CREATION MANIFESTO

THE 8TH INTERNATIONAL CREATION CONGRESS IN THE LIGHT OF SCIENCES

Istanbul, October 24-26, 2024 *

* Based on feedback, the editorial board has updated the sources, and sources have been categorized under relevant headings.
* Click here for the open letter prepared in response to the criticisms of our manifesto.
On behalf of the editorial board, Prof. Dr. Nevzat Tarhan and Prof. Dr. İsmail Kocaçalışkan.

Türkçe English

As scientists participating in the VIII. International Creation Congress in the Light of Sciences held on October 24-26, 2024, at Üsküdar University in Istanbul, we deem it appropriate—even necessary—to declare a "Creation Manifesto". We believe that scientific data and mathematical proofs have now reached a sufficient level of evidence indicating that the existence of the universe is purposeful and designed.

Some of the most fundamental philosophical and scientific questions in human history are “Why and how did the universe come into being and why and how did life began?”. There are two known perspectives on this subject:

  1. Existence by Chance
  2. Existence by Conscious Design (**)

If one perspective can be proven impossible, the correctness of the other is understood through the method of reasoning (Reductio ad absurdum).

The Argument of Reasoning: By this argument we first ask, “how and why would an unthinking, unconscious nature produce an intelligent, conscious human being?” Second, scientific findings prompt us to question the probability of self-existence of decision-making algorithms found in nature. The logic of these algorithms resemble the Fuzzy logic of artificial intelligence—a logic we’ve only recently understood. Such  sophisticated algorithms cannot be attributed to an unintelligent process of evolution.

These two perspectives have different interpretations, both scientifically and philosophically. Let us compare these perspectives, explore them with reasoning methods, and seek answers through mathematical proof.

The Impossibility of Accidental Existence

This view suggests that the universe emerged through natural processes and an accumulation of random events. According to the Big Bang theory, the universe is approximately 13.8 billion years old, - although the recent data received from the Webb telescope suggests the universe might have appeared around 26.7 billion years ago -and expanded within the framework of physical laws. Therefore before the Big Bang, there should not have been either time or matter, but a reality beyond time and space. The main arguments of the accidental existence view can be refuted one by one through proof by contradiction.

