Dating relation citat

2020-maj-07 - Utforska zanahamehs anslagstavla 'Sunda relationer' på Pinterest. Visa fler idéer om Sunda relationer, Relationer, Inspirerande citat. At the start of a relationship, everything seems so perfect but as time goes by you start to face relationship problems. And relationships become hard to sustain and finding the perfect balance to maintain becomes even harder. Citation Machine® helps students and professionals properly credit the information that they use. Cite sources in APA, MLA, Chicago, Turabian, and Harvard for free. Din vän träffar dina ex citat. Arab dating gratis. Hvordan heie id aurus 3 xdating. Din vän dating ditt ex citat Kaparot online dating. Din vän dating ditt ex citat Er kim chiu og xian lim dating. Dating over 50 sr-afrika. Relativ lder dating geologi. Hammond m3 leslie krok upp fredag kväll krok upp ce-inseamna cuvantul dating. 2019-okt-25 - Utforska Peter Jörnebrants anslagstavla 'Citat tavla' på Pinterest. Visa fler idéer om Citat, Inspirerande citat, Roliga citat. Welcome to an overview of “ What is MLA Format?” in relation to paper formatting. You’ll find in-depth guidelines, examples, and visual samples to help you easily format your paper. This guide does not serve as a reference for MLA citation format. For help determining the proper structure for citing, refer to the other guides on EasyBib.com. Ordspråk Roliga Skyltar Roliga Citat Skämt Svenska Roligt Tankar Dating Relation Ge alltid 100 % på jobbet! Det gäller förstås att alltid ge 100 % på jobbet. 2018-maj-06 - Utforska Noelia Marias anslagstavla 'Citat om relationer' på Pinterest. Visa fler idéer om Citat om relationer, Relationer, Citat. The Relation Between Parentification and Dating Communication: The Role of Romantic Attachment-Related Cognitions Show all authors. Amber R. Madden 1. Amber R. Madden . Psychology Department, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA See all articles by this author. Search Google Scholar for this author 21% of internet users agree with the statement that “people who use online dating sites are desperate,” an 8-point decline from the 29% who said so in 2005. Additionally, 32% of internet users agree with the statement that “online dating keeps people from settling down because they always have options for people to date.” This is the ...

Singh v. Pythagoras Innovation Academies, 2020 MISC 1

2020.09.20 14:25 JacobInAustin Singh v. Pythagoras Innovation Academies, 2020 MISC 1

Chesapeake State Court of Appeals

Singh v. Pythagoras Innovation Academies

Decided on May 18th, 2020

Judge Lemaire delivered the opinion of the Court.
¶ 1. Mr. Parkash Singh argues on appeal that the Circuit Court of the City of Baltimore erred in finding that appellee Pythagoras Innovation Academies did not violate the First Amendment or the Protecting Religious Expression Act by expelling Mr. Singh as a student due to his possession of an unsheathed kirpan. We disagree and affirm the Court’s decision.
I. Background
¶ 2. The record shows that Appellant was enrolled at Pythagoras Innovation Academies, a public charter school located in Baltimore’s Charles Village neighborhood, from 2017 until his expulsion in 2020.
¶ 3. Mr. Singh, a student in his last year of high school, is a devout, practicing member of the Sikh faith, a religion founded by Guru Nanak that originates from the Indian subcontinent in the 15th century. To many in the Sikh faith, the wearing of the kirpan, a ceremonial sword of various shapes and sizes, is a religious command. See Eleanor M. Nesbit, Sikhism: A Very Short Introduction (2016), http://tiny.cc/ejgxsz. Mr. Singh subscribes to this religious command and has, since the age of seven, worn the kirpan in his daily life. His kirpan is a small dagger with a four-inch blade, sheathed in a metalic cover that is attached at all times to his belt.
¶ 4. The issue of Mr. Singh’s kirpan is one which has confronted the school on several occasions. Upon enrollment as a sophomore transfer student, the school administration reached an agreement with Mr. Singh’s parents that he be allowed to wear the ceremonial blade so long as it remained fully sheathed on all occasions while on school premises. This arrangement went without incident for the first year of Mr. Singh’s time at the school, but this changed on October 22nd, 2018, when he unsheathed the kirpan during recess after a friend asked to see the weapon. For this offense, Mr. Singh was suspended for five days and received a stern warning that a repeat offense may lead to more severe consequences.
¶ 5. The second incident, and the subject of the instant action, occurred on March 26, 2020. During a kickboxing unit in physical education class, Mr. Singh performed a high kick and, in the process, the kirpan came loose from its cover and fell onto the ground in plain sight of his classmates. Citing student safety concerns, the instructor attempted to confiscate the kirpan for the remainder of the class period, but Mr. Singh refused to surrender the blade on account of his religious commandments and was consequently dismissed from classes for the remainder of the day.
¶ 6. On March 28, Mr. Singh was summoned to a meeting with Principal Samantha Chow and informed that he was in violation of the Code of Student Conduct and, this being the second infraction, he would be expelled at the end of the academic year. The provision of the school rules cited by Ms. Chow reads:
¶ 6A. “As a Pythagoras Academies Spartan, you are expected to show your school spirit and always behave in accordance to these rules. Don’t forget: our Spartan values are equality, cooperation and nonviolence. “
¶ 7. The first rule is that Spartans don’t hurt others. Weapons are not allowed on school premises under any circumstances without the written approval of the Principal. This includes any blade, explosive and firearm, whether operable or otherwise, along with any non-weapons being used as weapons (see Appendix). If you break this rule, you will be suspended from school for no less than one month and may face expulsion at the discretion of the Principal.
¶ 8. The Appendix to the Code further clarifies that: “A weapon is any tool that can be used to hurt another student or destroy school property. Weapons include, but are not limited to, guns (including fake, toy or “bb” guns), bullets, knives (including pocket knives and pen knives), swords, daggers, shanks, explosives, razors, blades, bats, clubs, brass knuckles, bombs, fireworks/firecrackers, “tasers” and any other tool or device that could be reasonably confused for a weapon.”
¶ 9. The trial court held that Mr. Singh’s claim implicated a First Amendment right and, applying strict scrutiny, found that the protection of student safety was a compelling government interest and that a ban on weapons on school grounds was narrowly tailored to further this goal. The court rejected Mr. Singh’s argument that a religious exemption would be a less restrictive means towards the same goal, finding that exemptions risked undermining the integrity of a weapons ban. With regard to the state law claim, the Court determined that, the presence of a weapon being sufficient per se to establish the existence of a threat to others, the Act does not protect Mr. Singh’s right to the kirpan on school premises.
II. Analysis
¶ 10. An appellate court reviews questions of law de novo. Rollins v. Commonwealth, 554 S.E.2d 99, 102; 37 Va. App. 73, 78 (2001). In the instant case, we are presented on appeal with two distinct claims: that Mr. Singh’s expulsion violated the First Amendment, or alternatively violated the state Protecting Religious Expression Act (PRE Act). Both are pure questions of law, and neither party disputes the evidentiary facts established at trial.
A. Free Exercise Clause
¶ 11. Appellant first challenges the trial court’s determination that the school did not infringe upon the First Amendment in expelling Mr. Singh. Citing the standard established in Carey v. Dixie Inn, 101 M.S.Ct. 112; 1 M.Slip.Op. 64; 2020 US 1, the court held that the school’s actions must be held to strict scrutiny, but that the school’s policy is both narrowly-tailored and furthers a compelling interest.
¶ 12. The trial court’s use of the strict scrutiny standard is inappropriate. Although Dixie Inn purportedly establishes strict scrutiny as the standard of review for rules of general applicability, 101 M.S.Ct. at 112; 1 M.Slip.Op., at 65; 2020 US 1, ¶ 9 (“even a neutral law of general applicability must meet the standard of strict scrutiny where the law substantially burdens the free exercise of religion”) (citations omitted), the Court immediately proceeds in its analysis to ignore its own finding and shift the burden of proof onto the plaintiff. Ibid (“[Plaintiff] failed to demonstrate that the the [sic] compelling government interest in combating discrimination can be advanced while allowing for religious exceptions.”) (citations omitted). This is consistent with no form of strict scrutiny that we are aware of, since, of course, longstanding precedent dictates that the burden of proof ought to fall squarely on the state. Horen v. Commonwealth, 479 S.E.2d 553, 559-60; 23 Va. App. 735, 748 (1997), accord, In re Dismemberment Abortion Ban Act, 101 M.S. Ct. 106 (“Our precedent does not place the burden upon the plaintiff’s [sic] in these cases.”).
¶ 13. We can only conclude from this contradiction, since we are precluded from entertaining the possibility that the Supreme Court has made a mistake, see generally Dismemberment Abortion Ban Act, supra (“Obviously the Court below cannot overrule our precedent, regardless of whether it thinks it is out of date.”), that the reference to strict scrutiny in Dixie Inn was merely dicta and that Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990), remains controlling precedent.
¶ 14. Under the Smith standard, “generally applicable, religion-neutral laws that have the effect of burdening a particular religious practice need not be justified by a compelling governmental interest.” 494 U.S., at 892. There is little contention that a prohibition of weapons on school grounds is such a neutral, generally-applicable regulation. Consequently, the regulation at hand does “not require heightened First Amendment scrutiny even though [it diminishes] some people's ability to practice their religion.” Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc., 501 U.S. 560, 579 (1991), accord, Free Locke v. Davey, 540 U.S. 712, 721 (2004).
¶ 15. The permissive tier of rational basis review requires “only that the classification challenged be rationally related to a legitimate state interest.” New Orleans v. Dukes, 427 U.S. 297, 303 (1976). We begin our analysis by noting the well-established proposition that protecting the physical safety of minors is a legitimate, even compelling, state interest. Cf. Sable Communications v. FCC, 492 U.S. 115, 126 (1989). The rational connection between this interest and the school’s weapons policy, in our estimation, is self-evident: eliminating weapons from school premises promotes the safety of students, since weapons are associated with increased violence. See Thomas R. Simon, et al., Students who carry weapons to highschool: comparison with other weapon-carriers, 24 Journal of Adolescent Health 340 (1999), http://tiny.cc/xjgxsz.
¶ 16. The dissent asks us to cast away the well-established foundations of First Amendment jurisprudence in favor of so-called ‘common sense,’ but “common sense is a collective noun, like religion: there is not just one common sense.” Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks (1971). In our society of laws, we cannot countenance the proposition that the Constitution dictates that the esoteric belief systems of certain subsets of the population should override general, religiously-neutral laws designed to protect the public safety. And as we have explained above, we find the idea that the vague and confused line of reasoning in Dixie Inn’s analysis supersedes the clear command of Smith to be unpersuasive.
¶ 17. As Mr. Singh’s expulsion did not violate the Free Exercise Clause and the school policy in question clears rational basis review, we conclude that the First Amendment claim must fail.
B. Protecting Religious Expression Act
¶ 18. Appellant further challenges the trial court’s determination that the school’s decision falls within the exclusion clause of the Protecting Religious Expression Act. The Act at section 3(a) provides that:
¶ 18A. No school, governmental agency or non-governmental organization that receives either full or partial funding from the Commonwealth may institute any ordinance, rule or regulation that prohibits, restricts or penalizes the wearing of any garments or accessories that are congruent with genuinely-held religious beliefs.
¶ 19. The Act further includes an exclusion clause which reads: This subsection does not apply to garments or accessories that are obscene or otherwise pose a threat to the safety of people around them. Schools should always make accommodations to serve the religious needs of citizens of Chesapeake in any way a reasonable person shall identify to meet the needs while respecting safety [sic] of others.
¶ 20. We first address the question of whether the kirpan falls within the protection of section 3(a)—the answer is undoubtedly yes. As previously established, the kirpan is an accessory that is fundamental to the practice of Sikhism, and it is undisputed by either party that Mr. Singh is a devout and genuine follower of the faith. His kirpan unquestionably constitutes an accessory congruent with a genuinely-held belief.
¶ 21. The more difficult question is whether the school policy is covered by the exclusion clause. As we explain below, we believe that it does.
¶ 22. As a matter of law, a dagger is a deadly weapon because of its extreme potential for harm and lack of other common uses. Cf. Floyd v. Commonwealth, 62 S.E.2d 6, 10; 191 Va. 674, 683 (1950) (an axe is a deadly weapon per se). The kirpan falls within this category, and its mere presence in a school environment thus poses a threat to the safety of other students. Consequently, we hold that the restriction of the kirpan falls outside the protections of the PRE Act and the school’s policy is lawful.
¶ 23. The dissent argues that the kirpan should not be treated as an ordinary knife because the Sikh faith does not permit adherents to employ the blade as a weapon. Though Mr. Singh’s religious convictions may prohibit him from using the knife offensively, its presence on school premises nonetheless tangibly increases the danger to other students. For instance, the kirpan may fall into the hands of another student with no such ethical command or, as occurred in the instant case, it may accidentally become unsheathed and potentially cause injury to others.
¶ 24. The dissent further argues that our interpretation of the exclusion clause ignores its second sentence concerning accommodations. In accordance with elementary principles of statutory interpretation, we take the Act at its plain meaning—the language of the second sentence, which begins with the distinctly advisory language “schools should,” is merely a recommendation that schools are requested to follow. As it is clearly non-binding upon the school, we decline to read compulsion into the Assembly’s suggestion.
III. Conclusion
¶ 25. For the foregoing reasons, we hold that the school’s dismissal of Mr. Singh did not violate the First Amendment or the Protecting Religious Expression Act. Accordingly, we affirm.
Judge Alcaldo, dissenting.
¶ 26. “[Justice] ever has been, and ever will be, pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuit.” Alexis de Tocqueville, 1 Democracy in America (1835). In today’s decision, the majority has pursued justice blindly to the ends of the world, only to lose at the end of its journey one of the most cherished liberties of our nation: the freedom of religion.
¶ 27. Deference to public authorities must stop where common sense begins. In the case before us today, everyone agrees on the essential premise: that the kirpan is a sacred symbol to the Sikh faith, that Mr. Singh is not a threat to public safety, and that the events that led to expulsion were an unfortunate accident. Common sense dictates one outcome; the Court has chosen the other.
I.
¶ 28. The trouble begins with the majority’s straitjacketed interpretation of the First Amendment, which ignores not only modern precedent but also lacks the most basic common sense.
¶ 29. “That they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights…” From the start of the Republic, Americans have looked to faith for guidance. Of course, a nation as expansive and diverse as the United States is home to various disparate groups, each with its own unique creeds and beliefs. The Founding Fathers, and indeed every generation of Americans since, has consequently seen it proper to enshrine within our Constitution the “freedom of every person to worship God in his own way.” President Franklin D. Roosevelt, State of the Union Address (Jan. 6, 1941). “In fact, whoever has really practised a religion knows very well that it is the cult which gives rise to these impressions of joy, of interior peace, of serenity, of enthusiasm which are, for the believer, an experimental proof of his beliefs.” Émile Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life (1912).
¶ 30. Religious freedom is therefore one of the most sacred liberties of the American republic, a fact recognized by the Supreme Court when it reaffirmed the strict scrutiny standard in religious discrimination cases, sub silentio with In re Stopping Abuse and Indoctrination of Children Act of 2015, 100 M.S.Ct. 111 (2015), and explicitly in Dixie Inn. The majority’s reliance on Smith is misplaced in light of this more recent precedent, as some of our sister courts have observed. Carey v. Dixie Inn, No. 19-21 (Dx. 2019), http://tiny.cc/wkgxsz, rev’ on other grounds, 101 M.S.Ct. 113; 1 M.Slip.Op. 64; 2020 US 1 (2020) (“Smith is simply no longer an applicable test.”).
¶ 31. Strict scrutiny is the “most rigorous and exacting standard of constitutional review.” Miller v. Johnson, 515 U.S. 900, 920 (1995). To survive strict scrutiny, “the law must be a necessary element for achieving a compelling governmental interest.” Mahan v. NCPAC, 315 S.E.2d 829, 832; 227 Va. 330, 336 (1984) (citing Greenberg v. Bolger, 497 F. Supp. 756, 778 (E.D.N.Y. 1980)). In turn, necessity requires the law to be “the least burdensome means available for attaining the governmental objective in question.” Id. I do not question the majority’s observation that the state has a compelling interest in protecting student safety, but, in my estimation, Appellee has failed to demonstrate that the presence of the kirpan has a real—not merely speculative—impact on the safety of students, and thus that a religious exemption from the rule would undermine the objective. Ergo, the school policy’s restriction on the kirpan does not materially improve upon the advancement of the interest in question and fails the narrow tailoring prong of the test.
¶ 32. As the school policy as applied to the instant case cannot withstand strict scrutiny, I would hold that Mr. Singh was deprived of his free exercise rights under the First Amendment.
II.
¶ 33. If the majority is unwilling to accord the protection of the First Amendment to Mr. Singh, one would be excused at least to believe that the Protecting Religious Expression Act, an act expressly passed by the Assembly to protect religious accessories, would still afford him relief. However, in a cruel twist, the majority has clipped the law’s wings before it could even take off by constricting its erstwhile expansive protections into oblivion.
¶ 34. The majority’s holding that all knives are per se deadly weapons is not only conclusory, it is incorrect in light of our longstanding precedent that “whether a weapon is to be regarded as deadly often depends more on the manner in which it has been used than on its intrinsic character.” Pannill v. Commonwealth, 38 S.E.2d 457, 462; 185 Va. 244, 254 (1946). The kirpan is no mere dagger because its dominant use is as a religious icon and its offensive use is strictly prohibited by Sikh teachings. To a devout Sikh, a kirpan is no more a weapon than a box cutter is to a mailman, as it “is worn in devotion to truth and should only be drawn as a last resort in a righteous cause.” W. Owen Cole, Understanding Sikhism (2004), http://tiny.cc/tkgxsz.
¶ 35. Moreover, the ruling today ignores the clear intent of the Assembly that the protections of the PRE Act ought to be interpreted liberally. The Act’s exception clause provides that “[s]chools should always make accommodations to serve the religious needs of citizens of Chesapeake in any way a reasonable person shall identify to meet the needs while respecting safety of others.” Far from the majority’s interpretation that the remotest sign of danger triggers the exception clause, the legislature stipulated that a balancing test be applied between religious freedom and student safety interests in the eyes of a reasonable person.
¶ 36. The religious freedom interest claimed by Mr. Singh under the Act is real, reasonable and simply palpable. A reasonable person would clearly understand the spiritual importance of the kirpan to any faithful Sikh, and acknowledge the deep ethical quandary that would emerge if Mr. Singh was forced to choose between his faith and his education. In contrast, a reasonable person would assess the security risk to be low, as Mr. Singh is a model student and responsible kirpan owner who has attended Pythagoras Academies for three years with little incident, beside a single youthful misunderstanding of the limitation of the rules. His possession of a small ceremonial blade, even if briefly exposed in an accident, would create at the very most an apprehended sense of danger—one that cannot outweigh the grave injury to Mr. Singh’s religious freedom if the school’s unjust expulsion is allowed to stand today. Moreover, given that the blade is at all times attached in a metallic constraint to Mr. Singh’s belt, I find the majority’s conjecture that a danger to student safety may arise from the kirpan falling into the possession of another student to be fanciful.
III.
¶ 36. The Court’s decision today places unthinking and legalistic adherence to the letter of the law over reason, common sense and the plain intent of the Assembly, legitimizing a clear instance of discrimination against a religious minority in our Commonwealth’s schools.
¶ 37. I respectfully dissent.
submitted by JacobInAustin to ModelOpinions [link] [comments]


2020.09.19 02:18 ginlilly Online Class tips from an experienced ADHD adult

Since so many people are switching to remote learning and getting through school normally is already hard enough for people with ADHD, I thought I'd make a little list of some of the ways I've figured out over the years to make it way easier (I'm in my 4th year of online college). Please also ask questions or share your own advice. And, remember that you can do this!
Managing deadlines/due dates: You probably have classes that open modules and expect assignments to be turned in on varying days of the week. (This is helpful for staying on top of your workload even if that isn't the case for you). For me, organizing tasks in my head like that is impossible, because the classes just kinda swirl over each other and I never know where to start. To combat that, I take an index card or a sticky note and take a minute to go through my gradebooks/class modules and write down assignments in chronological order of due dates every week. That might look like this:
Then when I sit down to work on things it's 10x easier to think "alright, it's the 18th, I need to turn in my paper for history, then the next thing I should work on is anthropology." Make a little routine out of looking at your list and checking the current date everyday when you start studying. Doing this also helps me not goof around and lose track of time so that I have to scramble to turn something in on time later.
Say it's Sept 16 and I've already turned in my history paper; I could take a break because my next thing isn't until the 22nd, but with this list it's easier to visualize workload - I can see that my next thing is the entire week's lesson for anthropology so I know that I can't just jump on at 8pm on the 22nd and turn it in real quick like I could with a discussion board post, and then just two days after that I have the whole mod for psych, so I should start anth now and start psych before the 22nd so I'm not pressed. If you need a little more support than that, try writing down the day you intend to do the assignment before the due date; then you can budget your time more and you have some cushion if you happen to fall behind or something takes longer than you think it will (ex - Sept 16 - work on HS paper; due Sept 18). I also write out a quick list of every actual individual task I need to do for each unit of each subject, then cross them out as I go so I can see how much tangible work I have left to do. This includes reading articles, taking quizzes, watching videos, whatever. It helps me absorb the information because it solidifies things as learning material.
Taking notes: This is super subjective and depends on you as a person but I'll talk about how I do it. Get a separate notebook or section of your notebook for each subject so that they don't jumble together and it's easier to find what you want to look at later. I just have one big notebook with tabs for each class. Divide that section by chapter, unit, module, or however your teacheprofessor chunks the class (or lump topics together by due date). Divide the unit by each individual task/source and make those titles stand out. For example: Ch. 1 Textbook Notes, Ch. 1 Lecture 1a "Thinking Anthropologically" Notes, Ch. 1 Charles C. Mann Article Notes, Unit 1 Test Study Guide. I draw boxes around my titles so that I can easily find the piece I'm looking for later. The actual format of the notes is really up to you. Since I separate pieces and highlight important stuff within them I find it easiest to just write big walls of text but if bullet points or those traditional notes they taught us in like 6th grade work best for you, do that! Also, pause lectures and videos to write stuff down - I can't listen and write at the same time and always end up missing things or getting lost. Turn on closed captioning too.
Here's the big thing that's going to help you out with your notes: highlight or underline big topics such as events, people, and concepts, and write the location you found it as you go; I do this in the margins or at the end of an explanation. I usually color code, so people are highlighted green, concepts are pink, key terms are orange, etc. Then I write the page number or timestamp nearby - "Wundt, structuralism, introspection, [notes/definitions], pg. 18." Or for a video lecture; "Wundt, introspection, [notes], 24:00." This makes citing way easier and if you need more info on that topic you can easily find it again. As for the actual body of the notes; write a quick summary of what you're reading or hearing and always define key terms. To determine what's important to record, I like to think of it as a cause/effect hunt; "Subject A did this to Subject B which caused Subject C," or "Subject C did This Thing because Subject B did This Thing."
Make a tertiary source: Do this before you write a paper or take a test/do it on your test study guide. A tertiary source is basically an index of the sources related to your topic. So, if your essay prompt is "compare and contrast Subject A and Subject B; discuss their impact on Subject C," section off a new part of your notebook. Write down some thoughts, notes, or ideas about Subject A, then record every place you can find Subject A or supporting evidence for Subject A; this includes lecture timestamps, textbook pages, notebook sections, primary/secondary sources, whatever you have. Do this for Subjects B and C too.
Another super helpful thing to do here is write out in-text citations. This way if you just paraphrased from a lecture and you know which lecture it was, you can just drop that citation (Lastname, YearOfPosting) at the end of your sentence and you don't have to open it back up or find the timestamp - super helpful for papers, short answers or discussion posts.
You can also use your tertiary source to study for your exams later or for checking your answers before you submit a test. If you take a quiz and get a question wrong or don't know the answer and have to look, write the answer down! It'll most likely come back up again later. You can learn on tests too.
Ask your teacheprofessor if you need to: First, check the syllabus for their preferred method of contact, but every professor I've had asked us to email if we needed them. Any prof worth their salt is happy to answer an email once in a while. If you aren't clear on a rubric or a prompt or if you keep getting something wrong and you're not sure why, email them and kindly ask (remember to be professional) for clarification.
However, you should exhaust your other options first: Check the syllabus, see if they have a "help" section on the discussion board (this is nice because your classmates might wonder the same thing and then can find the answer here, and saves your professor from having to type out 8 different emails when they could do it once) and see if it's been asked/ask there. Check announcement boards too. If you're still not sure, shoot them an email. Do this as early as you can, because they're people with things to do and they might take time to get back to you. I usually include that I've looked elsewhere or include why I thought something to show that I put in some effort before emailing; "I checked this section of the syllabus and am still unsure," "I answered that way because page # of the textbook says XYZ," for example.
I did this recently when I was pretty sure I was right on a test answer, checked some stuff so that I was sure, then emailed with those sources - I also asked for clarification on what the answer was if I was still wrong, and I ended up earning those points back and the interaction with my prof was really chill. It's better to be safe and ask, and your teachers are there to support you in their class - just put in some effort too.
Set some alarms to keep you on task: If I need a break I'll let myself goof around on Reddit or tiktok or something for a few, but I'll put a ten minute timer on my phone so that I don't lose track of time and waste the whole day lol. I'll also set alarms for different days when I know I need to get started on something. If your phone is a big distraction - like, if you'll pick up your phone to turn off the alarm, see that you got a text, reply, then wind up down a rabbit hole of social media - try setting the alarm on your computer so you have to put your phone down and get on your computer to turn it off. Shoot, you can put your phone on airplane mode too. The name of this game is gently forcing yourself by putting yourself in a good situation to do the tasks, lol.
Be compassionate with yourself. The world is weird right now and these big changes to your normal life are probably not helping. Get some candy to snack on while you work. Turn on some pretty string lights or listen to fun music if that helps you. Go easy on yourself, take breaks if you need to, rest, and remember that it's alright to struggle or not feel great sometimes. Hiccups are normal; they're not failure. You can do this.
submitted by ginlilly to ADHD [link] [comments]


2020.09.17 20:07 Rumored17 Refutations for Every Main Pro-Pit Argument

1."It's all how you raise them."

And more:
• ⁠Lockwood, R. A. N. D. A. L. L. (2016). Ethology, ecology and epidemiology of canine aggression. The Domestic Dog: Its Evolution, Behaviour & Interactions with People,, 160-181.
• ⁠Abrantes, R., Site, A., Camp, S., Diving, F. A. Q., Camp, G. P., Pages, M., ... & User, C. C. (2016). Aggressive Behavior—Inheritance and Environment.
• ⁠van den Berg, L. I. N. D. A. (2016). Genetics of dog behavior. The Domestic Dog: Its Evolution, Behavior and Interactions with People, 5, 69.
• ⁠O'Neill, D. G., & Packer, R. M. (2016). The First Canine Behavior and Genetics Conference: Summary and recommendations for future directions in canine behavioral science. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 16, 6-12.
• ⁠Sørensen, M. (2016). Breeding aggression: Review of recent literature concerning the influence of genes on aggressive behaviour (Doctoral dissertation).
• ⁠Schilder, M. B., van der Borg, J. A., & Vinke, C. M. (2019). Intraspecific killing in dogs: predation behavior or aggression? A study of aggressors, victims, possible causes and motivations. Journal of Veterinary Behavior.
These studies all show that genetics play a large role in dog behavior. Most are related to Pit Bulls or aggression, but some just show that there are noticeable differences between dog breeds based on their breed. Here are some anecdotal sources to support the claims that Pit Bulls are born with a tendency to be aggressive:
In addition, "it's all how you raise them" goes against the very existence of dog breeds. If someone is arguing this, they are saying a Labrador Retriever will have the same instincts as a Border Collie, which will have the same instincts as a Doberman, which will have the same instincts as a Great Pyrenees, which will have the same instincts as a Dachshund, etc. This is observably and demonstrably false. Humans created different dog breeds with different temperaments and physical and behavioral traits through selective breeding. This is why dog breeds exist, this is why breed standards exist, this is why people can reasonably and accurately predict how a dog will act based on breed. Are there exceptions? Of course. However, that is just what they are- exceptions. Different dog breeds have different traits and tendencies dependent on what they were selectively bred for.

