Caymanas Park Results for October 17, 2016Track Condition : Dirt : GoodRace 1 1000 M (S) (Purse $530,000) NB4-Y-O & UP RESTRICTED ALLOWANCE V(NW2) – F&MALEX’S IMPORT BODY PARTS DEPARTMENT PLAQUE1. *MAMETA SEllis 54.02. RISING POWER AntThomas4 49.0 121/2L3. CHEXIMAKIT BebHarvey2 52.0 Neck4. STAROFTHETOWN AndreePowell4 52.0 13/4LWIN: $67.00PLACE: $54.00, $99.00, $88.00Final Time : 1:00.3 Splits : 23.1, 46.4, ,Winner : 4yo b filly – STORM CRAFT out of BISCAYNE STARR byTrainer : NUNES,ANTHONY C Owner : STEPHAN A NARINESINGHBred by PHILLIPS, O’NEILQuinella : (3,4) $276.00 Exacta : (4-3) $295.00Trifecta : (4-3-5) $263.00NORMAN MANLEY MEMORIAL CUPRace 2 1000 M (R) (Purse $530,000) 3-Y-O & UP CLM($250,0-$210,0)/NB5YO-NW2 & 6YO&UP-NW41. TWO STEPS UP DenBrown 54.02. *WARRIOR PRINCESS JInnis3 52.0 2L3. WILLINSTON MWard4 48.0 11/4L4. ABOGADO JPatterson2 54.0 NeckLate scratch : #1 REGGAE GOLD, #7 QUEEN OF THE TOWNWIN: $131.00PLACE: REFUNDFinal Time : 1:02.3 Splits : 23.3, 48.2, ,Winner : 5yo b colt – TRADITIONAL out of HISHI BLOSSOM by MACHO UNOTrainer : MARKLAND,O’NEIL D Owner : O’NEIL D MARKLANDBred by HAM STABLES LTD.Quinella : (3,6) $133.00 Exacta : (3-6) $298.00D/E : (4-3) $143.00Trifecta : (3-6-4) $804.00Race 3 1300 M (Purse $590,000) 3-Y-O & UP CLM($450,0-$400,0)/NB5YO – NW4ALEX’S IMPORT TRANSMISSION DEPARTMENT PLAQUE1. *STORMING DDawkins2 53.02. WESTERN ROSE RLahoe 52.0 31/4L3. XQUISITE CHOICE AntThomas4 56.0 4L4. MEGATRON JErwin 53.0 5LLate scratch : #7 JUNIOR DONWIN: $97.00Final Time : 1:20.2 Splits : 24.0, 47.3, 1:12.4,Winner : 4yo b filly – STORM CRAFT out of PSYCHE by SCHISMTrainer : GRAHAM,NEIVE E Owner : MODERN CONNECTIONBred by ASTON MARSH (DR.)Quinella : (3,4) $230.00 Exacta : (4-3) $424.00D/E : (3-4) $331.00Trifecta : (4-3-5) $507.00Rolling Triple : (4-3-4) $416.00Race 4 1000 M (S) (Purse $768,000) NB3YO MAIDEN CONDITION RACE – NOT EARNED $120,0 SINCE JUNE 17. (DIV.I)ALEX’S IMPORT SUSPENSION DEPARTMENT PLAQUE1. MARKET SENSATION JPatterson2 48.52. SURE STEP AndreePowell4 48.0 11/4L3. *THAT’S THE MAN HPottinger2 50.5 3/4L4. WHITE RUSSIAN OEdwards3 51.0 41/2L5. DOUBLE DEAL RMcNaughton 52.5 13/4LTOOK #1 ONLINE TRAIN SBlake 52.0WIN: $174.00PLACE: $56.00, $81.00, $63.00Final Time : 1:00.2 Splits : 23.0, 46.2, ,Winner : 3yo b filly – MARKET RALLY out of ECONOMIC SENSATION by STAR ATTITUDETrainer : CHEN,DWIGHT P Owner : HAMARK FARMSBred by HAM STABLES LTD.Quinella : (4,13) $587.00 Exacta : (4-13) $969.00D/E : (4-4) $430.00Trifecta : (4-13-11) $621.00Hi-5 : (4-13-11-5-6) $8,684.00Rolling Triple : (3-4-4) $1,408.00Race 5 1300 M (Purse $530,000) NB5-Y-O & UP RESTRICTED ALLOWANCE V(NW2)ALEX’S IMPORT JAPANESE TRUCK PARTS DEPARTMENT PLAQUE1. MY FAVORITE DANCER JPatterson2 54.02. ALL FOR THE GLORY JErwin 56.0 61/23. WICKED TUFF AChatrie 54.0 11/24. SPROUTING WINGS JInnis3 52.0 21/2Late scratch : #6 MISS ADDIWIN: $167.00PLACE: $63.00, $56.00, $55.00Final Time : 1:24.0 Splits : 24.3, 49.2, 1:16.3,Winner : 5yo b filly – DISTORTED out of THE WHITE WITCH by SPLINTER REDTrainer : PRYCE,DENNIS Owner : UNCLE BOBBred by KENUTE BIGNALLQuinella : (2,7) $369.00 Exacta : (2-7) $548.00D/E : (4-2) $723.00Superfecta : (2-7-5-3) $2,162.00Rolling Triple : (4-4-2) $3,216.00Race 6 1000 M (S) (Purse $768,000) NB3YO MAIDEN CONDITION RACE – NOT EARNED $120,0 SINCE JUNE 17. (DIV.II)ALEX’S IMPORT ACCESSORIES DEPARTMENT PLAQUE1. *RUNAWAY GAL OWalker 53.02. SHEZA SPY RLahoe 52.0 1/2L3. LUNA EMMA AndreePowell4 46.0 21/4L4. MOON WALK DAThomas 52.0 11/4L5. CONCLUSION JInnis3 48.5 31/4LTOOK #1 WAR ADVOCATE RHalledeen 53.0Late scratch : #8 MRS. K. T.WIN: $73.00PLACE: $53.00, $97.00, $91.00Final Time : 1:00.0 Splits : 23.0, 46.0, ,Winner : 3yo ch filly – LEGAL PROCESS out of VOODOO CHANT by SCHISMTrainer : DACOSTA,WAYNE A Owner : EDWARD STEINMAN & VON G. WHITEBred by NEW BLUE LTD.Race 7 1400 M (Purse $800,000) NB2-Y-O MAIDEN SPECIAL WEIGHTALEX’S IMPORT NEW PARTS DEPARTMENT PLAQUE1. FEARLESS SAMURAI OWalker 