text:
#ifndef GUTHTHILA_DEFINES_H
#define GUTHTHILA_DEFINES_H

#if defined(WIN32)
#define	GUTHTHILA_EXPORT  __declspec(dllexport)
#else
#define GUTHTHILA_EXPORT
#endif

#if defined(__GNUC__)
#if defined(__i386)
#define GUTHTHILA_CALL __attribute__((cdecl))
#else
#define GUTHTHILA_CALL
#endif
#else
#if defined(__unix)
#define GUTHTHILA_CALL
#else
#define GUTHTHILA_CALL _cdecl
#endif
#endif

#ifndef guththila_char_t
#define guththila_char_t char
#endif

#ifndef GUTHTHILA_SUCCESS
#define GUTHTHILA_SUCCESS	1
#endif

#ifndef GUTHTHILA_FAILURE
#define GUTHTHILA_FAILURE	0
#endif

#ifdef __cplusplus
#define EXTERN_C_START() extern "C" {
#define EXTERN_C_END() }
#else
#define EXTERN_C_START()
#define EXTERN_C_END()
#endif

#ifndef GUTHTHILA_EOF
#define GUTHTHILA_EOF	(-1)
#endif

#ifndef GUTHTHILA_FALSE
#define GUTHTHILA_FALSE	0
#endif

#ifndef GUTHTHILA_TRUE
#define GUTHTHILA_TRUE		1
#endif

#endif

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Improvvisatore Involontario il proprio altissimo contributo.
The Artist serves a social function. That function is to move his or her fellowhuman beings to feel,to open their hearts toone another and find the best in themselves,and thereby to beautify the world...transforming action into sound into emotion and back into action. In the words of Bracha Ettinger,art 'fragilizes' the self (re)uniting us with one another.


text:
Retiboletus est un genre de champignons de la famille des Boletaceae dont la particularité est un goût amer dû à la présence de métabolites secondaires particulier : les rétipolides.

Taxinomie
Retiboletus Binder & Bresinsky 2002.

 reconnu comme.

Description
Le sporophore produit un groupe unique de composés buténolides appelé les rétipolides qui sont responsables du goût amer et la couleur jaune intense de la chair.

Habitat

Zone tempérées du Nouveau Monde,  Japon, régions néotropiques montagnardes. Costa Rica et Belize

Mycorhizes avec les arbres de la famille des Fagaceae.

Liste d'espèces
Selon  :
 Retiboletus flavoniger
 Retiboletus griseus
 Retiboletus nigerrimus
 Retiboletus ornatipes
 Retiboletus retipes
 Retiboletus vinaceipes

Selon  :
 Retiboletus flavoniger (Halling, G.M. Muell. & L.D. Gómez) Manfr. Binder & Halling 2002
 Retiboletus griseus (Frost) Manfr. Binder & Bresinsky 2002
 Retiboletus nigerrimus (R. Heim) Manfr. Binder & Bresinsky 2002
 Retiboletus ornatipes (Peck) Manfr. Binder & Bresinsky 2002
 Retiboletus retipes (Berk. & M.A. Curtis) Manfr. Binder & Bresinsky 2002
 Retiboletus vinaceipes B. Ortiz, Lodge & T.J. Baroni 2007

Selon  :
 Retiboletus griseus
 Retiboletus nigerrimus
 Retiboletus ornatipes

Notes et références

Liens externes

Genre de champignons (nom scientifique)
Boletaceae

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


September's retail sale figures are the eurozone's latest grim economic indicator: sales dropped 1.3% from August to September, up just 0.6% from September last year. Some recovery. Analysts had expected a 0.8% drop in sales between August and September, which would still have left the figure up by a modest 1.2% from September last year.
Not only are the eurozone's retail sales not back at pre-crisis levels, they're not even back at 2010 levels, still hurting from the European Central Bank's 2011 rate hikes.
While the UK and US economies are back above their 2008 levels, the euro area is still lagging far behind. And with dismal growth expected for years, the gap between the major recovering economies and most of Europe is likely to grow.


Dustin Schiltz is a cyclist from Minneapolis, MN. Join Strava to track your activities, analyze your performance, and follow friends. Strava members can plan routes, participate in motivating challenges, and join clubs. Get started by signing up for free.


text:
in Alma on autoExpert.ca # 62305A
Model: EDGE Sport
Vehicle Passengers: 5
Fuel Type: unleaded
Stock no.: 62305A
Ford Edge Sport 2018 - Intérieur en cuir 2018 FORD EDGE SPORT
Get more information on this vehicle
To get more information on this vehicle, enter your contact information below.
Hello. I would like more information about the "2018 Ford EDGE Sport" displayed on autoExpert.ca. Would you please contact me at the email above? Thank you.
Alma Honda
2625 Avenue du Pont S
Alma, Quebec
More info on financing Trade-in estimate View inventory of
Ford Alma
2018 Ford Edge Alma
Ford Edge Alma
Redesigned 2015 Ford Edge
Originally launched in 2006, the Ford Edge was one of the first crossovers, and was limited to the North American and some Latin American markets. Fast forward a few years, and the crossover segment is booming, and the newly redesigned 2015 Ford Edge is destined for the world. It will be marketed worldwide, in more than 100 markets. Along with the global push, the Edge is going bigger and better. It's now more upscale, and will be offered in Ford's top Titanium trim level. It is roomier, longer, more powerful and more aerodynamic than the version it's replacing. Ford is using the 2015 Edge as a showcase for it's newest technologies. Slotted between the cheaper Ford Escape and the family hauling Explorer, the redesigned 2015 Ford Edge is aimed at a more upscale customer.
Ford Edge Concept: More Than Just A Glimpse Of The Production Model
Visitors to the Toronto Auto Show were able to get a first hand look at the Ford Edge concept vehicle. Much more than simply a concept, it's very close to being a production model, one that will likely find itself in dealerships as a 2015 model. At the show, we also learned that the production of the next generation Edge for the entire global market, it is currently distributed in about 60 countries, will be carried out at the company's Oakville ON assembly plant. The Oakville plant benefited from a $700 million investment, which was announced last September; to better meet growing global demand and to save 2,800 jobs. The Ford Edge and Flex and the Lincoln MKX and MKT vehicles are assembled there.
Ford is recalling close to 383,000 SUVs due to a problem with the rearview camera image. The campaign targets 2020-2023 and Lincoln Aviators and 2020-2022 Lincoln Corsairs.
Ford Mustang Mach-e: Price Drop, Production Increase in Canada
Ford is increasing production of the Mustang Mach-E and reducing the EV's pricing in Canada. The company says this is possible because it now has greater ownership of the supply chain.
Trade-in estimate request
To receive a trade-in estimate if you buy this vehicle, enter your contact information below.
Trade-in vehicle

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


At DataCaptive, we understand the importance of targeted & segmented data for your marketing endeavors & hence collate comprehensive Biomedical Scientist Mailing Lists that can help you achieve the desired business growth with minimal data hassles.
Looking for tech support for your new HP product? With HP Printer Support Number, you can get in touch with customer care in a minute.
support number is available and accessible 24/7 for the users.


text:
Cumberland Bank and Trust
Cumberland Bank and Trust is a Clarksville, TN-based, FDIC-insured bank founded in 2001. The bank has equity of $21.2 million on assets of $173.6 million, according to December 31, 2017, regulatory filings.
U.S. bank customers have $150.6 million on deposit at 5 offices in TN run by 42 full-time employees. With that footprint, the bank holds loans and leases worth $132.8 million, $115.4 million of which are for real estate.
Overall, Bankrate believes that, as of December 31, 2017, Cumberland Bank and Trust exhibited a good condition, earning 4 out of 5 stars for safety and soundness. Here's an analysis of how the bank fared on the three important criteria Bankrate used to evaluate American banks.
SAFE AND SOUND?
TODAY'S SAVINGS RATES
THE INSTITUTION'S SCORE
Capital Score
Capital works as a cushion against losses and affords protection for account holders during times of financial instability for the bank. Therefore, when it comes to measuring an a bank's financial strength, capital is essential. When looking at safety and soundness, the more capital, the better.
Cumberland Bank and Trust racked up 16 out of a possible 30 points on our test to measure the adequacy of a bank's capital, better than the national average of 13.13.
One commonly used measure of this buffer is a bank's Tier 1 capital ratio. Cumberland Bank and Trust's Tier 1 capital ratio was 13.74 percent, above the 6 percent level regulators consider adequate, but lower than the national average of 25.65 percent. The higher the capital ratio, the better the bank will be able to stand up to financial difficulties.
Overall, Cumberland Bank and Trust held equity amounting to 12.20 percent of its assets, which exceeded the national average of 12.03 percent.
Asset Quality Score
This test's purpose is to estimate how the bank's loan loss reserves and overall capitalization could be affected by troubled assets, such as unpaid mortgages.
Having extensive holdings of these types of assets may eventually require a bank to use capital to cover losses, diminishing its cushion of equity. It also means that there are likely to be many assets that are in non-accrual status and no longer earning interest for the bank, resulting in reduced earnings and potentially more risk of a failure in the future.
Cumberland Bank and Trust exceeded the national average of 37.49 on Bankrate's test of asset quality, racking up 40 out of a possible 40 points .
A widely used indicator of asset quality is the percentage of problem assets a bank holds compared to its total assets. As of December 31, 2017, 0.09 percent of Cumberland Bank and Trust's loans were noncurrent, meaning they were more than 90 days past due or were in non-accrual status. That's below the national average of 1.01 percent.
Banks keep a reserve to deal with problem assets known as an "allowance for loan and lease losses." That reserve's size can be a widely used indicator when evaluating a bank's ability to manage troubled assets, especially when compared to the total amount of problem loans. Cumberland Bank and Trust's loan loss allowance was 1,495.69 percent of its total noncurrent loans, exceeding the national average. All things being equal, the higher the ratio of loan loss allowance to noncurrent loans, the better.
Earnings score
How profitable a bank is affects its long-term survivability. A bank can retain its earnings, increasing its capital buffer, or put them to work addressing problematic loans, potentially making the bank more resilient in times of trouble. Banks that are losing money, however, have less ability to do those things.
On Bankrate's earnings test, Cumberland Bank and Trust scored 12 out of a possible 30, falling short of the national average of 15.12.
One important way to measure a bank's earnings is return on equity, or net income (essentially profit) divided by the total amount of equity. The most recent annualized quarterly return on equity for Cumberland Bank and Trust was 6.00 percent, below the national average of 8.10 percent.
The bank earned net income of $1.2 million on total equity of $21.2 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2017. The bank had an annualized return on average assets, or ROA, of 0.72 percent, below the 1 percent deemed satisfactory in accordance with industry standards and below the average for U.S. banks of 1.00 percent.
WHAT IS SAFE & SOUND?
Bankrate.com's Safe & Sound Ratings provide a star rating system to evaluate the current financial status of financial institutions. The information gathered about banks, credit unions and thrifts is updated as set forth in the Terms of Use of Safe & Sound Ratings and Reports. The Safe & Sound Ratings information is grouped by categories of banks, thrifts and credit unions.
Bankrate.com evaluates the financial condition of institutions and assigns a one- to five-star rating for each with five stars representing the highest rating. Institutions with satisfactory performance will generally receive a rating of three or more stars. The majority of institutions fall into the three- to four-star range. An institution with an "NR" rating may be too new to rate or may have limited the publicly available information in their regulatory filings. The "NR" is not an indication of financial strength or weakness. The Safe & Sound rating is believed to be reliable, but the information is not guaranteed. In addition, events since the information was collected may have altered the institution's financial condition.


These time management tips for your home based business business were shared with my by my friend Carol. Hope you find them helpful.
Before sitting down in front of your computer screen, have a purpose – or a list of priorities.Attack this priority list before you allow yourself to succumb to the temptation to surf the net. Respond to e-mails, get new marketing updates in place, whatever… Surfing the net, especially within your own business niche is not a bad thing by any means, but don't allow yourself to start there. Priorities first.
Break goals down into smaller steps (objectives) and review them daily.Begin each day/week with an end in mind based on goals. Always keep the big picture in the frame.
Time is the great equaliser.Everyone gets 24 hours in a day and the key is in how you use that time. Successful people use their time effectively. Another time management tips is every time you begin a new task, ask yourself honestly to rate its productivity and priority.
For more tips take a look at this ebook: 139 Ways to Smash The Tyrany of Paperwork Emails Tephone Calls and Meetings.


text:
ShopHQ Homepage > Jewelry > Jewelle > 169-699
Jewelle 14K Gold Oval Shaped Turquoise & Diamond Accented Pendant w/ 18" Wheat Chain
$ 419.00 - $ 419.00 ShopHQ Price
Was Price: | (0% off)
Add a pretty pop of color to your look with this breathtaking accessory! Crafted from 14K yellow gold, this eye-catching pendant features one oval shaped turquoise cabochon drop. The 18" wheat chain threads through a diamond-accented bail and will grace your neckline with exceptional beauty. It's the perfect pendant to wear when you're grabbing brunch with the girls or dinner uptown with your date.
Pendant Details
Turquoise: One oval shaped 9 x 3mm cabochon
Diamond: Three round cut 1mm
Setting Type: Prong
Diamond Color Grade: HI
Diamond Clarity Grade: I2-I3
Approximate Total Weight:
Diamond: 0.02ct
Pendant: 5/8"L x 1/4"W x 5/16"W
Chain: 18"
Chain Type: Wheat
Clasp: Spring ring
Collection: Jewelle
All weights pertaining to gemstones, including diamonds, are minimum weights. Additionally, please note that many gemstones are treated to enhance their beauty. View Gemstone Enhancements and Special Care Requirements for important information.
YellowGold 14KGold Turquoise
By far the most common color of gold used in jewelry, yellow gold is gold in its natural shade. Yellow gold is usually alloyed with copper and silver to increase the strength of the metal. How yellow the metal is depends upon the content of gold. A 14-karat piece of jewelry will have a brighter yellow hue than a 10-karat piece. Likewise, an 18-karat piece of jewelry will have a deeper yellow than 14-karat gold, and so on.
Gold's softness and malleability make it a wonderful metal to work with when creating virtually any design in jewelry. But this softness can be a drawback as well. To make it stronger and more durable, gold is usually alloyed, or mixed, with other metals such as copper or silver. The higher a metal's percentage of gold content, the softer and more yellow the jewelry piece. The karat weight system used to measure gold in a piece is the same for all hues, including white and yellow gold.
The word "carat" is Arabic, meaning "bean seed." This is because historically seeds were used to measure weights of gold and precious stones. In the United States, "karat" with a "k" is used to measure gold's purity, while "carat" with a "c" is used in measuring a gemstone's size. The karat mark of gold represents the percentage of pure gold to alloy.
24K is pure gold or 100% gold
21K is 21/24ths gold content or 87.5% gold: In the United States, jewelry with this karatage or higher is rare. It is far more common in Europe, the Middle East and Southeast Asia.
18K is 18/24ths gold content or 75% gold: This karatage is a popular high-end choice in the United States, Europe and other regions. Its popularity is spreading throughout North America.
14K is 14/24ths gold content or 58.5% gold: This is the most common gold karatage in the United States because of its fine balance between gold content, durability and affordability.
10K is 10/24ths gold content or 41.7% gold: This karatage is gaining popularity for its affordability and durability. Commonly used in everyday-wear jewelry such as rings, 10K gold beautifully withstands wear and tear. It is the lowest gold content that can be legally marked or sold as gold jewelry in the United States.
In order to determine the karat weight of a specific item, simply look for the quality mark. Jewelry items will bear the stamp of their karatage based upon the United States or European system of marking. The United States system designates pieces by their karats—24K, 18K, 14K, 10K, etc. The European system designates pieces by their percentage of gold content. For instance, 10K gold is marked "417," denoting 41.7% gold; 14K is marked "585," denoting 58.5% gold; and 18K is marked "750," denoting 75% gold; etc.
Turquoise:
One of the oldest known gems, turquoise has been prized for thousands of years. The Egyptians believed it had powerful mystical properties, and turquoise jewelry has been found interred with 7,500-year-old mummies. Ancient manuscripts from Persia, India, Afghanistan and Arabia say that the health of a person wearing turquoise could be assessed by variations in the color of the stone. Montezuma's treasure, now displayed in the British Museum, includes a carved serpent covered by a mosaic of turquoise.
Turquoise was especially revered by the Native American culture, an association that dates back to the Aztec empire more than 700 years ago. For the Aztecs, turquoise was reserved for the gods and mere mortals were forbidden to wear it. They believed it to be a gem of good fortune and a commodity more valuable than gold. Native Americans believed turquoise protected people from demons and they even placed turquoise in tombs to guard the dead. The stone's colors were thought to be symbolically blue for the heavens and green for the earth. Often warriors tied turquoise to their bows to ensure accurate shots.
Today, turquoise is still believed to provide protection and bring luck. It is said to also promote prosperity, love, healing, courage and friendship. The stone is thought to relax the mind and ease mental tension.
The gem's opaque turquoise color varies from shades of greenish blue to deep cobalt to sky blue. Some varieties display white or brown matrixes, which are streaks of the mother stone from which they came, while others have veins of black matrix running through them. Generally, the bluer the blue, the more highly valued the stone. A clear, even texture without mottling or veins is also preferred. The most rare and valuable color is an intense azure, but the most common is the mild to medium sky blue. Sometimes imitated by minerals such as chrysocolla, turquoise stones are often dyed or colored with coatings of various resins.
In the 13th century, turquoise was mistakenly believed to have come from the country of Turkey. Hence, its name came from the French word for Turkey, "Turquie". The stone was actually brought to Europe from Persia (now Iran), via Turkey. It is a mineral usually found in association with copper deposits and is sometimes mined as a by-product of copper mining.
Although turquoise is found in desert regions worldwide, especially in the southwestern United States, perhaps the finest and most valuable comes from the Sleeping Beauty mine in Globe, Arizona. It is named after the Sleeping Beauty Mountain which resembles a reclined woman in a slumbering state. Its turquoise is world renowned for its beauty that ranges from pure robin's egg blue to a darker royal blue.
While only ranking between 5.0 and 6.0 on the Mohs Scale of hardness, turquoise remains quite popular for jewelry. In Europe, turquoise rings are given as forget-me-not gifts, while in the United States, the stone is given as traditional 5th and 11th wedding anniversary gifts. It has even become a modern consideration for the December birthstone. When wearing turquoise over the years, the stone will absorb oil from a person's skin, causing a slight change to the color of turquoise.
Turquoise is commonly treated in various fashions to ensure its durability and visual appeal, especially when set in jewelry. If a stone has been treated, the type of process will be noted.
Stabilized turquoise is enhanced through a process of coating the genuine gemstone with colorless acrylics or resin to fill porous gaps, harden the stone and maintain the stone's color.
Reconstituted turquoise is enhanced through a process in which genuine gemstone fragments are powdered and bonded with resin to reinforce the stone. Turquoise-bearing rock is pulverized and the turquoise is separated from the rock using a float process. The pulverized turquoise is then mixed with a colored resin, which is then injected into a mold to form a solid block. This is then cubed, preformed and fashioned into various shapes and sizes. It is an excellent method of using rough that would otherwise not be usable.
Impregnated turquoise is enhanced through a process in which the genuine gemstone is infused with oil, wax or resin to reinforce the stone.
Mohave turquoise is crafted through a process that uses a hydraulic press to assemble turquoise nuggets together with bronze metal matrix throughout the brick of turquoise. Once the turquoise is pressed or assembled, it is stabilized to harden the stone. Currently, Mohave turquoise is the only product on the market that features genuine Arizona Kingman Mine turquoise and real metal matrix. The Kingman mine is the oldest known turquoise mine in the Americas and is located at the Mineral Park Mine in the Cerbat Mountains, about 14 miles from Kingman, AZ.
Turquoise is one of the oldest gemstones known in history going back 6,000 years BC and has been revered by almost every ancient culture. It is the alternate birthstone for December and has a Mohs rating of 5.0-6.0. Turquoise is a Hydrous Phosphate of Aluminum and Copper and may form as a chalky coating on rocks or finely disseminated crystals formed within small rock cavities. Rough such as this is not commercially viable, which has led to the development of reconstituted turquoise. Turquoise-bearing rock is pulverized and the turquoise is separated from the rock using a float process. The pulverized turquoise is then mixed with a colored resin, which is then injected into a mold to form a solid block. This is then cubed, preformed and fashioned into various shapes and sizes. It is an excellent method of using rough that would otherwise not be usable.
Jewelle 14K Gold Oval 10 x 8mm Turquoise & Diamond Accented Ring - Size 7


