View allAll Photos Tagged Contingent,
Format: Photograph
Notes: Find more detailed information about this photograph: acmssearch.sl.nsw.gov.au/search/itemDetailPaged.cgi?itemI...
Search for more great images in the State Library's collections: www.acmssearch.sl.nsw.gov.au/
From the collection of the State Library of New South Wales: www.sl.nsw.gov.au
2015TCRFR03_008_CIKR15_CANADIAN-CONTINGENT_014
A member of 1 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group (1 CMBG) is at his workstation during Exercise CITADEL KLEBER. From March 3 to 20, 2015, Canadian soldiers are participating in the NATO command post exercise led by the Rapid Reaction Corps - France (RRC-FR) at the Mourmelon Training Area in France.
Photo by: BCH Dany Aelbrecht / RRC-FR
2015TCRFR03_008_CIKR15_CANADIAN-CONTINGENT_014
Un membre du 1er Groupe-brigade mécanisé du Canada (1 GBMC) est à son poste de travail durant l’exercice CITADEL KLEBER. Du 3 au 20 mars 2015, des militaires canadiens participent à un exercice de poste de commandement de l’OTAN dirigé par le Corps à réaction rapide - France (CRR-FR) au secteur d’entraînement de Mourmelon en France.
Photo : BCH Dany Aelbrecht / CRR-FR
Serving out saddles - camp of Bushmen's contingent at Kensington
Dated: . 01/01/1900
Digital ID: 1254_a011_a011000005r
Rights: www.records.nsw.gov.au/about-us/rights-and-permissions
We'd love to hear from you if you use our photos.
Many other photos in our collection are available to view and browse on our website using Photo Investigator.
Atheism = NOTHING created EVERYTHING, for NO REASON.
Makes perfect sense .... NOT!
www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/20_arguments-gods-existen...
If people would only think for themselves - there would be no atheists.
Atheism is anti-logic and anti-science ......
Atheism is the rejection of one of the only 2 origins options.
The only two options are:
1. An uncaused, supernatural first cause.
2. An uncaused, natural first cause.
Atheists categorically reject option one, therefore they believe in option two - by default.
Option two (an uncaused, natural first cause) is impossible according to logic, natural laws and the scientific method.
Every natural event/effect/entity has to have an adequate cause.
All material/natural entities/events are contingent, they rely on preceding causes.
A natural first cause, cannot be a very FIRST cause because something (which didn't need a cause) must have caused it.
A natural first cause also cannot be the very first cause of the universe because it is woefully inadequate for the effect. An effect cannot be greater than its cause.
So atheism is a set of beliefs which violate the scientific method, ignore logic and defy natural laws.
Atheism is akin to a religion because it credits matter/energy with similar creative powers and attributes as those applied to a creator God, which is really just a more sophisticated version of pagan naturalism, which imbued natural entities such as Mother Nature, The Sun or Moon god etc. with creative and magical powers.
To explain further ....
If there are only 2 options and one is ruled out as 'impossible' by logic, natural law and the scientific method, then it is safe, indeed sensible, to deduce that the other option is the only possible, and likely one.
Anyone who believes in science should know - that the basis of the scientific method is looking for adequate causes for every natural event/effect.
An 'uncaused' natural event is an anathema to science, it cannot even contemplate such a prospect.
If someone was to propose a natural first cause of everything, science would have to ask - what caused it? You cannot claim it was uncaused - that defies the scientific method.
However, if it was caused - if it had a preceding cause, ... then it cannot be the FIRST cause. Because FIRST means FIRST, not second or third.
So the very first cause of everything must be UNCAUSED ... which means, according to science, it CANNOT be a NATURAL cause.
In other words ... it cannot be a contingent entity, it can only be an eternally self-existent, self-reliant, autonomous, infinite, omnipotent entity which is entirely independent of causes, and the limitations that causes impose.
Furthermore, the first cause also has to be completely adequate for the effect, the effect cannot be greater than the cause ... so the first cause has to have adequate powers, properties and potentiality to create the entirety of the universe, i.e. nothing in the universe can be superior in any respect to the first cause.
That means the first cause must embody, or be able to create, every property and quality that exists, which includes: natural laws, information, life, intelligence, consciousness, self-awareness, design, skill, moral values, sense of beauty, justice etc.
All proposed, natural first causes - Big Bang's, Singularities, quantum mechanics etc. are not only ruled out because, as contingent events, they cannot be uncaused, they are also grossly inferior to the effect, which definitively rules them all out as credible first causes.
To put it more simply ... all effects/events/entities are the result of a combination of numerous, preceding causes, but the very first cause is unique, inasmuch as it is a lone cause of everything.
Everything can be traced back to that single cause, it is responsible for every other cause, entity and effect that follows it. Unlike other lesser or subsequent causes it has to account for the totality of everything that exists. So it cannot be inferior in any respect to any particular property, entity, event, effect, or to the totality of them all.
If we have intelligence then, that which caused us cannot be non-intelligent.
Atheists assume that we are greater in that respect than that which caused us .... that is ridiculous and it defies logic and natural law.
What about infinite time?
Time is simply a chronology of natural events. Time began with the origin of the material realm. No natural events ...means - no time. All natural entities, events/effects are contingent, they cannot be self-existent, they rely on causes and the limitations that causes impose. they are not autonomous entities, to propose that is anti-science.
Atheists often say: you can’t fill gaps in knowledge with a supernatural first cause.
But we are not talking about filling gaps, we are talking about a fundamental issue ... the origin of everything in the material realm.
The first cause is not a gap, it is the beginning - and many of the greatest scientists in the history of science had no problem whatsoever with the logic that - a natural, first cause was impossible, and the only possible option was a supernatural creator.
Why do atheists have such a problem with it?
Atheists seem to think that to explain the origin of the universe without a God, simply involves explaining what triggered it, as though its formation from that point on, just happens automatically.
This has been compared by some as similar to lighting the blue touch paper of a firework. They think that if they can propose such a naturalistic trigger, then God is made redundant.
That may sound plausible to some members of the public, who take such pronouncements at face value, and are somewhat in awe of anything that is claimed to be 'scientific'.
But it is obvious to anyone who thinks seriously about it, that a mere trigger is not necessarily an adequate cause.
A trigger presupposes that there is some sort of a mechanism/blueprint/plan already existing which is ready to spring into action if it is provided with an appropriate trigger. So a trigger is not a sole cause, or a first cause, it is merely one contributing cause.
Natural things do only what they are programmed to do, i.e. they obey natural laws and the demands of their own pre-ordered composition and structure. Lighting blue touch paper would do absolutely nothing, unless there is a carefully designed and manufactured firework already attached to it.
Atheists invent all sorts of bizarre myths to explain the origin of the universe and matter/energy.
Such as it arising from nothing of its own volition, for no reason.
Or even the utterly, ludicrous notion of the universe creating itself from nothing. Obviously for something to create itself, it would need to pre-exist its own creation, in order to do the creating!
Another idea which seems to be popular with atheists at present, is a continuously, reciprocating universe, one which ends by running out of energy potential and then rewinds itself in an never ending cycle.
However, the idea that the universe can simply rewind itself in a never ending cycle, which had no beginning, is complete, unscientific nonsense.
It seems atheists will try anything to justify their naturalist ideology. They apparently have no compunction about completely disregarding natural laws.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics rules out such atheist, pie-in-the-sky, origins mythology.
There is no such thing as a free lunch, the idea of a rewinding universe is tantamount to applying the discredited notion of perpetual motion - on a grand scale, to the universe.
Contingent things don't just rewind of their own accord. The Second Law (not to mention common sense) rules it out. Where does the renewed power or renewed energy potential come from? If you wind up a clock, it doesn't rewind itself after it has stopped. The universe had a beginning and it will have an end. That is what science tells us, it cannot rewind itself.
Such ridiculous atheist musings are just a desperate attempt to wriggle out of the inevitable conclusion of logic, and the Law of Cause and Effect which are the real enemies of atheist ideology.
Atheism is hoisted on its own petard by natural law and science, not by religion. Atheists can’t refute the Law of Cause and Effect which is so devastating to their naturalist agenda, so they regularly invent bizarre scenarios which ignore natural laws, and hope people won’t notice. If anyone does they just brush it off with remarks like “we just don’t know ”.
Sorry, atheists apologists may not know …. but we do know, we certainly know what is impossible …. And we certainly know that you cannot blithely step outside the constraints of natural laws and scientific principles, as atheists do, and remain credible.
Atheists are anti-science, because they treat natural law and the whole principle of the scientific method with utter contempt, while they masquerade as the champions of science to the public.
A further nail in the coffin of atheist pseudoscience is existence of order.
The development of order requires an organizational element. To do useful work, or to counter the effects of entropy, energy needs to be directed or guided. Raw energy alone actually tends to increase the effects of entropy, it doesn't increase order.
The organizational principle in living systems is provided by the informational element encoded in DNA.
Natural laws are a type of information which guide the behaviour of energy and matter, but also serve to limit it. They are an inherent property of matter/energy, natural processes operate only within the confines of natural laws. They cannot exceed the parameters of those laws.
A major problem for atheists is to explain where natural laws came from? In a purposeless universe there should be no regulatory principle at all.
Firstly, we would not expect anything to exist, we would expect eternal nothingness.
Secondly, even if we overlook that impossible hurdle, and assume by some amazing fluke and contrary to logic, something was able to create itself from nothing ….. we would expect the ‘something’ would have no ordered structure and we would expect it to behave randomly and chaotically.
This is an absolutely fundamental question to which atheists have no answer. The basic properties of matter/energy scream …. ‘purpose’. Atheists say the exact opposite.
Furthermore, if we add the accepted, atheist belief; that matter is inherently predisposed to produce life and the genetic information for life, whenever environmental conditions are conducive.
The atheist idea of a random, purposeless, universe is left completely in tatters.
It is the atheist ideology that is anti-science, not necessarily individual scientists.
There may be sincere, atheist scientists who respect the scientific method and natural laws, but they are wedded to an ideology that - when push comes to shove, does not respect natural laws.
It is evident that whenever natural laws interfere with atheist naturalist beliefs, the beliefs take precedence over the rigorous, scientific method. It is then that natural laws are disregarded by atheists in favour of unscientific fantasies which are conducive to their ideology.
Of course, in much day-to-day practical science and technology, the question of violating laws doesn't even arise, and we cannot deny that in the course of such work, atheists will respect the scientific method of experiment and observation within the framework of the Law of Cause and Effect and other established laws of science.
Bizarrely, It is a different matter entirely, when it comes to hypotheses about origins. It then becomes an 'anything goes' situation. The main criteria then seems to be that it doesn’t matter whether your hypothesis violates natural laws (all sorts of excuses can be made as to why natural laws need not apply), all that matters is that it is entirely naturalistic, and can be made to sound plausible to the public.
However, the same atheist scientists would not entertain anything in general, day-to-day science, that is not completely in accordance with the scientific method, they make an exception ONLY with anything to do with origins, whether it be the origin of the universe, or the origin of life, or the origin of species.
Atheism is not simply passive non-belief, you can only be a ‘genuine’ atheist if you proactively believe in the following illogical and unscientific notions:
A natural, first cause of the universe that was ‘uncaused’.
A natural, first cause of the universe that was patently not adequate for the effect, (a cause which was able to produce an effect far greater than itself and superior to its own abilities).
That the universe created ITSELF from nothing.
That natural laws simply arose of their own accord, without any reason, purpose or cause.
That energy potential at the start of everything material was able to wind itself up from absolute zero, of its own accord, without any reason, purpose or cause.
That the effect of entropy (Second Law of Thermodynamics) was somehow suspended or didn’t operate to permit the development of order in the universe.
That life spontaneously generated itself, of its own volition, from sterile matter, contrary to: the Law of Biogenesis, the laws of probability, the Second Law of Thermodynamics, Information Theory and common sense.
That the complete human genome was created by means of a long chain of copying mistakes of the original, genetic information in the first living cell, (mutations of mutations of mutations, etc. etc.).
That the complex DNA code was produced by chemical processes.
That the very first, genetic information, encoded in the DNA of the first living cell, created itself by some unknown means.
That matter is somehow inherently predisposed to develop into living cells, whenever conditions are conducive to life. But such a predisposition for life just arose of its own accord, with no purpose and with no apparent cause.
That an ordered structure of atoms, guiding laws of physics, order in the cosmos, order in the living cell and complex information, are what we would expect to occur naturally in a purposeless universe.
The claim of Dawkins and other atheists to be the champions of science and reason is clearly bogus. They think they can get away with it by pretending to have no beliefs. However, when challenged, they indirectly espouse the unscientific beliefs outlined above, in their futile attempts to refute the evidence for a supernatural first cause. Whenever possible, they avoid declaring those beliefs explicitly, but you don’t need to be very astute to realize that relying on those beliefs is the unavoidable conclusion of their arguments. That is why atheism is intellectually bankrupt and is doomed to the dustbin of history.
FOUNDATIONS OF SCIENCE
The Law of Cause and Effect. Dominant Principle of Classical Physics. David L. Bergman and Glen C. Collins
www.thewarfareismental.net/b/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/b...
"The Big Bang's Failed Predictions and Failures to Predict: (Updated Aug 3, 2017.) As documented below, trust in the big bang's predictive ability has been misplaced when compared to the actual astronomical observations that were made, in large part, in hopes of affirming the theory."
Evolution is on the rocks - some recent evidence:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/7215 7635944904973/
Fossil museum:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/7215 7641367196613/
So much for atheism .... What about progressive (macro) evolution?
There is no credible mechanism for progressive evolution.
Darwin believed that there was unlimited variability in the gene pool of all creatures and plants.
However, the changes possible through selective breeding were known by breeders to be strictly limited.
This is because the changes seen in selective breeding are due to the shuffling, deletion and emphasis of genetic information already existing in the gene pool (micro-evolution). There is no viable mechanism for creating new, beneficial, genetic information required to create entirely new structures and features (macro-evolution).
Darwin ignored the limits which were well known to breeders (even though he selectively bred pigeons himself, and should have known better). He simply extrapolated the limited, minor changes observed in selective breeding to major, unlimited, progressive changes able to create new structures, organs etc. through natural selection, over millions of years.
Of course, the length of time involved made no difference, the existing, genetic information could not increase of its own accord, no matter how long the timescale.
That was a gigantic flaw in Darwinism, and opponents of Darwin's ideas tried to argue that changes were limited, as selective breeding had demonstrated. But because Darwinism had acquired a status more akin to an ideology than purely, objective science, belief in the Darwinian idea outweighed the verdict of observational and experimental science, and classical Darwinism became firmly established as scientific orthodoxy for nearly a century.
Opponents continued to argue all this time, that Darwinism was unscientific nonsense, but they were ostracised and dismissed as cranks, weirdoes or religious fanatics.
Finally however, it was discovered that the opponents of Darwin were perfectly correct - and that constructive, genetic changes (progressive, macro-evolution) require new, additional, genetic information.
This looked like the ignominious end of Darwinism, as there was no credible, natural mechanism able to create new, constructive, genetic information. And Darwinism should have been heading for the dustbin of history,
However, rather than ditch the whole idea, the vested interests in Darwinism had become so great, with numerous, lifelong careers and an ideological agenda which had become dependant on the Darwinian belief system, a desperate attempt was made to rescue it from its justified demise.
A mechanism had to be invented to explain the origin of new, constructive information.
That invented mechanism was 'mutations'. Mutations are ... genetic, copying MISTAKES.
The general public had already been convinced that classical Darwinism was a scientific fact, and that anyone who questioned it was a crank, so all that had to be done, as far as the public was concerned, was to give the impression that the theory had simply been refined and updated in the light of modern science.
The fact that classical Darwinism had been wrong all along, and was fatally flawed from the outset was kept quiet. This meant that the opponents of Darwinism, who had been right all along, and were the real champions of science, continued to be vilified as cranks and scorned by the mass media and establishment.
The new developments were simply portrayed as the evolution and development of the theory. The impression was given that there was nothing wrong with the idea of progressive (macro) evolution, it had simply 'evolved' and 'improved' in the light of greater knowledge.
A sort of progressive evolution of the idea of evolution.
This new, 'improved' Darwinism became known as Neo-Darwinism.
So what is Neo-Darwinism? And did it really solve the fatal flaws of the Darwinian idea?
Neo Darwinism is progressive, macro evolution - as Darwin had proposed, but based on the ludicrous idea that random mutations (accidental, genetic, copying mistakes) selected by natural selection, can provide the constructive, genetic information capable of creating entirely new features, structures, organs, and biological systems. In other words, it is macro evolution based on a belief in a total progression from microbes to man through billions of random, genetic, copying MISTAKES, over millions of years.
However, there is no evidence for it whatsoever, and it is should be classified as unscientific nonsense which defies logic, the laws of probability and Information Theory.
People are sometimes confused, because they know that 'micro'-evolution is an observable fact, which everyone accepts. However, evolutionists often cynically exploit that confusion by citing obvious examples of micro-evolution such as: the Peppered Moth, Darwin's finches, so-called superbugs etc., as evidence of macro-evolution.
Of course such examples are not evidence of macro-evolution at all. The public is simply being hoodwinked, and it is a disgrace to science. There are no observable examples or evidence of macro-evolution and no examples of a mutation, or a series of mutations capable of creating new structures, organs etc. and that is a fact. It is no wonder that W R Thompson stated in the preface to the 1959 centenary edition of Darwin's Origin of the Species, that ... the success of Darwinism was accompanied by a decline in scientific integrity.
Micro-evolution is simply the small changes which take place, through natural selection or selective breeding, but only within the strict limits of the built-in variability of the existing gene pool. Any constructive changes outside the extent of the existing gene pool requires a credible mechanism for the creation of new, beneficial, genetic information, that is essential for macro evolution.
Micro evolution does not involve or require the creation of any new, genetic information. So micro evolution and macro evolution are entirely different. There is no connection between them at all, whatever evolutionists may claim.
Once people fully understand that the differences they see in various dogs breeds, for example, are merely an example of limited micro-evolution (selection of existing genetic information) and nothing to do with progressive macro-evolution, they begin to realise that they have been fed an incredible story.
To explain further.... Neo-Darwinian, macro evolution is the ridiculous idea that everything in the genome of humans and every living thing past and present (apart from the original genetic information in the very first living cell) is the result of millions of genetic copying mistakes..... mutations ... of mutations .... of mutations.... of mutations .... and so on - and on - and on.
In other words, Neo-Darwinism proposes that the complete genome (every scrap of genetic information in the DNA) of every living thing that has ever lived was created by a series ... of mistakes ... of mistakes .... of mistakes .... of mistakes etc. etc.
If we look at the whole picture we soon realise that what is actually being proposed by evolutionists is that, apart from the original information in the first living cell (and evolutionists have yet to explain where that original information came from?) - every additional scrap of genetic information for all - features, structures, systems and processes that exist, or have ever existed in living things, such as:
skin, bones, bone joints, shells, flowers, leaves, wings, scales, muscles, fur, hair, teeth, claws, toe and finger nails, horns, beaks, nervous systems, blood, blood vessels, brains, lungs, hearts, digestive systems, vascular systems, liver, kidneys, pancreas, bowels, immune systems, senses, eyes, ears, sex organs, sexual reproduction, sperm, eggs, pollen, the process of metamorphosis, marsupial pouches, marsupial embryo migration, mammary glands, hormone production, melanin etc. .... have been created from scratch, by an incredibly long series of small, accumulated mistakes ... mistake - upon mistake - upon mistake - upon mistake - over and over again, millions of times. That is ... every part, system and process of all living things are the result of literally billions of genetic MISTAKES of MISTAKES, accumulated over many millions of years.
So what we are asked to believe is that something like a vascular system, or reproductive organs, developed in small, random, incremental steps, with every step being the result of a copying mistake, and with each step being able to provide a significant survival or reproductive advantage in order to be preserved and become dominant in the gene pool. Incredible!
If you believe that ... you will believe anything.
Even worse, evolutionists have yet to cite a single example of a positive, beneficial, mutation which adds constructive information to the genome of any creature. Yet they expect us to believe that we have been converted from an original, single living cell into humans by an accumulation of billions of beneficial mutations (mistakes).
Conclusion:
Progressive, microbes-to-man evolution is impossible - there is no credible mechanism to produce all the new, genetic information which is essential for that to take place.
The evolution story is an obvious fairy tale presented as scientific fact.
However, nothing has changed - those who dare to question Neo-Darwinism are still portrayed as idiots, retards, cranks, weirdoes, anti-scientific ignoramuses or religious fanatics.
Want to join the club?
What about the fossil record?
The formation of fossils.
Books explaining how fossils are formed frequently give the impression that it takes many years of build up of layers of sediment to bury organic remains, which then become fossilised.
Therefore many people don't realise that this impression is erroneous, because it is a fact that all good, intact fossils require rapid burial in sufficient sediment to prevent decay or predatory destruction.
So it is evident that rock containing good, undamaged fossils was laid down rapidly, sometimes in catastrophic conditions.
The very existence of intact fossils is a testament to rapid burial and sedimentation.
You don't get fossils from slow burial. Organic remains don't just sit around on the sea bed, or elsewhere, waiting for sediment to cover them a millimetre at a time, over a long period.
Unless they are buried rapidly, they would soon be damaged or destroyed by predation and/or decay.
The fact that so many sedimentary rocks contain fossils, indicates that the sediment that created them was normally laid down within a short time.
Another important factor is that many large fossils (tree trunks, large fish, dinosaurs etc.) intersect several or many strata (sometimes called layers) which clearly indicates that multiple strata were formed simultaneously in a single event by grading/segregation of sedimentary particles into distinct layers, and not stratum by stratum over long periods of time or different geological eras, which is the evolutionist's, uniformitarian interpretation of the geological column.
In view of the fact that many large fossils required a substantial amount of sediment to bury them, and the fact that they intersect multiple strata (polystrate fossils), how can any sensible person claim that strata or, for that matter, any fossil bearing rock, could have taken millions of years to form?
You don't even need to be a qualified sedimentologist or geologist to come to that conclusion, it is common sense.
Rapid formation of strata - latest evidence:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/
All creatures and plants alive today, which are found as fossils, are the same in their fossil form as the living examples, in spite of the fact that the fossils are claimed to be millions of years old. So all living things today could be called 'living fossils' inasmuch as there is no evidence of any evolutionary changes in the alleged multi-million year timescale. The fossil record shows either extinct species or unchanged species, that is all.
The Cambrian Explosion.
Trilobites and other many creatures appeared suddenly in some of the earliest rocks of the fossil record, with no intermediate ancestors. This sudden appearance of a great variety of advanced, fully developed creatures is called the Cambrian Explosion. Trilobites are especially interesting because they have complex eyes, which would need a lot of progressive evolution to develop such advanced features However, there is no evidence of any evolution leading up to the Cambrian Explosion, and that is a serious dilemma for evolutionists.
Trilobites are now thought to be extinct, although it is possible that similar creatures could still exist in unexplored parts of deep oceans.
See fossil of a crab unchanged after many millions of years:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/12702046604/in/set-72...
Fossil museum: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157641367196613/
What about all the claimed scientific evidence that evolutionists have found for evolution?
The evolutionist 'scientific' method has resulted in a serious decline in scientific integrity, and has given us such scientific abominations as:
Piltdown Man (a fake),
Nebraska Man (a pig),
South West Colorado Man (a horse),
Orce man (a donkey),
Embryonic Recapitulation (a fraud),
Archaeoraptor (a fake),
Java Man (a giant gibbon),
Peking Man (a monkey),
Montana Man (an extinct dog-like creature)
Nutcracker Man (an extinct type of ape - Australopithecus)
The Horse Series (unrelated species cobbled together),
Peppered Moth (faked photographs)
The Orgueil meteorite (faked evidence)
Etc. etc.
Anyone can call anything 'science' ... it doesn't make it so.
All these examples were trumpeted by evolutionists as scientific evidence for evolution.
Do we want to trust evolutionists claims about scientific evidence, when they have such an appalling record?
Just how good are peer reviews of scientific papers?
www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full
www.examiner.com/article/want-to-publish-science-paper-ju...
Piltdown Man and Nebraska Man were even used in the famous, Scopes Trial as positive evidence for evolution.
Piltdown Man reigned for over 40 years, as a supreme example of human evolution, before it was exposed as a crudely, fashioned fake.
Is that 'science'?
The ludicrous Hopeful Monster Theory and so-called Punctuated Equilibrium (evolution in big jumps) were invented by evolutionists as a desperate attempt to explain away the lack of fossil evidence for evolution. They are proposed methods of evolution which, it is claimed, need no fossil evidence. They are actually an admission that the required fossil evidence does not exist.
Piltdown Man... it survived as alleged proof of evolution for over 40 years in evolution textbooks and was taught in schools and universities, it survived peer reviews etc. and was used as supposed irrefutable evidence for evolution at the famous Scopes Trial..
Nebraska Man, this was a single tooth of a peccary. it was trumpeted as evidence for the evolution of humans, and artists impressions of an ape-like man appeared in newspapers magazines etc. It was also used as 'scientific' evidence for evolution in the Scopes Trial. Such 'scientific' evidence is enough to make any genuine, respectable scientist weep.
South West Colorado Man, another tooth .... of a horse this time... It was presented as evidence for human evolution.
Orce man, a fragment of skullcap, which was most likely from a donkey, but even if it was human. such a tiny fragment is certainly not any proof of human evolution as it was made out to be.
Embryonic Recapitulation, the evolutionist zealot Ernst Haeckel (who was a hero of Hitler) published fraudulent drawings of embryos and his theory was readily accepted by evolutionists as proof of evolution. Even after he was exposed as a fraudster, evolutionists still continued to use his fraudulent evidence in books and publications on evolution, including school textbooks, until very recently.
Archaeoraptor, A so-called feathered dinosaur from the Chinese fossil faking industry. It managed to fool credulous evolutionists, because it was exactly what they were looking for. The evidence fitted the wishful thinking.
Java Man, Dubois, the man who discovered Java Man and declared it a human ancestor ..... admitted much later that it was actually a giant gibbon, however, that spoilt the evolution story which had been built up around it, so evolutionists were reluctant to get rid of it, and still maintained it was a human ancestor. Dubois had also 'forgotten' to mention that he found the bones of modern humans at the same site.
Peking Man, made up from monkey skulls which were found in an ancient limestone burning industrial site where there were crushed monkey skulls and modern human bones. Drawings were made of Peking Man, but the original skull conveniently disappeared. So that allowed evolutionists to continue to use it as evidence without fear of it ever being debunked.
The Horse Series, unrelated species cobbled together, They were from different continents and were in no way a proper series of intermediates, They had different numbers of ribs etc. and the very first in the line, is similar to a creature alive today - the Hyrax.
Peppered Moth, moths were glued to trees to fake photographs for the peppered moth evidence. They don't normally rest on trees in daytime. In any case, the selection of a trait which is part of the variability of the existing gene pool, is not progressive evolution. It is just normal, natural selection within limits, which no-one disputes.
Is macro evolution science? The answer to that has to be an emphatic - NO!
The usual definition of science is: that which can be demonstrated and observed and repeated. Evolution cannot be proved, or tested; it is claimed to have happened in the past, and, as such, it is not subject to the scientific method. It is merely a belief.
Of course, there is nothing wrong with having beliefs, especially if there is a wealth of evidence to support them, but they should not be presented as scientific fact. As we have shown, in the case of progressive evolution, there is a wealth of evidence against it. Nevertheless, we are told by evolutionist zealots that microbes to man evolution is a fact and likewise the spontaneous generation of life from sterile matter. They are deliberately misleading the public on both counts. Evolution is not only not a fact, it is not even proper science.
Plaque commemorating the departure of 125 men from Port Adelaide to the Boer War in South Africa. On 31 Oct 1899 the first contingent of SA men left nearby Queen’s Wharf on the tug “Yatala” to transfer to the “Medic” at anchor at Largs Bay, joining the Victorian and Tasmanian contingents. The volunteers were farewelled with patriotic enthusiasm, banners & bunting; crowds & soldiers singing the National Anthem, “Song of Australia”, “Soldiers of the Queen”.
“the contingent left the Old Exhibition grounds, which have been their home for two or three weeks past, and swung out into the Frome-road at a quick march and in a column of four abreast. . . It was naturally in Rundle-street — the heart of the city — that the greatest ovation awaited the troops. . . the crowd turned northwards . . . through side streets to North-terrace, and thence to the parade-ground, where a special train of five carriages was drawn up to carry the contingent and a limited number of friends to Port Adelaide. . . As the train passed through the stations on the Port line people rushed eagerly to their doors, not only to catch a sight of the soldiers, but to wave some expression of goodwill. . . the men were off for a tramp through Port Adelaide. The Military Band led, and between them and the company were Lord Tennyson, Lady Tennyson. . . The shipping offices and all the principal buildings had flags flying, and the ships at the wharfs were gay with bunting. It was truly the most remarkable non-public holiday that Port Adelaide has ever had. . . the men marched in splendid style to Queen' s wharf, where the Yatala was waiting for them. She appeared to be already crowded, for the members of the contingent had each received a ticket to admit two friends on the tug to see them off. . . crying and excited girls. . . the immense crowd swayed backwards and forwards on the edge of the wharf.” [Advertiser 1 Nov 1899]
“At the last Yatala got away. . . As the tug got beyond the lighthouse the men were told to say good-bye to their friends, and be ready to fall in in the front part of the boat. A considerable amount of feeling was displayed in the parting scenes. Many of the girls cried bitterly, and some of the soldiers seemed inclined to follow their example. Then kissing their sweethearts and sisters once more the men braced themselves up, and obeyed the bugle call. . . The Yatala was put dead slow, and then stopped 200 or 300 yards from the Medic, and the viceregal party. . . were allowed to board the Medic first. They were entertained at lunch on the big ship, while the men were being got out of the Yatala.” [Express & Telegraph 1 Nov 1899]
“On Tuesday the 125 men who had volunteered for active service in South Africa were awarded an ovation prior to embarkation. General dissatisfaction was felt that the Government had not seen fit to declare a holiday, nor to issue excursion fares on the northern railway. The selected men had been camped in the old show grounds for over a fortnight and had entered earnestly in the work of preparing themselves for active service. . . The contingent lined up, carrying their knapsacks, each weighing between 40 and 50 lbs.” [Bunyip, Gawler 3 Nov 1899]
“Altogether about 30 ladies volunteered for service as nurses in the Transvaal, but the Government, having decided not to send nurses with the contingent, the noble offers had to be refused.” [Chronicle 4 Nov 1899]
“Lady Tennyson sent to Dr. Toll by the special train which conveyed the troops on Tuesday morning a bundle comprising 85 roller bandages, 36 triangular bandages, 11 red flannel jackets, 20 cholera belts, flannel, and 44 boxes of safety pins. . . The conductor of stores (Mr. A. Hudson) is not sorry that the contingent has departed, for during the last few weeks he has been busily employed in providing the men with outfits. About 10,000 separate articles had to be provided.” [Express & Telegraph 1 Nov 1899]
“The soldiers have been supplied with two uniforms, hat (with puggaree), night-cap, forage-cap, two pairs of boots, leggings, two pairs of socks, braces, comb, clothes-brush, razor, brush, and soap, Jack-knife and lanyard, mess tins, valise, pair shoes, havresack [sic], great coat, blanket, two army shirts, army vest, and arms and accoutrements.” [Chronicle 4 Nov 1899]
“Major Dr. J. T. Toll, of Port Adelaide, volunteered to accompany the contingent to the Transvaal as medical officer. The Government has decided to give the doctor the opportunity of going with the troops, but without remuneration. Dr. Toll has accepted the offer, and will be attached to the contingent as honorary surgeon.” [Chronicle 28 Oct 1899]
“The farewelling is over, thank goodness. . . as the s.s. Medic steamed from Largs Bay anchorage on Tuesday, November 1, at 6.30 a.m. . . all were glad to be aboard the Medic after all the bustle and confusion of our last hours in S. Australia. . . Nov. 5, and towards evening entered the narrow channel that leads to Albany. . . After parading the streets for an hour or so, we marched about five miles into the country for a skirmish with the ‘Boers’, who turned out to be the Victorians, who were supposed to have occupied a hill. . . The daily routine is as follows:- Reveille sounds at 6 a.m., parade for physical drill at 6 30, which continues for an hour, breakfast at 8, parade at 9 or 10 for further drill, firing exercises, &c. . . dinner at 12 and 1 o'clock, parade at 3p.m. for more drill, or, maybe, a lecture. . . tea from 5.30 to 6.30. The evenings are spent in various amusements. Boxing, cards, music, dancing, yarns, smoking, &c. . . On November 8 we were all vaccinated. . . the horses, of which we have about 170 aboard, and some of them are magnificent animals. . . November 25. . . expected that we will reach Cape Town some time to-morrow morning and that we will disembark in the afternoon or on Monday morning.” [Areas Express, Booyoolee 5 Jan 1900]
DR JOHN TRESILLIAN TOLL
“TOLL.—On the 20th June, of apoplexy, on board the Australasian; invalided from South Africa, Surgeon-Major John Toll, dearly beloved brother of Mrs. R. Gething, St. Julians, Hahndorf, in his 50th year.” [Register 5 Jul 1900]
“Surgeon-Major Toll, of South Australia, who was invalided with enteric fever. . . died on board the steamer Australasian. . . and was buried with military honors. . . At the Semaphore no figure was better known than that of the cheery doctor, and he was a welcome and honored visitor on board of all the many ships which it was his duty to inspect. . . Mrs. Toll. . . is a daughter of the late Mr. W. R. Mortlock and a niece of the Hon. A. Tennant.” [Advertiser 25 Jun 1900]
“The late Dr. Toll was born in London, and was only forty-five years of age at the time of his death. As a boy he attended the Port Adelaide Grammar School. . . He took his medical degree in London, and also obtained honours at the Edinburgh University. After spending some time in Paris he returned to South Australia as surgeon in charge of a large emigrant ship in 1877. Shortly after his arrival he was taken into partnership by the late Dr. Gething at Port Adelaide, and on the death of that gentleman in 1883 he succeeded him as Government Health Officer. He also held the post of Health and Medical Officer to the Port Adelaide Corporation for fifteen years. He had the medical oversight of the Largs Bay and Glanville Forts and also of the Protector for many years.” [Adelaide Observer 30 Jun 1900]
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the model, the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
The Henschel Hs 126 was a German two-seat reconnaissance and observation aircraft of World War II that was derived from the stillborn Henschel Hs 122. The pilot was seated in a protected cockpit under the parasol wing and the gunner in an open rear cockpit. The first prototype was not entirely up to Luftwaffe standards; it was followed by two more development planes equipped with different engines. Following the third prototype, ten pre-production planes were built in 1937. The Hs 126 entered service in 1938 after operational evaluation with the Legion Condor contingent to the Spanish Civil War.
By the time the Hs 126 A-1 joined the Luftwaffe, the re-equipping of reconnaissance formations was already well advanced. By the start of World War II in September 1939, the Hs 126 served with many reconnaissance units. They were used with great success in the attack on Poland where it proved itself as a reliable observation and liaison aircraft. Its use continued after the end of the Phony War in May 1940, but with more and more Allied fighters appearing over the theatre of operations, the type’s main weakness became apparent: the Hs 126 was rather slow and could hardly avoid or even escape from fighter attacks. The losses were dramatic: alone twenty Hs 126s were lost between 10 and 21 May 1940!
The Hs 126 was initially produced in two versions, which only differed through their engines. 47 squadrons equipped with Hs 126 A/B participated in the invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941, and the Hs 126 was also successfully used in North Africa. However, low top speed was the Hs 126’s main weakness. To rectify this deficiency, the Hs 126 was in late 1940 experimentally outfitted with a more powerful BMW 132K which replaced the Hs 126 A’s Bramo or the B’s BMW 9-cylinder radial engine, which delivered around 625 kW (850 PS) each. The new powerplant delivered up to 809 kW (1,085 hp) with 96 octane fuel injection at take-off and as emergency power, and 705 kW (960 hp) at normal military power. This extra power, together with an aerodynamically more efficient cowling, pushed maximum speed to 400 km/h (250 mph), and after successful tests in the 1940/41 winter the RLM accepted it as the Hs 126 C for production and service.
