A report emphasized in Darwinist publications of late has entered the mainstream agenda. One part of an artificially manufactured DNA molecule was transferred to the nucleus of another cell and this DNA was observed to function within the cell. This subject, carried under misleading captions such as “synthetic genome brings new life to bacterium” and “creation of a bacterial cell” (surely Allah is beyond that) in various Darwinist publications has been made the tool of Darwinist speculation. Certain publications such as the Financial Times have even claimed that evolutionists have realized their endless dreams regarding creating life out of nothing. The fact is that the research in question represents no reply to the question of how life began, which Darwinists can never answer. On the contrary, this study is significant proof of the complexity of the DNA in the cell.

Clarifications on the subject are as follows:
After artificially synthesizing one Mycoplasma genitalium (Mycoplasma mycoides) in the laboratory, the American scientist J. Craig Venter then installed it in the cell nucleus of another mycoplasma, and the cell continued functioning with this DNA.
The procedures carried out are no different to the techniques known as cloning.
A copy taken from the DNA of Mycoplasma mycoides, consisting of 1.08 million base sequences, was arranged under laboratory conditions and transferred into the cell of another living thing.
No new DNA was manufactured, no information that did not exist before was produced, and no artificial DNA sequence was manufactured from nothing in the laboratory. DNA already exists in the cell. The procedure carried out is nothing more than existing DNA with its extraordinary information being taken and re-arranged and transplanted into another cell.
The re-engineering in question was carried out under the control of conscious scientists aware of the extraordinary complexity of the information in DNA, in the most advanced laboratories and under controlled conditions, using an existing specimen that Allah had created from nothing, and experimenting for many years.
This cloning procedure performed on a single bacterium could only be performed as the result of longer than 10-year research costing $40 million, by a core team of 20 scientists, with thousands of others in the background.
This effort made by scientists in order for a single pre-existing specimen to be transferred by conscious individuals in a conscious environment revealed that not even one copy of the complex structure in question could be manufactured without an existing specimen, without conscious intervention and without technical equipment.
The development in question is an excellent one in the name of science. As genome research progresses, it will be possible to copy DNA from living cells and transplant these into other cells. By Allah’s leave, this research will be used in many beneficial ways, such as curing various diseases. But all these things are conscious intervention in existing structures. To portray these conscious and controlled experiments performed on already existing structures as evidence for evolution is not only deceptive, but also an indication of Darwinists’ despair. It is feeble speculation used by Darwinists unable to explain the beginning and complexity of life.
If Darwinists wish to prove their claims, then they must BE ABLE TO PRODUCE the components of life FROM NOTHING. After that, they have to explain how this might have come about as the result of blind chance, in an uncontrolled environment exceedingly dangerous to life, in the absence of any conscious intervention. The fact is that Darwinists are unable to produce EVEN A SINGLE PROTEIN under controlled conditions and as a result of conscious intervention. And it is impossible for them ever to do so.
By this research, Darwinist scientists have once again proved, by their own hand, the complexity of life and that not even the smallest component of life can come into being by chance.
It needs to be made clear that this result DOES NOT EQUATE TO LIFE. The living cell is a whole consisting of countless complex components, and only forms when all of these are present at the same time and place and combine to produce a complex organization. The transplanting of a single extraordinarily complex DNA is nothing more than replicating a very small part of an already existing system. Darwinists rejoicing at the existence of DNA obtained by copying are a far cry from accounting for the first living thing, in other words living cell, they imagine, and there are insuperable obstacles to their doing so.
Moreover, and most important of all, the research in question HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HOW LIFE BEGAN. The study does not eliminate the dead-end that Darwinists are in regarding the origin of life. This profound dead-end, that effectively demolishes Darwinism, is growing still worse and leading Darwinism to a state of total collapse.
Jim Collins, professor of biomedical engineering from the University of Boston, opposed the speculation about the cloning research in question in Nature magazine, saying:
“The work reported by Venter and his colleagues is an important advance in our ability to re-engineer organisms; it does not represent the making of new life from scratch.” [1]

Conclusion:
One feature of Darwinists is that they include their efforts to reproduce structures exhibiting the glory of Creation in the whole Darwinist furore, using all the Darwinist publications at their disposal and very large capital letters. Darwinist furore has recently begun being extensively used in this time when science has been shown to refute the theory of evolution. This means that Darwinists are in a terrible bottleneck.
For the theory of evolution, which tries to explain life in very simple terms, the building blocks of life must also be equally simple. So much so that everything about life must agree with these false and facile claims made by Darwinists who account for everything in terms of chance. Therefore, if the Darwinist claim were true, the imaginary first cell they maintain formed in muddy water should be nothing else than the water-filled balloon postulated by Darwin. But the truth is very different. Even just one of the proteins that make up life has an exceedingly complex structure. Darwinist scientists across the world have been striving for the same thing for 150 years, and have failed utterly: TO BE ABLE TO MANUFACTURE A SINGLE PROTEIN.
For that reason, depicting the cloning of DNA as evidence for evolution and the helpless writhing of Darwinists wishing to continue with their furore do not alter an important truth, and they deceive nobody. That important truth is the extraordinary complexity of life. The scale of the effort needed to understand one single part of that complex life or to obtain a copy of it makes that clear. The fact is that as these people try to understand a single DNA over tens of years in the laboratory, the glorious DNA molecules in each of the 100 trillion cells in their bodies keep on performing the tasks inspired in them in an extraordinary system and regularity. Because their Creator is Allah. Allah created them from nothing. Almighty Allah is the Lord of all things, the Creator of the earth and sky. Every single day, science will continue to provide new evidence that praises the glory of our Lord. Every new scientific discovery will continue to provide evidence of this majestic Creation. Almighty Allah says in one verse:
Yes, everything in the heavens and earth belongs to Allah. Yes, Allah’s promise is true but most of them do not know it. (Surah Yunus, 55)

Live lectures of Harun Yahya are on: http://en.harunyahya.tv/HarunYahya_live_broadcast.php with English interpretation everyday between 10:00 pm – 02:00 am (GMT + 2) LISTEN ONLINE NOW.

