The Great Lie of the Monkey Men


To the average television watcher or student of Western Schools and Universities, the Ideal of Evolution has been declared as the beginning of life it’s self. Western societies obsession with discrediting religion and the existence of God has pushed this Theory of evolution to be declared as fact, when in reality, it is still a theoretical concept.

As Muslim’s walking in the path of Islam, we stand firm in our confident knowing of the divine creative power of Allah (SWT) and that He alone is responsible for the creation of the earth, heavens and all created beings seen and unseen. It is only those whom ‘grasp at straws’ searching for an excuse for their rebellion against the commands of Allah who entertain ideas of spontaneous creation of the evolution Theorem. We need to equip ourselves with factual based answers that can start to destroy Shi’itan’s plans to lead astray the masses of ignorant non-believers and start to proclaim the truth.

Where did the evolution theory come from?

Creation Science was the prevailing belief systems before the rise of geology in the late 18th Century. The early European scientists, from Copernicus to Galileo to Newton believed (as did almost all Muslims, Christians and Jews in their time) in a literal interpretation of the Holy books account of creation. Ancient Jewish scholars placed creation at 3761 BCE. In 1642 CE, John Lightfoot (a Professor of Greek) computed that the creation of the world started on 3928-SEP-17 at 09:00 hrs BCE. After 1658, most Christians accepted the calculations of James Usher, an Irish archbishop, who estimated 4004-OCT-23 BCE. Another estimate, based upon the Biblical account and modern archeology is about 4456 BCE. (3) This uses the date of 2800 BCE for a massive flood, which covered the plain between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. All of the towns in the area were buried under thick layers of mud. If we assume that this is the Noahic flood (Noah-Alaysalaam) that has been recorded in the Holy Quran and Bible as occurring when Noah was 900 years old, then the earlier date can be calculated. Belief in Usher’s date continued among creation scientists, until the early 18th century, when it became obvious to most researchers that geological processes were exceedingly slow, and must have been accomplished over incredibly long periods of time. A 6000 year old earth was not possible.

As geologists promoted theories that indicated that the earth’s age predated the creation story, opposition arose in many religious organizations. Friction between science and theology increased when Darwin published ‘The Origin of Species and The Descent of Man’. While many mainstream and liberal churches found evolutionary theory compatible with their faith (including the Catholic and Anglican churches), more conservative fundamentalists were highly vocal in their condemnation of it as leading to atheism and immoral behavior.

Charles Darwin the declared father of Evolution, declared in his view of the theorem, that as natural environments change, such as variations in climate or changing patterns of flora or fauna (which may be a consequence of climatic variations, or disease, or overuse by some species), the characteristics of populations within these environments change in such a way that the individuals of species become better suited to the new environment over successive generations (,from his book, ‘Origin of Species’, p. 64).

Continuing in saying ” Natural Selection acts exclusively by the preservation and accumulation of variations, which are beneficial under the organic and inorganic conditions to which each creature is exposed at all periods of life. The ultimate result is that each creature tends to become more and more improved in relation to its conditions (Origin of Species, 93).

It is as a result of such claims by Darwin and the continuation of Darwinism as a scientific study that the origin of ideas that we have the concept of humanities evolution from Apes/Monkeys. Charles Darwin in the realisation of his theory being unproven, rejected his theory prior to his death dying as a Christian.

Two of the biggest weaknesses of evolutionary theory are:

1) There is no adequate explanation for the origin of life from dead chemicals. Even the simplest life form is tremendously complex.

2) The fossil record, our only documentation of whether evolution actually occurred in the past, lacks any transitional forms, and all types appear fully-formed when first present. The evidence that “pre-men” (ape-men) existed is dubious at best. So called pre-man fossils turn out to be those of apes, extinct apes, fully man, or historical frauds.

Origin of life overview

Life is often portrayed as spontaneously arising from some sort of “primordial soup”. There it is quiet, tranquil, warm nutrients in a primitive sea, a lightning strike in the distance is imparting the energy of life, soon life will be emerging to the shores… Hold it, not so fast there! To go from a barren lifeless planet to a one filled with living things, we would have to pass through a number of stages:


For starters we need a favorable environment for life to evolve and be sustained.


