US exit from United Nations could become reality with fresh bill A Republican-proposed House Resolution has quietly slipped past the public radar – proposing that the United States withdraw its membership from the United Nations, just as another bill was being concocted to cut US funding to the body.
The bill, proposed by Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL), entitled American Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2017, seeks a complete US withdrawal from the UN, that the international body remove its headquarters from New York and that all participation be ceased with the World Health Organization as well.
Rogers and other prominent Republicans have repeatedly voiced the idea that US taxpayer money should not go to an organization that does not promote US interests – especially one that does not stick up for Israel together with the US. The new document is merely the latest manifestation of sentiment that has been brewing for some time.
The bill was quietly introduced on January 3 and was passed on to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. If approved, the bill would take two years to take effect. It would also repeal the United Nations Participation Act of 1945, signed in the aftermath of WWII.
"The President shall terminate all membership by the United States in the United Nations in any organ, specialized agency, commission, or other formally affiliated body of the United Nations…The United States Mission to the United Nations is closed. Any remaining functions of such office shall not be carried out,"according to the text of HR 193.
The bill would also prohibit "the authorization of funds for the US assessed or voluntary contribution to the UN," which would also include any military or peacekeeping expenditures, the use of the US military by the UN, and the loss of "diplomatic immunity for UN officers or employees" on US soil.
Rogers had tried to pass the same bill in 2015, albeit unsuccessfully.
"Why should the American taxpayer bankroll an international organization that works against America's interests around the world?" Rogers asked at the time in defense of his idea.
"The time is now to restore and protect American sovereignty and get out of the United Nations."
Another supporter of HR 193, Rend Paul (R-KY) also put it like this in January 2015: "I dislike paying for something that two-bit Third World countries with no freedom attack us and complain about the United States… There's a lot of reasons why I don't like the UN, and I think I'd be happy to dissolve it," added the Kentucky senator.
Later, in June 2015, Rogers had introduced his document – then named HR 1205, but essentially the same USExit idea he's proposing now.
"The UN continues to prove it's an inefficient bureaucracy and a complete waste of American tax dollars." Rogers went on to name treaties and actions he believes "attack our rights as US citizens." These included gun provisions, the imposition of international regulations on American fossil fuels – but more importantly, the UN attack on Israel, by voting to grant Palestine the non-member state 'permanent observer' status.
"Anyone who is not a friend to our ally Israel is not a friend to the United States."
That same logic was used this January when House Republicans prepared a legislation that would decrease – even potentially eliminate – US funding to the UN. According to calculations by the conservative Heritage Foundation, the US provides over 22 percent of all UN funding.
The bill to cut the funding was introduced shortly after the UNSC voted 14-0 to condemn the continued construction of illegal Israeli settlements – the resolution Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu considered a backstab from the US, which declined to veto it, as per former President Barack Obama's suddenly critical attitude to Israel at the end of his presidency. Read more at http://www.prisonplanet.com/us-exit-from-united-nations-could-become-reality-with-fresh-bill.html.
|
|
|
|
Foreigners Are Dumping U.S. Debt At A Record Pace And Our $20 Trillion National Debt ... While most of the country has been focused on the inauguration of Donald Trump, a very real crisis has been brewing behind the scenes. Foreigners are dumping U.S. debt at a faster rate than we have ever seen before, and U.S. Treasury yields have been rising. This is potentially a massive problem, because our entire debt-fueled standard of living is dependent on foreigners lending us gigantic mountains of money at ultra-low interest rates. If the average rate of interest on U.S. government debt just got back to 5 percent, which would still be below the long-term average, we would be paying out about a trillion dollars a year just in interest on the national debt. If foreigners keep dumping our debt and if Treasury yields keep climbing, a major financial implosion of historic proportions is absolutely guaranteed within the next four years.
One of the most significant aspects of the "Obama legacy" is the appalling mountain of debt that he has left behind. As I write this article, the U.S. national debt is sitting at 19.944 trillion dollars. During Obama's eight years, a staggering 9.3 trillion dollars was added to the national debt. When you break that number down, it comes to more than a hundred million dollars every single hour of every single day while Obama was living in the White House. In just two terms, Obama added almost as much to the national debt as all of the other presidents before him combined.
What Obama and the members of Congress that cooperated with him have done to future generations of Americans is beyond criminal.
Unfortunately, hardly anyone is talking about this right now, but the consequences are about to start catching up with us in a major way.
The only possible way that our game of "borrow, spend and stick future generations with the bill" can continue is if the rest of the world participates. In other words, we need them to continue to buy our debt.
Unfortunately for us, a major shift is now taking place. According to Zero Hedge, the most recent numbers that we have show foreigners dumping more than 400 million dollars of U.S. debt over the past 12 months…
The wholesale liquidation of US Treasuries continued in November, when according to the just released TIC data, foreign central banks sold another $936 million in US paper in November 2016, which due to an offset of $892 million in buying one year ago, means that for the 12 month period ended November, foreign central banks have now sold a new all time high of $405 million in the past 12 months, up from a record $403 million in LTM sales as of one month ago. Read more and click the links at http://www.dcclothesline.com/2017/01/23/foreigners-are-dumping-u-s-debt-at-a-record-pace-and-our-20-trillion-national-debt-is-poised-to-become-a-major-crisis-2/.
|
|
|
|
Trump Hits DC With $10.5 Trillion in Cuts Well, this certainly sounds promising, if it comes to pass. Named and unnamed sources inside the Trump transition team have said that President Donald Trump has been working with others to bring about a massive reduction in spending.
The Hill reports:
"The proposed cuts hew closely to a blueprint published last year by the conservative Heritage Foundation, a think tank that has helped staff the Trump transition.
"Similar proposals have in the past won support from Republicans in the House and Senate, who believe they have an opportunity to truly tackle spending after years of warnings about the rising debt.
"Many of the specific cuts were included in the 2017 budget adopted by the conservative Republican Study Committee (RSC), a caucus that represents a majority of House Republicans. The RSC budget plan would reduce federal spending by $8.6 trillion over the next decade.
"Two members of Trump's transition team are discussing the cuts at the White House budget office: Russ Vought, a former aide to Vice President-elect Mike Pence and the former executive director of the RSC, and John Gray, who previously worked for Pence, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) when Ryan headed the House Budget Committee.
"Vought and Gray, who both worked for the Heritage Foundation, are laying the groundwork for the so-called skinny budget — a 175- to 200-page document that will spell out the main priorities of the incoming Trump administration, along with summary tables. That document is expected to come out within 45 days of Trump taking office.
"The administration's full budget, including appropriations language, supplementary materials and long-term analysis, is expected to be released toward the end of Trump's first 100 days in office, or by mid- to late April."
The Departments of Energy, Commerce, Transportation, Justice and State are all going to be facing massive cuts in spending, including the elimination of some programs in some of the departments.
Additionally, the Trump team is looking towards the privatization of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, as well as the elimination of the National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities.
The Hill went on to provide a few specifics of the cuts.
"At the Department of Justice, the blueprint calls for eliminating the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, Violence Against Women Grants and the Legal Services Corporation and for reducing funding for its Civil Rights and its Environment and Natural Resources divisions.
"At the Department of Energy, it would roll back funding for nuclear physics and advanced scientific computing research to 2008 levels, eliminate the Office of Electricity, eliminate the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy and scrap the Office of Fossil Energy, which focuses on technologies to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Read more and click the links at http://www.dcclothesline.com/2017/01/22/trump-hits-dc-with-10-5-trillion-in-cuts/.
|
|
|
|
What?! They let you out of jail? Did you miss me, you luciferian pumpkinhead? Earth is still flat, and you still gargle curdled dog semen. GTFO, and take that Brokeback BobLawblaw bonesmoking bitch with you.  Well, you are still giving the flat earth idea a bad rep by your pervertedness. You are one of the greatest proponents of anything except flat earth. Keep it up. notbatman will hate you.  |
|
|
|
Again, it is not God doing the heavy lifting. It is you.
Your mind is playing a trick on you.
If you have that think, i'll ask some question for you. - Can you explain how human created before nothing anything in the world?
- If you have same mind with Darwin's theory, Are you want if your ancestors called monkey, and you are exactly monkey like your ancestors?
