The Collapse of Harun Yahya in 20 Answers

Turd’s mistake is that he’s a mindless robot of creationism, thinking
that quoting a professional LIAR somehow makes those lies come true.
It doesn’t. It merely makes an idiot out of whoever is quoting the
lies. Harun Yahya, aka Adnan Oktar is a LIAR and so is Buddy Turd.

At
http://www.harunyahya.com/20questions02.php
professional LIAR Harun Yahya (whose real name is Adnan Oktar) has a
piece titled “The Collapse of the Theory of Evolution in 20
Questions”. Yeah right! Here are the answers that the Yahoo and his
idiot followers are too fundamentally stupid to grasp.

#1 WHY IS THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION NOT SCIENTIFICALLY VALID?

Here’s Adnan Oktar’s lie #1: “Underneath its scientific façade it is a
materialist worldview that Darwinists are trying to impose on
society.”

Evolutionists are scientists who are trying to find the truth about
origins. Not one single theist ought to be standing in their way if
they have any faith at all, Why? Because if the theists are right,
then they would know that science would lead everyone inevitably to a
god eventually – unless, of course, that god is a deceptive god.

The fact that so very many theists are trying to stand in the way of
science is proof positive that they know, in their very soul, that
science will disprove their Biblical god in the long run.

Here’s Adnan Oktar’s lie #2: “The bases of this theory, which has been
disproved by science in every field”

Quite the contrary. The Theory of Evolution has been supported by
every relevant science, including sciences which did not even exist
when Darwin and Wallace wrote down their views. How powerful is that?
– that you come up with a theory and offer what science you have to
support it, and then for the next ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY YEARS, every
shred of relevant science to be uncovered supports your theory!

Yahoo blathers on: “…even today many people think that the theory is
a proven fact,”

Those who do are idiots. Science is not about absolute truths. It’s
about what the weight of the evidence supports. Evolution itself *is*
a fact. This has been proven. The *Theory of Evolution* is the only
scientific explanation for the *fact* of evolution. This, also, is a
fact. And every item of scientific discovery in the relevant fields
has supported the Theory of Evolution. *That’s* a fact.

Listen to this inexplicable blather: “For this reason, some people do
not know what rotten foundations this theory has, how it is disproved
by science at every turn, and how evolutionists are trying to keep it
alive in its death throes.”

Why? Creationists cannot offer a sensible answer to that question.
And how? How is it that someone like Einstein is able to shake the
very foundations of physics with an unorthodox perspective half a
century after Darwin? Where were the science police then? There were
none. There still are none today.

Scientists don’t care what your theory states. What they care about
is if the evidence supports it. It would be the easiest thing in th
world to overturn the Theory of Evolution even today if you had the
science to support your position.

So why, in ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY YEARS has no one ever done it? The
fact that prevailing views can be overturned or moved in a different
direction is proven by Einstein, who came long after Darwin.

So whence this pathetic and transparent LIE from the creationists
about the Theory of Evolution?

I’ll tell you where it came from. It came from their desperation and
stupidity. That’s where.

The Yahoo then tells more lies about how the complexity of the cell
disproves evolution. Not at all!

Chemistry can form “boundary structures” similar to cell walls:
“Boundary structures are formed by organic components of the Murchison
carbonaceous chondrite”
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v317/…s/317792a0.html
http://www.hms.harvard.edu/dms/bbs/fac/szostak.html

Molecules can mimic life:
“German scientists have created artificial life in the laboratory.
They have made molecules that are capable of copying themselves.
Although several labs around the world have done the same, these
molecules can evolve as well.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/217054.stm

How complex would the first cell need to be?
“When the entire 580,000-unit DNA sequence was completed, this free-
living microbe was discovered to have only 470 genes that code for
proteins. The human genome, by comparison, recently was estimated to
contain some 30,000….”
http://www.science.doe.gov/Sub/Accomplishm…scovery/77.html

The smallest genome so far?
“Researchers now say that a symbiotic bacterium called Carsonella
ruddii, which lives off sap-feeding insects, has taken the record for
smallest genome with just 159,662 ‘letters’ (or base pairs) of DNA and
182 protein-coding genes.”
http://tinyurl.com/ybca4u

J. Craig Venter aims to find out just how small the genome can go:
“In 2003 the team made significant advances toward the goal of a
synthetic genome. Using new methods the group improved the speed and
accuracy of genomic synthesis by assembling the 5,386 base pair
bacteriophage ?X174 (phi X).”
http://www.venterinstitute.org/research/

In short, Adnan Oktar is a pathetic little LIAR.

#2 HOW DOES THE COLLAPSE OF THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION DEMONSTRATE THE
TRUTH OF CREATION?

It doesn’t. To begin with, we’ve already shown that Adnan Oktar is a
LIAR when it comes to claiming that the Theory of Evolution has
collapsed or is collapsing.

Secondly, even if it were true that the Theory of Evolution had
collapsed, this would *not* in any way, shape or form prove any
alternate “theory”. A theory has to stand on its own merit, not on
the failure of an alternative.

And there is no scientific alternative to the Theory of Evolution!
That’s a fact.

Here’s Adnan Oktar’s lie #3: “One is that living things emerged by
evolution.”

The Theory of Evolution has nothing whatsoever to do with how life
first emerged. It has to do only with the distribution, diversity and
history of life once it did emerge. Adnan Oktar is too stupid to
understand that what he’s talking about here is not evolution but
abiogenesis.

Here’s Adnan Oktar’s lie #4: “According to the theory of evolution,
which makes this claim, life began with the first cell, which itself
emerged by chance or by some hypothetical natural laws of “self-
organization.”

Again, that’s not evolution but abiogenesis.

Here’s how fundamentally stupid Adnan Oktar truly is: “The second
answer is “Creation.” All living things came into existence by being
created by an intelligent Creator.

So after hypocritically claiming that science disproves evolution and
offering not a shred of support for his LIE, he now pronounces that
creation is true – and offers not a shred of support for his LIE.
Does Adnan Oktar blasphemously think he is a god which can make
reality simply by saying “Let it be so”?

Here’s Adnan Oktar’s lie #5: “…if one answer to a question with two
alternative possible answers is proved to be false, then the other
must be true.”

This would apply if there were two equal but competing theories. But
there aren’t. There is no alternative to the Theory of Evolution
which has any foundation in anything other than blind faith.

Here’s Adnan Oktar’s lie #6: “This rule, one of the most fundamental
in logic, is called disjunctive inference (modus tollendo ponens).”
Clearly Adnan Oktar is as ignorant of logic as he is about pretty much
everything else upon which he feels himself qualified to pontificate:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modus_tollendo_ponens

Here’s Adnan Oktar’s lie #7: “The science of fossils (paleontology)
shows that all living groups emerged on Earth at different times, all
at once, and perfectly formed.”

Not even close to being true. The fossil record shows that the very
first things to arise were single-celled organisms. Then there was
nothing. Nothing at all. FOR THREE BILLION YEARS. Nothing but lone
cells. Then about 600 million years ago we see the first
multicellular organisms. But these weren’t remotely like anything we
see today.

Then we start seeing things that become, the closer we get to modern
times, more and more like modern organisms. We see fish-like
organisms, then simple fish, then more complex fish, then fish-like
amphibians, then amphibians, then reptile-like amphibians, then
reptiles, then mammal-like reptiles and bird-like reptiles, then birds
and mammals. We never see humans or anything approaching human in any
of the fossil record until about four million years ago. From that
point to this, we see organisms that are increasingly like modern
humans. You can read the summary here:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/recent.html#mille

In short, the fossil record follows precisely what the Theory of
Evolution claims. It *has* to. The Theory of Evolution had its
foundation in the fossil record, not the other way around. That’s
what professional LIARS like Adnan Oktar simply don’t grasp. The
Theory of Evolution starts with the science and follows it wherever it
leads regardless of personal predilection or blind faith. That’s
something that creationism can never claim.

Here’s Adnan Oktar’s lie #8: “…living things came into existence
suddenly, in perfect and flawless form”
Yeah, like the snake with vestigial legs was perfectly designed:
http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/0…h-rionegri.html
Like this fish to amphibian transitional that was predicted by the
Theory of Evolution and found exactly where it was predicted it should
be:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04…es_another_ga...

