Yusuf Estes – Quran and the Origins of the Universe

August 9, 2007 | 13 Comments »

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Part 4:

Part 5:

13 Responses to “ Yusuf Estes – Quran and the Origins of the Universe ”

  1. John says:

    I was expecting to hear more about scientific theories about the origin of the universe and how they compare with religious doctrine. I did get some interest website links, however.

    I highly recomment Brian Green’s books The Elegant Universe and Fabric of the Cosmos. There is no need to assue atheism when exploring scientific explanations of the universe. Allah commands us to observe and learn from the creation as a means of worshiping the Creator.

    The Big Bang and Inflation theories were not dreamed up out of thin air. They were derived through scientific observation and mathmatical discovery. There is nothing in these theories that suggest or insist in an absense of a God-Creator (nor does the theory of evolution).

  2. John says:

    In this video, Mr. Estes brings up the issue of bird beaks adapting to a new type of environment (food) in just six months. He suggests that the discovery of this adaptation happening in just a few short months disproves evolution happening over millions of years.

    However, adaptation and evolution are different issues. Adaptation is biological alterations that do not change the actual species whereas evolution is a series of biological alterations that do change the species. In other words, evolution is a long series of adaptations over a long span of time.

    Mr. Estes bringing up the fact of adaptation happening in such a short time span actually supports the theory of evolution. Think about it… if such a change in a bird’s environment can spark an adaptation (being born with a different type of beak) within six months, imagine what environmental changes a species will experience over millions of years and the resulting adaptations that result.

    So, Mr. Estes’ arguments against evolution actually helps supports it.

  3. Not so fast... says:

    I think what Estes was actually inferring to was that what had logically occurred in each and every case had been only adaptation evidenced by survival of the organism, which is solely a characteristic, or capability, of the genome, NOT a selection action of the environment or conditions, or anything else understood by scientists. The only adaptation or “selection” made was simple survival. But that is true of all organisms. Thus, Estes’ assertion of how then is Adaptation or Natural Selection (or any other type of selection) the cause of evolution?

    Science has proved irrefutably that materialism is simply a dogma since if matter were capable of giving rise to life on its own, then it should be possible to synthesise life in laboratory conditions. However, not even one organelle in a cell can be reproduced in the laboratory, let alone a complete cell. How do you explain this?

    If you’re theory is indeed correct, where are the billions of the transitional, intermediate fossils? Why cannot we observe a smooth transition among all living creatures and fossil records?

    What records do you possess for the evolutionary ancestors of the insects?

    Can you provide proof that DNA can assemble itself? What about the billions of pages of ciphered information located in a tiny part of each of your one hundred trillion cells?

    How could sensory organs as complex as the eye or the ear or the brain of even a tiny ant ever come about by chance or natural selection? Surely complexity requires an explanation which always results in an intelligent designer?

    If the solar system evolved, How can three planets and six moons spin backwards? Why do comets exist if the solar system is indeed billions of years old? Where has all the helium gone?

    How do you explain the evolution of sexual reproduction?

    If the Big Bang occured, where did intelligence come from which is in and around us?

    How do you explain the global flood?

    How did the first ever cell reproduce?

    Did the atmosphere have oxygen just before life appeared?

    If it takes intelligence to build a car, is it not therefore reasonable to assert that it would take much more intelligence to create a human? If I place hydrogen and a mixture of what ever else that takes your fancy into a closed container, I can expect to see the creation of a human being if I wait long enough?

    Which came first, the chicken or the egg? DNA, or the proteins required by DNA?

    Could you identify one convincing hypothesis on how our moon exists today given all the information we have? Is it not true that all evolutionary theories concerning the existence of the moon have been unequivocally rejected by science?

    How do you explain the origin of plate tectonics, the Grand Canyon and Oil for example?

    The second law of thermodynamics demolishes the theory of evolution which asserts that life transitions from chaos to order. How do you explain this?

    Have you ever thought about the genius construction of a wasp’s nest or a spider’s web? How does the wasp know what materials are required and how to build the nest? Did it have to attend a special training course to learn this?

    How can you get something from nothingness?

    How can a watch come into existence without a watchmaker?

    How did thought come from non-thought?

    How can mutations create new and improved varieties? Jumbling up letters in a novel will never reproduce another better novel.

    The Earth’s magnetic field is decaying at such a rate that 10,000 years ago, the earth’s magnetism would have equaled that of a magnetic star, which is highly unlikely as it would have pulverised the earth. How then could the earth be billions of years old? Does not a young earth discredit the theory of evolution?

    If you do not feel compelled to answer any of my above questions, then could you please answer this one without avoiding it: What evidence would falsify the doctrine of scientific evolution? Evolutionists always answer “None!”, which leads me to believe that evolution is a direct manifestation of a dogma and not a science in any way, shape or form, because if no evidence exists, then how can evolution be a falsifiable, demonstrable and testable scientific theory?

    Evolution is not a science by definition and will not admit any evidence or observation to contradict its dead-end theory which is unfalsifiable. The theory of evolution is no more than a fallacious straw man, the purpose of creationism is to set it on fire and kick the cinders out of it.

  4. I agree says:

    Subhnallah, I totally agree with your arguments. The theory of evolution is just wild speculation and it’s like a fairytale. But what about natural selection?

  5. I’ve got trouble with viewing your site clearly in the latest release of Opera. It looks ok in IE and Firefox though.Hope you have a great day.

  6. WHY ISLAM says:

    visit for more whyyislam.blogspot.com/ or click why islam name above

  7. Oh dogs are so wonderful, i wish i could have my very household of dogs. It would make my evening everyday to see them have fun.

  8. Ted Shipman says:

    I amashed to admit I wasn’t aware of that

  9. cikcik says:

    Hello; Cool informations for me. Your post has supporting. I want to has valuable posts like yours in my website. How do you find these posts? And you have a problem about your template.You should fix your caseabout your template … I recently came across your blog and have been readingalong. I think I would leave my first comment. I don’t know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Very Nice blog. I will keep reading this blog very often.Good day…

  10. Anti-Evilution says:

    To evolutionist…if evolution is true, then take group of humuns and put them in the artic bare-naked and see how they evolve or adapt. I bet anything without clothing, or the means to aquire fire or clothing, they will die withen a day or two. Not one will adapt or start to evolve to some harry bigfoot like creature. Or allow a baby to be born under water, yes for awhile the baby will swim around as if it is still in the womb, but allow it to remain long enough and it will die, not adapt or evolve. Man adapts by growing in knowledge, not by evolving into a different species.

    God said he created man in the garden of eden, not from an animal species.
    And theirs no proof for evolution, its merely speculations form people who have no better answer other than admit God created people as they are.

  11. There is a clear Quranic concept of origin of life, matter & universe but unfortunately there is no real reseach institution which could explore these concepts and gather scientific evidences in favour of Islamic perspective of life, matter and universe. I have tried at my personal level and I have presented the same in my articles which I have got published in a peer reviewed science journal namely Indian Journal of Science & Technology which are available on http://www.indjst.org. The articles have been prepared on the basis of the book titled Natural World Order & The Islamic Thought which is also available on http://www.islamic-thought.com. I would like to have comments about the articles and the book. Finally I have completed an article which will resolve all the confusion between science, philosophy and theology and the article is being published very shortly.

  12. do a search for

    bakkah yusuf estes

    to read about some very serious mistakes opposing fundamental sunni beliefs with proofs and references.

Leave a Reply

39 queries in 0.748 seconds