Gravity is a hoax its all to do Density.  Without gravity, density wouldn't do the things that you show in this picture/diagram. Without gravity the different substances and objects in the picture would be all mixed up, located anywhere within the jar, or outside of it if there wasn't any lid on the jar. Without gravity, density wouldn't have much of any meaning at all.  |
|
|
|
FBI is a bunch of corrupt morons it seems, should've been dismantled long ago.
As long as government allows taxation rather than donation to government sponsored causes, the whole government is corrupt. |
|
|
|
Well, itīs like 250 Trillion miles away so Iīm not sure how important it is. Maybe mildly interesting for about fifteen minutes.
With our current tech, if we left today, it would take 1,078,800 years to travel the distance of 29 light years to this planet  Of course, what we see happened many years ago. And by the time the million+ years pass that it would take us to get there, there's no guessing what they would find. |
|
|
|
Is the rumor true that police and sheriff's offices are being manned by foreigners? I know that the poor black man that was killed by the pseudo policeman was this situation
Not sure what you mean. The name "Yantis" is generally a German or Dutch name, although anyone can "adopt" a name. Hadn't seen that rumor, that foreigners are involved. If they are, it stands to reason that don't know how the government in the States works. My guess about what happened is, the cops were having fun shooting at a dying bull. The bull belonged to Yantis, who was there to put it out of its misery. The cops probably ordered Yantis to not kill the bull, because they wanted to have some more "target practice" fun. When Yantis didn't obey, one of the cops became confrontational by grabing Yantis' rifle. The rifle accidentally discharged, the second cop panicked and started shooting at Yantis, the first cop became mixed up and joined his buddy cop, and since he was at point blank range, simply did not miss when he shot at Yantis. |
|
|
|
Well, itīs like 250 Trillion miles away so Iīm not sure how important it is. Maybe mildly interesting for about fifteen minutes.
Point isn't going there. Or colonizing it. It's looking at the atmosphere of the planet if it has one. Then learn more about it and how to study the atmospheres in other planets. And maybe learn ways of finding life more easily because of the influence it can have in the atmosphere. We have enough to study right here - and enough humanitarian acts to do here - without thinking about going out there, which is nearly impossible without a lot more study here.
The sooner we start visiting other planets the better. And colonizing them if possible. The alternative may be taking the same path the dinosaurs did. Better yet, stop taxing the people who don't agree with you, so it is only YOU who have to pay. If you ever get to some other planet, charge the people who weren't taxed for this, when they want to get in on your operation. Freedom, not taxation slavery. |
|
|
|
You are pretty good translating without using a translator. But try using one. You didn't answer the question. Bing translator http://www.bing.com/translator/. What's the problem now? Best regards. No problems. You didn't answer the question MakingMoneyHoney asked. That's all. I took his response to mean auntie = atheists, for some reason. Well, it wasn't my question. As long as you are comfortable with the answer. My response was only to what I understood. |
|
|
|
The beauty of this kind of fake democracy (for the cliques that run it) is that over time most people notice the blatant fakery and just give up on voting and what little of the electorate that bothers to vote more and more consists of the left side of the bell curve which of course explains how easy it is for all those psychopaths and homicidal maniacs to get to power. And with those fruitcakes in charge you can imagine that thereīs little official aversion to the same ilk running banks and other corporations funding the promotion of the former. Donīt get me started on the mass media. So you have extremes of human dysfunction feeding off each other. Itīs as American as apple pie and turkey. Unfortunately.
America is different. There is absolutely one reason why America has a police state. The police state has convinced the people that it is their king, even though it doesn't use those words. But... The founding documents of the united States show that the power is in the individual person, if he only picks it up and uses it. Look at the wording in the Declaration of Independence, the Preamble to the Constitution, the Constitution itself, and the Bill of Rights. There is no place in these where govenment takes authority over people that are not part of the government. In fact, in the Bill of Rights, Articles (Amendments) 6, 7, and 9, the rights over the goernment are maintained in the people, each person individually if necessary. Watch it in action here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twn96nj0jfw&list=PLHrkQxgz0mg6kUBciD-HIvTXByqjcIZ-D&index=10. Sure. Obama says The Constitution Is Out Dated, Dead- International Law Is Supreme then wipes butt with it. Bushie Boy said itīs a goodam useless piece of paper, wiped butt with it. The Constitution is a piece of paper. It doesn't do anything. The Constitution allows these guys to say anything that they want. There are certain things in the Constitution that these guys promised to do. One of the things is to not mess with people if they don't give government permission to mess with them. However, the Constitution isn't going to jump up and slap the naughty presidents when they do something wrong. That is up to Congress to do. In the same way, the Constitution isn't going to jump up and slap these presidents when they mess with the rights of a man or woman. The Constitution can't. It is only a piece of paper. The presidency is only an office. Whenever any of these guys does something, it is a man doing it. It is not the President doing it no matter how hard he says it is the President doing it. If the harmed man or woman doesn't get up and sue the man who sometimes acts as a president, then there is no case. It has to be man to man. When you look into Bill Clinton's affairs, you will see that Bill Clinton was faced of by several women as a man, and not as the President. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_misconduct_allegations_against_Bill_Clinton: Paula Jones brought a sexual harassment lawsuit against Clinton while he was president. Clinton argued that as a sitting president, he should not be vulnerable to a civil suit of this nature. The case landed in the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that "Deferral of this litigation until petitioner's Presidency ends is not constitutionally required." The point is, if there is a valid case brought against a man in man-to-man style, government can't intervene with some kind of immunity thing. All the cases where a person has been stopped because of governmental immunity, have been cases where a person brought the claim against a government official rather than against the man. |
|
|
|
You are pretty good translating without using a translator. But try using one. You didn't answer the question. Bing translator http://www.bing.com/translator/. What's the problem now? Best regards. No problems. You didn't answer the question MakingMoneyHoney asked. That's all. |
|
|
|
The above (previous post) is unclear BS. The point to focus on is simple. Slavery vs. freedom. Islam is the worst kind of slavery, because people can live with it. And that is what the whole thing is about. Probably there isn't any form of slavery that is as capable in every way as is Islam. Why donīt we make it even simpler. Black and white, no grey. Good vs. evil. Those who arenīt with us are against us and will be blown to smithereens. The big guy in the sky says so. We know that dictators are quick to choose aggression, while free nations strive to resolve differences in peace./George W.Bushs Address to the United Nations General Assembly, September 21, 2004. We can't do that. Why not? Because then we have to bow down to some religion. Or else we have to suggest that people can make up their own ideals of what is good and what is evil. If you want to get right down to it, freedom is to allow others to do anything as long as they don't harm you or damage your property. Harming you or damaging your property is the beginnings of slavery. But idiots vote for nutcases that among other insane things bow down to religion. And do so even in the freakin White House. This Bush screwball stated numerous times that the big guy in the sky told him to attack Iraq. Itīs a matter of historical record. Of course as usual with criminals and psychopaths the story changed. First it was weapons of mass destruction, then that and terrorists. He also was avenging for his daddy and so on. But after the scam had been pulled off and everything was heading straight to hell there in Iraq he was following orders from up above. And the weapons of mass destruction werenīt mentioned anymore. Now another batch of idiots are dying to vote for the crazy brother of this nutball who plans to use the nutball as foreign policy adviser! Un freakin believable. A lot of people understand the mess. More are coming to understand it. Many have been trying to change it for many years. The answer is not to change it. The answer is to let it die. Here's a peek at how to do it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twn96nj0jfw&list=PLHrkQxgz0mg6kUBciD-HIvTXByqjcIZ-D&index=10 |
|
|
|
Who is your auntie and what is the problem?
