stock here: The views and the thumbs up are so small, spread the word!

stock here: Steve Kirsch, a Hero, a Pitbull that won’t let this go.

Here is the study, again

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2607/12/7/1343

Slay, is doing good work

Study Exposes Massive Life Expectancy Plunge for Covid-Vaxxed

stock here, this study was quoted in several stories, but no one linked back to the study, although 1 named the study. I found the study, LOL, using AI. here is the study. I will also download it, as this could easily get censored.

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2607/12/7/1343

The other articles did interpret the results correctly, I was apprehensive and cautious. Bottom line: If you got 2 COVID Vaccines, your life expectancy is cut by 37%, so if you had 20 more years of life left, you gave up, on average 7.4 years. And that says nothing of the quality of those remaining years. See the deep blue highlight below.

HR means Hazard Ratio, I made this table to make it clear. Getting Jabbed is more dangerous than having diabetes or Cardio Vascular Disease. It’s not quite as bad as having Kidney Disease.

This is table 4 from the study, seriously, open the study and peruse it yourself.

I don’t want to confound my own work, but this…..

table 5 from the study is here, its for three covid vaccines, I will send table 4, 2 shots, in the next box, i dont understand why the RMTL for unvaccinated drop from 7.4 to 4.6 can you explain what that really means, so wait for the next post
ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT

In this table (Table 5), the Restricted Mean Time Lost (RMTL) measures the average time “lost” in terms of survival compared to a hypothetical perfect survival time within the study period.

Here’s a breakdown of what’s happening:

RMST (Restricted Mean Survival Time):
    The vaccinated group with three doses has an RMST of 573.7 days, while the unvaccinated group has an RMST of 574 days.
    This small difference (−0.8 days) suggests that, on average, the three-dose vaccinated group lived slightly less time than the unvaccinated group within the study’s observation window (579 days).

RMTL (Restricted Mean Time Lost):
    For the three-dose vaccinated group, the RMTL is 5.3 days, meaning this group "lost" 5.3 days on average in terms of survival during the study period.
    For the unvaccinated group, the RMTL is 4.6 days, meaning they "lost" 4.6 days on average in terms of survival.

Key Difference:

The unvaccinated group has a lower RMTL (4.6 days) compared to the vaccinated group (5.3 days), implying that the unvaccinated group lost less time on average in this study.
The RMTL ratio of 1.17 means that the three-dose vaccinated group lost 17% more survival time compared to the unvaccinated group.

Why the drop from 7.4 to 4.6?

The RMTL drop you’re referring to, from 7.4 in a different table (which likely represents two doses) to 4.6 for the unvaccinated in this table (three doses), could be attributed to different population characteristics or study parameters between these two dose comparisons. In other words:

When considering only two doses, the unvaccinated group might have had a higher average time lost (RMTL = 7.4), potentially due to different health factors or exposures.
When the analysis shifts to a three-dose comparison (Table 5), the unvaccinated group sees a lower time lost (RMTL = 4.6), suggesting that the time lost for unvaccinated individuals appears smaller in this context.

The reasons for this drop would depend on study-specific factors such as population health characteristics, pandemic waves, or statistical adjustments made in the analysis. It reflects how these metrics can change based on different vaccination status comparisons. The next post you mentioned might clarify more as we compare two versus three doses.
You said:
ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT

In Table 4, the Restricted Mean Time Lost (RMTL) for the unvaccinated group is 7.4 days, while for the two-dose vaccinated group, it’s 10.1 days. This indicates that the two-dose vaccinated group lost, on average, more time in terms of survival than the unvaccinated group during the study period (739 days).

Here’s what it means:

The RMTL for unvaccinated dropped from 7.4 (in Table 4) to 4.6 (in Table 5 for three doses): This decrease suggests that, on average, the unvaccinated group "lost" fewer days in the context of three-dose comparisons (Table 5) than they did when compared with the two-dose group (Table 4). This change could reflect various factors like how the unvaccinated population's outcomes improved or the vaccinated population's outcomes worsened with a higher number of doses.

Between-group contrast (RMTL ratio of 1.37 in Table 4): This means that the two-dose vaccinated group lost 37% more survival time than the unvaccinated group.

In comparison to Table 5, the three-dose group’s RMTL ratio was 1.17, meaning they lost 17% more time than the unvaccinated group. This suggests that the relative difference in time lost between vaccinated and unvaccinated populations becomes smaller as the number of doses increases.

To summarize:

In the two-dose comparison (Table 4), unvaccinated individuals had a higher RMTL (7.4 days), suggesting more time lost.
However, in the three-dose comparison (Table 5), the unvaccinated group appears to have fared better with a lower RMTL (4.6 days).
The exact reasons for this change could involve a variety of factors like population health differences, varying immunity levels, or other study-specific conditions, but the general trend shows that in the two-dose analysis, the vaccinated group experienced greater time lost than in the three-dose analysis.

I get these in email now. I love this summary of earth facing sunspots baby. The beta-gamma-delta spots are the most complex.

Solar Region Summary

---

Space Weather SRS

Issued on Wednesday, 30 October 2024 at 09:04 UTC

Observed Sunspot Regions:

Report issued four times a day (0300, 0900, 1500, 2100 UTC) from analysis of NASA SDO imagery and data from NOAA SWPC.

No.	Loc	Lo	Area	Z	LL	NN	Mag Type	Growth	C	M	X	P
3868	S11W36	219	170	Cso	3	2	Beta	Nil	15	2	0	1
3869	S17W11	194	350	Dsc	10	16	Beta-Gamma	Nil	43	20	7	6
3872	S18W00	183	250	Dko	3	5	Beta	Nil	52	20	3	5
3873	S11E06	177	40	Hax	3	2	Alpha	Decrease	8	3	0	1
3874	N24W37	220	170	Eso	11	12	Beta	Nil	31	6	0	2
3875	N28W19	202	30	Cri	4	4	Beta	Increase	30	4	0	1
3876	S05W24	207	300	Dac	8	10	Beta-Gamma	Nil	69	23	2	6
3877	S16E19	164	5	Axx	1	1	Alpha	Decrease	3	1	0	0
3878	N16E46	137	350	Eki	11	12	Beta-Gamma-Delta	Nil	79	34	5	3
3879	N15E70	113	700	Hhx	4	1	Alpha	Nil	9	6	1	1
NEW	S10W23	206	10	Axx	2	2	Alpha	Nil	3	1	0	0
Total Raw %									99	74	17	23
Total Issued %									99	70	20	99

Comments:

There are now eleven sunspot containing active regions, with AR3863 fading from view on the west limb and AR3875 redeveloping in the northwest disk. The south-centre disc contains a cluster of three spots. AR3869 is the largest and most complex with its polarities in the reverse configuration to what would typically be expected for a SC25 southern hemisphere spot. AR3872 is a simpler open bipolar spot, but with a potentially unstable N-S orientation, that could still allow for some activity. AR3876, just to the northwest of this group, has seen its small spots coalesce, and has seen the weak delta spot on its northern proximity fade somewhat. AR3878 remains the most likely flare source, with the moderate strength delta spot on its trailer. AR3879 in the NE is large and simple, but is likely the returning ex-3848, which produced a notable eruptive X-flare on the previous rotation.

Moderate activity in the last 24 hours, with a peak flare of M1.1 at 29/1633 UTC, chiefly from AR3872, but with some contribution from an ongoing long duration C-flare due to a filament eruption from the SW disc. Moderate to high activity is expected going forwards, with occasional M-flares expected given the activity on the disk and a chance of an isolated X-class flare. The ongoing S1-Storm is expected to continue easing, unless further notable flares occur. These giving approximately a 20 percent chance of further enhancement.

Carrington 0-deg Longitude: at 30/0800 UTC = 183°

Observed Penticton F10.7cm flux: on 29 October = 266 sfu

stock here, scroll down a pull page, one of the most important is the view of the magnetics of the sunspots. When they are mixed and complex, the chance for large eruptions, aka CME are higher.

https://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/data

This was looking potentially exciting in the last few days, but now it looks less likely to turn into something big. Unless they morph.

