Out-of-favour QPR striker Rob Hulse says he has not been told whether he will be made available for transfer before the new season starts.Hulse, whose Rangers contract has another year to run, was left out of the pre-season tour of Asia and has dropped further down the pecking order of forwards at Loftus Road.But the 32-year-old has been given no formal indication of the club’s plans for him.He said: “Obviously when you’re not included [in the Asia tour] it’s pretty clear that you’re not part of things.“But the club have said nothing to me and I’m just focusing on getting fit for the start of the season and seeing what happens.“To be honest I’ve not thought too much about my future. My priority is to get a decent pre-season and then take it from there.”Follow West London Sport on TwitterFind us on Facebook
(Visited 53 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0 Another attempt to explain the Cambrian explosion proposes a global flood that tapped the capacity of simple animals to evolve new body plans suddenly.As described in the 9/25/13 entry, evolutionists have come up with several ad hoc mechanisms or question-begging arguments to tap dance around the Cambrian explosion (the sudden appearance of nearly all the animal phyla in a geological instant). Another creative explanation sounds almost Biblical. Writing for the New York Times (9/19/13), Carl Zimmer described a global catastrophe that, rather than killing off life, enabled it to evolve. Leaning on the ideas of Paul Smith (Oxford U) and David Harper (U of Durham), the ones who hypothesized a “combo plate” model for causes of the explosion, Zimmer invoked a global flood:But those genes evolved in bilaterians tens of millions of years before the Cambrian explosion put them to the test, notes Dr. Smith. “They had the capacity,” he said, “but it hadn’t been expressed yet.”It took a global flood to tap that capacity, Dr. Smith and Dr. Harper propose. They base their proposal on a study published last year by Shanan Peters of the University of Wisconsin and Robert Gaines of Pomona College. They offered evidence that the Cambrian Explosion was preceded by a rise in sea level that submerged vast swaths of land, eroding the drowned rocks.Here’s how their paper in Science, “Causes of the Cambrian Explosion,” mentioned the big flood as one possible abiotic process for the explosion, on their combo plate of possible causes:Major sea-level rise in the early, but not earliest, Cambrian led to the flooding of these interiors and triggered a range of Earth system responses, including the extensive erosion and mobilization of weathered rock and regolith and the rapid input of calcium, phosphate, and other ions into the oceans. Calcium concentrations in seawater increased almost threefold in the early Cambrian, and this input may have directly facilitated the origin of biomineralization. The input of phosphate provided simultaneous nutrient flux to shallow-water areas.The paper by Peters and Gaines they referenced, from Nature in 2012, uses the Great Unconformity as evidence of a global flood (see 4/20/12), although they did not use the phrase “global flood.” Instead, they referred to “widespread continental denudation during the Neoproterozoic followed by extensive physical reworking of soil, regolith and basement rock during the first continental-scale marine transgression of the Phanerozoic.”It’s not clear from the Nature paper whether the authors believe all the high mountains on Earth were covered by water. Suffice it to say, though, that they proposed that the denudation was continental in scope and had global consequences on the ocean and on life. Additionally, they pointed to the fact that the Great Unconformity itself is global: it “can be traced across Laurentia and globally, including Gondwana, Baltica, Avalonia and Siberia, making it the most widely recognized and distinctive stratigraphic surface in the rock record.”What’s striking is that creationists also look at the Great Unconformity as evidence for a global flood. They also believe, like Smith and Harper, that the flood involved “extensive erosion and mobilization of weathered rock and regolith”. Two major differences would be the timing of the flood (as well as its mechanism) and the emplacement of the fossil record as a consequence.It’s apparently acceptable for evolutionists to propose a global flood, but when creationists point to evidence and written records of a global flood, it is laughed at as myth. Here’s how Zimmer replaced myth with hard science. He claims the complex life emerged out of poison, but life survived with crystal power:But these great floods also poisoned the ocean. The erosion of the coastlines released calcium, which can be toxic to cells. In order to survive, animals had to evolve ways to rid themselves of the poison. One solution may have been to pack the calcium into crystals, which eventually evolved into shells, bones, and other hard tissues.Readers can decide if that story constitutes scientific progress.See our entry and commentary from 4/20/12 for explanation of why the evolutionists’ proposal amounts to the Stuff Happens Law hidden in a kind of Gap Theory. That’s not the point at issue here; what’s striking is the ease with which they will propose global catastrophes to solve their puzzles, while denying flood geology to their opponents. Where are the critical thinkers looking at their fact-free proposal, with its myth of minerals turning into complex body plans, and not doubling over in mocking laughter? There are legends around the world of a global flood. There is the record in Genesis. There are fossil-bearing sedimentary layers that cross continents, mass kills covering hundreds of square miles. There are folds that extend continuously through thousands of feet of sedimentary layers, with no sign of fracturing. There are fault lines that extend upward through most of the geological ages, not truncated further down. There are strata contacts flat as a stack of pancakes for hundreds of miles, with no sign of erosion between them. There are seashells on the world’s highest mountains. There are the mid-oceanic ridges. These are just a few of the evidences that support a recent global flood.The creationists’ evidences and explanations are dismissed by evolutionists as religiously motivated, as if it is not religiously motivated to try to preserve a naturalistic worldview with multiple improbabilities, ad hoc mechanisms, and unobservable gaps (e.g., in the Grand Canyon, they propose at least four contacts where 6, 10, 60, or 1000 million years are missing). Worst of all, they assign magical powers to natural selection (the Stuff Happens Law), assuming that new minerals and phosphates in the ocean will generate complex body plans, composed of new cell types, tissues, organs and systems (guts, eyes, nervous, etc.), simply because the simple building blocks are there. That’s why we proposed an experiment on 4/20/12 (end of commentary) to scientifically test the validity of their gap theory.Read Stephen Meyer’s new best-selling book, Darwin’s Doubt. Watch the Illustra film Darwin’s Dilemma. The evolutionists’ problems with the Cambrian explosion are far worse than they imagine. Still, it’s kind of funny when they take “global flood” out of the creationists’ explanatory toolkit and use it to try to unscrew the Darwin nut.
