text:
Video: Scientist says he created an invisibility cloak
Explainer: The 2011 Weird Science Awards
Sex, booze and strange animal tricks: You had to know the 2011 Weird Science Awards would hit on those themes. After all, past award winners have included scientists' successful quest to reattach rabbit penises, a 2,700-year-old marijuana stash and glow-in-the-dark kitties. This year, msnbc.com users were asked to select the weirdest stories from a list of 30 nominees. Click ahead to count down the top 10 selections, plus some bonus picks.
— Alan Boyle, msnbc.com science editor
10. Oops! Maya doomsday date corrected
Are we having doomsday yet? Some folks say the ancient Maya calendar's "Long Count" runs out on Dec. 21, 2012, and that a world-changing crisis will occur at that time. Other folks, including the modern-day Maya, say that's just a load of llama crap ... and that 12/22/2012 will merely mark the start of a new calendar cycle.
And then there's Gerardo Aldana, a professor at the University of California at Santa Barbara, who says they're all probably wrong.
Aldana contends that the calculations we've used to match up the Maya calendar to our modern reckoning could be off by as much as 50 to 100 years, and that the Long Count may have already ended. If Aldana is right, the timetable for the apocalypse may already be up. Which might explain why "Apocalypto" director Mel Gibson's been acting so weird lately.
9. Why it's OK for birds to be gay
Scientists have found more than 130 bird species that engage in some sort of same-sex hanky-panky — and the males in some of those species, such as penguins and greylag geese, occasionally form long-term sexual relationships with each other.
That's presented a puzzle for some evolutionary biologists, because same-sex relationships would seem to reduce the birds' chances of reproductive success. Believe it or not, gay birds are quite a research topic ... not that there's anything wrong with that.
Geoff MacFarlane, a biologist at the University of Newcastle in Australia, and colleagues reviewed studies of 93 bird species and suggested that there was a relationship between the rearing of young and same-sex mating. Male homosexual behavior would be likelier if the females of the species took care of the chicks. "Homosexual behavior is more likely to be maintained and not be selected against than if you are a sex that cares a lot for offspring and only has one or few reproductive partners," MacFarlane said.
Are you still curious? Find out why some scientists think mercury pollution may spark bird homosexuality, and learn more about the bizarre study of a homosexual necrophiliac duck.
8. The race to create A.I. as smart as a cat
Puss-Bob is not amused: He's heard the reports claiming that Pentagon-funded scientists are trying to create an artificial brain as intelligent as a cat, of course, but he realizes this is a grossly oversimplified description of the SyNAPSE project.
He knows the real point of the research is to build electronic networks that mimic biological brains, using new types of devices known as memristors. Such networks could "learn" by taking in additional information from the environment and adapting accordingly.
The technology could produce smarter robotic scout vehicles for the U.S. military, IEEE Spectrum reports. But Puss-Bob highly doubts that memristor-based neural networks will ever match the intelligence of cats. Dogs, maybe ... but not cats.
7: 'Da Vinci code' in Mona Lisa's eyes?
The Mona Lisa is one of the great masterpieces of the art world, but it's also a great generator of weird science. In past years, researchers have said that they've tracked down the inspiration for Leonardo da Vinci's portrait, found a nude version of the painting and figured out what Mona Lisa's voice sounded like.
In 2010, Italy's national committee for cultural heritage claimed that Leonardo painted tiny, almost invisible letters in Mona Lisa's eyes. The committee's president, Silvano Vinceti, said the lines in one eye appear to form the initials "LV," perhaps standing for the artist's name. The other eye seems to contain the letters "CE" or perhaps "B." And still more letters and numbers were spotted in other areas of the painting.
But are they really there? Several experts have said the committee is probably reading too much into the painting's patterns of tiny cracks. Among art historians, at least, this "Da Vinci Code" is no best-seller.
6. Which came first, chicken or egg?
Which came first? The chicken or the egg? The question is really more of a philosophical conundrum, like the old "immovable object vs. irresistible force" conflict. But in 2010, British research into the process of eggshell formation was heralded as providing a scientific answer to the riddle.
Biologists from Sheffield and Warwick universities reported that ovocleidin-17, a protein found in a chicken's ovaries, played an essential role in building eggshells from calcium carbonate crystals. That led some chicken-or-egg philosophers to claim that the first chicken egg could exist only if it was created inside a chicken.
Actually, it all depends on your definitions: We know that dinosaurs laid eggs, for example, so eggs clearly predate chickens. And if a prehistoric not-quite-chicken laid an egg that contained the first honest-to-goodness chicken, based on its genetic coding, do you count that as a chicken, or a chicken egg? Try using that one if you're ever captured by "Star Trek" androids.
5. Giant storks may have fed on hobbits
"The storks! The storks! They're eating Frodo!" J.R.R. Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" saga might have had a horror-movie ending if it reflected the fossil evidence found on the Indonesian island of Flores.
Flores is known as the site where scientists discovered the remains of a species of hominids known as Homo floresiensis. The creatures, which apparently went extinct about 12,000 years ago, have been nicknamed "hobbits" because of their short stature.
Now paleontologists say they've unearthed wing and leg bones from carnivorous storks in the same cave where the Homo floresiensis bones were discovered. The storks, which apparently stood nearly 6 feet tall, could have fed on other birds as well as fishes and lizards — "and possibly in principle even small, juvenile hobbits, although we have no evidence for that," the Smithsonian Institution's Hanneke Meijer told LiveScience.
What sound do giant storks make when they're swallowing? Gollum! Gollum!
4. Cricket's testicles set world record
Now here's a bug with balls: The tuberous bushcricket's testicles account for 14 percent of its body weight, according to researchers at the University of Derby in England. That means the cricket's cojones are the largest in the animal world, based on proportion to total body mass.
To put the cricket's statistics in perspective, the testicles of a man weighing 200 pounds (91 kilograms) with that ball-to-body ratio would weigh 28 pounds (12.7 kilograms). Or basically the weight of two bowling balls.
Why would a cricket need testes that big? The researchers suggest that the large size lets male crickets capitalize quickly on breeding opportunities with multiple mates. But size is always relative, and often deceiving. Turns out that the runner-up in the ball-to-body competition is the humble fruit fly, with testes that make up more than 10 percent of body weight.
3. Better transit design through ... slime mold?
It's hard to imagine a scientific specialty that's weirder than slime mold, but researchers from Hokkaido University in Japan has been able to make the weird life form do some wonderful things.
First, the scientists used slime mold's food-finding prowess to solve labyrinth puzzles. This year, they published research showing how the mold's growth patterns could reflect the optimal routes for mass transit links ... on a map where bits of food stood in for train stations. Those dubious achievements earned them not just one, but two Ig Nobel Prizes for silly science.
The Hokkaido team isn't the only one working with the humble organism: British scientists say they've constructed a rudimentary slime-mold computer nicknamed the Plasmobot. So where does America stand in the race to harness slime mold? And what are we going to do about the slime gap?
2. How beer sparked civilization
Some people might say the invention of fire sparked the rise of civilization. But Brian Hayden, an archaeologist at Simon Fraser University, suggests that another innovation may have played a crucial role: beer.
The age of agriculture dawned about 11,500 years ago when Neolithic peoples began domesticating wild grains such as barley and rice. Hayden is among a number of archaeologists who say the motivation for domesticating those cereals might have been to brew alcoholic drinks for ceremonial use. "It's not that drinking and brewing by itself helped start cultivation, it's this context of feasts that links beer and the emergence of complex societies," Hayden says.
The earliest chemical evidence for beer comes from residues inside a jar excavated in Iran that is dated to between 3400 and 3100 B.C. Other evidence suggests that beer gave ancient Africans a healthy dose of antibiotics, and that women took on the primary role for brewing beer in ancient Peru. For still more, check out our interactive gallery of ancient drinks.
1. Stone Age carving may be ancient sex toy
The top vote-getter in the 2010 Weird Science Award competition may not be totally suitable for work ... but hey, this is archaeology, right? Researchers suspect that a carved piece of antler bone, found at a Stone Age site in Sweden that goes back as far as 6000 B.C., might have been an ancient sex toy.
The object is about 4 inches long and an inch wide, with a knobby end as well as a pointy end. The pointy end suggests that despite its phallic appearance, the bone could have been used for chipping flakes of flint. Sigmund Freud is said to have observed that "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar," and sometimes a Stone Age tool is just a Stone Age tool.
Even if the antler bone is judged to be a sex toy, it's not the oldest of its type: A polished stone phallus found in Germany is thought to be about 28,000 years old, while a 35,000-year-old female figure with exaggerated breasts could be considered the world's oldest-known porn.
Weirdly honorable mentions
Even though we offered up a long list of nominees for the Weird Science Awards, there are always some additional discoveries that deserve recognition. Here are four honorable mentions for 2010:
- Mice with two dads: Researchers reprogrammed mouse cells and then used unconventional breeding tricks to produce some cute babies with genetic contributions from two male mice (but carried to term by mommy mice, of course). The experiment suggested a method by which same-sex human couples could eventually have genetic progeny.
- Chimps with stick dolls: Female chimpanzees have been observed in the wild cuddling and playing with sticks and small logs, much like human children do. In contrast, such behavior has not yet been seen among male chimps, leading researchers to wonder whether gender differences in styles of play extend beyond humans to other species.
- Mice that sing like birds: In the course of developing new breeds of genetically engineered mice, Japanese researchers happened upon a mouse that made tweeting noises like a bird. The tweeting trait could be passed along to the generations that followed, and the lab says it now has more than 100 "singing mice." Listen to the chirping mice on YouTube.
- 8-year-olds publish scientific paper: One of the more unusual papers published in Biology Letters was illustrated with diagrams that looked as if they were scrawled by elementary-school students. That's because they were. The peer-reviewed report, written by 8- to 10-year-olds from Blackawton Primary School in Devon, England, represented a "genuine advance" in the study of bumblebee vision, the Royal Society said.
For still more scientific strangeness, review the 2010 Weird Science Awards.


