A beautiful interview with Sh. Ramadan Al-Bouti, part 2: Modern Tareeqas and Innovation

[Assalaam alaykum,

I have not been able to add subtitles to the video but I have managed to provide the translation below. Please use the comment function if you have any questions. [Part 1, along with a biography of the Sheikh, can be found below (May 13, 2010)]]

Sh. Bouti: This is what prevents me from letting people kiss my hand.

Interviewer: Sheikh, your father, may Allah have mercy on him, Shaikh Mulla Ramadan Al-Bouti said to you in, I read it in in your book Hadha Waalidi [This is my father]: 'Know, my dear son, that all the Tareeqas, none of them are free of bida’, except for the Naqshabandiyya, as they are the least of them in terms of bida’.' What does he mean by that?

Sh. Bouti: (You know) What he’s really saying is that the Naqshabandi Tareeqa , which is the one that Sheikh Abdul Qadir Al-Jilani saw, and Sheikh Abdul Qadir Al-Jilani was a Hanbali in madhab, stern in clinging and adhering to the Book and the Sunnah. This sternness was inherited from him. Is that clear? And this is why you find that the Naqshabandi Tareeqa , in its adhkar, constantly relies on the way (tareeqa) that distances itself from bida’. You know…

Interviewer: Indeed…

Sh. Bouti: For example, there is the Shadhili Tareeqa nowadays, which affirms group dhikr, and standing up…

Interviewer: Indeed…

Sh. Bouti: and so forth, while at the same time the Naqshabandi Tareeqa says: ‘No. We should be sitting in dhikr just as it was in the time of Al-Mustapha, salla Allahu alayhi wa sallam.'

Interviewer: With a lowered voice…

Sh. Bouti: I.e. adh-dhikr al-khafi [concealed dhikr], it relies on adh-dhikr

Interviewer: al-khafi

Sh. Bouti: al-khafi. Indeed, it is not connected to bida’, and they inherited this from their Sheikh, Sheikh Abdul Qadir Al-Jilani, yes, and Sheikh Muhammad Awaisi Al-Qarani, who is known as Shah Naqshaband, and they were contemporary to one another. Both of them were , you know, sternly opposed to bida’. For this reason, the Naqshabandi Tareeqa was the least of Tareeqas in terms of bida’, even though there is bida’ in it today. Today, there is bida' in it, but if you were to compare between the bida’ that is in the Naqshabandi Tareeqa and that which is in other Tareeqas, you will find, as you said absolutely, quoting my father, that it is the least of them. An example of the bida’ that is present in the Naqshabandi Tareeqa and which has appeared recently is Ar-Rabita…

Interviewer: Ar-Rabita Ash-Shareefa…

Sh. Bouti: Ar-Rabita, originally, is a bond between two beloveds, the murid and the sheikh. When the murshid is a true murshid, adhering to the Book of Allah and The Sunnah of Allah’s Messenger, preserving his soul (nafs) from the dunyā and its delusions completely, as we have said, of course, this person is a murshid. It is not possible for the murshid to rectify the murid unless love for the murshid has firmly established itself in the heart of the murid. This is the Rabita that was mentioned by Imam Ar-Rabbani, the author of Al-Maktubaat and other books. However, afterwards came along those who said: 'No. Ar-Rabita should be embodied in something else. If the murid is sitting and remembering Allah he should start his dhikr by imagining the sheikh, meaning that he says ‘Allah’ and ‘La ilaha illa Allah’' and so forth and an image of the sheikh is in his mind…

Interviewer: In his mind… to strengthen the bond between him and his sheikh

Sh. Bouti: Aha, this is bida’…

Interviewer: But Doctor, but, maybe one of the reasons for Ar-Rabita, as they say themselves, is that someone, when they do dhikr of Allah, must rid themselves of all material things besides Allah, and the one material thing that is possible for him to use to distance himself is the sheikh, and the sheikh is a means of getting to Allah, in one way or another, and it’s only for a few seconds, not more…

Sh. Bouti: Yes, you are describing reality, let me ask you: is this matter affirmed and accepted by the Shari’ah or is it bida’?

Interviwer: “And don’t associate anyone with your worship of Allah.” [paraphrasing Al-Kahf 18:110]

Sh. Bouti: Fine, I am telling you what was said by one of the great men of this Tareeqa, Imam Ar-Rabbani, the author of Al-Maktubaat, he says, in the chapter on dhikr, the etiquettes of dhikr: ‘When you sit to do dhikr of Allah, Mighty and Majestic, you should not be thinking of anyone, not even the Messenger of Allah.'

Interviewer: Not even the Messenger of Allah?

Sh. Bouti: Not even the Messenger of Allah, rather Allah’s attributes (sifaat), His attributes, not His Essence, should be all that occupies your mind, yes, the attributes of Mercy, the attributes of Forgiveness, the attributes of Patience, the attributes of Vengeance, yes, and Power and so forth. This is the speech of whom? The speech of Imam ar-Rabbani in his book Al-Maktubaat, and Al-Maktubaat is known, isn’t it? The Imams of this Tareeqa laid down this speech , and those who came after went against them and added things, so, who said, o brother, that the murid can’t enter Allah’s vastness without going via the murshid? If there is someone…

Interviewer: No one has said that. Ya Sheikh, they don’t say that blatantly. They say that the Ar-Rabita Ash-Sharifa is maybe, they want to, you know, makes the murid purer, he imagines the sheikh, then he clears his mind of the sheikh’s image. Then he does dhikr of Allah, Mighty and Majestic.

Sh. Bouti: If he wants, for example, to be purer, outside of remembering Allah, and he imagines the sheikh then there’s no objection. As we said, the murid should love his sheikh, and of course one of the consequences of love is to imagine the beloved. This is something natural. However, I sit in order to do dhikr of Allah, and I start saying 'la ilaha illa Allah', or 'Allah Allah', the ism mufrad. In this state, when doing dhikr, it is not appropriate to connect the dhikr of Allah to his sheikh. So, this is the point that I am raising regarding the matter.

Interviewer: Thank you very much for this, Ustadh, Doctor, our Ustadh and our Murabbi, Dr. Muhammad Sa’id Ramadan Al-Bouti, thank you very much.

Sheikh Wahba Az-Zuhayli on the Hadra

Question: Is the dhikr called hadra permissible with the words ‘ah’ or ‘aah’?

Answer: Indeed dividing up the Lafdh al-Jalaala [i.e. ‘Allah’] and distorting it or changing it is forbidden in the Shari’ah (muharram shar’an), because it consists of altering, changing and distortion (ilhad) with regards to Allah’s Most Beautiful Names. It is not considered an expression of correct worship, or legislated dhikr, because of His, the Exalted, statement: “To Allah belong the Most Beautiful Names, so call on Him by them and abandon those who distort (yulhidun) His names. They will be repaid for what they were doing.” [Al-A’raaf 7:180] True dhikr is rather done by mentioning Allah’s Most Beautiful Names and His Exalted Attributes, Mighty and Majestic is He, having humility (khushu’) when articulating them and adhering to etiquette and perseverance when mentioning them. This is because He, The Exalted, has said: “The believers are those who hearts tremble when Allah is mentioned, whose faith is increased when His ayaat are recited to them, and who put their trust in their Lord.” [Al-Anfaal 8:2] He, The Glorified, has also said: “…those who believe and whose hearts find peace in the remembrance of Allah. Only in the remembrance of Allah can the heart find peace.” [Ar-Ra’d 13:28]

[Translated from Fataawa Mu’asira by Sheikh Wahba Az-Zuhayli p.307, Dar Al-Fikr, Damascus, 2003]

Al-Albani on women wearing gold: The difference between a real faqih and mufti and someone who is self-taught.

Question: Right now I am in the process of getting married, all praise be to Allah, Lord of all the Worlds. However, a few days ago one of my friends came to me and told me that there was this good book by Sheikh Nasir u-Din Al-Albani called Adaab Az-Zifaaf (Wedding Etiquettes). Obviously, I went to the market and I bought it from one of the Islamic bookshops and then I went home and read all of it from start to finish. However, I was surprised by the subject of gold being declared haraam (forbidden) for women and the ahadith given to indicate this. My question is: what is your opinion of this Sheikh (Muhammad Nasir u-Din Al-Albani), what is your opinion of this book of his (Adaab Az-Zifaaf) and what is the correct ruling regarding gold being haraam for women. Please benefit me, may Allah have mercy on you, before I get married, and if you have any pieces of advice for me before I get married or afterwards regarding that which pleases Allah and His Messenger, then may Allah reward you with goodness. All Praise be to Allah, Lord of all the Worlds.

Answer: Indeed the deviation of some who occupy themselves with knowledge or those who learn by themselves without a teacher is of no value in terms of knowledge or the Shari’ah and their opinions are dismissed and rejected.

Declaring gold to be haraam for women is both an intellectual and Islamic deviation, as The Noble Qur’an has made it clear in the aya: “that which is raised with jewellery and unclear in dispute.” [43:18] that a woman adorning herself with jewellery is part of her nature and disposition.

It has also been established in the Prophetic Sunnah that the Prophet salla Allahu alayhi wa sallam said: ‘Gold and silk are halaal (permissible) for women and haraam for men.’ [Musnad of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, vol.14, pp. 499-500, hadith #19407, Dar ul-Hadith, Cairo edition] Saying that it is haraam is to go against the ijma’ (consensus of the scholars).

I have not read the book Adaab Az-Zifaaf and if it has opinions like this in it, it shouldn’t be bothered with.

[Translated from Fataawa Mu’aasira by Sheikh Wahba Zuhayli, pages 203-204, Dar Al-Fikr, Damascus, 2003]

Seeking Forgiveness

Assalaam alaykum,

As we are all sinners we are in constant need of repentance, and Allah is At-Tawab, the Oft-Returning Who constantly turns to us to accept our repentance. Insha'Allah these duas will help you and all of us to purify ourselves and draw closer to our Lord, amin! And with Allah alone is every success!

أستغفر الله العظيم من كل ذنب أذنبته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل فرض تركته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل إنسان ظلمته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل صالح جفوته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل ظالم صاحبته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل بر أجلته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل ناصح أهنته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل محمود سئمته!

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل زور نطقت به

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل حق اضعته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل باطل إتبعته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل وقت أهدرته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل ضمير قتلته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل سر أفشيته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل أمين خدعته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل وعد أخلفته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل عهد خنته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل امرئ خذلته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل صواب كتمته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل خطأ تفوهت به

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل عرض هتكته

· أستغفر الله من كل ستر فضحته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل لغو سمعته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل حرام نظرت إليه

· أستغفر الله من كل كلام لهوت به

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل إثم فعلته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل نصح خالفته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل علم نسيته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل شك أطعته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل ظن لازمته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل ضلال عرفته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل دين أهملته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل ذنب

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل ما وعدتك به ثم عدت فيه من نفسي ولم أوفي به

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل عمل أردت به وجهك فخالطني به غيرك

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل نعمة أنعمت علي بها فاستعنت بها على معصيتك

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل ذنب أذنبته في ضياء النهار أو سواد الليل في ملأ أو خلا أو سر أو علانية

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل مال إكتسبته بغير الحق

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل علم سئلت عنه فكتمته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل قول لم أعمل به وخالفته

· أستغفر الله العظيم من كل فرض خالفته ومن كل بدعة إتبعتها

· أستغفر الله الذي لا إله إلا هو الحي القيوم وأتوب إليه

Man and His Reality

Assalaam alaykum,

A new article is now avalaible from www.marifah.net

The section has been translated from Sh. Ramadan Al-Bouti's book Kubra Al-Yaqiniyyaat Al-Kawniyyah. Insha'Allah, the following section, which deals with the theory of evolution in more depth, will be translated and available soon, and with Allah alone is every success.

Assalaam alaykum,

Mahdi

A beautiful interview with Sh. Ramadan Al-Bouti

[A biography of Sheikh Al-Bouti can be found here]

[Edited Transcript of Interview:]

Interviewer: …Are they are an accurate, pure, and untainted representation of Sufis and tassawuf?
Shaykh Bouti: As far as previous generations are concerned, it’s not possible for me to pass judgment on them because I did not live in those times.  However, I have read biographies of people such as Shaykh Abdul Qadir al-Jilani, Shaykh Raslan al-Dimashqi, and Shaykh Ahmad al-Rifa`i.  I swear by Allah, these people embodied prophethood, except that they did not receive divine revelation.
Interviewer: They embodied prophethood?
Sh. Bouti: Prophethood, minus divine revelation.  In other words, if they had revelation, they would have been prophets.  What I mean by that is that they represented, in their character, in their self-discipline, in their inner development, the life of God’s Messenger (peace be upon him).  However, since divine revelation was not present in their case, [obviously] they were not prophets or messengers.
And for such people – the foundation of their journey to Allah was the two wings of the Divine Book and the Sunnah [Prophetic tradition], and nothing more.  Abdul Qadir al-Jilani – may Allah sanctify his soul – when death drew close to him, his son, whose name was also Musa like your name, was sitting next to him.  He gave him his parting advice.  Among what he said to him was, “My son, fly to the Truth with the two wings of the Book and the Sunnah.”  And he warned him from bid`ah [innovation].
So I don’t want to speak about such people [who came before us].  If I want to look for strict adherence to the proper methodology, it is in their lives that I will find such an adherence.  If I want to look for opposition to bid`ah, it is in their lives that I will find opposition to bid’ah.
However, if you’re asking me about the tariqas of this age, I request that you show me a single tariqa from among them whose murshid [spiritual leader and advisor] possesses knowledge of Islamic law that is proficient and sufficient, who is aloof from this world and everything that it contains and is attached to it, and who possesses uprightness in his character.  [If such a person were found] I will go tomorrow to become his murid [student].  But I have looked everywhere, and have not found such a murshid.
Interviewer: What is the reason for this, respected shaykh?
Sh. Bouti: Well, I don’t know.  The nafs [lower self] is as it always has been – and I don’t absolve my own nafs from this  – “Verily the nafs is ever commanding of evil.”  The whole business of being a murshid is a dangerous business.  It’s a slippery road.  The murshid, when he tastes the pleasure of leading others, the pleasure of having a following… it’s something that is almost intoxicating.  When he sees people kissing his hand day and night, and some almost willing to kiss his knees and his feet [out of awe and respect]….  when he sees things like this, he begins to believe and imagine that he has become someone great.  And the nafs is a constant presence.  If such a person has not spent long periods of time in self-reproach, reminding himself that he is nothing, and that he has done so many bad deeds etc, he will not be able to withstand these pressures.
Furthermore, when [this murshid] finds his murids bringing gifts for him, giving him money… Even if I didn’t have an appetite for wealth when it was first given to me, I begin to develop one.  I begin to desire wealth.  I begin to desire position.  I begin to desire humility and deference from people because I am such an important and great human being.  All of this is fitnah [trial and tribulation] for me… a fitnah… a fitnah.
And the person who does not fulfill the essential requirements for being a murshid, yet somehow becomes a murshid – this responsibility is dangerous for him, and dangerous for his murids.
Just to make what I’m saying clearer for you, my brother, let me present to you the opposite picture.  Let us turn to the age of Shaykh Ahmad al-Rifa`i, may Allah sanctify his soul.  Now that is an amazing man.  He always used to say in his gatherings, in front of his murids, something that he would repeat again and again – that he was not a shaykh, and not a murshid, and warned against people looking at him in that light.  He said in one of his gatherings – and this can be found in his book al-Burhan al-Muayyid – “May I be resurrected with Fir’aun and Hamman if I consider myself better than any one from among you.”
“I am not a shaykh.  I am not a shaykh.  My name is Little Ahmad, The Nothing. Or better yet, Nothing, The Nothing [a play on his name which literally means ‘the praised one, the high’]” – this is what (Sh. Ahmad ar-Rifa’i) used to say.
And he used to say, “The murshids whom Allah favors with karamaat [special abilities or occurrences] conceal them, just as a woman [naturally] conceals her menstruation from others.”
Compare between this and what we see from murshids of our times.  Some of them extend their hands for people to kiss, to teach them [the practice of] kissing hands, and if one of them doesn’t kiss their hands they consider him negligent in his duties.
Interviewer: But is there something wrong with kissing the hand out of respect?  There are many people who would even wish to kiss your hand, but you absolutely refuse?
Sh. Bouti: Yes… yes.  Why do I refuse my dear brother?
Sh. Bouti [close to tears]: I swear by Allah, the One besides whom there is no other god, I feel embarrassed before Allah when someone from among the people kisses my hand.  Because I know myself, and my Lord is One who conceals and veils the mistakes of His servants.  He conceals so much… He conceals.  I know my shortcomings.  I know how much I’ve fallen short in my relationship with my Lord.  Yet, He makes it so that the people only see the positive side of me, and He hides the rest from the eyes of people and keeps it something hidden between us.
So if some innocent person comes to me, who only sees my outer state and doesn’t know my inner state… it’s true that he doesn’t know, but doesn’t Allah know?  How can I say to him, “Go ahead, kiss my hand, it’s ok, so that you may learn proper etiquette,” while Allah azza wajal [Mighty and Majestic] is watching me and saying, ‘Haven’t you done this?  Haven’t you done that?  Aren’t you the one who sees such and such [bad qualities] in your self?”  This is what prevents me from allowing people to kiss my hand.

Part 2: Modern Tareeqas and Innovation

[This part of the interview was found here.]

Interview with Hamza Perez

Alhamdulilah, a very down-to-earth brother.

The Sinister and Evil Roots of the Global Warming Scam: Genocide in the name of the environment is still genocide

♫

What you need to know about Climate Change

Skepticus Maximus

In the comments section of the article below on the DT website, someone called Skepticus Maximus said (and it includes some really amazing figures):

I read a (re-purposed) quote the other day re the climate alarmist conspiracy which went something along the lines of “....if someone repeats something loud enough, long enough and often enough, sooner or later the masses will accept it as fact...” – And this is precisely what has happened re AGW, esp with the mass media censure of any real balanced debate. Gormless Brown, Nic Sarkastic, Al Bore and all those other gullible idiots have either, (at best), picked up the undetermined fag end of an issue several years ago and decided to run with and champion the liberal do-gooder / “save the planet” element to win public vote, with save drowning polar bear approbation. As the politicos naively thought this was an open and shut case (and didn’t bother to acid test the motivations (let alone data) of ego-maniacal eco “experts” (and in which many science “experts” are often ego-nuts with esteem issues, bent on proving themselves right and being “cleverer” than their peers in my experience), who are gravy-train grant funded precisely to seek out confirmation bias to support the empathised political agenda / hand that feeds).

Or, at worst, (just as likely), the political elite didn’t even care about the “inconvenient truth” of this being emperor’s new clothes, but knew it was yet another of those golden, once-a-decade opportunities to distract and dupe the proletariat whilst achieving command and control with addition direct and stealth taxation and power gain.

A concept covered in depth in Naomi Klein’s interesting, (but flawed, rather verbose (could’ve been a mag article) and also a bit too militant left-wing for my liking, “Shock Doctrine” book – which can be summed up nicely (via someone else’s’ review words) in one para as:- `...a book about shock. About how countries are shocked - by wars, terror attacks, coups d'etat and natural disasters . And then they are shocked again - by corporations and politicians who exploit their fear and disorientation of this first shock to push through economic shock therapy. And then how people who dare to resist these shock politics are, if necessary, shocked for a third time - by laws, police soldiers and prison officers...'

But it’s a perfect analogy. Climate Change is an “unnatural disaster” now all of a sudden. Mankind controls the planet, such is our scientific pre-eminence (despite not even yet being able to cure the common cold). So just drop the following into the government controlled left wing news media in regular doses:- “...the earth is melting. FACT. Another 3 degrees (which doesn’t sound much given most of the sheep listening turn their car AC up and down by double that) and London & NY WILL be underwater and everywhere else will be desert – FACT. It’s all down to man – FACT (here’s a picture of a chimney belching out smoke – you’ve all seen a chimney right?, and there were four days of relatively warm weather in June right?, so it must be true. FACT). Plus here’s a list of 1,000 scientists you’ve never heard of (all left of centre sympathisers on research grants), who say it must be so. So it must be so. FACT – though you’ll never get to hear from the other 1,000 scientists with a neutral or opposing view as we and their peers will see to it they never get print or air time (apart from the odd loon we’ll roll out to ridicule and prove a point every now and then). And, before you know it, the earth is flat again! – FACT. And you, cowering, fearful, guilty and responsible children of the apocalypse, will have to pay for it in extra taxes to file down those sharp corners, revert to a mediaeval lifestyle for five generations and also keep schtum re any creeping doubt or slight dissent for fear of public ridicule, being made a social pariah or just plain fines or good old arrest for heresy.

What really galls me, is the machiavellian deviousness of the AGW acolytes. To the extent, JUST like religious fundamentalism, they are so arrogant, narrow minded and corrupt they don’t want to entertain any balanced debate whatsoever or have an open mind, but seek to crush and ridicule any opposition to their gravy train and eco-jihad by resorting to spoiler tactics and outright lying.

It’s also rather pathetic that in the process of brainwashing themselves and the mass public, CO2 has been turned into some metaphor for smog, soot - practically coal itself - being emitted from cars, planes and even our mouths. When in fact it is an invisible, tasteless, odourless, non toxic gas found naturally in the atmosphere which plants and trees feed on. But it has been wrapped up with blurred concepts of smoke, dirt, lethal carbon monoxide, rubbish, toxic pollutants et al. Something most AGW fanatics tend to forget when happily drinking fizzy water, beer, coke et al whilst enjoying their cold hemp and gravel salad by torchlight.

Real pollution by man and damage to the environment, de-forestation, destruction of natural habitat, accelerated extinction of species, using the oceans as a waste bin, food chain and ecology bastardisation et al, is not in debate, is not acceptable and needs to be dealt with, it’s a fact. That the planet has warmed is also not in debate. It does this, and cools down, all by itself on a regular basis – and has done, for millions of years. That’s also a FACT. (Though the AGW posse like to gloss over the fact is was rather a lot warmer, for a LONG time, only a 1,000 years ago in the mediaeval warm period, when the Vikings had settlements on grass meadows in Greenland, and to the best of my knowledge, they didn’t get there by EasyJet). But what should be in debate is that it is NOT a FACT that man-made C02 is causing any appreciable global warming or climate change. It’s a hypothesis, nothing more, and a pretty dubious one at that, with lots of shaky data obtained and massaged by nefarious means into shock and awe graphs to serve a political purpose.

Here’s a REAL fact to end with, which even the AGW lobby can’t dispute (well, unless they start providing “evidence” that the 78% nitrogen in the atmosphere is produced from toasters).

• Man made carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere each year – 28.5 billion tons p.a. - Sounds quite a lot.....until....
• Natural (plants, volcanoes, hot springs, oceans, animals et al) C02 emissions – 255 billion tons p.a.
• Amount of C02 at natural equilibrium in the atmosphere – 21 trillion tons [Mahdi: Allah Akbar! We humans are so insignificant. Can a drop in the ocean poison the entire ocean?]
• Total volume of atmosphere – 5.5 quadrillion tons
• Percentage of all man-made C02 as additional gas in entire atmosphere – 0.0000518% [Mahdi: Allah!]

And yet the climate alarmist experts can, with a straight face, confidently predict that a “catalyst” such as C02 (already naturally and safely found in volumes 1,000x mankind’s entire annual output) can, by an additional dose of a further 0.0000518% alone, be responsible for a planet-wide increase in temperature of between 20-50% (3-6 degrees over the 15c avg for past 1000 yrs, if alarmists extrapolations are to be believed), and the resulting total cataclysmic change to every known environment (down to the precise amount of sea-level change), in a linear extrapolation for the next 50-100 years, when meteorologists with supercomputers consistently fail to get the local 48hr weather forecast correct on more than 60% of occasions, every single day. But they suddenly have the skill, science and equipment to form a prognosis based literally on the effects of a drop in the ocean.... yeah, right.....

[Absolutely brilliant]