The modern "theory of evolution" which states that all species we see today have come from a single common ancestor is accepted and used by atheist scientists to strengthen their ideology and they try to lead people who believe in God into thinking that science has disproved their faiths; but as a sincere person critically analyses what they are saying, statistical analysis, design in the organisms, intelligence of humans, the fine tuning of the universe and planets all disprove the idea that random events could have lead to all we see today, including us humans.
Only science can destroy the "evolution from single ancestor" myth, thus stating verses from the Bible, Quran or any other book will not mean anything in the eyes of the scientific community; so in other words scientific theories will only be disproven by science. Here I will touch upon a few scientific facts which are stumbling blocks against this theory; also to make it more understandable I will only use scientific facts about us humans.
We are made up of approximately 100 trillion cells and each of size (aprox.) 10 micrometers (think of a millimetre, then divide it by 100). What is astonishing is that each has nearly 2 metres of DNA; sincerely thinking even if the most skilled person was combined with the best of machines, he/she would still not be able to pack this amount of DNA into a single cell the way it is packed in there (see"chromatin packaging" for further info); not forgetting that the cell has thousands of other organelles apart from the nucleus (where the DNA is packed). Just storing this genetic information is not of any use, it must also be accessible by enzymes (DNA and RNA Polymerases) in order for the genetic code to be translated so that the cell and the organism can carry on with its essential life processes. A sincere person should say that there is design involved in the packaging of the DNA...
Moving on to our eyesight; humans have the ability to see only within the visible spectrum which covers waves with a wavelength between 400 and 700 nanometers. What makes these numbers special is that, if we were to see waves with longer or shorter wavelengths we would not even be able to see a metre in front of us; this is due to fact that we would start seeing Ultraviolet (UV), Infrared, radio waves etc which are abundant around and in front of us but due to this design in eyesight we can distinguish objects kilometres away. Other properties that should be considered about the eye is the resolution; if we were to see objects or organisms nearer to each other than what we observe now, this would enable us to see bacteria living on the top of other peoples skins, the apple we eat, the air etc, which would make life a misery. To say that random mutations thought and designed this delicate system would be laughed at. The eye is surely a gift from the designer, whether one thinks it is God, aliens or someone from the future who has the ability to time travel. The same thinking process could be used for the ear too because if we were to hear waves shorter or of longer wavelengths than our norms, then we would start hearing a background noise from the pumping of our heart, the rotation of our Earth etc again making our life a not a very happy one.
The attention paid to details in organisms also point towards an intelligent designer. Just one example amongst millions of systems that could be used, I choose the eyelashes. Our eyelashes serve the purpose of protecting our eyes from dust and small particles. They are of a certain length, thickness and frequency which serves it's purpose perfectly; if any of these parameters were more or less than what they are now, they would have to be cut off each time because they would tangle each time we blink our eyes, causing some blockage of our view while also affecting our concentration, making it a nuisance. I have not touched upon the fact that they stop growing after reaching the perfect height. If they grow less than usual, then they wouldn't serve their purpose. As you can see even an eyelash could lead a person to the Designer.
Even one impossible step in the processes of a theory is enough to prove that theory wrong, but the "theory of evolution" (there are several types of this theory, this article is talking about the one that the atheists are using to strengthen their ideology) has a lot, this article will touch upon a few (without much detail, many books can be and have been written about each point). Evolutionist scientists never talk about how the first organism and its genome came to being; it is just assumed to exist (seeliving organism for further info); because without DNA, there's no evolution. The biggest evidence they use is the phenotypic similarities between apes and humans to suggest that they have a recent ancestor; but what they do not (want to) see is that humans are bipedal where as apes are quadripedal (with four legs). It is obvious that humans are more complex than apes so according to this theory we are more "evolved" than apes so we must have arose later than them; thus our ancestor must be quadripedal. Can this be possible or does it make sense? Analysing the pros and cons of each will give clues about the answer of this question. Being bipedal, looking at it from a physical point of view is of no use because we cannot run like a cheetah or swing in trees like monkeys; so being quadripedal is more advantageous. Also fossil records do not show any intermediates showing the "evolution" from a quadripedal skeletal structure to a bipedal one (half quadripedal-half bipedal). It is also impossible for an intermediate form to exist because it is mechanically very energy inefficient for such an organism to exist (try walking for an hour with a hunchback and you'll see what I mean).
Another hypothesis is the idea that the ancestors of organisms living on land came from the sea. Again science disproves this theory because in order for a transition to occur, a kidney, a lung system, a sense of thirst (because fish do not feel thirsty, this is very important for land dwelling organisms), a skeletal system strong enough to lift the organism and enable for locomotion etc must exist at the same time; also the temperature does not change much in water compared to air. To suggest that these systems came into being instantaneously is nonsense of course; but also to say that these evolved gradually does not make sense when the fish are already covered by (nearly) unlimited amount of food and nutrients compared to the ones on land and they will have died out if they cannot adapt to the new environment straight away. A transition from water to land is impossible and the fossil records also confirms this; while there should have been millions of intermediates - showing change from fishes to land creatures; there is nearly no evidence that this has happened.
Finally if evolution was the cause ofallspeciation today, then we should have surely seen animals, bugs, bacteria etc, as or nearly as intelligent as us because intelligence is always a plus (an advantage) for an organism so why don't we observe any? An intelligent fish has more chance of survival than a less intelligent one so we should be seeing very clever ones (according to "natural selection" which is one of the pillars of the theory of evolution), which is not the case today. This fact alone can give evidence that the neo Darwinist theory is false. As you can see we do not hear any of the above points that are touched upon in the news because the media (as well as universities) is also full of atheists.
To finalise, I believe that we were created by a single all-powerful God and he sent mankind to this world to test (this explains why bad things happen to all of us). The average length of life is about 60-70 years; and 20-30 years of it passes by childhood and old age, third of the remaining goes by sleeping which leaves us with very less. Everyone must make it their main aim to find the meaning of life and find the true religion; life is a wonderful thing but it is nowhere near as good as what is pictured as Heaven in the Holy Scriptures.
Few verses from the Holy Quran (about Life being a Test)...
Every creature will taste death. We test you with both good and evil as a trial; and one day you will be returned to Us. (Qur'an, 21:35)
Do people assume that they will be left by saying 'We believe!' and will not be tested? We tested those before them so that Allah would know the truthful and the liars. (Qur'an, 29:2-3)
References:
Harun Yahya: Collapse of Evolution
Albertset al:Molecular Biology of The Cell, 5th Ed. 2008
