Affiliate Marketing Secrets

Thesis: Although considered by some to be a niche product, the Macintosh was a revolutionary milestone in technology and had a profound impact on the United States.
This is for an AP US history class and the paper must be 10-12 pages long, so the events must be before 1991. Each “prong” of my thesis must be 3 paragraphs, and I don’t know if there is enough evidence to prove how the Mac was not a niche product in 3 paragraphs. If anyone has any evidence, could they please share it? Thanks!

Some girl stole my iPod. There seems to be NO evidence pointing to her. However, on her email and Facebook account (messages), there is TONS.
Okay, so here is the back ground information:
-I am underage, 15.
-I talked to the school cops, but nothing yet.
-I have the passwords to both this girl’s Facebook profile and email.
-There was not much proof, but there is TONS now.
-I realize it is invasion of privacy.
-There are so many messages proving her guilty (on Facebook).
-On her email, it says she has used my iPod, which she stole, so many times.
-She is gang-affiliated.
I need help. I want it back. We know who it took it and want it back. They told me if she was found guilty I could press charges, but could she also press charges on me for looking through her stuff?
I’m scared and confused.
How much trouble would I get in if I took pictures of the evidence and presented to a police officer?
What would I say?
A school English teacher said that it was evidence/proof and that I would not get in trouble myself.
Although, some other kid told me I could face 1-5 years in Juvenile Hall, then prison.
Any help with the legal stuff?

Well, this is a very vague and obscure topic, and I know how difficult a question it is to answer, being right up there along with ‘What is the meaning to life?’.
I have always been rather ‘introverted’ (reflective and taciturn with a tendency to avoid expending effort) and I do not mean ‘anti-social’ or awkward. I just simply mean that I am contemplative, and have a relatively clear understanding of who I am. I am very mature and often find that it’s difficult to enjoy the things most people do.
Where I am finding difficulty, is that I have no way to know what is more ‘real’ and actually matters in development as a person. I tried personality theory (socionics, MBTI), and I’ve tried meditation, and they never seem to have information on what actually matters in life. I feel tugged between two ideals, a life of meditation and obscurity or a life of external achievement only to possibly find that it means nothing to me. I have tried my best to find answers on my own, but the arguments justifying an esoteric life seem so insubstantial and incoherent, and they seem to simply be a series of eloquent descriptions of ‘enlightenment’ with no certainty of whether they were made-up.
The arguments for living a productive life contributing to society and facing endless competition seem equally absurd, and they undervalue how tangible the mind can be, and completely ignore the value of subjectivity (a feeling of accomplishment/happiness) instead placing a huge emphasis on ‘jumping through hoops’.
The biggest issue I have, is simply that I want to find a productive and comfortable niche, but in order to do that I need to identify which reality matters more. I have no solid evidence for internal or external experiences being more important. I often put off asking questions like this because most people wouldn’t see the point in asing them.
I have always been mature and intelligent, and quite skilled, but rarely had any need to use my skills or even show that I have them to other people. I have never had ambition or any competitive spirit, and in general, I prefer solitude because I find most conversation/interaction to be tedius and boring. Most of the people I know are very childish and easily swept away by hype, but at the same time, I question whether I’m the child throwing temper tantrums because I don’t like what they do.
It is a very common struggle in literature, and in all honesty, I have yet to find another person at about the same place in their journey, and seldom found someone mature enough that I can look to for answers. I don’t seek reassurance; I find it in my solitude and reflections. What I seek is external evidence, rather than mere concepts embedded within stories. I am the kind that cannot be content with the normal standards of success, and yet, seeks a niche where I fit comfortably and can be myself. I do not have many material needs, but at the same time, I find that the only reason I speak is because I dislike the silence of knowing I don’t have to.
I am simply looking for something to apply myself to that I can believe in, and that won’t leave me ignoring either the external or internal world I experience. I find all too often that I don’t feel a need to do anything unless it is necessary, and that I do a lot of unnecessary things because I genuinely want to understand the world and my place in it. Even in writing this, I have contemplated its deletion simply on account of it seeming an unnecessary addition that will likely leave me where I started.
I have also considered that I’m possibly mentally unsound, and yet I find that stress has little power over me, and that I do not worry or fear like the people around me. Is it that I simply cannot enjoy what those around me do, or is it perhaps that I have grown beyond such trifling materials and shared interests? I have found that what I want most is not so much answers as perspective. I know where I am in relation to those around me, and I know myself well, but I do not know my exact position in this journey we call life. I simply want to know where I am and where I am going, not the direction I am going versus the direction they are going. Please be aware that I have deeply considered all the possiblities and implications of what I know, but I have no solid reference point by which to map them out.
Where is there something which doesn’t require pure faith in its reality? I simply seek to know where to find truth, rather than opinion; knowledge, rather than facts and figures; and certainty, rather than possibility.

I’ve noticed cons like to get their science from political websites.
A political organization, an amateur website, a blog, one person. These are not SCIENTIFIC ORGANIZATIONS.
=================
All well established SCIENTIFIC ORGANIZATIONS engaged in climate research support man made global warming.
1. AMERICAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY, FOUNDED IN 1919, OVER 14,000 MEMBERS
“There is unequivocal evidence that Earth’s lower atmosphere, ocean, and land surface are warming; sea level is rising; and snow cover, mountain glaciers, and Arctic sea ice are shrinking. The dominant cause of the warming since the 1950s is human activities. This scientific finding is based on a large and persuasive body of research.”http://www.ametsoc.org/POLICY/2012climat…
2. THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY, FOUNDED IN 1876, OVER 164,000 MEMBERS
“However, comprehensive scientific assessments of our current and potential future climates clearly indicate that climate change is real, largely attributable to emissions from human activities, and potentially a very serious problem.”http://portal.acs.org/portal/acs/corg/co…
3. GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, FOUNDED IN 1888, OVER 24,0000 MEMBERS
“The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2006), and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) that global climate has warmed and that human activities (mainly greenhouse‐gas emissions) account for most of the warming since the middle 1900s.”http://www.geosociety.org/positions/posi…
4. AMERICAN GEOPHYSICAL UNION, FOUNDED IN 1919, OVER 45,000 MEMBERS
“The scientific evidence for human activity impacting climate is strong and widely accepted within the
scientific community. Given the significant current and potential impacts of climate change,
scientists have a unique responsibility to educate the public and public policy makers on this topic.”http://www.agu.org/sci_pol/pdf/position_…
5. THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE, FOUNDED IN 1848, SERVES 262 AFFILIATED SOCIETIES AND ACADEMIES OF SCIENCE FOR A TOTAL OF 10 MILLION INDIVIDUALS
“The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society. Accumulating data from across the globe reveal a wide array of effects: rapidly melting glaciers, destabilization of major ice sheets, increases in extreme weather, rising sea level, shifts in species ranges, and more. The pace of change and the evidence of harm have increased markedly over the last five years. The time to control greenhouse gas emissions is now.”http://www.aaas.org/news/press_room/clim…

All the best evidence I can find indicates that Darwinian evolution is real, that man-made global warming is real, that America’s economic problems are primarily caused by excessive government spending and regulation, that free-market capitalism is the only answer to America’s economic problems, and that women are more oppressed by the so-called “Feminist” movement than they have ever been by anything men have ever done.
Why then do most people who accept Darwinian evolution and man-made global warming, also usually advocate state-socialism and wealth redistribution, and usually believe that women are oppressed by being wives and mothers, rather than seeing being a wife and mother for the glorious, beautiful privilege which it is?
Also, why do the same people who so rationally believe in private property, capitalism, free markets, limited government and traditional family values, also tend to think that man-made global warming is a hoax and that Charles Darwin was an agent of the Devil?
Also, why do so many of those same people think that the devaluation of the US dollar by means of money creation is some sort of conspiracy by secret organizations to take over the world and establish a one-world government, as opposed to seeing it as merely the actions of corrupt politicians trying to temporarily bribe the American people into voting for them without regard for the long-term consequences of their actions?
P.S. I realize that I have touched on many controversial topics, so please keep it civil.

In an example of one of many similarities to be found by those who choose to read and find factual evidence instead of being told what to think by major media outlets who espouse one or the other of two ideological standpoints:
By 2009, Senate Banking Chairman Chris Dodd had recieved $280,000 in donations from insurer AIG, a major player in the “bailout” situation which contributed to our current financial woes.
Barack Obama received $104,000 from AIG in his 2008 campaign
George W. Bush received $200,000 through the course of his campaigns.
John McCain recieved $99,000 at the same time that Obama received $104,000 in 2008.
Companies like AIG, Goldman Sachs,(of which Timothy Geithner is a former employee), and corporations in different areas of commerce such as Monsanto, have continually benefited no matter the political party in power, and have taken more and more power and hegemony to themselves.
Is it possible, as a modifier to the question, that more ambiguous differences used to stoke the fires of hatred and intolerance among the “right” and the “left” of the American populace, and which are never really fully addressed or resolved in any real way, such as abortion, gay rights, “big” vs. “small” government, etc, are purposefully exacerbated in order to keep the American people from thinking and acting collectively so that questions about where power is really placed and how it affects all of us regardless of ideological differences are never asked?
FOX News, the “Conservative” news, is owned by the gigantic “News Corp”, which controls a disproportionate amount of media outlets including many newspapers and other mediums, and which has ties to other corporate interests.
MSNBC, the “Liberal” news, is owned by GE, who owns all NBC affiliates and outlets, is associated through stock holdings to many other corporations, and which is also one of the world’s top ten defense contractors.
So again, what does this information tell us? Will we have a tendency in answering this to provide a stance which defends our “right” or “left” philosophy and demonizes the opposite side as having more blame in the circumstances that the above indisputable and retrievable facts indicate? If so, how then do we explain the monies paid to politicians of both “sides”, and that both “sides” have been equal in furthering the interests of those who have paid them?
If you identify yourself as “right” or “left”, do you feel that the ideologies of the other side are the sources of all destructive societal tendencies? If so, does this seem reasonable to you if you detach yourself from emotion and look objectively? Does it seem likely that all of the world’s complex problems can be boiled down to only TWO diametrically opposed viewpoints? Is it reasonable to say that if a group of inviduals wanted to divide and control a population, that manipulating emotion and ideological differences used to provoke emotional reaction and which are strongly tied to various religous beliefs, which are usually deep-seated, would be a smart and effective way to divide people so utterly that they would later find it almost impossible to view the other side as anything but a bitter enemy that can never be reconciled with?