Only in Japan. Fukushima has affected much more than they think!

Monkeys Trying to Have Sex With Deer Is a Thing Now, Says Study
https://www.sciencealert.com/female-japanese-macaques-having-sex-with-male-deer?perpetual=yes&limitstart=1

Yep, it happened again.
SIGNE DEAN
18 DEC 2017

At the start of this year, the world was left baffled when evidence emerged of a male snow monkey unsuccessfully getting it on with a female Sika deer on Japan’s Yakushima Island.

Now another research team has recorded female monkeys humping male deer, and these romps happened in an entirely different group of animals, in another part of the country.

Snow monkeys, or Japanese macaques, are known to cohabit with Sika deer, as the latter are attracted by food scraps discarded by the monkeys on the forest floor.

Researchers have seen monkeys grooming the deer and even riding them, but this sexual stuff is something new.

The single male macaque caught in the act on Yakushima was thought to be a low-status male who couldn’t get a female mate and thus reduced his sexual frustration by taking it out on the deer – who seemed unphased by the affair.

But it’s hard to judge what might be going on between the species with just one example, so primatologists from the University of Lethbridge in Canada decided to gather more data from the groups they were observing in Minoo, central Japan.

Scientists already know that adolescent female macaques have similar urges – they routinely interact with male and female monkeys in a sexy way, soliciting them for sex and even mounting them.

Having seen adolescent monkey girls mounting male deer in the vicinity, the team decided to compare these two behaviours to see whether the interactions really were meant to be sexual.

“This is the first quantitative study of heterospecific sexual behaviour between a non-human primate and a non-primate species,” the team writes in the study.

After counting a total of 67 mounts between two female monkeys and 258 female-monkey-on-deer mounts, the researchers identified 25 “successful” interactions, defined by three or more mounts within a 10 minute period.

Twelve of these happened between monkeys, and the other thirteen were monkey-deer liaisons. The romps would take anywhere between just a few minutes to as long as two hours.

Mostly, the deer didn’t seem to care at all – they nonchalantly stood still and even kept eating, and only a few reared up to dislodge the horny monkeys from their backs.

In a video featuring sample interactions recorded during the study, the whole thing looks fairly innocent, as the monkeys grind away atop bored-looking deer (although the biting and occasional antler-pulling is a bit more disconcerting).

After analysing the behaviours, the team concluded there was no significant difference between monkey-monkey or monkey-deer interactions – so what we’re seeing is indeed macaques having sexy time with deer.

But why are they doing this? The short answer is, we still don’t really know.

The team hypothesises there could be several reasons for these unproductive affairs – adolescent females could be practising their sex moves before engaging in the real deal, or perhaps relieving sexual tension since they couldn’t get a mate of their own species.

It all could be down to surging adolescent hormones, as female monkeys get a taste for what genital stimulation feels like, and decide to partake in it with non-threatening deer, as opposed to potentially aggressive adult male monkeys.

The researchers note they may have seen a larger number of interspecies action because of their observation area – a place in the national park where staff provide food twice a day to prevent monkeys from roaming too far out into the nearby city.

But apart from the possibly increased frequency, the researchers don’t think the sexual interactions had anything to do with human influence on the environment, as the two species hang around each other in many parts of the country.

“Future observations at this site will indicate whether this group-specific sexual oddity was a short-lived fad or the beginning of a culturally maintained phenomenon,” the team writes in the study.

The research was published in Archives of Sexual Behavior.

Advertisements

From Our Friends at Living Lies Weblog


URGENT REQUEST! California Court attempting to Bury Decision!!! Don’t allow Guliex v. PennyMac to go unpublished! Act Today!
7h ago

California Fifth Court of AppealsGuilexguilex v pennymac

Unfortunately it is not uncommon for courts to skirt the rules in order to protect the banks if they can get away with it. It is up to California attorneys and homeowners nationwide to contact California’s Fifth District Appellate court and request that the Guliex case be published. YOU almost didn’t have this opportunity because it appears the court attempted to end the submission window six-days early !

We need all HOMEOWNERS and FORECLOSURE ATTORNEYS NATIONWIDE to HELP get this case published!

Homeowners, PLEASE write the Court at the address below TODAY (or use the template) and request that Guliex v. PennyMac be published. Attorneys and registered pro se litigants can file electronically through the court’s TrueFiling.com system.

Letters should be mailed TODAY or possibly MONDAY if you live in California to be received by the Tuesday, August 1st deadline.

Electronic filings are accepted up until Tuesday.

Originally the court had issued an order stating that no more letters requesting publication of Guliex would be accepted. Apparently after public outcry, the court clerk stated they would now accept requests to publish until Tuesday, August 1st, 2017.

On July 12th, 2017 the California Fifth Appellate Court issued an unpublished opinion in Guliex v. Pennymac Holdings, a case that may potentially benefit homeowners nationwide who are litigating illegal trustee sales and Chain of Title issues.

The Rules of the Fifth Appellate Court permit 20 days for attorneys and citizens to request publication of the case by submitting letters to the court. The court originally incorrectly listed the deadline as July 27th when the deadline should have been August 1st, 2017. Thus, the court clerk shut down requests for publication SIX days prematurely.

The Appellate court also issued the opinion that the Guliex decision, “does not establish a new rule of law, nor does it meet any of the criteria set forth in California Rules of Court, rule 8.1105(c).”

WHAT? REALLY? The decision likely doesn’t meet the court’s publication criteria because it actually benefits the Homeowner, not the Bank for a change!! Apparently Homeowners fighting foreclosure and hostile courts must also fight judicial CENSORSHIP if they prevail, in addition to the other abuses and injustices they confront at every judicial juncture.

Unfortunately, this is one more attempt to silence victims of fraudulent foreclosure and the attorneys who defend them. The Guliex case is important because the court actually complies with the rule of law it established in its own jurisdiction.

Common sense decisions regarding wrongful foreclosure are infrequent and typically eroded or overturned. Yvanova, one of the finest decisions on the importance of standing, was decimated by the Saterbak ruling. A favorable precedent that adheres to the rule of law must be allowed to stand. We must be vigilant and our voices united.

Please write a simple letter, or copy the template below and mail it TODAY requesting that the court publish the Guliex decision. The request for publication should not exceed 2 pages.

(Hat tip to Charles Cox for composing the content of this letter). Please edit as desired.

Fifth District Court of Appeal
Request for Publication, Case No. F073142
Attn: Honorable Brad Hill, Presiding Justice
2424 Ventura Street
Fresno, CA 93721

Subject: Request for Publication

Guliex v PennyMac Holdings LLC

Court of Appeal No F073142 filed July 12, 2017

Opinion cited as 2017 Cal App Unpub Lexis 4742

REQUEST FOR PUBLICATION OF OPINION

Dear Justices of the Fifth Appellate District of the California Court of Appeal,

Pursuant to California Rules of Court (“CRC”), Rule 8.1120(a) et seq., I am writing to respectfully and timely request certification for publication of the Court’s entire Opinion, or in the alternative, partial publication of Parts I. et seq. and II.B., for the case captioned above.

My interest in this request relates to the engineered attacks upon home ownership by unauthorized intermediaries engaged in self-help that is California’s non-judicial foreclosure process; and the application, interpretation, clarification and addressing of the facts in this instant case by the Appellate Court and its distinguishing other holdings involving legal issues of continuing public interest as well as clarification of certain specifics related to this field of litigation as the Opinion(s) may apply to other cases more readily once published.

The Opinion meets the standard for publication as authorized by CRC, Rule 8.1105(c) which provides that an opinion of a Court of Appeal or a superior court appellate division-whether it affirms or reverses a trial court order or judgment-should be certified for publication in the Official Reports if the opinion:

(1) Establishes a new rule of law;

(2) Applies an existing rule of law to a set of facts significantly different from those stated in published opinions;

(3) Modifies, explains, or criticizes with reasons given, an existing rule of law;

(4) Advances a new interpretation, clarification, criticism, or construction of a provision of a constitution, statute, ordinance, or court rule;

(5) Addresses or creates an apparent conflict in the law;

(6) Involves a legal issue of continuing public interest;

(7) Makes a significant contribution to legal literature by reviewing either the development of a common law rule or the legislative or judicial history of a provision of a constitution, statute, or other written law;

(8) Invokes a previously overlooked rule of law, or reaffirms a principle of law not applied in a recently reported decision; or

(9) Is accompanied by a separate opinion concurring or dissenting on a legal issue, and publication of the majority and separate opinions would make a significant contribution to the development of the law.

I contend the Court’s well-reasoned Opinion contained therein accordingly satisfy sub-sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8 as referenced above more specifically related to Sections I. sub-sections B, C, and D.

Section I.B. The Opinion clarifies that a homeowner “…has standing to challenge a foreclosure by an unauthorized entity.” Further, the Opinion clarifies that although a superior court may take judicial notice of documents that have been publicly recorded at a county recorder’s office, the “disputed or disputable” factual content of recorded documents is inadmissible hearsay. This meets the standard for publication per CRC, Rules 8.1105(c)(2, 3, 5, 6 and 8).

Section I.C. The Opinion establishes a new rule on the analysis of a chain-of-title as reflected documents publicly recorded at a county recorder’s office; as well as the analysis of each link in the chain-of-title as to whether a document can establish an unbroken or perfect link in the chain. The Opinion further clarifies that a plaintiff must allege facts that show the defendant who invoked the power of sale was not the true beneficiary. This meets the standard for publication per CRC, Rules 8.1105(c)(1, 2, 4, 6 and 8).

Section I. D. The Opinion establishes a new rule by distinguishing the two illegal types of wrongful foreclosures: procedural irregularities v. unauthorized foreclosure. This is an important opinion for these cases not previously popularized by other opinions clarifying the question of whether and/or when a homeowner must allege tender and/or prejudice. This meets the standard for publication per CRC, Rules 8.1105(c)(1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 8).

Based on the foregoing, I respectfully request this Honorable Court publish the above referenced Opinion.

Respectfully submitted,

We encourage readers to post copies of the letters mailed to the court in the comments section of this post. Just to keep the courts honest!

Thank you to California Attorney Charles Marshall, Eva Sutton and Celia Salazar for their efforts to publish this important opinion.

Experts: Billions are being exposed… Reactors “will continue to pour water into Pacific for the rest of time”


TV: Scientists fear Fukushima radiation hitting US to worsen… “A lot of people are very concerned” — Experts: Billions are being exposed… Reactors “will continue to pour water into Pacific for the rest of time” (VIDEO)
By ENENews, on February 21st, 2017
http://enenews.com/tv-scientists-fear-fukushima-radiation-hitting-us-to-worsen-a-lot-of-people-are-very-concerned-experts-billions-are-being-exposed-reactors-will-continue-to-pour-water-into-pacific-for

Arnie Gundersen, former nuclear engineer (emphasis added), Feb 2, 2017: “When I went to school, the saying was ‘dilution is the solution to pollution,’ and that’s what the Japanese believe. If they dump [radioactive water from Fukushima Daiichi] on their side and it floats over to the West Coast of the U.S. — the Pacific’s a big place — it’ll dilute out. I don’t think that’s appropriate… people are going to die. Regardless of how low the radiation is, it does cause cellular damage and cancer. So if you spread it out in a big body of water, the concentration goes down, but on the other hand, you’ve got a couple billion people exposed to it because they’re on the edge of that big body of water. So the concentration is down but the population is up and you’re still going to get cancer; it’s inevitable.”
http://www.fairewinds.org/nuclear-energy-education//ecoshock-interview-extreme-nuclear-dangers


Dr. Helen Caldicott, Feb 13, 2017: As the water flows beneath the damaged reactors, it immerses the three molten cores and becomes extremely radioactive as it continues its journey into the adjacent Pacific Ocean. Every day since the accident began, 300 to 400 tons of water has poured into the Pacific where numerous isotopes including cesium 137, 134, strontium 90, tritium, plutonium, americium and up to 100 more, enter the ocean and bio-concentrate by orders of magnitude at each step of the food chain… tuna, salmon and other species found on the American west coast now contain some of these radioactive elements… [Fukushima Daiichi] will continue to pour water into the Pacific for the rest of time…
https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/helen-caldicott-the-fukushima-nuclear-meltdown-continues-unabated,10019


Fox News, Feb 8, 2017: Adam Housley, who reported from the area in 2011 following the catastrophic triple-meltdown, said… small levels of radiation are still being detected off the coasts of California and Oregon and scientists fear it could get worse. “The worry is with 300 tons of radioactive water going into the Pacific every day, what is that doing to the Pacific Ocean?” said Housley…
http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/02/08/unimaginable-levels-radiation-fukushima-pacific-ocean-leaks

Fox News video transcript excerpts, Feb 8, 2017: Nearly 300 tons of radioactive water is dumped into the Pacific Ocean each and every day… There is still radiation being detected off the west coast of California and Oregon… The worry is with 300 tons of radioactive water going in every day to the Pacific — what is that doing to the Pacific Ocean?… We really don’t know what this radioactive water is doing to the Pacific I think a lot of people are very concerned about that…. As we know that water moves toward the west coast of the US.”

Watch the FOX News broadcast here

Ugandan Outbreak of Marburg, a highly infectious hemorrhagic fever similar to Ebola

RSOE EDIS -AlertMail

RSOE EDIS

RSOE Emergency and Disaster Information Service

Budapest, Hungary

RSOE EDIS ALERTMAIL

2014-10-06 03:08:02 – Biological Hazard – Uganda

!!! WARNING !!!

EDIS Code: BH-20141006-45530-UGA
Date&Time: 2014-10-06 03:08:02 [UTC]
Continent: Africa
Country: Uganda
State/Prov.: Capital City,
Location: ,
City: Kampala
Number of dead people: 1

Not confirmed information!

Event location map <!–AlertMap–>
Description:
A man has died in Uganda’s capital after an outbreak of Marburg, a highly infectious hemorrhagic fever similar to Ebola, authorities said on Sunday [5 Oct 2014], adding that a total of 80 people who came into contact with him were quarantined. Marburg starts with a severe headache followed by hemorrhaging and leads to death in 80 percent or more of cases in about 9 days. It is from the same family of viruses as Ebola, which has killed thousands in West Africa in recent months. There is no vaccine or specific treatment for the Marburg virus, which is transmitted through bodily fluids such as saliva and blood or by handling infected wild animals such as monkeys. The health ministry said in a statement that the 30-year-old radiographer died on 28 Sep 2014 while working at a hospital in Kampala. He had started feeling unwell about 10 days earlier, and his condition kept deteriorating. He complained of headache, abdominal pain, vomiting blood and diarrhea. Samples were taken and tested at the Uganda Virus Research Institute, and results confirmed the man had a marburgvirus. Doctors said his brother, one of the people he came into contact with, has developed similar symptoms and has been quarantined in a group of 80 others, 60 of whom are health workers. Those quarantined came into contact with the victim either in Kampala or his burial place in Kasese, a district in western Uganda bordering the Democratic Republic of Congo. Marburg has a shorter incubation period of 14 days, compared with Ebola’s 21. The current outbreak of Ebola, the deadliest on record so far, has killed more than 3400 people in 4 West African countries. Uganda has been hit by several outbreaks of Marburg and Ebola in the past, but it has contained the outbreaks quickly, limiting fatalities. Its worst occurrence of hemorrhagic fever occurred in 2000, when 425 people contracted Ebola, and more than half of them died.
The name of Hazard: Marburg virus (MARV)
Species: Human
Status: Confirmed