#exercise program for over 50 | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

usafphantom2 · 6 months ago

Text

B-2 Stealth Bomber Demoes QUICKSINK Low Cost Maritime Strike Capability During RIMPAC 2024

The U.S. Air Force B-2 Spirit carried out a QUICKSINK demonstration during the second SINKEX (Sinking Exercise) of RIMPAC 2024. This marks the very first time a B-2 Spirit has been publicly reported to test this anti-ship capability.

David Cenciotti

B-2 QUICKSINK

File photo of a B-2 Spirit (Image credit: Howard German / The Aviationist)

RIMPAC 2024, the 29th in the series since 1971, sees the involvement of 29 nations, 40 surface ships, three submarines, 14 national land forces, over 150 aircraft, and 25,000 personnel. During the drills, two long-planned live-fire sinking exercises (SINKEXs) led to the sinking of two decommissioned ships: USS Dubuque (LPD 8), sunk on July 11, 2024; and the USS Tarawa (LHA 1), sunk on July 19. Both were sunk in waters 15,000 feet deep, located over 50 nautical miles off the northern coast of Kauai, Hawaii.

SINKEXs are training exercises in which decommissioned naval vessels are used as targets. These exercises allow participating forces to practice and demonstrate their capabilities in live-fire scenarios providing a unique and realistic training environment that cannot be replicated through simulations or other training methods.

RIMPAC 2024’s SINKEXs allowed units from Australia, Malaysia, the Netherlands, South Korea, and various U.S. military branches, including the Air Force, Army, and Navy, to enhance their skills and tactics as well as validate targeting, and live firing capabilities against surface ships at sea. They also helped improve the ability of partner nations to plan, communicate, and execute complex maritime operations, including precision and long-range strikes.

LRASM

During the sinking of the ex-Tarawa, a U.S. Navy F/A-18F Super Hornet deployed a Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM). This advanced, stealthy cruise missile offers multi-service, multi-platform, and multi-mission capabilities for offensive anti-surface warfare and is currently deployed from U.S. Navy F/A-18 and U.S. Air Force B-1B aircraft.

The AGM-158C LRASM, based on the AGM-158B Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile – Extended Range (JASSM-ER), is the new low-observable anti-ship cruise missile developed by DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) for the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy. NAVAIR describes the weapon as a defined near-term solution for the Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare (OASuW) air-launch capability gap that will provide flexible, long-range, advanced, anti-surface capability against high-threat maritime targets.

QUICKSINK

Remarkably, in a collaborative effort with the U.S. Navy, a U.S. Air Force B-2 Spirit stealth bomber also took part in the second SINKEX, demonstrating a low-cost, air-delivered method for neutralizing surface vessels using the QUICKSINK. Funded by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, the QUICKSINK experiment aims to provide cost-effective solutions to quickly neutralize maritime threats over vast ocean areas, showcasing the flexibility of the joint force.

The Quicksink initiative, in collaboration with the U.S. Navy, is designed to offer innovative solutions for swiftly neutralizing stationary or moving maritime targets at a low cost, showcasing the adaptability of joint military operations for future combat scenarios. “Quicksink is distinctive as it brings new capabilities to both current and future Department of Defense weapon systems, offering combatant commanders and national leaders fresh methods to counter maritime threats,” explained Kirk Herzog, the program manager at the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL).

Traditionally, enemy ships are targeted using submarine-launched heavyweight torpedoes, which, while effective, come with high costs and limited deployment capabilities among naval assets. “Heavyweight torpedoes are efficient at sinking large ships but are expensive and deployed by a limited number of naval platforms,” stated Maj. Andrew Swanson, division chief of Advanced Programs at the 85th Test and Evaluation Squadron. “Quicksink provides a cost-effective and agile alternative that could be used by a majority of Air Force combat aircraft, thereby expanding the options available to combatant commanders and warfighters.”

Regarding weapon guidance, the QUICKSINK kit combines a GBU-31/B Joint Direct Attack Munition’s existing GPS-assisted inertial navigation system (INS) guidance in the tail with a new radar seeker installed on the nose combined with an IIR (Imaging Infra-Red) camera mounted in a fairing on the side. When released, the bomb uses the standard JDAM kit to glide to the target area and the seeker/camera to lock on the ship. Once lock on is achieved, the guidance system directs the bomb to detonate near the hull below the waterline.

Previous QUICKSINK demonstrations in 2021 and 2022 featured F-15E Strike Eagles deploying modified 2,000-pound GBU-31 JDAMs. This marks the very first time a B-2 Spirit has been publicly reported to test this anti-ship capability. Considering a B-2 can carry up to 16 GBU-31 JDAMs, this highlights the significant anti-surface firepower a single stealth bomber can bring to a maritime conflict scenario.

Quicksink

F-15E Strike Eagle at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. with modified 2,000-pound GBU-31 Joint Direct Attack Munitions as part of the second test in the QUICKSINK Joint Capability Technology Demonstration on April 28, 2022. (U.S. Air Force photo / 1st Lt Lindsey Heflin)

SINKEXs

“Sinking exercises allow us to hone our skills, learn from one another, and gain real-world experience,” stated U.S. Navy Vice Adm. John Wade, the RIMPAC 2024 Combined Task Force Commander in a public statement. “These drills demonstrate our commitment to maintaining a safe and open Indo-Pacific region.”

Ships used in SINKEXs, known as hulks, are prepared in strict compliance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations under a general permit the Navy holds pursuant to the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act. Each SINKEX requires the hulk to sink in water at least 6,000 feet deep and more than 50 nautical miles from land.

In line with EPA guidelines, before a SINKEX, the Navy thoroughly cleans the hulk, removing all materials that could harm the marine environment, including polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), petroleum, trash, and other hazardous materials. The cleaning process is documented and reported to the EPA before and after the SINKEX.

Royal Netherlands Navy De Zeven Provinciën-class frigate HNLMS Tromp (F803) fires a Harpoon missile during a long-planned live fire sinking exercise as part of Exercise Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) 2024. (Royal Netherlands Navy photo by Cristian Schrik)

SINKEXs are conducted only after the area is surveyed to ensure no people, marine vessels, aircraft, or marine species are present. These exercises comply with the National Environmental Policy Act and are executed following permits and authorizations under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, Endangered Species Act, and Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act.

The ex-Dubuque, an Austin-class amphibious transport dock, was commissioned on September 1, 1967, and served in Vietnam, Operation Desert Shield, and other missions before being decommissioned in June 2011. The ex-Tarawa, the lead amphibious assault ship of its class, was commissioned on May 29, 1976, participated in numerous operations including Desert Shield and Iraqi Freedom, and was decommissioned in March 2009.

This year marks the second time a Tarawa-class ship has been used for a SINKEX, following the sinking of the ex-USS Belleau Wood (LHA 3) during RIMPAC 2006.

H/T Ryan Chan for the heads up!

About David Cenciotti

David Cenciotti is a journalist based in Rome, Italy. He is the Founder and Editor of “The Aviationist”, one of the world’s most famous and read military aviation blogs. Since 1996, he has written for major worldwide magazines, including Air Forces Monthly, Combat Aircraft, and many others, covering aviation, defense, war, industry, intelligence, crime and cyberwar. He has reported from the U.S., Europe, Australia and Syria, and flown several combat planes with different air forces. He is a former 2nd Lt. of the Italian Air Force, a private pilot and a graduate in Computer Engineering. He has written five books and contributed to many more ones.

@TheAviationist.com

12 notes · View notes

adolin · 1 year ago

Text

Jockposting :) Lifting progress under the cut 💪

the tldr is that i a couple of months I put 20kg on my deadlift, 15kg on my squat, and I am SO close to benching 35kg for reps I can taste it. If I was in a frame of mind to optimise for recovery and nutrition I'd be unstoppable but as it is I'm just really feelin' myself

I'm on week 9 of GZCLP, a reddit-bro sorta program that's IME extremely effective. Once again, I maintain that reddit is phenomenal for solid fitness knowledge

It's a linear progression program, meaning that you increase the weight on the bar week by week, and it's ideal for novices who're still in the "beginner's gain" stage of weightlifting. It's also great if you're returning to structured programming lifting after a break (me!) but I probably won't keep at it after the first 12-week cycle is over, there's only so much linear increase I can aspire to.

