text:
Q: JPA CriteriaBuilder - Change default join type I'd like to change the default join type from the criteriaBuilder from INNER to LEFT. Is this possible in some way? Atm I'm doing things like:
    Join<Request, Ship> requestShipJoin = requestRoot.join("ship", JoinType.LEFT);
    Join<Ship, Visit> shipVisitJoin = requestShipJoin.join("visit", JoinType.LEFT);

I've got a lot of nullable foreign keys, but if the FK is null the result still has to return (used with ordening). I'm hoping that this is possible since all the joins that I have to do are of type LEFT.


This mushroom is one and two third inches in diameter; has a white or cream colored cap and purplish pink gills, the gills becoming brown at a later stage. When once learned they are unmistakable. It is a highly esteemed variety, and grows abundantly in meadows and pastures, but never in the forest. It is the mushroom generally found for sale in the markets.
Cut off the stem near the cup, peel them, and lay them with the gills up on a dish and sprinkle them with salt. After a little time they will be quite moist; then stew them in a sauce, the same as given above for the "fairies." They may also be sauted in butter, or be broiled. To broil, lay them on a fine wire broiler; turn the gills first to the coals for a few minutes; then turn the other side, and place a piece of butter on each one. Serve on toast. The fire for broiling mushrooms should not be very hot or bright.
Remove the scurf spots, and broil the same as given above. Use plenty of butter. Serve on a dish with meat or on toast, as preferred.
This mushroom is of various colors. It is found in woody paths and clearings. It is particularly subject to the attack of worms, and must be carefully scrutinized. The noxious Russu-las have a bitter taste, and in appearance resemble closely the esculent ones, so care is required to discriminate them. Wash them well, peel, and broil as directed for the Campestris. Lay them under a broiled steak, so they will absorb the juices of the meat.
These grow in masses in barnyards, gardens or any rich earth, and in decomposition become a soft black paste. They should be gathered at the white or pink stage. Fry them in butter or stew them with butter and a little milk or cream.
They are very juicy, and do not need much liquor added to stew them.
This species is of a distinctly different character from the Aga-racini or gilled mushrooms. The cap is more solid, being filled with a mass of vertical tubes or pores. Some Boleti are as large as six to eight inches in diameter, one of them making a meal for several people. Any of this class which have any tinge of red on the under surface should be rejected.
Remove the skin and pores, and either saute the caps in butter, or dip them in fritter batter, or egg and crumb them, and fry in smoking-hot fat. They may also be stewed in a white sauce, but they are very juicy, and need but little extra liquor. These mushrooms must be carefully examined for insects, as they are quickly attacked.
All are edible when gathered at the white stage. Cut them in slices one half inch thick. Either saute them in butter, or dip them in beaten egg, and fry in hot fat or cook on a griddle. Season with pepper and salt.
These mushrooms resemble none but those of the same genus, and all of them are edible. They are hollow, the exterior resembles a honey-comb, and they are found in open woods and at the base of trees on lawns. Great use is made of all the Morels in the French kitchen, and they are much prized by epicures.
Morels are usually stuffed with chicken, veal, or other meat, chopped very fine and highly seasoned. The stem is opened to admit the forcemeat, then pressed together again. Lay them on slices of bread, and bake in a moderate oven for ten minutes, or until tender; baste them with butter while cooking, and sprinkle them with salt and pepper. "Wash the Morels well before stuffing them.
Cut the fungus into pieces, and simmer it in a little water; season with butter, salt, and pepper, and add a little cream. When cooked, pour the mixture over croutons, or saute the pieces in butter; add a little sherry just before removing from the fire, and serve on softened toast.
Separate the branches, and stew in white sauce; or saute them in butter, seasoning with lemon-juice, salt, and pepper.


text:
9 July 2018 / swift
Me, my future self and self
A colleague of mine complained, that I use self too much. In Objective-C, it was everywhere, but he sent me this blogpost and recommended me to use self in Swift sparingly and only when necessary for the compiler.
But back in 2012 I started to learn Objective-C. Until 2015 it was more or less a hobby, but in 2016, I moved to Berlin to start a job as an iOS developer. Pretty soon, I switched to Swift. Since June 2018 I've been part of the team, who develops the Lidl-app for iOS.
Earlier this day I fixed a bug and created a Pull Request. I had a discussion about self with the colleague. His argument was, that it's totally sufficient to use self only in those places, where the compiler really needs it. The consequence, according to him, is to have cleaner code. And so he made me think and I felt the urge to justify myself and self.
I strongly disagree with using self only in certain spots to make the compiler happy. It's much more important to use it, when it makes a developer's job easier. I'm not a fan of making the compiler happy in the first place. Making (future) developers happy is much more important to me.
And by "making happy" I mean writing code, that's easy to understand and easy to maintain for colleagues and my future self. And this includes being as explicit as possible. When I look at a piece of code, I don't want to spend a lot of time to understand the code, I want to understand the problem it solves and how.
self everywhere might add some kind of visual noise, but it also adds clarity. You get used to that visual noise. The aforementioned blogpost argues, that not using self helps you finding memory leaks in closures. I don't think, that this is an issue of having/not having self everywhere in the first place, but more of an issue of paying attention.
Just because you can write very short Swift-code doesn't mean that you should. Closures are another good example for this:
You can reduce the amount of code in a closure dramatically by using $0, removing return, not using the parameter-name and so on. At the same time you reduce the readability of this code even further and in the end, only the person who wrote this code knows what this closure actually does. But this person left the company two months ago, so yeah. But that's another issue.
One of my goals is to write maintainable code and not to make a compiler happy on the expense of this goal. A compiler doesn't need self, sure, but it will make my job easier, starting tomorrow.
I hope, that this explains, why me and my future self — pun intended — are fans of self. My (future) colleagues will be, too. Hopefully :-)
— Opinionated Notes on Software Development —
100 Days of SwiftUI — Day 22
Dear recruiter
In April 2018, I wrote an article and published it on my personal blog. This is an updated version of the original post. A few weeks ago I wrote a thread on twitter.
preconditionFailure
One of my goals for May 2018 was to finally read The Pragmatic Programmer. I haven't succeeded yet, that's why this year, June was May, Extended Edition and July is June, Extended Edition.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
News Online News Jan 28, 2023
Tripura polls : BJP announces 1st list of candidates, drops 6 MLAs
All-female match officials appointed for ICC U19 Women's T20 World Cup…
We are here to win : New Zealand captain Sophie Devine on Women's T20…
Two fighter jets crash in MP; 2 pilots safe, 3rd sustains 'fatal…
Anil Kumble Anurag Thakur Gautam Gambhir KL Rahul Mahendra Singh Dhoni Rohit Sharma Sachin Tendulkar Sourav Ganguly Virat Kohli
Women's World Cup: New Zealand's campaign in tatters as NRR comes into play
News Online News Mar 20, 2022
Auckland : New Zealand's one-wicket loss to England in the ICC Women's World Cup league match has left their hopes of qualifying for the semifinal knockouts in tatters, with the Sophie Devine-led team now needing a miracle to make the…
Josh Hazlewood again misses out as Australia retain playing XI for final Test
Lahore : +Australian pace bowler Josh Hazlewood will continue to sit out as skipper Pat Cummins will go into the third and final Test against Pakistan starting on Monday at the Gaddafi Stadium here with the same eleven that played in the…
Women's World Cup: England back on track after one-wicket win over White Ferns
Auckland : Defending champions England on Sunday boosted their chances of a semifinal berth in the ICC Women's World Cup, defeating hosts New Zealand by just one wicket at the Eden Park to move up to fifth place on the table with four…
Women's World Cup: Would have liked for a few wickets in the power-play : Yastika Bhatia
Auckland : India top-order batter Yastika Bhatia on Saturday admitted that her team would have liked to pick some wickets in power-play while defending 277 against Australia in the ICC Women's Cricket World Cup.At Eden Park on Saturday,…
Women's World Cup: One of those days when bowling unit didn't do well : Mithali Raj
Auckland : India captain Mithali Raj rued an off day for the bowling department in their ICC Women's Cricket World Cup match against Australia at Eden Park.After making 277/7 on a fresh pitch with short square and straight dimensions, India…
Jay Shah's term as Asian Cricket chief extended by a year
Mumbai : The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) secretary Jay Shah's term as president of the Asian Cricket Council (ACC) was on Saturday unanimously extended by a year till the 2024 AGM. The decision was taken at the ACC AGM in…
Women's World Cup: Australia enter semifinals with six-wicket win over India
Auckland : Captain Meg Lanning led from the front as Australia entered the semifinals of ICC Women's Cricket World Cup with a six-wicket win over India at Eden Park on Saturday.After Mithali Raj, Yastika Bhatia and Harmanpreet Kaur slammed…
Jimmy Anderson not happy with England exclusion, keen to return 'later in the summer'
London : England's pace bowling stalwart Jimmy Anderson has not been able to come to terms with his omission from the Test squad for the three-match series against the West Indies currently underway in the Caribbean, and hopes to return to…
Tamim Iqbal terms triumph against South Africa very special; lauds lower order as well
Centurion : Bangladesh skipper Tamim Iqbal termed his side's historic 38-run triumph against South Africa in the opening ODI of the three-match series as "a very special win", and lauded the contribution of the lower order, which helped the…
Shoaib Akhtar calls for unlimited bouncers, Bodyline to be legalised in Test cricket
Karachi : Former Pakistan pace bowler Shoaib Akhtar has called for 'Bodyline' bowling to return to Test cricket and asked the International Cricket Council (ICC) to remove restrictions on the number of bouncers that can be bowled in the…
Previous 1 … 399 400 401 402 403 … 552 Next
Boman Irani marks 38th wedding anniversary with…
Tripura polls : BJP announces 1st list of…
Mehbooba Mufti joins Bharat Jodo Yatra in Kashmir
All-female match officials appointed for ICC U19…
We are here to win : New Zealand captain Sophie…
Two fighter jets crash in MP; 2 pilots safe, 3rd…
Athiya Shetty shares pic in saree from pre-wedding…
Have come to seek blessings of Lord Devnarayan,…
'BB16': Archana Gautam calls Kartik Aaryan…


Bo Vape Tobacco Pods provide a prefilled pod that has 1.5mL of nicotine salt e-Liquid in a pure tobacco taste. This natural tobacco nicotine salt flavor is a great choice for smokers that are making the transition to vaping. Simply plug in the Bo Tobacco Pod into your Bo Vape device and vape away!


With Catan - The Seafarers, the expansion makes its debut on the mobile phone - naturally including the basic game. It puts fun at your fingertips, anywhere and any time. In the expansive new campaign, you will play through 16 diverse scenarios.


1CMS would like to wish everyone a happy Harmony Day.
Harmony Day is held on the 21 March each year and aims to celebrate and acknowledge the fantastic contribution all Australians make. It is also a chance to find out more about the different cultures that exist in Australia.
Harmony Day's colour is orange and it also coincides with the United Nations International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.
Events are held all around Australia to celebrate harmony day, whether through sport, dance, art, film, music, storytelling or through sharing food.


rencontre conjugation french about chat rillieux la pape · rencontres malgaches france · sit rencontre pour ronde chat saint lo Télécharger notre guide. site de rencontre france pologne · site de rencontre femme noir pour homme blanc · site de rencontres guide · site de rencontre musulman totalement gratuit. Chat Nostalgie - Venez dialoguer gratuitement et faire des rencontres avec les membres de la communauté Nostalgie. Tchat gratuit et sans inscription.
You're connected to the chat. No online user matching your criteria. Changes them and webcam coquine gratuit Wattrelos a new search. Register No thanks Public album Who can view it? Everybody can view it.
Unlike public places, Internet users can quickly find members that they like by simply meeting online. Babel also offers to the members the possibility of looking for profiles according to several criteria: In the real world it can be difficult to find the right person in your entourage. A nickname 'Guest' is now automatically assigned in Free Access mode. Babel is a free and international dating service. You didn't click on the activation link received by email. You can easily discover thousands of profiles all around the world by chat without registration. Your picture's validation is in progress Your video is awaiting moderation Your profile picture will be published in a few minutes Your new photo is awaiting moderation Warning Please share your location to see users nearby! Changes them and launched a new search. Are you sure you want to delete your account? Click here to register. That is the best way to do the right matching. The free chat system of Babel gives to every member the opportunity to get accurate information about the person with whom you choose to chat. Your profile has been temporarily deactivated. Dating, annonce de rencontre particulier Meaux love for marriage To find love on Internet, thousands of serious members connect tchat de cul Mantes-la-Jolie day to find the right partners for them. So that, you can measure your match with this person. Your profile photo is not validated because it does not respect the rules of our editorial guidelines. Click here to senior proximeety Épinay-sur-Seine our editorial guidelines. Registration allows Babel members to access to advanced features such as: In the real world it can be difficult to find the right person in your entourage. Lmentin No thanks Public album Who can view it? Thanks to our dating site Babel. You didn't click on the rencontre en ligne gratuite Fort-de-France link received by email. Tip Choose "Always share my location" to see connected near you. The chat tchatche com gratuit Caluire-et-Cuire chat system of Babel gives to every member the opportunity to get accurate information Lanentin the person with whom you choose to chat. A nickname 'Guest' is site gratuit rencontre femme Saint-Benoît automatically site rencontre personnes agees Saint-Laurent-du-Maroni in Free Access mode. Your profile has been temporarily deactivated. No online user matching your criteria. The wide virtual world can help you to find easily a person with whom you can match and share the same points of view and interests.
Vous avez frappé la marque. Ça me semble être un très bonne pensée. Complètement avec vous, je serai d'accord.


text:
Other Languages het Nederlands
Intelligent Design—'A War on Science' says the BBC
by Russell Grigg and Jonathan Sarfati
Published: 7 May 2006 (GMT+10)
Legal battles over Intelligent Design in the US have worried evolutionists worldwide.
The BBC has a long history of anti-Christian bigotry, although it is funded by a 'TV licence' fee that the British Government coerces from all TV owners—whether they watch the BBC or not. Its latest attack is their Horizon program titled 'A War on Science'. It was also aired in Australia on the taxpayer-funded SBS-TV on 11 April 2006, and will undoubtedly be broadcast in other countries. The subject is the rise of the Intelligent Design [ID] movement in America; the program title suggests not only that the concept of ID is wrong, but that it is harmful and opposed to true science. So for readers new to this movement, we suggest first studying:
CMI's views on the Intelligent Design Movement to find out what it is, and its strengths and weaknesses
A brief history of design for its long and venerable history, its power but insufficiency
The ID advocates interviewed are lawyer Prof. Phillip Johnson, biochemist Dr Michael Behe, Dr Stephen Meyer, and mathematician Prof. William Dembski. The defenders of evolution are the vociferous antitheist Prof. Richard Dawkins, TV celebrity and self-described agnostic Sir David Attenborough, and biologist and Roman Catholic theistic evolutionist Prof. Kenneth Miller.
[Update, 30 June 2009: Dembski also comments, in relation to christophobic attacks on the honesty of the interviews in CMI's film The Voyage that Shook the World:
Lynch is outraged: the documentary makers are guilty of "lies" and "deception". Would a charge of fraud hold up in court? I suspect the documentary makers simply withheld information. Is that wrong? The BBC, for instance, didn't inform me that a documentary they were making about ID was to be called "A War on Science", and that I would be portrayed as one of the "bad people" trying to "destroy science." I was, to be sure, displeased with this outcome, but I recognize that this is the way the game is played. The other side has been dishing it out for a long time, but has a hard time of it when the tables are turned.]
Evolution: real science?
The film opens with the narrator telling us that one of science's greatest theories—evolution—is under attack.
'One of science's greatest theories'?—hardly. Real scientists actually make no use of evolution in their research, because they are concerned with operational science not origins. The leading chemist Philip Skell, a member of the National Academy of Sciences, blew the whistle on the overrating of evolution in a famous column in The Scientist, Why Do We Invoke Darwin? Evolutionary theory contributes little to experimental biology. [full essay minus expurgated original subtitle available at the-scientist.com/opinion-old/why-do-we-invoke-darwin-48438, Ed.] In this, he took up a point made in a BioEssays special issue on evolution in 2000, that 'most [biologists] conduct their work quite happily without particular reference to evolutionary ideas' so evolution is a 'highly superfluous' idea. How much less relevant is evolution to other major fields of science such as physics or chemistry?
Another admission to support the point is that evolutionists on the one hand claim that evolution is essential for biology, but on the other hand lament the move away from evolution 'to a more utilitarian science' which demands 'more practical benefits from science' (Evolution and practical science).
Of course, even if evolution in the real sense of molecules-to-man were useful, it would not make it true. But in reality, there is no evidence to support life coming from non-living chemicals or one kind changing into a different, more complex, kind. Dawkins himself admitted:
'Evolution has been observed. It's just that it hasn't been observed while it's happening.' ['Battle over evolution' Bill Moyers interviews Richard Dawkins, 'Now', 3 December 2004, PBS network]
Indeed, the lack of genuine evidence has led to the promotion of fraudulent evidence such as Archaeoraptor (the 'Piltdown bird'), embryonic recapitulation and similarities; as well as staged pictures of peppered moths. As well as outright fraud, the historical sciences seem riddled with imaginative 'just-so' story telling, often based on the flimsiest of fossil evidence and often published in otherwise rigorously refereed journals, such as Nature or Science (see for example, Ardipithecus ramidus kadabba).
Intelligent design 'attack'
Atheist Richard Dawkins battles Intelligent Design.
Narrator: The threat is emerging from the only scientific superpower on Earth, provoking some of the biggest names in science to hit back.
Dawkins: It is enormously damaging if the world's leading economic power were subverted and undermined by this kind of anti-scientific tendency.
Dawkins is well-known, but what has he contributed of substance to science? What has he discovered? What inventions of his do we use today? He is a just a popularizer of evolution and an apostle of atheism.
Narrator: The controversy surrounds a new explanation for the diversity of life on Earth.
There is nothing new about creation by an intelligent Designer. It was first propounded in the opening book of the Bible, Genesis, written over 4,000 years ago. It does not threaten science, but it is a threat to those scientists who arrogantly claim that nothing could exist that they themselves have not experienced. See also A Brief History of Design.
Narrator: For many, it threatens to replace science with God.
Dawkins explicitly states that Darwinism made it possible to be an 'intellectually fulfilled atheist', a position he holds himself.
Attenborough: It is so fundamentally against every scientific principle you can think of that to put it in the same bracket is to seriously confuse thinking. …
One must wonder how all the great scientists such as Newton, Boyle, Pascal, Pasteur, Faraday, Maxwell, Joule or Kelvin made all their great discoveries then, being so backward as to believe that there was a Designer (and most were young-earth creationists as well!) …
Narrator: This is the story of a battle between faith and knowledge … .
The two are not mutually exclusive; this shows a common misunderstanding of biblical faith, which is trust based on knowledge of certain facts and has much to do with logic. Biblical faith is not wishful thinking, like the Queen in Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking Glass: 'Sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.'
Miller: I truly regard America's scientific soul to be at stake in this struggle, and losing that, I think would be a great tragedy.
How strange. Before evolution became part of the American school curriculum, American schools produced more Nobel prizes than the rest of the world combined. This was especially pronounced in the biological field (Physiology and Medicine), one that supposedly can't do without evolution—America produced twice as many as all other countries. In fact, America's greatness in science almost certainly flows out of its Christian roots and a traditional belief in Creation. Even secular historians of science have recognized that modern science flourished because of Christianity, and particularly following the Protestant Reformation (when the authority of the Bible was re-established over everything, including 'the church'). See Creationist contributions to science and The Christian origin of modern science.
High school controversy
The scene now shifts to a school in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, where a local high-school dispute over the teaching of Darwin's theory of evolution, sparked by a controversial new idea called Intelligent Design, is said to have spiralled into a battle that pitted science against God. Supporters are said to claim to have found scientific evidence for a supernatural Creator of life.
Narrator: For many, it could mark the beginning of a scientific dark age. Anonymous woman: If you can lie to kids about science, if you can lie to the American public about science, you can lie to them about anything, and that's why this case is so important.
Her body language says she is against ID, but her words apply to the theory of evolution! Also, since Dawkins agrees that evolution entails a 'moral vacuum, in which their best impulses have no basis in nature,' she has no basis within her evolutionary philosophy for claiming that lying was morally wrong. See also Bomb-building vs. the biblical foundation for further discussion on the problem of arguing for right and wrong from an evolutionary perspective.
Darwin's contribution
The narrator now introduces Darwin's 1859 book On the Origin of Species and says that for the first time science had directly challenged the biblical story of creation. But science had nothing to do with it. Darwin's On the Origin of Species is probably the least-scientific 'science' book ever written. It is loaded with conjecture. Darwin used words like 'perhaps', 'we may well suppose', etc. over 800 times.
Also, evolutionary naturalism is an ancient idea. It was very much helped by Hutton's and Lyell's uniformitarian geology that taught long ages as a result of denying the Flood a priori (that is, it was their starting point, not a conclusion from examining the evidence). Darwin was merely extending their attack on biblical history—he just extended the attack from geology into biology. This should be a lesson to the modern ID movement, who refuse to state a history of the Designer's acts including the Fall, Flood and subsequent dispersion.
So the proponents of ID are vulnerable to precisely the same attacks that defeated their counterparts in Darwin's time. For example, compare Darwin's resentment at a God who would design a pathogen to take his daughter Annie's life with Attenborough's resentment at a God who would design a parasite that bores through human eyes, although Attenborough got the story wrong anyway (see Why doesn't Sir David Attenborough give credit to God?).
Of course, aside from ignoring the Fall, these are actually theological arguments rather than scientific ones—ignoring the scientific pointers to a designer and instead using arguments from outside science about what a God would or would not do (likewise with certain arguments from vestigial organs). It's ironic that Attenborough earlier attacked ID as 'fundamentally against every scientific principle' whereas his main argument is actually a religious one!
Evolution v Christianity
Attenborough: There are people who think that Genesis should be taken literally …
Rather, creationists take Genesis according to the original meaning of the author, as we should with any other document. Attenborough should be more honest and just say that he doesn't believe Genesis, rather than make an issue of supposed 'literalism'.
Indeed, Dawkins is more consistent, agreeing that creationists understand what the biblical authors intended to teach, although of course the program won't reveal that he disagrees with his fellow evolutionist. In his TV diatribe against theistic religion called The root of all evil? (broadcast on Channel 4, 16 January 2006), he said:
'Oh but of course the story of Adam and Eve was only ever symbolic, wasn't it? Symbolic?! Jesus had himself tortured and executed for a symbolic sin by a non-existent individual. Nobody not brought up in the faith could reach any verdict other than barking mad!'
Elsewhere in The root of all evil?, he said the following after a discussion about homosexual behaviour with the Bishop of Oxford, Richard Harries, who has joined the antitheist Dawkins in opposing creation teaching in British schools. Harries, a liberal who also told Dawkins that he rejects the virginal conception of Christ, admitted that the OT and NT teaching was clearly that homosexual behaviour is wrong, but then went on to argue that we needed to reinterpret these texts based on modern scientific findings of 'a significant percentage of people are predominantly attracted to members of their own sex.' etc. (probably, like his fellow liberal (retired) bishop John Shelby Spong, relying on the discredited gall wasp specialist Alfred Kinsey). Again, he should just say that he doesn't believe the texts, rather than dishonestly claim he is reinterpreting them to mean the opposite of what they say!
Dawkins responded to the camera, showing that Harries' appeasement results only in contempt:
'The moderates' [liberals'] position seems to me to be fence-sitting. They half-believe in the Bible but how do they decide which parts to believe literally and which parts are just allegorical?'
Presumably here he means, 'which parts of the Bible's historical narrative are to be taken as historical narrative and which parts are to be explained away as allegorical.' Then he gets it right :
'It seems to me an odd proposition that we should adhere to some parts of the Bible story but not to others. After all, when it comes to important moral questions, by what standards do we cherry-pick the Bible? Why bother with the Bible at all if we have the ability to pick and choose from it, what is right and what is wrong?' [but see also answer to philosophy/religion professor on biblical exegesis and the problem of evil for some clarification on this topic]
On the BBC program, Attenborough continued:
And if they do so, the basis for their thinking so is a manuscript, a human document. It's nothing to do with the world out here.
This is the crux of the whole matter—a manuscript, yes, but merely a human document, no. In fact, a divine document, written by Moses, under the inspiration of God the Holy Spirit—see Bible Q&A for evidence.
Narrator: The logical consequences of Darwin's findings were even more unsettling. If the story of creation could be doubted, so too could the existence of the Creator. Darwin had given rise to a disturbing vision—a world without God.
Yes, again this is the crux of the whole matter.
Miller: To many people, if we are just material beings, any notion of a grand purpose, of a meaning to their lives, is merely an illusion—an illusion that Charles Darwin smashed in 1859.
While Miller, a theistic evolutionist, is trying to dismiss a major objection to evolution to weaken Christian opposition, Dawkins himself believes exactly that. Naturally the pro-evolution producers won't point out that two of their heroes contradict each other.
Attenborough: The notion that we are masters of our destiny is one which they found abhorrent, and that was why Darwin's views were so heretical and upsetting. He found them upsetting himself …
Hardly 'masters of our destiny', since Dawkins claimed in his first book The Selfish Gene:
'They are in you and me; they created us, body and mind; and their preservation is the ultimate rationale for our existence. They have come a long way, those replicators. Now they go by the name of genes,and we are their survival machines. … robot vehicles blindly programmed to preserve the selfish molecules known as genes.'
Narrator: Darwin likened his theory to confessing to a murder, but it was the scientific evidence, not his religious belief, that Darwin was compelled to accept.
This is blatant historical revisionism, as shown above. It is also shown by the fact that he had many supporters in the clergy, such as the racist Charles Kingsley who thought that Australian Aborigines had not evolved enough to receive the Gospel and that Irishmen were ' white chimpanzees'. Conversely, Darwin's main opposition came from scientists (see Holy War).
Schools and courts
Peppered moths are claimed to prove evolution, but even if the story were correct, they merely prove natural selection. This is not evolution, and was even discovered by creationists. But these famous photos turn out to have been staged; the moths were glued to the trunks, since they normally never rest on trunks but under leaves.
The Narrator here introduces the 1925 Scopes Trial, which is described as 'science vs religion' and 'reason vs faith'. Then he tells us that biblical creationism dominated the classroom, until 1987, when the highest court in America ruled that teaching creationism was unconstitutional; and creationism was banned from the science curriculum.
The scene now moves to Dover Area High School in Pennsylvania, where, we are told, in 2004, one of the 'overwhelming number of fundamentalist Christians' on the Board had objected to the teaching of Darwinism in the school's new biology textbook. One of the science teachers, Brian Rehm, claims that the Board Chairman had said to him that the teachers who had taught evolution biology class had lied to his children. Rehm says, 'I can't believe that somebody thinks that the teachers teaching science are actually intentionally lying to the children.'
Interesting! A little earlier in the program, the BBC showed a woman saying that if you can lie to kids about science and lie to the American public about science you can lie to them about anything. In fact, Creation Ministries International does not say that those teaching evolution are deliberately lying (see this discussion), although it is very serious when textbooks still carry fraudulent pictures.
Rehm opines that the Dover School Board is anti-teacher, anti-public education, and anti-science, without any evidence that physics and chemistry are at all affected.
Phillip Johnson, founder of the IDM
Prof. Phillip Johnson, a celebrated law professor, is introduced as the man behind the latest challenge to Darwin. The program mentions that he is a 'born-again Christian', without of course mentioning Dawkins as a vociferous born-again atheist, as it were. Thus it perpetuates the myth that creationists are the only ones with a religious bias while evolutionists are the epitome of objectivity.
Narrator: To defeat Darwin, Johnson would have to unravel the driving force behind his theory—natural selection. Natural selection explained how life evolved from the first simple organisms; how in nature the fittest win out, leaving more offspring with more of their desirable characteristics. This survival of the fittest would, over time, allow a species to change and develop until eventually new species could arise. Given billions of years, natural selection could create, unguided, the diversity of life on Earth.
This is a reasonable summary of what the theory of evolution claims, but is it not proof that this actually happened or that natural selection is capable of achieving this.
Then the narrator informs us that, like many before him, Johnson was unconvinced by the evidence. This is not surprising, as so far, not one item of evidence has been given to viewers. In fact, the program offers not one word of proof in support of evolution! It is assumed.
Johnson: The problem with the Darwinian story is not that it's altogether false; it's that perhaps it's true within a much more limited scale than is usually claimed.
Johnson is presumably here referring to variation within a kind, also sometimes misleadingly called ' micro-evolution'
Narrator: Johnson believed Darwin's theory was just part of a much greater problem with science. By attempting to explain the world solely through natural causes, science was excluding the supernatural. Science was inherently anti-religious.
This is one of the grand 'cons' of evolutionism. Atheists have defined 'science' as being limited to their own atheism. Thus it is not science which is inherently anti-religious, but the atheistic interpretation and limitation of science by people such as Dawkins and Attenborough, and even Miller whose view is no different from atheism for all practical purposes.
Johnson: The Darwinists claim we must keep God and any form of supernatural creation out of science, and nature had to be capable of doing all of its own creating.
Narrator: Johnson thought science unfairly ruled out God as a Creator. It couldn't even entertain the possibility.
Again, not science, but atheistic scientists.
Michael Behe and Irreducible Complexity
Bacterial flagellum
Biochemist Professor Michael Behe of Lehigh University is now introduced as the chief scientific proponent of ID.
Behe: Darwin wrote at one point that if it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not be put together by numerous successive slight modifications he said, 'My theory would absolutely break down.'
See On the Origin of Species, 6th edition, p. 154, New York University press, 1988.
Behe: [One such organ], the bacterial flagellum is literally an outboard motor that bacteria use to swim.
Narrator: When Behe looked inside, he saw a mechanism made of fifty different interacting parts. … If just one part was missing, the flagellum appeared to be useless. Anything less than the whole simply wouldn't work. It pointed to one thing: that this machine had not evolved from a simpler organism.
Narrator: If the flagellum could not have come about through gradual stages, it must have been created in its complete form; and for that to happen, Behe concluded there must have been some form of creator—an Intelligence.
Behe: Eventually … I called it Irreducible Complexity.
Narrator: Irreducible Complexity … was based on the observation of natural machines whose parts were so interdependent that they could not have evolved. And Irreducible Complexity appeared to be everywhere, right down to the smallest building blocks of life.
Note that this deduction was based on observation. No true evolution has ever been observed taking place. Evolution is nothing more than a theoretical dogma.
William Dembski and mathematical improbability
Mathematician Prof. William Dembski of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary is now introduced as someone who had challenged a concept at the centre of evolutionary theory: the mathematical probability of life evolving by chance. The narrator discusses DNA, saying that, as DNA is passed from one generation to the next, tiny random changes take place. According to evolutionary theory, it is these chance genetic mutations that generate variation within a species and allow evolution to work, over time, creating the diversity of life on Earth. But Dembski doubted the probability of that really happening. According to his calculations, the complexity of nature was beyond the limits of chance. Even relatively simple organisms such as a moth have DNA sequences hundreds of millions of units long, and they have to be in such precise order that chance alone could not explain [them]. … The theory of evolution was not just improbable, it appeared to be mathematically impossible. For Dembski, there had to be something else shaping life.
Dembski: The only causal power that we know that could produce something like this is intelligence. Human engineers have produced systems like this.
Narrator: Together [Dembski and Behe] claimed it was evidence for a supernatural power. They had forged the seemingly impossible: evidence of a Creator based on science, not religion. Intelligent Design had arrived!
Johnson: We saw an opportunity to change the world, by moving the bait away from this Bible vs science stereotype and into the question of whether the scientific evidence, when examined impartially, really justified and supported the grand claims of Darwinism.
Monopoly on ideas
The defenders of evolution now reply:
Dawkins: What this does to science is it wastes a lot of time of scientists who could be getting on with their work. As far as I am aware, in no other field of science does this happen. Physicists don't have to fight a kind of rearguard action against the yapping terriers of ignorance, the way biologists do.
Physics is actually testable science, unlike evolution; that's why the difference. One never talks about believing in gravity or electrons, because these are observable. But 'belief' is an appropriate term for evolution, since it is a philosophical (religious) belief system based on a grand conjecture.
And what happened to the scientific method of theory, counter theory, analysis, and conclusion? This is applied to physics—why is the theory of evolution exempt from normal scientific procedure?
Indeed, the evolutionist Prof. Gerald Kerkut asked students to give him evidence against evolution, because to 'really understand an argument you will be able to indicate to me not only the points in favour of the argument but also the most telling points against it.' (Implications of Evolution)'
Another evolutionist, Scott Todd, an immunologist at Kansas State University, stated:
'Additionally, one must question the interpretations of the observed phenomena and discuss the weaknesses of the model. Honest scientists are far more inspiring than defensive ones who scoff arrogantly at the masses and fear that discussing the problems of macro-evolutionary theory will weaken general acceptance of it. On the other hand, free debate is more likely to encourage the curious to seek solutions.' [Nature 401(6752):423, 30 Sept. 1999]
Narrator: For Dawkins, there was only one way to treat the assault on his science and his beliefs. He simply snubbed them.
Stephen Meyer of the Discovery Institute
Here the program brings in Dr Stephen Meyer of the Discovery Institute's Centre for Science and Culture in Seattle.
Meyer: There is a growing group of dissenting scientists around the world who are dissenting from Darwinian evolution. Now, over 450 scientists have signed a list saying they doubt that natural selection can produce the complexity of life. It may be a minority position in science, but it is a growing minority and one which we think has the support of an enormous amount of evidence about the complexity and inner workings of cellular life.
Dawkins: In America, ID is not getting a hold in the scientific community. It is getting a hold only among those parts of the population who don't know anything.
Notice the abusive ad hominem—anyone who disagrees with me is an idiot. It is a common ploy by evolutionists when they have no scientific rebuttal. It's also amusing to see Dawkins so self-righteous against anti-evolutionists, when he scoffs at the idea of righteous indignation and retribution against child murderers and other vile criminals, claiming that it is as irrational as Basil Fawlty beating his car:
'Why do we vent such visceral hatred on child murderers, or on thuggish vandals, when we should simply regard them as faulty units that need fixing or replacing? Presumably because mental constructs like blame and responsibility, indeed evil and good, are built into our brains by millennia of Darwinian evolution.'
Schoolteachers and indoctrination
There follows a diatribe from Prof. Barbara Forrest of Southeastern University, Louisiana, about the religious nature of ID, with its slogan of 'teach the controversy', and a reference to President Bush saying in August 2005 that both sides ought to be taught. The scene then changes to Dover High School in Pennsylvania, where the School Board voted 6–3 to change the curriculum to introduce a textbook that contained the theory of Intelligent Design. Teacher Rehm (who resigned of his own accord) tells us, 'We couldn't stop these clowns.'
Notice the personal abuse again.
We are told that the Rehms and other parents opposed to the policy decided to sue the Board for promoting religion in the science class.
Rehm: I am going to try and stop it because I know it's wrong.
But since Dawkins agrees that evolution entails a 'moral vacuum', on what basis under his own philosophy can Rehm proclaim anything 'wrong'? The best he can logically come up with is 'I don't like it'—and under his philosophy, this is no more meaningful as a moral assessment than 'I don't like tomato sauce.'
Somebody (presumably the Board members' lawyer) : Should the 9th Grade biology students be made aware of the fact that there is a controversy in the science community about Darwin's theory of evolution?
Narrator: If ID was found to be based on religion it would not only be barred from the classroom, but its scientific validity would be ruined.
The rotary motor of the bacterial flagellum
The first witness called by the dissenting parents was Prof. Kenneth Miller, who finally offered some scientific arguments.
Narrator: Within the flagellum there was a simpler functioning mechanism—a bacterial syringe.
Miller: This system is missing 40 of its 50 parts, 80%, and it is perfectly functioning … so the kindest thing one can say about this claim, which is the essential claim of Irreducible Complexity and ID is that it's wrong, it is simply wrong on the basis of the science.
Narrator: For Miller, the prediction of Irreducible Complexity was disproved—the flagellum could be broken down into other simpler biological mechanisms.
Miller again manages to misconstrue irreducible complexity, that is, that the flagellar motor could not function unless all the parts were coordinated. This still fails to account for 80% of its parts, most of which 'are unique to the motor and are not found in any other living system', according to Dr Scott Minnich, of Idaho University, the world's expert on this motor. Also, 'the parts would need to be assembled in the correct temporal sequence similar to the way an automobile is assembled in factory,' which requires 'many other protein machines to time the expression of those assembly instructions.' So Miller is actually begging the question, because his theory of co-option, 'tacitly presupposes the need for the very thing it seeks to explain—a functionally interdependent system of proteins.'
Minnich also points out that this flagellum assembly mechanism is designed to punch out the proteins required for the flagellum in the precise order required. The bubonic plague germ Yersinia pestis has 'lost the ability to assemble flagella', but can still use a degenerate version of this pump to inject toxins into other cells. That is, the germ's secretory apparatus degenerated from the flagellar assembly machinery, not the other way round. So the disease-causing effects are consistent with loss of information after the Fall, just like the loss of chemotaxis causing virulence in Vibrio cholerae or genome decay making Mycoplasma obligate parasites.
Probability arguments v cheating with chance
Miller: One of the mathematical tricks employed by ID involves taking the present-day situation and calculating probabilities that the present would have appeared randomly from events in the past. And the best example I can give is to sit down with four friends, shuffle a deck of 52 cards and deal them out, and keep an exact record of the order in which the cards were dealt. We could then look back and say, my goodness, how improbable this is … . Nonetheless, you dealt them out and you got the hand which you did.
Narrator: The chances of life evolving, just like the chance of getting a particular hand of cards, could not be calculated backwards. By doing so, the odds were unfairly stacked. Played that way, cards and life would always appear impossible.
According to evolutionary information theorist Hubert Yockey, the idea that life arose from non-living chemicals is based on faith, not fact.
This is a prime example of ' cheating with chance'—there is a 100% probability of getting SOME hand. Conversely, there are vastly more ways of being dead than alive, so there is by no means 100% probability of ANY old arrangement of amino acids forming the proteins required for life.
Furthermore, if Miller and his hero-worshipping narrator were right, one would never be able to tell that someone is stacking the deck. That is, if a dealer always gets an ace at the right time, it doesn't mean that he had one up his sleeve, because all hands are equally improbable … Poker players in the Wild West might not swallow this as easily as Miller does. In reality, it is not just the low probability, but the low probability of duplicating a specific hand that would give cheats away. It is not any old order, but certain specific arrangements, which have a very low probability of just happening, that indicate intelligent input rather than chance. See also Dembski's instructive example of a case of an accusation of cheating supported by probability arguments.
Also, Dawkins himself would not generally use Miller's facile anti-probabilty arguments. Rather, the whole point of his books was that the probability of forming complex structures really is far too low to have formed by chance. Instead, he claims that 'mount improbable' was climbed in very small steps that are not that low in probability, and that natural selection enabled these steps to be climbed, hence the title of his book Climbing Mount Improbable. This has its own problems (see critique of the book, and an analysis of his computer 'simulation'), but it shows that Miller's fallacious arguments do not answer the creationist probability arguments.
Dawkins deviates from this only when discussing the origin of the first self-reproducing entity, since natural selection cannot explain it. Here Dawkins dithers in his books between a hypothetical replicating molecule and Cairn's-Smith's outlandish theory of clay minerals as first life formed out of desperation with other materialistic models.
Behe: Contrary to Prof. Miller, I think Darwinism, to a large degree, acts to stifle science in some respects. The scientific evidence from the bacterial flagellum, from the molecular machinery in the cell, just points to design. It doesn't address the question of how that design was put in place.
Miller: From the advocates of ID themselves, the Designer creates outside of nature, supernaturally, by means that are undetectable. And if those means are undetectable, they are not susceptible to scientific observation or analysis, and therefore the whole idea is not science.
This shows ignorance of science. One can detect the effects of a phenomenon even if we can't detect the phenomenon itself. E.g. Newton proposed the law of gravity to explain the observed attraction between any two masses, but had no clue what causes gravitational attraction (and we still have little idea). And with design, archaeologists can see that arrowheads and firepits have been designed, even if they haven't seen the humans designing them or even if no human remains have been found. See also Is the design explanation legitimate?
In fact, by Miller's own reasoning, evolution fails the scientific test itself. For example, no one has observed life evolving from non-living chemicals by chemical evolution, or even provided a plausible mechanism (see the articles under Origin of Life Q&A); or one kind changing into another …
Miller: A theory that explains everything, in fact explains nothing, and that's the central flaw of ID.
This sounds very much like evolution—cosmic evolution supposedly explains the origin of everything. Sir Julian Huxley, former head of UNESCO, asserted:
'In the evolutionary pattern of thought there is no longer either need or room for the supernatural. The earth was not created: it evolved. So did all the animals and plants that inhabit it, including our human selves, mind and soul as well as brain and body. So did religion' (Essays of a Humanist, pp. 82–83, Penguin Books, UK, 1964 (1969 reprint)).
Dawkins: Design needs to postulate an entity at least as complicated, at least as high in information content, at least as irreducibly complex, as that which it is supposed to explain. It therefore is a total lack of explanation. It doesn't explain anything, because it can't explain itself.
This is an ipse dixit (Latin for 'he himself said it', meaning an unsupported assertion by someone expecting others to accept it without question). It is an argument one would expect from a 5-year-old. The God of the Bible is not composed of any parts, so is not 'complex' but simple. Also, God did not have a beginning, so didn't need a cause, while living things most definitely did begin at some time—see If God created the universe, then who created God?
Attenborough: Science is an observation-based way of thinking. If you then move from that and say we can't find any evidence, and therefore it was made by God or something or other, that simply moves into a totally different kind of intellectual discourse and is utterly different. It becomes not objective, which is what science is, but subjective.
It is the evidence that speaks of design, not the lack of evidence.
It is the evidence that speaks of design, not the lack of evidence. In fact, even Dawkins wrote in his famous book The Blind Watchmaker, 'biology is the study of complicated things that appear to have been designed.' Of course, he denies that they are designed in reality, but the onus is on him to prove that the appearance of design is misleading. And as shown, the design inference is not limited to appearances but extends to deep analogy with things we know have been designed.
It is not because we do not understand how a bacterial flagellum works, but because we do (to a large extent now) that we infer that it must have come from the mind of an intelligent designer. This is not about a 'god of the gaps'
Also, as shown, Attenborough's gripe against ID is mainly theological, not scientific. Also, design theory is not subjective. It works by objective analogy with features we know have been designed, and much science has worked by analogy—and Darwin used analogy repeatedly in Origin.
After a short diversion about Roman Catholic belief for and against ID, the narrator says that the proponents of ID have never stated who the Designer is. Meyer is quoted as saying that the God of theism is one possible candidate.
Behe: I find it convenient to say that God is the Designer, and certainly He has to be considered a major candidate, if you are a theist. But other people might have other ideas.
At this stage we are told that in December 2005 the judgment in the Dover High School court case was finally handed down in a 139-page opinion. Nothing is read from this, but an anonymous reporter says that the judge had identified a clear religious purpose behind the scientific claims of ID. We are told that it was an unequivocal defeat, that ID was no more scientific than creationism, but that this war is far from over. And it is irrelevant for countries (such as the BBC's own) where judges mainly apply the law rather than make it, as American activist judges (judicial supremacists) do.
But if the BBC wants to cite American court cases, then why not the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling, 'Atheism is [a Wisconsin prison inmate's] religion …' Thus people like Dawkins really do hold to evolution for religious reasons. Indeed, he is Vice President of the British Humanist Association, and the U.S. Supreme Court in Torcaso v. Watkins, 81 S.Ct. 1681 (1961) makes the following statement:
'Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God, are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism (emphasis added), and others.'
Also, the first two tenets of Humanist Manifesto II, signed by many prominent evolutionists, are:
Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created.
Humanism believes that Man is a part of nature and has emerged as a result of a continuous process.
The discrepancy can be summarized: when atheists want to expunge Christianity from public life (e.g. A Story of Two Professors), then Christianity is 'religious' while atheism is not. But when atheists want privileges (e.g. tax exemption or prison study groups), then atheism is a religion as well!
Miller: The battle in this country is not going to be won or lost in the courtroom. It is going to be won or lost in the hearts and minds of the American people and how they regard science. We could lose our scientific soul and cease being a country that is hospitable, warm, welcoming and nurturing to science, and losing that I think would be a great tragedy.
Dawkins: Evolution has a massive amount of evidence in its favour, and it explains, let's say, 99% of what we know about life. The remaining 1% remains to be discovered. ID explains precisely zero.
How odd that with so much alleged evidence for evolution, not one item of it all is offered to viewers in this program. Presumably the remaining 1% covers such things as the vast gulfs between non-living matter and the first living cell, single-celled and multicelled creatures, invertebrates and vertebrates, pterosaurs and non-flying reptiles; the origin of many complex inter-related structures, consciousness …
Attenborough: We would be wrong to suppose that evolution is the ultimate answer to everything, but nonetheless nobody has yet demonstrated the failing. If you find something you don't understand, of course you can say, well, it was created by a divine spirit. But that, of course, answers nothing really. That simply says we don't know.
Once again, this asserts that the design argument is an appeal to ignorance rather than an argument from analogy with what we do know. If we do not know, why are they so dogmatic that they do know that evolution is responsible for the origin and development of life? In any case, Attenborough seems to contradict Dawkins who claimed that evolution explains '99% of what we know about life'—that's pretty close to 'the ultimate answer to everything'.
Once more, the secular media are the loudspeakers of the prophets of atheism, while its 'heretical' opponents are given short shrift. But as shown, the evidence for design is extremely cogent, but the evidence for the atheistic worldview would clothe only vain emperors. This website helps to present the information and bypass the secular censors, as does our peer-reviewed journal.
Redressing the imbalance
The BBC TV series Darwin's Dangerous Idea
Is Intelligence allowed?
A road trip with a difference!
Darwinism a cult? (Peter Hitchens)


