In a previous article, I wrote, I provided several reasons why I believed something fishy was going on about this whole Ebola thing. First hand testimony coming from someone I have been in contact with living in Ghana confirms that the US government has ulterior motives in mind here. Profit, depopulation, oil military establishment, the flow of diamonds out of countries on strike, etc. They apparently have also been spreading this virus via Ebola testing and experimental vaccines, and a plant pathologist from Liberia claims that this virus was manufactured in a hospital in Sierra Leone and was spread by the workers there. I got challenged by some people that the evidence in the article wasn’t good enough to prove that Ebola was a conspiracy. So I dug a little bit deeper, and found some pretty disturbing things:
Not many people realize that the US actually has a bioweapons research facility in the Kenema Government Hospital in Sierra Leone (one of the main centers of the Ebola outbreak). Researchers from Tulane University in the US work within this hospital which has been running since the 1970s, and biomedical research involving hemorrhagic fevers testing (such as Ebola) has been going on for literally decades. In 2007, the National Institute of Health gave Tulane University a $3.8 million dollar grant to develop Ebola detection kits, and in 2009 they received another $7 million dollars and began to develop a new emergency ward at the Kenema Government Hospital. Quite the coincidence that a major outbreak occurred right after over $10 million dollars in tax payers money was pumped into Ebola research in a matter of just 2 years.
Ebola biomedical research has been funded by the US government for the purpose of creating “detection kits”, and testing has been done with live strains since at least 2007. Now do we actually think this is because the US government cares about the health of sub-Saharan West African people? Is it possible they were developing it there as a bioweapon? Even the president of Corgenix says at the end of the first grant that the purpose of the grant is to prepare against bioweapons attacks by deadly viruses like Ebola. Hardly anybody talks about the fact that this kind of bioterrorism research has been funded by the US government in Sierra Leone. This brings us to the next point.
Creaky footsteps around a dark corridor, disembodied knocking on cold concrete walls and iron bars worn smooth from the hands of tortured prisoners – these are just some of the experiences guests might expect when checking in for a night at an infamously haunted hostel in Ottawa.
Weary travellers looking for undisturbed sleep may be best to skip the Ottawa Jail Hostel, which sits at No. 9 on travel website Lonely Planet's list of the world's spookiest buildings. It's ranked just behind Ukraine's Chernobyl Reactor No. 4 and ahead of White Alice, Alaska.
In other countries, media analysis is the norm; in Canada, for some reason, it’s not. Jesse Brown—a veteran journalist who has reported for Maclean’s, the CBC and Toronto Life—tried to fill this gap the old-fashioned way, pitching media criticism to various news organizations. When that didn’t work, he started doing it himself. Last year, he launched Canadaland, a podcast and blog, and began uncovering troubling stories from within Canada’s news organizations. He has called out Peter Mansbridge for taking money from an oil sands lobby group, and he probed the Globe and Mail’s questionable endorsement of Tim Hudak. On Sunday, a story he had been working on for months made headlines worldwide when the Toronto Star, in collaboration with Brown, published part of what he says is an ongoing investigation into Jian Ghomeshi’s alleged history of sexual violence. On Wednesday, a second article related stories from eight different women who all claim to have had violent encounters with the radio host. Shortly after the first Star story was published, we met up with Brown to talk about the tricky process of reporting on the CBC’s golden boy, the timidity of the Canadian press and what it’s like being a crowdfunded journalist.
You won’t find the 300 MPG Volkswagen XL1 in an American showroom, in fact it has even been denied a tour of America because it is too efficient for the American public to be made widely aware of, and oil profits are too high in America with the status quo in place. No tour has been allowed for this car because the myth that 50 mpg is virtually impossible to obtain from even a stripped down econobox is too profitable to let go of, and when it comes to corporate oil profits, ignorance is bliss.
Years ago I had calculated that it should be possible to get a small car to exceed 100 mpg by putting parallel direct to cylinder water injectors side by side with the fuel injectors, and using the exhaust manifold to preheat the water so it would enter the cylinders as dry steam, thus providing added expansion (which drives the engine) while allowing the combustion process to proceed without reducing it’s efficiency. But I was obviously wrong with my calculations, because they were in fact over 2x conservative.
The 100 mpg carburetor was indeed a reality, and the Volkswagen XL1 proves it with only straightforward nothing special technology we have had since the 1970?s.Though the XL1 can be plugged in to deliver a 40 mile all electric drive, it does not need to be plugged in EVER to achieve 300 mpg. And it does not cheat in any way to achieve the rating, it weighs over 1,700 pounds, has normal tires, and delivers a very good driving experience with a governed top speed of 99 mph. The XL1 could reach a top speed in excess of 110 mph absent governor and turns in a 0-60 time of 11.5 seconds which is by no means leisurely for a car designed for efficiency. The XL1 in no way cheats on performance to hit it’s rating. It is simply the car we should have always had, and have had taken from us in the name of oil profits.
Though the XL1 can hit 300 mpg under ideal driving conditions, it’s combined mileage is usually a little over 200 mpg, and if you do city driving only that will drop to a minimum of 180 mpg under the worst driving conditions. But I’d be happy with that no doubt.
How many times should you follow up after a pitch goes unanswered? Chances are, more than you do now. Here's how to redouble your efforts--tactfully.
I once sent a pitch to a former client. I hadn't worked for this client in several months, but she paid well and I was eager to get another piece of business. I was certain I had a proposal she would be interested in. But my contact didn't respond to my first email. Or my second one, a couple of weeks later, or my third, a couple of weeks after that.
We had a strong history together and I really wanted to work with her again. And so, instead of my usual practice of giving up after a couple of tries, I kept at it. After yet another email went unanswered, I called her office and left a message. A week later, I left a message again. (I was feeling more and more like a stalker, but I really wanted the job.) A week after that, I called one more time--and she happened to pick up the phone.
She hadn't read or didn't remember my emails or phone messages, so I explained once more what I had in mind.
"That's interesting to me," she said. And gave me the job.
Are Americans getting dumber?
Our math skills are falling. Our reading skills are weakening. Our children have become less literate than children in many developed countries. But the crisis in American education may be more than a matter of sliding rankings on world educational performance scales.
Our kids learn within a system of education devised for a world that increasingly does not exist.
To become a chef, a lawyer, a philosopher or an engineer, has always been a matter of learning what these professionals do, how and why they do it, and some set of general facts that more or less describe our societies and our selves. We pass from kindergarten through twelfth grade, from high school to college, from college to graduate and professional schools, ending our education at some predetermined stage to become the chef, or the engineer, equipped with a fair understanding of what being a chef, or an engineer, actually is and will be for a long time.
We “learn,” and after this we “do.” We go to school and then we go to work.
This approach does not map very well to personal and professional success in America today. Learning and doing have become inseparable in the face of conditions that invite us to discover.
Learning to negotiate is one of the most important business skills you can have.
What's уоur best price?"
"That's tоо expensive."
"Your competitor is selling thе sаmе thing for … $X."
Most salespeople аnd business owners hear statements likе this еvеrу day. Тhаt mеаns it's imроrtаnt tо learn hоw tо negotiate mоrе effectively. Неrе аrе fivе strategies thаt will help you become a master of negotiation аnd drive mоrе dollars tо уоur bottom line:
Aside from perhaps running for President of the United States, the most intense hiring process in America belongs to its own Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), which often takes two years.
The process will almost certainly uncover your deepest, darkest secrets and use them against you. Along with you undergoing every possible assessment out there, from polygraph exams to personality tests, your family, your exes, your neighbors and your friends will all be interrogated.
Along the way, if you lie, or even exaggerate, you’ll be instantly disqualified. Obviously, you can’t take drugs or commit any criminal acts. And you have to be under the age of 35.
All that, for a job that pays below your market value, that you can’t talk about to even your closest friends and comes with the distinct possibility of being killed, tortured or the government denying your very existence.
So what is the CIA really looking for in its recruits? One word: passion.
Emotions coordinate our behavior and physiological states during survival-salient events and pleasurable interactions. Even though we are often consciously aware of our current emotional state, such as anger or happiness, the mechanisms giving rise to these subjective sensations have remained largely unresolved. Brilliant research by Finnish scientists has mapped the areas of our body that are experiencing an increase or decrease in sensory activity when we experience a particular emotion.
Depending on whether we are happy, sad or angry, we have physiological sensations that are not located in different areas of the body. We overlook this reality from one day to the next (the famous “lump in the breast” generated by anxiety, the feeling of warmth that pervades our face and our cheeks particularly when we feel the shame…), and do not consciously realize how much the location of these body areas activated by our emotions and how they vary considerably depending on the nature of the emotion.
Tesla Motors CEO Elon Musk unveiled a new version of the luxury electric car maker's Model S sedan that includes all-wheel drive and self-driving "auto pilot" features.
The open-to-the-public event Thursday night included free alcohol and test rides on an airport tarmac.
With more than 1,000 Tesla fans in the audience, Musk explained that the current Model S is a rear-wheel-drive car with one motor, but a new version will have two motors--one powering the front wheels and one powering the rear wheels.
All-wheel drive helps grip slippery roads and is standard on many luxury sedans. Analysts have said Tesla needed it to boost sales in the Northeast and Midwest, as well as Europe.
From flying cars to artificial intelligence, the SpaceX founder has some big, controversial ideas--and he's not afraid to share them.
Elon Musk has always been a quotable guy--and this week is no exception for the 43-year-old Tesla and SpaceX CEO. His recent media appearances ahead of a yet-unknown big announcement have him in the spotlight again. At Vanity Fair’s New Establishment Summit in San Francisco, he riffed on everything from the dangers of flying cars to the potential for artificial intelligences to destroy human life.
I've made plenty of mistakes. Big ones, little ones, expensive ones. Name it and I've messed it up.
Yet the mistake I made when I left a job haunts me more than any other.
In 2000 I took a leadership position at a commercial print facility that had just been acquired by a venture capital firm. Initially I was in charge of quality which was ironic since I came from a culture where productivity was everything.
Every other member of the leadership team was also new. Randy was in charge of customer service and scheduling; we had worked together previously and he basically got me the job.
Unfortunately that background didn't serve him particularly well in his new role. His command and control leadership style bombed with employees accustomed to playing political games in a family-owned business.