Tag: 江苏苏州龙凤论坛

CATEGORIES:

first_img He considers both Hansle Parchment and Omar McLeod, who finished second and sixth, respectively, in the World Championships, as potential Olympic champions. “If he (McLeod) performs to his real technical excellence, I don’t see why he shouldn’t be up there among the medals,” said Blake in reference to McLeod, who was far from his best in Beijing. Regarding Parchment, Blake said, “He keeps getting better every time he performs in the big events.” “He should also be there,” concluded the JAAA President, “as a medal contender for the gold.” He welcomed the Government-funded athlete support programme and reported that his association is currently looking for sponsors to contribute to a feeding programme. “Right now, we’re looking sponsorship to put in a feeding programme, so that the clubs can optimise the performance of their athletes,” said Blake. Jamaica’s best-ever medal tally at an Olympic Games came in 2012 in London when 12 medals (four gold, four silver, four bronze) were secured, all in athletics. Potential champs Athletics chief Warren Blake believes that Jamaica can top the track and field medal table at this summer’s Olympic Games. Blake, president of the Jamaica Athletics Administrative Association (JAAA), says the 110-metre hurdles and the men’s 4×400-metre relays are the events that could make the difference. The JAAA president is quietly confident about the prospects for the nation’s athletes for 2016. Reflecting on the seven gold-medal haul achieved by Jamaica at last year’s World Championships in Beijing, Blake stated: “If we had gotten another gold, and there are places where we could have gotten another gold but it just didn’t work out, we would have topped the medal table.” In Beijing, Jamaica won gold medals courtesy of Usain Bolt in the men’s 100 and 200 metres, Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce in the ladies’ 100m, Danielle Williams in the 100m hurdles, both 4×100 metres relays and the ladies’ 4×400 metres. However, Kenya edged Jamaica to top the table by one gold medal. Blake is, however, foreseeing a change for the better. “Strategically, we think that come the Olympics this year, we are really in a good position to top the athletics medal table,” Blake said. “If you look at the areas in which we did well in 2015, we are set to still do well in those areas and we have a good crop of 400m runners coming up,” he added. “Our hurdlers,” Blake continued, “both on the male and female sides, are expected to do well again this year, and, with a bit of luck, we can do better in the male hurdles.”last_img read more

Read More
CATEGORIES:

