text:
Innovation Markets
Archives For Innovation Markets
Innovation as a shield and a club in the agribusiness mergers [Ag-Biotech Symposium]
John Lopatka — 3 April 2017
John E. Lopatka is A. Robert Noll Distinguished Professor of Law at Penn State Law School
People need to eat. All else equal, the more food that can be produced from an acre of land, the better off they'll be. Of course, people want to pay as little as possible for their food to boot. At heart, the antitrust analysis of the pending agribusiness mergers requires a simple assessment of their effects on food production and price. But making that assessment raises difficult questions about institutional competence.
Each of the three mergers – Dow/DuPont, ChemChina/Syngenta, and Bayer/Monsanto – involves agricultural products, such as different kinds of seeds, pesticides, and fertilizers. All of these products are inputs in the production of food – the better and cheaper are these products, the more food is produced. The array of products these firms produce invites potentially controversial market definition determinations, but these determinations are standard fare in antitrust law and economics, and conventional analysis handles them tolerably well. Each merger appears to pose overlaps in some product markets, though they seem to be relatively small parts of the firms' businesses. Traditional merger analysis would examine these markets in properly defined geographic markets, some of which are likely international. The concern in these markets seems to be coordinated interaction, and the analysis of potential anticompetitive coordination would thus focus on concentration and entry barriers. Much could be said about the assumption that product markets perform less competitively as concentration increases, but that is an issue for others or at least another day.
More importantly for my purposes here, to the extent that any of these mergers creates concentration in a market that is competitively problematic and not likely to be cured by new entry, a fix is fairly easy. These are mergers in which asset divestiture is feasible, in which the parties seem willing to divest assets, and in which interested and qualified asset buyers are emerging. To be sure, firms may be willing to divest assets at substantial cost to appease regulators even when competitive problems are illusory, and the cost of a cure in search of an illness is a real social cost. But my concern lies elsewhere.
The parties in each of these mergers have touted innovation as a beneficial byproduct of the deal if not its raison d'être. Innovation effects have made their way into merger analysis, but not smoothly. Innovation can be a kind of efficiency, distinguished from most other efficiencies by its dynamic nature. The benefits of using a plant to its capacity are immediate: costs and prices decrease now. Any benefits of innovation will necessarily be experienced in the future, and the passage of time makes benefits both less certain and less valuable, as people prefer consumption now rather than later. The parties to these mergers in their public statements, to the extent they intend to address antitrust concerns, are implicitly asserting innovation as a defense, a kind of efficiency defense. They do not concede, of course, that their deals will be anticompetitive in any product market. But for antitrust purposes, an accelerated pace of innovation is irrelevant unless the merger appears to threaten competition.
Recognizing increased innovation as a merger defense raises all of the issues that any efficiencies defense raises, and then some. First, can efficiencies be identified? For instance, patent portfolios can be combined, and the integration of patent rights can lower transaction costs relative to a contractual allocation of rights just as any integration can. In theory, avenues of productive research may not even be recognized until the firms' intellectual property is combined. A merger may eliminate redundant research efforts, but identifying that which is truly duplicative is often not easy. In all, identifying efficiencies related to research and development is likely to be more difficult than identifying many other kinds of efficiencies. Second, are the efficiencies merger-specific? The less clearly research and development efficiencies can be identified, the weaker is the claim that they cannot be achieved absent the merger. But in this respect, innovation efficiencies can be more important than most other kinds of efficiencies, because intellectual property sometimes cannot be duplicated as easily as physical property can. Third, can innovation efficiencies be quantified? If innovation is expected to take the form of an entirely new product, such as a new pesticide, estimating its value is inherently speculative. Fourth, when will efficiencies save a merger that would otherwise be condemned? An efficiencies defense implies a comparison between the expected harm a merger will cause and the expected benefits it will produce. Arguably those benefits have to be realized by consumers to count at all, but, in any event, a comparison between expected immediate losses of customers in an input market and expected future gains from innovation may be nearly impossible to make. The Merger Guidelines acknowledge that innovation efficiencies can be considered and note many of the concerns just listed. The takeaway is a healthy skepticism of an innovation defense. The defense should generally fail unless the model of anticompetitive harm in product (or service) markets is dubious or the efficiency claim is unusually specific and the likely benefits substantial.
Innovation can enter merger analysis in an even more troublesome way, however: as a club rather than a shield. The Merger Guidelines contemplate that a merger may have unilateral anticompetitive effects if it results in a "reduced incentive to continue with an existing product-development effort or reduced incentive to initiate development of new products." The stark case is one in which a merger poses no competitive problem in a product market but would allegedly reduce innovation competition. The best evidence that the elimination of innovation competition might be a reason to oppose one or more of the agribusiness mergers is the recent decision of the European Commission approving the Dow/DuPont merger, subject to various asset divestitures. The Commission, echoing the Guidelines, concluded that the merger would significantly reduce "innovation competition for pesticides" by "[r]emoving the parties' incentives to continue to pursue ongoing parallel innovation efforts" and by "[r]emoving the parties' incentives to develop and bring to market new pesticides." The agreed upon fix requires DuPont to divest most of its research and development organization.
Enforcement claims that a merger will restrict innovation competition should be met with every bit the skepticism due defense claims that innovation efficiencies save a merger. There is nothing inconsistent in this symmetry. The benefits of innovation, though potentially immense – large enough to dwarf the immediate allocative harm from a lessening of competition in product markets – is speculative. In discounted utility terms, the expected harm will usually exceed the expected benefits, given our limited ability to predict the future. But the potential gains from innovation are immense, and unless we are confident that a merger will reduce innovation, antitrust law should not intervene. We rarely are, at least we rarely should be.
As Geoffrey Manne points out, we still do not know a great deal about the optimal market structure for innovation. Evidence suggests that moderate concentration is most conducive to innovation, but it is not overwhelming, and more importantly no one is suggesting a merger policy that single-mindedly pursues a particular market structure. An examination of incentives to continue existing product development projects or to initiate projects to develop new products is superficially appealing, but its practical utility is elusive. Any firm has an incentive to develop products that increase demand. The Merger Guidelines suggest that a merger will reduce incentives to innovate if the introduction of a new product by one merging firm will capture substantial revenues from the other. The E.C. likely had this effect in mind in concluding that the merged entity would have "lower incentives . . . to innovate than Dow and DuPont separately." The Commission also observed that the merged firm would have "a lower ability to innovate" than the two firms separately, but just how a combination of research assets could reduce capability is utterly obscure.
In any event, whether a merger reduces incentives depends not only on the welfare of the merging parties but also on the development activities of actual and would-be competitors. A merged firm cannot afford to have its revenue captured by a new product introduced by a competitor. Of course, innovation by competitors will not spur a firm to develop new products if those competitors do not have the resources needed to innovate. One can imagine circumstances in which resources necessary to innovate in a product market are highly specialized; more realistically, the lack of specialized resources will decrease the pace of innovation. But the concept of specialized resources cannot mean resources a firm has developed that are conducive to innovate and that could be, but have not yet been, developed by other firms. It cannot simply mean a head start, unless it is very long indeed. If the first two firms in an industry build a plant, the fact that a new entrant would have to build a plant is not a sufficient reason to prevent the first two from merging. In any event, what resources are essential to innovation in an area can be difficult to determine.
Assuming essential resources can be identified, how many firms need to have them to create a competitive environment? The Guidelines place the number at "very small" plus one. Elsewhere, the federal antitrust agencies suggest that four firms other than the merged firm are sufficient to maintain innovation competition. We have models, whatever their limitations, that predict price effects in oligopolies. The Guidelines are based on them. But determining the number of firms necessary for competitive innovation is another matter. Maybe two is enough. We know for sure that innovation competition is non-existent if only one firm has the capacity to innovate, but not much else. We know that duplicative research efforts can be wasteful. If two firms would each spend $1 million to arrive at the same place, a merged firm might be able to invest $2 million and go twice as far or reach the first place at half the total cost. This is only to say that a merger can increase innovation efficiency, a possibility that is not likely to justify an otherwise anticompetitive merger but should usually protect from condemnation a merger that is not otherwise anticompetitive.
In the Dow/DuPont merger, the Commission found "specific evidence that the merged entity would have cut back on the amount they spent on developing innovative products." Executives of the two firms stated that they expected to reduce research and development spending by around $300 million. But a reduction in spending does not tell us whether innovation will suffer. The issue is innovation efficiency. If the two firms spent, say, $1 billion each on research, $300 million of which was duplicative of the other firm's research, the merged firm could invest $1.7 billion without reducing productive effort. The Commission complained that the merger would reduce from five to four the number of firms that are "globally active throughout the entire R&D process." As noted above, maybe four firms competing are enough. We don't know. But the Commission also discounts firms with "more limited R&D capabilities," and the importance to successful innovation of multi-level integration in this industry is not clear.
When a merger is challenged because of an adverse effect on innovation competition, a fix can be difficult. Forced licensing might work, but that assumes that the relevant resource necessary to carry on research and development is intellectual property. More may be required. If tangible assets related to research and development are required, a divestiture might cripple the merged firm. The Commission remedy was to require the merged firm to divest "DuPont's global R&D organization" that is related to the product operations that must be divested. The firm is permitted to retain "a few limited [R&D] assets that support the part of DuPont's pesticide business" that is not being divested. In this case, such a divestiture may or may not hobble the merged firm, depending on whether the divested assets would have contributed to the research and development efforts that it will continue to pursue. That the merged firm was willing to accept the research and development divestiture to secure Commission approval does not mean that the divestiture will do no harm to the firm's continuing research and development activities. Moreover, some product markets at issue in this merger are geographically limited, whereas the likely benefits of innovation are largely international. The implication is that increased concentration in product markets can be avoided by divesting assets to other large agribusinesses that do not operate in the relevant geographic market. But if the Commission insists on preserving five integrated firms active in global research and development activities, DuPont's research and development activities cannot be divested to one of the other major players, which the Commission identifies as BASF, Bayer, and Syngenta, or firms with which any of them are attempting to merge, namely Monsanto and ChemChina. These are the five firms, of course, that are particularly likely to be interested buyers.
Innovation is important. No one disagrees. But the role of competition in stimulating innovation is not well understood. Except in unusual cases, antitrust institutions are ill-equipped either to recognize innovation efficiencies that save a merger threatening competition in product markets or to condemn mergers that threaten only innovation competition. Indeed, despite maintaining their prerogative to challenge mergers solely on the ground of a reduction in innovation competition, the federal agencies have in fact complained about an adverse effect on innovation in cases that also raise competitive issues in product markets. Innovation is at the heart of the pending agribusiness mergers. How regulators and courts analyze innovation in these cases will say something about whether they perceive their limitations.
In ag-biotech symposium, agriculture, agtech/biotech, antitrust, market definition, merger guidelines, mergers & acquisitions, technology	agbiotech, agriculture, antitrust, biotech, chemchina, dow, dupont, innovation, Innovation Markets, merger, monsanto, syngenta
Understanding innovation markets in antitrust analysis [Ag-Biotech Symposium]
Joanna Shepherd — 30 March 2017
Joanna Shepherd is Professor of Law at Emory University School of Law.
