Easiest way to pass 310-012 exam is to download examcollection from killexams

Move through our 310-012 test prep plus feel confident regarding the 310-012 test. You may pass your check at high signifies or your cashback. We today have aggregated the database of Solaris 8 System Administration II PDF Dumps through real test queries bank to end up being able to provide you a chance to get prepared and pass 310-012 check on the preliminary attempt. Simply set up our Exam Sim and get prepared. You are going to pass the particular 310-012 exam.

Exam Code: 310-012 Practice test 2022 by Killexams.com team
Solaris 8 System Administration II
SUN Administration test Questions
Killexams : SUN Administration test Questions - BingNews https://killexams.com/pass4sure/exam-detail/310-012 Search results Killexams : SUN Administration test Questions - BingNews https://killexams.com/pass4sure/exam-detail/310-012 https://killexams.com/exam_list/SUN Killexams : Do chemicals in sunscreens threaten aquatic life? No result found, try new keyword!Rising concern about possible environmental damage from the active ingredients in sunscreens could have ripple effects on public health if it causes people to use less of them. Tue, 09 Aug 2022 03:03:58 -0500 en-us text/html https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/do-chemicals-in-sunscreens-threaten-aquatic-life-a-new-report-says-a-thorough-assessment-is-urgently-needed-while-also-calling-sunscreens-essential-protection-against-skin-cancer/ar-AA10tLfJ Killexams : Do you know about the moon landing? Can you pass Sun Bingo’s lunar quiz?

DO you know much about the moon? Let’s put that knowledge to the test and see how many points you score on the Sun Bingo lunar quiz.

On 25th May 1961, President John F. Kennedy told Congress that they should pledge to put a man on the moon and return him safely to Earth before the end of the decade.

With less than six months left to complete that challenge, on 20th July 1969, NASA astronauts Neil Armstrong and Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin landed on the moon.

1

JOIN SUN BINGO NOW FOR A £50 BINGO BONUS AND 50 FREE SPINS*

Approximately 6.5 hours later, they became the first humans to walk on the lunar surface. 

Neil Armstrong went first and spoke the famous words: “That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind”.

You might have already known that. However, Sun Bingo is putting your moon knowledge to the test.

How many of these questions can you get right?

Moon quiz questions

  1. How long did it take to fly to the moon?
  2. What was the name of the Apollo mission that took Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin to the moon?
  3. Who was the third man on the mission?
  4. True or False: Buzz Aldrin’s mother’s maiden name was Moon?
  5. How many people have walked on the moon?
  6. What’s the name of the villain in Moonraker?
  7. Which country was the first to land on the far side of the moon?
  8. What cheeses does Wallace say the moon is like in A Grand Day Out?
  9. Which of these names is given to the full moon in November:
  • Buck Moon
  • Owl Moon
  • Beaver Moon
  • Wolf Moon

10. In days, how long does it take for the moon to orbit Earth?

BINGO DOESN'T COME FROM THE MOON - BUT YOU MIGHT BE SURPRISED WHERE THE GAME DOES COMES FROM

Answers

  1. Four days, six hours and 45 minutes.
  2. Apollo 11.
  3. Michael Collins. He never walked on the moon. Instead, he orbited the moon in Columbia, the command module.
  4. True!
  5. 12 men.
  6. Hugo Drax.
  7. China. The China National Space Administration’s Chang’e 4 was humanity’s first soft landing on the far side of the moon. It landed on 3rd January 2019.
  8. Wensleydale or Stilton.
  9. Beaver Moon.
  10. 27 days.  

DO YOU KNOW HOW TO PLAY SLINGO GAMES? FIND OUT HOW HERE

Sun Bingo’s moon games

Have you ever wondered how astronauts train for space travel?

Perhaps they start with simulations.

That just might include playing moon-themed games on Sun Bingo!

Get ready for blast off with our lunar slots:

  • Jinns Moon – Stake between 25p and £50 to win up to £100,000.
  • Chang’e Goddess of the Moon – Wild symbols are locked on the reels for 2 to 5 spins. If you spin in 5 Wild symbols, you win 1000x your stake.
  • Panther Moon – If 3 or more Scatter symbols spin in, you’ll get 15 free spins and a multiplier of 3x your stake.
  • Khonsu God of Moon – This 30-payline game has 4 jackpots to be won: the mini (20x your total bet), the minor (100x your total bet), the major (500x your total bet) and the grand (2000x your total bet).

FOR SOME OUT-OF-THIS-WORLD FUN - JOIN SUN BINGO TODAY

*Terms and Conditions: Until 30/09/2022. New customers only. Deposit & spend £10 on Bingo to receive £50 Bingo Bonus & 50 Free Spins (selected slots only £0.20 per spin). Free Spins must be accepted within 48 hours, winnings have 30x wagering which must be wagered within this time. Bingo Bonus has 4x Wagering, bonus must be accepted & wagered within 7 days. 1 new player offer only. Deposits made with Neteller/Skrill/PayPal are not valid for this promotion. 18+. T&Cs apply.

Commercial content notice: Taking one of the offers featured in this article may result in a payment to The Sun. 18+. T&Cs apply.

Remember to gamble responsibly

A responsible gambler is someone who:

  • Establishes time and monetary limits before playing
  • Only gambles with money they can afford to lose
  • Never chase their losses
  • Doesn’t gamble if they’re upset, angry or depressed
  • Gamcare – www.gamcare.org.uk
  • Gamble Aware – www.begambleaware.org

For help with a gambling problem, call the National Gambling Helpline on 0808 8020 133 or go to www.gamstop.co.uk to be excluded from all UK-regulated gambling websites. 

Tue, 19 Jul 2022 21:52:00 -0500 Katrina Vasey en-gb text/html https://www.thesun.co.uk/sun-bingo/19234904/moon-landing-sun-bingo-quiz-slots/
Killexams : Build your health & fitness knowledge

Studies have shown that the same active ingredients in sunscreens that protect people from cancer-causing ultraviolet rays can be toxic to a range of species in oceans, rivers and lakes. With both of these risks in mind, a new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine finds an urgent need for more information about whether these chemicals threaten aquatic life on a broad scale.

People are also reading…

The report calls on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to conduct a detailed review called an environmental risk assessment of the likelihood that exposure to one or more of these chemicals, called UV filters, may harm organisms in saltwater and freshwater ecosystems. The study recommends focusing on two types of settings – coral reefs in shallow waters near shore, and slow-moving freshwater bodies like ponds and marshes – that are heavily used for recreation and/or exposed to wastewater or urban runoff.

The study recognizes that sunscreen with a Sun Protection Factor (SPF) of 30 or higher is an effective defense against sunburn and skin cancer, and that making it harder to buy broad-spectrum sunscreen that people will actually use could harm public health. Accordingly, it calls for research examining how changes in sunscreen usage could affect human health. Two members of the study committee explain how their group balanced these concerns.

Many species are exposed to many stresses

Robert Richmond, Research Professor and Director, Kewalo Marine Laboratory, University of Hawaii at Manoa

Studies to date have provided compelling laboratory evidence that some UV filters can have toxic effects on aquatic species, including corals, anemones and zebrafish, that are exposed to the chemicals. These findings have raised concerns about sunscreens’ larger-scale impacts on biological communities and ecosystems.

But outcomes in the environment will differ depending on what compounds, ecosystems and local environmental conditions are involved. That’s especially true for coral reefs. The committee highlighted reefs because they are ecologically, economically and culturally valuable, and attract large numbers of tourists who use sunscreens.

Coral reefs are declining worldwide due to multiple human-induced disturbances. Some of these disturbances are global, such as ocean warming and acidification driven by climate change. Other stressors, such as coastal water quality, are more local.

Studying the effects of chemicals on corals and coral reefs is challenging because they are both complex systems. Reef-building corals are a combination of an animal, single-celled algae and rich populations of bacteria living and working together. Coral reefs are made up of thousands of interacting organisms.

Importantly, many stress responses in corals occur without causing outright death, but impair their health, growth, resilience and even ability to reproduce. Scientists need to know more about these responses to guide effective management responses and interventions.

Healthy coral reefs like this one in American Samoa support such diverse communities of fish and other organisms that they often are called the rainforests of the sea. Kevin Lino, NOAA/Flickr, CC BY

After in-depth reviews of the existing data, our study committee recommended that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency should undertake an ecological risk assessment of the 17 UV filters used in sunscreens sold in the U.S. Such a study would include a comparison of toxicity findings to relevant concentrations and exposure conditions.

For example, what happens to organisms exposed to these chemicals occasionally versus those exposed regularly, in calm bays or along open, wave-swept coasts? How do UV filters differ in whether they break down in water, or accumulate in sediments or the tissues of living organisms?

In our view, an ecological risk assessment would provide EPA and others the basis for sound and effective policy development. The sooner this happens and the results are applied to the regulatory process, the better for everyone who is affected, including future generations.

Lab results versus real-world conditions

Karen Glanz, George A. Weiss University Professor and Director, UPenn Prevention Research Center, University of Pennsylvania

The question of whether UV filters pose harm to the environment while helping to reduce skin damage and prevent skin cancer is a conundrum. It seemingly pits human and environmental health against each other head-to-head and asks policymakers, medical experts and the public to choose between them.

Humans need sunlight to live, but overexposure to the sun’s damaging rays – ultraviolet radiation – causes sunburn and wrinkles and is a risk factor for the development of skin cancers, including the most deadly type, melanoma. Routine use of broad-spectrum sunscreen with SPF 30+ when outdoors has been found to prevent skin damage and skin cancer. But sunscreens are most effective as part of a set of behaviors that also includes wearing hats and cover-up clothing and seeking shade.

Most people in the U.S. don’t practice these behaviors frequently or thoroughly enough. So it’s important to weigh very carefully the potential effects of restricting the choice of available sunscreens.

Some jurisdictions already restrict the sale of certain sunscreens because concerned advocates believe doing so will be good for the environment. In the U.S., they include Hawaii, the U.S Virgin Islands and the city of Key West, Florida. Our report doesn’t draw a definitive conclusion about whether these measures are scientifically justified or effective. Rather, it emphasizes analyzing whether and how they may affect human health as well as the environment.

The study draws attention to the challenge of understanding risks from UV filters to aquatic environments under various conditions, and in the context of overarching environmental stressors such as rising sea temperatures. It’s important to understand that for both environmental and human health issues, laboratory studies don’t always match what happens in the environment.

Studies of model systems such as bacteria and yeast, and organisms such as fish embryos and insect larvae, can yield findings that do not hold up in studies of humans. For both the environment and humans, it may not be possible or ethical to conduct true experiments that test the long-term effects of chemicals in UV filters.

Members of our committee wrestled to interpret the available evidence, and also with the gaps in that evidence. Ultimately we concluded that the science is not settled, but that there is much to build on to advance understanding of this issue. Our conclusions are not a win/lose outcome for either the environment or humans. Rather, they point to a need to think both broadly and strategically for the benefit of people and the planet.

The Conversation

Robert Richmond receives funding from the National Science Foundation, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Pew Environmental Group, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, the H.W. Hoover Foundation and the Hawaii Division of Aquatic Resources. He has been a Pew Fellow in Marine Conservation, and an Aldo Leopold Fellow in Environmental Leadership, and has served on the Board of Directors of the Palau International Coral Reef Center and as Science Advisor to the All Islands Committee of the US Coral Reef Task Force. He was a member of a previous study committee organized by the National Academies, on Interventions to Increase the Resilience of Coral Reefs.

Karen Glanz conducts research cancer prevention and control, theories of health behavior, and social and health policy. She has conducted descriptive, observational, methodological, intervention, and dissemination research in skin cancer prevention since 1993. She has worked on analyses of national surveys of UV exposure and sun protection; developed, analyzed and validated measures and methods of skin cancer prevention research; and led evidence reviews for skin cancer prevention. Her research has been funded by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and the Skin Cancer Foundation. Dr. Glanz served on the US Task Force on Community Preventive Services for 10 years and co-led reviews of the effectiveness of skin cancer prevention programs. She is an elected member of the National Academy of Medicine.

