How To: Do Things You Didn’t Know You Could

Finding out how to do anything useful is always great. It’s not like having to learn stuff in school, and you come to find out, everything you spent all of that time learning, is only useful playing Trivial Persuit! So much for getting straight A’s on your report cards, but at least when you play Trivial Persuit, you’re a winner every time.

Did you know your body emits electrical energy? Of course you did, because you did get straight A’s in school. Yes, but did you know you could you use your own body to charge your phone? Pretty cool huh? Here are a few How To videos, to help you out in a pinch, or if you want to amaze your friends at parties.
Human Energy Charges Cell Phone… WOW!

How to Charge an iPod using electrolytes and an onion

Uploaded on Nov 10, 2007

In this episode we show you how to charge your iPod (or other mp3 player) for up to 20 minutes using electrolytes derived from Gatorade or Powerade which are then stored within the cells of an onion.

How to view blocked numbers

Change traffic lights with a universal remote!

I don’t really advise doing this, at least during the daytime, when you may cause more harm than fun. But the idea is a great one.


 

Pareidolia – What’s That?

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Pareidolia

Pareidolia is the phenomenon of recognizing patterns, shapes, and familiar objects in a vague and sometimes random stimulus. It’s the result of your brain trying to “make sense” of input that really has no sense to find in it.

photo-Pareidolia - Chiesa Madre di Nereto - Teramo, Italy

Pareidolia – Chiesa Madre di Nereto – Teramo, Italy

 

This is seen often in inkblot tests, where random splatters of ink suggest different images to different people (look, it’s a conspiracy, they’re all deliberately made to look like vaginas!) but also in cases of people seeing visions, ghosts and other likenesses in what is actually just random patterns that happen to look like those things.

Examples
The Rorschach test, or the famous “inkblot” test asks people what they see in otherwise random blobs of ink. The accepted standard answers for the first four are A) a bat, B) a bat, C) a bat, and D) my father killing my mother with a hypodermic needle

photo-inkblot test - Google Search

inkblot test – Google Search

1-dollar bill
($1 bill must be not too new and not too old) Hold dollar bill with pyramid and eagle facing you. fold eagle behind the pyramid. If folded exactly in half the two circles will align on top of each other and touching on both sides. Hold up to an old light bulb to see the face of Baphomet come through the pyramid side. (The eyes will come through in the two circular clouds just below the eye on the pyramid).

photo-_Baphomet.png - RationalWiki

_Baphomet.png – RationalWiki

5-dollar bill
Repeat the same steps. The result is the Pentagon before the attacks.

photo--5d.jpg (350×189)

-5d.jpg (350×189)

]10-dollar bill
Repeat the same steps again. The result is the Twin Towers on fire.

photo-10a.jpg (360×249)

10a.jpg (360×249)

50-dollar bill
And again. This time, you get the building collapsing.

photo-50c.jpg (360×259)

50c.jpg (360×259)

100-dollar bill
All you get this time around is a bunch of smoke, which looks more like someone played around with the MSPaint airbrush tool. Just a bunch of smoke, presumably a result of a fallen building, perhaps after being hit with an airplane. When was this dollar bill made? Well before 9/11. So what is with the Twin Towers, in a mass of smoke?

photo-100c.jpg

100c.jpg

A picture made by NASA’s Viking 1 orbiter in 1976 showing a hill that looks like a face started a new hobby – looking closely at images returned by Mars probes and trying to find as much “evidence for extraterrestrial life” as possible.

photo-RationalWiki

RationalWiki

 

Contrary to expectations, magnifying images to the pixel level and repeatedly applying the “sharpen” tool are not considered cheating. Notable participants in this quaint activity are Richard Hoagland and the Mars Anomaly Research team. Not only a ‘face’ but whole pyramids and causeways are claimed to be seem – with the ‘face’ being ‘identical’ to that on the Sphinx at Gizeh. Sci-fi pedants have been amused to note that long-running BBC sci-fi show Doctor Who broadcast a serial in 1975 called The Pyramids of Mars, featuring a baddie called Sutekh the Destroyer who was imprisoned in a pyramid. On Mars. “coincidence??” etc. etc.

Giant Amphibian Ruled Ancient Rivers

Giant Amphibian Ruled Ancient Rivers

Nurses and Patients Demand Equal Rights!!!

This is another issue that needs to be brought forward to the public. The treatment of everyone needs to be both fair and just. Those that are treated poorly have the right to say so, in this country. If those at the top of the pyramid don’t like the bad press, they should take more care, to prevent atrocious acts. Punishing those that speak out against unfair treatment, is why we have so many problems in our society. I urge others to help make this known!

Psych Circus

Ideas, organization, and effort bring power and results! Ideas, organization, and effort bring power and results!

With this post, I introduce a project still in its infancy: its planning stages, really.

Nurses have long known that countless abuses and misbehaviors against us go unreported and unaddressed. Perpetrators are valued sources of revenue and prestige, and much protected. Nurses know from bitter experience: honest reports of real abuses through official channels more often result in retaliatory punishment of the nurse reporters than any accountability for perpetrators harming both nurses and patients. The only savior for such nurses has been publicity. My project aims to help nurses aim this light of day. The usual status quo severely risks patient safety and protects both fraudulent ‘care’ and malpractice. Nurses demand better! Our current path seems to lead ever deeper into such corruption, protected and encouraged by powerful interests that care only for profit, not patients. These interests have largely silenced nurses with ruthless retaliation against any…

View original post 254 more words

Google Data tools – Download your data!

Here is another useful piece of information.  Just like keeping a back-up copy of important data, you may want to keep a second copy of all of your personal data, where you can access it at a moments notice.  If the internet went down, and you needed your information in a hurry, hoe would you access it?

Put your data on a dvd, or a set of them, and tuck them away in your file boxes or safe, just in case.

John Skeats
Shared publicly8:36 AM

Think About Removing Your Data from a Service Before You Need to

Most people don’t give a thought to whether they would be able to export their personal content from online services until they need to because they want to change services or whatever. Unfortunately, they often find that the service providers have put up walls presumably to lock people in by making it difficult or impossible to export your content.

Google believes you own your content. They honor that by providing tools that allow you to export your content easily, at no cost, and in a standard format that can be used elsewhere.

h/t +Google+ Top Contributors

Google+ Top Contributors originally shared:

Google Data tools – Download your data

Your account, your data.
Download a copy.

Create an archive with your data from Google products:

Choose the Google products to include in your archive and configure the settings for each product. This archive will only be accessible to you.

It’s important that you can access your Google data when you want it, where you want it – whether is it to import it into another service or just create your own copy for your archives.

People usually don’t look to see if they can get their data out of a product until they decide that they want to leave. For this reason, we always encourage you to ask these three questions before starting to use a product that will store your data:

★ Can I get my data out in an open, interoperable, portable format?
★ How much is it going to cost to get my data out?
★ How much of my time is it going to take to get my data out?

The ideal answers to these questions are:

✫ Yes.
✫ Nothing more than I’m already paying.
✫ As little as possible.

There shouldn’t be an additional charge to export your data. Beyond that, if it takes you weeks to get your data, it’s almost as bad as not being able to get your data out at all.

https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/3024190?utm_content=buffer5410f&utm_medium=social&utm_source=plus.google.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Learn more from Google: http://bit.ly/1MH8L9J

Click through to the Takeout: http://bit.ly/1bdw1i1

#Google #Takeout #Photos #Maps #TCpost

The Rise of YouTube Plagiarism Bots

This is almost Plagiarism, as I didn’t change any part of it.  I know at some point I will get in trouble over some of my posts.  I found what I was looking for.   Everything on my site is under a Creative Commons license that allows reuse with attribution.

bit.ly/1wE6w2N .

So I used part of this post to help inform you all.  Again, I wrote none of the post you’re about to read, and you must follow the link to finish it.

The Rise of YouTube Plagiarism Bots

By Jonathan Bailey on Mar 17, 2015 03:47 pm

YouTube Logo

For almost as long as there’s been a YouTube, there’s been spam on it.

Traditionally this spam has taken the format of garbage accounts uploading misleading videos, often with fake thumbnails, for the purpose of promoting products, services or some cause.

But while that type of spam still certainly exists on YouTube, it’s now being joined by a new kind of spam, automated videos that plagiarize content from blogs, news sites and other text sources.

For the spammer, this is a very easy way to flood YouTube with a large number of low-quality topical videos. The result for content creators, especially those who produce text or image content, is that your hard work is being used to fuel spam videoblogs and those spammers will have an upper hand in search results because of the way Google shows preference to YouTube in its algorithm.

This raises two difficult questions: What can YouTube do to battle this problem? And what can creators do to protect their work?

Understanding YouTube’s Plagiarism Bots

I would like to thank Jonathan Bailey for allowing me to use some of his material for the preceding post.  You can find more information at his site plagiarismtoday.com/stopping-inter…

 

Creationism Or Evolutionism?

Well here’s something to get everyone wondering where I’m coming from. I believe in God and I believe there is an intelligent design to the universe. I don’t believe all of what we are capable and can see and do, is just a fluke.

I also believe in evolution. If we say: On the first day God created….What day would that be?

I am a Latter-day Saint, a member of the Mormon Church. If our Heavenly Father resides on ” Kolab ” as in the ” Pearl Of Great Price ” according to the book of Abraham, one day there represents 1000 years here.

There is nothing in Biblical scripture that says ” On Monday this, and on Tuesday that. The Bible only states ” On the first day ” and then it states, ” On the next day….Who is to say how many days went by before the next day was to happen.

That allows for evolution….A friend of mine, a former Bishop of the L.D.S. Church had a theory. It suggested while Adam and Eve were hanging out in the Garden Of Eden, there was no sickness, death, or anything except the two of them frolicking.

Until the serpent convinced Eve to taste of the forbidden fruit, countless eons may have passed. The ” Fruit ” was Knowledge. Eons is considered more than 1, and an eon is thought to be about half of a billion years.

Even if Creationism is correct, there was plenty of time for an intelligently designed system to evolve, and we are constantly evolving, as per our own scientific observations.

Overview: The Conflict Between Religion and Evolution
http://www.pewforum.org/2009/02/04/overview-the-conflict-between-religion-and-evolution/

Almost 150 years after Charles Darwin published his groundbreaking work On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, Americans are still fighting over evolution. If anything, the controversy has grown in both size and intensity.

(See The Social and Legal Dimensions of the Evolution Debate in the U.S.) http://www.pewforum.org/2009/02/04/the-social-and-legal-dimensions-of-the-evolution-debate-in-the-us/

But beginning in the 1960s, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a number of decisions that imposed severe restrictions on those state governments that opposed the teaching of evolution.

Teaching creation science, either along with evolutionary theory or in place of it, is also banned.

In the last decade, some local and state school boards in Kansas, Pennsylvania and elsewhere have considered teaching what they contend are scientific alternatives to evolution –
Notably the concept of intelligent design, which posits that life is too complex to have developed without the intervention of an outside, possibly divine force.

(See Fighting Over Darwin, State by State.)
http://www.pewforum.org/2009/02/04/fighting-over-darwin-state-by-state/

Evolution is “a theory, not a fact [and] … should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered.”

(See Darwin and His Theory of Evolution.) http://www.pewforum.org/2009/02/04/darwin-and-his-theory-of-evolution/

Others dismiss creation science as religion, not science, and describe intelligent design as little more than creationism dressed up in scientific jargon.

(See Evolution: A Timeline.) http://www.pewforum.org/2009/02/04/evolution-a-timeline/

So if evolution is as established as the theory of gravity, why are people still arguing about it a century and a half after it was first proposed?

For many, the Darwinian view of life – a panorama of brutal struggle and constant change – goes beyond contradicting the biblical creation story and conflicts with the Judeo-Christian concept of an active and loving God who cares for his creation.

(See Religious Groups’ Views on Evolution.) http://www.pewforum.org/2009/02/04/religious-groups-views-on-evolution/

Evolution: A Glossary of Terms

Creationism – The belief that the creation story in the Old Testament or Hebrew Bible book of Genesis is literally true and is akin to a scientific explanation for the creation of the Earth and the development of life.

Creation science – A movement that has attempted to uncover scientific evidence to show that the biblical creation story is true. Some in the creation science movement, known as “young Earth creationists,” reject not only evolution but also the idea that the universe and the Earth are billions of years old.

Darwinian evolution – The theory, first articulated by Charles Darwin, that life on Earth has evolved through natural selection, a process through which plants and animals change over time by adapting to their environments.

Intelligent design – The belief that life is too complex to have evolved entirely through natural processes and that an outside, possibly divine force must have played a role in the origin and development of life.

Social Darwinism – A belief that Darwin’s evolutionary theory can be applied to human society and that groups of people, just like life in the wild, are subject to “survival of the fittest.” The now discredited idea influenced many social theories and movements in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, from laissez-faire capitalism to various eugenics movements.

Scientific theory – A statement or principle, honed through scientific observation, reasoning and experimentation, that explains a natural phenomenon.

Theistic evolution – A belief held by some religious groups, including the Catholic Church, that God is the guiding force behind the process of evolution.

This report was written by David Masci, a senior researcher at the Pew Research Center’s Religion & Public Life Project.
_______________________________________________________________________
The above post is a short summary of the article. The article explains what “evolution is, as opposed to “creationism”. The post was very explicit, in that it was totally neutral.

Because of the Church and State, separation issues, it has been mandated Creationism, is a religious belief, and therefor can not be taught in schools.

If someone were to gather enough scientific evidence for the proofs of Creationism, the debates over what to teach in schools might turn the other way.

The Bible is not considered a proof as it was a compilation of many different books, written over a great timespan and heavily edited numerous times.

Although the Bible may be a narrative of the beginning of this world and the people here, there are no scientific proofs that it is anything more than a story.

There are torches and pitchforks in the corner, should you feel the need to use such tools to make your beliefs known. This website is protected by a shield of energy ( Force Field ) which uses all negative energy as further protection.

I hope no ideals or beliefs were hurt in the writing of this post.

Human beings came from another planet, not Earth

We keep studying Human history, looking for the answers to the thousand questions, involving WHO WE ARE. The deeper we delve into these things, more questions insert themselves into our curiosity of OUR ORIGINS. Religion doesn’t answer all of the questions. I don’t believe we are truly any smarter, than were earlier in history. (Knowledge is not the same as Smarts)

We know an impressive amount now, as some history had been recorded for posterity’s sake. As we learn to interpret other writing styles of ancient man, we may finally bring more ” TRUTH ” forward, and answer more of those questions that continually plague us. There will never be a time in Human history, whereby we’ve learned enough to have no questions left to answer.

Theories abound, as to this subject. I figure I could have a ” NICHE ” just on this one post, and have millions of articles posted in no time at all. Maybe I will ©. yes I just copyrighted that epiphany, so you just leave it alone!

Anyway….Here’s one such theory, and raised just as many questions as it might seem to answer. BTW…I certainly don’t know what’s really TRUE, and what’s total bull crap, so if we can all keep an open mind, this is only for entertainment. The poster child of this post does not endorse, nor has any affiliations with ” those responsible for the following theories “.  p.s. I also wanted to include this link, please check out this post https://opherworld.wordpress.com/2015/03/15/anthropocene-apocalypse-population-explosion-the-biggest-threat-to-humans-and-most-other-life-on-earth/  as it only makes you wonder even more, Thanks Opher for that fine post, to inspire me to bringing everyone this post.  You are great ( inspirational even ).  Sorry, I have to ask you to look at this too.   http://mindfuldigressions.com/2015/03/15/evolution-schmevolution/

This is probably copyrighted material ©

Thanks to +JOHN SKEATS, for the inspiration and the permission to be able to post this!

This is probably copyrighted material ©

I found a post in my email from someone at Google plus, about using and re-sharing posts. There is always a copyright problem. It used to be, a copyrighted article or picture had a copyright logo on it. That logo is a circle with a c, in the center.
http://www.copywriting-on-demand.com/on-a-pc.html
If you want to add this logo to your work, here is how to do that.

On a PC

… simply hold down the ‘Alt’ key and key in the numerals 0169. When you next lift your finger off ‘Alt’, the copyright symbol will appear. NB You must use the numeric keypad on the right of the keyboard. NOT the numerals running along the top. ©

Typing the copyright symbol on a MAC… http://www.copywriting-on-demand.com/on-a-mac.html
… simply enter Option + G
So…I got a post saying it isn’t cool to share others work unless you have express permission to do so. EVEN if that work is public, and has been shared publicly. There are ways to find out about whether something is copyrighted, or in ” public domain ” , and I will bring that article to you tomorrow, maybe….

John Skeats originally shared: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+JohnSkeats/posts/CXCScsP3v7f
Resharing Other People’s Materials: What You Should and Should Not Do

You are implicitly welcome to use the Google+ Re-share function to re-share any Public posts with anyone you want. That is arguably the highest compliment you can give for a post. Mentioning the person who created the post in your re-share and giving a “hat tip” to a person who might have re-shared the copy you saw is not only courteous, but is likely to result in those people joining the conversations on your posts, as well.

It is never appropriate to copy-and-paste someone else’s post content (text or photos) into a post of your own without the express permission of the original poster. That is true — even if you include a comment crediting the original author or photographer. Not only is that poor etiquette, but there is a good chance that you would be violating copyright laws as well if you were to do that doing so.

One important note: you should always be careful re-sharing posts that were shared privately because the originator of the post might consider re-sharing with the wrong audience a breach of their privacy. If you are not sure, ask the person who created the post before re-sharing their post with anyone the original post was not shared with.

+rusty garner-smith You’re welcome to re-share it. I shared it with Public and did not disable re-shares, so that is implicitly okay. I would not appreciate your copying the post and sharing it as if it were a new post even if you included an attribution.

So, I got permission to post this legally. It took nearly all day to do so, and I went through all kinds of channels to make this happen. If you have questions about whether you can or can’t post something, the best course of action is to locate the ” ORIGINAL ” document, or author and see what permissions are required. Again I want to thank +JOHN SKEATS for his contribution on this article.

Here are the comments that came up, before I got my answers, and I am sorry to all of those who responded, I don’t have time to ask all of you If I may include this in the article. Once again we run into the question ” Re-sharing Other People’s Materials: What You Should and Should Not Do “.
23 comments
Gerald BakerYesterday 7:09 AM+1
2
1
+John Skeats thanks 4 Tip
Nel PaYesterday 7:15 AM+2
3
2
Good one +John Skeats, keep going on this line, there are many(thousands) people using others Post’s.
John SkeatsYesterday 7:18 AM+2
3
2
Thanks, +Nel Pa. Unfortunately, I have to agree with you about the large number of people who steal other people’s work — because that it is really what it is. I have run into a lot of people who do not realize that what they are doing is wrong, so we can always hope that at least some of them will see posts like this and finally get it.
Nel PaYesterday 7:24 AM+1
2
1
+Bob Fisher: te das cuenta, que Google, ve esas prácticas como SPAM Y falta de etiqueta y legitimidad y por lo tanto son cuestionables. Y a los culpables los están investigando y mucha gente los rstá bloqueando. Saludos paisano!

+CLIVIA NOVIAS Espero que entiendas inglés y sino usa el traductor. Compartir contenido original y dando el crédito correcto está bien, pero no está según las normativas de Google re-compartir material de personas que están en los CÍRCULOS SHARED ( están mal vistos y sus cuentas son falsas por lo tanto so SPAM!

+Dennis Josue Avila Ceballos(la forma correcta de postear) lo que te decía días atrás y no quisiste entender!
Translate
Nel PaYesterday 7:37 AM+1
2
1
+John Skeats, it’s a shame… But if you, as the same way +Google+ Top Contributors Have been Continues follo those people with than untrusting practice. They’ll stop of doing SPAM!
John SkeatsYesterday 7:38 AM+1
2
1
+Nel Pa I don’t tolerate content theft when I am aware of it.
Tiffany JohnsonYesterday 7:44 AM+2
3
2
+John Skeats​ thanks for this. I believe that there is a lot of neglect of and misunderstandings about Copyrights these days. Many people aren’t even aware that most of what they find on the internet is under copyright protection or at least cc. Kudos.
Nel PaYesterday 7:44 AM+1
2
1
Amazing! .+John Skeats, 😉 I must leave U. I’m working!
Mike NoyesYesterday 7:44 AM+1
2
1
+John Skeats Some of this was discussed in +Mark Traphagen’s post on Google Scraper Report. It has some information you may want to add to your post.
https://plus.google.com/u/0/107022061436866576067/posts/gsCS233gwBV
Copyright ViolationYesterday 7:45 AM+6
7
6
Absolutely necessary to share, thanks +John Skeats .
When we look e.g. in some large G+ communities we see unfortunately the opposite of what should be done.
Rupert WoodYesterday 7:52 AM+5
6
5
maybe there should be some mention of those who all they do is reshare posts, often without any obvious purpose. I tend to block those who just reshare dozens of posts in a short space of time when there is no attempt to add to or explain why they are resharing so many posts.
Charlie HooverYesterday 8:07 AM+1
2
1
I really wish more people would be better about this stuff. When I do my #gqotd and #gsotd posts I always take time to attribute things like artwork back to the original creator. It’s not hard people…
rusty garner-smithYesterday 8:07 AM+3
4
3
Hey +John Skeats: May I re-post this for others to use? I do agree with the comments about this subject. Sometimes the original poster doesn’t respond to inquiries, and if the post is important, many miss out on said information. I probably have violated many rules, for these reasons.
Dawn BoeppleYesterday 10:11 AM+2
3
2
Guilty as charged! Can i at least have the black sack placed over my head & eyes….?
Kenneth Geiger IIYesterday 10:30 AM
Pretty sure I’ve done everything I shouldn’t and nothing I should.
Danny RivasYesterday 10:34 AM+1
2
1
If you are worried about it getting spread around, don’t post it.
Dawn BoeppleYesterday 10:36 AM+2
3
2
Im guilty for copying off fb & not requesting permission to do so…😝
Danny RivasYesterday 10:41 AM
Oooh, +Dawn Boepple , I’m telling…. Lol.
knightbear evansYesterday 10:49 AM+2
3
2
I understand what you say. But so what. Take my posts if you want to I don’t care. To many rules in the world as it is!!! When comes to copyright ballshit whats wrong with shareing don’t we teach kids to do that? Yep. I agree that you should name the original owner as its there’s fair does. Like g+ does. And thats good. All copyright is to make more money just like every thing in the world we live it. Full stop ! : )
Black DragonYesterday 1:37 PM
Sharing is caring
John SkeatsYesterday 2:24 PM+1
2
1
+rusty garner-smith You’re welcome to reshare it. I shared it with Public and did not disable reshares, so that is implicitly okay. I would not appreciate your copying the post and sharing it as if it were a new post even if you included an attribution.
Dawn BoeppleYesterday 6:14 PM+1
2
1
Oh please Danny,don’t tell..you kno what happens to tattle tales…..and ME TOO🔫🔪🚽…
Doesn’t look good for us…😆😡
Kenneth Geiger IIYesterday 6:16 PM

And you can see by the responses, Many people share, and some attribute the original author, and that is still “STEALING “. Even though we give links, and show all of the post, so nothing will be misconstrued, unless we have PERMISSION, we are all GUILTY, as charged!

1 Million Mini Computers So Kids Can Learn

BBC is give away 1 million mini computers so kids can learn

https://www.intspine.com/bbc-give-away-1-million-mini-computers-kids-can-learn-311499

 

BBC is giving away 1 million mini computers so kids can learn to code – LONDON — The BBC wants coding to become as fundamental as writing, and is taking some very practical steps to ensure that happens.

The broadcaster announced on Thursday that it is giving away 1 million micro computers to next year’s cohort of 11- and 12-year-old schoolchildren in Year 7, as part of a new initiative called Make it Digital.

Currently in development, the Micro Bit is a small piece of programmable, wearable hardware that helps kids learn basic coding and programming.

It could act as a springboard for more advanced coding on products, such as the single-board computer Raspberry Pi, according to the BBC. Children will be able to plug the device into a computer, and start creating with it immediately.

“BBC Make it Digital could help digital creativity become as familiar and fundamental as writing, and I’m truly excited by what Britain, and future great Britons, can achieve,” BBC director general Tony Hall said in a statement Thursday.

The broadcaster also announced it is partnering with 50 organisations, including Google, Google, Samsung, Samsungfor Good and Code Club, and will host a range of educational events and activities.