Jeffersonism: Judeo-Christian language in the foundation of the United States and the Contentious Role of the Christmas Tree.
For many years the United States has battled out and debated the role Christianity plays in the United States governance and education of the populous. The battle carries over to legal battles about evolution, abortion, Ten Commandments in court room, and whether Islam has an equal place in our history of the United States. It has been a battle with constant shifting lines and alliances. One particular legal battle that has a political paradox to it is the battle of the Christmas tree. What is interesting about the Christmas tree is that in some cases it is considered a religious symbol similar to a nativity scene, in other cases it is considered secular symbol and is deemed legal to display on public grounds. What is so interesting about the Christmas tree is that it’s origins are completely unchristian.
“But rather, has been adopted from the early pagan festival, Dies Natalis Solis Invictus, a/k/a Sol Invictus, which celebrated the victory of light over darkness and the lengthening of the sun’s rays at the winter solstice. The pagan festival of Saturnalia was also practiced on the Winter Solstice through December 25 and shared many of the same traditions of the Roman Solis Invictus and included tree worship of the evergreen, merrymaking and gift-giving-all pagan traditions grafted onto the celebration of Christ’s birth by the early church and carried forward through today.”
“The modern Christmas tree is frequently traced to the symbolism of trees in pre-Christian winter rites, wherein Viking and Saxon worshiped trees. The story of Saint Boniface cutting down Donar's Oak illustrates the pagan practices in 8th century among the Germans.”
The extreme irony of the Christmas tree is that many people in the early church tried to ban Christmas and decorating of trees for holidays.
“The second-century theologian Tertullian condemned those Christians who celebrated the winter festivals, or decorated their houses with laurel boughs in honor of the emperor:"Let them over whom the fires of hell are imminent, affix to their posts, laurels doomed presently to burn: to them the testimonies of darkness and the omens of their penalties are suitable. You are a light of the world, and a tree ever green. If you have renounced temples, make not your own gate a temple."”
When most people think of the church banning Christmas, they think of bickering Catholic Church officials in the Roman Empire deciding how to rule their people and establish domain. It is surprising to many people that Christmas was ban as late 1681 in Boston.
"Shocking as it sounds, followers of Jesus Christ in both America and England helped pass laws making it illegal to observe Christmas, believing it was an insult to God to honor a day associated with ancient paganism," according to "Shocked by the Bible". Most Americans today are unaware that Christmas was banned in Boston from 1659 to 1681."
Though the Christmas tree debate will continue to play a role in the greater debate in America’s future. There can be no other debate more contentious in the current political environment over the statement, “Under God” in the Pledge of alliance. For one, the Pledge of Alliance has a very unusual history. For starters, when was “Under God” added to the Pledge of Alliance?
“In 1953, Louis Rabaut, a democrat from Michigan sponsored a resolution to add the words "under God" to the Pledge. It failed. But by then, the decision was up to President Dwight D. Eisenhower. Recently baptized as a Presbyterian, he heard a sermon, arguing the words "under God" from Lincoln's speech set the United States apart from others as a nation. At the time, the Cold War was gaining steam, and Eisenhower was fighting communism across the globe.”
Irony of the decision to add,”Under God” to the Pledge allegations is that it was added to confront the godless communism that was spreading around the world in 1953. What some people today take for granted is that religion is often the subject of mass repression and state control in a socialist state at that time in history. The “Under God” was sort of a way of saying that we will protect people’s right to practice their faith. Though offensive to some secular atheists, “under god” could mean something more all-inclusive for all people, which we will discuss below. It could represent a Jewish God, Christian God, Hindu God, Muslim God, or Native American God or even have more loose interpretations. Obviously, it can mean a Christian god, and for most people in the USA it probably means that. But it can also mean:
“the incorporeal divine Principle ruling over all as eternal Spirit : infinite Mind, a person or thing of supreme value”
In the west the debate of religion symbols or words in public offices and language is often reduced to a debate by a Christian Majority versus Secular Atheists. However, during the cold war Communism was trying to eliminate Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, and indigenous religions. In many countries repression government over site led to millions of people forced into work camps for reeducation and often torture. Putting “Under God” in the Pledge of allegiance was probably more kin to the US government saying they protect the religious freedoms of their people. If we are going to split hairs; think about how wonderful Protestants and Catholics get along in the USA. Even though taken for granted in the USA, those religious splits often drew national boundaries in Europe through civil wars, repression, and massive wars throughout history too similar to the Islam; Sunni and Shia split. What is more paradoxical then adding the words, “Under God” to the Pledge Allegiance is the origin of the Pledge Allegiance itself; a topic too large for this editorial piece today.
So what were the views of God in early United States history by the presidents of the United States? Most of the presidents were affiliated to one Christian Religion or another. Many of the common religions have been Baptist, Methodists, Presbyterians, Catholic, and Episcopalian. Many people would argue about the authenticity and sincerity of the politician’s real beliefs or whether their affiliation with church was only a means to garnish support from the voting population. Even though the country was fundamentally a Christian State many of the presidents had a more diverse view of the divine. One of those presidents was Thomas Jefferson. President Thomas Jefferson was sometimes viewed as Unitarian, Epicurean and a Deist. His views on Jesus are seen as follows:
"Most deists denied the Christian concepts of miracles and the Trinity. Though he had a lifelong esteem for Jesus' moral teachings, Jefferson did not believe in miracles, nor in the divinity of Jesus. In a letter to deRieux in 1788, he declined a request to act as a godfather, saying he had been unable to accept the doctrine of the Trinity "from a very early part of my life." In an 1820 letter to his close friend William Short, Jefferson stated, "it is not to be understood that I am with him [Jesus] in all his doctrines. I am a Materialist; he takes the side of Spiritualism; he preaches the efficacy of repentance toward forgiveness of sin; I require a counterpoise of good works to redeem it." In 1824, four years later, Jefferson had changed on his view of the "materialism" of Jesus, clarifying then that "... the founder of our religion, was unquestionably a materialist as to man."
"In summary, then, Jefferson was a deist because he believed in one God, in divine providence, in the divine moral law, and in rewards and punishments after death; but did not believe in supernatural revelation. He was a Christian deist because he saw Christianity as the highest expression of natural religion and Jesus as an incomparably great moral teacher. He was not an orthodox Christian because he rejected, among other things, the doctrines that Jesus was the promised Messiah and the incarnate Son of God. Jefferson's religion is fairly typical of the American form of deism in his day."
"He considered the teachings of Jesus as having "the most sublime and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man," yet he held that the pure teachings of Jesus appeared to have been appropriated by some of Jesus' early followers, resulting in a Bible that contained both "diamonds" of wisdom and the "dung" of ancient political agendas."
Jefferson used certain passages of the New Testament to compose The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth (the "Jefferson Bible"), which excluded any miracles by Jesus and stressed his moral message. Though he often expressed his opposition to many practices of the clergy, and to many specific popular Christian doctrines of his day, Jefferson repeatedly expressed his admiration for Jesus as a moral teacher, and consistently referred to himself as a Christian (though following his own unique type of Christianity) throughout his life. Jefferson opposed Calvinism, Trinitarianism, and what he identified as Platonic elements in Christianity. In private letters Jefferson also described himself as subscribing to other certain philosophies, in addition to being a Christian. In these letters he described himself as also being an "Epicurean" (1819), a "19th century materialist" (1820), a "Unitarian by myself" (1825), and "a sect by myself" (1819). Upon the disestablishment of religion in Connecticut, he wrote to John Adams: "I join you, therefore, in sincere congratulations that this den of the priesthood is at length broken up, and that a Protestant Popedom is no longer to disgrace the American history and character."
Though if such a man, as Thomas Jefferson, used language such as “Nature’s God” in the Declaration of Independence, what did he mean:
Phrases such as "Nature's God", which Jefferson used in the Declaration of Independence, are typical of Deism, although they were also used at the time by non-Deist thinkers, such as Francis Hutcheson. In addition, it was part of Roman thinking about natural law, and Jefferson was influenced by reading Cicero on this topic.
Was Thomas Jefferson alone in his belief? Five of the US presidents were Unitarians including John Adams, John Quincy Adams, Filmore, and Taft. Unitarians believe Jesus was a person that was inspired by god and not a deity.
"Unitarianism (from Latin unitas "unity, oneness", from unus "one") is a Christian theological movement named for its belief that the God in Christianity is one person, as opposed to the Trinity (tri- from Latin tres "three") which defines God as three persons in one being; the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Unitarian Christians, therefore, believe that Jesus was inspired by God in his moral teachings, and he is a savior, but he was not a deity or God incarnate. Unitarianism does not constitute one single Christian denomination, but rather refers to a collection of both extant and extinct Christian groups, whether historically related to each other or not, which share a common theological concept of the oneness nature of God.
While the uncompromising theological monotheism at the heart of Christian Unitarianism distinguishes it from the major Christian denominations which subscribe to Trinitarian theology, Christian Unitarianism is analogous to the more austere monotheistic understandings of God in Judaism.
Unitarianism is also known for the rejection of several other Western Christian doctrines, including the doctrines of original sin, predestination, and the infallibility of the Bible. Unitarians in previous centuries accepted the doctrine of punishment in an eternal hell, but few do today."
What were the crafters of the constitution view about religion in the US? The Constitution itself doesn't even mention god accept in the form of addressing it as a religion in the first amendment, "The first amendment to the US Constitution states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
This is how Thomas Jefferson might have viewed how the Constitution would play out in political world,
Jefferson held that "acknowledging and adoring an overruling providence" (as in his First Inaugural Address) was important and in his second inaugural address, expressed the need to gain "the favor of that Being in whose hands we are, who led our fathers, as Israel of old." Still, together with James Madison, Jefferson carried on a long and successful campaign against state financial support of churches in Virginia. Also, it is Jefferson who coined the phrase "wall of separation between church and state" in his 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptistsof Connecticut. During his 1800 campaign for the presidency, Jefferson even had to contend with critics who argued that he was unfit to hold office because of their discomfort with his "unorthodox" religious beliefs.
Even then Jefferson was not without his critics,
During the 1800 presidential campaign, the New England Palladium wrote, "Should the infidel Jefferson be elected to the Presidency, the seal of death is that moment set on our holy religion, our churches will be prostrated, and some infamous 'prostitute', under the title of goddess of reason, will preside in the sanctuaries now devoted to the worship of the most High." Federalists attacked Jefferson as a "howling atheist" and infidel, claiming that his attraction to the religious and political extremism of the French Revolution disqualified him from public office. At that time, calling a person an infidel could mean a number of things, including that they did not believe in God. It was an accusation commonly levelled at Deists, although they believe in a deity. It was also directed at those thought to be harming the Christian faith in which they were raised.
Even though the Constitution has no mention of God; God is mentioned as a creator in the Declaration of independence, but is not wholly understood what it means:"
"The genius of the Declaration is the inclusive way the divine is given expression. The appellations of God are generic. Adherents of traditional theistic sects can read the words “Nature’s God,” “Creator,” and “Supreme Judge,” and understand them to mean the god they worship. The claims made on numerous Christian websites attest to this. Yet opponents of dogma read those same words and see an embracive, non-sectarian concept of divinity. This is no small testimony to the wisdom and foresight of the Founding Fathers. All Americans could support the Revolution and independence. All can regard their rights as unalienable, their liberty as inviolable."
On August 6, 1945 the first nuclear bomb was dropped on a city known as Hiroshima. Three days later a second atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki. Both bombs killed roughly 126,000-226,000 people and possibly more. These bombs changed the way superpowers confront each other and the nature of how wars are fought forever.
