Pakistan: lesson from Darwinism

Published Apr 13, 2013 01:05am

THIS is apropos of Dr Iftikhaar Ahmed’s letter under the heading ‘Pakistan: lesson from Darwinism’ (March 7), asking Pakistanis to learn a lesson from Darwin. The conclusion reached by Darwin on the basis of similarity of forms is not a theory but a supposition. This supposition is being termed as theory.

Darwin’s inductive logic derived from similarity of forms does not establish “man descended from apes.” The apes are a variety of species in the midst of numerous animals and all species in their individual capacity were created individually. Instantaneous creation does not recognise one species springing from another. Darwin’s experimental generalisation as opposed to the traditional, that man descended from a heavenly- created human being called Adam has for centuries been held to be valid, man being unique among all the other species.

All the prophets of God were uniquely gifted with a third dimension in which to receive communication from God. The fall of Adam from a paradisiacal state did not end the line of communication between the Creator and the created. The line of intuitive communication still exists, but not for everyone. The intuitive line of communication has to be metaphysically established between Heaven and Earth.

The prophets who came to establish this dimension between God and themselves were truthful. They received Revelations like the Torah, the Bible and the Quran -- unique in themselves. Darwin could have been misanthropic, unable to comprehend higher human values other than the animal in him.

Well-founded religions have completely shattered the purely logical generalisation of the materialist, and the third dimension opens a new dimension to those disposed to extra dimension. There, however, exists a proviso that extra-sensory knowledge in a third dimension is not accessible to a purely sensory approach. All the Revelations descended through this dimension and this dimension is a part of certain human beings not accessible to others is not initiated.

AKBAR KHAN          Karachi

More From This Section

Sindh IG’s removal

THIS is further to the letter ‘Sindh IG episode’ (July 19). The recently removed Sindh IG Iqbal Mahmood was ...

Hamas’s victory!

THANKS to peace-loving Israelis, the Zionist regime is facing stiff resistance at home. On July 26 more than 3,000...

Gaza and US

HOW can the US government criticise or condemn Russia for helping or supporting the rebels fighting in Ukraine who...

Comments (23) (Closed)


Reflector
Apr 13, 2013 04:47am
Pure nonsense!
omer
Apr 13, 2013 04:52am
Recently this (darwinism) has been proved false with casrbon dating of earth. Scientist ruled that the earth is too young to have allowed the transit from ape to man. So why are we still stuck to it?
malik
Apr 13, 2013 05:12am
So what lesson Pakistan has from Darwinism except that you dont believe in it?
Manek
Apr 13, 2013 06:01am
The author is still living in a fool's paradise
Muhammad Faisal
Apr 13, 2013 06:28am
Masha'Allah, Yes theory of evolution is just a supposition but it is taught in schools as fact to make young generation Godless :(
Masood Khan
Apr 13, 2013 07:15am
"Darwin?s experimental generalisation as opposed to the traditional, that man descended from a heavenly- created human being called Adam has for centuries been held to be valid, man being unique among all the other species" --- Humans ever held the position that Earth is the Center of Universe and Sun rotates around the Earth; it?s not long ago this fundamental position was changed and we found that Earth is a negligible part of the ever expanding Universe. Darwin and later research came up with missing links. When we accept scientific research on millions of ever-hidden areas, then what' the issue with going by Darwin' premise. Can Akbar prove the points mentioned in his letter?
J. Kumar
Apr 13, 2013 12:05pm
I want to know the name of this "scientist" and the science organization approves his theory.
sukhbir
Apr 13, 2013 12:43pm
I fully agree with the author in reaching a very Godly conclusion to the supposition of Darwinism. Yes Sir, you are bang on when you state "Well-founded religions have completely shattered the purely logical generalisation of the materialist, and the third dimension opens a new dimension to those disposed to extra dimension." I would, with your permission like to add "The FACTS, not theory and not hypothesis, of Instantaneous Creation are truly Illogical but True". None and I insist none, in the entire History of man ever received the gift of "extra-sensory knowledge in a third dimension" except the Prophets. Today, my dear Sir you have put an end to this meaningless debate for ever. You do deserve "MOST NOBLE AWARD" and May almighty grant it to you. With sincere regards
Agha Ata (USA)
Apr 13, 2013 12:45pm
Mr. Author, you have the right to think. You are a thinker. Please give the same rights to others. They may think quite differently but that have a right to think also. I would suggest you to watch the movie "Inherit the Wind". It had a tremendous impact on western thinking. The film doesn't support Evolution, as some people might conclude, rather it tells you of your rights. Especially the right to think. I am not supporting Evolution, but I do insist that please read the articles on Evolution in Encyclopaedia of Britannica, and think a little more. Thank you.
gabriel
Apr 13, 2013 01:47pm
"The prophets who came to establish this dimension between God and themselves were truthful." How do you know they were truthful ? How do you know it was not their own conscience providing the impulse for their pronouncements and activities?
nasir siddique
Apr 13, 2013 02:03pm
why do we share the same physiological features with all other mammals. Everything is the same. Perhaps if we were a gifted creation we should have had some difference.
Thoughtful
Apr 13, 2013 03:24pm
A ridiculous, bogus, and laughable article.
Muhammad Faisal
Apr 13, 2013 06:21pm
Carbon-14 testing is one of the dating tests most frequently employed. Evolutionists use this method in order to determine age when examining the fossil record. However, as with other radiometric tests, there are serious doubts concerning the reliability of carbon-14 dating. The most important of these is the high likelihood of gas exchange between the specimen to be dated and the outside environment. This exchange mostly comes about by means of waters containing carbonate or bicarbonate. If these natural waters?which contain carbon-14?come into contact with the specimen, then some of the carbon-14 atoms they contain will pass into the specimen. In that event, the specimen will test younger than it really is. The exact opposite of this situation may also arise. Under certain conditions, the amount of carbon-14 in the specimen to be dated can be released into the external environment in the form of carbonate and/or bicarbonate. In that event, the specimen will appear to be older than it actually is. Indeed, various concrete findings have revealed that carbon-14 dating is not all that reliable. Carbon-14 dating tests on specimens whose age is known for certain have often given false results. For instance, the skin of a newly dead seal was depicted as being 1,300 years old.70 A living shell was dated as 2,300 years old. A deer antler was variously dated as 5,340, 9,310 and 10,320 years old A piece of tree bark was dated as 1,168 and 2,200 years old.Carbon-14 dating gave an age of 6,000 years for the city of Jarmo in northern Iraq, where people have been living for 500 years For all these reasons, carbon-14 dating, like other radiometric tests, cannot be regarded as wholly reliable Sources: W. Dort, Antarctic Journal of the US, 1971, p. 210. M. S. Kieth, G. M. Anderson, ?Radiocarbon Dating: Fictitious Results with Mollusk Shells,? Science, August 16, 1963, p. 634. G. W. Barendsen, E. S. Deevey, L. J. Gralenski, ?Yale Natural Radiocarbon Measurements,? Science, Vol. 126, p. 911. H. R. Crane, ?University of Michigan Radiocarbon Dates I,? Science, Vol. 124, p. 666, specimen M-19. Charles Reed, ?Animal Domestication in the Prehistoric Near East,? Science, Vol. 130, p. 1630
Muhammad Faisal
Apr 13, 2013 06:45pm
Dear omer we still stuck it as there is Darwinism dictatorship in whole world. Creationists never say don't teach Darwinism in schools. They say teach Creationism along with Darwinism with scientific evidences. People have to decide which theory has more logic and which is only supposition. I also want to correct one line in article. Theory (Supposition) of Evolution doesn't say men descended from apes but it says men and apes have common ancestors but it failed to prove missing links and transitions between them.
Pervez Musharraf
Apr 13, 2013 06:45pm
one can afely assume that had there been Haloperidol in times of Self anointed godmen, then religion as a whole would have collapsed. but what can you expect from a fundoo writer from a fundoo country...
ramesh rao
Apr 13, 2013 06:55pm
mr.akbar khan: since you believe that torah,bible and quran are relavations of god, what about vedas and other nonabrahamic religious books? are they also revalations of god? if we are all descendents of only adam and eve,then we must be children born out of incest. if so, why do all religious books say incest is a sin? these issues cannot be resolved or explained by accepting the so called relavations of god and Darwinism and other scientific theories and facts can help us in understanding who we are.
alamgir
Apr 13, 2013 07:58pm
darwin attacked the church , he hated the guts of popes, walis and other such non-sensical people who claim to talk to almighty and beg forgiveness for all of us , these people (instead of darwin) have insulted GOD by saying that he does not listen to any other creatures but these pope, saints,sadhus,wali etc . so in one way if a normal human loves god it means nothing you still have to go through a rigorous and ineffiecient process of dargah,church,mandir to get god to listen to you. while a purely muslim masjid is a place for muslims to congregate and offer salah , not because its a ritual but to show the non-beleivers the strentgh of the ummah (no heretics= no mazar,dargah ) so this pure religion is exactly what mr darwin would have followed but unfortunately and thanks to the effort of the persian empire and its ally the british empire made their full effort to distort and halt the perpetuation of pure islam, in my opinion darwin saw the now dying sects and persian culture islam and was disgusted by it just like christianity and judaism,jainism,hinduism etc. darwinism tells us do not differentiate according to sexual preferences , while true islam perpetuates the natural affinity of male and female in a strong bond of matrimonial bliss . darwinism cannot stop descrimination in terms of race but in islam there is a total ban on racism . only some heretics tried to create syeds etc but soon we will be rid of these curses too sorry for typing such a huge reply but the mind works in mysterios ways buh bye
AAK
Apr 13, 2013 11:06pm
So what is your research to prove it is a supposition. What a baseless comment
Khota
Apr 14, 2013 12:22am
Just enjoy. You don't have to be harsh.
Siddique Malik
Apr 14, 2013 12:48am
That's right, and he calls it the third dimension. Siddique Malik, Louisville, Kentucky, USA.
sati
Apr 14, 2013 02:24am
Bandar does not understand evolution
Rajagopal
Apr 14, 2013 10:59am
Excellent question Mr. Ramesh rao. I hope Mr. Khan and his ilk will come up with a sensible answer.
Reflector
Apr 14, 2013 01:45pm
I don't know what your qualifications are in assessing scientific material but I don't you can randomly quote some supposedly research article as proof that radiocarbon dating is not accurate. Please read up on why radio carbon dating must be supplemented with calibration techniques to provide an accurate estimate of the age of species. Don't read bits are pieces from somewhere at jump to conclusions that a proven dating system is wrong. You don't get a nobel prize (like Will Liddy did in 1960 for Radio carbon dating) for something that is simply not accurate. On the other hand your seem to be somewhat ready to accept something someone said a long time ago without any proof as being true.