We will have a mirror site at http://nunezreport.wordpress.com in case we are censored, Please save the link

Sunday, April 30, 2017

First working “mini brains”

Scientists confirm that they have grown the first working 'mini-brains' in a dish which could provide future treatments for autism and epilepsy.The lab-grown organs have their own brain cells, formed into circuits similar to those of a two-month-old baby in the womb. Repots indicate that is the first time a human forebrain has been seen in action outside the body.

Despite ones position on these matters, the creation is scientifically thrilling nonetheless. The Daily Mail reports that scientists hope to use the mini-brains to watch in real time the triggers for epilepsy, when brain cells become hyperactive, and autism, where they are thought to form bad connections. Scientists have grown the first working 'mini-brains' in a dish which could provide future treatments for autism and epilepsy.

The brains in a dish are the latest advance for stem cell science. Human skin cells are transformed into pluripotent stem cells, capable of becoming any part of the body, using four genes in a petri dish. The 'culture', or nutrient-rich broth they are grown in, is then altered to determine which type of cell they will become – in this case brain cells, or neurons.

The result is a 60-day old forebrain like a baby's in the womb, although more scrambled in its connections. It includes the cerebral cortex, the most highly evolved 'thinking' and decision-making part of the brain.

It could pave the way for drugs to treat these conditions, as well as schizophrenia. It is also the next step towards a real-life Frankenstein, suggesting scientists may one day be able to grow an entire human body in the laboratory. Researchers at Stanford University grew two forebrain circuits, measuring only a sixteenth of an inch across, using only human skin cells.Then scientists at Harvard University went a step further, growing a mini-organ for more than nine months to create a human retina – the light-sensitive lining at the back of the eye.

Dr Selina Wray, Alzheimer's Research UK senior research fellow at UCL Institute of Neurology, said: 'This technology will provide researchers with insights into brain development and disease which have not previously been possible.'

Dr Sergiu Pasca, assistant professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Stanford University, said:

'We've never been able to recapitulate these human-brain developmental events in a dish before.

Dr Francois Guillemot, group leader and head of division of molecular neurobiology at the Francis Crick Institute in London, said the 'self-organising' ability of stem cells to become brain cells was 'remarkable'.

He said: 'I would not call these studies game-changers because previous organoid papers had already hinted at this. However they represent large steps forward. This is after all the first time that human neural circuits can be observed in action.'

Back in 2013 a similar scientific breakthrough made headlines. That research however, seems to have been a long way from the working "mini brains" scientists at Harvard University have just revealed.

Credit to:

The Daily Mail / TRUNEWS summary.

See more at: http://www.trunews.com/article/first-working-mini-brains-in-a-dish#sthash.wb9jMBNu.dpuf

NATO pushing for new Balkan war

Panic Bank Run Leaves Canada's Largest Alternative Mortgage Lender On Edge Of Collapse