- And how about some people believe in god if nothing someone bring religion before?
So, if you can explain all of that i'll believe on you. 1. Humans are a product of evolution from simpler life forms. The physical evidence is OVERWHELMING. Universe was most likely created out of nothing. Probably a product of some sort of singularity in other universes and we are the side effect of some other process. Just like Hawking radiation has a corresponding particles that enter the black holes and exist on the inside but not on the outside, our Big Bang is a result of some other process elsewhere. The latest theory is that our universe is sort of a black hole and we are holographic projections of the information on the event horizon. Our universe is probably seen as some sort of object (black hole or whatever the observers in that observing universe call it) in some other universe. The bottom line is there are many unknowns, questions to be answered. 2. We are all hairless apes. There is no 'if/maybe' about this. 3. People believe in God because most people need answers to feel safe. Others investigate and observe to discover the reality and try to explain the unknowns. The proof for God exists: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380. Evolution, by its own admission - Theory of Evolution - is an unknown, scientifically. People believe in evolution because most people need answers to feel safe. Others investigate and observe to discover the reality of the existence of God, and try to believe Him when He explains the unknowns. |
|
|
|
Science and religion are essentially one and the same thing and can be used interchangeably in any context.
Where do you people get such ideas? Science is about finding the truth via evidence & experimentation, and correctly predicting future results (like cosmic background radiation) Religion is about telling stories which are bullshit, have zero scientific merit, and are not capable of predicting anything You're not looking at it from a fundamental perspective. Both religion and science are systems of belief/faith. You believe in science, you believe in God. Getting on a plane and while not fully understanding how it all works, requires what would qualify as 'faith'. Taking a pill when ill, requires faith in science because you have no idea how the chemicals work. Both science and religion are systems of reason. Religion is not random, it follows a logic. Both science and religion rely on assumptions. No experiment/test in science can ever be truly conclusive. You can perform a test a million times and get the exact same result every time but there is absolutely no guarantee that on the million and one attempt, you'll get the expected result. Since there is no way to test something infinitely, science assumes a particular result to be true after a finite number of tests. That is why nothing in science is set in stone, theories that were once thought to be complete can still be improved upon as more tests are performed and new findings are uncovered. Religion is a system that demands that you as a reasonble person give up/surrender your reasoning ability. This logic that religion follows is full blown shit. That's why believing science theory to be fact, when one knows that it is not known to be fact, is giving up your reasoning ability for faith. There is religion in believing science theories to be factual without knowing it. Scientific theories are questioned, validated in the lab. When there is no experiment to disprove them, them become a scientific fact. Evolution is a very good example. Evolution is a good example of what? Being disproved - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1454732.0? Evolution in the lab being proven, is only an example of how the definition of "evolution" has been changed over the years, because it was found that the old definition was easily proven false. So, even the definition of evolution is evolving. Wullah! Proof for evolution. Your explanation of how science theories work is only partially correct, just like the theories themselves. Beginning to think that you are just a theory. |
|
|
|
It's not about him being a good boy or not. When you are sentenced for life you can be the nicest inmate in the world and it won't matter.
IMO his sentence should be reduced. Yes, he did something illegal, but he hasn't killed anyone, he just created a market site. Killers and rapists are usually sentenced for 5-10 years. I've seen pedophile murderers, who raped and killed a child, sentenced only to 25 years, and this guy gets life? This has nothing to do with justice.
You don't get it. Ross caused billions of USD in revenue loss to the drug cartels (and the banks which launder their money), and therefore he was sentenced to life without parole. On the other hand, child killers doesn't matter to the judges, as long as the victim comes from some broken family with no political connection. From a russian troll to DEA agent in a matter of seconds. We should trust his words and expertise regarding this topic. Billions of $ lost for the drug cartels... Lol Im still cringing on the ground  Illegal drug cartels ARE $billions lost for the legal drug cartels... and sometimes the other way around, as well. |
|
|
|
Another definition of evolution. When are people going to realize that there isn't any evolution in the original sense of the word. The only way proponents of evolution are able to make evolution exist, is to change the meaning into some other meaning of something that DOES exist. Of course, that doesn't make the original meaning to be something that exists. It only shows that evolutionists don't like giving up on their religion. I could say the same thing about gods. They are only a representation of human fantasies, but believers also don't like giving up, as it might show they were wrong most of their lives and wasted so much time and money worshiping something that not only does not give a shit but doesn't exist. It IS A FACT, no shit of the gods has ever been found. The difference is the evidence and scientific proof of the one real God: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380. The evidence and proof don't say much about Him. But they not only show that He exists, but also that He is God Almighty way beyond imagination or anything mankind can do or think. The same science that tries to make us believe that Evolution theory is fact (actually, it is some scientists, universities, and media), is the science that uses solid science law to prove that God exists. I've just read part of your essay and came to a conclusion that you're a lunatic. The vast majority of people recognize the greatness of the universe, naturally. They recognize that Something very great must have caused the universe and nature to come into existence. They know it is not themselves, because try as they might, they can't affect nature except in extremely limited ways. They can't stop themselves from aging and dying.
People recognize that as they can think, there must be Something that can think far beyond what they can. This is instinctive, natural knowledge. That is part of the reason that people throughout the world look for God. That's part of the reason that there are religions. People know in their hearts, inner minds, and spirits that God must exist.
Usually it is the frustration of certain people in being unable to determine much of anything about God, that they simply throw in the towel, so to speak, and give up on the idea of God. Way down deep in their hearts they know that God exists. But because of circumstances and their inability to find Him, they attempt to entirely push Him out of their lives. And many of them succeed to a great extent.
According to you god exists because people deny his existence and you somehow know that deep inside they know that he is real Nations look for an explanation = god exists People denby his existence = he exists The majority can't be wrong! = he exists No. All that is according to you. God exists because He exists. That's it. Period. People think and do all kinds of things. It doesn't affect God, except that it bothers Him that they keep on hurting themselves by denying His existence. But, what can He do about it? Nothing... because He made people so great that they can deny Him if they want. It was never His intent that they deny Him. But He made them that great. |
|
|
|
No. Please stay where you are. I'm leaving!  I just wish the "UNWATCH" feature worked for this thread. How can you maintain the ability to write so lucidly while you are living in such guilt over not being able to refute the things I say? |
|
|
|
There is no creation without a mastermind or someone with the bigger picture
What about the big bang theory?
If the Bible is a book of facts, then let us look at these "facts".
As your bible states:
"God creates Adam and Eve"
Adam and Eve have Children
These children grow into adults and have their own children.
As you need both male and female to produce children.... Adam and Eve's family commit incest.
I always thought that their children were Cain and Abel. How did they reproduce? Adam and Eve had many children. Eve probably lived 400 to 600 years or more. Adam lived well over 900 years. At one child a year, that was 400 or 500 for Eve. If Adam took other wives, that may have been many more. When you consider that these children might have started having children at age 20 - they were almost as healthy as Adam and Eve - look at how fast the world could fill up in just a couple hundred years. So Adam may have had many wives.... if Adam and Eve were the original 2... then they had to have had children which Adam could then take for wives.... So you admit the story of Adam and Eve is about incest. Thanks BADecker for admitting religion and the bible is corrupt. LOL! You are so funny. Where did Eve come from? She was made from a rib that was taken from Adam's body. Incest is nothing. You simply avoid looking at perfection and near perfection because you are so corrupt. Incest didn't become wrong until after the Great Flood of Noah's day. The reason for making it "illegal" was the failure, the devolution, of the human race into something that barely approximated the perfection of pre-flood times. But you, all you want to do is continue into deeper depravity. That's why you try to continually make God and the Bible out to be bad. Well, go ahead. Become more depraved. It will bring about your demise, and nobody will miss you. Oh come now Chuckles, you are calling me depraved and you are defending the incestuous relationships of your religion. I know, maybe you don't want to believe the wrong doings of your religion, or the atrocious nature of your religion. Either that, or you actually are that depraved! Well, you accept evolution as truth, don't you? There is way more incestuous "cross breeding" in evolution than there could ever imaginably be in creation. You can't seem to get it into your understanding that incest was not wrong when things were not in the corrupt state that they are in now. Devolution is the corruption that has made incest a bad thing. The major cause of devolution is, not accepting the fact that God exists, but if one accepts His existence, not believing what He says. So you are promoting corruption and devolution in your thinking. As long as you keep on promoting corruption, there will never be enough regaining of perfection to make incest an acceptable thing. |
|
|
|
Science and religion are essentially one and the same thing and can be used interchangeably in any context.
Where do you people get such ideas? Science is about finding the truth via evidence & experimentation, and correctly predicting future results (like cosmic background radiation) Religion is about telling stories which are bullshit, have zero scientific merit, and are not capable of predicting anything You're not looking at it from a fundamental perspective. Both religion and science are systems of belief/faith. You believe in science, you believe in God. Getting on a plane and while not fully understanding how it all works, requires what would qualify as 'faith'. Taking a pill when ill, requires faith in science because you have no idea how the chemicals work. Both science and religion are systems of reason. Religion is not random, it follows a logic. Both science and religion rely on assumptions. No experiment/test in science can ever be truly conclusive. You can perform a test a million times and get the exact same result every time but there is absolutely no guarantee that on the million and one attempt, you'll get the expected result. Since there is no way to test something infinitely, science assumes a particular result to be true after a finite number of tests. That is why nothing in science is set in stone, theories that were once thought to be complete can still be improved upon as more tests are performed and new findings are uncovered. Religion is a system that demands that you as a reasonble person give up/surrender your reasoning ability. This logic that religion follows is full blown shit. That's why believing science theory to be fact, when one knows that it is not known to be fact, is giving up your reasoning ability for faith. There is religion in believing science theories to be factual without knowing it. |
|
|
|
Science and religion are essentially one and the same thing and can be used interchangeably in any context.
Where do you people get such ideas? Science is about finding the truth via evidence & experimentation, and correctly predicting future results (like cosmic background radiation) Religion is about telling stories which are bullshit, have zero scientific merit, and are not capable of predicting anything You're not looking at it from a fundamental perspective. Both religion and science are systems of belief/faith. You believe in science, you believe in God. Getting on a plane and while not fully understanding how it all works, requires what would qualify as 'faith'. Taking a pill when ill, requires faith in science because you have no idea how the chemicals work. Both science and religion are systems of reason. Religion is not random, it follows a logic. Both science and religion rely on assumptions. No experiment/test in science can ever be truly conclusive. You can perform a test a million times and get the exact same result every time but there is absolutely no guarantee that on the million and one attempt, you'll get the expected result. Since there is no way to test something infinitely, science assumes a particular result to be true after a finite number of tests. That is why nothing in science is set in stone, theories that were once thought to be complete can still be improved upon as more tests are performed and new findings are uncovered. we first describe what is science and what is religion. Science is basing on the fact and has its own experiment to prove something. conducting a scientific experiment is a good thing to prove something that has to be proven. while religion, some are true and science also proved that some of the saids in the bible was true but some is just cant proved. they just believe it by faith. Same with science theory. Science theory is not known to be factual. If it were, it would be science law and not science theory. Anyone who believes that science theory is factual has a science religion in that belief. Science theories are validated by a direct observation. No belief is required. When science theories are validated by direct observation, they become science laws. If they are not validated, they remain theories, because the observations shows that they are wrong, or because the observation is insufficient. Therefore, there are no science theories that are validated by direct observation... only science laws... because they were always science laws, and it is our weak observation that made us think that they were theories. Theories like Big Bang and Black Hole are theories that will never be able to be validated by direct observation... BB because there never will be any certain observation of it, and BH because the observation is always tainted by its incompleteness or by other possible explanations for what is observed. Both should be relegated to the realm of non-theories. Believing these theories and other theories like them to be true, when there is no way to tell if they are true, is religion. |
|
|
|
Ending the hoax: Team Trump removes all references to 'climate change' on Whitehouse.gov web 
During the campaign, then-GOP nominee Donald J. Trump said he was not convinced that so-called "manmade global warming" and "climate change" was real, pointing out that instead of being "settled science," there was plenty of conflicting information out there (not to mention outright fraudulent manipulations of temperature data).
As president, Trump's position appears to be consistent with his skepticism.
