Submit Mirroring European counterparts, Ukraine’s Rada (parliament) has had to undertake radical adjustments to counter COVID-19 impacts, affecting its legislative resources and timetable.Facing a backlog of legislative readings, Rada’s situation is further undermined as President Volodymyr Zelensky ordered a sweeping senior cabinet reshuffle in March, having fallen out with influential first minister Oleksiy Honcharuk.Nevertheless, Zelensky’s SoP Party has maintained its 2020 schedule of finalising provisions attached to Bill-2285D, and returning regulated gambling to Ukraine by the end of the year.The last reading of Bill-2285D ‘Gambling Law’ was undertaken at the end of January, as MPs reviewed much-criticised tax drafts alongside unsatisfactory counter amendments.Silence was cast on the bill’s progress until this week, when Danylo Hetmantsev – Head of Rada’s finance committee – stated in an interview that Gambling Law readings would be fast-tracked by a Parliamentary committee.Hetmantsev underlined that the committee’s actions did not favour approving Bill-2285D into law. Instead, the minister highlighted that the Bill had been swamped by over 3,500 amendments submitted to its draft proposals on developing Ukraine’s federal gambling framework.Hetmantsev, a key economic advisor to President Zelensky, expressed his confidence that SoP would finalise Gambling Law legislations by the end of the year, maintaining a key pledge to revitalise Ukraine’s business and enterprise.Despite this confidence, Ukraine observers remain sceptical as the government has yet to meaningfully define key provisions related to licensing conditions, tax arrangements, industry standards and competition rules.The approval of Bill-2285D was hailed as SoP’s first Rada victory. Nevertheless, it now appears that the bill’s bare framework’s passage into law will be a much tougher journey. StumbleUpon Share Ukraine gambling bill enacted by President Zelensky August 11, 2020 Ilya Machavariani, Dentons – CIS regional dynamics will come to play prior to gambling take-off July 31, 2020 Andrey Astapov, ETERNA LAW: Ukraine faces critical choices as gambling finish line nears August 21, 2020 Related Articles Share
The goal came about in the most unlikely of circumstances as the seconds ticked down and Virgil van Dijk mishit a hopeful, desperate shot in the direction of the Everton goal, with the effort ballooning into the air and the defender turning his back in disgust.But goalkeeper Jordan Pickford struggled to judge the flight of the ball as it dropped from the Anfield night sky.The England man panicked, appearing to push the ball upwards before it bounced on top of the bar and into the path of Origi, who had a simple task to head into the open net.Pickford apologised for his blunder but gave a different version of events.“The ball spun and as I tried to flick it over, my hand hit the bar,” he said. “I think it is the Everton luck when we come to Anfield.”For Origi, whose derby appearance in April 2016 saw him suffer a career-threatening ankle injury before he was forced to spend last season on loan with Wolfsburg, it was a particularly sweet goal.“I said it to him, when I went to him on the pitch I had it in my mind. I’ve never forgot it (the injury) since,” said Klopp. “Fouls and harsh tackles happen, but in his case it was so obvious that it was a break in his development.“So it was always in my mind about Div that night (against Everton). And coming on tonight, he can finish that book and from now on everything will be fine again.”Share on: WhatsApp Pages: 1 2 Origi’s freak injury-time winning goalLiverpool, United Kingdom | AFP | Divock Origi’s freak injury-time winning goal settled a thrilling Merseyside derby as Liverpool beat Everton 1-0 on Sunday to stay in touch with Premier League leaders Manchester City, although the FA may yet have the final word on a tempestuous finale to the game.Jurgen Klopp apologised on TV afterwards for his celebrations after Origi, making his first Premier League appearance since August 2017, scored the decisive 96th-minute goal.The German manager sprinted onto the field, running beyond the centre circle, while numerous coaching staff and substitutes headed towards the Kop to join Liverpool players celebrating with supporters.At the other end of Anfield, Everton supporters threw blue flares onto the field, another incident that will likely bring FA action.And while Klopp claimed he had apologised to opposite number Marco Silva after the game — a claim denied by the Everton man — the FA may take a dim view of the wild scenes.