text:
Everton close to signing low-cost pair of wingers
Townsend and Gray are being tipped to join the Blues, but who will be leaving?
By Calvin@Mr_Faded_Glory Jul 19, 2021, 8:00am BST
Share All sharing options for: Everton close to signing low-cost pair of wingers
Demarai Gray tackles Andros Townsend
Photo by Ian Walton/Getty Images
Just a day after reports that Everton are close to making Asmir Begovic their first signing of the Rafa Benitez era, it appears the Blues are also going to add a pair of wingers at a relatively budget price as well.
Andros Townsend is currently a free agent after the expiry of his five year contract at Crystal Palace, with the London side preferring to let him walk as they retool after the departure of Ray Hodgson and the arrival of new manager Patrick Vieira. The 30-year-old has previously played for Benitez while the Spaniard was in charge at Newcastle United.
Demarai Gray left Leicester City in January 2021 to join Bayer 04 Leverkusen on a 18-month contract, but the move to Germany has not quite worked out for him and he is looking for a return to England. The 25-year-old has been linked with the Blues in the past as well but looks like it'll be a relatively cheap transfer at just £1.5m.
Everton closing in on deals for wingers Demarai Gray (£1.5m from Bayer Leverkusen) and Andros Townsend (free transfer).
— paul joyce (@_pauljoyce) July 18, 2021
Multiple media sources are now reporting on the transfer deals coming up, and an interesting thing common in the contracts of all Begovic, Townsend and Gray is that they apparently all include a one-year option on them. The former two will be joining on a one-year contract with an option for another year, while the latter will be coming in on a two-year deal with the option for the additional year. This appears to be a change from earlier on in Marcel Brands regime when players were being signed to longer-term contracts with no provisions.
Townsend just turned 30 and is going to be on a prove-it contract where he'll have one season to show that he can consistently provide goal contributions from the right wing, where he has provided at least 0.25 xG+xA per 90 min when he plays over 2,000 minutes in a season.
Townsend at Palace, last five seasons
Andros Townsend to Everton?
On the surface, I can certainly understand why this signing would seem (a) uninspired and (b) like a step back.
But, Townsend is actually pretty ok/good, and would, presumably, offer a decently good wide option for relatively cheap. Not too bad. pic.twitter.com/ipyAylxqHL
— Hugh Klein (@macro_football) July 17, 2021
While not a flashy speedster of the Leon Bailey or Hirving Lozano variety, Townsend could provide steady dependability as well as dead-ball delivery for the Blues from the right side especially whenever James Rodriguez is out injured or when Alex Iwobi has been his usual uninspired self.
If Andros Townsend to Everton is really happening, here's his attacking stats comparisons with James Rodriguez and Alex Iwobi, last season only.
(Data via @UnderstatXG)#EFC pic.twitter.com/COuFgLtelB
— Royal Blue Mersey (@RBMersey) July 18, 2021
It does appear that of the limited transfer funds Rafa Benitez will be headed towards upgrading the right back, attacking midfielder and possibly centrehalf positions, and the Blues are being linked with making a move for former Leicester City winger Demarai Gray, who primarily plays out on the left where he tends to cut in on his right foot, but is also capable of playing on the right wing too.
Gray is now 25 and is a classic case of unproven potential having picked up 13 goals and 17 assists in 169 appearances for the Foxes. At Leverkusen he only played two full 90s, being brought on as an impact substitute about half the time and coming off at the break the other games. He managed one goal and two assists in ten games in the Bundesliga last season.
Gray at Leicester and Leverkusen
The small sample size for last season does skew how his radar looks, especially compared to James and Iwobi.
Here is Demarai Gray last season (note small sample size) compared to James Rodriguez and Alex Iwobi.
(Data via @UnderstatXG )#EFC pic.twitter.com/gb2iBoOo0Z
Basically Everton are bringing in cheaper players to fill out the squad who will provide about the same level of output as Iwobi. With Richarlison expected to miss parts of the beginning of the season after returning from the Olympic Games, having both on hand will help strengthen the team especially if Bernard and possibly Iwobi depart this summer.