To Be Freed From Prejudice

Most people accept everything they hear from scientists as strictly true. It does not even occur to them that scientists may also have various philosophical or ideological prejudices. The fact of the matter is that evolutionist scientists impose their own prejudices and philosophical views on the public under the guise of science. For instance, although they are aware that random events do not cause anything other than irregularity and confusion, they still claim that the marvellous order, plan, and structure seen both in the universe and in living organisms arose by chance.

For instance, such a biologist easily grasps that there is an awe-inspiring harmony in a protein molecule, the building block of life, and that there is no probability that this might have come about by chance. Nevertheless, he alleges that this protein came into existence under primitive earth conditions by chance billions of years ago. He does not stop there; he also claims, without hesitation, that not only one, but millions of proteins formed by chance and then amazingly came together to create the first living cell. Moreover, he defends his view with a blind stubbornness. This person is an "evolutionist" scientist.


Michael Behe
"An embarrased silence surrounds the stark complexity of the cell"

If the same scientist were to find three bricks resting on top of one another while walking along a flat road, he would never suppose that these bricks had come together by chance and then climbed up on top of each other, again by chance. Indeed, anyone who did make such an assertion would be considered insane.

How then can it be possible that people who are able to assess ordinary events rationally can adopt such an irrational attitude when it comes to thinking about their own existence?

It is not possible to claim that this attitude is adopted in the name of science: scientific approach requires taking both alternatives into consideration wherever there are two alternatives equally possible concerning a certain case. And if the likelihood of one of the two alternatives is much lower, for example if it is only one percent, then the rational and scientific thing to do is to consider the other alternative, whose likelihood is 99 percent, to be the valid one.

Let us continue, keeping this scientific basis in mind. There are two views that are set forth regarding how living beings came into being on earth. The first is that Allah creates all living beings in their present complex structure. The second is that life was formed by unconscious, random coincidences. The latter is the claim of the theory of evolution.

When we look at the scientific data, that of molecular biology for instance, we can see that there is no chance whatsoever that a single living cell-or even one of the millions of proteins present in this cell-could have come into existence by chance as the evolutionists claim. As we will illustrate in the following chapters, probabilistic calculations also confirm this many times over. So the evolutionist view on the emergence of living beings has zero probability of being true.

This means that the first view has a "one hundred percent" probability of being true. That is, life has been instantly brought into being. To put it in another way, it was "created". All living beings have come into existence as the creation of Allah exalted in superior power, wisdom, and knowledge. This reality is not simply a matter of conviction; it is the normal conclusion that wisdom, logic and science take one to.

Under these circumstances, our "evolutionist" scientist ought to withdraw his claim and adhere to a fact that is both obvious and proven. To do otherwise is to demonstrate that he is actually someone who is exploiting science for his philosophy, ideology, and dogma rather than being a true scientist.

The anger, stubbornness, and prejudices of our "scientist" increase more and more every time he confronts reality. His attitude can be explained with a single word: "faith". Yet it is a blind superstitious faith, since there can be no other explanation for one's disregard of all the facts or for a lifelong devotion to the preposterous scenario that he has constructed in his imagination.

Abiogenesis

This is the theory that lifeless matter came together to form a living organism. Also known as the theory of Spontaneous Generation, this idea has persisted since the Middle Ages. (Also see Spontaneous generation.)

In Medieval times, it was widely accepted that maggots were generated from food scraps, clothe moths from wool and mice from wheat! Interesting experiments were devised to prove this belief. One 17th-century physicist by the name of J.B. Van Helmont thought that if he spread a few grains of wheat on a dirty cloth, mice would be generated.1 And when maggots appeared in rotting meat, they were regarded as proof that life could arise from lifeless matter.

Only later was it understood that maggots did not come about spontaneously, but from the nearly microscopic eggs that adult flies laid on the meat.

The theory of spontaneous generation was shown to be totally false by the famous 19th-century French scientist, Louis Pasteur, who summarized his findings in this triumphant sentence:
Never will the doctrine of spontaneous generation recover from the mortal blow struck by this simple experiment.2

Today the theory of abiogenesis has been discarded in favor of the theory of biogenesis, which holds that life comes from only from life. (See: Biogenesis.) But some evolutionist circles that still defend the idea that life was formed long ago from some chance combination of lifeless matter. But they have been unable to prove their claims scientifically, and their attempts to do so have been inconclusive. (See Miller Experiment, theand Fox Experiment, the.)
1 Ozer Bulut, Davut Sagdic, Selim Korkmaz, Biyoloji Lise 3, (“Biology High School 3”) MEB Publishing, Istanbul, 2000, p. 182.
2 From Rene Vallery-Radot, The Life of Pasteur, 1920, Garden City, NY: Garden City Publishing Company, Inc., p.109. http://www.foundersofscience.net/interest1.htm