The semi-finals of the Knockavoe 575 and the NWGOBA 525 are the feature races at tonight’s greyhound meeting at Lifford Stadium.There are 12 races on the card and the runners are (first race 8.00pm):Race 1 (350 yards): 1, Swanson Cash; 2, Corner Plane; 3, Lisbuoy Fire; 4, Freddys Trooper; 5, Avenue Vans; 6, Toogoodtoobeat. Race 2 Buy a Buster 350 (350 yards0): 1, Macruso; 2, Moss Bob; 3, Cushie Willow; 4, Supersonic; 5, Cloneen Dynamo; 6, Fanore Blue.Race 3 Booking Office 525 (525 yards): 1, Tullna Island; 3, Blackstone Maxx; 4, Sold Cola; 5, Killacolla Babe; 6, Collins.Race 4 Lifford €10 Sizzler Deal 350 (350 yards): 1, Coldwater Aoife; 2, Tommys Loch; 3, Deerpark Jenny; 4, Ballybun Oshea; 5, Pretty Lilymay; 6, Ardnasool Rio.Race 5 NWGOBA 525 semi-final (525 yards): 1, Hather For Luck; 2, Mineola Maximus; 3, Mullrook Dabhoyo; 4, Imperial Falcon; 5, Greenville Glory; 6, Smurfing Oddball. Race 6 NWGOBA 525 semi-final (525 yards): 1, Hather If; 2, Flagfield Band; 3, Smurfing Manx; 4, Battle Born; 5, Ballyhill Stream; 6, Button Jo.Race 7 Lifford €15 Special 525 (525 yards): 1, Tahina Ace; 2, Fridays Brett; 3, Belindas Cruise; 4, Hather Two Bake; 5, Budders Luck; 6, Burnpark Lee.Race 8 Ultimate Dining Experience 350 (350 yards): 1, Do It Ruso; 2, Lisnastrane Dude; 3, Drumsna Major; 4, Titanic Bound; 5, Blackhall Hero; 6, Crash the Party.Race 9 www.liffordgreyhounds.com 525 (525 yards): 1, Gilti Aero; 2, Wrong Note; 3, Fridays Maybe; 4, Hather Bonnie; 5, Colarhouse Bound; 6, Do It Boy.Race 10 Knockavoe 575 semi-final (575 yards): 1, Hanoras Dream; 2, Bua Pakie; 3, Spinning River; 4, He Tells Lies; 5, Spotty Totty; 6, Ballybun Glen. Race 11 Knockavoe 575 semi-final (575 yards): 1, Whiterock Diva; 2, Storm Warrior; 3, Drumsna Canyon; 4, Edels Ace; 5, Hi Beak; 6, Gortkelly Turbo.Race 12 The Getting Out 575 Bumper Stakes (575 yards): 1, Hi Dibbles; 2, Ill Get That; 3, Turbine Tulip; 4, Crossleigh Thyme; 5, Colarhouse Lady; 6, Another Choice.GREYHOUND RACING: TONIGHT’S LIFFORD CARD was last modified: August 16th, 2014 by johngerardShare 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:greyhoundLiffordRacing
The Intelligent Design movement took another lashing by the journal Science,1 in the form of three book reviews by Steve Olson, a Washington DC area science writer. Olsen reviewed one pro-ID book, Darwin, Design and Public Education by John Angus Campbell and Stephen C. Meyer, and two anti-ID books, God, the Devil and Darwin by Niall Shanks, and Creationism’s Trojan Horse by Barbara Forrest and Paul R. Gross. A flavor of Olson’s rhetoric: “Shanks… deftly skewers the scientific pretensions of intelligent design creationists. He is particularly effective in demolishing the claims of creationist William Dembski….” Olson calls the faithful to holy war:Resistance to the teaching of evolution is not going to fade away. On the contrary, creationism appears again to be in a period of ascendancy. Science educators must try to understand and come to terms with the viewpoints and passions of those who feel threatened by the teaching of evolution in public schools. They also must be well informed to continue to resist the inclusion of religiously motivated ideas in science curricula.1Steve Olson, “Evolution and Creationism: Shapes of a Wedge,” Science Vol 304, Issue 5672, 825-826, 7 May 2004, [DOI: 10.1126/science.1097382].Saddam Hussein talked tough when he had the power to torture any opponent, but when he met his match, he cowered in a hole. Evolutionists are such cowards. If you thought for a moment they were interested in the truth, then why don’t they invite Dembski to review the anti-ID books? It’s always loyal D.P. (Darwin Party) comrades who get to pummel the straw men when reviewing pro-ID books, and cheer their champions when reviewing anti-ID books. Science, when touching on these subjects, is the Al Jazeera of Charlie worship. It broadcasts the weaknesses of its enemies, but hides the genocides of its imams. It rallies jihad against anyone who questions their sacred dogmas or threatens their pantheistic worldview. Dembski can take care of himself. The master swordsman in The Design Revolution: Answering the Toughest Questions About Intelligent Design (IVP, 2004) and previous books, he deftly parries the “skewering” that Shanks and Olson bluff about, and doesn’t need our help, nor do Meyer and the other ID leaders. Their arguments are weightier and better stated than our few responses here. Olson launches the usual stereotypes. It gets so tiring when they won’t listen. All the usual tactics, the usual fear-mongering, the usual loaded words, the usual hidden agendas, the usual guilt by association rhetoric must be swept aside when looking for any argument of merit. Strangely, Olson accuses ID of being aligned with radical deconstructionists. What? If anyone is removed from the demands of evidence, it is the Darwinists, whose flexible just-so storytelling method of science can explain away any problem. Olson faintly admires Campbell’s “fine rhetorical flourish” and “the sophistication of those opposed to the teaching of evolution,” but only in the sense of watching a good actor, not admiring the substance of his arguments. But he cannot help but admit that “The volume’s legal, pedagogical, and social