Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Dick Cheney

2009-12-07T22:54:55Z

JimP: /* Political Career */

{| align=right border=3 cellspacing=0 style="border-width: 5px; border-color: #c0c0c0; background: #e0e0e0; margin: 2em;"
| style="text-align: center; padding: 10px 40px 10px 40px;" | [[Previous_Breaking_News/Dick_Cheney| Previous Breaking News: Dick Cheney]]
|}

{{President
|image=408px-Richard Cheney 2005 official portrait.jpg
|seq=46
|office=vice
|term_start=January 20, 2001
|term_end=January 20, 2009
|party=Republican
|pres=George W. Bush
|previous=Al Gore
|next=Joe Biden
|birth_date=January 30, 1941
|birth_place=Lincoln, Nebraska
|death_date=
|death_place=
|spouse=Lynne Cheney
|spouse2=
|religion=Methodist
}}
'''Richard B. Cheney''' served as the 46th Vice President of the United States, 2001-2009. He was elected as a Republican in 2000 with President [[George W. Bush]]. Cheney was re-elected along with President Bush in 2004.

Cheney is best known for his strong conservatism, and his promotion of the powers of the presidency, especially in foreign affairs.

== Life and Family ==
Richard 'Dick' Cheney was born in Lincoln, Nebraska. After dropping out of Yale College, he took a BA and an MA in Political Science from the University of Wyoming. He did graduate work in political science at the University of Wisconsin, where in 1964 he met [[Lynne Cheney]], who was finishing her PhD in literature. They have two daughters; Elizabeth and Mary.

== Political Career ==
Cheney assumed his first political post as an assistant to [[Wisconsin]] Governor Warren P. Knowles in the early 1960s, at the age of 28 when he became an intern near the beginning of the [[Nixon]] Administration. He quickly came to the attention of [[Donald Rumsfeld]], then directing the Office of Economic Opportunity, and was promoted to a paid position in 1971. When [[Watergate]] forced Nixon's resignation in 1973, Cheney became vice president of an investment firm for a year, but Rumsfeld convinced [[Gerald Ford]] upon the latter's accession to the presidency that Cheney was indispensable, and he was recalled to public service. Eventually Cheney replaced Rumsfeld as [[Chief of staff|Chief of Staff]] to Ford as Rumsfeld was promoted to [[Secretary of Defense]]. In 1978-88, Cheney served in Congress from Wyoming, becoming the Republican Whip (the #2 job).

Cheney served as Secretary of Defense for President [[George H. W. Bush]] in the late 1980s. In the 1990s Cheney worked for the big oil-supply company Halliburton, becoming CEO in 1995. After he left the company with a retirement package of $33 million (which went into a blind trust which Cheney does not control), leftist critics alleged that he twisted American foreign policy for the benefit of Halliburton.

[[Image:Cheney3.jpg‎|left|thumb|200px|Vice President Dick Cheney and his wife Mrs. Lynne Cheney welcomed their fifth grandchild, 2006]]

==Hunter==
On February 11, 2006, Mr. Cheney accidentally<ref>Bash, Dana. [http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/12/cheney/ Cheney accidentally shoots fellow hunter]. February 12, 2006 (accessed July 16, 2007), ''CNN''</ref> shot a hunting partner, Mr. Harry Whittington, in the face with [[Shotgun|birdshot]] while the pair were hunting Quail in [[Corpus Christi]], [[Texas]]. Mr. Whittington suffered a minor heart attack due to the incident,<ref>Lavandera, Ed. [http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/17/cheney/ Man shot by Cheney: 'Accidents do and will happen'] February 20, 2006 (accessed July 16, 2007), ''CNN''</ref> and Cheney accepted full responsibility for the incident.<ref>Dana Bash, Suzanne Malveaux, Tim McCaughan. [http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/15/cheney/ Cheney: 'One of the worst days of my life']. February 16, 2006 (accessed July 16, 2007), ''CNN''</ref> The incident was, according to all involved, an accident.<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11409731/ Harry Whittington's hospital statement]. February 2006 (accessed July 16, 2007), ''MSNBC''</ref>

== Health Issues ==
A survivor of several heart attacks, Cheney's health was too precarious to run for president. In March 2007 he had surgery to remove a blood clot in his leg, the result of extended periods of sitting while airborne.

==Gay Marriage==
On June 1, 2009, Cheney spoke out in favor of gay marriage at the National Press Club.<ref>http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/01/cheney-reasserts-stance-on-gay-marriages/?scp=1&sq=cheney%20gay%20marriage&st=cse</ref>

==Quotes==
* "It is easy to take liberty for granted, when you have never had it taken from you." <ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=MRalq4bgd60C&pg=PA15&dq=It+is+easy+to+take+liberty+for+granted,+when+you+have+never+had+it+taken+from+you&ei=XBMWSu7AKJaQyAS2i-z9CQ He Kept the Colors: The True Story of the General, the Old Man and the Flag‎ - Page 15] L.E. Johnson</ref>
==Further reading==
* Hayes, Stephen F. ''Cheney: The Untold Story of America's Most Powerful and Controversial Vice President'' (2007) by a conservative journalist. [http://www.amazon.com/Cheney-Americas-Powerful-Controversial-President/dp/B001AQVTJE/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1253687382&sr=1-2 excerpt and text search]

==See Also==
[[Previous Breaking News/Dick Cheney|Articles about '''Dick Cheney''' from previous "Breaking News"]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

==External links==

{{DEFAULTSORT:Cheney, Dick}}
[[Category:Republican Party]]

{{USVicePresidents}}
[[Category:Reagan Era]]
[[Category:Conservatives]]

Dick Cheney

2009-12-07T22:52:44Z

JimP: /* Hunter */ wiki link

{| align=right border=3 cellspacing=0 style="border-width: 5px; border-color: #c0c0c0; background: #e0e0e0; margin: 2em;"
| style="text-align: center; padding: 10px 40px 10px 40px;" | [[Previous_Breaking_News/Dick_Cheney| Previous Breaking News: Dick Cheney]]
|}

{{President
|image=408px-Richard Cheney 2005 official portrait.jpg
|seq=46
|office=vice
|term_start=January 20, 2001
|term_end=January 20, 2009
|party=Republican
|pres=George W. Bush
|previous=Al Gore
|next=Joe Biden
|birth_date=January 30, 1941
|birth_place=Lincoln, Nebraska
|death_date=
|death_place=
|spouse=Lynne Cheney
|spouse2=
|religion=Methodist
}}
'''Richard B. Cheney''' served as the 46th Vice President of the United States, 2001-2009. He was elected as a Republican in 2000 with President [[George W. Bush]]. Cheney was re-elected along with President Bush in 2004.

Cheney is best known for his strong conservatism, and his promotion of the powers of the presidency, especially in foreign affairs.

== Life and Family ==
Richard 'Dick' Cheney was born in Lincoln, Nebraska. After dropping out of Yale College, he took a BA and an MA in Political Science from the University of Wyoming. He did graduate work in political science at the University of Wisconsin, where in 1964 he met [[Lynne Cheney]], who was finishing her PhD in literature. They have two daughters; Elizabeth and Mary.

== Political Career ==
Cheney assumed his first political post as an assistant to [[Wisconsin]] Governor Warren P. Knowles in the early 1960s, at the age of 28 when he became an intern near the beginning of the [[Nixon]] Administration. He quickly came to the attention of [[Donald Rumsfeld]], then directing the Office of Economic Opportunity, and was promoted to a paid position in 1971. When [[Watergate]] forced Nixon's resignation in 1973, Cheney became vice president of an investment firm for a year, but Rumsfeld convinced [[Gerald Ford]] upon the latter's accession to the presidency that Cheney was indispensable, and he was recalled to public service. Eventually Cheney replaced Rumsfeld as [[Chief of Staff]] to Ford as Rumsfeld was promoted to [[Secretary of Defense]]. In 1978-88, Cheney served in Congress from Wyoming, becoming the Republican Whip (the #2 job).

Cheney served as Secretary of Defense for President [[George H. W. Bush]] in the late 1980s. In the 1990s Cheney worked for the big oil-supply company Halliburton, becoming CEO in 1995. After he left the company with a retirement package of $33 million (which went into a blind trust which Cheney does not control), leftist critics alleged that he twisted American foreign policy for the benefit of Halliburton.

[[Image:Cheney3.jpg‎|left|thumb|200px|Vice President Dick Cheney and his wife Mrs. Lynne Cheney welcomed their fifth grandchild, 2006]]

==Hunter==
On February 11, 2006, Mr. Cheney accidentally<ref>Bash, Dana. [http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/12/cheney/ Cheney accidentally shoots fellow hunter]. February 12, 2006 (accessed July 16, 2007), ''CNN''</ref> shot a hunting partner, Mr. Harry Whittington, in the face with [[Shotgun|birdshot]] while the pair were hunting Quail in [[Corpus Christi]], [[Texas]]. Mr. Whittington suffered a minor heart attack due to the incident,<ref>Lavandera, Ed. [http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/17/cheney/ Man shot by Cheney: 'Accidents do and will happen'] February 20, 2006 (accessed July 16, 2007), ''CNN''</ref> and Cheney accepted full responsibility for the incident.<ref>Dana Bash, Suzanne Malveaux, Tim McCaughan. [http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/15/cheney/ Cheney: 'One of the worst days of my life']. February 16, 2006 (accessed July 16, 2007), ''CNN''</ref> The incident was, according to all involved, an accident.<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11409731/ Harry Whittington's hospital statement]. February 2006 (accessed July 16, 2007), ''MSNBC''</ref>

== Health Issues ==
A survivor of several heart attacks, Cheney's health was too precarious to run for president. In March 2007 he had surgery to remove a blood clot in his leg, the result of extended periods of sitting while airborne.

==Gay Marriage==
On June 1, 2009, Cheney spoke out in favor of gay marriage at the National Press Club.<ref>http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/01/cheney-reasserts-stance-on-gay-marriages/?scp=1&sq=cheney%20gay%20marriage&st=cse</ref>

==Quotes==
* "It is easy to take liberty for granted, when you have never had it taken from you." <ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=MRalq4bgd60C&pg=PA15&dq=It+is+easy+to+take+liberty+for+granted,+when+you+have+never+had+it+taken+from+you&ei=XBMWSu7AKJaQyAS2i-z9CQ He Kept the Colors: The True Story of the General, the Old Man and the Flag‎ - Page 15] L.E. Johnson</ref>
==Further reading==
* Hayes, Stephen F. ''Cheney: The Untold Story of America's Most Powerful and Controversial Vice President'' (2007) by a conservative journalist. [http://www.amazon.com/Cheney-Americas-Powerful-Controversial-President/dp/B001AQVTJE/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1253687382&sr=1-2 excerpt and text search]

==See Also==
[[Previous Breaking News/Dick Cheney|Articles about '''Dick Cheney''' from previous "Breaking News"]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

==External links==

{{DEFAULTSORT:Cheney, Dick}}
[[Category:Republican Party]]

{{USVicePresidents}}
[[Category:Reagan Era]]
[[Category:Conservatives]]

Biblical scientific foreknowledge

2009-11-27T03:08:26Z

JimP: spelling, grammar

[[File:Scientific foreknowledge in the bible.jpg|thumb|alt=scientific foreknowledge in the bible|150px|''101 Scientific Facts and Foreknowledge'' is a [[creationist]] booklet that was given a favorable review by [[Creation science|creation scientist]] Dr. [[Duane Gish]].<ref>http://store.nwcreation.net/101scfafo.html</ref> ]]‎
'''Biblical scientific foreknowledge''' is the remarkable content of the [[Bible]], which shows a comprehension of scientific knowledge beyond anything which existed among secular sources at the time when the Bible was composed.

[http://creationwiki.org/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge Biblical scientific foreknowledge] is an underpinning of creation science, and is widely credited by Christian scientists and apologists, including the organizations [[Creation Ministries International]], [[Answers in Genesis]], and [[CreationWiki]].<ref>http://creationwiki.org/index.php/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge.</ref><ref>[http://creationwiki.org/index.php/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge Bible Scientific Foreknowledge]</ref><ref>http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/1718/</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v17/i1/medicine.asp</ref>

Secular organizations and scientists, particularly evolutionists, are fond of denying the Bible's foreknowledge and pointing to alleged scientific absurdities in the Bible, but continued study of the ancient source documents routinely, and remarkably, show that these alleged absurdities and contradictions in fact result from poor translation and cultural ignorance.

== Specific examples of foreknowledge ==

==Health==
====Homosexuality and disease====
The Bible's prohibition against [[homosexuality]] predated knowledge about the [[Homosexuality and Health|many diseases and disorders associated with homosexuality]], and thus showed scientific wisdom prescient for its time.

=== Eyesight ===

The description in the [[Gospel of Mark|Gospel of Mark (Translated)]] for the sensation when one's eyesight is restored includes his perception of "trees walking" was first confirmed nearly 2000 years later as physicians developed medical techniques for restoring eyesight.

==Cosmology==
===Spherical Earth===
The Book of Isaiah establishes that the true shape of the earth is a sphere:
{{cquote|It is He who sits above the circle of the earth... - Isaiah 40:22 (KJV)}}
Here, the translation "circle" is inapt, as the Hebrew term entailed something spherical, not flat.

Note that Isaiah was written circa the 8th century BC, centuries before Greek philosophers, beginning with [[Pythagoras]], theorized the earth was round.

=== Earth free floating in space ===
The book of Job states that God "hangs the earth on nothing." This presaged the fact that space is in fact empty, which wasn't known until the dawn of the 20th century, when ether theory was disproved. It also contrasts with pagan mythologies such as [[Atlas]] holding up the earth or the earth being supported by a giant turtle, as in ancient Hindu and native American myths.

===Beginning of the Universe===
Contrary to many mythical cosmologies, the Bible asserts that the entire cosmos had a beginning, as told in Genesis. This was considered unscientific for millenia, as scientists believed the universe was in a steady state, until the discovery of the [[redshift]] proved an expanding, and thus time-limited, universe and vindicated the Bible. Genesis also states that God said "let there be light, and there was light," which is in perfect compliance with our latest scientific understanding of the universe's early moments, in which there was an enormous quantity of energy, especially light.

== Zoology: ==
===Existence of dinosaurs===
[[Dinosaur]] fossils were not discovered until the 19th century, but the book of [[Job]] describes enormous creatures called behemoth and leviathan, the descriptions matching land and sea dinosaurs respectively. It may also have referred to another similarly giant now-extinct species.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v15/i2/behemoth.asp</ref>

== Alleged absurdities and contradictions ==
=== Bat as a bird ===
A favorite evolutionist canard is that Leviticus 11:13-19 labels the [[bat]], a [[mammal]], as a [[bird]]. But this is an obvious failure of translation, as the Hebrew term '' 'owph'' did not entail the "clade" of birds, but was a non-biological category referring to any winged creature, mammalian, avian, or insect. The KJV translation as "fowl" is simply incorrect.

==See Also==
*[[Christianity and Science]]
*[[Evolution]]
*[[Atheism]]

{{Template:Creation vs. evolution}}

==External Links==
*[http://creationwiki.org/index.php/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge Bible scientific foreknowledge] by [[CreationWiki]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}
[[Category:Bible]]
[[Category:Science]]
[[Category:Creationism]]

Milky Way Galaxy

2009-11-26T02:14:36Z

JimP: wikilink

'''The Milky Way''' is a [[galaxy]] of type SB (barred spiral galaxy) containing between 200 billion to 400 billion [[star|stars]], thousands of [[nebula|nebulae]] and clusters, and an innumerable amount of [[gas]] and [[dust]], that is the home of our [[Solar System]]. The Milky Way itself is some 100,000 light years in diameter, and some 250-300 thousand light years in circumference<ref>http://www.space.com/milkyway/</ref>. It is estimated that the [[mass]] of the Milky Way is around 1–2 × 1012 solar masses, some 5 to 10 percent of which is interstellar dust and gases.<ref name="david">http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/G/Galaxy.html</ref>

The [[English]] term for Milky Way (and Galaxy in general) has its origin in the [[Greek]] Γαλαξίας, or ''Galaxias'', which is from the word for milk, γάλα or ''gala''. According to [[Greek mythology]], the Milky Way is milk that was spilled when [[Hera]] was suckling [[Heracles]].

==History of Observation==

The first person to contend that the Milky Way, as seen in the night sky on [[Earth]], may consist of stars was the Greek philosopher, '''Democritius''' (450-370 B.C.).<ref>http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/now/stories/2007/07/stars.html</ref> However [[Aristotle]] believed the Milky Way was caused by "''the ignition of the fiery exhalation of some stars which were large, numerous and close together''", that occurred in the upper [[atmosphere]].<ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ibn-bajja/</ref> Aristotle's ideas about the Milky Way were disproved when the [[Arabia|Arabian]] [[astronomer]], [[Alhazen]] (965-1037 A.D.) made the first attempt to measure the Milky Way's [[parallax]], determining it to be so remote from the Earth due to having negligible parallax, it was established as ''celestial'' in nature and not part of the atmosphere. Many of the other famed astronomers of the [[medieval]] [[Islam#Historical_Background|Islamic world]] such as '''Abū Rayhān al-Bīrūnī''', '''Ibn Bajjah''', and '''Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyya''' came to the conclusion that the Milky Way was made up of many distant stars that were situated very close together.

Observational evidence for the Milky Way being made up of distant stars first came when [[Galileo Galilei]] pointed his [[telescope]] towards the Milky Way, observing a large amount of faint stars.<ref>http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Galileo.html</ref> [[William Herschel]] in 1785 was the first to attempt to map out the shape of the Milky Way. He created a diagram based on counting the stars in the different regions of the sky, giving a rough shape of the galaxy with the Solar System near the center. It wasn't until [[Harlow Shapley]] in the end of the 19th century was the Milky Way was discovered to be a flat disk with the Solar System far from the center.<ref>http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-did-scientists-determ</ref>

Although the [[Andromeda galaxy]] was recorded as long ago as the 10th century, and both it and the [[Magellanic Clouds]] were known perhaps since ancient times, historically they were not seen as other galaxies, but as nebulae. In 1917, Heber Curtis observed a [[nova]] in what was then called the "''Great Andromeda Nebula''", that along with previous novae found based on subsequent photographic evidence, discovered they were ten magnitudes fainter then novae events in our own galaxy. based on this new evidence, he became a proponent of the "'''island universe hypothesis'''" first proposed by [[Immanuel Kant]] in 1755, that the spiral nebulae were actually other galaxies.<ref>http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988PASP..100....6C</ref> This was later proven by [[Edward Hubble]] in the 1920's, when he was able to determine the distance to the other galaxies though using [[Cepheid variables]] located within them as standard candles to determine their distance, showing the "nebulae" were too distant to be part of the Milky Way and hence other galaxies.<ref>http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/bib_query?1929ApJ....69..103H</ref>

==Environment of the Milky Way==

The Milky Way is part of a group of tightly bound galaxies called the [[Local Group]], a small cluster of galaxies made up of three large and over 30 dwarf galaxies, itself part of the [[Virgo Supercluster]]. It is the second largest galaxy in this cluster after Andromeda, but may be the largest in terms of mass. The Milky way itself is orbited by several dwarf galaxies. The two most famous of these are the [[Magellanic Clouds|Large and Small Magellanic Clouds]], which are 179,000 and 210,000 light years distant, respectively. The closest satellite galaxy is actually '''Canis Major Dwarf''', which is only 45,000 light years from the Galactic Center (and 25,000 light years from Earth). There may be even more undiscovered dwarf galaxies orbiting ours, obscured from our own point of view, by our own galaxy.

The Milky Way, as part of the Local Cluster and Virgo Supercluster is moving towards the [[Great Attractor]]. The velocity of the Milky Way as it travels is around 552 km/s in respect to the photons of the cosmic microwave background.<ref>http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?bibcode=1993ApJ...419....1K</ref> Within the Local Cluster, the Andromeda galaxy itself is approaching us at 100 to 140 kilometers per second. The two galaxies will collide in some 3 to 4 billion years in the future, eventually forming a single, large [[elliptical galaxy]] over the course of a billion years.<ref>http://www.news.utoronto.ca/bin/000414b.asp</ref>

==Age of the Milky Way==

With the use of space-based observations of the [[Cosmic microwave background| microwave background radiation]], atheistic scientists estimate that the first stars were formed some 200 million years after the [[Big Bang]], and that the Milky Way were among one of the first galaxies in the early universe with an estimated age of 13.6 billion ±800 million years. This estimate was calculated by measuring the amount of [[beryllium]] in two stars within the cluster NGC 6397.<ref>http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0411699</ref> The two stars were found to be 13.4 billion years old. Using the estimated time it took for earlier stars to form and exploded, adding Beryllium to the interstellar medium, allowing for the type of stars found in NGC 6397 to form, approximately some 200 million years, they calculated the 13.6 billion year age for the galaxy.<ref>http://www.universetoday.com/2004/08/22/estimating-the-age-of-the-milky-way/</ref>. Although [[Creation science|creationary scientists]] disagree and highlight the many problems with this model<ref>http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss5.htm</ref>, these assumed figures are accepted by the scientific community.

==Structure of the Milky Way==

The Milky Way galaxy is roughly divided into three sections: The '''galaxy core''' or bulge containing the Galactic Center, the '''disk''', which contains the majority of stars and material of the galaxy and is further divided into spiral arms, and the '''halo''', a diffuse, roughly spherical region of stars around the rest of the galaxy, consisting of mainly old stars.

===Galaxy Core===

The '''Galaxy Core''', also called the '''Galactic Center''' or '''Galactic Bulge''', is the rotational center of the Milky Way. It is some 25,000 light years away from our solar system and is the densest and most compact part of our galaxy, mostly consisting of older [[Metallicity|Population II stars]]. From the vantage point on Earth, it appears as the brightest part of the Milky Way. Much of our knowledge of this region of our galaxy is from observations through [[gamma ray]], [[X-ray]], [[radio waves|radio]], and [[infrared]] satellites. This is because much of the Galactic Center is visibly blocked from our vantage point by intervening interstellar dust.

In the center of the core of the galaxy is a large, complex radio source known as '''Sagittarius A''' that is invisible in normal light due to interstellar dust. Here a [[supernova]] remnant exists along with a region of ionized [[hydrogen]]. Towards the center of this complex is '''Sagittarius A*''', the source of the radio waves and is the location of a supermassive black hole.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7774287.stm</ref> <ref>http://cass.ucsd.edu/public/tutorial/MW.html</ref> The black hole itself isn't the source of the radio waves, but the large accretion disk around it.

There appears to be no star formation currently in the core of the galaxy, which consists of mostly older, red stars and [[globular cluster|globular clusters]]. However, there is a cluster of 100-200 very young stars. It is possible they are from a star cluster outside the galactic core and migrated inward over time and now orbit near Sagittarius A*.<ref>http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~ghezgroup/gc/publications/yso.shtml</ref> They are sometimes collectively referred to as the '''paradox of youth''' as the presence of the supermassive black hole is thought to normally disrupt any star formation. The area immediately surrounding the core of the galaxy though, known as the "'''5-kpc ring'''", holds a large percentage of both the galaxy's molecular hydrogen and current star formation.<ref>http://www.bu.edu/galacticring/new_introduction.htm</ref>

===Disk===

The disk of the galaxy is the location of the spiral arms and holds various [[metallicity|Population I stars]], including our own sun, ranging from intermediate age stars to very young, hot stars, as well as open clusters, diffuse nebulae, and the interstellar dust and gas responsible for future star formation. Virtually all of the largest and brightest stars (class B and O stars) are found here.

The discovery and mapping of the spiral arms began in the 1950's using radio based observations of the abundant hydrogen gas in the galaxy. This lead to the theory that there are four distinct spiral arms known as '''Norma''', '''Scutum-Centaurus''', '''Sagittarius''', and '''Perseus'''. Our own solar system located in a partial arm known as the '''Orion Spur''' (sometimes called the Orion Arm) between the arms of Sagittarius, and Perseus.<ref>http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/080603-aas-spiral-arms.html</ref>

However starting the 1990s when it was discovered using infrared observations that the Milky Way was a '''barred spiral''', the original four armed design was challenged. Later in 2005, the bar in the center of the galaxy was found to extend farther out then previously believed, further bringing into question the prevailing four spiral arm theory. In 2008, new infrared imagery from the [[Spitzer Space Telescope]] made the case that the Milky Way has just two major spiral arms, which is known to be common for barred spiral galaxies.<ref>http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ASPC..387..375B</ref> These two arms are the '''Scutum-Centaurus''', and '''Perseus''' arms, which hold the greatest density of stars and join up with the ends of the central bar of the galaxy. The Sagittarius and Norma arms are now seen as minor arms of the galaxy, filled with gas and groups of young stars.<ref name="david">http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/G/Galaxy.html</ref>

Our own Solar System travels around the galaxy in an orbit of the center every 225-250 million years (called a ''galactic year'') at around 220 km/s. As the Sun orbits, it oscillates up and down relative to the plane of the galaxy approximately 2.7 times per orbit.

===Halo===

The '''halo''' is a the region that surrounds the galactic disk and holds old Population II stars and globular clusters, of which 158 have been discovered so far<ref>http://www.seds.org/~spider/spider/MWGC/mwgc.html</ref>. The Galactic Halo itself has a diameter of at least 200,000 light years based on the locations of the globular clusters, although it may extend much further.

The stars that inhabit this sparsely populated portion of the galaxy tend to have retrograde or highly inclined orbits. Many of these stars may have been acquired from smaller galaxies that have pulled into and since merged with the Milky Way. There is no star formation out in the halo and the region appears to be free of interstellar dust.

In addition to the inner, visible portion of the halo, there is the much larger region known as the '''dark halo''' or '''extended halo'''. This region is believed to hold a large amount of [[dark matter]], the presence of which can only be inferred through its gravitational influence in the rotation of the galaxy.<ref>http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/G/galhalo.html</ref>

[[Category:Astronomy]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

Randy Couture

2009-11-25T01:01:33Z

JimP:

'''Randy Couture''' is a pioneer of mixed martial arts fighting (MMA) having won championship titles at both the light heavyweight and heavyweight levels, the only person within the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) organization to do so to date, and is one of only four fighters to be put into the UFC hall of fame. While his overall record is not overly dominant, currently 16 wins and 8 losses, he has often fought larger opponents and has shown a remarkable ability to win against champions. Known most for his great wrestling skills, Couture has shown an ability to adapt to the situation to defeat men who looked more formidable.

After winning the light heavyweight title at age 40, Couture was defeated and then lost again in another title shot. Retiring, he came back to fight for the heavyweight title, and won by upset becoming the champion again at age 43. After his improbable and yet commanding victory, Couture said the following:{{cquote|People say why do you love America so much? It's because of two people: [[Jesus Christ]], who stood up and died for our sins, and the American GI, who stands up and dies for our freedom.<ref>http://www.columbusdispatch.com/dispatch/contentbe/dispatch/2007/03/05/20070305-E1-01.html </ref>}}

Couture has since had one title defense, a victory at age 44. He, however, was defeated by [[Brock Lesnar]] in the second round of their fight at UFC 91.

==References==

<References/>

{{DEFAULTSORT: Couture, Randy}}

[[Category:Religious People]]
[[Category:Christians]]
[[Category:UFC Light Heavyweights]]
[[Category:UFC Heavyweights]]
[[Category:Mixed Martial Artists]]

Ultimate Fighting Championship

2009-08-26T01:11:13Z

JimP: reinsert last title defence into table for Anderson SIlva

[[Image:UFC logo.jpg |thumb|300px|League Logo]]
The '''Ultimate Fighting Championship''' is the largest [[Mixed Martial Arts]] organization on the planet after recently buying out their top competitor, PRIDE. Originally begun in the mid 1990's as a way to showcase martial artists of different disciplines facing each other, the sport has evolved into weight classes and extra rules so that it could be accepted by the mainstream. The fighters have evolved as well. It is rare to have a fighter practice only one discipline. The fighters that win are usually well rounded in all facets of fighting. The current president of the UFC is [[Dana White]].

==Current Champions==
{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Division
! Champion
! Last Title Defense
|-
| Heavyweight
| [[Brock Lesnar]]
| TKO [[Frank Mir]]
|-
| Light Heavyweight
| [[Lyoto Machida]]
| KO [[Rashad Evans]]
|-
| Middleweight
| [[Anderson Silva]]
| [[Thales Leites]] by unanimous decision
|-
| Welterweight
| [[Georges St. Pierre]]
| Def. [[Thiago Alves]] by unanimous decision
|-
| Lightweight
| [[BJ Penn]]
| Def. [[Kenny Florian]] by submission
|-
|}

==External Links==

[http://www.ufc.com Website]

[[Category:Martial Arts]]
[[Category:Ultimate Fighting Championship]]

Kenny Florian

2009-08-10T05:05:12Z

JimP:

'''Kenny Florian''', nicknamed "Kenflo", is a [[mixed martial artist]] currently fighting in the [[UFC]]'s Lightweight division. He was the runner-up in the Middleweight contest on [[The Ultimate Fighter]] 1. By defeating [[Joe Stevenson]] at UFC 91, he became the top Lightweight contender and challenged Lightweight champion [[BJ Penn]] for the title at UFC 101 in August 2009, which he lost by submission. His professional record is 13-4.<ref>http://www.ufc.com/KennyFlorian</ref>

{{DEFAULTSORT: Florian, Kenny}}

[[Category:Mixed Martial Artists]]
[[Category:UFC Lightweights]]

Ultimate Fighting Championship

2009-08-10T05:02:02Z

JimP: /* Current Champions */ update ufc 101 details

[[Image:UFC logo.jpg |thumb|300px|League Logo]]
The '''Ultimate Fighting Championship''' is the largest [[Mixed Martial Arts]] organization on the planet after recently buying out their top competitor, PRIDE. Originally begun in the mid 1990's as a way to showcase martial artists of different disciplines facing each other, the sport has evolved into weight classes and extra rules so that it could be accepted by the mainstream. The fighters have evolved as well. It is rare to have a fighter practice only one discipline. The fighters that win are usually well rounded in all facets of fighting. The current president of the UFC is [[Dana White]].

==Current Champions==
{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Division
! Champion
! Last Defense
|-
| Heavyweight
| [[Brock Lesnar]]
| TKO [[Frank Mir]]
|-
| Light Heavyweight
| [[Lyoto Machida]]
| KO [[Rashad Evans]]
|-
| Middleweight
| [[Anderson Silva]]
| Def. [[Thales Leites]] by unanimous decision
|-
| Welterweight
| [[Georges St. Pierre]]
| Def. [[Thiago Alves]] by unanimous decision
|-
| Lightweight
| [[BJ Penn]]
| Def. [[Kenny Florian]] by submission
|-
|}

==External Links==

[http://www.ufc.com Website]

[[Category:Martial Arts]]
[[Category:Ultimate Fighting Championship]]

Narwhal

2009-06-05T04:26:12Z

JimP: Undo revision 670662 by Brasileiro (Talk) Tusk is not used for spearing polar bears!

{{Taxonomy
|name="Narwhal
|image=Narwhal.gif
|caption=
|superkingdom=
|kingdom=Animalia
|subkingdom=
|superphylum=
|phylum= Chordata
|subphylum=
|infraphylum=
|microphylum=
|superdivision=
|division=
|subdivision=
|superclass=
|class=Mammalia
|subclass=
|infraclass=
|superorder=
|order=Cetacea
|suborder=
|infraorder=
|superfamily=
|family=Monodontidae
|subfamily=
|supertribe=
|tribe=
|subtribe=
|genera=
|genus=Monodon
|subgenus=
|species=
|binomialname="Monodon" monoceros
|sub=
|alt=
}}
The '''narwhal''' (''Monodon monoceros'', "one tooth, one horn") is a medium-sized Arctic whale notable for having a spiral tusk projecting from it's snout. Narwhals have a black and white mottled skin pattern, the coloration of which resembled that of a drowned sailor, contributing to their Old Norse-language name of "nar" (“corpse”) and "hval" (“whale”).

==Gestation==
Male narwhals can reach a length of 5 meters and weigh up to 1,800 kg. Females are somewhat smaller, reaching a length of 4 meters and 1,000 kg. Narwhals reach sexual maturity between 6-9 years, and females give birth to a calf every third year, on average. The gestation period is about 14 months and they give birth in spring (April-May).

==Habits==
Narwhals have predictable migration patterns and are creatures of habit. Even though they spend a large amount of time offshore far from humans, they still move along the coast, and pass certain promontories, bays or fjords at precisely the same time each year. Today, in northwest Greenland, large pods of narwhals arrive every summer and are hunted by [[Inuit]] hunters in kayaks with hand-held harpoons.

In summer, narwhals often dive to depths between 30 and 300 meters, although they spend most of their time between 0 and 50 meters. In fall, dive depths and durations increase when narwhals migrate towards their wintering grounds. However, they are traveling rapidly during this period and do not do much focused diving. When narwhals are on their wintering grounds, they stay in a fairly limited area for 6 months and make small movements with the shifting leads and cracks in the pack ice. The proportion of shallow dives dramatically declines, and thus begins some of the deepest diving ever recorded for a marine mammal. Narwhals typically dive to at least 800 meters between 18 and 25 times per day every day for 6 months. Many of these dives go even deeper than 800 meters: over half reach at least 1,500 meters (4,500 feet). Dives to these depths last around 25 minutes, including the time spent at the bottom and the transit down and back from the surface. In addition to making remarkably deep dives, narwhals also spend a large amount of their time below 800 meters (>3 hours per day). This is an incredible amount of time at a depth where the pressure can exceed 2200 PSI (150 atmospheres) and life exists in complete darkness.

Narwhals travel to depths where there is intense pressure and no oxygen, which requires special adaptations for survival. The pressure problem is in part solved by having a compressible rib cage which is flexible and can be squeezed as the water depth increases. Narwhals also need mechanisms for bringing along as much oxygen as they can from the surface for their 25 minute long dives. They have a few solutions. Narwhals have a high concentration of myoglobin in their muscles (a molecule which binds oxygen). They have twice as much myoglobin as some seal species and eight times as much as terrestrial mammals, even those specialized in fast running. An average-size narwhal can carry 70 L of oxygen in its lungs, blood, and muscles. This meets oxygen demands for more than 20 minutes underwater at swim speeds of 1 m/s. Furthermore, the narwhal does not have fast-twitch fibers in its skeletal muscles (like a dolphin) but instead has muscles that are suited for endurance swimming (less oxygen demanding). During its dive, a narwhal can save oxygen by shutting off blood flow to selected organs or non-critical body parts. Finally, narwhals have streamlined bodies and can glide easily through the water column towards the bottom. This helps minimize oxygen consumption to work the muscles and ultimately saves energy.

==Diet==
Identifying what narwhals eat has proven to be a difficult task. Narwhals prefer waters far offshore covered in sea ice where they eat at great depths in complete darkness. Because of this, no direct observations of narwhal feeding have ever been made. An alternate method is to examine prey items in the stomachs of dead whales. Narwhals are harvested by local people throughout much of their range and in all seasons, therefore it is possible to collect the entire stomach (sometimes over 35 kg) from narwhals, freeze them, and send them to a laboratory for examination.

Narwhals eat only a few prey species. Their primary prey include the Greenland halibut, the polar and Arctic cod, shrimp and Gonatus squid. Occasional exceptions have been wolffish, capelin, skate eggs and sometimes rocks, accidentally ingested when whales feed near the bottom. Very few other prey items have been found in narwhal stomachs, implying that narwhals have a very restricted and specialized diet. The size of narwhal prey vary. Greenland halibut eaten by narwhals range from 35-55 cm in length and weigh between 200-1400 grams. Squid eaten by narwhals are much smaller and weigh on average 23 grams.

Narwhals change their diet seasonally. In winter, they feed intensively on Greenland halibut or Gonatus squid. The many deep dives in Baffin Bay and Davis Strait also indicate the narwhals feed intensively on the bottom. The summer ice-free season (between July and September) is not used for intense feeding and whales have very little in their stomachs.

The narwhal’s pattern of intense feeding in winter is the opposite of other sub-arctic whale species. This sheds insight into their specialization necessary for occupying arctic seas. Large baleen whales, such as fin, blue and humpback whales, undertake a northward migration to arctic waters in summer where they feed intensively and obtain their food requirements for the whole year. These species then migrate south for winter and hardly feed at all for the rest of the year. This is when the narwhal arrived on the scene, to feed in winter. The narwhal’s intense winter feeding period is likely an adaptation to relatively low productivity in the high arctic summering areas or perhaps a behavioral trait to avoid competition with lower latitude whales feeding in summer.

==Tusk==
The narwhal is an odontocete or toothed whale, but is different from all other toothed whales in that it has no teeth in its mouth. Instead the male bears a long straight tooth (or tusk) that protrudes 2-3 m out of the upper left jaw, and grows in a counterclockwise spiral. Tusks exported from the Arctic, perhaps by the Vikings, reached Europe, the Mediterranean, and even the Far East as early as the Middle Ages, and were sold without a good description of the animal from which they came; among the explanations as to the source was the mythical [[unicorn]]. The purpose of having such a huge tooth has been discussed for centuries, with many believing narwhals use their tusk to dig in the seafloor, spear prey, engaging in battles with each other to control females, or for making breathing holes in sea ice. Females almost never have a tusk, and the tusk cannot serve a critical function for individuals’ survival, as females live longer than males and occur in the same areas as the males.

