Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Darwinism Watch
22 followers -
http://darwinism-watch.com
http://darwinism-watch.com

22 followers
About
Posts

Post has attachment
Darwinist education might bring about an unaware generation far removed from God, who do not fear God. The goal of Darwinism is raising such an irreligious generation anyway. It is a grave disaster to raise youngsters by telling them that there is no God.

(Adnan Oktar, 2 July 2018)
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
The most urgent service that should be carried out is to ensure that people are loving and full of compassion. What should be done to ensure that is to put an end to Darwinist materialist education because Darwinism claims that humans are an animal species and that they should give a selfish and cruel struggle to survive. We need to intellectually annihilate this philosophy of the antichrist with science and knowledge as soon as possible. Or else, may God forbid, the system of the antichrist would continue to ruin children, animals and youngsters.

(Adnan Oktar,3 July 2018)
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
The most urgent service that should be carried out is to ensure that people are loving and full of compassion. What should be done to ensure that is to put an end to Darwinist materialist education because Darwinism claims that humans are an animal species and that they should give a selfish and cruel struggle to survive. We need to intellectually annihilate this philosophy of the antichrist with science and knowledge as soon as possible. Or else, may God forbid, the system of the antichrist would continue to ruin children, animals and youngsters.

(Adnan Oktar,3 July 2018)
Add a comment...

Capital punishment or chemical castration is not the right way to prevent children being lost and being murdered. Of course penal sanctions are necessary and should be used, however such sanctions cannot restrain or deter a person who is capable of committing such a violent murder. After a child is martyred chemically castrating the person perpetrating such a violent act would have no meaning anyway. Taking all necessary precautions before children are harmed is what is important. The method to follow for that is to provide the right kind of education. Such cruelty would never come to an end if you raise new generations telling them ‘you are the products of blind coincidences’, ‘ you have to be cruel and selfish to survive,’ ‘you need to fight like animals to have the upper hand’. A peaceful and safe society can only be formed if the Darwinist, materialist education is stopped and people are taught to love, have mercy and have fear of God.

(Adnan Oktar, 4 July 2018)
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
EVOLUTION THEORY COULD NOT BE PROVEN – ONCE AGAIN

For 25 years, evolutionary biologist Professor Richard E. Lenski has been conducting a set of mutation experiments on 12 different E.coli bacteria population encompassing 60,000 generations.

The aim was to be able to conduct an observable evolution experiment called LTTE (Long-term evolution experiment).

With the efforts of the evolutionary scientists who had been looking for the traces of the theory of evolution in fossils having proven in vain, they focused on trying to prove evolution by conducting more frequent experiments on generations of bacteria in much shorter periods, which is the actual purpose of this experiment.

This meant that if a visible change could be observed in living generations, it would offer the long-awaited and desired proof for evolution. But as always, things did not go as evolutionists wished.

Over the course of 25 years, the experiments featured countless mutation attempts made on bacteria. In these experiments, said bacteria are left in an environment containing citrate (C6H5O7-3) and glucose.

Some of the bacteria go through various genetic mutations regarding the absorption and utilization of citrate molecule by the cell, and begin to digest the citrate in the environment as a source of carbon. This, in turn, leads to an enhanced growth rate in these bacteria due to increased nourishment. In the following generations, however, this growth rate starts slowing down, resulting in the extinction of most of the generations among said species or the development of species-specific diseases.



In conclusion, mutated generations either become sick or suffer from growth retardation, and just as it is with all life forms, the original genes of E.colibacteria, too, remain healthy and intact.

Contrary to what is claimed, this mutation is obviously neither beneficial nor evolution-triggering. Because since day one, E.coli bacteria have possessed the genes that brake down citrate. In the experiment, the mutated generations are observed to have an increased citrate absorption into the cell. An examination of its cause reveals an abnormality in the genes of citrate transporter protein. In other words, this is not a progression, but retrogression.

The function of citrate transporter is to enter the cell in anaerobic (oxygen-free) conditions to ensure citrate uptake into the cell. In this example, however, this system in the bacteria goes haywire, resulting in a constant citrate uptake into the cell and triggering an uncontrolled citrate metabolism.

Evolutionists are trying to present this as a beneficial mutation. They attempt to say “Look! There was this pressure, but after we reduced glucose, the bacteria gained the brand new ability of utilizing citrate,”; whereas the bacteria have already been in possession of the genes to utilize citrate and what happens here is the deterioration of the control mechanism of these genes. In other words, the available system in the cell is being impaired.

The situation can be likened to this; as is known, special sensors are placed on the streets, which are adjusted to the dark of the night. These sensors activate and turn the street lamps on when it gets dark. If there is any failure in the sensor system and the sensors detect that it is night-time for 24 hours, the street lamps will be turned on for 24 hours and they will be worn-down while wasting energy. This is a loss rather than an advantage. It means that a previously functioning system breaks down.

In the said example, which evolutionists try to arbitrarily present as evidence, there is no new information; on the contrary, there is a loss of information. Although the situation is quite obvious, the evolutionists still attempt to deceive people by resorting to tautology. It is actually a matter of a genetic disease caused as always by a mutation, not by evolution. When the cell was created out of nothing, it lost the perfectly balanced system it possessed and become deteriorated. Thus, the methods of demagogy evolutionists usually resort to have once again been disproven.

And this also should be noted: Despite the controlled mutations on 60,000 generations, the E.coli bacteria is still bacteria. It did not evolve into any other living thing. This 25 years long experiment, once again could NOT PROVIDE ANY EVIDENCE for evolution theory.

The writer has authored more than 300 books translated in 73 languages on politics, religion and science. He may be followed at @Harun_Yahya and www.harunyahya.com
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
SCIENCE HAS ONCE AGAIN DECLARED: ‘WE WERE CREATED’

All those who are true friends of God, who are loyal to Him by heart and who rejoice by striving on His path, are the bright faces of this world. Regardless of their beliefs, religions and ethnicities, the friends of God are the force that keeps the world standing. If it were not for the existence of people who have a respectful fear of God, submit to His will and love Him more than anything, the world would be plunged into darkness. The earth would be left without love, friendship, mercy and compassion. The woe, pessimism and the oppression encouraging aspects of disbelief would lay waste to all mankind.