  1. Quantum Uncertainty: Quantum physics suggests that some events at the quantum level occur without an external cause. However, the Fine-Tuning Argument asserts that the laws of physics and universal constants are precisely aligned to allow life to emerge. If even minor adjustments were made to these constants, neither the universe nor life could exist. According to the “Chaos Theory,” things that may seem erroneous are part of perfection. Thus, quantum uncertainty is part of the universe’s perfection, but, it cannot know any reality outside of space and time. Such a perfection in accordance with mathematical reasoning leaves no room for chance but requires an external will beyond time and space.
  2. The Thesis of Natural Selection: The thesis explains the development and diversification of life forms through mutations and selection. However, while a child is in the zygote (the first cell consisting of half of the mother's and father's DNA) state in the womb, the child begins to move in the embryo in eight weeks. In the tenth week, the fetus period begins and the limbs become apparent. The mother's womb grows upwards by one centimeter every week. Birth occurs after forty (40) weeks. It is a mandatory law that the amino acids in DNA always grow by making the right decisions. There should be no random mutations in this process, otherwise the child cannot be healthy. Therefore, it is known that in this planned, systematic, fine-tuned, regular, measured and calculated growth that occurs in all mammals, mutation is very rare and produces negative results. Therefore, the “proof method using the opposite” shows the impossibility of natural selection and that selection must be conscious, not random. This shows that an external will is a necessary existence. We can apply the same analogy to the transformation of a fig seed into a fig tree, and to the way a bee works. Natural selection focuses only on survival, but conscious selection focuses on purposeful development.
  3. Primitive Conditions and the Thesis of Large Numbers: Given the vastness of the universe and the length of time, the chance of accidental formation of complex structures like life is suggested. When the developmental stages proven by scientific observations and experiments based on natural processes operating within the framework of physical laws are considered with the "Modal reasoning method", the occurrence of the right conditions is a very low probability situation according to the mathematical proof method. As probabilities like 10-50 are accepted impossible, considering the vastness of the universe it is impossible for these probabilities to occur according to mathematical reasoning. Despite the size of the universe and the length of time, the emergence of a living work from inanimate DNA throughout three weeks in the spring every year by always making the right decisions without any mutation indicates an absolute consciousness as a necessary being.
  4. Complexity and Order: The universe exhibits a complex structure, where natural laws function harmoniously. It is debatable whether this order will emerge spontaneously or as a result of a design according to the “General Systems Theory”. In systems theory everything is composed of small, interrelated parts, but is considered as a whole that functions as part of a larger system. There is an order that operates according to the “Laws of Cybernetics”. Cybernetics is the branch of science that examines the control and management of all complex systems, living and non-living. The laws of cybernetics require the existence of an administrator. The design-based view of existence, which argues that the universe and life were designed not by chance but by a conscious mind, is the mandatory option according to mathematical reasoning.
  5. The Mental Ability to Develop Theories: The accidental existence view cannot explain this theory. Unlike other living beings, humans have the ability to produce hypotheses. Metacognitive neurogenetic tendencies such as “searching for meaning, seeking novelty, time awareness, desire for eternity and the presence of the perception of death” are unique to humans. When humans abandon their mental attitude and abandon themselves to nature, they become identical to animals. When you point somewhere with your finger, the people with advanced autism, who cannot think clearly, look at the tip of your finger and cannot look at the indicated place. They do not have the mental ability to make a theory. Therefore, when humans are interested in the universe, they have the ability to look not only at the universe but also at the meaning behind it. Science explains how the universe works very well, but sciences that are based on meaning need to derive theoretical meanings. Why does this universe exist, why am I here and where am I going?... We observe that many people with the ability of the theory of mind and see this truth cannot express this due to their positivist mental attitude and dogmatic scientific prejudice. When we look at the universe using the ability of the theory of mind, there must be a being (Necessary Being) who has great and absolute knowledge, absolute will, absolute power and absolute wisdom.