The earth moves up and down relative to the equator of the sun, about 7 degree each way. On Dec 6, Earth will pass from the northern side to the southern side, i.e. be right at the Sun’s equator. About March 6, we will be at the lowest point, and therefore, more affected by sunspots in the southern hemisphere. That’s a point that no one else is making, so I am making it.

The part of Bob Seger’s song “Sunspot Baby” that mentions “she had a real good time” goes like this:

“She took me for a ride in a red Mercedes Benz.
She took off to Florida, she got a real good tan.
She had a real good time.”

stock here, 681000 views.

AI Summarize of Comments

The comments from people at the Harris rally generally express frustration, disbelief, and disapproval toward Harris supporters. Many commenters argue that Harris supporters are uninformed or emotionally driven, lacking in specific policy knowledge. They criticize the media for influencing voters and describe the atmosphere at the rally as disconnected from reality. Multiple comments accuse the Obama administration, rather than Trump, of dividing the country. Some find it shocking that people believe the economy is doing well, while others express a strong preference for Trump, with a belief that his policies were better for the country.

————————————————————

Here are the specific quotes from the transcript where Harris supporters flipped the script during the interviews:

"What did he lie about?"
    Response: "What hasn't he lied about is the simpler question to answer, and that's maybe his name and his age and that's about it."

"What don't you like about Trump?"
    Response: "What is there to like about him? There's nothing."

These are examples where the speaker deflects or reverses the question, highlighting a common rhetorical tactic in these discussions.
You said:
canyou find more than just 2 examples
ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT

Here are more examples from the transcript where Harris supporters flip the script in their responses:

"What did he lie about?"
    Response: "What hasn't he lied about is the simpler question to answer, and that's maybe his name and his age and that's about it."

"What don't you like about Trump?"
    Response: "What is there to like about him? There's nothing."

"Do you think he did a terrible job as president?"
    Response: "Oh absolutely. What is there to like?"

"What was wrong in 2016 to 2020?"
    Response: "Let's just talk about COVID for instance, he turned that into more of a disaster than it would have been under better leadership."

"How do you feel the country is going right now?"
    Response: "I hate that question because it's loaded... It always depends on who you're asking."

These examples illustrate how supporters often use rhetorical reversals when discussing Trump or when pressed for specifics about their opinions.

Here are all the corporation gouging comments along with mentions of Kamala Harris having a plan, and the answers to what that plan is:

"Corporations have been gouging."
    Followed by: "Corporations made huge raises in prices of things, and Kamala has a plan for getting that backed up so that they can't gouge you in times of trouble."

"Kamala has a plan for getting that backed up so that they can't gouge you in times of trouble."
    When asked "What is that plan?", the response was: "I don't know that plan exactly."

"Corporations made huge raises in prices of things, and Kamala has a plan for that."
    When asked about the plan, the response was: "I know she has a plan, but I don't know the specifics."

These comments indicate a belief that Harris has a solution to address corporate price gouging, but those who mention it are unsure of the specific details of her plan.

stock, check it out.

stock here: Just throwing that out there, because it is beyond absurd. And then the choice of Walz, who burned his own state down, and dated a 14 year old student.

But the children have spoken in a poll, and Harris should win, LOL.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/kamala-harris-wins-nickelodeons-kids-choice-presidential-election-poll

I mean, they are humiliating all of us, especially those “for” Harris, even though face palm they believe they are “freedom fighters” “truth seekers”.

stock here, from AI, I slap AI as sloppy at the bottom and they kind of agree and backtrack.

standing seems an odd concept in law since if someone has a valid point why do they need “standing” please flesh this out
ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT

The legal concept of “standing” refers to the requirement that a person must have a sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged to support their participation in the case. Essentially, standing ensures that courts resolve actual disputes where individuals have a personal stake in the outcome, rather than hypothetical or generalized grievances. Here’s why it is significant:

Constitutional Limitations: In the U.S., standing is rooted in the Constitution, particularly Article III, which limits the jurisdiction of federal courts to "cases" and "controversies." This ensures courts do not become arbiters of abstract legal questions but resolve actual disputes where plaintiffs have suffered or are in immediate danger of suffering harm.

