Our Beacon Forum

evolution 2
By:jawaid ahmed,uk
Date: Monday, 30 July 2018, 1:00 pm
In Response To: RE: Why millat of Ibrahim (Jawaid Ahmad, uk) (A Sayed (South Africa))

Everything Created In Pairs
36:36 Glory to Him Who has created pairs of everything that the earth grows, and of themselves, and of things they have no knowledge yet. [This discovery of all things existing in pairs earned the British physicist Paul Dirac the Nobel Prize in 1933]

Male and female; paired particles; matter and anti-matter; the interpretation of this verse can be simple or used for complex matters; “upward interpretation” based on increasing knowledge. The Qur’an does not have to give complex mathematical equations to prove it is from Allah, just the truth and leaves it up to us to fill in the details or it would be a pointless existence if we did not have to think for ourselves; sorry, talking about the fundamentalist fanatics again!
51:47 And it is We Who built the Universe with power, and certainly, it is We Who are steadily expanding it.
[Samaa = Sky = Heaven = Allegorically the Universe. Bi-Ayidin = With both hands = With power. The expansion of the Universe was first proposed by the Belgian cosmologist Georges Lemaitre and the Russian scientist A. Friemann. In 1929, it was observed for the first time by the American astronomer Edwin Hubble. (78 Km/Sec in 2012). The Qur’an had given us this knowledge 14 centuries ago! 55:5, 36:38-40]
51:48 And We have spread out the earth, and how excellent a Spreader We are!
51:49 And all things We created in pairs and in opposites (such that one complements the other), so that you may reflect.
51:50 (Say), “Therefore, find your way to God alone. I am a plain warner to you from Him."
[To emphasize the urgency to do good in this short, unpredictable human life, the word 'say' in this verse is merged with Fafirru = So flee = Therefore, rush = So, go forth now = So, escape = Find your way]
51:51 Set up no god or ‘authority’ along with God. I am a plain warner to you from Him.
We Muslims have adopted Bible fairy tales and attributed their “knowledge” to a number of hadith of the Prophet that some scholars openly state as “Judaic-Christian”. They still accept them because they believe that some parts of the Bible were inspired by Allah and instead of using the Qur’an to judge which verses are true or not, they use false Bible verses to understand the Qur’an! The above verses speak for themselves. Allah did create everything, we all agree with this statement, but He also created everything in pairs which shows that He knew mankind was to be “paired”, male and female, so did not create a man first and then a woman later. Every Muslim child knows that Hawaa came from Adam’s rib because that is what is taught to them. Muslims have failed to read the Bible in full which has two stories about the creation of man and because creationists and Muslims reject evolution based on this book, it is important to show them their “Gospel” truth:-

Genesis 1
1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
1:7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
1:9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so
1:10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.
1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
1:15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
1:17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
1:18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good
1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
1:20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
1:21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
1:22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.
1:23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
1:29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.
1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Genesis 2
2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
2:3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.
2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,
2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
2:6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
2:8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
2:9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
2:10 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads. 2:11 The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold;
2:12 And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone.
2:13 And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia.
2:14 And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates.
2:15 And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.
2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.
2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
2:22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
2:23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
2:25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed

Apart from getting the order of the creation of the universe, planets and life wrong, the Bible has other absurdities as well. How could God think Adam needed animals for companionship, or if you want to take it further, for procreation! Mankind, male and female created at the same time or man first then woman? Animals before man or man first and then animals? Two “inspired” stories with their god hedging His bet as to which one is true! In the opinion of many learned scholars the creation of Adam in the Qur’an and Genesis chapter 1 is about the creation of mankind (ahadam) but we Muslims believe in the fanciful rib story of Genesis chapter 2 which can be easily understood to be a false teaching of the Bible. Man made hadith stories, given “authenticity” by attributing them to the Last Messenger, are believed and followed and used to interpret the Qur’anic verses. This is interpolation on the word of Allah who is All-knowing, All-wise and does not create something which He later realises needs a female companion for friendship! If you have other sources for understanding the Qur’an then it is in your interest to translate it according to your whims rather than the true meaning of the Qur’an. Look again at the Arabic dictionary and lexicon and you will find that Adam has the meaning “mankind” and should be understood as such when reading the Qur’an. In Aramaic and Hebrew the same understanding can be found. Nowhere in the Qur’an does Allah say that Adam was the single first human being on this earth and a fuller explanation can be found in my section titled “Adam”.
So how did we come about?

