Burlington police chief to testify about smart law enforcement

first_img# # # # # Burlington Police Chief Michael E. Schirling will testify Wednesday before the US Senate Judiciary Committee at the invitation of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT).  Leahy, who chairs the panel, scheduled the hearing to explore Encouraging Innovative and Cost-Effective Crime Reduction Strategies. Leahy has made state and local law enforcement issues a priority for the Judiciary Committee this Congress.  He dedicated the first hearing of the 111th Congress to examining the needs of state and local law enforcement.  In 2008, Leahy twice brought the Judiciary Committee to Vermont to hear testimony about community efforts to address crime.Chief Schirling will offer testimony about the Burlington Police Department s success in developing and enhancing community policing through partnership and problem solving.  Police departments across the country are facing cutbacks in resources and funding during difficult economic times, and are increasingly looking to local business and community organizations to help identify and implement innovative strategies to address violence and crime.The hearing will be held tomorrow, Wednesday, March 3, at 2:15 p.m., in room 226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington.  A live webcast will be available online. Source: Leahy’s office. WASHINGTON (Tuesday, March 2)last_img read more

Rare remains of tropical storm to bring heavy rain to Iowa

first_imgMASON CITY — Remnants of Tropical Storm Cristobal are expected to reach Iowa Tuesday morning, bringing heavy rain and potential flash flooding.Meteorologist Brooke Hagenhoff, at the National Weather Service, says those big named storms over the Gulf of Mexico usually break up before they reach Iowa, but this one should remain a post-tropical depression, which is very uncommon.“That has really only happened once since records have been kept and that was in 1900, a Galveston (Texas) hurricane,” Hagenhoff says, “so, very rare.” The storm’s arrival will mean the end of the hot and humid weather in Iowa, funneling in much cooler temperatures and the potential for multiple heavy downpours between Tuesday morning and evening.“We are looking at rainfall totals of between two to three inches that go across portions of southeast and eastern Iowa,” Hagenhoff says. “That’s really where the main axis is going to be for the heavier precipitation.” The storm may bring western and central Iowa just an inch to an inch-and-a-half of rain, but then another system will arrive from the west late Tuesday into Wednesday morning, which could bring another inch or two of rain.“Thankfully, the rain with that secondary system coming out of the west is going to bring the heavier rainfall across western and central Iowa,” Hagenhoff says. “So, the axis for the heavy rainfall from the tropical system and the secondary one are not going to overlap.”A Flash Flood Watch is in effect along and east of the Interstate 35 corridor, including the Mason City-Clear Lake area.last_img read more

What gun control?

first_imgArm the teachers If you want safe airplanes, arm the pilots. If you want safe schools, don’t just arm the teachers – give them incentive pay to become reserve police officers with their local law enforcement agency. If only 10 percent of teachers took advantage of a program like this, there would always be several armed police officers at every school. These killers are nothing but cowards, and it’s high time we stop making our schools Killer Safe Zones. – Scott Hewes Castaic Guns not the answer We want unrestricted access to firearms and no gun-control laws, so we have to expect the occasional massacre. It’s just the price we pay for the current interpretation of the Second Amendment. – Annie Caroline Schuler West Hollywood Typical liberals The knee-jerk reaction by liberals for stricter gun laws is so predictable. If their logic is so correct, then every time there is a drug bust or a tragic car accident, the Legislature should sponsor new controlling laws. Unfortunately, there are people in our society who will find a way to break the law, no matter what. – Richard Diradourian Montrose What do they expect? Re “American Muslims beginning to fear that `Islamophobia’ is gripping the U.S.” (April 12): Brad Greenberg’s article suggesting that Islamophobia is gripping the U.S. puts forward the idea that this is somehow a fault of the people of the United States. After several years of horrific killings of thousands of innocent lives around the world by extremist Muslims and a total lack of coherent condemnation or action from any real Islamic leadership, what is the proper reaction for any non-Muslim population? Until concrete actions are taken in the Muslim world to condemn and reverse the inhuman behavior of the Islamic extremists that attack and murder innocent people, it will be difficult for non-Muslims to accept the Islamic faith and people as sincerely wanting to live in peace anywhere in the world. – Russell Smith Northridge Park perils Re “Safety first” (Our opinions, April 16): As someone who called for an environmental impact report when the Baseball Academy was being considered for the site, I fully agree with the Daily News’ concern about the new park on top of a landfill in Sun Valley. There were significant reasons why the neighborhood council of North Hollywood Northeast took a position calling for an EIR and they had little to do with the methane-gas issue. It was the other toxins which have already been found to be in the soil and the danger to those who are very young and the elderly. There is a reason the baseball league decided against going forward at the site. – David Hernandez Valley Village Another idea Re “City Council boosts cash for tenants” (April 12): With all the talk about doling out money to tenants being evicted because landlords want to turn apartments into condos, did anyone think about the possibility of making this money available to tenants as down payments on those very condos? – Harriet Jones Northridge160Want local news?Sign up for the Localist and stay informed Something went wrong. Please try again.subscribeCongratulations! You’re all set! The horrible news Monday from Virginia will again raise the gun control argument. The gun wackos will again cite whatever amendment they cite and repeat their mantra that “when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” Yet they never seem to have an answer as to why, in those countries where there is gun control, there are so few gun-related crimes. There was a time when effective gun control had a shot at making the United States as free from gun-related crime as countries with gun control, but it is too late for that. It is also too late for the popes and the leaders of Islam to preach birth control to prevent overpopulation and poverty. – Joel Gossman Los Angeles last_img

