Welcome

Welcome to my blog http://www.skegley.blogspot.com/ . CAVEAT LECTOR- Let the reader beware. This is a Christian Conservative blog. It is not meant to offend anyone. Please feel free to ignore this blog, but also feel free to browse and comment on my posts! You may also scroll down to respond to any post.

For Christian American readers of this blog:


I wish to incite all Christians to rise up and take back the United States of America with all of God's manifold blessings. We want the free allowance of the Bible and prayers allowed again in schools, halls of justice, and all governing bodies. We don't seek a theocracy until Jesus returns to earth because all men are weak and power corrupts the very best of them.
We want to be a kinder and gentler people without slavery or condescension to any.

The world seems to be in a time of discontent among the populace. Christians should not fear. God is Love, shown best through Jesus Christ. God is still in control. All Glory to our Creator and to our God!


A favorite quote from my good friend, Jack Plymale, which I appreciate:

"Wars are planned by old men,in council rooms apart. They plan for greater armament, they map the battle chart, but: where sightless eyes stare out, beyond life's vanished joys, I've noticed,somehow, all the dead and mamed are hardly more than boys(Grantland Rice per our mutual friend, Sarah Rapp)."

Thanks Jack!

I must admit that I do not check authenticity of my posts. If anyone can tell me of a non-biased arbitrator, I will attempt to do so more regularly. I know of no such arbitrator for the internet.











Monday, July 29, 2013

Best summation of Barack and Michelle ... Thx Nita E@! I agree! SamKat

Why I don't like Obama and Michelle ...

Masterfully stated. 
 
BEST SUMMATION OF BARACK AND MICHELLE
 
https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/603780_468119866599120_525103574_n.jpg
This Reporter has (((NAILED IT))) This should go VIRAL!!!!!!!!

BEST SUMMATION OF BARACK AND MICHELLE EVER!
Mychal Massie is a respected writer and talk show host in Los Angeles . The other evening on my twitter, a person asked me why I didn't like the Obama's? Specifically I was asked: "I have to ask, why do you hate the Obama's? It seems personal, not policy related. You even dissed (disrespect) their Christmas family picture."

The truth is I do not like the Obamas, what they represent, their ideology, and I certainly do not like his policies and legislation. I've made no secret of my contempt for the Obamas. As I responded to the person who asked me the aforementioned question, I don't like them because they are committed to the fundamental change of my/our country into what can only be regarded as a Communist state.

I don't hate them per definition, but I condemn them because they are the worst kind of racialists, they are elitist Leninists with contempt for traditional America . They display disrespect for the sanctity of the office he holds, and for those who are willing to admit same, Michelle Obama's raw contempt for white America is transpicuous. I don't like them because they comport themselves as emperor and empress.

I expect, no I demand respect, for the Office of President and a love of our country and her citizenry from the leader entrusted with the governance of same. President and Mrs. Reagan displayed an unparalleled love for the country and her people.

The Reagan's made Americans feel good about themselves and about what we could accomplish. Obama's arrogance by appointing 32 leftist czars and constantly bypassing congress is impeachable. Eric Holder is probably the MOST incompetent and arrogant DOJ head to ever hold the job. Could you envision President Reagan instructing his Justice Department to act like jack-booted thugs?

Presidents are politicians and all politicians are known and pretty much expected to manipulate the truth, if not outright lie, but even using that low standard, the Obama's have taken lies, dishonesty, deceit, mendacity, subterfuge and obfuscation to new depths. They are verbally abusive to the citizenry, and they display an animus for civility.

I do not like them, because they both display bigotry overtly, as in the case of Harvard Professor Louis Gates, when he accused the Cambridge Police of acting stupidly, and her code speak pursuant to not being able to be proud of America . I view that statement and that mindset as an insult to those who died to provide a country where a Kenyan, his illegal alien relatives, and his alleged progeny, could come and not only live freely, but rise to the highest, most powerful, position in the world.

Michelle Obama is free to hate and disparage whites because Americans of every description paid with their blood to ensure her right to do same. I have a saying, that "the only reason a person hides things, is because they have something to hide." No president in history has spent millions of dollars to keep his records and his past sealed.

