Binnie signs deal to market Stoneleigh Coffee

first_imgKINGSTON: Reigning All Jamaica and Caribbean men’s singles squash champion, Chris Binnie, has inked a sponsorship deal with Stoneleigh Coffee Roasters Company and will promote its Blue Mountain Coffee products in the international market. Under the three-year agreement, the top national and regional player will assume the role of brand ambassador for Stoneleigh Coffee, and will be featured in the company’s sales and marketing efforts overseas. Binnie will actively promote Stoneleigh’s products in the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada, among other places, as he travels to compete on the Professional Squash Association tour. The sponsorship comes as the high-flying player capped a banner year, which saw him win his sixth All Jamaica title in July and a record-breaking sixth Caribbean Championship in August. In addition, Binnie won his second international professional tournament in October and was ranked among the world’s top 100 squash players in November. A GRATEFUL BINNIE As he aims to move up to the top 75 by May 2016, Binnie expressed gratitude for the sponsorship, which will help to defray the expenses associated with competing on the professional circuit, including travel and accommodation costs, as well as coaching fees. “I am thrilled to have been chosen as a brand ambassador for Stoneleigh Coffee because I am proud to promote the best Jamaican brands in the international arena, and the sponsorship will go a far way in helping me to achieve my goals as a player,” said Binnie. In welcoming the player to his new role, Stephen Shirley, director, Stoneleigh Coffee Roasters Limited, said: “Our sponsorship deal with Chris is a win-win situation because we are bolstering the career of a top-performing Jamaican athlete, and we’re also getting a solid ambassador to promote our brands and products in international markets.”last_img read more

Read more on Binnie signs deal to market Stoneleigh Coffee

‘They’ll NEVER Come Back’

first_imgHealth and Social Welfare Minister, Dr. Walter T. Gwenigale, has thrashed the main demand of the striking National Health Workers’ Association of Liberia (NHWAL).Dr. Gwenigale, who did not mince his words when he spoke Monday, October 13, during the regular press briefing at the Ministry of Information Culture and Tourism, told the health workers that their demand for the re-instatement of Mr. Joseph Tamba, president and Mr. George Poe Williams, Secretary General and spokesman, would never be honored.“To those of you striking because you want those two men back, you better just stay home forever because they are never coming back to work with the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare,” Min. Gwenigale told the striking health workers.Both Tamba and Williams have since been fired from their respective posts at the National Malaria Control Program and the James David Hospital for over a year. However, the striking public health workers still regard both men as their leaders even though they (Tamba and Williams) are no longer officially in the employ of the public health sector. The health workers, especially the ones at the largest Ebola treatment unit (ETU) at the Island Clinic of 150-bed capacity at the moment, are also demanding that monies deducted from their September hazard pay be refunded to them.The Health Minister assured them that every health worker affected by the cut would be reimbursed. He appealed to them to return to work in order to save lives that they swore to protect. Dr. Gwenigale’s statement was buttressed by the Acting Finance and Development Planning Minister, Dr. James Kollie.Reacting to Dr. Gwenigale’s statement that they would ‘never return’ to the Ministry of Health, NHWAL Secretary General Williams told our Health Correspondent via phone that “never” belongs to God and that a “mortal man should not use it because things can change around.”He said with that pronouncement from Min. Gwenigale, he was left to wonder what could be the way forward.Asked whether the strike was ongoing he said “yes, but there have been numerous calls coming from international partners asking us to relax our action. So, we have informed our colleagues at various ETUs to remain and help save the lives of those who came in before the strike began.”He stressed that his colleagues at the ETUs have been warned not to take in new victims even if there are empty beds.At the moment, the immediate impact of the workers’ action might not be felt, but in the coming days if new victims are not allowed to be admitted to the ETUs, Liberia could return to the situation a few weeks ago when dead bodies were found everywhere in homes and communities. This will increase the risk of more infections of the disease, which has so far killed at least 2400 in confirmed, probable and suspected cases in Liberia between March 22 and October 7.Meanwhile, Mr. Williams disclosed to the Observer that he fears for his life. “Someone told me that there is a secret arrest order for me and Tamba. I am not on the run, if the security wants me, I can turn myself in but hunting me secretly is worrisome for me and my family looking at our country’s history,” he stated, emphasizing,  however, that he was not afraid of being arrested.Share this:Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)last_img read more

Read more on ‘They’ll NEVER Come Back’

Darwin’s Tree of Life is a Tangled Bramble Bush

first_imgResearchers at Vanderbilt University are tied up in knots trying to locate Darwin’s branching tree in contradictory data.A press release from Vanderbilt University summarizes a paper in Nature this week:These days, phylogeneticists – experts who painstakingly map the complex branches of the tree of life – suffer from an embarrassment of riches. The genomics revolution has given them mountains of DNA data that they can sift through to reconstruct the evolutionary history that connects all living beings. But the unprecedented quantity has also caused a serious problem: The trees produced by a number of well-supported studies have come to contradictory conclusions.Salichos and Rokas, in their Nature paper, had to resort to postulating rapid periods of diversification and long periods of stasis to keep Darwin’s vision intact against the onslaught of data.  The press release continues,In a study published online May 8 by the journal Nature, Rokas and graduate student Leonidas Salichos analyze the reasons for these differences and propose a suite of novel techniques that can resolve the contradictions and provide greater accuracy in deciphering the deep branches of life’s tree….“The study by Salichos and Rokas comes at a critical time when scientists are grappling with how best to detect the signature of evolutionary history from a deluge of genetic data. These authors provide intriguing insights into our standard analytical toolbox, and suggest it may be time to abandon some of our most trusted tools when it comes to the analysis of big data sets. This significant work will certainly challenge the community of evolutionary biologists to rethink how best to reconstruct phylogeny,” said Michael F. Whiting, program director of systematics and biodiversity science at the National Science Foundation, which funded the study.Problem is, the data looks more like a bush than a tree.  The record is punctuated by rapid, sudden appearances of organisms.  The authors acknowledged the problem of the Cambrian explosion:In broad terms, Rokas and Salichos found that genetic data is less reliable during periods of rapid radiation, when new species were formed rapidly. A case in point is the Cambrian explosion, the sudden appearance about 540 million years ago of a remarkable diversity of animal species, without apparent predecessors. Before about 580 million years ago, most organisms were very simple, consisting of single cells occasionally organized into colonies.“A lot of the debate on the differences in the trees has been between studies concerning the ‘bushy’ branches that took place in these ‘radiations’,” Rokas said.Calling this a “paradox,” the researchers found that even within yeast species a thousand genes did not match up to phylogenetic trees generated by standard software methods.  The same conflicts were found in larger data sets involving vertebrates and metazoans.  In response, they claimed that genetic dating becomes as unreliable as radiometric dating the farther back in time one searches, creating “considerable challenges to existing algorithms to resolve radiations” congruent with Darwin’s presumed ancestral tree.One whole subsection in the paper is titled, “All gene trees differ from species phylogeny.”  Another is titled, “Standard practices do not reduce incongruence.”  A third, “Standard practices can mislead.”  One of their major findings was “extensive conflict in certain internodes.”The authors not only advised throwing out some standard practices of tree-building, but (amazingly) proposed evolutionists throw out the “uninformative” conflicting data and only use data that seems to support the Darwinian tree:  “the subset of genes with strong phylogenetic signal is more informative than the full set of genes, suggesting that phylogenomic analyses using conditional combination approaches, rather than approaches based on total evidence, may be more powerful.”In conclusion, they had no solid answers for the conflicts.  They called on other evolutionists to “to develop novel phylogenomic approaches and markers to more accurately decipher the most challenging ancient branches of life’s genealogy from the DNA record.”This is scandalous!  It’s also old news.  Evolutionists have been concocting Darwin trees in spite of the evidence ever since Darwin acknowledged the Cambrian explosion as a real problem that lodged a valid objection to his theory (get the new book Darwin’s Doubt for details, and the film Darwin’s Dilemma).Darwinism is a classic case of Finagle’s Rule #3, “Draw your curves, then plot your data.”  Guru Charlie drew his little tree sketch by faith, then sent his disciples out on a hopeless quest to find evidence to support it.  Now, here it is May 15, 2013, and these guys are still telling us the tree vision is in conflict with the data!  They have to finagle their methods (“novel approaches”) to try to force a match with the uncooperative genes.And here, we saw they are even willing to lie, tossing out “uninformative” data sets and only using data that appear to support their foreordained conclusion.  Were you told this in biology class?  Did your textbook mention this?  No; but you hear it here on CEH all the time, because we bring out into the open the dirty deals evolutionists whisper to themselves in the journals. (Visited 162 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

Read more on Darwin’s Tree of Life is a Tangled Bramble Bush