Rekayasa Di Balik Tsunami Aceh

Sebagian besar orang menganggap Tsunami Aceh adalah bencana alam murni, sebagian kecil lainnya melihat“out of the box” bahwa tsunami adalah hasil rekayasa senjata thermonuklir Amerika yang diujicobakan. Maka tidak salah jika ada sebagian orang menjelaskan hipotesa tentang hal ini sebagai berikut:

Pertama, NOAA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, beberapa kali merubah data magnitudo dan posisi episentrum gempa, serta kejanggalan tidak adanya peringatan pada ‘seismograf’ di Indonesia dan India. Secara sederhana, gempa selalu dipicu oleh apa yang disebut frekuensi elektromagnetik pada 0,5 atau 12 Hertz, dan bukan merupakan sebuah proses yang terjadi secara mendadak seperti tsunami di Aceh.

 Kedua, Sebagian besar mayat yang ditemukan terbujur kaku dengan kulit berwarna hitam pekat, kematian akibat tenggelam tidak akan mengubah warna kulit sedemikian cepat dan sedemikian hitam, sebaliknya mayat-mayat hitam juga nampak pasca dijatuhkannya bom atom di Hiroshima dan Nagasaki.

 Ketiga, Kapal-kapal perang Amerika berdatangan dengan cepat dan bertahan di Aceh selama beberapa bulan bukan sekedar memasukkan bantuan namun juga mengawasi wilayah laut agar peneliti Indonesia tidak turun ke sana.

 Keempat, Ditemukan sampah nuklir 2 bulan pasca tsunami di wilayah Somalia yang kemudian diungkap UNEP, yang diduga berasal dari Samudera Hindia.

Jenis senjata HAARP (High Altitude Atmospheric Research Project) yang digunakan diperkirakan disebut Warhead Thermonuklir W-53 dengan kekuatan 9 megaton ternyata dapat dengan mudah ditempatkan dalam wadah yang mirip diving chamber (alat selam dalam) yang biasanya digunakan dalam eksploitasi minyak. Wadah ini sekaligus melindunginya dari tekanan sebesar 10.000 pon per inchi persegi di dasar palung laut dalam. Bobot total dengan wadahnya kurang dari lima ton, sehingga dapat dijatuhkan dari buritan kapal suplai anjungan pengeboran minyak lepas pantai. Metode teknologinya disebut SCALAR, yang menggunakan gelombang elektromagnetik untuk memanipulasi kekuatan alam.

Teknologi perusak berbasis gelombang elektromagnetik pertama kali dikenalkan saintis Rusia Nikola Tesla Saintis ini menjadikan bencana gempa di berbagai negara pada 1937 sebagai sampel penelitian. Selanjutnya, Tesla melakukan penelitian mengenai penciptaan alat yang mampu memunculkan gelombang frekuensi tinggi yang bisa memicu badai dan gempa tektonik. Setelah melalui berbagai penyempurnaan, alat itu mampu mengalahkan kekuatan Nuklir.

Belakangan senjata pemusnah massal itu dikenal sebagai elektromangnetik SCALAR. Anehnya, rancangan Tesla ini kemudian hilang tak berbekas setelah ia meninggal dan muncul kembali dalam program HAARP, padahal ketika pertama kali ditawarkan kepada Pentagon, rancangan Tesla ini ditolak mentah-mentah.

Menurut Bertell, AS sudah melakukan uji coba sejak puluhan tahun lalu. Negeri Paman Sam menggunakan Barium dan Lithium yang “dikirim” ke lapisan ozon dengan bantuan gelombang elektromagnetik ke langit negara-negara asia. Teori Bertell didukung Michel Chossudovsky yang berprofesi sebagai analis persenjataan global. Chossudovsky menuduh Pentagon sudah lama membuat senjata untuk memanipulasi cuaca. April 1997, menurut Menhan William Cohen, AS terpaksa menghadapi serangan senjata perubah cuaca dengan senjata sejenis. Demikian juga dengan penggunaan gelombang elektromagnetik pemicu gempa dan tsunami.

Apa yang dijelaskan Bartell dan Chossudovsky sebenarnya berada di luar nalar logika kita, sehingga kita lebih percaya bahwa sebuah tsunami terlalu musykil dibuat dan dirancang oleh manusia. Namun bila kita memikirkan isu apa yang saat ini digadang-gadang oleh Amerika dan sekutunya, khususnya mereka yang terlibat dalam manipulasi Pemanasan Global, maka senjata HAARP bukan lagi cerita fantasy Hollywood, seperti orang-orang di seluruh dunia yang sebelumnya tidak pernah percaya pada Bom Atom yang dijatuhkan Enola Gay ternyata hasil rekayasa teknologi nuklir yang pada masa itu dianggap begitu canggih.

Seperti kita ketahui HAARP adalah senjata yang didesain untuk menciptakan bencana alam seperti gempa, badai dan tsunami. HAARP memiliki alasan sendiri untuk dijadikan sebagai kekuatan baru dalam isu pemanasan global, seperti dalam project teranyar mereka yang menggunakan ELF (Extremely Low Frequency) untuk menembus lapisan tanah dan es kemudian menghancurkan/melelehkan lempeng artik, melubangi ozon seperti yg sdh dijelaskan, membuat gempa seperti di Haiti, China dan Korea, serta menciptakan ‘hurricane‘.

Pembaca yang budiman, tentu setiap orang bisa beropini, tergantung dari perspektif mereka masing, olehnya itu marilah kita mengeluarkan diri dari dogma dan paradigm orang lain dan mencoba menyimpulkan setiap fenomena yang terjadi sesuai dengan perspektif kita masing-masing. Insya Allah dengan sendirinya kebenaran itu akan muncul dan membongkar kebohongan ‘mereka’ yang menipu dunia.

Wallahu A’lam bisshawaab

Theory of Evolution, True or False?

As the subject announced: “Refutation Of Darwin’s Theory,” or “Darwin’s Theory – Is it True Or False?” As most of you must be knowing, what is Darwin’s theory in general? Darwin – his theory propagates or tries to make us understand that we human beings, we came into existence through an apes; our ancestors were the apes. And it is not Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala who created us, it is through the process of evolution humankind came into existence. Basically by this theory, what they want to propagate or present to the world that Allah does not exist. Allah is not the creator of the world, Allah has not created. It is through natural process, it is through natural evolution that living creatures came into existence and gradually and gradually, that particular stage came into existence where human beings came into being.

December 12 today coincides with the birthday of Charles Darwin was born 202 years ago, precisely on December 12, 1809 he was a founder of the theory of evolution that is still embraced by some people in the world.  It has been said that Darwin has done more harm to the faith than any persecution in history. Darwin’s theory of evolution, largely due to its posture as the ‘scientific’ explanation for the origins of life, caused many believers to doubt the creation by God and the truthfulness of the Qur’an. It planted a serious seed of doubt as to the credibility of the Qur’an and the kitab are believed by the other religions

But it does not end there, the rise and general acceptance of the theory of evolution has also fed the ideas of atheism and evolutionary racism. If the theory of evolution explains our existence we do not need God any longer -hence why believe in God at all? This thinking obviously leads to atheism. But there is more. If the theory of evolution is true, mankind is no more than the most sophisticated animal in existence today. And we can become ‘better’ by helping the ‘natural’ evolution by controlled breeding, no different that Hitler’s attempt during the 1940ies to create a blue-eyed, blond-hair, tall super-race (he called this the ‘Übermensch’, or ‘superman’ in English).

Is The Theory of Evolution a Fact?

I’d like to emphasize upfront that – despite many claims – evolution (Darwin’s theory of evolution) is NOT a fact. Neither evolution (or creation) is a natural law or a scientific fact,  each is merely a model. What does this mean?  The process of evolution (just as the act of creation) cannot be observed or repeated, so both models remain unproved by science. Therefore neither can be called a natural law (such as the law of gravity or the laws of thermodynamics, which describe well proved and observed behavior subject to laws of nature) nor a scientific theory (which requires the possibility and evidence of repeated observations).  So evolution – just as creation – is only a model used to explain the observations in the world as we know it. It is not a fact, not a natural law, not even a scientific theory, but just a model!

What are the Claims of the Theory of Evolution?

In the evolution model, the entire universe is considered to have evolved by natural processes and random selection into its present state of high organization and complexity. In this model the universe began in a state of pure randomness.  Gradually it has – by “survival of the fittest” – become more ordered and complex. In order for the complex structure of the universe to have been produced by present natural processes, a vast amount of time was required.

These concepts have been applied to many scientific disciplines, and the theory has been revised along the way.  More recently its tenets have been upgraded with more recent scientific discoveries especially in the areas of genetics/DNA (usually called Neo-Darwinism). The basic elements of the model behind the theory of evolution remain:

• Change over long periods of time: entities/organisms change over time. These changes are random and are only based on pure chance.
• Natural Selection: positive changes strengthen the organism and increase its chances for survival. Therefore (random) positive changes will be preserved and even favored over the original organism.
• The only forces at work are random change (chance) and (long periods of) time: evolution is completely controlled by natural processes and the natural environment. There is no controlling power or other influence.

Simplified, evolution’s equation for mankind becomes this:

 Change + Time  à  Mankind

Is Darwin’s Theory of Evolution Proven Through Science?

This all sounds logical and as over the last 150 years more and more bright minds have endorsed it, taught it and further developed it, a majority of people now seems to believe that evolution is true and that the alternative – that God created us and our world – is false and only still believed by the ‘uneducated’ and ‘gullible’.

However the ‘case’ for the theory of evolution is far from watertight. It seems actually to be more like a boat full of holes which – despite desperate efforts by evolutionists to keep on pumping – is slowly but surely sinking! Modern day science reveals massive problems, like (just to name a few):

1. The Beginning Needed a Creator, If there ever was a Big Bang – who or what caused it to happen? How can something (a lot, actually everything) come from nothing? Wild theories like the completely unproven evolutionary string theory  require a lot more ‘faith’ than accepting a Creator God.“In this century (twentieth century), science has come to understand how the universe began from a tiny point, fifteen billion years ago. No matter how incredible it sounds, it seems that the church’s ideas of a moment of creation were right from the beginning.”  (Steven Hawking, perhaps the most famous scientist alive, made this startling admission during the 1997 PBS program, Universe.)
2. The Natural Laws that Govern the Universe and Our World are Perfectly Fine Tuned, Even minor changes in the constants of these laws and/or the natural or chemical properties of the elements critical to life would have destroyed life before it existed. How can these natural laws be so perfectly balanced and designed without a Designer? “It is hard to resist the impression that the present structure of the universe, apparently so sensitive to minor alterations in numbers, has been rather carefully thought out… The seemingly miraculous concurrence of these numerical values must remain the most compelling evidence for cosmic design” (Paul Davies , God and the New Physics (1983), p.189)
3. Earth is a Truly Privileged Planet, Chances of finding a similar habitable planet like Earth suited for life in our Milky Way galaxy or even in the entire universe are practically zero.“To us, the signal is so strong that even at this time, it appears that earth indeed may be extraordinarily rare.” (Evolutionary astronomers Peter D. Ward and Donald Brownlee , Rare Earth  (2000), chapter 12)
4. First Life, Modern science has reached the unanimous conclusion that life on a planet like earth could not have started by mere chance. The complex building blocks of the simplest living cell – proteins, DNA  and molecular machines – do not allow for random assembly even through long periods of time. Despite decades of intense research, origin-of-life scientists have found no evolutionary explanation to explain how life could have started by natural processes alone. “Everything about evolution before the bacteria-like life forms is sheer conjecture,” because “evidence is completely lacking about what preceded this early cellular ancestor.” (Marc W. Kirschner  and John C. Gerhart, The Plausibility of Life (2005), p.46-50)
5. No Mechanism For Species to Evolve, Natural selection is just variation within a species. Genetic mutations are required to evolve from one species into the next, however mutations are not common and mostly neutral. If they happen, they are almost always harmful not beneficial.  The occurrence of many small, beneficial steps of mutations is against all odds and has never been observed. “Mutations are almost universally harmful. In human beings, they are classified as ‘birth defects.’ They result in death and sterility. People today suffer from more than 4,000 disorders caused by gene mutations. Down’s syndrome, cystic fibrosis and sickle cell anemia are familiar examples.” (James Perloff, Tornado in a Junkyard, 1999, p.25)
6. The Fossil Record, There are no intermediate species in the fossil record. According to Darwin’s theory of evolution, species would evolve to more complex new species by a series of gradual mutations. However, despite of over 100⁺ years of extensive studies of the fossil record, no intermediate species have been discovered. On the contrary, the Cambrian Explosion  shows the almost “overnight” appearance of the body plans of all modern day life forms at about the same moment in time. “I look skeptically upon diagrams that show the branching diversity of animal life through time, and come down at the base to a single kind of animal….Animals may have originated more than once, in different places at different times.” (Paleontologist Harry Whittington, The Biological Explosion at the Precambrian-Cambrian Boundary, as published in Evolutionary Biology, volume 25 (1991), p.294)
7. The Existence of so Called Irrudecible Complex Molecular Machines cannot be explained by gradual, ‘evolutionary’ evolvement of the components of these machines, as these systems can only perform if all components are present. Therefore, gradual “evolution” is not possible. “The bacterial flagellum uses a paddling mechanism, and it must meet the same requirements as other such swimming systems. And it is necessarily comprised of at least three parts – a paddle, a rotor, and a motor – it is irreducibly complex. Gradual evolution of the flagellum faces mammoth hurdles.” (Dr. Michael Behe, Darwin ’s Black Box (1996), p.70-71)

There are a plentitude of embarrassing statements by professed evolutionists who admit to the failure of the theory of evolution. Following are some more statements by evolutionary scientists about the – lack of real – evidence for the evolution ‘theory’:

