Evolution | Definition of Evolution by Merriam-Webster

1a : descent with modification from preexisting species : cumulative inherited change in a population of organisms through time leading to the appearance of new forms : the process by which new species or populations of living things develop from preexisting forms through successive generations Evolution is a process of continuous branching and diversification from common trunks. This pattern of irreversible separation gives life’s history its basic directionality. Stephen Jay Gould also : the scientific theory explaining the appearance of new species and varieties through the action of various biological mechanisms (such as natural selection, genetic mutation or drift, and hybridization) Since 1950, developments in molecular biology have had a growing influence on the theory of evolution. Nature In Darwinian evolution, the basic mechanism is genetic mutation, followed by selection of the organisms most likely to survive. Pamela Weintraub

(2) : a process of gradual and relatively peaceful social, political, and economic advance

3 : the process of working out or developing

4 : the extraction of a mathematical root

5 : a process in which the whole universe is a progression of interrelated phenomena

6 : one of a set of prescribed movements

Original post:

Evolution | Definition of Evolution by Merriam-Webster

evolution | Theory, Examples, & Facts | Britannica.com

Evolution, theory in biology postulating that the various types of plants, animals, and other living things on Earth have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generations. The theory of evolution is one of the fundamental keystones of modern biological theory.

Read More on This Topic

heredity: Heredity and evolution

centre of the theory of evolution as proposed by Charles Darwin and Alfred Russell Wallace were the concepts of variation and natural selection.

The diversity of the living world is staggering. More than 2 million existing species of organisms have been named and described; many more remain to be discoveredfrom 10 million to 30 million, according to some estimates. What is impressive is not just the numbers but also the incredible heterogeneity in size, shape, and way of lifefrom lowly bacteria, measuring less than a thousandth of a millimetre in diameter, to stately sequoias, rising 100 metres (300 feet) above the ground and weighing several thousand tons; from bacteria living in hot springs at temperatures near the boiling point of water to fungi and algae thriving on the ice masses of Antarctica and in saline pools at 23 C (9 F); and from giant tube worms discovered living near hydrothermal vents on the dark ocean floor to spiders and larkspur plants existing on the slopes of Mount Everest more than 6,000 metres (19,700 feet) above sea level.

The virtually infinite variations on life are the fruit of the evolutionary process. All living creatures are related by descent from common ancestors. Humans and other mammals descend from shrewlike creatures that lived more than 150 million years ago; mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fishes share as ancestors aquatic worms that lived 600 million years ago; and all plants and animals derive from bacteria-like microorganisms that originated more than 3 billion years ago. Biological evolution is a process of descent with modification. Lineages of organisms change through generations; diversity arises because the lineages that descend from common ancestors diverge through time.

The 19th-century English naturalist Charles Darwin argued that organisms come about by evolution, and he provided a scientific explanation, essentially correct but incomplete, of how evolution occurs and why it is that organisms have featuressuch as wings, eyes, and kidneysclearly structured to serve specific functions. Natural selection was the fundamental concept in his explanation. Natural selection occurs because individuals having more-useful traits, such as more-acute vision or swifter legs, survive better and produce more progeny than individuals with less-favourable traits. Genetics, a science born in the 20th century, reveals in detail how natural selection works and led to the development of the modern theory of evolution. Beginning in the 1960s, a related scientific discipline, molecular biology, enormously advanced knowledge of biological evolution and made it possible to investigate detailed problems that had seemed completely out of reach only a short time previouslyfor example, how similar the genes of humans and chimpanzees might be (they differ in about 12 percent of the units that make up the genes).

This article discusses evolution as it applies generally to living things. For a discussion of human evolution, see the article human evolution. For a more complete treatment of a discipline that has proved essential to the study of evolution, see the articles genetics, human and heredity. Specific aspects of evolution are discussed in the articles coloration and mimicry. Applications of evolutionary theory to plant and animal breeding are discussed in the articles plant breeding and animal breeding. An overview of the evolution of life as a major characteristic of Earths history is given in community ecology: Evolution of the biosphere. A detailed discussion of the life and thought of Charles Darwin is found in the article Darwin, Charles.

Continued here:

evolution | Theory, Examples, & Facts | Britannica.com

Evolution (2001) – IMDb

Edit Storyline

When a meteorite falls to Earth two college professors, Dr. Ira Kane and Prof. Harry Phineas Block, are assigned the job of checking the site out. At the site, they discover organisms not of this planet. Soon the site is taken over by the government, forcing Ira and Harry to the side. As the new life-forms begin to evolve and start to get more and more dangerous, it’s up to the two professors to save the planet. Written byFilmFanUK

Budget:$80,000,000 (estimated)

Opening Weekend USA: $13,408,351,10 June 2001, Wide Release

Gross USA: $38,345,494

Cumulative Worldwide Gross: $98,376,292

Runtime: 101 min

Aspect Ratio: 1.85 : 1

Read the original:

Evolution (2001) – IMDb

Ron Paul – Wikipedia

American politician and physician

Ron Paul

Ronald Ernest Paul

Ronald Ernest Paul (born August 20, 1935) is an American author, physician, and retired politician who served as the U.S. Representative for Texas’s 22nd congressional district from 1976 to 1977 and again from 1979 to 1985, and for Texas’s 14th congressional district from 1997 to 2013. On three occasions, he sought the presidency of the United States: as the Libertarian Party nominee in 1988 and as a candidate in the Republican primaries of 2008 and 2012. Paul is a critic of the federal government’s fiscal policies, especially the existence of the Federal Reserve and the tax policy, as well as the militaryindustrial complex, and the War on Drugs. He has also been a vocal critic of mass surveillance policies such as the USA PATRIOT Act and the NSA surveillance programs. He was the first chairman of the conservative PAC Citizens for a Sound Economy[2] and has been characterized as the “intellectual godfather” of the Tea Party movement.[3][4]

Paul served as a flight surgeon in the U.S. Air Force from 1963 to 1968, and worked as an obstetrician-gynecologist from the 1960s to the 1980s.[5] He became the first Representative in history to serve concurrently with their child in the Senate when his son, Rand Paul, was elected to the U.S. Senate from Kentucky in 2010.[6] Paul is a Senior Fellow of the Mises Institute,[7] and has published a number of books and promoted the ideas of economists of the Austrian School such as Murray Rothbard and Ludwig von Mises during his political campaigns.

On July 12, 2011, Paul announced that he would forgo seeking another term in Congress in order to focus on his presidential bid.[8] On May 14, 2012, Paul announced that he would not be competing in any other presidential primaries but that he would still compete for delegates in states where the primary elections have already been held.[9] At the 2012 Republican National Convention, Paul received 190 delegate votes. In January 2013, Paul retired from Congress but still remains active on college campuses, giving speeches promoting his libertarian vision.[10][11] Paul received one electoral vote from a Texas faithless elector in the 2016 presidential election, making him the oldest person to receive an electoral vote, as well as the second registered Libertarian presidential candidate in history to receive an Electoral College vote after John Hospers.

Ronald Ernest Paul was born on August 20, 1935, in Pittsburgh,[12] the son of Howard Caspar Paul (19041997), who ran a small dairy company, and Margaret Paul (ne Dumont; 19082001). His paternal grandfather emigrated from Germany,[13] and his paternal grandmother, a devout Christian, was a first-generation German American.[14]

As a junior at suburban Dormont High School, he was the 200 meter dash state champion.[15] Paul went to Gettysburg College, where he was a member of the Lambda Chi Alpha fraternity.[16] He graduated with a B.S. degree in Biology in 1957.[15]

Paul earned a Doctor of Medicine degree from Duke University’s School of Medicine in 1961, and completed his medical internship at the Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit and his residency in obstetrics and gynecology at Magee-Womens Hospital in Pittsburgh.[17][18] Paul served as a flight surgeon in the United States Air Force from 1963 to 1965 and then in the United States Air National Guard from 1965 to 1968. Paul and his wife then relocated to Texas, where he began a private practice in obstetrics and gynecology.[18]

While a medical resident in the 1960s, Paul was influenced by Friedrich Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom, which caused him to read other publications by Ludwig von Mises and Ayn Rand. He came to know economists Hans Sennholz and Murray Rothbard well, and credits his interest in the study of economics to them.[19]

When President Richard Nixon “closed the gold window” by ending American participation in the Bretton Woods System, thus ending the U.S. dollar’s loose association with gold[19] on August 15, 1971, Paul decided to enter politics[20] and became a Republican candidate for the United States Congress.[21]

In 1974, incumbent Robert R. Casey defeated him for the 22nd district.[18] President Gerald Ford later appointed Casey to direct the Federal Maritime Commission, and Paul won an April 1976 special election to the vacant office after a runoff.[22][23][24] Paul lost the next regular election to Democrat Robert Gammage by fewer than 300votes (0.2%), but defeated Gammage in a 1978 rematch, and was reelected in 1980 and 1982.[25][26][27] Gammage underestimated Paul’s popularity among local mothers: “I had real difficulty down in Brazoria County, where he practiced, because he’d delivered half the babies in the county. There were only two obstetricians in the county, and the other one was his partner.”[28]

Paul served in Congress three different periods: first from 1976 to 1977, after he won a special election, then from 1979 to 1985, and finally from 1997 to 2013.[29]

In his early years, Paul served on the House Banking Committee, where he blamed the Federal Reserve for inflation and spoke against the banking mismanagement that resulted in the savings and loan crisis.[13][30] Paul argued for a return to the gold standard maintained by the US from 18731933, and with Senator Jesse Helms convinced the Congress to study the issue.[19] He spoke against the reinstatement of registration for the military draft in 1980, in opposition to President Jimmy Carter and the majority of his fellow Republican members of Congress.[31]

During his first term, Paul founded the Foundation for Rational Economics and Education (FREE), a non-profit think tank dedicated to promoting principles of limited government and free-market economics.[32][33] In 1984, Paul became the first chairman of the Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE),[2] a conservative political group founded by Charles and David Koch “to fight for less government, lower taxes, and less regulation.” CSE started a Tea Party protest against high taxes in 2002.[34] In 2004, Citizens for a Sound Economy split into two new organizations, with Citizens for a Sound Economy being renamed as FreedomWorks, and Citizens for a Sound Economy Foundation becoming Americans for Prosperity. The two organizations would become key players in the Tea Party movement from 2009 onward.