Programming: GZCLP is 4x week, built around big compound lifts in the "strength" range (low reps, higher weights). They're complemented by a medium-rage amount of reps of a different compound lift than the one you're practising that day. So basically, you do big lifts twice a week, but at a different weight/range (called Tier 1 and Tier 2 to tell them apart). Every session also includes isolation exercises in the hypertrophy range, starting at 3x15+.

Jargon: that + symbol means that the last set is meant to be "as many reps as possible" or AMRAP. So if I'm doing 3x5+ squats, I'd do 5 reps for my first and second set, then try to aim for 6 or 7 in my last set.

Progression: You add weight every week to each compound lift; if you fail, the rep scheme changes keeping the volume the same.

T1 (main lifts) go from 3x5+ >>> 4x4+ >>> 5x3+

T2 (medium range reps for compound lifts) start at 3x10 >>> 3x8 >>> 3x6

T3 (back work and accessories) are 3x15+, only progressing when the AMRAP set gets to 25.

The T2 lifts especially are brutal. Because they go up every week but the amount of volume is A Lot. Doing sets of 10 reps with heavy-ish squats or deadlifts is extremely demanding.

Sessions! Basically, each week looks like this

Day 1: Squats (T1) + Bench press (T2) + Back work and leg accessories (T3)

Day 2: Overhead barbell press (T1) + Deadlift (T2) + Back work and upper body accessories (T3)

Day 3: Bench press (T1) + Squats (T2) + Back Work and upper body and core accessories (T3)

Day 4: Deadlift (T1) + Overhead bar press (T2) + Hip thrusts (T2) + Back work and core accessories (T3)

I start every session with dynamic stretching AND core engagement exercises (deadbug, planks, renegade row, suitcase carries) and usually end with an abs + kettlebell swing circuit. KB swings are SUPER FUN, btw. I do them every minute on the minute with a timer, starting with 5 swings then working my way up to 12-15 reps on the minute before I go up in weight. Currently I'm using a20kg (44 lbs) kettlebell.

💪 Weight on the bar! ✨

The whole point of this post was to blather about my lifting numbers so here we go. I started 9 weeks ago a bit conservatively, which imo is better than starting too heavy and going up too fast. I've failed every lift except squats, and that's only because I'm not consistently breaking parallel like I want to — a goal for my next training cycle is to work on lower body flexibility, go lighter on squats and with better form. This cycle is mainly to get more weight on that bar.

Squat

T1: 37.5kg >>> 52.5kg (116 lbs) for 3 sets of 5 reps

T2: 32.5kg to 43.5kg (96lbs) for sets of 10 reps

Overhead press

I failed multiple times here! Why is it so hard to build stronk shoulders, I ask you

T1: 17kg to 22.5kg (50 lbs) for 4 sets of 4 reps

T2: 12kg to 18kg (40 lbs) for sets of 6 reps

Bench Press

Veeeery proud of how this one is going

T1: 25kg to 33.5kg (74 lbs) for 5 sets of 3 reps

T2: 20 kg to 30kg (66 lbs) for 3 sets of 8 reps. Veeery proud of my progress on this one.

Deadlift

Bit frustrated because DLs used to be my strongest lift and I feel like I should be further ahead but that posterior chain needs nurturing

T1: 43kg to 62.5 (134 lbs) for 5 sets of 3 reps

T2: 33kg to 53.5 (118) for 3 sets of 10 reps

What's next?

3 more weeks of GZCLP then we shall see! I'm thinking an intermediate bench program + less volume on lower-body lifts, especially since I'm going to get more serious about half marathon training next month.

#jockposting #exercise #this is for accountability but also for my fellox flexin lesbians of tumblr dot com #elle.txt

19 notes · View notes

nicklloydnow · 8 months ago

Text

“Because, you see, a sociopath can help a psychopath.”*

“As a presidential candidate, Trump has threatened to quit NATO unless European allies contribute more, and should he carry it out Europe may decide to go it alone on defense, the game suggests. "A US policy of frustrating NATO has the potential to cause the alliance to collapse, with the EU as a candidate for eventually replacing NATO's ultimate function — defending Europe from Russia," wrote Finley Grimble, the British defense expert who designed and ran the game.

The US doesn't have to withdraw from NATO to imperil the 75-year-old alliance. Technically, the US is barred from leaving NATO after Congress voted in 2023 to prohibit withdrawal without congressional approval.

But the game showed how Trump — the presumptive Republican presidential nominee who said on the campaign trail that he'd encourage Russia to "do whatever the hell they want" with NATO allies who spend too little on their militaries — could undermine NATO simply by doing as little as possible to support the alliance. "What Donald Trump can do is just really hollow out what NATO does," Grimble told Business Insider. "He doesn't need to leave NATO to ruin it. He can ruin it from within."

Grimble, who has conducted wargames for the British government, conceived of this game after claims by former US National Security Adviser John Bolton that he talked then-President Trump out of withdrawing from NATO in 2018. He designed a tabletop simulation where the players — mostly British specialists in defense, intelligence and foreign policy — assumed the role of leaders of the 32 NATO nations, plus Ukraine and Russia; China was played by the umpires. The US was played by an American who "was trying to enter into the psyche of Trump, which was no easy task," Grimble recalled.

(…)

It is the first domino to fall. Trump then drastically reduces US participation in NATO, including redeployment of 50 percent of American military assets in Europe, where more than 100,000 US troops are based, to the Indo-Pacific theater. The Trump administration also institutes a new policy called "dormancy." This includes a variety of go-slow tactics, such as less US participation in NATO exercises. A particularly damaging move is to bar the Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) — the second-highest military position in NATO, and always a US officer — from acting without prior consultation with Washington.

"Ultimately, SACEUR is answerable to the president of the United States," said Grimble. "So he [SACEUR] can start slowing things down, or prevent things from happening. The US can just take the funding from NATO programs and they will collapse."

(…)

NATO was created four years after the end of World War II in an attempt to avoid the failures of the interwar years. American security guarantees have precluded European powers from re-arming in exchange for the greater expenses borne by the US. But with this US security umbrella suddenly diminishing in the game, France and Germany call for the European Union to take over from NATO. This angers Poland, which saw this as an attempt by the French to kick the US out and to have France become the top military power in Europe.

(…)

Meanwhile, with its campaign in Ukraine stalemated, Russia mulls invading the Baltic States — which are NATO members — to take advantage of NATO disunity and perhaps split the alliance over willingness to risk war with Moscow. But the Russian player ultimately decides that Russia doesn't have the resources to fight Ukraine and occupy the Baltics — and invading NATO territory just might bring America back into the alliance.

However, fictional Moscow does launch new offensives in Ukraine. Bereft of US support — which Europe is unable to compensate for — Ukraine feels compelled to sign a peace that cedes eastern Ukraine to Russia and installs a pro-Russian government in Kyiv. Europe faces another problem: fear that Russia might attack NATO is scaring off domestic and international investors, causing European economies to stumble.

By the end of the game, the effects of a US pullback from NATO are global. China realizes that the US has really shifted its focus from Europe to the Pacific, which deters Beijing from invading Taiwan. Yet this doesn't reassure Japan, Australia and South Korea — US allies whose forces and bases are essential to efforts to counter China — which worry that Trump might change his mind and abandon them too. Iran becomes emboldened to assert its power in the Middle East, which spurs an arms race with Saudi Arabia.

All of which left the British frustrated. The UK has traditionally backed a transatlantic, America-Europe alliance rather than a purely European defense bloc. Yet in the game, it could neither persuade Trump to ease his demands, nor the European NATO members to spend more on defense. "The British felt, 'for God's sakes, Trump, give the Europeans some time,'" Grimble said. "But also, 'Europeans, please do something. Let's all come to an accord and keep NATO alive.'"

Wargaming experts always caution that games shouldn't be treated as predictors of the future, but only as experiments to explore possibilities. Nonetheless, this wargame seemed to confirm the worst fears of critics who believe Trump could destroy NATO and make Europe vulnerable to attack.

"The US had reduced its resourcing of the NATO deterrence and defense missions, meaning NATO did not have credible warfighting plans ready to deal with a Russian invasion," said Grimble. "The whole thing had become dysfunctional. It certainly wasn't in any position to coherently defend against Russia at the end of the game."

Yet at the same time, there was a genuine desire to keep NATO alive. "Many NATO members — except for France mainly — thought post-Trump it could be salvageable," Grimble said. "So it was necessary to keep the US in, keep it together, and rebuild later."”

“Last month, NATO, the world’s most successful military alliance, celebrated its 75th anniversary. Some fear that it may have been its last anniversary with the United States playing a leading role. Former U.S. President Donald Trump still views the alliance as obsolete. If reelected, he says he would encourage Russian leaders to do “whatever the hell they want�� to member states that do not pay what he considers to be enough for defense. A second Trump presidency could have dire implications for European security.

Trump’s defenders argue that he is bluffing to pressure Europe into spending more on defense. But former U.S. officials who worked closely with Trump on NATO during his tenure, including one of us (Hooker), are convinced he will withdraw from the alliance if he is reelected. Trump hugely resents the more moderate advisers who kept him in check during his first term. If he reaches the White House in 2025, the guardrails will be off.

The U.S. Congress is concerned, too. It recently enacted legislation to prohibit a president from withdrawing from NATO unless Congress approves, either by a two-thirds vote in the Senate or an act of both houses of Congress. But Trump could circumvent this prohibition. He has already raised doubts about his willingness to honor NATO’s Article 5 mutual defense clause. By withholding funding, recalling U.S. troops and commanders from Europe, and blocking important decisions in the North Atlantic Council (NATO’s top deliberative body), Trump could dramatically weaken the alliance without formally leaving it. Even if he does not withdraw American support completely, Trump’s current position on NATO and his disinterest in supporting Ukraine, if adopted as national policy, would shatter European confidence in American leadership and military resolve.

EUROPE, ABANDONED

If Trump is reelected and follows through on his anti-NATO instincts, the first casualty would be Ukraine. Trump has opposed additional military aid to Kyiv and continues to fawn over Russian President Vladimir Putin. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg is already trying to Trump-proof aid to Ukraine by coordinating it under the aegis of the alliance rather than the U.S.-led Ukraine Defense Contact Group. Should the United States weaken or terminate its defense commitment to Europe under Trump, European countries would feel more vulnerable and may become increasingly reluctant to send Ukraine their own vital military supplies. With dramatic aid cuts, Kyiv could be forced to negotiate an unfavorable agreement with Moscow that would leave Ukraine a rump state militarily and economically vulnerable to Russia. Should Ukraine’s defenses collapse altogether, brutal repression and forced Russification await some 38 million people.

The disastrous consequences would only start there. A deflated NATO would struggle to mount an effective conventional deterrent against further Russian aggression. Russia is now on a war footing, spending six percent of its GDP on defense, and its authoritarian leader is committed to an ultranationalistic mission to consolidate his rule over what he calls the “Russian world,” an unspecified geographic space that extends well beyond his country’s internationally recognized borders. Moscow could reconstitute its armed forces relatively quickly. After subjugating all of Ukraine, Putin would probably focus on the Baltic states—NATO members covered by the alliance’s security umbrella but claimed as historic Russian lands by Putin. Should NATO’s conventional deterrence be weakened by the withdrawal of U.S. support, Russia would only be tempted to act more brazenly.

(…)

Should the United States abandon NATO, the erosion of nuclear deterrence would severely compound Europe’s conventional deterrence problem. Nuclear weapons underpin the United States’ commitment to defend its allies and its nuclear capabilities form the bedrock of NATO’s capacity for deterrence. Should Trump close the American nuclear umbrella, Europe would have to rely on less than 600 British and French strategic nuclear warheads, a fraction of Russia’s total force of over 5,000 strategic and tactical nuclear warheads. Since Europe has no tactical nuclear weapons, it can hope to deter a Russian tactical nuclear attack only by threatening escalation to the strategic level, a move that Moscow may not find credible. In an attempt to scare Europeans away from backing Ukraine, Russia has on many occasions hinted it might use tactical nuclear weapons. Unlike the United States, France and the United Kingdom have not extended their nuclear deterrent to protect their allies. Should Washington leave Europe to fend for itself, Moscow might calculate that it could successfully resort to nuclear blackmail to capture the territory of NATO member states.

Without U.S. leadership in NATO, cohesion and unity among members would be difficult to maintain. It often requires a strong American voice to bring disparate member states to a consensus. Since NATO’s founding, a U.S. general officer has led the organization’s command structure, overseeing the military activities of all NATO member states. It is doubtful that any other country in the alliance could play this role.

NATO without the United States might limp along, but it is more likely that the alliance would collapse altogether. The European Union is not in a position to take NATO’s place any time soon, as its military capabilities are limited and more capable of managing regional crises than fighting major wars. Even if a rump NATO survives without strong American involvement, the challenges of divided leadership, inadequate deterrence capabilities, and an assertive adversary would heighten the risk of war with Russia, a major power bent on overturning the liberal international order.

THE FALLOUT

The damage would not be limited to Europe. If Trump wants to withdraw from NATO to punish allies for their inadequate defense spending, why would the United States maintain its commitments to its Asian allies, many of whom currently spend even less than NATO countries? For now, the defense ties between the United States and its allies in Asia, such as Australia, Japan, and South Korea, are growing stronger in the face of Chinese provocations. But a lack of confidence in U.S. commitments may well lead some of these countries to pursue nuclear weapons to offset China’s and North Korea’s nuclear advantages, undercutting the fragile stability that has prevailed in the region for decades. The withering of U.S. global leadership would also have profoundly negative consequences in the Middle East, where U.S. forces and U.S.-led coalitions are needed to deal with terrorist threats.

The United States’ economy might also suffer. Should a breakdown of deterrence trigger a general war with Russia or China, the economic costs would be staggering. Just a few Houthi fighters in Yemen have been able to disrupt global shipping through their attacks in the Red Sea. Imagine the consequences of a war among major powers. Moreover, trade ties often follow security ties. Last year, two-way transatlantic trade in goods topped $1.2 trillion. The United States has about $4 trillion invested in European industry. Some five million Americans work in European-owned industries. The United States has a huge economic stake in maintaining a peaceful Europe.

The United States has been here before. Before both world wars, Washington sought neutrality. Neither effort at isolationism worked and only prevented the United States from being able to help deter the aggressors in those wars. Eventually, the United States was pulled into both conflicts. After World War II, having learned the dangers of isolationism, the United States remained engaged and paved the way for the founding of NATO and 75 years of relative peace in Europe. The United States must not forget the painful lessons of the last century. To do so would risk undercutting U.S. global leadership, undermining the Washington-built international order, and making the world safer for authoritarian rule.”

“'I'm not saying for certain that Trump will pull us out of NATO, but it's just too high a risk for Europe not to be prepared, because right now they're relying on America,' Harley Lippman, a foreign affairs analyst, told MailOnline.

(…)

Lippman, who has been re-appointed to a US commission under Trump, said: 'Europe has to go forward not counting on America staying in NATO. Europe has to have its own NATO.'

He added that even France has alluded to Europe's need for its own defence alliance and that Europe had to be prepared in case Trump followed through on his threat to leave NATO.

International affairs expert Lippman recently met MP Tobias Ellwood as well as former senior NATO Commander Sir Richard Shirreff in the House of Commons to discuss the dangers of American isolationism.

During the meeting organised the Henry Jackson Society think tank, Lippman warned attendees that Europe couldn't count on continued US support for NATO if Trump is re-elected.

He said that the attendees at the meeting in parliament agreed that a likely scenario would be Trump making a deal with Russia.

Lippman told MailOnline: 'Russia would get more of Ukraine than Ukraine wants and then, in another three years, Putin would come after Moldova and Georgia. He also certainly has his sights set on the Baltic Republics and Poland.

'And the problem with that is that no dictator in history who has successfully conquered a neighbour and then just stopped.

'If Putin defeats Ukraine, he is going to be so emboldened that he is going to go after other countries in Europe, almost all of which are NATO.'

Lippman said this could have devastating consequences: 'An attack on one NATO country is an attack on all NATO countries, which would be WW3.

'To avoid WW3, you have to defeat Russia in Ukraine, and Europe cannot count on America to [have its back].'

Lippman, who has been repeatedly appointed to the US Commission for the Preservation of America's Heritage Abroad by the last four presidents, also echoed Trump's calls for European nations to invest more in their defence.

He said: 'People need to understand the need to defend Europe from Russia, China, Iran and North Korea. These four nations are united together to undermine the West and ultimately to defeat the West.

'They are all playing to win and the only way we're going to preserve peace is if we are determined to defend democracies.'

(…)

Under the Biden administration, the US has sent more than $100billion (£79.5 billion) in military aid to Ukraine - EU nations have given the same.

NATO members have agreed on a long-term support package for Ukraine last month, which will see alliance members commit $100billion over five years to ensure long-term support, even amid a Trump presidency.

The proposals, led by outgoing NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, will give the security bloc a more direct role in coordinating the supply of arms, ammunition and equipment to Ukraine as it fights Russia's invasion, diplomats say.

(…)

Under the new plans, NATO will be granted control of the US-led ad-hoc coalition known as the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, which coordinates the sourcing and supply of lethal weapons and military kit to Kyiv.

The move is designed in part to guard against any cut in US support if Trump returns to the White House, with Stoltenberg saying it would 'shield the mechanism (of providing aid to Ukraine) against the winds of political change'.

(…)

'It goes some way to protecting in case of Trump. But it is impossible to create something Trump-proof,' one diplomat said.”

*as quoted in ‘American Conspiracy: The Octopus Murders’ (2024)

#nato #trump #russia #ukraine #war #world war iii #wwiii #ww3 #Henry Jackson #harley lippman

4 notes · View notes

ownedbybooks · 2 years ago

Text

so, it's been a while since I've posted original content in this blog lmao.

I have been reading, that's fore sure, but my life focus has shifted a bit this year, since I feel a bit more secure to leave my house, after all that crazy stuff happened the past 3 years.

Still, I still love this space of mine on the internet and for the last couple of days I've been thinking about it, specially because I do believe that we change overtime and since i've been moving on with some of my life stuff, I feel this could be a start of a new era of this little blog. I don't think it is fit to be only about books anymore.

That said, i've decided to start posting more about the studyblr community and, mainly, productivity over here as well. Mainly because I want to do some productivity challenges and I feel that posting about it over here will help me get motivated and continue to do them.

So, may I announce that starting tomorrow (June 12th 2023 aka. brazilian valentines day) I will be doing the Project 50 Challenge!

I will be following the basic rules (+ my takes on it) of the challenge, that are:

wake up before 8am (my goal is to wake up everyday at 6am)

do your morning routine: 1h no distractions (i have no idea what i'm going to do except that i can't use my phone and i will be dressing up and making myself some breakfast lmao)

exercise for 1h a day (gym during week days and blogilates exercises during weekends and holidays)

read 10 pages a day (i will start by reading The Prince, by Machiavelli)

dedicate 1h towards a new skill (revising and learning French)

follow a healthy diet (no soda, no red meat and i have to bring my own healthy snacks to work +edit: follow the weight watchers program!!!)

track your daily progress in a journal (this space of mine will work as my journal)

PS: I feel some of my takes on the goals will be changing as the 50 days will pass by. For example, The Prince is a really short book, so I guess I will finish it pretty early on the challenge and then change to another non-fiction book.

As for why I decided to start this productivity challenge, I have to say that's because I have a lot of things to do right now, and I need to put my life in some kind of track. I need to do online courses I've bought and haven't done yet. I'm a bit left behind my reading goals. I need to save a bit of money and eat healthier, as I need to build consistency at the gym. So finding about this 50 day challenge seemed perfect to try and go back on track.

#project 50 #productivity #studyblr #bookblr #mimi does a productivity challenge

14 notes · View notes

cvrpedie-m · 9 months ago

Video

youtube

Brain Age Mythology Compared to What Really Improves Cognitive Health

Many people have been asking us recently about whether we all have a "Brain Age" and how find out more here we can reduce our "brain ages". This concept is a myth, fueled by the (very fun) Nintendo game and a recent PBS campaign promoting a program produced by Posit Science.

The concept of having a "brain age" is, itself, profoundly unscientific, despite the radio ads for the PBS program titled Brain Fitness Program, where listeners of all ages get the impression (as many friends and colleagues have reported) that, should they buy the Posit Science Brain Fitness Program, they can expect their brains "rejuvenated" by 10 years. This, I hear often, must be true, coming from PBS.

Unfortunately, it isn't. And it isn't because the claim is founded on the same faulty premise of having a "brain age".

What is going on?

First, the good news. Today we know today that the brain retains lifelong plasticity (the ability to change itself through experience). Aging does not mean automatic decline.

Furthermore, we know that a variety of lifestyle factors, including physical and mental exercise, can influence how our mental abilities evolve as we age. We can delay or slow down age-related decline. Not only that, we can improve our abilities, and a number of computer-based programs have shown how they can help specific groups of people train and enhance specific cognitive skills.

Now, what is important to recognize is that there is not one overall "brain age". We can view our brain functions or cognitive abilities as a variety of skills, some more perception-related, some more memory-related, some more language-related, some more visual, some more abstract-thinking and planning oriented. All science-based brain fitness products in the market today target specific cognitive skills. The research that has been published shows how specific brain functions can be improved. But there is no general "brain age" that can be measured or trained in a meaningful way.

Let's analyze the PBS Posit Science-related message: you can rejuvenate your brain by 10 years. What would this mean, were it to be true? perhaps that ALL cognitive abilities would go back to where they were 10 years before. and that this would happen for individuals of all ages: in our 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s and so on. It would also mean that, given that rejuvenated "brain age", our risk of developing Alzheimer's symptoms would be adjusted to reflect our "new" brain age. And that the evolution of our cognitive abilities over the rest of our lives would reflect our new-found "brain age".

Has this been shown?

Unfortunately, not. The "10 years" claim seems based on one published study, and several unpublished ones, where individuals with an average age of around 70 years take on a very intense auditory processing training program that enables them to improve related auditory cognitive skills by a significant percentage. Whereby, on average, and on those specific skills, they reach a level comparable to people 60 years old.

But this doesn't say anything about other cognitive skills. Or Alzheimer's related risks. Or the cognitive trajectories that will follow.

Just think about this: if, by attending an intensive tennis camp, you were able to serve at a level comparable to people 10 years younger than your age...would you say that your body is now 10 years younger? Probably not. You'd say that now you play tennis better. Which is a significant benefit in itself if that's what you are after.

Recent studies have shown a tremendous variability in how well people age and how, to a large extent, our actions influence our rate of brain improvement and/or decline. The earlier we begin the better. And it is never too late.

What can we do to maintain our brain? Focus on four pillars of brain health: physical exercise, a balanced diet, stress management, and brain exercise. Stress management is important since stress has been shown to actually kill neurons and reduce the rate of creation of new ones. Brain exercises range from low-tech (i.e. meditation, mastering new complex skills, lifelong learning and engagement) to high-tech (i.e. using the growing number of brain fitness software programs).

In summary, the great news is that there are more tools available than ever before to assess and train a variety of cognitive skills, in what is still today a very small, but growing market. Nintendo, Posit Science, and others are offering valuable products and services.

#youtube

2 notes · View notes

religion-is-a-mental-illness · 11 months ago

Text

By: Gregory Brown

Published: Sep 1, 2023

About the Author

Dr. Greg Brown is a professor of Exercise Science at the University of Nebraska at Kearney where he also serves as the Director of the LOPERs General Studies program. His primary teaching responsibilities are undergraduate and graduate courses in Exercise Physiology, but he has also taught courses in Introductory Anatomy & Physiology, Sports Nutrition, Research Methods, and Professional Development in Exercise Science. His research has evaluated the effects of nutritional supplements on the physiological response to exercise, the physiological responses to various types of exercise, effective teaching in the exercise science program, and sex-based differences in sports performance. He has authored or co-authored over 50 peer reviewed publications and serves as a peer-reviewer for over two dozen academic journals. He is a member of the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM), the National Strength and Conditioning Association (NSCA), and the Association of American Educators (AAE).

He and his wife (Amber) have two adult sons and one daughter-in-law. Sadly, both their cat and dog passed away in the past year. His hobbies include running, hunting, fishing, studying history, and watching movies.

In the current battle over women’s and girls’ rights to female-only sports, a commonly heard mantra is that there are no sex-based differences in sports performance before puberty. Those who make this claim often contend that if a male is put on puberty blockers before age 12 (or Tanner development stage 2; whichever comes first), he can compete fairly in the female category. But is this really true?Are there really no differences in athletic performance between boys and girls before the onset of puberty? Do puberty blockers administered to children really erase male sex-based athletic advantages? Below, I’ll try to provide answers to these questions.

Like many things currently being put forth in public discourse as settled science, the presence or absence of sex-based athletic differences before puberty is not an open and shut case. There are few databases of records for children’s competitive sports performance and there has been limited scholarly research evaluating sex-based differences in competitive sports performance before puberty. Currently, there are no consensus statements from professional organizations such as the North American Society for Pediatric Exercise Medicine (NASPEM), the National Strength & Conditioning Association (NSCA), the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM), or the National Athletic Trainers’ Association (NATA) stating that there are, or are not, sex-based differences in athletic performance before puberty.

Below, I will cover the main reasons our data on pre-pubertal sex differences in athletic performance is relatively poor, and draw some preliminary conclusions based on the data we do have that indicates such differences are actually quite significant.

Lack of Records

One challenge that arises when trying to determine whether there are sex-based differences in athletic performance before puberty is the limited availability of records documenting competitive athletic performance in children. For adults participating at the Olympic and collegiate levels, meticulous record-keeping is the norm, and these records are readily accessible online. A simple internet search yields numerous listings of Olympic and collegiate records spanning various sports such as swimming, track and field, cross country, bicycling, and more.

Similarly, records for sports in secondary schools are also carefully maintained. In the United States, it is fairly easy to obtain the results of the most recent state high school track championship from news sources and on the state scholastic athletic association websites. Most secondary schools additionally showcase records for track and field, cross country, and other sports. The abundant availability of records in the Olympic, college, and secondary school arena makes it very easy to compare male and female athletes competing in the same events at the same level of competition. Such comparisons vividly illustrate that once puberty sets in, males outperform females by 10-30 percent (depending on the sport and event).

However, most sports involving pre-pubertal children operate outside the jurisdiction of state scholastic athletic association or even the local primary school. Instead, these activities are typically organized by local clubs or community recreation departments. Children’s sports often prioritize recreation and skill development over competitiveness. As a result, records pertaining to race times, throwing distances, weightlifting achievements, or other athletic benchmarks for children are not as meticulously maintained or as readily accessible as records for high school, college, or Olympic sports. Some have interpreted the lack of records for children’s sport as an indication that any sex-based differences in athletic performance before puberty are negligible or insignificant.

Lack of Scholarly Attention

Adding to the challenge of limited records detailing competitive athletic performance before puberty is the constrained number of available scientific evaluations. For example, Handelsman [1] analyzed publicly accessible data on swimming, running, and jumping in children and adolescents. Although his data clearly illustrate that boys aged 10 and under run faster, swim faster, and jump farther than girls of comparable age, he published these findings in 2017 in a paper titled “Sex differences in athletic performance emerge coinciding with the onset of male puberty.”

In 2019 Senefeld et al. [2] drew upon data from USA Swimming and found that, before age 10, the top 5 girls swam faster than the top 5 boys. However, no disparities in swimming performance were observed between the 10th-50th ranked girls and boys. Additionally, in 2020, Huebner and Perperoglou [3] reported that there were no sex-based differences in competitive weightlifting performance before age 10. To my knowledge, these studies represent the only scholarly examinations of competitive performance in children before puberty.

Taken together, the scarcity of sports records for pre-pubertal children and the limited scholarly output on children’s competitive performance has led some to conclude that there are no differences in athletic performance between boys and girls before puberty. Some have even gone so far as to erroneously asserting that a broad consensus exists regarding the absence of sex-based differences in athletic performance before this developmental stage. However, this does not appear to be true, and in the sections below I will present information that demonstrates the existence of sex-based differences in athletic performance before puberty.

School Based Fitness Testing

In contrast to the limited records available for sports performance and the scarcity of scholarly evaluations regarding children’s competitive sports performance, there exists a plethora of scholarly evaluations focused on school-based physical fitness testing in children as young as six years old. Various tests, such as the Presidential Fitness Test, FitnessGram, Eurofit Fitness Test Battery, and other school-based physical fitness assessments, consistently show that boys tend to outperform girls of the same age in tests measuring muscular strength, muscular endurance, running speed, aerobic fitness, ball throwing, and kicking distance. On the other hand, girls tend to perform better than boys in tests assessing flexibility.

A small sampling of publications evaluating school-based physical fitness testing includes a longitudinal evaluation of 240 German boys and girls aged 9-12 years [4], an analysis of 85,347 fitness test results among Australian boys and girls aged 9-17 years [5], an evaluation of 424,328 Greek boys and girls aged 6-18 years [6], a study examining 1,142,026 performances in a 20-meter shuttle run among boys and girls aged 9-17 year from 50 countries [7], and an assessment of 2,779,165 Eurofit performances among boys and girls aged 9-17 year from 30 countries [8].

Collectively, these studies (along with many others not listed here) indicate a consistent pattern: before puberty, boys tend to outperform girls of the same age in tests measuring muscular strength, muscular endurance, running speed, aerobic fitness, ball throwing, and kicking distance. Conversely, girls typically exhibit better performance in tests focused on flexibility. While physical fitness tests do not always accurately predict success in competitive sports, physical fitness is often a prerequisite for success in sports.

Sports Records

USA Track and Field (USATF) sanctions youth track and field meets in most states, including regional and national championship events. The youngest age categories in USATF are the 8-and-under and the 9-10-year-old age groups, both of which can reasonably be assumed to represent pre-pubertal athletes. Upon evaluating the performances at the USATF state-level Junior Olympics, it becomes apparent that boys frequently jump and throw farther, and run faster than comparably aged girls.

For instance, if we examine the race times for the 100m, 200m, 400m, 800m, and 1500m races, along with the distances achieved in shot put, javelin, and long jump events in the 2023 USATF Nebraska Association Junior Olympics [9], for both boys and girls in the 8-and-under age group, we find that no girl would have outperformed a boy to secure the gold, silver, or bronze medals in any of these events. For the same events in the 9-10-year-old age group, only one girl would have secured a gold medal (out of a possible 8), while two girls would have clinched silver medals (out of 8), and another two girls would have won bronze medals (out of 8). Of course, one could reasonably argue that data from a single youth track meet in Nebraska may not be representative data for pre-pubertal athletic performance as a whole.

So, if we make the same comparison in the same events (100m, 200m, 400m, 800m and 1500m races, and the distances for shot put, javelin, and long jump) in the 2023 USATF Arizona Association Junior Olympics [10], we observe that girls in the 8-and-under age group would have secured zero gold medals, one silver medal, and two bronze medals. In the 9-10-year-old category, a girl would have tied with a boy for a single gold medal, and three girls would have taken home bronze medals. Yet, once again, one could reasonably argue that the combined data from track meets in Nebraska and Arizona may not accurately represent the broader spectrum of pre-pubertal athletic performance.

So, if we make the same comparison for the same events (100m, 200m, 400m, 800m and 1500m races, and the distances for shot put, javelin, and long jump) at the 2023 USATF National Youth Outdoor Championships [11]—an event that includes athletes from many different states—we discover that girls in the 8-and-under age group would have won two gold medals (out of 8), three silver medals (out of 8), and no bronze medals. Girls in the 9-10-year-old age group would have won a single gold medal, two silver medals, and two bronze medals. Collectively, looking at these three track meets, placing side by side the race times for the 100m, 200m, 400m, 800m, and 1500m races, as well as the distances for shot put, javelin, and long jump for boys and girls in the 8-and-under and 9-10-year-old age groups, it’s clear that if girls were to compete against boys, they would have secured only 23 out of 144 medals. Within this tally, girls would have received only five out of 48 gold medals.

Of course, one could reasonably argue that the examples above represent only a single year and only three specific track meets. However, if we evaluate the overall youth records for the best performances in running, throwing, and jumping from USATF [12], the USATF National Junior Olympics [13], and the School Sport Australia Track & Field Championships [14], they collectively indicate that boys aged 10 and under outperform girls of the same age across all recorded events. On average, boys outperform girls by 3 percent in running, 9 percent in jumping, and 16 percent in throwing events. Similarly, records for boys aged 10 and under in USA Swimming show faster times than girls' records in 18 out of 22 events [15].

While examining medal counts at specific track meets offers valuable, albeit somewhat anecdotal, insights into performance differences between boys and girls before puberty, these counts do not qualify as a rigorous scientific evaluation. Though scholars often use evaluations of overall records for best performances to showcase sex-based differences in adult athletic performance, disparities in pre-pubertal children’s performance are frequently dismissed as being too small to be meaningful. Moreover, the overall youth records from USATF have not been updated since 2018, the records from the USATF National Junior Olympics have not been updated since 2019, and the School Sport Australia Track & Field Championship records have not seen updates since 2016. It’s unclear why these records have not been updated, but it does raise some questions about the accuracy of these records.

Nonetheless, by considering scholarly assessments of school-based fitness test data, several youth track meets, track and field best performance records, and swimming best performance records, it certainly seems like there is an emerging pattern of pre-pubertal male sex-based athletic advantages.

Scholarly Evidence for Sex-Based Sports Differences Before Puberty

Some colleagues and I have recently presented an assessment of sex-based differences in athletic performance before puberty at the 2023 Annual Meeting of the American College of Sports Medicine [16]. Drawing upon a national database of track and field performance (athletic.net) and evaluating the top 10 performances for boys and girls in the 8-and-under and 9-10-year-old age groups over a 5-year period, we observed consistent trends. Boys consistently (and statistically) ran almost 5 percent faster, long jumped 6 percent farther, threw the shot put 20 percent farther, and threw the javelin 40 percent farther than girls of the same age. At the 2023 Annual Meeting of the American College of Sports Medicine, a separate team of researchers from a different university used the same database, albeit with slightly different evaluation methods, and came to similar conclusions regarding the pre-pubertal advantages of male athletes [17].

In light of these findings, it is reasonable to conclude that male athletes indeed possess advantages in sports performance before reaching puberty. This conclusion is founded on extensive scholarly evaluations of fitness tests in schools, data gleaned from youth track meets and records, as well as youth swimming records for best performances. My personal analysis of the top 10 national track and field performances for boys and girls within the 8-and-under and 9-10-year-old age groups across a 5-year period supports this, further corroborated by similar outcomes from another team of researchers. Admittedly, the sex-based disparities before puberty are less pronounced than after puberty, but they exhibit a consistent pattern that yields a statistically significant difference favoring male athletes.

What about Puberty Blockers?

Whether there are, or are not, sex-based differences in athletic performance before puberty still leaves questions about how puberty blockers affect athletic performance. The truth is, we don’t have enough information to answer questions about how puberty blockers affect athletic performance. There are no published studies evaluating the effects of puberty blockers on muscle strength, muscle endurance, running speed, aerobic fitness, as well as throwing or kicking distance in children, whether in school or laboratory settings. Similarly, there is no research on how puberty blockers might impact performance in competitive sports. Limited studies have touched upon the effects of puberty blockers on body composition and height.

Two long-term studies investigating the impact of puberty blockers on body composition and height indicate that the sex-based differences in lean body mass [18] and height [19] persist even after 2 years on puberty blockers followed by an additional 6 years of so-called “gender-affirming hormone therapy.” It is undeniable that male advantages in lean body mass and body height translate to athletic advantages as adults. It’s reasonable to assume that these advantages also extend to athletic performance among children and adolescents. The sex-based differences in performance in children may be smaller than in adults, but small differences can mean the difference between a gold medal and no medal in sports.

Conclusion

Readers of Reality’s Last Stand will be familiar with the important sex-based differences between males and females. These differences begin at conception and continue throughout one’s life. Sex-based anatomical and physiological differences confer inherent athletic advantages to males when compared to females of the same age, possessing similar talents and undergoing similar training, across all age groups, even before puberty. Having a transgender identity, with or without the use of cross-sex hormones, does not eliminate sex-based differences in anatomy and physiology, nor does it erase sex-based differences in athletic performance.

It is my opinion that, in order to maintain a level playing field for female athletic competition, transgender identified males (i.e., “transgirls” and “transwomen”) should not be allowed to participate in the female sports category before or after puberty even when puberty blockers are used.

4 notes · View notes

affiliateinz · 11 months ago

Text

10 Highest Paying Clickbank Products to Promote

Are you looking to make money through affiliate marketing and Clickbank in 2024? Promoting the highest paying products can be key for making your efforts worthwhile. After analyzing thousands of Clickbank listings, I have compiled this definitive list of the 10 highest paying products that affiliates should promote this coming year.

Table of Contents

1. Xpress Fat Loss Workouts

Commission rate: Up to $135 per sale Average sale price: $37

Xpress Fat Loss Workouts is a popular fitness program that helps people lose weight using short but highly intense full body workouts. The easy-to-follow video workout guide appeals to those with busy lifestyles. With an impressive 75% commission rate, it will remain as one of the most lucrative products on Clickbank in 2024.

2. Unlock Your Hip Flexors

Commission rate: Up to $126 per sale Average sale price: $50

This digital guide teaches people how to strengthen tight hip flexors through specific exercises and stretches. It’s particularly popular among seniors and office workers suffering from hip tightness and pain. The high ticket price combined with generous commission makes it worth a try in 2024.

Unlock Your Online Success! Watch Our Exclusive Video for FREE and Start Earning Today!

3. Customized Fat Loss for Men/Women

Commission rate: Up to $135 per sale Average sale price: $97

This personalized fat loss program created by nutritionist Kyle Leon continues to crush it with sky-high gravity. Customized nutrition software coupled with video coaching makes it a hit. As sales remain steady with its premium pricing, promoting this in 2024 remains strongly advised.

4. Vertigo and Dizziness Program

Commission rate: Up to $100 per sale Average sale price: $47

This leading home remedy guide for treating vertigo sees impressive conversion rates. The sizable commissions for a mid-priced product explain its enduring popularity amongst affiliates.

5. Over 40 Keto Solution

Commission rate: Up to $124 per sale Average sale price: $29

This effective weight loss program designed specifically for those over 40 continues to be a top seller with a high commission rate in the competitive health niche. What makes it stand out is the hormone reset focus, which sets it apart from other keto programs.

6. Biotox Gold

Commission rate: Up to $125 per sale Average sale price: $50

This trendy liquid weight loss supplement sold exclusively online leverages the power of 20 detoxifying nutrients and plants. Backed by an aggressive upsell funnel, you can expect a nice commission cheque cut from each referred sale in 2024.

Unlock Your Online Success! Watch Our Exclusive Video for FREE and Start Earning Today!

7. The Anti-Anxiety Food Solution

Commission rate: Up to $135 per sale Average sale price: $97

Nutritionist Trudy Scott’s comprehensive guide on using food and diet to combat anxiety naturally is evergreen. With anxiety amongst adults at an all-time high, this product with healthy commissions will continue to crush it next year.

8. Venus Factor

Commission rate: Up to $135 per sale Average sale price: $47

This workout guide combined with nutrition software generates sky-high commissions thanks to aggressive upselling within the funnel. As John Barban’s weight loss formula for women continues to dominate, be sure to test it out in 2024.

9. Diabetes Freedom

Commission rate: Up to $150 per sale Average sale price: $37

Targeting the large diabetic and prediabetic audience, this all-natural guide receives glowing testimonials from past buyers. With a new update for 2022, there is pressure on the price which ensures large affiliate commission cheques per referral.

10. LeptoConnect

Commission rate: Up to $210 per sale Average sale price: $69

One of the top Clickbank launches of 2023, this all-natural weight loss supplement tackles weight gain on a cellular level. With an array of high quality bonuses within the funnel, LeptoConnect is expected to pay affiliates handsomely next year.

Unlock Your Online Success! Watch Our Exclusive Video for FREE and Start Earning Today!

And there you have it! The 10 highest paying Clickbank products that will enable you to maximize your earnings as an affiliate marketer in 2024. Let me know if you need any other details on these winning products!

Thank for read my atticle, 10 Highest Paying Clickbank Products to Promote

Affiliate Disclaimer :

Some of the links in this article may be affiliate links, which means I receive a small commission at NO ADDITIONAL cost to you if you decide to purchase something. While we receive affiliate compensation for reviews / promotions on this article, we always offer honest opinions, users experiences and real views related to the product or service itself. Our goal is to help readers make the best purchasing decisions, however, the testimonies and opinions expressed are ours only. As always you should do your own thoughts to verify any claims, results and stats before making any kind of purchase. Clicking links or purchasing products recommended in this article may generate income for this product from affiliate commissions and you should assume we are compensated for any purchases you make. We review products and services you might find interesting. If you purchase them, we might get a share of the commission from the sale from our partners. This does not drive our decision as to whether or not a product is featured or recommended.

3 notes · View notes

gureumz · 2 years ago

Text

just a little something i want to touch on seeing as it's an issue that a lot of people misunderstand.

this site is meant to thrive on reblogs. blogs grow from reblogs because the content gets spread around to a larger audience that don't otherwise follow the tags or content in the original post, thus attracting possible new followers (and in writers' cases, readers). i know reblogs are dying and it's been dying for years now bc (as i've seen personally, feel free to disagree) aesthetics have pretty much overtaken the entire internet. the current average tumblr user's mind, i think, has been somewhat programmed to see a blog full of reblogs as "messy" bc of all the differing formats and fandoms and content. i also think the decrease in reblogs is also bc of the rise of short form content but that's a discussion i don't want to get into rn.

now, this attitude towards keeping a cohesive look on your blog isn't wrong by any means, you do what you want to do on your own blog, but as a writer on this platform who writes for free, one of the few indicators we have that our work is appreciated is through reblogs. i'm not demanding anyone to write lengthy reviews or comments in the tags, but if you really, really, really like what you've read, a reblog goes a long way. i've been informed i have over 500 likes across my posts on this new blog (with only three full scenarios posted) but a mere 50 or so reblogs. that's...a big difference.

i know i did state that this blog of mine is a side project that i don't mean to take too seriously, but part of why i do this as well is to see what people like and don't like about my writing. an exercise of sorts, if you will. so yes, a tiny bit of clout chasing is in play.

it's saddening to see that the view on tumblr writers has come down to the word "entitled". we don't ask for much, but there are still things we would like in return for our time and effort. isn't that how content creation works?

anyways, it's not good to dwell on these things but i hope some of you can consider what i've just said. that's all, happy sunday 🫶🏻

#enhypen smut #enhypen scenarios #admin stuff

14 notes · View notes

keto--friends--helper · 1 year ago

Text

"Soup Ritual" Weight Loss Solution

☯️Introduction↘️

Embark on a transformative journey towards a healthier and leaner you with the revolutionary "Soup Ritual" weight loss solution. This simple daily ritual has been creating a buzz among women and men over 50, helping them shed stubborn belly fat and achieve remarkable results in a short period. If you've been struggling to find a sustainable weight loss solution, this might just be the game-changer you've been waiting for.

☯️Description↘️

The "Soup Ritual" is not your ordinary weight loss program—it's a science-backed approach to melting away fat, especially around the abdominal area. Developed with the expertise of researchers from Penn State University, this unique method leverages the power of carefully selected ingredients to create soups that effectively trick the body into feeling full, leading to a potential weight loss of up to 41 pounds in a year without strict dieting or excessive exercise.

Click here

☯️Benefits of the Product↘️

☯️Burns Abdominal Fat 240% Faster:↘️Experience accelerated fat-burning around the belly, a common problem area for many individuals over 50.

☯️Lose 1 Jean Size In a Single Week:↘️Witness tangible results in a remarkably short time, fitting into your favorite jeans with newfound confidence.

☯️Kills Hunger & Cravings:↘️Say goodbye to intense cravings without resorting to calorie-cutting, making the weight loss journey more manageable.

Click here

☯️Improves Blood Pressure & Blood Sugars↘️ Enjoy enhanced cardiovascular health, with noticeable improvements in blood pressure and blood sugar levels within just one week.

OFFICIAL WEBSITE

☯️Lose Up To 4 Sizes in Just 4 Weeks:↘️ Achieve significant changes in your body size and shape while eliminating achiness and fatigue.

☯️How it Works↘️

The magic lies in the combination of ingredients carefully chosen to create soups that not only satisfy your taste buds but also trigger a faster metabolism and fat-burning process. The science behind the program involves a clever manipulation of solid foods in liquid form, helping your body feel full 400 calories sooner than usual. This results in a natural appetite suppressant, making weight loss feel almost effortless.

Buy Now

☯️Health Benefits↘️

Beyond weight loss, the "Soup Ritual" offers a range of health benefits, including improved blood pressure and blood sugar levels. The carefully crafted soups are rich in nutrients that many individuals over 50 may be lacking, contributing to overall well-being.

☯️User Experience↘️

Real-life success stories, such as Jessica from Virginia, showcase the effectiveness of the "Soup Ritual." Jessica, a 53-year-old mom, experienced significant weight loss from a size 18 to a size 10 by incorporating these soups into her routine. The simplicity of the daily ritual and the positive impact on her body motivated her throughout the journey.

65%OFF FOR TODAY

☯️Recommendations or Precautions↘️

While the "Soup Ritual" presents an enticing solution for weight loss, it's crucial to emphasize the importance of choosing the right soups. Not all soups are created equal, and the key lies in avoiding processed options or those with ingredients that may trigger fat storage in adults over 50.

☯️Pricing and Availability↘️

The "Soup Ritual" program is an investment in your health and well-being. Pricing details and package options are available on the official website, providing flexibility for individuals seeking a tailored approach to their weight loss journey.

☯️Where to Purchase↘️

For those ready to embrace the "Soup Ritual" and embark on a transformative weight loss journey, the product is available for purchase exclusively on the official website. Be cautious of imitations and ensure you are getting the authentic program.

☯️Conclusion↘️

In conclusion, the "Soup Ritual" emerges as a promising and unique solution for individuals over 50 seeking sustainable weight loss. Backed by science and real success stories, this program offers a practical and enjoyable approach to shedding pounds and improving overall health. If you're tired of conventional diets and looking for a fresh perspective on weight loss, the "Soup Ritual" might be the answer you've been searching for.

☯️Additional Resources and References:↘️

For those eager to delve deeper into the science behind the "Soup Ritual" and explore more success stories, additional resources and references are available on the official website. Stay informed and motivated on your weight loss journey with valuable insights and expert guidance.

65%OFF FOR UP TO TODAY

#health #health fitness #ketotransformation #smoothie #weight loss #woman health #keto #ketosis

3 notes · View notes

signalwatch · 1 year ago

Text

WA Watch: Rushmore (1998)

I figure this is me and my nephew in about 8 years

Watched: 07/16/2023

Format: Streaming Amazon

Viewing: Unknown

Director: Wes Anderson

Recently, I was watching some old Bugs Bunny cartoons, circa 1940, and I was surprised to see the name "Charles M. Jones" in the credits. While "Chuck Jones" is synonymous with WB animation, he's really associated with a certain artistic style and flair that is characterized in certain styles of background, character design and with his comedic timing in everything from "What's Opera, Doc?" to The Grinch Who Stole Christmas. But there was his name in plain text.

He had not yet timed how long it took an anvil to fall or for Wile E. Coyote to hang in mid-air before plummeting for maximum comedic effect. He hadn't quite gotten the rise of an eyebrow or a sly look to the viewer. But. It's there.

Jamie was the one who requested a watch of Rushmore (1998) a film we saw together way back at the Arbor IV upon its release. And we've watched a number of times over the years. And, for her, it was an academic exercise in "what was he doing in 1998? and how does it true up to what's there in 2023 with Asteroid City?"

It's interesting how Anderson springs into a form we all would have been fine with here in 1998 and with his second feature (after the excellent Bottle Rocket). He's locking in on some of the themes he'd return to (certainly distant, bad dads), certain camera shots/ edits, formal dialog fit more for a 20th century short story than a film in the naturalist mode, aesthetics of symmetry and retro-ism.

It's also curious to ponder how much of the Wes Anderson story that Owen Wilson occupies. The two were roommates at the University of Texas, and Anderson - maybe UT's brightest star in film - did not actually participate in the film program, but got a Philosophy degree.* Bottle Rocket was a deep partnership between Anderson and the Wilson brothers and he'd co-star in the film as well as co-writing and appearing in Royal Tenenbaums. And, of course, he appears in numerous other Anderson pictures, including French Dispatch, which I haven't seen yet.

I assume the pacing of events means Anderson and Wilson wrote Rushmore while in their mid-20's to late-20's, and while there's certainly a level of goofiness to the proceedings and it is, in part, about a middle-aged man in a juvenile spat with a 15-year-old, there's some great character stuff that rings even more true here as I roll towards 50.

I don't know that Anderson could do Rushmore again. Maybe. He's never quite given up on teen geniuses, including underperforming teen and adult geniuses. He's still working through dead parents, bad parents, indifferent parents. He's still invested in messy romance treated as a matter-of-fact. I'm not sure a studio would be as ready to fund a movie about a teen and teacher with a complex relationship in the last 20 years.

But, in general, there's nothing - to me - about Rushmore that doesn't work.

I'm glad it's shot in Houston. Bleak, wintery Houston in all its no-zoning-laws glory and mix of industrial mess and bucolic park-like environs. I love that dumb town.

And, of course, it really gave the world Jason Schwartzman and a new view of Bill Murray. Co-star Olivia Williams has remained feverishly busy, appearing in American works, from The Sixth Sense to Hyde Park on the Hudson (reteamed with Murray).

But the film also has Brian Cox, briefly Connie Nielsen, Luke and Andrew Wilson, and the late Seymour Cassel. Sara Tanaka and Mason Gamble seem to have retired from acting - but I think Tanaka is a cardiologist now?

Anyway, 25 years later, the movie still works as well as it ever did, and at this point, it's much more than a curious artifact of Anderson's early work - it's clearly pointing the way he's headed.

*Little tip for you brainiacs like me who burned through 5 years of college and panicked in their 4th year and also got a history degree

https://ift.tt/3a8Kv9V

from The Signal Watch https://ift.tt/qFbXNlR

1 note · View note

weightlosehubs · 2 years ago

Text

How Does bob abishola weight loss.

Bob Abishola is a popular Nigerian-American actor who recently made headlines due to his dramatic weight loss. He has lost an incredible amount of weight in a short period of time, and this has sparked curiosity among fans wondering how he did it. In this article, we will explore Bob Abishola's weight loss journey and discuss the strategies that he used to achieve such remarkable results. We will also look at the potential health benefits associated with his new lifestyle and diet changes.

Bob Abishola is an American sitcom television series starring Billy Gardell and Folake Olowofoyeku. The show follows Bob, a Nigerian-American businessman, and his romance with Folake, a Nigerian nurse living in Detroit. In the show, Bob has been struggling to lose weight for some time now. In this article, we will discuss Bob's weight loss journey and how he has managed to keep the pounds off. We will also look at some of the tips and tricks that have helped him stay motivated and make progress towards his goal. Finally, we will explore the potential use cases of AI writing tools in helping individuals like Bob achieve their weight loss goals.

Bob Abishola is a popular Nigerian-American actor and comedian known for his roles in the CBS sitcom Bob Abishola and the hit film Coming to America. Recently, Bob has been making headlines for his impressive weight loss transformation. His journey of losing over 30 pounds has been inspiring many people around the world to take control of their health and fitness. In this article, we will explore Bob's weight loss journey and how he achieved such amazing results. We will also discuss some tips from Bob that can help you reach your own fitness goals.

Bob Abishola is an American sitcom television series starring Billy Gardell and Folake Olowofoyeku. The show follows Bob, a Nigerian-American businessman, and his relationship with Folake, a Nigerian nurse living in Detroit. As Bob and Folake's relationship blossoms, Bob has also been trying to lose weight. In the show, he has been struggling to maintain his diet and exercise regimen in order to reach his desired weight loss goals. This article will explore the role of diet and exercise in Bob's journey towards achieving his weight loss goals as well as how viewers can use what they see on the show to help them with their own health goals.

Bob Abishola is a Nigerian-American actor and comedian who stars in the CBS sitcom Bob Abishola. He has become a popular figure due to his comedic acting and his inspiring weight loss journey. Bob has lost over 50 pounds since he started his weight loss journey, which he documents on social media. In this article, we will discuss Bob's weight loss journey, how he achieved it, and what tips he has for others looking to lose weight.

—

Bob Abishola, the star of the hit CBS sitcom, is no stranger to weight loss. In recent years, he has made a concerted effort to get in shape and lose the extra pounds. This article will explore how Bob Abishola has managed his weight loss journey and discuss some of the strategies he has employed to achieve his goals. We will also look at some of the key lessons we can learn from Bob's experience that can help us in our own health and fitness journeys.

Transform Your Health with Bob Abishola's Weight Loss Program Today !

1 note · View note

usafphantom2 · 10 months ago

Text

Canada invests in support of CF-18 Hornet fighters

Aerospace solutions provider Arcfield Canada will continue to strengthen the operations of the Royal Canadian Air Force with support solutions.

Fernando Valduga By Fernando Valduga 03/11/2024 - 16:00 in Military

In an attempt to strengthen Canada's air defense capabilities, the Department of National Defense of Canada granted Arcfield Canada, a supplier of mission support solutions in the aerospace and defense sector, a $157 million contract for the avionics service support program of the CF-18 Hornet jets.

The Canadian Air Force has been looking for a replacement for its current fleet of just over 100 CF-18A/B Hornet multifunction fighters since May 2008. The Canadian government finally decided to upgrade its air force by buying 88 F-35 aircraft, with the first arriving in 2026.

In the meantime, the Royal Canadian Air Force will have the CF-18 (Canadian designation of the Hornet) and will use F-18 aircraft acquired from the RAAF, designed to be in service until 2032.

The fleet has already received a useful life extension through the Hornet Extension Program. The newly awarded contract was for an initial period of five years and five subsequent options of one year.

In the last five years, Arcfield Canada, L3Harris Technologies and Peraton have secured contract extensions to strengthen support for the CF-18 avionics fleet of the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF). L3Harris Technologies won a four-year performance-based contract extension, valued at $482 million, expanding support until the planned retirement of the CF-18 fleet in 2032.

Under the aegis of Team Northern Sentry, composed of industry representatives Raytheon Canada, L3Harris Technologies, Palitronica and Terra Nova, Arcfield Canada will provide the in-service support and support solution for the CF-18 jets.

The in-service support contract for CF-18 avionics will enter into force on April 1º of this year. If all options are exercised, it will last until the end of March 2034, allowing possible delays in the F-35 program.

The contract requires continuous operation and maintenance of Canada's CF-18 fighter fleet, ensuring the optimal availability of the fleet and the readiness of the mission until the early withdrawal of the aircraft.

Tags: Military AviationL3HarrisMcDonnell Douglas CF-188 HornetRCAF - Royal Canadian Air Force/Canada Air Force

Sharing

Fernando Valduga

Aviation photographer and pilot since 1992, he has participated in several events and air operations, such as Cruzex, AirVenture, Dayton Airshow and FIDAE. He has works published in specialized aviation magazines in Brazil and abroad. He uses Canon equipment during his photographic work in the world of aviation.