Prince and his high heels

Although Prince was known to be an advocate of healthy living, who didn't drink or take illicit drugs, he may have suffered from debilitating pain from decades of vigorous concert performances in the high-heeled shoes he habitually wore.


Prince was known for jumping off large speakers in his high heels.

This is what help to cause his debilitating pain.

His high heels were killing him and they finally did.

Prince died of 'fentanyl toxicity,' an overdose of a painkiller.

A law-enforcement official tells The Associated Press that tests show the music superstar died of an opioid overdose. (June 2)

Prompted by leaks, the Midwest Medical Examiner's Office in Minnesota released the long-awaited autopsy report on Prince Thursday, declaring the cause was accidental Fentanyl toxicity.

Fentanyl is a powerful painkiller. The official cause of death thus bolsters previous reports that Prince died from a opioid overdose, and that investigators were examining how he might have obtained the drug.

Read more here: Prince died of 'fentanyl toxicity,' an overdose of a painkiller

Compromises on origins and marriage

Creation.com

Marc Ambler

Link between compromises on origins and marriage


After the abolition of apartheid, under the new ‘broom’ African National Congress Government, in 2006 South Africa became one of the first countries in the world to legalize the ‘mirage’ of same sex marriage. As Creator, God has the right to, and has already defined marriage, and so any claim to a union outside of that definition is just a chimera.

An argument often employed to justify homosexual marriage, was that discrimination against them parallels the discrimination against black people under the apartheid policies of previous South African governments, or the segregation policies prevalent in the U.S. until the 1960’s. South Africa’s first black President, Nelson Mandela, claimed to have turned from believing that homosexuality was wrong to supporting gay marriage based on this comparison.

It is a completely fallacious argument. The unjust policies of apartheid were based upon one’s skin colour (or as we have often pointed out it is shade of colour because all humans actually have the one skin colour). This is something as spiritually irrelevant in the design of God as the shape of one’s nose or eyes, or size of one’s feet. Resistance against homosexual practices is based on actions, on activity; men having sex with men (born with XY chromosomes) and women with women (XX chromosomes).

The truth is that we all discriminate against actions all the time even when it is argued that people ‘cannot help themselves’ feeling a certain way (orientation). Most people making this spurious argument would have no problem with discriminating against people stealing their belongings (trying to stop them or putting them in jail), or against those involved in the trade in rhinoceros’ horn. And so it is not a general argument against action discrimination, but the argument against this particular action of same sex, to which the gay lobby object. Of course, some but not all gay lobbyists argue that people are born homosexual. Besides the growing evidence that the idea of genetic causality in human behaviour is culturally rather than scientifically driven, the fact is that none of us are born having sex.

At some point in our lives we take an action, we choose to have sex with a partner; whether within the biblical confines of marriage between one man and one woman; or the license of pre-marital or adulterous or homosexual or polygamous or the many other perversions of sexual relationships the Bible condemns; which we fallen humans have invented, and to which we are prone, and increasingly excuse or condone in a politically correct charged environment.

Creation.com Article Continues Here

Gen1.org
(Denying Evolution) Evolution = Millions Of Years + Your Imagination

Origins and marriage

What is "empowered water"?

What is empowered water?

I wanted to find out about the claim you can also drink it.

The stuff is a simple mixture of table salt and tap water whose ions have been scrambled with an electric current. Researchers have dubbed it electrolyzed water.

It turns out that zapping salt water with low-voltage electricity creates a couple of powerful yet nontoxic cleaning agents. Sodium ions are converted into sodium hydroxide, an alkaline liquid that cleans and degreases like detergent, but without the scrubbing bubbles. Chloride ions become hypochlorous acid, a potent disinfectant known as acid water.

A question was asked: is empowered water safe to drink as the company claims?

Why in the world would you want to drink a product that has a catchy name without knowing what is in it? Septic tank cleaning companies were known as the "Honey Wagon". Would you drink the liquid from that truck - obviously not since you know what sewage is, so don't fall for clever marketing as so many consumers are wont to do.

Can you drink empowered water?

Reference https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/what-is-empowered-water.586076/


I would not drink the zerorez "empowered" water. I think its a lot of hype that causes you to want to get your carpet cleaned using zerorez.

Is it better? I don't think so. Read the carpetguru10 blog below and research zerorez yourself.



Carpet Guru10 Has Much information about zerores and empowered water.

The low down on ZEROREZ® and their Empowered Water™

Woodpecker Owl (Evolution doublespeak explained)

Woodpecker Owl Story

Whats the difference between a "woodpecker owl" and an owl catching a woodpecker. BIG DIFFERENCE!

Example evolution theory explaination of the "woodpecker owl".

The evolutionary relationships of the woodpecker and woodpecker owls are not entirely clear. What is certain is that they are very closely related; they may be considered sister lineages that evolved over millions of years retaining their characteristic woodpecker sound.

Click here to listen to a woodpecker owl: "Woodpecker Owl" Sound (screech owl)

Click here to see an Actual evolved "woodpecker" owl??

A screech woodpecker owl fossil from the Late Pliocene of Kansas (which is almost identical to eastern and western screech woodpecker owl) indicates a longstanding presence of these birds in the Americas, woodpecker owl fossils very similar to the Eurasian woodpecker owl that have also recently been found in Stephen Hawkings backyard!

Where did this idea come from? (The FineTunedUniverse Webmaster.)

I was talking to a lady about her recent field trip with some children out in the woods with a "guide". She was excited to have heard an owl making a sound. She asked the guide what it was and he said, IT WAS A WOODPECKER ?!?!?

I told her I never heard of a woodpecker that sounds like an owl. She said that she didn't think the "guide" was correct.

After I got home I looked up some information about owls and found out there is an owl that sounds a little like a woodpecker. It is the male screech owl. It EATS small birds of prey including woodpeckers. Just because there is an owl that sounds a little like a woodpecker don't get confused and really think there is a "Woodpecker Owl". Owls do eat woodpeckers and other birds.

(Note that I did not say I found a woodpecker that sounds like an owl but an owl that sounds a little like a woodpecker.)

Have you ever heard of a woodpecker that sounds like an owl? No you have not. You would stop and think how silly the idea is and how it is NOT LOGICAL.

My point is people who teach evolution will tell you its possible that a woodpecker could evolve into an owl over "millions of years" and become a "woodpecker owl" that sounds a little like a woodpecker on the basis of a fossil alone.

If you stop and THINK about the "millions of years" and how silly and illogical the idea is you begin to understand its no different that a "woodpecker owl" that makes NO sense.

"Historical evolution science" is a term used to describe sciences in which data is provided primarily from past events and for which there is usually no direct experimental data, such as cosmology, astronomy, astrophysics, geology, paleontology and archaeology.

Evolution theory is based on speculation about what is observable today plus millions of years. Evolution masks itself as "real science". It is NOT real science but speculation based on a world view of "millions of years". Evolution cannot design intelligence.

Evolution is a belief about history. It involves events that cannot be repeated or reproduced in the laboratory, so it does not depend on science in the usual sense of the word.

"Real science" is a term for any science that deals with testing and verifying ideas in the present

Evolutionists try to prove things have existed for millions of years through various ways including misleading carbon dating methods etc as real science.

Creationists try to prove what is observable today is validated by what the Bible tells us about Creation in 6 days. Real science helps validate the bible creation as God has revealed to us in Genesis.

Both evolutionists and creationists look at the same data. (They interpret the data based on their world views and what they believe.)

The evolutionists world view of "millions of years" must be included in their evolution theory explainations and cannot be validated.

The creationisits world view of 6-8 thousand years is validated by the Bible and real science.

The question is what will you believe? Evolution speculation of "millions of years" or what God has revealed in his Word?

The ultimate authority about Creation is the Word Of God and NOT evolution disguised as historical "science"

Evolution is a Religion (Taught in public schools as "science")

Evolutionists also overcome the evidence of creation and intelligent design by a redefinition of science that makes science and naturalism the same thing, and the evidence unimportant. The new definition is: "Science is the search for natural solutions,"People whose religion is naturalism are now widely using the new definition. by a redefinition of science that makes science and naturalism the same thing, and the evidence unimportant. The new definition is: "Science is the search for natural solutions,"People whose religion is naturalism are now widely using the new definition.

FineTunedUniverse.com

Psalm 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.

Transgender Bathrooms

..................
..................
..................
(People can call themselves anything. They can identify with anything. A man who wants to be a woman calls himself transgender but he is still a man.

His genes and dna can't be changed. He was born a man and not a woman or a transgender.

The same is for a woman who wants to be a man. Her genes and dna can't be changed. She was born a woman and not a man or a transgender.

God didn't create a transgender. Her created a male and female.

Today as in the days of Sodom and Gomorrah homosexuals/trangenders, blinded in the commission of sin are searching for transgender doors and wearing themselves out hoping to find someone they can prey on like an animal. They seek recognition and acceptance as a "New" gender creation. God has warned them in Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.")

.....................
.....................
.....................
What does the Bible really say about homosexuality?

The sin of Sodom

The first mention, and the first overt condemnation, of homosexuality takes place in the account of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. When the angels come to investigate the sinfulness of the people there, it is evident that Lot knows the angels are in danger because of the urgency with which he pleads that they spend the night in his house, and not in the open square. He may have wanted to get them inside before anyone noticed the newcomers, but word had spread to the whole town, and they gathered outside his house that night.

The universality of the description is impossible to miss—all of the men, rich and poor, young and old, gathered outside the house and demanded that Lot give up his guests. They bluntly demanded that Lot bring out his guests so that they could rape them. In that culture, hospitality was a sacred duty, and Lot was obliged to defend his guests, even if it cost his own life. So he goes out and pleads with them, even offering his own daughters instead of his guests. It’s possible he was making a bad choice endangering his daughters, or it’s possible he knew the crowd had no interest in women and he was simply trying to buy time. Either way, the crowd responded by trying to break in, but the angels protected Lot and struck the whole crowd blind.

Most people, if they were suddenly blinded in the commission of a heinous sin, as well as all their accomplices, would at least pause to consider the extraordinary coincidence. But this did not deter them—in fact, the text says that they went on trying to find the door for so long that they wore themselves out! The picture is certainly one of immorality run amok.

Some who want to soften the condemnation of homosexuality say that it was the intended rape, not the homosexuality, that was the sin, and point to Ezekiel 16 for a definition of the ‘actual’ sin of the Sodomites. However, we should not interpret Scripture in such a way to make it contradict itself. Ezekiel gives a fuller picture of the sin of Sodom, without contradicting the story of the city’s destruction:

Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy. They were haughty and did an abomination before me. So I removed them, when I saw it (Ezekiel 16:49–50).

The homosexual sin of Sodom is presented as a culmination of the growing sinful decadence of the city. Lesser sins preceded it, such as refusing to aid the needy when they themselves had more than enough. But the word “abomination” clearly refers to the homosexual sin which resulted in its destruction.

The New Testament also discusses Sodom in a few places:

For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment; if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven others, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly; if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction, making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; and if he rescued righteous Lot, greatly distressed by the sensual conduct of the wicked (for as that righteous man lived among them day after day, he was tormenting his righteous soul over their lawless deeds that he saw and heard); then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment, and especially those who indulge in the lust of defiling passion and despise authority (2 Peter 2:4–10).

Peter was writing to encourage Christians who were experiencing persecution because of their faith. His argument proceeds:

God punished the angels who sinned, and destroyed the world with a global Flood, but preserved Noah and his family.
God destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, but preserved righteous Lot; therefore
God can keep the unrighteous under judgment and rescue the godly from trials.

Jude says:

Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day—just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.

Jude was warning his congregation against false teachers, so he gave examples of other people who were judged for unbelief and immorality.

Peter and Jude don’t argue that Sodom and Gomorrah were wicked; they assume it based on everything the Old Testament says about them. So the entire testimony of Scripture is that Sodom and Gomorrah were wicked cities, and that homosexuality was the sin they were destroyed for.
.............
.............
.............

These 4 sermons make it clear what the Bible says about homosexuality. If you are a Bible believer these messages will help and encourange you in your understanding of what God says in the Bible about homosexuals. It is a sin and will be judged by the Word Of God. Take the time to listen and learn.

These are MP3 files that can be downloaded also.  (Click On Links To Listen.)

Christian Perspective On Supreme Court Ruling On Same Sex Marriage Part 1 (1 HR 6 Min)  (Right Click To Save)

Christian Perspective On Supreme Court Ruling On Same Sex Marriage Part 2 (1 HR 21 Min)  (Right Click To Save)

Rightly Related to Sodom Part 1 (1 HR 8 Min)  (Right Click To Save)

Rightly Related to Sodom Part 2 (1 Hr 5 Min)  (Right Click To Save)

Shocking Results from Fluoride Tests On Top Brands of Bottled Water

Shocking Results from Fluoride Tests On Top Brands of Bottled Water



.....................

Water tested, with the results below.

Glaceau Smart Water was Distilled- .00 ppm (This is available at SAM's) No fluoride plus it is a zero calorie, vapor distilled, electrolyte- enhanced water (added electrolytes: potassium, magnesium, calcium)


The bottled water below have fluoride in the water. Fluoride is a poison. I once called my local water supplier and ask how much fluoride was in the tap water. He told me it was not as much as it used to be. I also asked him if he knew it was a poison. He said he did but that it was added in such a small amount that it should be ok.

The story is flouride is added to water to help prevent tooth decay. The real story is fluoride does not prevent tooth decay and water systems are a dumping ground for an industrial waste byproduct

Ice Mountain- .11 ppm
Family Gourmet- .14 ppm
Dasani- .16 ppm
Propel- .17 ppm
Deja Blue- .17 ppm
Crystal Geyser- .31 ppm
Fiji- .35 ppm

VOSS .25 ppm
Kiwaii .04 ppm
Aqua was .13 ppm

Kroger was .00 ppm (It is distilled.) This has no fluoride also.)

Evian was .00 ppm As well. (Natural mineral water) This has no fluoride also plus natural minerals ie electrolytes.) Evian Water

(When you drink water that has no electrolytes your body needs these replaced. It makes good sense to drink water that has electrolytes such as Glaceau Smart Water or Evian. You don't need to drink gator aid to get electrolytes, drink water that has electrolytes! These are what I recommend.)


50 Reasons to Oppose Fluoridation

Don't drink ANY tap water. It accumulates in the body so any amount you injest is a hazard to your health. Don't cook with it.

Fluoride accumulates in the body. Healthy adult kidneys excrete 50 to 60% of the fluoride ingested each day (Marier & Rose 1971). The remainder accumulates in the body, largely in calcifying tissues such as the bones and pineal gland (Luke 1997, 2001).

Infants and children excrete less fluoride from their kidneys and take up to 80% of ingested fluoride into their bones (Ekstrand 1994). The fluoride concentration in bone steadily increases over a lifetime (NRC 2006).

Benefit is topical not systemic. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC, 1999, 2001) has now acknowledged that the mechanism of fluoride’s benefits are mainly topical, not systemic.

There is no need whatsoever, therefore, to swallow fluoride to protect teeth. Since the purported benefit of fluoride is topical, and the risks are systemic, it makes more sense to deliver the fluoride directly to the tooth in the form of toothpaste.

Since swallowing fluoride is unnecessary, and dangerous, there is no justification for forcing people (against their will) to ingest fluoride through their water supply.

The dose cannot be controlled. Once fluoride is put in the water it is impossible to control the dose each individual receives because people drink different amounts of water. Being able to control the dose a patient receives is critical.

Some people (e.g., manual laborers, athletes, diabetics, and people with kidney disease) drink substantially more water than others.

.............

Fluoride: Highly toxic waste byproduct of "aluminum"


The main fluoride chemical added to water today is hydrofluorosilicic acid an industrial by-product from the phosphate fertilizer industry.

Hydrofluorosilicic acid is what is added to drinking water. It is untreated toxic waste from the phosphate fertilizer industry added to city tap water, and has trace amounts of other toxins in the waste including arsenic and heavy metals. Fluoride is classified as a neurotoxin, just as harmful as lead and aluminum to the human developing brain

Fluoride given to rats has been proven to cause bone cancer, liver cancer, and a host of other physical ailments.

Bill Clinton’s Alleged Former Mistress: ‘Hillary Is A Lesbian'

Hillary Clinton wears leather, talks trash and blows a stop light


Hillary Clinton showed her wild side at an LGBT event at SoHo's Capitale, where the presidential wannabe sported a leather jacket, boasted about her Democratic-leading campaign and ran a red light on her way out.

"Stars" including Rosie O'Donnell, Billie Jean King and former Rep. Barney Frank — celebrating his 76th birthday — were all in the house as Hill went on a roll.

.............
Sally Miller was told by Bill Clinton about his "wife"

Miller, who is about to release a tell-all memoir, entitled “The Beauty Queen: Let No Deed Go Unpublished” of her and Bill Clinton’s relationship said, “I take [Bill Clinton] at his word and he told me [Hillary] liked females more than men. She was the child of a more progressive community.”

Former Miss Arkansas and Bill Clinton’s alleged former mistress Sally Miller claims, “Hillary is a lesbian.

...................

(I have noticed she smiles a lot more at these type of "events". I think she feels more relaxed and at home with whom she has bonded. Its obvious she identifies with them and supports them. She is one of them. Hillary is on home turf speaking to her own.)

The Radon Business Is A Scam

 

streamzones.com

 
 

The radon business is a scam

It's put out by the same folks who are selling us man-made global warming scam; WHO, the EPA, the NIH, all of whose best interests it serves to create crises so they can get money to keep "studying" the problem.

EPA's magical 4 picocuries/cubic liter threshold is arbitrary. There have never been tests of the effects of varying amounts of radon in a home setting. The only tests come from mine shafts in Pennsylvania where miners developed cancers, and where radon was among 25 or so radioactive elements present The results pf these findings were extrapolated to homes. In other words, THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A SINGLE VERIFIABLE CASE WHERE RADON IN A HOME WAS LINKED TO AN OCCURRENCE OF CANCER. Even the EPA has admitted it.

From a 1994 EPA report: "Facts Concerning Environmental Radon"
"To date the EPA has had little success in stimulating home owners to measure levels in their homes which would be the first step in the process of deciding on a course of action if a high radon level is found. This is partly because it is difficult to get people concerned that their home, a place that one looks to for security, is a potential source of hidden danger. Also, it has not yet been possible to generate convincing data on increased risk at or below 4-8 pCi/liter"

What? No evidence of increased risk in the 4-8 range? Yet the EPA recommends action on any reading above 4? And all the radon companies are making $800 to $2000 setting up bogus vent systems for this number pulled out of thin air? And all the realtors, like sheep, fall into line?

Finally, two most widespread claims about radon all come from one source, the EPA:

1) Radon is the second-leading cause of lung cancer
2) 21,000 people die of lung cancer each year due to radon.

The rub here is that these two statements, long considered gospel, FAIL TO SEPARATE SMOKERS VS. NONSMOKERS. Furthermore, the numbers used are on the HIGH END of the actual findings which said 3,000 to 32,000. Ergo, it is IMPOSSIBLE TO MAKE EITHER CLAIM ABOVE without pulling numbers out of thin air.

ERGO, THERE IS NO WAY TO TELL WHETHER RADON OR SMOKING CAUSED CANCER IN THE ABOVE CASES.

Below is the sole source for these two claims which have been repeated thousands of times, so much, in fact, that they are considered gospel. It is from the public summary of the EPA report, "Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation".

Note: "EVER-SMOKERS' is defined as ANYONE WHO IS SMOKING OR HAS EVER SMOKED.


"The BEIR VI committee's preferred central estimates... are that about 1 in 10 or 1 in 7 of all lung cancer deaths-amounting to ... about 15,400 to 21,800 per year in the United States- can be attributed to radon among ever-smokers and never-smokers together."
"The number of radon-related lung cancer deaths resulting from (our analysis) could be as low as 3000 or as high as 32,000. Most of the radon-related lung cancers occur among ever-smokers, and because of the synergism between smoking and radon, many of the cancers in ever-smokers could be prevented by either tobacco control or reduction of radon exposure."

So...."15,400 to 21,800 per year in the United States- can be attributed to radon among ever-smokers and never-smokers together".....So how can they arrive at the claim that "21,000 people die in America from radon each year? It's a bogus lie.

And from that lie sprang the industry of radon mitigation for residential homes that we are all paying for.

When you think about it, anybody with an IQ over 75 would question the idea of paying a thousand bucks to "cure" a problem you can't see or smell; a problem nobody has ever noticed or observed negative results from; a problem that apparently didn't even exist until 1984.

The radon business scam is similar to "dark matter" or "dark energy" scam in that neither has been observed or actually seen.

.........................................................................................

Sleeping radon hoax from early 90s reawakened in 2002

Regulators capitalizing on nation's 9-11-induced fear of unseen enemies -- regardless of facts or science

Two years ago Tom Macy produced a research paper showing science discredits the radon scare as a hoax. We believed then that radon was used as a cover for strict building codes requiring homes and buildings to be airtight and energy efficient -- causing people to get sick from breathing fumes emanating from synthetic carpet fibers, paints, floor finishes and solvents.

However, Macy's research was not timely two years ago as the dominant media had put the issue to bed -- until January 16, 2002. “CdA, Spokane radon levels highest in region” was the headline attached to a story by Spokesman-Review staff writer Susan Drumheller. As an odorless and invisible gas by-product of the decomposition of uranium in soil, “experts” claim that radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer in the nation. Drumheller's article appears to be a vehicle to rekindle public hysteria over the unseen radon enemy so Kootenai county officials will be supported in their efforts to implement a regulatory scheme protecting the public from a problem that doesn't exist.

By Tom Macy

Prior to the 1850s, scientific endeavors were marred by the lack of a specified set of procedures for conducting inquiries. In many (if not most) cases, it was common to find mere opinions being passed off as facts and unsupported speculations being heralded as profound discoveries.

The “Scientific Method”, as the accepted procedure came to be called, consists of the following steps: 1) Problem identification; 2) data collection; 3) formulation of hypothesis; 4) empirically testing the hypothesis and; 5) publishing the results for peer review.

By adhering to this rather rigid framework, it became possible to limit the amount of erroneous data that was collected and to coordinate the work of researchers on a worldwide basis. Unfortunately, it appears that research into the radon issue has not followed this model.

Before about 1970, radon was regarded as something of a laboratory curiosity and was used mainly for therapeutic purposes. One textbook refers to it as “nasty stuff” and it was generally regarded to be a health hazard for workers in laboratories and hospitals where it was in use. Up to that point it appears that very little analytical work had been done with it because of the difficulties encountered in its handling.

Sometime in the early 1970s a serious problem was reportedly noticed at a uranium mine in Europe. It seems that the miners were contracting lung cancer at a rate 50 times higher than normal. A study of some sort was apparently conducted and it was concluded that the cancer was being caused by radon.

No information appears to be available regarding the location of the mine, who may have conducted the study, or what methods were employed in arriving at the conclusion presented. What is obvious, however, is that this was the beginning of the worldwide indictment of radon as a public health hazard. Many of the reports that have been published regarding the radon hazard nebulously refer to the “European uranium mine.”

Subsequent studies were conducted in the U.S. and involved coal miners in Pennsylvania. It has been reported that the data and conclusions originating from the uranium mine study were supported by the coal mine results. Again, the studies themselves have been impossible to locate and no data from them appears in the reports that are available. There is also a complete lack of information about who made such studies or which mines were involved.

A review of the material that is readily available to the consumer has illuminated one very important fact. There is absolutely no mention made of any qualitative or quantitative analytical techniques that might have been used to identify the radon that is supposedly present in homes all across America and around the world. The only measurements that are ever identified are those that detect the presence of radioactivity.

If radon were the only radioactive element in the universe, simply checking for the presence of radioactivity would be sufficient. But there are literally hundreds of radiation sources, both natural and man-made. The purpose of this paper is to point out the futility of trying to sort out which element is responsible when we live in a veritable stew of low-level radioactive sources. We eat, drink, breathe, bathe in and eliminate dozens of such materials every day.

The only reason that the radon story has retained any credibility at all is because its promoters, including the EPA and other government agencies, can depend upon the general public's ignorance of the science involved. The only way that anyone can begin to unscramble the misinformation is by understanding the problem. In order to accomplish that, radon and all of its relatives should be studied along with some of the ideas on how they interact with the rest of the world.

The following information was taken from the prestigious CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics; 68th edition:

1. Radon is but one of 14 radioactive elements that are created as Uranium 238 disintegrates to become Lead 206

2. The half-life for the whole 14-step process is 4.5 billion years -- it takes 10 half-lives for 99.9 percent of the radioactive material to decay

3. The half-life for radon is 3.8 days -- 99.9 percent of the radon in any given sample will be gone in 38 days

4. It takes seven tons of uranium ore to produce 1 gram of radium (radium is radon's parent)

5. One gram of radium will emanate 0.0001 ml. (1 ten-millionth of a liter) of radon per day

6. One square mile of soil six inches deep contains approx. 1 gram of radium

7. Radium emits alpha and beta particles as well as gamma rays.

8. Radon emits alpha particles only

The following information has been derived from a variety of physics, chemistry and geology textbooks:

1. Geologists use a process called “radiometric dating” in order to establish the age of rocks

2. In this process, the amount of Uranium 238 is compared to the amount of Lead 206

3. Since the 14-step decay process takes a known amount of time for the uranium to disintegrate to Lead 206, younger rocks will have more uranium while older rocks will have more lead

4. This process PRESUMES that the entire decay process takes place within the rock and that NONE OF THE DECAY PRODUCTS (INCLUDING RADON) is able to escape.

( Note: It is possible that a small amount of radon is able to leave the rock matrix if it is formed very near the surface of the rock or if the rock is very finely pulverized. If a significant amount were to routinely escape, the uranium dating method would be useless.)

The above information leads to the following inescapable conclusions: Under laboratory conditions, extremely small amounts of radon are produced and collected (It is not likely that these results are indicative of what occurs in the field because the laboratory sample is pure, refined radium while the field variety is trapped in rock matrices and widely distributed throughout non-uniform conditions).

If the entire daily production from one gram of radium were uniformly distributed over an area one-mile square and 8 to 10 feet high, the amount per unit of air would be extraordinarily small. Since most of the radon produced in rocks and soils is likely to stay there to become Lead 206, the amount available for distribution is so small that it approximates zero.

On the other hand, data obtained from Radium in natural sources in an article titled “Radioactivity in Nature” under the heading “Food” it is discovered that Brazil Nuts contain from 1,000 to 7000 pico curies per kilogram (pCi/kg) or 2.2 lbs.* There are approximately 120 nuts in a kilogram so each nut contains from 8.33 to 58.33 pCi of radium. Compare this to the 4 pCi/liter safety limit established by the EPA for radon in room air. Radium is far more dangerous because will replace calcium in bone structures and irradiate the marrow -- a known cause of leukemia.

(Did ya get that? If ya got about 2 pounds of brazil nuts you could have up to 14 times the safe level of radon the EPA has established as safe. Just think about that. All it would take is a bag of brazil nuts under your house to cost you about $1200.00 to get rid of a problem that doesn't exit. A scam for sure.) Story reports

But what of the miners?

They really died of lung cancer, we are told.

The most likely explanation for this entire scenario goes something like this:

1. The mining company is negligent in providing the miners with adequate breathing equipment

2. The miners breathe the mining dust containing at least 14 different radioactive elements

3. The miners get sick and die

4. The company seeks a way of avoiding any liability for the problem and hires someone to invent a cover story -- it is very successful; they can hardly be held responsible for something that occurs naturally

5. The story is picked up by the American Tobacco Institute which is looking for an alternate explanation for the causes of lung cancer in smokers

6. The ATI provides funds for research, hoping to avoid liability, as did the mining company

7. The ploy did not work, but misguided researchers confused laboratory data from the research by applying it to field conditions to make it appear that radon is a major health hazard.

8. The radon abatement industry is born!

* A picoCurie is one-trillionth of a Curie, the unit of measure for radioactive material.


Sleeping radon hoax from early 90s reawakened in
2002
.............
.............
Exposure To Low Levels Of Radon Appears To Reduce The Risk Of Lung Cancer, New Study Finds


ScienceDaily (Mar. 26, 2008) — Exposure to levels of radon gas typically found in 90 percent of American homes appears to reduce the risk of developing lung cancer by as much as 60 percent, according to a study published in the March issue of the journal Health Physics. The finding differs significantly from the results of previous case-control studies of the effects of low-level radon exposure, which have detected a slightly elevated lung cancer risk (but without statistical significance) or no risk at all.

The study, undertaken jointly by researchers at Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI), Fallon Clinic, and Fallon Community Health Plan, is the first to observe a statistically significant hormetic effect of low-level radon exposure. Toxins and other environmental stressors (including radiation) that have a beneficial effect at very low doses are said to exhibit hormesis (scientists believe that the low doses of toxins may stimulate repair mechanisms in cells). Home exposure to radon, a naturally occurring radioactive decay product of radium, has been thought to be the second leading cause of lung cancer, after cigarette smoking. Chemically inert, it can percolate out of the ground into basements.

The study was initiated and managed by Donald F. Nelson, now professor emeritus of physics at WPI, during the 1990s, a time when concern over the link between residential radon exposure and lung cancer was growing. Nelson says the aim was to try to establish what level of radon exposure actually correlated with significant lung cancer risk and to establish a safety zone for home radon levels. “We were certainly not looking for a hormetic effect,” says co-author Joel H. Popkin of Fallon Clinic and St. Vincent Hospital in Worcester. “Indeed, we were stunned when the data pointed to that conclusion in such a strong way.”

In the study, the exposure of 200 individuals with confirmed cases of primary lung cancer to radon was compared to the exposure of 397 carefully matched, randomly selected control subjects. All subjects were 40 years old or older and had lived in their homes for at least 10 years. All of the cases and controls were residents of Worcester County in Massachusetts and were enrolled in the same health maintenance organization, Fallon Community Health Plan.

The results were statistically adjusted for factors known to be correlated with lung cancer risk, including smoking, occupational exposure to carcinogens, and level of education. The adjusted results show that the odds ratios of developing lung cancer fall below one (the no effect level) at radon exposure levels within the range measured in about 90 percent of homes across the United States (0-150 Becquerel per cubic meter of air, or about 0-4 picoCuries per liter). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recommends that homeowners take remediation actions when household radon exposure levels rise above 4 picoCuries per liter, based on the belief that radon exposure presents a linearly increasing lung cancer risk (a view not supported by the new study in the low-dose region).

In a statistical analysis led by Richard E. Thompson, associate scientist in the department of biostatistics at the Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, two mathematical techniques were used to compute the odds ratios of developing lung cancer. They each showed a statistically significant lowered lung cancer risk—a reduction of as much as 60 percent–over portions of the 0-150 Becquerel per cubic meter range.

The results of the current study do not fall within the “linear, no threshold” (LNT) model commonly used to analyze radon’s cancer risk (in fact, the current study calls into question the validity of that model). The model starts with cancer risks documented for exposure to high levels of radon (for example, by uranium miners) and extrapolates a considerable distance to risks at low levels (for example, for homeowners). In that model, the odds ratios of developing cancer rise linearly from one, beginning at a radon level of zero. The model has been used by the EPA to derive its estimate that 21,000 cancer deaths annually can be attributed to radon exposure, and also accounts for the common belief that there is no safe level of radon exposure.

Donald Nelson says the differences in the outcomes of this and previous studies may be attributable to key elements of the new study’s design. For example, he noted, care was taken to place radon monitors (for yearlong measurements) in areas of the home where the subjects spent the most wakeful time. Monitors were also place in the subjects’ present and former bedrooms and on any other home level where they spent as little as one hour per week.

The subjects’ exposures were then obtained by weighting the measurements according to the time typically spent near each detector. The results were further adjusted to account for how subjects’ home use changed with changing lifestyle (for example, transitioning from full-time employment to retirement). “Our analysis shows this to be an important improvement over exposure measures used by almost all other studies,” he said.

“It is important to note,” Nelson added, “that these new results do not dispute the lung cancer risk associated with higher levels of radon exposure experienced by uranium miners. Nevertheless, the results represent a dramatic departure from previous results and beliefs. Of course, a single epidemiological study is seldom regarded as definitive, so our results point to the need for new studies using our techniques.”

Nelson also noted that the study revealed a dramatic correlation between level of education and lung cancer risk. Subjects who had at least some college education were found to have only 30 percent of the lung cancer risk of those with less than a high school education. “While education has been found to be an important correlated variable in many health studies,” he said, “this is a particularly striking and statistically significant result, one found after smoking, job exposures, and radon were statistically adjusted for.”
.............
.............
.............
(If this is true, and you be the judge, the radon scam business not only rips you off but increases your risk of lung cancer!!!!)
.............

 

streamzones.com

AnyCalculator.com (Over 100 FREE online calculators.)

ExactWeather.com (Not Exact But Close Enough.)

FineTunedUniverse.com (Atheist evolutionary theories disproven. There are No valid models proving anything except GOD created the heavens and earth in 6 days.)

Paul Harvey - Warning to America

.................................
Paul Harvey Warning To America MP3 2Min 31 Sec

Which political figures fit the mold Paul Harvey was talking about?

Its obvious.

When you vote keep Paul Harvey's advice in mind.
.......................
.......................
.......................

Listen to an episode of the Last Man Out.

Last Man Out MP3 24 Min

(The episode "The Last Man Out" describes in similar fashion the PC "progressive " subversion that has taken effect in America and American schools today.)

case of dorothy k funn
Air Date 12.06.1953 ( December 6, 1953)

Plot A former Communist tells how "The Party" instructs public school teachers to slant American education in favor of the Soviet Union. After her story is dramatized, the teacher herself appears on the program to praise the House Un-American Activities Committee.

...................
Top Cat Bernie Sanders is a communist

Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders,ie "top cat", has been getting away for years with describing himself as a socialist, when in reality he is an outright America-hating communist.
...................

AnyCalculator.com

Hillary Unsecured Classified Emails Detailed exact location and time of Murdered Ambassador Chris Stevens movments.

Hillary Clinton Unsecured Classified Emails Detailed exact location and time of Murdered Ambassador Chris Stevens movments.

Obama and Hillary Clinton both knew al Queda terrorists had planned to attack Benghazi 10 days in advance.

Hillary Clinton and Obama made sure al Qaeda knew the location/movements of Ambassador Stevens including the exact time of a Stevens meeting in Benghazi!


Judicial Watch: Defense, State Department Documents Reveal Obama Administration Knew that al Qaeda Terrorists Had Planned Benghazi Attack 10 Days in Advance.


Hillary Clinton and Obama are Traitors and should be arrested for Treason!

.....................
.....................

Aaron Klein

An email containing the whereabouts and plans of murdered U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens passed through Hillary Clinton’s private server, dispatches released Monday in the final group of messages from Clinton’s emails reveal.

The email was actually first released last May but was contained in Monday’s batch as well, serving as a reminder that numerous emails sent to Clinton’s private address betrayed Stevens’ location while he was stationed in arguably one of the most dangerous zones in the world for an American diplomat.

The email in question was written Sunday, April 10, 2011 by State employee Timmy Davis and sent to the State email addresses of other employees, including Clinton’s then-foreign policy aide, Jacob Sullivan and Clinton’s senior aide.

Abedin forwarded the message to Clinton. At the time, Stevens was the U.S. envoy to the Libyan rebels.

The dispatch read:

The situation in Ajdabiyah has worsened to the point where Stevens is considering departure from Benghazi. The envoy’s delegation is currently doing a phased checkout (paying the hotel bills, moving some comms to the boat, etc). He will monitor the situation to see if it deteriorates further, but no decision has been made on departure. He will wait 2-3 more hours, then revisit the decision on departure.

The email is one of several giving away Stevens’ location and movements.

A March 27, 2011 email released last year was titled, “Chris Stevens mission.” It divulged: “The current game plan is for Mr. Stevens to move no later than Wednesday from Malta to Benghazi. He will stage offshore initially for a one day visit during which he will have meetings with TNC interlocutors and get a sense of the situation on the ground. The goal of this one day trip is for him to lay the groundwork for a stay of up to 30 days.”

An April 8, 2011 email was forwarded to Clinton revealing the “security situation in Benghazi remains quiet. Chris Stevens & team are in the hotel, moving only for meetings as required.”

An April 22, 2011 email revealed Stevens was on the road: “I want to let you know about a temporary rotation in Benghazi. TNC Envoy Chris Stevens has been on the road since March 13, when he began his outreach mission, and has been in Benghazi since April 5.”

An April 24, 2011 email has the exact time of a Stevens meeting: “”Stevens will be meeting with MFA in one hour and will make a written request for better security at the hotel and for better security-related coordination. He still feels comfortable in the hotel. They are looking into the idea of moving into a villa,but that is some way off.”

..............
..............
..............
Why would anyone in the right mind support and vote for Hillary Clinton knowing she purposely used her private unsecured email server to send beyond top secret emails?

Anyone who supports hillary clinton supports a Traitor to America.
Anyone who supports obama supports a traitor to America.

I don't accept the idea that the majority of hillary clinton and obama supporters are guilty of just sincere ignorance or conscientious stupidity.

I think obama and hillary clinton supporters either don't care what they do or they know both hillary clinton and obama are criminals and support them anyway!