text:
What you should know about Twitter's data sales
Boulder, Colorado-based Gnip Inc and DataSift Inc, based in the U.K. and San Francisco, are licensed by Twitter to analyze archived tweets and basic information about users, like geographic location. DataSift announced this week that it will release Twitter data in packages that will encompass the last two years of activity for its customers to mine, while Gnip can go back only 30 days.
Harvesting what someone said a year or more ago is game-changing, said Paul Stephens, director of policy and advocacy for the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse in San Diego. As details emerge on the kind of information being mined, he and other privacy rights experts are concerned about the implications of user information being released to businesses waiting to pore through it with a fine-tooth comb.
As we see Twitter grow and social media evolve, this will become a bigger and bigger issue, said Graham Cluley, senior technology consultant for British-based Internet security company Sophos Ltd. Online companies know which websites we click on, which adverts catch our eye, and what we buy ... increasingly, they're also learning what we're thinking. And that's quite a spooky thought.
Twitter opted not to comment on the sale and deferred questions to DataSift. In 2010, Twitter agreed to share all of its tweets with the U.S. Library of Congress. Details of how that information will be shared publicly are still in development, but there are some stated restrictions, including a six-month delay and a prohibition against using the information for commercial purposes.
That's where DataSift comes in. More than 700 companies are on a waiting list to try out its offering, DataSift CEO Rob Bailey said in an interview with Reuters. Those who buy the data will be able to see tweets on specific topics and even isolate those views based on geography. Bailey, who is based in San Francisco, said the effect is something like holding a huge number of sporadic focus groups on brands or products.
For instance, Coca-Cola Co could look at what people in Massachusetts are saying about its Coke Zero, or Starbucks Corp could find out what people in Florida are saying about caramel lattes. Companies can also look at how they have responded to consumer complaints.
Gnip, which offers the short-term data package, said the information collected -- which involves real-time viewing -- can also be used during natural disasters to help rescuers, to monitor illnesses such as a flu outbreak and to analyze stock market sentiment.
No private conversations or deleted tweets can be accessed, Bailey said. Companies want aggregated data, not to try to figure out who said what to whom. The only information that we make available is what's public, Bailey added. We do not sell data for targeted advertising. I don't even know how that would work.
A digital analytics expert said the biggest impact will be for marketers. The only privacy risk is marketers being able to do more with the data, faster, said Thomas Bosilevac, director of analytics for the digital marketing company Digitaria.
That doesn't mean everyone has to be happy about this. It's frustrating, and telling, that now marketers have greater access to my old tweets than I do, said Rebecca Jeschke, digital rights analyst and spokeswoman for the non-profit Electronic Frontier Foundation. However, this is perfectly legal, if creepy. If you publish your tweets publicly, that allows all sorts of folks to do all sorts of things with them.
For people concerned that something they said will come back to haunt them, it's not too late to go back and delete old tweets. DataSift is required to regularly update its files to remove comments that have since been deleted. Unlike when you're looking for someone else's tweets, users can always see their own simply by clicking on the word tweets.
(Edited by Linda Stern and Beth Gladstone and Gerald E. McCormick)
© Copyright Thomson Reuters 2024. All rights reserved.


text:
Gillmeister Folder2List 3.28.5
Gillmeister Folder2List 3.28.5 | Size: 11.12 MB
Language: English
Quickly and easily create folder and file lists. With Folder2List you can quickly and easily create folder and file lists. Select the data to be displayed from numerous properties and format the data with various setting options. Folder2List supports metadata such as EXIF, IPTC, ID3, video attributes or Office document properties. This allows you to clearly list, for instance, information regarding your MP3 files or photos.
The program offers a variety of options to individually adapt the appearance of the lists. With a few simple clicks you can customize font, background color, frames, etc. You can save these settings as a profile. The generated folder or file lists can be printed and exported to many different formats (XLS, Excel-XML, PDF, HTML, CSV and TXT).
Key features
Use numerous properties of folders and files
When generating the data lists you can use properties like size, date of creation, file extensions. In addition, a lot of the metadata contained in files can be used. This feature enables you to create, for example, MP3 lists that contain artist, album, and genre.
File list columns
General data (name, path, file type, creation date, modification date, file size).
Exif data (taken date, camera manufacturer, camera model, photographer, description, commentary, image width/height, horizontal/vertical resolution, flash use).
Image data (width/height, horizontal/vertical resolution, bit depth).
IPTC data (country, country code, state, city, location, title, photographer, description, provider, source).
Audio data (artist, album, title, year, comment, track, genre, bit rate, duration).
Video data (width, height, frame rate, standard, aspect ratio, audio codec, video codec, overall bitrate, video bitrate, audio bitrate, audio compression, duration, title).
Document data (authors, title, subject, comments, tags, last saved by, revision number, template, content created, date last saved, last printed, program name, pages, words, characters) – supports XPS files, Word files, Excel files, PowerPoint files, OpenDocument files (e.g., Microsoft Office, OpenOffice or LibreOffice).
Export or print folder contents
With Folder2List you can easily print folder contents. Or you can save the directory contents as a text file, CSV file, etc. to further process the extracted information. For export, there are many formats available.
Select output type
Output directory contents as text (save as TXT, CSV or HTML file)
Export file list to Excel (save as XLS, Excel-XML or CSV file)
Save file lists as PDF file
Print directory and file lists
Copy textual directory and file lists to clipboard
Real-time preview for folder lists or file lists
Say "Thank You"

subset: commoncrawl


text:
The registration and use of this forum is completely free for you. Press "Accept" if you agree with the rules mentioned below. You will then be able to register.
Even though Administrators and Moderators from PC-Experience try to delete or edit all the unwanted posts, it is impossible for them to check all the posts. All the posts express the opinion of the author, the owners of PC-Experience and WoltLab GbR (developers of wBB) cannot be held responsible for the content of those posts.
By registering, you agree not to post messages that are vulgar, impolite, disrespectful or that express (extreme) political views or (verbal) law offences.
Additionally, the Administrators and Moderators of this board can edit or even delete your account for any reason.
Enjoy your stay at PC-Experience !


text:
How to Compete with "Billboard Agents" in Your Area (on a Budget)
There's probably an agent in your area whose face seems to be plastered everywhere you look. You're driving down the road and, boom, you see
We've all experienced the stress and tension of moving, right? Even after you've done all the footwork to find the perfect place, you've still got to deal with utilities, packing, moving trucks, lukewarm fast food meals, lost and broken items…
Oh, and if you've moved more than 20 minutes away, even after you've unpacked, you've got to find a new grocery store, school, park, favorite restaurant, etc. etc. etc….
So yeah, we all know…
When someone you love is going through it, how can you help to alleviate that stress? Well, outside of paying for their movers (PS SO WORTH IT), you can give them one of these moving/housewarming gifts. Some are gifts of time, some are thoughtful treats, and some are available on Amazon so even if your friend is moving to a new town, you can send Prime to the rescue! Best of all, you don't have to get cutesy or craftsy; you can send any of these goodies as-is.
Check 'em out and you, too, can be the most thoughtful friend/family member ever when you send housewarming gifts people actually want…
At the end of a long day of taking all their worldly possessions off of a truck, your friends are going to be HUNGRY. And this isn't any run of the mill hunger; it's more like an I-just-ran-a-marathon hunger. The really bad part of this is that they won't have food in the house and will probably be too tired to hit the ol' grocery store. Solve this problem by sending them dinner. If you're in town, you can bring it by (but don't stay a long time), and if you're not, you can send DoorDash or UberEats to feed these hungry folks for you.
Ahh, the first morning in a new house. So calm, so quiet, so… WAIT, where the heck did we pack the Keurig? And what box are the K-pods in?! Doing a Starbucks run (or, again, sending a delivery driver to do it for you) will have your tired pals crying happy, caffeinated tears faster than you can say Cinnamon Dolce Latte.
View this post on Instagram
A post shared by the canned wine connoisseur (@thecannedwineconnoisseur) on
When your friend is done bringing in boxes, they probably want to relax with a frosty adult beverage. Let them know you're thinking of them with booze in a can. Canned bevvies are all the rage right now and so easy to enjoy. No need to locate the bottle opener, corkscrew, or bar accessories; they can just pop the top and sip away.
While this is the least fun option, it's also probably the most appreciated. Whether it's running to buy more boxes and tape, helping to load that absurdly heavy table, or sitting and chatting while you both unpack the kitchen, your friend will appreciate you for pitching in on their hardest days. Also, they'll owe you one heck of a big favor.
Running out of paper towels and Windex when you've got to clean out the fridge in the place you're leaving is just about enough to make a person cry. Same thing when you get to the new place and it's… less than spotless. Coming by with a box of essentials will elevate you to a godlike status… and if they don't end up using them right now, you know they'll get used in the future.
Just like the paper towels, there are other paper products that you absolutely, positively HATE to run out of. Bring a package of TP — the GOOD stuff, not the kind that feels like tree bark… and some premium hand soap. Again, you know they'll appreciate it mucho and it's definitely not going to go to waste. (Err, no pun intended.)
If you owe your friend-on-the-move big time, or you're just #ballerstatus, send them a cleaning service. Having someone do the work for you is a beautiful thing, and walking into a sparkling clean home when you're still trying to get everything in your life back to normal brings such a sense of relief. It might not even be as expensive as you think. Depending on the size of the house and the location they're in, you might be able to get this great gift for less than $100.
There's nothing like a fresh, new start at a fresh, new house, and nothing says, "Welcome!" quite like a fresh, new doormat. There are so many neat ones available on Amazon or at your local Target. No matter what their taste is, you'll be able to find something that applies.
Houseplants lend a homey vibe no matter what the season. Bring over a few potted plants and know that you're enriching your friend's new home environment — both with a pretty plant AND with life-giving oxygen. Not sure if your friend is a plant-y person? Bring a succulent or two; they're notoriously hard to kill.
If your friend is moving into your area, save them a ton of time by bringing them a list of neighborhood favorites. Add things like restaurants, things to do, and local services they might need. Big ol' bonus points if you have a trustworthy babysitting reference — that alone is worth its weight in gold.
Did they get a new pool along with the new digs? Pool owners LOVE getting goodies for swim time. Ride on floats, beverage floats, remote-controlled boats — it's all good! Also, it's almost guaranteed you'll secure an invite to go swimming when summer hits.
No pool? No problem. Get them something to help them enjoy their new garden or patio… whatever form of the great outdoors they have. After all, no matter how nice the house is inside, sometimes it's nice to hang out outside, too!
When you've got a sparkly new kitchen, putting your dingy old towels on the counter is kind of a downer. Gift your pal some spiffy, clean kitchen towels and they'll think of you every time they walk into the kitchen.
From candy to coffee, dog treats to dinners, there's a subscription crate for just about anything your friend is into. If they've moved away, let them know you're thinking of them on the regular with a monthly crate. It might not get there on moving day, but it will relieve some stress and make them feel loved all the same!
This should go without saying, but sometimes well-meaning people think that just about any time is a good time for "advice." Moving time is NOT the time to gift a Dave Ramsey book (even if the house is on the pricey side), nor is it a time to ask why they have so darn much stuff and then offer a trip to Goodwill. Your friends are already under enough stress, so no matter how much you "wonder if you ought to say something," the answer is NO — or at least, not right now.
(Shh, our secret)
Show your sphere your an expert. We have over 1000 articles covering every real estate topic your audience will love.
Position yourself as a real estate authority!
Real estate + topical events — the perfect match!
Become the bearer of good vibes!
Because hey, everyone loves to laugh!
Get our weekly email that makes communicating with your sphere on social actually enjoyable. Stay informed and entertained, for free.
There's probably an agent in your area whose face seems to be plastered everywhere you look. You're driving down the road and, boom, you see
Social media made marketing yourself as an agent about as cheap and easy as it comes. Years ago, you had to have a good chunk
LinkedIn has been around since 2002, quietly trucking along. It's not a social media platform that you hear a whole lot of people talking about
Most real estate agents were shocked enough when they heard that The National Association of Realtors and two brokerage firms were liable for $1.8 billion
Every agent needs a lead list. They are compilations of prospects you can reach out to when you are trying to drum up business. They
This reset password link has expired. Check the latest email sent to you.