Here’s Adnan Oktar’s lie #9: “There are no fossils that show any so-
called “transition” between them.”
The transitionals are there for all to see and are all-too-briefly
summarised here:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html

Look at how stupid Adnan Oktar truly is: “Hallucigenia: One of the
creatures that suddenly emerged in the Cambrian Age. This and many
other Cambrian fossils have hard, sharp spines to protect them from
attack. One thing that evolutionists cannot account for is how these
creatures should have such an effective defense system when there were
no predators around.”

So why did the “creator” give them spines, Adnan? Did he like the
punk look?

#3 HOW FAR BACK DO TRACES OF MAN GO? WHY DO THESE NOT SUPPORT
EVOLUTION?
Adnan The Yahoo screws up again: “Make no mistake about it,… They
are like modern human footprints. If one were left in the sand of a
California beach today, and a four-year old were asked what it was, he
would instantly say that somebody had walked there. He wouldn’t be
able to tell it from a hundred other prints on the beach, nor would
you.”

Where does the Theory of Evolution say that fossil hominid footprints
cannot look like modern human prints? Nowhere! Oktar pretends that
if the prints are the same, then the being was the same, but can he
point to a three million year old modern human skeleton from the
fossil record? Not even close.

You know why he can’t? Because he’s a pathetic little LIAR. Yes, the
footprints were similar, but they were smaller than modern humans,
curiously matching the fossils we have from the period which were non-
human hominids who were…smaller than modern humans (such as “Lucy”,
for example).

Oktar stupidly repeats all the washed-out creationist claims such as
“If B descended from A how can A still be alive? Let’s ask him the
same question: “If a child is descended from it parents, how can its
parents still be alive?

Yes, it *is* a stupid question – but no more stupid than the idiot one
Oktar asks about fossils. Let’s look at one more LIE he tells”The
reason for this is that although the fossil in question is 7 million
years old, it has a more ‘human-like’ structure (according to the
criteria evolutionists have hitherto used) than the 5 million-year-old
Australopithecus ape species that is alleged to be “mankind’s oldest
ancestor.”

If he’d said 700,000 years instead of 7,000,000 he’d have been a lot
closer. And the fossil is incomplete, and what we do have of it
doesn’t look like a modern human but like a mix as the section on Homo
antecessor shows here:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/species.html

#4 WHY IS THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION NOT THE “BASIS OF BIOLOGY”?
Another LIE. The Theory fo Evolution is what makes biology maker
sense. That’s not the same thing as saying it was the very first
thing to be discovered in biology. So either Oktar is addicted to
blindly parroting creationist claims or he’s a complete idiot.

Look at this idiotic blather: “In our day, there is no reason why
science should remain tied to the theory of evolution.

Science isn’t tied to the Theory of Evolution. Biology *is*.
Inextricably.

#5 WHY IS THE EXISTENCE OF DIFFERENT RACES NOT EVIDENCE FOR EVOLUTION?
Look at this claim he makes: “SOME evolutionists try to put the
existence of different races forward as evidence for evolution.”

Yet he cannot quote a single reference for this. In other words, he’s
so lacking of material with which to attack the Theory of Evolution he
has to make up his own lies for no other reason that to puff himself
up by knocking them down! How pathetic is that?

Here’s how he starts with this LIE: “Another way of putting it is:
‘Since Adam and Eve’s height, colour, and other features were those of
only two people, how could races with entirely different features have
emerged?'”

According to Biblical mythology, they were not two people: Eve was a
clone of Adam, which begs the question as to the creator’s skill and
ability. The creator is so lacking in imagination (and magic,
evidently) that after creating the whole universe out of nothing, he
cannot create humans the same way. Why? We don’t know and not a
single creationist can even begin to pretend they can tell you. Why?
Because creationism is based not on knowledge but on willful blind
ignorance.

So instead, this god has to abusively make a man from dirt and then is
so lacking in ability after that, he cannot even make a woman the same
way and instead has to clone her from Adam (or was it Saddam?).

Next, Oktar, after chiding what he calls “amateur evolutionists”
pretends he can lecture us about genetics! Look at this blather as he
tries to explain how these two clones could have given rise to all the
human races: “The source of this variation is the genetic information
possessed by the individuals within that species. As a result of
breeding between those individuals, that genetic information comes
together in later generations in different combinations. There is an
exchange of genetic material between the mother’s and father’s
chromosomes. Genes thus get mixed up with one another. The result of
this is a wide variety of individual features.”

But this doesn’t explain how this variety came to be in Adam and Eve
or why. The Biblical explanation differs from Oktar’s. Is Oktar
claiming to be greater than god now, that he can explain it where this
god’s word fails? The Bible says nothing of genetics, nothing of
genes, nothing of gene pools, nothing of variation or heredity. In
fact, the only place where the Bible even dips into the topic, it gets
it hopelessly wrong.

Oktar cannot even begin to explain what it is which makes one race
like this, the other like that, let alone how or why this variation
came to be in our genome. Yet he claims his non-existent explanation
explains it!

Here’s Adnan Oktar’s lie #10 : “There are two genes that rule every
physical feature. One may dominate the other, or they may both
influence matters to an equal extent. For instance, two genes
determine the colour of a person’s eyes. One comes from the mother,
the other from the father. Whichever gene is the dominant one, the
individual’s eye colour will be determined by that gene.”

Here’s how it really is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_color
and this is just for eyes – a relatively simple system. Oktar’s
stupidity lies in the fact that he thinks he can take something like
this, simplify it until it’s meaningless, then apply it willy-nilly to
everything.

#6 WHY IS THE CLAIM THAT HUMAN AND APE GENOMES ARE 99 PERCENT SIMILAR
AND THAT THIS CONFIRMS EVOLUTION NOT TRUE?

The fact is that depending upon where in the genome you look, you can
be more closely related to a chimpanzee than to a human:
http://scienceblogs.com/evolgen/2006/05/ph…_5_may_2006.php

Here’s Adnan Oktar’s lie #11 : “Humans and chimps are not ‘99%
similar’ as the evolutionist fairy tale went on. Genetic similarity
turns out to be less than 95 %.”

Harun Yahya’s lie here is that he’s using two different numbers
describing two different things and not having the honesty (or the
smarts – maybe he’s just too stupid) to differentiate between them.
The truth is that it depends on whether you compare the whole genome,
in which case the 96% value is correct:
Here’s what national Geographic said after a chimpanzee named “Clint”
had his genome sequenced and compared with the human sequence:
“A comparison of Clint’s genetic blueprints with that of the human
genome shows that our closest living relatives share 96 percent of our
DNA. The number of genetic differences between humans and chimps is
ten times smaller than that between mice and rats.”
http://tinyurl.com/b8j3h

or the functionally coding part of the genome, in which case the
genome is closer yet:
“The human and chimpanzee genomes differ by just 1.2% between the
coding genes.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3594937.stm

and this is because:
“Most of the big differences between human and chimpanzee DNA lie in
regions that do not code for genes, according to a new study. Instead,
they may contain DNA sequences that control how gene-coding regions
are activated and read.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/…61013104633.htm

This is why:
“Chimps are human, gene study implies”
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3744.html

Adnan Oktar’s puerile ignorance shows glaringly through: “Human DNA is
also similar to that of the worm, mosquito, and chicken!”

Yes it is, if you compare specific areas. The reason for this is, and
can only be, evolution. There’s no reason whatsoever for a god who
can create everything out of nothing to put even one similarity in the
genomes of things as diverse as humans, plants, fish and birds, and
especially not to make them out of exactly the same basic chemicals.

#7 WHY IS THE CLAIM THAT DINOSAURS EVOLVED INTO BIRDS AN UNSCIENTIFIC
MYTH?

Short answer: it isn’t. We know for a fact that many dinosaurs had
traits of birds, such as egg-laying:
http://tinyurl.com/2m8kc8
hollow bones:
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/science/profiles/wedel_0609.php
feathers:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feathered_dinosaurs

Here’s another clueless claim from Harun Yahya: “Evolutionists who
claim that dinosaurs turned into birds need to be able to find
evidence for it in the fossil record. If dinosaurs did turn into
birds, then half-dinosaur, half-bird creatures must have lived in the
past and left some trace behind them in the fossil record.”

Yep. Here they are:
National geographic four-winged dinosaurs:
http://tinyurl.com/36odsv
Dinosaur to bird transitional examples:
http://www.geocities.com/earthhistory/fd.htm
More such transitions:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transi…art1b.html#bird

Here’s Adnan Oktar’s lie #12 : “Studies of Archaeopteryx’s anatomy
revealed that it possessed complete powers of flight, just like a
modern bird has. The efforts to liken it to a reptile are totally
unfounded.”
Yes there is evidence it might have been able to fly:
http://tinyurl.com/34v5xu
But the fact is that it was not a modern bird or even close. It was,
roughly, fifty-fifty bird reptile mix:
“it preserves a number of avian features, such as a wishbone, flight
feathers, wings and a partially reversed first toe, and a number of
dinosaur and theropod features. For instance, it has a long ascending
process of the ankle bone, interdental plates, an obturator process of
the ischium, and long chevrons in the tail. In particular, Ostrom
found that Archaeopteryx was remarkably similar to the theropod family
Dromaeosauridae.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeopteryx

Here’s Adnan Oktar’s lie #13 : “Drs. Alan Feduccia and Julie Nowicki
of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill… opened a series
of live ostrich eggs at various stages of development and found what
they believe is proof that birds could not have descended from
dinosaurs…”

Notice the ellipsis (the three dots) at the end of the “quote”?
That’s a sure sign a creationist is lying. It’s a sure sign they left
something out which will prove that what they just got through saying
was dishonest, distorted, or an outright lie.

Alan Feduccia is an evolutionist. Just because he believes the
evidence doesn’t support a particular line of descent doesn’t mean
there’s no line of descent that he supports.

Here’s an example of a quote where Feduccia appears to be denying
evolution – and an explanation for it:
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/creatio…e_feduccia.html

Here’s an article that contains the quote that Harun Yahya distorts:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/…20815072053.htm

At the end of that article, it says this: “Far more likely is that
birds and dinosaurs had a much older common ancestor, he said. Many
superficial similarities between birds and dinosaurs arose because
both groups developed body designs for walking upright on two hind
legs and began to resemble each other over millions of years. ‘It is
now clear that the origin of birds is a much more complicated question
than has been previously thought,’ Feduccia said.”

See? He’s not disproving evolution, he’s arguing about one particular
aspect of the Theory of Evolution – a theory which, in general, he
unreservedly supports

The fact is that the jury is still out. The claim is not that
archaeopteryx is undeniably *the* “missing link” between birds and
reptiles, but that there are links and transitionals. In time,
scientists will determine how and when this occurred. Right now it’s
too early to call definitively. This is something Harun Yahya will
never have the honesty to convey to you.

And how sad is it that Oktar calls up *one* scientist (and even then
has to lie about what his position is) in the ridiculous pretence that
he can overturn the scientifically established position of quite
literally thousands of scientists? Creationists do this again and
again. It’s a sure sign of their lack of intellectual wherewithal and
their impossibly weak position that this is what they call science.

#8 WHAT SCIENTIFIC FORGERY IS THE MYTH THAT “HUMAN EMBRYOS HAVE GILLS”
BASED ON?

There is no such forgery. That’s Adnan Oktar’s lie #14. The fact is
that no competent scientist has ever said that humans develop gills.
Here’s a reliable account:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB704.html
and another
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/denton.html

How sad is it that creationists have to make up a story and then
declare the story that they made up a lie in order to “prove” their
case for creation?!

First of all, they cannot make a case for creation by disproving
something else. They haven’t disproved the Theory of Evolution – they
haven’t even begun to do that – but even if they *had* done that, they
*still* would not have proven creation. A case for creation requires
positive scientific evidence and not one single creationist, not one
single so-called intelligent so-called design advocate has *ever*
published one shred of positive science for creation.

Here’s Adnan Oktar’s lie #15 ~Ernst Haeckel, one of the foremost
charlatans in the history of science.”

Haeckel traveled the world. He was a professor of comparative anatomy
for almost fifty years at a German university. He named countless new
species. Here’s the truth about Ernst Haeckel’s embryo drawings:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haeckel#.22In…embryo_drawings

Here’s a quote for you:
“On the other hand, Michael K. Richardson, Professor of Evolutionary
Developmental Zoology, Leiden University, while recognizing that some
criticisms of the drawings are legitimate (indeed, it was he and his
co-workers who began the modern criticisms in 1998), has supported the
drawings as teaching aids,[3] and has said that “on a fundamental
level, Haeckel was correct””
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embryo_drawings

#9 WHY IS IT DECEPTIVE TO PORTRAY CLONING AS “EVIDENCE FOR EVOLUTION”?

The Professional LIAR Adnan Oktar offers not a shred of support for
this LIE. He offers no references and mentions no one who has claimed
this.

Here’s Adnan Oktar’s lie #16 “The theory of evolution is built on the
claim that inanimate matter turned into living matter by chance.”

The Theory of Evolution has nothing whatsoever to do with how life
arose. It has to do with how life came to have the diversity it has,
the history it has, and how it came to be distributed as it is.

The science of how life arose is called abiogenesis:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/

Even if abiogenesis were completely disproven (which it most certainly
has not been), this would leave the well-established Theory of
Evolution completely untouched.

As it happens, there’s a wealth of evidence for abiogenesis and that
evidence is increasing. The basis of abiogenesis is organic
chemistry. Is this found naturally or not? Well, yes it is.
Experiments have shown that such chemistry occurs right here on Earth
– or it did in prebiotic atmospheric conditions that geologists have
shown existed on Earth several billion years ago:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller-Urey

Could “locally grown chemistry” have started life?
“A laboratory model of a deep ocean vent has convinced Japanese
scientists that life on Earth began at the bottom of the ocean more
than three and a half billion years ago.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/275738.stm

Could these chemicals congregate in sufficient undisturbed volume to
actually make a start on life?
“Scientists understand several probable steps in the origin of life,
notably how the first organic molecules could have formed. In fact,
prebiotic synthesis processes are now thought to have been so
productive that the ancient Earth must have had far more different
kinds of molecules than could have been used by early life.”
http://www.astronomy.com/asy/default.aspx?c=a&id=4670

Where could these molecules collect together?
“The birthplace for life on Earth may have been labyrinthine networks
of tubes on the surface of rocks. In these natural test tubes, the
complex molecules needed for life could have evolved in safety, taking
its building blocks from the water washing over the rock and from the
minerals within. New research argues that the pores provide the
perfect sheltered environment for the chain of chemical reactions
necessary to evolve the first bacteria.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/239787.stm

Can they form “boundary structures” similar to cell walls?
“Boundary structures are formed by organic components of the Murchison
carbonaceous chondrite”
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v317/…s/317792a0.html

Can molecules mimic life?
“German scientists have created artificial life in the laboratory.
They have made molecules that are capable of copying themselves.
Although several labs around the world have done the same, these
molecules can evolve as well.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/217054.stm

How complex would the first cell need to be?
“When the entire 580,000-unit DNA sequence was completed, this free-
living microbe was discovered to have only 470 genes that code for
proteins. The human genome, by comparison, recently was estimated to
contain some 30,000….”
http://www.science.doe.gov/Sub/Accomplishm…scovery/77.html

The smallest genome so far?
“Researchers now say that a symbiotic bacterium called Carsonella
ruddii, which lives off sap-feeding insects, has taken the record for
smallest genome with just 159,662 ‘letters’ (or base pairs) of DNA and
182 protein-coding genes.”
http://tinyurl.com/ybca4u

J. Craig Venter aims to find out just how small the genome can go:
“In 2003 the team made significant advances toward the goal of a
synthetic genome. Using new methods the group improved the speed and
accuracy of genomic synthesis by assembling the 5,386 base pair
bacteriophage ?X174 (phi X).”
http://www.venterinstitute.org/research/

In short, there’s nothing known to science which would prevent
abiogenesis. I’m sorry but your personal incredulity and ignorance is
*not* an argument against either abiogenesis or the separate science
of evolution. And please note that the Theory of Evolution only
addresses life *after* it arose, so it is still valid even if
abiogenesis were disproven.

Now if you have rationale or material, not only will that be a unique
experience for me, but we can discuss it right here. Please post
it. (Note: chanting a creationist mantra of “No it isn’t” or
“Godidit” does *not* constitute either a rationale or scientific
evidence).

Here’s Adnan Oktar’s lie #17 “The cloning process is no evidence for
evolution whatsoever. It is, however, clear evidence of a biological
law that totally undermines evolution. That is the famous principle
that “Life can only come from life,” put forward by the famous
scientist Louis Pasteur towards the end of the nineteenth century.”

There is no such “law”. Read this:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/s…generation.html

#10 COULD LIFE HAVE COME FROM OUTER SPACE?

The basic building blocks of life are “grown” in space:
“A team of NASA exobiology researchers revealed today organic
chemicals that play a crucial role in the chemistry of life are common
in space.”
http://tinyurl.com/9bfah
In other words, not only do these precursors to life exist naturally,
they are common.

But can this actually work in practice?
“Scientists have managed to create ‘primitive cells’ in an experiment
which may indicate that life began in space and was delivered to
Earth.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/1142840.stm

Could they come to Earth on meteors and comets?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murchison_meteorite
“A complex mixture of alkanes was isolated as well which was similar
to that found in the Miller-Urey experiment.”

Could they survive the impact?
“By simulating a high-velocity comet collision with the Earth, a team
of scientists has shown that organic molecules hitch-hiking aboard a
comet could have survived an impact and seeded life on Earth.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/1262216.stm

In short, Adnan Oktar is proven to be a LIAR again. Yes, the
precursors of life are found in space. Yes they can reach Earth, yes,
they can congregate. Yes we do understand many of the steps
necessary. No we do not have all the answers yet. But we have many
more answers than we had one hundred years ago. If we had taken
Oktar’s negative position, we would not have any of these answers and
we would all be believing Oktar’s pathetic LIES.

Well, we have 17 documented lies already and we’re only halfway
through Oktar’s mindless trash. How sad is *that*? In part two,
we’ll provide answers to the remaining ten Yahoo bullshit questions
and see how many more lies we can count.

Budikka

105 Responses to “The Collapse of Harun Yahya in 20 Answers”

  1. Joe Morreale Says:

    From Harun Yahya website:

    WE CHALLENGE DAWKINS TO A DISCUSSION BEFORE THE PUBLIC

    Richard Dawkins, a most ardent supporter of Darwinism, has long accounted for the perfect creation of the universe in terms of the theory of evolution, which has lately suffered a global collapse. In his recent writings and interviews, however, Dawkins has started to express that “life cannot form by chance.” It is an absence of sense and reason to support evolution on one hand and to state that life cannot come about by chance on the other. That is due to the fact that according to the theory of evolution, which Dawkins supports, the existence of life is based on entirely random coincidences.

    Dawkins has realized that he can get nowhere with the scenario of chance. But, he is now in the logical impasse as he basically claims that “evolution cannot be a result of coincidences, but has occurred by means of coincidences.” What he should realize is that demagogy no longer works.

    If Dawkins sincerely believes in this theory, we’d like to invite him to Turkey, or else we could come to UK to have a discussion. Dawkins should clarify hundreds of questions, only a few of which are listed below, before the cameras. So we, as well as the public, will be able to hear what he has to say. Obviously, it’s no good to engage in unilateral programs. Moreover, with such an attitude Dawkins only deceives himself. Let us send the first 4 volumes of Atlas of Creation to Mr. Dawkins, and let him examine the photographs of the fossils therein which have not changed at all over the hundreds of millions of years. And let him account for them in evolutionary terms according to his much-publicized logic�quot;if he can!

    Archeological researches unearthed over a hundred million fossils, proving that life forms were created out of nothing. Still, there is not a single transitional fossil supporting the theory of evolution. If Dawkins is sincere in his claim, he should bring a transitional fossil and announce it to the public as “a transitional form!”
    The odds against a functional protein emerging randomly is 10950 to 1�quot;a practical impossibility. (In mathematics, probabilities smaller than 1 over 1050 are accepted as “zero probability.”) If Dawkins is honest, he should point at a mass of proteins that formed by chance or by means of the methods he espouses. Let Dawkins explain us how he can account for the origin of life in evolutionary terms, when even a single protein�quot;the building block of life�quot;cannot form by chance!
    Let Dawkins explain us how all colorful, lively, three-dimensional and perfectly clear images, shortly life itself, can form in the pitch dark human brain and who sees this image in the brain!
    Let Dawkins explain us in evolutionary terms how conversations, music and all other sounds form in the sound-isolated brain; who listens to and enjoys these sounds, who knows their meaning, who reflects on them consciously and who answers back these sounds!
    Let Dawkins ask the same questions to us, and let us give our answers. Let us supply our evidence, and let him bring his�quot;if he has any. Then let the public decide who is right. We want the public to know on a larger scale how Darwinism is a false theory and how it is the greatest deception of the world’s history. We are confident that the days are soon to come when people will laugh, asking themselves “How could we ever believe this theory?” In near future, people will be wondering with amazement how they could ever have been taken in by it. In fact, this is already occurring, at an ever-increasing momentum. World-wide polls reveal statistical data proving this state of affairs.

    Darwinism, tried to be kept alive by engaging in demagogy and propaganda, has been refuted in all spheres and it is now widely recognized that it’s no longer possible to defend Darwinism by demagogy. Dawkins’ recent statement along the logic that “evolution cannot be a result of coincidences, but has occurred by means of coincidences” is nothing but a laughable misery of reason.

    HARUN YAHYA HAS REFUTED EVOLUTION AND IT IS TIME TO HUMILIATE IN PUBLIC THAT MUPPET DAWKINS WHO HAS ALWAYS BEEN HIDING BEHIND THE SECULAR ESTABLISHMENT.

    WE ARE WAITING…

  2. Serdan Says:

    Joe,

    “That is due to the fact that according to the theory of evolution, which Dawkins supports, the existence of life is based on entirely random coincidences.”

    No evolutionary biologist has ever claimed that the evolution of life is entirely random. On the contrary, the brilliance of Darwin was that he could see how the NON-RANDOM PROCESS OF NATURAL SELECTION could explain the diversity of life.

    “Dawkins has realized that he can get nowhere with the scenario of chance. But, he is now in the logical impasse as he basically claims that “evolution cannot be a result of coincidences, but has occurred by means of coincidences.” What he should realize is that demagogy no longer works.”

    The quote is, of course, taken out of context. The full quote would reveal that what Dawkins is talking about is that random mutations are what fuels Natural Selection. That is, Natural Selection needs diversity to work with. Mutations provide that. Basic stuff.

    “Let us send the first 4 volumes of Atlas of Creation to Mr. Dawkins, and let him examine the photographs of the fossils therein which have not changed at all over the hundreds of millions of years.”

    Dawkins has already addressed the Atlas of LIES and torn it to pieces. I especially liked that picture of a supposed modern fly, complete with hook and all. Oktar has no credibility.

    “Archeological researches unearthed over a hundred million fossils, proving that life forms were created out of nothing. Still, there is not a single transitional fossil supporting the theory of evolution. If Dawkins is sincere in his claim, he should bring a transitional fossil and announce it to the public as “a transitional form!””

    At least read the blog you’ve responded to, you fucking moron.

    “In mathematics, probabilities smaller than 1 over 1050 are accepted as “zero probability.””

    This is just plain stupid. Whether you accept a very small number as ~zero very much depends on what you are dealing with. Depending on the context 1 over 1050 could result in a large probability of something occurring.

    “Darwinism, tried to be kept alive by engaging in demagogy and propaganda, has been refuted in all spheres”

    Except for all those spheres that actually belong to science.

    “HARUN YAHYA HAS REFUTED EVOLUTION”

    The only thing Oktar has managed to do is to humiliate himself in public.

    • Bette Says:

      Is Russia Today (RT) Part of the Controlled Media Matrix and the Imposition of Global Goit;nmene?&#8230rThvs is perhaps the biggest Trojan Horse-oriented story I may ever write. I use the term “I” advisedly because much of what goes on here….

