The claim that 'the first cell formed in muddy water' is fraudulent

According to Darwin's theory of evolution, there is an imaginary
"first cell" which came into being from the chance combination of
inanimate substances. And according to Darwinism, everything began
with this "first cell." It is this imaginary "first cell" that,
according to Darwinism, is the origin of all life, butterflies, birds,
lions, eagles, whales, rabbits, deer and finally human beings who
produce technologies, found civilizations, train professors, travel
into space and study the cells they possess in the laboratory.
According to Darwinism, the origin of this imaginary first cell is;
some muddy water, time and chance! According to the religionof
Darwinism , these three magical (!) and intelligent (!) forces somehow
came togetherand produced a "CELL" that not even Nobel Prize-winning
scientists can manufacture in laboratories equipped with 21st-century
technology, the details of which human beings have researched for more
than half a centuryin order to understand, and that possesses highly
complex and perfect mechanisms, organelles and an irreducible
complexity! Moreover, these three glorious (!) forces combined to give
rise to all the glorious life we currently see on Earth. The religion
of Darwinism seeks to convince people of this nonsense.
But this claim is a horrendous fraud and lie.
The fantasy of the first cell that came into beingin muddy water,
which was proposed by Darwin, matched the level of science and
technology in the day of Darwin. Bearing in mind that Darwin thought
the cell was a simple blob of liquid, this childish tale is something
that might very well be expected from the knowledge andscientific
understanding of the time. Furthermore, since people did not know what
the cell was like, it was easy for them to be deceived with this lie.
But the findings of the science of genetics have once again revealed
thatDarwinism is a gigantic lie. In the light of currentknowledge and
data, just one of the countless proteins in the cell is enough to
refute the theory of evolution. Proteins are structures with a sublime
complexity, which cannot possibly come into being by chance. They
cannot even be manufactured using 21st-century technology in a
conscious and controlledlaboratory environment.To claim that such a
structure formed by chance in muddy water is laughable and irrational
in the face of science. The American academic philosopher ofscience
Stephen C. Meyerdescribes the impossibility of a single protein
forming by chance in these words:
Consider the probabilistic hurdles that must be overcome to construct
even one short protein molecule of about 100 amino acids in length.
First, all amino acids must form achemical bond known asa peptide bond
so as to join with other amino acids in the protein chain. Yet in
nature many other types of chemical bonds are possible between amino
acids.The probability of building a chain of 100 amino acids in which
all linkages involve peptide bonds is roughly 1 chance in 1030.
Second, in nature every amino acid has a distinctmirror image of
itself, one left-handed version or L-form and one right-handed version
or D-form. These mirror-image forms are called optical isomers.
Functioning proteins tolerate only left-handed amino acids,yet the
right-handed and left-handed isomers occur in nature with roughly
equal frequency. Taking this into consideration compounds the
improbability of attaining a biologically functioning protein.The
probability of attaining at random only L-amino acids in a
hypothetical peptide chain 100 aminoacids long is (1/2)100or again
roughly 1 chance in 1030.
Third and most important of all, functioning proteins must have amino
acids that link up in a specific sequential arrangement,just like the
letters in a meaningful sentence. Because there are 20 biologically
occurring amino acids, the probability of getting a specific amino
acid at a given site is 1/20. Even if we assume that some sites along
the chain willtolerate several amino acids (using the variances
determined bybiochemist Robert Sauer of MIT),we find that the
probability of achieving a functional sequence ofamino acids in
several functioning proteins at random is still "vanishingly small,"
roughly 1 chance in 1065—an astronomically large number—for a protein
only one hundred amino acids in length. (Actually the probability is
even lowerbecause there are many nonproteinous amino acids in nature
that we have not accounted for in this calculation.)
If one also factors in the probability of attaining proper bonding and
optical isomers, the probability of constructing a rather short,
functional protein at random becomes so small as to be effectively
zero (no more than 1 chance in 10125), even given our
multi-billion-year-old universe.Consider further that equally severe
probabilistic difficulties attend the random assembly of functional
DNA. Moreover, a minimally complex cell requires not 1, but at least
100 complex proteins (and many other biomolecular components such as
DNA and RNA) all functioning in close coordination. For this reason,
quantitative assessmentsof cellular complexity have simply reinforced
an opinion that has prevailed since the mid-1960s within
origin-of-life biology:chance is not an adequate explanation for the
origin of biological complexity and specificity.1
Even if we were to assume the impossible, that all these complex
structures did form by chance, Darwinists still have to explain the
formation of a million pages-worth of information in such a glorious
molecule as DNA. On this subject, as on every other regarding the cell
and the origin of life, Darwinists have no account to offer. According
to distorted Darwinist logic, the extraordinary information in a cell
thatemerged by chance in muddy water must also have come into being
bychance through various external agents. There is no doubt that such
a formation is impossible. The information in DNA is glorious
information, created together with that DNA.
The Darwinist claim that the cell formed by chance in muddy water is
an outdated belief left over from the time of Darwin, who thought the
cell was simply some blob. However, no doubtthat 19th-century
superstition no longer applies today, when science and technology are
so much more advanced. There are countless complex structures in the
body that all require explanation, yet Darwinism is unable to account
for the formation of even a single protein. But Darwinists behave as
if they were unaware of those impossibilities. Evolutionist
publications still describe this impossible emergence from muddy
water, just like the tales in a child's book of fairy stories. Theaim
is to deceive the mass of people with this account, which is
unscientific, illogical andincapable of proof. According to the
adherents of this false religion, the more people who believe in this
fairy tale, the more people will fall under the spell of Darwinism.
But people no longer believe in these fake tales of Darwinists.
Everything in creation exhibits the Sublime Might and Power of our
Almighty Lord, the Creator of the universe and everything within it.In
the Qur'an, Almighty Allah describes the sublime creation of the cell
and man:
We created man from the purest kind of clay; then made him a drop ina
secure receptacle; thenformed the drop into a clot and formed the clot
into a lump and formed the lump into bones andclothed the bones in
flesh; and then brought him into being as another creature. Blessed be
Allah, the Bestof Creators! (Surat al-Muminun, 12-14)
No matter how facile an account of the glory of life on Earth those
seeking explanations outside the Qur'an may offer, it is clear that
what has been created isvery great and majestic. And the theory of
evolution has no means of survival in the face of this sublime
creation. Almighty Allah describes the greatness of the works He has
created in another verse:
The creation of the heavens and earth is far greater than the creation
of mankind. But most of mankind do not know it. (Surah Ghafir, 57)
1 "Word Games: DNA, Design, and Intelligence" by StephenC. Meyer,
inSigns of Intelligence: Understanding Intelligent Design,ed. William
A. Dembski, James M. Kushiner, Brazos Press, 2001, pp.
109-110[emphasis added]