View allAll Photos Tagged replicator
Replicated crane (none-operational copy of one built and used from about 1949) beside the main passenger ship terminal, Station Pier, Port Melbourne.
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Thought I'd get started early this year and plan a Lord of Skull Spiders modification. Please note: this is the first time I've built an official set without any of the instructions to hand, but I'm pretty sure all the internals that work the function are correct. The main modification here is to the legs - here I've added an extra ball joint to each leg for much improved poseability in the real model. The abdomen handle has been filled out a little whilst retaining the function squeeze handle, and exposed balljoints have been put to good use to fill out and shape the model a bit more. The model was rendered using LDD2POV-Ray. Post-processing through Photoshop was applied to add LOSS' face as the chestplate does not accept decoration.
Here's the LDD file if anybody is interested: www.brickshelf.com/gallery/TheOneVeyronian/LDDfiles/lord_...
Please note the model is missing a rubber band, it goes in exactly the same place as in the official LOSS set. I'm also aware that the shade of orange may be wrong - it should be Trans-Neon Orange (but fairly sure it isn't in LDD)
Also, the pose shown in the render can't be exactly replicated in real life due to LDD limitations when constructing the function. The knob wheels are very fussy! :-)
Replicating a night owl in its intensity and ferocity. OK, maybe not the ferocity bit.
We're Here looks at Night Owls today.
Every Wednesday morning I have a web conference call with one of my customers to review status of their orders. The process involves me logging onto their vendor portal and then sharing my screen while we do the review so we both see the same thing at the same time. This morning when I shared my screen it began to replicate itself over and over and no matter what I did it would not stop. While my jaw was dropping I was grabbing my phone to get a picture. This is exactly as it was taken no photoshopping here:) oh yes in case you are wondering the only way I got it to stop was by logging off the web meeting. By the way no virus it was all caused by the web meeting connection.
This is a replicated cabin on the same site as the original cabin of Ol' Spot Mortimer. Mortimer was a shoemaker in New York, but eventually moved west to trap furs along the Missouri River in what is currently the Yankton SD area. While there, he heard stories of the fur rich Big Sioux Valley. However, the apprehension and terror of the Minnesota Uprising of 1862 had made the Big Sioux Valley virtually a no-man's land. The state of Minnesota offered a bounty for scalps of renegade Indians, and prospective white settlers feared another uprising. For 8 years, settlers and Indians alike shunned the area to avoid another conflict. Nevertheless, in 1869, Sam Mortimer arrived at Oakwood Lakes and found a trapper's paradise. Otter, mink, muskrat, and fox could be taken in great numbers. Mortimer, called 'Ol Spot, built a cabin at this site and lived here for the next 5 years. After 1869, white settlers began to arrive in ever increasing numbers. Trapping was of great value to these settlers as the furs could provide income until the first crops could be harvested. 1871 proved to be a peak year for trappers in this area. In 1874, Mortimer found that he could no longer depend on a profitable harvest from his trap lines. He sold 100 acres of timber from his land for $100 per acre to new settlers who were hard pressed to find logs for fuel and buildings. A pioneer reported that some of the oak trees were over 3 ft in diameter. In September of '74, Mortimer sold his claim, abandoned his Indian women, and returned to Vermillion, Dakota Territory, where he married a white widow with several children. In 1877, Sam and his new family returned to this site at Oakwood Lakes. Sam tried farming, but soon discovered he was more adept at trapping. Another pioneer wrote of the growing population in the Oakwood vicinity. He noted that in 1876, at the first 4th of July celebration, about 20 people attended, but 2 years later, about 400 attended. The population explosion may not have been agreeable to 'Ol Spot Mortimer, as he sold his 1,200 acres of land for $1,800 in 1886. Some claim he moved west with his family where the frontier was still unsettled. (Story taken from a sign at the cabin)
The original work is on the third floor.
Artist of the original work: Pablo Picasso
Title: The Studio (L'Atelier)
Date of original work: June 1934
For artist Pablo Picasso, who painted himself in the left, it was a cubist world. That is until it came to his model, muse and mistress, Marie-Thérèse Walter, who is at the center of his painting.
So let me ramble on for a moment: What does this all mean to me? This painting shows me that reality and life are difficult to represent, stylize and emphasize. Picasso intuitively realized in this painting that his cubism didn't do justice to the apple of his eye — the model that he was having an affair with. (I can guess what was on his mind when I look at his painting but I wonder what the true story was.)
My attempt at a photo shows Picasso's stylistic clash alongside an in-motion woman awaiting an elevator.
To the art scholars out there, I apologize for this. This painting probably represents something completely different to you than it does to my untrained eyes. To me, it tells me that no matter how masterful one gets, there are limitations and needed adaptations. If the master Picasso saw fit to follow his gut and adapted, then I have to follow mine. In my own rough stabs at photography, I've caught the exact moment in two dimensions but choices had to be made at what I wanted to convey. I've framed the painting and the woman a certain way. Her motion is blurred because of a slow shutter speed. The elevator buttons are slightly unfocused because it is just beyond the narrow depth of field that is focused on the painting — on the elevator door. I've saturated the colors, brightened the whites and darkened the blacks. Yet I still have not caught her or this scene clearly. But do I want her clearly? No. Her blurred back is exactly the point.
End of ramble.
1224 Unlink (Bluestar)
HF18FFK
seen on Castle Way, Southampton.
