Download Linkz:

DJ Babu Ft.Evidence - For Whatever Its Worth.mp3

DJ Babu - Dearly Departed ft. M.O.P.mp3

A bounty hunter who arranged the release of Casey Anthony, the mother of missing toddler Caylee Anthony, said today he plans to take steps to revoke her bond and now believes she was involved in her daughter's death.

Casey's bail may now be withdrawn and she could be going back to jail with the new evidence. Leonard Padilla, the bounty hunter, said he believes if Casey did kill Caylee that it was an accident. He also says the earliest he thinks she will be back in jail is Saturday.

Padilla, a self-styled celebrity bounty hunter, a few weeks ago offered to bail 22-year-old Anthony out of jail, saying that he thought he could convince her to cooperate in the search for Caylee. Padilla has said Anthony has not cooperated since her release.

A law enforcement source confirmed to ABC News that air sample tests taken from Anthony's trunk allegedly revealed evidence of human decomposition. The results were first reported Wednesday.

So sad, and so disgusting. Although it looks unlikely, especially now, let's hope little Caylee IS OK.

In Systematic Theology (Vol. I), Dr. Norman Geisler presents many lines of evidence supporting claims for the Bible as the Word of God. In unique fashion, he labels each line of evidence with a word beginning with the letter "S," making his arguments relatively easy to follow and remember. This article borrows his headings and then incorporates some of Geisler's research with numerous other sources, which are cited.

Reason 8: The testimony of the Spirit

• The same Holy Spirit who authored all Scripture (2 Tim. 3:16-17) lives in the hearts of all believers and "testifies with our spirit that we are God's children" (Rom. 8:16). This means the indwelling Holy Spirit confirms the truth of God's Word to us.
• Jesus taught that the Holy Spirit would convince unbelievers of their sin of unbelief, of the righteousness of Christ, and of the judgment they will share with Satan if they persist in their unbelief - all clear teachings of Scripture (John 16:7-11).

Next -- Reason 9: The tesimony of the saved.

Fashawn ft. Evidence- On Our Way (Produced by Exile)

nah right x onsmash

"our way"

But this one actually nailed it:

What they want is one thing: good old fashioned proof. [...] They want academic, reasoned, logical study with as much empirical proof as possible [...]

Bingo! What more can I say?

Of course, Dswerling goes on to admit that we'll never likely get that kind of proof because, well, Christians simply don't have it. It's a matter of faith or trust, if you will, which brings me to the reason I felt the need to write this post:

Faith is a form of trust; trust in God or Jesus or Allah or Zeus or Ra or any other deity you pick, but at its heart all faith is trust that somehow things are going to work out just fine in the end, in one way or another. I think even a lot of Atheists certainly have this trust, they just can’t reconcile it to trust in something greater, a reality above the reality that we observe in the physical world. However, this is a personal issue for everyone. After all, how would you ever find scientific proof that say, your mother or girlfriend or wife or father or boyfriend or husband loved you? How would you ever truly know another person was trustworthy? You simply cannot know, you are left with an act of faith on some level, and no one ever talks of finding scientific reasoning for these trust issues. So if we aren’t trying to scientifically prove why we can trust our mother or father or any other humble human, why would we bother trying to scientifically prove why we can trust the infinite creator of the universe?

[emphasis mine]

What Atheists Really Want

I would like to begin by addressing the last sentence there.

I have never seen or heard an atheist ask anyone to prove "why we can trust the infinite creator of the universe". Dswerling may well have broken the record for the most logical fallacies crammed into one sentence. Here we have the terribly worn out strawman, the exhausted red herring and the boring false analogy, all of it paired with some question begging. I may have left out a few, but I think that'll do for now, don't you?

I'm not interested in proof for why we can trust any number of gods (or the Christian deity in this case) simply because I'm still waiting to see even a shred of evidence that any of them even exists.

With that out of the way, I will now answer the question of how I can possibly know that my husband is trustworthy and that he loves me. I'll start by declaring that I am so confident in this that I will stand Mike up against God without hesitation or doubt.

Before I go into the issue of trust, I would like to point out that I know for certain Mike exists. Many other people know for certain that Mike exists. There is even legally documented evidence of Mike's existence. I have thoroughly examined Mike with all five of my senses and I can assure you that he does, in fact, exist. That puts him miles ahead of God right from the starting line.

But how do I know that he loves me or that he's trustworthy?

Well, for a start, I can actually hear him tell me that he loves me, uncountable times on any given day. I've never heard a peep out of God. I can call Mike at any time of the day or night and he is there for me. He listens to me and talks back to me, audibly. He offers practical solutions to problems, comforts me and gives of himself to help. God remains silent, too narcissistic to do so much as clear his throat just to let you know he hasn't hung up on you.

Mike is consistent; he does what he says he's going to do. He keeps his word and honors his obligations and responsibilities. That's part of what makes him trustworthy. The god of the Bible is not true to his word; it makes promises and doesn't keep them.

Mike has traveled, on several occasions, half-way across the globe to be with me, to spend time with me. He has done this at considerable cost, both financially and personally. He has made the same sacrifices, on two different occasions, to purchase airfare for me and our son to go and be with him in England. God hasn't bothered to show his face to me in a single bush, even though it wouldn't cost him anything to do it.

When I am in a financial bind, Mike doesn't feed me some self-serving shite like, "Be still and know that I am your Husband; My grace is sufficient unto thee". When I'm short on the rent, he sends cash via MoneyGram. Of course, one might argue that money can't buy me love, and that's not my point in mentioning this. But it does show that Mike is trustworthy (he sends money when he says he will, and he's not rich by any stretch) and he's not paying rent for strangers off the street. Paying the rent is more than God ever did for me.

But that's not all Mike does. When we're together and I'm hungry, he makes me food (and I'm not talking about taking credit for a neighbor bringing a casserole). When I'm thirsty, he brings me a drink. When I'm in pain, he massages me. I don't have to ask or even know that he's entered the room, and I'm not required to give anything in return or tell anyone that he did it.

When Mike goes to the shops, he brings me chocolate. He sings me love songs. When I cry, he cries. When I laugh, he laughs. I can count on finding a sweet email in my inbox every morning. I don't have to wonder if he's there or if he's interested in me. Heck, just read his blog. You won't get through more than a couple of posts at a time without seeing my name mentioned and hearing about how beautiful and wonderful I am.

I could go on and on listing ways that my husband shows his love for me. Does any of it prove, "scientifically" and beyond a doubt, that he loves me? Of course not. But the evidence is rather overwhelming in favor of his loving me and being trustworthy. Believing this does not require faith in the same way that faith is required to believe in God. That is a false analogy: apples and oranges.

When I see a shred of evidence (and take note: warm fuzzies are not evidence) supporting the existence of this alleged "infinite creator of the universe", then we can move on to discussing whether or not it's trustworthy. In the mean time, it would be nice if people like Dswerling would exhibit even a tiny bit of intellectual honesty by not making such blatantly fallacious arguments in a pathetic attempt to validate faith (trust) in something that they freely admit cannot be proven to exist.

Posted by Lottie -- Copyright © 2008 Rambling On

DUBLIN, Ohio, USA, 25 August 2008-OCLC is piloting a new service for libraries that encourages librarians and other interested parties to discover and share information about the copyright status of books.

The WorldCat Copyright Evidence Registry is a community working together to build a union catalog of copyright evidence based on WorldCat, which contains more than 100 million bibliographic records describing items held in thousands of libraries worldwide. In addition to the WorldCat metadata, the Copyright Evidence Registry uses other data contributed by libraries and other organizations.

Digitization projects continue for books in the public domain, but books whose copyright status is unknown are destined to remain in print and on shelves until their status can be determined. The process to determine copyright status can be lengthy and labor intensive. The goal of the Copyright Evidence Registry is to encourage a cooperative environment to discover, create and share copyright evidence through a collaboratively created and maintained database, using the WorldCat cooperative model to eliminate duplicate efforts.

"Having a practical registry of copyright evidence is vital to our objective of providing our scholars and students with more digital content, one goal of Stanford's mass digitization projects," said Catherine Tierney, Associate University Librarian for Technical Services, Stanford University. "By leveraging the value of its massive database, OCLC is in a unique position to champion cooperative efforts to collect evidence crucial to determining copyright status."

The Copyright Evidence Registry six-month pilot was launched July 1 to test the concept and functionality. Users can search the Copyright Evidence Registry to find information about a book, learn what others have said about its copyright status, and share what they know.

"The Copyright Evidence Registry builds on the WorldCat cooperative model envisioned by OCLC founder Frederick Kilgour," said Chip Nilges, OCLC Vice President, Business Development. "OCLC, and its network of libraries and librarians, is in a position to take a leadership role in this cooperative effort to build a database of copyright status information for all to share."

During a later stage of the pilot, OCLC will add a feature enabling pilot libraries to create and run automated copyright rules conforming to standards they define for determining copyright status. The rules will help libraries analyze the information available in the Copyright Evidence Registry and form their own conclusions about copyright status.

"The Copyright Evidence Registry is a resource being created by a cooperative network of librarians coming together to share their knowledge and findings about copyright status for the benefit of the entire community," said Bill Carney, OCLC Content Manager.

The WorldCat Copyright Evidence Registry Beta can be accessed at http://www.worldcat.org/copyrightevidence. Catalogers should feel free to use their OCLC Connexion cataloging authorizations to log in. Others are welcome to create or use their current WorldCat.org authorization. There is a "sandbox" record available to try out the system.

OCLC is encouraging feedback on the Copyright Evidence Registry from the library community on the WorldCat.org Web site http://www.worldcat.org/copyrightevidence/registry/feedback.

About OCLC
Founded in 1967 and headquartered in Dublin, Ohio, OCLC is a nonprofit library service and research organization that has provided computer-based cataloging, reference, resource sharing, eContent, preservation, library management and Web services to 60,000 libraries in 112 countries and territories. OCLC and its member libraries worldwide have created and maintain WorldCat, the world's richest online resource for finding library materials. For more information, visit www.oclc.org.

This is a press release which appeared here

Bar Exam 2-Pushed Back again. 9-9-2008

I stayed up last night till 12 with my card in hand, on amazon.com refreshing the same screen for about a half hour, only to get a text from one of my shorties that its being pushed back till the 9th. Every track I heard so far is insane. I cannot wait.

Jeezys shit is tight from the joints I have so far, and im still sketchy on T.I's.

BUT

These 2 dudes right here. Babu and Evidence.

....Just click the picture. I already told you about the dude EV.

Stop Playing, Click the damn pic, Download and Listen.

Real Hip Hop lives forever.

I want my sister to call her and say (in an alarmed tone), "Tell me you didn't tell the national media that he was framed and evidence was planted.  You're going to be in so much trouble!"  Hah!  No, that won't happen.  It's not worth the time or effort, and she is so deeply in denial that her precious son could have done anything wrong, that she'd never see that her words could be construed as defamation in some way.  She also denied that he has any outstanding warrants, calling the suggestion, "poppycock."

I'd be interested in hearing from any law enforcement agents/officers who have any special insight about what it takes to get someone hauled in for warrants.  I would like to get it on video.

401: "Relevant evidence means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence."

I picture this rule like so: there is this rushing river going down. That is the flow of probability. Imagine your evidence as a rock that you hold in your hand. If that rock is large, or curved in a particular way (in more evidence-y terms, if it is material and probative) then it will divert the river, sending probability more towards the right bank of less probability, or to the left bank of less probability. If the rock is small, or flat (read: not material, not probative) then it won't affect the flow of probability. You can put that type of thing in the river, but it won't do anything, so why waste your energy and time?

This is clearly an imperfect metaphor, but it's what comes to mind.

Today, the State Attorney's office released the discovery in the case against Casey Anthony. All 437 pages of it. This is the same documentation which her attorney, Jose Baez, will receive on the case.

Not only does the discovery include some typically dry police investigative reports, it also includes far more interesting items, such as transcripts of police interviews, including interviews conducted by police with Casey herself, as well as with witnesses such as Anthony Lazzaro, the boyfriend with whom Casey lived during and after the time when Caylee went missing. The discovery is broken up into three (very long) pdf files.

So sit back, put your feet up, and prepare to read the equivalent of an entire book about what is known regarding this case so far.

Casey Anthony Discovery. Package one, 153 pages.

casey-anthony-discovery-package-one-153-pages

The first discovery package has some information which has previously been released, such as the arrest affidavit. Something it has which no one has seen before, however, is a transcript of two separate interviews by police, with Casey Anthony.

In the first interview, held at the Anthony home when police originally respond to the 911 calls, the police make it very clear that they don't believe Casey, but she sticks to her story. In the second interview, held in a room at Universal Studios, they point out that they know every single thing Casey said was a lie, and she still sticks to her story. It takes them forever to get her to admit that she was lying at all, and even then, she fails to answer questions posed to her, and always has a ready excuse for her lies. For example, she says she took them to Universal Studios, knowing full well she didn't work there, because perhaps someone there will recognize Caylee. Bizarre.

What is most interesting about those interviews, though, is how the cops play her, and how she plays the cops. A definite must-read for those interested in the case.

There is an interesting tidbit of information in that package which really stands out, and which has been discussed in comments on this blog. The police tell Casey that they have the surveillance photos from the Sawgrass Apartments, for the stairs leading to apartment 210, and she's not in them. Bear in mind, at that point, they thought Caylee went missing on the 9th; it was not until later that they realized that she had been missing since the 16th instead. Therefore, that may very well be true, and it would not be incriminating. Nevertheless, if they really do have security videotape showing that - and bear in mind, it is not only perfectly legal for the police to lie to suspects, it's also very common - then they should have security video for the 16th as well.

Something else I found interesting is that the mysterious missing phone/SIM card were allegedly given to her by Universal Studios. Does the mysterious phone and missing SIM card even exist, since the job does not?

Last, but certainly not least, her ex-boyfriend Jesse Grund reported to police that Casey had taken down literally hundreds of photos of Caylee from her MySpace and Facebook accounts. Also, boyfriend Tony Lazzaro's roommate, Roy House, said that Caylee had never stayed overnight at the apartment.

The discovery documents, as usual, are not indexed. I have therefore created an index, for quick reference, and will do so for each package. I have listed the page number, followed by a brief statement of the content.

1. Public record request

2. Arrest affidavit (appears to be duplicated)

20. Witness list

22. Caylee photos, birth certificate

28. Family statements, Myspace documents

37. Witness statements

48. Zenaida Gonzalez

52. Sawgrass Apartments information

62. Transcript of first 911 call by Cindy Anthony

66. Transcript of second 911 call by Cindy Anthony

71. Recorded interview with Casey at parents' home

87. Universal Studios interrogation

Casey Anthony Discovery. Package two, 113 pages

casey-anthony-discovery-package-two-113-pages

Casey Anthony Discovery. Package three, 171 pages

casey-anthony-discovery-package-three-171-pages

******************************************************************

Please note that I seem to have a corrupted file for the third package. You can read it if you bypass the download, but you can't download it to your own computer at this time. I have tried literally for four or five hours to get it to work for downloads, with no luck. Not to worry, I will replace it as soon as I can, hopefully today. I apologize to all for that inconvenience.

In the meantime, while I'm trying to get the upload fixed here, so readers can save it to their own computers if they'd like, I've found another direct link source which seems to work with no problem.  You may or not be able to save it to your computer, I haven't checked that, but you will definitely be able to read it by clicking on these links.

Package #1: Casey Anthony Discovery

Package #2: Casey Anthony Discovery

Package #3: Casey Anthony Discovery

I also will update this entry today, giving a synopsis and discussion as I finish reading each discovery package. I have yet to finish reading packages two and three at this time.

I remember seeing this guy live and just losing my shit. He's definitely the nicest with the cuts. Check it out:

DJ Babu featuring Evidence - For Whatever It's Worth

One of the presentations at the conference was Ernest Sosa on intuitions. I am somewhat of an intuition skeptic, but the way he outlined what an intuition is made it reasonable for me to believe there are such things as intellectual seemings. In a previous post, I mentioned the ambiguity of the term “weight” and how it, like other terms, is used loosely by the analytic community. I’d like to pick up on that thread and discuss the term as it relates to Sosa’s intuition project. Sosa identifies intuitions with seemings. A seeming is an attraction to assent (i.e. an attraction to affirm a proposition). Seemings come in two flavors: prima facie and ultima facie (or resultant). Seemings can conflict. Such is the case when one views a Muller-Lyer display and initially the lines seem incongruent. This prima facie seeming can conflict with the opposite seeming that the lines are in fact congruent.

Seemings can come by way of different sources. These sources might include testimony, empirical data, or intellectual data about what seems to be the case upon reflection. When there is a conflict between seemings, for example, that the Muller-Lyer lines are congruent and that they are incongruent the resultant seeming is determined by weighing the conflicting seemings. These conflicting seemings are weighed based on the sources of evidence that count in their favor. My question, then, is this:

• Is the weighing of evidence for a seeming agent-relative? 

Put differently, is there no objective way to determine how an agent should resolve the conflict of seemings or take certain evidence to be decisive? Even if a person has measured the lines and been told that the seeming incongruence of the lines is an illusion it is plausible that if all evidence is agent-relative in terms of how it is weighed, then the person could still have a resultant seeming of the incongruence of the lines (because they weighed the perceptual prima facie seeming of incongruence heavily) despite the amount of strong evidence to the contrary. If weighing of seemings is strictly agent-relative (i.e. there is no objective way of ranking evidence or saying more evidence of a certain sort is better), then it looks as if there is no way to say the person has produced the wrong resultant seeming based on a mis-weighing of the evidence. Any ideas on how to objectively determine the weighing of evidence?

You already know Shake has to represent for the left coast. And what better way to do it than support the Dilated fam!? Here goes a new joint off DJ Babu's upcoming Duck Season v3, which drops October 28th! The first two volumes were dope and this should be no different.

DOWNLOAD: DJ Babu - For Whatever It's Worth f. Evidence | DivShare

Just got back from chilling at a really dope suite at the Ventian. Big shouts to Dara and Co. with SubCon Threads for welcoming the Shake and his lady. An extra shout goes out for the steak!. Good times, this week should be even better. Before I hit the sheets I have a few posts to make. Like this new joint from Granite State featuring and produced by Dilated People's Evidence. Off their upcoming album The RE:Public.

DOWNLOAD: Granite State - One Shot f. Evidence
[vodpod id=ExternalVideo.670724&w=425&h=28&fv=]

Finns inte så mycket att säga egentligen. Låter bilden tala för sig själv...

On the DL: Granite State - One Shot (feat. Evidence)