52.52. *HENRY THE SECOND DDawkins2 54.0 13/43. SOTOMAYOR LSteadman2 54.0 34. LAWS OF THE CODE AChatrie 51.5 65. WESTERN WARRIOR RHalledeen 54.0 11/2WIN: $108.00PLACE: $78.00, $77.00, $135.00Final Time : 1:26.3 Splits : 24.0, 46.3, 1:12.3,Winner : 2yo ch colt – FEARLESS VISION out of SAYURI by ALISIOSTrainer : DACOSTA,WAYNE A Owner : ELIZABETH A DACOSTABred by ORANGE VALLEY ESTATES LTD.Quinella : (4,8) $89.00 Exacta : (4-8) $209.00D/E : (12-4) $151.00Superfecta : (4-8-9-5) $615.00Rolling Triple : (2-12-4) $1,555.00Pick-4 : (4-2-12-4) $4,836.00Quinella : (12,13) $311.00 Exacta : (12-13) $292.00D/E : (2-12) $470.00Trifecta : (12-13-11) $1,491.00Hi-5 : (12-13-11-7-9) $45,887.00Rolling Triple : (4-2-12) $3,339.00Super-6 : (4-3-4-4-2-12) $6,356.40HEROES DAY STAKES TROPHYRace 8 1600 M (Purse $560,000) NB4-Y-O & UP RESTRICTED ALLOWANCE III(NW3 O/T)1. SUPERTRONICS BebHarvey2 52.02. MR. AMBASSADOR OWalker 54.0 Neck3. *BALLON D’OR SEllis 53.5 11L4. TARANTINO OMullings 52.0 NeckWIN: $137.00PLACE: $52.00, $51.00, $53.00Final Time : 1:39.4 Splits : 24.3, 47.4, 1:12.4,Winner : 4yo ch colt – SEEKING THE GLORY out of SUPER LASS by LINE IN THE SANDTrainer : DACOSTA,WAYNE A Owner : CARLTON S WATSONBred by ORANGE VALLEY ESTATES LTD.Quinella : (4,5) $169.00 Exacta : (5-4) $393.00D/E : (4-5) $328.00Superfecta : (5-4-1-6) $1,676.00Rolling Triple : (12-4-5) $448.00Race 9 1100 M (Purse $768,000) NB3YO(NW2)/IMP3YO&UP(MDN)/REST. ALL. IIALEX’S IMPORT ENGINE DEPARTMENT PLAQUE1. KING D OMullings 51.52. OCEAN SEEKER JInnis3 48.0 6 1/4L3. PROUD PRESIDENT AntThomas4 49.0 Neck4. *LIKE A LADY JPatterson2 49.0 1 1/2L5. IAN LINKS JErwin 53.5 1 1/2LLNS MR. LYNDHURST 52.5WIN: $277.00PLACE: $132.00, $325.00, $161.00Final Time : 1:05.4 Splits : 22.4, 46.0, ,Winner : 3yo colt – BLUE PEPSI LODGE out of FIGHT FOR PLEASURE by FIGHT OVERTrainer : CHUNG,SPENCER A Owner : MR. J.P.S.Bred by HAM STABLES LTD.Quinella : (5,9) $3,566.00 Exacta : (5-9) $6,704.00D/E : (5-5) $6,704.00Trifecta : (5-9-8) $4,301.00Hi-5 : (5-9-8-13-3) $40,922.50Rolling Triple : (4-5-5) $3,076.00PlacePot 8 : (1-3-6-7,3-4-7,4-13,2-7,8-12-13,4-8,4-5,5-9) $1,446.00GOLD CUPRace 10: Alex’s Import Gold cup1400 M (Purse $1,500,000) 3-Y-O & UP GRADED STAKES1. BUZZ NIGHTMARE OMullings 50.02. PHINEAS JPatterson2 48.5 2 1/4L3. BRAWN AChatrie 51.5 1/2L4. HOUDINI’S MAGIC DDawkins2 48.0 1 3/4LWIN: $186.00PLACE: $74.00, $121.00, $116.00Final Time : 1:23.4 Splits : 23.2, 45.4, 1:10.1,Winner : 4yo colt – INTO MISCHIEF out of QUEEN OF BATTLE byTrainer : FEANNY,PHILIP M Owner : 2 PENYUBred by HAM STABLES LTD.Quinella : (7,9) $1,221.00 Exacta : (7-9) $2,133.00D/E : (5-7) $521.00Superfecta : (7-9-10-2) $20,683.00Rolling Triple : (5-5-7) $3,136.00Race 11 1500 M (Purse $500,000) 3YO&UP CLM($180,0)-NOT EARNED $120,0 SINCE JUNE 17ALEX’S IMPORT WASSY CG 150 PLAQUE1. *BATIDOR DE MUNDO DDawkins2 50.02. SIRMANDI ARobles 52.0 8L3. MONEYNEVERSLEEP BebHarvey2 52.0 3/4L4. YES WE WILL HPottinger2 55.0 3/4L5. FIRST’K’BOY RoshJohnson4 53.0 5LWIN: $112.00PLACE: $76.00, $129.00, $85.00Final Time : 1:36.3 Splits : 24.4, 48.4, 1:16.0,Winner : 6yo b horse – NATURAL SELECTION out of COTTA’S JEWEL by MINER’S MARKTrainer : NUNES,ANTHONY C Owner : STEPHAN A NARINESINGHBred by Y.S. (1955) LTD.Quinella : (3,8) $551.00 Exacta : (8-3) $878.00D/E : (7-8) $390.00 () $89.00Trifecta : (8-3-1) $437.00Hi-5 : (8-3-1-9-11) $51,168.00Rolling Triple : (5-7-8) $1,981.00Pick-4 : (5-5-7-6,10,12) $5,468.00Super-6 : (5-12,4,5,5,7,8-10-12) $5,055.30Pick-9 : (4-7,4,2,8-12,4,5,5,7,8-10-12) $545,823.50
