Nick Pitera is a singer, and if you haven’t heard of this young man, you are missing out. Nick works as a 3D modeler with Pixar Animation Studios. He is also a voice actor and an online vocal musician. Although he is a baritone singer, he displays an incredible vocal range. One of his most popular videos is his cover of A Whole New World from the film Aladdin. And now you know why Nick Pitera is such a special singer. His amazing ability to switch between the male and female voices is perfect. It isn’t just a fluke with this one song, either. Nick has a wide variety of music available on his YouTube channel, showcasing his voice. Whether he is performing a multi-voice medley or solo, every song will have you frantically adding to your Spotify list. The raw talent on display in every video is jaw-dropping. Nick appeared on the Ellen DeGeneres Show as an audience act. He was so impressive singing A Whole New World that he was invited back as a guest. During that 2010 interview, he sang Don’t Stop Believin’. Nick also appeared on Broadway in 2024, singing A Whole New World. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Nick Pitera (@nickpitera) Nick is very active on most of his social media accounts. Amazingly, singing is “just a hobby,” and he hasn’t made the jump to doing this full-time professionally. In addition to doing cover versions and medleys on YouTube, Nick has several original songs in his queue. With more than 25,000 monthly Spotify users, Nick has a definite following. You can find and follow Nick on Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, X (Twitter), and YouTube. Nick has been singing since he was four and grew up in musical theater. Please share. You can find the source of this story’s featured image here. The post Singer’s Uncanny Ability To Switch Between Male & Female Vocals Will Amaze You! appeared first on InspireMore.

In a time filled with UFO conspiracy theories, a former NASA official is pushing back against claims of alien visits to Earth. Joseph Gutheinz, a retired NASA investigator and current attorney, says science—not speculation—should guide the discussion. “Prove it. Honestly, prove it,” he challenges UFO believers. “They’ve been claiming that there have been UFOs since the 1940s. And, you know, Area 51 supposedly houses UFOs. Have someone go in, look at Area 51.” During his NASA career, Gutheinz often heard wild claims. “I would regularly get calls from individuals who believed they were abducted or had a chip in their brain from aliens,” he said. His response? “The possibility of anybody coming from another world to visit us was beyond unlikely… See a psychiatrist.” He points to the vast distances in space as proof. “There are up to 400 billion stars in the Milky Way… but the closest solar system is Alpha Centauri, 4.4 light years away—25 trillion miles. If somebody started flying to Proxima Centauri, it would take them over 70,000 years. Nobody is visiting us from another world, likely.” If life exists nearby, he says, it’s not intelligent. Moons like Europa or Titan might host microbes, but “it’s nothing that’s going to visit us in a flying saucer.” So what explains UFO sightings? Gutheinz suggests earthly origins. “If you’re seeing something up there, and it’s real, it’s coming from the Chinese or the Russians or your next-door neighbor flying around with their drone.” He believes military secrecy fueled UFO myths. “In the 1940s, when UFO stories started, the military was probably testing aircraft and didn’t want Russia to know,” he said. “If the UFO cover worked, I wouldn’t be surprised if some in government played along to hide stealth technology. The bottom line is, we use the UFO cover to hide a lot of things.” The post Former NASA Official Debunks Alien UFOs: ‘Nobody Is Visiting Us’ appeared first on Anomalien.com.

The national media employ a long-held double standard on political protests. They boost left-wing protests regardless of crowd size and pretend they’re not leftist. When conservatives protest, it’s either ignored or it’s treated as menacing, laced with a “dark undercurrent.” Saturday’s nationally organized leftist “No Kings” protests against President Trump were boosted as “massive.” Morning Joe co-host Jon Lemire gushed "The vast, vast majority of these ‘No Kings’ protests were very peaceful and the crowds were huge!” But protests are not elections. Leftist Garry Kasparov – the Russian chess master – bragged about that “huge” turnout on Substack: “Five million people protested across the United States over the weekend—for liberal democracy and the rule of law and against a wannabe strongman. That’s 1.5% of all Americans taking part in a coordinated action.” Read that again: even if you accept this exaggerated crowd size, how does 1.5 percent of America represent public opinion? Five million protesters is a much smaller sample than 77 million Trump voters. Democracy is measured at the ballot box, not with the most activist voters in the streets.  Protests could be analyzed as “pseudo-events,” as defined by Daniel Boorstin – events staged to draw media attention.  Protests by the president’s opposition are morale boosters for the people who lost the election. You could have said that about conservative protests against President Obama in 2009. It’s instructive to review what happened back then. On August 7, 2009, then-MSNBC host David Shuster was spreading fear about protesters at Obamacare town hall meetings. "We know that threats to President Obama are up by like, 400% compared to the Bush administration. Is this putting our president in some sort of danger? Because of some wacko that will see this stuff and say, ‘oh, yes, it’s fascism and the way we dealt with Adolf Hitler was to try to kill him, so therefore, let’s do this with our president.’" That’s fascinating, since in the Trump years, MSNBC hosts and guests have routinely smeared President Trump as a dictator and a fascist and Hitler, and no one worries about their loose talk endangering him. CNN displayed a complete contrast in 2009. First came a big Tea Party rally with an estimated 75,000 protesters on September 12.  CNN’s Jim Spellman couldn’t locate a scary nut in D.C., so he aired canned footage of a man – somewhere in Michigan – holding an AK-47 and talking of a possible civil war. Then he warned of that "dark undercurrent" poisoning the right: "It’s a bit of a dark undercurrent. You have the bulk of the people that are there for low taxes, less government control, but there really is an element that's got these kind of outlandish conspiracy theories about death camps and about the, you know, this takeover, people comparing President Obama to Hitler.” Just twelve days later in Pittsburgh, the radical left held a protest in Pittsburgh against a G-20 summit. CNN reporter Brian Todd robotically cited the usual talking points for leftist rallies, highlighting the "very, very diverse" nature of the protesters: "We're told this is the biggest march in Pittsburgh since the 1970s, estimated at least a few thousand people. But it is much more peaceful, less confrontational. Very, very diverse group of protesters here, everyone from people protesting the Chinese occupation of Tibet, to women's rights groups, to anti-capitalists."  This “much more peaceful” protest ended with 200 arrests. The Left clearly thinks protests are Their Thing, and whenever conservatives protest, it must be a dastardly conspiracy that endangers democracy. In their minds, democracy only flowers when their stilted narratives dominate. 

Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota launched into a histrionic tirade against the U.S. and pointed to President Donald Trump's order to send military troops into Los Angeles, California, as the reason why it is no longer a beacon of hope.Omar made the comments while being interviewed on "Democracy Now!" from the U.S. Capitol. The interview was published on Friday. 'Can you imagine that image that is going to be coming out of our country? I mean, I grew up in a dictatorship, and I don't even remember ever witnessing anything like that.' "We are in the midst of the creation of a police state where you have masked, armed men who are in plain clothes that are snatching people off the streets, unwilling to identify themselves. You have the military being deployed in our streets. My God, this is America. You have states' rights being disregarded, so you know, a constitutional crisis that's being created in front of our eyes!" Omar ranted. "And the same week where we have a president who has deployed the military, who are trained to kill our enemies — not Americans, but our enemies — are in our streets!" she added. RELATED: Hegseth orders battalion of US Marines to quell anti-ICE rioting in Los Angeles Photo by BENJAMIN HANSON/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images She went on to excoriate the president for the military parade Saturday in Washington, D.C., on the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army. "Can you imagine that image that is going to be coming out of our country? I mean, I grew up in a dictatorship, and I don't even remember ever witnessing anything like that," Omar said. "To have a democracy, a beacon of hope for the world, to now be turned into one of the worst countries, where the military are in our streets without any regard to people's constitutional rights," she added, "while our president is spending millions of dollars propping himself up like a failed dictator with a military parade, it is really shocking, and it should be a wake-up call for all Americans." The president is in a legal battle with California and its Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom over whether he was acting constitutionally when he ordered troops into Los Angeles without the cooperation of local state officials. Critics accuse the president of wanting to militarize the streets, but his defenders say the attacks on federal agents justify a federal troop response. The full interview with "Democracy Now!" can be viewed on its YouTube channel. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Is Donald Trump a warmonger? It’s a simple question, and yet an increasingly popular accusation from corners of the political class and commentariat that once saw him as the clearest alternative to globalist foreign adventurism. But such an accusation also defies the record. Whatever else one might say about Trump, he has been — consistently and vocally — against needless foreign entanglements.To suggest that he has suddenly pivoted toward militarism is to misunderstand either the man himself or the moment we are in. Trump is not easily swayed from his core convictions. Trade protectionism and anti-interventionism have always been part of his political DNA. On tariffs, he is unbending. And when it comes to war, he has long argued that America must stop serving as the world’s policeman.Is Iran another Iraq, or is it more like Poland in 1980?So when people today accuse Trump of abandoning his anti-interventionist principles, we must ask: What evidence do we have that he has changed? And if he has, does that mean he was misleading us all along — or is something else happening?If you’ve lost your trust in him, fine. Fair enough. But then the question becomes: Who do you trust? Who else has stood on stage, risked his life, and remained — at least in conviction — largely unchanged?I’m not arguing for blind trust. In fact, I strongly advise against it. Reagan had it right when he quoted a Russian proverb during nuclear disarmament talks with the Soviet Union: “Trust, but verify.” Trust must be earned daily — and verified constantly. But trust, or the absence of it, is central to what we’re facing.Beyond pro- and antiwarThe West is being pulled in two directions: one toward chaos, the other toward renewal. Trust is essential to renewal. Chaos thrives when people lose confidence — in leaders, in systems, in one another.We are in a moment when clarity is difficult but necessary. And clarity requires asking harder questions than whether someone is “for or against war.”Too many Americans today fall into four broad categories when it comes to foreign conflict.First are the trolls — those who aren’t arguing in good faith, but revel in provocation, division, and distrust. Their goal isn’t clarity. It’s chaos.Second are those who, understandably, want to avoid war but won’t acknowledge the dangers posed by radical Islamist ideology. Out of fear or fatigue, they have chosen willful blindness. This has been a costly mistake in the past.Third are those who, like me, do not want war but understand that certain ideologies — particularly those of Iran’s theocratic rulers — cannot be ignored or wished away. We study history. We remember 1979. We understand what the “Twelvers” believe.Twelvers are a sect of Shia Islam whose clerics believe the return of the 12th Imam, their messianic figure, can only be ushered in by global conflict and bloodshed. Iran is the only nation in the world to make Twelver Shia its official state religion. The 12th Imam is not a metaphor. It’s doctrine, and it matters.Finally, there are the hawks. They cheer for conflict. They seek to project American power, often reflexively. And they carry the swagger of certainty, even as history offers them little vindication.The last few decades have offered sobering lessons. Regime change in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria — none produced flourishing democracies or stable allies. While America is capable of toppling regimes, we’re not so good at manufacturing civil societies. Real liberty requires real leadership on the ground. It requires heroes — people willing to suffer and die not for power, but for principle.That’s what was missing in Kabul, Baghdad, and Tripoli. We never saw a Washington or a Jefferson emerge. Brave individuals assisted us, but no figures rose to power with whom nations could coalesce.Is Iran 1980s Poland?That is why I ask whether Iran is simply the next chapter in a tired and tragic book — or something altogether different.Is Iran another Iraq? Or is it more like Poland in 1980? It’s not an easy question, but it’s one we must ask.During the Cold War, we saw what it looked like when people yearned for freedom. In Poland, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia, dissidents risked everything for a chance to escape tyranny. There was a moral clarity. You could hear it in their music, see it in their marches, feel it in the energy that eventually tore down the Berlin Wall.Is that spirit alive in Iran?RELATED: Mark Levin sounds alarm: Stop Iran’s nuclear ambitions before it’s too late Alex Wong/Getty ImagesWe know that millions of Iranians have protested. We know many have disappeared for it. The Persian people are among the best educated in the region. They are culturally rich, historically sophisticated, and far more inclined toward Western ideals than the mullahs who rule them.But we know Iran’s mullahs are not rational actors.So again, we must ask: If the people of Iran are capable of throwing off their theocratic oppressors, should the United States support them? If so, how — and what would it cost us?Ask tougher questionsI am not calling for war. I do not support U.S. military intervention in Iran. But I do support asking better questions. Is it in our national interest to act? Is there a moral imperative we cannot ignore? And do we trust the institutions advising us?I no longer trust the intelligence agencies. I no longer trust the think tanks that sold us the Iraq War. I certainly don’t trust the foreign policy establishment in Washington that has consistently failed upward.But I do trust the American people to engage these questions honestly — if they’re willing to think.I believe we may be entering the first chapter of a final, spiritual conflict — what Scripture calls the last battle. It may take decades to unfold, but the ideological lines are being drawn.And whether you are for Trump or against him, whether you see Iran as a threat or a distraction, whether you want peace or fear it’s no longer possible — ask the tougher questions.Because what comes next won’t be determined by slogans. It will be determined by what we truly believe.Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.

You don’t often see a gaming laptop for a price this low, while still offering a decent spec, but this $648 MSI gaming laptop deal genuinely delivers the goods. Not only does it contain a proper Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060 gaming GPU, but it even includes a fast 144Hz screen, 16GB of RAM, and an Intel Core i5 CPU. You’ll have to be quick, though, as Walmart says there are only a few left in stock. The laptop version of the Nvidia GPU in this MSI Thin laptop is quite unusual, as it contains the same core spec as the desktop GeForce RTX 4060, whereas you usually expect the laptop models to have a lesser spec. That’s not the case here, though, with the GPU in this laptop giving you 3,072 CUDA cores and 8GB of dedicated GDDR6 VRAM, just like the desktop card – the only difference is that the laptop model has lower clock speeds. I’ve seen this laptop’s price drop below $700 before, but I’ve never seen it go this cheaply before, making it one of the best gaming laptop deals I’ve seen. Continue reading This $648 MSI gaming laptop deal is outstanding, with an Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060 MORE FROM PCGAMESN: MSI MPG X870E Carbon WiFi review, MSI Titan 18 HX review, Best gaming motherboard

On Steam and other aggregators, Mindseye reviews remain relatively unenthusiastic. The debut game from Build A Rocket Boy, the studio created by former GTA, Red Dead Redemption, and Rockstar producer Leslie Benzies, Mindseye has been criticized by both players and publications, which cite issues with technical performance, repetitive mechanics, and uninteresting visual design. However, on some platforms, including social media, posts have appeared that have a more positive timbre, likening Mindseye to the launch version of Cyberpunk 2077 and praising the game’s narrative premise. In several instances, these posts have the exact same wording and punctuation, and are characteristic of bot-generated comments uploaded by fake accounts. In response to suggestions that it has engineered these posts to spread favorable sentiment about Mindseye, Build A Rocket Boy emphatically says it does not and will not use bots. Continue reading Positive Mindseye comments are not written by Build A Rocket Boy bots, dev says MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Best sandbox games, Best building games, Best upcoming PC games

A woman on dialysis experienced a lot of fluid buildup between appointments and developed an unusual eating habit in an attempt to counter it.

When gray-haired white liberals take to America’s streets for “No Kings” protests, the only danger they’re exposing themselves to is ridicule. What happens, though, when progressive protesters…