Once the subject of mythical accounts of magical power, the helix-shaped tusk of the narwhal has proved to be an extraordinary sensory organ, according to a team of researchers from Harvard University, the Smithsonian Institution, and the Paffenbarger Research Center of the American Dental Association Foundation (ADAF) at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The team's results were presented Dec. 13 at a technical conference in San Diego.

Measuring up to 2.7 meters or about 9 feet long, the tusk is traversed by up to 10 million nerve pathways. These pathways connect the outside of the tusk to a central core of nerves leading to the animal’s brain. Based on experiments with samples of the tusk as well as with a captured narwhal whale, the research team found that the tusk’s sensory system may be capable of detecting changes in temperature, pressure, salinity and other factors that may help a narwhal survive its Arctic environment.

Working at NIST, Naomi Eidelman, Anthony Giuseppetti and Frederick Eichmiller of the ADAF examined samples of narwhal tusk with both infrared microspectroscopy and scanning electron microscopy. Their work revealed the tusk’s unusual structure.

While most mammalian teeth are softer on the inside and harder on the outside, narwhal tusk appears to be made “inside out,” says Eichmiller. The researchers believe the softer outer layers of the tusk may act like a shock absorber to help prevent breaks. <ref>http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/techbeat/tb2005_1222.htm</ref>

{{Copyright Details (US Government)}}
source= [http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/06arctic/background/biology/biology.html]

==References==

<References/>

[[Category:Cetaceans]]

Dick Cheney

2009-05-15T05:27:23Z

JimP: Undo revision 663267 by Texas15 (Talk)

{| align=right border=3 cellspacing=0 style="border-width: 5px; border-color: #c0c0c0; background: #e0e0e0; margin: 2em;"
| style="text-align: center; padding: 10px 40px 10px 40px;" | [[Previous_Breaking_News/Dick_Cheney| Previous Breaking News: Dick Cheney]]
|}

{{President
|image=408px-Richard Cheney 2005 official portrait.jpg
|seq=46
|office=vice
|term_start=January 20, 2001
|term_end=January 20, 2009
|party=Republican
|pres=George W. Bush
|previous=Al Gore
|next=Joe Biden
|birth_date=January 30, 1941
|birth_place=Lincoln, Nebraska
|death_date=
|death_place=
|spouse=Lynne Cheney
|spouse2=
|religion=Methodist
}}
'''Richard B. Cheney''' served as the 46th Vice President of the United States, 2001-2009. He was first elected in 2000 along with President [[George W. Bush]]. Cheney was re-elected along with President Bush in 2004. He served as White House Chief of Staff for President Ford, and Secretary of Defense for President George H. W. Bush. Cheney is best known for his strong conservatism, and his promotion of the powers of the presidency, especially in foreign affairs.

== Life and Family ==
Richard 'Dick' Cheney was born in Lincoln, Nebraska.<ref>http://www.whitehouse.gov/vicepresident/1</ref> He has both a BA and an MA in Political Science from the University of Wyoming <ref>http://www.whitehouse.gov/vicepresident/2</ref>. He married [[Lynne Cheney]] in 1964. They have two daughters; Elizabeth and Mary.

== Political Career ==
Richard Cheney assumed his first political post as an assistant to Wisconsin Governor Warren P. Knowles in the early 1960s, at the age of 28 when he became an intern near the beginning of the [[ Nixon]] Administration. He quickly came to the attention of [[Donald Rumsfeld]], then directing the Office of Economic Opportunity, and was promoted to a paid position in 1971. When [[Watergate]] forced Nixon's resignation in 1973, Cheney became vice president of an investment firm for a year, but Rumsfeld convinced [[Gerald Ford]] upon the latter's accession to the presidency that Cheney was indispensable, and he was recalled to public service. Eventually Cheney replaced Rumsfeld as [[Chief of Staff]] to Ford as Rumsfeld was promoted to [[Secretary of Defense]].

[[Image:Cheney3.jpg‎|left|thumb|200px|Vice President Dick Cheney and his wife Mrs. Lynne Cheney welcomed their fifth grandchild, 2006]]Upon hearing that Cheney had been chosen by Bush as his running mate, [[Paula Jones]] who was notable in some of the early [[Bill Clinton|Clinton]] scandals sued to disqualify them from receiving the electoral votes of [[Texas]]. Her theory was that under the [[12th Amendment]] to the [[U. S. Constitution]], no state may give its electoral vote to a Presidential ticket both of whose members are from that state. [[Republican]] lawyers argued that Cheney's ties to [[Wyoming]] were more significant than those to Texas, which had effectively been dissolved as soon as Lynne carried out Richard's instructions to sell their house there. This argument prevailed in Federal district court, and Jones did not appeal.

On February 11, 2006, Mr. Cheney accidentally<ref>Bash, Dana. [http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/12/cheney/ Cheney accidentally shoots fellow hunter]. February 12, 2006 (accessed July 16, 2007), ''CNN''</ref> shot a hunting partner, Mr. Harry Whittington, in the face with [[birdshot]] while the pair were hunting Quail in [[Corpus Christi]], [[Texas]]. Mr. Whittington suffered a minor heart attack due to the incident,<ref>Lavandera, Ed. [http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/17/cheney/ Man shot by Cheney: 'Accidents do and will happen'] February 20, 2006 (accessed July 16, 2007), ''CNN''</ref> and Cheney accepted full responsibility for the incident.<ref>Dana Bash, Suzanne Malveaux, Tim McCaughan. [http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/15/cheney/ Cheney: 'One of the worst days of my life']. February 16, 2006 (accessed July 16, 2007), ''CNN''</ref> The incident was, according to all involved, an accident.<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11409731/ Harry Whittington's hospital statement]. February 2006 (accessed July 16, 2007), ''MSNBC''</ref>

== Health Issues ==
A survivor of several heart attacks, Cheney's health was too precarious to run for president. In March 2007 he had surgery to remove a blood clot in his leg, the result of extended periods of sitting while airborne.

==See Also==
[[Previous Breaking News/Dick Cheney|Articles about '''Dick Cheney''' from previous "Breaking News"]]

==References==

<references/>

==External links==

{{DEFAULTSORT:Cheney, Dick}}
[[Category:Republican Party]]

{{USVicePresidents}}
[[Category:Reagan Era]]
[[Category:Conservatives]]

Republican Party

2009-05-15T05:21:58Z

JimP: Undo revision 663262 by Texas15 (Talk)

{{AmericanPoliticalParty
| party_name = Republican Party
| party_articletitle = Republican Party (United States)
| party_logo = [[Image:Cjjfdjfty.png|200px|"Republican Party Elephant" logo]]
| website = [http://www.gop.com www.gop.com]
| headquarters = 310 K Street SE [[Washington, D.C.]] 20003
| chairman = [[Michael Steele]]
| houseleader = [[John Boehner]]
| senateleader = [[Mitch McConnell]]
| foundation = 1854
| ideology = [[moderate|Centrism]] [[Conservative|Conservatism]] [[Fiscal Conservative|Fiscal conservatism]] [[Neoconservatism]]
| fiscalpolicy = [[Free Market|Economic liberalism]]
| socialpolicy = [[Conservative]]
| international = [[International Democrat Union]]
| colors = [[Red states and blue states|Red]] (unofficial)
| footnotes =
}}
The '''Republican Party''' is one of the two major political parties in the [[United States]]. The former [[President of the United States]], [[George W. Bush]] is a Republican. The party is the U.S.'s major center-right party. The Republican voter coalitions have generally comprised businessmen, military veterans and evangelical Protestants, while the [[Democrats]] appealed more to the poor and to minority ethnic, racial and religious groups. Some groups have realigned: blacks went from the GOP to the Democrats in the 1930s, while white Southerners became Republicans in the 1980s. Catholics switched from 80% Democratic in 1960 to 50-50 in recent years. In recent years youth and better educated professionals have moved to the Democrats, while blue collar workers have become more Republican.

The party was created in 1854 by anti-slavery activists. It soon swept to control of all the northern states, and in 1860 elected [[Abraham Lincoln]] president. The South seceded, and the Union side of the [[American Civil War]] was directed by Lincoln and the new party, with help from "War Democrats." The GOP (as it was also called from the 1880s) dominated the elections of the [[Third Party System]] (1854-1894) as well as the [[Fourth Party System]] or Progressive Era (1894-1932). However the Democrats built a liberal [[New Deal Coalition]] under President [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]], and dominated the [[Fifth Party System]], 1932-1966, with the GOP only electing Eisenhower in that era. The [[Sixth Party System]], since 1968, has been dominated by the GOP.

18 of the 27 US Presidents since 1861 have been Republicans and since that same year a Republican has won 23 of the last 37 presidential elections. The party's most recent candidate [[Arizona]] [[Senator]] [[John McCain]], together with his running mate [[Alaskan|Alaska]] [[Governor]] [[Sarah Palin]] lost the 2008 presidential election to [[Democrat]] [[Barack Obama]] and his running mate [[Joe Biden]].

== Symbol ==
[[image:The_off_year_nast_1877.jpg|left|thumb|1877 Thomas Nast drawing of the Republican elephant]]

The official symbol of the Republican Party is the elephant. Although the elephant had occasionally been associated with the party earlier, a political cartoon by Thomas Nast, published in ''Harper's Weekly'' on November 7, 1874, is considered the first important use of the symbol<ref>http://www.harpweek.com/09Cartoon/BrowseByDateCartoon.asp?Year=2003&Month=November&Date=7</ref>. In the early 20th century, the traditional symbol of the Republican party in some Midwestern states was the eagle, as opposed to the Democratic cock. The eagle still appears on Indiana ballots.

A political term referring to the party is "G.O.P.", which was originally an acronym of "Grand Old Party". The term was coined in 1875.

==Ideology==
Historically, the fundamental philosophy and political ideals of the Republican Party are founded on the idea that societal health is rooted in personal responsibility and actions. The Republican Party holds the belief that all material things are earned, not owed. This is seen most often in the party's push for lower taxes. This is fought for in an attempt to treat all citizens equally despite income, race, gender, or religion. They also see taxes as a drag on the economy, and believe private spending is usually more efficient than public spending.

Republicans also show concerns about having big government in charge of such vital issues as food, shelter, or health care, as they believe the private sector and/or the individual are better suited to control their own lives. President [[Ronald Reagan]] who became a Republican in the early 1960s after being a [[New Deal]]er at one time, has been quoted as saying "Government is not the solution, it is the problem."

The party tends to hold both [[conservative]] and [[Libertarianism|libertarian]] stances on social and economic issues respectively. Major policies that the party has recently supported include a conservative foreign policy, including [[War on Terror]], liberations of [[Afghanistan]] and [[Iraq]], and strong support for democracy especially in the [[Middle East]]. Many party members and politicians have shown a distrust of the [[United Nations]] due to the organization's incompetent bureaucracy, anti-capitalist undertone, corruption on the [[Security Council]] and in UN humanitarian programs. Along with demanding radical reforms in the UN, many Republican politicians also opposes the Kyoto Protocol due the protocol's unfair application to certain countries (especially the United States) and the fact that it prevents economic growth and slows the reduction of poverty.

The Republican Party generally supports free trade, especially [[NAFTA]] and [[CAFTA]]. It is responsible for a series of across-the-board tax cuts since 2001 that have bolstered the economy and reduced the punitive aspect of the income tax. It has sought business deregulation, reduction of environmental regulations that restrict fair use of land and property, and other policies that are pro-capitalism. It supports gun ownership rights, and enterprise zones (low taxes for investing in poverty areas). On social issues the majority of its national and state candidates usually favor the death penalty, call for stronger state-level control on access to [[abortion]], support a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage at the federal level and by the states, favor faith-based charitable initiatives, support school choice and homeschooling, social welfare benefit reform, and oppose reverse racism, such as racial quotas.

In recent years the party has called for much stronger accountability in the public schools, especially through the "No Child Left behind Act" of 2001 (which also increased [[federal funding]] for schools). The party is split on the issue of federally funding embryonic stem cell research that involves the cloning and killing of human embryos. Many in the party think it unethical to force tax payers who believe this type of research is morally wrong to finance it. Historically Republicans have had a strong belief in [[individualism]], limited government, and business entrepreneurship.

In recent years, the Republican party has downplayed its emphasis on small government. Under the administration of [[George W. Bush]], the federal government has been expanded to record levels, surpassing even the Great Depression era <ref>http://www.dhs.gov/index.shtm</ref>. Additionally, the Bush administration has acted to nationalize the country's banking institutions in an effort to stymie the decline of the U.S. economy<ref>http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12078933</ref>

== History ==
The party began in 1854, at the start of the [[Third Party System]]. The '''GOP''' (or "Grand Old Party" as it was nicknamed after 1880) dominated national politics, including most of the [[Fourth Party System]] until 1932. Then the [[Fifth Party System]] (or "New Deal Coalition") was dominant until the late 1960s. Since 1968 the GOP has won 7 of 10 presidential elections (losing in 1976, 1992, and 1996). Its great rival is the [[U.S. Democratic Party, history|Democratic Party]].

===Third Party System: 1854-1894===
The Republican party began as a spontaneous grass roots protest against the [[Kansas-Nebraska Act]] of 1854, which allowed slavery into western territories where it had been forbidden by earlier compromises. The creation of the new party, along with the death of the [[Whig Party]], realigned American politics. The central issues were new, as were the voter alignments, and the balance of power in Congress. The central issues became slavery, race, civil war and the reconstruction of the Union into a more powerful nation, with rules changed that gave the vote to former slaves.

====Issues: Slavery====
Republican activists denounced the Kansas-Nebraska act as proof of the power of the [[Slave Power]]--the powerful class of slaveholders who were conspiring to control the federal government and to spread slavery nationwide. The name "Republican" gained such favor in 1854 because "[[Republicanism, U.S.|republicanism]]" was the paramount political value the new party meant to uphold. The name also echoed the former Jeffersonian party of the [[First Party System]]. The party founders adopted the name "Republican" to indicate it was the carrier of "republican" beliefs about civic virtue, and opposition to aristocracy and corruption. <ref> Gould (2003) pp 14-15; republicanism is explored in depth by Foner (1970).</ref>

Two small cities of the Yankee diaspora, Ripon, Wisconsin, and Jackson, Michigan, claim the birthplace honors. <ref>There is also a myth that the town of Exeter, New Hampshire was first by six months, but nothing came of the secret meeting there and scholars dismiss the claim.</ref> Ripon held the first county convention on March 20, 1854. Jackson held the first statewide convention where delegates on July 6, 1854 declared their new party opposed to the expansion of slavery into new territories and selected a state-wide slate of candidates. The Midwest took the lead in forming state party tickets, while the eastern states lagged a year or so. There were no efforts to organize the party in the South, apart from a few areas adjacent to free states. The new party was sectional, based in the northeast and northern Midwest--areas with a strong Yankee presence. It had only scattered support in slave states before the Civil War.<ref> There was some strength in border cities such as St. Louis, Louisville, Wheeling, and Baltimore.</ref>

The first presidential nomination in 1856 when to an obscure western explorer [[John C. Fremont]], as the party crusaded against the Slave Power with the slogan, "Free Soil, Free Labor, Free men, Fremont and victory!" Democrats warned darkly that disunion and Civil War would result. The remnants of the Know Nothing movement prevented the new party from sweeping the North, and the Democrats elected [[James Buchanan]]. By 1858 the Know Nothings were gone and the Republicans swept the North. The 1860 election seemed a certain victory, for the party had majorities in states with a majority of the electoral votes. In the event the opposition split three ways, and [[Abraham Lincoln]] coasted to an easy victory, carrying 18 states with 190 electoral votes, while the opposition carried 15 states (mostly in the South) with 123 electoral votes. Lincoln had 1.9 million popular votes.

====Modernization====
Besides opposition to slavery, the new party put forward a modernizing vision --emphasizing higher education, banking, railroads, industry and cities, while promising free homesteads to farmers. It vigorously argued that free-market labor was superior to slavery and the very foundation of civic virtue and true American values - this is the "Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men" ideology explored by historian Eric Foner <ref> Foner, Eric. ''Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men''. 1993. </ref>. The Republicans absorbed the previous traditions of its members, most of whom had been [[Whig Party|Whigs]], and some of whom had been Democrats or members of third parties (especially the [[Free Soil Party]] and Know-Nothings (American Party). Many [[U.S. Democratic Party, history|Democrats]] who joined up were rewarded with governorships. <ref> They included [[Nathaniel P. Banks]] of Massachusetts, [[Kinsley Bingham]] of Michigan, [[William H. Bissell]] of Illinois, [[Salmon P. Chase]] of Ohio, [[Hannibal Hamlin]] of Maine, [[Samuel J. Kirkwood]] of Iowa, [[Ralph Metcalf]] of New Hampshire, [[Lot Morrill]] of Maine, and [[Alexander Randall]] of Wisconsin).</ref> or seats in the U.S. Senate.<ref> The senators included Bingham and Hamlin, as well as [[James R. Doolittle]] of Wisconsin, [[John P. Hale]] of New Hampshire, [[Preston King]] of New York, [[Lyman Trumbull]] of Illinois, and [[David Wilmot]] of Pennsylvania.</ref> Since its inception, its chief opposition has been the Democratic Party, but the amount of flow back and forth of prominent politicians between the two parties was quite high from 1854 to 1896.
====Ethnocultural voting====
Historians have explored the ethnocultural foundations of the party, along the line that ethnic and religious groups set the moral standards for their members, who then carried those standards into politics. The churches also provided social networks that politicians used to sign up voters. The pietistic churches, heavily influenced by the revivals of the [[Second Great Awakening]], emphasized the duty of the Christian to purge sin from society. Sin took many forms--alcoholism, polygamy and slavery became special targets for the Republicans. The Yankees, who dominated New England, much of upstate New York, and much of the upper Midwest were the strongest supporters of the new party. This was especially true for the pietistic Congregationalists and Presbyterians among them and (during the war), the Methodists, along with Scandinavian Lutherans. The Quakers were a small tight-knit group that was heavily Republican. The liturgical churches (Roman Catholic, Episcopal, German Lutheran), by contrast, largely rejected the moralism of the GOP; most of their adherents voted Democratic. <ref> Kleppner (1979) has extensive detail on the voting behavior of groups.</ref>

====Politics 1854-1860====
[[John C. Frémont]] ran as the first Republican nominee for [[President of the United States|President]] in 1856, using the [[political slogan]]: "[[United States Free Soil Party#Positions|Free soil, free labor, free speech, free men]], Frémont." Although Frémont's bid was unsuccessful, the party showed a strong base. It dominated in New England, New York and the northern Midwest, and had a strong presence in the rest of the North. It had almost no support in the South, where it was roundly denounced in 1856-60 as a divisive force that threatened civil war. The election of [[Abraham Lincoln]] in 1860 ended the domination of the fragile coalition of pro-slavery southern Democrats and conciliatory northern Democrats which had existed since the days of [[Andrew Jackson]]. Instead, a new era of Republican dominance based in the industrial and agricultural north ensued. Republicans still often refer to their party as the "party of Lincoln" in honor of the first Republican President.
{{See also|American election campaigns in the 19th century}}
{{See also|Third Party System}}

====Civil War: 1861-1865====
Lincoln proved brilliantly successful in uniting the factions of his party to fight for the Union.<ref> Goodwyn 2005</ref> However he usually fought the [[Radical Republicans]] who demanded harsher measures. Most Democrats at first were [[War Democrats]], and supportive until the fall of 1862. When Lincoln added the abolition of slavery as a war goal, many war Democrats became "peace Democrats." All the state Republican parties accepted the antislavery goal except Kentucky. In Congress, the party passed major legislation to promote rapid modernization, including a national banking system, high tariffs, an income tax, many excise taxes, paper money issued without backing ("greenbacks"), a huge national debt, homestead laws, and aid to education and agriculture. The Republicans denounced the peace-oriented Democrats as [[Copperheads]] and won enough [[War Democrats]] to maintain their majority in 1862; in 1864, they formed a coalition with many War Democrats as the "National Union Party" which reelected Lincoln easily, then folded back into the Republican party. During the war, upper middle-class men in major cities formed [[Union League]]s, to promote and help finance the war effort.

====Reconstruction: Blacks, Carpetbaggers and Scalawags====
In [[Reconstruction]], how to deal with the ex-Confederates and the freed slaves, or [[Freedmen]], were the major issues. By 1864, [[Radical Republicans]] controlled Congress and demanded more aggressive action against slavery, and more vengeance toward the Confederates. Lincoln held them off, but just barely. Republicans at first welcomed President [[Andrew Johnson]]; the Radicals thought he was one of them and would take a hard line in punishing the South. Johnson however broke with them and formed a loose alliance with moderate Republicans and Democrats. The showdown came in the Congressional elections of 1866, in which the Radicals won a sweeping victory and took full control of Reconstruction, passing key laws over the veto. Johnson was impeached by the House, but acquitted by the Senate. With the election of [[Ulysses S. Grant]] in 1868, the Radicals had control of Congress, the party and the Army, and attempted to build a solid Republican base in the South using the votes of [[Freedmen]], [[Scalawags]] and [[Carpetbaggers]], supported directly by U.S. Army detachments. Republicans all across the South formed local clubs called [[Union League]]s that effectively mobilized the voters, discussed issues, and when necessary fought off [[Ku Klux Klan]] attacks. Thousands died on both sides.

Grant supported radical reconstruction programs in the South, the 14th Amendment, and equal civil and voting rights for the freedmen. Most of all he was the hero of the war veterans, who marched to his tune. The party had become so large that factionalism was inevitable; it was hastened by Grant's tolerance of high levels of corruption typified by the [[Whiskey Ring]]. The "[[Liberal Republican]]s" split off in 1872 on the grounds that it was time to declare the war finished and bring the troops home. Many of the founders of the GOP joined the movement, as did many powerful newspaper editors. They nominated [[Horace Greeley]], who gained unofficial Democratic support, but was defeated in a landslide. The depression of 1873 energized the Democrats. They won control of the House and formed "[[Redeemers|Redeemer]]" coalitions which recaptured control of each southern state, in some cases using threats and violence.

[[Image:Rings.jpg|thumb|250px|right|1874 Keppler cartoon of Grant using Whiskey Ring and corruption to hold GOP together.]]

Reconstruction came to an end when the contested election of 1876 was awarded by a special [[Electoral Commission (United States)|electoral commission]] to Republican [[Rutherford B. Hayes]] who promised, through the unofficial [[Compromise of 1877]], to withdraw federal troops from control of the last three southern states. The region then became the [[Solid South]], giving overwhelming majorities of its electoral votes and Congressional seats to the Democrats until 1964.

In terms of racial issues, "White Republicans as well as Democrats solicited black votes but reluctantly rewarded blacks with nominations for office only when necessary, even then reserving the more choice positions for whites. The results were predictable: these half-a-loaf gestures satisfied neither black nor white Republicans. The fatal weakness of the Republican party in Alabama, as elsewhere in the South, was its inability to create a biracial political party. And while in power even briefly, they failed to protect their members from Democratic terror. Alabama Republicans were forever on the defensive, verbally and physically." [Woolfolk p 134]

Social pressure eventually forced most [[Scalawags]] to join the conservative/Democratic Redeemer coalition. A minority persisted and formed the "tan" half of the "Black and Tan" Republican party, a minority in every southern state after 1877. (DeSantis 1998)

====Gilded Age: 1877-1894====
The "GOP" (as it was now nicknamed) split into factions in the late 1870s. The Stalwarts, followers of Senator Conkling, defended the spoils system. The Half-Breeds, who followed Senator [[James G. Blaine]] of Maine, pushed for [[Civil service reform]]. Independents who opposed the spoils system altogether were called "[[Mugwumps]]". In 1884 they rejected [[James G. Blaine]] as corrupt and helped elect Democrat [[Grover Cleveland]]; most returned to the party by 1888.

As the Northern post-bellum economy boomed with heavy and light industry, railroads, mines, and fast-growing cities, as well as prosperous agriculture, the Republicans took credit and promoted policies to keep the fast growth going. They supported big business generally, hard money (i.e. the [[gold standard]]), high [[tariff]]s, and high pensions for Union veterans. By 1890, however, the Republicans had agreed to the [[Sherman Anti-Trust Act]] and the [[Interstate Commerce Commission]] in response to complaints from owners of small businesses and farmers. The high [[McKinley Tariff]] of 1890 hurt the party and the Democrats swept to a landslide in the off-year elections, even defeating McKinley himself.
====Ethnocultural Voters: pietistic Republicans versus liturgical Democrats====

From 1860 to 1912, the Republicans took advantage of the association of the Democrats with "Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion". Rum stood for the liquor interests and the tavernkeepers, in contrast to the GOP, which had a strong dry element. "Romanism" meant Catholics, especially Irish Americans, who ran the Democratic party in every big city, and whom the Republicans denounced for political corruption. "Rebellion" stood for the Confederates who tried to break the Union in 1861, and the [[Copperheads]] in the North who sympathized with them.

Demographic trends aided the Democrats, as the German and Irish Catholic immigrants were Democrats, and outnumbered the English and Scandinavian Republicans. During the 1880s and 1890s, the Republicans struggled against the Democrats' efforts, winning several close elections and losing two to Grover Cleveland (in [[U.S. presidential election, 1884|1884]] and [[U.S. presidential election, 1892|1892]]).
Religious lines were sharply drawn [Kleppner 1979]. Methodists, Congregationalists, Presbyterians, Scandinavian Lutherans and other pietists in the North were tightly linked to the GOP. In sharp contrast, liturgical groups, especially the Catholics, Episcopalians, and German Lutherans, looked to the Democratic party for protection from pietistic moralism, especially prohibition. Both parties cut across the class structure, with the Democrats more bottom-heavy.

Cultural issues, especially prohibition and foreign language schools became important because of the sharp religious divisions in the electorate. In the North, about 50% of the voters were pietistic Protestants (Methodists, Scandinavian Lutherans, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Disciples of Christ) who believed the government should be used to reduce social sins, such as drinking. Liturgical churches (Roman Catholics, German Lutherans, Episcopalians) comprised over a quarter of the vote and wanted the government to stay out of the morality business. Prohibition debates and referenda heated up politics in most states over a period of decade, as national prohibition was finally passed in 1918 (and repealed in 1932), serving as a major issue between the wet Democracy and the dry GOP.<ref See Kleppner (1979)</ref>
===Fourth Party System: 1896-1932: The Progressive Era ===
The election of [[William McKinley]] in 1896 was a [[realigning election]] that changed the balance of power, and introduced new rules, new issues and new leaders. It did not, however, see the emergence of a new major party. The Republican sweep of the 1894 Congressional elections presaged the McKinley landslide of 1896, which was repeated in 1900, thus locking the GOP in full control of the national government and most northern state governments. The GOP made major gains as well in the border states. The [[Fourth Party System]] was dominated by Republican presidents, with the exception of the two terms of Democrat [[Woodrow Wilson]], 1912-1920.

====McKinley and realignment====
McKinley promised that high tariffs would end the severe hardship caused by the [[Panic of 1893]], and that the GOP would guarantee a sort of pluralism in which all groups would benefit. He denounced [[William Jennings Bryan]], the Democratic nominee, as a dangerous radical whose plans for "Free Silver" at 16-1 (or [[Bimetallism]]) would bankrupt the economy.

McKinley relied heavily on industry and the middle classes for his support and cemented the Republicans as the party of business; his [[campaign manager]], Ohio's [[Mark Hanna]], developed a detailed plan for getting contributions from the business world, and McKinley outspent his rival [[William Jennings Bryan]] by a large margin. McKinley was the first president to promote [[pluralism]], arguing that prosperity would be shared by all ethnic and religious groups.

====Roosevelt and Progressivism====
[[Theodore Roosevelt]], who became president in 1901, had the most dynamic personality in the nation. Roosevelt had to contend with men like Senator [[Mark Hanna]], whom he outmaneuvered to gain control of the convention in 1904 that renominated him. More difficult to handle was conservative House Speaker [[Joseph Gurney Cannon]].

Roosevelt achieved modest legislative gains in terms of railroad legislation and pure food laws. He was more successful in Court, bringing antitrust suits that broke up the [[Northern Securities]] trust and [[Standard Oil]]. Roosevelt moved left in his last two years in office but was unable to pass major Square Deal proposals.

Roosevelt did succeed in naming his successor Secretary of War [[William Howard Taft]] who easily defeated Bryan again in 1908.

====Progressive insurgents vs. Conservatives====

The GOP was divided between insurgents and stand-patters (liberals and conservatives, to use 21st century terms). [[Theodore Roosevelt]] was an enormously popular president (1901-1909), and he transferred the office to [[William Howard Taft]]. Taft, however, did not have TR's enormous popularity nor his ability to bring rival factions together. When Taft sided with the standpatters under Speaker [[Joe Cannon]] and Senate leader [[Nelson Aldrich]], the insurgents revolted. Led by [[George Norris]] the insurgents took control of the House away from Cannon and imposed a new system whereby committee chairmanships depended on seniority (years of membership on the committee), rather than party loyalty.

The tariff issue was pulling the GOP apart. Roosevelt tried to postpone the issue but Taft had to meet it head on in 1909 with the [[Payne-Aldrich Tariff Act]]. Eastern conservatives led by [[Nelson A. Aldrich]] wanted high tariffs on manufactured goods (especially woolens), while Midwesterners called for low tariffs. Aldrich tricked them by lowering the tariff on farm products, which outraged the farmers. In a stunning comeback the Democrats won control of the House in 1910, as the GOP rift between insurgents and conservatives widened.

Roosevelt sided with the insurgents and, after long indecision, decided to run against Taft for the 1912 nomination. Roosevelt had to steamroll over insurgent Senator [[Robert LaFollette]] of Wisconsin, turning an ally into an enemy. Taft outmaneuvered Roosevelt and controlled the convention. Roosevelt walked out and formed a third party, the "Progressive" or "Bull Moose" party. Very few officeholders supported him, and the new party collapsed by 1914. With the GOP vote divided in half, Democrat [[Woodrow Wilson]] easily won the 1912 election, and was narrowly reelected in 1916.

====State and local politics====
The Republicans welcomed the [[Progressive Era]] at the state and local level. The first important reform mayor was [[Hazen S. Pingree]] of Detroit (1890-97) who was elected governor of Michigan in 1896. In New York City the Republicans joined nonpartisan reformers to battle [[Tammany Hall]], and elected Seth Low (1902-03). Samuel "Golden Rule" Jones was first elected mayor of Toledo as a Republican in 1897, but was reelected as an independent when his party refused to renominate him. In Iowa Senator Albert Cummins came up with the "Iowa Idea" that blamed the trust or monopoly problem on the high tariff, angering the eastern industrialists and factory workers. Many Republican civic leaders, following the example of [[Mark Hanna]], were active in the [[National Civic Federation]], which promoted urban reforms and sought to avoid wasteful strikes.

====Harding-Coolidge-Hoover, 1920-1932====
The party controlled the presidency throughout the 1920s, running on a platform of opposition to the League of Nations, high tariffs, and promotion of business interests. [[Warren G. Harding]], [[Calvin Coolidge]] and [[Herbert Hoover]] were resoundingly elected in the elections of 1920, 1924 and 1928 as the Democrats were deeply split on prohibition and religion. The breakaway efforts of Senator [[Robert LaFollette]] in 1924 failed to stop a landslide for Coolidge, and his movement fell apart. The [[Teapot Dome Scandal]] threatened to hurt the party but Harding died and Coolidge blamed everything on him, as the opposition splintered in 1924. The pro-business policies of the decade seemed to produce an unprecedented prosperity--until the Wall Street Crash of 1929 heralded the [[Great Depression]]. Although the party did very well in large cities and among ethnic Catholics in presidential elections of 1920-24, it was unable to hold those gains in 1928. By 1932 the cities--for the first time ever--had become Democratic strongholds.

The African American vote held for Hoover in 1932, but started moving toward Roosevelt. By 1940 the majority of northern blacks were voting Democratic. Southern blacks who could vote (in border states) were split; disenfranchised blacks in the South probably preferred the Republicans.

The [[Great Depression]] cost Hoover the presidency with the [[U.S. presidential election, 1932|1932 landslide election]] of [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]]. Roosevelt's [[New Deal coalition]] controlled American politics for most of the next three decades, excepting the two-term presidency of Republican [[Dwight Eisenhower]].

==Fifth Party System: 1932-1980 ==
Minority parties tend to factionalize and after 1936 the GOP split into a conservative faction (dominant in the West and Southeast) and a liberal faction (dominant in the Northeast) – combined with a residual base of inherited progressive Republicanism active throughout the century. [[U.S. presidential election, 1936|In 1936]] Kansas governor [[Alf Landon]] and his young followers defeated the [[Herbert Hoover]] faction. Landon generally supported most New Deal programs, but carried only two states in the Roosevelt landslide.

Senator [[Robert Taft]] of Ohio represented the Midwestern wing of the party that continued to oppose [[New Deal]] reforms and continued to champion [[isolationism]]. [[Thomas Dewey]], governor of New York, represented the Northeastern wing of the party. Dewey did not reject the New Deal programs, but demanded more efficiency, more support for economic growth, and less corruption. He was more willing than Taft to support Britain in 1939-40. After the war the isolationists wing strenuously opposed the [[United Nations]], and was half-hearted in opposition to world Communism. Senator [[William F. Knowland]] of California, sobriquet ''Senator from Formosa'' (Taiwan).

[[Dwight Eisenhower]], an internationalist allied with the Dewey wing, challenged Taft in 1952 on foreign policy issues. The two men were not far apart on domestic issues. Eisenhower's victory broke a 20 year Democratic lock on the White House. Eisenhower did not try to roll back the New Deal, but he did expand the Social Security system and built the Interstate Highway system.

The conservatives in 1964 made a comeback under the leadership of [[Barry Goldwater]] who defeated [[Nelson Rockefeller]] as the Republican candidate in the [[U.S. presidential election, 1964|1964 presidential convention]]. Goldwater was strongly opposed to the New Deal and the United Nations, but he rejected isolationism and containment, calling for an aggressive anti-Communist foreign policy.

Any long-term movement toward the GOP was interrupted by the [[Watergate Scandal]], which forced Nixon to resign in 1974 under threat of impeachment. [[Gerald Ford]] succeeded Nixon and gave him a full pardon--thereby giving the Democrats a powerful issue they used to sweep the 1974 off-year elections. Ford never fully recovered, and in 1976 he barely defeated [[Ronald Reagan]] for the nomination. The taint of Watergate and the nation's economic difficulties contributed to the election of Democrat [[Jimmy Carter]] in [[U.S. presidential election, 1976|1976]], running as a Washington outsider.

====Strength of Parties 1977====
How the Two Parties Stood after the 1976 Election:

{| class=wikitable
! Party
! Republican
! Democratic
! Independent
|-
! Party ID (Gallup)
| 22%
| 47%
| 31%
|-
! Congressmen
| 181
| 354
|
|-
! House
| 143
| 292
|
|-
! Senate
| 38
| 62
|
|-
! % House popular vote nationally
| 42%
| 56%
| 2%
|-
| align=right | in the East
| 41%
| 57%
| 2%
|-
| align=right | in the South
| 37%
| 62%
| 2%
|-
| align=right | in the Midwest
| 47%
| 52%
| 1%
|-
| align=right | in the West
| 43%
| 55%
| 2%
|-
! Governors
| 12
| 37
| 1
|-
! rowspan=2 | State Legislators
| 2,370
| 5,128
| 55
|-
| 31%
| 68%
| 1%
|-
! State legislature control
| 18
| 80
| 1 *
|-
| align=right | in the East
| 5
| 13
| 0
|-
| align=right | in the South
| 0
| 32
| 0
|-
| align=right | in the Midwest
| 5
| 17
| 1 *
|-
| align=right | in the West
| 8
| 18
| 0
|-
! States' one party control of legislature and governorship
| 1
| 29
| 0
|-
|}
<nowiki>*</nowiki>The unicameral Nebraska legislature, in fact controlled by the Republicans, is technically nonpartisan.

Source: Everett Carll Ladd Jr. ''Where Have All the Voters Gone? The Fracturing of America's Political Parties'' (1978) p.6

====Moderate Republicans of 1940-80====
The term ''Rockefeller Republican'' was used 1960-80 to designate a faction of the party holding "moderate" views similar to those of the late [[Nelson Rockefeller]], [[governor of New York]] from 1959 to 1974 and vice president under President [[Gerald Ford]] in 1974-77. Before Rockefeller, [[Tom Dewey]], governor of New York 1942-54 and GOP presidential nominee in 1944 and 1948 was the leader. [[Dwight Eisenhower]] reflected many of their views. An important leader in the 1950s was Connecticut Republican Senator [[Prescott Bush]], father and grandfather of presidents of [[George H. W. Bush]] and [[George W. Bush]]. After Rockefeller left the national stage in 1976, this faction of the party was more often called "moderate Republicans," in contrast to the conservatives who rallied to [[Ronald Reagan]].
Historically, Rockefeller Republicans were moderate or liberal on domestic and social policies. They favored New Deal programs, including regulation and welfare. They were very strong supporters of civil rights. They were strongly supported by big business on Wall Street (New York City). In fiscal policy they favored balanced budgets and relatively high tax levels to keep the budget balanced. They sought long-term economic growth through entrepreneurships, not tax cuts. In state politics, they were strong supporters of state colleges and universities, low tuition, and large research budgets. They favored infrastructure improvements, such as highway projects. In foreign policy they were internationalists, and anti-Communists. They felt the best way to counter Communism was sponsoring economic growth (through foreign aid), maintaining a strong military, and keeping close ties to [[NATO]]. Geographically their base was the Northeast, from Pennsylvania to Maine.

====Suburbia====
The suburban electorate passed the city electiorate in the 1950s, as Eisenhower showed unusually strength there. The history of suburban politics is encapsulated in Nassau County (New York), just east of New York City, where a moderate Republican party machine operated. Despite predictions that the New Deal spelled the demise of the political machine, Nassau provided fertile ground for a party organization that rivaled its big city Democratic counterparts. The traditionally GOP county underwent a booming expansion during 1945-60, with an influx of new residents, many with previous Democratic party affiliations. In established villages and new housing developments such as [[Levittown]], under the canny leadership of J. Russel Sprague, the party used patronage and community organizing techniques to build its base among ethnic voters, young people, and new homeowners. The party expanded beyond its white Protestant base, with Italian Americans becoming particularly prominent in party leadership. Sprague was both party leader and county executive. That post was created in 1936 under a new charter engineered by Sprague to update a municipal apparatus unable to meet the infrastructure and development needs of a county that by 1960 had 1.3 million residents. Democrats and reformers had promoted charter revision for decades, and some consolidation of government services did take place. As county "boss," Sprague ruled with an iron hand. Nassau's pluralities for such candidates as Governor Thomas E. Dewey and President Dwight D. Eisenhower and Sprague's fundraising prowess made him a force in national party politics. He advocated a moderate, middle-of-the-road position that recognized expectations created by the New Deal while criticizing what were claimed to be Democratic excesses. After leaving elective office and party leadership, Sprague became a major campaign issue when the Democrats, in a 1961 historic upset, won the county executive post by both lambasting Sprague, tainted by a racetrack-stock scandal, and criticizing the developer-friendly "Spragueland" regime that had governed Nassau for decades. Soon after Sprague died in 1969, the Nassau GOP regained its control of the county government and reestablished virtual one-party rule until the 1990s.<ref> Marjorie Freeman Harrison, "Machine Politics Suburban Style: J. Russel Sprague and the Nassau County (New York) Republican Party at Midcentury." PhD dissertation Columbia U. 2005. 388 pp.
DAI 2005 66(5): 1925-A. DA3174807 </ref>

An even longer reign of power characterized GOP machine control of Delaware County, Pennsylvania, a rural and suburban area south of Philadelphia. William McClure controlled the GOP from 1875 until his death in 1907; his son John J. McClure, was in control from 1907 until his death in 1965. McLarnon (1998) has four main findings. First, political machines were not confined to big cities; the demographic and political peculiarities of suburban counties lent themselves to continued domination by political machines long after the heyday of the city machine had passed. Secondly, neither the New Deal, immigration restriction, nor the rise of organized labor destroyed all the old Republican machines. Delaware was one of several similar counties in southeastern Pennsylvania where the GOP continued to hold sway throughout the 20th century. Thirdly, not all blacks switched their electoral loyalties to the Democratic party in 1936. The black population of Chester, Delaware County's industrial city, generally voted Republican for offices below the presidential level. Finally, the citizens of Delaware County supported and continues to support the Republican machine because the machine delivered and continues to deliver those things that the citizens want most. At the beginning of the century, the machine provided food, work, and police protection to Chester's European and black immigrants. During Prohibition, it supplied the county with liquor. Through the Depression, patronage and close alliances with local industrialists kept a significant portion of machine loyalists employed. In the 1950s and 1960s the machine kept taxes low, initiated a war on organized vice, successfully defeated all threats to home rule, and discouraged blacks from settling in historically white communities. The trash was collected, the snow plowed, the streets repaired. The buses ran on time, the playgrounds and parks were clean, and the schools acceptably average. These were the most important concerns of a majority of county's citizens. While the citizens and their concerns changed over time, two things seem to have remained constant: the McClures', and their successors' ability to read and react to the needs of the electorate; and the fact that rarely, if ever, has a desire for honest, democratic government been high on Delaware County voters' list of priorities.<ref>John Morrison McLarnon, "Ruling Suburbia: A Biography of the McClure Machine of Delaware County, Pennsylvania." PhD dissertation U. of Delaware 1998. 616 pp. DAI 1998 58(12): 4780-A. DA9819160 </ref>

====Rise of the right====
[[Barry Goldwater]] crusaded against the Rockefeller Republicans, beating Rockefeller narrowly in the California primary of 1964. That set the stage for a conservative resurgence, based in the South and West, in opposition to the Northeast. Brennan (1995) stresses that conservatives in the late 1950s and early 1960s had many internal problems to overcome before they could mount an effective challenge to the hegemony of the distrusted Eastern Establishment, typified by [[Nelson A. Rockefeller]]. The conservative movement had some newspapers and magazines (especially [[William F. Buckley]]'s ''National Review'') and one charismatic national leader, Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater. The movement gained momentum once they had established a unity out of diverse elements on the Right with a common commitment to a militant anticommunism, and once they had succeeded in mobilizing a grassroots base inside a number of state and local organizations in the Sun Belt on behalf of a draft Goldwater campaign in 1960. Although Nixon was acceptable to the conservatives, they worried that he compromised with Rockefeller in 1960. His defeat in 1960 removed a major obstacle and also gave ammunition to those who wanted "a choice, not an echo" (to echo a Goldwater slogan). After 1960 liberals and moderates in the Republican party failed to appreciate the magnitude of the challenge they faced on the grass-roots level. They too readily equated their conservative opponents in the party with the "lunatic fringe" and did not take them seriously until they found themselves deposed by a grass roots insurgency of the sort unknown in the party since 1912.<ref> Brennan (1995) p, 59</ref> Goldwater's landslide defeat opened the way to a liberal Democratic resurgence, but did little to help the liberal wing of the GOP. The failues of the Great Society, especially a wave of major urban riots and a surge in violent crime, led to major gains in 1966, and to Nixon's election in the chaotic 1968 election. The Democrats became deeply divided on the Vietnam war (which did not divide the GOP), and on issues of race, when Alabamian [[George C. Wallace]] set up a third party that carried much of the deep South.

As Goldwater faded to a lesser role after 1964, a new conservative hero emerged: in the largest and most trendy state film star [[Ronald Reagan]] was elected governor of California in 1966 and reelected in 1970.

With the rise of conservatism the national Republican Party became more ideologically homogeneous. This change occurred as conservative politicians and voters joined the party and their liberal counterparts abandoned the GOP. Events in New York State during the 1960s and 1970s facilitated this transformation. Here, ideological conservatives formed a third party for the express purpose of changing a state GOP that both symbolized and contributed to the national GOP's liberal viewpoint. The [[Conservative Party, New York|Conservative Party]] relied on the state's unique election law to crash the New York GOP, either by forcing its way in or by imposing a lethal electoral price. The GOP-Conservative Party relationship began in 1962 at sword's point but achieved a high degree of harmony in 1980. Initially, New York Republicans, led by Governor [[Nelson Rockefeller]], successfully marginalized the new party. As the conservative movement matured, however, the balance of power began to shift. When Nixon was elected president in 1968, the Conservative Party gained an external ally who proved invaluable. The third party achieved partial acceptance in 1970 with the election of [[James Buckley]] to the Senate. For much of the ensuing decade, however, Conservatives struggled with success suffering a series of damaging setbacks. Only in the late 1970s, did the party recover when it embraced a more modest agenda. Finally, the 1980 election settled the overall contours of the relationship between the two parties. Conservatives formed their party to force the state GOP to the right, to drive liberal Republicans from office, and allow ideologically conservative national Republicans to succeed in the state. By 1980, it had achieved these goals changing the nature of politics in the state. This resolution affected politics beyond the state by diminishing the importance of ideological liberals in the national GOP, thus freeing a more ideologically consistent national Republican Party to promote the rise of conservatism.<ref> Timothy J. Sullivan, "Crashing the Party: The New York State Conservative and Republican Parties, 1962-1980." PhD dissertation U. of Maryland, College Park 2003. 458 pp. DAI 2004 64(11): 4181-A. DA3112508 </ref>

====Realignment: The South becomes Republican====
In the century after Reconstruction ended in 1877, the white South identified with the [[U.S. Democratic Party|Democratic Party]]. The Democrats' lock on power was so strong, the region was called the "Solid South." The Republicans controlled certain parts of the Appalachian mountains, but they sometimes did compete for statewide office in the border states. Before 1964, the southern Democrats saw their party as the defender of the southern way of life, which included a respect for states' rights and an appreciation for traditional southern values. They repeatedly warned against the aggressive designs of Northern liberals and Republicans, as well as the civil rights activists they denounced as "outside agitators." Thus there was a serious barrier to becoming a Republican.

However, since 1964, the Democratic lock on the South has been broken. The long-term cause was that the region was becoming more like the rest of the nation and could not long stand apart in terms of racial segregation. Modernization that brought factories, businesses, and cities, and millions of migrants from the North; far more people graduated from high school and college. Meanwhile the cotton and tobacco basis of the traditional South faded away, as former farmers moved to town or commuted to factory jobs.

The immediate cause of the political transition involved civil rights. The [[American Civil Rights Movement (1955-1968)|civil rights movement]] caused enormous controversy in the white South with many attacking it as a violation of states' rights. When segregation was outlawed by court order and by the Civil Rights acts of 1964 and 1965, a die-hard element resisted integration, led by Democratic governors [[Orval Faubus]] of Arkansas, [[Lester Maddox]] of Georgia, and, especially [[George Wallace]] of Alabama. These populist governors appealed to a less-educated, blue-collar electorate that on economic grounds favored the Democratic party, but opposed segregation. After passage of the Civil Rights Act most Southerners accepted the integration of most institutions (except public schools). With the old barrier to becoming a Republican removed, traditional Southerners joined the new middle class and the Northern transplants in moving toward the Republican party. Integration thus liberated Southern politics, just as [[Martin Luther King]] had promised. Meanwhile the newly enfranchised black voters supported Democratic candidates at the 85-90% level.

The South's transition to a Republican stronghold took decades. First the states started voting Republican in presidential elections--the Democrats countered that by nominating Southerners who could carry some states in the region, such as [[Jimmy Carter]] in 1976 and 1980, and [[Bill Clinton]] in 1992 and 1996; the strategy did not work with [[Al Gore]] in 2000, or [[John Edwards]] in 2004. Then the states began electing Republican senators to fill open seats caused by retirements, and finally governors and state legislatures changed sides. Georgia was the last state to fall, with [[Sonny Perdue]] taking the governorship in 2002. Republicans aided the process with systematic gerrymandering that protected the African American and Hispanic vote (as required by the Civil Rights laws), but split up the remaining white Democrats so that Republicans mostly would win. In 2006 the Supreme Court endorsed nearly all of the redistricting engineered by [[Tom DeLay]] that swung the Texas Congressional delegation to the GOP in 2004.

In addition to its white middle class base, Republicans attracted strong majorities from the evangelical Christian vote, which had been nonpolitical before 1980. The national Democratic Party's support for liberal social stances such as [[abortion]] drove many former Democrats into a Republican party that was embracing the conservative views on these issues. Conversely, liberal Republicans in the northeast began to join the Democratic Party. In 1969 in ''The Emerging Republican Majority'', [[Kevin Phillips]], argued that support from Southern whites and growth in the [[Sun Belt]], among other factors, was driving an enduring Republican electoral [[realigning election|realignment]]. Today, the South is again solid, but the reliable support is for Republican presidential candidates. Exit polls in 2004 showed that Bush led Kerry by 70-30% among whites, who comprised 71% of the Southern voters. Kerry had a 90-9% lead among the 18% of the voters who were black. One third of the Southerners said they were white evangelicals; they voted for Bush by 80-20%.<ref> See [http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.3.html exit polls]</ref>

===Reagan Era===

In 1980, [[Ronald Reagan]] won the Republican nomination and easily beat Carter and a breakaway Republican with his strong communication skills and message of economic freedom and strength against the [[Soviet Union]]. Reagan produced a major realignment with his 1980 and 1984 landslides. In 1980 the Reagan coalition was possible because of Democratic losses in most social-economic groups. In 1984 Reagan won nearly 60% of the popular vote and carried every state except his Democrat opponent Walter Mondale's home state of [[Minnesota]] and the District of Columbia, creating a record 525 electoral vote total (of 538 possible). Even in Minnesota, Mondale won by a mere 3,761 votes <ref>http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=1984&fips=27&f=1&off=0&elect=0</ref>, meaning Reagan came within less than 3,800 votes of winning in all fifty states.

Running on a "Peace Through Strength" platform to combat the Communist threat and massive tax cuts to revitalize the economy, Reagan's strong but genial persona proved too much for the ineffective and sour Carter in 1980. Reagan's election also gave Republicans control of the Senate for the first time in decades. Dubbed the "Reagan Revolution" he fundamentally altered several long standing debates in Washington, namely dealing with the Soviet threat and reviving the economy. His election saw the conservative wing of the party gain control. While reviled by liberal opponents in his day, his proponents contend his programs provided unprecedented economic growth, and spurred the collapse of the former Soviet Union. Currently regarded as one of the most popular and successful presidents in the modern era (1960-present.) He inspired Conservatives to greater electoral victories by being re-elected in a landslide against Walter Mondale in 1984 but oversaw the loss of the Senate in 1986.

The so-called "Reagan Democrats" were Democrats before the Reagan years, and afterwards, but who voted for Ronald Reagan in 1980 and 1984 (and for George H.W. Bush in 1988), producing their landslide victories. They were primarily ethnic Catholics in the Northeast and were frustrated by their seeing abandonment on cultural issues by the Democratic party's national leaders.

Reagan's Vice-President, George H.W. Bush, a [[World War II]] war hero, was elected in 1988 but was defeated in 1992 as domestic issues took prominence after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 and end of the [[Cold War]]. Democratic challenger [[Bill Clinton]] strategically repositioned the Democrats to the right. [[Ross Perot]]'s candidacy was instrumental in Clinton's victory as he took Republican votes with his criticism of deficits. Perot won 19% of the popular vote, and Clinton, still a largely unknown quantity in American politics with 41% of the popular vote took office. Despite his loss, George H.W. Bush left office in 1993 with a 56 percent job approval rating.

House Republican Minority Whip [[Newt Gingrich]]-led the "Republican Revolution" of 1994 and its famous ''Contract With America''. It was the first time since 1952 that the Republicans secured control of both houses of U.S. Congress, which, with the exception of the Senate during 2001-2002, lasted until the 2006 mid-term elections. Democrats had controlled both houses of Congress for the forty years preceding 1994, with the exception of the 1981-1987 Congresses (in which Republicans controlled the Senate).

In the 1994 mid-term election, Republican congressional candidates ran on a platform of promising floor votes to force members of Congress to go on record on a series of popular reforms -- something the Democrats had stifled for decades. These measures and others formed the Contract with America, which represented the first effort to have a party platform in a mid-term election. Seven of the ten Contract items actually became Law. The budget reforms, coupled with reduced defence spending after the Cold War, and the earlier Reagan Tax Cuts for Business Research and Development in the 1980s, led to a high tech consumer boom, rising incomes for all groups, and unprecedented, sustained economic growth in the late 1990s. Democratic President Bill Clinton opposed some of the social agenda initiatives but he co-opted the proposals for welfare reform and a balanced federal budget. The result was a major change in the welfare system, which conservatives hailed and liberals bemoaned. One Contract item, which required Democrats in a two-thirds majority to pass a Constitutional amendment to impose term limits on members of Congress, failed.

In 1995, a budget battle with [[President Clinton]] led to the brief shutdown of the federal government, an event which contributed to Clinton's victory in the 1996 election. That year the Republicans nominated Bob Dole, who was unable to transfer his success in Senate leadership to a viable presidential campaign. Ross Perot ran again (this time on Reform Party ticket), once again draining away a large percentage of Dole's support and insuring Clinton another term after the majority of Americans voters voted against him.

With the election of George W. Bush (son of former president George H. W. Bush) in an extremely close 2000 election, the Republican party controlled both the presidency and both houses of Congress for the first time since 1952. However, after [[Vermont]] senator Jim Jeffords left the Republican Party to become an independent aligned with the Democrats in June of 2001, Republicans lost control of the Senate by a single seat.

In the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, however, Bush pursued a "War on Terrorism" that included the liberation of Afghanistan from the radical Islamist Taliban regime and the [[Patriot act|USA PATRIOT act]]. By early 2002, the Taliban was removed from power in Afghanistan. On March 20, 2003, U.S. and allied nations initiated "Operation Iraqi Freedom" to liberate the Iraqi people from the brutal regime of [[Saddam Hussein]]. By May 1, 2003, the regime of Saddam was declared officially over. Once US and allied military forces entered Iraq, they discovered that various international terrorists had been given sanctuary by Saddam and ran their terrorist operations from Iraq. Notable terrorists found included Muhammad Zaidan aka Abu Abbas and Sabri Khalil al-Banna aka Abu Nidal.

The Republican Party fared well in the 2002 midterm elections, solidifying its hold on the House and regaining control of the Senate, in the run-up to the liberation of Iraq. This marked just the third time since the Civil War that the party in control of the White House gained seats in both houses of Congress in a midterm election (others were 1902 and 1934).

Bush was renominated without opposition for the [[United States presidential election, 2004]] and titled his political platform "A Safer World and a More Hopeful America". It expressed Bush's commitment to winning the War on Terror, ushering in an Ownership Era, and building an innovative economy to compete in the world.

On November 2, 2004, Bush was re-elected, while Republicans gained seats in both houses of Congress, leaving Democrats in disarray. Bush carried 31 of 50 states for 286 Electoral College votes. In that election, he also received more popular votes than any previous presidential candidate, 62.0 million votes. Democrat challenger, Senator [[John Kerry]], carried a 19 states and the District of Columbia, earning him 251 Electoral College votes and 48 percent of the popular vote to Bush's 51 percent, the first popular majority since his father was elected in 1988. That election also marked the seventh consecutive election in which the Democratic nominee failed to reach that threshold.

The counties where Bush led in the popular vote amount to 83% of the geographic area of the U.S. (excluding Alaska, which did not report results by borough/census area, but had all electoral districts but one of the two in Juneau vote for Bush).

The election marked the first time an incumbent president was reelected while his political party increased its numbers in both houses of Congress since Lyndon Johnson in the 1964 election. It was the first time for a Republican since William McKinley in the 1900 election.

==Presidential dominance==
[[Image:Washington painting at the Oval Office.JPG|right]]
In terms of winning presidential elections, the Republican Party has been the most successful political party in U.S. history. Since the American Civil War, Grover Cleveland is the only non-incumbent Democrat who has won the office of President of the United States under "ordinary" circumstances (meaning no third party, no Great Depression, no disputed count in Illinois, no assassination of the previous president, no Watergate).

From 1860 through 1912, 10 men were elected President of the United States -- Grover Cleveland being the only Democrat.

Woodrow Wilson, who won in 1912, only won because William Howard Taft (the Republican incumbent) split the party vote with former President Theodore Roosevelt who ran as the Progressive Party candidate. Wilson only garnered 41.6% of the popular vote, compared to a combined 50.6% of Roosevelt and Taft.

Following Wilson, there were three more Republicans. It took a major economic depression to get another Democrat elected (in 1932).

John F. Kennedy (the next Democratic non-incumbent to win the White House) won the [[United States presidential election, 1960]] as the result of voter fraud in Chicago (and several other locations), with a mere 0.2% difference in the popular vote.

It took the aftermath of the Watergate matter to get the next, non-incumbent Democrat elected in 1976 in a very close election in which Democrat Jimmy Carter received 50.1% of the popular vote to Gerald Ford's 48.0%. 5,000 popular votes in the State of Ohio would have made the difference.

The next non-incumbent Democrat victory occurred in 1992, in which third party candidate H. Ross Perot took away 19% of the popular vote from the Republican candidate, incumbent George H.W. Bush. And even though Bill Clinton was twice elected, he never once had a majority of the vote (43.0% in 1992; 49.2% in 1996). More people (the majority of voters) voted against Clinton for President than ever voted for him.

Since the birth of the Republican Party, the average Republican margin of victory over their opponents in Presidential elections has been around 12% to the Democrat's margin of victory over their opponents at around 8%. Also since the birth of the Republican Party, Democrats only garnered a majority of the vote a total of 7 times in 38 elections, while Republicans earned a majority 17 times in those same 38 elections.

In the 20th century, only 7 U.S. Presidents gained a larger margin of victory over their opponents in their second election. Five of those seven were Republicans. It must be noted that this statistic cannot be applied to incumbents who entered office without being elected, as their re-election was actually their first election -- i.e. Theodore Roosevelt, Calvin Coolidge, Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, Gerald Ford)

*Nixon from a 0.7% margin of victory in 1968 to a 23.2% MOV in 1972.
*Reagan from a 9.7% MOV in 1980 to a 18.2% MOV in 1984.
*FDR from a 17.% MOV in 1932 to a 24.3% MOV in 1936.
*Eisenhower from a 10.7% MOV in 1952 to a 15.4% MOV in 1956.
*McKinley from a 4.2% MOV in 1896 to a 6.1% MOV in 1900.
*Clinton from a 5.6% MOV in 1992 to a 8.5% MOV in 1996.
*GWB from a -0.5% MOV in 2000 to a 2.8% MOV in 2004.

Of the 11 U.S. presidents to be re-elected (i.e. elected a second time) since the Civil War, 7 were Republicans and only 4 Democrats. All seven of those Republicans were re-elected with a higher percentage of the vote , while only 3 of those Democrats received a greater percentage for their re-election bid. And this doesn't even include Franklin Delano Roosevelt's third and fourth terms, where victory margins diminished in his third and forth terms.)

== Contemporary Party ==

The contemporary Republican Party represents a wide array of interests such as the conservative evangelicals and the economic libertarians. The party has had some internal conflict over attitudes about how governments should run and how large they should be, what the party stands for, and what the party's attitude towards [[neo-conservatism]] should be especially in regard to foreign policy. The party is also divided over immigration issues with some members (such as George W. Bush) favoring workers visas and permits and some other members favoring strict control of immigration and strong action against illegal immigration. Unlike the Democratic party, the Republican party routinely allows dissenting factions such as the [[Log Cabin Republicans]] to speak at National Conventions.

==Presidents from the party==
# [[Abraham Lincoln]] (1861-1865)
# [[Ulysses S. Grant]] (1869-1877)
# [[Rutherford B. Hayes]] (1877-1881)
# [[James Garfield]] (1881)
# [[Chester A. Arthur]] (1881-1885)
# [[Benjamin Harrison]] (1889-1893)
# [[William McKinley]] (1897-1901)
# [[Theodore Roosevelt]] (1901-1909)
# [[William Howard Taft]] (1909-1913)
# [[Warren G. Harding]] (1921-1923)
# [[Calvin Coolidge]] (1923-1929)
# [[Herbert Hoover]] (1929-1933)
# [[Dwight Eisenhower]] (1953-1961)
# [[Richard Nixon]] (1969-1974)
# [[Gerald Ford]] (1974-1977)
# [[Ronald Reagan]] (1981-1989)
# [[George H. W. Bush]] (1989-1993)
# [[George W. Bush]] (2001-2009)

==Famous Republicans==
*[[Abraham Lincoln]] (1809 - 1865), 16th President of the United States
*[[James G. Blaine]] (1830 - 1893), Senator from Maine and Presidential nominee
*[[Joseph Gurney Cannon]] (1836 - 1926), Speaker of the House
*[[Charles Curtis]] (1860 - 1936), [[United States Vice President|Vice President]], a Native American
*[[Charles G. Dawes]] (1865 - 1951), Vice President
*[[Tom Dewey]] (1902 - 1971), governor of New York; presidential nominee 1944 and 1948
*[[John C. Frémont]] (1813 - 1890), 1st Republican Candidate for President of the United States
*[[Mark Hanna]] (1837 - 1904), Senator from Ohio; manager of 1896 campaign
*[[George Frisbie Hoar]] (1826 - 1904), Senator from Massachusetts
*[[Charles Evans Hughes]] governor of New York, nominee for president in 1916, Secretary of State, [[Chief Justice of the United States]]
*[[William Fife Knowland]] (1908-1974) Senator from [[California]]; Senate Majority Leader: 1953-1955; Senate Minority Leader: 1955-1959
*[[Henry Cabot Lodge]] (1850 - 1924) Senator from [[Massachusetts]]; foreign policy spokesman
*[[Joseph McCarthy]] (1908 - 1957), Senator from [[Wisconsin]] and noted [[anti-communist]]
*[[Richard Nixon]], (1913 - 1994), 37th president of the United States
*[[Thomas Brackett Reed]] (1839 - 1902), [[Speaker of the House]]
*[[Nelson Rockefeller]] (1908 - 1979), Vice President, [[Governor of New York]], leader of liberals
*[[Theodore Roosevelt]] President of the United States, (1901 - 1909)
*[[Thaddeus Stevens]] (1792-1868), Pennsylvania Senator; leader of Radicals in Civil War and Reconstruction
*[[Charles Sumner]], (1811-1874), Senator from Massachusetts; leader of Radicals in Civil War and Reconstruction
*[[Henry Stimson]], Secretary of War for Taft and FDR; Secretary of State for Hoover
*[[Robert Taft]] (1889 - 1953), Ohio Senator and presidential hopeful; leader of conservatives
*[[Strom Thurmond]] (1902 - 2003), the oldest serving Senator in history (from [[South Carolina]])
*[[Arthur H. Vandenberg]] (1884 - 1951), Michigan Senator; leader of internationalism in 1940s
*[[Earl Warren]] (1891 - 1974), Vice presidential nominee, [[Governor of California]], and [[Chief Justice of the United States]]
*[[Ronald Reagan]] President of the United States, (1981 - 1989)
*[[George H.W. Bush]] President of the United States, (1989 - 1993)
*[[George W. Bush]] President of the United States, (2001 - present)
*[[John McCain]], presidential nominee, 2008
*[[Sarah Palin]] Vice-presidential nominee, 2008

==See Also==
*[[RINO]] - '''R'''epublicans '''i'''n '''N'''ame '''O'''nly
*[[Previous Breaking News/Republicans|Articles about '''Republicans''' from previous "Breaking News"]]

==Bibliography==
===Historical===
*''American National Biography'' (20 volumes, 1999) covers all politicians no longer alive; online at many academic libraries.
* Abramson, Paul R. et al. ''Change and Continuity in the 2004 and 2006 Elections'' (2007) [http://www.amazon.com/Change-Continuity-2004-2006-Elections/dp/0872894150/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1221785751&sr=8-10 excerpt and text search]
* Batchelor, John Calvin. ''"Ain't You Glad You Joined the Republicans?" A Short History of the GOP.'' 1996. 399 pp. well-written popular history, well illustrated
* Chace, James. ''1912: Wilson, Roosevelt, Taft, and Debs - The Election That Changed the Country.'' (2004). 323 pp.
* ''Congressional Quarterly's Guide to U.S. Elections'' (4th ed 2003) 1600pp, vast compilation of data, esp., since 1945
* Foner, Eric. ''Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men: The Ideology of the Republican Party Before the Civil War (1970), influential history of ideas and ideology; [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=90104191 online edition]
*Gienapp, William E. ''The Origins of the Republican Party, 1852-1856'' (1987), quantitative voting studies, by state
* Goldberg, Robert Alan. ''Barry Goldwater'' (1995),
*Gould, Lewis. ''Grand Old Party: A History of the Republicans'' (2003), the best scholarly overview.
* Hodgson, Godfrey. ''The World Turned Right Side Up: A History of the Conservative Ascendancy in America'' (1996). by British journalist
*Jensen, Richard. ''Grass Roots Politics: Parties, Issues, and Voters, 1854-1983'' (1983) [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=15326916 online edition]
*Jensen, Richard. ''The Winning of the Midwest: Social and Political Conflict, 1888-1896'' (1971)
*Kleppner, Paul, et al. ''The Evolution of American Electoral Systems'' (1983), applies party systems model
*Kleppner, Paul. ''The Third Electoral System 1853-1892: Parties, Voters, and Political Cultures'' (1979), analysis of voting behavior, with emphasis on region, ethnicity, religion and class. [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=24451028 online edition]
*Marcus, Robert. ''Grand Old Party: Political Structure in the Gilded Age, 1880-1896'' 1971.
*Morgan, H. Wayne. ''From Hayes to McKinley; National Party Politics, 1877-1896'' (1969) [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=94446383 online edition], good survey of era
*Mayer, George H. ''The Republican Party, 1854-1966.'' 2nd ed. (1967), narrative.
*Parmet, Herbert S. ''Eisenhower and the American Crusades'' (1972) [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=14967951 online edition]
* Patterson, James T. ''Mr. Republican: A Biography of Robert A. Taft'' (1972)
*Perlstein, Rick. ''Before the Storm: Barry Goldwater and the Unmaking of the American Consensus'' (2002) well written, broad account of 1964
*Perlstein, Rick. ''Nixonland: The Rise of a President and the Fracturing of America'' (2008), 896pp; covers 1965 to 1972
* Reinhard, David W. ''The Republican Right since 1945'' (1983) [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=91954887 online edition]
*Rutland, Robert Allen. ''The Republicans: From Lincoln to Bush'' (1996) popular narrative
*Shafer, Byron E. and Anthony J. Badger, eds. ''Contesting Democracy: Substance and Structure in American Political History, 1775-2000'' (2001), long essays by specialists on each time period: [http://www.amazon.com/Contesting-Democracy-Substance-Structure-Political/dp/0700611398/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1221785707&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search]
**includes: "'To One or Another of These Parties Every Man Belongs;": 1820–1865 by Joel H. Silbey; "Change and Continuity in the Party Period: 1835–1885" by Michael F. Holt; "The Transformation of American Politics: 1865–1910" by Peter H. Argersinger; "Democracy, Republicanism, and Efficiency: 1885–1930" by Richard Jensen; "The Limits of Federal Power and Social Policy: 1910–1955" by Anthony J. Badger; "The Rise of Rights and Rights Consciousness: 1930–1980" by James T. Patterson; and "Economic Growth, Issue Evolution, and Divided Government: 1955–2000" by Byron E. Shafer
*Schlesinger, Arthur Meier, Jr. ed. ''History of American Presidential Elections, 1789-2000'' (various multivolume editions, latest is 2001). For each election includes good scholarly history and selection of primary document. Essays on the most important election are reprinted in Schlesinger, ''The Coming to Power: Critical presidential elections in American history'' (1972)
* Smith, Richard Norton. An Uncommon Man: The Triumph of Herbert Hoover, (1987) full-length scholarly biography.
*Summers, Mark Wahlgren. ''Rum, Romanism & Rebellion: The Making of a President, 1884'' (2000) [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=104865169 online edition]
* Sundquist, James L. ''Dynamics of the Party System: Alignment and Realignment of Political Parties in the United States'' (1983) [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=29223022 online edition]
* Thelen, David. ''Robert M. La Follette and the Insurgent Spirit'' 1976. short interpretive biography
===Since 1980===
*Barone, Michael, and Grant Ujifusa, ''The Almanac of American Politics 2008: The Senators, the Representatives and the Governors: Their Records and Election Results, Their States and Districts'' (2007) covers all incumbent Congressmen and governors with amazing detail. New edition published every two years since 1975.
* Aistrup, Joseph A. ''The Southern Strategy Revisited: Republican Top-Down Advancement in the South'' (1996)
* Black, Earl and Black, Merle. ''The Rise of Southern Republicans.'' (2002). 442 pp.
* Cannon, Lou. ''President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime'' (2000), [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=88989671 online edition]
* Critchlow, Donald T. ''The Conservative Ascendancy: How the GOP Right Made Political History'' (2007), by a leading conservative historian
* Edwards, Lee. ''The Conservative Revolution: The Movement That Remade America.'' (1999). 391 pp. by a conservative
*Ehrman, John, ''The Eighties: America in the Age of Reagan'' (2005) by a conservative historian
* Frank, Thomas. ''What's the Matter with Kansas? How Conservatives Won the Heart of America'' (2005), a liberal attack [http://www.amazon.com/Whats-Matter-Kansas-Conservatives-America/dp/B000FTWB3K/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1198072365&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search]
* Green, John Robert. ''The Presidency of George Bush.'' (2000). 1989-1993
* Lamis, Alexander P. ed. ''Southern Politics in the 1990s'' (1999)
* Layman, Geoffrey. ''The Great Divide: Religious and Cultural Conflict in American Party Politics.'' (2001). 435pp.
* Levy, Peter B. ''Encyclopedia of the Reagan-Bush Years'' Greenwood Press, 1996 [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=77341841 online edition]
* Lublin, David. ''The Republican South: Democratization and Partisan Change.'' Princeton U. Press, 2004. 272 pp. [http://www.amazon.com/Republican-South-Democratization-Partisan-Change/dp/0691130477/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1198072384&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search]
* Patterson, James T. ''Restless Giant: The United States from Watergate to Bush vs. Gore.'' (2005), standard scholarly synthesis.
* Pemberton, William E. ''Exit with Honor: The Life and Presidency of Ronald Reagan'' (1998) favorable biography by historian; [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=49534236 online edition]
* Reeves, Richard. ''President Reagan: The Triumph of Imagination'' (2005) detailed analysis by conservative historian
* Rymph, Catherine. ''Republican Women: Feminism and Conservatism from Suffrage through the Rise of the New Right.'' U. of North Carolina Press, 2006. 338 pp.
* Sabato, Larry J. ed. ''The Sixth Year Itch: The Rise and Fall of the George W. Bush Presidency'' (2007), in-depth essays by scholars
*Sabato, Larry J. ''Divided States of America: The Slash and Burn Politics of the 2004 Presidential Election'' (2005).
* Sabato, Larry J. and Bruce Larson. ''The Party's Just Begun: Shaping Political Parties for America's Future'' (2001).
* Schaller, Michael and Rising, George. ''The Republican Ascendancy: American Politics, 1968-2001.'' Harlan Davidson, 2002. 210 pp. Short survey by liberal scholars
* Steely, Mel. ''The Gentleman from Georgia: The Biography of Newt Gingrich.'' Mercer U. Press, 2000. 431 pp.
* Taylor, Andrew J. ''Elephant's Edge: The Republicans as a Ruling Party.'' 2005. 336 pp. academic study of how GOP turned small advantages into power [http://www.amazon.com/Elephants-Edge-Republicans-Ruling-Party/dp/0275985369/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1198072452&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search]
* Wilentz, Sean. ''The Age of Reagan: A History, 1974-2008'' (2008) by a liberal historian. [http://www.amazon.com/Age-Reagan-History-1974-2008/dp/0060744804/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1221786281&sr=8-1 excerpt and text search]
*Wooldridge, Adrian and John Micklethwait. ''The Right Nation: Conservative Power in America'' sophisticated study by two British journalists (2004). [http://www.amazon.com/Right-Nation-Conservative-Power-America/dp/B000F71124/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1198072420&sr=1-2 excerpt and text search]

====Notes====
<references/>

==External Links==
*[http://www.gop.com/ Official GOP Site]
*[http://platform.gop.com/2008Platform.pdf 2008 Republican Platform (pdf download)]
*[http://nyyrcrecord.blogspot.com/ New York Young Republican Record]
*[http://www.house.gov/hensarling/rsc/doc/rsc_action_plan.pdf The RSC’s Action Plan for House Republicans], Republican Study Committee, May 20, 2008
*[http://www.house.gov/hensarling/rsc/doc/rsc_action_plan_(broad).pdf A Detailed Action Plan For House Republicans: Bold, Simple, and Different than the Democrats], Republican Study Committee, May 20, 2008
*[http://www.aim.org/wls/category/republicans/ What Liberals Say - Category: Republicans], [[Accuracy In Media]]

[[Category:United States]]
[[Category:United States Political Parties]]
[[Category:United States Political Organizations]]
[[Category:Featured articles]]
[[Category:Modernization]]
[[Category:Conservatives]]

Pound sterling

2009-05-15T05:11:33Z

JimP: Northern Ireland too...

The '''pound sterling''', more commonly simply the "pound," is the official currency of the [[United Kingdom]]. While formerly divided into shillings and pence, in the 1960s the pound was decimalized, 100 pence to the pound.

[[Category:Currency]]

Minority government

2009-05-15T04:44:43Z

JimP:

In a Parliamentary democracy, a '''minority government''' is formed when one party controls a [[plurality]], but not an [[absolute majority]], of the seats in the [[parliament]]ary assembly. The governing party thus has to seek cooperation from one or more opposition parties in order to pass legislation. They can fall if the other parties combine against the government in a vote of no confidence.

The current Canadian federal government led by Stephen Harper is a minority government; Harper's Conservative Party has just 40% of the members of parliament.

[[Category:International Political Terms]]

Minority government

2009-05-15T04:43:13Z

JimP: merged content from "Minority Government"

In a Parliamentary democracy, a '''minority government''' is formed when one party controls a [[plurality]], but not an [[absolute majority]], of the seats in the [[parliament]]ary assembly. The governing party thus has to seek cooperation from one or more opposition parties in order to pass legislation.

The current Canadian federal government led by Stephen Harper is a minority government; Harper's Conservative Party has just 40% of the members of parliament.

[[Category:International Political Terms]]

Training Day

2009-05-15T04:35:31Z

JimP:

'''Training Day''' is a film starring [[Denzel Washington]] and [[Ethan Hawke]]. Hawke plays a rookie cop assigned to a corrupt veteran narcotics cop (Washington). In his first 24 hours, he faces some hard choices.

