text:
Friday, April 17, 2009
Easter festivities
Happy belated Easter everyone !! Here is a run down of our Easter weekend. It has always started with the local Egg hunt on Saturday morning. There were tons of kids and Katelyn loved looking for eggs. Then I took the kids over to Wheeler Farm. They had the Easter bunny there, a whole bunch of fun activities there to do. Wagon rides and an another egg hunt. Sunday morning the Easter bunny had to wait until after church to come so we all looked for our baskets. It was so fun to watch as the girls searched for their baskets. Katelyn really gets into the holidays now and it is so much fun. We had an egg hunt at our house, three to be exact. Both of the girls loved it !! We went inside and Katelyn preceded to hide them around the house for Maddie and her to find. This went on for a few days after Easter. That afternoon we dyed eggs and then went to Grandma Merrell's for Sunday dinner. It was a great Easter and I hope it was well for you to.
Posted by Mindi at 7:52 AM No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)


text: For over 30 years CR Jewelers Diamond Importers has been one of the most trusted names in Jewelry. We are a well-established jewelry company that has grown from a single store to a National Jewelry retailer. CR Jewelers 'Diamond Importers' is committed to make every customer "feel at home" with our personalized service and our classic to cutting edge Jewelry Designs. Our years of experience and services have built a legacy of integrity and trust with our customers. All CR Jewelers products come with the service and quality upon which we have built our reputation over the last 30 years. We offer our customers a wide range of designs to celebrate the important moments of their life's. Our personal relations with our customers have grown over the years and we value the trust you have placed upon us. We help you to select the perfect style to suit your lifestyle. For us, no question is too insignificant. You will receive our personal service and attention to every purchase you will make. CR Jewelers, Imported Quality at domestic pricing. Come in and, be Amazed!

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Australian Dollar
British Pound Sterling
Canadian Dollar
Chinese Yuan Renminbi
Hong Kong Dollar
Russian Ruble
Swiss Franc
US Dollar
By creating an account with our store, you will be able to move through the checkout process faster, store multiple shipping addresses, view and track your orders in your account and more.
Cart 0 item
Items 1 to 9 of 12 total
Shopping Options
You have no items to compare.
Regular Price:
Special Price:
21% Off
Regular Price:
Special Price:
12% Off


text:
Most Americans respect the jogger they see gutting it out on the side of the road as they make their morning commute.
Imagine their admiration if they knew the extent of what Ashton Eaton did on Saturday night.
Eaton broke the world record for the decathlon Saturday, amassing 9,309 points at the U.S. Olympic trials. In his final event, the 1,500 meters, he not only surpassed his personal record but also cleared it by several seconds. (And that was after he said he was so tired already he wanted to fall asleep.)
On a cold, rainy day that was a challenge for even elite athletes, Eaton set the new standard in the sport that is the pinnacle of athletic achievement. The decathlon is not for those who merely run fast or jump high — it incorporates every part of the body in a string of demanding events that tests the true mettle of a complete athlete.
The decathlon, however, is one of many sports that, while possibly the most physically demanding, is not among the most popular for spectators. Like professional swimming, marathon running or almost all of the sports that pop up every four years at the Olympics, the decathlon is only remembered every few summers.
But Eaton caught the nation's eye early this time around, and for good reason. In a sport whose last big hero was Bruce Jenner — more famous now for his Kardashian connections — Eaton is the leader of a crop of American talent that could redefine the decathlon for American fans in the same way Michael Phelps has redefined swimming in recent years.
The decathlon and swimming aren't as popular for fans as, say, baseball and basketball — and for obvious reasons. In the most popular spectator sports, fans get to watch entire teams work together in fast-paced games in which they already understand the rules and stakes. People have been groomed for years to know what to expect or who to watch for in big-name sports, even if they have little understanding of the deepest nuances of the game.
But that can also be the case for Olympic sports, if fans give them a chance. When Phelps took the swimming world by storm in 2008, winning a record eight gold medals, most people knew the basics of the sport. But very few knew the intricacies of Olympic qualifying, relays or the significance of what Phelps was doing. His accomplishment — and the coverage and analysis that went along with it — not only furthered the sport among those more interested in athletics but also attracted legions of fans to a basic understanding of swimming.
Eaton and his decathlon comrades have a chance to do the same this summer at the Olympics. While track and field has strong followings in high schools and colleges across the nation, it has mostly lost the imagination of millions of spectators. But seeing a man who owns his craft come out and dominate the sport could change that.
Rather than being accustomed to seeing professional leagues that are often filled with players who aren't really athletes, sports fans this summer can feel free to introduce themselves to a new wave of events, where an American who has a chance at being one of the greatest ever will be giving firsthand lessons.
Few can swim like Phelps, and few can run and jump like Eaton. But the Summer Olympics offer a chance to see why swimming and the decathlon are so compelling, even for the casual fan.
Photo via Twitter/@EricRoeske


text:
Publication Archive
This archive contains all documents published by cep over the last few years:
cepAdhoc: Incisive comment on current EU policy issues.
cepPolicyBrief: Concise 4-page reviews of EU proposals (Regulations, Directives, Green Papers, White Papers, Communications) – including a brief summary and economic and legal assessments.
cepInput: Impulse to current discussions of EU policies.
cepStudy: Comprehensive examination of EU policy proposals affecting the economy.
The European Commission wants to promote the penetration of the market by vehicles using alternative fuels by extending the network of both refuelling points for alternative fuels and electricity recharging points. For this purpose, the refuelling and electricity recharging infrastructure is to be standardised EU-wide and every Member States will be required to have a specific minimum number of electricity recharging points for electric vehicles by 2020.
The Regulation is to ensure complete traceability of transfers of funds in order to facilitate the "prevention, detection and investigation" of money laundering and terrorist financing. The Commission wants the Regulation to implement the recommendations of the Financial Action Transaction Force (FATF) of 2012. The FATF is an international body which develops measures to combat money laundering and terrorist financing.
The four Presidents of the European Council, the Commission, the Eurogroup and the European Central Bank (ECB) have proposed measures to improve the stability of the Euro Zone.
The Commission formulates recommendations to the Member States and outlines some of its own measures intended to promote entrepreneurship in the EU.
The Commission explains how it wants to reform European company law and the legal framework for corporate governance.
In order to increase competition in the rail transport sector the European Commission proposes to open the market for domestic passenger transport services by rail and provide for a more strict separation between infrastructure managers and railway undertakings. For this, infrastructure managers and railway undertakings must be fundamentally legally distinct. Infrastructure managers that are part of a vertically integrated undertaking (VIU), when the proposed amendment comes into force, may, under strict conditions, be exempt from this requirement of institutional separation.
The Commission wants to combat tobacco consumption, particularly among young people, and for this purpose re-harmonise the rules on tobacco products.
The Commission is seeking to prevent banking crises, strengthen financial stability and ensure that taxpayers do not shoulder the burden of future banking crises by establishing a recovery and resolution regime for banks and investment firms. Part 1 of the CEP Policy Brief deals with recovery and resolution plans and with further crisis prevention measures.
The Commission is seeking to prevent banking crises, strengthen financial stability and ensure that taxpayers do not shoulder the burden of future banking crises by establishing a recovery and resolution regime for banks and investment firms.
Public and private projects "likely to have significant effects on the environment" must undergo an environmental impact assessment (EIA) prior to receiving consent. For the first time in over 25 years the Commission wants to revise Directive 2011/92/EU fundamentally in order to eliminate deficiencies and to adapt it to the modified political, legal and technical framework.


text:
Robert Frost
Robert Frost (March 26, 1874 – January 29, 1963 / San Francisco)
» Click to list general statistics » OR, select a date :
In A Disused Graveyard
The living come with grassy tread
To read the gravestones on the hill;
The graveyard draws the living still,
But never anymore the dead.
read more >>
- Hits: Number of visitors who read the poem on the given date.
- Posts: Number of visitors who posted the poem to a friend (via e-mail) on the given date.
- Dates that have "0" hits may not be shown on the list.
- Dates, poems and poets that have "0" hits may not be shown on the list. Statistics are generated daily.


