Women’s Basketball Defeats UNI, 76-61

first_imgNicole Miller (Walker, Iowa) made a three-pointer at the start of the second quarter followed by a jumper by Rucker, but that was matched by a Sammie Bachrodt (Wichita, Kan.) three-pointer for the Bulldogs. Rucker continued her hot shooting, scoring five-straight points, to give UNI a 25-23 lead. It would be UNI’s final lead of the night though as Dean made a three-pointer after a Bulldogs’ timeout, that started a 12-0 run that lasted nearly seven minutes. Rucker made a pair of free throws with 29 seconds left and Bachrodt missed a half-court heave at the buzzer as Drake led 39-31 at the break. Preview Buy Tickets Live Stats 1350 ESPN Des Moines ESPN+ PDF Box Score Watch Live The Bulldogs started quickly as Hittner knocked down a three-pointer just five seconds into the in-state contest. On the next two possessions, Monahan made a layup and drilled a three-pointer, for a quick 8-0 lead. Later, Drake pushed its lead to 10 points after Rhine’s layup. However, UNI (15-9, 8-4 MVC) stormed back with an 11-0 closing run to lead 18-17 at the end of the first period. Karli Rucker, who scored a game-high 25 points, scored five points during the run. Story Links Full Schedule Roster Out of halftime, Monahan made another layup and Dean followed with another deep three as the Bulldogs would never lead by fewer than 12 points. Photo Gallery center_img DES MOINES, Iowa – Four players scored in double figures for the Drake University women’s basketball team in a 76-61 home win over UNI Friday night inside the Knapp Center. Drake (19-5, 11-1 MVC) was led in scoring by Becca Hittner (Urbandale, Iowa) who finished with 19 points while Maddy Dean (Jordan, Minn.) and Sara Rhine (Eldon, Mo.) each had 14 points. Maddie Monahan (Silver Lake, Minn.) scored a career-high 14 points behind a career-best three three-pointers to go with seven assists. HTML Box Score Next Game: Following Friday’s victory in the team’s Blue Out Game presented by AARP of Iowa, Drake welcomes Evansville Friday, Feb. 22 for its annual Pink Game presented by Mercy One. Tipoff with the Purple Aces is scheduled for 6 p.m. and will be streamed on ESPN+. Print Friendly Version Dean knocked down 4-of-7 from behind the three-point line and has 221 in her outstanding career. She is just one away from tying Kyndal Clark (2011-15) for fifth all-time in school history in career three-pointers. As a team, Drake made 12 three-pointers, which is one shy of its season-high for a game. Bachrodt nabbed three steals to move in front of Jenni Fitzgerald (1986-1990) for fourth all-time with 251. Evansville 2/22/2019 – 6 p.m.last_img read more

Big Science Joins US Democrat Party Campaign

first_imgScience journals and reporters—even those outside the US—position themselves to defeat Trump and elect Clinton to promote their leftist causes.If there was ever any doubt that institutional “Big Science” was an arm of the Democrat party, take a look at the evidence in these news stories. While individual scientists may certainly have their own opinions, their leaders and the organs of institutional science propaganda don’t even pretend to be politically neutral any more. The gloves are off; they want to defeat Trump. They want to elect Clinton.Donald Trump’s appeal should be a call to arms (Nature). Daniel Sarewitz is usually a thoughtful analyst, but in his column he refers to Donald Trump as an example of “blustering, xenophobic demogogues” that citizens should “undercut” for a “well-functioning democracy”. While Sarewitz makes a good point about historical debates after World War II between Vannevar Bush and Harley Kilgore about the role of science in a democracy, he doesn’t hide his bias. He considers “his [Trump’s] nomination as the Republican presidential candidate should be cause for serious reflection about what is going wrong in America.” Note: Nature is a British publication. Is it their business to get involved in US politics?What Donald Trump has said about science – and why he’s wrong (New Scientist). Another British rag joins the Democrats, scouring Trump’s Twitter tweets for signs he is anti-science. The article posts a video of Clinton saying over and over in a loop, “I believe in science.” The gleam in her eye suggests she is pandering to the Science lobby, but New Scientist doesn’t care. They want her to win.Adaptation to climate risks: Political affiliation matters (PhysOrg and Science Daily). It’s no secret that Democrats believe everything the climate alarmists say about global warming, while some Republicans differ with the scientific consensus. This article reports on “a new study” from Utrecht University in Amsterdam (another foreign academic interest group) that shows Democrat homeowners in New York City are more likely to buy flood insurance than Republican homeowners. Hear the subtext? There’s no question that the academics believe floods are likely due to human-caused climate change, and the wiser Democrats are preparing for it.The Issue: Democrats Support Leftist CausesWhy does Big Science and Big Media align itself with the Democrats? A look at various issues explains why. Name an issue with ethics or policy implications, and you will find Democrats and Big Science institutions locking arms in common cause.Fetal tissue.  Listeners to the Family Research Council’s conservative Washington Watch program know about the House Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives, headed by representative Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, who has appeared on the program several times. The Panel has been following up on the Planned Parenthood scandal revealed by last year’s undercover videos of top P.P. officials bragging about the sale of baby body parts (one of them joked about wanting “a Lamborghini” from the profits). Nature couldn’t care less about the scandal and the laws P.P. has broken. They printed a letter worrying about how this “witch-hunt endangers infants and researchers and must end.” It’s a little weird to think that the Panel endangers infants; how can dismembered unborn children be endangered any worse than by the institution that killed them? The US political parties could hardly be more starkly divided. The Democrats ratified the most pro-abortion platform in their history at their convention, not only denying all rights to the unborn, but advocating repeal of the Hyde Amendment that for decades has prohibited taxpayer funding for abortion (even though Planned Parenthood receives millions in fungible money each year). The Republican Party, by contrast, passed the most conservative platform in its history. It’s obvious who the Editors of Nature are rooting for.Abortion law. Speaking of abortion, Tom Davies in a piece on Medical Xpress rationalizes it. There’s no need for all these laws trying to limit abortion, he writes, because abortion is already on the decline. In the process, Davies takes shots at Mike Pence (now the Republican Vice Presidential candidate) and shows photos of ACLU activists and angry pro-abortion demonstrators. The bias is palpable, but this is supposed to be a medical news site. In another Medical Xpress article, the writer weeps for patients at Catholic hospitals who might have to “fend for themselves in seeking an abortion.” Yet forcing any person or institution to violate their conscience or religious convictions when they feel abortion is murder is a huge issue today. Where is the concern of the author for those pressured to violate their conscience or lose their religious liberty? Pretending that women are too stupid to know where to find an abortion, if they insist, is sexist.Abortion racism. Try to imagine, if you will, any Democrat reacting in horror at the naked racism of the abortion industry revealed in this Breitbart News story, “Scientists’ Failure to Report Abortions as ‘Cause of Death’ Masks Massive Racial Disparities.” Far more blacks and Hispanics are aborted than whites, statistics in the article show, yet abortion is not listed as the cause of death. In Dinesh D’Souza’s new documentary Hillary’s America currently playing in theaters (see trailer), he quotes Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger (a blatant eugenicist yet hero to Hillary Clinton) saying that the purpose of abortion was to weed out unfit minorities, specifically blacks. D’Souza documents how the Democrats supported slavery, the KKK, Jim Crow laws and segregation all the way till the 1960s when President Lyndon Johnson found it politically expedient to position his party as the defender of Civil Rights. Watch this black historian finger the real culprits in this clip from the film.Chimeras: from Nature: “‘it’s amazing that this is going on,’” a developmental biologist from Rockefeller says, “because there are many related questions and ethical issues that should be debated publicly.” Popular Mechanics knows this, too: “Not surprisingly, ethical concerns abound.” So why is the Obama administration lifting restrictions on creating animal-human chimeras? The Big Media spin doctoring team is ready with answers. Live Science justifies why human-animal chimeras may be coming, giving only excuses for it, no criticisms. In a separate piece, Live Science confuses the question by equivocating with “3 human chimeras that already exist.” It changes the discussion from deliberate embryonic tampering to things like bone-marrow transplants or natural anomalies with twins. Those involve parts from other humans. They have nothing to do with human-animal chimeras.Transgender sports. Why on earth would Big Science and their enablers in Big Science Media support the currently trendy push for transgender rights? What does that have to do with science? The only push for it is coming from the Democrats, like President Obama, whose executive mandate to include gender identity in Civil Rights laws will be made permanent by the Supreme Court if Clinton wins (Breitbart News). With reckless partisanship on the eve of the Olympic Games, New Scientist posted an entry titled, “Transgender Olympians in Rio don’t have an unfair advantage.” The author waves the flag of science, claiming that “The evidence shows that transgender women won’t outcompete other female athletes.” But they’re not females! They have male body parts and male muscle mass, with all the advantages that led to gender-separated contests in the first place (e.g., gymnastics, weightlifting, swimming). They just identify with females. In Democrat Party rules of political correctness, one is not allowed to question anyone’s self-identification under threat of being called a bigot (watch this video for a glimpse into the extremes of PC indoctrination at a US university). But to Republicans, sex differences are intuitively obvious and empirically binary. Except for a tiny fraction with genetic abnormalities, the evidence is right in the groin and in the chromosomes. Every parent knows the physical and emotional distinctions between girls and boys. Science Daily bumped into the lamppost of reality in its report on a London study, “Infants prefer toys typed to their gender.” This was undoubtedly a surprise to any of the researchers who might believe (like US Democrats) that gender is merely a cultural construct that should be a matter of personal preference, changeable at will. Conservative Breitbart News pointed to a statement by the American College of Pediatricians that says it is unscientific to allege that a human can be born into the wrong body. The statement staunchly recommends against the transgender political culture being pushed by the Democrat party and Obama administration:The treatment of GD in childhood with hormones effectively amounts to mass experimentation on, and sterilization of, youth who are cognitively incapable of providing informed consent. There is a serious ethical problem with allowing irreversible, life-changing procedures to be performed on minors who are too young to give valid consent themselves; adolescents cannot understand the magnitude of such decisions.Ethics alone demands an end to the use of pubertal suppression with GnRH agonists, cross-sex hormones, and sex reassignment surgeries in children and adolescents. The College recommends an immediate cessation of these interventions, as well as an end to promoting gender ideology via school curricula and legislative policies. Healthcare, school curricula and legislation must remain anchored to physical reality. Scientific research should focus upon better understanding the psychological underpinnings of this disorder, optimal family and individual therapies, as well as delineating the differences among children who resolve with watchful waiting versus those who resolve with therapy and those who persist despite therapy.Nudging. Republicans believe in self-determination; Democrats more often favor government regulation and coercion. In general, Republicans and many Libertarians would say, “Just give me the facts, and I’ll decide.” Democrats want behaviors that scientists consider unhealthful to be banned, from smoking to diet sodas to gun ownership. Sometimes instead of outright banning, they will support “nudging” with psychological propaganda to change the behavior of others (not their own, of course). A case in point is a Medical Xpress item titled, “Freedom-based considerations for withdrawing, withholding options: The example of tobacco control and nudging policies.” In the article, a Princeton academic considers how to make citizens think they have freedom, when they are really being manipulated. Andreas Schmidt appears aware of the bad optics, but justifies it with a touch of elitism:Some argue that nudging infringes upon people’s freedom and autonomy. Others say that nudging always happens, so why not nudge people toward better decisions. Of Schmidt’s considerations, only status freedom may offer an objection to nudging policies, but if nudging policies are transparent and democratic, this will mitigate the potential for status abuses.Who decides what constitutes “transparent and democratic”? The nudgers obviously have a goal in mind, and a policy to implement it. To envision the probable outcome, all you need to do is ask what happens if the nudgee (the citizen) decides to go against the nudger (the government regulator). A perceptive commenter wrote this:Tell me, how does government create a “nudging policy” without first taking money via force from citizens, to actually create and implement the policy? Isn’t taking people’s money from them via force (thru a majority vote of course) an infringement on their freedom to keep the fruits of their labor?Endangered species. A common propaganda tactic is to demonize the opposition. National Geographic, in an unvarnished hit piece against Republicans, discussed “Why These Rare Species Are Targeted by the GOP.” The article is a clear attack on the Republican party platform. Reporter Brian Clark Howard portrays Republicans as mean-spirited people who don’t care about endangered species. “In the end, perhaps the GOP’s mention of these species in their platform has more to do with wider cultural wars than wildlife science,” he says, positioning Republicans once again as anti-science.Big Science has lost its way. It is not the role of a scientist to engage in partisan politics. For whatever reason, the leaders in Big Science (journal editors, mainstream media heads, and lobbyists for scientific societies) have gone whole hog for the Democrat Party. Why? It’s a case of conflict of interest. They think that Democrats like Obama and Clinton funnel more more money to them. In this they are sadly mistaken, as the bitter fruits of socialism appear in Venezuela, leaving scientists struggling (Nature). Big Science’s best hope for a prosperous research environment would be to have a thriving economy—the result of free markets and the rule of law that protects private property (Prager University). Those are Republican values (Prager U). If they were really objective scientists, they would look at the pitifully slow economic recovery over the last 8 years under a Democrat administration, and turn right. They would consider whether the other party might offer true hope and change. A prosperous America would, once again, bring in higher tax revenues that would enable higher funding for science. A bankrupt country cannot afford such luxuries.Exercises: Watch the Prager University videos on economics to the point where you can articulate the principles of free markets to others. Then watch D’Souza’s documentaries Obama’s America and Hillary’s America. Be part of a grass-roots effort to educate people out of their indoctrination. The aim of this exercise is to bring balance back into political discourse, because it is wildly imbalanced now, as shown by these examples (if you can find a clear pro-Republican article in Big Science or Big Media, please send it to us). Like Darwin said, “a fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question.” It’s OK to share disagreements on any of the issues above—but only after the deprogramming is complete.Above all, let’s stop pretending that Big Science is objective when it comes to political, economic and worldview matters. Their hands are dirty in political advocacy, almost always for the Democrat, leftist, socialist, globalist, elitist side of any issue. Their writings have value when they are discussing observable, repeatable, testable facts about natural phenomena. Even then, you have to watch the Materials and Methods, and see if the conclusions logically follow from the data. You have to rinse off the Darwinist spin. Use our Baloney Detector and Darwin Dictionary for help when necessary. A scientist ceases to be a scientist when he leaves off the ideals of science, to understand the cause-and-effect structure of the world according to testable hypotheses. That takes rigor, integrity, and humility. “Vote for Clinton!” is not a scientifically rigorous statement. (Visited 24 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

Weaponizing The Patent System: A Tiny Startup Faces Financial Extinction

first_imgDitto is a 15-person eyewear startup that utilizes remarkable software — a 3D modeling system that  replicates the buyer’s face — to let customers try on glasses virtually before purchasing them. Unfortunately for Ditto, its innovative software has put the company in the crosshairs of Glasses.com. Glasses.com is owned by 1-800 Contacts, a much larger online eyewear retailer that recently purchased an old patent from a defunct company (U.S. Patent 7,016,824 covers selling glasses online based on 3D models) and announced its own version of 3D try-on software for glasses – while simultaneously filing a patent-infringement lawsuit against Ditto.  1-800 Contacts claims that it plans to its own service as an iPad app sometime soon. But this plan was first publicized on April 17, 2013, while Ditto launched its version a year ago. David vs. Goliath“It’s a game-changing event, truly. It’s terrifying,” sighed Ditto CEO Kate Endress. “We’ve had to stop all marketing, every dollar has to go into this litigation.” 1-800 Contacts refuses to license the patent to Ditto; instead it’s seeking an injunction to stop Ditto from using the software. The only option, as Ditto sees it, is to lawyer-up and try and win the suit. Making things even more expensive, 1-800 Contacts is suing California-based Ditto in its home state of Utah. Whatever the outcome of the suit, the most likely result is the depletion of Ditto’s cash reserves and the destruction of the company. That’s because this battle is far from equal. 1-800 Contacts was founded in 1995 and took off thanks to a partnership with Wal-Mart started in 2008. In 2012 it was bought by WellPoint for close to $900 million. Yeah, that WellPoint, the largest for-profit, managed health care company in the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association, with revenue in 2012 of $61.7 billion and more than 43,000 employees.“If we win this infringement case, we’re still out the millions of dollars we spent winning. That’s why it has become punitive for companies to innovate,” Endress said. “The patent systems is structured in a way where it lets corporations act like patent trolls where they can buy things they didn’t invent.” And in this case, “we are literally going up against a giant corporation,” Endress noted. 1-800-Not-Our-FaultWhen reached for comment, 1-800 Contacts told ReadWrite:1-800 CONTACTS and its Glasses.com division have invested significant time and resources into the development of the interactive try-on platform technology and acquiring the appropriate patent rights to protect it. However, we do not comment on pending litigation.  1-800 Contacts released a more elaborate statement to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), which has defended Ditto online: “1-800 Contacts invested significant time and resources to acquire and license the existent patent rights needed to practice its technology. Clearly, Ditto did not do the same.” Why Tech Companies Need Simpler Terms of Servic… Related Posts Top Reasons to Go With Managed WordPress Hosting Tags:#e-commerce#legal#online shopping#patent troll#Patents A Web Developer’s New Best Friend is the AI Wai… 8 Best WordPress Hosting Solutions on the Market nick statt The EFF was not impressed: “1-800-Contacts says it is not a patent troll. Sure, the company is not a classic patent troll – a shell company that does nothing but buy patents and sue – but it’s little better.” What Makes A Patent Troll?Could this entire issue be a misunderstanding, where 1-800 Contacts actually spent years pouring money into this concept, only to see a brash startup steal its lunch? Maybe, but 1-800 Contacts’ history of aggressive litigation doesn’t inspire confidence in that interpretation.In 2002, the company pursued WellU.com over pop-up advertisements that displayed competitors’ products. 1-800 Contacts was granted a preliminary injunction, but WellU won on appeal. In 2008, the company fought with Google over controversial search-related provisions of a Utah trademark law that were eventually repealed. And in 2010, 1-800-Contacts sued Contact Lens King, Inc. over key-word advertising. Despite the odds, Endress vows that, “We’re going to vigorously defend ourselves. We’re so proud of what we built. Maybe we can become cash flow positive and survive.” The EFF is asking for help in trying to invalidate the patent in question, but no matter how the legal complications unfold, the road Ditto faces will certainly be long and expensive.Images courtesy of Ditto.last_img read more

Negativity Has No Upside

first_img Get the Free eBook! Learn how to sell without a sales manager. Download my free eBook! You need to make sales. You need help now. We’ve got you covered. This eBook will help you Seize Your Sales Destiny, with or without a manager. Download Now Negativity has no upside. You do not achieve greater outcomes nor greater return on investing negative emotional energy in your problems, challenges, and inconveniences.Negativity creates a disempowered mindset. By reminding yourself how unhappy you are about a certain situation, you are changing your focus and your mental state. You negative mindset will cut you off from potentially positive choices. Your negative focus will blind you to opportunity.You make a negative situation even worse by investing your negative emotional state in it. You amplify the negativity. When something is already difficult or stressful, ratcheting up the negativity ratchets up already heightened emotional states. This is how relationships are destroyed.Being negative doesn’t help you to solve problems or challenges faster. Nor does it allow you to solve them more effectively. In fact, the opposite is true of negativity. It can be debilitating.Negativity doesn’t draw people to your cause. In fact, it can repel the very people whose help you need. Negativity attracts negative people. But to break through difficult challenges, you need the positive, can-do people who believe greater things are possible.Negativity doesn’t make a difficult conversation any easier. Quite the opposite. Negativity can make a difficult conversation crushingly painful. The emotional state and mindset of negativity makes it more likely that you turn a difficult situation into irreconcilable differences. Negativity is how relationships are damaged (or worse).In business and in life, you are going to have to deal with challenging situations and circumstances. You are going to have to deal with unpleasant and difficult people. You are going to fail from time to time, even when failure is not an option.Being negative about any or all of the above does nothing to change the situation or circumstance, nor does it allow you to deal with the circumstances more effectively. You don’t produce a better result by being negative.Making yourself feel bad does nothing to make you feel better. Deciding to feel powerless is not a recipe for being empowered and taking whatever necessary actions are required of you.Negativity is really fear. You are afraid that something bad will happen to you. You are afraid that you aren’t going to get what you want, that you aren’t capable of succeeding, or that you are going to be harmed in some way.There is no upside to negativity. But the upside for optimism and an empowered mindset is limitless.last_img read more

Tropical Depression in Five Days Bahamas TCI on Alert

first_imgFacebook Twitter Google+LinkedInPinterestWhatsApp Facebook Twitter Google+LinkedInPinterestWhatsAppProvidenciales, TCI, November 16, 2016 – The National Hurricane Center is saying that in five days, the region could again be looking at a Tropical Depression due to a large area of cloudiness and showers in the southwestern Caribbean Sea.Development will be slow for this low pressure system which will move either north or northeast.  We will keep an eye on it and keep you posted; the DDME issued notice yesterday morning of the weather system and a reminder that we are not yet out of the Atlantic Hurricane Season.   It ends on November 30th… at least officially. Related Items:last_img read more

BAHAMAS Olympians at BAISS

first_imgFacebook Twitter Google+LinkedInPinterestWhatsApp#Bahamas, February 19, 2018 – Nassau – Olympians Pauline Davis Rolle and Shaunae Miller Uibo were at BAISS today at the National Stadium.  Also pictured at the track and field competition are Cabinet Ministers Jeffrey Lloyd and Michael Pintard.(BIS Photos/Derek Smith) Facebook Twitter Google+LinkedInPinterestWhatsApp Related Items:last_img

Georginio Wijnaldum reveals how Klopp keeps Liverpool grounded

first_imgLiverpool midfielder Georginio Wijnaldum has revealed manager Jurgen Klopp is stopping the players from being distracted by Tottenham Hotspur and Manchester City.The Reds are currently top of the Premier League, six points above second place Spurs with City having slipped to third after back-to-back defeats.Klopp has spoken of his players focusing on their on game and Wijnaldum says the team will not be distracted by what other teams are doing.“When we played Wolves away (the Friday before Christmas) a lot of the players didn’t even know who City or Tottenham were playing,” he said, according to Sky Sports.“We were just focused on our own game and trying to get the most out of that one. That is why it goes so well.”“We are only focused on the things we can control. We can control our own performance. We are only busy with that.”Roberto Firmino, LiverpoolVirgil van Dijk praises Roberto Firmino after Liverpool’s win Andrew Smyth – September 14, 2019 Virgil van Dijk hailed team-mate Roberto Firmino after coming off the bench to inspire Liverpool to a 3-1 comeback win against Newcastle United.“If you are maybe less focused than normal, then you have a manager in Jurgen who will tell you directly that there is no space for doing less or enjoying things too much. He says keep both feet on the ground.”last_img read more

Solar Power Puts Dugway Proving Ground on Path to Net Zero

first_img Dan Cohen AUTHOR As Army officials prepare to celebrate the opening next week of a 2-megawatt solar array at Dugway Proving Ground, the installation confirmed plans for the construction of a 3-megawatt array about 20 miles away.When the second array is completed, the two will provide 25 percent of the electrical needs of the test center, administrative buildings and homes at Dugway, located in the West Desert of Utah. That output would meet DOD’s goal of obtaining 25 percent of its electricity from renewable sources and advance the proving ground’s efforts to become a net zero installation, reported Army Public Affairs.“Not only are we on track to meet the Army’s goal, but we are acting as good neighbors with the state of Utah,” said Don Smith, Dugway’s garrison manager. “We will be able to shave of a portion of Rocky Mountain Power’s output during its peak hours, which will benefit everyone.”The first array, which began operations in February, is made up of more than 7,000 solar panels on 10 acres of land. It cost $7.7 million to build.To support its effort to adopt renewables, the proving ground is building a microgrid, which will allow it to operate on stored energy when the commercial grid is down.“With the aging infrastructure of the commercial power grid it became critical that we find an alternate method to ensure an uninterrupted power source,” Smith said.last_img read more