Dating Google Scholar

Could I get your feedback on this short story?

2020.10.27 20:10 DemonicWombat Could I get your feedback on this short story?

The History of my world is being told by a Scholar named Lorekeeper Quillsong often from hundreds, if not thousands of years after the date of the story. I want to try for a slightly Academic tone, but not so dry it puts you to sleep like a lecture from Middle School. I would love any thoughts or feedback you have on this. ~1900 words.
Edited to a shareable link. I think?
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vOtVf3AAFwbPOQq82tpvuaVpUYnCfQEYmWglwD6f8wM/edit?usp=sharing
submitted by DemonicWombat to fantasywriters [link] [comments]


2020.10.27 00:36 Prodless Please Chance me for Florida Colleges, as my visa has cornered me into them...

Academics:
GPA: 3.8 (Unweighted); 6.3 (Weighted)
Rank top 3%
ACT: 31
SAT: 1470
(Got quarantined so could not take any before eligible date for early applications)

Sophomore & Junior AP course load:
AP Language: 5 AP Calculus AB: 4 AP Computer Science A (FLVS): 4 Ap US History: 4 AP Psychology: 4 AP Biology: 3 Ap World History: 3 Ap Chemistry: 3

Senior Year AP Course Load:
AP Physics AP Calc BC AP Literature AP Spanish Language AP Statistics AP Microeconomics (FLVS) AP Macroeconomics

Extra-Curriculars
● Medical Neuroscience Certification, through coursera
- Certified by Duke University - Primarily aimed at college graduates

● Volunteering at LifePath Hospice
- Volunteered at the Hospice to Make Check in Calls with patients about their daily medical needs ● Volunteering at 7cups as a listener - Virtual volunteering at a non-profit seeking to provide an outlet to anyone seeking mental help

● Math Honour Society ( Mu Alpha Theta)
- Have Tutored Several Students on Math
- Helped Organize Community Events (Trick or Treat Street etc.)

● Google Code-in (2019)
- An annual Computer Science Competition where applicants match and practice an organization’s Product testing ( Drupal Website Coding Engine )

● Art
- Have been practicing art since the last 10 years
- Have participated in several competition ( Got an Honourable Mention at the annual Florida State Fair)

Awards
● AP Scholar With Distinction
● American Math Competition 12 : 3rd in School
● Principal’s Honour Roll


Looking desperately and UF, USF (BSMD), UM, FSU. If you could also recommend for other good universities for Pre-med in Florida, I would really really appreciate it.
submitted by Prodless to chanceme [link] [comments]


2020.10.22 19:07 trashybarbie A fall from the ivory tower: a story of how the academic system will work you and a call for change

I'm not really asking, I guess I'm telling. I haven't ever really TOLD my story, but I feel the need to purge. reddit, in a sick way, is a home to me, so here goes...

Almost every call I have with one of my friends nowadays ends up in the same place, devolving into a conversation about my job: that fundamentally I’m not happy anymore. I’m a postdoctoral researcher. I live in one of the most romantic European cities, and have lived in several others, have a passport full of visas and a Google Scholar page full of publications. On the outside, this may sound glamorous, but from the inside looking out, it is lonely, cold, and redundant. I’d like to put a date to when these feelings started, but there has been a slow and steady tsunami of disinterest evolving into sheer contempt for what I do.
It is highly possibly it started with the suicide of my late husband. After someone dies from suicide, everyone tells their survivors not to place blame, but when some is both the perpetrator and victim of their own death, only the Buddha could avoid asking the question of ‘why?’ Since I had left my late husband, let’s call him Bob, several months before he made his choice to take his life, certainly I spent a lot of time blaming myself, but that story is for another day. The autumn before he took his life, Bob had his funding withdrawn by the University because his PhD was taking too long. His advisors had requested he change the foundation of his dissertation work from an experiment to a survey and then back to an experiment, all the while he was required to continue teaching classes to maintain his salary and fees. Bob loved his research, but I watched his interest and motivation wane. What used to be hours spent on what he called “dissertating” turned into hours of reading about conspiracy theories and playing video games, a notable avoidance of his work. I did not anticipate that this was a path I would come to follow.After he died, I promised myself that I would not let his death prevent me from finishing my PhD. I withdrew socially, for a time being, but continued to teach, had several publications, finished my PhD on time ,and found a postdoc in another country. I considered myself a success, despite immense adversity. I never talked about what happened in a professional space or really once I came to Europe, I wanted to be separate from the trauma of my past, and accomplish great things in the academic world.
I was so desperate to leave the past behind that I had decided my priority was to leave the US. The postdoc opportunity itself seemed secondary to highly reputable institutions where Einstein roamed the halls and the exquisite backdrops of Parisian blue roofs, the Alps, and the French Riviera. Little did I know that Paris is a cold and indifferent city, where particularly without speaking French, loneliness is the first friend you will make. My position was somewhat unique in that my academic advisors were located in Zurich and the French Riviera; and I actually worked with no one from my institute.
As an act of service, a researcher at another institute in Paris allowed me to come to their meetings once a week. However, he seemingly preferred to spend time with me as a drinking partner; where one time he informed me that based on my lack of interactions in his lab group’s meetings and since seeing me at a conference the year prior I had “lost my spark.”
This comment offended me deeply. This person didn’t know me. They never took the time to talk with me about my research, but had some expectation of what constitutes a “spark” based on how I interact with their research group about their research -- a topic which was almost entirely new to me. Although, in some regard, he was right. The project I was working on was completely contrived by my supervisor; any ideas I had were drowned out by micromanagement. What I had loved about research was stretching ideas, but my ideas now were muted. I was starting to forgot how to think critically, and the research I was doing I found utterly meaningless. The research was based deeply in empiricism, which I am not fond of in principle and should have worked to separate myself from. The results were also tenable; for example, changing the dataset only slightly, could produce vastly different results.
At this point, I was essentially floating around Paris, meeting with scientists in my field when I could to stay minimally engaged in my field, occasionally going to Zurich for a month or so to work with my academic advisor. My greatest solace was the friendship of an expat economist I’d met through reddit, who was a godsend. She and I suffered through Parisian expatriatism together with the greatest delight, that it actually made Paris rather enjoyable.
Because of my lack of connection to any research body in Paris, my supervisors offered to move me in my second year down to the French Riviera. It was my favorite place I have ever lived. I came in with a renewed sense of confidence, hoping that I could really make a home for myself. Feeling a bit lackluster about the project I was assigned and following advice I’d found online for disillusioned postdocs, I decided that in order to revive my so-called “spark”, I should work on something that I truly enjoyed. So, I continued to delve into something I started during my PhD, publishing a paper on it, as a single author. I had informed my supervisors I was working on this, for which I had their approval. When it was actually published, however, was when the other shoe dropped.
I won’t go into the details, but the relationship with my supervisors dissolved completely. Largely unrelated to the project I was working on, or the paper I’d published, I was accused of lying, stealing ideas, a lack of professionalism, being a “princess” and a “child.” Once, when my contract was coming to an end, I had an interview, which conflicted with a trip to Zurich to meet with my advisor. After seeking advice from said advisor in Zurich with regards about what to do about my interview (also given that Coronavirus was on the rise), without my consent, she cancelled my trip there and the other advisor scolded me for it. I was being bullied from both sides; I could do nothing right. Then, the more palatable of my two advisors came down with coronavirus. I was left with one advisor, who literally has a nationwide reputation for bullying.
At her current institution, her last three female PhD students did not finish. Most of her other students do not wish to stay in academia. After working solely under her supervision, I see why. Her comments were not about my work itself, but about me as a human being. In comments on manuscripts she would ask me what was wrong with me -- not to see an error that was... in fact, not so evident. She even corrected my English incorrectly, which is ironic, given that she is a head editor in a top journal in my field.
Socially, I retreated again, which must be a coping mechanism, but it also happened to correspond with Coronavirus. My confidence began to fizzle once again and doing work was worse than pulling teeth. I used to envision myself as a mentor to students, pursuing research about a growing mountain of ideas I had, but this idea becomes increasingly hard to conjure as time goes on. Miraculously, I found another position with a fantastic supervisor and research group in another city in Europe, but I’m afraid I’ve burned up. The version of me that wrote Marie-Curie proposals and papers for fun has vanished. Despite a much kinder boss and involved and enthusiastic colleagues, I can’t bring myself to open a terminal window, or read a paper. I’d much rather write about what I’ve been through, because I know that Bob and I are not alone. Instead now, I want to spend my time speaking about my experience. So many years of being afraid to share my experience, thinking it would somehow help me to succeed in the world of academia has ultimately made me want to leave it. I don’t know what I want to do, perhaps become a mental health advocate.
The bottom line is that academia is an exceedingly stressful environment. I see people, including myself, retweet positions for PhDs, and I want to say, side effects may include: anxiety, depression, self-sacrifice, loneliness, lack of stability, career uncertainty, and a systemic lack of support, godspeed to those who try. Academia is not for the faint of heart, even for the strong, it requires an enduring support network (even if not nuclear, extended), an unwavering passion for what you do (which I think sometimes cannot be determined when you are doing a PhD), and a good hold on how to maintain your mental health. EDIT: and a lot of luck.
I am just one voice of many, but I am calling for change. Somehow there are oceans of money for armies of PhD students and postdocs, who are routinely underpaid. These same graduates have a scarcity of jobs. Let’s systematically reallocate funding for fewer PhD students and postdocs, and make more permanent positions; this can even pave the way for a more diverse populus to occupy these roles. Professors and researchers in tenured positions need to challenge bullies, not condone their behavior; or an external system who can do more than an ombudsman needs to be put in place in every academic department. The system needs reworking, not more PhD students.
submitted by trashybarbie to AskAcademia [link] [comments]


2020.10.22 10:07 HaplessScribbler Trans-friendliness at the T14

Hi everyone, it’s your local stressed out trans guy splitter here with an effortpost.
I've been looking up info about the trans-friendliness of various T14 law schools, and I thought I might as well compile it into a post for myself as well as the other trans people I've noticed floating around LSA. Also, I didn’t want to work on my personal statement.
LSAC sent out a survey to all of the ABA accredited law schools about LGBTQ diversity in 2018, which is where I'm primarily taking this info from, supplemented by google and comments I’ve read on LSA.
Please feel free to add info about non-T14 schools in the comments. I've limited my summaries of the survey responses to the T14 because those are the schools I'm personally interested in and a man has limits.
Georgetown:
Georgetown chose not to fill out the survey. That worries me and makes me think they’re either trying to hide something or so apathetic they can’t bother to copy-paste in their antidiscrimination policy. If Pepperdine and Notre Dame can fill it out, then so can you Georgetown.
edit: based on comments below my guess is trending towards "apathy".
Georgetown does have an easy to read map of unisex bathrooms on their website, and I was able to find some classes related to LGBTQ civil rights in their online course catalog. There was also this post from a trans student at Georgetown, who seemed overall satisfied with the way the University was treating them.
Cornell:
I looked up the one prof they have listed under "Openly LGBT faculty members" but it isn't clear how she identifies. I find it hard to believe that there's only one out professor on the staff, but maybe she's the only person who volunteered to have her name listed?
They have a clinic for LGBTQ law.
They only have one unisex bathroom. If you've ever been to Cornell's campus, you'll know that it's huge, so that is concerning. I couldn't get their bathroom map to work for me, so I was unable to check if it is in a central location or in some far-off corner. (edit: a Cornell student commented, saying that the bathroom is centrally located). Unfortunately, their one bathroom is still better than the next school, because…
Northwestern:
Has no unisex bathrooms in the law school. Not one! I checked their website to see if that had changed since 2018, and the only unisex bathroom on the Chicago campus is two blocks away in the medical school. I guess people who don't pass yet/ are nonbinary are expected to wear diapers?
They also put less effort into filling out the survey than any of the other schools (unless you count Gtown), giving one-word answers to all but the very last question.
Duke:
They have a map of unisex bathrooms throughout the campus. There looks to be quite a few! Good for you, Duke. I was worried about Duke being in the South but this is very encouraging.
Like Cornell, Duke only lists one Prof as being out, but again, I suspect that he volunteered to be the example and isn't the Only Gay (tm). Unclear how he identifies.
Their answers imply that they have only one class related to LGBTQ issues.
UVA:
They claim to have unisex bathrooms on the survey, but when I looked at their bathroom map there were none marked in the law school. The closest is in an athletic rec center that is a 5 minute walk away. There are unisex bathrooms elsewhere on campus but it seems misleading at best to answer "yes" to that question on the survey.
Berk:
Looks like they have one unisex bathroom per building in the Law School- except for the Law Library, weirdly. May be a problem if you suffer from the Mariko Aoki Phenomenon.
Their answers imply that they have only one class related to LGBTQ issues, which seems odd considering that this is Berkeley we’re talking about.
Michigan:
They say they have unisex bathrooms, but I was unable to find a map. If anyone has a link to that, or can tell me how many of the buildings have them, please let me know.
Lists 4 profs as openly LGBTQ, instead of just one example or leaving it at a "yes", when asked if they have queer profs. Their specific identities are unclear. They also go into a lot of detail about 4 different LGBTQ-related courses at the school.
At the very end of the survey, under Additional Information, they note that Michigan was "the first law school to graduate an out-transgender person". I'm not sure how they know that, but it's neat.
They also promise to connect all of their admits who identified as LGBTQ on their app with a student active in OUTLaw.
Overall I get the impression that they took the survey really seriously and put a lot of thought into filling out. Their answers are the longest of any of the T14.
Dean Z explicitly talks about using they/them as a singular pronoun on her YouTube channel so that's another piece of evidence that says they're thinking about the needs of their trans and nonbinary students. (She's fine with it for both nonbinary people and as a replacement for he/her, if you were wondering.)
Penn:
Looks like they have unisex bathrooms in 3/4 of the law school buildings.
They list a single prof as being out (unclear how he identifies), and five courses related to LGBTQ issues.
I also found an article written by a pair of Penn 2Ls about the university being sued by a woman claiming to have been fired for being trans. Rather than saying she was fired for other reasons, Penn filed a motion claiming that gender-identity discrimination was not illegal (this was in 2019, so pre-Bostock). They withdrew the motion less than a week after filing it, but still, what the fuck Penn?
I've heard Penn called "the most LGBTQ-friendly Law School" but I haven't found any proof that they are better than, say, Michigan- especially when you focus specifically on trans people. Anyone who is trans themselves or has trans loved ones can tell you that when institutions claim to support "LGBT rights", what they often mean is actually "LGB rights".
NYU:
They list unisex bathrooms in 3/7 law school buildings, not including the library.
They gave mostly one-word answers to the questions, but go into detail about three LGBTQ-related courses and one civil rights clinic.
Campus is right next to the Village, so that would be convenient. You could even have lunch at the Stonewall Inn- google says it’s a six minute walk from the law school.
Columbia:
They claim to have unisex bathrooms, but unlike the other schools, do not provide a bathroom map. I'm sure they exist, but it's not that helpful if we need to go on a toilet treasure hunt to find them. edit: A Columbia student commented with a bathroom map! They say it's out of date, but there is at least one unisex bathroom in the main law building, and more throughout campus.
They give a huge list of classes when about LGBTQ-focused coursework but many seem only tangentially related, such as the Seminar in Mass Incarceration. Maybe it has a lecture on trans people being forced into the wrong prisons? I’m just speculating on that one.
They have a gender focused law-journal, a Sexuality and Gender Law Clinic, and an entire Center for Gender and Sexuality Law. I found one post from someone saying that Columbia “sometimes treat[s] LGBTQ students like garbage” but with no further explanation.
Chicago:
The University has unisex bathrooms, but I was unable to check how many, or where they were located. There's a broken link to a unisex bathroom map on their Outlaw chapter's website, so hopefully it will be re-uploaded soon.
Their survey answers include a mission statement from their Outlaw chapter in the student organization section, but it leaves out any mention of trans people. They don't even say "LGBT", instead preferring to write out "gays and lesbians" each time. I checked the school website to see if this description had been updated in the two years since the survey was published, and it had not. If their chapter of Outlaw sees fit to leave trans people out of their mission statement, I can't help but wonder what sort of reception trans people get at Chi.
They state that trans people are "welcome at the Law School and both the University", but then end that same paragraph with the statement that "The Stonewall Scholarship is available for students who demonstrate commitment to the advancement of legal rights for gays and lesbians," leaving out trans students again. It's especially glaring considering that the scholarship is named after a riot started by trans women.
Harvard:
Provides a link to their unisex bathroom map right in the survey responses- the only school to do so. They have them in most but not all buildings making up the law school. Harvard started a LGBTQ civil rights clinic in 2019, and they link to several classes related to LGBTQ issues as well.
They say they have LGBTQ profs, but don’t give any examples.
Stanford:
Their website says that “The university is aiming to have gender-inclusive single-occupancy restrooms in all buildings by 2020”, but doesn’t say whether they were successful or not, and the bathroom map is illegibly small. At minimum, the library and faculty building have unisex bathrooms.
The University says it has “many prominent LGBT scholars” and a “variety of academic classes” but doesn’t go into specifics.
They also have a huge document on their website about being trans at Stanford. It’s not specific to the law school but it has a lot of really useful information.
Yale:
Gave mostly one-word or answers to the questions, aside from a copy-paste of their non-discrimination policy and a link to their course catalog. They link to Yale Outlaw as well, but it requires a Yale login to access.
I also found some news articles about Yale suing the state of Connecticut in order to make more of their bathrooms gender-inclusive: apparently building code regulations were stopping them? They won on appeal in the state Superior Court and converted a bunch of stalls in the main law building. The fact that they were willing to take Connecticut to court in order support their trans and nonbinary students is very encouraging.
-----
TLDR; Dean Z says trans rights, Northwestern doesn’t mind if you wet yourself, and Penn claimed to have the legal right to discriminate against its trans employees for about a week in 2019.
If anyone has a correction or something to add, I'd love to hear it in the comments! I'm especially interested in anecdotal info about the social culture at Cornell, UVA, Michigan, and Duke since they are in smaller cities. Can a gay trans guy get a date in Durham? The people want to know.
I’m open to PMs as well if current students would rather have me edit it into the post for added anonymity.
submitted by HaplessScribbler to lawschooladmissions [link] [comments]


2020.10.22 06:22 avidchurchnapper EVM used this historical document to argue WWI started on July 27, 1914. Here's why he's still wrong by a long shot:

Several EVM video services ago, EVM provided a historical reference that supposedly proved that World War I started on July 27, 1914. He quoted from George Allardice Riddell's War Diary. Riddell is a war journalist. The quoted chapter is below:
Chapter I
THE EVE OF WAR
A letter to the Press — The Prince of Wales's Relief Fund — Cabinet divisions — The Churches and intervention — Mr. Mac- Donald's -prophecy — Releasing the Suffragettes.
So far as I was concerned, the war started on the afternoon of Monday, July 27th, 1914, at a hurriedly convened meeting of the Admiralty, War Office, and Press Committee. This body was set up in 1 9 1 2 as an official channel of communication between the Admiralty and War Office on the one hand and the Press on the other. It owed its existence to the initiative and foresight of those great public servants, Sir Maurice Hankey, Secretary of the Committee of Imperial Defence, and Sir Reginald Brade, Secretary of the War Office.

There are a LOT of things wrong with the INC's use of this though:
At the end of the day, the INC could have asked historians, scholars, or even Wikipedia/Google/History.com. Instead, to prove their point, they found a highly obscure (and rather difficult to find) document in the form of a war diary. That is highly suspect to me. The church could have adjusted and said the dates were close enough, but they have only continued to use historical revisionism to justify their prophecy.
Thanks for coming to my Ted talk.
submitted by avidchurchnapper to exIglesiaNiCristo [link] [comments]


2020.10.19 01:20 ignaposts [Thank You] ¡Que plancha lo atrasada que estoy con mis agradecimientos! (Chilean stuff #5)

Plancha, which means iron... the one used to iron clothes (so many "irons"!), in chilean also means "embarrassing": "It's embarrasing how late I am with my thank you's!"... or something like that. Oh, there was a tongue twister with "plancha", (but not the chilean one): Pancha plancha con cuatro planchas.... Why 4? It makes no sense, should be "pocas" instead.... but saying "few" for ironing with irons is quite a lot. Lol.

I know many here have sent me more than the mentioned cards below, but I'm keeping it simple and going with the ones that come out first for this round. For the glitterbomb ones, that'll be my last update, thus marking my definitive return to the sub (and also definitive chaos on my room again, oh dear... I'm seeing the pandora box eeying me evily)
So, let me try pouring with my weak words my feeble attempts at muttering my gratitude to so many wonderful people.

u/feellikebeingajerk Oh, man.... it seems the overseas Easter chick test failed due to... unexpected world events, lol. But it did bring me such a smile when I opened it.... many many months later (5 maybe?). I adore Samson. Yeah, that's how I named my chick, since he looks kinda hairy. Have it in my desk, supervising my artsy mess. I used the orange pipe cleaners to tie the two pompoms and even the beak! I wanted to test myself how little glue I could use in this project, which I find really fun challenging myself.... specially now. Oh, come on, look at Samson, he's so adorbs. <3 Thank you so much.
u/bellanova2018 I really hope your trip to India was awesome. I'd love going there some day! Al the regional dishes stamps are so fascinating, (and pretty). Thank you so much for also introducing me to such cool food. Now I really, really wanna try Palak Paneer. What does it have? My sis told me it doesn't look apetizing at all, but knowing that it has spinach, now it is in my top 10 ones I wanna try if I ever travel there. Is food too spicy? Thank you so much for such an awesome mail. I also LOVE your handwriting. I wanna try your cool “A”s, haha.
u/KrebsLovesFiesh I opened your card during quarantine and it brightened up my day so much. It had a super cute postcard of a watch shop. It reminded me of this store I liked seing with my mom and sisters in Austria everytime we turned a corner. It had these colorful handmade clocks with such fun and cool shapes. There was one of a kitchenaid . Wow, who would've thought that was this year. Seems like it was sooo long ago. I really hope you've been doing fine.oh, I also really loved the envelope with the year of the rat stamps marks. That is so freakin cool. They're so adorable, it makes you wanna collect them.
u/LifeOfLari Thank you so much for the Lake Kawaguchi postcard. Mt Fuji is so pretty. It reminds me of the Villarrica Volcano. I love watching it throwing smoke with the lake at its feet. I loved your story of asking help to a grandma while lost. It is so cute! Like being a kid back again. I usually get lost everywhere, specially in foreign counties when I'm supposed to be in a group. Lol, I sound so hatable, haha. But when I'm stolling alone, I like to get lost in purpose. I usually end up finding pleasant surprises. Who knows, maybe you find the old couple again one day, I'll keep my fingers crossed ;)
u/TigerLady13 Oh Aunt Bertha. I swear this card got lost after so many drinks, it took ages to arrive!. Even the stamps were backwards, adding more awesomeness to these cards sent by my fave auntie. Shhhh, don't tell that to anyone. My love is the best cash, so sending you lots of it! I also love the fact that you greeted me first in spanish and that was too scholarly for vacations, so it was crossed out and replaced by a proper holiday like “aloha”, lol.
u/oneinamelon I had a big facepalm with this yahoo knock knock joke. Many don't work in Spanish, so we have other types here, so it always feel new and refreshing, lol. And yes, I prefer google too. Is Yahoo still alive? I wonder if people still use it. I think after google I'd rather use DuckDuckGo before yahoo or even Bing. Bleuuughhh, don't like Bing at all. It is so messy and I never get the results I want. Thumbs down. And for some reasone I keep uninstalling it and from time to time it gets re-installed with the updates. Lol, I went on a tangent? Thanks so much for the laugh. I wanna show it to my sisters :)
u/CeceMarie I can't describe how much I love this card. It almost feels prophetic, how our everyday interactions get more and more transfered to the online world. Wow, 15 years ago feels like yesterday, but so many differences were there!s The 2000's feels so close but are actually quite back. What made me tell the card was old was the fax number in the back of the card instead of an email. I wonder if people still uses fax machines. I always felt them wierd, noisy and obsolete... and expenisve. I guess Chile was really poor back in the 90's. I remember my parents waited for more than a year to get a phone number, and they lived in a flat behind my grandparents, so they extended a wire up to their apartment, but it was the same number. I remember in elementary school a friend had a color printer in her house and that was so freakin cool. We never had a fax. What people used to do was to go to someone's house to send them or special shops. And for very imporant or specific things. I remember when my cousin was born the 94 in europe, and my aunt send us a fax. Still faxes felt alien for me. Maybe because I never used them for work. In the 2000's I watched many things on cartoons that seemed normal in households but not here. Like putting people on hold and changing to another call, or group calls, or seeing the ID number. I wonder if it was ever possible or a paid aditional service. Wow, how times change. During quarantine we got rid of our house number. It was painful for my parents, but at the end most of them were spam calls and no one wanted to answer. Oh gosh, I'm writing a novel here, I should give you a proper slow reply.
u/ninajyang I love the pictures you've taken in your trips. This one is an amazing night skyline in Shangai that looks so pretty! I'd love to visit there one day. When I got your postcard I couldn't stop and think, wow, cities next to clear waters look so dreamy! It makes me wonder, what were the sounds there, how are the people like, what are the smells that can be sensed, the temperature. I love remembering the smells of trips, and when I get to sense them again, they transport me to the good memories I've had around the world. I tasted Glühwein for the first time when I met u/5-finger-death-punch. And that's one of the aromas that stuck for that memory, with the feeling of a cold nose sensing the heat of the hot spiced wine. Oh man, I had planned traveling to Aus next month for quite a while and then tour Asia. Who knows if that'll be possible. But who knows if the future holds unexpected good surprises instead? We'll see. Thank you so much for your postcard!
u/5-finger-death-punch My dear friend! I've remembered you so much! For a long time I've felt like writing you a long letter, but then I start overthinking stuff and that oh, this is a carding sub, and that could be overwhelming and yada yada yada. I hope you're doing well as well as your studies. And also that you've kept your same address, I sent you some stuff your way. Did I ever send you the picture of the unrememberable-name-for-me sweet we ate? We couldn't ice skate at the end with my sisters that weekend, but we got to enjoy nice live music at the Prater while flakes started to fall. My historian sister remembers you the most, and in a very fond way. We had so much fun that day. Getting the Albertina postcard with the … Feldhase... Der Haseichverstehenicht? Brought me so many good memories. I wish I could've visited more museums! My fam hates me, I take too much time inside. I love how you also put a bunny in the back. I think I've watched this postcard for 10 minutes straight. Lol, I could make a museum locked-down experience with some of the postcards that I've got, and have no one complain.haha. Thank you so much. Ohhhh, I just realized! This one is stamped in germany with a flockenblume. Wow, I think I'm starting to understand what felt so overwhelming before! Is it like.... sheeps flower? Lol.
u/underscoreophelia Thank you so much for such a pretty and filled with energy and positivity card. I loved it so much! I love your handwriting and notes, and fun letter, it brings me so many good memories and also a Geronimo Stilton vibe, and I LOVE it. I also love how you write Chile... I wanna try writing it too. This was such a nice card to get, filled with so much love and praise. I know I've been away for a while, and that I wasn't very filled with warmth and positivity the last months, but now I feel filled with new energy again, and determined to be the best version of myself... and probably still a bit cray cray. I guess I still love being different and doing wierd random stuff. I really hope you've been doing okay. And hydrated? Lol, in my fam we became addicted to water this quarantine. Our first day out to a restaurant we all asked plain water and I refilled it 3 times and also drank my sis'. I've drank so much water that fizzy drinks taste wierd now and feel like a chore (for example, being in the countryside and no one brought drinkable water ) Thank you so much, and rest assured, I'm dead set on archieving real longlasting happiness now. And I know that can be archived by searching what is really really true and real, getting rid of what's fake and selfish in me and by doing my best for others by walking the extra mile. I have a hunch that I'm capable of loving so much more. There is so much good I could do! The future looks so bright now, whatever happens.
u/yellowseptember (x3) Oh my dear yellowseptember, I felt so spoiled getting your surprise selection of poems, haiku and poo-etry. You wrote them? Wow, I wanna try writing pooetry too. It'll always be a mystery to me how on earth you print your cards. I sometimes forget how much fun it is to write them. The other day I helped my cousin write a rant in verse about quarantine. In Spanish, of course.... I haven't tried in English, except that impromtu haiku battle I once had in the comment section of this sub once. I seriously love your cards, they made me snort, and the postcards are pretty and fun! It is also my first woman in science postcard I recieve, and I love it! I wanted to be a scientist when little, but robotics and mechanics was only for boys back then and that was maddening. I also was the only girl in advanced physics.
u/PotterSarahRN Ohhhh it's a scented valentine's dinasour! That was so unexpected and cool! I can't believe it held its strawberry smell all the way up here and still has it. I love how these cards are so cute and colorful and happy. Since which age kids start celebrating valentine's? When does the “change” happens? The one from gifting friends to actually thinking on flirting and all that. I was familiar with these celebrations because of tv, but it felt so foreign to me, but kinda cool. Though probably I'd be the kid that got the “oh, let's don't leave her out” cards and thingies, because I was such a trouble maker, lol. At least since 4th grade (it it “since” or “from”?? ahhhh someone help me!!), because I had an awesome group of friends till 3rd grade... until puberty hit them and they got so... stange, and since I was in other school, I couldn't keep up with their new interests and dramas. I think puberty hasn't reached me yet in all these decades.lol. By the way, my lil cousin says the card smells nice. I have a dilemma, lol, I freakin love tatoos and I like sticking them into paper and decorating with them, like a hardcore level sticker. But there's also my cousin's daughter that is obsessed with them and she'll get so happy if I paste her a couple. It's funny to see that all these little kids are full of these sticky tatoos, like in summer, since they don't have to take them off for online classes. Makes me feel like I'm already in summer. Ahh, sticky tatoos bring me so many good memories. We got them out of chip bags, mostly, and Chuck n' Cheese prizes and birthday's parties. Because we always got few tickets, so we could only redeem the cheapest things, which were usually tatoos., lol
u/germymany I had to read the “wheelie like you” twice to understand the pun, lol. The croc is so cute! Thank you so much for one of my firsts valentine's cards. It was so fascinating to think kids give each others these type of cards. That's so cute! I actually never celebrated Valentine's at school because that date falls into Summer Vacations, and just between february, when the “recambio de veraneantes” happens, that is, when almost everyone that was on their 2 week vacation, return to their homes and the others that took the other half of the month start theirs. It's chaos, and, since Chile is a loooong huge single panamerican highway pretty much, you can imagine the incredible traffic jams that occurs. So a huge group is stressed out travelling, not caring about it much, and in the many years I dated, I was always far away for that day... and kinda forgot about it? I also almost never had phone signal. How do you used to celebrate it?
u/fashbrownz I got your pretty aquarell card done in February.... very late in the year. Thank you so much. I hope things are doing better there. I still can't send to your country, which is pretty frustrating. We're still in our first wave down here, we managed to flatten the curve and the hospitals never collapsed because the government made the private ones open their doors to help the public system during our critical period, since we're all in this together. We're slowly going back to our normal lives, area by area, and the parameters are very well defined and everyone knows there won't be total “freedom” until a cure is found. But at teh end we're human beings and get tired of feeling uncomfortable, so we'll see. We already were having March panic buying because of the social protests, so it was implemented early on the limit quantity and in some places is still held, because some are still hard to find or the production of them was badly affected. I think I never asked my friends with 7, 9, 10 and 12 siblings how they managed that. This time has taught me to practice patience, which I don't have too much. It's interesting how every country has taken different measures, I sometimes feel like lab rats in a huge global scale experiment. I hope that this make us more humble and we learn from our mistakes and also the others' and copy and improve the best meassures and ideas that have been implemented. I'm dying to send you a reply, can't wait for the post service to open up to more countries.
u/stephanieTay Thank you so much for the xmass postcard with the advent candles. This was my first cold xmass in the northern hemisphere, and was able to smell and see the colors the picture shows, which brings me cozy memories. There was also a washi tape depicting Japanese Christmas cakes. I find it interesting how they also have their own version and traditions of that holiday, like the strawberry cakes.'They look quite yummy! Thank you so much!
u/YESmynameisYES Thank you so much for the Weasley's Wizzard Weezes postcard. Oh boy, I love those twins. I loved whenever they appeared in the books. And I love the quote you put “Oh wow, we're identical!” I couldn't help but smile. I used to be a Potter head, haha. The annoying kind that when the first movie went out I would complain about all the differences. And then I decided I'd never watch a movie again. In my child eyes they felt too dark and... dusty? Though I remember how wowed I was with the first movie trailer. The castle on the outside was cooler than what I imagined (don't get to see castles here at all), but those staircase were a trillion times better and cooler in my imagination, and I actually loved them a lot, I felt so heartbroken in that scene. When I started reading the books, I had just changed to another elementary school, and I had a freckled redheaded classmate, son of a teacher there, that was a troublemaker and had a huge family too, so it was not hard at all to imagine the caotic environment and fun interactions and hardships. The 6th book was so fun with all the Umbridge-related bullying done by the twins. I sometimes had trouble following them, because I read that book in English, and there are soooo many hard and unknown words but at some point I was so mesmerized by the book I kind of pretended I understood it and imagine whatever, lol. I read them all again last year and I was amazed at how different it felt. I could understad so much more after all these years!
u/PoisonousKey Thank you so much for the cute Winnie Pooh postcard. I feel your handlettering is getting better everytime, and it's so pretty! Have you practiced more? I'd love to see how it's evolved by the end of the year! I haven't practiced at all.... I got into a lettering class right before getting locked down and then I got somewhat discouraged after killing 2 brushpens. Well, after all these months locked, I killed many pens, specially my favorite drawing pens. From overuse and daily accidents. It's funny, when my family starts overdoing something, I get discouraged too. They got addicted to buying online, and I culdn't buy anything untill they calmed down. Or after they got obsessed with photography, I could never again take a camera in our family trips, despite how much I like taking pictures. What's the point of having 7 persons taking pictures to everything?? How it can be an archievent to come back with 3000 pictures that are a pain to sort out? Now I wanna try improving my caligraphy again! I just love how you do the “I”'s, I wanna try it now. Funny that in Spanish it's uncommon to capitalize so many “I”s, since it's not an overly used pronoun, haha. Thank you so much.
u/el_azul I LOVE the postcard from the stamp museum you sent me, and love the architecture of the buildings shown, mainly because it's so different from what I've seen in my life (I'd love to travel there some day). I wanna send you a postcard of one of our stamps' illustrators in Chile... as soon as I can send again your way. Unless we do a postcard chain with someone else that is able to send your way... that would be so cool. What you liked the most of that visit? I'd love to visit one some day... sadly stamp culture is dying in Chile.... the gov' puts their friends in charge of these departments, so they're zero interested in snailmail or philately and they're expecting it to die... as the stamp artist told me. She's the youngest by faaaaaar of the colectors that go to the official meetings and releases. Thank you so, so much for going the extra mile and sending me one, I wrote this while listening to Tam Zamani, such a nice peaceful song.... what is it about?
u/theycallmemia I ADORE your space postcard with the saturn pin, I found it such a cool format. I love its colors and everything, thank you so, so much for spoiling me. Do you like pins too? I love them, but I'm still a messy collector, haha. I wanna make something to display them, but I'm a master at procrastinating... I get distracted too fast at practically everything, ouchieeees. It's funny that since this one was not just paper, it went through the packages system and had to cross customs. They put a barcode in the envelope whenever they scan them through the packages system. I might be saying some postal aberration, but my English is too limited, lol. Btw, the doodle you did of yourself is super cute, and made me smile even more.
u/ThriftyRiver “Awww” that was the first thing I said. When I opened your card with a cat in it from Pet Partner's. And “awww” also said my lil cousin who was standing at my back. “Did she made it?” he asked. Oh, haha, other person walked behing me just now and also awwed. I didn't know about the Pet Partner's volunteering program, I think that's so cool! If something alike existed here, it'd give me the drive to fully train my dog and participate. But I'm a lazy loaf that whenever I teach him something, my family think it's cool and over stimulate him and somehow manage to confuse him and then he gets some things mixed up.He's so cute. When we go on our walks he likes running after quails and rabbits, but gets scared of cows. I'd love seeing deers, they must be so cute! Here in the south we have a little type of deer called Pudú, but they're very very shy. Thank you so much for the pancake recipe, I wanna try it out some weekend. Do you like them thick and spongy or thin as crepes? In my house we make them thin, filled with spinach or chicken in a roll and eat them for dinner topped with Bechamel, lol. Chileans don't eat pancakes for breakfast; instead, they like bread with avocado, scrambled eggs, ham, butter or mermelade... or dulce de leche. And coffee. We have tried making pancakes as shown on tv (except that we add dulce de leche... yummy), but we make them small and can't eat more that 2... how could people eat one bigger that the plate?! That's insane! Were you able to? When we've traveled to the US, we've all shared plates with my sisters, and still can't eat them whole. They once sold us a tower of fries at Burger King (actually it was part of the meal thingie), filling a whole tray. It was insane! We barely were able to eat 1/4th of them between 7.
u/MangoMeliss Thank you so much for such the adorable red ridding hood with her doggie. I love it so much. Reminds me of the years I was studying animation. I just love this style. I also loved your adventures in Holland. I'd love to visit there some day! Oh gosh, I just realized, after holding your postcard many times (because I adore it) that those phat kitty stickers are actually these memo paper things! Oh wow, hahaha, I'm laughing so much right now. I'll definetly use a couple to decorate cute things. Thank you so much for the Hello Kitty Valentine's, it makes me think in the little kids at school giving out these. I think that's cute. But do kids only write the to and from? Or they add little messages too? I've never celebrated it, it's fascinating knowing about these things. Also, thank you so much for the adorable washi samps. I'm copying your folding technique for the last bit, they look pretty and it's so practical! Oh, and last but not least (whatever that means, shoot, I need to study more English) I'm in love with the envelope and the Stitch you drew.
u/lonelytwatwaffle My dear waffle, I don't know why your cards took so long to arrive, but I've loved each one of them. I actually felt very touched to get a Christmas card with Mary in it and wishes to have a blessed Christmas. I wasn't expecting it! And it was a lovely holiday, my first ever cold one, away and relaxed, with my family and newborn nephew and not worrying about gifts, meetings, or things that just distract us of what is really important. We also, unexpectedly, met a huge group of spaniards living there and we sang carols in many languages and they stayed till very late and they were so noisy! It was sooo fun. Funny that since my sister came back from her exchange in Spain, she made us listen to villancicos sevillanos all year round, so we knew quite a lot, haha. By the way, I love your jigsaw puzzle ornament, I'll hang it this year. And I also loved the star's mischievous face, it's so adorable. Thank you so much.
u/suzilla10 (x2) Thank you so much for the Fernsehturm postcard. Many years ago I only got to see it from below, I was visiting with a huge group and there was a big parade and the city was chaotic, so the leaders decided to just walk around... a lot! I regret not buying postcards there, they were all so amazing I couldn't decide! So many types and just oh wow. Back then I would send them to myself. So I just spent all my money in cool magnets and yummy food. And still was so hard to pick! Haha. When I opened your surprise adventskalender-karte, all the amazing memories I had in Österreigh came back and brought me such a warm lasting feeling. I don't wanna ever forget those holidays. (Or the laughs I had at the sub the previous days of me searching for stamps like a madwoman while Santiago was getting destroyed by the protests, trying to get before the Germans bought everything). Last month I met the artist who designs the stamps, and she made such a cute one last year, that I obviously never knew its existance. (Well, also my post office, after the germans episodes never got stamps ever again, and she doesn't care at all). I also got to know how caotic is the system and how people who snail mail or collect stamps are seen as pieces of a museum that will eventually die into oblivion if it wasn't for the international groups that put money so stamps get printed. Oh man, I love your card and details so much. The stickers remind me of our many trips to Thalia with my sisters (we don't have anything as awesome as that here) and I would just walk around and dream I was buying everything. I wanna go back to Europe some dayyyy! Thank you so much, I love everything, I get so happy opening your envelope from time to time. I will definetly set up the advent calendar this year. I adored that when I visited in December, all these advent little things and presents, they were so cute and adorable, I NEED to do something like that this year, it brings me memories of my childhood. I used to love Advent. Ohhhh... holidays are looking more and more american here each year, and I just loved the european one so much better... it felt more familiar and authentic. Dude, we're getting malls installing snow machines to make it snow... in summer. Because now that's what xmass is about? Poor overdressed workers. This summer is going to be particularly hot and dry.
u/bananacreampiee Yay! I got your graduation card! Thank you so much! Funny how I would be graduated by now, but the internships were postponed so I technically finished college but need to do that to graduate-graduate... well, I'm not too worried about that, whatever has to happen will happen, I'm glad the worst part is over and the messy thesis is done. Still I can't believe I finally finished my studies... it's been a long and really hard journey! Lol, in my first sememster I visited Italy and met a priest while I was with my hopes impressively down on actually finishing something, so we made an exchange: he was going to pray for me, and if -by miracle at this point in life- I finished, I'd visit him and participate in his volunteering program. And he delivered it seems. For the first time ever I didn't fail any semester, which used to be impossible with my MH. I can't wait to contact him again, but I only remember his first name... and nothing else. And I have a picture with the family that invited us both to dinner (I met him there). I'll have to do some detective work. I still don't know how we managed to have such a deep and long conversation afterwards, he was speaking in Italian and I was in Spanish, and those years I couldn't understand a thing nor let myslef be understood, unless someone spoke Spanish or English.


Pics!
I have quite a lot of replies and exchanges that have remain unsent due to various reasons, so please, I'd be eternally greatful if you fill up my mailing list form. Specially if you've changed your address. C:
submitted by ignaposts to RandomActsofCards [link] [comments]


2020.10.16 20:38 whygohome PSA: New Rules for International Students

Recently DHS has announced new regulations that pertain to F1 / J1 international students, as well as H1B visas that may be of relevance to some international students in the future. I've compiled some relevant links and resources, I'm sharing it in hopes that it may be help to someone else.
======================TL;DR summary====================
F1: Elimination of "Duration of Status".
F1 students are permitted to reside in the US during their "Duration of Status", or D/S for short. The new rules would get rid of the D/S, and would explicitly set an end date that students must finish their program by. The max time limit given is 4 years to finish studies. In order to stay longer, you have to file an EOS (Extension of Status) request. So, for example, if you are a BS student (4 yrs) and want to continue with OPT (which is most int'l students), you must file an EOS request.
The problem is that there's no guarantee that the extension will be approved. The form just says you must have "compelling academic reasons", and doesn't really define what this means. This extension process is also super slow, adding 6+ months of processing time. It also costs a lot and some complex paperwork is involved. Applying for a EOS becomes quite tricky to get paperwork all lined up to be correct with precise timing.


H1B: There are two major changes happening:
  1. Raise in min wage levels that must be paid for H1B foreign workers.
  2. Stricter definition of "Specialty Jobs"
Basically, the government is **significantly** raising wage levels for all H1B and PERM workers. The problem is not many companies can afford such costs, and so we can expect that US companies will start to hire significantly fewer international workers. (Search for wage levels per job title and location here: https://www.flcdatacenter.com/OesWizardStart.aspx)
Also, now the employer must prove that the worker's degree and experience are fully aligned with the job title. For example, if Google has a job opening for software developers but only says "Bachelor's Degree is preferred" but doesn't explicitly say it is required, then they won't be able to hire H1B workers for that software dev role anymore, since a degree isn't required.
Also if you can't prove that your degree work is fully aligned with the job, then H1B won't be approved. So for example, if you studied ECE but are trying to get a software eng role, it may become trickier to get that H1B approved.
CMU OIE summary: https://www.cmu.edu/oie/news-and-events/2020-2021/october-2020/immigration-updates-9oct2020.html
==================F1/J1 students & scholars - Change to D/S policy==============
CMU OIE D/S change detailed summary: https://www.cmu.edu/oie/news-and-events/2020-2021/october-2020/duration-status-addendum-9oct2020.html
Forbes article detailing some of the changes: https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2020/09/28/new-immigration-rules-will-have-big-impact-on-international-students/#59c594566899
NAFSA detailed summary: https://www.nafsa.org/professional-resources/browse-by-interest/proposal-replace-duration-status
=============================H1B new rules===============================
Full Department of Labor document: https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/oflc/pdfs/DOL-Interim-Final-Rule-Strengthening-Wage-Protections-for-the-Temporary-and-Permanent-Employment-of-Certain-Aliens-in-the-United-States.pdf
DHS Press Release Statement: https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/10/06/department-homeland-security-and-department-labor-rule-restores-integrity-h-1b-visa
NAFSA detailed summary: https://www.nafsa.org/regulatory-information/dol-interim-final-rule-oes-and-prevailing-wage-determinations
Website documenting details in easy-to-understand way (not 100% sure of the accuracy here tho): https://redbus2us.com/new-h1b-perm-wage-levels-regulation/

Some relevant media articles:
NYTimes article: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/06/us/politics/h1b-visas-foreign-workers-trump.html?searchResultPosition=1
WSJ article: https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-administration-announces-overhaul-of-h-1b-visa-program-11602017434
Quartz article: https://qz.com/india/1914128/how-donald-trumps-new-h-1b-visa-tweaks-will-hurt-immigrants/
submitted by whygohome to cmu [link] [comments]


2020.10.16 10:38 7_trees Skeptical Science - Interpretation of Solar and Carbon-driven Climate Theories

