Select Page ::

How Neurotechnology Is Helping The San Francisco Giants Train Better – PSFK (subscription)

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

Halo Neuroscience's headset ensures practice has a bigger impact on the brain and the body

San Francisco-based neurotechnology company Halo Neuroscience has partnered with the San Francisco Giants. After reviewing research and testing the Halo Sport headset, they have now officially incorporated it into every players core training.

During testing, athletes were split into two groups to complete 20-minute warm-ups followed by 60 minutes of focused training to improve skill, speed, and power. Those in one group wore Halo Sport headsets during the 20-minute warm-up. This group saw the greatest improvements in speed work. In a 20-yard dash, almost all the athletes tested demonstrated significant improvement after two weeks, versus athletes in the control group who only demonstrated modest improvement.

Using Halo Sport means that every rep a baseball player puts in during practice has a bigger impact on their brain and body. When a player is at bat, his muscle memory has better recall of all past swings in the batting cage. For a pitcher, the form theyve perfected in training is replicated more precisely on the mound. When a player who has been training for explosivity is on base, they can launch more efficiently because their muscles know how to respond. Training with Halo Sport has been shown to accelerate improvement in bat velocity, grip strength, and speed.

As a result of these findings, the Giants will continue to implement Halo Sport to improve movement-based training for its athletes.

Dave Groeschner, Head Athletic Trainer for the San Francisco Giants, said in a press release:

We are extremely excited to integrate Halos neurostimulation technology into our core training regimen to improve and refine on-field player performance and athleticism. After testing the product internally, weve determined that incorporating Halo Sport Neuropriming into our training programs produces measurable and significant results.

You can learn more about Halo Sport in the video below:

Halo Neuroscience

Go here to read the rest:

How Neurotechnology Is Helping The San Francisco Giants Train Better - PSFK (subscription)

Elon Musk Wants to Merge Man and MachineHere’s What He’ll … – Observer

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

Computers and brains already talk to each other daily in high-tech labs and they do it better and better. For example, disabled people can now learn to govern robotic limbs by the sheer power of their mind. The hope is that we may one day be able to operate spaceships with our thoughts, upload our brains to computers and, ultimately, create cyborgs.

Now Elon Musk is joining the race. The CEO of Tesla and SpaceX has acquired Neuralink, a company aiming to establish a direct link between the mind and the computer. Musk has already shown how expensive space technology can be run as a private enterprise. But just how feasible is his latest endeavour?

Neurotechnology was born in the 1970s when Jaques Vidal proposed that electroencephalography (EEG), which tracks and records brain-wave patterns via sensors placed on the scalp (electrodes), could be used to create systems that allow people to control external devices directly with their mind. The idea was to use computer algorithms to transform the recorded EEG signals into commands. Since then, interest in the idea has been growing rapidly.

Indeed, these brain-computer interfaces have driven a revolution in the area of assistive technologies letting people with quadriplegia feed themselves and even walk again. In the past few years, major investments in brain research from the US (the BRAIN initiative) and the EU (the Human Brain project) have further advanced research on them. This has pushed applications of this technology into the area of human augmentation using the technology to improve our cognition and other abilities.

The combination of humans and technology could be more powerful than artificial intelligence. For example, when we make decisions based on a combination of perception and reasoning, neurotechnologies could be used to augment our perception. This could help us in situations such when seeing a very blurry image from a security camera and having to decide whether to intervene or not.

Despite investments, the transition from using the technology in research labs to everyday life is still slow. The EEG hardware is totally safe for the user, but records very noisy signals. Also, research labs have been mainly focused on using it to understand the brain and to propose innovative applications without any follow-up in commercial products. Other very promising initiatives, such as using commercial EEG systems to let people drive a car with their thoughts, have remained isolated.

To try to overcome some of these limitations, several major companies have recently announced investments in research into brain-computer interfaces. Bryan Johnson from human intelligence company Kernel recently acquired the MIT spin-off firm KRS, which is promising to make a data-driven revolution in understanding neurodegenerative diseases. Facebook is hiring a brain-computer interface engineer to work in its secretive hardware division, Building 8.

Musks company is the latest. Its neural lace technology involves implanting electrodes in the brain to measure signals. This would allow getting neural signals of much better quality than EEG but it requires surgery. The project is still quite mysterious, although Musk has promised more details about it soon. Last year he stated that brain-computer interfaces are needed to confirm humans supremacy over artificial intelligence.

The project might seem ambitious, considering the limits of current technology. BCI spellers, which allow people to spell out words by looking at letters on a screen, are still much slower than traditional communication means, which Musk has already defined as incredibly slow. Similar speed limitations apply when using the brain to control a video game.

What we really need to make the technology reliable is more accurate, non-invasive techniques to measure brain activity. We also need to improve our understanding of the brain processes and how to decode them. Indeed, the idea of uploading or downloading our thoughts to or from a computer is simply impossible with our current knowledge of the human brain. Many processes related to memory are still not understood by neuroscientists. The most optimistic forecasts say it will be at least 20 years before brain-computer interfaces will become technologies that we use in our daily lives.

But that doesnt make Musks initiative useless. The neural lace could initially be used to study the brain mechanisms and treat disorders such as epilepsy or major depression. Together with electrodes for reading the brain activity, we could also implant electrodes for stimulating the brain making it possible to detect and halt epileptic seizures.

Brain-computer interfaces also face major ethical issues, especially those based on sensors surgically implanted in the brain. Most people are unlikely to want to have brain surgery or be fit to have it unless vital for their health. This could significantly limit the number of potential users of Musks neural lace. Kernels original idea when acquiring the company KRS was also to implant electrodes in peoples brain, but the company changed its plans six months later due to difficulties related to invasive technologies.

Its easy for billionaires like Musk to be optimistic about the development of brain-computer interfaces. But, rather than dismissing them, lets remember that these visions are nevertheless crucial. They push the boundaries and help researchers set long-term goals.

Theres every reason to be optimistic. Neurotechnology started only started a few years after man first set foot on the moon perhaps reflecting the need for a new big challenge after such a giant leap for mankind. And the brain-computer interfaces were indeed pure science fiction at the time.

In 1965, the Sunday comic strip Our New Age stated:

By 2016, mans intelligence and intellect will be able to be increased by drugs and by linking human brains directly to computers!

We are not there yet, but together we can win the challenge.

Davide Valeriani, is a post-doctoral Researcher in Brain-Computer Interfaces at theUniversity of Essex. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Read the original:

Elon Musk Wants to Merge Man and MachineHere's What He'll ... - Observer

Synchron Inc. Secures $10 Million in Series A Financing Round – PR Newswire (press release)

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

"We have designed a product to attempt to overcome the greatest challenge facing other neural interfaces: chronic brain tissue scarring," said Thomas Oxley, MD, PhD, founder and CEO of Synchron.

"We aim to provide a safe way for patients with severe paralysis to achieve direct brain control of assistive devices. Successful completion of this funding round allows us to commence human studies."

The Stentrode system is small and flexible enough to safely pass through curving blood vessels in a procedure called cerebral angiography, eliminating the need for open brain surgery and direct contact with brain tissue. By using blood vessels to deliver the technology to the brain and house it there, the technique may reduce risk of brain tissue rejection of the device, which has been a significant problem for other techniques.

Pre-clinical studies published in Nature Biotechnology have demonstrated the Stentrode's ability to pick up high-frequency electrical data emitted by the brain. This level of brain recording has previously required invasive electrode implantation through the skull.

According to a global report from McKinsey & Co., in advanced economies, there are 50 million people with impaired mobility due to paralysis. A new industry of 'robotic human augmentation' promises to provide novel solutions to patients with paralysis to achieve enhanced and independent control of their environment.

The Stentrode was initially developed through a multi-departmental collaboration at the University of Melbourne, The Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, and the Royal Melbourne Hospital, Australia. The Australian company SmartStent was spun out in 2012 and was wholly acquired by Silicon Valley-based Synchron in 2016. Early funding for the device was provided from the U.S. Department of Defense, including DARPA and theU.S. Office of Naval Research Global.

Dr. Oxley and Nicholas Opie, PhD, Synchron co-founder and chief technology officer, also received substantial funding from the Australian National Medical Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) to the University of Melbourne Vascular Bionics Laboratory to develop the technology.

About Synchron, Inc.Based in Silicon Valley, Synchron, Inc. is an innovative medical device company focused on the development of minimally invasive neuromodulation technology solutions. Synchron is developing the world's first endovascular neural interface, the StentrodeTM. Development of this technology platform has been funded in part by grants from the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and U.S. Department of Defense (DoD). The company is targeting paralysis due to a range of neurological conditions as a first application. Other applications may include epilepsy and movement disorders.

Stentrode is a trademark of Synchron, Inc.

About NTI Neurotechnology Investors (http://themdadvantage.com ) draws on the knowledge and investment power of over 100 neurology, neurosurgery and radiology specialists from across the U.S. to perform targeted investments in high potential technologies.

To view the original version on PR Newswire, visit:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/synchron-inc-secures-10-million-in-series-a-financing-round-300433942.html

SOURCE Synchron Inc.

http://www.synchronmed.com

Original post:

Synchron Inc. Secures $10 Million in Series A Financing Round - PR Newswire (press release)

The Childfree, Outrage, and Where It Belongs – Huffington Post

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

A recent study, Parenthood as a Moral Imperative? Moral Outrage and the Stigmatization of Voluntarily Childfree Women and Men by Leslie Ashburn-Nardo, has recently received quite a bit of online ink.

I elaborate on the study here; briefly - the study had 204 introductory psychology college students randomly read one of four versions of a paragraph about the life of an alleged former student after s/he had graduated. They then answered questions that pertained to the alumnis psychological fulfillment or adjustment and the extent to which the alumni made them feel disapproval, angry, outraged, annoyed and disgusted.

A heap of online headlines put a big spotlight on one of the findings that not having children inspires moral outrage in others. However, reading the study itself is very informative. Jenna Watling Neal, who was part of a discussion on the study on Facebook makes an astute observation:

Ashburn-Nardo does acknowledge this in the article: the mean levels of moral outrage were small overall. However, many online headlines would make one think the findings were a lot stronger than the study found. As Watling Neal remarks, the findings are overblown in the media!

I have seen a fair amount of this online, and contemplate the impacts.

Though certainly not the first time headlines overstate research findings, in this case, I wonder how much they will serve to confirm perceptions that the childfree somehow do deserve moral outrage. To what degree does it feed the perpetuation of the pronatalist notion that parenthood is a moral imperative? To the extent it breeds pronatalism dogma, it notches back the progress of social change.

Or, does it ultimately notch progress forward? There is more awareness today than a generation ago that stigmas and misperceptions exist and shouldnt - about not having children by choice. For some years now, academics and authors have shined much light on how the childfree are ostracized, criticized and judged. Through blogs, e-publications, and forums, the evolution of our online world has made so much more information accessible, and provided the opportunity for the childfree to find community. Perhaps, as provocateur, exaggerated headlines draw people in to read online pieces, join in discussion, and inspire wanting to learn more, which can ultimately foster even more education about the childfree choice and those who make it.

So do instances of exaggerated headlines notch progress backward or forward? Maybe it does both.

Also consider how overstated headlines impact the perception of societys acceptance of the childfree choice. When the headline reads that being childfree inspires moral outrage, one could easily be led to believe that we are a long ways from society seeing this choice as equally legitimate as the choice to become a parent.

In 2012, I put out an online poll asking this question: How accepting is society of the childfree choice? Fifty-eight percent of the almost 700 respondents chose this response: It is more accepted today than 10 years ago but we still have a ways to go.

From being on the pulse of the childfree choice for 18 years now, I too say, we have a ways to go, and that in the last 40+ years, we have come a long way as well. Today, if you appeared on TV to talk about the childfree choice, it is highly unlikely you would lose your job like Marcia Drut-Davis did in the 70s. The internet continues to serve as a powerful, evolving platform for the childfree to come out of the silent margins. And today, we see much more dialectic on understanding the childfree choice, and how the stigmas, perceptions and judgments need to be questioned. We see more outspokenness about not buying into the stigmas, perceptions and judgments held by previous generations.

Outrage has a place, but not directed at the childfree. Instead, on the road to change, shouldnt it inspire outrage when:

These questions point to pronatalist forces that continue to drive too many peoples beliefs, attitudes and behaviors. What should also inspire outrage is the fact that pronatalism, which consists of outmoded and untrue assumptions about reproduction and parenthood, is uncritically followed, and has many negative impacts on all of us.

Yet, I am inspired by the words of Rebecca Solnit, that, Undoing social frameworks of millennia is not the work of a generation or a few decades but a process of creation and destruction that is epic in scope. On this important path of undoing, we need to continue to speak out about the wrongful perceptions, criticisms and judgments, and now more than ever, to pronatalism, the behemoth of a force that drives them.

Continued here:

The Childfree, Outrage, and Where It Belongs - Huffington Post

How political correctness kills credibility – Baltimore Sun

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

While welcoming a conference on the connections between universities and slavery, history professor and Harvard President Drew Gilpin Faust apologized for her university's contacts with the horrible institution of American slavery. According to the New York Times, President Faust observed that "only by coming to terms with history can we free ourselves to create a more just world." The conference discussed reparations, and ways to abolish any historical recognition of Harvard's 18th and 19th century faculty and benefactors who practiced or defended the enslavement of their fellow human beings.

Strangely, despite Harvard's focus on global citizenship rather than the American variety, President Faust never condemned Harvard's substantial ties with Saudi Arabia, a nation-state that only came around to abolishing slavery in 1962. Should not Harvard come to terms with this history?

