Scientists use the phrase instinct to define animals' inborn behaviors. Always left unanswered, however, are the questions of how these instinctive behaviors first appeared, and how animals developed these instincts and passed them below through later generations. In his book, The Best Evolution Mystery, evolutionist and geneticist Gordon Rattray Taylor admits this logical dead end: When we ask ourselves how any instinctive pattern of behaviour arose within first location and became hereditarily fixed, we are provided no answer. i Some evolutionists, who not ever admit this dilemma as Taylor does, try to pass over such questions with vague rhetoric of no critical meaning. According to theory of evolution, instinctive behaviors are coded within the genes.
According to this rationale, bees build their extraordinary and mathematically precise combs due to the fact that of their instincts. In other words, Someone should have programmed into the genes of all the bees on Earth the instinct of how to construct standard six-sided combs. If so, everyone of reason and common sense should wonder: If living things act out most of their behaviors due to the fact that they can be programmed to do so, who programmed them within first place? No program is self-generating or self-fulfilling, and every program should hold a programmer who originated it. Evolutionists can locate no answers to this question. In structure of atom the subject, they use a convenient smokescreen: the claim that Mother Nature gives all creatures their innate qualities.
But Mother Nature consists of rocks, soil, water, trees, and plants. Which of these elements should possibly make animals behave in a rational, conscious manner? Which component of nature has the intellect or ability to program living creatures? Everything we look in nature was created and therefore, cannot make on its own. What intelligent person, on seeing a painting, should say, What a nice picture these pigments have developed? This is an obviously irrational question. To similar to degree, it should be irrational to claim that creatures without intellect can program their own offspring to act rationally and intelligently. Here, we are confronted with a very simple fact: Since these creatures have not acquired these superior features with their own intellects but were born with these faculties, some superior Being of intellect and knowledge should have provided them these abilities and created them in a method as to display their behaviors.
No doubt the owner regarding the intellect and knowledge we look everywhere in nature is God. Within the Qur'an, The god uses bees as an example, saying that it is He Who inspires in them their seemingly intelligent behavior. In other words, God's inspiration is really what evolutionists attempt to explain as instincts, or that animals are programmed to do sure things. This reality is revealed within the Qur'an:. Your God revealed to bees: Build dwellings within the mountains and the trees, and also within the structures which men erect.
Then have from every kind of veggie and venture the paths of your Lord, which have been created easy for you to follow. From inside them returns a sip of varying colors, containing healing for mankind. There is certainly a Sign in that for people who reflect. Qur'an, 16: 68-69 Evolutionists disregard this simple fact, sequential to deny the existence of God. In reality, they themselves look for for an explanation for observed pet behavior, but are well aware that the theory of evolution cannot explain it.
In any current evolutionist pamphlet or publication on pet behavior, you can view sentences like, To do this requires higher intelligence, but how do animals, lacking intellect, do it? This is a question that science cannot answer. The renowned evolutionist Hoimar Von Ditfurth's comments on the atlas moth caterpillar are a classic example of what evolutionists need to speak on the obvious awareness in pet behavior: The thought of presenting predators with decoys other hard leaves sequential to conceal itself is astonishing to us, but whose clever system is this, anyhow? It's an extremely original strategy to send distant hungry birds who hunt for caterpillars by reducing the probability of their being discovered between the hard leaves. Who devised it for the caterpillar to use not long subsequent to it was hatched?. These are methods of survival that intelligent humans may resort to. However, if we think about the primitive central nervous system regarding the atlas moth caterpillar Attacus as well as its other behavior, it's clearly incapable of reasoning or designing along those lines.
Then how can this caterpillar protect itself this way? Within the past, naturalists who created such observations believed not only within the existence of miracles, but within the existence of a supernatural Creator or The god Who, sequential to protect His creations, distributed such knowledge for them to defend themselves. Such an explanation is anathema for today's naturalists. But on the other hand, its equally pointless for technological science to try and explain such a phenomenon with instincts. Contrary to what most of us may believe, attributing such behavior to instinctsin this case, the caterpillar'smeans interpreting them as inborn. That does not get us anywhere else than where we started from, and prevents us from finding true answers to this difficulty However, it's well-nigh irrational to speak regarding the intelligence of caterpillars lacking a developed brain.
Yet if we look at the behaviors that we have been examining from the start, we do notice that some features meet the criteria of intelligence. If focusing on a goal, predicting future events, calculating the potential behavior of another species, and responding appropriately are not indicators of intelligence, then what is? ii This is a well-known evolutionist's attempts to explain the behavior of a tiny caterpillar that acts with intelligence and planning. In such books or publications, it's not likely to discover other comments or explanations, aside from this sort of demagogic sentences and unanswered questions. Definitely Charles Darwin, father regarding the theory of evolution, realized the threat that animals' instinctive behavior posed to his theory. In his book, On the Origins of Species, he admitted this clearly, here as well as in other places: Many instincts are so wonderful that their development shall probably appear to reader a difficulty sufficient to overthrow my whole theory.
iii In The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, Francis Darwin, Darwin's son, relates his father's dilemma over instincts: Chapter III of [The Origin of Species], which concludes first part, treats regarding the variations which occur within the instincts and habits of animals It seems to have been placed thus early within the Essay to prevent the hasty rejection regarding the whole theory by a reader to whom the system of natural selection acting on instincts may seem impossible. This is the more probable, as the Chapter on Instinct within the Origin is specially mentioned Introduction, page six as one regarding the greatest apparent and gravest difficulties on the theory. iv Anyone who has observed living organisms should agree that clearly, these behaviors neither originate in them nor are the product of successive selective coincidences. The true source for pet behavior is to be located neither in their bodies nor in their environment. It is self-evident that these behaviors are governed by an invisible power and intellect, which belong to God, the greatest compassionate and merciful.
It is God, the God of everything on earth, within the heavens and in between, Who creates every being from nothing, controls it, guards it, and commands its behavior. As the Qur'an reveals: [Hud said], I have place my trust in God, my God and your Lord. There is no creature He does not hold by the forelock. My God is on a Straight Path. Qur'an, 11: 56 i Gordon Rattray Taylor, The Best Evolution Mystery London: Martin Secker and Warburg Ltd, 1983, p.
ii Dinozorlar?n Sessiz Gecesi two Turkish translation regarding the German original of Im Amfang War Der Wasserstoff Within the Beginning Was Hydrogen , Istanbul: Alan Publishing, Nov. By Veysel Atayman, pp. iii Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species New York: The Technological Library, p. ivFrancis Darwin, The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin New York: D. Hooker, Down, March 1, 1854.
No comments:
Post a Comment