Tony Fernandes claimed he was being “hammered” on Twitter by angry QPR fans after the FA Cup defeat against Sheffield United.The Rangers chairman, also the chief executive of AirAsia, has been in the news recently after one of the airline’s planes crashed into the Java Sea with 162 people on board.Fernandes tweeted: “Qpr fans hammering me. My concern right now is only families of our Surabaya flight.“Getting hammered by Qpr fans. only concern is the families affected by our plane. But experimental side today. 19 points. League not cup.”Getting hammered by Qpr fans. only concern is the families affected by our plane. But experimental side today. 19 points. League not cup.— Tony Fernandes (@tonyfernandes) January 4, 2015He also referred to QPR’s head of football operations Les Ferdinand, academy boss Chris Ramsey, chief executive Philip Beard, chief operating officer Mark Donnelly, finance director Rebecca Caplehorn and the club’s co-owner Ruben Emir Gnanalingam.Fernandes insisted: “There is a good team now at qpr. Les, Chris, Phil mark Rebecca and @Ruben_E_G from shareholders helping harry. While I focus on Airasia.”QPR legend Rodney Marsh defended Fernandes and played down the importance of yet another early cup exit for the club.Marsh tweeted: “FA Cup is meaningless for clubs like #QPR (not the fans) Can now focus on the only thing that matters is EPL survival.“Understand a small group of #QPR ‘fans’ are pelting Tony Fernandes. My god. He is the one person you should not be holding responsible !!!”See also:QPR v Sheff Utd player ratingsFollow West London Sport on TwitterFind us on Facebook
Evolutionists have a running theme that evolving humans invented religion for various evolutionary reasons.In her most blatant article in recent years, Elizabeth Palermo at Live Science purports to tell the rest of mankind where their religion came from. Her article is entitled, “The Origins of Religion: How Supernatural Beliefs Evolved.” To sound authoritative, she picks an expert named Kelly James Clark, a senior research fellow at the Kaufman Interfaith Institute in Michigan.Picture this: You’re a human being living many thousands of years ago. You’re out on the plains of the Serengeti, sitting around, waiting for an antelope to walk by so you can kill it for dinner. All of a sudden, you see the grasses in front of you rustling. What do you do? Do you stop and think about what might be causing the rustling (the wind or a lion, for example), or do you immediately take some kind of action?“On the plains of the Serengeti, it would be better to not sit around and reflect. People who took their time got selected out,” Clark told Live Science. Humans who survived to procreate were those who had developed what evolutionary scientists call a hypersensitive agency-detecting device, or HADD, he said.In short, HADD is the mechanism that lets humans perceive that many things have “agency,” or the ability to act of their own accord. This understanding of how the world worked facilitated the rapid decision-making process that humans had to go through when they heard a rustling in the grass. (Lions act of their own accord. Better run.)But is this a just-so story masquerading as a scientific explanation? Does giving an imaginary human response an acronym provide understanding? In order to look unbiased, Palermo suggests a different scenario, appealing to Robin Dunbar at the University of Oxford for expertise:But not everyone agrees that religious thinking is just a byproduct of evolution — in other words, something that came about as a result of nonreligious, cognitive faculties. Some scientists see religion as more of an adaptation — a trait that stuck around because the people who possessed it were better able to survive and pass on their genes.At first, Palermo seems to want to avoid reductionism. Both scenarios, however, are completely naturalistic, relying on Darwinian selection. As such, they deny any rational content in religion. It’s all the outcome of genetic forces in the prey-vs-predator competition.A Fool and Her Theory Are Soon PartedObservers may wish to read “How scientists fool themselves, and how they can stop” by Regina Nuzzo in Nature. One of four sources of cognitive bias she warns about is just-so storytelling:As data-analysis results are being compiled and interpreted, researchers often fall prey to just-so storytelling — a fallacy named after the Rudyard Kipling tales that give whimsical explanations for things such as how the leopard got its spots. The problem is that post-hoc stories can be concocted to justify anything and everything — and so end up truly explaining nothing. Baggerly says that he has seen such stories in genetics studies, when an analysis implicates a huge number of genes in a particular trait or outcome. “It’s akin to a Rorschach test,” he said at the bioinformatics conference. Researchers will find a story, he says, “whether it’s there or not. The problem is that occasionally it ain’t real.”Two of Nuzzo’s recommendations are to seriously consider alternatives and invite debate by those who disagree. Evolution News & Views gave high marks to the late atheist evolutionist Will Provine for doing this (see ENV #1, ENV #2, ID the Future with Phillip Johnson, ID the Future with Paul Nelson). Many creationists and ID advocates have encouraged debate (see Academic Freedom Petition) and have complained about the often one-sided presentation of evolution. Palermo’s article, though it presents two views, is an example of cognitive bias where only Darwinians need apply.Moral Evolution Without the E-WordOne cannot find the word evolution in two articles about the origin of morality, but what is the message? There’s no mention of evolution, for instance, in a press release from the U of Missouri on Science Daily that talks about the “development of altruism.” But there’s also no moral standard. What the psychologists look for is “prosocial” behavior, which might be interpreted as two individuals patting one another on the back. Toss in a little sympathy (feeling for another’s wants), and you get this from Gustavo Carlo, a “professor of diversity” at the university:Engaging in prosocial behaviors has a self-reinforcing quality that eventually may become incorporated into how adolescents view their moral selves; this may help explain how some individuals, over time, become more likely to engage in prosocial behaviors and become more sympathetic, Carlo said.In this view, the “moral self” is an illusion based on behaviors that become self-reinforcing. But if altruistic behavior is scientifically amoral, on what basis does Carlo advocate moral education that “encourages boys and girls to express their prosociality“? Is that morally good?A psychologist from Ludwig-Maximilian University of Munich with the name sounding like a Roman philosopher (Markus Paulus) offers his views on the “emergence of morality in toddlers” in a Commentary in PNAS. If humans are products of evolution, they are remarkable, he begins:Humans are a remarkable species. Not only do they display prosocial behavior to an extent that is unseen in other species, but these tendencies are also shaped by moral norms that prescribe what we ought and ought not to do. It is a central characteristic of moral norms that they are of an impersonal nature and apply likewise to the self and other. Thus, humans also evaluate their conspecifics’ behaviors on basis of moral standards and punish or reward them based on these moral judgments.Paulus avoids use of the e-word evolution. He does, however, delve into the usual materialistic debates about the “ontogenetic origins of human morality” with heavy reliance on neuroscience experiments to provide understanding. Morality, he suggests, is a malleable quality depending on embryonic development and social conditioning. To some extent, that is evident; children tend to follow the moral standards of their families, tribes and societies. Not always, though. Some turn to religion after a training in atheism, and vice versa. Some make choices based on their own observations and reasoning, such as from reading books, not from evolutionary influences on their social group. To deny the ability of reasoning to change one’s mind based on evidence or new information undercuts Paulus’s own credibility.Can morality be explained in a vacuum? At the end of the commentary Paulus changes tone, almost getting a tinge of conscience over having naturalized morality:It should be noted that research on human morality cannot be judged from a neutral point of view — a view from nowhere — as we are all continuously engaged in moral considerations and debates. Any research on moral behavior presupposes thus a particular view on what we judge to be moral or not moral. The basis of this differentiation, that is, the justifications of norms, can only be understood from the perspective of someone who participates in a moral debate. Consequently, we need to be careful to not confuse normative questions about the validity of norms with empirical signatures of moral judgments and social evaluations, as the latter can only be empirically assessed when one presupposes a particular normative view on what is actually good or bad. In