text:
\section{Introduction}
\label{Introduction}
Weak gravitational lensing (or `weak lensing') is the phenomenon whereby the images
of distant galaxies are distorted by a small amount as a result of mass perturbations along the line of sight.
The distortions are a change in the third flattening (or third eccentricity; known as `ellipticity') of the
galaxy images, and size. The change in ellipticity of an object is called `shear'.
Every matter perturbation along any line of sight will cause weak lensing distortions. The distortions caused
by large-scale-structure are known as cosmic shear. In the case that there is an individual lensing mass,
for example a single galaxy, galaxy group or cluster, then the distortions caused are an
elliptical alignment in the direction perpendicular (tangential)
to the angular separation between the centre of mass and the lensed objects projected position.
The amplitude of the distortion in this case is a function of the mass distribution of the lensing object
and the geometry of the source-lens-observer configuration. These two terms are in general separable, in the case that
the extent of the lens along the line of sight is much smaller than source-lens distance. Therefore
by taking the \emph{ratio} of the amplitude of the lensing distortion at two different redshifts behind the lens
the mass-dependent term cancels leaving only a measure of the geometry of setting.

This approach to extracting
the geometric part of the weak lensing signal is known as the `shear-ratio' method. It was first proposed
in Jain \& Taylor (2003), and subsequently developed in Taylor et al. (2007) and Kitching et al. (2008).
It has been applied to data twice in Kitching et al. (2007) and Taylor et al. (2012), but only on very small
data sets as a proof of concept, it was also discussed in Medezinski et al. (2011). In this paper
we apply this method to one of the largest combined weak lensing and cluster
catalogues yet available, RCSLenS, and use this to measure the distance-redshift relation from weak lensing data alone.

Purely geometric measurements of expansion history of the Universe, such as the supernovae magnitude-redshift
relation and the Baryon Acoustic Oscillation (BAO) length-redshift relation, have played a critical part in
building the standard cosmological model (e.g Samushia et al., 2014; Amanullah et al., 2010).
They provide low-redshift complementary distance measures
to the high-redshift Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) allowing consistency in the cosmological model to be tested across the
expansion history. Other probes such as cosmic shear, and measurements of the matter power spectrum from
galaxy clustering, measure combinations of the geometry of the Universe and the growth of structure. In
general dark energy models, and in particular for several modified gravity models, these two aspects may
be affected in different ways (e.g. Shafieloo et al., 2013; Clifton et al., 2012).
Therefore having both purely geometric methods, such as BAO,
and geometry-plus-growth methods, such as galaxy clustering, results in powerful combinations in determining the
nature of dark energy. The shear-ratio method provides a way for the geometric signal to be extracted from
weak lensing data, which is complementary to cosmic shear.

The shear-ratio method can be used to constrain cosmological parameters (Taylor et al., 2007), and also
systematic effects in the weak lensing data (Kitching et al., 2008); in Heymans et al. (2012) and Kuijken et al. (2015) a
similar method was used on galaxy scales
(but one that did not take a ratio, and therefore was not a purely geometric method)
to test photometric redshift systematic effects. In this paper we will use the lensing signal behind
galaxy clusters to measure the distance-redshift relation, and infer cosmological parameters.
We present systematic tests on the data and tests on simulated data to validate the method.

The structure of this paper is as follows. In Section \ref{Method} we outline the methodology and data that
is used. In Section \ref{Results} we present results, and cosmological parameter inference. In
Section \ref{Conclusion} we present our conclusions.

\section{Method}
\label{Method}
We use the approach outlined in Taylor et al., (2007) and Kitching et al. (2008).
The raw data that we use is a
catalogue of ellipticity and photometric redshift measurements from galaxies
and a set of cluster positions and redshifts.
For each cluster (`lens') we can identify those galaxies with a peak posterior photometric redshift greater than the cluster
(`background galaxies'). For each galaxy we compute its projected tangential (perpendicular) $e^T$,
and cross (45 degree) component $e^X$, ellipticities with respect to the angular separation
between the cluster centre $(\theta^C_1$, $\theta^C_2)$ and the background galaxy $(\theta_{1,g}$, $\theta_{2,g})$
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{ets}
e^T_g(\theta, z_i)&=&-(e_{1,g}\cos[2\phi_g]+e_{2,g}\sin[2\phi_g])\nonumber \\
e^X_g(\theta, z_i)&=& (e_{1,g}\sin[2\phi_g]-e_{2,g}\cos[2\phi_g]),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\phi_g=\tan^{-1}([\theta^C_1-\theta_{1,g}]/[\theta^C_2-\theta_{2,g}])$ is the angular position around the cluster,
and $e_{1,g}$ and $e_{2,g}$ are the measured ellipticities in Cartesian
coordinates on the sky, $g$ labels a single galaxy with
local radial angular coordinate $\theta=\sqrt{(\theta^C-\theta_{1,g})^2+(\theta^C_2-\theta_{2,g})^2}$ and redshift $z$.
Throughout we label source redshift bins using $i$ and $j$, and lens redshift bins using $L$.

For a given lens we can divide the background population into a series of redshift bins, selected using the {\tt Z\_B}
parameter of BPZ (Benitez, 2000; applied in Hildebrandt et al., 2015), which
is the peak of the posterior probability distribution,
to create a set of populations labelled by
the lens redshift $z_L$, source background redshift $z_i$ and angular position: $\{e^T_g(\theta, z_i|z_L)\}$. We assume
that, over a sufficiently large population of galaxies, the ellipticity is an unbiased estimate of the shear
$\gamma^T\simeq \langle e^T\rangle$ (we will later account for the finite number of galaxies with a shot noise term
in a covariance matrix of the measurement).

\subsection{Theory}
\label{Theory}
We assume that the weak lensing shear signal, for a given lens, is a function of the lens mass distribution $M_L$, radial
projected coordinate $\theta$, and a geometric part of the signal $G(z_L, z_i)$. We will further assume that these
are related in the following general manner
\begin{equation}
\label{tt}
\gamma^T(z_i,z_L|M_L,\theta)=f(M_L,\theta)G(z_i,z_L)
\end{equation}
i.e. that the radial and mass-dependence $f$ is separable from the geometric part $G$.
This is the case for both the Singular Isothermal Sphere (SIS) radial profile and the NFW profile (Navarro et al., 1996)
for a single lens.
For the SIS case the functional form of the shear signal, for a lens at redshift $z_L$, with mass $M_L$,
computed using background sources in a redshift bin $\Delta z_i$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{sis}
\gamma^T(z_i,z_L|M_L,\theta)
=f(M_L)\left(\frac{1}{\theta}\right)\frac{\int_{z\in \Delta z_i}{\rm d}z G(z,z_L)n(z|z_i)}{\int_{z\in \Delta z_i}{\rm d}z n(z|z_i)},
\end{eqnarray}
where the integral limit $z \in \Delta z_i$ means the integral over all redshifts in bin $i$,
with weighted mean redshift $z_i$,
with limits $z-\Delta z_i$ and $z+\Delta z_i$.
All sums are within the bins, and the ``leakage'' between bins is accounted for in the integrals over
the posterior redshift probability distributions.
$n(z|z_i)=\sum_{g\in z_i}w_g p_g(z|z_g)/\sum_g w_g$ is the normalised sum of the posterior redshifts $p_g(z|z_g)$
for each galaxy,
at a redshift $z_i$ i.e.
the redshift distribution; where $w_g$ are weights for each galaxy provided in the catalogue (see
Miller et al., 2013) that are related to the measured shape of the galaxies and are approximately
an inverse variance.

The geometric kernel $G$ is
\begin{equation}
G(z_i,z_L)\equiv \frac{D(z_i)-D(z_L)}{D(z_i)D(z_L)}
\end{equation}
where we have assumed a flat geometry, and $D(z)$ are comoving distances.
The comoving distance is given, for an observer at $z=0$, by
\begin{equation}
\label{Dz}
D(z)=\int_0^z {\rm d}z' \frac{c}{H(z')}.
\end{equation}
where $c$ is the speed of light in a vacuum. The
Hubble parameter $H(z)$, for a flat geometry and a constant dark energy equation of state $w_0=p_{\rm de}/(c^2\rho_{\rm de})$ (where $p_{\rm de}$ and
$\rho_{\rm de}$ are the pressure and density of the dark energy fluid respectively), is given by
\begin{equation}
H(z)=H_0[\Omega_{\rm M}(1+z)^3+(1-\Omega_{\rm M})(1+z)^{-3(1+w_0)}]^{1/2},
\end{equation}
where $\Omega_{\rm M}$ is the current dimensionless matter overdensity, $H_0$ is the
current value of the Hubble parameter.

If we now bin the lenses in a redshift bin $\Delta z_L$, assumming that the mean masses of the lenses do not evolve inside
$\Delta z_L$ then equation (\ref{sis}) is changed to
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{A1}
\langle\gamma^T(z_i,z_L|M_L,\theta)\rangle=\langle f(M_L)\rangle_{\Delta z_L}\left(\frac{1}{\theta}\right)\nonumber \\
\frac{\int_{z'_L\in \Delta z_L}{\rm d}z'_L q_L(z'_L)\int_{z\in \Delta z_i}{\rm d}z G(z,z'_L)n(z|z_i)}{\int_{z'_L\in \Delta z_L}{\rm d}z'_L q_L(z'_L)\int_{z\in \Delta z_i}{\rm d}zn(z|z_i)},
\end{eqnarray}
where $q_L(z)$ is the redshift distribution of the lenses in bin $\Delta z_L$, which is the
observed number density of the lenses $n_L(z)$ smoothed by the photometric redshift error distribution $p_z(z'|z)$
of the lenses: $q_L(z)=\int {\rm d}z' n_L(z') p_L(z'|z)$.
In this paper we use the photometric redshift error distribution of the galaxy cluster sample given in van Uitert et al. (2015)
who quote a redshift error of $\sigma_{z_L}(z)=0.03$
assuming a Gaussian probability density function.
$\langle f(M_L)\rangle_{\Delta z_L}=\sum_{L\in \Delta z_L} f(M_L)W(M)/\sum_L W(M)$ is the mean mass dependency in the
bin $\Delta z_L$ with some arbitrary mass-dependent
weight function $W(M)$ that we discuss further in Section \ref{Data}. We combine the amplitude into a single
function $\langle A(z_i,z_L)\rangle_{\rm theory}$ where
\begin{equation}
\label{ttt}
\langle\gamma^T(z_i,z_L|M,\theta)\rangle=\frac{\langle A(z_i,z_L)\rangle_{\rm theory} \langle f(M_L)\rangle_{\Delta z_L}}{\theta}
\end{equation}
and $\langle A(z_i,z_L)\rangle_{\rm theory}$ can be equated through comparison with equation (\ref{A1}).
This general expression is also true for an NFW profile except that the angular dependence is more complicated. Indeed
this separation of mass, geometric and angular parts
is generally true for the majority of plausible symmetric lens configurations (Bartelmann \& Schneider, 2001).