Nor did President Faust mention China, Sierra Leone, Iraq, Afghanistan, Morocco or any of the 26 nation-states representing most of humanity that abolished slavery after for some long after 300,000 Union soldiers died in large part to end American slavery.

Nor did President Faust apologize for certain 20th century Harvard faculty who defended Communist regimes that enslaved hundreds of millions. According to The Black Book of Communism, published by Harvard University Press, Marxist governments killed over 80 million people in the 20th century. North Korea and Cuba add to the death toll well into the 21st century. State ownership of the means of employment, including the news media, remains a form of systematic exploitation that only Bernie Sanders, and some professors, have the mendacity to defend.

How can university-based intellectuals condemn exploitation in traditional regimes while ignoring it in "progressive" ones? Should not Harvard consider reparations for those still living victims of Marxism? Do not they merit a museum, a conference or at least a debate?

Sadly, colleges don't do debates. In my 40 years in academia, I can recall only four. As Peter Beinart reports in The Atlantic, the same week as the Harvard conference student activists at Middlebury College violently disrupted a talk by conservative American Enterprise Insitute scholar Charles Murray. His interlocutor, left-leaning political science professor Allison Stanger, landed in the hospital after escorting Mr. Murray away from a hostile mob, some wearing ski masks.

If masked Trump supporters committed this kind of violence at a rally, the news media and academia would be all over it, and rightly so. Yet save for two local affiliates in Vermont and Boston, National Public Radio, which features regular accounts portraying the Trump movement as fascist, failed to cover events at elite Middlebury, where leftist blackshirts did everything short of book burning to stop the free exchange of ideas.

What gives? Historically, as political scientist Stanley Rothman showed in "The End of the Experiment" (meaning the American Experiment), after the 1960s, New Left activists worked their way up in cultural, media and educational institutions, gaining power and developing a politically correct etiquette. Unlike prior elites, many had little support for American institutions and only conditional backing for constitutional values like free speech. Consider, for example, the attempts at 90 mainly elite colleges and universities to disinvite (mainly conservative) speakers.

Whatever their good intentions, in the same way that overwhelmingly white institutions often ignore minority concerns, the overwhelmingly left leanings of the media, Hollywood and academia make it natural for members of those cultural institutions to exaggerate threats to freedom from the right, and ignore or even defend those from the left.

Though largely unconscious, this political correctness undermines the credibility of elite institutions to judge fitness for public office, something an essentially unfit showman, Donald Trump, exploited all the way to the White House.

A Baltimore native, Robert Maranto (rmaranto@uark.edu) is the 21st century chair in leadership in the Department of Education Reform at the University of Arkansas.

How political correctness kills credibility - Baltimore Sun

Choose Wisely: Political Correctness Or A Retreat To Conservative Censorship? – The Pavlovic Today

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

President Trump has no time for political correctness. What about you?

Beginning with the very inception of the country, conservative censorship has dominated the United States of America as a way to moderate public opinion. Beginning in the twenty-first century, however, a new kind of censorship dominated the headlines, schoolrooms, and workplaces of America: liberal political correctness. With the rise of right-wing ideals and isolationism, will we witness

This new liberal PC mentality seemingly accentuated a widespread shift from a traditional, religion-based outlook to the more contemporary inclusive, modern toleration-based outlook.

Political correctness has been criticized recently. From comedians to politicians, the doctrine is criticized for limiting free speech, overacting to even slightly offensive comments, and overall, acting as the thought police. The most obvious, essentially unmissable advocate against political correctness is, of course, President Donald Trump. At the first GOP debate, he stated that he has no time for political correctness, after replying to questions demanding why he has called women pigs and dogs in the past.

This societal censorship did not have liberal origins, however. Many forget that conservative-based censorship was ubiquitous in the twentieth-century. In 1918, for instance, the Sedition Act was enacted, effectively making it impossible to speak out against the United States government. The act barred any type of anti-government criticism that was profane, scurrilous, or abusive language. The penalty for such an offense? $10,000 and/or twenty years in prison. Eugene V. Debs, a prominent American socialist, was imprisoned for making an anti-war speech in 1918 under a similar law.

Even in 2013, almost one hundred years later, right-wing censorship is prevalent. Neil Gaimans book, Neverwhere, was banned in a New Mexico school after a parent complained of a sex scene and The F-word.

The Harry Potter series has come under attack for promoting witchcraft. One of the most thought-provoking and moving works of literature in recent memory, Brave New World, was also criticized for its anti-religion and anti-family values.

Literature has not been the only thing censored. The Pentagon Papers, published in part by The New York Times in 1971 were released after the government threatened to punish the company under the same law the aforementioned Eugene V. Debs was put up against. The Times later stated the papers were a great example of the widespread lying and censorship enacted by the Johnson administration.

The public-school superintendent in Georgia, Kathy Cox, was proposing banning the word evolution so as to not offend more conservative parents. The absurdity of this proposal is simply astounding.

However, with the growing backlash against liberal PC, we may see a retreat to conservative-based censorship. The pendulum of political influence may very well swing back to these kinds of restrictions. This development is doubtlessly influenced by the retreat of globalization and the possibility of the end of democracy as we know it.

Follow this link:

Choose Wisely: Political Correctness Or A Retreat To Conservative Censorship? - The Pavlovic Today

Political Correctness Hits Annual Easter Egg Hunt In Britain – Daily Caller

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

5575301

Plans to take the Easter out of an annual Easter egg hunt in Britain are under fire as an unnecessary act of political correctness.

Both the Church of England and Prime Minister Theresa May have condemned the move by the National Trust, a conservation charity responsible for organizing the annual event.

Last year it was called the Easter egg Trail. This year it is being promoted as the Great British Egg Hunt with Easter being lost in the transition.

This marketing campaign . . . highlights the folly in airbrushing faith from Easter, said an official statement from the Church of England that was sent to The Washington Post. A church spokeswoman added that senior church leaders are adamantly against the re-branding.

Some 300,000 children are expected to attend this years hunt, held at 250 sites owned by the National Trust, a charity that promotes conservation. It partners with Cadbury, the maker of the chocolate eggs for the hunt.

Finger-pointing is already underway as to who decided to remove the reference to Easter.

The National Trust is in no way downplaying the significance of Easter, a spokesman told the Telegraph, placing the blame for the growing fiasco on Cadburys board of directors who are responsible for the branding and wording of our egg hunt campaign.

Prime Minister May is a member of the National Trust, and she has not minced her criticism of the charitys decision to bow to political correctness especially since it wasnt even under any pressure to do so.

I think what the National Trust is doing is frankly just ridiculous, May told ITV Nanews. Easters very important. Its important to me, its a very important festival for the Christian faith for millions across the world.

Though Easter has been banished from all event advertising, it can be found on Cadburys website, which contains a reference to consumers of chocolate being welcome to Enjoy Easter Fun if they participate in the annual egg hunt.

Cadbury tiptoes around the Christian origins of the festival, assuring people of their multicultural bonafides in a statement that even includes atheists: We invite people from all faiths and none to enjoy our seasonal treats.

Archbishop John Sentamu of York said Cadbury is adding insult to injury by renaming the event because the companys founder, John Cadbury, was a devout Quaker who recognized the Christian significance of Easter.

To drop Easter from Cadburys Easter Egg Hunt in my book is tantamount to spitting on the grave of Cadbury, Sentamu said in a statement.

He built houses for all his workers, he built a church, he made provision for schools, Sentamu said. It is obvious that for him Jesus and justice were two sides of the one coin.

Follow David on Twitter

Continue reading here:

Political Correctness Hits Annual Easter Egg Hunt In Britain - Daily Caller

When Republicans defend Republicans’ bad behavior, we justify ‘political correctness’ – Mooresville Tribune

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

When Republicans defend Republicans' bad behavior, we justify 'political correctness'

Donald Trump's presidential campaign almost ended with his "grab them by the p -- -- -- y" riff. Last month, Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, stood by his statement that "We can't restore our civilization with somebody else's babies." Last week, Fox News host Bill O'Reilly watched a clip of Rep. Maxine Waters, D-California, speaking on the House floor and mocked her by saying, on air: "I didn't hear a word she said. I was looking at the James Brown wig."

Enough Americans voted for Trump last year to prove that his unprecedented crassness wasn't fatal to his political aspirations. King has gotten away with a series of racially inflammatory remarks (Remember "calves the size of cantaloupes?"). O'Reilly offered an apology, but instead of taking him to task, the Daily Caller's Jim Treacher argued that critics were playing a racial "gotcha" game. CNN commentator Ben Ferguson deflected blame from O'Reilly by wondering aloud, about Waters, "Isn't she a racist for saying that the white guy, who was elected president, who had done nothing wrong, but get elected, should be impeached?" And former Rep. Jack Kingston, R-Georgia, played down O'Reilly's comments by saying, "It always seems like it's OK to make fun of a conservative, but liberals are off -- you can't touch 'em. . . . Making fun of Maxine Waters's hair, making fun of Donald Trump's hair, I don't know what the difference is."

Go far enough back and recall that after Missouri Rep. Todd Akin suggested that women possess innate biological defenses against "legitimate rape," his fellow Republicans, former Sens. Jim DeMint of South Carolina and Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, still endorsed his 2012 Senate bid, calling him the candidate of "freedom-loving Americans."

I'm not naive enough to be stunned by Akin, King, O'Reilly or Trump, but as a Republican, I continue to be dismayed by the willingness of fellow Republicans and conservatives to overlook, rationalize and excuse this type of behavior. And each time I see conservatives defending, or looking away from, other conservatives' noxious behavior, I become less and less sure that liberals aren't justified in taking the sometimes-condescending, always-disapproving "politically correct" approach that they do in these all-too-predictable episodes.

Maybe liberals are so "P.C." because conservatives keep making excuses for bad behavior.

I didn't always think this way about liberal highhandedness toward Republicans. I used to co-sign the typical conservative rejoinder to political correctness, which generally goes something like "Life's not fair, so please get over yourself." My feelings were rooted in my experiences as a Republican in an overwhelmingly Democratic graduate school environment, where my liberal colleagues routinely derided my political views.

That case against political correctness was used to great effect in the 2016 presidential election, starting at a GOP primary debate when then-candidate Donald Trump addressed the litany of derogatory statements he's made toward women by saying: "The big problem this country has is being politically correct. I've been challenged by so many people, and I don't, frankly, have time for total political correctness."

But even if there's a grain of truth to Trump's logic, in general, it's not a catchall that makes it OK when a politician -- or anyone -- takes a cheap shot that's uncivil and degrading at best, and sexist or racist (or both) at worst. Impatience with political correctness isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card for a future president to mock a disabled reporter. Ritual deployment of the supposedly un-P.C. phrase "radical Islamic terrorism" isn't a foreign policy.

And it's not just being politically correct to publicly scrutinize the serial allegations of sexual harassment against O'Reilly. If even half of what's been alleged by women who say he harassed them is true, he's a disgrace, and so is any conservative or Republican who decides that what he's done doesn't merit consequences just because O'Reilly's shame might also be cheered by liberals. Already, 20 companies have announced that they're pulling advertising from O'Reilly's show, even though it's the gold standard when it comes to cable news ratings. The question now is whether self-respecting conservatives and Republicans will stand on principle or if, as former Republican Capitol Hill communications director Tara Setmayer wrote recently for Cosmopolitan, they continue to circle the wagons around him just because he's on their team.

If that's what they do, it would be pretty indecent, but it would also turn out to be bad politics.

Yes, House Speaker Paul D. Ryan, R-Wisconsin, was rewarded for choosing expediency over morality by endorsing Trump's candidacy even as he condemned Trump's attack on Judge Gonzalo Curiel's Mexican heritage as "the textbook definition of a racist comment." In doing so, Ryan confirmed an unsettling truth: When some in the Party of Lincoln witness racism, it's not necessarily a dealbreaker. Indeed, the GOP won big in 2016 embracing the same rhetoric I'm calling out now -- rhetoric we said we were leaving behind in the 2013 autopsy report commissioned after Mitt Romney's 2012 defeat.

But antagonism is only a short-term strategy. Trump lost the popular vote with our current demographic landscape by a margin of almost 3 million, and demographics are rapidly changing, not in his favor. Republicans who treat 2016 as the rule rather than the exception will come to regret it.

More important is acknowledging, before we try to beat political correctness into extinction, is that it's not political correctness to expect common courtesy and respect. And it's not a burden on a politician or anyone else to refrain from making sexist and racist remarks. It's both the right thing to do, and an approach in keeping with the values that the Republican Party is supposed to stand for, including judging all people as individuals, not caricaturing them because of their race or gender.

It's hard to deny that we've become a society where people are put out by the smallest slights, real or perceived. Conservatives are right to bristle at left-wing condescension, and liberals would be foolish to ignore that their elitism helped fuel Trump's rise. But this cuts both ways, and every time conservatives and Republicans let an O'Reilly slide -- rather than take a stand in favor of common decency - the "politically correct" scorn of liberals becomes just a bit more justified. Hoping that the GOP becomes the Party of Lincoln again may be wishful thinking. But if that's what we aspire to, no longer defending the indefensible would be a start.

- Wright is the author of "On Behalf of the President: Presidential Spouses and White House Communications Strategy Today" and a board member of the White House Transition Project. She begins a teaching appointment in the Department of Politics at Princeton University in the Fall 2017 semester.

Washington Post News Service (DC)

4/5/2017 9:30:21 AM Central Daylight Time

Continue reading here:

When Republicans defend Republicans' bad behavior, we justify 'political correctness' - Mooresville Tribune

Marvel V.P. Admits Political Correctness Killed Comic Sales … – FrontPage Magazine

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

FrontPage Magazine

Marvel V.P. Admits Political Correctness Killed Comic Sales ...
FrontPage Magazine
While the Marvel-Disney monster has been ruling the box office, Marvel Comics sales have been having serious issues. One obvious factor was trying to force ...
ICv2: Marvel's David Gabriel on the 2016 Market ShiftICv2
G. Willow Wilson / So About That Whole ThingG. Willow Wilson
ICv2: Marvel Retailer Summit -- Day 1ICv2
Gizmodo -Fortune
all 122 news articles »

See the article here:

Marvel V.P. Admits Political Correctness Killed Comic Sales ... - FrontPage Magazine

Editorial: freedom of speech in an era of political-correctness, part two – Daily Sundial

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

Though there should always be legal and moral standards to how we go about exercising our freedom of speech, press, assembly and petition, political correctness does not actually infringe on anyones freedom of speech.

However, political correctness (PC) culture can contribute to social division or polarization. The contemporary philosopher, Slavoj Zizek, argues that political correctness doesnt really allow you to overcome racism. Its just oppressed controlled racism. As any culture that becomes dominant in a given area, a number of sub-cultures are bound to form in response and sometimes for the mere sake of opposition. When speakers like Milo Yiannopoulos openly state I just want to burn it down, theyre making intentional provocations that stem from the sheer desire to oppose majority thought.

On one hand, we have the ability to cultivate a space around ourselves where we dont have to hear or expose ourselves to different opinions. We can un-friend people on social media, walk away from a politically charged family dinner, and ignore reading or listening to particular media sources that do not share the same value system as ours. However, this mentality just further polarizes people, undermines inter-community relations and severely limits our own ability to grow as individuals.

To exercise our freedom, the kind that is not necessarily governed by any nation or piece of paper but that is governed by our own critical, reasoning, minds, we must question how genuine our thoughts truly are. Since context plays such a crucial role in the formation and expression of ones thoughts, whether it be in the context of PC or anti-PC culture, reasoning and introspection are necessary. As the 18th century philosopher, Immanuel Kant, said in Critique of Pure Reason, there is nothing higher than reason.

When individuals feel that their freedom of speech is being violated, they feel they cannot speak for fear of retaliation or some social form of excommunication. Jon Ronson explores the consequences and nature of our modern democratization of justice via online shaming in his novel, So Youve Been Publicly Shamed. He writes, we are defining the boundaries of normality by tearing apart the people outside it. In this vicious cycle, weve reached a level of polarization where the minds power to reason begins to stale. It becomes easier to stew in anger than to deconstruct and answer whats so righteous about that righteous indignation.

If an opinion is held solely because it dwells in an echo-chamber of whispers or because its written in stone, then the holder of such an opinion is not using their natural privilege as a human being to use critical thinking before expressing the truth, or their truth, as they believe and reason it to be. Freedom of speech is arduously protected in America and exercised in many ways, but its nothing without the freedom to reason.

Kant goes on to state, thoughts without content are empty, intuitions without concepts are blind. Therefore, sincerity in words and reasoning behind those words helps illuminate the point of solidarity, that steady point on a precarious path. To teeter from thoughts and words that are subjective truths and that hold reason far beyond intuition is where one risks falling into the trap of a narrow-minded perspective. In addition, processing words solely by their context of communication can also lead someone to succumb to that frame of mind.

Freedom of speech, as its protected by our government, allows for us, our peers, colleagues, friends, neighbors, the disenfranchised, the silent, the underrepresented, the overlooked, to have a voice. No one should be pressured or forced into quietude, not when we have both the constitutional freedom of speech and the natural freedom to reason. Every time we pick up a microphone to speak, sit behind a computer to type, or march behind a picket sign, its not just what we say, but why we say it that matters.

Read the rest here:

Editorial: freedom of speech in an era of political-correctness, part two - Daily Sundial

Littleproud: program is ‘political correctness gone too far’ – Warwick Daily News

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

ONCE upon a time, fairy tales were a staple of children's reading material, but the traditional tales have come under fire in Victoria for promoting traditional gender roles.

A teaching aid in the Respectful Relationship program wants state school students to examine the roles of characters in classic stories like Beauty and the Beast, Snow White and Cinderella and compare them to modern stories challenging gender norms.

Preschool books and toys could also be audited to determine whether they promote gender stereotypes, under the Victorian government plan to address family violence.

Member for Maranoa David Littleproud has weighed in on the debate and urged parents and teachers not to let political correctness get in the way of a good story. I

"Domestic violence is a scourge in our community but I don't think asking very young children to pick apart a fairy tale to find the sexist elements is the answer - it's simply political correctness gone too far and I don't want to see it in Queensland," Mr Littleproud said.

"Fable legends Brothers Grimm and Hans Christian Andersen's traditional fairy tales are about life lessons and convey morals but remember these were written more than 100 years ago and should be read as they are, not through an adult-enforced magnifying glass.

"Contemporary story-tellers - like Disney-Pixar's Inside Out and Disney's Frozen - are great as they explore views on mental health and shifting gender roles but they're movies and don't offer the same enrichment as reading a book.

"Reading, writing and arithmetic should be a school's foundation and domestic violence education and positive role models are key to breaking the cycle.

"Science backs up the importance of reading so please don't stop reading to your kids."

The Respectful Relationships program, which claims children as young as four can exhibit sexist behaviour, was recommended by the family violence royal commission.

Critics of the the program however claim it exposes children to gender theory and notions of gender-based violence too early.

Original post:

Littleproud: program is 'political correctness gone too far' - Warwick Daily News

Reasons Against Cloning – VIDEOS & ARTICLES

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

Written by Patrick Dixon

Futurist Keynote Speaker: Posts, Slides, Videos - What is Human Cloning? How to Clone. But Ethical?

Human cloning: who is cloning humans and arguments against cloning (2007)

How human clones are being made - for medical research. Arguments for and against human cloning research. Why some people want to clone themselves or even to clone the dead (and not just cloning pets).

Why investors are moving away from human cloning and why human cloning now looks a last-century way to fight disease (2007)

Should we ban human cloning? Arguments against cloning

An abnormal baby would be a nightmare come true. The technique is extremely risky right now. A particular worry is the possibility that the genetic material used from the adult will continue to age so that the genes in a newborn baby clone could be - say - 30 years old or more on the day of birth. Many attempts at animal cloning produced disfigured monsters with severe abnormalities. So that would mean creating cloned embryos, implanting them and destroying (presumably) those that look imperfect as they grow in the womb. However some abnormalities may not appear till after birth. A cloned cow recently died several weeks after birth with a huge abnormality of blood cell production. Dolly the Sheep died prematurely of severe lung disease in February 2003, and also suffered from arthritis at an unexpectedly early age - probably linked to the cloning process.

Even if a few cloned babies are born apparently normal we will have to wait up to 20 years to be sure they are not going to have problems later -for example growing old too fast. Every time a clone is made it is like throwing the dice and even a string of "healthy" clones being born would not change the likelihood that many clones born in future may have severe medical problems. And of course, that's just the ones born. What about all the disfigured and highly abnormal clones that either spontaneously aborted or were destroyed / terminated by scientists worried about the horrors they might be creating.

A child grows up knowing her mother is her sister, her grandmother is her mother. Her father is her brother-in-law. Every time her mother looks at her, she is seeing herself growing up. Unbearable emotional pressures on a teenager trying to establish his or her identity. What happens to a marriage when the "father" sees his wife's clone grow up into the exact replica (by appearance) of the beautiful 18 year old he fell in love with 35 years ago? A sexual relationship would of course be with his wife's twin, no incest involved technically.

Or maybe the child knows it is the twin of a dead brother or sister. What kind of pressures will he or she feel, knowing they were made as a direct replacement for another? It is a human experiment doomed to failure because the child will NOT be identical in every way, despite the hopes of the parents. One huge reason will be that the child will be brought up in a highly abnormal household: one where grief has been diverted into makeing a clone instead of adjusting to loss. The family environment will be totally different than that the other twin experienced. That itself will place great pressures on the emotional development of the child. You will not find a child psychiatrist in the world who could possibly say that there will not be very significant emotional risk to the cloned child as a result of these pressures.

What would Hitler have done with cloning technology if available in the 1940s? There are powerful leaders in every generation who will seek to abuse this technology for their own purposes. Going ahead with cloning technology makes this far more likely. You cannot have so-called therapeutic cloning without reproductive cloning because the technique to make cloned babies is the same as to make a cloned embryo to try to make replacement tissues. And at the speed at which biotech is accelerating there will soon be other ways to get such cells - adult stem cell technology. It is rather crude to create a complete embryonic identical twin embryo just to get hold of stem cells to make - say - nervous tissue. Much better to take cells from the adult and trigger them directly to regress to a more primitive form without the ethical issues raised by inserting a full adult set of genes into an unfertilised egg.

Woodbury Police Need Your Help In Credit Card Cloning Case – Patch – Patch.com

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

Patch.com

Woodbury Police Need Your Help In Credit Card Cloning Case - Patch
Patch.com
Woodbury, MN - Woodbury police are trying to solve a credit card cloning case, and need the public's help. Can you identify this individual?
Police seek help identifying woman suspected in credit card cloning ...Woodbury Bulletin

all 2 news articles »

See the rest here:

Woodbury Police Need Your Help In Credit Card Cloning Case - Patch - Patch.com

Cloning Your VS 2017 Packages – Microsoft – Channel 9 (blog)

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

So, you've just installed VS 2017. Now you want to "copy" that setup and share what you installed with your coworkers, say you're trying to create a standard work or class setup...

How do you capture what you installed? You're sure there's some kind of command line switch or something, some way to export your currently installed VS 2017 setup/package/workload?

Nope.

There is a cool new VS 2017 Setup API, Setup Configuration, though, with code samples and everything. Maybe that can be used?

Yep!

Today's quick and dirty project from Tim Sneath uses the Setup Configuration API to capture and export your currently installed packages, generating the command line parameters that you can use to install a like looking VS setup on another PC.

timsneath/vs-clone

Clones a Visual Studio 2017 installation so it can be reproduced on another machine. Run this on a machine that already has Visual Studio 2017 installed, and it will interrogate the instance of Visual Studio to identify what workloads and components were selected, and attempt to create a command line that recreates the same installation.

Syntax:

...

... [Click through for the repo]

Read the rest here:

Cloning Your VS 2017 Packages - Microsoft - Channel 9 (blog)

Hair Cloning is Happening – NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

By the time theyre 50, 85 percent of American men will have significant hair loss, according to the American Hair Loss Association.

Now, an international team of hair restoration doctors is turning to cutting-edge science to grow more hair through cloning.

Ric Ortega has dealt with hair loss for a while. For him, it's a health concern.

Im outside a lot because I work in the construction industry, and I worry about skin cancer on the top of my head, explained Ortega.

Ortega is considering a hair cloning clinical trial with Kenneth Williams, Jr. D.O, a hair restoration surgeon with Orange County Hair Restoration in Irvine, California.

Williams is working with Hair Clone, a British company that believes it will perfect the science of cloning hair.

The typical candidate would be someone who has had multiple surgeries and cant have any more hair transplantations, but they do have lots of areas of balding, Williams said.

Doctors would harvest 50 hair follicles and send them to a cryopreservation tank in England. Surgeons there would remove the hair shaft from the bulb, which holds cells that control growth. Then, the cells are multiplied in a special cell culture.

Then, when the patient is ready, they have the actual transplantation," Williams explained. "They would let us know and wed go through the process of replication, and shortly, those 50 cells will now turn into 1,500 cells.

The trial would cost Ortega between $4,000 and $10,000, plus airfare to England, where hed get his cloned hair. England is the only western country that allows this type of treatment.

Williams said hair cloning is the next biggest frontier in hair science.

Hair Clone hopes to start a small trial in England later this year.

The good news is, companies around the world are racing to start hair cloning trials as soon as they can.

Published at 5:57 PM CDT on Apr 7, 2017

Read this article:

Hair Cloning is Happening - NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth

The next evolution in office working could be employees getting implanted with a microchip – Recode

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

From pacemakers that keep the heart beating to swallowable sensors that can tell when someone takes their meds, people have been implanting machines into their bodies for decades.

But a growing trend in bodily implants inserting a computer chip under the skin is more about morphing people into literal cyborgs than addressing a medical condition.

Im turning the internet of things into the internet of us, said Jowan Osterlund in an interview with Recode. Osterlund is the founder of Biohax, a Swedish company that specializes in injecting small microchips, about the size of a grain of rice, under peoples skin.

The microchips, says Osterlund, can be programed to speak to other networked devices, like coffee makers, speakers or doors with electronic locks. The idea is that its more convenient to wave your hand in front of the door than use a key card.

Inserted by a syringe into the skin between the thumb and the index finger, the chips communicate with other devices using Near Field Communication. Its a wireless way of linking devices in close proximity to each other, similar to the way Bluetooth works. Contactless payment systems, like Apple Pay, also use NFC.

Last year, Microsoft invited Biohax to its TechDays conference in Sweden to implant some of the speakers at the conference, as well as a few Microsoft executives in attendance, according to Osterlund.

Scientists have been implanting animals with microchips for years to help track down lost pets or monitor endangered species. In the U.K., microchipping dogs became a mandatory practice in 2016.

The procedure for humans, though, could raise concerns about security. If hacked, microchips implanted inside the body could be read to reveal a persons location and length of time spent somewhere, as well as information about your health or any data stored on the chip.

All kinds of medical devices can be hacked, after all. In 2015, the Food and Drug Administration recommended hospitals stop using a line of drug infusion devices after a security researcher discovered how easy it would be for a hacker to commandeer the device and overdose a patient.

Biohacking has become kind of a niche community in the past few years. Companies like Dangerous Things, a biohacking supply company based in Seattle that sells microchips and all the gear needed to insert the devices under the skin, have sprouted up. Theres also Grindhouse Wetwear, a biohacking company based out of Pittsburgh, thats created a LED star that can be implanted under the skin to light up when activated by a magnet.