Paul proposed term-limit legislation multiple times, while himself serving four terms in the House of Representatives.[31] In 1984, he decided to retire from the House in order to run for the U.S. Senate, complaining in his House farewell address that “Special interests have replaced the concern that the Founders had for general welfare… It’s difficult for one who loves true liberty and utterly detests the power of the state to come to Washington for a period of time and not leave a true cynic.”[35][36] Paul lost the Republican primary to Phil Gramm, who had switched parties the previous year from Democrat to Republican. Another candidate of the senatorial primary was Henry Grover, a conservative former state legislator who had lost the 1972 gubernatorial general election to the Democrat Dolph Briscoe, Jr.[37][38]

On Paul’s departure from the House, his seat was assumed by former state representative Tom DeLay, who would later become House Majority Leader.[39]

Following the loss of the 1984 senate race, Paul returned to his obstetrics practice and took part in a number of other business ventures.[13][40] Along with his former congressional chief of staff, Lew Rockwell, Paul founded a for-profit enterprise, Ron Paul & Associates, Inc. (RP&A) in 1984, with Paul serving as president, Rockwell as vice president, Paul’s wife Carol as secretary, and daughter Lori Pyeatt as treasurer.The company published a variety of political and investment-oriented newsletters, including Ron Paul Freedom Report and Ron Paul Survival Report,[41] and by 1993 was generating revenues in excess of $900,000.[42]

Paul also co-owned a mail-order coin dealership, Ron Paul Coins, for twelve years with Burt Blumert, who continued to operate the dealership after Paul resumed office in 1996.[43][44] Paul spoke multiple times at the American Numismatic Association’s 1988 convention.[43] He worked with his Foundation for Rational Economics and Education on such projects as establishing the National Endowment for Liberty, producing the At Issue public policy series that was broadcast on the Discovery Channel and CNBC,[32] and continuing publication of newsletters.

Paul left the Republican Party in 1987 and launched a bid for the presidency running on the Libertarian Party ticket. His candidacy was seen as problematic because of the party’s long support for freedom of choice on abortions. Native American activist Russell Means, Paul’s rival for the nomination, emphasized that he was pro-choice on the abortion issue.[45] In a forum held prior to the nomination, Means dismissed the greater funds raised by Paul’s campaign, commenting that Means was receiving “10 times more press” than the former Congressman and was therefore “100 times more effective”.[46]

In the 1988 presidential election, Paul was on the ballot in 46 states,[47] scoring third in the popular vote with 432,179votes (0.5%).[48] Paul was kept off the ballot in Missouri, due to what the St. Louis Post-Dispatch termed a “technicality,” and received votes there only when written in,[49] just as he did in North Carolina.[50]

According to Paul, his presidential campaign was about more than obtaining office; he sought to promote his libertarian ideas, often to school and university groups regardless of vote eligibility. He said, “We’re just as interested in the future generation as this election. These kids will vote eventually, and maybe, just maybe, they’ll go home and talk to their parents.”[47]

Paul considered campaigning for president in 1992,[51] but instead chose to endorse Pat Buchanan that year, and served as an adviser to Buchanan’s Republican presidential primary campaign against incumbent President George H. W. Bush.[52]

During 1996, Paul was re-elected to Congress after a difficult campaign. The Republican National Committee endorsed incumbent Greg Laughlin in the primary; Paul won with assistance from baseball pitcher, constituent, and friend Nolan Ryan, tax activist and publisher Steve Forbes[13] and conservative commentator Pat Buchanan (the latter two of whom had had presidential campaigns that year). Paul narrowly defeated Democratic attorney Charles “Lefty” Morris in the fall election, despite Morris’ criticism over controversial statements in several newsletters that Paul published.

In 1998 and 2000, Paul defeated Loy Sneary, a Democratic Bay City, Texas, rice farmer and former Matagorda County judge.[20]In the 2008 Republican primary,[53] he defeated Friendswood city councilman Chris Peden,[54] with over 70 percent of the vote[55] and ran unopposed in the general election.[56] In the 2010Republican primary, Paul defeated three opponents with 80percent of the vote.[57]

On July 12, 2011, Paul announced that he would not seek re-election to the House in order to pursue the 2012 presidential election.[58][59]

Of the 620 bills that Paul had sponsored through December 2011, over a period of more than 22 years in Congress, only one had been signed into law a lifetime success rate of less than 0.3%.[60] The sole measure authored by Paul that was ultimately enacted allowed for a federal customhouse to be sold to a local historic preservation society (H.R. 2121 in 2009).[60]

By amending other legislation, he has helped prohibit funding for national identification numbers, funding for federal teacher certification,[20] International Criminal Court jurisdiction over the U.S. military, American participation with any U.N. global tax, and surveillance of peaceful First Amendment activities by citizens.[61]

Paul was honorary chairman of, and is a member of the Republican Liberty Caucus, a political action committee that describes its goal as electing “liberty-minded, limited-government individuals”.[62] He is an initiating member of the Congressional Rural Caucus, which deals with agricultural and rural issues, and the 140-member Congressional Wildlife Refuge Caucus.[63]

Paul served on the following committees and subcommittees.[64]

With the election of the 112th Congress, and a resulting GOP majority in the House, Paul became the chairman of the Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology starting in January 2011.[65]

Paul’s congressional career ended on January 3, 2013 with the swearing in of the 113th Congress.

Paul formally declared his candidacy for the 2008 Republican nomination on March 12, 2007, on C-SPAN.[66] Few major politicians endorsed him, and his campaign was largely ignored by traditional media.[67] However, he attracted an intensely loyal grassroots following,[68] interacting through internet social media.[69][70][71] In May 2007, shortly after the first televised primary debates, the blogs search engine site Technorati.com listed Paul’s name as the term most frequently searched for;[69] and Paul’s campaign claimed that Paul had more YouTube channel subscribers than Barack Obama or any other candidate for president.[72] For a candidate who had had relatively low national name recognition prior to entering the race, Paul did surprisingly well in fundraising, taking in more money than any other Republican candidate in the fourth quarter of 2007, as the primary season headed into the Iowa caucuses.[73][74]

Despite benefiting from large numbers of campaign contributions from individual donors,[75] and the efforts of tech-savvy supporters determined to keep his name a frequent topic of discussion on the internet,[69] over the course of the campaign Paul was unable to translate the enthusiasm of his core supporters into large enough numbers of actual primary votes to unseat his rivals.

Paul came in 5th place in both the January 4 Iowa caucuses (10% of votes cast)[76] and the January 8 New Hampshire primary (8%).[77] With the exception of the Nevada caucuses January 19, where he came in 2nd (14%) behind Romney (51%), he did little better through the rest of January: Michigan 4th (6%), South Carolina 5th (4%), Florida 5th (3%). On SuperTuesday, February 5, he placed 4th in almost every state, generally taking in a mere 36% of the votes although he did better in the northern states of North Dakota (21%, 3rd place) and Montana (25%, 2nd place).[78][79]

By March, front-runner John McCain had secured enough pledged delegates to guarantee that he would win the nomination, and Romney and Huckabee had both formally withdrawn from the race. Paul, who had won no state primaries, knew that it was now mathematically impossible for him to win the nomination, as he had captured only 20[80] 40 pledged delegates compared to more than 1,191 for McCain, yet he refused to concede the race and said that it was unlikely that he would ultimately endorse McCain.[81][82][83] Over the next few weeks, Paul’s supporters clashed with establishment Republicans at several county and state party conventions over state party rules, the party platforms, and selection of delegates for the national convention.[84][85][86] In one of the more dramatic moments, Nevada’s state party leaders, outmaneuvered by Paul supporters at the state nominating convention, resorted to the highly unusual measure of prematurely and abruptly shutting down the convention before selecting national delegates, with a plan to reconvene at a later date.[87][88]

On June 12, 2008, Paul finally withdrew his bid for the Republican nomination. He later said that one of the reasons he did not run in the general election as a third-party candidate, after losing the primaries, was that, as a concession to gain ballot access in certain states, he had signed legally binding agreements to not run a third-party campaign if he lost the primary.[89] Some of the $4 million remaining campaign contributions was invested into the new political action and advocacy group called Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty.[90]

At a September 10, 2008, press conference, Paul announced his general support of four third-party candidates: Cynthia McKinney (Green Party); Bob Barr (Libertarian Party); Chuck Baldwin (Constitution Party); and Ralph Nader (independent). He said that each of them had pledged to adhere to a policy of balancing budgets, bringing the troops home, defending privacy and personal liberties, and investigating the Federal Reserve. Paul also said that under no circumstances would he be endorsing either of the two main parties’ candidates (McCain Republican Party, or Obama Democratic Party) because there were no real differences between them, and because neither of them, if elected, would seek to make the fundamental changes in governance that were necessary. He urged instead that, rather than contribute to the “charade” that the two-party election system had become, the voters support the third-party candidates as a protest vote, to force change in the election process.[91][92] Later that same day, Paul gave a televised interview with Nader saying much the same again.[93]

Two weeks later, “shocked and disappointed” that Bob Barr (the Libertarian nominee) had pulled out of attending the press conference at the last minute and had admonished Paul for remaining neutral and failing to say which specific candidate Paul would vote for in the general election, Paul released a statement saying that he had decided to endorse Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate, for president.[94]

Paul withdrew from active campaigning in the last weeks of the primary election period. He received 42,426 votes, or 0.03% of the total cast, in the general election.[95]

Paul won several early straw polls for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination[96] and in late April 2011, he formed an official exploratory committee.[97][98] He participated in the first Republican presidential debate on May 5, 2011[99] and on May 13, 2011, Paul formally announced his candidacy in an interview on ABC’s Good Morning America.[100] He placed second in the 2011 Ames Straw Poll, missing first by 0.9%.[101]

In December 2011, with Paul’s increased support, the controversy over racist and homophobic statements in several Ron Paul newsletters in the 1980s and early 1990s once again gained media attention.[102] During this time Paul supporters asserted that he was continually ignored by the media despite his significant support, citing examples of where television news shows would fail to mention Paul in discussions of the Republican presidential hopefuls even when he was polling second.[103][104][105]

Ron Paul’s presidential campaign managers Jesse Benton, John Tate and Demetri Kesari were all found guilty of paying former Iowa State Senator Kent Sorenson $73,000 to switch his support from Rep. Michele Bachmann to Paul.[106] In court papers filed in August 2014, Sorenson said that he had been paid by both presidential campaigns for his endorsement and plead guilty to criminal charges stemming from the incident.[107]

Paul came in third in the Iowa Republican Caucus held on January 3, 2012. Out of a turnout of 121,503 votes, Paul took 26,036 (21%) of the certified votes. Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney finished in a virtual tie for first place with 25% each,[108] although Ron Paul had ultimately won Iowa at the Republican National Convention gathering 22 delegates to Mitt Romney’s 5. In the New Hampshire Primary held on January 10, 2012, Paul received 23% of the votes and came in second after Romney’s 39%.[109]

Paul’s results then declined, despite the withdrawal of candidates Michele Bachmann, Jon Huntsman and Rick Perry. He had fourth-place finishes in the next two primaries, on January 21 in South Carolina (with 13% of the vote)[110] and on January 31 in Florida (where he received 7% of the vote).[111][112][113]

On February 4, Paul finished third in Nevada with 18.8% of the vote.[114] Three non-binding primaries were held on February 7; Paul took 3rd place in Colorado[115] and Missouri[116] with 13% and 12% of the vote respectively. He fared better in Minnesota[117] with 27%, finishing second to Rick Santorum.

On May 14, Paul’s campaign announced that due to lack of funds (though despite financial backing from financiers Peter Thiel and Mark Spitznagel)[118] he would no longer actively campaign for votes in the 11 remaining primary states, including Texas and California, that had not yet voted.[9][119] He would, however, continue to seek to win delegates for the national party convention in the states that had already voted.

In June, a group of 132 supporters of Paul, demanding the freedom as delegates to the upcoming Republican party national convention to cast votes for Paul, filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court against the Republican National Committee and 55 state and territorial Republican party organizations for allegedly coercing delegates to choose Mitt Romney as the party’s presidential nominee.[120] The suit alleged that there had been “a systematic campaign of election fraud at state conventions,” employing rigging of voting machines, ballot stuffing, and falsification of ballot totals. The suit further pointed to incidents at state conventions, including acts of violence and changes in procedural rules, allegedly intended to deny participation of Paul supporters in the party decision-making and to prevent votes from being cast for Paul. An attorney representing the complainants said that Paul campaign advisor Doug Wead had voiced support for the legal action.[120] Paul himself told CNN that although the lawsuit was not a part of his campaign’s strategy and that he had not been advising his supporters to sue, he was not going to tell his supporters not to sue, if they had a legitimate argument. “If they’re not following the rules, you have a right to stand up for the rules. I think for the most part these winning caucuses that we’ve been involved in we have followed the rules. And the other side has at times not followed the rules.”[121]

Paul declined to speak at the Republican National Convention as a matter of principle, saying that the convention planners had demanded that his remarks be vetted by the Romney campaign and that he make an unqualified endorsement of Romney.[122] Paul had felt that “It wouldn’t be my speech… That would undo everything I’ve done in the last 30 years. I don’t fully endorse him for president.”[122] Many of Paul’s supporters and delegates walked out of the convention in protest over rules adopted by the convention that reduced their delegate count and that would make it harder for non-establishment candidates to win the party’s nomination in future elections.[123] Supporters and media commentators had noted that the delegations from states where Paul had had the most support were given the worst seats in the convention hall, while delegations from regions with no electoral votes, such as the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, and Puerto Rico, were given prime seats at the front.[124][125]

As in 2008, in 2012 Paul ultimately refused to endorse the ticket selected by the Republican Party. He said that there was no essential difference between Romney and his Democratic opponent, President Obama, on the most critical policies: “I’ve been in this business a long time and believe me there is essentially no difference from one administration to another no matter what the platforms… The foreign policy stays the same, the monetary policy stays the same, there’s no proposal for any real cuts and both parties support it.”[126] Paul received 26,204 write-in votes, or 0.02% of the total cast in the election.[127]

Throughout his entire tenure in Congress, Paul has represented his district as a member of the Republican Party. However, he has frequently taken positions in direct opposition to the other members and the leadership of the party, and he has sometimes publicly questioned whether he really belonged in the party.

Paul voted for Dwight D. Eisenhower for president in 1956 when he was 21 years old.[128] He had been a lifelong supporter of the Republican Party by the time he entered politics in the mid-1970s.[128] He was one of the first elected officials in the nation to support Ronald Reagan’s presidential campaign,[129] and he actively campaigned for Reagan in 1976 and 1980.[130] After Reagan’s election in 1980, Paul quickly became disillusioned with the Reagan administration’s policies. He later recalled being the only Republican to vote against Reagan budget proposals in 1981,[131][132] aghast that “in 1977, Jimmy Carter proposed a budget with a $38 billion deficit, and every Republican in the House voted against it. In 1981, Reagan proposed a budget with a $45 billion deficit which turned out to be $113 billion and Republicans were cheering his great victory. They were living in a storybook land.”[129] He expressed his disgust with the political culture of both major parties in a speech delivered in 1984 upon resigning from the House of Representatives to prepare for a (failed) run for the Senate, and he eventually apologized to his libertarian friends for having supported Reagan.[131]

By 1987, Paul was ready to sever all ties to the Republican Party, as he explained in a blistering resignation letter: “Since [1981] Ronald Reagan and the Republican Party have given us skyrocketing deficits, and astoundingly a doubled national debt. How is it that the party of balanced budgets, with control of the White House and Senate, accumulated red ink greater than all previous administrations put together? There is no credibility left for the Republican Party as a force to reduce the size of government. That is the message of the Reagan years.”[128][130] A month later he announced he would seek the 1988 Libertarian Party nomination for president.

During the 1988 campaign, Paul called Reagan “a dramatic failure”[130] and complained that “Reagan’s record is disgraceful. He starts wars, breaks the law, supplies terrorists with guns made at taxpayers’ expense and lies about it to the American people.”[133] Paul predicted that “the Republicans are on their way out as a major party,”[131] and he said that, although registered as a Republican, he had always been a libertarian at heart.[131][132]

Paul returned to his private medical practice and managing several business ventures after losing the 1988 election; but by 1996, he was ready to return to politics, this time running on the Republican Party ticket again. He said that he had never read the entire Libertarian platform when he ran for president as a Libertarian in 1988, and that “I worked for the Libertarians on my terms, not theirs.”[134] He added that in terms of a political label he preferred to call himself “a constitutionalist. In Congress I took an oath to uphold the Constitution, not the (Republican) platform.”[134]

When he lost the Republican Party presidential primary election in 2008, Paul criticized the two major political parties, saying that there was no real difference between the parties and that neither of them truly intended to challenge the status quo. He refused to endorse the Republican Party’s nominee for president, John McCain, and lent his support to third-party candidates instead.[135][136]

In the 2012 presidential campaign, during which he acknowledged it was unlikely that he would win the Republican Party nomination,[137] Paul again asserted that he was participating in the Republican Party on his own terms, trying to persuade the rest of the party to move toward his positions rather than joining in with theirs.[138] He expressed doubt that he would support any of his rivals should they win the nomination, warning that, “If the policies of the Republican Party are the same as the Democrat Party and they don’t want to change anything on foreign policy, they don’t want to cut anything, they don’t want to audit the Fed and find out about monetary policy, they don’t want to have actual change in government, that is a problem for me.”[139] On that same theme he said in another interview, “I would be reluctant to jump on board and tell all of the supporters that have given me trust and money that all of a sudden, I’d say, [all] we’ve done is for naught. So, let’s support anybody at all even if they disagree with everything that we do.”[140]

Paul has been described as conservative and libertarian.[13] According to University of Georgia political scientist Keith Poole, Paul had the most conservative voting record of any member of Congress from 1937 to 2002,[141][142] and is the most conservative of the candidates that had sought the 2012 Republican nomination for president.[143] Other analyses have judged Paul much more moderate. The National Journal, for instance, rated Paul only the 145th most conservative member of the House of Representatives (out of 435) based on votes cast in 2010.[144][145] The National Journal’s analysis gave Paul a 2011 composite ideological rating of 54% liberal and 46% conservative.[146]

The foundation of Paul’s political philosophy is the conviction that “the proper role for government in America is to provide national defense, a court system for civil disputes, a criminal justice system for acts of force and fraud, and little else.”[147]He has been nicknamed “Dr. No,”[20] reflecting both his medical degree and his insistence that he will “never vote for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution.”[30]

Paul has advocated for a noninterventionist foreign policy.[148] He advocates withdrawal from the United Nations, and from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, for reasons of maintaining strong national sovereignty.[149]

He voted for the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists in response to the September 11 attacks, but suggested war alternatives such as authorizing the president to grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal targeting specific terrorists. An opponent of the Iraq War and potential war with Iran, he has also criticized neoconservatism and U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, arguing that both inadvertently cause terrorist reprisals against Americans, such as the 9/11 attacks. Paul has stated that “Israel is our close friend” and that it is not the place of the United States to “dictate how Israel runs her affairs”.[150]

Paul endorses constitutional rights, such as the right to keep and bear arms, and habeas corpus for political detainees. He opposes the Patriot Act, federal use of torture, presidential autonomy, a national identification card, warrantless domestic surveillance, and the draft. Paul also believes that the notion of the separation of church and state is currently misused by the court system: “In case after case, the Supreme Court has used the infamous ‘separation of church and state’ metaphor to uphold court decisions that allow the federal government to intrude upon and deprive citizens of their religious liberty.”[151]

Sometime within the same month but much after the event of authorities executing a lock-down in sequence to the April 2013 Boston Marathon bombing, Paul commented on the tactics used by governing forces into a harsh criticism that he has written as a “military-style occupation of an American city”.[11]

Paul is a proponent of Austrian School economics; he has authored six books on the subject, and displays pictures of Austrian School economists Friedrich Hayek, Murray Rothbard, and Ludwig von Mises (as well as of President Grover Cleveland and Chicago School economist Milton Friedman)[152] on his office wall. He regularly votes against almost all proposals for new government spending, initiatives, or taxes;[153] he cast two thirds of all the lone negative votes in the House during a 19951997 period.[20]

He has pledged never to raise taxes[154] and states he has never voted to approve a budget deficit. Paul believes that the country could abolish the individual income tax by scaling back federal spending to its fiscal year 2000 levels;[155][156] financing government operations would be primarily by excise taxes and non-protectionist tariffs. He endorses eliminating most federal government agencies, terming them unnecessary bureaucracies.

On April 15, 2011, Paul was one of four Republican members of Congress to vote against Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget proposal, known as “The Path to Prosperity.”[157]

Paul has consistently warned of hyperinflation and called for the gold standard as far back as 1981.[158][159] Since 1999, he has introduced bills into each Congress seeking to eliminate the Federal Reserve System in a single year.[160][161][162]

He endorses free trade, rejecting membership in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the World Trade Organization as “managed trade”.

As a free-market environmentalist, he asserts private property rights in relation to environmental protection and pollution prevention.[163] He called global warming a hoax in a 2009 Fox Business interview, saying, “You know, the greatest hoax I think that has been around in many, many years if not hundreds of years has been this hoax on the environment and global warming.”[164] He acknowledges there is clear evidence of rising temperatures in some parts of the globe, but says that temperatures are cooling in other parts.[165]

Paul has stated that “The government shouldn’t be in the medical business.” He pushes to eliminate federal involvement with and management of health care, which he argues would allow prices to decrease due to the fundamental dynamics of a free market.[166] He also opposes federal government influenza inoculation programs.[167]

Paul endorses increased border security and opposes welfare for illegal immigrants, birthright citizenship and amnesty;[168] he voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006.

He is an outspoken proponent of increased ballot access for third-party candidates.[169] He has sought to repeal the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, also known as the Motor Voter law.[170]

Paul has stated that secession from the United States “is a deeply American principle” and that “If the possibility of secession is completely off the table there is nothing to stop the federal government from continuing to encroach on our liberties and no recourse for those who are sick and tired of it.”[171] Paul wrote the remarks in a post on his Congressional website in one of his final public statements as a member of Congress, noting that many petitions had been submitted to the White House calling for secession in the wake of the November 2012 election.[172]

He terms himself “strongly pro-life”,[173] “an unshakable foe of abortion”,[174] and believes regulation or ban[175] on medical decisions about maternal or fetal health is “best handled at the state level”.[176] His abortion-related legislation, such as the Sanctity of Life Act, is intended to negate Roe v. Wade and to get “the federal government completely out of the business of regulating state matters.”[177] Paul says his years as an obstetrician led him to believe life begins at conception.[178]

Paul opposes the federal War on Drugs,[179] and believes the states should decide whether to regulate or deregulate drugs such as medical marijuana.[180]

Citing the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, Paul advocates states’ rights to decide how to regulate social matters not cited directly by the Constitution. He opposes federal regulation of the death penalty[176] (although he opposes capital punishment),[181] of education,[182] and of marriage, and endorsed revising the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy to concern mainly disruptive sexual behavior (whether heterosexual or homosexual).[183]

Paul was critical of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, arguing that it sanctioned federal interference in the labor market and did not improve race relations. He once remarked: “The Civil Rights Act of 1964 not only violated the Constitution and reduced individual liberty; it also failed to achieve its stated goals of promoting racial harmony and a color-blind society”.[184] Paul opposes affirmative action.[185]

Beginning in 1978, for more than two decades Paul and his associates published a number of political and investment-oriented newsletters bearing his name (Dr. Ron Paul’s Freedom Report, The Ron Paul Survival Report, the Ron Paul Investment Letter, and the Ron Paul Political Report).[41]

A number of the newsletters, particularly in the period between 1988 and 1994 when Paul was no longer in Congress, contained material that later proved controversial. Topics included conspiracy theories, anti-government militia movements, and race wars.[186] During Paul’s 1996 congressional election campaign, and his 2008 and 2012 presidential primary campaigns, critics charged that some of the passages reflected racist, anti-Semitic, and homophobic bigotry.[20][187][188][189]

In a 1996 interview, Paul did not deny writing the newsletters and defended some of their contents, but specified that he opposes racism.[190][191][192] In March 2001, Paul said he did not write the commentaries, but stopped short of denying authorship in 1996 because his campaign advisers had thought it would be too confusing and that he had to live with the material published under his name.[193][194] Half a dozen libertarian activists, including some still closely associated with Paul, pointed to Lew Rockwell as the primary ghostwriter of the newsletters. Rockwell denied responsibility for the content.[41] In 2011, Paul’s spokesperson Jesse Benton said Paul had “taken moral responsibility because they appeared under his name and slipped through under his watch.”[195]

In April 2013, Paul founded the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, a foreign policy think tank that seeks to promote his non-interventionist views.[196] The institute is part of his larger foundation Foundation for Rational Economics and Education.

In the same month, he began to offer the Ron Paul Curriculum, a homeschool online curriculum developed by Gary North and taught from a “free market and Christian” perspective; it is free from grades kindergarten5 and available to paid members from 612.[197]

In June 2013, Paul criticized the NSA surveillance program and praised Edward Snowden for having performed a “great service to the American people by exposing the truth about what our government is doing in secret”.[198]

On March 28, 2017, Paul predicted the markets would lower during the year and said President Trump had taken a risk with crediting himself for the postelection market surge, reasoning Washington was still predominantly unchanged.[199]

Paul has been a critic of Donald Trump’s plans to increase the number of military personnel in Afghanistan. In August 2017, he said that Americans don’t see Afghanistan as a threat to their personal security and being aggressive in foreign policy only loses Trump some of his support base.[200] Paul has also called for Trump to bring American troops back from Syria in April 2018, on the grounds that the threat from ISIS has been eliminated.[201]

In 2013, Paul established the “Ron Paul Channel”, an Internet broadcast. Its slogan is “Turn Off Your TV. Turn On the Truth.”[202] Speaking about the channel, Paul said, “I was at a debate one time a couple years ago, where I didn’t think I got a fair shake. In a two-hour debate, I had 89 seconds. I thought, maybe there’s something wrong with the media. Maybe they’re not covering us fairly. I’m just using it as a pun, but there’s a bit of truth to this. We don’t get a fair shake. The people who believe in liberty and limited government don’t expect it from the ordinary media.” Speaking about his youth appeal, he noted, “They don’t sit and watch TV and turn the programs on at seven o’clock to watch us like that so I thought the technology was there. The country is ripe for the continuation of this revolution.”[203]

In May 2015, Ron Paul ended all relationships with the Voices of Liberty and the Ron Paul Channel to start a new internet broadcast called the Ron Paul Liberty Report. According to Paul himself, it will not cost a thing, unlike the previous Ron Paul Channel. In the announcement of the ended relationship, Paul said, “But the message I have always tried to deliver over the years has always been the same, and that is spreading the message of liberty. Right now I am very much engaged in doing that through the internet. But, I believe we can do better. Right now, the program has changed to the Ron Paul Liberty Report, and that is what we do, we report on liberty in context of what is going on in daily activity and what is going on in the news.” Paul went on to say that it will be more locally controlled, unlike the previous Ron Paul Channel. Paul continued to say it will be produced out of Texas, instead of California.[204] As of April 2019, the “Ron Paul Liberty Report” channel has received more than 17 million views on YouTube.[205]

In April 2015, Paul began appearing in infomercials warning about an upcoming financial meltdown as a result of the imminent crash of the world’s currencies.[206][207] He urges listeners to read America 2020: The Survival Blueprint, a book written by Porter Stansberry.[208]

Paul endorsed his son, Senator Rand Paul, in the Republican primary and campaigned for him in Iowa.[209] After his son dropped out, Paul had said that no Republican or Democratic candidate even came close to holding Libertarian views.[210] Paul was disappointed in the Libertarian Party for nominating Gary Johnson for President of the United States and told independent voters that Jill Stein was a better candidate for those who “lean towards progressivism and liberalism”.[211]

Paul received one electoral vote from a Texas faithless elector, South Texas College political science professor William Greene (who had been pledged to Donald Trump),[212] in the 2016 presidential election,[213][214] making Paul the oldest person ever to receive an electoral vote.

Paul has been married to Carol (Carolyn) Wells since 1957.[215] They met in 1952 when Wells asked Paul to be her escort to her 16th birthday party.[216][217] They have five children, who were baptized Episcopalian:[13] Ronald, Lori, Randal, Robert, and Joy. Paul’s son Randal is the junior United States senator from the state of Kentucky. Raised a Lutheran, Paul later became a Baptist.[218] Since 1995, Carol Paul has published the Ron Paul Family Cookbook, a collection of recipes she and her friends contributed, and which was sold in part to support Ron Paul’s political campaigns.[219] His life and career is the subject of the 2012 film Ron Paul Uprising.[220]

Paul and his wife currently reside in Lake Jackson, Texas.[221]

Originally posted here:

Ron Paul – Wikipedia

Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity

may 20, 2019 Andrew Napolitano: President Trump Is Continuing the Long Trend of Expanding Presidential Power President Donald Trump is participating in a disturbing trend, dating back to the Woodrow Wilson presidency, of United States presidents acting to expand presidential power beyond what is prescribed in the US Constitution, declares Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst Andrew Napolitano in a new episode of his Fox News video editorial series Judge Napolitanos Chambers. read on…

may 17, 2019 Andrew Napolitano Praises San Franciscos Facial Recognition Technology Ban Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst Andrew Napolitano, in a new interview with host Stuart Varney at Fox Business, praised the San Francisco Board of Supervisors vote Tuesday to make San Francisco the first American city tobancity government use, including by the citys police, of facial recognition surveillance technology. read on…

may 14, 2019 Who Attacked Four Oil Tankers in United Arab Emirates? Earlier this week mysterious reports came in of a sabotage of four (empty) oil tankers in port in the United Arab Emirates. They were not destroyed, just damaged. With the US military on a hair trigger in the Middle East, any suggestion that Iran was behind it would lead a big step closer to war. Some unnamed US officials blamed Iran, while the Iranians blamed Israel. RPI Director Daniel McAdams participated in a debate on PressTV on this topic and on US/Iran relations in general… read on…

may 13, 2019 Lawrence Wilkerson: We Could See a Repeat of the Vietnam War in Venezuela If the United States militaryinvades Venezuela, we can expect to see a repeat there of what happened in Vietnam a long war costly in lives lost and ending in defeat for the US. That is the conclusion of College of William & Mary professor and former Army Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson in a recent interview with host Sharmini Peries at The Real News. read on…

may 11, 2019 Lawrence Wilkerson Warns the US is Driving Down a Highway to War with China Former Army Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, who was chief of staff for Secretary of State Colin Powell in the George W. Bush administration, warns in a new The Real News interview with host Sharmini Peries that the United States government is driving down a highway to war with China a war for which Wilkerson sees no sound justification. read on…

Go here to read the rest:

Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity

Ron Paul: The U.S. Dollar Is In a Bubble, Bitcoin An …

Former US presidential candidate and congressman Ron Paul is a regular critic of the United States Federal Reserve and of the countrys economic policy. In the past, the libertarian politician has spoken out in support of cryptocurrencies, suggesting that making the digital assets exempt from taxation could help avoid a Fed-created recession.

Link:

Ron Paul: The U.S. Dollar Is In a Bubble, Bitcoin An …

Ron Paul Liberty Report

America’s monetary system is a government-created disaster. The Federal Reserve System is in fact a “system,” and it was erected by an Act of Congress in 1913. This crony arrangement between politicians and bankers lies at the root of most (if not all) of America’s major problems.

Unfortunately, with political pressures being what they are, politicians will not address the Federal Reserve System until economic reality forces them to. Politicians will not “End The Fed” until they have no other choice.

Read the rest

Step one of her plan would cancel most or all of the student loan debt carried by nearly 45 million Americans, up to $50,000 per person as long as their household incomes dont exceed $250,000. This step alone would result in a one-time cost of $640 billion.Read the rest

This is understandable, given that some estimates project costs toexceed $32 trillionover its first ten years, and that Medicare is already suffering massive losses more than$130 billionsince 2008 along with facing unfunded liabilities inexcess of $30 trillion.

Read the rest

Read the rest

Read the rest

It wasn’t.

What happened in Vietnam hadnothing

Read the rest

Incoming US Defense Secretary Shanahan has informed us that Iran’s nefarious intentions toward the US and its allies in the region have been put on hold thanks to the deployment of a US carrier strike group and a handful of B-52s to the region. Details about the original threat, claimed by Bolton, Pompeo, and others, have not been revealed. We are expected to take the neocons’ word for it that there actually was a threat and that they defeated it.Streamed LIVE May 22, 2019

The treacherous government of Ecuador has opened Julian Assange’s private quarters at its UK embassy up to US investigators, who have seized Assange’s legal defense documents, medical records, and electronic devices. In what kind of court is the prosecution allowed to see the defendant’s case before the trial? A Soviet courtroom? A kangaroo court?Streamed LIVE May 21, 2019

A small rocket was fired in Baghdad’s Green Zone (the US Embassy neighborhood) yesterday and the Trump Administration has been quick to take advantage of the apparent attack to blame Iran. There was little damage and no casualties, but Bolton is using it to maximum advantage to push Trump toward war. Will Trump bite?Streamed LIVE May 20, 2019

The Federal Reserve, by manipulating interest rates and creating money out-of-thin air, produces economic bubbles that must always end in painful economic busts. Have you ever noticed that Fed officials never actually acknowledge any of this? They never warn Americans ahead of time and everyone acts surprised when it all comes down. Ron Paul explains why this is so on today’s Liberty Report!Streamed LIVE May 17, 2019

The ducks are lining up for the warhawks aiming for Iran. Today the State Department announced that all non-essential personnel should leave the US Embassy in Baghdad. US allies are wondering where are these “increased threats”? Are the neocons about to get their Iran war?Streamed LIVE May 15, 2019

See the article here:

Ron Paul Liberty Report

Ron Paul | Abortion | Pro-Life Profiles

Both the fifth and 14th Amendments create a constitutional right to life for all “persons” as well as a federal duty to protect those lives. Therefore, if the Court were to overturn Roe on the basis that the unborn child is a person, their lives would be protected by the Constitution and this nightmare would be over. However, most legal experts feel that the Court is far more likely to overturn Roe on the basis that abortion is… a “states’ rights” matter. That would be an unmitigated disaster for the unborn. We would almost immediately end up with a “patchwork quilt” of abortion laws in which a few states would prohibit abortion altogether, others would allow it in any circumstance, and the vast majority would take some sort of middle path. Given that state lines are freely crossed, this would leave every unborn baby in every state exposed to abortion. It could also guarantee that our great-grandchildren will still be fighting this battle a hundred years from now. when someone claims to be pro-life, he or she is saying that the unborn are persons. After all, there is no other basis upon which to justify the pro-life position. So in light of the Fifth and 14th Amendments, it would be preposterous for the pro-life movement to be working toward a situation where the right-to-life of the unborn is negotiated within the state legislatures. we must always be mindful that until America has a constitutional amendment that affirms the personhood of the unborn from the moment of fertilization, this battle cannot end the Personhood Movement is reminding us of that.

“So if we are ever to have fewer abortions, society must change again. The law will not accomplish that. However, that does not mean that the states shouldnt be allowed to write laws dealing with abortion. Very early pregnancies and victims of rape can be treated with the day after pill, which is nothing more than using birth control pills in a special manner. These very early pregnancies could never be policed, regardless. Such circumstances would be dealt with by each individual making his or her own moral choice.” -Ron Paul, Liberty Defined

Ron Paul’s legacy is apparent. When politicians run for mayor and they are asked about children being dismembered in the womb they reply that abortion is not a matter of city statute. When politicians run for governor they say abortion is a federal issue. When they run for president they say abortion is a state issue. They pass the buck. Ron Paul style. Paul is teaching a generation of politicians how to pass the buck regarding human rights and the slaughter of the innocent. When Paul makes his moral equivalence argument that just as Roe is invalid, “a federal law banning abortion across all 50 states would be equally invalid,” he trivializes the slaughter of millions and shows he has been seduced by legal positivism which is moral relativism in government. Process does not trump principle. Yet Paul undermines the most fundamental moral principles when he claims that abortion is a states’ rights issue. There is no right, anywhere, to decriminalize child killing. No constitution can bestow such a “right” and no one and no country nor political subdivision could ever in truth have the right to decriminalize killing children. Because human rights trump states’ rights, Ron Paul should not give a false sense of security to a state which legitimizes genocide, suggesting that state should expect to operate free from forceful intervention. To illustrate Paul’s bankrupt view of governance, he would have amended the Weimar Constitution to oppose a national ban on concentration camps, and he would have justified this by arguing that such a ban would have been just as invalid as the Holocaust. We urge obstetrician Dr. Ron Paul to humble himself before the greatest Physician, who conceived not only delivery, but reproduction itself. We pray that Paul will acknowledge that process does not trump principle, for no agreement among men could ever justify any part of America tolerating the intentional slaughter of innocent children in the States.

Continue reading here:

Ron Paul | Abortion | Pro-Life Profiles

Ron Paul, Author at Antiwar.com Original

Is President Trump about to invade Venezuela? His advisors keep telling us in ever-stronger terms that all options are on the table and that US military intervention to restore Venezuelas constitution may be necessary. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was on the Sunday news programs to claim that President Trump could launch a military attack Continue reading A Nuclear War? Over Venezuela?Russian gun rights activist and graduate exchange student Maria Butina was sentenced to 18 months in prison last week for conspiracy to act as a foreign agent without registering. Her crime was to work to make connections among American gun rights activists in hopes of building up her organization, the Right to Bear Arms, when Continue reading Why is Maria Butina in Prison?Last weeks arrest of WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange by the British government on a US extradition order is an attack on all of us. It is an attack on the US Constitution. It is an attack on the free press. It is an attack on free speech. It is an attack on our right to Continue reading Julian Assange: Political PrisonerThis week President Trump admitted what the Washington policy establishment of both parties would rather be kept quiet. Asked why he intervened to block a new round of sanctions on North Korea, he told the media that he believes the people of North Korea have suffered enough. “They are suffering greatly in North Korea And Continue reading Trump Tells the Truth: Sanctions Cause People to SufferLast week Secretary of State Mike Pompeo ordered the last of the US diplomats out of Venezuela, saying their presence was a constraint on US policy toward the country. The wording seemed intended to convey the idea that the US is about to launch military action to place a Washington-backed, self-appointed politician to the presidency. Continue reading Is Trump Really About To Attack Venezuela?President Trumps second summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un last week was criticized by both parties in Washington long before Air Force One even touched down in Hanoi. Washingtons political class seemed terrified that the nearly 70 year state of war with North Korea might actually end. In the end the only positive thing Continue reading Did Bolton Blow North Korea?In a fitting legacy for my friend Walter Jones, Jr. who passed away last week, the US House made history by voting in favor of H.J.Res. 37, a resolution Directing the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities in the Republic of Yemen that have not been authorized by Congress. As George ONeill wrote Continue reading Walter Jones and the Vote to End US War on YemenLast weeks bipartisan Senate vote to rebuke President Trump for his decision to remove troops from Syria and Afghanistan unfortunately tells us a lot about what is wrong with Washington, DC. While the two parties loudly bicker about minor issues, when it comes to matters like endless wars overseas they enthusiastically join together. With few Continue reading President Starts a War? Congress Yawns. Threatens to End One? Condemnation!Last week President Trump announced that the United States would no longer recognize Nicholas Maduro as president of Venezuela and would recognize the head of its national assembly, Jose Guaido, as president instead. US thus openly backs regime change. But what has long been a dream of the neocons may well turn out to be Continue reading Trumps Venezuela FiascoIm starting to wonder whether President Trump has any power over US foreign policy at all. Many people believe that the US president is just a figurehead, with actual foreign policy firmly in the hands of the deep state. Trumps latest dramatic U-turn on pulling troops from Syria certainly feeds such theories. When President Trump Continue reading Trumps Neocons Reverse His Syria Withdrawal Plan

Link:

Ron Paul, Author at Antiwar.com Original

Ron Paul: Julian Assange, Political Prisoner OpEd Eurasia …

Last weeks arrest of Wikileaks publisher Julian Assange by the Britishgovernment on a US extradition order is an attack on all of us. It is anattack on the US Constitution. It is an attack on the free press. It isan attack on free speech. It is an attack on our right to know what ourgovernment is doing with our money in our name. Julian Assange is everybit as much a political prisoner as was Cardinal Mindszenty in Hungaryor Nelson Mandela in South Africa.

They, and so many more, were imprisoned because they told the truth about their governments.

Repressivegovernments do not want their citizens to know that they are up to sothey insist on controlling the media. We are taught, at the same time,that we have a free press whose job it is to uncover the corruption inour system so that we can demand our political leaders make some changesor face unemployment. That, we are told, is what makes us differentfrom the totalitarian.

The arrest of Assange is a canary in a coal mine to warn us that something is very wrong with our system.

Whatswrong? The US mainstream media always seems to do the bidding of the USgovernment. That is why they rushed to confirm Washingtons claim thatthe Assange indictment was not in any way about journalism. It was onlyabout hacking government computers!

As the New York Times said inan editorial, sounding like a mouthpiece of the US government, JulianAssange committed an indisputable crime. But was it? As actualjournalist Glenn Greenwald wrote last week, what Julian Assange did in2010, for which he is facing extradition to the US, is no different fromwhat New York Times and other journalists do every day! He attempted tohelp Chelsea Manning shield his identity as he blew the whistle on USgovernment crimes to a publisher. The information in question included avideo showing US military personnel participating in and cheering themurder of Iraqi civilians. Why is it criminal for us to know this?

Thedifference is that what Assange and Manning did embarrassed the USgovernment, which was lying to us that it was liberating Iraq andAfghanistan when it was actually doing the opposite. Mainstreamjournalists publish leaks that help bolster the neocon or other vestednarratives of the different factions of the US government. Thats whythe US media wants to see Assange in prison, or worse: he upset theirapple cart.

The lesson is clear: when you bolster thegovernments narrative you are a brave journalist. When you exposecorruption in government you are a criminal. Do we really want to livein a country where it is illegal to learn that our government is engagedin criminal acts? I thought we had an obligation as an engagedcitizenry to hold our government accountable!

As long as JulianAssange is in prison, we are all in prison. When the government has thepower to tell us what we we allowed to see, hear, and know, we no longerlive in a free society. Julian Assange will be extradited to the US andhe will have dozens of charges piled on. They want him to disappear sothat the next Assange will think twice before informing us of ourgovernments crimes. Are we going to let them steal our freedom?

This article was published by RonPaul Institute.

Here is the original post:

Ron Paul: Julian Assange, Political Prisoner OpEd Eurasia …

Inside Ron Paul’s Counter-Convention | Vanity Fair

Last week, thousands of people descended upon Minneapolisthe other Twin Cityfor Ron Paul’s Rally for the Republic, a colorful affair heavy on Revolutionary War symbolism. The gathering was meant to serve as a message of revolt to the Republican Party from some of its most disaffected constituents. Just a little more than a cannon’s range away from the Xcel Center in St. Paul, where the official R.N.C was taking place, Paul’s rally attracted pilgrims from all over the countrysome driving from as far as New York and Alabama, some even walking from Wisconsin, 200 miles awayand ended up having all the energy that the R.N.C. lacked in its halting start. The atmosphere was certainly more informal and the attendees more outr. Compared to the general electorate, Ron Paul believers tend to be disproportionately white and male, but they’re also younger and grungier. There’s a misfit quality to many of them, and a disagreeable odor to some. Ponytails, mullets, goatees, dreadlocks, and piercings were everywhere. But families also made the trip, a few wearing tricorne hats and other colonial clothing.

The culmination of the rally took place on Tuesday at the Target Center, where a procession of libertarian- and conservative-leaning speakers, including Grover Norquist, Tucker Carlson, and Jesse Ventura, condemned the state of the Republican establishment. (“Socialist” Democrats also took a lashing, though their evilness was so obvious as to warrant less mention.) They also praised Paul’s proposals to abolish the Fed, reinstate the gold standard, and immediately withdraw nearly all U.S. troops from abroad. By the time Barry Goldwater Jr. made the grand introduction, 12,000 people had gathered in the arena, and when Paul took the stage he electrified them with a call to action and a hard-hitting denunciation of the Patriot Act, the War on Drugs, national I.D. cards, and executive abuses. Paul is an underrated speaker capable of preacher-like animation, and he was particularly fired up on this night. No fewer than three times did stomping chants of “END THE FED!” break out.Paul is no longer running for president. In fact, when I ask the 73-year-old Texas congressman if he’ll ever run for the White House again, he answers, “Oh, I doubt that very much,” then adds, “If I was anxious to do that then I would have continued the process, as an independent person or something, because we had a fair amount of momentum.” So what was the point of his convention?

The Rally for the Republic was announced back in June, as a way for Paul to make a loud and clear statement to his party as it tried to suppress his and his supporters’ views. Paul’s campaign said he was not invited to speak at the R.N.C., despite getting 1.2 million votes in the Republican primaries. (Fred Thompson, by comparison, received 286,000 votes and a prime time Tuesday slot.) His followers found themselves cheated at several state conventions when their fellow Republicans bent or broke rules in order to exclude them from the national convention. Clearly, top Republicans had decided that party unity called for keeping troublemakers out of the big tent.

As a result, the G.O.P. may have further incited the Ron Paul revolution. Shortly after the rally was announced, Paul also launched a grass-roots action group called Campaign for Liberty, dedicated to furthering the goals of “individual liberty, constitutional government, sound money, free markets, and a noninterventionist foreign policy.” The organization, a 501(c)(4), represents an attempt by Paul to convert the lightning he captured in the primary and convert it into a lasting movement. It will focus on educating and recruiting new leaders at all levels of government, from local precincts on up.

Some 700 activists attended the Campaign for Liberty grass-roots training session on August 31. One trainee told me that three fourths of the people in attendance were either running for office or planning to run for office. It’s this level of intense engagement that was perhaps the most striking part of the Rally for the Republic. A goodly number of the Paul supporters I encountered at the concert on Monday night and the blowout on Tuesday told me with calm convictionor slightly unsettling zealthat it was just a matter of time until they sought office, if they weren’t running for Congress or state assembly already. And if most didn’t have the intellectual capacity of Bill Clinton or the charisma of Ronald Reagan, a few had genuine potential, and most, upon cursory inspection at least, seemed generally free of the conspiracy thinking and fringe lunacy that stalk the edges of Paul’s events.

B.J. Lawson may be the most promising example. Thirty-two years old, with the all-American good looks and dimpled chin of a more boyish Aaron Eckhardt, Lawson is a self-identified “Ron Paul Republican” running for Congress in North Carolina’s fourth district. He studied engineering at Duke and then received an M.D. before leaving a residency in neurosurgery, also at Duke, to start a company that specializes in delivering clinical information to doctors’ wireless devices. His experience as an entrepreneur, he says, led him to start asking questions about our healthcare system, national debt, and other thorny issues.

Lawson faces an uphill battle against 20-year Democratic incumbent David Price but claims his campaign’s internal polling gives him reason to be optimistic. (No public polls are available yet.) He has already overcome a challenge by the G.O.P. in his primary. “Honestly, the party establishment worked really hard to get me not to run,” he tells me after Monday night’s outdoor concert and speech by Paul, whom he introduced. “They actually put up a guy to run against me. A lot of folks thought I was going to get toasted.” Pulling out a copy of the Constitution from his coat pocket (he carries one around with him at all times), he says, “We gave away about 10,000 of these things, we had lots of grass-roots support, and we walked away with 71 percent of the [primary] vote.” Lawson doesn’t call for scrapping the Fed, as Paul does, but he does want to eliminate the income tax, and he shares Paul’s opposition to pre-emptive war and nation building. He cites Paul as “definitely my inspiration,” explaining, “I’d almost given up hope” before the congressman’s presidential bid.

Almost all the Paul activists seeking office for the first time told me they will run again if they come up short this time around. Paul’s supporters have both a sense of urgency and the patience to wait until 2012 or beyond to start seeing the fruits of their labor. Many compare their mission to the Goldwater movement, which took years to produce results but eventually left a deep mark on the Republican Party.

Carl Bunce, an affable, talkative 31-year-old Republican with a Kentucky drawl now running for Congress in Nevada’s third district, has also been inspired by Paul’s example. “If it weren’t for Ron Paul,” he says, “I’d be sitting on my couch, playing PlayStation or Xbox with my little brother.” Nevada’s congressional primaries have not yet taken place, and as a newcomer Bunce, who resembles a less obnoxious version of Spencer Pratt, is a distant long shot against Republican incumbent Jon Porter. But he is fearless in criticizing the establishment frontrunner. To him, the Republican Party has become a “country club” of “neocon warmongers,” and he takes personal offense at the fact that, as he tells it, elder party figures counseled him to save his money instead of wasting it on a quixotic bid for Congress.

Paul has suffered from a similar lack of respect, even after pulling in more than $6 million in contributions in one day, raising more money from U.S. soldiers and veterans than all the other Republican candidates combined, and drawing as much as 15 percent of the vote away from John McCain in late primaries. Paul owes his very stardom to a defining moment of disrespect during the South Carolina Republican debate in May 2007, when Rudy Giuliani bullied him for suggesting that U.S. foreign policy might have in part motivated 9/11. The anti-war candidate stood his ground with a provocative response about America’s meddling in the Middle East and about “blowback”the notion that actions we take abroad have unintended consequences that may harm us down the roadand gained a huge following overnight.

The Republican pollster and strategist Frank Luntz once compared Paul’s followers to crabgrass, and that’s just one example of the disdain in which they are held by the powers that be in the G.O.P. But is that changing? Paul says that he has been contacted by numerous Republican Congressmen in tight races seeking his endorsement. And The Washington Times reported that the McCain campaign actually negotiated with Paul through the R.N.C. about giving him a speaking slot in exchange for his support and the names of his voter database. (Paul suggests he may make a presidential endorsement later this month and seems to be leaning toward Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party or Libertarian Bob Barr.) Appearing on The Colbert Report on September 4, Paul said he could have spoken at the convention if he’d simply given up everything he believed in. (Colbert’s reply: “So, just like everybody else. Listen, you want to play with the big boys, you’ve got to play along.”) The McCain campaign would not elaborate on the negotiations when asked by Vanity Fair about them.

As voters grow increasingly tired of the Republican Party’s politics and priorities, its foreign policy, and its handling of the economy, it will have to evolve somehow to regain its footing. Several theories on how this can be accomplished are already being debated among conservatives. Should the G.O.P. start listening to Ron Paul? Reihan Salam, an associate editor at The Atlantic, and co-author of Grand New Party: How Republicans Can Win the Working Class and Save the American Dream, believes the coalition Paul put together may be too flaky and heterogeneousand, frankly, not Republican enoughto ever be taken seriously by the party. “A lot of that movement has to do with Goldwater rights, libertarian conservatism, a lot of it is Rainbow Coalition, and maybe half of it comes from the far left,” says Salam. “It was a very unusual, quirky collection of lots of people who kind of reject the mainstream of American politics. I think the relationship to the mainstream of Republican politics is not really there.”

To Ron Paul’s supporters, that might make Salam yet another skeptic to disprove. At least these things are certain: The G.O.P. is vulnerable right now. And the opening salvos of “phase two” of the revolution, as Paul’s followers call it, have been sounded. In the coming election cycles, we’ll see how his armies fare with him still carrying the banner but no longer leading the charge.

Photograph by Keith Bedford/Bloomberg News/Landov

Go here to see the original:

Inside Ron Paul’s Counter-Convention | Vanity Fair

The Dollar Is Going to Self Destruct: Talking Bitcoin With …

Dr. Ron Paul was into sound money before it was cool.

Before he became an initiate in the Austrian school of economics, he served as a flight surgeon in the United States Airforce and as a private practice OBGYN in Texas. Proselytized by the works of Ludwig von Mises and Ayn Rand, Paul decided to run for Congress in the 70s following the termination of the Bretton Woods agreement an international pact that was the dollar’s final, albeit tentative, tie to the gold standard.

Nixons decision to withdraw from this agreement would have lasting consequences on U.S. monetary policy and Dr. Paul launched his political career as a crusade against these changes and the danger he saw in the fiat economy that they created. In his on-again-off-again career as a politician which included Texas Congressional Representative terms from 1976 to 1977, 1979 to 1985 and 1997 to 2013 as well as presidential runs in 2008 and 2012 the godfather of the modern right-wing Libertarian movement made a name for himself with his zealous advocacy of the gold standard and his uncompromising critique of the Federal Reserve and the hazards of its monetary policy.

As a fledgling congressman, his position on the House Banking Committee gave him a platform to disseminate his Austrian ideals. Today, his 2009 bestseller End the Fed and his 2012 presidential run can be seen as career capstones which also encapsulated the core tenets of his political philosophy: liberty, revolution and sound money.

Its not shocking, then, that Ron Paul is privy to Bitcoin. He and his son, former presidential candidate and Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, accept bitcoin for their political foundation.

Dr. Paul attended this years Consensus conference as a guest of the Digital Asset Policy Network (DAPNet), a cryptocurrency policy and lobbying non-proft led by veteran campaign manager Jesse Benton and Bitcoin Center Founder Nick Spanos. During the conference, Bitcoin Magazine sat down with Dr. Paul to discuss his views on bitcoin as a disruptive and sovereign asset. Our conversation showed that gold bugs have more in kind with bitcoiners than not (and its also a good reminder that bitcoin is not age specific not every old bull is a salty no-coiner la Warren Buffet).

When did you first learn about bitcoin and what were your initial reservations with it?

There was no one time where I read an article and it struck me. I just heard a little about it, but I didnt pay too much attention to it. And then I finally got interested enough to watch what it was doing in the marketplace I love to watch markets and, you know, down to $0 up to $20,000, that was sort of fascinating. What does this mean? Im still trying to figure out what the endpoint is.

So that got me interested, and then I looked at the technology and Im not a computer person. If I had to explain blockchain technology, I wouldnt do well. Im interested in the issue of alternative currencies, Im interested in what happens when the market crashes and Im interested in preserving an environment where people can have alternative ideas that might help solve the problems we have. I think thats what bitcoin offers: an alternative. I want a free marketplace.

Ive heard you mention free markets in relation to bitcoin, in an interview with CoinDesk, for instance. I want to ask you about Congressman Shermans remarks on a ban of cryptocurrencies. What do you think this signals for Congress? Do you think were going to see hostility?

There will be hostility but it will be more dignified. They will work behind the scenes and put in roadblocks if they can. The more successful that cryptos are, the more the government will get involved. There are people like Sherman, but they wont be talking like that. I dont think that he has the clout since hes over the top. Theyre not [going to] all of a sudden pass this; I dont even think hell introduce a bill. It wont be a movement, it just got everyones attention.

Story continues

Do you think Congress is paying more attention to these things than its letting on? Because weve seen some incompetency from Congress when it comes to technical topics.

No, I dont think there are many [people in Congress] who are more knowledgeable than I am and [theyre] much less interested in the principles of the marketplace. And theyre less in agreement that big problems lie ahead, so they have less interest in Bitcoin. I dont think that if you did a poll for Congress about whether to ban it or tax it, they probably havent thought it through. Republicans I would think would tend more to be very tolerant, but lovers of big government like Brad Sherman they know what is going on. His reaction, his emotions are his belief, because he can see what could happen to the Federal Reserves monopoly over the monetary system. You cant allow people to talk about using alternative currencies. Usually, we punish people for that.

To your point toward the end there, it seems like Sherman has thought it through. Because if you listen to his argument, he basically says cryptocurrency poses a threat to the dollars dominance and the U.S.s international commerce.

That tells you a lot. Hes speaking for the deep state establishment, military people and everyone else in the banking system. Hes representing their position that You dont mess with the dollar. But I dont worry about that because the dollar is going to self-destruct.

Yeah, I want to touch on that. In End the Fed, you speak of the dollar like a ticking time bomb just waiting to go off. What do you think could accelerate it and do you see crypto acting as a sort of hedge as weve seen with gold and silver at times of market volatility?

I would think so, but someone else needs to answer that question. I just want to make sure that theres allowed to be a hedge. In our country, for a lot of years, we werent allowed to own gold as a hedge. I think that there are a lot of time bombs. We have difficulty figuring out what our foreign policy is. You know, the on-again-off-again with Syria and North Korea, Iran.

The John Boltons and Abrahams of the world and the senators that are wild as long as they are in charge, a bad accident can happen or a bad judgement made. That could change everything. That could change the dollar system; it could change the stock market.

In End the Fed, you talk about a financial crisis that is worse than in 2008 to 2009. Do you think that were starting to see the foundations shake? Is the writing on the wall?

I think so, but its been there a long time. I decided that this trend was established with our announcement that we no longer could honor the dollar. Which was really an announcement of bankruptcy, and its been steadily building up the problem. And the trust in the dollar has allowed the bubble to get bigger. Its held together for a long time and thats just going to make the crash worse.

Im glad you mentioned the word bubble because that gets thrown around a lot in this industry. What would you say about the volatility of bitcoin when taken in kind with the devaluation of the dollar through inflation?

Theres going to be volatility. The dollar is going to be volatile. You have the supply and demand of the dollar: how many people really want to use it versus how fast theyre printing the money. A lot of people look at prices in terms of supply and demand but they dont look at the purchasing power of the dollar, which is hard to calculate. The thing that I realized in 1971 was that, since Nixon took us off the gold standard, this is a different world. Now, we have the digital currencies and I think theyll follow the same economic laws, but there is going to be a subjective element to it. You cant deny that there was some subjectivity when bitcoin hit $20,000. But does that mean its worthless? No, I dont think so things do that. This is new, so its going to have ups and downs.

If we see a threat to it, when someone comes along and says, We need a law to ban cryptocurrencies to get rid of this uncertainty. That to me is going to be around and its going to be a lot worse.

Do you think that the best way to regulate this is to not regulate it at all? Or do you think that theres a way to let these bitcoin and blockchain companies grow organically while providing investor protections?

I believe in regulation and that it has to be strict, but who are the regulators? Ever since the Depression, weve had hundreds of thousands of rules and regulations regulating the financial system and yet we still had 2009. It didnt do any good. And then when they decided that they need to save the system, they went hog wild rewarding the people who had already been ripping us off: the mortgage companies. And the people who lost their mortgages didnt get rescued.

I want to return to gold really quickly. Have you seen Grayscales Drop Gold campaign? It is trying to make gold obsolete and replace it with bitcoin, which it says is a digital alternative.

Well, theyre missing the whole point. If its obsolete, the market will declare it obsolete. But in a crisis, even if people are using bitcoin in a crisis, gold is going to be used. Id think that youd be a very wealthy person if you had a bag of gold coins in Venezuela.

Bitcoin has gone on an insane uptrend recently while the DOW, S&P and other traditional markets are trending downward. Do you think that its a little bit early to say this shows a decoupling from traditional markets?

Yes, I think its too early to tell. I dont think anybody knows. Its hard to say, but theres obviously enough confidence in bitcoin for people to go and buy it. But did you have one million buyers or 15 buyers? That could be pretty important.

Last question: Do you own any bitcoin?

Do I own any bitcoin? No. We accept bitcoin at our foundation, but we immediately convert it because we need to pay our bills.

This article originally appeared on Bitcoin Magazine.

See more here:

The Dollar Is Going to Self Destruct: Talking Bitcoin With …

ecosystem | Definition, Components, & Structure …

Ecosystem, the complex of living organisms, their physical environment, and all their interrelationships in a particular unit of space.

Read More on This Topic

conservation: The loss of ecosystems

) Conservation justifiably prioritizes tropical moist forests (see tropical forest) because they hold such a large fraction

A brief treatment of ecosystems follows. For full treatment, see biosphere.

Britannica Quiz

Ecosystems

Mangrove forests are found along the borders of high-elevation deserts.

An ecosystem can be categorized into its abiotic constituents, including minerals, climate, soil, water, sunlight, and all other nonliving elements, and its biotic constituents, consisting of all its living members. Linking these constituents together are two major forces: the flow of energy through the ecosystem, and the cycling of nutrients within the ecosystem.

The fundamental source of energy in almost all ecosystems is radiant energy from the Sun. The energy of sunlight is used by the ecosystems autotrophic, or self-sustaining, organisms. Consisting largely of green vegetation, these organisms are capable of photosynthesisi.e., they can use the energy of sunlight to convert carbon dioxide and water into simple, energy-rich carbohydrates. The autotrophs use the energy stored within the simple carbohydrates to produce the more complex organic compounds, such as proteins, lipids, and starches, that maintain the organisms life processes. The autotrophic segment of the ecosystem is commonly referred to as the producer level.

Organic matter generated by autotrophs directly or indirectly sustains heterotrophic organisms. Heterotrophs are the consumers of the ecosystem; they cannot make their own food. They use, rearrange, and ultimately decompose the complex organic materials built up by the autotrophs. All animals and fungi are heterotrophs, as are most bacteria and many other microorganisms.

Together, the autotrophs and heterotrophs form various trophic (feeding) levels in the ecosystem: the producer level, composed of those organisms that make their own food; the primary consumer level, composed of those organisms that feed on producers; the secondary consumer level, composed of those organisms that feed on primary consumers; and so on. The movement of organic matter and energy from the producer level through various consumer levels makes up a food chain. For example, a typical food chain in a grassland might be grass (producer) mouse (primary consumer) snake (secondary consumer) hawk (tertiary consumer). Actually, in many cases the food chains of the ecosystem overlap and interconnect, forming what ecologists call a food web. The final link in all food chains is made up of decomposers, those heterotrophs that break down dead organisms and organic wastes. A food chain in which the primary consumer feeds on living plants is called a grazing pathway; that in which the primary consumer feeds on dead plant matter is known as a detritus pathway. Both pathways are important in accounting for the energy budget of the ecosystem.

Follow this link:

ecosystem | Definition, Components, & Structure …

Ecosystem – Wikipedia

An ecosystem is a community of living organisms in conjunction with the nonliving components of their environment, interacting as a system. These biotic and abiotic components are linked together through nutrient cycles and energy flows. Energy enters the system through photosynthesis and is incorporated into plant tissue. By feeding on plants and on one-another, animals play an important role …

Read more from the original source:

Ecosystem – Wikipedia

Ecosystem | Definition of Ecosystem by Merriam-Webster

1 : the complex of a community of organisms and its environment functioning as an ecological unit That influx of fresh water alters the ocean’s salinity near the seafloor, a factor that influences the makeup of the ecosystems in those places. Sid Perkins Global warming, if it proceeds as many scientists predict, threatens to undo decades of conservation work and could mean the destruction of the monarch butterfly, the edelweiss, the polar bear and innumerable other species living in fragile ecosystems, an emerging body of scientific evidence suggests. William K. Stevens

2 : something (such as a network of businesses) considered to resemble an ecological ecosystem especially because of its complex interdependent parts Newspaper layoffs have ripple effects for the entire local news ecosystem because, as the Congressional Research Service noted, television, radio and online outlets often “piggyback on reporting done by much larger newspaper staffs.” David Sirota Lots of Walmart customers are underserved by banks and other financial institutions, [Daniel] Eckert says; the company’s experiments with finance-related products and services help customers “not only save money but also have access to a financial ecosystem they were crowded out from.” Rob Walker

Excerpt from:

Ecosystem | Definition of Ecosystem by Merriam-Webster

ecosystem | National Geographic Society

An ecosystem is a geographic area where plants, animals, and other organisms, as well as weather and landscape, work together to form a bubble of life. Ecosystems contain biotic or living, parts, as well as abiotic factors, or nonliving parts. Biotic factors include plants, animals, and other organisms. Abiotic factors include rocks, temperature, and humidity.

Every factor in an ecosystem depends on every other factor, either directly or indirectly. A change in the temperature of an ecosystem will often affect what plants will grow there, for instance. Animals that depend on plants for food and shelter will have to adapt to the changes, move to another ecosystem, or perish.

Ecosystems can be very large or very small. Tide pools, the ponds left by the ocean as the tide goes out, are complete, tiny ecosystems. Tide pools contain seaweed, a kind of algae, which uses photosynthesis to create food. Herbivores such as abalone eat the seaweed. Carnivores such as sea stars eat other animals in the tide pool, such as clams or mussels. Tide pools depend on the changing level of ocean water. Some organisms, such as seaweed, thrive in an aquatic environment, when the tide is in and the pool is full. Other organisms, such as hermit crabs, cannot live underwater and depend on the shallow pools left by low tides. In this way, the biotic parts of the ecosystem depend on abiotic factors.

The whole surface of Earth is a series of connected ecosystems. Ecosystems are often connected in a larger biome. Biomes are large sections of land, sea, or atmosphere. Forests, ponds, reefs, and tundra are all types of biomes, for example. They’re organized very generally, based on the types of plants and animals that live in them. Within each forest, each pond, each reef, or each section of tundra, you’ll find many different ecosystems.

The biome of the Sahara Desert, for instance, includes a wide variety of ecosystems. The arid climate and hot weather characterize the biome. Within the Sahara are oasis ecosystems, which have date palm trees, freshwater, and animals such as crocodiles. The Sahara also has dune ecosystems, with the changing landscape determined by the wind. Organisms in these ecosystems, such as snakes or scorpions, must be able to survive in sand dunes for long periods of time. The Sahara even includes a marine environment, where the Atlantic Ocean creates cool fogs on the Northwest African coast. Shrubs and animals that feed on small trees, such as goats, live in this Sahara ecosystem.

Even similar-sounding biomes could have completely different ecosystems. The biome of the Sahara Desert, for instance, is very different from the biome of the Gobi Desert in Mongolia and China. The Gobi is a cold desert, with frequent snowfall and freezing temperatures. Unlike the Sahara, the Gobi has ecosystems based not in sand, but kilometers of bare rock. Some grasses are able to grow in the cold, dry climate. As a result, these Gobi ecosystems have grazing animals such as gazelles and even takhi, an endangered species of wild horse.

Even the cold desert ecosystems of the Gobi are distinct from the freezing desert ecosystems of Antarctica. Antarcticas thick ice sheet covers a continent made almost entirely of dry, bare rock. Only a few mosses grow in this desert ecosystem, supporting only a few birds, such as skuas.

Threats to Ecosystems

For thousands of years, people have interacted with ecosystems. Many cultures developed around nearby ecosystems. Many Native American tribes of North Americas Great Plains developed a complex lifestyle based on the native plants and animals of plains ecosystems, for instance. Bison, a large grazing animal native to the Great Plains, became the most important biotic factor in many Plains Indians cultures, such as the Lakota or Kiowa. Bison are sometimes mistakenly called buffalo. These tribes used buffalo hides for shelter and clothing, buffalo meat for food, and buffalo horn for tools. The tallgrass prairie of the Great Plains supported bison herds, which tribes followed throughout the year.

As human populations have grown, however, people have overtaken many ecosystems. The tallgrass prairie of the Great Plains, for instance, became farmland. As the ecosystem shrunk, fewer bison could survive. Today, a few herds survive in protected ecosystems such as Yellowstone National Park.

In the tropical rain forest ecosystems surrounding the Amazon River in South America, a similar situation is taking place. The Amazon rain forest includes hundreds of ecosystems, including canopies, understories, and forest floors. These ecosystems support vast food webs.

Canopies are ecosystems at the top of the rainforest, where tall, thin trees such as figs grow in search of sunlight. Canopy ecosystems also include other plants, called epiphytes, which grow directly on branches. Understory ecosystems exist under the canopy. They are darker and more humid than canopies. Animals such as monkeys live in understory ecosystems, eating fruits from trees as well as smaller animals like beetles. Forest floor ecosystems support a wide variety of flowers, which are fed on by insects like butterflies. Butterflies, in turn, provide food for animals such as spiders in forest floor ecosystems.

Human activity threatens all these rain forest ecosystems in the Amazon. Thousands of acres of land are cleared for farmland, housing, and industry. Countries of the Amazon rain forest, such as Brazil, Venezuela, and Ecuador, are underdeveloped. Cutting down trees to make room for crops such as soy and corn benefits many poor farmers. These resources give them a reliable source of income and food. Children may be able to attend school, and families are able to afford better health care.

However, the destruction of rain forest ecosystems has its costs. Many modern medicines have been developed from rain forest plants. Curare, a muscle relaxant, and quinine, used to treat malaria, are just two of these medicines. Many scientists worry that destroying the rain forest ecosystem may prevent more medicines from being developed.

The rain forest ecosystems also make poor farmland. Unlike the rich soils of the Great Plains, where people destroyed the tallgrass prairie ecosystem, Amazon rain forest soil is thin and has few nutrients. Only a few seasons of crops may grow before all the nutrients are absorbed. The farmer or agribusiness must move on to the next patch of land, leaving an empty ecosystem behind.

Rebounding Ecosystems

Ecosystems can recover from destruction, however. The delicate coral reef ecosystems in the South Pacific are at risk due to rising ocean temperatures and decreased salinity. Corals bleach, or lose their bright colors, in water that is too warm. They die in water that isnt salty enough. Without the reef structure, the ecosystem collapses. Organisms such as algae, plants such as seagrass, and animals such as fish, snakes, and shrimp disappear.

Most coral reef ecosystems will bounce back from collapse. As ocean temperature cools and retains more salt, the brightly colored corals return. Slowly, they build reefs. Algae, plants, and animals also return.

Individual people, cultures, and governments are working to preserve ecosystems that are important to them. The government of Ecuador, for instance, recognizes ecosystem rights in the countrys constitution. The so-called Rights of Nature says Nature or Pachamama [Earth], where life is reproduced and exists, has the right to exist, persist, maintain and regenerate its vital cycles, structure, functions and its processes in evolution. Every person, people, community or nationality, will be able to demand the recognitions of rights for nature before the public bodies. Ecuador is home not only to rain forest ecosystems, but also river ecosystems and the remarkable ecosystems on the Galapagos Islands.

More here:

ecosystem | National Geographic Society

Ecosystem – Ecosystem

An ecosystem is a system which is formed when a community of organisms interacts with the environment.

An ecosystem is basically an organism community which interacts with one another and their environment in such a way that energy is transferred between them and system-level processes like the cycle of elements emerge.

The ecosystem is the core concept in Ecology and Biology, and serves as the building block of biological organization where organisms interact with each other simultaneously and with the environment as well. Therefore, ecosystems are a step after the ecological community level ( in which organisms of different species interact with one another) and are at a stage below or equal to the biosphere and biomes. Essentially, they are regional ecosystems, while the biosphere is larger than all the possible ecosystems.

Ecosystems include the living organisms alonside the dead organic matter which they produce, the abiotic environment which these organisms inhabit and exchange elements, for example, soils, water, the atmosphere, etc, and the interactions with the components. Ecosystems follow the concept that the living organisms must continually interact with one another and with their environment to create complex systems with different emergent properties, like that “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts” or “everything is connected”.

More:

Ecosystem – Ecosystem

Redheads, redhead gallery, hot redheads, sexy redheads

Galleries Home / Opposite Sex Channel / Bullz-Eye Home

Theres nothing like a fiery redhead to heat things up. True redheads are hard to find, but weve been able to find some great, sexy redheads to grace the pages of Bullz-Eye. Please contact us if you know of a hot redhead model that we should add to the site.

Dont forget to check out our galleries of blondes and brunettes as well!

For daily updates of photos of our many beautiful Bullz-Eye models from our archives, you can follow our Girl Next Door Instagram account for some of our best photos!

You can also follow our @bullzeyedotcom Instagram account for men’s lifestyle updates and photos. Follow us on Twitter @bullzeyedotcom for more men’s lifestyle updates and @hot_babes for more models, and you can follow us on Facebook and YouTube as well.

Anya All Pro ModelsCheck out the amazing gallery of photos of this sexy redhead model on All Pro Models. Also, check out the redhead tag on All Pro Models Blog.

Faye Valentine All Pro ModelsCheck out this beautiful redhead model on All Pro Models.

Redheads have more sex!Looks like redheads are having more fun than blondes and brunettes.

Please contact us if you’re interested in being photographed for Bullz-Eye.com or if you have any suggestions for models that we might want to feature. All models must be at least 18 years old at the time the photographs are taken.

Read the original post:

Redheads, redhead gallery, hot redheads, sexy redheads