Episode 34 – Zayd Ate the Dog’s Meat: Genes and Meaning

Peace be upon you.

Suppose the media one day presented you with breaking news: “The president won his twentieth presidential term with 99% of the vote. Therefore, all the country’s goodness, reform, excellence, success, progress and prosperity, morning and evening, are thanks to His Excellency the President.”

I expect you would not need long to realize that the leader's propaganda lies about the percentage and also lies about the conclusion. That is precisely what the propaganda of the myth does when it claims that the similarity between humans and chimpanzees in genetic material is (99%).

In the previous episode, we showed how this lie was manufactured in the myth's kitchen through several steps, and that episode shocked many people. Today's shock, brothers, is greater: we will see the conclusion that the myth's propaganda seeks to build upon this false percentage. It is a remarkable chapter in the myth priests' contempt for people's minds, alongside scenes of divine greatness, creativity, and power. Stay with us...

The misleading conclusion from the similarity percentage

Let us suppose the similarity percentage really is (99%). What do you want people to conclude from this, priests of the myth?

Do you want them to conclude that a human being is 99% chimpanzee or ape, as the title of your book issued by London's Natural History Museum, in cooperation with the University of Chicago Press in America, suggests?!

Do you want to make people imagine that your random mutations and blind selection had an easy task? That they merely had to create the 1% difference, leaving (99%) similarity in genetic material, after which every other process proceeded automatically, like dominoes, without need of a knowing Creator?!

Were the proteins produced from genetic material also (99%) similar? And the body's systems by (99%)? And then the mental abilities and emotions that you attribute to material causes, by (99%) between human and chimpanzee?!

Gene similarity does not mean organism similarity

Accordingly, according to the well-known evolutionary journal "Nature", when we see that (99%) of the genes of one species of mouse have counterparts in humans, does that mean humans, priests of the myth, are 99% mouse?!

When the American National Institutes of Health states that (60%) of our genes and those of flies are similar, does that mean humans are 60% fly?!

When we see that the X chromosome, which distinguishes females, is (69%) similar to the chimpanzee, while the Y chromosome, which distinguishes males, is (43%) similar, does that mean women are one and a half times closer to chimpanzees than men?!

The importance of order and context in meaning

If we compared two books and found, for example, (99%) similarity in the words of the two books, without considering the order of the words or their use in context, could we say that the two books reach the same conclusion by (99%)?!

If I told you, "The dog ate Zayd's meat," would it have the same meaning as "Zayd ate the dog's meat"?! The words are (100%) identical, yet the meaning is completely different.

If I said, “I eat, drink, get up, sleep, go, return…” and so on, then added the Arabic negative particle lā (“not”) before it, making the two sentences’ words 90% similar, would their meanings be 90% similar?!

Is that what you mean, priests of the myth? Otherwise, what do you want people to infer from this (99%) percentage?

A huge difference from a tiny percentage: is it randomness?

Or perhaps you mean: no, we did not mean that humans are chimpanzees by (99%); rather, we mean that the 1% difference between humans and chimpanzees caused the enormous physical, intellectual, and civilizational difference between the two beings, and that the great differences among creatures result from these slight differences in genetic material.

Aha! Then our question to you is: can this be the work of randomness and blind natural selection?

If you saw on a computer a long poem describing a human being in a complete, precise, detailed way—his life, body parts, emotions, and impulses—a beautiful metered poem without flaw; and on the same computer you saw another complete poem describing a chimpanzee in full, also metered, but with a different rhythm and order of words; and you found poems describing a mouse, a horse, a whale, and so on...

And you found that a large number of words were shared among all these poems, yet each time the same word was employed differently, suitably for its context, producing a different meaning, while the computer contained no nonsensical or jumbled speech: would this prove a frivolous randomness that brought the poems forth from one another?! Or would similarity in words together with a vast difference in meaning prove the author's artistry, power, and mastery? What if he wrote millions of beautiful, coherent poems, many of whose words were shared?

