BC Transit announced earlier this morning that they and the City of Fort St. John are offering complementary transit service on Remembrance Day.The complimentary rides will be offered on routes #1 and #2 from 8:15 AM until 12:35 PM, and again from 2:45 until 7:15 PM on November 11th.“Typically, transit services are suspended on holidays, but this extra service is offered in recognition of the sacrifices Canadian Forces members have, and continue to make.” BC Transit said in a press release.- Advertisement -Customers who use the handyDART system can also take advantage of the complimentary service between 8 AM and noon, and again from 3:30 until 7 PM.BC Transit also encourages bus drivers to stop their vehicles at 11 AM safely, to observe the traditional minute of silence in honour of Canadians who have served our country.
DONEGAL senior team manager Jim McGuinness is delighted his side got back to winning ways with the victory over Cork at the weekend.The four point win over the Rebels wasn’t perfect, he said, but he’s delighted to get the victory.McGuinness told RTÉ Sport: “We had a difficult start to the league and we had key players missing for those first few games. So from our own point of view it was nice to get those players back on the field today and getting a game under the belt. “Winning the game was definitely a big bonus. There were mistakes made by Colm McFadden, Michael Murphy and Christy Toy while the odd ball dropped short and there was the odd wide that they would normally take. They weren’t happening in the first half.“And that’s part and parcel of trying to make a comeback into a team when you’ve been out for a number of months.“So we’re just happy that those players got the game under their belts and that we picked up the two points so it opens up the division a bit as well.”McGuinness was also happy to blood some young players in his side that helped Donegal see out the win in the closing stages. “We’d be happy with the younger players and happy with their skill level but sometimes it’s difficult for the younger players to carry the weight of expectation on their own completely and it’s a different dynamic when you’re got your key players and experienced players on the field.“Then the younger lads coming in off the bench or playing alongside them and playing off them as the other lads have been around a lot of corners so that was nice for the younger lads as well and after the last two games it was nice to get a positive as well and they kicked a couple of scores, which was a big plus as well.”GAA: McGUINNESS HAPPY WITH WIN OVER REBELS was last modified: March 5th, 2012 by BrendaShare 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:Donegal GAAGAA: McGUINNESS HAPPY WITH WIN OVER REBELS
The full extent of Finn Harps goalkeeper Ciaran Gallagher’s recent injury has been revealed.The 20 year old netminder was out cold for almost ten minutes after a clash while playing against Waterford United recently.Now it has been revealed that Gallagher suffered a hairline fraction of the skull. It is now believed that Gallagher could be missing for more than a month.Gallagher’s young stand-in Shaun Patton, 16, will line out for Harps after saving a penalty against Waterford when he came on. FINN HARPS GOALKEEPER SUFFERS HAIRLINE FRACTURE TO SKULL was last modified: April 8th, 2012 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)
Magnífico! Naiara Sanchez Abad’s Doodle4Google entryTHE people of Carndonagh are getting behind a foreign exchange student whose Doodle4Google entry has caused quite a stir.Spanish student Naiara Sanchez Abad’s is in 2nd Year at Carndonagh Community School.Teacher Michelle McGee is hoping thousands of people across County Donegal will now vote for Naiara’s entry. “Her doodle has been selected to go through to the national competition. Public voting has started and closes on 10th March. Voting is sure to be frantic in schools throughout the country, so be sure to give Naiara your vote,” said Michelle.“It would be fantastic if Donegal got behind Naiara….it might make some headlines over in Spain!”You can vote here:http://www.google.ie/doodle4google/vote.html#d=d4-3 DONEGAL URGED TO VOTE FOR SPANISH STUDENT’S BEAUTIFUL DOODLE4GOOGLE! was last modified: February 18th, 2014 by John2Share 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:CarndonaghDoodle4GooglemagníficoNaiara Sanchez Abad
LOS ANGELES (AP) – Voters on Tuesday rejected all of Arnold Schwarzenegger’s “year of reform” ballot proposals in a special election that turned against the celebrity governor. It was a sobering evening for a man once considered among the most popular politicians in America. The same voters who swept Schwarzenegger into office in a historic recall election two years ago defeated every element of his plan to reshape state government. Though Schwarzenegger tried to look past the defeats, it was clear that an election he had called in June only angered voters. Still, appearing before supporters at a Beverly Hills hotel, a smiling governor did not concede defeat and instead suggested he wanted to look past the defeats and a year of hostility with Democrats and labor unions. “Tomorrow, we begin anew,” Schwarzenegger said, his wife Maria Shriver beside him. “I feel the same tonight as that night two years ago … You know with all my heart, I want to do the right thing for the people of California.” Voters overwhelmingly defeated Proposition 76, the governor’s centerpiece proposal to slow the growth of state spending. Proposition 77, which would have redrawn legislative and congressional districts, was knocked down by a similar margin. Failing by slimmer spreads were Proposition 74, a plan to make teachers work longer to achieve tenure, and Proposition 73, which would have restricted political spending by public employee unions. The contest represented the biggest test yet of a faltering Schwarzenegger’s leadership – and the outcome clouds his chances of winning a second term next year. Poll after poll showed it was an election that Californians didn’t want, with a lineup of eight initiatives that didn’t connect with every day issues such as gas prices, housing costs and the war in Iraq. And voters carried their displeasure to a ballot that had four other propositions. Proposals on energy regulation and prescription drug costs were easily defeated, though one on abortion rights was narrowly trailing and too close to call. The special election pitted the Republican actor-turned-governor against two of California’s dominant political forces – public employee unions and Democrats who control the Legislature. It also attracted another celebrity in Democratic activist Warren Beatty, who dogged the governor in the campaign’s closing days. Schwarzenegger’s conflict with the unions made him a target for teachers, nurses and firefighters – whom he once antagonized and whose television advertising blitz helped push his popularity ratings to record lows. Union leaders and Democrats who opposed the governor chanted “sweep, sweep” at their Sacramento victory party. “I’m very grateful to Arnold Schwarzenegger for really working people up,” said Deborah Burger, president of the California Nurses Association. Schwarzenegger’s proposals to curb spending and weaken unions inflamed passions on both sides, partly because of the election’s roughly $50 million cost in a state that repeatedly faces budget shortfalls. Tim Wong, 48, an independent from Belmont, called the election “a waste of the meager money we have.” “These propositions were a diversion from the important issues,” Wong said. “It’s all show and no substance.” Though some of the measures were complex, Schwarzenegger cast the election in simple terms: Support him and the state moves forward – vote no and protect a broken system of government in Sacramento. “I guess I didn’t do a good enough job to convince them otherwise,” the governor said of voters Tuesday night. Perhaps the most emotionally charged proposition wasn’t part of Schwarzenegger’s pitch. Proposition 73 proposed a constitutional amendment that would require doctors to notify parents or guardians when a minor seeks an abortion. It also would redefine abortion as an act that causes the death of an unborn child. With nearly all precincts reporting, it trailed narrowly but was too close to call. Another initiative was intended to reregulate part of the state’s energy market – but voters rejected Proposition 80 by a wide margin. Dueling propositions to lower prescription drug costs were soundly defeated in a battle that became one of the most expensive initiative campaigns in state history. Pharmaceutical companies had pumped in $76 million to support Proposition 78 and oppose Proposition 79, which labor and consumer groups supported. The cascade of campaign spending has been shocking, even in a state known as an ATM for political donations. Preliminary figures suggest that Republicans, Democrats, unions, big businesses, pharmaceutical companies and others could have ended up spending a combined $300 million – more than President Bush raised for his 2004 re-election campaign. It was the fourth statewide election in three years. Schwarzenegger’s Tuesday got off to an inauspicious start: When he arrived at a polling place near his Brentwood mansion, poll workers said he had already voted. He hadn’t. A quick call to the Los Angeles County Registar-Recorder Office turned up the problem – an unexplained mix-up involving an early voting test. After voting – for real – Schwarzenegger flashed a thumbs-up sign but didn’t speak with reporters. AD Quality Auto 360p 720p 1080p Top articles1/5READ MOREWalnut’s Malik Khouzam voted Southern California Boys Athlete of the Week160Want local news?Sign up for the Localist and stay informed Something went wrong. Please try again.subscribeCongratulations! You’re all set!