  6. The Enigma of Consciousness: Consciousness, uniquely human, includes the sense of "self," which is certainly absent in animals. The accidental existence hypothesis remains silent on consciousness, as creating consciousness from matter is akin to creating something from nothing. Our skin changes completely in twenty days; after six months all the cells in our body change, but our consciousness, which is like the IP of a computer, does not change at all. Consciousness is a phenomenon that is very difficult to explain with accidental processes and is specific to humans. The design argument argues that the existence of consciousness is the work of a designer. The deductive reasoning method points to the existence of conscious beings, the necessary existence of a higher consciousness and conscious design as evidence. The idea that the universe is the product of a higher consciousness and a superior owner, which is the ‘Divine Will’ seems mandatory.
  7. The Hypothesis that Life is a Struggle: According to this thesis, life was formed by chance and there is a struggle. The strong survive, the weak lose the struggle and perish. When we look at living beings from the first cell to the most advanced living beings, we observe that cooperation is the basic and struggle is the exception. The strong lion and the big dinosaur did not spread all over the world. The fact that dinosaurs had large armor, but small brains caused them not to adapt. In the universe, not the strong but those who adapt according to their genetic codes live. However, adaptation is possible for a purpose. According to "induction", which is a method of understanding all from singular events, the balance of living together in nature refutes the thesis that life is a struggle. Because according to the law of homeostasis (balance), there is a subtle harmony, competition does not disrupt the balance. Life is harmony according to a purpose. The purpose must be in accordance with the Divine Will.
  1. The Problem of Evil and the Dialectic of Testing: Materialist science tries to explain the purpose of man with the pleasure principle. Unlike other living beings, man is the only being who can act purposefully, think freely, question existence, and think abstractly, conceptually and symbolically. It cannot be scientifically said that there is no life after death. Man, also questions why evil exists. He has free will. In order for free will to exist, there must also be the freedom to do evil. The freedom to do evil, to make mistakes and wrong decisions indicates the existence of a test. The mathematical reasoning method, which is “proof by contradiction”, results in “accountability”. The fact that man can do evil is a contradiction. Therefore, according to holistic science, the most reasonable option for the purpose of the world’s existence is the dialectic of the test.
  2. The necessity of life after death: The only reality in the world without exception is death. The existence of programmed cell deaths has directed science to the field of seeking a cure for death. According to the theory of mind, death signals a deeper meaning other than our life. Creating such a perfect order and then destroying it is impossible according to the Abduction Reasoning method. Abduction, a scientific discovery method, shows the strongest result according to the conditions at hand. Diseases are diagnosed with this method. It is not fair for those who do evil to get away with it and die without paying the price. According to the working cybernetic laws, those who do evil must pay the price. On the other hand, the neurogenetic tendency of the desire for eternity that exists in all people necessitates an eternal life according to the abduction causality principle. Therefore, there should be a second birth, that is, resurrection. We can say ‘The Creator wanted to give. So, He gave the sense of wanting’.
  3. The Entropy Law necessitates external will: Entropy is the law of energy and is the second law of thermodynamics. The universe goes from order to disorder in an orderly manner. According to this course, the universe will end with heat death. According to this law, there is no darkness, but the absence of light; there is no cold, but the absence of heat. A sensitive, fine-tuned and calculated support with continuous heat and light is required. This law pushes a person with the theory of mind competence to seek meaning. The theory of mind competence is a function of the mirror neurons in the human brain. If there is no external control and regulator, entropy increases, and order is disrupted in the universe. The existence of One with conscious will is necessary, that is a Necessary Being (Vacib-ul Vucud***), who is outside of space and time, who created the first existence, established perfect laws and administered these laws every moment, is mandatory.