The difference among cells of one body

Let us concede as much as possible to you, priests of the myth. Let us suppose that the percentage really is (99%), that the immense difference between human and chimpanzee results solely from this 1%, and that randomness and blind selection made these two beings and differentiated their characteristics through this 1% difference.

Then answer us: how do you explain the difference between cells of one body when there is no difference at all in their genetic material? Neither 1% nor one thousandth! Does not a middle-school student know that genetic-material similarity among the cells of one human being is exactly (100%)?! Yet is a bone cell like a nerve cell? Is a brain cell like a cell at the far end of the intestine?!

If the answer is "no", then what do you want people to conclude from this (99%) percentage? How can you build upon it the claim that randomness and blindness are the cause of every creature in the universe, just as the leader's media concluded that every success in his country was due to him?

Put these questions to the priests of the myth, then leave them wandering in their arrogance. Come with us to see how the letters of genetic material are only the beginning of a story, while further details of wisdom, power, and wonder lie in the translation of those letters.

The secret of diversity: from genes to proteins and organisms

How does the great diversity among cells of one body occur while the genetic material is identical? How does the great diversity among organisms occur while their genetic material is similar? This is among the most splendid and beautiful subjects, containing many stories of the greatness of creation. We will now look together at a small part of it.

Your body is chiefly made of proteins, which assemble in different ways to form small particles, each with its function inside the cell. A group of cells makes a tissue; a group of tissues makes an organ; and a group of organs makes a system, such as the digestive system. In this way the body's different systems are formed, and together they make up the human body.

So how many proteins can exist in the human body, including the enormously diverse antibodies produced against invading microbes? A paper published in (2018) in a journal belonging to the "Nature" group tells you that the number reaches billions—billions, meaning thousands of millions of different proteins. These proteins result from reading the genetic material whose similarity among organisms the myth priests discuss.

So how many genes are read to produce these proteins? Only about (20) thousand genes, according to that same (2018) paper. Incidentally, it was a shock at the end of the Human Genome Project that the number of genes was far lower than expected.

How can billions of proteins be produced from only (20) thousand genes? I will first give you an illustrative example, then connect it to the answer to that question.

You opened a computer and found in it three files titled: The Human Story... The Bird Story... and The Fish Story. At the beginning of each file you found lines of separated letters, including the following line... the very same line appears in all these files.

In the Human Story file, on its first page, you saw the following versions of that line: this version is the original, but with the separators or dashes removed; this version is the original with the separators and some letters in the middle removed; and this version is also the original, with the separators and some different letters removed.

Under each of these versions you then found a meaningful sentence. It was formed by joining the separated letters in the versions together and adding the necessary vowel marks.

The first sentence: The human eats large and small birds and fish. The second: The human eats large and small birds. The third: The human eats small fish.

Three meaningful, correct sentences suitable for a human. On later pages of the Human Story file, you found sentences composed from other lines.

Then on the first page of the Bird Story file, you saw the following version of the same line, and beneath it the sentence formed by joining its letters while changing the letter yāʾ to tāʾ and placing a ḍammah (the “u” vowel mark) on the rāʾ: Birds eat small fish. It is a meaningful, correct sentence suitable for birds.

On the first page of the Fish Story file, you saw the following version of the line, and beneath it: Large fish eat small fish. The ḍammah (“u”) vowel marks on the kāf and tāʾ make the meaning correct and suitable for fish. You did not find on the computer any meaningless sentence from that same line; for example, you did not find a sentence like this... without meaning.

Let us now apply this example to the world of biology. The genetic material of living organisms contains genes, which are strings of letters like the letters of the line we discussed.

The five processes of diversity

What determines which genes are read in a particular cell of the human body? The answer is the need of that cell. A pancreatic cell, for example, reads genes for the insulin hormone; an intestinal cell reads genes for digestive enzymes; a brain cell reads genes for neurotransmitters; and so on—even though all these cells possess precisely the same genetic material, just as different lines were read on the pages of the Human Story file in our example.

This is the first cause of diversity among the cells of one body, despite their identical genetic material.

