Page 533 - Atlas of Creation Volume 3

Harun Yahya

So, why is this Lamarckian idea, discredited for more than a century, still trying to impose itself on
society?
Evolutionists say that these "just-so stories" encapsulate an actual process of biological evolution.

They do not believe that necessity gives birth to evolution, but that necessity guides natural selection in
a particular direction. They also believe that it causes the selection of the mutations that will bring about
results in that direction. That is, when they maintain that hominoids stood up on two feet, they are actu-
ally saying that it would have been advantageous for them to stand on two feet. Some stood up straight,
with a skeleton that had mutated at just the right time; and those that stood up straight were chosen by

natural selection.
In other words, the scientific explanations relevant to the mutation are completely ignored, because
if these details are examined, it will appear that they are merely unscientific superstitions.

The evolutionists' just-so stories suppose that mutations will appear to supply whatever an organism
needs and to ensure whatever advantages would suit it best.
Moreover, no mutation has been observed so far that develops genetic data.
To believe in this scenario is like believing in a magic wand that supplies a creature's every need. It is
superstition.

Even though the French zoologist Pierre-Paul Grassé theoretically accepts evolution, he is aware of
the reality of the situation and has come out strongly against Darwinism in describing its strange belief
about mutations:

The opportune appearance of mutations permitting animals and plants to meet their needs seems hard to be-
lieve. Yet the Darwinian theory is even more demanding. A single plant, a single animal would require thou-

sands and thousands of . . . appropriate events. Thus, miracles would become the rule: events with an
infinitesimal probability could not fail to occur. . . There is no law against daydreaming, but science must not
indulge in it. 119

In short, Darwinism is a figment of the imagination with nothing to do with science. And the just-so
stories presented as scientific fact have not the slightest scientific support.

All these myths have in common the supposition that living things' special needs are first deter-
mined and then supplied by mutations. Evolutionists call this need "evolutionary pressure." (For exam-
ple, the need to stand up on two feet in the high grass of the savannah is a so-called "evolutionary
pressure.")

Only those who blindly accept Darwinism can possibly suppose that
the necessary mutations are ready at hand. Everyone not caught up in
such blind dogmatism can see that just-so stories are inventions with no
relation to science.

Indeed, the nature of such conjectures is now openly admitted by
evolutionist scientists. A new example is the comment by Ian Tattersall,
curator in the Division of Anthropology at the American Museum of
Natural History, on an article in The New York Times, titled "Why

Humans and Their Fur Parted Ways." The answer proposed was the
scenario of having various advantages. Tattersall said, "There are all
kinds of notions as to the advantage of hair loss, but they are all just-so
stories." 120

In his 1999 book, evolutionist Henry Gee, science Lamarck's erro-
neous thesis
editor of Nature magazine, wrote that it is wrong to at-
was scientifi-
tempt to explain an organ's origin in terms of what is cally disman-
advantageous for it: tled, though
attempts are
. . . our noses were made to carry spectacles, so we still being made
to fix it in peo-
have spectacles. Yet evolutionary biologists do much ple's minds.

Adnan Oktar 531