Jensen made Santa’s List!! Check it out and give it a try at

http://family.go.com/santas-list/video/86566-rndankert/

Thanks Aunt Rachel!!

I just love waking up in the morning to see Jensen stretching and squirming to get out of the covers!  Once I say “good morning baby girl” she is all smiles and giggles!  I wish I felt like that every morning

I try to let little miss Jensen spend some time on her tummy after she gets up, but she doesn’t really enjoy it much.  Usually I can get her to be happy on her tummy for about 5 minutes and then she starts fussing.  I must say though, she is very good at holding her head up and she is now even starting to push herself up with her strong little arms!!

Beginning of Tummy Time

This is when I know she is done with Tummy Time

Then I flip her over to her back and she is happy again!

Our wonderful family friends, Karla and Larry, got Jensen this adorable little monkey on a recent road trip they took with my parents to Branson, MO.  Jensen just LOVES the monkey and I think it is so cute to put the monkey in her little arms!!

New image in the bling bling photography contest

…
GEO Jensen photography picture

A function defined on an interval (with non-void interior) is called -convex for a if .

The function defined on an interval is called convex if it’s -convex for all . A function is called Jensen convex if it is -convex.

Prove that any -convex continuous function is convex, any convex function is continuous on the interior of its definition interval. Furthermore, if is Jensen convex and continuous, then is convex. Therefore, if is continuous and convex then is convex.

Prove that there exist -convex functions which are not convex.

Casi todos estaremos de acuerdo en que el turista del presente (y el del futuro) intenta conseguir experiencias en sus viajes. Pero ¿cómo se genera una auténtica experiencia turística? Vamos a poner un ejemplo del creciente segmento del turismo de las relaciones.

Jensen y Urry escribieron un magnífico artículo sobre ésta cuestión, que se publicó el año 2007 en la inefable Annals of Tourism Research. Los autores postulan que los viajeros ya no solamente se sienten motivados por conocer nuevos espacios, sinó por encontrarse con otras personas. Las personas de hoy lo tienen mucho más senzillo para conocer a otras personas, o para mantener sus relaciones a distancia. El crecimiento exponencial de sistemas de comunicación entre las personas (e-mails, blogs, myspace, etc.) ha contribuido enormemente en este proceso. Y todo ello provoca un incremento del número de viajes con motivaciones relacionales. Estos turistas afirman que dichos viajes resultan ser una experiencia vital muy importante. De echo, los viajes para ver a nuestros relativos se han convertido en imprescindibles para la salut de dichas relaciones intermitentes.

Por otro lado, el turismo actual sufre de una pérdida de autenticidad generalizada. Y algunos autores afirman que el turista del futuro buscará dicha autenticidad en viajes como los de motivación relacional.

En resumen, los destinos del futuro pueden ser una mezcla de lugares con atractivos turísticos, lugares para reencontrarse con amigos o familiares, lugares para hacer negocios, para asistir a determinados eventos, etc. O todo ello a la vez. Entonces, volviendo al principio: ¿cómo conseguir una experiencia turística? El ejemplo expuesto confirma que el turismo está adquiriendo mucha complejidad, y se parece en poco o en nada a aquella actividad fundamentalmente ociosa y monótona que caracterizó la expansión del fenómeno durante la segunda mitad del siglo XX. Así pues, disortadamente (o por suerte), las experiencias turísticas son y seran cada vez más extremadamente poliédricas.

]]> http://newsandknowledge.wordpress.com/2009/10/18/jenson-button-and-his-brawn-gp-team-crowned-formula-one-champions/ Sun, 18 Oct 2009 18:45:14 +0000 newsandknowledge http://newsandknowledge.wordpress.com/2009/10/18/jenson-button-and-his-brawn-gp-team-crowned-formula-one-champions/

SAO PAULO (Reuters) – Jenson Button and his Brawn GP team were crowned Formula One champions with a race to spare in an action-packed Brazilian Grand Prix won by Red Bull’s Australian Mark Webber on Sunday.

Read more here

Quicktime version

Source: Crailtap

Ceci n’est pas seulement le nom du tube disco des Sister Sledge, c’est aussi le nom de ce sofa d’Ole Jensen qui va nous donner envie d’être convivial, juste pour le montrer à tous nos  ZAMIS.

A découvrir plus en détail là, juste là.

For those of you who actually did the reading assignment, you’ll know what I’m talking about when I shed a little light on our ‘voice of the people’. I think there was a reason this man recieved so much hate mail, how ever wrongly put they decided to set up their arguments.

Jensen spent relatively 19 pages arguing his view of William McDonough and comparing the man to a Nazi doctor. Not to mention at times talking himself in circles to repeat a point we already understood. Many of the facts he posted I wasn’t aware of, and for that I am glad to of read the article. However, Jensen is the poster child for why so many give up on caring about our environment. McDonough is a corporate monkey, I will give him that, but at least he’s trying, and that’s a lot more than many other big businesses can say. So he’s growing plants on the roof of a truck factory; it’s an oxymoron no doubt, but rather than naming him ‘Hero for the Planet’ or comparing him to a bunch of Nazis, perhaps we take away both the ’stick and carrot’ to be frank, and see where he goes with this. Isn’t that what we’re expected to do each time we elect a new president? They give us all these promises of a better, brighter future, and we are expected to WAIT for change, not to demand a new beginning over night.

I believe that McDonough may not be doing much now, but he’s obviously getting a head start on the corporations, they want him because he makes them look better, and he wants them for the money, as well as the small percentage of change he can bring to their factory. It may not be much, but it’s better than nothing. I say why don’t we see where he goes with it. If we were all to try giving up every form of ‘wasteful substance’ and technology right now, we would all go into a cultural shock. It’s not natural or fair to ask these people to do something like that over night. We need to take baby steps. Of course there will be great losses because we do need to go slow, but in the long run I believe we are not a ’stupid species’ as Jensen so kindly put it, we are intelligent, sometimes too intelligent for our own good, getting us into world wide trouble, such as Global warming. We’re the top of the food chain and forget we still have a far more dangerous preditor to worry about- ourselves.

I could go on for hours like this, but I’d rather hear the feed back. I know some of you out there might think I am being hateful towards Jensen because I don’t think we can change or that we don’t want to, the truth is I think every little bit helps, because it is better to get everyone to do something, rather than having a lot of peopel do nothing.

~Aspen B

I apologize in advance for the daunting length of this post. My sole excuse is that I should have made it still longer to cover the topic.

In dealing with any controversy, it’s usually healthiest to begin at the sticking point. On the question of the impact of biology on political ideology, it’s plain enough what that is: group differences in IQ in general, and the black-white gap in IQ in particular.

I believe the best evidence is that the black-white IQ gap is real, that IQ measures something basic about intelligence, and that the difference between the average IQ of blacks and the average IQ of whites is based in substantial part on genetic differences between the two groups.

I’ll focus on the claim regarding the substantial genetic basis for the IQ gap. The evidence is perhaps best summarized in the following sequence of papers. The series commences with an initial paper by Arthur Jensen and Phillipe Rushton, is followed by criticisms from some of the most prominent anti-heriditarians, and ends with a final response to their critics from Jensen and Rushton:

Rushton, J. P., & Jensen, A. R. (2005). Thirty years of research on race differences in cognitive ability. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 235-294.

Sternberg, R. J. (2005). There are no public-policy implications: A reply to Rushton and Jensen (2005). Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 295-301.

Nisbett, R. E. (2005). Heredity, environment, and race differences in IQ: A commentary on Rushton and Jensen (2005). Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 302-310.

Gottfredson, L. S. (2005). What if the hereditarian hypothesis is true? Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 311-319.

Suzuki, L., & Aronson, J. (2005). The cultural malleability of intelligence and its impact on the racial/ethnic hierarchy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 320-327.

Rushton, J. P., & Jensen, A. R (2005). Wanted: More race realism, less moralistic fallacy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 328-336.

Another paper that responds to the most recent criticism of the hereditarian hypothesis, in the book “Intelligence and How to Get It: Why Schools and Cultures Count” by Richard Nisbett, is this paper, again by Jensen and Rushton.

Also a very good summary of the latest data regarding the black-white IQ gap can be found in Charles Murray’s article The Inequality Taboo, from 2005.

As these papers make clear, there exist any number of items of evidence that point to the conclusion that the black-white IQ gap is quite considerable, and its genetic basis substantial. It is of course that evidence considered in aggregate that most inescapably nails down those conclusions. Yet some items seem even standing by themselves quite powerful.

I would subsume that evidence under the rubric of “regression to the mean” effects. Jensen and Rushton in “Thirty years of research on race differences in cognitive ability”, linked to above, describe the phenomenon and some of the evidence:

Regression toward the mean provides still another method of testing if the group differences are genetic. Regression toward the mean is seen, on average, when individuals with high IQ scores mate and their children show lower scores than their parents. This is because the parents pass on some, but not all, of their genes to their offspring. The converse happens for low IQ parents; they have children with somewhat higher IQs. Although parents pass on a random half of their genes to their offspring, they cannot pass on the particular combinations of genes that cause their own exceptionality. This is analogous to rolling a pair of dice and having them come up two 6s or two 1s. The odds are that on the next roll, you will get some value that is not quite as high (or as low). Physical and psychological traits involving dominant and recessive genes show some regression effect. Genetic theory predicts the magnitude of the regression effect to be smaller the closer the degree of kinship between the individuals being compared (e.g., identical twin  full-sibling or parent– child  half-sibling). Culture-only theory makes no systematic or quantitative predictions.

For any trait, scores should move toward the average for that population. So in the United States, genetic theory predicts that the children of Black parents of IQ 115 will regress toward the Black IQ average of 85, whereas children of White parents of IQ 115 will regress toward the White IQ average of 100. Similarly, children of Black parents of IQ 70 should move up toward the Black IQ average of 85, whereas children of White parents of IQ 70 should move up toward the White IQ average of 100. This hypothesis has been tested and the predictions confirmed. Regression would explain why Black children born to high IQ, wealthy Black parents have test scores 2 to 4 points lower than do White children born to low IQ, poor White parents (Jensen, 1998b, p. 358). High IQ Black parents do not pass on the full measure of their genetic advantage to their children, even though they gave them a good upbringing and good schools, often better than their own. (The same, of course, applies to high IQ White parents.) Culture-only theory cannot predict these results but must argue that cultural factors somehow imitate the effect theoretically predicted by genetic theory, which have also been demonstrated in studies of physical traits and in animals.

Jensen (1973, pp. 107–119) tested the regression predictions with data from siblings (900 White sibling pairs and 500 Black sibling pairs). These provide an even better test than parent– offspring comparisons because siblings share very similar environments. Black and White children matched for IQ had siblings who had regressed approximately halfway to their respective population means rather than to the mean of the combined population. For example, when Black children and White children were matched with IQs of 120, the siblings of Black children averaged close to 100, whereas the siblings of White children averaged close to 110. A reverse effect was found with children matched at the lower end of the IQ scale. When Black children and White children are matched for IQs of 70, the siblings of the Black children averaged about 78, whereas the siblings of the White children averaged about 85. The regression line showed no significant departure from linearity throughout the range of IQ from 50 to 150, as predicted by genetic theory but not by culture-only theory.

What is peculiarly compelling about this evidence? The simplicity and directness with which the genetic hypothesis accounts for the data, the accuracy of that prediction across the range of IQs, and the sheer implausibility of any primarily environmental account of that data.

Of course, those promoting the primarily environmental hypothesis can put together a response that formally meets the objection: some unknown factor X that depresses the IQ of all blacks effectively uniformly across the range, imposing a nearly exactly one standard deviation hit on each black subject measured. Now, I must say this purported effect impresses me as quite magical and unprecedented. What other socioeconomic or cultural environmental factor can one think of that induces such a uniform effect across such a range on a group of human beings?

Given what the factor X is supposed to effect in particular, how plausible is its existence? Wouldn’t one expect that some black families in some more environmentally propitious situations would enable their children to escape, or at least significantly to avoid, any factor X that might depress IQ scores? How is it, then, that even for black children with relatively high IQs of 120, their siblings should average only 100, rather than 110, as with the siblings of white children with IQs of 120? Consider the parents of a black child with the relatively high IQ of 120. Wouldn’t one expect that that family, which had managed to find and develop an environment congenial enough to the intellectual development of one of their children that he or she achieved an IQ of 120, might likewise have secured an environment as well suited for the intellectual development of their other children? Here we have the same parents, the same socioeconomic status, the same childrearing practices, as well as the same schools and neighborhoods. If environment means anything to IQ — which of course is the claim — shouldn’t such similarities be exactly what one would expect to engender the same kinds of outcomes in IQ? How explain then the great and otherwise unexpected disparity?

I find it very hard to ponder facts like these without inferring that genes dominate the explanation for the black-white IQ gap.

Another set of facts that I would categorize as “regression to the mean” effects is the disparity between black and white performance on the SAT even when controlling for economic status and level of education of parents. This is well captured in two graphs. (I take as a reasonable assumption that the SAT, which correlates as well with IQ tests as they correlate with each other, can here work as a good measure of IQ).

Both of these graphs run very hard against the hypothesis of purely, or dominantly, environmental basis of the black-white IQ gap. Yes, as parental education and income increase, SAT scores rise: that much an environmental explanation might predict. But, remarkably, the children of blacks whose income is over $70K attain an average SAT score lower than that of the children of whites whose income is well into the poverty level of $0K to $10K. Likewise, the children of blacks who had achieved a graduate level degree score lower on average on the SAT than do the children of whites who only finished HS.

How might one contemplate these items of data without feeling that they are exactly what one would not expect to see if environment played the major role in determining IQ differences between these groups? The advantages that come with a high income and with a graduate level education confer the very sort of benefits that are routinely said to explain why the average black student can’t do as well as the average white student on an IQ test or the SAT. How is it then that the effects of this relative privilege in black children cannot overwhelm, and easily, those of the clear deficts in the backgrounds of white students against whom the black childen are being compared? If income and educational level of parents entail so little, what can the environment plausibly be said to ground here?

Of course, this regression to the mean is, on the other hand, exactly what one would expect to see if the genetic basis were dominant in determining IQ or SAT scores. The hereditarian hypothesis predicts this and the earlier IQ data neat as a pin.

Now, again, one can contrive an explanation that lets the primarily environmental explanation off the hook. One can say that blacks at any income level and at any level of education suffer from a “caste mentality” or from “stereotype threat” which systematically undermines their performance. I plan to address those issues in more detail in a later post. For now, suffice it to say that the only likely motivation I can see to adopt such a view is to save the primarily environmental thesis from otherwise incompatible data. It appears to me to be a posit born of desperation: a scientific Hail Mary thrown up when the game is otherwise lost. In practice, it appears to operate as little more than a fudge factor X whose impact and exact size is determined only by what otherwise can’t be explained under a given hypothesis.

I think, though, that if one doesn’t divert one’s attention from the basic facts being communicated by these graphs and the earlier example described by Jensen and Rushton, and allows oneself to stare into this sun long enough to take its reckoning, then the natural conclusion is that it is genetic, rather than environmental, differences that are more basic to the black-white IQ gap.

TITULO ORIGINAL De Grønne slagtere

AÑO 2003
DURACIÓN 95 min.
PAÍS Dinamarca
DIRECTOR Anders Thomas Jensen (Director de Las manzanas de Adam)
GUIÓN Anders Thomas Jensen
MÚSICA Jeppe Kaas
FOTOGRAFÍA Sebastian Blenkov
REPARTO Line Kruse, Nikolaj Lie Kaas, Mads Mikkelsen, Nicolas Bro, Aksel Erhardtsen, Bodil Jørgensen, Ole Thestrup, Lily Weiding

SINOPSIS:
Bjarne y Svend son compañeros. Svend es ambicioso pero tiene un gran complejo de inferioridad, al tiempo que Bjarne apenas le importa nada que no sea Astrid, su novia. Los dos juntos consiguen abrir una carnicería propia, y así escapar de la tiranía de su antiguo jefe, carinecero también. Pero el negocio no va bien… hasta que suceden una serie de extrañas coincidencias. (FILMAFFINITY)

“Es un largometraje (extraño y maravilloso) de triunfo y de amistad. Explica con cruda franqueza el sueño de movilidad social y el deseo de sociabilidad que albergan muchas personas en este mundo y a los extremos a los que pueden llegar para conseguirlos.
The Green Butchers cuenta con un diálogo muy interesante e inteligente. El humor, además de provenir de la situación en la que se encuentran, surge de la ironía, el sarcasmo y la falta de sutilidad con la que se comunican dentro del filme.”
(http://filmotecapr.)

Bodil Awards 2004
Nominada Best Actor Mads Mikkelsen

Fantasporto 2004
Ganadora Best Actor Mads Mikkelsen
Ganadora Best Director Anders Thomas Jensen
Ganadora Best Film Anders Thomas Jensen

Robert Festival 2004
Ganadora Best Make-Up Charlotte Laustsen
Nominada Best Actor Nikolaj Lie Kaas
Nominada Best Cinematography Sebastian Blenkov
Nominada Best Costume Design Helle Nielsen , Mia Stensgaard
Nominada Best Director Anders Thomas Jensen
Nominada Best Production Design Mia Stensgaard
Nominada Best Screenplay Anders Thomas Jensen
Nominada Best Special Effects Morten Jacobsen

Sochi International Film Festival 2004
Ganadora FIPRESCI Prize Competition Anders Thomas Jensen

Codec: XVID [XviD ISO MPEG-4]
Calidad: DVDRip
Audio: V.O.- Danés
Subtitulos: Castellano (En archivo aparte)
Película: AVI winrar
Tamaño total: 700 MB. dividido en 8 partes, (incluidos los Subtitulos.)

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=0GBUIPR1
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=NXCZ3MPO
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=5LOJ5B2E
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=QUG6VDX3
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=8GDE9F31
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=7T9L7IO4
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=8A9TN8UZ
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=4NW3OX84

So, jetzt alle noch mal ab zum Wahl-O-Maten 2009 und Sonntag das Kreuzchen an die richtige Stelle machen.

http://www.wahl-o-mat.de/bundestagswahl2009/main_app.php

Schönen Start in die Woche,
Der Jensen

Am heutigen Sonntag trifft Werder Bremen am 6. Spieltag der Fußball Bundesliga auf Bayer 04 Leverkusen (17:30 Uhr / Live bei Sky). Dabei wird Mesut Özil den Grün-Weißen fehlen, denn er laboriert weiterhin an einer Knieverletzung. Bei Bayer ist Renato Augusto fraglich.

In dem Spiel steht aber ein Leverkusener im Mittelpunkt: Stefan Kießling der heute einen Torrekord brechen kann. Er traf bereits an den vergangenen fünf Spieltagen einmal und könnte heute mit einem Tor im sechsten Spiel einen neuen Rekord aufstellen. Auch steht dabei sein “Flaum” auf dem Spiel: Er rasiert sich so lange nicht, bis er in einem Bundesligaspiel keinen Treffer erzielt.

Aber bei Werder gibt es trotzdem tolle Neuigkeiten. Daniel Jensen absolvierte zum ersten Mal wieder ein Training mit seinen Kollegen nach einer fünfeinhalbmonatigen Verletzungspause. Doch für eine Nominierung im Kader kommt es noch deutlich zu früh, denn es fehlt ihm an Kondition und Spielpraxis.

Folgende 16 Spieler hat der Werder-Coach ins Aufgebot für die Partie in der BayArena nominiert: Wiese, Vander, Boenisch, Pasanen, Naldo, Borowski, Fritz, Rosenberg, Marin, Hunt, Frings, Pizarro, Niemeyer, Mertesacker, Moreno Martins, Bargfrede

The Outsider was at the last two practices, but we forgot to file a report yesterday. Probably because we spent too much time dissecting the game-wining touchdown drive from the Rams game. But, we digress….

The last two practices were much shorter than a regular in-season practice. There is an opportunity for some of the younger players to get more reps than usual and a little bit more scrimmage time as the team is not yet preparing for Alberta. The Huskies are focusing on some fundamentals and trying out some new drills as well.

One of those drills was with the defensive backs where coaches Dupont and Burko were throwing Frisbees downfield. The DBs had to locate the Frisbees in the air and then track them down. The highlight was Bryce McCall running about 60 yards downfield and tracking down a Frisbee just before it went out of bounds. It was one of those “you had to be there moments;” it sure was fun to watch.

Another difference this week is that the offense and defense have switched jersey colours. When the Huskies have a home game, the offense wears white. When they are heading on the road, the defense wears white. As next week is the first road game, it was time for the switch.

The play of the last two practices has to be a defensive lineman snuffing out a screen pass for a pick-six. We are pretty sure that it was Colten Jensen (there were a lot of players around and it happened quickly so it was hard to see from our vantage point who the DL was) who read the screen, intercepted a pass from Trevor Barss and took it to the house. There were so many players around Jensen, that we are not 100% sure it was him. So, correct us if we got the wrong player. Regardless, it was a great play!

One other thing that we noticed this week is that first-year Quarterback Matt Busse is starting to get in the throwing groove. Busse missed most of training camp due to a volleyball commitment.

Tomorrow, the Huskies will be doing more team O versus team D than usual, trying to give some of the younger players even more time on the field. This also gives the veterans a chance to see things from the sidelines.

We’ll be back later with some QuickHits and tomorrow with other Huskies news.