“When discussing organic evolution the only point of agreement seems to be: “It happened.” Thereafter, there is little consensus, which at first sight must seem rather odd.” 
(Simon Conway Morris, from Evolution: Bringing Molecules into the Fold, Cell, Vol. 100, pp.1-11, January 7, 2000, p.11)

“If it is true that an influx of doubt and uncertainty actually marks periods of healthy growth in a science, then evolutionary biology is flourishing today as it seldom has flourished in the past. For biologists collectively are less agreed upon the details of evolutionary mechanics than they were a scant decade ago. Superficially, it seems as if we know less about evolution than we did in 1959, the centennial year of Darwin’s on the Origin of Species.” (Niles Eldredge, Time Frames: The Rethinking of Darwinian Evolution and the Theory of Punctuated Equilibrium, 1985, p.14)

“The history of organic life is indemonstrable; we cannot prove a whole lot in evolutionary biology, and our findings will always be hypothesis. There is one true evolutionary history of life, and whether we will actually ever know it is not likely. Most importantly, we have to think about questioning underlying assumptions, whether we are dealing with molecules or anything else.“
(Jeffrey H. Schwartz, Professor of Biological Anthropology, University of Pittsburgh, February 9, 2007)

Many evolutionists will claim that above statements are pulled out of context to discredit Darwin’s theory of evolution, however looking at the above mentioned 7 major challenges to the theory of evolution and the numerous frustrated statements (by evolutionist) provided in this article illustrate the severity of the crisis of the evolutionary theory.

Would Darwin himself still be an evolutionist?

Charles Darwin himself – if he would be still alive today – would likely seriously be challenged to still believe in his own theory of evolution. Some of his own concerns about his theory have turned out to be ‘killers’, like (in his own words):

• he made the suggestion that what he call ‘simple’ life may have begun in a “warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, lights, heat, electricity, etc. present, [so] that a protein compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes.” We now know that is impossible and origin-of-life scientists are at a dead end trying to explain how the most simplest life form (a bacteria) ever came about. How can the theory of evolution be a viable theory if it cannot explain the origin of life?
• and about the fossil record he wrote: ““Why is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory.” Now, after 150 years of zealous searching for this ‘graduated organic chain‘, we know that is just does not exist. The fossil record does not give us any confirmation for gradual development of species and – as underlined in the above quotation – this is a serious argument against the theory of evolution.
• In The Origin of Species, Darwin also writes: “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down(emphasis added).” According to Darwin himself, the existence of these irreducible, complex systems is a devastating blow to the thieory of evolution!

Was Charles Darwin a Christian, an Agnostic or an Atheist?

All though raised as a Christian Charles Darwin likely abandoned Christianity as a student when he refused to become a minister. Charles Darwin wrote in his autobiography about the diminishment of his religious faith and he stated that he was an agnostic (claiming to ‘neither believe nor disbelieve’ in the existence of God). However, later Darwin stated in his private notebooks that he was a materialist (a type of atheist). Likely the best characterization of Darwin would be to call him a ‘weak atheist’. A weak atheist acknowledges a lack of belief in God but does not claim to have the proof that God does not exist.

Is Evolution Just Another False Religion?

So, WHY still believe in evolution? Why does the scientific world still want to convince us – after 150 years of unsuccessful looking for answers – that evolution is THE theory that explains our existence or is even a FACT?

I believe the answer is simple. Evolution has become a religion. Its adherents have based their personal convictions, values and above all comfortable lifestyle on this idea that we are just the product of time and chance. We are just an ‘accident’ and there is no God. Therefore we can do what we want and when we want it, because we are not accountable to anybody. We are our own gods and we should live life to achieve maximum pleasure. 

Because evolution has become like a religion its adherents are also not really interested to be open-minded for criticism or alternative explanations. “What do you mean that you want to challenge the concepts of evolution? Evolution is a fact, so we do not need to prove it anymore!” 

When I was studying at high school a few years ago I was taught the theory of evolution at subject of biology. It was not even presented to me as a theory but as a fact. Only very limited evidence was presented. and because of it I lost my interest to this subject. Now I know I was duped, I was deceived. Only when life presented me with an interest and an opportunity to do my own research at a later stage of my life I discovered that evolution is a lie. But I had to discover that myself. I had to dig myself into science to find the gaps and faulty patches. I just wish that during my school and college years one of my teachers would have been more objective and at least would have told me that the theory of evolution is not a fact and shown me the alternative view of Intelligent Design of Creation.  That way I could have made my own decision about what to believe earlier in my life. I have found truth in the Qur’an and hatidts, although in this paper, I did not explain the Islamic view, but simply by taking the opinion of scientists who dispute this theory, so that  readers of non-Islamic can better understand , and one day they will find the real truth that it comes from Allah and His Messenger

Unfortunately one cannot change the past, but one can make better choices for the future…
Wallahul Musta’aan..