“Immediately after the game I apologised to Marco Silva when we spoke to each other,” said Klopp. “I told him how much I respect his work.“What can I say about it? I didn’t want to run. It was not in my plan. I didn’t want to run to Ali (goalkeeper Alisson), I couldn’t stop obviously. Not cool, but it happened.” Silva rejected Klopp’s version of events, however. “He didn’t apologise to me,” he said. “To be honest, I didn’t see so I don’t know what he did and how he did it.“I think he didn’t expect anything (the late goal) so it was a lucky day for him.”– Freak goal –
Advertisement 6xpNBA Finals | Brooklyn Vsv2rWingsuit rodeo📽Sindre Ea0z( IG: @_aubreyfisher @imraino ) 242Would you ever consider trying this?😱uCan your students do this? 🌚2m2xmdRoller skating! Powered by Firework Manchester City star Kevin De Bruyne who is recovering from an illness during these testing times, reckons that he is unsure if he had coronavirus or not! The Belgian midfielder and his family suddenly fell ill two weeks ago, and by his own words, “we don’t know if we had coronavirus or not” Advertisement “I am doing well, to be honest,” De Bruyne said in an interview. “The first two weeks my family was sick so it was a little bit like up and down, but now they are all healthy. We don’t know if we had it (coronavirus) or not but I think we’re doing well now.”Advertisement The 2019-20 Premier League season has been postponed indefinitely due to the ongoing global pandemic, and KDB revealed that he is trying to stay fit and sharp by exercising and training at home.“Well, the first two weeks was a little bit weird because I don’t know what’s going on,” De Bruyne said.Advertisement “Then I managed to get a treadmill. I was swimming a little bit because I’m lucky to have a pool downstairs.“I was doing a couple of lengths but now mostly I’m doing a run and I would say every other day I would choose between swimming and doing some exercise, so I’m keeping fairly good for what we can on our own, I guess.”When asked whether his club knows about his training routine, De Bruyne replied, “They send us like a fairly big programme.“I think at the beginning of lockdown some of the gym physios went to the club and made videos of what we can do, different types of exercises. But there’s a few things that I like to do, obviously it’s more the running and the swimming exercise.”“I do a little bit in-between but I’m not one for sitting like an hour or two hours in a gym. I get bored of doing stuff on my own anyway so I prefer to do running, where I keep busy for myself and listen to some podcasts and all that stuff” he added. You may also like:maNcHeSter United turns blue for once as Old Trafford lits city with a heartwarming tribute. Liverpool legend Kenny Dalglish in hospital after asymptomatic Covid-19 positive Advertisement
Having raised more than 80 per cent of a $50,000 fund raising goal, over 50 members of the North Peace Community Choir are leaving this city this week, — for New York City.They’re now less than a week away from taking part in a Carnegie Hall performance of Handel’s Messiah — first performed in Dublin, Ireland on April 13 of 1742, nearly a year before its much anticipated premiere in London, which had become the home city of the German born composer.This Sunday’s performance at the venerable concert venue in Midtown Manhattan will feature fifteen choirs from five different continents and at last report the local group had received monetary, and donations in kind, from close to one hundred corporate, business, and individual sponsors.- Advertisement -So all that’s left to do now is wish them well, and send them off with a couple of the Big Apple’s most recognizable entertainers of all time.
