Evolutionists' Attempts to Cover Up The Evidence of Creation

Here we see a perfectly working system in place. Inside the cells that produce the antibodies, God placed information containing the construction plans of these antibodies that would fill thousands of encyclopaedia pages. Furthermore, He has given these unconscious cells the ability to make combinations, such as are beyond the reach of the human mind. 

How do people who blindly believe in evolution explain the existence of such a perfect system? The answer is very simple: they cannot. 

The only thing they do is put forward illogical assumptions which strongly self-contradict. There are many imaginary scenarios without any scientific validity that are solely directed towards finding an answer to the question of "How can we explain this system in terms of evolution?". 

The most popular of these scenarios maintains that the immune system evolved from a single antibody. Here is the summary of this scenario which has no scientific basis:

Initially the defence system comprised of a single gene that produced a single type of immunoglobulin (a kind of protein). But this gene "rapidly created copies of itself (!)" and developed these copies so that they formed a different molecule of immunoglobulin. Then the control mechanisms developed that monitor the manufacturing of different genes which possess the ability to re-combine".

This example is important in seeing how shaky are the grounds the theory of evolution is built on, and in understanding the brainwashing and window-dressing methods evolutionists frequently have recourse to. Now let us examine this deceit sentence by sentence: 

Sentence 1: "Initially the defence system comprised of a single gene that produced a single type of immunoglobulin (a kind of protein)."

The first question that must be asked is: 

"By whom was this inaugural gene created?"

Evolutionists try to present this stage as an insignificant detail and circumvent it. However, how this initial gene has originated must be explained. It is scientifically impossible for a gene to have formed by itself. The impossibility of the coincidental formation of the gene sequence is a fact which has been admitted by evolutionist scientists many times. We can give an example from Prof. Ali Demirsoy, a Turkish evolutionist, on this subject.

That is, if life requires a certain sequence, it can be said that this has a probability likely to be realised once in the whole universe. Otherwise some metaphysical powers beyond our definition must have acted in its formation.5

Yet evolutionists cover up this point and make a senseless presupposition such as "whatever the argument, there surely was a gene at the beginning." As is quite evident, the scenario collapses right at the first step. 

Sentence 2: "But this gene "rapidly created copies of itself (!)" and developed these copies so that they formed a different molecule of immunoglobulin."

Though impossible, let us suppose that there was a gene at the beginning. Though it is utterly impossible for this first gene to have formed by itself, evolutionists make statements, lacking any logical basis such as "it created copies of itself." Such statements, which have no scientific value, constitute a good example of the window-dressing style of the evolutionists. A hypothesis assuming that a gene created and developed different copies of itself complies neither with the rules of logic nor with scientific facts. 

Moreover, the antibodies produced by such an imaginary gene, which has supposedly formed by itself, and its copies, have to possess such properties and structure as will stop the antigens coming from the external world. This means that the same Creator, that is, God created both antigens and the genes that are responsible for producing antibodies for antigens. 

Sentence 3: "Then the control mechanisms developed that manage the manufacturing of different genes which possess the ability to re-combine.

Unable to explain even the working principles of these control and combination mechanisms, evolutionists evade the issue by saying that "this system brought itself into being" whenever it serves their purpose. They do not attempt to describe how such an incredible system developed by itself as a result of coincidences. When they try to bring some explanations of their own to these issues, they cannot put forward anything but fabricated and ridiculous scenarios. By doing so, they expose their weakness, and the unreasonableness of the claim they make. 

So great is the wisdom displayed in these control mechanisms that approximately two million differently structured products are fabricated from thousands of combinations of units of information. Yet, as mentioned before, neither the cell, nor any system within the cell has the ability to "learn" and "develop". Moreover, the cell makes these information combinations by selecting only the right ones out of infinite possibilities. Therefore, this requires a much more conscious and reasonable selecting mechanism.

Those who make such a claim may well advance the following theories for any given product that is manufactured by technology or the human mind: 

"Stone tablets created themselves and later developed into computers on their own." Or,
"Kites that have created themselves later developed into jet planes." 

The above sentences would sound absolutely absurd to any national person. However, even these sentences are much more logical than saying that the elements of the defence system, the working principles of which have not even been discovered, emerged by coincidence. 

What is more, the presence of antibodies alone is not sufficient to protect the human body. For the defence system to operate, and for the human being to survive, macrophages, helper T cells, killer T cells, suppressor T cells, memory cells, B cells and many other factors must work in cooperation.

5- Ali Demirsoy, Kalitim ve Evrim (Inheritance and Evolution), Ankara: Meteksan Publishing, p. 61