text:
You are here: Home / Library / Funding Opportunity Announcment - Water SMART Grants
Funding Opportunity Announcment - Water SMART Grants
Bureau of Reclamation has released FOAs for three WaterSMART grants: System Optimization Review Grants, Advanced Water Treatment Pilot and Demonstration Project Grants, and Grants to Develop Climate Analysis Tools.
News Release RECLAMATION
Media Contact: Kate Goggin, kgoggin@usbr.gov, 202-513-0599
Peter Soeth, psoeth@usbr.gov, 303-445-3615
Reclamation Announces WaterSMART Funding Opportunities
Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Michael L. Connor announced today the availability of three WaterSMART Funding Opportunity Announcements: System Optimization Review Grants, Advanced Water Treatment Pilot and Demonstration Project Grants, and Grants to Develop Climate Analysis Tools. These three funding opportunities are now available online at www.grants.gov.
"These grant opportunities will help Reclamation work smarter to address the water needs of a growing population and assist States, Tribes, and local entities in solving contemporary water resource challenges," stated Connor. "The WaterSMART Program is important because it concentrates on expanding and stretching limited water supplies in the West, while facilitating solutions to complex water and related energy issues, and meeting the needs of expanding municipalities, the environment, and agriculture."
The System Optimization Review Funding Opportunity seeks proposals for projects that assess the potential for water management improvements – in an applicant's water delivery system or in a river basin – and then identifies specific improvements to increase efficiency, including a plan of action for implementing the recommendations. The Funding Opportunity number is R11SF80356. Applications are due April 27, 4:00 p.m. MDT.
The Advanced Water Treatment Pilot and Demonstration Project Funding Opportunity seeks proposals for projects that address the technical, economic, and environmental viability of treating and using brackish groundwater, seawater, impaired waters, or otherwise creating new water supplies within a specific locale. The Funding Opportunity number is R11SF80351. Applications are due May 11, 4:00 p.m. MDT.
Eligible applicants for funding under the System Optimization Review or Advanced Water Treatment Funding Opportunities are States, Indian tribes, irrigation districts, water districts, or other organizations with water or power delivery authority. Applicants must also be located in the Western United States or an authorized Territory.
The Grants to Develop Climate Analysis Tools Funding Opportunity seeks proposals for research projects that will lead to enhanced management of western water resources in a changing climate. This Funding Opportunity is open to universities and non-profit research institutions as well as organizations with water or power delivery authority. The Funding Opportunity number is R11SF80344. Applications are due May 13, 4:00 p.m. MDT.
All projects will be evaluated using established criteria listed in each Funding Opportunity Announcement. Award announcements are expected to be made by the end of September.
The WaterSMART (Sustain and Manage America's Resources for Tomorrow) Program is intended to address the most significant challenges facing our water supplies in the 21st century, including population growth, climate change, rising energy demands, environmental needs, and aging infrastructure. For more information on the WaterSMART Program visit www.usbr.gov/WaterSMART/.
Reclamation is the largest wholesale water supplier in the United States, and the nation's second largest producer of hydroelectric power. Its facilities also provide substantial flood control, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits. Visit our website at http://www.usbr.gov.
Filed under: Grants and Funding


text:
Why Are There Still Republicans?
New York Times Death Spiral Watch (William Kristol Edition)
The Great Element Naming Controversy
Abi Sutherland sends us to
Element naming controversy: Finally in 1997, the following names were agreed on the 39th IUPAC General Assembly in Geneva, Switzerland: 104 - rutherfordium; 105 - dubnium; 106 - seaborgium; 107 - bohrium; 108 - hassium; 109 - meitnerium.
In 1999, Glenn T. Seaborg died, still disputing the name change for #105 and adamant about it remaining known as hahnium. His reason concerning Dubna in Russia was that he believed that they had made a false claim about discovering the element for which they had been credited. When the Dubna group finally did release some additional data on the experiment, Seaborg claimed that it was a misreading of the decay pattern of their product. Even then, the Dubna group still refused to remove their claim. Some people in the Berkeley group and some others still refer to it as hahnium.
Huh. I had thought that they had taken Glenn Seaborg's name away from him--that all he was left with was a room in Berkeley's Faculty Club and the Lafayette Library. Now I feel better.
May 28, 2008 at 19:27 | Permalink | Comments (2)