first_imgVisualize chimpanzees exercising their antics in the jungle: grooming, screeching at one another, chasing off rivals.  Now shift the scene to human activities in a large city: fans cheering their team at a stadium, an audience applauding a concert, kids screaming on an amusement park roller coaster, a congregation singing hymns at church, students taking notes in a university classroom, a crowd cheering a speech at a political rally.  Darwinians believe a chain of biological events in the genes and in the social interactions of our alleged ape-like ancestors produced capabilities that led to the development of our modern human culture with all its rich and varied accoutrements.  Two Spanish researchers publishing in PNAS1 think they know how.  They have suggested a key event that must have been the turning point in the evolution of culture among early hominids: the capacity of parents to approve or disapprove of their offspring’s behavior.Cultural transmission in our species works most of the time as a cumulative inheritance system allowing members of a group to incorporate behavioral features not only with a positive biological value but sometimes also with a neutral, or even negative, biological value.  Most of models of dual inheritance theory and gene-culture coevolution suggest that an increase, either qualitative or quantitative, in the efficiency of imitation is the key factor to explain the transformation of primate social learning in a cumulative cultural system of inheritance as it happens during hominization.  We contend that more efficient imitation is necessary but not enough for this transformation to occur and that the key factor enabling such a transformation is that some hominids developed the capacity to approve or disapprove their offspring’s learned behavior.  This capacity to approve or disapprove offspring’s behavior makes learning both less costly and more accurate, and it transformed the hominid culture into a system of cumulative cultural inheritance similar to that of humans, although the system was still prelinguistic in nature.(By negative biological value, they mean that humans sometimes engage in cultural activities that decrease evolutionary fitness for the individual, even though such behaviors might have adaptive value for the group.)  “It is not clear” in an evolutionary sense, the authors admit, “how cultural transmission has improved human adaptability, especially when other primates with well developed social learning abilities show comparably restricted ranges.”  Their interest in the questions of “what types of changes occurred during the hominization process that transformed typical social learning in primates into a cumulative cultural inheritance system similar to that of humans and what was the adaptive advantage that made these changes possible” formed the basis for their study.    They feel that imitation theory of Boyd and Richardson is incomplete.  Imitation is a necessary, but not sufficient, ingredient to generate culture, they say, because it does not by itself reward innovative capacity.  Their hypothesis adds another ingredient:We suggest that the transformation of primitive hominid social learning, which was probably rather similar to that of today’s chimpanzees (i.e., based on indirect social learning mechanisms and rudimentary imitative abilities), into a human cultural transmission system required that our hominid ancestors developed the capacity to approve or disapprove of offspring’s learned behavior.  Our thesis holds that the simultaneous presence of both capacities in our hominid ancestors, imitation and approval/disapproval of offspring’s learned behavior, represented a radical change in the rudimentary cultural transmission of first hominids.  Individuals with both abilities, which we call assessors, generated a cultural inheritance system in a strict sense, because by approval/disapproval, they constrained the behavior that offspring incorporated into their repertoire.The offspring has a lower cost of learning by profiting from the parents’ experience, without having to evaluate all the alternatives.  This speeds up adaptation of the learned behavior faster than natural selection can work.  The authors provide some differential equations to show that their model works better than the old.  But why is the development of culture rare among animals?  They answer with explanations of why the emergence of assessors is rare: it is costly to the parent, and also requires the development of a complex brain with symbolic memory, reentrant signaling, a mechanism for categorizing behavior and a strong link between the cortical and limbic systems, among other things.The ability to approve or disapprove of offspring’s learned behavior seems completely absent in primates.  Probably the evolution of this capacity would require the previous development of the capacity to conceptually categorize learned behavior.  The conceptual capacity to categorize is defined as the ability to categorize one’s own and others’ learned behavior in terms of values, i.e., positive or negative, or good or bad.This, they feel, was the beginning of teaching.  Experiments show that chimpanzee parents are unable to categorize their offspring’s behavior as good or bad when taking the offspring’s interest into account.  Human children are very sensitive to parental approval, “whereas chimpanzee young brought up as human children remain quite wild and troublesome.”  Because human children are sensitive to approval and disapproval, they are authority acceptors, and have a tendency to accept social influence.    The authors feel their hypothesis holds promise for explaining other defining aspects of human social behavior:Finally, it is worth emphasizing that the hypothesis above about the evolution of culture could have interesting implications on the evolution of other typical traits of the human species.  For example, we have proposed that conceptual classification of behavior in terms of positive/negative (good/bad) involves, according to its natural origin, a feeling of duty toward those positive behaviors, and this behavioral categorization and the feeling of “must” are the developmental roots of the ethical capacity.  We have also shown that the adaptive advantage that implies the improvement of the assessor cultural transmission could be a key factor in the evolution of language.1Castro and Toro, “The evolution of culture: From primate social learning to human culture,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 10.1073/pnas.0400156101, published online June 24, 2004.Put this one in the basket of quasi-erudite papers that will be laughed at some day when the Darwinian idol collapses.  Despite the equations, it is a collage of elitist, ivory-tower, pseudoscientific speculation with a sprinkling of magic to hold it all together.  Somehow, somewhere, random mutations appeared on cue to provide symbolic memory, reentrant signaling, a mechanism for categorizing behavior and a strong link between the cortical and limbic systems to allow an ape to express approval to its baby.  Maybe a lucky cosmic ray hit Bonzo and the lights went on.  He mated and learned to shriek disapproval at his offspring.  Simultaneously, the kid got hit with another cosmic ray and understood what disapproval meant.  And so a few million years later, Shakespeare emerged.    Darwinism will fall as soon as enough bright students, armed with baloney detectors, overcome the fear of big words, abstruse-looking equations and the prestige of big-name journals.  This Darwin-saturated hypothesis is utterly foolish on the face of it.  Its only reason for existence is that Darwinians need something to explain their own brains and desires.  They have sold their souls to Charlie, and since all of reality must fit within his unguided, naturalistic world, they need some explanation – no matter how foolish – for the evolution of everything: even ethics, morals and taste in music.  Like Richard Lewontin candidly admitted, “It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated.”  Don’t ever submit to the initiation rites of the Temple of Darwin, because they cause brain damage.    Since Darwin Party PhDs usually have skill with language and math, they are especially dangerous, because they have perfected the art of couching balderdash in nearly impenetrable jargon that serves to intimidate science reporters and other dupes.  Let’s remember a basic math lesson: equations are only as good as their assumptions and variables.  Suppose we write: “Let a be natural selection and a’ be population genetics.  Now let b represent Marxist economic policy, and b’ represent the degree of collectivization, and c the hominization rate.  Then letting the population p remain constant for one Milankovitch cycle t, we suggest that the expressionabc – (a’b – cab’)-ekt / pyields a stable economy over the lifetime of a hominid species.”  That was all just made up out of thin air.  Does this confabulation of irrelevancies deserve more respect when dressed up in math symbols?  Then why should anyone give a spit when these authors write nonsense like this:A simple model of cultural transmission that can be applied to assessor hominids ancestors can illuminate previous ideas better.  Let us define the probability that an individual without capacity of imitation acquires behavior i as hiBi, where hi is the probability that an individual discovers the behavior i, and Bi is the probability that the behavior will be included in his repertoire.  If the individual already knows an alternative (behavior j) to behavior i, the probability that behavior i will be included in his repertoire will be equal to hiBij, where Bij is the probability that he chooses i instead of alternative behavior j.  However, if the individual also has the imitation capacity and there are cultural models in the population, the probability of his including i in his repertoire will be h*i Bij, where h*i is the probability that an individual learns either by individual learning or by imitation behavior i, and equals h*i = hi + (1 – hi)a, where a represents the efficacy of the process of imitation, and (1 – hi)a measures the net effect of this process.  Therefore, an increase in the imitation capacity is expressed as an increase in the value of a.No amount of skill at manipulating math symbols can rescue bad assumptions.  The whole premise of this simplistic hypothesis (that an accidental ability to express favor/disfavor helped hominids evolve culture, ethics and language, resulting eventually in the Bush-Kerry campaign) is that complex, coordinated skills like the capacity for categorizing and symbolic memory “emerged” from random mutation and natural selection.  When, oh when, will we ever get some Darwinist to prove this instead of assuming it?  The null hypothesis of intelligent design should always be favored before yielding an ounce of credence to such a product of cosmic improbabilities.  A corollary of this premise is that all intangibles, including ethics, arts and language, are mere artifacts of biological determinism.  That is not science: that’s philosophy.    And now, the bottom line.  Why should we care about what a couple of pseudo-intellectual, ivory-tower professors in Spain write in a technical journal only pointy-headed members of a geek subculture would care to read?  You need look no further than their last sentences: “we have proposed that conceptual classification of behavior in terms of positive/negative (good/bad) involves, according to its natural origin, a feeling of duty toward those positive behaviors, and this behavioral categorization and the feeling of “must” are the developmental roots of the ethical capacity….”  They have just used their weird-science fable to preach moral relativism.  Dressed in pseudoscientific garb, it appears more authoritative than sending a nihilist dressed in a red devil costume into the college classroom hissing, “Do what you want!  There is no God!”    It wouldn’t matter if these pseudo-intellectuals only spouted their philosophy to other members of the Darwin Party, but they have the audacity to call this science.  (Note that this paper was edited by the anticreationist Francisco Ayala of UC Irvine.)  And they have the power, with all the usurped authority and dignity of science, to stand in college classrooms and declare that God is dead, that Darwinism has displaced religion, and that since morals and ethics evolve like everything else in the universe, any sense of right, duty, principle, honor and integrity your parents taught you are just downstream artifacts of mutations that caused some ape in your past to suddenly be able to express “approval” to its offspring.  Don’t tell this to the Marines.  If duty, honor, country are as arbitrary and meaningless as the Darwin Party would have us believe, then terrorists and mass murdering dictators are not doing anything inherently evil, and we have no duty to stop them.    Connect the dots.  Darwinism has its primordial-slimy fingers all over politics, foreign policy, and what you should teach your kid.(Visited 20 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

Read More
CATEGORIES:

first_img28 April 2009 President-elect Jacob Zuma has assured the country that his new administration would be a government for all South Africans. “Working together we will make it a government for all South Africans,” Zuma told journalists after the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) announced the results of South Africa’s general elections in Pretoria on Saturday night. Zuma, who will be inaugurated as President on 9 May, said South Africa needed a government that knew what to do in order to tackle poverty and build on the successes of the 15 years since the country’s first democratic elections in 1994. “We were serious when we said we want government to have direct contact with the people of South Africa,” he said, vowing to improve service delivery while ensuring that only competent people were employed in the public service. Zuma congratulated the IEC on delivering another efficient, free and fair election. The African National Congress (ANC) received 65.9% of the 17.6-million valid votes cast, securing 264 seats in South Africa’s National Assembly, followed by the Democratic Alliance (DA) with 16.6% of the vote (67 seats in Parliament) and the recently established Congress of the People (Cope) with 7.4% (30 seats). Regarding the 2010 Fifa World Cup, the President-in-waiting said the government would ensure that South Africa hosted the best ever tournament. He said he had spoken to Fifa President Sepp Blatter earlier on Saturday afternoon to assure him that the new administration pick up from the current administration in its preparations for the event. “We are convinced that we will make a success of the tournament and that we will impress the world with our abilities as a host for an event of this magnitude,” he said. Source: BuaNewslast_img read more

Read More
CATEGORIES:

first_imgShare Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest Something tells me that many of the “concerned consumers” who are celebrating the new federal GMO labeling law are the very same folks who are proud owners of Labradoodles and eagerly purchase seedless watermelon. And they are probably clueless that I just launched a snarky comment in their direction.The good news is that the federal law trumps any state law, so at least there will be one standardized format for the food industry. And while this was before Congress, many esteemed scientists, including 100 Nobel Laureates, and Fred Yoder, an Ohio farmer and former president of the National Corn Growers Association, came out in support of GMOs.Under provisions of the law, USDA has two years to write the rules. Most food packages will be required to carry a text label, a symbol or an electronic code readable by a smart phone that indicates whether the food contains a GMO.Consumer advocates are not pleased with the law, either, alleging that the bill’s language got watered down. Some folks are never happy.Too bad the consumer who researches away on the Internet never learns about all of the ways GMOs are improving life on the planet. Drought resistant genetics in our corn crop made a huge difference during this incredibly hot and dry summer.One of the most interesting Charlie Rose Shows on PBS I ever viewed included Bill Gates, who knew nothing of farming until his foundation began work in Africa. Because of GMOs, seeds were able to be engineered to grow in difficult conditions and provide food to the hungry. It was fascinating watching Bill Gates explain modern agriculture to Charlie. He specifically explained the value of GMOs to a well-populated planet with environmental concerns.As a lawyer, what I find truly annoying about the existence of any law requiring disclosure of GMO ingredients is that by the very nature of mandating specific labels it implies that there is something ominous inside so the government required disclosure. I hate it when all of the misinformation and paranoia and junk science gets legitimized by regulation.I also wonder how many of the anti-GMO advocates are heavy users of herbs and other natural supplements. If ever an industry needed some standardization and regulation that might be one. Anti-GMO consumer may take multiple natural herbs and supplements that are not regulated or standardized, yet may cause side effects or medical issues. Ironic, isn’t it?The late Dr. William Tyznik taught Animal Nutrition at OSU for decades. Taking his class was one of my best learning experiences ever. I will never forget his view on the “natural” trend. He opined that it didn’t get any more natural than manure. He warned that he was not encouraging it be spread directly on the face for cosmetic purposes or used as a food source.I miss his humorous, yet educated approach. Today it seems we spend too much time trying to please the consumer. That would be fine if we were dealing with an educated consumer, but we are not. My personal pet peeve is the rejection of antibiotics. I spend most of my time caring for calves during their first months of life. We are not adding antibiotics to the feed, and many animals never receive any. But, as someone who cares for calves as zealously as I represent clients, I know that there is a need for antibiotics should a calf become ill. Sometimes a simple round of medicine, just like the label instructs, saves a calf. To deny any animal that treatment would be inhumane. And I can assure you that by the time that cow enters the food chain, there is no residual antibiotic.As sophisticated as the U.S. has become, it still does not avoid ignorant behavior, and there is a lot of that going around. There is a trend among parents, typically well-educated and higher income, to avoid any immunizations of their children. So now this country can worry about childhood illnesses that should never occur because parents deny vaccinations to their children. The “New York Times,” in an editorial column on Feb. 7, 2015, suggested that kids in some wealthy areas of this country are as well vaccinated as children in Somalia. Health illiteracy is not acceptable. Something tells me these same parents who oppose any vaccinations are seeking out non-GMO foods for their children. Does this make any sense at all? How can people be so smart yet so dumb?The U.S. has always been about choices, and I think that is an amazing part of the American experience. Organic, or free range, or commercial, or Amish or local or family farm or GMO-free, it is great to give the consumer choices. Give them options, but do not enable their ignorance. And do not legitimize bad science by creating new regulations. After all, the American consumer is more likely to be attacked by a militant Sasquatch than suffer harm from eating GMO foods.last_img read more