If that's a problem, the problem is non-believers (atheists - atheism). I thought this was pretty clear. Best regards. You are pretty good translating without using a translator. But try using one. You didn't answer the question. Bing translator http://www.bing.com/translator/. |
|
|
|
Damn rats.
But good eating if you know how to cook them, and if you can catch them without getting all chewed up.  |
|
|
|
The above (previous post) is unclear BS. The point to focus on is simple. Slavery vs. freedom. Islam is the worst kind of slavery, because people can live with it. And that is what the whole thing is about. Probably there isn't any form of slavery that is as capable in every way as is Islam. Why donīt we make it even simpler. Black and white, no grey. Good vs. evil. Those who arenīt with us are against us and will be blown to smithereens. The big guy in the sky says so. We know that dictators are quick to choose aggression, while free nations strive to resolve differences in peace./George W.Bushs Address to the United Nations General Assembly, September 21, 2004. We can't do that. Why not? Because then we have to bow down to some religion. Or else we have to suggest that people can make up their own ideals of what is good and what is evil. If you want to get right down to it, freedom is to allow others to do anything as long as they don't harm you or damage your property. Harming you or damaging your property is the beginnings of slavery. |
|
|
|
Getting out of the believing is BS, as well. How do we know? We know because the complexity of the universe is proving that finding facts is way more difficult than we had thought. If it were not difficult, science would have found a way to allow us to live for a thousand years by now. Instead of focusing on facts, science has turned to emphasizing theories that are not facts, and making them appear to be facts. This has turned even science into a religion. If I happen to sensationalize some facts, this doesn't mean that others can't create thier own views. I don't have any control over whatever views other people have. Perhaps you should stop sensationalizing your view that my supposed sensationalizing of some facts is changing peoples' views. I'm with you BADecker, but you have a problem with Authority and I have a problem with my auntie. Best regards. And you have a problem with understanding what authority is. Wake up and see that authority rests first with God, and then with anyone else as long as he doesn't harm somebody or damage the other person's property. You are entirely welcome to make a Pope to be your leader. You have the authority to do that. But I don't have to. As a man, God gave me authority as strong as any other man or Pope, as long as neither of us harms the other or damages the property of the other. Wake up. |
|
|
|
Violence is what should concern people not the tool used in the violence. Yes ban guns and shootings decrease but violence not
Banning guns is a lie. When governments ban guns, they only ban them among their citizens. The governments still have guns. Most of the governments are filled with criminals. You can tell by the fact that it is the governments that make the wars. What does this mean? It means that when governments ban guns, they are pushing a war against their own citizens, to execute them or make slaves of them. If you as a non-governmental citizen allow banning of guns, you either become a slave from it, or you die. Using civilian firearms in a manner which would counter government chartered prerogatives would be a big deal and the risks of being killed would be very high. Only in extreme circumstances is there any realistic possibility that it would be done by a non-trivial percentage of citizens. Thus leads to a question: What, exactly, is the government envisioning that there is such a focus on dis-arming the population? It's hard to ignore that as the focus on civilian dis-armament intensifies, programs to arm police and other agencies such as the EPA are being ratcheted up, and the tactical capabilities they are being supplied with are impressive. Call these questions crazy paranoia if you like. To me it seems appropriate to apply the ' precautionary principle' and keep my eyes wide open. Government doesn't have the control that it advertises that it has. The other side of your question might help find the answer. If any government wanted to protect against terrorism, all they would have to do is arm their populace. So, why doesn't government take the time to arm the the people, and teach them good gun safety? Instead, many of the various kinds of criminal charges that have been brought against the people in the past, are now being brought as terrorism charges. The people might lose if government decided to fight them directly, but then government might lose their ability to fight. No more people to work the manufacturing of government war machines. It's a risk that government isn't willing to take right now. Arms in the possession of the people is keeping government at bay, one way or another, although not perfectly. |
|
|
|
An interesting thought about this is, if they spent this much to break TOR, then TOR must be very strong. In addition, they didn't break TOR. They only were able to find some of the people who use TOR. Now, true, this info could connect users with certain websites. But it still doesn't say what the users were doin there. It only gives the FBI locations to set up their surveillance... at peoples' homes. Use VPN's on top of TOR. Use TOR VPNs to mix signals, something like you would use Bitcoin mixers. If u use TOR and VPN, are you then compltely anonymous? People say that.. But ask Dread Pirate Roberts. FBI till now don't want to say how found him. Almost sure they use some illegal method to truck him. I don't have the article, but it was through his carelessness. One of their people accidentally found an IP address that DPR didn't protect properly. They followed it to the Silkroad login page for verification. The IP address gave the location. They went there and found the host - was it in Norway or Iceland? It still wasn't easy, but it was through Ross's carelessness. Host was from Iceland. They truck him through not protected captcha (!!!) - this was some unofficial information. Everyone believes in what he wants .. Ross should have made his own captcha. It isn't that difficult, you know... especially if you are enough of a hacker that you could run a site like Silkroad. |
|
|
|
The above (previous post) is unclear BS. The point to focus on is simple. Slavery vs. freedom. Islam is the worst kind of slavery, because people can live with it. And that is what the whole thing is about. Probably there isn't any form of slavery that is as capable in every way as is Islam. |
|
|
|
Atheism is a religion. It's just the belief that no God exists. Any person claiming to be athirst and hate religion is being very hypocritical.
Yes. A person that says, "I am an atheist," and then never talks or thinks about it again, isn't a very good atheist. Likewise, a person who says, " I belong to XXXXXX religion," and then never takes part in the religion, is not really part of that religion. The point? The more an atheist pushes the idea of atheism, the more he makes it to be a religion for himself. Yea, might be true fo the majority of the atheist's but not for all . I dont go and convince people to become atheist, but those religious people do the bullshitting everywhere. Since all the world hangs on religon, because almost all the people in the worls are religous in some way, people must be bullshit, right? YES, majority doesn't makes something right or wrong ,it just proves the strength and the most probable outcome . people are bullshit and will be bullshit unless they unchain their mind and get out of their believing . no need to sensastionalize your view's, let people create their own. Getting out of the believing is BS, as well. How do we know? We know because the complexity of the universe is proving that finding facts is way more difficult than we had thought. If it were not difficult, science would have found a way to allow us to live for a thousand years by now. Instead of focusing on facts, science has turned to emphasizing theories that are not facts, and making them appear to be facts. This has turned even science into a religion. If I happen to sensationalize some facts, this doesn't mean that others can't create thier own views. I don't have any control over whatever views other people have. Perhaps you should stop sensationalizing your view that my supposed sensationalizing of some facts is changing peoples' views. |
|
|
|
Violence is what should concern people not the tool used in the violence. Yes ban guns and shootings decrease but violence not
Banning guns is a lie. When governments ban guns, they only ban them among their citizens. The governments still have guns. Most of the governments are filled with criminals. You can tell by the fact that it is the governments that make the wars. What does this mean? It means that when governments ban guns, they are pushing a war against their own citizens, to execute them or make slaves of them. If you as a non-governmental citizen allow banning of guns, you either become a slave from it, or you die. |
|
|
|
Atheism is a religion. It's just the belief that no God exists. Any person claiming to be athirst and hate religion is being very hypocritical.
Yes. A person that says, "I am an atheist," and then never talks or thinks about it again, isn't a very good atheist. Likewise, a person who says, " I belong to XXXXXX religion," and then never takes part in the religion, is not really part of that religion. The point? The more an atheist pushes the idea of atheism, the more he makes it to be a religion for himself. Yea, might be true fo the majority of the atheist's but not for all . I dont go and convince people to become atheist, but those religious people do the bullshitting everywhere. Since all the world hangs on religon, because almost all the people in the worls are religous in some way, people must be bullshit, right? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