2. "Chihuahuas are more aggressive."

This is just a disingenuous attempt to derail the conversation. Even if Chihuahuas are more aggressive, they don't/can't kill people. If Chihuahuas were as large as Pit Bulls, perhaps this would be a conversation worth having- seeing as this is not the case, there is no argument to be had here.
I try to emphasize that the issue with Pits is how many people and pets they kill. Pit Bulls are not just biting people- they are killing, severely maiming, and mauling people. There is a huge difference, and it is important to recognize many Pit fanatics will try to lump in all dog bites with the maulings Pit Bulls are responsible for. They are not the same. This is similar to the "Labs bite more" argument- again, we are not just talking about bites. Keep the discussion focused on severe maulings, maimings, and deaths, because that is what BSL targets.
From 1982-2020 no Chihuahua has ever killed anyone. This source breaks down attacks by breed, child or adult victim, and death or maiming.

3. "There's no such thing as a Pit Bull." and "Pit Bulls can't be identified."

A good way to avoid even getting to this apologist bingo point is by using the phrasing "Pit Bull type dogs" as opposed to Pit Bulls. However, you can also just explain that "Pit Bull" is an umbrella term for four closely related dog breeds- the American Pit Bull Terrier, the American Staffordshire Terrier, the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, and the American Bully. The American Pit Bull Terrier and the American Staffordshire Terrier are actually so similar they can be dual registered as an AmStaff with the AKC and a APBT with the UKC. Until recently, most dog DNA tests would not even separate AmStaff from APBT due to the extreme similarities. This is also just another deflection technique- everyone knows what someone means by "Pit Bull" just as everyone knows what someone means by "Golden Retriever." This is what "pit bull" means legally.
Now, because "Pit Bull" does refer to 4 dog breeds rather than one, Pit apologists will often cry "well of course 4 dog breeds will kill more people!" but keep in mind that these 4 dog breeds have killed more people than 300+ other dog breeds combined. The Pit Bull umbrella kills more people than every other group or type of dogs and more than every other dog breed combined.
Regarding Pit Bulls being unidentifiable:
Pit Bulls have just as many obvious identifying characteristics as other dog breeds. There is no reason to believe Pit Bulls suffer from misidentification more than other dog breeds. There is reason to believe Pit Bulls are intentionally mislabeled as other breeds when in shelters, however. In addition, when discussing fatal Pit Bull attacks specifically, more often than not there are photos of the Pit Bulls involved so anyone can verify for themselves if they were Pit Bull type dogs. Genetic testing is not required for breed identification- anyone who argues this is being disingenuous. Another point is that we are constantly inundated with Pro-Pit propaganda; there is simply no way we can have Pixar shorts such as Kitbull and a new Dodo video every week about Pit Bulls and still be expected to believe the average person cannot visually identify a Pit Bull.

4. "Pits are no more dangerous than other dogs."

The statistics also support our side here- Pit Bulls have killed more people than all other dog breeds combined. Pit Bulls are not the largest, nor the strongest dogs out there. They do not have the strongest bite force. They are more deadly than other dog breeds because humans selectively bred them to be as deadly as possible. They are deadly due to the nature of their attacks and the behavioral traits they display when attacking such as gameness and a bite style mentioned in some of these studies, along with their physical traits.

5. "It used to be Dobermans, Rottweilers, and German Shepherds that people wanted to ban!"

Pit Bulls have killed more people than those three breeds ever did, even at the height of their popularity, even combined. There is also no evidence supporting this claim, and in fact, quite a lot of evidence showing it's completely false.
It is important to note as well that none of these breeds have an entire lobby supporting them. They do not have communities dedicated to attack victim harassment, misinformation, and lies, unlike the Pit Bull has. Something interesting to consider is the bias online when looking at these breeds and other restricted breeds vs pages about Pit Bulls. Wikipedia in particular is very obviously being manipulated by Pit Bull fanatics.
None of this manipulation is occurring on the pages for Dobermans, Rottweilers, or German Shepherds. These three breeds never reached anywhere close to the level of suffering and carnage Pit Bulls are responsible for. There has never been a concerted effort to ban these breeds, although some are targeted by apartment restrictions due to insurance issues. There is also no lobby supporting the misinformation and misrepresentation of these breeds.

6. "Dogsbite.org is biased and unreliable."

Dogsbite is completely open and transparent about their data collection strategies. They provide identification photographs and have all of their citations publicly listed. Citations and Photographs
Here is a challenge I like to give to people who claim Dogsbite is unreliable, although I have yet to receive a legitimate response:
Have you actually looked into dogsbite.org yourself? You do know that dogsbite tracks every fatal dog attack, regardless if it's a Pit or not? It appears anti-Pit because most fatal dog attacks are done by Pits. They're not only posting Pit attacks- there are just so many more fatal Pit attacks than other breeds it appears they are. Here's a proposal for you: Go to 2020 and late 2019, a time frame for which news reports are still abundantly available all over the internet, and fact-check ANY FOUR DOG-BITE FATALITIES OF YOUR CHOOSING, two where the killer dogs are said to be pit/mixes, and two cases where the killer dogs are not said to be pit/mixes:
  1. Did DogsBite accurately name the person killed?
  2. Did DogsBite accurately summarize the circumstances in which the person was killed?
  3. Did DogsBite accurately identify the breed(s) of the killer dog(s)?
  4. Did DogsBite provide a photo or photos of the killer dog(s) so you can judge for yourself what type of dog(s) you think did the killing?
DogsBite and Wikipedia both provide links to news stories about these fatal attacks. If you don't want to use the news links provided by DogsBite, then use the ones on Wikipedia that cover the same stories. DogsBite also provides links to autopsy reports, police reports and 911 calls, so you can compare these primary sources with the summaries on the DogsBite page and assess whether those summaries are accurate.

7. "Human aggressive Pit Bulls were culled!"

This is a myth. While human aggression was not something that was typically selectively bred for it is a myth that most human aggressive Pits were culled. That was not the case, and it still is not the case today. One look at shelter descriptions of Pits with bite histories and severe aggression issues shows these dogs are not being euthanized, and there are several instances of Pit Bulls who have killed people being bred.
There's no evidence whatsoever that dog fighters routinely destroyed human-aggressive dogs and refused to breed them. u/NorthTwoZero wrote at length about why it's a myth here, and this blogger put together a documented list of famously human-aggressive fighting dogs who not only weren't "culled" but were bred so often that they produced over 1,200 known, registered offspring:
"The man-biters were culled and the pit bulls were not bred for human aggression myths were created from thin air, complete fabrications. There is not a sliver of truth in the myth that dogmen culled man-biters. Not only weren't human aggressive pit fighters NOT culled, but a talented man-biter was heavily bred, his stud services were in high demand and the stud fees commanded a premium. The progeny of man-biters are still sought out long after he or she has passed away. This Italian game-dog website lists their choice for the Best Ever fighting dogs, three of the five are known man-biters and the other two trace their origins to the others on their "Best" list. Some famous man-biters have their own facebook fan pages. If you happen to be a 10x winner with 3 kills and scratching on the carcass, people tend to overlook a little thing like the danger she poses to people and she is also likely to be nominated for the cover of this month's International Sporting Dog Journal. Some famous man-biters not only have a facebook fan page, they have their own promotional merchandise too."

8. "Pit Bulls were nanny dogs!" or "Pit Bulls were America's dog!"

First, I usually ask questions that demonstrate out how absurd that claim is. What is a nanny dog? What duties does a nanny dog perform? Why would a dog type be called a "Pit Bull" if it nannied? Where does the name "Pit Bull" come from? Why is it necessary for Pits to have such large, gaping mouths and extremely muscular bodies if they were nannies? Then here is some actual info:
The first appearance of the term "Nanny Dog" dates from a 1971 NYT interview with the then president of the Staffordshire Bull Terrier Club of America, Lillian Rant, who called Staffordshire Bull Terriers "nursemaid dogs" for no apparent reason (other than to attempt to re-brand fighting dogs as family pets).
BAD RAP shared a link. It's Dog Bite Prevention Week. Did you know that there was never such thing as a 'Nanny's Dog'? This term was a recent invention created to describe the myriad of vintage photos of children enjoying their family pit bulls (see link for details about vintage photos). While the intention behind the term was innocent, using it may mislead parents into being careless with their children around their family dog - A recipe for dog bites!
Regarding Pits being "America's dog": Bronwen Dickey (author of incredibly biased and unscientific book "Pit Bull: The Battle over an American Icon") and other pit bull advocates argue that pit bulls were historically beloved in the U.S. until the dogs became associated with urban people of color in the 1970s, so Pit Bull stigma is really about being racist toward black and brown people.
But pit bulls were not historically beloved in the U.S. nor were they popularly regarded as a positive symbol of plucky can-do spirit. Joseph Colby, in his lifetime one of the world's leading authorities on the Pit Bull Terrier, wrote in 1936 that "The general public is under the impression that this breed is carnivorous, vicious, and, fed on a diet of raw meat, will devour a human being" and "When the pit bull terrier was introduced into America, he was more commonly found to be owned by prize fighters, saloon keepers and habitues, sporting men and the like. From the start the breed earned an unjust reputation due to his fighting ability and the character of the owner. To this day he is still trying to live down an unjust and undeserved reputation."
Sometimes Pit people will randomly mention how Sergeant Stubby, a decorated war hero dog, was a Pit Bull. He was not. Primary (contemporary) sources most often describe Stubby as a Boston Terrier or Boston Terrier mix (this breed was sometimes called the Boston Bulldog). He is sometimes said to be a Bull Terrier (the egghead dogs) mix but he obviously resembles a Boston Terrier significantly more than a Bull Terrier. Stubby is never said to be a Pit Bull in primary sources.

9. "Pit Bulls scored 2nd highest on temperament tests and better than most family dog breeds!"

This is always referring to the ATTS, or the American Temperament Testing Society. It is refuted thoroughly in the BanPitBulls FAQ, but this is what I usually say as well:
The test was developed to test working dogs, specifically dogs meant for schutzhund work. It has never been, nor ever purported to be about testing companion animals or a breed's suitability as family pets. Scoring actually favors dogs that bite, in some cases. Breed specific temperament, aggression, and each dog's training is taken into account when scoring. This means that if a relatively untrained Lab bites a "threatening stranger" it will score far lower than a German Shepherd that bites a "threatening stranger." According to the ATTS itself, "95% of dogs who fail do so because they lack confidence" NOT because they bite. Dogs that exhibit avoidance behaviors will fail. Dogs that bite do not automatically fail. The ATTS also states that comparing scores with other dogs means nothing- the pass/fail rates cannot be compared. Different dog breeds that behave the same exact way on the test will get hugely different scores due to the fact they take inherent breed tendencies into consideration. The test is not designed to test for breed aggression, according to the ATTS website. It is more of a test of bravery for individual dogs. Timid dogs will always fail. Dogs that bite will not always fail. If anything, you could argue that the reason Pits have a high passing rate is because they bite or show aggression, although that is speculation and not proven. Either way though- the test does not test breed aggression, passing rates cannot be compared, and the test absolutely does not test for suitability as a family pet. More info here: What the ATTS is really showing.
It is also worth mentioning that the only dogs that participate in the ATTS testing are dogs brought in by their owners- it is not a random sample or scientific study of any kind. Considering the evidence showing the existence of an actual Pit Bull lobby, it would not be a reach to say these results have been intentionally manipulated (if they did even matter, which they don't).
Also, a controlled temperament test found that 13 percent, or one out of seven, pit bulls tried to bite or attack during a one hour test simulating a neighborhood walk. One out of seven pit bulls tried to bite in the span of just one hour compared to only one out of 70 golden retrievers. Note that this study was funded and authored by anti-breed ban activists: They found "no significant difference" between breeds when the definition of aggression was watered down to include even whining or crying. But pay close attention to Table 5 on page 138: out of all the breeds tested, pit bulls were markedly the worst when it came to the percentage of dogs that reached a more serious level of aggression.

10. "It's racism for dogs!"

Humans are not dogs, and dog breeds are not analogous to human races.
In addition, one cannot compare a race of people to a breed of dogs for a multitude of reasons. Dog breeds were selectively, intentionally bred for specific characteristics and traits by human beings. Humans created dog breeds based on what physical and behavioral traits we wanted them to have. (Spaniels for flushing, retrievers for fetching prey/birds without damage, livestock guardian dogs such as Great Pyrenees for protecting livestock, Huskies for endurance and energy, Pointers for pointing, etc. Different dog breeds have different behavioral tendencies because humans selectively bred them to have those tendencies). Dogs also do not suffer from cultural differences, institutionalized racism, or socioeconomic disparities. Humans are also not as heavily influenced by our instincts as dogs are. Dogs behave based on their instincts and training. Humans behave mainly on their "training." Humans also have far more complex thought processes and the ability to make complex decisions. Dogs do not. You could go on and on but that is the basic overview there- dogs were selectively bred and rely mainly on their instincts. Humans were not selectively bred and are capable of making complex and rational decisions.
Post continued in the comments due to the character limit.
submitted by Rumored17 to BanPitBulls [link] [comments]


2020.09.16 23:58 vivek_david_law Request for retraction

So sevral users here have asked for retraction to my last thread and series of posts
https://www.reddit.com/DebateEvolution/comments/isg6li/if_radiometric_dating_is_accurate_how_come_decay/g5i8ys1/?context=3
regarding this study
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-64497-0
While this and everything else will be denied the point I am being asked to acknowledge is this sub in all its astounding scientific intellect and complete and through knowledge of every scientific field as diverse as virus equilibrium rates to radiation dating is that the variation is only by a small margin. So, let's talk about that. I am asked to retract my comments that this is asinine. So let's talk about the desired reaction.
The premise this sub wants be to retract my disagreement is this subs position that variation of between 1 to 2% reported by the samples in the study is equivalent to the variation in the amount of the half life. This sub held argues and continues to pester me with this nonsense even after shown with citations repeatedly why this is ridiculous
**retracting statistical significance**
Cause it's like simple math dude - you can like totally take a 5 day observation and take it as a sample population of 6 million day half life of radium 226 because bonkers and statistical significance means nothing.
**retracting probabilistic nature, half life uncertainties which create natural variation in decay rates even under same conditions**
Never mind that research says that radiometric dating is probabilistic and that any to samples will vary. Never mind that half life is even an exact number but has an uncertainty calculation attached to it. Both if this will create a % variation in any measurements of rates of decay even under the same conditions
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0026-1394/52/3/S51
https://fs.blog/2018/03/half-life/
The fact that they said there's a one 1% variation in rate of decay the stuff inside the box and outside the box lets us completely ignore statistical significance natural variation and assume that this also means we can assume 1% variation in half life. Because like we're science guys dude.
**retracting the fact that your conclusions actively conflict with the researcher's statements**
Sure even the researchers didn't make this conclusion about % chages in half life and were careful not to mention applying it to variation in total half life or total rate of decay. The seem to have said the opposite.
In case of no difference of the decay data with respect to the measurement inside or outside, the inside measured data must show a clear fluctuation/oscillation so that a correlation with space weather variables is evident (can become apparent).
ie - they didn't even need the samples inside the box and outside to have different decay data - the just looked for clear changes within the data set
And their conclusions actually state that they cannot tell the parameters of the decay and can only tell there is a correlation
The finding described in this paper reveals that there exists a link between space weather (i.e. GMA and CRA) and the sensors’ responses inside the (and thanks to) the MFC. It is an open question why this interaction exists and what the underlying physical mechanism is. Additional investigations are needed to measure additional physical parameters related to the measurement setup as well as factors from the environment.
Heck they even admitted that the rates fluctuated almost randomly and tried to account for that
last paragraph of materials and methods
Regarding the statistical test, there is a conceptual problem with the statistical testing of time-series correlations: it works only if there are not strong transients in the data. Since some of our data have such transients (for example, see Fig. 6a,b) the test indicates no correlation but in fact there is a clearly visible correlation. A statistically significant correlation between two time-series is therefore a sufficient but not necessary condition for the existence of a real correlation when the data are complex and nonlinear
and second paragraph of results and discussion even describes how the actual decay rates don't matter - what matters is the change
Later on, a description of the observed circumstances under which the correlations take place is also given. This refers to a description of the radioactive source used (whenever necessary), and of the state (and evolution) of the registered decay (or background) counts (in cpm), or the capacitance values. It may comprise a description of the state of the analyzed values relative to their initial values (outside the box, or just after its introduction in the inside), or of their subsequent variations and tendency along the analyzed period, i.e., how the decay rates or the capacitance evolve. As presented in1, those values can be higher, lower, or be the same compared to the initial values outside the cage (it should to be stressed that this aspect will be checked again in the next experiments, but in any case, the relevant fact is that the measures showed significant variations during the observation periods). Besides, they can have an increasing or decreasing trend, and/or show oscillating values, some of which may in turn differ significantly from each other.
But screw those whimps, we have a conclusion we want and we demand it
So if the only measure of truth is your own refusal to admit you were wrong and inability to look at facts and reason i will adimit that if all the facts above are completely ignored then yes a retraction would be warranted. Cause we math wiz's and we just multiply 5 days worth of variation by a million days to know what it's like on half life. it's that easy guies -
Of course certain attitudes are not amiable to satisfaction. They get angry when it is pointed out to them that they are wrong and shown why. They respond with condescension rather than by looking at facts to learn and grow. Thus you are all hereby blocked. Because i don't have the energy to argue nonsense for eternity
submitted by vivek_david_law to DebateEvolution [link] [comments]


2020.09.16 20:44 Rauffenburg A Civil Discussion and Exchange about the Authority of Felix Manalo

A Civil Discussion and Exchange about the Authority of Felix Manalo
This thread is a civil and friendly exchange with my community friend here on exIglesiaNiCristo - u/fareastern2627.
Dear Mr. or Mrs. u/fareastern2627,
Thank you again, for your participation here on exIglesiaNiCristo. We always welcome intellectual discussion and civility. Please join me in this conversation as proof two opposing sides and positions can have a fair and productive discussion.
u/fareastern2627 you wrote the following:
Mr Rauffenberg seemingly is a well-versed person but he always come up with the contradictory conclusions every time he reiterate his so-called "1913 Prophecy." Mr u/Truthcaster_INC had clearly stated the answers with biblical facts and good descriptive explanation about the calling and preaching of Bro. FYM.
Now, Mr. u/Rauffenburg, since that you're an expelled member or whatsoever, here is my direct question to you that requires verses from the Bible.
Now that you are not a member of the Church of Christ anymore, do you know any particular Church aside from the Iglesia Ni Cristo which has the right to receive salvation come judgement day? And why? At least one, e.i. ABLD (Ang Bagong Likong Daan) just a suggestion if you want to create a name for your group. LOL
Looking forward to your answer, Mr Rauffenberg.
fareastern2627
Dear u/fareastern2627, not once over the discourse of several thread exchanges has a proponent of Felix Manalo addressed my prophetic inquiry this includes our friend u/Truthcaster_INC, who left out the most important detail which I was asking for. The prophecy.
The prophecy about Felix Manalo's preaching emergence (calling, election, commissioning) in November 1913, pre-dating the so-called time, 'ends of the earth' or prior to the First World War.
u/fareastern2627 Do you build a house on sand? What about water? Of course, you don't. When you build a house you need a solid foundation. In the case of Felix Manalo, the INC teaches you need a prophecy. However, the Iglesia Ni Kristo's (Manalo) foundational prophecy when FYM started preaching in November 1913 is non-existent. No prophecy. No foundation.
Iglesia Ni Cristo: A House with No Foundation
u/fareastern2627 you wrote the following:
Mr u/Truthcaster_INC had clearly stated the answers with biblical facts and good descriptive explanation about the calling and preaching of Bro. FYM.
  • Biblical facts? A good descriptive explanation?
I would have to disagree u/fareastern2627, our friend, u/Truthcaster_INC did not provide a specific 'foundational' prophecy about FYM's preaching emergence (or calling to preach) in November 1913 which pre-dates the so-called time, 'ends of the earth' prior to the First World War (pre-ends of the earth) or before the closing of the sixth seal and opening of the seventh seal.
u/Truthcaster_INC did not provide a book, chapter, verse, with a notable time-element pre-dating the so-called ends of the earth or in these last days in support of FYM's authority to preach in 1913.
However, I did notice the 'redirect' in your previous comment. The redirect is always, "Well, 'Rauffenburg' can you explain how you will be saved outside of the Iglesia Ni Cristo or What church or religion do you belong to 'Rauffenburg' that assures you eternal life?"
My dear friend, professional magicians call this "sleight of hand" and is a redding herring. It's unrelated to the 'authority' discussion of Felix Manalo in November 1913. Let's please move on.
Kindly watch the following video as it is related to our discussion:
Robert F. Pellien, INK(M) Minister
Let me quote INC Minister, Robert (Bob) Pellien "You must be called [by God] first before you can preach".
If you agree with Bob Pellien; then please provide the prophecy with a 'pre-ends of the earth' time-element which specifies and authorizes the advent of Felix Manalo's preaching and emergence (calling) prior to the First World War to prove he was sent to preach in the year 1913?
(Book, chapter, verse w/ pre-ends of the earth time-element)
Example: "I have chosen thee from before the ends of the earth to preach my righteousness in the east ..". (Isaiah _ _:_ _
Example: "I have chosen thee from before the end of the sixth seal and opening of the seventh to preach my righteousness in the east ..". (Revelations _ _:_ _)
I shall await your reply and excited to examine the prophecy you will provide for me u/fareastern2627.
- Rauffenburg
P.S. For the benefit of this discussion, kindly read the following lesson I prepared. Note: All references (if any) are direct from official Iglesia Ni Kristo (Manalo) sources. You are more than welcome to fact-check my citation and sources for any inaccuracies.
The Anachronism of Felix Manalo's Claims
submitted by Rauffenburg to exIglesiaNiCristo [link] [comments]


2020.09.15 23:29 Rumored17 Refutations for Every Main Pro-Pit Argument

1."It's all how you raise them."

And more:
• ⁠Lockwood, R. A. N. D. A. L. L. (2016). Ethology, ecology and epidemiology of canine aggression. The Domestic Dog: Its Evolution, Behaviour & Interactions with People,, 160-181.
• ⁠Abrantes, R., Site, A., Camp, S., Diving, F. A. Q., Camp, G. P., Pages, M., ... & User, C. C. (2016). Aggressive Behavior—Inheritance and Environment.
• ⁠van den Berg, L. I. N. D. A. (2016). Genetics of dog behavior. The Domestic Dog: Its Evolution, Behavior and Interactions with People, 5, 69.
• ⁠O'Neill, D. G., & Packer, R. M. (2016). The First Canine Behavior and Genetics Conference: Summary and recommendations for future directions in canine behavioral science. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 16, 6-12.
• ⁠Sørensen, M. (2016). Breeding aggression: Review of recent literature concerning the influence of genes on aggressive behaviour (Doctoral dissertation).
• ⁠Schilder, M. B., van der Borg, J. A., & Vinke, C. M. (2019). Intraspecific killing in dogs: predation behavior or aggression? A study of aggressors, victims, possible causes and motivations. Journal of Veterinary Behavior.
These studies all show that genetics play a large role in dog behavior. Most are related to Pit Bulls or aggression, but some just show that there are noticeable differences between dog breeds based on their breed. Here are some anecdotal sources to support the claims that Pit Bulls are born with a tendency to be aggressive:
In addition, "it's all how you raise them" goes against the very existence of dog breeds. If someone is arguing this, they are saying a Labrador Retriever will have the same instincts as a Border Collie, which will have the same instincts as a Doberman, which will have the same instincts as a Great Pyrenees, which will have the same instincts as a Dachshund, etc. This is observably and demonstrably false. Humans created different dog breeds with different temperaments and physical and behavioral traits through selective breeding. This is why dog breeds exist, this is why breed standards exist, this is why people can reasonably and accurately predict how a dog will act based on breed. Are there exceptions? Of course. However, that is just what they are- exceptions. Different dog breeds have different traits and tendencies dependent on what they were selectively bred for.

2. "Chihuahuas are more aggressive."

This is just a disingenuous attempt to derail the conversation. Even if Chihuahuas are more aggressive, they don't/can't kill people. If Chihuahuas were as large as Pit Bulls, perhaps this would be a conversation worth having- seeing as this is not the case, there is no argument to be had here.
I try to emphasize that the issue with Pits is how many people and pets they kill. Pit Bulls are not just biting people- they are killing, severely maiming, and mauling people. There is a huge difference, and it is important to recognize many Pit fanatics will try to lump in all dog bites with the maulings Pit Bulls are responsible for. They are not the same. This is similar to the "Labs bite more" argument- again, we are not just talking about bites. Keep the discussion focused on severe maulings, maimings, and deaths, because that is what BSL targets.
From 1982-2020 no Chihuahua has ever killed anyone. This source breaks down attacks by breed, child or adult victim, and death or maiming.

3. "There's no such thing as a Pit Bull." and "Pit Bulls can't be identified."

A good way to avoid even getting to this apologist bingo point is by using the phrasing "Pit Bull type dogs" as opposed to Pit Bulls. However, you can also just explain that "Pit Bull" is an umbrella term for four closely related dog breeds- the American Pit Bull Terrier, the American Staffordshire Terrier, the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, and the American Bully. The American Pit Bull Terrier and the American Staffordshire Terrier are actually so similar they can be dual registered as an AmStaff with the AKC and a APBT with the UKC. Until recently, most dog DNA tests would not even separate AmStaff from APBT due to the extreme similarities. This is also just another deflection technique- everyone knows what someone means by "Pit Bull" just as everyone knows what someone means by "Golden Retriever." This is what "pit bull" means legally.
Now, because "Pit Bull" does refer to 4 dog breeds rather than one, Pit apologists will often cry "well of course 4 dog breeds will kill more people!" but keep in mind that these 4 dog breeds have killed more people than 300+ other dog breeds combined. The Pit Bull umbrella kills more people than every other group or type of dogs and more than every other dog breed combined.
Regarding Pit Bulls being unidentifiable:
Pit Bulls have just as many obvious identifying characteristics as other dog breeds. There is no reason to believe Pit Bulls suffer from misidentification more than other dog breeds. There is reason to believe Pit Bulls are intentionally mislabeled as other breeds when in shelters, however. In addition, when discussing fatal Pit Bull attacks specifically, more often than not there are photos of the Pit Bulls involved so anyone can verify for themselves if they were Pit Bull type dogs. Genetic testing is not required for breed identification- anyone who argues this is being disingenuous. Another point is that we are constantly inundated with Pro-Pit propaganda; there is simply no way we can have Pixar shorts such as Kitbull and a new Dodo video every week about Pit Bulls and still be expected to believe the average person cannot visually identify a Pit Bull.

