…threatened to bomb businessesThe Parika, East Bank Essequibo man who had been residing in Venezuela and who had threatened to bomb several stores in Guyana in a Facebook post was on Monday slapped with an inciting public terror charge.Shaim Wazir Nazir being escorted after his court appearanceShaim Wazir Nazir, 23, who at the time of making the post was living at Parika Backdam, stood before Chief Magistrate Ann McLennan at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Courts.He denied that between June 1 and June 3, 2018 at Parika Backdam, with intent to cause public terror, he wrote in a Facebook post: “Essequibo belongs to Venezuela, I will bomb all of your stores one by one.”Nazir, who worked as a labourer and who returned to Guyana just six months ago, was remanded to prison. According to Chief Magistrate McLennan, the defendant was remanded in the name of public safety.The case will continue on June 26, 2018 at the Leonora Magistrate’s Court.Following the post, hundreds of Guyanese called for his arrest.
Here’s news about the latest technologies coming out of biomimetics, the imitation of nature’s designs.Turtle skis. Before the spring skiing season is over, strap on your turtle-shell skis. PhysOrg says that new skis designed to mimic turtle scales will flex more in relation to your body position on the slopes, while remaining shock-resistant. A researcher thought about turtles, and an idea was born:The idea of mimicking the morphology of turtles occurred to Véronique Michaud, a researcher at EPFL’s Laboratory of Polymer and Composite Technology, while she was attending a seminar on bioinspired materials. “The scales of a turtle interlock, like a jigsaw puzzle, and are connected by a polymer,” said Michaud. “When turtles breathe, the scales separate slightly and the shell becomes flexible. But when an external shock occurs, the shell tightens and stiffens. It struck me immediately that we could build these features into skis.”Bacteria batteries. Today’s lithium batteries are unsafe, costly and dirty. Why not make power with living power plants? This would be especially helpful for solar and wind power that needs to be stored. Science Daily says that Dutch researchers see a future in bacteria batteries:The researchers combined, for the first time, two separate microbial energy systems: one that uses bacteria to form acetate from electricity and one to convert the produced acetate back into electricity. The researchers successfully charged the battery over a 16-hour period and discharged it over the next 8 hours, mimicking the day-night pattern typical for solar energy production. They repeated this cycle 15 times in as many days. With further optimization, they say the energy density of the microbial battery could be competitive with conventional technologies. Someday it could help us store energy from local renewable sources safely and at a lower cost than current options.Spider water collector. Why do raindrops stick to spider webs? Korean researchers looked into this, Science Daily says, and found that the adhesion of water to a fiber depends on its speed. A mechanical engineer in Seoul commented, “Engineers will apply our results to control the amount of liquid retained on fibers for water-collection from foggy air, air-filtration, and fiber-coating technologies.”Plastic proteins. What if you could build polymers the way proteins do? Science Daily put this into a long headline: “Plastic proteins: Synthetic material mimics essential characteristics of natural proteins: With inexpensive chemical base, variety of materials could be as limitless as proteins are.” This could give a whole new ID-friendly meaning to the phrase, “building blocks of life.” Synthetic building blocks can be more durable than amino acids while making good use of the design principle that sequence leads to function. Let’s quote the article’s paean of praise for proteins:Proteins are at the core of life: In living things, they are architect and engineer. They are the wrenches and machines that build an organism’s varied parts, building those parts out of other proteins of many sizes and shapes. They form the power plants in cells, run the plants, make energy and store energy. They make things grow, and are the bricks of growth as well.Because of their versatility, proteins are some of researchers’ favorite tools.Moth-eye solar cells. Here’s an update on an old biomimetics classic from Science Daily. The compound eyes of moths have desirable properties like anti-reflectivity and a self-cleaning surface. But they are not alone in the living world as sources of inspiration, this time for Chinese scientists (as you can tell from the English translation):Nature is no doubt the world’s best biological engineer, whose simple, exquisite but powerful designs have inspired scientists and engineers to tackle the challenges of technologies for centuries. Scientists recently mimicked the surface structure of a moth’s eye, a unique structure with an antireflective property, to develop a highly light-absorbent graphene material. This is breakthrough in solar cell technology. Rice leaves and butterfly wings also have unique self-cleaning surface characteristics, which inspire scientists to develop novel materials resistant to biofouling. The bio-inspired periodic multi-scale structures, called hierarchical structures, have recently caught broad attention among scientists in various applications such as solar cells, Light-emitting diodes (LEDs), biomaterials and anti-bacterial surfaces.Coincidentally, an American team is also imitating moth eyes to create silicon solar cells, Science Daily reports.Ant sunshields. This article on Live Science doesn’t mention biomimetic