After two years of recurring warnings (both on this website and elsewhere) that Canada's largest alternative (i.e., non-bank) mortgage lender is fundamentally insolvent, kept alive only courtesy of the Canadian housing bubble which until last week had managed to lift all boats, Home Capital Group suffered a spectacular spectacular implosion last week when its stock price crashed by the most on record after HCG revealed that it had taken out an emergency $2 billion line of credit from an unnamed counterparty with an effective rate as high as 22.5%, indicative of a business model on the verge of collapse .
Or, as we put it, Canada just experienced its very own "New Century" moment. 
One day later, it emerged that the lender behind HCG's (pre-petition) rescue loan was none other than the Healthcare of Ontario Pension Plan (HOOPP). As Bloomberg reported, the Toronto-based pension plan - which represented more than 321,000 healthcare workers in Ontario - gave the struggling Canadian mortgage lender the loan to shore up liquidity as it faces a run on deposits amid a probe by the provincial securities regulator. Home Capital had also retained RBC Capital Markets and BMO Capital Markets to advise on “strategic options” after it secured the loan. 
Why did HOOPP put itself, or rather its constituents in the precarious position of funding what is a very rapidly melting ice cube? The answer to that emerged when we learned that HOOPP President and CEO Jim Keohane also sits on Home Capital’s board and is also a shareholder. But how did regulators allow such a glaring conflict of interest? According to the Canadian press, Keohane had been a director of Home Capital until Thursday, but said he stepped away from the boardroom on Tuesday to remove the conflict of interest when it became clear HOOPP might step in as a lender.
Keohane further clarified on Friday that he doesn’t view the Home Capital investment as risky because the pension plan will be provided with $2 worth of mortgages as collateral for every $1 it lends to Home Capital.
“We take comfort from the underlying asset portfolio, so we are not looking at Home Capital as a credit,” said Mr. Keohane in an interview with Business News Network television. He added that a correction in the housing market is not of great concern, since the values of homes would need to plummet by more than 65 per cent for the fund to make no return beyond the value of its principal commitment.
Furthermore, it appears that Canada's pensioners are priming all other company lenders: Keohane also said that the funding syndicate would rank above Home Capital’s other lenders.
“We have security interest in the collateral we’ve received, so we have the right to sell that collateral if we don’t get paid. And then the balance that’s left over would go to recovery for other creditors.”
The implication is that as long as HCG's mortgages dont suffer greater than 50% losses, HOOPP's pensioners should be money good. Of course, if this is indeed Canada's "subprime moment", any outcome is possible. As for other lenders, or the prepetition (because there will be a petition here, the only question is when and in what form) equity, that's some $4 billion in assets that was just stripped from existing collateral.
"The Best Price May Come From Breaking Up The Company"
In any case, the company's frenzied, emergency measures to stabilize the near-insolvent mortgage lender were not nearly enough, and despite HCG stock posting a modest rebound on Friday between hopes of a rumored sale and a short squeeze, those hopes may be dashed soon because as the Globe and Mail reports, the depositor bank run that gripped Home Capital Group in the past week, only got worse after the company revealed just how precarious its funding situation had become. 
First, any hope the company, or rather its investors may have held of a sale, appear dashed. Investment banking sources cited by the G&M said "the best possible price may come from breaking up the company and selling portions of its mortgage portfolio to regional financial institutions." Which also implies that aside from a few select assets, there is no equity value left, or in other words, any potential buyer is now motivated to wait until HCG liquidates, and then picks off the various assets in bankruptcy court.
There are structural limitations as well: Home Capital currently holds $18-billion in home loans outstanding, "a portfolio that would be difficult to swallow for rivals in the alternative mortgage sector, such as credit unions, small mortgage lenders, Montreal-based Laurentian Bank and Edmonton-based Canadian Western Bank." These institutions, along with private equity firms, could still bid for pieces of Home Capital, the G&M admits. The only question is why they would do so before a bankruptcy filing.
While one prominent name features on the list of potential buyers, that of PE giant J.C. Flowers whose CEO J. Christopher Flowers earlier this year said he expected to expand the company’s Canadian real estate lending business, Canada’s six big banks are notable for their absence on a list of bidders. The reason is that Home Capital lends money to home buyers who have been turned down by the major banks and none of these institutions is expected to enter the alternative mortgage sector by acquiring the company. 
National Bank of Canada proactively called the equity analysts who follow the company this week to say it would not bid on Home Capital after being asked if it was a potential buyer. Needless to say, the big banks would be quite delighted if one of their "bottom picking" competitors would suddenly go bankrupt.
"When you have a bank run people get spooked"
Which brings us to the most imminent risk facing Home Capital Group, and its subsidiary, Home Trust.
Recall, that on Thursday we observed that as concerns about HCG's viability mounted, depositors were quietly pulling their funding from from savings accounts at subsidiary Home Trust. By Wednesday, when Home Capital revealed it was seeking a $2-billion loan to backstop its sinking savings deposits, shareholders ran for the exits, driving down the company’s share price by 65 per cent on Wednesday alone, and heightening the sense of panic.
On Friday, the company revealed that high-interest savings account balances fell another 36% to $521-million by Friday morning, down by a whopping $293 million from $814-million Thursday and more than $2-billion a month ago.
In other words, had it not been for the emergency HOOPP loan, the company would likely be insolvent as of this moment following what may be the biggest bank run in recent Canadian history; which also explains why the interest rate on the loan is above 20%.
“When you have a run on the bank, people get spooked and they sell and ask questions later,” said a Bay Street investment banker. “It’s investor psychology that takes over.”
As is usually the case, regulator appeared on the scene.... just one day too late.
Canada’s banking industry regulator, the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI), has gathered data from other financial institutions this week, both to monitor for signs of a broader depositor panic and to track where funds are moving as they leave Home Trust. 

OSFI sent an urgent request Wednesday to several smaller and mid-sized financial institutions and credit unions to provide the regulator with up-to-date information about their savings accounts, according to a source. Specifically, OSFI wanted to know the institutions’ most recent account totals for high-interest savings accounts, as well as data on recent redemptions and current levels of high-quality liquid assets.
The request, which the OFSI said had to be fulfilled "as soon as institutions are able", is seen as an attempt to take the pulse of the market by tracking where deposits flowing out of Home Capital may be going, and to gauge whether there is any contagion among other institutions. In recent days, some smaller and mid-sized institutions have also struck up early-stage discussions about whether multiple institutions could join together to explore a deal to buy some of Home Capital’s assets.
As for Canada's big banks, they have already decided that HCG won't survive. Several months ago, Canaccord Genuity Group Inc. told its financial advisers they could no longer steer investors to high-interest savings accounts at Home Capital or rival alternative mortgage lender Equitable Bank. Client money already placed with either bank had to be moved within 60 days.
Then, after Home Capital revealed in March it was under investigation by the Ontario Securities Commission over its disclosure practices, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce introduced a cap of $100,000 per client for purchases of Home Capital guaranteed investment certificates (GICs), which is the maximum level covered by Canada’s deposit insurer.
A spokesperson from Royal Bank of Canada said that, “several weeks ago” the bank introduced a $100,000 cap on Home Capital GICs bought through a full-service broker, although there were no limits for purchases through the firm’s discount brokerage. On Thursday, RBC also released the following entertaining price target scenario: it still has a price target of $8 but fear not, even if RBC is wrong, it promises at least $4/share in residual value. We are not quite as optimistic.
Additionally, late last week, Bank of Nova Scotia said it would stop selling all GICs sold by Home Trust, but said Monday that policy was amended to a limit of $100,000. Bank of Montreal’s brokerage unit also confirmed it has a $100,000 limit on Home Trust GICs but would not say when it went into force.
As G&M adds, the OSC news shook investors, but the panic was heightened as news of the banks' moves to cap investor deposits slowly seeped through Bay Street in subsequent days, raising concerns that major financial institutions were pulling away from Home Capital.
Credit to Zero Hedge

Breaking North Korea vows to sink US nuclear submarine

Duterte Warns Trump: "That Guy Kim Simply Wants To End The World"

In a rare comment on the deteriorating North Korean situation, outspoken Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte urged the US to show restraint after North Korea's latest missile test and to avoid playing into the hands of leader Kim Jong Un, who "wants to end the world". The notoriously blunt Duterte said on Saturday that the Southeast Asia region was extremely worried about tensions between the United States and North Korea, and said one misstep would be a "catastrophe" and Asia would be the first victim of a nuclear war.
"There seems to be two countries playing with their toys and those toys are not really to entertain," the president said quoted by Reuters during a news conference after the ASEAN summit in Manila, referring to Washington and Pyongyang. “One miscalculation of a missile, whether or not a nuclear warhead or an ordinary bomb, one explosion there that would hit somebody would cause a catastrophe."
Duterte also warned the United States, Japan, South Korea and China that they are sparring with a man who was excited about the prospect of firing missiles. Duterte's speech, which was delivered in his capacity as chairman of ASEAN, was due to speak by telephone to U.S. President Donald Trump later on Saturday. He said he would urge Trump not to get into a confrontation with Kim.
"You know that they are playing with somebody who relishes letting go of missiles and everything. I would not want to go into his (Kim's) mind because I really do not know what's inside but he's putting mother earth, the planet to an edge.
Ahead of his phone call with the US president, Duterte appealed to Trump saying it was incumbent upon the US as the a responsible country to not rise to Kim's provocations. He said he was sure Trump had cautioned his military not to allow the situation to spiral out of control; what Duterte may have ignored is that it may be precisely Trump's intent to provoke Kim into a first move, giving the US a carte blanche to retaliate.  "Who am I to say that you should stop? But I would say 'Mr. President, please see to it that there is no war because my region will suffer immensely'," Duterte said. "I will just communicate to (Trump), 'just let him play... do not play into his hands'."
He added: "The guy (Kim) simply wants to end the world, that is why he is very happy. He is always smiling. But he really wants to finish everything and he wants to drag us all down."

Ironically, Duterte has joined China and Russia in pleading with the leaders of North Korea and the U.S. to tone down their nuclear brinksmanship, even as he agreed with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe that negotiations to end the standoff would be useless.

Credit to Zero Hedge

Former Central Banker Just Signaled That The Economy Is About To Crash

Saturday, April 29, 2017

Trump the trojan horse.... Planned Collapse and World War III

Russia Shoots Down North Korean Scud Missile

Wire: Prominent Scientists Rally For Depopulation Agenda, Donald Trump 'Captured By Deep State'

Trump Is Compromised Says Paul Craig Roberts

Compelling Evidence of the Incursions of Giants, Their Extraordinary Technology, and IMMINENT RETURN Part #3

By Thomas R. Horn
In order to fully comprehend the role of the Smithsonian and the facts we have uncovered thus far involving what some suspect is the cover up of the ages, one has to understand the groundwork upon which the institution was built.
James Smithson gave all he had to establish an educational organization on American soil, and his reasoning for this has always largely remained a mystery (despite many theories), as he had never actually been to America. His will was, at the very least, ambiguous; he did not specify what the organization would or should be; he merely wrote that it would be for the increase of knowledge and that it must be named “Smithsonian Institution.” It appears by the verbiage used in Smithson’s will that he felt very alone in the world, with very few ties to fellow man or family (excepting one nephew, to whom he left all of his land), and as a result, the Smithsonian was left without a successor or supervising entity of any kind, though it came about through the fame of one man completely without ties to the American government. He had not even a correspondent within the United States to oversee the transfer of money after death, nor any distinguished U.S. colleagues, nor a mere friend. His funds, then, were left simply to the nation of the U.S., itself, and to his legal team to sort out how to get it there and what to say after it arrived (although eventually the money was retrieved through former U.S. Attorney General Robert Rush as traveling messenger). This was, assuredly, quite the pickle for bureaucratic organizers upon whose shoulders it rested to establish said institution, attempt to keep with its donor’s indefinite but documented wishes, and maintain the ideals of a man whose personal values were anyone’s best guess. Because of Smithson’s vague instructions, legal issues arising from the donation of a foreigner to another nation’s government generically, and due in part by some unique handling of the funds by the U.S. Congress during President Andrew Jackson’s administration, the approval of the Smithsonian seal did not occur until February of 1847 (nearly twenty years after Smithson’s death).
So, in the very beginning, the Smithsonian and its mission had been under the supervision of many contributing voices from a land/government foreign to its donor, and never once left to a single entity—whether individual or group entity—to construct and maintain an aim that was hazy in origin. According to Smithsonian historical literature,[i] eight years passed as members of Congress argued over different ideas for how the money should be invested, most of which suggested the raising of new school grounds, libraries, observatories, gardens, zoologist research centers, agricultural hubs, art galleries, and science discovery centers.
Gradually, the idea that morphed from so many conflicting angles birthed a one-of-a-kind establishment in that it eventually encompassed all of the ideas with one central focus: the assembling of a collection of artifacts, specimens, artwork, and educational materials and aims of every kind into newly raised buildings where they would be preserved and arranged for the purpose of public education. These buildings would also house many educational conferences, lectures, and seminars given by celebrated professors in fields relative to astronomy, geography, geology, minerology, philosophy, science and chemistry, agriculture, natural history, American history, fine arts, antiquities, and the study of cultures around the globe. So much more than a simple “museum” was the Smithsonian’s roots.
(Note that the story is by far more complicated than this, and it involves the five-year-long formation of the “National Institute”—which was more or less an elite society of opinionated, but critically helpful, wealthy contributors before a solid vision was set. Yet the simple explanation above can be viewed as a sharply truncated representation of how the Smithsonian eventually grew legs and expanded into the beginnings of what it eventually became, despite that I have left out many pieces of the puzzle for the sake of space. The mission of the Smithsonian from day one ping-ponged relentlessly until it was finally settled on the surface to simply be what Smithson wished: a place where knowledge for man was respected, perpetuated, and upheld.)
After its establishment in 1847, the Smithsonian was a bee’s nest of buzzing interest and continual growth, ever committed to increasing “the wisdom, education, and intelligence of mankind with evident unbiased and truthful transparency.” Elections for leadership were conducted that resulted in the final Board of Regents and head secretaries. Benefactors came from everywhere to pool their resources for the cause, and some followed in Smithson’s footsteps, entrusting their valuable estates to the directors of the institution, who pooled it into additional property and buildings, one of which was the eminent Smithsonian Library.
Then came the giants mounds…
The Doctrine of John Wesley Powell
As early as 1867, exploration teams commissioned by the Smithsonian had taken to the canyons of Colorado, led by one Major John Wesley Powell. Their research gradually adapted into geographical, geological, and anthropological surveys, and when the funding drew short in 1871, the U.S. government stepped in with provisions to continue. For several years, the teams continued their research, placing the majority of their time and efforts into the studies of “aboriginal inhabitants, and [the gathering of] extensive collections representing their arts, languages, institutions, and beliefs.”[ii] These collections were then taken to the Smithsonian, where they were further studied and preserved. In the summer of 1874, the survey was transferred to the U.S. Department of the Interior. Being now a federal endeavor, key leaders at the Smithsonian withdrew much interest in the project and relinquished research materials to the survey in accordance to custom. In order to transfer the materials under the supervision of the Smithsonian and keep official tabs on all archives and records regarding the North American Native Indians, a supervisory bureau would be necessary, and thus was the birth of the Bureau of Ethnology.
After the BAE was established, however, it appears some biased (translation: “dubious”) policies of artifact exclusion were enacted under the leadership of its founder, Major Powell, who had been the director of the exploration and survey up to this point.
Powell’s reputation had exceeded him by the time the BAE was founded, as he had reached fame through his exploration of the Grand Canyon, so his judgments on the archaeological surveys became the chief authority for everyone at the Smithsonian, as well as the listening world. It is not at all a secret that Powell was exceptionally bent toward rationalizing away any concepts that challenged our known evolutionary science, and although this would be the expected approach for many in his position, it is surprising to learn that his reaction to the large grant given by U.S. Congress to the Division of Mound Exploration was not positive.
The Indian burial mounds. Who built them? Why were they there? And why had there recently been news that bones were found buried in them, the size of which could not be explained?
One might take from reading Powell’s writings that he wished to study only the ethnicity of aboriginal tribes and remain nonintrusive, which might explain why the grant did not result in his celebratory reaction. Others throughout the years, however, have read his statements and understandably have concluded that Powell believed there were things buried in those strange mounds that he did not want the world to know about, lest everything we think we know about humanity’s history be confronted. Why else would additional government funding be bad news? Any true investigator would tackle the mounds enthusiastically in pursuit of authentic science when backed by support of the government, not with hesitance or fear that the science would be defied.
Nevertheless, Powell cooperated with the intentions of the funding, though not without a grand voicing of concern over how the resources would be employed. In 1882, the first BAE report from Powell was penned: On Limitations to the Use of Some Anthropologic Data. The title itself is revealing of his agenda. It does not require analysis by an achieved academic to see that before the report’s first sentence graced the eyes of its readers, Powell was already placing limitations on how the data accumulated at the exploration sites were to be used. For the next few pages, we will look at his words and reflect upon his intellectually shepherding undertones, and how he uses grand speech to completely and craftily avoid the issue of giant bones, which led to 150 years (and counting) of the public’s acceptance that “giants upon the earth” is a puerile, juvenile, and ridiculous concept. (Keep in mind that his report was written even while he openly acknowledged evidence of giant bones, as we will address in the next section.) His report begins:
Investigations in this department are of great interest, and have attracted to the field a host of workers [note this line referencing all the additional help, and remember all the funding he is receiving, as later on his complaints of resources are prominent]; but a general review of the mass of published matter exhibits the fact that the uses to which the material has been put have not always been wise.
In the monuments of antiquity found throughout North America, in camp and village sites, graves, mounds, ruins, and scattered works of art, the origin and development of art in savage and barbaric life may be satisfactorily studied. Incidentally, too, hints of customs may be discovered, but outside of this, the discoveries made have often been illegitimately used, especially for the purpose of connecting the tribes of North America with peoples or so-called races of antiquity in other portions of the world [referring to those who have seen large bones in the area and have theorized about a lost race of giants]. A brief review of some conclusions that must be accepted in the present status of the science will exhibit the futility of these attempts. [Note specifically his choice of words here. He does not shy away from using terms that suggest irrefutability, such as “conclusions that must be accepted.” His position as the renowned Grand Canyon explorer has gained the reverential attention of the country by this time, so if he says something is, then it is—regardless of logic. More on his logic shortly.]
It is now an established fact that man was widely scattered over the earth at least as early as the beginning of the quaternary period, and, perhaps, in pliocene time.
If we accept the conclusion that there is but one species of man, as species are now defined by biologists, we may reasonably conclude that the species has been dispersed from some common center, as the ability to successfully carry on the battle of life in all climes belongs only to a highly developed being; but this original home has not yet been ascertained with certainty, and when discovered, lines of migration therefrom cannot be mapped until the changes in the physical geography of the earth from that early time to the present have been discovered, and these must be settled upon purely geologic and paleontologic evidence. The migrations of mankind from that original home cannot be intelligently discussed until that home has been discovered, and, further, until the geology of the globe is so thoroughly known that the different phases of its geography can be presented.
The dispersion of man must have been anterior to the development of any but the rudest arts. Since that time the surface of the earth has undergone many and important changes. All known camp and village sites, graves, mounds, and ruins belong to that portion of geologic time known as the present epoch, and are entirely subsequent to the period of the original dispersion as shown by geologic evidence.
In the study of these antiquities, there has been much unnecessary speculation in respect to the relation existing between the people to whose existence they attest, and the tribes of Indians inhabiting the country during the historic period.
It may be said that in the Pueblos discovered in the southwestern portion of the United States and farther south through Mexico and perhaps into Central America tribes are known having a culture quite as far advanced as any exhibited in the discovered ruins. In this respect, then, there is no need to search for an extra-limital origin through lost tribes for any art there exhibited.
With regard to the mounds so widely scattered between the two oceans, it may also be said that mound-building tribes were known in the early history of discovery of this continent, and that the vestiges of art discovered do not excel in any respect the arts of the Indian tribes known to history. There is, therefore, no reason for us to search for an extra-limital origin through lost tribes for the arts discovered in the mounds of North America.[iii]
At this point, we are only a page into Powell’s report, and we have read some startling conclusions. One reading carefully into what Powell has just said can see wave after wave of the immediate and faulty circular logic in his argument. Powell is suggesting that:
  1. We should not be spending our time focusing on theories of ancient giants when there is real work to be done, which is the study of the Indians. Anything else is a waste of resources.
But one might argue: How is the study of ancient giants not the absolute highest priority of all in the field and their given resources if these discoveries shake the foundations of our known human origin and heritage, including the Indians? The tax-paying civilians of the United States whose hard-earned dollars are being forwarded to the research would not agree that evidence of this nature is a small thing. This would be the opposite of a waste of resources.
  1. The science of biology has proven thus far that there is only one species of man, so anything found to the contrary is by default proven to have originated from that biological thread.
But one might argue: Yes, the science of biology has proven this based on the human body or bodies we have available to study now, but if there were another species of man or man-like entities, which the mounds have already shown to exist (and Powell knows it), then our current biological knowledge would be trumped by such a discovery, and proof would be given that there is not merely one species. Or, at the very least, it would be proven that there was a race of this same species that defies all we know about their evolutionary development or inter-breeding practices that created another larger breed of man. Either way, this science and discovery should be top priority to any serious individual of the archaeological field.
For example: The Saluki is one of fourteen of the oldest known canine breeds, referred to as “the royal dog of Egypt” because of its association as the loyal, right-hand best friend to Egyptian pharaohs. (Their remains have been found mummified as well, suggesting that they were esteemed in high honor.) The Ibizan hound (as seen on the tomb of Tutankhamun) has a similar story, and both breeds were fit, trim, long-legged hunters. If an archaeological team discovered a Saluki/Ibizan hound crossbreed buried near an ancient pyramid today, such a find would not shake the foundations of all we know about canine biology. Why? Because we know there were at least fourteen breeds of canine around the world at that time that could have procreated and produced another breed, and our modern biological science now recognizes 339 official dog breeds, according to the World Canine Organization.[iv] We are already well aware that one dog can breed with another dog and create something entirely new, but the offspring is still a dog. Much funding has already backed such science, and the world is not turned on its head every time a breeder announces a new and great kind of hound for dog lovers everywhere. Humans, also, can breed after their own kind, producing interracial offspring, and this is common knowledge. So, yes, biology has proven that when something produces after its own kind, then the offspring of that union is of that kind. Powell is correct thus far.
But if the remains of a gigantically proportioned, fifteen-cubit-tall, Saluki-looking dog were found near a pyramid, the measurements of which disregarded all we know of canine evolutionary development, it would shake the foundations of all we know about canine biology. Any serious biologist would consider this a possible link to a completely new biological thread—or at the very least, an extreme interbreeding tactic practiced by the ancients but unknown to our current world—until proven otherwise…and it should be taken very seriously. Simply saying the huge dog bones represented just another canine because biology has proven that all dogs come from dogs in the past would be the epitome of deliberate, intentional, and negligent ignorance. Circular logic. If a discovery proves that something looks like a dog but can’t be, based on known biology, then let’s face it: Our biology would be determined subject to limitation, and the “dog” might not actually be a dog! Or it could be a dog that has crossbred with some other ancient animal, testifying to a DNA-manipulation procedure carried out by an ancient unknown science. Either way, it would not be ignored by the scientific community. It might be hidden away if the discovery points to something scientists don’t want the rest of the world to know about, but it would not be ignored.
Why, then, when a discovery is found that testifies to this same concept regarding humans, would Powell write it off with a statement suggesting that past science proves anything about anything? By default of a new discovery, our primitive science is replaced by new science, and all the facts of yesteryear are updated. Yet Powell is using old science to prevent us from updating our knowledge base? That goes against common sense and everything the Smithsonian stands for. By referring to biological data that pertains only to regular-sized humans and applying it to giant bones, Powell is insinuating that the bones are largely irrelevant, we already know all there is to know about them, and any time or resources spent on the study of them is inefficient.
For a man who prided himself on exploration and breakthrough, Powell’s concepts were either painfully primitive, or there was something he didn’t want the world to know about in those mounds.
  1. Evidence of these so-called ancient giants’ migration from one territory to another cannot be mapped until we can study how the plains of the earth have shifted since the migration, and these studies should only be carried out through “purely geologic and paleontologic evidence.” We cannot “intelligently” discuss potential giants “until [their] home has been discovered, and, further, until the geology of the globe is so thoroughly known that the different phases of its geography can be presented.”
But one might argue: Is it not left specifically to people in Powell’s very position to explore the geology of the globe and present his findings toward the express purpose of deliberation within the “intelligent,” scientific community? Yes, we agree that we cannot “intelligently” talk about these things until exploration has unearthed enough to discuss. But in case Powell hadn’t noticed, exploration is his exact job description, and he is considered the expert of his field whose duty it is to provide research to both the public through the Smithsonian and to the scientific community who is hungry for any findings he unearths. Perhaps mapping is not his department, but again, in case he hadn’t noticed, he is chief over a plethora of departments in related fields backed by the almighty Smithsonian (which plays an active role in the accumulation of “geologic and paleontologic evidence”) and funded by the almighty U.S. government. We can’t become intelligent because the mapping has not been done. If Powell had influence in the field, then it was his responsibility to support—not discourage— mapping, but here he is clearly steering focus away from mapping. His reason? Because it hasn’t been done yet by the very individuals he has influence to propel toward accomplishing that goal in the first place? Circular logic.
If Powell hadn’t the intention to carry out related research of his field, then why did he go into the field of exploration and discovery?
If “geological and paleontologic evidence” is the only means through which we will find real answers, then that is not a valid argument for why we shouldn’t try to map it out lest we waste resources that could have been used to document Native Indians. In fact, if the evidence leads to a revolutionary leap in science for all mankind with the Native Indians at the geographical center of it all, then it’s an argument for precisely why we should be placing our resources into mapping the footprints of a potential ancient race of beings who lived amidst the Indians.
  1. Tribes are “known” for being as far advanced as any others in discovered ancient ruins. Therefore, “there is no need to search for an extra-limital origin through lost tribes for any art there exhibited.” And since we know that these tribes built mounds, there is no reason to attribute the mounds to another race.
But one might argue: This is perhaps the worst of Powell’s illogical statements. And yes, you read that correctly. He is essentially saying that because the tribes are “known” for being advanced, there is no need to search for an explanation as to why or how they were so advanced or whether that involved an ancient lost race of giants, because we don’t have any evidence to support those ramblings. If it looks like a dog, it must be a dog, because old biological science goes without updating. If it looks like the otherwise primitive and nomadic Native Americans were far more intelligent than all our other archaeological findings can prove, then they were advanced, because old anthropological science goes without updating.
Wow…if the buck stops there on exploration and discovery, then we’re all in trouble.
And where one might agree with Powell that the mounds may have been of human Indian origin because they, again, were “known” to build them, that theory falls short of any true intelligent conversation the first time enormous bones are found within the mounds. The central issue does not have to be who built the mounds, because if it suits Powell to say the Indians built them, then fine. I concede. Let’s say the Indians built the mounds. That is honestly beside the point. Now we arrive at the natural next inquiry: Why were ancient Indian tribes burying giant human bones, and who were these giants to the Indians? If the great and influential Powell discouraged the research teams from ever digging and studying the mounds, then we will always be in the dark with these questions.
Perhaps, then, all these “Smithsonian cover-up conspiracy theorists” are onto something when they suggest that Powell was using his “we already know who built them” angle to keep the world from ever knowing the truth about the giants he wanted kept hidden. That Powell would steer his teams away from these burial sites on a claim that he wants to be respectful and nonintrusive to an ancient Indian culture appears to be a noble cause—and it is a cause that many revered him for from that day forward. But he was skirting the real issue, and he knew it. Obviously, the public is less concerned with who flung the dirt than whose massive bodies were buried underneath. But, through Powell’s endearing stance that any tampering with this soil would be a great injustice to the Indians, he has effectively locked away the secrets in the soil, shrouded in what can only be a counterfeit concern over cultural respect considering the enthusiasm one in his field of research would normally feel when given the opportunity to dig and study actual, archaeological evidence of the “giant”—one of the world’s most fearsome creatures of myth!
We do not have space herein to continue a word-for-word analysis of Powell’s biased report, as it is a lengthy one. However, his arguments continue to show either ignorance or, more likely, a clandestine agenda. We will break open these seals starting in the next entry.
Credit to Tom Horn