the present case of perceiving clearly antisocial and violent behaviors, such a judgment seems common-sense. Nevertheless, it would be good to keep in mind the normative presuppositions we are making when examining moral judgment and moral conduct. Such a combined effort of moral neuroscience, moral philosophy, and moral psychology seems to be well equipped to raise our understanding of the ontogenetic origins of human morality to the next level.Paulus just hinted that certain things can be “actually good or bad,” not just so defined based on one’s social context. But is it “good” to “keep in mind” that such presuppositional questions are best addressed in the academy (moral neuroscience, moral philosophy, moral psychology), rather than in church? Having briefly awakened from his dogmatic slumbers, it appears that Markus Paulus promptly rolled over and went back to sleep.Giving Religion a Minute on the SoapboxScience Magazine took advantage of the Pope’s visit to America to seek a Catholic view on science and religion. Edwin Cartlidge, a science writer from Rome, asked the Jesuit director of the Vatican Observatory, Guy Consalmagno, what he thinks. One tidbit: “God doesn’t get in the way of doing good astronomy,” Consolmagno said: “Just the opposite. He is the reason we do astronomy.”Consalmagno used the opportunity to advertise a couple of important Catholics in modern science, Gregor Mendel and Georges Lemaitre. But he also pointed to some of the presuppositions that underlie all of science: belief in an orderly universe of laws, confidence that the universe is real (not an illusion), and the conviction that “the universe is so good that it is worth spending your life studying it, even if you don’t become rich or famous.”Catholics get an outsized platform in the American science media even though they are a religious minority. At least three reasons account for this: (1) Catholicism has a celebrity figurehead (the Pope) that Protestants do not. Reporters are attracted to powerful people. (2) There is a perception that Catholicism has been static ever since Peter. Anyone who knows church history knows how false that is. (3) Catholics never question important consensus views like the big bang or an old earth, and are wishy-washy about Darwinian evolution. These factors draw science reporters to tolerate Catholics part way. Don’t hold your breath for Protestant creationists to get such a platform in the press, even though some of them are just as scientifically qualified as the Vatican astronomer, if not more so.Contest! We’ve answered the likes of Palermo’s “evolution of religion” articles so many times, we want to give our readers a try at it. Read her piece, and write a concise response, pointing out the flaws in her reasoning. Try to make watertight arguments that the most ardent evolutionists cannot deny. The best entries will be added to our commentary.Extra credit: tackle another “evolution of religion” theory by psychologist Steven Reiss of Ohio State, presented favorably without critique on PhysOrg.(Visited 58 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
Kagiso Lediga was one of the South Africancomedians who kept an overwhelminglySouth African audience of more than 3 000doubled up with laughter at London’s RoyalAlbert Hall in May.(Image: Bafunny Bafunny)MEDIA CONTACTS• Wolfgang Eichler, Fifa Media Officer+27 11 567 2010 or +27 83 2010 [email protected]• Delia Fischer, Fifa Media Officer+27 11 567 2010 or +27 11 567 [email protected] • Jermaine Craig, Media Manager2010 Fifa World CupLocal Organising Committee+27 11 567 2010 or +27 83 201 [email protected] ARTICLES• SA, UK’s unique relationship• The vuvuzela: Bafana’s 12th man• Gallery: United for Bafana Bafana• Bafana frenzy grips the nation• Gallery: Mandela meets Bafana BafanaJohn BattersbyAn extraordinary thing happened recently in the iconic chamber of London’s cavernous Royal Albert Hall.With 21 days to go before South Africa hosts the 2010 Fifa World Cup, eight South African stand-up comedians representing a kaleidoscope of the country’s racial diversity kept an overwhelmingly South African audience of more than 3 000 doubled up with laughter for three side-splitting hours.The show – called Bafunny Bafunny, a word-play on the national football team Bafana Bafana (“the boys”) – was an irreverent attempt to build national enthusiasm for the world’s largest sporting event among South Africa’s largest expatriate community – sometimes referred to as the 10th province of South Africa.It was catharsis of the kind that has been kindled – and could be fast-forwarded – by the national convergence and unity of purpose thrust on South Africans by hosting the world’s largest and most diverse sporting event.