Conclusions:

(**) Conscious design, is an  act by a Creator, just like all acts have their agents. Unlike Intelligent Design, Conscious Design has the capacity to generate its own algorithms.

(***) The term Vacib-ul Vucud, meaning “Necessary Being,” was introduced into the literature by Ibn Sina.

Resources:

A- In the manifesto, the sources prioritize rational evidence, reasoning methods, and computational sciences over speculative existential debates. Disciplines such as neuroscience, physics, chemistry, and logic are emphasized, along with neuropsychiatry, neuropsychology, neurophilosophy, neurotheology, and neuroquantology approaches that study consciousness, meaning, and purpose.

  1. Armağan, İbrahim: Methodology, Scientific Method. İzmir: Dokuz Eylül University Faculty of Fine Arts Publications, 1st Edition, 1983.
  2. Behe, Michael Joseph. "Irreducible Complexity: Obstacle to Darwinian Evolution," Philosophy Of Biology An Anthology, eds. Alex Rosenberg - Robert Arp. 427-437. USA: John Wiley & Sons, 2010.
  3. Behe, Michael Joseph. "Responding to Scientific Criticisms of Intelligent Design," trans. Orhan Düz. The Unknown History of the Universe’s Design, ed. Michael Joseph Behe - William Albert Dembski. 133-148. Gelenek Publishing, 1st Edition, 2004. Istanbul:
  4. Behe M.J., and Meyer, Stephen C. May 10, 2018 Intelligent Design https://www.discovery.org/v/what-is-intelligent-design
  5. Cogito: Neuroscience and Philosophy, Yapı Kredi Publishing, 2013, Istanbul
  6. Cohen, Simon Baron: The Science of Evil, Basic Books, 2011, New York
  7. Çınar, Aliye: Existential Theology: Religion and Symbol in Paul Tillich, İz Publishing, 2007, Istanbul
  8. Çengel, Yunus: Scientific Approach to Science and Risale-i Nur. https://sorularlaislamiyet.com/kaynak/akilli-tasarim-teorisi
  9. Damasio, Antonio R., trans. Bahar Atlamaz: Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain, Varlık Publishing, 1999, Istanbul
  10. Davidson, Richard J.: The Emotional Life of Your Brain, Pegasus Publishing, 2018, Istanbul
  11. Dawkins, Richard: The Selfish Gene, Kuzey Publishing, 1995, Istanbul
  12. Dawson, Christopher: Progress and Religion, Açılım Book, 2003, Istanbul
  13. Demirhan, Ahmet: Kierkegaard and Religion, Nirengi Book, 2003, Izmir
  14. Demirhan, Ahmet: Nietzsche and Religion, Nirengi Book, 2002, Izmir
  15. Ellenberger, Henri F.: The Discovery of the Unconscious, trans. Ebru Kılıç, Albaraka Publishing, 2021, Istanbul
  16. Emoto, Masaru: The Miracle of Water, Arıtan Publishing, 2008, Istanbul
  17. Frankl, Viktor E.: Man’s Search for Meaning, Okuyan Us Publishing, 2017, Istanbul
  18. Goetz, Stewart., Taliaferro, Charles: A Brief History Of The Soul, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford 2011
  19. Heisenberg, Werner: Physics and Philosophy, Revolution in Modern Science, Küre Publishing, 2007, Istanbul
  20. Herbert, Nick, trans. Meltem Andırıç: Basic Consciousness: Human Consciousness and the New Physics, Ayna Publishing, 2002, Istanbul
  21. Laughlin, Robert B.: A Different Universe, New York Times Books, 2012, New York
  22. Lefebvre, Henri: Dialectical Materialism, Kanat Publishing, 2017, Istanbul
  23. Lipton, Bruce H.: The Biology of Belief, Kuraldışı Publishing, 2007, Istanbul
  24. L. DuPont, Robert, M.D.; The Selfish Brain Learning From Addiction, American Psychiatric Press, Inc. 2005 Washington
  25. Kandel, Eric R.: What We Can Learn From Exceptional Brains, Kolektif Publishing, 2018, Istanbul
  26. Flew, Antony: There is a God, Profile Publishing, 2020, Istanbul
  27. Fry, Ron, trans. Feride Kurtulmuş: How to Improve Memory, Timaş Publishing, 2000, Istanbul
  28. Healy, Jane M., trans. Ayşe Bilge Dicleli: Your Child’s Developing Mind: Brain Development and Learning from Birth to Adolescence, Kolektif Publishing, 1997, Istanbul
  29. Hunke, Sigrid: Allah’s Sun over the Occident, Altın Publishing, 2001, Istanbul
  30. Huntington, Samuel P.: The Clash of Civilizations, Vadi Publishing, 2003, Istanbul
  31. İnalöz, Orhan: How to Think Correctly, Feyyaz Publishing, 2013, Istanbul
  32. İtil, Turan: The Forgotten Brain: The Greater Taboo Than Sex, Kaynak Publishing, 2015, Istanbul
  33. İzzetbegović, Aliya: Islam Between East and West, Ketebe Publishing, 1993, Istanbul
  34. Johnson, Phillip E., trans. Orhan Düz: The Evolution Trial, Gaye Bookstore Distribution, 2003, Bursa
  35. Karataş, Şükran, Deity And Freedom Equality Justice in History Philosophy Science, İmak Ofset Publishing, 2013
  36. King, Brett: Augmented, Maltepe University Press, 2016, Istanbul
  37. Kingsley, Peter: The Unknown History of Western Wisdom, Etkileşim Publishing, trans. Onur Atalay, 2004, Istanbul
  38. Köknel, Özcan: Conflicting Values From Family to Society, From Politics to Beliefs, From Love to Romance, Altın Publishing, 2007, Istanbul
  39. Maisonneuve, Jean: Social Psychology, Dost Bookstore, 2005, Istanbul
  40. Manafov, Rafiz: The Problem of Evil and Theodicy, İz Publishing, 2007, Istanbul
  41. Margenau, Henry and Varghese, Roy Abraham, trans. Ahmet Ergenç: Cosmos, Bios, Theos, Gelenek Publishing, 2002, Istanbul
  42. Maslow, Abraham, trans. Okhan Gündüz: The Psychology of Being Human, Kuraldışı Publishing, 2011, Istanbul
  43. Maslow, Abraham: Religions, Values, Peak Experiences, Kuraldışı Publishing, 1964, Istanbul
  44. Miquel, Andre, trans. Ahmet Fidan: Islamic Civilization from Birth to Present, Birleşik Bookstore, 2003, Ankara
  45. Morin, Christophe: The Persuasion Code in the Brain, Maltepe University Press, 2019, Istanbul
  46. Moses, Jeffrey: Becoming One: Shared Noble Principles of All Religions, Samsara, 2003, Istanbul
  47. Murphy, Joseph: The Power of the Subconscious, Koridor Publishing, 2000, Istanbul
  48. Nietzsche, Friedrich: Beyond Good and Evil, İş Bankası Culture Publishing, 2014, Istanbul
  49. Peteet, R. John, M.D., G.Lu, Francis, M.D., E. Narrow, William, M.P.H., M.D.; Religious and Spiritual Issues in Psychiatric Diagnosis, American Psychiatric Association Arlington, Virginia, 2011
  50. Ramachandran, V.S., Sandra Blakeslee, trans. Levent Öztürk; Phantoms in the Brain: Probing the Mysteries of the Mind, 2019, Istanbul Boğaziçi University Publishing
  51. Small, Gary, trans. Tuğba Kırca: The Memory Bible, Omega Publishing, 2002, Istanbul
  52. Songar, Ayhan: Cybernetics, Yeni Asya Publishing, 1980, Istanbul
  53. Stalin: Dialectical and Historical Materialism, Science and Socialism Publishing, 2017, Istanbul
  54. Stevens, Anthony: Jung, Kaknüs Publishing, 1999, Istanbul
  55. Stora, Jean Benjamin: Stress, İletişim Publishing, 1994, Istanbul
  56. Strano, Anthony, trans. Aynur Sungur Tuncer and İlknur Bulut: Eastern Thoughts and Reflections of Deep Thought for the Western Mind, Altın Bookstore, 2006, Istanbul
  57. Şimşek, Ümit: Creating an Act: From Work to Name, Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı, 2002, Ankara
  58. Shaffer, Jerome A., trans. Turan Koç: Philosophy of Mind, Küre Publishing, 2005, Istanbul
  59. Spinoza, Baruch: “Ethics,” Alfa Publishing, 1978, Istanbul
  60. Tanrıdağ, Oğuz: I Believe, Therefore I Exist, Üsküdar University Publishing No: 5, 2017, Istanbul
  61. Tanrıdağ, Oğuz: Social Neuroscience, Nobel Medical Publishing, 2015, Istanbul
  62. Talbot, Michael: The Holographic Universe, Omega Publishing, 2001, Istanbul Publishing, 2021, Istanbul
  63. Tura, Saffet Murat: Matter and Meaning: The Origin of Rationality, Metis Publishing, 2011, Istanbul
  64. Tarlacı, Sultan: Crime and Brain, Destek Publishing, 2017, Istanbul
  65. Tarlacı, Sultan: Dictionary of Death, Tuti Book, 2018, Istanbul
  66. Tarhan, Nevzat: Wisdom Psychology 1 Rational Belief Spinoza’s Mistake and the Evolution of Evolution, 2022, Timaş Publishing.
  67. Tarhan, Nevzat: Journey from Mind to Heart Bediüzzaman Model Timaş 2022 Istanbul
  68. Taslaman, Caner: Quantum Theory, Philosophy, and God, Istanbul Publishing, 2008, Istanbul
  69. Tatlı, Adem: Intelligent Design Theory. https://sorularlaislamiyet.com/kaynak/akilli-tasarim-teorisi
  70. Twenge, M. Jean, PH.D., Campbell, W. Keith, PH.D.; The Narcissism Epidemic, Living In The Age of Entitlement, Atria Paperback, New York, 2009
  71. Uzbay, Tayfun: The Invisible Brain, Destek Publishing, 2017, Istanbul
  72. Venter, Henry.: Self-Transcendence: Maslow’s Answer to Cultural Closeness. Journal of Innovation Management, 4.3, 2017
  73. Wilson E.O.: The Creation: An Appeal to Save Earth, W.W. Norton Company, New York/London, 2006
  74. Yalom, Irvin D., trans. Özden Arıkan: Religion and Psychiatry, Pegasus Publishing, 2000, Istanbul