text:
I get many odd golf equipment submissions for review. Many of these submissions may have new designs or technologies, but their true usefulness isn't all that great. When I initially opened the box with the Axis 1 Putter inside, I thought I'd received yet another not-so-useful piece of gear. I was wrong.
Axis 1 Overview
The Axis 1 Putter is obviously a departure from normal putter design. The Axis putter is precisely designed to put the absolute center of the club's weighting on the sweet spot. This is done primarily by moving the weight of the putter's heel forward of the club face.
When I pick up any new putter the first thing I do is see if the putter "wants" to stay square to the target line. My moderately unscientific way of determining that is to place the putter in my address position, then lighten my grip so that the putter head is free to move. I support the shaft just enough to keep it from falling to the ground.
If the putter head moves off line then I know the "default" position the putter wants to be in is not square. If the putter head stays square when I loosen my grip, then the putter wants to be square. I figure if I'm putting and off a little with my stroke, a putter which tends to stay square will help during those times.
The Axis 1 wants to be square.
True Balance
I was just messing around with the Axis and discovered something I've never noticed on any other putter. Sometimes you'll spin the a club in your hands for fun when you are bored. If you do that with any standard putter, it becomes very obvious that the balance of the putter is off center. When you spin it, the putter throws its weight from side to side and the whole club shakes back and forth.
When I spin the Axis 1 putter in my hands the putter is perfectly balanced. There is absolutely no weight shift at all, no shaking or moving from side to side. In other words there's exactly the same amount of weight on either side of the shaft, and the shaft itself is perfectly centered with the face. It is hard to explain and I hope you get the idea.
Looks and Feel
The initial look of the Axis 1 is hard to get used to. It just doesn't look like a standard putter or anything you'd be used to visually. But when you get over that initial impression, the putter itself is very beautiful.
The feel of the putter was what won me over instantly, before I even knew about the whole Axis balance concept.
There are a couple of stainless steel counter weights in the head of the putter which allow you to tweak the weighting. There's one weight in the toe and one in the heel.
Trust me, no tweaking of the weights is needed.
The face of the Axis 1 is milled like many putter faces these days. The milled grooves start the putt out on a great roll, rather than starting the ball out skidding. This makes the putts roll more true and straight.
For extra added feel (and beauty), there is a copper insert in the club face (pictured).
The Axis doesn't just have an every day shaft either. There are stiffening grooves and a vibration dampening core, making the putter feel very solid.
Winn AVS Grip
I'm a Winn grip fan and the Axis does include a Winn grip. No need to switch grips for me since the Winn AVS grip the Axis comes with is super soft and silky.
Pricing and Availability
There are two Axis putter models to date. The Axis 1 "Eagle" is the model I have and the one in my images here and in the Axis 1 Gallery. The Eagle retails for $325, with a street price around $299.
There's a limited edition Axis 1 Putter called the Collector's Series. 100 special putters from Axis are engraved and signed. Retail on the Collector's Series is $400.
From what I've been able to gather, the Axis 1 series is currently available in right hand only. No lefties just yet.
I've enjoyed using the Axis on the course. Many of my opponents comment on how odd it looks. As soon as they see my putts dropping and they have to fish into their wallets to pay their losing bets at the end of the round, they're much more interested in the Axis.


text:
Exchange trading takes place in sections, at present there are four such sections:
- equities section,
- debt securities section,
- derivatives section,
- commodity section.
For the list of the products included in these, see Products and Services at the top menu.
Acquisition of the exchange membership and the trading licence
The exchange membership and the trading licence can be acquired simultaneously, the prerequisite of the acquisition of the membership is that the candidate acquire also the trading licence at least in terms of an instrument group at the same time. Later on of course it is also possible for the member to extend its activity in other instrument groups.
The acquisition of the exchange membership and trading licence takes place on the basis of an application submitted to the Exchange, prepared in accordance with the Regulations on Exchange Membership. Detailed information on the process of acquiring membership is provided in Guide for becoming a member.
Exchange membership and trading licence are not transferable.
The following players can acquire trading licence:
- in order to perform the actions necessary when trading stock exchange products, the person handling such trade must have the appropriate legal licence to perform said action in the equities section, in the debt securities section, and in the futures and options markets of the derivatives section, as well as in the spot, futures and options markets of the commodities section;
- commodity exchange service provider in the spot, futures and options markets of the commodities section;
- cross members in sections covered by the relevant agreement on cross membership.
A list of exchange trading members is provided in the List of Exchange Members.
Trading companies participate in the trading on the exchange through their traders. Upon a written request from the trading company, the Exchange records a trader complying with the requirements of the Regulations on Exchange Membership after the receipt of the documents required for the registration of traders, by recording on the list of traders.


text:
Privacy Policy
Personal data refers to any information that identifies you as a specific individual. This page explains the what, how and why of the information we collect about you when you visit our website or use our services. It also explains the specific ways we use and disclose that information.
We take your privacy extremely seriously and we never sell your data.
Who we are
The Royal Mint Museum is the Data Controller for the personal information we hold to (i) operate our business including managing contracts with customers and partners, and (ii) market and sell to existing and potential customers and partners.
Below "we" and "us" refer to The Royal Mint Museum.
What types of information we collect and how we collect them
In order to provide our services, we must process some personal information about you. We may collect:
Contact details – including your name, organisation, organisation's address, telephone numbers, job title and email addresses.
These are collected when:- You complete a form on this website
- You volunteer this information to one of our employees over the phone
- You call or email us with an enquiry about our products or services
Marketing and communications data – including your preferences in receiving marketing from us and your communication preferences.
This is collected when:- You do any of the above AND provide your consent to receive marketing communications from us
- You electronically or verbally update your communications preferences
- Correspondence – including email content which potentially contains personal data. This may be collected automatically when you correspond with us via email.
- Technical data – internet protocol (IP) address, type of device, browser type and version, web pages visited
- Usage data - including information about how you use our website
- Automated technologies – we collect information about you automatically via technology tools such as cookies
- Third parties – we may collect information about you from publicly available sources, your references, business-to-business market intelligence companies and other service providers
Our legal grounds for processing your data
There are different legal grounds (or bases) on which we rely to use your personal information, namely:
Where it is necessary to provide you with our Products and Services
We will process your data in the course of providing our products and services to you, in performance of our contract (or in the course of creating a quote, and gathering information to create a quote, for providing products and services to you).
Where it is in our Legitimate Interests to do so
The Royal Mint Museum collect information from you in the course of our business including through your use of our website, your relationship or interactions with our staff or when you engage us in the provision of services for the following purposes:
Based upon conducting a Legitimate Interest Assessment (LIA) – as advised by the ICO – it is deemed that the rights and freedoms of the data subjects would not be overridden in our correspondence regarding our services and that in no way would a data subject be caused harm by our correspondence.
Where you have provided consent for us to use your data for a particular purpose
Where you have given your explicit consent, we may use your data for specific purposes. Such as when you sign up to receive our blog email updates, we will process your contact details in order to send you those emails
How we use your personal data
We use your personal data, including any of the personal data listed in the "What types of Information we collect" section above, for the following purposes:
- To provide services and/or information to you
- To fulfil our legal and regulatory requirements including establishing, exercising or defending legal claims
- To respond to your requests and enquiries
- To manage and administer our relationship with you and our clients
- To prevent and detect fraud and other criminal offences
- To ensure network and information security
- To host, maintain and improve our marketing communications website
We also use your personal data for:
Direct Marketing
We may use your personal data to send you marketing communications about services, publications, industry updates, events, courses, surveys, promotions and competitions by The Royal Mint Museum to display content that we believe may be of interest to you.
We will only contact you for these marketing purposes in accordance with our legitimate business interests or where you have explicitly agreed to this. Your agreement to the use of your personal data for these purposes is optional and if you do not wish to provide your agreement, your visit and use of our website and/or provision of services by The Royal Mint Museum will not be affected.
You have the right to request us not to use your personal data for marketing communications. You can opt out of receiving these by clicking on the 'unsubscribe' link at the bottom of any such electronic communication or through following the opt-out instructions provided in any marketing communication.
Use of our website
There are facilities on our website which invite you to provide us with personal data including our contact us form and contact email addresses. The purpose of these facilities is apparent from the point at which you provide your personal data to us and we only use the information for those purposes.
Our website also uses Google Analytics, a web-based analytics tool that tracks and reports on the manner in which the website is used to help us improve it. For more details and information on how to disable cookies, please visit our cookie policy:
Legal basis for using your personal data
We will only use your personal data when the law allows us to. In particular, we will use your personal data:
- Where it is necessary for our legitimate business purposes provided it does not override your rights and freedoms
- To perform a contract such as providing you with services
- To comply with legal and regulatory obligations including for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims
- Where we have received your explicit consent
How long we keep your data
In line with ICO guidelines, we will only retain your personal data for as long as necessary to fulfil the purposes we collected it for, including for the purposes of satisfying any legal, accounting, or reporting requirements. If you have a question about explicit retention periods for particular types of personal data we hold, please contact us (contact details below).
Who we share your data with
The Royal Mint Museum uses trusted third parties to provide support services for certain aspects of our business. Specifically, these include secure data storage, facilitating secure online transactions, website visitor analytics and sending email marketing communications.
We do not allow our third-party service providers to use your personal data for their own purposes and only permit them to process your personal data for specified purposes and in accordance with our instructions.
We may also provide your information to regulators and law enforcement agencies where we are legally required to do so and where necessary for the purposes of preventing and detecting fraud or other criminal offences. If legally permitted, we will use reasonable efforts to notify you prior to disclosing your information to such parties.
The Royal Mint Museum has ensured that all of the third party organisations we share your data with are Data Protection Act 2018 compliant and have signed a data processor agreement with us. We will never sell your data.
This website may contain links to third party websites including social media sites such as LinkedIn, Twitter and Facebook. These sites are owned and operated independently from us and have their own separate privacy policies. Any personal data that you provide to these websites will be governed under the terms of the privacy policy of that website. If you use these sites, you should review their privacy policies to learn more about how your personal data is collected and used.
This website uses cookies – small text files which are stored on your computer when you visit websites. We may automatically collect information about you through cookies.
For more information please click to see our cookie policy:
How we protect your information
We take our responsibilities around the safety and security of your data very seriously and are committed to ensuring this.
As such we take steps to safeguard this, including:
- Employing secure HTTPS encryption across our website to protect your data when completing online forms
- Storing all information you provide to us on our secured servers within the European Economic Area
- Limiting access to your information to only employees who need to process it
- Storing your information behind a password protected system internally
From time to time, your information may be transferred to and stored in a country outside the EEA in relation to provision of the services (i.e. the USA). The laws in these countries may not provide you with the same protection as in the EEA; however, any third party referred to above outside of the EEA has agreed with us to abide by European levels of data protection in respect of the transfer, processing and storage of any personal data.
Requesting a copy of your information
Under the Data Protection Act 2018 you have several rights regarding your personal data, including the right to be informed about the data we hold about you, the right to ask us to rectify that data if it is incorrect, and the right to ask for a copy of that data (called a Subject Access Request).
If you would like to request a copy of the data that we hold about you, please complete our Subject Access Request form and send it to firstname.lastname@example.com. We will aim to acknowledge your request promptly and in any event will respond to your request within one month.
If you are concerned about our data processing
If you are unhappy with how we have collected or processed your personal data you have the right to make a complaint at any time to the Information Commissioner's Office (https://ico.org.uk/) (ICO), which is the UK supervisory authority for data protection issues.
However, if you have such a grievance we would politely request the chance to deal with your concerns before you approach the ICO – so please do contact us in the first instance.
Queries and contact
If you have any queries regarding the above or would like update or obtain a copy of your data held by us, our appointed privacy representative is Data Protection Officer who can be contacted via email at email@example.com.
Notification of privacy policy changes
Whenever we make a material change to the information we collect or how we use it we'll update the policy posted here. When this policy changes, we'll announce it to let you know — or you can check back here for each update.
This policy was last updated on 1st August 2018


text:
Healthcare Professionals (HCP) compliance with necessary vaccinations ensures the uninterrupted operational continuity of Oaklawn and leads by example in the health and safety of the community we serve. COVID-19 and Influenza are required vaccinations at Oaklawn, EEOC exemption requests will be considered. Please consider this before applying for positions.
Clinical Supervisor - Marshall Internal & FamilyJob Summary: Provides supervision of clinical staff and performs clerical and administrative duties under the direction of the Site Manager. Provides basic patient care services under the direction and supervision of a licensed physician, physician assistant or nurse practitioner. Essential Functions:
Minimum Qualifications: Successful prior experience in a supervisory role. Current Credentialed, Registered, or Certified Medical Assistant or Licensed Practical Nurse in the State of Michigan. BLS from American Red Cross or American Heart Association certification within 90 days of hire. Knowledge Skills & Abilities: Prior experience in a physician's office setting. Demonstrated knowledge of computers, insurance, and medical terminology preferred. Knowledge using Athena and staff training experience preferred. The ability to operate standard office equipment including fax, copier, scanner, and computer. Maintains the standards of care and implements the policies and procedures of Oaklawn. Adheres to regulations and standards of accrediting body. Observes universal precautions and complies with OSHA and MIOSHA standards re: blood borne pathogens and biohazard waste. Demonstrates competency in technical and clinical skills, completes skills checklist, and correctly performs these skills daily as requested. Working Conditions: Work is generally performed within an office environment, with standard office equipment available. Potentially exposed to infectious diseases. Physical Requirements: Constantly see/visual acuity, handle/grasp/feel, talk/hear, taste/smell. Frequently stand, walk, reach, bend/twist. Occasionally lift/carry 1 to 50+ lbs. |


text:
Registration Deadline: | March 23, 2007 over 17 years ago |
To apply for Funding you must register by: | January 02, 2007 over 17 years ago |
Parent Program: |
Show List of Speakers
- Björn Birnir (University of California, Santa Barbara)
- Alexandre Chorin (University of California, Berkeley)
- Thomas Hou (California Institute of Technology)
The course provides an introduction to the theory of multiscale methods, and the techniques of averaging and homogenization in particular. The theory will be exemplified by application to ordinary and stochastic differential equations, Markov chains and partial differential equations. The course will comprise 10 introductory lectures on averaging and homogenization by G.A. Pavliotis (Imperial, on partial differential equations) and by A.M. Stuart (Warwick, on stochastic processes). There will also be several guest lectures by experts in multiscale phenomena. These will cover applications and theory. The course is aimed primarily at graduate students from mathematics and statistics, but will also be of interest to students working in closely allied areas of engineering and physics. Furthermore, postdoctoral and young researchers are also encouraged to attend. The introductory lectures by Pavliotis and Stuart will be based on the lecture notes: http://www.warwick.ac.uk/~masdr/mult.html
Guest Lecturers
Alexandre Chorin (Berkeley). Optimal Prediction and Dimension Reduction Tom Hou (CalTech). Fluid Mechanics. Eric Vanden Eijnden (Courant). Multiscale Integrators. For queries, please contact the course organizers.
Andrew Stuart's Web-Pages
Greg Pavliotis's Web-Pages
Participants will be responsible for their own expenses, there is no registration fee. Scroll to the bottom of the page for the link to the registration page. On the registration page, please select the link named "No Funding Needed" and then complete the registration.
A block of rooms has been reserved at the Hotel Durant. Please mention the workshop name and reference the following code when making reservations via phone, fax or e-mail: WV0000. The cut-off date for reservations is March 1, 2007. A block of rooms has been reserved at the Rose Garden Inn. Reservations may be made by calling 1-800-992-9005 OR directly on their website. Click on Corporate at the bottom of the screen and when prompted enter code MATH (this code is not case sensitive). By using this code a new calendar will appear and will show MSRI rate on all room types available. The following Group Code should be entered in the "Comment" field when booking through our Website. Group Code = CG48. Please note: The Original Queen room type does not have an in-room T1 connection, but we do have WIFI available in our main lobby area. The cut-off date for reservations is March 9, 2007.
Keywords and Mathematics Subject Classification (MSC)
Primary Mathematics Subject Classification
No Primary AMS MSC
Secondary Mathematics Subject Classification
No Secondary AMS MSC
Show Funding
To apply for funding, you must register by the funding application deadline displayed above.
Students, recent PhDs, women, and members of underrepresented minorities are particularly encouraged to apply. Funding awards are typically made 6 weeks before the workshop begins. Requests received after the funding deadline are considered only if additional funds become available.
Show Lodging
For information about recommended hotels for visits of under 30 days, visit Short-Term Housing. Questions? Contact email@example.com.
Show Directions to Venue
Show Visa/Immigration
Show Schedule, Notes/Handouts & Videos
Show All Collapse
Apr 02, 2007 Monday |
Apr 03, 2007 Tuesday |
Apr 04, 2007 Wednesday |
Apr 05, 2007 Thursday |


text:
Do you have a hundred hangers full of attire you no longer wear? Or maybe you've accepted you'll never fit back in to your formerly favorite jeans.
Styles, sizes, and needs change, especially recently. If you're looking to unload unwanted clothing, shoes, and accessories, or refresh your wardrobe for less, know that the secondhand clothing market has evolved significantly from the days when musty, dusty church thrift shops and Goodwill storefronts were the main options for selling off duds that were duds and hunting for hidden treasures.
The secondhand apparel market is in the middle of a growth spurt. In 2019, it generated $28 billion in revenue; by 2024, it's predicted to hit $64 billion, according to thredUP and GlobalData's "2020 Resale Report." Now it's not only cool and eco-friendly to buy previously owned clothing, but you can also earn a bit of cash by unloading your gently used apparel via brick-and-mortar shops, easy-to-use apps, or online consignment stores.
Major retailers have joined the movement. Patagonia has a "Worn Wear" program that buys back your old stuff, cleans and refurbishes it, and resells it at a fraction of what you paid. Boutique athletic apparel giant Lululemon has launched a pilot program called "Like New"—shoppers in select areas can trade gently used Lululemon items for gift cards; the retailer will sell traded-in products in stores and online. Clothing reseller thredUP.com has partnered with Macy's to create secondhand sections in select locations. Several other companies, including Nike and Levi's, have launched similar re-commerce programs.
Even though the secondhand market is hot and getting hotter, let's keep it real: You probably won't make a bundle selling your old sweaters and silk frocks, even if you're a designer-fiend clotheshorse. Like most consumer goods—cars, jewelry, electronics, etc.—apparel and accessories rarely hold their value. But you can make money, and it's better to earn even a small amount of cash than to have unwanted items clogging your closet.
Ready to sell your past fashions? Here's how to get the most for your stuff, your time, and your effort.
For more advice and help on selling or shuttling your clutter, check out our sections on how to get rid of your unwanted stuff and estate sales.


text:
I couldn't actually find a place in the control panel to disable/delete my account, and I couldn't find a specific enough board to place this, but I would like for this account here to be terminated. It only ever had trial software associated with it. The company I worked for has since purchased a license and has a separate account.
Thank you.


text:
The instructions are confusing in the 374UT manual, and I spent about 30 minutes trying to program the remote, before I figured out exactly what needs to be done.
Here are the steps:
- Start with your garage door closed.
- Put the 374UT remote into programming mode
- Press the learning button in the garage door opener
- The learn button on the garage door opener should glow solid.
- Press the button on the 374UT remote that you wish to program to control the garage door open.
- You will see the blue LED on the remote start to flash. (Dont press the button a second time just yet – this is what the manual tells you to do and messes everything up).
- Instead you should see the light on the garage door flash and hear 2 clicks
- Next, the blue LED on the 374UT remote should stop flashing (may take a few seconds before this happens). When it finishes flashing, press the button you are programming a 2nd time. Again the blue LED will start flashing. Be patient, it takes about another 30 seconds. Once the programming is complete, and the programming setup was successful, the garage door will begin to open.
- Press any button on 374UT button quickly. This will complete the programming.


text:
Unfortunately your CamShare has been ended.
You can continue chatting with this member using Live Chat.
You will no longer receive "Notification Name" email notifications
Re-subscribe Re-subscribe
You are unsubscribed from all emails.
You are subscribed back to "Notification Name" email notifications.
You are subscribed back to all emails.
View history
Company name add
September 27th, World Tourism Day
World Tourism Day is celebrated on September 27th of each year.
The United Nations General Assembly of the World Tourism Organization established World Tourism Day in 1979. The purpose of the day is to promote tourism, highlight tourism's contribution to the world economy and develop relations among people of different countries.
While this holiday may be honored by anyone who calls him or herself a traveler, it is especially reserved for those who work in the travel industry. Employees of the travel industry are anyone from the staff of a travel agency, museum professional, to managers and staff of hotel facilities. On this day you will find the gathering of tourists and the celebrations and festivals devoted to tourism and the travel industry.
Wish Oksana a Happy World Tourism Day!Send her a gift or flowers with AnastasiaDate Flower Delivery service.


