I'm looking for a simple recipe that wont take long and that is also tasty. Something really healthy?
Question by Rocky Horror 10 years ago | last reply 10 years ago
Question by Rocky Horror 10 years ago | last reply 10 years ago
firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com.Dear Customer, Rocky Mountain Eleme BilNEW 2008/2009 l Bike world Ltd is one of the leading bike distributors.We are Legitimate registered Company under licensed number(RC43315).We ship via FedEx,UPS or DHL, and your ordered items will get to your door step within 48 hrs(Two Working Day).We sell all kinds Cannondale, Cervelo, Ellsworth, Giant, Jamis, Klein, Kona, Litespeed, Rocky Mountain, Santa Cruz, Specialized, Trek, Gary Fisher bikes Here are some of our price list: NEW Cervelo P2C Ultegra Bicycle - 2008-CRV8P2CU....$2000 NEW 2009 Cannondale Road Tandem Bike....... $1,600 NEW 2009 Cannondale F4000 SL Mountain Bike..... $2,400 NEW 2009 Cannondale Gemini 900 Mountain Bike..... $1,200 NEW 2009 Cannondale Mountain Tandem Bike..... $1,200 NEW 2009 Cannondale Prophet 4000 Mountain Bike..... $2,600 NEW 2009 Cannondale R1000 Road Bike..... $1,000 NEW 2009 Cannondale Scalpel 3000 Mountain Bike.... $2,600 NEW 2009 Cannondale Six13 Team 1 Dura Ace Road Bike..... $2,400 NEW 2009 Cervelo Soloist Carbon Road Bike..... $2,800 NEW 2009 Cervelo P3 Carbon Road Bike..... $3,200 NEW 2009 Cervelo Soloist Team Road Bike..... $1,900 NEW 2009 Ellsworth Epiphany Mountain Bike..... $3,000 NEW 2009 Ellsworth Moment Mountain Bike..... $3,400 NEW 2009 Ellsworth Truth Mountain Bike..... $2,800 NEW 2009 Gary Fisher Cake 1 DLX Mountain Bike..... $1,700 NEW 2009 Giant Anthem 1 Mountain Bike..... $1,200 NEW 2008 Santa Cruz Blur LT Mountain Bike $2,200 NEW 2008 Santa Cruz Nomad Mountain Bike $2,000 NEW 2008 Santa Cruz V 10 Mountain Bike $2,200 NEW 2008 Specialized Demo 8 Mountain Bike $2,000 NEW 2008 Specialized Enduro SL Pro Carbon Mountain Bike $2,100 NEW 2008 Specialized Epic Comp Mountain Bike $1,150 NEW 2008 Specialized Epic Marathon Mountain Bike $1,700 NEW 2008 Specialized Roubaix Pro Road Bike $1,700 NEW 2008 Specialized Ruby Pro Road Bike $1,700 NEW 2008 Specialized S-Works Stumpjumper Fsr Carbon Bike $2,300 NEW 2008 Specialized S-Works Tarmac SL Sram Road Bike $2,300 NEW 2008 Specialized S-Works Roubaix Dura Ace Road Bike $2,300 NEW 2008 Specialized Stumpjumper Comp Mountain Bike $1,000 NEW 2008 Specialized Tarmac Pro Double Road Bike $1,700 NEW 2008 Specialized Transition Pro Road Bike $1,700 NEW 2009 MARIN Juinper Trail Bike $900 NEW 2009 MARIN Wildcat Trail Bike $1,200 NEW 2009 MARIN Alpine Trail Bike $1,300 NEW 2009 MARIN East Peak Bikw $1,550 NEW 2009 MARIN Rock Springs Bike $1,300 NEW 2009 MARIN Rift Zone Bike $1,400 NEW 2009 MARIN Rift Zone SE Bike $ 1,300 NEW 2009 MARIN Wolf Ridge Bike $1,600 NEW 2009 MARIN Mount Vision Bike $1,800 NEW 2009 MARIN Attack Trail Bike $1,810 NEW 2009 MARIN Mount Vision Pro Bike $2,600 NEW 2009 Cannondale Road Tandem Bike $1,100 NEW 2009 Cannondale F4000 SL Mountain Bike $2,300 NEW 2009 Cannondale Gemini 900 Mountain Bike $1,100 NEW 2009 Cannondale Mountain Tandem Bike $1,100 NEW 2009 Cannondale Prophet 4000 Mountain Bike $2,500 NEW 