Evolutionists base their scenarios on natural
effects and chance. One of the concepts they most shelter
behind while doing so is that of "considerable time." For
instance, the German scientist Ernst Haeckel, who supported
Darwin, claimed that a living cell could originate from simple
mud. With the realisation in the twentieth century of how
complex the living cell actually is, the silliness of that
claim became apparent, but evolutionists continued to mask
the truth with the "considerable time" concept.
1) centriole, 2) cytoplasm, 3) mitochondria
4) microtubules, 5) nucleus, 6) vacuole
7) endoplasmic reticulum, 8) lysosome
9) golgi apparaturs
are serious doubts concerning evolutionists' reason and
judgement, as they believe that the living cell, which
cannot be synthesised in the most modern laboratories
with the most sophisticated technology, could have come
about in primitive and uncontrolled natural conditions.
By doing this, they are trying
to free themselves from the problem by plunging it into a
quandary instead of answering the question of how life could
have come about by chance. By giving the impression that the
passage of a long period of time could be useful from the
point of view of the emergence of life and increase in variety,
they present time as something that is always beneficial.
For example, the Turkish evolutionist Professor Yaman Ors
says: "If you want to test the theory of evolution, place
an appropriate mixture into water, wait a few million years,
and you will see that some cells emerge."52
This claim is utterly illogical. There is no
evidence to suggest that such a thing could happen. The idea
that animate matter could emerge from inanimate is actually
a superstition dating back to the Middle Ages. At that time,
people assumed that the sudden appearance of some living things
was the result of "spontaneous generation." According to this
belief, people considered that geese emerged from trees, lambs
from watermelons, and even tadpoles from patches of water
formed in clouds, falling to Earth as rain. In the 1600s,
people began to believe that mice could be born in a mixture
of wheat and a dirty piece of cloth, and that flies formed
when dead flies were mixed with honey.
However, the Italian scientist Francesco Redi,
proved that mice did not form in a mixture of wheat and a
dirty piece of cloth, nor living flies from a mixture of dead
flies and honey. These living things did not originate from
those lifeless substances, they merely used them as vehicles.
For example, a living fly would deposit its eggs on a dead
one, and a short while later a number of new flies would emerge.
In other words, life emerged from life, not inanimate matter.
In the nineteenth century, French scientist Louis Pasteur
proved that germs did not come from inanimate matter, too.
This law, that "life only comes from life," is one of the
bases of modern biology.
The fact that the peculiar claims we have been
discussing above were actually believed may be excused on
the grounds of the lack of knowledge of seventeenth century
scientists, bearing in mind the conditions at the time. Nowadays,
however, at a time when science and technology have progressed
so far, and the fact that life cannot emerge from inanimate
matter has been demonstrated by experiment and observation,
it is really surprising that evolutionists such as Yaman ÷rs
should still be defending such a claim.
Modern scientists have demonstrated many times
that it is impossible for that claim to actually happen. They
have carried out controlled experiments in the most advanced
laboratories, reproducing the conditions at the time when
life first emerged, but these have all been in vain.
When phosphorus, potassium, magnesium, oxygen,
iron, and carbon atoms, which are all essential for life,
are brought together, all that emerges is a mass of inanimate
matter. Evolutionists, however, suggest that a mass of atoms
came together and organised themselves, over time, in the
ideal proportions, at the appropriate time and place, and
with all the necessary links between them. They further claim
that as a result of the perfect organization of these inanimate
atoms, and the fact that all these processes went ahead undisturbed,
there duly emerged human beings capable of seeing, hearing,
speaking, feeling, laughing, rejoicing, suffering, feeling
pain and joy, laughing, loving, feeling compassion, perceiving
musical rhythms, enjoying food, founding civilisations, and
carrying out scientific research.
However, it is perfectly clear that even if all
the conditions evolutionists insist on are realised, and even
if millions of years are allowed to pass, such an experiment
will be doomed to failure.
Evolutionists try to conceal this fact, however,
with deceptive explanations such as "All things are possible
with time." The invalidity of this claim, which is based on
introducing an element of bluff into science, is also obvious.
This invalidity can be quite clearly seen when the subject
is considered from different points of view. In one simple
example, let us consider when the passing of time is useful,
and when it is harmful. Imagine, if you will, a wooden boat
on the seashore, and a captain who at first maintains that
boat, repairing, cleaning, and painting it. As long as the
captain takes an interest in it, the boat will become ever
more attractive, safe, and well-maintained.
Then let us imagine that the boat is left abandoned.
This time, the effects of the sun, rain, wind, sand, and storms
will cause the boat to decay, age, and eventually become unusable.
The only difference between these two scenarios
is that in the former there is an intelligent, knowledgeable,
and powerful intervention. The passing of time can only bring
benefits with it when it is controlled by an intelligent force.
If it is not, time has destructive effects, not constructive
ones. In fact, this is a scientific law. The law of entropy,
known as the "Second Law of Thermodynamics," states that all
systems in the universe tend directly towards disorder, dispersion,
and decay when left to themselves and to natural conditions.
It is not possible for a car
left all alone in natural conditions to turn into a
more developed model with the passage of time. On the
contrary, the bodywork will rust, the paint will fall
off, the windows will break, and it will soon turn into
a heap of scrap. The same inevitable process occurs
even faster in organic molecules and living things.
This fact demonstrates that the long life of
the Earth is a factor that destroys knowledge and order and
increases chaos-the exact opposite of what evolutionists claim.
The emergence of an ordered system based on knowledge can
only be the product of an intelligent intervention.
When the proponents of evolution relate the fairy
tale of the transformation of one species into another, they
take refuge in the idea of it happening "over a long period
of time." In that way, they propose that things somehow happened
in the past which have never been confirmed by any experiment
or observation. However, everything in the world and in the
universe happens in accordance with fixed laws. These do not
change over time. For example, things fall to Earth because
of the force of gravity. They do not start to fall upwards
with the passage of time. Neither will they do so even if
trillions of years go by. Lizard offspring are always lizards.
That is because the genetic information to be passed on is
always that of a lizard, and no supplementary information
can be added to it with natural causes. Information may diminish,
or even decay, but it is quite impossible for anything to
be added to it. That, in turn, is because the adding of information
to a system requires knowledgeable and intelligent external
intervention and control. Nature itself does not possess such
Repetitions that occur over time, and the fact
that they take place often, change nothing. Even if trillions
of years are allowed to go by, a bird will never hatch out
of a lizard's egg. A long lizard may, or a short one-a stronger
one or a weaker one-but it will always be a lizard. A different
species will never emerge. The concept of "a considerable
time" is a deception designed to take the matter out of the
realm of experiment and observation. It makes no difference
whether 4 billion years go by, or 40, or even 400. That is
because there is no natural law or tendency to make the impossibilities
described in the theory of evolution actually possible.
Kurami Konferansi (Conference on the Theory of Evolution),
Istanbul Universitesi Fen Fakultesi (University of Istanbul,
Faculty of Economics), June 3, 1998