Waiting for evolution in Pakistan’s classrooms
Fallacies of logic are aplenty in Muslim creationist texts. Where do the lies begin and where do they end?
When I was in class III, my school teacher showed us an unusual illustration in our science class. It was the classic drawing of the evolution of man, from monkey ancestor to homosapien, and I remember thinking back then: well, that makes a lot of sense, we look just like monkeys.
There was no big debate in our science class. The teacher just taught us evolution (change via natural selection across successive generations in the heritable characteristics of biological populations), and we just absorbed the information and assumed it to be true. The narrative of how life came into existence was not so hard to swallow at that young age; the story was simple and elegant.
Luckily for us, it was also true.
[[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ONwp56pMBE&feature=fvwrel]]
Unfortunately, today some of the teachers and professors in our classrooms would prefer to tiptoe around the the subject of evolution either out of fear, ignorance or outright hostility.
Where does this fear, ignorance and hostility come from? How is it possible that something a young child can absorb and understand is simply unacceptable and unteachable? The answer to this question is also simple: evolution is a scientifically proven narrative to the creation of life, and that (to some religious people) is seen as a threat to the religious narrative. This is where teaching science moves from education, to politics.
The politics of education
Following in the footsteps of the Creationist craze spreading in the US, there is now a growing body of literature on ‘Muslim Creationism’ – an attempt to scientifically explain the existence of life and the evolution of man through religion, as a response to the now widespread acceptance of evolutionary theory.
This Islamic (dev)olution on the science front has been led by the likes of Harun Yahya, alias Adnan Oktar a man whose books are found in many Pakistani homes with titles such as “The Evolution Deceit”, “Disasters Darwinism Brought to Humanity”, “The Design in Nature” and “Fascism The Bloody Ideology of Darwinism”.
Bear in mind this body of ‘scientific’ literature is written by the same man who has written “The Holocaust lie” and been accused in Turkey of creating an illegal organization, the "Science Research Foundation" for personal gain, blackmail and extortion, not to mention threatening and defaming professors of science.
Luckily in Turkey, the professors successfully sued Oktar’s organisation. Sadly, in Pakistan, going under the Yahya alias has let this pseudo science permeate among people willing to accept anything with the ‘religion’ label tagged to it.
There are countless critiques of Yahya’s nonsense available, perhaps most poignantly by evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins pin pointing factual errors, incorrect photo captions all the way to highlighting how Yahya has simply ignored all scientific research contrary to his ideological standpoint.
To cite just one example, Yahya’s seminal work, The Atlas of Creation is so disgracefully put together that it misidentifies a sea snake as an eel (unrelated species) and labels Google images of fishing-lures as actual species.
Where do the lies begin? The question should be, where do the lies end?
Fallacies of logic are aplenty in Muslim creationist texts. Creationists look foolish again and again as new evidence and new theories come up to fill the gaps they point to as evidence against evolution. Where are the fossils showing humans evolved, ask creationists? Here they are say scientists. In fact, here are eight different forms from homohabilis to homosapien. Aha! But where is the ninth and the tenth form ask creationists – that is surely evidence that the theory is flawed. Well, damn, say the scientists – we just dug up two more, which means the last slew of creationist books now need to be updated with newer, smaller gaps.
The above fallacy identifies just one critical reason religion should not step into the domain of science. Religion does not evolve or change fast enough to keep abreast of science, and when religious ‘science experts’ tie key parts of religious texts to science theories or facts that change, all it does is make a mockery of the religion. This is sadly the state of biology in the Muslim world, where research is limited the moment it steps into the quagmire of religious pseudo-science; where Muslim scientists and teachers are threatened and/or fear alienation from their community; where young children are taught that God created all living things, but let’s not find out how.
Read more about evolution here.
