Video: The Star of Bethlehem BACK! You would not believe what it means! "Sign of Jesus Return or something Sinister? Tune in to find out!
During the coming week, if early morning skies are clear, you’ll be able to see a conjunction of planets that some folks think recreates the original “star of Bethlehem.”
This weekend’s conjunction is special, Schaaf said, because the apparent meeting of these three planets will be “for the last time in perhaps a thousand years.”
From Schaaf’s most recent column, here is a guide to seeing the brightly lit conjunction of planets that may have guided the Magi toward the baby Jesus in 2 B.C.
Before dawn on Oct. 23, three planets in the eastern sky — Venus, Jupiter and Mars — were stacked one on top of another, in that order, with about even spacing between them.
Over the next four days, Venus and Jupiter, which Schaaf said are “by far the brightest planets,” will be in conjunction, meeting within one degree of each other. This same conjunction of planets occurred in October of 2 B.C., which is said to be the last appearance of the “star of Bethlehem,” said Schaaf, a contributing editor to Sky and Telescope.
http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/life/how-to-see-the-star-of-bethlehem/article_f94f784c-798c-11e5-beb9-7fdb61962b78.html"Yawn. Conjunctions are no big deal. And they are totally predictable, and have no consequences. |
|
|
|
He was going to sit on them until the zombie apocalypse and then sell them to survivors.
awesome. Because guns must be hoarded. Because one day you might jest need them. So 10,000 criminals have had to go without guns. And they arrest HIM. Gotta ponder that one... |
|
|
|
Gloria Steinem: Pope Causing Global Warming By “Forcing Women To Have Children”…No matter his recent encyclical on the environment. Pope Francis himself is the cause of global warming, according to feminist activist Gloria Steinem. Cosmopolitan writer Prachi Gupta revealed that her editor-in-chief, Joanna Coles, interviewed Steinem, “arguably the most influential women’s rights activist in the world today” for an hour on Wednesday. From that interview, Gupta recalled Steinem’s “serious wisdom” and “best quotes.” One of those quotes came from when Coles spoke with Steinem about “rethinking the patriarchy.” Steinem started off with a focus on economics. She argued, “All of our courses in economics should start with reproduction, not production.”What do economics and the patriarchy have to do with each other? Steinem’s logic went something like this: Pope Francis and “other patriarchal religions” support “forcing women to have children” instead of abortion. There’s then a “human load” on the Earth. Thus, the pope causes global warming. Cosmo published Steinem’s quote: “I had this thought that we should have this massive education campaign pointing out that the Pope and all of the other patriarchal religions that dictate to women in this way, accusing them of global warming. Because the human load on this earth is the biggest cause of global warming, and that is because of forcing women to have children they would not on their own choose to have … I’m glad the Pope spoke out about global warming and it was very helpful, but does he know he’s causing it?” http://newsbusters.org/blogs/culture/katie-yoder/2015/10/22/gloria-steinem-pope-causing-global-warming-forcing-women-have------------------------------------------------ Had to chose between my "everyone hate feminists" thread or this one...  And Global Warming threatens iconic snow leopards. Come on, just connect the dots and solve the problems. Feed Glorious Steinen to the snow leopards. |
|
|
|
To defend ourselves we should have allowance to carry weapon.
I don't say I'm not humanist or anything other. I say carrying weapon may be really needed sometimes.
A compete ban on the possession of all types of fire-arms by the civilians can be enforced, in case the government succeeds in bringing down the crime rate to zero. If they are unable to do it, then there is no point in persecuting the ordinary citizens, who just want to defend themselves from the violent criminals, who indulge in home invasions and burglaries. Sure there is a point, and it is the central point - increasing and maintaining control over the ordinary citizen. It never did and does not have anything to do with relations between guns and crime, or the prevention of crime. |
|
|
|
http://americanhumanist.org/HNN/details/2013-01-your-opinions-on-gun-control-from-a-humanist-perspecI find the arguments over gun control and registration ridiculous. I usually shut my opponents up when I point out that automobiles in the hands of the inexperienced and untrained are dangerous, and therefore we have compulsory tests and licensing to drive a car. The same logic applies to gun control, they are dangerous and there should be compulsory tests to determine your aptitude to handle a gun with subsequent registration and licensing. I do not see why anyone would consider this unreason. (Howard McFann, Florence, South Carolina) God, I love Newspeak like "humanist" in place of "violent sociopath* safety advocate". *who perpetually have all the deadly weapons they want, whether they be automobiles, guns, blades, or blunt objects, while all those infringements only "reasonably" deny the victims of violent sociopaths, our human right to self-defense. Aw come on, what's wrong with a humanist approach guided by reasonable restrictions? No one can argue with something that's for the benefit of the children...Compulsary reasonableness can be implemented with wise oversight by the guiding hand of the State. I would propose six successive tests for gun ownership, each taking approximately three months to complete - well, unless the Agency received additional funding, of course. The tests would be administered by experts, and the results reviewed by the Gun Qualification Committee. Listen, I'm kind of busy. Is that enough of an explanation for now? I have to get back to devising the rules set for the Bullet Registration Division, we're currently studying fee schedules for designated Bullet Owners. LOL.... |
|
|
|
I don't take that Jew comment as a reason for the media being biased against same sex marriage. Its more likely that most media is gay take movies music TV what's the percentage theirs more gays then in other jobs.
Percent of gays in general population maybe 2% Percent of gays in media/entertainment might be 50% |
|
|
|
Intelligent Aliens are smarter than the those energy gatherers, gathering energy from a sun by placing a giant antenna around it. This proves that this story is another hoax.
Maybe (probably) not an alien structure, but maybe not a hoax either. The original statements from the scientists involved pretty clearly did NOT state it was an alien structure, but posited that it was odd data, which COULD be such and such. The media has blown it up into what it is now. "Alien Cruise Ship Rocks into the Milky Way" or whatever. Odds are it is a natural thing that science just hasn't seen before and so doesn't have a data profile to match it to to determine "this is what it is" Lots of unknowns out there and we haven't even begun to scratch the surface, so I would expect an endless stream of "WTF is that?" type things as we poke our noses out there and stumble across things we haven't seen before. It's obviously greedy capitalists. Some corporation greedily taking 25% of the entire output of the star. Think of the cold, miserable poor, left in the dark. Who will care for them? |
|
|
|
Global warming threatens iconic snow leopard: study23 OCT 2015  (this above image with that AFP story isn´t of a snow leopard but a jaguar) ... Wait, so they are going to opine on about a snow leopard but don't even know what it looks like and can't even produce the right picture of one? Can we just stop right there and laugh? |
|
|
|
I think that to own a gun you should be qualified and therefore you should take a test and be evaluated by a psychologist.
No problem. I assume that first I can have the psychologist take my test, then I can evaluate himher? |
|
|
|
do you believe that Donald Trump will support bitcoin if he elected as president?
No. I don't think that Donald Trump is in favor of Bitcoin. Donald Trump is a big corporation himself, and he is having strong ties with the Wall Street and big bankers. At the best, we can hope for a neutral stand. The only Republican primary candidates who support the usage and legalization of Bitcoin are Rand Paul and Ted Cruz (not that sure).
This is a very good point - Trump is used to dealing with the lying, stealing, corrupt schemers and looters that don't actually contribute anything to the economy. But that does not mean he's one of them. |
|
|
|
...
So your problem is not so much that we are being sprayed by things like aluminum, lithium, and barium, but that it's not affecting us the way they claim? Because it's quite obvious our skies are being sprayed by chemicals. NASA admits to that on their website: Tracers - Clouds and Trails and a phone call: NASA employee admits chemtrails. My problem is that we have no way to know with anything resembling certainty what is being sprayed where, much less the impact it has. My solution is to choose something which is undeniable and quite probably a big problem and demand that it be studied openly. Again, that would be the stone cold fact that we are seeing persistent trails form a dense haze which is surely blocking out solar flux over broad areas. An open and active study of this will provide a lot of threads to tug on. I have no doubt that all manners of things are released from sounding rockets and that bothers me not one iota. Sounding rockets are not a feasible delivery system for any systematic program. I suspect that other elements in fact are being released into the atmosphere on a more broad scale and there could be a number of reasons to do so. Among the more mundane would be the introduction of elements which would make remote sensing atmospheric monitoring more precise and effective. Much more threatening reasons exist. This is conjecture however. Even when people provide pretty good evidence in the form of privately commissioned sample analysis it still falls on deaf ears and the majority of the population has been trained to ignore or ridicule such results. The concern about sounding rocket experiments reminds me a lot of the story about gasses from the operating room acting as a greenhouse gas. Utterly laughable to worry about it due to the concentrations, but many people on the global warming panic side were suckered into doing just that. That leads into a whole other range of 'conspiracy theories' associated with our education systems (and one's which I find pretty compelling.) There will never be studies into what's above us, that will lead to the public knowing anything real, IMHO. An anti scientific, medieval, mystical claim made without any facts or basis whatsoever. To boot, ignores the actual facts about rockets and their use since the very beginning of their use. No more or less than one would expect from you though. |
|
|
|
This is absolutely brilliant! But you should retain the exclusion for the rich and famous, and the politically connected, to have guns. After all, it's only fair.
Laws and regulations, which are applicable for the ordinary people, are normally not enforced on the ultra-rich and the politicians. It doesn't matter whether the politician is pro-gun rights or anti-gun rights. The Senate and the House will make it sure that they are allowed to own fire-arms, although the possession of the same is banned for the ordinary people. Hey, come on. They got their special retirement plans. They got their special medical plans. You wouldn't expect them to have to get in the gutter with Obamacare, would you? And what's this about guns? Come on, don't be silly. Let's get back to something seriously important, like how much we're going to give to you in free stuff next year if you vote us back in. I know you want free stuff. |
|
|
|
...
