A charity shop has agreed to settle with a woman after initially refusing to give her a refund of €400 for a broken piano.Denise O’Boyle paid €400 for the 85-year-old piano at the Good And New charity shop in Letterkenny and a further €200 for it to be delivered to her home and tuned.Ms O’Boyle tried to return the item when she was informed by an expert that it could not be tuned. But the shop had refused to refund on the basis that the piano was bought as seen.Ms O’Boyle, from Killybegs, had told the Small Claims Court in Letterkenny that she had priced various pianos but said they cost in the region of €3,000.She said she was delighted when she saw the piano in the charity shop for €400.She brought a friend with her to view the piano, but admitted the woman was not a piano expert.“She just knew that it didn’t have woodworm, and we thought it was okay then,” said Ms O’Boyle.However, when a piano tuner arrived at her home, Ms O’Boyle was told the piano was only worth €50.A director from the charity shop, Mr Eamonn McDevitt, had said that they could not give back regular refunds or they would have to close down.The case was adjourned until yesterday (MON) by Judge Paul Kelly who urged both parties to come together and asked the charity to consider the matter.Solicitor for Ms O’Boyle, Mr Kevin McGlynn said the matter could be struck off as an agreement had been reached but gave no details of the settlement.Judge Paul Kelly said “I’m glad to hear that.”© 2011 donegaldaily.com, all Rights ReservedFollow us on www.twitter.com/donegaldailyFollow us on www.facebook.com/donegaldailySell anything on www.donegaldailyclassifieds.comCHARITY SHOP HITS THE RIGHT NOTE WITH DISGRUNTLED PIANO OWNER was last modified: November 7th, 2011 by StephenShare this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window) Tags:Denise O’BoyleGood and New charity shopletterkenny
With a successful penalty shot by Sarah Killfoil seven minutes before the half, the Fortuna High girls soccer team regained its confidence, enabling a 3-1 victory over visiting Arcata in the second semifinal game of the Humboldt-Del Norte League tournament, Thursday night at Fortuna High School.The No. 2 seeded Huskies (13-2-1) will face the No. 1 Eureka Loggers (15-0) in the H-DNL championship match on Saturday at 11 a.m., at Albee Stadium. Arcata (9-5-1) will join St. Bernard’s in the wait …
One would think make-believe is for kids, and science is for adults. Some recent evolution stories, however, seem to portray a seamless continuum between imagination and testable scientific hypotheses. You be the judge:Darwin in cyberspace: If it happens in a computer simulation, is it really evolution? National Geographic reported on a new computer game that allows players to evolve any kind of creatures they want and pit them against each other in survival-of-the-fittest competition. The description makes no distinction between what happens in the game and what supposedly happens in the wild. The words evolution and natural selection appear in the article in both contexts. One of the proponents called this “natural selection at its best.” But if the selection takes place in software designed by programmers, is it really natural?Reverse-engineering contingency: Science magazine reported this week that engineers “evolved” a salamander-like robot that could swim to land and crawl ashore.1,2 This is a fine piece of clever engineering, but is it evolution? Again, the article made no distinction between the natural and the artificial. It implied that the robot is retracing steps taken by organisms in the unseen past. Notice what Frank Fish (West Chester U, PA) said about the experiment: “This is clearly an excellent fusion of biology and robotics to test neurological and evolutionary hypotheses. This paper will be a high-profile example of how robots can be used as surrogates for living and fossil systems.” He did not explain in what respects this man-made, designed robot, lacking DNA and the ability to reproduce itself, compares or contrasts with a biological organism in any significant way. The reverse comparison, that an intelligently designed robot might suggest the first tetrapod was similarly designed, was definitely not what the article intended to convey. This is clear from a write-up in Live Science, where Jeanna Brynner took the Darwinist line to the hilt: “Studies of the robot show that our fishy ancestors likely used their primitive brains to make the evolutionary leap from water worlds to terra firma.” Surprisingly, this sentence makes it sound like fish brains intelligently designed their own upward evolution, with purpose and a goal (teleology). Another example of the equivocation between natural selection and intelligent self-design can be found in Science Digest: “This four-legged yellow creature reveals a great deal about the evolution of vertebrate locomotion,” it claims. “It’s also a vivid demonstration that robots can be used to test and verify biological concepts, and that very often nature herself offers ideal solutions for robotics design.” Is this describing nature as a personified engineer? Teleology and intelligent guidance were the very principles Darwin was trying to avoid.Make believe: Playing “what if?” games might provide a brainstorming activity a scientist could employ while developing a hypothesis that could be tested by experiment. “What if” on the other hand, the make-believe exercise becomes an end in itself? This is apparently what a BBC News exercise for students encourages. The following “what-if?” exercise is not advertised in the fiction department; it is found in the “Science and Nature” department. To some evolutionists, apparently, the dream is the thing:It’s a palaeontologist’s dream: the chance to live in a world where dinosaurs are not something to be dug out of the ground but are living among us. It may sound far-fetched but dinosaurs were actually rather unlucky. The meteorite impact that doomed them to extinction was an event with a probability of millions to one. What if the meteorite had missed? Had dinosaurs survived, the world today would be very different. If humans managed to survive alongside them, we wouldn’t have the company of most, if not all, of the mammals with which we are familiar today. Giraffes, elephants and other mammals wouldn’t have had space to evolve. Would we be hunting Hadrosaurs instead of elk? Or farming Protoceratops instead of pigs? Would dinosaurs be kept as pets? And could the brighter dinosaurs have evolved into something humanoid? Clearly anything is possible if imagination is substituted for testable hypotheses. The writers of this exercise did not mention that the impact hypothesis for the extinction of the dinosaurs is itself controversial (e.g., 10/24/2006). If the impact turns out to be imaginary, then the exercise becomes imagination balanced on imagination. If the Darwinian theory of common ancestry by natural selection is also overturned someday (as advocates of intelligent design feel is inevitable), it becomes imagination balanced on imagination balanced on imagination. Without a foundation of testable theories anchored to observational evidence, exercises in the imagination are indistinguishable from turtles all the way down (see joke).1Ijspeert, Crespi, Ryczko and Cabelguen, “From Swimming to Walking with a Salamander Robot Driven by a Spinal Cord Model,” Science, 9 March 2007: Vol. 315. no. 5817, pp. 1416-1420, DOI: 10.1126/science.1138353.2Elisabeth Pennisi, “Robot Suggests How the First Land Animals Got Walking,” Science, 9 March 2007: Vol. 315. no. 5817, pp. 1352-1353, DOI: 10.1126/science.315.5817.1352aIntelligent reader, nobody needs to tell you how stupid these Darwin sideshows are. It would be insulting to hold rotten baloney in front of your nose and ask you if it smelt bad. Yet this kind of folly is presented monolithically in today’s science journals, museums, popular science media, and public schools (notice that #1 was promoted by the prestigious, historic National Geographic Society, #2 was published in the leading American journal Science, and #3 was devised for UK public education). It doesn’t matter that it is untestable, illogical, equivocating, vague, personified, analogical, reductive, subjective, self-contradictory, self-refuting, and completely out of touch with reality. Darwin’s little myth has become so sacred that no one dare question it – or even laugh. In fact, if you do question it, you are likely to be called a fascist or Nazi (see AIG) and threatened with a lawsuit (01/06/2007; see also the two meanings of “make believe” in the 10/11/2006 commentary). If you are sick and tired of the Darwin Freak Show and can’t take it any more, then join the noble Visigoths in their futuristic space fighters (see this Japanese cartoon) and help depose Charlie from his antiquated Castle of the Imagination (see 01/17/2007 and 12/22/2003 commentaries). Kick the rascals out and let science once again be a rational search for verifiable understanding about the natural world – the real world.