View allAll Photos Tagged engaging
Two men engaging in a fistfight on the street. The facial expression of the onlookers captured the moment the conflict broke out . A couple of seconds later all turned out to be just an overdone but inherently playful act between the two men normally toting "friendship bracelets" for unsuspecting tourists.
Athens, Greece; 2016
Actively engaging in sexual alchemical work to pay off their karmic debts and annihilate their egos. Through this process, they gradually ascend toward the Absolute over many cosmic cycles. However, many initiates choose the easier spiral path, avoiding the stricter, more demanding direct path of self-transformation and spiritual growth.
Seraphim alchemy rules matter sublimation: Master Samael Aun Weor stated that the heavenly hierarchies have to make three selections.
The first selection is when initiates through Brith Esh ברית אש (the pact of fire, sexual alchemy) enter into initiation. In order to comprehend Brith Esh ברית אש, the pact of fire, the students have to receive lectures. They have to comprehend the doctrine of alchemy. They have to decide to walk on the path of the science of alchemy. This is how they enter into initiation, this is how they enter into Mitsrayimah מצרימה, Egypt, in order to control the waters of their Nile and their “Mediterranean waters” in themselves. Remember that Mediterranean means “the middle of the earth,” so the waters or fluids in “the middle of our terra” or physicality are the cerebral spinal and genital fluids where our spirit is hovering. So, those are the sexual waters that the initiates, the alchemists of the first selection have to control in order to achieve the first, second, third, fourth and fifth initiations.
Then when his inner Moses and inner Abraham (his Innermost) reaches the fifth initiation of major mysteries, he has to decide upon which of the two paths he will continue his alchemical work. The alchemist has to decide whether or not to follow the second selection, meaning the second selection of the Exodus, which is a very high work that the alchemist has to perform after reaching mastery. These two paths are represented in Genesis by the charitable life of Abraham. Regarding the former statement let us read the following quotation, written by this great alchemist and kabbalist Paul of Tarsus:
“Tell me you whose will is to be under the law, do you not hear [how] the law [is applied]? For it is written, that Abraham [Chesed] had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a free-woman.
“But the one who was of the bondwoman was born after the [law of reincarnation in the] flesh; but he of the free-woman was by the promise [in Daath].
“Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants [of fire]; the one from the Mount Sinai, which [through the spiral path] engenders to bondage, which is Hagar. For this Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answers to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children [the Pratyeka buddhas]. But Jerusalem which is above [in Daath] is free, which is [Elah-Yam] the mother of all of us [the Bodhisattvas].
“For it is written: “Rejoice, O barren she who does not bear; break forth and cry aloud, you who are not in [physical] labor! For the children of the desolate [in Malkuth] will be more than those of she who has a husband [in Daath].”
“Now we, brethren [צדיק Tzadik alchemists], as Isaac was, are the children of the promise [in Daath].” [“Isaac, who is on (Geburah) the left hand (below the sephirah Daath), presides over the Beth Din or tribunal of (צדק Tzedek) Justice, whence are issued decrees and judgments.” - Zohar]
“But as then the one who was born after the [law of reincarnation in the] flesh (Malkuth) persecuted the one who was born [in Geburah-Daath] after the [Holy] Spirit, even so it is now. Nevertheless what says the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her children: for the children of the bondwoman shall not be heirs [of Chokmah as] with the children of the free woman. So then, brethren, we [Bodhisattvas] are not children of the bondwoman, but children of the free.” - Galatians 4: 21-31
Paul of Tarsus is addressing initiates, alchemists, not believers. The quotation is not concerned with what people think or believe or something of the sort, but with the will of those who are already doing the sexual alchemical work.
Notwithstanding, most of the alchemists who reach the fifth initiation of major mysteries choose to be under the law of reincarnation. What is the law? It is the law of karma. Those of the spiral path reincarnate periodically in Malkuth in order to pay what they karmically owe and in order to annihilate their egos. Slowly they go up towards the Absolute through many cosmic days.
The initiate that chooses the path of sacrifice for humanity engenders Isaac, the son of Geburah from the free woman. Sarah, the free woman, represents Aima Elohim in Daath. Agar is Malkuth, the wheel of Samsara that relates with the law of evolution and devolution; this is the wheel where many Buddhas Pratyekas reincarnate because they are still with ego. These are the צדיקים Tzadikim, alchemists that developed themselves under the law. As long as the צדיקים Tzadikim have defects, vices, and errors, they are under the law of karma, since the law of karma controls the ego. Karma controls the negative forces of Geburah. Yet, the free woman, who precisely represents Aima Elohim, the supreme forces of the Divine Mother, is represented in this allegory by Sarah the wife of Abraham, who is the one that begat Isaac.
Isaac represents צדק Tzedek (justice, Geburah, the spiritual soul) that became united to חסד Chesed (mercy, the Spirit), and whose divine attributes or archetypes (symbolized by Israel) became blended in Jacob (their offspring or human soul), who represents the initiate that creates the causal body (Moses). Thus, Moses descends with all of the powers of Jehovah Elohim in order to liberate Israel by means of the performance of the great alchemical work. Israel is liberated by means of the annihilation of all of the defects and vices, which are represented in the exodus by the people who serve the mechanical laws of Malkuth. This is done in order to achieve the complete self-realization by means of the total annihilation of פה-רע Phe-Ra (pharaoh, “the evil mouth,” the ego), in order to be completely clean from karma.
Yes, in order to be completely clean from karma we have to annihilate the ego, because the ego is under the law. But there are many thousands of initiates who prefer to go on the easier spiral path. They do not follow the direct path because it is very strict and demanding. Initiates from the direct path include Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Buddha, Krishna, etc. They always show and teach how to kill, how to annihilate, our defects, vices, and errors. Their methods are written in books in a symbolic manner, as for instance the Mahabharata, which only the alchemists know how to read. In it Krishna talks to Arjuna about his relatives or psychological aggregates that we carry within our psyche, which are our egos. So that is precisely the point in this matter related to Abraham and Brith Esh ברית אש, the pact of fire.
glorian.org/learn/courses-and-lectures/precepts-of-alchem...
U.S. Chief Technology Officer, Megan Smith, speaks at the Engaging Women and Girls in STEM through Data Science event on Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at NASA Headquarters in Washington. The event was held as part of the White House's United State of Women Summit. Photo Credit: (NASA/Aubrey Gemignani)
NASA Deputy Administrator Dava Newman speaks at the Engaging Women and Girls in STEM through Data Science event on Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at NASA Headquarters in Washington. The event was held as part of the White House's United State of Women Summit. Photo Credit: (NASA/Aubrey Gemignani)
Agnes Von Weiss "Optic Verve" wearing
V. Jhon JAN13 Dress
"Festive Decadence" black belt
"Rare Appeal" heels
"Ready to Dare" pink earrings.
FR bracelet
Elise Jolie "Engaging" wearing
V. Jhon MAY13
V. Jhon necklace
JuniorNY choker
"Tricks of the Trade" earrings
"Opium" heels
FR bracelet
Engaging Wilderness Desires.
Présomptions immuables admirations distinctifs environnement de jungle idées primitives,
euogfarnau cnawd rhyddiaith darfodus chiseling anochel egnïol llyfnder ymadroddion ysbrydoliaeth,
militaribus iocis antithesis summa perfectio subsidiaria cantilenas grandeur aestimationem reddere conabimur tall,
lenyűgöző arany tornyok menedéket érzelmei zseniális módon trowl költők vadászok szeme,
antika anılar memnun antik hayvanları başlıkları provoke olası kayıtsız maceralar gibi kuğu,
artistieke incarnaties wilde identificeerbare middeleeuwse woordenschat burgerlijke groei oneerlijk intensiteit onthuld,
errantes passeios rurais regimes intervencionistas aristocratas tenebroso escritores manuais da fábrica dentro,
dilemmi amplificati intermedi posizioni economiche tradizioni nazioni ricostruiti privilegi esenta dominanti,
恥ずかしい文献不正は、法律の聖体は、ホールを沈黙排気逆想像力を大騒ぎ.
Steve.D.Hammond.
July's almost coming to a close, so I thought I'd share my thoughts on a few new films that I was able to catch in the past week or two!
Sorry to Bother You -
This movie was so fucking weird... So we need more movies like this, please! Now although I felt the base storyline to be a little average and slightly clichéd, everything else that surrounds this film is so different and so unique that it was such a visceral experience to watch. Not to mention the layers and layers of important social commentary that was packed into the movie that made the experience even more insightful. When weird has a purpose and drives a message like it did in this movie, it clicks for me; and let me tell ya, this movie SO DAMN WEIRD. I'm so glad I wasn't spoiled about anything going into this movie, if you plan on seeing this, go in as blind as you can. There was one surprise that just made this film my kind of weird movie, and once it happened I was all in! I'm so excited to see where Boots Riley's career's going to go, but I'm not gonna lie that first thing I thought when walking out of this movie was Boots Riley for an Earthbound movie PLEASE.
Score: 8.5/10
Three Identical Strangers -
2018 has been an absolutely excellent year for documentaries, and this film is no exception! The emotional journey that this film takes you through is absolutely incredible. The way how this story starts off with these triplets finding each other is fairytale-like and becomes such a fee-good flick. But as these brothers grow older and discover what truly happened to them, things become so sinister, tragic, but extremely fanscinating. I definitely recommend going into this film knowing absolutely nothing about these brothers and their story because it makes the film all the more visceral and engaging.
Score: 8/10
Hearts Beat Loud -
The saving grace of this movie is that NICK OFFERMAN DEADASS PERFORMS OCEAN MAN BY WEEN. I had absolutely zero expectations going into Hearts Beat Loud. I had my Movie Pass and this was the only film I could use it with (since I've used my Movie Pass for every other film) at my local independent theater, so I decided to give it a shot with the only piece of information in my head being the poster. This is such a tricky film for me, Hearts Beat Loud is one of those great feel-good movies with excellent music and performances, but I felt if this film was written as a 45 minute short film with extended sequences of the main characters just making and playing songs. They're good songs, but it overall dragged the pace of the film down for me. I would recommend seeing this film, it has great performances and music, but I just found the story to be so shallow and drawn out. Perhaps if Nick Offerman sang Ocean Man by Ween more in this film I would've enjoyed it more...
Score: 6.5/10
The Death of Superman -
Man, it's been a while since a DC animated film's been this good! The Death of Superman is a near perfect adaptation of the classic comic. The film is packaged with all the action and emotion that the original has, with some welcomed additions including the Justice League. While I must say I'm getting pretty tired of this bland art style and character designs in these newer DC animated movies, really hope DC ditches this bland art style soon for something a big more vibrant and stylized to the genre because their storylines do deserve better. But I must say the animation took a big leap in quality and became very cinematic and anime-like once the fight against Doomsday begun! I'm interested to see where this story goes with the Rein of the Superman, but I'm also fine with this film standing on its own. Let's hope DC fixes their animation problem but keeps this film's quality in storytelling!
Score: 8/10
If you have seen any of these films, let me know what you thought of them in the comments below!
If you like these mini reviews, I upload these almost EVERY DAY, both old and new movies, on my Letterboxd account! Make sure to create an account and follow me there!
I keep on staring her the day after i receive her...To me, it's hard to get her beauty. She doesn't like Agnes, as i don't have the "love at first sight" with when i look at her, but she's a grower, she's definitely a HUGE grower.
The more i look , the more i love, the more i obsess with this supermodel!I know that i want her, so so much! She's like a couture girl, she looks high-end in every inch!
I'm not a good photographer and to me, it's hard to capture her beauty too, but i'm pleased with what i take!
She's like a dream comes true, a big GRAIL in my FR wishlist!
Engaging the light shield of love, forgiveness & gratitude, I direct its powerful energy into the beautiful storm drain called Burford's Batcave. I hope its amazing energy will seep upwards through the ground and spread love, happiness and prosperity throughout the beautiful city of Brisbane for all of the year 2015 and beyond
#830: As of 1/24/19, under Flickr's popularity rankings of my 1400+ pics, this is listed as #830 in "interestingness."
I've been engaging in some short, private crossdressing opportunities at home recently, after acquiring and trying out some new clothes, shoes, and accessories. This is the 88th pic posted from this recent CD activity, and taken just last month.
