text:
The DI's Dishonest Attacks on Barbara Forrest
As a measure of the desperation felt by the Discovery Institute over the case in Dover, one could hardly find a better metric than this dishonest attack piece by John West on Barbara Forrest, an expert witness for the plaintiffs in the case and the author of Creationism's Trojan Horse. West makes it appear as though Judge Jones has declared that she is an unreliable witness. In fact, the opposite is true, but some background is necessary to understand what happened.
The TMLC attorneys made what is known as a Daubert motion to prevent Dr. Forrest from being able to testify at the trial. It's called a Daubert motion because the controlling precedent for what type of expert scientific testimony is admissable in court is Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals. In cases where experts are called as witnesses, one side may object to the witnesses of the other side based upon the standards in this case, essentially arguing that they are not qualified or bring no specialized knowledge to the case. The TMLC attempted such a tactic regarding Barbara Forrest and the DI cites a portion of the courtroom discussion concerning a portion of her expert report:
THE COURT: …Within Ms. Forrest's testimony, I see repeated references to quotes that were apparently derived from magazine articles and third persons that look to me to be inadmissible hearsay…
…if… we're going to have Ms. Forrest take the stand, or Professor Forrest, I should say, I guess, take the stand and if she is going to rely on hearsay, extracted hearsay statements from articles or narratives, I think we have a problem.
That's not to say that she can't testify as to – if, in fact, we get to this point and if I find it relevant, and that's another issue altogether, and I don't think we have to address it here – that's not to say that she couldn't testify if it's otherwise relevant to what the scope of the report appears to be, which is a – sort of panoply of what intelligent design has been over the course that she's looked at it or the course that she examined it. But these extracted statements by individuals I think are problematic. Tell me why they're not if you view it otherwise.
MR. ROTHSCHILD: I do, Your Honor. First of all, what she is basically doing is a history of a –and I say this reluctantly – an intellectual movement.
THE COURT: Well, and it read like a magazine article to me. I might find it interesting and others might find it even entertaining, but for the purpose of an expert report, I'll bet she hasn't probably testified many times, if at all, as an expert witness.
And the fact it has these quotes, that it is rife with these quotes, which not only present hearsay issues but also could be taken out of context and could otherwise be objectionable, I'm simply putting you on notice that either you've got to contour the report to – contour her testimony, not the report, to address that, or I think you're going to get repeated objections.
And I think, unless you come up with something that is pretty remarkable, those objections could be sustained to the extent, again, not as to the general scope of her report, but as to these extracted quotes by individuals from unverified sources.
They're not from treatises. A lot of them were taken out of news articles, it appears to me, magazines, other things. Why isn't that hearsay?
So what is this conversation really about? Contrary to the implication being made by John West, the discussion is not about Forrest passing on unsubstantiated rumors or anything like that. The issue is over the difference between what may be perfectly admissable in a scholarly examination of an issue but not admissable in a court of law. In particular, Forrest's book on the subject and a portion of her expert report detailing the origins and development of the intelligent design movement relied upon the writings and speeches of the leaders of that movement, which she quoted at length. In a scholarly book or article, that is of course entirely appropriate.
But in a court of law, objections are inevitably raised to such quotations because the quote might be out of context or might be interpreted differently, but the person who said it is not available to take the stand and be cross examined. Hence, it might be called "hearsay" and be inadmissable in court. And that is the argument that the TMLC was making against her testimony and saying that the testimony should be excluded. And one would think, by reading the DI's spin, that the Judge agreed with them. In fact, Judge Jones denied this motion. And here are the relevant portions of the judge's order denying that motion:
In the Motion, Defendants move the Court to exclude the testimony and expert reports, including the data upon which they are based, of Barbara Forrest, Ph.D., a witness who intends to testify as an expert on behalf of Plaintiffs, pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence 401, 403, 702, and 703. Defendants argue that Dr. Forrest brings no scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge to this case and accuses Plaintiffs of using her as a "Trojan Horse" to bring into the courtroom impertinent matters to prejudice the Dover Area School Board ("DASB"). (Defs.' Br. Supp. Mot. Limine at 12). In response, Plaintiffs assert that Dr. Forrest's proffered expert testimony goes directly to the issue of the origins of intelligent design creationism, that she is qualified to testify as an expert pursuant to Fed.R.Evid. 702, that her methodology is reliable, and that her testimony "fits" the issues in this case. An initial issue to address is Defendants' contention that Dr. Forrest is not qualified to give an expert opinion in the case sub judice. As Defendants submit, Fed.R.Evid. 702 provides, as follows:
If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case. Fed.R.Evid. 702.
