“Darwinism is the life-blood of terror”: an interview with Adnan Oktar

In this exclusive interview, Adnan Oktar - the man behind the pen name Harun Yahya - answers questions posed by our editor Milo Yiannopoulos and by Counterknowledge.com readers. He reveals how his profound Islamic faith has inspired his creationist beliefs, and answers some tough questions about Richard Dawkins, censorship and his criminal convictions. What follows is an abridgement of the entire interview text, which is available upon request.
 

Mr. Oktar, why is refuting Darwinism so important to you? Do you truly consider it the root of all evils, as your publications seem to suggest?
Darwinism is an idea that maintains that human beings are a species of animal, that some races are superior to others, and that it is supposedly a law of nature for superior races to ruthlessly crush weaker ones in order to develop and progress. For example, Darwin cited the Turks - surely my nation is above such statements - in reference to non-European races, describing them as “barbarian, lower races to be eliminated.” The two world wars, the suffering imperialism inflicted on many societies, the cruelty of Stalin and Mao, Hitler’s “Aryan Race” nonsense and Mussolini’s atrocities are all essentially the product of the same mindset.

So Darwinism and terrorism are connected?
Shortly after it was first proposed, the theory of evolution was extended from the fields of biology and paleontology and applied, by various circles, to and made highly influential in a great many other spheres, from human relations to the interpretation of history and from politics to social life. The application of the Darwinist lie that “nature is a sphere of struggle and conflict” to human society in particular bestowed a supposed scientific guise on Hitler’s obsession about the master race, Marx’s error that “the history of humanity is the history of class struggles,” Mao’s regarding human beings as a kind of animal and inflicting terrible savagery on them, Mussolini’s claim that “war alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy,” capitalism’s expectation of “the strong becoming even stronger by trampling on the weak,” Stalin’s ghastly labor camps, and the ruthless exploitation of the third world by colonialist nations and their inhuman treatment of them. Terrorists who ruthlessly slaughter innocent people and who believe that problems can be resolved by violence and that conflict is inevitable are also nourished by Darwinist indoctrination. Darwinism is the life-blood of terror.

Is there any relation between your ideas and the theory of intelligent design spreading in the West?
I do not find the idea and expression of intelligent design particularly honest. I mean, I do not think it is acceptable the way they say that nothing is by chance and that there is an intelligence that brings everything into being, but fail to openly state that this sublime intelligence is Almighty Allah. The existence and creation of Allah are crystal clear. There is no sense or logic in concealing this or trying to cover it up. 

Can you offer any evidence that the theory of evolution was “a theory in crisis” before the Discovery Institute and your own BAV began campaigning against it?
The theory of evolution has been an invalid, rotten theory ever since it was first proposed. There is no point in trying to portray evolution as only recently having entered a state of crisis. However, the public have been made aware that evolution is in a crisis and untrue through our activities. For one thing, Darwinism is at a loss to account for the formation of even a single protein. It has no scientific and rational explanation for how stones, earth, mud and some inanimate matter transformed into the living cell. According to evolutionists, a handful of unconscious atoms came together and decided to become a cell and to give rise to the world’s finest visual system, the world’s finest hearing system, to human beings capable of touching, smelling, thinking, loving and feeling compassion. A handful of unconscious atoms produced scientists who examine themselves under the microscope, human beings who compose magnificent symphonies, who construct majestic buildings and found great civilizations. But how that happened is a mystery. 

Why does the human body contain “useless” (so-called “vestigial”) elements, such as the coccyx and the appendix? Why do they exist?
This idea of vestigial organs is an unscientific one belonging to the previous century, and no reputable scientists ever raise it any more. It is a claim that has long since been abandoned. The list of supposed vestigial organs that some ignorant evolutionists used to keep bringing up is the “list of human vestigial organs” produced by the German anatomist R. Wiedersheim in 1895. But each of the structures cited as vestigial organs in that list have now been seen to possess very important functions. One of these, as you mentioned in your question, is the appendix. For years it was described as a functionless and vestigial organ by evolutionists, but medical research from the 1980s has shown that the organ plays a significant role in the body’s defense system. The coccyx at the end of the spinal column has been seen to support the bones around the pelvis and to be a point of attachment for certain small muscles. As you can see, the claims made by evolutionists are all outdated ones from the century before last, put forward at a time when science was not yet greatly advanced. It is really beyond the pale to insist, in a literally obsessive way, on primitive claims from the 1800s, now that science has progressed to the point it has. 

