Evolution and Religion: Kenneth Miller on The Colbert Report
Published by Haseeb January 13th, 2006 in Current News, Islam, Science/MedicineMany followers of Religions, including us Muslims are often troubled with issues relating science and religion. The worldviews of scientism a
nd religion in general are quite contrary, and I personally feel that generally, many students of higher science and medicine, without firm faith (Iman) in the fundamentals of Islamic theology and beliefs, can easily have their faith shaken when confronted with “science”. I have taken an enlightening course on Religion and Science with Professor William Chittick at Stony Brook, as well as studied the historical aspect of the ’scient
ific revolution’ and its impact on the world and contribution to human uniqueness extensively with Professor Paul M. Bingham (also at Stony Brook). These two professors, who I have learned so much from, and greatly admire and respect, have profoundly helped me in my understanding of these issues. I have written about some of this in papers for these classes (See Written Work Section). Inshallah I will like to discuss this issue in future posts.
And of course the most commonly debated and contested issue, evolution, always stirs up heat on ‘both sides’ of the debate. I disagree with common perceptions of evolution being contrary to Islam. For one to deny evolution, is to deny a scientific fact. Yes, Muslims believe that God created Man from ‘clay’, and the human being is different from all other creations, because of our divine spirits (ruh) having been inspired into us from God. The human being, because of his soul, is unique in terms of all of creation. (There is no concept of the spirit or soul in science) However, for us to believe in the human soul and its divine origin, is part of our iman, or faith, which of course supercedes anything else in this dunya (world) (science is essentially the study of the quantifiable aspects of the dunya). As Muslims, we need not justify our iman by what science tells us for the very fact that science is limited and stems only from the knowledge and reality of this world, whereas our faith comes from a higher source both beyond and unattainable by science. To start questioning matters of iman, such as the divine origin of the human being is to go down a very dangerous slippery slope. Nonetheless, by no means does Islam give any implication that it rejects evolution entirely, like many Muslims unfortunately, tend to suggest. Last night on The Colbert Report, Brown University Biology Professor Kenneth Miller answered issues regarding evolution in contrast to religion very well. Something for even Muslims to think about.
“My view [of God] is [that] I’ve got a higher opinion, this is a guy who was so clever that he set a process in motion that gave rise to everything on this planet, and you and me, maybe even Bill O’Reilly.”
CLICK HERE to Download this Video Clip (8.4 MB)
Or view it STREAMING from the original source at OneGoodMove.org
I have problems with evolution too though. In a class I took last semester, the book we used stated that after one of the mass extinctions, various life forms started to evolve because “any body system could survive in this new environment”. The book was saying that it was not the environment was not competitive and yet evolution was still ocurring. I asked my professor about this and he was like “well, nothing HAS to trigger evolution, it does not have some mechanism *telling* it what to do, it has no beginning”…. this really shattered any believe I would have had in evolution because:
1. Isn’t evolution triggered by natural selection?
2. If “evolution” doesn’t need a beginning, why is it absurd to say that God has no beginning?
Another issue is, at the cellular and molecular level, how do proteins/cells know what to code for new traits? How can my cells say “ok, now, write up GTAC to get rid of the tail cuz we don’t need it anymore”.
In any case, I don’t think Muslims should go in an outrage or anything. We should accept what Allah
says and if they want to teach evolution, let them, but in schools the gaps in evolution are conveniently left out. Sure, our belief of the creation of the universe may not be classified as “science” (and I don’t think we need things like “intelligent design” to justify our belief either), but science does not explain everything and is always going through various paradigm shifts.
Allah
knows best.
Danya - Good stuff. Science is an objective tool but the ones who use science (namely, scientists) to derive hypothesis are of subjective minds. Biased interpretations aren’t reserved for only religious fanatics.
Hahmed - awesome links, man. I like all the videos and resources you link alongside your personal views. Thanks!
salaams!
Keep everything simple: Allah
created everything. Everything will go back to Allah 
.
Khalas ya3ni!
I also don’t believe that evolution was Allah
’s way of putting forth life on Earth. One of the most fundamental arguments of evolutionists is the similarity between chimpanzee DNA and human DNA; some say it’s 97% similar, others say more.
Rather than believe that one evolved from the other, would it not make sense that they both came from the same creator? Two engines manufactured by the same company may be 97% similar - this similarity is usually a result of the same engineers designing it. It does not necessarily imply that one is the evolution of the other.
Of course, that’s highly simplistic, but so are most of the arguments given by evolutionists. I remember learning in biology class about how some creature just “evolved a lung”. Completely disregarding the notion of the Gestalt - that the whole is greater than the sum of it’s parts - we’re just expected to accept that all the composite pieces came together to form an extremely complicated system. There’s more dogma in evolution than there is in religion.
I like Mujahideen Ryders philosophy; keep it simple. From Allah
we came, and to Allah 
will we return.
Contrary to what many of us would like to believe, physically, our bodies are not much different than the bodies of chimpanzees or other mammals. Our DNA is indeed 99% identical to humans (both genomes have been mapped). Therefore our bodies, and our physiological processes, etc., are practically identical to these other animals, and we have physically evolved in a similar manner with regards to our environment, natural selection, etc.. You arent much better off physically than a monkey. And evolutionary arguments are indeed quite more complex than what you can imagine. Take any higher study in biochemistry or physiology. But yes, there are ‘gaps’, which some scientists explain, but others do have severe doubts over (Re: Professor Michael Behe - The Darwinian Blackbox).
However, by no means am I implying that Adam (pbuh) was any less ‘human’ than you or I, or that he was a decendent of monkeys. Astaghfirullah! What makes humans unique, at least Islamically, is our souls, our divinely inspired souls from The Creator. However, due to my faith, I know (because Allah
tells us in the Quran) that the Islamic myth (religious studies definition of myth, [NOT a false story]) of human creation says that Allah 
has created us Himself, and most significantly, he has blown into us our spirts, or our souls. This is what makes humans unique. Our divine souls that have the ability to ascend to levels higher than the angelic realm. So given this Islamic interpretation of the reality of the human being, I agree, that there nothing wrong with keeping this fact simple, and acknowledging the origin of the human species as such; the very fact that Allah 
tells us this in the Quran suffices as enough proof, for it serves as a much greater evidence than anything science tells us.
listen you simplistic jump to conclusioners, particularly Danya.
What Nisa asked was a good question. Why did changes ‘just happen’? Why didnt it need a trigger? Natural selection does not require a trigger. In fact, natural selection is happening RIGHT NOW. Your kid is going to have different genes, randomly having exchanged bits of dna from one chromosome to another. Dont believe me? just do a dna fingerprint of yourself and your kid and i guarantee you some of the genes are different. HALLELUJAH, RANDOM CHANGE IS PROVEN WITH ONE TEST. This is not even all that complicated. any even slightly advanced textbook will show you what happens during meiosis. Sometimes the change isnt good, the offspring has sickle cell, sometimes its so bad that the birth is miscarried, it was never viable, other times its just a slight change in some protein. Now take these random changes over a hundred thousand years and the slight changes add up. Whos going to survive in Africa? someone who has the dark skin pigment or the light? What usually happens to albinos born in africa? death. NATURAL SELECTION PROVEN AGAIN. This stuff is not complicated.
What Danya said is a nice and very concise point that amounts to absolutely nothing of value. While she/he/it panders to the intellect in you by prefacing with “Science is an objective tool” she goes on to show what the real point of the communication is by continuing “the ones who use science (namely, scientists) to derive hypothesis are of subjective minds.”, and of course ends with that perfect statement finally bringing out her point with the quotable ending “Biased interpretations aren’t reserved for only religious fanatics.” by suggesting that scientists are fanatics.
I agree with Kenneth Miller and I say this to anyone who doesnt believe that God set evolution in motion, dont get flu shots. Thats all. If you dont believe that evolution is real, then you should figure that the flu shot you got 10 years ago should be good forever.
“sigh” …. I’m glad you you bothered to my read my post. Now please read it again and:
1. Explain to me how I said that natural selection needs to be triggered? I think I said something closer to “evolution needs a trigger”.
2. Please differentiate between my post and Nisa’s.
When your reading comprehension skills improve, you can come back. Thanks and good day.
wow, what a harsh tongue. I realized afterwards that there was a difference btwn you two but then i figured that you would figure it out. I see that you did and yet you had to respond with that forked tongue. ssssssssss…..take it easy mothra
oh and something else:
—“sigh” …. I’m glad you you bothered to my read my post. Now please read it again and:—-
Two mistakes in your first sentence. Either your writing skills are poor OR you stutter even when you write! Based on this evidence, im going to tell you, when you get a greencard, you can come back.
Thanks and good evening.
owned.
sigh - obviously, you’re looking to make friends but you’re not the only one who’s taken Bio 101 in high school, so try another angle. And don’t pat your back just yet as you’ve done nothing but regurgitated what’s already been said.
When you get to Bio 102, or if you simply check current data, I’m pretty sure there is only “scientific” evidence behind “MICRO evolution” and not “MACRO evolution” as many of the fanatic scientists would have us believe. Sure, one can ‘believe’ that the rules that apply for micro can also be applied for macro, but is it ’scientifically’ proven? I think not. (Incidentally, believing in the theory of macro evolution doesn’t make one a kafir… but thats another topic)
Albeit, through the lens of science, Macro-Evolution, amounts to nothing more than a theory until you can provide ‘scientific’ evidence.
We’re expected to swallow:
(1) Surprising fact A.
(2) If theory B were the case, then A would naturally follow.
(3) Therefore B.
As Mr. Keller points out, “is the analogy from micro-evolution within a species (which is fairly well-attested to by breeding horses, pigeons, useful plant hybrids, mutation and so on) applicable to macro-evolution, from one species to another?”
This is where it gets messy and human politics come into play. Humans — the subjective beings that they are go to great lengths at establishing their beliefs/theories as ‘fact,’ in the mind of the masses.
Why can’t we disagree with both sides and think of new alternatives as Mr. Miller has rightly suggested. I don’t just have a problem with intelligent design; I also have a problem accepting theory as fact.
Feel free to point out my grammatical mistakes as well, i love it when people get personal.
Good night and Good Luck.
micro, macro, its all the same stuff
if micro is real then macro is real because they follow the exact same principles.
Biology sucks, but Bingham was the man, Haseeb knows him better than most people.
Regarding the 99% similarity between chimpanzees and humans, it has been proven to be false. It is actually about 95% http://www.darwinism-watch.com/99_myth_is_dead.php
“For example a genetic analysis has revealed a surprising 75 % similarity between the DNAs of nematode worms and man.iii According to the family tree made by evolutionists, the Chordata phylum, in which man is included, and Nematoda phylum were unrelated to each other even 530 million years ago. Thus, the % 70 similarity - a very high figure for humans and nematode worms, completely different and dissimilar life forms - does not imply any evolutionary relationship.”
Nisa - clearly you are trying to blow us away with your scientific knowledge, rather the lack thereof. Keep working on it and don’t give up. Citing that tidbit of information you learned in Intro logic and applying it to Evolution in an attempt to distinguish between macro and micro is an excellent application of college learning in the real world. I applaud you for your efforts but I question whether you have fetal alcohol syndrome.
One school of people might imagine that you are just trying to “Raise Up” - if true, i applaud you again for trying your hardest with that tiny bag of ‘facts’ to disprove a solid Theory - hallelujah for you - may you find a husband before you turn 17.
Another school of people might think that you are the unfortunate result of ‘baby dropped on head syndrome’ - I find myself leaning this way.
According to you
—–This is where it gets messy and human politics come into play. Humans — the subjective beings that they are go to great lengths at establishing their beliefs/theories as ‘fact,’ in the mind of the masses.——-
Are you describing yourself or people who believe that god set evolution in place or people who just support evolution? LOL because we all KNOW that scientists have a political agenda…oh yeah…you’d better watch out because when you least know it…theyre gonna get ya….eyes open…cuz when you least know it…THEYRE GONNA GIT YA!
I . Now do everyone a favor and take some more science classes. Im way beyond bio 101 and your way over your head. Try to make a real argument after taking real in depth courses and with some knowledge at your side, not some pamphlet called ‘disprove evolution with roundabout logic’ - for this I would suggest College.
Asim: Im sure Harun Yahya has written alot of very beneficial work benefitting many Muslims, and I hope he is rewarded for all of it, but dont take his work on science too seriously. They are quite flawed. But Im not here to ‘trash’ my brother.
By no means am I denying what the Quran says. I believe that whatever is written in the Quran is by far more real and true than any other means of knowledge, including scientific research. But that gives no exucse to give faulty arguments. It only makes you look bad, and when you are representing my beautiful religion, it makes Islam look bad.
For example, all of the articles cited in that page were from 1999 and older. And so what if a few evolutionists disagree over certain. The chimpanzee genome, however, was only finally completed last year!!!! (Scientists Complete Genetic Map of the Chimpanzee or The chimpanzee genome)
But thats science for you, its an objective means of trying to uncover knowledge; – based on empiricism, experimentation, and methodological naturalism – aimed at finding out the truth. Naturally there will be scientists who disagree over certain matters. But thats what science is, a reasonable (yet incomplete) attempt at trying to uncover the ultimate truth.
My major point of all this is as follows: We cannot fall into the debate of having to try to validate our beliefs by science, or try to argue Islamic mythical (again, by myth i do not mean false story; but rather divine truth) stories and phenomomena with what science tells us. Because no matter what science tells us, a Muslim should have complete unwavering faith of what has been revealed to us in the Quran and by the example of our prophets (peace be upon them), as revelation from God (swt) Himself is the ultimate source of Real Knowledge, Knowledge of The Truth. Wa Allahu’Alim.
Re: Human/Chimp DNA
All living beings share some amount of DNA. We even share DNA with a Banana.
Al though, the human/chimp genome is mapped there are still a lot of unanswered queries. Mapping the genomes is not enough to prove the dominant macro evolution theory. There is so much more research needed including improving methods of comparing sequences, learning about elusive features of genomes, such as gene encoding Rna that do not encode, and mapping proteins that have a functional impact, etc..
Nature (journal) came out with a paper not too long ago that presented experiment on chrom 22 which showed that the first sequence of chimp dna is unexpectedly different from human equivalent. The researchers report in Nature that many of the differences were within genes (and not in junk dna), the regions of DNA that code for proteins.
“In addition, there were nearly 68,000 regions that were either extra or missing between the two sequences, accounting for around 5 percent of the chromosome. “We already knew that at the DNA level we are similar to chimpanzees,” says Taylor. “But we have seen a much higher percentage of change than people speculated.”
“The researchers also carried out some experiments to look at when and how strongly the genes are switched on. 20 percent of the genes showed significant differences in their pattern of activity. Chromosome 22 makes up only 1 percent of the genome, so in total “there could be thousands of genes that significantly differ between humans and chimps,” says Jean Weissenbach from France’s National Sequencing Center in Evry. This could make it much harder than scientists had hoped to find the key changes that made us human.”
The researchers have already identified two genes called NCAM2 and GRIK1, the human versions of which contain large sections that are missing in the chimp. Both genes are known to be involved in neural function.”
According to Rubin (HHMI scientist): “How gene expression is regulated is much more difficult than analyzing gene structure. Even though regulatory regions of genes have been identified, he wrote, “the proteins that control gene expression by recognizing regulatory regions often detect sequence features that elude the best computer algorithms, and may use information from contacts with other proteins that is difficult to model. Proteins are simply cleverer than computers.
A human brain is much more complex than a fruitfly brain. But if you compare the individual nerve cell in the fruitfly to a human nerve cell, they’re really not that different. The human brain is much more capable because it has orders of magnitude more cells, interconnected in very complex ways.
“A good analogy is that these genes are like a set of LEGOs, the children’s blocks. With the same simple set of units, you could build a complete scale model of the Vatican or you could build a log cabin.”
To make it simpler, currently scientists are preplexed over why the HIV virus does not affect chimps in exactly the same gene found in humans that are subjected to the virus.
========================
Comparison of genomic DNA sequences: solved
and unsolved problems
http://bioinformatics.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/17/5/391
chimp DNA (nature.com)
http://search.nature.com/search/?sp-q=chimp+dna&sp-x-9=cat&sp_a=sp1001702d&sp_sfv1_field=subject%7Cujournal&sp_t=results&sp_x_1=ujournal&sp_p_1=phrase
http://www.imb.uq.edu.au/download/large/TheUnseenGenome.pdf
I read somewhere, “Science used to be based upon fact and experimentation. Now it is based upon what could have happened. When enough people agree that something may have happened then it is considered fact. Then the theories are built upon those supposed facts and so it goes. No one seems to consider that the whole thing is standing on a foundation of speculation.”
It is taught that our common ancestor spliced into two separate lines, one resulting in modern day chimps the other into modern Homo sapiens.
Only about 6-7 years ago, the following was taught as FACT:
Human evolved this way:
1. common ancestor -> austrolopethicus -> homo hablis -> homo erectus -> neanderthals -> modern human beings
In 2000, scientists were able to perform DNA testing on Neanderthal fossils, once and for all, disproving all religious fanatics. To their embarrassment, Neanderthals have nothing in common with modern human beings. But no problem, we’ve simply erased them for our chain of numbered fossils. Logically, we must’ve evolved straight from Homo erectus. This should’ve been a massive blow but since respected journals like NATURE had already published articles on it, the DNA study was quickly forgotten.
Theory of macroevolution doesn’t offend me as a Muslim it offends me a student of science.
Re: Human/Chimp DNA
All living beings share some amount of DNA. We even share DNA with a Banana.
Al though, the human/chimp genome is mapped there are still a lot of unanswered queries. Mapping the genomes is not enough to prove the dominant macro evolution theory. There is so much more research needed including improving methods of comparing sequences, learning about elusive features of genomes, such as gene encoding Rna that do not encode, and mapping proteins that have a functional impact, etc..
Nature (journal) came out with a paper not too long ago that presented experiment on chrom 22 which showed that the first sequence of chimp dna is unexpectedly different from human equivalent. The researchers report in Nature that many of the differences were within genes (and not in junk dna), the regions of DNA that code for proteins.
“In addition, there were nearly 68,000 regions that were either extra or missing between the two sequences, accounting for around 5 percent of the chromosome. “We already knew that at the DNA level we are similar to chimpanzees,” says Taylor. “But we have seen a much higher percentage of change than people speculated.”
“The researchers also carried out some experiments to look at when and how strongly the genes are switched on. 20 percent of the genes showed significant differences in their pattern of activity. Chromosome 22 makes up only 1 percent of the genome, so in total “there could be thousands of genes that significantly differ between humans and chimps,” says Jean Weissenbach from France’s National Sequencing Center in Evry. This could make it much harder than scientists had hoped to find the key changes that made us human.”
The researchers have already identified two genes called NCAM2 and GRIK1, the human versions of which contain large sections that are missing in the chimp. Both genes are known to be involved in neural function.”
According to Rubin (HHMI scientist): “How gene expression is regulated is much more difficult than analyzing gene structure. Even though regulatory regions of genes have been identified, he wrote, “the proteins that control gene expression by recognizing regulatory regions often detect sequence features that elude the best computer algorithms, and may use information from contacts with other proteins that is difficult to model. Proteins are simply cleverer than computers.
A human brain is much more complex than a fruitfly brain. But if you compare the individual nerve cell in the fruitfly to a human nerve cell, they’re really not that different. The human brain is much more capable because it has orders of magnitude more cells, interconnected in very complex ways.
“A good analogy is that these genes are like a set of LEGOs, the children’s blocks. With the same simple set of units, you could build a complete scale model of the Vatican or you could build a log cabin.”
To make it simpler, currently scientists are preplexed over why the HIV virus does not affect chimps in exactly the same gene found in humans that are subjected to the virus.
sigh - you failed to impress. your insults were unoriginal and boring. Try not to sound so hurt. Thus far, you’ve done nothing but embarrass yourself. you should know better than to reject an argument on the basis of some irrelevant fact about me. be more creative with your insults man. and throw a bone or two about the main topic as well. It will help us believe that you actually know what you’re talking about.
and im already married and done with school. Can you suggest something else for me, o wise one?
people people,chill! no need for insults or sarcy comments- just say what you think(about the topic) without having a dig at each other.
yea… if u have nothing nice to say then u shouldnt say anything at all
Oh man I loved Bingham. That negro wrote my recommendation for dental school.
Neanderthals not human ancestors
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/694467.stm
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/26/tech/main596026.shtml
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-01/nyu-nss012204.php
Nisa - I wasn’t attempting to impress you. in case you hadn’t noticed, i injected an ample number of insults in my address to you. Most people find my insults pretty original so Im pretty shocked that you didnt think so. How can i improve on them? Can you post a link to an obscure website that can show me how to better insult you?
—and im already married and done with school. Can you suggest something else for me, o wise one?——————
I’m going to suggest that you work on having a baby because your brains arent going to get you too far.
sigh, Nisa is talking about evolution and yet, you keep insulting her… I believe they call that ad hominem.
sigh- cut down on polemics, you are embrassing yourself .
“Are you describing yourself or people who believe that god set evolution in place or people who just support evolution? LOL because we all KNOW that scientists have a political agenda…oh yeah…you’d better watch out because when you least know it…theyre gonna get ya….eyes open…cuz when you least know it…THEYRE GONNA GIT YA!”
stop being so childish. Do not just read science, also read hisotry, sociology and philosophy of science.
sigh - i would love to carry on with our lessons but i think the folks here will take our back and forth a bit too seriously. for the record, i am not at all insulted by your insults. now that should be an insult to you.
Secondly, being witty isn’t a plastic toy found in your favorite cereal box; it takes talent, practice, and a generous heart. Knowing your limits doesn’t hurt either; picking on someone your own size is fun, picking on innocent people is cruel.
Thirdly, I want a notarized affirmation from the “most people’ you speak of. or did you mean’ no-one’ when you wrote ‘most people.’
and lastly, given your boring insults the only way you’ll make us laugh is by posting a picture of yourself. So what you’re not funny, at least you’re funny looking.
P.S wouldn’t I lose even more brain cells by having a kid? What kind of a cruel monster are you. at least i can type right now. sheesh.
it was fun while it lasted. im moving on now. enough evolution already.
hope everyone is feeling tranquil and joyful. laters!
tr - really, im embarassing myself? I thought your telling me to read about history and philosophy was a clearly idiotic example of some abused as a child’s all encompassing response….’GET EDUCATED’. Well thank you for that input genius. Heres a suggestion for you. Get a high school diploma, then get a girl - yes, you know who im talking about, go find out who NISA is, her asking me for a picture is clearly her way of telling us that she’s ready to ‘talk’. Also, tr, dont come to her defense like that you weirdo…ever heard of shaadi.com? If you marry america citizen, you get greencard, you make great wealth for family back home and good life.
I found Mr. Millers performance on Colbert Report very offensive. He said that intelligent design scientists are bad at collecting data. Here is some data for the evolutionists to collect. Entropy, a law of physics, states that all things deteriorate with time. Explain how things “evolve” over time while the rest of the world deteriorates.