Shortly after being inaugurated on Friday, the official Whitehouse.gov web site was scrubbed of all references to climate change. See the difference here.
During the Obama administration, the official White House site carried an information piece titled, "A Historic Commitment to Protecting the Environment and Addressing the Impacts of Climate Change," which explained the former president's commitment to policies that were ostensibly designed to reverse human impact on the climate through industrialization and modernization.
Obama, like all climate change hoaxers, claimed that it was the 'biggest threat to our children' than nuclear war or terrorism, and he regularly trotted out "data" that his federal bureaucracy claimed was "proof" that a) the Earth's climate is "changing" and b) it's because too many cows fart and too many Americans drive SUVs.
But Trump—and a host of genuinely independent scientists and climatologists interested in real data—has never bought into the hype. What's more, he and millions of Americans watched as Obama's business and economic policies destroyed jobs and opportunity because they were based on something more akin to a religion. (RELATED: How are 'they' fooling us today? Find out at Hoax.news)
"Climate skeptics are thrilled that one of the very first visible changes of the transition of power between President Obama and President Trump is the booting of 'climate change' from the White House website," said a statement from Climate Depot, a project of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, or CFACT, which documents climate change hoaxes and phony data. "Trump is truly going to make science great again and reject the notion that humans are the control knob of the climate and UN treaties and EPA regulations can somehow regulate temperature and storminess. Welcome to the era of sound science!"
While the Obama-era climate change page has been taken down, the Trump administration has uploaded the president's "America First Energy Plan" to the Whitehouse.gov site in its place.
"Energy is an essential part of American life and a staple of the world economy. The Trump Administration is committed to energy policies that lower costs for hardworking Americans and maximize the use of American resources, freeing us from dependence on foreign oil," the plan says. "For too long, we've been held back by burdensome regulations on our energy industry. President Trump is committed to eliminating harmful and unnecessary policies such as the Climate Action Plan and the Waters of the U.S. rule. Lifting these restrictions will greatly help American workers, increasing wages by more than $30 billion over the next 7 years."
The plan also notes that "sound" energy policy must begin with the acknowledgement that the United States has vast, untapped energy reserves that have been placed under federal 'protection' for decades by previous administrations. The administration says it is committed to unlocking those reserves and embracing the shale oil and gas "revolution" that will bring good-paying jobs to millions of Americans. (RELATED: What's going on with American energy? Find out at Power.news).
|
|
|
|
What?! They let you out of jail? |
|
|
|
There is no creation without a mastermind or someone with the bigger picture
What about the big bang theory?
If the Bible is a book of facts, then let us look at these "facts".
As your bible states:
"God creates Adam and Eve"
Adam and Eve have Children
These children grow into adults and have their own children.
As you need both male and female to produce children.... Adam and Eve's family commit incest.
I always thought that their children were Cain and Abel. How did they reproduce? Adam and Eve had many children. Eve probably lived 400 to 600 years or more. Adam lived well over 900 years. At one child a year, that was 400 or 500 for Eve. If Adam took other wives, that may have been many more. When you consider that these children might have started having children at age 20 - they were almost as healthy as Adam and Eve - look at how fast the world could fill up in just a couple hundred years. So Adam may have had many wives.... if Adam and Eve were the original 2... then they had to have had children which Adam could then take for wives.... So you admit the story of Adam and Eve is about incest. Thanks BADecker for admitting religion and the bible is corrupt. LOL! You are so funny. Where did Eve come from? She was made from a rib that was taken from Adam's body. Incest is nothing. You simply avoid looking at perfection and near perfection because you are so corrupt. Incest didn't become wrong until after the Great Flood of Noah's day. The reason for making it "illegal" was the failure, the devolution, of the human race into something that barely approximated the perfection of pre-flood times. But you, all you want to do is continue into deeper depravity. That's why you try to continually make God and the Bible out to be bad. Well, go ahead. Become more depraved. It will bring about your demise, and nobody will miss you. I think I'll pass on introducing you to my daughters. I'd kind of like them to have pubic hair before they become pregnant. I bet when you introduce people to your wife and sister there's only one girl standing there, right? Your poor daughters. They have you for a father. And how did you guess about my wife and sister? My sister lives a thousand miles away. Introductions are over the phone. |
|
|
|
The Blockchain Matters More than the President Then the price goes down, and it's radio silence again, but for people who complain that their investment hasn't panned out.