Why are some organisms’ natural processes so inefficiently designed? Why, for example, must some animals (for example, certain species of fish) lay thousands of eggs to produce just one offspring?
As you say, only some of the thousands of eggs that fish lay turn into new fish, but others provide food for other organisms and are used as a blessing from which they can benefit. In addition, there is an order and a structure inside every egg that evolution can never account for. Evolution is totally unable to account for how a single fish cell or scale came into being. It is totally unable to explain how the fish egg came into being. It is totally unable to explain how a new fish emerges from the egg with all its perfect physical structures and systems. It is unable to explain how this system has been operating in exactly the same way for tens of millions of years. It is this helplessness and these dead-ends that evolutionists should be thinking about. It is illogical to insist on espousing a theory that cannot possibly explain how life emerged and how living structures came into being.

What do you have to say about dinosaurs?
Dinosaurs are not the only extinct life forms that once lived in the past. Fossils are found of these other life forms as well as dinosaurs. But none of these fossils are any evidence of evolution. On the contrary, they prove Creation. That is because like all living things, dinosaurs are perfect and fully-formed creatures with their own unique characteristics. They were not descended from any other life form and never turned into one. 

Could you explain your “Fossil prize”?
I have been issuing the same challenge to Darwinists for a long time. I tell them to produce their intermediate form fossils if they have any. I have been waiting for months, but not a single person has so far come forward. And it is impossible for anyone to do so, because no such fossil exists. 

If, as Darwinists maintain, living things emerge gradually, there should be many fossils showing the stages a life form went through. A lion, for instance, should go through many stages before assuming its present form. The lion skull should have had many different forms before finally reaching the perfect one it has today. It should have undergone very many supposed evolutionary stages, such as having its jaw on its forehead, its ears on its jaw or three eyes. And, most important of all, we should be able to see the great majority of these stages in the fossil record. In other words, if evolution had really happened, the fossil record should be full of unidentifiable, strange, half-formed and monstrous life forms, rather than perfectly formed and complete ones. There should be traces of half-winged, half-eyed and half-finned creatures. We should be able to see how the wing came into being through supposed evolution, see how the eye allegedly developed in stages. But there is not one such fossil in existence. We have 100 million fossils, some of which belong to extinct life forms, but they are all perfect and fully formed entities; you look at a fish and it is a perfect fish, a spider is a fully formed spider, a bird is a fully formed bird and a lion is a fully formed lion. It is therefore scientifically impossible to say there is any such thing as evolution. 

Why did you distribute the Atlas of Creation? Did you achieve your aim in doing so?
The Atlas of Creation contains concrete evidence that deals a lethal blow to Darwinism. Note that before that, fossils were never placed on the public agenda. They were very seldom displayed. They were kept hidden away, either in museum storerooms or else in evolutionist scientists’ collections. We then brought these fossils out into the light of day, before the eyes of the public. Everyone saw with their own eyes that a dragonfly dating back 100 million years is the same one living today. A spider dating back 200 million years is identical to present-day spiders. Plants, fish, insects, reptiles and mammals are all the same. They all have exactly the same features today as they had tens of millions of years ago. So what happened to gradual development? Where is the supposed evidence that living things are descended from one another? Where are the supposed common ancestors? None of them exist. There are 100 million fossils, but not one to show that so-called evolution ever happened. That being the case, evolutionists have no alternative but to remain silent, because they are trying to defend a theory, or rather a myth, that is devoid of any evidence.

From the moment my Atlas of Creation arrived in Europe Darwinists on all sides began trying to have it banned. They said it should not be allowed in schools, they said it should be banned. They published decrees to stop it being taught to students. The Council of Europe even met to have the book banned. I have never seen such enormous panic in the face of any book in Europe before. Evolutionists have really been panicked by my book. This means that the information in the book has had a really powerful impact. 

Richard Dawkins claims there are many errors in your Atlas, including the incorrect identification of a sea snake as an eel. Do you concede any of his points? Do you have a second edition planned to correct these errors?
I personally find it rather odd the way these are depicted as a major discovery. It is a situation presumably stemming from a lack of information. Note that in his claims Dawkins never says anything about whether or not these life forms have been around for millions of years. He merely makes comments about the technical nature of pictures in the Atlas. But what Dawkins should really be concentrating on is how evolutionists can explain how eels have remained unchanged for tens of millions of years. He is careful to avoid the subject altogether, let alone offer an explanation for it. The same thing applies to the photograph of the caddis fly used in the Atlas and referred to by Dawkins. The fossil amber here is genuine, it is a 25-million-year-old caddis fly in Dominican amber. In order to express the fact that this life form is still living today, one could use a living specimen, or a model or a drawing. What matters is for it to be known that the creature is still alive today. The fact that demolishes evolution here is that the creature has remained unchanged for millions of years, which is a definitive refutation of the theory of evolution. Dawkins has nothing to say about the hundreds of living fossils on just about every page of the thousands of pages in the Atlas of Creation. As with other evolutionists for a long time now, Dawkins is silent in the face of this significant fossil evidence.

You have offered an extraordinary amount of prize money to anyone who can produce an intermediate fossil, and the cost of distributing 10,000 copies of your Atlas of Creation alone has been estimated at £500,000. How do you finance these operations?
Saying “bring me an intermediate form fossil” is like saying “bring me the Sun.” It is no more possible for them to produce an intermediate form fossil than it is to bring me the Sun. The printing, sales and distribution of the Atlas of Creation is entirely a matter for the publishers. My books sell in large numbers, as you know. Last year, for instance, 8 million copies of my books were sold, and some 16 million this year, but I receive no remuneration from them of any kind. The publishers use the revenues they receive as they wish for book printing and distribution. 

Can you afford to pay the Fossil prize money, if you are wrong? And would you be prepared to place the money in a third-party, or escrow, account, for the time being?
You are talking of something that does not exist and will never exist. As I said in answer to the previous question, it is impossible for anyone to produce a transitional form fossil as it is to bring me the Sun. 

There was widespread outrage at the censorship of Richard Dawkins’ website in Turkey, which occurred at your behest. Why did you do that?
The reason why the court decided to ban access to the site was the defamatory comments contained in it. No-one has the right to insult anyone else, no matter where in the world they may be. Such behavior attracts legal penalties. Freedom of thought is not freedom to defame. Everyone has a responsibility to express his or her ideas within a framework of respect and good manners, and everyone’s rights in this area are protected under the law.

You say that Richard Dawkins has failed to respond to requests for an interview or public debate with you. Why do you think this is?
The answer is evident. In my view, he knew he would lose, he has refused to come face to face with me and debate before the public, despite all my persistent invitations, and he says he has sworn not to engage in debates. But there is no reason for someone who is convinced of his ideas to avoid debate or to swear not to debate on the subject. So let him come, let him produce his evidence if he has any, and let us produce ours. And let the public decide who is scientific, who espouses the truth. 

To date, how many websites have you caused to be blocked in Turkey?
My lawyers would know better than me, I do not concern myself with such legal matters. 

Do you have plans to ban anyone else?
If a site carries material that is personally insulting to me and if it refuses to change its unpleasant behavior despite being asked to do so, then I will naturally seek to have my legal rights protected.

You have encountered some legal difficulties in Turkey, and your personal credibility has been called into question several times. Some sources report that members of your Foundation were found guilty of such crimes as blackmail, extortion, possession of unlicensed weapons and sexual intercourse with minors. Would you like to elaborate on this?
Let me place it on record that these are all fantasies, false allegations devoid of any evidence that have never been proved during the whole legal process (some 9 years). In fact, these and similar things are important evidence of the impact of my intellectual struggle. Everyone who has struggled on Allah’s path throughout the course of history has faced similar difficulties and tests. The prophets are the most valuable example of this. The prophets Moses, Noah, Abraham, Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon them all) were accused of being mad, of working for their own advantage, of telling lies and working magic, and faced unbelievable slanders and difficulties. Believers following in the path of the prophets also faced similar problems. It is revealed in the Qur’an that Pharaoh’s oppression was so fierce that nobody, apart from a few young people, had the courage to stand alongside the Prophet Moses. The early Christians had to live in secrecy for many years, and were accused by the leaders of the time of damaging the social order. It is therefore perfectly natural for a man with such a cause, engaged in such an intellectual struggle, to be subjected to slanders of this kind. These are a kind of psychological warfare technique. Those who are unable to respond to my works, evidence and ideas scientifically or with work of their own, imagine that by resorting to such methods they can reduce the impact of my work. But the truth is the exact opposite, because the public see and understand everything very well, and know just what is going on. They are well aware of the reason for this slander campaign.

Did you blackmail, or attempt to blackmail, Emin Colasan and Fatih Altayli, reporters from the newspaper Hurriyet, after they questioned some of your activities in Ankara?
These claims were all considered by the high criminal court and I was acquitted of all the charges. I am a writer and clearly have nothing to do with activities of that kind. Even a child would never believe it. These claims are fantasies without a shred of evidence, and the court considered the facts and reached the appropriate conclusion.

Would you like to respond to reports that, in 2008, you were sentenced by a Turkish court to three years in prison for “creating an illegal organization for personal gain”?
I of course respect the court ruling and would like everyone else to respect it. But the prosecutor in charge of this case asked for acquittal for me and all my colleagues, individually, saying there was no criminal offense involved. In asking for acquittal, the prosecutor made special mention of the following matters: first of all, the prosecutor said: “You, the court, previously ruled for acquittal for these people with regard to the same accusations, and it is impossible to now find them guilty on the same charges in the absence of any evidence.” Second, he said: “There are legally inadmissible Security Department statements taken in the absence of a lawyer. The court has already stated that these could not be regarded as admissible. The court would be contradicting itself to decide on a guilty verdict on the basis of these inadmissible statements.” Third, he said: “Not a single piece of evidence has been introduced against the defendants throughout the case, there is no evidence that the defendants committed any offense.” Yet despite all this the court still saw fit to punish and three of my female colleagues. This is also all for the best, insha’Allah. I respect the decision, but I am an author, not the leader of a criminal enterprise. As the prosecutor has said, there is not a single piece of evidence to support the indictment. But if that is what the court has ruled, we must respect its decision.

How integral to your beliefs about creation is your faith? Would you still be a creationist if you were not a Muslim?
Someone who believes in the existence of Allah believes that it is Allah who created the universe and everything in it. Allah could have created by means of evolution, and would have revealed this in the Qur’an and shown us traces of this in the earth. In that case, we would say, “Allah created life by way of evolution.” But that is not the case, and there is not the slightest scientific evidence or trace to suggest that evolution ever happened. It would be illogical, when all the scientific evidence shows that evolution never took place, to suggest that it did, despite science and despite all this crystal clear evidence.

In the recent U.S. election, Sarah Palin was identified by some in the international press as a creationist. What is your position on the political situation in the U.S.?
I had seen statements by Sarah Palin in the press that creation should also be taught in schools. In my view, this is an excellent position. She says that students should learn about creation too and make up their own minds what is right and what is wrong. That is the logical, correct and democratic thing to do. 

Do you have any particular hopes for Barack Obama’s administration?
Before winning the election, Mr. Obama promised to introduce significant changes in American foreign policy. I hope that he will keep these promises and contribute to world peace. By Allah’s leave, the 21st century will be one of peace and love. I hope that Mr. Obama will contribute to the building of that bright future. 

What does Turkey have to offer the EU?
The European Union is a most excellent and necessary union. Turkey must join it, but not like this! It must join as the leader of the Turkish-Islamic world. It must join as a super-state and a bridge to Europe. In that event, the EU will be a thousand times greater than it is now. It will find things much easier. The establishment of the Turkish-Islamic Union and Turkey’s joining the EU as the leader of that union will be the salvation of the EU. The Turkish-Islamic Union will also be like the EU’s police office, because the result will be a very strong body that will protect Europe and the world, and that will bring the world peace and security. Europe will live in peace and happiness. In addition to being an element that will very quickly make the Western world’s legitimate desires for an end to weapons of mass destruction and terror fulfilled, the formation of a powerful Turkish-Islamic Union will also be an important guarantee of the just exploitation of energy and underground resources. The methods the Turkish-Islamic Union will implement will produce very quick results in all areas and achieve the desired ends without wars causing loss of life and property and without security worries or economic crises. 

You have said that Islam, democracy, freedom and secularism do not conflict. Can you explain what you meant by that?
Secularism, or laicism, is an excellent system when implemented in the form of “democratic laicism” in which people are free to express their ideas. Islam is a faith that espouses tolerance, understanding, love and brotherhood. Laicism and democracy lie at the heart, in the essence of Islam. In the Qur’an Allah tells us there can be no compulsion in religion. Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance. In a society that fully abides by Qur’anic moral values, people have complete freedom of belief, worship and ideas. They have the right to express their ideas as they wish. Laicism ensures that believers and non-believers can both enjoy first-class lives. Believers’ beliefs and worship are respected, as are the ideas of non-believers. That is the ideal model. There will be no problems once this is established. Islam is opposed to religious extremism and violence. Beauty, love and peace are of vital importance for righteous Muslims. Nobody wants, or can permit, this to be sullied by a fanatical interpretation incompatible with religious moral values. 

What is your next project?
I am preparing the Atlas of Creation in seven volumes. The fourth is just about finished and I am still working on the others. Once the first seven volumes are complete I am planning seven more, and have already commenced work on them. These seven volumes will be intensively illustrated. I have also written a separate book consisting of fossil skulls alone. That has been published in Turkish. The English-language version has been published on the internet.

Suppose you succeed in exposing evolution as a fraud all over the world. What then? Do you have more to achieve?
Darwinism is a false religion that prevents people thinking freely and impartially. People liberated from the influence of this false religion will turn to belief in the truth—the existence of Allah. In the last few years in particular there has been a turning toward religion and increase in faith in the world in general, including Europe. The main reason for this is that people have seen the invalidity of Darwinism. By Allah’s leave, this turning toward religion will increase still further in the years to come and the world will be very bright and lovely. There will be peace and plenty, beauty and art will be strengthened and prosperity will increase.