Today, three of the largest proposed mergers — Bayer/Monsanto, Dow/Dupont, and ChemChina/Syngenta — face scrutiny in both the U.S. and Europe over concerns that the mergers will slow innovation in crop biotechnology and crop protection. The incorporation of innovation effects in the antitrust analysis of these agricultural/biotech mergers is quickly becoming more mainstream in both the U.S. and E.U. The concerns are premised on the idea that, by merging existing competitors into one firm, consolidation will reduce incentives to develop new products in the future. Since 2015, the Department of Justice has opposed proposed mergers between Applied Materials/Tokyo Electron, Comcast/Time Warner Cable, and Halliburton/Baker Hughes at least partly based on innovation concerns. Similarly, the European Commission has raised innovation concerns in its analyses of several mergers since 2015, including Biomet/Zimmer Holdings, GlaxoSmithKline/Novartis, and BASE/ Liberty Global.
Although most of these contested deals are not based exclusively on innovation markets, fear of harms to innovation often result in the required divestiture of innovation-related assets. For example, both the FTC and European Commission allowed the 2014 merger between Medtronic/Covidien only on the condition that Covidien divest its drug-coated balloon catheter business to protect innovation in that market. And just this week, Dupont agreed to divest a large part of its existing pesticide business, including its global R&D organization, to secure approval for the Dow/Dupont merger in the EU.
Certainly the incorporation of innovation effects in antitrust analysis could be relevant in specific mergers or acquisitions if the consolidating firms are the primary innovators in the area, the firms innovate internally, and there are limited sources of external innovation. However, in many industries, this model simply doesn't apply. Take, for example, the pharmaceutical industry; as I explain in a recent Article, concerns about consolidation's impact on drug innovation are largely based on an outdated understanding of the innovation ecosystem in the pharmaceutical industry.
Today, most drug innovation originates not in traditional pharmaceutical companies, but in biotech companies and smaller firms, where a culture of nimble decision-making and risk-taking facilitates discovery and innovation. In fact, about two-thirds of New Molecular Entities approved by the FDA originate in biotech and small pharmaceutical companies, and these companies account for almost 70 percent of the current global pipeline of drugs under development.
To complete the development process and commercialize their drugs, biotech companies regularly collaborate with large pharmaceutical companies that push drugs through the grueling late-stage clinical trials and regulatory hurdles of the FDA, organize their manufacturing and distribution capabilities to bring the drugs to market, and mobilize their vast sales force to quickly achieve peak sales. In this current ecosystem, biotech and pharmaceutical firms are each able to specialize in what they do best, bringing expertise and efficiencies to the innovation process.
This specialization has dramatically changed the share of internally-developed versus externally-developed drugs in the pharmaceutical industry. Whereas in the 1970s and early 1980s, almost all drug discovery and early stage development took place inside traditional pharmaceutical companies, today, the companies increasingly shift resources away from internal R&D expenditures and projects and towards external sources of innovation. Externally-sourced drugs now account for an incredible 74 percent of new drugs registered with the FDA for sale in the U.S. Internal R&D is no longer the primary source of drug innovation in large pharmaceutical companies.
As a result, antitrust analyses that focus on pharmaceutical mergers' impacts on internal R&D and innovation largely miss the point. In the current innovation ecosystem, where little drug innovation originates internally, a merger's impact on internal R&D expenditures or development projects is oftentimes immaterial to aggregate drug innovation. In many consolidated firms, increases in efficiency and streamlining of operations free up money and resources to source external innovation. To improve their future revenue streams and market share, consolidated firms can be expected to use at least some of the extra resources to acquire external innovation. This increase in demand for externally-sourced innovation increases the prices paid for external assets, which, in turn, incentivizes more early-stage innovation in small firms and biotech companies. Aggregate innovation increases in the process!
Thus, proper antitrust analyses must take into account the innovation ecosystem in the merging firms' industries. In industries in which most innovation originates externally, as in the pharmaceutical industry, analyses should be less concerned with mergers' impacts on internal innovation, and more focused on whether consolidation will increase demand for externally-sourced innovation and, ultimately, increase aggregate drug innovation.
In ag-biotech symposium, agtech/biotech, antitrust	Innovation Markets, merger analysis, pharmaceutical industry
Significant Impediment To Industry Innovation: A novel theory of harm in EU merger policy?
Nicolas Petit — 21 March 2017
Thanks to Truth on the Market for the opportunity to guest blog, and to ICLE for inviting me to join as a Senior Scholar! I'm honoured to be involved with both of these august organizations.
In Brussels, the talk of the town is that the European Commission ("Commission") is casting a new eye on the old antitrust conjecture that prophesizes a negative relationship between industry concentration and innovation. This issue arises in the context of the review of several mega-mergers in the pharmaceutical and AgTech (i.e., seed genomics, biochemicals, "precision farming," etc.) industries.
The antitrust press reports that the Commission has shown signs of interest for the introduction of a new theory of harm: the Significant Impediment to Industry Innovation ("SIII") theory, which would entitle the remediation of mergers on the sole ground that a transaction significantly impedes innovation incentives at the industry level. In a recent ICLE White Paper, I discuss the desirability and feasibility of the introduction of this doctrine for the assessment of mergers in R&D-driven industries.
The introduction of SIII analysis in EU merger policy would no doubt be a sea change, as compared to past decisional practice. In previous cases, the Commission has paid heed to the effects of a merger on incentives to innovate, but the assessment has been limited to the effect on the innovation incentives of the merging parties in relation to specific current or future products. The application of the SIII theory, however, would entail an assessment of a possible reduction of innovation in (i) a given industry as a whole; and (ii) not in relation to specific product applications.
The SIII theory would also be distinct from the "innovation markets" framework occasionally applied in past US merger policy and now marginalized. This framework considers the effect of a merger on separate upstream "innovation markets," i.e., on the R&D process itself, not directly linked to a downstream current or future product market. Like SIII, innovation markets analysis is interesting in that the identification of separate upstream innovation markets implicitly recognises that the players active in those markets are not necessarily the same as those that compete with the merging parties in downstream product markets.
SIII is way more intrusive, however, because R&D incentives are considered in the abstract, without further obligation on the agency to identify structured R&D channels, pipeline products, and research trajectories.
With this, any case for an expansion of the Commission's power to intervene against mergers in certain R&D-driven industries should rely on sound theoretical and empirical infrastructure. Yet, despite efforts by the most celebrated Nobel-prize economists of the past decades, the economics that underpin the relation between industry concentration and innovation incentives remains an unfathomable mystery. As Geoffrey Manne and Joshua Wright have summarized in detail, the existing literature is indeterminate, at best. As they note, quoting Rich Gilbert,
[a] careful examination of the empirical record concludes that the existing body of theoretical and empirical literature on the relationship between competition and innovation "fails to provide general support for the Schumpeterian hypothesis that monopoly promotes either investment in research and development or the output of innovation" and that "the theoretical and empirical evidence also does not support a strong conclusion that competition is uniformly a stimulus to innovation."
Available theoretical research also fails to establish a directional relationship between mergers and innovation incentives. True, soundbites from antitrust conferences suggest that the Commission's Chief Economist Team has developed a deterministic model that could be brought to bear on novel merger policy initiatives. Yet, given the height of the intellectual Everest under discussion, we remain dubious (yet curious).
And, as noted, the available empirical data appear inconclusive. Consider a relatively concentrated industry like the seed and agrochemical sector. Between 2009 and 2016, all big six agrochemical firms increased their total R&D expenditure and their R&D intensity either increased or remained stable. Note that this has taken place in spite of (i) a significant increase in concentration among the largest firms in the industry; (ii) dramatic drop in global agricultural commodity prices (which has adversely affected several agrochemical businesses); and (iii) the presence of strong appropriability devices, namely patent rights.
This brief industry example (that I discuss more thoroughly in the paper) calls our attention to a more general policy point: prior to poking and prodding with novel theories of harm, one would expect an impartial antitrust examiner to undertake empirical groundwork, and screen initial intuitions of adverse effects of mergers on innovation through the lenses of observable industry characteristics.
At a more operational level, SIII also illustrates the difficulties of using indirect proxies of innovation incentives such as R&D figures and patent statistics as a preliminary screening tool for the assessment of the effects of the merger. In my paper, I show how R&D intensity can increase or decrease for a variety of reasons that do not necessarily correlate with an increase or decrease in the intensity of innovation. Similarly, I discuss why patent counts and patent citations are very crude indicators of innovation incentives. Over-reliance on patent counts and citations can paint a misleading picture of the parties' strength as innovators in terms of market impact: not all patents are translated into products that are commercialised or are equal in terms of commercial value.
As a result (and unlike the SIII or innovation markets approaches), the use of these proxies as a measure of innovative strength should be limited to instances where the patent clearly has an actual or potential commercial application in those markets that are being assessed. Such an approach would ensure that patents with little or no impact on innovation competition in a market are excluded from consideration. Moreover, and on pain of stating the obvious, patents are temporal rights. Incentives to innovate may be stronger as a protected technological application approaches patent expiry. Patent counts and citations, however, do not discount the maturity of patents and, in particular, do not say much about whether the patent is far from or close to its expiry date.
In order to overcome the limitations of crude quantitative proxies, it is in my view imperative to complement an empirical analysis with industry-specific qualitative research. Central to the assessment of the qualitative dimension of innovation competition is an understanding of the key drivers of innovation in the investigated industry. In the agrochemical industry, industry structure and market competition may only be one amongst many other factors that promote innovation. Economic models built upon Arrow's replacement effect theory – namely that a pre-invention monopoly acts as a strong disincentive to further innovation – fail to capture that successful agrochemical products create new technology frontiers.
Thus, for example, progress in crop protection products – and, in particular, in pest- and insect-resistant crops – had fuelled research investments in pollinator protection technology. Moreover, the impact of wider industry and regulatory developments on incentives to innovate and market structure should not be ignored (for example, falling crop commodity prices or regulatory restrictions on the use of certain products). Last, antitrust agencies are well placed to understand that beyond R&D and patent statistics, there is also a degree of qualitative competition in the innovation strategies that are pursued by agrochemical players.
My paper closes with a word of caution. No compelling case has been advanced to support a departure from established merger control practice with the introduction of SIII in pharmaceutical and agrochemical mergers. The current EU merger control framework, which enables the Commission to conduct a prospective analysis of the parties' R&D incentives in current or future product markets, seems to provide an appropriate safeguard against anticompetitive transactions.
In his 1974 Nobel Prize Lecture, Hayek criticized the "scientific error" of much economic research, which assumes that intangible, correlational laws govern observable and measurable phenomena. Hayek warned that economics is like biology: both fields focus on "structures of essential complexity" which are recalcitrant to stylized modeling. Interestingly, competition was one of the examples expressly mentioned by Hayek in his lecture:
[T]he social sciences, like much of biology but unlike most fields of the physical sciences, have to deal with structures of essential complexity, i.e. with structures whose characteristic properties can be exhibited only by models made up of relatively large numbers of variables. Competition, for instance, is a process which will produce certain results only if it proceeds among a fairly large number of acting persons.
What remains from this lecture is a vibrant call for humility in policy making, at a time where some constituencies within antitrust agencies show signs of interest in revisiting the relationship between concentration and innovation. And if Hayek's convoluted writing style is not the most accessible of all, the title captures it all: "The Pretense of Knowledge."
In agtech/biotech, antitrust, barriers to entry, entrepreneurship, exclusionary conduct, Hayek, intellectual property, international competition, law and economics, market definition, markets, mergers & acquisitions, vertical restraints	AgTech, biotech, Concentration, DGComp, Industry structure, innovation, Innovation Markets, SIII