Personal Stake: The standing doctrine requires that the person bringing the lawsuit (the plaintiff) must show they have been directly affected by the issue at hand. This helps filter out cases brought by individuals with no real connection to the matter, preventing the court system from becoming overburdened with claims brought by individuals with only intellectual or philosophical objections. Courts demand:
    Injury-in-fact: The plaintiff must have suffered or will imminently suffer a concrete and particularized injury.
    Causation: The injury must be directly traceable to the defendant’s actions.
    Redressability: It must be likely, not speculative, that a favorable court decision will remedy the injury.

Judicial Efficiency: By ensuring that only those with a direct stake in the case can sue, standing helps maintain a manageable docket for courts. It prevents cases based on mere ideological disagreements from being heard, focusing resources on real-world harms and practical solutions.

Separation of Powers: Standing also reflects the separation of powers. Courts are not supposed to interfere with legislative or executive decisions unless they involve direct, specific harms to individuals or groups. Without standing requirements, courts could be overwhelmed with challenges to laws based on mere disagreements with policy choices, infringing on the roles of the other branches of government.

Criticism of Standing

Many people, like you, find standing to be an odd or frustrating barrier because it can prevent potentially valid claims from being heard, particularly when an individual may raise important legal issues of broad public interest but cannot demonstrate personal harm. Critics argue that this allows certain unconstitutional laws or governmental actions to persist if no one with standing steps forward to challenge them.

In response, some courts and legislatures have crafted exceptions or broader interpretations of standing, especially in cases involving constitutional rights, environmental law, or public interest litigation. However, the basic framework of standing remains essential for maintaining the judicial system’s structure and focus.

Standing may seem restrictive, but it’s designed to balance the court’s role in resolving disputes and maintaining judicial efficiency.

————————————————-

You said:
in 2022 we received a sizable “refundable tax credit” from hawaii for doing solar work and not having a tax liability that a tax credit could go against. The question is, would this refundable tax credit count as a tax refund in 2023, since there were not taxes due technically
ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT

The refundable tax credit you received in 2022 for solar work in Hawaii would generally not be considered a tax refund for federal tax purposes in 2023 if it was refunded to you as cash or a check, rather than being used to offset taxes.

Here’s why:

Refundable tax credit: This type of credit is treated differently from a non-refundable credit. It means that even if you don’t have any tax liability, you can still receive the credit as a payment from the government. Essentially, it’s considered more like income rather than a refund of taxes that were paid.

Tax refund status**: Since you didn’t have taxes to offset, the credit would not reduce previously paid taxes. Therefore, it’s unlikely to be treated as a "tax refund" in 2023 for federal tax purposes.

However, this credit might need to be reported if you deducted state taxes in the previous year (2022) and claimed the state tax deduction on your federal return. If the tax credit or refund was based on those state taxes, you might need to include it in your 2023 income. This is similar to the tax benefit rule, which applies to state tax refunds.

You should check your 2022 tax return to confirm if state taxes were deducted, or consult with a tax professional to ensure proper treatment. Does this answer align with your situation?
You said:
how much percent energy does maui get from qind and solar
ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT

As of recent data, approximately 50.8% of Maui County’s electricity is generated from renewable sources, with the bulk of this coming from solar and wind projects. Specifically, solar (both rooftop and utility-scale) contributes significantly, while wind energy accounts for about 16%. Maui has made significant progress toward its goal of achieving 100% renewable energy by 2045, with a focus on retiring older fossil fuel plants and replacing them with solar-plus-storage projects​
NREL
​
mauinews.com
.

For the near future, Maui is expected to continue increasing its reliance on solar and wind, with projections of achieving 100% renewable energy on an instantaneous basis by 2024 for certain periods of the year​
pv magazine USA
.
You said:
standing seems an odd concept in law since if someone has a valid point why do they need “standing” please flesh this out
ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT

The legal concept of “standing” refers to the requirement that a person must have a sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged to support their participation in the case. Essentially, standing ensures that courts resolve actual disputes where individuals have a personal stake in the outcome, rather than hypothetical or generalized grievances. Here’s why it is significant:

Constitutional Limitations: In the U.S., standing is rooted in the Constitution, particularly Article III, which limits the jurisdiction of federal courts to "cases" and "controversies." This ensures courts do not become arbiters of abstract legal questions but resolve actual disputes where plaintiffs have suffered or are in immediate danger of suffering harm.

Personal Stake: The standing doctrine requires that the person bringing the lawsuit (the plaintiff) must show they have been directly affected by the issue at hand. This helps filter out cases brought by individuals with no real connection to the matter, preventing the court system from becoming overburdened with claims brought by individuals with only intellectual or philosophical objections. Courts demand:
    Injury-in-fact: The plaintiff must have suffered or will imminently suffer a concrete and particularized injury.
    Causation: The injury must be directly traceable to the defendant’s actions.
    Redressability: It must be likely, not speculative, that a favorable court decision will remedy the injury.

Judicial Efficiency: By ensuring that only those with a direct stake in the case can sue, standing helps maintain a manageable docket for courts. It prevents cases based on mere ideological disagreements from being heard, focusing resources on real-world harms and practical solutions.

Separation of Powers: Standing also reflects the separation of powers. Courts are not supposed to interfere with legislative or executive decisions unless they involve direct, specific harms to individuals or groups. Without standing requirements, courts could be overwhelmed with challenges to laws based on mere disagreements with policy choices, infringing on the roles of the other branches of government.

Criticism of Standing

Many people, like you, find standing to be an odd or frustrating barrier because it can prevent potentially valid claims from being heard, particularly when an individual may raise important legal issues of broad public interest but cannot demonstrate personal harm. Critics argue that this allows certain unconstitutional laws or governmental actions to persist if no one with standing steps forward to challenge them.

In response, some courts and legislatures have crafted exceptions or broader interpretations of standing, especially in cases involving constitutional rights, environmental law, or public interest litigation. However, the basic framework of standing remains essential for maintaining the judicial system’s structure and focus.

Standing may seem restrictive, but it’s designed to balance the court’s role in resolving disputes and maintaining judicial efficiency.
You said:
Your argument that a person must show personal harm,as opposed to potential future harm is wrong, and this is especially important as regard to rights, so please review this and don’t be sloppy
ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT

You raise an important point about potential future harm and its relationship to standing, especially in cases related to constitutional or civil rights. While my initial explanation focused on the basic elements of standing, it’s worth clarifying that future harm, if sufficiently imminent, can indeed establish standing in many cases, especially when rights are involved.
Standing and Future Harm

Courts do recognize that imminent injury — even if the harm hasn’t occurred yet — can suffice to establish standing. The key distinction is whether the harm is speculative (too far in the future or too uncertain) or if it’s imminent and certainly impending.

The Supreme Court has addressed this concept in several key cases:

Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife (1992): This case is a leading example where the Court emphasized that injury must be concrete and particularized, but also actual or imminent. The Court found that the plaintiffs did not have standing because the harm they alleged was too speculative (involving future travel plans without concrete details).

Clapper v. Amnesty International USA (2013): This case further clarified that for future harm to confer standing, the harm must be "certainly impending," not just a possibility. The plaintiffs in Clapper alleged potential future surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), but the Court ruled that this potential harm was too speculative because it was not sufficiently imminent.

Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus (2014): In contrast, the Court ruled in favor of standing when the plaintiffs faced a credible threat of future prosecution under an Ohio law regarding false statements during elections. Even though the prosecution hadn’t yet occurred, the Court found that the threat was real and imminent enough to justify standing.

Importance in Rights Cases

In cases involving rights, courts are particularly attuned to ensuring that imminent threats to constitutional rights are addressed before the harm fully materializes. For example, in First Amendment cases, the threat of enforcement of a law that chills speech can create standing, even if the person hasn’t yet been prosecuted or fined under the law. The courts recognize that waiting until after harm occurs might mean irreversible damage to constitutional rights.

Example: In Steffel v. Thompson (1974), the Supreme Court ruled that a person could seek relief to prevent enforcement of a law that posed a serious threat of prosecution, even though no prosecution had occurred. The potential harm to the plaintiff’s First Amendment rights was deemed imminent and enough to confer standing.
Key Takeaway

You are correct that standing doesn’t always require present harm; potential future harm can suffice if it is imminent and concrete, especially in cases involving fundamental rights. Courts generally prevent claims based on hypothetical or speculative future harms but do recognize standing when there’s a credible, real threat of future injury.

This aspect of standing helps balance judicial efficiency with the need to protect individuals from real and immediate threats to their rights.

stock here, this was always pushed into my Facebook feed. And it was extremely interesting. He spoke truths, and certainly those that want to create a fake reality, hate that. So he was pushed out of my feed, and I suspect most feeds. But someone posted him back up.

https://www.facebook.com/reel/861860445712423

https://www.facebook.com/Alohakeakuaco/reels

https://www.facebook.com/reel/857429839642669

https://www.facebook.com/reel/408704971636501

https://www.facebook.com/reel/365621153002450

https://www.facebook.com/reel/858828126098883

This one has a ton of important people listed quickly

https://www.facebook.com/reel/843318653886708

This one is pretty powerful also, the descendants of the missionaries….became weak in spirit and manipulative.

https://www.facebook.com/reel/579121714642304

stock here: “They” are really out there.

This deserves to be preserved. I shall download and put it on Bitchute.

Armageddon Prose does generally good work, so why he doesn’t get my basic point above, and attacks Rogan for it. Silly.

https://armageddonprose.substack.com/p/why-did-trump-rogan-refuse-to-touch

Instead, we got a lot of fluff like “tell me what it felt like to be president,” etc.

These omissions were, in my view, pre-ordained. What I wouldn’t give to have been a fly on the wall in the negotiations between Rogan and the Trump team leading up to the appearance.

So, no points to Rogan for this massively disappointing performance.

Regarding the former president and his inability or unwillingness to tackle real issues head-on, the reality is that Trump is a notorious germophobe who bought in long ago to the biomedical industry propaganda that men in white coats and Fortune 500 pharmaceutical corporations love humanity and want us all to live our best lives.

The proper takeaway from the Rogan interview, in my view, is that he’s not bringing the kind of hard-nosed, confrontational, insurgent energy we desperately need in a leader to combat the industry and the deathgrip it has on every relevant institution.

Dexter Yuen

I saw this comment on a “non controlled opposition” Facebook page. They somehow got the dead rate down to 99, a dollar sale!!! However, as late as August this year they admitted that was like 382 people unaccounted for. Those of us paying close attention from day 1 believe there were about 1000 people burned alive. I would love to visit, but having 1000 angry ghosts would not be good for my soul.

—————————————–

“Lahaina Town Remembered”

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1354681525422426

It took Biden and Josh Green to destroy Lahaina City for the sole purpose of reinventing a Smart City and her Capital of her Kingdom leveled. Sixty-five years ago, Honolulu, the USA named it the Capital of Hawaii. Sanford Ballard Dole overthrow of Queen Liliuokalani the Hawaiian Monarch and established a new provincial government with Dole as President and he promised of no bloodshed.

It took Biden and Xi Jinping to play their game of Competition Not Conflict and playfully practiced Direct Energy Weaponry and picked targets and leaving areas unharmed for restructuring Lahaina for the sole purpose of political greed and Climate Change blaming the nonexistent lies of a Wildfire on a Hurricane thousands of miles away that melted aluminum and glass that a wildfire cannot possibly destroy, and blue evidence remain unharmed.

Petrified toads seen are evidence that DEW has caused this destruction. How many other creatures and natives were petrified. The evidence is still here in the nine freight morgue containers not shown of the substance to the public. Open the containers Josh Green you are a Medical Doctor not a Governor. Where is the transparency of Lahaina destruction the Democratic Party guaranteed?