text:
Noah's Ark
Rescued from the Global Flood |
Twelve of the clean kind |
In Abrahamic lore, Noah's Ark was a gigantic wooden vessel in which Noah supposedly saved every kind of animal of the Earth from an alleged great flood.[1] This myth appears in the Torah and in the Qur'an; it most likely represents just one of a number of retellings of retellings of retellings of the same general Mesopotamian flood-story, as exemplified by the story of Utnapishtim, the King of Shurrupak, in the Epic of Gilgamesh.
Any Bible-believer (for example, a creationist) who wants to argue that the Noah's Ark narrative is a scientific/historic story needs to give a clear answer to all of the questions outlined below - without invoking an act of God.
How was the ark built?[edit]
The construction of the Ark supposedly took at least 70 years,[2] or possibly even 120 (see The Ark on creationist wikis). The Bible translates that it was built of "gopher wood"[note 1] and was 300 cubits long by 50 cubits wide by 30 cubits deep (Genesis 6:14-15). This raises the question, what's a cubit? Cubits were a form of measurement used by the Ancient Egyptians. There are two types of cubits, a standard cubit and a royal cubit. A standard cubit is approximately 18" or a foot and a half, but a royal cubit is around 22" or a foot and ten inches. Essentially, a cubit was the measurement between a man's elbow to his wrist, or to the tip of his fingers.
How much wood?[edit]
And here we run into our very first problem: simply gathering enough wood to build the boat. When another notoriously large ship (that was purportedly only a fraction of the Ark's size), the Great Michael, was built in 1511, it was said to have taken "all the woods of Fife" (a county in Scotland famous for its shipbuilding), as well as having to import wood from France, other areas in the Baltic sea, and cargo ships scrapped for use in its construction. The Wyoming, the largest wooden ship ever built, used 3100 tons wood and 300 tons metal.[3] A ship of Noah's size would have required tens of thousands of trees (and on top of that, high quality timber trees) to be cut for its construction, something that is not exactly feasible considering the Ark was probably built somewhere in what is modern day Iraq, which as anyone can tell you has never been known for its thick abundant forests.[4]
Even if Noah could acquire the impossible amount of wood needed to construct it, however, we run into further problems. The Ark would have been a sizeable fraction of the size of an aircraft carrier or a battleship, and a wooden boat that size would have been too leaky and flexible to withstand the stresses of global flood conditions. The largest wooden ship which was definitely built was the schooner Wyoming at 330 ft on deck with a total length of 450 ft, and she required both diagonal iron braces for support and constant use of mechanical pumps to stop her hull flooding. While it is claimed that some Chinese treasure galleons were 400-650 ft long, there is little actual evidence of this, and these ships also required iron-braced keels. Since the Bible does not list any metal components, Creationists will tend to argue that the mysterious "gopher wood" must have had properties more akin to structural steel in a bit of circular reasoning that tries to fit what we know about the problems with large wooden ships and their a priori assumption that the Bible can't possibly be wrong.[5] Invoking what is simply a Goddidit escape hatch then simply raises the question of why Noah had to build the ark in the first place.
Noah's Ark, had it existed, would hold the record for the longest all-wooden ship, and yet Young Earth Creationists believe it happened in 2348 BCE.[6]
How strong was it?[edit]
Because the surface area of Earth is approximately 200 million square miles, and the height of Mt. Everest is approximately 5.5 miles, the amount of water that needed to be supplied (and disposed of) in the Great Flood is about 1.1 billion cubic miles.[note 2] The atmosphere today is only capable of holding the equivalent of one inch of precipitation (over the entire world) in the form of water vapor. The amount of rain per second that would be falling to generate 1.1 billion cubic miles of water over 40 days is almost unimaginable, the equivalent to 289 cubic miles per second.
How any non-divinely-protected vessel could survive this is unimaginable.
And this does not address the vexing question.. Where did all this water come from/go to?
The Bible makes no mention of sails, oars, keel or rudder, and it is usually assumed that the Ark did not have any. Depictions of the Ark almost invariably show a symmetrical vessel with no clearly-defined bow or stern; some assume the dimensions are a literal description of the shape of the vessel, and so envision it as a wooden brick with squared-off ends and no keel. Without means of propulsion or navigation in the flood waters, the Ark's course would have been entirely at the mercy of the elements. It could be argued that this is understandable as the point was survival, not a voyage, but a wooden vessel as big as the Ark which lacked the ability to steer into the wind in stormy waters would have a very low chance of survival. One must also wonder how Noah and his crew could be so certain that The Ark would stay in the Middle East and not drift away to some other part of the world, like the middle of the Atlantic Ocean. The absence of propulsion or steering would seem to be a very poor design choice in those circumstances.
Creationist response: God did it![edit]
The most common non-solution thrown out by creationists at this point is "Goddidit" — God provided the wood, held its planks together, etc. This opens the door for a number of gaping plot holes:
- If God magicked high-quality trees for Noah to chop down, why didn't he simply magic the entire boat into existence? Noah was a several-hundred-year-old senior citizen — and no carpenter. Why make him go through that?
- On top of that, why not create something a bit more technologically impressive? Surely an all-powerful, all-knowing deity could come up with something better than a cramped, rickety wooden boat that's rotten before it hits the water? Wouldn't materializing a high-tech super submarine or goddamn spaceship be a far more efficient means to convince future generations?
And for that matter, why is saving the animals even necessary? If you have the power to magic anything into existence, why not just magic the animals back into existence after you are done flooding the Earth? After all, you did it once before, so why not just do it again?
Or alternatively, why not either teleport or time-travel the animals so they don't have to suffer for the sins of man? They could be made to reappear after the environment has recovered enough that they'll have something to eat instead of bare rock and mud.
Not to mention this is all running on the assumption that the flood was even necessary in the first place. Surely an all-knowing god can come up with a better solution than killing everything, let alone through a horribly inefficient method such as this.
Mathematical Issues
Engineering requires training in advanced mathematics and physics.[7] There is no getting around it, plain and simple. Fields such as Calculus and General Physics were not discovered till around the 1700's. Engineering a ship as massive as the ark would require intelligence and skill in said fields. Even if such fields were known to a degree (needless to say there's no single mention of something unknown in the Bronze Age era), doing the calculations would have been time consuming and Noah's family would have been drowning long before the ark was completed. Even modern technology would not exactly save the ark either as the Ark Encounter built in Kentucky (with taxpayer money) was heavily damaged during a flood.[8]
How did Noah get the animals to the Ark?[edit]
""There is no possible way that Noah could've retained all ten billion species on a single boat and then distributed them appropriately, where the marsupials are all in Australia, and so forth... This is just ridiculous. It is so ridiculous, I find it embarassing for people who attempt to prove that it's true!
—Michael Shermer[9] |
The story of the Global flood, as related in the Bible, maintains that at least two of every clean large animal were present in a vessel somewhere in the Middle East. For young-Earth creationism to hold true this mandates that animals from all over the world had to travel thousands of miles to the ark.
There are dozens of major problems with taking the story of Noah's ark literally. These concentrate on the issues observed with getting the animals to the ark, preferably in one piece and within the time between Noah being informed of the flood (and ordered to build an ark) and God being a massive douche and slaughtering everything else on Earth.
The number of animals[edit]
The sheer number of animals on the ark is an issue on several levels. 10 million species on one boat? That this insanely high number of beasts would need to be transported to the ark is an issue in itself, a logistical nightmare if nothing else.
However, creationists do, as always, have plenty of excuses to get out of this. As John Woodmorappe duly noted in his authoritative analysis, Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study, "[m]odern anti-creationists continue to resurrect long-discredited tomfooleries about the overcrowded Ark (sic)." [10] According to this creationist idea, the ark contained fewer than 16,000 animals (the number of "baramins") rather than millions (the number of species). However, this response requires creationists to believe that just 16,000 baramins (with just 2-14 living members each) developed into billions of species in less than 4000 years. As such, they believe that the diversity currently seen within the animal kingdom is a result of rapid post-flood macroevolution and speciation within created kind. This explanation is somewhat ironic as those who accept the flood tend to reject evolution (or at least speciation) outright — and this explanation requires a massively sped up evolution with speciation. (In fact, the timeline might be just a few hundred years. The dietary laws given to Moses during the Exodus, sometime around 1491 BCE, less than a thousand years after the Flood in 2348 BCE, note many distinct species. There are a few references in the story of Abraham (the "Call of Abraham" is sometimes dated at 1921 BCE) which hint at a modern variety of species — distinguishing species within "baramins" such as sheep from goats (both in the subfamily Caprinae) and donkeys from horses (genus Equus).)
There are some animals that are too slow to make the journey. The sloth, for example, has an average speed of 5 feet per minute.[note 3] Even if the sloth could take a straight line from Central America to the Middle East — see further down for a creationist attempt to rationalize it, it would still be a journey of more than 7000 miles — which would take roughly 14 years. This is assuming that it doesn't die en route, as described above.
Animals unique to Australia, Madagascar, the Americas, and every miscellaneous island would have been forced to cross oceans to reach their destinations. The claim that animals could swim this distance is bizarre, and at best just unconvincing. Most land mammals have very limited swimming capabilities. Monkeys, llamas, snakes, moose, and countless other animals would drown within minutes. Even if for a miracle all these animals were proficient swimmers they would have died of dehydration and starved to death long ago while they were swimming. So, short of saying that God magically whisked them to the right spot (i.e., Goddidit, which is boring and unimaginative), there's not much hope for the ark being remotely possible in a literal sense.
The change in climate would also render the movement infeasible. Animals adapted to cold climate such as polar bears would die in the Middle East. This, again, assumes they didn't die en route due to drowning or starvation.
Predators would also render the migrants' journey a futile one. Penguins would be preyed upon mercilessly as they lack the mechanisms to defend against the predators of Africa or Asia and even dogs [12]. Even if the entire Antarctic had been depopulated and the penguins began a stoic journey across the ocean through Africa and then on to Israel the chance of even one surviving is a long shot. The nearly-ubiquitous and voracious dogs and predators of the savanna: jackals, lions, and other predators would still outnumber them and the penguins would be unable to escape. Dodo birds would also be unable to make it, being confined to a single island with a population numbering only several hundred. Being flightless and with little or no ability to swim, the journey — had they attempted it — would have killed them.
Some animals have very restricted diets: Koalas eat only eucalyptus leaves, a species not normally found in the Middle East; Pandas prefer bamboo, which has the same problem. To get around this, Noah and his family would have had to bring the animals and sufficient food with them (again, a logistical nightmare, even for thousands of individuals working with modern technology), or perhaps creationists imagine Mr. and Mrs. Koala making one hell of a packed lunch before heading out.
Creationist response: Every species lived next to the Ark[edit]
Some creationists have suggested that all the animals before the flood would have lived in close proximity to the ark. This creates more problems than it solves. If all animals were suddenly lumped together in a small sliver of land in the Middle East there would be mass extinctions, as all animals would not be able to coexist in the small climate; animals such as polar bears and penguins require cold environments while others such as cold blooded desert reptiles require hot environments. If it is suggested that the animals got those features after the flood, such pathways requires a mutation rate much higher than what evolution is currently accounting for, so it takes super-evolution to deny evolution, in a sense.
The lesser animals would also fall victim to the higher predators. Dodo birds and penguins do not have what it takes to compete with wolves and large cats. Marsupial mammals (such as kangaroos) don't do well competing with placental mammals (virtually every mammal outside of Australia, except for opossums in the Americas).
Creationist response: Supercontinent[edit]
AIG suggests that, before the flood, all land was in a single supercontinent,[13] with some literalists using as proof of it Genesis 1:9 and/or Genesis 10:25. This is a completely defective argument. Saying that the world was a single supercontinent only 4,500 years ago creates innumerable problems. It is true that there have been a number of supercontinents in Earth's history, but the most recent, Pangaea, broke up over 200 million years ago.[14] We know that the world 2,000 years ago was about the same as it is now, so creationism requires that all the tectonic activity of 200 million years be compressed into 2,500 years. Tectonic shifting is what causes earthquakes, so if the continents were to rearrange themselves so quickly it would be recorded in history and in the geological register. Primitive people would most likely be impressed by earthquakes measuring 10+ on the Richter scale happening every two weeks, not to mention volcanic activity next to which Jupiter's moon Io would be a vacation spot.
Creationist response: Homing instinct[edit]
AIG sometimes claims that the animals would have been brought to the ark by "homing instinct". To wit:[13]
The animals simply arrived at the Ark as if called by a "homing instinct" (a behavior implanted in the animals by their Creator) and marched up the ramp, all by themselves.
Though this was probably a supernatural event (one that cannot be explained by our understanding of nature), compare it to the impressive migratory behavior we see in some animals today. We are still far from understanding all the marvelous animal behaviors exhibited in God's creation: the migration of Canada geese and other birds, the amazing flights of monarch butterflies, the annual travels of whales and fish, hibernation instincts, earthquake sensitivity, and countless other fascinating capabilities of God's animal kingdom.
- "Wow, isn't nature beautiful? Let me just distract you from the utter non-scientific nature of Noah's Ark with a brief tangent."
- Let's go back to the sloth. If the sloth was experiencing a "homing instinct" and walked nonstop — without sleep and over bodies of water — in a straight line to Noah, it'd take 14 years. More realistically, we could estimate a lower bound of 30-50 years.
How did Noah care for the animals on the boat?[edit]
The story of the global flood in the Bible has Noah and his immediate family (8 persons in total)[15] caring for two of every kind of animal in the entire world. In his book Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study, creationist author John Woodmorappe asserts that only 8,000 kinds of animals would have been taken on the ark.[16] The total would probably have been a lot more, but we shall concede this point for the purpose of expediency. Even if only 16,000 animals were to be brought on that ark, eight people could not possibly have cared for them all.
Each animal would have to be provided with sufficient fresh water each day. If we say that watering an animal took only 20 seconds then that gives us 88 human-hours of work watering animals per day.
More problematic would be the source of the water itself.
If the flood waters were used, some method of purification would be needed to remove the silt, salt, and other high concentrations of toxins. Distillation would require a tremendous quantity of fuel and labour. Filtering it through sand would be painfully slow and would require tons upon tons of sand weighing a minimum of 90 pounds per cubic foot.[17] The sand would then have to be changed periodically due to mineral buildup. Solar distillation would require sunlight, which would be lacking for the first forty days of rains, and vast surface areas for water to evaporate and condense. Chemical purification and boiling, ignoring the impossible logistics, would do nothing to diminish the toxic levels of minerals. No matter the purification method, a method to move thousands of gallons per day, from the waterline to upper levels, would be needed.
Storing water from before the flood would have been even more absurd. Assume that at least 100 of the animals had at a minimum the water requirements of a goat. A goat requires more than two gallons of water per day to survive.[18] Water weighs 8.34 pounds per gallon. For these 100 animals alone, 200 gallons of water would be needed each day, weighing in excess of 1600 pounds. To last 376 days, 75,200 gallons, weighing almost eighty tons would have to be brought aboard and stored, without compromising the buoyancy and stability of the Ark — for just these 100 animals.
It is conceivable that a system of ducts could have captured rainwater and watered the animals for the first forty days of heavy rains. However, the problem remains that 336 days of water would need to be stored, purified, and/or captured. Only by heavy, regular rains would this be conceivable, which of course contradicts the statement that the rains stopped on the fortieth day.
Feeding all the animals would be literally impossible. If we accept a generous estimate of each person being able to feed one animal every 30 seconds, this means that 133 human hours of labor would be needed to feed every animal each day (Keep in mind, eight people equals a maximum of 192 people-hours per day). Perhaps some of the animals could be used to replace the human toil, if the design of the ark included provisions for this — but there is no note of such engineering in the Guide to Truth Bible.
Also, making the lions and tigers and bears to eat pellets of grain for 40 days and 40 nights, all while surrounded by nice warm living sides of T-bone steaks and New York Cuts and filets mignon would have been a difficult task. The carnivores would probably have needed fresh meat on a daily basis, leading to the extinction of many unfortunate species.[note 4]
Living in piles of their own dung is very unhealthy for most animals, and before long their health would suffer. The animals on Noah's ark would have to have their cages cleaned periodically. In most places that care for animals, this is done once a day. Eight people cleaning 16,000 cages a day is absurd. A healthy human, working hard, can clean roughly 100 or so "average" cages or stables in a really tough workday. Remembering the above, we also had to allocate time to providing water and food.
Let's take a closer look at what it takes to clean an animal's cage.
- Setting the estimate low we could say the process of removing the dung took 60 seconds for a large cage, 10 seconds for a small cage. We could say the average time spent per cage would be 30 seconds.
- The dung would have to be thrown overboard eventually, so, again setting the estimate low, we could say the cleaner would have to empty his waste container only every 20 cages.
- The time taken to empty the waste overboard would vary on the position of the cage being cleaned. The ones working on the deck below the water would take longer to empty their waste than the ones on the upper decks, while the ones working in the center of the ark would take longer to empty their waste than the ones on the edge. Setting the estimate low again we are looking at 3 minutes to empty waste.
- Calculating this out we are looking at 17 human hours of labor removing dung.
Of course, if Noah had built various magical machines (mostly powered inclined planes and those "screw" things), the disposal of the poop would have been a bit easier.
An alternative explanation is that each animal cleaned its own enclosure periodically. However, given the lack of opposable thumbs for most of the species on the ark, this explanation is implausible.
In other words, the amount of shit you need to believe to accept the literal biblical flood narrative is just about as much as the amount of shit that would be on the ark if it was real.
""Certainly since Scripture related nothing about the places which we said were set apart for the excrement of the animals, but tradition preserves some things, it will appear opportune that silence has been maintained on this about which reason may sufficiently teach of its importance. And because it could less worthily be fitted to a spiritual meaning, rightly, therefore, Scripture, which rather fits its narratives to allegorical meanings, was silent about this.
—Origin (AD 184/5-253/4)[19] |
Animals also pee. Animals on the top deck would not need to have their urine dealt with because the decks could theoretically be slanted so the urine would flow out into the ocean. (God must have supplied really detailed blueprints for Noah to get all this right.) The urine on the bottom decks, however, would have to be manually removed or else it would build up and sink the ship. Say there were only 10,000 animals on the bottom two decks. Say, setting the estimate low, each animal only peed on average one fourth of a cup per day. That gives us 2500 cups (165 gallons) of urine that needed to be bilge pumped per day.
Now, reasonably, the most a person can carry[note 5] is about eight gallons per trip.[note 6] That results in roughly twenty trips per day of "piss duty".
How did animals survive?[edit]
One often overlooked aspect of Noah's Ark is how the animals would have even survived their journey even if they were non-eating flesh robots that produced no waste. The pitch and roll of a ship would have tossed animals about in their cages, creating a constant source of injury to anything larger than a mouse. Under the extremely severe weather conditions posited by the global flood even if the ship's integrity would have held (it wouldn't have) most of the 'higher' animals would have been turned into chunky salsa after a few months of this treatment. The larger animals could have been hooked up to some sort of hammock device inside the cages to stop them from being thrown about too much, but this would require (yet again) much more space.
Fun Problems For Both Humans and Animals[edit]
The issue of piss and shit has been covered to a degree. Now the fun really begins — Zoonotic diseases. A Zoonotic disease is a pathogen that can spread between humans and animals. Because animals and humans are in a confined space, disease will spread between them. Obviously soap and clean hot water would not be available. The people on the ark would have to handle pee and poop; that would have some germs there. Due to people being exposed to animal droppings and animals being exposed to people droppings, disease would kill everyone on the ark. It is not like there would be proper nutrition either.
""Anyone can become sick from a zoonotic disease, including healthy people. However, some people may be more at risk than others and should take steps to protect themselves or family members. These people are more likely than others to get really sick, and even die, from infection with certain diseases. These groups of people include:
—Centers for Disease Control and Prevention[20] |
A zoonotic disease that has been a threat to the health of both humans and animals is the rabies virus. Rabies is a highly infectious pathogen that is spread by bodily fluids, scratches and bites.[21] In modern times rabies is prevented by vaccination and isolating infected animals and or people. Now due to the Ark story taking place over a thousand years ago, vaccinations and medical knowledge did not exist. So if a wolf became infected with the virus, it would rapidly spread and kill everybody aboard.
An irony[edit]
Immediately after the Ark landed and the animals exited the Ark, the first thing Noah did was to offer a sacrifice from each of the clean animals. After all that work, man? Come on.
Creationist response: Swamp theory engineering[edit]
An alternative is to design the ark so that it will carry an entire ecosystem similar to a swamp, so the bacteria and plants will utilize the urine and fecal matter, and have water vapor for collection (via metal plates or glass). However, the size of such a swamp will far exceed the assumed dimensions of the ark, given the number of animals on board. Water makes up a large proportion of the mass of a wetland such as this, and of course water is tremendously heavy. Assuming a pound of waste material per animal per day (the larger animals which produce many pounds of fecal material per day balancing out the smaller creatures), from 8000 animals in a 376-day period equals approx 1500 tons of waste material during the Great Flood. To avoid becoming a fetid, dead swamp, and to allow the natural waste digestion process to occur, the waste products would have to be extremely diluted, with the swamp having perhaps at least fifteen times the mass of all waste products produced by the animals. Thus the swamp could perhaps have to weigh over 20,000 tons, which would require a Handysize cargo ship to carry this waste processing swamp alone. The Ark would have had to be a vast ship to carry such a mass along with all the animals and feed. Also, a sophisticated plumbing system would have to be employed, because such a swamp would be on the top deck of the ark (it requires sunlight), while urine and fecal matter would need to be transported from the lower decks. Even if you have only one deck for everything (with caves or shelters for the animals; remember it's raining most of the time so animals roaming free to self-distribute probably wouldn't work) plumbing is still needed because those have to be manually distributed across the entire swamp. As pumps and other sophisticated plumbing devices are not available for thousands of years, we can safely assume they are manually transporting the urine and fecal matters into the swamp.
How many animals did Noah get?[edit]
The number of each "kind" that were to be brought on Noah's Ark during the global flood is inconsistent within the Bible. The contradiction can be found between Genesis 6 and Genesis 7 when God is telling Noah the number of animals he is to bring. Furthermore, the passage in Genesis 7 is an anachronism in Biblical chronology, because which animals are clean and which are unclean was only revealed in laws given to Moses after the exodus of Israelites from Egypt.
Biblical scholars have several different models for the origins of the Bible, including Genesis. One model is the documentary hypothesis, which holds that the Bible was assembled from multiple independent sources, each written centuries apart from the others, in a process of redaction. This means that one or more ancient Jews "spliced" different versions of different stories into one long book (or rather, five longish books), resulting in noticeable duplications and contradictions (such as the separate creation stories in Genesis 1 and 2, and of course, the issues discussed on this page). Another possibility is that the Bible did begin as a single narrative, and over the centuries various stories, rules, and commentaries were added and subtracted to it — rather like a wiki. Either way, it is believed that the command to bring seven pairs of clean animals was a later variation, added to the story so that Noah has some clean animals to sacrifice at the end without making them extinct.
Number of animals contradiction[edit]
In Genesis 6, God tells Noah to bring two of all living creatures including (as is logical) several of all birds. The King James translation makes it slightly more flowery, but the meaning "two of each" is still clear.
""You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you. Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive.
—Genesis 6:19-20[22] |
In the next chapter, Genesis 7, God directly contradicts himself. Instead of two of every animal, male and female, God tells Noah to bring seven of every clean animal - although this is also read by many as seven pairs. How can one bring seven of some animals if he is already only bringing two of all animals? Genesis 7 also contradicts God's statement in the previous book by stating that instead of two of all birds, seven of all birds were to be brought.
""Take with you seven of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and two of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate, and also seven of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth.
—Genesis 7:2-3[23] |
Mosaic law anachronism[edit]
The second quote from Genesis 7:2-3 also contains a gross anachronism. Which animals are ritually clean and which are unclean is only revealed in Leviticus 11, many hundreds of years later. If Noah knew the Mosaic law and passed it on to his children, there would be no point in God revealing it to Moses and Aaron later in Leviticus. In order to get away from this, you need to maintain one of two things: either Noah used his own intuition to discern which animals were "clean", or Noah was revealed at least parts of the Mosaic law, which were then lost at some point after the Flood.
Of course, there's also the much more plausible explanation that the story was invented by a Jewish writer who was so accustomed to thinking about animals as clean or unclean that he did not spot this chronological inconsistency.
Creationist position[edit]
Because the Biblical statements are so obviously contradictory, literalists have abandoned their usual tactic of denying the contradiction.[note 7] They instead declare that any translations that contain the contradictory statements are, in fact, mistranslations.[25] The problem with this statement though is that every translation of the Bible contains this logical error. If a few were found not to contain it, the mistranslation idea might hold water, but it would still not really matter because the vast majority of translations would still support the contradiction. It is logical to assume that statements that appear in nearly one hundred percent of all translations are correct, and are the correct translation and as close to the original meaning as possible. Below is a chart of the several verses in various Bible translations; those translations that need more explaining are in their own subsections.
Version | Genesis 6:20 | Genesis 7:3 |
KJV | "Of fowls ... two of every sort"[26] | "Of fowls also of the air by sevens"[27] |
ESV | "Of the birds.....two of every sort"[28] | "and seven pairs of the birds of the heavens also"[29] |
NCV | "two of every kind of bird"[30] | "seven pairs of all the birds"[31] |
YLT | "Of the fowl....two of every [sort]"[32] | "of fowl of the heavens seven pairs"[33] |
AB | "Of fowls and birds...two of every sort"[34] | "Also of the birds of the air seven pairs"[35] |
NASB | "Of the birds...two of every kind"[36] | "also of the birds of the sky, by sevens"[37] |
TM | "two of every species of bird"[38] | "seven pairs of every kind of bird"[39] |
NKJV | "Of the birds...two of every kind"[40] | "also seven each of birds"[41] |
Creationists so far have not addressed the anachronism in the second verse.
New Living Translation[edit]
Some creationists have suggested that the New Living Translation or the NLT does not contain this "error", because in Genesis 6:20 it uses the word "pair" in the plural form: "Pairs of every kind of bird, and every kind of animal, and every kind of small animal that scurries along the ground, will come to you to be kept alive."[42] However, the preceding verse, Genesis 6:19, makes it clear that the plurality of "pair" refers to the plurality of species, rather than the plurality of pairs from a single species: "Bring a pair of every kind of animal—a male and a female—into the boat with you to keep them alive during the flood."[43]
"A male and its mate"[edit]
Genesis 7:2 (NIV) says that the animals were taken as pairs, "a male and its mate". This has a couple of interesting consequences, and it's also telling that the female animal is treated as an extension of the male.
Not all animals form pairs. For example, there are genera of whiptail lizards which have only females, and which reproduce parthenogenetically. It would be impossible to take a male, because there aren't any. This also presents problems with eusocial animals: a male bee (a drone) and a queen bee do not make up a viable hive. One might also wonder about animals which do not form pair bonds, whether it makes sense to speak of a bull and his cow, for example.
Some creationists try to solve the space problem with the suggestion that many kinds of large animals were taken as eggs (or small babies).[note 8] But only mature forms have a mate. However many reptilian eggs rely on temperature-dependent sex determination, i.e. temperature determines whether an egg develops as male or female. This thermosensitive period occurs after the egg has been laid, so sex determination in these reptiles is at the mercy of the ambient conditions affecting egg clutches. For example, in many turtle species, eggs from cooler nests hatch as all males, and eggs from warmer nests hatch as all females. How the Ark was able to temperature control such eggs is not explained.
Another attempted method at space-saving is suggesting that only two of every "kind" was brought on board the ark (i.e., one of every "dog kind," or "cat kind." or "horse kind"), and that all the other breeds and "sub-kinds" micro-evolved later on. Besides the overwhelming amount of irony in acknowledging microevolution, this also fails in that, as usual, it fails to define what a "kind" is. Another irony is that this attempted explanation partly contradicts young-Earth creationism, as it suggests that macroevolution does in fact occur: the dog "kind" evolving into various species (wolf, coyote, dingo, etc.).
Even if you found a pair, biology and genetics would suggest that two single individuals will not have enough genetic diversity to actually parent a healthy, reproductive, successful population of animals — assuming mutations for recessive genetic disorders existed at the time.[note 9] Even the alternative reading of seven pairs of "clean animals" presents a very narrow bottleneck; and the family group of Noah, his wife, their three sons, and the sons' three wives only has the variation in, at most, a population of five. Both are far below the required 40 needed. This is a clear indication that the biblical writers (and their present-day fanboys) had no idea how Inbreeding depression worked. The aforementioned excuse of eggs or babies does nothing to alleviate this problem, and the latter suggestion of "only kinds" actually makes this problem much worse.
How did animals not included on the Ark survive during the flood?[edit]
- Parasites during the global flood
- Insects during the global flood
- Plant survival during the global flood
- Survival of aquatic species during the global flood
See also:
Archaeological search[edit]
Many creationists, both Christian and Muslim, have searched for the remains of Noah's ark, but in vain.
The Ark on creationist wikis[edit]
""This is not a literal story. This is a story about destruction, redemption, starting over, beginning anew, forgiveness, and so on. To try to read it literally is to miss the point of the story.
—Michael Shermer[9] |
Naturally, the fundie-hole Conservapedia treats the ark as a very real, rather than mythological, symbolical or even legendary vessel. They treat the Ark in the same manner as a modern vessel, using their "ship" template. Apparently Noah had 120 years' noticeimg[note 10] but it took him less than 19 years to build once he'd started. The fact that they give actual days of the month that the keel was laid and the ship was completed is rather impressive and certainly improves upon James Ussher's chronology dramatically.
A Storehouse of Knowledge gives a less detailed account than Conservapedia, preferring to stick with a straight Biblical description. It does not branch out into actual "evidence" or bizarre attempts to make it seem like a real object, although that is undoubtedly the editorial stance of the site.
CreationWiki presents a decent rundown of the ark as a fact.[45] It primarily complains about how secular scientists don't take the Flood seriously. It also features, in all seriousness, a good, full-color picture of a model of the ark, complete with dinosaurs![46] Their excuse for why technology of the day would be unable to produce the ark is that modern society can't know what the technology of the day was, due to it being under a mile of sedimentary rock. Unlike the hyper-precise Conservapedia ship template, CreationWiki admits that the exact time that Noah began construction is unknown.
Media about the story[edit]
One of the weirder things about Noah's Ark is the sheer amount of strange media that uses it as a basis. Below are just a handful of the various times the story has been adapted in some notable way.
Noah's Ark (1928)[edit]
One of the first talkies ever made, the film is notable for being a piece of lost media, with thirty-five minutes of the movie never being seen since its original premier in New York almost a century ago. The flood scene is also an infamous moment in film history, because according to the Lost Media Wiki, it "reportedly drowned three actors, critically injured another, and almost claimed the life of a young John Wayne (cast as an extra in the scene)." The page goes on to note that "The longer version of the flood scene apparently was more unsettling, and reportedly even contained shots of some of the actors of whom were drowning."[47] However, given the footage has never been seen by the public outside of a small handful of people, it is impossible to verify if this is true or not.
Super 3D Noah's Ark (1994)[edit]
A video game made by Wisdom Tree with the help of id Software, who let the company use the engine from Wolfenstein 3-D and having the honor of being "the only [unlicensed SNES game] to receive a commercial release in North America."[49] However, its unlicensed nature meant "it could only be run by stacking an officially licensed game cartridge on top of the Noah's Ark cartridge."[50]
The game is a first person shooter where you play as Noah, who has to go around feeding all the animals on the Ark. You use a slingshot to throw food at the animals, and despite what the Bible says, there are way more than a mere two of every animals you have to fight against.
El Arca (2007)[edit]
Have you ever wanted to see the story of Noah's Ark with gags thrown in? How about the story of Noah told from the perspective of the animals, who are anthropomorphic and, in some cases, drawn oddly sexually? If so, then the 2007 film El Arca is for you, as this adventure is one that TV Tropes notes is "best known for being a retelling of Noah's Arc with highly curvaceous female felines, especially Panthy and her giant bust."[51] The page goes on to write that the film fits the trope for "Uncertain Audience," saying:
It's an animated retelling of the story of Noah's Ark, but the movie seemed to have no idea who its audience was supposed to be. Christians who would have been interested in the film for its Biblical story were turned off by its blasphemy and raunchiness, the aforementioned sexual themes made the movie unsuitable for children when its art style seemed geared for them, and everyone except for a few members of the Furry Fandom were repulsed by a few heavily sexualized animal characters. And to cap it all off a large number of furries are put off by the biblical themes.[51]
With that said, the vulgarity could be blamed on it being from another culture, as the page notes "A lot of the more adult themes can be chalked up to family-friendliness standards in Argentina and indeed most of Latin America being different than those in the USA, generally more tolerant of sexual humor." However, "even then, though, relatively few push the boundaries this movie attempts to cross."[51]
If one wishes to watch the film with these themes toned down, Shout! Factory released one in English in 2014.[52]
See also[edit]
External links[edit]
- Mark Isaak Problems with a Global Flood (16th November 1998, Talk Origins)
- Robert A. Moore The Impossible Voyage of Noah's Ark (National Center for Science Education)
- A "Far Left Side" cartoon about the flood. (Damn kids and their damn calculators.)
- NonStampCollector - Noah's Ark Warning, this video may cause excessive hilarity
- See the Wikipedia article on Population bottleneck. — a.k.a., genetic bottlenecks — wherein one or more species may experience a near-extinction level event that leaves a relatively small number of survivors. (Although none of them are known to have built boats to do so.)
- ↑ The identity of this mysterious material is complicated by the fact that gopher wood only appears in this one place in the Jewish scriptures. Possible candidates include cypress (based on transliteration), cedar, reed (as in the reed boats built by Thor Heyerdahl,) or simply pitched wood (as far back as 2500 BCE, the ancient Egyptians used pitch to waterproof ships) to mention only a handful.
- ↑ For the metric kind it's about 4.5 billion cubic kilometers.
- ↑ One foot/minute = 99.6115088 miles/year.[11]
- ↑ Such as the Grestevask and Drobenbear.
- ↑ For the purpose of the discussion we do not assume God has revealed to Noah about technologies such as plumbing, pumps and siphons, so it does have to be carried away if the animals are within their individual partitions of the ark.
- ↑ That's sixty four pounds, reasonable for a tough Bronze Age farmer.
- ↑ Except for those people who simply ignore the bits they can't deny, like these people.[24]
- ↑ For example, this Answers in Genesis cartoon[44]
- ↑ Besides, the Bible says incest is bad. I guess Adam, Eve, their children, and non-human animals don't count.
- ↑ The 120 years notice probably doesn't work because it is after Noah is already 500 years old and the flood occurs 100 years later… so God is like "Screw you guys, I am flooding the earth 20 years early."
- ↑ Noah's ark The Skeptic's Dictionary.
- ↑ Yes, Noah did build an Ark! reply by Bodie Hodge & Jonathan Sarfati to "Did Noah really build an ark?" by Jeremy Bowen, Presenter (24 March 2004; Updated 26 March 2004) Answers in Genesis (archived from December 8, 2004).
- ↑ Schooner Wyoming fact sheet, Maine Maritime Museum, Jan 28, 2013
- ↑ Noah's Ark: Sea Trials by Brian Dunning (Podcast #279; October 11, 2011) Skeptoid.
- ↑ Genesis 6:14-15: Note Skeptic's Annotated Bible.
- ↑ Timeline of the Bible Creation Ministries International (archived from June 1, 2020). "This timeline was printed in Creation magazine to faithfully represent the details provided by Archbishop James Ussher in Annals of the World. His timeline was a statement about history."
- ↑ Engineering Science University of California Berkeley.
- ↑ [1],
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 Penn & Teller: Bullshit!, S02E01, The Bible - Fact or Fiction
- ↑ Woodmorappe, J: Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study, page 3. Institute for Creation Research, 1996.
- ↑ Speed of a Sloth The Physics Factbook.
- ↑ https://www.newsweek.com/little-penguins-found-dead-suspected-dog-attack-burnie-tasmania-australia-1664724
- ↑ 13.0 13.1 Was There Really a Noah's Ark & Flood? by Ken Ham & Tim Lovett (October 11, 2007) Answers in Genesis (archived from December 15, 2009).
- ↑ Breakup of Pangaea (200 mya — Present) by Christopher R. Scotese, PALEOMAP Project.
- ↑ Essentials Of The Unification Principle: 11. Noah's Family by Thomas Cromwell, Sun Myung Moon, FFWPU and the Unification Church in their own words (archived from February 15, 2002). "Noah's Family had eight core members".
- ↑ How did all the animals fit on Noah's Ark? by Jonathan Sarfati (March 1997) Answers in Genesis (archived from December 4, 2004).
- ↑ Weight Per Cubic Foot And Specific Gravity Reade Advanced Materials (archived from October 29, 2004).
- ↑ Livestock Water Needs by Bryan Smith (06/16/2002) Cooperative Extension Service, Clemson University (archived from August 31, 2006).
- ↑ Homilies on Genesis 2.1 (page 75) translated Ronald E. Heine Catholic University of America Press, 1982 volume 71 of The Fathers of the Church, A New Translation
- ↑ Zoonotic Diseases (Page last reviewed: July 14, 2017) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
- ↑ [2], CDC website.
- ↑ Genesis 6:19-20 (NIV)
- ↑ Genesis 7:2-3 (NIV)
- ↑ Answering The Atheist, Volume 1, Issue 8 (April 29, 2001) Limestone Church of Christ (archived from April 20, 2003).
- ↑ Chapter 27: The New Answers Book 2: Chapter 27. Isn't the Bible Full of Contradictions? by Paul F. Taylor on August 12, 2010) Answers in Genesis (archived from June 27, 2019).
- ↑ Genesis 6:20 (KJV)
- ↑ Genesis 7:3 (KJV)
- ↑ Genesis 6:20 (ESV)
- ↑ Genesis 7:3 (ESV)
- ↑ Genesis 6:20 (NCV)
- ↑ Genesis 7:3 (NCV)
- ↑ Genesis 6:20 (YLT)
- ↑ Genesis 7:3 (YLT)
- ↑ Genesis 6:20 (AB)
- ↑ Genesis 7:3 (AB)
- ↑ genesis 6:20 (NASB)
- ↑ Genesis 7:3 (NASB)
- ↑ Genesis 6:20 (TM)
- ↑ Genesis 7:3 (TM)
- ↑ Genesis 6:20 (NKJV)
- ↑ Genesis 7:3 (NKJV)
- ↑ Genesis 6:20 (NLT)
- ↑ Genesis 6:19 (NLT)
- ↑ Dinosaurs — Too Big? by Dan Lietha (July 23, 2001) Answers in Genesis (archived from April 14, 2015).
- ↑ Noah's Ark CreationWiki (archived from ).April 10, 2009).
- ↑ Noah's Ark Model by Rod Walsh CreationWiki (archived from April 14, 2015).
- ↑ Noah's Ark (partially lost film based on Bible story; 1928)
- ↑ Bible Games - Angry Video Game Nerd (AVGN)
- ↑ YMMV / Super 3D Noah's Ark
- ↑ Video Game / Super 3D Noah's Ark
- ↑ 51.0 51.1 51.2 YMMV / El Arca
- ↑ Western Animation / El Arca