Size approx. 11" x 12"
I have admired these rhinos of Chauvet cave since their discovery 15 years ago, but hesitated to recreate them because I thought their naturalistic style would be difficult to render on stone. It was just as tricky as I feared. It blows my mind that the original cave art is around 30,000 years old, yet looks absolutely modern in execution and was done on an unforgiving stone wall in the dark. Most of the paintings in Chauvet cave, including these rhinos are black. Grey was made by thinning the paint, rubbing off some pigment, or mixing stone scrapings together, for an affect that looks like it was done in art class on rag paper rather than on raw rock.
Although my paintings are much smaller than the originals, I strive to use the same pigments and techniques as the early artists did, hand-painting, rubbing, and carving into the surface of the stone.
To see a photo of the original painting, click here.
Size approx. 13.75" x 21.5"
This painting is on a beautiful piece of French Vanilla sandstone. The stone has a very fine grain, which was a delight for carving details into. The color of the stone is overall dark cream, with light and dark grey minerals flecking it, and a band of cinnamon colored minerals running across above the rhinos. I weathered the edges of the stone to make it look like an ancient artifact.
This is a big, gorgeous piece of sandstone with a shimmery gold-bronze majority and an earthy matte base for the rhinos.


Holy S&*T, now THIS is inspiring. Not just his physique but his outlook on life and aging. I want to be this guy when I grow up!
I'm not even a Ferrari lover, but I think the Ferrari California T is a truly beautiful blend of retro lines with a modern, exotic touch.
It's Ferrari's first turbo-powered car in nearly three decades with nearly 570 horsepower, and its retractable hardtop lets you convert it from coupe to convertible and back with the touch of a button.
Nicholas Felton is a unique, incredibly talented guy. He rose to fame with his stunning Annual Reports, which detail each year of his life in a staggeringly thorough and beautiful manner. Oh, and he's also the guy that built the Facebook Timeline.
Well, Reporter is his new iPhone app that uses your phone's sensors and a few short daily surveys to capture information about your daily routines, including where you've been, how active you've been, who you've been with, and so forth. All that data is then used to compile elegant reports, giving you a gorgeous birds-eye-view of your life.
Four programmable water temperature settings (176f, 194f, 203f amd 212f).
As you probably know, water temperature is a very important part of extracting enough flavor from the leaves to brew a perfect cup of tea.
A BPA-free plastic double infuser.
This is a basket-within-a-basket setup that lets you place shorter brew time ingredients in the inner basket and longer brew time ingredients in the outer basket.
A fine mesh screen to help keep sediment out of your cup.
Excessive tea debris is annoying and a mesh screen behind the spout keeps it out.
Although I prefer my Breville One-Touch, this Krups kettle is a great alternative for half the price.
I'm a bit of a board game geek, and Settlers of Catan is one of my favorites.
The game is for 3 to 4 players (but you can bring more players in using expansion packs) and it involves collecting resources and using them to build roads, settlements and cities, for which you gain Victory Points. The first player to collect 10 Victory Points wins.
What makes it great is its blend of strategy, luck, and player interaction. It's easy enough to learn that you can enjoy it from the get-go, but sophisticated enough that you can devise and test strategies to your heart's content. The trading and bartering system between players also adds a fun, challenging dimension and element of unpredictability.
I also love the replay value of this game. You can vary the board setup every game, which puts you into different starting positions every time, requiring you to adapt your strategies accordingly.
"My name is Patrick Bateman. I am twenty-six years old. I live in the American Garden Buildings on West Eighty-First Street, on the eleventh floor. Tom Cruise lives in the penthouse.
That's your first introduction to Ellis' protagonist, and you immediately know what type of person this is. In his world, you are what you wear, own, and drive. Your life is defined by where you eat, shop, and party. Your values are an ever-shifting, amorphous blob of social responses designed to impress and belittle others.
In this book, Ellis gives a haunting look into the world of the Manhattan uber-Yuppies, where materialism and physical beauty is admired over all. Bateman has gone to great pains to appear as perfect as possible: he's obsessed with taking care of his body and looks like a GQ model, he wears nothing but the finest designers, he lives in an upper-class condo in the trendy Upper West Side, he makes six figures working for his father's Wall Street firm, and he dines at the most exclusive restaurants in New York City, and parties in the most exclusive clubs. Bateman loves nobody, regards his fiance, friends, and co-workers with disgust, and feels nothing but a cold, bitter hatred of the world and its inhabitants.
The only thrill Bateman can experience is brutally torturing and murdering people, particularly young women. His violent outbreaks are rarely pre-meditated. If he's on a date with a girl, he may or may not take her home to chop her head off. If someone mentions how the Japanese are buying up all of New York City, he may order Chinese take-out to an abandoned building (mistakenly thinking it as Japanese food) and stab the delivery boy to death. If a bum asks him for money, he may toss him a few bucks with disdain, or strangle him to death.
That's just how his world moves, as he says.
I won't lie–for the first half of this book, I was pretty hooked. Bateman and his soulless comrades do and say some of the most outrageous stuff, and I just wanted to know what Ellis' twisted mind would think up next. I appreciated the shock value of the story and situations, but by 2/3 through the book, the gimmick felt repetitive. I kept reading simply because I don't like to quit books.
My experience could be summed up as 5 stars for the first half, 3 stars for the middle, and 2 stars for the final 1/3. I think it's worth reading for the first half alone, and while it goes downhill from there, there are a few later sequences that will still get a rise out of you.
This is one of the greatest action/adventure films in the last decade. You know, the type that you can watch for the seventh time and still enjoy. Up there with the original Indiana Jones movies, in my opinion.
Depp is at his comedic best and really steals the show despite a strong supporting cast of memorable characters. Rush couldn't have played the villain better and struck a perfect balance of despicable evil and comedic charm. He was one of those bad guys that you love to hate. Bloom and Knightley don't shine like Depp and Rush, but they fill their roles more than adequately and definitely contribute to the flick and help carry the story along.
I'm not sure if you could structure a story better than this. It holds your attention from beginning until end, tension builds and releases in a perfect rhythm, stakes build with every scene, and the film has the perfect blend of action, drama, romance, and comedy. It's just darn fun to watch.
If you haven't seen this movie yet, treat yourself to it–it's one of those rare movies that isn't just fun to watch, but completely enchanting.


