Auto news on Youtube Nov 30 2017

Baseball legend Joe Morgan makes passionate plea to Hall of Fame voters

Baseball legend and Baseball Hall of Fame vice chairman Joe Morgan released a passionate letter to voters in an effort to keep steroid users out of the Hall of Fame on Tuesday.

Prior to Morgan's letter, the Hall of Fame had never issued a clear statement about how voters should address the steroid issue.

Esteemed baseball writer Joe Posnanski shared Morgan's letter on his blog and the Hall of Fame sent it to a wider audience.

In the letter, Morgan acknowledged that while he couldn't speak for every person, many members enshrined in the Hall of Fame feel that steroid users have no place in Cooperstown.

The Baseball Writers' Association of America announced its annual Hall of Fame ballot on Monday.

Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds both received votes on more than 50 percent of the ballots last year.

A player must receive votes on 75 percent of ballots for induction.

"We hope the day never comes when known steroid users are voted into the Hall of Fame," Morgan wrote.

"They cheated. Steroid users don't belong here.

"Players who failed drug tests, admitted using steroids, or were identified as users in Major League Baseball's Investigation into steroid abuse, known as the Mitchell Report, should not get in.

Clemens, Bonds and Gary Sheffield are among the players eligible for the Hall of Fame mentioned in the Mitchell Report.

Of the three, only Sheffield has admitted using steroids. Clemens was acquitted on charges of perjury after testifying to Congress that he never used PEDs.

Bonds was convicted of obstruction of justice into an investigation of his alleged steroid use, a trial based on federal charges of perjury against Bonds ended in a mistrial.

Manny Ramirez and Sammy Sosa are two other players who wouldn't get into baseball's most prestigious clubhouse under Morgans steroid ban.

Ramirez retired in 2011 after failing two drug tests in a span of three years.

He is a 12-time All-Star, a World Series champion, and a member of baseball's 500-home run club.

Sosa, part of the 600-home run club, reportedly failed one of the first drug tests administered to players in 2003.

Morgans letter comes at an odd time for Hall of Fame. Recent inductees Mike Piazza and Jeff Bagwell were subject of longstanding performance-enhancing drug rumors.

Meanwhile, Jose Canseco wrote in his book, "Juiced," that he personally injected former Texas Rangers teammate Ivan Rodriguez with steroids.

Rodriguez was a first-ballot Hall of Famer last year after receiving 75 percent of the vote.

When asked about Morgan's letter, Jon Shestakovsky, the Hall of Fame's vice president of communications and education, told ESPN on Tuesday, "This is a Hall of Fame initiative.

Morgan was the National League MVP in 1975 and 1976, helping the Cincinnati Reds win back-to-back World Series championships in those years.

He finished his career with 268 home runs, 1,133 RBIs, 1,650 runs scored and 689 stolen bases.

What do you think? Scroll down to comment below.

For more infomation >> Baseball legend Joe Morgan makes passionate plea to Hall of Fame voters - Duration: 5:04.

-------------------------------------------

Take an alternative look at Ruby Riot, Sarah Logan & Liv Morgan's volatile debut on SmackDown LIVE - Duration: 1:31.

[MUSIC]

For more infomation >> Take an alternative look at Ruby Riot, Sarah Logan & Liv Morgan's volatile debut on SmackDown LIVE - Duration: 1:31.

-------------------------------------------

'You're a Dick' Piers Morgan wakes GMB fans up with John Barrowman interview - Duration: 2:48.

'You're a Dick' Piers Morgan wakes GMB fans up with John Barrowman interview

John Barrowman joined the sofa to discuss how hes moved on from working in science-fiction shows to panto performances.

But Good Morning Britain presenter Piers Morgan couldnt help himself from making a crude innuendo at his guests expense.

Piers blasted: You are a Dick. Surprisingly the 50-year-old actor – whos starred in the likes of Torchwood and Doctor Who – quickly grasped just what Piers was getting at….

Yes, replied John as he burst into laughter.

He added:In Manchester this season… you said it, I didnt. Telly babe Susanna Reid interrupted: This is the second time youve said that. Piers then explained what he meant: Well youre playing Dick Whittington in Manchester..

"Youre a Dick" Piers Morgan Correct, confirmed John.

John soon stopped himself from laughing though and discussed his upcoming play.

I think panto is the best way of introducing theatre to children and its fun, he continued.

The West End performer will star in the title role of the hero Dick starting next month alongside the legendary double act The Krankies.

