Page 199 - Darwin's Dilemma: The Soul

Harun Yahya (Adnan Oktar)

scribed in terms of a dynamic scenario, but which referred to no
scientific evidence. Why? Because evolution never happened.
Despite being an evolutionist, Henry Gee, editor of the well-
known magazine Nature, makes the following comments concern-
ing the illogical nature of this evolutionist claim:

. . . the evolution of Man is said to have been driven by improve-
ments in posture, brain size, and the coordination between hand and
eye, which led to technological achievements such as fire, the manu-
facture of tools, and the use of language. But such scenarios are sub-
jective. They can never be tested by experiment, and so they are un-
scientific. They rely for their currency not on scientific test, but on as-
sertion and the authority of their presentation. 124

In addition to being unscientific, this claim is logically incon-
sistent. Evolutionists maintain that the intelligence—which sup-
posedly emerged by way of evolution—developed the use of tools,
and that intelligence then developed thanks to the use of those
tools!
Evolutionists need to be able to account for the contradiction
inherent in this chicken-and-the-egg scenario. This only emphasiz-
es the dichotomy into which Wallace fell as he proposed his theory
of evolution, but it still applies to the theory of evolution today.
Phillip Johnson, one of the most influential critics of
Darwinism, writes on the subject:
A theory that is the product of a mind can never adequately explain
the mind that produced the theory. The story of the great scientific
mind that discovers absolute truth is satisfying only so long as we
accept the mind itself as a given. Once we try to explain the mind as
a product of its own discoveries, we are in a hall of mirrors with no
exit. 125
Robert Jastrow, Chairman of George Marshall Institute,
comments:

197