2009 Cannondale R1000 Road Bike $1,000 NEW 2009 Cannondale Scalpel 3000 Mountain Bike $2,500 NEW 2009 Cannondale Six13 Team 1 Dura Ace Road Bike $2,300 NEW 2009 Klein Q-Pro XV Road Bike $1,200 NEW 2009 Kona Dawg Primo Mountain Bike $1,100 NEW 2009 Kona Kula Supreme Mountain Bike $1,800 NEW 2009 Kona Stinky Mountain Bike $1,000 NEW 2009 Kona Kula Lisa Mountain Bike $1,000 NEW 2009 Kona Four Lisa Mountain Bike $1000 NEW 2009 Kona Blast Deluxe - Gold - SRP $900 NEW 2009 Cervelo Soloist Carbon Road Bike $2,200 NEW 2009 Cervelo P3 Carbon Road Bike $2,200 NEW 2009 Cervelo Soloist Team Road Bike $1,100 NEW 2009 Ellsworth Epiphany Mountain Bike $2,400 NEW 2009 Ellsworth Moment Mountain Bike $2,500 NEW 2009 Ellsworth Truth Mountain Bike $2,100 NEW 2009 Gary Fisher Cake 1 DLX Mountain Bike $1,400 NEW 2009 Giant Anthem 1 Mountain Bike $1,100 NEW 2009 Giant Reign X0 Mountain Bike $1,700 NEW 2009 Giant Tcr Composite 1 Road Bike $1,400 NEW 2009 Giant Trance 1 Mountain Bike $1,100 NEW 2009 Jamis Dakar XC Pro Mountain Bike $1,800 NEW 2009 Litespeed Bella Road Bike $1,100 NEW 2009 Litespeed Ghisallo Road Bike $2,500 NEW 2009 Litespeed Niota Ti Mountain Bike $2,700 NEW 2009 Litespeed Tuscany Road Bike $1,700 NEW 2009 Rocky Mountain Element Team Mountain Bike $2,000 NEW 2009 Rocky Mountain Slayer 70 Mountain Bike $1,600 NEW 2009 Trek 5000 Road Bike $1,100 NEW 2009 Trek Pilot SL 5.9 Road Bike $1,800 NEW 2009 Trek Tandem T 2000 Road Bike $1,400 NEW 2009 Trek Madone SSL 6.9 Road Bike $2,800 NEW 2009 Trek Top Fuel SL Mountain Bike $2,800 Get back to me with your full order if you are really interested in buying from us via email regards,sales manager.
Topic by dessy 10 years ago
Hi guys, I'm building an adaptable rover system which should be designed to go over rocky/muddy terrain (just imagine the basic farm environment). As i am doing this for an A level project, can you help me decide whether tracks or normal wheels would be better? Thanks!
Topic by DELETED_ThunderVolt99 1 year ago | last reply 1 year ago
I am in the process of making a (hopefully) extremely durable walking staff... it is going to be used in very rocky and hilly terrain so I don't want it breaking on me. About where I put those parentheses earlier... should I have it as "a" or "an"? (random extra question brought on by wording or question)
Question by Kraethi 9 years ago | last reply 7 years ago
Question by Yerboogieman 10 years ago | last reply 10 years ago
Video with slides http://www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid231.phpmp3 audio only http://sic.conversationsnetwork.org/series/si-energy.htmlAmory Lovins runs the Rocky Mountain Institute, working on cars made from thermoplastic/carbon re-formable body panels among other projects.He's a charismatic motivational speaker on the subject of energy solutions. Listen to this stuff to get enthused again after you get burned out by hearing about what our idiocracy is doing to us and the world. It's a really it's nice to hear him saying that thetechnology solutions exist and all our dreams will come true once we switch tothem. And this crisis is just the thing to get us off the dumb old methods thatare only used from habit.
Topic by TimAnderson 11 years ago | last reply 9 years ago
Since I'm entering a new school for the 2010-2011 school year, ( which means 3 schools will combine into one) I thought I might lose weight. Me, a bit tubby at 92.5 pounds, (As of August 17, 2010) So I decided to run. Everyday, I do half a mile running, and half a mile walking. I started 3 days ago, and I've already seen improvement. I was 93.5 lbs after 1 run. After a bit of cool down, I do sit ups. I've got my MP3 player going (The Rocky Theme-ULTIMATE MOTIVATOR) as I run. Any tips? I don't do sports, and I try not to eat after 8:00. I've got running shoes and a appropriate outfit. I'd like to see what everybody can say to me. -NYPA
Topic by NYPA 8 years ago
From my inbox this afternoon: GEMINID METEOR SHOWER: This weekend, Earth will pass through a stream of debris from extinct comet 3200 Phaethon, source of the annual Geminid meteor shower. Forecasters expect more than 100 meteors per hour to fly out of the constellation Gemini when the shower peaks on Dec. 13th and 14th. For most observers, the best time to look will be from 10 pm local time on Sunday night to dawn on Monday morning. Visit http://spaceweather.com for photos, a sky map, and live audio from a meteor radar. Sounds like a chance to arrange a unique Christmas gift for a loved one. Update: I've done a bit more reading about the Geminids, and they may not be suitable for collection by magnets. It seems they are the rocky remains of a dead comet, so lack metallic iron. However, I have added a map so you can work out where to look.
Topic by Kiteman 9 years ago | last reply 9 years ago
From Science Magazine:A group of astronomers today announced the discovery of the least massive planet yet detected outside of our solar system. It is lightweight enough--between two and three times the mass of Earth--to almost certainly be rocky like Earth rather than a huge ball of gas. Although the planet orbits too close to its star to be habitable, a new analysis of one of its neighbors suggests a world with deep oceans.The observation of Gliese 581e, made with the usual radial-velocity residuals fit, is of a terrestrial-mass planet orbiting insanely close to a red dwarf star. Nevertheless, it marks a substantial improvement (a factor of three in mass) in the precision of the radial-velocity technique.Read the whole article (let me know if it's password protected) for details.Another news article (including a very nice diagram of the habitable zone as a function of the mass of Gliese 581) is available from Science News.
Topic by kelseymh 10 years ago | last reply 10 years ago
Check out the amazing Zelda: The Quilt of Power and Galaga Retro Arcade Quilt from Carolina Patchworks.I've had the Zelda tune running through my head for weeks now. Now up on Etsy.The Legend of Zelda may have introduced an entire generation to the joy of colorful worlds of monsters and heroes filled with melodies of bleeps and bloops, all contained in a little plastic box connected with wires to the TV.Bosses and Triforces, dungeons and new swords, secret doors and endless maps; these inspired fear and joy beyond anything a 256x224 set of pixels wavering on an ancient CRT had any right to do. Return to that world by way of a 64-by-64 grid of pixels emblazoned in all their low-resolution glory across a 100% cotton quilt. Octorok and Leever threaten Link amidst the rocky Overworld's bushes and water, as a Darknut patrols in his Underworld dungeon.- Approximately 64" square.- Made from 100% cotton fabric and batting.- Machine wash cold, tumble dry low.- Pieced and quilted by machine in smoke-free, pet-free, and geek-friendly home.via Evil Mad Scientist.