Beyond the new engine the serial production Hs 126 C-1 did not differ much visibly from its predecessors, even though the internal structure was simplified and lightened by roughly 50 kg (110 lb). Various Reihenbildgeräte (reconnaissance cameras) could be installed in a compartment at the rear of the cabin, and the defensive armament was upgraded with heavy 13 mm MG 131 machine guns instead of the former 7.92 mm weapons. Sometimes, a MG 81Z 7.92 twin machine gun was alternatively fitted in the rear cockpit instead of the MG 131, which offered a higher rate of fire.
An interesting sub-variant of the Hs 126 C was the Hs 126 C-2, a dedicated observation and liaison floatplane for theatres of operation with difficult terrain where sufficient airfields were rare or hard to install and where alternatively bodies of water could be used for landing. Around thirty Hs 126 Cs were modified with twin floats instead of the type’s standard spatted fixed landing gear. They were, however, unlike the Arado Ar 196 shipboard reconnaissance floatplane, not capable of catapult starts and not intended for operations at high sea. Other changes included a ventral fin for improved directional stability, additional fuel tanks in the floats that compensated the loss of range through the floats’ drag, and the land-based Hs 126s optional shackles for light bombs under the fuselage were deleted to compensate for the floats’ extra weight, and there was no free space left to ensure a safe bomb release.
Another feature that was developed for the Hs 126 C after field experiences with the aircraft during winter operations was an extended cockpit glazing to better protect the observer from the elements. It covered the while rear section of the cockpit opening but still was open at the rear. It was mounted on rails and could be pushed forward, under the original glasshouse for the pilot. This canopy extension was offered as a Rüstsatz (field modification kit) for older Hs 126 variants, too, and modified aircraft received the suffix “R1” to their designation.
Only 150 Hs 126 Cs (32 of them C-2 floatplanes) were built between early 1941 and 1942, production of the Hs 126 A/B had already ended in 1941. Most of them were operated in Denmark and Norway, even though a few were also allocated to Aufklärergruppen in the Mediterranean where they operated in the Adriatic Sea.
The Hs 126 was well received for its good short takeoff and low-speed characteristics which were needed at the time. However, it was vulnerable and the Hs 126 A/Bs were already retired from frontline units in 1942, the better-performing Hs 126 Cs only a year later. The type was soon superseded by the light general-purpose STOL Fieseler Fi 156 Storch, which was simpler and cheaper to produce, and the medium-range two-engine twin-boom Focke-Wulf Fw 189 "flying eye" with a fully enclosed cockpit and a better defensive armament. However, many Hs 126s were still operated for some time in areas with little Allied aerial threat, or second-line duties as glider tugs or liaison aircraft.
General characteristics:
Crew: Two (pilot and observer/gunner)
Length: 10,90 m (35 ft 7 in) fuselage only
11,52 m (37 ft 9 in) overall
Wingspan: 14.5 m (47 ft 7 in)
Height: 4,61 m (15 ft 1 in) from waterline
Wing area: 31.6 m² (340 sqft)
Empty weight: 2,030 kg (4,480 lb)
Loaded weight: 3,090 kg (6,820 lb)
Powerplant:
1× BMW 132K air-cooled 9-cylinder radial engine with 809 kW (1,085 hp) emergency power
and 705 kW (960 hp) continuous output
Performance:
Maximum speed: 360 km/h (223 mph) at 3,000 m (9,850 ft) with floats
(C-1: 400 km/h (248 mph) with wheels)
Travelling speed: 280 km/h /174 mph)
(C-1: 300 km/h (186 mph)
Landing speed: 115 km/h (71 mph)
Range: 998 km (620 mi)
Service ceiling: 8,530 m (28,000 ft)
Rate of climb: 550 m/min (1,800 ft/min)
Time to height: 4,4 min to 1.000 m (3.275 ft)
14 min to 3.000 m (9826 ft)
Wing loading: 97.8 kg/m2 (20.1 lb/sqft)
Power/mass: 0.21 kW/kg (0.13 hp/lb)
Armament:
1× forward-firing 13 mm (.511 in) MG 131 machine gun
1× flexible, rearward-firing 13 mm (.511 in) MG 131 machine gun
The kit and its assembly:
This build was inspired by a similar project done by fellow modeler ericr at whatfimodellers.com in 1:48 a while ago: a combination of the German land-based Hs 126 observation aircraft with twin floats from an Ar 196 seaplane. This combo looked very natural and balanced, so I decided to re-create a personal interpretation in my “home scale” 1:72.
Basically, this what-if model is a straightforward combination of the Italeri Hs 126 A (a venerable but pretty good model, even today, despite raised panel lines) with floats from a Heller Ar 196 A (also a slightly dated but very nice model, also with raised panel lines). The selling point of both kits is their good fit and overall simplicity, even though mounting the Hs 126’s wings to the fuselage – it is held only at six points – is a tricky task. Furthermore, once the wing is in place, painting the area in front of the cockpit as well as the windscreen area is quite difficult, so that I did that ahead of the final assembly.
The Ar 196 floats feature lots of struts, and to mount them (only) under the fuselage the outer supports had to go, because they are normally attached to the Ar 196’s mid-wing section. What was a bit challenging is the struts’ attachment points on the floats: they come with square bases that offer relatively big surfaces to glue the party in place, adding stability to the whole construction. However, blending these areas into each other called for some PSR.
A similar attachment solution was chosen by Heller to mount the floats’ struts to the Ar 196 hull – again, the “end plates” had to go and the struts had to be trimmed to keep the floats parallel to the fuselage. Since the outer supports were gone, I added diagonal stabilizers between the front and rear struts cluster.
To add a personal twist and depict an evolutionary late version of the Hs 126, I decided to swap the engine for a donor part from a Matchbox He 115 – it is basically the same engine, but the cowling is slightly wider and cleaner. The engine part itself is simpler. Just a disc with an engine relief. But with the propeller in place (mounted on a metal axis to spin free), this is not obvious. With scratched exhaust pipes, the new cowling gives the aircraft a slightly more modern and beefier look?
Another personal addition is improved crew comfort: the original Hs 126 observer workplace was totally open, just protected by spoilers on the canopy that only covered the pilot’s station. Esp. at wintertime this must have been a real P!TA place, so that I tried to extend the glazing. A raid in the spares box revealed two things that created an almost perfect combo: a Hs 126 glazing from a Matchbox kit and a rear canopy section from the spurious ESCI Ka-34 “Hokum” kit. The Matchbox parts’ selling point: it fits perfectly into the respective opening on the Italeri kit and has a slightly “boxier” roof shape, which better too up the square profile of the Hokum cockpit, which, itself, perfectly fell into place over the observer station! To adapt the modern piece to the highly braced Hs 126 glazing I added fake stiffeners made from adhesive tape cross- and lengthwise. I thought that just painting braces onto the flat windows was not enough, and with some paint the tape’s 3D effect looks quite convincing!
Other small additions are a barrel for the machine gun the cowling, a stabilizing fin made from styrene sheet material and PE ladders from the floats into the cockpit on both sides.
Painting and markings:
I wanted an authentic Luftwaffe livery – but the Hs 126 and similar German recce planes of the mid-WWII era only offer a small range of camouflage options. The generic paint scheme was a splinter pattern in RLM 70/71/65 with a low, hard waterline. Africa as optional theatre of operations offered some variations with field-modifications of this basic scheme with German and Italian sand added on top – but that would not have been the right option for a floatplane, I guess?