B- Chemical processes claimed to have arisen spontaneously and by chance have failed to explain the existence of life and the origin of the genetic code.

  1. Gribbin, J. Carbon Dioxide, Ammonia and Life. New Scientist. Vol.94. May 13. 1982, p.143
  2.  Bliss, R. B. and Parker, G. E. Origin of Life. California. 1979
  3. Tatlı, Â. Evrim ve Yaratılış. 5. baskı. 2018, s. 38.
  4. Jack W. Szostak, David P. Bartel, and P. Luigi Luisi, “Synthesizing Life,” Nature, 409: 387-390 (January 18, 2001
  5.  Robert Shapiro, “A Simpler Origin for Life,” Scientific American, pp. 46-53, June, 2007
  6. J.T. Trevors and D.L. Abel, “Chance and necessity do not explain the origin of life,” Cell Biology International, 28: 729-739, 2004.
  7.  George M. Whitesides, “Revolutions In Chemistry: Priestley Medalist George M. Whitesides’ Address,” Chemical and Engineering News, 85: 12-17, March 26, 2007

C- Biological structures are highly sensitive and complex compounds, making them unlikely to be products of random mutations.

  1. Douglas A. Axe, “Estimating the Prevalence of Protein Sequences Adopting Functional Enzyme Folds,” Journal of Molecular Biology, 341: 1295-1315, 2004.

D- The sudden appearance of species in the fossil record does not support Darwinian evolution.

  1. R.S.K. Barnes, P. Calow and P.J.W. Olive, The Invertebrates: A New Synthesis, pp. 9-10 (3rd ed., Blackwell Sci. Publications, 2001
  2.  Robert L. Carroll, “Towards a new evolutionary synthesis,” Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 15(1):27-32, 2000
  3. Jaume Baguña and Jordi Garcia-Fernández, “Evo-Devo: the Long and Winding Road,” International Journal of Developmental Biology, 47:705-713, 2003
  4. Kevin J. Peterson, Michael R. Dietrich and Mark A. McPeek, “MicroRNAs and metazoan macroevolution: insights into canalization, complexity, and the Cambrian explosion,” BioEssays, 31 (7):736-747, 2009
  5. Stefanie De Bodt, Steven Maere, and Yves Van de Peer, “Genome duplication and the origin of angiosperms,” Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 20:591-597, 2005
  6. Frank B. Gill, Ornithology, 3rd ed. New York: W.H. Freeman, 2007, p. 42.
  7. Alan Feduccia, “‘Big bang’ for tertiary birds?,” Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 18: 172-176, 2003
  8. Ernst Mayr, What Makes Biology Unique?, p. 198 (Cambridge University Press, 2004
  9. John Hawks, Keith Hunley, Sang-Hee Lee, and Milford Wolpoff, “Population Bottlenecks and Pleistocene Human Evolution,” Journal of Molecular Biology and Evolution, 17(1):2-22, 2000.

E- Molecular biology has not succeeded in constructing a comprehensive "Tree of Life."

  1.  (“New study suggests big bang theory of human evolution,”January 10, 2000). http://www.umich.edu/~newsinfo/Releases/2000/Jan00/r011000b.html
  2. Jeffrewy Schwartz, Sudden Origins: Fossils, Genes, and the Emergence of Species, p. 3, Wiley, 1999
  3. Graham Lawton, “Why Darwin was wrong about the tree of life,” New Scientist (January 21, 2009
  4. W. Ford Doolittle, “Phylogenetic Classification and the Universal Tree,” Science, 284:2124-2128, June 25, 1999.
  5. Partly quoting Eric Bapteste, in Lawton, “Why Darwin was wrong about the tree of life” (internal quotations omitted.
  6. Carl Woese “The Universal Ancestor,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 95:6854- 9859, June, 1998
  7. Graham Lawton, “Why Darwin was wrong about the tree of life,” New Scientist, January 21, 2009
  8. Liliana M. Dávalos, Andrea L. Cirranello, Jonathan H. Geisler, and Nancy B. Simmons, “Understanding phylogenetic incongruence: lessons from phyllostomid bats,” Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 87:991-1024, 2012

F- Similar biological structures observed among unrelated organisms challenge Darwinism and refute the concept of a common ancestor.

