♫♫
Hello, today I'm going to be doing a challenge
between two different ice creams, vegan ice creams.
Both are almond milk based ice creams.
So let's get started.
So I have two different kinds. The first is...
Ben and Jerry's
peanut butter and cookies.
Second is So Delicious Cookies and Cream.
I tried to get similar flavors but this is the best I could do.
So, let's get tasting.
First is So Delicious.
♫ ♫ ♫
Very smooth.
♫ ♫ ♫
Hm... not bad.
♫ ♫ ♫
Very smooth, but a little bit of a nutty flavor for sure.
♫ ♫ ♫
Yeah, it's very good.
Just a little bit nutty.
Next is Ben and Jerrys.
♫ ♫ ♫
Again, very smooth.
♫ ♫ ♫
It's just hard cause its got such a strong peanut butter so it's different.
So I would say between Ben and Jerry's and So Delicious,
I would say been and Jerry's wins the almond milk.
The So Delicious yogurt was really good.
I recently did a video which you can see up here.
That was my favorite one, but it was coconut milk.
So maybe that makes a difference.
But between these two, Ben and Jerry's for sure.
So what video do you want to see me taste test next?
Maybe different ice creams... or what? Let me know!
I already have a second ice cream video idea.
So that will be coming soonish.
I have to space these out... the ice cream, or I'll explode!
Alright, hopefully you enjoyed the video.
If you want to support, you can do so here.
♫ ♫ ♫
I'll see you in the next video. Bye!
♫ ♫ ♫
I have to....
♫ ♫ ♫
for science reasons.
♫ ♫ ♫
You still there?
♫ ♫ ♫
(whispers) Go away!
♫ ♫ ♫
For more infomation >> WHICH IS BETTER?: Vegan Almond Ice Cream: So Delicous vs. Ben and Jerry's ⎮ ASL Stew Life - Duration: 3:19.-------------------------------------------
Which companies will reach $1 trillion market cap? - Duration: 1:44.
For more infomation >> Which companies will reach $1 trillion market cap? - Duration: 1:44. -------------------------------------------
Alan Watts- Which Holy Book is true - Duration: 5:22.
Now, what about them, the authority of these scriptures?
We could take this problem in two steps.
A lot of people don't know how we got the Bible at all.
We Westerners got the Bible thanks to the Catholic Church.
The Catholic Church and members of the church wrote the books of the New Testament.
And they took over the books of the Old Testament which even by the time of Christ had not been
finally decided upon by the Jews.
The Jews did not close the canon of the Old Testament until the year 100 A.D. – or thereabouts
– at the Synod of Jamnia.
And then they finally decided which were the canonical books of the Hebrew Scriptures and
embodied them in the Masoretic Text, the earliest copy of which dates from the tenth century
– early in the tenth century A.D..
The books to be included in the New Testament were not finally decided upon until the year
three hundred and eighty-two – A.D. again – at the Synod of Rome under Pope Damasus.
So it was the church – the Catholic Church – that promulgated the Bible and said "we
are giving you these scriptures on our authority and the authority of the informal tradition
that has existed among us from the beginning, inspired by the Holy Spirit."
So you receive historically the Bible on the church's say-so.
And the Catholic Church insists, therefore, that the church collectively, speaking under
the presumed guidance of the Holy Spirit, has the authority to interpret the Bible.
And you can take that or leave it.
Because obviously the authority of the Bible is not first of all based on the Bible itself.
I can write a bible and state within that book that it is indeed the Word of God which
I have received.
And you're at liberty to believe me or not.
Hindus believe that the Vedas are divinely revealed and inspired with just as much fervor
as any Christian or any Jew.
Muslims believe that the Koran is divinely inspired.
And some Buddhists believe that their Sutras are of divine – or rather Buddhic – origin.
The Japanese believe that the ancient texts of Shinto are likewise of divine origin.
And who is to be judge?
If we are going to argue about this – as to which version of the Truth is the correct
one – we will always end up in an argument in which the judge and the advocate are the
same person.
And you wouldn't want that if you were brought into a court of law, would you?
Because if I say that, "Well, thinking it all over I find that Jesus Christ is the greatest
being who ever came onto this Earth," by what standards do I judge?
Why obviously, I judge by the sort of moral standards that have been given to me as somebody
brought up in a Christian culture.
There is nobody impartial who can decide between all the religions because more or less everybody
has been in one way or another influenced by one of them.
So if the church says the Bible is true it finally comes down to you.
Are you going to believe the church or aren't you?
If nobody believes the church it will be perfectly plain, won't it, that the church has no
authority.
Because the people is always the source of authority.
That's why de Tocqueville said that the people gets what government it deserves.
And so you may say "Well, God Himself is the authority!"
Well, how are we to show that?
That's your opinion.
Well you say "Well, you wait and see.
The Day of Judgment is coming, and then you'll find out who is the authority!"
Yes, but at the moment there is no evidence for the Day of Judgment, and it remains until
there is evidence simply your opinion that the Day of Judgment is coming.
And there is nothing else to go on except the opinion of other people who hold the same
view and whose opinions you bought.
So really, I won't deny anybody's right to hold these opinions.
You may indeed believe that the Bible is literally true and that it was actually dictated by
God to Moses and the Prophets and the Apostles.
That may be your opinion and you are at liberty to hold it.
I don't agree with you.
-------------------------------------------
Serena Williams' 'superhero' catsuit helped with blood clots which nearly killed - Duration: 3:10.
Serena Williams' 'superhero' catsuit helped with blood clots which nearly killed her after giving birth
Serena Williams wore a black "superhero" catsuit on her Grand Slam return following the birth of her daughter and dedicated the victory to mothers "who had a tough recovery from pregnancy".
The costume helped her cope with blood clots by improving her blood circulation, which nearly proved fatal in childbirth earlier this year, and Williams has since shared that she felt invincible in it.
The athlete revealed in February of this year that she nearly died giving birth.
'A warrior princess' Speaking about the outfit, Williams said:.
"I feel like a warrior in it, like a warrior princess, kind of.
"I'm always living in a fantasy world.
I always wanted to be a superhero, and it's kind of my way of being a superhero.
I feel like a super-hero when I wear it.
" The star, 36, beat Kristyna Pliskova 7-6 (7-4) 6-4 at the French Open in her first Grand Slam appearance since welcoming Alexis Olympia Ohanian Jr in September.
It was her first major tennis match since winning at the 2017 Australian Open while eight weeks pregnant.
Following the victory,.
Williams – who is married to Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian – posted a message of support to mothers who had experienced difficulty giving birth.
"I call it, like, my Wakanda-inspired catsuit," she said in reference of the film Black Panther, The Guardian reported.
"We designed it way before the movie," she said, "but still, it kind of reminds me of that.".
Read more at: https://inews.
uk/inews-lifestyle/women/serena-williams-superhero-catsuit-helped-with-blood-clots-which-nearly-killed-her-after-giving-birth/.
-------------------------------------------
Which Banana Would You Choose? Your Response May Affect Your Health - Duration: 4:20.
Which banana would you choose?
Your response may affect your health
When you eat a banana, you do it because: a) you like the taste, b) you know it's
good for you, c) someone gave you one or d), all of the above.
Bananas are packed with vitamins and other nutrients, and eating two a day can do wonders
for your body.
But did you know that the color of a banana can reveal a lot about its nutritional content?
From green to brown, firm to soft, spots or no spots — a banana's appearance can tell
a lot.
1.
Unripe and green Green bananas are hard to digest unless they're
cooked.
But once cooked, they taste like potatoes and are quite delicious.
People who are familiar with Caribbean cuisine know that green bananas are used in many dishes
there.
But what you might not know, however, is that green bananas have a low glycemic index value
— perfect for people who need to monitor their sugar intake.
Another good thing about unripe bananas is they provide the the stomach with probiotics,
which also strengthens the immune system.
And in addition, green bananas also contain resistant starch, a form of carbohydrates
that improves insulin sensitivity and lowers blood sugar levels.
Because of their starch content, green bananas keep you feeling full for a long time and
are helpful if you're trying to losing weight.
Boil them, mash them, or fry them.
The downside?
Green bananas have fewer antioxidants than more mature bananas, as the antioxidants in
bananas increase as the fruits ripen.
2.
Firm and yellow Most of us prefer our bananas yellow but not
quite spotted.
At this stage, bananas are sweet and ripe.
Pale yellow bananas contain a lot of antioxidants that protect the body from diseases, aging,
ailments, and heart problems.
A medium-sized ripe banana also provides 37 mg of magnesium, an important mineral that
helps the brain stay fit.
3.
Spotted
Sweet, tasty and packed with antioxidants, spotted bananas pack a punch when it comes
to fighting diseases.
The more brown spots a banana has, the more mature it is and the more tumor necrosis factor
(TNF) inhibitors it contains.
TNF inhibitors are cell signaling proteins that fight cancer and abnormal cells in the
body, but more research is needed in this area.
A Japanese study from 2008 showed that spotted bananas produce this substance.
If you have a sensitive stomach, you'll find overripe bananas easy to digest, but
because they're sweeter, they're not great for diabetics or anyone who needs to watch
their sugar intake.
4.
Brown
Admittedly, not many people like eating brown bananas.
But if you want to save some cash, you can usually get some good discounts on overripe
bananas.
Buy some and put them in a smoothie or make some banana bread.
When bananas are brown, they're very sweet and have a high concentration of antioxidants.
They're also easy on the stomach and perfect if you have stomachache.
You just need to make sure to eat brown bananas before they rot!
However ripe you like your bananas to be, they all have these benefits in common:
They contain the amino acid tryptophan, a substance that converts into serotonin in
the body.
Serotonin is a signaling substance that is commonly referred to as the body's happiness
hormone.
While bananas contain some sodium, they are also rich in potassium, which protects the
heart.
They contain high levels of vitamin B6, which some researchers believe helps relieve the
symptoms of PMS.
The fruit also contains three natural sugars — sucrose, fructose and glucose — in combination
with fiber.
Since bananas lose some of their nutrients as they age, you can put them in the fridge
to slow down their ripening process.
Enjoy bananas in the morning, afternoon, or in the evening and discover the positive impact
they can have on your health!
Please share this article so that more people learn how healthy bananas really are!
-------------------------------------------
Which is Worse For You: Sugar or Fat? - Duration: 13:29.
[♪ INTRO]
We've all heard for decades about how terrible fat is for us, especially saturated fat.
In the 1970s and 80s, everyone was explicitly told to cut down on foods like butter, cheese,
and beef, to avoid heart attacks and strokes.
But now, apparently, they're ok?
Or good for you?
Or… something?
And it's sugar that's bad!
Sugar's what's killing us!
If we just cut sugar from our diets, we could rid the world of not only heart disease, but
also obesity, diabetes, and even cancer!
The change in attitude might seem extreme, but the case against sugar has been building
for decades, while the one against saturated fat has been weakening.
And yet, though we all love a good villain, when it comes to the health effects of your
diet, things are rarely that simple.
Today, we're taking a look back at the complex history of nutrition science to try to understand
how saturated fat became public enemy number one.
And how, when doctors zeroed in on fat, they overlooked the damaging effects of sugar.
But that doesn't mean it should be the new saturated fat, or that fat is entirely exonerated.
And while there still isn't an easy answer as to what diet is best for losing weight
or preventing heart disease, cutting down on things like saturated fats and refined
sugar is probably a good start.
Back in the late 1940s, Ancel Keys, a physiologist at the University of Minnesota was puzzled
by the fact that American businessmen seemed to be dying at an alarming rate from heart attacks.
These middle-aged men made more than enough money to to afford quality food.
So why were they the ones keeling over?
He hit upon an idea, often called called the diet-heart hypothesis, that would forever
alter 20th century food habits.
That's the notion that the amount of fat you eat, specifically saturated fats—the
ones where the fatty carbon chains are all connected by single bonds, and therefore maxxed
out, or saturated, with hydrogens—leads to high levels of fats in your blood, which
then glom onto the walls of your blood vessels to cause coronary artery disease.
It's kind of like how pouring too much bacon fat down your drain can clog your pipes.
Keys was especially concerned about blood levels of the fat cholesterol because it's
found in the fatty build ups in blood vessels.
So he did a few small studies to test his idea, and then decided to go big or go home.
In the Seven Countries Study, he and his colleagues looked for correlations between diet and coronary
artery disease in about 13,000 middle-aged men in the U.S., Japan, Finland, Yugoslavia,
Italy, Greece, and the Netherlands.
By 1970, the early results were in, and total dietary fat didn't seem to matter.
But the groups of men with the highest average saturated fat intake tended to die more often
from heart attacks,
and across the globe, blood cholesterol levels correlated with saturated fat consumption.
Another large epidemiological study, the Framingham Heart Study, further supported a link between
blood cholesterol and the risk of heart disease.
These studies showed robust correlations, but they still were just that: correlations.
Many people, though, assumed that these results meant that reducing fat intake would protect
people against coronary artery disease—which is not something a correlational study can actually show.
A handful of researchers did try to do randomized controlled trials—the gold standard for
testing medical interventions—to see if low saturated fat or low cholesterol diets
actually helped prevent heart attacks and deaths, as the hypothesis predicted.
But nutrition trials are notoriously difficult.
Some of the results suggested lowering saturated fat could help, but most were small studies
and they were hard to interpret.
And each one used a slightly different diet, replacing in the saturated fat calories with
different things.
So, by the late '70s, there was still no conclusive proof that reducing saturated fats
could actually protect hearts.
But that hadn't stopped the diet-heart hypothesis from becoming mainstream—it seemed to fit
most of the available data.
And many experts felt the danger of cardiovascular disease was too high not to recommend some
some change in what Americans were eating.
So in 1977, the US Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs released its
new dietary goals, telling Americans to get just 30% of their calories from fat — down
from 40% — and to limit the saturated fat to 10% of the total.
The guidelines also suggested reducing dietary cholesterol and refined sugar, and increasing
complex carbohydrates, but those weren't really talked about as much.
Other countries followed suit, so soon, pretty much everyone was told to shun butter for
margarine, and supermarket shelves were quickly stocked with "low fat" options.
But from the beginning, critics questioned those recommendations, pointing out that the
specific diet now being championed had never been tested in a trial.
And some suspected refined sugar was a bigger problem.
In fact, the Seven Countries Study also showed a strong correlation between the consumption
of sugar and heart attacks, but this finding wasn't given much additional study because
it looked like saturated fat was the better predictor.
And it wasn't until this century that we learned the sugar industry helped ensure its
product was overlooked.
For example, in 1967, they paid three Harvard public health researchers what would now be
about $50,000 to write a review article in The New England Journal of Medicine —a highly
influential journal—that highlighted the role of fat and downplayed any involvement of sugar.
But twenty years later, after a half century of fat-hating, the tide began to slowly turn
toward against them, both in the lab and at home.
Not only had research not found conclusive proof that saturated fats were the problem,
new analyses of the collective past studies showed that the link between saturated fats
and heart disease was much weaker than previously assumed.
And new observational studies were finding that quickly digestible carbohydrates and
added sugars were independently associated with an increased risk of heart disease.
Also, the whole idea that "cholesterol" was bad turned out to be much more complicated,
undermining part of the premise for why fat was supposed to be so evil.
To their credit, researchers in the '60s and '70s had a vague sense that the type
of cholesterol mattered.
But they didn't fully understand how cholesterol moves in our blood, including the roles of
the different lipoproteins that ferry it around.
When doctors look for "cholesterol" levels in blood now, they tend to look at triglycerides—the
total amount of fat—as well as the total amount of cholesterol.
They also look at whether that cholesterol is being shuttled by low-density lipoproteins
or LDL, the so-called 'bad' cholesterol, and high density lipoproteins or HDL, the
'good' cholesterol.
High LDL is a risk factor for heart disease, but having more HDL is usually considered
good, though researchers are still trying to understand the different sizes and subtypes
of each and how they help or harm.
The problem is, foods that are high in saturated fat can raise both HDL and LDL, so they might
seem more harmful if you just focus on total cholesterol or LDL.
So as a new century began, people started rethinking the war on fat, especially since
the advice to lower fat intake wasn't helping people stay healthy.
By the early 2000s, low-fat diets didn't seem to be doing squat for most people.
Obesity and diabetes — both of which are risk factors for heart disease — had skyrocketed.
And that might be because, while lots of people embraced low-fat foods, they had opted for
reduced fat snack cakes or cereal loaded with sugar or other carbs instead of healthier
things like fresh fruits and veggies.
So a different diet—the low-carb, high-fat Atkins diet—became all the rage, and it
did seem to help people lose weight.
Scientists started to pay attention to it, too, and their initial results were promising.
In short-term trials of 6 months or so, people lost a modest amount of weight and tended
to slightly lower triglycerides while boosting HDL.
Diets high in sugar and refined carbs, on the other hand, tended to do the opposite,
raising triglyceride levels and bad LDL cholesterol, while lowering good HDL.
And in both animals and people, excess sugar was linked to elevated blood pressure—another
risk factor for heart disease.
The weight of the evidence against sugar over the past twenty years in particular has tipped
the scales, and now, you've probably heard all about how sugar is the worst thing ever.
It sure is an easy target; since sugar provides no nutrients other than calories, it's hard
to defend.
You certainly don't need refined sugar to stay alive.
And that's led a lot of people to call it 'toxic' and blame almost anything on it,
even diseases with strong genetic links, like inflammatory bowel disease or cancer.
But careful review of the science suggests that's taking the backlash a little too far.
While most of us are likely eating too much added sugar, no one really knows how much
is too much.
And connections to diseases, even ones that seem clear-cut, are not always so straightforward.
Scientists don't actually know whether eating sugar can cause diabetes, for example.
Eating too much sugar can certainly lead to weight gain and obesity, which is one of the
biggest risk factors for the disease.
But different people break down and use sugars differently, and so right now many experts
think sugar consumption itself isn't causing diabetes—complications from being overweight are.
Which is also likely the case for heart disease and other aspects of health.
We know that high cholesterol in the blood, specifically LDL, is a risk factor for heart
disease, but so is high blood pressure and obesity.
How food fits into all of that isn't simple, since dietary fat and sugar both affect some
risk factors.
Other habits matter, too, like whether you exercise or smoke.
And researchers are still trying to understand what sugar actually does to the body.
Quote "sugar" comes in various forms, the relative merits or demerits of which scientists
are still debating.
And the same can be said of quote "fat."
If you ask a cardiologist today about whether saturated fat is bad for you, you may get
a surprising answer: it depends.
That's because whether or not saturated fat increases cardiovascular disease in any
given study seems to change depending on the exact type of fat being studied, what the
source is, and what it's replaced with if it's removed from the diet.
The extent to which sugar and saturated fat are to blame for heart disease, or pretty
much any disease, is still being heavily debated by researchers.
At the end of the day, though, you still have to eat, and all of this doesn't really give
us a satisfying answer as to what your diet should look like.
And I hate to tell you this, but head-to-head tests of low-fat and low-carb diets haven't
identified a clear winner.
While low-carb diets seem to be a teensy bit better in the short term, when scientists
study people for longer, the difference declines.
Low-carb diets seem to lead to slightly higher increases in good cholesterol and bigger drops
in triglycerides, but the two diets perform about the same for other heart disease markers.
And neither is terribly effective for people trying to lose weight.
Typical weight loss after a year is barely over 5 kg.
But you can always find individuals who respond really well, dropping like 30 kg, and those
who gain weight while on the diet.
This has led some researchers to think that maybe certain people, either because of genetics
or metabolic reasons, do better on a low-carb diet, while others benefit more from a low-fat
regimen.
One especially attractive idea is that people who already are a little insulin resistant—a
huge risk factor for type two diabetes—would probably fare better with fewer carbs and
more fat.
But even this more nuanced approach doesn't seem to hold water.
In a 2018 study of about 600 people, assigning diets based on genes or insulin levels didn't
help.
Everybody did about the same after one year, regardless of whether they went low-fat or
low-carb.
Scientists are still hoping to find other markers, like those related to the microbiome,
or how much certain genes are expressed, that could determine what diet is best for you.
But for now, what we're left with is a bit of a draw.
There are some things that can be gleaned from this big, nutritional mess, though.
In general, doctors still recommend cutting down on saturated fats, but it's important
to pay attention to what you eat instead.
Swapping out saturated fats for unsaturated ones, like those found in nuts, is usually beneficial.
That is also often true if you exchange the fat for whole grains, but not if you sub in
other carbs, like sugar.
And it probably wouldn't hurt to cut down on refined sugar in general, too.
But if we've learned anything from nutrition history, it's that a blanket prohibition
on any one thing isn't likely to be the answer.
Sugar vs. fat is a false dichotomy, and when you think about it, that makes complete sense.
Of course too much fat is a bad idea.
And so is too much sugar.
But just as eating the occasional sweet is not going to give you cancer, and the occasional
steak isn't going to give you a heart attack.
Thanks for watching this episode of SciShow, which is produced by Complexly.
If you want to watch other awesome Complexly videos about nutrition and health research,
you might want to go check out Dr. Aaron Carroll over at Healthcare Triage.
[♪ OUTRO ]
-------------------------------------------
Which Is Easier - $1 to 1 Million? or 1 Million to 100M? - Duration: 4:26.
Okay, Steven today we got a really awesome question someone submitted a
question for us to and basically said, "is it easier to turn a dollar into a
million bucks or is it easier to take a million and turn it into a hundred
million dollars? That's a great question. It's all coming your way right now.
You know you can always go into the comments below and drop brilliant
questions like this one that says, "is it easier to make a hundred million with 1
million or 1 million with $1. Good question. Uh-huh. I like it. So we're
not going to answer though. Yeah we're not, goodbye. So this is
actually super easy to answer. Steven, it's harder to make your first million
or your second million? It's harder to make your first million. Why? Because it's
your first time. Yeah and it gets easier every time after that. Because?
Because you have experience and you gain knowledge and wisdom and it's just
easier. So it's kind of like, it's kind of like anything you do the first
time, right? When you first learn to ride your bike, it's hard because you don't
even think it's possible. I just helped my son actually. So my son just turned
six years old. He was kind of tentative. You know I remember, I think I learned
how to ride the bike when I was like five maybe, right? You know and because I
learned that five, my son should learn about five too but he didn't want
to, right? So, he was all scared and he couldn't figure out the balance thing
right off the bat. But as soon as he learned it, I mean it was like easy, right? He
got off. I mean he just went out all over the neighborhood, was doing
awesome and you got to start with the belief that you can make a million
dollars. I remember when I was learning back flips, I could do a front flip
because I decided that was easier and everyone I met it's like no no no back
flips were way easier. Heard that. I've heard that a lot. And then when I finally
did a back flip was like, it was scary but every back flips since, guess what? it
got real easy. Are you still doing back flips? Yup, I do back flips. Good work. Yeah, absolutely. So
it's like riding a bike. The first time you learn it, it's difficult because
you're learning all these new things. Your body has to adjust, your mind has to
adjust. Once you've learned how to do it, you can do it over and over.
Let's get super specific on real estate investing for a moment. It took me four
years to basically make my first million dollars. But after I learned how to do
that, like I kid you not, today strip it all away from me. If I
have to do it all over again, I now know how to make my first million dollars in
way under a year, way under a year. And I want to just share with you for a moment why.
It's because not only if you've done it once can you do it again. But it's like
Steven said, it gets easier. So like for example, I was two years into my four
years of making money in real estate before my father-in-law said, "you know
what, maybe I'll do a deal with you." And I was nervous about it but the deal worked
and he made and then we did another one and then we
did another too. We did this several dozen deals together. And because he made
money, he kept coming back. Well, I remember I had 10 homes. I was a senior
in college and I just thought man, "I wish I had more father-in-law's." And that's
when I thought you know what, I could totally find people like my father in law.
More wives. No, no.That's not where I was going. No, I totally went and found four other men that had
done very well in their careers. I showed in my portfolio and just like my father
law, like, "dude, let's jump in and do some." And now it's like what I could
do as much real say as I want. If I could go back in time, guess what? Yeah. I could
do way more real estate way quicker, way sooner. So yeah, dude making your first
million is definitely the challenge. Going from 1 million to a 100
million, I think that would be way easier. Yeah. Than start with nothing and making
your first million. Yeah, well think about it.
$1.00 to a million dollars, that's a million dollar difference. Million
dollars difference. Yeah. So it's just a huge difference there. So
make your first million so that everything afterwards is just downhill.
Hey, thank you so much for watching this video.
Listen, if all you got is a buck and you're saying I need help making it into
my first million, have no fear. Steven and Kris are here and will even help
you do it. We've got all sorts of tools and gadgets and gizmos galore that
can help make that happen. I know but all you got to do is go home and click the
link in the description below and our team will be in touch with you to
share with you what we would do if we were you, to get started all over again
on making that first million even easier your first time with our experience. And
don't forget to subscribe and ring the bell so we can notify you of upcoming
videos. Booya!
you
-------------------------------------------
Who Knew about funny ladies Which has the Guinness record for longest career TODAY com - Duration: 3:50.
For more infomation >> Who Knew about funny ladies Which has the Guinness record for longest career TODAY com - Duration: 3:50. -------------------------------------------
M is for Macaron, which is a cookie - Duration: 6:49.
For more infomation >> M is for Macaron, which is a cookie - Duration: 6:49. -------------------------------------------
Which team's QB-WR duo will have a better 2018: Steelers or Texans? - Duration: 3:09.
For more infomation >> Which team's QB-WR duo will have a better 2018: Steelers or Texans? - Duration: 3:09. -------------------------------------------
Which two teams should compete in the next four Super Bowls? - Duration: 3:50.
For more infomation >> Which two teams should compete in the next four Super Bowls? - Duration: 3:50. -------------------------------------------
Kym Marsh speaks out on 'intense' wedding scenes which left her bruised - Duration: 3:53.
Kym Marsh speaks out on 'intense' wedding scenes which left her bruised
CORONATION STREET star Kym Marsh, who plays Michelle Connor on the ITV soap, has revealed intense scenes on the cobbles left her bruised and drained amid her upcoming on-screen wedding with fiance Robert (played by Tristan Gemmill).
The Coronation Street actress teased fans with what they can expect from her upcoming storyline, revealing some scenes affected her physically and mentally. She revealed: "The two days we spent filming this week's scenes and theres a lot of takes.
"I was bruised as there are a lot of physical scenes, it was really emotional, so I felt quite tired and drained.
Spilling further about the dramatic scenes, Kim, 41, teased she gets caught in a cross fire by villain Pat Phelan (Connor McIntyre) but remained tight-lipped about the outcome of her character.
She told OK! Magazine: "It's a soap wedding so nothing runs smoothly and my character gets shot as (Pat) Phelan's back!.
"Whether or not Michelle and Robert make it down the aisle remains to be seen but Michelle is taken hostler and she gets caught in the cross fire.
"I can't tell you whether Michelle live or dies, you'll have to watch to find out!". Despite Kim's minor injuries from set, she recently admitted filming the action-packed scenes were "fun".
She told The Mirror: "People don't seem to realise that our job can be quite physical at times, but it was quite fun. It's not something I've ever done before, so there were a lot of firsts for me.".
It's great to be involved in such a dramatic storyline and as actors that's what you want," she continued.
Pat's return has so far seen him left unconscious and tied up to a chair in a garage by Gary Windass (played by Mikey North). Gary's girlfriend Sarah Platt (Tina O'Brien) later showed up at the garage to demand the truth.
A flock of viewers took to Twitter to dub the storyline "stupid" but fans are seemingly in for darker drama as Kyms scenes unfold tonight.
Elsewhere in Kim's personal life, she divulged how she is coping amid her split from boyfriend Matt Baker, 27, last month. The actress said she had been finding more time to spend with friends since their break-up.
I've had more time on my hands recently to catch up with old friends and it's been lovely," she told OK! Magazine.
"When you're in a relationship you do tend to see some friends less, as you're making time in your life for your partner, which is understandable.
Last month, a statement from her representative said: "Sadly we can confirm Kym and Matt have made the decision to take some time apart, but remain friends.
-------------------------------------------
Wix vs Weebly: Which Website Builder Should You Use? - Duration: 5:55.
Hey there, it's Tom from websitebuilderexpert.com.
Today, we'll be looking at what's it like to build
a website on both Wix and Weebly.
By the end, you'll know which platform's right for you.
Lets do it.
First, let's crunch the numbers on Wix versus Weebly.
As you can see, Wix and Weebly are both really popular.
If you want to give Wix or Weebly a try,
hit the button in the top right corner,
or in the description to sign up for a free trial.
Okay, so the most important question,
which one is easier to use, Wix or Weebly?
Weebly prides itself on being easy to use.
To create your own content, all you have to do
is drag the feature you want in from the toolbar.
You can only add features to certain areas.
But this is how Weebly lets you switch templates
without losing your sites content.
It may be less flexible than Wix, but Weebly's still
one of the most intuitive builders around.
Wix is a pure drag and drop website builder.
This means you don't need any tech know-how
to get your site up and running.
It's very easy to get to grips with.
With Wix, you can't switch your template
once you've picked one.
Bear this is mind when you're scrolling through
their huge range.
It won't be hard to find one you love,
so make sure you choose wisely.
It's difficult to pick a winner,
but we have to hand it to Wix.
Wix scores strong marks for ease of use.
It's a true drag and drop builder,
that helps non-technical users build stylish websites.
To build a great site, you need great tools.
So how do Wix and Weebly's tools compare?
Well, Wix gives you incredible control over the styling
of your website.
You get access to great tools to build a stunning site.
Plus, Wix is up to date with the latest design trends,
and adds new features on a monthly basis.
Weebly's tools are less advanced than Wix's,
and there aren't as many customization options.
This is website building without all the extras.
But if you want to get online quickly,
you'll love the simplicity.
For a builder that combines ease of use
with powerful site building tools,
look no further than Wix.
Search engine optimization, or SEO,
is the practice of getting more visitors to your site,
by appearing high in search engines results pages.
So it's pretty important how much SEO support
Wix and Weebly offer.
Weebly does a great job on the basics of SEO.
You can take the necessary steps to get your site ranking
without any trouble.
This includes adding site description and meta keywords.
Your Weebly site will include responsive design
and SEO formatting as standard.
Weebly also has a great SEO user guide
to walk you through it.
SEO functionality is built into Wix's editor.
Wix makes SEO easy,
from adding the right tagging,
to making your site mobile responsive.
Plus, Wix's sites are easier to load,
and rarely every crash, a big tick for Google.
The more you grow your site, the more important SEO becomes.
And you can be confident Weebly and Wix both offer solid
and in depth SEO support.
Now it's time to talk money.
Both Wix and Weebly offer free trials.
So you can take them for a test drive before you sign up.
Let's have a look at how Wix and Weebly's
monthly pricing plans compare.
Upgrading to a premium plan with Wix or Weebly
brings a lot of benefits.
For example, to get rid of adverts,
you need to be on at least Wix's combo
or Weebly's starter plan.
This is very important for making
your site look professional.
Different plans come with different features
and functionality included.
To see exactly what you get for your money,
use the links in the video's description.
We think both Wix and Weebly are fairly priced
and offer great value for money.
Which plan is right for you will depend
on your particular circumstances.
It's a narrow win for Wix
because of the features you get included.
Now we will run through the top pros and cons
of using Wix and Weebly.
Let's start with Wix.
We're big fans of Wix's templates.
You can choose from over 500 stylish and professionally
designed templates to make your site look good.
All you have to do is pick one you like,
and get customizing.
Click the link on the screen now
to check out Wix's templates.
Another big pro of Wix is it's help center.
You can contact them over the phone and email.
It feels like hiring an army of designers
and developers to help work on your site.
One possible drawback of Wix is that if you want
to sell online, it's eCommerce functionality is limited.
If you're trying to sell over 50 products,
and grow a long term eCommerce business,
Shopify might be for you.
But that's not to say you can't load
a great online store with Wix.
Wix's eCommerce plans are a good way
to get online and selling
Now it's Weebly's turn.
Weebly keeps things simple and that's perfect
if you're looking for a painless and smooth way
to get your website online.
One of Weebly's main flaws is
that template customization can feel limited.
Without touching a template's code, it's difficult to
make wholesale changes to your site.
Wix versus Weebly is a clash of the drag and drop kings.
Both will let you build a functional and stylish
website without any coding knowledge at all.
We've picked Wix as the winner because
it's bursting with features to help you grow your site.
It's a brilliant all-round website builder.
But if you're looking for something super simple,
then Weebly is the one for you.
If you're still unsure about whether Wix or Weebly's
right for you, take our four question quiz,
to get personalized advice on which builder is
right for you.
If you've found our snapshot comparison helpful,
subscribe to our YouTube channel,
and pay us a visit at websitebuilderexpert.com.
Happy building.
-------------------------------------------
Which QB has more to prove this season: Carson Wentz or Andrew Luck? - Duration: 3:39.
For more infomation >> Which QB has more to prove this season: Carson Wentz or Andrew Luck? - Duration: 3:39. -------------------------------------------
Sanju Trailer: 5 Scenes Which Prove This Will Gross More Than Salman Khan's Race 3 - Duration: 4:56.
Sanju Trailer: 5 Scenes Which Prove This Will Gross More Than Salman Khan's Race 3
Sanju Trailer featuring Ranbir Kapoor is here, or wait was it Sanjay Dutt? We are not sure who actually is in the film.
The trailer starts with Ranbir Kapoor as Sanjay Dutt revealing how he's happy as his autobiography.
"Itna variety wala trailer aapko kahan se milega?", yes, this is inspired by a dialogue and the promo is full of surprises.
Yes, Salman Khan's Race 3 is there to buzz up the business in June but Sanju is arriving in the month end to make this period to remember.
The real debate here is, whether or not it will be able to outgross Race 3 at the Indian box office.
So, here are five scenes from the trailer which are enough to prove why this time the content has every chance to surpass the star-power.
Journey Of A Drug Addict!.
"At first because I was annoyed with my dad, the second instance happened because my mother was ill and by the third time, I was a drug addict," says Sanju in the trailer.
This is enough for us to realise how this is not a glorified biopic.
Yes, some matter could still be hidden because of obvious reasons, but to come up with such sensitive issues need courage.
Sitting high in a corner, staring at a name (Ruby) written over the smoke indicates how this will be an important phase of the film.
High On Destruction!.
Sonam Kapoor's character comes out roaring in anger asking for her 'mangal-sutra' and Sanju who's high does something unimaginable.
Now, we can't say how much truth is there in this scene but the build-up to it could be an altogether different experience.
The Dark Life Of Jail! We all are aware about Sanjay Dutt's contrition journey in jail where he was arrested for 5 years for possessing illegal arms.
The trailer showcases how he has been asked to agree to whatever been asked in court.
Tiger Hai Tu! The best scene of the trailer when Sanjay Dutt has been asked how he is a Tiger and he has to roar his way back to life.
After the hardships he faces in jail, this scene is a hospital as Sukhwinder's song "Kar har maidan fateh!" (Conquer every field) fades in.
This surely evokes goosebumps and given the calibre of Rajkumar Hirani we know how much impact this scene could have in the film.
Alvida Dad! Last, but not the least, the demise of legend Sunil Dutt sahab.
There is just a glimpse of it shown in the trailer but we are sure Ranbir Kapoor would have felt Sanjay Dutt's pain to emote this scene.
-------------------------------------------
Hard Work Vs Smart Work - Which One Is Better ? - | Talk World | - Duration: 4:29.
What is "" Work "" ?!
An Activity Involving Mental And Physical Efforts
Done In Order To Achieve The Desired Results
Which We Can Differentiate As
" Hard Work " As Well
As " Smart Work "
People Don't Know If
To Work "Efficiently"
As Well As "Effectively"
Which One Is Better ?
So , Without A Further
Ado , Let's Get Straight Onto The Difference :
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét