Tag: 爱上海app

Sterling out of England WC qualifiers

first_imgLONDON, England (AP): Injury has denied Raheem Sterling the chance to take his fine Manchester City form away with England. The 21-year-old winger has responded to a tough European Championship after which he called himself “the hated one” by flourishing under Pep Guardiola at City. Sterling has scored five goals in 10 appearances for City this season, but an unspecified injury means he will miss interim manager Gareth Southgate’s first matches in charge of England, against Malta and Slovenia. Andros Townsend had been named yesterday as Sterling’s replacement for the World Cup qualifiers, with the Crystal Palace winger returning to the England squad for the first time since the pre-Euro 2016 friendlies. The former Tottenham and Newcastle player will join the rest of the squad when they convene at their St George’s Park base in central England on Tuesday. England hosts Malta at Wembley Stadium on October 8, before playing away at Slovenia on October 11. Southgate is in temporary charge after Sam Allardyce’s contract was terminated last week after just one game and 67 days in the position. A British newspaper investigation showed Allardyce appearing to offer advice to fictitious businessmen on how to sidestep an outlawed player transfer practice, and also negotiating a £400,000 (US$519,000) public-speaking contract. Southgate has been promoted from the under-21 set-up until at least November when England also plays Scotland and Spain. “I’ve exchanged messages with Sam. It was important to thank him,” Southgate said. “I didn’t want to be seen as someone who was waiting in the wings for an opportunity. “After these seven weeks everyone can take a step back and think about what the future might be.”last_img read more


first_imgDanny McDaid runs through the tape to mark the official launch of the Donegal Marathon 2014 this evening.The countdown has officially started to the Donegal Marathon for 2014.The event, which takes place in Letterkenny on August 24th, was launched this evening at the local Town Council offices.Former Olympic athlete and event ambassador Danny McDaid officially ran through the red tape to launch the event. The chairman of the event, Cllr Dessie Larkin, told Donegal Daily he hoped this year’s event was just the start of what will become an annual event.The Donegal Marathon logo which was designed by LYIT Art and Design student Samantha McGinley from Letterkenny.“The amount of people out walking and jogging on the streets of Letterkenny and across Donegal is remarkable.“If we can harness that energy and entice them to come and take part in the Donegal Marathon, event to try the half marathon, then it’s going to be a huge success.“It’s hard to predict numbers but I would be hopeful of hundreds of people taking part in some shape or form be that the full marathon or half marathon,” said Cllr Larkin. The well-known and affable Letterkenny man admitted that he has never managed a marathon but quipped that he has managed a few Snickers in his day!His hopes for the event were echoed by fellow speakers including the Mayor of Donegal, Cllr Ian McGarvey, and Mayor of Letterkenny, Cllr Pascal Blake.Legendary runner Danny McDaid, the last person to win a marathon in Letterkenny when it was staged back in 1983, said he couldn’t believe it was 31 years since the last event.“It was a very proud moment for me running past my house and even better because I was alone,” laughed Danny.He paid tribute to the Donegal Marathon committee and encouraged as many people to take part as possible. Councillors and council officials help Danny launch the Donegal Marathon for 2014.Plans for the event are still gathering pace but Cllr Larkin promised a “completely professional approach” to the event right down to the quality of t-shirt and goodie bags for competitors.The event’s official website www.donegalmarathon.ie gives a complete breakdown of all that is needed for competitors from the actual route to tips for training as well as the vital registration forms.Donegal Daily will bring you regular updates on the Donegal Marathon for 2014 as the committee release them to us.HIGH HOPES FOR DONEGAL MARATHON 2014 AS LAUNCH ‘RUNS’ TO PLAN! was last modified: February 27th, 2014 by StephenShare 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:August 24Danny McDaidDonegal Marathon 2014letterkennylast_img read more

49ers draft: What do Nick Bosa, others defensive ends offer?