[[Category:Movies]]

Thales Leites

2009-05-15T04:31:43Z

JimP: add reflist

'''Thales Leites''' is a [[Brazilian]] [[mixed martial artist]] currently fighting in the [[UFC]]'s Middleweight division. His current MMA record is 14-2.<ref>http://www.sherdog.com/fighter/Thales-Leites-8593</ref> He attempted to gain the UFC Middleweight Title, but lost to current champion [[Anderson Silva]] by unanimous decision.

==References==
{{reflist}}

{{DEFAULTSORT: Leites, Thales}}

[[Category:UFC Middleweights]]

Public-key encryption

2009-05-04T23:12:34Z

JimP:

'''Public-key encryption''' is an [[encryption]] method in which the encryption key is public. There is a private key used known only to the individual. This differs from the traditional (so-called "private-key") encryption, in which the key is kept secret from the intended recipient. Public-key encryption is a form of ''[[symmetry|asymmetric]] encryption'', meaning that it is much easier to encrypt a message than to decrypt it, at least without knowing the decryption key.

Well-known public-key encryption algorithms include '''Diffie-Hellman''' and '''RSA'''. In Diffie-Hellman, the hardness is based on the [[discrete logarithm]]; in RSA it is [[factoring]].

==Diffie-Hellman encryption==
Diffie-Hellman encryption, also known as "Diffie-Hellman key exchange", relies on the fundamental [[hardness|difficulty]] of [[computing]] the discrete logarithm of a number in the [[Group (mathematics)|group]] ''G''. It was invented by [[Whitfield Diffie]] and Martin Hellman in 1976. The protocol proceeds in three steps:

# Alice and Bob decide on a large prime number ''p'' and a group ''G'' in which to work, with [[generator]] ''g''.
# Alice chooses a secret integer ''a''. She sends ''ga'' mod ''p'' to Bob.
# Bob chooses a different integer ''b'', and sends ''gb'' mod ''p'' to Alice.
# Alice computes ''(gb)a'', while Bob computes ''(ga)b''.

At this point both parties (Alice and Bob) have the same (secret) information, and can use the shared secret as a key for sending [[encryption|encrypted]] messages back and forth by the usual methods.

==RSA encryption==
"RSA" stands for "[[Ron Rivest|Rivest]]–[[Shamir]]–[[Adelman]]",<ref>[http://www.all-acronyms.com/?t=rsa&d=rivest%2Dshamir%2Dadelson ''AllAcronyms.com'']</ref><ref>[http://www.cogs.susx.ac.uk/courses/mct/Handouts/notes-6.pdf Course notes] from G6016 "Networks", at the [[University of Sussex]]</ref> the three [[MIT]] researchers who discovered the RSA algorithm in 1977.

RSA is based on the fundamental difficulty of [[factoring]] large integers into [[prime]]s.

The RSA algorithm was put to the test in 1991, when RSA Laboratories released the "RSA Factoring Challenge". The challenge consisted of a list of progressively larger numbers, which, when fully decrypted, read "The magic words are [[squeamish ossifrage]]."<ref>[http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/1393.html "The Magic Words Are Squeamish Ossifrage"], by Atkins, Graff, Lenstra, and Leyl</ref> Although the challenge was withdrawn in 2007, the RSA algorithm is still widely considered acceptable for business purposes.

==Example==
#
Fred needs to send documents to many people. They don't need to be secure, but its important that they know for certain that the message actually came from Fred.
* Fred '''encrypts''' the message using his ''private key''. (only fred knows this key)
* Fred sends the encrypted message
* George gets the message (so do many other people , it's not important)
* George '''decrypts''' the message using Fred's ''Public key''.
* Only a message coded with the private key can be decoded wth the public key so George knows it came from Fred.
#
* George drafts a reply and '''encrypts''' it with Freds ''Public key''.
* only Freds ''private key'' can '''decrypt''' the message , so it is secure
* Fred receives the message and decrypts it
* it's a valid message but Fred cant know who sent it , anyone with the public key could send to him.

This form of public key encryption works best with sets of private and public keys.

==References==
<references/>

== See Also ==
# [http://www.networkworld.com/news/64452_05-17-1999.html | Public key encryption for Dummies]
# http://www2.krellinst.org/UCES/archive/modules/charlie/pke/

[[Category:Cryptography]]

Fedor Emelianenko

2009-04-15T22:10:57Z

JimP:

[[Image:Fedor-emelianenko.jpg |thumb|300px|]]
'''Fedor Emelianenko''' is a [[MMA|Mixed Martial Artist]] currently fighting in [[Affliction Entertainment|Affliction]]. Known simply as "Fedor" to his fans, he is well-known for his PRiDE championships, but has never fought in the [[UFC]]. Top MMA site Sherdog ranks him as the #3 pound-for-pound fighter in the world,<ref>http://www.sherdog.com/news/rankings/Sherdogcoms-Pound-for-Pound-Top-10-16043</ref> and he is the current [[World Alliance of Mixed Martial Arts]] Heavyweight champion.

==References==
<references/>

{{DEFAULTSORT: Emelianenko, Fedor}}

[[Category:Mixed Martial Artists]]

Talk:World History Lecture Nine

2009-04-07T03:09:39Z

JimP: /* Non-German 'Great' Composers */ back on topic...

I've never before heard it said that the Whigs were the anteedents of the Labour Party. The conventioanal argument is that Whig=Liberal and Tory=Conservative, but even that is a gross over-simplification of the changes in political allegiance during the 19th and early 20th centuries. It is probably far truer to say that Whiggism led to economic and political Liberalism in the mid-19th century which in turn greatly influenced the 20th century Conservative Party with its individualist, free trade, laissez faire policies. Mrs Thatcher was nothing if not a classic nineteenth century Liberal. Also, in the late 19th century the Liberal Party split over Home Rule for Ireland and a large faction - known as Liberal Unionists - joined the Conservative Party (hence its full name, the Conservative and Unionist Party - nothing to do with Ulster Unionists). Yes, the late 19th century Liberal Party had trade union candidates, known as 'Lib Labs'; some of these joined the Labour Party when it was established (as the Labour Representation Committee) in 1900. But to say the Whigs developed into Labour is simply not the case. (unsigned)

'''Reply''' by [[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:48, 27 June 2007 (EDT):

Of course, the lecture's statement that the (leftist) modern Labour Party is a substitute for the (leftist) Whig Party of old is a simplification of this interesting facet of English history. But it is a correct simplication, as confirmed by the Columbia Encyclopedia quoted below. Admittedly, there is a step in between that entailed the more conservative Liberal Party. But the migration from leftist to Liberal to leftist does not break the chain.

From the Columbia Encyclopedia:

The Liberal party was an outgrowth of the Whig party that, after the Reform Bill of 1832 (see Reform Acts), joined with the bulk of enfranchised industrialists and business classes to form a political alliance that, over the next few decades, came to be called the Liberal party. Much of the Liberal program was formulated by an important manufacturing middle-class element of the party known as the Radicals, who were strongly influenced by Jeremy Bentham. The Liberals distinguishing policies included free trade, low budgets, and religious liberty. Their anti-imperialism reflected confidence in Britain's economic supremacy. Most Liberals believed in the economic doctrines of laissez-faire and thought labor unions, factory acts, and substantial poor relief a threat to rapid industrialization.
...

By 1914 the Liberal government had passed substantial welfare legislation but, unwilling to adopt a full socialist program, the Liberals began to lose support to the new Labour party. The party's stubborn adherence to the doctrine of free trade, arguments between the Lloyd George and Asquith factions of the party, long years of depression, the Irish problem, growing labor radicalism, and the rise of a working-class party all account for the rapid postwar decline of the Liberals.
...

The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition Copyright© 2004, Columbia University Press. Licensed from Lernout & Hauspie Speech Products N.V. All rights reserved.

:: Apologies for omitting to sign above. I think (perhaps mistakenly) that you are drawing your argument and inferring a link from this section of the quotation:''By 1914 the Liberal government had passed substantial welfare legislation but, unwilling to adopt a full socialist program, the Liberals began to lose support to the new Labour party.'' Certainly there was a radical interventionist wing of the party, under Lloyd George, which fostered this 'welfare' legislation; but (as with Lloyd George's post WW1 housing programme) this was to prevent socialism by improving living standards for the poor, rather than to encourage socialism. Some individual liberal politicians moved 'left', but I maintain that there is a much stronger philosophical link between nineteenth century classical economic Liberalism and modern UK Conservatism, and indeed even between mid-C19 radicalism - most of whose exponents were enthusiastic individualists and anti-Socialists - and modern Conservatism. Anyway... thanks in any case for your considered response. [[User:Pachyderm|Pachyderm]] 11:01, 27 June 2007 (EDT)

== Religious Persecution ==

''In the 1600s in England, there was some of the worst religious persecution in the history of the world, as Protestants harshly persecuted each other and there was also continuous conflict between Protestants and Catholics. The conflict between Anglicans and Puritans in England was particularly severe, causing many Puritans to flee to New England.''

To class the examples you give as "some of the worst religious persecution in the history of the world" is completely alien to the facts. Conflict between Anglicans and Puritans was not 'particularly severe' by world standards, or even Englsish standards: no executions were involved, by contrast with the hundreds of Catholics killed in the Elizabethan and 17th century persecutions and scores of Protestants killed in the 16th century Marian persecution). Contrast that with the Holocaust, with Tsarist antisemitic pogroms, with the butcheries of the Crusades, with the massacres perpetrated during the German Religious Wars, the French Wars of Religion, the Thirty Years War; the killings of Chinese Christians during the Boxer Rising - I could go on and on. [[User:Pachyderm|Pachyderm]] 12:52, 30 August 2007 (EDT)

== Corrections ==

*You simply eliminate Edward VI and Mary I as not being 'noteworthy'. They may have had relatively short reigns but they were important nonetheless.
*To say Elizabeth I is the most popular would need some sort of reliable survey to back it up, and to clarify whether that is from a contemporary perspective or not.
*As it stands the wording suggest she was formally excommunicated before 1559, in fact this took place afterwards in 1570.
*You completely omit the Gunpowder Plot, probably the defining event of James' reign, which is still commemorated to this day.
*Charles I did accept the Petition of Right, though he never intended to abide by it.
*You label the first civil war as purely religious. This was not the case. Yes Cromwell was a Puritan but to say all Parliamentarians were is incorrect. Although there was a split along religious lines the names used for either side, Royalists and Parliamentarians tells the story much better.
*The 'remainder' of William Prynne's ears were not removed but were branded with SL for 'seditious libeller'.
*You jump straight from describing the power wielded by certain Puritans to saying that this caused them to emigrate, though this makes no sense.
*Although Cromwell was essentially a dictator it should be noted that he refused the offer of Kingship.
*The US was not the only example of a revolution that did not lead to dictatorship. Venustiano Carranza became president of Mexico after overthrowing a dictator but did not become one himself. There are of course also many non-violent revolutions that did not lead to dictatorships, especially in recent decades.
*Charles II did not immediately take over after Cromwell's death.
*The Labour Party did NOT form from the Whigs. The Whigs developed into the Liberal party (even then not a straightforward matter), which has under gone many changes to become the Liberal Democrats today, the 3rd largest party. The Labour Party was not created until the early 20th century.
*You fail to mention the Battle of the Boyne. This was a hugely significant battle between Protestant and Catholic and has ramifications to this day. It was also the last battle in which two English kings faced each other.
*Your statement regarding the French revolution ''"ended up with nearly everyone being executed by the guillotine"'' is an overstatement to say the very least!
*You criticise the arbitrary nature of some of the French declarations, but most such statements are arbitrary. The phrase 'pursuit of happiness' is extremely vague for instance.
*I think you are mistaken in attributing any significant credit to Adam Smith for economic expansion as part of the industrial revolution. He was really more of an observer of it such that his ideas were significant later on.
*The vast majority of the cotton for Britain came from its colonies, not America, with the USA being independent by pretty much the start of the industrial revolution. Britain was also engaged in hostilities with the US for some time and so significant trade of cotton was unlikely between them.
*I think your claim that Britain tried to hide the secrets of the Industrial revolution is woefully inaccurate. This portrays it as if the revolution was a single event that was tightly controlled by single group, which of course it was not.
*You suggest the industrial revolution was simply built on the use of iron for example, neglecting the fact that revolutions in the extraction of iron for instance were part of the revolution.
*James Watt did not invent the steam engine (a common misconception), he simply improved it.
*You get into a discussion on the agrarian revolution after discussing the industrial revolution, which is odd given how they occurred the other way around.
*You characterise enclosure as simply the buying up of land. In fact much of it was simply the pre-existing owners enclosing their land. Certainly much buying and selling then occurred but this was not the defining feature of enclosure.
*Again when referring to Spain and Austria-Hungary you put far too great an emphasis on the role of Adam Smith and simply dismiss the consensus amongst historians in favour of said mistake.
*This sentence ''"If you are a businessman or investor, then you love the industrial revolution because it enables you to make money without being a farmer, and gives you access to all sorts of goods and products that might not otherwise be available, such as computers"'' seems to be mixed up in its temporal context.

I hope this has been of use. [[User:RobertWDP|RobertWDP]] 23:12, 25 February 2009 (EST)

== The Virgin Queen? ==

Is it worth mentioning Elizabeth I's reputation as "The Virgin Queen"? I know historians debate how true that was, but its why one of the colonies that caused Great Britain so much trouble later on is called ''Virgin''ia. [[User:ArthurA|ArthurA]] 10:34, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

== Revolution versus Civil War? ==

Might it be worth differentiating between revolutions and civil wars, since both are covered here?

My personal definition is that its a civil war until the rebels win, then the victors get to call it a revolution, but I'm little more than an amateur historian with specific interests (mostly American history, from the <s>Late Unpleasantness</s> Civil War on.) [[User:ArthurA|ArthurA]] 10:38, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

== Prussia vs. Germany ==

To call ''Prussia the former name of Germany'' is like calling ''Maryland the former name of the USA''... [[User:ClementB|ClementB]] 09:20, 26 March 2009 (EDT)

:Look up "Prussia" in the dictionary. Merriam-Webster, 10th Ed., second meaning: "former kingdom and state of Germany." Now complain to it if you still insist on your incorrect view.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 08:10, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

::The same Merriam-Webster has this entry on Hesse: "state of Germany & formerly of West Germany including larger part of Hesse-Darmstadt & part of Hesse-Nassau "
::Prussia was a state in Germany. Prussia was never the state of Germany. Hesse, neither. So Bavaria.
::To emphasize: the kingdom of Prussia was never identical to Germany. In fact, Prussia could only become a kingdom in 1701 as it lay outside of the German Empire.
::[[User:ClementB|Clement ♗]] 11:08, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

::: The lecture doesn't say Prussia was "identical to Germany." But Prussia was the leading state in the German empire, and hence is the predecessor (or former name) of Germany. Your analogy to Maryland is, frankly, beyond absurd.

::: Let me know when you assert your same complaint to Merriam-Webster.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:50, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

::::The lecture states ''Examples were Catherine the Great of Russia, Frederick II (the Great) of Prussia (the former name for Germany), and the Holy Roman Emperor Joseph II of Austria.'' Does this make Frederick II a former king of Germany? Or a king of former Germany? It gives at least a wrong impression.
::::I have no problems with the Merriam-Webster, as this dictionary (not an encyclopedia, BTW) states that ''Prussia was a German state''. That's absolutely correct, but you seem to misread it as the ''former kingdom of Germany'', when all it implies that it is a ''former German kingdom''.
::::[[User:ClementB|Clement ♗]] 12:12, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

::::As you're so adamant, I changed the entry on [[Germany]] to include this point. [[User:ClementB|Clement ♗]] 09:29, 29 March 2009 (EDT)

:::::Interestingly, I wasn't allowed to introduce this insight into the article on [[Germany]]. In the discussion on my home-page, Karajou linked to the MSN encarta. As the Merriam-Webster, it starts with
:::::''Prussia (German Preussen), former kingdom and state of Germany. ''
:::::But then, you find the line
:::::''Modern Prussia was successively, with geographical modifications, an independent kingdom (1701-1871); the largest constituent kingdom of the German Empire (1871-1918); a constituent state, or land, of the Weimar Republic (1919-1933); and an administrative division, comprising 13 provinces, of the centralized German Third Reich (1934-1945). ''
:::::Do you see how the first sentence never implies that Prussia ''is the predecessor (or former name) of Germany''?
:::::Please, allow me to change the lecture accordingly, i.e., from ''Examples were Catherine the Great of Russia, Frederick II (the Great) of Prussia (the former name for Germany), and the Holy Roman Emperor Joseph II of Austria.'' to something like ''Examples were Catherine the Great of Russia, Frederick II (the Great) of Prussia (a former kingdom in Germany), and the Holy Roman Emperor Joseph II of Austria.''
:::::If you insist on your view, the line ''A former name of [[Germany]] is [[Prussia]]'' should be added to the article on [[Germany]].
:::::[[User:ClementB|Clement ♗]] 14:51, 29 March 2009 (EDT)

:::::: Clement, your suggested replacement is not an improvement on the lecture. An encyclopedia entry about something (e.g., Germany) obviously goes into more detail, with greater precision, than a lecture should. A good lecture informs with the goal of making something easy to learn and remember. This lecture has done that, just as the dictionary has, and your suggestion is not an improvement. Please move on, at least for now. If this still bothers you after you've focused on other issues, then we can always revisit this. Thanks and Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:28, 29 March 2009 (EDT)

::::::: Dear Andrew Schlafly, I'm afraid that the matter still bothers me. I thought about it for quite a while and to get counsel, I've talked to the pastor of my former youth group. He took some time to read my entries - and some of yours - and we discussed the whole exchange at length.
:::::::* He scolded me for being overly aggressive in my replies. Even if mocked, I should have been more humble and considerate. Therefore, I apologize.
:::::::* I apologize to R. J. Jensen, too. It became obvious that he didn't want to be involved in a discussion of the statements of your lectures, but kept his contributions and these lectures separate. I should not have tried to drag him into this argument.
:::::::* You said: ''A good lecture informs with the goal of making something easy to learn and remember. '' We seem to disagree where there is the line between an allowed (over-) simplification and the outright distortion of facts. I'd like to point out that the statement ''ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny'' was kept in biology text books around the world because it is ''easy to learn and remember'', though there was no truth in it.
:::::::* I'm thankful that you considered my note on the ''Red Cross'' in your next lecture. On the other hand, you ignored my question on the beginning of the ''industrial revolution'' in Germany: There are discussions whether it was as early as in the 1830s or as late as in the 1850s, but I found no one who gave 1870 as a date. But looking back, it seemed to be prideful to expect that you'd follow all of my annotations: reading the talk pages of the other lectures shows that - seemingly - good advice is often ignored.

::::::: This said, I'll follow what I see as an example set by R. J. Jensen, i.e, I won't comment on the further ''World History Lectures''.
::::::: Yours [[User:ClementB|Clement ♗]] 13:05, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

:::::::: Clement, your conclusion is backhanded at best, and you still seem to push a double standard. I repeat: have you complained to Merriam-Webster yet? It says the same thing the lecture does, as I demonstrated. That you insist on complaining only here without complaining to Merriam-Webster suggests you have two different standards.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:36, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

::::::::: Andy, I won't complain to Merriam-Webster. Why? Because the statement: ''Prussia: former kingdom and state of Germany.'' is true. It just doesn't mean what you read into it! Merriam-Webster states that Prussia is a former kingdom. And that Prussia is a former state of Germany. It is possible to misread this very short statement as ''Prussia is the former state of Germany''. But your background in history should prevent you from such a misinterpretation! [[User:ClementB|Clement ♗]] 13:57, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

== Do you actually want editors to help? ==

Mr Schlafly, before I go any further in helping to edit your encyclopedia, please could you let me know if you actually want to use information contributed by editors. On the specific points you reverted,
* Mohammed is not and never has been the most common boy's name in Britain. It has regularly been in the top 20 for the last 30-40 years and famously overtook John about 10 years ago. But the most common name on a long-term basis continues to be James, as it has been for centuries, while Biblical names like Joshua and Adam and Celtic or Saxon names like Liam and Kevin are currently popular.
* There is no bar on a catholic being Prime Minister. As you surely know, the UK has no written constitution and there isn't even an official position of Prime Minister (his official title is First Lord of the Treasury). If a catholic (or muslim, hindu, sikh, jew, etc) became Prime Minister, the Queen could choose to be advised on ecclesiastical matters by the Lord Chancellor or another senior minister. Blair has never revealed why he chose to leave converting to catholicism until he left office but it wouldn't have affected his position as P.M.
So Mr Schlafly, if you'll accept input from an editor who knows what he's talking about, I'll gladly continue to contribute to Conservapedia. Otherwise, I won't waste my time. (I've read some of your talk pages and I see you're inclined to get into pointless arguments with editors who know more than you do about the subject in question. All I need to know is, do you accept input from people who know more about a subject than you do, yes or no.) [[User:JosephMac|JosephMac]] 17:46, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

: If you think you're such a genius, JosephMac, let's see how well you can do on the [[World History Midterm Exam]]. Or perhaps your skill is only acting like you know it all.

: The evidence is against both of your claims above. Moreover, you censored the statement about Muhammad rather than improving it.

: We don't welcome falsehoods, even by people who pretend to be know-it-alls. Now let's see if you even do as well as the top [[homeschooled]] students on the exam. I bet you'll run away from that opportunity to prove your immense knowledge.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:53, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

::*No, the evidence isn't against either of the statements above. They're both correct, as I think you actually know.
::*As you also know, I didn't censor the statement about Mohammed; I improved it to say it's in the top 20 of boy's names.
::*I'm not pretending about anything.
::*I would do your exam if I were confident that your historical knowledge was accurate enough to mark it correctly.
::*Mind your language, please.[[User:JosephMac|JosephMac]] 17:58, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

:::I'm a Brit (English) and I have nary a clue as to where you got that 'Muhammad' thing from. I don't personally know anyone called Muhammad, and I've never heard of a Christian with that name (unless they converted from another religion). In support of JosephMac, I know many people called James, so many that I call them by their last name instead of their first. [[User:LeslieHoyson|LeslieHoyson]] 18:10, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

:::: I'd too see if either you could even score 50% on the [[World History Midterm Exam]]. Looks like both you won't dare display your real knowledge.

:::: It only took 30 seconds to confirm that "Muhammad is now second only to Jack as the most popular name for baby boys in Britain and '''is likely to rise to No 1 by next year''' [2008], a study by The Times has found."[http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1890354.ece]

::::: 1 c. 2 d. 3 a. 4 c. 5 c. 6 e. 7 d. 8 e. 9 c. 10 b. 11 b. 12 d. 13 b. 14 b. 15 d. 16 a. 17 d. 18 e. 19 b. 20 a. 21 e. 22 c. 23 c. 24 d. 25 d. 26 c. 27 d. 28 a. 29 b. 30 c. 31 b. 32 e. 33 d. 34 d. 35 a. 36 e. 37 a(*). 38 a. 39 b. 40 e. 41 d. 42 c. 43 d. 44 c. Extra (male) e.
(*) Your numbering is muddled. You've labelled Song as VI before Tang as V in the list. The order is Qin, Han, 3 kingdoms, Sui, Tang, Song.

:::::JosephMac, your score is is 40, and you got some of the most challenging questions! That makes a new second place among internet submissions, and ties for second best among all submissions. Good job.

:::::Also, thanks for catching the error about the dynasties! [[User:AddisonDM|AddisonDM]] 19:13, 4 April 2009 (EDT)

::::: I'd be happy to help set future exams to help you avoid ambiguous or erroneous answers, of which there are several in this exam.

::::: As for Mohammed, here's a table from the Office of National Statistics, which is the definitive record for England and Wales. [http://www.statistics.gov.uk/specials/babiesnames_boys.asp] Mohammed is no. 17. [[User:JosephMac|JosephMac]] 19:30, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

:::::: I noticed several of your edits as being incorrect (e.g., replacing "Anglican" with "Protestant") or censoring information (erasing statement about Islam in France). Accordingly, I had to revert your edits. Some revisions of value may have been lost and I'll revisit Saturday. I suggest you be more careful.

:::::: Muhammad has several different spellings, obviously. Your failure to recognize that, even after I gave you an article explaining this, suggests you're more interested in censoring the truth here than in advancing knowledge. Please move elsewhere if you continue to have that attitude.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:10, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

Actually, JosephMac is pretty much right in his 2 original points.

There does not appear to be any data suggesting that Muhammed is currently or has ever been the most popular boys name in the UK. In 2007 it (including 14 spelling variations, although some might argue against doing this) was ranked 2nd for newborn boys. Although some said it would overtake the top name, Jack, this does not appear to have happened as of yet.

And there is NOT any legal obstacle to a Catholic becoming Prime Minister as he also correctly stated. This is often mixed up with the laws affecting the monarchy, for which reform has recently been discussed. [[User:RobertWDP|RobertWDP]] 07:24, 4 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::::Sorry but speaking as a Catholic from England I can confirm that JosephMac is quite correct there is NO legal obstacle to a Catholic becoming Prime Minister in the UK. We potentially had an atheist as Prime Minister and the main objection to him (Michael Foot) was his duffle coat! [[User:BrianNTS|BrianNTS]] 07:31, 4 April 2009 (EDT)

This story from the BBC states precisely this point about Catholicism at the end. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3746398.stm] The belief by some that there was some sort of legal restriction appears to have been heightened by the fact that Blair waited until he left office to convert to Catholicism. [[User:RobertWDP|RobertWDP]] 07:36, 4 April 2009 (EDT)

:I'm just pleased that JosephMac corrected the statement ''Prussia (the former name for Germany)'' to ''Prussia (the most powerful of the German states)'', and that A. Schlafly doesn't object any longer. [[User:ClementB|Clement ♗]] 07:51, 4 April 2009 (EDT)

How does "40" by JosephMac become a "new second place" among all submissions? We already have a 40 for second place, so JosephMac would tie for second place. Still a great score.

People are denying too much the ban on Catholicism for the British Prime Minister. The ban plainly does apply to the monarch and spouse of the monarch, and Tony Blair plainly did delay until after abdicating as Prime Minister before converting, and there plainly are legal restrictions that would kick in if a Prime Minister were Catholic. Why do so many Brits insist on denying the ban??? The denial is odd in itself.

ClementB's comment is misleading as I do still object to his suggested change to the Prussia/Germany statement.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:06, 4 April 2009 (EDT)

:You're still clinging to your statement that ''Prussia is a former name for Germany''? And your only justification for doing so is the short entry on the Merriam-Webster, [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prussia stating]

:'' '''Prussia:''' former kingdom & state of Germany * Berlin''

:You misread this entry. This becomes clear when you have a look at the entry on [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/waldeck Waldeck]:

:'' '''Waldeck:''' former county, principality, & state of Germany between Westphalia & Hesse-Nassau * Arolsen''

:Your reading of the Merriam-Webster would make ''Waldeck'' a former name of Germany, too.

:[[User:ClementB|Clement ♗]] 07:04, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

Andy, I'm afraid on the point about Catholicism and the Prime Minister you are wrong. There is NO legal restriction against a Catholic Prime Minister. The reason so many Brits 'deny' the ban? Because there isn't one. Sorry, but that fact has to be cleared up. [[User:RobertWDP|RobertWDP]] 11:20, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

: If this point is so important to you, then suggest more precise wording that does not censor the facts that the British Prime Minister has basic duties that could not be fulfilled if he were Catholic, that Prime Minister Tony Blair delayed converting to Catholicism until after he abdicated, and that there has never been a Catholic Prime Minister. And, by the way, the language obscuring how Brits celebrate the anniversary of the alleged "discovery" of the gunpowder plot is going to be corrected also.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 14:53, 5 April 2009 (EDT)
:: This was widely discussed at the time that Iain Duncan Smith (a Catholic) became leader of the Conservative Party, and the conclusion of constitutional scholars was that there is no barrier to a Catholic becoming prime minister -- the largely ceremonial role of the government in giving ecclesiastic advice to the monarch could be performed by ''any'' minister. Tony Blair has never given a public explanation for his decision to wait until he left office, although two explanations have been given by his friends: It had the potential to upset the delicate negotiations in Northern Ireland, and he did not wish for a purely personal decision to be interpreted as a political manoeuvre. [[User:Jalapeno|Jalapeno]] 15:09, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

::: "Constitutional scholars" make all sorts of claims, including silly ones. Nothing you say refutes the three facts I cite above, and I welcome alternative wording that does not censor the facts.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:23, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

(unindent) Ignoring the new material above for a moment, I should like to point out that both Joseph and I defeated Mr Schlafly's challenge of gaining more than 50% on the Midterm Exam (he with a score of 40 and I with 37), and I think that in light of his insulting and unchivalrous behaviour towards we who were trying to help, we both deserve an apology so we can all move on. [[User:LeslieHoyson|LeslieHoyson]] 15:45, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

: Apologies for my absence (owing to a misunderstanding about dynamic assignment of IP addresses). Mr Schlafly, this discussion exemplifies exactly what I said above about "pointless arguments with editors who know more than you do about the subject in question". You 've now had numerous British contributors telling you there's no constitutional bar on a catholic becoming Prime Minister. Ian Duncan Smith illustrates this perfectly. He's a Conservative (and conservative) politician who's highly respected across the whole political spectrum. Although he was a poor party leader, the fact that he's catholic was never once considered to prevent him becoming Prime Minister. Why Blair chose not to formally convert to catholicism until after he left office was entirely his own business, which he has never discussed. If the Queen had been concerned about it, she could have chosen any other minister to advise her as Head of the Church of England (although there's no sign she would have been concerned, as her PMs have included two Presbyterians, a Baptist and a Methodist). I must ask you to respect the knowledge of British people on this subject. I will edit Lecture 9 appropriately. [[User:JosephMac|JosephMac]] 16:49, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

::If I may add my six-penn'orth, Schlafers is completely wrong on this (as he is on the Prussia/Germany question too). Some humilityy and open-mindedness, such as he demands of Liberals, wuld be welcome. [[User:ThomasF|ThomasF]] 18:06, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

Godspeed to you, ThomasF. You are the classic definition of a troll. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 19:07, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

== Religious Conflict: Ireland ==

I've started improving the part of the 'Religious Conflict in England' section that deals with Ireland. There's a lot of work to do so if anyone else would like to help out, that would be great (I'll be away for a few days). The Protestant/Catholic thing needs to be toned down a bit. Although that dispute is highly visible, the origins of Irish Republicanism were more political than religious - Wolfe Tone was a protestant, the original Fenians were protestant industrial workers from Belfast, etc. [[User:JosephMac|JosephMac]] 20:12, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

: You should include the fact that there is some reason why there are anti-Catholic laws in GB, most importantly, the reason that a Catholic can't be monarch is becasue it would be insulting! The British monarch is the official head of the Anglican Church, having a Catholic monarch would be like having a muslim Pope!!--[[User:IScott|IScott]] 22:23, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

== Non-German 'Great' Composers==

I notice you claim that "most great composers were German". Musicologists, composers, music students and fans of Boulez, Borodin, Berlioz, Bartok, Mahler, Liszt, Karajan, Holst, Haydn, Grieg,Gould, Vivaldi, Verdi, Tchaikovsky, Sullivan, Stravinsky, Strauss, Sibelius, Shostakovich, Schubert, Schoenberg, Satie, Ravel, Rachmaninoff, Puccini, Prokofiev, Penderecki, Mussorgsky, Paganini, Mozart, or Monteverdi would disagree with you, I suspect. [[User:KBinbota|KBinbota]] 21:25, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

: Good list of mostly obscure composers. Only a few of them would be considered to be in the same league as the great German composers, and even they wouldn't be considered as great as the Germans.

: I know, I know. You probably think all languages are equal, all religions are equal, and ... all nationalities are equal with respect to composers. Well, we tell the truth here. I recommend Wikipedia if you prefer pushing political correctness instead.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:32, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

:: You certainly seem to have a very unusual definition of 'obscure'. [[User:KBinbota|KBinbota]] 21:41, 5 April 2009 (EDT)
::: What a great example of liberal corruption! Denying that Germans are the greatest composers is like denying that the Dutch are superior artists or that Americans are superior inventors!! (Yankee ingenuity anyone)
:::But I have to agree that Strauss was a great composer! Unfortunately for you, he's '''German'''!--[[User:IScott|IScott]] 22:23, 5 April 2009 (EDT)
:: Just out of curiosity, who do you consider the great German composers? I can only really think of Bach, Handel, Wagner, Strauss, Schumann and Brahms, and of course Beethoven, amongst the most popular composers in the world. There are certainly many composers of the same calibre from other countries.

:::The mention of Beethoven is problematic. ''"The greatest composer in the history of the world"'' is an opinion shared by many, though are very many others who would claim the same of Mozart (Austrian), Bach or others. The problem, however, is not that people might disagree with your assessment of Beethoven, but that a composer's greatness cannot be quantified. Things like a composer's technical skill, fame during their lifetime, posthumous reception and their influence on later composers can be approximately known. By these criteria, Beethoven was certainly ''among'' the greatest composers who ever lived. But because of the imprecise nature of this evaluation, we must be content with approximate judgments.

:::Next, the description of his achievements, that he ''"revolutionized instrumental music and took it to new heights never before thought possible"'' is one which was also true of many composers before and since. Perhaps you could say something specific to Beethoven, such as how his 32 piano sonatas have been referred to as "The New Testament of the Piano" (the Old Testament being Bach's 48 preludes and fugues), or that in particular he revolutionized the concept of the Symphony as an art form. Prior to him, the symphony was just a four-movement work for orchestra. Mozart wrote over 50 of them. Haydn wrote over 100. Beethoven's 9 symphonies (from the 3rd onward) expanded the scale, the seriousness, and the emotional breadth of what a symphony could be. Another quotation (I don't have sources for these, as I can't remember who said them) is that every symphonic composer since Beethoven has been writing in his shadow.

:::Finally, the phrase ''"A German like most great composers..."'' is most problematic of all. Beethoven was from a Flemish family, was born and raised in Cologne, which at the time was a principality of the Holy Roman Empire, and spent the majority of his life in Vienna. To say he was "German" is an oversimplification. To say that most great composers were also Germans is thus a distortion of history: Bach and Handel would not have been considered as members of the same country during their lifetimes. Second, it is simply not true that the majority of great composers were German. Even if Germany has had more great composers than other countries, the total number of great non-German composers easily dwarfs the total number of great German composers. (do you claim that the best composers were German, or that the German composers were best? The two claims are not the same) Lastly, ''even if'' your statement was true, what point are you trying to make? What conclusion do you expect your students to draw? That the German people are innately superior to non-Germans, at least as far as music is concerned? Surely the reason for great German composers is that there has been a long culture of music-making, which meant that talented children could be directed towards music (and would have the opportunity to get a better music education than their peers in France)? Such cultures, like the Rugby-playing culture in New Zealand, tend to be self-perpetuating once they get started. --[[User:Eoinc|Eoinc]] 09:01, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

:::: Your real discomfort is apparently in observing that one nationality to be better than others at something. Let me guess: you'd also insist that no language is superior to another, and that no religion is superior to another.

:::: You're in the wrong place if you think we're going to sacrifice the truth for political correctness. We don't. Welcome the truth yourself and you'll won't regret it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:16, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

:::::Regarding nationalities, it does not disturb me in the slightest to observe one nationality be better than others at something. I will take the example of German composers (because I would rather not go any further off-topic). Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that Germany has had a disproportionately large number of great composers compared to other European nations. Leave aside the problems I mentioned above. What this would indicate is that Germany has a long culture of music-making: great concert halls were built there; archbishops commissioned new music all the time; great concert halls were built; the public went to hear music being performed; the greatest teachers moved there; and that, therefore, German children with a natural talent for music would have had their talents nurtured and would have had a better musical education. Such cultures, as I said, are self-perpetuating. It is a cycle which feeds into itself. The alternative possibility, that there is something in the water in Germany, or that Germans have something in their DNA which the rest of us lack, is racist and has no supporting evidence. Or would there be an alternative explanation?

:::::As for languages, I wouldn't insist that that all languages are equal in every respect, though I would have a hard time ranking them in any order of superiority. For ease of learning, and intuitive grammatical sense, Esperanto is superior to Japanese. For the ability to communicate with a large number of people all around the world, English is superior to Swedish. For singing in a classical style, Italian is superior to English. Is this what you're referring to?

:::::And as for religions, I do not consider them all equal. Some religions contain beliefs which are harmful to oneself or others when acted upon, and the number of such beliefs is not the same in every religion.

:::::I am not interested in political correctness, or in censoring the truth. I am glad that you share my opinion. My statements on Beethoven, I repeat are: first, that the title of "world's greatest composer", unlike the title of "world's tallest building", cannot be awarded with truthful objectivity. Your preference for Beethoven is an opinion, not a fact. It would be better to describe Beethoven as being "one of the greatest composers". Second, that what you say about Beethoven is rather vague and conveys little useful information, and would be better and more interesting if it were made more specific. Third, that it is historically imprecise to describe him as German, and that it is potentially misleading to draw the conclusions you did. --[[User:Eoinc|Eoinc]] 09:58, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

Andy, can a musicologist jump in here? I, for one, find nothing contentious about calling Beethoven the "greatest composer" - in fact, my dissertation is over Beethoven, so I'm completely in sympathy with this statement. (That being said, it's been my perception that just as many musicians and music lovers say that either Bach or Mozart are the greatest.) However, I feel that the other posters here bring up a fair point, in that it's problematic to call Beethoven a German, since his heritage was Dutch, and because he found his success from an early age in Vienna, where he lived for most of his life. It's the same problem with Handel, who was German, but most people think of him as an English composer, because he wrote the ''Messiah''.

As far as "most of the great composers" being German, you can only say that if you're willing to leave out a great deal of the most beloved composers: Mozart, Haydn, Schubert (all three Austrians), Chopin (a Pole working in France) Verdi and Puccini (Italians), Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff (Russians), etc. If you polled classical music-lovers, your top ten list would surely include Germans like the "3 B's," but you'd definitely also have Mozart, most likely Chopin, as well as the aforementioned Russians and Italians.

There's nothing "politically correct" about this point. This is about accuracy. Beethoven (or Bach or Mozart) is widely considered to be the greatest composer, but right up there nearby are a pantheon of Russian, French, Italian, Polish, and Czech composers. Why is this such a contentious point? [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 11:26, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

: You're most welcome to "jump in here," but it's clear from Eoinc's comment that his objection is ideological. He won't admit that some languages, or religions, are superior to others, and from that liberal point of view he resists admitting that most great composers were German. In fact, he even implies that such an observation might be racist!

: I can't tell if you come from the same liberal camp. You strain mightily -- and unsuccessfully -- to find some other basis for objecting to the observation. A discussion would be more meaningful if you first rejected Eoinc's point of view and considered the issue with an open mind. The truth is not contorted by political correctness.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:09, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

::Did I not say that some languages are superior to others? Depending on what criteria you choose (my examples were: ease of learning, ability for widespread use in communication around the world, suitability for use in singing), certain languages are superior to others.

::Did I not also say that I do not consider all religions to be equal? I said that some religions contain harmful beliefs. The implication (which I will now state rather than imply) is that a religion which does not contain harmful beliefs is superior to one which does.

::Next, my implication of racism would only apply '''if''' one claimed that most great composers were German ''for reasons which had nothing to do with German culture''. I don't "resist admitting" that most great composers were German: that implies that I secretly know it to be true, but pretend I don't. I simply doubt that it is the case. I am willing to be shown otherwise. There is no reason why Germany could not have a disproportionately large number of musicians in its population (or for France to have the most chefs, or Italy the most painters, or England the most poets). I allow for the possibility, provided that one does not draw the conclusion from that that German people are innately more musical than people from anywhere else. [[User:Eoinc|Eoinc]] 17:28, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

::: "Did I not say ...." No, you didn't admit that some languages are superior to others, and you still won't admit it. Superior not just "on what criteria you choose," but overall. You're just babbling nonsense to deny that. It would like a mathematician pretending that some numbers are not larger than others. Some are. Ditto for religion, as you won't admit that some religions are superior (and more truthful) than others. Some obviously are.

::: If won't admit things that are obviously true, then there's little point in trying to hold a logical discussion with you. First open your mind, please, for your sake.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:02, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

::::When talking about languages, I qualified my remarks in the way I did because I am simply not aware of any one language which is superior to ''every'' other and in ''every'' respect. It's not that I "won't admit" it.

::::When talking about religions, I wrote in terms of harmful beliefs, because it's easier to agree about that. It goes without saying that some religions are more truthful than others, but I didn't want to get drawn into an off-topic discussion about religion.

::::Now, can we please return to the topic of Beethoven? JDWPianist and I raised some concerns about the wording in the lecture. Specifically:

::::* I don't think it is possible to say definitively which composer is the greatest. "One of the greatest", certainly, without a doubt.

::::* Beethoven grew up in an area which is now part of Germany, but was not at the time. His family was from Holland. He spent most of his life in Vienna. To say that "Beethoven was German" is therefore not really accurate.

::::* Many of the greatest composers in music history were from the area now known as Germany. But it is untrue to claim that most great composers were German, unless you ignore Vivaldi, Mozart, Haydn, Schubert, Chopin, Verdi, Rachmaninoff, Tchaikovsky, Debussy, Mahler, and dozens more. --[[User:Eoinc|Eoinc]] 18:31, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

::It makes no difference to me what Eoinc's point of view is, because both you and he have gone very far-afield of the subject at hand. You seem to misunderstand my objection, by attempting to read a political motivation behind it. But this is not politics or religion, this is about great music. And being a musician with a passion for the subject myself, it's simply my belief that there are embarrassing riches of great music in the repertoire, a lot of it by Germans, a lot by Austrians, and greatness as well from the French, Russians, and Italians too. To me, the relative greatness of my favorite composers is so hard to quantify as to be irrelevant. As a student of music history, I also have dealt with the issue that since musicians moved around frequently (no differently from today), speaking of a composer's nationality is less useful than organizing it by musical centers: i.e. Vienna, Paris, Leipzig, London, etc.

::If I wasn't clear enough about my objection in the last post, let me re-state it here: to assert that the best composers were all German is a gross over-simplification at best, and accuracy matters. That's all.

::Does anyone make the claim that the greatest painters were Flemish? Of course not, because there were various centers of artistic activity all over Europe across a 400-year period. No one tries to compare El Greco to Caravaggio, much less to Monet. Similarly, I don't know of anyone who tries to compare the greatness of Debussy to the greatness of Brahms, because they both represented the perfection of a certain aesthetic ideal, but were very different in their aims.

::My point is, there are many more accurate ways you can express your point, which is indeed based on truth: that there was a golden age of music based in German-speaking countries which occurred in the 18th and 19th-centuries. I simply can't understand why you insist on such an unnuanced assertion, when there is so much evidence to the contrary. Is it such an odious compromise to qualify your statement so that other great composers fit? [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 18:47, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

::: Neither of you above will admit that some languages are superior to others. So it's obviously pointless to discuss whether some nationalities have achieved more in composing than others. You implicitly deny that ''anything'' cultural related to nationality can be ranked. Hence this debate ends before it even begins. Your view is like that of a child who insists that no number is larger than 4. It's pointless to debate with that child whether 10 is greater than 9.

::: I suggest you revisit your premise of artificial equality. Just saying that different languages/religions/composers are equal doesn't make it so. At Conservapedia, we're not afraid to tell the truth. I suggest you start welcoming the truth also, and set your mind free.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:55, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

:::: A composer's skill has nothing to do with national heritage. All of a nation's history and culture is not inbred in a native of that country, otherwise America would be composed of George Washington clones, Italy of Caesar clones, and on and on. According to your logic everyone in Germany should be on their 9th symphony.

:::: Also how do you claim that one language is superior to another? Word order? Number of words? I have learned Spanish over many years and have found that many times conventions there (turning verbs into nouns, lack of helper verbs, lax use of gerunds, and very specific verb tenses) to be very useful, but othertimes illogical and useless. For example if an action is being performed for a person (i.e. "I helped Shawn") you need a small word known as the "personal a" making the sentence "Yo ayudo a Shawn". The "a" is usually used to denote "to" (as in "to a location" or "to a person"). Also in German one of my favorite words is "Schadenfreude" which has no exact word in English but has a very useful meaning (shameful joy, joy stemming from the misfortune of others).

::::Respectfully, --[[User:StevenB|StevenB]] 22:23, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

::::: So StevenB also denies that some languages are superior to others. No problem: that view seems to be the [[Holy Grail]] of the liberal ideology. I haven't yet found a [[liberal]] who admits that some languages are superior to others.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:41, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

:::::: Weren't we talking about composers?? [[User:JimP|JimP]] 23:09, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

Talk:World History Lecture Nine

2009-04-06T04:27:19Z

JimP: /* Non-German 'Great' Composers */

Vulgar Latin

2009-04-02T23:46:21Z

JimP: Undo revision 647432 by Jack456 (Talk)

#REDIRECT [[Common Latin]]

Public-key encryption

2009-04-02T23:43:42Z

JimP: spelling, refs

'''Public-key encryption''' is an [[encryption]] method in which both the message and the public key are public. There is a private key used known only to the individual. This differs from the traditional (so-called "private-key") encryption, in which the key is kept secret from the intended recipient. Public-key encryption is a form of ''[[symmetry|asymmetric]] encryption'', meaning that it is much easier to encrypt a message than to decrypt it, at least without knowing the encryption key; this is the reason that the key has to be made public.

Well-known public-key encryption algorithms include '''Diffie-Hellman''',
'''El-Gamal''', and '''RSA'''. These algorithms all work on the same basic
model, which is that of a [[cyclic group]] ''G'' distributing over an operation ''o'' which may or may not be [[commutative]]. In Diffie-Hellman and El-Gamal, the basic operation is the [[discrete logarithm]]; in RSA it is [[factoring]].

==Diffie-Hellman encryption==
Diffie-Hellman encryption, also known as "Diffie-Hellman key exchange", relies on the fundamental [[hardness|difficulty]] of [[computing]] the discrete logarithm ''ga'' of a number ''x'' in the [[Group (mathematics)|group]] ''G''. It was invented by [[Whitfield Diffie]] and [[Lillian Hellman]] in 1976. The protocol proceeds in three steps:

# Alice and Bob secretly decide on a large prime number ''p'' and a group ''G'' in which to work, with [[generator]] ''g''.
# Alice chooses a secret integer ''a'', for example 6. She sends ''ag'' mod ''p'' to Bob.
# Bob chooses a different integer ''b'', for example 7, and sends ''bg'' mod ''p'' to Alice.
# Alice computes ''(ag)b'', while Bob computes ''(bg)a''. Whoever finishes first sends their result to the other person.

At this point both parties (Alice and Bob) have the same (secret) information, and can use the shared secret as a key for sending [[encryption|encrypted]] messages back and forth by the usual methods.

==El-Gamal encryption==
El-Gamal encryption was invented by the [[Egyptian]] mathematician [[Taher El-Gamal]] in 1984, shortly after the assassination of [[Anwar Sadat]]. Like the Diffie-Hellman protocol, El-Gamal encryption relies on the discrete logarithm function, which can be used to unobtrusively compute the inverse of the [[exponentiation]] operation within a cyclic group.

Unlike classical encryption schemes such as ''ENIGMA'' (see [[Encryption]]), El-Gamal's cryptosystem actually expands the plaintext by a factor of 2, in order to make the message harder to [[decrypt]]. (Because information density is exponential, with ''two'' times as many bits in the ciphertext an attacker would have to work 22 = ''four'' times as hard to decode the message, assuming he did not already possess the key.) However, the usual implementation simply sets these extra bits to zero by default, rendering the security gain infinitesimal at best.

The El-Gamal encryption algorithm was added to the [[C programming language]] in 1999, as the math function <tt>lgammal()</tt> [sic]. (Only implementations conforming to TR1 provide this function.)

==RSA encryption==
"RSA" stands for "[[Ron Rivest|Rivest]]–[[Shamir]]–[[Adelson]]",<ref>[http://www.all-acronyms.com/?t=rsa&d=rivest%2Dshamir%2Dadelson ''AllAcronyms.com'']</ref><ref>[http://www.cogs.susx.ac.uk/courses/mct/Handouts/notes-6.pdf Course notes] from G6016 "Networks", at the [[University of Sussex]]</ref> the three [[MIT]] researchers who discovered the RSA algorithm in 1977, seven years before Taher El-Gamal developed his competing system.

RSA, unlike the previous two systems, is based on the fundamental difficulty of [[factoring]] large [[prime]]s. For example, although it is easy to factor 6=2×3, it is exponentially more difficult to factor 6000000=2000×3000. (Of course, the digital computers that implement RSA encryption use numbers that are bigger still; a "strong" key used by an organization such as the [[NSA]] might have 6000000=2000×3000 ''digits!'')

The RSA algorithm was put to the test in 1991, when RSA Laboratories released the "RSA Factoring Challenge". The challenge consisted of a list of progressively larger numbers, which, when fully decrypted, read "The magic words are [[squeamish ossifrage]]."<ref>[http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/1393.html "The Magic Words Are Squeamish Ossifrage"], by Atkins, Graff, Lenstra, and Leyl</ref> Although the challenge was withdrawn in 2007, the RSA algorithm is still widely considered acceptable for business purposes.

==Example==
#
Fred needs to send documents to many people. They dont need to be secure , but its important that they know for certain that the messge actually came from Fred.
* Fred '''encrypts''' the message using his ''private key''. (only fred knows this key)
* Fred sends the message
* George gets the message (so do many other people , it's not important)
* George '''decrypts''' the message using Freds ''Public key''.
* Only a message coded with the private key can be decoded wth the public key so George knows it came from Fred.
#
* George drafts a reply and '''encrypts''' it with Freds ''Public key''.
* only Freds ''private key'' can '''decrypt''' the message , so it is secure
* Fred receives the message and decrypts it
* it's a valid message but Fred cant know who sent it , anyone with the public key could send to him.

This form of public key encryption works best with sets of private and public keys.

==References==
<references/>

== See Also ==
# [http://www.networkworld.com/news/64452_05-17-1999.html | Public key encryption for Dummies]
# http://www2.krellinst.org/UCES/archive/modules/charlie/pke/

[[Category:Cryptography]]

Lewis Powell

2009-04-02T23:17:42Z

JimP: Undo revision 647008 by Jack456 (Talk)

'''Lewis F. Powell Jr.''' (1907-1998) was appointed at the age of 64 by President [[Richard Nixon]] in 1972 to be an Associate Justice of the [[U.S. Supreme Court]], where he was a swing vote on controversial issues ranging from [[affirmative action]] to aid to parochial schools to [[homosexuality]]. From [[Virginia]], where he was born and practiced law, he remained affiliated with the South and took the seat due to the retirement of another southerner, Justice [[Hugo Black]]. Powell served on the [[Supreme Court]] for only 15 years. His retirement in 1987 led to the hotly debated appointment by President [[Ronald Reagan]] of [[Robert Bork]], who was defeated in confirmation hearings by the [[U.S. Senate]].

His most important opinion was his concurrence in ''[[University of California Regents v. Bakke]]'' (1978), in which he opposed racial quotas in admissions processes but allowed the use of race as an admissions criterion.

He provided the fifth vote for the [[liberal]] wing of the court in ''[[Plyler v. Doe]]'' (1982), which required [[Texas]] to grant a free public education to the children of [[illegal alien]]s.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Powell, Lewis}}

[[category:United States Supreme Court Justices]]

Flight recorder

2009-04-02T23:01:21Z

JimP:

[[Image:BlackBox19850-11.jpg|right]]
A '''flight recorder''' is an [[airplane]]’s Digital Flight Data Recorder (DVDR) and Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) installed as one unit. "'''Black box'''" is the common name used in news stories. Despite this fact, 'black boxes' are almost always orange, to make them easier to see in wreckage.

The Flight Data Recorder was invented by an [[Australia]]n named Dr. David Warren. The original model was red, although these days they are usually orange to make them easier to find. A [[journalist]] at the launch described it as a “wonderful black box” to make the point that how it worked was complex and one didn’t really need to know, but that it worked was the important thing.<ref>http://www.abc.net.au/ra/innovations/stories/s1076167.htm</ref>

The phrase has since been commonly used to describe a device about which nothing is known of its inner workings. Computers could be considered a black box, as most people who use computers know almost nothing of their apparatus. Lehigh University Professor and Intelligent Design proponent [[Michael Behe]] used this analogy in naming his book ''Darwin's Black Box'', which deals with the issue of irreducible complexity in biological cells.

==The Recovery of KAL 007's Black Box==
[[Korean Airlines Flight 007]] was a Boeing 747 shot down by the Soviets on Sept. 1, 1983 just west of the Soviet territory of Sakhalin Island off the Siberian Maritime. There were 269 passengers and crew aboard. For over 10 years the Soviets denied having retrieved the black box but on January 8, 1993, [[Boris Yeltsin]], under pressure from Senator [[Jesse Helms]] of the Committee on Foreign Relations, handed the Cockpit Voice Recorder and the Digital Flight Data Recorder tapes from the black box to the International Civil Aviation Organization of the United Nations. Here are the combined Cockpit Voice Recorder and Flight Data Recorder transcripts chronicalling the first minute and 44 seconds of the flight of KAL 007 after missile detonation.<ref>http://www.rescue007.org/faq.htm#5</ref>

==See Also==
*[http://www.rescue007.org/faq.htm#4] [http://www.rescue007.org/] The website of the International Committee for the Rescue of KAL 007 Survivors and the reliability of KAL 007's recovered black box tapes and their use in reconstructing the flight.
*[[How KAL 007 was Lost]]

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Technology]]

Georges St. Pierre

2009-03-24T00:23:53Z

JimP: /* Fight History */ Updated, trimmed.

[[Image:Georges St. Pierre.jpg |thumb|300px|]]
'''Georges St. Pierre''', a Quebec-native, is considered to be one of the finest mixed martial artists at the 170 pound weight class. He is also viewed by most commentators and opponents alike as one of the classiest fighters in the sport. Top MMA site Sherdog places him as Number 2 on their best pound-for-pound fighters list.<ref>http://www.sherdog.com/news/rankings/Sherdogcoms-Pound-for-Pound-Top-10-16043</ref>

==Nicknames==
*GSP
*Rush

==Fight History==
Known to be freakishly strong and athletic, he won the [[UFC]] welterweight belt from [[Matt Hughes]] in April 2006 only to lose it in a surprising upset in November 2006 to [[Matt Serra]]. He defeated Hughes a second time in a dominating performance on December 29, 2007 and won the interim UFC Welterweight Championship. He had a rematch with Matt Serra on April 29, 2008 to become the undisputed UFC welterweight champion. St. Pierre has since defended his title against [[Jon Fitch]] and [[BJ Penn]].

A relatively shy person, St-Pierre does not consider himself to be a fighter at heart. He thinks there are some things that are more important than fighting that mean more in life.<blockquote>“Who do I most admire? I admire [[Jesus Christ]], [[Martin Luther King]] and [[Mother Teresa]]; I want to be more like these people than a fighter.”<ref>http://www.ufc.com/index.cfm?fa=news.detail&gid=9288</ref></blockquote>

==References==

<References/>

{{DEFAULTSORT:St-Pierre, Georges}}

[[Category:Mixed Martial Artists]]
[[Category:Religious People]]
[[Category:Canadians]]
[[Category:UFC Welterweights]]

Flight recorder

2009-02-26T04:01:26Z

JimP: Spelling, grammar

[[Image:BlackBox19850-11.jpg|right]]
A '''flight recorder''' is an [[airplane]]’s Digital Flight Data Recorder (DVDR) and Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) installed as one unit. "'''Black box'''" is the common name used in news stories.

The Flight Data Recorder was invented by an [[Australia]]n named Dr. David Warren. The original model was red, although these days they are usually orange to make them easier to find. A [[journalist]] at the launch described it as a “wonderful black box” to make the point that how it worked was complex and one didn’t really need to know, but that it worked was the important thing.<ref>http://www.abc.net.au/ra/innovations/stories/s1076167.htm</ref>

The phrase has since been commonly used to describe a device about which nothing is known of its inner workings. Computers could be considered a black box, as most people who use computers know almost nothing of their apparatus. Lehigh University Professor and Intelligent Design proponent [[Michael Behe]] used this analogy in naming his book ''Darwin's Black Box'', which deals with the issue of irreducible complexity in biological cells.

==The Recovery of KAL 007's Black Box==
[[Korean Airlines Flight 007]] was a Boeing 747 shot down by the Soviets on Sept. 1, 1983 just west of the Soviet territory of Sakhalin Island off the Siberian Maritime. There were 269 passengers and crew aboard. For over 10 years the Soviets denied having retrieved the black box but on January 8, 1993, [[Boris Yeltsin]], under pressure from Senator [[Jesse Helms]] of the Committee on Foreign Relations, handed the Cockpit Voice Recorder and the Digital Flight Data Recorder tapes from the black box to the International Civil Aviation Organization of the United Nations. Here are the combined Cockpit Voice Recorder and Flight Data Recorder transcripts chronicalling the first minute and 44 seconds of the flight of KAL 007 after missile detonation.<ref>http://www.rescue007.org/faq.htm#5</ref>

==See Also==
*[http://www.rescue007.org/faq.htm#4] [http://www.rescue007.org/] The website of the International Committee for the Rescue of KAL 007 Survivors and the reliability of KAL 007's recovered black box tapes and their use in reconstructing the flight.
*[[How KAL 007 was Lost]]

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Technology]]

Fetus

2009-01-19T21:24:10Z

JimP: Inserted Ed's quote from "unborn child"

[[image:fetus1.jpg|right|thumb]]

The term '''fetus''', as applied to human beings, refers to a conceived but unborn child that has developed beyond an [[Human embryo|embryonic]] stage.

{{quotation|Is an unborn child a human being? I happen to believe it is. [http://www.debates.org/pages/trans80a.html] }}

==See also==

*[[Abortion controversy]]

[[Category:Reproduction]]

Unborn child

2009-01-19T21:20:45Z

JimP:

{{delete}}
{{quotation|Is an unborn child a human being? I happen to believe it is. [http://www.debates.org/pages/trans80a.html] }}

[[Category:People]]

Symphony

2009-01-18T23:16:52Z

JimP:

[[Image:Stieler Portrait Ludwig van Beethoven.jpg|thumb|Joseph Karl Stieler Portrait of [[Ludwig van Beethoven]].]]
A '''symphony''' is a large-scale orchestral work. The symphonic form is a [[Sonata form|sonata]] written for the full orchestra, whereas the work for one or two instruments is named a "Sonata". In a sense, a symphony is anything that a composer chooses to call by that name; but the form, as developed from about 1750 to 1950, ''typically'':
*is played by an orchestra of fifty to a hundred musicians, including sections of strings (violin, viola, cello, bass), woodwinds (clarinet, oboe, bassoon, flute, piccolo), brass (French horns, trumpets, trombones, tuba), percussion (tympani, other drums, cymbals, triangle). The instrumental sections are more or less coequal and have conversations or dialogues with each other, as contrasted with a ''concerto,'' in which a solo instrument conducts a dialogue with the rest of the orchestra
*lasts about twenty to ninety minutes<ref>The compact disc originally had a maximum playing time of 74 minutes. A story holds that the size of the disc was influenced by the wish that Beethoven's Ninth Symphony fit onto a single disc. Sony's then-president Norio Ohga was a devotee of classical music and a friend of conductor Herbert von Karajan. Urban legends investigators seem to conclude that it's not quite as simple as that but that the story does have some truth to it; e.g. [http://www.snopes2.com/music/media/cdlength.htm CD length], Snopes.</ref>
*has a detectable structure to it; it is not simply a long medley of tunes. The pattern of key changes and recurring themes are often described as taking the listener on a musical journey.
*is usually "absolute music," without a specific story line to it (unlike "program music," such as Rimsky-Korsakov's ''Scheherazade'' or Smetana's ''Ma Vlast'')
*is usually in four separate parts, called ''movements,'' with the first movement following a pattern called "[[Sonata form|Sonata-allegro form]]." In 18th century symphonies, the second movement was the slow movement, followed by a minuet and trio (or scherzo and trio) in ternary form, and then a fast final movement, in either sonata form or rondo form.

These characterizations are not absolute, however, as many composers have experimented with the format of the symphony:

*Beethoven added programmatic features to his Sixth Symphony (as well as an extra movement), and a chorus to the finale of his Ninth
*Berlioz greatly expanded the size of the orchestra for his "Symphonie Fantastique", and used a programmatic structure
*Composers such as Mahler, Schoenberg, and Richard Strauss experimented with the number of movements and their size and scope

Some famous, familiar, and easily appreciated symphonies include:

*[[Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart|Mozart's]] Symphony No. 40 in G minor, his penultimate symphony, and one of only two of his symphonies written in a minor key (the other, Symphony No. 25, was also in G minor)
*[[Ludwig van Beethoven|Beethoven's]] Symphony No. 5, perhaps the best-recognized classical work ever written.
*[[Ludwig van Beethoven|Beethoven's]] Symphony No. 9, with the choral "Ode to Joy" in the fourth movement. This piece was performed by Leonard Bernstein to celebrate the fall of the Berlin wall, with the lyrics changed slightly to "Ode to Freedom".
*[[Antonin Dvorak|Dvořák's]] Symphony No. 9, "From the New World," with themes that have the flavor of black spirituals to them.<ref>Dvořák was not a musicologist, and, oddly, believed that "Negro" and "Indian" music were similar. He himself regarded the music as Indian-themed, with connections to ''The Song of Hiawatha.''</ref>

Other composers known for their symphonies include [[Joseph Haydn]], [[Franz Schubert]], [[Jean Sibelius]], [[Gustav Mahler]], [[Anton Bruckner]], [[Sergei Prokofiev]], and [[Dmitri Shostakovitch]].

The twentieth-century vogue for atonal music has to some extent obscured the continuing composition of "traditional" symphonies. Some twentieth-century symphonies written in a tonal idiom, more or less in a traditional symphonic mould, and enjoyable to non-expert listeners include:

*[[Charles Ives]], 1913, ''New England Holidays''
*[[Howard Hansen]], 1930, Symphony No. 2 ("Romantic")
*[[Meredith Willson]], 1936, Symphony No. 1, "A Symphony of San Francisco"
*[[Alan Hohvaness]], 1955, Symphony No. 2, "Mysterious Mountain"
*[[Henryk Górecki]], 1976, Symphony No. 3, "A Symphony of Sorrowful Songs"
*[[John Corigliano]], 1990, Symphony No. 1

==Notes and references==
<references/>

[[Category:Musical terms]]
[[Category: Musical forms]]

Center

2009-01-16T01:55:31Z

JimP:

The '''center''' of a [[geometric]] shape is a point that, on average, the points of the shape are [[equidistant]] from. This point does not have to be on the shape itself.

For example, all the points of a [[circle]] are equidistant from the center, however the center is not a point on the circle because the circle is only the rim and has empty interior. In contrast, the center of a disk is a point of the disk.

The center of a [[square]] is not the same distance from every point on the square--the corners are further away from the center than the [[midpoint]]s of the sides. The center of a square is the point where the two [[diagonal]]s intersect.

Figures like squares, [[triangle]]s, [[ellipse]]s, etc. are why we must say "on average" in the definition of "center". While not all points are the same distance away from the center of the figure, the distances will average to be the same value and cancel out.

For complicated geometric shapes and [[solid]]s, the term [[centroid]] is prefered.

[[Category:Geometry]]

Talk:Unborn child

2009-01-08T23:13:34Z

JimP: Suggest merge with other article

This article contains only a quote. It doesn't even say who is quoted, or provide any context for the quote. I suggest this <s>article</s> quote be moved to the [[fetus]] article, or to the [[abortion controversy]] article. [[User:JimP|JimP]] 18:13, 8 January 2009 (EST)

Unborn child

2009-01-08T02:11:28Z

JimP: suggest merge with fetus, or maybe abortion controversy?

{{merge|Fetus}}
{{quotation|Is an unborn child a human being? I happen to believe it is. [http://www.debates.org/pages/trans80a.html] }}

[[Category:People]]

Pinot noir

2009-01-08T00:55:00Z

JimP:

'''Pinot noir''' is the preeminent red [[grape]] variety in many of the world’s finest [[wine]] growing regions, such as the [[Pacific Northwest]] of the [[United States]]; Burgundy and Champagne, in [[France]]; Kent, in England.

In Burgundy, Pinot noir makes some of the most highly regarded red wines anywhere on Earth, but many experts believe that, as Pinot noir tends to produce its best wines in areas of lower [[temperature]]s, various regions further north may well eclipse the famous vineyards of the Cote d’Or in the very near future. Top Kentish producers such as Anthopolous Wines and Morgan Valley Estates have been proving what can be achieved in the unfashionable south eastern corner of England for many years now.

For example, in his seminal work ''Ornithological Winetasting'' (Scott Thomas Publishing, 2004), the famous critic Nicolas Neo-Klaus stated:
“Top Kentish Pinots are the vinous equivalent of a beautiful and yet unattainable woman – ethereal, wistful, continuously beguiling, and always surprising. Kent, in the next decade, will become to Pinot Noir what [[New Zealand]] has become to Pinotage and what [[Chile]] has become to Muller-Thurgau. I would not be at all surprised if the current extensive plantings of lesser varieties in Kent, such as Syrah and Mourvedre, were to be completely replaced by Pinot Noir.”

Keifer Profferoe, author of ''Getting Graped in the Cape'', however, disagrees, putting forward the view that:

<blockquote>
“The viticultural wonderland known as Kent will inevitably bow to economic pressures and replace their current vineyards, villages and shopping centres with blanket plantings of the only grape capable of producing truly world-class wine in the 21st century. I speak of course of Pinotage. In Kent, the [[Holy Grail|holy grail]] of an 18% [[alcohol]] Pinotage will surely become a reality.”
</blockquote>

[[Category:Alcoholic Beverages]]

Pinot noir

2009-01-08T00:52:48Z

JimP: wikify, caps

'''Pinot noir''' is the preeminent red [[grape]] variety in many of the world’s finest [[wine]] growing regions, such as the [[Pacific Northwest]] of the [[United States]]; Burgundy and Champagne, in [[France]]; Kent, in England.

In Burgundy, Pinot noir makes some of the most highly regarded red wines anywhere on Earth, but many experts believe that, as Pinot noir tends to produce its best wines in areas of lower [[temperature]]s, various regions further north may well eclipse the famous vineyards of the Cote d’Or in the very near future. Top Kentish producers such as Anthopolous Wines and Morgan Valley Estates have been proving what can be achieved in the unfashionable south eastern corner of England for many years now.

For example, in his seminal work ''Ornithological Winetasting'' (Scott Thomas Publishing, 2004), the famous critic Nicolas Neo-Klaus stated:
“Top Kentish Pinots are the vinous equivalent of a beautiful and yet unattainable woman – ethereal, wistful, continuously beguiling, and always surprising. Kent, in the next decade, will become to Pinot Noir what [[New Zealand]] has become to Pinotage and what [[Chile]] has become to Muller-Thurgau. I would not be at all surprised if the current extensive [[planting]]s of lesser varieties in Kent, such as Syrah and Mourvedre, were to be completely replaced by Pinot Noir.”

Keifer Profferoe, author of ''Getting Graped in the Cape'', however, disagrees, putting forward the view that:

<blockquote>
“The viticultural wonderland known as Kent will inevitably bow to economic pressures and replace their current vineyards, villages and shopping centres with blanket plantings of the only grape capable of producing truly world-class wine in the 21st century. I speak of course of Pinotage. In Kent, the [[holy grail]] of an 18% [[alcohol]] Pinotage will surely become a reality.”
</blockquote>

[[Category:Alcoholic Beverages]]

Jesus Christ

2009-01-08T00:05:39Z

JimP: Undo revision 604957 by Louisiana5 (Talk) Huh? Darwin was Jesus? undo vandalism

[[Image:Alphaomega.jpg|thumb|200px|''"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end."'' —Jesus (Rev. 22:13)]]
'''Jesus Christ''' is the only Son of [[God]] and prophesied [[Messiah]] who, at the appointed time, was sent by His [[God the Father|Father]] and became a man to be the payment for the penalty of sin that separated us from [[God]] and to reveal to us the loving nature of God through his human person (1 John 4:10; 2 Corinthians 5:19). Although He was sinless, he bore the penalty for sin upon Himself for us.

Speaking to his disciples, Jesus says,
{{cquote|'''John 14:1-15''' Believers will be in his Father's house Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me. “In My Father’s house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you. “If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also. “And you know the way where I am going.” Thomas said to Him, “Lord, we do not know where You are going, how do we know the way?” Jesus himself is the only way people can access his Father and his Father's house Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me. If you know Jesus, you know his Father “If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him.” Philip said to Him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” Jesus said to him, “Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? “Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on My own initiative, but the Father abiding in Me does His works. “Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me; otherwise believe because of the works themselves. “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do, he will do also; and greater works than these he will do; because I go to the Father. “Whatever you ask in My name, that will I do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. “If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it. “If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.}}

By the power of the [[Holy Spirit]], Jesus was conceived in the [[womb]] of the virgin [[Virgin Mary|Mary]], and became man in an event known as the [[Incarnation]], as referred to in Isaiah 7:14. Indeed, the calendar itself reflects this truth, with the traditional calculation of Jesus’ birth marking the first century A.D., that is, "''in the year of Our Lord…''." The [[John the Apostle|apostle John]] wrote in his gospel the following regarding Jesus Christ: "''For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life''" (John 3:16).
{{trinity}}
When he was about thirty, Jesus was baptized by [[John the Baptist]], inaugurating his ministry. Jesus of [[Nazareth]] is the Christ or Messiah, prophesied in the [[Old Testament]] (Greek: Χριστός; [[Aramaic]]: 'משיחא'). Jesus proclaimed that “[t]he time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent, and believe in the Gospel.”<ref>Mark 1:14-15.</ref> As signs of these truths, Jesus performed various miracles.

However, not all who heard the Lord believed in him, and, because he “was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God”, some sought to put him to death.<ref>John 5:18.</ref> Jesus was handed over to the Roman governor [[Pontius Pilate]] and crucified. But it was through his redemptive death, as the [[Holy Scripture|scriptures]] had foretold, that Jesus reconciled mankind with God.<ref>Romans 5:10.</ref> And so, on the third day, in a truly historical event, Jesus physically rose from the dead, making possible salvation and eternal life for those who believe in him. Indeed, his very name, ''Yeshua'' (Hebrew 'יהושע') means "[[Salvation]]" and is the concatenated form of ''Yahoshua'', ‘[[YHWH]] is salvation’. After appearing to his disciples on various occasions, Jesus ascended to Heaven, where he acts as our mediator, assuring, by his constant intercession, the permanent outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

== Jesus' Life ==
===The Pre-existance of Jesus before His incarnation===
Though it is commonly thought that Jesus had his beginning with His birth or with His conception in the womb of Mary, and that personality begins with birth and develops with age, the Person of Jesus on earth was one and the same Person as was the Son of God in the presence of the Father before the incarnation. That is why the transition of His becoming a man on earth is considered such a great act of humility and self forgetfulness - to have left it all, for us, for which He will always be honored and extolled.

Though he was in the form of God , He did not cling to this equality with God, but empried himself to assume the condition of a slave, and became as men are, and being found as a man, he was even humbler yet, even to accepting death, even on a cross. But God raised him high, and gave him the name which is above all other names, so that all beings, in the heavens, and on the earth, and in the underworld, should bend the knee at the name of Jesus, and that every tongue should acclaim, Jesus Christ as Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Philippians 2:5-11

===Incarnation of the Son of God===

The Son of God, who was always with the Father before all creation, took upon himself flesh, that is, become a human being, taking the flesh of manhood from his mother Mary but without her being impregnated by any man. He was born of Mary through the power of the Holy Spirit. The Gospel of John begins,<blockquote>"In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God... and the Word become flesh and dwelt among us"</blockquote>. There are two understandings of this. Though both hold that the Son of God, Divinity Himself, became a man, they understand differently the beginning of the Gospel of John.

The first understanding sees in the Son of God being the Word ("logos" in Greek) that He is the communication of the Father and thus in some sense the purpose of His coming was to mediate the knowledge of God to man among whom He would dwell and be one with them. But as mediator He is in no way inferior to the God He communicates because He Himself is God. The Trinity is emphasized though by implication (the word "Trinity" is of later usage to describe the phenomenon as presented by the New Testament). This understanding rests upon the use of "logos" in Philo and elsewhere meaning "reason", "word", "rationale"

The second interpretation, while in no way negating His coming to be the communication of the Father to man necessitating the incarnation and explicating the Trinity, rather says that we need to look not to Philo and the "logos" philosophy but to the Aramaic Jewish thought of the time. Doing so, we can see that the Gospel of John intends to rip away a veil, and in doing so, will show us that it was God Himself and no mediator, that leaped down to take the form of a human being, and that this is to be spoken of boldly.

Here is how this second understanding is developed:

The Hebrew text is very clear in visualizing the God of Israel in physical terms, even if meant to be understood metaphorically. But the Aramaic Jewish translations of the Hebrew Scriptures will not allow it to be so presented, but will rather speak around it (paraphrase) or use an intermediary word between the physical description and God. In [[Genesis]] 32, [[Jacob]] is wrestling with "a man" but after the bout, Jacob says, in the original Hebrew text, "I have seen God face to face and my life has been saved". In the Aramaic translation, however, Jacob is made to say, " I have seen the ''angel of God'' face to face and my life has been saved". At times, the intermediary word is the word "Word" - in Aramaic, Memra (the root is Aleph, Mem, Resh as in the Hebrew word 'Omer). Whereas the Hebrew text (Gen. 3:8) has it, "They ([[Adam]] and [[Eve]]) heard the sound of the LORD God walking about in the garden", the Aramaic has it, "they heard the sound of ''the Memra'' of the LORD God walking about in the garden" Apparently, walking about in the garden conjured up too much of rustling of leaves and bushes to take figuratively, and so it was the "Memra" that was heard and not the LORD God. This is the pattern in other places in Genesis. Prof. David Flusser of the Hebrew University notes that it is to this mindset that we owe our understanding of John 1:1 and not to Philo and the Alexandrian "logos" philosophy. "In the beginning was the Word (Memra) and the Word (Memra) was with God.. and the Word (Memra) was God. John 1:1 is meant to rip away the distinction between God and the Memra, so assiduously held to by contemporary Judaism, and so declare that they, the Memra and God, are in reality one, ...and this One has, indeed, come down and has become flesh of our flesh and bone of our bone. John, in his epistle would later say in wonderment, " Whom we have handled, we have touched and held Him."

=== Infancy ===
The [[Gospels]] tell us that Jesus was born in [[Bethlehem]] of [[Judea]] to a young virgin named [[Virgin Mary|Mary]], by the [[Holy Spirit]].<ref>http://objectiveministries.org/babyj/</ref> [[Gospel of Luke|Luke's account]] of the gospel relates that the angel [[Gabriel]] visited Mary in order to announce that she had been chosen to bear the Son of God (Luke 1:26–38). A survey of the [[Roman Empire]] was ordered by [[Augustus|Caesar Augustus]], which caused Mary and [[Joseph (father of Jesus)|Joseph]] to leave Nazareth and go to the home of Joseph's forebears - to the house of [[David|King David]]. After Jesus' birth, they were forced to use a [[manger]] for a crib because the town's inn was full. According to Luke 2:8–20, an [[angel]] spread word of Jesus' birth to several shepherds who came to visit the newborn. Matthew also tells of the "Magi" ([[Zoroastrianism|Zoroastrian]] priests) who brought many gifts to the infant Jesus (among which were [[gold]], [[frankincense]], and [[myrrh]])<ref>Note: This has led to the incorrect assumption that there were only three Magi, whereas the actual number is not given.</ref> after following a star which they believed was an indication that the [[Messiah]], or King of the Jews, had been born.

Jesus' early home was the town of [[Nazareth]] in [[Galilee]], and except for an escape to [[Egypt]] in early childhood to avoid [[Herod the Great|Herod's]] massacre of the other male infants, all other events in the Gospels take place in ancient Israel.

====The Infancy and the Massacre of the Innocents====

Within sight of the southern suburbs of Modern Jerusalem,towards the eastern desert, is a conical hill, Herodium, made conical by the work of Herod the King. Herodium served as his fortress in the time of war and as royal residence for himself and visiting dignitaries in the time of peace. Mazada by the dead sea served him in the same way. From this bastion were sent by him his soldiers to slay all the children under the age of two of Bethlehem, in full view of Herodium looking south. This was in hopes that in the slaughter of all, he would also slay the child, indicated by the star and the Magi, as his rival to the throne and power. And so, escaping, Joseph and Mary took the child Jesus to Egypt until it was time, at the death of Herod, for him to make exodus back into the Holy Land and Nazareth. "Out of Egypt have I called My Son" The fury and the hatred for one child, thus saw the slaying of so many of the innocents of Bethlehem whose only guilt was that they were under 2. And so, we know now the Massacre of the Innocents

Beyond this slaughter of so many and hatred for the One who had come, the Book of the Revelation, Chapter 12 would see another and ancient hatred, whether understood or not, one that works behind all other slaying, behind the slaying of all infants, within and without the womb - hatred for the very Son of God, and hatred for all his seed that bear His image, hatred for the Image of God borne by the Son of God, and hatred for God Himself.

=== At Twelve Years Old ===
The account of Jesus' parents finding him in the temple impressing the "teachers" with his knowledge of the [[Old Testament|scripture]] is the only detailed event between Jesus' infancy and adult life that is known.
{{cquote|'''Luke 2:41–51''' Now His parents went to Jerusalem every year at the Feast of the Passover. And when He became twelve, they went up there according to the custom of the Feast; and as they were returning, after spending the full number of days, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem. But His parents were unaware of it, but supposed Him to be in the caravan, and went a day’s journey; and they began looking for Him among their relatives and acquaintances. When they did not find Him, they returned to Jerusalem looking for Him. Then, after three days they found Him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers, both listening to them and asking them questions. And all who heard Him were amazed at His understanding and His answers. When they saw Him, they were astonished; and His mother said to Him, “Son, why have You treated us this way? Behold, Your father and I have been anxiously looking for You.” And He said to them, “Why is it that you were looking for Me? Did you not know that I had to be in My Father’s house?” But they did not understand the statement which He had made to them. And He went down with them and came to Nazareth, and He continued in subjection to them; and His mother treasured all these things in her heart.}}

At this early age of twelve years old, there is clearly shown an inner positional or relational commitment of Jesus. Nor is there any indication that this had not been present prior to His twelfth year. His deepest belonging, that against which all other belongings were to be judged, confirmed, rejected, etc. was to the Father, the Father's House, the Father's concerns. This commitment would reverberate at later times, severing ultimate claims on Him of his closest - mother, brothers, sisters, etc. In the presence of these and to their hearing, He would ask, "Who are my mother, and brothers, and sisters? He that does the will of my Father in Heaven is ..." This, in His own life, was the moral authority to demand the same of all others, "You cannot serve two masters..." The memory of what had happened in the Temple when He was twelve, pondering it in her heart, would stand Mary in good stead, when she would see her son hanging on the cross. She also would be found with the disciples in the upper room, praying, and waiting for the coming of the Spirit which He had promised.

====From Heaven's View====
But seen from heaven, a spark had entered into the Temple's precints..

and around that the time, there was to evolve the extra biblical ceremony and practice of Judaism, which woud try to make sense of the need to be anchored into the ancient tradition of God, with the need to make new for every generation the relevance of it for each Jewish youth. And so developed the Bar Mitzvah, the "Son of the Law" ceremony and concept. At the age of 13, a Jewish boy, so it developed, would read or sing out in the synagogue, the Shabbat of his birthday, the prophetic portion (the Haftorah) for that Sabbath assigned to the Torah portion (from the 5 books of Moses, read consecutively), raining down upon him from the Women's Section (Ezrat Nashim) - the Help of Women) above or to the side, hard sweet candy signifying the hope of sweetness set before him. For at that time, the Jewish boy becomes a Jewish man, taking upon himself, the obligations for fulfilling the Law of Moses, and is no longer absolved from this responsibility by the mediation of his father's fullfilment of the Law of Moses for him.

At this time, seen from Heaven, a spark entered in, another way, sometimes seen in other young boys and girls, but in a dim way, an intense concentration on the Father above all things and people, looking and judging all surrounding him from the viewpoint of Him flooding the soul, listening, speaking, believing.
So Jesus reasoned with the rabbis, never being encompassed by them, in the house of His Father. Was it told to us showing what He was and what we could be, or at least, learn to follow in His steps, or was it shown to us to allow us to view another step in His being made perfect, growing in favor with God and Man, totally consumed with the doing of His Father's will, and thus, "being made perfect", to take our place upon the Cross, for our sakes and for our salvation?

=== Ministry ===
==== Baptism ====
[[Image:Jesus' Baptism.jpg|thumb|right|150px|Jesus' Baptism]]
The [[gospel of Mark]] begins with the [[baptism]] of Jesus by [[John the Baptist]], which appears to be the beginning of Jesus' public ministry. Jesus came to the [[Jordan River|River Jordan]], where John was preaching and baptizing people in the crowd. After Jesus had been baptized, and had risen up out of the water, Mark states Jesus 'saw the heavens torn apart and the Holy Spirit descending like a dove on him. And a voice came from [[heaven]], 'You are my Son, the Beloved; with you I am well pleased' (Mark 1:10–11). Luke adds the chronological anchor that John the Baptist had begun preaching in the fifteenth year of [[Tiberius]] Caesar, approximately in 28 AD (Luke 3:1) and that Jesus was thirty years old when he was baptized (Luke 3:23).

'''The meaning of Baptism for Jesus:'''

Jesus insisted over the protests of John that He be baptized at the hands of John. John's protests are natural enough as John's baptism was for those who were sinners, and implied in baptism was the understanding that the baptizer was somehow greater than the one baptized. John believed that he needed to be baptized by Jesus and not the other way around. But Jesus' understanding of His being baptized was two-fold:"Baptism" meant suffering unto death, and it implied that His impending mission was to be in behalf and in place of the real sinners, the humanity for whom He would die. Jesus would later use "baptism" in the first sense when he said to disciples, "Can you be baptized with the baptism which I will undergo?" The Spirit coming down on the Son in the form of a Dove (Yonah = "Jonah" in Hebrew), and the voice of the Father, "This is My Beloved Son" was the Divine empowerment, and authorization for Jesus' mission to come entailing His sacrificial death, three days, not in the belly of the fish, but in the bowels of the earth, and after that, resurrection. As Baptism for Jesus meant, looking forward, His joining sinful humanity to the point of bearing their sins to the death of the cross, so the later New Testament understands, looking backward, that sinners believing in Jesus are also to join Him in His death through the waters of baptism "in the Name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" - according to the command of the Risen Christ. See [[Christianity]] for Jesus' self consciousness.

==== Temptation ====
After this baptism, according to Matthew, Jesus was brought into the desert by God where he fasted for forty days nights. During this period, the [[Satan]] appeared before him and tried three times to tempted Jesus into demonstrating his supernatural powers as a proof of his divine status; each temptation was refused by Jesus, with a scriptural quote from the Book of [[Deuteronomy]].

Jesus then began to preach. [[Gospel of John|John]] describes three different [[passover]] feasts that Jesus attended, thus implying that his ministry lasted three years.

'''The reason behind the Temptation:'''

The Temptation occurred just as told in the Gospels. But behind the happening, another message lies revealing the identity of Jesus to a people who would understand it. At the foothill of Mt. Hermon, in between the servile Roman infatuated people of Tiberius to the south west of the Sea of Galilee, and the rabidly nationalistic, anti- Roman Zealots of Gamla to the north east, Jesus asked His disciples who He was. The Messiah, the Son of the Living God, was the answer. And Jesus explained who He was and why he had come in terms that fit their experience - not to rule and throw out the Romans, nor to uphold their ways and laws but rather something on a different plane all together - to give His life settling it on the cross.

To a later believing people, those who were not Jewish, who He was would be understood in terms fitting to who they were - He had come the Second Adam, to give His life and to provide new life to those who were not Jewish, but also including the Jews, to all the lost and wandering children of Adam.

In the Temptation, it is the those who knew the Old Testament, the physical children of Abraham primarily, who could see in the long range, and not primarily dictated to by the political passions of the moment, and who could wonder who they were and where they had gone wrong, and wonder also who would be the One to take them out. It is they, Israel, who had been in the wilderness for 40 years, and they that had succumbed to the temptations of selling out for food and drink, though they were a "Son" whom God with a strong arm and outstretched hand had taken out of the bondage of Egypt, they had turned traitor, driven by their own lust and pride. And here now, in Jesus, was One who resisted the devil in the wilderness, also "for forty", preferring the will of God as His food rather than all the world could offer, Who was He? He was Israel! The only true one left, the faithful remnant spoken of by the prophet Isaiah, the servant true to the end. As the letter to the Hebrews saw, "Though He were a Son yet learned He obedience by the things He suffered, and being made perfect, He become the author of Eternal life...". This is the understanding of the Gospel of Matthew, in interpreting a passage from Hosea which was manifestly speaking of Israel the people and applying it to Jesus who also came out of Egypt with His parents at the death of Herod, " Out of Egypt have I called my Son". Who was Jesus? He was Israel who had ''not'' failed come to redeem Israel who had, and also out of all the peoples of the world.

==== Disciples and Apostles ====
[[Image:Jesus5.jpg‎|thumb|left|100px|Jesus Christ (Artist's impression)]]
The larger part of this was directed towards his closest followers, the [[apostles]], although all of his followers were considered [[disciples of Jesus|disciples]]. At the highest point of his ministry, Jesus attracted disciples and audiences numbering in the thousands; in particular in the area of Galilee. Many of Jesus' most well-known teachings were given during the [[Sermon on the Mount]], such as the [[Beatitudes]] and the [[Lord's Prayer]]. Jesus often used parables in his rhetorical technique, such as the [[Parable of the Good Samaritan]] and [[the parable of the sheep and the goats|the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats]]; these teachings encouraged unconditional self-sacrificing [[Shema|love for God]] and [[Agape|for all people]]. During these sermons, he also discussed service and humility, forgiveness of sins, how faith should be applied, the [[Golden Rule]], and the necessity of following the spirit of the law as well as its wording.

'''Their choosing and their purpose:''' Among the many who came to Jesus, from afar and from the surrounding villages of the north shore of the Sea of Galilee, were those moved by his insight into the nature of life, or touched deeply by His seemingly knowing them from the inside, by His intimacy with the God and Father they had only known "about", or impressed by the miracles done before their very eyes, and many, by His deep compassion for the people, so evident in all that He did. Jesus would sprinkle His words upon them as seed in a path, some to take root, and some to be blown away by the wind. But to those who heard and wanted more, they would get that more, receiving explanation, and move closer to His association. Those that would not, would receive only that which was commensurate to not wanting - more parables, silence. Never the revealing of the "Secrets of the Kingdom". Yet, there was no prohibition and no limit for getting closer to Jesus. Those that did, became His "learners" - the disciples, understanding the meanings of His word by the demonstration of His life and putting them into practice. Among these were another group, some that had been with Him from early on, possibly some from the time of His baptism at the hands of John. These He would hold in His mind for an additional and different reason.

Then one night, he ascended a hill praying about them, and came down knowing who they were to be. 12 in number, chosen not because of their virtue, or even what He would do in them in the future, but rather solely chosen by His Father to be deputized, delegated, or commissioned by Jesus to be sent out for a mission. He gave them the name "Shaliach" (meaning all that), which was translated into Greek as "apostolos" and so our Apostles.

The mission of the Apostles (see "Example 5." of [[New Testament understanding through the Jewish perspective]]) was to do all that they saw Jesus was doing, healing the sick, raising the dead, and with all this, to tell about the fast coming Kingdom of Heaven, the rule of His Father, and urge people to repent and get ready for it. He gave them His power and authority to do all this. But it was to be 12 in number, not more and not less, that number surviving even the suicide of one of them, Judas from the village of Kyriot, requiring an "election" to bring back the number from 11 to 12. And that was because the special additional reason for their appointment was to sit on the 12 thrones of the 12 tribes of Israel (the sons of Jacob) and lead them by whatever it takes - that is the meaning of the biblical term "Judge" (Shofet)*. For the community of the "little ones"., was to be, in some sense, an Israel within Israel, or a new Israel, a sort of beachhead for the onslaught of the Kingdom of God in its invasion (or sometimes, infiltration into) into and onto the Kingdom of the unjust occupier and enemy of all Goodness, the Devil, to overthrow him and all his works. This truer and newer Israel, He called His "Called Out ones" (Eklessia=Church) against whose onslaught the Fortified city of Hell with its defensive bars to its massive gates, would not prevail. Many captives would be released. The Church, then, was the community counterpart to what was known as the "Synagogue" (Greek), meaning "gathered together ones" (Beit Knesset - house of the gathering, Hebrew). It was the Synagogue of Jesus the King and Messiah, and aligned with and the focal point of the Prophetically promised and hoped-for Kingdom of God and the rule of Heaven on Earth. And the disciples and apostles of Jesus all had their place in the unfolding of it all.

*Note: For the significance of sitting on the seat and judging, see Example 2. of [[New Testament understanding through the Jewish perspective]].

==== Social Outcasts ====
Jesus also often conversed with social outcasts, such as the publican ([[Rome|Roman]] tax collectors who were unpopular for their practice of extorting money).

Jesus showed no partiality toward outcasts, and neither did He do so to those who were in society. But being an outcast was a category beyond the reach of all others which were in society. Jesus was not for the male over against the female, the Jew over against the non Jew, townsman over against the man of the field. He was impartial and penetrating in His love for all. But all of these had a certain standing in Society, they were part of it, though all being in it, could vie for more of it as their share. But all were united, and could work in concert against what they were not - the outcast. The love of Jesus and the love of His Father through Him, could not rest lightly on any one of them, until it would reach and rest on the one beyond the fringes, the outer edges, and down below - the outcast. This demonstrated in the life of Jesus what the Cross would later show and the Apostles preach - all were outcast to the Holiness of God, and all could be loved by Him and, indeed, were.

==== Miracles ====
Throughout his ministry, Jesus performed many miracles including healing the sick and possessed, feeding 5000, and even raising from the dead.

Miracles were an intrusion of the ordinary, but the ordinary of a different and far-superior Kingdom, into the sordid and sin sick kingdoms of this world. They showed what life was really like there in that Kingdom which was coming and how weak, unstable, subject and cringing were the powers of this corrupted world, "bent" under the heel of God. That a widow should have her dead son restored to her alive, that outcasts such as lepers should be restored to the community, and as a result of their being healed, that darkness should give way to light and sight, that a woman deserving stoning find solace and forgiveness, all of these are the way things are and ought to be in the Kingdom of God because of the way He is. They were, at one and the same time, signs of the Kingdom which was coming and great works of compassion done here below which will never by surpassed or forgotten. And Jesus the Messiah was bringing them in!

Note: See Example 5 of [[New Testament understanding through the Jewish perspective]] for the assault and infiltration of God's Kingdom on and into the Kingdom of Satan.

==== His Preaching was Offensive to the Established Authority ====
As He preached, Jesus ran afoul of the [[Sanhedrin]], the recognized Jewish religious authorities, who were allowed to have considerable religious, political and monetary influence under Roman rule. Jesus chastised them, accusing them of making laws for the people to follow that were the laws of men, not God. The Sanhedrin tried to set traps for Jesus by asking Him questions to either discredit Him with the people or get Him in trouble with the Roman authorities, but all of their efforts failed and they gave up. They lacked the means to stop Jesus until [[Judas Iscariot]] came to them and offered to betray Jesus for 30 pieces of silver. He would tell them where Jesus would be that night so they could seize Him.

Notable among Jewish established authorities were the Pharasees, the Saduccees, and the Herodians.

The Pharisees, believing that at the time God had given to Moses the "written Torah" (Torah shebikhtav), He had also given to Moses an "Oral Torah" (Torah shebe'al peh) which would apply the written Torah to all situations and times, and that that Oral Torah had been handed down from generation to generation, finally, it itself written down, making, in the days of Jesus, the beginning of the Talmud. Thus it was necessary to be able to "fill in the rabbis" from whom the teaching came (see [[Judaism]]) - "Rabbi Tarfon says in the name of Rabbi..." But this man Jesus, goes straight to Moses, and straight to Heaven! ''"You have heard it said...but I say unto you..."'' and himself speaks as the ''Mouth of God!''

The Saduccees, not believing in an Oral Torah, and believing much of the written Torah to be irrelevant and impractical in the modern times that they lived, believed that the "blanks" and how the Torah was to be applied in these days, must be decided by the Kingdoms of the World, namely, Roman law and requirement. But this man Jesus speaks of another Kingdom and another King, and not of Rome!

The Herodians saw clearly who their enemy was and who their Savior was and wherein their safety lie - Herod the King of the Jews and all the aura and the might that he possessed. And their enemy was anyone who would claim, or live in the claim of others, that it was he that was the King of the Jews and not Herod (and the royalty after Herod) - such as was doing the man Jesus of Nazareth

Note: Judaism does not have a "unified" theory of Inspiration or practical authority of Scripture. That is, The most authoritative, and capable of being regulatory to life as "law" is the five books of Moses. After that, the Prophets. And after that, the "Writings." The Scripture of the Saduccees was just the Five books of Moses, and since there is little if anything about the resurrection from the dead and the after life in the the Five Books of Moses, they believed in neither. The Pharisees, believing in the on-going of revelation extending, though with lesser authority, to the Prophets (such as Daniel) and the Writings, believed in both.

=== Last Days of Jesus' Life ===
==== Lord's Supper ====
'''God and man at table are sat down:'''

It happened before - "Moses went up with Aaron, Nadab and Abihu. and seventy elders of Israel. They saw the God of Israel...they gazed on God. They ate and they drank." Exodus 24: 9-11

It would happen after - "Now while He was with them at table, He took the bread and said the blessing, then He broke it and handed it to them. And their eyes were opened and recognized Him. But He had vanished from their sight. Then they said to each other, Did not our hearts burn within us as He talked to us on the road, and explained the Scriptures to us?"Luke 24: 30-32

Eating before the Lord or with the Lord, would be used as the highest form of friendship - Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If any one hears My voice and opens the door I will come in to him and share my meal with him, side by side.". Rev. 3:20.

At the [[Passover Seder]], the last meal the Lord would eat with His followers, His presence so permeated the atmosphere, and what He said and did at that special time, and especially they having received His command to do just what He was doing before them at this time, whenever they would meet together, the Apostles of the Lord and the Gospels after them could not speak of bountiful and miraculous times of the Lord's gracious giving of food feeding the multitudes, without mentioning that which otherwise would not have been mentioned - ''He took the bread, looked up to heaven blessing the bread, He broke the bread, and He gave it to them.'' That is what the Lord did before them, and that is what Hie commanded them to do after Him, and thus provided for them, and for the Church after them, the one of two universal services - the [[Lord's Supper]], or [[Eucharist]], or [[Holy Communion]].

But in addition, He gave His own particular understanding to the unleavened bread of the Passover and ceremonial cup of wine, the 3rd and "Thanksgiving cup" of wine drunk immediately after the Passover meal was eaten. In slightly varying words, the Gospels and the Church after would perpetuate that understanding by repeating what the Lord Himself said at that Last Supper - "This is My Body which is given for you... This is My blood, the blood of the New Covenant which is shed for you, and for the many, for the forgiveness of sins. Do this as my own Remembrance". And so He signified to His followers that His life would be given in sacrifice for them and for their benefit. How this benefit would be effected, would be explained by Jesus by other sayings, "Do not think that I have come in order to be served. I have not come to be served but rather to serve, and to give my life as a ransom for many."

But His presence remained with them at the continual celebration of this new Christian [[Passover]] of the Communion. Though He had vanished from their eyes as He would return to the Father, yet through the Spirit which He had promised to be in His stead, He was there with them to remain- "Where two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I!"..." Even so, Come Lord Jesus!"

Note 1: The word Maranatha, comes from the Greek word which is translating the Aramaic which comes in two forms according to the accent given. Marana tha - "O our Lord, come!", and Maran atha - "Our Lord has come". This appears in the earliest liturgies of the Eucharist, and was used either as an invocation for the Lord to come, a sort of invite, or as an exclamation that the Lord has indeed come, just as He said He would. In either case, it was a witness to the belief that the Lord was indeed with them when they participated in the Remembrance which He had commanded.

Note 2; What the Lord said, "This is my body... This is my blood...Do this!" (the "Words of Institution", His instituting the Holy Communion until His coming again), is absent in the Gospel of John when recounting the last time of the Lord with His disciples. This is not an oversight, as the Gospel of John, from all contextual indications, has already spoken of the matter in the 6th chapter.

==== Garden of Gethsemane ====
[[Image:Jesus in Gethsemane.jpg|thumb|right|150px|Jesus in Gethsamane]]
Jesus knew that His time was short and that He was about to be betrayed into the hands of sinners. He had His last supper with his disciples and went with them to the [[Garden of Gethsemane]] and prayed vehemently knowing what was about to come.

Decision, certainty, from a distance is clearer and easier than when the time approaches for decision's implementation. That is because the here and now, leaves no room for imagining a rescue from all that is around us and in us. Leaving us confused or uncertain, needing assurance, or a once again revelation, of what it was that brought us to decision in the first place. John knowing from the beginning that his cousin Jesus was the promised Messiah, when years later, found himself in prison, and things not going the way he had expected, understood or hoped, required assurance that Jesus was really the One he had thought Him to be. Jesus responded forcefully and completely to that so human request - Tell John what you see, the dead are raised, the sick healed, and the poor are being told of the good news of the Kingdom of God. And it was enough.

Jesus, knowing why He had come, and that He was to mount the cross, to bear the sins of the world, knowing also what that must mean, He who had never "known" sin, now to know it in a way, that man could never know, man who all the time was in it, inured to it, accustomed to it, Jesus prayed. There was a movement in His prayer, taking on anew, the certainty and decision of old, feeling the enormity of it at close hand, and in the garden, he prayed three times, each time agonizing* dripping great drops of sweat, each time making movement in the direction from ''If there be another way, The Father knows and will show, but He would do whatever the Father wills'', towards ''being the Father's will, He would do it. There really is no other way''. And then it was done, He had settled it within Him anew, having prayed, and having received the deep silent Amen of the Father within His soul. It was enough. He was ready.

*note: "Agonize" of the text is from the Greek word "to struggle".

==== Tried before Jewish Authorities ====
Jesus was betrayed by Judas into the hands of the Jewish religious authorities who took Him away and secretly put Him on trial during the night, trying to find justification for their desire to have Him killed. Finally, they convicted Him of blasphemy. For the location of the Jewish trial, see Example 6 of [[New Testament understanding through the Jewish perspective]]

==== Tried before Roman Authorities ====
As they did not have the authority to put a man to death, they took him to [[Pontius Pilate]], the Roman governor of Palestine, with their charges and demanded his execution. Pilate avoided the issue by sending him to [[Herod Antipas|King Herod]] since Jesus was a Galilean, but Herod sent him back to Pilate. Pilate at first tried to release Jesus with a flogging, and then gave the crowd a choice to either spare Jesus or a criminal called [[Barabbas]] as part of the passover tradition. The crowd chose to free Barabbas [Aramaic: "Son of a (the) Father") and Pilate washed his hands to signify that he bore no responsibility for Jesus' death before ultimately condemning Him to [[crucifixion]].<ref>Matthew 27: 15-44</ref>

==== Scourging ====
The penalty of crucifixion was always preceded by scourging (flogging) with the Roman ''flagellum''. a short ox-hide whip knotted with pieces of zinc, lead, and bone which removed swaths of the victims' skin with every stroke. Although the Bible mentions the scourging of Jesus only very briefly, it must have been particularly brutal from the relatively short amount of time Jesus lingered on the cross after the punishment. Victims who suffered less blood loss from the scourging were known to remain alive on the cross for two or three days.

==== Death on a Cross ====
[[Image:David Christ on the Cross.jpg|right|thumb|Christ on the Cross by [[Jacques Louis David]].]]
Jesus died after suffering and giving up his spirit.

Behind the Cross was the sum total of all the maladies of mankind, that the Old Testament unveiled : Pesh'a - conscious and "high handed" rebellion, for which , under the Old Covenant, there was no forgiveness provided, Khet - an unintended "missing of the mark", as in the deviation from the bull's eye of the bowman, Shigi'a - the mistakes, some causing great harm to others, which come about by plain ignorance, and 'Avon "iniquity" or distortion - the inner twistedness, that causes failure and suffering, seemingly from the very structure of our persons regardless of our intent. These were the sins Godwards as well as towards man, and these are all, Scripture revealed, repugnant to the nature and standard of a Holy God.

On the Cross, in a way which is unfathomable to man, but nonetheless believable, the repugnance fell upon Jesus, the Son of God, and again in a way not fully understandable to us, but believable nonetheless, God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself, not considering us the sinners but rather His own dear Son who had no taint upon Himself. A great transaction had taken place by the imposition of Himself of Christ in our place, absorbing, as if He were a blotter, all the reaction of a Holy God upon Himself, in our place, that we might go free. Unfair to Him, Mercy to us. Yet Jesus was not forced to do it. He did it both in His great love for us and in His obedience to the way that the Father had decided. "No one takes my life from me. I have power to take it and I have power to lay it down...I lay down my life for the sheep". Peter would say, "The Just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God." Paul would say, "He was made to be sin, He who did not "know" sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him". That was Friday.

On Saturday, when all were at Sabbath's rest, Jesus was not. His body dead, He passed in spirit to those that had died before, those in the period of Noah, and proclaimed, as Peter taught, what He had done. On Sunday, the first day of the week, He would rise from the dead.

The Cross of Christ, and the atonement He accomplished on it, is the very grounds that anyone who will be saved can be saved. The shedding of His blood brings salvation, to anyone who will respond, according to the ability that they have, that is given them. That brings forgiveness and acceptance, even welcome, to the murderer such as Paul, the adulteress such as the "woman taken in adultery", the tax-collecting extortionist, a seeker in the night turned believer, as hopefully Nicodemus proved to be, people that just know that they are sinners without any "grave sin" to specify, and also the "fetus" whose life was cut off in the womb as a "thing", and the severely retarded child banging his head in the institution he finds himself. All, according to the light given them, and repentance and turning to God given to them, will one day know just what was the basis for their salvation - the Cross of Christ. Those who reject, will also one day know the basis by which they could have been saved if they had not rejected - the Cross of Christ

=== Resurrection ===
:''See main article: [[Resurrection of Jesus Christ]]''
On the third day after his death, Jesus [[resurrection of Jesus Christ|rose bodily from the dead]].

Jesus' resurrection from the dead was no mere reassembling the molecules of His dead and disintegrating body, but it was a new union of His Spirit and body, in a way that could only be called by the Apostle Paul, in reference to ourselves, when we, in turn, following His pattern, a ''spiritual body''. Having risen from the dead, He was physical enough to eat and drink with His disciples, and we can assume to digest, as well as ingest, and to be touched and felt, having Thomas' hand thrust into His spear riven side, and yet, strangely not held by the physical laws of before, passing through the door to the room where the disciples were assembled, "Peace be upon you!", and to physically ascend, in the sight of all, from a location on the Mount of Olives into the presence of the Father In some way, even the disciples on the Road to Emmaeus, could not recognize Him, perhaps an aspect of the changed body, perhaps the power of the will of Jesus himself blinding them to the fact that It was He, until the breaking of the bread.
Jesus had risen, the stone unrolled, not to let Him out, but to let others in - to have the basis for their testimony, that He is risen indeed!
By the regaining of His life in the resurrection from the dead (Scripture asserts that it was by the power of the Holy Spirit that this took place) Jesus was "certified" to the Church, and to all that would come after, that He was indeed the Son of God, that the verdict of death to Him given by men, was not so much overturned, but used in a far superior way by the Father to accomplish His will for redemption, and has given Him, at the last, ''vindication''.

And for mankind, its individuals in the millions through the centuries who had believed in Him, there came the certainty, that death was also not to be their end, that they too will arise with Jesus, that death, the annihilation of all, or a future only to be dreaded, was not to be their end, that the Presence of Jesus who had gone before them, was a welcoming one, that He had found a way, and now they would be with Him forever and ever, and with good hope for the sight of loved ones again. Death had been conquered and fear could be too.

In recent history, Dr. [[Gary Habermas]] is considered the foremost [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] for defending the [[Resurrection of Jesus Christ|resurrection of Jesus]]. Other notable defenders of the resurrection include: [[William Lane Craig]], [[Ben Witherington]], [[Lee Strobel]], [[Josh McDowell]], [[Edwin M. Yamauchi]], [[N.T. Wright]], and [[Michael Horner]].<ref>
* http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/menus/historical.html
* http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/josh2.html
* http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/yama.html
* http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Early_Traditions.htm
* http://www.michaelhorner.com/articles/resurrection/index.html</ref> In addition, much has been written defending the resurrection of Christ in the field of [[Christian Legal Apologetics|Christian legal apologetics]].

=== Ascension into Heaven ===
He was lifted up while they looked on, and a cloud took him form their sight. They were still staring into the sky when suddenly two men in white were standing near them and they said, "why are you men from Galilee standing here looking into the sky. Jesus who has been taken up from you into heaven, this same Jesus will come back in the same way as you have seen Him go there." Acts 1:9-11

Scripture posits two purposes related to man for the ascension of Jesus: 1. it was to the right hand of the Father (showing favorable disposition of the Father to the Son to hear His requests) from which position Jesus intercedes to the Father on our behalf, and 2. Having ascended to the Father, He received from the Father the Spirit. The Father pours out the Spirit "through the Son" upon the Church. The "first Pentecost"

=== Return of Jesus from heaven to earth===
I gazed into the visions of the night and I saw coming on the clouds of heaven, One like a son of man. He came to the One of Great Age and was led into His presence. On Him was conferred sovereignty, glory and kingship. And men of all peoples, nations, and languages became His servants. His sovereignty is an eternal sovereignty which shall never pass away. Nor will His empire ever be destroyed. Daniel 7:13-14

The Lord Himself shall descend from heaven with a shout and with the voice of the Archangel and with the Horn of God, and the dead in Christ shall rise first. Then we who are still alive remaining here will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air and so will we ever be with the Lord. 1 Thess. 4: 16,17

You were converted to God and became servants of the real, living God; and how you are now waiting for Jesus, His Son, whom He raised from the dead, to come from heaven to save us from the retribution which is coming. 1 Thess, 1:9,10

==Jesus' Self Consciousness==

Jesus, conceived of the Holy Spirit, presented a disturbing surprise to his earthly father, Joseph, knowing he had not impregnated his fiancee, Mary. She would ponder the meaning of this miracle all the days Jesus would grow and finally she would behold her son expire on the cross. But Joseph, told by the Lord who his son really was, and how he had come about, and being warned by the Lord to flee the murderous Herod, took his family to Egypt - until the death of Herod made it safe ("Out of Egypt have I called My Son") to return to Israel. The family settled in Nazareth on the elevated rim of the Jezre'el Valley where he grew well and observably no different from the other youth. But when he was about 12 years old, he was taken to the Temple in Jerusalem, and displayed his consciousness that His real Father was God rather than Joseph ("Didn't you know that I must be here about the matters of My Father?".

They returned to Nazereth in Galilee and it wasn't until 28 years later that He began to publicly show His consciousness as to who he was. This was at his baptism at the Jordan River by John, when the voice came, to him, to John, and to the people privileged to be around, "This is my Son, the Beloved, Listen (Shma'a) to Him!" Here and now, against even the desire of John the Baptizer, Jesus, knowing that sin was not in him, chose to identify with sinful mankind in this baptism of John for repentance of sin, knowing that at the end of his time on earth, he would then be giving this sinless life of his on the cross, bearing the sins of the world upon himself.
[[Image:Carpaccio Christus in Emmaus.jpg|thumb|Christus in Emmaus by [[Vittore Carpaccio]]]]
Back, now, in Galilee, he would begin to do works of mercy, miracles of compassion, healings of deliverance, and overthrowing the devastations of Satan upon the people of God's compassion - in short, bringing in the Kingdom of Heaven and of God and supplanting the Kingdom of Darkness. He began to gather around him his followers, simple fishing folk and others, spending most of his time in the area around the north shore of the Kinneret (Sea of Galilee). among the Jews of this Jewish area. He was bringing in the Messianic Kingdom to those who would understand it best, the Jews. But all the time, there was burning within him the knowledge that the blessings of Abraham would be extended, according to the promise, to all the peoples of the earth, the Gentiles, and there would be a new Kingdom, a new nation, transcending both Jews and Gentiles, the Kingdom of the people of God the Heavenly Father. He began his forays then into gentile areas, Phoenecia, the Decapolis, and other locales, and finding faith there such as he had not found "even in Israel".

A crossroads occurred, then, in the choice of Jesus, and consequently in the options of his disciples. It occurred in the Tetrarchy of Philip, at the foothills of Mt. Hermon, at the town of Caesarea Philipi. He knowing who he was, would force the question upon others - "Who do people say Me to be?". From the lips of Shim'on, whom he would call Peter, as leader of the others, He would hear - "You are the Messiah, the Son of the Living God!" It was enough. Jesus would then begin imparting to them what the nature of His mission to be - not to expel the Romans from the Holy Land, but to go to Jerusalem, to be betrayed, to be spurned and rejected by the High Priests and the Elders of the People, to be hung on a Roman cross at the hands of the Gentiles, to die. Casesarea Philipi was in between, on one hand, Gentile pervaded Roman Tiberius to the southwest of the Sea, and on the other hand, anti-Roman nationalistic and zealotic Gamla to the north east of the Sea. (This latter would end their rebellion against Rome by suicide on Matzada in 73 A.D). Those two polarities were present in the minds of the disciples and Jesus began, on one hand, to divest from their minds the one, the warrior role of the Messiah against the Romans, and the other, to renew their thinking and their commitment to Him as the self sacrificing Lamb of God, the Prince of Peace and the true Messiah of Israel, on the other hand.

This took place on the long 3 or 4 day journey by foot from Galilee to Jerusalem, along the [[Jordan River]] valley, coming to Jericho, ascending to Jerusalem from the east. It was in Jerusalem that he prepared and settled the matter for the perpetuation of the Church at the Lord's last supper of the Passover, to be made palpable later by the descent of the Holy Spirit. It was in Jerusalem, in the Garden of the Oil Press, that what He had been lead to believe about his mission and the meaning and manner of his death was fully embraced and accepted with no reservation or turning back. "Your will be done, Father, if there is no other way", and "There is no other way, Your will be done Father!" It was a perfect decision and commitment, perfecting his life to be a perfect sacrifice. And it was to the west just outside Jerusalem that His teachings came to a concretization and realization on the cross. And just outside of Jerusalem that His Father would vindicate him by raising him from the dead.

"No man takes my life from me. I have power to take it and I have power to lay it down... I lay down my life for the sheep." <ref>Bible, Gospel of John, 10:18,15 http://etext.virginia.edu/etcbin/toccer-new2?id=KjvJohn.sgm&images=images/modeng&data=/texts/english/modeng/parsed&tag=public&part=10&division=div1</ref>

"Though He was in the form of God, He did not think equality with God something to grasp onto. But He emptied Himself and took to Himself the form of a servant and was made man, And being found in the form of a man, He humbled Himself, becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the Cross. For this reason, God has exalted Him..."<ref>Bible, Philippians 2:6-9a, http://etext.virginia.edu/etcbin/toccer-new2?id=KjvPhil.sgm&images=images/modeng&data=/texts/english/modeng/parsed&tag=public&part=2&division=div1 </ref>

==Following Jesus, believing in Him==
It is sometimes said that there are two faiths in the New Testament. That of Jesus and that of Paul. Paul's religion is that of believing in Christ as Lord and Savior, and as the divine Son of God, and that of Jesus is of following Him in the sense of living and doing as He has taught. But in reality, there is only one faith and the two not in contradiction. For the Jesus of the Gospels, besides setting forth the life that He himself lived, as a pattern for all His followers, also said, "No one knows the Son, except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son choses to reveal Him", and "I and the Father are One", and "If you see Me, you see God". .And Paul, aside, from saying that "if you believe in the Lord Jesus you shall be saved", and "therefore, being justified by Faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ", also said "work out your salvation with fear and trembling", and "Owe no man anything except to love one another, for he who loves another has fulfilled the law."