71:14 Knowing that He has created you in successive stages.
71:15 Do you not realize (not willing to reflect and research) how God has created the seven heavens in great harmony?
71:16 And made the moon a light therein, and made the sun a radiant lamp.
71:17 And God has caused you to grow as a growth from the earth. [Note the beginning of life out of water and organic matter – stages of evolution. 22:5]

This clearly relates to the evolution of man from lower organisms which agrees with modern scientific discoveries ( it can also mean the various stages of human development from fertilised egg to a full grown human, but the interpretation for evolutionary development is equally valid). The Qur’an describes the creation of the universe, then the sun and the moon and finally man. Allah has created us from the earth growing gradually which means an evolutionary process, no sudden materialisation of a single man! The whole universe was likewise not created in an instant as we see it now but went through various stages of development. Why do our scholars not say that the universe in its totality was created in a single process, suns, planets etc all at once? They do not because they know very well that this occurred in six periods. The term “yaum” in Arabic means days and also time periods, so based on the scientific, intellectual knowledge at our disposal we know that it was not created in six earthly days (the earth did not exist at the beginning!) but six eons that overlapped each other in a continuing process of development. If this was the case with the universe in approximately 14 billion years (14,000,000,000 years) then how easy for man to evolve in different stages over a few millions of years.
Some Muslims repeat some aspects of evolution that are not backed by irrefutable evidence and so reject all of the findings. Where there are gaps they “see” miraculous Divine intervention. When a gap is filled by new evidence they see two smaller gaps; you just cannot win with people that do not have eyes to see yet see not! Many creatures alive today were alive in the same form many millions of years ago, for example the shark. How is this possible if evolution is a mechanism for changing species due to genetic mutations? Why have they not evolved? If an animal is adapted to an environment then there are no evolutionary forces acting upon it to change it. When conditions change those most adapted to that new environment are able to survive, the rest die out. Or else they are replaced by a more efficient organism so they can die out this way too (the extinction of many species by man is such a means, for example the Dodo and the Woolly Mammoth). The shark is a beautiful piece of biological engineering and leaves very little, if any, room for improvement. Hence, it has no need to evolve. However, genetic variation has resulted in many different types of sharks, new species, but those that were suited to the sea environment have not been eliminated by any drastic changing sea conditions or a better predator than they.
Micro-organisms found in the earths crust dating billions of years ago are also alive today, unchanged. Again, they are able to adapt to their environment and have survived; no problem there. Some have mutated to form other life forms but the “originals” have not been eliminated. Species that are not able to survive are lost to history and others take their place. The earths “signs” confirm that single celled life forms existed some three to four billion years ago and there was a gradual development to multi-cellular organisms through the next two billion years or so. Originally there were no complex organisms but these developed; life evolving to more advanced forms over vast timescales which we cannot comprehend so find it difficult to understand the facts that are revealed to us by science.
Darwin based his findings on the available evidence of his time and on the bases of his own observations. Today modern science has shown that evolution has periods of steady change as well as long periods of stability followed by short periods of rapid change which accompanies some sort of environmental catastrophe. Modern science has not rejected Darwin’s theory but refined it in light of new discoveries. Please refer to the book “Phenomena of Nature and the Qur’an” by Abdul Wadud for a deeper understanding of the Qur’an about science and its position on evolution. Those that reject evolution point to the fact that there are no “missing links” between the fossils to show that one species evolved into another so Allah must have created them out of thin air. Actually there are links but the earth is vast and we are only able to find a small proportion of the evidence from it so it is obvious there are going to be some missing links. Where we have excellent evidence the “creationists” ignore this and quote from the problems which the “evolutionists” readily admit are there. Read the following;

