Page 45 - Confessions of the Evolutionists

Harun Yahya (Adnan Oktar) 43

Hoimar Von Ditfurth is a German professor of neurology and a

well-known evolutionist science writer:
In seeking an answer to the question of whether an infinitely complex bi-
ological process, an organic order, can emerge as the result of aimless,
purposeless and random mutations, our power of judgment will remain
fairly pedestrian. . .Indeed, would we not be going much too far and cor-
rupting those who think otherwise to claim that even if evolution had suf-
ficient time for the emergence of new orders, new mechanisms of the kind
we are discussing, and that new organization and order was the product
of coincidences? If it is not inappropriate to say so, these strange entities
were like a deformed neonate. They were the result of a mutation. The re-
sults of mutation have almost always given birth to a catastrophe. 85

At this point, objectors tend to propose a counter-thesis to the idea that
the number of mutations will not be sufficiently large from the point of
view of providing a sufficient quantity of significant and fit for purpose
characteristics by entirely coincidental means. In fact, according to the
laws of probability, not even large numbers of mutations can avoid being
harmful and even deadly, let alone support development. 86
Dr. Mahlon B. Hoagland is faculty member at Harvard Medical
School and former president and scientific director of the Worcester
Foundation for Biomedical Research:

The information that resides in organisms that are alive today... is far
more refined than the work of all the world's great poets combined. The
chance that a random change of a letter or word or phrase would improve
the reading is remote; on the other hand, it is very likely that a random hit
would be harmful. It is for this reason that many biologists view with dis-
may the proliferation of nuclear weapons, nuclear power plants, and in-
dustrially generated mutagenic (mutation-producing) chemicals. 87

You'll recall we learned that almost always, a change in an organism's
DNA is detrimental to it; that is, it leads to a reduced capacity to survive.
By way of analogy, random additions of sentences to the plays of
Shakespeare are not likely to improve them!.. The principle that DNA
changes are harmful by virtue of reducing survival chances applies
whether a change in DNA is caused by a mutation or by some foreign
genes we deliberately add to it. 88