Giants acquire 2019 Angels first round draft choice in Winter Meetings trade

first_imgSAN DIEGO — Free agency has been a much hotter topic than the trade market at this year’s Winter Meetings, but the San Francisco Giants have been involved in both aspects of the player acquisition process in San Diego.The Giants added three players to the organization on Tuesday, trading for infielder Zack Cozart and shortstop prospect Will Wilson in a swap with the Angels before announcing a one-year deal with free agent starter Kevin Gausman.Tuesday’s trade with the Angels is essentially …last_img

NOMA Still Isn’t Working

first_imgScience journals and websites continue to act as if religion is a subcategory of the science department.  If Stephen Jay Gould thought that NOMA was a good idea to keep peace between science and religion (see 11/05/2006), nobody paid any attention.  Scientism has taken over the world. Here’s how it happened.  Churches in the 19th century made a devil’s bargain: “You scientists can have all the natural stuff; we just want to focus on the salvation of souls.”  Sounds so attractive a deal.  After all, what did D. L. Moody and Charles Spurgeon know about boring stuff like pig embryos, fossils and geological strata?  “You can have it.We don’t want it; we don’t need it.”  And so the church gave away Nature to “Science”. Yeah, you’re just a phenotype, performing all the genes inside / Living things only seem designed, ’cause you can’t see how they’ve been revised / And the feedback lies in evolution’s brutal gaze / Either you have babies who have babies or get booed off stage. Was this attack against design criticized?  Not in the least.  Brinkman was allowed to preach a salvation message and hortatory sermon to the journal’s readers: “Converting people to looking at how evolution works and accepting it as a reality is an intellectual battle that is worth fighting.” Rap against ID:  Nature raved about Baba Brinkman, “a Canadian rap artist whose award-winning show The Rap Guide to Evolution wowed UK crowds at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival during Charles Darwin’s bicentenary year.”  The interviewer provided a sample of his materialistic, Spencerian-Malthusian-Dawkinsian lyrics: Next thing you know, the conspirators Huxley, Tyndall, Haeckel and others were redefining Nature.  Nature is all that exists.  Nature is all that is Real.  Since Science now owned Nature, Science owned everything that is Real.  By implication, churches dealt with things that are Unreal.  Anybody living in an unreal world must be mentally ill.  Religious people, therefore, became the patients of psychological scientists, who treated them like lab rats. Happiness science:  Another scientific article on happiness appeared on Medical Xpress June 14 (cf. 05/19/2011, bullet 1).  But do people need science to confirm that “Money can’t buy happiness”, like some New Zealand psychologists produced in “findings” published in a psychology journal?  To whom should a reader look for happiness: a psychological study, or Matthew 6:33?  What if the psychologists had found that money could buy happiness?  Would that make it right?   Can science answer such questions? Theology therefore reclaims Science from those mentally ill materialist scientists who deny Reality.  Science is once again the property of the Creator.  We learned our lesson.  Never again will we cede our rightful territory to the conspiratorial bigots whose pilfering of Christian concepts led to intellectual atrocities like those listed above.  From now on, you will practice science within the will of your Creator, and for His glory alone, like Newton and Kepler did.  We will suffer non-Christians limited operation on scientific questions, provided they are observable, testable, and repeatable, and have as their goal the improvement of human life or good stewardship of the Earth (see Francis Bacon).  Any time one of you tries to steal our assumptions or moral categories to deny your Creator, though, we are going to expose your irrationality and embarrass you publicly.  This is for your own good.  It is a form of tough love for sinners who trade in self-refuting fantasies, the outcome of which leads to evil and chaos.  Now, let’s get back to the beginning of wisdom and clean up this mess.(Visited 13 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0 It is abundantly clear that scientists and academic experts view no subject, no issue, no controversy as out of bounds.  It is also abundantly clear that science journals and news sites feel no obligation to ever include the opinions of religious experts or conservatives.  They have become echo chambers for godless liberals who pretend their critics do not even exist, except maybe as lab rats or targets for mockery. One can only shudder at the thought of a “marriage pantheon.”  The Roman pantheon was a shrine to pagan gods.  Science has its pagan gods, too: moral relativism, materialism, and evolution.  What kind of marriage(s) will come out of that toxic brew?  Historic marriage was instituted by our Creator.  The denial of the Creator puts Man, with his Science, in charge.  And now that the “gay rights” special-interest groups have co-opted so-called “scientific” experts with their presumptive authority, don’t even try to imagine what permutations of 1 + n entities will be enshrined in the “marriage pantheon.” Gay marriage advocacy:  In a shocking display of NOMA violation, Science Daily advocated abandoning Father’s Day and Mother’s Day and replacing them with “Co-Parent’s Day.”  Why?  Because “a second parent doesn’t have to be a dad. It can be a same-sex partner, a grandparent or another caregiver.”  Even though most of the article affirmed the value of fathers, clearly the program featured in the article, advocated by Philip Cowan, a UC Berkeley psychologist , is in line with the “gay agenda” of redefining marriage and family. Once again, psychologists were presented as experts with “findings” deemed scientific, therefore more worthy of reporting than the views of Focus on the Family, the Family Research Council, or other institutions who specialize in family issues.  The science sites always give the edge to academics and psychologists because they are assumed to be scientists.center_img Church blame:  Medical Xpress accused churches of ignoring mental illness in their congregations.  “Mental illness of a family member destroys the family’s connection with the religious community, a new study by Baylor University psychologists has found, leading many affected families to leave the church and their faith behind.”  The article begs the question whether mental illness even exists, or whether conditions could be divided into sin problems and physical problems. Many churches have active counseling programs for those suffering depression, stress, guilt, despair and other ailments.  They already cooperate with medical institutions that specialize in mental symptoms caused by physical conditions, but deny that “mental illness” is some kind of sterile category that can explain behavior apart from spiritual factors, considering the mish-mash of theories in psychological “science” and the wayward history of psychology (cf. 04/21/2011, 02/17/2010, 10/15/2009) .  Would a psychologist ever diagnose any behavior as caused by sin?  Who is to decide? Moral motives:  One would think religious counselors would be in the business of determining the motives of sinners and saints, but psychologists made it their business.  According to Medical Xpress, “People are more likely to condemn the bad behaviour of others when they sense someone else may be watching, research by a PhD student in the Department of Philosophy at the University of Sydney shows.”  This conclusion was published in the journal Evolutionary Psychology. Whether or not the psychologists’ conclusions coincide at any point with those of a preacher, priest or rabbi, it is clear from the article that the “scientific” study by psychologists intruded into non-scientific domains.  “The relevance of these findings is broad including shedding light on both politics and religion,” the article said.  One of the psychologists made it clear who’s in charge: “”The research is also part of Explaining Religion, a three-year, multinational project looking at religious practice and the kinds of behavior, involving moral judgement, that religion often claims to control.”  While claiming that “The findings do not prove belief in the existence of a judgmental god plays a role in cooperation,” the clear message is that psychologists need no such god for their theories.  They can explain human behavior simply in terms of behaviors and mental processes “While there was a significant decline across the high school years, it’s possible that teens were simply busy doing other things, perhaps a part-time job, taking part in extra-curricular activities or simply socializing with peers,” he [Andrew J. Fuligni, a UCLA professor of psychiatry] said. “Plus, kids are beginning to make their own decisions, and where attendance at religious services and activities is driven by parents earlier in childhood, parents may be allowing their teens to make their own decisions about participation as they progress through high school.” This lesson from history is disturbing and far-reaching, but there is a solution.  