A talented comedian and juggler juggling in rhythm to "Golden Slumbers" by The Beatles.
If so,talk to somebody,anybody,even me,before you do it. Please. There are people that care and I am one of them. Take care.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7WJeqxuOfQ The above links to the video that this is a response to. Unfortunately,the owner of that video did not approve this as a response video for whatever reasons. Take care.
A while back I had a strange dream involving Barack Obama. It may be prophetic or just a silly dream but people keep saying that his supporters see him as a Messiah reminded me of it. You will understand why once you hear the dream. I recorded it as a Snapvine voice blog and will play it for you.Your thoughts?
Amazing,huh? Definitely need to get out in the sun more and expose more of my skin while doing it.Yes,I will be using sunblock. Black folks can get burned and develop skin cancer too though getting burned is not easy for us.It is possible,though. I proved that by not using sunburn while doing the petition work I mentioned in this video and seeing my skin flake for weeks as a result.
I am commenting while watching this.
Re: RIP SEAN BELL....F*CK THE PIGS!!!
Advice on how to leave comments.
I think that Rand Paul is right in the sense that private owned businesses should not be forced to service those they do not want to service but there is a possibility that if they had not been forced to do so back in 1964 then blacks may not have fared well if they had been unable or unwilling to open enough businesses to service themselves. Blacks would have needed a lot of help from the government to establish more businesses.
Why Do So Many Blacks Vote For Obama?
I am addressing the pervasive problem of some folks assuming that Blacks are voting for Obama just because he is Black. That is just plain wrong or prejudiced and racist.
If you like this song,please go to the below site and comment saying you vote for "Sweet Dreams Are Made Of This" by WebAnt: http://uk.youtube.com/YTIdolContest For some reason none of my entries have been added to the Favorites section of the site. Please write them and ask them why. Okay? Take care.
Do they make kids violent or not?
About thirty minutes ago I am pretty sure St. Louis just experienced a tremor.Please make response videos and tell us your stories. INDIANAPOLIS (AP) - No significant damage has been reported in Indiana after an earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 5.2 struck the Midwest Friday morning. The quake just before 4:37 a.m. Central time was centered six miles from West Salem, Ill., and 45 miles from Evansville, Ind. It was felt in such distant cities as Chicago, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, and Des Moisaid that may represent two different seismic waves. He said there likely will be some small aftershocks most of which people will not feel. The quake is believed to have involved the Wabash fault, a northern extension of the New Madrid fault about six miles north of Mount Carmel, Ill., said United States Geological Survey geophysicist Randy Baldwin.
Re: WOMAN ARE THE WEAKER VESSELS? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/11/opinion/11guralnick.html Great song by a great singer who I believe has been incorrectly accused of being racist by some Blacks as the above article indicates.
To me,this horrible incident just further underscores the need for regular citizens to have the right to bear arms. Sad.
Why Did You Chose Your Name?
This video is for the purpose of me recounting my experiences with second hand smoke and I hope others will make video responses to it and tell their stories too. Take care.
A recount of more of my feelings and thoughts during the 5.2 earthquake (St. Louis) and why I did not feel the aftershock. INDIANAPOLIS (AP) - No significant damage has been reported in Indiana after an earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 5.2 struck the Midwest Friday morning. The quake just before 4:37 a.m. Central time was centered six miles from West Salem, Ill., and 45 miles from Evansville, Ind. It was felt in such distant cities as Chicago, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, and Des Moisaid that may represent two different seismic waves. He said there likely will be some small aftershocks most of which people will not feel. The quake is believed to have involved the Wabash fault, a northern extension of the New Madrid fault about six miles north of Mount Carmel, Ill., said United States Geological Survey geophysicist Randy Baldwin.
Hillary is so cracking under the pressure. Only the most blind loyalist cannot see that. Meanwhile,Barack and McCain are nothing but poised and eloquent. What a contrast.
More Racial Scandals Concerning McCain?
I am wondering if there will be more incidents unearthed in which McCain voted in a prejudiced or racist way.
Time To Put Parents On Notice!!!!
Raise your kids right,or else! I am not kidding. The days of letting people raise their kids all kinds of crazy ways (eg.raising them to be bigots) needs to come to an end. If it is clear that a parent has raised their kids in ways that make them anti-social or criminal or dangerous or violent then those parents need to be held accountable and punished and/or corrected in some way or another. If they need to lose custody,so be it. The days of just letting parents fail miserably at raising their kids right without any consequences outside of their kids going to jail or ending up dead or injured,etc. needs to come to an end. Word.
They need to put them there so it will be easier for us to know if there is trouble with our accounts.
Say You Want Autoplay Back In Community Help Forums!
Click on Help above and then on Community Help Forums and let them know in the Feedback and Suggestions area that you want Autoplay back. If you want it.


Movie review: "National Treasure: Book of Secrets"
If I had to pick a word to describe "National Treasure: Book of Secrets," it would be: alright, I guess (OK, it's not one word, but you get the idea).
This sequel to "National Treasure" brings in a new - but not fresh - plot and new characters, but everything pretty much fits the framework of the original. The good guys and the bad guys are trying to find a treasure that has a great bearing on our nation's history, the FBI is out to get them, and the good guys have to commit several crimes for the greater good.
Ben Gates, the protagonist, is played by Nicolas Cage. His mother (played by Helen Mirren) is new to this movie, and there's a new bad guy, Mitch Wilkinson (played by Ed Harris). The rest of the cast is familiar, including Justin Bartha as Riley Poole and Diane Kruger as Abigail Chase.
The excitement created is not particularly deep and most of the humor is only mildly funny, because much of it is repeated from the first film.
Also similar to the first film is the absolute lack of realism in some of the situations. Although you expect some stretching of truth in a fictional story, filmmakers could have kept some scenes from being so far-fetched. No one can stroll into the Oval Office merely accompanied by a White House curator and not get stopped.
The bottom line: The first film and the second film are virtually the same. If you have seen the first, I wouldn't bother seeing this in theaters; if you haven't seen the original, well, "National Treasure: Book of Secrets" might be worth it.


A new design jockstrap is our underwear suggestion today. The Double Stripe Jockstrap by Code 22 is made from a super soft modal/cotton and elastane blend and features a fresh design with horizontal stripes running along the pouch in black, navy and white colour block. The logo of the brand is featured at the centre of the elasticated waistband and there is a special barcode logo at the back.
Let the Andrew Christian games begin and may the best men win!


There is no display at the Tower this year but it still provides excellent views of the entire city, and the informal fireworks displays that happen in each neighborhood.
This fireworks display is the official city event put on by the San Antonio Parks Foundation. And it is usually so crowded that if you don't get there early for the daytime festivities you will be watching the explosions from your car while stuck in traffic.
San Antonio Living History Association members provide cannons and other firearms to accompany both the band concert and fireworks display at the Helotes Independence Day celebration. Located at Helotes Municipal Complex, 12951 Bandera Road, which begins at 6:30 p.m.
This fireworks display goes down rain or shine, drought or flood and bills itself as one of the largest celebrations of the armed forces in South Texas. You can go at night for fireworks or you can go early for live music, a parade, 5K and BBQ.
The city has a 20 minute fireworks display, and it's so impressive that last year 10,000 to 12,000 people showed up, even under overcast and stormy skies.
The free and fresh celebration is jam-packed with all-day entertainment including food, drinks and music. A 5K run and parade kick off the day and the fireworks finale ends it at dusk.
You need to buy a ticket to the park to get a front row seat to "the area's largest fireworks display," but there are areas around Six Flags with a good view.
See the Six Flags fireworks from the Shops at La Cantera parking lot, which is in perfect position to see the display.
After a day of fun at the park taking in the usual attractions, the day is topped off with a mega fireworks display. Just be ready for the traffic once it's all over, some people say they've been stuck in the parking lot for as long as 2-3 hours.
Knowing that the traffic will build up you can grab a spot toward the outer edge, but the view of the fireworks will still be amazing.
Twitter user Yolanda Bermea suggested this Fourth of July spot. She said there's usually a concert and fireworks there. Since the team doesn't have a home game on Independence Day, the fireworks show has been bumped up one week to June 27.


We have own manufacturing unit situated in Himachal Pradesh in 2015. We are manufacturing pharmaceutical tablets providing throughout India.
The pharmaceutical injections are manufactured by own manufacturing unit supplying throughout Himachal Pradesh at very much suitable cost.
The pharmaceutical syrups are widely distributed to our valued clients with the minimum cost. They are packed with world-class quality materials.