Elon Musk is even reportedly starting a new company, Neuralink, which will make implants for the human brain that can wirelessly interface with a computer. Though details on the new venture are thin, Musk hinted at the idea at Recodes Code Conference last year, when he described a digital layer located above the cortex, built into the brain.

Musk hopes that one day the technology, which he calls neural lace, could be used to improve brain function and help humans keep apace with rapid advancements in artificial intelligence.

Continue reading here:

The next evolution in office working could be employees getting implanted with a microchip - Recode

Dissent with Modification: Soothing EvolutionReligion Tensions in … – Scientific American

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

On topics ranging from astrophysics to public health, rejections of scientific consensus can prove quite inflexible when bolstered by religious doctrine. Buta new approach to teaching evolutionary biology appears to ease such tensions. It involves airing perceived conflicts between religion and evolution in the classroom rather than simply presenting a mountain of evidence for evolution. Such a curriculum could help biologists (most of whom claim to hold no religious beliefs) more effectively prepare students (most of whom profess belief in God) to meet the nations growing need for scientists and technologists.

During a two-week module on evolution that was part of an introductory biology course at Arizona State University, the instructor explored a variety of viewpoints about the relation between some religious beliefs and the development and diversification of life, ranging from evolution without the involvement of a deity to various types of creationismincluding theistic evolution. Students were encouraged to express their opinions and concerns.

Surveys filled out by 60 students before and after the module revealed that the number of students who perceived a sense of a conflict between religion and evolution at the start was cut in half by the end. An analysis of the results is detailed in the February issue of the American Biology Teacher.

In response to instructors concerns about limited classroom time, a follow-up project compressed the two-week module to six minutes. Remarkably, unpublished results suggest this brief exposure also proved effective at reducing students perception of a conflict. If we encourage national policy documents that promote these teaching practices, says study co-author Elizabeth Barnes of Arizona State, perhaps we can increase acceptance of evolution among our students, future teachers and future political leaders.

Trump’s evolution on Syria didn’t happen overnight – CNN

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

But while the decision to strike Syrian government targets marked a sharp reversal in the President's stance on Syria -- one that called for a laser-like focus on ISIS and largely ignoring Assad -- the sharp, 180-degree turn didn't happen over a matter of days.

Months earlier, during an off-the-record holiday gathering with reporters at his opulent Mar-a-Lago estate a week before Christmas, Trump spoke at length about the carnage of the Syrian civil war, revealing that the issue was weighing on him as he prepared to take office. Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks authorized CNN on Friday to report the contents of his remarks on the topic at the gathering, which CNN attended.

He described the slaughter of civilians in Syria as a "holocaust," and remarked on the "high pain threshold" of the population there.

Trump also described in detail a video he had seen of an elderly woman being shot multiple times in Syria, struggling as she tried to continue to walk.

And then, he acknowledged that the US had a "responsibility" over the devastating Syrian conflict -- the same word he would use months later before approving the launch of 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles to target a Syrian Air Force base.

"I now have responsibility. And I will have that responsibility and carry it very proudly, I will tell you that. It is now my responsibility," Trump said Wednesday during a White House news conference one day before approving the airstrike.

Trump said that the chemical weapons attack "crossed a lot of lines for me," a telling comment that signaled his shifting willingness to strike the Syrian regime.

But even as he spoke broadly during the December cocktail gathering about a US responsibility over the horrors taking place in Syria, he was clearly undergoing a shift in his approach to the conflict there as his moral responsibility as the US President and "leader of the free world" began to sink in.

It was clear Trump was giving more thought to the Syrian conflict that he would soon inherit as president, and he indicated he would be weighing different ways the US could act to stop the atrocities that continued to unfold in Syria.

He declined to say if he would take military action, parroting his oft-repeated line that the US should act first and talk later, rather than telegraph military actions in advance.

Trump spoke at length about the "tragedy" unfolding in Syria and the atrocities the world had grown all too accustomed to seeing and his demeanor and thoughtfulness as he addressed the topic struck reporters who had covered Trump's campaign since its early days as a crucial piece of insight into how Trump was becoming more clearly aware of the real world implications of his startling election victory.

With his strikes against a Syrian government target on Thursday night, Trump made clear that his Middle East policy won't just be driven by a single-minded focus on terrorist groups like ISIS or core national security threats -- but could be expanded to address the United States' moral responsibility in the world.

That's not something Trump spoke about during his campaign for president. Rather, Trump touted an "America First" philosophy that he said would drive his domestic and foreign policy. He decried the Iraq War as a "stupid" decision that had led to needlessly spilled blood and treasure in the Middle East.

Trump called for keeping US military action in the Middle East singularly focused on eliminating ISIS and argued that the US had "bigger problems" than Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

"We cannot be the world's policeman," Trump said at his first presidential debate against former secretary of state Hillary Clinton, whom Trump called out for her role in some of the very foreign interventions Trump railed against on the stump.

Trump's internal shift didn't translate into US policy until this week after the latest images of the Assad regime's horrific violence against civilians were broadcast around the world.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson insisted that the decision to strike was not triggered by an "emotional reaction," but made clear the decision was driven by Trump's refusal to "turn a blind eye" to the Syrian violence.

The chemical weapons attacks that prompted Trump to strike had happened "on his watch," Tillerson said of Trump.

As recently as last week, the administration's top officials continued to articulate Trump's realpolitik view of the Syrian civil war as he articulated it on the campaign.

"With respect to Assad, there is a political reality that we have to accept," White House press secretary Sean Spicer said last week. "The United States has profound priorities in Syria and Iraq, and we've made it clear that counterterrorism -- particularly the defeat of ISIS -- is foremost among those priorities."

Thursday night's strike sent a clear message that Trump was willing to act beyond those counterterrorism priorities, but US officials made clear that the strike was meant to send a message -- not fundamentally alter US policy in the region.

"I would not in any way attempt to extrapolate that to a change in our policy or posture relative to our military activities in Syria today. There has been no change in that status," Tillerson told reporters after the cruise missiles had struck their targets.

Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, the president's national security adviser, said the strike "should" shift Assad's calculus on chemical weapons.

Still, he acknowledged that the strike did not eliminate Assad's capacity to conduct the ghastly attacks.

CNN's Noah Gray contributed to this report.

Excerpt from:

Trump's evolution on Syria didn't happen overnight - CNN

College Hockey News: Adaptation and Evolution – College Hockey News

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

April 7, 2017 PRINT

by Avash Kalra/Senior Writer (@AvashKalra)

(photo: Todd Pavlack)

CHICAGO The Denver players and coaching staff have been asked about last season's NCAA Frozen Four semifinal loss to eventual champion North Dakota over and over.

And over and over again.

That loss has been a black cloud hovering perhaps fueling each of Denver's accomplishments this season. The Pioneers' nation-best 32 wins. Their 13-game winning streak from Jan. 21 to Mar. 11. Their NCHC regular season title. And now their long-awaited return to the national championship game, an all-NCHC tilt between Denver and Minnesota-Duluth set for Saturday night.

Denver sophomore Dylan Gambrell has been asked about that loss, too.

But the memory is vivid without the constant reminders.

"It's always in the back of your mind that feeling," Gambrell said before the final practice of Denver's season on Friday.

In reality, Gambrell has faced plenty of mental challenges over the past 12 months. Physical challenges, too.

A year ago, Gambrell was one-third of Denver's vaunted Pacific Rim line, which helped propel the Pioneers to last season's Frozen Four. Danton Heinen and Trevor Moore left during the offseason, leaving Gambrell with his 17 goals and 30 assists as a freshman as the potential focal point of the Pioneers' offense this season.

That was the burden he held before the puck even dropped on this 2016-17 season, long before Denver's dominant march to this year's title game.

But those plans seemingly changed during Denver's season-opening exhibition against Mount Royal on the first day of October. Gambrell suffered an upper body injury, tried to play the following weekend, but knew he had to be shut down for a time.

"He was our best player going into the year, and I'm talking about training camp," said head coach Jim Montgomery, the Spencer Penrose Award winner as the national coach of the year. "I'm not talking about just because of what he did last year. And then he got hurt in our exhibition game. He's a tough kid, a team player, played with three torn ligaments through the first weekend. Then we found out he needed to get surgery."

Gambrell missed only four games much less than originally expected. His return sparked Denver's lineup, but the sophomore forward had to adjust his game immediately.

"People don't know this. He played with a cast," Montgomery said. "He couldn't handle passes. So he had to try and adapt his game. He's a great team guy. He's really grown this year. He is still a huge focal point for our team. We don't win if he's not going and he knows that. His pace and his relentlessness adds skill to our group that not a lot of players possess."

Entering last night's national semifinal with Notre Dame, Gambrell hadn't scored in eight games the longest goalless streak of his career so far. He still averaged an assist per game during that stretch, though, playing a pivotal role alongside classmate Troy Terry on Denver's top line.

Against the Fighting Irish, Gambrell finally broke through, scoring two goals in the Pioneers' 6-1 win the first on a heads-up wraparound play to put Denver up 4-0 and in cruise control late in the second period

"I didn't feel any pressure," said the San Jose Sharks prospect. "I felt that as long as I'm doing the right things with the puck, and helping my team in any way that I can and we're having success and other guys are scoring and everyone's contributing, it doesn't really matter who gets the credit. As long as we're scoring and winning games.

"Personally, I feel like I've rounded out my game a little more and really honed in on my defensive zone play being on the right side of the puck and just doing the things away from the puck that are going to help the team."

Added Montgomery, "I didn't even know that he hadn't scored in eight games until you said that. That's how our team is built. We're built on the team having success. In my mind, he had been playing really well. He just hadn't scored. We did talk to him about getting into the tougher scoring areas inside the dots. We felt like he was getting a little too much from the outside. Last night, he went to tough areas."

Despite all the hurdles, Gambrell's 13 goals this season are still tied for third on the team, with Jarid Lukosevicius. Terry and freshman Henrik Borgstrom each have 22 goals to lead the team.

Borgstrom battled food poisoning the night before the NCAA tournament began. Terry dealt with almost unreasonably high expectations after willing Team USA to the gold medal in January at the World Junior Championships.

In each situation, the Denver players learned to adapt.

As a result, they've evolved into a team that isn't defined by last year's Frozen Four loss, into a team that's balanced throughout the lineup, and yes, into the team to beat all tournament.

Now, there's one hurdle remaining. And that's the Saturday night showdown with Minnesota-Duluth, with the NCAA trophy awaiting the winner.

Read the original post:

College Hockey News: Adaptation and Evolution - College Hockey News

Syria strikes: The story behind Trump’s ’72-hour evolution’ – Fox News

Posted on April 8, 2017 by Danzig

As President Trump was wrapping up his dinner with Chinese President Xi Jinping at Mar-a-Lago a hearty menu that included pan-seared Dover sole and dry-aged New York strip steak, paired with California wines he delivered the news: The U.S. had launched strikes on Syria.

By this point, the first of 59 missiles already had started to rain down on the Assad airbase alleged to have been used to carry out this weeks deadly chemical attack. Planning for a U.S. response had been underway since Tuesday but the final decision to order missile strikes, and the militarys execution of that directive, took place over the course of just a few hours Thursday evening.

The timeline of the presidents decision-making and the mission itself was detailed late Friday by White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer and other U.S. officials. The presidents top spokesman described the course of events as a 72-hour evolution that involved updates and options and refinements before a final decision.

OBAMA OFFICIALS UNDER FIRE FOR CHEMICAL WEAPONS CLAIMS

Hes not going to telegraph his next move, Spicer cautioned, but described Thursdays actions as carefully planned, decisive and justified.

According to Spicer and other officials, the timeline played out as follows:

Tuesday at 10:30 a.m. ET: Trump was informed during his daily briefing about the suspected chemical weapons attack in Syria. Trump asked his team for more information. The team developed initial options.

Tuesday at 8 p.m.: Preliminary options were presented and refined.

Wednesday morning: Another restricted principals meeting was held where options were further reviewed and refined.

Wednesday at 3 p.m.: Trump was briefed on updated options at a national security meeting. He reviewed them, asked questions, and requested more information including options for strikes on Syria.

Thursday at 1:30 p.m.: En route to Florida, Trump convened his national security team aboard Air Force One.

Thursday at 4 p.m.: Trump, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster and others met in a secure room in Palm Beach. The president gave the okay to move ahead. This decision was made at about 4:30 p.m.

Thursday at 7:40 p.m.: Navy destroyers in the Mediterranean launched Tomahawk missiles into Syria.

Thursday at 8:30 p.m.: Foreign leaders and congressional leaders started to be notified. Around that time, the first missiles were hitting. Trump informed President Xi as their dinner was ending. According to Spicer, all 59 missiles hit their target. After dinner, Trump held a secure call with the Joint Chiefs.

He asked about reaction from the world community as well as congressional leaders and was informed that there was fairly unanimous praise for the decision and the actions the president took, Spicer said.

Trump mostly has won bipartisan praise on Capitol Hill for the response, though some have warned that he must seek congressional authorization going forward. The strikes also fueled a fiery U.N. Security Council session on Friday, where Syrias allies condemned the action.

The strikes took some by surprise, considering Trumps past criticism of intervention in Syria. Spicer, and the president himself, say he was moved by the horrific images of victims of this weeks chemical attack.

It was very disturbing and tragic and moving to him, Spicer said.

Fox News Judson Berger, Lucas Tomlinson and Lesa Jansen contributed to this report.

The rest is here:

Syria strikes: The story behind Trump's '72-hour evolution' - Fox News

Select Page ::