September 24, 2017

Not Knowing What’s Science and What’s Scientism

The Wildlife Alliance of Maine has placed a link to what they call “science” to prove – “this is the science proving” – that baiting bears changes the dynamics of the animals and the surrounding forests, where bears “could” cause damage to plants.

First off, the fake “study” is not science. It is the result of Scientism and a couple of students who set out to discredit in any way they could, hunting and in particular hunting bear using bait as one of the tools to accomplish the task. In other words, this is very typical of outcome based “scientific research.”

Scientism is nothing more than what some of us have come to recognize as “what scientists say and do.” It is also a dangerous and unrestrained credence of the power and authority realized from the manipulated field of science. This study is a fine example of how the scientific process is foregone and replaced with someone’s belief system because there is power in the publication of “studies.”

The scientific process is almost never followed anymore, due to a myriad of reasons, money being one of them along with political idealism and personal agendas.

Secondly, this “study” takes place within a national park in Canada, where black bears are protected. Without having data at my disposal, an intelligent supposition would be that in a park where black bears are protected, depending upon the cycle the bears were going through during the study period, there are probably too many bears in the park. Those dynamics differ greatly from areas where bears a responsibly managed and kept in check to meet management goals and social tolerances.

The study references bear baiting stations adjacent to the park placed there by hunters. Not all hunters are stupid and thus they realize that with too many bears in the park, perhaps a good place to set up a bait station and a tree stand would be adjacent to the park. Does this tactic actually result in increasing the odds of bagging a bear? I dunno. Neither do the researchers.

The short of all this is that the “scientists” chose a location for their study that is far from being typical of the vast forests that make up Canada and parts of the U.S. So, the dynamics of bears and their habitat is not what one might expect to find in the majority of the rest of the world. Observations might prove interesting but for what purpose other than political?

So, what good then is the study? I alluded to that above. And when the study was all said and done, the authors state that with hunters having baiting stations adjacent to the park, bears “could” cause some damage to the trees and vegetation. I wonder if this “could” happen even if the bait stations weren’t there. Did the “scientists” set up a comparative study area outside of the park, in a location more typical of the forests?

The purpose of the study, more than likely, has been exemplified as we see an animal rights, environmental group emotionally grasping at anything, even when it doesn’t even closely resemble the scientific process, to promote their totalitarian agendas aimed at ending a lifestyle they don’t agree with.

The Wildlife Alliance of Maine, in their posting (on Facebook?) states that the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) doesn’t consider this dynamic change possible. Actually, I’ve never heard or read anywhere that MDIFW doesn’t believe that baiting bear changes the dynamics of the forest in places where bear are being baited. It doesn’t take a science degree to understand that any and all “changes” within a forest ecosystem can and will have an effect on the dynamics between animal and ecosystem. It then is left to a person’s, or a group of person’s, perspective on what they want to see or have before them.

I think that it is wrong to make a statement about MDIFW of this kind. MDIFW has made it perfectly clear from the beginning that they would like to continue with baiting bear as a tool to help keep the growth of black bears in check in order to assume responsible management of a healthy bear population. Should numbers of bears drop to management’s desired levels, I’m quite certain that MDIFW would cease bear baiting.

But, within this entire debate, both sides cherry-picking convenient products of Scientism to bolster their arguments, in the grand scheme of things, there is so little baiting going on anywhere that it is akin to somebody dumping a cup of coffee into Sebago Lake (47.68 sq. miles) and declaring that the lake dynamics have changed and thus the lake has gone to hell.

Share

Enjoy That Ball Earth That You Be-Lie-Eve In

Share

Phallus Worship/Obelisks In The Intellectually Spaced Out United Satanic Association

Phallus Worship / Obelisks

Phallus worship / obelisks
https://www.flickr.com/photos/spacex/

Formosat-5 Mission

The “universal” human spirit

http://www.spacex.com/news/2017/02/27/spacex-send-privately-crewed-dragon-spacecraft-beyond-moon-next-year

We are excited to announce that SpaceX has been approached to fly two private citizens on a trip around the Moon late next year. They have already paid a significant deposit to do a Moon mission. Like the Apollo astronauts before them, these individuals will travel into space carrying the hopes and dreams of all humankind, driven by the universal human spirit of exploration. We expect to conduct health and fitness tests, as well as begin initial training later this year. Other flight teams have also expressed strong interest and we expect more to follow. Additional information will be released about the flight teams, contingent upon their approval and confirmation of the health and fitness test results.
Most importantly, [[[[we would like to thank NASA,]]]] without whom this would not be possible. NASA’s Commercial Crew Program, which provided most of the funding for [[[Dragon 2 development,]]] is a [[[key enabler for this mission.]]]

That mission being delusion, distraction, and deception..

Yeah baby, they be going on a rocket ride…

In this world most people will be-lie-eve anything..

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS FOOLPROOF, BECAUSE FOOLS ARE SO DARNED INGENIOUS! AS HEAVENLY FATHER STATED, THINKING THEMSELVES WISE THEY ARE FOOLS!

Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me…

Share

In Post Fact Era, Creatures Are Smarter Than Creator

A few days ago there were a few comments being made on a previous post about how coyotes, when attempts are made by those interested in controlling their population numbers, will simply reproduce more to compensate for their losses. If this idea, to humanize the existence of animals, both wild and domestic, is true, then, as was also pointed out by a reader, all animals must be endowed by their Creator with the same intelligence level to increase their reproductive rate in order to compensate for mortality losses. Or as one person wrote on another website to answer someone’s question about “Why animals reproduce?”, we find this response:

“By the process of reproduction, which is of course natural for all animals, they ensure that the survival and balance of their species is maintained in this world. The process of reproduction basically compensates the loss of species by the mortality. It is as simple as that.”

Is it that simple? Perhaps in a simpleton’s mind – one that insists to exist in this “Post Fact” era of Scientism, Romance Biology and VooDoo Science. I suppose it’s all a part of perverse animal worship, hatred toward man’s existence and a brainwashed desire to change and control everything anybody does that isn’t in line with one’s own ideology.

If it was “as simple as that” why then, have species gone extinct?

In addition, as one reader pointed out, if animals have the intelligence or some automated response mechanism to compensate mortality through increased reproduction then there would never be any changes to the balance of any and all species. Those who believe in “Balance of Nature” also believe in the concept being discussed here. But, none of this makes any sense. If, in opposition to the animal protectionists, responsible wildlife managers attempt to implement a means of controlling coyote numbers, which causes the wild dogs to increase reproduction for losses, as is believed by far too many people, then when man hunts game animals, like deer, bear, moose, elk, grouse, ducks, pheasants, and all sorts of other yummy things, those animals will also get their act together and reproduce more to compensate for losses. How brilliant. Balance of nature is remarkable?

Of course the dog lover, believes this unbelievable ability to recognize mortality is endemic only to wild dogs and doesn’t exist in any other animal….well, unless, of course, that animal is something they are in love with and don’t want to share the resource with anyone else.

It’s odd that if man hunts and kills wild dogs, “they only reproduce more to compensate losses” but when the same men hunt deer, bear, elk, moose, etc. it makes the species go instinct.

When you listen to the words spoken by these insane people about wild dogs, they are the first to blame the extirpation of wolves in the Lower 48 States, on hunting and trapping. But I thought hunting and trapping, i.e., killing of these animal, only caused them to reproduce more?

According to the brain trust of the environmental nuts, the Post Fact era geniuses, hunters are responsible for killing anything that dies. And yet, when convenient to the narrative, hunting only causes increased reproduction to compensate for losses.

As the saying goes, you can’t make this stuff up.

Share

“Look, I can see the curvature of the earth!” Always complete the circle to spot the lie.”

We can’t destroy disinformation completely but we can expose the mechanisms that make it function and in doing so, marginalize it. And we can stay on message with the strongest and most undeniable evidence. One of the ways “we can expose the mechanisms (of disinformation) that make it function and in doing so, marginalize it”, is to rebut disinformation with the “strongest and most undeniable evidence.”

Anti-Propaganda…

Share

More Than a Million “Coywolves” in the Northeast?

Perhaps that claim is nonsense. Perhaps it’s not. What is nonsense is much of the discussions taking place about this seemingly newly discovered ad mixture of coyote, domestic dog and wolf.

The truth is nobody knows how long this crossbreeding has been going on. Much of its existence is based on romantic speculation and inaccurate evolutionary claims, of which most are also based on Romance Biology, Scientism and Ideology driven within a Post-Fact society of fantasy and whim.

I even read recently from one group of perverts demanding that this “coywolf” become a listed and federally protected species claiming that this new species of wild canine is the result of “natural” events.

Odd isn’t it, that it makes perfect science sense that it is more likely that intermixing of different breeds of wild dogs is more often occurring due to increased populations forced into limited space. However, the environmentalists choose to believe the complete opposite, partly because doing so blames the existence of man for the cause of crossbreeding. These clowns state that because man destroys their habitat and kills off numbers of animals, it forces the males to wander great distances in search of any creature that will have sex with them. (If this were true it destroys any thoughts that this hybrid mixture should be considered as a viable species….but we can’t go there in this post-fact era.)

The puzzling hypocrisy exists when the environmentalists, who hate man’s existence, blames man for causing wild breeds of dogs to intermix and yet claim that the crossbreeding is a “natural” thing and thus needs protecting. I think this is a classic example of demanding it both ways.

It is likely that hours upon hours could be spent discussing the ins and outs of crossbreeding and how it should be considered, if at all, as a legitimate “new” species. However, if the presented information is true that in just the Northeast section of the country there are “more than a million” mixed breed wild dogs roaming our countryside, who in their right mind would, with a straight face, consider seeking protection of the species?

Share

What Really Happened On 8-21-17-?

I don’t believe any man rightly knows.. My five senses seemed to tell me that something came to be in front of the sun.. The light went from normal to dimmed back to normal.. The temperature dropped twenty degrees.. Their were weird shadows on the ground.. Animals behaved normal as if the night was approaching then resumed their normal daily routines as the short night ended.. NASA say’s the Moon eclipsed the Sun. And they have almost all mankind believing them. I doubt it.. Some men have said their is a black sun involved.. Saturn perhaps Mars.. I doubt it.. I’ve heard there is dark moons along with the known lighted moon.. I doubt it.. When YHWH and Yeshuah tells us what these things were, if they ever do, then we will know what these things were.. Men are not wise and are fools..
eclipse (v.) Look up eclipse at Dictionary.com
late 13c., “to cause an eclipse of,” from Old French eclipser, from eclipse (see eclipse (n.)).Figurative use from 1570s. Also in Middle English in an intransitive sense “to suffer an eclipse,” now obsolete. Related: Eclipsed; eclipsing.
eclipse (n.) Look up eclipse at Dictionary.com
c. 1300, from Old French eclipse “eclipse, darkness” (12c.), from Latin eclipsis, from Greek ekleipsis “an eclipse; an abandonment,” literally “a failing, forsaking,” from ekleipein “to forsake a usual place, fail to appear, be eclipsed,” from ek “out” (see ex-) + leipein “to leave” (from PIE root *leikw- “to leave”).
ecliptic (n.) Look up ecliptic at Dictionary.com
“the circle in the sky followed by the Sun,” late 14c., from Medieval Latin ecliptica, from Late Latin (linea) ecliptica, from Greek ekliptikos “of an eclipse” (see eclipse (n.)). So called because eclipses happen only when the Moon is near the line. Related: Ecliptical.
ec- Look up ec- at Dictionary.com
typical form before consonants of Latin ex- or Greek ex-/ek- (see ex-), as in eclipse, ecstasy).
annular (adj.) Look up annular at Dictionary.com
“ring-shaped,” 1570s, from French annulaire (16c.) or directly from Medieval Latin annularis “pertaining to a ring,” from annulus, misspelled diminutive of Latin anus “ring” (see anus). An annular eclipse (1727) is one in which the dark body of the moon is smaller than the disk of the sun, so that at the height of it the sun, due to the moon’s remoteness from Earth, appears as a ring of light. Related: Annularity.
*leikw- Look up *leikw- at Dictionary.com
Proto-Indo-European root meaning “to leave.”

It forms all or part of: delinquent; derelict; eclipse; eleven; ellipse; ellipsis; elliptic; lipo- (2) “lacking;” lipogram; loan; paralipsis; relic; relict; reliction; relinquish; reliquiae; twelve.

It is the hypothetical source of/evidence for its existence is provided by: Sanskrit reknas “inheritance, wealth,” rinakti “leaves;” Greek leipein “to leave, be lacking;” Latin linquere “to leave;” Gothic leihvan, Old English lænan “to lend;” Old High German lihan “to borrow;” Old Norse lan “loan.”

totality (n.) Look up totality at Dictionary.com
1590s, from total (adj.) + -ity, or from or based on Middle French totalité, Medieval Latin totalitas. In the eclipse sense, “time of total obscuration,” from 1842.
penumbra (n.) Look up penumbra at Dictionary.com
1660s, from Modern Latin penumbra “partial shadow outside the complete shadow of an eclipse,” coined 1604 by Kepler from Latin pæne “almost” (see penitence) + umbra “shadow” (see umbrage). Related: Penumbral.
umbra (n.) Look up umbra at Dictionary.com
1590s, “phantom, ghost,” a figurative use from Latin umbra “shade, shadow” (see umbrage). Astronomical sense of “shadow cast by the earth or moon during an eclipse” is first recorded 1670s. Meaning “an uninvited guest accompanying an invited one” is from 1690s in English, from a secondary sense among the Romans. Related: Umbral.
helium (n.) Look up helium at Dictionary.com
1868, coined from Greek helios “sun” (from PIE root *sawel- “the sun”), because the element was detected in the solar spectrum during the eclipse of Aug. 18, 1868, by English astronomer Sir Joseph N. Lockyer (1836-1920) and English chemist Sir Edward Frankland (1825-1899). It was not actually obtained until 1895; before then it was assumed to be an alkali metal, hence the ending in -ium.
murk (n) Look up murk at Dictionary.com
c. 1300, myrke, from Old Norse myrkr “darkness,” from Proto-Germanic *merkwjo- (source also of Old English mirce “murky, black, dark; murkiness, darkness,” Danish m?rk “darkness,” Old Saxon mirki “dark”); cognate with Old Church Slavonic mraku, Serbo-Croatian mrak, Russian mrak “darkness;” Lithuanian merkti “shut the eyes, blink,” from PIE *mer- “to flicker” (see morn). Murk Monday was long the name in Scotland for the great solar eclipse of March 29, 1652 (April 8, New Style).
intramercurial (adj.) Look up intramercurial at Dictionary.com
“being within the orbit of the planet Mercury,” 1859, especially in reference to a supposed planet orbiting there (sought in vain in the eclipse of 1860), from intra- “within, inside” + Mercury (Latin Mercurius) + -al (1). The idea originated in France in the 1840s with Urbain Le Verrier, who later became director of the Paris Observatory. There was some excitement about it in 1859 when a French doctor named Lescarbault claimed to have tracked it crossing the Sun’s disk and convinced Le Verrier. It was sought in vain in the solar eclipses of 1860, ’68, and ’69. See Vulcan.

Ecclesiastes 8-17 Then I beheld all the work of God, that a man cannot find out the work that is done under the sun: because though a man labour to seek it out, yet he shall not find it; yea further; though a wise man think to know it, yet shall he not be able to find it.

Ecclesiastes 3-11 He hath made every thing beautiful in his time: also he hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end.

3-14 I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it: and God doeth it, that men should fear before him.

Mathew 11 /21 – 30 25 At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.

26 Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight.

27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.

28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.

30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light. Though he labor Adam (the natural man) cannot find out the works of God. He can ascertain certain knowable facts that are clearly seen and can be proven but that shall be the extent of his understanding. It is good and right to understand these things but God has set a limit to his ability. The natural has been hidden just as the gospel has been hidden to the wise and prudent. The child of grace has been given the mind of Christ in the new birth in the incorruptible seed and He knows all things but not according to the flesh. The gospel declaration is they shall call His name Jesus and He SHALL save HIS PEOPLE from their sins and as Hebrews says all His works were finished before the foundation of the world. Labor to enter into His rest which is the finished work of Christ. He is the righteousness of His sheep and they hear his voice and follow Him and will not follow another and know man can pluck them from His hand of out of the fathers hand. All who have been given faith to trust solely in the work of Christ and not their own filthy works have peace with God and the mystery of Godliness is theirs.

If you wish to believe the say so of unwise fools so be it..

Share

Why Constitutional Amendments to “Protect” Hunting Need The Correct Language

Many states have tried, some have succeeded, in getting a constitutional amendment to protect the right to hunt, fish and trap…or at least they think they have. Truth is, very few, and perhaps no state, has made a success out of actually protecting and guaranteeing the right to hunt, fish and trap. Essentially what they have done is end up with legalese, fit only for the law profession, that says the state recognizes that hunting, fishing and trapping are long held traditions and these activities have been used as part of a game management plan. The new laws then make people think this tradition is being protected, when it is not. And here’s why.

As an example of the wrong wording in a right to hunt, fish and trap constitutional amendment, the state of Maine, over the past few years, has bounced around half-efforts to get an amendment passed. However, I have opposed all wording of this effort because it’s fake wording that fails to provide the protection that I believe most sportsmen want.

Without the proper, tough and direct language, while there may be recognition of how hunting, fishing and trapping have been a part of game management and responsible use of natural resources, all attempts have failed to provide language that forces the state, along with their natural resources departments. or fish and game departments, to manage all game species specifically for surplus harvests. I might point out that this kind of tough language is generally opposed by legislators and in particular heads of fish and game departments. The biggest reason is because most fish and game departments have already morphed beyond sensible and scientific game management in favor of environmentalism’s “Romance Biology” and “Voodoo Science.”

Without this kind of tough and direct language, fish and game departments and/or state governments, can end hunting, fishing and trapping at anytime. With a growth and power of the progressive Left, a totalitarian social effort to end all hunting, fishing and trapping, mostly driven by an extremely perverse animal rights society, not only are fish and wildlife departments gradually, and sometimes not so gradual, are becoming more anti hunting, fishing and trapping, but the general electorate can end hunting, fishing or trapping with one effort at the ballot box with zero consideration for science.

An example of that is seen in British Columbia, Canada, where voters have decided to ban grizzly bear hunting because it doesn’t fit their ideological narrative. As was said by Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development Minister Doug Donaldson, “[It is]not a matter of numbers, it’s a matter of society has come to the point in B.C. where they are no longer in favour of the grizzly bear trophy hunt.”

Certainly this reflects the desires of the people, a product of a totalitarian democracy of sorts (two wolves and a sheep discussing what’s for lunch), where a simple vote can destroy long held traditions as well as making a mockery out of wildlife science.

While there never exists any true guarantee of a right to hunt, fish and trap, one does have to wonder if this same kind of referendum would have even been attempted if a true constitutional amendment existed with real power that said it is the mandated function of government to manage all game species for the purpose of surplus harvest and use of natural resources.

It is often argued about whether wildlife is part of the public trust. In my 65 years of life, I do not recall anyone suggesting that viewing wildlife, even out one’s back door, should be stopped or that managers should grow game species to levels that would be harmful to a healthy establishment of animal species. Why is it then, as seems to be the way of the “new” progressive society, that society has little interest in the aspects of the public trust when it comes to the public trust involvement of hunters, fishermen and trappers? In their pea brains, hunters, trappers and fishermen are excluded from any participation in a public trust.

A classic example of totalitarians at work.

Next time anyone begins talking about another proposed constitutional amendment to guarantee the right to hunt, trap and fish, please take a little extra time and honestly ask yourself if what is being proposed will do what it is being sold as doing and is worth any effort to get it passed. Contrary to what the politician will tell you. something is NOT better than nothing.

But, isn’t it now just too late? Does there even exist enough people who aren’t mentally destroyed and manipulated with animal rights and environmentalism, along with Romance Biology and Voodoo Science?

Share

Parasites “A Major Threat to Moose” But Leads “Occasionally to Death.” HUH?

Perhaps Cornell University is at it again. The last time I recall the antics of Cornell University, was when they, in their attempt to do something about the overrunning deer population on campus, decided to conduct some “tubal ligations” on some of the female population of deer.

When a university, or any other organization, is wallowing in liberal idiocy, stupid things happen to stupid people. What the brilliant wildlife department at the university failed to understand, in their blindness, was that tubal ligations on female deer only caused those female deer to go into estrus and remain in estrus until they had successfully mated. Now, without the ability to successfully mate…The result? Every buck within a hundred miles descended on Cornell looking for action.

And now, the $34,000.00 a year tuition at Cornell, has students who are conducting tests, and what they call research, to see what are killing the Adirondack moose. They say moose eating snails is how they contract “brain worm,” which ends up killing the moose. However, in one paragraph, the university writes: “…surveys in 2016 on 11 live moose and 22 necropsies and concluded parasites are a major threat to the moose population.” (Emboldening added by editor)

This if followed almost immediately by this: “Foraging moose then ingest infected snails, culminating in a diseased brain and spinal cord, and occasionally death.”(emboldening added by editor)

I may be wrong, but from my perspective, if I was going to state that parasites, from eating snails, are a major threat to the moose population, then it must be that death, and/or failure to reproduce, is at a level high enough the recruitment of new moose calves is lower than total mortality of the adult moose population.

If that is true, then how can the results of foraging moose, eating snails, lead to “occasional death?”

Maybe they should try some tubal ligations.

Understand that by reading Cornell’s own words, they are clueless as to whether moose are eating snails and if so, if it is killing the moose. “Our results show that moose foraging in areas with high soil moisture may likely encounter higher densities of gastropods – snails and slugs – which likely increases the risk of parasitic threats from deer brain worm if the snails are eaten.” (Emboldening added by editor)

I suppose it is just as LIKELY that moose MIGHT eat a truck full of cannabis a LIKELY die!

Here’s one more observation. The student researchers (give em a break, right? So they can graduate and fill our wildlife manager departments with more progressive, brainwashed, environmentalist, idiots.) said they are looking into wet and “water areas” where they think, perhaps they will find these parasitic-laden snails. One area of interest to them is described this way: “Since moose make use of water areas and eat in wet, dense pine forests, they’re susceptible to a large presence of gastropods …”

I grew up in Maine and lived the majority of my adult life here. Maine is the Pine Tree State. Pine forests are everywhere and for some strange reason, the people of Maine decided to call Maine the Pine Tree State. Maine also has moose…more than any other state in the lower contiguous states. I’m going to go out and search for moose eating in “wet, dense pine forests.” And all this time, I thought pine trees, like the hundreds of thousands I have on my small acreage, thrived in dry, sandy places.

I just can’t believe my own eyes!

Maybe I should try some tubal ligations.

Share

The Escalation Of Wolf Pimp Propaganda

“The Profanity Peak Pack: Set Up & Sold Out

http://www.predatordefense.org/profanity/

There’s no business like bullshit.

That statement can be taken as a quip based on the well known song about show business, or one can consider that this is really true, that this is the way that the world really works.

In Harry G Franfurt’s book, ON BULLSHIT, he shows how prevalent bullshit is, and shows that it is more than simply lying. What it is today is institutionalized as PR, specifically that termed as “spin”, the “scientific” application of ‘psychology’ to persuasion.

At their best, universities should protect academic freedom even when academiacs are obviously lying…

The anti management of large carnivores movement is based upon a totally a mythical concept, a jejune concept, one that these Disney tards needs to find the maturity to grow out of. The unquestioning acceptance of this myth, one saturated with pseudo scientific internal contradictions, is that which defines the ‘Wolf Pimp Zombie’ chanting around their GOLDEN WOLF as their ALTER… Kubrick must have written their script…The latest Disneyesque culture in the pathological society using their technocratic gadgets, is merely another culture of the scum grown in a social engineers petrie dish…

The Distinction Between ‘Knowing’ and ‘Believing’:
Here is the etymology of the word “Belief”: In Sanskrit, Bala=explain, describe, force, against one’s will, without being able to help or change things, militarily, troops, young, childish, infantile, not full-grown or developed, newly, rising early, ignorant, simple, foolish, fit for sacrifice, child, fool, simpleton, or any immature living creature.
Eva means earth, world, conduct, habit, usage, custom. We derived the word Eve from the Sanskrit Eva.
Eve, the wife of Adam, introduced Adam to the religion of sin and degradation. Bel + Eva = Baleva (Belief; Believe).
Belligerent. Bellum, Rebel, Rebellious, etc…

 

Share