We first recognize that there may be few experts with the particular area of expertise held by Dr. Forrest concerning the "nature and strategy of the intelligent design creationist movement." In fact, Dr. Forrest may be the only such expert. Accordingly, there is no particular touchstone in existence regarding an individual with Dr. Forrest's qualifications and the concept of "specialized knowledge," as there would be for example with an expert who is an accident reconstructionist specialist or one who is versed in the medical field. However, we find nothing in the submissions to indicate at least at this preliminary stage that Dr. Forrest is not an appropriate expert witness in this case. We are in agreement with Plaintiffs that Dr. Forrest's report makes clear that she has "specialized knowledge" on the nature and strategy of the intelligent design creationist movement, and possesses the ability to assimilate information and research topics intimately involved with the concept of intelligent design pursuant to Fed.R.Evid. 702. Therefore, at this juncture, given Dr. Forrest's credentials, extensive research, and writings on the subject of intelligent design and the intelligent design creationist movement, we will permit her to testify at the time of trial, subject to the opportunity by defense counsel to conduct a voir dire examination on her qualifications. We reserve as we must ultimate judgment concerning her ability and the extent to which she can testify until the trial in this case.
The second pertinent rule to consider for purposes of this inquiry is Fed.R.Evid. 703. Federal Rule of Evidence 703 provides, in relevant part, as follows:
The facts or data in the particular case upon which an expert bases an opinion or inference may be those perceived by or made known to the expert at or before the hearing. If of a type reasonably relied upon by experts in the particular field in forming opinions or inferences upon the subject, the facts or data need not be admissible in evidence in order for the opinion or inference to be admitted. Fed.R.Evid. 703.
We recognize that Fed.R.Evid. 703 permits experts to rely on hearsay in expert reports; however, the hearsay statements present in Dr. Forrest's report may be problematic because without more, we are unable to verify the accuracy of the statements at issue, nor can we determine whether the individual statements have been taken out of context. Accordingly, in an effort to be equitable, to balance competing concerns, and after a careful review of the submissions, we hold that to the extent that Dr. Forrest testifies and such testimony references hearsay statements found in her report, we direct Plaintiffs' counsel to stand ready to provide the Court and defense counsel with any pertinent material cited by Dr. Forrest. In particular, we are concerned with quotations within her report attributed to certain individuals, which purport to have been taken from books and publications. Counsel can either provide the Court and defense counsel with the entire article or section, for example, or a verifiable portion thereof with the quotation at issue clearly marked for inspection. This process will allow for any statement(s) taken from publications to be verified for accuracy purposes and to ascertain whether such statement was taken out of context. Finally, we are in agreement with Plaintiffs inasmuch as they assert that Dr. Forrest's testimony should be allowed in these areas as Defendants are free to cross-examine her concerning any and all inaccuracies present in her characterization of intelligent-design writings.
There is a good deal of irony to be found here. The text that West cites do not concern Dr. Forrest's veracity or reliability as a witness, they concern the issue of whether a witness can quote from others without having the full context of their statements available or having the person being quoted available for cross examination. And the judge dealt with that question quite reasonably and fairly, ruling that it was not enough for the defendant's attorney to argue that quotes might be out of context and therefore quotes are not allowed, that they must make specific arguments about the accuracy or contextuality of specific quotes as they may arise. And to that end, he ordered the plaintiff's attorney to make all of the original documents available for examination. The irony, of course, is that by selectively quoting out of context, the Discovery Institute has tried to turn legitimate concern about out of context quotes into the wholesale bashing of a witness by a judge who in fact ruled precisely the opposite of what they are implying. Just another example of deceitful propaganda from the DI.


text:
Your best surf pal in El Salvador!
Surf Resorts, Hotels, Beach Houses, tour operator companies and much more, find all the information you need to know about surf and travel in El Salvador. We have the best deals posted at the best accommodations, surf spots information, transportation and tour services, get the best tips to travel safe, we are the easy way to book your next surf trip to Central America.
Playa El Tunco
Playa El Tunco is located in La Libertad department right in the middle of the country, located just 30 kms from the capital city and also the same distance from the international airport, Playa El Tunco is probably the most visited beach town in the country.
Playa Las Flores
Playa Las Flores is located in the department of San Miguel in the East side of the pacific coast line of El Salvador, Playa Las Flores had been one of the main surf destination in El Salvador since several years ago, surf resorts and hotels with first class services available.
Playa El Zonte
Playa El Zonte is located in La Libertad Department, 22 kilometers west from the city of Puerto de La Libertad, right at Km 50 of the Litoral road, At this location you find a small surf village with a young local surf crew, popular for backpackers and low budget travelers.
Playa K59
One of the most important surf spots in La Libertad area, the hard access from the main roads makes this spot one of the most uncrowd waves in the country, at this locations you find just a couple accommodations avialable, perfect spot for surf travelers looking for privacy and a quiet enviroment.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
The Mateo collection has the perfect casual rug for any space. The flat woven jute offers a natural style that plays beautifully among the raised geometric patterns. The color palette evokes nature in deep ochre tones ranging to cool grey and seafoam.
for interior design tips, exclusive sales, and new product releases


text:
Refine by Clear all
Brand Clear
Product Range Clear
Sun Protection Clear
Price Clear
Hold Factor Clear
Hair Type Clear
For Clear
Fragrance Type Clear
Featured Products
210 x 165px
210 x 165px
Custom Block
Custom CMS block displayed at the left sidebar on the Catalog Page. Put your own content here: text, html, images, media... whatever you like.
There are many similar sample content placeholders across the store. All editable from admin panel.
Star Wars
Shop By
- 12
- 16
- 20
- 24
- 30
- 50
- Featured
- Price, low to high
- Price, high to low
- Alphabetically, A-Z
- Alphabetically, Z-A
- Date, old to new
- Date, new to old
- Best Selling
Sorry, there are no products in this collection


text:
In addition to following all official guidelines to protect ourselves and others from the spread of Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), it's also essential to take steps to prevent the emergence of other healthcare problems.
During these stressful and challenging times, we need to do our best to eat a nutritious diet, get sufficient exercise, and maintain our overall well-being. This advice includes protecting the health of your smile. By practicing good oral hygiene, following a diet low in sugary sweets, and avoiding harmful oral habits, you can significantly reduce your risk of dental problems or emergencies that would require leaving your home for in-office care.
Maintaining a healthy smile depends upon keeping your teeth and gums clean with a daily routine of brushing and flossing. However, because the mouth and nose areas are vulnerable entry points for Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) and other infections, it's essential to take extra precautions when performing your oral hygiene and personal care routines.
We offer the following helpful suggestions for maintaining your smile while protecting your overall health:
At the office of GoodDay Dental, we're dedicated to helping patients maintain their ongoing health and well-being at all times, including during the Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) outbreak. Please don't hesitate to reach out to us with any dental questions, concerns, or issues that require care.
By GoodDay Dental
April 3, 2020


text:
HR 4437, a bill sponsored by Wisconsin Republican James Sensenbrenner, which passed Congress in December, 2005, hit immigrant communities across the country like an electric current. Its proposals to make undocumented status a federal crime propelled people into the streets by the millions on April 10 and May 1 of 2006, and inspired a wealth of activity, from work and consumer boycotts, student "blowouts," and school strikes, denunciations from pulpits and union halls, and a surge in coalition-building.
The Democratic victories in November 2006 owed much to this upsurge. Although non-citizens could not vote, they mounted phone banks and walked precincts, and helped ensure the defeat of 20 of the most outspoken candidates of the House anti-immigrant caucus, led by Colorado Representative Tom Tancredo.
This wave of activism did not just happen overnight. It built on over two decades of efforts by immigrants to change sweatshop conditions, and, more broadly, to change an economic system that consigns some people to the bottom of an economic pyramid, working for the benefit of others.
New Strategies for Overcoming Old Laws
In the last decade in California, New York, and Texas, and in states where the immigrant population has appeared more recently, immigrants have been the backbone of strikes and union organizing drives in some of the hardest-fought labor struggles since the farm workers' battles of the late 1960s. In 1993, drywall hangers shut down home construction for a year in half of California. Over a decade later, workers at the largest pork processing plant in the world, in North Carolina, walked off the job to march in immigrants' rights protests, and to force the company to slow down its brutal "line speeds," responsible for hundreds of disabling injuries. The fact that a union contract did not exist in this last example did not deter the workers, however.
"I see immigration law the same way I did when I first started as an organizer," says UNITE regional manager Cristina Vasquez, who came up out of the garment shops of Los Angeles three decades ago. "It's a tool of the employers. They're able to use immigration laws as a weapon to keep workers unorganized."
The last decade of strikes and organizing drives has profoundly changed the attitudes of unions and workers, setting new rules for the conduct of successful labor battles. They have an inclusive character reminiscent of the turn-of-the-century birth of the United States labor movement, when the radical "wobblies" of the Industrial Workers of the World proposed "one big union" for everyone. Today's marches, mass picket lines, and flying squads of strikers are a reminder of the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) of the 1930s. In a world where workers and unions are hamstrung by routine procedures, on a playing field where only employers win, immigrants have recognized that their strength lies in having faith in the power of their own numbers, in direct action, and in the common culture shared by whole communities.
This wave of immigrant-based labor activity hasn't been lost on labor activists seeking a new constituency for unions, and strategy and tactics appropriate for what many of them describe as class war. Unions in building services, hotels and restaurants, garment production, and light industries have rebuilt themselves by tying their organizing strategy to this upsurge, and are learning to combine intense community pressure with all-out attacks on parent corporations, often involving marches, demonstrations, sit-ins, and other mass actions to mobilize and amplify the pressure workers can bring to bear against their employers.
Today, organizing tactics rely increasingly on close alliances between workers, unions, and communities to offset the power exercised by employers. Asbestos removal workers joining the Laborers Union in New Jersey and Long Island, or employees at the huge Blue Diamond almond-processing plant in Sacramento allying with the International Longshore and Warehouse union, organize around conditions they face on the job. But they also take their campaigns out into the community, organizing around immigration, discrimination in the schools, police misconduct, and many other issues that are part of daily life in immigrant communities
Unions Embrace New Members, Sometimes Resist New Leadership
The alliance between unions and immigrant workers, however, has been hampered by conflict over the rights those workers have once they become union members, and their ability to exercise leadership in the organizations they've joined. The United Farm Workers historically went through a number of internal struggles over the efforts of members to exert control from the rank-and-file. Once Southern California's drywallers won their strike in the mid-1990s, they began to conflict with existing union leadership in the Carpenters Union. And a sharp struggle took place once immigrant janitors helped reorganize the Los Angeles local of the Service Employees.
Workers who faced down government terror in El Salvador or Guatemala, and who share the militant traditions of many immigrant workers from Mexico, also come with the expectation they will have a significant amount of control over their union once they are members. For Latino workers, unions have become an indispensable tool for winning political power, but they often join unions whose structure and power are held by others, and find they have to win power inside their unions as part of the process for using the union for larger struggles.
Cross-Border Solidarity
While immigrant-based activism has been a product of the migration of millions of working people from Mexico and Central America, that activism has also spilled back over the border into Mexico. Even before the passage of NAFTA, the growth of maquiladoras just south of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California, led to the flight of thousands of jobs from the U.S. In the Southwest, thousands of those jobs belonged to immigrants themselves, whether in Levi's garment factories in San Antonio or Green Giant's freezers in Watsonville.
The connection is not hard to see. Just south of San Ysidro, or El Paso, or Brownsville, workers toil for incredibly low wages, according to The Coalition for Justice in the Maquiladoras (CJM) Director Martha Ojeda. "They earn $5.00 for an eight-hour day, when the same business in the U.S. pays workers $7.50 for a single hour, even if those workers are not legal immigrants." Despite the promises of the backers of the free trade agreement between the United States and Mexico, wages in the border factories haven't gone up in 13 years.
In the decade after passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement, efforts to develop working relations with unions and workers in Mexico sprouted all along the border. The United Electrical Workers and the United Steel Workers have formed cooperative relationships with Mexican unions–the Authentic Labor Front and the Mexican Miners Union—to try to organize unions in border factories and to defend workers against government policies of low wages and privatization.
CJM and other cross-border groups have provided help to border workers in their efforts to organize independent unions at Sony, Alcoa, Custom Trim, Sara Lee, Han Young, and a host of other plants.
Migration of Capital and Labor
Migrant Rights International estimates that over 170 million people today live outside of the countries in which they were born, not just moving from Mexico to the United States, but from developing countries to developed ones all over the world. Transnational corporations invest in the developing world, moving production to whatever area the wages are lowest. And in developed countries, they hire the workers who have been displaced by high unemployment and falling wages—by-products of the very economic realities created by transnational corporations. The migration of people is as much a product of the global economy as the migration of capital.
In this system, corporations are aided by United States immigration laws. While they are presented in the media as a means of controlling borders, 20 years ago, during the height of the debate over the Immigration Reform and Control Act, Mexican academic Jorge Bustamante declared that United States immigration legislation always has the purpose of regulating the price of Mexican (and more broadly, immigrant) labor in the United States.
In fact, United States immigration policy is institutionalizing the global flow of migration, not stopping it. Its basic function is defining the status of people once they're here. Many in corporate America now think they see a better way to regulate the cost and supply of this flow, through guest worker programs.
Guest Worker Programs: Open Regulation of the Price of Labor
The National Association of Chain Drugstores (think Wal-Mart), the American Meat Institute, and many other corporate players (organized in the essential worker immigration coalition) backed a bill that passed in the Senate for an enormous expansion of guest worker programs in which employers would recruit four hundred thousand contract laborers every year outside the United States. Under these proposals, migrants will now be considered only as workers, directed to the industries where they can be used most profitably. While the Senate and House couldn't agree on competing bills last year, it is almost certain that this Senate proposal will be reintroduced this year, with the support of large sections of the Democratic and Republican party leadership.
There are many visa categories employers already use to bring workers to the United States as contract laborers, in programs for high tech and healthcare workers, farm workers, garment workers, and others. The workers displaced by these programs, or threatened with displacement, are often other immigrants or workers of color whose jobs had higher wages and more job security. Furthermore, when workers under contract are fired, they lose their ability to stay in the country, effectively giving employers the power to deport.
Although the proposal to broadly expand the guest worker program comes from large corporations, and is supported by President George Bush, its primary supporters in Congress have been Democrats.
These industry-based visa programs are predicated on the idea that immigration law should be used to supply workers to employers. Only one bill in Congress, by Houston's Sheila Jackson Lee, and supported by the Congressional Black Caucus, would have granted real amnesty to people living here without papers. That bill was virtually shut out of the debate by the leaders of both parties.
In previous periods, when United States immigration policy valued immigrants only for their labor power, it produced extremely abusive systems. The memory of the bracero program, which ran from 1942 to 1964, is so bitter that even today defenders of guest worker schemes avoid association with the name. Braceros were housed in barracks, shipped from job to job, and deported if they went on strike. They were isolated from and pitted against the communities around them, as employers sought to create a labor surplus to drive down wages. That's why Ernesto Galarza and Cesar Chavez fought for 22 years to end the scheme.
A policy based on supplying guest workers to industry, at a price it wants to pay, is an immigration policy that denies community and inevitably produces rootless people, vulnerable to exploitation.
"We all have a right to work and eat," says Dolores Alcala, who, like most immigrants, expresses a mixture of gratitude to the United States for affording her economic opportunity, and anger over her exploitation. Alcala was only 11 years old when she went to work in the green onion fields in the Mexicali Valley, just below the border. She left for the other side when she was 15.
"I was afraid to come here, especially by myself, but my need was stronger," she remembers. "My family went hungry all the time, and I just needed to eat."
But in Los Angeles, although she was able to find a paycheck in a garment sweatshop, she also found she was not accepted. "What I didn't expect was so much discrimination, so much abuse, especially in the factory," she says. While she holds her boss responsible, she thinks the law shares responsibility.