text:
I didn't plan to write about ESPN's telecast of the Maryland-Duke game. After a day of wrestling with a controversial post on Fox News anointing Dr. Benjamin Carson the new darling of the right on Sean Hannity's smarmy show, I just wanted some sports viewing pleasure and TV rescue.
But Dave O'Brien (play by play), Doris Burke (analysis) and Jeannine Edwards (reporting) did such a fine job that by the middle of the first half I had my notebook out trying to keep up with all the things they were doing right.
The overall production was solid to very good, especially the efforts to give viewers at home a strong visual sense of the joyful madness of college basketball in special places like College Park at extraordinary moments like Saturday night's upset of second-ranked Duke. But while the direction and the camera work were sure-handed, it was the announcing that carried the telecast.
Of the three broadcasters, Burke was the star. After a full NFL season of listening to CBS announcers and analysts who sounded like they never made it to a Ravens practice, what a delight it was to hear Burke repeatedly peppering her analysis with what she saw at Maryland practice on Friday.
Maybe she was lucky to see so much in one practice, but she seemed to perfectly understand the frustration of having such a young team -- especially with freshman Seth Allen at point guard most of Saturday night.
"Slow it down, slow it down," she kept quoting Maryland coach Mark Turgeon as saying at practice.
"You have to slow it down for young players," she added, explaining that based on what she saw, Turgeon could have kept saying "slow it down" practically non-stop throughout the entire practice.
But the Terps kept turning it over.
As the half ended, Edwards, whose hustle was outstanding all night, was in position and on point to ask Turgeon about the turnovers.
"It's what we do," he said in one of the more candid halftime quotes of the season.
Edwards never stopped working courtside. She reported out of one second-half Maryland huddle that Turgeon told his team he wanted them "to keep running." She came out of another huddle, telling viewers that Maryland planned to focus on getting the ball into Alex Len.
Memo to Sean McManus at CBS: Take a look, Sean. this is what first-rate sideline reporting looks like. It injects energy, information and a sense of urgency to the telecast. Wouldn't it have been nice to have some of that when the lights went out in New Orleans?
Sorry, I couldn't resist.
More on what Burke did right:
Expertise. She nailed Allen, Nick Faust and Dez Wells for doing 'crossover dribbles' in front of Duke's hardnosed defenders -- and regularly losing the ball in doing so. Again, it's just the kind of hotdog move a more experienced or disciplined player wouldn't make, and it was as irritating to her as I am sure it was to many Terps fans.
Context. She knew Turgeon had suspended backup point guard Pe'Shon Howard and, as a result, had few options beyond moving Nick Faust to the point when Allen went through a spurt where he was involved in three turnovers on four plays. She also explained why that wasn't such a great option.
And, as an analyst, she did not hesitate to give her point of view on the disciplinary action against Howard: "The program comes first."
But she was also willing to alter the story line in reaction to what was happening as the game unfolded -- rather than sticking to one script like Phil Simms did in the Super Bowl when it came to rating the two quarterbacks.
After articulating the frustration for coaches and fans of having young players like Allen in key roles making mistakes through much of the game, Burke, near the end, started to praise and even celebrate Allen for playing through his mistakes and not hanging his head.
She made this pivot in her analysis just ahead of the point in the game where Allen started making key drives down the lane, either scoring on layups or getting fouled and making the free throws.
I even liked the one point in the game where she shifted her form of address out of frustration.
It came with 6:36 left in the game, when viewers knew the Terps were trying to pound the ball into Len thanks to Edwards' reporting.
"Give him the ball, Seth Allen," she yelled as the guard came across midcourt and ignored a wide open Len.
"He just missed Alex Len wide open," explained of her outburst.
I almost missed her explanation, because I was still yelling at Allen to "Look for Len."
Burke appreciated the fine game Len played, and I liked that, too. She and the cameras consistently brought viewers the drama of the battle between Len and Duke's Mason Plumlee.
Her description of Len "going chest to chest" with Plumlee to block a shot was pitch perfect.
"This is a really good bounce-back game for Len," she said with 7:42 left in the game. "And there's a line of NBA scouts watching."
Kudos to the producer, director and camera persons for giving viewers a feel for what it felt like on the court after the fans rushed the floor. I especially liked the hand-held, in-the-middle-of-the-madness shots.
Latest David Zurawik
And a final way-to-go to Edwards for the post-game Turgeon interview.


text:
- "As they entered November, the weather turned very cold. The mountains around the school became icy grey and the lake like chilled steel. Every morning the ground was covered in frost. ...The Quidditch season had begun."
- —Description.[src]
November is the eleventh month of the year. It is one of the months of the year with thirty days.
Important November events Edit
- 1981 - Rubeus Hagrid rescues the baby Harry Potter from the ruins of his parents' house. Wizards all over England celebrate the downfall of Lord Voldemort.
- 1994 - Harry writes to Sirius Black about being chosen as a fourth Triwizard Tournament champion.
- 1993 - The Gryffindor Quidditch team plays the Hufflepuff Quidditch team in a driving rain. Harry falls from his broom under the influence of Dementors, and Cedric Diggory catches the Golden Snitch. Harry's broom is also destroyed by the Whomping Willow. This is also the first Quidditch match which Harry loses.
- 1991 - Harry discovers that Professor Snape's leg had been injured and surmises that the injury was inflicted by Fluffy.
- 1992 - While Harry is in the hospital wing, Colin Creevey is petrified by Salazar Slytherin's Basilisk.
- 1991 - Harry plays in his first Quidditch match versus Slytherin. He is almost killed when Quirinus Quirrell jinxes his broom.
- 1994 - Harry and Hermione Granger visit Hogsmeade village. There, Hagrid asks Harry to meet him late that evening. Harry sees the dragons for the First Task. After midnight, he speaks with Sirius via the Floo Network.
- The First Task of the Triwizard Tournament takes place in which the Champions have to pass a dragon.
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.


text:
|System: PS3, PC, X360
|Review Rating Legend
|Dev: Reality Pump / TopWare Interactive
|1.0 - 1.9 = Avoid
|4.0 - 4.4 = Great
|Pub: SouthPeak Interactive
|2.0 - 2.4 = Poor
|4.5 - 4.9 = Must Buy
|Release: October 5, 2010
|2.5 - 2.9 = Average
|5.0 = The Best
|Players: 1 (2+ Online)
|3.0 - 3.4 = Fair
|ESRB Rating: Mature
|3.5 - 3.9 = Good
by J. Matthew Zoss
Its likely that you never played the original Two Worlds. If you did, theres a good chance that you didnt like it much. Unquestionably, Two Worlds was a deeply flawed game. The reviews ranged from passable all the way down to simply awful, thanks to plenty of bugs and quirks that rubbed critics and gamers the wrong way. But despite the games many problems, it did well enough to warrant a sequel. Clearly, with a game so troubled, any improvements to the formula were bound to make Two Worlds II better than the original. But will they make the game good enough to be worth your time?
We recently got our hands on the game and have to give Two Worlds II some credit. This is one ambitious game. Like the original, its a massive open-world game in the vein of The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. Pulling off this style of game alone is tough, and Two Worlds II has some additional twists to make things even more complex. First of all, Two Worlds II is a class-free game. You wont be forced into a familiar fantasy archetype. You can make a character with any sort of combination of skills you like. Fighter Mages are an option, but you can get even more creative, making a stealthy magical assassin or a tank-like brawler with incredible crafting skills. Its completely up to you.
Speaking of crafting, Two Worlds II has one of the most impressive crafting systems weve ever seen. Not only can you customize nearly every piece of equipment you have, you can even take items you find and break them down into raw materials. Want to make some new boots? Use the leather from an old shield and laces from a tunic. Its a really cool idea that we havent seen many times before, and it only gets more impressive when you start messing around with magical spells.
We had a chance to check out the spell-crafting first hand, and its definitely an involved and potentially awesome experience. We started with a simple projectile spell, but added new aspects to it until it became something, much greater. You can add elemental aspects to spells, physics behaviors, and more. You can add effects to spells that cause them to lock onto, targets, split upon impact, or bounce around like a ball. After playing around with the crafting system, our simple projectile became a flaming ball of doom that split into multiple projectiles on contact and summoned an undead warrior to fight at our side!
Of course, there are limits on how many effects you can stack onto a single spell, and the bigger the spell you create, the more mana it requires. Then, theres the challenge of actually crafting the spell. The interface was a little confusing at first, and it took us several tries to get the spell we actually wanted. According to the SouthPeak rep at our demo, certain elements in the interface are still being tuned, but with the release date right around the corner, were not sure how much will change before the game is released.
Wed be happy to say that a complex inventory system is the biggest flaw we encountered in the gameplay, but unfortunately that isnt the case. When playing as a fairly standard magic user, queuing up spells felt a little sluggish, and it was often difficult to tell when our spells were damaging enemies. Playing as a melee-based warrior, the delay between button press and attack felt even more pronounced. The time between pulling the trigger and the on-screen characters attack was roughly half a second, making the game feel a bit more like a PC MMO than a console action RPG.
Despite the sluggish feel of the combat, Two Worlds II does seem like a significant improvement over the original game. Sure, we saw a few other rough edges in our demo, such as some collision issues and a few bad textures. Plus, theres plenty of content we didnt get to check out, such as the multiplayer modes. But overall, Two Worlds II looks like it has the potential to be a reasonably solid game. One thing is for sure, it will definitely be a step in the right direction for the franchise!
J. Matthew Zoss
CCC Freelance Writer
Game Features:


text:
Thanks to our friends at Hirmer Publishers, we're giving away three copies of the extremely covetable 'Stephan Maria Lang. Architecture – A Journey to the Soul'. This richly illustrated book is an impressive introduction to the work of architect Stephan Maria Lang. The volume presents six selected projects which Lang has built between 2004 and 2011. Lang's work is, among others, inspired by Japanese thought and the Californian modernism. The quality of his state-of-the-art houses lies in the surprising views, the play of light and shadow, and in the integration of landscape, garden, and interior into a gesamtkunstwerk.
The competition is open to Architonic Facebook fans and runs until the end of the day on Sunday 10 November, 2013.
To enter, CLICK HERE
Stephan Maria Lang. Architecture – A Journey to the Soul
Hirmer Publishers
Edited by: Harry Dirrigl
30 x 26 cm
152 pp
Design: Petra Dirrigl
Published: 2012
ISBN: 978-3-7774-5931-8 (German Cover)
ISBN: 978-3-7774-5181-7 (English Cover)