text:
« Screen door cat
Another one bites the dust »
Parting the Red Sea
PLoS ONE (Public Library of Science) is an open-access journal with an unusual mission:
Too often a journal's decision to publish a paper is dominated by what the Editor/s think is interesting and will gain greater readership — both of which are subjective judgments and lead to decisions which are frustrating and delay the publication of your work. PLoS ONE will rigorously peer-review your submissions and publish all papers that are judged to be technically sound.
In practice, what this means is that if the reviewers or editors can't find anything technically wrong with the paper, they'll publish it, even if the results are completely trivial or irrelevant to what's going on in the rest of science. And, it seems, even the "rigorous peer review" sometimes fails, as in the case of the putative "missing link" Darwinius, which was rushed to print, apparently without much rigor on the part of reviewers. It proved to be controversial and almost certainly not a link between the two major branches of primates.
I go back and forth on whether this journal is needed, or useful. Sometimes data that are good but not earthshaking need a home. On the other hand, there are plenty of second- to fifth-rate journals that will publish nearly anything, including the kind of paper that PLoS ONE handles, so why do we need another one? Many scientists, I think, regard PLoS ONE as a place to give extra cachet to those almost-unpublishable papers. Rather than putting them in Nutting's Bird Journal, we can put them in PLoS ONE and hope that some of the glitter of the other PLoS journals, which publish much better stuff, rubs off.
PLoS ONE's reputation was, however, tarnished by its publication of the Darwinius paper, implying that even its vaunted "rigor" was negotiable if the discovery was sufficiently buzz-worthy. And now that reputation has slipped a huge notch. For, as many of you know (see the post at Pharyngula), the journal has just published a paper modeling how the Red Sea might have parted to allow the Jews to leave Egypt.
The paper, "Dynamics of wind setdown at Suez and the eastern Nile Delta" is by Carl Drews and Weiquing Han from the University of Colorado at Boulder. It's long, technical, and boring, but the upshot is that high winds, blowing for a sufficiently long period, could have driven shallow waters in the Nile delta back, exposing a reef that was about 2 meters underwater. The exposure could have lasted long enough to permit a "mixed group of people" (aka Israelites) to cross a temporary land bridge. Then, when the winds abated, the waters would rejoin, presumably drowning anyone in pursuit. The paper uses mathematical modeling, hydrology and satellite mapping to show that the exposure of mud flats could have occurred in two locations with 100 km/hr winds.
This is a not-so-transparent attempt to give plausibility to the story from Exodus 14 of Moses parting the waters. But why on earth would two scientists want to show that one part of a fictitious story is plausible? Well, check out author Carl Drews's website, Christianity and Evolution. Although Drews is a theistic evolutionist who doesn't like intelligent design, he's also a devout Christian who spends a lot of time trying to reconcile science with the Bible. He even has a credo, "What I believe", which includes this:
I believe that the Holy Bible is the true word of God. I believe everything that the Bible says about itself. The Bible is divinely inspired and divinely passed through history over thousands of years. The witness of the Bible is essential for understanding our faith, and for living out our lives in service to Jesus Christ. The Word of God is our Rock, the foundation upon which our Christian faith is based.
I believe that the Bible never requires me to bear false witness about God's creation. [Drews's emphasis]
I reject the idea that evolution and Christianity are always and must be in opposition to each other. I reject the notion that if the scientific theory of evolution is true, then Christianity must be false. I reject the idea that people who accept evolution must be atheists. I reject the idea that the scientific theory of evolution fundamentally denies the idea of God the Creator. I reject the idea that evolution and Christian faith are inevitably in conflict with each other and cannot be reconciled.
Next to these great beliefs, a biological theory seems pretty unimportant. That impression is correct. Do I "Believe in Evolution" like I believe in the Resurrection of Jesus Christ? Absolutely not! I accept the Theory of Evolution like I use the Quadratic Formula; they are both useful for a certain class of problems that I sometimes have to solve. I certainly do not place my eternal life and soul in the care of a scientific theory or a mathematical formula. I am no atheist. I place my entire being in the hands of God Almighty through his Son, Jesus Christ.
Do you sense here a motivation for the paper? Anyway, it's a ludicrous endeavor, and shame on PLoS ONE for publishing it. If that journal is in the business of publishing scientific tests of fictitious Bible stories, let's see some papers like these:
An investigation of whether any natural force could make the wheels simultaneously fall off the chariots of an entire army. After all, Exodus 14 says, "And it came to pass, that in the morning watch the LORD looked unto the host of the Egyptians through the pillar of fire and of the cloud, and troubled the host of the Egyptians, and took off their chariot wheels, that they drave them heavily. . "
A refutation of the idea that the wind posited by Drews and Han could have produced the scenario given in the Bible, which calls for waters rising above the reef on both sides: ". . and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left." After all, the diagram of Drews and Han shows no "wall" of water on either side, but waters lower than the "crossing" reef on both sides, but which gradually rise up with distance on one side and not the other—the scenario a strong wind would produce.
A scientific study of whether there is historical evidence for a mass exodus of Jews from Egypt to the Sinai around 1200 BC. Oh, wait—that's already been done. There isn't any evidence.
Given the lack of historical evidence for an Exodus, why is PLoS ONE in the business of publishing papers supporting its likelihood, especially when the scenario of Drews and Han doesn't correspond at all to the scenario described in the Old Testament? After all, if you're going to support a story, how can you justify picking those parts of the story that could have happened, and ignoring those that couldn't? What about those walls of water on either side of the Israelites?
This is a huge embarrassment for the journal. But I predict that, rather than apologizing for their bad judgment, the editors will—as they did for Darwinius—defend their actions. And that will open the floodgates for a whole host of Jebus-scientists to publish "technically sound" defenses of the Bible.
Don't miss Exodus 14 in The LOLcat Bible.
This entry was written by whyevolutionistrue and posted on September 23, 2010 at 6:27 am and filed under Articles, religion. Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post.	Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
John Hawks
It proved to be controversial and almost certainly not a link between the two major branches of primates.
It is strange that the "controversial" part isn't to be found in the research paper. It is also strange that those who criticize the reviewers persist in erring on this point without checking their facts, even after having been told.
Sloppy.
The Journal of Human Evolution has just published a paper by the same group that full-bore claims Darwinius has a haplorhine, in a possible transitional position. I don't accept this position, as there is equivocal evidence, but this paper directly makes the claim that was not made in the PLoS ONE paper.
Is this journal also discredited now? Were the reviewers careless? Or do you withhold judgment on these things when there's no media hoopla? Please elaborate.
Jonathan Badger
Yes, while I absolutely agree with Jerry on this shameful Red Sea drivel (which I hope gets retracted), I think the jury is clearly still out on Darwinius. Jerry is free to disagree with the placement of the fossil, but simply publishing a result that Jerry disagrees with is no tarnish.
Disclaimer: Among other things, I'm an academic editor of PLoS ONE, although I handled neither the Darwinius nor this Red Sea mauscript.
My plaint about the Darwinius stuff was that I didn't think the piece was properly reviewed, especially since the editors probably realized that it was gonna be a big p.r. splash. Maybe the phylogenetic placement will eventually turn out to be right, but there wasn't enough evidence at the time to support the authors' contentions. And a lot of people, including bloggers, saw big problems to begin with. I was curious why the reviewers didn't catch it. Yes, reviewers are sometimes biased, and sometimes don't do their job, but regardless—the "technical rigor" (in terms of a solid phylogenetic analysis that included fossil primates) wasn't there. I criticized the journal for the Darwinius piece, but didn't dismiss it entirely.
This time is more serious. This is not just a matter of reviewing, it's whether the subject is sufficiently serious to even merit a paper of this type. It's whether a story known to be fictitious should nevertheless be subject to serious scientific inquiry. Somebody at PLoS ONE fell down. And, unlike the Darwinius case, this piece (at least to me) tarnishes the journal in a major way.
By the way, I haven't singled out PLoS ONE uniquely here—I've been equally critical of other journals that have published bad stuff. I would say, though, that PLoS ONE has some major damage repair to do.
SteveF
I believe John Hawks was the PLoS editor for the Darwinius paper. Will be interesting to see him respond to your criticisms.
I won't defend the publication of this BS paper, but let's not disparage the entire journal. You already note that you don't think much about the journal, so this crap paper supports your mindset. However, I think the same attacks could be made about Science or Nature. Many papers are over-hyped (like Darwinius was), and crap papers, which demonstrate peer review is not foolproof, get published (cold fusion). PNAS has published insane papers but I do not recall that PNAS as a journal was trashed like PLoS ONE gets trashed.
I very much agree with Lorax on this. The comparison with PNAS, which publishes a range from very good to very bad, is excellent. So this was a crappy paper. It gets unwarranted publicity due to a few blogs jumping on it and then dies. If PZ and now Jerry hadn't bitten it would have just died unnoticed, the fate of many, perhaps most, more mainstream publications.
In defense of the PLoS model, in an era where research budgets are stretched, I would note that publishing in these journals is a bargain – somewhere around $1300 as I recall for as much color as you want – as compared to putting a paper with a lot of color figures into a more mainstream journal where costs can run to several times that. This can be an important factor for many people (especially those early in their careers) and was a part of the rationale in establishing these journals.
Nature, Science, Cell are at the top of the journal heap (at least in my field) and there is a natural tendency to believe their articles. However most people are not going to be publishing in those journals on a regular basis, and there are perfectly valid studies that need a home (the research has, after all been paid for, and if it's not published loses its value.) So it would seem incumbent upon the reader, as well as the reviewer, to evaluate the data presented. Such critical evaluation, after all, is a large part of what journal clubs are supposed to be teaching students. I have less of an issue with publishing rubbish of this sort (which I see an undesirable but inevitable, and in any case self correcting in the long term, side effect of the review process) than not providing an outlet for sound but perhaps unfashionable data (which in the long term may filter upwards.)
I tend to agree. There are far more bad editors and bad reviewers than there are bad journals.
tomh
SWH wrote:
If PZ and now Jerry hadn't bitten it would have just died unnoticed, the fate of many, perhaps most, more mainstream publications.
Since the story was featured on many mainstream TV news shows and in a wide variety of newspapers, I doubt that it would have died unnoticed, at least by the general public. And this general public gives the story credence because it has the veneer of "science" attached to it.
Yep, I heard about this from not from P.Z., but from the news. It's all over the place! Given that, I think it's appropriate to address it lest the authors say the paper has the approbation of the scientific community.
OK guys – I saw it here and on PZ's site. I didn't see it on the BBC or on CNN or my local – bible belt – newspaper. That doesn't mean it wasn't there – it just means that I didn't see it. I gave up watching TV news a long time ago because it's just so devoid of news in this part of the world. That being said I still think it's down to the reader to assess the data. Sadly expecting critical thinking of most journalists might be a losing proposition.
Notagod
When the journals fall to the same depravity as TV news, will your answer to that be to stop watching them as well.
At some point it is prudent to fight for quality.
This is like that similarly ridiculous paper in the Virology Journal a few weeks back about "Our Lord Jesus" curing a woman of influenza.
Mind you, if PLoS is really opening up its publication for the justification of fictional events, why stop at religious stories?
Finally I may have a venue to publish my controversial paper "On the biomechanics of equine assisted egg reconstruction". This paper will be the first positive proof of Ricky Gervais' hypothesis on the inadvisability of using all the Kings horses and all the Kings men to put Humpty Dumpty together again. As Gervais suggested: "I don't know why they used horses in the first place. If I was asked to come up with the perfect egg crushing device, it would be a hoof!"