Today a neighbour tried to convince me that emissions cause by human society have created a "greenhouse" effect on the Earth. I said I thought it was probably the Sun that influenced warming cycles, but he was adamant that I had, "Fallen into a black hole of nonsense funded by the petroleum industry so they can keep making money and polluting the planet."
Which sounded pretty plausible, given how much money the petroleum industry generates, and what huge dollars are at risk here. So I looked it up to see what the oil industry is worth: 2838.74 Billion, or 2.83874 Trillion USD. https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/biggest-oil-companies-in-the-world.html
Comparatively small, the CO2 credit trades market is approximately 168 Billion USD. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-carbontrading-report-idUSKCN1PA27H
One thing is for sure: A lot of money is involved, and global legislation is in the works. I figured I better learn about this more, so I asked him for some resources to get me up to date.
He recommended a website called skepticalscience.com, which provides scientific sources to address false claims of climate change. I went there and clicked on the Sun one. I read the basic, intermediate, and advanced arguments, learned all the jargon and maths, and read each study carefully. Here are my observations:
The first issue I wanted to look into was solar activity and correlative claims: https://skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming-advanced.htm
I and many others have picked up this idea that the Sun's activity is responsible for climate change. Let's see if I can understand this advanced proof which demonstrates that solar activity is not causing earth temperature fluctuations. I'm first going to look at their equations, which are the foundation of their argument--for they are the lens which all data is perceived:
"The solar radiative forcing is TSI in Watts per square meter (W-m-2) divided by 4 to account for spherical geometry, and multiplied by 0.7 to account for planetary albedo (Meehl 2002)."
Okay, so the basis of this rebuttle on Skeptical Science uses the equations published by Meehl in 2002 to interpret solar irradiance--the data for which will clearly show it has no correlation to the mean global surface temperature. Well, if we're going to disprove solar theory, we're going to need to know how this equation quantifies the very solar irradiance it draws conclusions from. If the equation expresses solar irradiance accurately, the proof based upon those numbers is supported.
Let's look at that original paper by Meehl to see its findings: (src: https://journals.ametsoc.org/jcli/article/16/3/426/29944/Solar-and-Greenhouse-Gas-Forcing-and-Climate)
Okay, so first thing Meehl tells us is how they are interpreting the data from the early-century warming period, which will then be used to form his equation which quantifies the values of solar irradiance we use today to disprove correlational data provided by solar theorists:
"if the ensemble mean change divided by the intraensemble standard deviation is greater than one, the ensemble mean difference is denoted as a consistent response" (e.g., Cubasch et al. 2001)."
I think I've got it so far--so 1. the data we are using to create these equations, which will ultimately disprove solar influence as the predominant cause of warming today, is 2. based on a representative data set of which: 3. a further equation is applied, to 4. validate which data entry points (based on standard deviation) are considered a "consistent response" worth including in the data set.
I'm already questioning why a scientist is ignoring the real available data sets, and instead applying a statistical standard deviation first to that data, and then interpretting the newly-sifted data. In this case, this is immediately suspicious--when you have a full real-world data set of such a substantial long-term scope as recorded in the early-century warming period, you use it as-is; you don't draw up a new equation which further narrows that basic data set according to a new metric of standard deviation. There's no reason the entire data set can't yield a mean value for our equations--the extra step of cutting off the outliers is unnecessary, because this is verifiable data taken over an extended time; the four-decades sample is large enough to produce a valid mean without adulteration.
But maybe it isn't that bad--(the equation Meehl arrives at, which uses Cubasch's data set that was filtered by an equation)--maybe the newly derived data set is still representative of the actual recorded climate data, but with more qualitative values which yield a more consistent model in our future projections. In statistics we know its often the case that discarding the outliers improves consistency in projections; such as in economics, for example. (ie. to predict mean income of newly graduated trades workers, data from highly specialized trades with exorbitant salaries are excluded, despite being part of the economic data; this is because these extreme outliers in income would inflate the estimation for what an entry-level tradesman may expect to earn)
Well, let's look at the 1900-1940 "early-century warming period" data set used, to see exactly what data was a.) excluded to improve consistency of the projection, to give us a more accurate prediction of the future, and b.) what data was maintained in the initial application of this first equation. (Which determines our eventual findings and conclusions years later down the road today.)
Here we go back to Cubasch, to figure out how he interpreted early-century climactic records circa 1900-1940, and what calculations he used to find the mean value: https://epic.awi.de/id/eprint/5180/1/Cub2001a.pdf
"The results presented in this chapter are based on simulations made with global climate models and apply to spacial scales of hundreds of kilometres and larger"
Okay--so by finding the standard deviations in our early-century warming period data, we can extrapolate and "apply [them] to spacial scales of hundreds of kilometres and larger". Good plan, I'm down.
And it makes sense at first, because this is a standard practice in statistics: to make a projection, you identify a data set which accurately represents the phenomena you are trying to project, and extrapolate it over (usually) time, for example.
Cubasch takes the sum of early-century warming period climate data, which is an accumulation of regional values throughout the northern hemisphere, and removes what are outside standard deviation, then uses these values to draw observations on "spacial scales of hundreds of kilometres and larger".
Except that we are not dealing with a data set which represents phenomena we wish to project more accuratel, as if we may apply a standard deviation to gambling or economic calculations, per se.
We are instead dealing with the actual true data of the phenomena. And in the real-world, early-century warming data was recorded by land-dwelling people in the Northern Hemisphere. Our real-world data set, which represents accurately and wholly our early-century warming period climate conditions recorded on regional landmasses, is being used to create a numerical representation to be applied on a global scale. This gap in relevance between the data we've chosen to use and reality is large.
Whoa hold up. Its one thing if we can predict regional weather patterns using this finesse; by finding the standard deviation, we actually gain great consistency in our future projections within a given area. But we can't use the weather in Texas during the early-century warming period to project accurate climate models of Ontario. Nor can we use the standard deviation yielded from climate data on land in the Northern Hemisphere to predict the global model of equitorial precipitation patterns and atmospheric greenhouse gases accumulation which Meehl examines and draws from in the creation of his equations--of which these equations are then used to measure solar irradiance values themselves.
So we are defining our very measurement of incoming solar radiance today based entirely on a standard deviation of aggregated regional landmass climate data from the early-century warming period. After shaving a bit off. And then we use this historical temperature-based equation to measure modern irradiance, which is solar activity? This makes no sense--why are the true values of solar irradiance not empirically measured and used in these calculations, by a device such as a spectrometer? Why is there a complex lineage of abused data sets and tailored equations, which somehow is now used in the measurement of radiation from the sun?
The advanced proof on the skeptical science website goes on:
"It has also been proposed that ultraviolet (UV) radiation, which varies more than other solar irradiance wavelengths, could amplify the solar influence on the global climate through interactions with the stratosphere and atmospheric ozone. Shindell et al. (1999) examined this possibility, but found that while this UV variability has a significant influence over regional temperatures, it has little effect on global surface temperatures."
Wait--how is this conclusion drawn? This is a mind-bendingly circular perspective:
  1. We (skeptical science) claim that solar irriadiance measurements disprove correlative claims to existing climate records and solar activity
  2. We (skeptical science) support this claim using Meehl's equations on solar irradiance
  3. Meehl forms his equations of solar irradiance based on analysis of a data set which,
  4. Cubash derives from a standard deviation applied to the actual climate data used by solar-proponents, which is the aggregation of only regional temperatures in the northern hemisphere, but yet
  5. We (skeptical science) cite Shindell's assertion that, "while this UV variability has a significant influence over regional temperatures, it has little effect on global surface temperatures."
So we've established that UV has a significant influence over regional temperatures. Which we use to create the early-century warming data sets. Which we use to form equations to measure solar irradiance. Which we use to predict global climate models. Which we use to refute the Sun's radiation as an explanation for warming.
Huh?
It goes on, continuing to address claims of UV-related heating effect:
"Moreover, Shindell et al. found that anthropogenic ozone depletion may have reduced the impact of UV variability on the climate, and may have even offset it entirely."
The use of the word "entirely" is never stated by Shindell--he writes of a *possible offset--*and does not propose the value of the offset, nor does he support this supposition with data; he is postulating. This claim is an erroneous inclusion, as it is not what was stated in the study and is not supported by the research. Here are Shindall's actual words which were paraphrased:
"Another consideration is that upper stratospheric ozone has decreased significantly since the 1970s as a result of destruction by halogens released from chlorofluorocarbons. This ozone decrease, which has been much larger than the modeled solar-induced ozone increases, may have limited the ability of solar irradiance changes to affect climate over recent decades, or may have even offset those effects."
He is saying that the ozone decrease *might* (no data to support this hypothesis) affect the climate effects of solar irradiance--he does not propose it may "reduce or eliminate" as the interpretation offered from Skeptical Science provides with its added words "reduced" and "entirely". Shindall is proposing that ozone decrease may, "affect" or "offset" climate in recent decades.
His data and findings (Shindall 1999) both support solar irradiance as a climate-changing force, and his research finds that the ozone decrease may be responsible for a hypothesized (no data) increase or reduction (affect or offset). In this context, he is has priorly stated that UV radiation increases temperatures, and so the context of "affect" is in a positive value; and "offset" is in a negative value. He's merely postulating on the two possible outcomes; a "[warming] affect" or "offset"--but clearly prefers the findings of his own report, that:
"Solar cycle variability may therefore play a significant role in regional surface temperatures, even though its influence on the global mean surface temperature is small (0.07 K for December–February***).*** The radiative forcing of the solar cycle, resulting from both irradiance changes and the impact of greenhouse trapping by the additional ozone, is also small (0.2 W m–2 [K] for December–February**).**
Solar Influence? "small" at 0.07 K
Greenhouse influence? "small" at 0.2w m-2 K
His own findings are that in December to February, while the sun's range of measurable activity is at its lowest in the north (a poor time and narrow window to study solar irradiation to any thorough extent--yet we still cite this one study), that both solar irradiance and greenhouse influence were responsible for a global surface temperature increase. Both were "small"
Considering the:
-correlation of solar irradiance to historical temperatures
-ever-moving turbulent air currents throughout the atmosphere
-that half the planet is in perpetual dark and cooling
-the vertical distance heat must travel while retaining its energy potential
-the very inefficient nature of translational kinetic energy to reflect and collide with particles
-the short heat-holding capacity of these specific atmospheric particles
-their complete lack of complex particle structure to facilitate the exponential buildup of heat through effecient re-direction of particle collision
-their 'greenhouse gases' infinitesimal concentration of the overall atmosphere (<0.48%)*
\the total cumulative greenhouse effect (of which is 0.04% carbon dioxide, 0.00017% methane, 0.0035% nitrous oxide, 0.001% neon and 0.00006% ozone)*
-of which only 2.95% (IPCC data 2001) to 3.63% (IPCC data 2007) total emissions are man-made
-which has decreased exactly as much as it has decreased:
"In the United States, greenhouse gas emissions caused by human activities increased by 7 percent from 1990 to 2014. Since 2005, however, total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions have decreased by 7 percent... Emissions per person have decreased slightly in the last few years." src: https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/greenhouse-gases
Considering all these facts and common sense factors... and how we know greenhouses to function... you can't hold heat without an organized barrier to efficiently management of translational kinetic energy in an organized fashion. If there is no stable structure, there can be no retention of heat energy. These gases do not exist in stable structures, because the atmosphere is in constant motion:
"In the model, circulation changes initially induced in the stratosphere subsequently penetrate into the troposphere, demonstrating the importance of the dynamical coupling between the stratosphere and troposphere. The model reproduces many observed 11-year oscillations, including the relatively long record of geopotential height variations; hence, it implies that these oscillations are likely driven, at least in part, by solar variability**.**" (Shindell 1999)
Skeptical Science uses this study to bolster its claims against solar theory, yet goes on misrepresenting the contextual relevance of this study further:
"Shindell et al. (1999) examined this possibility, but found that while this UV variability has a significant influence over regional temperatures, it has little effect on global surface temperatures." -skepticalscience
So Skeptical Science reasons that because--since the 1970s--the ozone has decreased, this explains away (without any evidence) the outstanding claims (empirically backed and peer reviewed) that UV radiations amplify the solar influence on global mean temperature. And this argument is made with a formula derived from 1900-1940 climate data. And is also contradicted in Shindell's paper, which is quoted out of context in support of the skepticalscience argument.
And while the official narrative preached by the established scientific community enables a multi-billion dollar CO2 credits industry (soon trillions) that continues to consolidate international powers through legislative actions, the mainstream media and popular consensus is that this man-made greenhouse gas driven climate change is resulting in an increase in global disasters.
The global media message is clear, "Wake up! The world is falling apart right now! We need to pass laws to fix this emergency! The carbon tax industry is hear. More taxes."
But the statistics show a dramatic decrease in natural disasters in the past century, which contradicts all narratives of CO2-induced climate-driven doom and fearmongering:
https://ourworldindata.org/natural-disasters
https://astronomy.com/news/2020/07/powerful-eruptions-on-the-sun-might-trigger-earthquakes
What's that--the Sun may trigger Earthquakes? But it doesn't affect the climate though, right?
If a cursory article on astronomy.com bears little weight, consider the scores of recent papers published citing tectonic-solar activity correlations:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=related:TFyRylwB0gkJ:scholar.google.com/&scioq=electromagnetic+sun+tectonics&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5
This understanding we have between solar activity and natural disasters correlates well. It also fits the narrative of solar-driven climate change, which respects the Sun's role in our survival. Which is essentially just the concept of seasons at a solar scale; for how does one suppose the Sun's output would be unchanging forever, with no pattern or habit? And how many years--too few--have we had tools to measure, to make any claim to know?
The problems between our understanding are largely contextual:
I see a multi-trillion dollar industry based on taxation emerge from nowhere, with dubious nonsensical claims running ancillary to all common sense and observation. I see reems of bias studies and elaborate mathematical feats to express, with warped data, the very way we define our terms. I see coordinated media, university, and governmental interests confirming each others' bias and ignoring some of the most meaningful correlative studies of the past century.
What do you see?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ztZg54roPI
submitted by 7_trees to politicsdebate [link] [comments]


2020.10.16 10:36 7_trees Skeptical Science.org - Interpreting Claims

Today a neighbour tried to convince me that emissions cause by human society have created a "greenhouse" effect on the Earth. I said I thought it was probably the Sun that influenced warming cycles, but he was adamant that I had, "Fallen into a black hole of nonsense funded by the petroleum industry so they can keep making money and polluting the planet."
Which sounded pretty plausible, given how much money the petroleum industry generates, and what huge dollars are at risk here. So I looked it up to see what the oil industry is worth: 2838.74 Billion, or 2.83874 Trillion USD. https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/biggest-oil-companies-in-the-world.html
Comparatively small, the CO2 credit trades market is approximately 168 Billion USD. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-carbontrading-report-idUSKCN1PA27H
One thing is for sure: A lot of money is involved, and global legislation is in the works. I figured I better learn about this more, so I asked him for some resources to get me up to date.
He recommended a website called skepticalscience.com, which provides scientific sources to address false claims of climate change. I went there and clicked on the Sun one. I read the basic, intermediate, and advanced arguments, learned all the jargon and maths, and read each study carefully. Here are my observations:
The first issue I wanted to look into was solar activity and correlative claims: https://skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming-advanced.htm
I and many others have picked up this idea that the Sun's activity is responsible for climate change. Let's see if I can understand this advanced proof which demonstrates that solar activity is not causing earth temperature fluctuations. I'm first going to look at their equations, which are the foundation of their argument--for they are the lens which all data is perceived:
"The solar radiative forcing is TSI in Watts per square meter (W-m-2) divided by 4 to account for spherical geometry, and multiplied by 0.7 to account for planetary albedo (Meehl 2002)."
Okay, so the basis of this rebuttle on Skeptical Science uses the equations published by Meehl in 2002 to interpret solar irradiance--the data for which will clearly show it has no correlation to the mean global surface temperature. Well, if we're going to disprove solar theory, we're going to need to know how this equation quantifies the very solar irradiance it draws conclusions from. If the equation expresses solar irradiance accurately, the proof based upon those numbers is supported.
Let's look at that original paper by Meehl to see its findings: (src: https://journals.ametsoc.org/jcli/article/16/3/426/29944/Solar-and-Greenhouse-Gas-Forcing-and-Climate)
Okay, so first thing Meehl tells us is how they are interpreting the data from the early-century warming period, which will then be used to form his equation which quantifies the values of solar irradiance we use today to disprove correlational data provided by solar theorists:
"if the ensemble mean change divided by the intraensemble standard deviation is greater than one, the ensemble mean difference is denoted as a consistent response" (e.g., Cubasch et al. 2001)."
I think I've got it so far--so 1. the data we are using to create these equations, which will ultimately disprove solar influence as the predominant cause of warming today, is 2. based on a representative data set of which: 3. a further equation is applied, to 4. validate which data entry points (based on standard deviation) are considered a "consistent response" worth including in the data set.
I'm already questioning why a scientist is ignoring the real available data sets, and instead applying a statistical standard deviation first to that data, and then interpretting the newly-sifted data. In this case, this is immediately suspicious--when you have a full real-world data set of such a substantial long-term scope as recorded in the early-century warming period, you use it as-is; you don't draw up a new equation which further narrows that basic data set according to a new metric of standard deviation. There's no reason the entire data set can't yield a mean value for our equations--the extra step of cutting off the outliers is unnecessary, because this is verifiable data taken over an extended time; the four-decades sample is large enough to produce a valid mean without adulteration.
But maybe it isn't that bad--(the equation Meehl arrives at, which uses Cubasch's data set that was filtered by an equation)--maybe the newly derived data set is still representative of the actual recorded climate data, but with more qualitative values which yield a more consistent model in our future projections. In statistics we know its often the case that discarding the outliers improves consistency in projections; such as in economics, for example. (ie. to predict mean income of newly graduated trades workers, data from highly specialized trades with exorbitant salaries are excluded, despite being part of the economic data; this is because these extreme outliers in income would inflate the estimation for what an entry-level tradesman may expect to earn)
Well, let's look at the 1900-1940 "early-century warming period" data set used, to see exactly what data was a.) excluded to improve consistency of the projection, to give us a more accurate prediction of the future, and b.) what data was maintained in the initial application of this first equation. (Which determines our eventual findings and conclusions years later down the road today.)
Here we go back to Cubasch, to figure out how he interpreted early-century climactic records circa 1900-1940, and what calculations he used to find the mean value: https://epic.awi.de/id/eprint/5180/1/Cub2001a.pdf
"The results presented in this chapter are based on simulations made with global climate models and apply to spacial scales of hundreds of kilometres and larger"
Okay--so by finding the standard deviations in our early-century warming period data, we can extrapolate and "apply [them] to spacial scales of hundreds of kilometres and larger". Good plan, I'm down.
And it makes sense at first, because this is a standard practice in statistics: to make a projection, you identify a data set which accurately represents the phenomena you are trying to project, and extrapolate it over (usually) time, for example.
Cubasch takes the sum of early-century warming period climate data, which is an accumulation of regional values throughout the northern hemisphere, and removes what are outside standard deviation, then uses these values to draw observations on "spacial scales of hundreds of kilometres and larger".
Except that we are not dealing with a data set which represents phenomena we wish to project more accuratel, as if we may apply a standard deviation to gambling or economic calculations, per se.
We are instead dealing with the actual true data of the phenomena. And in the real-world, early-century warming data was recorded by land-dwelling people in the Northern Hemisphere. Our real-world data set, which represents accurately and wholly our early-century warming period climate conditions recorded on regional landmasses, is being used to create a numerical representation to be applied on a global scale. This gap in relevance between the data we've chosen to use and reality is large.
Whoa hold up. Its one thing if we can predict regional weather patterns using this finesse; by finding the standard deviation, we actually gain great consistency in our future projections within a given area. But we can't use the weather in Texas during the early-century warming period to project accurate climate models of Ontario. Nor can we use the standard deviation yielded from climate data on land in the Northern Hemisphere to predict the global model of equitorial precipitation patterns and atmospheric greenhouse gases accumulation which Meehl examines and draws from in the creation of his equations--of which these equations are then used to measure solar irradiance values themselves.
So we are defining our very measurement of incoming solar radiance today based entirely on a standard deviation of aggregated regional landmass climate data from the early-century warming period. After shaving a bit off. And then we use this historical temperature-based equation to measure modern irradiance, which is solar activity? This makes no sense--why are the true values of solar irradiance not empirically measured and used in these calculations, by a device such as a spectrometer? Why is there a complex lineage of abused data sets and tailored equations, which somehow is now used in the measurement of radiation from the sun?
The advanced proof on the skeptical science website goes on:
"It has also been proposed that ultraviolet (UV) radiation, which varies more than other solar irradiance wavelengths, could amplify the solar influence on the global climate through interactions with the stratosphere and atmospheric ozone. Shindell et al. (1999) examined this possibility, but found that while this UV variability has a significant influence over regional temperatures, it has little effect on global surface temperatures."
Wait--how is this conclusion drawn? This is a mind-bendingly circular perspective:
  1. We (skeptical science) claim that solar irriadiance measurements disprove correlative claims to existing climate records and solar activity
  2. We (skeptical science) support this claim using Meehl's equations on solar irradiance
  3. Meehl forms his equations of solar irradiance based on analysis of a data set which,
  4. Cubash derives from a standard deviation applied to the actual climate data used by solar-proponents, which is the aggregation of only regional temperatures in the northern hemisphere, but yet
  5. We (skeptical science) cite Shindell's assertion that, "while this UV variability has a significant influence over regional temperatures, it has little effect on global surface temperatures."
So we've established that UV has a significant influence over regional temperatures. Which we use to create the early-century warming data sets. Which we use to form equations to measure solar irradiance. Which we use to predict global climate models. Which we use to refute the Sun's radiation as an explanation for warming.
Huh?
It goes on, continuing to address claims of UV-related heating effect:
"Moreover, Shindell et al. found that anthropogenic ozone depletion may have reduced the impact of UV variability on the climate, and may have even offset it entirely."
The use of the word "entirely" is never stated by Shindell--he writes of a *possible offset--*and does not propose the value of the offset, nor does he support this supposition with data; he is postulating. This claim is an erroneous inclusion, as it is not what was stated in the study and is not supported by the research. Here are Shindall's actual words which were paraphrased:
"Another consideration is that upper stratospheric ozone has decreased significantly since the 1970s as a result of destruction by halogens released from chlorofluorocarbons. This ozone decrease, which has been much larger than the modeled solar-induced ozone increases, may have limited the ability of solar irradiance changes to affect climate over recent decades, or may have even offset those effects."
He is saying that the ozone decrease *might* (no data to support this hypothesis) affect the climate effects of solar irradiance--he does not propose it may "reduce or eliminate" as the interpretation offered from Skeptical Science provides with its added words "reduced" and "entirely". Shindall is proposing that ozone decrease may, "affect" or "offset" climate in recent decades.
His data and findings (Shindall 1999) both support solar irradiance as a climate-changing force, and his research finds that the ozone decrease may be responsible for a hypothesized (no data) increase or reduction (affect or offset). In this context, he is has priorly stated that UV radiation increases temperatures, and so the context of "affect" is in a positive value; and "offset" is in a negative value. He's merely postulating on the two possible outcomes; a "[warming] affect" or "offset"--but clearly prefers the findings of his own report, that:
"Solar cycle variability may therefore play a significant role in regional surface temperatures, even though its influence on the global mean surface temperature is small (0.07 K for December–February***).*** The radiative forcing of the solar cycle, resulting from both irradiance changes and the impact of greenhouse trapping by the additional ozone, is also small (0.2 W m–2 [K] for December–February**).**
Solar Influence? "small" at 0.07 K
Greenhouse influence? "small" at 0.2w m-2 K
His own findings are that in December to February, while the sun's range of measurable activity is at its lowest in the north (a poor time and narrow window to study solar irradiation to any thorough extent--yet we still cite this one study), that both solar irradiance and greenhouse influence were responsible for a global surface temperature increase. Both were "small"
Considering the:
-correlation of solar irradiance to historical temperatures
-ever-moving turbulent air currents throughout the atmosphere
-that half the planet is in perpetual dark and cooling
-the vertical distance heat must travel while retaining its energy potential
-the very inefficient nature of translational kinetic energy to reflect and collide with particles
-the short heat-holding capacity of these specific atmospheric particles
-their complete lack of complex particle structure to facilitate the exponential buildup of heat through effecient re-direction of particle collision
-their 'greenhouse gases' infinitesimal concentration of the overall atmosphere (<0.48%)*
\the total cumulative greenhouse effect (of which is 0.04% carbon dioxide, 0.00017% methane, 0.0035% nitrous oxide, 0.001% neon and 0.00006% ozone)*
-of which only 2.95% (IPCC data 2001) to 3.63% (IPCC data 2007) total emissions are man-made
-which has decreased exactly as much as it has decreased:
"In the United States, greenhouse gas emissions caused by human activities increased by 7 percent from 1990 to 2014. Since 2005, however, total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions have decreased by 7 percent... Emissions per person have decreased slightly in the last few years." src: https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/greenhouse-gases
Considering all these facts and common sense factors... and how we know greenhouses to function... you can't hold heat without an organized barrier to efficiently management of translational kinetic energy in an organized fashion. If there is no stable structure, there can be no retention of heat energy. These gases do not exist in stable structures, because the atmosphere is in constant motion:
"In the model, circulation changes initially induced in the stratosphere subsequently penetrate into the troposphere, demonstrating the importance of the dynamical coupling between the stratosphere and troposphere. The model reproduces many observed 11-year oscillations, including the relatively long record of geopotential height variations; hence, it implies that these oscillations are likely driven, at least in part, by solar variability**.**" (Shindell 1999)
Skeptical Science uses this study to bolster its claims against solar theory, yet goes on misrepresenting the contextual relevance of this study further:
"Shindell et al. (1999) examined this possibility, but found that while this UV variability has a significant influence over regional temperatures, it has little effect on global surface temperatures." -skepticalscience
So Skeptical Science reasons that because--since the 1970s--the ozone has decreased, this explains away (without any evidence) the outstanding claims (empirically backed and peer reviewed) that UV radiations amplify the solar influence on global mean temperature. And this argument is made with a formula derived from 1900-1940 climate data. And is also contradicted in Shindell's paper, which is quoted out of context in support of the skepticalscience argument.
And while the official narrative preached by the established scientific community enables a multi-billion dollar CO2 credits industry (soon trillions) that continues to consolidate international powers through legislative actions, the mainstream media and popular consensus is that this man-made greenhouse gas driven climate change is resulting in an increase in global disasters.
The global media message is clear, "Wake up! The world is falling apart right now! We need to pass laws to fix this emergency! The carbon tax industry is hear. More taxes."
But the statistics show a dramatic decrease in natural disasters in the past century, which contradicts all narratives of CO2-induced climate-driven doom and fearmongering:
https://ourworldindata.org/natural-disasters
https://astronomy.com/news/2020/07/powerful-eruptions-on-the-sun-might-trigger-earthquakes
What's that--the Sun may trigger Earthquakes? But it doesn't affect the climate though, right?
If a cursory article on astronomy.com bears little weight, consider the scores of recent papers published citing tectonic-solar activity correlations:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=related:TFyRylwB0gkJ:scholar.google.com/&scioq=electromagnetic+sun+tectonics&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5
This understanding we have between solar activity and natural disasters correlates well. It also fits the narrative of solar-driven climate change, which respects the Sun's role in our survival. Which is essentially just the concept of seasons at a solar scale; for how does one suppose the Sun's output would be unchanging forever, with no pattern or habit? And how many years--too few--have we had tools to measure, to make any claim to know?
The problems between our understanding are largely contextual:
I see a multi-trillion dollar industry based on taxation emerge from nowhere, with dubious nonsensical claims running ancillary to all common sense and observation. I see reems of bias studies and elaborate mathematical feats to express, with warped data, the very way we define our terms. I see coordinated media, university, and governmental interests confirming each others' bias and ignoring some of the most meaningful correlative studies of the past century.
What do you see?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ztZg54roPI
submitted by 7_trees to climateskeptics [link] [comments]


2020.10.12 14:50 20PointFiveSquared Aliens are real and world governments are slowly disclosing this now

The UFO subject has always been heavily stigmatised and tarnished by crazy conspiracy people, overly dramatic documentaries and sources like the ‘history channel.’ I never really paid attention to the phenomenon most of my life, assuming that if aliens were ever actually discovered beyond just anecdotal evidence it would be a massive event, invoking a worldwide emergency broadcast or some kind of special global announcement.
Procrastinating my assignments this semester, I delved pretty deep into the subject, to find out if anything had changed in the discourse of the topic recently. Amazingly, many governments have been relaxing their secrecy over the last few years, slowly declassifying documents of credible incidents over the last 50 years, sometimes involving hundreds of military personnel or other trained observers.
This is happening now, with more coming out each day.
The US Pentagon has even released videos of three alien crafts and has actually stated that they are in possession of “off-world vehicles not made on this earth.” It has got to the point where you can literally search almost any country with an operational air force, in relation to UFO encounters and find extensive lists of incidents dating back to World War 2 and the ‘Foo Fighters’. Sightings go back as far as we have records with countless numbers of witnesses over time. Not to mention all the crazy similarities in historical art from cave walls and paintings.
Could people be lying? Absolutely, 98% of the time it’s probably made up stories or sightings that could be explained by some other known earthly phenomena. But all it takes is for ONE single instance to be an actual extra-terrestrial, to shatter our entire paradigm. And if one has actually made the trip, why not more? Look how many different types of probes have we sent to our neighbouring planets in our short time in the space race?
Extraordinary claims like these require extraordinary evidence.
Millions of shitty quality photos and a billion eyewitness testimonies are actually worth basically nothing in the scientific realm. Extraordinary evidence would be to examine an actual alien or a piece of a space ship meta-materials. Obviously, I am never going to be in a position to examine any of this real evidence if it existed. But that doesn’t mean that someone out there in the world at some point hasn’t. Maybe, out of all the people to have actually claimed to have done this over the years, perhaps at least one of them wasn’t lying or crazy? I mean all scientists have got to come from somewhere on Earth, right?
I don’t know, but the whole subject has been poisoned by conspiracies and people who want to add to the misinformation. They even had to ditch the UFO acronym, its Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon (UAP) now. Try typing that into Google Scholar or other search engines of credible peer revied information and see what you find. It is amazing the amount of information that is readily accessible now but nobody really seems to try to look even care.
Everyone jokes about aliens being the next crazy thing for 2020 but I’m beginning to think it has been always been our first and most fundamental story. Literally, replace God with Alien in any of humanities stories, and things seem to make a lot more sense. A being coming from above with infinite knowledge and promising to take us away to a better place? Out of all religions, this is the only commonality that is the most consistent with our scientific knowledge so far. I mean most people would agree that aliens exist at least somewhere in the universe, right?
All you need to do is make that last jump, that they have actually visited us at some point, and our leaders are only just now starting to tell us the truth about it. I don’t know, I just feel like more people should be talking about this, we are in the slow process of alien disclosure. Look into it yourself, you are so lucky to live in the only time where all the information in the world is in your fucking pocket, all you have to do is want to look.
Who knows, maybe this will be the thing to finally unite us all and put an end to the tribalistic shit that has separated us as people.
All of us are just humans, on a pale blue dot, in an uncomprehendingly immense universe.
submitted by 20PointFiveSquared to unpopularopinion [link] [comments]


2020.10.09 15:09 Bohrbrain The Gospel of Mark: Evidence of Petrine Origins (Part 2)

I thought it would be interesting to update my post I made about 6 months ago regarding the Petrine origins of Mark. After argumentation in favor of tradition, I will try to respond to important objections to Petrine origins (from Michael J. Kok, Joel Marcus, as well as criticisms I received last post) that I didn't respond to last time.

Internal evidence

1.1) Peter in Mark:
"Given its essentially smaller extent, the Gospel of Mark mentions Simon Peter more frequently than the other Synoptic Gospels and also more frequently than John, if we leave out the chapter which is critical of Peter in the supplement, John 21. Simon Peter is mentioned 25 times in all. Simon is the first disciple to be mentioned, in 1:16, directly after the proposition in 1:14, 15, and quite unusually his brother Andrew is described as ‘the brother of Simon’ (on this cf. 15:21). At the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, after the call of the first four disciples and the first exorcism in the synagogue of Capernaum, Jesus visits the house of the brothers—a report in the Gospel which falls outside its framework and seems very personal—and heals Simon’s mother-in-law (1:29). In 1:36, unusually, the first group of disciples is described as Σίμων καὶ οἱ μετʼ αὐτοῦ. Subsequently he stands at the head of all the lists of disciples, the Twelve and also the three and the four. All this cannot simply be explained as mere convention; there must be profound historical reasons behind it. As the spokesmen of the Twelve Peter not only acknowledges the messiahship of Jesus but is also sharply rejected by him (8:29, 32f.); he is an embodiment of the disciples’ lack of understanding and their failure. He is the last disciple whom Jesus addresses personally in Gethsemane (14:37), the last who accompanies Jesus as far as the courtyard of the high priest’s palace (14:37), indeed, even more, the last to be mentioned in the Gospel. [...] It can hardly be doubted that Mark is clearly stressing the unique significance of Peter, though without disguising his failure. Might this not be connected with the special origin of his tradition?
Certainly Simon Peter does not appear as a living individual, but as a type; however, this is part of the kerygamtic style of the narrator generally and affects all the people in the Gospel including Jesus himself."
(Hengel, Studies in the Gospel of Mark, p. 50-51)
SEE OBJECTION #1 FOR FURTHER ARGUMENTATION & EVIDENCE ON THIS VITAL POINT.

1.2) Parts of gMark read like a Direct Eyewitness Account (Independent of Papias' tradition)
As C.F.D Moule says (defending Papias' tradition): "Parts of [Mark] do, in fact, read like a direct, eyewitness account..." (C.F.D Moule, The Gospel According to Mark, The Cambridge Bible Commentary, p. 5)
This is exemplified in J.P Meier's work (vol. 2) The Marginal Jew. He thinks the following miracle stories are historical (in the sense of the Gospel of Mark portraying an accurate picture of what people thought occurred):
- The story of the healing of blind Bartimaeus (Mark 10:46-52) -page 686-690
- The blind man of Bethsaida (Mark 8:22–26)- page 690-694
- Mark 2:1-12 - page 679-680
- The possessed boy (Mark 9:14–29) - page 653-656
- The deaf-mute (Mark 7:31–37)- 711-714
Maurice Casey also thinks that the miracles of Mark 1:23-27; Mark 1:32-34; Mark 3:1-6; Mark 5:21-43, etc, are "literally true," "authentic," and "genuine" (Jesus of Nazareth, 2010, p. 107, 109, 247-248, 268).

1.2.2) The Last Supper (Mark 14:22-24 1 Cor 11:23-25)
James P. Ware writes: "Two factors make Paul’s testimony invaluable for the historian. First, Paul’s account of the words and actions of Jesus on that night is independent of the Gospels. Second, Paul had extensive and direct contacts with apostles who had shared the table with Jesus on that night. Paul met with Peter for a fifteen-day conference in 37/38, for the specific purpose of hearing his eyewitness testimony to Jesus, and at the Apostolic Council in 48/49, Paul had met with Peter, John, and other apostles. It is historically certain that Paul had the opportunity to verify with Peter and the other eyewitnesses what Jesus had actually said and done on that night. After all, on these occasions Paul not only had extensive discussions with Peter and other members of the Twelve, but, as we have seen, he also shared in the celebration of the Eucharist with them. Paul’s letters provide striking and explosive evidence that, beyond a reasonable historical doubt, the words of Jesus identifying the bread with his body and the wine with his blood go back to the eyewitness testimony of the apostles who reclined with Jesus at table on that night. [...] Moreover, this confirmation of the eyewitness origins of the account of the Last Supper in the canonical gospels (considered alongside the coherence of 1 Cor 15:1–11 with the narrative of Jesus’s death and resurrection in these same gospels) strongly suggests that the narrative of Jesus’s deeds and teaching in the Gospels as a whole has its origins in the eyewitnesses’ testimony of the apostles [along with what has been considered above]."
(James P. Ware, Paul’s Theology in Context, Eerdmans, 2019, p. 269-270)
____________________________________________________________________________________________

External Evidence

1) Matthew & Luke (75-95 C.E.)
Hengel writes on page 48 (Studies):
There are yet other reasons for supposing that Petrine authority stands behind the Gospel of Mark.
(1) Mark’s work was used by the historian Luke and also by Matthew, so self-consciously a Christian scribe, in a quite natural way as a guideline. The fidelity with which Matthew reproduces the whole of his Marcan model is particularly striking.
(2) The best explanation of the fact that Mark lived on in the church, although Matthew had taken over about ninety per cent of the material in it, is that the work of Mark was from the beginning bound up with the authority of the name of Peter.
Luke's preface is also important. It's more so the kind of preface historians wrote and shows that Luke is more keen to present his work in the way that literary historians did (see Sean Adams, "Luke's Preface and its Relationship to Greek Historiography: A Response to Loveday Alexander" [2006]). If we take seriously what he says about his sources, he must have considered Mark a good means of access to eyewitness testimony.

2) 1 Peter 5:13 (~85 C.E.)
our sister church in Babylon, chosen together with you, sends you greetings; and so does my son Mark.
The Presbyter John, Papias' informant, may be independent of 1 Peter, which associated Mark with Peter. Adela Y. Collins notes:
Given the common, and probably independent, association of the man with Peter, it is likely that Papias and 1Peter refer to the same person named Mark.
(Adela Yarbro Collins, Mark: A Commentary, Hermeneia, 2007, p. 4)

3) Papias of Hierapolis (95-109 C.E.) & the Presbyter John (70/80-100 C.E.)
Davies and Allison in their Commentary on Matthew (ICC) questions the dismissal of Papias:
In the light of the general considerations adduced and of the work of Kennedy and Kürzinger, the simplistic understanding of Papias which dismisses him out of hand must be questioned if not abandoned.
(Davies and Allison, Matthew, ICC, pp. 16)
So let's question, shall we?
Papias' statements about Mark seems to fit Mark as we have it today. First of all, Papias' critical judgement that "Mark was out of order is similar to Dionysius of Halicarnassus' criticism that Thucydides' history was not in order because it did not begin and end properly (On Thucydides 10; cf. Lucian, True History 47f). Mark does not begin with the recommended topics of birth and ancestry (cf. Theon, Progymnasmaia 8), and it ends abruptly at Mark 16:8. Matthew and Luke also made many linguistic and stylistic improvements on Mark..." (David E. Aune, The New Testament in its Literary Environment, 1987, p. 65-66)
As Hengel writes, Papias complaint that Mark was out of order "does not in fact relate to the literary arrangement, which in the Second Gospel is faultless, but to the historical and chronological arrangement of the material" (Studies in the Gospel of Mark, p. 48)
Second of all, the work of Mark does, in large part, seem like a bunch of anecdotes or little more than such. E.P Sanders & Margaret Davies, Studying the Synoptic Gospels, p. 20 sums it up this point nicely:
The material (in Mark) consists of a series of episodes which concentrates on teaching, disputes and miracles. Only the last week of Jesus’ life appears anything like a connected narrative
Norman Perrin’s What Is Redaction Criticism? claims that the passion narrative in Mark is the most organized, with much of the rest being anecdotes. Eta Linnemann, however, sees the PN as a collection of anecdotes.
One must keep the possibility open that there was an earlier draft of Mark, as Delbert Burkett argues in his book "The Case for Proto-Mark" (2018). The reconstructed draft of Mark would look more like the Gospel of Thomas in structure, in that it was a collection of unconnected chreia.

3.1) Why should we trust Papias?
Papias seems to have historiographical practices in the back of his mind, his tradition seems to be direct from an eyewitness of Jesus, his comments about Mark are very modest, if not even critical, and his location are all relevant to this question.

"Wrote down accurately whatsoever he remembered".
Where is Peter's supervision establishing a complete 2nd hand apostolic connection? Papias later on also says:
" Wherefore Mark made no mistake in thus writing some things as he remembered them
Further severing the direct 2nd hand connection.

"It was not, however, in exact order"
"The remark that it is “not in order” implies that it does not measure up to Papias’ standard of what a Gospel should be; nevertheless, he defends it" (Adela Y. Collins. Mark, Hermeneia, p. 4).

"For he neither heard the Lord nor accompanied Him."
Here he is saying Mark is not an eyewitness. It makes little sense to stress such a thing if Papias wasn't interested in genuine tradition. This is more weighty than it appears though, because as Joel Marcus points out on page 18 of his Anchor Yale Bible commentary on Mark 1-8:
Acts 13:13 relates that Mark abandoned Paul for some unknown reason in the middle of a missionary journey, and 15:36-41 describes this desertion as the cause of a subsequent quarrel between Paul and Barnabas, who may have been Mark’s cousin (cf. Col 4:10). Barnabas wanted to take Mark along with them on a later mission, but Paul, because of the earlier experience, refused, and the two missionaries therefore parted acrimoniously.
With this considered, it would not only be appropriate to explicitly say Peter okay'd Mark's work, but it would also be most appropriate to just name the Gospel after Peter himself.
All of this suggest that Papias did not have apologetic interests, or, at least, that was not his primary interest. Adela Y. Collins, citing Hengel, rejects Papian invention of Mark's relation with Peter on these grounds of Papias being critical of Mark in her Hermeneia commentary on Mark, p. 4. Jeff Jay (Mohr Siebeck, 2014, p. 180) likewise finds Hengel's arguments convincing.

If, then, any one who had attended on the elders came, I asked minutely after their sayings,--what Andrew or Peter said, or what was said by Philip, or by Thomas, or by James, or by John, or by Matthew, or by any other of the Lord's disciples: which things Aristion and the presbyter John, the disciples of the Lord, say.
Notice the difference between what the members of the 12 said, and what the Elder John and Aristion, disciples of the Lord, still say. Notice also how the members of the twelve are called "disciples of the Lord," just like Aristion and the Presbyter John, as if to equate their authority and eyewitness status.
Irenaeus claims that Papias knew the apostle who leaned on "the bosom of Christ" first hand, and Eusebius contradicts himself when he separates Papias from the elder John, since he also says that Papias asserts that he heard the Presbyter John in person:
Papias [...] moreover asserts that he heard in person Aristion and the presbyter John. Accordingly he mentions them frequently by name, and in his writings gives their traditions.
The context Eusebius cites suggests that this is the same Presbyter John that was spoken of in his preface:
He moreover hands down, in his own writing, other narratives given by the previously mentioned Aristion of the Lord's sayings, and the traditions of the presbyter John. For information on these points, we can merely refer our readers to the books themselves; but now, to the extracts already made, we shall add, as being a matter of primary importance, a tradition regarding Mark who wrote the Gospel, which he [Papias] has given in the following words]: And the presbyter said this. Mark having become the interpreter of Peter...
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/papias.htm
This point about Papias' source can hardly be overstated.

David E Aune raised the possibility that Papias thought of himself as a historian:
Papias reflects a considerable degree of rhetorical sophistication (Kürzinger 1983: 43-67; Black 1989: 31-41), and suggests that he thought of himself as a historian (Aune 1978: 79-82; 1987: 66-67).
(David E. Aune, 'Prolegomena to the Study of Oral Traditions in the Hellenistic World', in Henry Wansborough (ed.), Jesus and the Oral Gospel Tradition (JSNTSup 64; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991), p. 81).
Hengel notes that:
"The positive statements, that as far as Mark remembered the teaching of Peter he set this down on paper ἀκριβῶς, and that he took trouble not to leave out or falsify anything that he had heard, are conventional in character: similar formulae appear almost as stereotypes in the prologues of historians.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 For its frequency see e.g. also Plutarch, Lycurgus, 6.4; 13.2; 25.4; Theopompus, FGrHist 115 T 31 = Photius bibl. 176 p.121a 35; Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Thuc. 5 (LCL Vol. 465, p.472) and 8 (p.478), on Thucydides: πλείστην ἐποιήσατο πρόνοιαν, οὔτε προστιθεὶς τοῖς πράγμασιν οὐδὲν ὃ μὴ δίκαιον οὔτε ἀφαιρῶν, οὐδὲ ἐνεξουσιάζων τῇ γραφῇ.
(Martin Hengel, Studies in the Gospel of Mark, p. 49)
Furthermore, Papias' criticism that Mark was not in order "was a rhetorical term meaning "not artistically arranged." Portions of the historical preface of Papias' work survive complete with references to sources and method in accordance with historiographal convention (Eusebius, Church History, 3.39-2-4; 15; note the formal parallels with Luke 1:1-4). The reveals Papias' familiarity with the rhetorical conventions of Hellenistic historiography. His explicit preference for oral over written tradition (Eusebius, Church History, 3.39.3-4) typifies ancient historians from Herodotus to Plutarch (cf. Plutarch, Demosthenes 2.1)." (David E. Aune, The New Testament in Its Literary Environment, 1987, p. 67)
See this article for more on this (2014): https://www.jstor.org/stable/43665438?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

We should also note the relevance of his geographical location in Hierapolis. Vernon Bartlet explains:
Hierapolis, of which he became “bishop” or chief local pastor, stood at the meeting-point of two great roads: one running east and west, between Antioch in Syria and Ephesus, the chief city of “Asia,” the other south-east to Attalia in Pamphylia and north-west to Smyrna. There Papias was almost uniquely placed for collecting traditions coming direct from the original home of the Gospel both before his own day and during it, as well as from Palestinian Christian leaders settled in Asia (a great centre of the Jewish Dispersion).
(V. Bartlet, “‘Papias’ ‘Exposition’: it’s date and contents, p. 16-17: 20-22)

4) Irenaeus (175-185 C.E.)
Irenaeus' report of Mark writing after Peter's death (as per the vast majority of scholarship) makes him a very relevant source, despite his lateness (especially if we are to trust his hearing of Polycarp). Indeed, it seems like a huge coincidence, at the very least, that contemporary critical scholarship places Mark's composition around 70 C.E., with Peter's death around 64-68 C.E., cohering with Irenaeus' report of Mark being written after Peter's death perfectly.
Some call into question Peter's death in Rome during the Neronic persecution, but not for very good reasons. There is ample independent evidence of Peter's execution in Rome during the Neronic persecution around 64-68 C.E.:

4.1) 1 Clement (90-100 C.E.)
1 Clement indicates that Peter was martyred. Timothy Barnes writes: "The letter [then] continues by describing the deaths of numerous others besides Peter and Paul who are presented as having perished with them:
Because of jealousy women were persecuted as Danaids and Dircae and suffered terrible and unholy indignities. But they confidently completed the race of faith and, though weak in body, received a noble reward.
The reference to “Danaids and Dircae” (Δαναΐδες καὶ Διρκαί) has appeared so puzzling to many scholars that it has sometimes been emended away. [...] The problematic words have now been explained by Edward Champlin as conveying a specific allusion to Nero’s “fatal charades” (Champlin, Nero, pp. 123–25). Why Danaids? Because the temple of Apollo on the Palatine, dedicated in 28 bce, had been destroyed in the fire of Rome, and the portico surrounding the sacred area in front of the temple contained statues of the fifty mythical daughters of King Danaus. Why Dircae? The mythical Dirce, wife of the king of Thebes, was tied by her hair to a bull, which then trampled and gored her to death. One of the buildings burned down in 64 was the amphitheater in the Campus Martius built by Statilius Taurus in 26 bce, known as the amphitheater of Taurus or the amphitheater of the Bull (Cassius Dio 62.18.2).
The Letter of the Church of Rome to the Church of Corinth thus states [...] that both Peter and many women perished in Nero’s entertainments in 64."
(Timothy D. Barnes, "Another Shall Gird Thee," in Peter in Early Christianity, edited by Helen K. Bond, Larry W. Hurtado, 2015, p. 91-92).

4.2) John 21:18-19 (90-100 C.E.)
"The allusion to Peter’s execution in John’s Gospel cannot refer to a death by crucifixion because it states that Peter died clothed, not naked. The allusion dovetails perfectly with what Tacitus reports about the emperor Nero’s execution of Christians in Rome in the year 64." (Barnes: p. 80). See p. 77-86 for more on this point.

4.3) The Ascension of Isaiah ("End of the First Century")
Timothy Barnes writes: "The Ascension of Isaiah [...] contains a passage in which the Old Testament prophet Isaiah predicts that one of Jesus' twelve original disciples will be killed by Nero:
Now, therefore, Hezekiah and Josab my son, these are the days of the completion of the world. And after it is completed, Beliar will descend, the great ruler, the king of this world, which he has ruled ever since it existed. He will descend from his firmament in the form of a man, a lawless emperor, a matricide—this is the king of this world—and he will persecute the plant which the Twelve Apostles of the Beloved will have planted, and one of the Twelve will be delivered into his hands. This ruler will come in the form of that emperor, and with him will come all the powers of this world, and they will obey him in all that he desires. (4.1-4)
Barnes writes: "The reference to Nero is clear, and Champlin’s discussion of Nero’s posthumous reputation duly quotes the passage. No Roman emperor other than Nero killed his mother, still less was any other Roman emperor famous precisely for killing his mother. Moreover, this passage of the Ascension of Isaiah not only alludes to Nero’s persecution of the Christians of Rome in 64 but also reflects the belief, widespread in the East in the decades after his death in 68, that Nero would reappear on earth restored to life again and usher in the end of the world. Historical considerations, including this allusion to Nero redivivus, indicate a date “about the end of the first century” for the composition of this section of the work (3.13–4.22). Peter is the obvious and inevitable candidate." (Barnes: p. 92-93)

4.4) The Apocalypse of Peter (80-135 C.E.)
Look Peter, I have manifested to you and expounded all this [after the last judgement after the destruction of the world]. And go into the city that rules over the west and drink the cup that I promised you at the hand of the son of the one who is in Hades, so that his destruction may have a beginning and you, the receiver of the promise... (14:4-6)
Barnes writes: "Presumably, "the son of the one who is in Hades" means "the son of the devil" and denotes Nero. More significant, the passage alludes to Jesus' private prayer in the garden of Gethsemane that the cup be taken from him (Mark 13:36, 39), so that "the cup that I promised you" must refer to the future death of Peter: Peter will go to Rome, the "city that rules over the west," where he will drink the cup promised to him by Jesus; that is, he will be executed as a follower of Christ" (Barnes: p. 94-95)

4.5) A Petrine shrine dating around 160 C.E. in Vatican hill
Barnes writes: "There is ample archaeological, liturgical, and literary evidence for a cult of Peter on the Vatican Hill from the second half of the second century onward. From this varied evidence it is clear that the Christians of Rome a century after Peter’s death firmly believed that Peter had died in Rome, since a shrine was built around 160 on the Vatican Hill over the place where either Peter’s body or at least some relic of Peter was believed to be." (Barnes: p. 88).

Summary of Irenaeus: Evidence has it that Peter died around 64-68 C.E. Irenaeus very likely claims that Mark wrote after Peter died. Critical scholarship has confirmed indeed that Mark was written fairly shortly after Peter's death (~70 C.E.). Thus, the coherence of Irenaeus' tradition to the conclusions of critical scholarship regarding Mark makes him reliable on this specific Gospel, in spite of his date. This accuracy probably indicates that Irenaeus draws upon independent tradition.
____________________________________________________________________________________________

Objections

Objection #1: Peter in Mark
According to Michael J. Kok:
"Scholars too excuse the texts where the Twelve come across in a less than flattering light, such as their constant misunderstandings (4:13, 40-41; 6:51-52; 7:17-18; 8:4, 14-21, 31-33; 9:10, 32-34, 38-41; 10:35-45; 14:4-5), the bold request of James and John for seats of honor (10:35-40), the rebuke of Peter as the mouthpiece of Satan (8:33), or Peter’s threefold denials (14:66-72), by crediting it as a testament to apostolic humility.
[...]
The problem is that Mark does not just document the Twelve’s occasional foibles. Their extraordinary powers of incomprehension—worrying over bread after Jesus miraculously multiplied it twice (8:16-21) or caught off-guard in Gethsemane despite three straightforward passion predictions (8:31-32; 9:31-32; 10:32-34)—goes beyond reasonable miscommunication and borders on parody. Their lapses in judgment are retained in Synoptic parallels (Matt 16:5-12; Matt 16:21-22; Matt 17:22-23/Luke 9:44-45; Matt 20:17-23/Luke 18:31-34), but Mark alone has their hearts collectively hardened (6:52; 8:17) like Pharaoh (Exod 7:3, 13-14, 22; 8:19; 9:12, 35; 10:20, 27; 11:10; 14:4) or Jesus’ foes (Mark 3:5). Peter’s denials are not suppressed, but Matthew 16:17-19, Luke 22:32, and the Johannine epilogue (21:15-19) balance it out by explicitly re-affirming Peter’s leadership of the post-Easter community.
[...]
At any rate, Peter, the Twelve, and the family of Jesus are all represented ambivalently in the narrative and it is hard to imagine that its author worked at the behest of one of the Jerusalem Pillars.
(Michael J. Kok, The Gospel on the Margins, 2015, kindle location 1442-1476)
Joel Marcus likewise rejects Mark for it's "anti-petrine" stance.
Perhaps Kok will also favor us with another book, First Corinthians on the Margins, where he shows that this letter could not have likely been written by Paul, because of its strong anti-Pauline polemic (his "weakness and fear and great trembling," 2:4, "the least of the apostles," 15:9, etc.). Why does Paul talk this way? He highlights his own weakness, in order to glorify the transforming power and grace of God (see 2 Corinthians 10-13). Does Kok not know about the revolutionary Christian conception of humility, and the Christian conception that "he who boasts must boast in the Lord"? This is why the portrayal of Peter in Mark is one more evidence that the basis of Mark is the eyewitness account of Peter (see "Peter in Mark" at the top of the post). Only Peter would recount the events in this unvarnished way. We should be very weary of retrojecting our modern conception of what is "beyond reasonable miscommunication and borders on parody" onto theirs.
Furthermore, many of the passages cited by Kok don't really paint a picture of the Evangelist portraying Peter (or the disciples) as negative. In fact, the Evangelist may be attempting to do the opposite for Peter specifically (see "Conclusion of Objection #1").

- Mark 8:33
John R. Markley writes: "Fourth Ezra may provide a helpful analogy for understanding Peter's rebuke of Jesus, and Jesus' subsequent rebuke of Peter. In this apocalypse, Ezra questions whether God is just since the righteous suffer at the hands of the unrighteous. Occasionally, Ezra presumes to possess a point of view that is superior to the one represented by his angelic mediator, Uriel. For this reason, Uriel takes a biting tone with Ezra at points. He claims that a human like Ezra cannot understand the ways of God (4 Ezra 4:2, 10-11, 21; 5:35-37, 40); he questions whether Ezra believes that he loves Israel more than God does (5:33; cf. 4:34; 8:47a); and he is critical of Ezra for considering the present rather than what is yet to come (7:15). When Ezra queries whether if the fate of the wicked is just, Uriel sharply rebukes him: You are not a better judge than God, or wiser than the Most High!" (7:19). Uriel's antagonistic tone must be interpreted against the backdrop of the glowing statements made about Ezra elsewhere in the apocalypse (e.g. 6:32-33; 7:67-77; 8:47b--54; 10:38-40. 55-58; 13:53-56), the direct comparison of him with Moses (14:1-6, 37-48), and his removal from the earth before death (14:9). In light of these, it does not seem likely that the apocalypse reflects an antagonistic or ambivalent of Ezra himself; rather, it seems that Uriel's tone is directed towards Ezra's human point of view, which is fundamentally different from the divine point of view that is required to grapple faithfully with the problems with gentile hegemony, sin, and divine justice.
Ezra's human perspective is continually contrasted with the divine perspective that the angel Uriel discloses, much like Peter's rebuke of Jesus' passion prediction is designed to sharply contrast his human perspective with the divine perspective Jesus discloses. Indeed, just as the angle Uriel criticized Ezra's limited human perspective, Jesus says that Peter is thinking "human things," rather than "divine things.
The main purpose of this episode, therefore, is probably not to use Peter as an example of faulty discipleship. Instead, Peter performs the somewhat stereotyped function of a seer, who voices the human perspective that the divine revelation is designed to correct"
(John R. Markley, "Reassessing Peter's Imperception in Synoptic Traditions" in Peter in Early Christianity, edited by Helen K. Bond , Larry W. Hurtado, 2015, p. 107-108)
This analysis fits in very nicely with Hengel's point of view above.

- The Failure of Peter and the Disciples to Understand (i.e. Mark 9:5-6; 7:17; 10:35-45; 14:4-5, etc)
The failure to understand is a "motif that is common in apocalyptic literature: human imperception in the face of divinely revealed mysteries. In apocalyptic texts, human seers are regularly portrayed as being profoundly confused by the otherworldly realities they observe during visions are epiphanies. The venerable figure of Daniel, for example, cannot perceive the significance of his visions apart from divine explanation, despite his unrivaled qualities of wisdom and understanding. In Daniel 8:27, after Daniel has received an explanation of his vision, he comments that he did not understand it. Similarly, following the historical review of chapters 10-12, Daniel says "I heard but could not understand" (12:8). Daniel is therefore portrayed as expressing confusion and imperception when confronted with eschatological mysteries revealed to him, but there is no indication that his confusion is designed to reflect negativity on him. It merely plays into the duality between God's plan for the righteous, expressed as otherworldly mysteries, and the ability of finite human such as Daniel to grasp this ominous plan." (Markley: p. 107)
Markley also goes over similar confusion texts in 4 Ezra (cf. 10:30, 35, etc), whereby the seer is confused by divine mysteries, and more in his book Peter - Apocalyptic Seer, p. 78-113.

- The Gospel of Mark Leaves Peter Unredeemed
But this is just false. First of all, even Michael J. Kok thinks that Mark hints at Peter's reconciliation when he says:
If not for the hints of reconciliation at 14:28 and 16:7, the last time the Twelve appear in the narrative is on a note of their utter failure. (Kindle location 1468)
Furthermore, "the reference to Peter's weeping [Mark 14:72] to some extent cancels his previous behavior as it indicates his repentance and therefore his re-acceptance" (Ernest Best, Peter in the Gospel According to Mark, JSTOR, 1978, p. 554).
Lastly, the silence of the women (potentially leaving Peter unredeemed by reason of the angelic message not reaching Peter) is moot, as Adela Y. Collins writes:
Their silence is a result of their being struck with awe at the extraordinary events. The tension between the commission given the women by the angel in v. 7* and the silence of the women in v. 8* is due to the depiction of the overwhelming effect of the overall experience on the women. The text does not address the question whether the women eventually gave the disciples and Peter the message. It focuses rather on the numinous and shocking character of the event of Jesus’ resurrection from the dead..
(Adela Y. Collins, Mark: A Commentary, Hermeneia, 2007, p. 799)
Ernest Best thinks Mark 16:7 was sufficient, apart from Peter's weeping, for Peter's reconciliation (see "Conclusion to Objection #1"), especially considering that Mark 16:7 seems redactional.

- Conclusion to Objection #1
Ernest Best looks at Markan redactional tendencies from the tradition the Evangelist held, and actually concludes that the Markan author smoothed over the tradition which held Peter's failures! It may just be that our Marcus was a bit uncomfortable with Peter's humility he displayed in his tradition. Best concludes:
Where Peter appears in the tradition in a bad light Mark normally lifts the strain off him by associating other disciples with him; the only exception is the story of the denial where Mark may have increased the amount of material about him, perhaps turning the single denial into a threefold; but it is by no means clear that he did this in order to vilify Peter, since he probably also emphasized the flight of all the disciples. There may also be another factor: Peter's failure may be heightened in order to bring out the contrast in behavior to Jesus. Where Mark has himself introduced Peter he either presents him in a good light or, at least, neutrally; if the reference in 16:7 is Markan then this is an obvious attempt to correct the impression left by the denial. Thus there is no reason to conclude that Mark was attacking the historical Peter.
More generally, to ask the question about Mark's treatment of Peter may imply a view of Mark's purpose as ultimately biographical. But Mark does not set out to tell his community about Peter for Peter's sake but for the sake of the community. Failure occasioned by pressure from outside the community must have been all too common; if Peter's failure was eliminated he could not be seen as the proto-penitent
(Ernest Best, Peter in the Gospel According to Mark, JSTOR, 1978, p. 557-558)
And finally, Helen K. Bond writes:
The figure of Peter has been a favorite topic in many recent literary studies of Mark’s Gospel, with the prevailing opinion nowadays suggesting that the evangelist is not really so negative toward Jesus’ closest disciple as an earlier generation might have supposed.
(Helen K. Bond, "Was Peter behind Mark’s Gospel?" in Peter in Early Christianity, edited by Helen K. Bond Larry W. Hurtado, 2015, p. 49)

Objection #2:
According to Michael J. Kok, Papias does not seem to have historiographical tendenciesd (partially) because:
"Papias relates extravagant details about the grotesque death of Judas, a resuscitation of a corpse in his own day, and the miraculous drinking of poison with no ill effects (Hist. Eccl. 3.39.9) that Lucian would detest as myths." (The Gospel on the Margins, 2015, Kindle Location 1360)
Papias also records a tale about John the disciple speaking about "the days [...] in which vines shall grow, having each ten thousand branches, and in each branch ten thousand twigs, and in each true twig ten thousand shoots, and in every one of the shoots ten thousand clusters, and on every one of the clusters ten thousand grapes [...] And when any one of the saints shall lay hold of a cluster, another shall cry out, 'I am a better cluster, take me.'"
The talking grape is prophetic hyperbole. It’s not much different than a camel going through the eye or a needle, or straining a gnat and swallowing a camel, or a Jesus saying: "if they were quiet, the very stones would cry out." Talking stones! I don't see how this affects Papias' reliability.
Regarding Judas, what Papias actually wrote is a problem, because there is more than one version of what he said. But the blowing up business isn’t really any different than Acts 1, is it? Acts 1:18: he burst open in the middle. The weird part is the bloating. It does sound like a legend to me. It was just someone’s way of making Judas look horrible. It's not like he cites a source for this "tradition" like he does with Mark, and as we saw that the informant regarding Mark was an eyewitness of Jesus.
An ingestion of snake poison with no ill effects is also recorded in Acts, and Luke-Acts almost certainly is following historiographical practices (just look at his preface, for instance).
Luke also records the resuscitation of a corpse. Note also that Papias' source for the resuscitation of a corpse was different than that of Mark's Gospel. We should not put all of Papias' traditions under one blanket.

Objection #3:
Why doesn't Mark just say that Peter was his source? Many respected historians relayed their eyewitness sources in their writings.
These are accomplished literary writers we are talking about here. Mark writes on a much more popular style (see E.P Sanders' Studying the Synoptic Gospels) than many of the respected historians whose works have seen survived today. Unfortunately we don't have much in the way of biographies that belong to the same popular literary level as our Gospels, because what got preserved of ancient literature was the stuff that people most admired as literary works.
As noted by Adela Y. Collins in her Hermeneia commentary on Mark (p. 524), Mark was meant to be read aloud. For the author of Mark to say that Peter was his source, Mark would have to speak in the first person directly addressing his readers. This interrupts the flow of narrative and intrudes into the reader's experience of the narrative.
Luke's preface is also important, as pointed out above.

Objection #4:
Joel Marcus rejects a link with Peter. One reason is that Mark does not appear to be any closer to Peter than the other evangelists and that Mark's passages lack the kind of detail one would expect from the reminiscences of an eyewitness. He writes:
"If, for example, the first Markan narrative that features Peter, the story of his call in 1:16–18, were a genuine personal reminiscence, we should expect more details, such as an explanation of what it was about Jesus that made Peter and Andrew drop everything to follow him." (Mark 1-8, p. 23)
"This, however, is to confuse a “genuine reminiscence” (in the sense of an event told for its own sake) with a story retold as part of an ancient bios. Peter may well have had a clear recollection of the first time he set eyes on Jesus, of the tremendous impact it made on him. Perhaps he remembered other strange, inconsequential details as we sometimes do in connection with important events—but none of these details would have been relevant to Mark’s biographical enterprise. The evangelist was not interested in supplying his audience with details of Peter’s own call experience, but in raising the call to discipleship to a level of abstraction that would include his audience, and emphasizing to them (whatever Peter’s own call experience might have been like) that following Jesus required immediate and wholehearted commitment. The Gospel is not a biography of Peter, but of Jesus. Thus inconsequential details concerning Peter would simply be out of place."
(Helen K. Bond, "Was Peter behind Mark’s Gospel?" in Peter in Early Christianity, edited by Helen K. Bond Larry W. Hurtado, 2015, p. 56)

Helen K. Bond holds to a Petrine connection with our gMark (Ibid, 61),
submitted by Bohrbrain to AcademicBiblical [link] [comments]


2020.10.08 08:33 tengrrl Event: Invitation to an Editor's Listening Session

Forwarded from: Derek Ross[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 2:00 PM
Dear Colleagues:
The editors of many of our publications in technical and professional communication invite you to a Zoom-based listening session on anti-racism and inclusion practices in publication editing and academic publishing. We will hold two sessions: October 15, 2020, at 3:30 Central, and October 26th at 3:30 Central. You are welcome to come to either or both. While we recognize the potential problems of sharing an open Zoom link (included after the body of this invitation), we want everyone to have the option to join us, even anonymously if desired.
Our goal with this field-wide Editor’s Roundtable is to flip the script of a traditional editor’s roundtable and listen to your concerns, queries, and comments about current publication practices. Many of us, as editors, are rethinking our publication review policies through explicit anti-racist, inclusionary lenses. Many of us are doing this work individually, or with the help of our organizations and/or editorial boards. But we want your help. We want to hear your thoughts.
Our listening session will be moderated by Dr. Janine Utell, Editor of The Space Between: Literature and Culture 1914–1945 and Secretary of the Council of Editors of Learned Journals, and representatives from the current editorial group will be available, though our role will be to listen to you and take notes. We will then take what we hear back to our group and publications and try to strengthen our anti-racist and inclusionary practices. For those not able to make the session, or those who would like to participate in asynchronous or anonymous ways, we are also providing a survey for your feedback: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdwUDZd1nfo_cmxf60PlC7d1_8TZbWPUI9dWHnrvvyziJooMg/viewform
From this listening session, we are hoping to glean insight that we can turn into action items at our publications from the following types of prompts:
  1. In what ways would you hope to see the field's publication venues be more accountable to scholars from underrepresented groups?
  2. How might our submissions processes more clearly invite diverse scholarship and research perspectives?
  3. What, if any, outreach or mentoring would you like to see our publications offer to underrepresented authors to assist in your writing process towards publication?
  4. In what areas of the discipline do we need better editorial board, staff, and author representation to ensure our peer-review, copyediting, and publications are more inclusive?
  5. What peer review or submission guidelines would you look for in a publication to feel welcome as an author?
We hope these and any related questions you have spark feedback we editors can use to build accountability partners, continue a dialogue on anti-racism and scholarly communications, and implement a more equitable, inclusive publishing practice for the discipline.
We look forward to hearing your thoughts on October 15, 2020, at 3:30 Central and on October 26, 2020, at 3:30 Central. Please feel free to join for one or both sessions.
Sincerely,
Editors in Technical and Professional Communication
We are inviting you to a scheduled Auburn University Zoom e-meeting. If you're a new participant, we have a quick start guide here: https://aub.ie/zoomquickstart
Topic: Editor's Listening Session
Time: This is a recurring meeting Meet anytime
Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://auburn.zoom.us/j/87624816222?pwd=K1NQVCsrV3pEbGVGUTV4UU5JTmsrdz09
Password: 834128
Connect using ComputeDevice audio if possible.
Or Telephone: Meeting ID: 876 2481 6222
Dial: +1 301 715 8592 (US Toll)
or +1 312 626 6799 (US Toll)
Or an H.323/SIP room system:
H.323: 162.255.37.11 (US West) or 162.255.36.11 (US East)
Meeting ID: 876 2481 6222
Password: 834128
SIP: [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])
Password: 834128



Dr. Derek G. Ross
Professor & Director of Graduate Studies, Department of English
Editor, Communication Design Quarterly
Co-Director, Laboratory for Usability, Communication, Interaction, and Accessibility
9030 Haley Center, Auburn University 334-844-9073 http://www.derekross.com
Pronouns: he/him/his

via IFTTT
submitted by tengrrl to WPAannouncements [link] [comments]


2020.10.08 08:28 tengrrl Communication Design Quarterly Abstract Showcase

Forwarded from: Luke Thominet[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 12:45 PM
Dear Colleagues,

We wanted to share CDQ’s Abstract Showcase, which provides a succinct overview of the journal’s articles along with author spotlights from the past three years.

As you’re thinking about new research or putting the finishing touches on existing projects, please consider Communication Design Quarterly for publishing your work. We strive for rapid turnaround, and our Online First model allows cutting-edge research to be published in a timely fashion. Articles are published first on our website, and are open-access, freely available to all, and not hidden behind any paywall. Four times a year, we archive articles into issues that are published in the Association for Computing Machinery's (ACM) Digital Library.

Communication Design Quarterly strives to be a place open to all types of research and writing as it relates to communication design, and we welcome non-traditional work and work by emerging scholars. We also know that many of our number work outside of academia, and welcome experience reports that summarize important technologies, techniques, methods, pedagogies, or product processes. We are also interested in proposals for guest editing special issues. If you are interested in learning more about our past publications, we have a complete database of our articles with sortable titles, authors, keywords, and abstracts.

Our Editorial Board consists of over 40 scholars spanning the globe in both location and expertise, and we strive to provide timely, productive feedback. We have some excellent work in the pipeline for you, and invite you to contribute to the conversation. If you have a project or an idea for a special issue that would be a good fit for Communication Design Quarterly, please look over our publication guidelines, and please direct inquiries or submissions to our Editor in Chief, Dr. Derek G. Ross, at [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]).

In closing, I just want to say that it’s great to see so many of you at SIGDOC 2020 this week!

Best,
Luke Thominet, PhD
SIGDOC Communications Manager


Luke Thominet, PhD
Assistant Professor, Technical and Professional Writing
English Department, Florida International University
[[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])
Pronouns: he/him/his


_______________________________________________
CPTSC mailing list
[[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])
http://cptsc.org/mailman/listinfo/cptsc_cptsc.org
via IFTTT
submitted by tengrrl to WPAannouncements [link] [comments]


2020.10.07 16:13 normancrane [SF] The Circular Logic of Space Exploration

Appleton rushed to scratch the message onto the back cover of a magazine lying face-down on a table near the telephone. Scratch—because the pen didn’t want to cooperate; the ballpoint stuck. Appleton’s fingers shook.
It was a prank, surely. The conversation had been recorded. He would end up on a website somewhere, the anonymous out-of-touch butt of some teenager’s joke.
Yet there was something in the quality of that voice, a voice that didn’t belong to any teenager, that forced the shapes of the letters through his wrist, onto the paper. Even as he felt the fool, he also felt the chronicler. The words could be historic.
The words: after a plain “hello” the voice had excused itself and muttered something about a wrong number and galactic interference. Then it had said, exactly, “No matter, you will have to do. My name is Charles R—and I am calling from Mars. First, record the date and time of this communication. Second, please bring it to the attention of one Mrs Mary Clare of 34 Wentworth St, Nottingham. Pass along also that I am doing fine and that, though food is scarce, I have had my fill, and that water is plenty once one digs past the red surface of things.”
That was all. Then the phone went dead. The connection had not been good to begin with, but there was no doubt about any of it. Nothing had been made up. There was no uncertainty.
Having written these five sentences, Appleton let go of the pen, wiped his forehead and retreated to the safety of his customary evening chair. It was a few minutes after six—his regular reading time—but Appleton gave no thought to books. Today, he sat silently in his chair until the clock struck seven. His neurons fired incessantly.
By eight, he had made up his mind: in the morning he would fly to Nottingham and personally deliver the message to Mary Clare.
There was only the slight problem of the wife.
She would arrive home tomorrow afternoon and find it empty. She would worry. Appleton’s greatest fear was that the wife would worry. She was of good breeding and delicate constitution, and worry might weaken her system enough to allow otherwise harmless bacteria to set up residence, which would lead to complications and eventually a prolonged bedridden death. He shuddered at the mere inkling. Right, he would have to compose a note: “My dear, I am off on a scholarly pursuit. Do not worry. I will return by Wednesday. Sincerely, your devoted husband.”
He folded the note and placed it on the dining room table. That, he realized, was more writing than he’d done since his tenure at Oxford. He felt productive again.

- - -

The plane skidded as it touched down, but the flight was otherwise without incident. Outside, grey clouds produced a cold mist that collected drops of water on the brim of Appleton’s hat as he waited by the terminal. Although no one could say so by looking at him, he was nervous.
He nearly misspoke while telling the driver the address. In the taxi, he caught himself rubbing his thumb compulsively against his forefinger like he hadn’t done since his rugby days.

- - -

The house at 34 Wentworth St was made of pale yellow brick. It was smaller and set farther from the road than neighbouring houses. A stone path led to the front door, on either side of which bloomed a well-kempt garden. Appleton walked the path slowly, cherishing the smell of wet flowers and realizing that over the last twelve hours he’d developed a particular mental image of Mary Clare. It was something like the opposite of the wife.
He stood for a few moments before the front door and deliberated whether to ring the electronic bell or use the bronze knocker. Eventually, he rapped his knuckles against the wood. A woman opened the door.
“Yes, hello,” said Appleton.
The woman looked suspiciously at his hands, but he wasn’t carrying anything except the back cover of the magazine on which he’d written the message from Mars.
“I’m not selling,” he said. “I’m looking for Mrs Mary Clare. I’ve been informed that she lives at this address. I have a message for her from Charles R—.”
“Did he send you, the scoundrel?”
Appleton blinked.
“Well did he or didn’t he, speak up. All these years and he can’t even come back to show his face, sends some other poor fool.” Her eyes studied Appleton’s hat. “Or maybe he’s dead. Maybe that’s what you come to tell me. Last of kin or some such.”
“No, Mrs Clare—“
“Simpson, but one and the same as you’re looking for.”
“Mrs Simpson.” Appleton fumbled the correction. He’d shoved one hand into a cloak pocket and was furiously rubbing his fingers together. “Yesterday evening I received a phone call. I wasn’t meant to receive it, you see, there was a mistake with the connection. The call was from Mr Charles R—. He asked that I deliver this message.”
Appleton read aloud what he’d written on the magazine cover.
The woman laughed and stomped her foot. She was in her sixties, Appleton realized. Sections of her hair were greying. The lines under her eyes were deep and permanent. Her laughter was not a joyous laughter.
She said, “Whatever trick it is you’re playing, and whoever you’re playing it with, I’m too old for it, you understand? The past is dead. Mr Charles R— is dead. And I deserve to be left to my own peace. Don’t come back here.”
But before she could close the door, Appleton put his hand on her shoulder. It was a soft shoulder. Appleton gasped. Never had he been so forward with a woman.
“Please, Mr Charles R— is not dead. I spoke to him. I heard his voice. I’m telling you the truth. He’s alive. He’s just on another planet. It’s utterly remarkable!”
Mrs Simpson looked at Appleton with suddenly sympathetic eyes and, even as she removed his hand from her shoulder, kept her voice calm:
“He’s dead to me.”
Appleton’s hand fell limply against the side of his cloak.
“There are certain things you do that, once you do them, their consequences are permanent. There is no pretending and there is no coming back. Take care now, Mister.”
With that, she shut the door.

