Everlasting Place
  • Home
  • One way
    • Proof
  • Sadie Sparrow
    • Sadie Sparrow Excerpt
    • Author Chat
    • Articles
    • Book Reviews
  • Memoir
    • Memoir Excerpts
    • Reviews, interviews & endorsements
  • Blogs
    • Eternal eyes: a blog about forever
    • Golden years: a blog about the elderly
  • Old folks
    • Planting tips for Christians
  • Messages from Chris Carrillo
  • Library
  • Bookstore
  • Contact

"A poor sort of memory"

10/29/2016

0 Comments

 
Picture
I came across this clue in a crossword puzzle recently: “It’s a ___ sort of memory that only works backwards.” The missing word, of course, is “poor,” and it was spoken by the White Queen in Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass. 
​
Carroll really was brilliant, wasn’t he? Because that’s a great observation: in this natural world of ours, our memories only work backwards.

But how about in the supernatural world, the realm of the One who invented the universe and everything in it, including human beings with memories that often take us places we'd rather be -- or would rather not ever experience again?

Is it possible that in looking backwards, we’re glimpsing our futures?

I’ve long suspected that this might be the case, that, for the born-again believer in Jesus Christ, those joyful memories that fill us with such longing for the past may actually be glimpses of the joy awaiting us for all eternity. And maybe, just maybe, those who reject Christ until it’s too late experience the opposite phenomenon – recalling painful earthly memories that are warnings of the eternal anguish they face without the Savior.

I have no evidence that any of this is true. But if it is, then we really do have memories that work both backward and forward in the most profound and powerful way.  

The believer’s joy is truly wonderful. And it can be experienced at any time, simply by remembering the happiest of times.

My childhood chum Cathy reminded me recently of one such beloved memory. It was from the '60s, and the days that she and I rode horseback together -- days when we would occasionally grab our sleeping bags and our other little friends and sleep out in the apple orchard near our barn. 

I can’t remember much of what we did during these adventures – told ghost stories, I suppose, and spied on the migrant workers' barracks and gossiped and snacked on whatever treats we had managed to lug along up the big hill and through the local Rifle Range and past the barbed wire fence encircling the orchard. But I do remember Cathy's battery-operated record player and the 45s we listened to, over and over, until the melodies and lyrics were indelibly imprinted on our lives.

There was one song in particular that to this day evokes in my heart silhouettes of stout trees and wild grass, the sound of crickets and the scent of apples and an irrepressible sense of crazy happiness and belonging – a song that now, instead of making me look back with longing, points my heart heavenward, to eternal joy. 

Here's the song. I don’t suppose it’ll mean anything to most of you, but maybe it will to a few – especially one by the name of Cathy.
0 Comments

What exactly is truth?

10/24/2016

0 Comments

 
Picture
When I was younger, "truth" was a personal concept meaning whatever made me happy; there were no absolutes of any kind.  For instance, when I was in my early 20s, my truth said that recreational drugs, alcohol, and tobacco were perfectly safe. That a good sex life and a high-flying career were every woman’s right. And that evolution had proven religion a crock, so let’s eat, drink and be merry, for one of these years we were all going to die!

Truth was, after all, completely subjective.

Not that I’d been born a relativist. I had once known certain things to be true – my Granny was the best, there were parts of the world where it never snowed, lying to Momma about sleeping over at Rosie’s so that we could sleep out in our back yard was very dumb, and starving children in China would be grateful for my rutabaga.
​
But somewhere along the line, I had fallen for the idea that your interpretation of truth was every bit as valid as mine.

How this happened, I’m not sure. It might have had something to do with studying Russian History at UWM and doing a term paper on the Soviet definition of “Pravda,” which apparently means “truth.” In the course of researching this subject, I learned that to the Communists, truth was anything that was good for the Communist Party. To write my paper, I had to get to the point where this definition made some sense to me; maybe the mental gymnastics this exercise required had impaired my ability to recognize objective truth.

Or maybe it was the fallout from an analysis I did, for another college paper, on the Big Three news magazines’ treatment of the Thomas Eagleton affair in the 1972 presidential campaign.

“I don’t know what’s true anymore,” I’d told a classmate I’ll call Ginny on the way out of class the day we turned our papers in.

“Because Nixon won after all?” she asked, remembering that my paper had had something to do with the McGovern campaign.

I shook my head. “Because I discovered that U.S. News & World Report is the most objective of the news magazines.”

“Ha!” Ginny laughed delightedly; she was the first conservative kid I’d ever known, and I hadn’t yet taken the Econ 101 class that would show me the error of my ways. U.S. News was her magazine of choice; Time was mine. “Let’s go get a drink and you can tell me all about it,” she added.

We headed over to a dive of a bar on Oakland Avenue – one of my favorite bars, it featured a grungy atmosphere, largely disgusting clientele, and great prices.

“So tell me about it,” she said after we’d seated ourselves in a booth with our drinks – a Lite beer for me, a rum and coke for her.

“You remember Eagleton, don’t you? McGovern’s vice presidential candidate?”

She grinned and nodded. “I remember.”

“Right,” I said, wondering how someone I liked so much could have been on the wrong side in the McGovern/Nixon race. “So you remember when it came out that Eagleton had been treated for depression?”

“Yes – with electroshock, I think. Pretty scary that McGovern would choose someone with that kind of past as his running mate.”

“I don’t know about that,” I said. “But what was scary was that at first the news media were all over McGovern for saying he would stand by Eagleton – all of them, even Time and Newsweek. U.S. News, too, of course – that was to be expected.”

“McGovern was practically a Communist,” Ginny said in apparent defense of all three magazines.

“Separate issue,” I said evenly, saving that argument for another time. “My point is that when McGovern caved in to their pressure, and replaced Eagleton with Shriver, all of a sudden the press went nuts on him for dumping on the mentally ill! All of them, that is, except for U.S. News & World Report.”

“They stuck to their guns?”

“Yes,” I admitted, though it pained me to say so. “U.S. News said that McGovern had done the right thing.”

“Objective reporting is alive and well somewhere,” she said. “I’m glad to hear it.”

“Objective reporting?" What a funny thing to say. “Of course it’s alive and well. And it always will be. How can you doubt it?” 

************** 

Except I’d been horribly wrong about that; the Time and Newsweek flip-flops were just the opening salvos in the mainstream news media’s all-out attack on objective truth.

“It is not enough to refrain from publishing fake news or to take ordinary care to avoid mistakes,” said newspaper-publishing legend Joseph Pulitzer many years ago. “You’ve got to make everyone connected with the paper believe that accuracy is to a newspaper what virtue is to a woman.”

I knew from first-hand experience what happened to a woman’s virtue. By the 1990s, the same thing had apparently befallen American journalism – in the process, nurturing a subjective, devil-may-care attitude towards truth in stony hearts like mine. 

“What is truth?” I remember thinking now and then in the tumultuous last decades of the 20th Century. Never having read the Bible, I didn’t realize that I was quoting Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor of Judea in Jesus’ day, the opportunist who had ordered Jesus’ crucifixion even though he could find no fault with his victim. 

(From Heaven Without Her, pages 88-90)
0 Comments

It's all about me

10/19/2016

0 Comments

 
Picture
Last night, I watched the 1942 melodrama “In This Our Life,” the story of an abominably selfish and miserable young woman named Stanley (Bette Davis). Stanley remained troubled to the bitter end of the movie, in spite of the gentle intervention of her wise father. “In my day,” he commented in the midst of one of her tantrums, “we didn’t talk much about happiness. If it came, we were grateful for it. But we were brought up in the belief that there were other things more important – old fogy notions such as duty and personal responsibility.”
 
It wasn’t the first time such apparently obsolete wisdom was delivered in movies of that era. Think of Ashley Wilkes agreeing with Scarlett O’Hara that there was nothing tying him to his wife – “nothing but honor,” he said. (“Gone with the Wind,” 1939). Alas, virtues like these were routinely rejected by the heroines of such stories, and those who expressed them risked being portrayed as weak-minded and pitiable.

All of which paved the way for our modern ideas about what matters in this life.
 
In a word: me. It’s all about me. I am all that matters.
 
This notion came into its own in the 1960s, becoming the battle cry of my generation and the underlying MO of those that followed in our wake.
 
Our culture has encouraged this form of Nouveau Narcissism from the start, making it tough to resist. Consider our music, for instance. I could name a number of pertinent titles, but one of the most obvious contributors was Whitney Houston’s “Greatest Love of All.” Check out the chorus:
 
I found the greatest love of all
Inside of me.
The greatest love of all
Is easy to achieve
Learning to love yourself
It is the greatest love of all.
 
As if we needed advice on how to love ourselves! As the wisest man who ever lived proclaimed in Ecclesiastes 1:9, “There’s nothing new under the sun.” And, in fact, self-love permeates the Bible’s accounts of man’s ancient rebellion against his Creator.
 
Modern movie-makers and songwriters have simply borrowed the same old themes, and we’ve embraced them eagerly in pursuing the same broad way to destruction. Think of “Is That All There Is?”, 1969’s musical answer to “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die (Isaiah 22:13). Or consider Sinatra’s “My Way,” a first-person version of “Everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (Judges 17:6, e.g.).  
 
What’s really interesting is that all of this adds up to the fulfillment of yet another Bible prophecy. In 2 Timothy 3, the apostle Paul had this to say about our times:
 
“But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves ...”
 
The good news is that there is an escape from the “all about me” path. All it takes is repentance, trust in Christ, and an act of God. 
0 Comments

All my buckets were empty

10/15/2016

7 Comments

 
Picture
When I was first searching for the truth about our existence, and the identity of the Being who'd made His existence so obvious through His creation, I spent months exploring the full spectrum of major worldviews. 

One of my most valuable resources during this phase of my investigation was James Sire's The Universe Next Door: A Basic Worldview Catalog. Sire goes into great detail about everything from Naturalism, Deism and the New Age to Hinduism, Islam and the Baha'i Faith. But he also demonstrates that there are really only two fundamental worldviews: those that say the ticket to paradise is being a good person, and the one that says the ticket is Jesus Christ. In short, there’s Christianity, and there’s everything else.

I wanted to believe something in the “everything else” department. My rationale was this: All these other religions said that it’s being a good person that gets you into heaven. My mom had been a great person, and I was planning on becoming one ASAP. So one or more of the "everything else" worldviews would bring us together again, this time forevermore -- without subjecting me, in the meantime, to what I perceived as the priggishness of Christianity.

To find the perfect match, I set up a series of mental buckets and labeled each one with the name of a major “everything else” worldview. I then set out to gather the evidence for each one. My plan was to drop each proof into the appropriate bucket and then, at some as-yet-unspecified date in the future, to sift through all these proofs and proclaim one the winner in the truth department.

Except that, hard as I searched, I found not one shred of evidence for any of them. 

“Because we have a holy book” sure doesn’t cut it. Who doesn’t?

“Because it works” is equally unremarkable. They all say that.

“Because there are so many of us” is almost laughable, given how often the majority of people are dead wrong.

Finally, I had to admit that all my "everything else" buckets were empty. Which left only the opposite worldview standing: Christianity. 

Almost reluctantly, I turned to the Bible – and was blown away by the evidence I found for its truth, particularly in the realm of science and prophecy. 

It’s been 16 years since I set out on my quest, 15 since I arrived at the only possible conclusion. If you haven’t already reached this conclusion yourself, please let me know what’s standing in your way; your eternity may well be at stake, and perhaps I can help point you in the right direction.
7 Comments

Darwin's influence on the Third Reich

10/8/2016

0 Comments

 
Picture
As a journalism student back in the 1970s, I spent every precious elective on history classes. My favorite subject was 20th century German history.

This coursework did some damage to my near-perfect grade-point average, because it meant studying under a professor who considered “C” an adequate reward for mastering the material. I knocked myself out for him, studying obsessively, and reading all the best books about that era – everything from Allan Bullock’s acclaimed Hitler: A Study in Tyranny to Albert Speer’s fascinating Inside the Third Reich. 

Yet somehow, I don’t remember hearing much about the philosophy underlying Hitler’s attempt to exterminate the Jews. Maybe if I’d ever read Mein Kampf, I would have had a clue, but not one professor ever recommended it. Maybe they believed, with George Eliot, that cruelty requires no motive.

But Eliot was wrong, and I’m afraid my beloved professor was, too. The “why” of the Holocaust is critically important, both for evaluating our past errors and for doing everything possible to prevent another, perhaps even deadlier, catastrophe. 

That’s why I so appreciated Hitler and the Nazi Darwinian Worldview: How the Nazi Eugenic Crusade for a Superior Race Caused the Greatest Holocaust in World History.  The latest work of Dr. Jerry Bergman, it is one of those books that explores what should be obvious – but, like the proverbial elephant in the room, is for some reason rarely discussed in polite company.  

Hitler and the Nazi Darwinian Worldview explains the inexplicable, makes sense out of the nonsensical, and reveals the thought that allowed the unthinkable to come to pass. It should be mandatory reading in college history classes. And it should top the reading list of anyone who understands that what we believe really does matter. 

Dr. Bergman exhaustively documents his contentions about “doctrinaire Darwinist” Adolf Hitler – including this foundational premise: 

"A central goal of Hitler and his government was the development and implementation of eugenics to produce a 'superior race,' often called the Aryan, Teutonic or Nordic race. At the very least, this goal required preventing the 'inferior races' from mixing with those judged superior in order to reduce contamination of the gene pool. Hitler believed that what we today recognize as the human gene pool could be improved by using selective breeding, similar to how farmers breed superior cattle."[i]

In the process, Dr. Bergman makes an airtight case that this was indeed the philosophy driving Hitler’s murderous machine – the philosophy that unfortunately “culminated in the Final Solution, the extermination of 6 million Jews and over 5 million Poles and others who belonged to what German scientists judged were ‘inferior races.’”[ii]

Acknowledging that there were many circumstances leading up to the Holocaust, Dr. Bergman points out that “Of the many factors that produced Hitler’s eugenic and genocidal [programs], according to his own writings, one of the more important was Darwin’s notion that evolutionary progress occurs primarily as a result of the elimination of the weak in the struggle for survival and allowing the strong to flourish ... Darwin-inspired eugenics clearly played a critical role.”[iii]

He then goes on to prove it, point by frightening point, in a book that’s both terrifying and compelling.  He uses excellent techniques to pull the reader through, for instance by foreshadowing what we’ll learn in subsequent chapters to give context to the subject at hand. And in addition to setting the stage generally, he provides up-close-and-personal analyses of Hitler’s most important and influential henchmen – Mengele, Bormann, Himmler, Goebbels, Göring, Heydrich, Rosenberg and Streicher. 

Dr. Bergman closes his book with a weighty chapter titled “What can be learned from attempts to apply Darwinism to society.” This chapter alone is worth the cost of the book. 

***
Hitler and the Nazi Darwinian Worldview is full of surprises. The margins of my copy are filled with exclamation points to highlight facts about, for instance, the German government subsidizing reproduction among “racially and biologically desirable” couples,[iv] perfecting its Lebensborn program to advance the breeding of the Nordic super-race,[v] and sponsoring mass kidnapping of “racially valuable” children.[vi]

Another recurring (and not at all surprising) theme was the enthusiastic support that members of the scientific establishment gave Hitler. Germany was known in the first part of the 20th century as the home of the most accomplished scientists in the world, including the majority of Nobel Laureates.  These were the experts who gave Hitler the scientific justification he needed to advance his horrific programs. 

Noting that some Nazi scientists received accolades and awards long after the fall of the Third Reich, Dr. Bergman provides this chilling insight from Dr. Susanne Heim: “Scientists are highly vulnerable to intellectual and moral corruption – opportunities will be used if they promise more influence and success.”[vii]

Apparently not even medical doctors could resist. Forget the Hippocratic oath; “the psychiatric and medical professions were among the most enthusiastic supporters of Nazi race programs.”[viii]

Dr. Bergman is far from alone in believing that Darwinism influenced Hitler and his supporters. He quotes other authorities extensively throughout his book, and notes that scholars such as Professor Richard Weikart have also documented Darwinism’s role in Nazism.[ix] Even outspoken Harvard professor Stephen Jay Gould noticed. As he wrote in his book Ontogeny and Phylogeny, “’Biological arguments for racism … increased by orders of magnitude following the acceptance of evolutionary theory’ by scientists in most nations.”[x]

But Hitler and the Nazi Darwinian Worldview may be the first to gather all this evidence under one convenient cover and to make such a persuasive case for what happens when Darwinism is taken to its logical conclusion.   

It’s not a book I’d recommend for bedtime reading.

***
In the midst of reading Hitler and the Nazi Darwinian Worldview, I had the chance to watch Ray Comfort’s powerful pro-life documentary 180, in which he uses the Holocaust as an apt analogy for abortion (watch it at www.180movie.com/). Ray opens with clips of interviews with young people. Astoundingly, almost none knew who Hitler was. 

And there you have it. We are raising a nation of people who don’t know who Adolf Hitler was, or what he did; yet they have been raised on the same existential philosophy that drove his killing machine.

If Dr. Bergman is correct about the parallels that he and others are drawing to events in our world today, this is a problem of potentially tragic proportions.

Consider, for example, the alarming increase in reports of Antisemitism in many parts of the world. 

Or consider the “weaning of Americans from Christianity by banning public display of Christian symbols and ritual.” This is, he points out, “remarkably reminiscent of what Nazi Germany did.”[xi]

Or consider any of the other steps that the western world is taking, from gun control legislation to interfering with (and in some cases persecuting) home-schooling parents – all echoes of Hitler’s own policies.

Then read Hitler and the Nazi Darwinian Worldview, and consider the similarities between the philosophies underlying the Third Reich, and those prevailing in our culture today. 

What do you think? Is there cause for concern?

Many in Germany, early on, recognized the harm of Darwinism, and the Prussian Minister of Education for a time in 1875 forbade the “schoolmasters in the country to have anything to do with Darwinism … with a view of protecting schoolchildren from the dangers of the new doctrines.” A significant question is this: Would the Nazi Holocaust have occurred if this ban had remained in effect?[xii]

Great question – one that I believe Dr. Bergman answers affirmatively and persuasively in this very important book. 

Notes

[i] Bergman, J. Hitler and the Nazi Darwinian Worldview. Kitchener, Ontario, Canada: Joshua Press Inc., 2012, 38.
[ii] Ibid.
[iii] Ibid. 51.
[iv] Ibid., 84.
[v] Ibid., 256.
[vi] Ibid., 257.
[vii] Ibid., 126.
[viii] Ibid., 121.
[ix] Ibid., 125. 
[x] Ibid., 83.
[xi] Ibid., 16. 
[xii] Ibid., 96.
0 Comments

Countering contradictions

10/5/2016

0 Comments

 
Picture
If you’re an obedient, gospel-sharing, Bible-believing Christian, you’ve no doubt run into this familiar challenge from scoffers: “The Bible is full of contradictions. On the one hand it says we should turn away from bad people. On the other, it says we shouldn’t judge anyone. Which is it?”
 
The short answer to such a protest is context – immediate and Bible-wide. If one faithfully studies out an alleged contradiction, he will eventually be able to resolve the issue. And in the process, he’ll gain invaluable wisdom.
 
Unfortunately, the “context” defense doesn’t seem to satisfy everyone. In such situations, it might help to use a worldly analogy.  
 
Say, for instance, that someone tells us his dog Bowser bit Joe Blow, and adds that Bowser is one good dog. Sounds contradictory, doesn’t it? But suppose we dig a little and find out that Joe Blow is a veterinarian, and his owner had taken his normally benign pup into the clinic with an extremely painful dental abscess. Or maybe we learn that Joe Blow is a burglar, and Bowser was simply defending his family.
 
Whatever the explanation, we see that context has resolved an apparent contradiction.
 
A book we’re reading for adult Bible study shows how this principle can be applied to Scripture – in this case, to show how it’s possible for a believer to be both in the world and of the world.
 
"If we had only the story of Lot's life as it is told in the book of Genesis, we would never have imagined that Lot was a true believer. But 2 Peter 2 tells us three times that this conflicted, compromised man was 'righteous' -- and more, that he was 'distressed' and tormented by life in Sodom … Ironically, though Lot was revolted by Sodom, Sodom was in his soul. It is possible, then, for a believer to be distressed by the world while willfully clinging to the world." (Set Apart: Calling a Worldly Church to a Godly Life, R. Kent Hughes, 2003, p. 13)  
 
The point is that you could look at multiple biblical references to Lot and wind up being confused: With all that happened with him, how could Peter, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, call this man "righteous"? But when you look at the whole counsel of God, the answer comes into focus: Lot had not allowed himself to be fully "set apart" for God, which is the very definition of holy. Yet he was a believer, and his God-given righteousness did express itself in his refusal to participate in, or condone, Sodom’s sin.
 
There are many other biblical principles folded into these thoughts, but I think it’s a good illustration of why a scoffer can’t justify taking a couple verses out of context and saying they contradict each other. Just as we needed more information to determine how biting Bowser could possibly be called “good,” he would do well to look for more information in the face of an apparent biblical contradiction.
 
Of course, this assumes that our scoffer wants to resolve the alleged contradiction. And that's another issue entirely. 
0 Comments

    Kitty
    Foth-Regner

    I'm a follower of Jesus Christ, a freelance copywriter, a nursing-home volunteer, and the author of books both in-process and published -- including Heaven Without Her. 

    Archives

    December 2022
    September 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013

    Care to subscribe?

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly
Photos used under Creative Commons from tracie7779, Luci Correia, Maxwell Hamilton, giardinaggio, Doug1021, Angel Xavier Viera, Damian Gadal, Reboots, leoncillo sabino, mRio, HikingArtist.com, guymoll, csath07, Guudmorning!, fred_v, homegets.com, ishaip, jinxmcc, freeparking :-|, CallMeWhatEver, BryonLippincott, simpleinsomnia, csread, nicephore, Doug Beckers, mandydale, berniedup, tontantravel, h.koppdelaney, Jill Clardy, anieto2k, NASA Goddard Photo and Video, QuidoX, Ryo | [ addme. ], ShebleyCL, TinyTall, proggy-yahoo, Infiniteyes, Genista, kippster, Speculum Mundi, HerPhotographer, Tauralbus, megallypuff, harshxpatel, Waiting For The Word, CoreBurn, Gordon Chirgwin, {Guerrilla Futures | Jason Tester}, John McLinden, Patrick Feller, jikatu, Peter O'Connor aka anemoneprojectors, byzantiumbooks, bizmac, H o l l y., Peter Blanchard, sheriffmitchell, Tony Webster, hectorir, City of Overland Park, luis_cunha, Sam Howzit, bertknot, QuotesEverlasting, iturde, ejmc, VARNISHdesign, Cimm, Good Book Reader, Renaud Camus, banjipark, romana klee, 00alexx, erix!, branestawm2002, amsfrank, m01229, cbcmemberphotos2477, rhode.nel, Veronique Debord, joshjanssen, zenjazzygeek, h.koppdelaney, Laurel Mill Players, quinn.anya, *ErinBrierley*, Ben Pugh, Photographing Travis, BarnImages.com, anees.waqas, swambo, Alan Miles NYC, glenngould, Patrick Feller, davecito, wade in da water, Endre Majoros, France1978, dainamara, theseanster93, insightpest, eliduke, volker-kannacher, cogdogblog, Editor B, poshdee, brewbooks, J D Mack, ThomasKohler, mayeesherr. (in West Bengal!), TEDxHouston, Ms. Phoenix, PBoGS, Eselsmann™, Inside Guide To London, ShironekoEuro, Tom Anderson, flequi, cogdogblog, njaminjami, Search Engine People Blog, ShanMcG213, Julie Edgley, randihausken, pescatello, Waiting For The Word, moriza, Iain Farrell, Arizona Parrot, digitalmindphotography, enjosmith, www.WeisserPhotography.com, STC4blues, Holidayextras, Randy Roe, goprogresswent, BenDibble, kstoyer, Rennett Stowe, williac, ImNotQuiteJack, Life Mental Health, Jose Antonio Cotallo Lopez, gruntzooki, electricinca, adactio, miheco, Zemlinki!, bnilsen, chispita_666