arguments–in contrast to much of its scientific discussion–are nuanced and informed.” How to respond to this artful rhetoric, he asks, which he fears will “play well with legislators and school board members”?Scientists face a dilemma in deciding how to respond to anti-evolutionists. Demonstrating the scientific errors committed by creationists requires a thorough familiarity with their claims. But studying intelligent design hypotheses can be frustrating because they seem so obviously inspired by nonscientific considerations. When rebutted, intelligent design theorists tend to ignore the objections, claim that all will be revealed in the future [sic; Dembski’s detailed response has been in print three months now, with years of responses by all ID leaders in print, on tape, on film, on radio, and on the web], or rework their arguments to draw the same conclusions in a slightly different way [Darwinists, of course, never do this]. Essentially, the worldviews of scientists and intelligent design theorists fail to intersect. Scientists seek to explain the natural world, whereas creationists seek to find unexplainable mysteries in the natural world. Sometimes, scientists may be tempted simply to ignore the entire affair.Stop right there. This is so lame and so hypocritical. It has all the flavor of the Pharisees discussing among themselves how to respond to Jesus’ clever “render unto Caesar” answer – “if we say this, he’ll say that, if we say that, he’ll say this, but if we say nothing, the people will stone us. I wish he would just go away.” Not feeling that “science” (read: the priesthood of Darwin) is yet threatened, Olson is just annoyed at these pesky neighborhood brats, the “creationists” that keep coming back and disturbing his tea, not listening to them trying to warn him his house is on fire. He’s right about the worldview differences; trouble is, he equates (that is, equivocates) “science” with naturalistic philosophy. “Scientists seek to explain the natural world,” he claims (as if creationists and design theorists do not, forgetting that Kepler, Newton, Maxwell and so many other great scientists were design theorists), but he means they restrict themselves to natural causes (chance and necessity) and rule out, a priori, intelligent causes. The claim that “creationists seek to find unexplainable mysteries in the natural world” is a bald lie cloaked in loaded words. Intelligent causes are the only explanation for coded messaging and complex specified information. That is no mystery. It is already a practical truth in forensics, cryptography, archeology and SETI. That lie is only superseded by this one: “Advocates of intelligent design have produced no evidence that anything other than naturally occurring mechanisms is responsible for the empirically observed world.” Anybody home? Watch this film… again. Since we know Olson is already cheering for Shanks, it is a bit surprising to see him worried that his Goliath is ignoring the sling. He asserts without elaboration that Shanks has skewered Dembski’s law of “conservation of information,” but then sees his champion’s forehead unprotected: “However, Shanks offers relatively little advice about how to respond to the demand that science educators ‘teach the controversy.’ In fact, by focusing on the more extreme social ambitions of creationists, he sometimes overlooks their less divisive and therefore stronger arguments.” He must have read something that bothered him. Most of Olson’s bluff consists of unmasking the hidden agenda of creationists, as if the D.P. motives are pure as the new fallen snow. He delights in Forrest and Gross holding up all the evidence of subversive religious public relations activity by the ID conspirators. What if they’re onto something? We’d like to hear more about those ”less divisive and therefore stronger arguments.” After all, they don’t want to conquer the D.P. regime with weapons of mass destruction; they just want to teach the controversy, to get the scientific evidence out into the open marketplace of ideas for discussion. They want to show the captives, who have heard only the party line about the usual icons (Haeckel’s embryos, melanism, the origin of life, the Cambrian explosion–items which Olson lists), the rest of the story: the facts admitted in the scientific journals but carefully filtered for mass consumption. Olson can’t allow that: he knows exactly what will happen:According to polls (which are themselves controversial in this area), relatively few people in the United States believe that God played no role in the evolution of human beings from other life forms. Fortunately, many Americans are adept at recognizing a material and a nonmaterial dimension to life, and usually they succeed in keeping the two domains separate. But when individuals are forced to choose, such as through a ballot initiative, science [read: the Darwin Party line] almost invariably suffers.Since the pigs at the Darwinian Animal Farm control the media and train the dogs, you have to attend the private councils with the other animals to know what’s really going on. Don’t despair over the power of the regime. Since the incessant news about molecular motors, biological codes and sudden appearance of complex organisms is screaming in their ears, it will only be a matter of time before their Dagon falls over face-first toward the ark of evidence.(Visited 14 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