- - -

Upon returning home, Appleton’s life returned to normal—at least in all superficial respects: he smiled to his wife, he kept to himself, and, at Six O’clock each evening, he retreated to his customary chair to read his customary books. The magazine cover on which he’d written the message from Charles R—, he placed in a private drawer in the desk in his study, underneath unfinished essays and research into particle acceleration and magnet engine propulsion and other old academic bric-a-brac.
For weeks, whilst trying unsuccessfully to locate more information about Charles R—, he kept the drawer unlocked. But, once he’d given up hope, he turned the key and, with one click, banished all thought of Mars from his mind.
Or at least that’s what Appleton intended. For there are certain neurons that, once they start firing, are impossible to stop. At most, they can be slowed—their work delayed. They are not obtrusive neurons: they do not prevent, say, smiling to one’s wife or reading customary books. But they are persistent and every so often they make the results of their operation known. This happens most-of-all at unexpected times, as, for instance, when Appleton, having bent to retrieve a particularly large pine cone from the grass, stood up with the complete schematic for the Magna-IV Engine before his eyes, or, upon having been asked by the local lady grocer for his opinion about a recent stretch of fair weather, replied, “My God, Ruthenium!”
Once such ideas made themselves known to Appleton, he began putting them to paper. Once they were on paper, he tasked other, more compliant, neurons with dividing and conquering any problems that the papers made apparent; and, once those had been solved, what else was there to do but gather the necessary materials and construct the first prototypes?
Appleton kept mum about this, of course. To his physicist colleagues, he was still at work on the same book he’d been working on for the last decade. He was still irrelevant. The wife, as long he smiled to her, suspected nothing. It was only his books that could have given him away—lying unopened on their shelves, their regular Six O’clock appointments long forgotten, their yellowing pages gathering dust—but books by themselves cannot speak. Appleton’s secret was safe.
Even as the project approached completion, not one soul suspected.
When launch-day finally dawned and Appleton, having composed a note to his wife indicating that he would be away until Wednesday on a scholarly pursuit, packed the pieces and prototypes into the back of a rented truck and drove to an old farmer’s field, from where he would blast off that very noon, the whole world was still naïve to the history that would soon be made.
In the field, Appleton worked diligently. He filled the shell of the rocket with each of the separate machines he had designed and constructed. He had a life support system, a navigation system, a communications system. He had propulsion. He had fuel. He had everything that was necessary. Nothing had been overlooked. As the sun rose, it rose on years of endless effort that, today, had physically and for the first time come together in the middle of such a previously insignificant English spot on Earth.
By Ten O’clock, the rocket was nearly complete. All that was left was the installation of the final ingenious detail: the captain’s seat: Appleton’s own customary evening chair.
That done, Appleton looked for one last time at the earthly sky, its thin clouds moving slightly across an orange sun, then climbed into the rocket and closed the hatch. The pneumatics sighed. The inside air was warm. As he set the navigation, every click and beep audible as if within his own skull, Appleton wondered what became of Mary Simpson. But just as it had come, the wonder passed. He confirmed his intended destination on the small liquid crystal display and took a deep breath.
The destination was unbelievable: Appleton felt feverish. He maneuvered into his chair and strapped himself in. Space was tight but he was not uncomfortable. Besides—he thrust a needle into a vein in his arm—he would be asleep for most of the journey. The sedative began to flow. He activated the countdown sequence. When he awoke, he would already be in Saturn’s orbit.

- - -

“Hello? Can you hear me?”
The communications equipment produced only a monotonous hiss punctuated by crackles. Appleton scratched his head. He’d programmed the system to link directly to the telephone in his home. The signal was strong enough. It should be working. He tried another connection.
This time, there was a faint click and the echo of a voice.
“Darling! It’s me. Please say something,” Appleton spoke into the receiver.
The voice wobbled.
“I hope you can hear me. I hope you haven’t been worrying. I hope I haven’t caused you harm. Please, darling, say something so that I know there isn’t a malfunction.”
The echoing voice suddenly came into rather clear focus. “Who is this? And do you want to speak with my mum?”
Appleton knew right away that it wasn’t the voice of the wife. In fact, it wasn’t even a female voice. It was the voice of a boy.
“My name is Appleton,” said Appleton. “I am attempting to contact the wife. Unfortunately, I may have miscalculated. Nonetheless, if you’d be a good lad and please make a note of the following: I am calling from Titan, which is the largest moon of the plane—
“Saturn, I know. I’m not stupid.”
Appleton cleared his throat and adjusted his headset. “Yes, that’s mighty good of you. As I was saying, I am on Titan, having only just arrived, you see. But the situation thus far appears manageable. I predict I shall make a fair go of living here.” He remembered his reason for calling. “Right, then, if you could tell as much to the wife, whom you will find living at 11 Golden Pheasant Lane in Beaconsfield, I would be much obliged. Her name is—“
The connection went dead. The communications system went offline. Try as Appleton might, no amount of banging, prodding and reprogramming ever brought it back.

- - -

Phil Jones replaced the telephone receiver.
“Who was that?” his mother asked.
Then disappeared down the hall without waiting for an answer.
Phil went back to the homework spread out on his bedroom floor, whose doing Appleton had interrupted. Geography lay beside history, which bordered an island of English. Phil tried all three subjects—cross his innocent heart, he did—but all at once the history was too boring, the English too imprecise and the geography too much pointless memorisation. He rubbed his eyes. Next year he’d be in high school. The homework would only get harder.
T-I-T-A-N
He typed the letters almost absent-mindedly into a Google image search.
The moon stared at him.
Somewhere inside his head, certain neurons were beginning to fire.
submitted by normancrane to shortstories [link] [comments]


2020.10.07 16:11 normancrane The Circular Logic of Space Exploration

Appleton rushed to scratch the message onto the back cover of a magazine lying face-down on a table near the telephone. Scratch—because the pen didn’t want to cooperate; the ballpoint stuck. Appleton’s fingers shook.
It was a prank, surely. The conversation had been recorded. He would end up on a website somewhere, the anonymous out-of-touch butt of some teenager’s joke.
Yet there was something in the quality of that voice, a voice that didn’t belong to any teenager, that forced the shapes of the letters through his wrist, onto the paper. Even as he felt the fool, he also felt the chronicler. The words could be historic.
The words: after a plain “hello” the voice had excused itself and muttered something about a wrong number and galactic interference. Then it had said, exactly, “No matter, you will have to do. My name is Charles R—and I am calling from Mars. First, record the date and time of this communication. Second, please bring it to the attention of one Mrs Mary Clare of 34 Wentworth St, Nottingham. Pass along also that I am doing fine and that, though food is scarce, I have had my fill, and that water is plenty once one digs past the red surface of things.”
That was all. Then the phone went dead. The connection had not been good to begin with, but there was no doubt about any of it. Nothing had been made up. There was no uncertainty.
Having written these five sentences, Appleton let go of the pen, wiped his forehead and retreated to the safety of his customary evening chair. It was a few minutes after six—his regular reading time—but Appleton gave no thought to books. Today, he sat silently in his chair until the clock struck seven. His neurons fired incessantly.
By eight, he had made up his mind: in the morning he would fly to Nottingham and personally deliver the message to Mary Clare.
There was only the slight problem of the wife.
She would arrive home tomorrow afternoon and find it empty. She would worry. Appleton’s greatest fear was that the wife would worry. She was of good breeding and delicate constitution, and worry might weaken her system enough to allow otherwise harmless bacteria to set up residence, which would lead to complications and eventually a prolonged bedridden death. He shuddered at the mere inkling. Right, he would have to compose a note: “My dear, I am off on a scholarly pursuit. Do not worry. I will return by Wednesday. Sincerely, your devoted husband.”
He folded the note and placed it on the dining room table. That, he realized, was more writing than he’d done since his tenure at Oxford. He felt productive again.

- - -

The plane skidded as it touched down, but the flight was otherwise without incident. Outside, grey clouds produced a cold mist that collected drops of water on the brim of Appleton’s hat as he waited by the terminal. Although no one could say so by looking at him, he was nervous.
He nearly misspoke while telling the driver the address. In the taxi, he caught himself rubbing his thumb compulsively against his forefinger like he hadn’t done since his rugby days.

- - -

The house at 34 Wentworth St was made of pale yellow brick. It was smaller and set farther from the road than neighbouring houses. A stone path led to the front door, on either side of which bloomed a well-kempt garden. Appleton walked the path slowly, cherishing the smell of wet flowers and realizing that over the last twelve hours he’d developed a particular mental image of Mary Clare. It was something like the opposite of the wife.
He stood for a few moments before the front door and deliberated whether to ring the electronic bell or use the bronze knocker. Eventually, he rapped his knuckles against the wood. A woman opened the door.
“Yes, hello,” said Appleton.
The woman looked suspiciously at his hands, but he wasn’t carrying anything except the back cover of the magazine on which he’d written the message from Mars.
“I’m not selling,” he said. “I’m looking for Mrs Mary Clare. I’ve been informed that she lives at this address. I have a message for her from Charles R—.”
“Did he send you, the scoundrel?”
Appleton blinked.
“Well did he or didn’t he, speak up. All these years and he can’t even come back to show his face, sends some other poor fool.” Her eyes studied Appleton’s hat. “Or maybe he’s dead. Maybe that’s what you come to tell me. Last of kin or some such.”
“No, Mrs Clare—“
“Simpson, but one and the same as you’re looking for.”
“Mrs Simpson.” Appleton fumbled the correction. He’d shoved one hand into a cloak pocket and was furiously rubbing his fingers together. “Yesterday evening I received a phone call. I wasn’t meant to receive it, you see, there was a mistake with the connection. The call was from Mr Charles R—. He asked that I deliver this message.”
Appleton read aloud what he’d written on the magazine cover.
The woman laughed and stomped her foot. She was in her sixties, Appleton realized. Sections of her hair were greying. The lines under her eyes were deep and permanent. Her laughter was not a joyous laughter.
She said, “Whatever trick it is you’re playing, and whoever you’re playing it with, I’m too old for it, you understand? The past is dead. Mr Charles R— is dead. And I deserve to be left to my own peace. Don’t come back here.”
But before she could close the door, Appleton put his hand on her shoulder. It was a soft shoulder. Appleton gasped. Never had he been so forward with a woman.
“Please, Mr Charles R— is not dead. I spoke to him. I heard his voice. I’m telling you the truth. He’s alive. He’s just on another planet. It’s utterly remarkable!”
Mrs Simpson looked at Appleton with suddenly sympathetic eyes and, even as she removed his hand from her shoulder, kept her voice calm:
“He’s dead to me.”
Appleton’s hand fell limply against the side of his cloak.
“There are certain things you do that, once you do them, their consequences are permanent. There is no pretending and there is no coming back. Take care now, Mister.”
With that, she shut the door.

- - -

Upon returning home, Appleton’s life returned to normal—at least in all superficial respects: he smiled to his wife, he kept to himself, and, at Six O’clock each evening, he retreated to his customary chair to read his customary books. The magazine cover on which he’d written the message from Charles R—, he placed in a private drawer in the desk in his study, underneath unfinished essays and research into particle acceleration and magnet engine propulsion and other old academic bric-a-brac.
For weeks, whilst trying unsuccessfully to locate more information about Charles R—, he kept the drawer unlocked. But, once he’d given up hope, he turned the key and, with one click, banished all thought of Mars from his mind.
Or at least that’s what Appleton intended. For there are certain neurons that, once they start firing, are impossible to stop. At most, they can be slowed—their work delayed. They are not obtrusive neurons: they do not prevent, say, smiling to one’s wife or reading customary books. But they are persistent and every so often they make the results of their operation known. This happens most-of-all at unexpected times, as, for instance, when Appleton, having bent to retrieve a particularly large pine cone from the grass, stood up with the complete schematic for the Magna-IV Engine before his eyes, or, upon having been asked by the local lady grocer for his opinion about a recent stretch of fair weather, replied, “My God, Ruthenium!”
Once such ideas made themselves known to Appleton, he began putting them to paper. Once they were on paper, he tasked other, more compliant, neurons with dividing and conquering any problems that the papers made apparent; and, once those had been solved, what else was there to do but gather the necessary materials and construct the first prototypes?
Appleton kept mum about this, of course. To his physicist colleagues, he was still at work on the same book he’d been working on for the last decade. He was still irrelevant. The wife, as long he smiled to her, suspected nothing. It was only his books that could have given him away—lying unopened on their shelves, their regular Six O’clock appointments long forgotten, their yellowing pages gathering dust—but books by themselves cannot speak. Appleton’s secret was safe.
Even as the project approached completion, not one soul suspected.
When launch-day finally dawned and Appleton, having composed a note to his wife indicating that he would be away until Wednesday on a scholarly pursuit, packed the pieces and prototypes into the back of a rented truck and drove to an old farmer’s field, from where he would blast off that very noon, the whole world was still naïve to the history that would soon be made.
In the field, Appleton worked diligently. He filled the shell of the rocket with each of the separate machines he had designed and constructed. He had a life support system, a navigation system, a communications system. He had propulsion. He had fuel. He had everything that was necessary. Nothing had been overlooked. As the sun rose, it rose on years of endless effort that, today, had physically and for the first time come together in the middle of such a previously insignificant English spot on Earth.
By Ten O’clock, the rocket was nearly complete. All that was left was the installation of the final ingenious detail: the captain’s seat: Appleton’s own customary evening chair.
That done, Appleton looked for one last time at the earthly sky, its thin clouds moving slightly across an orange sun, then climbed into the rocket and closed the hatch. The pneumatics sighed. The inside air was warm. As he set the navigation, every click and beep audible as if within his own skull, Appleton wondered what became of Mary Simpson. But just as it had come, the wonder passed. He confirmed his intended destination on the small liquid crystal display and took a deep breath.
The destination was unbelievable: Appleton felt feverish. He maneuvered into his chair and strapped himself in. Space was tight but he was not uncomfortable. Besides—he thrust a needle into a vein in his arm—he would be asleep for most of the journey. The sedative began to flow. He activated the countdown sequence. When he awoke, he would already be in Saturn’s orbit.

- - -

“Hello? Can you hear me?”
The communications equipment produced only a monotonous hiss punctuated by crackles. Appleton scratched his head. He’d programmed the system to link directly to the telephone in his home. The signal was strong enough. It should be working. He tried another connection.
This time, there was a faint click and the echo of a voice.
“Darling! It’s me. Please say something,” Appleton spoke into the receiver.
The voice wobbled.
“I hope you can hear me. I hope you haven’t been worrying. I hope I haven’t caused you harm. Please, darling, say something so that I know there isn’t a malfunction.”
The echoing voice suddenly came into rather clear focus. “Who is this? And do you want to speak with my mum?”
Appleton knew right away that it wasn’t the voice of the wife. In fact, it wasn’t even a female voice. It was the voice of a boy.
“My name is Appleton,” said Appleton. “I am attempting to contact the wife. Unfortunately, I may have miscalculated. Nonetheless, if you’d be a good lad and please make a note of the following: I am calling from Titan, which is the largest moon of the plane—
“Saturn, I know. I’m not stupid.”
Appleton cleared his throat and adjusted his headset. “Yes, that’s mighty good of you. As I was saying, I am on Titan, having only just arrived, you see. But the situation thus far appears manageable. I predict I shall make a fair go of living here.” He remembered his reason for calling. “Right, then, if you could tell as much to the wife, whom you will find living at 11 Golden Pheasant Lane in Beaconsfield, I would be much obliged. Her name is—“
The connection went dead. The communications system went offline. Try as Appleton might, no amount of banging, prodding and reprogramming ever brought it back.

- - -

Phil Jones replaced the telephone receiver.
“Who was that?” his mother asked.
Then disappeared down the hall without waiting for an answer.
Phil went back to the homework spread out on his bedroom floor, whose doing Appleton had interrupted. Geography lay beside history, which bordered an island of English. Phil tried all three subjects—cross his innocent heart, he did—but all at once the history was too boring, the English too imprecise and the geography too much pointless memorisation. He rubbed his eyes. Next year he’d be in high school. The homework would only get harder.
T-I-T-A-N
He typed the letters almost absent-mindedly into a Google image search.
The moon stared at him.
Somewhere inside his head, certain neurons were beginning to fire.
submitted by normancrane to stories [link] [comments]


2020.10.07 02:00 franzfulan Evolution/influences of the Bahá'í view of the Bible

The Bahá'í writings contain divergent views of the Bible, its authenticity, and its teachings. The Báb could have read the New Testament (Browne, Materials, 262), which had recently been translated into Persian (see Bible translations into Persian), although his writings contain no direct citations of it and it does not appear that he was particularly familiar with it or would have viewed it as authentic. The Báb cites certain traditions from the Shi'ite Imams which include apocryphal 'quotations' from 'the Gospel' (al-Injīl) which do not appear in any extant Christian texts (Lambden, Isrā'īliyyāt, 234–238). It seems therefore that the Báb shared traditional Shi'i Islamic views of the Bible, to wit, the text was corrupted, but the Imams had access to it in its pure, original form (see Al-Jafr; cf. Lambden, Isrā'īliyyāt, 315). He condemns in no uncertain terms the Christian doctrine of the Trinity (Selections, 60–61), a doctrine which 'Abdu'l-Bahá reinterprets to conform to Bahá'í belief (Questions, 113–115). However, the Báb did not seem to exhibit this desire to bring Biblical texts into conformity with Islamic/Bábí theology. Moreover, the Báb's own prophetic chronology differs markedly from that of the Bible and even the Qur'an. He dates David (Dāwūd) and his Psalms (Zabūr) to five hundred years before Moses and attributes to the former the foundation of a religion independent of Judaism (Seven Proofs, 14) He later seems to contradict himself on this point in another work, placing David five hundred years after Moses (MacEoin, Messiah, 330–331, note 18). This discrepancy led Shoghi Effendi to claim that there were in fact two Davids, one of which lived before Moses, while the other was king of Israel and authored the Psalms (New Day, 76–77, 86–87, 93–94). However, in the Seven Proofs, it is the pre-Moses David to whom the Psalms (Zabūr) are attributed. The only way to resolve this contradiction would be to say that by the term 'zabūr,' the Báb does not mean the Biblical Psalms, although the Qur'an cites the Psalms as 'al-Zabūr.' (Q 21:105; cf. Psalm 37:29). On the other hand, Stephen Lambden has speculated that the Báb could have gotten this idea of two Davids through contact with the Ahl-i Ḥaqq, a sect of which highly reveres a semi-mythical David figure.
It is in the Kitáb-i Íqán that a tendency towards the rehabilitation of the Bible first appears in the Bahá'í writings. Bahá'u'lláh cites numerous passages from the New Testament as proof-texts for the Báb's claims, and he denies the Islamic doctrine of the corruption (taḥrīf) of previous scriptures, claiming that the Jews and Christians had only corrupted the meaning/interpretation of their texts (taḥrīf al-maʿānī). This reinterpretation of the Bible is not particularly unique to Bahá'u'lláh. Centuries before, Pseudo-Ghazālī (authorship disputed) had already attempted a similar reinterpretation of the New Testament in his Fitting Refutation of the Divinity of Jesus (al-Radd al-jamīl li-ilāhiyyat ʿĪsā, circa 11-12th centuries), a translation of which was published by Brill in 2016. Certain other authors had written similar works, such as ʿAbd al-Jabbār (d. 1025) and even Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1328). Other messianic movements in the Islamic world also made use of Biblical and pseudo-Biblical texts in their writings, such as the Ḥurūfī movement (14-15th centuries). In the Kitáb-i Íqán, Bahá'u'lláh explicitly mocks the belief in taḥrīf, asking his interlocutor why any religious person would corrupt their own scriptures and arguing that the distribution of Biblical texts would have made corruption impossible (Íqán, 86). Furthermore, in other writings, he seems to confirm the historicity of a global flood or at least to suggest its possibility and alludes to the story of the Tower of Babel as an explanation for the diversity of human language (Gleanings, 172-175).
This contrasts with the later writings of 'Abdu'l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi, who call into questions the authenticity of the historical narratives in the Bible. 'Abdu'l-Bahá says that the laws (mitzvot) of the Pentateuch constitute divine revelation, but "the stories are historical narratives and were written after Moses" (Scriptures of Previous Dispensations). Shoghi Effendi's language is much more explicit: "The Bible is not wholly authentic, and in this respect not to be compared with the Qur'án" (Directives, 12), and he refers to the Qur'an as "the only Book which can be regarded as an absolutely authenticated Repository of the Word of God" (Advent, 49). Thus it seems the Bábí-Bahá'í view of the Bible comes full circle, from its exaltation to its abasement. While Bahá'u'lláh's rehabilitation of the Bible would have been a step forward in the 'de-Islamicization' and universalizing of the Bahá'í religion and would have created new opportunities for the conversion of Jews and Christians, it would have also created problems since the Qur'an and the Bible contradict. Thus, it became necessary to privilege the Qur'an and to demote the Bible wherever the two differ, such as with the story of Abraham offering his son to be sacrificed.
'Abdu'l-Bahá seems to have been especially cognizant of this and was thus forced to temper the Bahá'í rehabilitation of the Bible, perhaps also out of the greater emphasis which he had begun to give to the principle of the unity of science and religion. Problems of taḥrīf had already been raised by 19th century Shi'a apologists in responses to missionary tracts circulating in Iran, and the notorious Izhār al-Ḥaqq (The Truth Revealed), which referenced work in Western biblical criticism, was published in 1864. So, by this time, the Muslim world was already somewhat aware of the issues which Western scholars of textual criticism were beginning to raise (Lambden, Isrā'īliyyāt, 147–148). Perhaps Shoghi Effendi could have also encountered these issues during his studies in the West. He was himself aware of Ernest Renan's work on the Bible and the history of Christianity, since he cites his "The Apostles" (Les Apôtres) in multiple different works (see Promised Day, 75; God Passes By, 66, 80; and Dawn-Breakers, 605, note 12). It is certainly debatable whether Shoghi would have been influenced by specific writers in his comments on the Bible and Bahá'í scripture, but the milieu of growing skepticism towards the Bible in the wake of modernity would have certainly made an impression on him and would have melded well with the views which 'Abdu'l-Bahá had already developed. In any case, as Stephen Lambden writes, it is obvious that "The call of the Bahā'ī leaders to Jews, Christians, and others began through the exegesis of the [Qur'an] but evolved to incorporate the rehabilitation and modernistic demythologization of biblical scripture" (Isrā'īliyyāt, 315).
submitted by franzfulan to exbahai [link] [comments]


2020.10.06 09:07 tengrrl REMINDER: CFP for Symposium on Black Lives Matter and Antiracist Projects in Writing Program Administration

Forwarded from: Jennifer Sano-Franchini[email protected]>
Date: Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 5:03 PM
____________________________________________________
Dear all:
A reminder that short abstracts (75–100 words) for a Symposium on Black Lives Matter and Antiracist Projects in Writing Program Administration are due in two days, on October 7. Please see the forwarded message for more details.
All the best,Jen and Sheila
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 2:09 PM Jennifer Sano-Franchini [email protected]> wrote:
Dear Colleagues:
Below please find a CFP for a Symposium on Black Lives Matter and Antiracist Projects in Writing Program Administration, to appear in WPA Journal, Spring 2021. The call is also available at this link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yFXXHb6lJjj3DS-uHY4cDOsN_f3rxVk3FepXYmid9qc/edit?usp=sharing
All the best,Jennifer
CFP: Symposium on Black Lives Matter and Antiracist Projects in Writing Program Administration
WPA Journal, expected publication date: Spring 2021
Sheila Carter-Tod and Jennifer Sano-Franchini, Virginia Tech
In response to the recent racial injustices enacted by police and other political and educational entities, two tenured Black women full professors—Christina Stanley and Marilyn Mobley—suggest that university administrators play a significant role in dismantling institutionalized racial injustice. In their August 2020 article “Time to Get Real”: What Black Faculty Need from White Faculty and Administrators to Interrupt Racism in Higher Education,” they state that “[s]ubstantive change begins earnestly and cross-culturally when White faculty and administrators, with access to the tower and its benefits, relinquish the propensity to guard and protect others from entering and begin to engage in the serious work of connecting intellectual heft with the emotional intelligence this moment demands.” In their list of actions that would lead towards this “earnest change” they list two actions that we see as particularly pertinent to the work done by writing program administrators: reflecting on how scholars of color are used to advance research, and breaking silence by speaking the truth.As directors of writing programs, during a time of racial unrest, protest and calls for change, we are positioned with a range of interconnected roles, with responsibilities for and to a network of stakeholders—students, faculty, staff, university administrators, and local communities. Writing program administrators of color may find negotiating these interconnected roles professionally and personally challenging—trying to figure out how to enact change, advance our own scholarship, and speak truth, while supporting the people in our programs.
To be sure, this summer, as Black Lives Matter protests appeared across the globe, several writing programs and professional organizations released statements decrying the unjust murders of Breonna Taylor, Tony McDade, George Floyd, and too many others. For instance, acknowledging that many writing program administrators need support and allyship as they react and respond to local and national racial unrest, The Council of Writing Program Administrators published a Statement on Racial Injustice. As they describe in the introduction to this statement, they are seeking to respond to “the dehumanizing, traumatizing, and even lethal injustices recently represented by the deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Rayshard Brooks, Tony McDade, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd… [and expressing] solidarity with those who are striving for meaningful societal change and a just world.” Within professional and technical communication, ATTW President Angela Haas’ Call to Action to Redress Anti-Blackness and White Supremacy and Natasha N. Jones’ and Miriam F. Williams’ call for “The Just Use of Imagination” urged that non-Black members in particular take concrete actions to redress anti-Blackness within theiour spheres of influence. What's been somewhat less visible, however, are what material actions and policy changes writing program administrators have taken since then to make Black Lives Matter within writing programs.
We are seeking submissions for aWPA Journalsymposium on race and the impact of the Black Lives Matter movement or other antiracist projects on writing program administration, including first-year composition, professional and technical communication, writing centers, undergraduate or graduate writing programs. More specifically, we are seeking proposals for:
These essays and vignettes might touch on the following topics (but they are not limited to these topics):
Submitting a Proposal
Send your proposal via email to Sheila Carter-Tod ([email protected]) and Jennifer Sano-Franchini ([email protected]) by October 7, 2020. Please include in the subject line: “WPA Symposium” as well as a title, 75–100 word abstract, and indicate whether you are submitting a proposal for a short essay or narrative vignette.
Please note that this symposium is a rapid response in a kairotic moment to longstanding issues of racial injustice, and the length of contributions may make this timeline more manageable than they might otherwise be. Contributions will be double anonymous peer reviewed.
Projected Timeline
Proposal due:October 7, 2020
Notification of decision:October 12, 2020
Full essays & vignettes due:November 10, 2020(the earlier the better)
Reviews to authors:December 1, 2020
Revisions due:December 15, 2020
Full symposium submitted:December 30, 2020
Publication:Spring 2021
Contact Sheila Carter-Tod ([email protected]) and Jennifer Sano-Franchini ([email protected]) with any questions.
References
Baker-Bell, April.Linguistic Justice: Black Language, Literacy, Identity, and Pedagogy. Routledge, 2020.
The CWPA Executive Board and Officers. “CWPA Statement on Racial Injustice.” Council of Writing Program Administrators Website. June 2020.http://wpacouncil.org/aws/CWPA/pt/sd/news_article/308259/_PARENT/layout_details/false
Haas, Angela.ATTW President's Call to Action to Redress Anti-Blackness and White Supremacy. ATTW. 2020.https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SlewDtMX41u6hjo1Xydp3D-gNy1anUJ9kCinRCH0li4/edit
Jones, Natasha N., Williams, Miriam F.. The Just Use of Imagination: A Call to Action. ATTW. 2020.https://attw.org/authoattworg_jg1gyk67/
Shelton, Cecilia. "Shifting Out of Neutral: Centering Difference, Bias, and Social Justice in a Business Writing Course."Technical Communication Quarterly29.1 (2020): 18-32.
Stanley, Christina, Mobley, Marilyn. “Time to Get Real”: What Black Faculty Need from White Faculty and Administrators to Interrupt Racism in Higher Education.Insight into Diversity. August 2020.https://www.insightintodiversity.com/time-to-get-real/.
via IFTTT
submitted by tengrrl to WPAannouncements [link] [comments]


2020.10.06 08:43 tengrrl Event: October Chat of the Non-Native English-Speaking Writing Instructors Standing Group

Forwarded from: Chen Chen
Date: Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 11:46 AM
Hi all,
I’m the vice chair of the Cs Standing Group Non-Native English Speaking Writing Instructors. Since I know we have some on this list who are also non-native English speaking writing teachers but may not be familiar with our group, I’d like to invite you to an informal event our group has organized. Please see below:
Non-Native English-Speaking Writing Instructors Standing Group October Chat (10/29): Recognize Differences, Build Coalitions
We are a group of non-native English speaking writing teachers working in the U.S.. Our Standing Groups hosts informal monthly chat about topics relevant to the work we do as writing teachers whose mother tongue is not English. This month, we’d like to extend the invitation to other non-native English speaking writing teachers who might not be familiar with our group yet. Join us at 5-6pm on Thursday, 10/29 by signing up here: https://forms.gle/tgGzzm7WAA3NV2zf7 !
As immigrants, we occupy the margins of the U.S. society, we have often experienced linguistic injustice based on our accent, nationality, but also our ethnicity, gender, or race, navigating the social, cultural, and political landscape in the academic work we do as scholars and teachers of writing. If you are like us, who are interested in discussing about how to reflect on our positionalities in relation to the ongoing BLM movement and calls for linguistic justice for Black communities (see Baker-Bell’s definition below), and how we can build coalitions across our differences, we invite you to join this chat. We ask you to think about these questions before the chat and we will collectively have a conversation that will hopefully result in some useful resources:
  • How can you better understand your own positionality and your community’s positionality in relation to the BLM movement?
  • How can we build coalitions and support BLM movement and work toward the broader goals of social justice?
  • What can we do as writing teachers, as multilingual writing teachers support linguistic justice in our classrooms?
  • How do we incorporate teaching the concepts of racial equality and social justice in writing courses as non-native English speaking writing teachers? What unique perspectives or contributions can we bring to this mission?
Again, this is an informal chat. If you are a non-native English speaker and you teach writing in the U.S., please join us! You can sign up for the event using this Google form: https://forms.gle/tgGzzm7WAA3NV2zf7 by 5pm on 10/28 and we will email you the Zoom link on the day of the event 10/29.
*April Baker-Bell defines “linguistic justice” as “an antiracist approach to language and literacy education” and “about dismantling Anti-Black Linguistic Racism and white linguistic hegemony and supremacy in classrooms and in the world” (Linguistic Justice: Black Language, Literacy, Identity, and Pedagogy, 2020).
Let me know if you have any questions!
Chen
Chen Chen, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of English
Winthrop University
Rock Hill, SC 29733Pronouns: She/HeHers
via IFTTT
submitted by tengrrl to WPAannouncements [link] [comments]


2020.10.04 13:29 Remarkable-Cut-3162 UPDATE (WE BROKE): Me (34M) dumping gf (27F) because of her former promiscuity?

First of all - a few responders noticed the previous post came as bragging. I am very sorry, it was not my goal. I wanted to highlight the fact I was a nerd and I had to work hard on myself to become a man I am now. I did it because I understood that without being attractive, I wouldn't be able to get a good-looking and kind woman, and start a family (in the current dating world) and have children. I am proud of my self-induced changes and achievements, but that's merely a state of facts, i.e. I didn't want to come off as an arrogant person.
The original post here:
https://www.reddit.com/relationship_advice/comments/j2jcpj/me_34m_dumping_gf_27f_because_of_her_forme
As promised there is an update. I ended up talking to that old hippie and it only strengthened my resolve. I broke up with her which was not a nice experience, but I was as civil as possible. I realise this post sounds angry, but I write it the very next day we broke up and I am still emotional about it. I have lots of anger in me after I realised she's far from the person I thought she was.
On Saturday, she knocked on my door. I had a few boxes with her stuff packed and prepared next to door (which she noticed and flinched). Also, she wanted to talk, so I put some juice on the kitchen table and we sat down. She said there is someone who wants to talk to me and if I am OK with it. I promised her that we would talk and I didn't want to be rude. She video-called someone and put that phone on the table so we both could see the video feed.
From the first sight I knew exactly it was the old hippie she was talking to before. I was pissed a bit, because she never told me she wants us to talk. But OK - we are all adults and let's keep things civil. Don't get me wrong - it wasn't easy having a conversation with a dude who had those intimate extreme experiences with my girlfriend (with his friends!), but there is no need to nasty to anyone.
He was an early 50 yrs old man, skinny and had paper-white skin. His apartment was unclean, i.e. some fast-food wraps on the shelves, some opened liquor bottles on the table. His voice was like a deep DJ voice you hear on the radio at night. I have to confess that the first few minutes it was like a trance for me. Then I started paying attention to what he says and it's just lots of free-love propaganda. I think he can be quite persuasive if you just listen without paying attention to what exactly he says.
I should have recorded all this talk. It was an interesting experience and I will try to re-call as much as I can from my memory about the points he made (my thoughs are in italic):
Now, this dude was quite charismatic - I have to give it to him. He had this deep DJ voice and his speech was quite paced. But the whole thing was very manipulative. It wasn't a direct pressure, but a subtle suggestion that I am somehow less developed than him. It's hard to pinpoint exactly where, but he framed himself like a superior being, who is sharing the enlightenment with us and I should be happy for that. I also should be happy because he and his family 'prepared' a wonderful girl for me. There was more of this nonsense and pseudo-science. He also said that I am a researcher and I should be able to find myself a study that proves the validity of alternative lifestyles. Just before the end of call, I asked for references, opened Google Scholar and asked for exact study, but he could not give them. He said he also had some writings that would help me, but he needs to bring them the next time, because they are not online (there won't be next time, lol).
I was polite the whole time, but it was obvious that this talk didn't go well with me and I was not impressed with all that mumbo-jumbo. Actually, I don't know what got into the girl to introduce her ex to me. I guess it was a last resort move to convice me and gave her a chance. However, it backfired badly - suddenly I could connect a real person to those orgies and it got the better of me, i.e. I started to have images of her being fucked by that old man and his friends. The whole thing was just disgusting - how she could be attracted to this old creep?
After the dude disconnected, there was uncomfortable silence. I was the first to break it with something like 'Are you fucking kidding me? This is the crep you were for three years?'. I guess lots of people will call me judgemental, but those were exactly my thoughts. She responded that she was a naive girl looking for a relationship and now she's mature, she sees what it wasn't a fulfilling life, but now she loves me, wants family and kids, yada, yada, yada... I don't buy this bs - from the conversation they had on the phone she does remember it as having fun. People just don't do 180 u-turns. I asked 'Did you notice how manipulative is he? He was using you for sex.' and her reply shocked me 'He's a good man. He's very smart and you should listen to him.' I quit here - I will never understand modern women.
Calling this old dude 'mature' is beyond me. Maybe I am a thick-skull engineer without higher functioning emotions, but I see the smoke and mirrors miles away. I also feel like I achieved much more than him - I have a house, car, good academic degree, career, side business, I am fit, etc. Why should I listen to a self-proclaimed guru who does not have its life together? I came from non-Western culture when we are drilled to respect elders, but fuck me - I am not respecting this old creep in a million of years. There are reasons why I have Stephen Hawking's books on my shelf. I also had enough of hearing that I am close-minded. I have my own beliefs and no creep will push his free-love bs down my throat. Especially from a dude who cannot have its life together and has no ambition whatsoever.
There was not much to say afterwards. At that moment I just knew there is zero chance of us moving on together. She started crying and asked me if we can stay friends. I responded we shared intimacy and I don't think it will be fair for both of us. I am sorry, I just don't stay in contact with exes. I want a clear cut from any remaining emotions because I want to be 100% for my future wife and I don't need any lingering stuff in my head. I am not here for drama. I suggested cutting his poly-dude out of her life completely because I can see the bs he preaches stays in her head, but I think it went nowhere.
The sad truth is that I just lost all respect for her - I never said that out loud because I didn't want her to feel bad. If she believes in that free-love crap, it's up to her, but I don't. In my books having a family is primarily a responsibility then benefits. Right now I feel overburdened with the past she brings and I don't feel that our values are aligned at all. Call me an asshole, but spending your best years on some old hippie (and his poly-friends) and then looking for a conservative 'old-school' man for marriage - I just call it pure hypocrisy. Those experiences shape what you are just like the previous cheating ex and my engineering career shaped me.
I cannot imagie any self-respecting man to be OK with her 'experimenting phase'. I worked on being the best possible man, while she was having those fuck-fests. She wanted both sides of the coin - enjoy that crazy promiscuity lifestyle and also enjoy the benefits of family life and a loving husband. I do have ego and my pride as a man. I want to be the best for my future wife and this is especially valid in our sexuality (because it's important for me!). I don't believe she would cheat, but I have no chance of replicating the experiences she had and I would always feel inferior. I feel jealous and disgusted at the same time, and that's not the healthy state to start a serious relationship. I am not willing to have those drills in my head for the sake of 'love' and 'being mature'.
In my opinion, her ex is a manipulative smooth-talking creep and she let herself be used by him over and over again. She either liked being used or she is easy to manipulate (i.e. stupid) - both options disqualify her from any serious relationship in my books. Plus there is a risk there will be a next smooth-talker who will brainwash her later in life. Those are very valid concerns in times where more than a half of couples divorce - I want my kids to grow up in a healthy two-parents family without any creepy brainwashing. She changed or not - I just don't care. I lost all respect to her and I cannot see her anymore as a life-partner. Had we continued, I would have those drills in my head and I don't see a reason why I should deal with all that stress and the lack of comfort for someone. Nope, I am not doing that to myself.
So here you go. Some people will respond that I am 'insecure asshole with double standards' (like in the last post). Well, that's your opinion. Before the cheating ex (who was also promiscuous), I was more sex-liberal and I didn't pay much attention to women's past. Now I do think that the past matters a heck lot (especially for a woman because it's so easy for them to cheat), and I consider former promiscuity as unattractive trait and a huge risk for stability of relationship. Maybe she changed and I am the one wrong here, but I am not willing to risk another heartbreak. I am back to a dating pool.
Edit 1: There is lots of hate (as expected) with insults: 'fucking gross and pathetic', 'arrogant prick', 'self esteem and/or trust issues', 'incel', etc. I don't think I have done anything wrong here and I will reply later. Btw, I definitely not identify myself with MGTOW.
Edit 2: A few responders mentioned the ex was young and brainwashed. I really don't know about this 'brainwashing' - it seems to me she enjoyed the whole poly lifestyle. I don't buy that. She had three years to pull out from this poly creep-land. Anyhow, it's either: (a) she enjoyed poly-life or (b) she's too easy to manipulate (i.e. stupid). Both options disqualify her from a serious relationship in my books. I learned a lot from the previous cheating (and being badly heartbroken) and I am not going to expose myself again.
Edit 3: In the previous post, I wrote I was hoping to stay friends after breakup, but after this talk I just don't see it possible. I don't want this poly creep-land anywhere next to me.
Edit 4: I received a few angry PMs which I am just going to block. You might disagree with my point of view, but please keep it civil. By the way, I never understood why dumping a girl is just a terrible thing to do. I was rejected many times in my life and I am somehow still alive. She has a clear cut from this relationship and she's free to do whatever she wants.
Edit 5: A few responders suggest that I should prepare a list of my dealbreaker-questions (e.g. have you participated in orgies in the last five years? have you participated in alternative lifestyle?) and present it before dating. Are you people nuts?! I asked her for her past relationships and she answered 'three-four long-term boyfriends'. It was as far from the truth as possible. Now, I just didn't want to address the lying here (or lying by omission at least), because I was 99% sure this relationship has ended. Actualy, if you read the previous post - she acknowledged that she lied: "I asked why she lied to me when I asked about her past relationships and she replied she panicked because she thought I wouldn't date her (she was very right!)". I am sorry, but if she is ashamed of her past or think that it will impact her future relationships, she should not follow this lifestyle previously. Now she has to work with what she has and let's be fair - if I were not working on my career, fitness and fashion style (among other things), I would not be able to date attractive girls.
Edit 6: Also, some people suggested theraphy, but I still didn't get a good reason why I should change my view. The published scientific research (https://pastebin.com/FhML2tsf), my past experiences (the cheating ex), and also my friends opinions (who are way more experienced than me), rather suggest to the fact that the formerly promiscuous female is a bad choice for a serious relationship (vs. FWB / ONS relationship).
Edit 7: It seems to me that many responders here have an agenda of putting down anyone who says that promiscuity is bad. I understand that many women had this 'experimentation phase'. It naturally repels many men (me included), but they cannot undo it and it seriously affects their attractivity for a monogamous relationship. Therefore, they keep pushing a notation, there is nothing bad with promiscuity, while in fact there is strong evidence against it. This is the best summary I found: We have this wonderful brain that learns from repetition, also called practice. If you practiced a lot of sex with changing partners, you become proficient and routined at it. This however excludes the opportunity to practice relationships, investing in someone, not running after the quick pleasure.
Damn, I was expecting another hate-rush after the last post, but I still cannot belive that people here try to shame me for not wanting to stay with a poly-girl. Especially that she just don't seem to completely break with that lifestyle. Those are just creepy and awful people.
submitted by Remarkable-Cut-3162 to relationship_advice [link] [comments]


2020.10.03 17:46 normancrane The Circular Logic of Space Exploration

Appleton rushed to scratch the message onto the back cover of a magazine lying face-down on a table near the telephone. Scratch—because the pen didn’t want to cooperate; the ballpoint stuck. Appleton’s fingers shook.
It was a prank, surely. The conversation had been recorded. He would end up on a website somewhere, the anonymous out-of-touch butt of some teenager’s joke.
Yet there was something in the quality of that voice, a voice that didn’t belong to any teenager, that forced the shapes of the letters through his wrist, onto the paper. Even as he felt the fool, he also felt the chronicler. The words could be historic.
The words: after a plain “hello” the voice had excused itself and muttered something about a wrong number and galactic interference. Then it had said, exactly, “No matter, you will have to do. My name is Charles R—and I am calling from Mars. First, record the date and time of this communication. Second, please bring it to the attention of one Mrs Mary Clare of 34 Wentworth St, Nottingham. Pass along also that I am doing fine and that, though food is scarce, I have had my fill, and that water is plenty once one digs past the red surface of things.”
That was all. Then the phone went dead. The connection had not been good to begin with, but there was no doubt about any of it. Nothing had been made up. There was no uncertainty.
Having written these five sentences, Appleton let go of the pen, wiped his forehead and retreated to the safety of his customary evening chair. It was a few minutes after six—his regular reading time—but Appleton gave no thought to books. Today, he sat silently in his chair until the clock struck seven. His neurons fired incessantly.
By eight, he had made up his mind: in the morning he would fly to Nottingham and personally deliver the message to Mary Clare.
There was only the slight problem of the wife.
She would arrive home tomorrow afternoon and find it empty. She would worry. Appleton’s greatest fear was that the wife would worry. She was of good breeding and delicate constitution, and worry might weaken her system enough to allow otherwise harmless bacteria to set up residence, which would lead to complications and eventually a prolonged bedridden death. He shuddered at the mere inkling. Right, he would have to compose a note: “My dear, I am off on a scholarly pursuit. Do not worry. I will return by Wednesday. Sincerely, your devoted husband.”
He folded the note and placed it on the dining room table. That, he realized, was more writing than he’d done since his tenure at Oxford. He felt productive again.

- - -

The plane skidded as it touched down, but the flight was otherwise without incident. Outside, grey clouds produced a cold mist that collected drops of water on the brim of Appleton’s hat as he waited by the terminal. Although no one could say so by looking at him, he was nervous.
He nearly misspoke while telling the driver the address. In the taxi, he caught himself rubbing his thumb compulsively against his forefinger like he hadn’t done since his rugby days.

- - -

The house at 34 Wentworth St was made of pale yellow brick. It was smaller and set farther from the road than neighbouring houses. A stone path led to the front door, on either side of which bloomed a well-kempt garden. Appleton walked the path slowly, cherishing the smell of wet flowers and realizing that over the last twelve hours he’d developed a particular mental image of Mary Clare. It was something like the opposite of the wife.
He stood for a few moments before the front door and deliberated whether to ring the electronic bell or use the bronze knocker. Eventually, he rapped his knuckles against the wood. A woman opened the door.
“Yes, hello,” said Appleton.
The woman looked suspiciously at his hands, but he wasn’t carrying anything except the back cover of the magazine on which he’d written the message from Mars.
“I’m not selling,” he said. “I’m looking for Mrs Mary Clare. I’ve been informed that she lives at this address. I have a message for her from Charles R—.”
“Did he send you, the scoundrel?”
Appleton blinked.
“Well did he or didn’t he, speak up. All these years and he can’t even come back to show his face, sends some other poor fool.” Her eyes studied Appleton’s hat. “Or maybe he’s dead. Maybe that’s what you come to tell me. Last of kin or some such.”
“No, Mrs Clare—“
“Simpson, but one and the same as you’re looking for.”
“Mrs Simpson.” Appleton fumbled the correction. He’d shoved one hand into a cloak pocket and was furiously rubbing his fingers together. “Yesterday evening I received a phone call. I wasn’t meant to receive it, you see, there was a mistake with the connection. The call was from Mr Charles R—. He asked that I deliver this message.”
Appleton read aloud what he’d written on the magazine cover.
The woman laughed and stomped her foot. She was in her sixties, Appleton realized. Sections of her hair were greying. The lines under her eyes were deep and permanent. Her laughter was not a joyous laughter.
She said, “Whatever trick it is you’re playing, and whoever you’re playing it with, I’m too old for it, you understand? The past is dead. Mr Charles R— is dead. And I deserve to be left to my own peace. Don’t come back here.”
But before she could close the door, Appleton put his hand on her shoulder. It was a soft shoulder. Appleton gasped. Never had he been so forward with a woman.
“Please, Mr Charles R— is not dead. I spoke to him. I heard his voice. I’m telling you the truth. He’s alive. He’s just on another planet. It’s utterly remarkable!”
Mrs Simpson looked at Appleton with suddenly sympathetic eyes and, even as she removed his hand from her shoulder, kept her voice calm:
“He’s dead to me.”
Appleton’s hand fell limply against the side of his cloak.
“There are certain things you do that, once you do them, their consequences are permanent. There is no pretending and there is no coming back. Take care now, Mister.”
With that, she shut the door.

- - -

Upon returning home, Appleton’s life returned to normal—at least in all superficial respects: he smiled to his wife, he kept to himself, and, at Six O’clock each evening, he retreated to his customary chair to read his customary books. The magazine cover on which he’d written the message from Charles R—, he placed in a private drawer in the desk in his study, underneath unfinished essays and research into particle acceleration and magnet engine propulsion and other old academic bric-a-brac.
For weeks, whilst trying unsuccessfully to locate more information about Charles R—, he kept the drawer unlocked. But, once he’d given up hope, he turned the key and, with one click, banished all thought of Mars from his mind.
Or at least that’s what Appleton intended. For there are certain neurons that, once they start firing, are impossible to stop. At most, they can be slowed—their work delayed. They are not obtrusive neurons: they do not prevent, say, smiling to one’s wife or reading customary books. But they are persistent and every so often they make the results of their operation known. This happens most-of-all at unexpected times, as, for instance, when Appleton, having bent to retrieve a particularly large pine cone from the grass, stood up with the complete schematic for the Magna-IV Engine before his eyes, or, upon having been asked by the local lady grocer for his opinion about a recent stretch of fair weather, replied, “My God, Ruthenium!”
Once such ideas made themselves known to Appleton, he began putting them to paper. Once they were on paper, he tasked other, more compliant, neurons with dividing and conquering any problems that the papers made apparent; and, once those had been solved, what else was there to do but gather the necessary materials and construct the first prototypes?
Appleton kept mum about this, of course. To his physicist colleagues, he was still at work on the same book he’d been working on for the last decade. He was still irrelevant. The wife, as long he smiled to her, suspected nothing. It was only his books that could have given him away—lying unopened on their shelves, their regular Six O’clock appointments long forgotten, their yellowing pages gathering dust—but books by themselves cannot speak. Appleton’s secret was safe.
Even as the project approached completion, not one soul suspected.
When launch-day finally dawned and Appleton, having composed a note to his wife indicating that he would be away until Wednesday on a scholarly pursuit, packed the pieces and prototypes into the back of a rented truck and drove to an old farmer’s field, from where he would blast off that very noon, the whole world was still naïve to the history that would soon be made.
In the field, Appleton worked diligently. He filled the shell of the rocket with each of the separate machines he had designed and constructed. He had a life support system, a navigation system, a communications system. He had propulsion. He had fuel. He had everything that was necessary. Nothing had been overlooked. As the sun rose, it rose on years of endless effort that, today, had physically and for the first time come together in the middle of such a previously insignificant English spot on Earth.
By Ten O’clock, the rocket was nearly complete. All that was left was the installation of the final ingenious detail: the captain’s seat: Appleton’s own customary evening chair.
That done, Appleton looked for one last time at the earthly sky, its thin clouds moving slightly across an orange sun, then climbed into the rocket and closed the hatch. The pneumatics sighed. The inside air was warm. As he set the navigation, every click and beep audible as if within his own skull, Appleton wondered what became of Mary Simpson. But just as it had come, the wonder passed. He confirmed his intended destination on the small liquid crystal display and took a deep breath.
The destination was unbelievable: Appleton felt feverish. He maneuvered into his chair and strapped himself in. Space was tight but he was not uncomfortable. Besides—he thrust a needle into a vein in his arm—he would be asleep for most of the journey. The sedative began to flow. He activated the countdown sequence. When he awoke, he would already be in Saturn’s orbit.