As usual, I really enjoy color-coordinating attractive/sexy/cute outfits, and this one features a dark-pink patterned long-sleeve button-down blouse paired with a light pink long pleated skirt, accompanied by new pink high heel wedge sandals, and a complementary belt, purse, scarf, net tights, and jewelry.
More about this and other new 2017 pics was written up recently in a descriptive Update provided in my profile or "About" page here on Flickr. It details some choices made for these 2017 pics.
Let me know your thoughts... :-)
P.S. As far as the picture setting here, this is on the deck of our home. I'm using the glass patio door as a mirror (fuzziness related to glass not cleaned in some time), aided with a black sheet hung right inside the door, although some of the wrinkles in the sheet may be detected in the image here.
Playing around with a ring flash for some macro photos of my wife's engagement ring, etc. Something I've been wanting to try for some time but had never gotten around to setting it up until now :)
Step into a world of words at the Hirshhorn Museum, where this immersive, black-and-white text installation completely transforms the gallery space into a thought-provoking, visually striking experience. The artist’s dynamic brushwork covers every inch of the floor, walls, and even the ceiling with handwritten text, illustrations, and graffiti-like scrawls, all in stark black and white. Snippets of phrases, poetry, and protest statements intermingle, challenging visitors to consider questions of identity, politics, history, and the human condition.
Visitors are dwarfed by towering phrases that ask, “What is truth?” and “Who owns the future?”, while figures and animals emerge from the painted chaos, including a prominent black sculpture of a raven—a potent symbol of transformation and observation. At the center of the room, a bright yellow canoe pops against the monochrome backdrop, an unexpected dash of color that invites both curiosity and contemplation.
The installation’s scale and detail create a sense of total immersion, urging visitors to physically move through and around the words, reading, pondering, and engaging with the artist’s urgent message. Each visitor becomes part of the artwork itself, their shadows cast on the text-laden floor as they navigate the space.
This installation exemplifies contemporary art’s power to challenge perceptions and invite dialogue, transforming a museum into an interactive environment where language and imagery converge. It’s a place where every footstep lands on a phrase or thought, and every glance finds new questions to ponder.
The Hirshhorn Museum, part of the Smithsonian Institution, continues to champion innovative, boundary-pushing contemporary art, and this installation stands as a testament to that mission. For those seeking an unforgettable, interactive experience that bridges text and visual art, this exhibit offers a unique journey through the written word’s raw energy and expressive power.
Michelle Easter, Engineer, NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) speaks at the Engaging Women and Girls in STEM through Data Science event on Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at NASA Headquarters in Washington. The event was held as part of the White House's United State of Women Summit. Photo Credit: (NASA/Aubrey Gemignani)
Gail Maurice, dir.; and Melanie Bray, act.; "Rosie" © Linda Dawn Hammond/ IndyFoto 2022. Photographed in Graffiti Alley, Toronto, Canada.
Portrait of Gail Maurice, by Artist Kent Monkman, "Shining Stars" series in "Being Legendary" exhibit, at the ROM (Royal Ontario Museum) © IndyFoto 2022
“Rosie”
Review and Interview
By Linda Dawn Hammond
“Rosie” is the first feature film of Metis director and writer, Gail Maurice, who is also known as an actor in the TV series, “Trickster”. She self identifies as a member of the LGBTQ+ community and is one of a small number of less than 2000 people who can still speak Michif, a now endangered language which was spoken by the Metis people of Canada in the 19th and 20th centuries. It is a primarily a combination of French nouns and Cree verbs, and originated in the 1800s from contact between Francophone traders and Cree and Ojibwe First Nations people. The descendants of these French and First Nations unions became known as Metis.
“Rosie” appears on the surface to be a simple, joyous film about an engaging trio of social misfits who, with the help of an orphan child, find emotional support and resolution in a chosen family of their own creation. Its underlying messages are far more complex and will speak to those aware of the terrible legacy of Canada’s Residential Schools and the “Sixties Scoop,” which adversely affected the lives of thousands of indigenous people and their descendants.
It is set in 1980s Montreal, which in “Rosie” is a world categorized by poverty and insecurity for those who don’t conform to society’s standards and norms. The character of “Fred”, (Mélanie Bray) is lovingly portrayed as a somewhat irresponsible Francophone artist who lives a precarious existence on the constant edge of poverty, eviction and unemployment. Her best friends are Flo (Constant Bernard) and Mo (Alex Trahan), who are flamboyant and decidedly non-gender conforming. Their alternative lifestyles are suddenly disrupted by the initially unwelcome arrival of a homeless six year old girl, Rosie (Keris Hope Hill). Through her enthusiastic, sweet presence, she teaches the adults about responsibility but also to live their dreams. At the time of shooting Keris had never acted before, but she is charming and effective in the part. The Kanien'kehá:ka girl from the Six Nations of the Grand River plays the role of an indigenous child left orphaned after the death of her mother. (It is perplexing that she was not included in Tiff’s roster of 2022 Rising Stars, but she was mentioned in CBC’s recent list of young, talented stars.)
In the film, “Rosie”, social services search for a blood relative to take custody of Rosie, an orphaned English speaking girl in Montreal. All they can uncover is a “sister” of the deceased mother, a Francophone woman who had been once been placed in the same adoptive home. They have no records of the whereabouts of any genetic relatives due to the willful incompetence of officials during the “Sixties Scoop”, when tens of thousands of children, primarily indigenous, were forcibly removed from their families and placed in predominantly white foster homes. These stolen children were not encouraged to remain in contact with their families or know of their heritage. In many cases they were intentionally sent far away to achieve this separation.
It is a story close to the heart of the director on many levels. Maurice experienced a similar painful disruption in her own family. Whereas she as the eldest child was fortunate to be taken in and raised by her Metis grandmother, who taught her Michif and the ways of their people, a younger brother and sister were removed in the “Sixties Scoop” and disappeared. It is only recently that the whereabouts of Gail’s brother was discovered.
In Quebec, language is always part of the conversation, but in Montreal in particular, bilingualism has been an important factor in breaching any linguistic or cultural divides. The little orphaned girl in the story is indigenous and anglophone, and although she finds herself in a world which is French speaking and white, there are no divides as people choose to learn from each other, and even introduce a third language, Cree.
Interview
I sat down with Rosie’s director, Gail Maurice, and her partner, actor Mélanie Bray, to discuss the film.
GM (Gail Maurice):
I was asked about the 80s, how there was so much violence against gay culture, queer culture. So they asked my perspective, because Rosie is not really (violent), I mean, there's a couple moments in the film that showed or insinuated it. But it's not about that, even though a couple of broadcasters told me they wanted me to add that element, the violence towards the gay people, towards Flo and Mo, and I tried to do that, and it just went to a dark place. And I thought to myself, that's not the story I want to tell. That's not my experience in the ‘80s, of being gay. What my experience was, basically, was what “Rosie” is, and it was a time of where I was finding out about being gay and gay culture, and it was also new and wild and beautiful. And, just extravagant, you know. And so, that's why I wrote a story from Rosie's perspective, because she is able to see the world with that wide eyed wonder. And that's exactly how I was when I came out, and that's the story I wanted to tell. I wanted to tell a story of chosen family, of love, belonging, being it wasn't a story about, gay culture, per se. What I’d like to say is, it's an indigenous story with an indigenous perspective, told through the eyes of a little indigenous girl who happens to be part of this scene, and during a period of time (the 80s) that is really important to me, that was, coming out. So that's the story I wanted to tell. I came out I was 18. My first year university. It was a magical time, in Saskatoon, in a little bar called Numbers.
LDH (Linda Dawn Hammond)
Can you talk about how the “60s scoop” affected you personally?
GM:
I was able to find my brother. Part of the effect of the “60s scoop” is loss of culture and identity. So when I found him, I did a little short (film) called, “Little Indians. “ We're not close. I've seen him maybe three times, and in a very different environment. He grew up in the white home, with a white family and on a farm. He said he played baseball with the little Indians. You know, so he took himself out and didn't see himself as an Indian. I know he knows he's Metis. It's hard. It's a loss, and I have a sister out there somewhere…
LDH:
You were able to live with your grandma, and there you learned a language that's so rare. Michif.
GM:
Michif. And yeah, I wrote a trilingual film, because I wanted to be able to talk about my language as well. Not a lot of people know about that language, which is a mixture of Cree and French. I was teasing Melanie, I said, “My French is the original French. Because, you know, it's part of the Couriers de Bois and the French fur traders. So my French is actually from that era. So we still have all that French in my language, whereas Melanie’s, it's now modern, right?
LDH:
French people in France say that yours (Melanie’s) is actually the original French. Quebec French is considered to be what the language was like before it transformed over in France and became modern.
You mentioned “Rosie” is a trilingual film.
Is it Michif you’re teaching them, the (indigenous) language in the class scene. Is that where it came in?
GM:
Yeah, so my language is pretty (much) French. So sometimes there's three. Our numbers are crazy, and household things are French- dirt and colds are French. So the numbers were all created. I wanted to tell a story about chosen family, to monitor those children that were taken away- it's part of the 60s Scoop, and the effects of that. Some of them will never know who they are, or where their family's from, or who their blood relatives are. I wanted to tell a story, to honour them, because they're doing the best that they can in the world. And just to say, that they're strong, and they're survivors, and I admire and honour them. So that's why I wanted to tell “Rosie” as well, but also, it's a story about beauty in trash. So metaphoric faith, there's a lot of people that think that others are less than them, for example, Jigger (the character of a homeless Cree man, played by actor Brandon Oakes), who's my favourite character, but he's the one that's most grounded to me. He's the one that has his culture, and his language, and he's the one that tells Rosie, and shares the culture with Rosie. So he is, actually, the strongest character.
That's the whole tragedy of it, always. There's people in Europe that don't even realize where they're from. There's a film out there which (Dr.) Tasha Hubbard did. She's Cree from the prairies. She did a documentary on family, the family that found each other. For years and years apart, and they were all over the world. (“Birth of a Family”, 2017, NFB)
LDH:
What acting role did you play in “Bones of Crows” ?
GM:
It's about residential school, and it takes place over 100 years, following a woman and matriarch. I played the Matriarch’s daughter.
There's so many people in Canada that don't know about my culture or the atrocities that happened. Two years ago, social workers went into a hospital and took a baby right out of a woman's arms… it was based on lies, but the power the government has, the power that the social workers and doctors have, is unbelievable… I can't imagine them doing that to a person that's non Indigenous. It's unfathomable that doctors and the government could get away with that, but they do get away with it with indigenous people. “Rosie” is a story with a lot of heavy topics, but in the next moment, you can be laughing, because the way I grew up, if we just soaked in all the hurt and all the pain and all the atrocities, how life is so difficult, if we did that, it would be bleak, and there would be no tomorrow, but the way I grew up, we actually can laugh even though the hardship of life, even though our world is breaking and falling apart. We can still laugh because laughter is, like they say, medicine, and it is medicine because it allows you to be able to lift up your head and carry on. And when you laugh, you're telling the world, you know, I can carry on, I can do this, and I'm going to do it. I'm going to triumph and that's why there's like moments where, you know, characters are crying, and then the next moment they're laughing. Yeah.
End
The World Premiere of the Canadian Indie film, “Rosie”, was featured in the Discovery program at TIFF (Toronto International Film Festival) on September 9, 2022. It was also selected as the closing film at Toronto’s ImagineNATIVE Film and Media Arts festival in October, 2022.
The ROM (Royal Ontario Museum) in Toronto is presently hosting, until March 19, 2022, an important exhibition entitled, “Being Legendary.”It features original paintings by the brilliant Cree artist, Kent Monkman, aka “Miss Chief”, who curated the exhibit. It includes cultural artifacts from the ROM’s collections, but from an indigenous perspective. The exhibit illustrates indigenous knowledge and challenges the past, colonial interpretation of history. As one enters the final room, there is a room of 11 portraits entitled, “Shining Stars”, illustrating indigenous women and men, who in their present state of being are beacons of the future. Among them, a portrait of Gail Maurice, where she is honoured by Monkman as a, “Filmmaker. Writer. Actor. Michif and nehiyawewin first languages speaker! “
A fitting tribute, which coincides with the years 2022 until 2032 being designated the UN’s * “International Decade of Indigenous Languages“
*The United Nations General Assembly (Resolution A/RES/74/135) proclaimed the period between 2022 and 2032 as the International Decade of Indigenous Languages (IDIL 2022-2032), to draw global attention on the critical situation of many indigenous languages and to mobilize stakeholders and resources for their preservation, revitalization and promotion.