‘Stop romanticizing Pinoy resilience’ Lights inside SMX hall flicker as Duterte rants vs Ayala, Pangilinan anew FILE – Draymond Green #23 of the Golden State Warriors defends James Harden #13 of the Houston Rockets during their NBA game at ORACLE Arena on October 17, 2017 in Oakland, California. Ezra Shaw/Getty Images/AFPThe buildup for this series truly began in February, with some pointed comments from Golden State’s Draymond Green.Or in October, when Houston won at Golden State on ring night.ADVERTISEMENT This Rockets team was assembled — the key being the trade for Paul last summer — with hopes of unseating the reigning champion Warriors from their perch atop the NBA. So far, so good. Houston set a franchise record with 65 wins in the regular season, went 2-1 against the Warriors in games that were hyped at the time though seem meaningless now, and has the likely MVP in James Harden.But how this Houston season will be remembered hinges largely on the outcome of this series.“Everybody at the beginning of the year thinks they’ve got a chance to be here,” Houston’s P.J. Tucker said. “Everybody talks about winning. Everybody talks about fighting for a championship. … We really believed it. We’re really fighting to get there. This is not a game. Everybody takes their job serious.”He’s right on all counts, particularly on the talking.And the talking will most definitely continue over the next few days. With five full off days between the Warriors’ and Rockets’ respective second-round clinchers on Tuesday and Game 1 of their series, a lot of people will be saying a lot of somethings.ADVERTISEMENT P16.5-M worth of aid provided for Taal Volcano eruption victims — NDRRMC Don’t miss out on the latest news and information. It picked up in January, when the teams split a pair of games. And in February, Green told Sports Illustrated that he knew the Rockets were focused on knocking the Warriors off.“Noted. Great. We’ll see y’all soon,” Green said then.Soon, now, has a definitive date. Soon is Monday.Sports Related Videospowered by AdSparcRead Next Jo Koy draws ire for cutting through Cebu City traffic with ‘wang-wang’ “I think it’s going to be a great series,” said New Orleans coach Alvin Gentry, whose Pelicans fell in five games to the Warriors in the West semifinals. “I think it will be very entertaining. I think the people will have a great time watching that series because you have great players out there. … I’m looking forward to it.”He’s hardly alone.For as great as LeBron James has been, again, the West matchup is going to overshadow the East finals between Cleveland and either Boston or Philadelphia. That’s no disrespect to the East; that’s just reality given the seasons that the Warriors and Rockets have had, and the collision course that seemed so inevitable for either to avoid.“The whole world’s been waiting for this matchup,” Hall of Famer Shaquille O’Neal said in his role as an analyst Tuesday night on TNT.The three Warriors-Rockets games were about as anticipated as any in the regular season: Golden State lost two of the three, and the final combined score of those matchups was Warriors 353, Rockets 352.“That was so long ago,” Warriors forward Kevin Durant said. “I think both teams are different and playing better. So you know, I try not to look at those games but we kind of know, they know what we do and they know what we do.”It’s the second time in four years that Houston and Golden State have met in the West finals; the Warriors ousted the Rockets in five games in 2015 on their way to the NBA title. Golden State was the No. 1 seed that year, Houston was No. 2. The seeds are flipped this time, after Houston finished the regular season with the league’s best record.This is the first time since 2014 — a span of 15 series — where Golden State will have to play Game 1 on the road.