And what the two of them have shared has been proved to be lies. He lied about when and how they met, he lied about his mother's death and problems with insurance, Michelle lied to a crowd pursuant to nearly $500,000 bank stocks they inherited from his family. He has lied about his father's military service, about the civil rights movement, ad nausea. He lied to the world about the Supreme Court in a State of the Union address. He berated and publicly insulted a sitting Congressman. He has surrounded himself with the most rabidly, radical, socialist academicians today.

He opposed rulings that protected women and children that even Planned Parenthood did not seek to support. He is openly hostile to business and aggressively hostile to Israel . His wife treats being the First Lady as her personal American Express Black Card (arguably the most prestigious credit card in the world). I condemn them because, as people are suffering, losing their homes, their jobs, their retirements, he and his family are arrogantly showing off their life of entitlement - as he goes about creating and fomenting class warfare.

I don't like them, and I neither apologize nor retreat from my public condemnation of them and of his policies. We should condemn them for the disrespect they show our people, for his willful and unconstitutional actions pursuant to obeying the Constitutional parameters he is bound by, and his willful disregard for Congressional authority.

Dislike for them has nothing to do with the color of their skin; it has everything to do with their behavior, attitudes, and policies. And I have open scorn for their constantly playing the race card.

I could go on, but let me conclude with this. I condemn in the strongest possible terms the media for refusing to investigate them, as they did President Bush and President Clinton, and for refusing to label them for what they truly are. There is no scenario known to man, whereby a white president and his wife could ignore laws, flaunt their position, and lord over the people, as these two are permitted out of fear for their color.

As I wrote in a syndicated column titled, "Nero In The White House" - "Never in my life, inside or outside of politics, have I witnessed such dishonesty in a political leader. He is the most mendacious political figure I have ever witnessed. Even by the low standards of his presidential predecessors, his narcissistic, contumacious arrogance is unequalled. Using Obama as the bar, Nero would have to be elevated to sainthood...

Many in America wanted to be proud when the first person of color was elected president, but instead, they have been witness to a congenital liar, a woman who has been ashamed of America her entire life, failed policies, intimidation, and a commonality hitherto not witnessed in political leaders. He and his wife view their life at our expense as an entitlement - while America 's people go homeless, hungry and unemployed."
--
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those that are willing to work and give to those who would not.” 
Molon labe
(mo-lone lah-veh)

Important truth of life ... CBN ... Christian BN



English  |  EspaƱol

1. God's Purpose...Peace and Life



God's Purpose... Peace and Life
God loves you and wants you to know Him so He can fill you with peace and give you real life -- forever.
The Bible says::
  • Because of our Lord Jesus Christ, we live at peace with God (Romans 5:1)
  • God loved the people of this world so much that He gave His only son, so that everyone who has faith in Him will have eternal life and never die (John 3:16).
Jesus said:
  • "I came so that everyone would have life, and have it in its fullest" (John 10:10).
Since God planned for us to have peace and real life right now, why are so many people hurting or angry inside?

2. Our Problem...Separation From God



God's Purpose... Peace and Life
God created us in His own image so we can know Him personally and have a joy-filled life. He did not make us as robots to automatically love and obey Him, but gave us a will and a freedom of choice. Since the beginning of time, we have chosen to disobey God and go our own willful way. We still make this choice today. This results in separation from God and ends in misery.
The Bible says:
  • All of us have sinned and fallen short of God's holiness (Romans 3:23).
  • The result of unforgiven sin is death. But God's gift is eternal life given by Jesus Christ our Lord (Romans 6:23).
The Bible says that disobeying God results in being separated from Him.
Our attempts can never unite us with God. Through the ages, people have tried many ways to bridge this gap and reach God -- without success.
The Bible says:
  • Adam sinned, and that sin brought death into the world. Now everyone has sinned, and so everyone must die (Romans 5:12).
  • You may think you are on the right road and still end up dead (Proverbs 14:12).
There is only one way to reach God.

3. God's Remedy...The Cross



God's Purpose... Peace and Life
Jesus Christ is the only answer to this problem. He is the only One who can bring us back to God. He died on the Cross and rose from the grave, paying the penalty for our sin and bridging the gap between God and people.
The Bible says:
  • There is only one God, and Christ Jesus is the only one who can bring us to God (1 Timothy 2:5).
  • Christ died once for our sins. An innocent person died for those who are guilty. Christ did this to bring you to God
    (1 Peter 3:18).
  • But God showed how much He loved us by having Christ die for us, even though we were sinful (Romans 5:8).
God has provided the only way -- we must make the choice.