text:
You have no items in your shopping cart.
Pre-orders and Sales That Will End Before or On August 20, 2016
***Pre-orders and Sales That Will End On August 20, 2016
***Buy any product from us, we will add a pair of tights or socks to your order automatically FOR FREE! Tights and socks are randomly selected(END on August 31, 2016), Learn More: Get Free Socks or Tights from My-Lolita-Dress.com
***Reminder: Login to your account when order, you can get customer reward points for each dollar you spent at my-lolita-dress.com :) Each dollar you spend at My-Lolita-Dress.com, there's 1 point rewarded. Each 100 points could be redeemed as 1USD for next order. No timeline or order amount limit. [Please click here to learn more about our Custom Reward Points System]
There are no products matching the selection.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Day 5: On the up and up
Today was a short day, with only 63 miles to cover. However, it was a long day if you think about the vertical distance we covered. We started in Granby, traveled through Rocky Mountain National Park, and ended in Estes Park.
We rode along Trail Ridge Road which crests above 12,000 feet. We climbed over 5,000 feet. We had to start in the cold, early morning because the Park Service wanted to minimize the disruption for other users (read: cars) of the park.
We were up before 5:00 and rolling before 7:00. I must admit, after the previous early mornings and long days where we had by now covered some 330 miles and climbed almost 20,000 feet (look out Mt Everest!), I was slow to appreciate the opportunity we were being presented. I now know why this opportunity was special: big mountains, big valleys, pristine lakes, meandering streams … need I go on?
An interesting question for cyclists is when do they think about their equipment. Is at Christmas time? Before a big ride? At the sight of an advertisement? For me it is when I'm descending at 45 miles per hour or more. A conversation begins in my head about my bike and its constituent elements When the wind is loud, around 40 miles an hour or so, I think through the qualities of carbon fiber, rubber, titanium, etc.
"I wonder if carbon fiber handle bars have a 'use by date'?"
"Have titanium skewers (the things that hold the wheels on) ever snapped?"
"What would happen right now if my tire blew?"
When these questions become annoying I look at the view.
The Last Day
Tomorrow is the last day when the plan has been to ride 55 miles, downhill to Ft. Collins.
There has been considerable concern about the un-contained fires in this general area of Colorado and what it will mean for RTR. The latest word is that we will continue to Ft. Collins but via a different route to avoid as much of the smoke in the area as possible.
This entry was originally published on tonyporter.co.


text:
Your browser is not supported. Please download Mozilla Firefox or Google Chrome browser.
Sell your Course Online. They will reside in our Market Place of Training
A secure private learning management system for internal distribution of training
"Coggno offers options for both private secure distribution, or public sale of your curriculum"
No description available
Basic fundamentals of Microsoft Outlook


text:
Tawni Weaver
Founder and Owner of Renu Medispa
As the founder and owner of Renu Medispa, Tawni Weaver has celebrated ten triumphant years as the first Medical Spa to open in Eagle, Idaho. During this decade, Tawni has made many remarkable achievements at Renu, including being the only National Council on Laser Excellence certified facility in Idaho. With a steadily growing clientele of more than 10,000 patients served, including 10% of her clients traveling from out of state, Tawni works tirelessly to ensure that each patient is properly educated and deeply satisfied with the treatments performed at Renu Medispa. Her sterling dedication, along with her loyal patient following, is a testament to the respect that the community holds for Tawni and her team. It also speaks to the ironclad staying power Renu Medispa has had in an ever-changing and often fleeting industry.
What makes Renu Medispa so exceptional is the philosophy Tawni upholds and adheres to without exception: to be THE BEST. Period. Tawni understands that to be the best, it must begin with her. As such, she has immersed herself in the finest training available in this field.
Tawni holds a Bachelor of Science degree from Brigham Young University, as well as advanced training in drug physiology, chemistry and physics. While working in New York, Tawni uncovered her passion for Medical Aesthetics and decided to learn as much as she could about the field. Tawni began exhaustive training in New York, San Francisco and Paris to fully understand injectable fillers and medical aesthetics. Tawni trained under the doctors who first began using Botox Cosmetics, Drs. Jean and Alistar Carruthers. She then spent time with the international facilitator for Allegan and Medicis, Mauricio de Maio. She has also trained with Michael Cane, author of The Botox Book,The Dermatology Research Institute's Fredrick Brandt, the co-developer of RetinA, Dr. James Fulton Jr. as well Dr. Peter Pugliese, author of Physiology of the Skin, and Advanced Professional Skin Care, Medical Edition.
In 2004, Tawni put her knowledge to the test by opening Renu Medispa. Tawni pioneered introducing the first equipment such as Visia Skin Analysis, Venus Freeze, Diamondtome Microdermabrasion, Silkpeel Dermal Infusion, Starlux Photo Rejuvenation (IPL), Photodynamic Therapy and Rejuvepen C.I.T to this area. Her unique background of science and business, coupled with her extensive training, has elevated her to an expert level in the field of Medical Aesthetics and although she is not a physician, she shares the esteemed respect of medical professionals in this field with whom she collaborates and shares information respectively.
The same principles of hard work and unparalleled integrity that Tawni applied to her training are the same principles carried over to the staff at Renu Medispa. With painstaking detail, Tawni has meticulously trained each team member with the "in the trenches" knowledge she acquired in order to position Renu Medispa to be the premier Medispa facility in the Northwest. With very low staff turnover and marked emphasis on quality, not quantity Renu stands out from the crowd. In fact, Renu Medispa received the only nomination for aesthetics by the Better Business Bureau for their Integrity Counts Award.
Renu has earned their five-star standing in the medispa community and will continue to lead by example for many years to come.
Hillary Manfredo
Assistant Spa Director
In 2006, Hillary joined Renu Medispa as a talented Make-up Artist and quickly moved up the ranks to become the Assistant Spa Director, given her excellent customer service skills. In addition to her fine make-up artistry, Hillary is certified in each of the laser and skincare treatments available at Renu. Hillary appreciates the cutting edge services Renu offers their clients because she knows that this medispa is always ahead of the game.
In 2000, Hillary moved to Idaho from Los Angeles, and presently resides in Boise. In her spare time, Hillary can be found walking her dogs or snowboarding. She also takes joy in floral arrangement.
Jacque Angelos
Human Resources & Administrative Assistant
After being a client of Renu, Jacque became their front desk superstar in 2011. Jacque takes care of all product orders, new hires and facility maintenance. She respects the top notch skills Tawni Weaver and the team hold, and she is proud to be working at Renu.
In 1999, Jacque moved to Idaho from Oregon, and she currently lives in Meridian. A self-proclaimed fitness buff, Jacque enjoys all aspects of health and wellness and she likes to go running with her dogs.
Sara Hollifield
Medical Esthetician
For nearly five years, Sara has been imparting her skincare wisdom to the clients at Renu as a lead Medical Esthetician. Sara is knowledgeable about the many skincare treatments available and she enjoys the ever evolving technology Tawni continually brings to the Renu to make them a cutting-edge spa.
Endi Fillmore
Medical Assistant & Weight Loss Specialist
Four years ago, Endi decided to call Renu her professional home and she has reaped the benefits of the scrupulous, in-house training and education provided by Tawni Weaver and the staff ever since. In particular, Endi enjoys the long lasting skin health improvement clients experience at Renu. Endi takes care of exfoliations, Venus Freeze, Ultherapy and the medical weight loss program at Renu.
With a background in Sports Medicine and Food Science Nutrition, Endi understands this industry well. Nearly a native of Idaho, Endi lives in Eagle with her husband and five children. She enjoys attending her children's volleyball, tennis and softball games.
Marsha Pepin
Certified Medical Assistant & Licensed Medical Esthetician
Once a former client, Marsha made Renu her professional home more than one year ago. She attends to client facials, peels and exfoliations and enjoys talking with the clients about their skincare regimes. Marsha is honored to work in a facility with such high standards and an impeccable reputation.
Marsha is a graduate of the Oliver Finley Academy of Cosmetology in Boise and she obtained her Certified Medical Assistant license from the University of Alaska in Anchorage.
Five years ago, Marsha moved to Meridian with her husband and two daughters. In her free time, she attends her daughters' sports practices and games. Her family also enjoys snowboarding and skiing during the winter.
Maggie McLain
Medical Director & Nurse Practitioner
Over the past three years, Maggie has been found assisting clients with any medical treatments at Renu. She handles all laser treatments, Botox and dermal fillers. Maggie is also the dedicated provider for the Metabolic Health and Longevity Center and she assists clients with Metabolic Health treatments at Renu. Maggie really enjoys helping men and women from both the inside and the outside with the impressive medical therapies offered at Renu.
Maggie earned her undergraduate Nursing degree at Seattle University in Seattle, along with her Masters of Nursing at Gonzaga University in Spokane. Maggie also has received local Obesity Basic Medical Treatment training.
A native of Idaho, Maggie currently resides in Boise. She has two daughters and one grandson. On her days off, Maggie likes to be outside riding bicycles with her family and hiking with her dogs.
Casey Dahlgren
Front Desk Receptionist
The newest member to join the stellar Renu team is the Casey Dahlgren. With her dedicated customer service skills, Casey demonstrates excellent client care in handling all appointment bookings. Casey is also knowledgeable about each of the products at Renu. Casey finds the atmosphere at Renu to be as comfortable as it is professional.
Casey is a native of Boise where she currently resides. She holds a B.S. in Psychology from Boise State University and she has a passion for physical therapy and fitness. She also enjoys dog sitting and ceramics in her spare time.