Stored specifications will be issued quarterly (February, May, August and November). When necessary, the Department may issue stored specifications that do not meet the quarterly schedule.
The stored specification files are saved in MS Word. The self-extracting zip file contains the stored specifications, PDF files showing change bars for the stored specifications updated with the latest issue of stored specifications and a spreadsheet summarizing the changes made and use instructions.
Sign up to receive email updates about Stored Specifications.


text:
Second period dominance leads Sharks over Coyotes
As dominant a twenty minutes as the Sharks have compiled all season was all they needed to curbstomp the Coyotes.
By The Neutral Apr 15, 2013, 10:56pm PDT
Share All sharing options for: Second period dominance leads Sharks over Coyotes
Given the tumultuous roller coaster that has been the Sharks' 2013 season, it's easy to forget that the team has rattled off some pretty impressive single-period showings throughout the year. There was the six-goal first period outburst in Edmonton during the first week of the season. There was a dominant three-goal effort against the Anaheim Ducks over the first twenty minutes of the Sharks' most successful homestand. San Jose even previously posted a four-goal third period against the very Coyotes club they faced tonight, erasing a two-goal deficit to win that game.
None of those compare to the utter domination that was on display during the second period tonight in Phoenix. Seemingly controlling the puck for the entirety of the stanza, the Sharks outshot the Coyotes 24-7, outchanced them 15-2 and outscored them 3-0 during those twenty minutes of hockey. It was more than enough to render lackluster first and third period efforts meaningless and inch the Sharks that much closer to clinching their ninth consecutive playoff berth.
Following a first period characterized by a series of defensive-zone turnovers and coverage miscues, the Sharks took the ice in the second period alternately attacking the Coyotes blueline with speed and setting up an effective forecheck. After Jason LaBarbera turned away quality opportunities from the slot by Martin Havlat, Patrick Marleau and Dan Boyle he finally kicked out the rebound of a Jason Demers attempt midway through the period that drifted right to Logan Couture who easily converted what would hold up as the game-winner. Minutes later, Tommy Wingels recovered the puck off a lost offensive-zone faceoff and shoveled a backhand past an unprepared LaBarbera. Joe Pavelski hammered the nail in the coffin of both this game and, in all likelihood, the Coyotes' season on a partial 2-on-1 break.
It's unrealistic to expect the Sharks to sustain the level of performance they provided in the second period tonight over any significant stretch. Unsurprisingly, given that they were protecting a three-goal lead, the Sharks failed to generate any semblance of offense in the third while giving Antti Niemi quite the workout although another hilarious LaBarbera misplay gave Matt Irwin a power play goal near the end of the game. Still, when this contest and a chance to both bury a division rival and solidify a playoff spot was on the line, the Sharks didn't just step on the Coyotes' necks. They tore off one of Shane Doan's limbs and bludgeoned the rest of the team to death with his elbow. (Metaphorically, of course). If that isn't a good sign heading into the playoffs, I don't know what is.
[Complete Coverage] - [Coyotes Reaction]
It seems like we say this every time Martin Havlat is shuffled onto a different line only to watch his effectiveness gradually dissipate, but he's looked excellent alongside Patrick Marleau and Logan Couture through two games. He supports the play so well at both ends of the rink and his puck skills are essentially unmatched on the Sharks; it's always nice to have him dialed in.
Speaking of Marleau, show the next person to tell you he never uses his speed footage of him beating out an icing call to set up Demers for the play that turned into the Couture goal. It won't make a difference since the anti-Marleau crowd is impervious to facts but, whatever, show it to them anyway.
The returns were relatively unchanged but the Sharks did seem to be employing a more aggressive forecheck when protecting the lead tonight compared to their usual setup. That's something to watch for as we head towards the postseason; if there's an Achilles' heel to this team, as counterintuitive as it sounds, it's their performance when leading. It's probably not ridiculous to suggest the coaching staff sees this as an area to shore up too.
Phoenix really has something in relatively no-name checking forwards Boyd Gordon and Rob Klinkhammer. Or they will until July 1st, anyway, when both players are slated to become unrestricted free agents. Along with David Moss, those two have been kicking in the teeth of some tough competition and were once again positive possession players tonight despite starting twice as often in the defensive zone and drawing the Couture line as their primary matchup.
Joe Pavelski had a really strong game in the circle, going 14 for 20 overall and an impressive 8 for 10 in the defensive zone.
Oliver-Ekman Larsson seals off the boards as well as any defenseman currently in the league, particularly now that Nicklas Lidstrom is retired. He'd be my Norris vote if I had a ballot.
On a related note, the "WTF?" moment of the 2013 season goes to OEL and Adam Burish either participating in an impromptu yoga lesson or attempting to act out Andrew Desjardins' sweater number from last season. Kudos to Ann for her gif magic:
1st Star: Antti Niemi
2nd Star: Logan Couture
3rd Star: Tommy Wingels
Game 42: Sharks vs. Phoenix Coyotes
Sharks vs. Coyotes: By the numbers
Gameday Thread: Sharks vs. Coyotes

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Global oil industry braces for turmoil from U.S. crackdown on Venezuela
FILE PHOTO: Oil facilities are seen on Lake Maracaibo in Cabimas, Venezuela January 29, 2019. REUTERS/Isaac Urrutia -
ISAAC URRUTIA(Reuters)
By Jessica Resnick-Ault
NEWYORK (Reuters) – More than 24 hours after the United States announced large-scale sanctions on Venezuela's nationally owned oil company, merchant trading firms and refiners were still deciphering what the measures prohibited.
The sanctions, announced on Monday, are aimed at driving President Nicolas Maduro from power, the strongest U.S. measures yet against the socialist president who has overseen economic collapse and an exodus of millions of Venezuelans in recent years.
Traders who sell Venezuelan crude to the United States are looking for avenues to keep crude flowing during the sanctions, according to people familiar with the discussions, while U.S. companies that buy Venezuelan oil have also been looking for work-arounds, seeking counsel for instance on whether they can continue to use third party intermediaries, such as commodity merchants.
The sanctions https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics-usa-sanctions-fact/factbox-u-s-sanctions-on-venezuelas-oil-industry-idUSKCN1PN34I froze assets of state-run PDVSA and require U.S. firms to pay for oil using accounts controlled by the country's opposition party head and self-proclaimed interim president, Juan Guaido.
PDVSA is seeking to sidestep the restrictions by asking major buyers, including U.S. refiners, to renegotiate contracts, sources said.
Oil sanctions in the past have been evaded by using intermediaries, said Scott Maberry, who specializes in international trade at Sheppard Mullin law firm, but he doubted that would happen with PDVSA. "I would not be surprised if this administration is vigilant and does not feel bound by past practices," said Maberry.
A U.S. Department of Treasury spokesman called the sanctions against PDVSA "extremely sophisticated," adding that the department would "take questions from industry and stakeholders and issue FAQs as appropriate."
No FAQ (frequently asked questions) had been issued by Wednesday morning. "It is unlike (Treasury) to roll out an action like this without some clear guidance," said a former Treasury official familiar with the sanctions.
"If you want to help refiners, third-party processors, and other companies understand and comply with these sanctions, especially if they are non-U.S. persons, this type of guidance is essential."
Via PDVSA, Venezuela exports about 500,000 barrels of oil daily to the United States, mostly to PDVSA subsidiary Citgo Petroleum and U.S. companies Valero Energy Corp and Chevron Corp. It also imports products from the United States.
The sanctions not only limit U.S. companies from paying PDVSA for crude, but also oil sales moved through multiple third parties, such as potential arrangements involving sending oil to Russia or China, which would later sell to an intermediary that would pass the oil on to U.S. buyers.
Intermediaries that comply with U.S. sanctions in general and transact in U.S. dollars would still be subject to the Venezuela sanctions. Transactions sent through a multitude of parties would only be allowed if the revenues were sent to accounts inaccessible by Maduro's government, several sources said.
"Treasury will be tracking this closely. The idea that this can get laundered and not tracked is far-fetched," said Joe McMonigle, senior energy policy analyst at Hedgeye in Washington and a former Energy Department official under President George W. Bush.
The Trump administration has said the restrictions should have a minimal impact on U.S. consumers, but some experts said they were concerned there could be unanticipated effects.
"PDVSA has so many intertwined dealings and transactions with the U.S., including through Citgo, that the immediate impact of these sanctions is far more comprehensive on the U.S. economy than you would typically see," said Scott Flicker, chair of the Washington office of law firm Paul Hastings and head of the firm's global trade controls practice.
The United States exempted Citgo from sanctions until July 27. However, previous sanctions have already prevented Citgo from sending PDVSA its profits, which had been paid to the parent in the form of dividends.
Analysts at Tudor, Pickering & Holt said that if Citgo was unable to import Venezuelan barrels, "some sort of impact on operations seems like a distinct possibility."
Several refining sources said they assumed the administration was trying to introduce sanctions slowly to avoid an immediate shock, but the lack of clarity has caused them to quickly look for cargoes elsewhere as they cut off Venezuelan shipments.
U.S. refiners last week asked the administration not to issue sanctions, according to a letter seen by Reuters on Tuesday.
"Such a ban would further tighten the heavy sour crude market in the United States, resulting in higher crude prices for U.S. refineries and higher fuel costs for U.S. consumers," the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, a trade association, said in a Jan. 23 letter to President Donald Trump.
(Reporting by Jessica Resnick-Ault; additional reporting by Jarrett Renshaw, Humeyra Pamuk, Marianna Parraga and Roberta Rampton; Editing by David Gaffen, Rosalba O'Brien and David Gregorio)
euronews provides breaking news articles from reuters as a service to its readers, but does not edit the articles it publishes. Articles appear on euronews.com for a limited time.
Irish parliament calls on government to thwart EU-Mercosur deal
EU's Juncker says trade deal with Mercosur signals open, fair trade
Macron says EU-Mercosur trade deal meets French demands


text:
Millennials and Gen X now outnumber older voters. So why do Baby Boomers dominate?
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Millennials and Gen Xers now outnumber Baby Boomers and older voters in Virginia, according to data from the Census Bureau. But that doesn't mean they have as much influence. Census numbers also show another trend: People over the age of 45 vote at much higher rates. That means Baby Boomers are expected to once again exert outsized influence in next week's election despite the fact that they are now outnumbered by ranks of younger voters.
"We talk about the Baby Boomers so much because they were a phenomenon unto themselves in some ways," says Quentin Kidd, director of the Wason Center for Public Policy at Christopher Newport University. "As they aged, they participated at high levels, and those participation levels stayed pretty high."
Voters across Virginia will be heading to the polls next week in a high-stakes election that will determine which party controls the House of Delegates and state Senate. All 140 seats in the House and Senate will be on the ballot this year. Election officials expect turnout to be about 30 percent, much lower than the 60 percent of registered voters that show up to presidential elections. That means voters who show up to the polls will be older, whiter and much more likely to be Republican.
"Virginia has a lot of immigrants. Immigrants tend to be younger and tend to have more kids, and those voters with that profile tend to lean Democratic," says Jeremy Mayer, associate professor in the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University. "So why are the Baby Boomers still dominating? Because that demographic votes, and tends to vote with extraordinary reliability."
Mayer says he sees a similarity between the victory of Donald Trump in 2016 with a victory of Brexit that same year, two elections where the interest of older voters overwhelmed the interest of younger voters, a phenomenon he calls a "revolution of the elderly." This election is also expected to be dominated by Baby Boom voters, although eventually millennials and Gen X voters will catch up and become the dominant force in Virginia politics.
"Of the new registered voters in Virginia for this election, a large element are indeed the 18 to 29 year olds," says Bob Denton, chairman of the Department of Communications at Virginia Tech. "There is going to be a political sea change, not so much on demographics per se but on political beliefs, attitudes and values of the Millennials and Generation Z."
Four years ago, when Virginia had no statewide races and every member of the General Assembly was up for election, about 30 percent of registered voters showed up to the polls and cast a ballot. Turnout statistics were pretty much the same for the election four years before that as well as the election four years before that. Democrats are expected to do well if they can push the turnout numbers above 30 percent, even if it's only a little bit.
"The early voting numbers suggest a significantly higher trajectory," says Stephen Farnsworth, director of the Center for Leadership and Media Studies at the University of Mary Washington. "Based on the number of candidates running in the Virginia mid-term this year as well as polls, including the Mary Washington statewide survey that shows a high level of voter interest in 2019, all indications are that this Virginia midterm will have much higher turnout than four years ago."
Uptick in Virginia Student Absentee Ballots Might Indicate Higher Turnout
Two Independents, One Republican Face Six Democrats in Alexandria
Early Morning Voting: Turnout Light But Steady: Snapshot of Precinct 222 Reston #3
Literary Voice for All
Opinion: Commentary: Virginia Primary Election Results


Begleri Beads ~ Aventurine and Carnelian gemstones and Sterling Silver.
Handmade begleri, made of natural aventurine and carnelian gemstones.
An elegant composition, suitable for everyday use.
LENGTH 25.00 cm / 9.84"


text:
Olivier de Baenst (voor 1396 - na 1445) was een edelman in het graafschap Vlaanderen.

Levensloop
Olivier de Baenst was de jongste zoon van Jan I de Baenst en Elisabeth Bave. Zijn broers waren Jan II de Baenst, Guy I de Baenst en Antoine de Baenst.

Er is over hem weinig bekend. J. J. Gailliard vermeldde hem niet in zijn genealogie van de familie de Baenst en volgens Frederik Buylaert zou het om een bastaardzoon gaan. Nochtans wordt hij op een lijst van edelen, gedateerd 1437, in één adem vermeld met de hierboven gemelde broers.

Wat met tamelijke zekerheid is geweten is dat hij baljuw was van de Vier Ambachten (van juni 1431 tot februari 1432) en van het Land van Waas (januari 1432, met tussenpozen tot juli 1444).

Hij was zeer waarschijnlijk ook ontvanger van de oude domeinen van Sluis (1426-1431) en ontvanger van Sluis (1444-1445).

Zie ook
 De Baenst

Literatuur
 J. J. GAILLIARD, Bruges et le Franc, Volume I, Brugge, 1857.
 M. NUYTTENS, Inventaris van het archief van de familie De Baenst, Brussel, 2004.
 J. VAN ROMPAEY, Het grafelijk baljuwsambt in Vlaanderen tijdens de Bourgondische periode, Brussel, 1967.
 Frederik BUYLAERT, Sociale mobiliteit bij stedelijke elites in laatmiddeleeuws Vlaanderen. Een gevalstudie over de Vlaamse familie de Baenst, in: Jaarboek voor Middeleeuwse geschiedenis, 2005, blz. 201-251.
 P. A. DONCHE, Edelen, leenmannen en vorstelijke ambtenaren van Vlaanderen. 1464 - 1481 - 1495, Uitg. Donche, 2012
 P. A. DONCHE, Geschiedenis en genealogie van de familie de Baenst, vorstelijke en stedelijke ambtenaren van Vlaanderen 1305-1676, 2014, blz. 86-87.

Olivier
Adel in de Nederlanden in de 15e eeuw

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Eclipse Depiction Over Washigton, DC 242 PM on 8-21-17
How dim will it be in Washington, DC during the eclipse?
August 21, 2017 at 2:42 PM is when the solar eclipse will be at its maximum in Washington, DC with 81% blockage. While it won't get dark here, there should be noticeable dimming from about 2:12 PM to 3:12 PM.
Author: Howard Bernstein
Published: 2:59 PM EDT August 16, 2017
Updated: 6:02 PM EDT August 20, 2017
August 21, 2017 at 2:42 p.m. is when the solar eclipse will be at its maximum in Washington, D.C. with 81% blockage.
While it won't get dark here, there should be noticeable dimming from about 2:12 p.m. to 3:12 p.m. Even though the eclipse begins at 1:17 p.m. and ends at 4:01 p.m., the 30 minutes either side of maximum looks to be the point at which noticeable dimming will occur.
RELATED: 32 solar eclipse questions answered
I've used the program Stellarium, which is an open source planetarium software which can be found at Stellarium.org. This software gives, in my opinion, a very realistic depiction of what the sky will look like at any given time, for any given place on earth.
The first image below is for August 22, 2017 at 2:42 p.m. over Washington, D.C. While not exactly the same as on the 21st, it's close enough for our needs.
RELATED: Everything you need to know about the eclipse
This next image shows the dimming that will occur at 2:42 p.m. on the 21st. It looks equivalent to a moderate to thick overcast.
VERIFY: Are your eclipse glasses safe?
Finally, to check how realistic Stellarium is, I looked at the depiction for Charleston, SC at 2:47 p.m. on the 21st. Charleston will be in the path of totality. Not only does it show the darkness, but the software also displays what planets and stars will be visible.
Please remember not to look directly at the sun. Only legitimate safety glasses, welders goggles that are #12 glass or higher, or a pinhole projector are the only safe ways to see the eclipse.


A special issue of the New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research has been released to shed light on the historical and contemporary setting which has hindered and aided Māori participation in aquatic management.
All articles in the new special issue, Mātauranga Māori shaping marine and freshwater futures will be available free-to-access for the next four weeks. This issue shows that mātauranga Māori is a method for generating useful knowledge that is both traditional and contemporary.
To create this special issue, the editorial team (Joanne Clapcott, Erica Williams, Anne-Marie Jackson, Daniel Hikuroa, Chris Hepburn, Jamie Ataria and Rauru Kirikiri) adopted kaupapa Māori principals alongside the standard journal peer review process. As the marine and freshwater relationship is highly significant for Māori, this special issue closely aligns with mātauranga Māori and 41 abstracts were received by the editors.
Selection from these papers was made in line with the guiding principal of Tino Rangatiratanga (sovereignty, autonomy, control, self-determination and independence and allowing Māori to control their own culture, aspirations and destiny). The editorial board was also supported by the inclusion of kaumātua (respected elder) Rauru Kirikiri who provided a cultural safety to the process.
The editors reflect that there is an ongoing need to build cross-cultural understandings in regards to the rights, interests, and values of Māori across institutions, agencies and researchers from a wide range of disciplines.
The editors also hope that this special issue will be useful for initiating further discussions on Māori-driven research agendas and priorities, including setting expectations related to time and defining process; intellectual property and transparency around the benefits to Māori of publishing and sharing knowledge.
The cover artwork of ancestor Rākaihautū comes from a project featured in the special issue. Water Warriors is a collaborative project between Te Pā o Rākaihautū and Hagley Community College that was established to look after the waterways and re-connect rangatahi youth with these environments within urban Ōtautahi Christchurch.
Blending mātauranga Māori with Western science: Like the ancestor Rākaihautū, the students of Te Pā o Rākaihautū and Hagley College have taken their own kō (depicted as mātauranga Māori, and the measuring sticks and water test kits of today) to maintain the wellbeing of our water ways. Copyright © 2017 by D. Watson and C. Callaghan.
The entire special issue New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research: Mātauranga Māori shaping marine and freshwater futures will be available free-to-access on Taylor & Francis Online for the next four weeks.
RNZ's Jesse Mulligan interviewed Joanne Clapcott on what mātauranga Māori is and how it could enhance our understanding of our aquatic ecosystems.