  3. Goginebulana Says:

    Could other intelligence being, manipulate earth creatures, and so step by step the creatures evolute become like today, some evolute very fast like prehistoric human, some others creature are very slow,and some not evolute.

    Today the Biotechnology has being advanced better then the past years ago, that we human might also manipulate DNA. Wouldn’t prehistoric human can be manipulated in DNA too?
    Could we manipulate gorila or chimpanzee into some kind prehistoric human creature in the next years?

  4. Beri Says:

    ..fuck all of you stupid materialists.. you are crazy….

    • Shadowjack Says:

      Says Beri writing on a machine created by materialists and enjoying the material comforts of a modern scociety. If you don’t like the advantages given by materialist technology and science there is always a cold cave in Afghanistan for you to go live in, you dimwitted buffoon.

  5. JAMSHED MOIDU Says:

    please do visit http://psychologicalwarfaremethods.com/

  6. JAMSHED MOIDU Says:

    visit http://psychologicalwarfaremethods.com/

  7. danu Says:

    the other fact

    THE SPEED OF ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVE
    THE HIGHEST SPEED IN THE UNIVERSE
    That is 299792.5 km/sec
    Can be determined / calculated exactly based on
    The information taken from an old document

    “He directs the affairs from the heavens to the earth: then it ascends unto Him, on a Day the measure of which is a thousand years of your reckoning” (32:5)

    it can be concluded that:
    The distance reached by The affairs in a day
    is equal to
    The distance reached by the moon in 1000 years or 12000 months
    C . t = 12000 . L
    where : C = the speed of the Affairs
    t = time in a day
    L = the route length of the moon’s trip in one month

    Based on Sidereal System, ( relative motion of the moon’s and the sun to the star in universe )
    1 day = 23 hours 56 minutes 4.0906 seconds
    = 86164.0906 seconds
    1 month = 27.321661 days

    Then consider the moon’s route during one sidereal month
    The route is not of a circle like you possibly imagine
    But in the form of a curvature with a length of L = v . T
    where:
    v = the speed of the moon
    T = moon revolution period
    = 27.321661 days

    alfa = angle formed by earth’s revolution during one sidereal month
    alfa = (27.321661 days/365.25636 days) * 360 degree = 26.92848 degree

    Relative speed to earth which can be calculated with
    the following formula:
    ve = 2 . pi . R / T

    Where R = radius of moon revolution = 384264 km
    T = the period of moon’s revolution = 655.71986 hours

    Hence ve = 2 * 3.14162 * 384264 km / 655.71986 hrs
    = 3682.07 km/hr

    Relative speed to star or universe. This is what we need
    v = Ve * Cos (alfa)

    Hence:
    C . t = 12000 . L
    C . t = 12000 . v . T
    C . t = 12000 . ( ve . Cos (alfa) ) . T

    C = 12000 . ve . Cos (alfa) . T / t
    C = 12000 * 3682.07 km/hr * 0.89157 * 655.71986 hrs / 86164.0906 sec
    C = 299792.5 km/sec

    US National Bureau of Standards
    C = 299792.4574 + 0.0011 km/sec
    The British National Physical Laboratory
    C = 299792.4590 + 0.0008 km/sec

    The conclusion
    “This calculation proved the accuracy and consistency of the constant C resulted from measurement and also shows the truth of the Holy Qur’an as revelation which is proper to be studied with a sharp analysis for the Writer is the Creator of the universe”

    • Max Says:

      [
      “He directs the affairs from the heavens to the earth: then it ascends unto Him, on a Day the measure of which is a thousand years of your reckoning” (32:5)

      it can be concluded that:
      The distance reached by The affairs in a day
      is equal to
      The distance reached by the moon in 1000 years or 12000 months
      ]

      So heaven = moon ?? Hmmm.. why not if the alleged author was the moon god (and didnt have access to stars beyond the moon)

    • asyrop qomarudin Says:

      The Quran isn’t science, it’s sign. It’s not science means that you can’t do calculation like this. (It is God’s word after all, we humans can’t possibly know His meaning thoroughly) . Besides, the Qur’an most powerful miracle is, the command in the Qur’an will consequently make the believers be having real happines. And trust me it works. ^_^

    • Nikki Says:

      Jag hÃlel¥r med! Jag sticker nog hellre ut med ett extremt plagg, än med massa färg (även om det ocksÃ¥ är fint!) Men själv känner jag mig ganska vad ska man säga, som en julgran i för mycket färg, även om jag älskar det pÃ¥ andra

  8. Anthony North Says:

    HARUN YAHYAH HAS FAILED TO REFUTE EVOLUTION. IN FACT ADNAN OKTAR HAS BEEN SO MORALLY BANKRUPT THAT HE AND HIS COHORTS HAVE ENDED UP IN PRISON.

    OK Joe Morreale and Jamshed moidu. Did you get that? you are pandering to a false prophet that is a crimnal. Why not stop your idolatry and actually read the scientific evidence for evolution. Or is your false prophet the only person that you listen to?

  9. Browzevsky Says:

    i don’t like the sub tittles of your page

  10. Nobody Says:

    You and your baboon ancestor.

  11. Musika Azroth Says:

    Alright…
    Firstly,,Don’t mind it! This is not A War of Faith againts other Faith.
    Secondly,,Even I’m a Moeslem,,But I open my mind to every science,,so its not about faith.
    At the last.
    I think,,Evolution may be occur(Exsist) yes it is…
    But,,I think Apes never evolute in to a human being.
    Why?
    Just close your eyes and think about universe. how could be such an Ape think bout those stuff? even for million years.
    Also, if Apes are the ancestor of mankind,,why there so many apes still exsist? why dont they evolute?
    How could an apes wrote a blog like this? thats imposible right?
    so I believe in Evolution Theory, But I dont believe in Origins of Mankind was an Ape. what a shame…

    • Aina Aravaindakshan Says:

      Musika, as so many rational posters to this blog have said to others. You need to read some real science books on evolution.
      “Also, if Apes are the ancestor of mankind,,why there so many apes still exsist? why dont they evolute?”

      Modern apes aren’t our ancestors. We both share an ape like ancestor millions of years back. Harun Yahya takes advantage of the fact that many people just don’t understand evolution and suffer from inaccurate ideas just like yours, Musika.
      Educate yourself by reading some real science on evolution, and not the warped ideas of Adnan Oktar.

      • Musika Azroth Says:

        Aina,,you too kind to tell me to read my science book, and yet you are so generous to tell me about my inaccurate ideas. As a “pay-back” of your kindness, would you let me know what kind of so-called accurate ideas of yours?
        How could you so sure that those people are accurate?
        Maybe You could deny me or other theories, but u cant deny that u are the one who stuck in string of words which is not guaranteed, rather than find the truth in real world.

        and i happily let you know that an inaccurate ideas take a place of Accurate Ideas Construction.

        I dont think harun yahya takes advantage from peoples “misunderstanding” but he tried to reveal the truth, just like every great scientist(or et.) else who could perform a great truth of a lil pieces of univers,,let me think…
        Read this:
        http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060820194513AAMYpHr
        if thats prove nothing than back to your history book and read the history part which tell us about the fate of Gallileo or Copernicus. Yup, most of the peoples in their times didnt blieve both of them, and after a long time,,their ideas which estimated as a Lie~ were proved.

        If u dont believe what just i said, it’s your problem. But I would say, I dont want to be someone who stuck and prisioned in such limited mortal minds.
        Open your mind, Universe is much bigger than all of your so-called science books. Still dont believe me? well if u have the eternity then start counting your books volume and compare it with universe.

      • Shadowjack Says:

        I have to laugh at Musikal Asswipe. Non sequiturs and inaccuracies abound in this clone’s drug addled replies.
        knowing nothing about science and in particular biology sure makes it easy to swallow Oktar’s bullshit.
        So Musikal Asswipe, why not read some real textbooks on biology and not the religious wankfantasies of a craven imbecile? Then you’ll be able to gauge how accurate the scientific method is when compared to your con man’s flawed mythology.

  12. Musika Azroth Says:

    Surely…
    even for million years,,Ape will not have such an INT as Human Races…

    • Shadowjack Says:

      Musika you are right your intelligence isn’t up to human standards. Therefore you’re an ape.

