eye_of_the_storm

One day I'll be a cultural hero like Gandhi and his fight for freedom/ independence from British Imperialism!! hahaa How funny though with the number of Indians now living in the UK and other British colonies? Quite confusing...

Hobbes doesn't say anything about race // Roman Christianity enforced it's beliefs upon the "Barbarians/ Uncivilized" in Europe... bringing it's own form of "civilization" ... it is you here implying that Africa is uncivilized/ primitive. I am saying African culture should be preserved and left to pursue its own evolutionary path without the interference of such things like Christianity or Cultural Marxism imposing its artificial ideologies on organic cultures. As I believe Christianity/ Islam Marxism should also depart from Europe as it is foreign/ alien to Ancient European Culture Just as I believe Christian missionaries in Nepal should get the f**k out Disagree?

so in other words no?

Considering you are so knowledgeable on the subject I just assumed you'd be able to back up your statement rather easily... Instead I have to read the entire works of Hobbes to see if you are making a true or false statement? and at the same time constantly demand for me to prove me position? haha @_@ Talk about double standards...

The title was a working title... as is the thread... the thread is more like play... than a static thing. Can you demonstrate Hobbes advocating white-supremacy? As you already know I am unfamiliar with his work, so unsure if that statement is true or not.

The proof is in the 3 pictures I presented... it can't get more obvious than that... you just have to open your eyes. A pictures says 1000 words

Seems to be your tactic... A discussion would be nice, rather than an interrogation... maybe you have something worthwhile to offer? maybe you don't Nothing you have said refutes what I have said... just sidetrack questions So I guess you are in agreement but wanting to divert things for whatever reason? Perhaps you are a marxist who does't believe their own BS? but doesn't want to admit it

Self evident

// Ok, I will elaborate... though my position is near exactly the same as what i quoted... so pointless task really... but anyway... > The laws of Nature are Divine law > All humans are bound by them > Natural law is self evident > Preservation of the natural law is Good > The natural laws direct the way to Good/ Harmony Sounds Taoist to me?? So the way to harmony is following natural laws and the way to chaos is going against natural laws - That maintaining unique cultures/people is good/ harmonious/ organic and in alignment with natural laws as per self evident patterns found in nature... of which the pictures in the OP demonstrated. // So I guess by ignoring my question, you do agree with elements of Social Darwinism? As you said... "Natural selection is about science and evolution" you also made a premise ^ that I am questioning? in regards to a couple of pages ago... lol So what? haha

Self preservation regarding the collective... Say like China before the "Cultural Revolution" So the Self in this regard is the Chinese people I have not even read Hobbes... I was looking for examples of Natural Law Theory, what I copy and paste is what I am in agreement with (from the link provided). // You still haven't answered "Natural selection is about science and evolution"? so you agree with some elements of Social Darwinism?

I think social order is a natural phenomenon/ unwritten law... for example You are in a romantic relationship, a mutual agreement / partnership with defined goals of a sort... one form of social order? in addition to that your immediate associates will if they have any common decency not attempt to pursue a a romantic relationship with your partner... or your partner with others or yourself with others... common decency/ mutual respect etc... This is a micro social order? ... an order of sorts always unfolds. A natural order which keeps society as a whole harmonious. If something threatens (some form of criminal activity) the harmonious order of society it has to be amended This I suppose is "Civilization" ... when a group of people understand such without much coercion. // The OP is not about Individualism either More about unique collectives (cultures) and unique evolutionary paths / natural diversity

I am for non interference/ non-intervention, self determination principles I think what I have presented so far at the least hints at that?

For purposes of ... wild speculation There are some interesting aspects to Fascism that I believe would be beneficial to our current situation.. Particularly the concept of Autarky... Thoughts? Is there a way we can expand / develop these ideas? Into a 21st c working model or use it to develop a new system of governance? I was thinking of starting another thread - "Create Your Dream Government" or something haha... and have forum members develop/ experiment / play with a potential new system of governance. But I wanted to cause a little (more) commotion haha ////// Fascism was influenced by Saint-Simonian utopian socialism that accepted private property and had criticized the legacy of the French Revolution that fascism also has done.[11] Fascism advocates a state-controlled and regulated mixed economy; the principal economic goal of fascism is to achieve autarky to secure national self-sufficiency and independence, through protectionist and interventionist economic policies.[10] It promotes regulated private enterprise and private property contingent whenever beneficial to the nation and state enterprise and state property whenever necessary to protect its interests.[10] Autarky is the quality of being self-sufficient. Usually the term is applied to political states or their economic systems. The latter are called closed economies.[1] Autarky exists whenever an entity can survive or continue its activities without external assistance or international trade. Autarky is not necessarily economic. For example, a military autarky would be a state that could defend itself without help from another country. Autarky can be said to be the policy of a state or other entity when it seeks to be self-sufficient as a whole, but also can be limited to a narrow field such as possession of a key raw material. Etymology The word "autarky" is from the Greek: aὐτάρκειa, which means "self-sufficiency" (derived from aὐτο-, "self," and ἀρκέω, "to suffice"). The term is sometimes confused with autocracy (Greek: aὐτoκρaτίa/aὐτaρχίa "government by single absolute ruler") or autarchy. Libertarian theorist Robert LeFevre used "autarchy" and "autarchism" in the sense of self-government to describe his own political philosophy and to distinguish it from anarchism. The symbolism of the fasces suggested strength through unity: a single rod is easily broken, while the bundle is difficult to break. There is a scholarly consensus that fascism was influenced by both left and right, conservative and anti-conservative, national and supranational, rational and anti-rational.[35] A number of historians have regarded fascism either as a revolutionary centrist doctrine, as a doctrine which mixes philosophies of the left and the right, or as both of those things.[36][37] Fascism was founded during World War I by Italian national syndicalists who combined left-wing and right-wing political views. Fascism as a form of tyranny One of the most common and strongest criticisms of fascism, is that it is a tyranny in practice.[220] Fascism is commonly regarded as deliberately and entirely non-democratic and anti-democratic.[221][222][223] Scholar on democracy, Anthony Arblaster has recorded fascists' policy claim about the ideology supporting a form of democracy, but Arblaster regards the claim as a deliberate lie and empty rhetoric, claiming that fascism never intended to put such claims of democracy into practice, and thus he categorizes fascism as non-democratic and anti-democratic in practice.[224] However there have been scholars who have rebuked this common critical view. Scholar on fascism Walter Laqueur says that fascists "would not necessarily accept the label of 'anti-democratic'. In fact many of them argued that they were fighting for a purer and more genuine democracy in which the participation of the individual in politics would not be mediated by professional politicians, clerical influences, the availability of the mass media, but through personal, almost full time involvement in a political movement and through identification with the leader who would represent the feelings and sentiments of the whole people."[225] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

And the USA which is said to be a Democracy? (Though suppose to a be a Republic?)... and Capitalist? Just word games really... USA is also a Communist Totalitarian /Welfare State / Wealth distribution which is only enforced on the majority (communism keeps the masses suppressed while the ruling elite (capitalist) suck the life out of the land and people. ^ So as per image... with slight amendment // The top is capitalist and the bottom is communist/ slavery The capitalist are parasites and the masses are brainwashed into being communist host. Capitalism is the "American Dream"... it's that small glimmer of hope that keeps the masses into thinking one day they will break free if they work really hard.... but the capitalist elite parasites trapped the masses into a communist system taking the wealth of the individual by force and redistributing either to themselves or into fruitless projects... keeping the masses and the state in perpetual debt (slavery). Ahaha... sooo, you could say that Communism is a Capitalist system?? yeh?

The original title was a play on how self preservation today is referred by some as "racist" ... so by that standard // anyhow And I agree with many of you, such a statement is absurd. ... Thomas Hobbes, for example, was also a paradigmatic natural law theorist. He held that the laws of nature are divine law (Leviathan, xv, ¶41), that all humans are bound by them (Leviathan, xv, ¶¶36), and that it is easy to know at least the basics of the natural law (Leviathan, xv, ¶35). He held that the fundamental good is self-preservation (Leviathan, xiii, ¶14), and that the laws of nature direct the way to this good (Leviathan, xiv, ¶3). He offered a catalog of laws of nature that constitute the “true moral philosophy” (Leviathan, xv, ¶40). ... There were a number of post-Thomistic writers in the medieval and modern periods who in some way denied (2), the natural authority of the natural law, holding that while the content of the natural law is fixed either wholly or in part by human nature, its preceptive power could only come from an additional divine command: the views of John Duns Scotus, Francisco Suarez, and John Locke fit this mold. Arguably the Stoics were natural law thinkers, but they seem to deny (4), holding the right to be prior to the good (see Striker 1986). Some contemporary theological ethicists called ‘proportionalists’ (e.g. Hallett 1995) have taken up the natural law view with a consequentialist twist, denying (6). (For a discussion of the relationship between proportionalism and natural law theory see Kaczor 2002.) And while some see Aristotle as being the source of the natural law tradition, some have argued that his central appeal to the insight of the person of practical wisdom as setting the final standard for right action precludes the possibility of the sort of general rules that would (at least in a theistic context) make Aristotle's ethics a natural law position. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/natural-law-ethics/ So I guess I am a Natural Law Theorist... perhaps some similarity with Taoism. And the other views/ denial + anti science here come from Cultural Marxism ... The Marxist position works to destroy all sense of identity/ culture / uniqueness among all peoples... which is natural + evolutionary The Natural Law Theorist would want to preserve identity/ culture / uniqueness among all peoples... Marxism... strangely is really an offshoot of Christianity and Islamic Ideology... I'd say Judaism is more in line with Natural Law Theory? Pope Pius IX's 1938: “One forgets today that the human race is a single, large and catholic race.” You may notice similar slogans amongst Marxists "Liberals", "Progressives" Islam has similar ideas also regarding conversion and destruction of culture... Marxism, Christianity, Islam primary concern is world domination... the most effective way to achieve this is to erase what makes people unique... A perfect example is the Borg The Borg are a collection of species that have been turned into cybernetic organisms functioning as drones of the Collective, or the hive. A pseudo-race, dwelling in the Star Trek universe, the Borg force other species into their collective and connect them to "the hive mind"; the act is called assimilation and entails violence, abductions, and injections of microscopic machines called nanoprobes. The Borg's ultimate goal is "achieving perfection". ^ Marxism ("Liberalism", "Progressives") Christianity and Islam Seems like Christianity/Islam you could add Freemasonry too was Proto-Marxism All Globalist / Internationalist ideologies... which are destroying people and planet -

You don't think economic systems can be political?

Ha, nice

@ Ralis You are correct... nature as racist is a bogus argument. It is just self preservation, true diversity + pursuit of unique evolutionary paths. "Natural selection is about science and evolution"? so you agree with some elements of Social Darwinism? @ PLF What do you think about different dog breeds? Some say some dog breeds are more violent than others, some are smarter etc, some are more curious etc So it is more than just the colour of ones coat? ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// The "Out of Africa" theory is losing ground also with recent studies/ finds etc http://www.pnas.org/content/108/37/15123.long Genetic evidence for archaic admixture in Africa Michael F. Hammera,b,1, August E. Woernera, Fernando L. Mendezb, Joseph C. Watkinsc, and Jeffrey D. Walld Author Affiliations Edited by Ofer Bar-Yosef, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, and approved July 27, 2011 (received for review June 13, 2011) Next Section Abstract A long-debated question concerns the fate of archaic forms of the genus Homo: did they go extinct without interbreeding with anatomically modern humans, or are their genes present in contemporary populations? This question is typically focused on the genetic contribution of archaic forms outside of Africa. Here we use DNA sequence data gathered from 61 noncoding autosomal regions in a sample of three sub-Saharan African populations (Mandenka, Biaka, and San) to test models of African archaic admixture. We use two complementary approximate-likelihood approaches and a model of human evolution that involves recent population structure, with and without gene flow from an archaic population. Extensive simulation results reject the null model of no admixture and allow us to infer that contemporary African populations contain a small proportion of genetic material (≈2%) that introgressed ≈35 kya from an archaic population that split from the ancestors of anatomically modern humans ≈700 kya. Three candidate regions showing deep haplotype divergence, unusual patterns of linkage disequilibrium, and small basal clade size are identified and the distributions of introgressive haplotypes surveyed in a sample of populations from across sub-Saharan Africa. One candidate locus with an unusual segment of DNA that extends for >31 kb on chromosome 4 seems to have introgressed into modern Africans from a now-extinct taxon that may have lived in central Africa. Taken together our results suggest that polymorphisms present in extant populations introgressed via relatively recent interbreeding with hominin forms that diverged from the ancestors of modern humans in the Lower-Middle Pleistocene. H. sapiens hybridization It is now well accepted that anatomically modern humans (AMH) originated in Africa and eventually dispersed to all inhabited parts of the world. What is not known is the extent to which the ancestral population that gave rise to AMH was genetically isolated, and whether archaic hominins made a genetic contribution to the modern human gene pool. Answering these questions has important implications for understanding the way in which adaptations associated with modern traits were assembled in the human genome: do the genes of AMH descend exclusively from a single isolated population, or do our genes descend from divergent ancestors that occupied different ecological niches over a wider geographical range across and outside of the African Pleistocene landscape? The introgression debate is typically framed in terms of interbreeding between AMH and Neandertals in Europe or other archaic forms in Asia. The opportunity for such hybridizations may have existed between 90 and 30 kya, after early modern humans dispersed from Africa and before archaic forms went extinct in Eurasia (1⇓⇓⇓–5). Recent genome-level analyses of ancient DNA suggest that a small amount of gene flow did occur from Neandertals into the ancestors of non-Africans sometime after AMH left Africa (6) and that an archaic “Denisovan” population contributed genetic material to the genomes of present-day Melanesians (7). Given recent fossil evidence, however, the greatest opportunity for introgression was in Africa, where AMH and various archaic forms coexisted for much longer than they did outside of Africa (5, 8–11). Indeed, the fossil record indicates that a variety of transitional forms with a mosaic of archaic and modern features lived over an extensive geographic area from Morocco to South Africa between 200 and 35 kya (12⇓⇓–15). More @ http://www.pnas.org/content/108/37/15123.long // http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0002700;jsessionid=077D0107E5A3BEEEDDA4FF0DBF5B0543 A 28,000 Years Old Cro-Magnon mtDNA Sequence Differs from All Potentially Contaminating Modern Sequences David Caramelli, Lucio Milani, Stefania Vai, Alessandra Modi, Elena Pecchioli, Matteo Girardi, Elena Pilli, Martina Lari, Barbara Lippi, Annamaria Ronchitelli, Francesco Mallegni, Antonella Casoli, Giorgio Bertorelle, Guido Barbujani Abstract Background DNA sequences from ancient speciments may in fact result from undetected contamination of the ancient specimens by modern DNA, and the problem is particularly challenging in studies of human fossils. Doubts on the authenticity of the available sequences have so far hampered genetic comparisons between anatomically archaic (Neandertal) and early modern (Cro-Magnoid) Europeans. Methodology/Principal Findings We typed the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) hypervariable region I in a 28,000 years old Cro-Magnoid individual from the Paglicci cave, in Italy (Paglicci 23) and in all the people who had contact with the sample since its discovery in 2003. The Paglicci 23 sequence, determined through the analysis of 152 clones, is the Cambridge reference sequence, and cannot possibly reflect contamination because it differs from all potentially contaminating modern sequences. Conclusions/Significance: The Paglicci 23 individual carried a mtDNA sequence that is still common in Europe, and which radically differs from those of the almost contemporary Neandertals, demonstrating a genealogical continuity across 28,000 years, from Cro-Magnoid to modern Europeans. Because all potential sources of modern DNA contamination are known, the Paglicci 23 sample will offer a unique opportunity to get insight for the first time into the nuclear genes of early modern Europeans. Citation: Caramelli D, Milani L, Vai S, Modi A, Pecchioli E, et al. (2008) A 28,000 Years Old Cro-Magnon mtDNA Sequence Differs from All Potentially Contaminating Modern Sequences. PLoS ONE 3(7): e2700. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002700 Editor: Henry Harpending, University of Utah, United States of America Received: April 23, 2008; Accepted: June 17, 2008; Published: July 16, 2008 Copyright: © 2008 Caramelli et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Funding: Study supported by funds of the Italian Ministery of the Universities (PRIN 2006). No sponsors had any role in any phase of the study, and the authors do not envisage any conflict of interests. Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. Introduction The anatomically-archaic Europeans, the Neandertal people, are documented in the fossil record from approximately 300,000 to 30,000 years ago. Around 45,000 years ago, anatomically-modern humans of the Cro-Magnoid type expanded in Europe from the Southeast. Neandertals coexisted with them for between 1,000 to 10,000 thousand years, depending on the region [1], but eventually their skeletons disappeared from the fossil record. Individuals of intermediate morphology have not been observed. With the possible exception of one 25,000 years old child [2], all known specimens in the relevant time interval can be classified without ambiguity either as Neandertals or Cro-Magnoids. The interpretation of these findings is not straightforward. Under the so-called Out-of-Africa model, Neandertals are considered to be extinct, and modern Europeans are regarded as descending exclusively from Cro-Magnoids who replaced Neandertals in the course of their expansion from Africa [3]. Conversely, recent versions of the alternative, multiregional model, propose that Neandertals gave a limited, but non-negligible, contribution to the gene pool of modern Europeans by admixing with Cro-Magnoids (e.g. [4]–[6]). Analyses of morphological traits [7], ancient Neandertal DNA [8], [9], and modern DNA diversity [10]–[12] are generally regarded as supporting a recent African origin of modern humans [13], without substantial Neandertal contribution, if any at all. In particular, mtDNA sequences from all studied Neandertals fall out of the range of modern variation and show no particular relationship with modern European sequences [9], [14]. However, it is clearly impossible to rule out any degree of reproductive interaction between the two groups. As a consequence, the possibility has been raised that admixture did occur, but the early Europeans of modern anatomy were not too different genetically from Neandertals, or else that most Neandertal haplotypes were lost through a process of lineage sorting, i.e. by genetic drift [5]. To clarify the evolutionary relationships between the two anatomically-distinct groups that coexisted in Upper Paleolithic Europe, data on DNA variation in Cro-Magnoids are of course extremely important. At present, only two Cro-Magnoid sequences, both from Paglicci in Southern Italy, have been published. Both of them fall within the range of modern mtDNA variation, thus differing sharply from all known Neandertal sequences, and both belong to fossil specimens from which Neandertal-specific primers failed to amplify mtDNA [15]. Serre et al. [16] confirmed that Cro-Magnoid mtDNAs could not be amplified using Neandertal-specific primers, but argued that the Paglicci sequences, as well as all ancient sequence that appear modern, cannot be considered reliable because contamination of ancient samples by modern DNA can be proved, but absence of contamination cannot. More @ http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0002700;jsessionid=077D0107E5A3BEEEDDA4FF0DBF5B0543 // http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=19566 Re-Examining the "Out of Africa" Theory and the Origin of Europeoids (Caucasoids) in Light of DNA Genealogy PDF (Size:736KB) PP. 80-86 DOI: 10.4236/aa.2012.22009 Author(s) Anatole A. Klyosov, Igor L. Rozhanskii ABSTRACT Seven thousand five hundred fifty-six (7556) haplotypes of 46 subclades in 17 major haplogroups were considered in terms of their base (ancestral) haplotypes and timespans to their common ancestors, for the purposes of designing of time-balanced haplogroup tree. It was found that African haplogroup A (originated 132,000 ± 12,000 years before present) is very remote time-wise from all other haplogroups, which have a separate common ancestor, named β-haplogroup, and originated 64,000 ± 6000 ybp. It includes a family of Europeoid (Caucasoid) haplogroups from F through T that originated 58,000 ± 5000 ybp. A downstream common ancestor for haplogroup A and β-haplogroup, coined the α-haplogroup emerged 160,000 ± 12,000 ybp. A territorial origin of haplogroups α- and β-remains unknown; however, the most likely origin for each of them is a vast triangle stretched from Central Europe in the west through the Russian Plain to the east and to Levant to the south. Haplogroup B is descended from β-haplogroup (and not from haplogroup A, from which it is very distant, and separated by as much as 123,000 years of “lat- eral” mutational evolution) likely migrated to Africa after 46,000 ybp. The finding that the Europeoid haplogroups did not descend from “African” haplogroups A or B is supported by the fact that bearers of the Europeoid haplogroups, as well as all non-African haplogroups do not carry either SNPs M91, P97, M31, P82, M23, M114, P262, M32, M59, P289, P291, P102, M13, M171, M118 (haplogroup A and its subclades SNPs) or M60, M181, P90 (haplogroup , as it was shown recently in “Walk through Y” FTDNA Project (the reference is incorporated therein) on several hundred people from various haplogroups. KEYWORDS Y Chromosome; Mutations; Haplotypes; Haplogroups; TMRCA; STR; SNP; “Out of Africa” Cite this paper Klyosov, A. & Rozhanskii, I. (2012). Re-Examining the "Out of Africa" Theory and the Origin of Europeoids (Caucasoids) in Light of DNA Genealogy. Advances in Anthropology, 2, 80-86. doi: 10.4236/aa.2012.22009. //

I don't subscribe to Social Darwinism Natural selection is also a human ideology... that you are using as an example of nature not conforming to human ideology? @_@

Communism never sleeps... ** (everyone equally poor, equally uneducated but thoroughly indoctrinated with a small parasitic alien element sucking the life out of the masses) What you really have is a global bolshevik/ communist revolution (devolution) ... Radical materialism, total annihilation of true culture + spiritual practices... being fundamentally atheist and irreligious/ degenerate Example: (Capitalism + Communism different sides of the same coin) Fascism was the opposite of such I think a comparison between modern "art" (communism, anti-human) and classical art (fascism, human) speaks volumes //// VS

The Bull Who Cried... Knowing he was about to be slaughtered, a bull in Hong Kong did what many people fail to realize or are skeptic about when it comes to animals - he showed emotion. As reported by Weekly World News, a group of workers walked a bull to a packaging factory. They were about to slaughter him to make steaks and beef stews. When they were close to the front door of the slaughter house, the sorrowful bull suddenly stopped going forward and knelt down on his two front legs. The bull... was all in tears. How did he know he was going to get killed before he entered the slaughter house? He is even smarter than people. Mr. Shiu, a butcher recalled: "When I saw this kind of so-called "stupid" animal sobbing and with his eyes in fear and sorrow, I started trembling. I called the rest over to see. They were just as surprised. We kept pushing the bull forward, but he just didn't want to move and sat there crying. "Billy Fong, owner of the packaging factory said: "People thought animals didn't cry like human beings. However that bull really sobbed like a baby. "At that time, more than ten strong men witnessed the scene and they were all touched. Those who were responsible for slaughtering even felt more touched and teared as well. Other workers working at the same slaughter house also came to see the crying bull. It was all packed with people. They were all shock by this scene. Three of them said they would never forget this crying bull when they slaughter other animals. With both man and animal crying, everyone knew that nobody could kill the bull. The problem was, what should they do with him? In the end, they raised funds to buy this crying bull and sent him to a temple, where the kind monks would take care of him for life. After the workers had made a decision, a miracle happened. A worker said: "When we promised this bull that we will not kill him, he started moving and followed us. "How did he understand people's words? Mr. Shiu said: "Believe it or not? This is real although it sounds unbelievable. "No doubt, this bull changed these butchers' lives. Hopefully this story has in turn changed yours."

Couldn't find the original source sorry. hmm I think they are very aware... Cow Proves Animals Love, Think, And Act http://www.globalanimal.org/2012/04/13/cow-proves-animals-love-think-and-act/71867/ April 13, 2012 Megan Cross (TOUCHING TALE) A dairy cow made the tough choice to hide one of her calves after giving birth to twins. As her fifth birth, the cow remembered her previous agony and knew that both of her babies would be taken away, unless she tried to save one. The intelligence and care displayed by this mothering cow is both heartbreaking and breathtaking. Read this touching tale, told by a veterinarian, about an amazing display of motherly love that proves animals love and feel. — Global Animal Photo Credit: APEX By Holly Cheever, DVM, reprinted from Action for Animals I would like to tell you a story that is as true as it is heartbreaking. When I first graduated from Cornell’s School of Veterinary Medicine, I went into a busy dairy practice in Cortland County. I became a very popular practitioner due to my gentle handling of the dairy cows. One of my clients called me one day with a puzzling mystery: his Brown Swiss cow, having delivered her fifth calf naturally on pasture the night before, brought the new baby to the barn and was put into the milking line, while her calf was once again removed from her. Her udder, though, was completely empty, and remained so for several days. As a new mother, she would normally be producing close to one hundred pounds (12.5 gallons) of milk daily; yet, despite the fact that she was glowing with health, her udder remained empty. She went out to pasture every morning after the first milking, returned for milking in the evening, and again was let out to pasture for the night — this was back in the days when cattle were permitted a modicum of pleasure and natural behaviors in their lives — but never was her udder swollen with the large quantities of milk that are the hallmark of a recently-calved cow. I was called to check this mystery cow two times during the first week after her delivery and could find no solution to this puzzle. Finally, on the eleventh day post calving, the farmer called me with the solution: he had followed the cow out to her pasture after her morning milking, and discovered the cause: she had delivered twins, and in a bovine’s “Sophie’s Choice,” she had brought one to the farmer and kept one hidden in the woods at the edge of her pasture, so that every day and every night, she stayed with her baby — the first she had been able to nurture FINALLY—and her calf nursed her dry with gusto. Though I pleaded for the farmer to keep her and her bull calf together, she lost this baby, too—off to the hell of the veal crate. Think for a moment of the complex reasoning this mama exhibited: first, she had memory — memory of her four previous losses, in which bringing her new calf to the barn resulted in her never seeing him/her again (heartbreaking for any mammalian mother). Second, she could formulate and then execute a plan: if bringing a calf to the farmer meant that she would inevitably lose him/her, then she would keep her calf hidden, as deer do, by keeping her baby in the woods lying still till she returned. Third — and I do not know what to make of this myself — instead of hiding both, which would have aroused the farmer’s suspicion (pregnant cow leaves the barn in the evening, unpregnant cow comes back the next morning without offspring), she gave him one and kept one herself. I cannot tell you how she knew to do this—it would seem more likely that a desperate mother would hide both. All I know is this: there is a lot more going on behind those beautiful eyes than we humans have ever given them credit for, and as a mother who was able to nurse all four of my babies and did not have to suffer the agonies of losing my beloved offspring, I feel her pain. Holly Cheever, DVM Vice President, New York State Humane Association Member Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association’s Leadership Council

What is humble?

English – The new language was created/written down appx 500 years ago by a collective group of high priests and scribes (scribblers, script writers). They supposedly added 160,000 new words in Shakespeare’s time. Since they were the only ones who could read and write, the ‘high priests/adepts of the mysteries’ passed down language to the illiterate in the church, to become the one language, one business and legal language for the world. The universal language, uni-verse/one-verse, una voce. Back then, whatever the guy in the pointy hat said, was the truth, and that’s that. Any of the old Celtic bards, or other tribal leaders who knew their history by word of mouth, and could recite their history for a week, any of them who refused to abandon the old language were put to death. It was made against the law to speak the old language under penalty of death. And they always impose such penalties to create the new. English is a coded language and has hidden meanings within. Even the alphabet is magical, so to speak. When you spell, you are spelling. Casting a spell as they say in The Craft . When you speak, you are speaking this world (or way of the world, this reality) into existence. It is the spoken word that is important http://api.ning.com/files/niZXtb2f03WkDSELYuiVfiFQ0zm*y*gzxXRGCI6aW7WFAOh5LhEKw6zKbOyHzDVh6KEEFzFHtGBoL0HX54ocrW-dcTRAcvZI/26132807HiddenMeaningsinEnglish.pdf