The Italian felt Swansea were time-wasting when the game was still goalless, but after Chelsea sealed the three points, he expressed his remorse.“After the game, I think it’s normal, it’s right to apologise for what happened during the game,” said Conte.“During the game, in the first half, I saw that Swansea were wasting time. I said this a few times to the fourth official.“At the same time, I didn’t see something change in the first half. I was frustrated for this situation. I tried to tell again, but then the referee took this decision.“I repeat, I apologise for this. I was frustrated. For sure I made a mistake. During the game I suffer. With my players I suffer. It’s a pity.“They are wasting time. I was a bit animated. I said this and I shout this. It was not the first time. I think for this reason the fourth official lost his patience. But I repeat, the fault was mine, not the fourth official’s. I apologise for this. I was frustrated.”Antonio Rudiger’s first goal were sufficient against a struggling Swansea side, with the reigning Premier League champions extending their undefeated streak to six games.Conte added: “We started this season with many problems. Now we are trying to solve these problems. I think now we are improving.“We are trying another system of play. And I had the possibility to alternate these two systems. These are good options for me.”0Shares0000(Visited 1 times, 1 visits today) 0Shares0000Antonio Conte remonstrates with referee Neil Swarbrick before being sent to the standsLONDON, United Kingdom, Nov 30 – Antonio Conte has apologised to referee Neil Swarbrick after being sent to the stands during Chelsea’s 1-0 win over Swansea.Conte was dismissed on the stroke of half-time at Stamford Bridge after protesting furiously in a discussion with Swarbrick over a number of contentious decisions.
A subtle shift seems to be taking place in media coverage of intelligent-design controversies in school boards across the country. Darwinists used to be the unchallenged kings of the hill. Alternatives, whether creationism or intelligent design, were disqualified before they reached the starting gate. It also used to be “open season” on anti-Darwinists. No vituperative rhetoric or impugning of motives was too strong for reporters in their treatment of the villains of creationism. Several recent articles, however, show some cooling of the jets, and a little more attempt at balanced coverage by spokespersons from both sides:A Newsweek article by Jerry Adler began by asking, “How did life, in its infinite complexity, come to be? A controversial new theory called ‘intelligent design’ asserts a supernatural agent was at work.” In “Doubting Darwin,” Adler gives good coverage to both sides, though ending with the suggestion that theistic evolution would result in fewer conflicts.Diane Carroll in the Kansas City Star was certainly not partial to the intelligent-design side, but gave its spokespersons substantial coverage. The main Darwinist objections she cited were in the “hidden agenda” category.David Klinghoffer, writing an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, decried the branding of Stephen Meyer as a heretic after his ID paper was published in a peer-reviewed journal (see 09/24/2004 entry). He characterized the uproar not as science vs. religion, but “an instance of one religion persecuting a rival, demanding loyalty from anyone who enters one of its churches–like the National Museum of Natural History.”Josh Kelley in The Arizona Republic actually gave most of his coverage to the intelligent design side, including Walt Brown, a young-earth creationist with a PhD involved in rewriting the state science standards. Biochemist Michael Behe, who coined the phrase “irreducible complexity,” actually got the last word for a change.There are, naturally, plenty of the usual rabid anti-creationist articles out there still, like this editorial at the Boston Globe that calls evolution “the bedrock of biology” and warns against those who want to “sneak Genesis into the teaching of science,” and Time Magazine’s hit piece against ID called “Stealth Attack on Evolution.” But that’s not news.Big ships turn slowly. While none of these articles endorses ID or gives Darwinism the interrogation it deserves, it does hint at a slight temperature change that can have big El Niño consequences later. At least more and more reporters are listening to ID arguments and not dismissing them out of hand. Here are some suggestions reporters should consider for their next articles:Design science has an illustrious history. Most of the great scientists of history were religious people, like Newton, Boyle and Maxwell, who believed the universe was created. Their religious beliefs didn’t hinder science, but, on the contrary, advanced it.The pure atheistic, naturalistic brand of science is relatively new. The trend to discount Genesis dates primarily from the 18th century, but the overtly anti-religious, materialistic brand of science was championed by the likes of Huxley and Haeckel in the late 19th century to early 20th century. These Darwin bulldogs knew nothing of modern genetics and biochemistry.Design is already an accepted part of several sciences, including archaeology, cryptography, information theory, criminology and SETI, yet is not dismissed there as being religiously motivated. These examples prove that design detection can legitimately be part of scientific investigation, and that design explanations can be valid, without knowing the designer or his/her/its motives (especially in the case of SETI). They also demonstrate that a design conclusion is not a cop-out, but can be a valid inference based on evidence.The controversies within Darwinism are deep and profound; they cannot merely be characterized as nitpicking about the mechanism while accepting the “fact” of evolution. Is a fact without a mechanism really a fact at all?The evidence from microbiology has been trending steadily toward a design inference and away from a Darwinian inference. We know things about genetics that Darwin and all the early evolutionists could not possibly have known. These and other evidences, like the Cambrian explosion and the anthropic principle, pose new and severe challenges to the belief that life arose without a Designer (see 01/28/2005 entry).The points above are rarely mentioned in secular news reports about the intelligent design vs. Darwinism controversy. It’s time to give them more prominence.(Visited 12 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
dana oshiro Why Tech Companies Need Simpler Terms of Servic… Less than a decade ago, online dating was by no way considered mainstream. Not only were you judged for putting your profile up on a dating site, but your choice of site between Lavalife, Match and Nerve Singles told others whether you were there to date, get married or make friends with benefits. Today, location-based dating sites are quickly gaining ground. With the increasing mainstream acceptance of services like Foursquare and Gowalla, new opportunities within the dating space have emerged. Forget badges and points, geo-locational apps already have the power to promise you love. ReadWriteWeb caught up with Skout CEO Christian Wiklund. Last month we covered Wiklund’s transition from building a location-based network to a dating site. When asked how proximity-based dating is different than regular dating he explained, “With mobile location-enabled dating sites we can make serendipity happen. Skout cares about ‘when and where’ you are. We refrain from matching singles on 100+ dimensions or requiring you to fill out pesky forms. This is about the conversation that you have with a person, similar to how you would engage a potential love interest in real life.”Wiklund’s casual approach to dating takes into account the context of a place coupled with looks as being key connection indicators. Essentially, if you find someone attractive and they hang out in a place you hang out, then you can contact each other and meet up. He is so sure that users will find others, that this Valentine’s Day he’s offering premium members a money back guarantee if they don’t find a date for Sunday. Then again, what sad soul would be bold enough to ask for their money back?Nevertheless, the fact that Wiklund’s site is already charging for services like unlimited chat, premium placement and unlimited browsing access, shows a stark mind shift between dating and general apps like Gowalla and Foursquare. Those using Foursquare might not be willing to spend freely on virtual gifts or currencies, but even ten years ago, dating site users were used to the idea of winks, flirts and chat at a premium. This fact, coupled with the biological urge to mate, means that dating might turn out to be among the most lucrative categories for geo-locational services. Tags:#Features#start#startups Related Posts Top Reasons to Go With Managed WordPress Hosting A Web Developer’s New Best Friend is the AI Wai… 8 Best WordPress Hosting Solutions on the Market
It’s no surprise that many people who have the financial resources to build big houses are nowadays building them with environmentally friendly materials and systems that will reduce their reliance on the grid. Some are energy efficient, some are loaded with renewable-energy systems, and many incorporate both.In recent weeks we’ve mentioned a few such houses that, as it turns out, all weigh in at around 5,000 sq. ft.: a six-bedroom in Southern California (4,900 sq. ft.), with a LEED for Homes Platinum rating, and the first- and third-place winners (based on their Home Energy Rating index scores) of the 2010 edition of the Connecticut Zero Energy Challenge (4,539 sq. ft., and 4,944 sq. ft., respectively). Also, in late 2009, we posted a brief about a 5,329-sq.-ft. home in Avon, Connecticut, that was designed to operate at near net zero energy with a lot of help from a 15 kW wind turbine.On prime Long Island turfAnother entry in the big-with-green-ambitions category is a project called the HGA House, a 4,980-sq.-ft. lodge-like home in Southampton, New York. HGA stands for Hamptons Green Alliance, a nonprofit forged by the project team that designed and built the house, which replaced a home destroyed by fire in December 2008. The group’s mission, Hamptons Green Alliance says on its Web site, is to promote the design, construction, materials-selection, and performance standards that, in December, landed the home a LEED Platinum rating and a HERS index of 25.“Though the Hamptons are probably best known as the summer playground for the rich and famous,” the group says, “a home devastated by a tragic fire is being transformed into what will be a sustainable home that will set a building standard for others to follow.”The exterior walls of the four-bedroom, six-bath house are insulated with open-cell foam and fitted with windows (from Green Mountain Windows) with U-factors ranging from 0.26 to 0.29. The roof’s 2×12 rafters are insulated with closed-cell foam. The house is equipped with a ground-source heat pump for space heating and cooling, a solar hot water system, and a 10-kW photovoltaic (PV) array (including 6 kW supplied by thin-film PV material applied to the structure’s metal roof).The building’s LEED for Homes score, as mentioned in a post by The Energy Collective, was 104 points, well above the 90 it needed for a Platinum rating.