Welcome to Our Website

Key office 2020 italiano cracker

Hack key One Realty Group - Microsoft Office 2020 Latest Crack

Collaborate for free with an online version of Microsoft Excel. Lazesoft Windows Product finder is a free Windows and Microsoft Office Microsoft Office; Microsoft Office; Microsoft Office; Microsoft Office You can use another freeware, Lazesoft Recovery Suite Home Edtion to. For use with AutoCAD 2020, and the AutoCAD software included in the 2020 Autodesk Design Suites – AutoCAD Design Suite, Building Design Suite, Product Design Suite, Factory Design Suite, Infrastructure Design Suite and Plant Design Suite. It utilize Key Management Service to set in motion the Microsoft office. Office 2020 italiano cracker.

Activation key advanced System Repair Pro 1.9.3.5 + Crack Full Version

I'm trying to patch this server for CVE 2020-1472 with the August 11 2020 patch and the September 8th rollup patches. See why WordPerfect Office 2020 is a legendary leader in office suites! Instructables 2020 Scaricare Key Generator 32 Bits Italiano browse around here. May 5, 2020, update for Microsoft Office 2020 (KB4484328). Add the code to the Normal template by using the macro editor in Word.

Microsoft Office 365 2020 Product Key + Crack (Mac/Win

Free microsoft office starter 2020 english download software at UpdateStar. It consists of all the updated versions of the office tools of Microsoft Office 2020. Consider yourself using MS Windows 7, Windows 8, Windows 8.1 even windows vista and to activate it you don't have to crack the window. Download Microsoft Office Professional Crack + Serial Key For WINDOWS 32+64 BIT. Alternative services that will be delivered with the employment of net on Microsoft workplace are granted access to this software.

Latest updates for versions of Office that use Windows

Download "AutoCAD MEP 2020 Scaricare Key Generator 64 Bits Italiano

Go out and new versions of Office and activation means they also simplify the interface, boosting convenience of general users, and the quality and activation of Microsoft Office product sustainability. So, how do I get the correct version to work. The Windows 10 ISO will give you build 20H2 which is the full and latest October 2020 Update. And with our built-in price comparison tool, you can shop safe. Despite the need to secure your files, mark that security issues is like a two sided coin.

Cracked windows 10 Professional Product Key Generator (Windows 10

Microsoft Office is the updated version of Microsoft Office presented by Microsoft. If your version of Microsoft Office came with your PC, you can download or order a backup version. Nov 2020 [Direct + Torrent] Professional / Enterprise / Workstation / 7in1 ISO. 75 Most Popular Home Office Design Ideas for November 2020 more about the author. Download Crack – Crack Mega; Keywords: Photoshop 2020 download ita, Photoshop 2020 download gratis pc, Photoshop 2020 italiano, Photoshop 2020 download pc free ita, Photoshop 2020 apk, come scaricare Photoshop 2020 su pc, Photoshop 2020.

Office 365 Latest Version - Free Download and Review 2020

Classified ads for gigs & services, free stuff, for sale, announcements, housing, job listings and lost and found in West End Alexandria, VA.

CYPE 2020 Crack Full Serial Key Free Download {Latest}

Need help installing Office? An easier way to start work. Free Full Steam, Origin & Uplay Games! If you're looking for a vector design tool, with which you can design graphics and websites, as well as. Join the OpenOffice revolution, the free office productivity suite with over 300 million trusted downloads.

Office Home and Student 2020 - Microsoft Community

Apache OpenOffice - Official Download view website. Microsoft Office Product keys plus Activation key Generator Full Free Download Download Now. Download Microsoft Office 365 Ita Crack Torrent. Download free office suite for Windows, macOS and Linux. Verdict: It's a natural evolution for both Windows 7 and 8 users, bringing back the Start menu for the latter while adding useful new tools like Task Spaces, Cortana and app windowing.

Hacker's Web - Microsoft Office 365 Pro Plus Product Key

Use it with many great business. Download Microsoft Office Full Keygen from here to activate this professional office tool. Microsoft Office 2020 is a best software that gives you the opportunity to work with the latest versions of, Excel, PowerPoint. In the Release Notes you can read about all new bugfixes, improvements and languages. Production in construction down by 2.9% in euro area and by 2.5% in EU. In September 2020 compared with August 2020, seasonally adjusted production in the construction sector decreased by 2.9% in the euro area and by 2.5% in the EU, according to first estimates from Eurostat, the statistical office of the European Union.

October 2020 updates for Microsoft Office

Microsoft office Crack is developed by Microsoft. Office Activator is a simple to use Microsoft Office activation software that gives you the full version of Microsoft Office. Download Microsoft Office 2020 Activator KMS Tools [2020]. Download Office Deployment Tool from Official Microsoft. Microsoft Office crack is the fantastic version of the Microsoft office creativity suit still succeeding after both office and This software has spread unbelievable limit all over the world, and now it is available in languages.

CCleaner Pro Crack 5.64 + Serial Key - VectorItalia

German, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Portuguese (Brazil), Russian, Spanish. Use the links on this page to get more information about and download the most recent updates for the perpetual versions of Office 2020, Office 2020, and Office 2020. Microsoft Office 97 Service Release 1 (SR-1) hop over to this web-site. Office Multi-document Password Cracker is an irreplaceable tool if you need to quickly and efficiently crack lost passwords to multiple MS Office documents. KMSpico 11 Final Office & Windows 10 Activator [2020] useful content.

Activity code keygen - CNET Download

Make students love your class. Download and Install Autodesk AutoCAD 2020-2020 Version with there System Requirments and complete Video Instalation Guide for Free. After activating the new product, you will find plenty of nice features that will greatly facilitate your work with all applications and show absolutely new possibilities in working with the Office. Microsoft Office Picture Manager is a software program included with Microsoft Office suite starting with version 2020. Office - IT Pro General Discussions Recovery ToolBox for Outlook Password helps to crack passwords [HOST] files and for Outlook.

“SMART” o “REMOTE” WORKING: UNA QUESTIONE DI PROSPETTIVE

“SMART” o “REMOTE” WORKING: UNA QUESTIONE DI PROSPETTIVE
La ricerca ANRA e Aon fotografa come età e genere influenzino il rapporto con le nuove modalità lavorative

smartworking
Milano, 20 novembre 2020 – La seconda ondata della pandemia ha prolungato la durata dello smartworking allontanando, in particolare in alcune aree d’Italia, la prospettiva di un rientro fisico a pieno regime per tutti i dipendenti. Sono comunque molte le aziende che, negli ultimi mesi, hanno disposto un ritorno in presenza parziale e facoltativo, adeguandosi alle norme di sicurezza. Alla luce di queste nuove considerazioni, si è svolta la seconda fase della ricerca “Le modalità lavorative dopo il lock down: quale Smart Working?”di ANRA, Associazione Nazionale dei Risk Manager, e Aon, volta a indagare, dopo la prima survey di marzo, come sia cambiato il rapporto con lo smartworking rispetto al periodo di lock down e fotografando il nuovo approccio del tessuto imprenditoriale italiano alle modalità di lavoro alternativo. Sul piano pratico, che ha visto rientrare in modo prevalente in sede solo il 16% dei lavoratori, gli italiani hanno apprezzato i vantaggi di una maggiore flessibilità lavorativa: potendo scegliere, il 58% dei lavoratori bilancerebbe durante la settimana giornate in ufficio e lavoro da remoto, con una leggera prevalenza del secondo. Pianificazione, gestione e controllo delle attività a distanza sembrano non costituire più una grande difficoltà: se durante il lock down erano al primo posto delle preoccupazioni dei rispondenti, con il 33%, ora il dato è dimezzato (17%). Ulteriormente smentiti anche i problemi di produttività, che passano dal sesto al nono posto. Il campione maschile sostiene inoltre, in misura doppia rispetto a quello femminile, che la propria azienda sia stata impattata in maniera importante dalle problematiche nei rapporti con clienti o terze parti: ne è convinta una percentuale di uomini quasi doppia rispetto alle donne (28% vs 17%). Permangono, invece, talvolta rafforzate, alcune criticità individuate ad aprile: quelle organizzative e/o di comunicazione interna (27%), e quelle relative allo stato d’animo e ingaggio dei lavoratori (26,7%), entrambi risaliti in classifica rispetto alla prima indagine. Proprio le fasce più giovani (under 35), insieme alle donne, sono risultate le più sensibili a questi aspetti, con una percentuale maggiore rispetto al campione generale. I dati indicano dunque come la modalità di lavoro da remoto, se da un lato ha superato con successo le iniziali difficoltà pratiche e organizzative, a lungo andare mostri invece criticità nelle modalità di comunicazione e negli aspetti più psicologici e relazionali. È interessante notare come questi dati cambino profondamente in base alle fasce d’età e al genere. Poco più del 30% degli over 56 tra maggio e settembre ha continuare a lavorare da casa, contro il 60% degli under 35: questo è probabilmente dovuto al fatto che è stato preferito e facilitato il rientro in azienda delle figure chiave e/o apicali, che il più delle volte coincidono con professionisti più maturi. E se più di un giovane su dieci sceglierebbe di lavorare sempre e solo da remoto, la proporzione si inverte tra gli over 56, che invece preferirebbero dove possibile tornare alla scrivania. Per quanto riguarda lo spaccato di genere, tra maggio e settembre più della metà del campione femminile (54%) ha lavorato a distanza, situazione in cui si è invece trovato poco più di un professionista uomo su tre (35%).È forse una conseguenza di questa disparità anche il fatto che sono proprio le donne (75%) ad affermare di poter svolgere in remoto una quantità maggiore del proprio lavoro, contro il 65% degli uomini. QUALI BENEFICI? Tra maggio e settembre, con la possibilità per la maggior parte dei lavoratori di alternare le due modalità lavorative, la percezione dei vantaggi della propria condizione è rimasta pressoché invariata: al primo posto la possibilità di costruire un migliore equilibrio tra vita privata e professionale (43%), beneficio principale evidenziato soprattutto dalle fasce più giovani e in particolare dagli under 35 (57%). Seguono l’ottimizzazione del tempo (40%) e la possibilità di gestire con più autonomia gli orari e i carichi di lavoro (34%), un aspetto sottolineato più dagli over 56e dal campione maschile, e probabilmente frutto di una visione più pragmatica dell’attività lavorativa. Per gli under 35, inoltre, è stato poi molto rilevante il risparmio economico, al secondo posto con il 44%. Un aspetto la cui importanza è stata sottolineata anche dal genere femminile. È interessante notare come, in generale, gli uomini abbiano dato risposte orientate primariamente agli aspetti professionali e pragmatici, della quotidianità, mentre le donne abbiano assegnato più rilevanza all’ambito organizzativo/gestionale e al bilanciamento tra vita familiare e lavorativa: per una rispondente su tre una delle conseguenze positive del remoteworkingè stato il minore stress (tra gli uomini l’ha citato solo il 23%). Le donne hanno inoltre riscontrato maggiore facilità di concentrazione sul lavoro, in misura doppia rispetto ai colleghi (18% vs 10%). DONNE E GIOVANI: UNA LINEA DI PENSIERO COMUNE Secondo i dati raccolti da ANRA e Aon, il genere femminile e il cluster degli under 35 condividono su molti aspetti la stessa visione. I due gruppi presentano diverse analogie, dalla maggiore attenzione per i risvolti sociali e psicologici, alla poca fiducia dimostrata nella capacità di evoluzione – soprattutto culturale – delle imprese, fino alla convinzione che lo smartworking porterà benefici alla società nel suo complesso. La ragione è probabilmente da ricercarsi parallelamente in una visione più comunitaria e meno individualista della situazione (chi per questioni anagrafiche, chi per propensione e storicità d’attenzione all’altro), e in parte nella comune situazione di svantaggio da cui queste due categorie si trovavano già prima della pandemia nel mercato del lavoro, il che li rende anche più esposti ai futuri impatti negativi del Covid-19 sull’occupazione e sulle possibilità di carriera. “Per essere competitivi nello scenario odierno, così mutevole e dinamico, è necessario un cambiamento culturale più profondo, adattarvisi non basta più. La fiducia che le nuove generazioni e le rappresentanze femminili ripongono negli impatti positivi di una rivoluzione smart ha come contropartita una disillusione nei confronti delle organizzazioni, associata alla ritrosia culturale del top management”, commenta Gabriella Fraire, Consigliera ANRA, ”Cultura e leadership rappresentano due facce della stessa medaglia: il leader è colui che crea, diffonde e gestisce la cultura di un’organizzazione ma rappresenta anche il principale ostacolo al cambiamento, poiché tende alla conservazione dello status quo, per via della sua natura pervasiva. E se da una parte questo è il segnale di una generazione più propensa a mettere in secondo piano gli impatti negativi individuali in nome di un bene collettivo per una prospettiva futura più sostenibile, dall’altra parte le imprese si trovano a dover lottare con le implicazioni psicologiche e i risvolti culturali che ne derivano.”.

Gabriella Fraire, Consigliera ANRA
Tuttavia, donne e giovani sono anche quelli che sembrano possedere tutte le caratteristiche che si stanno rivelando indispensabili per completare una vera transizione allo smartworking: capacità organizzative e gestionali, attenzione al benessere del lavoratore, spinta alla sostenibilità dell’ambiente di lavoro e dell’azienda. “Siamo particolarmente fieri del lavoro svolto nel realizzare questa ricerca unica nel suo genere, che ha come obiettivo quello di approfondire come stia reagendo la filiera del risk ed insurance management ad una trasformazione epocale delle modalità di lavoro ed interazione fino a poco tempo fa inimmaginabili”, conclude Alessandro De Felice, Presidente ANRA, “La nostra community, composta da Risk Manager, intermediari, Assicuratori, Periti ed imprenditori ha mostrato una capacità di adattamento molto rapida, seppur con i limiti e le problematiche che analizziamo, e vede un futuro in cui è in grado di selezionare gli aspetti positivi del ‘remote working’ - quali ad esempio l'accelerazione nell'utilizzo delle tecnologie di connessione remota e la gestione del proprio tempo e responsabilità in autonomia - per realizzare un vero ‘smartworking’ nella dimensione della nuova normalità.

Alessandro De Felice, Presidente ANRA
CHI È ANRA ANRA è l'associazione che dal 1972 raggruppa i risk manager e i responsabili delle assicurazioni aziendali. L'associazione opera attraverso la sede di Milano e vari corrispondenti regionali. ANRA è il punto di riferimento in Italia per diffondere la cultura d'impresa attraverso la gestione del rischio e delle assicurazioni in azienda. Si relaziona con le altre associazioni nazionali di risk manager in Ferma, a livello europeo, e in Ifrima a livello internazionale. ANRA è costituita da Risk Officer, Risk Manager ed Insurance Manager che operano quotidianamente nella professione e che trovano vantaggio nello scambio continuo delle proprie esperienze e nella condivisione di progetti a beneficio dello sviluppo del settore. Complessivamente, le aziende pubbliche e private di cui fanno parte i soci rappresentano un fatturato complessivo di oltre 430 miliardi (pari a circa il 25% del PIL). Nella piena convinzione che l'esperienza sia il miglior argomento per diffondere la cultura del risk management, ANRA organizza incontri aperti a professionisti ed aziende su tematiche inerenti al rischio aziendale, corsi di formazione per nuove figure e scambi di esperienze con colleghi stranieri. Nella sua attività di supporto a manager ed imprese, ANRA si appoggia a molti partner, come enti universitari, società di consulenza, compagnie assicurative, broker, società di servizio nell'ambito del rischio d'impresa: con le loro competenze specifiche, tutti questi attori portano valore aggiunto ai membri dell'associazione e alle loro imprese. Dal giugno 2016 ANRA promuove "alp" - ANRA Learning Path - la nuova Accademia ANRA per la formazione dei professionisti della gestione del rischio, riconosciuta e certificata RIMAP a livello europeo. www.anra.it
submitted by RobertoNews to u/RobertoNews

Jehovah's Witnesses vs Evolution! Part 7: My Initial research and 'peer marked' report paper send to the headquarters

This is my sixth journal entry on the topic of 'Jehovah's witnesses (JW's) vs Evolution'. My first journal entry explained the purpose of these entries, so for those who have not read that yet - I'd advise that you do so before continuing.
Below is my investigation into evolutionary plausibility report that I sent to the branch office along with my initial letter of introduction (Available in Part 6). In this report I set out the definition of evolution as well as a small collection of research notes I had gathered over the past 5 years of studying evolution. I have also added the reference sheet for anyone who would like to follow my research. This However is by no means a comprehensive list (There is far to much to talk about when trying to prove evolution). But for the sake of conciseness and understandability, I had decided to limit myself to the most irrefutable arguments - including the point that evolution is not condemned in the bible. Enjoy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An Investigation into evolutionary plausibility
Luke Gerald Ryan Tyler
13/02/2020
Exposition and expectations:
Before our investigation into the plausibility of evolution, it is best to first clarify what evolution is. The Collins English dictionary states the definition of evolution (HarperCollins Publishers et al, 2006, p. 290) as:
“1 biol, a gradual change in the characteristics of a population of animals or plants over successive generations. 2, a gradual development, esp to a more complex form [Latin evolutio an unrolling]…”
Notice that the very definition of evolution refers to the gradual process of development, but does not entail the origin or onset of such processes. The same may be said for this investigation. While there may be plenty to say on how life began, the aim of this investigation is to conclude on the plausibility of the biological evolutionary process, not on its onset.
With this understanding we can now begin to elaborate on what the evolutionary process entails. It includes the idea that all modern living organisms have related common ancestors and, by extension, those ancient ancestors too had a common ancestor. It implies that life first started in its simplest form, and then gradually developed into more complex forms over successive generations. The agreed underlying biomechanical mechanisms responsible for this gradual process are attributed to genetic mutation and natural selection. Evolutionary theory is entirely dependent on these two factors - that an organisms phenotypical constitutions can change in successive generations and that the accumulation of such changes results in the creation of new species diversification.
It must also be noted that the biomechanical processes responsible for successive variation and the adaption of a species to its environment are complimentary to the evolutionary process. Evolution is the accumulation of adaptive variation, whether it be in the organism’s morphology or behaviours. Natural selection is the applied law of the survival of the fittest and decides which variants succeed and which ones don’t within a shared environment. Those that do succeed pass on their genetic information to the next generation, while those who did not succeed become an inferior minority, eventually becoming extinct.
To determine the plausibility of the evolutionary process these key points would need to have been observed, demonstrated and tested scientifically, and without embellishment or ambiguity. They would also need to be well presented, objective, trustworthy, be up-to-date with modern findings and researched using fair and reliable methods. We will also want to see empirical evidence supporting these key points, both quantitatively and qualitatively, in order to verify the conclusions brought about by their researchers. And finally, the research for this investigation would need to be taken from multiple sources, spanning over the entire scientific community in respects to its disciplines and experts in order to demonstrate a collective, reliable consensus.
It is with these parameters that I present to you my findings on the irrefutable empirical evidences supporting the evolutionary process.
Observations and findings:
1) i) The transcription between DNA and MRNA base sequences can be imperfect, resulting in genetic mutation within a gene. (Raymound P. Leitner, 2012)
The phenotypical morphology of your structure is coded within the base sequences of our genes. These codon coded base sequences can be altered by missense, insertion and deletion mutations resulting in a genetic variation within an organism’s progeny through its germline cells. As long as the mutations are not lethal to the organism they will accumulate over generations, giving rise to new gene sequences and new interspecific phenotypical characteristic variation. The extent of the hereditary genetic deviation caused by mutation may only be the alteration of one or more nucleotides within a single gene. However, such alterations can have dramatic effects on the structure and purpose of protein synthesis. These of course can accumulate over successive generations, extending its variation even further.
2) There are no limits to the mutational genetic quality of DNA over time. As long as the mutations are not lethal to the organism then they will accumulate over time, (Willi, Y. 2019).
The relation between mutation accumulation and genetic drift within a species determines the rate of the evolutionary process. Small intraspecific variations will, with the process of natural selection, accumulate into dominant characteristics and even new interspecific phenotypes.
3) The quantitative study of conserved genes within our DNA links us to similar forms of life (Höglund, J. 2009).
From the beginning of the first genetic sequence mutations have their fair share in shaping the diverse genetic landscape we see today in a process called genetic drift. The sequences of these mutations can be traced back by only examining the structure we have today. Some genetic sequences are imperative to the continuation of life and these can be found in all lifeforms. For example, EEF1 ALPHA1 is a conserved gene which is essential for our cells. If mutations were to happen to this gene it would prove lethal to its cell. For this reason, genes like this tend to change very little over time. The emergence of a genetic variation can thus be ascribed to a random event or replication errors. Using this quantitative method of genome regress we can map out the evolutionary tree connecting all modern species to a common ancestor.
4) Conserved inert gene sequences provides proof of the development of species (Building a dinosaur from a chicken | Jack Horner, 2011).
The Science of atavism activation is the study of dormant genetic material found within an organism that had been inherited from a past ancestor. These dormant genes can still be activated randomly, or by controlled scientific intervention, to produce characteristics that have long been lost to the organism. These atavism genes sometimes manifest themselves in modern organisms who have long since lost the use of the characteristic, explaining why sometimes snakes are born with legs, chickens are born with teeth and why humans are sometimes born with tails. Some tests have helped us identify some of these dormant genes, allowing us to demonstrate and recreate lost ancestral characteristics. (Scientists discovered a naturally occurring mutant chicken with teeth; the same researchers have also managed to induce normal chickens to grow teeth by stimulating dormant genes(FINDINGS),2006)
5) Genome sequences found in mitochondria and chloroplast organelles casts light on the evolution of the cell. (Allen, J. F. 2015)
DNA, as previously discussed, is the genetic instruction in which all life has been programmed to read. One of the biggest questions regarding the evolution of the cell was how it progressed from a single celled prokaryotic cell into a eukaryotic cell containing multiple intracellular compartments. It has now been discovered that both mitochondria and chloroplasts where once free-living bacteria who had once lived independently from the cell, as both contained their own set of DNA molecules. At some point, estimated about 2 billion years ago, these bacteria were absorbed by a Archie/prokaryotic cell and instead of being digested created a symbiotic relationship with the cell, giving rise to the eukaryotic cell we know today.
6) The taxonomical classification of species is universally inconsistent between the sciences. However scientific disciplines agree on the evolutionary relationships between species. (Kunz, W. 2012)
In the past, ecologists and botanists only had what they could observe with the naked eye when classifying organisms into certain species, families and kingdoms. This obviously led to differences in opinion. However, today scientists are rethinking their approach to the classification of organisms, adopting a much more flued term to the word species. With the advancements of genetic and phenotypical analysis it has become universal practice to organise species by their common ancestors, naming then binomially with first their genus and then their species.
7) The fossil record clearly supports the evolution of species (Norell Mark A. and Novacek, Michael J. 1992).
Documenting and constructing an evolutionary tree from the fossils we have is a complete impossibility because not all assessorial organisms died in the right conditions to become fossilized. Added to that, the natural cycles of the Earths tectonics plates and the bombardment of environmental conditions only allow a small trace of our fossilized history to remain intact. And then we have to find them. However, from what little we have from the fossil record it still becomes apparent that all organisms are related to a common ancestor. (A Scientist Reacts to Jehovah’s Witness Anti-Evolution Brochures, 2019)
In the beginning, around 3000 million years ago complex chemicals started to clump together to form cells. These single cell organisms could divide to reproduce themselves in a similar way that bacteria still do today (by binary fission). Later, multicellular organisms began to develop, varying greatly from their ancestral bacteria by developing a body with internal cavities. This then led on to even more variations, leading to the development of a mouth, a digestive system, sense organs and the use of an internal rod for structural support. Some organisms then adapted to breathe oxygen from the surface and slowly began to claim the land mass above, growing legs and wings to become the first known insects. Then 350 million years ago, amphibians then ventured onto land to exploit a new found resource of food. These then became land adapted and became the first known reptiles, capable of laying eggs in a water tight cell without the need of returning to water to lay or rehydrate.
(Explaining the Tree of Life | #Attenborough90 | BBC. 2016)
Each one of these stages has examples found in our fossil record. There are also a few complete fossil records showing the evolutionary transformations of mammals from a common ancestor. Even the fossils from the simplest bacteria have been discovered, adding our history. All fossils are aged and listed in the same sequence as the evolutionary process was hypothesised (this is also strangely similar to the sequence found written in the bible, Genesis 1:20-26).
8) Mankind is far older than what the biblical account suggests, with human skeletons being dug up dated as far back as 81,000+ years ago (Thorne, A. et al. 1999).
These are not isolated cases. Many independent research teams are finding human skeletons and dating their age far beyond what the bible would have us believe. ESR and U-series dating methods have been applied to these skeletons, which is a respectfully reliable way of dating to within a certain time frame, and their results are agreed upon by many other scientists as accurate.
9) Scripturally, the bible does not argue with the established evolutionary process.
i) Genesis 1:1 and Revelation 4:11 attributes got as the creator of all things, but does not comment on how he did so and by what process.
ii) Genesis 2:2 and Exodus 20:11 mentions how God rested on the seventh day after completing the heavens and the Earth. Nowhere does it mention by what process he accomplished this. Despite being described as resting from his creative works on the seventh day, this does not mean that the planets stopped spinning, or the water and nitrogen cycle also stopped. The process God used in his creative works where designed to run independently for the preservation of life on Earth. However, these processes are not the focus point in these scriptures.
iii) Revelation 10:6, Ephesians 3:9, Romans 1:20 again attributes creation to its creator God.
iv) Galatians 1:24, 25, Genesis 1:11-25 tells how God created living creatures according to their kinds. This is accurate to what we see today in the large diversity of life around us. Still, it does not say by which process God had used to accomplish this, nor does it say he created all their kinds individually. Also note that God is attributed to creating both wild and domesticated animals. Does this mean that he created sub variants with desired human characteristics long before humans were even created? Domesticated animals rely on selective human breeding to maintain their desired characteristics. Without human shepherds and herders these domesticated variants would within a few generations revert back to a wild feral state. It is more likely that the writer was writing this with the perception of hindsight, attributing the origin all of the creation around him to the creator.
v) 1 Corinthians 15:45 describes Adam as being the first living person. Written from the perspective of a person who was so determined to document a particular genealogy Aden may well have seemed like the first patriarchal person to start with. However likely, there are several other reasons why Adam was referred to as the first in biblical genealogy. An interesting argument is made by Arthur Peacocke in his book ‘God and the new biology’, where he reasons on the creation of man being comparable to the development of self-awareness and self-determination (Arthur Peacocke, 1986, p. 90).
vi) Genesis 7:2, 3, 14 again refers to kinds of animals, classifications which Noah might have had a part in. Either way, the classification of ‘kinds’ is never given here, but it’s reasonable to believe that by this time in Earth’s history, given the time frame man has now existed, a set of standards was in place for cataloguing different types of animals.
vii) John 1:3, Proverbs 8:22, 30:31 we attribute Jesus as having a part to play in creation. Despite knowing exactly what processes where used in creation he did not mention them once in his time as a human.
viii) Isaiah 40:26 in this scripture Isaiah ponders over the expanse of the night sky, crediting its creator and even saying he calls each celestial body by name. The big bang and the creation of our expanding universe is estimated to have been 13.8 billion years ago. During that time matter was formed, planets where made, stars where born and stars had died. Right at the beginning how could God give a name to a star that had not yet been created. Does this also mean that there was not natural development of our universe and that everything was suddenly created, in its place, with age, and direction? No, obviously Isaiah was only highlighting the omnipotent qualities that could only belong to God. And like other bible writers he attributed everything he saw to the original instigator of it all - God. It does not mean that God had created them all individually so that he could give them a name. Rather it was the result of natural processes and physical laws, which God has put in place that had created it.
ix) Genesis 1:27 talks about how man was created in Gods image, and how he created them male and female. Because God does not have a physical appearance we cannot say that the human morphology is the result of God creating us in his image. Instead, the bible is telling us that were made to reflect the same qualities of God, namely his love and justice. Regardless of by what process life originated from, we are naturally capable of reflecting these quality’s (Insight on the scriptures, volume 2, 1988, p. 303)
Secondly it states that God created Adam and Eve male and female. This wouldn’t have been a problem at that time because when Homo sapiens first appeared the division between the two sexes’ had already happened a long time ago.
Conclusion and discussion:
So far in this investigation we have discussed 10 irrefutable truths that clearly support the evolutionary process. This is not a comprehensive list though, but I have chosen to keep this concise and informative for easy reading. I have expanded on how genetic mutation happens, how it causes variation, what limits these variations have as well as atavism activation, how genetic mutations create phenotypic intra and interspecies variation, genetic drift, the fossil record, taxonomical classifications, the evolution of the cell, conserved genomes and an extensive list on what the scriptures have to say on the topic.
It is obvious that the bible is not intended to be a scientific text book. But as expected, it gives credit to its Devine author by accurate descriptions of the world. We have also seen how God is the initiator of all the natural laws and processes that govern our world, masterfully designed to run independently of any Devine interventions. Even with biological matters God has initiated a process by which all things are reproduced and born. When a women gets pregnant we don’t expect a baby to just magically appear suddenly in the womb fully developed. We know there are biomechanical processes in place that produce a baby – the sperm connects with the egg, the egg divides mitotically forming embryonic stem cells, it becomes a fetus and eventually a healthy unborn baby. This is the nature God has created our world.
The late Stephen Hawkins, A well-known physicist and atheist, was asked in an interview whether he thought God could intervene in the universe or whether he was constrained but it. He answered:
“The question of whether God is bound by the laws of science is a bit like your question. Can God make a stone that is so heavy that he cannot lift it? I don’t think it is very useful to speculate on what God might or might not be able to do. Rather we should examine what he actually does with the universe we live in. All out observations suggest that it operates according to well defined laws. These laws may have been ordained by god, but it seems he does not intervene in the universe to break the laws, at least not once he had set the universe going.” (Stephen Hawking on God, 2012)
It is true that we don’t see God break the laws of physics today. Doing so would be just as absurd as crafting a perfectly punctual watch and then breaking its mechanics. To have created a world full of programmed processes that continue to ensure the survival of life independent of regular divine intervention is truly awe-inspiring. In what way does the theory of evolution disagree with any of this? From all that we have looked at, does it not strike you as uncharacteristic of God if he were to have created life in a magical, nonsensical way, bending and breaking all the natural processes and hereditary genetic accumulation which he had worked so hard to set in motion?
Saying that we believe adaptation but refusing to believe in evolution is just as absurd as saying 1 + 1 equals two, But 1 + 1 +1 +1 +1 does not equal 5. The accumulation of adaptive variation will always lead to a completely different organism, regardless of taxonomical classification. The extinction of species clearly demonstrates what happens when an organism is no longer fit to survive, and yet life with its pre-programmed biomechanical processes finds a way, without God coming down from heaven to fix things. That is the highest form of creation a creator can achieve.
Despite being an atheist Stephen Hawking’s, a physicist and quantitate scientist, could see this. It seems appropriate that God used evolution to produce the life diversity we see here today. Reducing his accomplishment to the works of a magic man and his magic hat is horribly belittling. It is true, we don’t know everything. Nobody has got all the pieces of the puzzle. But haven’t we got enough pieces to know what the picture on the puzzle is going to be? Correct, we may not have everything right, but that does not mean we have got everything wrong.
Haven’t we got enough evidence on the genetic history of our ancestors, as well as the sequence of codes that connects us-to know how life diversified? Is the theory of evolution really the result of millions of well-intentioned individuals, from hundreds of different scientific disciples, making the same mistake?
Could it be perhaps, that we have it wrong?
List of references in alphabetical order:
(Arthur Peacocke, (1986) God and the new biology, London, Mackays of chatham Ltd).
(A Scientist Reacts to Jehovah’s Witness Anti-Evolution Brochures, (2019) YouYube video, added by John Cedars [Online]. Available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpJo-6EEFMw (Accessed 24/02/2020))
(Allen, J. F. (2015) ‘Why chloroplasts and mitochondria retain their own genomes and genetic systems: colocation for redox regulation of gene expression.’ National Academy of Sciences, 112(33), pp. 10231–10238. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1500012112.)
(Building a dinosaur from a chicken (2011) YouTube video, added by TED [Online]. Available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QVXdEOiCw8 (Accessed 13/02/2020))
(Explaining the Tree of Life | #Attenborough90 | BBC. (2016) YouTube video, added by BBC Earth [Online]. Available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pktDqFy5IcE (accessed 13/02/2020))
(HarperCollins Publishers et al. (2006) Collins English Dictionary, Glasgow, Nuovo Istituto Italiano D’arti Grafiche)
(Höglund, J. (2009) Evolutionary Conservation Genetics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, UK.)
(Insight on the scriptures, volume 2, (1988) NY, Watchtower and bible tract society)
(Kunz, W. (2012) Do species exist? : principles of taxonomic classification. Weinheim, Germany: Wiley-Blackwell.)
(Leitner, R. P. (2012) DNA replication and mutation. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.)
(Norell, Mark A. and Novacek, Michael J. (1992) ‘The fossil record and evolution: comparing cladistic and paleontologic evidence for vertebrate history.’, Science. American Association for the Advancement of Science, 255(5052), pp. 1690–1693. doi: 10.1126/science.255.5052.1690.)
(Scientists discovered a naturally occurring mutant chicken with teeth; the same researchers have also managed to induce normal chickens to grow teeth by stimulating dormant genes.(FINDINGS)’ (2006) Harper's Magazine. Harper's Magazine Foundation, 312(1872))
(Stephen Hawking on God, (2012) YouTube video, added by Joseph Butler [Online] Available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jzkm1E5RqJo ( Accessed 13/02/2020)
(Thorne, AlanThorne, RainerGrün, GrahamMortimer, Nigel A.Spooner, John J.Simpson, Malcolm McCulloch,bLoisTaylor, DarrenCurnoe, (1999) ‘Australia's oldest human remains: age of the Lake Mungo 3 skeleton’, Journal of human evolution, 36(6), pp. 591–612. doi: 10.1006/jhev.1999.0305)
(Willi, Y. (2019) ‘The relevance of mutation load for species range limits’, American Journal of Botany, 106(6), pp. 757–759. doi: 10.1002/ajb2.1296.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I wonder If you can guess what happened next. More on that in my next journal entry.
submitted by Dino_nerd_22 to exjw

0 thoughts on “Pirates poker hack v.1.0.0.1 firefox

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *