genetic sequence and studying the rate at which random mutations accumulate in the genome (molecular clocking). To me very fascinating is the fact that Plasmodium falciparum (the agent of malaria) appears to have arisen only about 10,000 years ago - just when the earliest human societies were formed.

Then there is the astonishing similarity of our mitochondria to bacterial organisms, with some of the proteins preserved almost intact.

Contrary to what you say, many transitional forms of life have been found in the fossil record.

Although not a fossil record, (but infinitely superior) frozen chimpanzee tissue may have led to the most recent exciting evidence of a link between the chimpanzee virus and HIV - ie. the chimpanzee virus is the ancestor and appears to be thousands of years old. So even HIV did not spontaneously arise - it appears to have evolved from a chimpanzee virus - and boy, this happened in front of our eyes, probably no earlier than 50 years ago!

Regards,

Anita

Re: Syed Owais

Impressive research!

Just one question; is there a point you`re are trying to make and if there is one, could you please tell me what that might be?

Overall, the article was extermely interesting and orginal in that it was the first analytical paper I have read which had no hypothesis to base a conclusion upon! Reading this article was akin to undertanding directions to a road map which has nothing printed on it! Sarcasm aside, the article reminded me of someone trying to walk down on an escalator that is moving up!!

As an aside, I think that your writing talents will be further appreciated if you become a speech writer for Nawaz Sharif, because I know you said something, it sounded good and it made no sense at all in the end. I honestly think that you have talent and that it is being wasted in Pakistan Petroleum Limited! Think of a career as a political speech writer.....you have a gift for verbosity, I mean why confuse Chowkwallahs when you can confuse an entire nation....exploit it and be proud of yourself!!

The original passage is too long for me to read for the lack of time. But I would definitely like to comment on ``maliani```s statement.

In his zeal to discredit the author, he starts with an impolite comment. The story of Adam and Eve is the cornerstone of every ``religion of the book`` and quoting it is quite appropriate - it is not ``a quote from a holy book`` but agreed facts from several books.

When you assert the need for scientific appraoach, you yourself forget to practice it. There is no solid scientific evidence for theory of evolution. That is why it is a theory and not a fact. You say that Holy Quran is full of contradictions; pray tell me one , sir? The one you mention is the lack of your knowledge, understanding and intellect that leads you to discredit it. In Sura 41:9 and 10, the mention of four days of ``measured therein its sustenance`` includes two days of creation of the earth initially. It is a well debated and reseasrched verse, and scholars believe it with a concensus.

Allah being All Powerful has nothing to do with the number of days He needed to create anything. It is like I have the ability to hit a person in front of me, or have the ability to ram my car in to another, but I do not do so, etc, etc.

The making of lunar calendar as the marker of time is not primitive, but highly ingenious. This way, seasons change in various years in different months. e.g. Ramadan comes in different seasons over a period of years, therefore eliminating monotony, and so forth.

In the Sura 33:72 you again lack the intellect to comprehend such a profound philosophical argument! Heavens and Earth were offered the Trust, but they were unable to take the trust because they are not of free will; trust presumes a free will on the part of those trusted, and Earth and Heavens were but only obedient to Allah. Also, knowing the immense magnitude and responsibiityassociated with the task, they knew they could not accept it. Actually it is only a metaphorical example, and not to be taken so literally.

This is already a very loong reply. MOre on evolution and its compatibility with Quran later.

While all the references are interesting there is next to no intelligent analysis or deduction done here.

If the author`s message is that Logic should be subservient to Faith, why give all this ``support`` material to the reader only to say at the end that the best conclusion (the only option) is to be a good believer.

The Age of Reason limerick was particularly banal and immature.

As a muslim I believe in Creation and in the inadequacy of evolution in explaining the Origins of life but I really dont see how this article bolsters someone`s belief or diminish someone else`s skepticism.

If so little had to be said, at least it ought to have been said more succinctly.

What hocus-pocus! The story of Adam and Eve has no place in a scientific account of the origins of the human race!!!

You have the right to disect the evolution theory and the big bang theory but only with scientific approach and hypthesis and not by givng references from a ``holy`` book which is full of contradictions. In fact Quran gives a conradictory account of the creation:

Sura 50.37:
``We created the heavens and the earth and all between then in Six days, nor did any sense of weariness touch us.``

and then in Sura 41.9:
``Do you indeed disbelieve in Him who in two days created the earth? And do you join equals with him? He is the lord of(all) the worlds.
He set on (earth)mountains standing firm, high above it, and bestowed blessings on the earth, and measured therein its sustenance in four Days, Alike for (all) who ask.
Then he turned to the sky, and it had been smoke: He said to it and to the earth: come ye together, willingly or unwillingly. They said: we do come in willing obedience. So He completed them as seven heavens in two Days and He assigned to each heaven its duty and command.``

Now, 2 days for the earth, 4 days for the sustenance and 2 days to complete heavens. so the total is 8 Days, whereas in sura 50 we are told that the creation took 6 days!!!!!!!!! what a contradiction!

Besides, Allah is supposed to be almighty and merely has to say ``Be`` and his will is accomplished, so why does it take him 6 (or 8) days to create the heavens. And how come there were days before creation of earth. In some other verse we are told that before the creation God`s throne floated above the ``waters.`` Now where did this water come from when earth and the heavens were not created yet? and why does God need a throne which is such a human concept!

And then in sura 10.5:
``It is he who made the sun to be a shining glory and the moon to be a light (of beauty) and measured out stages for it, that you might know the number of years and the count of time...``

This is primitive Arabian notion, since all the advanced civilizations of Babylon, Egypt, Persia, China and Greek used the solar year for the purpose of time reckoning.


Here`s another strange verse:

Sura 33.72 ``We did indeed offer the Trust to the Heavens and the Earth and the mountains; But they refused to undertake it, being afraid thereof, but man undertook it. He was indeed unjust and foolish.``

It seems from the above verse that heavens, the earth and the mountains are seen as persons, and furthermore being the creation of God how dare they refuse disobey God. How come his own creation declines to accept this burden?????????

Your guidelines say not to use language that is offensive however, as a woman, I find the use of sexist nouns and pronouns to be offensive to the other half of the human race that you have left out. According to the ``APA`` publication Manual and other writing style manuals that are routinely used in today`s universities, the use of gender-neutral language has been in practice since 1974! This practice particularly important for science writing in order to eliminate any ambiguity. This gender-neutal policy was also adopted and revised by the National Council of English Teachers,(NCTE)in 1985. How about updating your use of the English language to reflect the times...