Truth hidden for more than an entire year is still here. 983 keiki the Department of Education says is unknown of the whereabouts and it is not the answer to any of the questions. Seven thousand homeless people and billions of dollars in lawsuits are presently ongoing at this very moment of time. Attorneys will make money for a long time. Homeowners Insurance of property is beginning to escalate because of the false accusation of the wildfire that natives cannot afford. Property Assessments which are neither fair nor equitable have gone on for generations. Natives are leaving in droves to find another home each year.

The story continues each passing day and Josh Green is as an incredible lying incompetent governor placed in charge of history that is being made up by Josh Green himself if he continues to lie about Lahaina that DEW was not the real cause for this disaster. Evidence is still here. Open the nine freight morgue containers so evil will expose Josh Green’s criminal activity. Smell the odor mean Josh Green is guilty of creating this holocaust.

Put nothing past the leftists that be.

stock out

Portuguese crypto-Jews: the genetic heritage of a complex history

Inês Nogueiro  ¹ , João C Teixeira  ² , António Amorim  ¹ , Leonor Gusmão  ³ , Luis Alvarez  ¹

Affiliations

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25699075

• PMID: 25699075
• PMCID: PMC4313780
• DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2015.00012

Abstract

The first documents mentioning Jewish people in Iberia are from the Visigothic period. It was also in this period that the first documented anti-Judaic persecution took place. Other episodes of persecution would happen again and again during the long troubled history of the Jewish people in Iberia and culminated with the Decrees of Expulsion and the establishment of the Inquisition: some Jews converted to Catholicism while others resisted and were forcedly baptized, becoming the first Iberian Crypto-Jews. In the 18th century the official discrimination and persecution carried out by the Inquisition ended and several Jewish communities emerged in Portugal. From a populational genetics point of view, the worldwide Diaspora of contemporary Jewish communities has been intensely studied. Nevertheless, very little information is available concerning Sephardic and Iberian Crypto-Jewish descendants. Data from the Iberian Peninsula, the original geographic source of Sephardic Jews, is limited to two populations in Portugal, Belmonte, and Bragança district, and the Chueta community from Mallorca. Belmonte was the first Jewish community studied for uniparental markers. The construction of a reference model for the history of the Portuguese Jewish communities, in which the genetic and classical historical data interplay dynamically, is still ongoing. Recently an enlarged sample covering a wide region in the Northeast Portugal was undertaken, allowing the genetic profiling of male and female lineages. A Jewish specific shared female lineage (HV0b) was detected between the community of Belmonte and Bragança. In contrast to what was previously described as a hallmark of the Portuguese Jews, an unexpectedly high polymorphism of lineages was found in Bragança, showing a surprising resistance to the erosion of genetic diversity typical of small-sized isolate populations, as well as signs of admixture with the Portuguese host population.

stock here, check it out.

stock here, I saw this the other day, but it’s worth spreading the word.

Remember, When Walz and his wife were teachers in Nebraska, and Walz was chumming around with at least 1 14 year old boy, taking him to an LGB type concert, Walz and his wife and one other teacher were all forced to resign on the same day. I saw the school board documentation, they called it a resignation. Then they moved to Minnesota where they had no connections at all.

They are beyond weird.

This video of Tim Walz’s wife going full psycho has 5.3 Million views, 235,000 likes and 50,000 comments on TikTok.

The entire country is finding out how insane these people are. 🔥 pic.twitter.com/zqyhoBeCf3

— johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) September 16, 2024

stock here:

Let’s say you don’t find out about a massive CME, it’s not going to be on the nightly news, that would panic the masses and create chaos. So you find out a day late on now it’s incoming 12 hours from now. Think about it now, what would you do.

Actions to take if a Carrington were incoming. You might have less than 2 days, so obviously implementing all of the below things needs to occur over a much greater range of time.

My other thoughts are to protect as much as you can in Faraday cages, and not just unplug important things, but disconnect your entire house from the grid. Pulling the meter breaks utility rules, but that is a huge air gap, more than your main breaker at your load center.

