- Birth order and crime research papers report that later-born children are more likely than firstborns to engage in civil disobedience or otherwise disobey the law.
- Current Foster Care Systems research papers look at an example of a paper order that addresses a need in psychology with a specific organization.
- Interpersonal Relationships research papers delve into an order placed to demonstrate the application of a real life experience or future scenario.
Robartes copied out and gave to Aherne several mathematical diagrams from the , squares and spheres, cones made up of revolving gyres intersecting each other at various angles, figures sometimes with great complexity. His explanation of these, obtained invariably from the followers of Kusta-ben-Luki, is founded upon a single fundamental thought. The mind, whether expressed in history or in the individual life, has a precise movement, which can be quickened or slackened but cannot be fundamentally altered, and this movement can be expressed by a mathematical form. A plant or an animal has an order of development peculiar to it, a bamboo will not develop evenly like a willow nor a willow from joint to joint, and both have branches, that lessen and grow more light as they rise, and no characteristic of the soil can alter these things. A poor soil may indeed check or stop the movement and rich prolong and quicken it. Mendel has shown that his sweet-peas bred long and short, white and pink varieties in certain mathematical proportions, suggesting a mathematical law governing the transmission of parental characteristics. To the Judwalis, as interpreted by Michael Robartes, all living minds have likewise a fundamental mathematical movement, however adapted in plant, or animal, or man to particular circumstance; and when you have found this movement and calculated its relations, you can foretell the entire future of that mind. A supreme religious act of their faith is to fix the attention on the mathematical form of this movement until the whole past and future of humanity, or of an individual man, shall be present to the intellect as if it were accomplished in a single moment. The intensity of the Beatific Vision when it comes depends, upon the intensity of this realisation. It is possible in this way, seeing that death itself is marked upon the mathematical figure, which passes beyond it, to follow the soul into the highest heaven and the deepest hell. This doctrine is, they contend, not fatalistic because the mathematical figure is an expression of the mind's desire and the more rapid the development of the figure the greater the freedom of the soul. The figure while the soul is in the body, or suffering from the consequences of that life, is usually drawn as a double cone, the narrow end of each cone being in the centre of the broad end of the other.It has its origin from a straight line which represents, now time, now emotion, now subjective life, and a plane at right angles to this line which represents, now space, now intellect, now objective life; while it is marked out by two gyres which represent the conflict, as it were, of plane and line, by two movements, which circle about a centre because a movement outward on the plane is checked and in turn checks a movement onward upon the line; & the circling is always narrowing or spreading, because one movement or other is always the stronger. In other words, the human soul is always moving outward into the objective world or inward into itself; & this movement is double because the human soul would not be conscious were it not suspended between contraries, the greater the contrast the more intense the consciousness. The man, in whom the movement inward is stronger than the movement outward, the man who sees all reflected within himself, the subjective man, reaches the narrow end of a gyre at death, for death is always, they contend, even when it seems the result of accident, preceded by an intensification of the subjective life; and has a moment of revelation immediately after death, a revelation which they describe as his being carried into the presence of all his dead kindred, a moment whose objectivity is exactly equal to the subjectivity of death. The objective man on the other hand, whose gyre moves outward, receives at this moment the revelation, not of himself seen from within, for that is impossible to objective man, but of himself as if he were somebody else. This figure is true also of history, for the end of an age, which always receives the revelation of the character of the next age, is represented by the coming of one gyre to its place of greatest expansion and of the other to that of its greatest contraction. At the present moment the life gyre is sweeping outward, unlike that before the birth of Christ which was narrowing, and has almost reached its greatest expansion. The revelation which approaches will however take its character from the contrary movement of the interior gyre. All our scientific, democratic, fact-accumulating, heterogeneous civilization belongs to the outward gyre and prepares not the continuance of itself but the revelation as in a lightning flash, though in a flash that will strike only in one place, and will for a time be constantly repeated, of the civilization that must slowly take its place. This is too simple a statement, for much detail is possible. There are certain points of stress on outer and inner gyre, a division of each, now into ten, now into twenty-eight, stages or phases. However in the exposition of this detail so far as it affects their future, Robartes had little help from the Judwalis either because they cannot grasp the events outside their experience, or because certain studies seem to them unlucky. '"For a time the power" they have said to me,' (writes Robartes) '"will be with us, who are as like one another as the grains of sand, but when the revelation comes it will not come to the poor but to the great and learned and establish again for two thousand years prince & vizier. Why should we resist? Have not our wise men have marked it upon the sand, and it is because of these marks, made generation after generation by the old for the young, that we are named Judwalis."'
