Signs of God: Design in Nature

Author: Harun Yahya
Paperback
Publisher: Global Publishing (2001)
ISBN: 9756426349

I often wonder what science could teach us if it were intended to discover a creation by God rather than advance support for an accident. It seems like we waste a lot of brainpower and time supporting theories that become less viable every year.

I’m not a scientist. Nor am I an attorney, a police officer, a judge, or a teacher. But I can recognize strong evidence when I see it, and that’s the foundation of the book Signs of God by Harun Yahya. The evidence for design is overwhelming. Thanks to Mr. Yahya, I’m thoroughly convinced that the evolutionary concept of complexity by natural selection is wholly bogus. However one approaches the debate, one has to admit that the many symbiotic relationships between species can only decrease the astronomically minute possibility of mutually beneficial evolutionary change.

One of Yahya’s strongest arguments is built on the study of the wings of birds and winged insects. The complex musculoskeletal structures of each type of wing would have made these species extinct before they could modify to their present state. Harun uses common scientific photographs and drawings to illustrate his point. His conclusions aren’t those of the elite in society, but they do echo the conclusions of most people on the planet. He sees such tremendous design work that he concludes there must be a Designer (God). Opinion leaders in the scientific community see this same design and conclude there must be lots of Time.

Whichever way you go, you have to exercise faith. Evolutionists have faith in time, and in themselves. If something can’t be reproduced in the lab, or if the adaptation seems too preposterous, one can always add millions of years to the equation. After all, there is no proof of evolutionary developments other than the claim that they took time. And since they are the experts, who can argue?

On the other hand, if creatures were created, time isn’t an issue; therefore the evolutionist must always default to time. And since evolution can’t really be observed, it must be taken on faith. What would be wrong with intelligent design, unless a person has an ingrained bias against it? Would it be so intellectually dishonest to believe that there was an intelligent being out there? And if so, why not serve Him?

It’s interesting that this book arrived at my door about the same time as two new books by atheists: The End of Faith by Sam Harris, and Breaking the Spell by Daniel C. Dennett. Both claim that evolution should eradicate belief in God. These assertions exemplify evolution’s biggest draw—and it’s only hope. It’s an alternative reality that there is no God—a premise. When dealing with the unprovable, a person has two choices: One, believe your side is true and protect it from all doubt (sort of like plugging your ears and yelling so that bad information can’t enter your consciousness). Or two, humbly consider both sides. In the case of origins your conclusions must have a faith component. Both sides believe they are correct, but they are diametrically opposed to one another. Someone is wrong.

Both Harris and Dennett rightly decry religions’ historical abuses. But you have two guesses as to the spiritual point of view of Atheistic Communism and Nazism. It is a narrow mind that assumes only one reason for religious horrors, especially since non-religion has an even worse record of human abuses, i.e., Atheistic Communism and Nazism. Also, not all religious systems have the same level of human excess. My argument is that humans are inherently evil. They will screw up the best of ideas. Maybe the atheist is just being economical; perhaps it’s easier to eliminate religion than human nature. Religion may not be the problem, but it’s at least easier to blame. Another mistake that atheists make is to lump all religions together, regardless of their individual assertions. They make no attempt to delineate the overarching effects each religion has had on its relative civilization. No two religions are alike.

Back to Harun Yahya. The pictures in his book are terrific. There are accurate illustrations, and excellent photographs. I recommend it for students as young as eight years old as well as adults. In my view, Yahya has simply compiled a book that considers Intelligent Design a foregone conclusion. He has a Muslim perspective that I happen to agree with on this topic, and there is definitely a solid foundation to his arguments. He treats his topic and his audience with respect.

Many atheists, by contrast, tend to share the opinion that anyone who disbelieves their ideas is stupid. “Woe to the unbelievers!� Perhaps they are evangelists writing “good news� to the unbelievers. I don’t know. We are all evangelists in one way or another. There are fundamentalist radicals on both sides of the God debate.

The evolution debate is over for me. I’m unmoved. I’ve examined the evidence as best as I could. I was spoon feed the dogma all through my elementary and high school years; it didn’t make sense to me then, and it doesn’t now. I believe evolution is based on a faulty premise. I guess I’m a dim bulb, as many atheistic evolutionists think. Or maybe I’m just an unbeliever.