Let’s go back and redefine Nature again.  Actually, since the term is so ambiguous it is virtually meaningless, let’s define all of reality as Supernatural (we can play their word game, too).  There’s even observational support for it: lifting your arm is a supernatural act, could it not be argued?  Mind over matter–wow!  Spooky action at a distance in the fundamental particles, fine-tuning in the universe, arguments in the conceptual realm–don’t you see?  The supernatural is everywhere!  Everything is supernatural.  (What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.) Teen religion:  In “Teens Maintain Their Religion,” Medical Xpress went beyond just stating poll results.  It interpreted them as “not surprising,” and actually pretty normal that teens abandon the religious practices they were taught: Beyond gay marriage:  If same-sex marriage continues its sweep, now that New York’s legislature adopted it by the narrowest of margins, what’s to stop other definitions of family?  Indeed, PhysOrg asked, “Can U.S. Law Handle Polygamy?”  The very question suggests it might.  The press release from Washington University in St. Louis gave honor to “Adrienne Davis, JD, an expert on gender relations and the William M. Van Cleve Professor of law” to give her “expert” opinion at the PhysOrg pulpit. To Davis, whether you agree polygamy is right or wrong is beside the point.  She “approaches polygamy as a problem of bargaining, cooperation and strategic behavior.”  She acknowledged that “Proponents and detractors of polygamy use same-sex marriage to support their arguments,” but was only concerned whether U.S. laws can handle plural marriages.  She even excused it by comparing it to families that have undergone multiple divorces, a form of “serial polygamy, or polygamy on the installment plan” (see Analogy).  It was not her moral concern whether two wrongs make a right.  But aren’t children harmed by polygamy?  The article threw in some doubt: “it is unclear that polygamy generates more problems for children than the standard alternatives.”  And aren’t women abused by it?  Science and law can work it out: “She proposes some default rules that might accommodate polygamy, while ensuring against some of its historic and ongoing abuses.” There was not a tinge of moral outrage in this article at the idea of polygamy, long detested by most Americans and civilizations.  Science has arrived to tell us what is moral.  “Is it better to channel legal energy into continuing to root out, repress, and punish polygamy, or into admitting it into the marriage pantheon?” Davis ended this “scientific” article loaded with moral terms like better, best, rules, and fairness. “The answer may hinge on whether polygamy could be effectively regulated.”  Next question: who regulates the regulators? Atheist pulpit:  New Scientist, an ostensibly scientific media site, gave a very friendly interview to atheist evangelist Robin Ince.  Reporter Roger Highfield appeared to enjoy it: “The UK’s funniest rationalist celebrates the world seen through godless eyes”  [italics in original].  Ince characterized his views as rational while denigrating his opponents as otherwise.  An avowed humanist and Carl Sagan disciple, he spoke of “looking at the universe rationally and avoid coping mechanisms like mysticism or religion”. With a sweep of the hand Ince wrote off scholars who disagree with him, mocking, “I think it is a pity to live your life in ignorance and embrace that ignorance  – for instance with ideas like intelligent design.”  Observers of Medical Xpress (a branch of PhysOrg) over the years know that it is practically inconceivable to imagine the site granting a comeback argument to any leader in the intelligent design community, such as William Dembski, Jonathan Wells or Stephen Meyer, all of whom have multiple PhDs.  Ince was given a chance to choose his hero between Einstein and Darwin.  “I love the Englishness of Darwin, the sweetness of his character. He was a man without arrogance who overturned our view of how all living things came to be as they are,” he said.  There were no references to Gerald Bergman’s new book The Dark Side of Darwin, obviously.  (Bergman also has multiple PhDs.)last_img read more

IPL 2011: Deccan Chargers vs Delhi Daredevils- DC win by 16 runs

first_imgHyderabad’s 169-run target proved to be too tough for Delhi as they lost this IPL match by 16 runs at the Ferozeshah Kotla Stadium in New Delhi on Tuesday. Score | PhotosThe bulk of scoring from the Hyderabad camp was done by opener Sunny Shohal (62) and Kumar Sangakkara (49) who put on 92 runs for the second wicket.Delhi started their chase poorly looking wickets early. In fact, they lost their first wicket in the fourth over when the total was 28. Delhi skipper Virender Sehwag wanted to cut loose and he made room for that in Hyderabad medium-pacer Harmeet Singh’s over but ended up getting caught at point by Daniel Christian on 12.The last ball of the next over saw Naman Ojha too walk back. Christian trapped him leg-before on 2 to reduce Delhi to 33/2. New man Aaron Finch too did not stay at the crease for long and was sent back to the dugout by Harmeet on a nought. Delhi were 38/2 at the stage.Then David Warner and Venugopal Rao put on 52 runs for the fourth wicket and they were quick in their pursuit, scoring in boundaries, but Hyderabad leggi Amit Mishra ensured that their partnership did not last long. He got the better of Rao in the 13th over with Christian performing the final honours near the boundary. Rao fell for 21 and Delhi fell to 90/4.David Warner, who was going steady till now too departed. And it had to be Hyderabad part-time bowler Shikhar Dhawan who scripted his departure in the 15th over. Warner played a pull shot off him and D Ravi Taje pouched him at deep mid-wicket on 51. Delhi were reduced to 99/5 post his wicket.advertisementOn the first ball of the 16th over Irfan Pathan played a sweep off Hyderabad left-arm spinner Pragyan Ojha and the ball took the aerial route to land in Bharat Chipli’s hands at deep mid-wicket for 5. Delhi were 112/6 at the stage and were looking in trouble.Yogesh Nagar, who scored 22 before being bowled out by Christian in the last over, and James Hopes tried hard for a revival but failed as the team ended up losing the match by 16 runs.Hyderabad innings Opener Sunny Shohal and Kumar Sangakkara scored 92 runs for the second wicket as Hyderabad posted 168/4 in 20 overs against Delhi on Tuesday’s first IPL match.Earlier, Hyderabad won the toss and elected to bat against the hosts at the Ferozeshah Kotla Stadium pitch and ended up losing their opener Shikhar Dhawan in the second over of the innings to Delhi paceman Irfan Pathan. Hyderabad were 14/1 at the stage in the 19th match of the IPL.But, post that wicket captain Kumar Sangakkara and Sunny Sohal got on with a partnership to frustrate the opposition bowlers. The two put on 92 runs for the second wicket before a rush of blood saw Sangakkara taking the aerial route off Ashok Dinda on the last ball of the 12th over and Aaron Finch took a fine catch moving backwards. He didn’t move his eyes of the ball and pouched the ball nicely. Sngakkara fell on 49 and Hyderabad were 106/2.After his wicket, Sohal too lost his rhythm and fell to Shahbaz Nadeem in the 15th over. He scored a fien 62 that came off just 41 balls. Daniel Christian was the last wicket to fall for Hyderabad as Cameron White and Bharat Chipli scored an unbeaten 12 runs for the fith wicket as Hyderabad finished with a fine 168/4 on board in this IPL match against Delhi.last_img read more

New York Now Has More Mets Fans Than Yankees Fans

8/31/075135-16 4/17/064836-12 POLL DATEYANKEESMETSMETS MARGIN 3/24/146127-34 Move over, New York Yankees — there’s a new baseball boss in town. For the first time since at least 1998, Quinnipiac University has found, more New York City baseball fans liked the Mets than the Yankees. Although it was a narrow victory — 45 percent to 43 percent, well within the margin of error — it shows that winning ballgames remains the key to winning the hearts of Big Apple sports fans.The Yankees usually hold a hefty fan advantage over the Mets in New York. Over the last 20 years, the Yankees have averaged a sizable 55 percent-to-31 percent lead over their crosstown rivals. Just three years ago, the Yankees led the Mets 61 percent to 27 percent on the same question Quinnipiac asked this year. 3/25/095655-133429 3/16/005235-17 10/19/004337-6 Average5554-1334310 6/1/126221-41 The Mets do much better when baseball fans are forced to choose between the Mets and the Yankees. While the Yankees lose a statistically insignificant 1 percentage point of support on average, the Mets pick up 10 points of support. This seems to confirm the finding of a nonscientific Reddit poll from three years ago that found the Yankees were the most hated team among baseball fans. In other words, non-Yankee and non-Met fans may pick the Mets when forced to choose between the two of them, simply because they dislike the Yankees more.This year, though, the Mets beat the Yankees on the open-ended version of the question — the version in which they have always done worse. If we take this year’s result and apply the same boost the Mets typically receive in the other version of the question (where fans were forced to choose between the two teams), they would probably hold a 10-point head-to-head advantage over the Yankees. That’s pretty mind-boggling, considering the Mets were down 22 points on that type of question just three years ago.The Mets need to keep winning, however, if they want to maintain an edge over the Yankees. As I wrote about three years ago, the Mets seem to pick up fans when they win and shed them when they lose, but the same didn’t hold true for the Yankees. Now, it seems the Yankees may also gain or lose fans depending on their record. (Before this year, Quinnipiac had never polled after a season in which the Mets made the playoffs — or World Series — more recently than the Yankees.) In the chart below, I’ve plotted the difference between the percentages of Met fans and Yankee fans in New York City against the difference in how long it had been since each team had been in the playoffs.1For the sake of simplicity, I’m using the version of Quinnipiac’s question that allows baseball fans to choose any team, not just the Mets and the Yankees. However, there’s a clear correlation with either question. 3/24/1459%37%-22 3/25/095542-13 Fav. in a Subway Series Average5531-24 4/1/024738-9 Indeed, the Yankee lead climbed as high as 41 points five years ago. That survey was taken after a season in which the Yankees had made the playoffs, while the Mets hadn’t appeared in the postseason in six years. Now the tables have turned: The Mets have made the playoffs two years in a row, even appearing in the World Series in 2015. Meanwhile, the Yankees didn’t make the playoffs last year and they haven’t made a World Series since 2009.Before this year, the only time the Mets ever came close to the Yankees was in May 2007. That year, 49 percent of New York City baseball fans said they’d root for the Yankees in a Subway Series against the Mets, while 48 percent said they’d root the other way. Recent results had an influence then, too — the Mets made it to the National League Championship Series (before losing to the St. Louis Cardinals) in 2006, while the Yankees were knocked out in the American League Division Series.The Mets’ triumph in this year’s poll, however, is far more impressive than when they nearly overtook the Yankees 10 years ago. You’ll notice in the table that there are two types of questions Quinnipiac has asked on this subject in the past: Sometimes they asked baseball fans who they’d root for in a World Series matchup between the Mets and the Yankees, as they did when the Mets came close to the Yankees in 2007. Other times, fans are asked who their favorite baseball team is overall. (That is, fans can choose teams besides the Mets and Yankees.) And in four surveys, Quinnipiac asked both versions of the question. 7/26/015432-22 3/24/146159-2273710 5/28/074948-1 POLL DATETEAM IN MLBIN SUBWAY SERIESDIFFTEAM IN MLBIN SUBWAY SERIESDIFF 5/28/0750%49%-136%48%12 Source: Quinnipiac University YANKEES ARE FAVORITE …METS ARE FAVORITE … 5/28/075036-14 NYC baseball fans like the Mets more than the Yankees for the first time in 20 years Among New York City baseball fansSource: Quinnipiac University Average5138-13 8/31/075152135449 7/28/986028-32 3/25/095633-23 3/31/1743%45%+2 7/29/115926-33 The Mets are more popular when they’re pitted against the Yankees 4/1/055136-15 7/18/064637-9 8/31/075244-8 Poll DateYankeesMetsMets margin Perhaps what’s most interesting about the chart is that, based on prior trends, we would have expected the Yankees to have more fans than the Mets even now. That is, in an environment where the Mets were doing slightly better than the Yankees, the pattern would have been for the Yankees to still have a larger fan base. That might mean Quinnipiac’s new poll is too friendly to the Mets — certainly a possibility, given the margin of error. It could also be the case that the Mets are receiving a “bonus” because they were in the playoffs last year and the Yankees weren’t. Again, we can’t really test that phenomenon because in every previous survey, the Yankees had been in the playoffs as recently (or far more so) than the Mets had been.Either way, it’s clear that New York City is a two-baseball-team town right now. The Mets have caught up to — or perhaps even surpassed — their older brother. Yankee fans need their team to start winning again, or they’ll have to get used to seeing a lot more Mets caps on the subway as they make their commute. 8/15/136223-39 FAVORITE TEAM IN MLB read more

The Rams Really Made A Mess Of Things

It’s appropriate that the lowest-scoring Super Bowl ever saw an interception on the first pass and set a record for the longest punt in a title game. In a season with the second-most points scored per game in NFL history, it was defense, not offense, that ruled the day.Throughout the 13-3 New England victory, the Patriots frustrated the Rams’ offensive plans, pressuring quarterback Jared Goff into off-target throws, ill-advised scrambles and finally — when it mattered most, with 4:19 left in the fourth quarter — a game-clinching interception. In holding Los Angeles to 3 points — which tied the 1971 Dolphins with the lowest point total in a Super Bowl — the Patriots were relentless in their pass rush. They blitzed an incredible 41 percent of the time, and Goff was pressured on 39 percent of his dropbacks, according to ESPN’s Stats & Information Group. And it wasn’t just the Patriots front six that made life difficult on the Rams; the Patriots secondary blanketed Los Angeles all night long. According to NFL Next Gen Stats, Rams receivers had the worst separation when targeted by Goff since Sean McVay was named head coach.But this wasn’t a case of the Patriots defense — one that was middling most of the regular season — suddenly morphing into the 1985 Chicago Bears or the 2000 Baltimore Ravens.1Both of which, incidentally, gave up more points in their respective Super Bowl wins. The Rams’ execution and play-calling were suspect as well. The Patriots held C.J. Anderson and Todd Gurley to 57 yards on the ground, and they did it without stacking the box. The Rams never faced a defensive front with more than seven men near the line of scrimmage — not even once in the game. Against a light box of six or fewer defenders, the Rams offensive line was able to generate only 21 rushing yards on six carries — a 3.5-yard average. That was 2.2 yards worse than their regular-season average of 5.7 and just a 10th of a yard more than the 3.4 yards per carry2On 12 carries. they averaged Sunday against a seven-man front. The Rams went from being the third-ranked rushing team in the league against these light and neutral defensive fronts — averaging 5.4 yards per carry in the regular season — to one that could muster only 3.4 in the biggest game of the year.Goff, who was hit five times in the game, was never able to find a consistent rhythm and frequently missed his target. Most notably, he was late on a pass in the third quarter, allowing safety Jason McCourty to break up a sure touchdown to a wide-open Brandin Cooks in the end zone. McVay, meanwhile, failed to aggressively push small edges, never going for it on fourth-and-short. The Rams also played sloppily, earning nine penalties for 65 yards to New England’s three for 20. Much was written about the experience gap between the two teams at coach and QB, and it showed. At one point, Goff forgot the snap count he called in the huddle and was flagged for a false start, an incredibly rare feat for an NFL quarterback.The net result of the Rams’ offensive futility was historic: They became only the second team in Super Bowl history not to score a touchdown, wasting a defensive effort that held Tom Brady and the Patriots to 13 points. And while there may be more to football than scoring points, it’s hard to argue that this Super Bowl was a shining example of compelling low-scoring football. Neither team was efficient on third down, with each converting just three opportunities into a new set of downs. A total of one play was run in the red zone by either team. The first half of the game was so uneventful that the two plays with the highest impact as measured by positive win probability3Using the nflscrapR win probability model. added were punts by Johnny Hekker.In a season defined by high-scoring excitement, this Super Bowl could have been a showcase for explosive offensive efficiency. Instead we got nine Hekker punts and Maroon 5 in the halftime show. In short, it was one of the worst Super Bowls ever. read more

Womens Basketball Ohio State wins fourth straight with 6150 victory against Wisconsin

Ohio State guard Carmen Grande (1) dribbles the ball up the court in the second half of the game against Indiana on Jan. 10. Ohio State won 55-50. Credit: Casey Cascaldo | Photo EditorThe Ohio State women’s basketball team (14-12, 10-7 Big Ten) continued its hot streak, winning 10 of its past 14 games, with a 61-50 win against Wisconsin(13-16, 4-13). Thursday’s game saw four players score 10 points or more, with redshirt senior guard Carmen Grande leading the way for Ohio State. Her 17 points along with three rebounds and five assists were key in giving the Buckeyes a substantial lead for most of the game. Also getting in on the action were freshman guard Janai Crooms, redshirt senior guard Carly Santoro and freshman forward Dorka Juhasz, who combined for 32 of the team’s 61 points. Crooms was hot early on helping the Buckeyes get off to an early lead in the first quarter. She was 4-of-8 from the field for 11 points to go with six rebounds. Moving into the second quarter, Santoro and Juhasz stepped up to take control of the game and get a 13-point lead heading into halftime. Santoro scored 11 points with two rebounds and two assists. Juhasz had a double-double with 10 points and 14 rebounds to contribute not only on the offensive side, but also being a key figure on the defensive side as well. Wisconsin could never quite get it going on the offensive side early on, but senior forward Marsha Howard kept the Badgers in the game with a 15-point performance along with seven rebounds and two assists. The second half was a bit of different story, as a 10-point Wisconsin run in the third quarter cut an 18-point Ohio State lead back down to a single-digit game. However, the Buckeyes countered with a nine-point run of their own to take a firm hold of the game again. Despite a nine-point run by Wisconsin in the fourth quarter, Ohio State burned enough clock to limit Wisconsin’s options. The Badgers were forced to foul to stay in the game, and the Buckeyes made enough free throws to get away with the win. The Buckeyes will close out the regular season with a rematch against Rutgers on Sunday at 2 p.m. at the Schottenstein Center. read more

Louisville Baseball Continues Excellence in Classroom

first_imgOverall, 33 student-athletes amassed a 3.0 GPA or better during the spring semester, with 16 members on the Dean’s List. The span of 16 straight semesters with a team GPA of 3.0 or better coincides with unparalleled success on the field for Louisville, which has three College World Series appearances, five NCAA Super Regional berths, seven NCAA Regional bids and seven conference championships during those eight seasons. Louisville baseball wrapped up the spring semester with a cumulative team grade point average of 3.32 to mark its 16th consecutive semester with a 3.0 or higher. Five members of the Louisville baseball program earned their undergraduate degrees from UofL at the conclusion of the semester. Current players Bryan Hoeing, J.D. Mundt, Zeke Pinkham and Pat Rumoro, along with bullpen catcher Gabe Burchell received their bachelor’s degrees. LOUISVILLE, Ky. – While the seventh-ranked Louisville baseball team has been experiencing great success on the diamond, the Cardinals have also excelled in the classroom.center_img Story Links FOLLOWING THE CARDINALS ON SOCIAL MEDIAFans can follow Louisville baseball on Twitter, Facebook or Instagram at @LouisvilleBSB. Print Friendly Versionlast_img read more

Mamata asks people to eradicate the menace of open defecation

first_imgKolkata: On the occasion of World Toilet Day, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee Monday asked people to eradicate the menace of open defecation. Banerjee said 11 districts of the state have become open defecation free (ODF). “On #WorldToiletDay today, let us pledge to eradicate the menace of open defecation. Our states flagship programme, #MissionNirmalBangla, has been very successful,” Banerjee wrote on her Twitter handle this morning. Also Read – Rain batters Kolkata, cripples normal lifeShe said “As of May, 2018, 11 districts, 33,261 villages, 2,621 gram panchayats and 255 blocks in the state have become #ODF.” The Mission Nirmal Bangla initiated by West Bengal government endeavours to achieve the larger objective of reduction in child mortality and morbidity, overall mortality and morbidity by reducing chances of water-borne and fecal- borne diseases due to prevalence of open defecation. World Toilet Day is an official United Nations international observance day on November 19 to inspire action to tackle the global sanitation crisis.last_img read more