text:
The business of whittling the bottom line became tangible Monday for the Gulf County School Board.
During a special meeting, board members unanimously approved privatizing custodial services for at least the next school year, hoping to save $80,000-$100,000 as the district addresses a budget shortfall of nearly $900,000.
"That money is money that is keeping us from cutting into teacher ranks," said Superintendent of Schools Jim Norton.
Norton has estimated that 12-15 teaching positions are likely to be trimmed.
And while tough just the start, the pain of removing employees, many of them long-term, from the district workforce was evident among board members.
"None of this is taken lightly," said board member John Wright. "Anytime you have layoffs there is a real concern. We've looked at this for months and shed a tear or two."
Board member Billy Quinn, Jr., said, "Some of these folks are our neighbors, people we see in the grocery store. We are going to be watching this process."
The process, though not formally ratified during Monday's meeting, is to "piggy-back" on a similar move and contract from Bay County, Norton said.
Bay County went out for qualifications and bids and four companies applied. Bay County School District chose the lowest bidder, GCA Education Services out of Knoxville, TN.
GCA made a presentation at the prior Gulf School Board meeting and Norton said the intention would be to "piggy-back" on the Bay County contract since the district had been through the qualification and bid process.
The School Board has not yet finalized a contract with GCA, only specified that the district will privatize custodial services.
The privatization will impact 11-12 employees, who will be laid off by the district.
Through an agreement between GCA and the district, those employees will be provided first opportunity to apply for the same positions under GCA, Norton said.
He said the largest impact would be that the employees would no longer be paying into the Florida public employees retirement system though those vested would maintain their current balances.
"This really should as seamless a transition as could be," Norton said.
The savings the district will realize should be on the high side of the ballpark provided Monday as the most basic level of services provided by GCA will be an improvement for county schools, maintenance/transportation director Greg Layfield said.
"We don't have adequate coverage, especially at the high schools" in light of workforce cuts the past several years, Layfield said. "They would provide an upgrade from where we are now."
But the decision to privatize custodial, Norton made clear Monday, was just a toe in the water for the coming budget cycle, which will begin in earnest at the regular board meeting next week.
The board will at that time take up the formal contract for custodial services as well as begin the examination of areas identified by Norton and district staff for possible cuts.
"The staff and I, we have our work cut out for us," Norton said.
The district must still trim, at least, $760,000 from the budget, a process that is likely to mean impacts not only to the workforce but potentially to programs.
The pain was already showing Monday.
"It takes everybody, from the school bus driver to the lunch room server to teachers to custodial," said board member Linda Wood. "Everybody is of equal importance."


text:
Celebrity Central / Top 25 Celebs
Kourtney Kardashian
Credit: AKM-GSI
Published: Tuesday February 19, 2013 10:00 AM EST
More from PEOPLE
Latest News!
- Bobbi Kristina Brown's Aunt: 'Justice Will Be Served'
- Read the Cover Story: Growing Up Kennedy!
Exclusive Family Photos from White House Nanny
- FROM EW: Channing Tatum Channels Madonna, Shows Off 7 Dance Moves in 30 Seconds
- Four Days Before Her Split from Ben Affleck, Jennifer Garner Was All Smiles on Solo Visit to Boston
- Miley Cyrus: 'My Life Is Insanely Serendipitous at the Moment'

subset: commoncrawl


text:
BEGIN:VCALENDAR VERSION:2.0 PRODID:-//184.108.40.206//NONSGML kigkonsult.se iCalcreator 2.20// CALSCALE:GREGORIAN METHOD:PUBLISH X-WR-CALNAME:Boulder City Library X-WR-CALDESC:Boulder City\, NV X-FROM-URL:http://bclibrary.org X-WR-TIMEZONE:America/Los_Angeles BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:America/Los_Angeles X-LIC-LOCATION:America/Los_Angeles BEGIN:STANDARD DTSTART:20151101T020000 TZOFFSETFROM:-0700 TZOFFSETTO:-0800 TZNAME:PST END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT DTSTART:20150308T020000 TZOFFSETFROM:-0800 TZOFFSETTO:-0700 TZNAME:PDT END:DAYLIGHT END:VTIMEZONE BEGIN:VEVENT UID:email@example.com DTSTAMP:20150702T010723Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:CARE CONTACT:CARE\; 702-836-9033 DESCRIPTION:
THIS EVENT IS BY APPT ONLY!\n
Nevada's Silver State Health Insurance Exchange will be open ing up on October 1st. If you're confused about your choices\, CARE can he lp.\n
CARE will be visiting Boulder City Library once a month the he lp with sign up for the Affordable Care Act. You can sign up for help by calling 702-836-9033 (Espanol 801-836-9033). These visits are scheduled by appointment. If you can't make any of t he following dates\, please call them. Other libraries are also having CAR E programs and they may be able to sign you up at a Las Vegas-Clark County or Henderson library.\n
CARE Appointments can be made on the follow ing dates:\n
We have gathered some resources to help you learn about the Affordable Ca re Act and how it affects you. Check out our Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) Information for Nevada< /a>.DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20131101 DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20131102 SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:CARE Affordable Care Act Help (by appt) URL:http://bclibrary.org/event/care-affordable-care-act-help-by-appt-2/ END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR


text:
CU: Home • A to Z • Campus Map
CU-Boulder student Andrew Nelson, a junior engineering physics major, has been awarded a prestigious Goldwater Scholarship. The scholarship is worth up to $7,500 and recognizes sophomores and juniors who have achieved high academic merit and who are expected to be leaders in their fields.
Avery Bang (MS CivEngr'09) believes that every person has a right to safely access essential services such as health care, schools and markets. As CEO of Bridges to Prosperity (B2P), a nonprofit that builds pedestrian bridges in rural poor communities to provide access, Bang is literally building upon that belief, one bridge at a time. She also founded the Bridges to Prosperity University Program, which supports student chapter groups around the world including one at CU-Boulder. (Support the CU B2P chapter's campaign to build a footbridge in Bolivia now—learn more: www.colorado.edu/crowdfunding.)
On her biennial trips to visit family in India, Colorado native Maithreyi Gopalakrishnan is always dismayed to see ever-increasing pollution levels dimming the "rich and colorful" country. Much of that pollution is caused by rickshaws, the motorized tricycle taxis that serve as a primary mode of transportation in India. In conversations with rickshaw drivers, Gopalakrishnan was saddened to learn that not only are the gasoline-powered vehicles bad for the environment, but that the fuel costs also leave drivers barely able to support their families.
Last fall, computer science major and avid cyclist William Luce and a friend turned their bikes east onto Niwot Road north of Boulder.
"There was a storm blowing in and there was a 40 mph wind coming right off the foothills and blowing straight east," he said. "We pedaled as hard as we could with this tailwind at our backs."
When Luce got back home, he uploaded the GPS data he'd recorded during his ride to an online program called Strava, which compared his performance to all other cyclists who had ever ridden and recorded their times for that section of road in the past.
Before there were beakers, there were barbells.
Brennan Coffey—one of three CU-Boulder undergraduates to win a coveted Goldwater Scholarship this year for high academic merit—has logged long hours at the gym. An avid bodybuilder, Coffey's weightlifting sessions have sculpted both his body and his interest in science.
Just before midnight Saturday, one day before the final presentation, the project came to a dead stop.
The following Monday, the student aerospace engineering team was scheduled to perform a live test of their prototype land exploration rover to a high-profile client. But the microcontroller—the circuit board that commands the rover—was fried.
A University of Colorado Boulder professor who developed a clever method to measure snow depth using GPS signals is collaborating with Western Slope officials to make the data freely available to a variety of users on a daily basis.
Professor Kris Gutiérrez has a rule about her after-school program at Alicia Sanchez Elementary School in Lafayette: "If you're not having fun, something is going wrong."
While civil engineering centers on the design and construction of physical environments, Jordan Burns specializes in a critical part of the discipline that isn't often recognized—communication.
Her interest in communication stems from her identification with the people she's working for. "I see people like myself get stressed out about how daunting engineering looks to people who want to fix problems and I want to help them," she said.
Stephen Kissler spends a lot of time thinking about research problems such as an artificial pancreas that could determine exactly how much insulin to release in a diabetic person.
"Usually my thoughts are about what's valuable, what hasn't been done, what would be an important piece of information for either a patient or a doctor to have and what skills I have to address that," said Kissler.
Every gift matters, no matter the size.
What kind of Buff will you be?
Be in the know. Know what to do.
© Regents of the University of Colorado
Contact Us • Privacy • Legal & Trademarks • Accessibility • Student Consumer Information


text:
Order Cancellation Policy
Please Note: orders are generally processed through our system within 24 hours, so we may be unable to cancel your order before it is shipped.
Cancellation Requests for Europe and Rest of World Customers:
Cancellation Terms and Conditions
Book Cancellation Policy
Books returned within 30 days along with the invoice marked "cancel" will receive full credit. (Valid on order quantities less than 50 copies). No credit will be issued for books held more than 30 days.
CD-ROM Subscription Cancellation
All new CD-ROM subscriptions may be returned within the first thirty days for full credit. After the thirty-day review period, Kluwer Law International's cancellation policy will apply. Renewal subscriptions will receive credit if cancelled prior to the renewal date. After the renewal date, the 1-4 months cancellation credit amount of 25% applies. That policy is as follows:
If your cancellation request is received by Kluwer Law International prior to the tenth of the month, that cancellation will be effective the first of that month. If your cancellation request is received after the tenth of the month that cancellation will be effective the first of the following month.
Please see the scale below to determine the amount of credit, if any, that you would receive should you choose to cancel your Kluwer Law International CD-ROM subscription.
Months of Service Credit to your account
1--4 25%
5--12 No credit will be given
Internet Subscription CancellationNo cancellation can be accepted for a current subscription if the subscription is active and the payment has been processed.
Fourth edition of Klaus Vogel on Double Taxation Conventions - Just publishedRead more»
NEW online service - Kluwer Tax LawRead more»
Get the latest news, product info and more Check out Insight, our marketing blog.Read more»
Twitter and Wolters Kluwer. Follow the latest News on Twitter. Follow us here...Read more»
New Blog on Mediation, join the experts.Read more»
New Blog on Copyright Law, join the experts...Read more»
Sign up here to receive our Monthly Newsletter


text:
Classic Square Finials & Rod
Our Classic finials fit nicely into any bedroom design scheme.
- Finials feature square design
- To hang drapery, rod, finials and bracket are required; rings and double-rod conversion kit are optional
- Finials, extending rods and brackets are sold as a set; rings, tiebacks and double-rod conversion kit sold separately
- Rods and brackets are metal; tiebacks and finials are resin
- In pewter
Classic Square Finials & Rod
- Small: ¾" diam.; 28"-48"L, 48"-88"L or 60"-108"L
- Large: 1¼" diam.; 28"-48"L, 48"-88"L or 60"-108"L
Classic Square Finials & Rod
Classic Double Rod Conversion Kit
Classic Square Tieback
Classic Clip Rings Set of 7
Classic Loop Rings Set of 7


text:
Assistant Professor of Modeling Technology
, Constructed Environments
An interdisciplinary studio practice includes furniture, product and display systems for residential and commercial clients. Taught at Hunter College, California College of the Arts. Studied at the Grew-Sheridan Studio; BA, Lawrence University; MFA, Hunter College, CUNY.
fabrication,furniture design,product design
Models 4
< back


text:
July 7th, 2015
Browse Archive by Day
Tea party questions Barbour's role in senate race
06/14/2014 2:31amHaley Barbour almost certainly isn't running for office again in Mississippi, but the former governor, one-time Republican National Committee chief and influential Washington lobbyist is playing a prominent role in the state's battle for the GOP Senate nomination.
Clinton has plenty of reasons to run for president
06/14/2014 3:30amShe insists she hasn't decided on a second bid for the presidency. But Hillary Rodham Clinton is laying out more reasons to run than not during her coast-to-coast book tour.
Miss. Senate candidate runs to 'save the republic'
06/14/2014 6:51amChris McDaniel comes from a small town, with a skyline of church steeples and a courthouse that overshadows a memorial to Confederate soldiers.
School chief primary race has crowded field
06/14/2014 12:01pmJanet Barresi has made good on promises to make major changes to Oklahoma's education system that she made while campaigning to be state school superintendent four years ago, but she has been unable to rally some educators and parents to her cause and faces six challengers to her re-election bid, including two within her own party.
US presses Russia over weapons flow to Ukraine
06/14/2014 3:21pmSecretary of State John Kerry on Saturday pressed his Russian counterpart to make clear Moscow's commitment to end the flow of weapons and other support to separatists in Ukraine, the State Department said.
3 GOP presidential hopefuls talk of unifying party
06/14/2014 3:31pmThree possible Republican candidates for the 2016 presidential race were in Iowa on Saturday to offer their prescriptions for uniting the GOP and rally party faithful in the early primary state.
Site Index
KSL's Children's Television Programming Reports, as well as its FCC public inspection file, are available for viewing during regular office hours at the KSL Broadcast House or online.
The station representative who can assist a person with disabilities with issues related to the content of the public files is Mike Dowdle, available during regular office hours at firstname.lastname@example.com and (801) 575-5555.
The station representative who can assist a person with disabilities with issues related to the content of the public files is Mike Dowdle, available during regular office hours at firstname.lastname@example.com and (801) 575-5555.
© 2015 KSL.com | KSL Broadcasting Salt Lake City UT | Site hosted & managed by Deseret Digital Media - a Deseret Media Company v04


text:
- richard moody jr
- Berne, NY
- United States
This conversation is closed.
Is it reasonable to teach Intelligent Design in physics or statistic classes to seniors in high school?
The purpose of permitting ID to be taught to seniors should be to attempt to find a well-reasoned explanation for intelligent life. What is necessary to permit ID to be discussed "legally"(separating church and state) in the class room is to divorce ID from any religious affiliation e.g. the Bible.
For our universe to originate by chance is about on a par with winning the Power Ball lottery a 1000 times in a row without ever buying a losing ticket! When you factor in all the conditions necessary for intelligent life to exist, it appears the universe is "fine-tuned" to support life e.g. if the force of gravity is off by one part in 10^36 in the range of all forces (the most powerful is the strong force), life does not exist. If the mass of a proton is off a tiny amount only blue giant stars can form; they can't support life.
The scientific explanation for our universe is that there are an infinite number of universes and this one originated by chance. Since we cannot observe, measure or replicate extra universes is this any more reasonable than ID?
Humanity is a pioneer in this universe; after the "Big Bang" 13.8 billion years ago, it takes a first generation star to explode to make heavy elements and a second generation star like our sun to corral those elements to support life on a planet. It takes 3.8 billion years to get from life to intelligent life.
We will be billions of years more evolved than civilizations growing up around third generation stars. By the time our sun becomes a red giant, we can take the moon, Mercury, Mars and Venus (for raw materials) and go into orbit around Jupiter; we will then extract hygrogen from Jupiter for fusion energy that will serve us until the universe ends.
edward long
Jun 10 2013: "Reasonable"? Is it reasonable to teach, as undisputed, scientifically confirmed fact that all life on earth is the result of random selection of beneficial mutations over eons of time from a common ancestor which had no knowable beginning or cause? Is it reasonable to teach as undisputed, scientifically confirmed fact that the entire Universe came into existence when, billions of years ago, when nothing existed, Nothing exploded for no knowable reason or cause and resulted in Everything coming into existence? Compared to those curricula would it be "reasonable" to teach that the Universe is the result of a sentient mind causing physical reality? Sure it would be reasonable. In fact it is most unreasonable to make it illegal to even mention the idea.
- +3
Jun 10 2013: The Discovery Institute is the leading organization promoting the consideration of ID, but what they say is instructive, "As a matter of public policy, the Discovery Institute OPPOSES any effort to require the teaching of intelligent design by school districts or state boards of education."
According to Monton, the go on to say, "does not support theocracy".Jun 10 2013: Hi edward my friend.
We don't teach "as undisputed, scientifically confirmed fact that all life on earth is the result of random selection of beneficial mutations over eons of time from a common ancestor." We teach that natural selection over random mutations is one mechanism proposed for evolution, not that it is the one and only way in which things have evolved. We teach that a universal common ancestor is a current conclusion from the available data. Those two things, natural selection and universal common ancestry, are separate things, by the way. One is a mechanism for evolution, the other a current conclusion from data about evolution.
We don't teach "as undisputed, scientifically confirmed fact that the entire Universe came into existence when, billions of years ago, when nothing existed, Nothing exploded for no knowable reason or cause and resulted in Everything coming into existence." Actually we teach that it is proposed, based on this and that pieces of data, that the universe originated, probably from a very small singularity, that once proposed people found this and that other clues confirming that the universe was truly very small and hot. The age of the universe is another matter. It is calculated from other pieces of data, not the same as those leading to the big bang. Though I would think that many aspect of both the age and the big bang might be quite well supported by the data.
We don't mention religious beliefs. They are based on nothing but faith, and thus have no place in a scientific curriculum. Would you truly like it if I talked about religions in a science class to kids in elementary, middle and high school?
Jun 11 2013: A kid coming out of an American public secondary school has been inculcated, in the classroom, with an exclusive view of the Universe and life. BB Physics and Evolution Biology are the only explanations ever heard coming from a teacher's mouth, or read from a school board approved textbook. Ask any HS graduate what they learned about where the Universe and life came from. It's all they are allowed to hear in the classroom. This post is asking if it is reasonable to censor any other possible explanation. We are not driven by reason now, but by a systematic denial of the very possibility of the Universe and life being the creation of a mind. Censoring such a concept is not reasonable. I'm certain this horse is dead, Entropy. Let's put the whips away. Keep learning my friend!
Jun 11 2013: I'm worried more that the average high schooler lacks basic writing skills, a sound grasp of the English language, the capacity to make change without consulting a computer, and, the fact that social media has not led to greater socialization, just more bullying, etc. Is having 200 friends on face book any substitute for having two or three close friends?
Maybe we should switch to more on line classes and allow the brick and mortar schools to gradually become extinct i.e. truly home schooling will experience a rebirth once parents begin to realize how much time is spent not learning in the class room.
Comment deleted
Jun 9 2013: But the problem is not about prejudices from the start. We came all this way after eons of learning. The big bang is not a prejudice, it's a scientific proposal, while creationism and it's subset ID are backwards superstition. Treating backwards superstition as if it was "equal" to a scientific proposal is unfair to our history as humanity and to the eons of work involved in developing the scientific method for learning about the universe.
Comment deleted
Jun 10 2013: ID can not be tested, a central part for obtaining truth. It could be true, but so could anything.Jun 9 2013: Nope, backward superstitions are backward superstitions. I would not consider that santa will bring me presents, and that does not mean that I am "prejudiced." I just have learned my lessons. We humanity should learn our lessons and grow up too. There is no way in which backward superstitions, based all on anthropomorphizing natural phenomena and our story-telling imaginations (as beautiful and poetic as they can be), could be true. It's not about prejudices, it's about putting things in their proper perspective. Those backward superstitions have my full respect as cultural phenomena, as monuments to human imagination, but I shall never grant purely imaginary beings the stature of a scientific finding. Not now, not ever. I know that scientific theories get revisited, corrected, and improved. I did not say that they could not be wrong, but their foundations are very different to those of gods and Olympus and angry volcanoes who demand virgins going into their fiery bellies.
Comment deleted
Jun 10 2013: If you're going to teach religion the big bang theory has no place there and if you're going to teach science religion should have no place there. (ID is a pseudoscience, a religion masked as science.)Jun 10 2013: "That you as a person don't accept ID and creationism as fair counterparts to Big Bang, doesn't make it unfair."
Of course not, and that was not my basis. My basis is that the merely imaginary is not at the same level as scientific work. My basis is that we should grow up already and boldly say what has to be said: fantasies are fantasies are fantasies. Leave them next to other fantasies, talk about them in the proper setting for fantasies.
"You as a fierce believer of the truth of the big bang theory should be glad if teachers want to compare them to alternative theories or religions"
First I wonder what part(s) of my comment could be taken to mean that I am a firm believer in the big bang theory. I can't be, since I have little knowledge about it. I know some of the scientific data leading to the idea of the big bang, but that's about it. Therefore I neither believe it, nor disbelieve it, let alone "firmly." I just accept that it is a scientific model based on scientific data. What I don't accept is that scientific models are comparable to backwards superstitions.
But I think that now I got your point. Teaching the way you suggest in a religious setting is up to the religious setting. I wouldn't do so in public school though. It is still unfair to humanity to pretend that background superstitions are equal to scientific advances.Jun 24 2013: I will gladly teach ID to my senior physics classes when someone shows me an experimental result that supports it as a theory.
Jun 24 2013: Peter,
Use the same experimental results that support the theory that there was a ball of matter? that exploded into what is now our universe.
What a minute, there are no experimental results, just mathematical calculations.
So, if we were to recalculate the origination of the universe factoring in a positive value for a plan or direction or algorithm or or or giving raise to the known universe, would that work for you?
Jun 25 2013: Hubble
Jun 25 2013: if you are speaking of the telescope, that only peers into what happened after the big bang and provided verification of the math. it didn't show the little chunk of whatever before it exploded or how it got there.Jun 25 2013: Not the telescope Mike the man for whom it is named. He made the measurements before the theory existed. The theory came about to explain existing observations. Then the maths was deciphered to see if the physics theory would agree with the observed phenemenon. If you have a look you will find that the science "establishment" faught agianst the whole idea for many years.
Jun 25 2013: OK, The man. Same analysis. His observations created or proved the math. OK. But, there still has not be an observation of the little chunk etc.
What am I trying to say. We have no real idea of the composition of that chunk of stuff. Was it pure energy or my favorite... matter squished so hard together that there was no space between the protons or electrons or neither.
We don't really know how it got there or if it included some script how it was to go after it blew up or did it really blow up or just maybe ooze out. All we know for sure is that after 14 B years we are part of an expansive universe of which 25% is matter and the rest is in the dark... There are some forces that we can barely explain and some that are also in the dark. The best we got is some measurements of celestial movement with which we were able to make some math calculations to generate some theories. Can't ask for anything more positive then that!Jun 26 2013: We know it wasn't protons and electrons etc as we already have neutron stars that are made of protons and electrons squished together and they're not as dense as whatever is in a Black Hole. If you squash neutrons then you are left with a mass of quarks that takes up much less space as the three individual quarks that make up a neutron are many times smaller (and lighter) than the neutron. There are experimental results from CERN that show this if you want to look.Jun 19 2013: Fine-tuning of the universe is a jaded subject.
Think of it. There are billions of men and women in the world. What is the probability of your specific father meeting your specific mother? What is the probability that this event would have resulted in your birth and not the birth of any of the 7 billion other people? Moreover, what is the probability of this event happening in your hometown out of all possible places? Mind-boggling, isn't it? Yet, there you are, as sure as the sunrise. What can we make out of this fact? Not much, really. But we can enjoy a conversation about all these perplexities of life.
Whatever the chances of winning a lottery might be, it is a certainty that someone will win it if it's played long enough and enough people participate. Do you know of a single lottery played for any reasonable period of time which nobody has ever won? And this remarkable event happens over and over and over with remarkable certainty. The probability of life on any given piece of rock is almost zero. But if you consider the number of rocks in the universe and consider that this lottery is played for 13.8 bln years, the probability of winning turns into a certainty.
When event is happening, the possible alternatives are irrelevant. It's best to focus on "what is" rather than on "what might be" or "what ought to be".Jun 10 2013: When Einstein came up with his special theory of relativity, it took a long time before anyone accepted it. When he tried to incorporate Gravity into his theory (General Theory of Relativity), it took a long time before it could be proven and, therefore, accepted by the Scientific community.
Einstein did not write this Theory for the minds of general people. Most if not all would never understand it. He wrote it specifically for the Scientific community. He knew, if he could convince them, than most of the general population would accept it and teach it in schools.
ID asserts itself as a scientific theory but has not offered any evidence that it is a plausible, scientific theory. It is religion, pure and simple. It is not science.
I don't want my grand-kids learning anything, declared to be Science, that is not scientifically proven. They can get plenty of Imaginary probability at the movies or on Youtube.
Let's say we accept the idea that most mechanisms in the biological world have a strong sense of intelligent design.
What would be the next offering from ID as a scientific field of study?
It would be to study these mechanisms and understand how they work
We are already doing this. ID does not offer any avenues of pursuing knowledge that are not already supplied by the scientific method. It offers no change to these methods. It can't stand alone on it's own merits as a scientific theory that should be pursued in a manner that is not already in force and being taught in schools.
It's only food for thought, not food for truth.
All ID really does is split the Religious world apart. On one hand, God is a super intelligent alien and less of a God as taught in Religious Organizations. It Diminishes God as a supernatural being.
It doesn't hurt the Scientific world at all. Because science creates the opportunities to become like God by altering or coming close to creating things we see in the Universe, God is only a bit smarter than we are.Jun 9 2013: Richard,
It would seem that you have been reading the wrong literature. In any event, the probability that we would be here is 1, since we are already here. Now, I know that you are talking about prior probabilities. However, I would have to ask what is the foundation for such calculations. It seems like on the one hand, you accept the idea that the constants, the values of some main forces known to physics, could have been different, and therefore, unfriendly to life and unfriendly to intelligent life. Why would you accept such idea, that constants could have been almost anything else, yet deny the idea of multiverses? We cannot observe, measure of replicate universes with different constants. We only have what we have. So, why should we accept the constants being "fine tuned," but reject the multiverses? Why would we apply a different standard to each idea? Just so that you can claim that our universe is very unlikely? Furthermore, if our universe was very unlikely it would follow that more likely universes would have to exist, wouldn't it?
There's more to say about the assumptions behind those probabilities, for example, whether other combinations of constants would work. But, since the argument for fine tuning fails from the start, I see no reason to visit them. I think that the main problem is philosophical: one of making too many unwarranted assumptions.
In order to teach anything in science classes, such a thing has to go through what everything in science goes: scientific validation. ID-ers try to get their disguised religion taught via laws, which betrays their actual intent: to teach creationism instead of science in public schools. Their scientific and philosophical failures are exemplified in the "fine tuning" and other probabilities games that they play. Check the ID arguments carefully and you might soon learn to notice their unwarranted assumptions and fallacious thinking.
Jun 10 2013: As far as "every thing in science goes (through): scientific validation." When I was in high school I was taught, "the ontology recapitulates the phylogeny"; it is my understanding now that this is false. I was also told that the moon might have come out of the Pacific Ocean---now we have plate tectonics and know that this was a specious idea---but given serious consideration by top scientists.
Maybe ID should not be taught in schools but be left to philosophy classes in college; as other readers point out students in physics classes should be taught physics. But which physics? Should we only teach Newtonian mechanics which we know approximates the truth because it breaks down when relativistic considerations come into play? One of my sayings is that the approximation of the truth is a lie, yet we teach Newtonian mechanics in high school with nary a reference to relativity. Do physics students have an accurate understanding of gravity in high school?
My personal preference is that there may have been a massive number of universes that just bounced i.e. underwent the Big Crunch and underwent another big bang until this universe, which could support life, emerged. Now that it supports life, life will keep it open for an eternity. Is "dark energy" the "force"? :) If it is may the force be with you!
The most important finding in astrophysics in the future, in my opinion, will be conclusive proof that the Big Bang had "structure" i.e. that something existed before the Big Bang. In other words I predict in our lifetime that we will see clear evidence of a bounce, and, with it, the recognition that if one bounce occurred, others would be likely. Then it just becomes a mindless throwing of the dice before a universe appears that can support life. Then the question becomes, "Who throws the dice?"
Jun 10 2013: I'm sorry but I doubt that you were taught that "ontology recapitulates phylogeny," since that did not make it into the textbooks, let alone with such absolutism. I was taught that some scientists had proposed that the moon might have come from a collision of some asteroid with our planet, not that the moon came from the pacific ocean. I was taught that the idea that it came from the pacific ocean was en vogue for a time long ago but that it was discredited, but that it inspired the idea that maybe that collision, and that such collision was the most supported hypothesis. What does plate tectonics have to do with the moon? Are you saying that plate tectonics is false? If so you are quite misinformed.
But let us suppose that you were taught such things. Does that mean that we have to teach fallacious hypotheses like ID, or that we should make sure that what goes in is consistent with scientific validation?
In physics we teach the state of affairs in theories and such. I don't know where you get your information, but I have taught science at the high-school level, and we don;t teach things as final truths. Students want to hear about the big questions, and we teach them what is best supported by the data, but we don't tell them that such are all final words on the matters. That would be as much a disservice to scientific education as teaching such fallacies as ID.
Your personal preference might be such multiverses with multi-chunches, but such idea would have to be presented as mostly speculative. Anyway, we digress.
I hoped that we would find evidence that the universe will bounce back, but it seems like the latest news is that this expansion is going to go forever. But whatever structure that could be found. I see no reason to think that someone is throwing any dice.
Jun 10 2013: I most certainly was exposed to that phrase in biology class in 1966---maybe my biology teacher just wasn't up-to-date with the refutation. You suggest I read the "wrong literature", I suggest you read books like that by Monton; you seem to read only literature in opposition to ID. I dislike the whole concept of religion and would never consider my willingness to consider the possibility of ID as religious dogma.
ID specialists are very inventive; they have invented a whole new journal where the authors undergo "peer review", so this is a hallowed "peer-review" journal. Should I accept what they write because it is a peer-review journal? Have you read any of the their papers?
You say "...fallacies as ID." What ID devotees want is that ID be presented as what it really is---a circumstantial evidence model awaiting validation through the standard scientific method. I reserve judgement until all the data is in. One key element of ID is irreducible parts; my gut tells me this is not a valid argument. However, when a scientist with the stature of Crick goes on the record calling the origin of life, "almost a miracle", that is hardly a refutation of ID.
Scientists who appeal to what I call the "God of Chance" offer only speculation about how the Big Bang occurred. As you must know the physics breaks down once you get to what? About 1x10 to the -45 seconds. Depending on whose math you believe black holes with their singularity are real; others argue that the math is wrong and that with the right math, you get a collapse to a neutron star.
Do you think we should expose students to black holes, string theory, the multiverse, extra dimensions, the false vacuum, etc.?Jun 10 2013: Hi Richard,
Check my comments. I make my own points. I don't quote from any books against ID. I have read what the IDers present in their blogs and videos. I have found that most of their stuff is repackaged arguments against science from classic creationist propaganda. They use the very same tactics. My opinions and judgements come from my own background in the sciences, and from interacting with IDers and their writings themselves.
I know that the IDers are very "inventive." I have read their "peer-reviewed" articles and when they don't suck they are meaningless. Should you accept what they write? Read them and make your own mind. Make sure you also read actual scientific papers.
I truly don't care one bit if IDers want to present ID as "a circumstantial evidence model awaiting validation through the standard scientific method." They have nothing going for it but fallacious thinking combined with scientific illiteracy.
How many times should I ask you to check what Crick actually said in context?
There's no god-of-chance. That's creationist parlance all-in-all. It is based on a false dichotomy perpetuated by creationists. Why do you think that it is either pure chance or gods? Why can't nature have properties that make it work the way it works just because that's how it works? Gravitation is not chance, magnetic fields are not chance, et cetera. yes. several processes involve some random processes, but such processes are not the whole thing. Scientists don't think that everything is just chance.
Do you really think that current and still in-the-works scientific stuff, like string theory and multiverses, are at the same level as ID? I repeat, you should read from reputable scientific sources. IDers have misinformed you enough.
Barry Palmer
Jun 9 2013: It seems to me that this whole discussion is ignoring the elephant in the room.
- +2
There are limits to human knowledge.
Suppose, whenever this subject is raised in school, we get extremely intellectually honest, and just say that no one knows how the universe began, and there is absolutely zero evidence regarding what might have occurred prior to the existence of this universe. In all probability, we will never be able to empirically confirm any hypothesis for the origin of this universe. Every hypothesis for the origin of this universe is essentially just speculation about the unknowable.
Even if science finds a way to initiate new universes, that would not necessarily confirm that this universe was initiated in the same manner.Jun 28 2013: what is the probability of a being existing that can create universes.
what is the probability it would create a universe exactly like this.
its impossible to calculate.
id is one big fallacious argument from ignorance. it should only be used as an example of faultu logic in philosophy or religious studies of how not to thibk and the flaws of religious thinking.Jun 24 2013: To me it's not really a reasonability question. Rather it's an aesthetics question.
Everette Hill's position in this debate is interesting to me but I stand on a different hill looking at her, if she doesn't mind the pun :)
Einstein said : Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler. To me the idea that the Universe got 'help' during creation or that it is an intelligent design with a 'purpose' seems to me simpler than the simple. If I have to wonder and imagine when something cannot be explained with certainty, the idea of ID (whether or not a veiled creationist story) is just not appealing to me. Rather that it all emerged from nothing without any so called intelligent intervention leaves more space in my imagination to befilled with rational explantion in future, if not now.
The reasonability of teaching issues particularly in light of US laws etc. are too local for a foreigner like me.
Jun 24 2013: I understand you are leaving space in your imagination for a more rational future explanation about the origin of the universe. That's a little confusing, wouldn't be more rational to imagine all explanations?
Further, I am not sure that the Intelligent Design is all that simpler then simple. If there was ID, then the who, when, what, why and where issues come into play. No sir. Not simpler at all.. At least not for me.
Jun 25 2013: It is certainly confusing Mike because you are looking for reason in imagining things where I am imagining a possible reason.
Actually the possibility that partcles emerging out of nothing, then condensing to form elements and the elements congealing to form living cells and then living cells making out few ounces of grey matter in human head and that grey matter developing a mind and that mind reflecting back on a possible purpose of it all is far more interesting to me. Someone intelligent doing it for purpose is a spoiler. :)
I respect your idea of simplicity. Mine is different.Jun 12 2013: Your question boils down to CAN ID BE TAUGHT. The answer is yes: Intelligent design was developed by a group of American creationists who revised their argument in the creation–evolution controversy to circumvent court rulings such as the United States Supreme Court's Edwards v. Aguillard decision, which barred the teaching of "Creation Science" in public schools on the grounds of breaching the separation of church and state.
However, it really is still a rose by any other name. The battle will aways be there from science purists and athiests of any and all degrees. There have been religious and scientific groups that are playing well together .... and some that do not and never will play nice.
We could change names ... open minds .... ignore ..... play nice ... etc .. However, egos would never allow that to occur. There must be a fight to prove that WE are right and THEY are wrong. To bad.
Jun 12 2013: That is one way of looking at Intelligent Design. Another interpretation could be that Theologian wanted to address 'creationism' in their spectrum and keep it out of the science arguments of how the universe came to be.
Intelligent design can be determined under scientific principals. It could be determined if there was or was't.
For example. Some studies have shown the rate of motion of the expanding universe is relatively constant.
That was not an expected finding. Then there is dark matter. Matter without mass? Why? Again, not an expected result. If they can find out about it, determine what it effect in the evolution of the universe. Was it there by accident or was it there to effect something like the constant rate of motion of the known mass of the universe. Some have theorized that there was a previous universe that collapsed and the mass of that universe exploded into this one. Did those folks facing the inevitable put all the info into the mix so our universe had what it needed to get us started? Was that the intelligent design?
I have no idea about any of this stuff. Because there is so many unanswered questions, can we categorically deny any alternative?
Jun 12 2013: When you put it like that, evolution and ID have possibilities of both being right. The prior existence could have designed a universe that does evolve. All possibilites, but evolution is still very valid.
Jun 13 2013: I haven't made myself clear. It's not evolution and ID. It's just evolution... not the Darwinian kind, but the universe coming into being kind. Our best guess is that there was a big bang and the universe started to form until it is what it is today. Did it just happen? Or where there some plans involved which is the ID position.Jun 14 2013: Mike you seem to be unaware that ID has been largely debunked where it is testable.
Dark matter, expanding universe, is following the evidence as per science.
Where is the evidence for a designer? Either the designer itself or evidence of its handy work?
Saying life and the universe is complex is not evidence.
Jun 14 2013: Hi Obey,
And I'll make the argument that because the universe is expanding at a mathematically precise rate is it the sign of an intelligent designer. Otherwise, if it was just accidental the math would be chaotic if at all discernible.
The universe and life maybe complex but it follows very define mathematical formula.
We know that almost everything we've learned seems to follow math. Astrophysicists
use formulas to predict events and they happen. Strange!Jun 15 2013: Math/Physics is a tool to model reality or abstract concepts. To count, measure or calculate numerically.
We can use math to for physical calculations such as how long it takes for an object to hit the ground when dropped from a certain height. And it is repeatable.
The fact that the laws of nature are not changing all the time is not evidence of a designer. What you suggest it simply an argument from ignorance.
Why would a universe without the hand of a designer be in constant flux? Do you know of other universes where this is the case?
Why is matter made from atoms. Why are atoms the way they are. Why is gravity the strength it is. Why is there gravity. If we don't know we don't know. Maybe we will never know.
Not understanding why something is the way it is is not an reason to plug in a supernatural god.
This is just god of the gaps all over.
And it really explains nothing. How did god make the universe the way it is and why. You are just guessing. And why is the universe creating god the way it is. How did the universe creating god come into immaterial existence (oxymoron) and why is it the way it is and not changing all the time. God must have a designer right or it would be chaos ?
I can do Newtons calculations in my sleep. Not any stranger than there being a universe in the first place.Jun 12 2013: Also from the perspective of separation of church in state.
ID is just a way to sneak in an unjustified alternative compatible with certain religious beliefs.
They fear that science undermines some aspects of there beliefs, because it does, because the evidence does. It doesn't mean a committee of other dimensional beings did not make everything look 13 billion years old and evolved, or that there are 12 of them standing beside me. But overall it requires a great deal of supernatural speculation, or accepting a theistic or deistic belief based on a naturalistic interpretation of the evidence. Like the Catholics and Anglicans accept much of science these days they just belief in lots of unverifiable stuff as well.
Jun 12 2013: The major problem with permitting ID to be taught in school is the "slippery slope" problem. As my dad has said, "You don't know how to use a tool unless you know at least three ways to abuse it." I am sure that religious zealots will undoubtedly try to slip in references to the Bible either intentionally or unintentionally and we will be right back to the teaching of religion in school.
Maybe ID should be left to college students.
Mike Colera
Jun 11 2013: # E. Driven
- +1
So, if I understand your post, scientist are looking at the universe looking for patterns, etc. Signs of how the universe got made.
Hmmm! isn't that what I have been saying all along?
We can all except that the universe is out there. How did it do that. Well, there was this here explosive or a very rapid expansion of gases and stuff flew all over forming galaxies, nebulas, stars of various sizes, shapes and whatever, etc. etc.
So, was it a blind shot... the 12 monkeys with computers typing shakespeare or is it the result of God as identified in the five books of Moses.
I don't know and neither does anyone else. At least, I don't think anyone knows for sure.
As far as a guess, I lean more toward Moses then the monkeys.
Cosmologists should be looking for patterns, and everything else to understand how it all came about.
That's science.
As far as guessing goes, I'll acknowledge the monkeys if you could see your way to at least a 1 % chance that there might have been, not a major input, some small inclining of Intelligent Design.
PS I still think it would be a fun exercise for a school... If a class is too much, at least put it out as a subject for the debate club.
Jun 12 2013: "Hmmm! isn't that what I have been saying all along?"
Nope. You keep insisting that if it's nor random it is intelligences. I keep saying that such is a false dichotomy. That I see no reason why such things as gravitation could not be completely natural even though it is not mere randomness. There's absolutely no reason to think that because something is not random it is therefore due to plans and intelligence. Not one.
You introduce a worse false dichotomy:
"12 monkeys with computers typing shakespeare or is it the result of God as identified in the five books of Moses."
Man, so you truly think that the only gods to consider under your first false dichotomy is some god from the abrahamic religions? There's many imaginary beings in human culture Mike. The biblical ones are just a few compared to every gods ever imagined, and not truly among the best ones to imagine.
I repeat, it's not 12 monkeys. It's whatever way in which nature works. If it has both random processes and then processes that are not random, like gravitation and magnetism, for example, then that's all we can say. Inferring gods out of patterns that clearly say "this is the way things work" is far from confirming intelligences. The intelligence that you infer from patterns is no different from old tribes thinking that volcanoes were angry gods. Pure and imaginary anthropomorphism.
The only way I could come close to 1% that intelligence might have been involved is if we found evidence for such a thing. For as long as there's nothing but fallacious thinking akin to what those old tribes did, I remain out of it.
Jun 12 2013: You had me properly chastised until you spoke.of nature with random processes and not random processes gravity and electromagnetism. So, forget Intelligent design. It's nature. You know the old adage, 'you can't fool mother nature.'
Gravity et. el. are complex forces that extend across the universe. So, you would have to agree that nature is a sentient being to have created these processes.
As I see it our lack of understanding is semantics not dichotomy.
I have always said that I don't know the answer to how the universe came to be.
I have a problem to believe that is was just a random set of circumstances that came together at just the right time, in just the right way to create all that is the known universe and all the unknown.
People who are the experts in Creationism tell us that it is a theological matter and not a scientific explanation of the universe. So, it's not creationism and not just one big accident (I think).
What I have always said that the answer is not 0 and it's not 100, it's in 1 through 99.
Jun 12 2013: "When you add everything in the universe up, you get 0" -Michio Kaku
We can have positives be cancelled out by negative forces such as dark energy, antimatter, and gravity. So why exactly would a god create nothing from nothing?Jun 12 2013: Hi Mike, I also don't know how it got started and why the foundational things are the way they are. Or even why water is a polar molecule so we get snowflakes.
Why in some senses is a difficult one.
I guess what science is pointing to is what we see now didn't happen overnight and the universe is complex.Everything we understand really well in nature doesn't seem to need agency.
Once there was stuff and gravity, I don't find it that difficult to conceptualise the first generation of stars creating heavier elements that formed planets etc etc.
When you just happen to be the one born with some disease or struck by lighting, assigning meaning to it is so human, but maybe there is no intent. Stuff happens.
A lot that happens in nature is not planned. Why are these particular water molecules in this cup of water. The probability of this particular combination of water molecules being here is minuscule. Yet here they are.
I guess with the stuff we don't kno or theists ignore or refute you can inject a god or any number of supernatural explanations. Maybe the universe was created by ghosts from a previous big bang. There is just as much evidence for this as there is that yaweh or allah or bob (a relatively unknown godling) or the dragons of creation did it.
so theists can believe what they like. I guess the point is there is little reason to believe if the truth matters to you.
Our incredulity at the universe, our ignorance, our inability to comprehend the quantum and cosmic, our hyperactive agency detection is also not evidence or a good reason to believe in gods and goddesses, often defined in ways that may be impossible to exist, or know, or verify.
Not being able to disprove that there is an invisible universe creating dragon in my kitchen is not a good reason to believe.
Actually most theists who lived must be wrong, as there are so many mutually exclusive god concepts. Also the answer may be there are no gods. Everything is pretty pointing to this,Jun 11 2013: Richard Moody Jr. stated: "While somewhat out of place in this forum, I do suggest as you do that any intelligence, no matter how advanced, can "know" everything. What follows is that if knowledge is power such an entity cannot be all powerful.
Richard, what if, what we perceive as complex, becomes in the knowing, as a simple thing? What took Issac Newton a long time to figure out is taught in one class of Physics. All knowledge builds upon other knowledge, until we see clearly the lesson. If a whole Universe can resolve from the creation of a single hydrogen atom, how complicated is the act of creating the atom in the first place? We don't know yet. But, I don't think it is beyond our reckoning
I think that knowledge can be power, if there exists a path where thought, which has no weight and occupies no space, can have an impact on matter, space-time, and energy.
Perhaps, one day, we will be able to project our thoughts to one another. After that it should be a small leap to pushing things around with our minds. We will need no prosthetic devices to develop our thoughts in reality.
Maybe we won't need reality any more.
Jun 11 2013: As I approach senility it is scary to me the mixing of reality and fantasy; been there done that. With the advances made in special effects we could duplicate with absolute fidelity the visions of prophets. Consider The Revelation of Saint John the Devine. Maybe John's visions were caused by millions of viewers watching a movie of John's visions!
One test I've never heard tried is to have an identical twin on the ground and one in space; then have them shown different cards used as a standard test of ESP to see if: A)They correctly identify the same card, & B)Whether it is simultaneous or whether there is a time delay.
It is an interesting prospect to believe we will communicate with telepathy and have telekinetic powers in the future.
Jun 12 2013: Gee Richard. I think I lost you somewhere.
Such things as you talk about are far in the future. We don't have such activity taking place around here that I can see or know about.
I'm not talking about Hollywood special effects in movies or science fiction books. Maybe this stuff is a bit over your head. I should probably quit commenting on this subject. I don't want any to think I'm some kind of head wrangler or twisting them up to the point of senility.
If your interested in some real heady stuff, have you read "Chariot's of the Gods", or the book of Daniel?
You don't smoke pot do you?Jun 10 2013: Just curious , what is the difference between , creationism (as described by religion ) vs ID ?
Why ID need to attached with Physics or Statistics? Why not with Biology or say Philosophy ?
Jun 10 2013: The difference is that the overwhelming majority of scientists reject Creationism; some like me reject the religious (usually the Biblical version) view of ID and favor one that is testable, and, if successful, would stand apart from Creationism.
Your suggestion that ID would more appropriate for biology classes or philosophy classes is a good suggestion.
Right now I see only circumstantial arguments in favor of ID, not scientific evidence; what Monton provided was a test of ID that many scientists would agree was a valid test of ID. Until or unless ID provides testable predictions, unambiguous data in support of ID, etc., it does not constitute science.
What Ed Long suggests is that we should entertain many divergent views that were discredited. Should we teach our students how science has been constructed? I present in an article in press called, "Sacrificing Truth on the Altar of Science" a dozen or more instances where scientists have corrupted/violated the scientific method. Should we teach that science is created by humans and that they have a variety of motives many of them not particularly noble?
Jun 10 2013: Richard, to assume the ignobility of man will continue forever is a far reaching leap of faith.
We may overcome our selfishness and come together in a form of scientific unity that would rival the accommodations in heaven itself. Who among us can predict the future?
Jun 10 2013: Interesting about predicting the future. We need only consider the loss of civility over the past 40 years (roughly coinciding with the computer revolution) to suggest, if anything, we are becoming far less noble. Consider the fact that we have to invent a phrase to describe the systemic loss of civility on the internet, flaming, to describe an obnoxious behavior, or the recognition that bullying has been raised to an art form on the internet.
From this morass of lost civility, "we may overcome our selfishness and come together in a form of scientific unity that would rival the accommodations in heaven itself." The data suggests otherwise.Jun 14 2013: Hi Richard
Thanks for your thoughts.
I have no disagreement about encouraging divergent views , ideas, thought unless it is threat for others. In the education system of my country students has to study Religion as one of their subject up to 10th standard. Up to 8th standard it's mandatory for all students. So coming from that background inclusion of ID does not sound too crazy for me :)
However I am just giving an example what happens when kids (I know your suggestion is not for kids) when they study science & religion side by side in school. My younger son who is studying 2nd standard , asked me few days back "whether Adam , was modern person like us or he was someone like prehistoric human being living in jungle "? It was real difficult question for me , as I didn't want influence his thinking process with my thought process too much.
Yes, I agree there are scientists who manipulated scientific methods to establish their hypothesis or theories....interestingly science has got that beauty of catching them up and discarding them due to their dishonesty.
Peter Law
Jun 10 2013: Hi Salim.
- +1
Creationists take the bible as the Word of God. As such it is infallible & can be trusted as a reference book for science.
ID proponents do not reference the bible at all. Their view is that the natural world is entirely too complex to have come about by the presently popular chance & natural selection. For instance, the coding in DNA is so complex that a 'mind' is the only possible source.
Of course, if the ID guys are right, then we have to hunt around for the source of the intelligence. This has been deemed 'religious'; but is beyond the remit of the current ID movement.
Jun 10 2013: "...the coding in DNA is so complex that a 'mind' is the only possible source." ~ Peter Law
Peter, All that is in the Universe can be attributed to the creation of a single atom, hydrogen. It requires one other attribute, gravity. Gravity is inherent in the atom Hydrogen so it clumps together, forms a sun. The conversion of hydrogen takes place due the combination of hydrogen, held tightly together with gravity.
Form this simple interaction, all the elements of the Universe are created. How these elements associate with one another, according to the separate attributes, is a simple matter of chemistry, which is well within the grasp of the mind of humans.
It's really not that complicated. It becoming more apparent within the confines of science that RNA was the first bio-molecular configuration that can easily be put together by both energy and the elements under the right environmental conditions. It's really not that complicated. Water, a supposed creation of God, is easily chemically created. Light (energy), also considered a God creation is produce by modem men in huge amounts.
It appears that everything attributed to the creation skills of God, can and are being created by Humans. Does this imply that human beings are capable of possessing the same creative skills as a God? Does God have to be omnipotent and all powerful? Is it possible that we can share Godlike power alongside a God of creation one day?
Is it possible, under the light of ID that God is nothing more than an alien species, perhaps similar to Humans and possesses a super science which enables these/this being to produce the power of creation, one where a simple hydrogen atom can be created our of still smaller particles we know little about, in sufficient quantities to create a whole Universe?
Considering the Hydrogen atom, how the Universe came to be is not a complex question, nor how chemicals interact with one another. It's a question of who created and how, the first atom.
Jun 10 2013: One of my fantasies is that humanity could evolve for a billion years. What could such a civilization do? Could it reach backwards in time and tweak the starting conditions of a universe that could support life? The computer simulation model makes sense to me because I have witnessed a "miracle"; unfortunately it could only be recovered by hypnosis. I observed a primitive chess computer with the transient ability to see 15 moves ahead in seconds play both sides of the board for 80-100 moves. This intelligence provided me a simple mechanism to see how far ahead it was calculating. It is my belief that, briefly, I communicated with an intelligence far superior to ours. The impression I got at the time was that this intelligence looked at the programming, learned chess in a matter of seconds and took over the board.
Part of my belief in ID is that I have witnessed this "miracle". It has no logical explanation because the odds against it being do to chance are about on the same level as those estimates of the fine-tuning arguments in physics.Jun 11 2013: While somewhat out of place in this forum, I do suggest as you do that any intelligence, no matter how advanced, can "know" everything. What follows is that if knowledge is power such an entity cannot be all powerful.Jun 11 2013: Hi John,
Not sure why you brought up God ?
On the subject of hydrogen; perhaps you can help me. On earth hydrogen obeys the gas laws. Simply put, it expands to fill the space allocated to it. Is there a different gas law in outer space? Why should hydrogen implode under it's own gravitational pull in space, when it does the exact opposite on earth ? Surely in the relative vacuum of space it would disperse all the more rapidly, especially if motivated by a Big Bang?
Always wondered !
:-)Jun 14 2013: Thanks Peter for your reply.
Yes , that's the point where religion and ID converges.....I mean in the quest of knowing the "source of intelligence" that's what I feel.
Have a good day :)Jun 10 2013: ID is creationism repackaged to look as if it were science.
Jun 10 2013: Yes it was repackaged as ID; that part I reject as obfuscation. However, that still doesn't alter the belief of those in favor of ID who say it should be divorced from religion (as far as I am concerned).
Jun 11 2013: That's just pretence. They have a religious agenda and it shows. If they didn't then they would divorce their methods from those used by their prior generations of creationists. They would renounce the straw-men of scientific findings, and they would stop blaming everything on Darwin and materialism. They would not be behind almost every attempt at putting laws in place to allow for their religious viewpoints to be taught in science classes. If they were about science, they would do science and let it run its course.Jun 11 2013: It is an attempt to package ID to serve as a platform for the presentation of Creationism.
The attempt merely evolves into an evolutionary explanation, expanded with the idea of extraterrestrial origins.
Everett Hill
Jun 10 2013: If we only teach what has been scientifically researched and proven to be true, we can eliminate a whole bunch of science topics that have been proven wrong and only teach what is "right" at the moment.
- +1
ID provides a point/counter-point argument that brings up good discussion in class about what is accurate and correct based on what we know and don't know. Last I checked, we still teach flat earth theory, the sun revolving around the earth, and various other historical theories that are know to be wrong. Shoot, the new discoveries of the atom mean that what was taught not long ago is now wrong based on new information.
Why can't we discuss the changing views of these issues and state them as such?
That is the point of school after all right? To cause you to think? To force you to come to grips with issues you might not otherwise wrestle with and make intelligent decisions about them. Why can't there be a little bit of mystery and intrigue left in the world?
Jun 10 2013: "Why can't we discuss the changing views of these issues and state them as such?"
We can and we do. As long as there's scientific data and actual scientific work about them. ID is just creationism disguised as if it were science. I have used ID in university courses. I would ask the students to identify the flaws in such and such, and most of my students, I am proud to report, catch such problems quite quickly. Should we do that in science class in high-school and earlier? I don't think that creationists would like that. Here, an example from the creation-whatever international: What are the flaws in this argument? Why is this not considered science? Why is this considered poor science? Is evolutionary theory really what this paragraph describes?
Excellent as aids to see if the students understood the scientific theories, to see if they understand logic, but not very good for ID and other forms of creationism.
Jun 11 2013: This is the kind of discussion I was thinking was appropriate for the high school students. It is a real world discussion which can be addressed appropriately in a class setting.Jun 9 2013: You just cannot divorce ID from its religious affiliation, just as you cannot divorce a child from his mother... but let's say you could, I can't see a different goal than religious indoctrination, because the moment you open the possibility of an intelligent creator behind the universe you stop talking science and start talking religion.
Peter Law
Jun 9 2013: Ideally we should teach Physics in Physics class. That would include all that can be tested & verified. No comment need be made about god, or evolution, as all you would get would be the teacher's worldview.
- +1
This would allow much more class time for productive work & arm the students with more useful knowledge. I'm sure that those who are interested can access the Origins arguments in their own time; but real knowledge is what they will need to earn a crust & move industry forward.
Jun 10 2013: Don't worry Pete, evolution is not taught in physics, but in biology. Nothing to do with world-views though. It's all about the science.
It worries me when I read someone say that students should only learn "useful" science. Should we drop art from school? Should we not nurture our student's curiosity?


text:
There are currently no items in your cart.
100 Carols for Choirs
- Look inside(1) Listen (4)
- Ensemble:
- Format:
- Series:
Mostly SATB choir & piano
Composed by David Willcocks and John Rutter (1945-). This edition: paperback. Mixed Voices. ...for Choirs Collections. Advent, Christmas, Epiphany, Easter, Sacred, Secular. Choral score. 388 pages. Published by Oxford University Press (OU.9780193532274).
Item Number: OU.9780193532274
ISBN 9780193532274. Advent, Christmas, Epiphany, Easter, Sacred, Secular. 10 x 7 inches.
74 of the most popular items from Carols for Choirs 1, 2 and 3 in one volume, plus 26 pieces new to the series. The volume contains both accompanied and unaccompanied items, and the Order of Service for a Festival of Nine Lessons and Carols. Orchestral and brass ensemble accompaniments for many of the items are available on hire from the publisher. For details see Instrumental carol accompaniments section.
- Adam Lay Ybounden Performed by Peter Warlock
- All My Heart This Night Rejoices Performed by J.G. Eberling
- Alleluya, a new work is come on hand Performed by Peter Wishart
- Angels, From The Realms Of Glory Performed by French Trad. Arr. Willcocks
- Angelus Ad Virginem Performed by 14 Cent. Irish Arr. Willcocks
- As with Gladness Men of Old Performed by German Chorale Arr. Willcocks
- Ave plena gracia Performed by Sir Peter Maxwell Davies
- Away In A Manger Performed by W.J. Kirkpatrick Arr. Willcocks
- A Babe Is Born Performed by William Matthias
- Birthday carol Performed by David Willcocks
- The Cherry Tree Carol Performed by English Trad. Arr. Willcocks
- Child In A Manger Performed by Celtic Trad. Arr. Rutter
- A Child Is Born In Bethlehem Performed by Scheidt Ed. Willcocks
- Christmas Night Performed by 16th Cent. French Arr. Rutter
- Coventry Carol Performed by 16th Cent. English
- Cradle Song Performed by Flemish Trad. Arr. Rutter
- The Crown of Roses Performed by Peter Ilyich Tchaikovsky
- Deck the Hall Performed by Welsh Trad. Arr. Wllcocks
- Ding Dong! Merrily on high Performed by 16th Cent. French Arr. Willcocks
- The First Nowell Performed by English Trad. Arr. Willcocks
- Gabriel to Mary came Performed by 14th Cent. Trad. Arr. Willcocks
- Gabriel's Message Performed by Basque Carol Arr. Willcocks
- God Rest You Merry, Gentlemen Performed by English Trad. Arr. Willcocks
- Good King Wenceslas Performed by Piae Cantones Arr. Willcocks
- A Great and Mighty Wonder Performed by German Harm. Praetorius
- Hail! Blessed Virgin Mary Performed by Italian Harm. Wood
- Hark! The Herald-Angels Sing Performed by Mendelssohn Arr. Willcocks
- He is born the divine Christ-child Performed by French Trad. Arr. Willcocks
- Here We Come A-Wassailing Performed by English Trad. Arr. Rutter
- The Holly and the Ivy Performed by English Trad. Arr. Walford Davies
- Hush! My dear, lie still and slumber Performed by French Trad. Arr. Willcocks
- I saw a maiden Performed by Basque Noel Arr. Pettman
- I Saw Three Ships Performed by English Trad. Arr. Rutter
- I Wonder as I Wander Performed by Appalachian Coll. Niles Arr. Rutter
- Il est ne le divin Enfant Performed by French Trad. Arr. Willcocks
- In dulci jubilo Performed by German Trad. Arr. Pearsall
- In The Bleak Mid-Winter Performed by Gustav Holst
- Infant Holy, Infant Lowly Performed by Polish Trad. Arr. Willcocks
- The Infant King Performed by Basque Noel Arr. Willcocks
- It Came Upon the Midnight Clear Performed by English Trad. Arr. Willcocks
- Jesus child Performed by John Rutter
- Jesus Christ Is Risen Today Performed by Lyra Davidica Arr. Willcocks
- Jesus Christ The Apple Tree Performed by Elizabeth Poston
- Jingle, bells Performed by J. Pierpont Arr. Willcocks
- Joy To The World Performed by Lowell Mason Arr. Rutter
- Joys seven Performed by English Trad Arr. Cleobury
- King Jesus Hath A Garden Performed by Dutch Trad. Harm Wood
- Kings of Orient Performed by J.H. Hopkin Arr. Willcocks
- Lo he comes with clouds descending Performed by 18th Cent. English Arr. Willcocks
- Lo How A Rose E'er Blooming Performed by German Harm. Praetorius
- Longfellow's carol Performed by Allen Percival
- Lord Of The Dance Performed by American Adapted Carter Arr. Willcocks
- Lute-book Lullaby Performed by W. Ballet Arr. Shaw
- A Maiden Most Gentle Performed by French Trad. Arr. Carter
- Mary's Lullaby Performed by John Rutter
- A Merry Christmas Performed by English Trad. Arr. Warrell
- Myn lyking Performed by R.R. Terry
- Nativity Carol Performed by John Rutter
- A New Year Carol Performed by Benjamin Britten
- O Come, All Ye Faithful Performed by J.F. Wade Arr. Willcocks
- O Come, O Come, Emmanuel Performed by 15th Cent. French Arr. Willcocks
- O Little One Sweet Performed by German Harm. J.S. Bach
- O Little Town of Bethlehem Performed by English Trad. Harm. Vaughan Williams Arr. Armstrong
- O Queen of Heaven Performed by Timothy Rogers
- Of the Father's heart Begotten Performed by Piae Cantones Arr. Willcocks
- Once, as I remember Performed by 17th Cent. Italian Harm. Wood
- Once In Royal David's City Performed by H.J. Gauntlett Harm. Mann Arr. Willcocks
- Out of Your Sleep Performed by Richard Rodney Bennett
- Past Three A Clock Performed by English Trad. Arr. Wood
- Personet hodie Performed by German 1360 Arr. Holst
- Quelle est Cette Odeur Agreable? Performed by French Trad. Arr. Willcocks
- Quem pastores laudavere Performed by 14th Cent. German Arr. Rutter
- Rise Up, Shepherd, and Follow Performed by Spiritual Arr. Rutter
- Sans Day Carol Performed by Cornish Trad. Arr. Rutter
- See Amid The Winter's Snow Performed by John Goss Arr. Willcocks
- The Shepherd's Farewell Performed by Hector Berlioz
- Shepherds, in the field abiding Performed by French Trad. Arr. Willcocks
- Shepherds left their flocks a-straying Performed by 14th Cent. German Arr. Rutter
- Shepherd's Pipe Carol Performed by John Rutter
- Silent Night Performed by Franz Gruber Arr. Willcocks
- Sing aloud on this day! Performed by German 1360 Arr. Holst
- Sir Christemas Performed by William Matthias
- A Spotless Rose Performed by Herbert Howells
- Star Carol Performed by John Rutter
- Still, Still, Still Performed by German Arr. Ledger
- Stille Nacht Performed by Franz Gruber Arr. Willcocks
- Sussex Carol Performed by English Trad. Arr. Willcocks
- The Three Kings Performed by Peter Cornelius Arr. Atkins
- The Truth From Above Performed by English Trad. Arr. Vaughan Williams
- The Twelve Days of Christmas Performed by English Trad. Arr. Rutter
- There Is A Flower Performed by John Rutter
- There Is No Rose Performed by Anon. C. 1420 Ed. Stevens
- This Christmas night Performed by Malcolm Williamson
- This Joyful Eastertide Performed by Dutch Carol Arr. Wood
- Tomorrow Shall Be My Dancing Day Performed by English Trad. Arr. Willcocks
- Unto Us Is Born a Son Performed by Piae Cantones Arr. Willcocks
- Up! Good Christen folk, and listen Performed by Piae Cantones Harm. Woodward
- Wassail Song Performed by English Trad. Arr. Vaughan Williams
- Wexford Carol Performed by Irish Trad. Arr. Rutter
- What cheer? Performed by William Walton
- When Christ Was Born Performed by Reginald Jacques
- Whence Is That Goodly Fragrance Flowing? Performed by French Trad. Arr. Willcocks
- While Shepherds Watched Their Flocks Performed by Este's Psalter Arr. Willcocks
- Ye Choirs Of New Jerusalem Performed by H.J. Gauntlett Arr. Willcocks
- A Festival of Nine Lessons and Carols
Buy Together
100 Carols for Choirs
Vocal Warm-Ups
Buy both for $40.90
Customers Who Bought 100 Carols for Choirs Also Bought:
John Rutter Carols
The Christmas Caroling Songbook
An A Cappella Christmas
John Rutter Anthem Collection
European Sacred Music
The King's Singers Book of Rounds, ...
The Shaw-Parker Book Of Christmas C...
Carols for Choirs 4
Folder - Legacy Choral
Carols for Choirs 2
Requiem Rutter
Still, Still, Still (Austrian Carol...
$2.25 $2.07
100 Carols for Choirs
King's Singers Christmas (Collectio...
Lennon & McCartney Collection
English Church Music, Volume 1: Ant...
Christmas in Song
To play the media you will need to update yourFlash plugin.
100 Carols for Choirs
- Explain exactly why you liked or disliked the product. Do you like the artist? Is the transcription accurate? Is it a good teaching tool?
- Consider writing about your experience and musical tastes. Are you a beginner who started playing last month? Do you usually like this style of music?
- Feel free to recommend similar pieces if you liked this piece, or alternatives if you didn't.
- Be respectful of artists, readers, and your fellow reviewers. Please do not use inappropriate language, including profanity, vulgarity, or obscenity.
- Avoid disclosing contact information (email addresses, phone numbers, etc.), or including URLs, time-sensitive material or alternative ordering information.
- We cannot post your review if it violates these guidelines. If you have any suggestions or comments on the guidelines, please email us.
- All submitted reviews become the licensed property of Sheet Music Plus and are subject to all laws pertaining thereto. If you believe that any review contained on our site infringes upon your copyright, please email us.
- Read Sheet Music Plus's complete Privacy Policy
100 Carols for Choirs
Tell a friend (or remind yourself) about this product. We'll instantly send an email containing product info and a link to it. You may also enter a personal message.
We do not use or store email addresses from this form for any other purpose than sending your share email.
Read our Privacy Policy.
Make a wish list for gifts, suggest standard repertoire, let students know which books to buy, boast about pieces you've mastered: Music Lists are as unique as the musician! Easily share your music lists with friends, students, and the world.
To create a music list, please sign in.Existing Accounts
Sign In and Add to My Music ListNew Accounts
Top Selling Choral Titles
Savior, Like a Shepherd Lead Us
$2.05 $1.89
Cantata - Dona Nobis Pacem
Folder - Legacy Choral
Think of Me and Remember
$2.10 $1.93
Vocal Warm-Ups
Hold On to the Rock
$2.05 $1.89
10,000 Reasons (Bless the Lord)
$2.15 $1.98
Opera Choruses
You Are Mine
$2.20 $2.02
$2.25 $2.07
Baby Born in Bethlehem
$2.10 $1.93
St. Matthew Passion, BWV 244
The Prayer
$1.95 $1.79
Mary, Did You Know?
$2.20 $2.02
Missa Cellensis Hob.XXII:8 'Mass fo...
The Marriage of Figaro, KV 492
Gather by the River to Pray
$2.10 $1.93
Carmina Burana
Christmas Grace
$2.05 $1.89
The Ground
$2.25 $2.07
Cups (When I'm Gone)
$1.95 $1.79
The Lord is My Shepherd (Psalm 23)
$2.95 $2.71
The Armed Man
$1.95 $1.79
In Christ Alone
$2.15 $1.98
Sure on this Shining Night
$1.90 $1.75
Were You There on That Christmas Ni...
$1.95 $1.79
Christmas Sanctus
$2.05 $1.89
Look At The World
$1.90 $1.75
Text Me Merry Christmas
$1.95 $1.79
The Lord Bless You and Keep You
$2.05 $1.89
Best of Gospel Hymnal (Book)
How Beautiful
$2.10 $1.93
Morning Star
$2.05 $1.89
God Bless America
$1.95 $1.79
Ding-a Ding-a Ding
$2.00 $1.84
100 Carols for Choirs
Mass in b minor, BWV 232
See Similar Sheet Music
More by this Composer: David Willcocks Sheet Music David Willcocks Voice Sheet Music David Willcocks Choir Sheet Music David Willcocks Piano Accompaniment Sheet Music David Willcocks 4-Part Sheet Music David Willcocks Mixed Choir Sheet Music David Willcocks SATB Sheet Music
Instrument: Voice Sheet Music Choir Sheet Music Piano Accompaniment Sheet Music
Ensemble: 4-Part Music Mixed Choir Music SATB Music
Genre: Caroling Books Sheet Music Classical Sheet Music Easter Sheet Music
Format: Vocal Score
Series: ...for Choirs Collection


text:
Homeschool Curriculum - Get High School Diploma Through Homeschooling
High School Diploma ProgramHigh school diploma program offered by MUST High School surpasses the similar traditional programs offered by world-class high schools across the globe in terms of ease & flexibility, affordability, quickness and quality of education. To read more about why MUST High School is the first choice of working adults and students across the globe, please Click here
|Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Refund Policy Copyright © 2008- MUST HighSchool. All rights reserved.
|MUST--Truly Global Education
|You must be currently employed or must have at least one year of work experience. If you are not employed and have no work experience you will be required to provide adequate supportive information during your initial interview to briefly demonstrate to the evaluation committee your capability for enrollment.
|If English is not your native language, admission evaluation committee after interviewing you may ask you to pass the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL), the Test of English as an International Communication (TOEIC), the Berlitz® Online English Proficiency Exam or the International English Language Testing System (IELTS)
Course Details for High School Diploma Program:
There are 16 courses in high school diploma program. You will be required to pass all the courses (other than those for which you transfer credits or get prior learning credits).
Details of all the courses in high school diploma program are given below.
The General Education Development Test, or GED, is a test that certifies a person's high school academic level and is taken by people who have not obtained a high school diploma. It is a common mistake to consider the GED to be a diploma; in fact those who pass the GED test receive a Certificate of General Educational Development.
Before taking the GED test, individuals must first take pretests to show their level of competency, and score at least within the 40th percentile of high school students nationwide. Test takers, in the US, are recommended to join the federal and state adult education program where students review high school material in a traditional classroom setting.
The GED test itself is made up of 5 individual tests together called a "testing battery". Each test takes between 70 to 90 minutes to compete, 12 hours in total. Subjects include
|Language Arts
|Social Studies
|Reading I & II
|Mathematics I & II


text:
Read our comment standards
StarTribune.com welcomes and encourages readers to comment and engage in substantive, mutually respectful exchanges over news topics. Commenters must follow our Terms of Use.
- Keep it civil and stay on topic.
- No profanity, vulgarity, racial slurs or personal attacks.
- Comments with web links are not permitted.
- Comments that violate the above will be removed. Repeat violators may lose their commenting privileges on StarTribune.com.
Comments will be reviewed before being published.
Sponsored Links
From Around the Web
More from Star Tribune
- Fire truck flies Confederate flag alongside U.S. flag in Albert Lea holiday parade
- Greece in uncharted territory after referendum 'no' vote
- I own guns. But I hate the NRA.
- Some bicyclists: Are they really jerks? Or just fast riders?
- In farm country, tainted water is 'just the way it is'
- As D.C. bickers, Minnesotans suffer from the gridlock
More from Video
Evening forecast: Severe weather possible overnight
Afternoon Star Tribune Local Twin Cities (Minneapolis/St. Paul) Weather Video Forecast
Afternoon forecast: Breezy and sticky
Afternoon Star Tribune Local Twin Cities (Minneapolis/St. Paul) Weather Video Forecast
Morning forecast: Breezy and sticky
Morning Star Tribune Local Twin Cities (Minneapolis/St. Paul) Weather Video Forecast
Meet the couple who began the fight for gay marriage
More than four decades before the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the right of same-sex couples to marry nationwide, Jack Baker and Michael McConnell applied for a marriage license and were wed in Minnesota.
Pelfrey agreed with decision to pull him
Twins righthander Mike Pelfrey says he couldn't blame manager Paul Molitor for lifting him in the fifth inning despite holding a lead on Saturday.


text:
Regular meetups are held in the bay area – see the Facebook page and the Meetup.com page. There is also a New York meetup group (see the Facebook page) and more coming soon.
If you'd like to start a new meetup group, please sign up as a seasteading ambassador and contact us.
May – August 2012
A landmark event featuring the vanguards of the seasteading movement. Network with fellow entrepreneurs, ocean law experts, maritime professionals, industrial leaders, investors, and seasteading enthusiasts for two days of cutting-edge presentations. Enjoy catered meals and refreshments throughout the day at the luxurious Le Méridien Hotel in San Francisco's financial district. Show your support for The Seasteading Institute by participating in an exclusive dinner at historic Forbes Island, a 700 ton floating island complete with palm trees, waterfall and lighthouse. Close the weekend out in style with a sunset dinner cruise around the San Francisco Bay.
For more information and to register, visit the main conference page.
The Seasteading Institute will be attending this year's Ephemerisle.
Ephemerisle is a floating festival on the Sacramento Delta originally started by The Seasteading Institute, and now crowd-sourced and community operated independently of the Institute. Last year 300-400 people passed through the festival over the course of the weekend. Participants are encouraged to "bring their own land," which means arrive on a houseboat, sailboat, raft, or other structure that provides a floating home for the course of the event. We hope attendees of The Seasteading Conference will spend the following weekend with us celebrating in a temporary floating village. More information about how to participate can be found on Ephemerisle's Wiki page and Facebook pages.
Seasteading Enthusiast Steven Fowkes is opening his home for our this San Francisco Bay area meetup. Please visit the meetup page to RSVP.
Steven Fowkes address is 22560 Poppy Drive, Cupertino, CA.
This gathering will be held outdoors, so bring layers in case the temp drops in the evening.
Chef Joni will create a simple gourmet meal, served buffet style. A plate of food costs $15 per person, which should compare to the cost at a restaurant. If you have food issues, send them to Steve (email@example.com). The entree will be chicken and there will be plenty of veggies.
The house is three minutes from the Highway 85 Interstate 280 interchange. Exit off 280 at Foothill (the first exit north of 85). If you are coming north on 85, take the 280N exit, stay in the rightmost lane and immediately exit onto Foothill. Turn left at the light. If you are coming north on 280, watch the merge! The Foothill exit is very close to 85 and there is only 99.44 feet to make the merge for the Foothill exit.
There is a waterfall-creek feature next to the patio which makes a great place to hang out and talk. The creek will be running by 6:00 PM, if you get there early.


text:
In primates the arms are richly adapted for both climbing and for more skilled, manipulative tasks. The ball and socket shoulder joint allows for movement of the arms in a wide circular plane, while the presence of two forearm bones which can rotate around each other allows for additional range of motion at this level.
The humerus is the (upper) arm bone. It joins with the scapula above at the shoulder joint (or glenohumeral joint) and with the ulna and radius below at the elbow joint.
The fascia merges with the periosteum (outer bone layer) of the humerus. The compartments contain muscles which are innervated by the same nerve and perform the same action.
Two other muscles are considered to be partially in the arm:
The structures which smell through the cubital fossa are vital. The order from which they pass into the forearm are as follows, from medial to lateral:
The radial nerve, which is from the fifth cervical spinal nerve to the first thoracic spinal nerve, originates as the continuation of the posterior cord of the brachial plexus. This nerve enters the lower triangular space (an imaginary space bounded by, amongst others, the shaft of the humerus and the triceps brachii) of the arm and lies deep to the triceps brachii. Here it travels with a deep artery of the arm (the profunda brachii), which sits in the radial groove of the humerus. This fact is very important clinically as a fracture of the bone at the shaft of the bone here can cause lesions or even transections in the nerve.
Other nerves passing through give no supply to the arm. These include:
The brachial artery continues to the cubital fossa in the anterior compartment of the arm. It travels in a plane between the biceps and triceps muscles, the same as the median nerve and basilic vein. It is accompanied by venae comitantes (accompanying veins). It gives branches to the muscles of the anterior compartment. The artery is in between the median nerve and the tendon of the biceps muscle in the cubital fossa. It then continues into the forearm.
The profunda brachii travels through the lower triangular space with the radial nerve. From here onwards it has an intimate relationship with the radial nerve. They are both found deep to the triceps muscle and are located on the spiral groove of the humerus. Therefore fracture of the bone may not only lead to lesion of the radial nerve, but also haematoma of the internal structures of the arm. The artery then continues on to anastamose with the recurrent radial branch of the brachial artery, providing a diffuse blood supply for the elbow joint.
The basilic vein travels on the medial side of the arm and terminates at the level of the seventh rib.
The cephalic vein travels on the lateral side of the arm and terminates as the axillary vein. It passes through the deltopectoral triangle, a space between the deltoid and the pectoralis major muscles.


text:
Are You Just Trying to Get By?
As I was flipping through a health and fitness magazine a few days ago I stumbled across an ad that instantly grabbed my attention. The ad read, "I don't ignore my sweet tooth I outsmart it". The photo was of a woman sipping on an artificially sweetened drink (ick!) walking past a cupcake stand with the hashtag "tiny win". Ugh! For some reason that whole message totally bothered me.
Quit Dieting, Start Living.To promise not to do a thing is the surest way in the world to make a body want to go and do that very thing. – Mark Twain Diets don't work. If you've ever been on one before (who hasn't?) you probably already know this. In fact, if you want to...
Social Media is how I share motivational, educational and inspirational posts each day with my community and fans. I share recipes, cooking tips, and introduce amazing partners that help shape a healthy lifestyle. Look for the hashtag #liveitshareit on your favorite social media platform.
Contact Kate
Meet Kate
Health Coach. Lifestyle Expert. Chef.
Kate Horning is an emerging thought leader in health and nutrition. She is an ambassador on the leading edge of a new generation that challenges established ideas, looking for better ways to achieve healthier, happier lives.
Kate's journey began with a book report at age thirteen, to be allowed by her mother to become a vegetarian. That sparked a passion that has led to studying and living nutrition for over a decade. She uses her own life and her own journey as the blueprint, but the message is to create a healthy lifestyle that fits YOUR needs. And while Kate focuses on plant-based foods personally, the information and structure she provides is equally applicable no matter what your health or fitness beliefs.
Join the Live It. Share It. Lifestyle
All Rights Reserved. Copyright © 2015 Simply Nutritious by Kate, LLC