With their kinetic graphic designs and striking two-tone color palettes, these stylish rugs bring a subtle and sophisticated surge of energy to any area interior. Expertly crafted with a soft feel, this contemporary-chic collection is certain to steal the spotlight.Add a touch of antiquity, grace and style with this classic Persian inspired piece. An evocative display of palmettes, leaves, and floral designs adorn a twining vine pattern set on a stately slate blue background. Sure to add a breath of fresh air to any space.


text:
Q: Django email with smtp.gmail SMTPAuthenticationError 534 Application-specific password required I am trying to have django send emails but I am getting this error:
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<console>", line 1, in <module>
  File "/Library/Python/2.7/site-packages/django/core/mail/__init__.py", line 62, in send_mail
    return mail.send()
  File "/Library/Python/2.7/site-packages/django/core/mail/message.py", line 286, in send
    return self.get_connection(fail_silently).send_messages([self])
  File "/Library/Python/2.7/site-packages/django/core/mail/backends/smtp.py", line 92, in send_messages
    new_conn_created = self.open()
  File "/Library/Python/2.7/site-packages/django/core/mail/backends/smtp.py", line 59, in open
    self.connection.login(self.username, self.password)
  File "/System/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/smtplib.py", line 615, in login
    raise SMTPAuthenticationError(code, resp)
SMTPAuthenticationError: (534, '5.7.9 Application-specific password required. Learn more at\n5.7.9 http://support.google.com/accounts/bin/answer.py?answer=185833 v14sm3323298pbs.11 - gsmtp')

The link suggested my to perform a 2-step verification which I did but still no results.
In my settings.py
EMAIL_USE_TLS = True
EMAIL_HOST = 'smtp.gmail.com'
EMAIL_HOST_USER = 'email@gmail.com'
EMAIL_HOST_PASSWORD = 'password'
EMAIL_PORT = 587

I tried testing this in django shell but got the error shown above:
>>> from django.core.mail import send_mail
>>> from django.conf import settings
>>> sub = "sup man"
>>> msg = "char lisss"
>>> from_user = settings.EMAIL_HOST_USER
>>> to = ["email@email.com"]
>>> send_mail(sub,msg,from_user,to, fail_silently=False)

A: Because you use 2 factor authentication, you must create a password for this application to access your Google account without the 2 factor auth.
Perform all the steps on the Google support page to generate an application password, and then update your EMAIL_HOST_PASSWORD to use that, rather than your regular account password.
On this page: support.google.com/accounts/answer/185833 follow the steps under the heading "How to generate an App password". After you generate it, you need to use that password in your configuration.

A: Well, you need to generate a password from your google account (2 factor authentication). It is one time shown.
check this link
for guide.
Afterward, page will prompt a password and  paste it in your settings.py
EMAIL_HOST_PASSWORD "your password goes here"

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Q: Issue with Reacts render method :Giving Parsing error Im getting the following error Parsing error: Unexpected token, expected ",",for the below code
class ProductDetails extends React.Component{
constructor(){
    super();
    this.state = {timer:0};
}
start = () => {
    this.setState({timer:this.state.timer + 1});
}
componentDidMount(){
    setInterval(this.start,1000)
}
render(){
    var data = [{ _id:12345,
                pdtName:"Gaming Laptop",
                pdtPrice:35000,
                pdtDescription:"An excellent choice for great gaming experience",
                img:'images/Laptop.jpg',
                rating:5,
                isDiscontinued:false

            }];

    return(

Timer: {this.state.timer}

             data.map(product =>{
                return <Product pimg={product.img} pid = {product._id} pname = {product.pdtName} pprice = {product.pdtPrice} pdesc = {product.pdtDescription}
                 prating = {product.rating} pisdiscon = {product.isDiscontinued} key={product._id}/>
            })

        )
}

}
When I remove Timer: {this.state.timer}  from render() Im not getting the error.Simillarly if i remove data.map leaving  not getting error..But when using both getting the above error.How to fix it?

Thanks

A: React component can return only one element. You can wrap return inside another element, e.g.
...
, or use React.Fragment
 which not adding extra nodes to the DOM.
return (
    <React.Fragment>

Timer: {this.state.timer}

        {data.map(product => {
            return (
                <Product
                    pimg={product.img}
                    pid={product._id}
                    pname={product.pdtName}
                    pprice={product.pdtPrice}
                    pdesc={product.pdtDescription}
                    prating={product.rating}
                    pisdiscon={product.isDiscontinued}
                    key={product._id}
                />
            );
        })}
    </React.Fragment>
);

A: render() function should return only one element. In your case it is returning 2 elements which are
 and <Product>.
You can resolve this by using <React.Fragment> as mentioned above or simply put everything inside


text:
CSA awarded $300K to boost women in construction
The Metro Washington Council's Community Services Agency has been awarded a nearly $300,000 grant to increase the number of women in its Building Futures Construction Pre-Apprenticeship Program in the District and expand the program to women in Prince Georges County. "We are so thrilled to have this opportunity to bring more women into the dynamic and growing field of construction, opening the doors for more women to family-sustaining careers," said CSA Executive Director Sonté DuCote. The $297,432 Women in Apprenticeship and Nontraditional Occupations (WANTO) grant is from the U.S. Department of Labor's Women's Bureau. To support this effort, CSA will convene a Project Advisory Committee made up of female Building Futures graduates and representatives in the construction industry and invites journeywomen and trades women retirees to volunteer as speakers and mentors for the program. email Client Services Coordinator Sylvia Casaro Dietert at [email protected].
photo: from the "Hard Hatted Woman" documentary

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Q: How to disable Chrome download blocking feature? Recently, I tried to download this zip file with Chrome v72.0.3626.121.
Chrome simply deleted the file as soon as it downloaded it.
A mere message informed me that "Chrome has blocked jd-gui-windows-1.4.0.zip, because this file may be dangerous.". I did a quick search ending up on a Google support page.
This page explains why some downloads may be blocked. Among the proposed reasons, I spotted this one: "We think it might be a malicious, unwanted, or uncommon file."
So I sent this file to virustotal.com. You may check the detailed produced report. virustotal.com didn't find any problem with this file. On my side, I use the program in the zip regularly for years.
How can I disable this Chrome feature?

A: Solution #1

*

*Click on the "View Site Information" button on the left side of the URL (Padlock Icon) and click "Site Settings".

*Set Insecure Content to "Allow" and it will no longer block downloads from that site.

Solution #2
You can also whitelist entire websites via Chrome's settings:

*

*Settings > Security and Privacy > Site Settings > Insecure Content.

*Under Allowed to show insecure content click "Add" and enter the main website URL and click "Add".

Solution #3
Here is how I did:

*

*Go to chrome://settings or just click on the settings icon on the dashboard.

*Scroll to the bottom of the settings page and click on Show advanced settings

*Under advanced settings, find the subsection called Privacy and Security.
Then look turn off the option Protect you and your device from dangerous sites.

=> You can now download anything from Internet AT YOUR OWN RISK !
=> You can turn back on the option.
Reference:
https://appuals.com/how-to-fix-the-dangerous-download-blocked-error-in-chrome/

A: Just a workaround per file...: Hit CTRL+J and per downloaded file you can indicate if you want to keep it anyway (or not..). I know that's a workaround, but it's at least more safe than turning off protection.


On Monday Jess attended a readthrough for her brand new radio drama for Radio 4 called the Forsytes coming in April 2016.
Jess Plays Fleur the daughter of Irene and Soames Forsyte. Jess is also the Narrator for the drama.
More details when they come through.


This tournament is great. The soccer was high quality, and the experience for the players involved was unparrallelled.
I would like to see a third referee added for all games, but that's the only major issue I had.


text:
Theological Notebook: Stephen Jay Gould on Science and Religion – "Nonoverlapping Magisteria"
• Theological Notebook: Stephen Jay Gould on Science and Religion – "Nonoverlapping Magisteria" [+2]
8th-Mar-2008 12:29 pm
Tags:academia, books, catholicism, christianity, course articles, cultural, education, evolution, faith and reason, john paul ii, philosophical, scientific, secularism/modernity, theological methodology, theological notebook, vatican
Current Mood:pleased
One key problem that seems to lurk in many students' minds is this cultural stereotype of what I once heard CNN describe as "the eternal war between science and religion." Now, if you know anything about the history of science, not only do you know that this perceived conflict only goes back to the philosophers who proclaimed their anti-Christian agenda as "the Enlightenment," that is, about 200 years at the most, but even more absurdly that what we call "modern science" and its attendant miracles of technology are actually an intellectual outgrowth of Christian theology. Had you never had the huge assumption of the thirteenth century Scholastics that because the universe was created by a God of logic that therefore the universe had an inherent logic that could be described in the logic of mathematics, you never would gain the centuries of intellectual investment that it took to produce our basic sciences before they started paying off in the concrete results of our technology. That's all straightforward History of Science, which I first learned from a man of Hindu sensibilities, who fully acknowledged the difference between what Christian Europe could have produced from all of the more haphazard and unsystematic sciences of other cultures throughout history that didn't have the theology to make the leap of faith required to assume that there was a logic behind the universe capable of being discovered.
Since then, this was perhaps the most important essay I've ever read about science and religion, written by the evolutionary biologist from Harvard, the late Professor Stephen Jay Gould, himself an agnostic of Jewish heritage, whose popular writing on evolutionary theory has been so well received. I read his magisterial The Mismeasure of Man as a sophomore in my Racism in American Society and Culture course, and that damning history and critique of the scientific establishment's construction of "scientific racism" in the 19th and 20th centuries has stayed in my memory as a model of the power that clear scholarly writing can achieve. The similarly-powerful essay of his that I reproduce here I read in the South Bend Public Library one summer afternoon, I think, where I believe it was reprinted in an issue of Commonweal. I've thought of it quite a bit since then, and cited its thinking and its mere existence to students concerned with the matter. It popped into my head again in the shower the other day as I thought over my students' discussions on the Aristotelian revolution in 13th century Catholic theology, and I just thought to go looking for it and was pleased to be able to find it online, and indeed, to discover that it is one of his more noteworthy and much-discussed essays.
I call it the most important essay I've read on the matter not because it was particularly new in its thinking. It's not. In fact, it's main point is pretty much straightforward, long-established Catholic thinking on the matter. In fact, it's kind of amusing to admit, but I think it's important as an appeal to authority. Now, normally an appeal to authority is seen as the sort of thing that "religion" does: appeal to the authority of Scripture, or a Pope, or the Magisterium – that sort of thing. It's the kind of appeal that's used to discredit religion as not having any greater proof for its claims. In fact, though, the appeal to authority functions in most of our lives, as we are all mostly not experts in all of the fields, topics and questions that we interact with through our lives. In this case, to hear a scientist who holds great authority in his field say that there's no intrinsic conflict between science and religion ends up having much more weight for the person who has been conditioned by our culture to view religion with Enlightenment skepticism. And so I appeal to Gould's authority for this purpose, though I could cite older, more long-established theologians on the same point, or appeal simply to a logical argument on my own, laying out the evidence for my listener or reader. Yet I know that, in fact, the authority of the Harvard agnostic evolutionary biologist will have a weight that even just a glance at the pure logic of the argument will not. That's not "scientific" of even the hard skeptic, I'm amused to note, but it's the way things are.
Now, I will say that I'm not sure that I'd entirely sign off on what Gould says. I think he makes a common mistake when he says that the realm of religious thought has to do with "the search for proper ethical values and the spiritual meaning of our lives." While that's true, I don't think it's the whole truth of the matter. There is a tendency today to reduce "religion" to ethics or morality, and maybe that business about "meaning" or "the afterlife" as well. Christianity, at least, cannot let theology be quite so limited. Gould speaks here of "nonoverlapping magisteria," or NOMA, as the principle has been abbreviated. It seems indisputable to me that "science" and theology (the quotes are simply to acknowledge the vague or popular term: theology is "science" too, after all) have different methodologies. But I also think they have the same subject and goal, to the extent that one is general enough to call their subject and goal "reality" or "truth."
Theology's task is just as much the pursuit of factual truth as is the physical sciences': it is not about imaginary stories whose goals are simply "personal" and aimed at some kind of cheap psychological "comfort." To the extent that they are both interested in the truth about reality, sciences' insights about the nature of the physical universe are key data for theology. Gould acknowledges that the fields do rub up against one another: I think that to too quickly call them "nonoverlapping" might dogmatically blind us to the necessary interactions of the two fields, and unnecessarily complicate the important task of their dialogue and collaboration. And it's a critical collaboration: one that has been destructively distorted in the past by theology interfering with science, and destructively distorted today by scientists dictating philosophical or theological conclusions under the mask of the authority of the physical sciences. Gould's essay goes a long step toward a scientific declaration of modesty that can help in restoring that balance.
Nonoverlapping Magisteria
by Stephen Jay Gould
Incongruous places often inspire anomalous stories. In early 1984, I spent several nights at the Vatican housed in a hotel built for itinerant priests. While pondering over such puzzling issues as the intended function of the bidets in each bathroom, and hungering for something other than plum jam on my breakfast rolls (why did the basket only contain hundreds of identical plum packets and not a one of, say, strawberry?), I encountered yet another among the innumerable issues of contrasting cultures that can make life so interesting. Our crowd (present in Rome for a meeting on nuclear winter sponsored by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences) shared the hotel with a group of French and Italian Jesuit priests who were also professional scientists.
At lunch, the priests called me over to their table to pose a problem that had been troubling them. What, they wanted to know, was going on in America with all this talk about "scientific creationism"? One asked me: "Is evolution really in some kind of trouble. and if so, what could such trouble be? I have always been taught that no doctrinal conflict exists between evolution and Catholic faith, and the evidence for evolution seems both entirely satisfactory and utterly overwhelming. Have I missed something?"
A lively pastiche of French, Italian, and English conversation then ensued for half an hour or so, but the priests all seemed reassured by my general answer: Evolution has encountered no intellectual trouble; no new arguments have been offered. Creationism is a homegrown phenomenon of American sociocultural history—a splinter movement (unfortunately rather more of a beam these days) of Protestant fundamentalists who believe that every word of the Bible must be literally true, whatever such a claim might mean. We all left satisfied, but I certainly felt bemused by the anomaly of my role as a Jewish agnostic, trying to reassure a group of Catholic priests that evolution remained both true and entirely consistent with religious belief.
Another story in the same mold: I am often asked whether I ever encounter creationism as a live issue among my Harvard undergraduate students. I reply that only once, in nearly thirty years of teaching, did I experience such an incident. A very sincere and serious freshman student came to my office hours with the following question that had clearly been troubling him deeply: "I am a devout Christian and have never had any reason to doubt evolution, an idea that seems both exciting and particularly well documented. But my roommate, a proselytizing Evangelical, has been insisting with enormous vigor that I cannot be both a real Christian and an evolutionist. So tell me, can a person believe both in God and evolution?" Again, I gulped hard, did my intellectual duty, and reassured him that evolution was both true and entirely compatible with Christian belief—a position I hold sincerely, but still an odd situation for a Jewish agnostic.
These two stories illustrate a cardinal point, frequently unrecognized but absolutely central to any understanding of the status and impact of the politically potent, fundamentalist doctrine known by its self-proclaimed oxymoron as "scientific creationism"—the claim that the Bible is literally true, that all organisms were created during six days of twenty-four hours, that the earth is only a few thousand years old, and that evolution must therefore be false. Creationism does not pit science against religion (as my opening stories indicate), for no such conflict exists. Creationism does not raise any unsettled intellectual issues about the nature of biology or the history of life. Creationism is a local and parochial movement, powerful only in the United States among Western nations, and prevalent only among the few sectors of American Protestantism that choose to read the Bible as an inerrant document, literally true in every jot and tittle.
I do not doubt that one could find an occasional nun who would prefer to teach creationism in her parochial school biology class or an occasional orthodox rabbi who does the same in his yeshiva, but creationism based on biblical literalism makes little sense in either Catholicism or Judaism for neither religion maintains any extensive tradition for reading the Bible as literal truth rather than illuminating literature, based partly on metaphor and allegory (essential components of all good writing) and demanding interpretation for proper understanding. Most Protestant groups, of course, take the same position—the fundamentalist fringe notwithstanding.
The position that I have just outlined by personal stories and general statements represents the standard attitude of all major Western religions (and of Western science) today. (I cannot, through ignorance, speak of Eastern religions, although I suspect that the same position would prevail in most cases.) The lack of conflict between science and religion arises from a lack of overlap between their respective domains of professional expertise—science in the empirical constitution of the universe, and religion in the search for proper ethical values and the spiritual meaning of our lives. The attainment of wisdom in a full life requires extensive attention to both domains—for a great book tells us that the truth can make us free and that we will live in optimal harmony with our fellows when we learn to do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly.
In the context of this standard position, I was enormously puzzled by a statement issued by Pope John Paul II on October 22, 1996, to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, the same body that had sponsored my earlier trip to the Vatican. In this document, entitled "Truth Cannot Contradict Truth," the pope defended both the evidence for evolution and the consistency of the theory with Catholic religious doctrine. Newspapers throughout the world responded with frontpage headlines, as in the New York Times for October 25:
"Pope Bolsters Church's Support for Scientific View of Evolution."
Now I know about "slow news days" and I do admit that nothing else was strongly competing for headlines at that particular moment. (The Times could muster nothing more exciting for a lead story than Ross Perot's refusal to take Bob Dole's advice and quit the presidential race.) Still, I couldn't help feeling immensely puzzled by all the attention paid to the pope's statement (while being wryly pleased, of course, for we need all the good press we can get, especially from respected outside sources). The Catholic Church had never opposed evolution and had no reason to do so. Why had the pope issued such a statement at all? And why had the press responded with an orgy of worldwide, front-page coverage?
I could only conclude at first, and wrongly as I soon learned, that journalists throughout the world must deeply misunderstand the relationship between science and religion, and must therefore be elevating a minor papal comment to unwarranted notice. Perhaps most people really do think that a war exists between science and religion, and that (to cite a particularly newsworthy case) evolution must be intrinsically opposed to Christianity. In such a context, a papal admission of evolution's legitimate status might be regarded as major news indeed—a sort of modern equivalent for a story that never happened, but would have made the biggest journalistic splash of 1640: Pope Urban VIII releases his most famous prisoner from house arrest and humbly apologizes, "Sorry, Signor Galileo… the sun, er, is central."
But I then discovered that the prominent coverage of papal satisfaction with evolution had not been an error of non-Catholic Anglophone journalists. The Vatican itself had issued the statement as a major news release. And Italian newspapers had featured, if anything, even bigger headlines and longer stories. The conservative Il Giornale, for example, shouted from its masthead: "Pope Says We May Descend from Monkeys."
Clearly, I was out to lunch. Something novel or surprising must lurk within the papal statement but what could it be?—especially given the accuracy of my primary impression (as I later verified) that the Catholic Church values scientific study, views science as no threat to religion in general or Catholic doctrine in particular, and has long accepted both the legitimacy of evolution as a field of study and the potential harmony of evolutionary conclusions with Catholic faith.
As a former constituent of Tip O'Neill's, I certainly know that "all politics is local"—and that the Vatican undoubtedly has its own internal reasons, quite opaque to me, for announcing papal support of evolution in a major statement. Still, I knew that I was missing some important key, and I felt frustrated. I then remembered the primary rule of intellectual life: when puzzled, it never hurts to read the primary documents—a rather simple and self-evident principle that has, nonetheless, completely disappeared from large sectors of the American experience.
I knew that Pope Pius XII (not one of my favorite figures in twentieth-century history, to say the least) had made the primary statement in a 1950 encyclical entitled Humani Generis. I knew the main thrust of his message: Catholics could believe whatever science determined about the evolution of the human body, so long as they accepted that, at some time of his choosing, God had infused the soul into such a creature. I also knew that I had no problem with this statement, for whatever my private beliefs about souls, science cannot touch such a subject and therefore cannot be threatened by any theological position on such a legitimately and intrinsically religious issue. Pope Pius XII, in other words, had properly acknowledged and respected the separate domains of science and theology. Thus, I found myself in total agreement with Humani Generis—but I had never read the document in full (not much of an impediment to stating an opinion these days).
I quickly got the relevant writings from, of all places, the Internet. (The pope is prominently on-line, but a Luddite like me is not. So I got a computer-literate associate to dredge up the documents. I do love the fracture of stereotypes implied by finding religion so hep and a scientist so square.) Having now read in full both Pope Pius's Humani Generis of 1950 and Pope John Paul's proclamation of October 1996, I finally understand why the recent statement seems so new, revealing, and worthy of all those headlines. And the message could not be more welcome for evolutionists and friends of both science and religion.
The text of Humani Generis focuses on the magisterium (or teaching authority) of the Church—a word derived not from any concept of majesty or awe but from the different notion of teaching, for magister is Latin for "teacher." We may, I think, adopt this word and concept to express the central point of this essay and the principled resolution of supposed "conflict" or "warfare" between science and religion. No such conflict should exist because each subject has a legitimate magisterium, or domain of teaching authority—and these magisteria do not overlap (the principle that I would like to designate as NOMA, or "nonoverlapping magisteria").
The net of science covers the empirical universe: what is it made of (fact) and why does it work this way (theory). The net of religion extends over questions of moral meaning and value. These two magisteria do not overlap, nor do they encompass all inquiry (consider, for starters, the magisterium of art and the meaning of beauty). To cite the arch cliches, we get the age of rocks, and religion retains the rock of ages; we study how the heavens go, and they determine how to go to heaven.
This resolution might remain all neat and clean if the nonoverlapping magisteria (NOMA) of science and religion were separated by an extensive no man's land. But, in fact, the two magisteria bump right up against each other, interdigitating in wondrously complex ways along their joint border. Many of our deepest questions call upon aspects of both for different parts of a full answer—and the sorting of legitimate domains can become quite complex and difficult. To cite just two broad questions involving both evolutionary facts and moral arguments: Since evolution made us the only earthly creatures with advanced consciousness, what responsibilities are so entailed for our relations with other species? What do our genealogical ties with other organisms imply about the meaning of human life?
Pius XII's Humani Generis is a highly traditionalist document by a deeply conservative man forced to face all the "isms" and cynicisms that rode the wake of World War II and informed the struggle to rebuild human decency from the ashes of the Holocaust. The encyclical, subtitled "Concerning some false opinions which threaten to undermine the foundations of Catholic doctrine" begins with a statement of embattlement:
Disagreement and error among men on moral and religious matters have always been a cause of profound sorrow to all good men, but above all to the true and loyal sons of the Church, especially today, when we see the principles of Christian culture being attacked on all sides.
Pius lashes out, in turn, at various external enemies of the Church: pantheism, existentialism, dialectical materialism, historicism. and of course and preeminently, communism. He then notes with sadness that some well-meaning folks within the Church have fallen into a dangerous relativism—"a theological pacifism and egalitarianism, in which all points of view become equally valid"—in order to include people of wavering faith who yearn for the embrace of Christian religion but do not wish to accept the particularly Catholic magisterium.
What is this world coming to when these noxious novelties can so discombobulate a revealed and established order? Speaking as a conservative's conservative, Pius laments:
Novelties of this kind have already borne their deadly fruit in almost all branches of theology.…Some question whether angels are personal beings, and whether matter and spirit differ essentially.…Some even say that the doctrine of Transubstantiation, based on an antiquated philosophic notion of substance, should be so modified that the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist be reduced to a kind of symbolism.
Pius first mentions evolution to decry a misuse by overextension often promulgated by zealous supporters of the anathematized "isms":
Some imprudently and indiscreetly hold that evolution…explains the origin of all things.…Communists gladly subscribe to this opinion so that, when the souls of men have been deprived of every idea of a personal God, they may the more efficaciously defend and propagate their dialectical materialism.
Pius's major statement on evolution occurs near the end of the encyclical in paragraphs 35 through 37. He accepts the standard model of NOMA and begins by acknowledging that evolution lies in a difficult area where the domains press hard against each other. "It remains for US now to speak about those questions which. although they pertain to the positive sciences, are nevertheless more or less connected with the truths of the Christian faith." [Interestingly, the main thrust of these paragraphs does not address evolution in general but lies in refuting a doctrine that Pius calls "polygenism," or the notion of human ancestry from multiple parents—for he regards such an idea as incompatible with the doctrine of original sin, "which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which, through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own." In this one instance, Pius may be transgressing the NOMA principle—but I cannot judge, for I do not understand the details of Catholic theology and therefore do not know how symbolically such a statement may be read. If Pius is arguing that we cannot entertain a theory about derivation of all modern humans from an ancestral population rather than through an ancestral individual (a potential fact) because such an idea would question the doctrine of original sin (a theological construct), then I would declare him out of line for letting the magisterium of religion dictate a conclusion within the magisterium of science.]
Pius then writes the well-known words that permit Catholics to entertain the evolution of the human body (a factual issue under the magisterium of science), so long as they accept the divine Creation and infusion of the soul (a theological notion under the magisterium of religion):
The Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter—for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God.
I had, up to here, found nothing surprising in Humani Generis, and nothing to relieve my puzzlement about the novelty of Pope John Paul's recent statement. But I read further and realized that Pope Pius had said more about evolution, something I had never seen quoted, and that made John Paul's statement most interesting indeed. In short, Pius forcefully proclaimed that while evolution may be legitimate in principle, the theory, in fact, had not been proven and might well be entirely wrong. One gets the strong impression, moreover, that Pius was rooting pretty hard for a verdict of falsity. Continuing directly from the last quotation, Pius advises us about the proper study of evolution:
However, this must be done in such a way that the reasons for both opinions, that is, those favorable and those unfavorable to evolution, be weighed and judged with the necessary seriousness, moderation and measure.… Some, however, rashly transgress this liberty of discussion, when they act as if the origin of the human body from pre-existing and living matter were already completely certain and proved by the facts which have been discovered up to now and by reasoning on those facts, and as if there were nothing in the sources of divine revelation which demands the greatest moderation and caution in this question.
To summarize, Pius generally accepts the NOMA principle of nonoverlapping magisteria in permitting Catholics to entertain the hypothesis of evolution for the human body so long as they accept the divine infusion of the soul. But he then offers some (holy) fatherly advice to scientists about the status of evolution as a scientific concept: the idea is not yet proven, and you all need to be especially cautious because evolution raises many troubling issues right on the border of my magisterium. One may read this second theme in two different ways: either as a gratuitous incursion into a different magisterium or as a helpful perspective from an intelligent and concerned outsider. As a man of good will, and in the interest of conciliation, I am happy to embrace the latter reading.
In any case, this rarely quoted second claim (that evolution remains both unproven and a bit dangerous)—and not the familiar first argument for the NOMA principle (that Catholics may accept the evolution of the body so long as they embrace the creation of the soul)—defines the novelty and the interest of John Paul's recent statement.
John Paul begins by summarizing Pius's older encyclical of 195O, and particularly by reaffirming the NOMA principle—nothing new here, and no cause for extended publicity:
In his encyclical Humani Generis (1950), my predecessor Pius XII had already stated that there was no opposition between evolution and the doctrine of the faith about man and his vocation.
To emphasize the power of NOMA, John Paul poses a potential problem and a sound resolution: How can we reconcile science's claim for physical continuity in human evolution with Catholicism's insistence that the soul must enter at a moment of divine infusion:
With man, then, we find ourselves in the presence of an ontological difference, an ontological leap, one could say However, does not the posing of such ontological discontinuity run counter to that physical continuity which seems to be the main thread of research into evolution in the field of physics and chemistry? Consideration of the method used in the various branches of knowledge makes it possible to reconcile two points of view which would seem irreconcilable. The sciences of observation describe and measure the multiple manifestations of life with increasing precision and correlate them with the time line. The moment of transition to the spiritual cannot be the object of this kind of observation.
The novelty and news value of John Paul's statement lies, rather, in his profound revision of Pius's second and rarely quoted claim that evolution, while conceivable in principle and reconcilable with religion, can cite little persuasive evidence, and may well be false. John Paul—states and I can only say amen, and thanks for noticing—that the half century between Pius's surveying the ruins of World War II and his own pontificate heralding the dawn of a new millennium has witnessed such a growth of data, and such a refinement of theory, that evolution can no longer be doubted by people of good will:
Pius XII added . . . that this opinion [evolution] should not be adopted as though it were a certain, proven doctrine. . . . Today, almost half a century after the publication of the encyclical, new knowledge has led to the recognition of more than one hypothesis in the theory of evolution. It is indeed remarkable that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers, following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge. The convergence, neither sought nor fabricated, of the results of work that was conducted independently is in itself a significant argument in favor of the theory.
In conclusion. Pius had grudgingly admitted evolution as a legitimate hypothesis that he regarded as only tentatively supported and potentially (as I suspect he hoped) untrue. John Paul, nearly fifty years later, reaffirms the legitimacy of evolution under the NOMA principle—no news here—but then adds that additional data and theory have placed the factuality of evolution beyond reasonable doubt. Sincere Christians must now accept evolution not merely as a plausible possibility but also as an effectively proven fact. In other words, official Catholic opinion on evolution has moved from "say it ain't so, but we can deal with it if we have to" (Pius's grudging view of 1950) to John Paul's entirely welcoming "it has been proven true; we always celebrate nature's factuality, and we look forward to interesting discussions of theological implications." I happily endorse this turn of events as gospel—literally "good news." I may represent the magisterium of science, but I welcome the support of a primary leader from the other major magisterium of our complex lives. And I recall the wisdom of King Solomon: "As cold waters to a thirsty soul, so is good news from a far country (Prov. 25:25).
Just as religion must bear the cross of its hard-liners. I have some scientific colleagues, including a few prominent enough to wield influence by their writings, who view this rapprochement of the separate magisteria with dismay. To colleagues like me—agnostic scientists who welcome and celebrate thc rapprochement, especially the pope's latest statement—they say: "C'mon, be honest; you know that religion is addle-pated, superstitious, old-fashioned b.s.; you're only making those welcoming noises because religion is so powerful, and we need to be diplomatic in order to assure public support and funding for science." I do not think that this attitude is common among scientists, but such a position fills me with dismay—and I therefore end this essay with a personal statement about religion, as a testimony to what I regard as a virtual consensus among thoughtful scientists (who support the NOMA principle as firmly as the pope does).
I am not, personally, a believer or a religious man in any sense of institutional commitment or practice. But I have enormous respect for religion, and the subject has always fascinated me, beyond almost all others (with a few exceptions, like evolution, paleontology, and baseball). Much of this fascination lies in the historical paradox that throughout Western history organized religion has fostered both the most unspeakable horrors and the most heart-rending examples of human goodness in the face of personal danger. (The evil, I believe, lies in the occasional confluence of religion with secular power. The Catholic Church has sponsored its share of horrors, from Inquisitions to liquidations—but only because this institution held such secular power during so much of Western history. When my folks held similar power more briefly in Old Testament times, they committed just as many atrocities with many of the same rationales.)
I believe, with all my heart, in a respectful, even loving concordat between our magisteria—the NOMA solution. NOMA represents a principled position on moral and intellectual grounds, not a mere diplomatic stance. NOMA also cuts both ways. If religion can no longer dictate the nature of factual conclusions properly under the magisterium of science, then scientists cannot claim higher insight into moral truth from any superior knowledge of the world's empirical constitution. This mutual humility has important practical consequences in a world of such diverse passions.
Religion is too important to too many people for any dismissal or denigration of the comfort still sought by many folks from theology. I may, for example, privately suspect that papal insistence on divine infusion of the soul represents a sop to our fears, a device for maintaining a belief in human superiority within an evolutionary world offering no privileged position to any creature. But I also know that souls represent a subject outside the magisterium of science. My world cannot prove or disprove such a notion, and the concept of souls cannot threaten or impact my domain. Moreover, while I cannot personally accept the Catholic view of souls, I surely honor the metaphorical value of such a concept both for grounding moral discussion and for expressing what we most value about human potentiality: our decency, care, and all the ethical and intellectual struggles that the evolution of consciousness imposed upon us.
As a moral position (and therefore not as a deduction from my knowledge of nature's factuality), I prefer the "cold bath" theory that nature can be truly "cruel" and "indifferent"—in the utterly inappropriate terms of our ethical discourse—because nature was not constructed as our eventual abode, didn't know we were coming (we are, after all, interlopers of the latest geological microsecond), and doesn't give a damn about us (speaking metaphorically). I regard such a position as liberating, not depressing, because we then become free to conduct moral discourse—and nothing could be more important—in our own terms, spared from the delusion that we might read moral truth passively from nature's factuality.
But I recognize that such a position frightens many people, and that a more spiritual view of nature retains broad appeal (acknowledging the factuality of evolution and other phenomena, but still seeking some intrinsic meaning in human terms, and from the magisterium of religion). I do appreciate, for example, the struggles of a man who wrote to the New York Times on November 3, 1996, to state both his pain and his endorsement of John Paul's statement:
Pope John Paul II's acceptance of evolution touches the doubt in my heart. The problem of pain and suffering in a world created by a God who is all love and light is hard enough to bear, even if one is a creationist. But at least a creationist can say that the original creation, coming from the hand of God was good, harmonious, innocent and gentle. What can one say about evolution, even a spiritual theory of evolution? Pain and suffering, mindless cruelty and terror are its means of creation. Evolution's engine is the grinding of predatory teeth upon the screaming, living flesh and bones of prey.… If evolution be true, my faith has rougher seas to sail.
I don't agree with this man, but we could have a wonderful argument. I would push the "cold bath" theory: he would (presumably) advocate the theme of inherent spiritual meaning in nature, however opaque the signal. But we would both be enlightened and filled with better understanding of these deep and ultimately unanswerable issues. Here, I believe, lies the greatest strength and necessity of NOMA, the nonoverlapping magisteria of science and religion. NOMA permits—indeed enjoins—the prospect of respectful discourse, of constant input from both magisteria toward the common goal of wisdom. If human beings are anything special, we are the creatures that must ponder and talk. Pope John Paul II would surely point out to me that his magisterium has always recognized this distinction, for "in principio, erat verbum"—"In the beginning was the Word."
Carl Sagan organized and attended the Vatican meeting that introduces this essay; he also shared my concern for fruitful cooperation between the different but vital realms of science and religion. Carl was also one of my dearest friends. I learned of his untimely death on the same day that I read the proofs for this essay. I could only recall Nehru's observations on Gandhi's death—that the light had gone out, and darkness reigned everywhere. But I then contemplated what Carl had done in his short sixty-two years and remembered John Dryden's ode for Henry Purcell, a great musician who died even younger: "He long ere this had tuned the jarring spheres, and left no hell below."
The days I spent with Carl in Rome were the best of our friendship. We delighted in walking around the Eternal City, feasting on its history and architecture—and its food! Carl took special delight in the anonymity that he still enjoyed in a nation that had not yet aired Cosmos, the greatest media work in popular science of all time.
I dedicate this essay to his memory. Carl also shared my personal suspicion about the nonexistence of souls—but I cannot think of a better reason for hoping we are wrong than the prospect of spending eternity roaming the cosmos in friendship and conversation with this wonderful soul.
[ Stephen Jay Gould, "Nonoverlapping Magisteria," Natural History 106 (March 1997): 16-22; Reprinted at www.stephenjaygould.org with permission from Leonardo's Mountain of Clams and the Diet of Worms, New York: Harmony Books, 1998, pp. 269-283. ]
8th-Mar-2008 10:30 pm (UTC)
No? I imagine there's a similar Logos idea, like you see in the Tao of the Analects of Confucius, but there isn't the merging of that with a logical methodology like that of Aristotle and the Jewish theological contribution of the universe as a creation ex nihilo. As far as I've understood the history of science that I've read, that was the critical mix of assumptions needed to move toward a physics like Newton. If that's indeed "ignorant bullshit," I'd appreciate it if you could give me a few more exact references toward what you're thinking of. And I'm sorry if I upset you: I didn't think there was anything in what I said that was particularly controversial in the field.
Yes, that would be the exact opposite of what I mean to construe.
This is particularly so in a context where I cite Gould's The Mismeasure of Man, the point of which is to destroy exactly that sort of racism supposing a Western European intellectual superiority from the results of the explosion of scientific and technological achievement in early Modernity.
There is a happy confluence of Greek and Christian ideas in the Scholastic thought of medieval Europe that enables the presuppositions necessary for the rise of Modern science. (Which you rightly note starts to pay off by the time of the Enlightenment and which the Enlightenment philosophers quickly took credit for.) The point of noting this confluence is to see that this has nothing to do with any kind of racial or cultural superiority. Certainly that's what I teach my students.
The Babylonians had algebra complicated enough to predict the return of comets in their orbits. The Chinese made chemical and material breakthroughs like the creation of gunpowder and of paper. The Romans were accomplishing engineering feats, like underwater construction, that weren't equaled until the 20th century. And the list goes on. Yet none of these civilizations turned their discoveries into that productive methodological system that we call "Modern science." Is it because the Modern Europeans were superior intellectually? One can certainly see how those who chose to interpret it that way made their case, given the productive results of that system, and the technological power it granted them to dominate the globe.
But instead we see that the rise of this distinctive form of science in Modernity was the coincidental result of the merging of two key ideas. The first was the Jewish/Christian assumption of a Creator God who was responsible for the entire universe in an ex nihilo fashion (that matter itself wasn't an eternal principle). The second was the Scholastic emphasis and assumption that God was logical and that logic, rightly applied, could be used to discern and dissect even the inner "workings" of the Triune God, as well as the workings of God in Creation. With those two critical assumptions, you can leap to the conclusion of a syllogism that allows you to assume that everything in the universe can be discerned and dissected by logic and rendered in logical form. For us on the other side of that assumption, it seems impossible not to think that way, but for those on the other side of that leap – and hundreds of years away from the technological payoff of hundreds of years of work in developing that assumption – it's a huge leap of faith.
But the circumstance of those critical assumptions intersecting as they did is not one Western Europeans can take credit for as Europeans. Any human culture that had developed to the point of civilization and that had the same assumptions could have produced the same results. So while I certainly think that it enhances the intellectual credibility of the claims of the Christian faith, I also certainly acknowledge that, logically speaking, Christians could have just made a fortuitous conclusion based upon false data or assumptions. I think there were other happy circumstances that likely contributed to that plodding age of early development between Albert the Great and Sir Isaac Newton, not least of which was Western Europe's development of a Church that had a semi-independence from the political order (though it obviously was utterly entwined with that order). But that's another topic.
The key point is that it wasn't the people, in a way: it was the ideas. That the ideas happened where and when they did was the blessing to that time and place as much or moreso than it was the blessing from that time and place to the rest of the world. For all the crap that came with the technology stemming from the rise of Modern science, it remains, in itself, like all human knowledge, a great good.
Does that make sense? I really think the data leads to the opposite of the ugly implications you feared were in what I said.


text:
'use strict';

Object.defineProperty(exports, '__esModule', {
  value: true
});

var _createClass = (function () { function defineProperties(target, props) { for (var i = 0; i < props.length; i++) { var descriptor = props[i]; descriptor.enumerable = descriptor.enumerable || false; descriptor.configurable = true; if ('value' in descriptor) descriptor.writable = true; Object.defineProperty(target, descriptor.key, descriptor); } } return function (Constructor, protoProps, staticProps) { if (protoProps) defineProperties(Constructor.prototype, protoProps); if (staticProps) defineProperties(Constructor, staticProps); return Constructor; }; })();

function _interopRequireDefault(obj) { return obj && obj.__esModule ? obj : { 'default': obj }; }

function _classCallCheck(instance, Constructor) { if (!(instance instanceof Constructor)) { throw new TypeError('Cannot call a class as a function'); } }

var _pathToRegexp = require('path-to-regexp');

var _pathToRegexp2 = _interopRequireDefault(_pathToRegexp);

var _Match = require('./Match');

var _Match2 = _interopRequireDefault(_Match);

var Route = (function () {
  function Route(path, handlers) {
    _classCallCheck(this, Route);

    this.path = path;
    this.handlers = handlers;
    this.regExp = (0, _pathToRegexp2['default'])(path, this.keys = []);
  }

  _createClass(Route, [{
    key: 'match',
    value: function match(path) {
      var match = this.regExp.exec(path);
      return match ? new _Match2['default'](this, path, match) : null;
    }
  }]);

  return Route;
})();

exports['default'] = Route;
module.exports = exports['default'];

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Laser-Induced Plasma Channel – (a gun like Zeus's Thunder arsenal) It sends a lighting bold on a direct path to the target.
Pigeon-Projected Missiles – This is a pigeon-guided bomb. They would shoot a trained pigeon from a gun to attack its target by pecking them to death. It was scrapped in 1944 and revived in 1948 only to find out there were more useful ways of doing things. They actually have it displayed at the American History Museum in Washington DC.
Bat Bombs – The idea was to load bats with explosives and train them to find targets. The plan got scrapped with the invention of the atomic bomb.
Soviet Attack Dolphins – Developed in the 1960's the idea was to train dolphins to search for submerged warheads. But considering their friendly animals, the plan didn't work.
Chicken Nuclear Weapon- If the government wanted to set off a bomb in a very cold area, the nukes had to stay hot. In order to do that they had to train chickens to heat the nuke.
Kill-Proof Human Soldiers – A project by DARPA, in 2007, called inner Armor that attempted to mix man with harbor seals to help protect them from assault and make the more super soldier like. No mention as to if this is still being attempted.
Gay Bomb- In 2005 they wanted to create a chemical weapon that would make enemy troops sexually irresistible to each other. They got 7.5 million in 1994 to create it.
Human-Zee Warriors – They want to mix and hybridize humans and chimpanzees. Mixing human and chimpanzee sperm together. Obviously, they are still doing it.
Invisibility Cloak- In 2016 they pushed a proposal for invisible uniforms. They actually have created one already, but it's not available or ready yet.
Quantum Stealth – This is kind of like the invisibility cloak, but this style bends light waves around a soldier uniform to make them camouflage looking and is still being worked on today.
PreviousEscape From "New York" Leading Investor Drops Earth Shattering News!!


text:
FACING A FAMILY LAW ISSUE? WE CAN HELP.
Forrest, Daniel E. Esq.
Forrest, Paulina Esq.
COVID-19 NEWS::
Due to precautions related to COVID-19, we have expanded our options for remote consultations but remain fully operational. Pleasecontactour office to discuss whether a full phone consultation or video conference is appropriate for your situation
Experienced South Florida
Complex Divorce Litigation
Child Custody Parental Responsibility Relocations
SPOUSAL SUPPORT AND ALIMONY
POST-JUDGMENT MODIFICATIONS
ENFORCEMENT AND CONTEMPT
» When love packs a punch …
When love packs a punch …
On behalf of Law Office of Forrest & Forrest, PLLC | Feb 21, 2020 | divorce |
Attorneys fees in domestic violence proceedings
Florida law allows a person who is the victim of domestic violence or who is in real fear of domestic violence to obtain a court order for protection to prevent the perpetrator from having contact with the victim. The Florida Supreme Court has said that if a person files a petition for a certain type of protective injunction, but the petition is not supported by actual events or facts, the defendant may seek to recover legal fees from the petitioner through the court.
Interpretation of the language of the law
On Jan. 11, 2018, in the case of Lopez v. Hall, the state Supreme Court looked at whether attorneys fees are available for "unsupported claims and defenses" asserted by a party in a proceeding under the Florida statute allowing protective injunctions for repeat violence, sexual violence or dating violence. The court agreed to decide the issue because state appeals courts had disagreed on the issue.
The court said yes – that a party may request legal fees in a petition for a protective order for repeat, sexual or dating violence. The court noted that the Florida attorneys fees statute says that legal fees may be available when a party or its lawyer "knew or should have known" that a "claim or defense" they asserted in a "civil proceeding or action" was "baseless."
The court then held that the law that allows a request for this court order provides for a "civil cause of action for a protective injunction," so the legal fee statute should apply – making available the possibility for an award of attorneys fees.
Florida legislature responds
Since the Lopez decision, the state legislature amended the attorneys fee statute effective Oct. 1, 2019, to clarify that in a request for attorneys fees in a proceeding for a protective order not only against repeat violence, sexual violence or dating violence, but also one against domestic violence or stalking, the court must be able to find by clear and convincing evidence that either the petitioner or responding party "knowingly made a false statement" in the proceedings … "with regard to a material matter."
Anyone considering a petition for a protective injunction or who must respond to one, or who would like to request legal fees in such a proceeding should speak with an experienced lawyer immediately to understand all potential remedies and issues.
Marital Law (2)
Parental responsibility (2)
Part 2: Looking for a fresh start in the new year through a Florida divorce?
Part 1: Is divorce your New Year's resolution, but not your spouse's?
Who is naughty, and who is nice? Part 2
Making a list, and checking it twice, part 1
Ex-spouse remind you of Ebenezer Scrooge? Remedies for past-due alimony, part 2
The Law Office of Forrest & Forrest, PLLC represents individuals in Fort Lauderdale in high-asset divorce matters. Daniel Forrest is board-certified family lawyer and mediator serving the South Florida area.
ABOUT YOUR LEGAL OPTIONS
450 East Las Olas Boulevard
© 2021 Law Office of Forrest & Forrest, PLLC. All Rights Reserved.


Structure of Indonesia cement limestone quartz sand slag coal clay industrial ultra fine grinding mill There are two ways of grinding: the dry process and the wet process . It can be divided into tabular type and flowing type according to different forms of discharging material .
The effect of dispersing agents on fine grinding of limestone. A pilot plant grinding study was made to investigate the effect of moisture content of the slurry and chemical additives on wet grinding of "hard" and "soft" limestones. It was determined that a narrow range of optimum moisture content exists for fine grinding of limestone.
Jul 11, 2016· Uganda Hot Sale Q235 Limestone,Copper Grinding Ball Mill Machine, Find Complete Details about Uganda Hot Sale Q235 Limestone,Copper Grinding Ball Mill Machine,Copper Ball Mill Machine,Ball Valve Grinding Machine,Ore Grinding Ball Mill from Mine Mill Supplier or Manufacturer-Zhengzhou Yufeng Heavy.
Application Range. With scientific & reasonable design and abovementioned unique advantages, HLMX ultra-fine vertical mills are applied widely in metallurgical, chemical, and non-metallic industry, for grinding of various materials, such as limestone, gypsum, coal, barite, calcite etc.
Fine Grinding Mill Features. 1) The Fine Grinding Mill is an efficient tool for grinding many materials into fine powder; 2) The Fine Grinding Mill is used to grind many kinds of mine and other materials, or to select the mine; 3) The Fine Grinding Mill is widely used in building material, and chemical industry.
In this study ultra-fine grinding of limestone was carried out in jet mill using four levels of classifier rotational speed and grinding pressure The holdup amount + More The effect of grinding aids on the fine grinding of limestone quartz . Read More. fine grind limestone michigan diebold-bau eu.
ultra fine limestone grinding ball mill offers 15,580 fine grind mill products. About 33% of these are flour mill, 26% are mine mill, and 24% are grinding equipment. A wide variety of fine grind mill options are available to you, such as ball mill, universal, and raymond mill.
Calcium carbonate (CaCO 3), which occurs primarily in the form of the minerals calcite and aragonite, is one of the most prevalent compounds on Earth.Calcium carbonate is not only the main component of marble, limestone and dolomite, it is also found in bones and teeth as well as the exoskeleton of crustaceans, coral, muscles, snails and protozoa.
(7) The grinding aids were very effective in the grinding of Portland cement clinker and limestone only in the range of very fine grinding. Therefore, the commercial application of these grinding aids for very fine grinding of Portland cement and limestone may be justified. References .


text:
Suit highlights suburban unease with addiction centers
by: MICHAEL TARM, Associated Press
FILE – Felicia Miceli holds a photograph of her son, Louie Miceli as opponents of a Haymarket drug treatment march toward Peacock Junior High prior to a public hearing on the subject on Wednesday, Sept. 18, 2019 in Itasca, Ill. Haymarket Center, a Chicago-based addiction treatment center, which like others nationwide has faced fierce opposition to opening suburban branches, filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday, Jan. 11, 2022, to force one suburb, Itasca, to stop blocking its expansion plans. Miceli's son, Louie died of a heroin overdose at the age of 24 in 2012. (Chris Sweda/Chicago Tribune via AP)
CHICAGO (AP) — A Chicago-based addiction treatment center, which like others nationwide has faced fierce opposition to opening suburban branches, filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday to force one suburb to stop blocking its expansion plans.
The suit brought by the Haymarket Center, the largest nonprofit treatment service in Chicago, says the city of Itasca's rejection of a 240-bed facility in a former hotel violates U.S. laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act, that bar discrimination against those recovering from addictions.
Elsewhere, including in Florida, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Michigan, communities have also thwarted the opening of such facilities. Treatment advocates say the resistance highlights how everyone seems to recognize the need for the facilities amid the ongoing opioid crisis — but bristle at putting them in their neighborhoods.
In November, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said drug overdoses spiked during the pandemic, registering more than 100,000 overdose deaths from April 2020 to April 2021 — a U.S. record for a 12-month stretch. It was an increase of nearly 30% from the roughly 78,000 deaths over the same period the year before, the CDC reported.
Many residents in Itasca, a middle-class community of 9,000 people, mounted a two-year battle against the Haymarket facility, saying they feared it would lead to an uptick in crime and lost tax revenue, as well as strain Itasca's one-ambulance emergency service. Opponents held street marches and handed out yard signs that read, "No Haymarket."
Tuesday's lawsuit says Itasca officials "strategically fostered, intentionally contributed to, and were unduly negatively influenced by this 'not in my backyard' opposition." It accused officials of seeking pretexts to reject the proposal amid "discriminatory stereotyping of Haymarket's mission" and the patients it would serve.
A message seeking comment left for the Itasca village government Tuesday morning wasn't immediately returned.
After some 35 hearings over two years, Itasca's Plan Commission and the Village Board voted unanimously late last year against approving Haymarket's plans. Wheaton, another Chicago suburb, rejected a similar 2018 proposal for a Haymarket branch.
The 83-page lawsuit says Haymarket went out of its way to address some of Itasca's concerns, including by agreeing to contract a private ambulance to respond to calls from the treatment facility. It said it would have trained medical staff on-site 24 hours a day.
Before Tuesday's filing in U.S. District Court in Chicago, Itasca Mayor Jeff Pruyn and other city officials denied discrimination underpinned their opposition, saying the proposed facility didn't comply with criteria applied to everyone.
Pruyn said at a hearing before votes against the plans that his primary concern was a financial one. He contended that Itasca, one of the region's smallest communities, "was going to have to absorb 100% of the cost, risk and burden of servicing a facility that would be accepting residents beyond Itasca."
"We learned more and more about the immense size and scope of Haymarket's plan, and I kept coming back to one question: How could Itasca reasonably handle a facility like this?" he asked. He said he concluded that "Haymarket's request on our village is unreasonable."
Interest in the plan in Itasca was intense from the start. One early hearing in 2019 at a high school gym that was meant to give the public a chance to comment was postponed because the venue couldn't accommodate the more than 1,300 people who showed up.
Some residents and regional leaders supported the Haymarket plans, saying a dearth of facilities outside major cities makes treatment for suburbanites less accessible. During one Itasca protest, a woman who supported the facility stood as protesters passed, holding a picture of her son who died of an overdose.
Pressure on Itasca won't only come from the new civil litigation.
Two months ago, Chicago-based U.S. Attorney John Lausch sent a letter to Itasca's mayor telling him that prosecutors are investigating whether the city violated federal anti-discrimination laws in rejecting Haymarket's proposal. The letter included a three-page list of documents investigators sought, including copies of communications between Itasca officials.
Haymarket says that between 2017 and 2018, nearly 2,000 people recovering from addictions who reside in communities outside Chicago sought treatment at its Chicago facility, which included hundreds from the Itasca area, the lawsuit says.
Those unable to pay for treatment at for-profit centers are particularly vulnerable, according to the filing. It says up to 30% of Haymarket patients have no insurance or rely on state-funded programs, and around 70% depend on Medicaid.
Haymarket cites figures that only some 10% of those who qualify for such services actually get it.
The lawsuit names, among others, the village, Pruyn and the Itasca Plan Commission as defendants. It seeks a court order allowing the facility to open, and also asks for compensatory and punitive damages, as well as the payment of attorneys' fees.
Follow Michael Tarm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/mtarm
LAS VEGAS (KLAS) — Thousands of flights have been either delayed or canceled around the United States as a winter storm hits the East Coast on the holiday weekend.
According to Flightaware, 4,910 flights worldwide have been canceled, 2,962 of those are either in or out of the U.S. or within the U.S.


Hydras have 2250 hitpoints. They are immune to poison and they cannot be paralyzed. These creatures can neither be summoned nor convinced. In addition, they are able to sense invisible creatures.
Hydras yield 2100 experience points. They carry gold coins, ham, meat and sometimes other items with them.


I will be living alone in January 2019 after I graduate with my BS degree in Accounting, with a minor in Mathematics, and begin full-time employment as an accountant. (I took 2 years off from university to live in Hong Kong and learn Cantonese.) I love to study and learn new things. My mom is Chinese, and my dad is white (US). I am calm and highly motivated.
I'm looking for a potential wife who is pretty, smart, and has a strong will. She does not need to know how to cook.
I like biographies and autobiographies like: A Man for all Markets, Shoe Dog, The Wright Brothers, Twelve Years a Slave, Surely You're Joking Mr Feynman. Also Animal Farm.
Classical, jazz, R&B, pop, folk.
Playing ultimate Frisbee, guitar, and piano. Also weight training and astronomy.
I have traveled to Hong Kong and Beijing. I would like to travel to China again and to Ukraine.
Maybe dinner and a movie. Maybe a movie at home. Or a cruise. I'm open to ideas.


Course Description: Algebra 1 explores writing, simplifying and evaluating algebraic expressions. Students will use algebraic properties to write, graph, or solve linear equations, inequalities and systems of equations and inequalities. Students will perform operations on monomials and polynomials and solve polynomial equations using various methods. Radical or Rational expressions and equations will be graphed or solved for a given variable. Students will perform tests and calculate probability from those tests.
Course Description: Extended Algebra 1A explores writing, simplifying and evaluating algebraic expressions. Students will use algebraic properties to write, graph, or solve linear equations, inequalities and systems of equations and inequalities. Students will perform operations on monomials and polynomials and solve polynomial equations using various methods.
Course Description: Geometry will familiarize students with geometric fundamentals including terminology and the use of a compass and straightedge in constructions. Students will implement inductive and deductive reasoning in the composition of formal proofs. Students will calculate perimeter, area, volume and surface area of geometric figures and solids. The Pythagorean Theorem and trigonometric functions will be used to solve right triangles and discover their relationships. Students will use given postulates, properties and conjectures to solve problems involving lines, circles and polygons. Students will also solve problems involving the lengths, areas, and volumes of similar figures.
Course Description: Applied Geometry explores the terms used in geometry and implements tools for measurement and construction of geometric figures. Euclid's postulates are investigated and used as reasoning in basic proofs. Students will calculate perimeter, area, volume and surface area of geometric figures and solids. The Pythagorean Theorem and trigonometric functions will be used to solve right triangles and discover their relationships. Students will also solve problems involving the lengths, areas, and volumes of similar figures.
Course Description: Development of math skills for success in specific vocational/technical fields, with major emphasis on problem solving through numerical methods. Major topics include measurement, number representation, formulas, and personal finance concepts such as payroll, income tax, credit, insurance, loans, etc. Colleges may not accept this course for entrance requirements.
Course Description: This course covers trigonometry including but not limited to right triangle trig., circular functions, graphs, identities, applications, etc. Students will also revisit functions, relations, systems of equations and inequalities, logarithms, exponentials, conics, number systems, vectors, parametric equations, sequences and series, polar coordinate and complex numbers.
The course is also available as a dual college credit course through NECC.
Course Description: This course covers limits, derivatives (sums, products, quotient, chain rule etc.) and applications (Maxima, minima, Newton's method, rates of change), integrals and applications (areas, volumes, lengths of curves, work, fluid pressure, etc.), transcendental functions (growth and decay, L'Hopitals Rule) and techniques of integration (integration by parts, improper integrals).
Course Description: Study of algebraic sets, finite probability spaces, counting techniques, random variables, and binomial distribution.
Course Description: This is a general mathematics course designed to reinforce basic math skills and begin introducing students to algebraic concepts. Study will include the following concepts: statistics, integers, linear equations and functions, fractions, decimals, percents, ratios and proportions, probability, and geometry. This course utilizes Saxon Math.
Course Description: This course is designed for students who need extended practice with Algebra 1 concepts. Study will include the following concepts: number systems, solving systems of equations and inequalities, functions, probability and statistics, algebraic equations & inequalities, exponents and exponential functions,, combining and factoring polynomials, and graphing on a coordinate plane.
Course Description: Algebra II is the second course studying algebraic manipulation to solve real world situations. Study will include these concepts: number systems, solving systems of equations and inequalities, functions, powers and roots, quadratics, matrices, logarithms and exponentials, probability and statistics.


Every person had expectations of needing a luxury dream residence and in addition good nevertheless together with confined finances and minimal land, also will possibly be tough to understand this want residence. Yet, usually do not be anxious due to the fact nowadays there are several Cool Home Office Designs that can produce your house along with simple household style into your home seem opulent nevertheless not good. Although now Cool Home Office Designs is usually many awareness due to the fact besides its basic, the purchase price it will take to make a property may also be not really too large. With regard to his or her own Cool Home Office Designs should indeed be straightforward, but rather glimpse unsightly because of the simple residence present remains desirable to look at.


Simply pin this complete upper assembly on your completed AR-15 lower and you are ready for some fun at the range, 7.62x39 style! It features a 16" chrome lined M4 profile barrel with flash hider, plastic hand guard and a railed front sight base and gas block. The muzzle is threaded 5/8x24 for muzzle accessories, and a single 30 round magazine is included.