Share:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window),According to CBS news: Know whom your defendingA criminal complaint was filed against Blake on July 6, charging him with felony third-degree sexual assault, misdemeanor criminal trespassing and misdemeanor disorderly conduct, according to Wisconsin Circuit Court records. He is accused of assaulting his ex-girlfriend, with whom he has three children.Blake was shot after officers were dispatched Sunday for a caller who reported that her boyfriend, who was not supposed to be on her premises, was present, according to the Wisconsin Department of Justice. The release did not specify what role Blake played in the original incident, but family attorney Benjamin Crump said he was attempting to break up a domestic dispute.Officials have not said if Sheskey was aware of Blake’s history at the time of the shooting.Sheskey and another officer, Vincent Arenas, deployed tasers in failed attempts to apprehend Blake, the Wisconsin Department of Justice said Friday. Image by Justin Gould / WNY News Now.JAMESTOWN – Organizers say a rally celebrating the accomplishments of the Jamestown Justice Collation will also focus on the continued work that needs to be done in order to properly reform policing not just nationwide, but locally as well.In an interview with WNYNewsNow Friday morning, Justin Hubbard, the Jamestown Justice Collation Coordinator, says the rally was scheduled to highlight achievements his group has made so far, however, it will now focus on a recent national shooting of Jacob Blake.Hubbard says even though police violence against black people doesn’t happen in Jamestown, it could.“We do not want to become the next Ferguson, Missouri or Kenosha, Wisconsin,” said Hubbard. “We are trying to work with the police in all areas and with our government to make sure we do not become the next area.” The rally is scheduled to take place Sunday at 2 p.m. at Dow Park across from the James Prendergast Library.
Would you like to read more?Register for free to finish this article.Sign up now for the following benefits:Four FREE articles of your choice per monthBreaking news, comment and analysis from industry experts as it happensChoose from our portfolio of email newsletters To access this article REGISTER NOWWould you like print copies, app and digital replica access too? SUBSCRIBE for as little as £5 per week.
Committed prisoner Delon Boucher received injuries about his body after he set fire to his mattress located in the Security Block of the New Amsterdam Prison.The incident occurred at around 19:15h on Thursday, according to Prison Director Gladwin Samuels.New Amsterdam PrisonHe said the fire was extinguished by prison officers on duty and later inspected by firefighters, who quickly responded.The prisoner, who was described as aggressive to first responders, received lacerations to his head and above his left eye. He received medical attention and is in a stable condition.Boucher, in 2015, hurled a bench at Magistrate Zamena Ali when she sentenced him to four years’ imprisonment. Reports indicate that he had also attacked and wounded a police detective in the Cove and John Station.
UPDATE: Sandy has come home safely, thanks to all who shared this post.An appeal has been launched to find a much-loved missing dog in Letterkenny. Sandy was last seen on Monday 11th March in the Ramelton Road/Ballyraine area of Letterkenny. She is 12 years old.Sandy’s owners are anxious to see her come back home safely.If anyone has any information please call Caitrina on 0861655232.Missing Dog Sandy – LetterkennyMissing Dog: Have you seen Sandy? was last modified: March 14th, 2019 by Rachel McLaughlinShare this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window) Tags:letterkennylost and foundMISSING DOG
apostle of Darwinian evolution, Ernst Mayr, turned 100 recently. His mind still sharp, he recounted in the July 2 issue of Science1 the battles that led to “Neo-Darwinism” in the 1940s. Surprising though it may be to some, there was no consensus on speciation, natural selection and other key evolutionary concepts for eighty years since Darwin published his book. Only in the 1940s did a compromise called the Neo-Darwinian Synthesis satisfy the majority of Darwinians. Neo-Darwinism still reigns today, despite strong minority positions such as punctuated equilibria and Gaia, along with a number of sects that deny certain aspects of the Synthesis. Mayr lays the background of his youthful acceptance of evolution:Curiously, I cannot pinpoint the age at which I became an evolutionist. I received all of my education in Germany, where evolution was not really controversial. In the gymnasium (equivalent to a U.S. high school), my biology teacher took evolution for granted. So, I am quite certain, did my parents–who, to interest their three teenage sons, subscribed to a popular natural history journal that accepted evolution as a fact. Indeed, in Germany at that time there was no Protestant fundamentalism. And after I had entered university, no one raised any questions about evolution, either in my medical curriculum or in my preparations for the Ph.D. Those who were unable to adopt creation as a plausible solution for biological diversity concluded that evolution was the only rational explanation for the living world.Nevertheless, he continues, “Even though creationism was not a major issue, evolutionary biology was nonetheless badly split by controversies,” namely, “the causation of evolutionary change and the validity of various theories of evolution.” These seem pretty all-encompassing. He describes some of the early battles:Philosophy of science: “… the philosophy of science at that time was totally dominated by physics and by typology (essentialism). This philosophy was appropriate for the physical sciences but