Tiktaalik
Using the principles of evolution, scientists have been able to predict what new fossils might be discovered. For example, scientists had found fossils of ancient fish that lived in shallow waters in earlier times and fossils of four-limbed land dwellers that appeared later in time. What happened in between? Evolutionary theory predicts that there would be one or more creatures with characteristics of both the ancient fish and the later land-dwellers. A team of scientists decided to look in sedimentary rock in northern Canada that was deposited about 375 million years ago, about the time these intermediate species were thought to have lived, based on other evidence from the fossil record. In 2004, the team found what they had predicted: the fossil of a creature with features of fish (scales and fins) and features of land-dwellers (simple lungs, flexible neck, and fins modified to support its weight). The bones in the limbs of this fossil, named Tiktaalik, resemble the bones in the limbs of land-dwelling animals today. By understanding evolution, scientists were able to predict what type of creature existed and in what geologic layer it would be found. The discovery of Tiktaalik fills another gap in the fossil record. (From Science, Evolution, and Creationism (2008), produced by a committee of the National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine.)

Let us look at another example where sufficient evidence is available due to the vast numbers this animal has had over the eons, the horse. (It is most annoying that creationists are selective in the “evidence” they bring forth and are unwilling to discuss the overwhelming evidence for some sort of Darwinian evolution):-
Encyclopaedia Britannica
“The evolutionary lineage of the horse is among the best-documented in all palaeontology. The history of the horse family, Equidae, began during the Eocene Epoch, which lasted from about 54.8 to 33.7 million years ago. During the Early Eocene there appeared the first ancestral horse, a hoofed; browsing mammal designated correctly as Hyracotherium but more commonly called Eohippus, the “dawn horse.” Fossils of Eohippus, which have been found in both North America and Europe, show an animal that stood from 4.2 to 5 hands high, diminutive by comparison to the modern horse, with an arched back and raised hindquarters. The legs ended in padded feet with four functional hooves on the forefeet and three on the hind feet—quite unlike the unpadded, single-hoofed foot of modern equines. The skull lacked the large, flexible muzzle of the modern horse, and the size and shape of the cranium indicate that the brain was far smaller and less complex than that of today's horse. The teeth, too, differed significantly from those of the modern equines, being adapted to a fairly general browser's diet. Eohippus was, in fact, so unhorse like that its evolutionary relationship to the modern equines was at first unsuspected. It was not until palaeontologists had unearthed fossils of later extinct horses that the link to Eohippus became clear.
The line leading from Eohippus to the modern horse exhibits the following evolutionary trends: increase in size, reduction in the number of hooves, loss of the foot pads, lengthening of the legs, fusion of the independent bones of the lower legs, elongation of the muzzle, increase in the size and complexity of the brain, and the development of crested, high-crowned teeth suited to grazing. This is not to imply that there was a steady, gradual progression in these characteristics leading inevitably from those of Eohippus to those of the modern horse. Some of these features, such as grazing dentition, appear abruptly in the fossil record, rather than as the culmination of numerous, gradual changes. Eohippus, moreover, gave rise to many now-extinct branches of the horse family, some of which differed substantially from the line leading to the modern equines.
Although Eohippus fossils occur in both the Old and New worlds, the subsequent evolution of the horse took place chiefly in North America. During the remainder of the Eocene, the prime evolutionary changes were in dentition. Orohippus, a genus from the Middle Eocene, and Epihippus, a genus from the Late Eocene, resembled Eohippus in size and in the structure of the limbs. But the form of the cheek teeth—the four premolars and the three molars found in each half of both jaws—had changed somewhat. In Eohippus the premolars and molars were clearly distinct, the molars being larger. In Orohippus the fourth premolar had become similar to the molars, and in Epihippus both the third and fourth premolars had become molar like. In addition, the individual cusps that characterized the cheek teeth of Eohippus had given way in Epihippus to a system of continuous crests or ridges running the length of the molars and molar form premolars. These changes, which represented adaptations to a more specialized browsing diet, were retained by all subsequent ancestors of the modern horse.