We need a means of constructing the building blocks of life.

* LARGE MACRO-MOLECULES (proteins, DNA, RNA, etc.) –

Some the simple molecules must be assembled into biologically useful large molecules.


Biological systems such as energy conversion must be constructed.


And finally, all these molecules and systems must be assembled together to form a highly complex living cell.

When each of these steps are examined scientifically, we see that each has tremendous problems and requires large leaps of faith to believe that they ever happened without the Creative power of Allah (SWT). To explain the origin of life by non-supernatural means we must have a plausible explanation for each of these steps. An artist’s conception of lightning striking a sea of ‘organic soup’ and then jumping to self-replicating life is woefully inadequate. In fact, it is very misleading.

Although the origin of life by mechanistic means is routinely taken for granted by the media, it is, in reality still a mystery event to evolutionary scientists.

Origin of Life: the Early Atmosphere

Our current atmosphere consists primarily of oxygen (21%) and nitrogen (78%) and is called oxidizing because of chemical reactions produced by oxygen. For example, iron is oxidized to form iron oxide or rust.

The presence of oxygen in a hypothetical primordial atmosphere poses a difficult problem for notions of self-assembling molecules. If oxygen is present, there would be no amino acids, sugars, purines, etc. Amino acids and sugars react with oxygen to form carbon dioxide (CO2) and water. Because it is impossible for life to evolve with oxygen, evolutionists theorize an early atmosphere without oxygen. This departs from the usual evolutionary theorizing where a uniformistic view is held (i.e. where processes remain constant over vast stretches of time). In this case the present is NOT the key to the past.

Instead, they propose a “reducing” (called thus because of the chemical reactions) atmosphere which contains free hydrogen. Originally, they postulated an atmosphere consisting of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), carbon monoxide (CO), ammonia (NH3), free hydrogen and water vapor. Newer schemes exclude ammonia and methane.

There is a problem if you consider the ozone (O3) layer which protects the earth from ultraviolet rays. Without this layer, organic molecules would be broken down and life would soon be eliminated. But if you have oxygen, it prevents life from starting. A “catch-22” situation (Denton 1985, 261-262):

Atmosphere with oxygen =>

No amino acids => No life possible!

Atmosphere without oxygen => No ozone => No life possible!

In must be noted at this point that the existence of a reducing atmosphere is theoretical and does not rely on physical evidence. To the contrary, there are geological evidences for the existence of an oxidizing atmosphere as far back as can be determined. Among these are: the precipitation of limestone (calcium carbonate) in great quantities, the oxidation of ferrous iron in early rocks.

Monkey Men

While some humans may behave like monkeys, the great theory of Human evolution from Apes, has a whole quandary of errors. Atheists search for justification has led them to new levels of deception using all sorts of lies and undisclosed trickery in order to perpetuate a non-existent illusion. The supposed hominids (creatures in-between ape and human that evolutionists believe used to exist) bones and skull record used by evolutionists often consists of `finds’ which are thoroughly unrevealing and inconsistent. They are neither clear nor conclusive even though evolutionists present them as if they were.

Evolutionists present much of their finds as if they were compelling and factual explanations to human evolution. In fact, they base their conclusions on mere speculation and often the flimsiest of `finds’. Many discoveries of supposed hominids consist of only a mouth fragment, a leg bone, a hipbone, or a knee joint. On this alone, they have considered it to be a hominid. They even name it, use artist’s interpretations to reconstruct what it looked like, and present it to the public as a fact. Some of these finds have turned out to be those of a pig, donkey, or the result of a hoax. One hoax consisted of someone placing a human skull with an ape’s jaw. Evolutionist declared it to be a hominid for fifty years without having done an in depth study of it. Some finds consist of an assortment of fragments found miles apart and then placed together to look as though they came from the same individual. Sometimes rocks as simple as those

found in any backyard are called tools of hominids and are pictured in books. Footprints that look identical to any person’s today are sometimes declared in books and accepted as those of hominids. The brow ridge that supposedly marked the hominid appears only in one skull, that of an Ape.

1.”Our task is not unlike attempting to assemble a 3-dimensional jigsaw puzzle in which most of the pieces are missing, and those few bits which are at hand are broken!” Quoted famous Paleontologist Richard Leakey.

2.”There is a strong tendency for fossils to be presented as if they were lucid texts to be read unambiguously rather than scrappy fragments of unknown morphologies.” Famous Paleontologist Misia Landau upon realizing how poor the fossil evidence was.

3.”`We’ve got to have some ancestors. We’ll pick those.’ Why? `Because we know they have to be there, and these are the best candidates.’ That’s by and large the way it has worked. I am not exaggerating.” Gareth Nelson of the American Museum of Natural History.

4.Several of the supposed finds have relied on mere tooth or jaw fragments. These include Piltdown man, Dryopithecus, Ramapithecus, and Hesperopithecus. Ramapithecus, considered the first `hominid’ for twenty years by evolutionists, was based only on a few teeth.

5.Piltdown was discovered in 1953 to have been nothing more than an Ape’s jaw placed with a human skull. It was a hoax placed on purpose. They recognized neither the jaw to be an ape’s or the skull to be a human’s. Instead, they declared each part as an in between of ape and human. They dated it to be 500,000 years old, gave it a name (Eoanthropus Dawsoni or `Dawn Man’), and wrote some 500 books on it. The `discovery’ fooled paleontologists for forty-five years. Scientists often demonstrate an utter inability to interpret their finds with any accuracy. This hoax, a human skull placed with an ape jaw, was not recognized as a hoax by the field for forty-five years. During this time, they declared it to the public as being a human ancestor.

6.Ramapithecus lasted twenty years as considered to be the first in-between of humans and apes by judgment based only on teeth. He is now known to be an extinct baboon.

7.Hesperithecus was actually created from one pig’s tooth but it fooled the entire paleontology field and dental experts for fourteen years. Evolutionists often base their conclusions on such small `evidences’ as a single tooth. They reconstructed creatures on this basis alone and presented artistic impressions of pre-historic men.

8.Similarly, hominids (supposed in betweens) are declared on the basis of such things as a piece of a leg bone, a hip, or a knee piece, etc. An example of the poor evidence that evolutionists use is a hip bone `find’ that they say marked a `hominid’.

9.Orce man was based on the skull cap of a donkey.

10.The famous find named Lucy when placed together looked nothing more than a few bones yet it was regarded as a hominid without reservation. Popular `finds’ were often based on nothing more than a few bones that were not even found together or from the same individual.

11.Regarding Lucy, in fact, it is known, “Lucy – when they required a knee joint to prove that Lucy walked upright, they used one found more than 200 feet lower in the (earth) and more than two miles away.”

12.Regarding the finder of Lucy we read, “…he regards the evolution of man from apes as self-evident, but who also regards the evidence as poppycock.”

13.Rarely do they even know if the bone set is from the same individual.

14.The Boisei skull was broken in 400 pieces but pieced together and declared as all from the same skull.

15.Regarding the reconstructive drawings always made of these finds we note, “Well-known anthropologist E.A. Hooten has said that from a Neanderthal skull an artist can fashion the features of a chimpanzee or a philosopher and that it is wise to `…put not your faith in reconstructions.'”

16.In addition to being poor, the fossils are also inconsistent. The Boisei skull has a large crest unlike any supposed hominid before it or after it and nothing like any human ever: It’s skull actually has a crest on the top (as ape skulls only have) but it was declared as a human ancestor.

17.The brow over the eyes which, supposedly characterised lesser humans, existed in none of the fossils prior to Neanderthal or after.

18.Paleontologists have called simple rocks as hominid tools

19.Even bones and teeth were picked as tools of hominids. Evolutionists have declared nondescript bone and tooth remains to be tools of `hominids’.

20.The most non-descript footprints were called those of hominids.

21.Biochemists Allen Wilson and Vincent Sarich discovered that the first people had to originate less than 200,000 years ago and could only have come from an original two people. This made virtually all the paleontologist’s dates wrong and made all the posited bushes of human origins incorrect.