Also, if you are wounded, for example, dozens of tiny particles in your skin cells gather at the line for the collagen gene so that it may be read, producing the collagen protein that mends the wound. Here comes another marvel: remember the parts of genetic material that were previously described as junk? One of their tasks is to bind to small particles and help produce collagen in a wonderful manner.

Thus this is a second cause of protein diversity: a protein is formed according to your need, at a particular time, in a particular amount, and in particular cells.

So, a gene has been copied in a cell. This copy is called mRNA, or messenger RNA, and resembles a copy of the line of letters in our example. These letters are distributed across regions numbered 1 to 6, with separators between them.

Here comes the third, wonderfully subtle cause of diversity. Some cells remove the separators and join the letters together, creating a long, meaningful sentence: The human eats birds. This sentence is a particular protein suitable for a particular cell.

In another cell, the separators and some letters located here in region (2) are removed, producing a second messenger, which is translated into a protein suitable for this cell rather than the first. This protein is like the sentence: The human eats large and small birds.

In a third cell, the separators and the letters located in region (5) are removed, producing a third messenger which is translated into a protein suitable for this cell, not the first two: The human… small fish.

This process is called "Alternative Splicing" in biology. More precisely, it may be called varied splicing: cutting and deletion occur at different locations in the messenger. You may ask: what determines where this cutting happens? These separators are copies of what are known as introns. The followers of the myth thought they were useless, but modern research has been publishing their many functions, including determining exactly where splicing occurs. There is no scrap in the cell that goes to waste.

Thus, through varied splicing, the human body can produce many proteins from one gene, just as many sentences could be made from the same line. Among the finest examples are proteins known as neurexins. These proteins are in the human brain and help build an efficient brain for a human being who is morally accountable capable of thought. How many of these proteins are there? Thousands. So from how many genes, from how many lines of letters, were these thousands of sentences read? The startling answer is only 3! Thousands of proteins are produced from only 3 genes—like producing thousands of correct sentences from 3 lines. The primary credit for this belongs to varied splicing.

Proteins produced by varied splicing need modifications resembling changes to certain letters and to the vowel marks of words in our example. These modifications are called "Post Translational Modifications", abbreviated "PTMs": modifications after translation, the translation of messengers into proteins. This is the fourth station of diversity in proteins produced from genetic material.

The same raw protein can receive different markings, yielding different sentences with different meanings. Why is this marking placed here, for example, and not there, when we have many locations and many possibilities? A protein such as titin consists of more than (34) thousand amino acids, like the little balls in this example. What makes a marking be placed here and not elsewhere? We have (34) thousand letters, each capable of receiving several markings. If the matter were left to chance and randomness, the space of the known universe would not suffice to produce the required titin precisely and repeatedly in every muscle cell.

Thus these "PTMs" produce marked sentences, each suitable for a certain cell in a certain organism. A difference in marking may make a protein fit the story of one organism and not that of another. These markings at the appropriate locations in proteins lead them to assume the appropriate "Three Dimensional Structures".

Then comes the fifth step: assembling these proteins in different ways to form larger and more complex proteins. This assembly takes many forms according to the cell, the organism, or the condition to which that organism is exposed. This is the fifth cause of diversity.

We have explained five processes to you, brothers:

1. Transcribing different genes to produce proteins according to the cell within one organism.
2. Transcribing different genes at the appropriate time and in the appropriate quantity according to the conditions to which an organism is exposed.
3. The process of varied splicing, which produces many sentences from the same line.
4. The "PTMs" processes that place the appropriate markings on the words of the sentence.
5. And the assembly of proteins in different forms and combinations to produce more complex proteins.

Through these processes and others, it becomes possible to produce billions of different proteins from only (20) thousand genes. Without them, we would need billions of genes to produce billions of proteins.

Through these processes, human cells have diversified into thousands of types even though they all have exactly the same genetic material, with a (100%) identity rate.

Through these processes and others, a human becomes human, an ape an ape, a chimpanzee a chimpanzee, a fly a fly, and a mouse a mouse, whatever the similarity of their genetic material—(70), (80), (90), more or less; it does not matter.