Eventually I decided to locate the model’s unit far up North and to add improvised winter camouflage to the standard livery. It was applied just as in real life: first, the whole model received its standard splinter camouflage with Humbrol 30, 91 and 65, then the decals were applied. The latter were puzzled together from the scrap box, using simplified Eiserne Kreuze without black edges. The white unit emblems are fictional and come from an MPM He 100 kit with spurious PR markings. The tactical code is “plausible” (“9W” is the AufklGr. 122’s unit code, “D” denotes the 4th aircraft, and “C” is the verification letter for the Stabgeschwader of the unit’s 2nd group) and created from single letters/digits. The black and the green have no strong contrast to the camouflage, but this style was common Luftwaffe practice. The Stabflieger color green was also incorporated on the spinner, another very typical Luftwaffe marking to denote an aircraft’s operational unit.
The temporary whitewash was the applied with white acrylic paint (Revell 05) and a flat, soft brush. Once dry, the whole model received a light black ink washing, post-panel shading and a light treatment with wet sandpaper on the white areas to simulate wear and tear. After some exhaust stains were created with graphite, the model was finally sealed with matt acrylic varnish.
Well, not a spectacular what-if model, and mounting the Hs 126 on floats was trickier than one would expect at first glance. Pimping the rather dull Luftwaffe standard livery with whitewash was a good move, though, adding an interesting and individual twist to the aircraft. And the resulting whole “package” looks pretty convincing?
The Guinean contingent of MINUSMA composed of 850 soldiers, including 16 women, they are based in Kidal in the extreme north of Mali. They ensure the security of the MINUSMA camp, through the occupation of strategic points around the city of Kidal called Galaxies. In addition, the Guinean contingent conducts mine search and improvised explosive device activities on the roads used by MINUSMA vehicles. This contingent also ensures the safety of the civilian population, thanks to the control of the vehicles which return which by the checkpoints of the city of Kidal.
Photo: MINUSMA/Harandane Dicko
Contingent of Rhode Island State Police troopers assembled on the parade route, preparing to march.
Middletown, RI / May 2, 2010
First they help elect him, then they start complaining one week in. Just like us! At the Million Women March, Washington DC, January 21, 2017
El contingente alemán participante en el ejercicio #TJ15 , desembarca en puerto de Sagunto.
Vía Cuartel General FLO @CGFLO_ET
The Guinean contingent of MINUSMA composed of 850 soldiers, including 16 women, they are based in Kidal in the extreme north of Mali. They ensure the security of the MINUSMA camp, through the occupation of strategic points around the city of Kidal called Galaxies. In addition, the Guinean contingent conducts mine search and improvised explosive device activities on the roads used by MINUSMA vehicles. This contingent also ensures the safety of the civilian population, thanks to the control of the vehicles which return which by the checkpoints of the city of Kidal.
Photo: MINUSMA/Harandane Dicko
Contingent of New Jersey State Police troopers marching to the National Mall to attend the annual Police Week candlelight vigil.
Washington, DC / May 13, 2019
Contingent of New Jersey State Police troopers marching to the National Mall to attend the annual Police Week candlelight vigil.
Washington, DC / May 13, 2019
Contingent leader Afzal Hossain from Bangladesh attending his ninth World Jamboree the at World Point during the 24th World Scout Jamboree on Monday, July 22, 2019. Check out other photos and videos at bit.ly/WSJ2019. (Photo by Jeff Hattrick)
A contingent in a march of several thousand demonstrators demanding freedom for the “Scottsboro Boys” parades down Pennsylvania Avenue May 8, 1933.
Signs called for freedom for Tom Mooney, Angelo Herndon and Euel Lee in addition to the “Scottsboro Boys.”
The march meandered for some six miles through the city.
The march route: Assemble at Florida Avenue and New York Avenue, west on New York Avenue to N Street, west on N street to Thirteenth Street, south on Thirteenth Street to New York Avenue, west on New York Avenue to Pennsylvania Avenue, west on Pennsylvania Avenue to West Executive Avenue, south to roadway south of the White House, east around the roadway to Pennsylvania Avenue via E Street, east on Pennsylvania Avenue to Constitution Avenue, east on Constitution Avenue to Second Street NE, south on Second Street to C Street SE, west on C Street to third Street SW, north on Third Street to Seaton Place: Rally then disband.
The ”Scottsboro Boys” were nine black youths accused of raping two white women in Alabama. The case was taken up by the Communist Party and a coordinated campaign of demonstrations, letter writing, petitions, telegrams, meetings and rallies were staged along with a legal strategy—and in doing so established the tactics of the 20th Century Civil Rights Movement.
The effort succeeding in freeing some of the youths and forestalling the death penalty for all. Two precedent setting U.S. Supreme Court decisions came out of the case—the right to competent counsel and a bar on excluding black people from juries.
For an article on the Scottsboro marches and rallies in Washington, D.C, see washingtonspark.wordpress.com/2013/02/19/scottsboro-boys-...
For more images related to the Scottsboro campaign in Washington, D.C., see www.flickr.com/gp/washington_area_spark/920302
The photographer is unknown. The image is a Los Angeles Times photograph obtained via an Internet sale.
Trinidad contingent having breakfast during the 2023 National Scout Jamboree at The Summit Bechtel Reserve in Mount Hope, West Virginia. (BSA Photo by Leo He)
**********Beginning of Shooting Data Section**********
20230720-07-48-33--LH date - 7/20/23 time - 07:48:33
Burkina Faso is the largest troop contributor to MINUSMA, with a total strength of 1,723 military personnel, including 38 women. They are mainly based in the regions of Timbuktu in northern Mali and Mopti in the center. They ensure the security of logistics convoys of MINUSMA, military operations for the security of civilian populations and the protection of MINUSMA camps.
Photo: MINUSMA/Harandane Dicko
Kos or Cos (Greek: Κως) is a Greek island, part of the Dodecanese island chain in the southeastern Aegean Sea, next to the Gulf of Gökova/Cos.
In Homer's Iliad, a contingent from Kos fought for the Greeks in the Trojan War.[12]
In the Roman mythology, the island was visited by Hercules.[13]
The island was originally colonised by the Carians. The Dorians invaded it in the 11th century BC, establishing a Dorian colony with a large contingent of settlers from Epidaurus, whose Asclepius cult made their new home famous for its sanatoria. The other chief sources of the island's wealth lay in its wines and, in later days, in its silk manufacture.[14]
Its early history–as part of the religious-political amphictyony that included Lindos, Kamiros, Ialysos, Cnidus and Halicarnassus, the Dorian Hexapolis (hexapolis means six cities in Greek),[15]–is obscure. At the end of the 6th century, Kos fell under Achaemenid domination but rebelled after the Greek victory at the Battle of Mycale in 479. During the Greco-Persian Wars, before it twice expelled the Persians, it was ruled by Persian-appointed tyrants, but as a rule it seems to have been under oligarchic government. In the 5th century, it joined the Delian League, and, after the revolt of Rhodes, it served as the chief Athenian station in the south-eastern Aegean (411–407). In 366 BC, a democracy was instituted. In 366 BC, the capital was transferred from Astypalaia to the newly built town of Kos, laid out in a Hippodamian grid. After helping to weaken Athenian power, in the Social War (357-355 BC), it fell for a few years to the king Mausolus of Caria.