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest Reducing manure volumes produced throughout the year is certainly worth considering when building a manure management plan. For example, what goes into your manure pit other than manure, urine and wash water? Additionally, it is important to note waste water can be from several sources, including:1. Leaking drinkers and water lines,2. Pigs wasting water when they drink; and,3. Rain water entering the pit.Leaking drinkers and water lines: One way to determine how many gallons go into the pit on a daily basis is to take a water meter reading when there are no pigs in the barn or no washing activities planned. Check the reading after a 24-hours. According to Adam Hocker’s 2014 Pork Congress presentation, Brenneman Pork in Iowa had records from 22 finishing barns that were leaking on average 4,000 gallons of water per week. That would be over 200,000 gallons of wasted water in a 2,400 head barn per year. Kevin Elder with the Ohio Department of Agriculture said, “Additional research has shown the diluted manure moves easier to subsurface tile. If manure has at least 4% solids and even better 8% solids it moves much less to drainage tile.” Pigs wasting water when they drinkResearch has shown there are differences in the amount of water wasted from drinkers of varying styles. As such, it is recommended to check the flow rate of your existing drinkers. Pigs only consume water at a given rate, dependent upon the size of pig, and higher flow rates lead to more wasted water. Research shows that water flow for a nursery should not exceed 45 seconds to fill a 16-ounce container. Comparatively, the flow rate for a grow finish should not exceed 30 seconds to fill a 16-ounce container. Water line pressure should be 20 psi; however, it is important to make sure you have adequate flow rates throughout the barn. If drinker height is adjustable be sure to adjust as pigs get bigger. In general, nipple height should be at pig shoulder level, or slightly above. Rain water entering the pitEvaluate outside landscaping (settling ground), especially around pump out ports to determine if surface water is entering the pit. There are barns that have pump-out ports that have separated, or cracked, from the pit walls and have allowed roof water to enter the pits. Be sure rainwater is diverted away from the building, and make any necessary repairs to pump-out ports. There should be no ponding water around the building after rainfall events. Developing an emergency planDevelop an emergency plan in the event field conditions do not allow for manure application when the pit is almost full. While options vary on location, below are several conditions to consider that might allow for you to partially pump down your pit:1. A neighbor with a dairy lagoon that is not full and would accept hog manure.2. A custom manure applicator with frac tanks or tankers for emergency storage.3. An older swine facility that is currently empty.4. A municipality sewage treatment plant that would take manure.5. Contact your local Soil and Water Conservation District Office to discuss local options: http://www.agri.ohio.gov/divs/SWC/SearchLocalSWCD.aspx6. Constructing emergency storage as a last resort (This has been done before and is cheaper than paying fines and having bad publicity), contact local SWCD or ODA-Division of Livestock Environmental Permitting.For additional information on best manure strategies, please visit https://ohleap.org/
In a setback to the government’s efforts to pass the triple talaq Bill in the Rajya Sabha, the Janata Dal(U), a National Democratic Alliance partner, on Saturday said it would oppose the draft legislation in the Upper House.Party spokesperson K.C. Tyagi slammed the Bill, which criminalises instant divorce by Muslim men with a jail term of up to three years, and said it was of an “imposing nature” and would “definitely create a lack of trust in society”.“We believe that ours is a nation based on a delicate balance in respect of laws and governing principles for different religious and ethnic groups. We must not impose any view without obtaining substantive consultations,” Mr. Tyagi said.The JD(U) does believe in reforms, but these should be brought after in-depth consultations with various religious and ethnic groups, he said.The Bill may be tabled in the Rajya Sabha on Monday, sources said. The Lok Sabha passed it on July 25 and if the Rajya Sabha passes it, it will become law, replacing an ordinance which had enacted a similar provision through an executive decree.The JD(U), led by Bihar CM Nitish Kumar, did not vote in the Bill’s support in the Lok Sabha and staged a walkout. It made little difference though, as the BJP enjoys a strong majority in the House on its ownThe party may adopt a similar tactic in the Rajya Sabha.The numbers are much trickier for the saffron alliance as it is still far short of a majority and depends on parties like the BJD, the TRS and the YSR Congress — which are not aligned to either the BJP-led NDA or the Opposition.The JD(U), which is otherwise an NDA constituent, has six members in the Rajya Sabha, whose current strength is 240, according to details on its website.The government had recently got the better of the Opposition, which includes the Congress, the TMC and the Left among others, in the Rajya Sabha when it got the RTI Bill passed with the support of the BJD, the TRS and the YSR Congress.However, the three may not take a similar stand on the contentious Triple Talaq Bill, which faces strong opposition by a number of Muslim groups.