السلام عليكم و رحمة الله
Abraham Lincoln was born on the 12th February. Muslims sadly were forced to convert to Catholicism on 12th February. The Battle of La Victoria also occurred on the 12th February. Charles Darwin was born on the 12th February too. But IERA uploaded a lecture under the name "Is Darwinian Evolution a Fact? #DarwinDay" on Youtube on 12th February 2016.
The video, obviously aimed at Muslims in order to alleviate their doubts regarding the hot topic which has remained hot for the last 150 years - that hot, proved to be a pain to some. I mean the comment section is just littered with Darwinian garbage. I don't even know why IERA didn't just disable the comment section.
The whole lecture was about how Darwinian Evolution is more philosophical than scientific. Evidence was provided to prove this point. The idea that Darwinian Evolution is philosophical was advanced by the father of Intelligent Design movement Phillip Johnson in his nice book Darwin on Trial.
 |
| Gustav Jaeger (1832-1917) |
The lecturer, Subboor Ahmad, explained from the start that the scientific method has clear flaws. He does not mean, in any shape or form, that science is useless. Rather he is pointing to the fact that scientific evidence might have one understanding today, but will, most likely, have another understanding tomorrow. This understanding is crucial and many people dont seem to understand its significance. What it means is that what a thing means to you can be very wrong and to assume its gospel truth is a fallacy not built upon scientific foundation. Here are some things that were once thought true before but now seen as fables:
1. In the Descent of Man [1] Darwin, in chapter one, tried to enumerate the evidence that man is "descendant of some pre-existing form" (9) by showing that man today have rudimentary parts. Which means that we have some things on (or in) our bodies that are "either absolutely useless... Or... Of such slight service". (14). So Darwin cites the vermiform appendage as rudimentary (21). He also cites that os coccyx (human 'tail') as rudimentary (22-23). Even the hair "scattered over the body" is rudimentary. (19). The muscles on the scalp is "...partially rudimentary" (16). And many other alleged evidence of rudimentary things in us. However all these alleged rudimentary hair, muscles etc is now seen as functional, far from being rudimentary. See how evidence change?
2. Samuel T. Soemmering, in his book "On the bodily difference between Moor and European" (1784) "proved" that the thickness of the brain nerves affected how intelligent a person is. He claims that if the nerves are thick, then you don't have space for "cerebral (brain) matter available for the higher cognitive functions"[2] and if you have thinner nerves then you are smart. His "proof" is now regarded as mere fables. See how evidence change?
 |
| Carl Vogt (1817-1895) |
3. Again, Darwin in Descent of Man tried to show evidence how black people have ape-like features. He says that "With some savages, however, the foot has not altogether lost its prehensile power" (106) which simply means blacks still have ape like foot whilst the white does not. The KKK used this as evidence for the animality of blacks. But who believes this today (apart from evolutionist who subconsciously worships Darwin)? See how evidence change?
4. Darwin, again, in Descent tried to argue that blacks are missing links between ape-like creatures and humans (the whites). Darwin talks about how there are big gaps due to absence of missing links then he says "But all these breaks depend merely on the number of related forms which have become extinct. At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races... The break will then be rendered wider..." (155). If you didn't understand what it means then here is an explanation. Blacks (he calls them savages) are evidence as missing links. There is still gaps between blacks and white but the gap is small. If the whites kill all the blacks, and surely they will by a number of centuries, then the gap will become wider because we might lose their skeletons which is evidence for their savage state. If you think you heard such racist rant before then don't worry, it came from here. Of course Darwin borrowed his racist and ill ideas from high class racist people like Carl Vogt, the "Darwin of Germany"[3], Ernst Haeckel and Gustav Jaeger. No one is claiming that Darwin originated racism, rather Darwin justified racism, war and genocide - as long as the savages (i.e. blacks or anyone that is regarded as low) are dying, not the whites. Today no evolutionist would dare to say such things since they want to appear on the bright side of justice but their belief says something else. Who today believes that blacks are missing links to the white today? See how evidence change?
 |
| Ernst Haeckel (1834-1919) |
This list is just a few out of the many that exists in abundance. All it proves is that science does change and depending in what society you exist in and what beliefs you have, your ideas will surely be affected.
As the late Gould expressed in sadness that empirical method "...has often harmed science by turning the empiricist method into a shibboleth." [4] We should be careful how we use science.
I agree with Subboor Ahmad wholeheartedly with his claim that scientific evidence, it's understanding, changes.
الله المستعان
References and notes
All images taken from Wikipedia.
[1] I am using the Wordsworth Classics of World Literature edition. You can buy it on Amazon (https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1840226986/ref=mp_s_a_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1474828393&sr=8-2&pi=SY200_QL40&keywords=darwin+the+descent+of+man&dpPl=1&dpID=51M5rCgtndL&ref=plSrch)
[2] Gustav Jahoda, 1999, Images of Savages, Routledge, page 58.
[3] J. MacGregor Allan, The Anthropological Review, volume 7, no. 25 (Apr., 1869), pp. 177.
[4] Stephen Jay Gould, 2001, The Lying Stones of Marrakech, Vintage, page 31.