4. Our Response...Give Ourselves to Christ


.
Our Response... Give Ourselves to Christ
We must trust Jesus Christ to forgive our sins and determine to obey Him for the rest of our lives. That way we can know God and find peace again.
The Bible says:
  • So you will be saved, if you honestly say, Jesus is Lord, and if you believe with all your heart that God raised Him from death. God will accept you and save you, if you truly believe this (Romans 10:9-10).
Is there any good reason why you cannot turn your life over to Jesus Christ right now?
How to give your life to Christ:
1. Admit you are a sinner and need forgiveness.
2. Believe that Jesus Christ died for you on the Cross and rose from the grave.
3. Through prayer, confess that Jesus Christ is the only way to God and commit to live for Him for the rest of your life.

Would you like to give your life over to Jesus Christ right now?



Democratic liberalism's affect upon government- Detroit

Charles Krauthammer commentary: When entitlement state gets too big, you get Detroit

Also in Opinion

Subscribe to The Dispatch


Monday July 29, 2013 5:43 AM
 
If there’s an iron rule in economics, it is Stein’s Law (named after Herb, former chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers): “If something cannot go on forever, it will stop.”
Detroit, for example, can no longer go on borrowing, spending, raising taxes and dangerously cutting such essential services as street lighting and police protection. So it stops. It goes bust.
Cause of death? Corruption, both legal and illegal, plus a classic case of reactionary liberalism in which the governing Democrats — there’s been no Republican mayor in half a century — simply refused to adapt to the straitened economic circumstances that followed the post-World War II auto boom.
Corruption of the criminal sort was legendary. The former mayor currently serving time engaged in a breathtaking range of fraud, extortion and racketeering. And he didn’t act alone. The legal corruption was the cozy symbiosis of Democratic politicians and powerful unions, especially the public-sector unions that gave money to elect the politicians who negotiated their contracts — with wildly unsustainable health and pension benefits.
When our great industrial competitors were digging out from the rubble of World War II, Detroit’s automakers ruled the world. Their imagined sense of inherent superiority bred complacency. Management grew increasingly bureaucratic and inflexible. Unions felt entitled to the extraordinary wages, benefits and work rules they’d bargained for in the fat years. In time, they all found themselves being overtaken by more efficient, more adaptable, more hungry foreign producers.
The market ultimately forced the car companies into reform, restructuring, the occasional bankruptcy and eventual recovery. The city of Detroit, however, lacking market constraints, just kept overspending — $100 million annually since 2008. The city now has about $19 billion in obligations it has no chance of meeting. So much city revenue had to be diverted to creditors and pensioners that there was practically nothing left to run the city. Forty percent of the streetlights don’t work, two-thirds of the parks are closed and emergency police response time averages nearly an hour — if it ever comes at all.
Bankruptcy, which will radically cut payments to bondholders and retirees, is the only chance to start over. Yet, if a Detroit bankruptcy succeeds, other cities will be tempted to follow suit. Dozens of other large urban areas have similarly massive pension and debt obligations, with commensurately denuded services and exorbitant taxes — leading to a vicious cycle of depopulation that makes everything worse. Detroit has lost more than 60 percent of its population since 1950.
The moral hazard increases if the federal government steps in to help. The Obama administration is therefore firmly opposed to any “bailout,” recognizing both the political toxicity of the word and the fiscal consequences of a Detroit precedent that invites other cities to line up with a tin cup. Washington cannot afford a nationwide bailout of insolvent cities.
However, under pressure of the public-sector unions, whose retirees will necessarily be victimized, the administration will likely offer “assistance” — which implies whatever kind of non-cash payments, indirect funds from other ongoing federal programs and enterprise-zone tax subsidies that it can get away with.
But Detroit is an object lesson not just for other cities. Not even the almighty federal government is immune to Stein’s Law. Reactionary liberalism simply cannot countenance serious reform of the iconic social-welfare programs of the 20th century. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are pledged to their inviolability. President Barack Obama will occasionally admit that, for example, Medicare cannot go on as is, but then reverts to crude demagoguery when Republicans propose a structural reform, such as premium support for Medicare or something as obvious as raising the retirement age to match increasing longevity.
On the contrary. Obama added one enormous new entitlement (Obamacare) and, in his last State of the Union address, proposed yet another (universal preschool).
None of this is inevitable. In Wisconsin, Republicans showed that they recognize the perils of unconstrained government growth and will take on the unchecked power of government unions. Democratic Detroit, on the other hand, has for 50 years conducted a contrary experiment in myopia and the most imprudent passivity.
It doesn’t take a genius to see what happens when the entitlement state outgrows the economy upon which it rests. The time of Greece, Cyprus, Portugal, Spain, the rest of insolvent social-democratic Europe — and now Detroit — is the time for conservatives to raise the banner of Stein’s Law and yell “Stop!” You can kick the can down the road, but at some point it disappears over a cliff.
Charles Krauthammer writes for the Washington Post Writers Group.
letters@charleskrauthammer.com

Saturday, July 27, 2013

What is culture? ... Google search ... SamKat

The World Transformation Movement Blog

What is culture?

28 April 2013
By Susan
Category: Life Questions
Culture describes the cumulative influences on a group of people or societytheir collective knowledge, characteristics and learned behaviours. This knowledge is passed on from generation to generation and accounts for the different cultures that we can see around the world, for example Western culture, Eastern culture, Middle Eastern culture, African and Latin culture. Each of these cultures is defined by the values, traditions, social habits and behaviours, language, belief systems, concepts of the universe, dress, food, music and arts that they encompass.
What is culture?
‘Cultural diversity’ is the term that we have traditionally used to refer to differences between cultures. Terms such as ‘ethnic inclusiveness’ or ‘cross culturalism’ also relate to the issue of cultural differences. What is immensely significant about the whole issue of culture is that through the advances made in science we are now, at last, able to have a real discussion about not just ‘what culture is’ but also about why cultures around the world are so different from one another. In truth, the important question needing to be answered is not ‘What is culture?’, but ‘why are there cultural differences?
The truth is that questions, like ‘what is culture?’, and more importantly, why are there cultural differences, have until now been impossible to answer truthfully. We humans all live under the duress of the human condition, a state of insecurity brought about by our inability to explain why we humans are the way we arewhy, when all the ideals are to be loving, cooperative and selfless are we humans seemingly divisive, destructive and selfish? And until we could explain our human condition we could never hope to explain any of the fundamental questions about our nature with any great insight. However, the situation has now greatly changed. We can now easily explain all kinds of previously unanswerable questions, like ‘what is culture?’, and why cultures vary so much, because we can finally explain the human condition.
Yes, most wonderfully, biology is now able to provide the full, compassionate explanation of the human species’ non-ideal, contradictory behaviour. This comprehensive explanation of the origin of humans’ psychologically upset state, is available in this Introductory Video Series and Part 3 of Freedom Book 1, by Australian biologist Jeremy Griffith. It is this fundamental explanation that unlocks all of the seemingly unanswerable and off-limits questions about human behaviour.
In Freedom Book 1, Griffith explains that a society’s behaviour and its culture is actually based on how that society has learnt to cope with the human condition. As Griffith explains, ‘On the whole, culture essentially encompassed the various ways people passed on, from one generation to the next, the knowledge they had learnt about living under the duress of the human condition’ (Freedom Book 1: The Biology). And differences in cultures really relates to the intensity at which the human condition has impacted the lives of people in that particular society. The longer and more intense the battle that the human condition has given rise to becomes, the more psychological upset and alienation are present in a particular culture, as Griffith writes: ‘Just as an individual person’s lifestyle was inevitably going to largely be a response to that person’s particular level of upset, so too a race’s culture was inevitably going to largely be a response to that race’s particular level of upset’ (Freedom Book 1: The Biology).
A race’s culture was inevitably going to largely be a response to that race’s particular level of upset
Griffith also explains that without explanation of the human condition, any deeper acknowledgement and analysis of differences in levels of upset, alienation or innocence amongst individuals, races and cultures has not been possible. This is because it immediately leads to the erroneous view that some individuals, races and cultures are superior to others, or some are ‘good’ and some ‘bad’, and hence direct confrontation with the issue of the human condition, when in fact all humans are equally ‘good’. So, to avoid confrontation with the human condition, any differences in individuals, races and cultures were explained as ‘cultural diversity’ or as adding ‘colour’ to our lives, and we celebrated and lived off the excitement and distraction this colour provided. However as Jeremy Griffith articulates in Freedom Book 1; ‘If we wanted to understand human behaviour, we had to look at how upset we humans have been, specifically how alienated we have been’. And this is exactly what Griffith has done.
With the human condition now solved and the full defence of humans’ psychologically upset state understood we can explain exactly what culture is and safely acknowledge differences in cultures and the real reasons for those differences. But very importantly, as Griffith explains, while humans do vary in their degree of psychological upset, ‘all humans are equally good because upset was a result of an unavoidable and necessary battle humanity has had to wage to find knowledge. The equality of goodness of all people is a first-principle-established, fundamental and universal truth now. Humanity no longer has to rely on dogmatic assertions that ‘all men are created equal’, purely on the basis that it is a ‘self-evident’ truth, as the United States’ Declaration of Independence asserts, because we can now explain, understand and know that the equality of all humans is a fundamental truth. We can now understand why everyone is equally worthy, and that no one is superior or inferior, and that everyone deserves the ‘rights’ of ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’ (ibid). Prejudice, the view that some individuals, races, genders, generations, countries, civilisations or cultures are either superior or inferior to others, is eliminated by understanding of the human condition. In fact, with understanding of the human condition the concepts of good and bad, superior and inferior, worthy or unworthy, disappear from our conceptualisation of ourselves’ (Freedom Book 1: The Biology). So culture, rather than just being explained as adding some diversity and colour to our lives can be honestly recognised as an expression of these different levels of upset, alienation and innocence, and how humans have variously adapted to life under the duress of the human condition.
We can now explain, understand and know that the equality of all humans is a fundamental truth

Please add a comment




(Your email will not be publicly displayed.)


Posted by Frank B on
Brilliant blog as culture is something that has been vaguely described and all you could do was ask yourself the question but why? Why are so many people from around the world so different what is going on. Such honest answers have been stifled by political correctness and so forth however it does clear a lot up for me as I’m sure it would for most people as we are in such a desperate need for understanding at the moment.
Posted by Emma on
thanks for the great post. This subject takes me back to anthropology at university, debating whether we ‘live to work’ or ‘work to live’. I can now appreciate that it was a futile debate, that each and every human copes the best way possible in a world where we know so much, yet so little when it comes to how we view ourselves and one another.
Posted by Stirling on
That was a great article Sus.
Posted by Aggie Harpham on
This is just so relevant to my current work up in the Kimberley’s where I am faced with such extraordinary differences in culture and the devastation of Aboriginal Australians from this area coming into contact with White fella culture. There is almost no acknowledgement of it in any discussions up here as until now there has been no capacity for an honest dialogue about it. It is so precious that we can now talk about it honestly. One day soon there will be so much relief.
Posted by Jimmy on
Thanks for a great article Susan
Posted by Connor on
Great article. So refreshing to finally get some tangible responses to questions that traditionally just get “covered over” with ambiguous and confusing explanations!! Thanks Sus.
Posted by Ali on
enjoyed reading that thanks Susan.
Posted by Steven Collins on
Thanks for this great blog Sus. I am teaching a year 12 ‘Society and Culture’ class. This will be a very handy resource.
Posted by Gavin Braithwaite on
An interesting Article but I can’t quite see how understanding the differences can repair them. Take for example Fiji where on a recent holiday I observed the tension that exists between the native Fijians and Indians, or indeed any of the many more cultural and ideological clashes that have resulted in horrendous persecution like the so-called “Indian Removal Act”of 1830 in the US which saw the forced removal of the Cherokee native American Indians from the state of Georgia or the ‘stolen generation’ of Australian Aboriginals that occurred under a ‘White Australia policy in Australia. Culture not only defines but also divides us so it seems the healing can only begin if the more “innocent” as you put it can be magnanimous enough to forgive the more “alienated”.
Posted by Susan on
Thanks for your comment Gavin. What we are suggesting is that Jeremy Griffith’s explanation of the human condition does now give us the ability to repair the cultural divide that you talk about because it allows us to compassionately admit and reconcile (forgive) all the differences that exist in humans and our paradoxical behaviour. To quote Jeremy Griffith: “Science has made it possible for all humans to win the freedom they have fought so valiantly for two million years to achieve. We can at last understand that there was a sound (that is, integrative) biological reason for why humans became divisively behaved and soul-corrupted. Sir Laurens van der Post made the essential point about our predicament when he said, ‘how can there ever be any real beginning without forgiveness?’ (Venture to the Interior, 1952, p.16 of 241). Forgiveness was the key but it had to be forgiveness at the most profound, deepest level of our psychosis; forgiveness found through understanding of the dilemma of our human condition–understanding that would allow all humans to know that while we are all variously upset we are all fundamentally good and not bad or evil” ( Freedom Book 1: The Biology).

So until we had the biological reason for our divisive behaviour we couldn’t admit that there were any differences in alienation levels because that would have led to even greater prejudice and divisiveness. Even now that our upset is defended and we can admit these differences it is still an extremely confronting aspect of this new understanding of ourselves. This is all incredibly explained by Jeremy in Freedom Book 1: The Biology where he reveals the six unconfrontable truths that have blocked our access to understanding the human condition and the differences in alienation is dealt with in “Part 4:4E Fifthly, the upset human race has had to deny the differences in alienation between human individuals, races, genders, generations, civilisations and cultures” (see http://www.worldtransformation.com/freedom-book1-fifthly-we-couldnt-confront-differences-in-alienat/ ) which you might like to read as it looks at the historical situation regarding the Fijian and Indian cultures.
Posted by Nicholas J on
Thanks for posting that Susan. Understanding a person is very important. Sometimes a person moving into different society may act the way he/she normally does back home and so that idea still linkers in mind. The important thing is that we all must understand each others culture so that we can get along well wtih those we come into contact with.
Posted by Mathome Kgalema on
A very enriching article about understanding culture. What is more important to me is the analytic tool used unpack origin and manifestations of culture. How culture is used in South Africa is mostly associated with biological identity more than any physical adaptability. often, culture is assumed not to be flux or dynamic. Thanks for the analysis.
Posted by tanveer hussain on
enjoyed reading & i complete my task from ur article thanks

Y Chromosome from Wikipedia ... SamKat

From: Y chromosome Wikipedia:

Shrinking theory

By one estimate, the human Y chromosome has lost 1,393 of its 1,438 original genes over the course of its existence, and linear extrapolation of this 1,393 gene loss over 300 million years gives a rate of genetic loss of 4.6 genes per million years.[14] Continued loss of genes at the 4.6 genes per million year rate would result in a Y chromosome with no functional genes --- that is the Y chromosome would lose complete function --- within the next 10 million years. Comparative genomic analysis, however, reveals that many mammalian species are experiencing a similar loss of function in their heterozygous sex chromosome. Degeneration may simply be the fate of all nonrecombining sex chromosomes due to three common evolutionary forces: high mutation rate, inefficient selection and genetic drift.[10] Furthermore, comparisons of the human and chimpanzee Y chromosomes (first published in 2005) show that the human Y chromosome has not lost any genes since the divergence of humans and chimpanzees between 6–7 million years ago,[15] and a scientific report in 2012 stated that only one gene had been lost since humans diverged from the rhesus macaque 25 million years ago.[16] These facts provide direct evidence that the linear extrapolation model is flawed and suggest that the current human Y chromosome is either no longer shrinking or is shrinking at a much slower rate than 4.6 genes per million years estimated by the linear extrapolation model.

The Y chromosome makes the male and double X chromosomes make the female.  

Body Fat Calculator... Maybe you just do not want to know

skegley.blogspot.com
How much Body Fat are you carrying? Find out if you are in the healthy range. This Body Fat calculator is based on a formula developed by the US Navy.
First, your body fat percentage is simply the percentage of fat your body contains. If you weigh 140 pounds and are 10% fat, it means that your body consists of 14 pounds fat and 126 pounds lean body mass (bone, muscle, organ tissue, blood,...).
A certain amount of fat is essential to bodily functions. Fat regulates body temperature, cushions and insulates organs and tissues and is the main form of the body's energy storage. Check out this Body Fat Chart which describes fat ranges and their associated categories.
Body Fat Calculator Metric Body Fat Calculator
Weight pounds
Waist inches
Wrist inches *
Hips inches *
Forearm inches *
Female Male
* only required by females

Amazing illusion ... Thx Marge R!


I don't care how it's done  - - it's amazing. 
 

Blog Definition

On Line Blog Definition
Google-Blog Definitionblog, short for web log, an online, regularly updated journal or newsletter that is readily accessible to the general public by virtue of being posted on a website.