Page 198 - Death of the Darwinist Dajjal System

Death of the Darwinist Dajjal System

the reports that Darwinists issue in the publications they support.
But this is a grave error.
Darwinists’ sole aim is propaganda. They act out of the idea that
the majority of readers will harbor no doubts about a deceptive report
regarding evolution in New Scientist or National Geographic. That is also
the position of people who never even consider the possibility that a
scientific journal such as Nature would play host to a lie and never
properly think about what they learn. But that state of affairs creates
such fertile ground in terms of Darwinist propaganda that they are
even able to convince people of the veracity of such an unbelievably lu-

dicrous idea as the Darwinist myth of “the first cell appearing sponta-
neously in muddy water.” All it takes is for this story to appear in such
a pro-Darwinist publication as Nature, written by a scientist and with
plenty of complicated terminology.
A person or body possessed of a materialist mindset may do any-
thing in order to keep materialism propped up. That is what pro-mate-
rialist publications do. They will do anything to keep Darwinism on the
agenda, and blatantly use science as a mask for their activities. Nature
makes its materialist mindset crystal clear:
Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such a hypothesis is
excluded from science because it is not naturalistic. 142
As we have seen, materialists have conditioned themselves to re-

ject it, even if all the concrete scientific evidence confirms Creation. It is
impossible to speak of anything scientific here. Materialists’ devotion
to Darwinism is dogmatic, not scientific. Darwinism is still defended
despite having been scientifically discredited. Meanwhile, these people
ignorantly deny Creation, even though it is corroborated by countless
pieces of scientific evidence. Because according to materialism, no ac-
count outside matter is acceptable. That is why these journals that ap-
pear to be scientific so insistently defend an idea such as evolution that
is of no scientific worth whatsoever. For these publications, evidence
showing the fact that living things were created is unacceptable at any

196