Fossils of Mesohippus, the next important ancestor of the modern horse, are found in the Early and Middle Oligocene of North America (the Oligocene Epoch lasted from about 33.7 to 23.8 million years ago). Mesohippus was far more horse like than its Eocene ancestors—it was larger (averaging about six hands high); the snout was more muzzle like; and the legs were longer and more slender. Mesohippus also had a larger brain. The fourth toe on the forefoot had been reduced to a vestige, so that both the forefeet and hind feet carried three functional toes and a foot pad. The teeth remained adapted to browsing.
By the Late Oligocene, Mesohippus had evolved into a somewhat larger form known as Miohippus. The descendants of Miohippus split into various evolutionary branches during the Early Miocene (the Miocene Epoch lasted from about 23.8 to 5.3 million years ago). One of these branches, known as the anchitheres, included a variety of three-toed, browsing horses comprising several genera. Anchitheres were successful, and some genera spread from North America across the Bering land bridge into Eurasia.
It was a different branch, however, that led from Miohippus to the modern horse. The first representative of this line, Parahippus, appeared in the Early Miocene. Parahippus and its descendants marked a radical departure in that they had teeth adapted to eating grass. Grasses were at this time becoming widespread across the North American plains, providing Parahippus with a vast food supply. Grass is a much coarser food than succulent leaves and requires a different kind of tooth structure. The cheek teeth developed larger, stronger crests and became adapted to the side-to-side motion of the lower jaw necessary to grind grass blades. Each tooth also had an extremely long crown, most of which, in the young animal, was buried beneath the gum line. As grinding wore down the exposed surface, some of the buried crown grew out. This high-crowned tooth structure assured the animal of having an adequate grinding surface throughout its normal life span. Adaptations in the digestive tract must have occurred as well, but the organs of digestion are not preserved in the fossil record.
The change from browsing to grazing dentition was essentially completed in Merychippus, which evolved from Parahippus during the Middle and Late Miocene. Merychippus must have looked much like a modern pony. It was fairly large, standing about 10 hands high, and its skull was similar to that of the modern horse. The long bones of the lower leg had become fused; this structure, which has been preserved in all modern equines, is an adaptation for swift running. The feet remained three-toed, but in many species the foot pad was lost, and the two side toes became rather small. In these forms, the large central toe bore the animal's weight. Strong ligaments attached this hoofed central toe to the bones of the ankles and lower leg, providing a spring mechanism that pushed the flexed hoof forward after the impact of hitting the ground. Merychippus gave rise to numerous evolutionary lines during the Late Miocene. Most of these, including Hipparion, Neohipparion, and Nannippus, retained the three-toed foot of their ancestors. One line, however, led to the one-toed Pliohippus, the direct predecessor of Equus. Pliohippus fossils occur in the Early to Middle Pliocene beds of North America (the Pliocene Epoch lasted from about 5.3 to 1.8 million years ago).
Equus—the genus to which all modern equines, including horses, asses, and zebras, belong—evolved from Pliohippus toward the end of the Pliocene. Equus shows even greater development of the spring mechanism in the foot and exhibits straighter and longer cheek teeth. This new form was extremely successful and had spread from the plains of North America to South America and to all parts of the Old World by the Early Pleistocene (the Pleistocene Epoch lasted from about 1,800,000 to 10,000 years ago). Equus flourished in its North American homeland throughout the Pleistocene; then, about 10,000 to 8,000 years ago, Equus disappeared from North and South America. Scholars have offered various explanations for this disappearance, including the emergence of devastating diseases or the arrival of human populations (which presumably hunted the horse for food). Despite these speculations, the reasons for the demise of Equus in the New World remain uncertain. The submergence of the Bering land bridge prevented any return migration of horses from Asia, and Equus was not reintroduced into its native continent until the Spanish explorers brought horses in the early 16th century.
During the Pleistocene the evolution of Equus in the Old World gave rise to all the modern members of the genus. The modern horse, Equus caballus, became widespread from central Asia to most of Europe. Local types of horses, all breeds of this single species, undoubtedly developed, and three of these—Przewalski's horse from central Asia, the tarpan from eastern Europe and the Ukrainian steppes, and the forest horse of northern Europe—are generally credited as being the ancestral stock of the domestic horse. According to this line of thinking, Przewalski's horse and the tarpan formed the basic breeding stock from which the southerly “warm-blooded” horses developed, while the forest horse gave rise to the heavy, “cold-blooded” breeds.”
horse. (2008). Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopaedia Britannica 2008 Ultimate Reference Suite. Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica.

It is a bit long but there you have it! Evolution; clear and simple. What about the finding of humanoid apes? There is a small but growing amount of evidence to show that mankind has come from a period of evolutionary development. There were no modern day human beings running around with the earlier hominids many millions of years ago so we must have evolved from them. To say God created Adam out of thin air is far from the scientific truth of what we have been able to find.
The Neanderthal man is not the same as us Homo sapiens but he has been shown to have buried his dead in graves which also had artefacts in them. This could only have been done by a thinking being but, as stated, he was not a human being! Just because all the pieces are not there for the puzzle to be 100% complete does not mean that the rest of the available evidence should be rejected. Some scientists have forged evidence and some have made exaggerated claims about fragments of evidence they have found, for example, a bone fragment belongs to a human ancestor which could well be from an animal instead. We should not use these to disprove what the vast majority of scientists have proved to be correct, evolution fits the available evidence. We should not abandon evolution because some mentally deranged person has used it as an excuse to commit genocide on peoples they deem not fit for living or by those who wrongly interpret Divine Revelation.
Evolution is going on today. Adam and Eve are said to be the ancestors of us all so why are we all different? We do not have different human species but we have genetic variation within Homo sapiens so the mechanism of evolution is there to be seen. Variation amongst the same species exists and is there due to the evolutionary processes that lead to new species being formed. Some creationists have no problem with diversity within species but think God creates new species when He wants to. If you agree with the mechanisms for diversity within species then it is only a matter of time (assuredly a very long time in most instances) that new species are formed due to physical isolation or other factors. Life was created to evolve. Richard Dawkins (an atheist natural historian) has a “biomorph programme” which generates shapes from random patterns, some of which look like spiders and other animals. He seems to think that these shapes are a natural process which can be extrapolated to show how the species we see today were generated but he is forgetting, or ignoring, one crucial factor; someone “programmed” his computer to do this and What or Who programmed this universe? He belittles the concept of a God due, in part, to the pagan beliefs that are associated with this reality but what alternative is there? Looking at how things work is one thing, why they work and how did they get here is another!
Mendel has given us the mechanism of genetic variation which is the process of evolution:-
Encyclopaedia Britannica
“The fame of Gregor Mendel, the father of genetics, rests on experiments he did with garden peas, which possess sharply contrasting characteristics—e.g., tall versus short; round seed versus wrinkled seed. When Mendel fertilized short plants with pollen from tall plants, he found the offspring (first filial generation) to be uniformly tall. But if he allowed the plants of this generation to self-pollinate (fertilize themselves), their offspring (the second filial generation) exhibited the characters of the grandparents in a rather consistent ratio of three tall to one short. Furthermore, if allowed to self-pollinate, the short plants always bred true—i.e., never produced anything but short plants. From these results Mendel developed the concept of dominance, based on the supposition that each plant carried two trait units, one of which dominated the other. Nothing was known at that time about chromosomes or meiosis, yet Mendel deduced from his results that the trait units, later called genes, could be a kind of physical particle that was transmitted from one generation to another through the reproductive mechanism.
Mendel's most important concept was the idea that the paired genes present in the parent separate or segregate during the formation of the gametes. Moreover, in later experiments in which he studied the inheritance of two pairs of traits, Mendel showed that one pair of genes is independent of another. Thus, the principles of segregation and of independent assortment were established.
Mendel's findings were ignored for 35 years, probably for two reasons. Because the distinguished Swiss botanist Karl Wilhelm von Nägeli failed to recognize the significance of the work after Mendel had sent him the results, he did nothing to encourage Mendel. Nägeli's great prestige and the lack of his endorsement indirectly weighed against widespread recognition of Mendel's work. Moreover, when the work was published, little was known about the cell, and the processes of mitosis and meiosis were completely unknown. Mendel's work was finally rediscovered in 1900, when three botanists independently recognized the worth of his studies from their own research and cited his publication in their work.
Elucidation of the hereditary mechanism
By 1901 it was understood how the hereditary units postulated by Mendel are distributed; it was also known that the somatic (body) cells have a double, or diploid, complement of chromosomes, while the reproductive cells have a single, or haploid, chromosome number. The experimental demonstration of the chromosomal basis for heredity had been firmly established by the German biologist Theodor Boveri soon after the turn of the century and subsequently confirmed by others. To account for the large number of observed hereditary characters, Boveri suggested that each chromosome in a pair can exchange the hereditary factors it carries with those of the other chromosome. At first the U.S. geneticist Thomas Hunt Morgan dismissed this concept, but later, when he found that it agreed with his own laboratory findings, Morgan and his collaborators assigned the hereditary units (genes) specific positions, or loci, within the chromosomes. With the genes established as the carriers of hereditary traits, William Bateson, an English biologist, coined the name genetics for the experimental study of heredity and evolution.”
biology. (2008). Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopaedia Britannica 2008 Ultimate Reference Suite. Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica.

These are the “Signs of Allah” that we Muslims, please do not laugh, should be searching for but instead we ignore our intellectual capabilities and follow our ancestors “teachings” by denying the truth (anything that goes against modern day scientific known facts must not be associated with Allah or the Prophet but understood to have come from interpolation of foreign, man made ideas added during the continuing times of ignorance that Muslims have kept themselves in).

Again read
2:171 The parable of those who reject Faith (true Islamic Deen) is as if one were to shout like a goat-herd, to things that listen to nothing but calls and cries: Deaf, dumb, and blind, they are void of wisdom.
SUMMUN BUKMUN AYUMYUN

Messages In This Thread

RE: Why millat of Ibrahim (Jawaid Ahmad, uk)
A Sayed (South Africa) -- Sunday, 29 July 2018, 1:38 pm
evolution1
jawaid ahmed,uk -- Monday, 30 July 2018, 12:59 pm
evolution 2
jawaid ahmed,uk -- Monday, 30 July 2018, 1:00 pm
evolution 3
jawaid ahmed,uk -- Monday, 30 July 2018, 1:01 pm
salat
jawaid ahmed,uk -- Monday, 30 July 2018, 1:12 pm
Re: salat (Jawaid Ahmad, uk).
A Sayed (South Africa) -- Tuesday, 31 July 2018, 1:21 pm
Re: RE: Why millat of Ibrahim (Jawaid Ahmad, uk)
Sidqi, ca -- Monday, 30 July 2018, 8:41 pm
Re: RE: Why millat of Ibrahim (Jawaid Ahmad, uk) (
A Sayed (South Africa) -- Tuesday, 31 July 2018, 1:08 pm
Re: RE: Why millat of Ibrahim (Jawaid Ahmad, uk) (
jawaid ahmed,uk -- Tuesday, 31 July 2018, 5:20 pm
Re: RE: Why millat of Ibrahim (Jawaid Ahmad, uk) (
Sidqi.ca -- Wednesday, 1 August 2018, 4:04 am