“The hosting of the 2010 World Cup will change the way the world sees South Africa and the African continent forever,” said South African President Jacob Zuma, who kicked a mean football while serving time for resistance to apartheid in the country’s notorious Alcatraz-like Robben Island prison.Just as the 2006 World Cup had Germans smiling, drinking beer and waving the national flag en masse for the first time in 60 years, so the first African World Cup in South Africa could have an equally dramatic effect on promoting social cohesion in a country with a legacy of deep racial inequality.Inside the hall there were two gigantic South African flags on either side of the massive organ and nothing to remind the audience that they were sitting in the heart of London.The crowd, a tiny fraction of the estimated 600 000 South Africans in the UK, was mobilised by word-of-mouth without a single advertisement in mainstream media.Trevor Noah, Nick Rabinowitz, Loyiso Gola, Mark Lottering, John Vlismas, Kagiso Ledega, Mark Banks and Barry Hilton took the gloves off with slick, witty and hugely varied performances.Their repartee – peppered with four-letter words – slaughtered a series of favourite targets: Fifa, the fiery African National Congress youth leader Julius Malema, the police shoot-first policy, violent crime and the biggest and most sensitive no-go area of all: race.Inevitably, the controversial “kill-a-boer” song featured prominently in the comedians’ repertoire.How do you justify a song coveted by one group of South Africans when it calls for the killing of members of another? Do you laugh or cry?At the Royal Albert Hall on 20 May the only tears to be found were those generated by excessive laughter.For three hours, a diverse audience of South Africans laughed at themselves, at each other and with each other at things that many could not talk about outside the comfort zone of their racial or cultural groups even a few years ago.In recent months, South Africans of all races have been donning Bafana football shirts on Fridays, flying the national flag from their car windows, wrapping their rear-view mirrors in socks sporting the national flag and chanting slogans about Africa’s time having come: “It’s here. Can you feel it?” There is a rare inclusive outpouring of patriotic fervour.As the row about the noisy but uniquely African trumpet – known as a vuvuzela – is debated on breakfast television shows at home and abroad, South Africans are undergoing a seismic shift in terms of social cohesion and identity which is set to be galvanised by hosting the 2010 Fifa World Cup.White South Africans, previously wedded only to rugby while football was (and remains) an overwhelmingly black sport, are starting to take ownership of the national team and willing it to victory despite its low international ranking.As the finishing touches are given to the 10 awesome stadiums, three transformed airports and a range of new transport and access routes, the level of national excitement is palpable.Estimates of foreign arrivals have come down to 300 000 since the build-up began, which will mean that far more South Africans will get a seat at the stadiums.The physical benefits for the country’s economic infrastructure are there for all to see despite a healthy debate about whether the large numbers of poor and unemployed South Africans will benefit from the expenditure of some R40-billion (US$5.2-billion) on stadiums and related infrastructure.But the most enduring benefactor of the World Cup will be the national psyche and the quest for a common national identity to transcend a deeply divided past.As former President Thabo Mbeki said when he spoke at the handover ceremony in Berlin in 2006, the German World Cup succeeded in restoring some of Germany’s self-respect after its legacy of national socialism.“We are confident that the 2010 soccer World Cup will do the same to consolidate our self-respect and dignity gained when we attained our freedom and democracy in 1994 and, in a unique way, also help our own nation and the continent of Africa,” Mbeki said.Long before the World Cup kickoff, Bafana Captain Aaron Mokoena took the lead in ensuring the legacy of the 2010 World Cup will benefit future generations of football players.A year ago he launched the Aaron Mokoena Foundation, which will ensure that those who were denied an opportunity in the past will benefit from the coaching and mentoring services the foundation will provide initially in the sprawling townships south of Johannesburg including his home town of Boipatong in Sedibeng.