It seems nature has wreaked havoc on the area of "Big Flats" in Centrel Wis. (about 25 south of where I grew up...Wisconsin Rapids).
The news stories are saying thousands of acres were burnt to the ground as well as hundreds of homes lost to the flames.
I remember a fire back in the 70s in the Adams County area (you can still see the charred trees on Hwy 13 going from Adams to Rapids) but I dont think it was nearly the size that this recent natural disaster ended up being.
Link to a video story from Milwaukee's TMJ4 follows:
http://www.jsonline.com/multimedia/multiplayer.asp?id=8895
Hope everyone has a good weekend (will be hard for all those people up there though I suppose)
Friday, May 6, 2005
Thursday, May 5, 2005
666 is actaully 616??
The infamous Mark of the Beast may not be the one everyone thinks.....
Here is a story that sheds some new light on the "Mark of the Beast"....and thank goodness.
Most of my I.Ds (all of them in fact- Social Security Card, driver's licence, my credit cards) have "666" embedded in parts of the numbers.
I havnt shaved my head to see if the numbers are there though......
Can I breathe a sigh of relief now??
Read on.....
__________________________________________________________________________
The Truth Behind the Ominous 666
02-May-2005
Tom Anderson writes in the Independent that 666 is NOT the "number of the beast"—that's actually 616.
A newly discovered fragment of the book of Revelation, from the oldest copy of the New Testament that's ever been found, has been deciphered, and theologian David Parker says the number was mistakenly translated as 666.
666 is an example of the Hebrew habit of assigning numbers to people's names. Revelation, instead of being a prophecy of future events, was actually a book written in code, so as not to get the writers in trouble with the Roman censors. 616 (formerly 666) refers to the Emperor Caligula, not to the "antichrist."
Other mistranslations in the Bible occurred when the King James version was first translated into Enlgish from the original Hebrew and ancient Greek texts. "Thou shall not suffer (allow) a witch to live" was actually "Thou shall not allow a poisoner to live." The "Red Sea," where Moses parted the waves to allow the Jews to escape the Egyptians, was actually the "Reed Sea," probably a marsh. This conjures up images of the Jews getting away from the pursuing Egyptians on foot by stepping on the plants that grow in marshy conditions, while the Egyptians, with their high technology (for that time) chariots, became trapped in the muck.
The King James version of the Bible was translated into English in the early 17th century, the same era in which Shakespeare wrote his plays. Those who wish to make a literal interpretation of the Bible should realize that if they can't easily comprehend Shakespeare's language, they won't readily understand the King James Bible either.
__________________________________________________________________________
Warm Regards for a nice weekend to all.....
Here is a story that sheds some new light on the "Mark of the Beast"....and thank goodness.
Most of my I.Ds (all of them in fact- Social Security Card, driver's licence, my credit cards) have "666" embedded in parts of the numbers.
I havnt shaved my head to see if the numbers are there though......
Can I breathe a sigh of relief now??
Read on.....
__________________________________________________________________________
The Truth Behind the Ominous 666
02-May-2005
Tom Anderson writes in the Independent that 666 is NOT the "number of the beast"—that's actually 616.
A newly discovered fragment of the book of Revelation, from the oldest copy of the New Testament that's ever been found, has been deciphered, and theologian David Parker says the number was mistakenly translated as 666.
666 is an example of the Hebrew habit of assigning numbers to people's names. Revelation, instead of being a prophecy of future events, was actually a book written in code, so as not to get the writers in trouble with the Roman censors. 616 (formerly 666) refers to the Emperor Caligula, not to the "antichrist."
Other mistranslations in the Bible occurred when the King James version was first translated into Enlgish from the original Hebrew and ancient Greek texts. "Thou shall not suffer (allow) a witch to live" was actually "Thou shall not allow a poisoner to live." The "Red Sea," where Moses parted the waves to allow the Jews to escape the Egyptians, was actually the "Reed Sea," probably a marsh. This conjures up images of the Jews getting away from the pursuing Egyptians on foot by stepping on the plants that grow in marshy conditions, while the Egyptians, with their high technology (for that time) chariots, became trapped in the muck.
The King James version of the Bible was translated into English in the early 17th century, the same era in which Shakespeare wrote his plays. Those who wish to make a literal interpretation of the Bible should realize that if they can't easily comprehend Shakespeare's language, they won't readily understand the King James Bible either.
__________________________________________________________________________
Warm Regards for a nice weekend to all.....
Monday, May 2, 2005
WTF....North Korea shooting of Missiles in the Pacific? Is this the start of another Cold War or...
......Worse yet, another "Cuban Missile Crisis"??
I am catching up on the days events, and I just finished posting further down in the blog about Bush and his moronic idea to fix Social Security and then..... I come across news stories about Little kid North Korea" trying to "get the goat" of "Daddy Bush" by playing with some "Big Boy toys".....
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/J/JAPAN_NORTH_KOREA?SITE=WIMIL&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
........It seems that North Korea fired a short range missile today (5/1/05) into the Sea of Japan...It seems that they are just fueling the fire as they shoot missiles near Japan, back out of the six-nation Nuclear talks, shutdown nuclear plants so they can have it focus more on uranium enrichement....ikes!! Thank god they were NOT nuclear.
But if they ever do get that capability (and I am sure it is just a matter of time) and we do what is outlined in the draft of a "Nuclear strike Resolution".....
http://www.wslfweb.org/docs/doctrine/3_12fc2.pdf (click link to download pdf file)
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20050501-033240-5837r.htm
.......written by the U.S. Government, we might not have to worry about Bush hijacking Social Security after all. If there is a preemptive strike, we will all be dead anyway.
From the tone of the draft mentioned above, it seems that the US is indeed preparing for a possible confrontation with certain countries. In particular, this doctine seems to be addressing the North Korean nuclear weapon issue. The paper specifically mentions outfitting submarines whose port of call is in Japan. Another point to mention is that the doctrine calls for preemptive nuclear strikes on potentially overwhelming conventional forces. The only country I can think of with such is China. A new era seems to be dawning on foreign policy in the Asian region.
I think I will go to Manards on my next day off and stock up on plastic sheeting and duct tape....ah never mind....it wouldn't do any good.
But the Fireworks sure would be spectacular!!
What a "Crazy World" we all live in ha??
I am catching up on the days events, and I just finished posting further down in the blog about Bush and his moronic idea to fix Social Security and then..... I come across news stories about Little kid North Korea" trying to "get the goat" of "Daddy Bush" by playing with some "Big Boy toys".....
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/J/JAPAN_NORTH_KOREA?SITE=WIMIL&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
........It seems that North Korea fired a short range missile today (5/1/05) into the Sea of Japan...It seems that they are just fueling the fire as they shoot missiles near Japan, back out of the six-nation Nuclear talks, shutdown nuclear plants so they can have it focus more on uranium enrichement....ikes!! Thank god they were NOT nuclear.
But if they ever do get that capability (and I am sure it is just a matter of time) and we do what is outlined in the draft of a "Nuclear strike Resolution".....
http://www.wslfweb.org/docs/doctrine/3_12fc2.pdf (click link to download pdf file)
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20050501-033240-5837r.htm
.......written by the U.S. Government, we might not have to worry about Bush hijacking Social Security after all. If there is a preemptive strike, we will all be dead anyway.
From the tone of the draft mentioned above, it seems that the US is indeed preparing for a possible confrontation with certain countries. In particular, this doctine seems to be addressing the North Korean nuclear weapon issue. The paper specifically mentions outfitting submarines whose port of call is in Japan. Another point to mention is that the doctrine calls for preemptive nuclear strikes on potentially overwhelming conventional forces. The only country I can think of with such is China. A new era seems to be dawning on foreign policy in the Asian region.
I think I will go to Manards on my next day off and stock up on plastic sheeting and duct tape....ah never mind....it wouldn't do any good.
But the Fireworks sure would be spectacular!!
What a "Crazy World" we all live in ha??
Whats up with Bush's Stupid Social Security Plan?
So a few nights ago President Bush talked about cutting Social Security benefits for “people who are better off.” Who are these people?
Bush adopted a proposal created by a guy named Richard Posen called “progressive price indexing.” That proposal would cut benefits for everyone except “the bottom 30 percent of earners, or those who make less than about $20,000 currently.”
So now people who “are better off” are defined as anyone earning over $20,000 a year.
This is a dramatic change from the rhetoric Bush used to promote his tax cuts.
A 3/8/01 White House fact sheet entitled “President’s Tax Relief Plan Gives Greatest Relief to Lowest Income Taxpayers,” touts that the “share of income taxes paid is reduced for all income groups below $100,000 in income.”
So to sell his tax cuts, Bush implied that anything under $100,000 was “low income.” Now, to sell his Social Security package, anything over $20,000 is “better off.”
Well folks, I guess depending which way you look at it, I am either slightly better then "better off" or way "very very low income"!! Please help! I am confused....
Happy Monday
Bush adopted a proposal created by a guy named Richard Posen called “progressive price indexing.” That proposal would cut benefits for everyone except “the bottom 30 percent of earners, or those who make less than about $20,000 currently.”
So now people who “are better off” are defined as anyone earning over $20,000 a year.
This is a dramatic change from the rhetoric Bush used to promote his tax cuts.
A 3/8/01 White House fact sheet entitled “President’s Tax Relief Plan Gives Greatest Relief to Lowest Income Taxpayers,” touts that the “share of income taxes paid is reduced for all income groups below $100,000 in income.”
So to sell his tax cuts, Bush implied that anything under $100,000 was “low income.” Now, to sell his Social Security package, anything over $20,000 is “better off.”
Well folks, I guess depending which way you look at it, I am either slightly better then "better off" or way "very very low income"!! Please help! I am confused....
Happy Monday
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)