text:
Close Member Area
Gayespur West Bengal's Hotels can manage their frontdesk, point of sales, accounts and much more using just one login. The cloud based hotel management software enables hoteliers to easily manage their operations from online or offline.
Magnolia 2.0 is one of the finest, easiest and most comfortable software system available to manage your
hotel, restaurant, bar, confectionery and sweets shop or coffee shop. Magnolia
Hotel Management System is the best management software available for stand alone restaurants or chain restaurants. It provides the best solution for one screen order, kitchen-order-printing, food cost calculations, restaurant accounting, and table management options.
Unlike other restaurant software, it's simple to setup, easy to use and manage, allowing you to train new employees in less time and open new restaurants. Magnolia Hotel Management System is capable to run in touch screen mode. The system is prepared in such a way that it improves client satisfaction by providing improved and better dining service. Helps you to do great business year around. The most important part of it is that, the Magnolia Hotel Management System makes you free so you can make other business plans without any hassles.
Call for Detail Information +91 8723 978 480
or Visit our Online Demo Page.
For Better Experience use Cool Novo Browser.
Cool Novo Browser Direct Download Link.
They tried very hard and wanted to do as much as they could. This Company is very trustworthy and realistic.
Did an excellent job on my project - Communication was excellent, and did the job on-time and to my specifications.
Very polite, good communication and completed the job to a high level. Would hire again.


text:
Call for info: (972) 532-0581
274 TrustBuilder Reviews in Dallas, TX Area
1612 Cedar Crest Drive, Forney TX 75126
From $316,990 Why 'From' pricing?
New homes can be personalized to your needs and taste.
Builders pricing can vary greatly. Builders display base pricing because you have not selected your options and upgrades yet and some homes may indicate that the land cost is not included.
Last Updated: 1 day ago
Plan Fairhall (2745 sq. ft.) is a home with 4 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms and 2-car garage. Features include dining room, living room and master bed downstairs.
Builder Community Sales Office Map
1612 Cedar Crest Drive, Forney, TX 75126
Sales Agent: John Straub
Hours: Mon - Sat: 10:00am - 6:00pm, Sun: 12:00pm - 6:00pm
Gateway Parks: 60ft. lots
Gateway Parks will feel like a true community, with beautiful homes and fun-filled amenities for the whole family. You'll love the hike-and-bike trails and the resort-style amenity center with its own splash pad and clubhouse. Throughout the neighborhood, creative play areas, sports fields and parks offer even more opportunities for relaxation. Gateway Parks will connect with Gateway, an expansive 2,000-acre development that will include retail centers, restaurants, offices, entertainment venues, schools and more!Visit the website Free brochure
Actual schools may vary. Contact the builder for more information.
Gateway Parks: 60ft. lots
1612 Cedar Crest Drive
Forney, Texas 75126
John Straub
Get the latest Dallas news and deals delivered weekly!
We will never share your email address.
Privacy policy


text:
Artist description:
A collab with Mojo Jo--- er I mean Liquid_gibbon90. he did the 5% My hands are numb now, hope you all like it ^_^
Java Draw Created Jun 11, 2009 470 x 338px Unless noted Copyright 2009 feefiry.
We encourage you to submit a comment and let the artist know what you think of this drawing. Please log in or join to post a comment.
Post a comment
OMG THIS IS PERFECT!u're awesome and Happy b'day^^
THIS IS EPIC :O its so good Your really talented :D keep up the good work
Absolutely breathtaking!! Wow Beautiful work! =) =) 5/5 collect
I play violin, and this is so real looking i could grab it and play it. Only one comment: the top part the the finger board has five strings, violin has four. Where did the fifth go, and where did it come from?! :-)
You are soooo soo observant! finally, someone who caught my mistake haha! I actually noticed it when I was about to submit my drawing. Then I got lazy and didn't correct it anymore XD
... Woaaah !!!
wowowowowowowowowowwowowowowowow! Amazing! great work! stunning! breath taking! wow! 5/5 and fav! :)
so perfect!! faves 5 big hearts
so beatiful just perfect wooooooow favs
Wow! You could frame it and put it in a museum! Sooooooooooo realistic! 5h+fav.
wow, that's sooooo Gooood


text:
Hey! This thing is still a Work in Progress. Files, instructions, and other stuff might change!
Pixel 3a XL Caseby lightofhonor May 26, 2019
Repair, slice, or enhance this Thing
Auto-magically prepare your 3D models for 3D printing. A cloud based 3D models Preparing and Healing solution for 3D Printing, MakePrintable provides features for model repairing, wall thickness...
MakePrintable Thing App Thing App
Kiri:Moto is an integrated cloud-based slicer and tool-path generator for 3D Printing, CAM / CNC and Laser cutting. *** 3D printing mode provides model slicing and GCode output using built-in...
KiriMoto Thing App


text:
Hundreds of people came together to grant the wish of a 10-year-old baseball fan in Connecticut.
When Make-a-Wish approached Thomas Hastings, who suffers from Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, Thomas knew he wanted a ball park in his backyard. What he didn't know was that hundreds of people in his Windsor community would come together to create a scale replica of Fenway Park in the Hastings family's backyard.
"At first when I wished for the baseball field I didn't expect to get a mini-Fenway park. I just thought I was just gonna get a little flattened area and some bases and not Fenway grass, I didn't expect that was going to happen," Thomas Hastings said.
U.S. & World
Thomas created artwork and wrote down aspects of Fenway Park he wanted included in the field, and the community did the rest. It took 34 days to transform Thomas's hilly backyard into a mini-Fenway Park, complete with all the bells and whistles including a wheelchair-accessible Green Monster.
On Saturday, dozens of people turned out for opening ceremonies at the park. Thomas's parents say the community support has been overwhelming.
"So many people donating their time, you know, more important than writing a check, showing Thomas that people really do care and people want to do something to make him have a great experience," Thomas's mother Mary Hastings said.
"It started off as Thomas's wish for a baseball field in the town, in his backyard, and the town of Windsor came together, local contractors, everybody, and just made it so much more," said father Brad Hastings.
Thomas visits Fenway often and has even thrown out the first pitch at a game. But now he has a place all his own to play baseball with friends and family anytime he wants.
"Thomas faces many challenges," Brad Hastings said. "He's had 14 surgeries. Dealing with the muscular dystrophy can be tough. Here it all disappears. Here's Fenway Park in his backyard, where the magic is. Where he can forget about everything."
On Saturday, they celebrated with the community over Wiffle ball and refreshments. Thomas threw the first pitch to Keith Herzig, chairman of the board for Make-a-Wish Connecticut.
Make-A-Wish spokesman Michael Dominick said Thomas's wish exceeded all expectations.
"We dream big at Make-a-Wish, this is a bigger than even we had dreamed," Dominick said.
Dominick said Thomas is an inspiration because he never lets his condition slow him down.
"He doesn't let it confine him or define him at all," Dominick said.
Pam Keough, the president and CEO of Make-A-Wish Connecticut, described Saturday as one of the most exciting days she's had as part of the organization.
"We do a lot of things for the community and for folks out there but nothing like Thomas's wish I've ever seen since I've been a part of this," Keough said.
Thomas said he looks forward to having his friends over to play ball, including his teammates on the University of Hartford Hawks baseball team.


text:
Rep. Joseph Cao, a Republican representing New Orleans in Congress, voted repeatedly last night to kill health reform. Cao briefly supported health reform last November, when an amendment was added to the bill which altered current law and vastly restricted even private sector dollars from abortion insurance coverage. Staunch pro-life supporters — from a group of 59,000 Catholic nuns, to the Catholic Health Association, to Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) and Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) — supported the health reform bill passed last night and said it does not provide taxpayer funds to abortion services.
Regardless, Cao said he withdrew his support for health reform because of nonexistent abortion services. In an interview with the New Orleans Times-Picauyne, he further explained that the Senate bill contained abortion services "at a par with slavery." Cao's ugly comparison lacks substance and is insulting to his majority African American district. Statistics show that expanding health insurance coverage is "one of the most powerful tools for reducing the number of abortions" in industrialized countries. Furthermore, Cao is promoting a culture of death by trying to deny health reform to his New Orleans constituents:
— According to a report by the Center for American Progress, health reform makes a tremendous first step to eradicate the "medical apartheid" of health disparities faced by communities of color in America. The bill establishes demonstration programs to promote access to Medicare beneficiaries with limited English proficiency and provides incentives to encourage a range of needed health professionals to work in primary care settings, public health services, and in areas of workforce shortage.
— New Orleans is heavily uninsured. At about 24%, Cao's district is 10% more uninsured than the national average. A Harvard study found that nearly 45,000 people die every year because of a lack of health insurance. Health reform will provide 31 million previously uninsured Americans with coverage, while ensuring those with coverage are never denied treatment because of their health status.
— Louisiana has a high level of infant mortalities, 9.8 per 1,000 live births. Health reform includes expanded prenatal care for low income women.
— Cao's district has high rates of obesity and diabetes. Among many provisions aimed at decreasing chronic illness and promoting health lifestyles, health reform guarantees that all insurance companies offer free preventive care.
Despite promising to be an independent voice, Cao has now voted in lockstep against the stimulus, the President's progressive budget, clean energy reform, financial reform, and health reform. Notably, shortly before the vote last night, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) hosted a $500-per-person fundraiser for him at the Capitol Hill Club.


