search results matching tag: Revealed
» channel: learn
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.009 seconds
Videos (1000) | Sift Talk (62) | Blogs (75) | Comments (1000) |
Videos (1000) | Sift Talk (62) | Blogs (75) | Comments (1000) |
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
Enharmonic_Equivalent (Member Profile)
Congratulations! Your video, Cambridge Analytica: Secret filming reveals election tricks, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.
This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 1 Badge!
Enharmonic_Equivalent (Member Profile)
Your video, Cambridge Analytica: Secret filming reveals election tricks, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.
A New View of the Moon
Psalm 19:1-4
The heavens declare the glory of God;
And the firmament shows His handiwork.
2
Day unto day utters speech,
And night unto night reveals knowledge.
3
There is no speech nor language
Where their voice is not heard.
4
Their line has gone out through all the earth,
And their words to the end of the world.
The Truth About Wireless Charging
Not really, no.
It simply reveals that there is a hidden cost to wireless charging that most people are unaware of.
What's this "truth" advertised in the title? It implies it's going to reveal something widely believed about wireless charging is false.
The Truth About Wireless Charging
What's this "truth" advertised in the title? It implies it's going to reveal something widely believed about wireless charging is false.
JFK - The Speech That Killed Him
Bob, I honestly believe you need to be psychology examined. You have apparently gone off the deep end into full blown delusional political paranoia....or perhaps you really are just a Russian troll.
Please acknowledge that your hero Trump has repeatedly suggested that slander and libel laws are too lax (except when applied to his baseless accusations against others) and that the press should be hobbled and stymied if they speak out against him or reveal what he's trying to hide, as in have their licenses and credentials revoked and be sued into bankruptcy or even charged with treason among other sanctions, but published lies that support him are totally acceptable, even praiseworthy.
If only the press was free from the controlling arm of the deep state shadow government -- operation mockingbird
Han Solo movie trailer
Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)
They really worked hard on the reveal shot to give him that Solo look. Also, looking forward to seeing Glover as Lando - he brings a lot of fun to his roles.
New Rule: Distinction Deniers
What on earth do you mean by "can" lead?
We're already there.
Sadly sites like the one in question and even Hannity's show are useful in showing us the other side of the coin that big brother doesn't want us to see.
Society is a sick puppy.
Where losers rejoice at taking down anyone they "perceive" as being better than them.
(Kinda like that gangsta old lady parking violator video mentality on a larger scale)
The bit about the airlines was only a small part of the entire video and still holds up at any rate.
This is why men do have EVERY right to listen in and gosh darnit even COMMENT on the latest rules of conduct being introduced on how they should act and be treated in society.
I'm not even going to lower myself by entering the arguments here on what constitutes rape etc or how a broad slanderous brush will or will not solve the problems.
It's like dealing with people who sniffed glue or suffered brain trauma.
Like talking to anyone who actually thinks CNN is real news or isn't totally biased.
How it's totally ok for the FBI to do what it did and shame on anyone who tries to reveal it.
I always find it cute how CNN pushes news clips at you often not having anything at all to do with what you went there to read.
I am or was a liberal but this trend has gone far beyond troubling.
Where this can lead if unchecked....
*related=https://videosift.com/video/Australian-Men-Are-All-Considered-Pedophiles
Weighing a Baby Aardvark is Not Easy - Cincinnati Zoo
All that trouble and waiting and they never reveal the WEIGHT!! WTF!
The Greater Good - Mind Field S2 (Ep 1)
Philosophically I am conflicted, but gotta admit, I am very curious to know what I'd actually do.
but I don't think I'd get past the screening. It would be interesting to see if the people that may have a predisposition to some sort of trauma would react differently in the moment. I mean, obviously completely unethical to find out, but still interesting.
Also, did any of participants have knowledge of the trolley problem before? Were they able to recognize the scenario without the deception being revealed? Would having thought about how they'd react previously prompt them to make a decision faster in the heat of the moment, or would perhaps doubts about the realness of the scenario cause them to be passive?. questions. so many questions
Town Where Chinese Millionaires House their Kid and Mistress
The reason for cash payment is: No mortgage means you escape Federal laws when a mortgage is involved in which the "beneficial owner"---the actual owner---has to be revealed to the bank.
lol
Money laundering.
Dear Satan
1) The resurrection is absolutely not historical. Jesus the man MIGHT be.
There is a lot of scholarly research that says it is historical, especially in the last 80 years or so. There are volumes upon volumes of work, and there are a lot of things that deserve an honest and indepth discussion.
Almost all skeptical scholars affirm that Jesus was a historical person and that His disciples had an experience which convinced them that He was raised from the dead. Many agree that a group of women discovered the empty tomb. The origin of Christianity is something which must be accounted for, historically. You can't just wave your hand over it and say its all nonsense.
2) I know Christianity is a joke religion invented for political control by Constantine. That is a verifiable, historical fact.
On what do you base that conclusion?
3) mythos cannot verify mythos. You say Satan created other religions (many before Chritianity existed) to trick them out of worshiping Yahweh....why isn't that likely true of Christianity?
Because of the person of Jesus Christ, who is verified to be the Messiah from many lines of evidence. Some of these would include the fulfillment of dozens of prophecies, His life and ministry, and His resurrection from the dead.
4) not true. Verified truth can be proven and defended against being twisted with fact and evidence, at least to those willing to examine actual evidence and not rely on only propaganda and myth. God (if he existed) should have more backbone, and a clear, unambiguous word/voice. ( Your position seems to be he's not willing to stand behind his word and prefers most people burn in hell for their God given inability to distinguish which is which.)
How is it different from politicians? They aren't empowered by all powerful, vengeful gods....clearly neither are clergy.
I'm not sure why you think you are holding the keys of facts and evidence in your hand, first of all. Can your worldview account for these things? You would need to establish that before we can talk about what "verified truth" is. What is your worldview, by the way? I am assuming it is scientific materialism. Have you ever looked into whether it is correct or not?
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/is-scientific-materialism-almost-certainly-false/
5) ...you shall stone them to death.....thou shalt not kill. Not so clear.
I think that is easily explained. The laws you are looking at were civil laws which governed the nation of Israel. Consider that our society has a law against murder, yet we execute criminals. Same concept.
6) only those who believe are saved...so clearly the sin of disbelief is not erased and is worse than all others. If it's not automatic, he didn't die for MY sins or yours, he's trading being saved (from something he told you exists with zero evidence) for belief and obedience.
None of your sins would be erased if you reject Christ. You would be paying not only for unbelief, but for all of the other ones too. Unbelief is like any other sin execept that the consequence of the sin prevents you from receiving forgiveness. It is exactly like expecting your cancer to be cured without taking the cure.
Jesus died for the sins of the world, including mine and yours, but you cannot partake of the atonement unless you receive Him as Lord and Savior.
My evidence is not just what we are discussing. Jesus Christ is alive and He is with me every single day of my life. He comforts me in my distress. He encourages me when I feel stuck. He gives me strength to overcome things I otherwise couldn't. He gives me wisdom for every problem and situation. He gives me love for those I find difficult to love. He fills my heart with generosity when I want to be stringy. He helps me do the right thing when I am going to fall short. This is not abstract, but a living reality in my life that grows more and more. He has utterly changed me and made me into a completely different person just like He said He would.
7) things that only work if you believe are hokum or placebo, things that only exist if you believe enough are pure fantasy.
Without buying your system, I have no sin to repent so I should go straight to heaven and collect my $200.
That's kind of like saying you don't believe in the law so you think you won't be punished when you break it. You have to account for your sin whatever you believe you have any or not. Your conscience, however, tells you that you have done wrong things.
9) You have cancer and some guy tells you God sent a car (he just needs $50 for telling you about it), it's invisible, and will take you to the cure, but you must believe the car exists, and when you die sitting in the freezing street he says it's your fault for not believing enough in God's magic cars. Duh. I'll buy my own plane ticket and get myself there, not wait for ethereal magic cars.
Let's say that you got a sign that the car was legitimate, but you still stubbornly chose not to go. For instance, you had a dream that a green car with a florida license plate drove up to your house, and a middle age woman got out and came up to your door and told you she was sent by God to take you to the cancer cure, and then it really happened. Does that change anything for you?
Mostly the questions are for you, in hope you might see the contradiction and self reinforcing mythos, but your answers do offer insight to your (and other people's) intractable mindsets. Thanks
God had revealed Himself to me, personally, and verified the scripture in my as true. I know that He loves me, personally, and I know that He loves you too. My hearts desire is that you would know that love. That is my mindset, primarily.
1) The resurrection is absolutely not historical. Jesus the man MIGHT be.
Dear Satan
God verifies His word, as He did to me. I wasn't looking for Him and He showed up in my life and revealed that He is God. If you don't believe, ask God to help your unbelief.
Rejecting Jesus Christ is like kicking the key back out of your jail cell and then complaining that you can't get out. Your choice is to either pay for your own sins or let Jesus pay for them.
Please explain why God made his own word so easy to misidentify, mirror, confuse, contradict with fact and logic, and to use for evil.
Sounds to me like he fucked up big time by not identifying himself clearly when he speaks, and by not identifying false profits as false, thereby causing most of the evil in the world because he's lazy and can't be bothered to be unambiguous.
If Jesus died to erase all our sins, how does that cover murder, rape, torture, hate, lies, etc. but not include the one unforgivable sin of disbelief in the completely unbelievable? Pretty lame and self serving saviour imo.
Donna Brazile: HRC controlled DNC and rigged the primary
[editing down to not make wall of text / rant]
Russia is not a hostile power. We are not at war with them, and we are not in any standoff. While that sort of rhetoric generates plenty of sensation for the news, it isn't factually true. We certainly do plenty to antagonize them (placing missiles launchers on Russia's border, stoking the 2014 Ukrainian coup that led to a civil war on Russia's border), and in light of that I consider it understandable that they would attempt to aide a candidate that is likely to be less confrontational.
(Keep in mind that both sides have been hacking each other on the daily for decades. Nothing special there.)
The DNC hack was a good thing for democracy. People should not be in the dark about any candidate's election cheating.
The news argues about things that are not salient.
Collusion is not a crime. That term only comes up for argument's sake, and has no bearing on the legality/illegality of anything in question.
The crime that the campaign is accused of is 'accepting foreign money for elections', which is a campaign funding violation. The argument is that : while Russia appears to not have provided money, the *information Russians provided directly to campaign staff had a monetary value, which makes it equivalent to receiving money.
(*content of said information as of yet not revealed)
Since then, campaign staff has gotten into individual trouble when their individual financial actions have been dug into (namely, laundering), which has led to individual financial conspiracy charges (IIRC).
-scheherazade
So, there's no evidence any hack was by request, except that one, highly illegal hack where he repeatedly publicly requested a foreign country hack into and release to show his opponent used then for top secret info...meaning he also requested they hack and release that top secret info. Lucky for us all there wasn't any secret info in them....after thanking them for hacking the DNC on his behalf, and the Russians followed his direction to the letter. To me, that's pure unquestionable collusion in public intended to skew the election for the benefit of a hostile foreign power...or treason. Edit: his claim now that it was just a joke is as ridiculous as the spurned lover who hires a hitman, pays them, and revels in the murder claiming the instructions to murder were a joke. It just doesn't fly.
The email hack was not the first publicly known instance of Russian interference this election, sorry. It might be the first well known to the majority of the public, but there were many known "items" before that. Trump suggested they hack her servers and anywhere the missing emails might be because it was already well known they were hacking American systems on his behalf, clearly and repeatedly....also it was clear the FBI was investigating Trump in the final weeks of the election, but Comey didn't feel the need to tell the public about that, only about the baseless reopening of the Clinton investigation over not new evidence...WTF?
ABC News: Purity Balls: Lifting the Veil on Special Ceremony
1)I considered that argument, I just disagree. Women under some religious laws can't initiate a divorce at all, but I doubt you would argue the lower, near zero divorce rates are evidence that it's a better way of life or leads to better outcomes for those powerless women than normal current American Christianity, would you? I think women who stay in bad marriages for their religion don't usually find it to be a better way of life, they often find it an inescapable trap of hopelessness.
2) you would be hard pressed to find men living up to that ideal and or not taking unfair advantage of their religion given position of dominance. As I recall, the bible also tells you various reasons it's your duty to murder people with rocks, so it's not a bad thing to be a bit loose in your interpretations, but perhaps not that particular instruction.
3)but, if I am created by the creator with reason enough to believe only in things that are at least either logical or verifiable, and God is neither without revealing himself to be more than fable, and he doesn't, it's his decision not mine. If he exists and has miraculous powers including revelation, he chooses to have me not believe by choosing to not prove his own improbable existence, meaning he chooses to create me just for inescapable eternal torture.
When you're talking about something that clearly skews the stats, like hyper religious people thinking divorce is totally a slap at God, that's not confirmation bias, it's statistics.
1) It's also evidence that it is a better way of life, but that is something you apparently refuse to consider. That is why I am calling confirmation bias.
Do you feel the same about those who imprison women, force their silence with abuse, and treat them like abused pets because their religion says that's proper? What if they're Christians?
2) The bible says that husbands should lay down their lives for their wives, like Christ loved the church and died for it.
What say you about those God has chosen to be non believers? According to you, God created them with no purpose besides eternal torture in hell, because according to you they have no alternative since God never revealed himself to them so heaven is barred to them. Pretty fucked up God imo. I prefer Mt (Mot, Mewt, etc). He's older than Yahweh and far more honest and stable.
3) It's not that God wouldn't reveal Himself to them; a lot of ex-christian atheists simply inherited the faith of their parents, and when they got turned loose in the world, they fell away because they didn't really know God. They need to have their own faith that is wholly theirs. No one can make you or by proxy give your life to Christ. That is a decision each individual person has to come to on their own.