But what if history took a different turn. What if Germany invaded Russia one month sooner. What if Hitler did not listen to Herman Goring, and Germany did not lose 250,000 troops at Stalingrad and possibly won the battle of Kursk. What if Germany did not wait until 1943 to go into Full War Production, and they had adequate supplies to defeat Russia from 1941-1942. Or possibly Italy successfully beat Britain in Egypt and conquered all of North Africa. It would have been a truly interesting turn of fate, Germany would now have unlimited amounts of oil to build their war machine and would no longer have any shortages of equipment, supplies, Oil, and technology to defeat Britain or at least consolidate their power in Europe. Many of these ideas are not far fetched either, several countries in 1941 were already moving toward full war production, and Germany waited until 1943. And Russia was hanging by a thread:
"For example, the USSR was very dependent on rail transportation, but the war practically ended rail equipment production. Just 446 locomotives were produced during the war, with only 92 of those being built between 1942 and 1945. In total, 92.7% of the wartime production of railroad equipment by the USSR was supplied by Lend-Lease, including 1,911 locomotives and 11,225 railcars which augmented the existing prewar stocks of at least 20,000 locomotives and half a million railcars. Furthermore, much of the logistical assistance of the Soviet military was provided by hundreds of thousands of U.S.-made trucks. Indeed, by 1945, nearly a third of the truck strength of the Red Army was U.S.-built. Trucks such as the Dodge ¾ ton and Studebaker 2½ ton were easily the best trucks available in their class on either side on the Eastern Front. American shipments of telephone cable, aluminum, canned rations, and clothing were also critical. Lend-Lease also supplied significant amounts of weapons and ammunition. The Soviet air force received 18,200 aircraft, which amounted to about 13% of Soviet wartime aircraft production. And while most tank units were Soviet-built models, some 7,000 Lend-Lease tanks were deployed by the Red Army, or 8% of war-time production.According to the Russian historian Boris Vadimovich Sokolov, Lend-Lease had a crucial role in winning the war:On the whole the following conclusion can be drawn: that without these Western shipments under Lend-Lease the Soviet Union not only would not have been able to win the Great Patriotic War, it would not have been able even to oppose the German invaders, since it could not itself produce sufficient quantities of arms and military equipment or adequate supplies of fuel and ammunition. The Soviet authorities were well aware of this dependency on Lend-Lease. Thus, Stalin told Harry Hopkins [FDR's emissary to Moscow in July 1941] that the U.S.S.R. could not match Germany's might as an occupier of Europe and its resources."
What if history took a totally different twist. Germany had adequate mobilized divisions along the western coast, making a invasion suicide. And tit for tat air campaigns by the Allies and Germany created a stale mate. With Germany establishing air supremacy over their own skies, reducing the destruction to their domestic industrial base. Germany starts to consolidate their power across Europe building their Third Reich. However, would the war be over?
What if a nuclear bomb was dropped on Berlin in August 6, 1945
How would this changed the course of history? Your left with several questions. First, how would Germany respond to the nuclear bombs dropped on Japan? Would the first nuclear bomb dropped on Germany wipe out most of the Nazi leadership? Would US be willing to use a Nuclear bomb on Germany to save people in concentration camps? Would US even be willing to use a nuclear bomb if Germany was winning the war? If the Soviet Union did not exist because of a German victory, how would the world look today. Some critics say US did not have enough nuclear bombs or Germany would have developed it. Contrary to those ideas; US was preparing to drop 12 nuclear bombs on Japan. So, US would have had at least another ten to drop on Germany. And there were no signs that there was an imminent threat that Germany was going to build a bomb. It also begs deep lying questions for people fighting on all of the theaters of war. Because of the nuclear bomb, was US destined to win the war no matter the outcome?? And what would have filled the following 50 years instead of the Soviet Union vs NATO Cold War?
Solar forcing comparison between the Holocene and Anglian interglacial periods related by eccentricity
An example of an interstadial similar to current climate events is an inter-glacial event that happend roughly 130,000 to 115kya years ago known as the Eemian. During the Eemian the global temperature were several degrees Celsius higher than it is today and the oceans were 20-30 feet deeper. This of course is not even considered an anomaly, it is estimated that all the inter-glacial periods might have had similar climate conditions as the Eemian during the Pleistocene. In attempts to understand the current interglacial period, known as the Holocene, scientists have observed that the Eemian period is not quite like the Holocene because it had a sharper temperature increase with no Younger Dryas effect, higher temperatures, and a temperature peak lasting less then 10,000 years. Some of the reasons for this are explained by eccentricity,
“The orbital eccentricity of an astronomical object is a parameter that determines the amount by which its orbit around another body deviates from a perfect circle. A value of 0 is a circular orbit, values between 0 and 1 form an elliptic orbit, 1 is a parabolic escape orbit, and greater than 1 is a hyperbola.”