text:
Resident Evil (GameCube) review
"In 1999, System Shock 2 showed the world that it's possible to craft an unspeakably brilliant and always-chilling tale, complete with horrifying characters and a relentlessly anxious and unfriendly atmosphere. It also proved that survival horror in its truest sense - a focus on the conservation of resources in a harrowing, otherworldly situation - doesn't have to be restricted by godawful movement and an errant camera, and certainly that tension doesn't have to be ramped up by not being able to see where you're going. Why, when we have a wonderful benchmark like that, are we still lapping up rubbish like this?"
Freelance review by Lewis Denby (January 21, 2009)
A bio for this contributor is currently unavailable, but check back soon to see if that changes. If you are the author of this review, you can update your bio from the Settings page.
More Reviews by Lewis Denby [+]
Resident Evil: Operation Raccoon City (PlayStation 3)
A dismally unimaginative co-op shooter, coupled with a half-finished idea for an intriguing competitive component. Play it in either mode and youll be bored or irritated within minutes.
To the Moon (PC)
Its retro graphics look beautiful. The original soundtrack is utterly stunning. Its story is one of the most confident and grown-up that our medium has ever seen. Dont approach To the Moon expecting taxing puzzles or combat or stats, because that isnt what its about. It is its own thing: an indie adventure a...
Unreal (PC)
As a first-person shooter, its incredibly competent. Quake 2 might have had the tempo, and Half-Life the suspenseful pacing, but Unreal had the variety and the challenge. Its weapons drew criticism for feeling weak and weedy against the Skaarj oppressors, and its a fair comment. They often do. Bu...
If you enjoyed this Resident Evil review, you're encouraged to discuss it with the author and with other members of the site's community. If you don't already have an HonestGamers account, you can sign up for one in a snap. Thank you for reading!
bloomer posted January 22, 2009:
Disagree aggressively with everything - except the dialogue point. Which I don't care about. I'd elaborate but RSI arm rationing prevents me from typing the necessary essay here. Maybe in the future.
Lewis posted January 22, 2009:
Very obviously a contentious one. I vehemently despise this game (and, frankly, the whole series), and decided to throw objectivity out of the window. It's 'Honest' Gamers, after all.
I'd like to hear your thoughts. I can imagine what some of them might be, and they're reasonable and valid ones. I'm surprised you passionately disagree with some of the things I said, though: surely you find the camera and control mechanics of these dated, ugly games completely contemptuous? If not, you've got a lot more patience than me.
Lewis posted January 22, 2009:
"except the dialogue point. Which I don't care about."
I think that's an important point, actually. I think if I had a higher tolerance for woeful videogame storytelling, I'd have enjoyed this a lot more. As it stands, that's kind of my pet area, and an invigorating, well-told interactive narrative is pretty much the reason I play single-player games. I actually didn't mention the puzzles in this review, which I regret a bit - they're quite nifty, and if you play purely for the element of challenge, it wins marks back. I don't. I play to become involved in a well-realised world. Resident Evil's is horrible.
honestgamer posted January 22, 2009:
Resident Evil on the GameCube is the best title in the series pre-RE4. The graphics are well done and maintain the spirit of the original games while upgrading things for the era in which the remake was released, the control scheme that had been such an issue for the series up to that point is less irritating than normal (though still awkward, yes) and the campiness in the narrative--an intentional element that adds a lot to the games--is at its finest.
Remember that while we're trying to provide honest reviews on HG, a big part of that is a certain degree of objectivity. It's why you won't ever see me reviewing any WWE games. If I come into a game with baggage that's going to make me predisposed to dislike it--baggage that its target audience won't have--then I'm not really writing a useful review as much as I am polishing up a forum post and trying to make it sound more official.
Please keep in mind that I haven't read your review in-depth, Lewis, just your comments in this thread.
wolfqueen001 posted January 22, 2009:
Well, I read the reiew (naturally, as it's his tourney entry, though I likely would have regardless), and I thought he backed up his points quite well. So even if he's the only one on this site (theoretically) who doesn't like the game, he shouldn't be knocked for it just because he seems too "subjective", at least not when he does a good job backing up his claims.
Lewis posted January 22, 2009:
The thing with trying to write completely objectively is that no-one will have the same experience as you describe. We (I mean games players, not critics) don't go into the medium thinking objectively about the good and bad points of the game. We go into it thinking about whether we're enjoying it or not.
For me, the most successful critics will discuss a subjective reaction to the game, and analyse it with reference to actual content and undeniable facts about how the game works. In this review, I discuss how my instinctive reaction was to think "I'm not engrossed or invested in this story-driven single-player game at all." My analysis is to put this down to the awkwardness of the controls and camera, and the poor quality of the characters' dialogue, which both served to destroy the immersion it tries so hard to create. I go on to credit the game for the things it does well - which, funnily enough, are pretty much the exact things you picked up on, JV - but I'm not going to pretend I had more fun with the game than I did, just because I can see its qualities. Funnily enough, I think this is one of the most analytically and critically detailed reviews I've written in a long time.
As for going into a game with baggage, I absolutely agree with you. I'd also point out that, if there's a very specialist area of videogames I consider myself knowledgeable and well-researched about, it's the narrative-driven single-player game, with a particular leaning towards the exploration and execution of interactive horror. Some of my favourite games in the world come under the loose banner of 'survival horror', but I really don't like the pre-4 Resi games. They're overly traditionalist, without considering why other developers were experimenting with alternate ways of telling a horror story through the medium.
(I'd also suggest that "Resident Evil on the GameCube is the best title in the series pre-RE4" is a far more subjective statement than almost anything I wrote in that review. And yeah, I know you haven't really read it yet, so that's not a dig. Hope you don't take it, or any of this, as such.)
In short: I can appreciate, I suppose, why people like Resident Evil. I'd just urge them to consider how fundamentally flawed it is, and how unacceptable these schoolboy errors really are. And I'm not going to pretend I can overlook them, because I can't.
WilltheGreat posted January 22, 2009:
Honestly I don't see what the problem is here. Lewis doesn't like this game. He wrote a review about it to explain why. Should we not write reviews about games we didn't like.
Felix_Arabia posted January 22, 2009:
I thought Code Veronica was the best pre-RE4 game in the series???
JANUS2 posted January 22, 2009:
You could invert the "objectivity" argument and say that my blind love of Ninja Gaiden and refusal to acknowledge its camera as an issue makes a strictly objective review of it impossible. Does that mean I shouldn't bother reviewing it?
The only way the WWE example is relevant is if Lewis hated zombies before playing Resident Evil and used that as a basis to criticise the game.
zigfried posted January 22, 2009:
I agree with the first couple paragraphs of Lewis's essay on subjectivity.
However, I would contend that the way to establish a global "objectivity" is for everyone to review games regardless of their predisposition. Take WWE games for example -- most reviews are rather forgiving of the stilted, clunky gameplay because the reviewers enjoy seeing their poorly-rendered heroes parading around onscreen. If some people who *didn't* care for pro wrestling picked the games up and reviewed them as fighting games, then the overall internet review catalogue of WWE games might better represent the populace as a whole.
In other words, 99% of wrestling games would be labeled as flops, and wrestling fans like myself wouldn't keep wasting money on supposed "innovations".
Despite popular belief, it does convey meaning for someone to say "I played this game thinking I would hate it, and... I actually do hate it!".
zippdementia posted January 22, 2009:
I think what you're missing here Lewis is that everything you've said you disliked about the game (and you defended your points well, a tip of the hat to you, sir), is exactly what everyone LOVES about REmake. Including the voice acting.
wolfqueen001 posted January 22, 2009:
And that shouldn't be a problem. Lewis shouldn't be railed against just because "Waaaah - he bashed my favowit game!" If he should be taking any criticism, it should be for his argument and his argument alone (which I don't see a problem with), not predispositions about a game.
I like Resident Evil as a franchise. I haven't played much of it, but I still like it. And I still looked at the review with an open mind without wetting myself because "OMG - he hates it!"
It seems like what's going on here is a bit of fanboyism, which, is about as subjective as it gets, ironically.
Now, that's not to say your points of objectivity aren't valid, but those arguments of objectivity really hold no water when the argument is strong (which I believe it is here). I also honestly believe that reviews of all types should be taken into consideration. I mean, really, isn't it kind of fishy if EVERYONE thinks a certain game is great? When I read game reviews, I like to read both the good and the bad because it gives me a better sense of the game as a whole. If we outlaw one thing or another because "it's subjective" - even if the arguments are valid - then aren't we eliminating a critical aspect to acquiring all the necessary and relevant information to make a decided and well thought-out purchase?
There are other, much more valid criticisms you can make about this review, but subjectivity isn't really one of them, I don't think, at least not when he actually has something to say in a rational, well-defended manner.
zippdementia posted January 23, 2009:
I think you missed my point. I wasn't getting into the whole subjective thing. I was just saying, like Jason, that it seems that Lewis simply doesn't like this genre of game, the niche that the original RE's fit. Crappy controls, dismal voice acting, no plot... it's all part of that niche and people go to RE looking for that.
When you end up reviewing a genre you don't like, sometimes your opinion can be totally justified, but also completely hold no water, because you're criticizing the things that people go to that genre to get. I thought Lewis' review was well-stated, well-defended, and well-written. I also think it doesn't matter, because people will ignore his opinion within the first few paragraphs when they realize the things he doesn't like are the things they love.
It's a thin line, but I do think there's a difference between not liking a game because it's bad and not liking a game because it doesn't appeal to your aesthetic.
It's like how it's really hard for me to review puzzle games, because I generally find them boring and a waste of my time (especially if they're on console system). When I wrote my Lumites review, I wrote three reviews that I scrapped because I realized I was complaining more about the genre and not really giving puzzle fans (people who would actually play the game) what they would want to know. It's actually one of the reasons I wanted to write that review, so I could learn to get over that particular bump.
Note: NOT WHAT THEY WOULD WANT TO HEAR. Rather, the things they would need to know when establishing whether this game was worth their time.
Lewis' review is an interesting and well written read (all his reviews are well written), but ultimately it doesn't help RE or the particular brand of Survival Horror fans that go for RE.
Suskie posted January 23, 2009:
Enough is enough. I've been trying as hard as I can to restrain myself in an effort to keep my promise and never post anything on HG again, but the ridiculousness of this thread has forced me to intervene.
Jason's argument is one that he has used before, and it's one that I generally agree with. Of course, objectivity can't be the dominant theme of any review -- it is based on your opinion of the game, after all, and not your expectations of what someone else will think of it -- but the argument doesn't apply in this case. I, for example, do not like Madden games, but it's not a question of quality. I acknowledge that if a pro American football simulator is what you're looking for, Madden is your best bet. They're well-made games. They just don't appeal to me. It goes beyond quality; it's more a matter of genre.
Jason and Zipp seem to think that the same applies to Lewis's analysis of the RE series, that his gripes are rooted in the fundamental characteristics of the genre itself, but that's not true at all. I think what his review is saying (and this is a thesis I agree with) is that game developers have found smarter, more effective ways to instill fear into players without handicapping the game itself. His assertion that the tendencies of old-school survival horror games are "rubbish" is more a statement of where his interests lie. As he said, Lewis appreciates an involving narrative. This doesn't rule out the survival horror genre from his interests. Quite the contrary: He's illustrating his ideal survival horror game.
Zipp's argument is that all of the "flaws" attributed to the RE games can be excused as niches of the genre, yet I've played plenty of scarier games that didn't need to rely on imprecise controls and awkward camera angles to make their horror elements work. Just an example: Eternal Darkness. I don't know if Lewis has played that, but I imagine he'd love it. It's unquestionably a survival horror title, yet it breaks the conventions introduced by the RE series and uses unique tactics to inspire equally frightening results. I guess there's an audience for the old-fashioned mechanics of the RE games (excluding RE4), but dismissing anyone for not taking to such mechanics on the grounds that "they're not the target audience" feels more like an escape route for RE fans who don't want to admit that they're attracted to flaws... and then complain when Capcom fixes said flaws and actually produces a quality game for once (RE4).
It's true that all of the issues Lewis brings up in his review can be attributed to the series as a whole, and he even admitted that he dislikes the entire series. That might be a problem if he were to continue writing RE reviews (for the same reason I no longer take Cairo seriously when he reviews a MGS game), but I don't think he will. This review seems to be a retrospect on the series as a whole, his one chance to lash out on a franchise that he's always had some serious issues with.
I've said many times before that the opinions of the HG community differ greatly from those of the general majority, and it's true. Lewis, more often than not, takes the side of that majority, and he's had to put up with a lot of shit from us over the past because of it. (BioShock is the best example.) Now he's finally turned the tables and penned a bash review for a game he's always considered overrated. For him to receive so much flak for that -- being given the bullshit "objectivity" argument in such an out-of-place context (even RE's most ardent fans seem to admit that the series is hilariously flawed, intentionally or otherwise) -- is both unfair and poetically ironic.
And Lewis, if you're still listening... Welcome to the other side.
zippdementia posted January 23, 2009:
Well, what can I say? I've been outgunned at 3:00 in the morning. Not much left to do but lie down and wait for the collection of wallets.
At least until reinforcements arrive.
I don't except the Eternal Darkness bit, though. Eternal Darkness is an extremely flawed game.
Suskie posted January 23, 2009:
I brought up Eternal Darkness because it's extremely narrative-driven, which Lewis likes, and because it's a survival horror game that doesn't house the flaws that supposedly make up the foundations for the genre ("cinematic" camera angles, tank-like controls, etc.). You're free to dislike it for other reasons, Zipp, but then you're missing my point.
Lewis posted January 23, 2009:
You know, it's funny. After I posted that thread about reviews and scores the other day, I toyed with the idea of creating a series of 'Games-journalism-journalism' threads, but then decided no one would be remotely ineterested. Then, by penning a mere 'review', I've inadvertently started one of the main discussions I wanted to raise. Brilliant.
I'm going to try to go through a lot of points here, fairly comprehensively. Apologies if I miss anything out, or, conversely, if I bore you to tears.
Jason sent me an email last night, outlining why he was disappointed with this particular review. I'm sure he won't mind my discussing it here, as it wasn't overtly personal, and was both a relevant and elegantly put argument that, as games critics (as opposed to the editor of a games site) may not necessarily pick up on as easily.
The crux of it was thus: if you're going to raise a contentious and controversial point about a whole genre of community-adored games, you have to be extremely careful how you present it, otherwise you're going to risk alienating the entire target audience of the review.
In the case of this review, Jason felt that I didn't go into enough analytical depth to justify this sort of reaction in a staff review. I'm paraphrasing here, but his words were something like "this is exactly the sort of critical analysis of a game I'd love to see more of in the User Reviews section, or on the forum, but perhaps not as the site's 'official word'."
He also made the undoubtedly true case that the review's target audience - essentially, survival horror fans and lovers of the Resident Evil series - obviously aren't too bothered about the flaws and inconsistencies I pointed out, or - essentially - they wouldn't be fans in the first place. And since I only dwell on the general, common faults of the genre, the review isn't saying anything worthwhile about the game to these people.
I touched upon this in the other Games Journalism Journalism thread, but it's particularly relevant here: I'm probably guilty of forgetting that the bulk of the site's readers aren't games critics. The fact that most of the active community contributors are clouds that vision a little, and I usually end up writing the sort of stuff that I, as a games writer, love to read. But then I'm the sort of person who reads entire reviews without so much as glancing at the score, and I'm well aware that this isn't the case for most gamers. Without meaning to alienate further anyone who may be reading this thread from outside the critical community, it's likely that gamers - as opposed to critics - aren't as likely to want to engage in this level of meta-criticism of a genre. They want to know if the new game in the series they love is as good as the previous ones. In this respect, the review has failed.
And that's undeniable. In retrospect, it's the sort of thing I'd love to read at - I don't know - Rock Paper Shotgun, or The Escapist, or somewhere like that, where the emphasis is on careful, critical consideration about wider issues relating to games. But I would be very surprised (though secretly delighted) to see it printed in a mainstream games mag. It's treading a dangerous tightrope between "review" (ie. buyers' guide, essentially) and "criticism" (ie. intellectual discussion about an art form). It's important, given the current readership of sites like this, to be able to separate the two. Personally, I'm geared towards the latter. But I should be aware that most are not.
(It's worth noting that I'd actually forgotten to even score the thing before WQ pointed it out to me, just before I submitted it. A '4' was completely arbitrary. The case didn't lend itself to a mark whatsoever - which is probably indicative of something that didn't quite work as a straightforward 'review'.)
Right. That's covered.
The criticisms about me not liking survival horror games holds far less weight. Particularly because A) I referenced a really good one in the review itself, and explained exactly why that game is, to the very core, a 'survival horror' game, pointing out that the only differentiation between that and Resident Evil is the abhorrent control mechanisms of the latter; and B) because I've said on at least a couple of occasions now that I do like the genre. This argument, however, was probably not best presented in the review, and I made a bit of a sweeping statement. But I'd equally make that statement about adventure games. I love adventure games when they're done well; most of them, in my humble opinion, simply aren't.
Zipp's point about the fine line between analysing a game's quality and analysing its aesthetic is a very interesting one. I know people like the oddball controls of traditional survival horror, but I genuinely struggle to understand why. The things that appeal to me about Resident Evil seem vastly more successful approached in different ways. I don't understand why people have grown comfortable with this reliance on cheap aesthetic tactics to add scare points. It's a bit like the film The Strangers. A load of my friends thought it was amazing "because it made me jump more than anything else I've ever seen." I thought this was a crippling negative. I didn't enjoy the film, because it cheated at scaring me. The narrative wasn't compelling, and I didn't care for the characters. Instead, I was just on-edge, for no real reason, which wasn't in any way fun. I can jump out from behind a tree and scream at you, and it'll get your heart racing. It doesn't mean I'm a genius of horror.
Maybe what I was trying to do is to get people to re-evaluate why they play these games, and consider for themselves whether or not it's just because they've found a comfort zone. I really, strongly believe that, if anyone was being honest, they'd have to admit this is partially the case.
Eternal Darkness is a fabulous example. Genuinely creepy and well-written, with innovative techniques, and still shamelessly 'survival horror'. With its heavy focus on resource conservation and puzzle-solving, from a third-person perspective, it simply couldn't be described as anything but survival horror in its purest form. The only thing that separates it from Resident Evil is the camera. And it's so much easier to get into as a result.
This would have been a far better example to cite in my review than a survival horror title that's poured into an eff-pee-ess-arr-pee-gee mould. But then Mike's a better human than me.
Conclusions, then:
I'd absolutely stand by everything I said in my article, while conceding it perhaps wasn't the most appropriate argument to make under the guise of Honest Gamers' "official word" on the game.
But I have no regrets, because it's stimulated the sort of brilliant games-journalism discussion I absolutely adore.
NB. I've actually been asked by Jason to make a few revisions to the review, in order to make it less alienating to its target audience, and to solidify a few points. So this piece will end up being altered, but I might post this version to the User Reviews section so it still exists in its original form. And I'll probably still use this one for the competition. God forbid I enter a 'normal' review, after my ethereal and awkward Half-Life 2 concept review and my vehement destruction of the obviously brilliant Oblivion.
EDIT: Amusingly, this forum post is as lengthy as most long-form reviews, and nearly twice as long as the article itself.
JANUS2 posted January 23, 2009:
Does HG have an "official word"?
If by "official word" you mean reviews that are designed to be inoffensive to fanboys then I think I'll stop reading staff reviews. I'd rather people expressed their honest, unbiased opinion rather than sugarcoat it for the sort of readers who send death threats to gamespot when they give Zelda a 8.9.
Lewis posted January 23, 2009:
"No opinions expressed in any review, guide, cheat, fanfic, or editorial necessarily represent the opinion of the staff or any site sponsors."
Maybe this should just be bigger.
Masters posted January 23, 2009:
Wow, you know a topic is a big deal when it stirs the sleeping Suskie.
goldenvortex posted January 23, 2009:
This topic is silly.
Lewis seemed to convey his opinions pretty well, and while I don't agree with them, I wouldn't go out of my way to criticise him just because of that.
Lewis posted January 23, 2009:
Amusingly, I've just been sent a survival horror collection to review.
So far, this one's genuinely interesting and creepy, if a little rough around the edges. And, like Eternal Darkness, it stick pretty rigidly to the thematic and content conventions of the genre, without a reliance on shoddy mechanics.
Guess the game(s).
Lewis posted January 23, 2009:
"This topic is silly."
No it's not. It's a really, thoroughly interesting and highly relevant discussion. I don't mind being criticised at all if it leads to brain-engagement like this. I like a challenge.
overdrive posted January 23, 2009:
This has been an interesting discussion. I can see where the objective/subjective stuff comes in, as you did mention early in your review stuff about how traditional survival horror is rubbish, but you did back up your points well, I thought. But a line like that isn't going to help your case, as I'd guess that many people who don't feel like that about traditional survival horror games for whatever reasons would use it to detract from your points. Like, for example, I'm not a fan of fighting games. If I reviewed one, I could make the greatest case of all time as to why said game isn't good. But if I had a line saying that I don't like this kind of game or something to that effect, that will do nothing but kill my credibility within my target audience. You know, the, "He said he doesn't like this kind of game.....and what do you know, he doesn't like this particular game.....*close window*," syndrome.
Now, when it goes beyond simple genres, that's when I take issue with the whole "objectivity/subjecivity" thing. There are genres I don't like to play for whatever reasons. Ergo, I don't play them and don't review games in them. But the concept that I shouldn't necessarily review a game/series I dislike (regardless of whether it be a poor game in a huge series like Final Fantasy or oft-ridiculed drek like Hydlide) in a greater genre I do like is something I'd strongly disagree with. Obviously, regardless of how popular or unpopular the game is, the onus would be on me to present a good case as to how it's bad and/or didn't meet my expectations. Overall, I thought you did a solid job of that, although as I said before, the traditional survivor horror is rubbish line definitely hurts in trying to convince a person that your stance is "right", as it can be read as simply that you're biased against this sort of game.....and when a reader initially gets that impression, no amount of great arguing of points is likely to change their mind on that.
As for the "official word" of the site, that's part of the beauty of having multiple staff members....there can be multiple "official words". It doesn't take much effort to find games on this site where different staff people have dramatically different opinions on games. Look at Super Castlevania IV, where Masters gave it a 10 and Zig gave it a 5. And I could bring up Chrono Cross's diverse array of staff scores, but that might divert this discussion in a new direction.... So, my challenge to a staff member who feels Lewis' review isn't a good representation of the game for an "official voice" would be to pen your own review with the score you see fit to give us two diverse "official voices".
pickhut posted January 23, 2009:
Hey, guys, can I post in this topic too?
zippdementia posted January 23, 2009:
Indeed, Lewis. HG needs MORE of this kind of discussion.
Except that it goes away after a few months :(
Masters posted January 23, 2009:
I forgot about that, Rob. Man, Zig has bad taste. :
Halon posted January 23, 2009:
Haha Suskie's last paragraph of his first post is spot on. Lewis often clashes with people for praising every single game and he finally writes a bash review and this happens. Poor guy can't win here.
dagoss posted January 23, 2009:
I love this 'review'.
And I'm not just saying that because I'm on Lewis's team in the Challange. I have never understood the persistence on this site in the belief that a review's primary functions are to inform and entertain in a capitalistic sense (e.g. should I buy this? Is it fun?). Such an attitude really makes no sense, especially given that the primary audience for this site is its own users (i.e. people that aren't reading it to be swayed into a purchase) and the fact that many of the reviews posted here are on dead systems. Here Lewis engages the "is it good" question on an intellectual level as though games should be held to the same artistic standards as films or books, and when he does so, exposes the game for the cheap, illconceived thing that it is. I applaud this review; I wish I had written it.
EmP posted January 23, 2009:
Does HG have an "official word"?
Not so long as I draw breath!
I'm not going to go the way of the mega-paragrapgh. I'm only going to say that, while I disagree with some of what Lew said, it's a stellar review and some of the claims being leveled at it are laughable.
I'm also in full agreement with Suskie. Look the the skies for the riders of doom!
wolfqueen001 posted January 23, 2009:
Well, I'm tired of talking and my points don't seem to be contributing much anyway, so I'm just going to say a few more things:
I also completely agree with Suskie, and OD, to some extent, especially his point about the site's "official word".
I also somewhat agree with dagoss, but I think we need to combine the two elements. HG, from what I know, is ideally supposed to appeal to a wider audience, but because we're so small, we mostly attract others like ourselves (at least those who are active). However, I strongly dislike the idea of writing something I disagree with just because Zelda_Fan_123 can't bear a single negative word against Wind Waker.
I truly don't believe we should not write about something just because someone else will disagree with it. If you think about it, somebody somewhere is going to disagree with anything at one point or another, so there's no point in trying to make everyone happy. And attempting so would just result in boring material because, well, to create an unbiased piece of literature requires extremely boring, dry, super-analytical and unemotional writing. Nothing wrong with the analytical, but combined with everything else, could just read like an encyclopedia article. But that doesn't mean we should all just say things willy-nilly without any defense or reasonable argument. A review isn't "lol dis gaem sux - dun bai it!" A review is something that tells us why it sucks with as much relevant detail as possible.
In that regard, it's how we present our distaste that counts, and I agree that if you make sweeping generalizations based on your own self-bias, then that could cause a problem (i.e. credibility issues). However, as mentioned before, (by OD and Suskie, I believe, if not myself) I do not see that as much of a problem in Lewis' review.
Anyway, that went far longer than expected. Now let's all discuss in dagoss' vein what a review on this site should be because that's significantly less provocative, I think.
Yay for big, gay happy families!
hmd posted January 23, 2009:
PROTIP: There's a difference between, "hmm I kind of don't like this game" versus the dozens of "this game is for gay queer nintendo fans who enjoy the taste of transexual penis p.s: fag" that are probably still hanging around this sites' archives.
As long as Lewis doesn't start posting shit like that, I think we'll be alright!
bloomer posted January 23, 2009:
I didn't imagine the whole site would be here to talk about this review. With my left hand typing, my biggest criticisim is this. I feel this is the kind of dismissive review in which 80% of it is spent describing a game system the reviewer doesn't like, not= the particular game itself. You even get a timekeeping alert to the fact in this review at the 'Sigh. Calm. Evaluate.' line, which falls at the 80% mark. Was this much of a review of RE rebirth? I don't think so. Was it a good personal discourse about your hatred of older mode of survival horror? Yes. As such, is this really the appropriate venue for it? I'm not sure. It feels more like blog fodder.
To just my plain old disagreements. Re: the cameras. On a personal note, that's what I miss the most, that nobody may make games like this again. I don't want everything like this, but it's a very artful mode I like a lot, which reached its peak in RE rebirth and RE0. The camera angles display great artifice and design and beauty, and also a tolerance for stillness. And they make some extremely 'horror film genre' choices, of a kind that utilitarian 3d cameras very rarely bother with because they're mostly just, functional and (would-be) transparent slaves. They're hardly about artifice at all. I like when someone fights the transparency of the delivery system occasionally. The RE games mess with it a lot and were made by people deeply interested in horror. Glances at screenshots from RE games will not be confused with generic angled looking screenshots from newer all 3d games.
RE rebirth is of course a remake as well, so RE Zero is really the first (and last, for now) game where nobody actually 'had' to use static camera angles, but they chose to. It's the major aesthetic and design choice for the game.
The controls - the angles demand different controls. Some people and me find them transparent (deep nerd analysis has suggested the 'hold button to move forward' model you can get in the cube RE games is actually the height of sophistication with this camera style - I haven't tried it a ton, too used to the other ways by this time). Others hate it. I don't blame anyone who hates it, except when they go for the 'the controls were deliberately crippling to make it scarier.' angle as I don't buy it. Also, people who say this were rarely scared?!
Away from the review, I resist the move in most fields of technical advancement saying we should do the thing the new way just because we can. EG - no more 4 track chiptunes because we can record unlimited audio tracks. No more holding shots in action films because in Bourne someone used really fast edits. And no more static camera angle videogames just because we can move the camera around now. If you're me, the worst gaming one has been 'no more text adventure games because we made point and click', but hordes of point and clickers will disagree.
Finally, a criticism:
'Hats off to Capcom for re-recording the inexcusably bad voice work'
The implied alternative being you thought they might just re-use the recordings from before? :)
bloomer posted January 23, 2009:
for those as stimulated by the discussion as was said, have a look here:
Nearly all the articles on the front page should interest you, and talk about s/h controls, the change in the genre post RE4, the camera, etc. etc
Chris has a veeeery still hand in his writing delivery, but he is very good.
wolfqueen001 posted January 23, 2009:
I feel this is the kind of dismissive review in which 80% of it is spent describing a game system the reviewer doesn't like, not= the particular game itself.
That's the thing, though... by critiizing the game system (camera, controls, whatever), he's basically implying it belongs to this game as well.
That's probably not a very strong argument, but I'm tired of arguing anyway.
Suskie posted January 23, 2009:
I'm sure Lewis wrote this review knowing that plenty of people would disagree with him, and that's perfectly fine. Where I start getting ticked is when those same people start questioning the validity of his review and Lewis's authority in penning it.
If my enormous post didn't make my point clear, here it is bluntly: The objectivity argument can work to a certain degree, but push it too hard, and suddenly any game can be excused of any flaw on the grounds that the reviewer didn't fit into the target audience.
zippdementia posted January 24, 2009:
Much more interesting a topic than whether or not Lewis' review is good or not is the discussion about objectivity in a review. Let's have more of that.
bloomer posted January 24, 2009:
This big topic didn't develop for nothing. Many people felt the review was somehow unreasonable or we wouldn't all be here.
I don't question Lewis' authority to review anything (though I don't know if you're referring to what i wrote, zipp.). I question choices he made here in this review, and yeah, I have thus questioned this review's validity.
We all draw what we probably don't realise are tons of complicated lines in the sand about our own reviewing behaviours - I would do this, I wouldn't do that - and we stretch them around to suit our taste and circumstance. And when others cross them, we come out and say so, especially if we're interested in the game in question.
I could summarise this review unkindly into, 'Resident Evil sucks because I hate this genre, for these reasons.' It's a kind of misdirective approach I don't like in what we call reviewing, where any genre is concerned. I hate point and clickers but I still address particularly what is in front of me if I try one, and don't rely on my criticisms of an entire mode as being a review of that game. This review could probably get to that way with rewriting, but that's where it'd go if we subscribed to my lines in the sand.
Re: objectivity in general. if you find yourself thinking about what you're doing, you're probably trying to write with a degree of objectivity. Even what that objectivity is changes with everyone, but it has some tangible quality for an individial that, if they're any good as a critic, they are conscious of and somehow aspire to deal with. I think if you don't aspire to deal with it or don't think about it, you're not a critic. I concentrate on the broad notion of a sense of it because each person will define its edges differenetly if asked, giving the illusion of no agreement. But actually there's a big fat overlap that everyone here with some reviewing chops is aware of and probably trying to serve.
Comparing it to the other forum topic, I think a sense of objectivity is like a sense of how to score a game. Very hard to articulate if you're pressed on it, yet you see everyone's actually thinking about it a lot in practice, which is good. And if you lapse on that big overlap area, people tend to notice.
Lewis posted January 24, 2009:
"I could summarise this review unkindly into, 'Resident Evil sucks because I hate this genre, for these reasons.' It's a kind of misdirective approach I don't like in what we call reviewing, where any genre is concerned. I hate point and clickers but I still address particularly what is in front of me if I try one, and don't rely on my criticisms of an entire mode as being a review of that game. This review could probably get to that way with rewriting, but that's where it'd go if we subscribed to my lines in the sand."
How many times? I don't. I hate its former reliance on outdated mechanics that contribute little to the genre other than to render it practically unplayable for anyone who isn't so into the games that they begin to overlook it. My accusation of the 'traditional survival horror genre' as being "rubbish" should have been pointed specifically to its mechanics, not to the genre as a whole. That was an oversight, granted.
Conversely to you, I love the point-and-click adventure genre, but actually loath the majority of its output. It's a more specific occurence of the same thing I think about survival horror - ie. done well, it's fabulous, but it mainly isn't. Point-and-clicks for far too long relied on obtuse, arbitrary puzzles with little to no guidance. Fans of Myst - and, inexplicably, there were tonnes - probably liked this approach, and as such won't mind it in its various sequels. But critically, across the board, it's a series that's pretty much detested.
Does this mean the entirety of the enthusiast press wrote inappropriate reviews, because they weren't pandering exclusively to the views of the series' fans?
My thought on 'objective reviewing' is that it serves absolutely no purpose to anyone. By trying to account for any experience a gamer may have with a product, you're A) failing to engage with it on any meaningful level, and B) likely to provide a report on an experience that, in fact, no-one will have.
Read this review of the Rhodan game. UK journo Richard Cobbet picked up on this as an example of "a reviewer who's clearly not enjoying the game at all, but is absolutely terrified it might just be them." Observe the lack of any detail whatsoever, speaking in sweeping generalisations, and a truckload of hedging. It also focuses more on a description of the game's content than an analysis of its quality. In fact, the tone is vaguely positive, but suggests absolutely no enthusiasm whatsoever on the part of the reviewer, so I end up simply not believing him when he says it's a good game.
(And, y'know, because I've suffered through the game as well.)
This is what happens when you try to be totally objective in a review. Ultimately, you're going to end up praising it and criticising it in equal measures, and you aren't going to talk about whether you actually enjoyed the thing, which is inherently the most important bit.
The best critics will engage with a piece of work at a personal level, analysing how it ticks and how that affected them. But videogames journalism is still in its relative infancy. It's why reviews of films and music tend to vary wildly across publications, while videogame reviews tend to nestle quite sweetly in ambivalent agreement.
Lewis posted January 24, 2009:
Oh, and by the way.
I mentioned the games journos' Symposium email group on another thread, but it's definitely worth having a read through when it comes to this sort of discussion. It's primarily about scores, but there's a lot of 'subjective vs objective' talk as well. Thoroughly interesting to see what the pros have to say on the matter.
Oh - the site's down at the moment. Hopefully will be operational soon.
bloomer posted January 24, 2009:
'My thought on 'objective reviewing' is that it serves absolutely no purpose to anyone.'
Then you have gone too narrow in your definition of objectivity. This review you cite is just a lame-o consumer guide, not a poster boy for objectivity, except in some super calcified extreme manifestation. The guy did not bring his own subjectivity and was clearly wimping around for reasons that somewhere are related to money and company relationships, maybe even his fear of unemployment, not because he personally subscribed to a theory of pure objectivity. This does not mean you don't bring objectivity to your own reviews every time.
You already exercised a ton of objectivity as soon as you compared all those games, genres, etc in your own review. It's why we give creedence to your opinion as a reviewer, for playing a ton of games and demonstrating you know where things have stood in the past and where they do stand, where they could in your opinion. If you either never played any other games, or acted in each new review as if you never did, as if they just stuck this in front of you now and 'here's my opinion on this thing in isolation', then we wouldn't give you any cred.
When you raised the spectre of a pile of survival horror games, you were demonstrating objectivity. It's not like there are these two poles 1000 miles apart from each other. We bring our subjectivity, modulated by objectivity, to each review. Everyone has the former, but it's some engagement with the latter that makes a critic, and actually, in demonstrating your sense of the latter is how you can get away in turn with being aggressively subjective and having people go with you. They mentally grant you the authority to do it.
You build objectivity first by playing games, remembering your experiences and bringing them to bear on your later actions, and showing people you're doing this when you communicate with them. They can be made to feel 'Oh this guy clearly guy knows his stuff (and is aware of standards.)' and then they heed what you say. And standards are a manifestation of objectivity.
If this all sounds too obvious, it's probably why people find it hard to articulate. Most frequent reviewers on this site have developed a high level skillset in most of the above already, which is almost second nature to them.
threetimes posted January 24, 2009:
Quote: I have no methodology for choosing a review score. I certainly dont think about it much. Your gut feeling (after either beating the game or the game beating you) is more accurate than whatever you might come up with after careful consideration."
I realise I tend to go either high or very low, and mostly only review games I enjoyed. I don't aim to be objective at all. It's a subjective experience. But then, I haven't reviewed many games.
What clicked for me was reading something Honestgamer wrote somewhere. Judge a game by what it intends to accomplish, or words to that effect. So if it intends to be scary, it should scare me. If it intends to be comical and light hearted, then it should make me chuckle. That kind of thing. If RE doesn't accomplish what it sets out to do, then that's fair enough.
Suskie posted January 24, 2009:
If we're supposed to judge games by what they mean to accomplish, then I'm wondering why Killer7 didn't get perfect scores across the board. Just because developers have achieved what they set out to do doesn't mean that everyone will agree with said goals. And who's to say what any game means to accomplish, anyway? From what I've heard, the guys who made Too Human think their game is pretty awesome.
I judge games by how much I enjoy them. That seems reasonable enough to me.
zippdementia posted January 24, 2009:
I'm glad you're posting again, Suskie. As usual, your posts are right on target.
Halon posted January 25, 2009:
This reminds me of that article on Segabastard a while back about the Twisted Metal/God of War creator (can't remember his name ATM) crying over his car mini-game scoring in the 6-range on Gamespot because he didn't set out to make a 10/10 game so it shouldn't be judged that way. He set out to make a mediocre game and since it is a mediocre game it should receive a 10!
It's a lame argument.
EDIT: Who keeps on changing my avatar? Even Heavy is way better than this.
honestgamer posted January 25, 2009:
I don't remember the article, but you're probably thinking of the very vocal David Jaffe. If he made a mini-game collection that was worth 10/10 (such an occurrence is not impossible) and then a bunch of action and FPS fans in the media rated it down because there wasn't enough shooting or sword slashing, then he has a point.
If Road & Track started rating down sports cars that don't have enough towing power, people would cry 'fowl' and they would be right to do so. It's the same sort of thing here. Rate a game down because it's a bad game, not because it's a good game within its respective genre and you just don't like that genre.
With that said, I rather doubt that Mr. Jaffe produced a 10/10 mini-game compilation. That's not the sort of thing a developer like him tends to stumble upon the first time out the gate. Someone critiquing his game needs to go deeper than "This game sucks because it's not God of War," though. If Jaffe makes a mini-game collection, it's not beyond reproach just because it's in a different genre, but it should be criticized according to the criteria that genre needs to meet. Critics have a responsibility to bring the right tools to the table.
WilltheGreat posted January 25, 2009:
Posting in a thread with Suskie.
bluberry posted January 25, 2009:
have you been lurking for months?
good god.
Lewis posted January 25, 2009:
Anyone got a link to that Gamespot review?
JANUS2 posted January 25, 2009:
This topic is going round in circles.
I could make similar complaints about Jason Venter's Winning Eleven 2007 review (complaining that you can't slide tackle everyone is clear evidence of a lack of understanding of the genre, in my view). But then we all have personal issues with games or genres that others see as ideal. People disagree. It happens. I really don't understand why this review is so contentious. It's only one person's opinion. If someone mistakes that as the site's official word, then that's down to their ignorance.
honestgamer posted January 25, 2009:
I could make similar complaints about Jason Venter's Winning Eleven 2007 review (complaining that you can't slide tackle everyone is clear evidence of a lack of understanding of the genre, in my view).
A fair point. :-)
Halon posted January 25, 2009:
Yeah, it was David Jaffe. Just forgot his name ATM.
If Road & Track started rating down sports cars that don't have enough towing power, people would cry 'fowl' and they would be right to do so. It's the same sort of thing here. Rate a game down because it's a bad game, not because it's a good game within its respective genre and you just don't like that genre.
It's a Twisted Metal spinoff that's supposedly 20 minutes long and has no replay value. He said (in a temper tantrum) since he was only trying to create a 20-minute downloadable game it should be rated highly for succeeding in what he wanted it to do. The article on SB that no longer exists argued that with that logic the burger king games should be awarded 10/10 since they're only $5 and 20 minutes long.
Lewis: here it is
Genj posted January 25, 2009:
Posting in legendary topic.
Lewis posted January 26, 2009:
"If Road & Track started rating down sports cars that don't have enough towing power, people would cry 'fowl' and they would be right to do so. It's the same sort of thing here. Rate a game down because it's a bad game, not because it's a good game within its respective genre and you just don't like that genre."
Is that aimed at me? If so, I really can't be bothered to address this argument yet again. Have a read back through the thread, and notice that I've contended it at least three times already.
If not, then I'll get off my high horse. :)
Anyway, that Calling All Cars review is pretty woeful to be honest. If Jaffe had a problem with it, it probably should have been that there's absolutely no critical appraisal of the game beyond "yeah, what's here is quite good" in a short paragraph towards the end. The rest looks like it's been ripped straight from a press release. If I were Greg Mueller's editor, I'd have rejected that copy immediately. It's completely vacuous, and entirely comparable to that Rhodan review I linked to earlier.
But, from what people are saying, it sounds as if his complaints were more about the score than the review. And that's just pathetic. You'd have thought people who were actually working within the industry would have enough sense to know that scores are completely arbitrary in terms of how you engage with a game, and instead have to function pretty much entirely as a buyer's guide. And, to be honest, if I were presented with a really good game that was still completely awful value for money, then I'd have probably settled for a similar rating.
Halon posted January 26, 2009:
He was pissed because he felt the game shouldn't be judged in the same way as every other game on the planet and should be treated lighter because it was not intended to be a great game. In other words, it should be rated based on what it was supposed to be (which in this case is a mediocre arcade game), which is absurd I don't have the blog post and don't feel like searching for it but in the process he threw a hissy fit and started crying like a baby.
Lewis posted January 27, 2009:
I can't find the original post, but I've just read a response to the uproar about it by Jaffe, in which he says he doesn't have a problem with the review score or tone - he mentiones a few reviews that criticised it even more heavily that he even agrees with in parts. Instead, he says, he has a problem with how much the Gamespot writer managed to miss the mark in terms of actually analysing how the game works. Which, y'know, is kind of what I said. It's like a big press release, followed by "and it's really good, but far too short."
User Help | Contact | Ethics | Sponsor Guide | Links


