DARA SHIKOH AND HINDUISM

Dara Shikoh translated Upanishads from its original Sanskrit into Persian.

CHOLA RULE EAST SOUTH INDIA,INDONESIA,THAILAND,MALAYSIA,BANGLADESH

800 yrs ago, Cholas ruled east coast of India, Bangladesh, Thailand, Malaysia & Indonesia. How many schools teach it? 

BIGGEST SYMBOL OF LOVE- IS RAMSETU NOT TAJ-MAHAL

WHY HINDUS DO NOT PROPOGATE RELIGION

Jodha Akbar serial Fake Story

Jodha Akbar serial Fake Story Reality Check, Exposed !!

CLICK HERE

CHINA AND RUSSIA TO START NEW WW3 AFTER 15 YEARS AFTER 1/2 ISLAMIST DISAPPEAR AND USA GOES WEAK FIGHTING ISIL

The South China Sea is a powder keg of territorial claims mixed with oil and gas resources.

Almost every country in the area has a longstanding animus toward at least one of its neighbors. China claims 90% of the Sea, and Beijing is viewed with fear and suspicion throughout the region.

The U.S. and Chinese militaries are both entrenched there — Japan is slowly building its military capabilities in the face of a perceived Chinese threat while Vietnam and the Philippines are emerging as regional players.

The South China sea is where the world’s next major interstate power struggle will play out. Any blowup there will almost necessarily involve China and the U.S., which have the two largest economies on earth.

But the confrontation has already begun, with China claiming everything within its now-infamous "nine-dash line," and nearly all of its neighbors involved in disputes along the line's edges. Between April and June of 2014, Japan scrambled its fighter jets 340 times "in response to feared incursions on its airspace." What's still unclear is just how bad things could plausibly get there.

Here are the South China Sea’s major flash points:

FAKE DR. Oz AND HIS DIET

If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is, even if it is coming from the popular Dr. Oz. A diet pill that went viral after Dr. Oz promoted it on his show was advertised as a miracle-like weight loss supplement based on scientific evidence. According to CBS News on Oct. 21 those claims were based on research that was made up.
The researchers who were paid to pen the study paper making claims that the green coffee bean extract diet pill could help folks lose weight without diet or exercise have admitted they could not verify the data. This study was published back in 2012 in the journal Diabetes, Metabolic Syndrome and Obesity: Targets and Therapy and Dr. Oz promoted this new product on his show, according to WTSP Channel 10 News.
The company who employed the two researchers was fined millions, but what about Dr. Oz who was more than likely the driving force behind the diet pill’s popularity? He would be at fault if he knew that the claims about the pill were bogus in the research paper, but he claims that he did not.
He did his own study on the pill when the boom fell on the research he originally presented and after coming under criticism for promoting a “miracle cure” with less than honest research behind it. For his trial he recruited 100 women in his audience and he simply gave half the women the green coffee bean extract pill and the other half were given a placebo.
After two weeks the women given the diet pill lost an average of two pounds each and the placebo group lost an average of one pound each. This was seen as an attempt at damage control and many in the medical community and some folks in Congress were not convinced with his findings.
Oz defended himself and the role that he had in the sale of the pills. He insisted that his show is about “hope” and when he saw these diet pills and the original claims made on its effectiveness it offered hope.
The company that sponsored the study, Applied Food Science Inc. agreed to pay $3.5 million as part of their settlement for presenting the false research on the diet pill. This company should have known that the botched study didn’t prove a thing.
As far as Dr. Oz, he promoted the pills on good faith. He believed the research that came along with the product was correct. Legal analyst and CBS News correspondent Eboni Williams said “Unless there was proof that Oz knew the data was fraudulent, he couldn't be held liable. "A plaintiff could argue that he 'should' have known better, but it's a high burden to prove the requisite knowledge required to prevail in court."