“Eccentricity is important because it regulates the strength of polar maximum summer insolation caused by precession of the equinoxes every 21,000 years. Precession determines the distance from the sun during a Polar summer. If summer coincides with the earth’s perihelion then summer insolation can be up to 20% higher than average. However if the earth’s orbit is nearly circular, as it is today, then precession has little effect at all. That is why we have about 12000 years left before cooling begins.” October 4, 2016 by Clive Best, When is the next ice age due?
In order to compare current climate changes to the past we need to look at an interglacial period with a similar eccentricity.
Two observations from these charts come to play. The first is the current interglacial period, Holocene, is only half over. And if the Holocene is anything like the Anglian interglacial period temperatures are set to continue to rise if they correlate with EPICA (European Project for Ice Coring in Antarctica) temperatures reported for the Anglian interglacial period.
"We can argue about how warm the peak temperature will get and CMIP5 models vary about this roughly between 2 and 5 degrees. However this manmade climate disturbance should last for not much more than 3000 years so long as our emissions are reduced before 2100. The real question is what level we should then try to keep CO2 to avoid another devastating glaciation in 13,000 years time? If we want to survive long term then probably we should never let CO2 fall below 300ppm ever again!"October 4, 2016 by Clive Best, When is the next ice age due?
Paleohydrological Events From the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene 30KYA to 1500AD
Since 1880 the ocean began to rise briskly, climbing a total of 210 mm (8.3 in) through 2009- about 7 inches a century. However, if you put that in a historical perspective; 19,000 to 6,000 years ago the sea level raise rate was roughly 529% to 2814% higher then today. Oceans during this time raised close to 120 metres (4,724 inches), this would be 56,915% percent larger then the 8.3 inch sea level raise since 1880. This all happened from 18,000 to 4,000 years before the birth of Jesus.
National Oceanography Centre
"Global sea level rose by a total of more than 120 metres as the vast ice sheets of the last Ice Age melted back. This melt-back lasted from about 19,000 to about 6,000 years ago, meaning that the average rate of sea-level rise was roughly 1 metre (37 inches) per century. Previous studies of sea-level change at individual locations have suggested that the gradual rise may have been marked by abrupt ‘jumps’ of sea-level rise at rates that approached 5 (197 inches) metres per century. Their analyses indicate that the gradual rise at an average rate of 1 metre per century was interrupted by two periods with rates of rise up to 2.5 metres (98 inches) per century, between 15 and 13 thousand years ago, and between 11 and 9 thousand years ago."
However, this is not the whole story. Recent data pulled from the NASA website suggests that the sea level fluctuated very little since September 16, 2015. In other words, no observable data in the last 2 years can show a discernible sea level rise at all.
Nor is the current shrinking of Greenland's Glaciers Unique. D Dahl-Jensen 2013 showed that Greenland's glaciers 122,000 years ago, during the Eemian, reached surface elevations 130 ± 300 metres lower than today. Is the Arctic Ocean's shrinking summer ice concentrations unique?
One of the arguments that exists why the Eemian is not a good analogy for what is happening right now is that the Arctic sea still had summer ice coverage as compared to current conditions. The argument also suggests that the current conditions are unique because the Arctic ocean was cooling during the late Eemian. Recent observations by Stein en al 2017 show that there is discrepancies in these widely held opinions. Their data showed that the Arctic Ocean may have been close to ice free from 116,000 to 120,000 years ago.
"There, planktic δ18O records from cores MD95-2010 and MD99-2304 (for core locations see Fig. 7e) document a climatic optimum in the early-middle part of the LIG between about 126 and 116 ka, related to a strong poleward extension of warm Atlantic Water. These conditions are quite similar to those also described for the Early Holocene at cores MSM5/5-712-2 and NP05-11-70GC (Fig; see Fig. 7e for core locations), i.e., very low PIP25 values of 0.2 and less, interpreted as almost ice-free conditions triggered by increased Atlantic Water inflow."