4. Pits are no more dangerous than other dogs.

The statistics also support our side here- Pit Bulls have killed more people than all other dog breeds combined. Pit Bulls are not the largest, nor the strongest dogs out there. They do not have the strongest bite force. They are more deadly than other dog breeds because humans selectively bred them to be as deadly as possible. They are deadly due to the nature of their attacks and the behavioral traits they display when attacking such as gameness and a bite style mentioned in some of these studies, along with their physical traits.

5. "It used to be Dobermans, Rottweilers, and German Shepherds that people wanted to ban!"

Pit Bulls have killed more people than those three breeds ever did, even at the height of their popularity, even combined. There is also no evidence supporting this claim, and in fact, quite a lot of evidence showing it's completely false.
It is important to note as well that none of these breeds have an entire lobby supporting them. They do not have communities dedicated to attack victim harassment, misinformation, and lies, unlike the Pit Bull has. Something interesting to consider is the bias online when looking at these breeds and other restricted breeds vs pages about Pit Bulls. Wikipedia in particular is very obviously being manipulated by Pit Bull fanatics.
None of this manipulation is occurring on the pages for Dobermans, Rottweilers, or German Shepherds. These three breeds never reached anywhere close to the level of suffering and carnage Pit Bulls are responsible for. There has never been a concerted effort to ban these breeds, although some are targeted by apartment restrictions due to insurance issues. There is also no lobby supporting the misinformation and misrepresentation of these breeds.

6. "Dogsbite.org is biased and unreliable."

Dogsbite is completely open and transparent about their data collection strategies. They provide identification photographs and have all of their citations publicly listed. Citations and Photographs
Here is a challenge I like to give to people who claim Dogsbite is unreliable, although I have yet to receive a legitimate response:
Have you actually looked into dogsbite.org yourself? You do know that dogsbite tracks every fatal dog attack, regardless if it's a Pit or not? It appears anti-Pit because most fatal dog attacks are done by Pits. They're not only posting Pit attacks- there are just so many more fatal Pit attacks than other breeds it appears they are.
Here's a proposal for you:
Go to 2020 and late 2019, a time frame for which news reports are still abundantly available all over the internet, and fact-check ANY FOUR DOG-BITE FATALITIES OF YOUR CHOOSING, two where the killer dogs are said to be pit/mixes, and two cases where the killer dogs are not said to be pit/mixes:
  1. Did DogsBite accurately name the person killed?
  2. Did DogsBite accurately summarize the circumstances in which the person was killed?
  3. Did DogsBite accurately identify the breed(s) of the killer dog(s)?
  4. Did DogsBite provide a photo or photos of the killer dog(s) so you can judge for yourself what type of dog(s) you think did the killing?
DogsBite and Wikipedia both provide links to news stories about these fatal attacks. If you don't want to use the news links provided by DogsBite, then use the ones on Wikipedia that cover the same stories. DogsBite also provides links to autopsy reports, police reports and 911 calls, so you can compare these primary sources with the summaries on the DogsBite page and assess whether those summaries are accurate.

7. "Human aggressive Pit Bulls were culled!"

This is a myth. While human aggression was not something that was typically selectively bred for it is a myth that most human aggressive Pits were culled. That was not the case, and it still is not the case today. One look at shelter descriptions of Pits with bite histories and severe aggression issues shows these dogs are not being euthanized, and there are several instances of Pit Bulls who have killed people being bred.
There's no evidence whatsoever that dog fighters routinely destroyed human-aggressive dogs and refused to breed them. u/NorthTwoZero wrote at length about why it's a myth here, and this blogger put together a documented list of famously human-aggressive fighting dogs who not only weren't "culled" but were bred so often that they produced over 1,200 known, registered offspring:
"The man-biters were culled and the pit bulls were not bred for human aggression myths were created from thin air, complete fabrications. There is not a sliver of truth in the myth that dogmen culled man-biters. Not only weren't human aggressive pit fighters NOT culled, but a talented man-biter was heavily bred, his stud services were in high demand and the stud fees commanded a premium. The progeny of man-biters are still sought out long after he or she has passed away. This Italian game-dog website lists their choice for the Best Ever fighting dogs, three of the five are known man-biters and the other two trace their origins to the others on their "Best" list. Some famous man-biters have their own facebook fan pages. If you happen to be a 10x winner with 3 kills and scratching on the carcass, people tend to overlook a little thing like the danger she poses to people and she is also likely to be nominated for the cover of this month's International Sporting Dog Journal. Some famous man-biters not only have a facebook fan page, they have their own promotional merchandise too."

8. "Pit Bulls were nanny dogs!" or "Pit Bulls were America's dog!"

First, I usually ask questions that demonstrate out how absurd that claim is. What is a nanny dog? What duties does a nanny dog perform? Why would a dog type be called a "Pit Bull" if it nannied? Where does the name "Pit Bull" come from? Why is it necessary for Pits to have such large, gaping mouths and extremely muscular bodies if they were nannies? Then here is some actual info:
The first appearance of the term "Nanny Dog" dates from a 1971 NYT interview with the then president of the Staffordshire Bull Terrier Club of America, Lillian Rant, who called Staffordshire Bull Terriers "nursemaid dogs" for no apparent reason (other than to attempt to re-brand fighting dogs as family pets).
BAD RAP shared a link.
It's Dog Bite Prevention Week. Did you know that there was never such thing as a 'Nanny's Dog'? This term was a recent invention created to describe the myriad of vintage photos of children enjoying their family pit bulls (see link for details about vintage photos). While the intention behind the term was innocent, using it may mislead parents into being careless with their children around their family dog - A recipe for dog bites!
Regarding Pits being "America's dog": Bronwen Dickey (author of incredibly biased and unscientific book "Pit Bull: The Battle over an American Icon") and other pit bull advocates argue that pit bulls were historically beloved in the U.S. until the dogs became associated with urban people of color in the 1970s, so Pit Bull stigma is really about being racist toward black and brown people.
But pit bulls were not historically beloved in the U.S. nor were they popularly regarded as a positive symbol of plucky can-do spirit. Joseph Colby, in his lifetime one of the world's leading authorities on the Pit Bull Terrier, wrote in 1936 that "The general public is under the impression that this breed is carnivorous, vicious, and, fed on a diet of raw meat, will devour a human being" and "When the pit bull terrier was introduced into America, he was more commonly found to be owned by prize fighters, saloon keepers and habitues, sporting men and the like. From the start the breed earned an unjust reputation due to his fighting ability and the character of the owner. To this day he is still trying to live down an unjust and undeserved reputation."
Sometimes Pit people will randomly mention how Sergeant Stubby, a decorated war hero dog, was a Pit Bull. He was not. Primary (contemporary) sources most often describe Stubby as a Boston Terrier or Boston Terrier mix (this breed was sometimes called the Boston Bulldog). He is sometimes said to be a Bull Terrier (the egghead dogs) mix but he obviously resembles a Boston Terrier significantly more than a Bull Terrier. Stubby is never said to be a Pit Bull in primary sources.

9. "Pit Bulls scored 2nd highest on temperament tests and better than most family dog breeds!"

This is always referring to the ATTS, or the American Temperament Testing Society. It is refuted thoroughly in the BanPitBulls FAQ, but this is what I usually say as well:
The test was developed to test working dogs, specifically dogs meant for schutzhund work. It has never been, nor ever purported to be about testing companion animals or a breed's suitability as family pets. Scoring actually favors dogs that bite, in some cases. Breed specific temperament, aggression, and each dog's training is taken into account when scoring. This means that if a relatively untrained Lab bites a "threatening stranger" it will score far lower than a German Shepherd that bites a "threatening stranger."
According to the ATTS itself, "95% of dogs who fail do so because they lack confidence" NOT because they bite. Dogs that exhibit avoidance behaviors will fail. Dogs that bite do not automatically fail.
The ATTS also states that comparing scores with other dogs means nothing- the pass/fail rates cannot be compared. Different dog breeds that behave the same exact way on the test will get hugely different scores due to the fact they take inherent breed tendencies into consideration.
The test is not designed to test for breed aggression, according to the ATTS website. It is more of a test of bravery for individual dogs. Timid dogs will always fail. Dogs that bite will not always fail.
If anything, you could argue that the reason Pits have a high passing rate is because they bite or show aggression, although that is speculation and not proven. Either way though- the test does not test breed aggression, passing rates cannot be compared, and the test absolutely does not test for suitability as a family pet.
More info here: What the ATTS is really showing.
It is also worth mentioning that the only dogs that participate in the ATTS testing are dogs brought in by their owners- it is not a random sample or scientific study of any kind. Considering the evidence showing the existence of an actual Pit Bull lobby, it would not be a reach to say these results have been intentionally manipulated (if they did even matter, which they don't).
Also, a controlled temperament test found that 13 percent, or one out of seven, pit bulls tried to bite or attack during a one hour test simulating a neighborhood walk. One out of seven pit bulls tried to bite in the span of just one hour compared to only one out of 70 golden retrievers. Note that this study was funded and authored by anti-breed ban activists: They found "no significant difference" between breeds when the definition of aggression was watered down to include even whining or crying. But pay close attention to Table 5 on page 138: out of all the breeds tested, pit bulls were markedly the worst when it came to the percentage of dogs that reached a more serious level of aggression.

10. "It's racism for dogs!"

Humans are not dogs, and dog breeds are not analogous to human races.
In addition, one cannot compare a race of people to a breed of dogs for a multitude of reasons. Dog breeds were selectively, intentionally bred for specific characteristics and traits by human beings. Humans created dog breeds based on what physical and behavioral traits we wanted them to have. (Spaniels for flushing, retrievers for fetching prey/birds without damage, livestock guardian dogs such as Great Pyrenees for protecting livestock, Huskies for endurance and energy, Pointers for pointing, etc. Different dog breeds have different behavioral tendencies because humans selectively bred them to have those tendencies). Dogs also do not suffer from cultural differences, institutionalized racism, or socioeconomic disparities. Humans are also not as heavily influenced by our instincts as dogs are. Dogs behave based on their instincts and training. Humans behave mainly on their "training." Humans also have far more complex thought processes and the ability to make complex decisions. Dogs do not. You could go on and on but that is the basic overview there- dogs were selectively bred and rely mainly on their instincts. Humans were not selectively bred and are capable of making complex and rational decisions.
Post continued in the comments due to the character limit.
submitted by Rumored17 to BanPitBulls [link] [comments]


2020.09.13 12:16 walknstar10 Best Workers Comp Insurance

Best Workers Comp Insurance

Best Workers Comp Insurance
Insurance Business Tv
These agents are familiar with employees’ Best Workers Comp Insurance and other business insurance policies. Because they are independent, they'll shop around for the most effective employee’s compensation policy to meet your small business’s specific protection and budgetary needs. If you're a sole proprietor, an impartial contractor, or a freelancer, you aren't mechanically linked by employees’ compensation insurance coverage. If you run a general contracting company that regularly makes work agreements with clients, it may be in your finest interest to purchase employees’ comp insurance even though you are not legally obligated to do so. Failing to take action in sure industries may end up not being awarded the contracts you are vying for.
Decreased premiums and unexpected claims could negatively impact workers' comp writers, said Sridhar Many, director, and Dan Mangano, financial analyst, AM Best. #insurance #workerscompensation #workercomp #COVID19 #coronavirus
— AM Best (@AMBestCo) June 24, 2020
Workers' Compensation
They can, however, sue you for things that aren’t covered beneath the employees’ comp portion of your policy. Employer’s liability insurance can also be included in your coverage to pay for courtroom costs and authorized fees if you’re concerned in such a lawsuit. Workers’ compensation insurance coverage is required by regulation in nearly every state.
Get Business Insurance With Optimized Coverage To Meet Your Exact Needs
Many of these data are important for getting your staff’ comp declare permitted and paid. The first thing you should do after work harm is immediately reported it to your boss. Every state requires staff to give discover their accidents by a certain deadline, which varies considerably by state.
Accident/harm
In Florida, if you have staff, you're required to carry Workers Compensation coverage. Even in non-obligatory states, it may be an excellent concept, significantly when you have much staff, or if they are engaged in hazardous actions. Employers failing to comply with these legal guidelines could also be subject to penalties by the state and, as well as, could lose protections afforded them by workers’ compensation insurance coverage and the legal guidelines of the state. The cost of protection, which is able to range based mostly on enterprise sort and number of staff, is something that small-enterprise house owners usually fear.
Who Is Covered By Workers Compensation Insurance?
The first is the state-run fund — some state funds supply assured protection for employees for top-danger work classifications or companies with large losses. Business owners who can't discover protection in the non-public market can turn to an assigned risk plan. The plan is run by the National Council of Compensation Insurance (NCCI). State funds are usually run by labor or commerce departments however can be run independently and compete in the personal insurer market for staff compensation.
Do I Need Workers Compensation Insurance?

  • No matter what sort of business you’re in, there’s always the potential for an employee changing into sick or getting injured on the job.
  • Workers' compensation insurance coverage offers workers with benefits and safety if they're ever injured or become unwell on the job.
  • Workers' Compensation coverage helps shield you and your employees from varied job-related accidents and diseases.
  • Workers' compensation insurance coverage covers your small business in terms of medical expenses and lost wages for these employees.
Read more at https://www.businessusainsurance.com/small-business/best-workers-compensation-insurance/
Having an area agent to satisfy with and have questions answered is one other bonus. The Hartford integrates with payroll providers to create correct premiums with its XactPAY® option. This means you’re much less more likely to pay greater than you have to all year long. The pricing is contingent on the business, location, and size of your small business and can be incorporated into a pay-as-you-go plan. Additionally, The Hartford has a distinctive claims approach that moves the enterprise and injured employees forward shortly.
Tim participated in u/journal workers’ compensation webinar examining how COVID-19 has changed the market. He provided insight into the underwriting process, employment best practices, stressors on the workers' comp system & more. View the webinar:
— EPIC Insurance Brokers & Consultants (@EPIC_Insurance) July 1, 2020
In addition to the insurance premium itself, prices embody funds made beneath deductibles, the administrative prices of handling claims and reporting to the state and your insurer. No Coverage and Claim Filed– If an employee has injured on the job and records data a claim for coverage, but your organization is uninsured, it can really get expensive. If a choice determines that your company was uninsured, your company could also be assessed a fantastic of $10,000 per worker that was on your payroll on the time of the declare, as much as $100,000.
To get the most effective Best Workers Comp Insurance for your small business, you need to know what’s required in your state. Most states require you to have workers’ comp coverage, however relying on where you reside, you might need different rules. Business homeowners who can't find staff’ compensation insurance coverage from a personal carrier sometimes have a few selections.
Most folks think of WCI as a type of insurance coverage safety that protects the workers of an enterprise, which it does. But, it additionally protects the company from pricey and potentially devastating lawsuits that would in any other case arise in response to office injuries, sicknesses, and deaths. A number of elements are weighed in calculating the annual premium for a worker's comp insurance coverage coverage in Arizona and Nevada. There are 315 impartial insurance coverage brokers in South Carolina who are ready to help.
The written premium is the amount a policyholder is obligated to pay for coverage. Workers' compensation premiums are paid in advance so the written premium is the amount the insured has paid upfront. The written premium differs from the earned premium, which is the amount the insured has paid for the expired portion of the policy. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan is a health insurer and the mother or father company of Accident Fund Group. The latter owns a number of subsidiaries that promote workers' compensation insurance only.
In monopolistic states, Ohio, North Dakota, Wyoming, and Washington, employers are required to use the state insurance fund to make sure that all coverage meets state labor requirements. A firm that chooses to give attention to one line of insurance is choosing to be the leader in that area. EMPLOYERS may use its e-book of the enterprise to expand its product lines simply however as a substitute chooses to enhance its on-line portal and assist companies to scale back claims and fraud. Many Liberty Mutual reviews point out how simple the corporate makes it to apply for protection and handle claims.
We perceive the variety of risks concerned across industries and might fantastic-tune your coverage to fit your specific enterprise. On-site Consultation providers are separate from enforcement and don't end in penalties or citations. Everything about your organization’s operation is exclusive, and so are your needs in terms of Best Workers Comp Insurance coverage.
If you miss the deadline, you may lose your proper to gather workers’ comp advantages. In some states, you’ll also have to file a staff’s compensation declare kind by a certain date in order to officially begin your declare. To study extra about these requirements, learn our article on submitting staff’s comp claims.
Main Source: USA Business Insurance
submitted by walknstar10 to u/walknstar10 [link] [comments]


2020.09.12 17:53 StevenStevens43 The Messenian trojan horse wars

The Messenian trojan horse wars
Eochu Uairches 633-621 BC:
Eochu Uairches was an Irish high king, that is reported to have left Ireland for 12 years, during the second halve of the 600's BC.
Apparently he left Ireland in a fleet, to wage war and plunder neighbouring countries.
Now this might appear to just be trivial and unimportant legend, but, in actual fact, just this little snippet of information may be more indicative and consistan with the happenings going on in the world around this time.
And this is what i hope to highlight in this article.
Eochu Uairches
Eochu (or Eochaid) Uairches, son of Lugaid Íardonn, was, according to medieval Irish legend and historical tradition, a High King of Ireland. After Lugaid was overthrown and killed by Sírlám, Eochu was driven into exile overseas, but he returned after twelve years, killed Sírlám with an arrow, and took the throne. His epithet is obscure: the Lebor Gabála Érenn says he gained it because of his exile,[1] while Geoffrey Keating explains it as meaning "bare canoes", because he had canoes for a fleet, in which he and his followers used to plunder neighbouring countries.[2]
Link for photo
Tara stone (biography)
Kaska invasion:
Now, it is likely that were Eochu Uairches went, is connected to a war which began in around 1450 BC with the kaska invasion.
As has already been established on other threads, the Egyptian pharoah Ahmose I, in 1549 BC, led a native Egyptian uprising against foreign rulers in Egypt, and expelled them from Egypt, and continued chasing them northwards, under Thutmose III.
In response to this, the Indo-Aryan Hittite empire came up from South Asia, and down from Northern parts of europe, and made Anatolia the base for their war on Egypt, when, for whatever reason, the Greeks seemingly allied themselves with Egypt, and began attacking the Hittite empire.
The first attack was the Kaska invasion.
The Kaska invasion was conducted by indigenous Greeks/Romans, as Anatolia was the land that is modern day Turkey, and the Greeks would have felt that this land belonged to them.
Early history
The Kaska, probably originating from the eastern shore of the Propontis,[4] may have displaced the speakers of the Palaic language from their home in Pala).[citation needed]
The Kaska first appear in the Hittite prayer inscriptions that date from the reign of Hantili II, c. 1450 BC, and make references to their movement into the ruins of the holy city of Nerik.[5] During the reign of Hantili's son, Tudhaliya II (c. 1430 BC), "Tudhaliya's 3rd campaign was against the Kaskas."[6] His successor Arnuwanda I composed a prayer for the gods to return Nerik to the empire; he also mentioned Kammama and Zalpuwa as cities which he claimed had been Hittite but which were now under the Kaskas.
Link for photo
Anatolia
Hittite counter attack:
Now, as has already been established, the Hittites hit back, and won the war.
But, in fact, the war would continue from this moment on, probably right up until the time of the Roman empire, if not beyond.
Early history
Tudhaliya III and Suppiluliuma (c. 1375–1350 BC) set up their court in Samuha and invaded Azzi-Hayasa from there. The Kaska intervened, but Suppiluliuma defeated them; after Suppiluliuma had fully pacified the region, Tudhaliya and Suppiluliuma were able to move on Hayasa and defeat it too, despite some devastating guerrilla tactics at their rear. Some twelve tribes of Kaska then united under Piyapili, but Piyapili was no match for Suppiluliuma. Eventually, Tudhaliya and Suppiluliuma returned Hattusa to the Hittites. But the Kaska continued to be a menace both inside and out and a constant military threat. They are said to have fielded as many as 9,000 warriors and 800 chariots.[10]
Arzawa revolt:
The Kaska war would be continued with the Arzawa revolt, when this time, subjugated native Greeks/Romans would rise up against the Hittites.
Involvement in Asia minor
In c. 1400 BC, Hittite records mention the military activities of an Ahhiyawan warlord, Attarsiya, a possible Hittite way of writing the Greek name Atreus, who attacked Hittite vassals in western Anatolia.[53] Later, in c. 1315 BC, an anti-Hittite rebellion headed by Arzawa, a Hittite vassal state, received support from Ahhiyawa.[54] Meanwhile, Ahhiyawa appears to be in control of a number of islands in the Aegean, an impression also supported by archaeological evidence.[55]
Link for photo
Middle east
Mycenaean collapse:
However, the end result of the Arzawa revolt was not good for the native Greeks/Romans, that found themselves having to flee their homeland and seek refuge on the islands of the Mede, as the Northerners they had tried to remove from Anatolia, had responded with an almost total conquest of Greek mainland.
Final collapse
None of the defence measures appear to have prevented the final destruction and collapse of the Mycenaean states. A second destruction struck Mycenae in c. 1190 BC or shortly thereafter. This event marked the end of Mycenae as a major power. The site was then reoccupied, but on a smaller scale.[62] The palace of Pylos, in the southwestern Peloponnese, was destroyed in c. 1180 BC.[68][69] The Linear B archives found there, preserved by the heat of the fire that destroyed the palace, mention hasty defence preparations due to an imminent attack without giving any detail about the attacking force.[64]
As a result of this turmoil, specific regions in mainland Greece witnessed a dramatic population decrease, especially Boeotia, Argolis and Messenia.[64] Mycenaean refugees migrated to Cyprus and the Levantine coast.[69] Nevertheless, other regions on the edge of the Mycenaean world prospered, such as the Ionian islands, the northwestern Peloponnese, parts of Attica and a number of Aegean islands.[64] The acropolis of Athens, oddly, appears to have avoided destruction.[64]
Link for photo
Mycenaean depopulation
Fall of Hittite empire:
The Hittites would eventually be removed from Mesopotamia.
But not by the Greeks.
It would be the Neo-Assyrians that would send the Hittites out of Mesopotamia.
Hittites
Between the 15th and 13th centuries BC, the Empire of Hattusa, conventionally called the Hittite Empire, came into conflict with the New Kingdom of Egypt, the Middle Assyrian Empire and the empire of the Mitanni for control of the Near East. The Middle Assyrian Empire eventually emerged as the dominant power and annexed much of the Hittite Empire, while the remainder was sacked by Phrygian newcomers to the region. After c. 1180 BC, during the Late Bronze Age collapse, the Hittites splintered into several independent Syro-Hittite states, some of which survived until the eighth century BC before succumbing to the Neo-Assyrian Empire.
Link for photo
Asia minor
Scoloti:
However the Hittites would only retreat to the otherside of the Black sea, were they would become known as the Scoloti, and would join forces with the Cimmerians.
Scythians
The Scythians are generally believed to have been of Iranian origin.[6] They spoke a language of the Scythian branch of the Iranian languages,[7] and practiced a variant of ancient Iranian religion.[8] Among the earliest peoples to master mounted warfare,[9] the Scythians replaced the Cimmerians as the dominant power on the Pontic Steppe in the 8th century BC.[10] During this time they and related peoples came to dominate the entire Eurasian Steppe from the Carpathian Mountains in the west to Ordos Plateau in the east,[11][12] creating what has been called the first Central Asian nomadic empire.[10][13] Based in what is modern-day Ukraine and southern Russia, the Scythians called themselves Scoloti and were led by a nomadic warrior aristocracy known as the Royal Scythians.
The Scythians are generally believed to have been of Iranian origin.[6] They spoke a language of the Scythian branch of the Iranian languages,[7] and practiced a variant of ancient Iranian religion.[8] Among the earliest peoples to master mounted warfare,[9] the Scythians replaced the Cimmerians as the dominant power on the Pontic Steppe in the 8th century BC.[10]
Link for photo
Scythia
War of the Medes:
The fallen Hittites would now retreat to the otherside of the Black sea, and turn their focus purely on conquering Greece.
Scythians
In the 7th century BC, the Scythians crossed the Caucasus and frequently raided the Middle East along with the Cimmerians, playing an important role in the political developments of the region.[10][14] Around 650–630 BC, Scythians briefly dominated the Medes of the western Iranian Plateau,[15][16]
Link for photo
Scoloti comb
Welshmen:
Contemporary scholars now agree, that the Scolotis partners in crime, the "Cimmerian", is from the root word Cymru, which is the ancient name for Wales.
legacy
Early modern historians asserted Cimmerian descent for the Celts or the Germans, arguing from the similarity of Cimmerii to Cimbri or Cymry. The etymology of Cymro "Welshman" (plural: Cymry), connected to the Cimmerians by 17th-century Celticists, is now accepted by Celtic linguists as being derived from a Brythonic word *kom-brogos, meaning "compatriot".[21
Link for photo.svg)
Welsh flag
First Messenian war:
This of course, would all lead to the first Messenian war, when Sparta would expel native Greeks and native Spartans.
First Messenian war
The First Messenian War was a war between Messenia and Sparta. It began in 743 BC and ended in 724 BC, according to the dates given by Pausanias).
The war continued the rivalry between the Achaeans) and the Dorians that had been initiated by the purported Return of the Heracleidae. Both sides utilized an explosive incident to settle the rivalry by full-scale war. The war was prolonged into 20 years. The result was a Spartan victory. Messenia was depopulated by emigration of the Achaeans to other states. Those who did not emigrate were reduced socially to helots, or serfs. Their descendants were held in hereditary subjection for centuries until the Spartan state finally needed them for defense.
Link for photo
Messenian Greece
Dorians:
Now this is where confusion sets in.
The Trojan horse effect.
You see, the Dorians that invaded Sparta from the North, pushed the indigenous Spartans out to the Medesm and the Dorians assumed the name "Spartans", in the place of the original Spartans.
This means, that because we now have Spartans fighting Medians, people think that the Spartans are the Greeks, and the Medians are the foreigners.
But this is not the case.
The Spartans are actually the Dorians.
The Dorians carried the flag that had originally belonged to the very people they were expelling from Greece.
Dark ages
The earliest certain evidence of human settlement in the region of Sparta consists of pottery dating from the Middle Neolithic period, found in the vicinity of Kouphovouno some two kilometres (1.2 miles) south-southwest of Sparta.[28] These are the earliest traces of the original Mycenaean Spartan civilisation represented in Homer's Iliad.[citation needed]
This civilization seems to have fallen into decline by the late Bronze Age, when, according to Herodotus, Macedonian tribes from the north (called Dorians by those they conquered) marched into the Peloponnese and, subjugating the local tribes, settled there.[27] The Dorians seem to have set about expanding the frontiers of Spartan territory almost before they had established their own state.[29]
Link for photo
False flag
Second Messenian war:
One of the biggest mistakes the Spartans made, was expelling the Messenians from their homeland.
I will reveal why shortly.
However the second Messenian war has a great deal to do with why.
You see, the Romans had until now, been completely demolished by the Dorians/Scythians/Hittites/Spartans, whatever you want to call them, but in around 660 BC they re-emerged on Greek mainland and began to fight back.
They actually won a battle, and began pushing the "Spartans" out, but the Spartans did regain their composure and won the war.
At least, for now.
War
Furthermore, the Spartans were able to quell the revolts following the death of the Argive commander. With the aid and support of the Athenian schoolmaster and poet Tyrtaeus, the Spartan Army was able to crush the Messenians and re-establish their helot status. As a result of this war, Spartan society became a strong militaristic power in the Mediterranean in order to control the masses along the Peloponnese and to prevent further rebellions brought on by the helots who later did manage to break away from Spartan rule around 350 BC.[6]
Bakenranef:
Now, do you remember i said that one of the biggest mistakes the Dorians made was expelling the Romans to the Medes?
Well here is why.
The Romans would re-emerge in Italy, according to Egyptian pharoah Bakenranef in 725 BC.
The Romans first arrived in the Bay of Naples.
Bakenranef
,[4] "Perhaps some Greeks, unknown to us, had had close dealings with him; from his reign we have scarab-seals bearing his Egyptian name, one of which found its way into a contemporary Greek grave on Ischia up near the Bay of Naples." Ischia was the earliest of eighth-century BC Greek colonies in Italy.
Link for photo
Bakenranef stele
Ischia:
And archaeologists do agree, that right around this time, Messenaean Greeks turned up in Ischia.
Ancient times
An acropolis site of the Monte Vico area was inhabited from the Bronze Age, as Mycenaean and Iron Age pottery findings attest. Euboean Greeks from Eretria and Chalcis arrived in the 8th century BC to establish an emporium for trade with the Etruscans of the mainland.
Link for photo
Ischia
Latin league:
Now, the Romans are pushing themselves ever so close to the territory of the Latin league.
Latin league
The Latin League (c. 7th century BC – 338 BC)[1] was an ancient confederation of about 30 villages and tribes in the region of Latium near the ancient city of Rome, organized for mutual defense. The term "Latin League" is one coined by modern historians with no precise Latin equivalent.[2]
Link for photo
Cities of the Latin league
Roman republic:
Now the Romans would eventually invade the territory of the Latin league, and create the Roman republic.
And the Romans were not Latins.
As we have already established on other threads, Latin is a language the Greeks got from Dorians.
Dorians, would of course, be part of the Latin league, which has it's capital and Alba Longa, 12 miles outside Rome.
Roman leadership of Latin league
During the reign of Tarquinius Superbus, the Latins were persuaded to acknowledge the leadership of Rome.
Latin league Etrusans, no:
And no, the Etruscans had nothing to do with the Latin league.
The Etruscans allied themselves with the Romans against the Latins, and the Latin league was an enemy of the Etruscans.
Latin league creation
It was originally created for protection against enemies from surrounding areas (the Etruscans) under the leadership of the city of Alba Longa.[1]
Roman republic:
The Greco-Romans were successful in overthrowing the Roman kingdom of the Latin league, and the created the Roman republic, which later evolved in to the Roman empire.
Roman republic
The Roman Republic (Latin: Rēs pūblica Rōmāna [ˈreːs ˈpuːblɪka roːˈmaːna]) was the era of classical Roman civilization, led by the Roman people, beginning with the overthrow of the Roman Kingdom, traditionally dated to 509 BC, and ending in 27 BC with the establishment of the Roman Empire. It was during this period that Rome's control expanded from the city's immediate surroundings to hegemony over the entire Mediterranean world.
Link for photo
Early Roman expansion
Marseille:
However it was not only Rome the expelled Mycenaeans would turn up.
But also the South coast of France.
History of France
In 600 BC, Ionian Greeks from Phocaea founded the colony of Massalia (present-day Marseille) on the shores of the Mediterranean Sea,
Link for photo
Massalia coins in Gaul
Gaul:
Now, Gaul was a Celtic colony.
It covered most of France and Northern Italy before the Greco-Roman invasion, and expanded to include other parts too, including Greece.
But this period, marked the beginning of a Celtic depopulation from mainland europe.
Gaul
Covering large parts of modern-day France, Belgium, northwest Germany and northern Italy, Gaul was inhabited by many Celtic and Belgae tribes whom the Romans referred to as Gauls and who spoke the Gaulish language roughly between the Oise) and the Garonne (Gallia Celtica), according to Julius Caesar.
Link for photo
End of Celtic expansion
Summary:
Now as we have already established on other threads, the Gaulish language was Gaelic, and Irish people were Gaelic speakers.
Therefore, the Irish high kings likely had a lot of interests in Italy and France.
So if we suddenly had Irish high kings taking off in a fleet of boats around this period, to wage war and plunder, then it would be likely they were going to war with the Greco-Romans in Italy and France.
submitted by StevenStevens43 to AhrensburgCulture [link] [comments]


