Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Bu video yüklenirken bir sorun oluştu. Bu geçici bir ağ sorunundan kaynaklanıyor olabilir veya video kullanılamıyor olabilir.

Ana Sayfaya Dön

No matter where you stand on the #Evolution vs. #Creation debate, you have to acknowledge it's at the very least eyebrow-raising that there isn't a single real-life observable example of darwinian "changing of kinds" taking place (ex: bacteria ➡️ fish ➡️ primate ➡️ human, which is the official scientific... show more

₿en Wehrman

114,905 subscribers

78,038 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

Eğitim Bilim & Teknoloji #Evolution #Creation

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

Stephen C. Meyer says Darwin’s theory of evolution has, for many, become more like a religion than a scientific theory. “Darwinian evolution functions as a kind of secular religion.” “And you can see why, because it's answering one of the most fundamental questions that any worldview or religion has to answer.” “Which is what is the thing or the entity or the process from which everything else came?” “And the neo-Darwinian explanation of the origin of new forms of life is part of the answer to that really fundamental question, which is not only a scientific question but a philosophical worldview question.” “Because it functions like a secular religion, sometimes there's resistance to a more dispassionate scientific evaluation of its merits.” Stephen C. Meyer

Stephen C. Meyer says Darwin’s theory of evolution has, for many, become more like a religion than a scientific theory. “Darwinian evolution functions as a kind of secular religion.” “And you can see why, because it's answering one of the most fundamental questions that any worldview or religion has to answer.” “Which is what is the thing or the entity or the process from which everything else came?” “And the neo-Darwinian explanation of the origin of new forms of life is part of the answer to that really fundamental question, which is not only a scientific question but a philosophical worldview question.” “Because it functions like a secular religion, sometimes there's resistance to a more dispassionate scientific evaluation of its merits.” Stephen C. Meyer

Jan Jekielek

199,433 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

.Naval: You have a beautiful definition of knowledge, which most people don’t even try to tackle, about how knowledge perpetuates itself in the environment. You gave some really good examples. One was around genes. Successful, highly adapted genes contain a lot of knowledge and can cause themselves to be replicated because they’re survivors. In the same way, knowledge itself is a survivor, in that if you transmit to me the knowledge of how to build a computer, it’s an incredibly useful thing. I’m going to build more and more computers and that knowledge will be passed on. Your underlying point that you repeated here was if you want to understand the physical universe you have to understand knowledge, because it is the thing that over time takes over and changes more and more the universe—more than almost anything else. You have to understand all the explanations behind it. You can’t just say “particle collisions” because that explains everything, so it explains nothing. It’s not a useful level to operate at. Therefore, the things that create knowledge are uniquely influential in the universe. And as far as we know, there are only two systems that create knowledge. There’s evolution and there are humans. But is there a difference even between these two forms of knowledge creation, between evolution and between humans? David Deutsch: Yes. I have argued that the human way of creating knowledge is the ultimate one, that there aren’t any more powerful ones than that. This is the argument against the supernatural. Assuming that there is a form of knowledge creation that’s more powerful than ours is equivalent to invoking the supernatural, which is therefore a bad explanation—as invoking the supernatural always is. The difference between biological evolution and human creative thought is that biological evolution is inherently limited in its range. That’s because biological evolution has no foresight. It can’t see a problem and conjecture a solution. Whenever biological evolution produces a solution to something, it’s always before natural selection has even begun. This is Charles Darwin’s insight. This is the difference between Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution and the other theories of evolution that had been around for a century or more before that, including Charles Darwin’s grandfather and Lamarck. The thing they didn’t get is that the creation of knowledge in evolution begins before. That means that biological evolution can’t reach places that are not reachable by successive improvements, each of which allows a viable organism to exist. Creationists say that biological evolution has, in fact, reached things that are not reachable by incremental steps, each of which is a viable organism. They’re factually mistaken. The thing which they have in mind is the idea of a creator who can imagine things that don’t exist and who can create an idea that is not the culmination of a whole load of viable things. A thinking being can create something that’s a culmination of a whole load of non-viable things. Explanatory creativity makes humans unique Out of all the billions and billions of species that have ever existed, none of them has ever made a campfire, even though many of them would’ve been helped by having the genetic capacity to make campfires. The reason it didn’t happen in the biosphere is that there is no such thing as making a partially functional campfire; whereas there is, for example, with making hot water. The bombardier beetles squirt boiling water at their enemies. You can easily see that just squirting cold water at your enemies is not totally unhelpful. Then making it a bit hotter and a bit hotter. Squirting boiling water no doubt required many adaptations to make sure the beetle didn’t boil itself while it was making this boiling water. That happened because there was a sequence of steps in between, all of which were useful. But with campfires, it’s very hard to see how that could happen. Humans have explanatory creativity. Once you have that, you can get to the moon. You can cause asteroids which are heading towards the earth to turn around and go away. Perhaps no other planet in the universe has that power, and it has it only because of the presence of explanatory creativity on it.

.Naval: You have a beautiful definition of knowledge, which most people don’t even try to tackle, about how knowledge perpetuates itself in the environment. You gave some really good examples. One was around genes. Successful, highly adapted genes contain a lot of knowledge and can cause themselves to be replicated because they’re survivors. In the same way, knowledge itself is a survivor, in that if you transmit to me the knowledge of how to build a computer, it’s an incredibly useful thing. I’m going to build more and more computers and that knowledge will be passed on. Your underlying point that you repeated here was if you want to understand the physical universe you have to understand knowledge, because it is the thing that over time takes over and changes more and more the universe—more than almost anything else. You have to understand all the explanations behind it. You can’t just say “particle collisions” because that explains everything, so it explains nothing. It’s not a useful level to operate at. Therefore, the things that create knowledge are uniquely influential in the universe. And as far as we know, there are only two systems that create knowledge. There’s evolution and there are humans. But is there a difference even between these two forms of knowledge creation, between evolution and between humans? David Deutsch: Yes. I have argued that the human way of creating knowledge is the ultimate one, that there aren’t any more powerful ones than that. This is the argument against the supernatural. Assuming that there is a form of knowledge creation that’s more powerful than ours is equivalent to invoking the supernatural, which is therefore a bad explanation—as invoking the supernatural always is. The difference between biological evolution and human creative thought is that biological evolution is inherently limited in its range. That’s because biological evolution has no foresight. It can’t see a problem and conjecture a solution. Whenever biological evolution produces a solution to something, it’s always before natural selection has even begun. This is Charles Darwin’s insight. This is the difference between Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution and the other theories of evolution that had been around for a century or more before that, including Charles Darwin’s grandfather and Lamarck. The thing they didn’t get is that the creation of knowledge in evolution begins before. That means that biological evolution can’t reach places that are not reachable by successive improvements, each of which allows a viable organism to exist. Creationists say that biological evolution has, in fact, reached things that are not reachable by incremental steps, each of which is a viable organism. They’re factually mistaken. The thing which they have in mind is the idea of a creator who can imagine things that don’t exist and who can create an idea that is not the culmination of a whole load of viable things. A thinking being can create something that’s a culmination of a whole load of non-viable things. Explanatory creativity makes humans unique Out of all the billions and billions of species that have ever existed, none of them has ever made a campfire, even though many of them would’ve been helped by having the genetic capacity to make campfires. The reason it didn’t happen in the biosphere is that there is no such thing as making a partially functional campfire; whereas there is, for example, with making hot water. The bombardier beetles squirt boiling water at their enemies. You can easily see that just squirting cold water at your enemies is not totally unhelpful. Then making it a bit hotter and a bit hotter. Squirting boiling water no doubt required many adaptations to make sure the beetle didn’t boil itself while it was making this boiling water. That happened because there was a sequence of steps in between, all of which were useful. But with campfires, it’s very hard to see how that could happen. Humans have explanatory creativity. Once you have that, you can get to the moon. You can cause asteroids which are heading towards the earth to turn around and go away. Perhaps no other planet in the universe has that power, and it has it only because of the presence of explanatory creativity on it.

Deutsch Explains

186,329 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Even the brainwashed Russians suspect that they weren't wished a happy new year by the real Putin, but by an AI-generated version of him. Several arguments for this theory are being presented on Russian channels: ➡️ The dictator's head appears to move independently of his body. ➡️ The sleeves of his coat look empty, as if there were no hands there. ➡️ Putin didn't say that the year was "difficult," as he does every year. ➡️ Russians are reporting that even pensioners have noticed this. And what do you think?