COMMENTS (170)
1 Simple Refutation 2 Expanded Refutation 3 Note on 'complex and specified' information 4 See also 5 Documented Examples for Reference 6 Further Reading 7 Evolution of novel genes: article references 8 Discussions of function found in randomized peptide libraries 9 External Links 10 See Also 11 Acknowledgments"
"Simple Refutation Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of this ID claim is that it can be refuted from first principles, without needing any specialized knowledge or evidence! Suppose there exists a simple nucleotide sequence (called sequence A): Sequence A: TACACACCCAAGACC This sequence actually codes for the last five amino acids of the human insulin alpha-chain, but any other gene would suffice for this refutation. Suppose some particular mutation (mutation X) can transform sequence A into sequence B: Sequence B: TACACACCCAAGGCC This will change the insulin product into one that features a threonine instead of an alanine as the final amino acid of the insulin alpha chain. This will probably decrease the binding of the insulin in humans, but not enough to actually render it ineffective (pigs and cows have a threonine instead of an alanine in this position, and insulin-dependant diabetics are able to utilise porcine and bovine insulin). In any case, if a human had such a mutation, it would be almost certainly considered a loss of information by any creationist. Suppose that this human reproduces and the child has another particular mutation (mutation Y) which transforms sequence B back into sequence A. If mutation X is one which subtracts information from a sequence, it follows that sequence A must contain more information than sequence B -- and mutation Y must, therefore, be one which adds information to a sequence. We have a mutation with a gain in information!" This link gives 45 additional LINKS to refutuaions of this tired, dishonest creatard canard, many of them examples of new genetic information: From Yet Another Creationist Myth: "Evolution Cannot Produce New Genetic Information", http://home.nctv.com/jackjan/item13.htm "No matter what example is offered as evidence that mutations can generate an increase in information, Creationists naturally have rationales for regarding that example as a case of loss of information. But every time Creationists "prove" another mutation to be an example of information loss, they add one more item to the list of biological changes which don't require a gain of information! If this pattern continues, Creationists will eventually "prove" that no biological change requires an increase in information; hence, they will have destroyed their own argument." (From reference 23 below) "1. Can New, Beneficial Genetic Information Arise? Apolipoprotein AI Mutations and Information Numerous examples of genetic information increase in biological systems via evolutionary mechanisms How to Measure Information Is there a law of conservation of information? Can evolution cause an increase in information? Does "microevolution" merely select pre-existing variation? Spetner and Biological Information A short review of Spetner's book, "Not By Chance" A more detailed review of Spetner's book, "Not by Chance" Information Theory and Creationism: Werner Gitt Discussions with a Creationist [Timothy Wallace] about the Second Law of Thermodynamics Letter by Chris Paull to Timothy Wallace Examples of Beneficial Mutation and Natural Selection Information Theory Creationism and Information Theory Genome Evolution Evolution of Biological Complexity Evolution, Biology, and Biocomplexity Gene Duplication versus ID Evolution of Improved Fitness The Nylon Bug Gene Duplications Adapt to Changing Environments Evolution of new information Information Theory and Creationism Individual Gene Changes in Complex Structure Traced, Proving Darwin's Theory Evolutionary increases in information Gene Family Information (Gene families are formed when genes are duplicated and diverge, under selective control, to perform new functions.) Bicoid Evolution Evolutionary Fate of Retroposed Gene Copies in the Human Genome Sodium Channel Genes and the Evolution of Diversity in Communication Signals of Electric Fishes Gene duplication and evolution of molecular isoforms of prothrombin activators in the brown snake Adaptive evolution by mutations in the FLO11 gene Bacterial reverse mutation test Mutation increases bacterial heat resistance Evolution by Gene Duplication Prediction of Gene Family Distributions in Microbial Genomes Further Examples of Evolution by Gene Duplication... Lineage Specific Gene Duplication... The Evolution of Trichromatic Color Vision by Opsin Gene Duplication... ...Complex History of Gene Duplications During Early Vertebrate Evolution Independent Duplications of the Acetylcholinesterase Gene Conferring Insecticide Resistance... Resurrected Proteins Reveal Their Surprising History Novel Sex Pheromone Desaturases...Generated Through Gene Duplication and Retrospon Fusion A Gene Divided Reveals the Details of Natural Selection" Still denying reality, Hameed? How much more science do you need?The theory of the probability of transmission of messages with specified accuracy when the bits of information constituting the messages are subject, with certain probabilities, to transmission failure, distortion, and accidental additions. (answers.com)
That proves evolution can't happen???" "Mutations and New Information Mutations produce new information in lots of ways.They can simply get a letter wrong in the code. This could damage a protein, or it could create a new protein that performs different functions. Sometimes a gene is completely duplicated, added into your genome (your DNA sentences). Sometimes a whole new chromosome is produced. This actually happens often; it is the cause of Down's Syndrome.
