Tags: Hall of the year, residence halls, Residence Life Hall of the Year presentations, which give hall presidents and vice presidents the chance to summarize the activities and condition of their dorm, begin next week. These presentations make up more than half the criteria for the Hall of the Year selection.Senior Michael Wajda, co-chair of Hall Presidents Council, said 65 percent of Hall of the Year deliberations are based on next week’s presentations, in which hall presidents recap their dorm’s activities over the last year with respect to three categories: heart, mind and body.“Over the course of the next week, all of the dorms are going to be giving their presentations, and they’ll be graded on the mind, heart and body categories, but they will also be graded on how they have worked to grow as a community holistically,” he said. “We’ll judge how they’ve worked to include all members of the community, and what sort of sustained unique impact they’ve had this year.”Wajda said 5 percent of the deliberations is based on the dorm’s signature event, which is hosted by the dorm and open to all of campus. The remaining 30 percent is based on monthly Rockne presentations.“These presentations are snapshots that the presidents provide each month, just a listing of what they’ve done which includes events and a couple of pictures,” Wadja said.“We really look for four things in the Rockne presentations,” he said. “We look for how they’ve advanced the mental aspect of dorm life, which can be anything from cultural events, academic events and sustainability events. We also look at how they advance the body of the dorm, so that includes inter-hall athletics and social events.“Finally, we look at how they advance the heart of dorm community that include the service and liturgical aspects,” he said. “There’s a reflection and goals aspect of the presentation where we ask them to see where they want to go from here in the next month.”Kathleen Clark, Hall Presidents Council co-chair, said it is impossible to judge each dorm in a vacuum.“Each of the 29 halls is Hall of the Year in some way,” she said. “So really what we’re looking for is to see that each residence hall has been the best possible version of itself.”Michael Wajda said the Hall of the Year selection is made by a group of nine judges.“These nine judges are the two Hall Presidents Council co-chairs, the council finance chair, the two HPC social chairs, the athletic chair, one senior member of judicial council and two senators.“The judges represent a really diverse group of people,” he said. “We have a good mix of all the quads, all the grades and both genders. It’s a really fun mix of people and we’ve really enjoyed working together.”Wajda said the senators do not have to judge their own dorms.“One of the things we’ve changed is the institution of a recusal process,” Wajda said. “If I felt like I couldn’t be fair in judging Duncan, I could recuse myself without hurting their overall grade.”Clark said Notre Dame residential life holds a special place in her heart.“I showed up for freshman orientation at 2011 and I knew I wanted to be a part of hall council,” Clark said. “I had the good fortune of being on hall presidents council last year and, while I really love and cherish the Farley community, I relished the opportunity to work with each of the 29 communities on campus.”Clark said the most rewarding aspect of her position as Hall Presidents Council co-chair is seeing the hard work the presidents and vice presidents put in to improve student life for those who live in their dorm.“As co-chair you get a glimpse into each community, and that has been a tremendous gift,” she said. “It has made me cherish my Notre Dame education even more because the quality of residential life here is so special.”Wajda said there are several concrete prizes for winning Hall of the Year, including a plaque for the winning dorms, a dome dance and a monetary prize. Two dome dances are given out, one to the overall Hall of the Year and one to either the Women’s Hall of the Year or the Men’s Hall of the Year — whichever is the opposite sex of the overall winner.Clark said the biggest and most meaningful prize for winning Hall of the Year is the title and recognition.“It’s something special to be able to put Hall of the Year on the banner outside your dorm,” Clark said. “It’s all about the bragging rights.”Clark said the selection process is difficult because every dorm is worthy of Hall of the Year.“We recognize there are 29 outstanding communities on campus that are lead by 29 outstanding presidents, vice presidents, and communities,” Clark said.“I think what is valuable in having Hall of the Year awards is that it continues to affirm the importance of residence life here at Notre Dame,” she said. “It is worth celebrating a good, strong community. That’s one of the things that makes Notre Dame different. You hear constantly that people come here for the residential structure, and we have a role in perpetuating that importance and strengthening our communities into families.”Wajda said Notre Dame residential life is unique in that students of all years are living and learning together.“You’re a senior living next to freshman and across from sophomores, and you’re all called Highlanders or Vermin, or Lions, or The Finest,” he said. “It’s a system that most other colleges don’t have, and having Hall of the Year lets us say that Notre Dame residential life is something special, something unique and something meaningful.”
Lasse Vibe’s sixth goal of the season put Brentford ahead at the break in Dean Smith’s first game in charge.The new head coach saw his initial plans derailed slightly when Alan McCormack pulled out in the warm-up and Sergi Canos came in for only the second start of his loan spell from Liverpool.And it took the Bees a little time to settle, with Josh Murphy firing wide from an angle and Dean Bowditch shooting straight at home keeper David Button.But on 20 minutes, Brentford showed Smith their counter-attacking potential with a wonderfully worked goal.Alan Judge began the move with a neat turn and sprint from halfway before releasing Jake Bidwell, whose cross was headed home by Vibe.After that, the Bees dominated and should have added to their lead before half-time.Judge wasted a good one-on-one chance as Dons keeper David Martin saved and he also struck the bar with a free-kick, while Antony Kay cleared Konstantin Kerschbaumer’s follow-up off the line.And on 33 minutes, a ball dropped to Canos, as the Dons looked decidedly uneasy at the back, but he too hit the woodwork.Brentford: Button; Yennaris, Tarkowski, O’Connell, Bidwell; Kerschbaumer, Diagouraga; Woods, Canos, Judge; Vibe.Subs: Bonham, Barbet, McEachran, Saunders, Gogia, Jota, Hofmann.MK Dons: Martin; Spence, McFadzean, Kay, Lewington; Potter, Poyet; Baker, Bowditch, Murphy; Maynard.Subs: Cropper, Hodson, Benavente, Carruthers, Powell, Hall, Gallagher.Follow West London Sport on TwitterFind us on Facebook
When unrelated fossils have similar traits, evolutionary paleontologists twist, shove and stuff them into Darwin’s theory with an all-purpose tool called convergence.It wasn’t supposed to work this way. Animals were supposed to diverge as they evolved. Branches on real trees do that. In neo-Darwinism, the branch tips in Darwin’s image of a branching tree should get farther apart the more they evolve, because neither branch knows what the other one is doing. But the real world is full of counter-examples, where unrelated animals end up becoming very similar. Even more often, fossils exhibit “mosaics” of traits from different branches, or from “stem” (early) or “crown” (mature) members of a single branch. It’s all very confusing to Mr. Darwin, so his disciples invented a trick to keep from getting their story falsified. It’s called convergence, and here’s how it works. (Note: Not being Darwinians, we will dispute inclusion in the occasional first-person plural pronouns.)The Weird FishColin Barras at New Scientist introduces his fossil with a warning: “Weird fish fossil changes the story of how we moved onto land” [Who’s we, Paleface?]. If you thought the story of tetrapod evolution from fishy ancestors was all wrapped up, the wrapping just came off.The evolutionary story we have written [Who’s we, Paleface?] to explain our ancestors’ move from sea to land may need a rethink. A fossil fish from this era has been discovered with several of the features of land animals – yet it was only distantly related to them.Roughly 360 million years ago, one group of lobe-finned fish began evolving into four-legged, land-living animals that resulted in reptiles, amphibians and mammals like us. [Who’s us, Paleface?]Notice first that he calls it an evolutionary “story” – not a scientific discovery. The long-stable account of how lobe-finned fish moved onto land just got unstabilized by a Chinese fossil given the name Hongyu chowi.But when the researchers tried to fit H. chowi into the existing evolutionary tree, it didn’t fit easily.That’s because in some respects, H. chowi looks like an ancient predatory fish called rhizodonts. These are thought to have branched off from lobe-finned fish long before the group gave rise to four-legged land animals.Very well, then. Time to bring in the all-purpose tool called convergence. It works like a vise, cramming the fossil into Darwin’s box whether it wants to fit or not. (Jargonwocky note: Sometimes this is called “independent evolution” or “parallel evolution”).This implies one of two things, the researchers say. The first possibility is that H. chowi is some sort of rhizodont that independently evolved the shoulders and gill cover supports of a four-legged animal.Alternatively, the rhizodonts may be more closely related to the four-legged animals and the elpistostegids than we thought. But this would also imply a certain amount of independent evolution of similar features, because the rhizodonts would then sit between two groups that have many features in common – features the two groups would have had to evolve independently.It implies no such thing, but in Darwinland, everything must fit.The Flying Jurassic Early SquirrelEvolutionists found another misfit: a Jurassic flying squirrel. Trouble is, it’s in the wrong group. It’s not a therian (placental) mammal, and it’s not a marsupial mammal either (that’s another severe case of convergent evolution). This is a “stem mammal” called an eleutherodontid, that is supposed to be earlier than both later groups and not as evolved, but behold: it already was a glider! Plus, it had tooth rows “convergent” with bats, and other specialized traits that weren’t supposed to evolve till later. Writing in Nature, the authors from University of Chicago and University of Beijing seem surprised: “Here we report a new Jurassic eleutherodontid mammaliaform with an unusual mosaic of highly specialized characteristics,” they say, yet they continue to claim they have “New evidence for mammaliaform ear evolution and feeding adaptation in a Jurassic ecosystem.” Whatever it was, it evolved!The inferred dietary adaptation of eleutherodontid gliders represents a remarkable evolutionary convergence with herbivorous gliders in Theria. These Jurassic fossils represent volant [flying], herbivorous [plant-eating] stem mammaliaforms associated with pre-angiosperm plants that appear long before the later, iterative associations between angiosperm plants and volant herbivores in various therian clades.How can this be? Well, the Bearded Buddha was experimenting.The unique mosaic of characters related to tooth replacements and the middle ear of eleutherodonts adds to growing evidence of complex transformations of mammalian characteristics. Their complex dentitions and occlusal patterns are probably adapted for omnivory and herbivory, showing that the volant and herbivorous lifestyle, previously known only in therian gliders, was also part of mammaliaform evolutionary experimentation during the Jurassic.Shameless Plug for ConvergenceBaleen whales are champions of filter feeding with baleen instead of teeth. Long before they appeared on the evolutionary timeline, though, a marine reptile, unrelated to mammals, already had come up with a similar feeding strategy. Phys.org‘s coverage of a plesiosaur that evolved filter feeding puts convergence right in the headline: “Plesiosaur fossil found 33 years ago yields new convergent evolution findings.” All other marine reptiles used their teeth for biting, but Morturneria had interdigitating teeth that allowed them to catch krill, much like baleen whales do. So how did that happen? Bring out the all-purpose Darwin rescue tool:The identification of Morturneria’s whale-like filter feeding is a startling case of convergent evolution between reptiles and mammals. Plesiosaurs and whales shared many of the intervening steps in the evolution of this feeding style and their extreme morphologies are similar despite arising from different ancestors.[Sankar] Chatterjee stresses convergent evolution does not imply Morturneria was in any way related to today’s baleen whales; it just means they both evolved the same way.“They had adopted similar lifestyle and feeding,” he said. “For example, birds and bats fly, but birds are now considered dinosaurs [according to whom, Paleface?] and bats are mammals. These superficial similarities of lifestyles and behavior are called ‘convergent evolution.’” [by whom, Paleface?]Giving something a name is not the same as explaining it. Physicist Lee Spetner spoke about “convergent evolution” for ID the Future, commenting that “convergent evolution is even more improbable than evolution itself” (see Evolution News). Spetner presents an alternative, the Non-Random Evolutionary Hypothesis, which proposes “evidently purposeful evolution as a response to environmental and other stresses.” But then, if it is non-random, such adaptability must have been pre-programmed into organisms—i.e., intelligently designed.Convergence is an essential ingredient in Darwin Flubber. Don’t let the Darwin Party get away it. “Convergent evolution” is simply an empty phrase, a cover for ignorance, a rescue device to avoid falsification. Multiple independent similar adaptations are not proof of evolution in action: they are the opposite of what Darwin predicted. Some convergences in nature are so precise, it takes an expert to identify them (see the “Convergence Concoction” page by Brett Miller).If the Creator pre-programmed organisms with the ability to respond to environmental changes, or to use similar strategies for similar needs, that’s a design feature, not luck. The former is the kind of programming that goes into fault-tolerant systems. It represents intelligent design at a high level. The latter is an example of modular design (see Living Waters for examples of multiple unrelated animals that use magnetic navigation, for instance). Darwinians, by contrast, would rather believe animals won the lottery multiple times when they see finely-tuned, successful creatures with similar designs than to reject their Buddha’s teachings. What better proof of design could there be than similarities between unrelated organisms? What better disproof of blind, unguided evolution could there be than convergence everywhere? Don’t be fooled. Evolutionists get away with this in the media because they are totalitarian bigots, not allowing any criticism or debate. They know that once legitimate debate is allowed, they would be laughed off the stage in disgrace. Bring it on.(Visited 514 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
Top Reasons to Go With Managed WordPress Hosting Why Tech Companies Need Simpler Terms of Servic… Related Posts A Web Developer’s New Best Friend is the AI Wai… klint finley Tags:#cloud#security The number of available IPv4 addresses is expected to run out in less than a year, as we’ve reported before. The proliferation of mobile devices and sensors, all of which use IP addresses, is depleting the total number available. Organizations need to migrate to the newer IPv6 standard to avoid running out of these critical points in the network.The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has issued a free 188 page report to help guide managers, network engineers, transition teams and others working on IPv6 deployments. The report explains IPv6, covers IPv6 security issues, explains how to deploy dual IPv4/IPv6 environments and more.NIST developed this guide to assist the Office of Management and Budget with its IPv6 deployment, which required Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) compliance. The report is designed for federal agencies, but will become helpful to private sector organizations seeking a comprehensive migration guide.According to an announcement from FIST, some of the security issues organizations may face while deploying IPv6 include “fending off attackers that have more experience than an organization in the early stages of IPv6 deployment and the difficulty of detecting unknown or unauthorized IPv6 assets on existing IPv4 production networks.”To learn more about IPv6, visit IPv6 Act Now.Photo by thesaint 8 Best WordPress Hosting Solutions on the Market
A 23-year-old man, beaten up by a mob of cow vigilantes in Kishangarh Bas area of Rajasthan’s Alwar district on suspicion of smuggling cattle, was referred in a serious condition to the Sawai Man Singh Government Hospital here on Monday. He was allegedly taking cows in a pick-up van to Haryana through a village on Sunday, when he was roughed up.Sagir Khan, a resident of Haryana’s Mirzapur village, and his friend Mushtaq were taking four cows and two bullocks in the van, when their vehicle stalled at Bagheri Khurd village in the early hours. An irate mob which gathered beat up Sagir, while Mushtaq managed to flee.