first_imgWESTERN BUREAU:WITH the prospect of re-signing homegrown striker Craig Foster waning, Roshane Sharpe chose a fine time to remind the Reno coaching staff and faithful of his abilities when he scored an 80th-minute equaliser to save FC Reno another heartbreaking loss to Boys’ Town on Sunday.Lennox Cargill had given the travelling Boys’ Town a 17th-minute lead, but with the clock running down, Sharpe scored his fourth goal this season to force a crucial result, as Reno were facing a third loss in five matches.”This is still very much a work in progress,” admitted Graham. “Yes, we recognise that we need to fix some things. It’s not that the team is not playing according to how we want them. Against Boys’ Town, we played very well, but again failed to score the necessary goals to win the match.”He added: “I think we are going to get there shortly, because if we don’t have a ready-made centre forward, we have to make one, and that is why a player such as Roshane Sharpe is very important. I was happy to see him finally score again yesterday (Sunday).”SEASONALSTRUGGLEReno’s struggles appear to be seasonal, and yet again, the lack of inspiration, particularly up front, has returned to hurt them. It appears it will not get any better – at least in the short term – as it doesn’t appear they will secure the signature of Foster, the league’s top scorer last season.Foster left the club in the off-season for the United Soccer League’s Harrisburg City Islanders, and after a promising start to their season, in which he netted five goals in three matches – including a hat-trick – the centre forward was sidelined with a leg injury.A return to his boyhood club was seen as a light at the end of the tunnel for the management of FC Reno, who are mired in ninth place in the League table with 24 points, five more than the respective 11th- and 12th-placed Tivoli Gardens and Rivoli United, both of which currently occupy the relegation places.”We heard from a good source that Craig Foster may not, after all, rejoin the club as he is due to leave the country shortly,” Graham said.”We were hoping to pin him down in a new deal, but I cannot say what has really happened, except that that may not be happening as we had planned.”last_img read more

first_imgThe authors of the paper in the previous entry (09/06/2006) found that bacteria swim with near perfect propulsive efficiency.  They only mentioned evolution one time, but it’s short and to the pointless.  It wins Stupid Evolution Quote of the Week: “Such measurements can shed light on how this remarkable ability to swim evolves among different microorganisms.”Still waiting in the dark for payment on this promissory note (03/27/2003 commentary).(Visited 9 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

first_imgOnly by the most egregious twisting of terms could one call what these scientists did “evolution.”“Directed evolution” is a contradiction in terms. It’s like conjuring up visions of “natural voting” or “unguided targeting.” It’s like “blind sight” or “deaf hearing.” If terms mean anything, what Marcos Alcocer says in The Conversation is absurd, or dishonest, like defending Orwell’s 1984 slogan, “War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.”The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2018 has been awarded to three researchers for their work on “harnessing the power of evolution” to create compounds that are of benefit to humanity. One half of the nine million Swedish kronor (£770,686) prize will go to the American Frances Arnold from the California Institute of Technology, US. The other half will go jointly to the American George Smith from the University of Missouri, US, and the Brit Gregory Winter from the MRC lab in Cambridge, UK.Their work centres on techniques of “directed evolution” – a method which imitates natural selection. This can help to create new powerful proteins that achieve specific tasks.This critique intends no disparagement of the prize winners, who evidently “transformed research and saved lives.” But they didn’t do it by evolution. They did it by intelligent design.And yet all the media, Nature included, are framing this win as a victory for ‘natural selection’ theory. Nature allows this ignorant statement from Sweden:During the prize announcement, Claes Gustafsson, chair of the Nobel Committee for Chemistry 2018, noted the benefits of the researchers’ work for humanity: “Our laureates have applied principles of Darwin in the test tubes, and used this approach to develop new types of chemicals for the greatest benefit of humankind.”What the winners achieved had absolutely nothing to do with Charles Darwin’s theory. To really mimic Darwin’s ‘natural selection,’ the winners would have turned out the lights, walked out the door, and let stuff happen. The moment they made an observation and selected something on purpose, they murdered Darwinism.The media, however, continue mixing Darwin with design, mixing darkness with light. Live Science says, “Chemistry Nobel Awarded to Scientists for Taking the Reins on Evolution.” The moment anyone takes the reins on evolution, stuff stops happening by chance. Intelligence takes over. Darwin-worshiping reporter Yasemin Saplakoglu turns out the lights of logic, making evolution out to be a creative genius:Every living organism on this planet is a sculpture of evolution. Now, evolution is also unfolding in the lab.This year’s Nobel Prize in chemistry was awarded to three scientists for their work in harnessing the power of evolution for a variety of applications that benefit humankind. These new applications helped create biofuels, pharmaceuticals and antibodies that fight disease.A Long History of FallacyHere it is 2018, and this blatant fallacy is still being promoted. Darwin famously used ‘artificial selection’ as a stepping-stone to ‘natural selection,’ which is its polar opposite. You can’t get there from here. Darwin’s contemporary John Herschel called natural selection the “law of higgledy-piggledy,” showing that he understood ‘natural selection’ to be equivalent to ‘stuff happens.’ In the 1980s, Carl Sagan popularized the same grand fallacy by leaping from spectacular examples of artificial selection to natural selection, (paraphrasing), ‘If artificial selection can achieve such amazing changes in just a few years, how much more must natural selection be able to accomplish, given millions of years?’Seeing design in nature, Darwin was trying to achieve it without a Designer, by ascribing creative power to the Stuff Happens Law, which is the opposite of what breeders do. Breeders have a goal. They can role the dice, but they know what they want, and they steer variation toward it. Doug Axe exposes the fallacy at Evolution News, showing that the Nobel Prize was a vindication of intelligent design, not evolution. Nature cannot ‘select’ what does not already exist, he argues. And the word ‘selection’ itself implies a Selector. A philosophical naturalist cannot personify nature as a selector. Selection is not natural; it is a choice made on purpose by an intelligent agent. Even a robot playing ‘Maxwell’s Demon’ (21 Sept 2018) makes a selection based on choice programmed by its designer.Can the Fallacy Be Rationalized?Perhaps their idea of ‘directed evolution’ could be defended metaphorically, the way we use oxymoronic language to refer to ‘black light,’ realizing that ultraviolet radiation is not really black, but just invisible to human retinas. We know that UV light is just as ‘real’ as white light, and would appear bright to a creature able to perceive that part of the electromagnetic spectrum. That’s not what is happening here. The media are specifically referring to Darwin’s principles being employed by the prize winners. It’s not a stylistic oxymoron, used for effect; it’s illogically sophoxymoronic.Maybe the media expect us to see part Darwinism and part design, giving some credit to both. Darwin can have the mutations, and ID can make the selections. Alcocer tries that angle, but it doesn’t wash, because the media portray what the winners did as the same essential process used by their material view of nature to evolve human beings without any intelligent guidance:One of the most crucial characteristics of evolving organisms – life as we know it – is the ability to replicate and mutate. All organisms can make copies of their genes and undergo changes that are passed to their progeny. In other words, we are totally dependent of evolving chemicals.Arnold’s work focused on the directed evolution of enzymes – proteins that accelerate chemical reactions. Because they are so useful, scientists had long tried to create enzymes with desired properties artificially, but with little success.Arnold – who is the fifth to join an important group of women to win the Nobel Prize in Chemistry – instead developed a method to produce mutations in the genes that produced certain enzymes in order to select the best ones. Different mutations will produce slightly different versions of the enzyme in each cell so, over time, one can select the one which works the best for a specific task.Arnold’s discovery was hugely important – creating a completely new way to design and produce pharmaceuticals and renewable fuels for a greener transport sector.No ExcusesThe logical flaw in “directed evolution” cannot be overemphasized, because Big Science (BS) and Big Media (BM) are using the Nobel Prize announcement to promote a serious fallacy to a largely unwary readership, who are being led to believe that Darwin’s theory is bearing good fruit in our day. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Darwin envisioned a world of blind, pitiless indifference, where stuff happened in random directions, and nobody was around to care (see “Time to Ditch Natural Selection?”, 3 October 2015). To the extent that these prize winners acted out of compassion to advance human health and well-being, they illustrate the image of God in man, not the image of Darwin.Glorifying Darwin for what these scientists achieved using design is like awarding a Pulitzer Prize to a plagiarist. No; worse. It’s like putting a crown on a dirt pile and calling it a god. I’m honestly having a hard time coming up with an analogy for how rotten this reasoning is. Help me out; send your idea in the comments. (Visited 731 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

first_img7 July 2010South African and international celebrities are to join a group of bikers this year for a five-day tour from Johannesburg to Cape Town in support of Mandela Day.According to Sello Hatang, Manager of Information Communications at the Nelson Mandela Foundation, the tour will start in Johannesburg on July 13 and arrive in Cape Town on Sunday, July 18.He said those who will be giving their time to promote Mandela Day will include international actors, adventurers, media people, sportsmen and women and artists.“Bikers are asked to support the Mandela Day tour by performing a good service of some kind in their own home town and local communities,” he said.67 minutes for community projectsThe bikers and their entourage, sponsored by the Vodacom Foundation, Spar and Absa, will be welcomed by town and city mayors along their route and then be put to work for 67 minutes on various community projects in each region.The Mandela Day bikers will include YFM DJ and businessman Paul Mnisi, Highveld Stereo’s Jeremy Mansfield, Isidingo actor Jack Devnarain, former Egoli actor Darren Kelfkens and Survivor SA contestant Hanna Grobler.Also among those on the trip will be OFM presenter James Kilbourn, former Bafana Bafana player March Batchelor, the Development Bank of Southern Africa’s Sithembiso Khoza, and Sean Shipalana, owner of the first black-owned Harley Davidson dealership in South Africa.“The group will consist of both prominent and ordinary people supporting the cause of Mandela day. Other high profile bikers will also be part of the initiative,” he said, adding that additional names will be confirmed at a later stage.Nelson Mandela International DayMandela Day, July 18, celebrates the 92nd birthday of Nelson Mandela, and is a call to action for all South Africans to make a difference in the places in which they live and work.Declared “Nelson Mandela International Day” by the United Nations last year, July 18 is one day in the year that people across the globe band together to serve the communities around them and work towards a better future.Source: BuaNewslast_img read more