Through these processes you understand why, whatever the similarity in genetic material between humans and chimpanzees, (80%) of their proteins are different according to this research—meaning only (20%) are similar. Even if we assumed that the difference in genetic material were 1%, so what, if we know that the difference in proteins is (80%)?

Through these processes, genetic material and the degree of its similarity become only the beginning of the story, while the capacity to diversify, create, and distinguish becomes a sign before which hearts submit and tongues glorify, for people who understand.

Conclusion: the greatness of creation in unity and diversity

Do the senior doctors and "Professors" among the myth priests not know all this? I personally learned much of it in my first university year in a "Biology" course. Do the senior doctors of the myth not know it when they repeat the figure of (99%) similarity with chimpanzees? Either they cheated in their university examinations and obtained their degrees falsely, or they became occupied with preaching the myth instead of updating information that has been obsolete for decades, or they deliberately laugh at people and belittle their minds.

When we see that similarity between organisms at the level of genetic-material letters and at the level of the messenger is not (70), (90), or (99), but (100): all are composed of four nitrogenous bases, like four letters forming words that are translated into more than (20) amino acids. From these, billions of proteins are formed. And from these, according to a startling recent paper, come billions—thousands of millions—of types of precise, integrated living organisms; billions, if bacteria and their species are included. Billions of organisms connected by a food pyramid and natural balance, with no room for scribbles, meaningless sentences, or failed attempts at randomness; all are perfected “You do not see in the creation of the Most Merciful any inconsistency.” [Al-Mulk 67:3]. Is this evidence of aimlessness and lack of intention? Or of perfection and creativity that leaves the tongue speechless?

God the Exalted says: “And within the land are neighbouring plots and gardens of grapevines and crops and palm trees, growing several from a root or otherwise, watered with one water.” Notice! “Watered with one water; but We make some of them exceed others in quality of fruit. Indeed in that are signs for a people who reason.” [Ar-Ra’d 13:4]. For people... who? Once again, for people who understand.

In an earlier episode, we saw plants that resemble one another in appearance while actually differing greatly in their genetic material, such as the olive and the pomegranate. Today we see the opposite: identity in the letters of genetic material and great diversity in form. Greatness and creativity for people who understand.

If there were no similarity in genetic material among organisms, supporters of the myth would say: if a Creator made these creatures intentionally, why would He make their genetic material completely different when they have great similarity in fundamental processes at the cellular level? Every cell, every organism, needs its cells to manufacture proteins, divide, produce energy, and so on. If they had one Creator, would He not unify them in these shared fundamental elements, just as a designer unifies the basic components of a set of different devices? Yes... they would say that.

But in reality they are similar, and this similarity makes them similar in the building units of their bodies—the proteins—allowing some to feed on others so that the cycle of life is completed with the food chain and balance is achieved. If genetic material, and consequently the building units, were completely different, organisms would become poison to one another, unable to benefit from one another's components. Then it would be said: if there were a Creator, why did He not make them similar so that they could benefit from one another? Glory be to the One who unifies by measure and diversifies by measure! “And everything with Him is by due measure.” [Ar-Ra’d 13:8]

Thus, brothers, we have completed the story of the (99%) that the myth priests sing about. We have learned how they lie about the number, its interpretation, and the entrenchment of scientific shallowness and naivety in people's minds, while blinding people to the astonishing and wonderful facts in this universe. All of this for the sake of the myth, so that late-night stoners may then say to you: "molecular genetics" is the strongest evidence of evolution, has settled the matter, and the issue is finished—relying on the difficulty people have in following these absurdities and checking their hidden details.

We ask God that we have succeeded in this episode in uncovering an aspect of the greatness of creation that urges you to further reflection in response to the command of the All-Creating, All-Knowing: “Do they not look into the realm of the heavens and the earth and everything that Allah has created and think that perhaps their appointed time has come near? So in what statement hereafter will they believe?” [Al-A’raf 7:185]

Peace and God’s mercy be upon you.