The International Decade aims at ensuring indigenous peoples’ right to preserve, revitalize and promote their languages, and mainstreaming linguistic diversity and multilingualism aspects into the sustainable development efforts. It offers a unique opportunity to collaborate in the areas of policy development and stimulate a global dialogue in a true spirit of multi-stakeholder engagement, and to take necessary for the usage, preservation, revitalization and promotion of indigenous languages around the world.
www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/indigenous-...
Wearing a silkstone suit, A Starry night fur wrap, leopard print scarf and pearl earrings, she is just amazing. Have eyes ever been so blue?
This engaging species is found mostly in CO and NM. It favors pine forests with rocky terrain. Several pairs find shelter and raise their broods in the rock pile that surrounds the pond of our created bird oasis. They have all the cavities committed to memory, and usually present themselves for viewing except in the dead of winter. This guy is likely a first-year pup... the dark stripes on the back get darker (blacker) as the chipmunks age.
IMG_4888; Colorado Chipmunk
What is atheism?
Modern atheists say that atheism is the non-belief in ALL deities (gods). They also say things like; atheism does not require any beliefs - similar to not believing in fairies. Some even say that atheism is like not being a stamp collector or not engaging in some other hobby.
However, many people would disagree with the idea that atheism doesn't require any beliefs, or is not in itself a type of ideology/religion. The Bible proclaims that such atheism is irrational nonsense (the fool hath said in his heart there is no God).
So which view is correct?
Is it rational or feasible to reject ALL deities, and could such a rejection be described as simply a non-belief, similar to not believing in fairies?
Rejecting all deities seems fine at first glance. However, if we bother to consider what it really means, we soon realise that rejecting ALMOST all deities could be feasible - BUT not EVERY deity, because there is one particular exception..
Anyone with a modicum of intelligence realises that all deities (gods) are NOT the same. They can’t all be lumped together. There is one particular deity that is fundamentally different from all the others. There is one particular deity that it is not credible for any rational person to reject or dismiss. This may seem like a bold statement but, as we will see, it is not logically possible to reject the deity (God) that is regarded as the ‘Creator’ or supernatural, first cause of the universe.
Why?
Because, if you reject the supernatural, first cause, you have no option but to transfer all the creative powers and godlike attributes of the supernatural, first cause to nature or the natural/material realm. This means you effectively deify nature.
So by attempting to eliminate one deity - a supernatural, first cause (God) - you simply create another deity with similar, godlike powers (such as Mother Nature) to replace it.
Therefore, no rational person can honestly reject belief in a creator god. The only question is; which god best fits the bill of being the creator of the universe?
Is it the supernatural, first cause monotheists call ‘God’- or a natural, first cause - a material god of nature?
So we are left with the option of choosing which creator god (first cause) to believe in? Either - a supernatural, first cause (God) - or a natural, first cause (a material, pagan style god)? We do not have the choice or luxury of believing in neither, there is no other option. This reveals the atheist claim that it is rational, feasible or logical to reject ALL deities as completely bogus.
A most crucial question in this matter is ….
Why is there something rather than nothing?
It seems the most logical viewpoint would be the idea of eternal nothingness – i.e. total non- existence - that there is not, never was and never has been, the existence of anything. However, it is not that easy, we don’t have that option, because something definitely does exist and thus we are forced to face the question of why and how something exists here and now, rather than an eternal, infinite nothingness?
We are left with only two options for where the ‘something’ we know as the material universe came from? - It either came from:
1) An eternally, pre-existing nothingness.
OR
2) An eternally, pre-existing something.
The first option of something tangible/material arising of its own volition from absolute and complete nothingness is not logically credible. It is safe to say it is a certain impossibility. There is no rational argument that can be made for such a scenario. Which means that we are forced to accept the second option (an eternally pre-existing something) as the only credible possibility for the origin of everything that now exists.
If the ‘something’ that eternally pre-existed the material universe has always existed, it must be entirely self-sufficient in its ability to exist. Which means it is eternally self-existent, i.e. not dependent on anything else, other than itself, for its origin or its continued existence. It always has, and always will exist.
In other words, it is non-contingent and completely independent and autonomous. Nothing can effect, cause or prevent its existence in any way.
It also has to be the first cause of everything else that exists. Without it nothing else could exist.
What does science tell us?
Science tells us that all material entities are regulated by natural laws - natural laws are based on the properties of natural/material things. Natural laws allow scientists to make predictions concerning the behaviour of all natural entities. It is obvious that natural things can never exceed the limits of their own inherent properties which natural laws describe. One natural law, that is actually the founding principle behind all scientific research, is the Law of Cause and Effect. It tells us that every natural effect/entity has to have a sufficient or adequate cause. A causeless, natural entity is impossible according to science, science cannot entertain such a prospect, because scientific research is based on looking for a sufficient cause or causes of EVERY natural occurrence. Scientists expect every natural occurrence to be contingent - to be adequately caused. Science cannot look for non-causes. That would be a nonsense. The dilemma here for atheists is that the first cause of everything had to be uncaused, it had to be eternally self-existent, it could not be contingent, it could not be subject to the limits of any natural laws, it had to be entirely autonomous and self-sufficient. It could not rely on causes or anything else for its existence, it had to contain within itself everything it required to exist and furthermore to bring everything else that exists into existence.
Atheism is not just a rejection of a Supernatural First Cause, it is also the BELIEF (by default) in the only other option ... a NATURAL first cause.
Atheists may call their natural, first cause - a big bang, a quantum fluctuation of nothing, a singularity, a cyclical universe, a self-creating universe, string theory, or any other fantastical invention.
It makes no difference, because none of them can be UNCAUSED and none of them are ADEQUATE as a first cause of everything that exists in the universe. They are all contingent and all inferior to the end result, and consequently ALL are disqualified as possible, first causes by the Law of Cause and Effect.
So atheists simply transfer the creative powers, properties and qualities, that theists attribute to a Supernatural, First Cause (God), to a natural entity. In other words, they effectively deify matter/energy and credit matter/energy with godlike, creative powers. Thus atheism is simply a revamped version of the discredited beliefs of pagan naturalism.
Remember the pagan belief in the all powerful Sun god (Ra), or the Moon god, Mother Nature etc.? EXACTLY!
A natural first cause is an impossibility, there is no such thing as an UNCAUSED NATURAL event or entity.
That is not my opinion, it is the verdict of science, which is founded on the principle that every natural effect/event/entity requires an adequate cause. There is no exception to that rule. Which means any scenario atheists propose as a natural, first cause cannot be regarded as scientific. They are all unscientific nonsense.
People may be surprised to hear that, because we are conditioned by the popular media and incessant, atheist hype to believe that such proposed, natural causes are a scientific version of origins. It is complete hogwash, they all violate scientific principles without exception, and have got nothing to do with science. The public is being cynically conned and manipulated. All atheist, naturalistic, origin scenarios are based purely on ideology and the pagan religion of naturalism, and that is the true nature of atheism.
Pagan naturalism was soundly debunked by the onset of modern science and the understanding that all natural occurrences are contingent - that all natural occurrences MUST have an adequate cause and are subject to, and limited by, natural laws based on the inherent properties of matter/energy. The idea that nature/material things are some sort of power unto themselves - that they are all powerful, autonomous, non-contingent entities which can behave with impunity unrestricted by natural laws etc., that things can just happen the due to the vagaries of Mother Nature etc. was demonstrated by science to be nonsense. Regardless of this, modern atheists are intent on reviving pagan naturalism in a different guise. We have to wonder why?
The law of cause and effect is the basis of science. If you deny it, you step outside of science into the realm of metaphysics or magic. That is why atheist naturalism (which credits nature/matter/energy with autonomous powers, unfettered by the restraints and limitations of the law of cause and effect and other natural laws, which are intrinsic to nature) is really a religion. Even worse, it is not a rational religion, it is one which defies logic, science and reason.
The law of cause and effect (which is the fundamental basis of the scientific method) tells us that EVERY natural effect/event/entity has to have an adequate cause. The material universe as a whole is no exception. It had to have a beginning and a cause - it is a contingent thing, it cannot exist without causes. Therefore, it cannot possibly be UNCAUSED. It had to have a sufficient cause to bring it into existence). That is the verdict of science. Science can only look for adequate causes, not non-causes. That is the fundamental principle behind all scientific enquiry. Whereas, if we go back far enough, the very first cause of everything material had to be UNCAUSED (i.e. non-contingent and thus non-material) because it is the FIRST cause. No other cause could have preceded it. If another cause preceded it - it would not be the first cause, it would be only a secondary cause and not FIRST. So the first cause of the material realm couldn't be a natural, contingent entity. That would violate the law of cause and effect. Hence for anyone to propose that the first cause could be a natural thing is illogical, unscientific nonsense.
Atheists are very fond of repeating the claim that the idea of a creator God/religion is just a human invention.
Christians would say that the existence of a creator God is revealed and confirmed by His revelation to mankind. But whether you accept the revelation argument or not, the claim that God is a human invention is clearly wrong and silly. Because, regardless of revelation, the existence of God is an inevitable conclusion reached by logic and the application of natural laws and principles of science.
So rather than God being a human invention, the existence of God should be described as a discovery. Revelation, scriptures or religious texts are not essential for the knowledge that a creator God must exist. That is a true discovery that can be reached independently of revelation by any sensible, rational, objective person through simple logic and respect for natural laws and science.
What about the idea that our knowledge is limited, that we cannot know what took place at the beginning of the universe, we cannot know what laws existed? And therefore to propose a supernatural, first cause (God) as the Creator is just a desperate or lazy way of filling a gap in our knowledge? This is the so-called God-of-the-gaps argument.
If we trust science, we simply cannot propose a natural, first cause of the universe as a logical or scientific possibility. We do KNOW that for certain. There is no gap in knowledge as far as that fact is concerned. Our present knowledge is sufficient to rule out a natural, first cause of the universe as impossible according to well established, scientific principles.
The law of cause and effect makes scientific research possible. It is only possible because we trust the scientific principle that we can expect to find an adequate cause or causes for EVERY natural occurrence.
If, like atheists, we want to claim we don't or cannot know whether the universe had an adequate cause - or to claim that a natural first cause could be possible, we are ignoring science and stepping outside of science into fantasy.
That is ALL we need to know, in order to conclude that the atheist paradigm is fatally flawed.
The law of cause and effect is exactly that which, as the basic founding principle of modern science, demolished all pagan, naturalist religions, it demolished belief in the autonomous, creative powers of material things. Atheists apparently want to resurrect that belief.
Science is: 'knowledge' through seeking and discovering causes. If anyone claims a natural event happened without an adequate cause - they are anti-science.
Therefore, to say "we don't know" what laws existed at the origin of the material universe, as some atheists do, is utter nonsense. The law of cause and effect pertains to matter/energy and ALL natural occurrences - wherever they may be.
All natural events whether inside or outside of the universe are governed by the law of cause and effect. Just like gravity (which is an inherent property of matter), so the principle of causality is an inherent property of everything in the natural world. . Everything ... means all natural entities, events and effects. All natural things, by their very nature, are contingent, that is a fact, and they can't be anything else.
They can never act independently of causes, to say they can is to invoke magic, it is definitely not science.
That then, is our understanding of science, it is not just an opinion or assumption. It is the very basis of the scientific method that we can expect to find an adequate cause of every natural occurrence. To say that there may be some natural occurrences that are not subject to the law of cause and effect is to dispute the scientific method. So atheism has no valid, scientific argument, it is just pie-in-the-sky fantasy.
Is it possible to know the attributes (or character) of God - the Supernatural, First Cause?
The evidence that a natural, first cause is IMPOSSIBLE (because it violates natural laws) should be sufficient for any rational person to conclude that the first cause could not be a natural entity, and therefore has to be supernatural. Furthermore, the first cause HAS to be adequate for the effect.
If an effect of the first cause is the universe, then that cause has to embody the potential and power to produce everything that exists in the universe. Nothing in the universe can be superior to that which ultimately caused the universe.
AN EFFECT CANNOT BE GREATER THAN ITS CAUSE.
Therefore - if there is life in the universe - the first cause or the universe MUST have life.
If there is intelligence in the universe - the first cause MUST have intelligence.
If there is consciousness in the universe - the first cause MUST be conscious.
If there is law in the universe - the first cause MUST be a lawmaker.
If there are morals in the universe - the first cause MUST be moral.
If there is justice in the universe - the first cause MUST be just.
If there is love in the universe - the first cause MUST be loving.
And so on ...
All the powers, properties and qualities that exist in the universe were created by the first cause, so the first cause must possess the ability to create those attributes. None of those attributes can be greater in any respect than the attributes possessed by that which created them. There is no conceivable natural, origins scenario that is adequate to account for every quality that exist in the universe. Which shows that the so-called big bang, singularity or any other proposed, natural, origins scenario is not possible as a first cause.
The Bible says we were made in the image of a Creator God who is the first cause of everything material, including us. The Bible thus reveals and confirms the SCIENTIFIC principle that an effect cannot be greater than its cause. We cannot have any properties or powers that are superior to that which caused the universe, we have inherited all our attributes from the first cause and are therefore made in the image of that cause (the Creator God, as described in the Bible).
Atheism revealed as false - why God MUST exist.
www.flickr.com/photos/truth-in-science/18927764022
What about the idea proposed by some atheists that quantum mechanics or a so-called god-particle are the answer to the origin of the universe and of everything from nothing without the need for any cause?
We can say quite categorically that quantum effects haven't got anything to do with an origin of the universe from nothing.
Why?
It is common sense that something CANNOT come from nothing and that EVERY natural occurrence needs an adequate cause, micro or sub-atomic particles are not an exception. There are NO exceptions.
However, the atheist mentality seems to be that if something is impossible, just propose that it could happen - little by little -and that makes it plausible to a credulous public.
Just make it as small, make it sound as simple, and as less complex as you can, and then people will believe anything is possible.
This is exactly the same little-by-little criteria that atheists apply to the origin of life and progressive evolution.
What makes them think that it is easier for something to come from nothing if it is smaller or simpler?
Is it any easier or more credible for a grain of sand to come from nothing than it would be for a boulder?
Of course it isn’t - it makes no difference whatsoever.
Something cannot come from nothing - that is an irrefutable fact.
Size or lack of complexity doesn’t alter that.
Atheists obviously think …. OK, people might realise that you couldn’t get a grain of sand from nothing, any more than you could a boulder, but what if we propose the something which came from nothing is the smallest thing imaginable?
What about the quantum world – how about a sub-atomic particle?
That should sound much more plausible.
What if we could find such a particle - a sort of ‘god’ particle (a substitute for God)? A supernatural, first cause (a creator God) would then be made redundant.
Problem solved - apparently!
People will think that, even if the problem of the origin of everything without a cause hasn’t been solved completely, at least 'science' is well on the way to solving it.
Of course, if anyone stubbornly insists that even a simple, sub-atomic particle can’t possibly come from nothing, we can always propose that nothing isn’t really nothing, but ‘something’, i.e. space/time.
It shouldn’t be too difficult to get a scientifically illiterate and gullible public, in awe of anything claimed to be scientific, to swallow that.
However, the idea of a so-called ‘God’ particle was always an OBVIOUS misnomer to anyone with any common sense, but militant atheists loved it and, predictably, the popular, secularist, media hacks also loved it.
What they either failed to realise (or deliberately failed to admit) is that not only is it just as impossible for a particle (however small) to arise of its own volition from nothing, as anything else, but also the smaller, simpler and less complex a proposed, first cause becomes, the more IMPOSSIBLE it is for it to be a first cause of the universe.
A simple, sub-atomic particle CANNOT possibly be the first cause, it CANNOT replace God because, not only is it impossible for it to be uncaused, it is also clearly not adequate for the effect/result.
So, atheists, while trying to fool people into thinking that it is easier for something to come from nothing, if it is simple and microscopic, actually shot themselves in the foot....
The little by little approach which they apply to the origin of life and progressive evolution doesn’t work for the origin of the universe.
An effect CANNOT be greater than its cause.
The very first cause of the universe, as well as not being a contingent entity, cannot be something simpler or less complex than everything that follows it, which is the sum total of the universe itself.
The first cause of the universe MUST be adequate to produce the universe in its entirely and complexity - and that means every property and quality it contains.
Sub-atomic particles or quantum effects are OBVIOUSLY not up to the job, any more than any of the other natural, first causes proposed by atheists.
So atheists are flogging a dead horse by thinking they can replace God with quantum mechanics, which may be interesting phenomenon, but the one thing it is absolutely certain they are not, is a first cause of the universe.
Wikipedia …
“And since the Higgs Boson deals with how matter was formed at the time of the big bang, and since newspapers loved the term, the term “God particle" was used.
While media use of this term may have contributed to wider awareness and interest many scientists feel the name is inappropriate since it is sensational hyperbole and misleads readers the particle also has nothing to do with God, leaves open numerous questions in fundamental physics, and does not explain the ultimate origin of the universe."
____________________________________________
"I believe that the more thoroughly science is studied, the further does it take us from anything comparable to atheism"
"If you study science deep enough and long enough, it will force you to believe in God"
Lord William Kelvin.
Noted for his theoretical work on thermodynamics, the concept of absolute zero and the Kelvin temperature scale.
The Law of Cause and Effect is a fundamental principle of the scientific method. Science literally means 'knowledge'. Knowledge about the natural world is gained through seeking adequate causes for every natural occurrence. An uncaused, natural ocurrence, is a completely, unscientific notion.
Concerning the Law of Cause and Effect, one of the world's greatest scientists, Dr. Albert Einstein wrote: “All natural science is based on the hypothesis of the complete causal connection of all events”
Albert Einstein. The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Hebrew University and Princeton University Press p.183
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."
First time I ever saw a member of the visiting team playing toss and catch with kids in the stands. He did this for ten or fifteen minutes, so that every interested kid (and some adults too) got a chance.
view light box - I love worn old fences. Perhaps one of the most difficult things to explain to a client (as a garden designer) was that new and pristine often has a soulless quality, and that perfection is not the goal, because perfection requires nothing, it is in itself complete, but imperfection needs a loving eye or hand and it is engaging. . . but there again, what is perfection? - and there is a huge difference between imperfection from years of wear and unaesthetic chaos. . .
I posted a different picture of the man in the background some time back (taken, like this one, in Belmullet, during Heritage Day) and it was amazingly popular in terms of the number of hits it got. I think he is a bar owner. Perhaps he serves the best pint in Belmullet - that could well account for it. Perhaps there is some other reason. He certainly seems charming and engaging!
The earlier picture is here: www.flickr.com/photos/frankfullard/8002524203/
#225: As of 12/28/18, under Flickr's popularity rankings of my 1400+ pics, this is listed as #225 in "interestingness."
I've been engaging in some short, private crossdressing opportunities at home recently, after acquiring and trying out some new clothes, shoes, and accessories. This is the 18th pic posted from this recent CD activity, and taken just a couple weeks ago.
As usual, I really enjoy color-coordinating attractive/sexy/cute outfits, and this ensemble features a matching blush pink midi skirt & turtleneck pair each with a gold shimmer (not really noticeable in the photo though), paired with my sexy pink high heel booties, and this pink/gold belt and jewelry here.
More about this and other new 2017 pics was written up recently in a descriptive Update provided in my profile or "About" page here on Flickr. It details some choices made for these 2017 pics.
Let me know your thoughts... :-)
P.S. As far as the picture setting here, this is on the deck of our home. I'm using the glass patio door as a mirror, aided with a black sheet hung right inside the door, although some of the folds in the sheet can be detected in the image here.
I had a playdate with Siama today on a beach. My Elyse and Lukas double dated Siama's Dasha and Romain. The girls enjoyed sun and champagne while the boys enjoyed the fine view.
#382: As of 10/9/18, under Flickr's popularity rankings of my 1300+ pics, this is listed as #382 in "interestingness."
I've been engaging in some short, private crossdressing opportunities at home recently, after acquiring and trying out some new clothes, shoes, and accessories. This is the 295th pic posted from this recent CD activity, and taken just in January.
As usual, I really enjoy color-coordinating attractive/sexy/cute outfits, and this one features: an Anermy rose gold metallic see-through-knit midi dress (from China via Amazon) over a Red Hot by Spanx pink lacy full-slip (from Kohl's); a Steve Madden rose gold waist belt (from Macy's); Liliana rose gold ultra-high-heel strappy sandals (from Nordstrom Rack); gold metallic fishnet stockings; a Jennifer Lopez rose gold metallic mini crossbody handbag (from Kohl's); a couple rose gold necklaces (including an elegant chandelier-style choker from Aldo); and rose gold earrings, bracelets, and rings.
More about this and other new 2017 pics was written up recently in a descriptive Update provided in my profile or "About" page here on Flickr. It details some choices made for these 2017 pics.
Let me know your thoughts... :-)
P.S. As far as the picture setting here, this is on the deck of our home. I'm using the glass patio door as a mirror (fuzziness related to glass not cleaned in some time), aided with a black sheet hung right inside the door, although some of the wrinkles in the sheet may be detected in the image here.
Day 56/365 Engaging
Shoot last night with Marissa and Paul, went for an engagemnent typr shot with this did a load more which i will upload in time, got over 800 pictures to go through with the last three shoots in the past two days and have had little time. Im uploading two for todays 365 as i really like some of them and really really like the Lens flare on the other.
The Zaanse Schans is a delightful village on the banks of the river Zaan with characteristic green wooden houses, charming stylized gardens, small hump-backed bridges, tradesmen's workshops, historic windmills and engaging little shops.
This enchanting village has been lovingly established by relocating local houses, windmills, storehouses and barns to form a remarkable replica of a typical Zaanse village of the seventeenth and eighteenth century.
Wind Mills
The cunning application of the crank shaft revolutionised the development of industrial windmills in the Netherlands. Cornelis Corneliszoon or Uitgeest, an inventor at the beginning of the Golden Age the principle applied for the first time with a floating sawmill in 1592. This process was so successful that timber production in the area rose by 3000 percent. With an abundance of wind and water and the close proximity of Amsterdam's important, global, commercial center the stage was set for the Zaan region to become the first industrial area in the world.
Of the thousand industrial windmills ever built along the banks of the river Zaan thirteen remain. Six can be found at the Zaanse Schans.
De Zaanse Schans is een unieke woon-en werkbuurt vol werkende molens, oude ambachten, bijzondere musea en prachtige groene houten huizen.
Molens
De toepassing van de krukas vormde de basis voor de ontwikkeling van de industriemolens in Nederland. Cornelis Corneliszoon van Uitgeest paste dit principe in 1594 voor het eerst toe in een houtzaagmolen. Het met de hand zagen van boomstammen behoorde vanaf dat moment tot het verleden. Gezien de beschikbaarheid van windkracht en water en de nabijheid van het belangrijke handelscentrum Amsterdam werd hier in snel tempo een groot aantal molens gebouwd. Zo ontwikkelde de Zaanstreek zich tot een van de eerste industriegebieden van West-Europa. Van de ruim duizend industriemolens die ooit langs de Zaan werden gebouwd zijn er nog dertien bewaard gebleven, waarvan er zes op de Zaanse Schans staan.
5/11/2010 - 131/365
Life is a beach. :)
Hello again, it’s you and me
Kinda always like it used to be
Sippin' wine, killing time
Trying to solve life’s mysteries.
~ Jon Bon Jovi, (You Want to) Make a Memory
Filters: ND Grad 2x, ND Grad 4x, 81(A) Warmer
Shobhana Gupta speaks at the Engaging Women and Girls in STEM through Data Science event on Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at NASA Headquarters in Washington. Shobhana is an American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Fellow in NASA's Science Mission Directorate and was a first-time challenge owner in this year's Space Apps Challenge. Photo Credit: (NASA/Aubrey Gemignani)
This is a glass slide showing a traditionaly English country scene of cows drinking in a shallow stream.
The slide is from 1928. It was taken by South Shields Photographic Society's photographer Harrison Burgess.
This image is part of the Tyne & Wear Archives & Museums set Harrison Burgess and the South Shields Photographic Society.
(Copyright) We're happy for you to share this digital image within the spirit of The Commons. Please cite 'Tyne & Wear Archives & Museums' when reusing. Certain restrictions on high quality reproductions and commercial use of the original physical version apply though; if you're unsure please email adam.bell@twmuseums.org.uk