These E400s are incredibly difficult to get the colours replicated accurately on camera (mine at least!). To the naked eye they are almost an aqua/turquoise tint of colour, this is about as close as I could get to it being the same shade in the lens.
This is my attempt at replicating the Pagani Zonda Cinque in LEGO bricks. The Zonda is one of my top 5 favorite cars, so I had to include one in my LEGO collection. This is actually my third attempt at building the Zonda (see my previous versions here and here). With this version, I think I've improved the overall shape of the car by increasing the width at the rear of the car to 17 studs (the front of the car is 16 studs wide).
As you can see, this creation was inspired by Firas Abu-Jaber's own Zonda. I tried to replicate the Zonda's shape using different methods from Firas' Zonda, but in the end some areas, such as the front simply could not be made better (Firas' version is near perfect).
Also, if anyone has a set of Ferrari FXX rims and is willing to sell, please let me know (prices on Bricklink are so high for this piece)! Those rims would look a lot better on this car than these silver ones I have.
www.facebook.com/TimWoodPhotoGallery
Facebook.....
www.facebook.com/pages/Tim-Wood-Photo-Gallery/34329520241...
Twitter......
twitter.com/TimWoodFoto
www.flickriver.com/photos/imagesofwales/popular-interesting/
© All rights reserved. This image is copyrighted to Tim Wood; Any users, found to replicate, reproduce, circulate, distribute, download, manipulate or otherwise use my images without my written consent will be in breach of copyright laws. Please contact me at woodrot147@aol.com for express permission to use any of my photographs.
All of my images can be purchased...... Visit my website, coastal and countryside images at......
© All rights reserved. This image is copyrighted to Tim Wood; Any users, found to replicate, reproduce, circulate, distribute, download, manipulate or otherwise use my images without my written consent will be in breach of copyright laws. Please contact me at woodrot147@aol.com for express permission to use any of my photographs.
All of my images can be purchased...... Visit my website, coastal and countryside images at......
Facebook...
www.facebook.com/TimWoodPhotoGallery
Twitter......
My most popular photos on Flickr...
www.flickriver.com/photos/imagesofwales/popular-interesting/
“The Eye Moment photos by Nolan H. Rhodes”
“Theeyeofthemoment21@gmail.com”
“www.flickr.com/photos/the_eye_of_the_moment”
“Any users, found to replicate, reproduce, circulate, distribute, download, manipulate or otherwise use my images without my written consent will be in breach of copyright laws.”
Our animated android named Rogg replicated a bottle of coco using the replicator behind him. Rogg misunderstands double meanings of words from Earth. He is a co-co-host of the talk show airing on television in 14 U.S. Cities/Markets with Star Trek news and Interviews. This segment was an animated portion shot to use Rogg in the Ambassadors quarters, while the live action talk show hosts are on the bridge.
A screenshot from the live action TV talk show "A Captain's Log" in the 16th episode. Designed in Winter 2022 by Ian H. Stewart.
Tried to replicate this. =) Meanwhile the no sleeping plan is going perfectly! My bats are blooming, people are afraid to leave their homes and world domination is just a Flaming Moe away.
Kidding. I have found ze secret. Bed time stories. So, who wants to come read for me tonight?
The Cloud Forest replicates the cool moist conditions found in tropical mountain regions between 1,000 metres (3,300 ft) and 3,000 metres (9,800 ft) above sea level, found in South-East Asia, Middle- and South America. It features a 42-metre (138 ft) "Cloud Mountain", accessible by an elevator, and visitors will be able to descend the mountain via a circular path where a 35-metre (115 ft) waterfall provides visitors with refreshing cool air.
The "cloud mountain" itself is an intricate structure completely clad in epiphytes such as orchids, ferns, peacock ferns, spike- and clubmosses, bromeliads and anthuriums. It consists of a number of levels, each with a different theme.
In replicating this fifth-gen stealth fighter, I was aiming for:
– Smooth: nearly studless in form.
– Integrated: packing in a host of features.
– Fresh: incorporating new pieces and techniques.
and of course, purist! (at least, for now; I may experiment with designing some Marine Corps liveries on waterslide decals for mere aesthetic decoration that denotes the squadron affiliation…)
The 1:40 scale replica includes:
– Opening cockpit that holds pilot, control panel, and joystick
– Hidden weapon bays in fuselage for stealth missions
– Optional exterior loadout for air-to-ground attacks
– Retracting landing gear that supports the model
– Opening flaps, rotating fan blades, and tilting vector nozzle for VTOL
– Stable Technic display stand and brick-built name plaque.
This is the first MOC I’ve finished in about five years (during which I completed my university degree, got my full-time career job, moved out, got married, and a few other things), after working on it off-and-on for at least three years. [The real-life aircraft has suffered from its own extensive delays in design / production, so I guess it could be worse where my LEGO one is concerned. XD]
A big thank-you to everyone who has inspired me along the way, including special acknowledgements to AFOL friends like the Chiles family and Eli Willsea for helping rekindle my joy in the hobby; Brickmania, for showing me a few new hinge techniques that I incorporated during these last few months of the design process; and especially my lovely wife Natalie who, bless her heart, has allowed the dining room of our tiny apartment to serve as my building studio and encouraged me to use it more often as such!
Let me know what you guys think!