Topic by ewilhelm 11 years ago | last reply 8 years ago
Say hello to Mr.T. He is old, simple, and there is really nothing special about him. However, Mr.T is a sneaky little feller. He likes putting on clever disguises like iron sights and stocks and even removable magazines to make people think that he is special. But he isn't. He's been around for years now, and for some reason, can't accept that his time is done. As a community, we are going to get rid of Mr.T. I hope you found that funny, but more importantly, I hope that you took it seriously. No, I am not talking about the guy who played Clubber Lang in the third rocky. I am talking about the K'nex gun that has been built and posted thousands of times, and makes the rest of the Instructables community hate K'nex gun builders. At this point, pretty much any search done on this site will result in at least one K'nex gun. What is worse? They are all the same. The "T" format is the most simple, most redundant approach to building a K'nex aside from the now heavily discriminated block trigger guns. They involve three things: 1. A vertical magazine 2. A firing ram 3. A trigger Any gun that requires only these three components to operate is, in my opinion, pointless. Despite cosmetic features such as stocks and iron sights, all "T" format guns are exactly the same. Yes, they do work, and some of them even work very well, but at this point, improvement will only occur with change, not with repetition. Compared to a few years ago, this K'nex community is dwindling on the edge of a cliff. Many people have lost interest because nothing new was being made, so they just quit. I do not support this decision, but I cannot blame them either. Like many of the other "veterans" on this site, I have been on and off, but have never officially quit. Sometimes one just needs to think. Hopefully by now, I have made it clear: not another Mr.T should be posted ever again. They are great guns for those learning the ropes. That is about it. There are so many other options out there. Horizontal magazines, pump systems, lever systems, bolt systems, and so many more. Make up your own system! Combine different systems! There are millions, maybe billions of different ways to put a thousand K'nex together, so why limit yourself. You are all builders, which means that you see things in your head before you make it. But sometimes these ideas come to us in inopportune times, so what do you do? Write it down. Even if your drawing skills are as pathetic as mine, just scribble it out so you can make sense of it, and then refine it later with a ruler. Then get to work on it. So, here are the steps you can take to advance this community: 1. Stop posting Mr.T!!! He can be a good teacher, but that is about all. 2. Be different! My goal when I entered this community was to make guns that nobody has ever made. No two of my guns are similar, nor are my guns like any others out there. You have millions of options. Make use of them! 3. If you have an idea, write it down! Even if it seems absurd, I guarantee that it, even if it only be small parts of it, will improve your building skill. I really hope this has made you want to make something different. Not much more I can say. Just go do it. Oblivitus and TheDunkis have started building a database of different gun elements and different ways of approaching them. Check it out and feel free to contribute! http://knexbuilding.wikispaces.com/
Topic by Kinetic 7 years ago | last reply 7 years ago
In our recent update, one of the major changes is the removal of ratings and emphasis on favorites. Key points: We did this because most people rate either 1 star or 5 stars The ratings ended up extremely close to one another and became meaningless Our experience with a +/- system showed that having a down vote made for a toxic experience for everyone We're now just using the favorite button now to simplify and keep it a positive experience for all Read on for more details. We've had a rocky relationship with ratings. When we started Instructables in 2005, we had a "+/-" rating system where members could express either an up or a down vote for an Instructable. Good Instructables generally received lots of "+" votes, and the list of the most negatively voted Instructables was pretty amusing (with this taking the bottom position for quite some time). Our experience with this system was two-fold: first, negative ratings really didn't add much value to the community and were often given in a mean-spirited way rather than in a spirit of constructive criticism; second, the community expressed an interest in giving a more nuanced rating to an Instructable. In fact, for a while members would comment on a project and assign it a letter grade from A to F. So, we implemented a 5-star rating system. An Instructable's rating was calculated by the average of all of its ratings. This method is fine when there were lots of ratings, but gives poor results when there are few. For example, if the first two raters of a newly published Instructable both rated it 1 star (for whatever reason), that Instructable would appear to be terrible by its rating, and its rating would only improve as more people decided to give it a chance and perhaps rate it. It is an awful experience for new authors to watch their work be initially down rated and then maybe improve over several days. To address this, we built a Bayesian rating system with 5 stars. The objective was to push the rating of an Instructable towards the average rating of all Instructables when it had few raters. As more people rated it, the rating could diverge further and further from the average. We spent quite some time optimizing this system: we built messages helping people understand what 1 star meant vs. 5 stars; we made it so the first couple dozen ratings of a new member had lower weight than later ratings (so it was difficult to change an Instructable's rating by rating it with lots of newly created accounts); and we tweaked all of the underlying knobs and ratios. When everything had settled, a newly published Instructable would have a rating around 3, a very good Instructable could get to around 4, and an extremely popular and highly rated Instructable approached 4.8 or 4.9. It seemed like the system was working, and it gave a quantitative measure of the quality of an Instructable in relation to other Instructables. However, it was ultimately deeply dissatisfying. After all this work, and lots of input from the community through ratings, thousands of Instructables were all rated pretty much the same, with only slight differences in the rating's third digit. The slight variations were most likely noise, and the ranking didn't give a definitive sense of quality to a new visitor nor a sense of accomplishment to an author. What does it mean to say Sweet Potato Fries is rated 4.22 compared to Arduino-Controlled Robotic Drum at 4.23? Is the rating going to help you decide which Instructable you might try your hand at? Further, when we looked at how people actually rated, it turned out that ratings were heavily skewed towards 1 star or 5 stars. Even after requesting more nuanced ratings, and despite how we described what various star levels meant, people were still only giving As or Fs -- either they liked the Instructable or they didn't. This system probably would have been ok if not for two factors: star ratings appearing in Google searches and the rise of the "Like" button. If you search for "sweet potato fries" on Google you'll likely get a couple of recipes including one from Instructables. Many first time visitors to Instructables find us through searches -- many of them food-related -- so it's very important how our content appears in search results. A while back, Google started including star ratings in some of the search results, primarily recipes. Many recipe sites have 5-star rating systems, so I guess the presumption was that including the ratings might help searchers better choose between results. Unfortunately, this doesn't work because you cannot compare the ratings of one site to the ratings of another. For example, many of the results for a "sweet potato fries" search have 5-star ratings using a basic average system (you can easily tell by the number of raters), while the result from Instructables might have more raters giving it 5-stars, but because of our Bayesian system, the overall rating might only be 4 stars. On Instructables, 4 stars represents a very good project, while on another site, everything -- even garbage -- might be rated 5. All of our work to create a meaningful rating system was being used to penalize us in search results -- why would a searcher click through to a 4-star sweet potato fries recipe when they could go to a 5-star recipe? We couldn't tell how many people were choosing not to visit Instructables because our projects had lower star ratings, but we needed to do something. I'm not proud to admit this, but our solution was to inflate all of our ratings by a full star. Instructables rated 4.9 were suddenly joined by Instructables previously rated 3.9. The ratings became even more meaningless because lots of Instructables were now all rated 4.5 or greater. At this same time, Facebook's "Like" button was gaining momentum. The "Like" button is a pretty nice concept as it eliminates the ability to express a negative preference and it associates an individual with the rating. I think it's more meaningful to know that 10 people like my Instructable than it is to have a 4.5 (or whatever) rating, even if that rating is the result of 10 people giving me 5 stars. Not everyone on Instructables uses Facebook, nor do we want to outsource our rating system to Facebook, but we wanted to learn from the success of the "Like" button and expand upon the concept to make our rating system less like giving a grade or being graded. To accomplish this, we've removed our ratings and made the "favorite" action the way to express a preference on an Instructable. Marking something as a favorite is more of a commitment than saying you like it or giving it a rating, but this is a distinction I see as important and worth developing. At Instructables, we hope to inspire you to take action and build something great which requires a greater commitment than simply liking something. In the future, we plan to expand what you can do with favorites, exploring concepts such as "I made it" and "I want to make it" among others. Do we need something more akin to a like button in addition to favorites? I'm not sure, and I'd love your feedback. We'll be closely watching how people use favorites in its new, highly prominent position. As with most things, this is an experiment, and we're collecting data to see if this change is something that helps our authors. I hope you've enjoyed seeing a little bit under the hood about our rating system! Let us know what you think.