In deriving this expression we assume that the sum over lenses $L$ is performed on thin slices $S$
in redshift within a bin $B$,
$\sum_{S\in B} w_S(z_S) \sum_{L\in S} f(M_L)G(z_i,z_L)$ (where $G$ is the geometric kernel in equation \ref{tt}), so that in
the limit that the slice is thin all lenses are at the same redshift and the geometric term drops out of the sum over
lenses $\sum_{S\in B} w_S(z_S) G(z_i, z_S) \sum_{L\in S} f(M_L)$; by taking the continuous limit of this expression and weighting
by the lens number density and probability distributions, we derive equation (\ref{ttt}).
This results in the sums over lenses on each redshift slice becoming a mean
computed for each lens redshift slice within the bin $\langle f(M_L)\rangle_L(z)=\sum_{L\in z} f(M_L)W(M)/\sum_L W(M)$.
In order to proceed with taking ratios such that the mean mass distribution of the lenses can be cancelled-out we
therefore need to assume that the mean of the lens mass as a function of redshift, within each lens bin, is constant.

The constancy of the mean mass within narrow redshift slices is well justified through measurements of mass and richness as
as function of redshift (see e.g. van Uitert et al., 2015) which only vary slowly, however
we test the robustness of this assumption by varying the lens bin width in our analysis.
By taking thinner bins in lens redshift the assumption that the mean mass dependency is constant across the bin will be more
accurate and the number of data points will increase, however the noise per bin will get larger and the contamination between
bins due to the photometric scatter will also get larger.
In Appendix A we show the final cosmological parameter constraints
presented in Section \ref{Results} as a function of lens bin width. In the main analysis we use a bin width of
$\Delta z_L=0.18$, which has the fewest number of bins in the redshift range that we consider and should be most robust to
the lens photometric redshift probability distribution.

\subsection{Ratios}
To extract the geometric information from each lens we fit the function $A(z_i,z_L)/\theta$ to each source redshift bin,
using a $\chi^2$-minimisation on the set of galaxies $\{e^T_g(\theta, z_i|z_L)\}$, as we describe in more detail in
Section \ref{Data}.
This provides a set of
amplitudes $\{A(z_i,z_L)\}$ which are estimates of the numerator in equation
(\ref{ttt}) for each lens.
From the data we can compute the mean over all lenses for each lens-source redshift bin pair,
of the SIS amplitudes
\begin{equation}
\langle A(z_i,z_L)\rangle_{\rm Data}=\frac{\sum_L A(z_i,z_L) W(M)}{\sum_L W(M)},
\end{equation}
which has the theoretical prediction given by equation (\ref{ttt}).

For all lenses within the same redshift bin we can now define a ratio
\begin{equation}
R^L_{ij}=\frac{\langle A(z_i,z_L)\rangle_{\rm Data}}{\langle A(z_j,z_L)\rangle_{\rm Data}},
\end{equation}
where $z_j>z_i$, which has the expected theoretical value given by equation (\ref{ttt}), and
\begin{equation}
\label{theory}
T^L_{ij}=\frac{\langle A(z_i,z_L)\rangle_{\rm theory}}{\langle A(z_j,z_L)\rangle_{\rm theory}},
\end{equation}
where the mass dependency is cancelled in taking the ratio, and we are left with a statistic that depends only
on ratios of comoving distances i.e. geometry. Note that we have taken the ratio of the mean of two quantities, not
the mean of a ratio, and that therefore this statistic is not prone to divergences such as those discussed in e.g.
Viola, Kitching, Joachimi (2014).

\subsection{Covariance}
To construct a likelihood function for the ratios we need to specify their covariance. This is composed
of three terms as described in Taylor et al. (2007) and Kitching et al. (2008).
The first is a shot noise term, whose fractional covariance is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\frac{\langle R^L_{ij}R^L_{mn}\rangle_{\rm SN}}{R^L_{ij}R^L_{mn}}=
\left(\frac{\sigma^2_e}{2[\gamma^T(z_i,z_L)]^2}\right)(\delta^K_{im}-\delta^K_{in})+\nonumber \\
&&\left(\frac{\sigma^2_e}{2[\gamma^T(z_j,z_L)]^2}\right)(\delta^K_{jn}-\delta^K_{jm}),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\sigma^2_e$ is the mean per-component variance of the background galaxy ellipticities which is estimated from
the data, $\gamma^T(z_i,z_L)$ is an estimate of the shear at redshift $z_i$ (equation \ref{sis}), and $\delta^K$ are Kronecker
delta functions, and $ij$ and $mn$ are background redshift bin pairs. The second term is due to matter perturbations
along the line of sight between the background redshift bins and the lens, the `cosmic shear' noise (Hoekstra, 2001),
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\langle R^L_{ij}R^L_{mn}\rangle_{\rm CS}}{R^L_{ij}R^L_{mn}}&=&\nonumber \\
\frac{C^1_{im}}{\gamma^T(z_i,z_L)\gamma^T(z_m,z_L)}+
\frac{C^1_{jn}}{\gamma^T(z_j,z_L)\gamma^T(z_n,z_L)}&-&\nonumber \\
\frac{C^1_{in}}{\gamma^T(z_i,z_L)\gamma^T(z_n,z_L)}-
\frac{C^1_{jm}}{\gamma^T(z_j,z_L)\gamma^T(z_m,z_L)}&+&\nonumber \\
\frac{C^2_{i,{\rm min}(j,n)}}{[\gamma^T(z_j,z_L)]^2}\delta^K_{im}+
\frac{C^2_{{\rm max}(i,m),j}}{[\gamma^T(z_j,z_L)]^2}\delta^K_{jn}.
\end{eqnarray}
The first four terms are due to the
correlated distortions induced on both background galaxy redshift bins
by matter lying in front of the nearest source plane.
The last two terms arise from matter lying between the background
source planes and should be regarded as an extra noise
term on the ellipticities of the furthest background source
galaxies. The $C^1$ and $C^2$ functions are given by
\begin{equation}
C^{\alpha}_{ij}=\int_0^{\infty}\frac{\ell{\rm d}\ell}{\pi}C^{\alpha}_{ij}(\ell)
\left\{\frac{2[1-J_0(\ell\theta_{\rm max})]}{\ell^2\theta^2_{\rm max}}-\frac{J_1(\ell\theta_{\rm max})}{\ell\theta_{\rm max}}\right\}^2
\end{equation}
where $\alpha=[1,2]$, $\theta_{\rm max}$ is the angular size of the aperture in which the
ellipticities are used about the lens, and $J_i$ are Bessel functions of the first kind.
The power spectrum functions, assuming the Limber approximation, are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
C^1_{ij}(\ell)&=&{\mathcal A}\int_0^{D(z_i)}{\rm d}D P(\ell/D[z]; D[z])\nonumber \\
&&{\mathcal W}(D,D(z_i)){\mathcal W}(D,D(z_j))\nonumber \\
C^2_{ij}(\ell)&=&{\mathcal A}\int_{D(z_i)}^{D(z_j)}{\rm d}D P(\ell/D[z]; D[z])\nonumber \\
&&{\mathcal W}^2(D,D(z_j)),
\end{eqnarray}
where $P(\ell/D; D[z])$ is the power spectrum of matter overdensity perturbations at a
radial scale $k=\ell/D$ and redshift $z$, and $D(z)$ is given by equation (\ref{Dz}).
The pre-factor is ${\mathcal A}=9\Omega^2_{\rm M}H^4_0/4c^4$.
The weight function is
\begin{equation}
{\mathcal W}(D,D[z_j]|D(z_L))=\int_{z_L}^{\infty} {\rm d}z \frac{n(z|z_j)}{a(z)}\frac{(D-D(z_L))D(z_j)}{(D(z_j)-D(z_L))D}
\end{equation}
where $a(z)$ is the dimensionless scale factor at redshift $z$.

The third term of the covariance is due to intrinsic alignment effects, which is given by equation (21) in Kitching et al.
(2008), however its impact is expected to be negligible so we do not reproduce this here.
Therefore the total covariance is given by
\begin{equation}
C^L_{\mu\nu}=\langle R^L_{\mu}R^L_{\nu}\rangle_{\rm SN}+\langle R^L_{\mu}R^L_{\nu}\rangle_{\rm CS}
\end{equation}
for each lens redshift $z_L$, and background redshift $\mu=ij$ and $\nu=mn$ pair combinations.

\subsection{Likelihood}
We can now construct a log-likelihood function for the ratio, assuming Gaussian distributed data
\begin{equation}
\label{like}
-2\ln{\mathcal L}(\Theta)=\sum_L\sum_{\mu\nu}
(R^L_{\mu}-T^L_{\mu}(\Theta))
[C^L_{\mu\nu}]^{-1}
(R^L_{\nu}-T^L_{\nu}(\Theta))
\end{equation}
where we neglect a constant additive factor. $\Theta$ are parameters of interest (i.e. cosmological
parameters, or otherwise) and the sums run over all lens redshifts labelled by $L$, and background redshift bin pairs $\mu$ and
$\nu$.

In practice some redshift bin pairs are degenerate, for example the pairs $(i,i+1)$, $(i+1,i+2)$ and
$(i,i+2)$ where the third pair could be constructed from a combination of the first two. To avoid this
we take a complete set of redshift bin pairs to be only those $R^L_{ij}$ where $j=i+1$; or $\mu=(i,i+1)$.
This also has the advantage that the covariance matrix is a band-diagonal matrix
and so numerically stable to invert.

In general a further weight function can be applied to the data and theory, $R^L_{ij}H(z_i,z_j,z_L)$, $T^L_{ij}H(z_i,z_j,z_L)$,
where $H$ is some arbitrary function of the lens and background galaxy redshifts. A particularly convenient weight function is
the geometric distance relation for a fiducial cosmology $H(z_i,z_j,z_L)=[D(z_j)-D(z_L)]/D(z_j)$, which in the case that the
real cosmology were equal to the fiducial would result in $T^L_{ij}$ being a function of the redshift $z_i$ only.
We test the likelihood code using mock ratio data as described in Appendix B.

\subsection{Data}
\label{Data}
The data we use is the RCSLenS (Hildebrandt et al., in prep) data which is a re-analysis of the RCS2 data
(Gilbank et al. 2011); observed with the CFHT (Canada France Hawaii Telescope).
RCS2 was $785$ pointings. $765$ out of those have $r$-band data, and $761$ out of those have been successfully
processed for RCSLenS. This corresponds to an effective area after masking of $571.8$ square degrees if only
the $r$-band masks are used. $513$ out of the $761$ fields have $g$, $r$, $i$, $z$ coverage,
this corresponds to an effective area of $383.5$ square degrees, now using masks from all filters, which is what we
use in this paper. The RCS2 survey has been used several times to study galaxy cluster properties for example
Sharon et al. (2015), Hoag et al. (2015), Anguita et al. (2012), Wuyts et al. (2010).
In addition there are several papers based on the RCS2 data including galaxy-galaxy
lensing (van Uitert et al., 2011; Cacciato et al., 2014) and galaxy clustering
(Blake et al., 2015). An overview of the survey, data quality, photometric accuracy, etc. is given in Gilbank et al. (2011)
and additional details for the specific applications may be found in the other papers listed.
The cluster catalogue, based on the Gilbank et al. 2011 photometric catalogues, is outlined in van Uitert et al. (2015).
Briefly, this applied a simplified version of a red-sequence cluster-finder,
largely as described in Lu, Gilbank, Balogh, Bognat (2009).
The data was reduced using the {\tt THELI} pipeline (Erben et al., 2012)
with the shape measurement ellipticities and weights described in Miller et al. (2012),
created using {\tt lensfit} (Miller et al., 2007; Kitching et al., 2008).

We use all the available RCSLenS data and do not make a pass/fail selection based on
cosmic shear statistics as described in Hildebrandt et al. (in prep) adapted from Heymans et al. (2012),
as these refer to shear-shear statistics,
and they aim at detecting residual coherent PSF ellipticity in the shear catalogue,
while we are employing here a position-shear statistic which is much less sensitive to residual PSF ellipticity
in the shear measurements, as it is done by azimuthally averaging the shear measurements around each lens. For this
analysis the cross-component ellipticity analysis is the relevant systematic test. The pass/fail test also
The catalogoues were created in four different versions that employed a simple blinding scheme, such that four
versions of this paper were created with the true catalogue unknown, then an unblinding was performed before submission.

In equation (\ref{A1}) we use a weight function $W(M)$ that is the signal-to-noise of the cluster detection;
although results are not sensitive to this choice, we reran the analysis using no weighting and the
cosmological parameter results were unchanged. We use only those clusters
and groups with a signal-to-noise of $10$ or more, resulting in a final catalogue of $535$ clusters which have
background galaxies available for a lensing analysis in all background redshift bins.

Around each cluster we take a maximum angular extent corresponding to a comoving transverse separation of
$1h^{-1}$Mpc (approximately corresponding to $R_{200}$, see van Uitert et al., 2015),
computed using a Planck best-fit cosmology (Planck Collaboration, 2014). We use a minimum angle
corresponding to $0.01h^{-1}$Mpc to minimize the effect of a possible miscentre of the cluster position with regard to
the true centre of the dark matter cluster halo, as well as contamination from central bright galaxy light in
measurement of shapes of surrounding galaxies. We use $5$ background galaxy redshift bins, approximately
corresponding to the maximum redshift divided by the mean photometric redshift error $\sim 1.5/0.2$,
that are centred on $z_i=[0.39, 0.57, 0.75, 0.93, 1.11]$.
For RCSLenS the photometric redshifts are known to have a large scatter for {\tt Z\_B} $< 0.4$, but this regime is avoided in our source
selection except for the lowest redshift bin.

We use two cluster redshift bins
of $0.24\leq z_L<0.40$, and $0.4\leq z_L <0.6$, where the minimum cluster redshift in the catalogue is $0.241$.
Taking such large bins in lens-redshift decreases the signal in
the measurement, but the larger number of background galaxies in each lens-source redshift
bin combination also decreases the shot noise contribution. For the analysis we sum over lenses in each bin,
and include the redshift error from van Uitert et al. (2015) as described in equation (\ref{ttt}).
In Figure \ref{distributions} we show the probability
density function of the distribution of clusters in each bin as well as the distribution of weak lensing sources
(taking into account the RCSLenS shape measurement weight, see Hildebrandt et al., in prep).
\begin{figure}
    \includegraphics[angle=0,clip=,width=\columnwidth]{distributions4.eps}
 \caption{The distribution of the clusters in each of the bins used, and the
   weak lensing sources in the RCSLenS data with a redshift greater than the minimum cluster redshift in the catalogues
   $z>0.241$. The mean redshift of the lens bins are $0.33$ and $0.5$. The left panel shows the probability density
   function of the distributions, the right panel shows the number counts (on a logarithmic y axis to account for
   much larger number of source background galaxies than lenses).}
 \label{distributions}
\end{figure}

Using this data we then fit the function $A(z_i,z_L)/\theta$ to the set of tangential or cross
component ellipticities in each bin, given in equation (\ref{emean})
to find the best fit set of amplitudes. This is done using
a $\chi^2$-minimisation where for each source redshift bin for each lens we divide the source galaxies
into $5$ angular bins $B$ corresponding to projected comoving separations of $B=[0.01, 0.02, 0.1, 0.2, 1.0]h^{-1}$Mpc
(which are the centre of the radial bins). We explicitly assume here that the SIS is a good fit to the data. The fitting is
done for each lens-background redshift bin pair
separately, and then the mean amplitude over all lenses
for each background redshift bin taken as described in Section \ref{Theory}.
In each bin we compute the mean tangential and cross-component ellipticities
\begin{equation}
\label{emean}
\langle e^T\rangle_B=
\frac{\sum_{g\in B}e^T_{g,{\rm corrected}}w_{\rm LF}}{\sum_{g\in B}w_{\rm LF}}
\frac{\sum_{g\in B}m^0_g w_{\rm LF}}{\sum_{g\in B}m^T_g w_{\rm LF}}
\end{equation}
where the `corrected tangential ellipticity' is corrected for the additive systematic residuals $c_i$
(see Miller et al., 2013
for an exposition of this, and Hildebrandt et al., in prep, for details of the RCSLenS derived values), the
average value of the $c$ term over all lenses and background source redshift bins is $0.0016$. The additive
residuals are simply subtracted from the observed ellipticities as follows
\begin{equation}
e^T_{g,{\rm corrected}}=-((e_{1,g}-c_{1,g})\cos[2\phi_g]+(e_{2,g}-c_{2,g})\sin[2\phi_g]).
\end{equation}
We also correct for multiplicative systematic effects, as described in Miller et al. (2013). This is achieved
by replacing the observed ellipticity with a $(1+m_{i,g})$ term in the statistic used, then applying a weight
so that in the limit of no systematic ($m_{i,g}=0$) the result is unchanged. This is done in equation (\ref{emean})
where the multiplicative correction factors are
\begin{eqnarray}
m^T_g&=&-((1+m_{1,g})\cos[2\phi_g]+(1+m_{2,g})\sin[2\phi_g])\nonumber \\
m^0_g&=&-(\cos[2\phi_g]+\sin[2\phi_g]).
\end{eqnarray}
A similar calculation is done for the cross-component part, see equation (\ref{ets}), and for
the variance of the ellipticities we take the mean of the square of the $e^T_{g,{\rm corrected}}$ which is
$\sigma^2_{e^T}=0.06$. Note that in our case $m_1\equiv m_2$ and that, because we have a high background number of
galaxies that fairly sample $\phi=[0, 2\pi]$, the sums over the multiplicative bias reduce to approximately
$\sum_{g\in B} w_{\rm LF}/\sum_{g\in B}(1+m) w_{\rm LF}$. The average value of this quantity is
$1.06$ over the set of lenses and background source redshift bins, however we
use the full expression to avoid any assumptions.
We then take the mean over all clusters in each lens redshift bin, and then compute the set of ratios
$R^L_{ij}$, where $j=i+1$.

In taking a ratio any constant multiplicative bias also cancels out, so that the above
correction is to account for any redshift-dependence of this bias. However because we only take ratios of neighbouring
bins the method should also be relatively insensitive to these
redshift dependent terms (unless the bias changes by a large amount
over the redshift interval between bins, which is not expected). For example if we expand the multplicative bias
to be $m(z)=m_0+m_1(1+z)$ then to linear order in $m_1$ the measured ratio becomes
$[1+(m_1/m_0)(z_i-z_j)]R^L_{ij}$,
if we have $m_1\ls 10^{-3}$, $m_0\ls 10^{-2}$
and $(z_i-z_j)\simeq 0.2$ then the correction is a $\ls 2\%$ change in the ratio.
The ratio is also expected to be insensitive to changes in the additive bias as discussed in Kitching et al. (2008) where
it was shown that uncertainties in the dark energy equation parameter scale approximately
as $\delta w_0 = 0.4 (\delta c/0.01)$ where $\delta c$ is an unknown uncertainty in the additive bias.
Therefore for changes of $\delta c \ls 10^{-3}$, which is an order of
magnitude estimate expected for the RCSLenS shape measurement
(Miller et al., 2013), the contribution to the error on cosmological parameters
from misestimation of the additive bias are expected to be $\delta w_0\ls 0.04$.

In Figure \ref{ratios} we show the measured tangential $A_T$, and cross component
$A_X$, mean amplitudes.
The cross component is consistent with zero, and is a systematic test of the measurement.
We also show the measured ratios from these amplitudes. The signal $R^{T,L}_{ij}$ is significantly
non-zero at $4.2$-sigma for the two lens redshift bins.
We do not show the ratio of the $A_X$ amplitudes because the values are consistent with (very close to zero),
so that the distribution of the ratio is divergent.
In this case the $A_X$ are the relevant systematic quantity.
This is also why a ratio is not plotted in the $z\leq z_L$ regime where the theoretical ratio signal is also divergent.
\begin{figure*}
    \includegraphics[angle=0,clip=,width=\columnwidth]{shears4.eps}
    \includegraphics[angle=0,clip=,width=0.97\columnwidth]{ratios4.eps}
 \caption{Left: The measured shear amplitudes fitting to the tangential
(upper panel) and cross-component (lower panel) ellipticities averaged over all clusters in
redshift bins $0.24\leq z_L<0.40$ (blue, marked `x'), and $0.40\leq z_L <0.60$ (red, marked `o').
Right: The ratio of the
shear amplitudes $R_{ij}=\langle A_T(z_i,z_L)\rangle/\langle A_T(z_j,z_L)\rangle$
where $j=i+1$. We show the prediction for a Planck best fit cosmology (Planck Collaboration, 2014)
for the two lens redshifts (equation \ref{theory}).}
 \label{ratios}
\end{figure*}

\section{Results}
\label{Results}
The cosmological parameter constraints from the shear-ratio method are not expected to be as small as
from cosmic shear (see Taylor et al., 2007), but importantly it is only sensitive to the geometric information. Therefore, like
other geometric-only methods, in combination with the CMB it should be able to lift degeneracies and improve constraints.
Much like BAO and Type-1a supernovae constraints we can therefore also place a measurement on the distance-redshift relation.
We test this by using a cosmological-parameter-free parameterisation of the comoving distance where
$D(z)\propto z/\sqrt{az+bz^2}$ where $a$ and $b$ are free parameters (based on the fits in Pen, 1999\footnote{\tt https://www.ssl.berkeley.edu/$\sim$mlampton/ComovingDistance.pdf}). We fit these two parameters to the data using the likelihood
in equation (\ref{like}), where we sample both $a$ and $b$ over the range $[0, 2]$ on a 2D $100\times 100$ grid,
that we then supplement with $1000$ uniform random samples of $a$ and $b$ over the same range, which
provides a good sampling of many functions including extreme solutions. We
show the results in Figure \ref{distance}, where we show all sampled functions, and the $1-\sigma$
likelihood confidence region. The shear-ratio is not sensitive to
the overall normalisation of the distance-redshift relation, therefore we need an `anchor' distance (similar to that required
for Type-1a supernovae constraints). For the anchor redshift we use the
the revised geometric maser distance to NGC4258 of Humphreys et al. (2013) which has a distance of
$7.60\pm 0.22$ Mpc and a redshift of $0.0015$.

In Figure \ref{distance} we show the $1$-sigma confidence region about the best fit comoving distance-redshift relation.
This is \emph{a fortiori} consistent with the relation inferred from the Planck best-fit cosmological
model (Planck Collaboration, 2014), and measurements from BAO
(6df, SDSS, BOSS and WiggleZ; Beutler et al 2011, Padmanabhan et al. 2012, Anderson et al. 2013, and Blake et al. 2011),
and extends the geometry-only redshift relation to the $z\gs 1$ domain.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
  \includegraphics[angle=0,clip=,width=\columnwidth]{distance4.eps}
  \includegraphics[angle=0,clip=,width=\columnwidth]{ommw04.eps}
 \caption{Left: The best fit comoving distance relation to the shear-ratio data. The grey
lines show the set of functional forms considered, the solid red band shows the $1$-sigma
confidence region about the maximum likelihood function. We use an anchor
distance from NGC4258 (Humphreys et al., 2013). The black solid line shows the comoving distance inferred from the
Planck best fit cosmology (Planck Collaboration, 2014; this is not a fit to the shear ratio data).
The blue points show distances inferred from BAO data (6df, SDSS, BOSS and WiggleZ).
Right: Confidence limits on the dimensionless matter overdensity $\Omega_{\rm M}$ and a constant dark energy equation of state
$w_0$. The lines show the 2-parameter $1$, $2$, and $3$-sigma confidence limits for the shear-ratio method only (dark blue), Planck
only (green), and the combination (red).}
 \label{distance}
\end{figure*}

We can also convert the ratio measurement into an inference on cosmological parameters
(this is done directly on the data rather than through the non-parameteric distance relation). We
assume a flat geometry, and the shear-ratio
is not sensitive to the Hubble parameter normalisation $H_0$. Therefore, assuming a constant dark energy equation of state,
the only free parameters in an Friedmann-Robertson-Walker cosmology are the
dimensionless matter density $\Omega_{\rm M}$ and the
dark energy equation of state parameter $w_0$. We use the Planck MCMC chains from the Planck
Legacy Archive\footnote{Chain {\tt PLA/base\_w/planck\_lowl\_lowLike/base\_w\_planck\_lowl\_lowLike\_1}.},
and do not place any additional priors on any parameters. We note here that in the parameter estimation here we do not
assume the $H_0$ prior used above to derive the distance relation, where it is only required in that instance
to use the shear ratio data to infer distances.

In Figure \ref{distance} we show the confidence levels for these parameters.
Whilst the shear-ratio constraints themselves are relatively weak, there is a clear disfavouring at over $3$-sigma of the area
around $\Omega_{\rm M}\simeq 0.1$ and $w_0\simeq -2.0$ (which causes a higher comoving distance of approximately $4000$ Mpc
at a redshift of $z\simeq 1.2$). The scaling of the shear ratio with cosmological parameters is
described in Taylor et al. (2007).
This is in the direction of the degeneracy of the Planck wCDM confidence region. Hence
in combination with Planck the result is
\begin{eqnarray}
\Omega_M=0.31 &\pm& 0.10\nonumber \\
w_0 = -1.02&\pm& 0.37,
\end{eqnarray}
which is consistent with an $\Lambda$CDM model (i.e. $w_0=-1$).
This is similar to the way in which CMB degeneracies are lifted by including
BAO measurements (e.g. Beutler et al 2011, Padmanabhan et al. 2012, Anderson et al. 2013, Blake et al. 2011),
and these results are consistent with the cosmological interpretation of these data.
For example Aubourg et al. (2014) find $\Omega_{\rm M}=0.302\pm 0.008$ and $w_0=-0.97\pm 0.05$ with a combination of
SDSS BAO, Union data set Supernovae with Planck data; and Parkinson et al. (2012) find $\Omega_{\rm M}=0.354\pm 0.041$
and $w_0=-1.215\pm 0.117$ using WiggleZ data in combination with Union supernovae and Planck.

\section{Conclusion}
\label{Conclusion}
In this paper we present a measurement of the distance-redshift relation and inferred cosmological parameters using the
shear-ratio method applied to the RCSLenS data. The method takes the ratio of the mean tangential shear signal about galaxy
clusters at the same redshifts, and therefore any mass-dependency on the signal is cancelled-out, resulting in a statistic that
is only sensitive to the geometric lensing kernel.

Using a redshift anchor from NGC4258 (Humphreys et al., 2013) we
measure the comoving distance using a flexible non-cosmological parametric model out
to redshifts $z\gs 1$. In combination with Planck data we constrain the dimensionless matter overdensity and dark energy equation
of state parameter to $\Omega_M=0.31 \pm 0.10$ and $w_0 = -1.02\pm 0.37$.
We test our method by computing the cross-component shear signal from the same clusters and find this to be consistent with zero,
and create some mock data from which we can recover the input cosmology.
The main assumption that we make is that there is no redshift evolution of the mean lens mass within the lens redshift bins,
and we tested that, given our statistical
sensitivity, this does not impact our results. This supposition may not be true when using
a larger sample of clusters, although thinner redshift slices could also be used in such a case,
that would make the assumption more accurate.

Extracting the geometric part of the weak lensing data allows for a probe that is complementary to cosmic shear
studies that are sensitive to both the geometry of the Universe and the growth of structure. On small-scales of $\ls 1$Mpc
cosmic shear studies are likely to be sensitive to baryonic feedback processes (Semboloni et al., 2011, Mead et al., 2015) and the non-linear growth of structure
that are difficult to model. One way to mitigate such uncertainty is to remove those small-scales from the data (Simpson et al., 2013)
or in the modelling (Kitching et al., 2014). This removal degrades cosmological parameter constraints, however
the shear-ratio method on cluster and group scales offers a way to use the `cleaner' geometric part of the weak lensing signal
to regain some of the cosmological information using weak lensing data alone.
\\

\noindent{\em Acknowledgements:}
TDK is supported by a Royal Society University Research Fellowship. MV acknowledges support from the European Research Council under FP7 grant number 279396 and the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) through grants 614.001.103.
HH is supported by an Emmy Noether grant (No. Hi 1495/2-1) of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft.
DGG thanks the South African National Research Foundation for financial support. EvU acknowledges
support from an STFC Ernest Rutherford Research Grant, grant reference ST/L00285X/1. AC and CH acknowledge
support from the European Research Council under FP7 grant number 240185.
We are grateful to the wider RCS2 team for planning the survey, applying for observing time, and conducting the observations. We acknowledge use of the Canadian Astronomy Data Centre operated by the Dominion Astrophysical Observatory for the National Research Council of Canada's Herzberg Institute of Astrophysics. We would like to thank Matthias Bartelmann for being our external blinder, revealing which of the four catalogues analysed was the true unblinded catalogue at the end of this study.
\newpage

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaArXiv


At WeWork Dumbo Heights, overlooking the Manhattan Bridge, there's a company that's trying to reinvent the way healthcare is bought and sold. Its cofounder, Mike Botta, is Brooklyn born and bred. Before the interview, he pointed out the wallpaper of the WeWork conference room - featuring Jane's Carousel in Brooklyn Bridge Park, where he proposed to his wife. We caught up with him to hear about how his company, Sesame, is trying to make healthcare simpler and more accessible.
Downtown Brooklyn Partnership: Mike, tell us about yourself.
Mike Botta: I'm one of the cofounders of Sesame. I'm a health economist by training. I studied at Harvard Medical School, then went to McKinsey & Company, and after that I helped build Sesame.
DBP: Can you give us the rundown on what Sesame is?
MB: Sesame, at its core, is something that hasn't existed before, which is a discount healthcare services marketplace. Anything that's not emergency, that doesn't require getting in an ambulance or staying over at the hospital, we can provide on the platform. So that's primary care appointments, strains and sprains, colds and flus, seeing any kind of specialist - be it an orthopedic surgeon, a cardiologist, to diagnostics and imaging. Essentially, we want to bring what has been really effective about yield management in the travel industry to healthcare, and help doctors make the most of their time.
DBP: What was the problem you saw? And how does your company solve it?
MB: We're a two-sided marketplace, so think about the problems on both sides. If you're a patient, healthcare is really expensive. Whether you have insurance or not, when most people go to the doctor, they brace for impact. Maybe you call around to find out where you can get a better cash price but there's no real organized way to do that right now. If you're a doctor, you get three to four cancellations a day and oftentimes that's just revenue lost to you. Also, many physicians just don't fill up their schedule every day and they'd love to have a way to bring more patients into the door, but they don't really have a cost-effective marketing channel for the specific thing they're doing. A lot of doctors are finding now that patients who have historically had really good insurance are all of a sudden having plans with higher and higher deductibles, and are responsible for paying bills more on their own. And if those patients can get a better price for paying cash upfront, the more likely they'll pay and the more likely they'll show up and get the care they need.
DBP: So how does the platform work?
MB: So it's very similar to how a travel website would work, like Expedia or Kayak or Hotel Tonight. You log onto the homepage and see daily deals and specials. You can search for whatever you're looking for, if you need an MRI, if you need to see a cardiologist, it shows you the times and prices. If a doctor suggests you need to get a referral for an MRI and you care about how much it costs, we would say you should probably schedule with us.
DBP: How long have you been in Brooklyn?
MB: I grew up in Bensonhurst.
DBP: Why did you choose to start the company in Brooklyn?
MB: This is home. I think it's a wonderful place to recruit. It's crazy how much Brooklyn has changed since I was a kid. Now it is itself a destination. People know what it is and it's a great place to build. Downtown Brooklyn and Dumbo have grown and developed a ton in that now there's office space, there's restaurants…there's tons of talent here. I've been thrilled to build our team here.
DBP: When you were thinking about where to locate, what were the pros and cons of Brooklyn over Manhattan?
MB: I think fundamentally Brooklyn is home for me, so the idea of starting it here was super appealing. It's also home for one of our cofounders, John, who grew up in Brooklyn Heights. Manhattan is great, but Brooklyn's got a culture all its own and we're Brooklyn people so it's good to be home.
DBP: And how's it going so far?
MB: We have thousands of people using our platform every single day. We're really excited about that, we get to talk to folks that are calling our customer service team and can't really believe it exists, you can see a primary care doctor for $29, so we just want to keep it going.


Always after deep cleaning at home, the wiping of dust is an essential exercise from all other final touches. It will ensure a more visually pleasing look of your house and most of all – it will make your house healthier. Some people are allergic to dust and wiping off dust is actually one of the most crucial steps of the domestic cleaning. Another great tip is to prevent the objects from build-up of dust. The key for this is to clean regularly everything and make your own schedule for maintenance with different activities that should take place every season. You can make a truly long and overwhelming schedule, but to get rid of the dust and of all other loose particles like hair, sand and food crumbs is still one of the easiest things to do.
The easy way to do it is to run the vacuum cleaner very often like once or twice a week. It will prevent the build-up of dust and loose particles on the floors, as well as on the furnishings and over all other surfaces, because the main source of the dust is from the floors and the foot traffic. People also produce fine dust particles, which indeed is the primary source of the dust. Other potential issues might be the leathered upholsteries, textiles, fabrics and other soft cotton materials that you use every day. The carpets and the rugs are perhaps the greatest textile objects in your home and that`s why you want a strict schedule for vacuuming and wiping of dust. Change the vacuum cleaner bag often as it is the best way to prevent spreading out dust while trying to clean it.
There are few, but very important tools and tricks that you will need to clean the dust and the loose particles. Check them out!
A duster with electrostatically charged fibers. A duster with a flexible part will help get through some really hidden and invisible places like behind the cupboards and the wardrobes, under the couches or within the fine cooling coils of the fridge. This duster absorbs the accumulated dust automatically, thanks to the electrostatically charged fibers. It`s not required to rub or polish, yet you can do it for an even smoother and finer finish.
A microfiber towel is the next important tool, which requires just a gentle passing onto the furnishings and appliances at home. Thanks to its microfiber texture, it can absorb plenty of dust within the soaking intervals. The towel needs just a small amount of clean water or a special solution for dust for an even better effect. Make sure that the cloth is perfectly clean and free of sand and other loose particles that can scratch or damage the surfaces of the objects, so keep one special microfiber cloth only for removal of dust.
A polishing wax. It adds an invisible layer of protection onto wooden, metal and leather surfaces to prevent the build-up of dust. Use this wax every time after deep cleaning at home or at least once every season. The frequently used objects such as the dining table, the chairs and the side tables, can be polished more frequently for better results.
– Using a moisture absorber and an air purifier. They can be left overnight or for a longer period of time and they don`t require any complimentary tasks. They help maintain a regular level of humidity in the rooms and thus prevent the quick build-up of dust.
– Changing the filter of the air-con is another thing that you don`t want to miss.


BLS is seeking a professional with advanced technical skills in audit areas with a strong mid-sized, privately held business emphasis, including preparation and review of work papers, financial statements, and reports for complex engagements and special assignments.
For more information, please contact LeAnne Diebold, SPHR. She looks forward to hearing from you.


Parklea founder Andrew Facey, a prominent Melbourne South East developer is celebrating 50 years in real estate this year.
In 1968 a young Andrew Facey started what would become a long and successful career in real estate. The grandson of Frank Facey, founder of Frank Facey Real Estate, Andrew rose from salesmen to Director and Partner of the firm, taking the reigns from his father Angus in the 1970's.
"When he started to let Andrew and I run the business we weren't very old; in 1975 I was 30 and Andrew was younger than I," said former Frank Facey Real Estate Director and long-time friend of Andrew's, Brendan Rice.
"Andrew was a gun salesman. Dandenong was starting to boom and there were lots of subdivisions, so Andrew became the go-to-man," said Rice.
Parklea is now the biggest land owner in the Cardinia Shire and has residential and commercial developments from Gippsland to the Great Ocean Road. Recent developments planned including the largest residential estate in Cardinia Shire's history in Pakenham East.
"The population in Melbourne's South East is booming with thousands of families making their home here. I'm proud that Parklea is an integral part of shaping new communities during this exciting period of growth." 50 years from his beginnings as a real estate agent, Andrew Facey is still passionate about property. Accountant for Parklea and Facey since 1986, Frank Barret, describes working for Andrew as 'dynamic'. "He does not let an opportunity go by – he cannot sit still, metaphorically," he said.


text:
Home News Small halls concert had big impact
Small halls concert had big impact
Danielle, Aisha and Molly Polmeer.
Meredith Femino of Boston, USA and Harry Mortimer.
Jack, Barb and Olivia Laverty.
Performer Dave Gunning, from Nova Scotia, Canada, gets a drink from Ray Billing.
Oivi Walsh and Susan Newnham.
Janet Peel and Jeff and Sarah Kynaston.
Marjory Tomlinson, Colleen Dawson and Tina Billing.
The Festival of Small Halls wound its way into Batlow on Sunday and received a warm and appreciative welcome.
The concert, performed by singer-songwriters Claire Anne Taylor of Tarkine Forest, Tasmania, and Dave Gunning, of Nova Scotia, Canada, backed up by Molly Polmeer of Talbingo, drew about 70 people to the Batlow Literary Institute.
The crowd were well entertained and the artists expressed their gratitude that the Festival of Small Halls allowed them to visit and play in places such as Batlow.
Dave and Claire were on their way between two of the biggest contemporary folk festivals in Australia, the Port Fairy festival and the National Folk Festival in Canberra.
"They had a lovely time in Batlow," event spokesperson Justine Wilkinson said.
The Literary Institute, which is still being renovated, handled the occasion perfectly.
"It is looking fantastic at the moment, even though it is not yet finished," Justine said.
"This is the second concert we have held since the renovation got underway and we are hoping to have another toward the end of the year, depending on the progress of the work."
The Festival of Small Halls Australia was inspired from the seed of an idea in Canada for a new touring structure to take great music into regional areas. On Prince Edward Island (PEI), Canada, local communities have hosted roots, traditional and acoustic artists in community halls all over the island since 2008. In 2014, armed with a vision of bringing big music to small places, the Ontario Festival of Small Halls joined the family. The event was born of inspiration by the spirit of community, hospitality, exceptional music, and fun that has made small halls festivals in PEI and Australia such treasured events.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
8th Brigade may refer to:

Argentina
8th Mountain Infantry Brigade (Argentina)

Australia
8th Brigade (Australia)

Canada
8th Canadian Infantry Brigade

India
 8th Indian Infantry Brigade in the Second World War
 8th (Jullundur) Brigade in the First World War
 8th (Lucknow) Cavalry Brigade in the First World War

Israel
8th Armored Brigade (Israel)

Lebanon
8th Infantry Brigade (Lebanon)

New Zealand
8th Brigade (New Zealand)

Romania
8th Mixed Artillery Brigade (Romania)

Spain
8th Mixed Brigade

United Kingdom
8th Armoured Brigade (United Kingdom)
8th Cavalry Brigade (United Kingdom)
8th Infantry Brigade (United Kingdom)
8th Mounted Brigade (United Kingdom)
8th Support Group (United Kingdom)
VIII Brigade RAF
 Artillery Brigades
 8th (Howitzer) Brigade Royal Field Artillery
 VIII Brigade, Royal Horse Artillery

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Suicide: The Public Health Crisis We Need to Discuss
Tragically, a suicide takes place every 40 seconds, claiming more than 800,000 lives each year globally.1 In the United States alone, in 2016 nearly 45,000 Americans age 10 or older died by suicide. Suicide is the 10th leading cause of death and is one of just three leading causes that are on the rise in the U.S.2 These are compelling numbers, but they do not speak to the enormity of the human losses from suicide, the loss of great potential, and the suffering of both the people who took their lives and their families and loved ones.
Suicide is a very complex issue that is typically related to brain disorders, particularly depression. While we know more about the brain and mental illnesses than ever before, more knowledge is needed to understand what leads to suicide and how to help prevent it. Janssen is committed to further championing science and clinical research to gain insights and develop new and better treatments for serious mental health conditions.
To help in the short-term and in recognition of World Suicide Prevention Day on September 10, and the start of National Suicide Prevention Week, Janssen has launched a new digital video series called "Suicide: The Public Health Crisis We Need to Discuss," as part of its Champions of Science: Janssen Healthy Minds Program.
I offer some medical perspectives about suicide in the videos, which are hosted by Emmy Award-winning journalist Vicki Mabrey. The program also includes Robert Gebbia, CEO of the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, and Mackenzie Drazan, Mental Health Advocate and Founder of non-profit organization, Teaching Everyone About Mental Health (TEAM).
In the videos, we share our knowledge and personal experiences while providing tips about how to recognize people who may be at risk and how our society can work together to help prevent suicide.
Our guest mental health advocate Mackenzie Drazen explains that after losing her sister to suicide, her family did not know how to talk about suicide and struggled to find resources because it was such a difficult topic. She discusses her organization, TEAM, and how she is helping families find the mental health resources they need.
Bob Gebbia, the CEO of the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, explains that suicide can be prevented, and that research shows that we can reduce suicidal risk by making sure we connect with one another.
Bob believes that these new videos and other resources are helping to ensure people have information and new tools to reach out for help. He has inspired us by saying that "together we can save lives."
It's important to have honest conversations about mental health and suicide in our families and among friends, as well as in society in general.
The scientific community also needs to do conduct more research to better understand suicide and to find ways to prevent it. Industry, governments, academia and nonprofit organizations need to work more closely together on the scourge of suicide in our society.
Our new videos about suicide prevention can be viewed on the Janssen YouTube channel. The Champions of Science: Janssen Healthy Minds initiative is designed to educate the public about advances in neuroscience research and provide news and information about mental health and brain disorders, including suicide prevention.
If you or a loved one are in crisis, please call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-TALK (8255). You can also text the Crisis Text Line by typing TALK to 741741. For more information about the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, visit and TEAM (Teaching Everyone About Mental Health).
1 World Health Organization. (2018). Suicide data. Accessed August 23, 2018 from http://www.who.int/mental_health/prevention/suicide/suicideprevent/en/
2 US Center for Disease Control News Room 2018, https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2018/p0607-suicide-prevention.html
Dr. Carla Canuso
Dr. Carla Canuso is a Senior Director of Clinical Research at Janssen. She and her colleagues are focusing on research to help in the treatment of people with major depressive disorder who are at imminent risk for suicide.
The White House Announces New Funding for Microbiome Research
My Mother's Career Words of Wisdom: Never Compromise!
Men and Mortality Rates: How One Simple Appointment Could Help Save Your Life.


The best way to prepare for any examination is to prepare with the help of Previous Year Papers. Similarly here we have the IBPS Clerk Previous Year Question Papers With Answers for those contenders who are preparing for the IBPS Clerk posts. Applicants who wish to know the examination difficulty level can get it from the previous year papers. We can get a big help if we take help of Previous Year Papers. On this page we provide the examination pattern and Previous Year Papers link. Please have a look on further stated content which may help you in grab some useful information. We hope you may get what you are searching for. All the best for the examination friends, prepare well to get success in it.


37 Lovely 2 Shelf Side Table. white 2 shelf patio side table the home depot, white 2 shelf patio side table sand 2 shelf patio side table mahogany 2 shelf patio side table slate grey 2 shelf patio side table brand polywood polywood polywood polywood ratings 4 4 4 4 view product view product view product view product. Tag : 37 Lovely 2 Shelf Side Table.
Gilford 2 Shelf Side Table Threshold Tar. Image for 2 Shelf Side Table Fantastic Gilford 2 Shelf Side Table Threshold Tar.
So, if you like to have these wonderful photos about 37 Lovely 2 Shelf Side Table, press save button to download these pics for your pc. For some updates and latest news about 37 Lovely 2 Shelf Side Table pictures, please share to google plus or follow us on twitter, Instagram and path, or you mark this page on book mark section, We try to present you update regularly with all new and fresh images, love your searching, and find the ideal for you.


text:
Tag Archives: traitor
Dear Media:
America, coup, Impeachment, traitor, treason, USA, violence
Please do not quote or summarize or repeat what the likes of Ted Crews, Minorlee Greene, or #MoscowMitch say. Their words mean nothing. They have worked to overthrow our democracy. They are not interested in fair trials. They are not interested in the rule of law. They are not interested in fair elections. They are not interested in taking their oath of office seriously.
They are interested in one and only one thing: power. They want power in order to line their own pockets and decide what other people can do in their private lives. They have zero interest in governing, solving America's problems, or listening to what liberals, Democrats, Independents or experts have to say.
Yes, they vibrate their vocal cords. Yes, they move their lips and jaws to form sounds that remind people of actual words. But their words mean nothing.
Photo by Nikolay Ivanov on Pexels.com
Their word means nothing.
When they take a solemn oath to defend America against all enemies, foreign and domestic, they don't mean it.
When they take an oath to have a fair trial, they don't mean it.
When they say that a Supreme Court Justice should not be confirmed during the last year of a President's term, they don't mean it.
When they say that tax reductions for the rich will benefit everyone, they don't mean it.
When they say that they think the attempted coup and the attack on the Capitol was despicable, they don't mean it.
They don't mean anything they say.
Photo by Moose Photos on Pexels.com
They bark and snarl and whine and, I grant you, it sounds a lot like actual words.
But it's different. They use these barks that sound like words only trying to lie, cheat, steal from Americans and to confuse enough voters and donors to get votes and money in order to stay in power.
In America, we have a long tradition of trying to be "fair" to "both sides" of a debate, discussion, campaign, election, etc. And, given that you have two sides playing by the rules, that is a great tradition. But if only one side is playing by the rules and the other side subverts and avoid the rules, that is no longer a relevant tradition.
If two sides are both arguing in good faith based on facts, then presenting those facts with various analogies and analyses in order persuade people that their plan, position, or platform is superior, it is good to make sure people hear both sides or all sides of those arguments in order to make a better-informed decision. That's fine.
Photo by Sora Shimazaki on Pexels.com
But if one side is telling the truth and one side makes up stuff out of thin air, it is not the duty of the media to repeat both sides. If one side is using words in order to destroy our democracy, it is not the duty of the media to repeat both sides. If one side is on board with a Crime Family and pushing for an absolute dictatorship, it is not the job of the media to repeat their lies.
When a patient has cancer, the ethical doctor limits treatments to those treatments that kill the cancer cells or improve the health of their patient. They don't give medicine in "fair proportion" — giving equal doses to those treatments that help the patient and those treatments that help the cancer cells.
When a general leads his troops in a war, he or she doesn't go out of his way to make sure the enemy has just as much ammunition as their own troops so they can have a "fair fight." They call in air support to bomb the enemy. They don't ask their bombers to be sure to they are dropping shells equally on both sides.
The likes of Ted Cruise, #MoscowMitch, and all the other Trumputinists who tried to overthrow our government by refusing to certify the election; the likes of Trumputinists who attend a trial and snub the entire process of prosecuting the most egregious campaign of actions that any President has taken in the entire history of the nation are not involved in true debate, true discussion, true dialog, or true governing.
They are interested in one thing: power. And they will do anything and everything to get that power — including overthrowing the duly elected government through violence.
Repeating the lies of violence-loving traitors is not part of the duty of the media.
You might think that it is okay so long as you add the tag line that what they say is contested or even a lie. Sadly, however, that doesn't really do the trick. Once the lie is presented to people enough times, it will "stick" in some people's memory. (See this post about the "primacy effect" in human memory).
https://petersironwood.com/2020/08/21/the-primacy-effect-the-destroyers-advantage/
What betrayal of trust in all of American history rivals the relentless campaign of lies, conspiracy theories and violence perpetrated by Trump and supported by disingenuous, treasonous Trumputinists? There is nothing close. Presenting the so-called opinions, views, musings, thoughts, etc. of the Trumputinists is not the duty of the media any more than it is to repeat the delusional lies of Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, or Kim Jong-un.
We are not having a dialog, or a debate, or a discussion, or a contest with Trumputinists. They want to destroy our country. Don't be fooled into pretending to have a debate with them. This is an attack on our country every bit as much as the sacking of the Capitol by the British in the War of 1812. Trumputinism is an attack on America every bit as much as Pearl Harbor. Trumputinism is an attack on America every bit as much as were those who flew planes into the World Trade Towers.
Trumpism is a new religion.
A query on quislings.
The Loud Defense of Untenable Positions.
The Ailing King of Agitate.
Try the Truth.
Essays on America: A Query on Quislings
America, Democracy, Dictatorship, IMPOTUS, traitor, treason, USA
Photo by Aneta Foubu00edkovu00e1 on Pexels.com
You own a dog. You love your dog. And you know your dog loves you.
Your neighbor, on the other hand, you do not love.
But you tolerate the guy despite his odd habits.
Then, one day, your neighbor comes over and shoots your dog dead.
In court, he explains that bullets only kill evil dogs. Bullets will pass through good dogs without harm. In fact, he claims he was doing you a favor, because an evil dog can appear like a good dog and then kill you in your sleep. And, as it turns out, he knows this is true because he found this out on the Internet. Then he heard it on Sketchy News Channel. He joined a group called "Bullets are Truth" on a social media site called "Parlez Vous Tromperie" which has cool pictures of scantily clothed acrobats all around the edges.
Your friend is an adult. He went to high school. He came from a reasonable home. He was not on drugs when he murdered your dog. He is not certifiably insane. He insists he was doing you a favor. He was operating, of course, on the basis of misinformation.
It doesn't matter.
He killed your dog.
The fact that he did it based on false information makes no difference in how you feel nor does it make a difference in the eyes of the law. The false information he believed in makes no sense and is easily disproven. It doesn't matter that thousands of people were duped into believing the same nonsense.
Case 2.
You own a dog. You love your dog.
Same neighbor. Same result. He shot and killed your dog.
When the truth at last comes out, it turns out that your spouse called him up and through sobs and hysterical screams, managed to squeak out that the dog had been bitten by a bat and though they had thought little of it at the time, the dog was now rabid and about to attack the children where they were all playing in the yard. She said she knew you had a gun and could you please save her children before it was too late!
Turns out your spouse always hated the dog and the neighbor. After the call, she smiled a very self-satisfied smile at her acting performance. Then, she let your dog out to play, but not before squirting whipped cream all over his muzzle.
When your neighbor came into the yard he saw your dog charging toward the kids and apparently foaming at the mouth.
He killed your dog. He did it on the basis of misinformation.
After all the facts come out, you'll probably still be pretty PO'd at your neighbor, but you'd be a lot more PO'd at your spouse!
One crucial difference between Case 1 and Case 2 is that in Case 1, your neighbor had plenty of time to verify the veracity of the claim that bullets would pass "harmlessly" through the body of a "Good Dog." In Case 2, your neighbor could have reasonably thought that he had zero time to do anything but save your children. In Case 1, your neighbor's belief was absurd. In Case 2, your neighbor believed something unlikely to be true, but it wasn't physically impossible. Dogs can catch rabies. And if a rabid dog bites a child, that's really bad for the child.
What do you think are appropriate punishments in these two cases?
Case 3 is just like Case 1 except that your neighbor comes and shoots your kids. He has all the same excuses. He has all the same misinformation as in Case1.
What do you think would be an appropriate punishment for your neighbor? How about the people who put the information on the Internet?
Or, perhaps you think all should be forgiven because he was misinformed?
Your neighbor relies on misinformation on TV and internet sites to engage in treasonous behavior toward America.
The minimum sentence for treason is five years in a Federal Penitentiary.
The maximum penalty is death.
What do you think is an appropriate price for committing treason when the traitor does it based on an absurd conspiracy theory — one that he sincerely believes?
Plans for US; some GRUesome
Ramming your Head into a Brick Wall doesn't Make you a Hero.
Transcript of Mystery Conversation
A Profound and Utter Failure
My Cousin Bobby.
Put in the Fool; Put out the Fool
Posted by petersironwood in America, apocalypse, COVID-19, poetry, politics, psychology, Uncategorized
America, Constitution, Democracy, double-cross, fascism, pandemic, politics, Putin, traitor, treason, truth, USA
Another bright and shiny thing!
Let's all shout and dance and sing!
It glitters in polluted air!
It makes you want to sit and stare!
The newest bright and shiny thing!
Photo by Jesus Arias on Pexels.com
I'll cage the babies! Ain't it fun!
I'm chosen as The Chosen One!
I'll bring you pain; I'll bring you down.
But as of now, my game's in town!
At end of day, my game is done.
All my wondrous treacherous creatures!
All my crimes — now being reported!
But I'll fight back with reporters deported.
Let's open schools and kill some teachers!
They're over-eager over-reachers!
Black lives matter? What's with that?
I've grown fatter! Chomp on my chat!
I'll spew and spatter racist chatter.
I've stolen so much my platter is flatter.
I'm careful as a junkyard rat.
My Pelf on Shelf – he's such a Sweetie!
Never tries to do his duty:
Lock me away to save the nation.
He'd rather mouth his incantation:
"Lootie, Booty, Gawd-darned Tootie!"
Photo by Public Domain Pictures on Pexels.com
I'll rest at last when all is mine,
"Der Fooler" they will claim's divine!
Pootie will show me how it's done!
Torture, steal — it's all such fun!
Just drink a little chloroquine!
What's that you've given me to drink?
Why Vlad, you've broken rank
Given me polonium — and I drank.
I threw others under bus and tank,
But I gave you your life long prize.
You betrayed me – what a surprise!
You said I was the light — just right —
The son you never had
Oh, Vlad, Oh, Vlad.
You used me like a tool it seems.
I never thought in foulest dreams
You'd play me for the fool.
You're bad.
You promised me and now I'm had.
Winning bigly is so sad.
I'll tell! I'll tell! They'll all believe
Me when I say…
You Bet Your Life!
Rejecting Adulthood
Essays on America: Wednesday
Plans for us some GRUesome
A profound and utter failure.
Winning by Cheating is Losing
ANTIFA, COVID19, Democracy, fascism, life, pandemic, poem, poetry, politics, Putin, traitor, treachery, treason, truth
A lonely lackey claims a throne:
A peasant traitor to the bone;
A peasant who's impressed with gold;
A coward who pretends he's bold.
The teeniest hands in all the lands;
The teeniest glands among the bands.
The frailest ego ever found.
The smallest heart to ever pound.
A shroom: Ka-boom! An ort of sorts.
The base proclaim his magic warts.
Eschews a fight that's not a fix.
The courts are clogged with crappy tricks.
Now watch him crumble; watch him fold;
He's frail and his tricks are old.
He's flat and rancid as a toad
He's stupidly squashed upon the road.
He cannot think from A to B;
Betrays his country easily.
Now Weenie's caught; he can't be taught.
He does not do coherent thought.
He's too inept to fairly race.
Instead he hides behind his face,
A mango face with wobbly head
He whimpers; cries of "foul!" Instead.
It's he himself who's truly rank
A Fraud as big as Deutsche Bank.
He sucks the wealth of everyone.
But now at last his time is done.
He's needless slain a host of lives
To compensate, he feints and dives.
He rants and raves; corrupts; depraves.
He likes to rape the younger slaves.
Photo by Thuanny Gantuss on Pexels.com
His daddy never showed him love;
Kowtows to every Putin shove.
He felt a quiver and a thrill.
When Putin ordered him to kill.
But soon the people will arise
Vote out the Vichy Putinate!
The People all with open eyes
Will oust the King of Agitate.
Photo by Element5 Digital on Pexels.com
The Truth Train
The Pandemic Anti-Academic
The Watershed Virus
Index of Patterns — Best Practices in Collaboration
Myths of the Veritas: The Orange Man
(A myth about what happens when insatiable greed is combined with lying).
Myths of the Veritas: The First Ring of Empathy
(A series of tales that features ethical, empathic, & effective leadership in times of crisis and uncertainty. Our tale begins as the leader of the Veritas seeks an eventual successor so she devises a series of seven trials that mainly test empathy.)
Donnie Gets his Name on Tennis Trophy!
Posted by petersironwood in America, apocalypse, family, psychology, story, Uncategorized
criminal mind, crook, fascism, felon, fiction, IMPOTUS, psychopath, sociopath, story, traitor
Fred slammed the black phone down onto its cradle and swore. "Damn, damn, damn!!"
Fred looked up and glared at his three children. His face wore that dangerous mottled red and yellow pallor that often foretold that someone would get a beating. The kids dare not walk away, but none of them wanted to be the one to incur his wrath. They stared down at the floor, avoiding his eyes and each other's.
"F###ing doctors! F###ing hospitals! They're keeping your mother for more tests! Well?! Do you have anything to say for yourselves?! Dolts!"
At last, Junior chanced a response, "I'm sorry, Dad, will she be okay?"
Fred stared at Junior as though he had spinach caught between his ears. "Who the hell knows? But it means she won't be here to take care of you! I'm no f###ing babysitter! What the hell does she think I'm going to do with you for another damned day? F###! I've got marks to make. Patsies to take. All right, look, Mary, go to your room and read till dinner time. Junior, take Donnie Boy to the club and have him pick up balls while you have a tennis lesson. I'll pay for all day, so long as he keeps you two out of trouble. GO!! Get your stuff and go! GO!!"
The three children obediently went off. Mary liked to read but she wondered vaguely as she climbed the stairs what was wrong with her mom. Fred Junior was silent but inwardly grumbled because his younger brother always spoiled his fun. Donnie Boy was wondering how he could horn in on Junior's lesson.
While the boys gathered their tennis clothes, shoes, and racquets, Fred Senior made a quick call to the club. "Listen, Joe, Junior's coming down for a lesson. Donny's tagging along. Clear your calendar. I want you to keep them out there all day. Kind of a family emergency. Mom's in the hospital. I need you to keep those two out of trouble till dinner time. I've got a big deal coming up. So, I don't want to see or hear from them till after 6 pm tonight. Got it? Okay, good. They'll be there in about half an hour. What? What other commitment? I just told you! It's an emergency! Cancel the lesson for Missy Fancy Panties. She can come another time. What? I don't care! Jesus. You're a smart man. Just make something up. Tell her your hemorrhoids are bothering you. Tell her your cousin from Florida just came to visit. Tell her you broke your arm. I don't care. Just lie. It's not rocket science!"
The boys arrived and soon enough went to court one where Joe had a large basket of balls. The sun shone through a hazy August sky. It was hot and humid and the three of them were all sweating even before the lesson began. "Okay, Fred, go to the service line and let's warm up a little — like we need to warm up today. He chuckled at his own joke.
Donnie Boy said, "What about me? Where should I go?"
Joe, who was quite familiar with the whole family, and especially tiny-handed Donnie Boy, thought to himself that a visit in hell might do him good. But he had been promised a substantial tip from Fred Senior if he kept them occupied the whole day, so he bit his tongue and said, "You stand over there Donnie and just watch the ball and watch how I hit it for a while. Pick up the balls that go astray and put them in the basket. Keep it filled. Then, when your brother gets tired, we'll see whether we can teach you something."
"I already know how to play! I just want to get better! I want my name on a trophy! Today!"
Joe laughed in spite of himself. "Donnie, no-one gets a trophy the first day they play. You need to earn it."
Donnie Boy thought to himself: Oh yeah? We'll see about that. Aloud, he said, "I told you. I already know how to play. I watched it on TV one time. It's really easy."
Photo by icon0.com on Pexels.com
Joe shook his head, glared a little more fiercely than he meant to at the scrawny awkward kid. He decided not to pursue that line of thought and instead concentrated on Junior. "Here you go. Yes. Nice." Fred Junior proved to be half-way decent, with good form. "No, bend your knees on those low ones. Don't bend over. Get your butt down."
Donnie shouted, "If I don't get to play, I'm going to tell Daddy you said the word 'butt'!"
Donnie wondered whether it would rain later. He didn't think so. Not till they got home. He didn't want it to rain, so it probably wouldn't rain. He practiced making it not rain. It didn't always work, but sometimes it did. It's because I'm a genius, Donnie Boy thought to himself. He became vaguely aware that play had stopped. Why?
Joe spoke loudly but did not yell. "See anything missing from our tennis game, Donnie Boy?"
Donnie Boy blinked. "Well, when I watched tennis on TV, there were lots of fans screaming. Nobody's watching us play tennis. Nobody at all."
Joe shook his head. "Donnie Boy. What do you need to play tennis?"
Donnie Boy brightened. "Rackets! My dad loves rackets!"
Joe sighed. "Right, but what else do you need?"
Donnie frowned. "A court?"
Joe continued, "Right. A court. And what else do you need to play tennis?"
Donnie stared at Joe. He glanced at his brother who seemed to mouth the word, 'Paul's' but he didn't know which 'Paul' his brother was talking about. He said, "Paul's! You need Paul's!"
"Paul's? What are you talking about Donnie Boy? Who's Paul?" Joe was visibly annoyed now despite his attempts not to let it show. "What were you supposed to be doing while you were watching your brother, Donnie Boy?"
Donnie stared at Joe. "Watching." He glanced at his big brother again but Junior was just shaking his head. "Donnie Boy, you were supposed to be fetching the balls for us and putting them back in the basket!"
Donnie gritted his teeth. He hated the word "fetch." That was for dogs and dark-skinned people, not for the likes of him. "Okay, okay. But when do I get a turn?"
Photo by Isabella Mendes on Pexels.com
"You'll get a turn when I say you do, and that will happen much sooner if you help by picking up the stray balls and putting them back in the basket! Just like I asked you to."
"Okay, Joe. I'll get them." Donnie Boy ran to one spot and picked up a ball and carried it back to the basket and put it in. Then, he went to gather another ball and put that in. Finally, when there were five balls in the basket, Joe asked Junior to go to the baseline and practice backhands. Fred had progressed a lot this summer, but the five balls were gone just as Donnie Boy put a sixth one in the basket.
Fred yelled to his younger brother. "Donnie Boy! For God's sake, don't just put the balls in one at a time. You should be able to hold five or six — even in your teeny hands. Take the basket with you so you can put them in quickly. Are you thinking?"
Oh, I'm thinking brother, he thought. Count on it. Aloud, Donnie said, "Yes, Fred. I'll get them all. Thank you for your suggestion." Don't want him to be on guard here.
Donald put his mouth into the shape of a smile and said to Joe, "I'm going to watch from back here, Joe. I want to see how to hit from the back." Donnie Boy found that he could only hold three in teeny hands, but he could jam a few more into his shorts.
Joe ignored Donnie Boy but shouted to Junior. "Recover! Hit and recover. That's it! If you are way over there you need to move back quickly to cover the cross-court shot. There you go. Faster next time."
Junior was hitting pretty well now and watching the ball intently. He was executing a pattern so obvious that even Donnie Boy could see it. And when the coach hit to Junior way out near the alley, Donnie put four balls in his teeny hands and slid all four onto Junior's path just as he was sprinting back to just past the middle of the court.
Fred Junior stepped directly onto one of the stray balls and his right ankle rolled and he fell on his elbow and shoulder. "CRAP!" he screamed.
Joe sprinted directly to Junior, easily hurdling the net in the process. Crap indeed, thought Joe. Now I have to fill out a frigging report and maybe Fred Senior won't give me that promised tip after all. Crap. Although, half the time, he doesn't keep his promises anyway. He'll just deny he ever made the promise. What proof do I have. Anyway, injuries are crap for the club."
Joe helped Fred over to the stands and had him sit down. He could see that the ankle was already swelling. He got an ice pack and put it on Fred's swollen ankle. He looked at Donnie Boy and wondered how someone could be so inept.
Still hoping for the promised tip, Joe kept his face neutral as he said, "Okay, Donnie Boy. Your turn. Show me your stroke."
"What?! I'm not doing that in front of you! You pervert!" Donnie put his face into a look of horror and revulsion.
"What? What the — what are you talking about? Show me your tennis stroke, Donny."
Donnie pretended to gain some insight. "Oh, okay. Like this!" As he said the word 'this' Donnie slapped the racquet through the air as hard as he could.
Joe sighed. "This is going to be a long afternoon", he mumbled under his breath. "More slowly, Donnie. Ac-cele-rate through the shot. Never mind. Just don't try to kill it." Joe hit an easy shot over the net to where he thought Donnie's racquet head might go. Donnie swung with all his might and hit the tennis ball onto an adjoining court.
"I win!" shouted Donnie Boy.
"Donnie," explained Joe patiently, "it's not a contest to see how far you can hit it. You have to make it land inside these white lines. That's the court. It has to land in the court or it's my point."
Joe fed another easy ball to Donnie who swung as hard as he could and this time hit the ball onto a nearby fairway. "I WIN!" shouted Donnie.
"No, Donnie Boy. I told you. It has to land in the court. Inside these lines. Or on the line. But not over the fence."
"My shot was IN!" shouted Donne Boy.
"It wasn't even close! You have to think about where you want the ball to go, Donnie."
"MY SHOT WAS IN!!" shouted Donnie.
"It was not in. We not even playing for points, Donnie. I'm just trying to get you to hit a better stroke."
"It was too in! You just don't like me! That's why you said it was out. You don't want me to win! You won't let me win! You don't like me!"
The pain in Fred's ankle was still increasing despite the ice. "Donnie, the ball was way out! Surely you can see that. Anyway, it's not a match! He's a professional! You're a beginner! We're here to learn!"
"It was IN! insisted Donnie Boy. "You say it wasn't in, Junior, because you don't like me either!"
"Of course I like you, Donnie. You're my brother." Fred Junior tried to make this sound sincere, but he really couldn't quite muster it. It sounded thin and hollow as though he were reading it off a teleprompter without understanding any of the words. "The ball is either in or out. It has nothing to do with whether we like you."
"So people's eyes never play tricks on them? People always see just perfectly, I suppose?"
Joe said, "Of course, when it's close, sometimes people are mistaken. Your shots were not close. Not even close to close. They were way out, Donnie."
"No, you don't like me. Anyway, show me how to play tennis. That's what Daddy's paying you for."
Joe sighed. He amazed himself by suddenly picturing himself sprinting over to Donnie and smashing that thick skull of his with Donny's own racquet. He shook his head and dismissed the image. At long last, the worst hour of Joe's teaching career was over and it was time for a short break and lunch. Joe helped Fred Junior hobble inside while Donnie got his bag from the locker room and then stood in front of the club trophy case; stared longingly at the display of cups, plates, and statues. At last, he walked over to Joe and said, "Hey, Joe, I think it would help motivate me better if I could see what one of those trophies really looks like up close. So close, I could grab it by the pedestal! Do you think I could see one?"
Joe frowned. It was definitely an unusual request, but hell, why not. If it would keep Donnie off his back for a moment. "Okay, sure." He took out his keys and opened the trophy case and took out one of the large shiny trophies and handed it to Donnie, saying, "This is the Club Championship Trophy. Be careful, by the way."
"Oh, I will, Joe. I will be very careful!" Donnie Boy made his face look sincere.
Soon, the three had ordered. "Joe and Fred Junior talked about some tennis people Donnie had never heard of. Suddenly he leapt to his feet! "Uh-oh! Can you guys watch my trophy for a second? I'll be right back." Without waiting, Donnie strode into the kitchen. Joe glanced after him, but turned back to the conversation. In a few moments, Donnie returned and sat. Joe and Fred Junior stared at him. "Oh, I had to change my order. I forgot I want a cheeseburger, not just a hamberder."
Photo by Adrian Dorobantu on Pexels.com
They talked for a few moments when Donnie called out, "LOOK!" He leapt up, pointing toward the kitchen. Thick white smoke was coming out. The fire alarm shrieked at them mercilessly. The sprinklers soaked them. The quiet chatter of the dining room shattered into cacophony like a dropped stack of dishes. No-one noticed Donnie Boy slip the Trophy into his gym bag.
The fire damage to the Club was only a few thousand dollars. No-one in the kitchen had any idea how the fire had started. The Head Chef was, nonetheless handed a pink slip. Joe was reprimanded for Junior's injury. He never received the promised tip. Indeed, Fred Senior had instead threatened to sue the instructor "for every f###ing penny he had" unless he agreed to give a summer's worth of free lessons to both boys. He rumbled and grumbled before he crumbled.
A few weeks later, Donnie Boy came by to practice his putting and chipping on the practice green. When he checked in, he opened up a pocket in his golf bag and handed a large trophy to what's his face — the freckled guy with red hair — who often checked people in. Luckily, he had a name tag: WALLACE. "Wally, could you please do me a favor and get this trophy back into the trophy case. Joe was showing it to me when the kitchen caught fire. Wanting to protect it, I shoved it into my gym bag. Well, of course, here it is now, safe and sound."
"Oh, you were here when they had that fire! Wow! That was something."
"Yes, Wally! It was scary. Nobody knows how it started, right?"
"No sir. Weird. The cook said someone had apparently spilled cooking oil all over one of the stovetops. No-one remembers doing it or seeing it. Anyway, I'll make sure it gets back where it belongs."
"Thank you so much, Wally."
Neither Wallace nor the receptionist noticed that the name of last year's club champion had been replaced. Donny Boy had scratched the original tag beyond recognition and then had taken it to a jeweler. Donny explained that he had been mad at his Dad and scratched his Dad's name off of the trophy plaque. Donny clenched his nails into his fist until tears appeared. He explained that Dad would black and blue him if he found out. The jeweler swore it as a low price for the new engraving, but Donny Boy had to pay ten dollars of his own money that he had stolen from his sister's purse. But it was worth it. Every time he walked through the club lobby, he glanced over at the Club Championship Trophy and it made him feel how special he was.
Months later, the actual champion, who had since moved to California, returned to play a match with an old buddy of his. He wanted to remind his buddy about his skill and on the way out to court six, pointed to the Trophy in the display case. "Oh, look. What do you know. There I am," he drawled jokingly.
His friend glanced in. "Yeah, yeah. Well today…What the—?" He couldn't believe his eyes. He pointed at the Trophy Case wordlessly.
The champion stepped slowly toward the glass case. He stopped only when his nose touched the glass. His mouth fell open. His name was gone. Donny Boy had instead had his own name engraved. "Who the hell is this?" He seemed to be addressing the question to the universe, but if he was, the universe didn't answer.
At least not in so many words.
Other stories of the mythical and completely fictional child sociopath, Donny Boy.
Donnie Boy Plays Bull-Dazzle Man
Donnie Visits Granny!
Donnie Gets a Hamster
Donnie Boy Plays Soldier Man
Donnie Plays Captain Man
Donnie takes a Blue Ribbon in Spelling


text:
Nine SEC games? Slive says SEC must be flexible and innovative with schedules
Updated: Jan. 14, 2019, 9:20 a.m. | Published: Jul. 19, 2012, 8:30 p.m.
By Jon Solomon
HOOVER, Alabama -- The possibility of playing nine SEC games won't disappear.
Alabama coach Nick Saban and Tennessee coach Derek Dooley expressed support for the concept today at SEC Media Days. Meanwhile, SEC Commissioner Mike Slive said the conference must be flexible and innovative with scheduling.
Strength of schedule -- however it's eventually defined -- is expected to be an important criteria in how a playoff selection committee chooses the four participants.
"I think I've put up the caution flag because as we move ahead with the committee and strength of schedule, we're going to have to make sure we balance nonconference scheduling with conference scheduling," Slive said. "I think everybody in the league will be sensitive to make sure we do everything to position us so we can achieve what we want to achieve. I also view it as a fan attendance matter as well."
Saban said he wants less scheduling emphasis on divisions so every player faces every SEC school during his career. That won't happen with the new 6-1-1 scheduling format of six divisional games, one permanent partner and one rotating team.
Said Saban: "Everybody's got a self-absorbed opinion about why we shouldn't do it because maybe they won't get bowl eligible. ... We're all playing somebody that is a quality opponent outside the league right now. I don't think the difficulty of the schedule would be any greater. I think if you're one of the best teams, playing another team in our league would just be an opportunity to prove that you are a quality team."
Dooley also supports nine SEC games to keep a familiarity between fan bases.
"We don't want to lose what made this game special, we don't want to lose what makes this league special," Dooley said.
On the flip side, nine games would create unbalanced home and away SEC schedules for teams each year. Slive said nine games and a 6-2 model with no permanent partners were favored by some coaches at the SEC spring meetings.
"It's a democracy, so people voted and this is what it turned out to be," Slive said.
The Pac-12 and Big 12 play nine conference games, and the ACC will soon go to nine as well. Since the Pac-12 and Big Ten canceled its planned challenge series, Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany suggested to The Chicago Tribune that revisiting nine conference games is a possibility again.
What the strength-of-schedule component used by the selection committee actually looks like remains unclear. It's possible it could be similar to the Ratings Percentage Index used in several NCAA sports, including men's basketball.
"A committee will develop a way of collecting data in a certain format and we'll see how that adds up," Slive said.
Slive said he isn't concerned by how many league games other conferences play.
"I think it's how we take care of business," he said. "There are different dynamics in every league for different purposes. For me, it will be what best positions us to maintain the success we've had as the postseason changes. It's a matter of being open and flexible and dynamic and innovative, and we'll continue to be in that frame of mind."
E-mail: jsolomon@bhamnews.com
Twitter: twitter.com/jonsol


to our outdoor Millennium Bandstand in the heart of Main Street Unionville for all to enjoy free of charge.
And we're back for our 11th season!!!
Our popular, free music series "Thursday Nights at the Bandstand" kicks off summer on May 30 at Unionville's Millennium Bandstand at the corner of Main Street and Fred Varley Drive.
Organized by community based Unionville Presents, the summer series attracts talented Canadian, International and local performers to the outdoor Unionville Millennium Bandstand stage for all to enjoy free of charge.
This year's series runs on 14 consecutive Thursday evenings from May 30 through August 29 Performances run non-stop from 7:30 to 9 pm each night.
Our primarily Tribute band live music series has once again been put together with input from our audience. And this year 5 first timers to Thursday Nights will be performing!! We have an outstanding live music line-up for all to enjoy throughout the warm summer ahead of us.
Thursday Nights at the Bandstand is financially supported by our dedicated sponsors. The series is entirely funded from their support. We sincerely thank each of them for their loyal, committed support of our Community initiative. Support and Enjoy Live Music!!!!
Thursday Nights at the Bandstand is financially supported by our dedicated sponsors. The series is entirely funded from their support.
Series Sponsor Partners include Kylemore Communities, Remington Group, Minto Communities, Watford Group, Ledgemark Homes, Yamaha Music, CaTech Systems, PeopleToGo, BMW Markham, Markville Chevrolet, Village Grocer, UBIA, Unionville Arms, Century 21 Sylvia Morris, CrupiLaw, Minken Employment Lawyers, Ashgrove Spa, Roberts Group, and Ambiyan.
Additional services and support comes from the City of Markham, Celebrate Markham, Official Photographer Robert Hyland +, media partners MarkhamToday.ca and Intrigue Media, website partner HOBO Computer Services and sound production by Chris MacBride Productions and RP Dynamics.
Thursday Night at the Bandstand?
What was your favourite performance of 2018?
For more information, contact Bill Dawson at 647-300-4891 or info@unionvillepresents.com .


A grand white staircase under the name Paul Costelloe sets the scene for the designer's AW17 show inside The Waldorf Hilton. As the first three models walk out, a strong tailoring theme is instantly set.
Irish tweeds, fine wools and silk jacquards make up looks with a slight nod to the Tudor period. Sleeves are exaggerated, waists are small and skirts are full.
Corseted designs emphasise the feminine silhouette and plunging necklines and slit skirts add a youthful edge to these historical shapes. Traditional fabrics are teamed brilliantly with modern English latex and leather to bring the look into the present day.
Sheer fabrics, cut-outs and a metallic colour palette also add an element of youth to the designs.
The models walk proud, confident and strong, reflecting the Paul Costelloe muse. He pays close attention to detail, creating collections out of the finest quality materials, tailored beautifully to make the wearer look and feel fantastic.
The designer has an exceptional talent for pairing textures expertly. There is a constant play between matte and sheen, smooth and tactile, delicate and structured.
In his own words, Costelloe says, "Creativity, texture and traditional designs are what I want my brand to always be." He's certainly hit the mark again with this extraordinary collection.