Friday, April 28, 2017


Image result for obama nero

Obama launched a war in Libya in 2011, with the end result being that the nation has become increasingly hostile to Christianity. News in late April revealed that Islamic terrorists have driven many Christians from the country while the rest fear for their lives.

Obama’s war first overthrew Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, with U.S.-backed forces eventually sodomizing him before summarily executing him. The nation has essentially been lawless since then, with Islamic terrorists gaining increasing influence and control over it. This in turn has led to increasing attacks on Christians.

Breitbart reported on April 20 that the attacks on Christians have become so bad that some people now believe Libya has “lost the Christian presence.” The same Breitbart post also cited numbers claiming that somewhere around 20,000 Christians now live in Libya whereas “as many as 100,000” had lived there prior to the American-backed war.

Obama’s hatred of Christianity is one of the defining attributes of his presidency. Domestically, he attacked the free speech of Christians through Obamacare, the IRS, other government force, and as the leader of the cultural War on Christianity. His intense hatred of God was also why he advocated so hard for the twin evils of infanticide and sodomy. So a war in a foreign land that devastated Christianity in the process isn’t surprising.

Furthermore, such warring isn’t unique to Obama. It has in fact become a bipartisan and perpetual policy of the United States of America. George W. Bush launched wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. They ultimately led to a staggering loss of Christians in those nations as well. Indeed, even as the Ruling Class has accused the U.S. of being on a crusade against Islam over the past 16 years, the reality is that the U.S. has been on a jihad against Christianity.

Christianity is nearly nonexistent in Afghanistan today, and many fear it will disappear from Iraq. Obama’s war in Libya means its survival is threatened there as well.

Credit to Barbwire.com

There Is An All Out Push To Get The Main Event Started

World Leaders Warn of Crisis - Situation Has Deteriorated!

90 percent of US Population Reduction Will Happen in the Next 7 Years

Breaking: "Canada River Vanishes In 4 Days" Whaaaaaaaaat?

Have the U.S. Just Reached Peak Stock Market Absurdity?