So, you have sent in your resume, filled out an application and you managed to land an interview with a prospective employer. Now what? It is hard to know exactly what an interviewer will ask, if they will throw challenging questions what questions you should ask them. Even though each employer does things a little differently, there are ways you can practice your responses to common questions in order to better prepare for the interview. Even if the types of answers you have prepared do not come up in the interview, they will still be good practice for talking about yourself and your experience.
Many interviews start with some variation of this statement. Prior to an interview, work on a brief overview of your experience and why you would be a good fit for the job. Include any relevant training or education. This is a commercial about you and a chance to make a good first impression. Remember to keep your statement brief, and avoid going into great detail about your life story.
When an employer asks this question, they are not necessarily trying to collect data on how job seekers hear about the company. They want to see if you did your homework prior to the interview. Always make time to read up on a company before you arrive for an interview. This is also a good way to come up with some questions for the interviewer about the job as well as the company.
When you do your research on the company, get a sense of how you might fit into the culture there. This will help you to figure out how to highlight the areas of your experience that show you are a good fit. An employer may also ask you why you want to work for them. Being prepared with background information on the company will help you answer this question.
Why Did You Leave Your Last Job? Tell Me About this Gap in Your Employment.
Both of these questions can trip up a candidate—especially if your reason for leaving a job or being off work for a long time were not positive. While you may be tempted to lie to cover up problems in your past, this may lead to trouble when an employer conducts a background check and finds out the truth. It is better that they hear it from you, so put some time into practicing how you will answer questions about problems in our past.
Put a positive spin on negative experiences. For example, if you were fired from a job for attendance issues, explain what you have done to make changes. Maybe the issue was with not having reliable transportation, but you now have a good car, so this is not a problem anymore. Avoid blaming a past employer or your boss for the problems. Accept responsibility, and show how you have changed from the experience.
The same goes for gaps in employment. While you do not need to go into great detail about the reason for a gap, be honest. It is sufficient to say that you were taking time off to look for a new job, go to school or deal with family issues.
What Type of Pay and Schedule are You Looking for?
Be honest with your answers to these questions. Sometimes candidates are tempted to say what they think the interviewer wants to hear. You want to make sure the job is a good fit in terms of pay and schedule, so it can cause problems at the time of hire if you lie about availability or accept a job that does not meet your financial needs.
When an employer asks about pay, they often want to make sure you are in the pay range for the position. It ends up being a waste of time for you and the interviewer if you keep interviewing for a job that is way below the wage you need to pay your expenses.
This advice also works for questions about the type of work environment you are looking for. Remember that you want to make sure the company is a good fit for you, so make sure the business is a place you would be comfortable working.
What Was Your Biggest Accomplishment at Your Last Job?
It is a good idea to come up with a few things you are proud of from your previous work. Remember that you can also draw from volunteer experience and school if your work history is limited. Come up with several different examples as well as things that you learned from in the past. These are stories you can draw from if asked specific questions about things like how you handle difficult customers or a time you worked through a disagreement with a coworker or supervisor.
It is usually easy to come up with a couple strengths, but candidates often struggle with how to answer questions about weaknesses. As with blemishes in your work history, turn a negative into a positive. If, for example, public speaking makes you nervous, talk about how you have started attending Toastmasters meetings to work on getting more comfortable speaking in front of a crowd.
It is a good idea to get a friend to interview you prior to meeting with an employer. This is a chance to practice speaking about yourself and your experience. The more you do so, the more comfortable you will feel during an interview. If an interviewer stumps you with a question, you can ask them to come back to the question later. Just because you cannot come up with an answer on the spot, it does not mean you have automatically disqualified yourself. Many candidates get nervous, and interviewers are often willing to give you a chance to think about your answer.
Are you formerly incarcerated and looking for more help preparing for interviews? Get in touch with us to find out how Pacific Reentry Career Services can help you prepare for your job search.
Looking for a job can be a big undertaking. Major job posting sites are overwhelming and often job seekers find themselves wading through endless ads promising ways to get rich working from home. While some people may have luck with casting a huge net online in their quest for the perfect job, the average job seeker may find that resumes sent in response to ads on major job sites go into some kind of application blackhole. The way around this is to take a targeted approach in your job search.
The key to a targeted job search is to look for companies that provide the type of work you want. While companies may not pay to post all their openings on a big job search site, they will probably put all their openings on their own website. Check the company's site regularly for new openings. I worked for one company that was popular in the community. Many applicants were people who had walked into one of our stores asking about job openings or were persistent job seekers who made a habit of regularly checking the company's website. This meant we rarely had to rely on paying to post our openings on other sites.
Research companies in your area, and do not limit yourself. Last year I spoke to graduate students at my alma mater. Many of them were planning for careers in academia or the nonprofit sector. I reminded those eyeing nonprofit jobs that there are for-profit companies out there who have a socially-minded philosophy that is similar to what can be found at a nonprofit. Before starting my consulting business, I worked at a small grocery chain that had a goal of giving at least 10% back to the community. They also offered a volunteer benefit for employees and other programs that were focused on giving back. In doing your research on companies, look for such opportunities to expand the pool of places you can see yourself working.
Connect with your target companies on social media. Some companies have even set up specific profiles for job seekers. This is a good way to find out about new openings that may not be posted on major job search sites.
Here's an inside tip about reaching out to the companies you want to work at: do not call their HR department in the hopes that it will make your application stand out. As an HR person, I can tell you that it's not that we do not want to talk to every applicant, but HR is often inundated with calls to the point that it is impossible to get back to everyone. For job seekers, it can be discouraging to send in an application or resume and then hear nothing. Even though HR may not be the right place to go to make a personal connection when you first submit an application, there are ways to reach out effectively.
Focus on your network. Do you already know someone at the company? If so, they may be a good resource to put in a good word for you or to introduce you to someone who has power over hiring decisions. LinkedIn can be an excellent tool for seeing who you may already know at a company or if one of your connections may be able to introduce you to someone who works there. As I mentioned earlier, some companies connect with job seekers through social media, so this can be another way to network with people in a way that could bring positive attention to your application.
Finally, get involved in your community. This is an excellent way to connect with people who may turn out to be powerful connections when it comes to finding a job. In my own experience, the best networking happens at events where the main objective is not marketing yourself. This may be volunteering for a beach clean up, working on a political campaign or getting involved with your favorite nonprofit.
What you have heard about job posting sites is true: companies do not post all their jobs in such places. Posting on some of the bigger sites can run several hundred dollars each. For many businesses, this means they may be choosy about which jobs they pay to post. When I used to work on hiring, I would only post harder to fill jobs on the big sites. Job sites can also take a lot of time to wade through. Even when employing filters and narrowing search criteria, it can be a challenge to find jobs that are a good fit. This is especially true if you live in a major metropolitan area, where the list of open jobs may be really long.
While it is good to keep an eye on the major sites and give them a weekly scan, a better strategy is to figure out what kind of job you want and to then find the places offering positions that are a good match.
One of the most common HR-related requests I get from friends is to review their resume. Even in the age of LinkedIn and online portfolios, there are still countless articles about how a great resume can be your ticket to success. There are no magic tricks that can guarantee your resume will land you your dream job, but there are things you can do to keep your resume from automatically being tossed in the reject pile. After years of reviewing thousands of resumes, here are my tips for creating a clean, easy-to-read resume that showcases your experience and qualifications.
I am once and for all taking the HR Hammer to the objective section. If you have an objective section lingering at the top of your resume, I'll give you a moment to go delete it right now. Most resume objectives are the same, and it is some variation on "To find a job that challenges me and where I can be a positive member of a dynamic team." A company already knows you are trying to find a good job, so there is no reason to waste valuable resume real estate space with an objective. You want to showcase your skills and experience rather than write a generic statement that is similar to what many other job seekers have at the top of their resume.
Now that we have the objective out of the way, let's tackle the question of length. It used to be that one page was the generally accepted length of the resume. This was in the days before online applications and emailing in a resume. These days, it is not very common to mail in a resume. Length becomes less important when a recruiter or hiring manager is scrolling through resumes on a screen rather than flipping pages. This does not mean you should send pages and pages to a prospective employer, but it is perfectly acceptable to fill two pages. Unless you are applying for an academic job or a highly specialized position, I would not recommend going much longer than that.
It is important that your resume is easy to read because your resume usually only gets a minute or so to make a strong enough impression to warrant a closer read by a recruiter or hiring manager. Have clearly labeled sections (e.g. work experience, education) and create bullet points rather than lengthy paragraphs.
The star of your resume should be your work experience. I prefer to see work experience listed chronologically by job rather than sectioned out by skill. If you want to showcase some skills relevant to the job, include a short section at the top with a few sentences summarizing your experience. For those who are new to the workforce, include any volunteer experience or school activities as part of your work experience if you have not worked before or have only had one job.
Do not forget to include education and any relevant training at the bottom. Avoid listing every single training you have attended, but instead focus on including things relevant to the job.
When I see this on a resume, I know that a job seeker has experience using the software.
Focus on ways that you used a skill in a previous job that is relevant to how the skill will be used in the job you are applying for. This is especially useful if you are jumping careers and want to show how your skills from other jobs will be applicable to a new career.
Collaborated with team members to build capacity in an impactful manner that increased optics, learnings and upward velocity.
Managed recruitment and training of 100 new employees for a new store location; implemented new hire training programs that reduced turnover by 10% from the previous store opening.
Do not send out your resume without having at least one other person proofread it. I have been in situations where I was deciding between two high-level candidates with similar experience. There have been times where it has come down to spelling and grammar mistakes. If a candidate does not make the effort to make sure they are sending me a clean resume, why should I hire them to be a manager?
Remember that your resume is often the first impression you make with a potential employer. Be honest about your experience. Take the time to put your best effort forward. Write cleanly and clearly, demonstrate your skills and qualifications through your experience, and make sure it is free from errors.