text:
Journal of Creation 27(3):23–28, December 2013
No keeper's brother
Am I My Keeper's Brother?—Human Origins From A Christian And Scientific Perspective, Philip Pattemore
New Zealand, 2011
Reviewed by Shaun Doyle
In recent years a very vocal cavalcade of theistic evolutionists has made a rather big splash in evangelical circles. Led by Dr Francis Collins and BioLogos,1 they have sought to reformulate evangelicalism basically from the ground up around evolution. Central to this program has been the origins of humanity—they have blatantly denied the existence of an original human pair based on the 'obvious' evidence for common ancestry, and have sought to reshape the doctrines of sin and salvation around this denial.2
However, while there has been a resurgence in theistic evolution in other countries, BioLogos and the controversy surrounding them has largely focussed on the American context. Enter into the New Zealand evangelical context Dr Philip Pattemore, Associate Professor3 of Paediatrics at the University of Otago. Unfortunately, he is also the Christian Medical Fellowship of NZ board chairman. He has presented a relatively detailed circa 450-page apologetic for the BioLogos trajectory on human origins in Am I My Keeper's Brother? However, not only has he reproduced much of the BioLogos position, but also much of the mode of argumentation against opposing views, as seen before in the works of Darrell Falk,4 Francis Collins,5 and Karl Giberson, among others.6 Far from a compliment; it is a severe indictment.
Opponents not worth a reference
A reader unfamiliar with the biblical creationist literature will simply be left with Pattemore's opinion and no leads to follow up to test what he's said.
Pattemore has produced a book intended (partially) as a rebuttal of Intelligent Design and biblical creationist understandings of human origins. The problem is there is not a single citation of any material from a biblical creationist, old-age creationist, or Intelligent Design point of view. It's almost expected these days that compromisers will ignore the biblical creationist literature,7 but why fail to reference every other position held by Christians? Extreme hubris seems the only plausible explanation. Pattemore is not ignorant of this literature.
For instance, he knows a term like baramin and understands that it often approximates to 'family' in Linnaean taxonomy (p. 260), which shows he has read something from biblical creationists. But I can only pick this up because I've read creationist literature on baraminology. A reader unfamiliar with the biblical creationist literature will simply be left with Pattemore's opinion and no leads to follow up to test what he's said.
Misrepresenting opponents
Since Pattemore does not reference his opponents, it should come as no surprise that he knocks down numerous strawmen. A couple of examples will suffice.
Wikipedia/Thomas Lersch
Figure 1. Even if chimps had 99% genetic similarity to humans (though they do not), that would be a testimony to the amazing capacity of the common designer of chimps and humans. It would be like redesigning a car to drive itself just by tinkering with 1% of its components—clearly not something every intelligent agent can do, let alone an evolutionary process that is mindless for all practical purposes.
First, consider his "Genetic predictions of the Special Creation of Mankind" (pp. 196–197). Pattemore seems to think the prime assumption is that man was "not patterned on any other creature—rather, they were made 'in the image of God'." He makes much of this 'problem' of creationism later on (pp. 255–261). But why must God be completely novel in his creation of humans? The ancients, who viewed change and novelty with suspicion rather than favour (a viewpoint still held in many places around the world), certainly didn't think it had to be so.8 Moreover, producing large results from small changes evinces a mastery of design that complete novelty does not. If humans are 99% genetically similar to chimps (figure 1),9 consider how large a phenotypic difference that 1% has made!10 There are important qualitative differences between chimps and humans, such as the capability of generating syntactic language.11 That would be like redesigning a car to drive itself just by tinkering with 1% of its components—clearly not something every intelligent agent can do, let alone an evolutionary process that is mindless for all practical purposes.12
There is also the 'reading Genesis scientifically' (p. 66) canard. Young-age creationists do not read Genesis as science but as history. Pattemore, like many theistic evolutionists, doesn't seem to understand the difference. It seems that a 'scientific' account of history for Pattemore (and others like him) seems roughly to mean an account of what really happened in the physical world. If so, then that is how we understand Genesis 1–11, but why call that 'scientific'? That just causes concept confusion—science is not history. Science is about repeatable present process; history is about unrepeatable past events. Science can be used in the study of history, but it cannot be the final authority on determining historicity in a universe governed by the God of Scripture since at the very least science cannot constrain how God might act. Science can't 'tell' us how God acted, only people can—and only God is sure to produce a reliable account.
Patronizing opponents
Pattemore's tone towards his opponents is also problematic: "Although the proponents [of young-age creationism] claim the authority of Scripture for these beliefs, their activity is also driven by certain fears or perceived dangers" (p. 35). He then proceeds to list numerous fears that supposedly drive the beliefs of biblical creationists. Pattemore doesn't claim this only for biblical creationists: "Does Intelligent Design harbour undercurrents of fear too? I suspect it does" (p. 36). He then lists the supposed 'fears' of ID proponents. Apparently anyone who believes in some form of Special Creation is motivated by fear. Pattemore must be nigh omniscient to know just what motivates his ideological opponents! C.S. Lewis called this 'Bulverism'13—the fallacy of pontificating on the motives one's opponents have for their 'obviously irrational' belief before actually disproving their belief.
What of the actual argument?
Pattemore's presentation has numerous holes in it before we even come to consider the truth value of the position he promotes and the arguments he advances for it. What about the substance of his arguments? He covers much ground, and it would take a book to address every point he makes. And though the general argument is not new, there are some relatively unique features embedded that make the general thrust of his argument worth examining in some detail.
Critically real, with a side of Bacon books
Pattemore adopts an epistemology called 'critical realism', which essentially states that the objects of our sense perceptions objectively exist, but that we must remain to some extent critical of our cognitive faculties, as they can be deceived. Our only path to knowledge, then, is continual interaction and 'dialogue' with the thing known so as to check and recheck our biases against reality.14 The dual emphasis of acknowledging an objectively real world and that our cognitive framework can lead us astray in interpreting it is commendable.
Pattemore also adopts a Baconian 'two books' approach to science and theology, where 'science' and 'theology' are two different books authored by the same God, and thus are authoritative in their own field. Interestingly—considering how summarily Pattemore dismisses ID philosophy—a leader in the ID movement, William Dembski, has also adopted this Baconian paradigm in favour of ID.15
However, this 'two books' notion does not gel well with Pattemore's critical realism or with the doctrine of sola scriptura.16 In practice, it sets up 'science = evolution' as about the 'real world', and the Bible is just 'religion'. Therefore, in practice it seems that 'critical' applies to Scripture and 'realism' applies to evolution. Sola scriptura however, gels well with notions of critical realism because it also affirms that men are not always reliable, though God always is. Therefore, while human-discovered truth can correspond to reality just as much as the Bible can, intrinsic trust is given only to revealed truth.
Pattemore chides biblical creationists for setting up this 'revealed truth' vs 'discovered truth' distinction as producing 'two types of truth' (pp. 36–37). But the issue in the distinction is not between different 'types of truth' but between differing levels of reliability in the two sources of information—something Pattemore considers commendable (pp. 42–44). Rather, it is the Baconian 'two books' notion that creates two types of truth, and does it by effectively divorcing theology from the 'real world' of history and science.
Wikipedia/Edward Luther Stevenson
Figure 2. The 'antipodean heresy' is the idea that humans lived on the opposite side of the globe who were not sons of Adam. It has oft been claimed that this notion caused the church to oppose Columbus' proposed voyage west to reach India, though it is without historical basis.
Bad church, worse history
He claims the church has a rather vexed history with science over the antipodes,17 geocentrism, and racism. The first is completely false—the 'received opinion' came not from the Bible but from Augustine, whose theology on the point was good, but his geography was bad.18,19 This was falsified by Christians before Columbus first set sail (Bartholomew Diaz rounded the southern tip of Africa in 1488—four years before Columbus sailed west to try and reach India) and didn't impact the Christian hegemony of Europe.20 The second was the result of reading Ptolemaic cosmology into the Bible,21 and the third was also reading modern notions of race into the Bible—actually racism was aided by anti-biblical notions, including 'pre-Adamites' and evolution itself (figure 2).22 In all three cases the problem was not the Bible but the ideas men brought to the Bible. However, deep time and evolution directly contradict the Scriptures.
Genesis 1–11, pagan parody?
Pattemore argues that Genesis 1–6 is an essentially ahistorical parody of ancient pagan mythology.23 However, why would an ahistorical parody work better as a refutation of pagan myth (and a precedent for the Israelite work week) than factual history? There is no indication that the pagans didn't believe their 'myths' were actual history—in which case if Genesis were an ahistorical parody would be a dramatic failure in polemics. However, even some who reject the 'factual history' reading of Genesis 1–11 also reject the notion that it is primarily a polemic—it appears more didactic than polemic in intent.24 Neither is this interpretation found in the Bible—the people and events of Genesis 1–11 are always treated as having really existed/happened.
Pattemore also calls Genesis 1–11 'proto-history', which seems to mean that it's essentially a few 'once upon a time' historical notions presented in a largely symbolic framework conventional to the day. Only the most basic particulars of the narrative should be treated as historical.25 This is a common argument,26 though obvious questions arise—how do we know which particulars are 'basic' (and thus historical) and which are not? Why was the 'symbolic framework' conventional? Why accept Genesis over the pagan renditions? While we in the 'scientific' West might consider the lack of gods in Genesis a desirable thing, many non-westerners even today would consider the cosmic picture Genesis paints unsettlingly and implausibly empty. Who is right? This all of course assumes Genesis is easily comparable to these other pagan myths, which is disputable.
The pattern of evolutionary paternity
Pattemore then spends three sections detailing the evolutionary 'paternity case', though most of his substantive argument is in section 6. Section 4 deals mainly with physiology, where a few basic canards are presented (invoking 'bad design' and a lack of 'qualitative difference' between us and apes as reasons to reject special creation—arguments that have been dealt with many times before27). Section 5 sets out some basic genetics. The centrepiece of Pattemore's case for evolution is in section 6, which we might term the genetic 'pattern of paternity'—notions such as 'shared mistakes' in non-functional DNA, nested patterns of genetic insertions, and protein sequence similarities. In essence, it is the 'molecular homology' argument. This argument posits that there is a recognizable nested pattern to the genomes of organisms (including primates) that reflects what we would only expect assuming evolution. This argument is analogous to plagiarism—the same unusual spelling mistakes in two papers suggest a common source.
In all these cases the 'plagiarism' analogy breaks because the shared idiosyncrasies are found not to be entirely random.
There are a number of problems with this argument.28 Firstly, analogy and homoplasy (similarity not due to common ancestry) plague the analysis far more than Pattemore acknowledges—many 'patterns' in the molecular data simply do not fit the evolutionary scheme.29 Secondly, some 'changes' may not be changes at all. Functionality is being found in more and more non-coding DNA, including 'pseudogenes' and 'retroelements', which means the shared features may actually reflect a common function rather than common ancestry.30–33 Thirdly, some changes may not be random—they may be the result of preferential mutation: e.g. mutational hotspots34 or designed variation.35 The fact is that we simply do not know enough of how the genome works to understand its semantics, especially with respect to non-coding DNA. In all these cases the 'plagiarism' analogy breaks because the shared idiosyncrasies are found not to be entirely random. And if this analogy breaks, so does Pattemore's central argument for common ancestry.
Moreover, evolutionary pattern is only as convincing as the process posited to explain the pattern, and here evolution falls down miserably. Genetic degradation is the inexorable norm,36 not the addition of radically new features and systems (e.g. an innate ability for syntactic language).37 Moreover, evolutionary analyses of the genetic data evince a systemic evolutionary bias.38 Unless a viable mechanism can be produced, evolutionary 'patterns of paternity' are interesting speculations based on a vastly incomplete understanding of the genome which amount to nothing more than the fallacy of affirming the consequent. Common ancestry is not the only way to explain these patterns.
Unoriginal sin, inconsequential death
Section 7 is the obligatory section on Adam, Original Sin, and salvation. Consistent with his belief in evolution, Pattemore rejects the historicity of Adam and Eve. This unsurprisingly leads him to reject Original Sin and sin-death causality (with respect to physical death, at least), though he acknowledges that Paul believed Adam existed. But this entails that Paul is wrong—Pattemore also rejects biblical inerrancy, disqualifying him as an evangelical.
However, he doesn't think this really matters for Paul's argument in Romans 5:12–21. He considers Paul's use of Adam in Romans 5 to be an incidental rhetorical device to contrast with forgiveness in Christ—the historicity of Adam is apparently irrelevant to the point Paul is making. At this point Pattemore is against not only the history of interpretation but even the consensus of modern commentators.39,40 Moreover, a simple reading of Romans 5:13–14 clearly shows that Paul makes much of Adam not in an abstract sense but as an integral part of a theologically significant historical framework. The argument is so grounded in history that extracting a historical Adam leaves the whole argument in tatters.
Pattemore's handling of physical death is even worse. He acknowledges that 1 Corinthians 15:20–22 rather clearly makes Adam the cause of physical death since the solution to 'death' in Adam is bodily resurrection in Christ41: "But it seems as though Paul is talking in 1 Corinthians about physical death when he contrasts it with resurrection from the dead" (p. 295). He then tries to sidestep Paul's argument by appealing to Genesis 3 (p. 296). But Genesis 3 doesn't help him—a part of the judgment on Adam is returning to the dust, which is clearly physical death.
Soulless humans?
Section 8 is a discussion of the notion of the human soul as it relates to evolution and the Bible. Pattemore advocates (with many theistic evolutionists today) physicalism42—the idea that humans possess no immaterial soul that can be distinguished from the body. The implication is that we cease to exist upon death, and resume our existence once we are raised.
To refute the notion of an immaterial soul Pattemore puts much effort into (re)defining the terms used for 'soul' and 'spirit' in Scripture (nephesh, ruach, psyche, and pneuma) in physicalist terms. There are dualist responses to this that he doesn't interact with,43 but the point is somewhat moot—he hardly deals with passages where these terms are not present or important that still seem to suggest our continued disembodied existence after death: e.g. Luke 23:42–43; Philippians 1:23; 2 Corinthians 5:8; Jesus' answer to the Sadducees' question about the resurrection (Matthew 22:23–33, Mark 12:18–27, Luke 20:27–40); the conscious 'souls' of martyred saints before their resurrection (Revelation 6:9–10); and even the rather enigmatic account of Saul, Samuel, and the witch at Endor (1 Samuel 28). Pattemore only mentions one of these passages (Matthew 22:31–32), though without comment beyond that it's about resurrection. It is, but the form of the argument is rather involved, and Jesus' stated punchline is not 'and they will be raised from the dead' but rather 'Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are currently alive', with the unstated implication in context being that they are awaiting resurrection. Ironically, one of the best recent defences of this view comes from New Testament scholar (and theistic evolutionist) N.T. Wright,44 whom Pattemore approvingly cites as rejecting the notion of a disembodied soul:
"Recent scholarship (eg NT Wright in Surprised by Hope) has tended to affirm rather that the New Testament hope is the resurrection of the body, and that there is little consistent biblical or scientific evidence for the existence of a disembodied soul" (p. 354).
And this is the quote he uses to prove his point about Wright's belief (p. 354):
"… do we have immortal souls, and if so what are they? Again, much Christian and sub-Christian tradition has assumed that we all do indeed have 'souls' that need 'saving', and that the 'soul', if 'saved', will be the 'part' of us that 'goes to heaven when we die'. All this, however, finds minimal support in the New Testament, including the teachings of Jesus, where the word 'soul', though rare, reflects when it does occur underlying Hebrew or Aramaic words that refer, not to a disembodied entity hidden within the outer shell of a disposable body, but rather to what we would call the whole 'person' or 'personality', seen as being confronted by God … In other words, the idea that every human possesses an immortal soul, which is the 'real' part of them, finds little support in the Bible."45
However, this needs to be compared to this statement from the same book:
"… all the Christian departed are in substantially the same state, that of restful happiness. Though this is sometimes described as 'sleep', we shouldn't take this to mean a state of unconsciousness. Had Paul thought that, I very much doubt that he would've described life immediately after death as 'being with Christ, which is far better'. Rather, sleep here means that the body is 'asleep' in the sense of 'dead', while the real person—however we want to describe him or her—continues.
"This state is not, clearly, the final destiny for which the Christian dead are bound, which is as we have seen bodily resurrection. But it is a state in which the dead are held firmly within the conscious love of God and the conscious presence of Jesus Christ, while they await that day [emphases added]."46
Wright seems rather confused. He clearly affirms a disembodied intermediate state between death and resurrection and yet has no time for an 'immaterial soul' or 'substance dualism'.47 However, a conscious disembodied intermediate state entails some form of substance dualism.48 Whence the inconsistency? Wright argues against Platonic dualism49 but at times seems to think he has thereby refuted all forms of substance dualism.50
Clearly, Pattemore has misrepresented Wright to a certain extent; whatever Wright is, he is no physicalist. There are plenty of Christian physicalists more consistent than Wright on this topic that Pattemore could have referenced, and yet didn't.51
In another ironic twist, though, Pattemore seems to reproduce Wright's error of subsuming all forms of substance dualism under Platonic dualism. He thus seems to consider Platonism and physicalism as the only live options. However, while the doctrine of the intermediate state entails a form of substance dualism, it is not Platonic dualism. Unlike Platonism, which views this disembodied state as a desirable permanent state, Paul viewed it as a temporary state of nakedness (2 Corinthians 5:2–4). It is in one sense better (for Christians) than our existence in a fallen world and in corrupted flesh because we come to rest in God's presence (Luke 23:42–43, 2 Corinthians 5:8, Philippians 1:23). However, in such a state we are distinctly less than we were created to be—a disembodied state is not proper for humans. Thus we seek a more permanent embodiment (2 Corinthians 5:4) when our corrupted flesh is raised incorruptible and immortal (1 Corinthians 15:51–54). This dualism bears little relation to Platonic dualism. It arises for different reasons, serves a different purpose, and has a drastically different estimation of the value of a disembodied state.
Pattemore only acknowledges such a view once, and only in passing without refutation (p. 350). He doesn't seriously interact with any dualistic view that propounds bodily resurrection as a desirable final state.52 For what he considers "stray[ing] deeply into theological and philosophical territory to examine the notion of the soul" (p. 358), this is a massive omission. No orthodox Christian view has anything other than bodily resurrection as the desirable final state (1 Corinthians 15), therefore the debate he is having is not one among different Christian views—he's debating with a pagan Greek thinker.53
Theistic evolution = informed theism?
One of course would expect Pattemore's summary of the issue to be in favour of theistic evolution, and so it is. However, what is striking is not the conclusion, but the way in which every other view is represented. Theistic evolution is 'informed theism' (p. 378), whereas everything else is 'creationism'. The rather clear implication is that 'creationists' are not informed. This can be taken in two ways—either creationists simply have never interacted with any serious evolutionary arguments and so are not equipped to produce any informed responses, or belief in creationism per se is a sign of ignorance, regardless of what evolutionary literature they may have interacted with. Neither option is good, the first being gross incompetence, and the second being hubristic prejudice (which in turn leads to gross incompetence). Unfortunately, the second option seems more plausible—he seems to think skepticism of evolution is the sine qua non of irrationality.
The end of the matter?
For all the detail the book attempts to go into concerning the human origins issue (it would take a book to refute everything), Am I My Keeper's Brother? is just one more vapid authoritarian 'apologetic' for theistic evolution. There are simplistic errors, facile misrepresentation of opponents, unfounded psychoanalyzing of his opponents' motives, and a complete lack of reference to any Christian literature promoting views he attempts to rebut. In terms of content, any heterodox theology goes so long as the orthodoxy of evolution is preserved. Is this fair and scholarly? No. It's not even original. It merely follows uncritically a long line of bad polemics associated with BioLogos.
Harmony and discord
The Non-Mythical Adam and Eve!
Evolutionary syncretism: a critique of BioLogos
Taking firm hold on an illusion
If evolutionists inspired Scripture
Theistic evolutionary doublespeak
Will the New Heavens and Earth be physical?
Creation Compromises
Cosner, L., Evolutionary syncretism: a critique of BioLogos, 7 September 2010. Return to text.
Carter, R.W., The Non-Mythical Adam and Eve! Refuting errors by Francis Collins and BioLogos, 20 August 2011. Return to text.
In New Zealand, this is the second-highest academic rank. Return to text.
Williams, A., Taking firm hold on an illusion: A review of Coming to Peace with Science by Darrel R. Falk, J. Creation 20(3):45, 2006. Return to text.
Weinberger, L., Harmony and discord: A review of The Language of God by Francis S. Collins, J. Creation 21(1):33–37, 2007. Return to text.
Cosner, L., Theistic evolutionary doublespeak: A review of The Language of Science and Faith by Karl W. Giberson and Francis S. Collins, J. Creation 26(1):20–23, 2012. Return to text.
Bell, P.B., The portrayal of creationists by their evolutionist detractors, J. Creation 16(2):46–53, 2002. Return to text.
Holding, J.P., 'Not to Be Used Again': Homologous Structures and the Presumption of Originality as a Critical Value, 29 November 2006. Return to text.
It is unlikely that the similarity is anywhere near this high; see Cohen, J., Relative differences: the myth of 1%, Science 316(5833):1836, 29 June 2007 | DOI: 10.1126/science.316.5833.1836; and Anderson, D., Evolutionists abandon the idea of 99% DNA similarity between humans and chimps, 10 August 2007. However, even a 1% difference is no help for evolution—Batten, D., Haldane's dilemma has not been solved, J. Creation 19(1):20–21, 2005. Return to text.
Wieland, C., Furry little humans? Creation 24(3):10–12, 2002. Return to text.
Cosner, L., Project Nim: Can a chimp learn language? 18 December 2011. Return to text.
Theistic evolutionists may argue that evolution in their scheme cannot be cast as 'mindless'. However, since theistic evolutionists consider naturalistic processes sufficient to explain biological origins and change there is no practical difference between theistic evolution and atheistic evolution. Return to text.
Lewis, C.S., God in the Dock: Essay on Theology and Ethics, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, MI, pp. 271–277, 1970. Return to text.
For an introduction to critical realism from a biblical creationist perspective, see Kennard, D., A nuanced Lakatos philosophy of theology and science; in: Snelling, A.A. (Ed.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Creationism, Creation Science Fellowship and Institute for Creation Research, Pittsburgh, PA, and Dallas, TX, pp. 31–41, 2008. Return to text.
Dembski, W., The End of Christianity, B&H Publishing Group, Nashville, TN, chapter 8: 'Two Books', 2009. Return to text.
Weinberger, L., Whose god? The theological response to the god-of-the-gaps, J. Creation 22(1):120–127, 2008. Return to text.
The 'antipodean heresy' is the idea that humans lived on the opposite side of the globe who were not sons of Adam. Return to text.
Augustine did object to the notion of antipodean humans based on this, and because he knew that only sons of Adam could be saved and God would not create irredeemable humans (De Civitate Dei 16.9). Augustine was right in his anthropology; he was wrong in his geography. Return to text.
He also claims that Augustine was equivocal on the sphericity of the earth, citing Ferrari, L.C., Augustine's cosmography, Augustinian Studies 27:129–177, 1996, in support. However, this has been challenged in the literature: Nothaft, C.P.E., Augustine and the shape of the Earth: A critique of Leo Ferrari, Augustinian Studies 42(1):33–48, 2011. Pattemore may be excused for not knowing about this reference at the time of printing, but it was incumbent on him to do his due diligence on the author of the paper he cites. Leo Ferrari was indeed a credentialed Augustinian scholar, but he was also a flat-earther (Leo Charles Ferrari, w3.stu.ca/stu/sites/nble/f/ferrari_leo_charles.html, as at 18 July 2013). Ferrari also admits that his position was counter-consensus, which while not falsifying his position in itself, certainly suggests that his flat-earth views could have distorted his reading of Augustine's cosmography. Nothaft shows, I believe conclusively, that this is indeed the case. Further, almost all church scholars who commented on the shape of the earth affirmed its sphericity, as conclusively documented in Russell, J.B., Inventing the Flat Earth: Columbus & Modern Historians, Praeger, 1991 (see also Sarfati, J., The flat earth myth, Creation 35(3):20–23, 2013; creation.com/flat-earth-myth). Return to text.
The Portuguese had in fact been progressing down the west coast of Africa for decades before even Diaz' journey. See Davidson, M.H., Columbus Then and Now: A Life Reexamined, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, OK, p. 70, 1997. Return to text.
Schirrmacher, T., The Galileo affair: history or heroic hagiography? J. Creation 14(1):91–100, 2000. Return to text.
Wieland, C., One Human Family, Creation Book Publishers, Atlanta, GA, 2011. Return to text.
Weeks, N., Problems in the interpretation of Genesis 1–11: Part 1, Creation 2(3):27–32, 1979; Weeks, N., Problems in the interpretation of Genesis 1–11: Part 2, Creation 2(4):22–26, 1979. Return to text.
E.g. Walton, J.H., The Lost World of Genesis One, Kindle version, IVP, Downers Grove, IL, locations 981–985, 2009; see review by Statham, D., J. Creation 24(3):24–26, 2010. Return to text.
See e.g. Collins, C.J., Science and Faith: Friends or Foes? Wheaton, IL, 2003; Wenham, G., Gordon Wenham, Genesis 1–15, Word Biblical Commentary series, Waco, TX, p. 91, 1987. Return to text.
Batten, D., Catchpoole, D., Sarfati, J.D. and Wieland, C., Is Genesis poetry/figurative, a theological argument (polemic) and thus not history? 30 November 2007. Return to text.
On 'bad design', see e.g. Sarfati, J., By Design, Creation Book Publishers, Brisbane, 2008; Gurney, P.W.V., Is our 'inverted' retina really 'bad design'? J. Creation 13(1):37–44, 1999; and Sarfati, J., Refuting Evolution 2, Creation Book Publishers, Atlanta, GA, chapter 7, 2011. On 'the lack of qualitative difference between humans and chimps', see e.g. Wieland, ref. 10, Anderson, D., Chimps and humans—are we really the same kind? 4 April 2008; and Batten, D., The biological classification of humans, 30 June 2013. Return to text.
Woodmorappe, J., Are pseudogenes 'shared mistakes' between primate genomes? J. Creation 14(3):55–71, 2000. Return to text.
Bergman, J., Does homology provide evidence of evolutionary naturalism? J. Creation 15(1):26–33, 2001. Return to text.
Williams, A., Astonishing DNA complexity demolishes neo-Darwinism, J. Creation 21(3):111–117, 2008. Return to text.
Doyle, S., Large scale function for 'endogenous retroviruses', J. Creation 22(3):16, 2008;. Return to text.
Carter, R.W., The slow, painful death of junk DNA, J. Creation 23(3):12–13, 2009. Return to text.
Tomkins, J., The junk DNA myth takes a well-deserved hit, J. Creation 25(3):23–27, 2011. Return to text.
Terborg, P., An illusion of common descent, J. Creation 24(2):122–127, 2010. Return to text.
Terborg, P., The design of life: part 4—variation-inducing genetic elements and their function, J. Creation 23(1):107–114, 2009. Return to text.
Sanford, J., Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome, 3rd edn, FMS Publications, New York, 2008. Return to text.
Carter, R.W., Can mutations create new information? J. Creation 25(3):92–98, 2011. Return to text.
Tomkins, J., How genomes are sequenced and why it matters: Implications for studies in comparative genomics of humans and chimpanzees, Answers Res. J. 4:81–88, 2011. Return to text.
Cosner, L., Romans 5:12–21: Paul's view of literal Adam, J. Creation 22(2):105–107, 2008. Return to text.
See also Smith, H.B., Cosmic and universal death from Adam's Fall: an exegesis of Romans 8:19–23a, J. Creation 21(1):75–85, 2007. Return to text.
Cosner, L., Christ as the last Adam: Paul's use of the Creation narrative in 1 Corinthians 15, J. Creation 23(3):70–75, 2009. Return to text.
Also known as 'soul sleep' or 'Christian mortalism'. Return to text.
Cooper, J.W., Body, Soul, and Life Everlasting: Biblical Anthropology and the Monism-Dualism Debate, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, MI, 1989. Return to text.
Wright, N.T., The Resurrection of the Son of God, SPCK, London, pp. 415–429, 2003. Return to text.
Wright, N.T., Surprised by Hope, SPCK, London, p. 39, 2007. Return to text.
Wright, ref. 45, pp. 183–184; emphases added. Return to text.
Wright, N.T., Mind, Spirit, Soul and Body: All for One and One for All: Reflections on Paul's anthropology in his complex contexts, ntwrightpage.com, as at 5 August 2013. Return to text.
If I exist consciously in the intermediate state, then such existence must be apart from my body since I am not capable of conscious existence in my body when it is physically dead. Therefore, my identity is not defined by or reducible to my body. Whether we call that in which my identity persists a 'soul' is irrelevant—that my 'me-ness' exists at all apart from my body means it inheres in some immaterial mode of existence distinct from my body. When separate from the body it doesn't have to be a great or autonomous existence, but it is still existence apart from the body, which is sufficient for substance dualism. Return to text.
An extreme form of substance dualism that sees the soul as autonomously immortal and better off without the body. This is a Platonic and Gnostic idea, not a biblical one. Return to text.
Rickabaugh, B.L., Responding to NT Wright's Rejection of the Soul: A Defense of Substance Dualism, www.academia.org, as at 5 August 2013. Cited with permission. Return to text.
Just to name two: Corcoran, K.J., Rethinking Human Nature: A Christian Materialist Alternative to the Soul, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 2006; and Green, J.B., Body, Soul, and Human Life. The Nature of Humanity in the Bible, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids, MI, 2008. Return to text.
For example: Alcorn, R., Heaven, Tyndale House Publishers, Coral Stream, IL, 2004. See also Cosner, L., An eternal perspective on creation: Lita Cosner chats with Randy Alcorn, writer and founder of Eternal Perspectives Ministries, Creation 34(2):40–43, 2012. Return to text.
Or at best a sub-Christian syncretism with Platonism that views 'going to be with Jesus when we die' as our final state—on which see Alcorn, ref. 52, pp. 475–482. Return to text.
Refuting Compromise, updated & expanded
by Dr Jonathan Sarfati
Did God Use Evolution? MB Edition
by Dr Werner Gitt
Trent W.
US December 7th, 2013
Wow! I never knew about the Physicalism stuff, and it's obviously consistent with evolutionists because they believe nothing exists outside the physical realm.
As for Wright, he's hyper-nuancing and vaciliating, if not just plain wishy washy. He'll affirm one thing in front of a conservative crowd and denounce it in front of a liberal audience a a day later.
GB December 6th, 2013
If Christians who believe in evolution are correct in their belief then does this mean that God is not sovereign? If evolution operates independently of God then God is not in full control of this universe. Was it just luck that human beings are at the top of the tree? Why not some other animal? If, on the other hand, God intervened periodically in the evolutionary process to ensure that humans came into being then why bother with evolution at all? Why not just create a man and a woman and avoid all the death and suffering of evolution. The creation of Adam and Eve makes sense but theistic evolution does not.
Dean R.
AU December 6th, 2013
Its amazing how much people will read something into or out of the Bible, even learned men & women, no surprise then that they would do it with skulls, bones & apes.
There are some great comparisons & exposing in this article, informative stuff. There is a lot of inconsistent baggage that comes with the evolutionary narrative.
Brian J.
Is this guy even a Christian? I haven't read the book but it appears, based on this article, in order to believe what he believes he has to do quite a hack and slash job on the Bible.
He basically dismisses Genesis completely. Apparently Exodus 31:17 is a lie. The genealogies in both the Old and New Testaments are off by a factor of what.....a million or so? I must have missed the part in the Bible where they traced Jesus's lineage all the way back to LUCA. I'm assuming he brings this up in his book and gives the full lineage?
When I was growing up I was told hacking out most of the Bible was a 'cult'. It's almost appalling what some consider to be Christianity in today's world. Well done on the article.
Excellent article, was amused at the quoted references that fear was the motivation for creationists, it is demonstrably a case of the pot calling the kettle black, and a tactic that is used very successfully by the gay movement when they label any opposing viewpoint as homophobic.
Hi Shaun
We are our brother's keeper and Christ reminds us to be neighbourly. Thanks for the detailed review.. it sounds rather harsh at the end .. 'vapid polemics'.. but you are rebuking Philip for good reason.
Philip should have been a bit more thorough and considered the wealth of advice and information available on creation.com before venturing into waters that are much deeper than his previous published research on childhood asthma.
I am sure that your review which Philip may be reading in NZ today will draw his attention to the testimony of scientists who preach the six days of creation and the veracity of Genesis in season and out of season with no conflict between their faith and their science.
Victor B.
I have not read the book "Am I My Keeper's Brother" - However I thank you for clarifying these misrepresentations about Biblical Creationists (Young Age Creationists):
"Young age Creationists do not read Genesis as science but as history"
" revealed truth vs discovered truth .... But the issue in the distinction is not between different 'types of truth' but between differing levels of reliability in the two sources of information. "
Seems to me when scripture is our authority (being sanctified by the truth, having one's mind renewed by the Holy Spirit) then because God is true and what he reveals in his word is true we can have the confidence and assurance that the Holy Spirit brings; - just as we have in the truth of the virgin birth, the deity of Christ and the bodily resurrection of the Lord Jesus. (All historically true, miraculously and scientifically true) - 'Theistic evolution' compromises biblical truth. (sola scriptura)


text:
Q: Serial communication from Raspberry to Arduino with phpSerial not working I develop a software and I need to use the serial port of the raspberry to send data to arduino.
I use phpSerial but It's impossible to know what data are received on Arduino with this code. I test with led on the port 2 but when I send this data the led does not light..
ON RASPBERRY
    $serial = new phpSerial;
    $serial->deviceSet("/dev/ttyACM0");
    $serial->confBaudRate(115200);
    $serial->confParity("none");
    $serial->confCharacterLength(8);
    $serial->confStopBits(1);
    $serial->deviceOpen();
    sleep(1);
    $serial->sendMessage("1");
    echo $serial->readPort();
    $serial->deviceClose();

ON ARDUINO
  if (Serial.available() > 0)  {

      readed_char[i] = (char)Serial.read();
      Serial.print(readed_char[i]);

      if (readed_char[0] == '1'){

         digitalWrite(2,HIGH);

       }
    }

Thanks for help :)

A: Don't you have to configure hardware handshake?
You read into readed_char[i] but check readed_char[0], is this correct?
BTW: there is no "readed" in English.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


This recipe is for medium couscous only - of the pre-cooked/instant kind - ready in 5 minutes.
Cut any vegetables you would like to include.
Carrots, diced to the size of small peas will remain quite firm if not pre-cooked.
Frozen vegetables (eg, peas, corn, diced carrot, etc) will cook to firm.
For softer results from frozen vegetables, defrost them first.
Save water from precooked vegetables to use in place of fresh water.
Put 1 cup couscous into a pot with herbs and vegetables (do not add salt at this stage). Stir well.
Bring water or saved water from pre-cooking vegetables to a boil in a separate pot or kettle.
Add 1 cup boiling water to the pot of couscous.
Add (optional) salt immediately after the water is added and stir briefly (Do not add salt if using water from boiled vegetables) .
Cover and let it stand for at least 5 minutes.
After couscous has absorbed the water (after 5 miinutes) stir the couscous in the pot - gently lifting it from the bottom with a fork to separate the grains.
Let the couscous stand in the pot for an additional 2 to 5 minutes, with the lid ajar.
We almost always add some dried parsely to our couscous ... stir it in before the water is added.
When adding flavours and seasonings (including salt) do so in very modest amounts as couscous will readily take on other flavours.
Need more salt? Add it at the table rather than to the pot.
Couscous is pasta - a pasta made of (durum wheat) semolina. Traditionally, it was hand rolled. What we buy, in North American supermarkets, is usually medium (pre-cooked) instant couscous.
There are so many ways to make any single dish. This is just one general way of many and is for medium (instant) couscous only.
Couscous can be used for a cold salad, as a side dish or as an element within a main dish.
Most common is as a side dish. This is how we tend to use this product although it does, sometimes, become a quick and delicious snack.
Use our recipe flavouring ideas as a guideline for your own. Of course, you are quite welcome to replicate what we do but don't limit yourself. Have fun. Try out your own ideas too!
You can always go get some Wallpaper Originals' Free Food Desktop Wallpapers for Mac & PC - now that you've found the web's best and easiest Free Medium Couscous Recipe.


Marcel Proust and Walter Berry became friends in 1916, when Berry sent Proust a fine eighteenth-century volume stamped with the arms and coronet of Prondre de Guermantes. A descendant of an old and wealthy New York family, Walter Berry was born in Paris where he spent his early years. He came back to the United States with his parents, attended Harvard, and decided to pursue a career in international law and diplomacy. Prior to returning to France, Berry had served as a judge at the International Tribunal of Egypt from 1908 to 1911. When Proust met him, Berry was fifty-seven, handsome and tall—six feet three—with blue-eyes that sparkled mischievously. An avid tennis player who was remarkably fit for his age, Berry often rose early in the morning to play matches in the Bois de Boulogne.
Berry, who spoke fluent, eloquent French, was, after the American ambassador, the most influential American in Paris and the most revered. Berry's importance to American business interests was demonstrated when he was elected President of the American Chamber of Commerce in Paris. Berry was a close friend of two famous American expatriates, Henry James and Edith Wharton. Wharton, who lived most of her adult life in France, called Berry the love of her life.


text:
from yapsy.IPlugin import IPlugin
import logging

## @package masterPlugin
# provides a master plug in class which all other menu plug ins will inherit
# from

class masterPlugin(IPlugin):

    ## Default constructor
    # sets command and aliases to none, and creates an empty commandInfo
    def __init__(this):
        this.command = None
        this.aliases = None  # list of strings - aliases to command
        this.commandInfo = {'argumentInfo': None,  # commandInfo for this item
            'help': "",
            'optionalArguments': None,
            'requiredArguments': None}

    ## Run this command (stub)
    # Should be overloaded by the child
    #
    # @param[in] arguments arguments already parsed by processArguments and
    # validated by validate()
    # @param[in,out] instance of libHercMatrix.hercMatrix for the command to
    # operate on, if needed
    #
    # @returns None
    def execute(this, arguments, WORKINGMATRIX):
        pass

    ## called before execute to validate arguments
    # Child classes should overload this and also call super().validate()
    #
    # This stub fails only if command is uninitialized
    #
    # @param[in] arguments list of strings - arguments already parsed by
    # processArguments()
    # @param[in] WORKINGMATRIX instance of libHercMatrix.hercMatrix which
    # the command may use for validation, if needed
    #
    # @returns False if validation fails
    # @returns True if validation passes
    def validate(this, arguments, WORKINGMATRIX):
        if this.command is None:
            logging.warning("{0}.command is None".format(this))
            return False
        return True

    ## Process arguments for later use by command
    # This function should typecast all arguments (if needed) and verify any
    # required arguments are present. Child classes are strongly discouraged
    # from overriding this method
    #
    # @param[in] arguments split arguments, not including the command
    #
    # @returns arguments typecasted and verified as a list of objects
    # @returns None on error

    def processArguments(this, arguments):

        if this.commandInfo['requiredArguments'] != None:
            if len(arguments) < len(this.commandInfo['requiredArguments']):
                print("ERROR, incorrect number of arguments for {0}"
                      .format(this.command))
                firstMisingArgument = len(arguments)
                for i in range(firstMisingArgument,
                        len(this.commandInfo['requiredArguments'])):
                    print("Missing argument '{1}' at position {0}".format(i,
                            this.commandInfo['requiredArguments'][i][2]))
                return None

            for arg in this.commandInfo['requiredArguments']:
                try:
                    arguments[arg[0]] = arg[1](arguments[arg[0]])
                except Exception:
                    print("""ERROR: argument {0} was present, but is not of
 required type {1}""".format(arg[0], str(arg[1])))
                    return None

        if this.commandInfo['optionalArguments'] != None:
            for arg in this.commandInfo['optionalArguments']:
                argOffset = 0
                if this.commandInfo['requiredArguments'] != None:
                    argOffset = len(this.commandInfo['requiredArguments'])
                if argOffset + arg[0] > (len(arguments) - 1):
                    # this optional arg was not given
                    break

                try:
                    arguments[arg[0] + argOffset] = \
                        arg[1](arguments[arg[0] + argOffset])

                except IndexError:
                    print("WARNING: IndexError while accessing index {0} of {1}"
                          .format(arg[0] + argOffset, arguments))
                except Exception:
                    print("""ERROR: argument {0} was present, but of type {1}
 not required type {2}""".format(arg[0] + argOffset,
                                 type(arguments[arg[0] + argOffset]),
                                 str(arg[1])))
                    return None
        return arguments

    ## Prints the help text for this command
    # uses commandInfo to generate a help message for this command. Child
    # classes are discouraged from overloading this function

    def printHelp(this):
        import textwrap

        print("-" * 40)
        print(this.command, end='')

        if this.commandInfo['requiredArguments'] != None:
            for arg in this.commandInfo['requiredArguments']:
                print(' [' + arg[2] + '] ', end='')
        if this.commandInfo['optionalArguments'] != None:
            for arg in this.commandInfo['optionalArguments']:
                print(' (' + arg[2] + ') ', end='')
        print("\n-- arguments --")
        argCounter = 0
        if this.commandInfo['requiredArguments'] != None:
            for arg in this.commandInfo['requiredArguments']:
                print('    [' + arg[2] + '] ' + str(arg[1]) + ' - ' + ' ' +
                      this.commandInfo['argumentInfo'][argCounter])
                argCounter += 1
        if this.commandInfo['optionalArguments'] != None:
            for arg in this.commandInfo['optionalArguments']:
                try:
                    print('    (' + arg[2] + ') - ' + str(arg[1]) + ' ' +
                          this.commandInfo['argumentInfo'][argCounter])
                except IndexError:
                    print("WARNING: commandInfo of {0} malformed"
                          .format(this.command))
                argCounter += 1

        print("-- use --")
        # get rid of extraneous white space
        helpText = this.commandInfo['help'].split()
        helpText = ' '.join(helpText) # put back just spaces
        # wrap text, then print line by line
        for line in textwrap.wrap(helpText):
            print('    ' + line)

        if this.aliases is not None:
            print("-- aliases --")
            for alias in this.aliases:
                print(alias, end="")
                if this.aliases.index(alias) != len(this.aliases) -1:
                    print(", ", end="")
                else:
                    print("")


Scar tissue isn't just physical. Reid never told anyone—why would he?
Soundwave hates physical contact. Or at least he used to before he became trapped in the shadow plane. Now the only thing he wants to do is touch Shockwave. They...figure something out until Shockwave can bring him back.
Maria is the young daughter of a prestigious Duke, living in the midst of the Vermilion Capitol: a society that accepts and encourages the kidnapping of innocent people, and the selling of slaves. She wants no part of it. But she may not have a choice.


A world-leading multi-agency specialist unit dedicated to tackling stalking that is run in partnership with the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) and the Suzy Lamplugh Trust.
Designed to be a centre of excellence, the Stalking Threat Assessment Centre (STAC) offers a range of services from different agencies, all working together to combat stalking and protect victims.
The new STAC is supported by the Mayor of London and the project as a whole has been awarded £4 million pounds over two years from the Home Office's Police Transformation Fund. Around £1.4m of this funding will be dedicated to the STAC in London while the rest will be divided between two other units in Hampshire and Cheshire who are also taking part in this pilot.
The initiative will aim to improve responses to stalking across the criminal justice system and the health sector through rehabilitative intervention for stalkers. Ultimately, it is hoped that working with perpetrators can help to make victims of stalking safer.
It will be staffed by eight police officers, two nurses, a nurse manager, Forensic Consultant Psychiatrist Frank Farnham, and Sara Henley Consultant Clinical and Forensic Psychologist, supported by a victim advocate, a Crown Prosecution Service lawyer and a probation officer. The STAC's two year pilot aims to reduce reoffending and improve public safety; increase early intervention to reduce the risk of offenders becoming violent; improve the response to victims of stalking; and enhance communication and relationships between the police and other local services to help improve how information is shared. At the end of the pilot, the outcomes will be assessed and will be considered for roll out nationally.
The Suzy Lamplugh Trust will provide independent stalking expertise to professionals. Specialist stalking advocates from the National Stalking Helpline, which is run by the charity, will provide crucial advocacy to victims of stalking.


My mini and I donned our best stripes in recognition of the first #NationalStripesDay, a day created by the one and only J. Crew. Classic stripes are reinvented in a variety of cuts and styles every spring. From skinny to wide, navy and white to multi-colored, there are so many looks to choose from this season. Of course, you can never go wrong with an always-in-style, preppy striped tee. And, while horizontal stripes are a popular look, vertical stripes are ultimately more flattering with their long, slimming line. Note that a great pendant or statement necklace can break up the widening effect of horizontal stripes though by drawing the eye down. Bell sleeves are a haute trend right now and I am in love with the look — such a beautiful statement! And, can you believe this top I'm wearing is only $45??! Happy National Stripes Day!
Arizona Midday | Spring Dresses!


text:
ElectionsMidterms
On Not Beating the Odds
Libby Watson
Virginia's Fifth Congressional District makes no damn sense. Shaped like a wizard's hat, it stretches from its wide base at the state's southern border and winds up nestling against the DC metro area in the north. It occupies a huge slice of the middle of the state, is more than 200 miles long, and contains more than 700,000 people, 65 percent of whom live in rural areas.
Smack in the middle of the district is Charlottesville. Charlottesville is what people who speak in clichés call a "liberal enclave," a spot of blue in a red sea, and so on. Its biggest employers are the University of Virginia and the local hospitals. Despite its infamy as the place where the Unite the Right protests happened, and where Heather Heyer was killed, people here are quick to tell you that the chino-wearing race war virgins responsible for its national notoriety are not representative of the city in the least. Eighty percent of its voters went for Hillary Clinton in 2016.
The Fifth has been represented by Republicans since 2002, with the exception of Democrat Tom Perriello, who was barely elected in the Obama landslide of 2008 and was defeated in the Tea Party landslide of 2010. Going into Tuesday's midterms, FiveThirtyEight gave it an 87 percent chance of being represented by Republicans based on historical patterns; the site also said that Virginia's current map gave Republicans a 14 point advantage in the state.
This is all to say that Leslie Cockburn, a former journalist and the 2018 Democratic nominee for Congress in the district, faced an uphill battle. Last night, she lost that battle to Denver Riggleman, a distillery owner and possible Bigfoot erotica enthusiast. She earned 46 percent of the vote, five more points than the last Democratic nominee in 2016 and 11 more points than the 2014 candidate. She came pretty damn close, but she couldn't overcome the odds.
Her race was also seen as something of a bellwether for the rest of the midterms. Chuck Todd called it a "tsunami-watch" race, saying that if it had flipped, it would be "something we've never seen before on the Democratic side." Though Democrats took the House, and won the popular vote by 7 percent, it was not the Big Blue Wave many had hoped for. It was not something we've never seen before; it was a familiar tale of toil and defeat. It wasn't magic. It was life.
On Election Day, I joined Rob, a Cockburn campaign volunteer, as he spent the afternoon knocking on doors in Charlottesville. Rob is a deeply likable man, who moved back to Charlottesville in 2017, after 15 years in the Tetons. He's a production manager at the brewery where the Cockburn campaign held its election night party. His son Cormac was a field organizer for the campaign, and we picked up his high school-age son from a phone banking shift.
As we went door-to-door in the rain, he explained that the list of doors he had to knock should be all definite Cockburn voters, and he would ask whether they had a chance to vote yet. (It was better, he said, to ask whether they had a chance to vote yet rather than asking outright if they did vote, which puts people on the defensive.)
In four hours of canvassing over two neighborhoods, only one person who answered the door—a majority weren't home, since it was the afternoon on a work day—said they hadn't voted yet. Many said they had been first thing in the morning; one resident told us that, at 9:30 that morning, he had been the 1,600th voter at his polling place. In fact, so many people had already voted that Rob wondered if his list was wrong—he shouldn't be talking to people who vote in every election, he said, because they don't need the push.
Many of the houses had signs indicating their support for Cockburn or other progressive policies; I saw several of those "we're glad you're our neighbor" signs that sprang up after Trump's election. There were lots of smiley young families; almost every house we visited had a dog that desperately wanted us to either pet them or die. One neighborhood was comprised of new-looking McMansions, with cavernous garages and beautiful views of the hills around Jefferson's Monticello, lit up blood red in the post-rain sunset. Even there, among mostly white people who clearly made six figures—usually an extremely Republican demographic—there were plenty of Cockburn signs. Most were enthusiastic about Cockburn, too, and many thanked Rob for working on the campaign. One guy sarcastically told us he had written in Ted Cruz and Dana Rohrabacher.
I asked Rob what kind of issues people had said were important to them, as he had gone door-to-door in the weeks leading up to the election. Almost all of them said healthcare, he said. Cockburn supported Medicare for All, but other major issues dominated the campaign, too, most notably the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, a proposed fracked gas pipeline which Cockburn opposed. Her website said the state's rural areas are "vulnerable to the schemes of large, out-of-state corporations that despoil the land without a stake in the consequences." Denver Riggleman also opposed it—because it would run through his land.
Rob was remarkably diligent and thorough in his canvassing. He told me with great pride about a woman who hadn't known she could vote absentee since she was going to be out of town on the day, until he told her. I went out that day with him partly because I wanted to see what the voters he spoke to were like, but mostly because I was interested in people like him—people who really drive a campaign. When we took the canvassing packets back to volunteer headquarters, it was full of volunteers waiting to get out there. These people had poured so much energy and optimism into Cockburn's campaign, as I found when I talked to other volunteers and staff that night, at the Cockburn campaign party at Three Notch'd Brewery.
Most of the time, you try and try, and campaign and volunteer and knock on doors, and you lose anyway.
The party was upbeat, and very crowded. CNN played on the big screens, and every time a Democratic win flashed up, people cheered—except for when Andrew Cuomo's win was announced. Not a peep for that. The crowd was a mix of Cockburn supporters and actual campaign staff and volunteers—who, I found, were universal in their praise for the campaign's field operation.
John and his partner had been up at 5 a.m. to start campaign work. Kate had driven two hours down to Danville to knock doors that day; I spotted her fighting back tears after Cockburn's concession speech. Everyone I spoke to who had worked on the campaign emphasized how robust the field operation was; one called it "extraordinary." They were all cautiously optimistic, before the result came in—except one campaign worker who said he thought she would lose by 10 points, because the district is so stacked. He was only a couple points too pessimistic.
Where does that energy go, after such a gutting loss? After you work and work, and you still lose? At the party, I talked to Rebecca Wood, a single payer healthcare activist who told me she'd been carried out of the Kavanaugh and tax bill hearings in the Senate. "That's what I have in me," she said. "I'm not going to stop until single payer happens." I was shocked, in fact, how high spirits seemed to be even after the news of Cockburn's loss had spread. Some campaign staff and volunteers looked crushed, but others I spoke to were at least happy with the rest of the results. More people seemed dismayed when the big screen playing CNN told us Ted Cruz had won.
At about 9:20 p.m., about half an hour before Cockburn showed up, I saw one volunteer pick up one of the many handmade blue waves on a stick and wave it about, half-hopefully and half-sardonically, saying "Maybe? Maybe?" to his friend.
Turnout was high in Charlottesville: 61 percent voted, only two percent lower than the 2016 election and almost double the 2014 midterm vote. Albemarle County, which surrounds Charlottesville, which went 65 percent for Cockburn, had even higher turnout. Matching midterm vote to presidential-level turnout is astronomical. But it was high in the red areas, too. Cockburn's campaign knocked on every door in Charlottesville they could—in fact, one campaign volunteer said they knocked every door in the whole of Albemarle County—but it wasn't enough to overcome a district that is primarily, by design, Republican. The campaign workers did their job as well as they could do.
And it's hard to imagine the sort of Democrat who might have had a better shot than Cockburn. Yes, she had the air of a DC elite, coming from a background in journalism. She was for Medicare for All; Riggleman described her, inaccurately, as "Ocasio-Cortez in a scarf." But she's lived in Rappahanock County, on a farm, for two decades, and she had a campaign uniform of a farmer's vest and riding boots right through Election Day. Maybe protecting the beautiful land of Virginia from the pipeline wasn't a message that would ever persuade those rural Republicans to vote for her, but it was more important that Riggleman was a warm-bodied Republican who said the right things about liberty and taxes, and pledged to join the House Freedom Caucus. What do you say to people like that to get them to vote for a Democrat instead? Do you tell them you favor the subsidies of the Affordable Care Act instead of Medicare for All? Do you hem and haw about the migrant caravan, which worked out just great for Joe Donnelly, who lost his Indiana Senate seat last night?
You don't. You just try your fucking hardest to turn out everyone else, and you probably gotta get lucky and hope the Republicans nominate someone even more unpalatable than the Bigfoot porn guy, too. And then, in 2020, you work on redistricting, and voter ID, and every other bullshit thing that the Republicans have thrown up to make it harder.
This election was the culmination of the psychic angst that set in on November 9, 2016. A majority of Americans disapprove of Trump, and almost half of yesterday's voters strongly disapprove. Millions and millions hate his rotten guts, and were shocked by his unexpected victory, and what it said about this country. Since then, they have been waiting for the spell to break, for the democracy threat level to revert from Not Normal to Normal. But this election was never going to be that.
In life, unlike in the books and TV that the #Resistance turns to for comfort, there is generally no savior. Dumbledore doesn't show up. On TV, if the odds area against someone, that's a good indication they're going to show 'em all and win anyway; in real life, it's a good indication you're going to get crushed. That's how the odds work. Most of the time, you try and try, and campaign and volunteer and knock on doors, and you lose anyway.
When Cockburn gave her concession speech, and said Denver Riggleman won, someone in the back yelled "Gerrymander won!" Yes, she said, gerrymandering won, but "there is a future for all of us here as one unit." That doesn't really mean a lot—it's politician speak—but there's truth in there. Gerrymandering is a product of political efforts by a party determined to shape democratic processes to their advantage; it can be overcome by other political efforts. Florida just restored voting rights to felons; progress can be made. Things are getting a little better.
And there's always next time.
Splinter politics writer. libby.watson@splinternews.com


001222: The service is currently being cached.
The service is currently being cached by another process or user.
In the Catalog window of ArcGIS Desktop, bring up the service context menu and go to View Cache Status to check if any job is in progress. Rerun the tool if no job is running on the service.


Today I'm sharing a DIY Wrapping Paper Wreath tutorial. I saw these two rolls wrapping papers at Micheal's and fell in love with the bright fun colors. I did a little search for something to make with them and came across a book page wreath. I didn't want to use a book page because I LOVE color. I decided to try my hand at creating a wrapping paper wreath on my own. So what follows is a lot of trial and error.
I used a straw one because I got it for .50 at a garage sale. I left the plastic on so I didn't have a mess.
2 glitter snowflakes that coordinate with my wrapping paper- 1 is larger than the other.
Cut 2″ in strips of both of the coordinating wrapping paper. I didn't count how many I cut. I just did it. I did cut more than I needed.
After I cut my 2 in. strips. I cut each of them in half again.
I took my blue folded in half strips and glued it around the wreath.
I then took the colorful folded in half strips and glued them on to the wreath. Placing them a little lower covering more of the wreath and alternating them between the blue ones.
Next, I took one blue strip and one colorful strip and folded them in half and glued them together and then hot glued them to the wreath.
When I put the strips on I left them floppy. I decided I didn't like them that way and went back and creased each strip and then glued each one of them down at the top of the crease. This strengthened each strip so they didn't flop.
I hot glued two snowflakes together and then hot glued it to the wreath.
I hot glued a few white feathers in under the snowflakes.
I LOVE it! I now have a fun colorful wreath for very little money.
Now to figure out how to store it for the year without getting ruined??
Here is another DIY Christmas decor idea, Burlap Christmas Placemats.
Go check out how I made them.
previous : pvBody- Have you heard of it?
next : Are you Ready for Christmas?
I love how that turned out! The colors are fabulous!