For these reasons, people who love God and who don’t want the world to face such darkness came together on April 28, 2018 at the Istanbul Fairmont Quasar Hotel for the Third International Conference on the Origin of Life and the Universe. Scientists and theologians from the USA, Italy, Austria and Germany contributed to a historical meeting. Co-hosted by The Technics and Science Research Foundation, The Foundation for the Preservation of National Values and The Foundation of National Values, the speakers once again announced to the whole world that science shows universe and life were created out of nothingness and proved that there was no further tolerance for Darwinist dictatorship. During the conference, which had two coffee and one lunch break, eight esteemed speakers offered breathtaking details about God’s beautiful creation of the universe and life. In between the sessions, Istanbul Dance Factory displayed an amazing dance performance, and famous percussionist Onur Seçki stunned the attendants with his spectacular show. The Third International Conference on the Origin of Life and the Universe was a success not only with the topics it dealt with or in its impeccable organization, but also with an elite lineup of speakers and its modern and sophisticated attendants. The flawless organization, which saw close to 500 guests, was praised by guests from the scientific, political and artistic communities.

Esteemed scientists who spoke during the conference touched on many crucial points. While Dr. Bijan Nemati explained why Earth has a very special and privileged place in the universe, Professor Ken Keathley mentioned the seven days of creation as explained in the Bible and explained why the new ‘Young Earth’ movement is wrong. Dr. Fazale Rana showed how the human genome is a very intricate, elaborate creation, while Ms. Anna Manja Larcher demonstrated that love and compassion cannot be accounted for by evolutionary ideas. Professor David Snoke showed that those who use the phrase ‘Intelligent Design’ to avoid using the name ‘creation’ were conflicted and sociologist Fabrizio Fratus made it clear that evolution was not science but a mere ideology. Dr. Oktar Babuna explained that the Qur’an pointed to creation and not evolution and Professor Hans Koechler analyzed monotheism and the meaning of co-existence.

Needless to say, there is a crucial reason why such an elite and large international gathering was organized.

The world today is faced with an unprecedented bloodshed. People live in fear and apprehension. While many countries have remained untouched by war, they too are wrestling against the plague of terrorism. The world has been effectively deprived of happiness, joy, cheerfulness and tranquility. People lead tense, stressful and anxious lives.

But they do not know what to do or how to put an end to the current state of affairs. They feel helpless against the power that incites wars, that somehow orchestrates and propagates evil. They are waiting for a helping hand to reach them.



At this point, we, the friends of God, are obliged to step into action and fulfill our responsibility. We have to be a strong wind that will sweep through the dark clouds spawned by disbelief looming over the world and usher in the bright, luminous, warm and peaceful days.

For that reason, the people who hold this heart, came together for the Third International Conference on the Origin of Life and the Universe and foiled the sinister plot of the materialist dictatorship around the world. This was a crucial response to those who sought violence, discord and division; it was shown that Darwinism was the source of the evil.

However, this is not the only reason why the conference was a great achievement.

The Third International Conference on the Origin of Life and the Universe brought together Mormons, Muslims, Catholics, Evangelists Presbyterians, and welcomed diverse nationalities and religions under a single roof. A common language was used to declare Almighty God as the Creator of all universes from nothing. The beauty in unity, friendship and solidarity was shown to the whole world.

There is no doubt that no matter how great the plot of the evil, the alliance of the good, the right will always be triumphant. It is impossible to live with hatred while love and sincerity are very easy to achieve. It is for this reason crucial to show these facts to the world through such events. Love is the most amazing value in the world and it should be shown that love can be honestly and sincerely experienced without any ill-intentions or ulterior motives. This event was one of those rare incidents where this love and spirit of solidarity were displayed.

The International Conference on Origin of Life and the Universe, which has been an annual event for the past three years, once again proved to be a spectacular event to usher in love and solidarity to the world. This beautiful effort will continue and gather strength every year.

The world, now a scene of constant aggression, anger, fear and death, urgently needs love, solidarity and a beautiful future. Societies who were made to believe that everything is a product of coincidences, should be saved from this deception. People who fell into a the cycle of desperation due to the deception of coincidental formation, will now discover the beauty of seeing God’s existence and relying on Him. Showing this fact to the world using science and with the warmth and modernism of religion will help open up a whole new leaf of beauty for our world.

The writer has authored more than 300 books translated in 73 languages on politics, religion and science. He may be followed at @Harun_Yahya and www.harunyahya.com
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Capital punishment or chemical castration is not the right way to prevent children being lost and being murdered. Of course penal sanctions are necessary and should be used, however such sanctions cannot restrain or deter a person who is capable of committing such a violent murder. After a child is martyred chemically castrating the person perpetrating such a violent act would have no meaning anyway. Taking all necessary precautions before children are harmed is what is important. The method to follow for that is to provide the right kind of education. Such cruelty would never come to an end if you raise new generations telling them ‘you are the products of blind coincidences’, ‘ you have to be cruel and selfish to survive,’ ‘you need to fight like animals to have the upper hand’. A peaceful and safe society can only be formed if the Darwinist, materialist education is stopped and people are taught to love, have mercy and have fear of God.

Add a comment...

Post has attachment
İnsanın Evrimi Hiç Olmadı Ki!

Dünyaca ünlü çeşitli Darwinist yayınlarda yer alan bir haber, 7 Ekim 2008 tarihinde Vatan gazetesinde de yayınlandı. “İnsanın evrimi artık durdu” başlığı altında yayınlanan haberde, İngiliz genetikçi Steve Jones’un insanın sözde evriminin geleceğine dair spekülasyonlarına yer veriliyordu. İnsanın hayali evriminin sona erdiğini öne süren Jones’a göre, “insan nesli varlığını sürdürmeye devam ederse bundan 100 milyon yıl sonra insan şu anda olduğundan pek de farklı görünmeyecek”ti.

Dünyaca ünlü çeşitli Darwinist yayınlarda yer alan bir haber, 7 Ekim 2008 tarihinde Vatan gazetesinde de yayınlandı. “İnsanın evrimi artık durdu” başlığı altında yayınlanan haberde, İngiliz genetikçi Steve Jones’un insanın sözde evriminin geleceğine dair spekülasyonlarına yer veriliyordu. İnsanın hayali evriminin sona erdiğini öne süren Jones’a göre, “insan nesli varlığını sürdürmeye devam ederse bundan 100 milyon yıl sonra insan şu anda olduğundan pek de farklı görünmeyecek”ti.