Even the brainwashed Russians suspect that they weren't wished a happy new year by the real Putin, but by an AI-generated version of him. Several arguments for this theory are being presented on Russian channels: ➡️ The dictator's head appears to move independently of his body. ➡️ The sleeves of his coat look empty, as if there were no hands there. ➡️ Putin didn't say that the year was "difficult," as he does every year. ➡️ Russians are reporting that even pensioners have noticed this. And what do you think?

Jürgen Nauditt 🇩🇪🇺🇦

389,632 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

a bunch of stanford nerds did the ultimate form of mass surveillance on fish and tracked their activities and life span. Have you ever heard the theory that you have a fixed "bank" of heartbeats or breaths or calories so the more you eat / the more active you are the sooner you die? NO. The more active you are, the longer you live. (may only apply to African killifish)

a bunch of stanford nerds did the ultimate form of mass surveillance on fish and tracked their activities and life span. Have you ever heard the theory that you have a fixed "bank" of heartbeats or breaths or calories so the more you eat / the more active you are the sooner you die? NO. The more active you are, the longer you live. (may only apply to African killifish)

outside five sigma

404,770 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

"This is probably the biggest con that we've ever had." Geologist Prof. Ian Plimer: "There is no climate emergency... It has never been proven that human emissions of carbon dioxide drive global warming." "Only 3% of emissions are from humans, the rest is natural... So if you're to prove that humans, and their emissions of the the gas of life, change climate, then you also have to prove that the natural emissions—97% of all emissions—don't change climate." "That has never been addressed."

"This is probably the biggest con that we've ever had." Geologist Prof. Ian Plimer: "There is no climate emergency... It has never been proven that human emissions of carbon dioxide drive global warming." "Only 3% of emissions are from humans, the rest is natural... So if you're to prove that humans, and their emissions of the the gas of life, change climate, then you also have to prove that the natural emissions—97% of all emissions—don't change climate." "That has never been addressed."

Wide Awake Media

734,728 görüntüleme • 11 ay önce

The theory of evolution is bullshit. Period. Can’t find one evolutionist who can explain why apes still exist. What, are all the other apes absolutely retarded? They just can’t figure this evolution thing out? These are the same people who will point towards snakes having legs at one point as proof of evolution - except there isn’t a single snake running around the planet with feet. My point? They contradict themselves. If all snakes have evolved to a point where they no longer have feet, THEN WHY HAVEN’T ALL APES EVOLVED INTO HUMAN BEINGS. Simple: Because we didn’t evolve from apes. Evolution theory also does nothing to explain RH- blood, of which 15% of the planet possesses. That means that roughly 1.2 BILLION people possess blood that is in no way genetically tied to a monkey or an ape. But evolution, right? 🤣

The theory of evolution is bullshit. Period. Can’t find one evolutionist who can explain why apes still exist. What, are all the other apes absolutely retarded? They just can’t figure this evolution thing out? These are the same people who will point towards snakes having legs at one point as proof of evolution - except there isn’t a single snake running around the planet with feet. My point? They contradict themselves. If all snakes have evolved to a point where they no longer have feet, THEN WHY HAVEN’T ALL APES EVOLVED INTO HUMAN BEINGS. Simple: Because we didn’t evolve from apes. Evolution theory also does nothing to explain RH- blood, of which 15% of the planet possesses. That means that roughly 1.2 BILLION people possess blood that is in no way genetically tied to a monkey or an ape. But evolution, right? 🤣

Paul Fleuret

254,839 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

Mistral CEO Arthur Mensch on why AGI is too simple of a concept: “There’s no such thing as one system that is going to be solving all of the problems of the world... It’s never going to exist.” “Just like you don't have any human that is able to solve every task in the world, you of course have to have some level of specialization to actually solve problems.” “We are back from magical thinking to system thinking.” “In real life enterprises are just complex systems. You can’t solve that with a single abstraction, which is AGI.” Arthur Mensch on Big Technology Podcast

Mistral CEO Arthur Mensch on why AGI is too simple of a concept: “There’s no such thing as one system that is going to be solving all of the problems of the world... It’s never going to exist.” “Just like you don't have any human that is able to solve every task in the world, you of course have to have some level of specialization to actually solve problems.” “We are back from magical thinking to system thinking.” “In real life enterprises are just complex systems. You can’t solve that with a single abstraction, which is AGI.” Arthur Mensch on Big Technology Podcast

a16z

37,667 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

Today, I took off my glasses for the first time ever. 👓✨” For years, people have asked me the same questions: ➡️ How did you start Sarkinmota Autos? ➡️ How did you grow? ➡️ What challenges did you face? ➡️ Do you have investors? ➡️ Why are you always on glasses? ➡️ Do you really have problems with civil servants? ➡️ And do you truly sell cars on just 40% initial deposit? In this special documentary, I’ve finally answered all your most frequently asked questions. It’s raw, it’s real, and it promises to be amazing. This isn’t just about cars — it’s about a journey, the struggles, the wins, and the truth behind the brand you all know today as Sarkinmota Autos. 🚗👑 Stay tuned. The King of Cars is telling it all.

Sarkin Mota

96,329 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

David Adelman on Nikola Jokic 🃏🗣️ "He takes this very seriously and it's a craft for him." "But I think in life, if this is your sole purpose, you are a sad human being. When you leave here, you have to have other interests. You have to have a real life. And I think it makes you better when you come back here because you're refreshed. I think thats part of the human experience." "He's someone to look up to. To be this successful, this good for this long, historically good, and have that outlook on life in general is something that says a lot about him. And it's a good example for all of us."

David Adelman on Nikola Jokic 🃏🗣️ "He takes this very seriously and it's a craft for him." "But I think in life, if this is your sole purpose, you are a sad human being. When you leave here, you have to have other interests. You have to have a real life. And I think it makes you better when you come back here because you're refreshed. I think thats part of the human experience." "He's someone to look up to. To be this successful, this good for this long, historically good, and have that outlook on life in general is something that says a lot about him. And it's a good example for all of us."

DNVR Nuggets

267,186 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

That "convenient" Digital ID for your iPhone? It's the trojan horse for a global surveillance system, and the walls are already closing in. While it's "optional" in the U.S. for now, the UK blueprint reveals the true endgame: a mandatory Digital ID just to have a job. No ID, no work. It’s the ultimate control mechanism. This isn't conspiracy theory; it's the stated goal of elites like Tony Blair, Bill Gates, and Larry Ellison. Their aim? A "unified data platform"—a single, centralized database merging your health records, identity, and employment history. Think of the consequences: ➡️ Geo-fencing & 24/7 Tracking ➡️ Social Credit Systems that punish dissent ➡️ Total loss of financial privacy ➡️ Nefarious control over every aspect of your life This isn't about convenience. It's about constructing the digital cage for a new era of tyranny. The debate isn't about technology; it's about whether we will remain free.

That "convenient" Digital ID for your iPhone? It's the trojan horse for a global surveillance system, and the walls are already closing in. While it's "optional" in the U.S. for now, the UK blueprint reveals the true endgame: a mandatory Digital ID just to have a job. No ID, no work. It’s the ultimate control mechanism. This isn't conspiracy theory; it's the stated goal of elites like Tony Blair, Bill Gates, and Larry Ellison. Their aim? A "unified data platform"—a single, centralized database merging your health records, identity, and employment history. Think of the consequences: ➡️ Geo-fencing & 24/7 Tracking ➡️ Social Credit Systems that punish dissent ➡️ Total loss of financial privacy ➡️ Nefarious control over every aspect of your life This isn't about convenience. It's about constructing the digital cage for a new era of tyranny. The debate isn't about technology; it's about whether we will remain free.

Camus

64,190 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. "By way of deception thou shalt do war." The official motto of the IsraeIi Mossad. "Let me ask you: If you were being deceived, used, and lied to, would you even be able to recognize that you were?" Very specific reason not mentioned a single time. TIMES are changing. Are you paying attention?

It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. "By way of deception thou shalt do war." The official motto of the IsraeIi Mossad. "Let me ask you: If you were being deceived, used, and lied to, would you even be able to recognize that you were?" Very specific reason not mentioned a single time. TIMES are changing. Are you paying attention?

The SCIF

103,494 görüntüleme • 9 ay önce

"We're not in a crisis. There is no climate emergency." Geologist, Professor Ian Plimer: "It has never been proven that human emissions of carbon dioxide drive global warming." "Only 3% of emissions are from humans, the rest is natural... So if you're to prove that humans, and their emissions of the the gas of life, change climate, then you also have to prove that the natural emissions—97% of all emissions—don't change climate. That has never been addressed."

"We're not in a crisis. There is no climate emergency." Geologist, Professor Ian Plimer: "It has never been proven that human emissions of carbon dioxide drive global warming." "Only 3% of emissions are from humans, the rest is natural... So if you're to prove that humans, and their emissions of the the gas of life, change climate, then you also have to prove that the natural emissions—97% of all emissions—don't change climate. That has never been addressed."

Wide Awake Media

234,145 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

I’m in America at the start of a five-week tour of America promoting this book, The Genetic Book of the Dead: A Darwinian Reverie, which is being published on the 17th of September in America. I’m having a good time. I’m in Texas—the first stop was Dallas, and the second stop is here in Austin. I’ve enjoyed both. I’ve especially enjoyed the book signings, where a large number of people have thanked me for changing their lives, which is a wonderful thing to be told. Many have also told me I’ve inspired them to take up a career in biology, to do a doctorate in biology, for example. So I have been very pleased about that, and I’m enjoying myself in America very much. I’m also looking forward to getting back to England, where I am continuing the tour there.

I’m in America at the start of a five-week tour of America promoting this book, The Genetic Book of the Dead: A Darwinian Reverie, which is being published on the 17th of September in America. I’m having a good time. I’m in Texas—the first stop was Dallas, and the second stop is here in Austin. I’ve enjoyed both. I’ve especially enjoyed the book signings, where a large number of people have thanked me for changing their lives, which is a wonderful thing to be told. Many have also told me I’ve inspired them to take up a career in biology, to do a doctorate in biology, for example. So I have been very pleased about that, and I’m enjoying myself in America very much. I’m also looking forward to getting back to England, where I am continuing the tour there.

Richard Dawkins

516,604 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

I am a physicist and I'm profoundly opposed to any idea of non-physical explanations that contradict physics. So that's a no-no and really doesn't make sense. However, there are ways in which both emergent properties such as minds and life and so on have an effect. And as you said, also abstractions. Now the fact that the theory of good explanations led to the idea that abstractions are real things was slightly surprising to me. I wasn't expecting the link, at least wasn't expecting it to be so strong as it is. But the thing is, if you think about how to explain events, physical events like a footprint on the moon, how do you explain how that happened? Well, it happened because of human ideas, of science. And human ideas, you could say in this reductionist sense that as you rightly say is the prevailing mode of explanation and the prevailing idea is to look down on other modes of explanation, that those ideas are nothing more than configurations of atoms. So some physicists, some rocket scientists put their brain into certain configurations of atoms and those atoms then acted on other atoms which then ended up making a footprint on the moon. Now what that misses is the explanation of why certain configurations of atoms put footprints on the moon while others, the overwhelming majority of configurations that human brains, even human brains have been put into in history, do not have that effect. And it's because there's a certain type of information. And this information can't in my view be reduced to statements about atoms because if you think about what that information does, it is in brains but the same information then gets transferred into, let's say, sound waves in air and then it gets transferred into ink on paper and then it gets transferred into magnetic domains inside a computer which then control a machine that instantiates those ideas in bits of steel and silicon and so on and so on. There's an immense chain of instantiations of the same information. And it's only special kinds of information that have this property that they are preserved and instantiated in successive physical modes. So what is being transmitted, what is having the causal effect is not the atoms but the fact that the atoms instantiate certain kinds of information and not other kinds. So therefore it is the information that is having the causal effect. If a particular instantiation of that information were damaged, then processes would come along to fix it, whether or not they could fix the physical instantiation. For example, if the computer goes wrong, then we don't use the corrupted information. We go back and rescue the information from a different computer and we throw away the atoms that at one point instantiated it. So the information causes itself to remain in existence. Now I think there's no way out of that mode of explanation. And if explanation is going to be the fundamental thing about our criterion, for example, about what is or isn't real, then we have to say that information and this particular kind which we call knowledge is real and really does cause things. David Deutsch

I am a physicist and I'm profoundly opposed to any idea of non-physical explanations that contradict physics. So that's a no-no and really doesn't make sense. However, there are ways in which both emergent properties such as minds and life and so on have an effect. And as you said, also abstractions. Now the fact that the theory of good explanations led to the idea that abstractions are real things was slightly surprising to me. I wasn't expecting the link, at least wasn't expecting it to be so strong as it is. But the thing is, if you think about how to explain events, physical events like a footprint on the moon, how do you explain how that happened? Well, it happened because of human ideas, of science. And human ideas, you could say in this reductionist sense that as you rightly say is the prevailing mode of explanation and the prevailing idea is to look down on other modes of explanation, that those ideas are nothing more than configurations of atoms. So some physicists, some rocket scientists put their brain into certain configurations of atoms and those atoms then acted on other atoms which then ended up making a footprint on the moon. Now what that misses is the explanation of why certain configurations of atoms put footprints on the moon while others, the overwhelming majority of configurations that human brains, even human brains have been put into in history, do not have that effect. And it's because there's a certain type of information. And this information can't in my view be reduced to statements about atoms because if you think about what that information does, it is in brains but the same information then gets transferred into, let's say, sound waves in air and then it gets transferred into ink on paper and then it gets transferred into magnetic domains inside a computer which then control a machine that instantiates those ideas in bits of steel and silicon and so on and so on. There's an immense chain of instantiations of the same information. And it's only special kinds of information that have this property that they are preserved and instantiated in successive physical modes. So what is being transmitted, what is having the causal effect is not the atoms but the fact that the atoms instantiate certain kinds of information and not other kinds. So therefore it is the information that is having the causal effect. If a particular instantiation of that information were damaged, then processes would come along to fix it, whether or not they could fix the physical instantiation. For example, if the computer goes wrong, then we don't use the corrupted information. We go back and rescue the information from a different computer and we throw away the atoms that at one point instantiated it. So the information causes itself to remain in existence. Now I think there's no way out of that mode of explanation. And if explanation is going to be the fundamental thing about our criterion, for example, about what is or isn't real, then we have to say that information and this particular kind which we call knowledge is real and really does cause things. David Deutsch

Deutsch Explains

45,735 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

A season to remember. A season to learn. A domestic double and everything poured out in pursuit of the title, pushing until the very last breath, only to fall agonisingly short. Doing all of that in a transitional season is nothing short of extraordinary. It is a brilliant feat and one that deserves to be celebrated wholeheartedly. And to Pep Guardiola, wishing you nothing but the very best in everything that comes next. You are a once in a lifetime gaffer. You only come around once. Thank you for changing my club. Thank you for changing my life. I am forever and eternally grateful for every single moment of it.

A season to remember. A season to learn. A domestic double and everything poured out in pursuit of the title, pushing until the very last breath, only to fall agonisingly short. Doing all of that in a transitional season is nothing short of extraordinary. It is a brilliant feat and one that deserves to be celebrated wholeheartedly. And to Pep Guardiola, wishing you nothing but the very best in everything that comes next. You are a once in a lifetime gaffer. You only come around once. Thank you for changing my club. Thank you for changing my life. I am forever and eternally grateful for every single moment of it.

Geronimo Morgans

97,058 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

15% of the humans have Rh negative blood and scientists have no idea where it came from. What they do believe is that if you have that you may have been evolved from a different kind of species on this planet. Where did Rh negative evolve from? Some people speculate it could be linked to Alien Hybrid Breeding Program. Rh negative blood was only in Europe before the 15th century. It did not exist in the Americas, southern Africa or Asia until colonization spread it. This definitely challenges the 'Out of Africa' theory.

15% of the humans have Rh negative blood and scientists have no idea where it came from. What they do believe is that if you have that you may have been evolved from a different kind of species on this planet. Where did Rh negative evolve from? Some people speculate it could be linked to Alien Hybrid Breeding Program. Rh negative blood was only in Europe before the 15th century. It did not exist in the Americas, southern Africa or Asia until colonization spread it. This definitely challenges the 'Out of Africa' theory.