Chiefs vs. Raiders: Five questions with opposing beat writer

first_imgChecking in with Adam Teicher, who covers the Kansas City Chiefs for ESPN:1) A pretty impressive Week 1 by Patrick Mahomes. Is it even possible for him to be better than he was last season when he won the MVP?It’s difficult to see Mahomes topping his stats from 2018, when he became only the second player in NFL history to get to 50 touchdown passes and 5,000 yards. But he can still have a greater impact on games even if he throws, say, 40 touchdowns and 4,500 yards. His impact on last …last_img read more

What Is the Evidence for Feathers Before Flight?

first_img(Visited 93 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0 Birds evolved from dinosaurs; that’s the evolutionary consensus.  Let’s examine the evidence for that scenario.In “Feathers Before Flight,” Julia Clarke [U of Texas] gathered together the evidence birds evolved from dinosaurs in a Review article for Science Magazine.  To the untrained eye, the confident assertions can seem convincing.  Buried within the text, though, are the bits and pieces of actual fossil evidence used to support the conclusion.  Do they support the evolutionary picture?  Her first paragraph seems to have more gap than link:Feathers are branched structures consisting of β-keratin—a rigid protein material formed by pleated β sheets—with a hollow central shaft. They are strikingly different from other forms of vertebrate integument such as scales, skin, and hair. Until recently, evolutionary hypotheses envisioned their origin through elongation of broad, flat scales driven by selection for aerial locomotion such as gliding or flapping flight. Over the course of the past two decades, fossil discoveries, especially from northeast China, have revealed that the early precursors of feathers were filament-like rather than expanded scales and that branched pinnate feathers of modern aspect predate the origin of active flight. The revolution in our understanding of feather evolution continues, driven by rapid fossil discoveries and by new information from the study of extant birds.She implies that the scale-to-feather theory is out.  Somehow, filaments emerged where scales once existed.  Two statements stand out in this quote: that feathers are “strikingly different from any other forms of vertebrate integument,” and that “branched pinnate feathers predate the origin of active flight.”  The first is confirmed by discussions in the new Illustra Media documentary Flight: The Genius of Birds, where an animation of a single feather shows a complex structure complete with a hook-and-groove microstructure that provides an ideal mechanism for flight: lightweight, flexible, and strong.  The second claim, that feathers predate flight, will have to be supported further down in Clarke’s review.Clarke calls the new ideas of feather evolution “transformative,” suggesting that previous evolutionary scenarios taught in textbooks are no longer correct.  Most notable in transforming evolutionary beliefs have been the Chinese fossils:The Chinese deposits provide one such unique snapshot, where over a thousand specimens with fine details of soft tissues such as feathers, hair, and skin are preserved in ash-rich lake deposits ranging from the Late Jurassic (∼150 million years ago) to the Early Cretaceous (∼120 million years ago). Fossils from these deposits have revealed that dinosaurs that were inferred from bone characteristics to be closely related to living birds also share more features of feather structure.Acceptance of the evolutionary story is going to require acceptance of the dates, and with that, the belief that a lake was repeatedly buried in ash over a period of 30 million years – a very long time for an ecological community to survive with volcanoes going off.  Has anyone thought that through?  Would a dinosaur with filaments get buried in ash, then a lake form again, then more-evolved creatures with more-advanced feathers happen along, only to be buried in fine ash again, preserving soft tissues?  Would this cycle repeat for 30 million years?Between Clarke’s retellings of the consensus dinosaur-to-bird scenario, curious statements appear.  “The latter forms do not fit the hypothesis of flat scales morphing directly into flat feathers,” she writes.  “But these hollow filaments or ‘protofeathers’ are similar to structures seen early in feather development; a simple hollow cylindrical sheath arises first in feather ontogeny from the collar of the feather follicle before the barb ridges, linked to the development of its branching shape, form.”  There are two problems for evolution here.  One is the gap between scales and filaments.  The other is that her statement sounds like Recapitulation Theory: a modern bird’s feathers remember their ancestral forms as they develop.  The idea that “ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny” is generally frowned upon in evolutionary circles.Another problem is her statement, “Fossil data indicated dramatic shifts from scale to filament, to bunches of filaments, to branched feathers in theropod dinosaurs.”  Evolutionists typically like to avoid dramatic shifts, preferring gradual changes that mutation and selection can accommodate.  (Whether theropod dinosaurs had branched feathers will have to wait for the fossils she presents.)But then, Clarke mentions another gigantic conundrum confronting the simple scenario:The more recent discoveries of a basal ornithischian dinosaur with a filamentous body covering, and another ornithischian more closely related to Triceratops with a bristle-covered tail, force reconsideration of the timing of this transition. These fossils indicate that filamentous structures may be ancestral to dinosaurs. Filaments called pycnofibers also covered some pterosaurs. Ornithischian dinosaurs, sauropod dinosaurs, and pterosaurs are on evolutionary branches that split from that of theropod dinosaurs and birds about 230 million years ago in the Triassic. If these structures have the same evolutionary origin, a form of filamentous integumentary structure evolved from scales nearly 100 million years before the locomotor transition that we call the origin of birds (see the figure).If 30 million years is a problem, how about 100 million?  The findings (accepting the evolutionary dates) now require filaments to evolve from scales way back, 230 million years ago, long before Triceratops, T. Rex and pterosaurs (let alone feathered theropods) – only to come and go in various species for 80 to 100 million years.  Is that plausible?  And why would feathers “evolve” out of scales long before any functional adaptation?The figure Clarke referred to should be fodder for creationists.  It shows true pinnate feathers and simple filaments emerging virtually simultaneously in different branches, long after the split from Archosauria.  Not only does this show abrupt appearance; it shows no ancestral relationship between the filaments and the true feathers.  What’s more, the feathers are used for flight in some of the creatures suddenly at the earliest appearance of any integumentary structures.  Instant birds!  If her diagram is authoritative for the evolutionary story, it has “evolution of filaments” a good 50 million years before the first fossil bearing those filaments or feathers – simply because the timing of presumed evolutionary splits between various groups requires the filaments to be in the common ancestor.  Apparently, it is too difficult a pill to swallow for “convergent evolution” of these structures.The emerging evolutionary story is far from simple.  Clarke points out important questions it raises:The recent fossil data suggest that key integumentary shifts might be related not to flight but to innovation in stance, terrestrial gaits, and life history in early archosaurs, which came to dominate terrestrial ecosystems by the end of the Triassic. However, there are unanswered questions. Were there at least three independent and convergent shifts from scales to filaments in Archosauria, with only one of these linked to the origin of feathers and flight? Or was there a single ancient origin of filaments, with subsequent losses in some species and, much later, a second period of novelty seen in the evolution of a branching feather form? Answering these questions is key to understanding the evolution of feathers and other integuments.That these key questions remain unanswered undermines simplistic portrayals that “birds are dinosaurs.”  Generally, composite explanations are not useful in science.  Clarke says that “key integumentary shifts might be related not to flight but to innovation in stance, terrestrial gaits, and life history in early archosaurs….”  Well, which is it?  Composite explanations won’t do for the student who excuses his missing homework with “either the dog ate it, or my sister threw it away, or I forgot it was due.”  Science needs definitive explanations.  Besides, abrupt appearance is the norm throughout this story.  What is a “key integumentary shift,” anyway?  Did it just “happen” somehow?  What is “innovation,” or a “single ancient origin,” or a “period of novelty” but a confession of ignorance of any mechanism to explain how it arose?  Where are the fossils?  The figure caption reads, “Filamentous feather precursors may have originated nearly 100 million years before the origin of flight, but very few fossil deposits sample this period.”So despite the confidence shown on TV and museum displays, the critical fossil evidence for the origin of flight is missing.These questions send paleontologists back into the field. Early fossils of most major archosaur lineages are known from records in the Late Triassic and Early to Middle Jurassic (∼225 to 165 million years ago). However, no dinosaur older than the Late Jurassic has been recovered with preserved integuments (scales or feathers). Early pterosaurs are virtually unknown in the fossil record; their earliest fossils with integuments are also Late Jurassic in age (see the figure). A Late Triassic or Early Jurassic site with fine-scale soft tissue preservation would offer crucial insight into this question. However, very few candidate sites are known.Clarke becomes more confident again, if the early evolution can be ignored.  “The fossil snapshots that we do have offer much more insight into the evolution of pinnate feathers seen in living birds,” she says, launching into a discussion of what feathers might have been used for before flight emerged.  Maybe it was for sexual display.  “There is no known analog of archosaur filaments in adult living animals, but bird feathers are known to have diverse functions, for example, in flight, display, camouflage, and heat retention.”  Feathers on modern birds might be used for sexual selection, she notes.  But she’s talking about “living birds” there, not where they came from.  It’s only inference that dinosaurs used them for sexual selection before they thought of taking to the skies.  How did that happen?  It’s time to get specific about the origin of flight.  Remember as you read her statement that living birds are irrelevant.  Where are the fossils?Evidence is thus accruing for the function of early pinnate feathers in sexual selection, but there is little consensus on shifts in feather function associated with the evolution of flight. Reconstruction of ancestral conditions for the bird lineage requires consensus on the evolutionary relationships of key species. These species differ in feather shape as well as in their organization and layering on the forelimb and hind limb. Whether observed differences can presently speak to a gliding or flapping origin for flight is debated. Species with elongate feathers or a “wing” on the hind limb show characters consistent with a form of aerial locomotion but not one seen in living birds. At the same time, continued research indicates a broader variety of locomotor functions for forelimb feathering in living birds other than powered flight; young living birds flap short pinnate feathers on the forelimb, increasing traction to climb highly inclined surfaces. Although historically, feathers were firmly linked to flapping flight, the evolution of their early locomotor function in climbing, taking off, turning, landing, gliding, or flapping is a key outstanding question.The reference to “young living birds” on “inclined surfaces” is a hat tip to Ken Dial’s “WAIR” hypothesis (wing-assisted incline running), in which he watched living partridge chicks raising their forelimbs as they scuttled up ramps (see story and comments from 12/22/03, 12/03/12).  Her final paragraph is basically an admission that there are more questions than answers about the origin of flight:The evolution of feathers is now seen as one part of a broader story concerning the origin of novel integumentary structures in archosaurs, although data on the early parts of this story are very limited. New data multiply the set of questions we must ask about the locomotor transition that we call the evolution of flight. Model-based approaches are needed to explore the varieties of aerial and nonaerial locomotor strategies that extinct dinosaurs may have employed. These must take into account not only the diverse locomotor strategies in living birds but also potential differences in feather properties, shape, and plumage organization.Like Illustra’s film on Flight says about current speculations on the evolution of flight, “Each of these theories is highly controversial.”  The film contends that the functional requirements for powered flight cannot be achieved piecemeal by gradual steps.  “It’s really an all-or-nothing proposition,” Paul Nelson explains; “You don’t partly fly, because flight requires not just having a pair of wings, but having your entire biology coordinated towards that function.”  Even if dinosaurs were capable of employing “nonaerial locomotor strategies” of some undefined nature, how did a “locomotor transition” occur, leading to all the biological “innovations” required for powered flight?Clarke began with a promising title, “Feathers Before Flight.”  She ended on a series of unanswered questions – primarily, “New data multiply the set of questions we must ask about the locomotor transition that we call the evolution of flight.”Oh, wow, this article is so classic of the evolutionary genre, it’s a virtual gift to creationists.  Aside from the obvious evidential conclusion that dinosaur-to-bird evolution is a myth, Clarke used all the evolutionary tricks of the trade we’ve been pointing out in the Darwin lit for 12 years now: the Stuff Happens law, just-so stories, shielding complex changes in words like “novelty” and “innovation,” promissory notes, the coulda-woulda-shoulda habit, embedding evolution in terms like “protofeathers,” the convergence concoction, using passive verbs and subjunctive mood as covers for ignorance, composite explanations, punk eek, incredible stasis, ghost lineages, “more research is needed,” job security for storytellers, glossing over soft tissue in supposedly ancient material, tidbits of Lamarck and Haeckel as needed when gradualism doesn’t work, forcing uncooperative data into prefab scenarios, parading naked Emperor Charlie in public, sacrificing brains at his shrine – everything.  Hardly a sentence of this article is devoid of fallacies masquerading as science.We hope you caught these things before the commentary began.  If not, you need Creation-Evolution Headlines as a deprogramming course.  Bookmark this site and come for your daily therapy.  Since Ken Dial made an off-camera appearance, we like all beginners to get the shock treatment in our commentary from 12/22/03 – the first time (now a decade ago, still cited favorably by Darwinists) the Montana drunkard-on-Darwine presented living partridge family chicks as possible props to an evolutionary tale.  Read that color commentary now; know the tricks, and you won’t be fooled again.Flight: The Genius of Birds is now on sale in DVD format!  The Blu-ray edition is coming June 11.  Get breaking news and join the discussion on Illustra’s Facebook Page.last_img read more