“If there’s anyone who knows how to turn teams around in a very short time, it is Gordon,” he told IOL’s Matshelane Mamabolo. ‘The bigger picture’“The bigger picture is the 2013 Afcon tournament and qualifying us for Brazil 2014 World Cup,” Nematandani said. “All I can say to you all is that I’m going to do my very best to make us all proud.” “At the end of the day, it was a unanimous decision and we think the final verdict was in the best interest of the nation.” “I feel very honoured and privileged to be in charge of an asset like the national football team,” Igesund said at the press conference at Safa House. Unrivalled PSL coaching recordIgesund owns a Premier Soccer League (PSL) coaching record that is unrivalled, having led four clubs to titles: Manning Rangers in the PSL’s inaugural season in 1996/97, Orlando Pirates in 2000/01, Santos in 2001/02 and Sundowns in 2006/07. Most recently he led unfancied Moroka Swallows to a runner-up finish in the past PSL season. ‘He’ll have them delivering’“Gordon knows how players think and is able to find out what makes them tick. He knows how to treat them as individuals and get them playing at their best. He’ll do that with Bafana and have them delivering.” Igesund’s assistants have not yet been named and speculation is that Komphela will stay with Bafana in that role. The contract comes with a mandate to achieve two things: to make at least the semi-finals of the 2013 African Cup of Nations, which South Africa will be hosting, and to qualify for the 2014 Fifa World Cup. It won’t be easy, given Bafana’s poor record in big competitions in recent years. The search for a coach began with five men in the running. The others, apart from Igesund Komphela, and were SuperSport United’s Gavin Hunt, Neil Tovey of Thanda Royal Zulu and former Bafana Bafana coach Shakes Mashaba, who now coach the national under-23 team. “He is amazing at raising players’ morale and confidence, and right now, we all can see that Bafana’s confidence is at an all-time low. He’s the ideal man to get them motivated. He also called on Bafana Bafana supporters to give Igesund time to make his mark and not judge him on forthcoming away friendlies against Brazil in September and against Poland in October. What that record shows is that Igesund is able to get results out of players at underdog teams, such as Rangers and Santos, and out of players at big name clubs, such as Pirates and Sundowns. That augurs well for his tenure because, many agree, it is man management that will be needed to achieve better results, and that is one of the new Bafana coach’s strengths. 2 July 2012 Gordon Igesund was named the new coach of South Africa’s national football team, Bafana Bafana, in Johannesburg on Saturday. He has been handed a two-year contract. Commenting on the choice of Igesund over interim Bafana coach and former coach Pitso Mosimane’s assistant Steve Komphela, Safa President Kirsten Nematandani said: “It was not an easy decision as both coaches are well-equipped to take Bafana Bafana forward. The right man for the jobFormer Bafana Bafana player Clinton Larsen, who coaches Bloemfontein Celtic, won PSL titles under Igesund with Rangers and Pirates. He believes, despite the tough job Igesund has been given of uplifting a team that has severely underperformed, that his former boss is the right man for the job. Would you like to use this article in your publication or on your website? See: Using SAinfo material
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest Tying up financing that is needed for operating costs, such as equipment, can lead to trouble down the road. Farmers can potentially run out of operating credit before harvest and have to pass up a good opportunity because they don’t have cash or credit available. So, how can producers plan ahead for equipment purchases instead?“It’s best to plan out machinery purchases well in advance and secure sufficient financing for those purchases to avoid losing money because of financing costs, said Vince Bailey, Senior Vice President of Ag Underwriting with Farm Credit Mid- America. “Farmers can also consider a lease that offers a lower annual payment, combined with a limited down payment requiring less cash up front.”Bailey says that operating lines of credit are designed to accommodate short-term purchases like input costs and therefore have a higher interest rate and that paying a percentage point higher to finance a long-term purchase can have unforeseen long- term costs.For more financial tips, insights and perspectives from Farm Credit Mid-America visit e-farmcredit.com/insights.AUDIO: The Ohio Ag Net’s Ty Higgins visits with Farm Credit Mid-America’s Vince Bailey about planning for an equipment purchase.FCMA Vince Bailey 8.21.17
Why Tech Companies Need Simpler Terms of Servic… A Web Developer’s New Best Friend is the AI Wai… frederic lardinois Related Posts Tags:#Browsers#Google#news#web 8 Best WordPress Hosting Solutions on the Market Within the next two weeks, Google will release a new development version of Google Chrome that will include the ability to sync bookmarks between different computers. As Tim Steele, a software engineer on the Chrome team explained in a message to the Chrome developer group, the synchronization will be managed through a Google account. Changes in one install will be reflected in another Chrome instance in real time thanks to the Chrome team’s use of the Google Talk servers as the messaging backend for this service.For now, Google will only sync bookmarks. In the long run, the Chrome team also plans to sync other data types, including browser history. In the announcement, the Chrome team did not specify if passwords will be synced as well. With Weave, Mozilla Labs currently offers a very similar feature, though Weave hasn’t made it into the default install of Firefox yet. In the past, Google also offered a synchronization plugin for Firefox, but the company discontinued this service in December 2008. Link to Chrome OS?Of course, we can’t help but wonder if this work isn’t also being done in preparation for the upcoming release of the Google Chrome OS. A lot of the work to get Chrome to sync between different instances is being done at the backend. If Google could get its netbook OS to seamlessly sync with applications on the desktop, then that would be yet another selling point for the Chrome OS.Privacy?Chances are that you are already storing your search history on Google’s servers. With Chrome’s synchronization feature, however, you would also store a complete record of all of your comings and going on other parts of the Internet on Google’s servers. Mozilla Weave encrypts your data before it is synced with Mozilla’s servers. In today’s announcement, the Chrome team did not talk about encryption, though we would be surprised if Google didn’t implement client-side encryption as well. For some users, though, giving even more information to Google – even if it is encrypted – may turn out to be a deal breaker. Get the Dev Channel Release (if you dare)For now, only users who have installed Chrome’s developer version and are subscribed to the Dev channel will see these new features. The Chrome Dev channel is the most frequently updated, cutting-edge version of Chrome, but these version are also far less stable than those in the more mainstream Beta and Stable channels. If you would like to switch to the Dev channel, instructions for installing this version of Chrome can be found here. Top Reasons to Go With Managed WordPress Hosting
- No Comments on Stopped him in his tracks Outrage after expro hockey player kills grizzly
- Posted on
A former professional hockey player is facing a backlash after he posted photos of a massive dead grizzly bear he hunted in Yukon.Tim Brent, who was born in Ontario and played for several teams in the NHL, shared the photos on Facebook and Twitter.“So this is the Mountain Grizzly Bear!” he said in a Sept. 10 post. “It was very easy to tell by his posturing that this boar owned the valley we were hunting and wasn’t scared of anything!“My heart felt like it was pounding out of my chest, but the 30 Nosler did the job and stopped him in his tracks. Couldn’t be more thrilled to take a world-class mountain grizzly in one of the most beautiful settings in the world!!!”In another post a couple days later, Brent posted a photo of himself with a moose he killed.“The stars definitely aligned in the Yukon when I spotted this giant bull in the willows,” he wrote. “I am thankful and I will never forget this moment in time, with family, in the most beautiful place on earth. This is a moose of a lifetime!!!”The posts of him posing with the dead animals have sparked criticism and threats from other social media users — including one suggesting they should get a Mexican cartel to “put a hit” on him and see how he felt.Brent said in another post that he reported the tweet, but Twitter didn’t see it as a threat.“This is what we are up against as hunters and conservationists!” he wrote last Friday. “These are the types of messages I am getting on Twitter in response to my moose and bear hunts. I would love to know what constitutes a threat or abuse for Twitter?”Brent has not responded to a request for comment.Officials with the Yukon government didn’t respond to questions about the outrage, but confirmed the fall hunting season for grizzlies runs from Aug 1. to Nov. 15. They say it’s legal to shoot moose from Aug. 1 to Oct. 31.In the emailed statement, they said a non-resident Canadian hunter would need to use an outfitter or a special guide to hunt for a black bear, grizzly bear or moose in Yukon.There’s an estimated 6,000 to 7,000 grizzly bears in Yukon.Earlier this year, outdoor television host Steve Ecklund’s cougar hunt in Alberta led to a similar controversy — prompting Laureen Harper, wife of former prime minister Stephen Harper, to suggest Ecklund had a small penis — after he bragged about it on social media.Similar outrage followed the killing of No. 148, a well-known Banff grizzly bear, by a hunter in British Columbia last summer.Both kills were legal, but prompted a debate about the cultural divide that exists about hunting large carnivores.Hunters often defend the hunt as tradition and a way to put food on the table, while others say predator meat isn’t very tasty so they are often killed for their trophy items.