22.”(That modern humans evolved in many different areas at the same time) is theoretically implausible based on current knowledge (in population genetics).” Popular geneticist Shahin Rouhani.

23.Famous Paleontologist Roger Lewin admits, “The mitochondrial DNA technique appears to support the Noah’s Ark hypothesis (that we originated from one set of people at the same location not many people and places as the evolutionists concluded).

24.Outside the strict fossil evidence, therefore, each branch of scientific analysis that has focused on the origin of modern humans – mitochondrial DNA, population genetics, ecology – has cast its vote to replacement, the Noah’s Ark Hypothesis.

25.The paleontologist dates had to be changed. They had hominids dating as far back as 63 million years.

26.Biochemists and Molecular Biologists note that inferring relationships from fossils was “Fraught with potential error.”

27.Sarich put it bluntly, “…it (a fossil) could not be (a hominid), because it was too old.”

28.Paleontologists were slow to admit their errors or even look at any of the data. At first they just “…trimmed (their) dates…just in case there was something in it (the biochemistry data).” Famous Paleontologist David Pilbeam

29. .Famous Paleontologist David Pilbeam, regarding two of the finds now known not to be hominids, observes, “We should have been aware how flimsy our original arguments had been and that should have made us more cautious. But it didn’t. That 130 years of very determined efforts to confirm Darwinism have done no better than to find a few ambiguous supporting examples is significant negative evidence.”

The Nine Apes

Nine of the twelve popularly supposed hominids are actually extinct apes/monkeys and not part human at all, these first nine regarded hominids have been put forth by evolutionists by bone and skull finds have been demonstrated as being extinct apes or monkeys. The discovery of extinct apes demonstrated some of the finds to be monkeys/ apes. Close examination of the skulls and bones has caused experts to determine that none of the other skulls have any human characteristics either. The bones and skulls found could be any of the perhaps thousands of monkeys and apes that have existed in the past. These bones and skulls have never been found apart from where apes/ monkeys live or have lived. All of the fossils were named as hominids only because they looked like a cross between certain known monkeys. It never had anything to do with being part human at all. It is observed; Pliopithecus resembled a modern day spider monkey except for its skull, face and teeth, which looked like those of a gibbon.

As for similarities between structural skeletal formation of Humans and Apes can be explained simply é Same designer similar design. In the same way that an Architect who designs one building will display similarities in style, trademarks and design when he builds supplementary designs. Can we conclude that because all birds have three toes they are of one species that evolved to become many? If this was a formula for evolutionary development we would then see humans with vast distinctions such as exist between Sparrows and Penguins, humans with four legs or the ability to fly. If the existence of an Ape species with the ability to form into an intelligent being existed we are still faced with the dilemma of the current existence of Apes and why they have not started the process of evolution???

It is as Muslim’s and believers in Allah’s word that we hold fast that it is by His and only His super-natural power that humanity and all of creation has been formed. The methods of Allah (SWT) and the scientifically proven evidences presented in The Holy Quran, confirm to us that we can put our faith in Allah’s explanation. For it is Allah alone who can declare:

“It is not befitting To Allah that He should beget a son. Glory be to Him! When He determines a matter, He only say To it, “Be”, and it is.

The Holy Quran, Surah Al-Maryam 19:35

Evolution being far from confirmation and confirmed as merely a theory that requires faith in unproven non scientific conclusions, can then no longer be defined as scientific, but has in it’s self formed as a religion for it’s believers. Both the belief in a supreme unseen deity and the belief in a process of unseen, non-eventuated spontaneous chemical reactions require faith. Is it so ludicrous to believe that the Holy Quran is the infallible word of God?, when it clearly provides us with evidence on such details as embryonic development, formation of earth matter and Mountains, detailed descriptions of the principals of salinity in our oceans and many more, prior to scientific technological equipment required to confirm these evidences as in recent times. It takes more ignorance than faith to believe in ‘The Evolution Theory’ and more Hoaxes’ than reality to try to prove that God does not exist.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here