Page 891 - Atlas of Creation Volume 1

Harun Yahya

this book—that matter is perceived in the brain. This gave us the impression that we hadn't made our point
clearly enough, that it needed further explanation. Yet before long, it became apparent that materialists did
feel quite uneasy about the popularity of this topic and moreover, felt a great fear about it all.

After a while, materialists started loudly publicizing their fear and panic in their publications, confer-
ences and panels. Their agitated, hopeless discourse implied that they were suffer-
ing a severe intellectual crisis. The collapse of the theory of evolution—the
basis of their so-called scientific philosophy—had already come as a

great shock. Now they experienced an even greater one, as they real-
ized that they were losing their belief in the absolute supremacy of
matter, which for them was a greater mainstay than even
Darwinism. They declared that for them, this issue is a tremen-

dous threat that totally demolishes their cultural fabric.
One who expressed the materialist circles' anxiety and panic
in a most outspoken way was Renan Pekunlu, an academician
and writer in the periodical Bilim ve Utopya (Science and Utopia)

which has assumed the task of defending materialism. Both in his
articles in Bilim ve Utopya and in the panels he attended, Pekunlu
presented our book The Evolution Deceit as the number-one threat.
What disturbed Pekunlu even more than the chapters invalidating

Darwinism was the section you are currently reading. Pekunlu admon-
ished his handful of readers not to let themselves be carried away by the in-
doctrination of idealism and to keep their faith in materialism. He used
Vladimir I. Lenin, leader of Russia's bloody communist revolution, as a reference. Advising everyone to read

Lenin's century-old book Materialism and Empirio-Criticism, Pekunlu only repeated Lenin's counsel to "not
think over this issue, or you will lose track of materialism and be carried away by religion." In an article for
the aforementioned periodical, Pekunlu quoted the following lines from Lenin:

Once you deny the objective reality [that is] given us in sensation, you have already lost every weapon against
fideism [reliance on faith alone], for you have slipped into agnosticism or subjectivism—and that is all that
fideism requires. A single claw ensnared, and the bird is lost. And our Machists [an adherent of Machism, a mod-
ern positivist philosophy], have all become ensnared in idealism, that is, in a diluted, subtle fideism; They became
ensnared from the moment they took "sensation" not as an image of the external world, but as a special "element."
It is nobody's sensation, nobody's mind, nobody's spirit, nobody's will. 202
These words explicitly demonstrate the fact that Lenin found alarming and wanted to expunge, both
from his own mind and the minds of his "comrades." It disturbs contemporary materialists too, in a similar

way. But Pekunlu and other materialists suffer a yet greater distress because they know that this certain fact
is now being advanced in a way that's far more explicit convincing than a hundred years ago. For the first
time, this subject is being explained in a truly irrefutable way.
Still, nevertheless, a great number of materialist scientists take a superficial stand against the fact that no

one can reach matter in and of itself. The subject covered in this chapter is one of the most important and
most exciting that a person can ever run across. It's fairly unlikely that these scientists would have faced such
a crucial subject before, but the reactions and the stance they employ in their speeches and articles still hint
at how shallow and superficial their comprehension really is.

Some materialists' reactions show that their blind adherence to materialism has somehow impaired their
logic, making them far removed from comprehending the subject. For instance, Alaeddin Senel—like
Rennan Pekunlu, an academician and a writer for Bilim ve Utopya—said, "Forget the collapse of Darwinism,
the real threatening subject is this one," and made demands implying " prove what you tell," sensing that his

own philosophy has no basis. More interestingly, this writer has written lines revealing that he can by no
means grasp this very fact which he considers such a menace.
For instance, in one article where Senel discussed this subject exclusively, he accepts that the brain per-

Adnan Oktar 889