Man Who Bought Amazon at Just $0.12 Reveals His “Inflation Busting Stock”
28-Year Wall Street Veteran Chris Rowe who invested in ...
A spеcial mеssagе frоm thе еditоr оf American Stock Review: Wе arе оftеn apprоachеd by оthеr businеssеs with spеcial оffеrs fоr оur rеadеrs. Whilе many dоn't makе thе cut, thе mеssagе bеlоw is оnе wе bеliеvе dеsеrvеs yоur cоnsidеratiоn.
The first biography of Ivan Sirko, written by Dmytro Yavornytsky in 1890, gave Sirko's place of birth as the sloboda of Merefa near the city of Kharkiv. Historian Yuriy Mytsyik states that this could not be the case. In his book Otaman Ivan Sirko[2] (1999) he writes that Merefa was established only in 1658 (more than 40 years after the birth of the future otaman). The author also notes that Sirko later in his life did actually live in Merefa with his family on his own estate, and according to some earlier local chronicles there even existed a small settlement called Sirkivka. However, Mytsyik also points out that in 1658–1660 Sirko served as a colonel of the Kalnyk Polk (a military and administrative division of the Cossack Hetmanate) in Podilia, a position usually awarded to the representative of a local population. The author also gives a reference to the letter of Ivan Samiylovych to kniaz G. Romodanovsky (the tsar's voyevoda) in which the hetman refers to Sirko as one born in Polish lands instead of in Sloboda Ukraine (part of Moscovy). Mytsyik also recalls that another historian, Volodymyr Borysenko, allowed for the possibility that Sirko was born in Murafa near the city of Sharhorod (now in Vinnytsia Oblast). The author explains during that time when people were fleeing the war (known as the Ruin, 1659–1686) they may have established a similarly named town in Sloboda Ukraine further east. Part of a series on Cossacks "Zaporozhian Cossacks write to the Sultan of Turkey" by Ilya Repin (1844–1930) Cossack hosts AmurAstrakhanAzovBaikalBlack SeaBuhCaucasusDanubeDonFreeGrebenKubanOrenburgRedSemirechyeSiberianTerekUralUssuriVolgaZaporozhian Other groups AlbazinanBashkirDanubeJewishNekrasovPersianTatarTurkish History Registered CossacksUprisings KosińskiNalyvaikoKhmelnytskyHadiach TreatyHetmanateColonisation of SiberiaBulavin RebellionPugachev's RebellionCommunismDe-CossackizationCossacks in the SS Cossacks Petro DoroshenkoBohdan KhmelnytskyPetro SahaidachnyIvan MazepaYemelyan PugachevStepan RazinIvan SirkoAndrei ShkuroPavlo SkoropadskyiYermak TimofeyevichIvan Vyhovsky Cossack terms AtamanHetmanKontuszKurinSotniaOseledetsPapakhiPlastunYesaulStanitsaShashkaSzabla vte Further, Mytsyik in his book states that Sirko probably was not of Cossack heritage, but rather of the Ukrainian (Ruthenian) Orthodox szlachta. Mytsyik points out that a local Podilian nobleman, Wojciech Sirko, married a certain Olena Kozynska sometime in 1592. Also in official letters the Polish administration referred to Sirko as urodzonim, implying a native-born Polish subject. Mytsyik states that Sirko stood about 174–176 cm tall and had a birthmark on the right side of the lower lip, a detail which Ilya Repin failed to depict in his artwork when he used General Dragomirov as a prototype of the otaman. Mytsyik also recalls the letter of the Field Hetman of the Crown John III Sobieski (later king of Poland) which referred to Sirko as "a very quiet, noble, polite [man], and has ... great trust among Cossacks".[citation needed]
Son of Mykhailo Sulyma, Ivan came from a petty noble (szlachta) family. He was born in Rohoshchi (next to Chernihiv). He served as an estate overseer for Stanisław Żółkiewski and later the family of Daniłowicze who inherited his lands; for that service in 1620 he was awarded three villages: Sulimówka, Kuczakiw and Lebedyn. All the villages today belong to the Boryspil Raion, Kyiv Oblast. His sons included Stepan (died 1659), a captain of Boryspil company, and Fedir (died 1691), a colonel of Pereiaslav regiment. He became popular among the unregistered Cossacks, leading them on campaigns to plunder Crimea and other Ottoman vassal territories. For organizing a revolt on an Ottoman slave galley and freeing Christian slaves[1] he received a medal from Pope Paul V himself. Eventually, Sulyma reached the rank of the hetman, which he held from 1628 to 1629 and 1630 to 1635. In 1635, after returning from an expedition to Black Sea against the Ottomans, he decided to rebel against the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, which at that time controlled most of the Cossack territories, and whose nobility was trying to turn militant Cossacks into serfs.[citation needed] Ivan Sulyma took part in numerous campaigns of Sagaidachny against Tatars and Turks. In particular, it was the famous capture of Kafa (modern Theodosia), the main center of the slave trade on the Black Sea, Trapezont, Izmail, and also two attacks on Tsaregrad. On the night of 3 to 4 August 1635 he took the newly constructed Kodak fortress by surprise, burning it and executing its crew of about 200 people under Jean Marion. Soon afterwards however his forces were defeated by the army of hetman Stanisław Koniecpolski and Sulima was turned over to the Commonwealth by Cossack elders or starshina. Together with several other leaders of his rebellion, Hetman Sulyma was executed in Warsaw on 12 December 1635. At first, the Polish King Władysław IV Waza, known for his friendly attitude towards the Cossacks, was hesitant to execute Sulyma, especially since he was a person upon whom the Pope himself bestowed his medal. However, pressured by the nobility who wanted to show that no rebellions against the 'established order' would be tolerated, the order for an execution was given; after being tortured, Sulyma was cut to pieces and his body parts were hung on the city walls of Warsaw.[2]
In evolutionary biology, mimicry is an evolved resemblance between an organism and another object, often an organism of another species. Mimicry may evolve between different species, or between individuals of the same species. Often, mimicry functions to protect a species from predators, making it an anti-predator adaptation.[1] Mimicry evolves if a receiver (such as a predator) perceives the similarity between a mimic (the organism that has a resemblance) and a model (the organism it resembles) and as a result changes its behaviour in a way that provides a selective advantage to the mimic.[2] The resemblances that evolve in mimicry can be visual, acoustic, chemical, tactile, or electric, or combinations of these sensory modalities.[2][3] Mimicry may be to the advantage of both organisms that share a resemblance, in which case it is a form of mutualism; or mimicry can be to the detriment of one, making it parasitic or competitive. The evolutionary convergence between groups is driven by the selective action of a signal-receiver or dupe.[4] Birds, for example, use sight to identify palatable insects and butterflies,[5] whilst avoiding the noxious ones. Over time, palatable insects may evolve to resemble noxious ones, making them mimics and the noxious ones models. In the case of mutualism, sometimes both groups are referred to as "co-mimics". It is often thought that models must be more abundant than mimics, but this is not so.[6] Mimicry may involve numerous species; many harmless species such as hoverflies are Batesian mimics of strongly defended species such as wasps, while many such well-defended species form Müllerian mimicry rings, all resembling each other. Mimicry between prey species and their predators often involves three or more species.[7]
Emsleyan[9] or Mertensian mimicry describes the unusual case where a deadly prey mimics a less dangerous species. It was first proposed by M. G. Emsley[45] as a possible explanation for how a predator can learn to avoid a very dangerous aposematic animal, such as a coral snake, when the predator is very likely to die, making learning unlikely. The theory was developed by the German biologist Wolfgang Wickler[3] who named it after the German herpetologist Robert Mertens.[46][47][48] The scenario is unusual, as it is usually the most harmful species that is the model. But if a predator dies on its first encounter with a deadly snake, it has no occasion to learn to recognize the snake's warning signals. There would then be no advantage for an extremely deadly snake in being aposematic: any predator that attacked it would be killed before it could learn to avoid the deadly prey, so the snake would be better off being camouflaged, to avoid attacks altogether. But if the predator first learnt to avoid a less deadly snake that had warning colours, the deadly species could then profit (be attacked less often) by mimicking the less dangerous snake.[47][48] Some harmless milk snake (Lampropeltis triangulum) subspecies, the moderately toxic false coral snakes (genus Erythrolamprus), and the deadly coral snakes (genus Micrurus) all have a red background color with black and white / yellow rings. In this system, both the milk snakes and the deadly coral snakes are mimics, whereas the false coral snakes are the model.[45]
28-Year Wall Street Veteran Chris Rowe who invested in
Amazon at just $0.12, Teslas at $10.75, and Qualcomm at $2…
Is issuing his latest super stock. A stock he believes could be the absolute best way to combat inflation.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar