MORE THAN 200 TURN OUT FOR THE SWILLY SEALS 5K- WHERE DID YOU COME?

first_imgMore than 200 people turned up for the Swilly Seals Fundraising 5K in Letterkenny.It was a Rosses AC one and two with Ciaran McConnigle was first over the line and his club mate Kevin McGee second.Here is a full list of all the finishers. Place Race No. Time FirstName Surname Category Club1 941 16.48 Ciaran McConnigle SM Rosses A.C.2 824 17.27 Kevin McGee M40 Rosses A.C.3 820 17.34 Alan McGinley Walker Lifford A C 4 969 18.16 Rory Grant SM Individual5 995 18.17 Brian Crossan SM Individual6 821 18.18 Conor McGinley Walker Lifford A C7 829 18.28 Paul Dillon SM 24/7 Triathlon8 936 18.29 Paul Russell SM Individual 9 958 18.30 Shaunna McGeehan SW LAC10 968 18.30 Joe Gallagher M40 Milford A C11 854 18.35 Daniel Cullen SM LAC12 957 18.41 Gerard Devine SM Individual 13 997 18.47 Dan Friel SM LYIT14 937 18.50 Collie O’Donnell M40 LAC15 816 18.59 Karim Maguella Walker Swilly Seals16 866 19.07 Alan O’Mahoney SM 24/7 Triathlon17 932 19.08 AN Other SM Individual18 815 19.24 Ciaran O’Donnell M40 LAC19 901 19.32 Shaun McDaid SM Individual20 975 19.33 Michael Black SM 24/7 Triathlon21 864 19.41 Garvan Milligan SM Individual22 948 19.43 Michael Galvin M40 LAC23 949 19.56 Barry Mackey M50 LAC24 868 19.57 Gerard Callaghan SM 24/7 Triathlon25 947 20.11 Kirstie McIlwaine Girls 18 Swilly Seals26 946 20.13 Paul Lee M40 Swilly Seals27 863 20.16 Naoise Enright M40 LAC28 971 20.27 Mark McFadden M40 Individual29 774 20.27 Conor Kelly Walker Swilly Seals15 April 2015 Page 1 of 7Place Race No. Time FirstName Surname Category Club30 865 20.29 James Whoriskey SM Milford A C31 972 20.34 Chris Nee M40 Individual32 871 20.35 Gerard Dorrian M50 Milford A C33 828 20.37 Cathal Harley SM Individual34 991 20.41 Colette McElwaine W40 Milford A C35 845 20.47 Mark Bonner Walker Swilly Seals36 955 20.48 Ciaran MacIntyre SM Individual37 848 20.54 Liam Ferry SM Individual38 915 20.54 Karl Sweeney SM 24/7 Triathlon39 990 21.01 Brian Sweeney M40 24/7 Triathlon40 954 21.01 Noel Kilpatrick SM Milford A C41 782 21.10 Meave Callaghan SW LAC42 914 21.11 Terence Diver M40 Individual43 918 21.15 Paul Sweeney M40 LAC44 939 21.16 Clara Quigley SW 24/7 Triathlon45 768 21.26 Clodhna Dunne SW LAC46 781 21.27 John Hughes M50 LAC47 902 21.28 Dannhy McDaid SM Individual48 977 21.31 Marcus McClintock M40 24/7 Triathlon49 852 21.38 Jason Regan SM Individual50 776 21.44 Peter Kelly Walker Swilly Seals51 938 22.06 Lisa Dalton SW 24/7 Triathlon52 860 22.07 Rory Reynolds SM Individual53 923 22.24 Jason McDaid SM Individual54 923 22.24 Colm McNabole SM Individual55 999 22.25 Ciaran Liddy SM LAC56 974 22.28 Aoife McElwaine SW LAC57 830 22.32 Richard Raymond M60 LAC58 998 22.41 Noel McCormick M40 Individual59 908 22.53 Joseph Casey M40 Individual60 875 22.56 Eoghan Moore Walker Swilly Seals61 943 22.57 Frank McGettigan M50 Individual15 April 2015 Page 2 of 7Place Race No. Time FirstName Surname Category Club62 981 23.00 Eoin Fogarty M40 Individual63 879 23.01 Eoghan Gleeson SM Individual64 853 23.03 Maggie Shiels W40 LAC65 920 23.04 Marian Kerr SW LAC66 921 23.10 Eoghan O’Colla SM Individual67 950 23.24 Brian Duffy M40 Individual68 967 23.35 LorcaN Harvey Walker Swilly Seals69 882 23.37 Mark Trayers SM Individual70 983 23.40 Lisa Doherty SW Finn Valley A C71 803 23.46 Eoin Bonar Walker Swilly Seals72 956 23.55 Alison Stoddart SW Individual73 775 24.00 Eadaoin Kelly Walker Swilly Seals74 916 24.05 Patrick Brennan SM Individual75 770 24.06 Danny Hall Walker Swilly Seals76 900 24.07 Martina McDaid SW Individual77 862 24.11 Helena Crossan SW Individual78 877 24.12 Gary Price SM Individual79 993 24.12 Rachel Crossan SW Individual80 769 24.19 John Hall SM Swilly Seals81 992 24.20 Olivia Gillan SW Individual82 826 24.21 Philip McGee Walker Swilly Seals83 951 24.22 Maura O’Grady W50 Swilly Seals84 812 24.23 Tiegan Smith Walker Individual85 837 24.25 Mary Bond W50 Finn Valley A C86 811 24.34 Cliff Smith Walker Individual87 813 24.35 Rowan Smith Walker Individual88 783 24.35 Liam McLaughlin M50 Individual89 986 24.46 Harry Shields Walker Swilly Seals90 922 24.53 Alicia Quigley SW Foyle Valley91 940 24.53 Kevin Fisher SM Individual92 777 24.54 Brendan Giles SM Cranford A C93 899 24.58 Fiona McDaid SW Individual15 April 2015 Page 3 of 7Place Race No. Time FirstName Surname Category Club94 784 25.03 Mary T Gallagher SW Individual95 867 25.17 Kieron Kelly SM 24/7 Triathlon96 919 25.25 Filip Blazejcz Walker Swilly Seals97 773 25.30 Michelley Kelly W40 Swilly Seals98 973 25.34 Angus Hunter M40 Individual99 876 25.35 CharlieJoe McGinley M40 LAC100 924 25.55 Conor McGuigan SM Swilly Seals101 976 26.07 RoseMary Russell W40 Swilly Seals102 989 26.25 Pauline McDaid SW Individual103 933 26.30 Sam Faulhner SM Individual104 841 26.44 Ernest Cooke SM Individual105 804 26.48 Aimee Bonar Walker Swilly Seals106 917 26.49 John Crawford SM Individual107 907 26.59 Una McCotter W40 Milford A C108 903 27.01 Mary Bonnar W50 Individual109 934 27.11 Anthony Gildea M40 Individual110 985 27.14 Molly Shields Walker Swilly Seals111 961 27.35 Patrick Carrig SM Individual112 963 27.35 Darragh Saupson JM Individual113 785 28.23 Ciara Johnston SW Individual114 861 28.24 Jimmy Gildea SM LAC115 772 28.50 Stewart Friel SM Swilly Seals116 904 28.58 shauna higgins Walker Swilly Seals117 962 28.59 Roisin Gardiner SW Individual118 982 29.06 Orla Gallagher SW Individual119 869 29.10 Klaudia Rogalla SW 24/7 Triathlon120 823 29.14 Kerem Yilmaz Walker Individual121 953 29.21 Carmel Kavanagh SW Individual122 935 29.23 Liam Haughey M50 Individual123 911 29.35 Caoimhe Bond Walker Swilly Seals124 857 29.36 Stevie Shiels M40 LAC125 859 29.36 Conor Shiels Walker LAC15 April 2015 Page 4 of 7Place Race No. Time FirstName Surname Category Club126 980 29.39 Eilish Russell Walker Swilly Seals127 832 29.40 Georgia Keys Walker Swilly Seals128 994 30.07 Ann Marie McDevitt SW Individual129 966 30.49 Siofra Harvey Walker Swilly Seals130 786 30.52 Isabel Du plessis Walker Swilly Seals131 850 30.54 Senan Martin Walker Swilly Seals132 851 31.00 Ellie Martin Walker Swilly Seals133 849 31.00 Shirley Barrett SW Swilly Seals134 791 31.16 Isabel Mills SW Swilly Seals135 792 31.16 Mark Mills SM Swilly Seals136 771 31.39 Kitty hall SW Swilly Seals137 884 32.00 Christina Nelis SW Individual138 883 32.01 Elaine Callaghan SW Individual139 945 32.37 Ciara McDermott Walker Swilly Seals140 944 32.38 Pat McDermott SM Swilly Seals141 927 33.40 Sean Pascual Walker Swilly Seals142 888 33.48 Scott Wilson Walker Swilly Seals143 889 33.54 Sarah Wilson Walker Swilly Seals144 846 34.31 Darragh Bonner Walker Swilly Seals145 839 35.07 Erin Toye Walker Individual146 827 35.19 Katie McGee Walker Swilly Seals147 959 35.19 Kayleigh McGuinness Walker Swilly Seals148 825 35.19 Ita Mcgee Walker Swilly Seals149 844 35.34 Megan Bonner Walker Swilly Seals150 806 35.45 Ellie Maloney Walker Swilly Seals151 798 36.02 Chloe Tinney Walker Swilly Seals152 833 36.12 Jessica Keys Walker Swilly Seals153 996 36.16 Sarah Duffy Walker Swilly Seals154 979 36.18 Eamon Russell Walker Swilly Seals155 874 37.58 James Moore Walker Swilly Seals156 843 38.19 Caoimhe Harvey Walker Individual157 842 38.19 Deirdre Bonner Walker Swilly Seals15 April 2015 Page 5 of 7Place Race No. Time FirstName Surname Category Club158 965 38.27 Roisin Harvey Walker Swilly Seals159 817 38.28 Cara Nulty Walker Swilly Seals160 810 38.50 Lisa Black Walker Individual161 805 39.13 Emma Bonar Walker Swilly Seals162 906 39.18 Tobias Bagasala Walker Swilly Seals163 905 39.20 Richie Bagasala SM Swilly Seals164 925 39.21 Mario Pascual Walker Swilly Seals165 880 39.53 Deirdre Duffy Walker Swilly Seals166 790 39.54 Kira Mills Walker Swilly Seals167 881 39.55 Catriona Carr Walker Swilly Seals168 878 39.56 Marie Mailey Walker Individual169 873 39.57 Susan Doherty Walker Individual170 970 39.57 Ellen Russell Walker Swilly Seals171 978 39.58 Grainne Russell Walker Swilly Seals172 779 39.59 Alannah Ferry Walker Swilly Seals173 822 40.00 Ezgi Yilmaz Walker Individual174 912 40.01 Jack Bond Walker Swilly Seals175 814 40.02 Josie Gallagher M60 Individual176 838 40.12 Anthony Boyle Walker Individual177 836 40.13 Paul Gillespie Walker Swilly Seals178 942 40.20 Paula Gready Walker Individual179 802 40.20 Jackie Bonar Walker Swilly Seals180 855 41.05 Chloe Shiels Walker LAC181 855 41.05 Alison Johnston Walker Individual182 928 41.14 Arlene Lunney Walker Individual183 984 41.18 Lucy Shields Walker Swilly Seals184 987 41.19 Denis Shields M40 24/7 Triathlon185 835 41.20 Philip Gillespie Walker Swilly Seals186 778 42.21 Cora Ferry Walker Swilly Seals187 885 42.21 Sinead O’Kane Walker Swilly Seals188 780 42.21 Amy O’Donnell Walker Swilly Seals189 964 43.38 Toni Harvey Walker Swilly Seals15 April 2015 Page 6 of 7Place Race No. Time FirstName Surname Category Club190 858 43.41 Louise Cullen Walker Individual191 809 45.25 Ellie McCarry Walker Individual192 808 45.25 Aine Doherty Walker Individual193 801 48.21 Sine Ohaodha Walker Swilly Seals194 913 48.22 Paddy Bond Walker Swilly Seals195 788 48.26 Leon Halligan Walker Swilly Seals196 834 48.26 Jack Keys Walker Swilly Seals197 800 48.37 Maarife Ohaodha Walker Swilly Seals198 818 49.08 Brooke McCauley Walker Swilly Seals199 910 49.08 Joseph Bond Walker Swilly Seals200 926 49.12 Nympha Pascual Walker Swilly Seals201 930 49.12 Tina Maniti Walker Individual202 909 49.34 Paddy Bond Walker Swilly Seals203 872 49.48 Clare Duffy Walker Individual204 870 49.48 Brid Ronaghan Walker Individual205 787 50.35 Linda Halligan Walker Swilly Seals206 789 50.35 Tara Gildea SW Swilly Seals207 799 51.30 Justin Baylon Walker Swilly Seals208 952 51.30 Aoibheann O’Grady Walker Swilly Seals209 831 51.30 Sarah Bundschu Walker Individual210 847 52.38 Kathleen McDaID Walker Individual211 819 52.38 Phil Dalton Walker Swilly Seals212 931 55.38 Princess Maniti Walker Individual213 929 55.39 Mona Esguera Walker IndividualTotal Runners: 213MORE THAN 200 TURN OUT FOR THE SWILLY SEALS 5K- WHERE DID YOU COME? was last modified: April 15th, 2015 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:5kletterkennySwilly Sealslast_img read more

Ottawa very relieved after 2 Canadian women abducted in Ghana rescued

first_imgOTTAWA — Global Affairs Canada says the federal government is “very relieved” that two Canadian women who were abducted in Ghana earlier this month have been rescued.A spokesman for the department says consular officials are providing assistance to the two women and their families after what he called their “harrowing experiences.”Guillaume Berube says no further details will be released.Ghana’s information ministry says national security operatives completed the rescue mission in the country’s south-central Ashanti region early Wednesday.The ministry has sought to assure travellers that the West African nation remains safe despite a recent uptick in kidnappings for ransom. The country has been considered one of the safest in the region for foreign travellers.The country’s national police force said last Thursday that the two Canadian women, aged 19 and 20, were volunteers with a non-governmental organization. The Associated Presslast_img read more

Nanoball Batteries Could Charge Electric Cars in 5 Minutes

first_img This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only. Citation: Nanoball Batteries Could Charge Electric Cars in 5 Minutes (2009, March 12) retrieved 18 August 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2009-03-nanoball-batteries-electric-cars-minutes.html A sample of the new battery material that could allow quick charging of portable devices. Image credit: Donna Coveney. Explore further Byoungwoo Kang and Gerbrand Ceder of MIT have improved the design of a “nanoball battery,” which has a cathode that is composed of nanosized balls of lithium iron phosphate. As the battery charges, the nanoballs release lithium ions that travel across an electrolyte to the anode. As the battery discharges, the opposite occurs, and the lithium ions are reabsorbed by the nanoballs in the cathode. The key to the nanoball battery’s quick charge time is the speed at which the lithium iron phosphate nanoballs in the cathode can release and absorb lithium ions. In conventional lithium ion batteries, detaching the ions from the normal cathode takes a relatively long time. By coating each nanoball with a thin layer of lithium phosphate, Kang and Ceder showed that they could detach the lithium ions from the nanoballs even quicker than previous studies have found. To demonstrate the technology, the researchers fabricated a small battery that could be fully charged or discharged in 10 to 20 seconds, which would otherwise have taken six minutes. The scientists’ tests showed that the new material degrades less than other battery materials after repeated charges and discharges. This means that the battery could be made with less material, which could possibly lead to smaller, lighter batteries.More information: Byoungwoo Kang and Gerbrand Ceder. “Battery materials for ultrafast charging and discharging.” Nature 458, 190-193 (12 March 2009), doi:10.1038/nature07853.© 2009 PhysOrg.com New battery material could lead to rapid recharging of many devices (PhysOrg.com) — Researchers at MIT have designed a new battery that can recharge devices about 100 times faster than conventional lithium ion batteries. The design could lead to electric car batteries that charge in 5 minutes (compared with 8 hours in today’s electric cars) and cell phone batteries that charge in just 10 seconds.last_img read more

We are not going to withdraw from the future says Microsofts Brad

first_imgThe Pentagon has been trying to get a hold of AI and related technologies from tech giants. Google employees had quit over it, Microsoft employees had asked the company to withdraw from the JEDI project. Last Friday, Microsoft President Brad Smith wrote about Microsoft and the US Military and the company’s visions in this area. Amazon, Microsoft, IBM, and Oracle are the companies who have bid for the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure (JEDI) project. JEDI is a department wide cloud computing infrastructure that will give the Pentagon access to weapons systems enhanced with artificial intelligence and cloud computing. Microsoft believes in defending USA “We are not going to withdraw from the future, in the most positive way possible, we are going to work to help shape it.” said Brad Smith, President at Microsoft indicating that Microsoft intends to provide their technology to the Pentagon. Microsoft did not shy away from bidding in the Pentagon’s JEDI project. This in contrast to Google, which opted out of the same program earlier this month citing ethical concerns. Smith expressed Microsoft’s intent towards providing AI and related technologies to the US defense department saying, “we want the people who defend USA to have access to the nation’s best technology, including from Microsoft”. Smith stated that Microsoft’s work in this area is based on three convictions: Microsoft believes in the strong defense of USA and wants the defenders to have access to USA’s best technology, this includes Microsoft They want to use their ‘knowledge and voice’ to address ethical AI issues via the nation’s ‘civic and democratic processes’. They are giving their employees to opt out of work on these projects given that as a global company they consist of employees from different countries. Smith shared that Microsoft has had a long standing history with the US Department of Defense (DOD). Their tech has been used throughout the US military from the front office to field operations. This includes bases, ships, aircraft and training facilities. Amazon shares Microsoft’s visions Amazon too shares these visions with Microsoft in empowering US law and defense institutions with the latest technology. Amazon already provides cloud services to power the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Amazon CEO, Jeff Bezos said: “If big tech companies are going to turn their back on the Department of Defense, this country is going to be in trouble.” Amazon also provides the US law enforcement with their facial recognition technology called Rekognition. This has been a bone of contention for not just civil rights groups but also for some Amazon’s employees. Rekognition will help in identifying and incarcerating undesirable people. But it does not really work with accuracy. In a study by ACLU, Rekognition identified 28 people from the US congress incorrectly. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has now filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request which demands the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to disclose how DHS and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) use Rekognition for law enforcement and immigration checks. Google’s rationale for withdrawing from the JEDI project Last week, in an interview with the Fox Network, Oracle founder Larry Ellison stated that it was shocking how Google viewed this matter. Google withdrew from the JEDI project following strong backlash from many of its employees. In the official statement, they have stated the reason for dropping out of the JEDI contract bidding as an ethical value misalignment and also that they don’t fully have all necessary clearance to work on Government projects.’ However, Google is open to launching a customized search engine in China that complies with China’s rules of censorship including potential to surveil Chinese citizens. Should AI be used in weapons? This question is the at the heart of the contentious topic of the tech industry working with the military. It is a serious topic that has been debated over the years by educated scientists and experienced leaders. Elon Musk, researchers from DeepMind and other companies even pledged to not build lethal AI. Personally, I side with the researchers and believe AI should be used exclusively for the benefit of mankind, to enhance human lives and solve problems that would prosper people’s lives. And not against each other in a race to build weapons or to become a superpower. But then again what would I know? Leading nations are in an AI arms race as we speak, with sophisticated national AI plans and agendas. For more details on Microsoft’s interest in working with the US Military visit the Microsoft website. Read next ‘Employees of Microsoft’ ask Microsoft not to bid on US Military’s Project JEDI in an open letter Google employees quit over company’s continued Artificial Intelligence ties with the Pentagon Oracle’s bid protest against U.S Defence Department’s(Pentagon) $10 billion cloud contractlast_img read more