Books that demolish the theory of evolution

Documentaries that demolish the theory of evolution

Websites about the collapse of the theory of evolution

Books on the fact of creation

Documentaries on the fact of creation

Articles on the fact of creation

The logic that nothing, but chance, is scientific is a flawed one. It is a logical dead-end. If brand-new civilizations were discovered in outer space, would the logic of Darwinism and chance be employed in all of them? Would it be claimed that chance established civilizations everywhere? The portrayal of this miserable logic as scientific is the shame and disgrace of the current century.

Vol I:
Acrobat (pdf)
MS Word (rtf)
Vol II:
Acrobat (pdf)
MS Word (rtf)
Vol III:
Acrobat (pdf)
MS Word (rtf)
Vol IV:
Acrobat (pdf)
MS Word (rtf)

There is a better question for New Scientist to ask!
On 11 March 2006, the New Scientist magazine website carried an article titled ?Are we still evolving?? The article, written by Kate Douglas, contained speculation regarding whether or not the evolutionary process, which evolutionist researchers have adopted as a dogma, is still continuing. After quoting Steven Pinker from Harvard University as saying, ?In the biological sense of changes in the gene pool, it"s impossible to say,? Douglas referred to work by Bruce Lahn, considering this as a finding suggesting that supposed evolution is still taking place.
New Scientist"s Error regarding The Chimpanzee Genome
A report titled “Here’s looking at you, chimp” was published in the 24 December, 2005, issue of New Scientist magazine. The report carried details regarding the studies to decipher the chimpanzee genome. New Scientist, which has adopted as a dogma the scenario of humans and chimpanzees separating from a common ancestor 6 million years ago, suggested that comparative analyses of the genomes of these two life forms would illuminate the details of the fictitious evolutionary process.
Errors In The 9 April, 2005, New Scientist
The cover story of the 9 April, 2005, edition of New Scientist magazine bore the title “Life’s Top 10 greatest Inventions.” The report resorted to evolutionist myths and maintained that the present order in the world formed as the result of phenomena in nature caused by blind chance and that man also came into possession of his present-day biological abilities by chance.
The New Scientist Error Regarding the Ancestor of Mammals
An article titled ?Ancient genes rise from the dead? was carried in the 4 December, 2004, edition of New Scientist magazine. The article described a study performed by geneticists from the University of California?s Santa Cruz campus, in which the pig, horse, cat, dog, bat, mouse, rabbit, gorilla, chimpanzee and human genome structures were investigated.
The Mysteries of Life and Evolutionist Errors in New Scientist
New Scientist magazine published an article called "The Mysteries of Life" in its 4 September, 2004, edition. The article in question concentrated on the 10 most important questions that science has been unable to answer. However, the groundless evolutionist claims contained in the article were particularly striking. The claims in question are set out below, and we have added links through which you can read our responses to these.
The Four-Winged Bird Myth In The New Scientist
The 22 May 2004 issue of New Scientist magazine carried a report titled ?Four-winged birds were first to take to the air. The article concerned an investigation into the fossil Archaeopteryx by zoologist Per Christiansen of the University of Copenhagen. Christiansen reported the existence of objects resembling traces of feathers along the fossil?s back, around its legs and possibly on the base of its neck.1 The New Scientist article recalls a parallel claim made by Nick Longrich, a graduate student at the University of Calgary in Canada2, referring to his claim that the Archaeopteryx specimen had flight feathers on its legs.
The (Ignored) Debate On A Study On Neanderthal Tooth Development
New Scientist magazine carried a report titled "Neanderthals Had A Life Less Human" in its 1 May 2004 edition. The article reported on a claim about Neanderthal Man published in the British scientific magazine Nature.
A Bone-Headed H. Erectus Tale In New Scientist
The April 17, 2004 edition of New Scientist magazine carried an article titled "Brute of Dragon Bone Hill [*]." In the article anatomist Noel T. Boaz and anthropologist Russell L. Ciochon described their study concerning Asian Homo erectus, devoting space to a claim regarding the thickness of the H. Erectus skull based entirely on imagination. According to this claim, skull (or cranial vault) thickness developed in response to the many head blows received by H. erectus individuals during their frequent fights.
The Myth of the Evolution of the Rejection of Love in New Scientist
New Scientist carried an article called “Dumped” in its 14 February 2004 edition. The article dealt with various experiments that had been performed on people who had fallen in love and separated. Emotions such as anger, hatred and disappointment in people suffering the pains of love and data from brain scans of the subjects were interpreted from an evolutionist perspective. The researchers who evaluated the harm and benefits to the organism of the depression suffered by such people all adopted the same approach to the subject. They had adopted evolution as a dogma and produced evolutionary fairy tales in such a way as to adapt the data they obtained from experiments and observations to fit this dogmatic perspective.
Support for Homosexuality by a Distortion of Science from New Scientist
In its 17 January 2004 edition, New Scientist carried an article titled “Does Darwin’s theory ‘fall flat’ when it comes to homosexuality?” In the article, ecologist Joan Roughgarden, a professor of biology at Stanford University in California, cited examples of homosexual behaviour observed in various animals and considered the lethal blow these deal to Darwin’s theory of sexual selection.
1 2 3 4


The way that all of Europe has become acquainted with Atlas of Creation and the declaration of the fact that living creatures have remained unchanged for millions of years and that evolution is devoid of any scientific worth have led to a major change of belief among the people of Europe. Independent polls conducted by well-known publishing institutions in different European countries have revealed a major drop in the numbers of people believing in Darwinism and that belief in Allah now dominates Europe. >>

In order to create, God has no need to design

It's important that the word "design" be properly understood. That God has created a flawless design does not mean that He first made a plan and then followed it. God, the Lord of the Earth and the heavens, needs no "designs" in order to create. God is exalted above all such deficiencies. His planning and creation take place at the same instant.
Whenever God wills a thing to come about, it is enough for Him just to say, "Be!"
As verses of the Qur'an tell us:
His command when He desires a thing is just to say to it, "Be!" and it is. (Qur'an, 36: 82)
[God is] the Originator of the heavens and Earth. When He decides on something, He just says to it, "Be!" and it is. (Qur'an, 2: 117)

Home | Books | Documentaries | Articles | Audio | Contact us | Subscribe

2007 Darwinism-Watch.com
Our materials may be copied, printed and distributed, by referring to this site.