Their name means makers of measures, or as we would say, of diagrams.
CATCH: A lyric poem or song meant to be sung as a round, with the words arranged in each line so that the audience will hear a hidden (often humorous or ribald) message as the groups of singers sing their separate lyrics and space out the wording of the poem. For example, one might write a song in which the first line contained the words "up," the word "look" appears in the middle of the third line, the word "dress" appears in the second line, and the word "her" appears in the middle of the fourth line. When the song or poem is sung as a round by four groups of singers, the word order and timing is arranged so that the singers create the hidden phrase "look up her dress" as they sing, to the amusement of the audience as they listen to an otherwise innocent set of lyrics. Robert Herrick's "To the Virgins, to Make Much of Time" is an example of a catch, and when William Lawes adapted the poem to music for Milton's masque Comus, it became one of the most popular drinking songs of the 1600s (Damrosche 844-45).
microevolution + time + isolation + selection pressure + changing environment = macroevolutionThese ideas were discussed at the 1980 Chicago Conference on Macroevolution. For more information, please see the Roger Lewin article "Evolutionary Theory Under Fire", Volume 210, 21 November 1980, pp 883-887.We have transitional fossils, despite the creationist claim that "there are no transitional fossils". We have transitional fossils for humans, too, in spite of the claim that "there are no ape-men." (see Time magazine, August 23, 1999; "How Man Evolved", by Michael Lemonick and Andrea Dorfman, pp. 54-55). The References section of this essay contains links to transitional fossils, including some with pictures.It is puzzling that transitional fossils are more rare than we would expect. I think that paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould is on the right track with his theory of evolution through Punctuated Equilibrium. This theory states that major changes occur locally in an isolated population, so that fossils are more rare than would be expected by the slow, stately progress of change predicted by Charles Darwin. Punctuated Equilibrium is not just an excuse for finding no transitional fossils, because many such fossils have been found. Transitional forms are found locally for certain animals, and outside the "evolution zone" the transition looks quite abrupt because of migration of the new and displacement of the original species.When I look at the flowers in our front garden I marvel at the pistils and stamens, and at the mechanism for pollination and reproduction. It startles me that such a thing could arise simply from natural selection through mutation, in just a billion years. We have examples of change in moths, finches, people, and bacteria, but these examples are kind of unsatisfying in comparison to the great variety of form that we see in nature. Is there more to it?I realize that my life-span of about 80 years is so short that I cannot properly comprehend a million years, let along a billion. My common sense is simply not equipped to make a proper analysis of the time span required to produce a moon flower, or a bird, or a human.I think the "not enough time" problem bothers atheists more than it bothers me. I believe that God directs the processes that we call "random", and that He can engineer an unlikely event according to His plan. With God Almighty in charge, the unlikely becomes certain. I would be more comfortable with a theory that includes proper statistical measures, but I do not require it. Atheists require it.Certain recent evidence indicates just the opposite of what our common sense tells us. It appears that evolution actually occurs much faster than we would expect from natural selection through random mutation alone. Punctuated Equilibrium takes advantage of this difference by proposing that local changes occur rapidly in a small population under survival pressure.This is an unsolved puzzle. The mechanism that drives evolution is something for future biologists to research and figure out. I think that the mechanism is more complex than just natural selection through random mutation. However, I don't believe this to be an enormously difficult puzzle. Scientists finished decoding the human genome in June 2000, and further analysis should provide some answers. We don't know exactly how mutations occur, although that marvelous DNA structure seems to favor viability when it reproduces.The term "Pre-Cambrian Explosion" refers to the sudden emergence of complex life forms after millions of years of single-celled creatures. How did evolution produce a sudden burst of advanced complexity? How does a paramecium become a trilobite in such a short time? This is a bigger puzzle for evolutionary theory. I thought that perhaps this big jump could be explained by the development of sexual reproduction over single-parent reproduction, until someone directed me to another development.Geologists have recently found evidence that something very strange happened to the earth right at the Pre-Cambrian boundary. Discoveries like this make science exciting! It appears that a global freeze suddenly gave way to a very hot period. This abrupt change must have had something to do with the sudden explosion of life forms, but what? The researchers suppose that isolation and selection pressure during that event produced an "evolution engine" capable of great leaps in a short space of time. But the details, the mechanism, and the verification are still anybody's guess.A gap in does not prove the existence of God. We are not at the end of science, or history, until Jesus returns in person.The biggest mystery of biology is the emergence of the first life forms from the "soupy seas". This problem is not strictly of the field of evolution, but of biogenesis instead. It is a related field, so I will discuss it here.A biologist named Stanley Miller has done amazing experiments with lightning that produce amino acids from simple carbon compounds and water. Beyond that, biologists are fairly confident that they can develop a reasonable progression from RNA to DNA, then up through single-celled organisms to multi-celled creatures, and onward to the plant and animal kingdoms. However, the gap between amino acids and RNA remains a mystery.Various mechanisms have been proposed to cross this gap (lightning, solar energy, comets, etc.). However, even the most reasonable mechanisms are extremely unlikely to have produced life on this earth in the space of 3 billion years, according to the latest analyses.As noted earlier, the small probabilities here bother me less than they would bother an atheist, because I believe in more than just a tinkering God. I believe in a God who knows and cares for even the sparrows (Matthew 10: 29-31). Yahweh is always directing and caring for His creation. He does not show up only when evolution needs a boost. Jesus Christ is with us always, even to the end of the age (Matthew 28: 20).I would like to discover a sound scientific treatment of the amino acid - RNA gap, because I believe that science allows us to reveal the marvels of God's creation. Until then, here is how I shall answer the question."I don't know. Only God Almighty knows."I realize that this is not a good answer among men. But it was a good answer for the prophet Ezekiel (37: 3), and it will be good enough for me.There are some non-scriptural objections to evolution that I have heard from Christians:1. Cruelty of Evolution"Evolution is cruel, wasteful, and inefficient; God would not accomplish His creation that way."With regard to "wasteful and inefficient", I have not seen a Bible verse that states that God's ways are waste-free and efficient according to the judgment of 21st-century Americans. In contrast, God's ways often look wasteful and inefficient in man's eyes. For example, consider the parable of the vineyard workers in Matthew 20: 1-16. The vineyard owner wasted his money on the workers hired to work for only the last hour. But God does not call this waste and inefficiency. He calls it grace and mercy.The creation of the dinosaurs would seem like a waste of time on the way to creating mankind. They ruled the earth for millions of years and then were wiped out pretty suddenly. Why did God bother to create them? One may ask the same question in the field of astronomy. The other galaxies besides our Milky Way are magnificent to look at through powerful telescopes. But we won't get the chance to make much use of them, unless Jesus' return is a lot farther off than most people think. Why did God bother to create all those extra galaxies? One would have been plenty.The charge of cruelty is another matter. Where does the Bible say that the working out of God's plan here on earth never involves cruelty? There is plenty of cruelty in the coming of Jesus Christ:I know that God is not cruel. When I see cruelty in this world, I look for an explanation involving our sin, not God's intention."Survival of the fittest is cruel. Death is cruel. God would not design his creation that way."There are some places in the Bible where apparent cruelty is recorded, and man's sin cannot reasonably be the cause.It strikes me as very presumptuous to claim to know the mind of God Almighty, to know His designs and to know what He judges to be cruel and what to be kind. Isaiah 55: 8-9 compares our intellect to God's: "This plan of mine is not what you would work out, neither are my thoughts the same as yours! For just as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than yours, and my thoughts higher than yours."Perhaps God created the process of evolution as a way for life to survive the natural calamities that He knew would come, such as the meteorite impact at Chicxulub in Mexico's Yucatan Penninsula that is thought to have wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. A remnant of the animals (mammals, birds) apparently did survive and went on to re-populate the earth. This view is consistent with the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 18-19, where a remnant is saved because of God's mercy. (If you want to know why God sent or allowed the Chixculub meteorite in the first place when there was no sin of mankind to destroy, you'll have to ask Him when you get to heaven. I plan to. The same question applies to present-day hurricanes, floods, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and other natural disasters.) This view asserts that evolution is not God's ideal process for creating life, but instead evolution is God's way of providing for life to survive and thrive in a difficult and dangerous universe. Life on earth has indeed survived for many millions of years despite the worst that satan could throw at it. The universe is good - good enough for us to marvel at along with the Psalmist. But God's ideal arrangement for life is . . . heaven!Albert Einstein followed what he thought to be God's perfect simplicity in relativity. After many scientific successes, he reached a dead end when confronted with the unavoidable complexities of quantum mechanics. Each time he read a new modern theory, he rejected it with the words "If I were God, I would not have designed it that way." Finally Niels Bohr advised him to stop telling God what to do.St. Paul gives a long warning against criticizing the ways of God in Romans 9: 9-24. He gives examples from Biblical history, then denies our right to conclude that God was unfair or unkind. Note especially verse 20: "No, don't say that. Who are you to criticize God? Should the thing made say to the one who made it, 'Why have you made me like this?'"God chose a certain method to spread the Gospel message: Tell people, and then those people will tell other people, and so on. We humans could easily conclude that this method is cruel and inefficient by looking at human history. Jesus Himself was crucified for spreading the message this way. St. Stephen, St. Paul, and all the Apostles except for St. John are thought to have suffered violent deaths for spreading the Gospel message. We can see that this method is inefficient because 2,000 years later there are still people in the world who have not heard about Jesus. Some people have heard the message so poorly communicated that thay are not inclined to accept it. Yet we do not deny that God chose to use this method to spread the Good News of salvation through Jesus Christ. Neither can we conclude that God did not use evolution because to us it seems cruel and inefficient. If you do not accept evolution as being from God, then I suppose you have one fewer "God-is-cruel" scenario to wrestle with. But it is a mistake to say, "In my judgment this process is cruel, so therefore God must not have permitted this process to occur."2. Common Sense"The idea that we all crawled out of the mud is contrary to common sense."So is the idea that we are living on a little globe spinning around a sun through empty space. But here we are.3. Random Chance Creating Order"You could shake up a bunch of watch parts in a bucket all day long and never get a watch."I've never met anyone who has tried shaking up those watch parts for a million years, or even for 10,000 years. I don't think the mechanism is the same, anyway.4. Evolution and Christian Faith are Incompatible"Theistic evolution is sitting on the fence. Pick one or the other."So is theistic meteorology sitting on the fence, but most Christians believe in it. God sends rain according to His plan, but water evaporates from the oceans and falls out of clouds as rain. They are both true. There is no conflict. Even Elijah knew that clouds were a sign of rain, although it was God who directed them (1 Kings 18:44).5. Theistic Evolution is a CompromiseMy dictionary defines a compromise as "a settlement of differences by arbitration or by consent reached by mutual concessions". There is the additional implication that these concessions are bad because we don't want to give up part of the Bible. Certainly we do not! So let's look at what we give up in the alleged "compromise" of theistic evolution. So - theistic evolution does not fit the definition of a compromise because we don't have to give up anything that is truly of value to our faith. Now let's look at what we gain. 6. Evolution is Not "Very Good" In Genesis 1:31 God looks over all that He has made: "And God saw every thing that He had made, and behold, it was very good." This verse is used to contend that evolution cannot be part of God's plan because natural selection, the survival of the fittest, cannot be "very good" in God's eyes. Creationists quote a fragment of the very last paragraph of Darwin's book as evidence that evolution is not very good: "...the war of nature, from famine and death...".
- Birth order presents scientists, psychologists and other researchers with opportunities that unlock more secrets about the human personality and other social factors.
- Surnames Proposal research papers discuss how to order a research paper with giving specific details with format and items that need to be included in the project.
- African American Family research papers discuss a sample of a paper order on how to order an observation paper, with specific questions to answer on the topic.
A Frencharmy returned to defend Rome early in 1867 after Garibaldi and a large forcemade a serious armed incursion into these territories fromTuscany. The incursion was opposed by forces, drawn from manyCatholic countries, in the employ of the Papacy. This incursion may have had the covert personal support of the King Victor Emmanuel who hopedthat the remaining Church territories might fall to the Italian kingdom ifGaribaldi prevailed.
As the Franco-Prussian War irrupted in 1870 Napoleon III was obligedto recall those forces garrisoned in protection of Rome in orderto defend France herself on 16 August 1870. The Convention of September 1864 with France by which the Italian Kingdom had offered to guarantee the security of the territories of the Church had not in fact been in operation as France had again felt obliged to undertake responsibility for security after Garibaldi's campaign of 1867 - given the French withdrawal to meet the Prussian challenge it now came back into operation. The Convention contained a phrase that read "in the case of extraordinary events both of the contracting parties would resume their freedom of action."
Given the absence of theFrench and more particularly the fact of the Prussian ledinterest prevailing in the wars after the critical battle of Sedan on 2 September the Kingdom of Italy was largely obliged by the strength of "Italian aspiration" to deem the Prussian victory an "extraordinary event" and to seriously consider a move toannexe Rome and the remaining Papal territories.
On 7 September several Great Powers of Europe were advised by Italian diplomatic channels that Italy intended to take control of Rome but would thereafter support the continued freedom and spiritual independence of the papacy. There was no significant protest from any of the these powers as they seemed to accept that it was now inevitable that the Italian Kingdom would move to annexe Rome.
King Victor Emmanuel appealed to Pope Pius IX for a voluntaryacceptance of the protection of the Kingdom of Italy in the "name of religion and peace."
An envoy was sent to the Pope with a personal letter, dated 8 September 1871, from Victor Emmanuel who styled himself as writing "With the affection of a son, the faith of a Catholic, the loyalty of a king and the soul of an Italian" outlining that his soldiers were obliged to cross the papal frontiers to maintain the security of Italy and of the Holy See. Assurances were given in this letter that "the Head of Catholicity, surrounded by the devotion of the Italian people, should preserve on the banks of the Tiber a glorious seat independent of human Sovereignty".
On 11 September the Pope replied saying that he could not admit the demands of Victor Emmanuel's letter nor accept the principles contained therein.
Some sixty thousand soldiers in the service of the Kingdom of Italy subsequently moved to seize the Papal territories. The Pope invited the numerous diplomatic representatives that were present in the Vatican to bear witness to this assault and delivered protests to them that were to be conveyed to their authorising governments.
Thewalls of Rome were compromised after a four hour bombardment on the 20th September, 1870. Some nineteen papal soldiers and forty-nine Italian soldiers lost their lives in the associated battle. This "token" battle was itself brought to an end by the Papacy ordering its defenders to lay down their arms after making a show of resistance consistent with honour. Thesubsequent annexation of Rome to the Italian Kingdom was resoundingly endorsed by a plebiscite held two weeks later. Rome was now proclaimed as the capital of the Italiankingdom. There was in fact some debate about the wisdom of this move of the Italian capital away from Florence but it seemed that no other designation would be acceptable to the Romans themselves.
Pope Pius IX was offered numerous far-reaching assurances asto the position of the Papacy in a "Law of Guarantees" considered bythe Italian Parliament meeting in Florence in January 1871 and passed into law in May 1871. These guarantees would haverecognised the Pope as being a Temporal Sovereign with theVatican and Lateran palaces being deemed to be outside Italianterritory and with a large grant equal to previous Papal budgetsbeing made.
Pope Pius and Cardinal Secretary of State Antonelli chose to ignore such a system of guarantees and, when the first instalment of monies were offered they were repudiated by Pope Pius :- "Never will I accept it from you by way of reimbursement and you will obtain no signature which might seem to imply an acquiescence in or a resignation to Spoilation."
In June 1871 the Rome became the Italian seat of government and King Victor Emmanuel delivered an address to the parliament of the Kingdom of Italy now convened in Rome. This address begins:-
A Papal Encyclical that was sent to the higher Roman Catholic clergy in May 1871 had included the following sentiments:-
Pope Pius IX had already depicted Rome as being "in the possession of brigands" after "the triumph of disorder and the victory of the most perfidious revolution" and had styled himself as being the "Prisoner ofthe Vatican." He insisted on referring to the "usurping" power as a Sub-alpine, rather than an "Italian" government. Decades of deep estrangement between Italy and thePapacy ensued. Pope Pius forbade participation by way of votingor any political involvement in the workings of the "godless"Sub-alpine government.
Quite apart from these tensions between Papacy and Kingdom the new state had other hurdles to face. The census of 1871 showed that only 2.5% of the 26.8 million population actually spoke the Florentine-Tuscan "Italian" that was to become the language of the state. Also at this time 69% of population were illiterate but this is perhaps largely explicable by the fact that perhaps 60% of the people worked as subsistence farmers on the land and that there had previously been no widespread sponsorship of general education by the church or by the states that had so recently been replaced by the new Italy. The disparity of prosperity between the relatively prosperous north and relatively impoverished south continued as a worrisome factor for many years thereafter.
The Kingdom of Italy that emerged after 1870 was not the dynamic, powerful state that many nationalists had hoped for. The state was mired in debt. The liberal values of the regime suggested that they assume the debts of the states that Piedmont-Sardinia had absorbed in the process of unification. The wars of liberation had been expensive. The loans organized in France had to be repaid. Much infrastructure for a united state had to be created: public buildings in Rome, the new capital, a navy, a unified army, and an educational system, to name a few.
Italy was poor, since its establishment in 1861 the Italian kingdom had experienced great difficulty in balancing its budgets and the liberal, Piedmontese, administrators of the Kingdom of Italy insisted on financial responsibility. This at a time when the peninsula as a whole lacked economic development and had a poor infrastructure of roads and railways. In the south there was much brigandage and insurrection and in Sicily the Italian government was probably as unpopular as that of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies had been. In efforts to balance the books taxes were raised on salt and tobacco and more tellingly, as far as the poor were concerned, the tax on milling grain, the Macinato, which had been introduced into Piedmont by Quintino Sella in 1869 was now applied to the entire realm. Taxes were levied on mules, the omnipresent beast of burden of the peasantry, whilst horses and cows usually owned by landowners were not similarly taxed. There were many instances of serious rioting entered into against the economic policies being followed by the Italian royal administration. In cases the battle-cry of the economically distressed rioters was "long live the Pope and Austria". The birth of the Kingdom of Italy was not proving to be a straightforward affair. Newly united Italy experienced a wave of mass emigration as distressed poor people sought new and better lives in the United States and elsewhere.
It was not just the discontented poor of the south that threatened the stability of the regime. Many adherents of Mazzini and Garibaldi felt betrayed by the state that had emerged. Austria might still hope to restore her position in Italy. And the Church, still headed by Pius IX, condemned the new state and all that it stood for. In these conditions the state had to struggle to survive.
In many areas the masses spoke dialect and not Italian (the formerly "Tuscan" language that had become accepted as a literary language since the middle ages due to the impressive creativity of Dante and others). When Italy unified in the 1860s the question of languages other than Italian was never considered (several regional dialects continue to survive as 'household' languages) and the administrative model chosen was designed to annex a dispersed and disconnected plethora of pretty states to Piedmont. The national state that emerged was centralized but weak -- precisely what might have been expected - other things being equal - to give rise to waves of peripheral resentments and mobilizations.
Liberal doctrine also demanded that the laws and practices be standardized throughout the land. Piedmontese officials, bringing with them new laws and practices that inadvertently undermined the economy of the south. In the event the several states that now newly came under the sovereignty of the House of Savoy in the Kingdom of Italy did so under the existing Piedmontese constitution, under existing Piedmontese laws and existing Piedmontese foreign policy arrangements. King Victor Emmanuel II remained as King Victor Emmanuel II even though "Italy" had never had a King Victor Emmanuel previously. The were cases of resentment, in the south particularly, of the way Piedmontese organisers were deployed in rearranging aspects of the functioning of the territories newly under the House of Savoy.
Mazzini, who had remained committed to his republicanism, died at Pisa on 10 March 1872. At this time he was illegally present, and living under an assumed name, on Italian soil, and was regarded as an outlaw for attempting insurrection against the king.
Cardinal Secretary of State Antonelli informed Odo Russell, a quasi official British representative in Rome, that his demise might allow the relaxation of some of the restraints that Cavour had placed on Italian Republicanism.
Since these times Italians have sometimes tended to characterise Cavour as being the "brain" of Italian Unification - (with Garibaldi being sometimes characterised as its "sword" and Mazzini as its "spirit").