first_img PRINCIPLES OF BATTING The top-order West Indies batsmen sometimes bat with no regard for the basics of the game, nor display the principles of good batting. Apart from not knowing the difference between aggression and carelessness, they drive when they should not be driving; they play back when they should not be playing back; and even when some of them do what is right, the lower-order batsmen do silly things. Sometimes, most times, when the team is in trouble, they get run-out, stumped, or caught on boundary going for big hits. That is the general attitude of the West Indian cricketer of today. The top-order batsmen do not bat responsibly and the lower-order batsmen bat as if they are as good as, or even better than the batsmen. How often does one see the recognised batsmen battling for survival, and at the other end, the tail-ender is swiping away until he is either stumped or gets caught on the boundary. No one supports the other, like all good team players do. The bowling is a little different, but how can a team select five specialist bowlers – including four specialist pacers – bowl 153 overs in one innings, and the four pacers bowl only 80 overs with the one spinner bowling 47 overs and a batsman bowling 27, more than any of the pacers. These things suggest that apart from the weakness of the players, the West Indies are not playing good cricket, despite the presence of a support group of four coaches, a former captain as manager, and another former captain as chief selector. Maybe the coaches are not any good, or may be, with the exception of Curtley Ambrose, the players just do not listen to them. The West Indies have just played finished a two-match series in Sri Lanka. They lost both matches badly, they enjoyed one good day, and the players, the team, are still in the same position as they were before the contest started. According to the captain, the batsmen lack good temperament and they have no patience. The truth, however, is that although the players have changed in the 20 years since Sabina Park in 1995, although the coaches have changed, although the selectors have changed, and although the board presidents have changed many times, Walcott’s words in Durban 1998 remain true to this day. The West Indies go to Australia in December, and, as usual, much is expected. It is always, according to them, unfortunate that the batsmen, who get to 10, 20, or 30, fail on a pitch that was good for batting, one on which opposing batsmen of similar or less experience score centuries, and one on which the bowlers, more times than not, always bowl well, picking up one or two wickets when the opposing bowlers reel in five or six wickets to beat the West Indies handsomely. It is also disappointing to hear, time and time again, that, but for the many dropped catches, the West Indies may have won. It is time they understand that catches are a part of cricket. It is sometimes, most times, the difference between a good team and a bad team, between victory and defeat. The West Indies cricketers, at this time, are generally poor cricketers. They are nowhere near the standard of previous West Indies cricketers, and they should know that that is so, or they should be told that it is so. Some of them got into the team by the skin of their teeth, some of them just ahead of not just another player or two, but ahead of several players. In other words, they got into the team when others could also easily have made the team. In fact, on many occasions, some got into the team when they were obviously not good enough, and never will be good enough. Instead of behaving like they are God’s gift to cricket, therefore, they should try to be West Indies cricketers. The batsmen, for example, should try and bat even for a reasonable time, they should concentrate, and as Phil Simmons encouraged them to do a few months ago, they should, for example, bat with an eye on the scoreboard, sometimes scoring a little at a time. POOR CRICKETERS BAT ACCORDING TO SKILL Walcott went on to explain that the batsmen needed to concentrate, to bat according to their skill, to bat to match the situation, and to bat for the team. “They should not, all of them, bat as if they are the best batsmen in the world, with respect for no one; as if they are all like Lara.” In South Africa, Walcott was right. Since that time, he has been right many times, and had he been alive and said it in this time, he definitely would also have been right. Test match cricketers are beyond the ordinary, or should be beyond the ordinary. The West Indies cricketers, a few of them, are beyond the ordinary. Most of them, however, are not, and it is time the West Indian fans face that fact. West Indies captains of recent vintage, the selectors, the manager, the coaches, and team’s media rep always, each time the team loses, talk about the talented batsmen and bowlers in the team. They always have some flattering words for the players. It is high time, however, that the people in charge stop making excuses for the players. CHANGE IN ATTITUDE Some 20 years ago, the West Indies’ long and distinguished reign as champions of the world came to an end, and today, they are still fighting to recover some of the lost glory – especially in Test cricket. The reason why it has taken them so long to dust themselves off is probably because they believe that are better than they really are. The late Sir Clyde Walcott said in Durban in 1998 during a Test match between the West Indies and South Africa, “The problem with the West Indies is that they believe that they are good, too good to be exact.” Walcott, a former great West Indies batsman, chief selector, manager, and president, as well as a former chairman of the International Cricket Conference, was in South Africa watching the West Indies who were about to lose the third Test match and the series 5-0. That was a tour which started with the West Indies players threatening to go on strike, and that was a West Indies team which included batsmen such as Brian Lara, Carl Hooper, and Shivnarine Chanderpaul, Philo Wallace, Clayton Lambert, and Stuart Williams; and bowlers like Curtly Ambrose, Courtney Walsh, Franklyn Rose, and Nixon McLean. If there is no change in the attitude of the players, however; if there is no change in the selection process; if there is no change in the personality and quality of coaches to get the players to listen to them and to try and follow their instructions; and if there is no change in the quality of players coming out of the islands by their performances in the regional competition, the result will be the same – probably even worse. The players are weak, and so is the eleven selected. I do not know how to balance the team but I do know that in the present situation, a team of five specialist batsmen, with Denesh Ramdin at number six, and five specialist bowlers cannot work. When all is said and done, the players must take most of the blame for what is happening to West Indies cricket. After all, they are the ones who do the batting, bowling and fielding. They must better prepare themselves to do so.last_img read more

first_img“When I was hungry, you fed me. When I was naked, you clothed me. When I was thirsty, you gave me water to drink.” “Master,” Jesus’ disciples asked, “when did we do all these things for you?” He replied, “If you have done it for the least of these, my brethren, you have done it unto me.”One part of this messianic mandate—providing safe drinking water to every Liberian village, town and district—is what Rev. Dr. Todd Phillips and his organization, The Last Well (TLW), have embarked upon. TLW’s aim: to build wells in every village, town and district throughout Liberia by 2020.Jesus’ words to His disciples about reaching out to the needy wherever we find them, is a lesson for us all. All of us who call ourselves Christians should reach out to people in need, wherever we find them, whether or not we know them. Was that not the point the Master made in his “Parable of the Good Samaritan”?That is the mission Dr. Phillips and his partners have taken upon themselves to accomplish by the year 2020. Do he and his partners know anyone in the remote towns and villages of Bomi, Grand Cape Mount and Grand Kru counties? No! Yet there they are building wells in all these places to bring safe drinking water. This campaign will substantially reduce the incidences of dysentery, malaria and typhoid that each year kills thousands of Liberian children. The placing of wells in every village, town and district will cut that out and save our children’s lives.As Vice President Joseph Boakai told The Last Well conference last Tuesday, this great project deserves the support of all of us. Each Liberian citizen and resident should do whatever he or she can to help make this mission successful. It is in our prime interest and that of future generations.In addition to providing safe drinking water, The Last Well also aims to carry the Gospel of Jesus Christ wherever they go. That, too, is one of the messianic mandates of Christ to His disciples: “Go into all the world and preach Gospel” to everyone, not with bayonets, bombs and bullets, but with love, compassion and doing good, just as The Last Well is doing and many other Christian bodies have done in our country since its founding in 1822. The Baptists, Episcopalians, Methodists, Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, Seventh Day Adventists and a host of other Christian missions have come to Liberia since the 1820s, many later, to preach and spread the Gospel. The Daily Observer publisher’s maternal uncle, Christian Lovett Porte, in the late 1940s started an unfinished book entitled, Hosts of Missions Invade Liberia. Christian never went beyond fifth grade, yet he had vast knowledge of history, literature and current events. His friends marveled at his extensive knowledge and named him KA, meaning Know All. He, too, sensed the proliferation of missions in the country.Yet until today the country is still plagued with witchcraft and ritualistic killings, and these are set to increase as next year’s elections approach. We applaud and welcome The Last Well’s initiative to bring not just safe drinking, but also living water throughout Liberia—the living water which Jesus gave to the woman He met at Jacob’s well in Samaria. She took that living water to the people in her village, exhorting them to “come see a man who told me all that I ever did!” When they returned from meeting Jesus, they told her, “We believe not because of what you told us, but because we have seen Him for ourselves and know that He is the Messiah.”We call on all Christian denominations to join Dr. Phillips, Doc Lawson and their team in bringing safe drinking water and living water to the Liberian masses, in a determined bid to saturate (flood) this beleaguered republic and eliminate not just the dryness on the people’s tongues but also the darkness in their souls. This newspaper has frequently called on the churches to intensify their evangelistic outreach to help rid the country of witchcraft and bring our people closer to God and Christ. The Last Well can definitely help us to extend this messianic mandate and extirpate (wipe out) from our country these and other demonic tendencies. Share this:Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)last_img read more

first_imgAfter a last-minute change of plea, Sophia, Georgetown resident Kwame Bourne was on Wednesday sentenced to 20 years imprisonment by Justice Navindra Singh for beating his father, Rickford Bourne to death in May 2016. The 39-year-old father of two was accused of inflicting the injuries on the 71-year-old man with a metal pipe on May 19, 2016 at ‘D’ Field Sophia, Greater Georgetown. During Wednesday’s proceedings, the prosecution closed its case and Justice Singh was set to sum up the evidence for the jury to deliberate on innocence or guilt.Kwame BourneHowever, in a twist of events, Bourne consulted with his attorney Maxwell McKay and elected to plead guilty to the lesser count of manslaughter. Bourne when asked to address the court said he realised that “certain things happened” and noted that he will try to be a better person.Reports were that while being heavily intoxicated, Bourne allegedly struck his 71-year-old father to his head with the metal pipe after the man reportedly refused to give him money to support his smoking habit. After beating his father to the head, Bourne went to his neighbor and revealed what he had done. His sister, Aisha Bourne testified only Tuesday that after hearing about the incident, she rushed to her father’s home which is one street away from hers and saw him with wounds to his head. She told the jury that she rushed her father to the Georgetown Public Hospital Corporation (GPHC) and he died four days later.The court ordered that the prison service deduct the time Rickford Bourne spent awaiting trial. Earlier Wednesday, Government Pathologist Dr Nehaul Singh informed the court that the cause of death was brain haemorrhage as a result of blunt force trauma to the head. Police Detective Constable Corwin Osbourne had earlier testified that when the accused was taken into custody and cautioned, he admitted to the offence. “My father came home from work. He walked past me; IDeceased: Rickford Bournewas watching TV. I took out an iron pipe and I lash he,” Bourne allegedly told police. When called upon to lead a defence, the defendant opted to remain silent and the prosecution at that point was subsequently disallowed from making closing arguments as the defence observed that there would be no closing address. It was after these events that the jury was recalled early and was formally directed by the trial judge to return a guilty verdict for manslaughter. Justice Singh in considering the 20-year sentence noted that the offender never denied hitting the deceased man. He also surmised that the offender was remorseful. Tuanna Hardy led the State’s case.last_img read more

first_imgOn the wake of protest action by farmers appalled by the gargantuan hike in lease fees and other charges for land in the Mahaica/Mahaicony/Abary-Agriculture Development Authority (MMA/ADA), the Opposition People’s Progressive Party/Civic will be moving to lay a motion in Parliament to reverse the increases.Rice farmers in the project area are now being commanded to pay $15,000 per acre, a major increase from $3500 just last year for land rent and drainage and irrigation charges. Cattle and other crop farmers are now forced to pay $3900, a more than 100 per cent increase from the previous fee.The Guyana Rice Producers Association (RPA) and the Region Five (Mahaica-Berbice) Administration have indicated their solidarity with the farmers and condemned the more than 600 per cent increase. Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo, during his recent press conference, also condemned the increases imposed on the farming population. He pointed out that farming is the main economic activity in the Region and was at a loss to understand why Government would want to put additional burdens on a segment of the population that has no alternative for earning a livelihood other than depending on agriculture.On Tuesday, farmers protested outside the MMA/ADA office in Region Five. The more than 100 protesters held placards expressing their disapproval over the unilateral way the decision was made.The representative body highlighted the fact that there were no consultations with the farmers prior to imposing the new fee “draconian” structure.The MMA/ADA later reneged on a promise to meet with the RPA on the increases, prompting more outrage.“The RPA is calling on all farmers to resist this draconian increase and show solidarity with all as we join in the call for the reversal of this decision which was taken without any consultation with farmers, their association or any other stakeholders,” the RPA urged.The MMA/ADA and farmers have been at loggerheads since 2015 when Government moved to cancel the leases for several farmers. This resulted in a group of West Coast Berbice rice farmers filing a lawsuit against Government. After months of hearings, former Chief Justice Ian Chang in February 2016 quashed the cancellation of the leases in favour of the farmerslast_img read more

first_imgManchester United star Robin van Persie has rubbished claims he needs knee surgery.Reports suggested the Old Trafford giants agreed a loan move for Radamel Falcao because there were fears about the Dutchman’s fitness.But the Holland forward insists he won’t be going under the knife any time soon.He said: “I am impressed people can pick up the imagination to invent something like that. I do not know where it comes from.“I can say with my hand on my heart I won’t be in a hospital to have the operation.”Van Persie has also told former Monaco star Falcao he should not expect to walk straight into the United team.“I welcome his arrival, he makes us better,” he added in an interview with Fox Sports NL. “At a top club you should always go for the best, which also fits my philosophy.“Falcao must fight for his place, as I also have to. We must duke with Wayne Rooney and James Wilson to see who is playing.” 1 Robin van Persie in action for Manchester United against Burnley last_img read more

first_imgBut hope springs eternal, and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s Task Force on Jobs and the Economy is developing a recommendation that would call for a new charter reform commission to help make the city more business-friendly. What’s more, one of the task-force members, David Fleming – who led the previous charter-reform effort and the San Fernando Valley secession movement – is proposing some pretty enticing reforms. For starters, Fleming is reviving a proposal to break L.A. up into boroughs, like New York City. This idea was last proposed around the time of secession, but once the L.A. power and money machine crushed that effort, they could comfortably ignore the idea of sharing power with the people. If the city were to be divided into boroughs, the Valley and other regions could at last get the attention and fair share they’ve been denied under the downtown-dominated system of today. Fleming also hints that with boroughs could come the breakup of the Los Angeles Unified School District. “In some cities with boroughs, they each have their own school district,” he says. “I don’t see why that couldn’t work here.” IF at first you don’t succeed, try, try again? Well, maybe. Perseverance may be a virtue, but so is having the good sense to know when to quit. Should we just quit trying to reform Los Angeles City Hall by taking baby steps? By all measures, the seven-year-old charter reform in the city of Los Angeles has failed. We were promised local control, but instead got impotent neighborhood councils. We were promised an end to the City Council’s fiefdom-like control of local development, but got more of the same. We were promised a responsive bureaucracy that didn’t require council prodding to do its work, and got no such thing. Now there’s an idea worth pursuing! Let the arrogant puppet masters be forewarned: We won’t be fooled again.160Want local news?Sign up for the Localist and stay informed Something went wrong. Please try again.subscribeCongratulations! You’re all set!last_img read more

first_imgThe dead squirrel found yesterday. Pic by Bren Whelan.Calls have been made to protect a colony of endangered red squirrels at an Inishowen beauty spot.It follows the discovery of a dead squirrel at Lis Na Gra woods in Muff yesterday.The red squirrels are now thriving in the woods.However locals believe signs must be erected in the area asking traffic to slow down. It is understood this particular squirrel was hit by a fast-moving truck.However local nature watchers also fear that people may be bringing dogs into the area to allow the animals to chase the squirrels for sport.The squirrels have become a popular attraction in the woods and many people are feeding the tiny creatures.However, this too has brought another element of danger. Some of the squirrels have become more tame and this may leave them vulnerable to predators.“We needs signs erected to ask people to look after the squirrels but also traffic signs or control ramps to stop people speeding.“This has become a popular area for families coming to see the ‘reds’ but they need to be safe while walking on the roads,” said one nature watcher.A happy halloween squirrel!FEARS OVER ROAD THREATS TO DONEGAL’S ENDANGERED SQUIRRELS was last modified: October 27th, 2015 by StephenShare this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window) Tags:donegalmuffRed Squirrelstrafficwoodslast_img read more

first_imgVisitors from five European countries are touring Donegal this week as part of a story writing and sharing project.The Craoibhín Community Enterprise Centre Termon are taking part in the Storysavers Project, an EU funded activity through Léargas.The visitors will learn about the beauty and history of Donegal through trips, exhibitions and storytelling sessions. The itinerary is packed with visits to Glenveagh National Park, Downings, Dunfanaghy, Joe Brennan at the library and a storytelling session in The Thatched Cottage Kilmacrennan.The visitors are from Norway, Poland, Czech Republic, Greece, Wales, and France.Staff from Craoibhin are gathering tales from the local area and producing an e-book. They have spent days with historians, senior citizens and school students to collect stories.Within the last year, Craoibhin staff have travelled to Norway, Greece and Czech Republic as they compile their Storysavers book. EUROPEAN GUESTS VISIT DONEGAL ON TALE TELLING TRIP was last modified: September 19th, 2013 by Rachel McLaughlinShare this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window) Tags:storysaversTermonlast_img read more

first_imgThe Bulldogs’ defense finally conceded in the 75th minute when a lofted pass bounced into a dangerous area in the box. With Anderson off his line, Wilson tried to prevent a sure goal and took down the Bears’ attacker. He was shown a red card, and Missouri State converted the penalty kick to take a 2-1 lead. ESPN+ The Bulldogs (6-6, 3-3 MVC) travel to Evansville on Saturday, Oct. 19 for a rematch with the Purple Aces. Drake won against Evansville in Des Moines, 1-0, on Oct. 9. Print Friendly Version Watch Live Live Stats at Evansville 10/19/2019 – 5 PM SPRINGFIELD, Mo. – The Drake University men’s soccer team dropped its match at Missouri State, 3-1, on Sunday afternoon. The No. 14 Bears (11-0-0) are the only unbeaten and untied team remaining of the 204 Division I schools. The Bears doubled their lead in the 78th minute by converting a corner kick. Missouri State outshot Drake 17-3 on the day. Missouri State opened the second half very aggressively, peppering the crossbar twice in a thirty-second span in the 56th minute. In the 72nd minute, Anderson made two valiant saves to keep the game level. The Bears’ pressure paid off in the 30th minute when Stuart Wilkin broke the stalemate. Wilkin collected the ball near the edge of the box, took a touch into space, and struck a low shot toward goal. Luke Anderson got a mitt to it, but the ball had too much pace, and it spun over the goal line to give the Bears a 1-0 lead. Four minutes later, Wilson made an important stop for the Bulldogs. He reacted promptly and quickly extended his foot to intervene on a dangerous pass in the box, stomping out the opportunity before Missouri State could capitalize. Preview Wilson recorded Drake’s second shot in the 44th minute, heading home the equalizer for his first goal of the year. The score came after Erik Fahner drew a free kick from about 40 yards out. Cole Poppen sent a low ball into the box, where Scott Misselhorn got a foot to it to lift it up to eye level. Wilson was in the right place at the right time to head the ball past the keeper and into the lower-left corner, knotting the game at one just before the halftime break. Drake regrouped quickly and nearly equalized in the 34th minute. Juan Louis made a strong run into the heart of the box before being dispossessed, and the ball spilled back to a waiting Leroy Enzugusi, whose shot sailed high. It was the Bulldogs’ first attempt of the day. Both sides spent considerable time feeling each other out in the midfield to begin the game, with the first shot not being fired until the 15th minute when Missouri State finally broke the seal. Drake found itself on the defensive after that, warding off two corner kicks by the Bears in the 22nd minute. Missouri State opened the scoring in the 30th minute, but Drake’s Liam Wilson headed home the equalizer in the 44th minute. The Bears responded with a flurry late in the game, finding the back of the net in the 75th and 78th minutes to secure the win. Next Game: The sequence began with Anderson hustling off his line to meet Josh Dolling one-on-one, reacting quickly to stuff the shot. Seconds later, Anderson sprawled to his right to reject another shot from point-blank range. Full Schedule Roster last_img read more

first_imgDr. Jerry Bergman has taught biology, genetics, chemistry, biochemistry, anthropology, geology, and microbiology at several colleges and universities including for over 40 years at Bowling Green State University, Medical College of Ohio where he was a research associate in experimental pathology, and The University of Toledo. He is a graduate of the Medical College of Ohio, Wayne State University in Detroit, the University of Toledo, and Bowling Green State University. He has over 1,300 publications in 12 languages and 40 books and monographs. His books and textbooks that include chapters that he authored, are in over 1,500 college libraries in 27 countries. So far over 80,000 copies of the 40 books and monographs that he has authored or co-authored are in print. For more articles by Dr Bergman, see his Author Profile.(Visited 493 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0 Another Case of Censorship in ScienceStudy that disparaged conservatives was falsified, but journal would not retract Jerry Bergman, PhDStudies have consistently found that Republicans are much more likely than Democrats to believe humans were created as-is 10,000 years ago.[1] It is also true that conservatives are also much more likely to believe in creationism than liberals.[2] For this reason, the following example of censorship is of much interest. A study originally published 2008 in Science, by John Hibbing et al., titled “Political Attitudes Vary with Physiological Traits” has now been replicated with opposite results. What happened next reveals a lot about censorship in science.An attempt to replicate a claim, particularly a controversial claim, should be the normal procedure in science. Repeatability, indeed, is supposed to be a hallmark of the scientific method. In this case, though, the original study, called the Oxley study, was convincingly falsified. Assuming the second study holds, it means the 2008 study has been shown to be false. The replication paper was then submitted to the journal that published the original study, namely Science. The new paper was flat out rejected without bothering to have the paper peer reviewed!The authors and others are concerned that the reason it was rejected was due to bias against conservatives and creationists. The original study showed conservatives [and creationists] in a very poor light, and liberals [and evolutionists] in a far better light. At the least, the new study should have been peer reviewed and, if valid concerns were determined to exist, the study could have been rejected for valid reasons. This did not happen.Censorship a Major ProblemI am very familiar with the problem of censorship and along this line have authored a 500-page study carefully documenting the problem (see book cover below).[3] I also have experienced the problem, as have many others. When I was employed at Ohio Medical College doing cancer research using the rat model, one study our lab completed openly contradicted several other published studies, so we replicated the study and obtained the exact same results. At this point, I urged publication, but the lead researcher refused, reasoning that the risk of being wrong was too great. I have often wondered if the study was replicated after this event and showed that our results were correct.Do Genes Make Fearful People Conservatives?The original Science article concluded that political views have a biological foundation:  “Although political views have been thought to arise largely from individuals’ experiences, recent research suggests that they may have a biological basis.”[4] The study indicated that political attitude variations correlate with various physiological traits. The sample, a group of only 46 adult participants were, for example, shown a series of images and galvanic skin response was used to measure the participants’ palm sweat level in response to the pictures. The values for each picture and subject were then recorded. The images included pictures of a large spider on a person’s face.Participants with strong liberal “political beliefs were measurably lower in physical sensitivities to sudden noises and threatening visual images.”[5] The liberals were “more likely to support foreign aid, liberal immigration policies, pacifism, and gun control.”[6]  In contrast, individuals displaying measurably higher physiological reactions to these stimuli [the conservatives] were “more likely to favor defense spending, capital punishment, patriotism, and the Iraq War.”[7]Etsy.comThe researchers concluded that the degree to which individuals respond physiologically to perceived threats indicates the level which they advocate policies that protect the existing social structure from both external (outgroup) and internal (norm-violator) threats, i.e. conservatives.[8]When this study was replicated in 2019 by Arceneaux et al., the trends found in the original study were not supported.[9] Their paper was submitted and rejected. This is no small concern because the results of the original study was repeated in many leading journal and mass media venues.Some Examples That Used the [falsified] Oxley Study ResultsA broadcast on the NPR program titled the Hidden Brain made the following irresponsible claim, which is a fundamental argument (i.e., genetic determinism) that eugenicists made decades ago that caused enormous harm to society, especially in the United States, Sweden, and Nazi Germany:John Hibbing is a political scientist at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Over the years, he’s studied how our political views may also be influenced by our biology. “We would look at brain scan results and we could be incredibly accurate knowing whether they’re liberal or conservative”…. Hibbing says, environment and upbringing play a large role as well. But … on average, about 30 or 40 percent of our political attitudes come from genetics. [10]Another report went even further. The short write up by the government-owned British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) put conservatives, which included most creationists, in a very negative light, and liberals, which included many evolutionists, in a very positive light:Americans are as divided as ever between Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives. … Researchers at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln are studying liberals’ and conservatives’ reactions to happy or pleasant photographs and scary or sad ones in an effort to learn more about the cognitive underpinnings of political preference. The findings? Conservatives tend to concentrate more on images considered to be negative, while liberals’ eyes tend to linger on positive images.[11]This research fit right into anti-creationist Chris Mooney’s theory, which is reflected in the title of his book namely The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science–and Reality.” This title makes it obvious that the creation-evolution issue is at center stage in this debate. By science and reality, Mooney is referring to evolution and global warming. Mooney addedGenes make proteins, not Republicans. …  [And in] a recent study … Hibbing and his colleagues tried to trace the route by which genes may ultimately shape political behavior. Hibbing, for one …  likens the issue to the debate over the origins of homosexuality. “The closest we’ve come to a widespread debate over this kind of issue is sexual orientation,” he says, “and it’s noteworthy those who are the most tolerant are the ones that do think it is partly biological.” Indeed, religious conservatives who think it is possible to “convert” gays and lesbians to heterosexuality, and claim homosexuality is a “choice” tend to ignore the science on this issue.[12]The science, however, is incontrovertible. No clear evidence exists for a genetic cause of homosexuality; nor does evidence of a gene that causes heterosexuality. The ones ignoring that biological reality are the liberals—not the conservatives.Last, TV host and astronomer Neil deGrasse Tyson, on his show Star Talk, interviewed Professor Hibbing. He recounted his research that, when shown a set of pictures to his subjects, he claimed his research found liberals mostly remembered the positive pictures and conservatives the negative pictures.[13] Thus, he claimed, Liberals focus on the positive, they claim, and Conservatives focus on the negative. Tyson did not dispute this questionable claim.Is All This Research Science?To function properly, science must be self-correcting. The 19th-century biologist Thomas Huxley famously stated the truism that one “ugly fact can kill a beautiful theory.” But, as one set of researchers learned recently, the leftist policies of the top scientific journals do not appear to agree with Huxley. They chose to suppress an ugly fact so as to allow their beautiful theory to survive another day.Was the Replication Study Done Properly?The authors of the replication study described the original 2008 study as both path-breaking and provocative.[14] They recognized that political scientists and psychologists have attempted to understand the psychological source of ideological differences even before Emile Durkheim’s important work done in the 1800s. The Science article presented some “clues as to why liberals and conservatives differ in their worldviews. Perhaps it has to do with how the brain is wired…. …  perhaps the reason is because conservatives’ brains are more attuned to threats than liberals’.[15]  In addition, they said that the 2008 finding helped to usher in a new set of psychophysiological works on the study of politics, which generated extensive coverage in the popular media.In 2014, all four of the authors of the now rejected replication study were researching the physiological basis of political attitudes. Two were working in Amsterdam, the Netherlands (Bakker and Schumacher were both at the University of Amsterdam), and two were at Temple University in Philadelphia (Arceneaux and Gothreau). They first raised the funds to construct labs equipped with state of the art equipment for measuring physiological reactions.They then conducted two replications, one in the Netherlands and one in the U.S. to help deal with local perceptions in the images presented to measure “threat” responses. An example of a threat response is a picture of a gun pointing at the viewer. The preliminary studies were used to calibrate the equipment. Nonetheless, both teams independently failed to support the thesis that people’s physiological reactions to the images correlated with their political attitudes.To explore the possibility that the images used distorted their results, they obtained the original images, to which a few more were added. In Philadelphia, the researchers recruited 202 participants, four times the original sample size of 46. Again, no correlation between physiological reactions to threatening images and political conservatism was found. Nonetheless the researchers still feel that value exists in exploring how physiological reactions and conscious experience shape political attitudes and behavior. Nonetheless, they have concluded that any such relationships are far more complicated than previously presumed. The authors thendrafted a paper that reported the failed replication studies along with a more nuanced discussion about the ways in which physiology might matter for politics and sent it to Science. We did not expect Science to immediately publish the paper, but because our findings cast doubt on an influential study published in its pages, we thought the editorial team would at least send it out for peer review. It did not. About a week later, we received a summary rejection with the explanation that the Science advisory board of academics and editorial team felt that since the publication of this article the field has moved on and that, while they concluded that we had offered a conclusive replication of the original study, it would be better suited for a less visible sub field journal.[16]Arceneaux et al. wrote back to Science after the rejections asking the editors to consider at least sending their paper out for peer review, as is normal. If the reviewers found fatal flaws in the studies replicated, the paper would have been rejected for valid reasons. Arceneaux et al. argued that the original paper was often featured in popular science pieces in the lay media, where the research was translated into the incorrect claim that physiology alone allows people to accurately predict liberal and conservative bias.Rebuffed Without a ReasonArceneaux et al., also stressed that Science magazine, as the leader in science publishing, has a responsibility to set the record straight just as newspapers do when publishing inaccuracies. They were rebuffed without a reason, except a vague suggestion that the journal’s policy on handling research replications might change in the future. Not publishing articles that document a previously published study as erroneous gives the false impression about the quality of science. Or it could be that, as the website retraction-watch documents, false and/or misleading research is epidemic in peer-reviewed science journals.[17] And Science magazine is very aware of this epidemic, even writing several excellent articles on the problem.[18] Arceneaux et al., added that they believeit is bad policy for journals like Science to publish big, bold ideas and then leave it to subfield journals to publish replications showing that those ideas aren’t so accurate after all. Subfield journals are less visible, meaning the message often fails to reach the broader public. They are also less authoritative, meaning the failed replication will have less of an impact on the field if it is not published by Science.[19]The researchers involved in the replication study concluded that “open and transparent science can only happen when journals are willing to publish results that contradict previous findings.…  We should continue to have frank discussions about what we’ve learned over the course of the replication crisis and what we could be doing about it. … If only journals like Science were willing to lead the way.”[20]ReferencesBergman describes the many tactics of censorship by the media, libraries, courts and schools.[1] Frank Newport. 2008. “Republicans, Democrats Differ on Creationism.” Gallup  News.[2] Pew Research Center. 2015. Chapter 4: “Evolution and Perceptions of Scientific Consensus.”[3] Jerry Bergman and Kevin Wirth. 2018. Censoring the Darwin Skeptics. How Belief in Evolution is Enforced by Eliminating Dissidents. Southworth, WA: Leafcutter Press.[4] Oxley, Douglas R., et al. 2008. “Political Attitudes Vary with Physiological Traits.” Science 321:5896: 1667–1670. September 19, p. 371.[5] Oxley, Douglas R., et al. 2008, p. 371[6] Oxley, Douglas R., et al. 2008, p. 371.[7] Oxley, Douglas R., et al. 2008, p. 371.[8] Oxley, Douglas R., et al. 2008, p. 371[9] Oxley, et al. 2008, Science. Open Science Framework[10] CAMILA vargas-RESTREPO 2018. Nature, Nurture And Your Politic Emphases added.[11] Matt Danzico. 2012. “Fear Factor: The Science Behind America’s Red/Blue Divide[12]  Chris Mooney. 2012. “Politics May be Partly Genetic, Now What?”[13][14] Oxley, Douglas R., et al. 2008[15] Oxley, Douglas R., et al. 2008.[16] Kevin Arceneaux, Bert N. Bakker, Claire Gothreau, and Gus Schumacher. 2019. We Tried to Publish a Replication of a Science Paper in Science. The Journal Refused. Our research suggests that the theory that conservatives and liberals respond differently to threats isn’t actually true. JUNE 20.[17][18] What a massive database of retracted papers reveals about science publishing’s ‘death penalty.’[19] Kevin Arceneaux, et al., 2019.[20]  Kevin Arceneaux, et al., 2019.last_img read more