But this isnt the first time this month that Piers has branded a guest a Dick, as just last week he made a sly dig at dating guru Richard La Ruina.

Todays show proved to be full of double entendres as Piers asked Susanna what shed do for a man if she were married… Never a dull moment on breakfast telly.

Catch Good Morning Britain weekdays from 6am on ITV.

For more infomation >> 'You're a Dick' Piers Morgan wakes GMB fans up with John Barrowman interview - Duration: 2:48.

-------------------------------------------

UQx LEARN034 Morgan Stebbings Interview - Duration: 6:38.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

MORGAN STEBBINGS: I think the key thing that philosophy deals with or allows

for deep learning is the concept of instead of it being established

knowledge that we're trying to transfer onto our students,

it's more of an ability or an opportunity for them to inquire.

So there's no right or wrong.

There's no established response that we are trying to get out of our students.

And in doing so, we teach them how to question and rely on their reason,

so what their reasons are for whatever topic we're talking about.

So it moves away from this kind of rote learning

that we all know is not really working.

It's never really worked - memorization -

because that's just acquisition of knowledge.

What we want you to do is apply that knowledge, use it.

When you don't actually use it, you're not actually learning anything.

So and I think there's that real shift between learning and thinking.

Philosophy is always tied to these deep questions.

And so I think that when we encourage them to question things,

we give them that ability to really focus on the deeper level.

What is at the heart of what we're talking about?

With philosophy, because there's no right or wrong,

we want the students to pause and take a minute

and figure out if what another student has just responded with towards

them maybe alters what they had originally thought.

You will often see in a philosophical discussion

that students will hold very strongly to their beliefs.

And I think that's a human nature thing is we value our beliefs.

And if we have to change our beliefs, then we've lost in some way.

But with the philosophy classroom, we specifically state to them that,

and we encourage this idea of being able to change your opinions

and that it's a good thing if you do because sometimes,

through this art of communication and this community of inquiry,

we actually highlight on something that we might have realized

was a generalization that we've made or an assumption that we've made.

Or maybe we've created a stereotype, or we didn't look at something

from a particular point of view.

So in doing all of that, sometimes students

will change their points of view.

Or maybe they'll adjust what they were thinking.

Or they will respond with a passionate example

of what they originally had thought.

When you question students, you can get silence.

You can get passion.

You can get a change of opinion.

So there's many different ways in which they

respond to these kind of deep or these philosophical questions.

The effect that philosophical inquiry gives to reasoning and problem solving

is pretty fundamental because at the heart of philosophy

is being able to be reasonable or reason able.

You need to back up whatever you are communicating

in a community of inquiry.

You need to back it up with your justifications.

And those are your reasons for why you believe or think or have

a thought or an idea.

So in terms of their reasoning, it really

strengthens their ability to reason because it gives them

a foundation, or a safe environment, to be

able to exercise that reasoning skill.

And that's something that's central to all of philosophy.

You can never - in order to do philosophy,

you must take an opinion that you have, and you

must provide a reason for having it.

If you provide no reason, then you're not

engaging in a philosophical discussion.

You can think about this idea of fast and slow thinking.

And Daniel Kahneman was the one who kind of wrote a book about it.

And this idea of fast thinking is our heuristics, or our algorithms,

that we program.

And that's the way we approach a lot of things.

And it allows us to go through life really, really quickly.

The slow thinking is the logical.

It's the calculated.

It's what takes time.

And it's sometimes more infrequent than the other.

And that's what philosophy does.

Philosophy allows students the practice to be

able to engage in slow thinking, the logical side of this thinking

perspective.

And when they do it in the classroom, our classroom, they internalize it.

And they start taking it out, and they apply it to their other subjects

and beyond school.

They apply to other aspects of their lives.

I mean, philosophical inquiry has had positive effects on behaviors

and being able to ask or make good decisions.

I think one of the most important things about philosophical inquiry

is the fact that through the process, you're enabling students.

You're not shaping them in something that you want them to turn into.

You're giving them the opportunity to explore their own thinking

and their own understanding.

And it leads them to be in control.

And that's something that is really powerful.

If a student is in control of their thinking

or in control of what they're learning, then they'll

have a greater investment in it.

And they'll want to carry it out with more sincerity.

Because we don't expect this answer or that answer or a particular response,

it's about the process and how we arrive at our understanding,

we give students the opportunity to figure out their own way to that point.

So we give them the ability to shape their own learning in a sense.