So your problem is not so much that we are being sprayed by things like aluminum, lithium, and barium, but that it's not affecting us the way they claim? Because it's quite obvious our skies are being sprayed by chemicals. NASA admits to that on their website: Tracers - Clouds and Trails and a phone call: NASA employee admits chemtrails. My problem is that we have no way to know with anything resembling certainty what is being sprayed where, much less the impact it has. My solution is to choose something which is undeniable and quite probably a big problem and demand that it be studied openly. Again, that would be the stone cold fact that we are seeing persistent trails form a dense haze which is surely blocking out solar flux over broad areas. An open and active study of this will provide a lot of threads to tug on. I have no doubt that all manners of things are released from sounding rockets and that bothers me not one iota. Sounding rockets are not a feasible delivery system for any systematic program. I suspect that other elements in fact are being released into the atmosphere on a more broad scale and there could be a number of reasons to do so. Among the more mundane would be the introduction of elements which would make remote sensing atmospheric monitoring more precise and effective. Much more threatening reasons exist. This is conjecture however. Even when people provide pretty good evidence in the form of privately commissioned sample analysis it still falls on deaf ears and the majority of the population has been trained to ignore or ridicule such results. The concern about sounding rocket experiments reminds me a lot of the story about gasses from the operating room acting as a greenhouse gas. Utterly laughable to worry about it due to the concentrations, but many people on the global warming panic side were suckered into doing just that. That leads into a whole other range of 'conspiracy theories' associated with our education systems (and one's which I find pretty compelling.) Yes, sounding rockets are just that - scientific experiments. There is zero reason to be concerned about them. There is no conspiracy there. You can look up the research articles from the experiments. |
|
|
|
lets hope that sometime we will leave this greedy earth..  Agreed. I want some of those greedy stars. |
|
|
|
just ban all guns every were save the deaths.
Just ban all criminal activity.. problem solved.  This is absolutely brilliant! But you should retain the exclusion for the rich and famous, and the politically connected, to have guns. After all, it's only fair. |
|
|
|
I am against gun control 100%. anyway criminals don't care about laws.
You don't think that if we talked to them nicely, and told them we were going to get rid of all our guns, they'd be nice to us too? |
|
|
|
....Do you really give a shit about emails, and if you do is it because you legitimately care, or is it because she's a dem and it makes her look bad so that's sweet.....
No, it's just a right out in the open demonstration of total incompetence, total inability to manage even simple things, and possible brain damage. |
|
|
|
This smells a lot like the Rosa Parks case. Contrived, fake, intentional, misleading, oppressing. The little kid DID NOT just punk the president. He was in on it or using it to advantage. |
|
|
|
The bible says pretty much the same.
Leviticus 11:7-8
And the pig, because it parts the hoof and is cloven-footed but does not chew the cud, is unclean to you. You shall not eat any of their flesh, and you shall not touch their carcasses; they are unclean to you.
Guess the difference between christians and the Muslims when it comes to the pig is that Muslims takes their book serious
Leviticus, 11:12 " Anything living in the water that does not have fins and scales is to be regarded as unclean by you." Also a lot of seafood is forbidden. Now that's just plain unacceptable. No shark, no shrimp, no calimari. |
|
|
|
I strongly support private gun control. Police does nothing most of the time.
Guns can be used only to save yourself from danger. And I think it is fair use.
What seems to be the case in the USA is that when the bad guys think there are probably some guns in and around an area, they avoid it. It doesn't matter if it's one gun or a hundred. For example, they don't attack the local AR15 club meeting or the Glock two day training sessions. They attack the defenseless old lady at the bus stop, or the school cafeteria (gun free zone). Hence, instilling that fear into the bad guy is what is important, more so than having a weapon for your own protection or that of those you love. What is sought is the creation of a cultural milieu in which the bad guy is scared to make bad acts. They are basically cowards.... I would not say that engaging in almost any form of crime is 'cowardly.' There are a variety of risks, but having one's face peeled off by a shotgun blast is certainly one of the more emotionally potent. Much crime is driven by desperation and some by run-of-the-mill stupidity and lack of self control. These classes are the ones who end up losing most often and are certainly the ones who pose the bigger risk to the innocent victim. Criminals also victimize one another probably at least as often as they do the innocent. When the FBI studied the problem of 'guns', they realized that for most criminals, not possessing a gun was a non-option largely because of this. Thus, the strategy of making use of a gun in the commission of a crime carry extra-high penalties. This was remarkably effective which is why real gun problems (as opposed to phony staged 'active shooter' events) have been declining significantly over the last four decades and are now at very tolerable levels. I'd say generally that criminal are business people in a particular business and make rational cost/benefit analyses just like any other people in any other business. As a gun owner I do my best to make sure that criminals are cognizant of the risk side of the equation. Way to stop that armed robber - https://youtu.be/vsVCHE7ayPEhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2gCFOtaZPo |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
