A member of the public has appealed for witnesses following a hit and run incident this morning (Weds) on the N15 in Donegal. Shaun McBrearty was driving his Silver Kia Cee’d on Wednesday morning sometime between 08:35 and 08:45 towards Stranorlar when a ‘smaller silver car’ driving in the opposite direction towards Killygordon struck his vehicle.It is understood that the car failed to stop following the incident, making off from the scene. Gardaí have since been alerted about the incident.However, Mr McBrearty has launched his own appeal for information.He said: If anyone was in this area at the time and they can recall anything – or if they have a DASH CAM in their vehicle, can they please contact the Garda station in Ballybofey on 0749137740 or Letterkenny Garda station on 0749167100.“In addition, I would appeal to any businesses in the Killygordon area who would have CCTV footage from in and around this time this morning (Wednesday). “The other vehicle was a small, silver car – similar to an Opel/Vauxhall Corsa, Renault Megane or possibly even a small Volkswagen – but I am not sure of the exact make/model of the vehicle as the accident happened on a corner,” he added.“The other vehicle will be missing the driver-side wing mirror and the driver-side of the vehicle will have various scrapes, scratches and dents the full length of the vehicle.“If anyone can help in any way, it would be very much appreciated. My own vehicle has sustained substantial damage and I would like to try and identify the other vehicle that was involved in the accident.”Public appeal for information following Donegal hit and run was last modified: October 2nd, 2019 by Shaun KeenanShare 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)
Here’s an update to the “State of the Cambrian Explosion.” Two years ago, our 04/23/2006 entry analyzed a lengthy paper in Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences by Dr. Charles R. Marshall, a Harvard professor of biology and geology. Dr. Marshall had taken on the arduous task of explaining, in evolutionary terms, the sudden emergence of all the animal phyla in a geologically short period of time. It seemed that all Marshall had done by the end of the paper was to say that animals evolved because they evolved. Needs, he argued, produce the pressure to evolve. The survival need, for instance, will force an animal to explore the fitness landscape and come up with an optimal solution, especially if the fitness landscape has been “roughened” by some environmental or ecological change. But can necessity really be the mother of invention without a guiding intelligence? Why would a population of non-sentient, blind colonies of cells even care about surviving? And what is the source of information to build an eye, a leg or a gut?Marshall’s latest views were shared in a piece on Science Daily. Has he fleshed out his explanation with more rigor? The headline teased readers, “‘Missing’ Ancestors Of Today’s Animals May Not Be Missing After All.”Marshall’s latest idea is that “it was an increase in interactions between species, such as predation, that drove an escalating evolutionary process that led to the development of teeth and claws and the wide variety of characteristics that we see among Earth’s animals today.” For the first creature able to invent teeth, it must have been free shopping at the meat market.“I believe … the explosion was driven by the onset of adult-adult interactions,” Marshall said. “Maybe the evolution of jaws or a large enough gut, or the evolution of something like chitin so they could bite rather than just giving a nasty suck.”Marshall admitted, however, that the Cambrian Explosion was unique in the history of life on earth, and that none of the transitional forms leading up to explosion have been found. He supported his model with a computer program that started with primitive plant-like forms and offered them 4 genetic rules and 6 selection pressures. He let the initial forms evolve in the computer and ended up with 20 different body types, all of which had counterparts in the Cambrian fossil record. The article did not elaborate on how much the model might have been rigged to get the desired result, however, nor what criteria were used to compare the computer forms with real animals. Also, Marshall had considered the interaction class of explanation interesting but inadequate in 2006. He left it as an unanswered question how a need could generate innovation. It looks like it still is an unanswered question.As is common in science reporting, Science Daily merely reprinted the press release from the home institution (Harvard) and tacked on its own title and opening summary. An institution has a vested interest in making its researchers look good. This arrangement rarely allows a reporter to ask the scientist any hard questions, and most science reporters end up reproducing the claims verbatim – if not embellishing them.Since no one else exposes the charlatans pretending to be scientists, do your part to get the word out about Creation-Evolution Headlines. Marshall and the Darwinists have given the same song and dance we refuted two years ago. Nothing has changed. They are appealing to miracles, saying that the mere presence of opportunities prompts Evolution (capitalized, because it’s is essentially their deity, a tinkering goddess) to invent eyes, jointed appendages, digestive tracts, lungs, blood and all kinds of sensory organs. Look at this nonsense: “it may have been something as simple as the evolution of jaws with toothlike projections that allowed the world’s first painful bite.” Good grief; instant jaws and teeth. Simple, isn’t it. Two miracles, special order, coming right up. Don’t bite; it’s painful all right. Another trick they try is to stretch out the timeline to make it sound less explosive. But in fact, as we pointed out, no matter how long they try to make the Cambrian explosion period, every new animal appears abruptly in the record. There are no pre-trilobites. Trilobites appear fully formed with all their complex equipment already functioning. They were actually more diverse at their first appearance than higher up in the rock layers (see 07/28/2007). Same for echinoderms, worms, brachiopods, jellyfish, crustaceans, and all the rest. Paleontologists do not see a progression at all no matter how many millions of years they want to add. Everything just shows up fully formed from the get go. Shouldn’t this be told to students? The upshot is that evolutionists are deceiving the public. This one problem falsifies Darwin’s theory, but they tiptoe around and it make up fables to distract readers. Meanwhile, when not ignoring the creationists entirely (whose view is supported by the fossil record), they harangue them as fundamentalist idiots who are “anti-science.” No one in the news media takes them to task for this huge deceptive campaign. Science Daily’s headline that the “Missing ancestors… may not be ‘missing’ after all” is one of the worst big lies ever seen on this subject in recent memory. Who is being anti-science here? Creationists have been hounding the Darwinists about the Cambrian Explosion since the days of Darwin himself, who was well aware of it and called it the biggest objection that could be lodged against his theory. Well, his disciples have had all this time and the problem has only gotten worse. Any apologies? Any show of sorrow? Any humility? Any consideration of alternatives? Never. When they aren’t dodging the issue, they make up preposterous fables about it. And they pretend the critics don’t even exist. Look at the article; there is not one mention of the criticisms of Darwinism. Talk about a nasty suck. Where are you going to get straight talk on the breaking science news except here? We are glad our readership has been climbing steadily, but there are still millions who need to know what’s going on in the Science Academy since the Darwin Party dictatorship took over. If you respect real science and the search for truth based on the evidence, please help spread the word. Our shortcut URL is simply crev.info: CR for creation, EV for evolution, INFO for information from an intelligent source. That’s redundant on purpose: information always requires an intelligent source. Deception does not.(Visited 11 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
There’s an ASTM standard for thatUsing sound to track air leakage is not a new idea. An ASTM standard, ASTM E1186 – “Standard Practices for Air Leakage Site Detection in Building Envelopes and Air Barrier Systems,” has longed contained an option (“Generated Sound in Conjunction with Sound Detection”) that uses acoustic information to characterize air leakage. RELATED ARTICLES How to Keep the Noise DownPinpointing Leaks With a Fog MachineBlower Door Basics What about long tortuous leak paths?Gary Nelson is president and founder of The Energy Conservatory, one of the oldest companies building blower door systems. Nelson is not so sure about SonicLQ.Nelson said, “Sonic leak detection has been around for a long time and sometimes is very useful. But [it does not] work for all types of leaks, especially long tortuous paths, sometimes going through or around sound absorbing insulation. I’m very skeptical that it will ever be able to measure the same leakage that a blower door does on a whole building. Blower door testing big tight buildings can be pretty easy.”I will keep you posted as SonicLQ is put through its paces in the field in the upcoming year. Back in the early days of airport noise mitigation programs, there was a pretty strong link between air leakage and sound. A document titled “Tips for Insulating Your Home Against Aircraft Noise” noted, “Sound travels from the exterior to the interior of the home in two ways: through solid structural elements and through the air…. Wherever air can infiltrate a home, sound can as well.”In fact, in around 1986 — when the price of oil dropped from $32 to $11 a barrel and President Reagan slashed funding for a slew of energy-efficiency program started by President Carter — it was airport noise and the passage of the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 that served as a bit of a bridge for programs such as the pioneering Minnesota Energy Office program. In addition to acting as GBA’s technical director, Peter Yost is the Vice President for Technical Services at BuildingGreen in Brattleboro, Vermont. He has been building, researching, teaching, writing, and consulting on high-performance homes for more than twenty years. An experienced trainer and consultant, he’s been recognized as NAHB Educator of the Year. Do you have a building science puzzle? Contact Pete here. You can also sign up for BuildingGreen’s email newsletter to get a free report on avoiding toxic insulation, as well as regular posts from Peter. The new approach has promiseI decided to check in with Terry Brennan of Camroden Associates on this new technology for air leakage testing.“This is definitely real,” said Terry. “The math holds up. I am not sure that this approach will be a real advantage over existing approaches for new, tight, buildings, but this has real promise.”Brennan has some particular questions regarding how well SonicLQ will do with complex, circuitous air leaks — for example, air leaks through wall assemblies that include steel studs with fiberglass insulation, gypsum sheathing, and brick veneer (leaks that sometimes extend past the top of wall into a soffit or coping). He also says that the SonicLQ might do better than existing depressurization techniques for features such as trash chutes.Brennan is also very interested in the Department of Defense comparative testing project, emphasizing how important it will be to have experienced blower door experts working with SonicLQ on the testing.Brennan also had the following insight: “The test standard I recommend is the ABAA Standard Method for Building Enclosure Airtightness Compliance Testing. I recommend it for the following reasons:It was developed to be used to determine whether or not a building meets an airtightness target, including methods for determining how to interpret the results and calculated uncertainty.It contains requirements for building setup that includes handling things found in large buildings (e.g. elevator shafts, linen and rubbish chutes, laundries, fire egress stairwells, isolated boiler rooms with makeup air, mechanical rooms with entrances to outside and inside.It allows the use of E779 (multipoint shell pressure regression analysis) and E1827 (single and two point repeated reference pressure tests)It was developed by an ABAA committee that included testing agencies, envelope consultants, air barrier systems manufacturers, architects, engineers, test and balance contractors, and the manufacturers of blower door testing equipment over the course of three years, including two rounds of voting and two rounds of external review.The ABAA board of directors voted to accept and publish the standard.I’d like to get word out about this standard, as I believe it is the best one to reference for conducting large building tests.”NOTE from Brennan: “The only caveat regarding this ABAA standard is it’s hard to find the right place to click on the ABAA whole building test page. While you might think it should be in the list of standards in the list at the top of the page, it’s not. It’s at the end of the paragraph below that is headed ‘ABAA – Standard Method,’ where it says, ‘For a copy of this standard, click here.’” But note that ASTM E1186 is all about qualifying air leakage in buildings, not quantifying it: ASTM E1186 techniques are only about site detection. Researchers have applied for a patentSo how would this work on a two- or three-story home or a multifamily building?The microphone array is lightweight enough that a drone can be used to track with the internal speaker location (see Image #5, below.)Will the equipment work? Muehleisen continues, “We have published our patent application, started testing our field prototype, and have funding from the Department of Defense to do comparative field testing of conventional blower door and our ABIMS. We will be ready for pilot projects within the next 9 months.” The new connection: SonicLQBuilding innovatively on the sound detection option within ASTM E1186, researchers at the Argonne National Laboratory have developed SonicLQ, a system that uses sound to locate and size air leaks in building exterior enclosures (the LQ stands for Leak Quantifier).The system can be used to test any building, during construction or after the building is completed or occupied, and during any season of the year. (You don’t need the temperature difference that infrared imaging requires). Acoustic data are presented to the user in a visual format that identifies where air leaks are located on the building faÃ§ade — as well as the size of specific leaks — so that informed decisions can be made to seal the largest leaks and realize the greatest energy savings while minimizing assessment and diagnostic costs.Image #1 (above) is a schematic of how the Acoustic Building Infiltration Measurement System (ABIMS) (the approach used by the SonicLQ equipment) works. Image #2 (below) shows the components. Image #3 is a close-up of the microphone array. Image #4 shows how the ABIMS is actually a two-step process.Essentially, low-frequency sound (about 60 decibels or so, roughly the same as conversation in a restaurant or background music) is generated from the speaker and picked up by the microphone array. The sound data are wirelessly sent to a laptop computer, which translates the data into a “sound” picture, which can be overlaid with a digital one. Testing an office — one measuring about 12 feet by 12 feet — would take 2 to 4 minutes.“Distant” acoustic measurement identifies target areas of air leakage; these measurements currently cover about 100 square feet of exterior enclosure, but the goal is to increase this significantly. The near-field acoustic measurements assess 3 feet by 3 feet areas of leakage. Summing up the identified and quantified targeted areas of leakage involves simple proportional surface geometry.Inventor Ralph Muehleisen, principal building scientist at Argonne National Laboratory, adds, “The keys to this technology moving from a lab concept to real-world measurement are the recent advances in near-field acoustic holography (NAH) and the digital micro electrical-mechanical system (MEMS) microphones. The NAH advances have dramatically improved our acoustic capabilities while the MEMS advances have decreased their cost by a factor of ten while making the microphone arrays much lighter weight and more rugged.”
The Odisha government on Monday launched a Public Bicycle Sharing system to reduce traffic congestion, enhance space efficiency, and improve air quality in Bhubaneswar.Capital Region Urban Transport and Bhubaneswar Smart City Limited have come together for the PBS, which has been christened as ‘Mo Cycle’ system.Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik flagged off a promotional rally on Monday from Airport Square to Kalinaga Stadium in this regard.More than 300 cyclists took part in the rally to generate public awareness. Initially, 2,000 cycles will be available at about 400 Mo Cycle stations in different locations of the city.According to the BSCL, riders can take cycles from any location and drop them off at any destination of their choice. The operators will coordinate to ensure the redistribution and availability of cycles at high-demand locations.“Unlike rentals under the PBS system, cycles stored in a closely spaced network of stations will be made available to riders for short term shared use. This new system would encourage use of the same cycle by multiple riders every day,” said an official.Users would have to download Mo Cycle application and register for a nominal monthly subscription. The rider can locate the nearest Mo Cycle station and unlock the cycle through Quick Response Code scan. Technology interventions such as GPS and smart locks are an integral part of the system.