“The future of the country is in the hands of the youth,” said Mokoena. “I want to make a contribution to ensure that they have the opportunity to reach for the stars.”An initiative such as John Perlman’s Dreamfields project is ensuring that thousands of would be football players are getting access to kit and playing fields often in the most remote rural reaches of the country.Local Organising Committee CEO Danny Jordaan, who has become synonymous with the World Cup, sees the staging of the event as a culmination of the anti-apartheid struggle which so effectively used sport to defeat apartheid.In 1995, former President Nelson Mandela used the Rugby World Cup to galvanise conservative white support for the country’s first black majority government. The story has been movingly told in the book Invictus by John Carlin and the film of the same name starring Morgan Freeman and Matt Damon.Mandela was also instrumental in securing the 2010 Fifa World Cup for South Africa.“Reconciliation is an important aim of the World Cup.” Jordaan told the Independent on Sunday. “We want to make this country better and more united and I think we will achieve that.“It will chart a new course in our country’s history.”John Battersby is a former southern Africa correspondent of the Christian Science Monitor and a former editor of the Sunday Independent in Johannesburg. He is co-author of Nelson Mandela: A Life in Photographs published by Sterling in the United States in January 2010. Battersby is a trustee of the Aaron Mokoena Foundation. He is currently UK Country Manager of the International Marketing Council of South Africa. This article was first published in the Christian Science Monitor (online)
TagsPremiership NewsAbout the authorIan FerrisShare the loveHave your say Rodgers: Maddison still an injury doubt for Leicester recallby Ian Ferrisa month agoSend to a friendShare the loveLeicester boss Brendan Rodgers has been giving the latest update on the injured James Maddison.”We’ll see over the next couple of days. He’s obviously going to be a doubt. He’s put some weight on his ankle so we’ll see over the coming days.”He’s a big talent and he’s been playing great. We’ve got a really strong squad. We made some changes in the week, and the rhythm, speed and intensity in the team was the same.”It’s just the risk of whether he’s going to last the game or not. It’s questionable whether he’ll play or not. He’s such a talented player, we’ll give him every chance.”
COLLEGE PARK, MD – OCTOBER 03: Head coach Jim Harbaugh of the Michigan Wolverines (L) jogs off the fiedl with his brother Baltimore Ravens head coach John Harbaugh (R) following halftime of the Michigan and Maryland Terrapins game at Byrd Stadium on October 3, 2015 in College Park, Maryland. (Photo by Rob Carr/Getty Images)It’s a safe bet that Michigan head coach Jim Harbaugh, who also played for the Wolverines, isn’t a fan of Michigan State. But for at least one day in 1999, he intentionally wore Spartan green. This week, WXTZ-TV in Detroit unearthed footage of Harbaugh celebrating with the 1999 Michigan State basketball team during their national title run.Why does this exist? Harbaugh’s sister, Joani, is married to Tom Crean, who was then MSU’s assistant coach. Crean is now the head coach at Indiana.Harbaugh probably isn’t thrilled that this footage exists. But if his team beats MSU tomorrow, he probably won’t care.
Twitter The emotions of climactic scene of Season 2 of The Handmaid’s Tale, which featured Alexis Bledel’s character Emily, were leavened by the use of an upbeat 1990s pop song by Annie Lennox. (GEORGE KRAYCHYK / HULO/THE ASSOCIATED PRESS) Login/Register With: The second season of The Handmaid’s Tale was brought to a close with a moment of cathartic violence. But one could argue the star of the scene wasn’t Alexis Bledel’s handmaid Emily but instead a voice off-screen: Annie Lennox.With Emily fearing for her life, the sound of Lennox’s symphonic pop cut “Walking on Broken Glass” breaks the silence, materializing via car radio. The tune’s upbeat tone contrasts with the pain of the character and, in turn, attempts to bring greater emotional weight to the scene by highlighting the show’s extremes. It’s one example of how the Hulu series (which airs in Canada on Bravo) used familiar pop music throughout its second season not as a cause for celebration but as a tool to torture.With “Broken Glass,” the desired effect was to make the audience uncomfortable. What at first starts as a simple juxtaposition soon becomes somewhat menacing.