2020.09.12 02:44 StevenStevens43 Joan of Arc I

Joan of Arc I
Brutus of Troy:
According to Celtic mythology, Brutus of Troy was the first king of Britain in 1112 BC.
Brutus of Troy
Brutus, or Brute of Troy, is a legendary descendant of the Trojan hero Aeneas, known in medieval British history as the eponymous founder and first king of Britain.
Link for photo
Brutus
Aeneas Silvius:
Brutus is supposed to be the Brother of Aeneas Silvius..
Historia
.[1] A more detailed story, set before the foundation of Rome, follows, in which Brutus is the grandson or great grandson of Aeneas
Link for photo.jpg)
Aeneas Silvius
Alba longa:
And they are both considered to be descended from the first king of Alba longa.
Aeneas Silvias
Aeneas Silvius (said to have reigned 1110-1079 BC)[1] is the son of Silvius), in some versions grandson of Ascanius and great-grandson, grandson or son of Aeneas. He is the third in the list of the mythical kings of Alba Longa in Latium, and the Silvii regarded him as the founder of their house.[2]
Link for photo
Alba longa
Latin league:
Now, Alba longa, is, in actual fact, quite factually an early aristocratic location, approximately 12 miles from modern day Rome, that was subjugated by the early Romans in the 7th Century, and as we have already established in a previous thread, named "Proto-Greek trojans", Latin was a language that the Romans picked up from the Dorian invasion, which was a Hittite invasion, from Indo-Aryans.
Alba longa
Alba Longa (occasionally written Albalonga in Italian sources) was an ancient Latin) city in Central Italy, 12 miles (19 km) southeast of Rome, in the Alban Hills. Founder and head of the Latin League, it was destroyed by the Roman Kingdom around the middle of the 7th century BC, and its inhabitants were forced to settle in Rome.
Link for photo
Alba location
Scotland:
I would also just like to quickly point out, that Alba "has always" either, been the name for Scotland, or alternative Gaelic name for Scotland, and was even the name for the Island of Britain, before the Romans pushed the Alba border up to Hadrians wall.
Alba
Alba (English: /ˈælbə/) is the Scottish Gaelic name (pronounced [ˈal̪ˠapə]) for Scotland. It is cognate with the Irish term Alba (gen. Alban, dat. Albain) and the Manx term Nalbin, the two other Goidelic Insular Celtic languages, as well as contemporary words used in Cornish (Alban) and Welsh (Yr Alban), both of which are Brythonic Insular Celtic languages. (The third surviving Brythonic language, Breton, instead uses Bro-Skos, meaning 'country of the Scots'.) In the past these terms were names for Great Britain as a whole, related to the Brythonic name Albion.
Link for photo
Alba
Corineus:
Now Brutus was not the only "Trojan" that had been supposedly enslaved in Greece, to have ended up escaping enslavement, and becoming a king of Britain.
Corineus partnered Brutus, and became king of Cornwall.
Corineus
Corineus, in medieval British legend, was a prodigious warrior, a fighter of giants, and the eponymous founder of Cornwall.
According to Geoffrey of Monmouth's History of the Kings of Britain (1136), he led the descendants of the Trojans who fled with Antenor) after the Trojan War and settled on the coasts of the Tyrrhenian Sea. After Brutus, a descendant of the Trojan prince Aeneas, had been exiled from Italy and liberated the enslaved Trojans in Greece, he encountered Corineus and his people
Link for photo
Corineus. likely location stonehenge
Trojan war:
Now, whilst all we have for the Trojan war, is incoherent, likely usurped myths and legends, this does not take away that fact, that at this period in time, there truly was a war being fought between the Indo-European Hittite empire, and Greece.
As we established in the previous "Proto-Greek trojan thread, the Kaskas were a Greek army that attacked the Hittites, causing the Hittites to add Greece to their list of enemies.
Early history
The Kaska, probably originating from the eastern shore of the Propontis,[4] may have displaced the speakers of the Palaic language from their home in Pala).[citation needed]
The Kaska first appear in the Hittite prayer inscriptions that date from the reign of Hantili II, c. 1450 BC, and make references to their movement into the ruins of the holy city of Nerik.[5] During the reign of Hantili's son, Tudhaliya II (c. 1430 BC), "Tudhaliya's 3rd campaign was against the Kaskas."[6] His successor Arnuwanda I composed a prayer for the gods to return Nerik to the empire; he also mentioned Kammama and Zalpuwa as cities which he claimed had been Hittite but which were now under the Kaskas. Arnuwanda attempted to mollify some of the Kaska tribes by means of tribute.
Link for photo
Trojan horse
Ramesses III:
Now, as we have already established in many previous threads, the real enemies of the Hittites, were the Egyptians, fighting over the land of Mesopotamia.
And Ramesses III won a battle against Sea peoples, and those that he did not kill, he enslaved and enlisted in to the Egyptian army, and then rehomed in Dan, in Canaan.
Tenure of constant war
Ramesses III incorporated the Sea Peoples as subject peoples and settled them in southern Canaan. Their presence in Canaan may have contributed to the formation of new states in this region such as Philistia after the collapse of the Egyptian Empire in Asia. Ramesses III was also compelled to fight invading Libyan tribesmen in two major campaigns in Egypt's Western Delta in his Year 5 and Year 11 respectively.[6]
Link for photo
Ramesses III
Northerners from all lands:
And of course, as we have already established in previous threads, Merneptah described the Sea peoples as being "Northerners from all lands".
Campaigns
[Beginning of the victory that his majesty achieved in the land of Libya] -I, Ekwesh, Teresh, Lukka, Sherden, Shekelesh, Northerners coming from all lands.
Link for photo
Merneptah
Romulus and Remus:
Ok, so, now that i have implied that it would not be in the least bit unbelievable, that Hittites from Northern regions, did indeed escape enslavement whilst making war in the Medes, during this precise period, i will now go to one of Romes greatest legends.
Apparently the founders of Rome, were Romulus and Remus, from the first king of Alba.
Alba longa
In legend, Romulus and Remus, founders of Rome, had come from the royal dynasty of Alba Longa, which in Virgil's Aeneid had been the bloodline of Aeneas, a son of Venus).[1]
Link for photo
She wolf and Twins
Cunedagius & Marganus
Now, if there is any truth in the Romulus & Remus legend, it would almost definitely mean that Rome was founded by Brits, from Albion.
This is due to the fact, that the Romulus and Remus legend, is almost definitely taken from the Celtic legend, of Cordelia.
Cordelia of Britain
Queen Cordelia (or Cordeilla) was a legendary Queen of the Britons), as recounted by Geoffrey of Monmouth. She was the youngest daughter of Leir and the second ruling queen of pre-Roman Britain.
Cordelia of Britain:
You see, Cordelia of Britain, is said to have been the first born princess of Queen Goneril and King Regan, right around the time of the Romulus and Remus narrative.
Now, Cordelias parents decided to split up her kingdom between her younger brothers and sisters, and she was so displeased with this, that she ended up being deported from Britain, and went to live in Gaul, with king of the Franks.
However, a few years later, she came back to Britain with the King of the Franks and his army, and conquered Britain.
King Aganippus temporarly became king of Britain, before dying, and Cordelia became queen of Britain.
A proper she-wolf?
Legend
Leir became exiled from Britain and fled to Cordelia in Gaul, seeking a restoration of his throne which had been seized by the husbands of his other daughters. She raised an army and invaded Britain, defeating the ruling dukes and restoring Leir. After Leir's death three years later, Cordelia's husband Aganippus died, and she returned to Britain and was crowned queen.[1]
Link for photo
Cordelia
Death of Cordelia:
Cordelia ruled peacefully for five years.
But her sisters sons despised her, and they killed her, and crowned themselves.
However Cuniedagius ended up killing Marganus.
Legend
Cordelia ruled peacefully for five years until her sisters' sons, Cunedagius and Marganus, came of age. As the dukes of Cornwall and Albany, respectively, they despised the rule of a woman when they claimed proper descent to rule. They raised armies and fought against Cordelia, who fought in person at numerous battles. She was captured and imprisoned by her nephews. In her grief, she committed suicide. Cunedagius succeeded her in the kingship of Britain in the lands southwest of the Humber. Marganus ruled the region northeast of the Humber. Civil war broke out between them soon after,[1] with Marganus' being defeated and killed.
Link for photo
Cordelias execution
Rivallo:
Perhaps Cunedagius killed Marganus over rulership of Rome?
After-all, Cunedagius son, and next king of Britain, was named "Rivallo".
Sounds Italian.
Cunedagius
Cunedagius killed him and became king of all of Britain. He ruled all of Britain for 33 years and was succeeded by his son Rivallo.[2]
Geoffrey synchronizes Cunedagius' reign with the ministry of the Jewish prophet Isaiah and the founding of Rome by Romulus and Remus.[2] Both events are dated to the 8th century BC.
Rome:
And it is not true that Rome was only founded "after" the Romulus and Remus legend.
Archaeological evidence supports Rome being an established City, dating back to the 8th Century BC.
Earliest history
These developments, which according to archaeological evidence took place during the mid-eighth century BC, can be considered as the "birth" of the city.[21]
Link for photo
Italy
14,000 years:
And archaeological evidence also suggests, that the city of Rome was slowly built by developing villages, dating as far back as the Younger dryas
Earliest history
While there have been discoveries of archaeological evidence of human occupation of the Rome area from approximately 14,000 years ago, the dense layer of much younger debris obscures Palaeolithic and Neolithic sites.[7]
Link for photo
Pyramid of Gaius
submitted by StevenStevens43 to AhrensburgCulture [link] [comments]


2020.09.11 21:21 Combinatorilliance I made a histogram of the dates cited in the WPATH SoC v7

I made a histogram of the dates cited in the WPATH SoC v7
I noticed a lot of comments about how the WPATH references many outdated studies. I don't know what is considered outdated in the medical world, but I did want to at least contribute a little bit.
So, I copied all the references out of the SoC v7, and made a histogram that shows the age of each citation relative to 2012, the year v7 was released in. Made in Excel. The raw dates are available on pastebin here
In total, the SoC has 249 references, the histogram below shows the relative age of each citation. Ie (2012 - citation_date).
The average relative age of each reference is 10 years, rounded down. The median is 7 years.
https://preview.redd.it/dl0ddljmjkm51.png?width=853&format=png&auto=webp&s=5491a87bc5374e3ee9c46bfe88c5d5f72cf118be
One promising thing I see here is that the vast majority of the studies were recent at the time of publication. This does make me very hopeful of the upcoming version 8 of the document, where I assume the same will hold.
It is clear that there are a lot of references that are 10 years or older. I have no experience in the medical world, I have no point of reference, so I don't know if that's normal/bad/good or something else.
Make of it what you wish, I was just curious.
submitted by Combinatorilliance to DrWillPowers [link] [comments]


2020.09.11 19:44 StevenStevens43 Proto-Greek Trojans

Proto-Greek Trojans
Greek language:
The Greek language evolved around 1,500 years ago from a branch of Indo-European, which means that around 3,500 years ago, there was likely somekind of Indo-European invasion, in to Greek lands.
This language that arrived from Proto-Greek Indo-European, also includes "Latin".
Greek language
Greek (Greek: Ελληνικά, romanized: Elliniká) is an independent branch of the Indo-European family of languages, native to Greece, Cyprus, Albania, other parts of the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea. It has the longest documented history of any living Indo-European language, spanning at least 3,500 years of written records.[3] Its writing system has been the Greek alphabet for the major part of its history; other systems, such as Linear B and the Cypriot syllabary, were used previously.[4] The alphabet arose from the Phoenician script and was in turn the basis of the Latin, Cyrillic, Armenian, Coptic, Gothic, and many other writing systems.
Link for photo
Proto-Greek expansion
Dorian invasion:
This invasion, is actually named "the Dorian invasion".
Dorian invasion
The Dorian invasion is a concept devised by historians of Ancient Greece to explain the replacement of pre-classical dialects and traditions in southern Greece by the ones that prevailed in Classical Greece. The latter were named Dorian by the ancient Greek writers, after the Dorians, the historical population that spoke them.
Link for photo_en.svg)
Dorian invasion
Hittite empire:
Now, the reason that there was a war between Indo-Europeans, and Greeks, all stems from the fact that the Hittite empire had to come down from Northern lands, and up from Indus Valley in numbers and strength and make Anatolia the base for their empire, due to the fact they were fighting a native Egyptian expansion in to Mesopotamia and beyond, led by Thutmose III.
Hittites
The Hittites (/ˈhɪtaɪts/) (Ancient Greek: Χετταίοι, Latin Hetthaei) were an Anatolian people who played an important role in establishing an empire centered on Hattusa in north-central Anatolia around 1600 BC. This empire reached its height during the mid-14th century BC under Šuppiluliuma I, when it encompassed an area that included most of Anatolia as well as parts of the northern Levant and Upper Mesopotamia.
Between the 15th and 13th centuries BC, the Empire of Hattusa, conventionally called the Hittite Empire, came into conflict with the New Kingdom of Egypt, the Middle Assyrian Empire and the empire of the Mitanni for control of the Near East.
Link for photo
Hittite Empire
Thutmose III:
Now, Thutmose III, who was the ancestor of Ahmose I, who was the native Egyptian pharoah who expelled the Hyksos from Egypt in 1549 BC, continued the expulsion in to Mesopotamian lands, until he was actually subjucating Indo-Aryan kings of Mitanni.
Military campaigns
Widely considered a military genius by historians, Thutmose III conducted at least 16 campaigns in 20 years.[14] He was an active expansionist ruler, sometimes called Egypt's greatest conqueror or "the Napoleon of Egypt."[15] He is recorded to have captured 350 cities during his rule and conquered much of the Near East from the Euphrates to Nubia during seventeen known military campaigns. He was the first pharaoh after Thutmose I to cross the Euphrates, doing so during his campaign against Mitanni.
Link for photo
Thutmose III
Amenhotep III:
Now, a superstud grandson of Thutmose III, actually ordered all the kings of Mesopotamia to send their daughters to him, for marraige, and this included two Indo-Aryan princesses.
I assume the reason there was two sent from Mitanni, was due to the fact one would have been Indo, and the other, Aryan.
So all the kings of Mesopotamia, and surrounding regions, sent their princess daughters to marry him.
Family
Amenhotep III is known to have married several foreign women:
Gilukhepa, the daughter of Shuttarna II of Mitanni, in the tenth year of his reign.[12]
Tadukhepa, the daughter of his ally Tushratta of Mitanni, Around Year 36 of his reign.[13][14]
A daughter of Kurigalzu, king of Babylon.[14]
A daughter of Kadashman-Enlil, king of Babylon.[14]
A daughter of Tarhundaradu, ruler of Arzawa.[14]
A daughter of the ruler of Ammia (in modern Syria).[14]
Link for photo
Amenhotep III
Amarna letter EA4:
Now, according to the Amarna letter, one of the subjugated kings of Mesopotamia, later on wrote to their son in law, Amenhotep III, and requested that he return the favour, and return one of his Egyptian princesses to marry one of their handsom princes, and Amenhotep wrote back, virtually saying (in not so many words), sorry, only the male line-age has access to the throne of other countries, and Egypt is not in the business of pimping out it's daughters.
Now, if the Indo-european kings of Mitanni were at the centre of an Indo-European empire, that stretched across the Eurasian continent, then they would take this as Amenhotep virtually announcing himself the king of Afro-eurasia.
His claim would be, the most male chauvinist claim ever made in the history of this world.
With that claim being, his accessing and invading a foreign princess, equals accessing and invading that princesses country!
Life
In one famous correspondence—Amarna letter EA 4—Amenhotep III is quoted by the Babylonian king Kadashman-Enlil I in firmly rejecting the latter's entreaty to marry one of this pharaoh's daughters:
From time immemorial, no daughter of the king of Egy[pt] is given to anyone.[18]
Amenhotep III's refusal to allow one of his daughters to be married to the Babylonian monarch may indeed be connected with Egyptian traditional royal practices that could provide a claim upon the throne through marriage to a royal princess
Link for photo
One of Superstuds many foreign princesses
Kings of Mitanni:
Now, the kings of Mitanni were actually Indo-Aryan.
Not Indo-European.
You see, Indo-European is a modern political correct term, originating after the battle of the ten kings in 1400 BC, when Indo-Aryan mixed with Dravidian, to create the Indo-European language.
But, before 1400 BC, the proto-Indo european language, was in fact Indo-Aryan.
Therefore, this also means, that the Dorian invasion, was in fact, an Indo-Aryan conquest, and not an Indo-European conquest, as Greece is also a part of europe, populated by Romano looking peoples, and at that point in time, during the Dorian invasion, Greeks did not speak a European language.
Thus, the languag did not become european, until Aryans invaded Greece.
Also, as the Mitanni were mostly populated by Semitic speaking Arabs, and the Aryan-Indo princesses of Mitanni were now Egyptians, the kingdom of Mitanni ended up allying itself with Egypt, becoming an enemy of the Hittite empire
Mitanni
While the Mitanni kings were supposedly Indo-Aryan, they used the language of the local people, which was at that time a non-Indo-European language, Hurrian. Their sphere of influence is shown in Hurrian place names, personal names and the spread through Syria and the Levant of a distinct pottery type.
Link for photo
Mitanni
Kaska invasion:
Now, how did the war between Greece and the Hittites begin?
Well, in actual fact, the Greeks for a good part of history, actually allied themselves with the native Egyptian empire.
This would be to do with the fact that they felt Aryans were invading their land. Probably dating as far back as the younger dryas, and that European mainland belonged to Greeks, and thus they likely felt it would be a good political move to help the native Egyptians defeat the Hittite empire, and send them back to Scandinavia, and retake european mainland, so, in around 1450 BC, the Kaska invaded Anatolia, which had been invaded by the Indo-Aryans, and the Greeks likely felt Anatolia belonged to them.
Kaskians
The Kaska, probably originating from the eastern shore of the Propontis,[4] may have displaced the speakers of the Palaic language from their home in Pala).[citation needed]
The Kaska first appear in the Hittite prayer inscriptions that date from the reign of Hantili II, c. 1450 BC, and make references to their movement into the ruins of the holy city of Nerik.[5] During the reign of Hantili's son, Tudhaliya II (c. 1430 BC), "Tudhaliya's 3rd campaign was against the Kaskas."[6] His successor Arnuwanda I composed a prayer for the gods to return Nerik to the empire; he also mentioned Kammama and Zalpuwa as cities which he claimed had been Hittite but which were now under the Kaskas. Arnuwanda attempted to mollify some of the Kaska tribes by means of tribute.
Co-regency:
However, a joint rulership of Tudhaliya and Suppiluliuma resulted in a counter invasion of Greece, from the Hittites, and the Hittites defeated the Kaska.
Kaska
Tudhaliya III and Suppiluliuma (c. 1375–1350 BC) set up their court in Samuha and invaded Azzi-Hayasa from there. The Kaska intervened, but Suppiluliuma defeated them; after Suppiluliuma had fully pacified the region, Tudhaliya and Suppiluliuma were able to move on Hayasa and defeat it too, despite some devastating guerrilla tactics at their rear. Some twelve tribes of Kaska then united under Piyapili, but Piyapili was no match for Suppiluliuma. Eventually, Tudhaliya and Suppiluliuma returned Hattusa to the Hittites. But the Kaska continued to be a menace both inside and out and a constant military threat. They are said to have fielded as many as 9,000 warriors and 800 chariots.[10]
Suppiluliumu:
Of course, Suppliluliuma, is very likely the same person as the Hindu god of war, Subrahumanya.
Kartikeya
Kartikeya (Sanskrit: कार्त्तिकेय, IAST: Kārttikeya), also known as Skanda, Kumara,[4], Murugan and Subrahmanya, is the Hindu god of war.[5][
Link for photo
Superman
Tudhaliya III:
Tudhaliya III, is likely Eochaid Ollathair in Irish mythology.
Or, Ruad Rofhessa, depending upon which Irish clan one is from.
The reason that Tudhaliya III was likely the same person as Eochaid Ollathair, is because Eochaid Ollathair reigned as the High king of Ireland during the same period Tudhaliya III reigned as emperor of the Aryan branch of the Hittites.
The Dagda
The Dagda's name is thought to mean "the good god" or "the great god". His other names include Eochu or Eochaid Ollathair ("horseman, great father" or "all-father"), Ruad Rofhessa ("mighty one/lord of great knowledge")
King Thorri:
It is also likely, that Eochaid Ollathair was known as "King Thorri" in Scandinavia, and as Tudhaliya III, in Anatolia.
It is also likely, that they all got remembered by everyone, in pseudo legends, as Thor.
King of Kvenland
Hversu Noregr byggðist has very similar usage for the title. This time, the great-grandson of Fornjót (who is said to be "a man"), Snær, and his son Thorri are told to be kings. Kvenland now appears in relation to Thorri, of whom it is said that "he ruled over Gothland, Kvenland (Kænlandi), and Finland". Fornjót's great-grandson Snær is also mentioned in Ynglingasaga, in relation to Finland.[4]
Link for photo
Thor
Trojan war:
Now, just in case you do not grasp yet, the significance of this war, the Kaska invasion was the roots for what would become the Trojan wars.
Involvement in Asia minor
The Hittite-Ahhiyawan confrontation in Wilusa, the Hittite name for Troy, may provide the historical foundation for the Trojan War tradition.[59] As a result of this instability, the Hittite king initiated correspondence in order to convince his Ahhiyawan counterpart to restore peace in the region. The Hittite record mentions a certain Tawagalawa, a possible Hittite translation for Greek Eteocles, as brother of the king of Ahhiyawa.[58]
Link for photo
Greece before collapse
Collapse:
After hundreds of years of fighting, the Greeks would go from equals, to almost being totally expelled to the Mediterranean Islands.
Final collapse
As a result of this turmoil, specific regions in mainland Greece witnessed a dramatic population decrease, especially Boeotia, Argolis and Messenia.[64] Mycenaean refugees migrated to Cyprus and the Levantine coast.[69] Nevertheless, other regions on the edge of the Mycenaean world prospered, such as the Ionian islands, the northwestern Peloponnese, parts of Attica and a number of Aegean islands.[64]
Link for photo
Final collapse
Psamtik I:
Now, by the reign of Psamtik I, in 660 BC, Egyptian and Greek allied relations were well and truly sealed.
Military campaigns
Psamtik won Egypt's independence from the Assyrian Empire and restored Egypt's prosperity during his 54-year reign. The pharaoh proceeded to establish close relations with archaic Greece and also encouraged many Greek settlers to establish colonies in Egypt and serve in the Egyptian army. In particular, he settled some Greeks at Tahpanhes (Daphnae).[5]
Link for photo
Psamtik I
Investigation into the origin of language:
Now, according to Greek sources, Psamtik I conducted an investigation in to the origins of language, and his conclusion was, that Phrygian pre-dated Greek.
Invetigation into the origins of language
he Greek historian Herodotus conveyed an anecdote about Psamtik in the second volume of his Histories) (2.2). During his visit to Egypt, Herodotus heard that Psammetichus ("Psamṯik") sought to discover the origin of language by conducting an experiment with two children. Allegedly he gave two newborn babies to a shepherd, with the instructions that no one should speak to them, but that the shepherd should feed and care for them while listening to determine their first words. The hypothesis was that the first word would be uttered in the root language of all people. When one of the children cried "βεκός" (bekós) with outstretched arms, the shepherd reported this to Psammetichus, who concluded that the word was Phrygian because that was the sound of the Phrygian word for "bread". Thus, they concluded that the Phrygians were an older people than the Egyptians, and that Phrygian was the original language of men.
Link for photo
Psamtik writing
Phrygians:
Now whilst the story of the experiment is likely an euhemerism.
It is still indicative that Psamtik I believed Greek language derived from Phrygian.
And the Phrygian are indeed thought to be Indo-European, by scholars and historians.
Of course, the language may have been Indo-european by the time it became the official language spoken by Greeks.
But, at the time of the first of the Dorian invasion, the language would almost definitely have still been more Indo-Aryan.
Phrygians
The Phrygians (Greek: Φρύγες, Phruges or Phryges) were an ancient Indo-European people, initially dwelling in the southern Balkans – according to Herodotus – under the name of Bryges (Briges), changing it to Phryges after their final migration to Anatolia, via the Hellespont. However, the Balkan origins of the Phrygians are debated by modern scholars.[1]
Link for photo
Phrygians
Summary:
Therefore, it is quite apparent that Northerners, united with Indus valley, were likely Indo-Aryans that counter invaded Greece, and left Greeks with the Latin language, that would later be adopted by Romans.
submitted by StevenStevens43 to AhrensburgCulture [link] [comments]


2020.09.11 12:02 autotldr High-fidelity record of Earth's climate history puts current changes in context

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 85%. (I'm a bot)
For the first time, climate scientists have compiled a continuous, high-fidelity record of variations in Earth's climate extending 66 million years into the past.
The record reveals four distinctive climate states, which the researchers dubbed Hothouse, Warmhouse, Coolhouse, and Icehouse.
These major climate states persisted for millions and sometimes tens of millions of years, and within each one the climate shows rhythmic variations corresponding to changes in Earth's orbit around the sun.
Each climate state has a distinctive response to orbital variations, which drive relatively small changes in global temperatures compared with the dramatic shifts between different climate states.
"An astronomically dated record of Earth's climate and its predictability over the last 66 million years," Science.
Citation: High-fidelity record of Earth's climate history puts current changes in context retrieved 11 September 2020 from https://phys.org/news/2020-09-high-fidelity-earth-climate-history-current.
Summary Source FAQ Feedback Top keywords: climate#1 record#2 variations#3 Earth#4 million#5
Post found in /worldnews, /climatechange and /TopScience.
NOTICE: This thread is for discussing the submission topic. Please do not discuss the concept of the autotldr bot here.
submitted by autotldr to autotldr [link] [comments]


2020.09.10 06:09 StevenStevens43 Old MacDonald

Old MacDonald
House of Woden:
Now in this article, there is going to be a sensational claim made, and the claim will likely not make sense if one reads this article, without before reading the information required to understand it, first.
Therefore one should click on the below link, and read that article first, then come back and read this one.
House of Woden
Oengus Olmucaid 1050-1032 BC:
Now i want to begin with something slightly irrelevant and trivial.
I don't know why, but there is just something about the name Oengus Olmucaid that makes me want to start singing "Old Macdonald had a farm".
Therefore, i have named this article, Old MacDonald, even if there is no connection between Old MacDonald, and Oengus Olmucaid.
Old MacDonald
Old MacDonald had a farm, E-I-E-I-O!And on his farm he had a cow, E-I-E-I-O!With a moo-moo here and a moo-moo there,Here a moo, there a moo,Everywhere a moo-moo,Old MacDonald had a farm, E-I-E-I-O!
Link for photo
Old MacDonald
Oengus conquered Scotland:
Now, i am not sure from the quote below, what is more unbelievable.
The fact Oengus Olmucaid conquered Scotland?
Or the fact he even defeated the Lombardi?
Oengus Olmucaid
Óengus Olmucaid (or Aengus Olmucada), son of Fíachu Labrainne, was, according to medieval Irish legend and historical tradition, a High King of Ireland. During the reign of his father, he conquered Scotland. He came to power by killing the incumbent High King, Eochu Mumu, who had killed his father twenty-one years earlier. He fought many battles against the Cruithne), the Fir Bolg, the Fomorians and other peoples of Ireland, the people of the Orkney islands, and even the Longobardi. He was killed by Enna Airgdech, son of Eochu Mumu, in the battle of Carman, continuing the feud between the descendants of Erimon and Éber Finn. Geoffrey Keating, who interprets his epithet as meaning "great hogs", dates his reign to 1050–1032 BC,
Dan I:
Now, in actual fact, nothing written above is unbelievable in the slightest.
It is likely that Dan I was the son of a fallen Hyksos pharoah.
Or, at the very least, related to noble Hyksos families that found themselves at war with native Egyptians.
Dan I
Dan I was the progenitor of the Danish royal house according to Saxo Grammaticus's Gesta Danorum. He supposedly held the lordship of Denmark along with his brother Angul), the father of the Angles in Angeln, which later formed the Anglo-Saxons in England.
Link for photo
Dan I
Angel:
Now Dan I had a brother named Angul.
Dan I
Now Dan and Angul, with whom the stock of the Danes begins, were begotten of Humble,
Langobards:
It also just so happens that his likely euhemerised persona "Odin", was king of the Langobards, amongst others.
Odin
In Old English texts, Odin holds a particular place as a euhemerized ancestral figure among royalty, and he is frequently referred to as a founding figure among various other Germanic peoples, such as the Langobards.
Link for photo.jpg)
Odin
Dan II:
Now, there was also a Dan II.
Dan II
Dan II is one of the legendary Danish kings, the son of Offa of Angel,
Offa of Angel:
Now Dan II, was son of Offa of Angel, and he led an expansion of Scandinavian territory, pushing it out to the Schleswig border between Denmark and Germania, by defeating the Saxons, and pushing them in to Saxony, from Denmark.
Offa of Angel
According to Widsith and the Danish sources, Offa successfully conquered the Myrgings, possibly a clan of Saxon origin, and incorporated their land into Angel or Danish lands, by slaying two Myrging princes in single combat and installing himself as their king.
Link for photo
Offa's victory
Saxon invasion:
Now the war originally began when the Saxons rose up against Offa, and began invading Offa II's territory.
However Offa retaliated, and ended up pushing the Saxons out of Scandinavia, to the otherside of the Schleswig border.
Myrgings
The Myrgings were a clan and people of Saxon origin[citation needed] who, together with their king Eadgils, are only mentioned in the Old English poem Widsith. They are mentioned as the people of the scop Widsith. They appear to have been the neighbours of the Angles and Offa of Angel, who was involved in a war against them. Perhaps they were a dynasty or clan competing for power with Offa over the rule of the Angles, though Offa slew two Myrging princes, probably the sons of Eadgils (not to be confused with the Swedish king Eadgils); this Eadgils was later killed by Ket and Wig, the sons of Freawine, a governor of Schleswig who challenged Eadgils to combat while he was pillaging in the Angle lands. Freawine was killed in combat and the Myrgings may then have overrun Schleswig, as they are said to have settled or had holdings at Schleswig, though they were eventually defeated by Offa, who extended the boundary with them to Fifeldor.[1]
Schleswig
Schleswig
Dan:
Now Dan II, finished what his father started.
Dan II
Uffe was succeeded by his son DAN, who carried his arms against foreigners, and increased his sovereignty with many a trophy;
Langobards:
Now, you have probably heard of the Langobards.
They are better known as the Lombards.
The lombarts actually were of South scandinavian origin, before being forced to migrate in to Germania.
And the Lombards are the same people that would later on in history, invade Italy.
Lombards
The medieval Lombard historian Paul the Deacon wrote in the History of the Lombards (written between 787 and 796) that the Lombards descended from a small tribe called the Winnili,[2] who dwelt in southern Scandinavia[3] (Scadanan) before migrating to seek new lands.
Link for photo
Lombard migration
The vandals:
Now what gets extremely interesting here, is that in even semi-contemporary history, the army that kicked the Lombards out of Denmark, were the vandals.
The vandals were obviously Dan II's army.
Legendary origins
The Winnili were young and brave and refused to pay tribute, saying "It is better to maintain liberty by arms than to stain it by the payment of tribute."[23] The Vandals prepared for war and consulted Godan (the god Odin[3]), who answered that he would give the victory to those whom he would see first at sunrise.[24] The Winnili were fewer in number[23] and Gambara sought help from Frea (the goddess Frigg[3]), who advised that all Winnili women should tie their hair in front of their faces like beards and march in line with their husbands. At sunrise, Frea turned her husband's bed so that he was facing east, and woke him. So Godan spotted the Winnili first and asked, "Who are these long-beards?," and Frea replied, "My lord, thou hast given them the name, now give them also the victory."[25] From that moment onwards, the Winnili were known as the Longbeards (Latinised as Langobardi, Italianised as Longobardi, and Anglicized as Langobards or Lombards).
Link to photo
Saxon army trying to disguise themselves as women
Keredic:
Now, it just so happens, that in around 510 AD, the Saxons enlisted the help of an Irish based army of Vandals, to drive out Cedric I of Wessex., even though Cerdic himself was king of the Saxons, the Saxons recognised him as more Romano-Brit, than Saxon.
Keredic
Keredic (Welsh: Ceredig) was a legendary king of the Britons, as recounted by Geoffrey of Monmouth. The origin of Geoffrey's character is unknown, but he is not depicted as a Saxon. According to Geoffrey, Keredic's rule was so unpopular that the Saxons enlisted the aid of an army of Vandals from Ireland to drive him from his kingdom.
Geoffrey's legendary Keredic may have been a conflation of Cerdic, the traditional founder of Wessex
Cerdic of Wessex:
Cerdic (/ˈtʃɜːrdɪtʃ/; Latin: Cerdicus) is cited in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle as a leader of the Anglo-Saxon settlement of Britain, being the founder and first king of Saxon Wessex, reigning from 519 to 534 AD.
Link for photo
Cerdic of Wessex
House of Scylding:
Now, back to Dan I just a second.
It must be pointed out that Dan I, was from house fo Scylding.
Scylding
Old English Scylding (plural Scyldingas) and Old Norse Skjöldung (plural Skjöldungar), meaning in both languages "People of Scyld/Skjöld" refers to members of a legendary royal family of Danes), especially kings.[1]
Link for photo
Scyldinga
House of Scylfings:
Now, it is extremely likely that the house of Scylding in Denmark, is known as the house of Scylfing in Sweden.
Simply a slight different abbreviation,
However house of Scylding takes it's root from the age of migration, and the centre of the age of Migration, is Scythia.
The Ynglings were a legendary dynasty of kings, supposedly originating from Sweden. It can refer to the clans of the Scylfings (Old Norse Skilfingar), the semi-legendary royal Swedish clan during the Age of Migrations,
Scythians:
Now, another name for the Scythians, were the Scoloti, and the Scoloti were the Royal family in charge of sending fallen Hittites home, after the Hittite empire fell to the Assyrian empire, around this time.
Scythians
the Scythians called themselves Scoloti and were led by a nomadic warrior aristocracy known as the Royal Scythians.
Link for photo
Scythians
Hittites:
Hittites
After c. 1180 BC, during the Late Bronze Age collapse, the Hittites splintered into several independent Syro-Hittite states, some of which survived until the eighth century BC before succumbing to the Neo-Assyrian Empire.
Link for photo
Hittite territory
Scotland:
Some of the Scoloti, likely eventually began returning to Scotland under Dan II.
And Oengus Olmucaid was likely Dan II.
Angus:
Angus is also considered the birth place of Scotland, and this title likely pre-dates the declaration of Arbroath.
Medieval history
Angus is marketed as the birthplace of Scotland. The signing of the Declaration of Arbroath at Arbroath Abbey in 1320
Link for photo
Angus
3500 BC:
Angus was probably the birthplace of Scots, before becoming the birthplace of Scotland, and as Angus is supposed to date back to 3500 BC, then it also likely dates back to when Oengus Olmucaid sent the first Scoloti to Angus, possibly to the displeasure of locals.
Pre-history
The area that now comprises Angus has been occupied since at least the Neolithic period. Material taken from postholes from an enclosure at Douglasmuir, near Friockheim, about five miles north of Arbroath has been radiocarbon dated to around 3500 BC.
Link for photo
Scottish flag
Summary:
Therefore, it is perfectly believable, and probable, that Oengus Ol Mucaid was King of Denmark, Ireland, Angus, aswell as expeller of the Lombards.
It is also possible, that the Anglos did not invade Britain from the same shores as the Saxons did.
Link for photo
Irish flag
submitted by StevenStevens43 to AhrensburgCulture [link] [comments]


2020.09.10 02:06 Jaracgos The Engoodening of r/WorldPolitics, Diary of a Meme War

https://i.redd.it/ksvip2za1fy41.png

The Beginning: From Politics to Hentai

Some men just want to watch the world burn.

Wednesday, May 6th, 2020
Straight up anime titties hentai. Your move mods, let's see if you have the balls to remove my post.
was submitted by u/TheLoIiLicker69.
This post and it being later pinned is ground zero for everything that happened to WorldPolitics and started the first wave of off-topic shitposts: Hentai and Waifu- not e-thots, not Warhammer 40K.
Here are his motivations as he put them:
Over the past few days, several karmawhoring reposts of "upvote this picture of trump looking dumb" that blatantly break sitewide reddit rules have been upvoted to the front page of all and the subreddit kept getting spammed with them. Yes I understand there is basically no moderation here, but Reddit rule 4 literally says "asking for votes or engaging in vote manipulation" is prohibited. At the very least the mods should remove posts that violate sitewide rules. And no I'm not a salty Trumptard, the "uPvOtE rEpOsTeD pIcTuReS oF _____ cUz GoOglE" are just actual cancer. Look at the comments of any one of those posts, no one likes them. The mods were asked to do something about it but they flat out refused to do their jobs and ban or remove a single post on this subreddit. Thus, the sub has dissolved into chaos and is full of shitposters like me spamming it with stupid memes or straight up porn because the mods are too smallbrained to do anything.
Edit: every one keeps thinking I'm a salty MAGA Trumptard for some reason. Let me assure you that is not the case, I in fact despise trump as a person. All people wanted was for the mods to ban "upvote this picture of ______ so it shows up on google" posts because they are annoying and no one fucking likes them. This is worldpolitics not WeHateTrumpCirclejerk, go shit on Trump in one of the sanders subreddits they love that stuff.
Edit 2: also for everyone saying this is child porn please kindly check your eyes and tell me what child you've seen with these bountiful pair of double D titties. Not to mention this character, Aki Nijou, is literally a mid-20s school nurse in the anime Maken-ki so she's 100% legal. Kindly stop spamming my inbox saying she's an "age indeterminate teen."
Post Link:
https://www.reddit.com/worldpolitics/comments/gern8i/straight_up_anime_titties_hentai_your_move_mods/
Comment Link:
https://www.reddit.com/worldpolitics/comments/gern8i/straight_up_anime_titties_hentai_your_move_mods/fpphzmp?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
Thursday, May 7th 2020
In exasperation from the influx of porn and hentai shitposts, the moderators set /worldpolitics to private. This was only a temporary action but when the subreddit opened back up it had seen a substantial moderator exodus and a few newcomers.
New WorldPolitics moderator u/FreeSpeechWarrior had this to say on another subreddit, WatchRedditDie:
Nah it got privatized because a recently added mod went rogue and added some of the protestors as mods who then locked down the sub, made it NSFW, stickied hentai etc... I've reverted the damage. We let people post what they want within the rules of Reddit and don't try to exercise any control over the discussion beyond what the admins require of us. If people want to post about US Politics / Trump (whether for or against him) in Reddit's most unrestricted political/news sub then they are welcome to do so. If you don't like the content in worldpolitics you can vote it down.
Part of the 'damage' that was referred to as being reverted has been confirmed to have been removing from the mod team long-standing moderator u/ilvisar (alt) along with u/TheLoIiLicker69, who had served mere minutes. The name was also reverted back to its original state from being temporarily christened 'WorldPolititties', and u/TheLoliLicker69's post was removed from sticky.
Comment Link:
https://www.reddit.com/WatchRedditDie/comments/gexpdk/rworld_politics_just_got_privatised_by_the_mods/fpqo79q?context=3
I have been able to substantiate this through off-site interviews with u/TheLoIiLicker69, a comment on a selfpost, and through the collaboration of fellow journalists mentioned below.
Discord Quote:
"i was never supposed to be a mod and I was only there for 20 minutes before I got removed lol. The only reason I got to mess around with the sub was because one of the actual mods ilvisar was also tired of the orange man bad karma farming hellhole that worldpol was turning into, so he added me to screw with it together."
Comment Link:
https://www.reddit.com/useTheLoIiLicker69/comments/geyo4a/the_state_of_rworldpolitics/fpqlkja?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
Thursday, May 7th 2020
I'm the former mod of worldpolitics that made it a hentai sub before I was booted, AMA
was submitted by u/ilvisar.
This was an AMA posted to casualiama in which a booted moderator, using an alternate account, answered users questions on the events happening on his former subreddit.
Post Link:
https://www.reddit.com/casualiama/comments/gfb9m1/im_the_former_mod_of_rworldpolitics_that_made_it/
Thursday, May 7th 2020
Rate limiting is in effect
was submitted by mod u/IAmAnAnonymousCoward.
It limited submissions to two posts per hour to try and cut down on spamming. The limit was later lifted and the post edited to reflect, but I am unsure exactly when the edit was made and the limitation removed.
Post Link:
https://www.reddit.com/worldpolitics/comments/gfge86/rate_limiting_is_in_effect/
Thursday, May 7th 2020 -
Anime_Titties was chartered by u/M1chaelSc4rn, with u/TheLoIiLicker69 as a moderator, to be the new home for discussing world politics. Its governing rules were set in place on his post titled “What is and isn't allowed regarding posts related to the U.S”.
Note from the Author:
This is actually a great sub. Please join in. No Shitposting.
Subreddit Link:
https://www.reddit.com/anime_titties/
Post Link:
https://www.reddit.com/anime_titties/comments/gfd4lwhat_is_and_isnt_allowed_regarding_posts_related/
Thursday, May 7th 2020
The Chronical of worldpolitics anime_titties and PearlsOfAnimeTitties"
was written by u/TheAmazingKyla on /PearlsOfAnimeTitties, a tangential subreddit focusing on meta discussion of /anime_titties. This post served as explanation to the formation of the newfound home for global political discussion.
Here are the insightful words:
Settle down children and I'll tell you a story. Are you sitting comfortably?"
"It all started long ago, when worldpolitics, a sub for "world" "politics" began karma whoring over real world political news. It was minor at first, but as soon as it began, it was nay to be stoped. As more and more karma whoring got posted, more and more became discruntled and disamused, untill 5 posts in no time at all were all begging for upvotes about upstein and trump being together to "get it to the front page" or "make it show up when you google them". It hit a boiling point."
People knew the mods would do nothing, as they were non-interventionist, so hell broke loose in an instant. worldpolitics fell from it's shit world political status to posting memes, hentai, porn, and shitposting, a bit of an upgrade really"
"In responce, the subbreddit of anime_titties was born, ironicly one of the best world politics subs reddit has seen, with 100% less US centric posts, in addition to a much more polite and refined atmosphere"
"Knowing that the quality of anime_titties was so high, a branch off was created for meta and memes, which led you, little political child of the world, to here."
Post Link:
https://www.reddit.com/PearlsOfAnimeTitties/comments/gfxkdy/the_chronical_of_rworldpolitics_ranime_titties/
Friday, May 8th 2020
Petition to make this our new subreddit header.
was submitted by u/JeantheDragon.
Moderator u/IAmAnAnonymousCoward approved and granted the change that day. It has been speculated that this new banner being seen on “Popular Subreddits” lists as well as user submitted untagged NSFW content hitting /all is what caused the subreddit-wide NSFW label. The banner was temporarily removed but, once the subreddit no longer appeared in lists that it would be shown, it was eventually restored.
Post Link:
https://www.reddit.com/worldpolitics/comments/gflqww/petition_to_make_this_our_new_subreddit_heade
Banner source image:
https://www.pixiv.net/en/artworks/56255833

Phase 2: E-thots and Shitposters

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
It is between these two dates, May 7th and 9th, that the first evolution of the sub occurred after its initial transformation. The change was graceful but there was a steady influx of OnlyFans content creators from GoneWild and a steady decline of 2D imagery hitting /hot. It was at this point that I focused my attention on user moderating /new with the help of several other users, downvoting others trying to get the subreddit back on politics and away from what they assumed to be only a temporary halt to normal operations. We intended to make sure that was not the case through the raw power of shitposting random content and nuking anything remotely political.
This back and forth continued for days, we were barely hanging on but us few were dedicated. This was our crusade.
I am unable to find nexus point, the initial post submission, of an OnlyFans advertisement. If you have this information please contact me with sources so that I can add to this timeline.
Friday, May 8th 2020 -
Join me in my crusade, brothers!
was submitted by u/senior_cynic to GrimDank, a Warhammer 40K-centric meme subreddit. This is the first instance I can find of a call to action from the 40K community.
Post Link:
https://www.reddit.com/Grimdank/comments/gfmg5c/join_me_in_my_crusade_brothers/
u/senior_cynic had this to say when asked for comment through private messages:
"Motivations? I think I speak for everyone except the onlyfans users that this whole thing is basically born for quarantine based boredom. I called grimdank in when rate limiting was in effect just for more volume of warhammer shitposting, and once that was gone, we were already the largest presence on the sub, so we took it over."
"I anticipated us being a major force for another few days and see where it went from there"
Saturday, May 9th 2020
What happened?
post made by mod u/IAmAnAnonymousCoward.
Post was made sticky post on submission but was removed from sticky sometime around May 15th.
https://www.reddit.com/worldpolitics/comments/ggj4zwhat_happened/
Thursday, May 14th 2020
No more promising rewards via PM, we're considering it spam
was submitted by mod u/IAmAnAnonymousCoward.
This post outlined rules for the OnlyFans E-thots to follow such as not advertising their off-site content in post titles, comments, or direct messages with other users. It was these rules that broke the first evolution and allowed for the transition to phase three.
Post Link:
https://www.reddit.com/worldpolitics/comments/gjhr3no_more_promising_rewards_via_pm_were_considering/

Phase 3: The Inquisition

Hatred is the emperor's greatest gift to humanity.
It took the Warhammer community several days to assert their dominance and gain control of the sub. Their crusade was hard fought, but with the help of the new rules and regulations set in place by the moderators driving out the heretical content they were able to establish dominion. Again, there was no single post that drove this transition outside of the initial calls to arms in GrimDank and other 40K communities.
Note from the author:
I was able to take my first break from Reddit in almost ten days thanks to these dedicated users. I finally felt that we had the reinforcements necessary to ensure that the new normal would be maintained and that the old status-quo of this subreddit would not resurface. I got to enjoy an afternoon at the beach that I haven’t seen in months due to quarantine and watch the sun set. I was able to enjoy actual world politics again and participate in conversations outside of WorldPolitics. Thank you.
The Warhammer 40K Galactic Imperium was a mighty force, it had managed to do what rules alone could not- deliver this holy land from the heretical lewd pestilence that had driven it's tentacles deep into the crevices of this subreddits userbase.
No king rules forever. No king rules without its due resistance, in due time.
Saturday, May 16th 2020
Oh? This is a Warhammer Sub now? Well, if you say so~
was submitted by u/PyrrhaRose.
PyrrhaRose is a special user on WorldPolitics. She didn't necessarily come for factions or rivalries or crusades. She was always here for the lewds. Upon seeing the complete decimation of her beloved sanctum of lust at the hands of the Grimdank Imperium, this ambiguous spectator became one of the strongest individual powerhouses on the subreddit. She is a lone juggernaut.
She used the one weapon she had at her disposal to seek her retribution, the one means to demoralize and fight off the onslaught- artistically composed pornographic fan art based on characters from the Warhammer 40K universe. She continued this fight, alone, until she gained a cult following of fans and became a known and respected figure in the community.
u/PyrrhaRose gave these compelling remarks when asked about her feelings on the recent ceasefire between factions:
I kinda wanna thank everyone for coming together like we did a few days ago. To come to a peace agreement, and the likes. The toxicity was getting very bad at one point and I brought it up with the others, and instead of them siding with the more toxic ones they agreed! And we slowly shifted to more fun centric. Which just made me extremely happy. Nowadays, there’s hardly any toxicity, and it’s still really fun! I hope we get to continue doing so, and to keep the freedom we’ve had all this time going forward. •^
Post Link:
https://www.reddit.com/worldpolitics/comments/gkudab/oh_this_is_a_warhammer_sub_now_well_if_you_say_so/
Statement from PyrrhaRose Link:
https://www.reddit.com/memewarsnews/comments/gshq8n/the_engoodening_of_rworldpolitics_updates/fs5jvd1
Saturday, May 16th 2020, approx. 7AM
Fuck y'all, this is a plant sub now. Post pics of your plants!
was submitted by u/purple_yosher.
This post marks the formation of the first major faction to rival the 40K Imperium, the Plant Squad. Desperate for something, anything, relatable to latch on to, users quickly joined the cause.
u/purple_yosher had this to say when asked what the motivations were for this new movement, about faction rivalries, and current events:
day drinking and a thirst for plants.
there was hostility at first, but plant gang represents peace and unity.
plants good, lewds bad
Post Link:
https://www.reddit.com/worldpolitics/comments/gktpws/fuck_yall_this_is_a_plant_sub_now_post_pics_of/
Statement from purple_yosher Link:
https://www.reddit.com/u_Jaracgos/comments/glsfs9/the_engoodening_of_rworldpolitics/fr328lf?context=3
Sunday, May 17th, 2020, approx. 7PM-
A call to action.
was submitted to Gardening by u/that-dyslexic.
This was a recruitment for the newly formed Plant Squad. Although the post did not get much traction in its subreddit support had grown for the squad substantially since its formation.
Post Link:
https://www.reddit.com/gardening/comments/glrlqb/a_call_to_action/
Sunday, May 17th, 2020 –
Looking for a more appropriate subreddit banner
was submitted by mod u/IAmAnAnonymousCoward.
A user requested a 40k banner and was acknowledged with “This will do.” However the image does not appear as the current banner, but instead a JoJo’s Bizarre Adventure mural is pictured. This marks the first major change to the look of the subreddit since u/JeantheDragon submitted his suggestion.
Post Link:
https://www.reddit.com/worldpolitics/comments/glb5hy/looking_for_a_more_appropriate_subreddit_banne

Phase 4 and Beyond

Reality really can be whatever you want.
We are here. The first faction that broke out were the Plants, but many have come to try and wrestle control from the ruthless collective might of miniature figurine collectors around the globe. Nobody knows what will come of the future, if the Warhammer shitposters have the dedication to hold control or if the tides of fate will move in another direction.
All I really know is that this subreddit will never again be what it was before we started here, and that was our intention. What happens from here on out is up to you, the reader and the Reddit user.
You have the power to be the change you wish to see in the world and to instill that change.
Thursday, May 21st, 2020 –
Choose your faction now!
was submitted by mod u/IAmAnAnonymousCoward.
This post marks the addition of user flair features to signify team and squad membership. It looks as though the flairs will be maintained, at least for now, as the dynamic of the subreddit changes.
Factions as of May 27th are: 'furry', '🌱', 'tf2', '🔥this is amazing 🔥', 'darkwraiths', 'deus vult', 'worldpolitics', 'anime titties', 'titties', 'grimdank', 'shitpostcrusaders', 'prequelmemes', 'berserktards', and 'hydrohomies'.
Post Link:
https://www.reddit.com/worldpolitics/comments/gnrten/choose_your_faction_now/
Thursday, May 21st, 2020 –
When the crusaders start calling me Warmaster
was submitted by u/g0d-3mp3r0r.
The tides of war had worn long on u/senior_cynic, the defacto figurehead for the Warhammer incursion. There were rumors of betrayal but evidence for such action has proven elusive, however his role as Warmaster was short lived. In his place u/g0d-3mp3r0r was granted the leadership position, chosen to direct and instill discipline in what forces remained after the long skirmishes.
When asked for comment on his role in events, u/g0d-3mp3r0r chose these words:
I have always been told I had the mind of a politician and the stubbornness of a mule. I was already nominated for Warmaster by senior_cynic back when he stepped down and soon a lot of the new recruits called me warmaster, showing the traditional community acceptance of my new role. Whilst I will admit that I could hear the voices of chaos in the form of PyrrhaRose I did not falter in my leadership of the crusade. I immediately decided to do something about the death threats and lack of centralization by granting titles to Kaiserschalt, LooneyW, Noisy_Ferox and Watercrown123. They would be my Inner Circle and we would lead the crusade together. There was also leadership coming from Petty Officer Imperium_of_69 whilst we were asleep because timezones. The taint of heresy would infect many of our crusaders but they would never stop fighting, until they did when peace was declared. The war is still raging on against the thots and political posters but one day I will be able to hang up my spear and retire
Post Link:
https://www.reddit.com/worldpolitics/comments/gne8dd/when_the_crusaders_start_calling_me_warmaste
Comment Link:
https://www.reddit.com/memewarsnews/comments/gshq8n/comment/fs71bv9
Tuesday, May 26th, 2020 –
/worldpolitics, can we do this as a community?
was submitted and pinned by mod u/IAmAnAnonymousCoward.
On seeing the content move further from NSFW content the moderators put forward the idea of having the subreddit-wide label removed, but this change would hinge on the community being able to consistently apply the labels to their postings themselves or for others to report untagged posts.
Post Link:
https://www.reddit.com/worldpolitics/comments/gqt5ta/rworldpolitics_can_we_do_this_as_a_community/
Friday, August 21st, 2020 –
My friend, fellow anime_titties moderator, and the initial instigator of the fall of WorldPolitics, u/TheLoIiLicker69 , has had all of his reddit accounts permanently suspended. I wanted to make sure that the community was made aware of this and the reasons behind it, these are his words taken directly from off platform communications;
"Well shoot sorry guys all my accounts including the alt I used to mod AT got permanently suspended for posting personal information. I was on a thread about the animemes doxxing and wanted to clear up the misconception that the doxxer was a member of the animemes community, so I posted a link to a screenshot of their comment admitting they were just a transphobic asshole stirring up drama, which was probably what got me suspended since that's the only personal info I've revealed.Yeah I expected a comment removal at most for that not a permanent ban. Sucks that it had to happen because I was trying to make sure the animemes community didn't get falsely blamed for the actions of 1 lunatic."
"I posted the comment I suspect got me banned a earlier this morning and my ban was about an hour ago"
Post Link:
https://www.reddit.com/memewarsnews/comments/ie504d/utheloiilicker69_the_user_credited_with_starting//
.
.
.

Epilogue: by u/TheLoIiLicker69

The Beginning is the End is the Beginning.
Mahatma Ghandi is smiling upon us all, for we have become the change we wished to see. Our cause is just.
Also funny thing is about 2 days before I nuked worldpol I'd gotten a 15 day ban on my main account from my favorite shitposting sub okbuddyretard, so it wouldn't be a stretch to say that caused a chain reaction leading to the engoodening of this formerly terrible sub. Shoutout to whichever anonymous mod temp banned me, I'd probably have been too busy pretending to be a retarded 9 year old otherwise lmao.
An extra special thanks as well to everyone who saw what was happening and joined in on the shitposting, as well as to those who have helped grow anime_titties to be an actually good replacement. Whilst I am good at causing chaos, I have next to no leadership skills and it's really thanks to all the great mods there that the new sub has grown to almost 100k members in under 2 weeks. We'll be working our hardest to continue making the sub into a legitimate source of world news and keep it from becoming another USA-only echochamber. In the meantime keep the dream alive and have fun memeing everyone 👌
.
.
.
PS: I am sure that I have missed an event or two, if you have a suggestion for an addition please provide me with a detailed account of your experiences and links for citation to ensure legitimacy. Anyone wanting me to redact their username please comment below, I left them up so that you were notified of this post. A lot of people have been asking for it.
.
.
Special thanks to u/TellMeMoreYT for his interest in journalistic collaboration and for catching the reference.
.
.
If you use any or all of this, please cite where you got the information. It wasn’t easy following along and documenting all of this or going back to find things that were missed.
submitted by Jaracgos to stories [link] [comments]


2020.09.07 14:30 Build_A_Better_Fan [Spoilers C2E108] Putting everything in order on Critical Role Wiki's Time Line

This week at the Critical Role Wiki there's a new page intended to put everything in the Critical Role universe in chronological order, and it helps put a lot of lore in perspective. Even if you've watched every episode and read the Tal'Dorei Campaign Setting and Explorer's Guide to Wildemount, there's such a broad, deep history that it's easy to forget the order and length of so many events and how they relate to each other: how long the events of the series have taken, how different parts of Exandria developed through overlapping eras, or which characters could have experienced some historical event.
But now we've started organizing everything we can get our hands on! Starting with a lot of groundwork on historical events by CorvusTheFeatherbrain and OccidentalAvian, compiling on-stream dates with the help of CritRoleStats' Vox Machina and Mighty Nein day trackers, and adding a great deal more from the books and the wiki, there is already a tremendous record that ties the events of the campaigns together and connects the series to earlier eras.
For example, this time line taught me that Pike's beloved Wilhand Trickfoot was just a little older than Pike (at the height of her adventuring days) when the continent of Tal'Dorei was first named Tal'Dorei, and he got to experience what the realm was like when the White Duke (a member of the Golden Grin) was carving his way into myth.
And what made me really want a resource like this was the effort I had to put in to line up everything we know about how long Vilya had been gone. The work on this Time Line page has already led to clarifying edits on pages all across the Wiki, and the better this record is, the more it can serve that purpose.
Indeed, this record can help make sense of, or at least identify, some conflicting evidence in the lore. Believe it or not, sometimes cast members lose track of time in-universe; even Matthew Mercer is mortal. (Hey, maybe they can use this resource when they need to recall things their characters would know.)
But with so many characters and so many places, with a history stretching back thousands of years, there is still more to add! When you see a bit of lore that is related to anything else by time—an event that happened some number of years ago, the age of a character or a place, or something that traces back to a certain era like the Calamity or the Age of Arcanum—please add it to the Time Line so that everyone else can see how it fits into the larger narrative.
We're trying to keep it thoroughly sourced with citations, so there's no confusion about why an event is placed where it is. If you have an idea for something to place on the page, but you can't figure out how the formatting works, maybe just leave a comment on that page and as much evidence about its timing as you can (like X years before Y), or try messaging me first to see if I can handle it in a timely manner.
I hope you enjoy checking out the Time Line page and, if your favorite events aren't included or need a bit more detail to make the page easier to scan, that you take a minute to make the record more complete. Thanks for your contributions!
submitted by Build_A_Better_Fan to criticalrole [link] [comments]


2020.09.06 14:40 AB1908 Fact check: Trump was tougher on Russia than the previous administration

You can see my previous fact checks here and here. I've seen an oft repeated claim on /AskTrumpSupporters by a certain user stating the following:
Trump is tougher on Russia than your softball administration ever was (1) (2) (3) (4)
The evidence does not appear to (strongly) support the conclusion. I have attempted to read through all four articles as well as their corresponding citations and I present my findings here. I would also welcome any feedback or corrections in any form. I doubt a limited amount of reading would present a full picture of the scenario.

Analysis of given articles

Article 1

From [1] which, to note, is an op-ed:
For starters, it was President Obama who, according to Reuters, was “caught on camera” saying to a Russian leader that he’ll have more flexibility after the election — not President Trump.
This excerpt cites an article from Reuters [2] and has been mischaracterised as can be seen below:
The exchange, parts of it inaudible, was monitored by a White House pool of television journalists as well as Russian reporters listening live from their press center.
The United States and NATO have offered Russia a role in the project to create an anti-ballistic shield which includes participation by Romania, Poland, Turkey and Spain.
But Moscow says it fears the system could weaken Russia by gaining the capability to shoot down the nuclear missiles it relies on as a deterrent.
It wants a legally binding pledge from the United States that Russia’s nuclear forces would not be targeted by the system and joint control of how it is used.
“This is my last election ... After my election I have more flexibility,” Obama said, expressing confidence that he would win a second term.
Additionally, this was in 2012, during his re-election, much prior to the 2014 annexation of Crimea and thus, is not relevant to the discussion in any way. However, subsequent paragraphs in the article do appear to make accurate claims such as addition of new sanctions that directly penalised President Putin's inner circle and several wealthy individuals. It is also noted that the sanctions from the previous administration remained in place which, although true, aren't exactly helping the point of President Trump's administration being "tougher on Russia".
The following excerpt from the article states that he made even more progress by signing Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, CAATSA, in 2017.
In August 2017, Trump signed a bill slapping even more sanctions on Russia — this time specifically aimed at the country’s energy and defense industries. Congress made the legislation Trump-proof, meaning that no executive order could ever undo such sanctions; yet Trump signed it anyway.
This excerpt cites a piece from CNBC [3] which states the following:
Trump and his secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, had expressed concerns about the sanctions’ possible effects on U.S. relations with Russia. The administration has pushed to improve relations with Moscow but has gotten tripped up by the probe into Russian attempts to affect the election and whether the Trump campaign colluded with the Kremlin.
In a statement after the signing, Trump said he wanted to “punish and deter bad behavior” by North Korea and Iran. The president wanted to make “clear that America will not tolerate interference in our democratic process.”
However, Trump argued that the measure “encroaches on executive power, disadvantages American companies and hurts the interests of our European allies.” Trump needs congressional approval to roll back sanctions under the measure.
This is corroborated by a statement from The White House [4]:
Since this bill was first introduced, I have expressed my concerns to Congress about the many ways it improperly encroaches on Executive power, disadvantages American companies, and hurts the interests of our European allies.
My Administration has attempted to work with Congress to make this bill better. We have made progress and improved the language to give the Treasury Department greater flexibility in granting routine licenses to American businesses, people, and companies. The improved language also reflects feedback from our European allies – who have been steadfast partners on Russia sanctions – regarding the energy sanctions provided for in the legislation. The new language also ensures our agencies can delay sanctions on the intelligence and defense sectors, because those sanctions could negatively affect American companies and those of our allies.
Still, the bill remains seriously flawed – particularly because it encroaches on the executive branch’s authority to negotiate. Congress could not even negotiate a healthcare bill after seven years of talking. By limiting the Executive’s flexibility, this bill makes it harder for the United States to strike good deals for the American people, and will drive China, Russia, and North Korea much closer together. The Framers of our Constitution put foreign affairs in the hands of the President. This bill will prove the wisdom of that choice.
Yet despite its problems, I am signing this bill for the sake of national unity. It represents the will of the American people to see Russia take steps to improve relations with the United States. We hope there will be cooperation between our two countries on major global issues so that these sanctions will no longer be necessary.
Some critics noted that the imposition of sanctions was far too slow as the bill had been signed in August but sanctions were imposed in April. The administration deserves criticism for failing to miss its October 1 deadline of producing a list individuals to be sanctioned but they still deserve credit for the move in its entirety [5].
Here is yet another excerpt:
In fact it was Trump — not Obama — who ordered the closure of Russian diplomatic properties in San Francisco, Washington, D.C., and New York City that appeared to be a threat to American security.
This is misleading as it cites a piece by NYT [6] that clearly states the following:
The administration’s response had been expected for the past month, since Russia ordered the American Mission to cut its staff by 755 people — a sign of its displeasure after Congress imposed sanctions because of Russia’s meddling in the 2016 presidential election.
President Trump has kept his distance from the dispute. He expressed gratitude, rather than anger, toward Mr. Putin when was asked about the Russian president’s action to reduce American diplomatic personnel.
“I want to thank him because we’re trying to cut down the payroll,” Mr. Trump said, “and as far as I’m concerned, I’m very thankful that he let go a lot of a large number of people, because now we have a smaller payroll.”
Mr. Putin’s move was also a delayed reaction to President Barack Obama’s expulsion of 35 Russian diplomats and his seizure of two Russian diplomatic compounds last year. Mr. Obama was acting after American intelligence agencies concluded that Russia attempted to influence the 2016 election. The administration said there was no decision on whether the Russian government would be allowed to take back those facilities.
The rest of the article seems to be fairly accurate except for engaging in a hypothetical in the following excerpt:
To be sure, Obama kicked 35 Russian diplomats out of the country after suspected election meddling by Russia, but only after Trump won the 2016 election. It is questionable whether he would have done so had Hillary Clinton succeeded in being the victor.
and making the following misleading claim:
Furthermore, it was President Trump who led the world in expelling Russian diplomats after the Russian government was suspected of carrying out a nerve agent attack in the United Kingdom against one of their former spies. President Trump moved swiftly to expel 60 Russian diplomats from U.S. soil, and other countries followed suit by expelling dozens as well.
As evidenced by the Reuters article cited in the above excerpt, the administration actually joined other countries instead with Australia joining in later [7]. However, it may have been referring to the claim that it was expelling the highest number of diplomats, in which case it would be accurate but again, not noteworthy as it likely has the highest number of diplomats of all nations involved [citation needed]. The article, however, goes on to note that he had expressed sentiments earlier of wanting to work together. To quote:
Trump, who before he took office in January last year promised warmer ties with Putin, last week congratulated the Russian leader on his re-election, drawing criticism from Republicans and Democrats alike. Trump said the two leaders had made tentative plans to meet in the “not too distant future”.
He did not bring up the poisoning attack in his phone call with Putin.
Trump himself was silent on Monday on Twitter, where he often comments about his policy decisions. However, the White House said later it would like to have a “cooperative relationship” with Russia.
“The president wants to work with the Russians but their actions sometimes don’t allow that to happen,” White House spokesman Raj Shah told a news briefing. “The poisoning in the U.K. that has kind of led to today’s announcement was a very brazen action. It was a reckless action.”
Overall, the article does have some valid points regarding the sanctions but a thorough analysis of its effects are required before we can objectively conclude it has been "tough on Russia". A report from the Congressional Research Service may prove useful for said analysis. Still, I would say this does appear to support the claim of the President being "tough on Russia" but whether it was "tougher than your previous softball administration" remains to be examined.

Article 2

The Washington Post op-ed by Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK) [8] also appears to make a few misleading claims. With regards to the Pentagon budget:
More broadly, under Obama, the Pentagon’s budget was slashed by 25 percent from 2010 to 2016.
This cites a report by the Heritage Foundation [9] that states the following:
In total, since FY 2010, the defense budget, including overseas contingency operations (OCO) spending, has been cut 25 percent in inflation-adjusted dollars.[10]
FY 2010 and FY 2011. While the FY 2010 budget slightly increased the defense budget, the department began cancelling major programs that year. For the FY 2010 budget, the department announced:
  • Cancellation of the F-22 Raptor fighter aircraft;
  • Cancellation of the VH-71 presidential helicopter;
  • Cancellation of the vehicle portion of the Future Combat System;
  • Cancellation of missile defense programs, including the Airborne Laser and the Multi-Kill Vehicle;
  • Cancellation of the CSAR-X search and rescue helicopter; and
  • The end of C-17 Globemaster III military transport production at 205 aircraft.[11]
In FY 2011, the cuts focused on modernization spending:
  • Ending C-17 production at 223. (Congress blocked the first attempt.)
  • Cancelling the F-35 alternate engine program.
  • Cancelling the CG(X) future large cruiser.
  • Cancelling the Navy’s EP-X future intelligence aircraft.[12]
In some cases, these cuts were necessary because the program requirements were not a high priority or because the program was too costly. On the other hand, other cancellations have led to serious problems for the military today.
Note that this is also somewhat contentious as this is fails to take into account the fact that the (then) administration started pulling out of Iraq and was also bipartisan, as stated in a fact check by Politifact [10]:
Has the military budget dropped under Obama, and if so, who is to blame?
Overall spending on national security includes the Pentagon budget as well as spending by other agencies, such as the Energy Department’s work on nuclear weapons. Spending increased in 2010 and 2011, but it has fallen every year for four years since then by a cumulative 15 percent.
Other ways of looking at the question show declines as well. National security spending made up 20.1 percent of the federal budget in 2010, but in 2015 it was 15.9 percent. Over the same period, spending fell from 4.6 percent of gross domestic product to 3.3 percent.
There are two main reasons for the spending drop. The first is the Obama administration’s decision to start removing U.S. troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. The second has to do with a process known as sequestration.
Sequestration refers to the framework for automatic, across-the-board cuts to both military and non-military spending that were originally designed to force bipartisan negotiators in Congress to strike a deal in 2011. When negotiations fell apart, the cuts went into effect.
The bipartisan nature of the sequestration provision means that both parties merit a share of the blame, experts say.
The most recent Obama budget proposed a 7.8 percent increase in the base Defense Department budget between 2015 and 2016. The spending bill enacted this fall puts the defense budget on a path to start growing in fiscal year 2016, up about 6 percent from the previous year.
"It’s still not quite as much as the president requested, but it’s much closer," said Todd Harrison, director of defense budget analysis at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Another claim made is the following:
After Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014, Ukrainian leaders desperately requested from President Barack Obama defensive anti-tank weapons systems that could fend off the invading Russian T-72 tanks in eastern Ukraine. In 2015, members of the Senate Armed Services Committee — Democrats and Republicans — encouraged Obama to grant this request to help Ukraine defend itself. Obama refused. Soon after coming into office, Trump changed course , and the Ukrainians now have Javelin anti-tank weapons systems from the United States. Russian tank drivers have a lot more to worry about today.
The initial sentence cites a report from Foreign Policy [11] that corroborates the statement that T-72 tanks were invading eastern Ukraine but they were controlled by separatists and appear to have had some ties to Russia in the form of funding. It is very slightly misleading to call them "Russian" forces. To quote:
Fighting has not stopped, and the rebels have continued to retake territory. The Russian military took advantage of the deals and continued to supply weapons and troops to the separatists, and this conflict is not any closer to resolution than it was before the deals were signed. On the other hand, each carried with it at least a temporary de-escalation in fighting, bringing needed reprieve for civilians who have been stuck in the crossfire.
The claim of President Obama denying anti-tank weapons is also correct as corroborated in an article by the AP [12]. However, the overall claim is misleading. His administration actually refused to provide lethal weaponry for fear of escalating conflict and instead relied on non-lethal aid. To quote from the USA Today article [13] also cited in the excerpt:
The White House refused to include weapons in an aid package announced Thursday for embattled Ukraine despite an impassioned plea by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko for more military assistance.
The Obama administration is providing $46 million in non-lethal security assistance and $7 million for relief organizations providing humanitarian assistance to Ukrainians affected by the conflict between government forces and Russian-backed separatists in the eastern region.
The White House announcement came shortly after Poroshenko stood before a joint session of Congress and pleaded for more political support and military equipment beyond the non-lethal aid the United States has pledged.
Poroshenko said blankets and night-vision goggles from the USA are important, "but one cannot win a war with blankets!"
What the White House offered was a military aid package that will provide body armor, helmets, vehicles, night and thermal vision devices, advanced radios, patrol boats, counter-mortar radars, rations, tents and uniforms. U.S. military and civilian advisers will help Ukraine improve its defense capacity, the White House said.
The new aid brings the total U.S. assistance package for Ukraine to $291 million, plus a $1 billion loan guarantee. The Obama administration has refused to provide lethal aid for fear of escalating tensions.
This is further corroborated in a fact check by PolitiFact [14], an article which I would recommend reading in its entirety. Here are some relevant excerpts:
At the time, Obama officials were debating whether to send lethal military equipment amid the conflict with Russia, particularly Javelin anti-tank missiles. Obama rejected a request from Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko for lethal aid in 2014, though the White House approved a $53 million aid package that included vehicles, patrol boats, body armor and night-vision goggles, as well as humanitarian assistance.
U.S. officials were concerned that providing the Javelins to Ukraine would escalate their conflict with Russia. Key allies, including Germany, were not keen on sending weapons into the conflict zone, said Michael Kofman, an expert on Russia and senior research scientist at the CNA Corporation.
Under Obama, the federal government started the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which sent other kinds of U.S. military equipment to the country. From 2016 to 2019, Congress appropriated $850 million.
In the last year of the Obama administration, Congress authorized lethal aid, but it didn’t include the Javelins.
"The first lethal deliveries came from Trump," said Jim Townsend, deputy assistant secretary of defense for European and NATO Policy during the Obama administration.
In July 2016, the White House announced a $335 million security assistance package for Ukraine that included "counter-artillery and counter-mortar radars, secure communications, training aids, logistics infrastructure and IT systems, tactical UAVs, and medical equipment."
In 2017, the Trump administration said it would sell lethal aid to Ukraine, and in 2018 it approved a plan to sell Ukraine $47 million in lethal Javelin Missiles. Even though the Trump administration has allowed the weapons, they are far from the frontlines.
Congress approved another $250 million in military assistance in 2018, which Trump temporarily withheld along with $141 million in State Department aid in July.
Overall, the article does very little to support the claim that President Trump has been tougher on Russia than his predecessor. It is somewhat misleading, tries to conflate numbers so as to make them look favorable and does not produce concrete evidence to support the claim. There is also the issue of witholding aid from Ukraine despite pledging support in terms of lethal weaponry. However, credit should still be awarded for continuing to provide assistance to them. Note that being pro-Ukraine isn't necessarily anti-Russia, so this is poorly supportive of the claim at best.

Article 3

The third article linked mostly goes on to state the several actions taken by the current administration without providing much context or history behind the moves but is still a decent source [15]. It was subsequently cited in the NPR article on President Trump's actions against Russia. It can be said that he has a decent stance against Russia.

Article 4

The fourth article from NPR [16] weighs the President's rhetoric versus his policies. It notes that his policies have largely been in the right direction as noted in the opening:
President Trump is in the process of inviting Russian President Vladimir Putin to come to Washington, D.C., this fall to continue the talks they started in Helsinki earlier this week.
It's another sign of Trump's efforts to build closer ties with Moscow, even though he insists his administration has taken a hard line toward Russia.
"There's never been a president as tough on Russia as I have been," Trump told reporters on Wednesday.
That might sound like hyperbole, but in this case, there's actually some basis for the president's boast.
After describing a list of actions taken, it then notes:
Whatever tough policies the White House may have adopted toward Moscow also have to be weighed against Trump's rhetoric, which is consistently friendly to Putin. He suggested inviting Russia to rejoin the G-7, a group Moscow was suspended from following the illegal annexation of Crimea. Trump also congratulated Putin on his suspect re-election victory, despite explicit instructions from his advisers.
"There's a real disconnect between the president's words and the underlying policy," said Richard Fontaine, president of the Center for a New American Security.
While Trump has no qualms about criticizing leaders of allied countries like Germany's Angela Merkel, Canada's Justin Trudeau or the U.K.'s Theresa May, he almost always treats Putin with kid gloves.
"The president very rarely speaks about Putin's transgressions and when asked about them expresses the hope that everyone can get along," said Fontaine, a former national security adviser to Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.
Just last week, Trump told reporters in the U.K., "If we could develop a relationship which is good for Russia, good for us, good for everybody, that would be great."
The article goes on to cite a report from The Washington Post detailing the President's attitude in private [17]:
The United States, they explained, would be ousting roughly the same number of Russians as its European allies — part of a coordinated move to punish Moscow for the poisoning of a former Russian spy and his daughter on British soil.
“We’ll match their numbers,” Trump instructed, according to a senior administration official. “We’re not taking the lead. We’re matching.”
The next day, when the expulsions were announced publicly, Trump erupted, officials said. To his shock and dismay, France and Germany were each expelling only four Russian officials — far fewer than the 60 his administration had decided on.
The president, who seemed to believe that other individual countries would largely equal the United States, was furious that his administration was being portrayed in the media as taking by far the toughest stance on Russia.
His briefers tried to reassure him that the sum total of European expulsions was roughly the same as the U.S. number.
“I don’t care about the total!” the administration official recalled Trump screaming. The official, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.
Growing angrier, Trump insisted that his aides had misled him about the magnitude of the expulsions. “There were curse words,” the official said, “a lot of curse words.”
The incident reflects a tension at the core of the Trump administration’s increasingly hard-nosed stance on Russia: The president instinctually opposes many of the punitive measures pushed by his Cabinet that have crippled his ability to forge a close relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Some close to Trump say the recent measures are the product of an ongoing pressure campaign to push the president to take a more skeptical view of the Russian leader.
“If you’re getting briefed by the CIA director on all this stuff, there’s a point where, even if you’re Donald J. Trump, you think, ‘Hmm [Putin’s] a really bad guy,’ ” said former House speaker Newt Gingrich, an informal Trump adviser.
Others note Trump’s ongoing unease with his own policy. Even as his administration has ratcheted up the pressure on Putin’s inner circle, Trump has continued in recent weeks to make overtures to the Russian leader, congratulating him on his election win and, in a move that frustrated his national security team, inviting him to visit the White House.
“I think I could have a very good relationship with Russia and with President Putin,” Trump said at a news conference just days after the largest expulsion of Russians in U.S. history. “And if I did, that would be a great thing. And there’s also a possibility that won’t happen. Who knows?”
Trump came to the White House believing that his personal relationships with other leaders would be central to solving the world’s thorniest foreign policy problems, administration officials said. In Trump’s mind, no leader was more important or powerful than Putin, they said.
A cooperative relationship with the Russian leader could help Trump find solutions to problems that bedeviled his predecessor in places such as Ukraine, Syria and North Korea.
Former president Barack Obama had a tense relationship with Putin. Trump said he could do better but felt stymied by the media, Congress and special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s probe into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election.
Any conciliatory move he made toward Putin came under heavy scrutiny. “When will all the haters and fools out there realize that having a good relationship is a good thing,” Trump tweeted in November. “They are always playing politics — bad for our country.”
Privately, he complained to aides that the media’s fixation on the Mueller probe was hobbling his effort to woo Putin. “I can’t put on the charm,” the president often said, according to one of his advisers. “I’m not able to be president because of this witch hunt.”
As the months passed, the president’s options for improving relations with Russia narrowed. In late July, Congress overwhelmingly approved new sanctions on Moscow that were widely seen as a rebuke of Trump’s efforts to reach out to Putin. It took aides four days to persuade Trump to sign the bill, which had cleared with a veto-proof majority.
Trump advisers were reluctant to even raise the topic of Russian interference in the election, which Trump equated with Democrats’ efforts to undermine his victory. “It’s just kind of its own beast,” a senior national security official said. “It’s been a constant from Day One.”
Gingrich and other Trump advisers said CIA Director Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state nominee, was one of the few advisers who could address Russia without raising the president’s ire.
In January, Pompeo told the BBC that he had “every expectation” that Russia would make an effort to disrupt the 2018 midterm elections. Privately, he pushed Trump to take a tough line on Moscow.
One area where aides worked to change Trump’s mind was on a proposal to sell antitank missiles to Ukraine. Obama had opposed the move for fear of angering Moscow and provoking a Russian escalation.
Trump initially was also hesitant to support the move, which had the backing of the Pentagon and State Department. “He would say, ‘Why is this our problem? Why not let the Europeans deal with Ukraine?” a U.S. official said.
Aides described a lobbying effort by Pompeo, Haley and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis in support of the lethal aid. “I just want peace,” Trump would say when pressed on Ukraine.
His aides countered that the weapons would help achieve peace by deterring further Russian aggression.
To bring the president around, U.S. officials argued that the $47 million military aid package could be a boon to U.S. taxpayers if cash-strapped Kiev stabilized and someday became a reliable buyer of American military hardware.
To the surprise of even his closest advisers, the president agreed late last year to the weapons transfer on the condition that the move be kept quiet and made without a formal news release.
Aides tried to warn him that there was almost no way to stop the news from leaking.
When it broke, Russia hawks in Congress praised the president. “Another significant step in the right direction,” said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a frequent Trump critic. But Trump was still furious, an administration official said.
“For some reason, when it comes to Russia, he doesn’t hear the praise,” a senior administration official said. “Politically speaking, the best thing for him to do is to be tough. . . . On that one issue, he cannot hear the praise.”
The poisoning in Britain in early March of former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, with a nerve agent upped the tension between Trump and his advisers.
Initially, the president was hesitant to believe the intelligence that Russia was behind the attack — a fact that some aides attributed to his contrarian personality and tendency to look for deeper conspiracies. To persuade him, his advisers warned that he would get hammered in the press if he was out of step with U.S. allies, officials said.
“There was a sense that we couldn’t be the only ones not to concede to reality,” the Trump adviser said.
The next task was convincing Trump that he should punish Putin in coordination with the Europeans. “Why are you asking me to do this?” Trump asked in a call with British Prime Minister Theresa May, according to a senior White House official. “What’s Germany going to do? What about France?”
He was insistent that the poisoning in the English city of Salisbury was largely a European problem and that the allies should take the lead in moving against Russia.
Trump told aides in an Oval Office session on March 23 that he was confident French President Emmanuel Macron would deliver on promises to expel Russian officials but that he was worried about German Chancellor Angela Merkel, whose country depends on Russian oil and gas.
The next day, at his Mar-a-Lago resort, Trump’s aides gave him the final memo with the precise number of American expulsions.
Trump was furious as news reports described the expulsions as the largest purge in U.S. history and noted the wide gap between the United States and its allies. “If you had told me France and Germany were only doing [four], that’s what we would have done,” one official recalled him saying.
Some officials said it was a simple misunderstanding. Others blamed the president’s strained relationship with his top aides, including H.R. McMaster, his former national security adviser.
“Anytime McMaster came in with a recommendation, he always thought it was too much,” the Trump adviser said. “They were just oil and water on everything. So his natural impulse was, if this was your recommendation, it must be too far.”
Less than a month after Trump shocked his foreign policy advisers by inviting Putin to the White House, the prospects for a visit anytime soon seem remote. No date has been set, White House officials said.
“We’re not rushing to do this meeting,” a senior administration official said. “Our team wasn’t thrilled about the idea.”
The report certainly paints an unflattering picture of the President's attitude towards Russia but the NPR report concludes the following:
However grudging Trump's moves against Moscow might have been, though, his defenders say the actions speak for themselves.
"It is hard for me to believe that he was dragged kicking and screaming through each and every one of these decisions," Vajdich said.

Counter Analysis and Evidence

Overall, from the evidence presented, we can safely say that the policies certainly do appear to be a step in the right direction but they have done little to deter Russia. Crimea is still occupied and military operations against Ukraine have expanded to nearby waters [18]:
Debates about the effectiveness of sanctions against Russia continue in Congress, in the Administration, and among other stakeholders. Russia has not reversed its occupation and annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea region, nor has it stopped sustaining separatist regimesin eastern Ukraine. In 2018, it extended its military operations against Ukraine to nearby waters. At the same time, Russia has not expanded its land-based operations in Ukraine, and Moscow participates in a conflict resolution process that formally recognizes Ukraine’s sovereignty over Russia-controlled areas in eastern Ukraine. With respect to other malign activities, the relationship between sanctions and changes in Russian behavior is difficult to determine. Nonetheless, many observers argue that sanctions help restrain Russia or that their imposition is an appropriate foreign policy response regardless of immediate effect.
Examining his record outside the data presented, however, paints a different picture. For example, he failed to bring up Russian interference in election during early talks in 2017, despite overwhelming evidence produced from multiple intelligence agencies [19]. Notably, in 2018 in Helsinki, he cast doubt on Russia's role in the interference, putting forth a "both sides" narrative on both US Intelligence and Vladimir Putin. To quote the interview published in a fact check by FactCheck.org [20]:
Reporter, July 16: Just now, President Putin denied having anything to do with the election interference in 2016. Every U.S. intelligence agency has concluded that Russia did. What — who — my first question for you, sir, is who do you believe? My second question is would you now, with the whole world watching, tell President Putin, would you denounce what happened in 2016 and would you warn him to never do it again?
Trump: So let me just say that we have two thoughts. You have groups that are wondering why the FBI never took the server. Why haven’t they taken the server? Why was the FBI told to leave the office of the Democratic National Committee?
I’ve been wondering that, I’ve been asking that for months and months and I’ve been tweeting it out and calling it out on social media. Where is the server? I want to know where is the server and what is the server saying?
With that being said, all I can do is ask the question. My people came to me, [Director of National Intelligence] Dan Coates came to me and some others, they said they think it’s Russia. I have President Putin; he just said it’s not Russia. I will say this: I don’t see any reason why it would be. But I really do want to see the server.
But I have — I have confidence in both parties. I — I really believe that this will probably go on for a while, but I don’t think it can go on without finding out what happened to the server. What happened to the servers of the Pakistani gentleman that worked on the DNC? Where are those servers? They’re missing; where are they? What happened to Hillary Clinton’s e-mails? 33,000 e-mails gone — just gone. I think in Russia they wouldn’t be gone so easily. I think it’s a disgrace that we can’t get Hillary Clinton’s 33,000 e-mails.
I have great confidence in my intelligence people but I will tell you that President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today and what he did is an incredible offer. He offered to have the people working on the case come and work with their investigators, with respect to the 12 people. I think that’s an incredible offer. Ok? Thank you.
Further, he also pushed for Russia to be included in the G7 Summit, much to the disapproval of other member nations. In an article from Reuters [21]:
Trump over the weekend had raised the prospect of expanding the G7, whose members are the world’s most advanced economies, to once again include Russia, which had been expelled in 2014 following Moscow’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea region.

Final Conclusion

All these events, combined with the indictment of his campaign officials certainly cast doubt over the "tough on Russia" claim. The claim of being "even harder than the previous administration" becomes even more outrageous, especially since relations were already strained during the previous administration and Russia was not as aggressive in its operations. I would therefore have to reject the claim of "Trump was tougher on Russia than the previous administration" and label it as somewhat true but still disputable at best if considering only policies and not personal actions, as Russia's aggressions warranted action regardless of the sitting President, and false at worst when considering the broader picture.

Potential Improvements

The actions of the Trump administration with regards to Syria and Iran have not been examined. Further, there are additional ties that the President seems to have to Russian oligarchs but they have been left out in the interest of examining the evidence presented. The report on the sanctions by the Congressional Research Service has also not been thoroughly read and thus, its findings have been left out at the time of writing.
submitted by AB1908 to RussiaLago [link] [comments]


2020.09.06 03:45 whyme1924 Sources to Counter Common Transphobia

Classification as a Mental Illness

Being trans is not classified as a mental illness by either the American Psychological Association or the World Health Organization. Gender dysphoria or incongruence is recognized by both as a medical condition, and transition is the only treatment recognized as effective and appropriate medical response to this condition. A trans person who has completed transition, and who no longer experiences distress because the conditions previously causing it have been corrected, is no longer diagnosed as having dypshoria or incongruence.
Transgender no longer recognised as 'disorder' by WHO

Citations for the Medical Basis of Gender Identity

Citations for the Medical Necessity of Transition

Citations for the Reduction in Suicide Rates

There are a lot of studies showing that transition improves mental health and quality of life while reducing dysphoria. Not to mention this 2010 meta-analysis of 28 different studies, which found that transition is extremely effective at reducing dysphoria and improving quality of life.

Countering That Swedish "Suicide Study"

the 40% suicide rate is a reference to this study by Dr. Dhejne. The claim that her study shows that transition does not reduce risk of suicide attempts while improving mental health and quality of life is a deliberate misrepresentation popularized by Paul McHugh, a religious extremist and leading member of an anti-gay and anti-trans hate group, who presents himself as a reputable source but publishes work without peer review. His claim to fame is having shut down the Johns Hopkins trans health program in the 70's, which he did not based on medical evidence but on his personal ideological opposition to transition. Johns Hopkins has resumed offering transition related medical care, including reconstructive surgery, and their faculty are finally disavowing him for his irresponsible and ideologically motivated misrepresentation of the current science of sex and gender.
That study's lead author Dr. Dhejne had emphatically denounced McHugh and his misuse of her work. If for those who don't trust the TransAdvocate article, she did so again in her Science AMA last year.
Edit: Details on Dr. Dhejne's often misrepresented study - it found only that trans people who transitioned prior to 1989had slightly higher risk of suicide attempts than the general public. The author attributed this higher risk to the vicious anti-trans discrimination people who transitioned 29+ years ago experienced. The study found no difference in the risk of suicide attempts among trans people who transitioned after 1989, vs the general public.
She is also the primary author the other study I posted below, An analysis of all applications for sex reassignment surgery in Sweden, 1960-2010: prevalence, incidence, and regrets, which found a "regret" rate of 2.2%

Countering Claims of Widespread Transition Regret

This 1% "regret" rate also includes a lot of people who are very happy they transitioned, and continue to live as a gender other than the one they were assigned at birth, but regret that medical error or shitty luck led to low quality surgical results.
This is a risk in any reconstructive surgery, and a success rate of about 99% is astonishingly good for any medical treatment. And "regret" rates have been going down for decades, as surgical methods improve.

Countering Claims that Puberty Blockers are Harmful

There is extensive research about long term use of puberty blockers, and they have overwhelmingly been shown to be very gentle and safe.
This treatment isn't just used for trans youth - it has been the standard treatment for kids with precocious puberty for decades. Most kids with precocious puberty don't have any underlying medical condition, their early development is just an extreme variation of normal development, but it would still cause serious psychological damage to start puberty at the age of, say, 6. This treatment has no long term side effects; it just puts puberty on hold. Stop treatment, and puberty picks up where it left off.

Countering Claims that Trans People Didn't Historically Exist

And while until recently there has been no place in modern US/European culture for people with gender identities and lives atypical to their sex at birth to exist publicly, that isn't true in other times and cultures. Throughout the middle east and Asia there have been Hijra visible in public life for hundreds or even thousands of years. The same is true of Kathoey in Thailand, Muxe in Zapotec culture in Mexico, various two-spirit identities found in indigenous American cultures, Māhū in traditional Hawaiian/Tahitian/Maohi cultures, the Fa'afafine of Samoa, Tongan Fakaleiti, the Sworn Virgins of the Balkans, the Galli of Ancient Rome, etc.
And of course, humans are not the only animals. While we can't interview animals, and gender identity is harder to identify visually in animals than something like same-gender sexual activity is, we sure as hell have observed a lot of animals displaying instinctive behavior typically associated with the other sex. And there very certainly is evidenceof congenital, neurologically based sexually specific behavior in animals.

Condemnations of "Conversion Therapy"

submitted by whyme1924 to alltheleft [link] [comments]


2020.09.05 14:24 I-grok-god It’s one nuclear power plant Michael, what could it cost, ten billion dollars?

There is a circlejerk present on Reddit, in which people discuss how necessary nuclear power is, and how the government should invest in it. This is likely because the greater world is scared of nuclear, and Redditors feel that they can establish themselves as righteous rational right-minded contrarians who understand that ackshually nuclear power is a good thing. I have seen such a feeling infest itself within this particular subreddit, so, without further ado, an R1 on why nuclear is an overrated technology, specifically in the United States.
The Capital Costs are Too Damn High
The money. The money is always the issue. Nuclear power is expensive, very expensive. Nuclear power offers a large sticker shock: around 6-9 billion dollars for a 1,100 MW plant, according to industry estimates. One may note that industry estimates do not always correlate with reality, and in this case that is true; a study done by Synapse Energy Economics finds that the average cost overrun for 75 nuclear power plants built in the US is an astounding 207 percent.1
This can best be illustrated with the absolutely horrific story of the Vogtle Nuclear Power Plant in Georgia. The first reactors were built in the 1980s, to provide Georgia with a source of energy that could grow into the future. Vogtle was initially estimated to cost around 1 billion dollars each, a reasonable amount for two 1,000 MW plants (although initial estimates included an additional two reactors that had to be cancelled). This was, however, not to be. Ballooning costs sent the price of the initial plants through the roof, until the total price of the two nuclear power plants was 9 billion dollars.
One would imagine that an almost 900 percent increase in cost would be a deal breaker for the people of the state of Georgia, but just twenty years later they were back for round two, with Vogtle 3 and 4. This time the cost merely doubled, but the cost was also initially much higher: 14 billion, now turned into 27 billion. Not only is it enormously expensive, but it is also far behind schedule, with a current completion date of 2021, five years late.2
This enormous boondoggle is being subsidized partially by the people of Georgia, to the tune of about 14 billion dollars.3 But what if Georgia chose a different route? Imagine, if you will, about 2200 MW worth of solar power in Georgia, which cost around $2436/kW back in 2016 for a grand total of 2 billion dollars4. Sounds quite a bit more reasonable doesn’t it?
This split in price between renewables and nuclear is getting worse and worse over time. Lazard estimates that between 2008-2018 solar costs fell 88 percent while nuclear rose 23 percent over that same period. Nuclear is also slower to build. Even in aggressive nuclear building programs like China, nuclear was slower than renewables by a factor of two. Nuclear requires anywhere between 5-17 more years to construct than solar or wind.3 This extra time is problematic, as it increases the amount of time fossil fuels are being burned, and makes nuclear unpopular.
But why is nuclear so damn expensive?
Bob the Delayer
One reason, is that the US is quite terrible at constructing nuclear power plants. Around 85% of the price of a nuclear power plant comes from the initial cost of construction. Moreover, nuclear power plants are complicated to construct. Unlike solar power plants, which can be set up in your backyard, nuclear power plants have a wide variety of complicated systems necessary for the operation of the plant.
This creates problems when the nuclear power plant industry is just plain bad at building nuclear power plants. See, the problem began with Third Mile Island incident. Afterwards, for a generation, nuclear power plant construction was effectively shut down in the US. As a result, companies and contractors in the US are building the most recent round of nuclear power plants blind; they have no experience building these things before because no one still working has. This alone raises costs by about 30% for the first-round of construction.5
Then comes the problem of project management. Inexplicably, it is common in the US and Western Europe to start construction on nuclear power plants without having finished the design. A study done during the 70s found that only 12% of project changes after construction starts come from regulatory requirements; instead they originate in flawed planning.6
In addition, there are a number of other issues related to the construction, including contractor disputes, the inability of US contractors to meet the proper safety standards, and the difficulty of easily making even small unanticipated changes to the initial design.
All of these problems lead to delays which are absolutely lethal for power plant costs. Nuclear projects are primarily funded via debt. Delays increase the amount of time it will take to start paying back loans, and thus increase the amount of interest the companies are being forced to pay. To illustrate this problem, decreasing cost and construction time by 20% would save about $1000/kW in initial costs and $600/kW in interest payments. The loans create a multiplicative effect on the cost of a project, driving up costs far more than what would it would initially seem to do.5
Beaten by Sentient Baguettes
We are not the only nation in the world that requires electricity. \citation needed]) One of these other nations, is France, a country powered by quite a bit of nuclear energy. France has some advantages over the US when it comes to nuclear construction, but much like the US, they have dismal project management. However, unlike the US, France has modular design, a single energy market, and far simpler regulations.
A nuclear power plant builder in the US faces the ludicrous problem that depending on what state, county, or municipality they choose to put their plant in, it’ll be subject to different regulations, and have to comply with different utility rules. A plant design that works in one area, will not necessarily work in another. Even worse, a power plant design that works one day may be challenged in court the next, creating delays.
Contrast that with France, who have no post-facto legal challenges to building. Once the project is approved, it cannot be stopped by outside interest groups seeking to challenge it in court. In addition, they have a single utility and a national energy market, making it relatively simple for them to design their system from the top-down. They created a single design that worked, and they repeated it all across the country.7
This kind of modular design is one of the largest barriers to cheap nuclear energy in the US. Modularization can create savings up to 50% from the current costs in the US.5 But as is clear, it is not feasible in the current United States power grid.
Implications
The truth is that the barriers to building nuclear are unique to the United States. Other countries have predictable regulatory schemes, modular designs, national energy markets, and so on. The US does not. Constructing nuclear on a large-scale may only be possible in the US with either massive government subsidies, significant improvements in technology, or a major change in the structure of the US energy market.
This does not eliminate our need for nuclear. Reliable energy generation is necessary, as only around 80% of the grid can be taken to renewables before major problems start to arise.8 Nuclear is a necessary and important part of our energy future. But saying that the US has some glorious nuclear-powered future ahead of us isn’t right.
Much ink has been spilled about the unwillingness of certain progressive politicians arguing against nuclear investment. The truth is, for now, they are correct. Nuclear energy is politically unpopular, painfully slow, and extraordinarily expensive, especially when compared to renewables, which get cheaper with every passing year. If the US government is going to throw billions in subsidies at carbon-free energy, it shouldn’t be throwing it at nuclear.

  1. https://www.synapse-energy.com/sites/default/files/SynapsePaper.2008-07.0.Nuclear-Plant-Construction-Costs.A0022_0.pdf
  2. https://www.powermag.com/how-the-vogtle-nuclear-expansions-costs-escalated/
  3. https://www.worldnuclearreport.org/IMG/pdf/wnisr2019-v2-hr.pdf * (anti-nuclear but highly credible)
  4. https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=36813#
  5. http://energy.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/The-Future-of-Nuclear-Energy-in-a-Carbon-Constrained-World.pdf
  6. http://ansnuclearcafe.org/2016/02/16/nuclear-plant-cost-escalation-a-look-back-and-ahead/#sthash.fI666rEw.dpbs
  7. https://www.vox.com/2016/2/29/11132930/nuclear-power-costs-us-france-korea
  8. https://www.nrel.gov/analysis/re-futures.html
submitted by I-grok-god to neoliberal [link] [comments]


2020.09.05 01:12 GeneralSploon Wikipedia Article on Copypasta’s

Open main menu Wikipedia Search Copypasta Language Watch Edit A copypasta is a block of text which is copied and pasted across the internet by individuals through online forums and social networking websites. Copypastas are said to be similar to spam.[1]
History Edit
The word "copypasta" was first used on Usenet groups in 2006,[2] being added to Urban Dictionary on 20 April 2006[3] and Encyclopedia Dramatica, a satirical internet culture wiki, in September 2006.[citation needed] According to Google Trends, the word "copypasta" was first used around April 2006.[4]
Etymology Edit The term "copypasta" is derived from the computer term "copy/paste", and can be traced back to an anonymous 4chan imageboard from 2006.[1][5]
Notable examples Edit
Navy Seal Edit The Navy Seal copypasta is a lengthy, comically written, aggressive attack paragraph against a "kiddo", written in the voice of the stereotypical "tough guy", listing absurd accomplishments such as having "over 300 confirmed kills" and being "trained in gorilla warfare". This copypasta is often reposted as a humorous overreaction to an insult and is thought to have originated a post on a 4chan message board from 11 November 2010.[6]
Bee Movie Edit Main article: Bee Movie § Internet popularity The Bee Movie copypasta dates back to 2013 where users would post the entire script of the Bee Movie onto websites such as Reddit and Tumblr.[7] This was popularised around the time where edits of the film were first being posted and popularized on YouTube in late 2016.[8]
See also Edit
Look up copypasta in Wiktionary, the free dictionary. Creepypasta Faxlore References Edit
^ a b "What is Copypasta? - Definition from Techopedia". Techopedia.com. Retrieved 30 December 2018. ^ "Words We're Watching: 'Copypasta'". Merriam-Webster. Retrieved 30 December 2018. ^ "What does copypasta mean?". Urban Dictionary. Retrieved 19 May 2018. ^ ""copypasta" - Explore". Google Trends. Google. Retrieved 30 December 2018. ^ Jaquez, Sophia (12 December 2018). "My Favorite CopyPastas". The County Current. Retrieved 30 December 2018. ^ "What Does Navy Seal copypasta Mean?". Dictionary.com. Archived from the original on 26 October 2018. ^ Bergado, Gabe. "How Barry B. Benson Became an Internet A-Lister". Inverse. Retrieved 30 December 2018. ^ "The Best Prank on Facebook Right Now Involves the Entire Transcript of Bee Movie". Intelligencer. 2 December 2015. Retrieved 30 December 2018. Last edited 8 days ago by JAYFAX RELATED ARTICLES Creepypasta horror-related legends or images that have been copy-and-pasted around the Internet Basic (slang) slang Milkshake Duck Internet meme describing phenomena that go from being seen as positive to deeply flawed Wikipedia
Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless otherwise noted. Privacy policyTerms of UseDesktop
submitted by GeneralSploon to copypasta [link] [comments]


2020.09.03 12:27 RobleViejo Your casual UFO enthusiasts conversation

The following is an interchange of private messages between another user and me. Im posting this because I think it would be a waste to keep this conversation to ourselves, as our texts are a combination of ideas and links backing up those ideas. This interchange consist of Two PMs sent to me by [user] back to back, and my Two PMs in reply, but they are cited below as "First PM - First Reply" so it makes more sense and it easier to read. Im sure Im gonna get flagged in some way because of this, and I'm not using a throwaway account because I stand for everything I say. May the Truth escape the Grip of Secrecy our leaders have been negating. But ALWAYS make up your own mind.
"I Want To Believe, but Only Science Guides My Thoughts"

First PM from [user]

your comment about how UFOs travel
from [user] sent 11 hours ago
"My point is referred to the "maneuvers outside the normal laws of physics"
Here's a copy of my post today describing my discovery of the mechanism some UFOs use for transport so they don't maneuver "outside the normal laws of physics":
Physicists years ago determined that the seemingly impossible speeds and maneuvers by UFOs reported by countless witnesses can be explained if the UFOs distorted space as a transport mechanism. Einstein's law of relativity says that space and time are actually one single entity, spacetime - - and that it’s possible to distort space - - for example, with an intense gravitational field. This has already been verified with countless experiments - - including observations of the extreme distortion of the shapes of galaxies outside the edges and behind other galaxies that have very intense gravity. Physicists determined that if a UFO distorted the space between its present location and target location, it could perform its seemingly impossible maneuvers and still obey the laws of physics.
I discovered a mechanism that some UFOs could use to distort space. I first discovered this mechanism while watching a NASA channel program, where a NASA scientist who studied Lightning described his experiences when Lightning hit his jet. He said that everything moved in "Slow Motion"; and he could watch the lightning as it moved across the outside surface of the jet. This, of course, would normally be impossible to watch since a Lightning discharge occurs in only a split second. He says Lightning caused everything to move in Slow Motion shortly after position 2:14 in this NASA Channel video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pi5FP2G05k
Because he could watch the Lightning move - - that "seemed to take forever", while everything moved in "Slow Motion" - - I concluded that an Extremely high voltage Static Electricity discharge (Lightning) can slow down the passage of Time - can Distort Time. Since Einstein's law of relativity says that time and space are one single entity, spacetime, this Time Distortion should be accompanied by a simultaneous Space Distortion. Since physicists determined that UFOs must Distort Space to perform their seemingly impossible maneuvers, it follows that that some UFOs can use Extremely high voltage Static Electricity, like Lightning, to cause the Distortion of Space for transport. This theory is confirmed by the Rendlesham Forest UFO:
In James Fox’s UFO movie documentary “Out of the Blue”, in the video near position 51:40 three soldiers at the Rendlesham Forest Air Force Base in England describe the UFO that landed in the forest next to the base at night. Shortly after position 54:40 the chief of security at the base, Sgt. Penniston, says as he walked up to the craft there was "Static Electricity in the air".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssa7V0l7c0E
On the next night in a different online testimony another soldier said he felt Static Electricity when a UFO flew near treetop level above his head. And another Air Force officer said as he walked toward another UFO that landed just outside the forest, it felt like he was walking through Jello - - another way of say that everything moved in Slow Motion, and that Time had slowed down - - that the UFO had Distorted / Dilated Time.
In another excellent video with a high quality accurate computer animation of the landed UFO based on Sgt. Penniston’s description, starting shortly after position 4:2S he says as they walked toward the landed Craft, "We started feeling Static Electricity on our skin, and on our hair, and on our clothes. One of the unusual effects is that once we entered this immediate area around the craft, it felt like everything went in Slow Motion. It felt like there was a dragging of time" .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgAIQ0OCaxs
This is the same phrase used by the NASA scientist when Lightning hit his jet that led me to conclude that Extremely high voltage Static Electricity, like Lightning, distorts Space and Time (Spacetime). Penniston then says their watches later showed the wrong time - - 45 minutes in the past -- confirming again that Extremely high voltage Static Electricity Distorts Time, and is used by some UFOs for transport. He also couldn't see any landing gear under Craft - - so apparently the Craft also used this high voltage Static Electricity for levitation. His buddy who stood farther away said elsewhere in an online testimony that he experienced a space distortion effect, where this area looked like it was miles across rather that just a few feet across - - AGAIN confirming my theory that some UFOs use Extremely high voltage Static Electricity to distort Space and Time (Spacetime) for transport (and apparently also for levitation):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgAIQ0OCaxs
Accurate computer rendition of Rendlesham Forest UFO based on Sgt. Penniston's description. Screenshots are taken from previously linked video:
1: https://imgur.com/a/P2EuxEW
2: https://imgur.com/a/uQqlcpF
3: https://imgur.com/a/0OtNVKZ
4: https://imgur.com/a/Bwx5R4L
5: https://imgur.com/a/apAmN2P
6: https://imgur.com/a/8MYyjT3
7: https://imgur.com/a/OrC8NdB
8: https://imgur.com/a/f107bYF
According to my theory, the white light enveloping the UFO Craft as it takes off is white hot PLASMA , a continuous Extremely high voltage Static Electricity discharge like the white hot Static Electricity discharge of a Lightning bolt / Thunderbolt. The laws of physics in electromagnetism show that electrons, including electrons in a Static Electricity discharge, can be channeled to move in various directions with a magnetic field. So, the UFO's surface could be magnetized to channel the Static Electricity electron plasma to form an envelope of Lightning around the Craft.
https://imgur.com/a/f107bYF

First Reply from [RobleViejo]

re: your comment about how UFOs travel
to [user] sent 49 minutes ago
He says Lightning caused everything to move in Slow Motion shortly after position 2:14 in this NASA Channel video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pi5FP2G05k
To be fair, he says and quote "[only lasts about one second but it seems to take forever when you it hit the aircraft]"
And another Air Force officer said as he walked toward another UFO that landed just outside the forest, it felt like he was walking through Jello - - another way of say that everything moved in Slow Motion, and that Time had slowed down
Sgt. Penniston’s description, [...] he says as they walked toward the landed Craft, "We started feeling Static Electricity on our skin, and on our hair, and on our clothes. One of the unusual effects is that once we entered this immediate area around the craft, it felt like everything went in Slow Motion. It felt like there was a dragging of time"
What I don't understand is how a human could possible perceive a change in the passage of time, wouldn't the EEG Brain Activity also be affected by it, and thus negate the perception of the time delay? At the end of the day perception (depth, color, touch, hearing, everything) works by comparing what you are perceiving with the background. Maybe this is something similar to the Doppler Effect in sound waves, Gravitational Waves HAVE been proven to exist so it wouldn't be too out of whack to think this "Time Delay" is some kind of "Gravitational Doppler effect". Im saying this because if you could perceive the delay of time inside the aircraft then you would feel like it takes YEARS to go from A to B.
Oh, and this is the moment to point out that Lazar described a "gravitational pocket that isolated the craft from the spacetime surrounding it" so yeah, you're right assuming this technology distorts time or even isolate the craft from the passage of time.
that led me to conclude that Extremely high voltage Static Electricity, like Lightning, distorts Space and Time (Spacetime). Penniston then says their watches later showed the wrong time - - 45 minutes in the past -- confirming again that Extremely high voltage Static Electricity Distorts Time, and is used by some UFOs for transport. He also couldn't see any landing gear under Craft - - so apparently the Craft also used this high voltage Static Electricity for levitation. His buddy who stood farther away said elsewhere in an online testimony that he experienced a space distortion effect, where this area looked like it was miles across rather that just a few feet across - - AGAIN confirming my theory that some UFOs use Extremely high voltage Static Electricity to distort Space and Time (Spacetime) for transport (and apparently also for levitation)
We can actually prove this, by attaching a very finely tuned clock to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vxror-fnOL4. We know that movement itself, of any kind, slows down time, but if the negation of the gravitational pull makes this effect even stronger then we are on the trail.
And this is the moment to point out another thing, very important: Light does not experience the passage of time at all, literally. Because it moves at the Speed of Causality, which could be understood as the "Speed of Time", is not correct to call it that way but it helps me understand what it is and how it works. And yeah, if you move at the Speed of Causality then time "freezes" completely
the white light enveloping the UFO Craft as it takes off is white hot PLASMA , a continuous Extremely high voltage Static Electricity discharge like the white hot Static Electricity discharge of a Lightning bolt / Thunderbolt. The laws of physics in electromagnetism show that electrons, including electrons in a Static Electricity discharge, can be channeled to move in various directions with a magnetic field. So, the UFO's surface could be magnetized to channel the Static Electricity electron plasma to form an envelope of Lightning around the Craft.
Holy shit buddy! I think you're right!
Ok, I finished Part One of your PMs. Im gonna link you two videos that made me think of the possibility that these crafts use water as fuel (Im not gonna fetch the testimonies that associate large masses of water with UFOs sightings because there are a LOT and Im sure you knew about that already)
Theoretically speaking, you can have a substance with Negative Mass, but it MUST be a liquid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DW7VBrKmLS8
"Punching Water So Hard LIGHT Comes Out - Sonoluminescence": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puVxGnl_3y8&t=1264s
I think that the combination of our ideas leads to some theories that no one is considering.
And this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ugQArIkM8A Go to the "03:40 min" mark. Ning Li is our White Rabbit, and the fact that she disappeared but her company is still cited as active and paying taxes regardless of not launching any product, ever, is our best evidence that she indeed, succeed at creating an anti-gravity device. Maybe the fuel is water at a Boss-Einstein Condensate state moving in a disc, that would explain the shape of the Flying Saucers (and that maybe would mean the Flying Saucers are the USA's UFOs). But the dates dont match.
Ima read your second pm now.

Second PM from [user]

UFOs
from [user] sent 7 hours ago
Here is additional evidence that UFOs distort Space as a transport mechanism. It's from my research and analysis of George Adamski's movie film of a UFO very close above his friend's home. You can clearly see the UFO distorting Space in his film.
When I first learned about Adamski's UFO pictures and contacts I disregarded them as fake ... But then I kept coming across bits and pieces of information that forced me to change my assessment.
One Very Important piece of information came from William Sherwood, the "Father of Optical Photometry", and one of the top optical physicists in the world. He worked at Eastman Kodak Company headquarters in Rochester, NY. He and other scientists there examined the Kodak Kodachrome color movie film of the UFO in 1965 a few feet above Adamski's friend Madelyn Rottifer's home in Silver Spring, MD. He also visited her home to measure the position of the UFO. Here is what he said in his video testimony about his and his fellow Kodak scientists' findings:
“Densitometers, photometers, projection devices of all sorts, electronic devices, everything that you could name that you could use, telephotometers, and so on; the electron microscope was used by a man at Kodak park. Everything pointed to the conclusion that the objects in the film were true, unknown objects, not model objects. And it was taken by Madelyn Exactly as she told us it was.”
His entire testimony can be seen starting at position 7:45 in the following video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QDBmmbqwF8
and continued in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdrNKz60BVM
In a letter to Ronald Caswell, William Sherwood later wrote: “When Mr Adamski came to Rochester in March, 1965, I took him to Eastman Kodak Co. and introduced him to scientists and photographic specialists in the optical laboratory. (…) They accepted his films as genuine. A typical comment was: ‘We wouldn’t begin to know how to fake such a film if we wanted to…’.”
A testimony from a scientist with such high credentials as this man
cannot be brushed aside!
The 2nd video above also shows the testimony of a man who worked as a film expert for the United Nations, who analyzed Admski's color film and visited Madyelyn's home where the UFO was filmed. He also determined that the UFO in the film is authentic.
William Sherwood used the distance of the UFO that he determined when he visited Madelyn's home, and the focal length of the movie camera, and the size of the Craft measured on the film, along with a mathematical equation to determine that the Craft was 27 feet in diameter. Here is a collage I made from various frames in the film. It periodically extends and retracts a ball shaped object on the underside of the craft:
https://i.imgur.com/AmY2Zbf.png
One thing that is very noticeable is that the right side of the UFO PERIODICALLY BECOMES DISTORTED AND INCREASED IN LENGTH:
https://i.imgur.com/HKY10bJ.png
The distorted odd-looking UFO shape in parts of the film doesn't conform to the concept that people had, and still have, in their minds of the classical round, symmetrical shape that a UFO should have. And the continually changing shape from the classical round shape to the lopsided unsymmetrical shape with right much longer than left side is even more Bizarre. The vast majority of people would never conceive of a UFO changing shape like this. So, you wouldn't expect someone who wanted to deceive the public by hoaxing a UFO, to create such a ridiculous UFO that doesn't fit in with peoples' pre-conceived notions - it would drastically reduce the chances that people would believe it.
But this distorted shape is exactly what, years later, physicists determined what UFOs must be able to do - - to move at seemingly impossible speeds, and perform seemingly impossible maneuvers (like making split second sharp angle turns at thousands of miles an hour; and stopping from that speed in a split second). Physicists determined the only way a UFO could move this way is if it Distorts Space. Einstein showed it's possible to distort space (with an intense gravitational field for example). The distortion on the right side of Adamski's UFO indicates that it Distorted Space, giving the illusion of the increase in length of the right side.
https://i.imgur.com/HKY10bJ.png
Although this doesn't fit in with the public's pre-conceived notion of what a UFO should look like - - Adamski's Distorted UFO DOES fit in with the concept that physicists later developed to explain how UFOs maneuver by Distorting Space. This, together with the Kodak scientists' determination that the UFO in Adamski's film is authentic, and the United Nations film expert's determination that the UFO in Adamski's film is authentic
is undeniable evidence PROVING that the UFO in Adamski's Film is AUTHENTIC.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdrNKz60BVM

Second Reply to [user]

re: UFOs
to [user] sent 11 minutes ago
George Adamski's movie film of a UFO
Holy shit, thats the most detailed UFO picture Ive ever seen. The three spheres underneath coincide with Lazar's claim. But the shape, the way its designed, look VERY human. What do you think about the "NAZI Bell"? Because if that is real it might have some relation with George Adamski's UFO. The dates between the fall of NAZI Germany and that sighting line up.
One thing that is very noticeable is that the right side of the UFO PERIODICALLY BECOMES DISTORTED AND INCREASED IN LENGTH: https://i.imgur.com/HKY10bJ.png
Now we talking, who would distort fake pictures on purpose? Only undermines credibility. I believe every word of Adamski's interview, but the whole "They wanted us to record them so the people would know" is very fishy. If they wanted people to know they would have landed in the middle of Wall Street.
But this distorted shape is exactly what, years later, physicists determined what UFOs must be able to do [...]. Physicists determined the only way a UFO could move this way is if it Distorts Space. Einstein showed it's possible to distort space [...] The distortion on the right side of Adamski's UFO indicates that it Distorted Space, giving the illusion of the increase in length of the right side.
Yes. Im gonna take a shot and call this "Gravitational Doppler Effect". Because of gravity "curves" light, Gravitational Waves would indeed distort Light around the object affected by them, something akin the Doppler Effect of the distorted Sound coming from a fast moving object. This is truly fascinating, Ive never consider that.
Ok... That was it. I finished both PMs. Main points I added to my "thoughts collection" regarding UFOs:
Dude, again, thanks for these PMs, I loved how you backed up every sentence with links. This is the Way.
Much love and remember: May the Truth escape the Grip of Secrecy.

END OF CITATION

If you make it this far, thank you very much for your time and attention. Only collective thinking leads to collective answers. But keep in mind, these are two nutheads theorycrafting about something that escapes their scientific qualifications. NEVER accept internet stuff as true, but CONSIDER the context and sources so you can ALWAYS make up your own mind.
Peace, Love and Truth.
submitted by RobleViejo to ufo [link] [comments]


2020.08.27 01:38 bangerz42069 My rationalization of the rise of Black Lives Matters protests and rioting

I. About this post Sorry, there is no TL; DR. If you can’t take the time to thoroughly read this, then you aren’t welcome on this post.
First off, I want to say that this is a NEUTRAL post. I present my in-depth thoughts on how I have rationalized everything going on regarding the Black Lives Matter movement. Take it for what it’s worth.
II. What is BLM It’s terrible that there is destruction and violence. It’s terrible that the destruction takes away from the BLM cause. It’s utterly heartbreaking that peoples’ small, private businesses are being destroyed. It’s sad, but understandable that the reporting is primarily on the riots since that’s what the large majority of people want to see and care about staying up to date on in the news.
What I’m going to explain here is how this is all so much bigger than just Jacob Blake or George Floyd, this is so much more than Breonna Taylor or Trayvon Martin. What I am going to rationalize for you is that BLM is just how much more than one specific case this all is. This is even way more than just the mere “battle” between police and the black population. The Black Lives Matter movement isn’t just about police, protesters, rioters, looters, antifa, etc. either. You must use the nation’s history to rationalize everything going on regarding BLM, well at least that’s what I have done.
III. Systematic Oppression Let’s start at slavery to show how this is purely a systematic problem that dates back to the very moment the white population created the United States’ black population and forced them into slavery. Here sit on this thought while you read further: The American white man created today’s American black man.
African Americans were forced into slavery in the United States. While in slavery, what was the white population doing? The white population was progressing their culture, family, future generations and BUILDING for a prosperous future. Meanwhile blacks were being held captive in slavery, and were forcefully prevented from prospering and growing those same things that the white population had the privilege of doing. Blacks were held back from learning, held back from enjoying life, and were held back from building their family to help their future generations.
After slavery was abolished, queue in segregation. Again, SYSTEMATIC problem. Okay, so the white population finally allowed the black population to be “free”. Big quote-quote there. So, the black population is now allowed to do anything they want, right? Get a job, freely roam the country, go do whatever they want, have the same opportunities that the white population has. NO. Big no. The black population may have been “free”, but they were given practically nothing to work with to start building their culture and future generations. Relating this to systematic problems, the whites knew exactly what they were doing here by saying “Okay sure, you don’t have to be a slave, but we aren’t going to help you prosper by any means. We are still going to make your life hell. We aren’t going to help you make money. On top of that, better watch your back or else we will throw you in jail at the drop of a dime, or better yet (in the white man’s words) shoot you.” That’s how I view it.
Yes, as time went on leading up to outlawing segregation, things slowly got better for the black population, but the keyword is slowly. If you graphed the rate of growth between whites and blacks from the time slavery was abolished up until even this day probably, you’d see that the blacks have progressed at a much slower rate on average. This is not a coincidence; this is a result of the systematic outline that the white authorities created for the blacks by making it so much harder for a black individual to get a job or even stay alive. You’d be ignorant to think otherwise that this was not a planned-out system that angry white people exercised upon abolishing slavery.
Now let’s relate all of this to today’s day in age. Take a look at the poverty-stricken communities in inner cities. There is no coincidence that the large majority of the population is African American. What is common in poverty-stricken communities? Crime. Why is there crime? Business. The crime in these areas from gangs are resultant of business. Now why would these communities choose gang crime for a business? They would do that when they have very few other options, which was more prominent in times of segregation, but these communities have not been given enough assistance to reduce the poverty rate, so their family generations are now routinely joining gangs. You know how if your parents are a farmer then there’s a good chance that you also become a farmer? This is the same thing. This is the systematic racism people talk about. This is what the white man created in the black man. If you date this back to slavery, the actions of the black population can be justified by the fact that they were forced into each and every one of these circumstances by being provided so little opportunity for them to prosper in our nation.
This helps me rationalize why the black population has in a way been forced into a stereotype of gangs and drugs, and most of all being dangerous because there is no doubt about it; gangs are very dangerous. Again, in no way am I saying any of this is okay to have in a society or in our nation, but this is how I have been rationalizing how and why it got to be this way. Primarily how the African American male “gang member” stereotype was created, but even more than that why poverty must be solved (which takes more than just the government, we as a nation need to solve this together).
For years now, African Americans have been at a strong disadvantage, and they’ve resorted to other means that they can prosper at. This has indeed created a dangerous stereotype revolving around black males in poverty-stricken areas especially, who are committing crimes. Think of this again, the white man created this for the black man. This is systemic, they give no opportunity for blacks and it results in blacks doing crime to prosper. Now the whites can just arrest them and lock them up, or worse shoot them and justify it with “That person was a criminal anyway.”
“That person was a criminal anyway.” Heard that before? Damn, I am pretty sure I’ve seen that comment quite a bit on my social media news feeds. What every single person who says that doesn’t understand is how systematic this is.
THIS IS BIGGER THAN JUST PROTESTS AND RIOTS. THIS IS EVEN BIGGER THAN JUST A POLICE OFFICER SHOOTING A BLACK MALE. THIS IS ABOUT SYSTEMATIC OPPRESSION DATING BACK TO THE BEGINNING OF OUR NATION.
IV. The Riots We can finally get to the riots. Let’s use not one specific piece of history on this, but the history of riots, war and battle between groups of people. This can go back as far as you want, pretty much to the beginning of established communities in the B.C. era. In a lot of these instances, fires were started, violence erupted, peoples’ homes and businesses destroyed. Why would someone do such a thing?
A group of people erupt into battle finally once they feel like they aren’t getting their point across to the other side. When they feel like their voice isn’t being heard. When they feel like they don’t have respect. Whether we like it or not, fear is one thing that, depending on how you word the definition of respect.
Let’s use this one under Google’s dictionary definition for ‘respect’ in the verb section: “agree to recognize and abide by (a legal requirement)”. I would say inducing fear is one way to get recognized. Think of this, why wouldn’t someone willingly harm a high authority person, such as the president. They would not do so because of the FEAR of getting killed themselves or spending their life in prison.
That is why rioting is a means of gaining respect, in the definition as I stated, when all else has thus failed. Is rioting good for our nation, not a chance! At least not in the near-future, but who knows this may be what finally initiates a legitimate change at solving these systematic racism issues that we all wish were never a thing, yet they are still to this very day.
That is how I am able to rationalize the protests turned riots. This is how I rationalize why Black Lives Matter became a movement. This is how I rationalize why African Americans have been known to commit crime as we know it. This is not the fault of their heritage. The systematic problems that the white population created from the start of our nation is at fault here. We as a nation are all at fault as well for not solving these issues of inequality faster.
For anyone that wants to blame the rioters for destruction and violence, you are thinking too small. Think bigger than that, please.
Our nation’s history is at fault for the riots this very day in Kenosha, Wisconsin.
V. Regarding the police, here’s my quick hot take on it:
My stance on everything right now is that every cop that only went through the regular police academy training to become a cop should be stripped of lethal weapons.
There should then be a higher tier of police that can carry lethal weapons, one's that are much more respectable, people that criminals don’t even want to mess with. These police of higher rank are much more composed human beings, than the average person in society not even just the current police force members. People that perform very well in critical situations and are able make smart decisions in high-risk situations.
The police that are leftover, the lower tier, should be just writing traffic citations and responding to the basic low-level calls, and whenever they run into a situation of higher risk, they instantly call in the higher ranked police force to handle it.
What this will do is make it so not just any Joe-Schmo can complete a police academy, have no experience, and then be given a lethal weapon to wield in our communities with little to no real experience on the job. This will then make it so those higher ranked police who do carry lethal weapons are much better suited to handle high-risk situations.
BLACK LIVES MATTER
submitted by bangerz42069 to socialjustice101 [link] [comments]


2020.08.27 00:50 bangerz42069 Hot Take - Rationalizing protests

I. About this post Sorry, there is no TL; DR. If you can’t take the time to thoroughly read this, then you aren’t welcome on this post. With how important and prominent this situation is today; I’d recommend reading my thoughts.
First off, I want to say that this is a NEUTRAL post, although I do understand I am rationalizing destructive protests/riots. Rationalizing something doesn't mean that I agree with the destructive behavior. I present my in-depth thoughts on how I have rationalized everything going on regarding the Black Lives Matter movement. Take it for what it’s worth.
II. What is BLM It’s terrible that there is destruction and violence. It’s terrible that the destruction takes away from the BLM cause. It’s utterly heartbreaking that peoples’ small, private businesses are being destroyed. It’s sad, but understandable that the reporting is primarily on the riots since that’s what the large majority of people want to see and care about staying up to date on in the news.
What I’m going to explain here is how this is all so much bigger than just Jacob Blake or George Floyd, this is so much more than Breonna Taylor or Trayvon Martin. What I am going to rationalize for you is that BLM is just how much more than one specific case this all is. This is even way more than just the mere “battle” between police and the black population. The Black Lives Matter movement isn’t just about police, protesters, rioters, looters, antifa, etc. either. You must use the nation’s history to rationalize everything going on regarding BLM, well at least that’s what I have done.
III. Systematic Oppression Let’s start at slavery to show how this is purely a systematic problem that dates back to the very moment the white population created the United States’ black population and forced them into slavery. Here sit on this thought while you read further: The American white man created today’s American black man.
African Americans were forced into slavery in the United States. While in slavery, what was the white population doing? The white population was progressing their culture, family, future generations and BUILDING for a prosperous future. Meanwhile blacks were being held captive in slavery, and were forcefully prevented from prospering and growing those same things that the white population had the privilege of doing. Blacks were held back from learning, held back from enjoying life, and were held back from building their family to help their future generations.
After slavery was abolished, queue in segregation. Again, SYSTEMATIC problem. Okay, so the white population finally allowed the black population to be “free”. Big quote-quote there. So, the black population is now allowed to do anything they want, right? Get a job, freely roam the country, go do whatever they want, have the same opportunities that the white population has. NO. Big no. The black population may have been “free”, but they were given practically nothing to work with to start building their culture and future generations. Relating this to systematic problems, the whites knew exactly what they were doing here by saying “Okay sure, you don’t have to be a slave, but we aren’t going to help you prosper by any means. We are still going to make your life hell. We aren’t going to help you make money. On top of that, better watch your back or else we will throw you in jail at the drop of a dime, or better yet (in the white man’s words) shoot you.” That’s how I view it.
Yes, as time went on leading up to outlawing segregation, things slowly got better for the black population, but the keyword is slowly. If you graphed the rate of growth between whites and blacks from the time slavery was abolished up until even this day probably, you’d see that the blacks have progressed at a much slower rate on average. This is not a coincidence; this is a result of the systematic outline that the white authorities created for the blacks by making it so much harder for a black individual to get a job or even stay alive. You’d be ignorant to think otherwise that this was not a planned-out system that angry white people exercised upon abolishing slavery.
Now let’s relate all of this to today’s day in age. Take a look at the poverty-stricken communities in inner cities. There is no coincidence that the large majority of the population is African American. What is common in poverty-stricken communities? Crime. Why is there crime? Business. The crime in these areas from gangs are resultant of business. Now why would these communities choose gang crime for a business? They would do that when they have very few other options, which was more prominent in times of segregation, but these communities have not been given enough assistance to reduce the poverty rate, so their family generations are now routinely joining gangs. You know how if your parents are a farmer then there’s a good chance that you also become a farmer? This is the same thing. This is the systematic racism people talk about. This is what the white man created in the black man. If you date this back to slavery, the actions of the black population can be justified by the fact that they were forced into each and every one of these circumstances by being provided so little opportunity for them to prosper in our nation.
This helps me rationalize why the black population has in a way been forced into a stereotype of gangs and drugs, and most of all being dangerous because there is no doubt about it; gangs are very dangerous. Again, in no way am I saying any of this is okay to have in a society or in our nation, but this is how I have been rationalizing how and why it got to be this way. Primarily how the African American male “gang member” stereotype was created, but even more than that why poverty must be solved (which takes more than just the government, we as a nation need to solve this together).
For years now, African Americans have been at a strong disadvantage, and they’ve resorted to other means that they can prosper at. This has indeed created a dangerous stereotype revolving around black males in poverty-stricken areas especially, who are committing crimes. Think of this again, the white man created this for the black man. This is systemic, they give no opportunity for blacks and it results in blacks doing crime to prosper. Now the whites can just arrest them and lock them up, or worse shoot them and justify it with “That person was a criminal anyway.”
“That person was a criminal anyway.” Heard that before? Damn, I am pretty sure I’ve seen that comment quite a bit on my social media news feeds. What every single person who says that doesn’t understand is how systematic this is.
THIS IS BIGGER THAN JUST PROTESTS AND RIOTS. THIS IS EVEN BIGGER THAN JUST A POLICE OFFICER SHOOTING A BLACK MALE. THIS IS ABOUT SYSTEMATIC OPPRESSION DATING BACK TO THE BEGINNING OF OUR NATION.
IV. The Riots We can finally get to the riots. Let’s use not one specific piece of history on this, but the history of riots, war and battle between groups of people. This can go back as far as you want, pretty much to the beginning of established communities in the B.C. era. In a lot of these instances, fires were started, violence erupted, peoples’ homes and businesses destroyed. Why would someone do such a thing?
A group of people erupt into battle finally once they feel like they aren’t getting their point across to the other side. When they feel like their voice isn’t being heard. When they feel like they don’t have respect. Whether we like it or not, fear is one thing that, depending on how you word the definition of respect.
Let’s use this one under Google’s dictionary definition for ‘respect’ in the verb section: “agree to recognize and abide by (a legal requirement)”. I would say inducing fear is one way to get recognized. Think of this, why wouldn’t someone willingly harm a high authority person, such as the president. They would not do so because of the FEAR of getting killed themselves or spending their life in prison.
That is why rioting is a means of gaining respect, in the definition as I stated, when all else has thus failed. Is rioting good for our nation, not a chance! At least not in the near-future, but who knows this may be what finally initiates a legitimate change at solving these systematic racism issues that we all wish were never a thing, yet they are still to this very day.
That is how I am able to rationalize the protests turned riots. This is how I rationalize why Black Lives Matter became a movement. This is how I rationalize why African Americans have been known to commit crime as we know it. This is not the fault of their heritage. The systematic problems that the white population created from the start of our nation is at fault here. We as a nation are all at fault as well for not solving these issues of inequality faster.
For anyone that wants to blame the rioters for destruction and violence, you are thinking too small. Think bigger than that, please.
Our nation’s history is at fault for the riots this very day in Kenosha, Wisconsin.
V. Regarding the police, here’s my quick hot take on it:
My stance on everything right now is that every cop that only went through the regular police academy training to become a cop should be stripped of lethal weapons.
There should then be a higher tier of police that can carry lethal weapons, one's that are much more respectable, people that criminals don’t even want to mess with. These police of higher rank are much more composed human beings, than the average person in society not even just the current police force members. People that perform very well in critical situations and are able make smart decisions in high-risk situations.
The police that are leftover, the lower tier, should be just writing traffic citations and responding to the basic low-level calls, and whenever they run into a situation of higher risk, they instantly call in the higher ranked police force to handle it.
What this will do is make it so not just any Joe-Schmo can complete a police academy, have no experience, and then be given a lethal weapon to wield in our communities with little to no real experience on the job. This will then make it so those higher ranked police who do carry lethal weapons are much better suited to handle high-risk situations.
BLACK LIVES MATTER
submitted by bangerz42069 to BlackLivesMatter [link] [comments]


6 Tips on Maintaining Long Distance Relationships - YouTube Dating Tips & Relationship Advice from TIKTOK ... How to Make an Online Relationship Last YouTube www.youtube.com FIXING THEIR RELATIONSHIP! [VRCHAT DATING] - YouTube Relationship Manifesto -- Girlfriends, Threesomes And Open Relationships Dating vs. Relationships  How To Turn Dating Into A ... DATING GAY/ RELATIONSHIP ADVICE - YouTube

Online Dating & Relationships Pew Research Center

  1. 6 Tips on Maintaining Long Distance Relationships - YouTube
  2. Dating Tips & Relationship Advice from TIKTOK ...
  3. How to Make an Online Relationship Last
  4. YouTube
  5. www.youtube.com
  6. FIXING THEIR RELATIONSHIP! [VRCHAT DATING] - YouTube
  7. Relationship Manifesto -- Girlfriends, Threesomes And Open Relationships
  8. Dating vs. Relationships How To Turn Dating Into A ...
  9. DATING GAY/ RELATIONSHIP ADVICE - YouTube
  10. Being In A Long Distance Relationship My Story & Advice ...

Instagram ↠ @caseebrim Twitter ↠ @caseebrim Want a personal shout out video? Check out my Cameo profile: https://www.cameo.com/caseebrim Long distance relationships also known as LDR's is when two people are dating from across a distance. This can be continents apart. Someone you meet online, ... Dating Tips & Relationship Advice from TIKTOK ~ Compilation This is a mixed Tiktok compilation about love, feelings, and crushes. Credit goes to TikTok and t... Dating vs. relationship. How to turn to date into a relationship! LINKS: ***PRIVATE COACHING SESSIONS *** https://www.apolloniaponti.com/private-coaching-2/ ... LOVE IS IN THE AIR!! ...Not really, BECAUSE EVERYONE HATES EACH OTHER! So we are going to fix that today in APHMAU'S TALK SHOW! 💜 Subscribe! :💜 http://bit.ly... I talk a lot about how to get to the point of sex, but what then? How do you turn a sexual partner into a girlfriend? How do you create a relationship you're happy with? And how to you deal on ... Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube. IG: @ZednRay @ItisZed @RastaRayOfficial Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube. The Dating Den - Long Distance Relationship Rules for Success - Duration: 9:42. datingwithdignity 29,803 views. 9:42. Online Dating Guide For Women (How to Land a Quality Man Online) ...