text:
'I Hate Suzie' But Billie Piper Rocks In The New HBO Max Series
I Love Lucy. Everyone Loves Raymond. I Hate Suzie.
On the title card it's even 'I Hate Suzie" with a period at the end – definitive. A title card that has made up its mind. While some people use "hate" casually, it's still a strong word, and to name a TV show, I Hate Suzie, she must be terrible, right?
Billie Piper (Photographer: Alison Painter. ©Sky UK Limited)
Wrong, or at least not entirely right. Hate comes in a lot of different forms. There are obnoxious people. There are people you love to hate. There are people you hate irrationally and there are people who are unequivocally evil (the highest echelon of hate). Suzie Pickles isn't any one of those things. She's a woman who's had an affair and, if TV is any indicator, affairs are pretty commonplace.
What makes Suzie special, or the reason her affair is getting so much attention, is because of who she is and how the world found out. It's been twenty years since Suzie won a singing competition. Now a series regular on a genre TV show, the big news in episode one (before the pictures come out) is that she's been chosen to play a Disney princess. During a photoshoot to announce the casting, however, Suzie slowly finds out that her phone has been hacked and that photos of her (with a man who's not her husband) have leaked onto the internet.
Love can turn into hate fast, and to say Suzie's husband, Cob (Daniel Ings), isn't happy to learn this is an understatement but, whatever the title of the show might be, you don't hate Suzie, and while that could be knocked down to the inspired casting of Billie Piper (who also serves as co-creator of the series with Lucy Prebble), it's not just Piper's likability rubbing off on the character. It's the series' writing, too.
Prebble (who created Secret Diary of a Call Girl, starring Piper) wrote all eight episodes and while often there's a distance to stories about celebrity, Suzie could be anyone. Her being famous means there are more people invested in her story, but she's not the Beatles. She's not walking around, being recognized all the time. Her problems aren't "celebrity problems." They're problems any couple could have.
Strangely it's Suzie's husband who inspires the most ire, and Prebble plays this line particularly well because you don't have to be lovable to be wronged and Cob is the wronged party. Suzie cheated on him and the show never forgets that.
For this season, each episode is named after one of the stages of grief, or something resembling a stage of grief. Since there are eight episodes and the Kübler-Ross' model has five stages they reach an impasse eventually but, more than a title, the name of each episode is used to color how that episode is directed. It never feels forced, and maybe that's why the stages are in a different order, too, but the result is each episode has its own identity. What better place than a comic con, for example, to feed into "Denial," whereas in "Fear" every creak is amplified.
It all culminates in "Acceptance," yet what "Acceptance" looks like on I Hate Suzie is not a clean slate. Suzie's actions have consequences.
More drama than comedy, I Hate Suzie is available to stream now on HBO Max.
November 20, 2020 November 20, 2020 Rachel Bellwoar 388 Views Billie Piper, HBO Max, I Hate Suzie
'Black Panther 2' Still On The Schedule With Tenoch Huerta In Talks To Play Villain →
5 Point Discussions – Sword Art Online Alternative: Gun Gale Online 1: "Squad Jam"
April 24, 2018 Sage Ashford 0
HBO Max Announces Launch Date And Debut Lineup
Netflix Picks Up Dennis Liu's Raising Dion
October 5, 2017 Erik Amaya 0


text:
Relevant Magazine's The Best Musical Surprise of 2011
Gungor opens up about theology, Christian music and their breathtaking new album. When you first listen to Gungor, the full sound belies the fact that the collective is primarily led by husband-and-wife duo Michael and Lisa Gungor. With stirring cellos, driving drums and delicate harmonies, their first album innovated both the sound and the language of worship music as Christians know it today. (If you don't believe us,watch their performance of "Beautiful Things" at RELEVANT Studios last year.) They recently released Ghosts Upon the Earth, which represented a stylistic departure for the band. Gone were the soaring arena choruses, and in their place Gungor put in careful, driving chamber pop. The result is an album steeped in mystery, beauty and, well, spirituality. The band recently sat down with us to discuss the new album, theology and why, just as with God, you can't put worship in a box.
RELEVANT: Your music is very spiritual—much more spiritual than general-market listeners are probably used to, yet you don't want to be labeled as "Christian music." Why is that?
Michael Gungor: Music, to me, was always very spiritual. I pretty much learned how to "do" music in church, playing in the worship band. Music always touched me in a deep place in my soul. Spirituality and faith and all the stuff we write about and worship itself—those are coming from the deepest places in my soul. What I love about music is that it has this ability to get beneath the surface of things and speak from and to the soul. Part of what I don't like about the labels of Christian music is that, first of all, we don't classify other music like that. We don't say "atheistic music" or "humanistic music"—we don't lump that all together as if that is the foundation. If it's art, we're all saying something. To me it's just an odd way of separating it; it's a word game, really.
How has your theology informed the kind of music you make?
MG: It's interesting—it actually has informed it in its entirety, not just the lyric content. The entire idea of what it means to be a Jesus follower in this world has shifted from what it used to mean. It left realms like art, even caring for the poor. You hear Jesus talking about it, but even in the theology I grew up with, it never really made sense to me why Jesus would stress something like that so much. That didn't fit my big story of what it was all about. These kind of philosophical things seem abstract on some level, but for me it really gave me an impetus to create as a sacred act, to bring order into creation. To order creation in a way that is meaningful and sacred. Growing up, I felt like if I wanted to really be selfless and serve God with my gift, then it had to fit into a certain category. You know: "You'd better have enough Jesuses per minute if you really want to write a song and have it please God. If you really want to do a lot with your life, you're supposed to join full-time ministry and work for a church." That was just kind of the mindset I grew up with....
Tagged: 2011, Interview, Music, Relevant Magazine
Ghosts Upon The Earth Tour
Gungor Receives GRAMMY Recognition for the Second Year In A Row


Local high school basketball teams are bound for the first round of the GHSA state tournament this weekend.
Darlington's girls' and boys' teams will play at home in the opening round of the Class A private playoffs. The Lady Tigers will host Galloway at 6 pm, to be followed by a match between the Tigers and Hebron Christian Academy at 7:30 pm. Both games will be broadcast on WLAQ AM 1410.


Online slots are a lot of fun, but the real fun stems from the possibility of winning money. In this guide to the best online slots to win, find out which online slots games offer the best chances to win real money. Also, find out what strategies can make you a winner the next time you play online slots.
The best online slots to win real money all have one thing in common, and that is the need to follow a winning slots strategy. Failure to do so can nullify the fact that some of these games are winnable. Of course, when reading this it is important to keep in mind that it is opinion-based. Some strategies and games work better for some than others, and no strategy or game is guaranteed to win. With that said, let's get started.
Some people think that there is no such thing as a strategy for the best online slots to win real money. And while they are right in that slots have random outcomes, there are still strategies to employ. These strategies can help maximize any player's chances to win at online slots.
Perhaps the most important tip for any form of wagering. Managing your bankroll can help you keep your money for enough time to win. At the very least, good bankroll management will keep you playing for as long as possible. That will stretch your entertainment dollar further, which is always a good strategy.
Bonus rounds are what really increase the potential winnings at the best online slots to win real money. Finding games that offer potentially lucrative bonus rounds and managing your bankroll in those games can be the key to enjoying a profitable slots experience.
Slots games have a predetermined rate of return that players can expect to see over a long period of time. Even the best online slots to win real money have that rate pre-determined. That rate is known as the Return To Player, or RTP for short. Of course, the higher the RTP, the more money players can expect to see as a return on investment when playing online slots.
This value is determined ahead of time by an online slots site. Its calculation is straightforward, but so important to understand. Let's say, hypothetically, that an online slots game has an RTP of 80%. That means that on average, for every $100 wagered on that game players will get $80 of it back. It should be noted that not every $100 wagered will result in a return of $80. That is an average across a much larger sample size. However, having a general expectation should be a good thing to consider when evaluating online slots sites.
Combining strong bankroll management principles and knowledge of RTP rates can help maximize a player's chance to win. At the very least, those things will extend the amount of time you can play slots with your budget and can give you an avenue to inexpensive entertainment.
A five-reel game with up to 20 pay lines, Pharaoh's Secret is a game that features a low variance and some bonus features that make it one of the best online slots to win real money. An Xtra Win feature increases the value of wilds and scatters that can open up bonus levels. That setting increases the cost per spin, but also increases the amounts that players can win on those spins. Of course, this game can be outside of the bankroll management strategies for some players based on that Xtra Win spin cost increase. But if it is within your range, it could be a big winner.
What is great about the Pink Panther slots game is the fact that it can award bonuses for no reason whatsoever. The game randomly awards bonuses to its players after the completion of spins. These are in addition to the wins that can be earned by the spins themselves. But having games that can give out bonuses in that way adds a ton of value to the game. When it comes to slots games that you can win real money on, this greatly increases the odds.
With an above average RTP rate and plenty of bonuses to be had, The Mummy has a solid hold on being one of the best online slots games. The pay lines are plentiful, with a number of different configurations that can result in wins. It is another low-variance game, which means that the top win amounts are lower than its high-variance counterparts. However, the expected win rate is higher on a low-variance slot game as the low-variance games tend to be less turbulent as a whole.
Pop-culture themed online slots tend to be pretty hit or miss. They are higher variance games but at the same time they offer the chance for larger payouts. The Avengers does this with a massive jackpot that exceeds what most slots games can offer. Generally speaking, this game can be more volatile than the low-variance games mentioned above. But if you manage to win a huge payday when playing The Avengers, you will not be bemoaning the variance. Keep in mind, though, that players should still use sound bankroll management principles when playing The Avengers or any other higher variance game.
A very high-variance progressive slots game, Mega Moolah is worth the risk with a jackpot that can change the life of its winner. Mega Moolah vows that the winner of its top progressive payout will become a millionaire for doing so. Even though the likelihood of winning this massive prize is small, again, managing your bankroll will give you enough chances to have a genuine opportunity to win it. Slots are fun because of the possibility of the big win. Mega Moolah certainly offers the possibility of that big win, and is worth playing.


Ptahshepses was originally a royal manicurist and hairdresser, who rose to the rank of Vizier during Egypt's Old Kingdom 5th Dynasty. Like others who held the office of manicurist and hairdresser, he was a priest of high rank since, to discharge his function of grooming the king, he had to touch the body of a living god. He also became the son-in-law of King Niuserre, married to Khamerernebty, and therefore a man of some prominence during this period. He held a number of different titles besides Vizier.
It should be noted that some references confuse this individual with others because Ptahshepses was a common name during this period.
His tomb is located at Abusir in the vicinity of Niuserre's pyramid, next to the Pyramid Complex of Sahure. This mastaba, second in size only to that of Mereruke at Saqqara, was first excavated by Jacques de Morgan in 1893. The ruins were originally discovered by LepsiusLepsius, who classified it as a pyramid, but Jacques de Morgan excavations soon revealed the entrance to this mostaba. However, he really only excavated a very small part of the mastaba, and afterwards, it was forgotten for almost seventy years.
Interest in the mastaba of Ptahshepses resurfaced with the founding of the Czech Institute of Egyptology at Charles University. They initiated excavations in the mastaba in 1960, which continued through 1974, resulting in the unearthing of what is as yet the most extensive and architecturally the most complex non-royal tomb known from the period of the Old Kingdom.
In fact, many features incorporated into the design of the Ptashepses mastaba were more or less inspired by royal architecture, and it became a model for generations of Old Kingdom noblemen and architects, particularly at Saqqara through the end of the 6th Dynasty.
From this moment on, imitations of royal architecture became a common feature of the mastabas built for the highest of noblemen. This tendency concerns not only particular elements of their plan, but also their decoration, in which many motifs, invented in royal workshops of the 5th Dynasty for the funerary and solar temples of subsequent kings, were imitated.
The tombs of noblemen such as Ptahshepses were usually more sophisticated in their architecture and decorative elements than the tombs of lesser men, and their richness bears witness to a wealth and power without precedence in Egyptian history. Such is the case with the Mastaba tomb of Ptashepses, with its dimensions of 80 by 107 meters and its complex layout, in which the most important elements of royal funerary monuments may be found.
The two principle elements of the mastaba were the superstructure, which was constructed from mudbrick and masonry and seems to have evolved and been enlarged over a period of time, and the partly rock-cut subterranean chamber which is now open to the elements.
The grand front entrance to the tomb, which has recently been reconstructed, includes a portico flanked by two unique eight-stemmed lotus columns with closed buds. Each column was made from a single piece of the fine white limestone that in Arabic is often referred to as batn al-baqara, meaning "cow's belly", perhaps because this is what the color and smoothness of the stone brings to mind. These columns are currently the oldest known example of their type from Ancient Egypt.
The lotus used in the column capital is was very symbolic to the ancient Egyptians. Its flower closes at night and sinks into the water until morning, when it opens once more. Hence, the ancient Egyptians saw it as a symbol of resurrection and rebirth. Therefore, in this mastaba, the entrance was not that of a tomb, but rather the gateway to resurrection and a new life.
The columns supported a heavy architrave on which rested the enormous slabs of the roof terrace, all of which was made from the same high quality stone as the columns. This portico originally reached a height of eight meters.
These limestone columns, together with the entry portal, have been reconstructed to their original height.Inside is a columned vestibule, though here the columns are six-stemmed. In the second stage of building at the mastaba, this vestibule was planned to be the main entrance, but it lost this function during the third stage, becoming instead a closed room. Within, the walls are adorned with depictions of boats and bearers bringing funerary equipment and other items necessary for the mortuary cult. These items include furniture, jewelry, cloth, grain, fruit and other items. The torso of a large, seated statue of Ptahshepses was discovered near the entrance to the vestibule.
"Local Prince, Only Friend (of the pharaoh), Ruler of Nekhab, Guardian of the (royal) Diadem, Privy to the Secret of the House of Morning, Beloved One of his Lord, Chief Justice, Vizier, Overseer of all the Royal Works, Servant of the Throne, Lector-Priest, Privy to the Secret Sacred Writings of the God's Words"
Originally, slightly larger than life reddish quartzite statues of a standing Ptahshepses, stood in the three niches. Though only fragments of these statues were unearthed, the inscriptions on the facing wall of the niches seem to indicate that the statues represented Ptahshepses in three different functions, as an official, as a priest and as a private individual. Offerings were placed on altars at the foot of these statues during funerary ceremonies, while a lector-priest recited various religious formulae.
Much of the polychrome relief decorations, linked by a common theme, have survived in the chapel. Here, Ptahshepses oversees work in his fields, pastures, gardens and workshops. For example, on the northern wall there are scenes in which gardeners are working in fields of grain and vegetable plots, while bearers bring the fruits of the fields and gardens on offering tables and in baskets to the feet of Ptahshepses.
The south wall depicts fishermen, herdsmen milking cows and the foreman of a poultry operation driving flocks of duck, geese and cranes. Here, there are also scribes who carefully record everything.
On the northern part of the east wall of the chapel are superb scenes of a sculptor's atelier where two statues of Ptahshepses, one seated and of red granite, and the other standing and made of wood, are being completed. Here, metal workers are also shown at their work, together with carpenters who are making a staff.
There is a very curious scene depicting the six sons of Ptahshepses walking, opposite the scenes of crafts and very near the entrance of the narrow hall leading from the vestibule. In this simple scene, the figure and name of the first-born son has been carefully chiseled off and almost entirely removed. However, with good lighting, the name of the first born, Khafini, could be made out. The destruction of the name, which was also done elsewhere in the tomb, points to a deliberate action which would have dire consequences, for according to the religious ideas of the Ancient Egyptians, the name was one of the enduring spiritual elements of a person that lasted beyond his earthly lifetime.
This may have had much to do with the marriage of Ptahshepses, late in life, to the daughter of King Niuserre. Almost certainly Ptahshepses already possessed a family, but this non-royal family would have had to give way to any new children produced from his royal marriage, including the first born. One can only guess at the ramifications of these events.
To the south is an enormous courtyard, surrounded by a portico which was supported by 20 square limestone pillars, decorated with reliefs of Ptahshepses. The huge pillars can still be seen in the now-open court which is annexed to the tomb structure. On the walls of the eastern part of the southern portico opening the way from the chapel to the pillared courtyard, Ptahshepses is shown surrounded by his subordinate officials. On the northern wall of this portico the tomb owner is being carried on a litter by servants, with an interesting inscription above the line of men. This inscription is really a dialogue between the man leading and supervising the procession, and the man at the end of the row. The bearer at the rear is being reprimanded by the supervisor, who tells him to fulfill his duties. However, the man at the rear is being stubborn, and suggests that the "privileged one," meaning the supervisor, would do well to mind his own business and follow his nose. From this, we surmise that the supervisor enjoyed no great status, but it is nevertheless an interesting exchange, particularly in the context of a tomb depiction.
The western part of the southern portico is adorned with scenes displaying statues of Ptahshepses being transported , and also of the storage of the offerings. Here we see a typical Egyptian scene, with the striding statues being dragged on wooden sleds. Interestingly, the inscriptions describe statues of red granite measuring some seven cubits, or approximately three and a half meters in height. Such colossal statues were likely to be only a royal privilege during the Old Kingdom, so one must wonder if these were somehow symbolic. Indeed, though many statue fragments were discovered during excavations, none were from colossal statues.
This pillared court only came into existence during the third phase of the mastaba's construction. Though de Morgan marked and measured the disintegrating tops of the twenty monolithic limestone pillars contained in the court, it was not, as a whole, investigated.
West of the Pillared court, de Morgan unearthed the entrance to what seemed to be another mastaba, separate from that of Ptahshepses. However, later excavations by the Czech team revealed that this was actually the original mastaba constructed during the first building phase of the same complex.
Offerings were originally made in the pillared courtyard under the open sky on a huge alter, the upper face of which was decorated with the large hieroglyphic sign hetep, meaning "offering" or "offering table." The courtyard walls were once richly decorated with reliefs, though only a tiny fraction of those remain in situ. They were protected by a flat limestone slab roof supported on twenty monolithic stone pillars. The interior side faces of the slaps each bore a life-size image of Ptahshepses in sunk relief. The figures of the tomb owner were arranged on the pillars in such a way as to lead visitors in the direction of the altar, and therefore to the northwestern corner of the courtyard where the entrance to the original mastaba (and the burial chamber of Ptahshepses) was located. Above each figure, in sunk relief, were carved the titles of the tomb owner. This type of relief is particularly suitable for open space accessible to direct sunlight, because it allows the aesthetic effect of the inscriptions to be accented by the play of light and shadow. Though none of the pillar crowns have survived intact, it is clear from fragments that his titles began with "King's Son." Hence, by the time of the final construction, Ptahshepses had already attained the status of prince, undoubtedly as a result of his marriage to Khamerernebty, the daughter of King Niuserre. This was very much so an amazing feat.
There are two large magazine complexes, or storage areas in the mastaba. One, comprising four chambers is situated southwest of the pillared courtyard, while the other with seven chambers is to the southwest. Unearthed in the 1960s, these added further evidence to the high rank of the owner as they mirrored the so-called treasury and granary found in contemporary royal pyramid temples.
However, if these features of the Ptahshepses mastaba were more or less inspired by royal architecture, than a room in the southwest corner of the tomb was a completely unexpected surprise to the excavators, which left no one in doubt of the extraordinarily high and truly exceptional social standing of the tomb's owner. It is the largest room in the tomb and, remarkably, resembles a boat. Its northern wall is not only convex, but carved in a way that visibly recalls the side of a boat. Clearly, the existence of a boat pit is almost exclusively an element of royal burials, because the boat journey in the netherworld of the sun god was only a royal privilege. Interestingly however, the room, which is large enough to hold several boats, was left unfinished.
In the northwest part of the funerary monument is situated the original mastaba built during the earliest phase of construction. This was, at one time, a complete tomb with slightly inclined walls made of white limestone slabs. Regrettably, of the original rich relief program adorning the walls, only two fragments remain in situ. One, measuring only a few square centimeters, depicts the lower part of the figure of an offering bearer, and the other, on the eastern wall of the serdab, is a much larger fragment showing the lower part of a well carved, polychrome false door in the form of a palace facade. In the floor just beneath the false door was a shaft that communicated with the burial chamber of Ptahshepses.
Remarkably, and somewhat perplexing, in this earliest phase of construction, the burial chamber was constructed in the manner of royal burial chambers, with a gabled ceiling built of huge monolithic limestone blocks. Here, two well executed red granite sarcophagi were found. Though robbed in antiquity, the larger one, belonging to Ptahshepses was well preserved, while the smaller one, reserved for his royal wife, Khamerenebty, had a broken lid.
The existence of Khamerenebty's sarcophagus in the burial chamber may help to explain why, even in this early phase of construction, the burial chamber resembles that of royal monuments. This sarcophagus could not have been carried through the narrow descending passage, so it must have been lowered into the chamber at a time when the mastaba was only half finished, and still open. It is also significant that the name of Princess Khamerernebty has been found among the inscriptions recorded by the builders in red directly on the rough limestone blocks that were used to construct the core of the original mastaba. Clearly, Princess Khamerernebty must have already been a part of Ptahshepses' life soon after the start of work on his original mastaba. Note that this does little to explain the removal of Ptahshepses' first born son from the reliefs of additions made to the complex sometime after the original mastaba was completed.
Regrettably, it is not possible to reconstruct much of Ptahshepses' early life from the almost totally destroyed reliefs in his original mastaba. We can date the start of the original mastaba's construction, from builder's inscriptions, to a time shortly before the tenth regnal year of King Niuserre, and its completion to about the king's thirtieth regnal year. However, little else is known, other than that his career and achievements were absolutely miraculous, given the customs and traditions of that period.
Unfortunately, like the royal pyramids, Ptahshepses' own wealth resulted in his funerary monument's destruction over time by looters, probably during the First Intermediate Period, and later by those who turned it into a stone quarry. Parts of it were dismantled and re-used for other buildings beginning in the New Kingdom. Later, nomads even camped with their herds of goats and sheep in the Boat Hall, and its destruction continued into the Roman era. Finally, before its modern excavation, the ruins disappeared under six meters of sand and rubble, or likely there would have been nothing left of it today.
This tomb was only opened to the public a few years ago, but is now one of the major tourist attractions at Abusir.


text:
class Settings::AccountsController < ApplicationController
  cache_sweeper :export_sweeper
  menu_group "設定"

  before_action :set_account_class
  before_action :find_account, :only => [:show, :update, :destroy]

  # 一覧・登録フォーム
  def index
    @menu = @account_class.human_name
    @accounts = user_accounts
    @account = @account_class.new
    set_asset_kinds_option_container if @account_class.has_kind?
  end

  # 新しい勘定を作成
  def create
    @account = user_accounts.build(account_params)
    if @account.save
      flash[:notice]="「#{@account.name}」を登録しました。"
      redirect_to action: :index
    else
      @accounts = user_accounts.reload
      set_asset_kinds_option_container if @account_class.has_kind?
      render action: :index
    end
  end

  def update_all
    raise InvalidParameterError unless params[:account]
    @accounts = []
    all_saved = true
    params[:account].keys.each do |id| # NOTE: Rails 4.0.2 key, value ととると value が普通のハッシュになってしまう(strong parameters が効かない)
      attributes = params[:account][id].permit(:name, :asset_kind, :sort_key)
      account = user_accounts.find(id)
      all_saved = false unless account.update_attributes(attributes)
      @accounts << account
    end
    if all_saved
      flash[:notice] = "すべての#{@account_class.human_name}を変更しました。"
      redirect_to action: :index
    else
      flash.now[:notice] = "変更できなかった#{@account_class.human_name}があります。"
      @accounts.sort!{|a, b| a.sort_key.to_i <=> b.sort_key.to_i}
      @account = @account_class.new
      set_asset_kinds_option_container if @account_class.has_kind?
      render :action => "index"
    end
  end

  def destroy
    begin
      @account.destroy
      flash[:notice]="「#{@account.name}」を削除しました。"
    rescue Account::Base::UsedAccountException => err
      flash[:errors]= [err.message]
    end
    redirect_to action: :index
  end

  # 詳細・変更開始兼用
  def show
    @menu = "#{@account_class.human_name} - 詳しい設定 - #{@account.name}"
  end

  def update
    if @account.update(account_details_params)
      redirect_to({action: :show}, notice: "「#{@account.name}」の詳しい設定を更新しました。")
    else
      render :show
    end
  end

  private

  def account_details_params
    permitted = [:active, :description]
    permitted.concat([:settlement_order_asc, :settlement_target_account_id, :settlement_paid_on, :settlement_closed_on_month, :settlement_closed_on_day, :settlement_term_margin]) if @account.any_credit?
    params.require(:account).permit(*permitted)
  end

  def user_accounts
    current_user.send(params[:account_type].pluralize)
  end

  def set_account_class
    @account_class = Account.const_get(params[:account_type].classify)
  end

  def account_params
    params.require(:account).permit(:name, :asset_kind, :sort_key)
  end

  def find_account
    @account = user_accounts.find(params[:id])
  end

  def set_asset_kinds_option_container
    @asset_kinds_options_container = {}
    for key, attributes in current_user.available_asset_kinds
      @asset_kinds_options_container[attributes[:name]] = key.to_s
    end
  end

end

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Home >> Academics >> Health Human Services >> Biology and Human Biology Majors
Bachelor of Science Degree in Biology or Human Biology
Two Biology Majors to Meet the Growing and Vital Worlds of Healthcare and Science
If you know you like science – and you want a career where you can continue to explore the physical world – College of Saint Mary has you covered. The biology and human biology degree programs at College of Saint Mary will help you explore and expand your interest in the living world. Your studies will open doors into the areas of research, technology, and fieldwork or to advanced degrees in biology, occupational therapy, physician assistant studies, medicine, veterinary medicine, pharmacy, physical therapy, dentistry or other areas.
Our biology major will prepare you for a career in lab or field research environment, environmental education, biotechnology, forensic science, industry, science communication, bioregulation, advanced education and many other options, while our human biology major will provide you with the knowledge and skills you need to succeed in clinical labs, medicine and to pursue advanced education. You even have opportunities to do undergraduate research and internships in the field. We have placed graduates into graduate programs and medical, dental, physical therapy, physician assistant and veterinary schools.
You also have the benefit of being able to earn your Bachelor of Science degree in human biology as a pre-physician assistant status student and your master of science in physician assistant studies in just five years with our combined tracks. These competitive programs have a limited number of spots available and some additional admission requirements, as noted on the program-specific pages linked above and below. Our multi-million dollar renovation to our math and science buildings provides the perfect environment you need to succeed.
College of Saint Mary is THE place for professional women, which is why we offer the Marie Curie Scholarship Program. This prestigious program provides significant financial support and resources for academically talented young women who are interested in biology, chemistry or mathematics. You could receive up to $20,000 annually for four years!
Bachelor of Science in Human Biology
Pre-Physician Assistant Status
Conduct or assist in research, including collecting information and samples of blood, water, soil, plants or animals. Analyze experimental data and interpret results, then write summaries of your findings. A degree in biology or human biology could mean finding answers that could help save lives. The U.S. Department of Labor projects an increase in demand for biologists and biological technicians between 3 and 15 percent by 2022. The median annual salary for biologists is $78,000.
Source: U.S. Department of Labor/Employment and Training Administration
Additional career information is available at the American Institute of Biological Services website.
Meet the Biology Faculty
Meet Sara Hanson
Biology Admissions Advisor
Explore your interest in research, technology and fieldwork. Contact Sara for more information.
Email: hellis [at] csm.edu
Meet Dr. Phyllis Higley
Associate Professor of Biology and Director of the Biology Program
Dr. Higley earned her bachelor's degree at Cornell University and her master's and doctoral degrees from Iowa State University.
phigley [at] csm.edu (Contact Dr. Higley)
Tour the Science Classrooms & Labs
Get Up to $20,000 a Year with Our Marie Curie Scholars Program!
Majoring in Biology, Mathematics or Chemistry? You may qualify for our Marie Curie Scholars Program!


text:
Home Uncategorized Alumni organise orientation for State High School students
Alumni organise orientation for State High School students
A cross section of students of State High School, Oyewole at the orientation programme held at the school premises on 5th December, 2018
The 1996 set of the State High School, Oyewole old students have organised an orientation programme for senior school students in the school.
The event was held on Wednesday, 5th December, 2018 at the school's premises.
According to the Executive Director of Students Without Borders, Daniel Nwodi, it sought to motivate students.
Mr Nwodi who was also the guest lecturer for the day warned the students against engaging in social vices as these could jeopardise their future ambition.
"Our mission here is to motivate the students. I was in this school 22 years ago and I passed through the same sought of lesson that do. Today, I can say that I'm a better person though there are rooms for improvement."
L-R Vice Principal (Academic), Mrs Bolanle Adekala; an old student, Mrs Olaitan Kuponiyi; the Vice Principal (Administration), Mrs Victoria Daropale; the Guest Speaker, Mr Daniel Nwodi ; the school counsellor, Mrs Titilayo Oladimeji ; and another old student, Mr Saheed Oladipo at the orientation programme for students of State High School, Oyewole, Agege on 5th December, 2018
"We are here to motivate them. No matter what people call them, they can be whoever they want to be. They can be outstanding in anything that they do and come out excellently in anything that they do."
Prior to the orientation programme, which also included anti-corruption advocacy, the 1996 old students of the school had donated about 200 classroom furniture.
Mr Daniel, who also belongs to the set told EduCeleb.com that his colleagues came together in 2016 to do all these.
"We came together two years ago on the basis that it's needful for us to do so. We wanted to network with each other and see what we can do for the school," he added.
He also disclosed that on 22nd December, the set of old students would be organising its biannual dinner to network and see to other ways of helping the school community.
Meanwhile, the Vice Principal (Administration) of the school, Mrs Victoria Daropale commended the organisers for coming up with the initiative.
In her words, "The programme was well organised. I like the way the old students of the 1996 set came here to encourage the students. With all they've given to them, I really appreciate what they have done."
"This is an encouragement, especially for our students to put in more efforts in their studies and shun hooliganism, and other social vices. They were encouraged to face their education because their future is bright."
The well attended event was graced by staff and students of the school, and a section of the 1996 Old Students' Association.
ALSO READ: UNIZIK to graduate 259 PhD holders
Daniel Nwodi
State High School Oyewole
Previous articleTanure Ojaide, Harriet Anena jointly win Wole Soyinka Prize for Literature
Next article2019 Elections: Why JESAC is mobilizing 24 million members to vote for education-friendly candidates
ATBU alumni angry over exemption of third class graduate members from varsity employment
Kaduna poly alumni against selling of institution's staff quarters
UNILAG alumnus wins American Bar Association award
Ooni, Bugaje to speak at UNIFEMGA reunion
EKSU alumni pay up student's debt
Zulum emerges University of Ibadan alumnus of the year