Chapter 18. Evolutionists' Confessions Stating that the Theory of Evolution cannot Explain Animal Instincts
Many characteristics observed in living things represent enormous quandaries for the theory of evolution. Bees and ants live together in enormous communities and exhibit the finest examples of excellent, disciplined social life. Bees build those architectural marvels called honeycombs. Spiders spin such high-quality webs that technology is barely able to begin replicating them. Even the fiercest animals show devotion to their own young and even to other species. Countless other actions involving reason, judgment and decision-taking-features supposedly unique to human beings-cannot be explained in terms of any of the mechanisms proposed by the theory of evolution.
Evolutionists say that these modes of living, or behavior in living things emerged as the result of "impulses" from inside. However, they are unable to say what those impulses were.
Darwinists admit the fact that an enormous force affects the behavior of living things. They attribute the display of devotion, division of labor and perfect organization among life forms to direction by a force.
However, they then bring the issue to an end by simply referring to this force as instinct. To describe the origin of that force, they employ the clichéd term "Mother Nature."
In fact, however, no evolutionist to date can say where instincts are located in living things' bodies. In what part of the anatomy do these impulses, described as instincts, lie? In the brain, weighing just a few hundred grams? Or tucked away in some of the proteins and amino acids that make up the tissues?
When we open up the bodies of living things to examine them, we are still unable to establish the source of this information. This is because instinct is an impulse that expresses the spiritual, and has no material counterpart. This shows the serious inconsistency among Darwinists and materialists, who reject the spiritual and maintain that all things are simply accumulations of matter.
In fact, evolutionists have been consistently unable to shed any light on this question. If an animal shows characteristics like altruism, love, cooperation, friendship and loyalty that means that there is a force that leads the way, that shows it what to do and that inspires it to do such things. That power is obviously Allah, the sole Lord and Ruler of the universe.
Given the obvious nature of these facts, evolutionists have been forced to make confessions regarding instinct too. And as in all areas, the clearest admissions come from Darwin.
Francis Darwin, son of Charles Darwin:
Gordon Rattray Taylor is an evolutionist author and chief science advisor for the BBC:
Biologists assume freely that such inheritance of specific behavior patterns is possible, and indeed that it regularly occurs. Thus Dobzhansky roundly asserts: "All bodily structures and functions, without exception, are products of heredity realized in some sequence of environments. So are all forms of behavior, without exception." This simply isn't true and it is lamentable that a man of Dobzhansky's standing should dogmatically assert it.
The manifest fact is that the genetic mechanism exhibits not the smallest indication of being able to transmit specific forms of behavior from one generation to another. The genetic mechanism just produces protein. It may affect behavior in general by producing greater amounts of certain hormones; it may make an animal more aggressive or passive, for instance, or more dependent on its mother. But there is no evidence that it can transmit a specific form of behavior, such as the string of actions required to build a nest, from one generation to another. If behavior really is inherited, then what is the unit of behavior transmitted from one generation to another? These are assumed; nobody has been able to answer this question.
Evolutionists' Confessions About the Altruism in Living Things
Contrary to what evolutionists maintain, nature is not a battleground. Quite the opposite: Nature is full of instances of acts of altruism and rational cooperation, even at the price of the death of the individuals concerned in order to save the family, or their coming to harm. These countless examples of altruism, self-sacrifice and solidarity disprove evolutionists' claims that nature is simply a battleground, with the selfish, those putting their own interests first, surviving.
John Maynard Smith, a famous evolutionist:
Prof. Cemal Yıldırım, a Turkish evolutionist, is Professor of Philosophy at the Middle East Technical University:
Peter Kropotkin, an evolutionist author:
From Scientific American magazine:
From Bilim ve Teknik (Scientific and Technical) magazine:
363- Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, VI. "Difficulties of the Theory of Descent with Modification."
364- Ibid., Chapter VIII. "Instinct, Instincts Comparable with Habits, but Different in Their Origin," p. 184.
365- Ibid., p. 185.
366- Ibid., p. 208.
367- Francis Darwin, The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, Vol. II, p. 419.
368- Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, p. 208.
369- Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man, Chapter III, "Comparison of the Mental Powers of Man and the Lower Animals."
370- Francis Darwin, The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, Vol. II, pp. 111-112.
371- Francis Darwin, The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, Vol. I, p. 374.
372- Gordon R. Taylor, The Great Evolution Mystery, p. 222.
373- Ibid., p. 221.
374- John Maynard Smith, "The Evolution of Behavior," Scientific American, December, 1978, Vol. 239, No.3, p. 176.
375- Cemal Yildirim, Evrim Kurami ve Bagnazlik ["The Theory of Evolution and Bigotry"], p. 49.
376- Peter Kropotkin, Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution, 1902, Chapter I, http://www.etext.org/Politics/ Spunk/library/writers/kropotki/sp001503/ index.html
377- John Maynard Smith, "The Evolution of Behavior," Scientific American, September 1978, Vol. 239, No. 3, p. 184.
378- Bilim ve Teknik ["Science and Technology"] Turkish Scientific Journal, No.190, p. 4.