Also, during the Eemian, "the mean air temperatures in Northeast Siberia that were about 9 °C higher than today air temperatures above the Greenland NEEM ice core site of about 8 ± 4 °C above the mean of the past millennium North Atlantic sea-surface temperatures of about 2 °C higher than the modern (PI) temperatures and a global sea level 5–9 m above the present sea level (Stein en al 2017)". Further more an addition paper from Stein el al 2017 shows that there was a significant increase in ice in the Chukchi Sea and the East Siberian Sea the last 4,500 years as compared to the early Holocene. These new findings are excellent science work and engaging to the reader. The reader will be left with many mysteries and the papers themselves only open doors to more questions and provide a direction for research to head in.
We would also like to state we are not suggesting that Carbon Dioxide levels are not rising or ocean and surface temperatures have trended up lately. It is widely held in the science community that Carbon Dioxide levels are rising and there has been observable temperature increases globally on the surface and in the ocean. We are only suggesting that Climate Sensitivity be dialed down and let these people continue to do their research on the Eemian, Penultimate, and other earlier interglacial undisturbed by global warming hysteria...
Everybody is talking about the oceans rising and the ending of the world. But what would happen if the glaciers blanketed Canada and Eurasia. In a world looking for more certainty this recent research only leads to more questions.
Please also see our article; Glaciers or Rising Oceans; Damned if you do, damned if don’t, And maybe both
Recently the news has been lit up by news of NSA whistle blowers and debates about privacy and anonymity often relating to Snowden, julian assange, or Anonymous. Sometimes meaningful debates are spun out of their actions, other times these whistle blowers just stirred up a nest of bees, sometimes their information was flawed without any basis, and other times they had no effect. But, no doubt you have had a conversation with your neighbor at one point or another about privacy as a right in the USA. You or your audience probably finished the conversation by saying, "I am not worried I do not have anything to hide." But is that in kin to if somebody says your freedom of speech will be taken away and somebody says ,"I am not worried because I have nothing to say."
Let's celebrate the fourth of July by taking a look at the fourth amendment and take a pleasant stroll into the past and look at Benjamin Franklin's Silence Dogood Letters-
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
""HE “Couranteers” or “Hell-Fire Club,” as the contributors to James Franklin’s The New-England Courant came to be known, started something new in America--a lively journal without ties to the Massachusetts colonial government that published attacks on Boston’s political and religious establishment. In this heady atmosphere, sixteen-year-old Ben Franklin was inspired to make his own first efforts as a journalist. As he recollected in his Autobiography:
He (Franklin’s brother, James) had some ingenious Men among his Friends who amuse’d themselves by writing little Pieces for this Paper, which gain’d it Credit, and made it more in Demand; and these Gentlemen often visited us. Hearing their Conversations, and their Accounts of the Approbation their Papers were receiv’d with, I was excited to try my Hand among them. But being still a Boy, and suspect that my Brother would object to printing any Thing of mine in his Paper, if he knew it to be mine, I contriv’d to disguise my Hand, and writing an anonymous Paper I put it in the Night under the Door of the Printing House.The submission Benjamin Franklin wrote and slipped under the door to the newspaper was a letter supposedly written by a minister's widow named Silence Dogood. The favorable reception of the first letter prompted Franklin to write a second. In all, fourteen essays by Silence Dogood appeared in the Courant.
James Franklin and his friends knew that "Silence Dogood" was a pen name and not a "real" woman. They concluded that the writer using the pseudonym was a clever and well-read man of town; they had no idea that the real author was James's younger brother. Eventually Benjamin admitted that he was the author of the Silence Dogood essays and got some favorable attention from the "Couranteers" but perhaps alienated his older brother, James. Benjamin Franklin, in his Autobiography, recalled that James cautioned against being too vain because of the reception the Dogood essays received. This vanity (real or perceived) might have contributed to the rift that was developing between the younger brother/apprentice and the older brother/master printer.""
"This is the first appearance of Benjamin Franklin in print, writing under the pseudonym of Silence Dogood, the outspoken widow of a minister. In this essay published in the 26 March-2 April 1722 issue of The New-England Courant, the reader learns about Silence Dogood's birth on board a ship sailing to Boston and the dramatic death of her father (swept overboard as he was standing on deck celebrating his newborn daughter), the necessity of her apprenticeship to a minister (because of the impoverished situation her mother found herself in), and her education and exposure to books during her work for the minister. At the end of the letter Dogood promises to write to the paper again:"
It may not be improper in the first place to inform your Readers, that I intend once a Fortnight to present them, by the Help of this Paper, with a short Epistle, which I presume will add somewhat to their Entertainment.
And since it is observed, that the Generality of People, now a days, are unwilling either to commend or dispraise what they read, until they are in some measure informed who or what the Author of it is, whether he be poor or rich, old or young, a Schollar or a Leather Apron Man, &c. and give their Opinion of the Performance, according to the Knowledge which they have of the Author’s Circumstances, it may not be amiss to begin with a short Account of my past Life and present Condition, that the Reader may not be at a Loss to judge whether or no my Lucubrations are worth his reading.
At the time of my Birth, my Parents were on Ship-board in their Way from London to N. England. My Entrance into this troublesome World was attended with the Death of my Father, a Misfortune, which tho’ I was not then capable of knowing, I shall never be able to forget; for as he, poor Man, stood upon the Deck rejoycing at my Birth, a merciless Wave entred the Ship, and in one Moment carry’d him beyond Reprieve. Thus, was the first Day which I saw, the last that was seen by my Father; and thus was my disconsolate Mother at once made both a Parent and a Widow.
When we arrived at Boston (which was not long after) I was put to Nurse in a Country Place, at a small Distance from the Town, where I went to School, and past my Infancy and Childhood in Vanity and Idleness, until I was bound out Apprentice, that I might no longer be a Charge to my Indigent Mother, who was put to hard Shifts for a Living.
My Master was a Country Minister, a pious good-natur’d young Man, and a Batchelor: He labour’d with all his Might to instil vertuous and godly Principles into my tender Soul, well knowing that it was the most suitable Time to make deep and lasting Impressions on the Mind, while it was yet untainted with Vice, free and unbiass’d. He endeavour’d that I might be instructed in all that Knowledge and Learning which is necessary for our Sex, and deny’d me no Accomplishment that could possibly be attained in a Country Place; such as all Sorts of Needle-Work, Writing, Arithmetick, &c. and observing that I took a more than ordinary Delight in reading ingenious Books, he gave me the free Use of his Library, which tho’ it was but small, yet it was well chose, to inform the Understanding rightly, and enable the Mind to frame great and noble Ideas.
Before I had liv’d quite two Years with this Reverend Gentleman, my indulgent Mother departed this Life, leaving me as it were by my self, having no Relation on Earth within my Knowledge.
I will not abuse your Patience with a tedious Recital of all the frivolous Accidents of my Life, that happened from this Time until I arrived to Years of Discretion, only inform you that I liv’d a chearful Country Life, spending my leisure Time either in some innocent Diversion with the neighbouring Females, or in some shady Retirement, with the best of Company, Books. Thus I past away the Time with a Mixture of Profit and Pleasure, having no affliction but what was imaginary, and created in my own Fancy; as nothing is more common with us Women, than to be grieving for nothing, when we have nothing else to grieve for.
As I would not engross too much of your Paper at once, I will defer the Remainder of my Story until my next Letter; in the mean time desiring your Readers to exercise their Patience, and bear with my Humours now and then, because I shall trouble them but seldom. I am not insensible of the Impossibility of pleasing all, but I would not willingly displease any; and for those who will take Offence where none is intended, they are beneath the Notice of Your Humble Servant,""
In Recent Science protests around the USA, people protested varying issues related to science. But one claim stuck out, protesters claimed there is no planet b? It turns out rather recently scientists have in fact found 6 possible b habitable exoplanets within a conservative habitable zone and additional 14 b habitable exoplanets within an optimistic habitable zone. Of the 6 b habitable planets within a conservative habitable zone, 3 are found within 14 light years from earth. Even more, Proxima Centauri b is only 4.22 light years from earth.
Below is a list of b planets in the conservative habitable zone
This is a list of the exoplanets that are more likely to have a rocky composition (which according to current research requires a radius of less than 1.6 R⊕ and a mass less than 6 M⊕) and maintain surface liquid water (i.e. between 0.5 and 1.5 R⊕ and between 0.1 and 5 M⊕, and orbiting within the conservative habitable zone). Note that this does not ensure habitability, and that * represents an unconfirmed planet or planet candidate. Earth is included for comparison.