What's going on here is the classic pattern. Non-specialists buy high (because of rising public attention) and sell, and then fail to buy low (because low prices don't make the news). It's no different with cryptocurrency than it is with any other stock.
What's difficult for people to understand is that far more is at stake with Bitcoin than your investment portfolio. Anyone who thinks of this innovation merely as a chance for riches has completely misconstrued the significance of what we are dealing with here.
Still, every new technology, even revolutionary ones like railroads or flight, must enter our lives through real-time market experience, with all its trials and errors, failures and success, legit companies and frauds, along with investors who get burned and those who make it big. Read more at https://fee.org/articles/the-blockchain-matters-more-than-the-president/.
|
|
|
|
Private moon rovers may visit the Apollo 17 landing site The Apollo 17 landing site has been abandoned since the last lunar astronauts went home in 1972. Now the site could get its first visitor in 44 years, as private companies race to the moon in the Google Lunar Xprize competition. A German team known as the PartTimeScientists plans to send its rovers to the Apollo 17 landing site and examine the moon buggy left behind by astronauts Gene Cernan and Harrison Schmitt.
PartTimeScientists is the fourth team to book a flight to the moon. A rocket rideshare company called Spaceflight Inc. is handling the launch contract. Exactly which rocket it will ride on (and when) is still up in the air. Read more at http://www.popsci.com/private-moon-rovers-may-visit-apollo-17-landing-site. It seems to me that people do not knowingly repeat trips to the moon after the first glad. After all, there is even commercial interests, but all that it takes. And nobody says anything public. What is the problem. The problem might be that we never went there. It seems there is a lot of evidence that the moon shots were faked. So all the people that have shown a solid nonsense and lies. Probably cinema greatly succeeded, if this movie took off the landing Americans on the moon. About Mars will no longer speak. Although the technology is not what it used to be. But the theory of the structure of the earth completely redraw all. If we really DID go to the moon, the expense was so great that it isn't profitable to do it frequently. Otherwise we would be doing it regularly right now. Someday the expense might come down, and it might be profitable. But it won't happen until we eliminate poverty in the world. Why not? There are too many people who fight the stupidity of a moon shot while there is poverty around the world. I do not think anyone is interested in poverty, people around the world. So much lately sounded information that any rich vlazhivayut money in different projects, which do not carry an important character for humanity at this time. Even the recent statement of the colonization of Mars and preparing to fly to the planet. Google "anti poverty charities." |
|
|
|
There is no creation without a mastermind or someone with the bigger picture
What about the big bang theory?
If the Bible is a book of facts, then let us look at these "facts".
As your bible states:
"God creates Adam and Eve"
Adam and Eve have Children
These children grow into adults and have their own children.
As you need both male and female to produce children.... Adam and Eve's family commit incest.
I always thought that their children were Cain and Abel. How did they reproduce? Adam and Eve had many children. Eve probably lived 400 to 600 years or more. Adam lived well over 900 years. At one child a year, that was 400 or 500 for Eve. If Adam took other wives, that may have been many more. When you consider that these children might have started having children at age 20 - they were almost as healthy as Adam and Eve - look at how fast the world could fill up in just a couple hundred years. So Adam may have had many wives.... if Adam and Eve were the original 2... then they had to have had children which Adam could then take for wives.... So you admit the story of Adam and Eve is about incest. Thanks BADecker for admitting religion and the bible is corrupt. LOL! You are so funny. Where did Eve come from? She was made from a rib that was taken from Adam's body. Incest is nothing. You simply avoid looking at perfection and near perfection because you are so corrupt. Incest didn't become wrong until after the Great Flood of Noah's day. The reason for making it "illegal" was the failure, the devolution, of the human race into something that barely approximated the perfection of pre-flood times. But you, all you want to do is continue into deeper depravity. That's why you try to continually make God and the Bible out to be bad. Well, go ahead. Become more depraved. It will bring about your demise, and nobody will miss you. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