"The immigration law," says Alcala flatly, "is just trampling on all of us."
A better alternative to the oppressive Alcala experience would be a policy that recognizes and values communities, and sees their support as a desirable goal. It would seek to integrate immigrants into the broader society, while protecting their ability to practice their own culture.
A pro-worker immigration policy would protect the rights and welfare of all people, immigrant and non-immigrant alike. People in the United States, and in immigrant-sending countries like Mexico, need the same things—secure jobs at a living wage, rights in the workplace and community, and the freedom to travel and seek a future for their families. For working people, borders should be a common ground, not a dividing line.
Download or view a PDF of this article (787 KB).
JUST Jobs? Organizing for Economic Justice | Vol. 14 No. 1 | Spring 2007 | Credits


text:
When you think of the most ubiquitous street food in Nepal, there flashes the sight of piping hot momo that warms the cockles of your heart and makes you drool. If you take a stock of the culinary scene on the busy streets and alleys and you will get to fathom the phenomenal popularity of this dish. Such is the craze, especially among the young crowd that that momo have attained the status of unofficial national dish of the country. Hence we are on a momo trail to taste the incredible variety that is available locally. To guide us on this fascinating culinary trail featuring this quintessential Nepalese dish we are joined by Kamal who is a momo aficionado too.
Our first stop was Ghangri Cafe at Jhamshel, Kathmandu. This place is famous for what is known as open momo or Sui Mui momo. Available in chicken, pork and buff, they are loved for their unique flower-like shape and of course their unparalleled taste. One bite is enough to fall in love with these open momos. As the three different chutneys accompanying the delicacy reaches the stuffing inside the momo through the open ends it infuses them with a vibrant character and transforms them into tiny bombs of flavours. Apart from the taste what we loved about them was that the juiciness is very much intact in these momo.
The next stop was Mahabharat momo in Patan Dhoka. Before trying their popular Jhol momo, we first witnessed the making of the momo in the kitchen. This kind of momo originated from the Newari community. It was fascinating to watch a team of young workers efficiently doling out momo in lightning speed. We then tried a plateful of freshly steamed momo that is to be eaten with the creamy and spicy sesame, peanuts, soyabean and fresh coriander based broth. The momo and the broth are served separately and one has to dunk them in the broth and have them together to get the real feel of the combo.
Next was the turn of another batch of jhol momos at Narayan Dai Ko Mashangali. This variant was completely different from the previous Jhol Momos as the broth here was thin, spicy and tangy due to the use of a local sour fruit called Lapsi Nepali Hog Plum (Choerospondias axillaris). They serve you fresh chicken, mutton or buff momo in a bowl which you need to submerge with ladle full of this sour, runny broth from the huge clay vessels kept at the counter and enjoy. The taste was indeed very unique and irresistible. The momo were perfectly done and the broth just accentuate the whole flavour profile.
Our next destination was a Sinka restaurant which is famous for Chaat momo and the unique Sizzler momo. The first one is zesty, sweet and sour combination of fried chicken momos that is topped with beaten curd, chutneys, peanuts, onions and chaat masala. This chat was quite unique and flavoursome. Trying a Chaat with fried momo as the base was a novel experience for us. The second dish is a sizzler platter comprising of steamed chicken momos, stir fried noodles and stir fried veggies,. This one was flambeed with Khukri Rum and had very interesting Continental flavours that came from the various herbs used in the dish.
Our final destination in the trail was a quaint and cosy eatery named Noyoz. Here we met the very graceful food connoisseur and entrepreneur, Susan Karmacharya who was there to guide us more about the momo culture in Nepal. Here we tried a couple of their bestsellers like the smoked pork and aloo nimki along with two kinds of momo- the kothey momo and steamed chicken momo in white sauce. The smoked pork was succulent, fatty, flavoursome, smoky and hearty. Aloo nimki, a popular Nepalese snacks, with multitude flavours was a welcome change.
It was such a memorable momo journey where we relished some of the best momo from the city and met some really amazing people who are serving it to the masses. Heartfelt thanks to Kamal and Susan for their insights that resulted in such a gratifying trail. Till next time Keep walking and keep exploring.