- - -

“Hello? Can you hear me?”
The communications equipment produced only a monotonous hiss punctuated by crackles. Appleton scratched his head. He’d programmed the system to link directly to the telephone in his home. The signal was strong enough. It should be working. He tried another connection.
This time, there was a faint click and the echo of a voice.
“Darling! It’s me. Please say something,” Appleton spoke into the receiver.
The voice wobbled.
“I hope you can hear me. I hope you haven’t been worrying. I hope I haven’t caused you harm. Please, darling, say something so that I know there isn’t a malfunction.”
The echoing voice suddenly came into rather clear focus. “Who is this? And do you want to speak with my mum?”
Appleton knew right away that it wasn’t the voice of the wife. In fact, it wasn’t even a female voice. It was the voice of a boy.
“My name is Appleton,” said Appleton. “I am attempting to contact the wife. Unfortunately, I may have miscalculated. Nonetheless, if you’d be a good lad and please make a note of the following: I am calling from Titan, which is the largest moon of the plane—
“Saturn, I know. I’m not stupid.”
Appleton cleared his throat and adjusted his headset. “Yes, that’s mighty good of you. As I was saying, I am on Titan, having only just arrived, you see. But the situation thus far appears manageable. I predict I shall make a fair go of living here.” He remembered his reason for calling. “Right, then, if you could tell as much to the wife, whom you will find living at 11 Golden Pheasant Lane in Beaconsfield, I would be much obliged. Her name is—“
The connection went dead. The communications system went offline. Try as Appleton might, no amount of banging, prodding and reprogramming ever brought it back.

- - -

Phil Jones replaced the telephone receiver.
“Who was that?” his mother asked.
Then disappeared down the hall without waiting for an answer.
Phil went back to the homework spread out on his bedroom floor, whose doing Appleton had interrupted. Geography lay beside history, which bordered an island of English. Phil tried all three subjects—cross his innocent heart, he did—but all at once the history was too boring, the English too imprecise and the geography too much pointless memorisation. He rubbed his eyes. Next year he’d be in high school. The homework would only get harder.
T-I-T-A-N
He typed the letters almost absent-mindedly into a Google image search.
The moon stared at him.
Somewhere inside his head, certain neurons were beginning to fire.
submitted by normancrane to normancrane [link] [comments]


2020.10.03 04:21 tengrrl CFP: Have We Arrived? A special summer 2021 issue with Praxis

Forwarded from: Sicari, Anna[email protected]>
Date: Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 12:17 PM
Dear colleagues,
We are writing to share the CFP forHave We Arrived? Revisiting and Rethinking Responsibility in Writing Center Work: The Need for Transformative Listening and Mindfulness of Difference, a special summer 2021 issue withPraxis: A Writing Center Journal. You can view the CFP attached as a PDF, below, andhere.
We would be grateful to have help in circulating this CFP widely and please don't hesitate to let us know if you have any questions. We would also be happy to discuss any ideas you may have for submissions!
All our best,Anna & Romeo
Have We Arrived? Revisiting and Rethinking Responsibility in Writing Center Work: The Need for Transformative Listening and Mindfulness of Difference,Special Summer 2021 Issue,Praxis
The history of writing centers and writing center work is one of regulation, service, and academic policing of students who “don’t belong” in academic settings (see Faison & Treviño; Newman & Gonzalez; Green; Burrows; Keaton Jackson; Villaneuva; Grimm). As scholars such as RomeoGarcía (2020), Harry Denny (2010), Beth Boquet and Neal Lerner (2008), and Nancy Grimm (1996) have discussed, many writing centers were created and flourished during the 1970s, “as the Open Admissions movement brought larger numbers of ‘underprepared’ students to higher education” (Boquet & Lerner 172); as such, writing centers are born out of regulation, policing students “who don’t measure up” (Grimm 6) and who needed fixing; inclusion, thus, meaning a “technology of governance” (Ahmed 163) over who enters and how they are to act This is a history that currently, we--as writing center professionals and scholars--have still not come to terms with, as much of the work we do, despite perhaps our “good intentions,” is regulatory, even as the field embraces progressive narratives of social justice and anti-racist work. While we acknowledge the good and important social justice and anti-racist work done by scholars in the writing center community (Condon; Dees, Godbee, & Ozias; Denny; Denny, Mundy, Naydan, Sévère, & Sicari; Geller, Eodice, Condon, Carroll, Bouqet; Greenfield; Greenfield & Rowan; Hallman Martini & Webster; Lockett; Madden & Eodice), and work that is reflected for instance in a recent special issue ofPraxis,Race and the Writing Center, we also believe it is necessary to continue to interrogate this call for responsibility that largely draws its meaning, like the writing center does, from a haunting.
The writing center is a haunt(ed/ing) place. The work of regulating and policing is unfinished. This CFP, thus, asks for writing center professionals to revisit notions of responsibility as we reconcile with a past that is “haunted,” and to recognize and acknowledge that our writing centers are still predominantly white spaces that privilege white standards of languaging, knowledge, and being (seeGarcía; Inoue; Martinez). Hauntings, or in this case the epistemic work of managing, controlling, and policing places and bodies, centers and indeed demands a different kind of work of and from the writing center community: a bearing witness to hauntings, rather than an exercise in politicking responsibility apart from and outside of it. A framework of hauntings, for instance then, would bring a critique to bear on a responsibility that has long masqueraded as well-meaning rhetoric and that has long allowed well-meaning and benevolent white bodies to announce “I/we have arrived.” Such an announcement comes at the expense, too often, of thosewho will never have arrived--policed bodiesincluded under the agenda to make them into proper subjects. A revelation of one’s own whiteness, of the whiteness of a place such as the writing center, we argue, does not remove the haunt. The writing center is a wound(ed/ing) place (see Till; Basher et al.;García).
Drawing fromRomeo García’s 2017Writing Center Journalarticle, “Unmaking Gringo-Centers,” the 2020 SCWCA conference, hosted by Oklahoma State University, aimed to have conversations on transformative listening and cultivating a “mindfulness of difference,” at the conference and, hopefully, carrying this mindfulness back to our writing centers. InGarcía’s “Unmaking Gringo-Centers,” he asks the writing center community to listen “well and deeply” to how the writing center community has discussed race and racism in our spaces and how we have pursued anti-racist agendas, which have often been reductive and born out of white guilt. The type of transformative listening, or community listening (García 2018; also seeGarcía and Zhu),Garcíacalls for is centered on justice and understanding, a listening that recognizes that the writers that we meet and work with in our centers are “shapers of language, discourse, and modalities of agency” (García 13). Through this type of listening, a listening that requires those of privilege positionalities to recognize the necessity to learn with and from difference; to understand institutional and historical power dynamics; to reconcile with a history of whiteness and domination; and to value lived experience of others, writing center professionals can perhaps begin to do thework of social justice in their writing centersotherwise. As the writing center staff at Oklahoma State was working withGarcía’s “Unmaking” article, we askedRomeo Garcíato be the keynote speaker at the SCWCA conference. The OSU WC staff found his nuanced discussion on race and embodiment and his intentional use of decolonial theory, recognizing the problematics when decolonial work is metaphorical, helpful for our own space and place in Oklahoma, working in a state that is just beginning toacknowledge its violent history of the removal of Natives from their land in the 1800s and its continual erasure and silencing of Native bodies and systemic racism in dominant discourse, and at a university that resides on settled indigienous land of the Muscogee nation.
García poses an important and necessary question for the writing center community in his 2020 SCWCA keynote address: “Have we arrived? Will I ever have arrived?” These questions set the stage for talking about writing centers as haunt(ed/ing) places and for thinking about the traces of presence of minoritized and racialized bodies that will never have arrived. He further elaborates on these questions:
The question I ask myself...the question I ask you, ‘Have we arrived, will I ever have arrived’? The former is an indictment of sorts, on a benevolent ethos and sense of academic responsibility. Since Neisha-Anne Green’s indictment on an academic and benevolent sense of responsibility at the 2017 IWCA Conference, some of you have replaced your safety pins that used to read “ally” with new ones that now read “accomplice.” But both actions draw their meaning from a haunting and an epistemic crisis to be sure: how to overcome one’s own whiteness? But what is responsibility without a careful reckoning with inheritance, dwellings, and haunting? I have moved away from concepts such as rhetorical listening over the years then, for the “community” functioning within rhetorical listening, much like that functioning in the transition from ally to accomplice, maintains the white body as a universal frame for understanding difference and positions this body as the loci of and for change. They assume a revelation, such as their own whiteness, corresponds with an arrival of an ethic or a responsibility otherwise that no longer has to be questioned thereafter...
The writing center, as I saw it at the time of writing “Unmaking Gringo-Centers,” was a prism by which to see the management, control, and policing of spaces and bodies. The latter question--will I ever have arrived--, thus, reflects the haunt I feel in my bones, the reality I experience--much like that of the students I know from the Lower Rio Grande Valley and the minoritized and racialized students I have taught over the years--of beingforced to practice a hope, in and from anothered place and a denied subjectivity, that hinges upon two seemingly antithetical dispositions, anassent (así son las cosas) and anawaiting (a hope for that which may or may not arrive) (García 2020; also seeGarcía and Cortez 2020). The reality that one makes achoice to enter a space such as the writing center is really not a choice at all but a demand. And as many of usarriveat the writing center, hesitantly uttering the words, “can you help me,” we encounter and observe our bodies being read and treated in certain ways. We are left wondering, will we ever have arrived?
Our traces of presence have long been covered over by well-meaning rhetoric and benevolent bodies. But if we listen well and deeply, we will encounter sounds from the silence and presence from the absence; the writing center is a haunt(ed/ing) place...
We aim to explore the two questions above in this special issue ofPraxis. How might we re-envision the writing center as a haunt(ed/ing) and wound(ed/ing) place, and re-envision writing center narratives under a lens of responsibility and a ‘reckoning with inheritance, dwellings, and haunting’? What new stories might we gain through transformative listening and a more thorough understanding of what the work might entail for those invested in social justice and anti-racist work?
This CFP stems from the original 2020 SCWCA conference theme that was ultimately canceled because of COVID-19, as many conferences were. We believe that conversations centered on racial justice, responsibility, and reconciliation of haunted histories both institutionally and nationally, are needed now more than ever as we are working and living in a climate that privileges ignorance and dismissal of racial violence, historical atrocities, and environmental crises. With the generous support ofPraxis, this CFP gives the writing center community the opportunity to extend their work and conversations on arrival, responsibility, transformative listening, and mindfulness of difference in order to better the work we are doing with social justice initiatives and practices, anti-racst work, and to advocate for institutional change in our policies and procedures as we rethink our ethics and ways of being.
Submissions might explore, but are not limited to, the following questions and topics:
  • What might accountability and responsibility look like for WC directors, administrators, tutors, and other WC staff, particularly those invested in social justice work? How do white WC professionals move beyond the metaphorical work of allyship and account for their own privilege as they do social justice work?
  • How might those in positions of power and privilege (ie., white writing center directors) give up space in their WC missions and agendas, particularly those invested in social justice work, for POC scholars/administrators/tutors? How do those in power do the work so that they do not exhaust those at the margins of writing center communities?
  • Exploring the idea of arrival, what does it mean to “arrive” in the writing center and how can the WC community reconcile with past histories of regulation and policing in order to advocate for structural and institutional change?
  • What might transformative listening look like in writing center work? How can we work towards mindfully incorporating transformative listening in our pedagogies and practices?
  • How can WCs move from “white centers” to “centers of becoming”? What does this look like? How can WC practitioners and workers and the students that we meet work and learn from difference in their sessions? How can we foster a “mindfulness of difference” in writing centers?
  • Utilizing decolonial theory and addressing the colonial histories of Mexican-Americans in the LRGV, Garcia asks that we train our consultants to be decolonial agents in our spaces, understanding our local histories and ways in which white people continue to dominate both institutional and societal communities, in order to participate in social justice work. In what ways can WC professionals educate consultants to become decolonial agents? In what ways can WC professionals educate themselves to become decolonial agents?
  • In what ways do writing center staffing practices, hiring decisions, university partnerships, policies, and procedures perpetuate and/or disrupt larger and local systems of domination and structural difference?

For this issue, the recommended article length is 6000-8000 words for focus articles; the editors will also consider shorter pieces as columns, as well as book reviews. Articles should conform to MLA style. While we strongly encourage members of SCWCA to consider applying, this call is open to the entire writing center community (and beyond) and all articles will undergo the peer review process. We are especially interested in featuring contributions and work from BIPOC scholars, those at HBCUs, HSIs, MSIs, and two-year colleges, and graduate and undergraduate tutors and students. Please submit articles to[[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]). The subject of your submission email should say “Special Issue SU21 Submission.” Please also review the “Instructions for Authors”pageavailable on thePraxiswebsite before submitting.
For further information about submitting an article, the blind peer-review process, or to contact the editors of this special issue, please email:Romeo García ([[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])) and/or Anna Sicari ([[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])).
The deadline for consideration in this special issue isJan 15, 2021
Anna Sicari, PhD
Director, OSU Writing Center
Assistant Professor, English
Oklahoma State University
via IFTTT
submitted by tengrrl to WPAannouncements [link] [comments]


2020.10.02 17:43 normancrane The Circular Logic of Space Exploration

Appleton rushed to scratch the message onto the back cover of a magazine lying face-down on a table near the telephone. Scratch—because the pen didn’t want to cooperate; the ballpoint stuck. Appleton’s fingers shook.
It was a prank, surely. The conversation had been recorded. He would end up on a website somewhere, the anonymous out-of-touch butt of some teenager’s joke.
Yet there was something in the quality of that voice, a voice that didn’t belong to any teenager, that forced the shapes of the letters through his wrist, onto the paper. Even as he felt the fool, he also felt the chronicler. The words could be historic.
The words: after a plain “hello” the voice had excused itself and muttered something about a wrong number and galactic interference. Then it had said, exactly, “No matter, you will have to do. My name is Charles R—and I am calling from Mars. First, record the date and time of this communication. Second, please bring it to the attention of one Mrs Mary Clare of 34 Wentworth St, Nottingham. Pass along also that I am doing fine and that, though food is scarce, I have had my fill, and that water is plenty once one digs past the red surface of things.”
That was all. Then the phone went dead. The connection had not been good to begin with, but there was no doubt about any of it. Nothing had been made up. There was no uncertainty.
Having written these five sentences, Appleton let go of the pen, wiped his forehead and retreated to the safety of his customary evening chair. It was a few minutes after six—his regular reading time—but Appleton gave no thought to books. Today, he sat silently in his chair until the clock struck seven. His neurons fired incessantly.
By eight, he had made up his mind: in the morning he would fly to Nottingham and personally deliver the message to Mary Clare.
There was only the slight problem of the wife.
She would arrive home tomorrow afternoon and find it empty. She would worry. Appleton’s greatest fear was that the wife would worry. She was of good breeding and delicate constitution, and worry might weaken her system enough to allow otherwise harmless bacteria to set up residence, which would lead to complications and eventually a prolonged bedridden death. He shuddered at the mere inkling. Right, he would have to compose a note: “My dear, I am off on a scholarly pursuit. Do not worry. I will return by Wednesday. Sincerely, your devoted husband.”
He folded the note and placed it on the dining room table. That, he realized, was more writing than he’d done since his tenure at Oxford. He felt productive again.

- - -

The plane skidded as it touched down, but the flight was otherwise without incident. Outside, grey clouds produced a cold mist that collected drops of water on the brim of Appleton’s hat as he waited by the terminal. Although no one could say so by looking at him, he was nervous.
He nearly misspoke while telling the driver the address. In the taxi, he caught himself rubbing his thumb compulsively against his forefinger like he hadn’t done since his rugby days.

- - -

The house at 34 Wentworth St was made of pale yellow brick. It was smaller and set farther from the road than neighbouring houses. A stone path led to the front door, on either side of which bloomed a well-kempt garden. Appleton walked the path slowly, cherishing the smell of wet flowers and realizing that over the last twelve hours he’d developed a particular mental image of Mary Clare. It was something like the opposite of the wife.
He stood for a few moments before the front door and deliberated whether to ring the electronic bell or use the bronze knocker. Eventually, he rapped his knuckles against the wood. A woman opened the door.
“Yes, hello,” said Appleton.
The woman looked suspiciously at his hands, but he wasn’t carrying anything except the back cover of the magazine on which he’d written the message from Mars.
“I’m not selling,” he said. “I’m looking for Mrs Mary Clare. I’ve been informed that she lives at this address. I have a message for her from Charles R—.”
“Did he send you, the scoundrel?”
Appleton blinked.
“Well did he or didn’t he, speak up. All these years and he can’t even come back to show his face, sends some other poor fool.” Her eyes studied Appleton’s hat. “Or maybe he’s dead. Maybe that’s what you come to tell me. Last of kin or some such.”
“No, Mrs Clare—“
“Simpson, but one and the same as you’re looking for.”
“Mrs Simpson.” Appleton fumbled the correction. He’d shoved one hand into a cloak pocket and was furiously rubbing his fingers together. “Yesterday evening I received a phone call. I wasn’t meant to receive it, you see, there was a mistake with the connection. The call was from Mr Charles R—. He asked that I deliver this message.”
Appleton read aloud what he’d written on the magazine cover.
The woman laughed and stomped her foot. She was in her sixties, Appleton realized. Sections of her hair were greying. The lines under her eyes were deep and permanent. Her laughter was not a joyous laughter.
She said, “Whatever trick it is you’re playing, and whoever you’re playing it with, I’m too old for it, you understand? The past is dead. Mr Charles R— is dead. And I deserve to be left to my own peace. Don’t come back here.”
But before she could close the door, Appleton put his hand on her shoulder. It was a soft shoulder. Appleton gasped. Never had he been so forward with a woman.
“Please, Mr Charles R— is not dead. I spoke to him. I heard his voice. I’m telling you the truth. He’s alive. He’s just on another planet. It’s utterly remarkable!”
Mrs Simpson looked at Appleton with suddenly sympathetic eyes and, even as she removed his hand from her shoulder, kept her voice calm:
“He’s dead to me.”
Appleton’s hand fell limply against the side of his cloak.
“There are certain things you do that, once you do them, their consequences are permanent. There is no pretending and there is no coming back. Take care now, Mister.”
With that, she shut the door.

- - -

Upon returning home, Appleton’s life returned to normal—at least in all superficial respects: he smiled to his wife, he kept to himself, and, at Six O’clock each evening, he retreated to his customary chair to read his customary books. The magazine cover on which he’d written the message from Charles R—, he placed in a private drawer in the desk in his study, underneath unfinished essays and research into particle acceleration and magnet engine propulsion and other old academic bric-a-brac.
For weeks, whilst trying unsuccessfully to locate more information about Charles R—, he kept the drawer unlocked. But, once he’d given up hope, he turned the key and, with one click, banished all thought of Mars from his mind.
Or at least that’s what Appleton intended. For there are certain neurons that, once they start firing, are impossible to stop. At most, they can be slowed—their work delayed. They are not obtrusive neurons: they do not prevent, say, smiling to one’s wife or reading customary books. But they are persistent and every so often they make the results of their operation known. This happens most-of-all at unexpected times, as, for instance, when Appleton, having bent to retrieve a particularly large pine cone from the grass, stood up with the complete schematic for the Magna-IV Engine before his eyes, or, upon having been asked by the local lady grocer for his opinion about a recent stretch of fair weather, replied, “My God, Ruthenium!”
Once such ideas made themselves known to Appleton, he began putting them to paper. Once they were on paper, he tasked other, more compliant, neurons with dividing and conquering any problems that the papers made apparent; and, once those had been solved, what else was there to do but gather the necessary materials and construct the first prototypes?
Appleton kept mum about this, of course. To his physicist colleagues, he was still at work on the same book he’d been working on for the last decade. He was still irrelevant. The wife, as long he smiled to her, suspected nothing. It was only his books that could have given him away—lying unopened on their shelves, their regular Six O’clock appointments long forgotten, their yellowing pages gathering dust—but books by themselves cannot speak. Appleton’s secret was safe.
Even as the project approached completion, not one soul suspected.
When launch-day finally dawned and Appleton, having composed a note to his wife indicating that he would be away until Wednesday on a scholarly pursuit, packed the pieces and prototypes into the back of a rented truck and drove to an old farmer’s field, from where he would blast off that very noon, the whole world was still naïve to the history that would soon be made.
In the field, Appleton worked diligently. He filled the shell of the rocket with each of the separate machines he had designed and constructed. He had a life support system, a navigation system, a communications system. He had propulsion. He had fuel. He had everything that was necessary. Nothing had been overlooked. As the sun rose, it rose on years of endless effort that, today, had physically and for the first time come together in the middle of such a previously insignificant English spot on Earth.
By Ten O’clock, the rocket was nearly complete. All that was left was the installation of the final ingenious detail: the captain’s seat: Appleton’s own customary evening chair.
That done, Appleton looked for one last time at the earthly sky, its thin clouds moving slightly across an orange sun, then climbed into the rocket and closed the hatch. The pneumatics sighed. The inside air was warm. As he set the navigation, every click and beep audible as if within his own skull, Appleton wondered what became of Mary Simpson. But just as it had come, the wonder passed. He confirmed his intended destination on the small liquid crystal display and took a deep breath.
The destination was unbelievable: Appleton felt feverish. He maneuvered into his chair and strapped himself in. Space was tight but he was not uncomfortable. Besides—he thrust a needle into a vein in his arm—he would be asleep for most of the journey. The sedative began to flow. He activated the countdown sequence. When he awoke, he would already be in Saturn’s orbit.

- - -

“Hello? Can you hear me?”
The communications equipment produced only a monotonous hiss punctuated by crackles. Appleton scratched his head. He’d programmed the system to link directly to the telephone in his home. The signal was strong enough. It should be working. He tried another connection.
This time, there was a faint click and the echo of a voice.
“Darling! It’s me. Please say something,” Appleton spoke into the receiver.
The voice wobbled.
“I hope you can hear me. I hope you haven’t been worrying. I hope I haven’t caused you harm. Please, darling, say something so that I know there isn’t a malfunction.”
The echoing voice suddenly came into rather clear focus. “Who is this? And do you want to speak with my mum?”
Appleton knew right away that it wasn’t the voice of the wife. In fact, it wasn’t even a female voice. It was the voice of a boy.
“My name is Appleton,” said Appleton. “I am attempting to contact the wife. Unfortunately, I may have miscalculated. Nonetheless, if you’d be a good lad and please make a note of the following: I am calling from Titan, which is the largest moon of the plane—
“Saturn, I know. I’m not stupid.”
Appleton cleared his throat and adjusted his headset. “Yes, that’s mighty good of you. As I was saying, I am on Titan, having only just arrived, you see. But the situation thus far appears manageable. I predict I shall make a fair go of living here.” He remembered his reason for calling. “Right, then, if you could tell as much to the wife, whom you will find living at 11 Golden Pheasant Lane in Beaconsfield, I would be much obliged. Her name is—“
The connection went dead. The communications system went offline. Try as Appleton might, no amount of banging, prodding and reprogramming ever brought it back.

- - -

Phil Jones replaced the telephone receiver.
“Who was that?” his mother asked.
Then disappeared down the hall without waiting for an answer.
Phil went back to the homework spread out on his bedroom floor, whose doing Appleton had interrupted. Geography lay beside history, which bordered an island of English. Phil tried all three subjects—cross his innocent heart, he did—but all at once the history was too boring, the English too imprecise and the geography too much pointless memorisation. He rubbed his eyes. Next year he’d be in high school. The homework would only get harder.
T-I-T-A-N
He typed the letters almost absent-mindedly into a Google image search.
The moon stared at him.
Somewhere inside his head, certain neurons were beginning to fire.
submitted by normancrane to Write_Right [link] [comments]