Boys: 200 M7th26.53 Colin Reichenberger110 hurdles2nd14.66 Kassie BowmanLong jump2nd16-9 Tanner BalstersShot put9th48 9-5 Colten Ward400 M9th54.24 300 hurdles1st39.48 Girls:Â Timmie Catlin300 hurdles10th43.22 Jaycee Schettler100 M12th12.74 High jump10th6-0 Skyler MisakJavelin7th119-0 Tyler Balsters1600 M14th04:52.8 Girls:Â OXFORD – Class 2AÂ Â Â Boys:Â Brenton Troutman400 M13th52.54 Jennifer Grandoleo100 M14th13.06 Girls: Boys:Â Makayla HollisPole Vault5th9-6 4x800M relay15th09:26.1 Sara EckelberryDiscus2nd126-2 Triple Jump13th33-1.5 CONWAY SPRINGS – Class 3AÂ Â Triple jump7th48 – 9.5 4x800M relay2nd08:56.9 Todd Ray400 M14th54.5 4x400M relay11th3:46.46 Long jump5th16-6 4x800M relay8th10:42.4 Close Forgot password? Please put in your email: Send me my password! Close message Login This blog post All blog posts Subscribe to this blog post’s comments through… RSS Feed Subscribe via email Subscribe Subscribe to this blog’s comments through… RSS Feed Subscribe via email Subscribe Follow the discussion Comments (2) Logging you in… Close Login to IntenseDebate Or create an account Username or Email: Password: Forgot login? Cancel Login Close WordPress.com Username or Email: Password: Lost your password? Cancel Login Dashboard | Edit profile | Logout Logged in as Admin Options Disable comments for this page Save Settings Sort by: Date Rating Last Activity Loading comments… You are about to flag this comment as being inappropriate. Please explain why you are flagging this comment in the text box below and submit your report. The blog admin will be notified. Thank you for your input. +4 Vote up Vote down sportsfan · 275 weeks ago Kaleb Hunt of Oxford also jumped 6 feet in the men’s high jump competition Friday, 5/1 at meet in Cheney, tying Colten Ward. Report Reply 0 replies · active 275 weeks ago 0 Vote up Vote down aegeaea · 275 weeks ago I was throwing the discus at like 150-160 ft every time. Wonder what I would be ranked lol Report Reply 0 replies · active 275 weeks ago Post a new comment Enter text right here! Comment as a Guest, or login: Login to IntenseDebate Login to WordPress.com Login to Twitter Go back Tweet this comment Connected as (Logout) Email (optional) Not displayed publicly. Name Email Website (optional) Displayed next to your comments. Not displayed publicly. If you have a website, link to it here. Posting anonymously. Tweet this comment Submit Comment Subscribe to None Replies All new comments Comments by IntenseDebate Enter text right here! Reply as a Guest, or login: Login to IntenseDebate Login to WordPress.com Login to Twitter Go back Tweet this comment Connected as (Logout) Email (optional) Not displayed publicly. Name Email Website (optional) Displayed next to your comments. Not displayed publicly. If you have a website, link to it here. Posting anonymously. Tweet this comment Cancel Submit Comment Subscribe to None Replies All new comments Lacey PaulyHigh jump13th5-0 4x400M relay8th03:44.9 Sumner County athletesÂ Â Â Lucas ShafferHigh jump3rd6 ft. 2 There are a few Sumner County track athletes to keep your eye on. Caldwell’s Shelby Schmidt currently has the top Class 1A time in the 100 meter hurdles with a 15.85 time. She did not participate in the 100 hurdles in Wellington after hurting her ankle in the pole vault.Those currently in the top two include:â€¢Kassie Bowman of Belle Plaine in the long jump in Class 3A.â€¢Sara Eckelberry of Conway Springs in the discus in Class 3A.â€¢Caldwell’s 4×800 meter boys relay team, who broke its own record Friday in Wellington has a 8:52.28 in Class 1A.â€¢â€¢â€¢â€¢â€¢Tyler Balsters sweeps the 1600 and 3200 meter relays Friday in Wellington.As far as the Wellington Invite goes which included several Sumner County schools as well as Rose Hill and Circle, there were no team scores. Some notable Sumner County performances at the meet include:â€¢Wellington Austin’s Pfalzgraf placing first in the 800 meters in a tight race with Zach Pounds of South Haven.â€¢Belle Plaine’s Tyler Balsters was a first place winner in both the 1600 and 3200 meter runs.â€¢The Caldwell boys pulled within four seconds of the Hanover, 8:48 time.Austin Pfalzgraf survives a close victory in the 800 meters Friday.â€¢Wellington’s Schettler swept both the 100 and 200 meters and Nelson won the 400 girls.