Mark 16:16 "He who believes and is baptized shall be saved. And he who does not believe, shall be condemned", Jesus said. It is belief in Jesus which brings a person to the waters of baptism, and it is through the waters of baptism, that one enters into the fellowship of the Church, the people of God who are being brought, day be day, one with the other, to the life that Jesus taught about. And so his new belief and his being and living and doing are all unified under the direction of Christ and His under-shephards. And if one will not believe, of course, then it goes without saying, he will not be baptized.

== Historical Analysis ==
=== Dating Jesus' Birth ===
Modern historians generally place the actual date of Jesus' birth between 7 and 4 B.C., due to problems reconciling the Roman and Jewish calendars with the [[Gregorian Calendar]] which is in use today throughout the industrialized world.

=== Historicity of Jesus ===
Occasionally, non-historians deny the [[historicity of Jesus]] (Having to do with the question of whether Jesus was in fact a real person who had a real life on earth), but few scholars take this seriously. [[Tacitus]], a Roman historian, wrote about Jesus in A.D. 115,<ref>http://www.digisys.net/users/ddalton/evidence_of_jesus_outside_the_bible.htm</ref> and [[Josephus]], a Jewish historian who did not believe in Jesus' divinity, wrote about him.<ref>http://www.christian-thinktank.com/jesusref.html</ref> Dr. [[Gary Habermas]] wrote an extensive analysis of the historicity of Jesus in his work ''The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ'', which discusses many historical sources that mention Jesus.

[[Lee Strobel]]'s book ''[[The Case for Christ]]'' contains a number of interviews with experts on the historical Jesus and a defense of Jesus's resurrection, and is a good resource on this subject.

== Jesus' Name ==
=== ''Jesus'' ===
The bible doesn't tell us much about the meaning of the name ''Jesus'', but does tell us who gave the name, when the name was given, and a reason the name was given. Luke 2:21 tells us that his name was given (1) "by the angel," (2) and it was given "before He was conceived in the womb." The reason for naming him Jesus seems to be given in Matthew 1:21, which says, "...you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins."

==== Hebrew Origin ====
The Greeks derived the name from the late Hebrew or Aramaic name Yoshua, today’s version of which is “Joshua”. The earlier Aramaic form was Jehoshua (Y’hoshua) or Joshua., deriving from Hebrew Yah, short for Yahweh, and Aramaic y’shuoh meaning “salvation”. The name thus meant “Jah is salvation”. Both Joshua and Jehoshua were common names in the time of Jesus.

=== ''Christ'' ===
Athough it appears that "Jesus Christ" is composed of a first and last name, and indeed, the New Testament at times considers the names together as a first and second name, in origin, and through much of the New Testament, "Christ" is used as a title. It is the Greek translation for "Mashiach" (Hebrew), and Meshicha (Aramaic) - meaning "Annointed". Thus He was called, "Jesus, the Annointed One". Kings priests, and prophets were often annointed with oil to consecrate them for their task, and so was Jesus for His task by the descent of the Spirit when He was baptized by John. The Spirit descended on Him and dwelt within Him. This was in fulfillment of Isaiah 61 - "The Spirit of the LORD is upon me for He has annointed (Mashach) Me; He has sent Me to bring good news to the meek, to console the broken hearted, to call out Freedom to the captives, and to prisoners Release." When Jesus ascended into the presence of the Father, the Father sent the Spirit of Jesus, the Holy Spirit, through the Son, upon the believers and they too, as their Master, were "annointed" for their living and their task.

Note: The change from a title to a name is much more authentic and understandable in Aramaic language than in English. There is no inner connection from "Jesus the Christ" to "Jesus Christ" in English but in Aramaic the connecting bridge is the vocative "O Christ" (O, Annointed One)! "O Christ" and "The Christ" is the same in Aramaic - Meshicha.

== Teachings of Jesus ==
Jesus' special method of teaching was very different from what we know as "class room" teaching, and different from "teaching from definition". Though His students sometimes sat around Him and listened, He often taught them through the actual every day events of life, by parable and much more - as they traveled, as they ate, as they met people. All of life was His text book. He took them from what they understood to what they ''were to understand'', and brought them to understanding of what He meant, by how they saw it enacted and displayed in His own life. His life was the commentary to what they heard from His lips. That is why, besides that He was the Savior of the World, the believers in Him need be followers as well - to learn of His ways by intimate association. They would remember the words of the Savior later on and understand even more once His Spirit would be given them. His Spirit would then be their Guide, just as Jesus had done for them when He was on earth.

The Teachings of Our Lord Jesus Christ are found in the four [[Gospels]] and other holy documents.

[http://www.lifeofchrist.com/teachings/sermons/mount/default.asp '''Sermon on the Mount'''] This is the greatest sermon Jesus ever preached. It contains the Lord's prayer, the beatitudes, the golden rule, and practical advice for Christian living.

'''The Lord's Prayer'''

Our Father who art in heaven,

Hallowed be Your name.

Your kingdom come.

Your will be done,

On earth as it is in heaven.

Give us this day our daily bread.

And forgive us our debts,

as we also have forgiven our debtors.

And do not lead us into temptation,

but deliver us from evil.

For Yours is the kingdom

and the power

and the glory forever.

[[Amen]].

See [[The Lord's Prayer]] for the Greek and the interlineal transliterated Aramaic and Hebrew versions.

'''The golden rule:'''

"Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you!"

'''Prayer To Receive Him Now '''

''"Jesus, I believe You are the Son of God and the Savior of the world. Thank you for coming to Earth and dying so that I could have eternal life. Please forgive all my sins. I am going to follow You with my life now. Please fill me with Your Holy Spirit and direct my steps. In Jesus' name, [[Amen]]."'' <ref> [http://www.jesus2020.com/jesus.html Prayer To Receive Him Now]</ref>

== See also ==
*[[Andrew the Apostle]]
*[[Atonement]]
*[[Byzantine Empire]]
*[[Christianity]]
*[[Eucharist]]
*[[Lazarus (brother of Mary)]]
*[[Lazarus (Parable)]]
*[[Judaism]]
*[[New Testament understanding through the Jewish perspective]]
*[[Passover Seder]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

== External links ==
* [http://www.lifeofchrist.com/life/lifescan/default.asp Summary of the Life of Jesus]
* [http://www.lifeofchrist.com/life/lifescan/teachings.asp Teachings of Jesus]
* [http://www.lifeofchrist.com/teachings/sermons/ Sermons of Jesus Christ]
* [http://www.ccci.org/wij/ Who is Jesus? Is Jesus Christ God?]
* [http://www.bible-history.com/links.php?cat=19&sub=302&cat_name=Jesus&subcat_name=Background Jesus Background] Bible History on line.
* [http://www.lewissociety.org/ C. S. Lewis Society of California].
* [http://www.lewissociety.org/bodily.php The Bodily Resurrection of Jesus, by William Lane Craig].
* [http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Historical_Problem.htm Christian Origins and the Resurrection of Jesus: The Resurrection of Jesus as a Historical Problem, by N. T. Wright].
* [http://www.lewissociety.org/resurrection.php Contemporary Scholarship and the Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, by William Lane Craig].
* [http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Justice_Jesus.htm Doing Justice to Jesus: A Response to J.D. Crossan: "What Victory? What God?", by N. T. Wright].
* [http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Historical_Jesus.htm The Historical Jesus and Christian Theology, by N. T. Wright].
* [http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=37 The Wright Quest for the Historical Jesus, by Ben Witherington, III].

[[Category:Jesus]]
[[Category:Christianity]]
[[Category:Christian History]]
[[Category:Biblical Persons]]
[[Category:Divine Beings]]

Methodological naturalism

2009-01-07T03:12:01Z

JimP: red-link

'''Methodological naturalism''' is a strategy <ref>Roger Pennock declared that "science is not based upon a dogmatic [[ontological]] or [[metaphysical]] [[naturalism]], but rather makes use of naturalism only in a heuristic, [[methodological]] manner." [http://www.msu.edu/~pennock5/research/papers/Pennock_SupNatExpl.html] </ref>
for studying the world, by which scientists choose not to consider [[supernatural]] causes - even as a remote possibility.

The first methodological naturalist is sometimes considered to have been [[Thales]]<ref>http://www.naturalism.org/history.htm</ref>, who explained earthquakes (which were traditionally attributed to the anger of the god [[Poseidon]]) with an early theory of [[Plate tectonics|plate tectonics]]
<ref>Padamsee, Hasan. Unifying the Universe: the Physics of Heaven and Earth. CRC Press, 2003. Page 15.</ref>.

According to [[Christian]] [[Philosophy|philosopher]] [[Alvin Plantinga]], "The philosophical doctrine of methodological naturalism holds that, for any study of the world to qualify as "scientific," it cannot refer to God's creative activity (or any sort of divine activity)." <ref>http://www.arn.org/docs/odesign/od181/methnat181.htm</ref>
The possibility of divine intervention in nature is not only neglected, but positively dismissed. <ref>"The methods of science, it is claimed, "give us no purchase" on theological propositions--even if the latter are true--and theology therefore cannot influence scientific explanation or theory justification.'' [http://www.arn.org/docs/odesign/od181/methnat181.htm Alvin Plantinga], Department of Philosophy, Decio Hall, University of Notre Dame </ref>

==Critique==

This kind of approach is the result of application of the [[epistemology]] of either of the [[empirical]] philosophies of [[pragmatism]] or [[logical positivism]], and (because it is a [[methodology]] developed without first establishing the [[ontological]] principles of the world) is unfounded.

This is the reason that [[Presuppositionalist Metaphysics|presuppositionalists]] do not subscribe to methodological naturalism, relying on the [[intelligent design]] Programme instead. Presuppositionalists also contend that methodological naturalism is inherently [[atheistic]], since it would be a meaningless exercise to define the rules of empirical inquiry in an entirely arbitrary manner. Since we define the rules of empirical inquiry in such a way that the ontological systematicness of the world is reflected in the method, the methodological naturalist's claim that methodological naturalism is independent of ontological naturalism is [[deceit|disingenuous]].

==Defense==
Defenders of methodological naturalism point out that it in no way requires or implies [[naturalism|philosophical naturalism]]. Many scientists of faith nevertheless adopt naturalism in their studies. This is because there is simply no way for an experiment to investigate forces which by their nature cannot be investigated scientifically.{{circular}} And the assumption that a supernatural force is not going to affect the outcome of an experiment is no more unreasonable than the assumption that supernatural forces are not going to miraculously poison all the apples in the supermarket.<ref>http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA301.html</ref>

== External Links ==
*[http://www.arn.org/docs/odesign/od181/methnat181.htm Methodological Naturalism?] by [[Alvin Plantinga]]
*[http://www.arn.org/docs/odesign/od182/methnat182.htm Methodological Naturalism? Part 2] by [[Alvin Plantinga]]
*[http://www.asa3.org/ASA/topics/Philosophy/PSCF9-97Plantinga.html Methodological Naturalism?] by [[Alvin Plantinga]] - From Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 49 (September 1997): 143-154.
*[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1315 The Rules of the Game] by [[Carl Wieland]]

==Notes==

<references/>
[[category:philosophy]]

Talk:Gallery of Sports Idols

2008-12-19T00:02:07Z

JimP: reply to JY23 - is MMA notable enough?

==Like To See==
*[[Tiger Woods]]
*[[Jack Nicklaus]]
*[[Terry Bradshaw]]
*[[Joe Montana]]
*[[Jeff Gordon]]
*[[John McEnroe]]
*[[Babe Ruth]]
*[[Venus Williams]]
*[[Richard Petty]]
*[[Dan Marino]]
{{unsigned|Jpatt}}

Are you quite sure Mike Tyson is a good plan to have? His behavior hasn't exactly been the best. [[User:JY23|JY23]] 16:26, 18 December 2008 (EST)
:He was the undefeated champ for a good period of time. I agree on the behavior aspect that he could be disqualified, same for Jim Brown.--[[User:Jpatt|jpatt]] 16:52, 18 December 2008 (EST)

:...Jack Nicholson? I wasn't aware he's a sports idol... --[[User:AlanS|AlanS]] 16:40, 18 December 2008 (EST)
::Every record Tiger breaks seems to be ones previously set by Nicholson--[[User:Jpatt|jpatt]] 16:52, 18 December 2008 (EST)
:::...are you sure you don't mean Jack '''Nicklaus'''? --[[User:AlanS|AlanS]] 16:55, 18 December 2008 (EST)
:::(Please note: I know NOTHING about golf, so this is an honest question based on some googling. --[[User:AlanS|AlanS]] 16:56, 18 December 2008 (EST))
::: Ooppsy, got me AlanS. Shows how much I know about golf.--[[User:Jpatt|jpatt]] 18:07, 18 December 2008 (EST)
::::I changed everything up, now to put the pictures on. [[User:JY23|JY23]] 17:10, 18 December 2008 (EST)
:::::I'd like to see Rocky Bleier (Pittsburgh Steelers of the 70's). He is a personal idol of mine. I'll write the page. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|Hello!]] 18:05, 18 December 2008 (EST)

I don't know about the addition of Anderson Silva. He is uncommon if you don't follow the sport. I don't even believe the UFC is professional status. I know it is up and coming, the next great sport, but to put him there with the Babe? Even people who don't follow baseball know Ruth was a baseball player/idol. --[[User:Jpatt|jpatt]] 18:12, 18 December 2008 (EST)
: The UFC is definitely professional status, however I would agree that Anderson Silva probably doesn't belong in this list. Also, is this list only for American sports idols (Silva isn't American) or just sports idols in general? --[[User:JimP|JimP]] 18:22, 18 December 2008 (EST)
::I would say sports in general. I believe it was MMAWeekly that called him the best pound-for-pound fighter in the world. I could probably switch him with [[Randy Couture]], if you wish. [[User:JY23|JY23]] 18:28, 18 December 2008 (EST)
:::Oh, he's definitely one of the best fighters, and surely a contender for best p4p (with GSP, Fedor and BJ among others) I guess I was questioning the inclusion of an MMA fighter in the list. To paraphrase jpatt, they're uncommon if you don't follow the sport. Whereas most people would probably have heard of Michael Jordan even if they don't follow basketball. [[User:JimP|JimP]] 19:02, 18 December 2008 (EST)

Talk:Gallery of Sports Idols

2008-12-18T23:22:34Z

JimP: /* Like To See */

==Like To See==
*[[Tiger Woods]]
*[[Jack Nicklaus]]
*[[Wayne Gretzky]]
*[[Terry Bradshaw]]
*[[Joe Montana]]
*[[Jeff Gordon]]
*[[John McEnroe]]
*[[Babe Ruth]]
*[[Venus Williams]]
*[[Richard Petty]]
*[[Dan Marino]]
{{unsigned|Jpatt}}

Are you quite sure Mike Tyson is a good plan to have? His behavior hasn't exactly been the best. [[User:JY23|JY23]] 16:26, 18 December 2008 (EST)
:He was the undefeated champ for a good period of time. I agree on the behavior aspect that he could be disqualified, same for Jim Brown.--[[User:Jpatt|jpatt]] 16:52, 18 December 2008 (EST)

:...Jack Nicholson? I wasn't aware he's a sports idol... --[[User:AlanS|AlanS]] 16:40, 18 December 2008 (EST)
::Every record Tiger breaks seems to be ones previously set by Nicholson--[[User:Jpatt|jpatt]] 16:52, 18 December 2008 (EST)
:::...are you sure you don't mean Jack '''Nicklaus'''? --[[User:AlanS|AlanS]] 16:55, 18 December 2008 (EST)
:::(Please note: I know NOTHING about golf, so this is an honest question based on some googling. --[[User:AlanS|AlanS]] 16:56, 18 December 2008 (EST))
::: Ooppsy, got me AlanS. Shows how much I know about golf.--[[User:Jpatt|jpatt]] 18:07, 18 December 2008 (EST)
::::I changed everything up, now to put the pictures on. [[User:JY23|JY23]] 17:10, 18 December 2008 (EST)
:::::I'd like to see Rocky Bleier (Pittsburgh Steelers of the 70's). He is a personal idol of mine. I'll write the page. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|Hello!]] 18:05, 18 December 2008 (EST)

I don't know about the addition of Anderson Silva. He is uncommon if you don't follow the sport. I don't even believe the UFC is professional status. I know it is up and coming, the next great sport, but to put him there with the Babe? Even people who don't follow baseball know Ruth was a baseball player/idol. --[[User:Jpatt|jpatt]] 18:12, 18 December 2008 (EST)
: The UFC is definitely professional status, however I would agree that Anderson Silva probably doesn't belong in this list. Also, is this list only for American sports idols (Silva isn't American) or just sports idols in general? --[[User:JimP|JimP]] 18:22, 18 December 2008 (EST)

Horse

2008-12-18T21:00:31Z

JimP: /* Evolutionary view of origins */ revert - was modified with no reason given

{{Taxonomy|image = Blackstallion.jpg|kingdom = Animalia|phylum = Chordata|subphylum = Vertebrata|class = Mammalia|order = Perissodactyla|suborder = Hippomorpha |family = Equidae|genus = Equus|species = E. caballus (Domestic Horse) E. ferus caballus (Wild Horse)}}
'''Horses''' are large mammals known for their beauty and usefulness to humans. They provide a source of rapid transportation for hunting and travel and can pull wagons and carts. Before the invention of the tractor, horses were invaluable to farmers who used them to plough fields and haul heavy loads.

Horses have been bred since antiquity. Their use for transportation was curtailed in the early 1900s as [[automobile]]s (then called "horseless carriages") replaced them. In [[US Customary System of Units|imperial measurement]]s, motors are still measured in terms of [[horsepower]].

The height of a horse is usually measured in "hands", with one hand corresponding to to approximately four inches or ten centimetres.

==Young Earth Creationist view of origins==
[[Young Earth Creationism|Creationary]] biologists believe that the horse [[baraminology|baramin]] is one of the kinds taken by [[Noah]] aboard the Ark. Therefore all horse-like animals (including zebras and donkeys) are descended from the fourteen horses taken on board by Noah.<ref>Sarfati, Jonathan, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/595/ How did all the animals fit on Noah's Ark?], Creation 19(2):16–19, March 1997.</ref>

Creationists reject that ''Hyracotherium'' is a horse at all (it was named by [[Richard Owen]] as being similar to a [[hyrax]], not a horse,<ref name="NonE">Sarfati, Jonathan, [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/308/ The non-evolution of the horse], ''Creation'' 21(3):28–31, June 1999.</ref> and consider the rest of the so-called ''horse series'' as simply variations within the horse baramin, and not evidence of evolution at all.
Modern horses have considerable variation, with height varying between four hands and 20 hands, the number of ribs varying between 17 and 19, and some horses having three toes, like some supposed evolutionary ancestors.<ref name="NonE" />
==Evolutionary view of origins==

[[Evolution|Evolutionary]] biologists believe that the modern horse has slowly evolved into its present form over the course of about 60 million years, from ''Hyracotherium'' (60 million years ago) to our "modern-day horse," ''Equus'' (1 million years ago). This claim is based on various pieces of fossil evidence arranged in an apparent evolutionary pattern, such as the change from five toes on ''Hyracotherium'' (some vestigial) to three toes on ''Mesohippus'' and then to the single toe of ''Equus'' along with the progressing development of hooves. The skulls also shows an evolutionary trend from fossil to fossil, as do the teeth changing from a browser to a grazer.<ref>[http://chem.tufts.edu/science/evolution/HorseEvolution.htm Horse Evolution] from Tufts University</ref>

==See also==
* [[Mule]]

==References==
<references/>

==Links==
*[http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/breeds/horses/Horses-w.htm Horses and horse breeds]
*[http://www.thehorse.com/ Equine health care] at TheHorse.com
*[http://www.smoothrunequine.com/Articles.htm/ Horse Care Articles]

[[Category:Horses]]
[[Category:Livestock]]
[[Category:Equestrianism]]
[[Category:Biblical Animals]]

Young Earth Creationism

2008-12-17T21:54:15Z

JimP: Undo revision 589264 by RowanE (Talk) revert vandalism

[[Image:Michelangelo creation-of-sun-and-moon.jpg|right|thumb|300px|[[Michelangelo|Michelangelo's]] painting of the creation of the [[Sun]] and [[Moon]].]]
'''Young Earth Creationism''', sometimes abbreviated ''YEC'',<ref>"YEC", can refer to Young Earth Creationist or Young Earth Creationism. "YECs" refers to Young Earth Creationists.</ref> is a form of [[creationism]] which holds that the [[earth]] and the [[universe]] are approximately 6,000 years old.<ref>Sarfati, 1999, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3837 Chapter 8, How old is the earth?].</ref><ref>Sarfati, 1999, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3836 Chapter 7, Astronomy] of Refuting Evolution.</ref>

Young earth creationists hold that both creation and the [[Evolution|evolutionary position]] are at root tied to [[worldview]]s, and because they are both claims about historical (or prehistorical) events, they depend on untestable assumptions. At the same time, young earth [[Creation Science|creation scientists]] argue that the young universe view is the explanation that best fits the evidence.

Most other scientists regard young earth creationism as being unscientific. Many do so because they believe that things such as [[radiometric dating]] and [[biology|biological]] observations have disproved it, and/or for ideological reasons. In addition, these scientists may not be aware of the many [[anomaly|anomalies]] associated with the old earth/universe position.

== Beliefs ==

=== Biblical ===
Young Earth creationism generally takes the following positions regarding the biblical book of [[Genesis]]:
* Creation took place over a period of six ordinary (solar/24-hour) days, with God then "resting" on the seventh day.
* This creation, described in Genesis as "good" and "very good", was without flaw or defect.
* All people are descended from the first couple, [[Adam]] and [[Eve]].
* Adam and Eve [[sin]]ned, leading to their expulsion from the [[Garden of Eden]].
* A global [[Great Flood|Noachian flood]] occurred, destroying all land-based, air-breathing life, except that on the [[Ark]].
* The dispersal of humanity was caused by God after the [[Tower of Babel]]. <ref>[http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/confusionoflanguages.html Is there any reference to the confusion of languages at Babel in early Mesopotamian literature?] (ChristianAnswers.Net).</ref><ref>[http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a021.html Is there archaeological evidence of the Tower of Babel?] (ChristianAnswers.Net).</ref><ref>Jackson, Wayne, [http://www.christiancourier.com/archives/babel.htm The Tower of Babel—Legend or History?] [[December 17]] [[1999]] (Christian Courier).</ref>

=== Scientific ===
Young earth creationism holds that the scientific evidence is unreasonably ''interpreted'' by evolutionists and [[atheism|atheists]]/[[naturalism|naturalists]] as supporting their point of view, but that the same evidence can be reasonably interpreted by creationists to support the creationary point of view. This imposes a heavy burden on the testability of both theories, which is one of the reasons why some scientists question whether either the creationary or evolutionary view is scientific.

They further argue that the scientific evidence is more consistent with the creationary point of view than the evolutionary point of view.

Some specific arguments are as follows:

* The [[First Law of Thermodynamics|first law of thermodynamics]] and [[Second law of thermodynamics|second law of thermodynamics]] argue against an eternal universe and these laws point to the universe being created by [[God]].<ref>[http://godevidences.net/space/lawsofscience.php Evidences for God From Space—Laws of Science]</ref><ref>Thompson, Bert, [http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2329 So Long, Eternal Universe; Hello Beginning, Hello End!], 2001 (Apologetics Press)</ref><ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences14.html</ref>
* The [[theory of evolution]] is at odds with scientific evidence. They often cite secular scientific sources which agree with them on various points (for further details please see: [[theory of evolution]] and [[creationism]]).<ref>http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/21</ref>
* Both evolutionary scientists and young earth creation scientists believe that [[speciation]] occurs, however, young earth creation scientists state that speciation generally occurs at a much faster rate than evolutionary scientists believe is the case.<ref>[[Creation Ministries International]], [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3036/ Speciation: Questions and Answers]</ref>
*Many young earth creationists (including those at [[Creation Ministries International]] and [[CreationWiki]]) assert that the [http://creationwiki.org/index.php/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge Bible contains knowledge that shows an understanding of scientific knowledge beyond that believed to exist at the time the Bible was composed].<ref>[http://creationwiki.org/index.php/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge Bible Scientific Foreknowledge]</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v17/i1/medicine.asp</ref>

== Biblical exegesis ==

Young earth creationism holds that the book of Genesis is historical in nature and that [[Bible exegesis]] warrants a six-day creation with each day being 24 hours.<ref>[http://creationwiki.org/Days_of_creation Days of Creation] (CreationWiki).</ref><ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/genesis.asp Genesis Questions and Answers] (Answers in Genesis).</ref><ref>Niessen, Richard, [http://www.icr.org/article/164/ Theistic Evolution and the Day-Age Theory] ''Impact'' 81, March 1980.</ref>
Andrew Kulikovsky describes it as follows:
{{QuoteBox|The hermeneutic employed by most YECs is best described as the historical-grammatical method in which historical narrative (such as the book of Genesis) is interpreted as literal history, prophecy is interpreted as prophecy, poetry is interpreted as poetry, etc.
<ref>Kulikovsky, Andrew S., [http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/tj/tjv16v2_forster.pdf Fostering fallacy] ''Journal of Creation'' 16(2) 2002, p.31-36.</ref>}}
{{QuoteBox|Historical-grammatical exegesis involves a systematic approach to analyzing in detail the historical situation, events and circumstances surrounding the text, and the semantics and syntactical relationships of the words which comprise the text.<ref>Kulikovsky, Andrew S., [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/4880/ The Bible and hermeneutics] ''Journal of Creation'' 19(3):14–20, December 2005, p.14-20.</ref>}}

== Age of the Universe and Earth - General Overview ==
Young earth creation scientists advance a number of reasons for the earth and [[universe]] being approximately 6,000 years old.<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/young.asp ‘Young’ age of the Earth & Universe Q&A] (Answers in Genesis).</ref><ref name="AiG Astr QA">[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/astronomy.asp Astronomy and Astrophysics Questions and Answers] (Answers in Genesis).</ref><ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3040/ ‘Young’ age of the Earth & Universe Q&A] (Creation Ministries International).</ref><ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dating.asp Radiometric Dating Questions and Answers] (Answers in Genesis)</ref><ref name="AiG Astr QA" /><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/young.asp</ref> They argue that the evolutionary geological timescale is in error,<ref>Woodmorappe, John, [http://www.trueorigin.org/geocolumn.asp The Geologic Column: Does It Exist?] ''Journal of Creation'' 13(2):77–82, 1999 </ref><ref>Morris, Henry, [http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=54 Geology and the Flood] ''Impact'' 6, August 1973</ref><ref>[http://www.allaboutcreation.org/geologic-time-scale.htm Geologic Time Scale - The Misconceptions] (All About Creation)</ref> and that [[geology]] further provides multiple lines of evidence that the earth is young.<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/geology.asp Geology Questions and Answers] (Answers in Genesis)</ref><ref>[http://www.creationism.org/topbar/geology.htm Geology] (Creation.org)</ref><ref>[http://www.nwcreation.net/geologylinks.html Geology Links] (Northwest Creation Network)</ref><ref>Baumgardner, John, [http://globalflood.org/ Genesis Flood] [[28 July]] [[2003]].</ref> Rejecting the [[uniformitarianism (science)|uniformitarian]] assumptions of secular geologists, they use a [[geologic system|geological system]] that depends more on [[Catastrophism|catastrophism]]<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/ee/geologic-record</ref> and point out that catastrophism is being increasingly accepted in the field of geology.<ref>http://www.grisda.org/origins/12061.htm</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84</ref>

== Astronomy ==
[[Image:NGC .jpg|right|thumb|350px|The majestic spiral [[galaxy]] ''NGC 4414'', imaged by the [[Hubble Space Telescope]] in 1995.]]
The young earth creationism view is that the various astronomical bodies such as [[planet]]s, [[star]]s, and [[galaxy|galaxies]] were supernaturally created and that [[Materialism|materialistic]] explanations of the the origins of various astronomical bodies are insufficient and counter evidence.<ref>Brown, 1991, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences.html Astronomical and Physical Sciences]; Sarfati, 1999, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3836 Chapter 7].</ref> In addition, creationists often cite the secular scientific literature in order to make the case that materialist explanations of various astronomical bodies are inadequate:
{{cquote|...most every prediction by theorists about planetary formation has been wrong.<ref>Scott Tremaine, as quoted by Richard A. Kerr, “Jupiters Like Our Own Await Planet Hunters,” Science, Vol. 295, 25 January 2002, p. 605, quoted by [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes42.html Brown, 2001, notes for chapter 43].</ref>}}
{{cquote|Attempts to find a plausible naturalistic explanation of the origin of the [[Solar System]] began about 350 years ago but have not yet been quantitatively successful, making this one of the oldest unsolved problems in modern science.<ref>Stephen G. Brush, A History of Modern Planetary Physics, Vol. 3 (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1996, p. 91, quoted by [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes42.html Brown, 2001, notes for chapter 43]).</ref>}}
{{cquote|We don’t understand how a single star forms, yet we want to understand how 10 billion stars form.<ref>Carlos Frenk, as quoted by Robert Irion, “Surveys Scour the Cosmic Deep,” Science, Vol. 303, 19 March 2004, p. 1750, quoted by Brown, 1991, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes59.html Notes for chapter 61]</ref>}}
{{cquote|We cannot even show convincingly how galaxies, stars, planets, and life arose in the present universe.<ref>Michael Rowan-Robinson, “Review of the Accidental Universe,” New Scientist, Vol. 97, 20 January 1983, p. 186, quoted by Brown, 1991, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes59.html Notes for chapter 62].</ref>}}

In 2001, Cristina Chiappini wrote regarding the [[Milky Way]] galaxy the following:
:". . . it is an elegant structure that shows both order and complexity. . . . The end product is especially remarkable in the light of what is believed to be the starting point: nebulous blobs of gas. How the universe made the Milky Way from such simple beginnings is not altogether clear. - Cristina Chiappini, "The Formation and Evolution of the Milky Way," [[American Scientist]] (vol. 89, Nov./Dec. 2001), p. 506. <ref>http://www.icr.org/article/547/</ref>

Dr. [[Walt Brown]] provides numerous citations to the secular science literature that corroborate the failings of current old universe paradigm explanations in regards to the planets, stars, and galaxies.<ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes43.html</ref><ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes60.html#wp1142334</ref><ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes61.html#wp1212721</ref>

The [[Institute for Creation Research]] has a notable essay by David Coppedge entitled "Mature at Birth: Universe Discredits Evolution" which cites recent findings which challenge an old universe paradigm.<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/2946/</ref> In addition, [[Henry Morris]] has an essay regarding the subject of the failings of the old universe paradigm entitled "What Astronomers Don't Know". <ref>http://www.icr.org/article/547/</ref>

Young earth creationist scientists also contest the [[Big Bang theory]] stating that it is scientifically unsound.
<ref name="BB Critique">Thompson, Bert, Harrub, Brad, and May, Branyon [http://www.apologeticspress.org/modules.php?name=Read&cat=1&itemid=22 The Big Bang Theory—A Scientific Critique] ''Apologetics Press'', May 2003 - 23[5]:32-34,36-47.</ref>
<ref>Brown, Walt, 2001, [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences16.html Big Bang?]</ref> <ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/309</ref> <ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2047</ref> <ref>http://www.icr.org/article/343/</ref>
=== Starlight and the Age of the Universe ===
{{main|Starlight problem}}

[[Image:Barry_setterfield.jpg‎|right|thumb|175px|[[Barry Setterfield]]]]
Anti-creationists often claim that [[star|starlight]] from millions of light years away demonstrates that the Biblical timescale of 6,000 years is in error, as insufficient time has passed for the light from distant stars to reach [[Earth]].
Creationists respond in part by pointing out that the popular Big Bang theory has its own star light-travel time problem (the horizon problem), citing the work of Dr. [[Charles W. Misner]]. <ref>Lisle, Jason, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/167/ Light-travel time: a problem for the big bang], Creation 25(4):48–49, September 2003.</ref>

Secondly, creationists have proposed a number of explanations for the objection, and although none are yet certain, they claim that it shows that the critics' claims that it cannot be explained is unfounded.

==== Setterfield's decay of the speed of light ====

One early explanation was that of creationist [[Barry Setterfield]], who proposed that the speed of light was faster in the past.<ref>Wieland, Carl, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/2551/ Speed of light slowing down after all?], Journal of Creation 16(3):7–10, December 2002.</ref>.
Critics objected to Setterfield's proposal, including on the grounds that the constancy of the speed of light is one of science's most fundamental laws.<ref name="JS">Sarfati, Jonathan, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/2430/ Have fundamental constants changed, and what would it prove?], 22nd August, 2001.</ref>
Yet in 1999, John Webb, a professor at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia, and his colleagues reported astronomical observations suggesting that the value of the fine-structure constant (which is related to the speed of light) may have changed (although the size of the change was much smaller than proposed by Setterfield).
They subsequently published this in 2001 in ''[[Physical Review Letters]]''.<ref>http://www.nature.com/physics/highlights/6849-3.html#ref1</ref><ref name="JS" />
However, other problems with the proposal has led most creationists to abandon the idea.<ref>For example, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/2996#c_decay CMI] and [http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dont_use.asp#c_decay AiG] say that this is an idea that should not be used.</ref>

==== Russell Humphreys's model ====

Creationary physicist Dr. [[Russell Humphreys]] proposed a model based on [[Albert Einstein|Einstein's]] law of relativity (as the Big Bang model is), but with a different starting assumption, a bounded universe.
Humphreys's model proposes that God created the universe much smaller than it is now, then expanded it, quoting the Bible saying that God "stretched out the heavens".
In such a scenario, time would pass at different rates on Earth and in outer parts of the universe, so that while 6,000 years went by on Earth, billions of years passed on the outer edge of the universe.
This model is also based on the [[Genesis]] account recording the days of creation according to time on Earth, rather than elsewhere.

==== John Hartnett's model ====

Young earth creationist scientist Dr. [[John Hartnett]] proposes a model similar to Humphreys, wherein the Earth was trapped in a time-dilation field caused by extremely strong gravitation during the first few days of creation, from Earth's point of view, while billions of years passed for the rest of the universe.
He attributes the field, it's removal and the continued balance in our solar system (after the field was removed) to divine intervention. <ref>Hartnett, John G., [http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/tj/j17_2/j17_2_98-102.pdf A new cosmology: solution to the starlight travel time problem] ''Journal of Creation'' 17(2):98–102, August 2003.</ref>
Whilst Humphreys' model has time dilation caused only by gravity (per [[Albert Einstein|Einstein's]] [[General Theory of Relativity]]), Hartnett's model also takes into account time dilation caused by motion (God's expansion of the universe) (per Einstein's [[Special Theory of Relativity]]).

== Biology ==

According to young-Earth creationists, God separately created each ''kind'' of living thing, or ''[[baraminology|baramin]]'', to reproduce "after its kind".
Living things had built into them a capacity for variation and adaptation, but within the limits of their ''kind''.
Genetically, in the case of sexually-reproducing species, much this is due to the [[information]] carried on each living thing's [[DNA]] being a subset of the parent's DNA, with the subset of information being selected for by the process known as natural selection (described by a creationist before Darwin wrote about it).
Mutations also play a part in this variation, but only to the extent of ''destroying'' genetic information, not ''creating'' it.

Many of the ensuing variations have been classified by science as different ''species'', but this speciation is not evolution, as it does not involve the generation of new genetic information and therefore could not have produced the evolutionary "family tree".

YECs believe that most of the world's living things were wiped out by the [[Great Flood]], but that pairs of each ''kind'' that could not survive in a flood (i.e. air-breathing, land-dwelling creatures) survived the flood on [[Noah's Ark]], and from the Flood survivors all modern species have descended.

== Geology ==

YECs believe that most rocks were laid down in two main episodes.
The first was in creation week, particularly when God caused the waters of the Earth to gather together into the sea and dry land to appear.
The second was during Noah's Flood.
The effects of a global watery catastrophe would have been enormous, with massive amounts of erosion and sedimentation.
Further, many young-Earth creationists believe that there was a single supercontinent prior to the Flood, which broke up during the Flood.
This would have further contributed to a massive reshaping of the Earth's surface.

== Anthropology ==
{{main|Biblical anthropology}}

YECs believe that all intact evidence of civilisation is evidence of post-flood civilisation, as the [[Global flood|Flood]] destroyed the pre-flood world.
God confounded man's single language at the [[Tower of Babel]], forcing different family groups to separate and spread around the world.
Most of the people groups listed in the 'Table of Nations' in {{Bible ref|Genesis|10}}, which contains a family tree of Noah's descendants, are identifiable from non-biblical records.
People enduring a forced migration will find any shelter they can, and this would explain much of the evidence of "cavemen".

== Contrasted with evolution ==

The young earth creationism view contrasts with evolution and other aspects of the old universe view in the following ways:
* According to the [[chronogenealogies]] in the Bible, the age of the [[universe]] and [[Earth]] is approximately 6,000 years. The old universe view is that the universe started about 14,000 million years ago, and Earth was formed around 4,500 million years ago.
* The creation account has everything being created over a period of six ordinary days, whereas the old universe view has things appearing over billions of years.
* The order of creation is different. The creation account has the Earth before the sun, plants before the sun, and birds before land animals, among other differences. The old universe view is the opposite order for each of these.
* The creation account records that death didn't exist prior to the [[Fall of man|Fall]], whereas the evolutionary view is that death and suffering are part of the biological process and existed for billions of years of death prior to the appearance of [[homo sapiens|man]].
* The creation account records various living things being separately created, whereas the evolutionary view has all living things being descended from the first living cell.

== Responses to criticisms ==

Young Earth creationist responses to criticisms from atheistic evolutionists, theistic evolutionists, progressive creationists, and others include the following:
* ''The young Earth view is just one interpretation of the Bible.''
: The young Earth view is the clear intention of the authors of the Bible. See [[Creation week]] for more. Also, the young Earth view was the view of most of the church throughout most of its history. That has only changed in order to accommodate non-biblical views of history.
* ''Creationists read the Bible literally, whereas parts, such as the creation account, are really metaphor.''
: Creationists deny that they read all the Bible literally, and accept that there is metaphor an other non-literal passages in the Bible. Instead, they read the Bible the way it was meant to be understood, which in the case of the creation account, is as literal history. See [[#Biblical exegesis|Biblical exegesis]] above and [[Creation week]] for more.
* ''Evolution has scientific evidence, and creationism does not.''
: Both creationists and evolutionists have the same evidence. The difference is in how that evidence is interpreted.
* ''Creation relies on faith, not evidence.''
: Both creation and evolution are faith positions based on different worldviews. Evolutionists exclude God from consideration ''a priori'', not because of the evidence.
* ''If creation had scientific merit, why don't they publish their evidence in peer-reviewed scientific papers?''
: The scientific establishment won't allow creationists to publish. See [[Suppression of alternatives to evolution]].
* ''Creationists start with a preconception and try and fit the evidence to that. Evolutionists start with the evidence.''
: Both creationists and evolutionists have their worldview as a starting point. Evolutionists try and fit the evidence into their idea just as much as they accuse the creationists of doing.
* ''Because they are based on the Bible, creationists are not willing to change their views. Evolutionists will change their views as new evidence is found.''
: Creationists start with the Bible as the foundation of their views, but beyond that are willing to change their views as new evidence is found. Evolutionists are willing to change the details of how evolution works, but are not prepared to change their basic view that evolution did occur.
* ''Creationists are anti-science.''
: Many creationists are scientists and fully support science. They never reject science itself, and the criticism is bogus.
* ''Creationisms is not falsifiable.''
: Creationism is not less falsifiable than evolution. See [[falsifiability of Creation]] and [[Falsifiability of evolution]].
* ''Creationists want their view taught in schools, but not other creation stories.''
: Creationists have made it clear that they only want ''scientific evidence'' consistent with creation taught. Critics have not proposed any scientific evidence for other creation stories.
* ''Leading creationists know that what they promote is wrong, so they are liars.''
: Accusations like this are rarely backed by any evidence of systematic lying.

== Arguments for a recent creation ==
{{main|Arguments for a recent creation}}

[[Image:Roth-01.gif|right|thumb|350px|The arrows point to [[Paraconformity|paraconformities]] at the [[Grand Canyon]].]]

Many arguments for a recent creation have been put forward by creationary scientists, both scientific and theological arguments.

Scientific arguments include [[radiometric dating]] results that disagree with secular ages, other dating methods that do not fit with secular ages, and phenomenon showing events that occurred quickly.

There should be no 14C present in carbon supposedly older than 100,000 years, yet it has proved impossible to find any such carbon without 14C.

Dating methods don't have to be based on radioactivity.
Measuring the amount of [[sodium]] in sea water, for example, and calculating how long it would take to reach those levels is another method.
Yet calculations show that the amount of sodium could not have taken longer than 62 million years to accumulate, well short of the 3,000 million year supposed age of the oceans.

[[Polystrate fossil]]s demonstrate that many layers of [[sedimentary]] rock that are normally supposed to take a long time to form can be formed quite quickly.

== Adherents of Young Earth Creationism ==

Young Earth Creationism is a subset of [[Creationism]] most commonly found among members of the [[Abrahamic religion]]s, especially [[Judaism]], [[Christianity]], and [[Islam]] (for details please see: [[Creationism]]). In regards to early Judaism and early Christianity,
early [[Judaism]] supported young earth creationism and a majority of the early [[church fathers]] held the young earth creationist view.<ref>
* James-Griffiths, James,[http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v26/i2/tradition.asp Creation days and Orthodox Jewish tradition] ''Creation'' 26(2):53–55, March 2004.
* Bradshaw, Robert I., [http://www.robibrad.demon.co.uk/Chapter3.htm Creationism & the Early Church, chapter 3, The Days of Genesis 1]
* http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/tj/tjv16v2_forster.pdf</ref>

== Organizations and publications ==

=== Organizations ===

Some of the more notable young earth creationist organizations include: [[Answers in Genesis]] (America and the United Kingdom), [[Creation Ministries International]] (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Singapore, South Africa, U.S.A., and United Kingdom), [[Institute for Creation Research]] (U.S.A.), [[Creation Research Society]] (U.S.A.), and [[NorthWest Creation Network]] (Washington state, U.S.A.) which founded [[CreationWiki]].

=== Magazines and newsletters ===

The Institute for Creation Research publishes a free monthly magazine, ''Acts & Facts'', which includes news of the organization and articles.

Creation Ministries International publishes a 56-page colour magazine, ''Creation'', with no paid advertising, which is distributed to 140 countries.<ref>http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3871/97</ref>

Answers in Genesis, which previously distributed ''Creation'', began their own magazine, ''Answers'', in 2006. It contains advertising and its target audience is primarily American.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am</ref>

=== Peer-reviewed journals ===

The [[Creation Research Society Quarterly]] is published quarterly by the Creation Research Society,<ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq.html</ref> and the Journal of Creation is published three times a year by Creation Ministries International.<ref>http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3873/98</ref>

==Further Reading==

*[[Duane Gish]], ''Evolution: The Fossils Still Say No!'', El Cajon: [[Institute for Creation Research]], 1996 <ref>http://www.icr.org/store/index.php?main_page=pubs_product_book_info&products_id=2176</ref>
*[[Jonathan Sarfati]], ''Refuting Evolution'', Master Books, 1999 [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/4014/ (Free on-line version)]
*Jonathan Sarfati, ''Refuting Evolution 2'', Master Books, 2002, ISBN 0890513872 [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/4013/ (Free on-line version)]
*[[R.L. Wysong]], ''The Creation-Evolution Controversy''.<ref>http://www.grisda.org/origins/05105.htm</ref><ref>http://www.wysong.net/page/WOTTPWS/PROD/EDUAIDS/ED022-S</ref>
*[[Phillip E. Johnson|Phillip Johnson]], ''Darwin on Trial''. InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, Illinois. 1991 <ref>http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/darwin.html</ref>
*[[R. C. Sproul]], ''Not a Chance: The Myth of Chance in Modern Science and Cosmology'', Baker Book House: 1994 <ref>http://www.ldolphin.org/chance.html</ref><ref>http://store.apologeticsgroup.com/product_info.php?products_id=191</ref>
* [[Walt Brown]], ''In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood'', 7th Edition, 2001 [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/IntheBeginningTOC.html (free online version)]

== External Links ==
Young earth creationism websites:

*[http://www.answersingenesis.org Answers in Genesis]
*[http://www.creationontheweb.com/ Creation Ministries International]
*[http://www.icr.org Institute for Creation Research]
*[http://edinburghcreationgroup Edinburgh Creation Group]
*[http://trueorigins.org TrueOrigins.org]
*[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/index.html Center for Scientific Creation]
*[http://www.allaboutcreation.org/ AllAboutCreation.org]
*[http://www.nwcreation.net/ageyoung.html Biblical Young Earth Creationism]

Articles focusing on arguments for a young earth:

*[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/feedback/2006/0303.asp What are the most compelling evidences of a young earth - AiG]
*[http://www.nwcreation.net/young.html Evidence Supporting a Recent Creation - Northwest Creation Network]
*[http://www.icr.org/article/1842/ Evidence for a Young World - Institute for Creation Research]

Videos focusing on arguments for a young earth:

*http://edinburghcreationgroup.org/youngearth.php Evidence for a Young Earth - Dr Marc Surtees

== See also ==
*[[Creation Science]]
*[[Christianity and Science]]
*[[History of Young Earth Creationism]]
*[[List of Young Earth Creationists]]
*[[Earth Age Opinions of Prominent Christians - Pre-1800]]
=== Alternative views===
*[[Old Earth Creationism]]
*[[Theistic evolution]]
*[[Theory of Evolution]]
*[[Gap theory]]
*[[Day age creationism]]
*[[Progressive Creationism]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category: Young Earth Creationism]]
[[Category: Creationism]]
[[Category:Abrahamic Religions]]

Gustav Holst

2008-12-17T21:38:11Z

JimP: links

'''Gustav Holst''' – born Gustavus Theodore von Holst - (1874-1934), [[English]] composer; known for the ''“The Planets"'' suite; was of Latvian extraction – his great grandfather had arrived in [[Britain]] from [[Riga]] in the early 19th century. He studied with [[Charles Villiers Stanford]] at the [[Royal College of Music]], became a close friend of [[Ralph Vaughan Williams]] and like him became interested in the conservation of English [[folk song]], and the choral tradition. (He was conducting village choirs in his teens.) He was a trombonist of professional standard. For the last 29 years of his life he taught at St. Paul’s Girls School in Hammersmith, [[London]].

Holst’s early works show influences of [[Wagner]], [[Edvard Grieg|Grieg]] and [[Antonin Dvorak|Dvorak]]; but his own voice can be heard, especially the exquisite little ''“Ave Maria”'' for female chorus. Like RVW he was a slow developer and he was into his late thirties before his music became consistent in quality. By then he had absorbed [[plainsong]] and [[medieval]] [[poetry]] and the modal harmonies of the past into what he called “the musical idiom of the English language”. Still, many of his songs, and folksong settings, and hymns and other works for the church are frequently performed today. Perhaps because of his long association with St. Paul’s, his use of the female voice in choral works is outstanding.

Holst’s step-mother was a theosophist. It may be her influence that led him to his abiding interest in eastern mysticism and astrology that was to find expression in ''“The Planets”'' and other works. Whilst that suite is the most popular of his music, and is a world-wide favourite, he wrote numerous other pieces with an “eastern flavour”, including settings of parts of the [[Rig Veda]] – he had learnt [[Sanskrit]] and did his own translations – and these are unique in Western music.

From an early age, when he helped his father organise and arrange the music of the local [[parish]] church, Holst participated in the musical life around him. Any lover of [[brass band]] music will probably have heard pieces of his - he wrote competition pieces and much else for that ensemble. Much of his music is suitable for performance by amateurs, be they church choirs, bands, or the young singers and instrumentalists at St. Paul’s, for whom he wrote some of his most popular works, including ''“St. Paul’s”'' and ''“Brook Green”'' suites for orchestra.

He considered ''“The Hymn of Jesus”'' to be his best work. The text is his own translation of the “dancing” hymn from the [[Acts of St. John]], and the music is both passionate and quietly transcendent by turns. Audiences in the early 1920s had never heard anything like it.

'''“The Planets”''', opus 32, is a suite for full orchestra and female chorus, first performed in 1918. It is in seven movements based on the astrological “characters” of the planets. It is a “tour de force” of the orchestral repertoire and there is nothing like it elsewhere, although hints of it occur in an earlier work, ''“Beni Mora”'', conceived during a trip to North Africa. The movements are:
:Mars – the Bringer of War.
:Venus – the Bringer of Peace.
:Mercury the Winged Messenger.
:Jupiter – the Bringer of Jollity.
:Saturn – the Bringer of Old Age.
:Uranus – the Magician.
:Neptune – the Mystic.

In 1921 Holst arranged part of "Jupiter" to words by the [[British]] [[Diplomat]], Cecil Spring-Rice, as the hymn, "I vow to thee, my country".

[[Category: Composers]]
{{DEFAULTSORT: Holst, Gustav}}

Johann Pachelbel

2008-12-17T05:25:14Z

JimP:

'''Johann Pachelbel''' (1653-1706), [[German]] [[Baroque|baroque]] composer and organist, belonged to that generation of composer/musicians ([[Buxtehude]], [[von Biber]], [[Arcangelo Corelli]] and others) whose compositional skills and instrumental virtuosity prepared the scene for the now better known [[J. S. Bach]], [[G. F. Handel]], [[Vivaldi]] and others of the [[High Baroque]].

A native of [[Nuremberg]], he was taught by a couple of local teachers, before entering the nearby Altdorf University in 1669 and becoming organist at the Lorenzkirche. He left within the year – financial restraints – and managed to gain a scholarship to the Gymnasium Poeticum at Regensburg; which arranged external musical tuition for him from Kaspar Prentz, whose [[Italian]]ate leanings were to influence certain of Pachelbel’s later compositions.

During the period 1673 to 1678 he was in Vienna, studying under Johann Kaspar Kerll whilst filling the deputy organist post at Stephanskirche (to 1677) and the next year as court organist at Eisenach; before accepting the post of organist at Predigerkirche which he was to hold for 12 years – extremely productive years, when most of his chorales were written and he was in demand as an organist and teacher – and married twice. (He lost his first wife and their only son in a plague epidemic in 1683.)

After short stints as organist at [[Stuttgart]] and Gotha, his remaining years were spent back in his home town of Nuremberg at St. Sebald church, where he replaced his old teacher, J.K. Kerll in 1695. He died in 1706, his burial on 9th March.

Pachelbel is most known for his ubiquitous ''Canon in D major''; these days found everywhere in every conceivable mix of instruments and arrangements. Even people who think they do not know it, know it. It is ironic that the Canon (with its lesser known partner, the Gigue) was one of his relatively few pieces written for chamber ensemble. The bulk of his work is for organ with some other keyboard works and a considerable amount of choral and vocal music. His music is, in the main, clear and uncluttered with much of the adornment frequently found in music of his time. Whilst he was a prolific composer, much of his music has never been published.

Works include:

*Organ music: about 70 chorales, 95 Magnificat fugues, over 60 toccatas, preludes, fugues, ciacconas, fantasias and ricecares.

*Other keyboard music: 21 suites, 7 sets of chorale variations, 10 arias with variations,
(incl. 6 in ''Hexachordum Apollinis'', 1699)

*Chamber music: 6 suites (''Musicalische Ergotzug'', 1695) Partita in G, Canon and Gigue in D.

*Sacred music: 11 concertos; vespers music, incl. 13 magnificats; 2 masses; 11 motets; arias.

Reference: “The Grove Concise Dictionary of Music”

{{DEFAULTSORT:Pachelbel, Johann}}

[[Category: Composers]][[Category:German People]]

Johann Pachelbel

2008-12-17T05:24:30Z

JimP: caps,

'''Johann Pachelbel''' (1653-1706), [[German]] [[Baroque|baroque]] composer and organist, belonged to that generation of composer/musicians ([[Buxtehude]], [[von Biber]], [[Arcangelo Corelli]] and others) whose compositional skills and instrumental virtuosity prepared the scene for the now better known [[J. S. Bach]], [[G. F. Handel]], [[Vivaldi]] and others of the [[High Baroque]].

A native of [[Nuremberg]], he was taught by a couple of local teachers, before entering the nearby Altdorf University in 1669 and becoming organist at the Lorenzkirche. He left within the year – financial restraints – and managed to gain a scholarship to the Gymnasium Poeticum at Regensburg; which arranged external musical tuition for him from Kaspar Prentz, whose [[Italian]]ate leanings were to influence certain of Pachelbel’s later compositions.

During the period 1673 to 1678 he was in Vienna, studying under Johann Kaspar Kerll whilst filling the deputy organist post at Stephanskirche (to 1677) and the next year as court organist at Eisenach; before accepting the post of organist at Predigerkirche which he was to hold for 12 years – extremely productive years, when most of his chorales were written and he was in demand as an organist and teacher – and married twice. (He lost his first wife and their only son in a plague epidemic in 1683.)

After short stints as organist at [[Stuttgart]] and Gotha, his remaining years were spent back in his home town of Nuremberg at St. Sebald church, where he replaced his old teacher, J.K. Kerll in 1695. He died in 1706, his burial on 9th March.

Pachelbel is most known for his ubiquitous ''Canon in D Major''; these days found everywhere in every conceivable mix of instruments and arrangements. Even people who think they do not know it, know it. It is ironic that the Canon (with its lesser known partner, the Gigue) was one of his relatively few pieces written for chamber ensemble. The bulk of his work is for organ with some other keyboard works and a considerable amount of choral and vocal music. His music is, in the main, clear and uncluttered with much of the adornment frequently found in music of his time. Whilst he was a prolific composer, much of his music has never been published.

Works include:

*Organ music: about 70 chorales, 95 Magnificat fugues, over 60 toccatas, preludes, fugues, ciacconas, fantasias and ricecares.

*Other keyboard music: 21 suites, 7 sets of chorale variations, 10 arias with variations,
(incl. 6 in ''Hexachordum Apollinis'', 1699)

*Chamber music: 6 suites (''Musicalische Ergotzug'', 1695) Partita in G, Canon and Gigue in D.

*Sacred music: 11 concertos; vespers music, incl. 13 magnificats; 2 masses; 11 motets; arias.

Reference: “The Grove Concise Dictionary of Music”

{{DEFAULTSORT:Pachelbel, Johann}}

[[Category: Composers]][[Category:German People]]

Rhapsody in Blue

2008-12-16T22:56:24Z

JimP: re-cat

'''Rhapsody in Blue''' is a one-movement composition by [[George Gershwin]] for solo piano and orchestra. It was written to fulfill a commission for a "Jazz concerto", and influenced composers such as [[Maurice Ravel]] to integrate "jazzy" sounds into their works. It has a famous clarinet introduction.

[[category:Classical Works]]

Essay:Ostrich syndrome

2008-12-16T21:03:25Z

JimP: nominate page for DELETION, see talk. Removing category (it is NOT a psychiatric disorder!)

{{delete}}
{{RefAppeal}}

'''Ostrich Syndrome''' is when people prefer to 'stick their heads in the sand', much as an [[ostrich]] does, rather than accept some uncomfortable facts. On wikis, especially [[liberal]] ones like [[Wikipedia]], this is achieved by deleting such uncomfortable facts from articles or talk pages.

Talk:Essay:Ostrich syndrome

2008-12-16T02:08:31Z

JimP: Any cites to suggest it's a "mental syndrome"

JimP, if the category is not [[:Category:Psychology]], as you have undone the addition of said category twice, please find an appropriate category for the page that you see fit. Thanks! [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|Hello!]] 20:46, 15 December 2008 (EST)
: Justify its inclusion in [[:Category:Psychology]] and you can put it in there. It clearly has nothing to do with psychology. I don't know which category it belongs in, but it's not Psychology. Perhaps the article should simply be deleted? [[User:JimP|JimP]] 20:52, 15 December 2008 (EST)
::Most mental syndromes just happen to be in the realm of Psychology. Personally, I believe the category should stay as-is. [[User:JY23|JY23]] 20:54, 15 December 2008 (EST)
:::Maybe more apt in [[:Category: Psychiatric Disorders]]? [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|Hello!]] 21:00, 15 December 2008 (EST)
::::Will do. [[User:JY23|JY23]] 21:02, 15 December 2008 (EST)

::: That doesn't mean that "Ostrich syndrome" is a mental syndrome. The article has entirely 0 references/citations. It was created by a blocked user who used it merely to accuse sysops of having their head in the sand about a possible parodist, and the only link to this page is from a talk page. I really can't see any encyclopedic value in this article! [[User:JimP|JimP]] 21:08, 15 December 2008 (EST)

Talk:Essay:Ostrich syndrome

2008-12-16T01:52:52Z

JimP: This has nothing to do with psychology!

Essay:Ostrich syndrome

2008-12-16T01:35:56Z

JimP:

'''Ostrich Syndrome''' is when people prefer to 'stick their heads in the sand', much as an [[ostrich]] does, rather than accept some uncomfortable facts. On wikis, especially [[liberal]] ones like [[Wikipedia]], this is achieved by deleting such uncomfortable facts from articles or talk pages.

Ultimate Fighting Championship

2008-12-12T02:49:33Z

JimP: wiki link

The '''Ultimate Fighting Championship''' is the largest [[Mixed Martial Arts]] organization on the planet after recently buying out their top competitor, PRIDE. Originally begun in the mid 1990's as a way to showcase martial artists of different disciplines facing each other, the sport has evolved into weight classes and extra rules so that it could be accepted by the mainstream. The fighters have evolved as well. It is rare to have a fighter practice only one discipline. The fighters that win are usually well rounded in all facets of fighting. The current president of the UFC is [[Dana White]].

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Division
! Champion
! Last fight
|-
| Heavyweight
| [[Brock Lesnar]]/[[Antonio Nogueira]]
| TKO [[Randy Couture]]/Submit [[Tim Sylvia]]
|-
| Light Heavyweight
| [[Forrest Griffin]]
| Def. [[Quinton Jackson]] on unanimous decision
|-
| Middleweight
| [[Anderson Silva]]
| TKO [[Patrick Cote]]
|-
| Welterweight
| [[Georges St-Pierre | Georges St. Pierre]]
| Def. [[Jon Fitch]] by unanimous decision
|-
| Lightweight
| [[BJ Penn]]
| TKO [[Sean Sherk]]
|-
|}

==External Links==

[http://www.ufc.org Website]

[[Category:Martial Arts]]
[[Category:Ultimate Fighting Championship]]

Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now

2008-12-12T01:08:22Z

JimP: Undo revision 584368 by RightWingAndProud (Talk) removing un-cited claim of electoral fraud

The '''Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now''', or '''ACORN''' is, according to their [[website]], ''"a non-profit, non-partisan social justice organization"'' [http://www.acorn.org/index.php?id=12342], yet has been mired in the controversy connected with the collapse of mortgage giants [[Fannie Mae]] and [[Freddie Mac]] in the fall of 2008. ACORN was created as a community organization responsible for registering voters and soliciting donations. It was founded by organizers of [[Saul Alinsky]]'s Industrial Areas Foundation (IAF) <ref>[http://www.speroforum.com/site/article.asp?id=15363 Obama, ACORN, and the churches] SperoNews, October 7, 2008</ref>. The group considers itself the nation’s largest community organization and has the full support of then [[Democratic]] Presidential candidate [[Barack Obama]]. ACORN is a partner of the [[liberal]] coalition [[America Votes]]. <ref>[http://www.americavotes.org/site/partner_summaries/ America Votes - Partners]</ref> American Votes is a coalition member of the [[Shadow Party]]. <ref>[http://www.discoverthenetworks.com Discover The Networks]</ref>

==Founding organization==
George Wiley's community organization, National Welfare Rights Organization, forged an army of tens of thousands of single minority mothers. His aim: to flood the welfare system with so many clients that it would burst, creating a crisis that, he believed, would force a radical restructuring of [[America]]’s unjust capitalist economy. The flooding succeeded beyond Wiley’s wildest dreams. Wiley then sent one of his young lieutenants, Wade Rathke, to Little Rock, Arkansas, to launch a new community-organizing group: ACORN. At that time, ACORN stood for the Arkansas Community Organizations for Reform Now. Rathke expanded it into a national organization replacing Arkansas with Association. Their ''People's Platform'' reads, “We will continue our fight . . . until we have shared the wealth, until we have won our freedom . . . . We have nothing to show for the work of our hand, the tax of our labor.” <ref>[http://www.city-journal.org/html/13_2_acorns_nutty_regime.html ACORN’s Nutty Regime for Cities] City-journal.org, 2003</ref>

In 2008, a lawsuit filed in August by two board members accuses ACORN founder and former chief organizer Wade Rathke of either concealing or failing to properly report that his brother Dale embezzled around $948,000 from [[New Orleans]]-based ACORN and affiliated charitable organizations in 1999 and 2000. <ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/acorn_missing_money/2008/10/17/141481.html Missing ACORN Funds Spark Lawsuit, Power Struggle] AP, October 17, 2008</ref>

==Consumer advocacy==
Acorn now operates in more than 100 cities with a national budget of $37 million. <ref>[http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/_wsj-acorn_squash.htm Acorn Squash] WSJ, August 26, 2006</ref> Also, chapters in 700 poor neighborhoods with dues-paying members exceeding 120,000. <ref>[http://www.city-journal.org/html/13_2_acorns_nutty_regime.html ACORN’s Nutty Regime for Cities] City-journal.org, 2003</ref> Despite what is stated on its official website (''"To maintain independence, ACORN does not accept government funding and is not tax exempt"'' [http://www.acorn.org/index.php?id=12342]), this left-wing [[liberal]] group takes in 40 percent of its revenues from American taxpayers under the guise of consumer advocacy and has leveraged nearly four decades of government subsidies to fund affiliates that promote the welfare state and undermine capitalism and self-reliance. The rest of its' money coming from left-wing heavyweights like billionaire [[George Soros]] and the Democracy Alliance.<ref>[http://www.nypost.com/seven/10082008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/the_pro_barack_vote_fraud_drive_132618.htm?page=0 THE PRO-BARACK VOTE-FRAUD DRIVE] NY Post, October 8, 2008</ref>

==Support for gun control and illegal immigration==
ACORN legally intervened in an unsuccessful attempt to defend Jersey City, [[New Jersey]]'s local [[gun control]] ordinance, which was struck down December 13, 2006 in New Jersey state court as a violation of state law pre-empting stronger local gun ordinances.<ref>http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1166448999875 "N.J. Judge Voids City's Gun Control Law", Charles Toutant, ''New Jersey Law Journal'', December 20, 2006</ref>

ACORN has held frequent rallies in support of amnesty for [[illegal immigrants]] and against enforcement-only bills for dealing with the illegal immigration problem. According to their official website they list four demands on immigration, the first of which is "A path to citizenship for the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States" (in other words, amnesty).<ref>http://www.acorn.org/index.php?id=16966 ACORN official website position on illegal immigration</ref>

==Big businesses==
ACORN opts for undisguised authoritarian socialism, as when it proposes that “large companies which desire to leave the community” be forced to obtain “an exit visa from the community board signifying that the company has adequately compensated all its employees and the community at large for losses due to relocation." ACORN promotes ideas like “sustainable development,” which would limit the growth of suburbs—so businesses and individuals can’t flee just beyond the city limits. One of ACORN's highest targets is big businesses, dubbing them, “irresponsible.” This means any financial institutions that supposedly hinder the minority poor from getting the capital needed for home buying and business start-ups.<ref>[http://www.city-journal.org/html/13_2_acorns_nutty_regime.html ACORN’s Nutty Regime for Cities] City-journal.org, 2003</ref> ACORN strongarms financial institutions into to providing risky loans to the undeserving. In 1998, Acorn activists disrupted Federal Reserve hearings on the proposed Citicorp merger with Travelers and then later protested Citigroup's acquisition of Associates First Capital Corp. Eventually Citigroup signed an agreement to provide mortgages through Acorn counseling centers, including home loans to undocumented aliens in California. <ref>[http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/_wsj-acorn_squash.htm Acorn Squash] Wall Street Journal, August 26, 2006</ref> They protest and picket banks mergers until they are paid off. The banks see it as the cost of doing business. One of Acorn's real intentions is to help its public-sector union allies. ACORN argues for the "Living-wage." By artificially raising the cost of outsourcing until it is just as costly as work done by government employees, "the living-wage undercuts the incentive to privatize." This is a tactic used against Wal-Mart preventing the opening of stores in low-income Chicago neighborhoods. ACORN's living-wage campaign is more likely to benefit unions than the poor. <ref>[http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/_wsj-acorn_squash.htm Acorn Squash] Wall Street Journal, August 26, 2006</ref>

==Barack Obama==
Liberal lawyer Sandy Newman founded Project Vote, a 501(c)(3) organization, to register voters in welfare offices and unemployment lines with the explicit goal of turning back the Reagan revolution. Newman hired Obama in 1992 to lead Project Vote efforts in [[Illinois]]. The effort's motto: "It's a Power Thing." Under Obama's leadership, he trained ACORN members in Chicago. According to ACORN, Obama trained its [[Chicago]] members in leadership seminars; in turn, ACORN volunteers worked on his campaigns. Obama also sat on the boards of the Woods Fund (with [[William Ayers]]) and the Joyce Foundation, both of which poured money into ACORN’s coffers. In 1996, Project Vote's tax returns show it paid ACORN more than $4.6 million for campaign services and Citizens Services more than $779,000 for legal and administrative services. <ref>[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/10/obama-camp-downplays-ACORN-payments/ Obama camp downplays ACORN payments] Washington Times, October 10, 2008</ref>

Federal Election Commission reports show ACORN-affiliated Citizens Services Inc. got $832,598 from the Obama campaign for get-out-the-vote work during the primaries. <ref>[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/10/obama-camp-downplays-ACORN-payments/ Obama camp downplays ACORN payments] Washington Times, October 10, 2008</ref>

==GOP==
Amid a widening probe into voter registration fraud by the liberal group, House Republican Leader [[John Boehner]] (R-Ohio) said “All federal funding to ACORN must be stopped.” <ref>[http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=37232 De-Fund ACORN, Republican Leader Insists] CNSNews, October 10, 2008</ref> In addition, "..further evidence that this group cannot be trusted with another dollar of the taxpayers’ money. House [[Republicans]] took at stand recently to cut off funding to an ACORN slush fund created by their [Democratic] allies...but now more must be done.” The congressman's Web site notes that in the recently passed financial bailout package, Republicans “stripped out special-interest earmarks for trial lawyers, labor bosses and thinly-veiled political organizations like ACORN..."

[http://www.gop.com/obamaacorntree/ RNC Fact Sheet]

Tom DeLay writing for the Washington Times says "Organizations like America Votes and ACORN are so closely tied to Democrat politics that they might as well be arms of the party apparatus." <ref>[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/nov/05/the-democrats-shadow-party/ DELAY: The Democrats' Shadow Party] Washington Times, November 5, 2008</ref>

==Voter Fraud==
ACORN tactics are starting to reveal a pattern of unethical behavior across the country and they have been implicated in voter fraud schemes in [[Missouri]], [[Ohio]] and at least 12 other states. The group’s [[vandalism]] on electoral integrity is systemic.

===Past Issues===
* The Wall Street Journal noted: “In Ohio in 2004, a worker for one affiliate was given crack cocaine in exchange for fraudulent registrations that included underage voters, dead [[voters]] and pillars of the community named Mary Poppins, Dick Tracy and Jive Turkey. During a [[congressional]] hearing in Ohio in the aftermath of the 2004 election, officials from several counties in the state explained ACORN’s practice of dumping thousands of registration forms in their lap on the submission deadline, even though the forms had been collected months earlier.”

* In March, [[Philadelphia]] elections officials accused the nonprofit advocacy group of filing fraudulent voter registrations in advance of the April 22nd Pennsylvania primary.

* In July, ACORN settled the largest case of voter fraud in the history of [[Washington]] State. Seven ACORN workers had submitted nearly 2,000 bogus voter registration forms. According to case records, they flipped through phone books for names to use on the forms, including “Leon Spinks,” “Frekkie Magoal” and “Fruto Boy Crispila.” Three ACORN election hoaxers pleaded guilty in October.

* In 2004, ACORN registered illegal immigrant Nuradin Abdi. He was the suspected Ohio shopping mall bomb plotter from Somalia, according to the Columbus Dispatch. <ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/minutemen_illegal_voting/2008/10/30/145903.html Minutemen Muster Nationally to Foil Illegal Voting] NewsMax, October 30, 2008</ref>

===2008 Presidential Elections===
When ACORN is questioned regarding their tactics, they reply with an attack of their own, voter suppression. Teresa James, an attorney for ACORN affiliate Project Vote says, "they don't have the resources," to catch all fraud. However, ACORN has the money to air commercials nationwide. In it, blaming racism and vote suppression, not ACORN. <ref>[http://www.cleveland.com/plaindealer/stories/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/122345478771640.xml&coll=2 Voter-registration can't be totally fraud-free, group says} Plain Dealer, October 08, 2008</ref>

* [[Nevada]] officials raided ACORN's [[Las Vegas]] office after election authorities accused the group of submitting multiple voter registrations with fake and duplicate names. Among the bogus monikers: names of former [[Dallas Cowboys]] players.

* Lake County, Ind., election officials this month rejected thousands of registration forms ACORN had turned in from its drives. On a conference call yesterday, [[GOP]] officials noted that up to 11,000 of the applications were no good - tying up election officials and jeopardizing the voting rights of untold victims whose identities may have been stolen. At least 2,100 of the applications turned in were rejected.<ref>http://www.capitalresearch.org/blog/?p=1443</ref>

* ACORN vote canvassers had pulled names and addresses from phone books and forged signatures. According to a local paper (the Northwest [[Indiana]] and Illinois Times), "Large numbers of voter registration forms bore signatures all in the same apparent handwriting style" and "apparently the organization's canvassers broke rules to meet ACORN-set voter registration quotas to get paid." The fake registrants include dead people and underage kids. Also, there were 5000 more voter registrations in Indiana than voters.

* [[Milwaukee]], Wisc., officials discovered at least seven felons employed as voter-registration workers for ACORN and another affiliated group. (State law bans felons from such work.) They also uncovered a raft of problematic voter-registration cards. The state GOP accuses the group of trying to get dead, imprisoned or imaginary people on the voter rolls. Fraud has plagued ACORN's Milwaukee chapter since the last election cycle. 26 ACORN workers are facing criminal investigations.

* In [[Florida]], in Orange County alone, ACORN workers turned in multiple, copycat forms for six separate voters over the summer. The Miami Herald reports: "One individual had 21 duplicate applications."

* In Ohio, large numbers of homeless people got free van and bus rides to register. Shelby Holliday, a reporter for Palestra.net, filmed ACORN shuttling in some prospects. Homeless including felons were registered with an undocumented temporary address. <ref>[http://www.nypost.com/seven/10082008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/the_pro_barack_vote_fraud_drive_132618.htm?page=0 THE PRO-BARACK VOTE-FRAUD DRIVE] NY Post, October 8, 2008</ref> Also, Christopher Barkley claimed that they were hounded by the community-activist group ACORN to register to vote several times, even though they made it clear they'd already signed up. He had registered to vote "10 to 15" times after canvassers for ACORN relentlessly pursued him and others. A subpoenaed voter of Cuyahoga County, Freddie Johnson, 19, filled out registration cards 72 times over 18 months <ref>[http://www.nypost.com/seven/10092008/news/politics/nuts__132771.htm NUTS!
HOW ACORN GOT ME INTO VOTE SCAM] NY Post</ref> On October 14, 2008, the Buckeye Institute filed a RICO suit against ACORN for vote fraud.<ref>http://www.capitalresearch.org/blog/?p=1502</ref>

* In [[Pennsylvania]], The Allegheny County district attorney said Thursday that criminal charges could result from nearly 100 fraudulent voter registrations submitted in the Pittsburgh area. <ref>[http://obamaacorn.com/acorn-may-face-new-charges-in-pa-update-video-added-hotair/ ACORN may face new charges in PA] ObamaAcorn.com, October 10, 2008</ref>

* In [[Michigan]], Oakland County election officials found more than 33,000 duplicate registrations, about two-thirds of new applications since August and ACORN canvassers submitted most of those applications. <ref>[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/10/obama-camp-downplays-ACORN-payments/?page=2 Obama camp downplays ACORN payments] Washington Times, October 10, 2008</ref>

* Evidence has surfaced that ACORN and Barrack Obama are intimately linked. The article, “Case Study: Chicago-The Barack Obama Campaign,” which appeared in the Winter 2003-Spring 2004 issue of Social Policy magazine, was written by ACORN organizer Toni Foulkes. The full article is available [http://www.capitalresearch.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/chicago-the-barack-obama-campaign.pdf here].

===FBI Investigation===
The FBI plans to investigate the group. "It's a matter we take very seriously," FBI spokeswoman Bridget Patton told the Associated Press. "It is against the law to register someone to vote who does not fall within the parameters to vote, or to put someone on there falsely." <ref>[http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=37232 De-Fund ACORN, Republican Leader Insists] CNSNews, October 10, 2008</ref>

It was believed that ACORN has helped register over 1.27 million people nationwide. Michael Slater, executive director of Project Vote, told the [[New York Times]] that the real number of newly registered [[voters]] is closer to 450,000. About 400,000 registrations were rejected by election officials for a variety of reasons including fraud. <ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/acorn_numbers_exaggerated/2008/10/24/143773.html ACORN Numbers Vastly Exaggerated] NewsMax, October 24, 2008</ref>

==See also==
* [[New Party]]
* [http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDZiMjkwMDczZWI5ODdjOWYxZTIzZGIyNzEyMjE0ODI= Inside Obama’s Acorn] National Review Online
* [http://www.city-journal.org/html/13_2_acorns_nutty_regime.html ACORN’s Nutty Regime for Cities] City-Journal

==References==
<references/>

[[Category: Liberal Organizations]][[Category:Barack Obama]]