first_imgCLICK HERE if you are having a problem viewing the photos on a mobile deviceSANTA CLARA – Here is a look at not only the top draft prospects but others who might fit with the 49ers. Today’s category: defensive ends.HIGH-FIVE1. Nick Bosa, Ohio State (6-4, 266): His NFL genes and beefy frame — if healthy — make him an ideal bookend opposite edge rusher Dee Ford. Aside from his impressive but limited college film, the 49ers know him well from at least four pre-draft meetings. 2. Josh …last_img read more

Materialists Shoot Themselves in the Foot

first_imgIn science, it’s never wise to propose a self-refuting theory.The first two of three news stories give us practice in detecting self-refuting theories.  The third, the harder one, is for extra credit.Irrationality:  Everyone knows people who are crazy, but most of us pride ourselves in our ability to think clearly, employing reason and evidence.  Where did that ability to come from?  PhysOrg says, “Natural selection can favor irrational behavior.”  But if that is true, nobody could know rationality from irrationality without appealing to standards outside of evolution.  And if evolution (a mindless, irrational process) actually favors irrationality, then everybody is crazy – including the scientist who argues that natural selection can favor irrational behavior.Religion: Science Daily offered to explain how religion evolved.   Since religious belief is such a global phenomenon, “This has led scientists to speculate that there must be a biological basis for the evolution of religion in human societies,” Gopikrishna Deshpande of Auburn University thought, apparently assuming that if it’s biological, it’s not rational (since the product of unguided natural processes cannot be rational).  With that thought in his brain, he went looking for religious biology with functional MRI in other people’s brains.  What he didn’t see is the bullet hole in his own foot.  Since evolutionary beliefs are just as global as religious beliefs, there must be a biological basis for that, too – meaning his own belief is irrational, because it evolved by the same unguided processes.Consciousness:  A materialist claims to have solved “the hard problem” of consciousness (for explanation, see Michael Egnor and David Chalmers in Evolution News & Views).  Basically, it’s the question of how our subjective experience of the world arises from the physical brain.  If one can believe a news feature from Princeton, psychology professor Michael Graziano – a materialist – has solved it with a new theory.  In order to demystify any “magic” in the brain, his trick was to turn the question around:“The question has always been how does a brain produce the inner ‘magic.’ What we’re asking is, ‘How does the brain attribute magic to itself,’ and that’s a fundamentally different way to frame the question,” he said.“Every past theory of consciousness has a gap. Even the most modern theories at some point just point to a circuit and say, ‘And then awareness appears.’ But understanding where the magic comes from is pointless,” Graziano continued. “The phenomenon that scientists can say with certainty happens is that the brain attributes the ‘magic’ to itself. We can understand how that happens and the computations behind it. And that’s what this theory attempts to do.”The article proceeds to congratulate Graziano for “demystifying” consciousness and showing it to be just a creation of the brain.  No longer requiring an “unseen force,” consciousness can now be viewed as a physical consequence of neurobiology.  But can it?  Who is doing the viewing?  More on that later, but first, Aaron Schurger (Switzerland) tries to explain what Graziano’s “attention schema theory” tries to do:“The only thing for science to explain about consciousness is not, ‘Why is there something more inside of us, apart from just input, processing and output,’ but rather, ‘Why do we insist that there is something more inside of us,’” he said. “The answer given by Michael’s theory is that this is the way the brain describes the process of attention happening inside the brain itself. Even if the phenomenon being described is real, the description does not have to be real.”Since we attribute awareness to others, Graziano feels, we must be attributing it to ourselves as well.  Critics of his theory, he explains with some frustration, just don’t get what he’s trying to say:“People say, ‘Great, you’ve explained how brains claim to have magic inside them, but you haven’t explained the actual magic.’ That’s almost impossible to get people to see from the opposite perspective,” he said. “Ninety percent of the pushback comes from that belief in magic. It’s really almost like an ideological difference.“But perhaps they perceive more than he admits.  Graziano seems to be standing outside of his brain looking at it and other people’s brains from a privileged platform.  By appealing to explanation, he becomes the explainer, someone applying immaterial laws of logic.  