Elbette insan nesli varlığını sürdürürse bundan 100 milyon yıl sonra insan şu anda olduğundan pek farklı görünmeyecektir. Ancak bunun sebebi, insan evriminin durması değil, böyle bir evrimin hiç yaşanmamış olmasıdır. Evrimcilerin insanın kökeniyle ilgili senaryoları, materyalizmin kabullerini kendi varoluşlarına uyarlayarak kurguladıkları masallardan ibarettir. Sadece önyargı ve hayalgücüne dayalı bu senaryoları bilimsel olarak güçlü kılacak herhangi somut delil bulunmamaktadır.

İnsanın hayali evrimi konusuyla ilgili sayısız yazı yazmış bulunan Science dergisi yazarlarından Ann Gibbons First Human (İlk İnsan) isimli kitabında insanın hayali evrimini destekleyen fosil kayıtlarının olmayışını şöyle ifade eder:

Bir süre boyunca, insanlık tarihinde insanlar ile maymunların atası arasında tek bir eksik halka bulunmadığı ilan edilmişti. Oysa milyonlarca yıldır, insanın gerçek soyuna uzanan döneme ait eksik halkaların sayısı çok fazladır. Ayrıca bunlar yarı maymun, yarı insan görünümündeki mükemmel ara geçiş formları değildir. Bu nedenle “eksik halka” terimi artık gözden düşmüş durumdadır.1

Ann Gibbons, böyle hayali bir evrimleşmenin moleküler anlamda imkansızlığını ise şöyle ifade etmektedir:

Yeni fosillerin ortaya çıkmaya başladığı dönemde, moleküler biyoloji alanında bir devrim yaşanıyordu. Moleküler evrimciler 1960’larda insanlık tarihindeki en eski oyuncuların hâlâ bulunamadığını öne sürmüşlerdi. Birçok antropolog bu söylenenlere inanmamıştı. 1990’ların ortalarına gelindiğinde moleküler kanıtlar o derece güçlüydü ki, başlangıca ait ilk bölümün, daha doğrusu insanlığın (evrimsel) kökeninin tümüyle eksik kaldığı ortaya çıktı. Biyokimyagerler, insanların ve maymunların DNA’larını karşılaştırarak insanlara en yakın akraba olarak şempanzeleri belirlemişlerdi. Fakat insan ve şempanzeye ait DNA şeritlerini yan yana koyduklarında, ... yaklaşık 3.8 milyon yıllık süre zarfında birikmesi mümkün olmayacak miktarda farklılık ya da mutasyon olması gerektiğini gördüler.2

İnsan ve şempanzenin ortak bir evrimsel tarihe sahip olduğunu gösterecek fosiller bulunmadığı halde, evrimciler iki canlının sahip olduğu benzerlikleri kendi dogmatik inançları gereğince evrim ürünü varsayıp buna dair hikayeler ortaya koymaktadırlar. Konuşma yeteneği olmayan maymun benzeri bir canlının milyonlarca yıllık bir süreçte iki ayağı üzerinde doğrulduğu, tüylerini döktüğü, el ve ayaklarındaki kıvrımları kaybettiği, beyin hacminin üç misli büyüdüğü, konuşmayı öğrendiği ve nihayet artık evrimleşmeyeceğini ilan eden bir genetik uzmanına dönüştüğü iddiası sadece önyargı ve spekülasyona dayalı bir masaldan ibarettir.

Unutulmamalıdır ki, evrim teorisi maymun benzeri bir canlıdan insana hayali dönüşümde gerekli anatomik değişimlerin- ki bunların fosil kayıtlarında hiçbir izi olmadığını yukarıda belirtmiştik- tesadüflere dayalı mutasyonlarla ve şuurdan tamamen yoksun, kör doğa olaylarına bağlı bir süreçte ortaya çıktığını öne sürmektedir. Mutasyonlar, bir matbaa makinesinin baskı esnasında yaptığına benzer kopyalama hatalarıdır ve genlerdeki bilgiye etkileri olduğu zaman bu etki daima tahrip edici özelliktedir. Mutasyonların canlıları başka canlılara evrimleştirebileceği umuduyla onyıllar boyu gerçekleştirilen deneyler evrimcileri tam bir hüsrana uğratmış, mutasyonların canlılara yeni organ ve sistemler, hatta tek bir yeni protein dahi eklemedikleri ortaya çıkmıştır. (Mutasyonların evrimleştirici gücü olmadığına dair detaylı bilgiyi buradan okuyabilirsiniz.)

Buna rağmen Vatan gazetesinin ve konuyla ilgili haberi yapan diğer yayınların ideolojik olarak hareket ettiği ve körükörüne Darwinist propagandayı sürdürmeye çalıştıkları görülmektedir. Vatan gazetesi bu doğrultudaki son haberinde, Jones’u “dünyanın en ünlü genetik uzmanlarından birisi” olarak tanıtmakta ve “uzman görüşü” aktararak bu anlatılanların doğru olduğu görünümü vermeye çalışmaktadır. Oysa Darwinizm’i bir inanç ve ideoloji olarak benimsemiş olan Jones’un bir uzman genetikçi olması, Darwinizm lehinde sunduğu iddialarını “bilimsel” kılmamaktadır.

Bilimsel iddiaları, bilimsel olmayan iddialardan ayıran temel kriterler; tekrarlanabilir ve test edilebilir olmalarıdır. Örneğin yerçekimiyle ilgili deneylere girişen bir bilimadamı, objelerin kütlesiyle yerçekimi arasında nasıl bir ilişki bulunduğunu laboratuvar ortamında gözlemleyebilir. Deney ortamında yapacağı düzenlemelerle, objenin yere düşme hızına etki eden faktörleri belirginleştirebilir. Böylelikle konuyla ilgili varsayımlarının gerçeklerle ne derece uyumlu olduğunu ortaya koyabilir. Bunun sonucunda elde ettiği sonuçlar diğer bilim adamlarınca aynı deney şartlarında tekrar edilebilir. Maymun benzeri bir canlının, ağaçlardan inerek bir süre sonra medeniyetler, hastaneler, devletler, üniversiteler, kütüphaneler, sendikalar, uzay istasyonları kuran insana dönüştüğü iddiasının ise ne tekrarlanabilir ne de test edilebilir bir yönü vardır. Fakat daha da önemlisi, henüz daha Darwinistlerin elinde iddianın ortaya atılması için gerekli olan altyapı, yani bu iddiaları delilendirmesi gereken ara fosiller yoktur. Nitekim, Jones da bu iddialarında bilimsel olarak elde ettiği kanıtlara değil, ideolojik olarak benimsediği dünya görüşünün gereklerine dayanmaktadır. Materyalizm, canlıların ve evrenin kökeni alanında bir Yaratıcı’yı inkar etmeye çalıştığı ve doğayı kapalı bir sistem kabul ettiği için, Jones da materyalist inancın gereği herşeyin tesadüflerle ve kendiliğinden evrimleştiği yönünde hikayeler ortaya koymaktadır. Vatan gazetesi ve haberi yapan diğer yayın organları ise ortak dünya görüşüne sahip olduğu için Jones’un felsefeye dayalı masallarını bilim kisvesi altında okurlarına aktarıp onları yanıltmış olmaktadır.