Proximity to the east gave the island first access to imported silk thread. Aristotle mentions silk weaving conducted by the women of the island.[16] Silk production of garments was conducted in large factories by women slaves.[17]
In the Hellenistic age, Kos attained the zenith of its prosperity. Its alliance was valued by the kings of Egypt, who used it as a naval outpost to oversee the Aegean. As a seat of learning, it arose as a provincial branch of the museum of Alexandria, and became a favorite resort for the education of the princes of the Ptolemaic dynasty. During the hellenistic age, there was a medical school; however, the theory that this school was founded by Hippocrates (see below) during the classical age is an unwarranted extrapolation.[18] Among its most famous sons were the physician Hippocrates, the painter Apelles, the poets Philitas and, perhaps, Theocritus.
Diodorus Siculus (xv. 76) and Strabo (xiv. 657) describe it as a well-fortified port. Its position gave it a high importance in Aegean trade; while the island itself was rich in wines of considerable fame.[19] Under Alexander the Great and the Egyptian Ptolemies the town developed into one of the great centers in the Aegean; Josephus[20] quotes Strabo to the effect that Mithridates was sent to Kos to fetch the gold deposited there by the queen Cleopatra of Egypt. Herod is said to have provided an annual stipend for the benefit of prize-winners in the athletic games,[21] and a statue was erected there to his son Herod the Tetrarch ("C. I. G." 2502 ). Paul briefly visited here according to Acts 21:1.
Except for occasional incursions by corsairs and some severe earthquakes, the island has rarely had its peace disturbed. Following the lead of its larger neighbour, Rhodes, Kos generally displayed a friendly attitude toward the Romans; in 53 AD it was made a free city. Lucian (125–180) mentions their manufacture of semi-transparent light dresses, a fashion success.[22] The island of Kos also featured a provincial library during the Roman period. The island first became a center for learning during the Ptolemaic dynasty, and Hippocrates, Apelles, Philitas and possibly Theocritus came from the area. An inscription lists people who made contributions to build the library in the 1st century AD.[23] One of the people responsible for the library's construction was the Kos doctor Gaiou Stertinou Xenofontos, who lived in Rome and was the personal physician of the Emperors Tiberius, Claudius, and Nero.[24]
The bishopric of Cos was a suffragan of the metropolitan see of Rhodes.[25] Its bishop Meliphron attended the First Council of Nicaea in 325. Eddesius was one of the minority Eastern bishops who withdrew from the Council of Sardica in about 344 and set up a rival council at Philippopolis. Iulianus went to the synod held in Constantinople in 448 in preparation for the Council of Chalcedon of 451, in which he participated as a legate of Pope Leo I, and he was a signatory of the joint letter that the bishops of the Roman province of Insulae sent in 458 to Byzantine Emperor Leo I the Thracian with regard to the killing of Proterius of Alexandria. Dorotheus took part in a synod in 518. Georgius was a participant of the Third Council of Constantinople in 680–681. Constantinus went to the Photian Council of Constantinople (879).[26][27] Under Byzantine rule, apart from the participation of its bishops in councils, the island's history remains obscure. It was governed by a droungarios in the 8th/9th centuries, and seems to have acquired some importance in the 11th and 12th centuries: Nikephoros Melissenos began his uprising here, and in the middle of the 12th century, it was governed by a scion of the ruling Komnenos dynasty, Nikephoros Komnenos.[25]
The contingent of Chile cheers as their country is recognized. Photo taken during the 24th World Scout Jamboree on Tuesday, July 23, 2019. Check out other photos and videos at bit.ly/WSJ2019. (Photo by Kevin A. Shaw)
Before the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Soviet Air Force and Naval Aviation had a large contingent of aircraft and weapons stationed in Ukraine. These included the 5th, 14th, and 17th Air Armies plus five regiments of the 46th Air Army, Long Range Aviation, and significant portions of the Soviet Naval Aviation (Black Sea Fleet). After the collapse of the Soviet Union, these forces became the property of the newly independent Ukraine. The Ukrainian Air Force, established on 17 March 1992, inherited a large number of Tu-22M2/M3 bombers from the 185th Guards, 260th, and 402nd Heavy Bomber Aviation Regiments and the 5th Guards, 124th, 170th Guards, and 943rd Maritime Missile Aviation Regiments. These forces were gathered into the Ukrainian Long-Range Aviation Group and the Ukrainian Naval Aviation.
Ukraine’s Long-Range Aviation and Naval Aviation units found it difficult to operate due to the deep economic crisis in Ukraine after the collapse of the Soviet Union, pressure from the U.S. State Department on Ukraine to eliminate its nuclear and strategic forces, the lack of support from production plants and design bureaus which remained in Russia, the reduction in the size of the armed forces resulting in the loss of experienced pilots and supporting personnel, and the life expectancy of some aircraft components and assemblies had expired. On 25 November 1993, Ukraine signed an agreement with the United States to eliminate its strategic nuclear weapons and strategic aircraft. By 31 December 2006, Ukraine had officially eliminated it's Long-Range Aviation and Naval Aviation strategic forces.
This aircraft, Red 07, flew briefly with the 5th Guards Maritime Missile Aviation Regiment stationed at Veseloye, Crimea. This aircraft now rests at the Ukraine State Aviation Museum at the Kyiv International Airport (Zhuliany) south of Kyiv.
Cérémonie d’adieu au Capitaine Massamaesso TANGAOU du contingent Togolais de la MINUSMA, décédé le 14 août dernier à Douentza dans la Region de Mopti au centre du Mali lors de l’attaque du camp de la MINUSMA.
Photo: MINUSMA/Harandane Dicko
Departure of Bushmen's contingent. Police band en route
Dated: 28/02/1900
Digital ID: 1254_a011_a011000017R
This series comprises photographs of the New South Wales Bushmen's Contingent departing for active service in the Cape Colony during the Boer War.
Rights: www.records.nsw.gov.au/about-us/rights-and-permissions
We'd love to hear from you if you use our photos/documents.
Many other photos in our collection are available to view and browse on our website using Photo Investigator.
Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar visited today contingents of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) in South Lebanon. He was met at the Headquarters of the Finnish Battalion in the Village of Bourj Qallawiyah, by Col. J. Tenhunen, Commander of the Finnish Contingent. On the right is Col. J. Tenhunen, Commander of the Finnish Contingent and on the left is Brian Urquhart, Assistant Secretary-General for Special Political Affairs.
UN Photo/John Isaac
11 June 1984
Lebanon
Photo # 61392
This year's theme was "Looking Back and Moving Forward".
...100th view 7-15-23...
...200th view 8-6-23...
...300th view 10-29-23...
...400th view 1-12-24...
...500th view 5-7-24...
Esta semana está siendo muy intensa para nuestros militares y lo queremos compartir con vosotros.
▶El contingente EUTM Mali XXII con base en la VIII Bandera de la Brigada “Rey Alfonso XIII” de #LaLegión, realiza en el CTM Álvarez de Sotomayor #Viator su último ejercicio de preparación antes de ser desplegado fuera de #España.
¡Buen trabajo y buena misión legionarios! 💪 #SomostuEjército 🇪🇸
Two of the Scottish contingent at the Lincoln 1940s and WWII event during the last weekend in May 2015. On the Saturday the sun shone and the crowds flocked to experience the excitement of people in period costume and a collection of old military vehicles in the Cathedral Quarter of the city.
Lincoln attracts tourists from all over the world and you can hear many accents and languages being spoken - some of them must have been bemused at what this event was about but the tourists from the Orient looked so happy and excited when we pulled up in a horse and trap carriage that their cameras were going ten to the dozen on us.
My images are processed to look good on my laptop, and they do look good on there - and on my phone and tablet - I am aware though that some other screens will show my images as either too dark or indeed too light. This is due to individual screen settings and not my inability to produce a clear image ....