#ChurchGRA #Gratitude #MyTurnToShine
Now Ministering: Pst Mike Nwangwa @mikeonwangwa
Topic: Gratitude, Faith, and Answer
Gratitude is the quality of being thankful. 1Thess 5:16,17 and 18.
#ChurchGRA #Gratitude #MyTurnToShine
#ChurchGRA #Gratitude #MyTurnToShine
#ChurchGRA #Gratitude #MyTurnToShine
#ChurchGRA #Gratitude #MyTurnToShine
#ChurchGRA #Gratitude #MyTurnToShine
#ChurchGRA #Gratitude #MyTurnToShine
#ChurchGRA #Gratitude #MyTurnToShine
#ChurchGRA #Gratitude #MyTurnToShine
1. Gratitude helps you become better at heart
2. It changes the environment (James 1:2-4)
3. It multiplies little things and brings forth great results.
4. Gratitude would make you receive more
#ChurchGRA #Gratitude #MyTurnToShine
More from God's Royal Assembly
More from Life
Okay hope everyone having a lovely weekend. Lots of love today. Feeling very blessed 🥰 Going through NNOX tweets from last week. Time to compile threads and bring you highlights. No need to go digging old tweets if I do for you 🤗 FDA, Secondary, and 3P510k. Let’s review..
The NNOX news flow been exceptionally good. I tweet about Fear Uncertainty Doubt and how short sellers leverage friction in news flow to mine some of your gains. NNOX published Form F-1/A to remove friction. Investors have answers.
Form F-1/A Link:
Form F-1 is over 200 detailed pages. Very concentrated. Everything you need for rest of this month in the document. A few notes for you. NNOX FDA approval uses a third party review organization in 510k process. This is abbreviated to 3P510k.
I covered the 3P510K in thread here: https://t.co/w7zE882CVk
Reference to Eagle eyes: https://t.co/gT779MFX82
We discover in F-1 that 3P510K recommended clearance of Nanox Source. This triggers a 30 day timeline to approval by FDA. However ...
Look at you favorite broker news for NNOX. I look at 3 different broker none of them comment NNOX from 60 to 80 on news that 3P510k recommended FDA approve NNOX device. NNOX get a letter and slide 10% we get headline. But no headline for big pop 🤷♂️ that’s the friction.
The NNOX news flow been exceptionally good. I tweet about Fear Uncertainty Doubt and how short sellers leverage friction in news flow to mine some of your gains. NNOX published Form F-1/A to remove friction. Investors have answers.
Form F-1/A Link:
Form F-1 is over 200 detailed pages. Very concentrated. Everything you need for rest of this month in the document. A few notes for you. NNOX FDA approval uses a third party review organization in 510k process. This is abbreviated to 3P510k.
I covered the 3P510K in thread here: https://t.co/w7zE882CVk
Reference to Eagle eyes: https://t.co/gT779MFX82
We discover in F-1 that 3P510K recommended clearance of Nanox Source. This triggers a 30 day timeline to approval by FDA. However ...
Eagle-eyes \U0001f985 https://t.co/w1wF3Ysmt1
— Harvey \U0001f1fa\U0001f1f8 (@realharveymark) February 12, 2021
Look at you favorite broker news for NNOX. I look at 3 different broker none of them comment NNOX from 60 to 80 on news that 3P510k recommended FDA approve NNOX device. NNOX get a letter and slide 10% we get headline. But no headline for big pop 🤷♂️ that’s the friction.
You May Also Like
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.

Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)

There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.

At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?