Interstellar

18,579 görüntüleme • 25 gün önce

We are a Church of all kinds of minds, and it was wonderful to recognise today at General Synod that our difference is a blessing. Neurodivergent experiences add to all of our experience, helping us to understand and reflect the glory of God. I shared my own experience of dyslexia and how I have been made in the image of God, called by name. Today we resolved to learn how to be a place where neurodivergent people can flourish, and where our welcome is for all.

We are a Church of all kinds of minds, and it was wonderful to recognise today at General Synod that our difference is a blessing. Neurodivergent experiences add to all of our experience, helping us to understand and reflect the glory of God. I shared my own experience of dyslexia and how I have been made in the image of God, called by name. Today we resolved to learn how to be a place where neurodivergent people can flourish, and where our welcome is for all.

Archbishop of Canterbury

11,925 görüntüleme • 6 gün önce

I know I’m a little late - was very busy today. But I’d be remiss if I didn’t say - To all of the moms out there fighting for your kids and everyone else’s, no matter what anyone says, you are the reason we exist, you are the ones changing the world, and you are the ones that will save it. Happy Mother’s Day, and thank you.

I know I’m a little late - was very busy today. But I’d be remiss if I didn’t say - To all of the moms out there fighting for your kids and everyone else’s, no matter what anyone says, you are the reason we exist, you are the ones changing the world, and you are the ones that will save it. Happy Mother’s Day, and thank you.

Del Bigtree

12,412 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

😵‍💫 Grusch: The U.S. Government is Aware of Non-Human, Corporeal-Bipedal, and...Sentient-Plasmoid Life 😬 Real America's Voice (RAV): "Can you confirm for us, how many species? Recent reports have said that there are perhaps four different alien species: Grays, Nordics How many species are you aware of?" David Grusch: "I certainly don't have the compendium. It's a continuum from corporeal-bipedal type life to, you know, what I would consider is like, sentient-plasmoid life. But there are there are several that the U.S. government is aware of."

😵‍💫 Grusch: The U.S. Government is Aware of Non-Human, Corporeal-Bipedal, and...Sentient-Plasmoid Life 😬 Real America's Voice (RAV): "Can you confirm for us, how many species? Recent reports have said that there are perhaps four different alien species: Grays, Nordics How many species are you aware of?" David Grusch: "I certainly don't have the compendium. It's a continuum from corporeal-bipedal type life to, you know, what I would consider is like, sentient-plasmoid life. But there are there are several that the U.S. government is aware of."

Joe Murgia

223,472 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

ELON MUSK: THERE SHOULD BE AT LEAST ATTEMPTED PROSECUTION OF THE WORST OFFENDERS "I think the public will be rightly frustrated if no one is prosecuted for the Epstein client list. No one at all. At least the top five or some number there should at least be an attempted prosecution of the worst offenders. Particularly if Ghislaine Maxwell is in jail for sex trafficking, that means sex trafficking occurred. So she’s in jail for it, but how do you put someone in jail and you don't even name the clients? That sounds kind of insane. It's stunning that they've been able to hold it back for so long When people say that people can't keep secrets, look at this. These things are common knowledge, but we don't actually have the proof The proof is there I mean, there’s lots of videos. Whenever they raided Epstein's place, there would have been a mountain of evidence. Where is that mountain? What’d you do with it? Who took possession of the evidence specifically? The individuals... where are the tapes?"

ELON MUSK: THERE SHOULD BE AT LEAST ATTEMPTED PROSECUTION OF THE WORST OFFENDERS "I think the public will be rightly frustrated if no one is prosecuted for the Epstein client list. No one at all. At least the top five or some number there should at least be an attempted prosecution of the worst offenders. Particularly if Ghislaine Maxwell is in jail for sex trafficking, that means sex trafficking occurred. So she’s in jail for it, but how do you put someone in jail and you don't even name the clients? That sounds kind of insane. It's stunning that they've been able to hold it back for so long When people say that people can't keep secrets, look at this. These things are common knowledge, but we don't actually have the proof The proof is there I mean, there’s lots of videos. Whenever they raided Epstein's place, there would have been a mountain of evidence. Where is that mountain? What’d you do with it? Who took possession of the evidence specifically? The individuals... where are the tapes?"

X Freeze

18,247 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce