pbsthisdayinhistory: May 17, 1954: The Supreme Court Rules on Brown v. Board of Education On this day in 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously that racial segregation in public schools violated the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which says that no state may deny equal protection of the laws to any person within its jurisdiction. Although the decision did not succeed in fully desegregating public education in the United States, it put the Constitution on the side of racial equality and galvanized the nascent civil rights movement into a full revolution.Can you name all the key players behind Brown v. Board of Education? Revisit the landmark case with PBS’ The Supreme Court site. You can also learn more about Brown v. Board of Education with “The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow” and explore more events of the Civil Rights Movement with PBS Black Culture Connection. School integration, Barnard School, Washington, D.C., 1955 (Library of Congress).
Pop-upView Separately

pbsthisdayinhistory:

May 17, 1954: The Supreme Court Rules on Brown v. Board of Education

On this day in 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously that racial segregation in public schools violated the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which says that no state may deny equal protection of the laws to any person within its jurisdiction.

Although the decision did not succeed in fully desegregating public education in the United States, it put the Constitution on the side of racial equality and galvanized the nascent civil rights movement into a full revolution.

Can you name all the key players behind Brown v. Board of Education? Revisit the landmark case with PBS’ The Supreme Court site.

You can also learn more about Brown v. Board of Education with “The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow” and explore more events of the Civil Rights Movement with PBS Black Culture Connection.

School integration, Barnard School, Washington, D.C., 1955 (Library of Congress).

(via npr)

Source: pbsthisdayinhistory

dduane: call-me-dash: portablegaytardis: xandorasbox: goatkult: ceorfaex: tothedeathsheadtrue: whiskey-wolf: And this is what happens when a masterfully crafted katana collides with a masterfully crafted longsword. Suck it, katana HAH! suck my fuckin’ diiiick Aren’t katanas and longswords made for different overall purposes thoKatanas are slasher weapons made for cutting masterfully through human flesh so obviously it’s not gonna get through a fucking longsword which is really fucking thick and heavy and made for beating the shit out of people as well as hacking at armourA katana would slice the shit out of you guys so idk what the fuck you’re so smug about ^That. this is basically like driving a ferarri into a tank. Now /that’s/ a metaphor And fun, too, but the above comparison between the purposes and structures of the two types of swords is simplistic and (at core) incorrect. …I’ve got things to do this morning, though, so I’ll just reblog this for the moment and ask Peter to spell it all out when he gets up. Very briefly, though: longswords are not “really fucking thick and heavy”; this is that old Victorian-era music-hall myth about heavy swords and armor surfacing again. …I have a long posting about this from a year or so back on my own tumblr, but I’m going to excerpt out the germane part here. (With just the general note added: I am trained in iaido and the use of the katana: but these days — knowing now what I’ve learned about European weapons over the past quarter-century — if you’re going to ask me whether I’d prefer to take on a katana user with another katana or a longsword, it’ll be the longsword every time. It is a far more versatile weapon to use against a broad spectrum of opposition weaponry. The katana’s versatility is surprisingly limited.) About longsword / broadsword weights: I am 5 foot 7, and while I’m not at my optimum weight right now, I am by no means hefty and would be classed as petite if I were a bit shorter. In any case, here’s my broadsword. It is an Oakeshott Type Xa made by Fulvio Del Tin of Del Tin Armi Antiche in northern Italy. Fulvio specializes in both museum-quality replicas and “hero weapons” for major motion pictures. (For example, he forged Mel Gibson’s famous hero weapon in Braveheart.) From point to pommel the sword is 39 inches long. …And there’s my hand for size comparison. Now watch what happens when I put this sword on the kitchen scale. It weighs twelve hundred and twenty four grams, or just under two and three-quarters pounds. This is a normal weight for a broadsword of the period. They did not weigh tons. That myth, and its fellow urban legend that armor of the period was so heavy that a knight wearing it had to be winched onto his horse and couldn’t get up again if knocked down, are the direct result of popular British music hall comedies of the Victorian period. They have no basis whatsoever in fact, as any museum’s armor curator will immediately tell you (while either groaning and tearing their hair, or snickering a lot). I mean, seriously, what possible use would there be in a weapon that either a man or woman would get too tired to use in a very short time? The people who used it would select themselves out of the gene pool in very short order. (And their relatives would select the weaponsmaker out of the gene pool immediately thereafter.) Now, on the off chance that my relatively small hand makes this seem not very much like a broadsword to you (though I guarantee you, it is one): okay, let’s pull out our other one. Here it is, once more with my hand for scale. This is an Oakeshott Type XIII, a so-called hand-and-a-half or “bastard” broadsword of the same general type as the first one, 48 inches long from point to pommel. (Peter got it because it was a close match to the description of Khávrinen in the Middle Kingdoms books: in fact, we used it on the new ebook cover for The Door into Fire). It was meant to be used easily either one-handed or two-handed. So now let’s weigh it. Fifteen hundred seventy-six grams, or about three and a half pounds. Again, I have to emphasize that this is the proper weight for a sword of the period, and indeed, many of similar size were lighter because they were made of better steel. (Fulvio forges his swords of steel that will be able to cope with the mishandling inherent in use on film sets, or the much more intensive banging around that’s expected when such a sword is being used by re-enactors.) Both this sword and its smaller sibling are balanced with extra weight in the hilt and pommel so that the blade is astonishingly easy to handle… as both Peter and I know from personal experience. …The source, I think, of these most recent katana/European sword pissing wars is that the katana has been so mythologized over the last hundred years. Peter will doubtless get into this in more detail. But the tide has been turning of late. As the many medieval- and Renaissance-period European swordfighting manuals start to seep out of the museum collections into the public consciousness, the fascinating and complex details of the old European fighting styles are starting to be better known as well. This shift of balance has been taking some of the Eastern weapons fans by surprise, and has started leaving some of the too-thoroughly-legend-invested katana fans feeling a bit exposed  — as what they previously decried as a landscape bereft of any real sword technique or weapons sophistication suddenly turns out to be just thick with it — and a bit butthurt. (sigh) Oh well. The pendulum swings. ETA: re the downstream comment “…so Diane Duane could totally take Jo Rowling in a fight”: Likely enough. But the only place I want to take Jo Rowling is shoe shopping. :)
View Separately