â€¢The Wellington girls 4×100 meter relay team finished first with a 51.69 time and the 4.400 meter relay team placed first with a 4:25.91 time.â€¢Belle Plaine’s Heidel was first in both the long jump and triple jump.â€¢Conway Springs Echelberry was first in the discus.Follow us on Twitter. Javelin5th121-10 Shelby Schmidt100 hurdles1st15.85 Mason MisakJavelin8th169 – 8 Colin Reichenberger in the 110 hurdles at Wellington Invitational.by Tracy McCue, Sumner Newscow â€” Sumner County track athletes are less than a month away from the 2015 Kansas State Track and Field Championships at Cessna Stadium in Wichita on May 29-30.Currently, several Sumner athletes have a shot at winning a state title. No more than Colin Reichenberger of Wellington, who continues to record some of the best times in the state in 110 and 300 meter hurdles.Currently, Reichenberger has the best 300 meter time in the state at 39.48. He is also second in the 110 meter hurdles with a 14.66 time. Jacoby Greenwood of Osawatomie currently has the state’s best 4A time at 14.47. Reichenberger only ran the 110 meters in the Wellington Invitational on Friday due to shin splints. Full results for Wellington Invite can be found here. Photo gallery of the event can be found here.Currently, there would be 44 Sumner County entries at the state track meet if the qualifying times were accumulated today. The list of Sumner County athletes who were in the top 16 of their event as of April 27 according to CatchitKansas are as follows:Â Girls:Â Â EventState rankTime-distance Logan CreekDiscus5th143-7.5 none. 3200 M5th10:33.1 WELLINGTON -Class 4AÂ Â Â Jessica Heidel100 M5th12.51 Girls: Leah Nelson400 M8th61.63 Remington Gilkey110 hurdles16th15.93 Shot put12th47- 1.25 Girls: Girls 4x400M reley5th04:17.0 Boys: Boys: 4x100M relay10th54.55 SOUTH HAVEN – Class 1AÂ Â Boys:Â Boys:Â Triple jump14th32 – 11.25 200 M16th27.72 ARGONIA – Class 1AÂ Â Â BELLE PLAINE – Class 3AÂ Â Â 4×400 M relay15th03:48.5 Austin TracyShot Put9th44-.25 Alicia CarterShot put8th36-7 Faith GaddieLong jump15th15 -10 CALDWELL – Class 1AÂ Â Â Devyn Smith3200 M13th12:54.7 Girls:Â
Airtel will contribute a total of shs 10 billion towards the Uganda Cranes for the next 4 years that will be shs 2.5 billion every year.THIS WEEK: Airtel resumes Cranes’ sponsorshipKampala, Uganda | THE INDEPENDENT | Airtel Uganda has resumed sponsorship of the National Football team – the Cranes sponsorship with Shs10billion.This meant that the Telecom Company has renewed its ongoing partnership with the Federation of Uganda Football Association (FUFA) as the official sponsor of the team for another four years. In addition to the national team that the company started sponsoring in 2013, it also sponsors the Uganda Cup and the FUFA Big League. Charles Bakkabulindi, the minister of state for sports commended Airtel. “We are grateful to see an international brand like Airtel sharing the passion and love that we have for this team by sponsoring them,” Bakabulindi said.Airtel’s Managing Director, V.G. Somasekhar said that since Airtel signed the partnership agreement with the Uganda Cranes national team, it has enjoyed a long list of successes both for the team and for the individual players. “To us, this is an indication that a strong partner that believes in you is a key component of success,” he said.Share on: WhatsApp
Justin Evans has been relieved of his duties as head coach of the Pittsburgh Riverhounds, the team announced today.“It was a tough decision to make,” said Riverhounds CEO Jason Kutney. “Justin has been a critical part of this organization for many years, but we felt that we needed to do this at this time to try and turn things around.”The Riverhounds are off to a 0-4-3 mark this season.A search for a new head coach is underway. Evans will be replaced on an interim basis by First Team Player Nikola Katic and assisted by Director of Academy Operations, Scott Gibson.Katic has been a part of the Riverhounds organization as a professional player since 2009, and has played a key coaching role in The Riverhounds Academy throughout his time in Pittsburgh.The Riverhounds play the Wilmington Hammerheads on the road on May 23 and the Charleston Battery on May 24. Both games are scheduled for 7:30 PM and will be streamed live on Youtube.
