For children, - Muslim Society:(Islamic Society, Amar Bil Maroof, Nahi Anil Munkar)

Share ::-

- -

- -

Can you be indifferent to the actions of other people? Can you exist in "isolation" and as totally cut off from the rest of the society? Can you exist without any relations with other people?
What effect does the goodness or badness of the society have on the individual? What kind of individuals grow up in a religious society? When a person grows up in an evil, corrupt and perverse society, to what evils is he led?
What responsibility does the Muslim have towards the society he or she lives in? In Islam, everyone is responsible before Allah towards the society and no one can be indifferent to the actions of his neighbors. Each person must realize that he is linked to the rest of society, and that the society is like a single body of which he is a part.
Therefore, the true Muslim strives with all his might for the benefit and good of his society. Islam teaches Muslims that the heaven-sent programs of Islam lead the society to perfection and happiness provided that those programs are properly carried out and followed by all the people in the society.
Therefore, in order that all the aspects of the laws and regulations of religion be properly carried out, Islam places the responsibility of ensuring the proper implementation of the Islamic teachings upon two factors.
Firstly, the legal Islamic authority, that is, the legitimate Islamic Government. It is the duty of the Government in Islam to put into practice all the Islamic laws, regulations and programs. Islamic Government has the duty of leading the individuals of the society towards good deeds, and it must put an end to all instances of injustice, oppression, corruption and perversion. It must severely punish those who are guilty of these crimes, and must constantly encourage those who are religious and benevolent.
These are some of the most important duties of the Islamic Government. Secondly, each and every Muslim is considered in Islam to be responsible for the society and for practicing the divine laws. Each person is counted as a kind of guardian and policeman. In Islam, every Muslim must pay attention to the actions and behavior of the people of his society, and must do what he can to prevent corruption.
A Muslim must himself be good and must also encourage others to do good, and he must strive for the welfare of society. Islam calls this duty "Amar Bil Maroof", which means enjoining the right.
A Muslim must also refrain from sins and from breaking the laws of Islam and the Islamic Government (if it is truly Islamic), and as far as he can, he must try to prevent sins and corruption from occurring in the society.
Islam calls this duty "Nahi Anil Munkar", which means forbidding the wrong. Amar Bil Maroof and Nahi Anil Munkar together form one of the most important public duties in Islam, and one of the foremost duties of every Muslim.
It is obligatory for every Muslim to defend the laws of his religion in this way, and to strive to safeguard them and have them carried out. Allah (SWT) tells us in the Noble Qur'an: "You are the best of the nations raised up for (the benefit of) men; you enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong and believe in Allah ..." (3:110)
Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)of Islam has said: "Enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong. For as long as you do so your society will be strong and happy; but when the Muslims would fail in this, their society will be dominated by oppressors and no matter how much they pray to Allah for deliverance from the oppressors, Allah (SWT) will not answer their prayers and they will find no justice anywhere, neither in the skies nor in the earth."
Also Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said, Never forget practicing "Amr Bil Maroof Wa Nahi Anil Munkar" otherwise cruel will become your masters and then your prayers will not be accepted by Allah (SWT).
Now that you know about this great and sacred duty, what programs will you draw up for the rest of your life? How will you cooperate with your friends in performing this great duty?









:: Share ::

- PUBLISHERNajimudeeN M

General, - Darwinism, - Why is NTV so willing to embarrass itself with such nonsense as “We evolved while cooking meat”?