Image result for stock absurdity
Have you ever wondered how tech companies that have been losing hundreds of millions of dollars year after year can somehow be worth billions of dollars according to the stock market?  Because I run a website called “The Economic Collapse“, there are naysayers out there that take glee in mocking me by pointing out how well the stock market has been doing.  This week, the Dow is flirting with 21,000 and the Nasdaq crossed the 6,000 threshold for the first time ever.  But a lot of the “soaring stocks” that have been fueling this rally have been losing giant mountains of money every single year, and just like the first tech bubble this madness will eventually come to an end in a spectacular fiery crash in which investors will lose trillions of dollars.
Anyone that cannot see that we are in the midst of an absolutely insane stock market bubble simply does not understand economics.  Every valuation indicator that you can possibly point to says that we are in a bubble of epic proportions, and history teaches us that all bubbles inevitably come to an end at some point.
Earlier today, I came across an article by Graham Summers in which he persuasively argued that the price to sales ratio indicates that stock prices are far more inflated than they were just prior to the great stock market crash of 2008…
Sales cannot be gimmicked. Either money comes in the door, or it doesn’t. And if a company is caught messing around with its sales numbers, someone is going to jail.
For this reason, Price to Sales is perhaps the single most objective and clear means of measuring stock valuations. 
This metric, above all others, you can point to and say, “this is definitively accurate and has not been messed with.”
On that note, as Bill King recently noted, today the S&P 500 is sporting a P/S ratio that is massively higher than it was in 2007 and is only marginally lower than it was during the Tech Bubble (the single largest stock bubble of all time for most measures).
To me, looking at profitability is even more important than looking at sales.
Large tech companies such as Twitter certainly have lots of revenue coming in, but many of them are deeply unprofitable.
In fact, Twitter has never made a yearly profit, and over the past decade it has actually lost more than 2 billion dollars.
But despite all of that, investors absolutely love Twitter stock.  As I write this article, Twitter has a market cap of 11.5 billion dollars.
How in the world is that possible?
How can a company that has never made a single penny be worth more than 11 billion dollars?
Twitter is never going to be more popular than it is now.  If it can’t make a profit at the peak of its popularity, when will it ever happen?
And guess what?  ABC News says that Twitter actually just reported a decline in revenue for the most recent quarter…
Twitter has never turned a profit, and for the first time since going public in 2013, it reported a decline in revenue from the previous year. Its revenue was $548.3 million, down 8 percent.
Net loss was $61.6 million, or 9 cents per share, compared with a loss of $79.7 million, or 12 cents per share, a year earlier.
The only reason why financial black holes such as Twitter can continue to exist is because investors have been willing to pour endless amounts of money into them, but now that bubble is starting to burst.
In his most recent article, Simon Black discussed how Silicon Valley investors are starting to become more cautious because so many of these “unicorns” are now going bust.  One of the examples that he cited in his article was a company called Clinkle…
(Given that investing in an early stage company is high-risk, investors might provide a few hundred thousand dollars in funding, at most. Clinkle raised $25 million.)
The company went on to burn through just about every penny of its investors’ capital.
There were even photos that surfaced of the 21-year old CEO literally setting bricks of cash on fire.
At the end of the farce, Clinkle never actually managed to build its supposedly ‘world-changing’ product, and the website is now all but defunct.
Most of you may have never even heard of Clinkle, but I bet that you have definitely heard of Netflix.
Netflix has revolutionized how movies are delivered to our homes, and that revolution helped drive movie rental stores to the brink of extinction.
There is just one huge problem.  It turns out that Netflix is losing hundreds of millions of dollars
Netflix might be my favorite example.
The company’s most recent earnings report for the period ending March 31, 2017 shows, yet again, negative Free Cash Flow of MINUS $422 million.
Not only is that a record loss, it’s 62% worse than in Q1/2016, and over twice as bad as Q1/2015.
Netflix just keeps losing more and more money.
But even though Netflix is losing money at a pace that is exceedingly difficult to imagine, investors absolutely love the company.
I just checked, and at this moment Netflix has a market cap of 68.4 billion dollars.
Sometimes I just want to scream because of the absurdity of it all.
Companies that are losing hundreds of millions of dollars a year at the peak of their popularity should not be worth billions of dollars.
Nobody can possibly argue that these enormously inflated stock prices are sustainable.  Just like with every other stock market bubble in our history, this one is going to burst too, and I have been warning about this for quite a long time.
But for the moment, the naysayers are having their time to shine.  Despite the fact that U.S. consumers are 12 trillion dollars in debt, and despite the fact that corporate debt has doubled since the last financial crisis, and despite the fact that the federal government is 20 trillion dollars in debt, they seem to be convinced that this irrational stock market bubble can keep inflating indefinitely.
Perhaps they can all put their money where their mouth is by pouring all of their savings into Twitter, Netflix and other tech company stocks.
In the end, we will see who was right and who was wrong.
Credit to Economic Collapse