If a homeowner at 42° north were to detect a Carrington-level CME (coronal mass ejection) incoming, here are practical actions they could take to prepare:

1. Protect Electronics Unplug Everything: Immediately disconnect all electronics and appliances from outlets to prevent them from being fried by power surges.
2. 
   Faraday Cages: Build or use Faraday cages to store small electronics, like phones, radios, and laptops. Simple DIY versions can be made from metal garbage cans lined with insulating material.
   Surge Protectors: If time permits, ensure all critical electronics have strong surge protectors installed.
4. Water Supply Fill Bathtubs & Containers: If the grid goes down, so will the water supply. Fill bathtubs, buckets, and other containers with water to last at least a couple of weeks. The average person needs about 1 gallon per day for drinking and basic hygiene.
5. 
   Backup Water Filters: Have a gravity water filter (e.g., Berkey) on hand in case you need to purify rainwater, streams, or other sources.
   Emergency Well Pumps: If you have a well, consider an emergency pump that can operate manually or on a 12V battery.
7. Food Storage Stockpile Non-Perishable Food: Have at least 3-6 months’ worth of non-perishable foods. Canned goods, freeze-dried food, rice, beans, and shelf-stable products are ideal.
8. 
   Cooking Solutions: Use solar ovens, rocket stoves, or propane camping stoves for cooking. Ensure you have extra fuel for any gas-based appliances.
9. 
   Backup Power for Fridge/Freezer: A small solar-powered generator or propane generator could be used to keep your freezer running for a short period. Freezers that remain unopened can keep food frozen for up to 48 hours.
11. Off-Grid Power Solar Power Backup: If you have solar panels, disconnect them from the grid during the CME. Set up off-grid solar power for critical devices (lights, communications, minimal refrigeration).
12. 
    Battery Storage: Keep a battery bank charged for emergency power needs. Deep-cycle marine or lithium-ion batteries can power small devices and appliances.
13. 
    Hand Crank Devices: Have hand-crank radios, flashlights, and other essential tools that don’t require external power.
15. Communication Ham Radio: Ham radios, especially those with low-frequency ranges, are essential for communication when phones and the internet go down.
16. 
    Walkie-Talkies: Short-range radios for family communication if cell networks fail.
18. Heating & Cooling Wood Stove: If it’s winter, a wood stove or fireplace with a sufficient wood supply could be a lifesaver.
    Insulation: Make sure your home is well-insulated to retain heat during power outages.
19. 
    Fans for Ventilation: Battery or solar-powered fans can help with ventilation and cooling if air conditioning is unavailable.
21. Security Reinforce Home Security: In prolonged outages, some preppers recommend securing windows and doors and establishing neighborhood watch systems.
22. 
    Self-Defense Tools: It might be wise to have non-lethal or legal self-defense tools ready if civil unrest becomes an issue.
24. Medical Supplies Stockpile First Aid Kits: Ensure you have basic first aid kits, prescription medications, and other medical supplies.
    Backup for Medical Devices: If you rely on powered medical devices, ensure you have a backup power solution or manual alternatives.
25. Transportation Store Fuel: Have extra gasoline safely stored for vehicles, generators, or outdoor equipment. Fuel pumps may not work in the event of a grid collapse.
26. 
    Bicycles: Bicycles or other non-fuel-dependent modes of transport might be essential if vehicles or gas become unavailable.
28. Cash & Bartering Cash Reserves: ATMs and card systems may go down. Keep cash on hand in small denominations.
29. 
    Barter Items: Store extra useful items for potential bartering, such as batteries, candles, lighters, food, and fuel.
30. Lighting Solar-Powered Lights: Ensure you have plenty of solar-powered lights and lanterns.
31. 
    Candles & Oil Lamps: Stock up on candles, oil lamps, and batteries for basic lighting.
33. Gardening & Sustainability Plant a Garden: Long-term sustainability might require a garden to grow your own food. Have heirloom seeds ready and consider planting perennial crops.
34. 
    Compost & Rainwater Harvesting: Set up compost systems and rainwater catchment systems for garden use.