      • Musika Azroth Says:

        Yup, just as you belive we are all just like apes.
        I rather be an apes than be a so-called human that have no Intelligence just like Shadowjack.
        Let me mourn for your human-being which is not smarter than me as an Apes.

        Do u understand Jack? Oh Im sorry you are not capable for this.
        Oh..Poor Jack… Let me pet you… Come Here Jack… take this bananas… Come here Jack….

      • Shadowjack Says:

        Musikal Asswipe said:

        “Yup, just as you belive we are all just like apes.
        I rather be an apes than be a so-called human that have no Intelligence just like Shadowjack.
        Let me mourn for your human-being which is not smarter than me as an Apes.”

        Ever heard of a straw man argument? No, I suppose you haven’t due to your lack of education. Let me laugh at your ignorance of biology.

  13. Tanya Says:

    First of all, the tone that is set in your article is far from being polite, why would you insult Mr. Yahya with all those words, it only shows your low level of intelligence. Second, you will know the truth when you leave this world, and asked by GOD…your evolution theory is not gonna help you, lol

    • Aina Aravaindakshan Says:

      Tanya we already know the truth. Mr Yahya has a low level of intelligence and misrepresents evolution so that his organization can spread creationist lies. Politeness does not equate with truth.
      Wether evolution theory will help on the day of judgement is irrelevant to the fact that it has been observed, and has more scientific evidence than all the creationists can muster for their fantasies.

      • Musika Azroth Says:

        Well then Tanya and Aina,,Let me help you to meet your god, so you could ask him bout truth.

        Who gonna meet him first?
        Or both of you at a same time?
        I’ll Gladly escort you there.

        And talking about Mr.Yahya Organization, Compare with yourself guys! if you think you are smarter than Mr. Yahya then what all of you have achieved? a Evolution-Organization? or a Team which confront frontally with Mr. Yahya? or A bunch of peoples who would aid you in the “frontal-confront”? or nothing?

        So you think you are smarter? well I could forgive you,,since you eagerly want meet the god in first place.

        So this what YOUR-ape-like-ancestor descendanted upon all of you? a pride of nothing but an arrogance of small pieces of knowladge?
        Well-Apes are better than you guys,,Honestly.

      • Shadowjack Says:

        Musikal Asswipe drooled:

        “And talking about Mr.Yahya Organization, Compare with yourself guys! if you think you are smarter than Mr. Yahya then what all of you have achieved? a Evolution-Organization? or a Team which confront frontally with Mr. Yahya? or A bunch of peoples who would aid you in the “frontal-confront”? or nothing?”

        Aina is a million times more clever than Adnan Oktar. You see Oktar can’t speak or read english, she can. Aina Aravaindakshan knows something about biology, Oktar knows nothing at all. Lastly Aina isn’t in prison for blackmail and rape. So all this clearly shows that she’s much much much smarter than your sad stupid and locked up little con man.
        By the way Musika you’re even more stupid than Adnan Oktar to believe his bullshit.

      • Aina Aravaindakshan Says:

        “Well then Tanya and Aina,,Let me help you to meet your god, so you could ask him bout truth.

        Who gonna meet him first?
        Or both of you at a same time?
        I’ll Gladly escort you there.”

        I’ll gladly send you to your god, Musika. I’ll find out which prison Oktar is in and pay for you to go see him. then you could ask him about why he is in prison and why Richard Dawkins isn’t. You could also take some Arabic books to ask Oktar if he could read them, and you could ask him what DNA stands for.
        I’m sure that then you wouldn’t think Oktar is anything more than a sad little con man.
        Shadowjack, thanks for the compliments:)

  14. solomon Says:

    The theory of evolution is a stupid theory guessed by stupid people like the author.

    • Dark Monk Says:

      Well if you ignore the scientific evidence of fossils genetics and experiments you must be the stupid fool, like Adnan Oktar.

  15. solomon Says:

    Provide the transitional fossils from ape to man you evolutionist fools if youre the man of truth.Now start diggin’.

    • Aina Aravaindakshan Says:

      Show us some sign that you are intelligent then. try using a search engine with the words “transitional fossils” typed into it, you lazy moron.

  16. Garry Scholey Says:

    Solomon said:

    “The theory of evolution is a stupid theory guessed by stupid people like the author.”

    You might find it stupid Solomon, but you know nothing about evolution. You really find your own ideas of what you think is evolution stupid.
    All fossils are transitional as evolution is an ongoing process.

    “Provide the transitional fossils from ape to man you evolutionist fools if youre the man of truth.Now start diggin’.”

    The only fool here is you Solomon; and you’re an ignorant fool at that. The evidence for evolution covers far more than humanity and fossils. You might want to read The Greatest Show on Earth by Richard Dawkins, or Why Evolution is True by Jerry Coyne before you go humiliating yourself by showing your ignorance.

    • Musika Azroth Says:

      Wow,,Garry how old are you? 600 millions year?
      Yes, Fossils is evidence but it just a fossils, it can’t come back to live and tell us their history, and human prediction is something could be inaccurate.
      well, unless u live long enough like Garry. Aint that right eh Grand(10^4) Father Garry?

      • Shadowjack Says:

        Musikal Asswipe just doesn’t get it. Even if we had no fossils we’d still have truckloads of DNA evidence to support evolution.
        Musikal Asswipe, you must have been born yesterday to have swallowed Adnan Oktar’s ignorant shit.

  17. solomon Says:

    Dear Garry Scholey,
    They can’t produce the simplest unrefuted fossil proofs yet they can rant rubbish.’All fossils are transitional as evolution is an ongoing process.’As you said, if so then provide the fossil proofs.This is a clear indication that the evolutionists have been lying or guessing by not able to provide the proofs.
    One more thing….I wonder how the primitive primates is able to populate the whole world.The apes great great grandfather must have travel around the world on sail boats I guess!!!
    The Greatest Show on Earth will be the The Lousiest Show on Earth.

  18. Garry Scholey Says:

    Solomon the senile said:

    “They can’t produce the simplest unrefuted fossil proofs yet they can rant rubbish.’All fossils are transitional as evolution is an ongoing process.’As you said, if so then provide the fossil proofs.This is a clear indication that the evolutionists have been lying or guessing by not able to provide the proofs.”

    Now you are the liar. There are plenty of fossils, I suggest that you go to a museum or, better still, get an education and become a palaeontologist.
    The fossil evidence is just the icing on the cake. The DNA evidence wipes the floor with creationist arguments as well.

    “One more thing….I wonder how the primitive primates is able to populate the whole world.The apes great great grandfather must have travel around the world on sail boats I guess!!!”

    This is an argument from ignorance. You know nothing about the subject and so you sound stupid. You might want to read some proper books on the subject of primate evolution before you go making yourself look like a fool again.

    “The Greatest Show on Earth will be the The Lousiest Show on Earth.”

    Dawkins might not be the best science writer on the planet but he sure blows the ignorant dreck of Adnan Oktar, and his fellow morons, out of the water.
    You might try reading Dawkins book. I don’t think that you are intelligent enough to understand what Dawkins writes, though Solomon.

  19. Mikeharvey Says:

    Hey from Toronto, Canada

    Just a quick hello from as I’m new to the board. I’ve seen some interesting comments so far.

    To be honest I’m new to forums and computers in general 🙂

    Mike

  20. adil Says:

    hi, who ever wrote this(the 20 answers etc..) definately does not like harun yahya….
    ok u have based ur info on wikipedia – u are seriously having a laugh… zionist are u perhaps?

  21. Robert Carter Says:

    Adil, a lot of people don’t like Harun Yahya. Yahya is a con man, blackmailer and a rapist. Plus he knows nothing about evolution or biology.
    We’re having a laugh at your ignorance. Are you one of his puppets perhaps?

    • Shumayal Says:

      How do you know he is a ‘rapist’ ? You are basically a prejudiced person who needs to be laughed at for your ignorance.

      • Morlock Says:

        Shumayal we know he is a rapist because of the trial Adnan Oktar went through. The prejudice is really all on your part, because you won’t accept that Oktar is a know nothing con man that is being laughed at by the scientific community.

      • Shumayal Says:

        No, i’m don’t think I’m prejudiced. You produce a proper evidence for your claim & then i will believe with you.

      • Roberto Calnetti Says:

        Well, a jury found him guilty of blackmailing women into his bed, so it looks like Shumayal is ignorant of the facts of the case against Oktar.

      • Shumayal Says:

        Yes, I might be the ignorant one over here since according to you it happened. Anyways I never asked anyone if it ever happened or not. The question is If It happened, provide proof… You know… A link from the bbc news or something…

      • Sam Memet Says:

        Shumayal are you so stupid that you can’t use a search engine?
        or so lazy that you can’t be bothered to? Why don’t you find what is all over the net and read the evidence against Adnan Oktar, instead of making excuses in defence of your cult leader.

  22. Mbemba lombo Says:

    hi
    you are so little minder theory stupid yourself and you look like your ancester. You are better go back to the groot where you came from
    i am very passioned with what i read from harron yahya. for me the theory of evolution i have been brought with and by the time of the soviet union had scrambled even before i hava known anything about Haroun Yahya. In the few words let me alert those who are attaking Haroun Yahya. You are living the all Western World desmantled by open lilterature. If anyone think that the world is changing, you will be better watching your side drive mirror before it too late. Knowledge is going back where it came from. Good sleep and keep faith.

  23. Effenelle Says:

    urm…a few questions here…

    wikipedia is an open sourced website where anybody can edit the articles in it right? i’m a little bit suspicious about the website because not anyone can be trusted…
    yes i know richard dawkins is a great man (for those who support him) and harun yahya is also a great man too (for those who support him)
    and there’ll always be people who don’t like them will say bad things to them
    but being a great man doesn’t necessarily mean he can be trusted…i want to trust science because science is the truth, right? but anyone can make a lie…book writers, websites, scientists, ministers, even great men can lie, and people believe them because they are well known…

    even if there are proofs, how could i know that the proofs are not forged? we only know this or that scientists said the proofs are valid, but how far can we trust those people? just because they had done the experiments, they had tested the proofs, so we trust them? how do we know they are not lying? how can we proudly support the theory while we ourselves are actually just agreeing on what great and knowledgeable people said. Why don’t we ourselves experiment the proofs, find its validity ourselves, then explain to others how we justify the proofs so that others can justify and confirm the truth themselves…not just by giving proofs from what others says, then you believe in it…

    now i’m having problems with what to believe…be it evolution theory or creation theory…help…?

    • Morlock Says:

      Who cares wether Dawkins or Yahya are great or not? Only an idiot would care for such things.
      Dawkins collects the evidence for the theory of evolution in his books, and Yahya displays his total ignorance of the theory of evolution.
      So when deciding who is better at showing wether evolution is correct or not, a wise person would choose the person that at least knows something about that subject.
      Yahya knows diddly squat about science.

  24. naz Says:

    harun yahya is NOT an Islamic scholar. i heard he is busted for misleading information about Islam

  25. frenky Says:

    gvRPOX http://gdjI3b7VaWpU1m0dGpvjRrcu9Fk.com

  26. 1 Says:

    I think you’re make a sensation-less claim here, friend. Let’s not forget that he actually converted one or two (not sure how many) Jew(s) into Islam without even getting it “heavy”.

    • Dark Monk Says:

      1, you the one making senationless claims here. Lets not forget that he blackmailed some women into bed, which shows how nasty Adnan Oktar is.

      • Religious war is pointless Says:

        Bold statement. You got any proof for that? Sure as hell, everyone knows that’s just a lame excuse of Darwinists since they can’t back out of his words. PS, the guy’s right… it’s sensationless.

      • Dark Monk Says:

        That “lame excuse” has landed Adnan Oktar in prison. If you want the evidence that your cult leader blackmailed girls into bed and had anal sex with them I guess you’re going to have to look through the court records. And you’d better take your cultist glasses off since they are blinkering you to the reality that adnan oktar is a fraudulent pervert.
        Also have you got any scientifically reliable evidence against evolution? Thought not.

      • Religious War Is Pointless Says:

        So, you have no proof, infidel? Ah, no wonder why you’re jealous of him… Why should I take a look of the court records? Why can’t you give it to me? Of course, then you’ll spout some harsh words about it. You atheists are so predictable.

      • Dark Monk Says:

        Religious Cult Member fFor Yahyas’s Stupidity, if you want to play that game…if you had any evidence that Yahya was not guilty you’d have presented it to the court, and Yahya would not have gone to prison. You haven’t got any alibi for your cult leader, so he ended up in prison.
        Why can’t Yahya write a scientific paper with evidence of his experiments that prove evolution false? Because he has no experimentation to back up his claims and little knowledge of any sciences.:)

  27. 1 Says:

    and one other thing, please rebuild your thread. It’s a lil boring to watch and just because you and your brother is 99% same doesn’t mean he’s related to you.

    • Dark Monk Says:

      1, just because you’re stupid doesn’t mean you have to inflict your stupidity on us all.

      • Religious war is pointless Says:

        If you wanna be a son of ape, be my guest but what’s with the cruel comment, Ape/Man?

      • Dark Monk Says:

        If you want to be a gullible fool then be my guest. But why the concern trolling about my tone? Don’t you have any real argument to put forward?

      • Religious War Is Pointless Says:

        Why don’t the ‘info’ up there put up any real argument?

      • Dark Monk Says:

        Religious Idiot For Criminal Blackmailers, why don’t you post your “evidence” that Harun Yahya isn’t a blackmailing rapist, so we can see it?

  28. I'm not in anyone's side. Says:

    After going through your 20 statements, I can only see your individual vendetta against Harun Yahya… you fail to bring an understandable proof. All I can read is just, “lie” “blather” and stuff like that…

    my name says it all.

    • Dark Monk Says:

      Your post is typical of the ignorance of Yahya cultists. You dare not even mention what you don’t agree with in the 20 statements, because you aren’t educated enough to understand them. Yahya fails to provide any realistic scientific evidence to even slightly dent the theory of evolution, so all the blather comes from him and his cultist lackies.

      • Religious war is pointless Says:

        What’s with the cruel comment here? You’re not getting anyone to believe you with that tone, you know?

      • Dark Monk Says:

        RWIP you are what is known as a concern troll. You won’t believe anything that shows your ignorant cult leader, Adnan Oktar, to be a stupid con man; and you to be a gullible fool.
        Furthermore you try to equate civility with truth. It ain’t so. Rude folk can be as truthful as civil ones. Now go and read Dawkins book on the evidence for evolution so that you have something real to argue about.

      • Religious War Is Pointless Says:

        Pastry-headed clown like you would be the taint of this universe. You have no proof that he conned girls into bed and then you claim to be truthful? You’re more delusional than R-Truth… LIL JIMMY !

      • Dark Monk Says:

        Religious Plop For Brains Buffoon, you have no evidence that your cult leader wasn’t guilty, or you’d have presented such evidence to the court and he wouldn’t have gone to jail.

  29. Eeeekgyh Says:

    I’m sorry, I’m not interested cute boys jerking 568

  30. Xgfuqxdc Says:

    Children with disabilities free japan preteen
    😯

  31. Jyakjmeb Says:

    Do you have any exams coming up? Teen Modeling Young
    :-DD

  32. Qsbznemu Says:

    When do you want me to start? Top 100 Nn Teen Model
    :-[

  33. Religious war is pointless Says:

    Dark Monk, what’s with the insulting, man? Can’t you do it peacefully? And do you have the video footage of him blackmailing women into bed? If it is, show us all. Not some quotes, I hope. From what I’m seeing here, it’s flooded with hatred. Maybe this is what one would expect from Darwinists and Atheists. Come on, guys… can’t we do it peacefully? And I agree with “1”, the thread is jumbled a lot.

    • Dark Monk Says:

      RWIP, Have you got any evidence against evolution that passes the test of being scientific. Thought not. Go and argue with the judge and jury, and the witnesses in Adnan Oktar’s case. The disinformation is strong with you. You are the one that hates science and reality. And you are the one that wants to hide behind statements of peace when you are at war with reality.

      • Religious War Is Pointless Says:

        Did I defend Harun Yahya? No… I only said we don’t have solid evidence against him. It’s just media. Media been hyping US is ruled under Illuminati… do you believe that? And yes, I do have an evidence against evolution… if we evolve from apes, why there are still apes?

      • Dark Monk Says:

        Conspiracy Minded Imbecile, If there was no solid evidence against him why was he thrown in jail? Do you think that a man that has plenty of money could afford the very best lawyers to show a lack of evidence against their client?
        As for your evidence against evolution, it is more evidence of your ignorance. We evolved from ape like ancestors, as did modern apes. We share an ancestor. Modern apes are not our ancestors. Please try to keep up, moron.

  34. Religious War Is Pointless Says:

    Dark Monk is a terrorist.

    • Dark Monk Says:

      RWIP, you ask if we are descended from apes why are they still here? Apart from your naive canard, we are descended from apelike ancestors, which we have in common with modern apes.
      And by the way calling me a “terrorist” isan irrelevant ad hominem. its also ironic considering that Harun Yahya is a creationist for islam, and islamists know a thing or two about terrorism don’t they?

      • Religious War Is Pointless Says:

        Only to your infidel eyes, yes we are terrorists to you… So, it’s now apelike ancestors… then? apelike ancestors have two reproductive organs… you atheists make me laugh.

      • Dark Monk Says:

        You are the one calling people terrorists. But you are so stupid you can’t see this plain fact. Which explains why when you write about evolution you write blithering stupidity and non sequiturs.You can’t see anything factual. you are stuck in a religious fantasy. Try reading The Greatest Show on Earth by Richard Dawkins, and engage your tiny amount of brain.
        You cretinous creationists make me scream with laughter at the total idiocy of some humans.;)

    • John Emsholm Says:

      What makes me laugh is that an idiot that calls himself Religious War Is Pointless is calling someone an “infidel” and trying to start a religious argument.

  35. fongy Says:

    Adnan Oktar is the most outrageous, deluded, self proclaimed intellectual I have ever had the misfortune of encountering on the internet. He has multiple blocked-to-commenting channels on youtube where he nonchalantly makes ridiculous, self indulgent and blatantly disinformative claims whilst surrounded by a harem of ridiculously dressed, painted tarts.
    The man is so absurd it borderlines comedy – all of his writings are considered childishly naive in the west and anyone that considers the man anything less than an enormous joke to intelligence is beyond hope.

    • John Emsholm Says:

      I think that the fact that so many believe Oktar’s creationist pap shows a lack of science education in certain parts of the world.

  36. Gjeuvuue Says:

    Will I get paid for overtime? http://ibykogiamyt.de.tl preteen megan this chick has to been of the hottest babes that i have ever had the pleasure of watching and trust me i watched this very close , beautful body , face the package!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  37. M Says:

    After reading these poor answers, I see that the facts in that book of Mr. Adnan Oktar are completely true. The writer of this blog quotes sentences from that book, and tries to disprove them with big alineas, but he just serves to explain the facts in that book clearer, by showing that there are no evolutionist answers to it.

    But besides this good job, I see he tries to challange his frustration by slandering Mr. Adnan Oktar. That is of course not acceptable.

  38. Abid Ali Says:

    I already knew by reading Oktar’s books that he is the biggest bastard, lier, mother fcuker of the universe after Mohammed.
    GO TO HELL YOU BASTARD, RASCAL, IDIOT, LIER, MOTHER FCUKER, HARUN YAHYA,SON OF A BITCH

    • Kaylee Says:

      Man tar seden dit man kommer… Det är en fÃut¶tsätrning för att bli respekterad som person. When in Rome, do as the Romans doLite svÃ¥rare med dagens internet… Men skriver man pÃ¥ en svensk blogg (Ramonas)… DÃ¥ bör man respektera den…

  39. Ken Says:

    Truth needs to be backed by proofs, strong arguments, hence the step in scientifical conclusion founding: hypothesis, research (gathering of data), experiments, stating first conclusion, re-examination of first gained conclusion, concluding final conclusion. True scientist, for the benefit of her/himself and the whole humanity (if they work for their benefit indeed), would always open themselves to new hypothesis, and again new research, new findins, and so on. If we have reached the final result, that logically would have deliverd us to the knowledge level of a God. Well, we haven’t, apparently, have we?

    So, simple. Just look at who swore the most here. Simply those who hate Harun Yahnya/Adnan Oktar, or Islam, or muslims, or all.

    Do they swear that much in excavation sites or laboratories or other scientifical result findins processes and sites all over the world? Instead of findind the truth?

    One won’t make her/his claim believable, let alone really credible and accurate, by swearing. it simply makes, as the Buddhist say, “spitting to the sky will make you spit your own face”. You spit on God’s other creature, your own fellow creature. You spit on Him. Your spit returns to you, instead of actually examining the facts and finding the truth.

    Truth doesn’t concern whomever may say it. If a convicted thief say to us “don’t steal, it will bring bad luck to you”, will we say he is wrong?

    Adnan Oktar may be right. Or wrong. As any human being was and is and will be. But slandering and swearing get us nowhere. It simply show how degraded we are.

    And if we believe eery human being is entitled to “freedom of speech”, especially speech backed up by evidences, proofs, facts, strong arguments etc, than not just those who join this forum, even Adnan Oktar entitled to that right.

    • Tinuviel Says:

      “So, simple. Just look at who swore the most here. Simply those who hate Harun Yahnya/Adnan Oktar, or Islam, or muslims, or all.” Politeness or rudeness does not make an argument correct or not. as you write “Truth needs to be backed by proofs, strong arguments” and those argument better have some good scientific evidence behind them. Harun Yahya and his cultists have none, while science has plenty. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

  40. tank game free download Says:

    Gday!
    I was considering adding a backlink back to your website since both of our websites are centered around the same topic.
    Would you prefer I link to you using your website
    address: http://whoisharunyahya.wordpress.
    com/the-collapse-of-harun-yahya-in-20-answers/ or blog title: The
    Collapse of Harun Yahya in 20 Answers | who is Harun Yahya.

    Please let me know! Thank you

  41. grand seiko Says:

    seiko 価格

  42. ブランド アクセサリー Says:

    Xingliang

  43. シャネルデコパーツ Says:

    Niugao

  44. Apple Says:

    If it’s a fact why is it still called the evolution theory?

  45. seidnejmy Says:

    seidnejmy

    i found it finally… it is very important…
    after i read one of his books translated to my local language the book attracted me and i wanted to search who yahya is and there were pics every where on Google t didn’t trust that the book “24 hours in the Muslims life” was written by that person….i searched again and again to see his real photo but all those pics where of him.and i skipped the physical confirmation and continued to read his works…
    since 2007 i read almost all of his books he owes no discovery the more i read is the most i suspect that person and searched to know if that person is reliable??? there were the same people suspected the same man one of which is this tread.
    i live in country more than 70 languages are spoken the kids of all this languages almost under 10 reads the Quran just from their mind and without need of referencing you think they where Arab as they recite to to you but non of the 70 were Arab.i am sure this is true all around you in the globe.
    i also read that almost all of Muslim Scholars from Bukhari to Albani where non Arab.if the Quran has been made simple even for non Arab kids, how could Mr. yahya claims the mahdi without knowing how to read or write the Quran??? That is amazing….
    no doubt that the mister was given the knowledge of talk and supporters that promote his business like “THIS WORK IS BASED UPON THE WORKS OF HARUN YAHYA” The worst is that weak people are following someone who cant read the QURAN AT ALL.
    THE REASON THAT YAHYA Was JAHHIL IS THAT HE NEVER ATTEND ISLAMIC UNIVERSITIES FOR THE SAKE OF ISLAMIC KNOWLEDGE AS HE PAID SCARIFICATION TO STUDY PHILOSOPHY…..
    THE TRICK MAN wears a gold like a women and an eye glass to avoid eye contact he never marries as he has no desire I do not know if he offers the five solat correctly.
    I swear if harun yahya was not the Dajjal then he is safe…
    I call Muslims to avoid following the hidden man just seeing his copied works.
    i hatted him while reading further .
    I am seid nejmy. No personal conflicts with the yahya…

  46. Clear Says:

    Shit page written by an idiot. Tone is shit. No class. Manner is absent. How old were you when you wrote this shit? 16?

    You should step in the real world you mong and see where this sort of behavior lands you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: