Hey, don't take it personal. Like I've said before, I appreciate and respect your ability to profit from promoting this crap. That said, I will continue to discard it all as nonsense until you provide me some legitimate evidence that it something other than what I am calling it. I believe the burden of proof lies with you. FYI, I listened to your entire radio interview. It was awesome. The idea that Sonia "truthergirl" has an audience and sponsors has my mind thinking over the possibilities .
Then let me ask you this: If I was to prove to you that every President since Eisenhower (remember: the rh negative factor was not officially discovered until 1937) was rhesus negative while the world population is only 5% rhesus negative, would that raise your curiosity, or would you consider that just "one of those things" and turn back to Fox News thinking "something is out there, but "this is just crazy""?
If you are asking if I should be shocked to discover Eisenhower had a physical characteristic that only 5% of the world population had, the answer is no. If he had a characteristic only 1% of the world population had, I would still say no. Your numbers are only going to become meaningful when tested against some other measurable number such as IQ, height, weight, etc.
Dwight D. Eisenhower [131][132][133][134] January 20, 1953 January 20, 1961 [n 11] Republican Richard Nixon 42 43 35 John F. Kennedy [135][136][137][138] January 20, 1961 November 22, 1963 [n 7] Democratic Lyndon B. Johnson 44 36 Lyndon B. Johnson [139][140][141][142] November 22, 1963 January 20, 1969 Democratic vacant[n 3] Hubert Humphrey 45 37 Richard Nixon [143][144][145][146] January 20, 1969 August 9, 1974 [n 4] Republican Spiro Agnew[n 4] January 20, 1969 – October 10, 1973 46 47 vacant[n 3] October 10, 1973 – December 6, 1973 Gerald Ford December 6, 1973 – August 9, 1974 38 Gerald Ford [147][148][149][150] August 9, 1974 January 20, 1977 Republican vacant[n 3] August 9, 1974 – December 19, 1974 Nelson Rockefeller December 19, 1974 – January 20, 1977 39 Jimmy Carter [151][152][153][154] January 20, 1977 January 20, 1981 Democratic Walter Mondale 48 40 Ronald Reagan [155][156][157][158] January 20, 1981 January 20, 1989 Republican George H. W. Bush 49 50 41 George H. W. Bush [159][160][161][162] January 20, 1989 January 20, 1993 Republican Dan Quayle 51 42 Bill Clinton [163][164][165][166] January 20, 1993 January 20, 2001 Democratic Al Gore 52 53 43 George W. Bush [167][168][169][170] January 20, 2001 January 20, 2009 Republican Dick Cheney 54 55 44 Barack Obama I'm talking about these 10 guys who held the Presidency since Eisenhower all being rhesus negative with only 5 percent of the world population being rhesus negative. Curiosity? Or coincidence?
Darn it, ... Not sure why, but I've always known that. Actually, that description does appear to be pretty close. As you're aware, that's quite rare. I found these statistics for blood types in the US: O+ 37% O– 6% A+ 34% A- 6% B+ 10% B– 2% AB+ 4% AB– 1% You too, it's really nice to see you again. Blogmaster, about your list of Presidents...Do you have any good sources on their blood types? I did a brief search, and didn't find much. Except, I did find these... John Kennedy AB+ (?) Blood type: O RH positive Ronald Reagan blood type O positive George Bush Sr. blood type O positive According to the statistics, O positive is the most common. So, it would appear, at least for the few that I've found, that they have a common blood type (If the data I've found is accurate). I think Blogmaster is sincere, and that certain topics on his website are quite thought provoking. With that said, someone "not as sincere" (in the belief in conspiracy theories) could probably make bank. You're very creative, I think you would be a natural. You could even just make stuff up. LOL. Did you ever read about the Pakistani news site making up, and referring to Wikileaks that never existed? The funny thing is, hardly anyone double-checks information (especially if it's something we want to hear).
Sounds like the starsign regimen. Give them stories about life & tell them thats the traits of your starsign. One of my sites does starsigns, we just switch them around every month. BTW i'm O- so believed the lot of course.
My wife is AB-, perhaps she will be the next president. . Light eyes are also a recessive trait. I wonder how many of our presidents have had light eyes ... Oh, I agree, its a great business! Bushmaster nailed it in his analysis below (Did I really just write that?)/ As a business, I love it. A friend of a friend of mine put himself through med school via mail order absolution. He got himself certified as an ordained minister in the State of California ($25 fee), and took out advertisements in every religious journal he could find. By sending him 5$(Check or cash) and the sin for which you wanted absolution, he would absolve you of said sin and send you back a nicely printed card saying as much. After completing his internship, his mail order absolution business was still pulling down more $$$ than his medical practice. He eventually had to abandon the business due to the seedy impression it left on his friends from his upper middle class social circle. Apparently, envelopes with 5$ continued to arrive more than a year after shutting down the business. Whether Blogmaster is sincere or not, really doesn't matter to me. He's figured out a way to monetize peoples political views. My only issue with the business is the nut jobs like ATVKing and IsraeI who read the stuff like it's gospel(instead of gossip), and take action accordingly. In fairness to Blogmaster, those guys seem pretty predisposed to lunacy (Rhesus neg?/JK).
If, most every American President was the rare AB-(1% of population) blood type, then I think that would be interesting, and worth further researching -- and, if that were true, then yes, statistically your wife may be more likely to become President (in comparison to a someone that is not AB-). With regards to the idea that every President since Eisenhower was rhesus negative, actually I'm as skeptical, as the data I've found doesn't appear to support that. I've only found a few, John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, and Bush Sr., but they were all positive blood types. Ha Ha, What is the world coming to! It must be a cold day in ...LOL. They literally paid for their sins. I do admire your friends entrepreneurship. The high tech version of this is Fiverr where you can buy or sell anything for $5. Check this out (not mine): I will text satan asking him to forgive you for your sins for $5 Absolutely. I think there is a also a dark side to conspiracy, where it's used by some to spread hate. And, so many that just gobble it up without even verifying. It's much better, if it's considered to be entertainment, and if a topic really sparks your interest, something for further research.
Yes correlation not causation. I dont understand why this study or article got so much press. Even the rowthorne himself said its highly speculative. Next we will say that because atheists are too stubborn to admit their illogical assumptions on theists that there is a stubborness gene. Just because there is a gene that gives believers the advantage of understanding and accepting certain metaphysical concepts which is too closed off to the atheists narrow minded worldview doesnt mean that the atheist cant overcome this. Belief like unbelief is a free will choice. This research is highly speculative at the very least lol. The fact that from my google search that it was carried by every atheist site and very few theist sites shows me 2 things: that atheists are getting desperate and theists arent bothered very much. Its like me saying that most atheists score twice as high on the asberger quotient test but does it mean they are doomed to being narrow minded unbelievers. When the bible or Quran states that Gods laws were written into our hearts, God didnt mean our genes. HE meant the metaphysical side of us (ie the soul ). Rebecca as far as believing texts, I would say that there are people that have researched biblical texts much more then you or me, and anyone that has done their research knows that it is very reasonable and rational on many grounds to believe in God. I would suggest to dosome intense historical research before you deem a book illogical or crazy because it was written hundreds of years ago. We are living in an age of information yet alot of people still erroniously believe that darwinian evolution is true in regards to macro-evolution even though the evidence is laughable at best. The researcher basically stated that people of religious beliefs will dominate. If rowthorne can get his butt out of his laboratory he would know that religion allready dominates the world with athgeism being between 1 and 3% of theworld population. I dont think it can get more dominating than this
One study classified 2.5% of the world's population as atheists, and a separate 12.7% as non-religious. That's more like 15.2% of the world, not 1 to 3% as you suggest. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism I believe that number is rising fast as the world gets smarter, religion as a whole is doomed.