Topic by ewilhelm 6 years ago | last reply 5 years ago
On this day, a Baptist minister from Atlanta Georgia stood up in front of a quarter of a million people, and said this: I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of captivity. But 100 years later, we must face the tragic fact that the Negro is still not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languishing in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land.And so we've come here today to dramatize an appalling condition. In a sense we've come to our nation's capital to cash a cheque. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men would be guaranteed the inalienable rights of "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness."It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of colour are concerned. Instead of honouring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad cheque which has come back marked "insufficient funds." But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. So we've come to cash this cheque - a cheque that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice. We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God's children.It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. 1963 is not an end, but a beginning. Those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual.There will be neither rest nor tranquillity in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.But there is something that I must say to my people, who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice: in the process of gaining our rightful place we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force.The marvellous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. They have come to realise that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom. We cannot walk alone. And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall march ahead. We cannot turn back. There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights: "When will you be satisfied?" We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as the Negro's basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their selfhood and robbed of their dignity by signs stating "For Whites Only". We cannot be satisfied and we will not be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells. Some of you have come from areas where your quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive.Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed.Let us not wallow in the valley of despair. I say to you today, my friends, that in spite of the difficulties and frustrations of the moment, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream. I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed - we hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal.I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave-owners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood.I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a desert state, sweltering with the heat of injustice and oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character.I have a dream today!I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification; one day right there in Alabama little black boys and little black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.I have a dream today!I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together.This is our hope. This is the faith that I will go back to the South with. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope.With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.This will be the day, this will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with a new meaning: "My country, 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing. Land where my fathers died, land of the pilgrim's pride, from every mountainside, let freedom ring." And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true.And so let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire.Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York.Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania!Let freedom ring from the snow-capped Rockies of Colorado.Let freedom ring from the curvaceous peaks of California.But not only that.Let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia.Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee.Let freedom ring from every hill and every molehill of Mississippi, from every mountainside, let freedom ring!And when this happens, when we allow freedom to ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual: "Free at last! Free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"
Topic by Kiteman 10 years ago | last reply 10 years ago
If we look up then seeing the moon is the most normal thing to us there is in the sky.But did you ever wonder how it actually got there? ;)Theories are out there by the lot, including those from real scientists.One of the most common is that it all started by catching the thing and that all was perfect at the time.Over time the orbit then stabilized.Other theories include that formed when our planet formed..What they all lack is what is common and true for all other moond out there: These rotate.According to science an object the size of our moon would need to rotate to maintain a stable orbit.No one told this to our moon, so it just stays in a stable orbit anyway.The only other accepted theory, that funny enough never mentioned OUR moon, is that the center of mass must be facing the orbiting planet.Now theories can run and wild if you let schientifically people loose on a subject.Official NASA data obtained by monitoring equippment on the moon supports the theory of the center of gravity.You see, sesmometers recorded "moon quakes" but also the impact of burnt rocket stages - the later were dropped on purpose.At first everyone agreed the equippment must be faulty but going through it again and again confirmed all works fine.So what got them so exited that was never officially made public?You see, every thing with suffient mass will create a sesmic shock on impact.On earth we can located the source of an earthquake or even explosion quite accurately.Same happened on the moon only with one difference to earth.Every impact caused a ringing effect.Like a bell, the soundwaves and shockwaves traveled through the moon for very long times.An early explanation was that the moon is made from really hard rock or that it might even have a metal core.This was rendered useless once the actual mass was calculated and it turned out the moon would rip us apart while spinning around us.The term "hollow moon" was born.Another interesting thing happens when you try to track down what equippment was left on the moon during which specific mission.Everything up there must have been installed at some stage.For some things though it seems there is no record when or where exactly something was left up there.Then there is the thing with the interviews...If you check the fuzz about the first moon landing then back then you couldn't help yourself but got exited as well.None of the three astronauts however appeared to be at least a little bit exited about going where no man has gone before.Somehow like visiting Iceland for the first time only to realise someone was there before you already.But it was the moon, not some easy to reach island...And while up there we did not see any exitement either, like fully staged and planned ahead.Like a not so 100% school rehersal.Claims that it was a fake and actually filmed in some studio have been verified to be false - they really were up there.After they came back two went silent and refused any interviews about the moon.All three though never spoke about anything we did not see on "live TV"...All the missing segments, the drop outs, the silence during communications...The money...Apart from the Pentagon making a disappearing act of 6Billion US, the already planned and staged moon missions were cancelled with no valid reason at all.One mission already ready to go to the launch pad, crew fully trained and briefed.Two more ready for final assembly.Official reason back then was "We have been there, it is time to explore new things."Almost the same statement was made by Obama a few weeks after he claimed "We will go up there again!".If you take away the costs for the abandoned missions then the money blown up to the moon has a huge difference to what can be tracked back.The lost sum equals out to about 8 more moon missions plus tons of state of the art equippment (back at the time it was state of the art).If you add what the Pentagon lost we are close to 15 more missions.The now...A few years back a lot of previously declared top secret documents have been released to the public.What was a good idea however turned out to be a bit too much.Quite a few documents were included that provide missing links to "incidents, missions, money spent"...Within these piles were documents indicating that space missions of the same extend as the much later moon missions were made.Same rockets, similar crafts, same requirements for water, food and oxygen, some though with just payloads of oxygen and water.Mind you though the documents speak from proposed options and not planned missions.And none of them had any exploration within it, just deliveries if you don't mind the comparison.Those documents about the ringing of the moon and how this would impact on the things we assumed to know about the moon were in there as well.What is really interesting though is what came back from the moon.None of it actually indicate that there is suffient ressources up there to justify mining.Funny enough exactly is planned on a military style.Seems fair enough considering the military can provide the best people for such a hard job.Some normal miner might have no problems getting under ground every day but knowing he is on the moon and might never make it back is another.With all the probing done that we know of you would assume the planned mining operations would be in an area rich in minerals, metals or at least something to generate fuel or oxygen.But no, it is planned to happen "on the dark side" and in an area that appearently was never explored in other ways then taking a few blurry pics while flying around the moon.However, both Russia and China claim to have been very close to this area long before details about the mining became public.And that brings us back to the past and what astromauts stated or to be precise refused to confirm or deny.In some videos we can see movements in the background.In several adio stream we hear the comments to what happens in the videos.If there is light moving around then it does not matter that is blue.You just wonder what it is and where it might have come from.Imagine the surprise if then in other videos you hear things like that the lights are back or that steam comes out of the moon like a gysir.There were official explanations for the first sightings made by the normal people when watching those videos on the NASA websites.Soon after the videos disappeared from the servers.Copies were made by the curious and quite a few videos were identified later to have contained "sightings" as well.Some even show what appears to flying machines with great manouverbilities.And if you take the high point of the happenings then it is also the same time when it was decided that we actually have no real interest in the moon.Astromauts later denied to have ever made any comments like that they are being followed or "escorted" by another craft.And the same Astromauts many years later still refuse to deny or confirm that what we could see and hear during their mission videos actually happened.Don't get me wrong but if the deny it then it just means we all saw some refections or such things.If the confirm it then we know something was out there with them.Doing neither usually means what we saw is ture enough to deny any knowledge about more details.Why then the sudden interest?Trump wants to get up there, military mining, private companies not to forget China.If there is nothing at all up there then why would they all spent money that could provide a much better living for those with low incomes?Even if it would be just for new schools and hospitals the money would be better spent if we trust the official claims about what is up there.The not so official claims....We already know NASA does not want to come with an official explanation why the moon sounds and reacts as if it would be hollow.Same for any video, audio or picture evidence indication there is sturctures on the moon or activities.Here is some of things that other people of great knowledge and with nice degrees under the belt say could, might or even is true about the moon.1. We have no evidence that the moon was always there, only what we have in record throughout history.Some claim the moon would be an artificially created structure.Indications of techonlogically highly advanced civilisations before us are there.And mining out a tiny planet and placing it in earths orbit is not far fetched if you consider higher technology levels than what we currently (officially) have.2. The satellite claim.Like the Death Star our moon could be an artifical satellite placed there for a purpose.What speaks for that theory is the impact craters on the moon.If it was never spinning or better rotating around all axis then a lot them would have been impossible.A crater always shows to some extend the direction of the impact.And on the moon they all apear to be direct and straight hits only.And even at some proper angle that against physics did not create a corresponding crater: Our plant would have been in the way.Officially it is claimed though that there would not be much of a directional crater because of the missing atmosphere and all debris settling evenly.Debris however does not explain the deformation from an impact at an angle.The satellite claim would also explain the missing depth in the craters.By the size of the bigger ones the crater should be much deeper and as said show some direction.If however the rocky surface landed there over time or is just the remaining natural hull then the craters could no go deeper.No advanced civilisation would design a stationary satellite that get a hole as soon as some big space rock hits it...3. Undocumented missions.If claims are true then we have been up there a lot more times than what our history lessons tell us.Tiny probes to analyse things, send data and so on are a thing not the the USA did.If you explain the reason for collecting seismic data by wanting to document an impact of an astroid then it is a joke.Sure it would be possible but what could we learn from the data?Nothing unless you consider that in some unoffial missions drilling was attempted on the moon.Sample collection to evaluate what is in the ground of use for future missions.Some documents now claim that all these attempts ended prematurely.Drills failed or broke, drill heads failed to go deeper and upon inspection were totally worn out.And all seemed to have happend at around the same depth.Although there is no atmosphere on the moon - if you stand on it you would be able to feel vibrations of the surface.Something astronauts would have felt during the drilling.And you can feel the difference between a vibration ending by stoping the drill and one that keeps going for a long time after...The dark side is visible in quite a few school books.Looks like the front with the brightness corrected just with different craters.Ever bothered to scan these pictures in and use some software to find matches to craters on the front of the moon ? ;)Anyways, those images show us the moon as near perfect sphere.What they don't show is how the images were actually made.They certainly did not use massive search lights from orbit to provide light for cameras.Means other sources were used, like IR, Radar, Microwaves and so on.Like we found the ruins of old civilisations by using satellites that can "see" through the forest and soil.And with that it would certainly be impossible to create such a nice and detailed image like we get from the front side.If some is edited, then why not all of it...And if all those missions we don't really know about also landed on the dark side it would explain a lot of things.All sightings seem to have disappeared to the dark side.And all leaked informations about previous missions before our first landing idicate the interest in the dark side was actually huge.They all ended though with one mission report claiming to have spotted lights on the dark side.Moving and stationary and when trying to get a better look by adjusting the orbit for the next round those lights were all gone.But audio recording indicate that from that moment on the astronauts were no longer alone and followed until turning back to earth.Several attempts seem to have been made to land near sightings on the dark side.Those where the astronauts returned home the never were the same again.Documents claim long treatment in mental facilites or suicide.The official missions appearntly started with the backstory of exploring.Some now claim it was attempt for a peaceful presence that still was not tolerated.4. Stories from involved companies.Even if NASA builds a craft themself they still need the corresponding supplies.And for a lot of things they are made outside by independent companies and contractors.Trying to track down early space mission again seems to confirm all claims about previous missions.The amount of materials provided would otherwise mean NASA actually crashed the majority of things right after take off without anyone noticing.5. Launches...So far all claims about previous moon missions or just secret ones were denied.I call this "plausible deniability".In all statements it is refered to the official launch sites.Things like being in public view and so on.What is not that commonly known is that there were a lot of capable launch sites available.After all big rockets have been tested in secrecy since we had the first.The claimed landing of the chinese started a big conundrum.At first the US claimed it never happened because there was no rocket that went up.Images prived by the chinese however clearly indicated the opposite.Not much later it was noticed that a few launches might have been misinterpreted as missle tests....What does that really mean?Quite simple: The surveillance is not perfect if the other side insists that it happened.The plausible deniablity is gone.If the US was "forced" to confrim they actually noticed the launches then it also means the chinese claims about the US doing the same could be true as well.And wasn't it a very important thing during the cold war to know when, where and why the other side launched anything?The silent agreement not to go up there again was broken many times...And although most if not all of these mission ended in orbit only it makes you wonder.What would be big deal even if all claims and conspiracies would be true?A hollow moon would defy what we know about how the universe works.With that it would also contradict some of solid laws of physics.So we need(ed) proof.Assuming we had that for a long time already then it leaves the big question of why it is hollow.Natural or artificial.Nothing natural would make sense so we investigate further.And if people still claim that they can use their little equippment to every now and then hear transmissions from the moon...Sure some things up there transmit data all the time but they do so on common frequencies and not in a range that is and never was used for long distance communications.The interest in the mon came back with our modern technology.We have watches with more computer power than what was used for the old moon missions.Materials and manufacturing methods that provide much safe crafts and space suits with a fraction of the weight of old designs.And we have new means of taking more or less limited energy up with us...We are prepared so to say.No matter what really is up there, no matter if it natural or artificial, just the fact that the moon is hollow changes our views on a lot of things....What do you think would be the best explanation for the data showing the moon rings like a bell?
Topic by Downunder35m 8 weeks ago | last reply 24 days ago