Kaldı ki, Vatan gazetesi bu haberi yayınlamakla kendisiyle çelişmektedir. Örneğin, 1 Şubat 2006 tarihinde gazetede “İnsanın fiziksel değişimi sürüyor mu?” başlığıyla yayınlanan yazıda, Vatan gazetesi okurlarına şöyle demiştir:

“Peki 75 bin yıl içinde onlarca farklı ırka ayrılan, yüzlerce kültür oluşturan insanoğlu küreselleşen 21"inci yüzyıl dünyasında gelişmeye devam mı ediyor? Bu sorunun cevabı tek kelimeyle, evet... Canlıların evrimleri bir süreç değil, doğa ve yaşam şartlarına bir ayak uydurmadır. Yani bedenin herhangi bir yerindeki veya tek bir gendeki değişim, canlının hayatta kalma olasılığını artıran bir sistemdir.” (vurgu bize ait)

Görüldüğü gibi Vatan gazetesi uzak olmayan bir geçmişte “İnsanın evrimi devam ediyor” dediği halde bugün “İnsanın evrimi artık durdu” haberi yaparak kendi açısından çelişkili bir durum ortaya koymaktadır. Gerçekte ise bunların her ikisi de spekülasyondur. Darwinist yayınlar genellikle bir evrimci bilimadamı çıkıp “insan evrimleşmeye devam ediyor” dediğinde de derhal iddiayı Darwinizm uğruna sahiplenerek haber yapmaktadır, bir başka evrimci bilim adamı çıkıp “insanın evrimi artık durdu” dediğinde de aynı yöntemi izlemektedir. Anlaşılmaktadır ki, burada söz konusu yayınlar için belirleyici kriter kimin ne dediği veya bunun kanıtlarla ne denli desteklendiği değil, iddiaların Darwinizm adına ortaya konup konmadığıdır. Bunun ise bilim haberciliği değil, körükörüne propaganda olduğu açıktır.

Sonuç:

Darwinist medyada aralıklarla gündeme getirilen “evrim hızlandı”, “evrim yavaşladı”, “evrim devam ediyor” veya “evrim artık durdu” gibi iddialar Darwinizm’in bilimdışı bir spekülasyon yumağı olduğunu göstermektedir. Çeşitli bahanelerle bilimadamlarını kullanarak kamuoyu nezdinde “bilim” ve “evrim” kavramlarını yanyana kullanarak propagandayı amaçlayan bu strateji, bilimin gerçekleri karşısında çökmeye mahkumdur. Türler arası dönüşüm iddiası; bilimin test edilebilirlik ve tekrarlanabilirlik kıstaslarını yerine getirmeyen, gözlemlenmemiş olan ve tümüyle bilimdışı bir iddiadır. Doğal seleksiyon ve mutasyonların hiçbir evrimleştirici gücü yoktur ve insanın fosil tarihi de maymunsu atalardan bir gelişim göstermemektedir. Söz konusu yayını yapan yayın organlarına Darwinizm’e verdikleri bilimdışı propaganda desteğine son vermelerini tavsiye ediyoruz. Aksi takdirde kendilerini kaçınılmaz olarak çelişkilerin ortasında bulmaya devam edeceklerdir.

Notlar:

1. Vatan gazetesinin yukarıda anılan 1 Şubat 2006 tarihli yazısına cevabımızı buradan okuyabilirsiniz.
2. İnsanın evrimi senaryosunun geçersizliği hakkında detaylı bilgi için bkz. http://www.darwinizminsonu.com/insanin_kokeni.html

1 Ann Gibbons, Doubleday, Random House Inc., 2006, s. 6
2 Ann Gibbons, Doubleday, Random House Inc., 2006, s. 6
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Human Evolution Never Happened!

On 7 October 2008, a report was carried in various well-known Darwinist publications. Titled “Human evolution has finally stopped,” the report contained speculation about the supposed evolutionary future of man by the British geneticist Steve Jones. According to Jones, who suggests that human evolution has now come to an end, if humanity survives, human beings in 100 million years’ time will look little different to people today.

On 7 October 2008, a report was carried in various well-known Darwinist publications. Titled “Human evolution has finally stopped,” the report contained speculation about the supposed evolutionary future of man by the British geneticist Steve Jones. According to Jones, who suggests that human evolution has now come to an end, if humanity survives, human beings in 100 million years’ time will look little different to people today.

Of course if humanity survives people in 100 million years’ time will not look much different to how they do today. However, the reason for this is not that human evolution has stopped, but that no such evolution ever happened in the first place. Evolutionist scenarios about the origin of man consist of tall tales produced by adapting the assumptions of materialism to their own existence. Based solely on preconception and imagination, there is absolutely no evidence to make these scenarios at all scientifically valid.