Share ::-

- -

- -

As we all know, the world has been held captive by atheist masons and atheist Zionists’ wide-ranging and organized plans and Darwinist propaganda for the last century and a half. Through this comprehensive propaganda, institutions of state had to defend the heretical theory of evolution, schools had to teach it and teachers had to instruct their students in it, despite not believing it themselves. So shamelessly has this propaganda been disseminated that despite the theory of evolution being an astonishingly false and irrational lie, some people have been put in the willing or unwilling position of vigorously espousing this primitive thesis.
Darwinists never anticipated certain developments in the 21st century. They never imagined this unintelligent theory, devoid of any scientific or logical basis, would be so easily defeated. In deciding to raise new generations with this theory, they never even dreamed THAT THE NEW GENERATION WOULD MAKE FUN OF THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION. They never even ADMITTED THE POSSIBILITY that when the whole world had submitted to this unbelievable theory SOMEONE WITH THE COURAGE TO ANNIHILATE THE THEORY WOULD EMERGE. But everything they never imagined has come true.
That is the origin of Darwinists’ current bafflement.
Darwinists cannot deceive a population 99% of whom do not believe in evolution
NTV’s broadcasts are a small accompaniment to the crowd in question who have so wasted their time and been so seriously defeated. NTV’s position is a bit different to that of the others, however, because the media group in question IS TRYING TO DECEIVE A SOCIETY 99% OF WHOSE POPULATION DO NOT BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION. However,
We have news for NTV:
*.Turkish society HAS BEEN READING THE MORE THAN 300 BOOKS, WATCHING DOCUMENTARIES AND PERUSING ARTICLES BY HARUN YAHYA, which demolish evolution with concrete evidence, ever since the 1980s.
*.EVERY MEMBER of this society IS WELL AWARE, even if he knows very little about the subject and has never received any education in biology, THAT NOT EVEN A SINGLE PROTEIN CAN COME INTO BEING BY CHANCE AND THAT 60 PROTEINS ARE NEEDED FOR ONE TO COME INTO BEING.
*.This society has learned that more than 300 million fossils prove the fact of Creation AND THAT NOT A SINGLE TRANSITIONAL FOSSIL EXISTS.
*.Just about all Turkish people have studied theAtlas ofCreation, page by page, through which they can access free of charge over the internet and which uses fossil evidence to refute all the unscientific claims of evolution.
*.People in this society have seen with their own eyes at fossil exhibitions the evidence that refutes evolution AND HAVE TOUCHED THESE FOSSILS THAT PROVE CREATION WITH THEIR OWN HANDS.
*.The younger generation has attended some 2000 SCIENTIFIC CONFERENCES IN JUST ABOUT ALL OF TURKEY’S 81 PROVINCES that refute the theory of evolution in their own schools, universities and conference halls.
*.Students ARE REACTING AGAINST teachers who try to deceive their pupils by telling them about evolution and questions about evolution imposed on exam papers ARE BEING HURRIEDLY REMOVED.
*.If we ask any citizen on any street in any Turkish province, THEY WILL SAY THAT THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION IS A HUGE FRAUD AND A TERRIBLE DECEPTION.
It is terribly illogical to defend the fraud of evolution and to imagine that people will still believe in it in such a climate. Everyone in Turkey, from 7 to 70, knows perfectly well THAT NO MONKEY EVER TURNED INTO A HUMAN BEING BY COOKING MEAT. To imagine that the Turkish nation, whose superior virtues act as a model for all countries, will believe in this nonsense, to so underestimate that nation, means to think that they are completely gullible, and that is a grave and total error. This glorious nation is far more intelligent and foreseeing than Darwinists could ever imagine. The fact that 99% of people in Turkey do not believe in evolution is an explicit reflection of this.
Darwinists have suffered a huge and profound defeat all over the world
As a result of the works that emerged from Mr. Adnan Oktar’s 30-year intellectual struggle, Darwinists have suffered a stunning defeat they never expected. This is something they never calculated for. The more they strive to rescue their theory, they greater the effect of the reaction they attract. The fact that people are abandoning this theory in droves, despite the Darwinist conditioning all over the world, is the clearest sign that their awareness on the subject has been raised and that they now think in the light of the scientific evidence.
People have now seen the Sun. It is enough for them to have seen the Sun for just a second. It is now impossible to convince them that there is no such thing outside, as the Sun. That is why broadcasting organizations striving to spread Darwinist indoctrination under the direction of certain forces are aware they have been dealt a heavy blow and that there is now nothing else for them to do in order to defend the theory of evolution. The few examples we are witnessing these days are mere death throes. As a small media group trying to follow these Darwinists who have been so globally defeated, NTV is engaged in the same hopeless endeavors, but it is suffering an even worse disappointment, and the reports it issues to that end are a serious embarrassment to it. Our advice to NTV is, instead of imitating Darwinist broadcasts that have been profoundly defeated across the world and that nobody takes seriously, they should go out on the streets and see what people really think, see how intelligently and open mindedly people think and thus see how they do not believe in the nonsense that is Darwinism. In that even, NTV and media organizations that engage in similar Darwinist propaganda will see how they are being humiliated by tales such as “we evolved while cooking meat.” They will realize that they cannot deceive the Turkish people, and we hope that they will then cease espousing such nonsense.








:: Share ::

- PUBLISHERNajimudeeN M

General, - Darwinism, - The Archaeoraptor Dino-bird forgery exposed by Jerry Bergman, PhD

Share ::-

- -

- -

Fraud in Evol: Archaeorapter ref ck’ed 12/20/10 CL MAS
Abstract
The history of the brief life of the Archaeoraptor forgery was reviewed. The claim that the fossil was a dinosaur-bird transitional form consisting of a bird-like body and a dinosaur-like posterior turned out to be a fake. The forgery illustrates some of the difficulties of interpreting the history of life from teeth and bones. It also illustrates how easy it is to fool the authorities, although in this case the forgery was so poorly done that it was exposed within a matter of months.
Introduction
One of the most recent forgeries used to prove evolution is that of Archaeoraptor liaoningensis, commonly called Archaeoraptor. Dubbed the evolutionary find of the century, it purportedly proved that birds evolved from theropod dinosaurs. The find was first announced in October 1998 at a press conference at the National Geographic Society in Washington, D.C. The announcers included paleontologist Philip J. Currie of the Royal Tyrrell Museum of Paleontology in Drumheller’ Alberta; Stephen Czerkas of the Dinosaur Museum in Blanding, Utah; and Xing Xu of the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology in Beijing.
The first documentation about the Archaeoraptor find was published in a full-color, well-illustrated feature article in the November 1999 issue of The National Geographic Magazine. The article touted it as “a missing link between terrestrial dinosaurs and birds that could fly” (Sloan, 1999, pp. 99). Rowe et al., wrote that the
Archaeoraptor fossil was announced as a “missing link” and [was] purported to be possibly the best evidence since Archaeopteryx that birds did, in fact, evolve from certain types of carnivorous dinosaur[s]. It reportedly came from Early Cretaceous beds of China that have produced other spectacular fossils transitional between birds and extinct non-avian dinosaurs (2001, p. 539).
The find, “once proclaimed as a key intermediate between carnivorous dinosaurs and birds,” turned out to be a Piltdown man forgery story all over again (Zhou, Clarke, and Zhang, 2002, p. 285; Bergman, 2003, 2006). It is part of what some now consider an epidemic of fraud in science, especially in the area of evolution (Feder, 2006: Chang, 2002; Rowe et al., 2001).
The fossil was discovered in the northeastern province of Liaoning, China, the location of many new putative feathered dinosaur species. The National Geographic Society “trumpeted the fossil’s discovery ... as providing a true missing link in the complex chain that connects dinosaurs to birds” (Simons, 2000, p. 128). The turkey sized Archaeoraptor was also used by certain prominent paleontologists to prove that birds evolved from dinosaurs and provided a “long-sought key to a mystery of evolution” (Simons, 2000, p. 128).
The “missing link between terrestrial dinosaurs and birds that could actually fly” which had the “arms of a primitive bird and the tail of a dinosaur” was touted as a “true missing link in the complex chain that connects dinosaurs to birds” (Sloan, 1999, p. 100). The “true missing link” soon “soared off in a burst of media fame” (Chin, 2000, p. 2221).
Suspicions Arise Early
The fossil caused no small sensation. Nature reported that as a result of the find the “palaeontology community has been rocked by a Chinese ‘bird’ fossil that may be a new species” (Dalton, 2000a, p. 689). The importance of the fossil was indicated by the 1.6 million dollar price set on it by the insurer because the experts judged it as “an important link in dinosaur and bird evolution” (Dalton, 2000a, p. 689). Nonetheless, suspicions about the fossil arose early. Monastersky wrote that
Red-faced and downhearted, paleontologists are growing convinced that they have been snookered by a bit of fossil fakery from China. The “feathered dinosaur” specimen that they recently unveiled to much fanfare apparently combines the tail of a dinosaur with the body of a bird (2000, p. 38).
The paleontologists had doubts because of “the concerns about the tail” due to the fact that the bones connecting it to the body are missing and the slab showed signs of reworking. The dinosaur-bird evolution supporters had convinced themselves, however, that the two parts belonged together as part of one animal until they could no longer deny the overwhelming evidence against this conclusion (Monastersky, 2000, p. 38).
Xu Xing evaluated the fossil and found a “strong resemblance” between the rear half of an unnamed dinosaur and the Archaeorapter (Grant, 2007, p. 78). High-resolution computed X-ray tomography evaluations confirmed Xing’s evaluation. He now had clear evidence that the fossil consisted of two “unmatched pieces, skillfully pasted over” (Simons, 2000, p. 130). The body has now been identified as that of the fossilized fish-eating bird called Yanornis martini and the tail as that of the small winged dromaeosaur Microraptor zhaoianus (Zhou, Clarke, and Zhang, 2002, p. 285). M. zhaoianus was a medium-to-large sized animal—all known specimens of M. zhaoianus are larger then Archaeopteryx except a recently discovered example (Xu, Zhou, and Wang, 2000, p. 705).
The forgery was not skillfully done but was “put together badly and deceptively” by, it appeared, amateurs (Simons, 2000, p. 130). When carefully examined by X-ray tomography “it took about five minutes” to determine that the fossil had been faked (Dalton, 2000b). In the end the whole story involved “zealots and cranks,” “rampant egos clashing,” “misplaced confidence,” and “wishful thinking” (Simons, 2000, p. 128). Simons adds that this is a story in which not one of those involved was entirely innocent (2000, p. 128).
Even the original article noted that the bird section was part of a bird more advanced than Archaeopteryx, the “earliest known bird,” but the tail was “strikingly similar to the stiff tails of a family of predatory dinosaurs called dromaeosaurs.” Before the forgery’s exposure the scientist supporters rationalized these major contradictions by claiming that this “mix of advanced and primitive features is exactly what scientists would expect to find in dinosaurs experimenting with flight” As Chin notes, “none of these problems sank in at the National Geographic” and so they printed their story (2000, p. 2221). This is one more example of evolution misleading research, resulting in incorrect conclusions, which is exactly what happened in the Piltdown fiasco.
Paleontologist Philip Currie, a leader of the dinosaur-to-bird evolution theory and a member of the National Geographic Scientific team that supported the validity of the find, said “this embarrassment will follow me the rest of my life” (Friend, 2000, p. 2A). The editor of the National Geographic Magazine claimed that the Archaeoraptor article was “reviewed by six leading paleontologists” and the staff worked on the story “for a full year” to insure accuracy and high standards of both facts and presentation (Allen, 2000, p. 541). None of these six experts detected the hoax.
Conclusions
In the end, the Archaeorapter fiasco was “a disaster for science” (Dalton, 2000a, p. 690). In a field based on little empirical evidence, many assumptions, and strong personalities, the Archaeoraptor affair was not surprising. It also illustrates the conflicts historically common among scientists in the paleontology field (Chang, 2002). The unprofessional, at times even fraudulent, behavior of the leading participants in this case is far from what one would expect from highly trained professionals. Holden concluded that a problem in paleontology is the fact that this field naturally excites much interest because of our curiosity about the origins of life, and