The Canadian Press MONASTERY, N.S. – A school in northeastern Nova Scotia has closed due to an online threat that came just days after racist graffiti was spray-painted on a school bus and a sign not far from the facility.The Mounties issued a statement Tuesday saying vandals spray-painted the graffiti close to the East Antigonish Education Centre, a school attended by many Mi’kmaq students.The school board also issued a release today saying the school was closed Wednesday due to a “possible threat … using social media.”Cpl. Dal Hutchinson, a spokesman for the RCMP, said the two incidents are being treated as separate matters by police, but investigators will try to determine whether there is a connection.He said when the school reopens there will be a police presence to reassure students and parents of their safety.The RCMP said the crude remarks about Indigenous people and African Nova Scotians were painted on the bus and the sign at some point between 8 p.m. and 9 p.m. Sunday at the school about 30 kilometres northeast of Antigonish.Facebook photo.Many of the children who attend the school are residents of the Paqtnkek First Nation, located about 10 kilometres from the facility.One parent posted photos of the racist graffiti on his Facebook page, adding, “School my kids go to. Nice, eh?”Police said that by Tuesday afternoon most of the red spray paint had been removed or covered up, but that evening a notice went out to parents from school principal Richard Britten saying the school was closing, based on the advice of police.
Football has the kicker, baseball the relief pitcher and soccer the defensive midfielder. They are specialty players who have a focus, a certain set of skills that set them apart from the rest. They aren’t always the flashiest players, but what they bring to the team, if only for a play or two, can be the difference between a win and a loss. For lacrosse, that position is known as the faceoff get-off, or more colloquially, the FOGO. What is a FOGO? “Basically the game of facing off is a player for a team comes out to the middle of the field (the X) and is trying to gain possession of the ball for his team,” said Trey Wilkes, senior midfielder and primary FOGO for the Buckeyes. “In theory, if a faceoff guy can go out and win the ball for his team every time, it’s kind of like ‘make it, take it’ in basketball.” Assistant coach Jamison Koesterer was a faceoff player when he was at Johns Hopkins and said he sees the position continue to develop into a specialty area. “It’s kind of transformed into an area of expertise. Guys have really started to focus and buckle down and create a specialty position if you will. I think you’re starting to see more and more guys become comfortable not just being faceoff get-off, but stay and play a little offense,” Koesterer said. “Obviously if you have a dynamic player that can face off with a good stick, that’s a solid athlete that can play defense, it allows you to do more from a coaching perspective.” Koesterer said in lacrosse, the more opportunities there are for a team to be on offense, the more likely it is to earn the victory. “Having possession of the ball in a game like lacrosse where the ball is moving up and down the field is extremely important,” Wilkes said. “There is a lot of technique, there’s a finesse side to facing off, but there’s also a physical side, and it’s just having a balance of that aggression and balance at the same time.” Since the players aren’t a regular part of the offensive or defensive rotations, a FOGO has to prepare differently than others on the team, Wilkes said. “I try to focus more on myself individually and try not to worry as much about my opponent. I feel like throughout the week if I can work on the things that I do really well, I can kind of leave the game in my hands,” Wilkes said. Another FOGO for the Buckeyes, junior defender Darius Bowling, doesn’t fit the bill of the typical faceoff player. Though Bowling still takes his turn attempting to win his team the ball, he also plays on the defensive side of the ball as a long stick. But his defensive focus shows facing off at the X doesn’t mean a player can’t also be a standout in other positions. “For me it’s just kind of making it a scrum (ground ball). I would think that I’m pretty good at ground balls, so if I could make it a scrum, I would have a pretty good chance at getting it,” Bowling said. “So during the week I try to make sure that I’m in a good stance. That’s the most important thing for me is my stance.” Unlike their counterparts, such as attackers who score handfuls of goals or goalies who rack up saves, FOGOs fly under the radar. Their names are rarely in game recaps, despite their vital contributions to their team’s success. “They don’t get a lot of accolades. When you find them in the postgame report, it’s usually when they’re 70 percent or better, when they’re really dominating,” Koesterer said. “But when we come across a great faceoff player and we neutralize him, make it a 50-50 battle, even though we don’t get the headlines, it’s a win in our book.” Though they might not be household names or team MVPs, there is no doubting what a FOGO means to his lacrosse team.