This is my attempt at replicating the Pagani Zonda Cinque in LEGO bricks. The Zonda is one of my top 5 favorite cars, so I had to include one in my LEGO collection. This is actually my third attempt at building the Zonda (see my previous versions here and here). With this version, I think I've improved the overall shape of the car by increasing the width at the rear of the car to 17 studs (the front of the car is 16 studs wide).
As you can see, this creation was inspired by Firas Abu-Jaber's own Zonda. I tried to replicate the Zonda's shape using different methods from Firas' Zonda, but in the end some areas, such as the front simply could not be made better (Firas' version is near perfect).
Also, if anyone has a set of Ferrari FXX rims and is willing to sell, please let me know (prices on Bricklink are so high for this piece)! Those rims would look a lot better on this car than these silver ones I have.
Replications of the Venus de Milo appear 28 times in this painting.
There is an optical illusion - a toreador (man's face is just about discernable).
Among other things, it symbolises his wifes disapproval of the Spanish tradition of bull fighting.
(View larger to see notes on the image)
Just visible through the window is the boat that is a memorial to Gala after her death, It is part of a large visual pun, that will appear in later images.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hallucinogenic_Toreador
Dali was a contraversial character who was known for his egotism and immoral behaviour, as well as his eccentric charm. Some of his artistic works reflect his questionable attitudes and are offensive to many. These images are ones that I personally, choose not to admire or reproduce. However, I do appreciate many of his art works and how they contribute to the richness of our human experience.
Ink and acrylic marker on paper 6.75" x 9.75" 7.2025. www.saatchiart.com/art/Drawing-Self-replicating-Surface-P...
Trying to replicate an image by Ryan Matthew Smith published in Modernist Cuisine: The Art and Science of Cooking.
STROBIST INFO: One SB-900 through an Apollo Micro softbox, pointed to the background, commanded by D90 pop-up flash. Manual at 1/16 power.
In replicating this fifth-gen stealth fighter, I was aiming for:
– Smooth: nearly studless in form.
– Integrated: packing in a host of features.
– Fresh: incorporating new pieces and techniques.
and of course, purist! (at least, for now; I may experiment with designing some Marine Corps liveries on waterslide decals for mere aesthetic decoration that denotes the squadron affiliation…)
The 1:40 scale replica includes:
– Opening cockpit that holds pilot, control panel, and joystick
– Hidden weapon bays in fuselage for stealth missions
– Optional exterior loadout for air-to-ground attacks
– Retracting landing gear that supports the model
– Opening flaps, rotating fan blades, and tilting vector nozzle for VTOL
– Stable Technic display stand and brick-built name plaque.
This is the first MOC I’ve finished in about five years (during which I completed my university degree, got my full-time career job, moved out, got married, and a few other things), after working on it off-and-on for at least three years. [The real-life aircraft has suffered from its own extensive delays in design / production, so I guess it could be worse where my LEGO one is concerned. XD]
A big thank-you to everyone who has inspired me along the way, including special acknowledgements to AFOL friends like the Chiles family and Eli Willsea for helping rekindle my joy in the hobby; Brickmania, for showing me a few new hinge techniques that I incorporated during these last few months of the design process; and especially my lovely wife Natalie who, bless her heart, has allowed the dining room of our tiny apartment to serve as my building studio and encouraged me to use it more often as such!
Let me know what you guys think!
Faithful replications of the Doge's Palace, the Bridge of Sighs , the Campanile Tower , and St. Mark's Square offer awe-inspiring sights and sounds true to the crown jewel of Europe. Don't miss the quarter-mile Grand Canal set in a frescoed sunset sky where gondoliers serenade their passengers on the romantic ride of a lifetime
This is my attempt at replicating the Pagani Zonda Cinque in LEGO bricks. The Zonda is one of my top 5 favorite cars, so I had to include one in my LEGO collection. This is actually my third attempt at building the Zonda (see my previous versions here and here). With this version, I think I've improved the overall shape of the car by increasing the width at the rear of the car to 17 studs (the front of the car is 16 studs wide).
As you can see, this creation was inspired by Firas Abu-Jaber's own Zonda. I tried to replicate the Zonda's shape using different methods from Firas' Zonda, but in the end some areas, such as the front simply could not be made better (Firas' version is near perfect).
Also, if anyone has a set of Ferrari FXX rims and is willing to sell, please let me know (prices on Bricklink are so high for this piece)! Those rims would look a lot better on this car than these silver ones I have.
“Any users, found to replicate, reproduce, circulate, distribute, download, manipulate or otherwise use my images without my written consent will be in breach of copyright laws as well as contract laws.”
“The Eye Moment photos by Nolan H. Rhodes”
nrhodesphotos@yahoo.com
What is the truth about Darwinian, progressive (microbes to human) evolution?
Although we are told it is an irrefutable, scientific fact .....
the real fact, as we will show later, is that there is no credible mechanism for such progressive evolution.
Classical Darwinism: Evolution by creeps.
What was the evolutionary idea that Darwin popularised?
Put simply ...
Darwin believed that there was unlimited variability in the gene pool of all living things, which would enable the gradual transformation of a first, self-replicating, living cell, through many years of natural selection, into every living thing, including humans.
However, the changes possible were well known by selective breeders to be strictly limited.
This is because the changes seen in selective breeding are due to the shuffling, deletion and emphasis, or duplication, 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 body parts ... anatomical structures, biological systems, organs etc. (macro-evolution).
Darwin rashly 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 strictly limited, minor changes observed in selective breeding to major, unlimited, progressive changes able to create new structures, organs etc. through natural selection, over an alleged, multi-million year timescale.
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. Natural selection can only select from that which is already there, it cannot create any new information.
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 so quickly and widely acquired a status more akin to an ideology than objective science, belief in the Darwinian idea outweighed the verdict of observational and experimental science. Thus classical Darwinism became firmly established as scientific orthodoxy for nearly a century.
Opponents continued to argue all this time, that Darwinism could not be supported scientifically, and should not even merit the status of a scientific theory, 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) would require the creation of new, 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 consigned to the dustbin of history,
However, rather than ditch the whole idea as unscientific nonsense, the vested interests in Darwinism had become so important, with numerous, lifelong careers and an ideological agenda which depended 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 mechanism was 'mutations'. Mutations are ... literally, genetic, copying MISTAKES.
Enter Neo-Darwinism: Evolution by freaks.
Because the majority of the public had already been convinced that classical Darwinism was a scientific fact, and that anyone who questioned it was undoubtedly a crank, all that had to be done, as far as the public was concerned, was to give the impression that the ‘theory’ had been refined and updated in the light of modern science.
The true fact that classical Darwinism had always been demonstrably wrong and was fatally flawed from the outset, was kept quiet. This meant that the opponents of Darwinism, who had been correct all along, and who were the real champions of science, continued to be ridiculed and vilified as cranks and scorned by the mass media and the establishment.
The new developments were portrayed simply as an updating of the ‘theory’. The impression was given that there was nothing wrong with Darwin’s original idea of progressive (macro) evolution, it had simply 'evolved' and 'improved' in the light of greater knowledge ....
A sort of progressive evolution of the whole 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 (which are accidental, genetic, copying mistakes) selected by natural selection, can provide the constructive, genetic information capable of creating entirely new features, anatomical structures, organs, and biological systems. In other words, it is macro-evolution based on a belief in the progression from microbes to humans through billions of random, genetic, copying MISTAKES, accumulated over many millions of years.
However, there is no evidence for it, and it should be classed as unscientific nonsense, it defies logic, the laws of probability and Information Theory.
It is understandable that people can be confused, because they know that 'micro'-evolution is an observable fact, which everyone accepts. It is a disgrace that evolutionists 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.
Such examples are not evidence of macro-evolution at all. The public is being hoodwinked and lied to. 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 anatomical structures, organs etc. and that is a fact. It is no wonder that the distinguished entomologist, W R Thompson wrote 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 just 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, constructive, genetic information. That is essential for ‘macro’ evolution. And that is a massive problem.
Micro evolution does not involve or require the creation of any new, genetic information. Therefore, micro evolution and macro evolution are entirely different. Apart from the idea that both require natural selection, there is no other connection, whatever evolutionists may claim.
Once people fully understand that the differences they see in various, dog breeds, for example, are just limited micro-evolution (selection of existing, genetic information) and nothing to do with progressive macro-evolution, they realise that they have been fed an incredible story.
A dog will always remain a dog, it can never be selectively bred into some other creature, the extent of variation is constrained by the limitations of the existing, genetic information in the gene pool of the dog genus, and fully, informed evolutionists know that is an irrefutable fact.
To explain further.... Neo-Darwinian, macro evolution is the incredible 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 purely the result of the accumulation of billions of genetic, copying mistakes..... mutations accrued upon previous mutations, and on - and on - and on.
Although evolutionists don’t like to state it this way, Neo-Darwinism actually 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 long series of cumulative mistakes ... mistakes upon previous mistakes .... upon previous mistakes .... upon previous mistakes etc. etc. In other words, the complete genome of every living thing is made up of nothing more than an incredibly long chain of mistakes. That is the mind-boggling truth about the neo-Darwinian, evolution story. For obvious reasons, it is something evolutionists would prefer you not to think about too much.
When we do think about it, we soon realise that what is actually being proposed is that, apart from the original information in the first living cell (and evolutionists have yet to explain how that original information magically arose?) - every additional scrap of genetic information for all - biological features, anatomical 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 entirely 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 body 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.
Incredibly, what we are asked to believe is that something like a vascular system, reproductive organs, or something like the process of insect metamorphosis, 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.
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 incredibly, vast accumulation of these imaginary, beneficial mutations.
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?
What do laboratory experiments and field studies of recent, sedimentation events show? sedimentology.fr/
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 - some recent, field evidence:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/
Evolution - multi-million year timescale debunked.
Rapid strata formation in soft sand (field evidence).
www.flickr.com/photos/truth-in-science/39554035561
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.
When no evidence is cited as evidence:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/15157133658
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
Want to publish a science paper?
www.nature.com/nature/journal/v434/n7036/full/nature03653...
www.nature.com/news/publishers-withdraw-more-than-120-gib...
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'?
Punctuated Equilibrium: Evolution by Jerks.
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..
_____________________________________________
A pig, a horse and a donkey!
The pig ....
Nebraska Man, this was a single tooth of a peccary. it was trumpeted as scientific evidence for the evolution of humans. Highly imaginative artists impressions of an ape-like man appeared in newspapers magazines etc.
Having been 'discovered' 3 years prior to the Scopes Trial, it was resurrected, and given renewed publicity, shortly before the trial - presumably, in order to influence the trial and convince the public of the scientific evidence for evolution.. Such 'scientific' evidence is enough to make any genuine, respectable scientist weep.
The horse ....
South West Colorado Man, another tooth .... of a horse this time... also hailed as ‘scientific’ evidence for human evolution.
The donkey ....
Orce man, loudly proclaimed by evolutionists to be scientific evidence of an early hominid, based on the discovery of a tiny fragment of skullcap. This is now believed to have most likely come from a donkey, but even if it was human. such a tiny fragment is certainly not any evidence of human evolution, as it was claimed. A symposium which had been planned to discuss this alleged human 'missing link' had to be embarrassingly cancelled when it was identified as being very similar to a donkey skull.
_________________________________________
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.
The Orgueil meteorite, organic material and even plant seeds were embedded and glued into the Orgueil meteorite and disguised with coal dust to make them look like part of the original meteorite, in a fraudulent attempt to fool the world into believing in the discredited idea of spontaneous generation of life, which is essential for progressive evolution to get started. The reasoning being that, if it could be shown that there was life in space, spontaneous generation must have happened there and could therefore be declared by evolutionists as being a scientific fact.
Is macro evolution even 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.
You don't need a degree in rocket science to understand that Darwinism has damaged and undermined science.
However, what does the world's, most famous, rocket scientist (the father of modern rocket science) have to say?
Wernher von Braun (1912 – 1977) PhD Aerospace Engineering
"In recent years, there has been a disturbing trend toward scientific dogmatism in some areas of science. Pronouncements by notable scientists and scientific organizations about "only one scientifically acceptable explanation" for events which are clearly outside the domain of science -- like all origins are -- can only destroy the curiosity of those who must carry on the future work of science. Humility, a seemingly natural product of studying nature, appears to have largely disappeared -- at least its visibility is clouded from the public's viewpoint.
Extrapolation backward in time until there are no physical artifacts of certainty that can be examined, requires sophisticated guessing which scientists prefer to refer to as "inference." Since hypotheses, a product of scientific inference, are virtually the stuff that comprises the cutting edge of scientific progress, inference must constantly be nurtured. However, the enthusiasm that encourages inference must be matched in degree with caution that clearly differentiates inference from what the public so readily accepts as "scientific fact." Failure to keep these two factors in balance can lead either to a sterile or a seduced science. 'Science but not Scientists' (2006) p.xi"
And the eminent scientist, William Robin Thompson (1887 - 1972) Entomologist and Director of the Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control, Ottawa, Canada, who was asked to write the introduction of the centenary edition of Darwin's 'Origin', wrote:
"The concept of organic Evolution is very highly prized by biologists, for many of whom it is an object of genuinely religious devotion, because they regard it as a supreme integrative principle. This is probably the reason why the severe methodological criticism employed in other departments of biology has not yet been brought to bear against evolutionary speculation." 'Science and Common Sense' (1937) p.229
“As we know, there is a great divergence of opinion among biologists … because the evidence is unsatisfactory and does not permit any certain conclusion. It is therefore right and proper to draw the attention of the non-scientific public to the disagreements about evolution. But some recent remarks of evolutionists show that they think this unreasonable ......
This situation, where scientific men rally to the defence of a doctrine they are unable to define scientifically, much less demonstrate with scientific rigor, attempting to maintain its credit with the public by the suppression of criticism and the elimination of difficulties, is abnormal and unwise in science.”
Prof. W. R. Thompson, F.R.S., introduction to the 1956 edition of Darwin's 'Origin of the Species'
"When I was asked to write an introduction replacing the one prepared a quarter of a century ago by the distinguished Darwinian, Sir Anthony Keith [one of the "discoverers" of Piltdown Man], I felt extremely hesitant to accept the invitation . . I am not satisfied that Darwin proved his point or that his influence in scientific and public thinking has been beneficial. If arguments fail to resist analysis, consent should be withheld and a wholesale conversion due to unsound argument must be regarded as deplorable. He fell back on speculative arguments."
"He merely showed, on the basis of certain facts and assumptions, how this might have happened, and as he had convinced himself he was able to convince others."
"But the facts and interpretations on which Darwin relied have now ceased to convince."
"This general tendency to eliminate, by means of unverifiable speculations, the limits of the categories Nature presents to us is the inheritance of biology from The Origin of Species. To establish the continuity required by the theory, historical arguments are invoked, even though historical evidence is lacking. Thus are engendered those fragile towers of hypothesis based on hypothesis, where fact and fiction intermingle in an inextricable confusion."—*W.R. Thompson, "Introduction," to Everyman’s Library issue of Charles Darwin, Origin of Species (1958 edition).
"The evolution theory can by no means be regarded as an innocuous natural philosophy, but rather is a serious obstruction to biological research. It obstructs—as has been repeatedly shown—the attainment of consistent results, even from uniform experimental material. For everything must ultimately be forced to fit this theory. An exact biology cannot, therefore, be built up."—*H. Neilsson, Synthetische Artbildng, 1954, p. 11
Berkeley University law professor, Philip Johnson, makes the following points: “(1) Evolution is grounded not on scientific fact, but on a philosophical belief called naturalism; (2) the belief that a large body of empirical evidence supports evolution is an illusion; (3) evolution is itself a religion; and, (4) if evolution were a scientific hypothesis based on rigorous study of the evidence, it would have been abandoned long ago.”
To end with a more jocular quote, it has been said that:
"If Classical Darwinism is evolution by creeps and punctuated equilibrium is evolution by jerks, then neo Darwinism is evolution by freaks".
The real theory of everything
www.flickr.com/photos/truth-in-science/34295660211
www.flickr.com/photos/truth-in-science/39554035561/in/dat...
“Any users, found to replicate, reproduce, circulate, distribute, download, manipulate or otherwise use my images without my written consent will be in breach of copyright laws as well as contract laws.” www.flickr.com/photos/the_eye_of_the_moment
nrhodesphotos@yahoo.com
“The-Eye-of-the-Moment-Photos-by-Nolan-H.-Rhodes”
The ninth photograph in the series is entitled “Princess Odalisque” and is based upon Jean Auguste Dominique Ingres’ Grande Odalisque. It has been said that the anatomy of Ingres’ figure in his painting has two or three vertebrae too many. Studies have shown that the curvature of the spine and the rotation of the pelvis would be impossible to replicate in a real female. I guess it’s a good thing that I use toys and not real figures in my work!
Grande Odalisque was completed in 1814, nearly 200 years ago and represents Ingres’ shift from Neoclassicism to Romanticism. The painting depicts an odalisque or concubine lying on a bed. In my work, I have replaced Ingres’ odalisque with Princess Leia dressed in her slave outfit worn in Jabba’s Palace and on Jabba’s Sail Barge; Khetanna.
The opening scenes from Return of the Jedi set the mood and tone for the third film in the original trilogy, so I have attempted to fit as much symbolism into the photo as I could. If you look carefully you can see Jabba has replaced the curtain to the right while Threepio has replaced the cushions to the left of Leia. I have also included Boushh’s helmet as reference to Leia and Luke’s failed recuse of Solo from his carbonite tomb as well as Artoo’s drinking tray in reference to the great escape on the Jabba’s Sail Barge at the Sarlacc Pit. Leia’s chain is also included to point to Jabba’s imminent death.
Enjoy!
Subscribe via RSS | Email | Tumblr | Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | Pinterest
Visit our Cast of Star Wars Characters at www.365DaysofClones.com.
Replicating a scene that could easily pass for 90 years ago, the narrow gauge Mike rumbles past some open range cattle country on the Rio Grande San Juan Extension with C&TS Train 216.
Locomotive: CTS 484
7-26-16
Coxo, CO
© All rights reserved. This image is copyrighted to Tim Wood; Any users, found to replicate, reproduce, circulate, distribute, download, manipulate or otherwise use my images without my written consent will be in breach of copyright laws. Please contact me at woodrot147@aol.com for express permission to use any of my photographs.
All of my images can be purchased...... Visit my website, coastal and countryside images at......
Facebook...
www.facebook.com/TimWoodPhotoGallery
Twitter......
My most popular photos on Flickr...
www.flickriver.com/photos/imagesofwales/popular-interesting/
I just got back from 3 days photographing the South West of Western Australia . The South West is an amazing place for photographers there is such diversity with the scenery from rolling vine yards , to farms , to rugged coast to sandy white beach's with crystal clear blue water .
Spent the three days camping down there and it was cold and wet got into the negatives (which is cold for WA ) but the Light was great so didn't mind .
This morning I woke up not knowing where to photograph . Drove the Boat ramp at Dunsbrough , having no clouds around I quickly made the decision to drive to Yallingup and was glad I did . Had pretty good light and even had a rainbow .
Read more at ... kirkhille.wordpress.com/
This was a 4 image manual blend in photoshop .
Taken with the Canon 5D MKII , 24 -70mm F2.8 Lens and Lee Soft grad .6 filter
My webiste is nearing completion as well so I have start a fan page which I will post specials deals and information on my photography
www.facebook.com/pages/Kirk-Hille-Photography/27572925343...
I have had a few requests for larger size image for the use as wallpapers computer . So over the next few weeks will resize and uplpad selected images to my blog: kirkhille.wordpress.com/ at the wallpaper page on (Link on the top right) which people will be able to use .
Blog: www.kirkhille.wordpress.com
website : www.kirkhillephotography.com
Face book : www.facebook.com/pages/Kirk-Hille-Photography/27572925343...
Twitter :http://twitter.com/Kirkhille
Various images of mine are for sale on various finishes and sizes from Gloss and lustre, Metallic and Fuji Flex prints. Laminating and Mounting are available and framing service are available for local customers. Any enquires please contact me by email at kirkhille (@) westnet . com . au . For more information on my photographs you can visit my blog at kirkhille.wordpress.com/
All images are © Kirk Hille, All Rights Reserved. You may not use, replicate, manipulate, redistribute, or modify this image without my express consent
A few years ago, I got to see a 1:1500 scale model of London at the Building Centre there. It is a large scale model of the heart of the city in three dimensions, with representations of most buildings, landmarks, parks, the Thames, and the (at the time yet to be built) Olympic Park.
It's extremely impressive.
And it is as nothing compared to The Panorama at the Queens Museum of Art.
Here's two panorama photos to give a sense of the scale:
⁂
Quoting from the Museum’s page on the The Panorama of the City of New York:
The Panorama is the jewel in the crown of the collection of the Queens Museum of Art. Built by Robert Moses for the 1964 World’s Fair, in part as a celebration of the City’s municipal infrastructure, this 9,335 square foot architectural model includes every single building constructed before 1992 in all five boroughs; that is a total of 895,000 individual structures.
The Panorama was built by a team of 100 people working for the great architectural model makers Raymond Lester Associates in the three years before the opening of the 1964 World’s Fair. In planning the model, Lester Associates referred to aerial photographs, insurance maps, and a range of other City material; the Panorama had to be accurate, indeed the initial contract demanded less than one percent margin of error between reality and the model. The Panorama was one of the most successful attractions at the ‘64 Fair with a daily average of 1,400 people taking advantage of its 9 minute simulated helicopter ride around the City.
After the Fair the Panorama remained open to the public, its originally planned use as an urban planning tool seemingly forgotten. Until 1970 all of the changes in the City were accurately recreated in the model by Lester’s team. After 1970 very few changes were made until 1992, when again Lester Associates changed over 60,000 structures to bring it up-to-date.
In the Spring of 2009 the Museum launched its Adopt-A-Building program with the installation of the Panorama’s newest addition, Citi Field, to continue for the ongoing care and maintenance of this beloved treasure.
The Queens Museum of Art has a program giving you the opportunity to “purchase” NYC real estate on The Panorama of the City of New York for as low as $50. To learn how you can become involved click here.
We hope that you will take time to enjoy the Panorama of the City of New York.
The Panorama of the City of New York is sponsored by the New York City Department of Cultural Affairs and New York State Assembly members Mike Gianaris, Mark Weprin, Audrey Pheffer, Nettie Mayersohn and Ivan Lafayette, The New York Mets Foundation and the supporters of the Adopt-A-Building Program.
View the winning pictures from our Gala 2011 Panorama Picture Contest!
View pictures from our Gala 2011 Photo booth, May 12, 2011!
View pictures of the Panorama on its Flickr page
Add your own pictures to our Panorama Flickr Group!
⁂
Quoting now from The Panorama section in Wikipedia’s Queens Museum of Art article:
The best known permanent exhibition at the Queens Museum is the Panorama of the City of New York which was commissioned by Robert Moses for the 1964 World’s Fair. A celebration of the City’s municipal infrastructure, this 9,335-square-foot (867.2 m2) architectural model includes every single building constructed before 1992 in all five boroughs; that is a total of 895,000 individual structures. The Panorama was built by a team of 100 people working for the architectural model makers Raymond Lester Associates in the three years before the opening of the 1964 World’s Fair. The Panorama was one of the most successful attractions at the ’64 Fair with a daily average of 1,400 people taking advantage of its 9 minute simulated helicopter ride around the City. After the Fair the Panorama remained open to the public and until 1970 all of the changes in the City were accurately recreated in the model by Lester’s team. After 1970 very few changes were made until 1992, when again Lester Associates was hired to update the model to coincide with the re-opening of the museum. The model makers changed over 60,000 structures to bring it up-to-date.
In March 2009 the museum announced the intention to update the panorama on an ongoing basis. To raise funds and draw public attention the museum will allow individuals and developers to have accurate models made of buildings newer than the 1992 update created and added in exchange for a donation. Accurate models of smaller apartment buildings and private homes, now represented by generic models, can also be added. The twin towers of the World Trade Center will be replaced when the new buildings are created, the museum has chosen to allow them to remain until construction is complete rather than representing an empty hole. The first new buildings to be added was the new Citi Field stadium of the New York Mets. The model of the old Shea Stadium will continue to be displayed elsewhere in the museum.
⁂
Quoting now from the explanatory sign at the exhibit:
THE PANORAMA OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK
The Panorama of the City of New York, the world's largest scale model of its time, was the creation of Robert Moses and Raymond Lester. Presented in the New York City Pavilion as the city’s premiere exhibit at the 1964/65 New York World’s Fair, it was intended afterwards to serve as an urban planning tool. Visitors experienced the Panorama from a simulated “helicopter” ride that travelled around perimeter or from a glass-enclosed balcony on the second floor, while news commentator Lowell Thomas provided audio commentary on “The City of Opportunity.” One of the “helicopter” cars is now on view in the Museum’s permanent exhibition, A Panoramic View: A History of the New York City Building and Flushing Meadows Corona Park.
Constructed at the Lester Associates workshop in Westchester, New York, the Panorama contains 273 separate sections, many of which are four-by-ten-foot rectangular panels. They are composed of Formica flakeboard topped with urethane foam slabs from which the typography was carved. Lester Associates’ staff consulted geological survey maps, aerial photographs, and books of City insurance maps, to accurately render the City’s streets, highways, parks, and buildings. Once the Panorama’s modules were completed at Lester Associates’ workshop, they were assembled on site in the New York City Building. It took more than 100 workers, three years to complete the model.
Built on a sale of 1:1,200 (1 inch equals 100 feet), the Panorama occupies 9.335 square feet and accurately replicates New York City including all 320 square miles of its five boroughs and 771 miles of shoreline, as well as the built environment. It includes miniature cars, boats, and an airplane landing and taking off at LaGuardia Airport.
The majority of the City’s buildings are presented by standardized model units made from wood and acrylic. Of more than 895,000 individual structures, 25,000 are custom-made to approximate landmarks such as skyscrapers, large factories, colleges, museums, and major churches. The amount of detail possible on most buildings is limited; at a scale of 1 inch to 100 feet, the model of the Empire State Building measures only 15 inches. The most accurate structures on the Panorama are its 35 major bridges, which are finely made of brass and shaped by a chemical milling process.