QUARTERBACKStarter: Jimmy … CLICK HERE if you are having a problem viewing the photos on a mobile deviceSANTA CLARA — Almost every 49ers position group was addressed in some capacity the past month — except quarterback and tight end where Jimmy Garoppolo and George Kittle reign.Free agency still could bring in more competition, and next month’s draft surely will, especially with the No. 2 overall pick.Time to measure up each position’s depth and reveal a burning question:
Two related articles in the Public Library of Science (PLoS) show that a large number of species can branch out of a small population in a short time. Hobbyists familiar with tropical fish appreciate how wide is the variety found within Cichlids. In the first article,1 the author alleged that in the last 15,000 years, the number of cichlid species living in the lake grew from a handful to hundreds. Nearby Lake Malawi, which is supposedly much older, boasts no better variety of cichlids. Just as dog breeders select for a desired trait, the environment that each group of fish finds itself in selects for genes that cause the fish to survive well in that environment. Isolation of the new “breed” of fish causes the combination of genes to be preserved. The surprise to scientists was the speed at which this happened, compared to their expectations:Though Lake Victoria cichlids appear millions of years younger than their counterparts in nearby Lake Malawi, both groups display an enormous range of physical and behavioral traits. This staggering diversity in such young species provides compelling evidence for adaptive radiation, which occurs when divergent selection operates on ecological traits that favor different gene variants, or alleles, in different environments. When divergent selection on an ecological trait also affects mate choice—promoting reproductive isolation of diverging populations—ecological diversity and speciation may proceed in tandem and quickly generate numerous new species.Another surprise was to find that natural selection had succeeded in eliminating gene variety in some groups, “fixing” the gene: offspring contained only one type gene, recessive or dominant, and variety has been eliminated:Despite substantial theoretical and some experimental support for such “by-product speciation,” few studies have shown that selection has “fixed” alleles (that is, driven its frequency in a population to 100%) with different effects on an adaptive trait in closely related populations. But now, Yohey Terai, Norihiro Okada, and their colleagues have bridged that gap by demonstrating divergent selection on a visual system gene that influences both ecological adaptation and mate choice in cichlids.In another paper in PLoS Biology,2 the author demonstrates that it really was the environment that produced the variety of characteristics within the Cichlid population:Divergent natural selection acting on ecological traits, which also affect mate choice, is a key element of ecological speciation theory, but has not previously been demonstrated at the molecular gene level to our knowledge. Here we demonstrate parallel evolution in two cichlid genera under strong divergent selection in a gene that affects both. Strong divergent natural selection fixed opsin proteins with different predicted light absorbance properties at opposite ends of an environmental gradient. By expressing them and measuring absorbance, we show that the reciprocal fixation adapts populations to divergent light environments. The divergent evolution of the visual system coincides with divergence in male breeding coloration, consistent with incipient ecological by-product speciation.1Gross L (2006), “Demonstrating the Theory of Ecological Speciation in Cichlids,” PLoS Biology 4(12): e449 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0040449.2Terai Y, Seehausen O, Sasaki T, Takahashi K, Mizoiri S, et al. (2006), “Divergent selection on opsins drives incipient speciation in Lake Victoria cichlids,” PLoS Biology 4(12): e433.DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0040433.This is exactly what creationists have been saying all along: it doesn’t take long for genetic variation and the environment to produce the variety of species we see. All species of canines could have descended from one pair on an Ark a few thousand years ago. From wolves to Chihuahuas, all dogs are of the “dog” kind, and it didn’t take millions of years for their “adaptive radiation.” In fact, it could have taken only hundreds of years in some cases. The environment they found themselves in selected for the traits best suited to that environment. For an evolutionist accustomed to speaking in millions of years, a mere fifteen thousand years for Lake Victoria to get its variety of cichlids is just a blink of time. Yet they acknowledge that all these species appeared in this amazingly brief period. Human skin color could have been selected in a similar short time: light skinned people who could make Vitamin D with less sunlight were selected for in northern latitudes, while dark skinned people who resisted the effects of intense sun were selected for in equatorial regions. Notice the sleight of mind with terminology in the last quote: “Divergent natural selection”, “parallel evolution”, “divergent selection”, “divergent natural selection”, and “divergent evolution” are used interchangeably to mean the same thing. We are regularly being conditioned to confuse natural selection with evolution, or, to put it in other terms: micro-evolution with macro-evolution. Evolution requires new information to be created. There is no creation of new information here, as the articles admit. In fact, one of the points the author makes is that the natural selection of the environmental factors often drove the frequency of a particular gene in a fish population to 100%. All other genes affecting the characteristic had been eliminated. This is loss of information, not gain – the opposite of what macro-evolution requires. Surely, the scientists who wrote these papers must know this. Once again, commitment to evolution is faith in spite of the evidence.—DK(Visited 14 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
Methane is 30 times more potent than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas. Look where it comes from.The media are all reacting to the latest report from a federal commission on climate change, which says that global warming is a bigger threat than thought. Leftists are demanding prompt action (Science Daily) to avoid catastrophe (Nature). Some conservatives (Breitbart News), including President Trump (CNS News), are claiming the report is politically-motivated ‘fake science’ written by Obama holdovers in the government. CEH is not taking a position on this, but we do like to point out when peer-reviewed journal papers and consensus-believing secular science media cast doubt on whether global warming is humanity’s fault, if for no other reason than to show that a consensus can preach dogmatically from shaky ground – just like they do with Darwinism. Consider:From burping cows and food miles to greenhouse gasses (BBC News). This short article with video claims that cows, who emit methane from both ends of their digestive tracts, are at an all-time high in number.The amount of methane produced by livestock farming is predicted to rise by 60 percent over the next 11 years, which could be catastrophic for combating climate change. So what changes should we make to our eating habits?This could be blamed on humans, because we are breeding so many cows, but before humans began domesticating cattle, there were times in earth history when wild animals were much more numerous. Think of the methane that must have been emitted by herds of sauropods! Does it make sense that humans need to cut back on eating beef because today’s cows are at record numbers? What about the herds of wild bovines before the rise of agriculture, and the millions of bison that used to roam the American west?Bison herd, Black Hills, South Dakota (DFC).How a termite’s mound filters methane—and what it means for greenhouse gases (Phys.org). Cows are not the only belchers of methane. Many animals that digest plant material have gut bacteria that digest the cellulose and emit methane as a by-product. That includes termites, which are far more numerous than cattle. This article says that termites are able to recapture some of the methane they emit, which is helpful, but not all of it. Their measurements show that half of it escapes into the atmosphere. So even if science cuts termite methane emissions in half, that’s still a lot of greenhouse gas coming out the rear ends of these “poorly understood creatures.” Did the IPCC take termite methane into account? Remember methane is 30 times more potent than carbon dioxide (CO2) which receives most of the attention in climate mitigation talks.4,000-year-old termite mounds found in Brazil are visible from space (Science Daily). Let’s combine the previous paragraph with this finding also reported in Nature: “Termite mounds dating back millennia can be seen from space.” These are big termite mounds if they can be seen from space! Found in Brazil, they cover an area as big as Great Britain. How much methane were these billions of termites emitting for millennia before the Industrial Revolution? Both articles say nothing about that.Volcanoes and glaciers combine as powerful methane producers (Astrobiology Magazine). This article and another in Phys.org report a surprising discovery of large amounts of methane coming from a glacier in Iceland. This is the “first published field study to show methane release from glaciers on this scale,” and it represents a “huge amount” of methane.A study of Sólheimajökull glacier, which flows from the active, ice-covered volcano Katla, shows that up to 41 tonnes of methane is being released through meltwaters every day during the summer months. This is roughly equivalent to the methane produced by more than 136,000 belching cows.This means that even if many people gave up eating beef, and if ranchers cut their herds significantly, it would not make up for what is already coming from one glacier. Undoubtedly there are other sites on the planet with these conditions that are also emitting natural methane without any help from mankind. The open-access paper in Nature Scientific Reports explains all this, and yet another paper in Nature Scientific Reports insists that “increased mitigation efforts” will be required to meet the UN goals. Did the climate consensus take this into account when building their models and informing governments at climate conferences that drastic action must be taken by man to remove the threat we put ourselves in by building smokestacks? Not likely; the first paper admits that “subglacial microbial communities with methanogenic potential may be more significant and extensive than previously anticipated.” The press release gives astonishing news:“This is a huge amount of methane lost from the glacial meltwater stream into the atmosphere,” said Dr. Peter Wynn, a glacial biogeochemist from the Lancaster Environment Centre and corresponding author of the study. “It greatly exceeds average methane loss from non-glacial rivers to the atmosphere reported in the scientific literature. It rivals some of the world’s most methane-producing wetlands; and represents more than twenty times the known methane emissions of all Europe’s other volcanoes put together.”Aerial photo of Greenland with countless glaciers (DFC)Climate sensitivity to ozone and its relevance on the habitability of Earth-like planets (Icarus). Another factor not