When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
A county supervisor in Virginia has been accused of dozens of counts of voter fraud in a case in which prosecutors allege he showed up at the homes of voters, with absentee ballot applications and ballots, to ensure he would have their vote.
According to WJHL a grand jury indicted Knox District Supervisor for Buchanan County Trey Adkins on 82 felony charges.
Those charges include 34 counts of false statement – election fraud, 11 counts of absentee voting procedure violations, 11 counts of forgery of a public record, 3 counts of conspiracy to make a false statement – election fraud, and more.
WND reported that Sherry Lynn Bailey was also indicted, who is Adkins’ aunt, and allegedly took part in the scheme too. Bailey is facing multiple counts of false statement – election fraud, conspiracy and forgery of a public record.
Adkins was under investigation by Virginia State Police for over two years. Authorities said they would have little further to release before a trial.
Do you know where I do see that? Social media. The problem is these companies control the narrative on their sites, while claiming not to be publishers and avoided any ramifications for what they publish.
TV news, newspaper, and the others on your list can be held liable for what they publish.
And with Zuckerberg's recent admission that they did censoring because of an inquiry from the FBI - now the Social Media companies are acting on government's behalf without any documentation or process. it's really just 1984, but anyone that says otherwise is asleep or woke or NPC.
If science stopped changing, then it would just be religion.
Laugh now....scientists are in a tizzy about the data coming back from the Webb telescope are throwing the Big Bang into question. And there's a a growing group of scientists that are saying that if you "do the math", there's no way Darwin and his natural selection was right. Before being able to map genomes, this could never have been known.
Now I'm not saying the earth was made 8,000 years ago or anything like that, but science sure hates it when you make an assumption into a "Law."
Laugh now....scientists are in a tizzy about the data coming back from the Webb telescope are throwing the Big Bang into question.
This is a good thing. It means that they have open minds.
Originally Posted by cordycord
And there's a a growing group of scientists that are saying that if you "do the math", there's no way Darwin and his natural selection was right. Before being able to map genomes, this could never have been known.
I haven't read this, but if it's true, then again, evidence that they are open to new ideas.
Originally Posted by cordycord
Now I'm not saying the earth was made 8,000 years ago or anything like that, but science sure hates it when you make an assumption into a "Law."
The Ken Ham quote wasn't just something I found on the web, incidentally. He personally said this to me in October, 2019. I'd driven down to Kentucky to meet up with my sister and the crew who were on an RV trip. First day was Mammoth Cave, which was awesome.
She failed to inform me that Day 2 was The Ark Encounter, and Day 3 was the Creation Museum.
(She's on a mission to save my lost soul.)
The hardest part was, when my niece and I were talking about some crystal formations we'd seen in one of the caves, I said "over hundreds of thousands of years..." and my sister chimed in "Or, over thousands of years..."
Despite the fact that we had, just hours earlier, seen stalactite formations whose rate of growth does not need to be speculated about, it has been measured with physical instruments over the past 150 years. And there is no way that those formations are less than 300,000 years old based on those measurements. But she is committed to believing that the Earth is 6,000 years old, and passing that belief on to my niece.
And I'm committed to maintaining a nice, nonconfrontational family relationship. Been that way for about the past 15 years, since I recognized the futility of arguing with them. They still keep trying.
People who are strongly invested in a certain narrative will invent facts, or invent doubt, to contort evidence to make it possible for it to maybe support their story.
This is the same whether we are speaking of religion or of politics.
Anyway, photos...
Here I am (at the left) standing in front of an Ark which, amusingly, was damaged by flooding resulting in a rather large insurance claim:
A photo I took inside, which proves that incest is OK so long as God commanded it:
Proof that dinosaurs were aboard Noah's ark:
Noah conserved resources by carrying only juvenile dinosaurs.
And another photo from an exhibit which uses the fact that evolution takes place before our eyes every day is proof that evolution does not exist:
And, finally, my niece and her dog, the testes of which spent an uncomfortable amount of time bumping against the back of my head as I was riding shotgun in the RV as navigator and he insisted on standing just atop the jumpseat above and behind me:
This is a good thing. It means that they have open minds.
I haven't read this, but if it's true, then again, evidence that they are open to new ideas.
And, finally, my niece and her dog, the testes of which spent an uncomfortable amount of time bumping against the back of my head as I was riding shotgun in the RV as navigator and he insisted on standing just atop the jumpseat above and behind me:
The scientist dishing dirt on the Webb telescope said there's a sort of "Climate Science" club arranged around the "Big Bang", and if you're a skeptic you simply don't get the grant money. Same with evolution. Same with AGW.
I don't feel qualified to comment on your family or your lost soul, and I'm not sure if it would have been nicer if they had tried, or not. As for the trip, at least you got lucky.
The scientist dishing dirt on the Webb telescope said there's a sort of "Climate Science" club arranged around the "Big Bang", and if you're a skeptic you simply don't get the grant money. Same with evolution. Same with AGW.
The fact that this is happening, and yet nobody is comparing anybody to Hitler, is proof that reason and sanity still exist.
At least, in some fields.
(It's sad that the burden of proof has sunk this low.)
Originally Posted by cordycord
I don't feel qualified to comment on your family or your lost soul, and I'm not sure if it would have been nicer if they had tried, or not. As for the trip, at least you got lucky.
I think the dog got lucky. Not sure if I feel the same...
Nothing to say about any of the creationist / apologist nonsense above?
The fact that this is happening, and yet nobody is comparing anybody to Hitler, is proof that reason and sanity still exist.
At least, in some fields.
(It's sad that the burden of proof has sunk this low.)
I think the dog got lucky. Not sure if I feel the same...
Nothing to say about any of the creationist / apologist nonsense above?
Preventing actual science from happening because it might affect your grant money--or make you look foolish--just might be considered more subversive than "Hitler." Literally trillions of dollars are spent on this nonsense yearly. Child labor--slaves really--are mining lithium every day. All based on "science."
After seeing the ****-show that "science" made of Covid, I'm not sure that all the branches aren't similarly rotten.
Laugh now....scientists are in a tizzy about the data coming back from the Webb telescope are throwing the Big Bang into question. And there's a a growing group of scientists that are saying that if you "do the math", there's no way Darwin and his natural selection was right. Before being able to map genomes, this could never have been known.
Now I'm not saying the earth was made 8,000 years ago or anything like that, but science sure hates it when you make an assumption into a "Law."
I recall a good quote from a movie that may or may not be real "Life finds a way". Evolution probably happens in 'fast' spurts in response to environment changing drastically in sort periods of time. Like climate change. People that live in high elevations in Nepal are for example physically different from people at sea level for instance. We can have huge variation within species, and when an external forcing mechanism presents the strong survive.
Originally Posted by Joe Perez
Here I am (at the left) standing in front of an Ark which, amusingly, was damaged by flooding resulting in a rather large insurance claim:
(ark.jpg)
I'd like to see that just for the impressive feat it took to construct.
re: God stuff, its just spin. People either believe that stuff in the bible has a basis in truth or does not. Lot of people in the middle that believe, but also accept that the earth is not 6k years old.
Originally Posted by cordycord
After seeing the ****-show that "science" made of Covid, I'm not sure that all the branches aren't similarly rotten.
The Spin on covid is a perfect example. Instead of a magic sky man it was the even fuzzier concept of 'the science.' I saw this with 'climate change' when for a year or so in 2009-2010 when cap and trade on carbon was being seriously considered that the 'science' on anthropogenic forcing on global warming is...terrible. Like, the error bars on the proxies for historical temperature record are 5x what is supposedly catastrophic for the world terrible. We have actual history to prove this is not true, since we are still here and all. Like, can't even measured temps today that well terrible. Like, data, from satellites specifically launched and built to do this exact job have not returned expected results and are ignored in models bad. Like, IPCC commissioned 'science' is not peer reviewed bad.
So covid was disappointing but not unexpected for me. They convinced at least half the country for a minute, some very smart technical people in their fields too, that cloth masks will stop the movement of aerosol vector illness.
Speaking of smart people being fooled: an example. All the administrators and people being interviewed are MAKSED UP FOR SAFTEY! even outside. Yet (most of) the guys doing the actual work IN AND AROUND THE CLEAN ROOM are not. Because they are the ones that know how particles and filtration work because its part of their JOB. This is NASA, where we are supposed to have some of the best and brightest.
Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread
“Its the worst pandemic ever save us help help help!”
Ok here’s some medication, Hydroxychloroquine, which works to inhibit virus replication and to interfere with SARS-CoV2 receptor (ACE2). Hydroxychloroquine impedes lysosomal activity and autophagy.
“Noooooo its not approved!! You're spreading misinformation. You need to take Fauci's mRNA garbage with a EUA ( which requires no other treatments on the market ) so we can get rich"
Were they? Or were they complicit? We even had a mt.net rocket man once here that was a double masker and boosted* and still risked his life going to social get togethers. Where have all those guys gone? I'd be willing to bet they are still masking up and boosting because covid is still out there killing everyone! I mean, why else would they still have TV and radio ads telling you to get covid vaccines?
boosted*= by vaccines of course. I have no idea how much boost their cars make but am sure their bodies make ALL OF IT!
MARGARET BRENNAN: And you write, the six feet was arbitrary?
DR. GOTTLIEB: The six feet was arbitrary in and of itself. But if the administration had focused in on that, they might have been able to effect a policy that would have actually achieved their outcome. But that policy making process didn't exist, and the six feet is a perfect example of sort of the lack of rigor around how CDC made recommendations. Nobody knows where it came from. Most people assume that the six feet of distance, the recommendation for keeping six feet apart, comes out of some old studies related to flu, where droplets don't travel more than six feet. We now know COVID spreads through aerosols. We've known that for a while, so how operative is that? The initial recommendation that the CDC brought to the White House, and I talk about this, was 10 feet. And a political appointee in the White House said, we can't recommend 10 feet. Nobody can measure 10 feet. It's inoperable. Society will shut down. So the compromise was around six feet. Now imagine if that detail had leaked out. Everyone would have said, this is the White House politically interfering with the CDC's judgment. The CDC said 10 feet, it should be 10 feet, but 10 feet was no more right than six feet and ultimately became three feet. But when it became three feet, the basis for the CDC's decision to ultimately revise it from six to three feet was a study that they conducted the prior fall. So they changed it in the spring. They had done a study in the fall where they showed that if you have two masked individuals, two people wearing masks, the risk of transmission is reduced 70 percent with masks if you're three feet apart. So they said on the basis of that, we can now make a judgment at three feet is an appropriate distance. Which begs the question, if they had that study result in the fall, why didn't they change the advice in the fall? Why did they wait until the spring? So the whole--
Remember when the WHO had to release guidance on proper test cycles for testing covid, then sudden positive cases plummeted, just as Joe Biden took office?
Remember when science changed the day after Trump lost the election and suddenly a bunch of companies had the same shitty drug ready to make money off of?
08-29-2022, 08:30 AM
0