Liam Fraser and Kyle Strohmann combined for 40 points to lead the Grand Forks Wolves to a 65-53 victory over Stanley Humphries Rockers of Castlegar in the final of the Bomber Junior Boy’s Invitational Saturday at the L.V. Rogers Hangar.Strohman, playing most of the game in foul trouble, finished with a game-high 23 points while Fraser, lights out from behind the three-point line, had 17 including five threes.
SHERMAN RECEIVES DORTMUND FROM KALEEM SHAHThe New Year began with surprising but welcome news for trainers Art Sherman and Doug O’Neill, recipients of some blueblood Thoroughbreds from owner/breeder Kaleem Shah, who moved his 13 horses from Bob Baffert, giving six to Sherman and seven to O’Neill.In an email, Baffert said he and Shah “have ended their business relationship.”Among those given to Sherman were 2015 Santa Anita Derby winner Dortmund and Triple Crown hopeful Klimt, winner of the Grade I Del Mar Futurity this past September. Among those sent to O’Neill were three-year-old maiden winner Iliad, a son of 2004 Horse of the Year Ghostzapper, and American Gal, third in the Breeders’ Cup Juvenile Fillies.“It was a big surprise for me,” said Sherman, who will send out 2014 Horse of the Year California Chrome for his final race in the $12 million Pegasus World Cup Invitational Jan. 28 at Gulfstream Park. After that, it’s off to stud for the popular California-bred son of Lucky Pulpit who turned six today, so Dortmund could prove a fortuitous acquisition.“I only met Mr. Shah one time. He was very cordial and a very nice man,” Sherman said. “It came out of the blue. I’ve never had a client like him with so much money.”Sherman will ship California Chrome to Florida from Ontario Airport at 2 a.m. on Jan. 6. Sherman plans to leave Jan.19.“The horse is doing unbelievably good,” Sherman said.Said Doug O’Neill: “We’re so excited, blessed and grateful. We’re looking forward to being a part of Team Shah.”Added Doug’s brother, Dennis: “We were sitting in our suite at Santa Anita when we got the news. We were extremely surprised.” NAKATANI RETURNS TO SANTA ANITA A WINNERCorey Nakatani is back.Now 46, the native of Covina has returned to Santa Anita, site of some of his greatest triumphs, looking fresh, fit, and if the front-running win in Saturday’s second race on first-time starter Gogoula at 8-1 for trainer George Papaprodromou is any indication, formidable as well.For good measure, Nakatani won the fourth race, the $100,000 Robert J. Frankel Stakes, aboard the Richard Baltas-trained Goodyearforroses.“I’m happy to be home,” said Nakatani, looking like he just sipped from the Fountain of Youth. “California is where I was born (in Covina), this is where I started racing (in 1988) and Santa Anita’s always had a special place in my heart. I was leading rider here (in 1995-96 and 1999-2000) and won so many stakes races (132, placing him eighth all-time at Santa Anita).”Nakatani was the leading apprentice rider in Southern California in 1989, topping the nation in earnings among ‘bug’ boys with $2.3 million. His victory on Goodyearforroses gave him 1,035 at Santa Anita, ninth on the track’s all-time list.“I’ve got my weight down to 118 pounds and I’m working out with Becky (Touber) at Sierra Fitness in Sierra Madre. I train sometimes two days a week and I need to lose about five pounds of muscle weight, which is a lot harder to lose. I’ve got to get back into the grind and do what I do best, which is riding horses.“So we started to do interval training two and three times a day. Becky came up with a regimen and it’s worked, but it’s not over yet. I’m just doing what I do best and enjoying it now that we’re healthy again. Everything’s fine now.”Nakatani overcame walking pneumonia after a recent stint at Oaklawn Park.“I’m going to get my weight down to 114, which would be perfect,” he said. “Then I could tack 17, 18 (pounds) every day. My training regimen is very similar to what Laffit (Pincay Jr.) had with Becky.”Corey’s agent is his son, Matt, who graduated from the University of Louisville two years ago and is mature beyond his 24 years. When Gogoula won, it marked his first win as an agent.“I studied sports management and communications,” Matt said, “and I planned to go to law school from there to be an NFL sports agent, but when the opportunity came for me to represent my father, I couldn’t turn it down. It was something I always wanted to do. I always loved following the horses. I think I’ve watched every race of my Dad’s for the past 10 years.“I follow the horses pretty heavily; my whole family’s involved. My Mom (Michele) is a trainer, my Aunt (Aimee) trains for Graham Motion, my grandfather (the late Wally Dollase) was a trainer and my uncle Craig is a trainer, so it’s always been in my blood from Day One.“I’ve always wanted to do it but never knew if I would get the opportunity. When my Dad stepped away for a little while, I knew I was going to be the key to getting him back, so I’ve been on him for months.