IT was the second shock of the evening and it rocked the building. The first was the resignation of Fabio Capello as England manager. That caught everyone on the hop.
But we rallied instantly and ripped apart the Front Page. The previous splash – a story about more deep cuts at Nitherley Borough Council – was relegated to Page 7 to allow Capello's face to glare gloomily beneath a banner headline that said CAPELLO OUT: REDKNAPP IN?
The page was finished for 10.30pm. We sat drinking coffee and watching the press reviews on Sky News, unaware that an even greater quake was about to shake us from our chairs and dislodge ceiling tiles.
BRITAIN is braced for up to eight inches of snow today as temperatures fall to -15C.
I glance out of the window. It's raining softly here in the North-East and feels quite mild. I might do a spot of gardening. But the second paragraph leaves me scratching my head.
It will be so cold that even the salt spread by gritters may not work.
A strange use of words. Does salt work? Can it be broken or malfunction? Would you return a packet to the supermarket and say: "I'm sorry – but this salt doesn't work"? Perhaps the Leek Man is right. They're on another planet at the Daily Express. A very cold one. Where the salt doesn't work.
BIG Bernard is sifting through emails on the newsdesk. He suddenly recoils in alarm.
Thomas Crapper: Contrary to widespread misconceptions, Crapper did not invent the flush toilet. He did, however, do much to increase the popularity of the toilet, and developed some important related inventions, such as the ballcock.
It has often been claimed in popular culture that the slang term for human bodily waste, "crap", originated with Thomas Crapper because of his association with lavatories. The most common version of this story is that American servicemen stationed in England during World War I saw his name on cisterns and used it as army slang, i.e., "I'm going to the crapper". The word crap is actually of Middle English origin.
Which just goes to prove something or other. But I'm not sure what.


The first few years of life can be the most enjoyable and yet the most taxing. In the first two years of life, the average child experiences 8-10 colds per year. This is an average, meaning some kids are sick more often, and some kids are sick less often. Common risk factors include daycare, older siblings, playgroups and maybe having a pediatrician for a parent.
healthychildren.org: Allergies or a Cold?


Shoot the Movig targets fast display of both the Directios I move Advace of level ad results of highest hotspots.
The cross hairs up and down by moving the mouse to move. Fire with the left cross the Z button triggered, use the X button with the correct cross-hairs.
All that I is your work Iside the party started. It is up to you to save them all - by Usig your super cool Pait gu of course!
United States Itelligece an illegal discovered dock busiess o Tradig. to keep the army, able to stop them. You gotta trimmers all these display stay alive this mission completed. But beware, the dirty armies are Dagerous ad I umbers are great.
Kill as Schappies as possible Withi may deadline.
Press the goals ad flying objects such as hotspots as possible before your time of RUS out can to collect! But to beat the Nope! Press the alarm to stop the timer.
Use your ship to destroy all evil gree blobs.
A Thrillig ad fast shoot em up game where you shoot any target o, who moved against him has a Chace on click to shoot! Actio fast music I get quickly the mood!
In the ten rounds of shotgun chaos you can choose to shoot clay pigeons, chickens and beer cans. happy hunting!
Get off my roof is a game where you use the control of an old war veteran improvised projectile and melee weapons to him flocks of pigeons to get his roof! Remove the pigeons be stubborn no walk in the Park, because these pigeons are numerous, and you stop which makes awesome used poop!
A very cool scrolling space shooter game.
Virtual Police is an on-rails shooter (much like Virtu Cop).
A Topdow actio zombie shooter game!
Fit your soldiers with Thousads of Weapos, armor ad upgrades packed I this epic actio - shooter.
Stop of the Nocra army Reachig place Earth I this epic top Dow-shooter.
colorful bubble shooter game with pleasant music and bonuses!
Page Scrollig Uderwater shooter with RPG elements.
Move that I shoot this first person shooter as Lego-Ma-display the Eemies appear.
StarGazer is a simple but, although very difficult space shooter game.
I fresh arcade Fuky actio shooter game ' ultimate crab battle' Fiish of this huge Ed-chef.
Ru a Madma, minimum time, cops, I need this game fast actio shooter!
O take an ew old arcade shooters.
Chapter 5 of the 3D actio shooter game series here comes '2112 staff'.
Blow your Eemies from the sky I this Itese-page Scrollig shooter.
Awesome stick figure shooter with number Weapos ad perhaps Ulimited Eemies.
A fast-paced ad fratic arcade shooter!
Trimmers the other roommate I a o-holds ingot Watergu fight with this first-person shooter.
Great artwork I this Sidescrollig shooter with a book by upgrade optios.
Choose this Sidescroller shooter from 3 characters I. Upgrade display Maage of your ship parts.
A page Scrollig-shooter with Outladish art!
Yay it's St. Patrick of day! Shoot dozens of goblins, access all golden bags and find the pot of gold in the physics puzzle game ' Shamrock shooter'!
The goal of this game is simple, kill as many schnappies as possible within the timelimit. You will receive 4 extra seconds for 10 dead schnappies. Killing many schnappies will keep you playing. However, the more schnappies you kill, the faster they run.
Fight your way through the canyons taking out the enemy on the way down. Look out for upgrades.
Shoot the apple off your friends head, but be careful not to hurt him! If you want to hurt him?
Shoot the Apple your friends head, but be sure to hurt him! Unless you want to hurt him?
Shoot the monster as you move through real life. Open bust their heads!
Gun down the enemy troops, as your base attack!
A shooting and decision making game made footage life. Sweet!
Apple's head of zombies in this game Archer to shoot! or shoot him in the eye! Depending on you find funny!
shoot the passing chickens. try to blow their heads off for maximum points. leave no escape!
I walk this ad shoot all boys, I got on the way.
A Shootig ad OU Makig game is made to live footage. Sweet!


text:
package com.xmlcalabash.extensions;

import com.xmlcalabash.core.XMLCalabash;
import com.xmlcalabash.core.XProcConstants;
import com.xmlcalabash.core.XProcException;
import com.xmlcalabash.core.XProcRuntime;
import com.xmlcalabash.io.ReadablePipe;
import com.xmlcalabash.io.WritablePipe;
import com.xmlcalabash.library.DefaultStep;
import com.xmlcalabash.runtime.XAtomicStep;
import com.xmlcalabash.util.Base64;
import com.xmlcalabash.util.TreeWriter;
import com.xmlcalabash.util.XProcURIResolver;
import net.sf.saxon.s9api.QName;
import net.sf.saxon.s9api.SaxonApiException;
import net.sf.saxon.s9api.XdmNode;
import org.slf4j.Logger;
import org.slf4j.LoggerFactory;
import org.stathissideris.ascii2image.core.ConversionOptions;
import org.stathissideris.ascii2image.graphics.BitmapRenderer;
import org.stathissideris.ascii2image.graphics.Diagram;
import org.stathissideris.ascii2image.text.TextGrid;
import org.xml.sax.InputSource;

import javax.imageio.ImageIO;
import javax.xml.transform.Source;
import javax.xml.transform.TransformerException;
import javax.xml.transform.URIResolver;
import javax.xml.transform.sax.SAXSource;
import java.awt.image.RenderedImage;
import java.io.ByteArrayOutputStream;
import java.io.InputStream;
import java.net.URI;
import java.net.URISyntaxException;
import java.net.URL;
import java.util.ArrayList;

/**
 * Created by IntelliJ IDEA.
 * User: ndw
 * Date: Oct 8, 2008
 * Time: 7:44:07 AM
 * To change this template use File | Settings | File Templates.
 */

@XMLCalabash(
        name = "cx:ditaa",
        type = "{http://xmlcalabash.com/ns/extensions}ditaa")

public class DiTAA extends DefaultStep {
    private static final QName _shadows = new QName("", "shadows");
    private static final QName _antialias = new QName("", "antialias");
    private static final QName _corners = new QName("", "corners");
    private static final QName _separation = new QName("", "separation");
    private static final QName _scale = new QName("", "scale");
    private static final QName _html = new QName("", "html");
    private static final QName h_img = new QName("", "http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml", "img");
    private static final QName _src = new QName("", "src");
    private static final String library_xpl = "http://xmlcalabash.com/extension/steps/ditaa.xpl";
    private static final String library_uri = "/com/xmlcalabash/extensions/ditaa/library.xpl";

    private ReadablePipe source = null;
    private WritablePipe result = null;
    private ConversionOptions options = null;

    /**
     * Creates a new instance of Identity
     * @param runtime The XProc runtime
     * @param step The atomic step
     */
    public DiTAA(XProcRuntime runtime, XAtomicStep step) {
        super(runtime, step);
    }

    public void setInput(String port, ReadablePipe pipe) {
        source = pipe;
    }

    public void setOutput(String port, WritablePipe pipe) {
        result = pipe;
    }

    public void reset() {
        source.resetReader();
        result.resetWriter();
    }

    public void run() throws SaxonApiException {
        super.run();

        String base64 = null;
        boolean html = false;

        try {
            options = new ConversionOptions();

            boolean shadows = getOption(_shadows, true);
            boolean antialias = getOption(_antialias, true);
            boolean roundedCorners = "rounded".equals(getOption(_corners, "rounded"));
            boolean separation = getOption(_separation, true);
            html = getOption(_html, false);

            String scaleStr = getOption(_scale, (String) null);
            if (scaleStr != null) {
                float scale = Float.parseFloat(scaleStr);
                options.renderingOptions.setScale(scale);
            }

            options.processingOptions.setCharacterEncoding("utf-8");
            options.renderingOptions.setDropShadows(shadows);
            options.processingOptions.setAllCornersAreRound(roundedCorners);
            options.processingOptions.setPerformSeparationOfCommonEdges(separation);
            options.renderingOptions.setAntialias(antialias);

            TextGrid grid = new TextGrid();
            if(options.processingOptions.getCustomShapes() != null){
                grid.addToMarkupTags(options.processingOptions.getCustomShapes().keySet());
            }

            XdmNode doc = source.read();
            String text = doc.getStringValue();

            ArrayList<StringBuffer> lines = new ArrayList<StringBuffer>();
            String[] linesArray = text.split("\n");
            for (int i = 0; i  < linesArray.length; i++) {
                lines.add(new StringBuffer(linesArray[i]));
            }
            grid.initialiseWithLines(lines, options.processingOptions);
            Diagram diagram = new Diagram(grid, options);
            RenderedImage image = new BitmapRenderer().renderToImage(diagram, options.renderingOptions);

            ByteArrayOutputStream baos = new ByteArrayOutputStream();
            ImageIO.write(image, "png", baos);
            base64 = Base64.encodeBytes(baos.toByteArray(), 0, baos.size());
        } catch (Exception e) {
            throw new XProcException(e);
        }

        TreeWriter tree = new TreeWriter(runtime);
        tree.startDocument(step.getNode().getBaseURI());

        if (html) {
            tree.addStartElement(h_img);
            tree.addAttribute(_src, "data:image/png;base64," + base64);
            tree.startContent();
            tree.addEndElement();
        } else {
            tree.addStartElement(XProcConstants.c_data);
            tree.startContent();
            tree.addText("data:image/png;base64," + base64);
            tree.addEndElement();
        }

        tree.endDocument();
        result.write(tree.getResult());
    }

    public static void configureStep(XProcRuntime runtime) {
        XProcURIResolver resolver = runtime.getResolver();
        URIResolver uriResolver = resolver.getUnderlyingURIResolver();
        URIResolver myResolver = new StepResolver(uriResolver);
        resolver.setUnderlyingURIResolver(myResolver);
    }

    private static class StepResolver implements URIResolver {
        Logger logger = LoggerFactory.getLogger(DiTAA.class);
        URIResolver nextResolver = null;

        public StepResolver(URIResolver next) {
            nextResolver = next;
        }

        @Override
        public Source resolve(String href, String base) throws TransformerException {
            try {
                URI baseURI = new URI(base);
                URI xpl = baseURI.resolve(href);
                if (library_xpl.equals(xpl.toASCIIString())) {
                    URL url = DiTAA.class.getResource(library_uri);
                    logger.debug("Reading library.xpl for cx:ditaa from " + url);
                    InputStream s = DiTAA.class.getResourceAsStream(library_uri);
                    if (s != null) {
                        SAXSource source = new SAXSource(new InputSource(s));
                        return source;
                    } else {
                        logger.info("Failed to read " + library_uri + " for cx:ditaa");
                    }
                }
            } catch (URISyntaxException e) {
                // nevermind
            }

            if (nextResolver != null) {
                return nextResolver.resolve(href, base);
            } else {
                return null;
            }
        }
    }
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Affutage er et underlag eller monteringsstativ til våben. Betegnelsen kan benyttes om et kanonunderlag eller morterstativ, men benyttes også om et stativ til fast montage af let eller tungt maskingevær på køretøjer eller blot stående på jorden eller på et skib. Fordelen er bedre kontrol over våbnet under skydning og dermed større skudvidde. Der findes affutager til montering af 2, 3 eller 4 ens maskingeværer, såkaldte tvillinge- , trillinge- og firlingeaffutager, som kan være manuelt eller maskinelt rettede. Fordelen her er, at en enkelt skytte kan yde større ildkraft, da aftrækkermekanismerne betjenes synkront. Sådanne affuteringer anvendes hovedsageligt til luftværnsvåben.

Betegnelsen lavet (som fx kanonlavet), som også ses, er etymologisk beslægtet med affutage (gennem tysk fra fransk l'affût).

Affutager

Våben

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


This production by Handmade Performance was presented on 20 June 1998, at the University of Toronto, as part of a day-long performance of the complete York Cycle of medieval religious plays produced by the Poculi Ludique Societas and the Records of Early English Drama. The Cycle was in part an experiment in re-creation, examining the viability of performing all forty-seven plays in one day–as well as an experiment in the theatrical limits and potential of the pageant wagon. It was also an increasingly rare example of outdoor community theatre, drawing from a broad range of local, national and international performance groups, playing to large and enthusiastic audiences. Productions ranged from the concerted effort to re-create the original circumstances of production, to the radical re-reinterpretation that re-cast the anachronism and topicality of the original in a contemporary idiom.
The Last Judgement was the final play, performed at and after dark. Like all other plays, it was performed four times in quick succession, rolling the wagon between venues (or 'stations').
A special volume of the journal Early Theatre: A Journal Associated with the Records of Early English Drama, was devoted to the production of the complete York Cycle produced in 1998. See 'Special Volume: The York Cycle Then and Now,' in Early Theatre (Volume 3, 2000), published by McMaster University Press. Included was an article on Handmade Performance's version of 'The Last Judgement,' which outlines the mandate of the group, and the specific goals of this production.
With indispensable assistance from Dave Woodcroft and his crew of strong-arms, who rolled the wagon, hoisted the lift, and physically created Hell Mouth at four stations. It is important to note that, in the spirit of the community pageant, they did all this on their way to a friend's stag party.
Thanks also to everyone on the PLS York Production Committee and involved with technical production was patient as well as knowledgeable. Among that group, special thanks to Kimberley M. Yates and Chester N. Scoville for a full-prepared actor-friendly text, Chris Warrilow for the working lift, Luella Massey and Linda Phillips for technical advice, and David Klausner for the open and forthright discussion of interpretation.


text:
Dr. Aziza Eldarrat
Prof. Eldarrat holds her PhD degree from Leeds Dental Institute, University of Leeds, UK and received her MSc degree from Al-Arab Medical University and her BDS degree from Garyounis University in Libya. She is the winner of many international awards such as Peter Wilson Prize and Gold Medal award of Excellence in Research from University of Leeds in the UK; Best Research Project Award of FDI Annual World Dental Congress, Mexico; Research Grant Award from Emirates Foundation for Research, Abu Dhabi, UAE. Prof. Eldarrat's academic teaching experience extends over 15 years, teaching at both undergraduation and postgraduation levels, and her clinical experience over 30 years. Before joining the USTF, Prof. Eldarrat was the head of the research, head of the restorative dentistry and the director of endodontic diploma programme at MBHDUC, Dubai, UAE. Prof. Eldarrat has been actively involved in many research areas, such as sealing ability of obturation materials; diabetes mellitus; ac-impedance spectroscopy of human dentine and the dental applications of ultrasound. Prof. Eldarrat was a co-supervisor of PhD degree, the PhD degree was an international collaboration with College of Dentistry, University Sains Malaysia, Malaysia. Prof. Eldarrat published book Chapter in Research on Diabetes book, many research articles in international dental journals and presented many research papers in national and international dental conferences. Prof. Eldarrat is a member of several scientific dental societies and a reviewer for many dental journals.
University: Leeds University, Leeds, UK
Date of Obtaining degree: 2003
Major: Dentistry
Minor:
Title: An in-vitro study of human dentine using ac-impedance spectroscopy
University: Al Arab University, Benghazi, Libya
Country: Libya
Major: Pharmacology
University: Benghazi, Libya
• MFDRCSI-Part 1, Dublin, Ireland (2013)
Ph.D., Electrical Engineering, Cairo University, Egypt, 2010
Prof. Aziza EldarratProfessor of Restorative and Endodontics
Office Extension: 092023513
Email: a.eldarat@ustf.ac.ae