There's a lot of ways these sorts of mutations can produce new information. Information theory must allow this because it happens. Mostly, that new information is bad or neutral. Occasionally, however, like an archer randomly shooting at a target, they produce information that is useful to the individual involved. If that individual is then more likely to survive or becomes more desirable to mates, then his mutation is likely to spread through the population as he produces more descendants than his less fit relatives." "New Information in Real Life Intelligent Design adherents will admit that the formation of a new species that has never existed before is new information. It's known that the banana that Americans love to eat is the product of a mutation that occurred in the early 1800's. There are over 50 species of banana in existence in the world, but prior to 1800 there was no bananas like the Yellow Cavendish variety Americans eat. It mutated from a different species.The bright yellow bananas that we know today were discovered as a mutation from the plantain banana by a Jamaican, Jean Francois Poujot, in the year 1836. He found this hybrid mutation growing in his banana tree plantation with a sweet flavor and a yellow color-instead of green or red, and not requiring cooking like the plantain banana. The rapid establishment of this new exotic fruit was welcomed worldwide, and it was massively grown for world markets. (Patrick Malcolm, "The History and Evolution of Banana Hybrids")
New information. It happened, and it happens. Intelligent Design theorists can try to confuse us with information theory, but we know better. New information happens." Do you need more, Hameed? Hmmm?increased genetic variety in a population (Lenski 1995; Lenski et al. 1991) increased genetic material (Alves et al. 2001; Brown et al. 1998; Hughes and Friedman 2003; Lynch and Conery 2000; Ohta 2003) novel genetic material (Knox et al. 1996; Park et al. 1996) novel genetically-regulated abilities (Prijambada et al. 1995) If these do not qualify as information, then nothing about information is relevant to evolution in the first place.
2) A mechanism that is likely to be particularly common for adding information is gene duplication, in which a long stretch of DNA is copied, followed by point mutations that change one or both of the copies. Genetic sequencing has revealed several instances in which this is likely the origin of some proteins. For example: Two enzymes in the histidine biosynthesis pathway that are barrel-shaped, structural and sequence evidence suggests, were formed via gene duplication and fusion of two half-barrel ancestors (Lang et al. 2000). RNASE1, a gene for a pancreatic enzyme, was duplicated, and in langur monkeys one of the copies mutated into RNASE1B, which works better in the more acidic small intestine of the langur. (Zhang et al. 2002) Yeast was put in a medium with very little sugar. After 450 generations, hexose transport genes had duplicated several times, and some of the duplicated versions had mutated further. (Brown et al. 1998) The biological literature is full of additional examples. A PubMed search (at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi) on "gene duplication" gives more than 3000 references. 3) According to Shannon-Weaver information theory, random noise maximizes information. This is not just playing word games. The random variation that mutations add to populations is the variation on which selection acts. Mutation alone will not cause adaptive evolution, but by eliminating nonadaptive variation, natural selection communicates information about the environment to the organism so that the organism becomes better adapted to it. Natural selection is the process by which information about the environment is transferred to an organism's genome and thus to the organism (Adami et al. 2000). 4) The process of mutation and selection is observed to increase information and complexity in simulations (Adami et al. 2000; Schneider 2000). MUCH more to follow . . .Just to fix an error in my blog: humans did not evolve from ‘monkeys’, we share a distant common ancestor with monkeys - given that we are dealing with a technical subject, it is my mistake to use common rhetoric in the blog in saying 'evolved from monkey to man' (which is actually inaccurate).
--
And to make it more interesting - did you know that Chimps are evolving faster than humans?
--
http://www.livescience.com/1429-chimps-evolved-humans.html-- PS: It is encouraging to see that a number of schools, matric and otherwise in Pakistan do in fact teach evolution (as did/does mine). However it is unfortunate to see that that teaching is either flawed, or does not exist for some (and here I am talking about the more urban, progressive schools with decent funding - lets not get into schools that don't even have basics in place).
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