My first reaction was that it was some kind of bad-taste joke. When, thanks to PZ, it became clear what it was and since I had derived small pleasure from PLoS, I was happy to unsubscribe.
How do you subscribe to an open-access journal? I hope they don't make you pay too much 😉
Ben Goren
For that matter, I'd like to see scientific evidence that a putrid corpse (such as Lazarus's) can be reanimated; or historical evidence of a zombie invasion of Jerusalem in the early part of the first century (as reported to have happened the moment Jesus gave up the ghost); or scientific evidence that, long after having been buried after execution by crucifixion, a human being is capable of inviting somebody to fondle his intestines through the gaping wound in his side (as Jesus asked Thomas to do).
Or, while we're on the subject of Exodus, that plants can talk if they're on fire, and whether or not the instructions they give for turning a magic wand into a snake really work. And are the wands themselves capable of speech when they assume their snake form? I don't think that was adequately addressed in the original source.
What would really interest me — but I'm sure PLoS wouldn't publish — is what can drive an otherwise-rational adult to not only think that the zombie story of the Gospels is true, but that it's good to be a zombie yourself. After all, that's the point of the whole thing: eat the zombie flesh masquerading as stale bread, and on Judgement Day™ your own rotted corpse will be amongst the rest of the dead who shall be raised incorruptible after the trumpet sounds.
b&
Don't be silly, Ben — those examples are miracles.
Moses parting the Red Sea was a miracle too. Or so I thought. Apparently it was just science.
Rocket Stegosaurus
I believe you mean "metaphors."
Chayanov
They could start with something easy, like using sticks to breed striped goats.
MosesZD
Given the lack of historical evidence for an Exodus
There's quite a lot of evidence that is negative evidence. Mostly the fact that the Egyptians controlled the Sinai desert, Judah and Israel through their Canaanite proxies at that time. And the Egyptians had studded the entire region with forts, all one-day's walk from each other. Partially because they were at war with the Hittites during the time frame in which Exodus would have had to have happened and partially because the occupied the entire "promised land."
Further, there is a lot of evidence that the pyramids were built by farmers who'd work on them during the annual flooding of the fields. There is also a decided lack of evidence for any large-scale migration in the Sinai.
Further, the Exodus story conveniently ignores the Sea People that wrecked havoc during that period. They're the ones that destroyed a number of the Canaanite coastal city-states, helped topple the Hittites and established a number of cities in their population migrations.
All-in-all, if you address the region through the process of science (archeology) you find a decided lack of evidence for the events of Exodus. However, you do find a lot of evidence that it was impossible based on the biblical events described.
Wasn't Moses a ladies hairdresser? He parted the waves…
Tuco
Two shows a night, folks!
stvs
The archaeological evidence is conclusive: The Jews were never in Egypt, there was never an Exodus, and and no Jewish conquest of the land of Israel. In fact, the Jews were still polytheists when the first Passover was supposed to have happened. Jews and Christians wishing to pretend otherwise would do well to absorb the facts presented by Ze'ev Herzog, Israel Finkelstein, William Dever, and many others.
Because there was never an Exodus, an attempted physical proof of the parting of the Red Sea is beyond silly.
William Dever, a Christian biblical archaeologist who got into the business to prove the truth of the Biblical account, tells about how his research into the Bible's historicity led to his loss of Christian faith in "Losing Faith: Who Did and Who Didn't, How Scholarship Affects Scholars":
About 15 years ago, in my archaeological work I began to write about ancient Israel. Originally I wrote to frustrate the Biblical minimalists; then I became one of them, more or less. The call of Abraham, the Promise of the Land, the migration to Canaan, the descent into Egypt, the Exodus, Moses and monotheism, the Law at Sinai, divine kingship—archaeology throws all of these into great doubt. My long experience in Israel and my growing uncertainty about the historicity of the Bible meant that was the end for me.
Herzog's Ha'aretz article trying to introduce these facts as firmly but gently as possible to Israeli citizens is worth reading in full. Of course, Israelis and Christians are in deep denial—and no doubt always will be—about the fact that all major Old Testament stories are discredited by archaeological findings.
Deconstructing the walls of Jericho
Ha'aretz, Friday, October 29, 1999
This is what archaeologists have learned from their excavations in the Land of Israel: the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom. And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the God of Israel, Jehovah, had a female consort and that the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai.Most of those who are engaged in scientific work in the interlocking spheres of the Bible, archaeology and the history of the Jewish people – and who once went into the field looking for proof to corroborate the Bible story – now agree that the historic events relating to the stages of the Jewish people's emergence are radically different from what that story tells. …
I need to see a paper published on how goat muscle tissue can miraculously regenerate after being eaten if their bones are tied up inside their skins overnight. This journal may help revitalize the religion of the Norse!
yokohamamama
Weird–is there something going around? I just read this over at Pleiotropy:
"Can you imagine what would happen in the creationist community if creationists could get their papers published in a scientific journal without peer-review? I can. There would be much rejoicing, I think the correct term is. And now they can, in WebmedCentral.
WebmedCentral is post publication peer review: the papers are first published and then reviewed online as readers can add their comments. I am not kidding." (Bjorn Ostman at Pleiotropy)
Post publication peer review, huh? Somehow that doesn't quite seem like a great idea (isn't that what blogs are for?).
This isn't really a problem and as you say it's pretty much the equivalent of a blog post. Creationists have never been prevented by peer review from airing real results – in extreme circumstances they can always publish their 'findings' in book form (as the Discovery Institute tends to do).
This is very disappointing. There is huge pressure on scientists & doctors to publish from what djunior doctors tell me, & there are plenty of journals who are willing to publish case studies because it is a whole lot easier from the ethics point of view than a long & complicated process if you want to study a group of patients. No one reads half this stuff – but if they get it published they can wave it about. What concerns me is publishing propaganda in what ought to be a serious journal. I have no problem with small increments of knowledge getting into print, what might seem trivial to one person, if it reveals something new that we did not know before. PLOS ONE had begun to get noticed with regular articles featuring in news items. They seem to have plumbed the shallows here…
occamseraser
The Red Sea paper is a stinker, and PLoS ONE should be ashamed. They should be similarly mortified by the medical woo BS they've published on acupuncture (see Orac's blog). As an occasional editor of papers for P1, Hawks' comments come off a tad defensive…
The Gingerich et al. reply in JHE(which Hurum just sent unsolicited and unfinished to a huge email list, which lacks page numbers for the quotes from the Wiliams et al paper) makes some valid points in response to the criticisms by Williams et al. (JHE) and Seiffert et al. (Nature). But their new minimalistic cladistic analysis includes no other fossils and just one strepsirrhine primate (Lemur catta). Add a living mouse lemur, a fossil adapid and the primitive anthropoid Aegyptopithecus (and perhaps an omomyoid OTU) — and Paup it again. In other wods, let the fossil record inform this phylogenetic debate.
A couple of little problems:
As states above, the Egyptians controlled Sinai. Wouldn't they have retrieved their "property"?
There have been many searches for evidence of the "Israelites' sojourn in the wilderness [Sinai]" and no evidence has been found. The scientific conclusion has been drawn: No Israelite exodus from Egypt to Palestine.
If the F-ing wind is enough to blow the water away to a depth of 2m, do you think it might make walking across many miles of exposed sea bed just a little difficult for a large party of people including women, children, old folks, baggage, pack animals? Think: Hurricane force winds, folks; storm surge.
Sheesh!
Eric MacDonald
Absolutely, this is the really bizarre part of the story. No one of any competence now takes the story of the patriarchs or the story of the exodus seriously. So why try to show that there is a plausible explanation for the crossing of the reed sea, the Red Sea, or the Nile delta? Crazy.
Ray Moscow
I think the point of the Red Sea crossing story was that it was impossible, except for God's intervention. God delivers the Israelites by doing the impossible.
That's why it's just a story.
Trying to show that it was actually possible and compatible with scientific principles of course jars with the story, both by diluting the details into something not very impressive and by just missing the point. If it's natural, then "God" is not necessary.
Badger3k
This is basically what happened in the in the past – some people tried to justify their faith by turning miracles into real, natural phenomena. I can't remember the name of the movement, but it had pretty much the same results. It's continued through the years, leading to some nice papers such as the one that had Jesus walk on the Sea of Galilee as it was frozen in a freak storm and he just walked on the ice.
Bogie49
I am an atheist, but I have to defend PLOS One here. While the underlying aim of the article might have been trying to "prove" the story of Moses parting the Red Sea, there is still something useful in attempting to find historical and physical evidence for how legends and myths got started. Many civilizations have flood myths, and there are several instances of mass flooding and tsunamis that probably turned into these myths over time. But the proof of real floods don't mean that Noah's Ark is a true story. Likewise, the possibility of certain wind and geological formations causing a brief reveal of dry land is far from proving the story of Moses. Drews only mentions Moses once, and that's in the abstract. The editors do not let a religious theory be expressed. I think the outrage expressed here is piling on.
Dammit…I just completed a writing project and the very last reference is from PLoS One.
That's gotta go.
Don't want the entire project to be tainted. It's like a big old turd in the punch bowl.
Juha Savolainen
There is a sense in which fundamentalists of all stripes who wish to be scientifically credible are obliged to show that their beliefs are in conformity with our best scientific understanding. So far,so good,in fact. But after that, it is all downhill, as you correctly point out: they are always engaged in cherry-picking, just choosing those bits and pieces for which they think they can find a scientifically looking account. And for the rest, all those very embarrassing pieces? To hell with the rest!
But all that fundamentalist-wants-to-be-taken-seriously-sciencewise stuff in scientific magazines? What does all that apologetics has to do with scientific research agenda? Nothing!
OK, there are some cases where discussion of otherwise obscure or half-mythical Bronze Age documents – as evidence of what really happened, not as manifestations of the beliefs of the authors – is appropriate, namely, in the context of real Bronze Age events. Hence an archaeologist is well within her rights to study, say, ancient reflections of the very important Thera/Santorini eruption, but then the research agenda is the reconstruction of poorly known events and conditions of that era.
It has been very different with "biblical archaeology". Its best practioners arrived in Palestine with a spade in one hand and the Bible in the other hand and with some understanding of both taken separately. The worst have understanding of neither but a truly amazing capability for creating confusion.
It has to be said that there are people who have began their personal journeys in that intellectual mist, but learned to see more clearly, thanks to scientific studies. An interesting and, I think, rather representative case, of these more enlightened attitudes would be Robert Cargill who attacks in the links below the recent looney stories of Noah's Ark and tells his own story:
http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/misuse357930.shtml
http://blog.beliefnet.com/omeoflittlefaith/2010/09/robert-cargill-skeptic-sanctuary.html
Needless to say really, but Cargill's bildungs narrative makes sense only on the assumption that religious faith and science do contradict and conflict. Cargill has felt the pain and is not whining about it, quite the contrary. Why is it that some atheist cum secularist cum humanists want so desperately to "save" the religiously minded from such a Bildung when it is plainly obvious that learning to think scientifically and rationally inevitable creates such challenges?
Hempenstein
Is this the same Han as in Warda and?
No, it's a different Han.
Thanx. I guess this is proof that god has two Han's. But which is the right one?
John McCain says he saw one in the Grand Canyon, to my knowledge he didn't specify to which arm it had loosened itself from.
Thanks taking this up. I had a go at it on Secular Cafe yesterday — mostly because it pissed me off to see public resources go toward "testing" one of the old apologetic arguments about one of the less plausible Bible stories.
And, you can be sure that this "paper" will be touted at sites like this:
http://www.bibleprobe.com/exodus.htm
http://scienceandthebible.xanga.com/679728875/item/
Shuggy
It came on TV last night, illustrated, of course, not with diagrams with isobars etc, but with footage from the second Cecil B. DeMille film. The outcome is doubtless going to be that people who have never heard of PLoS ONE will now say, "You see, the Bible is TRUE!"
Kirth Gersen
"And that will open the floodgates for a whole host of Jebus-scientists to publish 'technically sound' defenses of the Bible."
Maybe that would be a good thing? Everyone could then read for themselves how absurd those defenses get, and we might get a Ben Franklin effect: "Some volumes against Deism fell into my hands. They were said to be the substance of sermons preached at Boyle's Lecture. It happened that they produced on me an effect precisely the reverse of what was intended by the writers; for the arguments of the Deists, which were cited in order to be refuted, appealed to me much more forcibly than the refutation itself. In a word, I soon became a thorough Deist" (Autobiography, p. 66).
The problem is that most people will lack the technical expertise to know when they are being BS'ed. All that matters to them is that "It was published in a scientific journal, so it must be true" – nevermind that when they hear science they don't like, such considerations go out the window. That kind of person is never the soul of consistency.
I just figured it out…
Gray beard, magic staff, supernatural powers….
Moses is Dumbledore!!!
steve oberski
So Moses is gay ?
You beat me to it.
I urge everyone with a beef to register, log-in, and rate this paper.
It takes some doing, and you have to sign up for at least one "alert", but it's worth it.
Complain here for fun. Complain THERE for effect.
Leonardo Martins
After properly reading the paper, please. Let's not game the system.
Josh Slocum
Oh, I'm very sure there's much quality information in the paper that needs to be carefully considered. It would egregious to dismiss out of hand a paper about a Biblical miracle as irrelevant and embarrassing.
Thank you for sharing your concern.
Velikovsky, updated by throwing in a little mathematical modeling.
This kind of speculation has been going on for years. At one level there is some potential value, ie, perhaps the occasional blowing back of the Nile delta was known in the folklore, so when the 'escape' story was being assembled, this was one more well know plot device to attach to it.
But it still doesn't help the Bible believers who actually think about it because it does not match the details of their story. So they either have to accept that there story got key stuff very wrong, or deny this as some other 'attack by science'
Rajesh Kher
I think the chariots or the axles were manufactured at one factory. A design and production flaw that could lead to wheels falling off in say most of the chariots. Remember there were no warranties and no recall.
Or planned obsolescence? Their warranties had expired the previous day?
I think the "floodgates" scenario misses two key points:
1) The majority of biblical literalists are inherently hostile naturalist explanations for Biblical miracles. They tend to regard such work as scientists trying to "explain away" the bible. See the comments on this interview with Doron Nof an oceanographer that has published research in the same vein (including providing an oceanographic "explanation" for the parting of the Red Sea) as the Drews and Han paper for many years: http://news.cnet.com/Did-the-Sea-of-Galilee-ice-over-2,000-years-ago/2008-11395_3-6060618.html
2) This is hardly a new thing. There is a long history of scientists publishing speculative scenarios to explain events described in the bible:
-an atmospheric optical illusion inspiring the story of the sun standing still in Joshua (Camuffo 1990)
-various explanations for the destruction of Jericho from natural radioactivity (Blake 1967) to earthquakes (Ken-Tor et al. 2001) to schistosomiasis(!) (Hulse 1971)
-the true identity of Manna as plant or insect exudates (Harrison 1950, Danin 1972)
-the destruction of Sodom due to geological events (Clapp 1936, Harris and Beardow 1995)
-catastrophic flooding of the Black Sea as the origin of the flood narrative (Ryan et al. 2003 and other papers)
-Jesus walking on floating ice in Galilee (Nof et al. 2006)
Without providing the full citations here (some searching on Google Scholar will turn all of these up quickly) I will note that while all of these apparently went through some fashion of peer-review, many appear in specialty journals (Journal of Paleolimnology, Economic Botany).
But consider David Hughes speculation that the Star of Bethlehem was "a a triple conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter in the constellation of Pisces" which allowed him to calculate that Christ had been born "around October 7 BC"; findings published in Nature 264:5586 (513-517) 1976.
Note that I am not advocating the validity of any of these, which seem to me largely hokey and untestable. In fact as a taxpayer I am especially frustrated that Nof's wacky papers on the parting of the Red Sea and Jesus walking on Galilee thank NASA, NSF and the Department of Defense for funding.
Still, I think the Drews and Hans paper is not some kind of clarion call just another peep from an established but dubious line of quasi-scientific inquiry.
"… and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left."
Drews has all the answers on his youtube posts. The Red Sea parting has to do with a "bend in the body of water" (!)
As expected, "Adding comments has been disabled for this video."
Shockingly, note the National Science Foundation's imprimatur at the end of these videos.
Mike from Ottawa
"After all, if you're going to support a story, how can you justify picking those parts of the story that could have happened, and ignoring those that couldn't?"
Because sometimes parts of a story are true and parts false?
This is something obvious to anyone who has ever heard a friend or relative tell a story of some past event they also witnessed (i.e. anyone not raised by wolves) or who has even a small interest in history. As an example of the latter, historians don't doubt the existence of the siege and battle of Alesia and consider Caesar's account reasonably accurate though few serious historians credit the Gauls with the quarter million men Caesar claimed the relief force had. The profession of history would come to a screeching halt if Jerry's razor above were applied.
Your comment ignores the fact that the Jewish people were never slaves in Egypt, which means that there is no need to explain how the Red Sea could "part".
No, my comment addresses a specific point about the nature of thruth in historical accounts. I was addressing the misconception Jerry's remark evidenced. I put that carefully, since if he believes that stories of the past must either be true in every aspect or false in all he'd be an idiot, rather like the Biblical literalists who do hold that view. I doubt he does believe it, but nuance gets in the way of rhetorical flight and he's not one to trip himself up on mere accuracy or reason.
Your particular complaint evidences the same misconception Jerry showed. That the Jewish people as a whole were not slaves in Egypt (if indeed there was such a thing as 'the Jewish people' at the time) does not mean that no people were who upon making their way out of Egypt founded what became 'the Jewish people'.
It is, I suppose, possible the entire Bible is entire conscious invention, but I don't know that any folk who actually study it, even those who are not themselves religious, consider that to be the case. If it is not the case, then it is far from certain that stories such as that of the Exodus contain not a whit of truth, which is to say history, in them, even if greatly embellished – a virtually universal human trait in the telling and retelling or stories.
No, my comment addresses a specific point about the nature of thruth in historical accounts.
Your comment though, falls prey to the same misconception Jerry's remark evidenced (I put that carefully, since if he believes that stories of the past must either be true in every aspect or false in all he'd be an idiot, rather like the Biblical literalists who do hold that view).
The Bible has about as much documentation of historical fact as Harry Potter does — and searching for such "facts" in either entirely misses the point in exactly the same manner.
Mike from Ottawa wrote:
I was addressing the misconception Jerry's remark evidenced. I put that carefully, since if he believes that stories of the past must either be true in every aspect or false in all he'd be an idiot, rather like the Biblical literalists who do hold that view.
Do you seriously think that anyone holds that view? Not even literalists do, though they may claim to. The Bible is so full of contradictions that it is impossible to believe the entire thing literally.
This doesn't seem to follow from what you quote from the original post. This isn't a matter of sorting out the truth from exaggeration of an historical event. The authors set out to invent a scenario that would support the biblical story. In doing so they ignored everything, including hard evidence, that didn't support their conclusion. This is a far cry from an historian who is trying to get at the truth about how many soldiers the Gauls had. One is scholarship while the other is religious apologetics. The original post merely wondered how they could justify picking a few kernels from the story that might actually be possible while ignoring all evidence to the contrary. Obviously, they can't.
Mike from Ottawa: "That the Jewish people as a whole were not slaves in Egypt (if indeed there was such a thing as 'the Jewish people' at the time) does not mean that no people were who upon making their way out of Egypt founded what became 'the Jewish people'."
Actually, Ancient Egyptian history is known in a lot of details, and there's no mention in it of Pharaoh and his whole army drowning in the Red Sea while giving chase to a horde of escaping slaves, around 1200 BCE.
So, yes, we can dismiss the whole Exodus scenario out of hand.
Mandrellian
Egypt's own records aside, there aren't any accounts of the Exodus story from Egypt's neighbours. Even if Egypt did try and cover the whole thing up out of shame or erase it from history (as they attempted with the detested radical Pharaoh Akhenaten), the idea that none of Egypt's neighbours heard a single thing about the instant demise of Pharaoh and his legions is laughably implausible.
It's not just nosy neighbours we should consider – what of Egypt's enemies? Egypt was powerful, rich and had many foes. The slightest hint that Pharaoh and his entire army had perished all at once would have had spies flooding in from all corners to confirm the stories and, later, invaders ready to take great advantage of the situation. Leave out the lack of a non-Biblical record of the Exodus – any subsequent assault on a weakened Egypt would have been recorded in glorious detail by the attackers!
Finally, the loss of an entire slave class would have had a noticeable if not devastating impact on Egypt economically. Imagine the impact on industry, trade, society etc. if a Confederate state, for example, was divested of all its slaves instantly, overnight. Imagine any large economy suddenly being denied its labour force – the only result, initially at least, is chaos.
Exodus, if it happened at all (and there's little to even suggest a massive slave-class of Hebrews there to begin with), must have barely registered on the Egyptians' radar, let alone warranted column inches on a papyrus. If it happened as described, the loss of a massive free labour force, an entire armed force and a head of state could quite possibly have destroyed the Egyptian empire. But Egypt didn't even blink.
And how would the slaves have been able to escape? Put in the words of the old spiritual, why would a pharaoh "let [those] people go"? If we are going to try to naturalize the entire account, then surely we have to completely dismiss the biblical plagues as nothing but myth. But what apart from supernatural calamities of such scale would cause a pharaoh to willingly part with a huge enslaved labour force? There is no suggestion at all in the bible or elsewhere that the Jewish slaves could have organized and effectively fought a determined opposition from the Egyptian army, so how are they supposed to have gathered up and marched to the Red Sea without anyone stopping them?
The whole story is a nice myth, but it is nonsense as history.
I tend to support PLoS ONE because I support the idea of open-access journals in general. Especially when work is publicly funded, it should be published in open access journals.
It's happened about a hundred times that my work has been stymied because I couldn't access large sections of the scientific literature, due to them being locked up behind paywalls. And journals aren't cheap.
I'm sure there are other ways of funding journals that don't prevent the public from having free access to humanity's store of scientific knowledge.
I see ceiling cat approves. Now why do I get the uneasy feeling that Charlton Heston is looking for his rifle in that image?
The REAL question is, did Joshua actually part the river Jordan? Or was that wind too?
Do these idiots even READ their Bibles?
Etienne Joly
Posted October 1, 2010 at 3:40 am | Permalink
Followers of this blog may be interested to know that a lively discussion has taken place in the comments section of the Drews & Han manuscript, including replies from the authors themselves, and a statement from the PLoS ONE editorial office.
I believe that this is a clear demonstration of the benefits of the PLoS ONE model: publishing sound science in a open access, and open discussion mode.
member of PLoS ONE academic board.
Could you post the link for us? Thanks.
2 Trackbacks/Pingbacks
By Mellanting mellan deism och teism « Pataphysics of Simulacra on December 21, 2010 at 9:51 pm
[…] stötte på ordet på Parting the Red Sea « Why Evolution Is True där en kommentar berättar om "a Ben Franklin effect", som bl.a. beskriver hur Ben […]
By bjoern.brembs.blog » Unquestioning dogma: the gatekeepers of science on September 3, 2013 at 1:16 am
[…] morning my friend Ramy reminded us of the recent spats over two PLoS One publications (Darwinius, Red Sea) and how they were used to question the 'reputation' of PLoS One as a journal. Of […]

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


How to become a member of the ADFS?
Please note that the accomodation costs are not included in the course fee, and the participants of the ADFS course 2019 are responsible to take care of their own accomodation.
The Association of Diabetic Foot Surgeons (ADFS) is organising this year a cadaver course in Padua (Italy) in cooperation with the Plastic Surgery Department and Human Anatomy Institute of the Padova University School of Medicine.
The University of Padova is one of the most ancient in the world, where the most important anatomists of the past studied and taught here. Moreover, the founder of the modern pathology, Biovanni Battista Morgagni was working at the University of Padova as Professor in Anatomy.
The first day will be devoted to the introduction to the course and the reconstructive technique. ADFS members and well-known experts will deliver oral presentations related to the plastic surgery approach to diabetic foot syndrome.
The second day will be a hands-on session focused on the reconstructive flaps from the leg and the foot.


text:
Killington-to-Rutland bike trail envisioned
By Julia Purdy
The Mendon Economic Development Committee met in a public meeting Wednesday, June 6, to continue discussing ways to improve Mendon's economic picture.
Bryan Sell, a board member of the Pine Hill Partnership, shared with the committee a preliminary plan for an east-west mountain bike trail that would link Killington bike trails with Pine Hill Park in Rutland, passing through Mendon.
Rutland County is a premier mountain biking destination in the U.S. and confers a large economic benefit to the area, Sell said. He noted that the Kingdom Trails in East Burke, a well-known biking destination, brings in $9 million in earnings and a total economic impact of more than $30 million, citing the report "Economic and Fiscal Impact Analysis of the Vermont Trails and Greenway Council Member Organizations."
Mountain bike tourists who spend a few days in Vermont very often include Pine Hill Park as a stop on their trip, Sell continued, noting, "It is common that visitors from out of state come in new sports cars with $10k bike on top of their cars."
In addition to connecting trail networks between Rutland and Killington, Sell suggested that a shuttle service could take riders and their bikes back up the mountain.
Sell moved to Mendon from Pennsylvania a year ago and views this location as a "hub" for recreation. His wife landed a job at the Rutland Regional Medical Center as a physician assistant. Sell is putting his energies into using his extensive trail-building experience to help develop mountain biking routes here.
Referring to the potential for economic benefits, MEDC chair Dick Wilcox asked, "What's in it for Mendon?"
Sell replied that the trail could connect to lodging establishments that will accommodate bikers. He also said mountain bikers would shop and dine in area establishments, noting that bikers and breweries go particularly well together.
Most of the trails would be done by the Pine Hill Partnership in partnership with Killington Mountain Bike Club and possibly others. Most of the work would be done by hand, in a sustainable manner, he said.
The project is asking for Mendon's cooperation in working with businesses and land owners.
The group did a little brainstorming about possible routes and challenges such as the Rutland Town Forest and a Meadow Lake Drive trail crossing as well as attempting to avoid crossing the Appalachian and Long Trails by routing the proposed trail to the junction with Route 4.
Mark Latzky asked about year-round use of mountain bike trails. Sell responded that the trails would be multi-use.
Sell plans to reach out to the Catamount backcountry ski trail and has talked with the planners of the newly proposed north-south Velomont Trail, which aims to connect Killington with Stowe.
Though no action was taken at Wednesday's meeting, the committee viewed the project favorably.
Tagged Bryan Sell, julia purdy, Killington-to-Rutland bike trail envisioned, mountain bike, Mountain Biking, Pine Hil, The Mendon Economic Development Committee
Shiffrin wins 84th World Cup race
Public hearing for Killington's new water syste...
Game wardens investigate bald eagle shot in Ludlow
Are strokes between holes practice strokes?
City Creek Path advances


This multi pack for Photoshop features 14 modern and colorful event banners in the most widely used web and social media banner sizes. Each banner has been specially designed for the specific dimensions of that banner size or social media format, not just resized to fit.
Use this set of professionally designed layouts to help you kick start your online campaign, simply update the smart objects with your own image and update the text then you are ready to go.
The .psd files were created with Photoshop CC2019 and use Artboards to facilitate easy exporting of your graphics. We have also included legacy CS6 compatible .psd files which do not use Artboards.


text:
Artists Index
Years & Years Shares New Single "Sweet Talker" (Feat. Galantis)
Night Call Due Out January 7, 2022 via Interscope
Nov 26, 2021 By Joey Arnone
Years & Years (the project of Olly Alexander) has shared a new single, "Sweet Talker," featuring electronic duo Galantis. It is the latest release from his forthcoming album Night Call, which will be out on January 7, 2022 via Interscope. More
Kylie Minogue Announces "Disco" Reissue, Shares Video for "A Second to Midnight" Feat. Years & Years
DISCO: Guest List Edition Due Out November 12 via BMG
Oct 06, 2021 By Joey Arnone
Kylie Minogue has shared a video for her new single "A Second to Midnight," which features Years & Years. It will be featured on her forthcoming reissue, DISCO: Guest List Edition, a revamped version of her 2020 album Disco. It features remixes, live performances, and new collaborations with Gloria Gaynor and Jessie Ware (who has expressed interest in working with Minogue in our most recent interview with her). DISCO: Guest List Edition will be available November 12 via BMG. More
Years & Years Announces New Album, Shares Video for Lead Single "Crave"
Sep 28, 2021 By Joey Arnone
Years & Years (the project of Olly Alexander) has announced the release of his third studio album, Night Call, due out on January 7, 2022 via Interscope. He has also shared a video for the album's lead single, "Crave," which stars cast members from his hit HBO Max miniseries It's a Sin, including Omari Douglas, Nathaniel Hall, and David Carlisle, as well as model Munroe Bergdorf. More
Pet Shop Boys Team Up with Years & Years For New Song "Dreamland"
New Album Due Out January 24, 2020
Sep 11, 2019 By Christopher Roberts
1980s electro-pop icons Pet Shop Boys have shared a new song, "Dreamland," that's a collaboration with Years & Years (the band led by Olly Alexander). More
Bloc Party's Kele Okereke Shares New Song "Grounds For Resentment" (Feat. Olly Alexander)
Fatherland Due Out October 6 via BMG
Aug 03, 2017 By Christopher Roberts
Bloc Party frontman Kele Okereke is releasing a new solo album, Fatherland, October 6 via BMG. Previously she shared "Yemaya" and "Streets Been Talkin'." Now he's shared another song from the album, "Grounds For Resentment," which features Olly Alexander of Years & Years. More
Check Out Photos From Day Two of Flow Festival
Last Weekend in Helsinki, Finland
Aug 19, 2015 By Julia Underwood
Last weekend Helsinki hosted Flow Festival. More
Jul 24, 2018 By Conrad Duncan
It's no coincidence Years & Years' second album arrived on the eve of London's Pride weekend. Pride in sexuality is a recurring theme on Palo Santo, tying together a bold and adventurous new record which draws inspiration from reggaetón, Stevie Wonder-esque pop-soul, and 2000s R&B. More


text:
package com.android.example.watchface;

import android.content.BroadcastReceiver;
import android.content.Context;
import android.content.Intent;
import android.content.IntentFilter;
import android.graphics.Bitmap;
import android.graphics.BitmapFactory;
import android.graphics.Canvas;
import android.graphics.Color;
import android.graphics.ColorMatrix;
import android.graphics.ColorMatrixColorFilter;
import android.graphics.Paint;
import android.graphics.Rect;
import android.os.Bundle;
import android.os.Handler;
import android.os.Message;
import android.support.wearable.watchface.CanvasWatchFaceService;
import android.support.wearable.watchface.WatchFaceStyle;
import android.view.SurfaceHolder;

import java.util.Calendar;
import java.util.TimeZone;
import java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit;

/**
 * Analog watch face with a ticking second hand. In ambient mode, the second hand isn't shown. On
 * devices with low-bit ambient mode, the hands are drawn without anti-aliasing in ambient mode.
 */
public class MyWatchFaceService extends CanvasWatchFaceService {

    /**
     * Update rate in milliseconds for interactive mode. We update once a second to advance the
     * second hand.
     */
    private static final long INTERACTIVE_UPDATE_RATE_MS = TimeUnit.SECONDS.toMillis(1);

    @Override
    public Engine onCreateEngine() {
        return new Engine();
    }

    private class Engine extends CanvasWatchFaceService.Engine {

        /* Handler to update the time once a second in interactive mode. */
        private final Handler mUpdateTimeHandler = new Handler() {
            @Override
            public void handleMessage(Message message) {
                if (R.id.message_update == message.what) {
                    invalidate();
                    if (shouldTimerBeRunning()) {
                        long timeMs = System.currentTimeMillis();
                        long delayMs = INTERACTIVE_UPDATE_RATE_MS
                                - (timeMs % INTERACTIVE_UPDATE_RATE_MS);
                        mUpdateTimeHandler.sendEmptyMessageDelayed(R.id.message_update, delayMs);
                    }
                }
            }
        };

        private final BroadcastReceiver mTimeZoneReceiver = new BroadcastReceiver() {
            @Override
            public void onReceive(Context context, Intent intent) {
                mCalendar.setTimeZone(TimeZone.getDefault());
                invalidate();
            }
        };

        private boolean mRegisteredTimeZoneReceiver = false;

        // Feel free to change these values and see what happens to the watch face.
        private static final float HAND_END_CAP_RADIUS = 4f;
        private static final float STROKE_WIDTH = 4f;
        private static final int SHADOW_RADIUS = 6;

        private Calendar mCalendar;

        private Paint mBackgroundPaint;
        private Paint mHandPaint;

        private boolean mAmbient;

        private Bitmap mBackgroundBitmap;
        private Bitmap mGrayBackgroundBitmap;

        private float mHourHandLength;
        private float mMinuteHandLength;
        private float mSecondHandLength;

        /**
         * Whether the display supports fewer bits for each color in ambient mode.
         * When true, we disable anti-aliasing in ambient mode.
         */
        private boolean mLowBitAmbient;
        /**
         * Whether the display supports burn in protection in ambient mode.
         * When true, remove the background in ambient mode.
         */
        private boolean mBurnInProtection;

        private int mWidth;
        private int mHeight;
        private float mCenterX;
        private float mCenterY;
        private float mScale = 1;

        @Override
        public void onCreate(SurfaceHolder holder) {
            super.onCreate(holder);

            setWatchFaceStyle(new WatchFaceStyle.Builder(MyWatchFaceService.this).build());

            mBackgroundPaint = new Paint();
            mBackgroundPaint.setColor(Color.BLACK);

            final int backgroundResId = R.drawable.custom_background;

            mBackgroundBitmap = BitmapFactory.decodeResource(getResources(), backgroundResId);
            mHandPaint = new Paint();
            mHandPaint.setColor(Color.WHITE);
            mHandPaint.setStrokeWidth(STROKE_WIDTH);
            mHandPaint.setAntiAlias(true);
            mHandPaint.setStrokeCap(Paint.Cap.ROUND);
            mHandPaint.setShadowLayer(SHADOW_RADIUS, 0, 0, Color.BLACK);
            mHandPaint.setStyle(Paint.Style.STROKE);

            mCalendar = Calendar.getInstance();
        }

        @Override
        public void onDestroy() {
            mUpdateTimeHandler.removeMessages(R.id.message_update);
            super.onDestroy();
        }

        @Override
        public void onPropertiesChanged(Bundle properties) {
            super.onPropertiesChanged(properties);
            mLowBitAmbient = properties.getBoolean(PROPERTY_LOW_BIT_AMBIENT, false);
            mBurnInProtection = properties.getBoolean(PROPERTY_BURN_IN_PROTECTION, false);
        }

        @Override
        public void onTimeTick() {
            super.onTimeTick();
            invalidate();
        }

        @Override
        public void onAmbientModeChanged(boolean inAmbientMode) {
            super.onAmbientModeChanged(inAmbientMode);
            if (mAmbient != inAmbientMode) {
                mAmbient = inAmbientMode;
                if (mLowBitAmbient || mBurnInProtection) {
                    mHandPaint.setAntiAlias(!inAmbientMode);
                }
                invalidate();
            }

            /*
             * Whether the timer should be running depends on whether we're visible (as well as
             * whether we're in ambient mode), so we may need to start or stop the timer.
             */
            updateTimer();
        }

        @Override
        public void onSurfaceChanged(SurfaceHolder holder, int format, int width, int height) {
            super.onSurfaceChanged(holder, format, width, height);
            mWidth = width;
            mHeight = height;
            /*
             * Find the coordinates of the center point on the screen.
             * Ignore the window insets so that, on round watches
             * with a "chin", the watch face is centered on the entire screen,
             * not just the usable portion.
             */
            mCenterX = mWidth / 2f;
            mCenterY = mHeight / 2f;
            mScale = ((float) width) / (float) mBackgroundBitmap.getWidth();
            /*
             * Calculate the lengths of the watch hands and store them in member variables.
             */
            mHourHandLength = mCenterX * 0.5f;
            mMinuteHandLength = mCenterX * 0.7f;
            mSecondHandLength = mCenterX * 0.9f;

            mBackgroundBitmap = Bitmap.createScaledBitmap(mBackgroundBitmap,
                    (int) (mBackgroundBitmap.getWidth() * mScale),
                    (int) (mBackgroundBitmap.getHeight() * mScale), true);

            if (!mBurnInProtection || !mLowBitAmbient) {
                initGrayBackgroundBitmap();
            }
        }

        private void initGrayBackgroundBitmap() {
            mGrayBackgroundBitmap = Bitmap.createBitmap(mBackgroundBitmap.getWidth(),
                    mBackgroundBitmap.getHeight(), Bitmap.Config.ARGB_8888);
            Canvas canvas = new Canvas(mGrayBackgroundBitmap);
            Paint grayPaint = new Paint();
            ColorMatrix colorMatrix = new ColorMatrix();
            colorMatrix.setSaturation(0);
            ColorMatrixColorFilter filter = new ColorMatrixColorFilter(colorMatrix);
            grayPaint.setColorFilter(filter);
            canvas.drawBitmap(mBackgroundBitmap, 0, 0, grayPaint);
        }

        @Override
        public void onDraw(Canvas canvas, Rect bounds) {
            long now = System.currentTimeMillis();
            mCalendar.setTimeInMillis(now);

            if (mAmbient && (mLowBitAmbient || mBurnInProtection)) {
                canvas.drawColor(Color.BLACK);
            } else if (mAmbient) {
                canvas.drawBitmap(mGrayBackgroundBitmap, 0, 0, mBackgroundPaint);
            } else {
                canvas.drawBitmap(mBackgroundBitmap, 0, 0, mBackgroundPaint);
            }

            /*
             * These calculations reflect the rotation in degrees per unit of time, e.g.,
             * 360 / 60 = 6 and 360 / 12 = 30.
             */
            final float seconds =
                    (mCalendar.get(Calendar.SECOND) + mCalendar.get(Calendar.MILLISECOND) / 1000f);
            final float secondsRotation = seconds * 6f;

            final float minutesRotation = mCalendar.get(Calendar.MINUTE) * 6f;

            final float hourHandOffset = mCalendar.get(Calendar.MINUTE) / 2f;
            final float hoursRotation = (mCalendar.get(Calendar.HOUR) * 30) + hourHandOffset;

            // save the canvas state before we begin to rotate it
            canvas.save();

            canvas.rotate(hoursRotation, mCenterX, mCenterY);
            drawHand(canvas, mHourHandLength);

            canvas.rotate(minutesRotation - hoursRotation, mCenterX, mCenterY);
            drawHand(canvas, mMinuteHandLength);

            /*
             * Make sure the "seconds" hand is drawn only when we are in interactive mode.
             * Otherwise we only update the watch face once a minute.
             */
            if (!mAmbient) {
                canvas.rotate(secondsRotation - minutesRotation, mCenterX, mCenterY);
                canvas.drawLine(mCenterX, mCenterY - HAND_END_CAP_RADIUS, mCenterX,
                        mCenterY - mSecondHandLength, mHandPaint);
            }
            canvas.drawCircle(mCenterX, mCenterY, HAND_END_CAP_RADIUS, mHandPaint);
            // restore the canvas' original orientation.
            canvas.restore();
        }

        private void drawHand(Canvas canvas, float handLength) {
            canvas.drawRoundRect(mCenterX - HAND_END_CAP_RADIUS, mCenterY - handLength,
                    mCenterX + HAND_END_CAP_RADIUS, mCenterY + HAND_END_CAP_RADIUS,
                    HAND_END_CAP_RADIUS, HAND_END_CAP_RADIUS, mHandPaint);
        }

        @Override
        public void onVisibilityChanged(boolean visible) {
            super.onVisibilityChanged(visible);

            if (visible) {
                registerReceiver();
                // Update time zone in case it changed while we weren't visible.
                mCalendar.setTimeZone(TimeZone.getDefault());
                invalidate();
            } else {
                unregisterReceiver();
            }

            /*
             * Whether the timer should be running depends on whether we're visible
             * (as well as whether we're in ambient mode),
             * so we may need to start or stop the timer.
             */
            updateTimer();
        }

        private void registerReceiver() {
            if (mRegisteredTimeZoneReceiver) {
                return;
            }
            mRegisteredTimeZoneReceiver = true;
            IntentFilter filter = new IntentFilter(Intent.ACTION_TIMEZONE_CHANGED);
            MyWatchFaceService.this.registerReceiver(mTimeZoneReceiver, filter);
        }

        private void unregisterReceiver() {
            if (!mRegisteredTimeZoneReceiver) {
                return;
            }
            mRegisteredTimeZoneReceiver = false;
            MyWatchFaceService.this.unregisterReceiver(mTimeZoneReceiver);
        }

        private void updateTimer() {
            mUpdateTimeHandler.removeMessages(R.id.message_update);
            if (shouldTimerBeRunning()) {
                mUpdateTimeHandler.sendEmptyMessage(R.id.message_update);
            }
        }

        /**
         * Returns whether the {@link #mUpdateTimeHandler} timer should be running. The timer
         * should only run when we're visible and in interactive mode.
         */
        private boolean shouldTimerBeRunning() {
            return isVisible() && !isInAmbientMode();
        }
    }
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


I'll try to make this year in review as brief as possible, since my efforts to promote Amelia Earhart: The Truth at Last are far outweighed by many more negative incidents and unhappy encounters, which, though permanently etched in my mind, need not distract or bore the few interested readers who might visit this blog.
Truth at Last was published by Larry Knorr's Sunbury Press in June 2012, thus the past 12 months marked the first full year in the life of this book. Although we enjoyed a few bright moments, 2013 will be memorable almost solely for the nearly overwhelming number of rejections the book and its message received. I thought I'd learned all about rejection during the more than a year it took to find the right publisher, but that was merely an introductory course. 2013 has offered a high-octane dosage of rejection on a scale that dwarfs all previous experience, leaving me to ponder how much longer I can continue to pursue this worthy cause while being almost completely ignored.
This "pan-institutional aversion to the truth" described in the final chapter of Truth at Last is alive, well and worse that I imagined. Make no mistake, the powers that be at the network and corporate levels fully understand that honest discussion of the Earhart disappearance is off limits. No matter that after nearly 77 years of government-media propaganda, the idea that Amelia's loss is an irresolvable mystery has been a familiar, universally accepted piece of our cultural landscape virtually since the day she failed to land on Howland Island. No slippage can be tolerated, so the insidious campaign of lies and disinformation continues in its incessant refrains, ensuring the ignorance and disinterest of media consumers nationwide, and maintaining the status quo.
No honest discussion of efforts to solve – or, more accurately, explain the Earhart disappearance — would be complete if it didn't include Ric Gillespie and The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery, which has done more damage to the truth in the Earhart matter than anyone over the past 25 years or so. Before Gillespie we had Elgen Long and the even more ridiculous Navy-Coast Guard crash-and-sank verdict, which, for the most part, kept a gullible public stupid for the first five decades following Amelia's loss. Thanks to these two paragons of deception, with their abject contempt for the truth, and a long list of lesser lights, as well as the enthusiastic help of the American media, the disappearance of Amelia Earhart remains among the most misunderstood and misreported events of the 20th century. I understand some may disagree, and freely admit this is my convicted opinion.
Every other year, well in advance of the next TIGHAR-Nikumaroro boondoggle, we get the endless press releases, TV news stories and documentaries trumpeting and exploring the latest follies announced by TIGHAR's Ric Gillespie, a propaganda blitz now led by Discovery Channel and Discovery News (see Oct. 24 and July 11 posts). Other possibilities are rarely if ever mentioned; it's as if Gillespie is the only man on earth who has any clue about what happened to the lost fliers. For 25 years now it's been one phony claim after another; one might think that few are taken in anymore, yet the false headlines keep coming, telling us that the Earhart mystery might be solved soon if TIGHAR's latest hunch pans out. If the search were for anything or anyone else except Amelia Earhart, this shopworn charade would have been ignored by the national media after TIGHAR's first few jaunts failed to produce any credible evidence. But after a much-too-long 50-year run, the original crashed-and-sank lie became impossible to maintain by the late 1980s; lacking anything better to keep the public distracted from the unpleasant truth, the establishment holds its nose and keeps dishing out nausea-inducing portions of Nikumaroro gruel to a public that could hardly be more disinterested.
No overt or covert conspiracy compels most establishment types to run from the truth in the Earhart case; most of them are completely ignorant of the facts. Cynicism, disinterest, and even boredom motivate many of these jaded characters to avoid the subject, while others who express initial interest flee in fear from public discussion upon learning of the very unpleasant ends that Earhart and Fred Noonan met on Saipan. Others, informed by their habitual servitude to political correctness, instinctually understand that the subject of the fliers' miserable deaths at the hands of the Japanese, now our good friends, is simply not a proper topic for cultured eyes and ears. The reasons are many, but they add up to a colossal societal resistance to the truth. If we lived in a world that encouraged truth seekers in the Earhart matter, I'm convinced Truth at Last would be a bestseller by now. Of course, without the 77-year government cover-up, no need would exist for Truth at Last to be written, nor any of the other fine books that present the truth in varying degrees of effectiveness.
I won't name the numerous talk radio hosts, newspaper editors, bloggers and others who have scheduled me on their shows or promised their help in various ways and then bailed without warning, explanation or apology – as if they had suddenly learned that I had leprosy, with apologies to any lepers who might be reading this. It's bad enough to be ignored by more than 95 percent of these media types when I send them my standard query, but for them to respond, schedule a date and then ignore me is truly unprofessional and inexcusable. This has become a standard treatment option when dealing with requests to air the truth in the Earhart case. Usually, of course, they simply delete my request, or if sent by snail mail, they trash it.
Just three days into 2013, the retail sales manager at the Admiral Nimitz Museum unwittingly set the tone for the coming year when she refused to stock the book that significantly expands upon Admiral Chester W. Nimitz's revelation to Fred Goerner in 1965, a year before Goerner's bestseller The Search for Amelia Earhart was published. Search immortalized the famed admiral's statement to the San Francisco radio newsman that Earhart "went down in the Marshalls and was picked up by the Japanese." My letter to the museum directors appealing this decision was ignored; even the simple decency of a response was refused me. Maj. Glenn MacDonald (U.S. Army, retired), editor-in-chief of the popular rank-and-file military-oriented site, www.militarycorruption.com, is among our book's greatest supporters. Glenn chronicled the Nimitz Museum travesty with this story, which was also ignored by the Nimitz Museum's enlightened leadership.
In early March we had the Jim Bohannon debacle. Charles Heller, a Tucson, Ariz., radio host, had recommended me to Bohannon after having me on his own show. Bohannon's late night show is syndicated to more than 350 stations nationwide, and I had high hopes that his program might provide a launching pad to the breakthrough this book badly needed. It wasn't to be, as Bohannon had invited me only as a favor to Heller. He didn't do a minute of show preparation, knew nothing of the Earhart matter and told me he didn't receive the PDF of the book and other material I had twice sent to him. Bohannon spent the first half hour by reacting with hostility and disbelief to everything I said, catching me off balance and unprepared. I finally stood up to the bully, and Bohannon had little to say over the last 25 minutes or so. This sad episode, captured in a post by Jessica Renshaw on her Hidden in Jesus blog, served as a hard-learned lesson I will never forget: Never assume anyone is on your side going into a media interview unless you're absolutely certain.
During the second half of the year, inspired by the success of veteran Earhart presenter Rob Ellos, of Stillwater, Minn., I embarked on my own attempt to spread the word, dubbing my new enterprise "Earhart Truth Presentations." Sounds impressive, and I even had 1,000 business cards made for distribution to interested parties, but most of these are still in my drawer at home, and the inaugural version of Earhart Truth Presentations failed to pay for its rollout. I sent this flyer or a close version to many hundreds of assisted living facilities and senior centers, as well as Kiwanis, Rotary, Moose and Elk Lodges and Daughters of the American Revolution chapters within a 90-minute drive of Jacksonville, with pathetic results. Apparently only phony searches on tramped-down islands in the central Pacific have any chance of making money in the Earhart information business.
After talking to the few groups I visited, it was obvious that it's not the older people who aren't interested, but the much younger activity directors who don't care about the Earhart disappearance. The future of Earhart Truth Presentations is quite dim, with nothing at all scheduled for the New Year. As for Rob's success in Stillwater and the Minneapolis-St. Paul area, maybe the baby boomers up there, the ones who run the senior facilities, are better educated and informed, and thus more inclined to invite him to their facilities. Who can say?
I also sent the flyer to all private and public high schools, and the response was exactly zero, which speaks volumes about the pathetic state of our secondary schools. It's common knowledge that our public schools ceased to teach true American history decades ago, but I thought the private schools might have retained a semblance of traditional curricula. Sadly, none of them have any interest in anyone coming into their classrooms to set the record straight about Amelia Earhart, whom few of any have heard of anyway. You get the picture.
Perhaps the highlight for my year was a lengthy commentary I wrote to commemorate the July 2 anniversary of Amelia's last flight, published by Veterans News Now, the same outfit that posted Dave Martin's fine review of Truth at Last in August 2012, "Hillary Clinton and the Amelia Earhart Cover-up." Titled "The truth in the Earhart 'mystery' is a sacred cow,' and posted June 13 by editor Debbie Menon, the piece stayed atop the VNN top 50 for over two weeks and continues its run in VNN's top 25 with over 11,300 reads as of Dec. 31. Joel Freedman, my friend from Canandaigua, New York, placed some guest columns in local newspapers, and Jessica Renshaw, whose Hidden in Jesus blog was among the first to discover Truth at Last, did what she could to help.
Did about 18 radio appearances with the relatively few independent radio types who were unafraid to step up and help, PC be damned. Many of these hosts failed to read anything I sent them, were completely unprepared to do a decent interview, and simply were filling time by having me on. But a few were outstanding professionals, did plenty of show prep, read the book and had great programs. The best of these were author and host Deanna Spingola, who had me on her show, "Spingola Speaks" on the Republic Broadcasting Network for a return engagement; and Bill Xam, host of the Internet program "Surrounded by Idiots," which recently joined the Freedom Talk Radio/SETV network. Bill spent many hours preparing notes and special features for our two-hour discussion, which can be found on the EarhartTruth.com Media page.
Other radio people I should thank again for their help included Chuck Wilder, host of "Talkback with Chuck Wilder" on CRN; Michael Betteridge, general manager of WTHU 1450 AM "The Source," Thurmont, Md., and nephew of noted Earhart researcher Paul Rafford, Jr.; Bill Hay, host of "I'm Speaking Plainly," on local Jacksonville's 600 AM "The Answer; and Dr. Stan Monteith, veteran host of Radio Liberty, heard in multiple cities including Cincinnati and Spokane, Wash., who has invited me back on Jan. 7 at 6 pm EST and Jan. 9 at 11 pm.
I also want to express a special thanks to my old friend Sonny Auld, who has been the webmaster of www.EarhartTruth.com since its inception. Without Sonny's unselfish efforts, we'd be nowhere at all.
That's about it. I continue to do whatever I can and hope that somehow the breakthrough that Truth at Last needs to come to the attention of the American public will eventuate. It can't happen if we give up, and so I won't. Amelia deserves far better than she's received since her tragic loss, and so does the book that presents the truth about it without apology.


text:
Charles William Alcock
 Charles R. Alcock

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


"Foreigners may have an edge on the change management roles because it is recognized that it is difficult for an internal person to be the nail that sticks up. Sometimes it's just easier to find people who are willing to come in and go through the learning curve of the organization – there are more foreigners who enjoy that. I love learning a new organization but I haven't met too many Japanese colleagues that welcome that challenge (C: why is that?) Well, mid-career hires are still very rare. It's become a phenomenon only in the last five years or so. This is because it is ingrained into people that you work for a company, you are a company man, it's your security, you have to support yourself so you take the secure path and you are loyal. This is a socio-cultural based thing. In the west, people will change careers up to five times. That's a normal career path but it's still very unusual for a Japanese person to change careers more than once or twice….if that often.


text:
River Plate have reportedly agreed to a two-year contract extension with midfield starlet
Eduardo Razo
February 18th 2021, 22:54
Follow @eddierazo_
Uruguayan midfielder Nicolás de la Cruz is one of the significant pieces to River Plate, but there was some anxiety among the supporters over his contract situation.
The 23-year-old's contract will expire in June, and there was fear he'd leave on a free transfer elsewhere. However, those feelings can now be put to rest as de la Cruz will continue his career with the Argentine side.
According to TyC Sports, the Uruguay international will extend his contract with River Plate until 2023. Furthermore, with the departure of Ignacio Fernández, de la Cruz will be wearing the number ten for River Plate.
Despite reportedly agreeing to a new deal, River Plate still needs to pay off what it owes for the 23-year-old. TyC Sports adds that Los Millonarios have a near $1-million debt to Liverpool FC of Uruguay since they have not finished paying off the purchase of 30-percent of the footballer's pass.
The Argentine media outlet states that River Plate will pay off his debt this month.
More Stories CONMEBOL Nicolás De La Cruz River Plate
Manchester United is among the clubs expressing interest in River Plate ace
Sep 20 2021, 6:18
CONMEBOL wants audience ahead of Copa America final between Argentina and Brazil
Jul 9 2021, 5:50
Man United eye South American star in €20m deal after Edinson Cavani recommendation
Jun 26 2021, 15:28
Health Expert continues to question why Brazil decided to host Copa América
River Plate win Copa Libertadores tie despite 20 Covid absentees and no goalkeepers
May 21 2021, 6:37
CONMEBOL announces FIFA World Cup Qualifiers will take place before the Copa América
Apr 24 2021, 21:54
River Plate want Manchester City transfer target to remain in Argentina past this summer
Apr 22 2021, 8:09
Paul Pogba wants Edinson Cavani to remain another season with Manchester United
Argentina president worried about country hosting the Copa América this summer due to rise in COVID cases
Manchester City has made an offer for £16-million talent; face competition from Serie A club
Apr 3 2021, 10:15


I was a huge proponent of Gonzaga not being on the No. 1 line for a few reasons: The Big Ten is so good this year that three teams could have laid claim to a No. 1 seed. Then you have two ACC teams (Duke and Miami), two Big East teams (Louisville and Georgetown) to go with Kansas as "big boys" who have played a tougher schedule throughout the season and, without stumbles, would definitely have better resumes.
Then last week happened. Michigan lost at Penn State. Michigan State lost at Michigan. Indiana lost at home to Ohio State. Georgetown fell at Villanova. Miami lost at Duke. The compilation of those losses means there just isn't any way to keep Gonzaga off the No. 1 line (not today and not on Selection Sunday if Gonzaga wins the WCC Tournament).
Duke, by virtue of not being swept by Miami and by having arguably the toughest schedule in the country (Kenpom has MSU No. 1 and Duke No. 11) not only gets a No. 1 seed but, at the moment, would be the No. 1 overall seed.
I'm on record saying Indiana can lose at Michigan and in the Big Ten quarterfinals and should still be a No. 1 seed. The overall body of work is there and Indiana's wins stack up with any other team's. Now, could Indiana be the last No. 1 seed? Of course. But I just don't think, given my worst-case scenario, that the selection committee could justify putting four teams ahead of the Hoosiers on the S-curve.
The other No. 1 seed goes to Kansas. The biggest head scratcher as to how the committee will judge the Jayhawks is the TCU loss. It's, by far, the worst loss by any No. 1 seed contender. Then again, Kansas has been dominant as of late and a 27-4 record speaks for itself in a solid Big XII.
At this point, most of the debate centers around the "Last Four In." It's not that those teams don't matter but, seriously, those teams don't matter. There will be four "bid stealers" so if you're in a "First Four" game right now you need to play your way in. I have Iowa State, Tennessee, Virginia and Temple as those teams right now.
Kentucky has two "good" wins this season: vs. Missouri (No. 8 seed) and vs. Ole Miss (projected First Four out). That isn't exactly the kind of resume you want to show the committee in hopes of a NCAA bid. Therefore, there is no debating the defending champion Wildcats are NIT bound at the moment.


text:
Lacto Bacto
Health, Microbes, and More
Sinusitis Treatment Story
Sinusitis Treatment Summary
Best Probiotics For Sinusitis
Feeding Your Gut Microbes
Avoiding Harmful Chemicals
Buy Lanto Sinus Probiotic
Tag: Bacille Calmette-Guerin (BCG) vaccine
Vaccines or High Fever to Prevent Cancers?
Author SimaPublished on November 11, 2014 April 11, 2019
This recent scientific (and yes, technical) article discusses the tantalizing promise of treating cancer, especially melanoma, with infections and certain vaccines. Much discussion of how two vaccines that are already out there may prevent some cancers such as melanoma and leukemia (vaccination with Bacille Calmette-Guerin (BCG) of newborns and vaccination with the yellow fever 17D vaccine of adults).This recent article is a further development on what was discussed in the last post (Injecting a person with a bacterial extract - called Coley's toxins or Coley toxins - to cause an infection, and so treat cancer). From BioMed Central:
The biography of the immune system and the control of cancer: from St Peregrine to contemporary vaccination strategies
In 1875 Campbell de Morgan, a surgeon at the Middlesex Hospital in London, reported that regressions and remissions of cancers sometimes occurred after post-operative infections, particularly the streptococcal infection erysipelas...
Campbell de Morgan's observation that remissions sometimes occurred after post-operative streptococcal infections inspired some workers to undertake the risky procedure of deliberately inducing erysipelas in cancer patients. Subsequently, an American surgeon, William Coley, developed bacteria-free extracts of streptococci and other bacteria ("Coley toxins") and reported their successful use in the therapy of cancers, especially sarcomas, between 1881 and 1936 . Unfortunately Coley, a mild mannered and unassuming gentleman, did not adhere to rigorous scientific protocols in his studies and he was marginalized by forceful personalities advocating radiotherapy. Notwithstanding, an analysis of his results with cancer deemed inoperable undertaken in 1994 revealed a remission rate of 64% and a five-year survival rate of 44%, results equal to or better than those with modern therapies [14].
It is also now appreciated that chronic inflammation is an essential element of cancers and it has indeed been termed 'the other half of the tumour' [37]. The normal healing process relies on inflammation, collagen production, angiogenesis and cell proliferation and, in a description of the similarities between tumour stroma formation and wound healing, tumours have been referred to as "wounds that do not heal" [38],
The relationship between infection, and associated inflammation, and cancer is a complex and paradoxical one and there are several well described examples of cancer being the direct consequence of infection [41]. Around 2 million of the 12.7 million new cancer cases worldwide in 2008 (16.1%) were assumed to be related to infection, principally Helicobacter pylori, hepatitis viruses, and the human papilloma virus, with a higher proportion in developing countries (22.9%) than in developed ones (7.4%) [42]. The large majority of cases of cancer, especially those in the developed nations, are therefore not caused by infection – on the contrary, there is growing evidence that a history of certain infections and environmental exposure to certain populations of micro-organisms, as well as some types of vaccination, may induce patterns of immune reactivity that reduce the risk of at least some cancers.
A study of an adult population in Italy demonstrated an association between a history of common childhood infectious diseases (measles, chickenpox, rubella, mumps and pertussis) and the risk of developing chronic lymphatic leukaemia (CLL), with a strong inverse relationship between the risk of CLL and the number of infections (p = 0.002) [47].
In the 1990s Kölmel and colleagues established a working group – Febrile Infections and Melanoma (FEBIM) – within the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC). Based on a pilot study [79] this group undertook a series of studies to establish the relationship between the risk for developing melanoma and a history of, initially, infectious diseases [80], and, subsequently, also of vaccinations [81,82].
In the first report of the FEBIM group a significant level of protection against melanoma in those with a history of certain severe infections (sepsis, Staph. aureus infection, pneumonia, pulmonary tuberculosis) with fever of over 38.5°C was demonstrated [80]. It should, however, be noted that these apparently melanoma-protective infectious diseases have become rare in the industrialized nations.
It is claimed that, as a result of recent observational studies, measures for prevention of some malignancies such as melanoma and certain forms of leukaemia are already at hand: vaccination with Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) of new-borns and vaccination with the yellow fever 17D (YFV) vaccine of adults. While the evidence of their benefit for prevention of malignancies requires substantiation, the observations that vaccinations with BCG and/or vaccinia early in life improved the outcome of patients after surgical therapy of melanoma are of practical relevance as the survival advantage conferred by prior vaccination is greater than any contemporary adjuvant therapy.
Published on November 11, 2014 April 11, 2019 Categories cancer, healthy living, microbesTags Bacille Calmette-Guerin (BCG) vaccine, chronic inflammation, Coley toxins, infections and cancer, leukemia, melanoma, tumors, vaccines, yellow fever 17D vaccine
endocrine disruptors
human microbiome
© Lacto Bacto. 2013-2020. All Rights Reserved.