Tue, 09 Aug 2022 06:30:00 -0500 en text/html https://omaha.com/lifestyles/health-med-fit/do-chemicals-in-sunscreens-threaten-aquatic-life/article_533ca789-8f17-5694-ac15-26be2c7d8641.html
Killexams : Be the first to know

Studies have shown that the same active ingredients in sunscreens that protect people from cancer-causing ultraviolet rays can be toxic to a range of species in oceans, rivers and lakes. With both of these risks in mind, a new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine finds an urgent need for more information about whether these chemicals threaten aquatic life on a broad scale.

People are also reading…

The report calls on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to conduct a detailed review called an environmental risk assessment of the likelihood that exposure to one or more of these chemicals, called UV filters, may harm organisms in saltwater and freshwater ecosystems. The study recommends focusing on two types of settings – coral reefs in shallow waters near shore, and slow-moving freshwater bodies like ponds and marshes – that are heavily used for recreation and/or exposed to wastewater or urban runoff.

The study recognizes that sunscreen with a Sun Protection Factor (SPF) of 30 or higher is an effective defense against sunburn and skin cancer, and that making it harder to buy broad-spectrum sunscreen that people will actually use could harm public health. Accordingly, it calls for research examining how changes in sunscreen usage could affect human health. Two members of the study committee explain how their group balanced these concerns.

Many species are exposed to many stresses

Robert Richmond, Research Professor and Director, Kewalo Marine Laboratory, University of Hawaii at Manoa

Studies to date have provided compelling laboratory evidence that some UV filters can have toxic effects on aquatic species, including corals, anemones and zebrafish, that are exposed to the chemicals. These findings have raised concerns about sunscreens’ larger-scale impacts on biological communities and ecosystems.

But outcomes in the environment will differ depending on what compounds, ecosystems and local environmental conditions are involved. That’s especially true for coral reefs. The committee highlighted reefs because they are ecologically, economically and culturally valuable, and attract large numbers of tourists who use sunscreens.

Coral reefs are declining worldwide due to multiple human-induced disturbances. Some of these disturbances are global, such as ocean warming and acidification driven by climate change. Other stressors, such as coastal water quality, are more local.

Studying the effects of chemicals on corals and coral reefs is challenging because they are both complex systems. Reef-building corals are a combination of an animal, single-celled algae and rich populations of bacteria living and working together. Coral reefs are made up of thousands of interacting organisms.

Importantly, many stress responses in corals occur without causing outright death, but impair their health, growth, resilience and even ability to reproduce. Scientists need to know more about these responses to guide effective management responses and interventions.

Healthy coral reefs like this one in American Samoa support such diverse communities of fish and other organisms that they often are called the rainforests of the sea. Kevin Lino, NOAA/Flickr, CC BY

After in-depth reviews of the existing data, our study committee recommended that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency should undertake an ecological risk assessment of the 17 UV filters used in sunscreens sold in the U.S. Such a study would include a comparison of toxicity findings to relevant concentrations and exposure conditions.

For example, what happens to organisms exposed to these chemicals occasionally versus those exposed regularly, in calm bays or along open, wave-swept coasts? How do UV filters differ in whether they break down in water, or accumulate in sediments or the tissues of living organisms?

In our view, an ecological risk assessment would provide EPA and others the basis for sound and effective policy development. The sooner this happens and the results are applied to the regulatory process, the better for everyone who is affected, including future generations.

Lab results versus real-world conditions

Karen Glanz, George A. Weiss University Professor and Director, UPenn Prevention Research Center, University of Pennsylvania

The question of whether UV filters pose harm to the environment while helping to reduce skin damage and prevent skin cancer is a conundrum. It seemingly pits human and environmental health against each other head-to-head and asks policymakers, medical experts and the public to choose between them.

Humans need sunlight to live, but overexposure to the sun’s damaging rays – ultraviolet radiation – causes sunburn and wrinkles and is a risk factor for the development of skin cancers, including the most deadly type, melanoma. Routine use of broad-spectrum sunscreen with SPF 30+ when outdoors has been found to prevent skin damage and skin cancer. But sunscreens are most effective as part of a set of behaviors that also includes wearing hats and cover-up clothing and seeking shade.

Most people in the U.S. don’t practice these behaviors frequently or thoroughly enough. So it’s important to weigh very carefully the potential effects of restricting the choice of available sunscreens.

Some jurisdictions already restrict the sale of certain sunscreens because concerned advocates believe doing so will be good for the environment. In the U.S., they include Hawaii, the U.S Virgin Islands and the city of Key West, Florida. Our report doesn’t draw a definitive conclusion about whether these measures are scientifically justified or effective. Rather, it emphasizes analyzing whether and how they may affect human health as well as the environment.

The study draws attention to the challenge of understanding risks from UV filters to aquatic environments under various conditions, and in the context of overarching environmental stressors such as rising sea temperatures. It’s important to understand that for both environmental and human health issues, laboratory studies don’t always match what happens in the environment.

Studies of model systems such as bacteria and yeast, and organisms such as fish embryos and insect larvae, can yield findings that do not hold up in studies of humans. For both the environment and humans, it may not be possible or ethical to conduct true experiments that test the long-term effects of chemicals in UV filters.

Members of our committee wrestled to interpret the available evidence, and also with the gaps in that evidence. Ultimately we concluded that the science is not settled, but that there is much to build on to advance understanding of this issue. Our conclusions are not a win/lose outcome for either the environment or humans. Rather, they point to a need to think both broadly and strategically for the benefit of people and the planet.

The Conversation

Robert Richmond receives funding from the National Science Foundation, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Pew Environmental Group, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, the H.W. Hoover Foundation and the Hawaii Division of Aquatic Resources. He has been a Pew Fellow in Marine Conservation, and an Aldo Leopold Fellow in Environmental Leadership, and has served on the Board of Directors of the Palau International Coral Reef Center and as Science Advisor to the All Islands Committee of the US Coral Reef Task Force. He was a member of a previous study committee organized by the National Academies, on Interventions to Increase the Resilience of Coral Reefs.

Karen Glanz conducts research cancer prevention and control, theories of health behavior, and social and health policy. She has conducted descriptive, observational, methodological, intervention, and dissemination research in skin cancer prevention since 1993. She has worked on analyses of national surveys of UV exposure and sun protection; developed, analyzed and validated measures and methods of skin cancer prevention research; and led evidence reviews for skin cancer prevention. Her research has been funded by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and the Skin Cancer Foundation. Dr. Glanz served on the US Task Force on Community Preventive Services for 10 years and co-led reviews of the effectiveness of skin cancer prevention programs. She is an elected member of the National Academy of Medicine.

Tue, 09 Aug 2022 06:30:00 -0500 en text/html https://omaha.com/lifestyles/health-med-fit/article_533ca789-8f17-5694-ac15-26be2c7d8641.html Killexams : Five common questions about blood thinners

kitsapsun.com cannot provide a good user experience to your browser. To use this site and continue to benefit from our journalism and site features, please upgrade to the latest version of Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.

Thu, 21 Jul 2022 03:36:00 -0500 en-US text/html https://www.kitsapsun.com/story/life/2022/07/11/five-common-questions-blood-thinners/10033292002/ Killexams : For Superintendent Mike Swize, running Palm Springs Unified is all about kindness No result found, try new keyword!For Superintendent Mike Swize, running the Palm Springs Unified School District is all about kindness. Prior to becoming superintendent in July 2021, Swize had already been with the district for over ... Mon, 08 Aug 2022 03:30:07 -0500 en-us text/html https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/careers/for-superintendent-mike-swize-running-palm-springs-unified-is-all-about-kindness/ar-AA10rtqf Killexams : Urban farm proposal met with tough questions

Gondek said there’s been a general problem lately with administration reports causing confusion for councillors

Article content

A pitch to a council committee regarding an urban farm failed to germinate on Wednesday, but the project will be brought forward again before the end of the year.

Advertisement 2

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Article content

Sunspring Farms was pitching a three-way partnership between its business, the City of Calgary, and Fresh Routes to test a hydroponic operation in a shed adjacent to the city-owned Armour Block heritage building.

Council’s executive committee heard a report about the planned project, which could see $250,000 from the Council Innovation Fund going to support the program.

However, councillors joked that the matter felt more like an episode of the business pitch reality show “Dragon’s Den” as questions arose about Sunspring’s plans.

Councillors repeatedly asked to clarify if the money from the Council Innovation Fund would be a loan or a grant, and if it would be going to help a private business.

“It’s a great idea,” said Coun. Dan McLean. “You can hardly criticize something like this. It’s a great business model. But that’s different than a business plan.”

Advertisement 3

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Article content

Coun. Peter Demong said he felt uncomfortable with the idea that city money would be going to a private entity.

Mayor Jyoti Gondek tried to clarify the plan with her own line of questioning. She reminded administration that the idea, as she understood it, was to provide space for Sunspring to operate. The city would benefit by seeing if such a pilot project could be replicated across Calgary.

Speaking with reporters outside the council chambers, Gondek said the communication breakdown was due, in part, to the way the report was written.

“When we write reports that are not clear in their intent, we get into a strange world of going down rabbit holes, because members of committee interpret the record a certain way,” said the mayor.

Advertisement 4

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Article content

She said her understanding is that the $250,000 was to be used to create an integrated civic facility which would be an adaptive reuse of an existing city-owned asset.

Gondek said there’s been a general problem lately with administration reports causing confusion for councillors.

“Those reports need to be much more succinct,” said Gondek. “They need to get to the point they need to tell us what it is that we’re discussing, and sometimes that’s not happening.”

Coun. Jasmine Mian put forward a motion to refer the report back to administration for more work, specifically around explaining the intent of the city funding, and to spell out benefits for the city.

That motion was approved, and administration will report back before the end of the year.

“I feel that there’s something really good here,” said Mian. “I think we’re starting to get into the weeds and maybe it’s just the way that the presentation came forward.”

brthomas@postmedia.com
Twitter: @brodie_thomas

    Advertisement 1

    This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Comments

Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion and encourage all readers to share their views on our articles. Comments may take up to an hour for moderation before appearing on the site. We ask you to keep your comments relevant and respectful. We have enabled email notifications—you will now receive an email if you receive a reply to your comment, there is an update to a comment thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information and details on how to adjust your email settings.

Wed, 20 Jul 2022 14:41:00 -0500 en-CA text/html https://calgarysun.com/news/local-news/councillors-have-tough-questions-for-urban-farm-proposal/wcm/516c3ff9-2a1f-4b54-a992-8babf22cb196
Killexams : Herd has questions in inaugural Sun Belt season

Marshall has high expectations for itself as the Thundering Herd begins its football life in the Sun Belt Conference this fall, but it would appear as if the rest of the league’s coaches do not quite share those expectations for MU in 2022.

A quick look at the Sun Belt’s preseason coaches poll, released Monday, shows the Thundering Herd slotted into fourth place in the SBC’s East Division – behind defending division champ Appalachian State, perennial title threat Coastal Carolina and an allegedly up-and-coming Georgia State team.

If you are Marshall coach Charles Huff or the Herd, that should probably serve as a sizable chip on your shoulder this season – one MU will need in its new, deeper and (let’s just call it what it is) better conference. The coaches, however, were pretty close to getting this one right. Marshall has not done anything to prove itself above Appalachian State or Coastal as it enters the SBC, and while the Thundering Herd certainly has its fair share of talented players returning to the roster for the upcoming season, the fact remains that there are some significant questions that need to be answered at several very important positions.

Until we know those answers, the jury should remain out on just how good Marshall football can be in 2022.

What are those questions? Well, let’s start at quarterback. Charleston native and multiple-year starter Grant Wells is gone via a hop into the transfer portal to Virginia Tech. The QBs who remained on the roster have not done much to impress before or since Wells’ departure, and while there was a crop of incoming signal callers in Huff’s top-rated 2022 recruiting class those players are still just freshmen.

Huff and his staff realized the situation they had on their hands at quarterback and grabbed Texas Tech transfer Henry Colombi from the portal – which sounds good but let’s not get it twisted. Colombi was far from a superstar for the Red Raiders. He has the talent to do well at Marshall, but his resumé is a little thin.