(Visited 6 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest Prior to the report corn was at $3.47 up 1.5 cents. Soybeans were $9.53 down one cent. At 12:20 pm corn was down 3 cents, soybeans up 6 cents, and wheat was up 2 cents. The corn yield was estimated at 173.4 bushels per acre, right in line with trade expectations. Corn production was 15.057 billion bushels. Corn harvested acres increased by 200,000 acres. Ending stocks for corn declined to 2.320 billion bushels, down from last month at 2.384 billion bushels.The soybean yield was estimated at 51.4 bushels per acres and again right at the trader estimate. Soybean production was 4.269 billion bushel, up from last month at 4.201 billion bushels. Soybean harvested acres were unchanged. Ending stocks were higher by 30 million bushels at 395 million bushels. Some could call the report bullish for soybeans as ending stocks did increase but came in below the trade estimate of 413 million bushels. It could be bullish since the number was something less than 400 million bushels.The Brazil soybean production was estimated at 102 million tons. Last month it was 101 million tons. Soybean production in Argentina was pegged at 57 million tons, unchanged from last month. The Brazil corn production estimate of 83.5 million tons is up one million tons from last month. The Argentina corn production at 36.5 million tons is unchanged from last month.Traders will focus heavily on two numbers today, the US corn yield and the U.S. soybean yield. The market looks for the corn yield to move lower while the soybean yield increases. That thought has permeated the market since the Sept. 12 report. The corn yield is expected to decline compared to the September yield of 174.4. Trader estimates put the US corn yield at 173.5. While corn yield estimates are coming down the reduction has been tempered in recent weeks due to yield reports of better than expected in Illinois and westward. Trader estimates put the US soybean yield at 51.5, the September yield was 50.6.Today is a day of reckoning for soybeans on two fronts. Huge yields head butts massive demand. The increased soybean yield seems to be a forgone conclusion. It is just a matter of how much it increases. A point to bring out is that the farmer participation in USDA surveys for this report is record low with a response rate at 66.5% compared to the normal rate of 79%. Not sure what that means other than to just point it out. Long forgotten is that the September yield at 51.5 bushels was above the high end of expectations with November CBOT soybeans closing 16 cents lower on Sept. 12. Bottom line, there are lots of moving parts for today’s USDA report, especially for soybeans. Higher yields, increased harvested acres, and the low farmer participation in the surveys all add to the uncertainty. It would seem a surprise is certainly possible in today’s reports.Moving on to corn, in the last 20 years the October corn yield compared to September has decreased in just five of those years. Prior to the report December CBOT corn was $3.47 up 1.5 cents for the day. The contract low of $3.14.75 was made on Aug. 31. A forgotten aspect ahead of this report will be corn and soybean harvested acres. While it is not getting much traction many are expecting both corn and soybean harvested acres to increase 50,000-100,000 acres. Ideas of higher acres come from FSA enrollment acres being higher than expected from earlier reports this summer.China has been very active the last few days buying eight cargoes of US soybeans. They were on a week long holiday earlier this month. It appears they are making up for lost time. Current USDA estimates have China importing 82.5 million tons of soybeans. Five years ago they imported just 52 million tons of soybeans, an increase of 58%.This week’s weekly crop progress report put the U.S. corn harvest at 35%, below trade estimates of 40% to 45%. The five year average is 38%. The U.S. soybean harvest was pegged at 44% completed with trade estimates of 50% to 55%. The five year average is 47%. Corn yield reports continue to be widely varied with very few producers seeing record yields in Ohio. While many corn yields will be above average, they rate as “disappointing” by many producers. Ohio is experiencing some outstanding soybean yields with many reports of 55 to 80 bushels per acre. Corn harvest in Ohio is 23% done while the soybean harvest is 31% completed. The farmer sell rate, harvest progress, and elevator lines will be important factors the next two weeks. Weather looks great for harvest the next four days. Don’t forget to pay attention to the close for grain prices.
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest Bill Richards has been concerned with the health of his soil for a long time.For more than 40 years, Richards and his family have used no-till to reduce costs and limit soil and nutrient runoff on their Pickaway County farm. Richards has also spent countless hours educating his fellow farmers about the importance of managing their land in a productive way while still protecting the environment. He served as the chief of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Soil Conservation Service from 1990 to 1993 as well.“In the late 1950s the agronomists were telling us there was no reason to till other than weed control. Ohio is the cradle of no-till because at Wooster we had Dr. [Glover] Triplett and Dr. [David] Van Doren who started the original no-till research. There was a group that got started and I was sort of the ring-leader, trying these things to make them work on a farm level,” Richards said. “It is a change. It is different management and a different culture. We have a culture carrying over from the plow of the old days where farms should look neat and clean and the soil should be turned over. We fell in love with big tractors and big horsepower. It is hard to get farmers to change, but when the prices get down near the variable costs of production, farmers are going to be looking for a way to produce more efficiently. When we started no-till, our mission was to save fuel and machinery costs — we had no idea about the soil improvement and the erosion reduction we’d see. We learned very quickly that with no-till we could spread over many more acres, but we haven’t progressed like we should. Other countries like Brazil, Argentina, Australia that do not have the price structure like we have here have adopted no-till at a much greater rate than we have here in the U.S.”For Richards and many others reducing and eliminating tillage has changed the way they farm and view the soil.“No-till has been a revolution in the way we farm and those using it long term are really benefitting. Then when you add cover crops you really can see the benefits. One of the problems is that we are not doing a good job of measuring those benefits. We have to be able to prove that we are really benefitting and lowering the risk of farming,” Richards said. “No-till is not the only conservation practice, but it is the easiest and the best and the fastest way to raise productivity and make row-crop production much more efficient. We have been taught that it is all about yield, but it is how much money you have left over at the end of the year that really counts. Some years for us, no-till has lost us money, but over time it has made up money. No-till farmers benefit long term and our tenants also really benefit from that soil improvement from no-till.”Today, no-till is seen as an important component of conservation and (maybe more importantly) improving soil health that is more often being considered in the ongoing 2018 Farm Bill discussions.“Back in the ’85 Farm Bill they tied conservation to agricultural payments for the farms. That got a great jump in no-till because no-till was the fastest easiest and most profitable way to meet those standards. That sort of slipped away,” Richards said. “That is something that will probably be looked at very carefully in this upcoming farm bill. There is going to be a big push to tie conservation to crop insurance and that will bring no-till to the front again.“What responsibility are we willing to accept in return for low-cost crop insurance? I think that is going to be one of the issues in the farm bill that will cause some discomfort in the countryside. I think we have the duty and moral responsibility to use the best conservation technology available to control erosion, improve soil and water quality and increase productivity in the production of food fiber and energy for the long term benefits of people all over the world.”Richards and others have speculated that soil health requirements for participation in the crop insurance program could be a future farm bill possibility. In the initial version of the 2018 Farm Bill released by the House Ag Committee last week the crop insurance program was virtually unchanged from the previous farm bill, though as more is learned about the complexities of measuring and improving soil health, there is greater likelihood that soil health will work its way into the farm bill.But what exactly is soil health? The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service defines it as: the continued capacity of soil to function as a vital living ecosystem that sustains plants, animals, and humans. Every farmer knows that some soils are healthier than others but there is still plenty to learn about why and how.Jim Hoorman, an NRCS soil health specialist based in Ohio, outlined four key principles of improving soil health.“The first one is minimizing your soil disturbance. When you till the soil, you are burning up your organic matter and we have lost 50% of our organic matter in most of our soils. The second principle is to maximize the amount of live roots. You want to feed the microbes and we know that where we have live roots we will get 1,000 or 2,000 times more microbes,” Hoorman said. “The third principle is rotate your crops and maximize surface residue. You rotate crops to minimize problems with insects and diseases and you want to keep surface residue to protect the soil from erosion. You also want to increase your biodiversity above ground and below ground. The more species you have out there, the more soil life you will have and the healthier the soil system will be. Those are the key principles we are promoting at the Soil Health Division of the Natural Resource Conservation Service.”Improving soil health is certainly not an overnight process, Hoorman said.“Many times we have to crawl before we walk or run. A lot of these farms started with no-till and later added cover crops. The best place to start with cover crops is after wheat because you have several months for things to grow. Other great places to start are after a hay crop or maybe after some CRP ground. As guys go along they learn more about equipment, seeding rates and management,” Hoorman said. “It is also important to get cover crops out early by using shorter season corn and soybeans so you can get your cover crops planted, growing in the fall and get more roots.”More farmers are finding that healthier soils will ultimately produce better yields with fewer inputs, though there are often short-term yield sacrifices for long-term gains for improved soil health and farm profitability. This is one factor that makes the soil health advantages hard to quantify and more challenging to incorporate into federal farm programs.Jim Moseley, former U.S. Department of Agriculture deputy secretary, was on a panel with Richards and others at the Conservation Tillage and Technology Conference in March and said he was hoping soil health would be a bigger part of the farm bill discussion this time around.“I have been kind of disappointed in the discussion of the farm bill in the last year and a half. It has been about maintaining the status quo,” Moseley said. “We have had an unprecedented amount of new information and enthusiasm beginning to come forth in this area of soil health. If you have this beginning to sweep across the landscape with farmers I guess I expected there would be something innovative that would come out of this legislation to move us forward a little bit and that just hasn’t happened.”Jim Moseley, former U.S. Department of Agriculture deputy secretary, talks about soil health and farm policy at the Conservation Tillage and Technology Conference.One bit of soil health progress in terms of federal policy Moseley highlighted, however, could develop with the March 1 introduction of the Agriculture Data Act of 2018. The legislation would aggregate and anonymize the vast amount of farmer data that the U.S. Department of Agriculture already manages, making it accessible to land-grant university researchers while maintaining producer privacy. There will likely be a push to include a version of the Agricultural Data Act of 2018 in the next farm bill with one goal being to potentially develop future policy based on gaining a better understanding of the benefits of soil health.“The world of big data is sweeping across agriculture so we can make better decisions. That is in the private sector, but in the public sector it is difficult to access the wealth of data in the RMA, FSA and NASS. We have worked on this project for a year and a half there has been legislation introduced to collate and access the data so we can do a better job of giving answers to some tough questions,” Moseley said. “What is the linkage between the farmers doing good conservation practices related to their net profitability? Individuals are trying to make that correlation but their data sets are hard to come by. USDA holds real data. You can take the real data and synthesize it into a real solution. Once you get that then you can begin to develop policy around it.”And, beyond policy development, the lessons potentially learned through the research made possible through the Agricultural Data Act of 2018 could add credence and incentive at the farm level to focus on improving soil health outside of federal policy. Proof of profitability is a powerful incentive.“The No. 1 question about conservation from farmers is, ‘How is it going to help me with profitability?’ Big picture, there are three things that help with profitability and production: genetics, technology and the third leg to that soil for us to feed the growing population is soil health,” Moseley said. “Without soil health we have an unstable stool. If we are absent soil health we don’t get there.”
The Indigenous People’s Front of Tripura, the junior ally of the ruling BJP, will hold demonstrations across the State in August to spearhead its demand for a separate State, a party leader said on Thursday.“We will organise sit-in demonstrations all over Tripura on August 23 in support of our demand for a separate State and withdrawal of the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2016,” IPFT vice-president Ananta Debbarma said.“We would continue our agitation in the State to highlight the two important demands,” he added.Old demandThe IPFT has been agitating since 2009 for a separate State to be carved out by upgrading the Tripura Tribal Areas Autonomous District Council, which has jurisdiction over two-thirds of the State’s 10,491 sq. km area, home to over 12,16,000 people, mostly tribals.Most political parties, including the BJP, CPI(M), Congress and Indigenous Nationalist Party of Tripura, have rejected the IPFT demand, saying it is not practical to divide the small State.The IPFT forged an alliance with the BJP, based on a common minimum programme, before the February 18 Assembly polls and secured eight seats in the 60-member House. During the poll campaign, the IPFT toned down its Statehood demand while the BJP maintained that it did not support the separate State issue. IPFT president Narendra Chandra Debbarma and general secretary Mevar Kumar Jamatia are Ministers in the nine-member Council of Ministry headed by Chief Minister Biplab Kumar Deb.On the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2016, Mr. Ananta Debbarma said it would jeopardise tradition and customs besides demographic positions of the indigenous people not only in Tripura but also in the entire north-eastern region. The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2016 seeks to enable Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians who fled to India from Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh without valid documents or those whose documents expired to acquire Indian citizenship through the process of naturalisation.Many parties in the northeastern region are opposing the Bill, which is now under scrutiny of a Joint Parliamentary Committee.
A baba, or faith healer, arrested in Guwahati on Thursday for allegedly raping and impregnating a 15-year-old last year has turned out to be the equivalent of an MLA in an autonomous council.The police on Friday produced Ghanashyam Das, referred to as babaji by his followers, before a local court, which ordered his judicial custody for 14 days. The man had been on the run after the minor girl, who he was to cure, delivered a girl on April 8 at a private hospital. The hospital reported the case to 181 Women Helpline.“We found out that he is an MCLA (Member Council Legislative Assembly) after arresting him on Thursday from the Noonmati area,” Pallav Tamuli, Assistant Commissioner of Police, told The Hindu.Das, in his mid-fifties, is one of 40 MCLAs in the Bodoland Territorial Council that administers four districts of north-central and western Assam. He represents the Dihira constituency in Baksa district for the Ana-Bodo Suraksha Samity, a front of non-Bodo (tribal) communities.“We have sought DNA profiling of the accused,” Mr. Tamuli said.Police said the victim, from Assam’s Sonitpur, was working as a domestic help at the house of a bank officer. She told counsellors that her employer had taken her to the babaji as she was unwell, where she was raped.Miguel Das Queah, a government-appointed support person for cases related to Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, said the victim’s employers admitted her to a private hospital in an advanced stage of pregnancy on April 7. The hospital discharged her on April 17. The girl and the baby have since then been staying at a State Home for Women.
The new-look Wankhede Stadium was formally inaugurated in Mumbai on Sunday. However, it is still uncertain whether or not the stadium will be allowed to host World Cup matches.The venue is yet to receive a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the fire department with the chief fire officer saying they will not issue the NOC unless they are fully satisfied.The stadium recently failed a fire inspection, raising concerns that it may not be ready in time for the World Cup matches.One of the main concerns raised by the fire department was the lack of access to fire brigades to all parts of the stadium. Wankhede Stadium is scheduled to host three World Cup matches including the final on April 2.ICC president and Mumbai Cricket Association chief Sharad Pawar, who formally inaugurated the stadium, refused to comment on the issue.
The Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) has notified Online Recruitment Applications (ORA) for 108 various faculty and non-faculty posts.Interested candidates should apply online through UPSC website till August 28, 2014.Vacancies and Pay scale:Total vacancies: 108 posts1. Assistant Directors (Chemistry): 3 postsPay Scale: PB-3 of Rs 15600-39100 + Grade Pay of Rs 54002. Assistant Directors (Plant Pathology): 4 postsPay Scale: PB-3 of Rs 15600-39100 + Grade Pay of Rs 54003. Assistant Directors of Air Safety: 4 postsPay Scale: PB-3 of Rs 15600-39100 + Grade Pay of Rs 66004. Aeronautical Officers: 15 postsPay Scale: PB-3 of Rs 15600-39100 + Grade Pay of Rs 54005. Legal Officers: 2 postsPay Scale: PB-3 of Rs 15600-39100 + Grade Pay of Rs 54006. Deputy Registrars of Trade Marks & Geographical Indications: 4 postsPay Scale: PB-3 of Rs 15600-39100 + Grade Pay of Rs 76007. Professor of Agriculture Chemistry: 1 postPay Scale: PB-4 of Rs 37400-67000 + Grade Pay of Rs 87008. Assistant Engineers (NQA) in Mechanical Engineering: 11 postsPay Scale: PB-2 of Rs 9300-34800 + Grade Pay of Rs 46009. Assistant Engineers (NQA) in Metallurgical Engineering: 3 postsPay Scale: PB-2 of Rs.9300-34800 + Grade Pay of Rs 460010. Assistant Drugs Controllers (India): 10 postsPay Scale: PB-3 of Rs 15600-39100 + Grade Pay of Rs 660011. Specialists, Gr.III, Assistant Professors (Neurology): 8 postsPay Scale: PB-3 of Rs.15600-39100 + Grade Pay of Rs 660012. Specialists, Gr.III, Assistant Professors (Paediatric Cardiology): 3 postsPay Scale: PB-3 of Rs.15600-39100 + Grade Pay of Rs 660013. Specialists, Gr.III, Assistant Professors in Orthopaedic Surgery (Sports Injury): 6 postsPay Scale: PB-3 of Rs 15600-39100 + Grade Pay of Rs 660014. Superintendent (Legal): 2 postsPay Scale: PB-2 of Rs.9300-34800 + Grade Pay of Rs 480015. Assistant Public Prosecutor: 32 postsPay Scale: PB-2 of Rs 9300-34800 + Grade Pay of Rs 4600Experience in relevant field is also desirable, check the detailed advertisement on the website for more information.advertisementSelection Procedure: Candidates will be shortlisted on the basis of the information provided by them on the application. Selection of candidates short listed will be done on the basis of their performance in the interview.Candidates shortlisted for interview will be required to send self attested copies of documents/relevant certificates in support of the claims made in the application as and when demanded by the Commission.Application Fees: Candidates are subjected to pay a non-refundable application fee of Rs 25 in the form of an SBI Challan paid at the bank by cash or by using net banking facility of the SBI or by using visa/master credit/debit card.SC/ ST/ PH/ Women candidates are exempted from payment of application fees.How to Apply: Interested and eligible candidates should apply online through UPSC website http://www.upsconline.nic.in by due date.Candidates willing to apply for more than one post should apply separately for each post.If claiming an experience, candidates should upload their experience certificate in a single pfd file.After submitting the Online Recruitment Application (ORA), candidates should take out a printout of the finally submitted Online Recruitment Application and retain it for future referenceImportant Dates Last date to apply online: August 28, 2014 (11.59 PM)Last date for printing online submitted applications: August 29, 2014 (11.59 PM)Official UPSC website link to apply:http://upsconline.nic.in/ora/VacancyNoticePub.php
BATTLEFORD, Sask. – A Saskatchewan farmer on trial for the shooting of an Indigenous man says he was filled with terror in the moments before his gun “just went off.”Gerald Stanley told the jury in his second-degree murder trial Monday that he and his son heard an SUV with a flat tire drive into his farmyard near Biggar, Sask., in August 2016. He said they heard one of their all-terrain vehicles start and thought it was being stolen.Stanley testified they ran toward the SUV. He kicked the tail light and his son Sheldon hit the windshield with a hammer.Stanley said he grabbed a handgun, normally used to scare off wildlife, when the SUV didn’t leave the yard, and fired two or three shots into the air.“I thought I’m going to make some noise and hopefully they’re going to run out of the yard,” he told court. “I just raised the gun in the air and fired straight up.”Stanley said he popped out the cartridge “to make sure it was disarmed.”“As far as I was concerned, it was empty and I had fired my last shot.”He testified he went up to the SUV because he worried it had run over his wife and he tried to reach for the keys in the ignition.“I was reaching in and across the steering wheel to turn the key off and — boom — this thing just went off,” Stanley testified.“Was your finger on the trigger?” his lawyer, Scott Spencer, asked.“No,” Stanley answered.“Did you intend to hurt anyone?” Spencer asked.“No. I just wanted them to leave,” Stanley said. “I couldn’t believe what just happened and everything seemed to just go silent. I just backed away.”Colten Boushie, who was 22, was sitting in the driver’s seat of the grey Ford Escape when he was shot in the back of the head.Court has heard an SUV carrying Boushie, and five other people from the Red Pheasant First Nation, had a flat tire and drove onto the Stanley farm. The driver testified the group had been drinking during the day and tried to break into a truck on a neighbouring farm, but went to the Stanley property in search of help with the tire.Spencer told the jury in his opening statement earlier Monday that Boushie was the victim of “a freak accident that occurred in the course of an unimaginably scary situation.” He told jurors Boushie’s death wasn’t justified, but they must put themselves in Stanley’s shoes.“Is it unreasonable to fire warning shots when the intruders have tried to steal, taken a run at you with their vehicle, crashed into your vehicle — from Gerry’s perspective intentionally — almost run over your wife?” Spencer asked.“Is it reasonable to fire warning shots to get them to just leave? That’s what it comes down to in many ways.”Stanley was faced with intruders and didn’t have the luxury to wait for police, Spencer said.“This was not a justified death. This death is not justified legally or morally. It is never, never right to take somebody’s life with a gun. But that’s not what this case is about,” he argued.“This is really not a murder case at all. This is a case about what can go terribly wrong when you create a situation which is really of the nature of a home invasion. For farm people, your yard is your castle and that’s part of the story here.”Under cross-examination Crown prosecutor Bill Burge asked what was going on inside the car just before the shooting.“Was he looking at you? Were you trying to scare him?” he asked.“No. I was trying to scare them all out of the yard,” Stanley replied.“Did you intentionally shoot this person?” asked Burge.“No I didn’t. I didn’t pull the trigger,” said Stanley.Stanley was the last witness for the defence. Chief Justice Martel Popescul excused the jury until Thursday at which time they’ll hear closing arguments and receive his instructions.“At that point I turn it over to you, and at that point you would be sequestered until your deliberations are concluded,” Popescul said.Several people holding “Justice for Colten” signs waited outside of court.Boushie’s cousin was distraught.“That was one of the hardest things I’ve ever seen and to have to sit there and endure,” said Jade Tootoosis.“All we want is justice for Colten.”Follow @BillGraveland on TwitterNote to readers: This is a corrected story. An earlier version referred to the victim as an Indigenous teen.