In essence, he acts as an disembodied intelligent agent passing judgment: he judges that it is illogical to “insist that there is something more”.   But to make a judgment or to propose any theory is to appeal to the conceptual realm beyond the physical.His theory, therefore, becomes self-refuting: he needs to employ magic to claim there is no magic there.  Graziano realizes his theory may have an Achilles heel:“There are two questions to ask about this theory: First, does it provide an actual explanation, or does it just appeal to magic like so many other theories? And second, is it correct? The answer to the first question is yes,” he said. “As for the second, that’s up in the air. I’m very encouraged by it, but one never knows, I suppose.“One can rightly ask, who is doing the supposing?  Who is judging the theory to be provide an actual explanation?  Is that not a conflict of interest?  (If so, it tosses morality into the muddle.)  And if no one can ever know if his theory is correct, what differentiates his “explanation” from gobbledygook?If you practice the art of detecting self-refuting propositions, you can watch much of evolutionary theory evaporate.  Darwinists don’t realize that they suffer from a serious mental disorder known as the Yoda Complex (look it up in the Darwin Dictionary).  They pretend to be rational creatures, not evolved ones.  But the moment they try to argue that Darwinism is true, they shoot their feet.  Why?  One cannot get knowledge (a justified true belief) from causes that are, at their base, irrational.  G.K. Chesterson, Arthur Balfour, and C.S. Lewis understood this (also, more recently Alvin Plantinga has applied more rigor to the argument).  Learn more about this in Discovery Institute’s 2012 book, The Magician’s Twin: C.S. Lewis on Science, Scientism and Society. See more examples of the self-referential fallacy or self-refuting fallacy in our Baloney Detector.In his lectures, philosopher of science J.P. Moreland has elaborated on why one must avoid self-refuting propositions: they are necessarily wrong, he says: no amount of new information or evidence will ever make them right.  They are false, and they will always be false.  To find someone guilty of a self-refuting position, therefore, is to disarm them of making any truth claims.  Once that is done, it becomes superfluous to quibble about details; their “truth” claims are false claims, not worth pursuing further.Why do smart people keep committing this fallacy?  Evolutionists like Michael Graziano and the others we critique here are not stupid.  Don’t they see how they box themselves into absurdity with their evolutionary explanations?  Perhaps so, but perhaps not.  I believe it is because they are so committed to their evolutionary ideology, it blinds them to their fallacies.  They want so much to rid all science of the “supernatural,” the “magic” as Graziano puts it.  They feel they are doing mankind a favor by resolutely pursuing the Enlightenment ideal of “demystifying” nature.  Out must go all appeals to gods, angels, demons, spirits, and “unseen forces.”  What gets tossed out with it, they fail to notice, is their own spirit.  They gain the whole material universe and lose their own soul.But–and here’s the rub–if you lose your soul, you reduce yourself to matter.  The only tools at your disposal are unguided, aimless, irrational causes.  So out goes your claim to explain things scientifically.  You become an absurd, emergent thing wandering between a bang and a heat death.  The price of demystifying the universe is intellectual suicide.  Think about that when the next rabid creationist-hating Darwin doberman comes barking.  We get them here sometimes.  With righteous fury, they deny righteousness; standing haughtily on the pillar of rationality, they plant it in the air.Only the Biblical worldview provides the grounds for justified true belief.  Starting with God, who is rational and the source of all rationality, who is also good, and therefore trustworthy, we can anchor our explanations in the rational.  Our knowledge may never be exhaustive, but it can be genuine.  We can appeal to rationality and the laws of logic, because they are justified as real in the nature of God.  No other world view provides that anchor.Deep down, the evolutionists know better.  It’s obvious, Paul wrote in Romans 1:18-22.  By suppressing the truth (that is evidence in creation), they choose to become fools.  (See sophoxymoroniac in the Darwin Dictionary.)Exercise: Listing major world religions, find which ones purport to be rational.  Of those, which are not self-refuting?  (Hint: Greg Bahnsen is helpful on this.)  Example: when a Hindu says, “All is Maya, illusion” he cannot exempt Hinduism from being an illusion, too.  But if Hinduism is an illusion, it is necessarily false: all is not illusion – the statement refutes itself.Resource:  Dr. Jason Lisle’s talk, “The Ultimate Proof of Creation,” on YouTube, borrowing from Greg Bahnsen’s apologetics and Romans 1, explains worldview presuppositions and which ones provide knowledge. (Visited 414 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

Reduce vulnerability to increase competitiveness

first_img“A country’s competitiveness requires in part the efficient use of human resources – men and women alike,” writes Lynette Ntuli.As borders between countries become more permeable, nations look to strengthening their global competitiveness in order to access global markets for tourism, foreign direct investment, skills and more. But every country doing this must realise that its competitor countries are doing the same.South Africa must be vigilant in growing the equity of its nation brand and safeguarding its reputation as it strengthens its competitive advantages in the global marketplace. In our work to improve our competitiveness, social cohesion and equality are critical.Vulnerability, as a concept, can seem overly broad and abstract. After all, most people and most societies at different levels of development are vulnerable to adverse events and circumstances, not all of which can be anticipated or prevented. But vulnerability as a concept becomes less abstract when broken down into who is vulnerable, what are they vulnerable to and why.Vulnerability, according to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) 2014 Human Development Report, reduces the individual’s ability to manage their affairs, which weakens the foundations of society. The report looks at groups of people who are structurally the most vulnerable and the reasons for this vulnerability. Structural vulnerability is rooted in people’s position in society – their gender, ethnicity, race, job type or social status – and evolves and persists over long periods.Gender inequality in South AfricaAccording to the UNDP, South Africa ranks 94th in the world for gender equality, with a total inequality score of 0.461. (The best score, for Switzerland, is 0.021.) Women make up 41% of South Africa’s parliamentary representatives, while 72.7% of women aged 25 years or more have some secondary education, in contrast with 75.9% of men.The labour force participation rate for those aged 15 and older is 44.2% female and 60% male – a significant gap in a democratic society. Children aged up to 14 who live with HIV account for 410 000 of the population, while HIV prevalence amongst youth aged 15 to 24 stands at 13.9% for females and 3.9% for males.A key part of vulnerability is often an inability to influence decisions that affect one’s life. At the heart of true development is the choice to decide about the direction of your own life.This requires, the UNDP suggests, giving the poor and marginalised a greater voice in decision-making and opportunities for recourse when rights are violated or discrimination is encountered. Research suggests that women are more likely than men to suffer from negligence, petty corruption and harassment when they engage with state institutions.How does this relate to competitiveness?A country’s competitiveness requires in part the efficient use of human resources – men and women alike. The National Development Plan and its vision for a transformed South Africa in the year 2030 can only be implemented when women and children are no longer vulnerable to any form of abuse. This will not only impact on the development of our country, but will also increase equality between men and women, ultimately contributing to our reputation as a nation. We must therefore all play our part to stop the spread and acceptance of abuse, one person at a time. Count me in!Brand South Africa Play Your Part ambassador Lynette Ntuli is a founding director and chief executive of the property, asset and infrastructure development and solutions firm Innate Investment Solutions.last_img read more

Why 2011 May Be The Year For a Sustainable IPO Market

first_imgWhy Tech Companies Need Simpler Terms of Servic… 8 Best WordPress Hosting Solutions on the Market bernard lunn The IPO market may seem like a dim and distant picture for most entrepreneurs inthe hardscrabble world of an early stage start-up. How about “makingpayroll” as a big strategic objective? Or maybe your objective is “getenough money to pay for hosting, coffee and Ramen”?But a healthy IPO market, one that is sustainable, actually does matter to all ofus.We don’t have enough public market acquirers to sustain the start-up ecosystem.That was the real back story that explains why Google failed to close a deal to buyGroupon. Groupon wanted tosell to Google for $6 billion. Of course they did, that is a huge amount of money – real cold hard cash – for a 2 year oldventure. Do you really think they turned that down for the vague possibility ofmaking more from an IPO in the distant future? Yes we all hear the stories ofvisionary entrepreneurs who are such bold risk-takers and some of that is true butmost entrepreneurs don’t love risk, they love eliminating risk on the way tobuilding a venture.  The real story is that Groupon only backed off due to worries that the dealwould fall into AntiTrusthurdles.If we only have a handful of acquiring companies (basically today it is Google,Amazon and Microsoft, now that eBay and Yahoo are wounded), the AntiTrust hurdle becomes more real. Evenif there is no AntiTrustissue, Google, Amazon and Microsoft simply cannot buy all those venture-backedcompanies.So we need Groupon to go public and use their publiccurrency to buy other ventures working on local advertising/ecommerce. That will begood news for lots of ventures. And a Groupon IPO successwill spur on other ventures that are getting ready for IPO.I don’t know if Groupon really have the solidfinancials to go public. We won’t know until they issue their prospectus to theSEC. Until then we only have rumor and speculation. But if I were a betting man, Iwould bet on Groupon being able to go public beforeTwitter. And, this will be more controversial, before Facebook. But that as they say is another story. I am not trying hereto compile an actual list of ventures that could IPO in 2011. This is more about thegeneral environment for IPOs.This has been what Steve Blank calls the “lostdecade” for tech IPOs. So why do I think that 2011 will be the year thischanges? There are 5 reasons:Privatemarkets are under SEC scrutiny. This takes away the easy option of gettingliquidity without either selling or going public. If you have more than 500shareholders you have to make your financials public, it is the law.There is abacklog of great companies that have the financial strength to IPO. The IPO markethas been pretty well closed for a couple of years (some notable exceptions prove therule). So the companies that have the potential to IPO have had more time to grow andget their act together.Investorsare hungry for growth outside emerging markets. GDP in America and Europe seems tohave a ceiling at 3% and the Chindia and BRIC stories ofemerging markets growing at 8-10% has created too much capital flowing to thosemarkets (generating fears of a bubble). So investors want companies in the developedmarkets that can grow at really fast pace (at least 30%, ideally 60% plus) from abase of at least $100m revenue for a long time to come. That has to come primarilyfrom tech/media ventures.Themacroeconomic picture is improving. Yes, there are always worries and anothercrash is always possible, but “markets always climb a wall of worry” and the generaltrends seem positive. But cycles don’t last forever, so the people making thesedecisions (Boards and their Investment Bankers) will look at 2011 as a good window ofopportunity.The beancounters have figured out how to live with Sarbox. For a long time, Sarbanes Oxley (“Sarbox”) regulatory overhead has been seen as a reason why you cannotrun a public company. Baloney, as they say in Brooklyn. It is a simple bit ofoperational overhead, a rounding error for a great company.IPO is still the golden ticket. Real entrepreneurs want to IPO. Getting acquiredis a great way to build capital, but it is not the dream of the really driven,talented entrepreneurs. There are logical reasons for this. The valuation at IPO isusually (not always, plenty of exceptions to this rule) higher than you can get froman M&A exit. And more importantly for theentrepreneur, it is actually often easier to manage public market investors than abunch of VC with different agendas. But logical reasons be damned, an IPO is simplythe big badge of honor for the entrepreneur and the investors who back him/her.It is not clear what we will call the decade that starts in a few days time– the “teens” maybe – but it will possibly be one where weget a sustainable IPO market for tech ventures. By “sustainable” I meanthat it cannot be a return to the Dot Com bubble years. Only great companies withreally solid financials will get through the IPO gate. And the valuations will haveto remain grounded in reality (short sellers will ensure that is the case).Here’s hoping. Happy New Year folks. Tags:#business#web center_img Related Posts Top Reasons to Go With Managed WordPress Hosting A Web Developer’s New Best Friend is the AI Wai…last_img read more