In her book The First Human, Ann Gibbons, a Science magazine writer who has penned countless articles on the subject of supposed human evolution, describes that lack of any fossil record supporting evolution:

It had also been obvious for some time that there was not just one missing link between humans and the ancestor of apes over the course of the human history - there were many missing links on the one true line to humans over millions of years. And they were not perfect intermediates that looked half ape and half human. The term "missing link" fell into disfavor.1

Gibbons also sets out the impossibility of such an illusory evolution in molecular terms:

At the time as new fossils were making their appearance, there was a revolution in the field of molecular biology. The molecular evolutionists had suggested in the 1960s that the earliest players in the human story had yet to be found. Most anthropologists had not believed those findings. By the mid-1990s, the molecular evidence was so strong that it was clear that the fist chapter – the genesis of humankind – was missing entirely. Biochemists had identified chimpanzees as the closest living relative of humans by comparing the DNA of humans and other apes. When they lined up the same stretches of DNA from humans and chimpanzees, they consistently found too many differences - or mutations - to have accumulated in. . . about 3.8 million years ago.2

Although there are no fossils to point to a common evolutionary history between human beings and apes, evolutionists dogmatically assume that the similarities between them are the product of evolution and come up with tall tales regarding this. The idea that over the course of millions of years an ape-like creature lacking the power of speech gradually began standing on two legs, shed its fur, lost the curvature in its hands and feet, tripled the size of its brain, learned to speak and turned into an expert geneticist declaring that human beings would evolve no further is a myth based solely on preconception and speculation.

It must not be forgotten that the theory of evolution suggests that the anatomical changes necessary for the imaginary transition from an ape-like creature to human beings – of which there is in fact in any case no trace, as outlined above – took place during a process relying on chance-based mutations and blind, natural events devoid of any consciousness. Mutations are copying errors similar to those in a printing machine running off documents, and are inevitably destructive whenever they impact on genetic data. Decades of experiments conducted in the hope that mutations would turn living things into other life forms have always totally disappointed evolutionists, and mutations have never bestowed new organs or systems on any living things, nor even added a single new protein. (You can find detailed information as to why mutation has no an evolutionary power here.)

Despite this, these certain Darwinist publications reporting the subject have acted ideologically and continue in their blind dissemination of Darwinist propaganda. In their latest such report, these publications describe Jones as “one of the world’s greatest experts on genetics” and seek to give the impression that these accounts are true publishing “the expert view”. However, the fact that Jones is an expert geneticist who has adopted Darwinism as a belief and ideology does not make his claims in favor of Darwinism in the least bit scientific.

The fundamental criteria that separate scientific claims from unscientific ones are repeatability and testability. For example, a scientist embarking on experiments concerning gravity may observe in the laboratory environment what kind of correlation there is between objects’ mass and gravity. Using modifications during his experiment he may be able to determine those factors that affect the speed at which objects fall to earth.

He may thus be able to establish to what extent his hypotheses approach the truth. As a result, other scientists will be able to repeat his findings under the same experimental conditions. However, the idea that ape-like entities descended from the trees and soon turned into human beings capable of founding civilizations, hospitals, states, universities, libraries, labor unions and space stations is neither repeatable nor testable. But even more importantly, Darwinists lack even the infrastructure on which such a claim could be based, in other words the intermediate fossils needed to support these claims. Indeed, in making these claims Jones is basing himself not on evidence scientifically obtained, but on a worldview he has adopted as an ideology. Since materialism seeks to deny the involvement of a Creator when it comes to the origin of life and the universe and regards nature as a closed system, his materialist beliefs lead Jones to produce fairy tales about how everything evolved spontaneously and by chance. Since the publishing organs reporting on the issue share that same worldview, they deceive the public by imparting a scientific guise to myths based on Jones’ philosophy.

What is more, one of these publishing organs Daily Vatan carrying this report is even inconsistent with itself. For example, in another report dated 1 February, 2006, and titled “Will humanity’s physical change last?” the paper told its readers the following:
Will the development of humanity, which is divided into tens of different races and has established hundreds of cultures, continue in the globalizing 21st century? The one-word answer to that question is, yes... The evolution of living things is not a process, but an adaptation to nature and living conditions. In other words, change anywhere in the body or in a single gene is a system that increases the organism’s chances of survival. (our emphasis)

As we have seen, there is an inconsistency between Vatan saying, not so very long ago, that “human evolution is continuing” and its announcement today that “human evolution has finally stopped.” The fact is that both are mere speculation. Darwinist publications generally report at once and in terms favoring Darwinism whenever an evolutionist scientist stands up and says “human evolution is continuing,” but also employ the exact same method when another evolutionist scientist declares that “human evolution has finally stopped.” It is obvious that the determining factor for these publications is not the extent to which this is supported by the evidence, but whether the claims are made for the sake of Darwinism. And that is obviously not news reporting, but rather blind propaganda.

Conclusion:

Claims such as “evolution has accelerated,” “evolution has slowed down,” “evolution is continuing” or “evolution has finally stopped,” which appear from time to time in the Darwinist media, show that Darwinism is a mass of totally unscientific conjecture. This strategy, aimed at making propaganda by using scientists and the concepts of “science” and “evolution” alongside one another on a variety of pretexts, is doomed to collapse in the face of the scientific facts. The idea of a transition between species is a totally unscientific claim that has never been observed and one to which the criteria of repeatability and testability cannot be applied. Natural selection and mutation have no evolutionary power, and the human fossil record shows no passage from ape-like forebears. We advise those organs reporting on the subject to put an end to their unscientific propaganda on behalf of Darwinism. Otherwise, they will inevitably continue to contradict themselves.

Notes:

You can obtain detailed information about the invalidity of the concept of human evolution on http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/origin_of_man.html

1 Ann Gibbons, The First Human, Doubleday, Random House Inc., 2006, p. 6
2 Ann Gibbons, The First Human, Doubleday, Random House Inc., 2006, p. 6
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Why Is The Claim That Dinosaurs Evolved Into Birds An Unscientific Myth?

The theory of evolution is a fairy tale built on the hope of the impossible coming true. Birds have a special place in this story. Above all things, birds possess that magnificent organ, the wing. Beyond the structural wonders of wings, their function also inspires amazement. So much so that flight was man's obsession for thousands of years, and thousands of scientists and researchers put considerable effort into duplicating it. Apart from a few very primitive attempts, man only managed to build machines capable of flying in the twentieth century. Birds have been doing something which man tried to do with the accumulated technology of hundreds of years right through the millions of years that they have existed. Moreover, a young bird can acquire this skill after only a few attempts. Many of their characteristics are so perfect that not even the products of the latest modern technology can compare with them.

The theory of evolution relies on prejudiced comments and twisting the truth to account for the emergence of life and all its variety. When it comes to living things such as birds, science is finally sidelined completely, to be replaced by evolutionists' fantasy stories. The reason for this is the creatures that evolutionists claim to be the ancestors of birds. The theory of evolution maintains that the ancestors of birds were dinosaurs, members of the reptile family. Such a claim raises two questions that need to be answered. The first is, "How did dinosaurs come to grow wings?" The second is, "Why is there no sign of such a development in the fossil record?"

On the subject of how dinosaurs turned into birds, evolutionists debated the matter for a long time and came up with two theories. The first of these is the "cursorial" theory. This maintains that dinosaurs turned into birds by taking to the air from the ground. Supporters of the second theory object to the cursorial theory, and say that it is not possible for dinosaurs to have turned into birds in this way. They offer another solution to the question. They claim that dinosaurs that lived in the branches of trees turned into birds by trying to jump from one branch to another. This is known as the "arboreal" theory. The answer to the question of how dinosaurs could have taken to the air is also ready: "While trying to catch flies."

However, we must first of all put the following question to those people who claim that a flight system, together with wings, emerged from the body of such an animal as a dinosaur: How did flies' flight system, that is much more efficient than that of a helicopter, which is in turn modelled on them, come about? You will see that evolutionists have no answer. It is certainly most unreasonable for a theory which cannot explain the flight system of such a tiny creature as the fly to claim that dinosaurs turned into birds.

'Dinozorların sinek avlamaya çalışırken kanatlanıp kuş oldukları' iddiası
The idea that "dinosaurs grew wings while trying to catch flies" is not a joke, but rather a theory which evolutionists claim is very scientific. This example is sufficient by itself to show how seriously we should take evolutionists.

As a result, all reasonable, logical scientists are agreed that the only scientific things about these theories is their Latin names. The essence of the matter is that flight by reptiles is simply the product of fantasy.

Evolutionists who claim that dinosaurs turned into birds need to be able to find evidence for it in the fossil record. If dinosaurs did turn into birds, then half-dinosaur, half-bird creatures must have lived in the past and left some trace behind them in the fossil record. For long years evolutionists claimed that a bird called "Archaeopteryx" represented such a transition. However, those claims were nothing but a great deception.

The Archaeopteryx deception
Archaeopteryx, the so-called ancestor of modern birds according to evolutionists, lived approximately 150 million years ago. The theory holds that some small dinosaurs, such as Velociraptors or Dromaeosaurs, evolved by acquiring wings and then starting to fly. Thus, Archaeopteryx is assumed to be a transitional form that branched off from its dinosaur ancestors and started to fly for the first time.

However, the latest studies of Archaeopteryx fossils indicate that this explanation lacks any scientific foundation. This is absolutely not a transitional form, but an extinct species of bird, having some insignificant differences from modern birds.

The thesis that Archaeopteryx was a "half-bird" that could not fly perfectly was popular among evolutionist circles until not long ago. The absence of a sternum (breastbone) in this creature was held up as the most important evidence that this bird could not fly properly. (The sternum is a bone found under the thorax to which the muscles required for flight are attached. In our day, this breastbone is observed in all flying and non-flying birds, and even in bats, a flying mammal which belongs to a very different family.)

However, the seventh Archaeopteryx fossil, which was found in 1992, disproved this argument. The reason was that in this recently discovered fossil, the breastbone that was long assumed by evolutionists to be missing was discovered to have existed after all. This fossil was described in the journal Nature as follows:

The recently discovered seventh specimen of the Archaeopteryx preserves a partial, rectangular sternum, long suspected but never previously documented. This attests to its strong flight muscles, but its capacity for long flights is questionable. 30

This discovery invalidated the mainstay of the claims that Archaeopteryx was a half-bird that could not fly properly.

Morevoer, the structure of the bird's feathers became one of the most important pieces of evidence confirming that Archaeopteryx was a flying bird in the true sense. The asymmetric feather structure of Archaeopteryx is indistinguishable from that of modern birds, and indicates that it could fly perfectly well. As the eminent paleontologist Carl O. Dunbar states, "Because of its feathers, [Archaeopteryx is] distinctly to be classed as a bird."31 Paleontologist Robert Carroll further explains the subject:

The geometry of the flight feathers of Archaeopteryx is identical with that of modern flying birds, whereas nonflying birds have symmetrical feathers. The way in which the feathers are arranged on the wing also falls within the range of modern birds… According to Van Tyne and Berger, the relative size and shape of the wing of Archaeopteryx are similar to that of birds that move through restricted openings in vegetation, such as gallinaceous birds, doves, woodcocks, woodpeckers, and most passerine birds… The flight feathers have been in stasis for at least 150 million years… 32

Another fact that was revealed by the structure of Archaeopteryx's feathers was its warm-blooded metabolism. As was discussed above, reptiles and—although there is some evolutionist wishful thinking on the opposite direction—dinosaurs are cold-blooded animals whose body heat fluctuates with the temperature of their environment, rather than being homeostatically regulated. A very important function of the feathers on birds is the maintenance of a constant body temperature. The fact that Archaeopteryx had feathers shows that it was a real, warm-blooded bird that needed to retain its body heat, in contrast to dinosaurs.

The anatomy of Archaeopteryx and the evolutionists' error
Two important points evolutionary biologists rely on when claiming Archaeopteryx was a transitional form, are the claws on its wings and its teeth.

It is true that Archaeopteryx had claws on its wings and teeth in its mouth, but these traits do not imply that the creature bore any kind of relationship to reptiles. Besides, two bird species living today, the touraco and the hoatzin, have claws which allow them to hold onto branches. These creatures are fully birds, with no reptilian characteristics. That is why it is completely groundless to assert that Archaeopteryx is a transitional form just because of the claws on its wings.

Neither do the teeth in Archaeopteryx's beak imply that it is a transitional form. Evolutionists are wrong to say that these teeth are reptilian characteristics, since teeth are not a typical feature of reptiles. Today, some reptiles have teeth while others do not. Moreover, Archaeopteryx is not the only bird species to possess teeth. It is true that there are no toothed birds in existence today, but when we look at the fossil record, we see that both during the time of Archaeopteryx and afterwards, and even until fairly recently, a distinct group of birds existed that could be categorised as "birds with teeth."

Archæopteryx
Studies of Archaeopteryx's anatomy revealed that it possessed complete powers of flight, just like a modern bird has. The efforts to liken it to a reptile are totally unfounded.

The most important point is that the tooth structure of Archaeopteryx and other birds with teeth is totally different from that of their alleged ancestors, the dinosaurs. The well-known ornithologists L. D. Martin, J. D. Stewart, and K. N. Whetstone observed that Archaeopteryx and other similar birds have unserrated teeth with constricted bases and expanded roots. Yet the teeth of theropod dinosaurs, the alleged ancestors of these birds, had serrated teeth with straight roots.33 These researchers also compared the ankle bones of Archaeopteryx with those of their alleged ancestors, the dinosaurs, and observed no similarity between them. 34

Studies by anatomists such as S. Tarsitano, M.K. Hecht, and A.D. Walker have revealed that some of the similarities that John Ostrom, a leading authority on the subject who claims that Archaeopteryx evolved from dinosaurs, and others have seen between the limbs of Archaeopteryx and dinosaurs were in reality misinterpretations.35 For example, A.D. Walker has analysed the ear region of Archaeopteryx and found that it is very similar to that of modern birds. 36

In his book Icons of Evolution, American biologist Jonathan Wells remarks that Archaeopteryx has been turned into an "icon" of the theory of evolution, whereas evidence clearly shows that this creature is not the primitive ancestor of birds. According to Wells, one of the indications of this is that theropod dinosaurs—the alleged ancestors of Archaeopteryx—are actually younger than Archaeopteryx: "Two-legged reptiles that ran along the ground, and had other features one might expect in an ancestor of Archaeopteryx, appear later." 37

All these findings indicate that Archaeopteryx was not a transitional link but only a bird that fell into a category that can be called "toothed birds." Linking this creature to theropod dinosaurs is completely invalid. In an article headed "The Demise of the 'Birds Are Dinosaurs' Theory," the American biologist Richard L. Deem writes the following about Archaeopteryx and the bird-dinosaur evolution claim:

The results of the recent studies show that the hands of the theropod dinosaurs are derived from digits I, II, and III, whereas the wings of birds, although they look alike in terms of structure, are derived from digits II, III, and IV... There are other problems with the "birds are dinosaurs" theory. The theropod forelimb is much smaller (relative to body size) than that of Archaeopteryx. The small "proto-wing" of the theropod is not very convincing, especially considering the rather hefty weight of these dinosaurs. The vast majority of the theropod lack the semilunate wrist bone, and have a large number of other wrist elements which have no homology to the bones of Archaeopteryx. In addition, in almost all theropods, nerve V1 exits the braincase out the side, along with several other nerves, whereas in birds, it exits out the front of the braincase, though its own hole. There is also the minor problem that the vast majority of the theropods appeared after the appearance of Archaeopteryx. 38

These facts once more indicate for certain that neither Archaeopteryx nor other ancient birds similar to it were transitional forms. The fossils do not indicate that different bird species evolved from each other. On the contrary, the fossil record proves that today's modern birds and some archaic birds such as Archaeopteryx actually lived together at the same time. It is true that some of these bird species, such as Archaeopteryx and Confuciusornis, have become extinct, but the fact that only some of the species that once existed have been able to survive down to the present day does not in itself support the theory of evolution.

Latest Evidence: Ostrich Study Refutes The Dino-Bird Story
Drs. Alan Feduccia and Julie Nowicki of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill studied a series of live ostrich eggs and, once again, concluded that, there cannot be an evolutionary link between birds and dinosaurs. EurekAlert, a scientific portal held by the American Association for the The Advancement of Science (AAAS), reports the following:

Drs. Alan Feduccia and Julie Nowicki of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill... opened a series of live ostrich eggs at various stages of development and found what they believe is proof that birds could not have descended from dinosaurs...

Whatever the ancestor of birds was, it must have had five fingers, not the three-fingered hand of theropod dinosaurs," Feduccia said... "Scientists agree that dinosaurs developed 'hands' with digits one, two and three... Our studies of ostrich embryos, however, showed conclusively that in birds, only digits two, three and four, which correspond to the human index, middle and ring fingers, develop, and we have pictures to prove it," said Feduccia, professor and former chair of biology at UNC. "This creates a new problem for those who insist that dinosaurs were ancestors of modern birds. How can a bird hand, for example, with digits two, three and four evolve from a dinosaur hand that has only digits one, two and three? That would be almost impossible."39

In the same report, Dr. Feduccia also made important comments on the invalidity—and the shallowness—of the "birds evolved from dinosaurs" theory:

"There are insurmountable problems with that theory," he [Dr. Feduccia] said. "Beyond what we have just reported, there is the time problem in that superficially bird-like dinosaurs occurred some 25 million to 80 million years after the earliest known bird, which is 150 million years old."

"If one views a chicken skeleton and a dinosaur skeleton through binoculars they appear similar, but close and detailed examination reveals many differences," Feduccia said. "Theropod dinosaurs, for example, had curved, serrated teeth, but the earliest birds had straight, unserrated peg-like teeth. They also had a different method of tooth implantation and replacement."40

This evidence once again reveals that the "dino-bird" hype is just another "icon" of Darwinism: a myth that is supported only for the sake of a dogmatic faith in the theory.

Evolutionists' bogus dino-bird fossils
With the collapse of evolutionists' claims regarding fossils like Archaeopteryx, they are now at a complete dead-end as regards the origin of birds. That is why some evolutionists have had to resort to classical methods–forgery. In the 1990s, the public were several times given the message that "a half-dinosaur, half-bird fossil has been found." The evolutionist media carried pictures of these so-called "dino-birds" and an international campaign was thus set in motion. However, it soon began to emerge that the campaign was based on contradiction and forgery.

The first hero of the campaign was a dinosaur called Sinosauropteryx, discovered in China in 1996. The fossil was presented to the whole world as a "feathered dinosaur," and made a number of headlines. However, detailed analyses in the months that followed revealed that the structures which evolutionists had excitedly portrayed as "bird feathers" were actually nothing of the kind.

This was how the matter was presented in an article called "Plucking the Feathered Dinosaur" in the journal Science:

Exactly 1 year ago, paleontologists were abuzz about photos of a so-called "feathered dinosaur," which were passed around the halls at the annual meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology. The Sinosauropteryx specimen from the Yixian Formation in China made the front page of The New York Times, and was viewed by some as confirming the dinosaurian origins of birds. But at this year's vertebrate paleontology meeting in Chicago late last month, the verdict was a bit different: The structures are not modern feathers, say the roughly half-dozen Western paleontologists who have seen the specimens…paleontologist Larry Martin of Kansas University, Lawrence, thinks the structures are frayed collagenous fibers beneath the skin—-and so have nothing to do with birds.41

Another "dino-bird" storm blew up in 1999. Another fossil discovered in China was presented to the world as "major evidence for evolution." National Geographic magazine, the source of the campaign, drew and published imaginary "feathered dinosaur" pictures inspired by the fossil, and these hit the headlines in a number of countries. This species, which was said to have lived 125 million years ago, was immediately given the scientific name Archaeoraptor liaoningensis.