Caolan in action.A young Donegal motorbike rider has been selected from more than 3,000 riders to ride for the International Red Bull Rookies GP Select.Caolan Irwin, from Kilmacrennan, was chosen yesterday from a selection process which took place in Spain.Over 3000 teen riders from around the globe applied for the prestigious event and 109 carefully selected. Hopefuls were invited to attend the selections which have been taking place this week.Tensions were high as 16 year old Caolan took his opportunity to shine on the world stage of motorcycle sport and he did not disappoint !The last Irish rider standing, Caolan has been selected as one of the worlds fastest teen riders and will be joining the last thirty from around the world including USA, Japan and Australia.Caolan will now be judged by an experienced panel of judges. The panel includes former Grand Prix racer and Engineer Harold Bartol, Austrian motorcycle legend August Auinger, former Red Bull Yamaha team owner Peter Clifford and high performance riding school instructor Dani Ribalta.Since its inception in 2007 the Red Bull Rookies Cup has grown into one of the most thrilling two-wheel spectacles in the world. The Rookies Cup has released new stars into the world of Grand Prix racing and produced GP winners. YOUNG DONEGAL MOTORBIKE RIDER CHOSEN FOR RED BULLS ROOKIE SELECT was last modified: October 16th, 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:Caolan IrwinkilmacrennanRed Bull Rookies Select
A PIONEERING course aimed at turning dangerous drivers away from being menaces on our roads and into safer drivers has won a top national award.The Pro-Social Driving Course has seen 116 motorists – mainly young drivers – being referred to it by the courts.Run by Gary Doggett and supported by Judge Paul Kelly and Garda Inspector Michael Harrison, so far just one motorist has re-offended after completing the course. This evening at the Mansion House in Dublin Gary was honoured by Social Entrepreneurs Ireland.TD and Sinn Fein Justice spokesman Padraig Mac Lochlainn was among the first to congratulate Gary.Contrary to what some people think, motorists referred to the course by Judge Kelly don’t learn how to drive again.They study their behaviour and meet victims of road crashes – and sometimes relatives of young people killed on Donegal’s roads. There are now calls for the course to be extended to other parts of the country.Ironically, some local councillors refused funding to the course earlier this year and the course has been struggling to stay afloat. ANTI-CAR CRIME COURSE WINS TOP NATIONAL AWARD was last modified: October 14th, 2015 by John2Share 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:donegalGARY DOGGETTPro-social drivers
What has Darwin done for you lately? Some evolutionists promote Darwinism because of its alleged usefulness to humanity.Yesterday’s post analyzed whether evolutionary theory explains things (10/18/14). Even if the theory has doubtful explanatory value, perhaps its worth can be salvaged if it provides benefits to man.Global challenge: Here’s a promising headline in Science Magazine: “Applying evolutionary biology to address global challenges.” Nine evolutionists state their thesis in the opening paragraph:Differences among species in their ability to adapt to environmental change threaten biodiversity, human health, food security, and natural resource availability. Pathogens, pests, and cancers often quickly evolve resistance to control measures, whereas crops, livestock, wild species, and human beings often do not adapt fast enough to cope with climate change, habitat loss, toxicants, and lifestyle change. To address these challenges, practices based on evolutionary biology can promote sustainable outcomes via strategic manipulation of genetic, developmental, and environmental factors. Successful strategies effectively slow unwanted evolution and reduce fitness in costly species or improve performance of valued organisms by reducing phenotype-environment mismatch or increasing group productivity. Tactics of applied evolutionary biology range broadly, from common policies that promote public health or preserve habitat for threatened species—but are easily overlooked as having an evolutionary rationale, to the engineering of new genomes.Engineering? Strategy? That sounds like intelligent design. Surely scientists and farmers before Darwin understood how to protect “valued organisms” without resorting to ideas about mutation and natural selection. It’s a little late to apply an “evolutionary rationale” to what humans were already doing. What exactly do these 9 evolutionists want mankind to do? What strategy is new, and based solely on Darwinian theory?Their opening infographic shows six societal sectors with the challenges they face, and proposes tactics for addressing those challenges. Three of the sectors are categorized under “rapid evolution” and involve mostly bacteria and pathogens. The other three, labeled “mismatch,” concern things like habitat loss, biodiversity loss, and chronic disease. “Each of these strategies uses a combination of manipulations of the organismal genotype, phenotypic plasticity (development), or environmental conditions.” Again, though, “manipulations” have been worked on for centuries or millennia, under what Darwin (and these evolutionists) call “artificial selection“—a form of intelligent design. Artificial selection is not evolution. Humans design a goal, then they manipulate the factors that help them reach the goal. Today, the factors might include genetic engineering, but that’s “engineering” nonetheless. Conservation predates Darwin, too, as does medical research. It’s not clear, therefore, what any of these strategies have to do with Darwin’s notion that innovations arise by chance. The whole discussion is about design: engineering, strategies, policies. It would seem, therefore, that a design-based approach would be more useful than Darwinism in addressing the biological challenges each sector of society faces.A summary of this paper in Science Daily, though, says that facing these challenges “requires evolutionary thinking” as well as “evolutionary approaches” to identify “evolutionary solutions.” This is the only way, the article argues:“Applying evolutionary biology has tremendous potential, because it takes into account how unwanted pests or pathogens may adapt rapidly to our interventions and how highly valued species including humans on the other hand are often very slow to adapt to changing environments through evolution,” said study co-author Peter Søgaard Jørgensen, a biologist at the Center for Macroecology, Evolution and Climate at the University of Copenhagen. “Not considering such aspects may result in outcomes opposite of those desired, making the pests more resistant to our actions, humans more exposed to diseases and vulnerable species less able to cope with new conditions.”This seems to be a very non-Darwinian rationale. Why should humans and other “highly valued species” try to fix the adaptation rate that millions of years of evolution have built into them? Isn’t competition and conflict with the environment the engine that drives survival of the fittest? Countering these forces would seem to be the very strategy that could “result in outcomes opposite of those desired” and accelerate the mismatch of species to environments. What they’re advocating is humans doing battle with Darwinian mechanisms, using their brains—their intelligent design.Indeed, another summary posted by PhysOrg talks about efforts “to try to outwit evolution” when it is too fast or too slow for human desires. The “management of evolution” is neither natural nor unguided, the very bases of evolutionary theory. Incidentally, this article is shamelessly adorned with a drawing, “The Tree of Man,” by the fraudster and Darwin worshiper Ernst Haeckel.All the articles mention “climate change” as a reality that is catching species unprepared, presumably because of man’s actions. But if man is a product of evolution, then so are his actions. On what moral grounds, then, should he be required to manage evolution or outwit evolution? Other species affect the climate, too; an article on Science Daily showed that trillions of microbes affect global ocean chemistry with their urine. Certain evolutionary advocates of the “Gaia hypothesis” believe that organisms engineer the global environment for their benefit. Nobody expects those organisms to convene and design strategies to mitigate their effects.Another challenge of rapid evolution cited by the articles is antibiotic resistance. This is often heralded by evolutionists as evidence of evolution at work. An article in PhysOrg, “How bacteria evolve defenses to antibiotics,” suggests that in at least some cases, “resistance genes” lie in wait in some microbes, and are called upon only when needed. These “resistance genes” can be shared between bacteria by genetic exchange. When activated by the presence of the antibiotic, the resistance genes take part in complex signaling pathways that switch on other genes. None of this new understanding of resistance comes from Darwinism; it sounds designed.Imbalance of Nature: If anyone thinks that man alone is upsetting the “balance of nature,” he or she should consider an article on PLoS Biology by Daniel Simberloff that examines the historical use of the concept, finding no consensus or rationale for it. In fact, it was Darwin who “radically changed its underlying basis, from God to natural selection,” Simberloff writes, and Alfred Russel Wallace who challenged “the very notion of a balance of nature as an undefined entity whose accuracy could not be tested.” Then, “His skepticism was taken up again in the 20th century, culminating in a widespread rejection of the idea of a balance of nature by academic ecologists, who focus rather on a dynamic, often chaotic nature buffeted by constant disturbances.” Well, then, what could be more chaotic, buffeting and disturbing than climate change? Why are evolutionists taking up the campaign to fight climate change with moral zeal?Simberloff calls the “balance of nature metaphor” a “panchreston“—an interesting but rarely-used word that means “a proposed explanation intended to address a complex problem by trying to account for all possible contingencies but typically proving to be too broadly conceived and therefore oversimplified to be of any practical use” (see Glittering Generalities in the Baloney Detector). The terms “phenotype-environment mismatch” and “sustainable” used by the 9 evolutionists play into this metaphor of a world in balance, forgetting that it was evolutionists who turned their focus to “a dynamic, often chaotic nature buffeted by constant disturbances.” Climate change is merely the latest disturbance, brought about by products of evolution (humans), so it would seem humans are justified for any short-sighted, self-interested actions. That’s the nature of Darwinism.Can evolution cure cancer? Let’s get really practical and see if evolution is useful in the fight against cancer. “Physicists’ model proposes evolutionary role for cancer,” Nature announced, reprinting an article by Zeeya Merali from Scientific American. It begins,Could cancer be our cells’ way of running in ‘safe mode’, like a damaged computer operating system trying to preserve itself, when faced with an external threat? That’s the conclusion reached by cosmologist Paul Davies at Arizona State University in Tempe and his colleagues, who have devised a controversial new theory for cancer’s origins, based on its evolutionary roots. If correct, their model suggests that a number of alternative therapies, including treatment with oxygen and infection with viral or bacterial agents, could be particularly effective.There are several problems with the evolutionary approach. First of all, it’s qualified by “if correct,” and described as “controversial,” indicating it is not on solid scientific ground. Second, “safe mode” in an “operating system” is merely a metaphor, which cannot apply anyway, because computer systems are intelligently designed. Third, effective treatments are proved by clinical trials run by intelligent doctors, not by evolution. Finally, Davies’ portrayal of “an ‘atavistic’ model positing cancer is the re-expression of an ancient “preprogrammed” trait that has been lying dormant” is a mere story, impossible to prove and of dubious practical value. Things do not lie dormant in evolutionary theory; they are eliminated by negative selection, being too costly to maintain if non-functional.Davies thinks that cancer is a throwback to the days when microbes operated without oxygen, so that adding oxygen might be effective. A physiologist referenced in the article tried that idea independently. It showed promise, which is great, but, he says, the test was “not carried out to test Davies’s hypothesis and cannot be taken as proof that the atavistic model is correct.” A surgical oncologist quipped about this and other proposed treatments by Davies: “The ‘predictions’ of atavism are nothing that scientists haven’t come to by other paths.” Evolutionists cannot, therefore, take credit after the fact; Darwinian theory was superfluous.Evolution’s most useful trait: storytelling. Nothing in the above articles points to evolution being useful. It’s never the factor that is necessary or sufficient to bring about solutions to human problems. An article in Astrobiology Magazine suggests one area where evolution is very useful: for storytelling:“These properties are expected to ‘tell’ a story that makes sense in biological terms by providing a convincing evolutionary narrative,” said Gaucher.An example of this proteinaceous storytelling: the fact that ancient proteins, as mentioned before, seem optimized for the high-heat, high-acidity environmental conditions which geology suggests characterized the young Earth.Perhaps, then, if the goal is to tell a story—to provide a convincing evolutionary narrative—evolutionary biology should be moved from the Science Building to the Humanities Theater.What a useless, senseless, warped enterprise evolutionary biology is. Its disciples keep trying to shove it into the faces of policy makers, like mobsters demanding payment for “protection.” They keep trying to convince doctors, engineers and government officials that they “need” or require “evolutionary thinking” to solve problems. Balderdash. Evolution is superfluous. Who needs to know what chance and selection did over millions of years in order to solve a problem? What’s the doctor to do, play dice? Should he wait a few more million years for a natural solution to “emerge”?Evolutionary thinking is the opposite of “reverse engineering.” If you know something was designed, you can make progress by knowing that a function exists for something you observe but do not understand. We know how intelligent agents think; we can approach a problem with a designer’s eye, and are often rewarded in biology with understanding. You can see the contrast in approaches with the way biologists thought about “junk DNA” (see Evolution News & Views). Some evolutionists gave up and called something they didn’t understand “junk.” Believing there was functional treasure there, other scientists found things working for a purpose. Biomimetics is another great example. Reverse engineering nature’s designs has been extremely fruitful. Evolutionists try to insert themselves into this burgeoning field, but cannot justify their participation (Evolution News & Views).“Evolutionary thinking”—how’s that for a sophoxymoronic, self-refuting concept? If they really tried evolutionary thinking, they wouldn’t think at all, because free will is an illusion in evillusion. Thinking presupposes intelligent design. So send Darwin’s tired old notion down the trash chute of history, and think intelligently, like you were designed to do. (Visited 56 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave
Roundtable discussion held at the University of the Witwatersrand, on Friday, 28th September 2012.This year South Africa ranks at number 52 out of 144 nations surveyed for this year’s report. South Africa is the highest-ranked African country and third-placed among the BRICS economies. This working paper highlights some of the strengths and weaknesses in South Africa’s performance. In addition it presents some of the key issues discussed during the roundtable.Working Papers [PDF, 744Kb]