text stringlengths 59 1.12k |
|---|
cat Flea, although this Flea mostly infests dogs and cats. Fleas can be detected on pets by rubbing animal fur backwards and looking for their presence next to the skin. |
Bites on both pets and humans is an indication of a Flea infestation. Fleas are medically important insects. The most serious human disease transmitted by biting Fleas is Bubonic Plague, |
which reportedly killed 25,000,000 people in the Middle Ages. Other diseases include typhus. Flea Allergy Dermatitis is also a problem with pets. The presence of Fleas on pets may cause |
allergic reactions on the animal and lead to an overall unhealthy appearance. A homeowner can perform several simple techniques to prevent infestations: A professional treatment is the best way to |
reduce fleas in a given area. Cook’s Pest Control offers professional treatment for the reduction of fleas. Our technicians are thoroughly trained to address your flea problems. Don’t waste time |
and money on over-the-counter remedies or unprofessional service. Call Cook’s, the South’s reliable pest control service. We provide free pest identification and free evaluations. Ask about our 110% Money-Back Satisfaction |
Volume 15, Issue 1: Liturgia Why Sacraments are not Means of Grace Precision is not the problem so much as pseudo-precisionconfusion masquerading as clarity. This is a common malaise, and perhaps most especially in sacramental theology. Instead of actually explaining how sacraments do what sacraments do, many sacramental theologies put on a show of explanation that amounts to little more |
than thick fog, which can lead the unwary into a cul de sac. One example of this problem is the use of the phrase "means of grace" as a description of sacraments. The language of "means" has an ecumenical pedigree, and appears frequently in Reformed theology and confessions. According to the Westminster Larger Catechism, God enables us to "escape the |
wrath and curse of God due to us by reason of the transgression of the law" by making "diligent use of the outward means whereby Christ communicates to us the benefits of his mediation." Among these means "whereby Christ communicates to his church the benefits of his mediation" are "word, sacraments, and prayer; all of which are made effectual to |
the elect for their salvation" (questions 153-154). To the extent that the idea of "means of grace" emphasizes that believers receive real benefit from baptism and the Supper, it is a helpful corrective to feeble theologies that are widespread in the modern church. And, to the extent that the phrase is used to emphasize that God is the One bestowing |
life through water, bread, and wine, it is a useful reminder not to make idols of the elements. In several respects, however, describing sacraments as "means of grace" can be misleading and adds unnecessary complication. We can get a sense of the problem when we attempt to apply "means" language to other areas of life. Is the sentence "food is |
a means of nourishment" any more precise than "food nourishes"? Is the claim that "water is a means for washing" better than "water washes"? Is sex a "means of making love" or is it "making love"? In each case, sticking "means" into the sentence gives the impression of insight and precision, without much payoff. More seriously, sticking "means" into the |
sentence gives the impression that "nourishment," "washing," and "love" exist apart from means and have to be "channeled" through means, as if washing or nourishment were an existing thing that has to find an embodiment in the "means" of water or food. In fact, nourishment only exists by our eating food, washing only with water, and love in bodily expressions. |
Talking about the sacraments as "means" tends to mechanize them, turning the sacraments into machines that deliver grace. Sometimes, the mechanistic imagery is explicit. Thomas Aquinas, for example, tried to explain how sacraments worked by referring to Aristotle's view of causation. God is the "principal cause" of the grace of the sacraments, which means that God acts through sacraments. So |
far, so good. But then Thomas went on to compare the causative power of sacramental elements to a hammer in the hand of a carpenter (i.e., God). Is it useful to describe sacramental causation by comparison with physical causes? Do signs "cause" in the same way as tools? More fundamentally, mechanistic metaphors obscure the fact that sacraments are moments of |
personal encounter with the living God, "trysting places" between God and His people, as Luther liked to say. The Reformed tradition has defined the sacraments as "signs and seals of the covenant of grace," thereby highlighting the covenantal and interpersonal character of the sacramental event. Unfortunately, the "personalism" of this covenantal theology has often been undercut by the notion of |
sacraments as "means." The phrase "means of grace" further obscures the personal dimension of sacraments when allied with a misunderstanding of grace. Shortly after the apostolic period, theologians began to treat grace as a kind of "created thing," "force," or "energy" communicated through the sacraments. Ultimately, this model rests on a mistaken doctrine of God, for there is no impersonal |
force in God, nor is there any "energy" that mediates between God and creation. The God revealed in Scripture and in Jesus is exhaustively and eternally personal, eternally in communion of Father, Son and Spirit, and therefore God's relation to the creation cannot but be a personal one. The "force" that acts on us, whether in sacraments or in ordinary |
food or washing, is God Himself. Thus, the model of the sacramental operation should not involve four termsGod, grace, sacraments (as "means" or "channels" of grace), church; but only threeGod (who is favorably disposed to us), sacraments, and the church. In the sacraments there is a personal encounter with the Triune God through the particular agency of the Spirit. The |
Jews marveled at the change that came about in the disciples, and noted that they had been with Jesus (Acts 4:13), and the same is true for us who have not encountered Jesus in the fleshwe are transformed not by impersonal energy flowing from God, but by a personal encounter, in word and water, in bread and wine, with the |
Lord who has become a life-giving Spirit (1 Cor. 15:45; 2 Cor. 3:17-18). So I suggest the following refinement of the confessional language: instead of saying that sacraments are means by which Christ's benefits are communicated to us, we should simply say that the sacraments are among the benefits that Christ has graciously given to us. Sacraments are not means |
Industrial water use has triggered off a host of problems In developed and developing countries alike, competition among water users is increasing. Tensions are particularly high in water-scarce areas where |
domestic, agricultural and industrial water needs are pitted against each other. In developing countries like India, where every segment of the economy is growing rapidly, the conflict will become unmanageable |
if not addressed now. Even today most big cities in India are getting piped water from far-off places. This is putting tremendous Depletion of groundwater by industries, supply of water |
meant for irrigation to industries, preferential treatment given to industries by the government are some of the major reasons for the conflict between industry and community over water use. Another |
major reason for this ongoing conflict is water pollution. Protest and public interest litigations have become quite common on this issue. One of the few integrated viscose rayon manufacturers in |
India, SIV Industries was established in 1964. It is situated upstream river Bhavani in Sirumugai village of Coimbatore district, Tamil Nadu. The mill used river water and discharged its treated |
effluent back into river Bhavani. Villagers living downstream used the water for drinking, irrigation and other household activities. They lodged complaints such as discoloration of water, skin allergies and a |
decline in crop productivity due to the usage of contaminated water. The Bhavani river agitation was marked with protests by the local community mobilised by NGOs - Bhavani River Protection |
Joint Council and Lower Bhavani Projects Ryots Association. But this entire episode took its toll and the industry is currently not operational. Sinar Mas Pulp & Paper (India) Ltd. (SMPPIL) |
was set up in 1997 on the Pune-Solapur highway near Pune, Maharashtra. The mill met its entire requirement from Ujjani dam. Since the imported pulp is dry, SMPPIL consumed a |
large quantity of water during its papermaking process and the treated effluent was discharged through a 12 km long pipeline into river Nira. The local communities in and around the |
region were against the mill for various reasons. To begin with, the water from Ujjani dam was originally meant for irrigation of drought-prone areas. Secondly, there was the fear that |
usage of water by Sinar Mas would lead to water shortage for sugarcane growers in Solapur and Indrapur, which in turn would affect the sugar co-operative factories. To make matters |
worse, the local community was also upset at the preferential treatment given to the industry by the government, namely, cheaper rates for tankers (it was alleged that the government was |
charging only Rs 3 per 10,000 litre tanker from the company whereas farmers and villagers had to pay about Rs 100 per tanker). The industry was also assured that they |
would be provided water from the dam for eight months. But villagers received no such assurance. As a spillover of this conflict more than 20 cases were filed against the |
company in various courts. The company thereafter reduced its water consumption significantly and today it is one of the lowest water-consuming paper mills in the country. It took almost five |
years for the company to regain confidence of the local community. Currently the mill is functioning under the name of Ballarpur Graphics Paperboards Ltd. The Mavoor unit of Grasim Industries |
is situated on the banks of river Chaliyar in Kozhikode district of Kerala. The unit produced rayon grade pulp. The unit used to discharge its treated effluent into river Chaliyar. |
Over 200,000 people live on the banks of the Chaliyar and the discharge of effluents by the mill was one of the main reasons of conflict between the local Complaints |
of pollution of river, fish deaths and lack of adequate treatment facility at the unit began pouring in. There were also several health related complaints, such as high incidence of |
cancer in the The committee made 28 recommendations after conducting a detailed study and interacting with the local community. The government accepted them and Kerala State Pollution Control Board gave |
Long before we learned how to download music from the Internet, people knew how to make music out of whatever raw materials were available. Nowadays, we can reduce, reuse and recycle to make beautiful music from throwaway items like soda pop bottles and toilet paper rolls. In this presentation, award-winning |
performer and educator Paula Purnell demonstrates a host of homemade musical instruments while sharing songs from Pennsylvania's past at 7:30 p.m. June 25, at the Folk Meeting House in Springs. Purnell is an educator and musician from Greensburg. She is cofounder of Sense of Place Learning, and affiliate partner of |
the Children's Museum of Pittsburgh. Purnell teaches education courses at Indiana University of Pennsylvania, and presents workshops and professional development classes on regional history, folk music and arts integration. She has released six albums of original music, including two Parent's Choice award-winning children's albums. Her band, The NewLanders, performs songs |
by and about the people of western Pennsylvania. Purnell holds a Doctorate in Curriculum and Instruction. Audience members are invited to play along—and even do a little instrument making of their own. If you would like to make a pop-tars (a recycled stringed instrument), bring along a clean one or |
two liter plastic bottle. The program is sponsored by the Springs Historical Society and is a presentation of the Pennsylvania Humanities Council supported in part by the National Endowment for the Humanities. It will be presented in the Folk Meeting House on 1711 Springs Road in Springs. Call 814-442-4594 or |
Why We Make Mistakes [book] by Joseph T. Hallinan We forget our passwords. We pay too much to go to the gym. We think we’d be happier if we lived in California (we wouldn’t), and we think we should stick with our first answer on tests (we shouldn’t). Why do we make mistakes? And could we do a little better? We human beings have |
design flaws. Our eyes play tricks on us, our stories change in the retelling, and most of us are fairly sure we’re way above average. In Why We Make Mistakes, journalist Joseph T. Hallinan sets out to explore the captivating science of human error—how we think, see, remember, and forget, and how this sets us up for wholly irresistible mistakes. In his quest to |
understand our imperfections, Hallinan delves into psychology, neuroscience, and economics, with forays into aviation, consumer behavior, geography, football, stock picking, and more. He discovers that some of the same qualities that make us efficient also make us error prone. We learn to move rapidly through the world, quickly recognizing patterns—but overlooking details. Which is why thirteen-year-old boys discover errors that NASA scientists miss—and why |
think San Diego is west of Reno (it’s not). Why We Make Mistakes will open your eyes to the reasons behind your mistakes—and have you vowing to do better the next time. We Look but Don't Always See A man walks into a bar. The man's name is Burt Reynolds. Yes, that Burt Reynolds. Except this is early in his career, and nobody knows |
him yet--including a guy at the end of the bar with huge shoulders. Reynolds sits down two stools away and begins sipping a beer and tomato juice. Out of nowhere, the guy starts harassing a man and a woman seated at a table nearby. Reynolds tells him to watch his language. That's when the guy with the huge shoulders turns on Reynolds. And rather |
than spoil what happens next, I'll let you hear it from Burt Reynolds himself, who recounted the story years ago in an interview with Playboy magazine: I remember looking down and planting my right foot on this brass rail for leverage, and then I came around and caught him with a tremendous right to the side of the head. The punch made a ghastly |
sound and he just flew off the stool and landed on his back in the doorway, about 15 feet away. And it was while he was in mid-air that I saw . . . that he had no legs. Only later, as Reynolds left the bar, did he notice the man's wheelchair, which had been folded up and tucked next to the doorway. As |
mistakes go, punching out a guy with no legs is a lulu. But for our purposes the important part of the anatomy in this story is not the legs but the eyes. Even though Reynolds was looking right at the man he hit, he didn't see all that he needed to see. In the field of human error, this kind of mistake is so |
common that researchers have given it its own nickname: a "looked but didn't see" error. When we look at something--or at someone--we think we see all there is to see. But we don't. We often miss important details, like legs and wheelchairs, and sometimes much larger things, like doors and bridges. We See a Fraction of What We Think We See To understand why |
we do this, it helps to know something about the eye and how it works. The eye is not a camera. It does not take "pictures" of events. And it does not see everything at once. The part of the visual field that can be seen clearly at any given time is only a fraction of the total. At normal viewing distances, for instance, |
the area of clear vision is about the size of a quarter. The eye deals with this constraint by constantly darting about, moving and stopping roughly three times a second. What is seen as the eyes move about depends, in part, on who is doing the seeing. Men, for instance, have been shown to notice different things from those that women do. When viewing |
a mock purse snatching by a male thief, for instance, women tended to notice the appearance and actions of the woman whose purse was being snatched; men, on the other hand, were more accurate regarding details about the thief. Right-handed people have also been shown to remember the orientation of certain objects they have seen more accurately than left-handers do. Years ago, after the |
Hale-Bopp comet made a spectacular appearance in the evening skies, investigators in England asked left- and right-handers if they could remember which way the comet had been facing when they saw it. Right-handers were significantly more likely than lefties to remember that the comet had been facing to the left. Handedness is also the best predictor of a person's directional preference. When people are |
forced to make a turn at an intersection, right-handers, at least in the United States, prefer turning right, and lefties prefer turning left. As a result, advised the authors of one study, "one should look to the left when searching for the shortest lines of people at stores, banks and the like." The Expert's Quiet Eye In fact, what we see is, in part, |
a function not only of who we are but of what we are. Researchers have demonstrated that different people can view the same scene in different ways. Say you're a golfer, for instance. Even better, say you're a great golfer with a low handicap. You're playing your buddy, who's not so great. You've teed off and played through the fairway, and now it comes |
time to putt. Do you and your buddy look at the ball in the same way? Why? Because experts and novices tend to look at things in different ways. One of these differences involves something known as the "quiet-eye period." This is the amount of time needed to accurately program motor responses. It occurs between the last glimpse of our target and the first |
twitch of our nervous system. Researchers have documented expert-novice differences in quiet-eye periods in a number of sports, ranging from shooting free throws in basketball to shooting rifles in Olympic-style competition. The consistent finding is that experts maintain a longer quiet-eye period. In the final few seconds of the putt, good golfers with low handicaps tend to gaze at the ball much longer and |
rarely shift their sight to the club or to any other location. Less-skilled golfers, on the other hand, don't stare at the ball very long and tend to look at their club quite often. Superior vision is so important in golf that many of the world's best players, including Tiger Woods and at least seven other PGA Tour winners, have had Lasik surgery to |
correct their vision, usually to twenty-fifteen or better. That means they can see clearly at twenty feet what people with twenty-twenty vision could see clearly only at fifteen feet. The sportswear giant Nike has even introduced a new putter, the IC, designed to reduce visual distractions. The shaft and the grip of the $140 putter are both green (to blend in with the color |
of the grass and reduce distraction), but the leading edge of the blade and the T-shaped alignment line are a blazing white, to help focus a golfer's eyes on the part of the club that contacts the ball. We Notice on a Need-to-Know Basis Regardless of whether we are experts or amateurs, even those of us with otherwise perfect vision are subject to fleeting |
but nonetheless startling kinds of blindness. One of the most fascinating forms is known as change blindness. It occurs when we fail to detect major changes to the scenes we are viewing during a brief visual disruption--even so brief as a blink. The profound impact of change blindness was demonstrated a decade ago in an impish experiment by Daniel Simons and Daniel Levin, both |
of them at the time at Cornell University. The design of their experiment was simple: they had "strangers" on a college campus ask pedestrians for directions. As you might suspect, the experiment involved a twist. As the stranger and the pedestrian talk, the experimenters arranged for them to be rudely interrupted by two men who pass between them while carrying a door. The interruption |
is brief--lasting just one second. But during that one second, something important happens. One of the men carrying the door trades places with the "stranger." When the door is gone, the pedestrian is confronted with a different person, who continues the conversation as if nothing had happened. Would the pedestrians notice that they were talking to someone new? In most cases, it turns out, |
the answer was no. Only seven of the fifteen pedestrians reported noticing the change. At this point, you may find it tempting to think, "I would have noticed a change like that." And maybe you would have. But consider this: you've probably seen countless similar changes and never noticed them. Where? In the movies. Movie scenes, as many people know, are not filmed sequentially; |
instead, they are shot in a different order from how they appear in the film, usually months or even years apart. This process often results in embarrassing mistakes known in the trade as continuity errors. Continuity errors have long bedeviled the motion picture industry. The Hollywood epic Ben-Hur is a good example. The 1959 movie, which starred the late Charlton Heston as Ben-Hur, won |
eleven Academy Awards--more than any other movie up to that point in history, including one for Best Picture. But it still has its share of errors, especially in the famous chariot scene, which lasts for eleven minutes but took three months to film. During the chariot race, Messala damages Ben-Hur's chariot with his saw-toothed wheel hubs. But at the end of the race, if |
you'll look closely, you'll see that Ben-Hur's chariot appears--undamaged! There's also a mix-up in the number of chariots. The race begins with nine chariots. During the race, six crash. That should leave three chariots at the end of the race. Instead, there are four. Hollywood employs experts who are supposed to catch these things. Officially, they are known as continuity editors or script supervisors, |
though they are more commonly referred to as script girls because the role, traditionally, has been filled by women. But even they can't catch all the mistakes. "It's not humanly possible," says Claire Hewitt, who has supervised scripts on a variety of movies, from documentaries and short films to full-length features and even kung-fu action flicks. The best you can do in any given |
scene, she says, is to try to spot the most important things. But even that is easier said than done. One of Hewitt's more memorable lapses occurred in her second film as a script supervisor, a short film about a man and a woman who live next door to each other in an apartment building. Instead of filming the actors in separate rooms, though, |
the filmmakers cheated: they used the same room to film both actors. This required redecorating the room to make it appear in the various scenes to belong to either the man or the woman, but it saved on location costs. The error occurs in a key scene of the movie, when the woman finally meets the man. "You see her leaning against the door, |
listening to whether he's out in the hall, and she comes out," says Hewitt. "But the door opens the wrong way!" Hewitt never noticed the error on her own; it was instead brought to her attention by her mother's boyfriend. "People love doing that--catching you out," says Hewitt. Indeed, entire Web sites are devoted to pointing out continuity errors. (One of the more popular |
ones is the British Web site moviemistakes.com, run by Jon Sandys, who has been cataloging movie flubs since he was seventeen.) But Hewitt's experience with her mother's boyfriend carries an important lesson: errors that are obvious to others can be invisible to us, no matter how hard we try to spot them. Okay, you might say, it's easy enough to miss changes to minor |
details like which way a door opens. Who cares? But what about changes to bigger, more important things? That's what Levin and Simons wanted to find out. So they shot their own movie. This time, they didn't just change the scenery; they changed the actors. During each film, one actor was replaced by another. For example, in one film an actor walked through an |
empty classroom and began to sit in a chair. The camera then changed, or cut to a closer view, and a different actor completed the action. The films were shown to forty students. Only a third of them noticed the change. We See What We Are When we look at something, we intuitively feel that we can see everything in it in great detail |
and are quite confident that we would notice any changes. That, said Simons, is what makes change blindness such an interesting problem. "People consistently believe that if something unexpected changes, it will automatically grab their attention and they will notice it." As part of their "door" experiment, for instance, the two Dans polled a group of fifty students. They read them a description of |
the experiment, then asked them to raise their hands if they believed they would be able to detect the changes. All fifty raised their hands. The eye, says Simons, has high resolution only at an angle of two degrees. That's not much. If you hold your fist out at arm's length and stick out your thumb, the width of the thumb is roughly two |
degrees. Superimpose that thumb on a movie theater screen and you get an idea of how little you see clearly. Beyond that, things get progressively blurry. True, you do see some things through your peripheral vision, which is why movies like March of the Penguins are popular on wide-screen formats like IMAX theaters. But what you gather through this peripheral vision, says Simons, is |
broad, blurry information. "You're not going to see the details of the penguins." The details we do notice depend, to a degree, on how we define ourselves. In the door experiment, for instance, Simons and Levin found that the seven pedestrians who did notice the change had something in common: they were all students of roughly the same age as the "stranger" they encountered. |
In one sense, this finding wasn't surprising. Social psychologists have shown that we often treat members of our own social group differently from how we treat members of other groups. Black people encountering white people (or vice versa) may behave differently than when they encounter someone of their own group; ditto for rich people encountering poor people, old versus young, and men versus women. |
Nonetheless, wondered Simons and Levin, would those differences in the way we behave toward others extend to the way we see others? To answer that question, they repeated the door experiment, using the same "strangers" they had initially used. Only this time the strangers weren't dressed casually, as students would be; they were dressed as construction workers, complete with hard hats. And this time, |
they approached only people of their own age. In all, the "construction workers" encountered twelve pedestrians. Of those twelve, only four reported noticing the switch when the door came through. Putting the experimenters in construction clothes, it seemed, had been enough to change the way they were seen by students. Rather than being seen as individuals--as they had been when they were dressed as |
students--the experimenters were now seen as members of another group. One of the pedestrians who had failed to detect the change when the door was brought through said as much when she was told of the experiment and interviewed afterward. She said she had seen only a "construction worker" and had not really noticed the individual; that is, she had quickly categorized him as |
a construction worker and hadn't noted those details--like his hair or his eyes or his smile--that would allow her to see him as an individual. Instead, she had formed a representation of the category--a stereotype. In the process, she traded the visual details of the scene for a more abstract understanding of its meaning; she had skimmed. Excerpted from Why We Make Mistakes by |
Definitions for call back a return call the recall of an employee after a layoff recall, call in, call back, withdraw(verb) cause to be returned "recall the defective auto tires"; "The manufacturer tried to call back the spoilt yoghurt" remember, retrieve, recall, call back, call up, recollect, think(verb) recall knowledge from memory; have a recollection "I can't remember saying any such thing"; "I can't |
think what her last name was"; "can you remember her phone number?"; "Do you remember that he once loved you?"; "call up memories" return or repeat a telephone call "I am busy right now--can you call back in an hour?"; "She left a message but the contractor never called back" recall, call back(verb) summon to return "The ambassador was recalled to his country"; "The |
company called back many of the workers it had laid off during the recession" Kernerman English Learner's Dictionary to use a telephone to talk to sb again or to talk to sb who called you before Call me back when you have a chance.; I'll call back later. Request for a second interview or audition, following a successful initial interview. To request someone's return. |
The goal of achieving a high throughput is familiar enough in manufacturing settings, but it also matters every bit as much in drug discovery labs, where researchers need to screen thousands of chemical compounds. Autosamplers can help improve the speed and accuracy of this screening process—by robotically shuttling and dispensing samples as they make their way between various analytical instruments |
and related pieces of sample processing equipment. Now Parker Hannifin's Life Sciences Business Unit has come up with a new way to make robotic sample handling even faster. The extra speed comes from a unique electromechanical design that targets a bottleneck associated with previous autosamplers. These robotic portion of these systems often stands idle while samples are readied for and |
sent through the analytical processes, according to Mike Portela, manager of Parker's Life Sciences unit. “The motion system spends a lot of time just sitting there and waiting,” he says. Parker engineers got rid of that waiting time by decoupling the robot that moves the samples from the microfluidics system that dispenses them. “What we did was cut the cords |
to the motion system,” Portela says. Parker engineers created an autosampling system around self-contained dispensers, called Smart Syringes, that operate without electric or fluid connections to the rest of the robotic handling system. With each Smart Syringe acting independently, groups of syringes can perform their operations in parallel once they have been put in place by the autosampler's three-axis robot. |
As a result, throughput increases by as much five times versus systems where operations take place sequentially, Portela estimates. Parker's Smart Syringe dispensers measures just 8-mm in diameter and weigh 26 grams. Yet each one contains its own microprocessor, memory, RFID chip, drive, gearbox and motor capable of drawing and injecting sub-microliter samples.Portela won't say much about the DC-brushless motors |
that Parker uses, other than to note that they have a six-mm diameter and generate enough torque to inject or dispense at 300 psi. Portela places the system's precision at better than 0.5 % CV. Thanks to the embedded intelligence provided by the microprocessor, the syringes actually control their own workflows. “You can download a program into the syringe so |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.