“It took time, but when I said we should do this as a team, we’re here for each other and we have each other’s backs, ultimately, I got him to return.” FINISH LINES: Phil D’Amato, trainer of new San Pasqual morning line favorite at 2-5 Midnight Storm with the scratch of Arrogate: “I would think we’re going to be on the pace or right there. Acceptance has some tactical speed, but my guy’s ready to go.” . . . Team O’Neill plans to pass the Sham Stakes against males and run romping Delta Princess victor Shane’s Girlfriend against monster maiden winner Unique Bella and other three-year-old fillies in next Sunday’s Grade II Santa Ynez Stakes at seven furlongs . . . Victor Espinoza will ride Perfectly Majestic in quest of the gelding’s first stakes victory in Saturday’s Grade II San Gabriel Stakes scheduled for 1 1/8 miles on turf. Mike Smith has the assignment on Twentytwentyvision for Richard Mandella, who has Flavien Prat engaged for Chilean import Paquita Coqueta in Saturday’s Grade III Las Cienegas Stakes set for about 6 ½ furlongs on turf . . . Santa Anita will be dark for live racing Tuesday through Thursday. Live racing resumes Friday, Jan. 6, at 1 p.m. Admission gates open at 11 a.m. . . . Players wishing to gain a seat in the 2017 National Handicapping Championship Challenge in Las Vegas Jan. 7 or get a head start in the 2018 event can buy in to Santa Anita’s Players Choice contest for $500. The top five finishers in the Players Choice competition will have their pick of a 2017 or 2018 NHC Challenge entry. Cash prizes will be awarded to the top four Players Choice finishers: $10,000, $2,500, $1,500 and $1,000. For further information, visit santaanita.com/contest. NEW YEAR OFF TO A WINNING START FOR NAKATANISHAH TURNS HIS HORSES OVER TO SHERMAN, O’NEILLSHANE’S GIRLFRIEND TO RUN IN SANTA YNEZ STAKES
Colin Kaepernick is back in San Francisco. And he’s larger than ever.The former 49ers quarterback’s likeness now towers over Union Square in the city in the form of a giant billboard as part of his new Nike ad campaign.Lots of people have opinions about the @Kaepernick7 ad campaign and the #NikeBoycott. Many we spoke to outside the @Nike in #SanFrancisco support him and the store. The new billboard sits above the Union Square location. @KTVU pic.twitter.com/juNNAtcnJu— Cristina Rendon …
While attempting to tell us how fairness evolved for selfish reasons, evolutionists want to push for the “common good.”An editorial in Science Magazine begins with a stern warning:Humanity is at a crossroads. Do we continue trends of preceding decades that lift people out of poverty and extend life spans, but in the process run down the planet’s natural capital? Solutions to this profound problem will require greater cooperation among people. The rise of market fundamentalism and the drive for growth in profits and gross domestic product (GDP) have encouraged behavior that is at odds with pursuit of the common good. Finding ways to develop a sustainable relationship with nature requires not only engagement of scientists and political leaders, but also moral leadership that religious institutions are in a position to offer.The two authors, scientists of Indian descent (one at Cambridge, one at Scripps), have climate change on their mind. In their view, the “common good” consists of mitigating the effects of global warming through international treaties, to which all other groups (scientists, politicians, and religious leaders) must submit. They see “market fundamentalism” (notice the loaded word) as the enemy of the common good. Their article is heavily doused with the “sustainable/unsustainable” concept frequently used to support globalist agendas. To decide if something is sustainable or not, though, relies heavily on complex data and modeling that conservatives and liberals often see very differently. Liberals, for instance, claim that the earth is past “peak oil” so that current utilization rates are “unsustainable” as are the carbon emissions they generate. Conservatives respond that new sources of oil continue to be found and new technologies are making its production cleaner, believing that market forces will take care of alternative energy production if and when they supersede the affordability of hydrocarbons.Science Magazine only presents one side. To Dasgupta and Ramanathan, there is only one common good, and that is leftist globalism. Religion must be co-opted to support their vision of the common good, even if it means reducing life spans and slowing the efforts to lift people out of poverty. It’s not that they don’t care about the poor; they just believe that exploitation of resources at “unsustainable” rates by greedy capitalists is plunging the world into a crisis that will make everyone poor, unless we find “ways to develop a sustainable relationship with nature” which, presumably, gets by without modern technologies and large families:Environmental problems are manifest at scales from the global, such as climate change, to the local, such as declines in availability of fresh water and forest products in villages in the poor world. High fertility rates in the poorest regions exacerbate pressure on local systems and contribute to the persistence of poverty. Unsustainable consumption, population pressure, poverty, and environmental degradation are intricately linked, but this is appreciated neither by development economists nor by national governments who permit GDP growth to trump environmental protection in their policies.Conservatives and libertarians argue that technology offers the best hope for the poor; it’s government coercion and corruption that’s the problem. An acre of wasteland can be transformed into a productive paradise when people have the freedom to use their gifts and talents, because market forces will require that human self-interest be channeled into making products others will want to buy. It doesn’t have to be a zero-sum game, with rich getting richer and poor getting poorer. From Adam Smith to Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek, conservative economists have shown how freedom solves the “tragedy of the commons” and generates the most wealth for the most people, whereas coercive governments often hurt the most people while wrecking the very resources liberal theorists want to make “sustainable.” 20th century examples abound (communist Russia, China, North Korea, Cambodia, Tanzania).What’s notable about Science Magazine’s article is its very one-sided presentation of the problem and its solution, without any opportunity for comeback arguments by conservative scholars. Where is the debate? One might think that “science” requires airing of all the evidence, and a balanced presentation on controversial issues. That is not evident here: it’s all one sided, using the language and arguments for global coercion to solve a problem framed by an ideology that arrogates “science” to itself. Notice how Dasgupta and Ramanathan simply dismiss Adam Smith, passing the buck to other references as their authorities:Because the socioecological processes giving rise to this state of affairs aren’t self-correcting (5), there is urgent need for collective action from the community level to the international level. Studies on resource allocation in nonlinear systems have shown that Adam Smith’s famous “invisible hand” cannot, even in theory, be expected to come to the rescue (8, 9). Natural and social scientists have done their part in documenting the irreversible environmental damages (albeit with large uncertainties) that we have inflicted and in spelling out specific mitigation actions (1). The transformational step may well be a massive mobilization of public opinion by the Vatican and other religions for collective action to safeguard the well-being of both humanity and the environment.For their authorities, they reference themselves! They also cite Paul Ehrlich, who has been demonstrably wrong on many of his doomsday predictions. The only other reference is to David A Starrett, a Stanford economist whose 1987 book Foundations in Public Economics doesn’t have any reviews on Amazon.com; his assumption-based theories appear to be of interest only to academics (example), and lack the track record of free-market economists. So why do the authors cite these few as authorities for such audacious claims that market economics cannot work? This is picking and choosing evidence in a very unscientific way. The authors also use buzzwords of globalism: transformational, collective action, international, sustainable, and mobilization. Does this one-sided political-economic advocacy piece belong in a “Science” magazine?Their solution is for governments to take inventory of their assets, and then for internationalists to decide how they are to be allocated (i.e., redistribution of wealth). History shows that has never worked: governments get bigger, corruption increases, and the poor suffer more (see, for instance, Jay Richards‘ 2010 book, Money, Greed, and God: Why Capitalism Is the Solution and Not the Problem). Religious leaders appear in their article only as useful idiots who can use their powers of persuasion to push the global agenda: “The transformational step may well be a massive mobilization of public opinion by the Vatican and other religions for collective action to safeguard the well-being of both humanity and the environment.” They get downright moral about this. Since they believe “there is a need to reorient our attitude toward nature and, thereby, toward ourselves,” they look to the Pope and other religious leaders for the “moral leadership” that can “mobilize people to act” according to their perspective on what is the common good. Clearly, they would not be happy if religious leaders used their moral leadership to mobilize people against the global agenda and toward individual liberties endowed by the Creator, as expressed in America’s Declaration of Independence.Does Evolution Even Have a Common Good?What makes Dasgupta and Ramanathan’s opinion piece seem especially out of place is the context: Science Magazine is also a one-sided outlet for Darwinian evolution. All the talk about a common “good” and “moral leadership” must be derived from evolutionary theory, with no filching from Judeo-Christian presuppositions. Can it be done?A recent attempt was made by evolutionists at Georgia State. In “Research Shows Human Sense Of Fairness Evolved To Favor Long-Term Cooperation,” a press release tells how Dr. Sarah Brosnan and Dr. Franz de Waal have spent the last decade working with primates to discover the secret of fairness evolution. Their work bears direct relevance to the preceding article about global cooperation:“This sense of fairness is the basis of lots of things in human society, from wage discrimination to international politics,” Brosnan said. “What we’re interested in is why humans aren’t happy with what we have, even if it’s good enough, if someone else has more. What we hypothesize is that this matters because evolution is relative. If you are cooperating with someone who takes more of the benefits accrued, they will do better than you, at your expense. Therefore, we began to explore whether responses to inequity were common in other cooperative species.“They found through experiments that a number of species appear upset if another individual gets a bigger reward for the same task, but the “sense of fairness” requires more than that: it requires recognizing unfairness when you get more than the other individual. Without elaboration, the article asserts, “Thus far, this has only been found in humans and their closest relatives, the apes.”More detail on this study is provided by Rachel Kendal, a Senior Lecture at Durham University, in The Conversation. Her conclusion is announced right in the headline: “The human race evolved to be fair for selfish reasons.” As could be expected, the Darwinian explanation for morality is rooted in selfishness: survival of the fittest—only in this case, it’s survival of the fittest population (inclusive fitness), not fittest individual.Kendal first dismisses the fairness our parents taught us. External rules don’t cut it. “In fact, children do not need encouragement to be fair, it is a unique feature of human social life, which emerges in childhood,” she claims. That’s Darwin’s puzzle:Biologists are surprised by this tendency to behave fairly. The theory of evolution by natural selection predicts that individuals should behave in ways to maximise their inclusive fitness. So behaviours are only selected, and hence evolve, if they ensure the survival and reproduction of the actor or kin whom contain copies of the actor’s genes. However, the behaviour displayed by children seems to be at a detriment to themselves, especially when those who benefit from their selfless behaviour are not the children’s kin.Not to worry; evolutionists are clever with imagination. Kendal turns to Brosnan and de Waal’s theory. She repeats their assertion that many species, including dogs, birds and fish, will appear agitated if another gets a bigger reward for an equal task. The flip side, expressing displeasure at getting a larger reward than a neighbor, is rare: “Such inequity aversion, at a cost to oneself, has only been recorded in humans and chimpanzees.” So what’s the Darwinian explanation?Brosnan and de Waal propose that the motivation to seek equal rewards, despite disadvantaging oneself, is to prevent dissatisfaction of the co-operative partner and avoid any negative outcomes that may follow. The main negative outcomes are the likelihood of conflict and loss of future advantageous co-operation with the partner.Also, one’s reputation is tainted, reducing the chances of forming future beneficial partnerships. When we humans “play fair” we are doing so, according to Brosnan and de Waal, not due to a motivation for “equality for its own sake but for the sake of continued cooperation”.Because humans also have large brains, they can ponder the benefits of self-control. Because we have language, we can express our fairness policies in regulations. Nevertheless, it is striking that only chimpanzees and humans show this ability. How did that come about? “Because responsiveness to advantageous inequity is only seen in humans and chimpanzees, Brosnan and de Waal hypothesise that its evolution, since the split from other primates, was the starting point for the eventual development of the advanced sense of fairness displayed by humans.” It’s strange, then, that chimpanzees show so much violence toward one another, if their social evolution favored cooperation (see BBC News, “Murder comes naturally to chimps”).Kendal ends by undermining any intrinsic meaning or value from altruistic actions. It’s all disguised selfishness:The many heroic and selfless actions of individual humans, for example rescuing strangers in mortal danger and money or blood donation, are inspiring and admirable. Yet, however distasteful to contemplate, it is likely that these individuals gain in terms of their reputation and future cooperation from others, known as indirect reciprocity. If extreme prosociality is a “costly signal” indicating ones worth to future mates, it makes sense that highly visible individuals, such as celebrities, may feel the most pressure to act charitably.But is this an explanation or a just-so story? A unique attribute of humans (and perhaps of chimpanzees, depending on how well designed the experiments are in the absence of language) has been “explained away” as a product of inclusive fitness: you are unselfish toward strangers because you might need their cooperation some day, and you strategize that kindness is the best policy for getting dates so that you can pass on your genes. Why isn’t this a law of nature for all animals, then? Why is it not seen in lower primates and in dogs, fish, and birds? Ah, the evolutionist says: it’s because chimps and humans have big brains. Yet other animals have large brains relative to their body sizes. Well, then, it somehow got selected when chimpanzees split from other primates.This is not only unfalsifiable, it’s mystical. None of these evolutionists has identified a mutation or variation that first led Chimpanzee A to take offense at being given a larger reward than its neighbor. If that was a spontaneous mutation due to unguided, physical causes, it would have had to cause Chimp A to be so much fitter that its mutation would spread rapidly through the whole population, without any plan or forethought. Simultaneously, all the other chimps without the mutation would either have to die off, or want to mate with Chimp A because somehow their brains recognized that it was a nice thing for Chimp A to express displeasure at getting a smaller reward. It’s not clear how any of this can fit a blind mutation-selection theory. Can that really explain why people cross the world to help the poor? Are we to believe that is why Medal of Honor winner Michael Murphy exposed himself to enemy fire to save his comrades, because he thought they would cooperate with him later and make him more attractive to the ladies? It sure didn’t help Murphy pass on his genes.Tying This All TogetherReturning to the Science Magazine paper (and assuming that Dasgupta and Ramanathan are evolutionists, which is highly likely if they are respected at Scripps and Cambridge), we must conclude that they are acting selfishly. Their pretended altruism to help the poor and save the world is a mechanical ruse, thrust on them without their control, determined by an evolutionary past that rewarded acts of “fairness” that have nothing to do with the meaning of fairness. In short, their genes are making them talk that way so that they can attract females and pass on their genes. Since the evolutionary explanation is self-refuting, all this talk by Dasgupta, Ramanathan, Kendal, Brosnan and de Waal can be dismissed as nonsense.Do you see why recognition of self-refuting propositions provides a shortcut to sound conclusions? You didn’t need to read all their fluff and worry about whether it made sense. By their own presuppositions, it is all nonsense.* Next time, look for that, and you can save a lot of time. We went into detail as a training exercise so you can learn the principles.Now, go be altruistic in the power of the spirit of God, your Maker, who endowed us with awareness of His righteous character by making us in His image. He also provided the ultimate empirical evidence of unselfish love by taking upon Himself our guilt and punishment on the cross, leaving an empty tomb, so that trusting in His great act of love, we might live forever with Him in great joy (Romans 5). The Bible, thus, provides logical consistency, understanding, and evidence. Given the root meaning of science (knowledge), which view should be considered the more “scientific”?*If the authors want to argue for redistribution of wealth from sensible presuppositions, we will listen to their arguments on stipulation that God’s word is the final authority for all thought, morality, and action. (Visited 32 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest Japan said that rising imports of frozen beef in the first quarter of the Japanese fiscal year (April-June) have triggered a safeguard, resulting in an automatic increase to Japan’s tariff rate under the WTO on imports of frozen beef from the United States.The increase, from 38.5% to 50%, will begin Aug. 1, 2017 and last through March 31, 2018. The tariff would affect only exporters from countries, including the United States, which do not have free trade agreements with Japan currently in force.“I am concerned that an increase in Japan’s tariff on frozen beef imports will impede U.S. beef sales and is likely to increase the United States’ overall trade deficit with Japan,” said Sonny Perdue, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture. “I have asked representatives of the Japanese government directly and clearly to make every effort to address these strong concerns, and the harm that could result to both American producers and Japanese consumers.”Japan was the top export market for U.S. beef, valued at $1.5 billion in 2016. According to data compiled by the U.S. Meat Export Federation, 2017 first quarter U.S. beef sales to Japan increased 42% over 2016. In addition to the United States, the 50% safeguard tariff also applies to imports from Canada and New Zealand.“We’re very disappointed to learn that the tariff on frozen beef imports to Japan will increase from 38.5% to 50% until April 2018. Japan is the top export market for U.S. beef in both volume and value, and anything that restricts our sales to Japan will have a negative impact on America’s ranching families and our Japanese consumers,” said Craig Uden, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) president. “NCBA opposes artificial barriers like these because they unfairly distort the market and punish both producers and consumers. Nobody wins in this situation. Our producers lose access, and beef becomes a lot more expensive for Japanese consumers. We hope the Trump Administration and Congress realize that this unfortunate development underscores the urgent need for a bilateral trade agreement with Japan absent the Trans-Pacific Partnership.”
MOST READ E.T. returns to earth, reunites with grown-up Elliott in new ad BSP sees higher prices in November, but expects stronger peso, low rice costs to put up fight Read Next “He hasn’t had to go into a lion’s den with all these screaming fans against him.” Saunders’ promoter Frank Warren is confident his boxer will face the winner of Golovkin-Alvarez should he beat Monroe Jr.“If Bill comes through he will fight the winner of Canelo-Golovkin,” said Warren. “It’s all in his hands now. He knows what he gets out of this fight if he wins and I believe he will deliver.”– ‘Shot at redemption’ –Monroe, 30, is boxing for the first time in a year and has registered two points-wins since being stopped in six rounds by knockout specialist Golovkin.“He took a beating before and if he quit before when there were three belts on the line, he will certainly quit when there’s one belt on the line,” said Saunders.Monroe, from New York, refused to be drawn into trash talk but is hoping Golovkin beats Alvarez so he can have a re-match.“It’s a shot at redemption,” said Monroe. “I think Canelo is just going to win but I want Triple G (Golovkin) to win so I can get him back.“If you look at my fight with Golovkin and his fight against Kell Brook and Danny Jacobs, he doesn’t deal with fast fighters.“I’ve had a 12 week camp for Billy Joe, but I only got six weeks’ notice for Golovkin. I never had big backers and money guys in my corner to make things happen, so when a shot like that comes up you take it.”He added: “Billy Joe has had a great promoter like Frank Warren in his corner. All the fights have been in his own backyard. Willie Monroe Jr. of the US is checked by the referee after being knocked down in the first round by Gennady Golovkin from Kazakhstan during their Middleweight World Championship bout at the Forum Arena in Los Angeles, California on May 16, 2015. Golovkin won the fight by knocking out Monroe Jr. in the sixth round. AFP PHOTO / MARK RALSTON / AFP PHOTO / MARK RALSTONGennady Golovkin and Saul ‘Canelo’ Alvarez’s eagerly-anticipated bout will be watched by a global television audience, but it is not the only world middleweight title fight on Saturday.Billy Joe Saunders’ second defense of his World Boxing Organization belt against Willie Monroe Jr. in London will not attract the same attention or glamour but is nevertheless significant since the winner is likely to face the victor of Golovkin-Alvarez clash, which takes place a few hours later in Las Vegas.ADVERTISEMENT Fire hits houses in Mandaluyong City LATEST STORIES Frontrow holds fun run to raise funds for young cancer patients Nonong Araneta re-elected as PFF president Great Britain’s Billy Joe Saunders (L) is declared winner after defeating Turkey’s Adem Kilicci during their 2008 Olympic Games Welterweight (69 kg) boxing bout on August 10, 2008 in Beijing. AFP PHOTO JACQUES DEMARTHON / AFP PHOTO / JACQUES DEMARTHON“You can say lack of motivation but when you’re in touching distance of something great, that alone gives me motivation,” Saunders told reporters on a conference call from his training base in Fuerteventura, one of the Spanish Canary Islands.“The way the Ingles go about their business is second to none. My fitness is on a different level. I’m fit enough now to fight 15 rounds, every minute of every round. That alone boosts my confidence by leaps and bounds.“I know what is around the corner, I want to test myself against one of the greats. Willie had his chance (against Golovkin in May, 2015). I want to beat Willie Monroe in a better way than Golovkin did.”Golovkin, 35, and Alvarez, 27, are recognised as the best middleweights in the division and Saunders thinks the champion will prevail this weekend.“I think it will be a very close fight but Canelo looks like he has overdone it in training, he looked fatigued in training and he’s overdone it,’ said Saunders, from Hertfordshire, northwest of London.ADVERTISEMENT WATCH: Streetboys show off slick dance moves in Vhong Navarro’s wedding Don’t miss out on the latest news and information. Trending Articles PLAY LIST 00:50Trending Articles00:50Trending Articles05:18After the Typhoon Part 201:37Protesters burn down Iran consulate in Najaf01:47Panelo casts doubts on Robredo’s drug war ‘discoveries’01:29Police teams find crossbows, bows in HK university01:35Panelo suggests discounted SEA Games tickets for students02:49Robredo: True leaders perform well despite having ‘uninspiring’ boss02:42PH underwater hockey team aims to make waves in SEA Games Brace for potentially devastating typhoon approaching PH – NDRRMC LOOK: Loisa Andalio, Ronnie Alonte unwind in Amanpulo for 3rd anniversary Lyceum averts disaster, escapes Arellano to stay unbeaten Golovkin, from Kazakhstan but based in California, defends the other three versions of the world title (World Boxing Council, World Boxing Association and International Boxing Federation) against Mexico’s Alvarez in a clash between boxing’s biggest stars now that Floyd Mayweather Jr has gone back into retirement.For Saunders, there can be no more excuses about motivation after an inactive and frustrating reign as champion. The 28-year-old English boxer won the WBO belt from Ireland’s Andy Lee in December 2015 but due to injuries and postponements has only fought once since, an unimpressive points win over Artur Akavov at a leisure centre in Scotland in December.FEATURED STORIESSPORTSWATCH: Drones light up sky in final leg of SEA Games torch runSPORTSSEA Games: Philippines picks up 1st win in men’s water poloSPORTSMalditas save PH from shutoutBut Saunders (24 wins, 0 defeats, 12 KOs) feels rejuvenated and credits new trainer Dominic Ingle with improving his conditioning ahead of facing American Monroe (21 wins, 2 defeats, 6 KOs).‘Confidence boost’ View comments