Plants and animals can evolve to an extent, but the idea of all species coming from one common ancestor is false, and even evolutionists cannot prove any of this.
I'll explain a simple point which evolutionists can't totally address with ease;
If so much animals evolved, some got extinct - these animals could have been like half fish, half bird - so why don't we find their fossils now? Surely they got extinct so there should have been quite a few thousand atleast. Since it took them stages for that fish to become a bird etc. So where have they vanished? Did ALL them fossils vanish totally from the face of the earth, or maybe it just never happened?
There's two types of evolution;
Micro Evolution (the small evolution) doesn't contradict Islamic teachings. For example, if there are 2 giraffes - 1 with a small neck and 1 with a long neck - its more likely the long necked one will survive if there are taller trees. So this rule of survival does not contradict Islam, so long as you believe that it is a pattern in Allah's creation. Meaning - the taller giraffe's descendants are more likely to survive [since they will be taller] compared to the shorter necked species.
Macro Evolution (the big evolution [where species become from 'one to the other'] is discussed here:
http://seemyparadigm.webs.com/evolution.htm
He says:
To making comparisons, some try to enter the fossil record as proof for common descent, the argument goes, that fossils show up in certain layers of ground which in term are linked to certain eras in time. If you then make a timetable of which time the fossilized creatures lived in, it matches the timetable that common descent proposes. Well first of all, that's hardly any proof, all it does is proof which creatures lived at which time, it doesn't proof which evolved into which. Creationists might just as well claim that this proves when certain animals were created. The fossil record does not favor common descent over creation. In fact quite the opposite can be said, the fossil has many issues that reflect bad on common descent. Like the cambrian explosion. and era where there's a sudden high concentration of entirely new species, as opposed to the slower pace of other eras. Another problem are the large number of missing links. There are so many proposed intermediate species missing, that some scientists have started suggesting that rather then a slow step by step evolution, there must have been "jumps" to. But that's of course very unlikely. A mutation that carries benefit is in itself unlikely, many mutations at once that carry some benefit is close to impossible. Other than that it needs to be noted that there's a lot of controversy regarding the accuracy of dating fossils. I wouldn't go as far as saying that it's all a hoax, but it does need a lot of work.
http://www.islamicboard.com/dawah/1...eists-our-foundations-debate.html#post1050831