dduane:

call-me-dash:

portablegaytardis:

xandorasbox:

goatkult:

ceorfaex:

tothedeathsheadtrue:

whiskey-wolf:

And this is what happens when a masterfully crafted katana collides with a masterfully crafted longsword.

Suck it, katana

HAH!

suck my fuckin’ diiiick

Aren’t katanas and longswords made for different overall purposes tho

Katanas are slasher weapons made for cutting masterfully through human flesh so obviously it’s not gonna get through a fucking longsword which is really fucking thick and heavy and made for beating the shit out of people as well as hacking at armour

A katana would slice the shit out of you guys so idk what the fuck you’re so smug about

^That.

this is basically like driving a ferarri into a tank.

Now /that’s/ a metaphor

And fun, too, but the above comparison between the purposes and structures of the two types of swords is simplistic and (at core) incorrect. …I’ve got things to do this morning, though, so I’ll just reblog this for the moment and ask Peter to spell it all out when he gets up.

Very briefly, though: longswords are not “really fucking thick and heavy”; this is that old Victorian-era music-hall myth about heavy swords and armor surfacing again. …I have a long posting about this from a year or so back on my own tumblr, but I’m going to excerpt out the germane part here. (With just the general note added: I am trained in iaido and the use of the katana: but these days — knowing now what I’ve learned about European weapons over the past quarter-century — if you’re going to ask me whether I’d prefer to take on a katana user with another katana or a longsword, it’ll be the longsword every time. It is a far more versatile weapon to use against a broad spectrum of opposition weaponry. The katana’s versatility is surprisingly limited.)

About longsword / broadsword weights:

I am 5 foot 7, and while I’m not at my optimum weight right now, I am by no means hefty and would be classed as petite if I were a bit shorter. In any case, here’s my broadsword.

image

It is an Oakeshott Type Xa made by Fulvio Del Tin of Del Tin Armi Antiche in northern Italy. Fulvio specializes in both museum-quality replicas and “hero weapons” for major motion pictures. (For example, he forged Mel Gibson’s famous hero weapon in Braveheart.) From point to pommel the sword is 39 inches long. …And there’s my hand for size comparison.

Now watch what happens when I put this sword on the kitchen scale.

image

It weighs twelve hundred and twenty four grams, or just under two and three-quarters pounds. This is a normal weight for a broadsword of the period. They did not weigh tons. That myth, and its fellow urban legend that armor of the period was so heavy that a knight wearing it had to be winched onto his horse and couldn’t get up again if knocked down, are the direct result of popular British music hall comedies of the Victorian period. They have no basis whatsoever in fact, as any museum’s armor curator will immediately tell you (while either groaning and tearing their hair, or snickering a lot). I mean, seriously, what possible use would there be in a weapon that either a man or woman would get too tired to use in a very short time? The people who used it would select themselves out of the gene pool in very short order. (And their relatives would select the weaponsmaker out of the gene pool immediately thereafter.)

Now, on the off chance that my relatively small hand makes this seem not very much like a broadsword to you (though I guarantee you, it is one): okay, let’s pull out our other one.

image

Here it is, once more with my hand for scale. This is an Oakeshott Type XIII, a so-called hand-and-a-half or “bastard” broadsword of the same general type as the first one, 48 inches long from point to pommel. (Peter got it because it was a close match to the description of Khávrinen in the Middle Kingdoms books: in fact, we used it on the new ebook cover for The Door into Fire). It was meant to be used easily either one-handed or two-handed. So now let’s weigh it.

image

Fifteen hundred seventy-six grams, or about three and a half pounds. Again, I have to emphasize that this is the proper weight for a sword of the period, and indeed, many of similar size were lighter because they were made of better steel. (Fulvio forges his swords of steel that will be able to cope with the mishandling inherent in use on film sets, or the much more intensive banging around that’s expected when such a sword is being used by re-enactors.) Both this sword and its smaller sibling are balanced with extra weight in the hilt and pommel so that the blade is astonishingly easy to handle… as both Peter and I know from personal experience.

…The source, I think, of these most recent katana/European sword pissing wars is that the katana has been so mythologized over the last hundred years. Peter will doubtless get into this in more detail. But the tide has been turning of late. As the many medieval- and Renaissance-period European swordfighting manuals start to seep out of the museum collections into the public consciousness, the fascinating and complex details of the old European fighting styles are starting to be better known as well. This shift of balance has been taking some of the Eastern weapons fans by surprise, and has started leaving some of the too-thoroughly-legend-invested katana fans feeling a bit exposed  — as what they previously decried as a landscape bereft of any real sword technique or weapons sophistication suddenly turns out to be just thick with it — and a bit butthurt.

(sigh) Oh well. The pendulum swings.

ETA: re the downstream comment “…so Diane Duane could totally take Jo Rowling in a fight”: Likely enough. But the only place I want to take Jo Rowling is shoe shopping. :)

Source: whiskey-wolf

todaysdocument: In the only land battle of World War II to take place on incorporated U.S. territory, American forces began the invasion of Attu, in the Aleutian Islands of Alaska, to dislodge occupying Japanese Forces on May 11, 1943. U.S. FORCES BLAST JAPANESE FROM ATTU [ETC.], 1943 From the “United News” Newsreels series from the Office of War Information
Zoom Info
todaysdocument: In the only land battle of World War II to take place on incorporated U.S. territory, American forces began the invasion of Attu, in the Aleutian Islands of Alaska, to dislodge occupying Japanese Forces on May 11, 1943. U.S. FORCES BLAST JAPANESE FROM ATTU [ETC.], 1943 From the “United News” Newsreels series from the Office of War Information
Zoom Info
todaysdocument: In the only land battle of World War II to take place on incorporated U.S. territory, American forces began the invasion of Attu, in the Aleutian Islands of Alaska, to dislodge occupying Japanese Forces on May 11, 1943. U.S. FORCES BLAST JAPANESE FROM ATTU [ETC.], 1943 From the “United News” Newsreels series from the Office of War Information
Zoom Info
todaysdocument: In the only land battle of World War II to take place on incorporated U.S. territory, American forces began the invasion of Attu, in the Aleutian Islands of Alaska, to dislodge occupying Japanese Forces on May 11, 1943. U.S. FORCES BLAST JAPANESE FROM ATTU [ETC.], 1943 From the “United News” Newsreels series from the Office of War Information
Zoom Info
todaysdocument: In the only land battle of World War II to take place on incorporated U.S. territory, American forces began the invasion of Attu, in the Aleutian Islands of Alaska, to dislodge occupying Japanese Forces on May 11, 1943. U.S. FORCES BLAST JAPANESE FROM ATTU [ETC.], 1943 From the “United News” Newsreels series from the Office of War Information
Zoom Info
todaysdocument: In the only land battle of World War II to take place on incorporated U.S. territory, American forces began the invasion of Attu, in the Aleutian Islands of Alaska, to dislodge occupying Japanese Forces on May 11, 1943. U.S. FORCES BLAST JAPANESE FROM ATTU [ETC.], 1943 From the “United News” Newsreels series from the Office of War Information
Zoom Info
todaysdocument: In the only land battle of World War II to take place on incorporated U.S. territory, American forces began the invasion of Attu, in the Aleutian Islands of Alaska, to dislodge occupying Japanese Forces on May 11, 1943. U.S. FORCES BLAST JAPANESE FROM ATTU [ETC.], 1943 From the “United News” Newsreels series from the Office of War Information
Zoom Info

todaysdocument:

In the only land battle of World War II to take place on incorporated U.S. territory, American forces began the invasion of Attu, in the Aleutian Islands of Alaska, to dislodge occupying Japanese Forces on May 11, 1943.

U.S. FORCES BLAST JAPANESE FROM ATTU [ETC.], 1943

From the “United News” Newsreels series from the Office of War Information

historical-nonfiction: Shibam, a town in Yemen, is considered to have the world’s oldest skyscrapers. It has about 7,000 inhabitants and all of the town’s houses are made out of mud bricks. Some of these houses rise 5 to 9 stories high. It protected residents from Bedouin attacks. While Shibam has existed for around 2,000 years, most of the city’s houses come mainly from the 16th century. Shibam is often called “the Manhattan of the desert”.
View Separately

historical-nonfiction:

Shibam, a town in Yemen, is considered to have the world’s oldest skyscrapers. It has about 7,000 inhabitants and all of the town’s houses are made out of mud bricks. Some of these houses rise 5 to 9 stories high. It protected residents from Bedouin attacks. While Shibam has existed for around 2,000 years, most of the city’s houses come mainly from the 16th century. Shibam is often called “the Manhattan of the desert”.

nationalpost: Some of America’s first settlers turned to cannibalism, ‘powdered wife’ to survive, scientists sayScientists revealed Wednesday that they have found the first solid archaeological evidence that some of the earliest American colonists at Jamestown, Virginia, survived harsh conditions by turning to cannibalism.For years, there have been tales of people in the first permanent English settlement in America eating dogs, cats, rats, mice, snakes and shoe leather to stave off starvation. There were also written accounts of settlers eating their own dead, but archaeologists had been skeptical of those stories.But now, the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History and archaeologists from Jamestown are announcing the discovery of the bones of a 14-year-old girl that show clear signs that she was cannibalized. Evidence indicates clumsy chops to the body and head of the girl, who appears to have already been dead at the time. (The Bettman Archive)
Pop-upView Separately

nationalpost:

Some of America’s first settlers turned to cannibalism, ‘powdered wife’ to survive, scientists say
Scientists revealed Wednesday that they have found the first solid archaeological evidence that some of the earliest American colonists at Jamestown, Virginia, survived harsh conditions by turning to cannibalism.

For years, there have been tales of people in the first permanent English settlement in America eating dogs, cats, rats, mice, snakes and shoe leather to stave off starvation. There were also written accounts of settlers eating their own dead, but archaeologists had been skeptical of those stories.

But now, the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History and archaeologists from Jamestown are announcing the discovery of the bones of a 14-year-old girl that show clear signs that she was cannibalized. Evidence indicates clumsy chops to the body and head of the girl, who appears to have already been dead at the time. (The Bettman Archive)

madhistory: theolduvaigorge: Inbred royals show traces of natural selection Study suggests the Spanish Habsburgs evolved to mute the effects of inbreeding, but other geneticists are unconvinced. by Ewen Callaway “King Charles II of Spain was physically and mentally disabled, infertile — and extremely inbred. When he died in 1700, aged 38, so did the male line of the Spanish Habsburg royal family, as famous for their pointed jaws as for their extreme consanguinity. A provocative analysis now suggests that the Habsburg royal family might have evolved under natural selection over three centuries to blunt the worst effects of inbreeding. Evolutionary theory predicts such a ‘purging’ process, and researchers have documented the effect in animals and plants. But evidence among humans is scant — in part because of the dearth of data on inbred families spanning many generations. Royal families such as the Habsburgs are an ideal place to look, says Francisco Ceballos, a geneticist at the University of Santiago de Compostela in Spain, who led the research. He and colleague Gonzalo Álvarez used written records to track the marriages, births and deaths of 4,000 individuals across more than 20 generations. “The royal dynasties of Europe are a lab of inbreeding for human populations,” says Ceballos. The team’s study is published this month in Heredity1”(read more). ***I’m going with a statistical fluke. (Source: Nature) Biology AND History! Perfect for jamesthepious and mortallyfoolish! Poor Carlos II.  Couldn’t even feed himself without a struggle.  Also, interesting study.
Zoom Info
madhistory: theolduvaigorge: Inbred royals show traces of natural selection Study suggests the Spanish Habsburgs evolved to mute the effects of inbreeding, but other geneticists are unconvinced. by Ewen Callaway “King Charles II of Spain was physically and mentally disabled, infertile — and extremely inbred. When he died in 1700, aged 38, so did the male line of the Spanish Habsburg royal family, as famous for their pointed jaws as for their extreme consanguinity. A provocative analysis now suggests that the Habsburg royal family might have evolved under natural selection over three centuries to blunt the worst effects of inbreeding. Evolutionary theory predicts such a ‘purging’ process, and researchers have documented the effect in animals and plants. But evidence among humans is scant — in part because of the dearth of data on inbred families spanning many generations. Royal families such as the Habsburgs are an ideal place to look, says Francisco Ceballos, a geneticist at the University of Santiago de Compostela in Spain, who led the research. He and colleague Gonzalo Álvarez used written records to track the marriages, births and deaths of 4,000 individuals across more than 20 generations. “The royal dynasties of Europe are a lab of inbreeding for human populations,” says Ceballos. The team’s study is published this month in Heredity1”(read more). ***I’m going with a statistical fluke. (Source: Nature) Biology AND History! Perfect for jamesthepious and mortallyfoolish! Poor Carlos II.  Couldn’t even feed himself without a struggle.  Also, interesting study.
Zoom Info

madhistory:

theolduvaigorge:

Inbred royals show traces of natural selection

Study suggests the Spanish Habsburgs evolved to mute the effects of inbreeding, but other geneticists are unconvinced.

“King Charles II of Spain was physically and mentally disabled, infertile — and extremely inbred. When he died in 1700, aged 38, so did the male line of the Spanish Habsburg royal family, as famous for their pointed jaws as for their extreme consanguinity.

A provocative analysis now suggests that the Habsburg royal family might have evolved under natural selection over three centuries to blunt the worst effects of inbreeding. Evolutionary theory predicts such a ‘purging’ process, and researchers have documented the effect in animals and plants. But evidence among humans is scant — in part because of the dearth of data on inbred families spanning many generations.

Royal families such as the Habsburgs are an ideal place to look, says Francisco Ceballos, a geneticist at the University of Santiago de Compostela in Spain, who led the research. He and colleague Gonzalo Álvarez used written records to track the marriages, births and deaths of 4,000 individuals across more than 20 generations. “The royal dynasties of Europe are a lab of inbreeding for human populations,” says Ceballos. The team’s study is published this month in Heredity1”(read more).

***I’m going with a statistical fluke.

(Source: Nature)

Biology AND History! Perfect for jamesthepious and mortallyfoolish!

Poor Carlos II.  Couldn’t even feed himself without a struggle.  Also, interesting study.

Source: theolduvaigorge

One of the problems with the idea that America needs a ‘Conversation On Race’ is that it presumes that ‘America’ has something intelligent to say about race. All you need do is look at how American history is taught in this country to realize that that is basically impossible.
Ta-Nehisi Coates (via theatlantic)

(via theatlantic)

My problem with the “it’s part of our history” argument is two-fold: (1) The history of Southern states extends much further back than the Confederacy, so I’m left wondering why that pivotal (and controversial) moment has become identified as the historical juncture that should define what “the South” is about. (2) The history of the Confederacy was extremely brief: it lasted less than five years. (By contrast, the Third Reich lasted more than twice as long, giving the Nazi flag a stronger claim to historical tradition.)
Miguel Centellas, a professor at the University of Mississippi’s Croft Institute for International Studies, explains the whole “why-that-Brad-Paisley-song-is-a-bad-idea” thing perfectly. Oh yeah, he has a great Tumblr worth a follow. (via shortformblog)

(via shortformblog)

1. All beliefs in whatever realm are theories at some level. (Stephen Schneider)

2. Do not condemn the judgment of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong. (Dandemis)

3. Read not to contradict and confute; nor to believe and take for granted; nor to find talk and discourse; but to weigh and consider. (Francis Bacon)

4. Never fall in love with your hypothesis. (Peter Medawar)
5. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts. (Arthur Conan Doyle)

6. A theory should not attempt to explain all the facts, because some of the facts are wrong. (Francis Crick)

7. The thing that doesn’t fit is the thing that is most interesting. (Richard Feynman)

8. To kill an error is as good a service as, and sometimes even better than, the establishing of a new truth or fact. (Charles Darwin)

9. It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so. (Mark Twain)

10. Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. (Thomas Jefferson)

11. All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second, it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident. (Arthur Schopenhauer)

Prospero’s Precepts  – 11 rules for critical thinking from history’s great minds.

(via explore-blog)

(via jtotheizzoe)

Source:

Top