because conclusions of emotional significance to many must be drawn from extremely paltry evidence, it is often difficult to separate the personal from the scientific in disputes raging within the field. … The primary scientific evidence is a pitifully small array of bones ... One anthropologist has compared the task to that of reconstructing the plot of War and Peace with 13 randomly selected pages. Conflicts tend to last longer [than in other fields] because it is so difficult to find conclusive evidence to send a theory packing (1981, p. 737).
The fact is, paleontology is an “unexacting kind of science” (Medawar, quoted in Hill, 1986, p. 209). Tattersall and Schwartz have even questioned if paleoanthropology is a hard science. And, although the whole field of paleontology field is more sophisticated today, the fact remains that “modern as the undertaking has become, it continues to be riddled with controversies and dominated by personalities” (Holden, 1981, p. 737). The unmasking of forgeries and new research is forcing so many revisions in the evolution field that a Time magazine senior science editor wrote that, as a former science teacher, many facts he believed to be true in evolution have been found out to be false. He later reminisced that “just about everything” he taught his students in this area has turned out to be wrong (quoted in Headland, 1997, p. 605). This is not the first major forgery used to prove evolution, nor will it be the last (Chin, 2000). Nor is evolutionary biology the only scientific discipline where fraud is a problem. The related area of archaeology, which shares several features with that of paleontology, has had its share of fraud as well (Feder, 2006). Nonetheless, much progress has been made in these fields in the last century by many dedicated researchers.
References
Allen, William. 2000. “Fooled, but Not Foolish.” Nature, 404:541.
Austin, Steven A. 2000. “Archaeoraptor: Feathered Dinosaur from National Geographic Doesn’t Fly.” Impact, i-iv.
Bergman, Jerry. 2003. “A History of the Piltdown Hoax.” Rivista di Biologia/ Biology Forum. 96(3):457-484.
-. 2006. ‘The History of Hesperopithecus: The Human-Ape Link that Turned Out to be a Pig.” Rivista di Biologia/ Biology Forum. 99(2):205-224.
Chang, Kenneth. 2002. “On Scientific Fakery and the Systems to Catch It.” The New York Times Science Times, Tuesday, October 15, pp. 1, 4.
Chin, Gilbert. 2000. “Disappearing Discovery of the Year: Archaeoraptor.” Science 290:2221. December 22.
Dalton, Rex. 2000a. “Feathers fly over Chinese Fossil Bird’s Legality and Authenticity.” Nature. 403: 689-690.
-. 2000b. “Fake Bird Fossil Highlights the Problem of Illegal Trading.” Nature, 404:696.
Feder, Kenneth L. 2006. Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries: Science and Pseudoscience in Archaeology. Fifth edition. New York: McGraw Hill.
Friend, Tim. 2000. “The ‘Missing Link’ That Wasn’t.” USA Today, 18(98):1A-2A.
Grant, John. 2007. Corrupted Science: Fraud, Ideology and Politics in Science. Surrey: Facts, Figures and Fun.
Headland, T.N. 1997. “Revisionism in Ecological Anthropology.” Current Anthropology 38: 605–630.
Hill, A. 1986. “The Gift of Taungs.” Nature, 323:209, September 18.
Holden, Constance. 1981. “The Politics of Paleoanthropology.” Science, 213:737-740.
Monastersky, R. 2000. “All Mixed Up Over Birds and Dinosaurs.” Science News, 157: 38.
Rowe, Timothy, Richard A. Ketcham, Cambria Denison, Matthew Colbert, Xing Xu, and Philip J. Currie. 2001. “The Archaeoraptor Forgery.” Nature, 410: 539-540.
Simons, Lewis M. 2000. “Archaeoraptor Fossil Trail.” National Geographic, 198(4):128-132.
Sloan, Christopher. 1999. “Feathers for T. Rex?” National Geographic, 196(5): 99-103. November.
Tattersall, Ian and Jeffrey H. Schwartz. 2002. Is Paleoanthropology Science? Naming new Fossils and Control of Access to Them. The Anatomical Record, 269:239–241.
Xu, Xing, Zhonghe Zhou and Xiaolin Wang. 2000. “The Smallest Known Non-Avian Theropod Dinosaur” Nature 408:705-708.
Zhou, Zhonghe, Julia A. Clarke and Fucheng Zhang. 2002. “Archaeoraptor’s Better Half.” Nature. 420:285.









:: Share ::

- PUBLISHERNajimudeeN M