considered in climate models is the interaction of greenhouse gases with ozone. This paper is noteworthy on two fronts: (1) ozone warms the planet, and (2) exoplanets without proper ozone concentrations may not be habitable. So while humans have worked very hard to reduce the “ozone hole” they believe was produced by man’s use of fluorocarbons (which appears to have worked, thankfully, since the ozone hole is healing), they may have been warming the planet as a side effect of getting the atmosphere back to its natural state. Ponder that conundrum, as we ask again if climate models took this factor into account:Atmospheric ozone plays an important role on the temperature structure of the atmosphere. However, it has not been included in previous studies on the effect of an increasing solar radiation on the Earth’s climate. Here we study the climate sensitivity to the presence/absence of ozone with an increasing solar forcing for the first time with a global climate model. We show that the warming effect of ozone increases both the humidity of the lower atmosphere and the surface temperature. Under the same solar irradiance, the mean surface temperature is 7 K higher than in an analogue planet without ozone. Therefore, the moist greenhouse threshold, the state at which water vapor becomes abundant in the stratosphere, is reached at a lower solar irradiance (1572 W/m2 with respect to 1647 W/m2 in the case without ozone). Our results imply that ozone reduces the maximum solar irradiance at which Earth-like planets would remain habitable.Climate correction: when scientists get it wrong (Phys.org). In this consensus-defending piece, Patrick Galey tells how the media and scientists goofed on November 1 by reporting a flawed paper. The paper claimed that oceans were warming faster than thought. But in science’s defense, Galey assures readers that you can trust the scientific consensus, even when they are wrong. Watch this dramatic illustration of snatching victory from the jaws of defeat:Peter Frumhoff, chief climate scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said the ocean study correction was “a beautiful thing”.“The rapid, transparent acknowledgement and correction of inadvertent errors in scientific papers… is at the heart of what separates science from dogma,” he told AFP.And so, let us all lean on the scientific consensus, the article says, with appeals to authority and bandwagon:“Science is a human endeavour and it’s therefore imperfect. What’s important is that results are scrutinised and replicated by others so that we can assess what is robust and what isn’t,” Gavin A. Schmidt, director at the Goddard Institute for Space Sciences at NASA, told AFP.“Current climate change has been looked at by thousands of scientists (and other interested people) and our understanding of it is pretty solid,” he said.If your confidence in the consensus has just been restored, despite the “replication crisis” science is dealing with (16 Nov 2014), consider that those previous articles all admitted that the consensus did not take into effect methane from glaciers, methane from termites, ozone warming, and methane produced by vast herds of large and small animals (from termites to sauropods) long before mankind built the first coal plant.Folks, you are watching a real live current case of dogmatic scientists banding together in self-promoting consensus, convincing the media they are right, and pushing governments to redistribute wealth as penance for mankind’s climate sins. And yet at the same time they keep finding new natural sources of greenhouse gases, like methane that is 30 times more potent than CO2, that they never thought about before. The climate models used as a club by these fallible scientists cannot know all the unknowns and unknown unknowns. So is it possible, we ask, that thousands of scientists can be wrong? There are historical cases of this phenomenon, where the minority or the maverick was right against all the screaming hordes of consensus bigots accusing their critics of being “anti-science.” Whether you believe the climate consensus is your business, but you had better build your case on research into real data, not on appeals to authority. And do that with Darwinism, too. Hopefully we have shown for 17 years now that the Darwin consensus is trusting in a house of cards built on quicksand in a windstorm, despite their dogmatic, bigoted intolerance of skeptics. (Visited 712 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest Dry again today. But, the pattern gets wetter tomorrow forward. We should see sunshine for most of the day today, although we wont rule out a few clouds in northern parts of the state.Moisture totals from Wed-Thur-early Friday event.Rain arrives tomorrow, and continues through Thursday. There will be two waves of action, with about 12-16 hours of pause in-between. Rain can end as wet snowflakes on Friday morning. However liquid equivalent precipitation remains in a .5″-1.5″ range for the entire event.Significantly colder behind this system, with clouds breaking for some late day sun on Friday. Then we stay partly to mostly sunny through the weekend and Monday. Temps will stay cold through the weekend, but we should start to see some temperature moderation MondayStill dry for Tuesday, but we see clouds increase through the day. Scattered showers can develop overnight next Tuesday night through Wednesday, but will be limited to a few hundredths to a couple of tenths. The rest of the 10 day window is dry.The extended period shows a few showers around for Saturday the 9th, with rain totals from .05″-.4″ over 70% of Ohio, otherwise we are dry with a mix of clouds and sun. We can see cold air initially for the 10th and 11th, but then temps moderate and go even to above normal levels toward the end of the 11-16 day period.
German cruise line TUI Cruises celebrated the delivery of its new cruise ship Mein Schiff 6 on May 9, 2017. The ship was constructed by Finnish shipbuilder Meyer Turku.Featuring a length of around 294 meters, Mein Schiff 6 has 15 decks with around 1,267 staterooms and the capacity to carry approximately 2,534 passengers. It is the fourth ship in a series of vessels built in Turku for TUI Cruises.“We are very happy about the delivery of Mein Schiff 6 in time and excellent quality,” Wybcke Meier, TUI Cruises CEO, said.“With Mein Schiff 6 our goal was to improve further from previous ships with a few fine tunings based on passenger feedback and at the same time build it with fewer hours than before. At the same time we are ramping up our production volume to meet the demands of our long and stable order book,” Jan Meyer, CEO, said.With an order book reaching until 2024, Meyer Turku shipyard is facing a gradual ramp up of production in the coming years.“We are rebuilding the shipyard with heavy investments exceeding 100 million euros for a further increase in output,” Meyer added.Image Courtesy: Meyer Turku
zoom German shipping major Hapag-Lloyd finished the first three months of the current financial year with a positive operating result, in spite of higher bunker prices.Although the company’s EBITDA improved by 6.4% to EUR 131.3 million from last year’s EUR 123.4 million, Hapag-Lloyd informed that its net loss widened to EUR -62.1 million from EUR -42.8 million seen in the same quarter in 2016.Hapag-Lloyd said that the first-quarter result “was noticeably affected by ongoing bunker price increases.” At 313 USD/tonne, the average bunker price was clearly above the previous year’s figure of 197 USD/tonne, representing the highest level seen since June 2015.The transport volume increased by 6.8% year-on-year to more than 1.9 million TEU from 1.8 million TEU handled in the same period a year earlier. While the average freight rate was USD 20 lower than in the first quarter of the previous year at 1,047 USD/TEU, there were further signs of a slight upward curve compared with the past quarters, according to the company.The greater transport volume and exchange rate effects pushed revenue up by 10.4% to EUR 2.13 billion from EUR 1.93 billion seen in the corresponding period in 2016.Rate increases were introduced in a number of trades even though the industry environment remains challenging, but these rate increases “are only going to have an impact on the company’s result later in the year,” Hapag-Lloyd said.“Our activities in the first quarter focused on preparations for the merger with UASC and on the launch of our new alliance. The launch of the THE Alliance went well, and the merger with UASC will be closed shortly,” Rolf Habben Jansen, CEO of Hapag-Lloyd AG, said.“After the closing our priority will be to integrate UASC into Hapag-Lloyd quickly and to realize initial synergies from the merger,” Jansen added.The merger with the Arabian liner shipping company is expected to generate annual savings of USD 435 million from 2019 onwards, with a large proportion of this already to be achieved in 2018, according to the company.