  1. David P. Mindell, Michael D. Sorenson, and Derek E. Dimcheff, “Multiple independent origins of mitochondrial gene order in birds,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 95 (September, 1998): 10693-10697
  2. Frederick M Ausubel, “Are innate immune signaling pathways in plants and animals conserved?,” Nature Immunology, 6 (10): 973-979 (October, 2005
  3. Michael Syvanen, “Evolutionary Implications of Horizontal Gene Transfer,” Annual Review of Genetics, 46:339-356, 2012.

G- Differences among vertebrate embryos contradict predictions of common descent.

  1. Kalinka et al., “Gene expression divergence recapitulates the developmental hourglass model,” Nature, 468:811, December 9, 2010
  2. Steven Poe and Marvalee H. Wake, “Quantitative Tests of General Models for the Evolution of Development,” The American Naturalist, 164, September, 2004): 415-422; Olaf R. P. Bininda-Emonds, Jonathan E. Jeffery, and Michael K. Richardson, “Inverting the hourglass: quantitative evidence against the phylotypic stage in vertebrate development,” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B, 270 (2003): 341- 346;
  3.  Olaf R. P. Bininda-Emonds, Jonathan E. Jeffery, and Michael K. Richardson, “Inverting the hourglass: quantitative evidence against the phylotypic stage in vertebrate development,” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B, 270:341-346, 2003).

H- Darwinism’s predictions regarding vestigial organs and so-called "junk DNA" have been proven incorrect in stark clarity.