text:
Welcome To Los Cristianos | Home
Callao Salvaje | Costa Adeje | Costa del Silencio | Golf de Sur | La Caleta | Los Cristianos | Los Gigantes | Playa de Las Americas | Playa la Arena | Playa Paraiso | Puerto de la Cruz | Puerto Santiago | Santa Cruz | Tenerife Accommodation | Tenerife Attractions | Tenerife Climate | F A Q | Links | Contact Us | Flight Information |
If you have previously visited Los Cristianos and already know where you wish to stay in the resort, we have put together this list of accommodation in the area, along with links to the appropriate pages in the reservation systems offered by Booking.com, Trivago, or Alpha Rooms.
Or alternatively, for a more detailed description of a specific hotel, complete with photographs, maps and videos, simply click on the accommodation name.
|Hotel Andreas
|Hotel Arona Gran
|Hotel H10 Big Sur
|Hotel Reveron Plaza
|Hotel Sol Arona Tenerife
|Paradise Park Lifestyle Hotel
Have you, or any other members of your family, recently visited Los Cristianos? If the answer is "yes", then we would really like to hear from you by taking a few moments to add your holiday review HERE.
© Copyright Islas Travel Guides
No part of this web site may be reproduced without the prior written permission of the publishers. For further information please contact Islas Travel Guides. Whilst every care has been taken to ensure the accuracy of editorial content of this site, no responsibility can be taken for any errors and omissions that occur therein.


