File manager

File manager - Edit - /home/adiance/mail/.spam/new/1672936079.M254481P14125.40-69-163-212.cprapid.com,S=13476,W=13637

Back
Return-Path: <18579-29269-151684-3597-rsinghal=adiance.com@mail.boostaropro.shop> Delivered-To: adiance+spam@40-69-163-212.cprapid.com Received: from 40-69-163-212.cprapid.com by 40-69-163-212.cprapid.com with LMTP id hcpgDo/6tmMtNwAAeDY3lg (envelope-from <18579-29269-151684-3597-rsinghal=adiance.com@mail.boostaropro.shop>) for <adiance+spam@40-69-163-212.cprapid.com>; Thu, 05 Jan 2023 16:27:59 +0000 Return-path: <18579-29269-151684-3597-rsinghal=adiance.com@mail.boostaropro.shop> Envelope-to: rsinghal@adiance.com Delivery-date: Thu, 05 Jan 2023 16:27:59 +0000 Received: from sjan.characted.com ([23.247.83.162]:53279 helo=oboe.boostaropro.shop) by 40-69-163-212.cprapid.com with esmtp (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from <18579-29269-151684-3597-rsinghal=adiance.com@mail.boostaropro.shop>) id 1pDT5x-0003fQ-8A for rsinghal@adiance.com; Thu, 05 Jan 2023 16:27:59 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=k1; d=boostaropro.shop; h=Mime-Version:Content-Type:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Message-ID; i=FailingEyesight@boostaropro.shop; bh=B6rruh7cSKsxJDq0Y3XWrRmQPUk=; b=KkLeJM5UFA7A75tPnBxpQX00S+t9LFYkAFnXoqvn83d19fltbETDcUXvarIYIUVmlvcquFPmSSmY OVnZcLNMb2DkcH3MENlODpd97pVahtZuy/ZnuZ8iuMgUEgCuPdPgzvYUoJ9+VT9CCYS7lwnvrkDo 56l4DitKDpNXDovNs0U= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; q=dns; s=k1; d=boostaropro.shop; b=nAg6PHLw37v6cDjhKnVMZEIL3N0YV91obb6Zn8rjvKvUizD6HNW1+xOG/uDdRWfIxaTyV3oXdyKr que2Og8zWmeHUjpJS2SY+7ZRDZCMWmlcurpUOjgtGms1BK69KgmQ0fzB9Jd4HQm+ytnXnrynbXcB stLFZewMKK5mSIdN3KU=; Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="6428c6cfd5268766b5807fc78e8e1e62_7255_25084" Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2023 17:27:09 +0100 From: "Failing Eyesight" <FailingEyesight@boostaropro.shop> Reply-To: "Your Eyesight" <YourEyesight@boostaropro.shop> To: <rsinghal@adiance.com> Message-ID: <s4um4wfutgrg3e1f-k2m8pdy1j0352v9e-7255-25084@boostaropro.shop> X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=26.4 X-Spam-Score: 264 X-Spam-Bar: ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "40-69-163-212.cprapid.com", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see root\@localhost for details. Content preview: Restore & save dying eyes with a 12-second Biblical trick http://boostaropro.shop/L-h_l57uRrW1BtUNVklVQtAW8T5N4vvweBTtw3SuKoReR0U http://boostaropro.shop/CiXyUPy0z13G0HpGtVNasRZROHftV1Wuhh8O1VycDgljKU9v Content analysis details: (26.4 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.7 RCVD_IN_PSBL RBL: Received via a relay in PSBL [23.247.83.162 listed in psbl.surriel.com] 5.0 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist [URIs: boostaropro.shop] 1.9 URIBL_ABUSE_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the ABUSE SURBL blocklist [URIs: boostaropro.shop] 1.3 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL RBL: Relay in Validity RPBL, https://senderscore.org/blocklistlookup/ [23.247.83.162 listed in bl.score.senderscore.com] 4.5 URIBL_DBL_SPAM Contains a spam URL listed in the Spamhaus DBL blocklist [URIs: boostaropro.shop] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST BODY: HTML font color similar or identical to background 0.0 PP_MIME_FAKE_ASCII_TEXT BODY: MIME text/plain claims to be ASCII but isn't -0.1 DKIM_VALID_EF Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 2.4 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% [cf: 100] 1.7 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) 2.0 PYZOR_CHECK Listed in Pyzor (https://pyzor.readthedocs.io/en/latest/) 5.0 KAM_VERY_BLACK_DBL Email that hits both URIBL Black and Spamhaus DBL 0.0 FSL_BULK_SIG Bulk signature with no Unsubscribe X-Spam-Flag: YES Subject: *SPAM* Restore & save dying eyes with a 12-second Biblical trick --6428c6cfd5268766b5807fc78e8e1e62_7255_25084 Content-Type: text/plain; Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Restore & save dying eyes with a 12-second Biblical trick http://boostaropro.shop/L-h_l57uRrW1BtUNVklVQtAW8T5N4vvweBTtw3SuKoReR0U http://boostaropro.shop/CiXyUPy0z13G0HpGtVNasRZROHftV1Wuhh8O1VycDgljKU9v Cheke and the Dutch ornithologist Justin J. F. J. Jansen stated in 2016 that the Edinburgh specimen has no clear provenance information, and that it may have been collected from Mauritius (only one of Dufresne's other bird specimens was from Réunion, while several were from Mauritius). They noted that, unlike modern Mauritian specimens, the pink neck ring of the Edinburgh specimen continued uninterrupted around the back of the neck, similar to what Buffon and Levaillant described, but that from where the specimen Levaillant described was, was unclear. They stated that the genetic differences between the specimens were not necessarily subspecific, but because the Mauritian specimens were much more recent than the Edinburgh specimen, the similarity of the former specimens could have been due to a genetic bottleneck, resulting from a severe decline of the Mauritian population in the 19th century. They concluded that the default assumption should be that it came from Réunion. They also called attention to a usually overlooked, unlabelled sketch from around 1770 by French artist Paul Philippe Sanguin de Jossigny of a ring-necked parakeet with a collar encircling the neck, which they thought could have been from either island. In 2017, Hume agreed that the Edinburgh specimen could have come from Mauritius. He stated that the genetic differences could be due to variation within the population there, and pointed out that some other bird species migrate between Mauritius and Réunion. Also in 2017, Australian ornithologist Joseph M. Forshaw agreed that the Mauritius and Réunion populations were subspecifically distinct and that the Edinburgh specimen was from Réunion, and should be designated the neotype of P. eques. The following year, Jones and colleagues, including authors of the DNA studies, Hume, and Forshaw, supported the identification of the Edinburgh specimen as a Réunion parakeet and the subspecific differentiation between the populations. They found that the specimen differed from all examined Mauritius specimens in having a complete pink collar, instead of having a gap at the back of the neck, a feature emphasised by Brisson, Buffon, and Levaillant in their descriptions of the Réunion parakeet, but not obvious in the photographs seen by Jones in the 1980s. Since populations on islands usually have lower genetic diversity than those on continents, they stated that the low level of differentiation between the Mauritius and Réunion specimens would be expected. They also concluded that Jossigny's drawing showed a Réunion parakeet. In 2018, the American ornithologist Kaiya L. Provost and colleague --6428c6cfd5268766b5807fc78e8e1e62_7255_25084 Content-Type: text/html; Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit <html> <head> <title>Newsletter</title> <meta name="viewport" content="width=de-vice-width, initial-scale=1.0"> </head> <body><a href="http://boostaropro.shop/le8Ky6JoD5L9L_cQYD7YnjIh8jmAoIDM3KaasFPiIKeAlWQ"><img src="http://boostaropro.shop/eee1ac6e0058991509.jpg" /><img src="http://www.boostaropro.shop/VXl9pbi0B2tCLZae1gZSdejgzBCcRaW1tKY3Protqufd_3gn" /></a><br />   <center> <div style="width:550px;font-size:18px;font-family:Times New Roman;padding:10px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #000000;"><a href="http://boostaropro.shop/L-h_l57uRrW1BtUNVklVQtAW8T5N4vvweBTtw3SuKoReR0U" http:="" microsoft.com="" style="font-size:28px;color:#0C9003;font-weight:bold;" target="blank">The eye industry is SCAMMING you and you don’t even know…</a><br /> <br /> How?<br /> <br /> They’re keeping <strong><a href="http://boostaropro.shop/L-h_l57uRrW1BtUNVklVQtAW8T5N4vvweBTtw3SuKoReR0U" http:="" microsoft.com="" rel="sponsored" target="blank">this shocking secret away from you…</a></strong><br /> <br /> And it’s a <strong>12-second eye trick</strong> that will fix your eyesight and give you 20/20 vision within a matter of DAYS.<br /> <br /> That’s right.<br /> <br /> And it works on just about anyone, no matter the age. That means your doctor is WRONG and there IS a way to reverse your bad eye sight even if you’re almost 70.<br /> <br /> Don’t believe me?<br /> <br /> This U.S. doctor is actually challenging the ENTIRE billion dollar industry with this discovery so they can keep making money…<br /> <br /> <strong>Money from expensive glasses, eye exams, lasik surgeries, and more…</strong><br /> <br /> Things that we all know are just band-aid temporary solutions to our failing eyesight…<br /> <br /> And he’s been fighting to get the truth known.<br /> <br /> So if you wanna know what secret your eye doctor is probably hiding…<br />   <center> <div style="font-family:cursive;width:300px;background-color:#ffff80;color:#d90000;font-size:22px;font-weight:bold;;padding:15px;border:1px solid #df7000;"><u><a href="http://boostaropro.shop/L-h_l57uRrW1BtUNVklVQtAW8T5N4vvweBTtw3SuKoReR0U" http:="" microsoft.com="" rel="sponsored" style="color:#d90000;text-decoration:none;" target="blank">Click here to find out…</a></u></div> </center> </div> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <span style="color:#FFFFFF;font-size:6px;">Cheke and the Dutch ornithologist Justin J. F. J. Jansen stated in 2016 that the Edinburgh specimen has no clear provenance information, and that it may have been collected from Mauritius (only one of Dufresne's other bird specimens was from Réunion, while several were from Mauritius). They noted that, unlike modern Mauritian specimens, the pink neck ring of the Edinburgh specimen continued uninterrupted around the back of the neck, similar to what Buffon and Levaillant described, but that from where the specimen Levaillant described was, was unclear. They stated that the genetic differences between the specimens were not necessarily subspecific, but because the Mauritian specimens were much more recent than the Edinburgh specimen, the similarity of the former specimens could have been due to a genetic bottleneck, resulting from a severe decline of the Mauritian population in the 19th century. They concluded that the default assumption should be that it came from Réunion. They also called attention to a usually overlooked, unlabelled sketch from around 1770 by French artist Paul Philippe Sanguin de Jossigny of a ring-necked parakeet with a collar encircling the neck, which they thought could have been from either island. In 2017, Hume agreed that the Edinburgh specimen could have come from Mauritius. He stated that the genetic differences could be due to variation within the population there, and pointed out that some other bird species migrate between Mauritius and Réunion. Also in 2017, Australian ornithologist Joseph M. Forshaw agreed that the Mauritius and Réunion populations were subspecifically distinct and that the Edinburgh specimen was from Réunion, and should be designated the neotype of P. eques. The following year, Jones and colleagues, including authors of the DNA studies, Hume, and Forshaw, supported the identification of the Edinburgh specimen as a Réunion parakeet and the subspecific differentiation between the populations. They found that the specimen differed from all examined Mauritius specimens in having a complete pink collar, instead of having a gap at the back of the neck, a feature emphasised by Brisson, Buffon, and Levaillant in their descriptions of the Réunion parakeet, but not obvious in the photographs seen by Jones in the 1980s. Since populations on islands usually have lower genetic diversity than those on continents, they stated that the low level of differentiation between the Mauritius and Réunion specimens would be expected. They also concluded that Jossigny's drawing showed a Réunion parakeet. In 2018, the American ornithologist Kaiya L. Provost and colleague</span><br /> <br /> <a href="http://boostaropro.shop/vWSiGigwELhsKl6qB4PVB1xHmJ-itqTA4yO5HlzNeLsfNUmS" http:="" microsoft.com="" rel="sponsored" target="blank"><img http:="" microsoft.com="" src="http://boostaropro.shop/f7b53311476a1e4097.png" /></a><br /> <br /> <br /> <br />  </center> </body> </html> --6428c6cfd5268766b5807fc78e8e1e62_7255_25084--

| ver. 1.4 | Github | . | PHP 7.3.33 | Generation time: 0.09 | proxy | phpinfo | Settings