Colombi started or saw significant playing time in six games last season – we’re going to omit TTU’s beatdown of Florida International because, well, everyone beat on FIU last season and Colombi only threw one pass in the game. In those six other games, the Red Raiders won just twice – against the latest version of bad Kansas football and in Morgantown against an underachieving WVU team. Colombi tossed a total of five touchdowns in those six games while also throwing five interceptions. He wasn’t losing games for Texas Tech, but he also certainly wasn’t taking over any games either.

All of that said, there is no reason it can’t or shouldn’t work for Colombi at Marshall with one sizable exception – the offensive line.

Marshall’s men up front went through some significant changes this offseason with longtime starters and program leaders Alex Mollette and Will Ulmer, along with Alex Salguero, gone via graduation, so Huff and the Thundering Herd plugged the holes by reaching into the transfer portal and elevating some of their own players who had been further down the depth chart. In the spring, that plan was very much still a work in progress. Injuries and inexperience shined a bright light on a problem area for Marshall. If the line can’t perform up to the task at hand, it doesn’t matter how well Colombi, Corey Gammage, Rasheen Ali or Khalan Laborn play. They will be at a disadvantage that will be extremely tough to overcome.

Now, of course, there is a flipside to those questions. The worst case is if Colombi and the offensive line don’t live up to expectations and the Thundering Herd struggles. If they do meet or exceed those expectations, however, the sky is the limit and a predicted preseason fourth-place finish in the East Division will be a distant memory as Marshall looks down from the top of the Sun Belt standings.

l l l

It is the end of July and if you’re like me, your brain is (almost) all football right now. The move to the Sun Belt has, however, drummed up some Marshall basketball news this summer with the release of the league’s schedule for the upcoming season.

If you haven’t seen it, all the favors the schedule makers did for MU with its first Sun Belt slate for football were not also made for hoops. In fact, quite the opposite.

Marshall basketball opens its Sun Belt portion of the schedule at home on Dec. 29 against App State followed by a New Year’s Eve game in Huntington against fellow SBC newcomer James Madison. The Herd goes on to play a pretty normal balance of home and away games through January, but February is where the schedule really does MU no favors.

MU plays four consecutive road games to open the shortest month on the calendar – at App State, at Louisiana, at Coastal Carolina and at Georgia State – before returning to the Cam Henderson Center to take on Georgia Southern (Feb. 16) and Troy (Feb. 18). Then it’s right back on the road to close out the regular season with games at James Madison and at Old Dominion.

Do the math – that’s six of eight games on the road in February for a program that has struggled to find much success away from home in latest seasons and went just 3-11 away from Huntington last season. Possible to overcome? Sure. An ideal way to start your tenure in a new conference? Far from it.

Tue, 26 Jul 2022 09:22:00 -0500 en text/html https://www.register-herald.com/sports/college_sports/herd-has-questions-in-inaugural-sun-belt-season/article_1d13959b-d39e-5beb-a8f5-e3695dbc4cbb.html
Killexams : NC’s Tillis works to end questions on vice president’s role in electoral count No result found, try new keyword!Those resources would go to the winner once they receive the majority of electoral votes in the November election and there isn’t further legal or administrative ... required to test the ... Fri, 29 Jul 2022 22:58:00 -0500 text/html https://www.heraldsun.com/news/politics-government/article263898297.html Killexams : White House’s menthol ban proposal fails equity test

Why do I have to complete a CAPTCHA?

Completing the CAPTCHA proves you are a human and gives you temporary access to the web property.

What can I do to prevent this in the future?

If you are on a personal connection, like at home, you can run an anti-virus scan on your device to make sure it is not infected with malware.

If you are at an office or shared network, you can ask the network administrator to run a scan across the network looking for misconfigured or infected devices.

Another way to prevent getting this page in the future is to use Privacy Pass. Check out the browser extension in the Chrome Web Store.

Sat, 23 Jul 2022 21:16:00 -0500 en-US text/html https://lasvegassun.com/news/2022/jul/24/white-houses-menthol-ban-proposal-fails-equity-tes/
310-012 exam dump and training guide direct download
Training Exams List