entirely unsuitable as a foundation for theories dealing with biological populations….”Sub-issues: “…the paradigm of Darwinian evolution was not a single theory, as Darwin always insisted, but was actually composed of five quite independent theories. Two of these were readily accepted by the Darwinians: the simple fact of evolution (the ‘non-constancy of species’ as Darwin called it) and the branching theory of common descent. The other three–gradual evolution, the multiplication of species, and natural selection–were accepted by only a minority of Darwin’s followers. Indeed, these three theories were not universally accepted until the so-called Evolutionary Synthesis of the 1940s.”International rivalry: “Superimposed on these conceptual differences were others that arose because of the preferences of evolutionists in different countries. The evolutionary theories considered valid in England or in France were rejected in Germany or the United States. One powerful author in a particular country often could determine the thinking of all his fellow scientists.”Interdisciplinary rivalry: “Finally, different evolutionary theories were often favored by scholars in different branches of biology–say, genetics, or developmental biology, or natural history.”Gradual vs. jerky change: “We naturalists thought that evolution was indeed a gradual process, as Darwin had always insisted. Our material provided hundreds of illustrations of widespread species that gradually changed throughout their geographic range. By contrast, most early Mendelians, impressed by the discontinuous nature of genetic changes (‘mutations’), thought that these mutations provided evidence for a saltational origin of new species.”Biodiversity: The founders of population genetics accepted natural selection, but “Several historians have mistakenly thought that this synthesis within genetics had solved all the problems of Darwinism. That assumption, however, failed to take account of an important gap. One of the two major branches of evolutionary biology, the study of the origin of biodiversity, had been left out of the major treatises of Fisher, Haldane, and Wright.” Mayr claims that this problem had been solved by European taxonomists.Paradox and schism: “Thus, evolutionary biology around 1930 found itself in a curious position. It faced two major seemingly unsolved problems: the adaptive changes of populations and the origin of biodiversity.” For instance, “As a student in Germany in the 1920s, I belonged to a German school of evolutionary taxonomists that was unrepresented in the United States. Our tradition placed great stress on geographic variation within species, and particularly on the importance of geographic isolation and its role in leading to the origin of new species. It accepted a Lamarckian inheritance of newly acquired characters but simultaneously accepted natural selection as facilitating gradual evolution. We decisively rejected any saltational origin of new species, as had been postulated by DeVries.”Object of selection: “The two belief systems had only one inconsistency—the object of natural selection. For the geneticists the object of selection had been the gene since the 1920s, but for most naturalists it was the individual. Elliot Sober showed how one could resolve this conflict. He pointed out that one must discriminate between selection of an object and selection for an object.”Mayr claims that the taxonomists and the population geneticists had solved parts of the problem; all that remained was to get the parties together. That compromise was achieved by Theodosius Dobzhansky with Mayr’s assistance. He claims the neo-Darwinian synthesis that resulted has been remarkably stable, even through the discovery of DNA and the revolution in molecular genetics, but part of that stability has been due to enforcement: “At a meeting in Princeton in 1947, the new paradigm was fully acknowledged and it was confirmed again and again in the next 60 years. Whenever an author claimed to have found an error in the Synthesis, his claim was rapidly refuted.” In his conclusion, Mayr notes that new battles have arisen over allopatric vs. sympatric speciation, the enormous amount of biodiversity, and non-allopatric genetic mechanisms such as “speciation by hybridization, by polyploidy and other chromosome rearrangements, by lateral gene transfer, and by symbiogenesis.” He regrets he will not be able to continue exploring the new frontiers of evolutionary biology.1Ernst Mayr, “80 Years of Watching the Evolutionary Scenery,” Science, Vol 305, Issue 5680, 46-47, 2 July 2004, [DOI: 10.1126/science.1100561].Did you know that believers in natural selection were in the minority in the 1920s, and that many evolutionists believed in rapid, saltational change instead of gradualism? You heard one of the living legends of Darwinism, Ernst Mayr, say it himself. Notice how nothing has changed. Early 20th century evolutionists disagreed on the mechanism of evolution (natural selection, Lamarckism or other) on the pace of evolution (gradual vs. saltational), and on mechanism of speciation. Those seem like pretty major issues. How can Darwin’s hunch rise above the status of hypothesis without answers to these questions? The only things they agreed on were: (1) evolution is a fact, and (2) things change. The same controversies go on today. Evolutionists fight over how species split into two, how fast things happen, and the role of natural selection, and other major issues, but they still dogmatically claim that (1) evolution is a fact, and (2) things change. The first is belief, not science, and the second is too vague to be called science; even creationists acknowledge that things change. It does not follow that humans had bacteria ancestors. Mayr’s account sounds less like a scientific law emerging from the evidence, and more like a victory of two major factions of storytellers over rivals, until they agreed to give a little and meet in the middle (thesis vs. antithesis -> Synthesis). The antagonists came to a compromise, and hashed out new talking points for the students: “Father Charlie was right about gradualism and natural selection, but Mendel has helped forge an even better story: mutations provide the raw material for variation, then natural selection preserves the fittest. We will call this neo-Darwinism.” Students, attracted to anything that is Neo, thought this was cool. The official sound bite for reporters became, “We may have some disagreements about the mechanism of evolution, but all scientists agree evolution is a fact.” These short, glittering mythoids sufficed to keep most peasants compliant. Those interested in the relation of Mendel to Darwin will find this paragraph interesting:When Mendel’s laws were rediscovered in 1900, there was widespread hope that they would lead to a unification of the conflicting theories on speciation. Unfortunately, it turned out that the three geneticists most interested in evolution–Bateson, DeVries, and Johannsen–were typologists and opted for a mutational origin (by saltation) of new species. Worse, they rejected gradual evolution through the natural selection of small variants. For their part, the naturalists erroneously thought that the geneticists had achieved a consensus based on saltational speciation, and this led to a long-lasting controversy between the naturalists and the early Mendelians.Long-lasting, all right; it was about 47 years after this “rediscovery” of a 33-year old paper (70 years total) before the Darwinians found a way to incorporate Mendel’s inconvenient laws of discrete inheritance into their story. Textbooks present Darwin as if his ideas were so intuitively obvious that late 19th century scientists instantly saw the light and embraced it, and lived happily ever after. As we know from frequent reports on Darwinism and Evolutionary Theory in these pages, controversies still rage about the mechanisms of evolution, the pace of evolution, the mechanism of speciation and the origin of complex structures. Nothing has advanced except the power of the Darwin Party to enforce their views. How tragic to hear that the Reformation was dead in Germany by the time Mayr went to school. The country where Martin Luther had taken his brave stand on the Word of God had cast off its heritage for a radical revolutionary, Ernst Haeckel, who replaced it with the Word of Charlie. The early Protestant reformers had the will to withstand the Catholic counter-reformation, but their heirs, asleep at the switch, let the Darwinian revolution take over with hardly a word of protest. So now the revolution has become the mainstream, controlling the propaganda outlets, the universities, the schools and the official creation myths of the culture. The rallying cry for the Darwinian revolution is “just-so storytelling by faith, not by lab work.” Instead of A Mighty Fortress Is Our God, the official anthem is (to the tune of For He’s a Jolly Good Fellow), “We all take Charlie for granted (3x), which nobody can deny.” Try to deny it and face the wrath of the counter-reformation (see 08/19/2003 headline).(Visited 15 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
Light It UpThe main feature of the ASTRA is the backlight, which is customizable to five different light levels. I personally love backlit keyboards. After using a backlit keyboard for the first time on a Macbook Pro, I couldn’t go back. As an editor, I often work in dimly lit edit suites. At my previous job, they had a keyboard with two small USB-powered lights attached to the keyboard, and I really didn’t like that setup. I definitely would’ve preferred the ASTRA. Backlit keyboards are the way to go. Speaking of go, if you’re on the move and want to bring the ASTRA with you, check out the LogicGo Keyboard Bag.If you’re a fan of keyboard shortcuts and backlit keyboards, you really can’t go wrong with the ASTRA.Which editing keyboard do you prefer? Let us know in the comments. Durability and DesignLogicKeyboard products are beautiful — both the packaging and the products. I’ve been using a LogicSkin on my Macbook Pro for several months now, and I can’t even tell you how many times people have noticed and asked about it. This is because the skin is so colorful. Both the LogicSkin and the new ASTRA keyboard use color-coded keys to categorize and group keyboard shortcuts. This makes the shortcuts easily identifiable when editing. In addition to the beautiful design, the ASTRA is also very durable. When you hold and use the ASTRA, it truly feels like a very high-quality product. Ease of UseThe ASTRA is a breeze to use. It is plug and play — no drivers required. It comes with two USB connectors, one for the keyboard and one for a USB hub. You will find two additional USB ports on the back of the keyboard. When you aren’t using your software application, the ASTRA functions as a standard keyboard. If you are confused with any of the keyboard shortcuts, simply look them up in the ASTRA documentation, which explains every shortcut in detail. In addition to the color-coded system, it uses icons on each key. I find it much easier to quickly reference a shortcut visually with an icon. Tired of editing in the dark? Let LogicKeyboard’s new Backlit ASTRA light your way.LogicKeyboard offers a wide variety of keyboards for both Mac and PC. You can pick up a backlit ASTRA keyboard for Premiere Pro, Media Composer, Pro Tools, Final Cut, and a handful of other brands. The nice folks over at LogicKeyboard sent me an ASTRA series designed specifically for Premiere Pro on the Mac. I’ve had some time to tinker with it, so here are my thoughts on this wonderful product.
Touch Football Singapore is hosting the 2014 ‘All Schools’ Challenge from Friday, 26 September until Sunday, 28 September 2014. Under 14’s and 16’s divisions will be staged in Boys and Girls divisions, while Youth 19’s divisions will cater for Boys, Girls and Mixed divisions. For more information, please click on the following attachments. To register your Expression of Interest, please visit the following website – www.touchsingapore.org. Related Filesinternational_schools_singapore_2014-jpgtfa_international_touring_framework-pdfRelated LinksSingapore All Schools
Twitter/@bmweezy13Even the biggest Cam Newton supporters can admit that yesterday’s Super Bowl wasn’t his finest moment. The NFL MVP failed to dive for a fumble with his Carolina Panthers down just six points late in the game, and afterwards, he left his press conference after a few minutes and few substantive answers. Obviously, Cam wasn’t thrilled after losing the biggest game of his career, but that may not be the only reason for his quick presser exit.Video shows that Denver Broncos cornerback Chris Harris was giving his own conference near by, and some of his comments may have caused Cam to leave so abruptly.It appears Cam Newton was irritated by Chris Harris’ nearby presser. May have led to him walking out of his presser. pic.twitter.com/kLpSTrtY14— Cameron Wolfe (@CameronWolfe) February 8, 2016Here’s another video, with more clear audio:THIS is why Cam walked out (listen to what’s being said in the background). pic.twitter.com/6LdLFwv8tj— Brian (@bmweezy13) February 8, 2016Harris was discussing the Broncos’ gameplan, during which he openly questions Newton’s ability to throw the ball on Denver’s fantastic secondary.That was Chris Harris talking in the background. Here’s the full quote. pic.twitter.com/ifTVQKWHF5— Brian (@bmweezy13) February 8, 2016This doesn’t excuse Newton, but again, it was probably the most difficult moment of his career, and he had to sit there while a player that just beat him is loudly discussing his failures as a quarterback. Most of us probably wouldn’t have handled the situation any better. Newton will learn from yesterday’s game, and the criticism that came from the events afterward.
Bahamas DPM Turnquest, as IDB Governor, Talks Technology and Climate Change Resilience at IDB Conclave Facebook Twitter Google+LinkedInPinterestWhatsAppKINGSTON, Sept. 8 (JIS):Measures being implemented by Government should see a reduction in the number of Jamaicans, who receive welfare support, over the next two years.The Ministry of Labour and Social Security is introducing a $600 million welfare-to-work programme for some 2,000 beneficiaries of the Programme of Advancement Through Health and Education (PATH).The initiative will be carried out under the Steps-To-Work programme, which targets working age members of families on PATH, providing them with training and on-the-job experience to enable them to seek and retain employment. “Looking ahead, the Steps-to-Work Programme will support the Ministry’s graduation strategy, which will see some 1,000 PATH families (or about 2,000 individuals) participating in the phased implementation of a welfare-to-work programme,” explained Portfolio Minister, Hon. Derrick Kellier.He was speaking recently at the official closing ceremony for the 2014 Steps-to-Work summer camp held at the Chestervale Youth Camp in Eco Village, St. Andrew.A total of 111 at-risk youth from PATH beneficiary households island-wide, received skills and development training at this year’s camp.The camp provided an opportunity for school dropouts to develop literacy and job skills to re-enter the school system or seek employment.Minister Kellier said that the Steps-to-Work Programme is about graduating people from welfare to well-being. “PATH and Steps-to-Work are important elements of the National Social Protection Strategy, and are recognition of the powerful outcome that is possible when the country invests in human capital,” Minister Kellier said. Recommended for you Related Items:jamaica, ministry of labour and social security, path Facebook Twitter Google+LinkedInPinterestWhatsApp Two boys die, bicycle and van collide in St. Catherine, Jamaica Jamaica’s Senate Begins debate on National Identification and Registration Bill