text:
So how do the millions of years required for evolution mesh with the fact that "air breathers" can survive for only a few moments (at most) if a disruption to their respiratory system occurs? How can you take a "two-way" reptile lung and over a period of minutes evolve it into a fully functional "one-way" bird lung? The simple answer is, you cannot. John Ruben, an expert in respiratory physiology from Oregon State University at Corvallis, addressed the problem of such a hypothetical intermediate.
Recently, conventional wisdom has held that birds are direct descendants of theropod dinosaurs [those dinosaurs that are said to have been "beastfooted" and bipedal Saurischians—BH/BT]. However, the apparently steadfast maintenance of hepatic-piston diaphragmatic lung ventilation in theropods throughout the Mesozoic poses a fundamental problem for such a relationship. The earliest stages in the derivation of the avian abdominal airsac system from a diaphragmatic-ventilating ancestor would have necessitated selection for a diaphragmatic hernia [or hole—BH/BT] in taxa transitional between theropods and birds. Such a debilitating condition would have immediately compromised the entire pulmonary ventilatory apparatus and seems unlikely to have been of any selective advantage (1997, 278:1269).
To suggest that the "debilitating condition of a diaphragmatic hernia would have immediately compromised the entire pulmonary apparatus" and thus be "unlikely to have been of any selective advantage" is nothing more than scientific "prestige jargon" for stating the obvious: in other words, the animal would not have been able to breathe. We think it is a gross understatement, therefore, to suggest that this "seems unlikely to have been of any selective advantage." Death—to put it bluntly—is not a good survival mechanism!
|Archaeopteryx lithographica
A comparison of the pelvic bones of modern perching birds and Archaeopteryx reveals that both probably assisted their breathing while perching by means of muscles attached between their pubis and tail. In contrast, the pelvic bones of the theropod dinosaurs look nothing like that of either modern birds or Archaeopteryx, but instead look more similar to those of modern reptiles (like the crocodile, for example). There is no way for the pubis of modern reptiles or the theropod dinosaurs to serve as an attachment point for suprapubic muscles that are needed to assist in breathing during perching.
Numerous studies have pointed out that the curvature of Archaeopteryx's claws, compared to the curvature of modern birds' claws, puts it firmly in the "perching bird" category (see Feduccia, 1993). In fact, the habits of birds that are similar to Archaeopteryx (such as the earthbound Australian pheasant cuckoo) can be distinguished on the basis of claw curvature. Furthermore, the unusual claws on the wings of Archaeopteryx resemble those of various tree-climbing birds, and differ noticeably from the claws of its supposed dinosaurian relatives. As ornithologist Alan Feduccia put it: "Archaeopteryx probably cannot tell us much about the early origin of feathers and flight in the true protobirds because Archaeopteryx was, in the modern sense, a bird" (1993, 249:792). Our point exactly!
Much controversy has occurred in scientific circles regarding whether Archaeopteryx should be classified strictly as a bird or as a "transitional intermediate" between dinosaurs and birds. Many researchers automatically place this animal into the "bird" category based solely on the presence of feathers. As Feduccia noted: "Feathers are unique to birds, and no known structure intermediate between scales and feathers has been identified" (Feduccia, 1980, p. 52). Creationists, of course, have long made that very point. In fact, writing in volume two of their Modern Creation Trilogy on this matter in regard to Archaeopteryx, Henry Morris and John Morris stated:
Archaeopteryx is a "mosaic" of useful and functioning structures found also in other creatures, not a "transition" between them. A true transitional structure would be, say, a "sceather"—that is, a half-scale, half-feather—or a "ling"—half-leg, half-wing—or, perhaps a half-evolved heart or liver or eye. Such transitional structures, however, would not survive in any struggle for existence (1996, 2:70).
Recent intriguing discoveries have caused researchers to speculate with wild abandon about exactly how Archaeopteryx fits into the dinosaurs-to-birds theory. As you will see later in this article, some evolutionists have haplessly fashioned a fascinating tale of dinosaur-to-bird descendants, only to realize after the fact that they actually have created a huge time-line fiasco for themselves (and for the birds!). Much of this began after several important recent finds in China, in what some believe is ever-increasing evidence that establishes a direct link between dinosaurs and modern birds. The first find, uncovered in the early 1990s, was a newly discovered bird named Confuciusornis from the Yixian formation of Liaoning province in northeastern China. The find, which is considered more modern in form than Archaeopteryx, was described from three partial skeletons, and is said to be roughly half the size of the London specimen of Archaeopteryx (while sharing several common features). In his 1999 book, In Search of Deep Time, zoologist (and senior editor for Nature) Henry Gee noted:
Unlike Archaeopteryx, which had a conventional reptilian spout, Confuciusornis had a beak, the earliest record of a beak in the fossil record. In more than 150 years, only seven specimens of Archaeopteryx have ever been found, and each one is treated as a priceless relic. The contrast with Confuciusornis could hardly be greater; in only a few years, hundreds of specimens had been excavated from Liaoning province. Confuciusornis joined a steadily accumulating catalogue of fossil birds unearthed in the 1980s and 1990s from a small number of fossil sites in China, Spain, and other countries. Most fossils came from the mid to late Cretaceous. None were [sic] as old as Archaeopteryx itself, which still remained the oldest bird (pp. 188-189).
The exact age of these combined specimens, however, has turned out to be a matter of intense debate among evolutionists, having been reported to be either "as old as" or "older than," Archaeopteryx (Hou, 1995), or almost the same age (Gee, p. 189).
In 1996, two additional finds were discovered. The first was Compsognathus, a small theropod about the size of a chicken (see Gibbons, 1996a, 274:720-721; Corliss, 1998, p. 281). Dated at 121 million years old, Compsognathus is too recent to have given rise to Archaeopteryx. Initially, it was believed to have had a mane of downy feathers running along its neck, back, and tail, which caused Yale paleontologist John Ostrom to state: "If it does have feathers, it could be a descendant of the dinosaur that gave rise to birds" (as quoted in Gibbons, 1996a, 274:720). At first, Dr. Ostrom believed that the structures on the back of Compsognathus were, in fact, some kind of primordial feathers. Later, however, he abandoned that idea as erroneous (see Corliss, 1998, p. 280). Furthermore, University of North Carolina ornithologist Alan Feduccia and University of Kansas paleontologist Larry Martin have suggested that the creature's anatomy was all wrong and much too distinctly un-bird-like: Feduccia noted: "It's biophysically impossible to evolve flight from such large bipeds with foreshortened forelimbs and heavy, balancing tails" as Compsognathus (as quoted in Gibbons, 1996a, 274:721). In his 1998 volume, Biological Anomalies: Birds, scientist William R. Corliss concluded: "Compsognathus was too good to be true.... [T]he structures along the fossil's back were not really feathers. Just what they were remains a mystery" (p. 280, emp. in orig.).
That was not the end of the story, however, because the discovery of another fossilized creature was announced later that same year (1996). Sinosauropteryx [Chinese winged lizard] originally was uncovered in China in 1992 and is believed by evolutionists to be about 135 million years old. It differs from Archaeopteryx in that its main toes face away from its other toes rather than all of them pointing forward. This placement allows for better gripping of branches, and thus is viewed as an important advance over Archaeopteryx. However, some have suggested that Sinosauropteryx's features are due to the manner in which the damaged fossil was reconstructed (a not-too-improbable scenario, as you will see later in this article when we discuss the fossil fraud, Archaeoraptor).
The skeleton of Sinosauropteryx was said to be surrounded by a halo of "fuzz," which resulted in the discovery making headlines on the front page of the respected New York Times and being viewed by many as confirmation of the dinosaurian origins of birds. However, after all the facts were gathered the verdict was somewhat different. Henry Gee stated in regard to the Sinosauropteryx "feathers":
At the time, there was a great deal of debate about the significance of the fibers. They did not really look much like either hairs or feathers. Chen [Chen Pei-Ji from Nanjing, the Chinese scientist who discovered the Sinosauropteryx fossils (see Chen, 1998)—BH/BT] and his colleagues called them "integumentary structures," in a way to avoid seeming to prejudge the functions or affinities of these structures. Some even supposed that they were not external at all, but internal collagenous struts supporting a lizard-like frill....
The range of types of skin covering in extant tetrapods is rather limited; apart from bare skin, there are scales, hair, or feathers, and that's it. The not-quite-feathery, not-quite-hairy fibres of Sinosauropteryx may represent a completely different, hitherto unknown variety of vertebrate skin covering.... [T]he significance of fibres of Sinosauropteryx in understanding the origin of birds in particular is hard to estimate.... Sinosauropteryx remained an enigma: were its puzzling integumentary structures peculiar to itself, revealing nothing about the ancestry of feathers, or did they represent a significant discovery that might further understanding of the origin of feathers, and therefore of birds? (1999, pp. 190,191).
Since the initial find of Sinosauropteryx, two additional discoveries of the creature have been made (one is a dromaeosaur and the other is a therizinosaur), both of which have the same type of Sinosauropteryx-like fibers. Larry Martin of the University of Kansas (Lawrence) thinks the fine structures may be "frayed collagenous fibers" beneath the skin that have nothing whatsoever to do with either feathers or birds. John Ruben of Oregon State University (Corvallis) dissected a sea snake's tail and showed that such fibers can indeed look feathery [see Gibbons, 1997, 278:1229]. In an intriguingly titled article ("Plucking the Feathered Dinosaur") published in Science, Ann Gibbons referred to "roughly a half-dozen Western paleontologists who have seen the specimens" and who admitted that "the structures are not modern feathers" (1997, 278:1229).
And now, to add to the confusion, hotly disputed claims from China of the discovery of two species of dinosaurs that allegedly possessed feathers (Protoarchaeopteryx robusta and Caudipteryx zoui) have many evolutionists scratching their heads and reevaluating their time lines altogether. Protoarchaeopteryx, the larger of the two specimens, is about the size of a turkey and has a patch of bird-like feathers at the tip of its tail. Caudipteryx had a fairly short tail, a fan of tail feathers, and a fringe of feathers along the trailing edges of each of its forearms. Two Chinese scientists, Ji Qiang and Ji Shuan, discovered these so-called "feathered dinosaurs" in the same location as the Sinosauropteryx, and suggested in an article in Chinese Geology (and then later in another article in the June 25, 1998 issue of Nature [393:753-761]) that the feathers link these creatures both to theropods and to birds. That same year, in an article in Science, Philip Currie asserted: "You can't get around the fact that these are feathers on dinosaurs" (as quoted in Gibbons, 1998, 280:2051). In his book, In Search of Deep Time, Gee wrote:
This time, the nature of the skin was quite unambiguous, because these dinosaurs had unmistakable feathers, rather than enigmatic fibres.... The feathers are like those of birds; each one has a central stalk, and vanes on either side. Given the smallness of these creatures' arms, it is extremely unlikely that either dinosaur was capable of flight.... The implications of these discoveries are profound: the discovery of feathers in patently non-flying dromaeosaurs demonstrates that feathers existed before the evolution of flight. It can no longer be claimed that the origin of birds is inextricably linked with the origin of flight or denied that the heritage of the birds is closely linked with that of the theropod dinosaurs.... The discovery of these feathered dinosaurs has brought the debate about the origin of birds to a close (1999, pp. 191,192).
Even evolutionists who do not accept the dinosaur-to-bird concept of evolution agree that the feathers are real. They stress, however, that the feathers document the fact that the two creatures were birds, not dinosaurs. Larry Martin wrote: "I think they've found a group of flightless birds" (as quoted in Gibbons, 1998, 280:2051). The radiometric dating of the sites in which the finds were discovered has presented serious problems as well. In an article in Science, Ann Gibbons reported on this aspect of the controversy.
Until recently, many paleontologists thought that Archaeopteryx itself gave rise to opposite birds [birds whose foot bones are fused from the top down, as opposed to modern birds, whose foot bones are fused from the bottom up—BH/BT] which in turn gradually evolved into modern birds.... [Alan] Feduccia and his colleagues now challenge that view with fossils of a bird the size of a sparrow, called Liaoningornis. The specimen, unearthed by a farmer in the Yixian formation in northeastern China's Liaoning Province, lacks a skull but includes a nearly complete skeleton with foot bones and a keeled sternum that resemble those of modern birds. Yet the Chinese scientists cite radiometric dates of 137 to 142 million years for the volcanic rock of the Yixian formation, which would make the bird almost as old as Archaeopteryx. And the same beds also yielded a magpie-sized primitive bird called Confuciusornis, which shares many traits with both Archaeopteryx and modern birds.... According to Feduccia and Martin, the discoveries imply that by the time of Archaeopteryx, birds had already diverged into two lineages and had a rich history that is missing from the fossil record. One lineage led to modern birds. Another led to Archaeopteryx and the opposite birds, which they view as sister taxa, closely related to each other but distinct from the line that led to modern birds. And both of these bird lineages must have descended from a much earlier ancestral bird. Feduccia reckons that the first bird must have lived about 76 million years before the birdlike dinosaurs of the Cretaceous—a fact that he says raises questions about the dinosaurian origins of birds (1996b, 274:1083, emp. added).
Evolutionists admit that radiometric dates for the Yixian formation (estimated at anywhere between 121 million and 142 million years) are controversial. As Feduccia has suggested: "Whatever the date is, we're getting both types of birds shortly after Archaeopteryx" (as quoted in Gibbons, 1996b, 274:1083). His point is well taken. Ann Gibbons noted in another Science article: "...the Chinese fossil is too recent—121 million years old—for the dinosaur to have given rise to the 150-million-year-old Jurassic bird, Archaeopteryx" (1996a, 274:720). In his article in Science ("The Forward March of the Bird-Dinosaurs Halted?"), Richard Hinchliffe commented on the controversy over the "recent nature" of these fossil finds when he noted that "most theropod dinosaurs and in particular the birdlike dromaesours are all very much later (i.e., more recent—BH/BT) in the fossil record than Archaeopteryx (1997, 278:597). So unless birds perfected time travel millions of years ago, these latest finds do little to support the theory that dinosaurs gave rise to birds.
In the February 1998 issue of Scientific American, Kevin Padian and Luis Chiappe, while fully backing the dinosaurian origin of birds, added a sidebar explaining the major points of contention:
1. The hands of theropod dinosaurs and birds differ in important ways.
2. Theropod wishbones differ significantly from those of birds.
3. Avian lungs are very complex and could not have evolved from theropod dinosaur lungs.
4. Theropod dinosaurs appear to have been exclusively ground dwellers; thus, flight would have had to originate from the cursorial or "ground-up" theory, which many scientists do not accept (Padian and Chiappe, 1998).
In his review of an article on "Developmental Patterns and the Identification of Homologies in the Avian Hand" by Ann Burke and Alan Feduccia in the October 24, 1997 issue of Science, Richard Hinchliffe reiterated many of these same problems by pointing out problems with the "dinosaur-to-bird" hypothesis. These included:
1. The much smaller theropod forelimb (relative to body size) in comparison with the Archaeopteryx wing. Such small limbs are not convincing as proto-wings for a "ground-up" origin of flight.
2. The rarity in theropods of the semilunate wrist bone—known in only four species. Most theropods have relatively large numbers of wrist elements difficult to homologize with those of Archaeopteryx.
3. The time problem. Theropod dinosaurs are found too recently in the fossil record to have given rise to Archaeopteryx (Hinchliffe, 1997).
The controversy over the alleged connection between reptiles and birds in the evolutionary scenario increased dramatically with the publication in November 1999 by National Geographic of a feature article by Christopher P. Sloan titled "Feathers for T. Rex?" The article claimed to provide "a true missing link in the complex chain that connects dinosaurs to birds" (Sloan, 1999, 196[5]:100). The fossil, named Archaeoraptor liaoningensis, was discovered at Xiasanjiazi in China's northeastern Liaoning Province and appeared to have the body of a primitive bird with the teeth and tail of a small, terrestrial dinosaur or dromaeosaur. This definitely fit the criteria of the type of fossil that evolutionists had hoped to find to fill in some of the gaps in their popular "dinosaur-to-bird" scenario because it manifested the long, bony tail of dromaeosaurid dinosaurs along with the specialized shoulders and chest of birds.
The Associated Press quickly picked up the story, and soon all the major news networks were reporting about this "fierce turkey-sized animal with sharp claws and teeth" (Recer, 1999). Philip Currie of the Royal Tyrrell Museum in Alberta, Canada, and one of the scientists involved in the examination of Archaeoraptor for National Geographic, boasted: "We're looking at the first dinosaur that was capable of flying" (as quoted in Recer, 1999). However those words barely had left Currie's mouth before the questions about this fossil started flying (no pun intended). After a short-lived period of "pomp and circumstance," National Geographic suddenly found itself embroiled in one of the hottest scientific controversies in decades.
In an "open letter" dated November 1, 1999 and addressed to Peter Raven, Secretary of the National Geographic Society Committee for Research and Exploration, Dr. Storrs L. Olson, the eminent curator of birds at the prestigious Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Natural History, verbally castigated the Society, Dr. Raven, Christopher P. Sloan (author of the National Geographic article), and Bill Allen, the magazine's editor, for what he called "an all-time low for engaging in sensationalistic, unsubstantiated, tabloid journalism." And that was the nicest thing he had to say! Dr. Olson continued:
Prior to the publication of the article "Dinosaurs Take Wing" in the July 1998 National Geographic, Lou Mazzatenta, the photographer for Sloan's article, invited me to the National Geographic Society to review his photographs of Chinese fossils and to comment on the slant being given to the story. At that time, I tried to interject the fact that strongly-supported alternative viewpoints existed to what National Geographic intended to present, but it eventually became clear to me that National Geographic was not interested in anything other than the prevailing dogma that birds evolved from dinosaurs.
Sloan's article takes prejudice to an entirely new level and consists in large part of unverifiable or undocumented information that "makes" the news rather than reporting it. His bald statement that "we can now say that birds are theropods just as confidently as we say that humans are mammals" is not even suggested as reflecting the views of a particular scientist or group of scientists, so that it figures as little more than editorial propagandizing. This melodramatic assertion had already been disproven by recent studies of embryology and comparative morphology, which, of course, are never mentioned.
More importantly, however, none of the structures illustrated in Sloan's article that are claimed to be feathers have actually been proven to be feathers. Saying that they are is little more than wishful thinking that has been presented as fact. The statement on page 103 that "hollow, hairlike structures characterize protofeathers" is nonsense, considering that protofeathers exist only as a theoretical construct, so that the internal structure of one is even more hypothetical.
The hype about feathered dinosaurs in the exhibit currently on display at the National Geographic Society is even worse, and makes the spurious claim that there is strong evidence that a wide variety of carnivorous dinosaurs had feathers. A model of the undisputed dinosaur Deinonychus and illustrations of baby tyrannosaurs are shown clad in feathers, all of which is simply imaginary and has no place outside of science fiction.
The idea of feathered dinosaurs and the theropod origin of birds is being actively promulgated by a cadre of zealous scientists acting in concert with certain editors at Nature and National Geographic who themselves have become outspoken and highly biased proselytizers of the faith. Truth and careful scientific weighing of evidence have been among the first casualties in their program, which is now fast becoming one of the grander scientific hoaxes of our age—the paleontological equivalent of cold fusion. If Sloan's article is not the crescendo of this fantasia, it is difficult to imagine to what heights it can next be taken. But it is certain that when the folly has run its course and has been fully exposed, National Geographic will unfortunately play a prominent but unenviable role in the book that summarizes the whole sorry episode (Olson, 1999).
It is unlikely that anyone—outside National Geographic's offices—ever will know the severity of the damage Dr. Olson's highly publicized, widely distributed letter inflicted. And it is equally as unlikely that Dr. Olson could have known how prescient his predictions would prove to be. But one thing we do know with certainty: National Geographic found itself in the embarrassing position of having to retract the entire article because, as it turned out, the Archaeoraptor fossil was a fake—a neatly contrived composite of a bird and a dinosaur tail! In the March 2000 issue of National Geographic, the magazine published a "letter to the editor" from Xu Xing, one of the scientists who first examined and discussed the fossil find.
After observing a new, feathered dromaeosaur specimen in a private collection and comparing it with the fossil known as Archaeoraptor, I have concluded that Archaeoraptor is a composite. The tail portions of the two fossils are identical, but other elements of the new specimen are very different from Archaeoraptor, in fact more closely resembling Sinornithosaurus. Though I do not want to believe it, Archaeoraptor appears to be composed of a dromaeosaur tail and a bird body (2000, 197[3]:no page number).
|Archaeoraptor model, as displayed in The Dinosaur Museum (Stephen Czerkas, director) in Blanding, Utah. Dr. Czerkas suggests, in text accompanying the model, that this is the only Archaeoraptor model on display for public viewing anywhere in the world. Comments accompanying the model admit that the tail of the original fossil belonged to a dinosaur (not to a bird), but Czerkas nevertheless contends that Archaeoraptor is one of the earliest known birds to evolve from the dinosaurs. Photograph by Kyle Butt and Eric Lyons of the Apologetics Press staff.
Seven months later, the October 2000 issue of National Geographic contained a five-page article by veteran investigative reporter Lewis M. Simons, describing how this massive debacle transpired (Simons, 2000). [For additional information on how this story unraveled, see also: Dalton, 2000a, 2000b; National Geographic, 2000; Rummo, 2000.] In his National Geographic article, Simons explained how farmers in many regions of China have made a very profitable hobby of selling the fossils they find. The only problem is that these farmers realize that fossil fanciers prefer specimens assembled and suitable for display. Therefore, on occasion the farmers will "doctor" the fossils to follow basic market economics and thus increase the value of their finds. Archaeoraptor actually "evolved" in a Chinese farmhouse where homemade paste was used to glue together two completely different fossils. The result was the now-famous (or infamous, as the case may be) "missing link" that allegedly had the body of a primitive bird with the teeth and the tail of a terrestrial dinosaur.
Unfortunately, National Geographic chose to run its November 1999 story before the "find" had been reported in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. In an effort to capitalize on this rare find, participants in the Archaeoraptor discovery rushed a paper to both Nature and Science but, as USA Today reporter Tim Friend learned, that paper "was never published" (2000). In his report for National Geographic, Simons acknowledged that
...a plan was cobbled together [to] first write a paper and have it published in the prestigious scientific journal Nature. National Geographic—which attempts to bridge the gap between hardcore science and popular interpretation—prefers not to break scientific discoveries without having them peer reviewed in advance by scientists. The effort to coordinate publication between Nature and National Geographic would eventually break down, contributing in large measure to the Geographic publishing a false article (2000, 198[4]:130).
With time constraints nipping at its heels, and peer-review rejections piling up, National Geographic decided to go out on a limb (again, no pun intended) and run the story on its own. Writing for Science News, Richard Monastersky observed:
Red-faced and downhearted, paleontologists are growing convinced that they have been snookered by a bit of fossil fakery.... "There probably has never been a fossil with a sadder history than this one," says Storrs L. Olson of the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Natural History (2000).
In an e-mail to his co-authors and to Sloan, Xu Xing wrote: "I am 100% sure, we have to admit that Archaeoraptor is a faked specimen" (as quoted in Simons, 2000, 198[4]:132).
Proof of that fact was not long in coming. In the March 29, 2001 issue of Nature, Timothy Rowe and his colleagues published the results of their X-ray computed tomography studies on the Archaeoraptor fossil (2001, 410:539-540). Their study documented the fact that "the Archaeoraptor slab was built in three layers," and concluded that Archaeoraptor
represents two or more species and that it was assembled from at least two, and possibly five, separate specimens. Additional work in China verified that the tail is from an entirely different specimen, which has been described previously as a new species of dromaeosaur. Sadly, parts of at least two significant new specimens were combined in favour of the higher commercial value of the forgery.... Knowing the history of human handling can be critical to proper evaluation and scientific interpretation of specimens (410:540).
That last statement—that "knowing the history of human handling" is considered a prerequisite to accepting a fossil as genuine—presents a sad commentary on the current state of evolutionary theory, does it not? In what other area of science do we encounter such embarrassing forgeries as Haeckel's "human gill slits," England's Piltdown Man, or China's Archaeoraptor? It seems that all too often someone is prepared to make an outlandish claim—and back it up with what turns out to be "faked" evidence. In their Nature article on the Archaeoraptor forgery, Rowe et al. commented: "Fortunately, a growing array of techniques can now be applied to forensic analysis of fossils" (410:540). Good thing—considering the nature and number of the forgeries that continue to appear!
As a side note, we might mention that normally the privilege of naming a fossil goes to the primary author of the scientific paper describing the specimen. However in this instance, the published name Archaeoraptor liaoningensis appeared in Christopher Sloan's article in National Geographic [Sloan is the magazine's art director, not a trained scientist], and therefore the final scientific moniker carries his name: Archaeoraptor liaoningensis Sloan. Unfortunately, no correction or retraction ever will be able to separate Sloan's name from this publicly exposed forgery.
In his investigative report submitted to National Geographic, Lewis Simons documented the fact that authors of the original account were told several times of discrepancies in their data and problems with the fossil, but apparently never took the opportunity to establish the accuracy of the specimen (Simons, 2000). The desperate desire to find the long-sought-after "missing link" between dinosaurs and birds overshadowed the truth. As American humorist Mark Twain suggested in Life on the Mississippi: "There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact" (1883, p. 156).
In the short span of time that has passed since we mailed Part I of this series, yet another "missing link" has been reported in the scientific and popular media. The paper describing the latest in a long (but failed) series of missing links, "The Distribution of Integumentary Structures in a Feathered Dinosaur" (Qiang, et al., 2001), appeared in the April 26, 2001 issue of Nature. In a review article, Time magazine extolled this latest find as "as good a missing link as anyone could want" (Lemonick, 2001, 157[18]:56).
Interestingly, one of the authors of the Nature paper, Ji Qiang, had made the same type of claim regarding an earlier "missing link" known as Caudipteryx zoui, boasting that it represented "a missing link between dinosaurs and birds which we had expected to find" (as quoted in Chang, 1998). University of Kansas biologist Larry Martin was not so quick to agree with Ji Qiang's expectations regarding "feathered dinosaurs." In referring to Caudipteryx zoui, Martin suggested that it was merely a flightless bird, and stated: "You have to put this in perspective. To people who wrote the paper, the chicken would be a feathered dinosaur" (as quoted in Chang, 1998). Martin's words of caution are especially important in light of the last report of "feathers" from Liaoning fossils, since those "feathers" eventually were dismissed as little more than frayed internal fibers of collagen (a structural protein found in connective tissue).
With memories of Archaeoraptor still fresh in their minds, Ji Qiang and his colleagues included the following statement in the second paragraph of their latest "feathered dinosaur" report: "Although some specimens from Western Liaoning have been shown to be composites or forgeries, the integrity of the specimen described here is assured because both slabs match up exactly..." (2001, 410:1084).
Fossil composition data and X-ray computed tomography results were not included in Qiang's latest report of this "feathered dinosaur," so further research will be necessary to determine its authenticity. It is a well-known fact that many fossils from this area of the world have been unwittingly or deliberately subjected to misleading reconstruction. Additionally, Ji Qiang and his team explained that the fossilized bones were brittle and that "most shattered when the specimen was collected by splitting the slab, so many skeletal details cannot be scored adequately" (410:1085). This lack of proper skeletal scoring, and the admission that the tail is "unusual" in that it has "no individual vertebral segments," make it difficult to determine the exact category in which this specimen should be placed—bird or dinosaur. But if this as-yet-unnamed creature is categorized as a "dinosaur," then scientists will face an even more daunting task because the date assigned to it suggests that feather "evolution" precedes almost all of the dromaeosaur fossil finds (the theropod from which birds allegedly evolved) [see Padian and Chiappe, 1998, 278[2]:43]. This would indicate that the "insect-catching" theory, the "tree-down" theory, and all other ideas regarding the evolution of feathers for flight, are completely inaccurate. Therefore scientists are left to explain why (and how!) these early dinosaurs "evolved" and maintained feathers that would not be used for flight? Some have suggested that perhaps feathers were used to maintain body temperature. But that then poses the question: Why didn't other animals (like, for example, crocodiles and snakes) evolve feathers as a means of warmth? Stay tuned; the quest continues.
For more than a century, the approach of some evolutionists has been to find some supporting evidence, tout it as "proof " of evolution, and then ignore conflicting theories or data. But what do the actual facts reveal about creatures such as Archaeopteryx? In reality, the story that scientists have attempted to weave in regard to this ancient "missing link" is unraveling before their very eyes. Scientific data have shown colossal differences in reptilian and bird lungs, scales as opposed to feathers, and the embryological hand development of dinosaurs versus birds. It may well be that we are witnessing the last gasps of a dying hypothesis about how birds evolved from dinosaurs! Faced with such overwhelming evidence against true evolutionary descent, it would be unrealistic to accept the position that Archaeopteryx lithographica is anything like the missing link that evolutionists once claimed it was.
Lewis Simons, the reporter who was commissioned to investigate the Archaeoraptor fiasco for National Geographic, stated that what he had uncovered was "a tale of misguided secrecy and misplaced confidence, of rampant egos clashing, self-aggrandizement, wishful thinking, naďve assumptions, human error, stubbornness, manipulation, backbiting, lying, corruption, and most of all, abysmal communication" (Simons, 2000, 198[4]:128). It may well be that we routinely witness the same kind of "tale" (albeit admittedly to a much-less-publicized degree) every time a new "missing link" is uncovered and then shown to be either incorrect or fraudulent. The history of science is replete with just such events (to wit, Nebraska Man, Piltdown Man, etc.). Certainly many authentic fossils do exist. However, as the late Colin Patterson (who served with distinction for many years as the senior paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History in London) admitted in his 1999 book, Evolution: "Fossils may tell us many things, but one thing they can never disclose is whether they were ancestors of anything else" (p. 109). While the "Piltdown Man" hoax was able to fool evolutionists for more than 40 years, the Archaeopteryx hoax appears to have lasted far longer—and continues in some quarters to this very day, in spite of such admissions as this one from evolutionary ornithologist Allan Feduccia who wrote in Science almost a decade ago:
I conclude that Archaeopteryx was arboreal and volant [i.e., possessing extended wings for flight—BH/BT], considerably advanced aerodynamically, and probably capable of flapping, powered flight to at least some degree. Archaeopteryx...was, in the modern sense, a bird (1993, 259:792).
And so, once again, it is not merely the "link" that's missing in evolutionary theory—it's the entire chain! Given all the facts about the origin of birds, it is little wonder that Charles Darwin remarked in a letter to his American friend, Asa Gray, on April 3, 1860: "[T]rifling particulars of structure often make me very uncomfortable. The sight of a feather in a peacock's tail, whenever I gaze at it, makes me sick!" (as quoted in MacBeth, 1971, p. 101). Mr. Darwin, considering the paucity of the fossil record, and the elegance of the design inherent in a single feather, we certainly can understand why.
Burke, Ann C. and Alan Feduccia (1997), "Developmental Patterns and the Identification of Homologies in the Avian Hand," Science, 278:666-669, October 24.
Chang, Kenneth (1998), "A Feathered Dinosaur," [On-line], URL: http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/science/DailyNews/dinobird980623.
Chen, Pei-ji (1998), "An Exceptionally Well-Preserved Theropod Dinosaur from the Yixian Formation of China," Nature, 391:147-152, January 8.
Corliss, William R. (1998), Biological Anomalies: Birds (Glen Arm, MD: The Sourcebook Project).
Dalton, R. (2000a), "Feathers Fly Over Chinese Fossil Bird's Legality and Authenticity," Nature, 403:689-690, February 17.
Dalton, R. (2000b), "Chasing the Dragons," Nature, 406:930-932, August 31.
Feduccia, Allan (1980), The Age of Birds (Cambridge, England: Harvard University Press).
Feduccia, Allan (1993), "Evidence from Claw Geometry Indicating Arboreal Habits of Archaeopteryx," Science, 259:790-793, February 5.
Friend, Tim (2000), "Dinosaur-bird Link Smashed in Fossil Flap," USA Today, [On-line], URL: htty://www.usatoday.com/life/science/paleo/lsp024.htm.
Gee, Henry (1999), In Search of Deep Time (New York: Free Press).
Gibbons, Ann (1996a), "New Feathered Fossil Brings Dinosaurs and Birds Closer," Science, 274:720-721, November 1.
Gibbons, Ann (1996b), "Early Birds Rise from China Fossil Beds," Science, 274:1083, November 15.
Gibbons, Ann (1997), "Plucking the Feathered Dinosaur," Science, 278:1229, November 14.
Gibbons, Ann (1998), "Dinosaur Fossils, in Fine Feather, Show Links to Birds," Science, 280:2051, June 26.
Hinchliffe, R. (1997), "The Forward March of the Bird-Dinosaurs Halted?," Science, 278:596-597, October 24.
Hou, L., Z. Zhou, L.D. Martin, and A. Feduccia (1995), "A Beaked Bird from the Jurassic of China," Nature, 377:616-618, October 19.
Lemonick, Michael D. (2001), "Down-Covered Dinosaur," Time, 157[18]:56-57, May 7.
MacBeth, Norman (1971), Darwin Retried (Boston, MA: Gambit).
Monastersky, Richard (2000), "All Mixed Up Over Birds and Dinosaurs," Science News, [On-line], URL: http://www.sciencenews.org/20000115/fob6.asp.
Morris, Henry M. and John D. Morris (1996), The Modern Creation Trilogy—Volume 2 (Green Forest, AR: Master Books).
National Geographic (2000), "Archaeoraptor A Composite, Panel of Scientists Determines," [On-line], URL: http://www.nationalgeographic.com, April 4.
Olson, Storrs L. (1999), Letter to Dr. Peter Raven, Secretary of the Committee for Research and Exploration, National Geographic Society, [On-line], URL: www.answersingenesis. org/docs/4159.asp.
Padian, K. and L.M. Chiappe (1998), "The Origin of Birds and Their Flight," Scientific American, 278[2]:38-47, February.
Patterson, Colin (1999), Evolution (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press), second edition.
Qiang, J., P.J. Currie, M.A. Norell, and J.I. Shuan (1998), "Two Feathered Dinosaurs from Northeastern China," Nature, 393:753-761, June 25.
Recer, P. (1999), From Dinosaur to Bird, [On-line], URL: http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/science/DailyNews/flyingdino991014.html.
Rowe, Timothy, Richard Ketcham, Cambria Denison, Matthew Colbert, Xing Xu and Philip Currie (2001), "Forensic Paleontology: The Archaeoraptor Forgery," Nature, 410:539-540, March 29.
Ruben, J.A., T.D. Jones, N.R. Geist, and W.J. Hillenius (1997), "Lung Structure and Ventilation in Theropod Dinosaurs and Early Birds," Science, 278:1267-1270, November 14.
Rummo, G.J. (2000), "Another 'Missing Link' Proven to be a Fraud," Independent News, November 9.
Simons, Lewis M. (2000), "Archaeoraptor Fossil Trail," National Geographic, 198[4]:128-132, October.
Sloan, Christopher P. (1999), "Feathers for T. Rex?," National Geographic, 196[5]:99-107, November.
Twain, Mark (1883), Life on the Mississippi (Boston, MA: J.R. Osgood).
Xing, Xu (2000), "Feathers for T-rex?" [Letter to the editor], National Geographic, 197[3]:no page number, March.
Copyright © 2001 Apologetics Press, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may be copied, on the condition that it will not be republished in print unless otherwise stated below, and will not be used for any commercial purpose, as long as the following stipulations are observed: (1) Apologetics Press must be designated as the original publisher; (2) the specific Apologetics Press Web site URL must be noted; (3) any references, footnotes, or endnotes that accompany the article must be included with any written reproduction of the article; (4) textual alterations of any kind are strictly forbidden; (5) Some illustrations (e.g., photographs, charts, graphics, etc.) are not the intellectual property of Apologetics Press and as such cannot be reproduced from our site without consent from the person or organization that maintains those intellectual rights; (6) serialization of written material (e.g., running an article in several parts) is permitted, as long as the whole of the material is made available, without editing, in a reasonable length of time; (7) articles, in whole or in part, may not be offered for sale or included in items offered for sale; and (8) articles may be reproduced in electronic form for posting on Web sites pending they are not edited or altered from their original written content and that credit is given to Apologetics Press, including the web location from which the articles were taken. Further, documents may not be copied without source statements (title, author, journal title), and the address of the publisher and owner of rights, as listed below.
For catalog, samples, or further information, contact:
Apologetics Press
230 Landmark Drive
Montgomery, Alabama 36117
Phone (334) 272-8558


text:
Marion County, FLHome Sitemap Contact
Calendar of events
Library - Belleview - Technology Help Center
Now on Wednesdays, 2 - 4 p.m. Belleview Computer Lab
- Date: 08/21/2019 2:00 PM - 4:00 PM
- Location: Belleview Public Library
13145 SE Highway 484
Belleview, Florida 34420
Return to full list >>
Technology Help Center is moving to Wednesdays beginning June 5th!
Have a technology question about your newest gadget? Bring that device and/or your question and drop in for one-on-one assistance from staff members.


text:
Stryper – The Covering (2011, Big3 Records)
- Set Me Free
- Blackout
- Heaven And Hell
- Lights Out
- Carry On Wayward Son
- Highway Star
- Shout It Out Loud
- Over The Mountain
- The Trooper
- Breaking The Law
- On Fire
- Immigrant Song
- God
Band Lineup:
Michael Sweet – Lead Vocals & Guitars
Oz Fox – Guitars & Vocals
Robert Sweet – Drums
Timothy Gaines – Bass & Vocals
Charles Foley – Keyboards/Piano/Organ
Executive Producer: Bill Edwards
Producer: Michael Sweet
Country: USA
Total Time = 53:30
Stryper MySpace page
Big3 Records
When a band from the '80s releases a new album, I always get excited. I lived and died with these bands as a kid growing up and I still do to this day. I love hearing what these veteran bands have to offer 20 to 25+ years after their '80s heyday. When I read that Stryper was releasing a new album in early 2011 I marked the release date on my calendar right away because I was a big Stryper fan back in the day. I started out with SOLDIERS UNDER COMMAND (1985), picked up the 1986 re-release of THE YELLOW & BLACK ATTACK (originally released in 1984) and went forward. I've supported the band ever since and picked up every album as they were released. Recently, the band has been very active with three new releases since 2005 and touring consistently in that time. With a new tour date at the end of March added to my local area, and the announcement of THE COVERING, I admit that I got a little psyched about Stryper…..until I found out the new album was an album of cover songs.
If you've read this website over the last five years then you know that nothing irritates me more than cover songs taking the place on a studio album where original songs could be AND records that are billed as "new albums" but are really covers and nothing new except new versions of old songs. I'll give Stryper credit, they were up front about doing a covers album, and the performances are good. If you take a look at the song selection you'll notice a lot of safe and well known Rock songs included from the likes of the Scorpions, KISS, Deep Purple, Ozzy, Iron Maiden and even Led Zeppelin. I have no problem with the performances because the band sounds in fine form and the songs are all done basically as the originals. I also like a few of the songs the band selected among the safe ones: UFO's 'Lights Out', The Sweet's 'Set Me Free', Kansas' 'Carry On Wayward Son' and Van Halen's 'On Fire'. The other songs are done well but how many times have we all heard the original or a cover of 'Breaking The Law', 'Over The Mountain' and 'Shout It Out Loud'? Maybe a few more deep tracks by some of these bands would have been a better choice. The last song on THE COVERING is the new Stryper song aptly titled 'God'. If there was ever a song title that you would think Stryper would have already used it would be 'God'! The new original is an uptempo Hard Rock song that easily fits into the typical Stryper fare and could have easily been a part of the last Styper record, MURDER BY PRIDE (2009). What impresses me most is Michael Sweet's voice…..this guy hasn't lost a step since the mid-'80s! He can still hit all the highs and sing with a lot of power and melody. The band is always going to sound very good because Robert Sweet, Oz Fox and Timothy Gaines were always a tight unit but the usual measuring stick on a band's sound is usually how the singer is…..if you want classic Stryper, they sound like classic Stryper and I bet they pull it off well live.
Bottom Line:
I was looking forward to a new Stryper album because their last one, MURDER BY PRIDE, was so good. Unfortunately, I'm disappointed to have a new album of covers with only one new song bu this is the trend lately to get a quick product on the shelves before a tour. A veteran band like Stryper can easily go through the more popular Rock songs with ease and put out an album like this but I would rather have all new material. Like I said, the performances are well done and there are a few different songs in the tracklist that you don't hear that often but I'm still disappointed, I'd rather gat an album of original tunes. The main highlight for me is the new song 'God', the best cover for me is probably 'On Fire' because you don't really hear that covered much. I would recommend this for the Stryper diehard and collector completist but not for a general fan looking to discover Stryper or add some new Stryper to their collections.
Favorite Songs:
'God' is the best song for me because it's a good solid original. Best covers are 'On Fire', 'Carry On Wayward Son' and 'Lights Out'


text:
(Reuters) - BlackRock Inc (BLK.N), the world's largest money manager, offered a detailed plan on Thursday to break a deadlock with regulators over tightening rules on the $2.6 trillion U.S. money market fund industry.
Regulators have been seeking to tighten rules on money funds in the wake of the financial crisis, when problems at one fund spooked investors and sparked a run of withdrawals that threatened to destabilize the economy. But the industry has so far successfully defeated the plans by arguing that the new rules would make the funds too expensive to run and unappealing to customers.
Under BlackRock's proposal, money funds would maintain a constant net asset value in times of market turmoil by imposing a fee of 1 percent on customer withdrawals. The so-called stand-by liquidity fees would go back into to the funds to bolster their share price.
New York-based BlackRock included the proposal in a 26-page letter to regulators.
BlackRock also said it opposed the latest reform options offered by the U.S. Financial Stability Oversight Council last month. Those options relied on either ending the industry's fixed $1-per-share pricing policy or requiring funds to set aside capital against future losses.
Although BlackRock has indicated a willingness to compromise in the past, most of the money fund industry, including leading companies like Fidelity Investments and Federated Investors Inc FII.N, have long opposed floating share prices and capital requirements.
Reporting by Aaron Pressman; Editing by Lisa Von Ahn


text:
- Indiana Natives Briscoe, Haley Finish 1-2 in Wild Pennzoil 150 at the Brickyard Finish
- Dixon Runs Away from Field for Breakthrough Victory on IMS Road Course in GMR Grand Prix
- NTT IndyCar Series: GMR Indy Grand Prix Preview
- Dreyer & Reinbold Racing Team's 1st Road Race In 7 Years
- Beaubier And Fong Spilt Weekend MotoAmerica Wins At Road America
- Austria Opener Signals Return Of Formula 1® Racing
- INDYCAR to Welcome Fans For July 9-12 Race Weekend At Road America
- Road America adds Vintage Indy™ to INDYCAR REV Group Grand Prix Presented by AMR Double Header Weekend, July 9-12
- INDYCAR To Welcome Fans for July 17-18 Iowa Speedway Race Weekend
- IMS Fourth of July Weekend Events To Run Without Spectators
New Sponsor, Fan Amenities and Attractions Fuel Excitement At Dollar General NHRA Four-Wide Nationals
- Updated: February 15, 2013
CONCORD, N.C. (Feb. 15, 2013) – Fans gearing up for the greatest spectacle in
drag racing have more to look forward to than ever before when the NHRA and the
fastest-accelerating machines on the planet return to the Bellagio of drag
strips April 19-21.
A familiar name at Charlotte Motor Speedway has extended its partnership with
the legendary facility to become the title sponsor of the fourth annual Dollar
General NHRA Four-Wide Nationals fueled by Full Throttle. Dollar General, which
also serves as title sponsor of the NASCAR Nationwide Series Dollar General 300
in October, signed on for the nitro-fueled event that includes action-packed
racing from the NHRA's top categories, Top Fuel, Funny Car, Pro Stock and Pro
Stock Motorcycle.
"We couldn't ask for a better partner than Dollar General to get behind one of
the most popular and absolutely the most unique events on the NHRA circuit,"
said Christian Byrd, general manager of zMAX Dragway. "By extending the
partnership Dollar General already has with Charlotte Motor Speedway, we are
adding a strong retail presence that will help grow the sport of drag racing
even more across the southeast."
But a new sponsor isn't all fans will see for the first time at this year's
four-wide spectacular. In addition to the return of Pro Stock Motorcycles –
racing four-wide for the first time since 2009 – and fan-favorites like
four-wide jet car exhibitions on Friday and Saturday nights, new additions to
the weekend include:
• A Sunday hot rod cruise-in with Charlotte-area car clubs showing off their
best classics, customs and street rods;
• A giant video board set up near the starting line to provide replays and other
• An oversized ladder board to help fans keep track of the brackets during
elimination rounds;
• A smartphone app that will allow fans to pick the winners of each round of
competition and accumulate points that can be redeemed for prizes;
• Blue light specials at concession stands throughout the facility with menu
items like a hot dog, popcorn, fries and a sweet tea for just $1 each before 11
a.m. daily;
• Free wireless internet for campers staying in Tom Johnson Camping Center;
"Our new amenities and additions to an already fan-friendly event are in
response to suggestions from our Fan Council and other past customers. It's part
of our ongoing effort to make every fan's race day experience a memorable one at
the world's greatest dragway," said Byrd.
To purchase tickets and camping to the fourth annual Dollar General NHRA
Four-Wide Nationals at zMAX Dragway, April 19-21, visit [2]www.zmaxdragway.com
or call 1-800-455-FANS (3267). Fans who buy three East Grandstand tickets to any
day will receive a fourth ticket free. Every ticket is a pit pass, so fans can
walk through the pits and see their favorite drivers and teams as they prepare
to take to the track.
Connect with zMAX Dragway and stay up to speed with all the happenings at the
Bellagio of drag strips on Facebook at www.facebook.com/zmaxdragway and on
Twitter at [3]www.twitter.com/zmaxdragway.


text:
Here is a preview of the MOCK UP box for the "Black & White TV Edition" Add-On set (separate purchase)
to our GIJCC Membership Incentive FREE 12-inch Action Soldier figure for 2018!
Here is a preview of the MOCK UP box for the "Black & White TV Edition" Add-On set (separate purchase)
to our GIJCC Membership Incentive FREE 12-inch Action Soldier figure for 2018!
The box looks a little wider than normal, is that to accommodate a larger amount of gear?
Is the Joe really going to be grey?
I believe everything about this Joe will be grey. As if we were seeing him on TV back in '64.
Think of him like the Sideshow "Sideshow Silver Screen Monsters."
Last edited by firstname.lastname@example.com; 09-12-2017 at 06:00 PM. Reason: I'm trying to get my point across.
Thanks for the response. I'll probably pass on this next year. For me it won't display well with the rest of the stuff.
Really? The LAST ONE EVER?????
Me to, figure and concept just does nothing for me.
I would have preferred something ATish. Oh well.Really? The LAST ONE EVER?????
Oh, me too.
But this can be nifty in its own right. I've come around to it and thought of some nice ways to use it/play with it.
And you'll kick yourself if you don't get the last one ever. I know I would.
Anyway, my question still stands, what does he come with? The box looks wider, and the equipment list on top looks like it could be longer than usual.
I once speculated that the figure could be like the first issue figures, with raccoon eyes, and have all fabric gear, like the prototype stuff used for some commercials and promotional images.
Last edited by firstname.lastname@example.com; 09-13-2017 at 09:17 PM.
Just a couple of notes: Yes, everything will be in gray tones. This is a set of figures, not just a one off, so they will display well together. There will be an Action Sailor, Action Pilot, and Action Marine as well in this series. You will get the 12" gray tone figure wearing shorts and the accessories and box are the add on that completes the set. These will be REALLY limited. Yes, it's a novelty but something that harkens back to the ORIGINAL days of Joe as he was first seen. The box images came off of the original commercials. The box is the width of the talker boxes to accommodate the accessories.


text:
I received the following press release from Elissa Scalise Powell, CG, one of the directors of the Genealogical Research Institute of Pittsburgh. I am excited for registration to open for the 2013 institute as I will be participating this year as an instructor in the land course. There is a great lineup of courses to choose from.
PRESS RELEASE -- January 31, 2013
Genealogical Research Institute of Pittsburgh (GRIP) will open registration for its six courses on Thursday, February 7 at noon eastern. These courses sell out quickly, some within minutes of registration opening.
GRIP's week-long courses will be held from July 21 through July 26, 2013 at LaRoche College, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Last year students from 28 states enjoyed a small collegial atmosphere where they were able to know not only their classmates and instructors, but the other students in the intimate campus atmosphere. Dorm rooms, just steps from the classrooms and cafeteria, make off-hours fun and friendly.
For more information beyond the below, visit www.GRIPitt.org where you may subscribe to email notifications of new postings, or email email@example.com.
The six courses to be offered in 2013 are:
1.) Intermediate Genealogy: Tools for Digging Deeper with Paula Stuart-Warren, CG, FMGS, FUGA.
Stuart-Warren focuses on unusual resources, manuscripts, methodology, and analyzing records. She encourages the class to bring their own family history problems for brainstorming and discussion. D. Joshua Taylor, MA, MLS and Deborah S. Mieszala, CG, are instructors in this course.
2.) Determining Kinship Reliably with the Genealogical Proof Standard with Thomas W. Jones, Ph.D., CG, CGL, FASG, FUGA, FNGS.
Learn how to achieve genealogical proof by planning and executing focused research, citing the resulting sources, testing the evidence they contain, assembling that evidence into a conclusion, and explaining it clearly. Jones has edited the National Genealogical Society Quarterly since 2002 where many proof arguments are published.
3.) Bridging the 1780-1840 Gap: From New England to the Midwest with D. Joshua Taylor, MA, MLS.
Explore the migration patterns across New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio which left a scarcity of records and researchers more than one "brickwall" problem. Learn the methods and tools to overcome these challenges. Taylor is a former Director of Education and Programs at New England Historic Genealogical Society, and has appeared on the television program "Who Do You Think You Are?" Other instructors are Deborah Mieszala, CG, Richard Sayre, CG, CGL, Craig Scott, CG, and Paula Stuart-Warren, CG.
4.) Your Immigrant Ancestors' Stories: Writing a Quality Narrative with John Philip Colletta, Ph.D., FUGA.
Having researched the stories, now it's time to share what you know! Learn how to incorporate documentary information, family lore, and artifacts into a work that your relatives will enjoy reading. German, Irish, and Italian case studies will be enlarged with sample sources for other nationalities, colonial times to 20th century. Hands-on exercise lets you practice writing. Dr. Colletta is the author of They Came in Ships, Only a Few Bones, and Finding Italian Roots. Michael Hait, CG, is an instructor.
5.) Advanced Land Research: Locating, Analyzing, Mapping with Rick Sayre, CG, CGL and Pam Sayre, CG, CGL.
Understanding land history and records is essential for successful research and kinship determination. This course explores land distribution in the current United States by colonial powers, private land claims, federal land records at both the National Archives and the General Land Office, and local-level county or town deeds. Use of software and Internet resources is practiced in hands-on computer labs. Angela Packer McGhie is also an instructor.
6.) Military Records: From Cradle to Grave with Craig R. Scott, CG.Examines the types, uses and functions of military records and the organizations that created them. Records exist outside of compiled military service records and pensions that must be searched for to get a full picture of a soldier, sailor or marines military and post-military life. Scott specializes in National Archives records and is recognized as one of the leading experts in military research. Other instructors are Deborah S. Mieszala, CG, and Richard G. Sayre, CG, CGL


text:
The world will not end on December 21st, 2012. The government is sure of it and so is NASA. In fact, NASA is so confident that the world will not on that day, that it has already published the December 22nd, 2012 ScienceCast video explaining why the world didn't end the day before. Heady.
So here you have it, a sober, reasoned future explanation of why the world didn't end on December 21st, 2012. Very clever, NASA, but if you're wrong about this, no one will be around to know it. [CNET]


text:
| 10.9°C Dublin
Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim, who already controls America Movil, tightened his grip slightly on Latin America's biggest phone company, according to a U.S. regulatory filing on Thursday that shows two companies controlled by Slim bought more shares.
The purchases, made in November and December last year, come on top of a massive buyback effort by America Movil, whose share price has been under pressure since Mexico's government last year passed a reform plan that seeks to curb the company's dominance.
Slim's real estate company Inmobiliaria Carso and his bank Grupo Financiero Inbursa spent $212.5m and $34.7 million purchasing 187.11 million and 30.98 million shares respectively in America Movil, a document sent to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission showed.
Slim, his three sons, three daughters and their controlled companies and foundations now own about 47.6 percent of America Movil's outstanding shares, up from 47.3 percent when the group made their last filing in November, according to a Reuters calculation.
The stake directly held by Slim has not changed from 4,950,586,338 million shares or 7.1 percent based on America Movil's total shares outstanding on Thursday, the filing showed.
The filing also shows that one of Slim's daughters, Maria Soumaya, sold 100,000 shares on December 30.
America Movil shares have fallen more than 10pc this year, in spite of the company's continued buyback plan.
In 2013, the company spent about $5.4bc, more than half its total capital expenditure for the year, buying back its own shares.
The shares closed 2013 up 2.14pc, helped by the buyback.
America Movil shares closed down 2.05pc on Thursday at 13.35 pesos, dragging Mexico's IPC index, which closed down 0.88 pesos.
Online Editors


text:
Guía de productos
A tougher take on a favorite multitool. Safely poke and pry with this tough, firm, and antistatic tool for electronic repair. 5" carbon fiber tool essential for smartph...
De USD 2.99
Phillips #00 Screwdriver
Standard Phillips screwdriver used to take apart laptops. Swivel top handle with precision tip driver.
De USD 6.99
Anti-Static Wrist Strap
Help protect your electronics from accidental electrostatic discharge (ESD) damage during repairs. Ground yourself while working.
TR8 Torx Security Screwdriver
Compatible with both T8 and T8 Security fasteners (TR8). Swivel top handle with precision tip driver.
De USD 5.99
Mostrando productos 1 - 4 de 4


text:
The following checklist is submitted
for your consideration, following requests for advice on
appropriate pathology tests from many doctors over the years.
This list is neither exhaustive nor
authoritative, and should only be regarded as a prompt to assist
the busy practitioner. Obviously, in individual and specific
circumstances, some tests mentioned will be irrelevant; equally,
other tests not on the list may be very appropriate.
The tests are organised into
first-stage, second-stage and more specialised tests; to encourage
appropriate ordering strategies. Medicare restrictions apply to
those tests marked with a *.
You may also refer to the Complete Clinical Problem Listing from
The Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia manual for
guidance in clinical scenarios.