STATE PATHOLOGIST CALLED AFTER MAN’S BODY FOUND IN SUSPICIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES

first_imgBREAKING NEWS: Gardai are primed to launch an investigation after the body of a man was found in Falcarragh last night.The body of the man, believed to be in his 60s, was discovered outside a house.His remains were taken to Letterkenny General Hospital for an examination. It is understood the death is believed to be suspicious.Donegal Daily understands that the body was not fully-clothed.The state pathologist’s office was contacted and assistant pathologist Dr Khalid Jabber on her way to Co Donegal.No further Garda comment is being made on the matter at present. A full post mortem is expected to be carried out later this afternoon. STATE PATHOLOGIST CALLED AFTER MAN’S BODY FOUND IN SUSPICIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES was last modified: November 2nd, 2013 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:bodyFalcarraghGardaipathologistlast_img read more

Human-Ape Gap Quadruples

first_imgRemember that old truism that humans and chimpanzees share 98.5% of their genes?  Try 94% instead.  That’s a new estimate by Matthew Hahn (Indiana U) and a team who published in a new online journal, PLoS One.1  J.R. Minkel, writing for Scientific American, said “The 6 percent difference is considerably larger than the commonly cited figure of 1.5 percent.”    Why such a drastic revision?  Hahn says the earlier estimate fails to take into account duplicated genes.  As Minkel explains it assuming evolution,The new finding supports the idea that evolution may have given humans new genes with new functions that don’t exist in chimps, something researchers had not recognized until recently.  The older value of 1.5 percent is a measure of the difference between equivalent genes in humans and chimps, like a difference in the spelling of the same word in two similar languages.  Based on that figure, experts proposed that humans and chimps have essentially the same genes, but differed in when and where the genes turn on and off.    The new research takes into account the possibility for multiple copies of genes and that the number of copies can differ between species, even though the gene itself is the same or nearly so.The stats: “The group estimated that humans have acquired 689 new gene duplicates and lost 86 since diverging from our common ancestor with chimps six million years ago.  Similarly, they reckoned that chimps have lost 729 gene copies that humans still have.”    Minkel and the authors of the paper did not look outside the box of evolution to explain these differences.  A geneticist was quoted as saying, “The paper supports the emerging view that change in gene copy number, via gene duplication or loss, is one of the key mechanisms driving mammalian evolution.”  Exactly how this produces new genes or complex systems was not explained.  Minkel also summarized what evolutionists believe in this line: “Researchers believe that additional copies of the same gene allow evolution to experiment, so to speak, finding new functions for old genes.”  That sentence, along with his earlier line “evolution may have given humans new genes with new functions” personifies evolution as an intelligent, or semi-intelligent, agent.    A press release about this new calculation appeared in EurekAlert entitled, “What it means to be human.”  The article did not describe this as a problem for evolution.  On the contrary, it said, “So the question biologists now face is not which measure is correct but rather which sets of differences have been more important in human evolution.”  The problem of statistics was briefly mentioned.  Although claiming that the 1.5% difference remains when comparing the genes base-per-base, the article admitted, “there isn’t a single, standard estimate of variation that incorporates all the ways humans, chimps and other animals can be genetically different from each other.”  Yet accounting for those differences in the time allowed, and understanding how genetic bit changes could have transformed screeches into sonnets, surely cannot be glossed over in answering the question of what it means to be human vs simian.1Demuth JP, Bie TD, Stajich JE, Cristianini N, Hahn MW (2006) The Evolution of Mammalian Gene Families.  PLoS ONE 1(1): e85. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000085.There you have it: another bad case of the statistics fallacy.  Genomes are extremely complex entities that are just barely understood.  Depending on what you choose to look at, you can find all kinds of similarities and differences and come up with agenda-driven numbers.  It seems clear that the earlier estimate was motivated by an evolutionary agenda to show how similar we were to the apes.  If this new estimate becomes widely accepted, evolutionists are going to have a terrible time explaining this many genetic changes in “only” six million years.  It’s too late for them to even try, though, now that neo-Darwinism has been falsified (see 12/14/2006 entry).    We really must help the Darwinian science reporters get over their bad habit of personifying evolution.  It’s so pre-ID.(Visited 18 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

Batter Up! Enterprise Giants and the Games They Play

first_imgA Web Developer’s New Best Friend is the AI Wai… Top Reasons to Go With Managed WordPress Hosting Related Posts 8 Best WordPress Hosting Solutions on the Market alex williamscenter_img Tags:#cloud#cloud computing The big guns of the technology world are sometimes like that aging baseball team making another run for the World Series.The baseball team’s roster is filled with stars in the later part of their careers. They are not as fast as the younger players they oppose. But they sure have experience and enough knowledge to know exactly how to exploit the weaknesses of those kids with the big bats and strong arms.In the world of cloud computing and the enterprise, companies like IBM, SAP and Oracle represent the older, more seasoned players. They have great technology. They innovate to some degree but not at the pace of the younger, agile (no pun intended) pure play providers.Appirio has written a two-part series that explores the issues customers face when considering a cloud computing service.Of course, Appirio has its own agenda. The company provides services to implement, build and manage cloud environments for. The platforms they work with include Salesforce.com, Google and Amazon. So, it’s no surprise that they critique companies that have a history of providing enterprise software.In the first part, Appirio makes a distinction between public and private clouds. The second post provides its own view about the more established players.Appirio makes three observations about the games the entrenched players are now making:Name Everything the SameWe see that a lot. Appirio points out IBM and SAP. We’re told it’s about branding but making sense of it all helps muddy the waters. Baseball Analogy: Established technology companies have any number of pitches in their arsenal. They throw a particularly good knuckle ball. Our view: It’s not as diabolical as it seems. Technology companies need to grow as much as the startups do. They have shareholders who hold them accountable on that score. It is, though, a way for companies to obfuscate what it really is they provide in the cloud.Claim Progress Through StandardsThis one is tough to judge. The cloud computing world does need standards to make interoperability a reality. But standards issues can be a bit like a slow moving chess match. Case in point is the Open Cloud Manifesto.Baseball Analogy: A veteran team knows how to slow the game to a crawl. Lots of pitching changes. Goal is to throw the other team off.Our view: Standards can be used by the new players as much as the older established companies. Most all, new and old, are guilty of poor interoperability. Chess is a thinking man’s game. Standards are, too.Develop a Few innovative SolutionsEstablished technology companies do innovate but will often mix its developments with legacy services, making the on-premise offerings look like it has a cloud connection. We see this all the time. Baseball Analogy: Don’t mess with the starting team but do beef the line up a few promising players from the minors.Our view: You see this approach with companies that are considered relatively young. Salesfroce.com is criticized for strapping on new features to10 year old technology.How to RespondBut how to respond when facing the dizzying marketing barrage presented by the veterans of the gamer?Appirio makes three points worth considering when going to the cloud. It’s the last point that we think makes a lot of sense:Use pure plays to increase knowledge, get real benefit and put pressure on legacy vendors – We have had many prospects and customers begin to explore public cloud apps like Google simply to place pressure on their legacy vendors (Microsoft Exchange or Lotus Notes). In some cases, this resulted in dramatically lower renewal costs of those products; in others it led to a deeper understanding of and eventual selection of Google Apps. Either way, it’s a clear benefit to the enterprise. And over time it inevitably increases the rate of adoption of the solutions delivering superior value (i.e. the cloud).We agree that established companies do take steps to develop the next generation of technology. But they have a lot to protect, too. The young companies are exciting and have the capability to serve the enterprise. But do remember they are young and are more susceptible to ever present disruptions to the market.But in either case, now is the time to move forward with cloud computing, no matter if you choose the veteran or the new upstart. The times are changing fast. It’s not the time to live by the time worn and well known refrain made famous by Brooklyn Dodgers fans:“Wait ’till next year.” Why Tech Companies Need Simpler Terms of Servic…last_img read more