Below is a list of b planets in the optimistic habitable zone
This is a list of the exoplanets that are less likely to have a rocky composition or maintain surface liquid water (i.e. 0.5 < planet's radius ≤ 1.5 Earth radii or 0.1 < planet's minimum mass ≤ 10 Earth masses, or the planet is orbiting within the optimistic habitable zone). Note that this does not ensure habitability, and that * represents an unconfirmed planet or planet candidate.
Fixit, Swexit, Italexit, Nexit, Frexit, and Grexit. Everybody in Europe Wants the Euro but not the European Union. Except for maybe the UK which uses the pound and voted to leave the European Union in the Brexit. And 61% of France has an unfavorable view of the EU, yet close to 72% would like to keep the Euro in a recent poll. Currently, unemployment in Greece is over 20 percent. Greece still has not balanced a budget and has been digressing in and out of a non-ending depression and malaise. And Italy has close to 12% unemployment and 130% debt to GDP. However, nobody including the markets even shuddered or blinked an eye recently when Italy’s government approved 21 billion dollars to shore up its troubled banks and on April 4th it has been confirmed the Veneto Banks have a shortfall of 6.4 Billion. All the European Union Members are hostage to the export power house Germany in order for the European Union to thrive. But, this often means high unemployment, debt, and excessive welfare in the other countries so they do not rock the boat. And everybody celebrated when the overall EU jobless rate dropped to 9.5 % but France’s unemployment rate still sits at 10% and Spain’s is still 18%. And now Germany is talking about hurting it’s own economy to help the other economies so other countries can develop jobs. Very few people even noticed the European Union's 5.5 trillion negative interest loans? Currently, the Euro Zone has 8.6 trillion in negative yielding debt. So far do no worry, Europe can probably pull through with a debt to GDP ratio of 87%, which is better then the US.
April 2, 2017 Russia: The little cold war that is a little hot. Western Sanctions on Russia, NATO forces deployed in Baltic countries and Poland for the first time, close to a 40 million Russians took part in a nuclear defense drill last summer, over a 1,000 Russian Service men killed in Ukraine and Syria, and a 100,000 man military snap drill planned in Belarus; called a threat of war from the West, Turkey shot down a Russian Fighter, talk of NATO expanding to Ukraine, and a Russia Diplomat Andrey Karlov shot on TV in Turkey. Even more, dozens of Russian diplomats keep showing up dead around the world including 8 prominent ones. Russian servicemen keep dying in the Syria conflict. Looks almost as if Retired Admiral John Kirby delivered on the statement, “‘Russia will continue to send troops home in body bags’: US warns Moscow if Syria violence goes on”. Could a Russia Intervention be inconceivable? Actually no, over 279 US troops died in Russian between 1918-1919 when US and her allies intervened in the Russia Civil War .…
April 2 2017 The Shiite and Sunni proxy war, the Saudi ticking time bomb, and why we may already be in world war III. Up until now over 500,000 to 1,000,000 people have died in the middle east due to the Sunni and Shia proxy wars in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. And Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Bahrain may follow. Also, the repressed minority of shiites in Saudi Arabia sit on 90% of the oil fields. What could go wrong; besides ISIS and Al Qeada? Does every country in the world have a hand in this fight already?
Response to OPINION: “EARTH FIRST” – AN EMOTIONAL ARGUMENT LACKING UNDERSTANDING OF THE FACTS. Space is expensive. However, most people that follow the space industry know that a initial investment is necessary for almost an infinite return later. And there is some top down economics happening as well. All the advance systems built are paid to some one. And they buy houses, commodities, investments, and give charity to important causes. In the long run, I think it just adds to the GDP. Long term, people do want to see a return on these investments, like being so they can buy a ticket to go live on the moon for a month. I think we have gotten a good return on space exploration via numerous new technologies, advancement on research, and a highly skilled aerospace work force.Furthermore, I think we are closer to a out post on the moon then we realize. When I say close I mean like 5-20 years. I think we have the technology to do it now, but it should be done safely and efficiently with a eye on long term return. A Long term return should include how do we increase traffic to space efficiently. Some very badly needed infrastructure might be needed to really cut costs of launches. Like the US highway System....