applications directly, but one can feel inspiration offstage. There’s an ant species in the hot Sahara that has silvery hairs that reflect the sun’s heat like tiny mirrors, allowing the ants to keep their cool even in ground temperatures of 122 °F. The secret is in an optical property called total internal reflection. It gives the ants 10 times as much reflectivity as ants shaved of their silver hairs. Now that scientists know how it works, whose to stop an entrepreneur from thinking of ways to imitate it? This cooling secret is apparently unique to this ant, and is also the first time total internal reflection determines the color of an organism, too.Artificial leaf. An update on the challenge to create an artificial leaf, posted by Science Daily, says that Japanese scientists are making progress on one aspect of plant life, getting ammonia from N2 molecules. Plants make it look so easy.Whisker navigation. Rodents use their whiskers to sense their surroundings in dark, narrow places where vision and hearing are limited (like inside the walls of your house). Seals in the ocean do this, too. Engineers from America and Singapore are making progress using this technique on robots, Science Daily says, but the man-made versions use plastic and wire. Their progress is published in the journal Bioinspiration and Biomimetics. So far, the animals are way ahead of man’s clumsy contraptions:Currently, the whiskers developed in this study can only form two-dimensional images. Creating three-dimensional images would require a more sophisticated mathematical model to interpret the signals coming in, as well as improving the whisker sensors, making them smaller and more flexible. Not only this, but because humans have only begun to understand how animals in the wild use their whiskers to read their environment, it is important to continue research to find out how animals such as seals actively process vibrissal signals in their brains in different situations, and to understand how their whiskers are designed to do so.“Designed to do so”? Where were the Darwin censors on that one?Use your influence to promote biomimetics. It’s the antidote to Darwinism. Think of the potential for science projects at school, or motivation for budding entrepreneurs. There’s no need to use the words “intelligent design”; it may freak out teachers unnecessarily or alert the ACLU. Just do what these scientists are doing. If anyone worries, you can quote the articles above to show how major science labs are using the word design. It’s all purely secular, but it gets people thinking along design lines instead of blind, unguided processes. Who needs Darwin just-so storytellers when you can show off real turtle-shell skis or whiskered robots? Cool! Think of the crowds gathering around your kid’s science fair poster about ant sunshields. Think of the customers buying your bacteria batteries and moth-eye solar panels. Evolution is going to seem so quaint, so 1859 in the new design gold rush. This is a positive way to destroy the power of the Darwin Sharia police. (Visited 27 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
The evidence is coming together to support the Biblical record of David and Solomon. An Israeli publication updates the latest finds.In Haaretz, an Israeli news site, you can watch Bible stories rise from the dust. For decades, liberals critics have said that Biblical kings David and Solomon were mythical heroes invented by later Bible writers. It’s hard to say that any more. Philippe Bohstrom has done a service to those who prefer to trust the Bible over man’s changing opinions, pulling together in one place the latest findings that support the great kings of the united monarchy.The headline is: “Did David and Solomon’s United Monarchy Exist? Vast Ancient Mining Operation May Hold Answers.” Bohstrom opens his survey of Davidic archaeology by sharing the latest findings from Timna, a copper mining site dating from Solomon’s time (1/12/17). “Archaeology has provided precious little evidence for the biblical account of a powerful Judaic kingdom 3,000 years ago, but the sheer extent of copper mining in Timna, when Egypt was in a state of collapse, is otherwise hard to explain.”The opening paragraphs read as if written by a skeptic, complaining about the lack of evidence for “the grandeur described in the biblical accounts of David and Solomon.” But then Bohstrom starts putting the pieces together. (Visited 2,891 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0 Egyptian carving at Timna. David Coppedge, 2006.The Timna copper mining site was much larger than previously known. Located in the Arabah just north of the Gulf of Aqaba, archaeologists have recently found indications of a major operation going on when David and Solomon lived, including textiles, living quarters and even donkey dung that shows the animals lived well.Radiocarbon dates of some of the organic remains at Timna date from the 10th and 9th centuries BC, the time of Solomon.The Egyptians had been at Timna earlier, as seen from hieroglyphs found, but Egypt was too weak to manage the site when the Bible has Solomon running his empire.Additional copper mines in Edom and two other sites were also major operations. “More than 100,000 tons of slag from the Iron Age have been discovered in the area,” Bohstrom says. Think of the water, food, and equipment needed to run such an enterprise. “The sheer scale of copper production at Timna and Faynan would have required the support of a major polity, scholars studying the Aravah agree.” Moreover, a substantial bureaucracy would have been required in Jerusalem to manage the faraway operation.Edomites were involved in the mining operations, but the question is who was in control. All the other empires near the Levant in that period—Egypt, Edom, Greece, Anatolia and Babylonia, were in a downward spiral when the mines were active.A large stone building in the City of David (south of Jerusalem’s current walls) is being interpreted as King David’s palace by lead archaeologist Eilat Mazar.Stepped Stone Structure, City of David, Jerusalem. David Coppedge, 2006.The “Stepped Stone Structure” below David’s palace appears to be the “Millo” supporting the palace, as described in the Bible. It could have been started by King Saul, the article says.The Tell Dan inscription, found in at Biblical Dan in the north of Israel, marked with the words “house of David,” was the first extra-Biblical reference to David found. Incidentally, a new paper in Science Advances discusses the city of Dan and how its inhabitants handled water and climate.Solomon made extensive use of copper when building the Temple. Detailed descriptions in the Bible have the verisimilitude of truth. They would be unimportant if the narrative only had theological purposes. Archaeologist Gabriel Barkay notes, “There is no reason to specify these technical details that basically are instructions to the contractor.”Khirbet Qeiyafa, a spectacular find south of Jerusalem near where David killed Goliath, with its Judahic style buildings and Hebrew inscriptions, shows that the site was a significant fortress outpost of a powerful king, not a tribal chieftain as minimalists complain.Pottery found at Hazor, far north of Jerusalem, dates from Solomon’s golden age. The “Solomonic gates” found there, according to archaeologist Amnon ben-Tor, who has spent his career excavating the site, fit with the Bible: “Hazor is well-planned, with fortifications, gates and well-built domestic buildings that could not have been built by semi-nomads,” he says.An Egyptian inscription confirms that Shishak, described in the Bible, invaded Judah around the time of Rehoboam, the successor to Solomon.Bohstrom is careful not to overstate the case. Some of the findings can be interpreted different ways. In fact, he appears willing to believe that the Biblical record was embellished by later writers. “Apparently sometimes the Bible is right, other bits have been distorted, and often we simply cannot know,” he says. By this and other statements, we know he is not writing from a conservative view of the inspiration of the Scriptures. But one take-home lesson from his pictorial review of the archaeological evidence is that the minimalists seem to be on the run. Bohstrom gives ample time to minimalist Israel Finkelstein, for instance, to give his views. At one point he lets Finkelstein speculate about Jerusalem’s origins, then responds, “It is a convenient theory, but there is not one shred of evidence to support it.”One other argument he makes deserves attention. Why do historians have no problem with other historical figures, when the archaeological evidence is even weaker? “Today, Homeric kings such as Agamemnon, Nestor, Diomedes and Odysseus are widely accepted as historical figures,” he notes. The implication is that we should not be surprised that much of the evidence for the United Kingdom of David and Solomon has been lost, given that Israel has been repeatedly invaded and destroyed by numerous empires since those famous kings lived.Bohstrom is clearly not a Biblical conservative or apologist. He thinks much of the story of David and Solomon could be mythological. In a way, that makes his article more valuable for Bible believers, because he cannot be said to have an “agenda” to defend the Scriptures. Bible believers need to be aware of how strong or weak the evidence is at this current time, realizing that much of what we would like to see has been lost over the past 3,000 years of this war-ravaged land. Nevertheless, what we do see is consistent with the Biblical record, and nothing repudiates it as false. Be wary of skeptics who have an agenda to disprove the Bible. Arguments from silence are risky.Realize, too, that very little in the land of Israel has been excavated. Think of the revolutionary discoveries in recent years, at Khirbet Qeiyafa, in Jerusalem, at Timna, and at Tell Dan. And it’s only the earliest of the kings that are in dispute; no one doubts the historicity of Omri, Ahab, Jehu, Joash, Hezekiah and later kings. Those later kings, corroborated by extra-biblical evidence, did not pop into existence out of nowhere. They were already established in kingdoms that had founders: David and Solomon. Those kings of the United Monarchy are also book-ended by earlier archaeological evidence of the conquest by Joshua, and of the Exodus (see Illustra film at TheJohn1010Project.com). You can’t read the Old Testament without being impressed by the tremendous amount of detail about David (his movements, numerous officials named, the Psalms, etc) and of Solomon (ditto on historical details, plus Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Song of Solomon). You come away feeling that these writings have the ring of truth. There is no guile in the accounts, no gratuitous embellishment. No writer trying to glorify these great kings would include their dark sides, describing shocking details of their sins and personal flaws. Inscriptions by the Assyrians and Babylonians never do that, because their purpose was to exalt the glory of their rulers. The Bible is unique in the world: historically accurate, yet morally compelling, always requiring truth. We should use the Bible to validate archaeology, not the other way around.Bible believers do not put their trust in archaeology, since the word of God speaks for itself. It’s exciting, though, to watch the pieces falling into place.
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest By Barry Ward, Leader, Production Business Management & Director, Ohio State University Income Tax SchoolsWith unprecedented amounts of prevented planting insurance claims this year in Ohio and other parts of the Midwest, many producers will be considering different tax management strategies in dealing with this unusual income stream. In a normal year, producers have flexibility in how they generate and report income. In a year such as this when they will have a large amount of income from insurance indemnity payments the flexibility is greatly reduced. In a normal year a producer may sell a part of grain produced in the year of production and store the remainder until the following year to potentially take advantage of higher prices and/or stronger basis. For example, a producer harvests 200,000 bushels of corn in 2019, sells 100,000 bushels this year and the remainder in 2020. As most producers use the cash method of accounting and file taxes as a cash based filer, the production sold in the following year is reported as income in that year and not in the year of production. This allows for flexibility when dealing with the ups and downs of farm revenue.Generally, crop insurance proceeds should be included in gross income in the year the payments are received, however Internal Revenue Code Section (IRC §) 451(f) provides a special provision that allows insurance proceeds to be deferred if they are received as a result of “destruction or damage to crops.”As prevented planting insurance proceeds qualify under this definition, they can qualify for a one year deferral for inclusion in taxable income. These proceeds can qualify if the producer meets the following criteria:Taxpayer uses the cash method of accounting.Taxpayer receives the crop insurance proceeds in the same tax year the crops are damaged.Taxpayer shows that under their normal business practice they would have included income from the damaged crops in any tax year following the year the damage occurred.The third criteria is the sometimes the problem. Most can meet the criteria, although if producers want reasonable audit protection, they should have records showing the normal practice of deferring sales of grain produced and harvested in year 1 subsequently stored and sold in the following year. To safely “show that under their normal business practice they would have included income from the damaged crops in any tax year following the year the damage occurred” the taxpayer should follow IRS Revenue Ruling 75-145 that requires that he or she would have reported more than 50% of the income from the damaged or destroyed crops in the year following the loss. A reasonable interpretation in meeting the 50% test is that a farmer may aggregate the historical sales for crops receiving insurance proceeds but tax practitioners differ on the interpretation of how this test may be met.One big problem with these crop insurance proceeds is that a producer can’t divide it between years. It is either claimed in the year the damage occurred and the crop insurance proceeds were received or it is all deferred until the following year. The election to defer recognition of crop insurance proceeds that qualify is an all or nothing election for each trade or business IRS Revenue Ruling 74-145, 1971-1.Tax planning options for producers depend a great deal on past income and future income prospects. Producers that have lower taxable income in the last 3 years (or tax brackets that weren’t completely filled) may want to consider claiming the prevented planting insurance proceeds this year and using Income Averaging to spread some of this year’s income into the prior 3 years. Producers that have had high income in the past 3 years and will experience high net income in 2019 may consider deferring these insurance proceeds to 2020 if they feel that this year may have lower farm net income. Market Facilitation PaymentsWhen the next round(s) of Market Facilitation Payments (MFPs) are issued, they will be treated the same as the previous rounds for income tax purposes. These payments must be taken as taxable income in the year they are received. As these payments are intended to replace income due to low prices stemming from trade disputes, these payments should be included in gross income in the year received. As these payments constitute earnings from the farmers’ trade or business they are subject to federal income tax and self-employment tax. Producers will almost certainly not have the option to defer these taxes until next year. Some producers waited until early 2019 to report production from 2018 and therefore will report this income from the first round of Market Facilitation Payments as taxable income in 2019.Producers will likely not have the option of delaying their reporting and subsequent MFP payments due to the fact they are contingent upon planted acreage reporting of eligible crops and not yield reporting as the first round of MFP payments were. Cost share paymentsIncreased prevented planting acres this year have many producers considering cover crops to better manage weeds and erosion and possibly qualify for a reduced MFP. There is also the possibility that producers will be eligible for cost-share payments via the Natural Resources Conservation Service for planting cover crops. Producers should be aware that these cost-share payments will be included on Form 1099-G that they will receive and the cost-share payments will need to be included as income.You are advised to consult a tax professional for clarification of these issues as they relate to your circumstances.
Girl children born during the devastating Titli cyclone on October 11 are being named ‘Titli’ in the Gajapati and Ganjam districts of Odisha.So far, four girls born in the two districts are reported to have been named ‘Titli’.Out of five deliveries conducted at the Mohana Community Health Centre in Gajapati district on October 11, three were girls. According to Dr. Nibedita Panda, who delivered all the newborns, parents of the female babies have named them ‘Titli’.On the same day, a woman delivered a girl child at the Aska Community Health Centre, just before it was flooded by water from the Rushikulya river. Dr. Mohan Barik, who delivered the baby, also confirmed that she was named ‘Titli’.President of the Odisha Medical Service Association, Dr. Nirakar Bhatta, praised Dr. Panda and Dr. Barik for their services to the patients even during the cyclonic storm. All the six deliveries were normal deliveries and all the newborns have survived, said Dr. Bhatta.As a precautionary measure, the State government had ordered all pregnant women in areas to be affected by the cyclone to be shifted to near by medical centers and safe places.