text:
Welcome to Savage View Estates, PEI's newest cottage community. Located in the beautiful and desired community of Savage Harbour, this 23-acre subdivision provides residents with an affordable, private place to build your dream PEI cottage. Sixteen lots are available, ranging from 0.72 acres to 1.66 acres, all perc category 1 or 2. Multiple waterview and waterfront lots facing the harbour are available. Enjoy the privacy of this secluded development while just being moments from the water and one of PEI's best beaches. A newly upgraded road and brand-new electric poles incoming will provide long-lasting infrastructure for you to get started building your PEI cottage getaway. All lots come with deeded access to the water and strong restrictive covenants to protect your investment. Just moments from the Savage Harbour Beach and 35 minutes from Charlottetown. Taxes included in all prices. (id:30476)
MLS® Number | 202413775 |
Property Type | Vacant Land |
Community Name | Savage Harbour |
Easement | None |
Features | Treed |
Utility Water | None |
None |
Acreage | Yes |
Sewer | No Sewage System |
Size Irregular | .76 |
Size Total | 0.7600|1 - 3 Acres |
Size Total Text | 0.7600|1 - 3 Acres |
Contact us for more information
John Ployer
(902) 838-2888
(902) 838-5082


text:
Recent Jobs Posted
Looking for a private job?
Enter your job key
Received a bid invitation?
Enter your access code
Looking for jobs?
Our planroom makes it fast & easy
- View documents in your browser
- Order prints of what you need
- Selective jobs offer downloading
- Notifications for job updates
- Calendar shows upcoming jobs