“Every series you play, it gets harder and harder and harder,” said Warriors guard Stephen Curry, who is seeking a fourth straight trip to the NBA Finals and third ring in four years. “So following that trend for sure.”The verbal jousts between the Warriors and Rockets go back to the preseason, with Green questioning Houston’s commitment to defense. And after Houston beat Golden State 122-121 on opening night of the season, that prompted Rockets coach Mike D’Antoni to turn that phrase back around on Green. Djokovic loses to Edmund in Madrid Open; Nadal advances MOST READ Or in June, when the Rockets landed Chris Paul.Whenever it started, however it started, it’s clear that this is the series that the NBA-watching world wanted. Western Conference finals, Golden State versus Houston, Game 1 on Monday on the Rockets’ home floor. Series winner to the NBA Finals, series loser will undoubtedly feel like they let a championship ring slip away.FEATURED STORIESSPORTSGinebra beats Meralco again to capture PBA Governors’ Cup titleSPORTSAfter winning title, time for LA Tenorio to give back to Batangas folkSPORTSTim Cone, Ginebra set their sights on elusive All-Filipino crown“They got us. We got them,” Green said. “Got to go out there and play. We’ll see who better.”After more than 10 months of playing, posturing and some pontificating, it really is that simple. Truck driver killed in Davao del Sur road accident Carpio hits red carpet treatment for China Coast Guard PLAY LIST 02:14Carpio hits red carpet treatment for China Coast Guard02:56NCRPO pledges to donate P3.5 million to victims of Taal eruption00:56Heavy rain brings some relief in Australia02:37Calm moments allow Taal folks some respite03:23Negosyo sa Tagaytay City, bagsak sa pag-aalboroto ng Bulkang Taal01:13Christian Standhardinger wins PBA Best Player award Volcano watch: Island fissures steaming, lake water receding In fight vs corruption, Duterte now points to Ayala, MVP companies as ‘big fish’ LATEST STORIES Green group flags ‘overkill’ use of plastic banderitas in Manila Sto. Niño feast Scientists seek rare species survivors amid Australia flames View comments
Intelligent Design proponents have often pointed to the similarity between what they are doing and what SETI is doing. For example, SETI is attempting to detect evidence of intelligence in coded signals from space, and design biologists are detecting evidence of intelligence in the DNA code. Seth Shostak, Director of the SETI Institute, decided to challenge that comparison in the weekly SETI report on Space.com. He started with a comparison of his own: ID people are no more to be taken seriously than the comedian who found a potato that looked like Richard Nixon’s head. But then he got serious; isn’t there a double standard, if SETI is accepted by the scientific community and ID is not? First, Shostak argued that the signals SETI is searching for are not all that complex. A code or message is not a requirement; a valid candidate might just be a “persistent narrowband whistle” of no known natural origin. Still, why would SETI be able to deduce intelligence with far less complexity than the high complexity found in DNA? Here, Shostak made a surprising statement: such a simple, narrow signal from space would constitute better evidence for intelligence than the DNA code:Well, it’s because the credibility of the evidence is not predicated on its complexity. If SETI were to announce that we’re not alone because it had detected a signal, it would be on the basis of artificiality. An endless, sinusoidal signal – a dead simple tone – is not complex; it’s artificial. Such a tone just doesn’t seem to be generated by natural astrophysical processes. In addition, and unlike other radio emissions produced by the cosmos, such a signal is devoid of the appendages and inefficiencies nature always seems to add – for example, DNA’s junk and redundancy. (Emphasis added in all quotes.)He admitted that the pulsar first thought to be evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence in 1967 did not convey information, but then says that it was profligate in its signal, broadcasting all over the spectrum. This, he claims, shows that it was a signal no alien would produce; it would be too “wasteful.” In cells and sea lions, on the other hand, nature produces things full of “Junk, redundancy and inefficiency” he claimed. To him, this proves they were not artificially engineered because they are not “optimally built.” A second error in the comparison, Shostak continued, is in overlooking the importance of context. SETI researchers would be justified in inferring artificiality if they found a large green square on an earth-like planet (instead of in a group of stars), just like archaeologists are justified in inferring hominid tool-making if rock chips are found in a cave. In summary, Shostak disavows the comparison between SETI and ID research on two counts: (1) SETI is not looking for messages with evidence of intelligence, but only for simple artificial signals; (2) SETI is looking for artificiality in the context of places where such “very modest complexity” would be unexpected and not otherwise observed. The last word: “This is clearly nothing like looking at DNA’s chemical makeup and deducing the work of a supernatural biochemist.”We have to hand it to Seth Shostak for tackling an argument head-on without too much mocking. Will his arguments stand up to scrutiny? You decide. In the first place, looking for a simple signal is just the first pass filter. All the SETI literature has been replete with claims that eventually humans want to converse with the aliens and learn from them. Jimmy Carter spoke for the earth in writing, “We hope some day, having solved the problems we face, to join a community of galactic civilizations.” That’s also why our messages to them have been very complex: from the Arecibo message, to the Pioneer plaque, and especially to the Voyager records – loaded with information, telling them as much about ourselves as the bandwidth allowed. Finding a “persistent narrowband whistle” would most certainly instigate an intensive follow-up search to first confirm the artificiality of the signal, and then try to discover more complexity in it. Shostak and the world would certainly not be sufficiently convinced to get off at the whistle-stop and say, “well, we found intelligent life, so let’s move on to something else.” Look at how the alleged canals on Mars sent scientists and the public into a frenzy to get more data and learn more about a possible Martian civilization. The confirmation of extraterrestrial intelligence would surely demand more complexity in the signal, just as it did in the SETI-dominated movie Contact. As to Shostak’s second argument that an artificial signal would be efficient whereas life is profligate and wasteful, who is he kidding? This is a red herring wrapped in circular reasoning. Like most of the SETI crowd, Shostak is an evolutionist. He assumes life evolved, and he assumes evolution is a wasteful process without design, so when he finds what (to him) looks like wastefulness and redundancy, he only argues his assumptions. This is the old dysteleology (bad design) argument, but it is rather presumptuous to tell the Designer “if you were really so smart, you would have done it my way.” In the first place, Shostak obviously has not been listening to the molecular biologists who are in such awe of the efficiency and robustness of biological machinery that they are racing to imitate it (11/19/2005). (Artists may try to imitate junk, but not engineers.) In the second place, the “junk DNA” he speaks of is rapidly being redefined as more about its essential functions is being uncovered (10/20/2005, 09/08/2005, 07/15/2005). In the third place, he presumes he knows what the aliens would do, when maybe, to them, sending a wideband message might make more sense than a narrowband one. In the fourth place, he assumes human intelligence is not profligate, redundant and wasteful. Ever seen government regulations? So not only is he presumptuous and uninformed over the particular claims of this argument, it is an irrelevant argument anyway: SETI would certainly follow up any sign of “artificiality” with a massive search for more complexity containing a message. He argued that the ID claim that “complexity would imply intelligence, is also wrong.” But this misrepresents the claims of ID (see next paragraph), and will come back to bite his own assertion in the end. Shostak also misleads his readers by making a false distinction between artificiality and complexity. This equivocation also begs the question about design vs. evolution. The ID literature has made it clear that it is not just complexity that makes a design inference valid, but specified complexity. If an “artificial” signal were found with enough complexity beyond what could be produced naturally, it would be specified by definition, even if it were a persistent lowband whistle. After ruling out chance and natural law as sources, both Shostak and the ID community would conclude that an intelligent design inference is warranted. So the distinction disappears. Both sides also agree that specified complexity depends on context; a little complexity, like a cairn on a trail, is sufficient to make a design inference in the mountains, whereas much more specified complexity would be required to declare a forger guilty. And what is “artificial” anyway, if not designed by an intelligence? Shostak is not being consistent here, because to him, artificiality evolved: it has its roots in non-design. How could artificiality (i.e., purposeful action of a designer) evolve in the first place? At what point did purpose and intent (i.e., free will) diverge from chance and necessity? A beaver is intelligent, but is hauling a piece of wood for the purpose of making a dam equivalent to sending an intelligent signal bearing information? Is the guard crow sending intelligent communication when it caws the warning signal to the flock? Suppose an alien planet had frogs that croaked with a persistent narrowband whistle in the radio range; would SETI be ready to ask them about the meaning of life and how to survive global war? Clearly a different category of communication is being sought here. SETI goes beyond astrobiology. It would not be content to find bacteria on Mars; it wants evidence of purpose, intent, intelligence and free will – beings capable of harnessing nature to send information-bearing messages that would never occur by chance or natural law. Humans do this all the time: smoke signals, skywriting, petroglyphs, writing with a stick in the sand, or beaming bits into space. How can Shostak make a design inference based on artificiality (extraterrestrial intelligence, the kind that intends to communicate with us) without first assuming the very criterion he wants to deny to advocates of intelligent design? And without coming up with some sort of criterion for minimum specified complexity, how can he distance himself from the comedian who finds a potato that looks like Richard Nixon’s head? Finally, let’s have a little fun at Seth Shostak’s expense, with all due respect. One of the persistent harangues against intelligent design is that it “brings science to a halt by claiming a designer did it.” According to this view, ID scientists are lazy and prone to jumping to conclusions. They don’t want to be diligent in performing the rigorous work necessary to find natural explanations for complex phenomena (see 11/21/2005 end of main article). This is not true, because using the Dembski Explanatory Filter, intelligent causes are always a last resort after natural and chance causes are eliminated. But let’s put the shoe on the other foot for a change. Dr. Shostak, Jill Tarter et al.,wouldn’t it be the lazy way out for a SETI scientist to infer intelligence for a persistent narrowband whistle? Surely a naturalistic explanation must be out there. You must keep trying, ad infinitum, till a natural cause is found. If you infer intelligence was the cause, you are just giving up. You are failing to perform the rigorous analysis necessary to do science; you are bringing science to a halt. Nice try, Dr. Shostak. Think about this some more and try again. And while you’re at it, tell us how your own intelligent message-sending capacity evolved, or how it can be distinguished from chance and natural law, if nature is all there is. (Visited 28 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest See the Agronomic Crop Team’s calendar for more information: https://agcrops.osu.edu/events/calendar/. Manure Science Review on Wednesday, Aug. 2, 2017 at the Stoller Brothers & Sons farm in Paulding County. Learn how to use manure nutrients to improve crop yields and protect water quality, get the latest on regulations and staying safe, plus more. See field demonstrations on applying manure, subsurface tile drainage, and more. For program and registration details, https://ocamm.osu.edu/sites/ocamm/files/imce/Events/MSR_2017_FLYER.pdf. Southwest Ohio Corn Growers and Fayette County Agronomy Field Day – Fayette Co. August 15, 2017, 9:30 a.m. – 3 p.m. The event is free to attend at the Fayette County Farm, 2770 State Route 38 NE, Washington Court House, OH 43160. Contact: Ken Ford at 937 378-6716 or email@example.com. For more information see the website: fayette.osu.edu. Several speakers will be heard throughout the day including: keynote Speaker Sonny Perdue Secretary of Agriculture (yet to be confirmed), a follow-up for 2018 Farm Bill Listening Session, corn ear rot diagnostic demonstration, using on-farm research to make adaptive nitrogen decisions, cover crops for pollinators, and many other activities will be available throughout the day. A Crop Walk for looking at corn disease (Champaign County) is Aug 15, 2017, 5 p.m. Contact Amanda Douridas at 937 484-1526 or by email firstname.lastname@example.org. Join Pierce Paul as he identifies corn diseases and discusses management strategies. This event will take place in a corn field in Champaign County to be identified the week before. Leave your name and contact information with the Champaign County Extension Office to be notified when the location is set or in the event it is cancelled due to weather. Precision Ag Day: Nutrient Application (Champaign County) Aug 17, 2017, 8 a.m., cost is $5 and the location is Bauer Stoves and Fireplaces, 3548 OH-54, Urbana, OH 43078. Register by August 10. Contact Amanda Douridas at 937 484-1526 or by email email@example.com. Learn about the latest in nutrient management and application technology from the industry’s leading experts. Fertilizer certification will be offered to those who still need to complete the training. The Precision Ag Field Day is in Hardin County, Aug 23, 2017, from 8 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. The registration deadline is Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at http://go.osu.edu/hardinprecisionagday.This will be held at Kellogg Farms, 17392 Township Road 50, Forest, OH 45843. Presenters from Ohio State University Extension, USDA, ODA, Farm Bureau, and private industry will be on the program, which will offer 3 Hours of Fertilizer Applicator Certification Training credit. Certified Crop Adviser credits are also planned.
MONTREAL — University and high school students across Quebec are holding strikes today as they join climate marches taking place around the world.In Montreal, a large crowd is marching from Mount Royal, waving signs and denouncing government inaction on climate change.Earlier today, students formed human chains around six Montreal high schools, forcing the cancellation of morning classes.The protesters are demanding stronger government action on climate change, including a law to require measures that would limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. One of the organizers says 150,000 students are on strike in the province, representing 120 student associations.Other climate marches are expected to take place in Quebec City, Moncton, Toronto, Regina and Vancouver, as well as in close to 100 countries around the world.The Canadian Press