text:
U.S. Secretary of Transportation LaHood Announces $15.6 Million for Repairs to I-5 Skagit River Bridge in Washington
Topics: Ray LaHood, Interstate Highway System
Federal Highway Administration
18 June 2013
Tuesday, June 18, 2013
Contact: Nancy Singer
Tel: 202-366-0660
WASHINGTON - U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood today announced that he is making $15.6 million in federal emergency funds available to Washington State to help repair the Interstate 5 bridge over the Skagit River that collapsed on May 23. A section of the four-lane bridge, located 60 miles north of Seattle, collapsed into the water, disrupting travel in both directions.
"We are making good on our promise to help the people of Washington in every way we can," said Secretary LaHood. "These emergency funds are a major part of our commitment to restore mobility and expedite repairs as quickly as possible."
Today's funding follows $1 million in quick release emergency relief provided the day after the collapse. The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) will use the funds to build a new replacement span. In the interim, WSDOT continues to operate detours and is building a temporary bridge. When the new replacement span is complete, WSDOT will remove the temporary bridge and install the new span.
"People and businesses have been impacted while this bridge is out of commission, and that hurts both the local and national economy," said Federal Highway Administrator Victor Mendez. "We are providing the state with the federal support it needs to restore this critical link."
The bridge carries an estimated 71,000 vehicles each day and is a major commercial route between Washington and Canada. Approximately 11 percent of the vehicles are commercial trucks transporting goods between the two countries.
The Federal Highway Administration's Emergency Relief program provides funding for highways and bridges damaged by natural disasters or catastrophic events.
|Connect with The Crittenden Automotive Library


text:
Adobe Acrobat Pro DC 2015.023.20053 Multilingual | MacOSX | 930 MB
Acrobat DC (former Adobe Acrobat XI Pro) is the completely reimagined desktop version of the worlds best PDF solution. It includes a mobile app so you can fill, sign and share PDFs on any device. And with Document Cloud services, you can create, export, edit and track PDFs from anywhere – and stay connected to recent files across all your devices.
Visualize this: A UI for users.
Touch friendly and easy on the eyes, Acrobat DC has a beautiful new interface that works the way you think – with a design-your-own Tool panel so you can find what you need fast. This UI is so simple, you have to see it to believe it.
Sign anywhere. Its included.
Weve put e-signatures in everything, for everyone, from PDFs created in Acrobat DC to mobile apps. So now, you can securely send and track agreements that anyone can sign in seconds – on any device. And filling out forms is just as quick.
Never lose track of documents again.
Now, you can securely send and track your most important documents. Know who opened them, when – and even what time they were signed. Plus, you get the peace of mind that theyre protected – every step of the way.
Acrobat DC works like magic.
Edit any file, even a paper one. Just snap a photo with your phone, and then open it on your desktop. Before your eyes, Acrobat will magically transform it into a PDF you can edit on your tablet – complete with custom fonts that match the type in your original file.
E-signatures. Everywhere.
Acrobat DC brings e-signing to more than one billion devices around the world. Now anyone can legally sign documents with a finger on a touch-enabled device – or with a few quick clicks in a browser. More than just a signing app, Acrobat DC makes it easy to send, track and store signed documents, too.
Download Via RapidGator
Download Via UploadGIG
Download Via Nitroflare


text: International Student Resources Once admitted, international students must secure an I-20 in order to go to the US Consulate to secure an F-1 student visa to be able to study in the United States. Students must show sufficient financial resources to cover living expenses while engaged in a GTU program. Students will need to pay a SEVIS fee online before the meeting with the consulate official. The Admissions Office will work with new students on this process. Current Student Resources


text:
Glorious Summer Days!!!!Sunday, November 16th, 2008
We know that nearly in the rest of the world winter is already there. Well, not in Australia, and definetely not in Tropical North Queensland. Days are soooooooooooooooo hot. Don't believe me???????? You only have to take a look at the photos we took this morning. I know my Spanish friends would think I'm kidding if they knew this photos were taken from 7.30am to 8.30am. Because, and Steve doesn't understand this yet, Sunday morning are made to sleep in. And not one hour or two but the whole day, unless you're meeting your friends to go out and have some tapas. Otherwise, you shouldn't go further from bed than the sofa. But our Cairns underwater camera rental business keeps us busy and this morning the alarm went off at 6am. Not bad, eh? Now you understand why we don't go out partying any more.
And yesterday we decided to leave Cairns behind and discover Innisfail, a city we've only been to when we have visited Paronella Park. Innisfail is the Art Deco capital of Australia and in the photos you will see why. There are lots of beautiful buildings, many of them were built in the 1920's.
But before we got to Innisfail, we stopped in Babinda Boulders, a magnificent fresh water pool with a fascinating legend. Legend has it that a beautiful girl called Oolana, from the Yidinji tribe, married a very respected elder from her same tribe called Waroonoo. Very shortly after they married, another tribe moved in the area and a very handsome man moved in with this tribe. His name was Dyga and soon Oolana and Dyga fell in love. Realising how serious the crime they were comitting was, the adulterous couple escaped and fled into the valleys. But they were soon captured by the elders although Oolanda managed to break free and jumped into the still waters of what is nowadays known as Babinda Boulders, calling for Dyga to follow her. No sooner has she hit the waters than her cries for her lost lover turned the still waters into a rushing torrent and the land shook with sorrow. Massive rocks were scattered around the creek and the crying Oolana disappeared amongst them. The legend says that her spirit still guards the boulders and her cry for her lost love can still be heard.
It's a fantastic place, although not good for swimming. And the rainforest surrounding the boulders is very interesting, with lots of ferns forming intricated patterns around the trees. But we also saw some destruction caused by Hurricane Larry back in 2002. Huge fallen trees can still be seen, with massive roots that weren't enough to hold them in place when the hurricane hit the area.
After the Boulders we made our way to Josephine Falls, a beautiful area within the Wooroonooran National Park. We were ready for a swim as it was getting very hot, but during the dry season, which we're still in, there's not enough water flowing and we decided to wait until we were back home and we could go to our swimming pool. We will go back when there's more water as we saw some very wicked rocks perfect for sliding into the water.
And to finish the blog for today, I'll leave a photo of the most fantastic tree house I have ever seen. Can you imagine a better location for it???????????????


text:
1 Sep 2019
8:00 am - 1:00 pm
Bittern Railway Station
Bittern Sunday Market is a Community Market run by Volunteers with the purpose to raise funds to support local groups/activities.
Every Sunday from 8am – 1pm at the Bittern Railway Station car park.
*Peninsula Kids holds no responsibility for last minute changes/cancellations to events listed on this website.