Read More
CATEGORIES:

first_imgShare Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest By Harold Watters, Ohio State University Extension agronomistThings are changing for the Tri-State Fertilizer Recommendations for agronomic crops. We are giving these updates this winter in advance of the publication update likely to come at the end of winter, and maybe too late to put in your plans for 2019. First the work. Steve Culman our OSU soil fertility specialist coordinated much of it:From 2014 to 2017, over 300 on-farm strip trials were conducted across Ohio.Yield responses to P and K fertilizer in soils at or above the current maintenance range were very rare.Long-term data shows that when Ohio soils are in the current maintenance range, they supply sufficient P and K to meet corn and soybean demand for many growing seasons without yearly fertilization.Recommended corn N rates were updated and are based on maximizing farmer profitability, not maximizing yields (http://go.osu.edu/corn-n-rate).Corn, soybean and wheat today yield more grain with less nutrients.We also learned from the trial participants that most fields are in the maintenance range, unless it is rented. So we will provide recommendations for fields in the maintenance range for the most part. We learned that crop nutrient removal was less that it was in the past. Ohio grain nutrient removal (lb/bu) for corn, soybean and wheat. As expected to be in the forth-coming Tri-State Fertilizer Recommendations.NutrientCurrent Data1995 Tri-State% decreaseCornP2O50.340.375%K2O0.190.2726%SoybeanP2O50.800.80—K2O1.081.419%WheatP2O50.490.6322%K2O0.240.3735% The other big news is that we will be making recommendations based on a Mehlich III soil test for both phosphorus and potassium. The previous Tri-State made recommendations based on Bray P1 for phosphorus and Ammonium acetate test for potassium. What Steve did was calibrate for the new recommendations based on the newer Mehlich III test, because that is what all the labs in Ohio are using. It’s quicker and should be cheaper to run. And if we stay in the agronomic ranges for P & K, then the tests are not that different.So what are the new maintenance ranges?Based on Mehlich III test, and our work here in Ohio the maintenance range:for P is 20 to 40 ppmfor K is 100 to 150 ppm.If soil test levels are above maintenance range, then no nutrient application (P and K) is needed. So that things do not get too out of whack, sample and retest every three to four years. Generally, we believe the research supports these remarks as well:If P level is below the critical level, then make an annual application. A band application of P2O5 can be beneficial when P test is below maintenance range.If the CEC is very low or very high an annual K2O application may be warranted. Low is below 6 meq/100g and high is above 25 meq/100g.last_img read more

Read More
CATEGORIES:

first_imgWhy Tech Companies Need Simpler Terms of Servic… 8 Best WordPress Hosting Solutions on the Market A Web Developer’s New Best Friend is the AI Wai… Chittenden Bank started developing its plan to double the size of its presence in Vermont and came across the challenge of how the enterprise would be affected by the expansion.It realized that the existing physical infrastructure would not suffice. And doubling the size of the IT staff was not an option.Instead, it turned to virtualization. Here are the results.A Vermont Bank Readies for Expansion Related Posts center_img Top Reasons to Go With Managed WordPress Hosting alex williams Tags:#cloud#cloud computing#Virtualization last_img

Read More
CATEGORIES:

first_imgJaguar XFR-S Automobile manufacturer Tata Motors’ luxury sports car brand Jaguar will unveil its XE S derivative vehicle next month, a company statement said Wednesday.Jaguar said the full XE range will be revealed at the Paris Motor Show press conference on Oct 2.Jaguar has described the XE as “a true driver’s car, one that redefines the concept of the mid-size sports saloon”. The XE will be Jaguar’s smallest model and with it the company will widen its presence in the market and potentially increasing its already healthy profits.Designed, engineered and manufactured in Britain, the XE, according to Jaguar, “will bring levels of innovation never seen before in this segment – with its lightweight construction expertise and sophisticated chassis technology in addition to the new family of Ingenium engines”.It claimed: “The XE combines thrilling performance, agile handling and precise, responsive steering, with outstanding levels of refinement and fuel efficiency.”Insiders in the car industry in Britain have also spotted another Jaguar prototype – belonging to its flagship XJ model – undergoing final tests.The top-selling sedan has been in the fray in its current version since it was presented in 2009. A facelift to entice customers is now anticipated.last_img read more

Read More
CATEGORIES:

first_imgUNICEF UK Ambassadors Jemima Goldsmith and Michael Sheen led the terror-ific turn out alongside guests Rita Ora, Poppy Delevingne and Hugh Grant at Unicef UK’s annual Halloween Ball on Thursday, raising vital funds to help protect Syria’s children in danger.Michael Sheen at UNICEF Halloween BallCredit/Copyright: UNICEF UKThe event raised an incredible £1.6 million, made possible by the UK Government matching all public donations pound for pound on the night.Rita Ora at UNICEF Halloween BallCredit/Copyright: UNICEF UKHigh-profile personalities from the worlds of entertainment, fashion and business arrived at London’s iconic venue, One Mayfair, for the freaky circus themed party that included live circus acts and spooky immersive theatre.Hugh Grant at UNICEF Halloween BallCredit/Copyright: UNICEF UKSinger Jessie Ware kicked off the entertainment with a breath-taking performance followed by an electrifying show by artist, Rita Ora. Producer and DJ Mark Ronson kept the party going with a DJ set until the small hours as guests danced the night away.Long-standing Unicef UK Ambassador Jemima Goldsmith said, “We’ve all been shocked by the recent heart-breaking images of children’s bodies washed up on beaches and children suffocating in trucks as families desperately try to seek safety in Europe. But it’s not enough to be shocked, we must take action. Unicef is one of the few organisations working inside Syria as well as delivering life-saving humanitarian aid for refugee children across the region. Their work remains desperately underfunded. At the Halloween Ball tonight we’re thrilled to help raise vital funds to support Unicef’s work for Syrian children whose lives have been devastated by the conflict.”The money raised at the Halloween Ball will help Unicef, the world’s leading children’s organisation, provide clean water, vaccinations, school supplies, warm winter clothes, psychosocial care and child protection for Syrian children whose lives have been turned upside down by the conflict.Until the end of January 2016, the UK Government will match pound for pound all donations made to Unicef’s work for the children of Syria.International Development Secretary Justine Greening said: “The Syria conflict is robbing a generation of its childhood. There are nearly six million children inside Syria in desperate need of help and children make up half of the four million refugees forced to flee their homes. Many have known nothing but war.“Unicef is working to reach these children in danger and to ensure they get the clean water, medical care, protection and warm clothes they need as another winter closes in. For the third year in a row we are matching pound for pound all donations to Unicef’s Syria winter appeal, to ensure that this public support goes twice as far.”Unicef UK Executive Director, David Bull said: “Right now there are there are now nearly 14 million children in Syria and the surrounding countries affected by the conflict. Every day they face danger of exploitation, violence and abuse and as winter looms, many are sleeping in the open air and are at risk from pneumonia and hypothermia. The need to protect these children has never been greater. We are thankful for the overwhelming support and generosity that our guests have shown at the Halloween Ball and to the UK Government for matching pound for pound all donations made on the night and until the end of January 2016. We rely entirely on voluntary donations so the money raised is vital to enable Unicef teams to continue working round the clock to protect Syrian children in danger.”You can help keep Syria’s children safe. Please visit www.unicef.org.uk/halloweenball to donate.last_img read more

Read More
CATEGORIES:

first_imgAPTN National NewsThere were cheers outside a Saskatchewan court room over the weekend after foster parents Tammy and Kevin Goforth were convicted of neglect and abuse of two children in their case.One girl died, the other was severely injured.As APTN’s Cara McKenna reports, the story has reopened the debate about the supervision and vetting of foster parents.cmckenna@aptn.calast_img

Read More