However, the fossil was a fake and was skilfully constructed from five separate specimens. A group of researchers, among whom were also three paleontologists, proved the forgery one year later with the help of X-ray computed tomography. The dino-bird was actually the product of a Chinese evolutionist. Chinese amateurs formed the dino-bird by using glue and cement from 88 bones and stones. Research suggests that Archaeoraptor was built from the front part of the skeleton of an ancient bird, and that its body and tail included bones from four different specimens. An article in the scientific journal Nature describes the forgery like this:

The Archaeoraptor fossil was announced as a 'missing link' and purported to be possibly the best evidence since Archaeopteryx that birds did, in fact, evolve from certain types of carnivorous dinosaur. But Archaeoraptor was revealed to be a forgery in which bones of a primitive bird and a non-flying dromaeosaurid dinosaur had been combined… The Archaeoraptor specimen, which was reportedly collected from the Early Cretaceous Jiufotang Formation of Liaoning, was smuggled out of China and later sold in the United States on the commercial market… We conclude that Archaeoraptor represents two or more species and that it was assembled from at least two, and possibly five, separate specimens.... 42

So how was it that National Geographic could have presented such a huge scientific forgery to the whole world as "major evidence for evolution"? The answer to this question lay concealed in the magazine's evolutionary fantasies. Since National Geographic was blindly supportive of Darwinism and had no hesitation about using any propaganda tool it saw as being in favour of the theory, it ended up signing up to a second "Piltdown man scandal."

Evolutionist scientists also accepted National Geographic's fanaticism. Dr. Storrs L. Olson, head of the famous U.S. Smithsonian Institute's Ornithology Department, announced that he had previously warned that the fossil was a forgery, but that the magazine's executives had ignored him. In a letter he wrote to Peter Raven of National Geographic, Olson wrote:

dino-kuş sahtekralığı
National Geographic magazine portrayed "dino-birds" in this way in 1999, and presented them to the whole world as evidence of evolution. Two years later, however, the source of inspiration for these drawings, Archaeoraptor, was shown to be a scientific falsehood.

Prior to the publication of the article "Dinosaurs Take Wing" in the July 1998 National Geographic, Lou Mazzatenta, the photographer for Sloan's article, invited me to the National Geographic Society to review his photographs of Chinese fossils and to comment on the slant being given to the story. At that time, I tried to interject the fact that strongly supported alternative viewpoints existed to what National Geographic intended to present, but it eventually became clear to me that National Geographic was not interested in anything other than the prevailing dogma that birds evolved from dinosaurs.43

In a statement in USA Today, Olson said, "The problem is, at some point the fossil was known by Geographic to be a fake, and that information was not revealed."44 In other words, he said that National Geographic maintained the deception, even though it knew that the fossil it was portraying as proof of evolution was a forgery.

We must make it clear that this attitude of National Geographic was not the first forgery that had been carried out in the name of the theory of evolution. Many such incidents have taken place since it was first proposed. The German biologist Ernst Haeckel drew false pictures of embryos in order to support Darwin. British evolutionists mounted an orangutan jaw on a human skull and exhibited it for some 40 years in the British Museum as "Piltdown man, the greatest evidence for evolution." American evolutionists put forward "Nebraska man" from a single pig's tooth. All over the world, false pictures called "reconstructions," which have never actually lived, have been portrayed as "primitive creatures" or "ape-men."

In short, evolutionists once again employed the method they first tried in the Piltdown man forgery. They themselves created the intermediate form they were unable to find. This event went down in history as showing how deceptive the international propaganda on behalf of the theory of evolution is, and that evolutionists will resort to all kinds of falsehood for its sake.

Footnotes
29. Harun Yahya, Darwinism Refuted, pp.207-222

30. Nature, vol. 382, August, 1, 1996, p. 401.

31. Carl O. Dunbar, Historical Geology, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1961, p. 310.

32. Robert L. Carroll, Patterns and Processes of Vertebrate Evolution, Cambridge University Press, 1997, p. 280-81.

33. L. D. Martin, J. D. Stewart, K. N. Whetstone, The Auk, vol. 97, 1980, p. 86.

34. L. D. Martin, J. D. Stewart, K. N. Whetstone, The Auk, vol. 97, 1980, p. 86; L. D. Martin, "Origins of the Higher Groups of Tetrapods,” Ithaca, Comstock Publishing Association, New York, 1991, pp. 485-540.

35. S. Tarsitano, M. K. Hecht, Zoological Journal of the Linnaean Society, vol. 69, 1980, p. 149; A. D. Walker, Geological Magazine, vol. 117, 1980, p. 595.

36. A.D. Walker, as described in Peter Dodson, "International Archaeopteryx Conference,” Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 5(2):177, June 1985.

37. Jonathan Wells, Icons of Evolution, Regnery Publishing, 2000, p. 117

38. Richard L. Deem, "Demise of the 'Birds are Dinosaurs' Theory,” http://www.yfiles.com/dinobird2.html.

39. "Scientist say ostrich study confirms bird 'hands' unlike these of dinosaurs,” http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2002-08/uonc-sso081402.php

40. "Scientist say ostrich study confirms bird 'hands' unlike these of dinosaurs,” http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2002-08/uonc-sso081402.php

41. Ann Gibbons, "Plucking the Feathered Dinosaur,” Science, vol. 278, no. 5341, 14 November 1997, pp. 1229 – 1230

42. "Forensic Palaeontology: The Archaeoraptor Forgery," Nature, March29, 2001

43. Storrs L. Olson "OPEN LETTER TO: Dr. Peter Raven, Secretary, Committee for Research and Exploration, National Geographic Society Washington, DC 20036,” Smithsonian Institution, November 1, 1999

44. Tim Friend, "Dinosaur-bird link smashed in fossil flap,” USA Today, 25 January 2000, (emphasis added)
Add a comment...
Wait while more posts are being loaded