  1. Francis Collins, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief (New York: Free Press, 2006), 136-37.
  2. Richard Sternberg, “On the Roles of Repetitive DNA Elements in the Context of a Unified Genomic- Epigenetic System,” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 981 (2002): 154-88.
  3. Richard Sternberg, a.g.e.
  4. Tammy A. Morrish, Nicolas Gilbert, Jeremy S. Myers, Bethaney J. Vincent, Thomas D. Stamato, Guillermo
  5. E. Taccioli, Mark A. Batzer, and John V. Mora “DNA repair mediated by endonuclease-independent LINE-1 retrotransposition,” Nature Genetics, 31 (June, 2002): 159-65.
  6. Galit Lev-Maor, Rotem Sorek, Noam Shomron, and Gil Ast, “The birth of an alternatively spliced exon: 3′ splice-site selection in Alu exons,” Science, 300 (May 23, 2003): 1288-91; Wojciech Makalowski, “Not junk after all,” Science, 300 (May 23, 2003): 1246-47.
  7. Morrish et al., “DNA repair mediated by endonuclease-independent LINE-1 retrotransposition,” 159-65; Annie Tremblay, Maria Jasin, and Pierre Chartrand, “A Double-Strand Break in a Chromosomal LINE Element Can Be Repaired by Gene Conversion with Various Endogenous LINE Elements in Mouse Cells,” Molecualr and Cellular Biology, 20 (January, 2000): 54-60
  8. Richard Sternberg and James A. Shapiro, “How repeated retroelements format genome function,” Cytogenetic and Genome Research, 110 (2005): 108-16.
  9. Jeffrey S. Han, Suzanne T. Szak, and Jef D. Boeke, “Transcriptional disruption by the L1 retrotransposon and implications for mammalian transcriptomes,” Nature, 429 (May 20, 2004): 268-74; Bethany A. Janowski, Kenneth E. Huffman, Jacob C. Schwartz, Rosalyn Ram, Daniel Hardy, David S. Shames, John D. Minna, and David R. Corey, “Inhibiting gene expression at transcription start sites in chromosomal DNA with antigene RNAs,” Nature Chemical Biology, 1 (September, 2005): 216-22.
  10. S. Henikoff, K. Ahmad, H. and S. Malik “The Centromere Paradox: Stable Inheritance with Rapidly Evolving DNA,” Science, 293 (August 10, 2001): 1098-1102;
  11. C. Bell, A. G. West, and G. Felsenfeld, “Insulators and Boundaries: Versatile Regulatory Elements in the Eukaryotic Genome,” Science, 291 (January 19, 2001): 447-50;
  12. M.-L. Pardue and P.G. DeBaryshe, “Drosophila telomeres: two transposable elements with important roles in chromosomes,” Genetica, 107 (1999): 189-96;
  13. S. Henikoff, “Heterochromatin function in complex genomes,” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, 1470 (February, 2000): O1-O8; L. M.Figueiredo, L. H. Freitas-Junior, E. Bottius, Jean-Christophe Olivo-Marin, and A. Scherf, “A central role for Plasmodium falciparum subtelomeric regions in spatial positioning and telomere length regulation,” The EMBO Journal, 21 (2002): 815-24;
  14. Mary G. Schueler, Anne W. Higgins, M. Katharine Rudd, Karen Gustashaw, and Huntington F. Willard, “Genomic and Genetic Definition of a Functional Human Centromere,” Science, 294 (October 5, 2001): 109-15.
  15. Ling-Ling Chen, Joshua N. DeCerbo, and Gordon G. Carmichael, “Alu element-mediated gene silencing,” The EMBO Journal 27 (2008): 1694-1705;
  16. Jerzy Jurka, “Evolutionary impact of human Alu repetitive elements,” Current Opinion in Genetics & Development, 14 (2004): 603-8;
  17. G. Lev-Maor et al. “The birth of an alternatively spliced exon: 3′ splice-site selection in Alu exons,” 1288-91
  18. M. Mura, P. Murcia, M. Caporale, T. E. Spencer, K. Nagashima, A. Rein, and M. Palmarini, “Late viral interference induced by transdominant Gag of an endogenous retrovirus,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 101 (July 27, 2004): 11117-22;
  19. M. Kandouz, A. Bier, G. D Carystinos, M. A Alaoui-Jamali, and G. Batist, “Connexin43 pseudogene is expressed in tumor cells and inhibits growth,” Oncogene, 23 (2004):4763-70.
  20.  K. A. Dunlap, M. Palmarini, M. Varela, R. C. Burghardt, K. Hayashi, J. L. Farmer, and T. E. Spencer, “Endogenous retroviruses regulate periimplantation placental growth and differentiation,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 103 (September 26, 2006):14390-95;
  21. L. Hyslop, M. Stojkovic, L. Armstrong, T. Walter, P. Stojkovic, S. Przyborski, M. Herbert, A. Murdoch, T. Strachan, and M. Lakoa, “Downregulation of NANOG Induces Differentiation of Human Embryonic Stem Cells to Extraembryonic Lineages,” Stem Cells, 23 (2005): 1035-43;
  22. E. Peaston, A. V. Evsikov, J. H. Graber, W. N. de Vries, A. E. Holbrook, D. Solter, and B. B. Knowles, “Retrotransposons Regulate Host Genes in Mouse Oocytes and Preimplantation Embryos,” Developmental Cell, 7 (October, 2004): 597-606
  23. Yong, “ENCODE: the rough guide to the human genome,” Discover Magazine (September 5, 2012), at http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/09/05/encode-the-rough-guide-to-the-human-genome/ Makalowski, “Not Junk After All,” 1246-47.
  24. Laura Poliseno, “Pseudogenes: Newly Discovered Players in Human Cancer,” Science Signaling, 5 (242) (September 18, 2012).
  25. Yan-Zi Wen, Ling-Ling Zheng, Liang-Hu Qu, Francisco J. Ayala and Zhao-Rong Lun, “Pseudogenes are not pseudo any more,” RNA Biology, 9(1):27-32 (January, 2012).

I- Evolutionary theory is not scientific knowledge but rather an ideological and philosophical view grounded in atheism.

  1. Evgeniy S. Balakirev and Francisco J. Ayala, “Pseudogenes, Are They ‘Junk’ or Functional DNA?,” Annual Review of Genetics, 37 (2003): 123-51.
  2. BwEyoAcA&sclient=gws-wiz-serp (Erişim Tarihi: 16.03.2024). https://www.worldhistory.org/trans/tr/1-19704/immanuelkant

I APPROVE

I APPROVE THE CREATION MANIFESTO

people signed the document.

Thank You
Your signature has been generated

© 2011 - 2024 T.C. Üsküdar University All Rights Reserved.