The model is color coded to indicate various types of land use. The dark green areas are parks. Parkways are also edged in dark green. Mint green sections are related to transportation including train and bus terminals. The pink rectangles that dot the City show the locations of recreational areas including playgrounds and tennis and basketball courts. Clusters of red buildings are indicative of publicly subsidized housing.
Red, blue, green, yellow, and white colored lights were installed on the surface of the Panorama in 1964 to identify structures housing City agencies relating to protection, education, health, recreation, commerce, welfare, and transportation. Overhead lights have been designed to run in a dawn to dusk cycle, and the nighttime effect is enhanced by ultraviolet paint, illuminated by blacklight.
In 1992, the City began a renovation of the Queens Museum of Art and the Panorama. Using their original techniques, Lester Associates updated the Panorama with 60,000 changes. In the current instalation, designed by Rafael Viñoly Architects, visitors follow the course of the original “helicopter” ride on an ascending ramp that enables them to experience the Panorama of the City of New York from Multiple Perspectives.
Virus replication
Viruses replicate only in living cells. The use of the term 'replicate' infers that the process of virus multiplication is different from that of micro-organisms and tissue cells which divide by binary fission with or without mitotic division of their genetic components. Whilst the mode of entering the host cell varies from virus to virus the mode of replication is considered to be similar for all and has been most completely worked out for bacteriophage. The viral nucleic acid upon entering the cell takes over control of the cellular metabolic processes and codes for the separate synthesis of viral nucleic acid and protein which later combine to form the mature virus particle. The virus yield from a cell infected with a single virus particle varies widely but often ranges from 10 to 100 particles.
The host cell must be capable of supporting this sequence of steps in viral replication. Many viruses have a single or limited host cell requirement; others may replicate in a range of different host cells but the quantity of virus produced in each cell type may differ widely.
Viruses may be propagated in susceptible animals, plants or micro-organisms, or in tissue cultures made from animal or plant tissues.
When using animals it is necessary to consider:
(1) their natural susceptibility to infection or immune status to the virus;
(2) the possibility of latent infection with the same or other virus (often the challenge of another virus stimulates a latent virus to become active, as occurs with herpes simplex in man, the cause of the common cold sore on the lips which often erupts when the patient is challenged by a common cold virus);
(3) the most suitable route of inoculation which is usually related to the affinity of the virus for particular tissues. Infection is recognized by characteristic signs and symptoms of disease.
VIRUS DISEASES OF VERTEBRATE ANIMALS
General considerations of virus infection
Unlike the majority of plant virus diseases most animal virus diseases cannot be diagnosed solely on their signs and symptoms. Viruses do not produce exotoxins and the diseases they cause are the direct result of their primary and secondary replication cycles within the various tissue cells of the animal body. An understanding of how this replication occurs in tissue cells provides an understanding of the disease processes taking place in the animal body as a whole. Replication is studied in in vitro systems of animal tissue cultures.
The replication of viruses in tissue cells leads to the biological malfunctioning of those cells and if large numbers of cells are involved malfunctioning of the organ generally follows. This may result in the death of the animal.
Some animal viruses replicate in a limited range of tissue cells, e.g., influenza virus replicates only in cells of the respiratory tract, while others replicate in a wide variety of tissue cells, e.g., smallpox virus in cells of the skin, lungs, and other internal tissues. The latter category of viruses can therefore spread to other susceptible tissues by blood-borne dissemination from a primary site of infection. The presence of virus in the blood stream is not necessarily an indication of wide tissue susceptibility since viruses with a limited tissue range may 'spill-over' into the blood stream following replication in the susceptible tissues.
As with other microbial diseases the severity of a virus disease depends upon the size of the infecting dose, the state of health of the animal, its age, sex, and degree of immunity. The various aspects of the epidemiology of animal virus diseases are considered elsewhere.
In replicating this fifth-gen stealth fighter, I was aiming for:
– Smooth: nearly studless in form.
– Integrated: packing in a host of features.
– Fresh: incorporating new pieces and techniques.
and of course, purist! (at least, for now; I may experiment with designing some Marine Corps liveries on waterslide decals for mere aesthetic decoration that denotes the squadron affiliation…)
The 1:40 scale replica includes:
– Opening cockpit that holds pilot, control panel, and joystick
– Hidden weapon bays in fuselage for stealth missions
– Optional exterior loadout for air-to-ground attacks
– Retracting landing gear that supports the model
– Opening flaps, rotating fan blades, and tilting vector nozzle for VTOL
– Stable Technic display stand and brick-built name plaque.
This is the first MOC I’ve finished in about five years (during which I completed my university degree, got my full-time career job, moved out, got married, and a few other things), after working on it off-and-on for at least three years. [The real-life aircraft has suffered from its own extensive delays in design / production, so I guess it could be worse where my LEGO one is concerned. XD]
A big thank-you to everyone who has inspired me along the way, including special acknowledgements to AFOL friends like the Chiles family and Eli Willsea for helping rekindle my joy in the hobby; Brickmania, for showing me a few new hinge techniques that I incorporated during these last few months of the design process; and especially my lovely wife Natalie who, bless her heart, has allowed the dining room of our tiny apartment to serve as my building studio and encouraged me to use it more often as such!
Let me know what you guys think!