text:
Department of Ancash

Ancash (Anqash; Áncash ) is a department and region in western Peru. It is bordered by the departments of La Libertad on the north, Huánuco and Pasco on the east, Lima on the south, and the Pacific Ocean on the west. Its capital is the city of Huaraz, and its largest city and port is Chimbote. The name of the region originates from the Quechua word anqash ('light, of little weight'), from anqas ('blue') or from anka ('eagle').

Geography
Ancash is a land of contrasts: it features two great longitudinal valleys, which combine the mountain characteristics of the Callejón de Huaylas (Alley of Huaylas) with the sylvan ones of the Alto Marañón. Kilometres of sandy beaches and the blue waters of the Pacific. The territory of the coast, high plateaux and Andean punas of the department are flat, while the rest of the territory, in the Andes, is very rough. In the west, there are slopes with strong declivity form narrow canyons with abrupt and deserted sides.

The rough territory of the department is crossed by two mountain ranges: on the western side, the Cordillera Negra (Spanish for "black mountain range"), which has peaks without glaciers, and on the eastern side, the Cordillera Blanca ("white mountain range"), which has many peaks covered with snow and ice, such as the Huascarán and the Alpamayo. Between these two mountain ranges, the Santa River flows through the so-called Callejón de Huaylas. This valley narrows to form the Cañón del Pato ("duck canyon"). Also along the Pacific slopes, the Santa River has shaped a wide valley in the punas which narrows into the Cordillera Negra, where the Cañón del Pato canyon was formed.

The snow-covered peak of Huascarán, the highest peak of Peru and second of the Americas, reaches a height of 6768 m and contrasts with the 6263 m deep trough of Chimbote found in the ocean west of Ancash. Remnants of glaciers created many lakes such as Llanganuco Lakes and Lake Parón.

Following the Pan-American Highway north from Lima, the territory of the department begins just beyond the Fortress of Paramonga, between wide fields of sugarcane, and across the Fortaleza River, 206 km from Lima.

Along the coast of Ancash, from the Fortaleza River to the Santa River, the Pacific exerts great influence. The Peruvian current and the El Niño current exert considerable and sometimes tragic effect on local lives and regional economies.

Normally, the Peruvian current, also known as the Humboldt Current, brings cold water and large numbers of fish. With the development of the shoals of anchoveta, the Ancash ports and creeks became commercial fishing centers. During the 1950s, the bay of Chimbote was the top fishing port of the world.

However, when warmer waters from the north, such as the current of El Niño, bring catastrophic rains to the coast and sea, the shoals of anchoveta disappear, leaving the fishing fleets plants paralysed, and flooding rivers cause serious damage to the lands and cities. The cycles of these two sea currents that affect Peru are hard to predict.

Further north along the Pan-American highway, numerous islands and islets dot the sea near the coast. Most are home only to guano seabirds. From south to north, the most important islands include Tortuga Island (Turtle Island), La Viuda Island (The Widow Island), Isla Blanca (White Island) and Santa Island (Holy Island).

The coastal region of Peru includes many peninsulas, creeks, warm bays and sand beaches, full of colour. Because of the lack of roads and difficult terrain, many of these are inaccessible by land. The most important beaches include Grande Beach, La Gramita Beach and Las Salinas Beach.

Much of this coast is a monotonous stretch of huge sand deserts, a common denominator in all Peruvian coastal regions because of the influence of the Humboldt Current.

Along the rivers, there are green valleys, cultivated mainly with sugarcane, rice and cotton. From south to north, the main rivers of the Ancash coast are the following: Huarmey, Culebras, Casma, Sechín, Nepeña, Lacramarca and Santa.

Of these rivers, the only one with water year-round is the Santa River. Its sources are the glaciers and lakes of the Cordillera Blanca. The other rivers, as with most rivers of the Peruvian coast, are intermittent, depending on the highland rains or the advance of El Niño.

History
Between 400 and 600 BC, the first Peruvian civilization, known as Chavín, originated and flourished in this zone. The importance of this culture lies not only in its antiquity but in the history and culture it shares with other cultures along the Andean and Amazonian territories. As archaeologist Julio C. Tello put it, "Chavín was the mother of all the cultures that later bloomed in the old Peru." The name Chavín comes from the Quechua word Chawpin, which translates as center or headquarters. Tello believed that people came from the Amazonas, scaled the Andes, and developed the Chavín culture.

During the Inca age, the population of the Santa valley was assimilated into the Inca empire by Pachacuti.

The first Spaniards came to Huaylas attracted by the fame of the silver veins of the department. In time, the Spanish destroyed the Inca cities. It was during this time that Jerónimo de Alvarado founded the city of Huaraz. Though in the Colonial Age this city held little importance and its artistic and cultural life did not have much relevance, it became the headquarters for Simón Bolívar during his campaign to liberate Peru.

The department of Ancash was created following the defeat of the Peru-Bolivia Confederation by the combined forces of the Peruvian restoration army and the Chilean army at the battle of Yungay in 1839.

The 1970 Ancash earthquake devastated the department, killing more than 50,000 people and damaging 186,000 houses in one of the deadliest natural disasters in Peru.

Today, most of the Ancash population is concentrated in the Callejón de Huaylas.

Beginning in 2011, the department has been the site of an ongoing anti-mining protest over allegations of water contamination and public versus private rights to the natural resources of the zone. Clashes between protesters, mining company security, and the federal police have resulted in numerous deaths and injuries.

Political division
The department is divided into 20 provinces (provincias, singular: provincia), which comprise 166 districts (distritos, singular: distrito). Its capital is Huaraz. The provinces and their capitals are:

Economy
The economy of Ancash, the third largest in Peru, is largely made up of gold, copper and zinc mining. Its coast is rich in fishing resources and it is the most productive fishing region of Peru (Peru is the world's largest exporter of fish meal). Crops cultivated in Ancash include potatoes, wheat and barley.

Languages
According to the 2007 Peru Census, the language learnt first by most of the residents was Spanish (68.34%) followed by Quechua (31.36%). The Quechua variety spoken in Ancash is Ancash Quechua. The following table shows the results concerning the language learnt first in the Department of Ancash by province:

Ethnicity
Most of the population identifies Mestizo or Quechua.

Literacy
As of 2017, 85.3% (923,542) of the population is literate and 14.7% (158,839) of the population is illiterate.

Toponyms
Many of the toponyms of the Department of Ancash originate from Quechua. In and around the Cordillera Blanca, in provinces like Huaylas and Yungay, these names are overwhelmingly predominant. Their Spanish-based orthography, however, is in conflict with the normalized alphabet of the language. According to Article 20 of Decreto Supremo No 004-2016-MC (Supreme Decree) which approves the Regulations to Law 29735, published in the state-owned newspaper El Peruano on 22 July 2016, adequate spellings of the toponyms in the normalised alphabets of the indigenous languages must progressively be proposed with the aim of standardizing the namings used by the National Geographic Institute (Instituto Geográfico Nacional, IGN). The National Geographic Institute realizes the necessary changes in the official maps of Peru.

Contrarily to intentions to replace indigenous toponyms by other names like Santa Cruz or Contrahierbas, the Ministry of Culture proposes to the municipalities of the provinces to recover ancient indigenous toponyms and that these names should be spread by the local and communal authorities on posters and other signage.

Tourism
The geographical centre of Ancash, the Callejón de Huaylas, is an area of intense interest to tourists. This is due to its large variety of natural attractions, its sport and recreational facilities, and the nearby archaeological remains of the ancient cultures that once flourished there. The Cordillera Blanca offers an interesting attraction for tourists visiting Peru. Visitors also come to see the natural beauty of the area's glaciers and valleys and to enjoy the many lakes and thermal fountains.

Ancash is sometimes referred to as the "Switzerland of Peru". There is the four mile high Huascarán, home to the Huascarán National Park. There is also the Alpamayo peak, considered one of the most beautiful in the world.

Among archaeological sites of interest, Ancash has many vestiges of old cultures, including the Guitarrero Cave (10,000 BC), the pre-Columbian ruins of Chavín de Huantar, Hunsakay, Willkawayin, Sechín, and Pañamarka are also well-known.

Tours
There are a few tours in the Department of Ancash that will let us know the main touristic and historical places of the zone. Among the principal ones are:

 * Huaraz – Recuay – Catac – Pachaqutu ravine and Pastururi.
 * Yungay – Llankanuku – Vaquería – Waripampa – Santa Cruz and Caraz
 * Caraz, Cañon del Pato
 * Huaraz – Pitiq – Qillqay and Juanca
 * Caraz, Puya Raimondi at Mirador de Huinchus
 * Huaraz – Olleros – Yanashallash – Chavín de Huantar – Qiruqucha and Catac
 * Caraz, Parun Lake
 * Catac and Carpa
 * Huaraz – Willkawayin and Llaqa ravine
 * Chacas – Perlilla
 * Chacas – Huari

Pativilca-Caraz-Huallanca route
The historical village Pativilca (Lima Region), where Simón Bolívar planned his expedition for the liberation of Peru, lies 202 kilometres (126 mi) north of Lima on the Pan-American Highway. At this point begins the highway that leads to the Callejón de Huaylas. This road is completely paved, although it often had to be repaired because of the extreme damage caused by the huaycos (flash floods) and the rains. The same problem affects most Peruvian roads, especially the ones in the mountains (Quechua natural region and rainforest Rupa-Rupa natural region).

This highway is 287 kilometres (178 mi) long, with an extremely comfortable course, especially in the steep climbing stretches through the Cordillera Negra (Black Range) up to the summit of Conococha, 4,100 metres (13,451 ft) above sea level. From there, the road descends toward the Callejón de Huaylas.

The trip Lima-Huaraz-Caraz of 468 kilometres (254 mi) takes seven hours by car. Modern buses spend eight hours over the same stretch.

East of Pativilca, for about 20 kilometres (12 mi) the highway passes between wide fields planted with sugarcane in extensive fields, parallel to the Fortaleza River bed.

At the town Huaricanga the road enters the department of Ancash. At this point, the highway begins a slow ascent of the first spurs of the Cordillera Negra. This stretch continues for about 50 kilometres (31 mi). The climb gets suddenly steeper beyond the towns Chasquitambo and Chaucayán, with many bends and serpentines.

Cordillera Blanca

This mountain range is composed by gigantic summits covered with snow, which are among the most beautiful of the world. The White mountain range is considered the highest tropical mountain range in the world. It borders the Callejón de Huaylas to the east. It has a length of 180 km.

It has 35 peaks that are higher than 6,000 m and many other smaller ones, a real symphony of summits with different grades of difficulty in climbing.

This mountain range was called White, not only for its eternal snow but also for the chemical constitution of its quartz and feldspar rocks. It has the highest summit in Peru and the fifth one in America after Aconcagua, Ojos del Salado, Bonete and Mercedario: Huascarán, whose south peak reaches 6768 msnm. Huascarán's north peak reaches 6655 m.

Alpamayo whose height has been estimated in 5,947 m, has been considered as "the most beautiful snow mountain of the world". This statement was achieved by the distinguished Peruvian mountaineer César Morales Arnao who sent the photo of Alpamayo to the world contest of scenic beauty made in 1966 in Munich, Germany.

Huandoy N reaches 6,395 m, Huantsán reaches 6410 m, Chopicalqui reaches 6354 m, Copa N reaches 6173 m, Artesonraju reaches 6025 m, Santa Cruz S reaches 6,259 m and Hualcán reaches 6,126 m.

The beauty of the Cordillera Blanca is largely determined by the Cordillera Negra because this mountain range softens the winds that come from the Pacific Ocean. The Cordillera Negra, acting as a shield, avoids the thaw of the big glaciers from the Cordillera Blanca.

The Cordillera Negra has rocky peaks with very little winter snowfall, reaching a maximum height of 5500 m. Its name comes from the comparison with the white snowy peaks of the Cordillera Blanca.

Huascarán National Park

The Huascarán National Park is one of the most outstanding conservation parks in Peru, due to its landscapes that are full of peaks, lakes, canyons, torrents and waterfalls. Inside its borders, it can be observed the whole Cordillera Blanca and seven peaks of more than 6000 m height. They constitute one of the main international focuses for climbers and mountaineers. It was stated as a National Park on July 1, 1975, with a surface of 340,000 ha and a length of 158 km. This National Park includes parts of the following provinces: Recuay, Huaraz, Carhuaz, Yungay, Huaylas, Pomabamba, Mariscal Luzuriaga, Huari, Corongo, Sihuas and Bolognesi. This park has also been listed as a biosphere reservation and as a World Heritage Site by UNESCO.

The park territory is very uneven. It has snowy summits, which altitudes vary between 5000 and 6768 MSL. It also has gullies, that are deeply encased because of the fluvioglacial erosion, and a great number of lagoons. Inside the borders of the park, there are 663 glaciers that are distributed throughout 180 km, from the Tuku in the south up to the Champara in the north.

Regarding its climate, there are two very well defined seasons: The dry season from April to September becoming worse between the months of June and August and the wet season from October to May whose highest rainfall is between January and March.

Its flora is countless and beautiful, including important groups of Puya Raimondi. In its fauna, there are tarucas, spectacled bears, vicuñas, pumas, foxes, vizcachas, weasels, Andean mountain cats, opossums, hog-nosed skunks, etc.

There is also a great number of birds, predominantly ducks, American coots and hummingbirds.

Cordillera Negra

The route Casma-Huaraz is not a very highly travelled road. The highway begins with a paved path that arrives up to Yaután. Then it quickly begins to ascend through an unpaved path by the sides of the Cordillera Negra, following the course of the Casma River. This route becomes more steep once it arrives to Pariacoto. Along the road, there are not important towns at all, except for Pira that offers some traveler's services.

This route, extremely steep and narrow, goes between big abysses and gullies. It can be seen small rural districts with chacras (smallholdings) that have been sown with potatoes, wheat, barley and other food products. It can also be seen livestock and a lot of human activity.

The gullies of the Cordillera Negra -that goes, simultaneously, with the Cordillera Blanca throughout 150 km- are gloomy and dark. Most of them are dry or their flow is scarce. From north to south, there are some hills like Rumicruz (5,020 m), Rocarre (5,187 m), Cerro Rico (5,015 m), and Chunta (4,810 m).

The beauty of the Cordillera Blanca is largely determined by the Cordillera Negra because this mountain range soften the winds that come from the Pacific Ocean. The Cordillera Negra acts like a shield and avoids the thaw of the big glaciers that are located in the Cordillera Blanca.

The Cordillera Negra has rocky peaks with very little winter snow, reaching a maximum height of 5,500 m. Its name comes from the comparison with the white snowy peaks of the Cordillera Blanca.

Extreme sports
Extreme sports in the Callejón de Huaylas and the Huascarán National Park:

 * Mountaineering: the glaciers of the Cordillera Blanca constitute one of the most important world scenarios for ice climbing. Mountaineering can be practiced the whole year but the weather is best between the months of May and September.
 * Trekking: the prehispanic paths offer excellent opportunities for trekking during the whole year. On the way, it can be observed varied flora, fauna, impressive snowy mountains, gullies and deep canyons, archaeological sites and several typical villages. There are several routes that last from one day to three weeks.
 * Camping: it is a pleasant and a relaxing experience to spend the night under the moonlight, having as a unique companion: the stars and some constellations like Capricornus, Crux, Centaurus and others. This sport can be practiced at any time of the year.
 * Canoeing: the Santa River has the technical characteristics and different difficulty grades for practicing river sports as canoeing, kayak and others. For example, there are some rapids between Anta and Caraz that are good for those who are just beginning to practice this sport. The lakes Llankanuku and Qiruqucha also offer some special characteristic for a boat ride.
 * Cycling: the cyclists that ride on the highways and roads enjoy the practice of this sport by traveling inside and outside the Huascarán National Park. This sport can be practiced at any time of the year. The north area, near Caraz, offers the best rides, single tracks and down hill tracks.
 * Rock climbing: the granite belt that goes round the glaciers of the Cordillera Blanca constitutes the suitable place for practicing this sport. There are walls from 100 m to 1000 m of height that have many kinds of technical difficulties to get through. There is an odd scenario for this sport called Rocódromo de Monterrey.
 * Alpine skiing: it consists on slipping from the glaciers. The most favorable ones for practicing this sport are: Pastururi, Copa, Wallqan, Huascarán, Wallunarahu and Perlilla, the latter being recently discovered and promoted by the local government of the Asunción Province, with 6 km of moderate and steep slopes where competitions were held soon snowboarding and alpine skiing. These snowcapped mountains are ideal for practicing the slide on snow (also known as siquiesqui) and for making snowmen.
 * Paragliding – Hang gliding: along the Callejón de Huaylas there are several places that are favourable for the practice of these flight sports. They can be practiced at any time of the year.
 * Horse riding: it is a sport of big emotions. It is practiced on bridle paths with Peruvian horses that were raised in the Callejón de Huaylas.
 * Fishing: the rod fishing of trout can be practiced in rivers and lagoons of the Cordillera Blanca and Cordillera Negra at any time of the year.

Santa River and the Cañón del Pato
From Chimbote to Huallanca, there are approximately 140 km. This unpaved and very little travelled highway is a provisional line over the embankment of the old railroad. This railway and several tunnels were destroyed by the catastrophe of 1970.

The highway, outside Chimbote, goes through the wide flat and fertile embankments of the Santa valley and it continuous its course up to Huallanca.

From Chuquicara, the highway becomes narrower. The Chuquicara River is a major right-hand tributary of the Santa River. Its waters are black because they contain abundant coal sediments proceeding from the heights of Pallasca.

From Huallanca, it is possible to travel through the Cañón del Pato. This canyon is one of the many canyons that are along the 370 km of the Santa River. The Santa River has its source in the lake Conococha. This river is the most important river in the coast, because its annual water mass is 6100 million m3. As centuries went by, it has formed a narrow pass of 2000 m of altitude in the Cordillera Negra.

In this place, the waters turn into whirlpools and rapids before going out from a narrow gorge of 500 m that is called Cañón del Pato (Duck Canyon). This waterfall constitutes the source of hydroelectric energy in the power station of the Cañón del Pato, in Huallanca.

From Huallanca, it is possible to enter the Callejón de Huaylas by the highway that goes to Caraz. It is also a way to enter the Callejón de Conchucos (Conchucos valley).

Callejón de Conchucos
The Callejón de Conchucos is a beautiful succession of valleys located to the east of the Cordillera Blanca. It is connected by a highway from Catac to Huallanca.

There are eight provinces of the Ancash Region that cover the Callejón de Conchucos. They are Huari, Asunción, Antonio Raymondi, Mariscal Luzuriaga, Pomabamba, Sihuas, Corongo and Pallasca. This Callejón is located to the east of the Cordillera Blanca, that is to say, to the other side of the Callejón de Huaylas, before the Marañón River.

The topography of the soil presents high summits, deep valleys and inhospitable punas, making it a rough zone, such as most of the highland in Peru.

The northern provinces of Pallasca Province and Corongo Province have their own direct access towards Chimbote and the Callejón de Huaylas. The other provinces have a longitudinal highway of double entry, one from Huari Province and the other one from Huallanca District and Sihuas Province, joining Pomabamba Province, Mariscal Luzuriaga Province and Antonio Raymondi Province.

Transportation
Five main highways cross the department:
 * The North Pan-American highway, that crosses the coast of Ancash longitudinally.
 * Three east-west highways that connect the coast with the region of the highlands, most importantly the Callejón de Huaylas:
 * Pativilca – Huaraz – Caraz – Huallanca
 * Nepeña – Pamparumas – Caraz
 * Huarmey – Aija – Recuay
 * Casma – Huaraz
 * Chimbote – Huallanca – Caraz
 * One highway that crosses the Callejón de Conchucos (Conchucos Alley) longitudinally, to the east of the Cordillera Blanca.

In addition, the region has a network of local roads.

Notable people
Santiago Antúnez de Mayolo Santiago Antúnez de Mayolo, physicist, engineer and mathematician

title: Department of Ancash


text:
Talk:Ley line

Omission of origin
Why isn’t ancient Egypt referenced in this article? This is an ancient Egyptian concept; it is a fallacy to state its ancient European in its origin l. Purocaribe (talk) 01:51, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 * because there are no sources meeting WP:RS. The sources I've seen are all fringe. If you have some good academic sources, bring them here. Doug Weller  talk 14:36, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 * If that is what they believe, than shouldn't the article at least state the fact that this is what is commonly believed among proponents? I could see the claim that it was actually derived from Ancient Egypt needing academic sources, but are those really necessary just to state that the Egyptian origin is one of the widely held beliefs?

Idumea47b (talk) 05:41, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Including section about pop culture or fiction?
Considering the popularity of the idea in fiction I think it's deserving of mention. To my knowledge it's used in a good handful of novels as a supernatural means of transportation, among other things. As a trope within literature and video games I think it's had a significant influence. Learncraft (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 04:03, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Communiy comes before a magazine
" Michell's publications were accompanied by the launch of the Ley Hunter magazine and the appearance of a ley hunter community keen to identify ley lines across the British landscape." I have never yet heard of a magazine being launched prior to the appearance of reader base. Usually a community of interested people forms and a magazine is created to target and serve that group. Simply changing the order of the second sentence would improve it greatly. I think it probable that such a community existed even before Mitchell's book, and the interest simply spread more widely after the book, culminating in the publication of a magazine to serve the swelling community.

Idumea47b (talk) 06:07, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Provenance of pizza map
I love the map showing an alignment of pizza restaurants, however, is there any provenance for this? Otherwise would it count as original research? I think it's good to have it included, but some sort of reference would be great here. It's discussed in some archived chat, but with no reference to dataset etc.

Orbific (talk) 15:16, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

 * I removed the figure since no source is given for it. Cheers! DoctorMatt (talk) 00:19, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Claim
Somehow I reverted this edit by User:Skyerise when I just wanted to remove the word "intentionally" inserted earlier by User:Leutha. I don't know how exactly this happened, but afterwards I intended to revert those removals of "claim" too, then noticed I had already done it with the first edit, without explaining it in the edit summary. So, I'll explain here.

"Intentionally" is original research. The ley lines fans may sometimes say it was intentional, but usually the just point at it and goggle.

"Claim" is not a word to always delete, it is just a word to watch. WP:CLAIM says, To write that someone asserted or claimed something can call their statement's credibility into question, and that is exactly what should be done here. See WP:FRINGE. --Hob Gadling (talk) 08:28, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

 * Use of the word "claim" is simple, it the source cited calls it a "claim", then we can call it a claim. We cannot, as editors, introduce the word "claim" where the source doesn't use it. You will find I did not remove every instance, because in some cases it is in the source. The article already clearly states it is pseudoscience, so there is no good reason to use "claim" except where a source does. Skyerise (talk) 13:26, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Now that is a much better reason than the one given in the edit summary. But "not an improvement" is an even worse edit summary. --Hob Gadling (talk) 13:38, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, my edit summaries can be vague or cryptic. But I'm actually generating content so please forgive me. I only came by here due to the fact that I was writing an article on the album Leylines... Skyerise (talk) 21:53, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Ley line


text:
User:Zhu Bangguo

.

title: User:Zhu Bangguo


text:
Handbrake turn

The handbrake turn (also known as a bootleg or bootlegger's turn) is a driving technique used to deliberately slide a car sideways, either for the purpose of quickly negotiating a very tight bend, or for turning around well within the vehicle's own turning diameter.

Technique
The driver starts by using steering input to transfer weight to the outside tires; the handbrake is then used to lock the rear wheels, thus upsetting the adhesion between the tires and the road surface. With practice, the car can be placed accurately by releasing the handbrake and accelerating the vehicle. The technique is used in some forms of motorsport, for example rallying, autotesting, drifting and motorkhana.

Many sports cars, especially UK makes such as MG and Triumph, as late as the early 1970s were offered with a fly-off handbrake option for competition purposes—the button on the end of the lever has to be pressed before the brake will lock on, which is the reverse of the normal arrangement—allowing for faster and more controlled application in a handbrake turn, and less liable to be accidentally locked on while doing such a maneuver.

In a rear-wheel drive manual transmission vehicle, it is also necessary to operate the clutch to prevent the handbrake from stalling the engine.

Physics involved
In a normal turn, rear wheels follow the front ones because resistance to motion in the forward direction (in which the wheels turn) is significantly less than in the sideways direction. The latter provides the centripetal force that makes the rear end of the car follow the turn. When the driver locks the rear wheels with the handbrake, both directions offer the same resistance, so the rear end tends to keep moving in the existing direction (due to inertia) and thus slides out.

Usage
Handbrake turns are primarily a technique used to negotiate tight turns in motorsport but can also be used in certain other applications such as stunt or pursuit driving.

For stunt purposes, parallel parking can be completed in a single motion using the handbrake. This technique is often demonstrated at car shows, demonstrating the vehicle's agility and the driver's control.

In pursuit driving, the technique can be used for turning the car around in the width of two lanes without using a three-point maneuver (see bootleg turn), for example, to bewilder a pursuer. It can also be used to quickly negotiate tight corners.

The handbrake turn has colloquially been called the bootlegger's turn in the US as it was reported to be used by bootleggers transporting illegally manufactured alcoholic drinks while escaping from the IRS. It has been reportedly used by boy racers on public roads as a manoeuvre to show off to their friends.

Usage in drifting and rallying
Whereas pulling the handbrake is the easiest way to start a drift, it is rarely used in circuit racing because it causes a significant loss of speed at the exit of the corner. Racers use handbrake turning only to negotiate tight 180-degree bends that would otherwise require a three-point turn.

Handbrake turns are commonly used in rallying to negotiate tight, low-speed corners, and also as a means of performing manoeuvres and stunts.

Dangers
The handbrake turn is not recommended for novice racing drivers, as pulling the brake with too little or too much force will not lock the wheels correctly to allow the vehicle to negotiate the corner correctly.

Like other methods of inducing a drift, the handbrake turn does pose a serious risk of the vehicle flipping over, and caution must be taken when performing the maneuver with a vehicle with a high center of gravity (such as an SUV). The basic danger lies in bad judgment of surroundings, resulting in the sliding vehicle hitting an obstacle (another vehicle, a guardrail or a tree), or bad judgment of speed, resulting in the vehicle driving off the road rather than sliding, or releasing the handbrake when the vehicle is moving sideways so that all tire forces are sideways.

title: Handbrake turn


text:
Talk:Rail (bird)

Untitled
Leave the picture for the moment, Adrian - I'll attend to that shortly by finding a tall, narrow picture to replace it with Tannin 08:59 8 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Stub tag
There's a stub tag on this article, when the wikiproject bird tag says its been rated as a start class article. Canadianshoper 17:18, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Virginia Rail?
In my section of the USA (Northeast), and in general in the northern US and in México, the most common rail seems to be the Virginia Rail. Why, then, is this species not mentioned in the article? David spector (talk) 21:04, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * There are forty genera, and 142 species, found all over the world. A number of common and rare NA species are in the article, but not every species can get mentioned. In articles about families and other higher level taxa, mentions of individual species are often in the context of illustrative examples (Takahe = example of flightless species, Clapper Rail = example of long-billed species).Sabine's Sunbird  talk  22:08, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia does have a page on the Virginia rail] Abote2 (talk) 21:10, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Descendants of non-ancestor?
This sentence in Rail (bird) seems to be garbled: "In examining the phylogeny of G. philippensis, although the species is clearly polyphyletic, it is not the ancestor of most of its flightless descendants, revealing that the flightless condition evolved in rails before speciation was complete." How can it not be the ancestor of its descendants?

Anyway, I'm adding a gloss on "polyphyletic", as it is very technical. New sentence (not much better): "In examining the phylogeny of G. philippensis, although the species is clearly polyphyletic (it has more than one ancestral species), it is not the ancestor of most of its flightless descendants, revealing that the flightless condition evolved in rails before speciation was complete." Zaslav (talk) 21:07, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Gymnocrex
Where does it fit in the cladogram? 104.153.40.58 (talk) 16:13, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

POV? Or what do you call this kind of shade-throwing?
""The family Rallidae was introduced (as Rallia) by the French polymath Constantine Samuel Rafinesque in 1815.[31][32] The family has traditionally been grouped with two families of larger birds, the cranes and bustards, as well as several smaller families of usually "primitive" midsized amphibious birds, to make up the order Gruiformes. The alternative Sibley-Ahlquist taxonomy, which has been widely accepted in America, raises the family to ordinal level as the Ralliformes. Given uncertainty about gruiform monophyly, this may or may not be correct; it certainly seems more justified than most of the Sibley-Ahlquist proposals."

There _has_ to be a less inflammatory way of saying this. Not knowing the status of the taxonomy variations being discussed, I'd rather not take the chance of fixing it. Is this reasonable, though? "The Sibley-Ahlquist taxonomy, on the other hand, raises the group(clade? I feel that repeating family here is argumentative given what comes after: maybe not if it's changed) to ordinal level as the Ralliformes. Though this has become widely accepted in America, uncertainty about gruiform monophyly prevent it from being adopted everywhere."

I can't just drop that it there, given that I don't know how standard the Sibley-Ahlquist taxonomy is in America or anywhere else, or whether my restatement introduces some distortion of its own. But seriously, the current language reads like a blind item in a gossip column.````LucyKemnitzer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucy Kemnitzer (talk • contribs) 04:24, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Rail (bird)


text:
Hand-waving

Hand-waving (with various spellings) is a pejorative label for attempting to be seen as effective – in word, reasoning, or deed – while actually doing nothing effective or substantial. It is often applied to debating techniques that involve fallacies, misdirection and the glossing over of details. It is also used academically to indicate unproven claims and skipped steps in proofs (sometimes intentionally, as in lectures and instructional materials), with some specific meanings in particular fields, including literary criticism, speculative fiction, mathematics, logic, science and engineering.

The term can additionally be used in work situations, when attempts are made to display productivity or assure accountability without actually resulting in them. The term can also be used as a self-admission of, and suggestion to defer discussion about, an allegedly unimportant weakness in one's own argument's evidence, to forestall an opponent dwelling on it. In debate competition, certain cases of this form of hand-waving may be explicitly permitted.

Hand-waving is an idiomatic metaphor, derived in part from the use of excessive gesticulation, perceived as unproductive, distracting or nervous, in communication or other effort. The term also evokes the sleight-of-hand distraction techniques of stage magic, and suggests that the speaker or writer seems to believe that if they, figuratively speaking, simply wave their hands, no one will notice or speak up about the holes in the reasoning. This implication of misleading intent has been reinforced by the pop-culture influence of the Star Wars franchise, in which mystically powerful hand-waving is fictionally used for mind control, and some uses of the term in public discourse are explicit Star Wars references.

Actual hand-waving motions may be used either by a speaker to indicate a desire to avoid going into details, or by critics to indicate that they believe the proponent of an argument is engaging in a verbal hand-wave inappropriately.

Spelling and history
The spelling of the compound varies (both with regard to this idiom and the everyday human communication gesture of waving). While hand-waving is the most common spelling of the unitary present participle and gerund in this usage, and hand-wave of the simple present verb, hand wave dominates as the noun-phrase form. Handwaving and handwave may be preferred in some circles, and are well attested. "Hand waving" is mostly used otherwise, e.g. "she had one hand waving, the other on the rail", but is found in some dictionaries in this form. A more arch, mock-antiquarian construction is waving of [the] hands. Superlative constructions such as "vigorous hand-waving", "waved their hand[s] furiously", "lots of waving of hands", etc., are used to imply that the hand-waver lacks confidence in the information being conveyed, cannot convincingly express or defend the core of the argument being advanced. The descriptive epithet hand-waver has been applied to those engaging in hand-waving, but is not common. The opposite of hand-waving is sometimes called nose-following in mathematics.

However it is spelled, the expression is also used in the original literal meaning of gesturing in a greeting, departing, excited, or attention-seeking manner by waving the hands, as in "friendly were the hand-waving crowds ..." (— Sinclair Lewis), which dates to the mid-17th century as a hyphenated verb and the early 19th century United States as a fully compounded verb. It is unclear when the figurative usage arose. The Oxford Dictionary of English lists it as "extended use", and it appears primarily in modern American dictionaries, some of which label it as "informal".

In debate, generally
Handwaving is frequently used in low-quality debate, including political campaigning and commentary, issue-based advocacy, advertising and public relations, tabloid journalism, opinion pieces, Internet memes, and informal discussion and writing. If the opponent in a debate or a commentator on an argument alleges hand-waving, it suggests that the proponent of the argument, position or message has engaged in one or more fallacies of logic, usually informal, and/or glossed over non-trivial details, and is attempting to challenges and deflect questions, as if swatting at flies. The distraction inherent in the sense of the term has become a key part of the meaning. The fallacies in question vary, but often include one of the many variants of argument to emotion, and in political discourse frequently involve unjustified assignment or transference of blame. Hand-waving is not itself a fallacy; the proponent's argument may incidentally be correct despite their failure to properly support it. A tertiary meaning refers to use of poorly-reasoned arguments specifically to impress or to persuade.

The New Hacker's Dictionary (a.k.a. The Jargon File) observes: "If someone starts a sentence with "Clearly..." or "Obviously..." or "It is self-evident that...", it is a good bet he is about to handwave (alternatively, use of these constructions in a sarcastic tone before a paraphrase of someone else's argument suggests that it is a handwave). The theory behind this term is that if you wave your hands at the right moment, the listener may be sufficiently distracted to not notice that what you have said is bogus [i.e., incorrect]. Failing that, if a listener does object, you might try to dismiss the objection with a wave of your hand."

The implication that hand-waving is done with the specific intent to mislead has long been attached to the term, due to the use of literal waving of a hand – either natural-looking or showy, but never desperate – by illusionists to distract audiences and misdirect their attention from the mechanisms of the sleight-of-hand, gimmicked props or other trick being used in the performance. This meaning has become reinforced in recent decades by the influence of Star Wars (1977) and its sequels, in which the fictional Jedi mind trick involves a subtle hand wave with mystical powers – that only work on the weak-minded – to disguise reality and compel compliance. Consequently, there is an implication in current usage that a hand-waver may be craftily intending to deceive, and has a low opinion of the intelligence of the opponent or (especially) an audience or the general public. The labels "Jedi hand wave" and "Jedi mind trick" themselves are sometimes applied, in a tongue-in-cheek way, to this manipulation technique in public discourse; US Congressman Luke Messer's use of it in reference to President Barack Obama's 2016 State of the Union address generated headlines.

In an unplanned debate or presentation, an off-the-cuff essay, or an informal discussion, the proponent may have little or no time for preparation. Participants in such exchanges may use the term in reference to their own arguments, in the same sense as an author admitting a minor plot flaw. When the proponents use the term, they are conceding that they know an ancillary point of or intermediate step in their arguments is poorly supported; they are suggesting that such details are not important and do not affect their key arguments or conclusions, and that the hand-waved details should be excluded from current consideration. Examples include when they believe a statement is true but cannot prove it at that time, and when the sources upon which they are relying conflict in minor ways: "I'm hand-waving over the exact statistics here, but they all show at least a 20% increase, so let's move on".

In formal debate competition, certain forms of hand-waving may sometimes be explicitly permitted. In policy debate, the concept of fiat allows a team to pursue a line a reasoning based on a scenario that is not presently true, if a judge is satisfied that the case has been that it could become true.

In literary criticism
By extension, handwaving is used in literary, film and other media criticism of speculative fiction to refer to a plot device (e.g., a scientific discovery, a political development, or rules governing the behavior of a fictional creature) that is left unexplained or sloppily explained because it is convenient to the story, with the implication that the writer is aware of the logical weakness but hopes the audience will not notice or will suspend disbelief regarding such a macguffin, deus ex machina, continuity error or plot hole.

The fictional material "handwavium" (a.k.a. "unobtainium", among other humorous names) is sometimes referred to in situations where the plot requires access to a substance of great value and properties that cannot be explained by real-world science, but is convenient to solving, or central to creating, a problem for the characters in the story. Perhaps the best known example is the spice melange, a fictional drug with supernatural properties, in Frank Herbert's far-future science-fantasy epic, Dune.

Hand-waving has come to be used in role-playing games to describe actions and conversations that are quickly glossed over, rather than acted out in full according to the rules. This may be done to keep from bogging down the play of the game with time-consuming but minor details.

In mathematics
In mathematics, and disciplines in which mathematics plays a major role, hand-waving refers to either absence of formal proof or methods that do not meet mathematical rigor. In practice, it often involves the use of unrepresentative examples, unjustified assumptions, key omissions and faulty logic, and while these may be useful in expository papers and seminar presentations, they ultimately fall short of the standard of proof needed to establish a result. Proof by intimidation is one form of hand-waving.

The mathematical profession tends to be receptive to informed critiques from any listener, and a claimant to a new result is expected to be able to answer any such question with a logical argument, up to a full proof. Should a speaker apparently fail to give such an answer, anyone in the audience who can supply the needed demonstration may sometimes upstage the speaker. The objector in such a case might receive some measure credit for the theorem the hand-waver presented. The opposite of hand-waving in mathematics (and related fields) is sometimes called nose-following, which refers to the unimaginative development of a narrow line of reasoning that—while correct—can also end up making the subject dry and uninteresting.

The rationale for this culture of hyper-critical scrutiny is suggested by a quote of G. H. Hardy: "[A mathematician's] subject is the most curious of all—there is none in which truth plays such odd pranks. It has the most elaborate and the most fascinating technique, and gives unrivalled openings for the display of sheer professional skill."

In applied science and engineering
Hand-waving arguments in engineering and other applied sciences often include order-of-magnitude estimates and dimensional analysis, especially in the use of Fermi problems in physics and engineering education. However, competent, well-intentioned researchers and professors also rely on explicitly declared hand-waving when, given a limited time, a large result must be shown and minor technical details cannot be given much attention—e.g., "it can be shown that z is an even number", as an intermediary step in reaching a conclusion. Another example of hand-waving can be found in the oversimplifications of the geologic representations commonly used in groundwater models created in support of land-development applications, especially those involving metal mining and aggregate extraction. Back-of-the-envelope calculations are approximate ways to get an answer by over-simplification, and are comparable to hand-waving in this sense.

In business
Hand-waving has been used to describe work-related situations where productivity is seemingly displayed, but deliverables are not produced, especially in the context of intentional engagement in busy work or pretend-work, vague claims of overwork or complications, impenetrably buzzword-laden rationalizations for delays or otherwise poor performance, and plausible-sounding but weak excuse-making and attention-deflecting tactics. In employment situations, as in political discourse, a hand-waving effort may seek to shift blame to other parties.

Another use is in reference to fiscal problems, such as an inability to adequately explain accounting discrepancies or an avoidance of accountability for missing funds.

title: Hand-waving


text:
Kreisau Circle

The Kreisau Circle (German: Kreisauer Kreis, ) (1940–1944) was a group of about twenty-five German dissidents in Nazi Germany led by Helmuth James von Moltke, who met at his estate in the rural town of Kreisau, Silesia. The circle was composed of men and a few women from a variety of backgrounds, including those of noble descent, devout Protestants and Catholics, intellectuals, military personnel, socialists and conservatives. Despite their differences, the members of the Kreisau Circle found common interest in their opposition to Hitler's regime on moral and religious grounds. At their meetings, the circle discussed how they would reorganize the German government after the end of the Third Reich.

Although the circle did not promote violent overthrow of the regime, their planning was considered by the Nazis to be treasonous as it rested on the assumption that Germany would lose the war. The group began to falter after Helmuth von Moltke was arrested by the Gestapo in January 1944 and eventually came to an end when most of its members were arrested following Claus von Stauffenberg's attempt on Hitler's life on 20 July 1944.

Intellectual background
The members of the Kreisau Circle were heavily influenced by popular movements in Germany that followed World War I, most notably the German Youth Movement and German religious socialism. Although motivated by differing ideologies (the German Youth Movement in a return to nature and religious socialism in a return to Christian values), each faction inspired resistance to the Nazi regime by encouraging their followers to reconsider traditionally rigid political, social, and religious distinctions and engage in discourse with those who disagreed with them. These fundamental similarities created an environment that allowed for persons of a variety of backgrounds to meet and participate in intellectual resistance to the Third Reich.

German Youth Movement
The German Youth Movement was characterized by the creation of various youth organizations that emphasized a return to nature since 1896. For example, the Wandervogel, a youth movement that arose in the early 20th century, encouraged youth to reject their middle-class upbringings that overemphasized materialism. The movement stressed the importance of the individual and emboldened them to pursue their interests rather than follow traditional class expectations.

Many members of the German youth groups were sent to war in 1914. Following great losses during the war, young men found themselves fascinated with Volkish ideology, the idea of reunification of the German people that transcended class distinctions. The preoccupation with the Volk made for an easy transition for some into Nazi ideology, but for others, such as Helmuth von Moltke, their roots in a youth movement that questioned the status quo led them to resist a regime that undermined the freedom which they sought through their youth organizations.

Löwenberger Arbeitsgemeinschaften (Löwenberger Working Groups)
An extension of the German Youth Movement, the Löwenberger Arbeitsgemeinschaften was an organization of college professors, youth movement leaders, unemployed workers, students, and farmers who came together to work in work camps and discuss social and political issues and solve the problems Silesia faced (i.e. high unemployment) in the aftermath of WWI. Between the days of 14 March and 1 April 1928, approximately one-hundred people from a variety of backgrounds came together for the first Silesian work camp. In the mornings, participants would partake in physical labour. This was followed by lecture courses, discussion groups, and leisure time. Two additional camps followed in 1929 and 1930. One participant described his time at the camps, "Representatives of the three social groups in the nation were able to achieve a common language that had proved beyond the grasp of the older generation. A group such as this, which formed a cross-section of the community, was capable of rising above class and party interests". The camp allowed participants to cooperate with people of different upbringings and discuss how they could work together for the common good of their community. This lesson that people of differing social classes and political views could collaborate successfully would greatly influence Helmuth James von Moltke in his construction of the Kreisau Circle, who himself was an important contributor to the Löwenberger movement.

Religious Socialism in Germany
Religious socialism in 20th century Germany also influenced members of the Kreisau Circle. This movement is notably characterized by the work of Paul Tillich, who sought to fashion socialism into an ideology that was complementary with Christian faith. He looked to create “socialist political forms that were rooted in a religious substance”. Tillich called this socialism “theonomous”. Tillich emphasized the importance of social justice which he defined as "the demand for a society in which it is possible for every individual and for every group to live meaningfully and purposefully, a demand for a meaningful society".

Similarly to the youth movements, religious socialism challenged conventional political divisions. The movement asked followers not to focus on the differences between Christianity and socialism but rather see how the two could work together to create a better society. Prison chaplain Harald Poelchau, a member of the Kreisau Circle, was a close follower of Tillich, and other members such as Horst von Einsiedel, Carl-Dietrich von Trotha, Adolf Reichwein, and Adam von Trott zu Solz were also affiliated with religious socialism.

Origins of the Circle
The Kreisau Circle was officially formed in 1940 with the merging of the intellectual circles of Helmuth James Graf von Moltke and Peter Graf Yorck von Wartenberg. Moltke and Yorck were descendants of prominent Prussian nobility and therefore were initially favored by Hitler's regime. Helmuth von Moltke, for example, descended from Field Marshal von Moltke, who was a prominent military commander in the Bismarck era. The Nazis honored his family title by giving him a position in their High Command. Despite this special treatment, both men felt morally obliged to resist Hitler. In 1938, both men began to form separate social circles in which they discussed the problems of the Reich and their hopes for Germany's future. Moltke's circle, which included Einsiedel, was largely preoccupied with the sociological and economic problems that Germany would face after the Reich fell. Yorck's circle, which began to meet frequently at his home, focused mostly on the administrative questions of how the government should run after Hitler's regime had ended. In January 1940, Moltke was connected to Yorck through a mutual friend. They both agreed that the Third Reich's defeat was inevitable and that a new government would have to be prepared to take over in this event. The two valued their common desire to oppose the regime through intellectual means despite differences in political views. The circle was formed in November 1940, against the backdrop of Hitler's successes in France.

Members

The membership of the Kreisau Circle was varied, with affiliates ranging from conservatives to socialists, religious and non-religious, and all of the above. Although Freya von Moltke, Helmuth von Moltke, Peter von Yorck and Marion von Yorck were at the center of the circle, the group was more of a network of friends than a formal organization. Freya von Moltke said her husband and Yorck searched for, “people who objected, who were opposed to National Socialism and were trying to envisage a better Germany beyond National Socialism, which at the time seemed completely impossible”. Their differences were valued as Moltke and Yorck believed that debate would assist them to accomplish their common goal for a better Germany following “X-day”, or the day after the end of the Reich.

Helmuth James Graf von Moltke
The Kreisau Circle's most notable member was Helmuth James Graf von Moltke, who was considered to be the leader of the organization. Moltke was born on 11 March 1907 in Kreisau, Silesia to one of Prussia's best known military families. The Moltke household encouraged discussion and debate. For instance, although both of Moltke's parents were Christian Scientists, he became an Evangelical Christian at the age of 14. He attended university from 1925 to 1929 and studied law and political science. During this time, he became an important leader of the Lowenberger Arbeitsgemeinschaften. He also found himself drawn to the Schwarzwald Circle in 1929, which was an intellectual discussion group led by Eugenie Schwarzwald, where he met his future wife, Freya Deichmann. Later that year, Helmuth was forced to return home from school to Kreisau to manage his family's estate. He married Freya on 18 October 1931. In 1932, the Kreisau Estate had been stabilized, allowing Helmuth to resume his career in law in Berlin. He eventually opened his own private firm along with his colleague Karl von Lewinski to practice international law. In this occupation, Moltke assisted Jewish émigrés to escape the Nazi regime despite the obvious threat that this presented to his own safety.

From 1935 to 1938, he spent time in England in hopes of joining the British bar. Although these plans were halted by the declaration of war in September 1939, it was during this time that Moltke gained many of his connections outside of Germany. He returned to Berlin and was drafted into the Abwehr, where he attempted to ensure adherence to international law. During this time, Moltke kept in contact with his friends from the Silesian work camps, such as Horst von Einsendel. They largely discussed sociological and economic consequences of the Third Reich. In January 1940, Moltke met Peter Graf Yorck von Wartenburg. By November 1940, the circles of Moltke and Yorck had merged to create the Kreisau Circle.

Peter Graf Yorck von Wartenburg
Peter Graf Yorck von Wartenburg was born on 13 November 1904 to a well-known family of Prussian nobles. The family emphasized the importance of scholarship and the arts and encouraged opposition to authority. Peter's father, Heinrich, called himself "His Majesty's most loyal opposition". Yorck studied law in Bonn and Breslau and during this time became critical of the failing republic. Following Kristallnacht in 1938 and a trip to Prague that made him realize the Nazis' imperialist intentions, Yorck became increasingly troubled with Hitler's regime and began to bring groups of dissenters to his home to discuss what was to be done after the fall of the Third Reich. Members of these initial groups would later become a part of the Kreisau Circle.

Women in the Kreisau Circle
The participation of women in the Kreisau Circle discussion was often limited to the presence of their husbands. Freya von Moltke, a founding participant, was cut off from the circle's correspondence following her husband Helmuth von Moltke's arrest. There are also no known female members who were not married to a male member. However, despite these limitations, women played an integral role in the Kreisau Circle. Margrit von Trotha, for example, utilized her skills as an economist to partake in the plans for Germany's future economy. In addition, in Marion Yorck von Wartenburg's memoirs, she refers to the circle as "our group", indicating that she was a part of the circle's membership and discourse. A known list of female members of the circle includes: Freya von Moltke (lawyer), Marion Yorck von Wartenburg (lawyer), Margrit von Trotha (economist), Rosemarie Reichwein (physician/therapist), and Irene Yorck von Wartenburg.

Other Protestant members
Additional Protestant members of the circle included Horst von Einsiedel, Carl-Dietrich von Trotha, Adolf Reichwein, Otto von der Gablentz, Theodor Steltzer, Adam von Trott, Hans-Bernd von Haeften, Harald Poelchau, and Eugen Gerstenmaier.

Catholic members
Catholic members included Hans Peters, Hans Lukaschek, Paulus Husen, Augustin Rösch, Lothar Konig, and Alfred Delp.

Socialist members
Socialists members included Carlo Mierendorff, Theodor Haubach, and Julius Leber.

Proposals for the future
The activities of the Kreisau Circle formed around the idea that the fall of the Third Reich was in the near future. The day after this day when the new government would need to take over was referred to as "Day X". This day would mark the beginning of a new Germany and the end of an historical era. Therefore, based on this assumption, the job of the Kreisau Circle was to prepare for this day. On 24 April 1941, the Kreisau Circle created a memorandum titled, Starting-point, Objectives and Tasks. In this text, the Circle expresses their belief that with the end of the Third Reich would also come the end of nationalism, racism, and party politics.

Although a general consensus existed regarding the imminent fall of the Third Reich, the question of what this reformed Germany would look like remained up for debate. According to Freya von Moltke, some of the most pressing questions that the group sought to answer were, "How can I make democrats out of Germans who had not been able, really, to run a democracy properly?" and "How to build a new economy and whether it should be free or not free".

In 1943, Moltke began to prepare formal drafts for a new German constitution to answer these questions. In a constitutional draft made on 9 August 1943, Moltke outlined a new Reich structure which would be self-governing and rest upon the, “natural divisions of the nation: family, municipality, and land”. Basic freedoms were to be restored. Germany would become a federal state with a weak central government, divided into provinces of between 3 and 5 million people, the provinces would also be divided into self-governing communities, organised into districts. The regions would have parliaments elected by the district assemblies. The minimum voting age would be 27. The All eligible voters, which Moltke defined as all persons over the age of 21 or have served in the military, would elect municipal and county representative assemblies. These district assemblies would then elect the regional legislature, which would have the responsibility of electing those in the Reichstag. In the realm of culture and education, Moltke emphasized the importance of a renewed relationship with the German Evangelical Church and the German Catholic Church. Moltke and other members in the circle wanted a restoration of Christian values that they felt had been lost and led to Hitler's regime. With the return of Christian values, the group believed that greater acceptance and cooperation between all peoples would occur and lead to the political unification of the European continent. However, this is not to be mistaken for intolerance of other religions, as Moltke emphasizes that in this new government, "The freedom of [religious] faith and conscience is guaranteed". Moltke hoped this government would create a unified Germany where freedom and personal responsibility would be complementary to order and leadership.

Arrests in January 1944
In the autumn of 1943, Helmuth von Moltke learned from an informant that a Gestapo spy had discovered an anti-Nazi salon in Berlin and that there would be a round-up of all participants. Moltke warned his friend who had been present at the salon, Otto Kiep, of the round-ups. Kiep, former German Consul General in New York and member of the Abwehr's counterintelligence department under Admiral Wilhelm Canaris, failed to escape and was arrested in January 1944. The Gestapo later discovered that von Moltke had warned him of the arrests, and Helmuth himself was then arrested on 19 January 1944. This left the Kreisau Circle without one of its integral members. Freya von Moltke was also ousted from the group following Helmuth's arrest as the members were worried she would be interrogated. During this time, Yorck struggled to maintain cohesion of the group. However, this was not the death knell of the circle as the Gestapo was not yet aware of the resistance. Prior to the attempted assassination of Adolf Hitler, Helmuth von Moltke was treated fairly in prison and allowed to correspond with his wife Freya.

20 July 1944 attempt and executions
On 20 July 1944 a group of dissidents attempted to assassinate Hitler with a bomb and failed. Claus von Stauffenberg, cousin of Peter Yorck, was among the leading figures in this attempt to create "Day-X". However, the bombing only injured Hitler and led to a series of arrests. Peter Yorck was arrested and executed on 8 August 1944 for his involvement. Although Moltke himself was not involved, his close association with Yorck proved fatal as he was also executed on 23 January 1945. These arrests and executions signaled the formal end of the activities of the Kreisau Circle.

Legacy
When "X-day" finally came in May 1945, none of the Kreisau Circle's proposals for Germany's future were implemented. Although their plans never came to fruition, the legacy of resistance established by the Kreisau Circle still remains important. The members of Kreisau came together, despite their individual differences, to fashion a Germany which was democratic, anti-racist, and internationalist. Those at the Kreisau Circle committed treason and sacrificed their lives for their belief of a fairer society where opposition was heard, and that if heard together these voices could fashion a better world. They were idealists in a totalitarian regime which threatened to extinguish any trace of resistance.

Many of the surviving members of the circle continued to remain active after the war. For example, Marion Yorck received a judgeship in Berlin and Rosemarie Reichwein began her own physical therapy clinic. In addition, Freya von Moltke transformed the Kreisau estate into the Krzyzowa Foundation for Mutual Understanding in Europe on 10 July 1990. This foundation bases its work on the principles of the Kreisau Circle, and continues to look towards developing understanding between persons from different social, political, and cultural backgrounds.

title: Kreisau Circle


text:
Talk:Galileo Galilei/Archive 1

Untitled
When Galileo was defending the copernican model, it was not scientifically superior to the Ptolemaic system. Copernicus still tried to use circular orbits, and as they failed, had to use epicycles and other resources of Ptolemaic kinematics. Only after Kepler's work (that was largely ignored by Galilei) was incorporated in the theory, and Newton's law of gravity gave a sound physical basis to the whole system, was the heliocentric model undoubtedly superior.

Also, despite what is said, the Church did not approve the Ptolemaic system as real. It simply stated that both were simply devices to predict positions. It was Galileo who tried to force an acceptance of the Copernican system as "real"

''Wasn't the church in definite favor of a geocentric universe, though? At least, there were many religious arguments put forth for it, and Copernicus undoubtedly published posthumously for some reason or another. Also the church had just finished some council or another where they decided there absolute and final stance on all sorts of issues, which I vaguely recall Galileo was opposing somehow...maybe the non-Aristotelian physics. In any case, I agree that the church was being fairly nice until Galileo got out of hand.

--Josh Grosse''

 * Copernicus did not publish posthumously. De Revolutionibus had been in the process of being printed since 1541, and the first complete copies did make it into circulation shortly before his death in 1543.  Moreover, though, he had published the Narratio prima, which was a greatly shortened form of Del Revolutionibus, in 1540.  Also, he published a trigonometry text (a completely non-contraversial topic) in 1542, although he had written most of it substantially beforehand.  So the idea that Copernicus delayed publication until his death to avoid religious persecution is rather implausible.  It seems more likely that Copernicus was quite a perfectionist, and spent much of his life refining and adding to his works.  It was only in the last few years of his life that he published his writings, both contraversial and otherwise, more because he knew his time to work on them had run out, and he wanted to see them in print before he died, not after.  --User:Shimmin

I think you got some confusion with the terms philosopher and scientist Josh Grosse.

''Not to mention superior. Anyway I left your text there. I'm not AxelBoldt that likes deleting here and there.''

--little guru
 * The word "scientist" itself is probably recent. Newton called himself "natural philosophergiu4hngin4g

Didn't mention superiority, and I'm not mixing philosophy and science up - the two fields split fairly recently, and much earlier material falls into both categories, in scope if not methodology.

---tyy4uy64u6

Even in its early form, though, the Copernican system was clearly superior to Ptolemy in that the model of a tilted Earth rotating around the sun explained the oddly-inclined motion of sunspots in a simple way that Ptolemy could not, for example. Yes, Copernicus got a few things wrong like circular orbits, and Galileo himself was mistaken about his theory of tides being caused directly by the rotation of the Earth, but overall, his theories were still far superior to Ptolemy.

 * Sunspots? No one even knew about sunspots' existence, much less their motions, until 1612, and Kepler had put forth elements for an elliptical orbit of Mars in 1609, with the other planets following thereafter, so there wasn't any time for an early Copernican system to explain sunspots.  User:Shimmin

The church might not have accepted Ptolemy as "real" (and I don't think my text claims that), but at no point did Galileo ever claim that Copernicus' model was real either. The churuch's main concern was with scripture that claimed the Earth was stationary. The generally-accepted Ptolemaic system fit with that; the Copernican system (even in its early less-than perfect form) did not. Galileo pointed out that by _assuming_ a Copernican model, you could more easily calculate and predict certain things, but at no point in his life did he ever claim (at least publicly) that the system was "real"; he firmly backed away from such claims at every opportunity. De Revolutionibus itself is a masterpiece of weaseling and backpedaling.

Note: As I understand it, De Revolutionibus is no such thing, except in so far as there is an introduction that states the theory is intended for calculations and not as a description, which was not put in by the original author.

Did Galileo claim the universe was heliocentric, though? I can't imagine why he wouldn't have - after all, he defied the church to publish material on it (assuming the Dialogues mention the topic), and it seems more likely that he would do so if he though it was genuinely valid. --- Actually the church claimed that in the book of Joshua when the text says that miraculously "the sun stood still" it implies that the sun rotates around the earth. This among other texts led the church to believe that be bible claimed that the Copernican theory was false, but it is now commonly understood that these texts were only intended to describe what the spectators saw, not to describe the natural processes behind the events, so the church now has no problem with the heliocentric position. Does anyone besides me feel that Galileo should be credited, even more so than Newton, for founding modern science by conducting experiments rather than relying on mere conjecture (as Aristotle did). Or was there someone before Galileo who not only relied on experiment, but realized that it was the only way to really learn anything about the world?--

BlackGriffen

I think Francis Bacon came before Galileo in that regard. --LDC

 * Bacon may have philosophized about the scientific method; Galileo actually practiced it.

 * Bacon did in fact perform some experiments, mostly in alchemy, but it is true that most of what he did was promoting the method in writing, speculating, and collecting other people's (Arab's) results.

--AxelBoldt

 * By the way, is there any historical evidence of a person using a telescope to examine the night sky, prior to Galileo? In "Galileo's daughter" the author says Galileo first picked up a telescope ten years after its invention by Dutch spectacle makers. People used it to spot ships coming over the horizon. She claims Galileo first turned it towards the sky.

--Ed Poor

There is an account of Thomas Harriot observing the moon with a three-power scope in June of 1609, and no recorded account of Gallileo doing so before Obtober of that year. Galileo did have telescopes before then, so it is likely that he did so earlier, but it is just as likely that any number of people who had the first telescopes in 1608 did so but did not record it. Galileo should certainly be credited as the one who popularized the practice, but it is unlikely that he was in fact the first. --LDC

There's a journalistic account of the new instrument being demonstrated before visiting dignitaries to the Hague, dated 10 September 1608. In any case, it would have to have been a very new instrument, because the patent applications (by three different lens-makers) on the instrument were all made in the last week of September. This alone doesn't make the 10 September date implausible though, because also in the last week of September, there was a spyglass for sale in Frankfurt, several hundred miles to the south, so word of the invention would have needed time to make it there. User:Shimmin

 * Okay, he's not the first. I've stirred up a lot of trouble today. Gotta start checking my sources and distinguishing between what I guess/hope and what I know (tucks in tail, slinks away).

--Ed Poor

It is commonly taught in science classes that Galileo was the first, so it is natural that that factoid would end up here. Here's a good rule of thumb: anything you ever learned about history in school is probably wrong. :-) Note, for example, The Myth of the Lone Inventor.  Factoids of "X was the first to..." form are about as reliable as "X invented..."  --LDC

I think Bacon and Galileo should be mentioned in any article on the development of the scientific method. I don't know about "credit" in terms of "lone inventor", but it would nice to know what part each had in science's development. I make no claims for or against either. It's science I love, not dead white males (nothing against them, though).

--Ed Poor

I certainly agree that any article on the foundations of science ought to mention both men; but this isn't an article on that--it's an article on Galileo. If he, personally, was influenced by Francesco Bacone, then that should be mentioned. But otherwise, I see no need to necessarily mention him, though I'm sure some description of Galileo's role in founding modern science might mention Bacon in passing. --LDC

The following passage seems a bit anti-church:

 * he was forced to recant and put under life-long house arrest. The Church, and most everyone else, held to a Ptolemaic, or Aristotelian view, incorporating an Earth-centered theory of the universe. Recent scholarship has highlighted the fact that many of Galileo's problems with the Inquisition stemmed more from his lack of judgment than from any great desire by the Catholic Church to suppress his ideas.

 * Nevertheless, Galileo remains a classic case of a scholar forced to recant some of his best work because it offended powerful forces in society.

What exactly was he "forced to recant"? The mobility of the earth?

What were the terms of the "life-long house arrest" and when did it start? Was he guarded, told not to leave his estate, or what?

In what way did Galileo's "lack of judgment" contribute to his problems with the Inquisition?

 * "Lack of judgment" might be a bit strong, but if you actually read the Diologio, you will understand exactly what whoever said that is talking about.  It was more than a scientific treatise; it was also a rather vicious satire.  The speaker in the dialogue who represents the Aristotelean viewpoint is named Simplico (meaning buffoon or simpleton), and this character is not only portrayed as a fool, but at many points directly parodies various church officials.  For example, his final lines are a direct quote from Urban VIII, and this goes a long ways toward explaining why parties who had been among Galileo's supporters in the Papal court (including the Pope himself) as one closed ranks and turned against him in his 1632 trial.  It wasn't about theology or science anymore.  This time, it was personal.

 * Truly, the heads of the Church were among the most powerful men in Italy and to a lesser extent Germany in the 17th century, and truly, the Galileo affair was an egregious abuse of that power. But honestly, if he was going to publish a Copernicanist treatise, Galileo should have known better than to publish it in the form of the Diologio.  And his correspondence shows he did know better.  Whereas normally it would have been submitted to the censors in Rome, he worked out a deal with the censorship authorities to have the book's preface and conclusion reviewed in Rome, while the bulk of the book was cleared by the church censors in Florence -- among whom sat one of his former pupils!  Thus explaining how the book got into publication in the first place, and further explaining why certain eminent personages who, prior to the book's publication, had been quite favorably disposed toward Galileo, found the book to be an act of extreme ingratitude and turned the Inquisition against him.  More or less, anyone who takes the time to read the Diologio will understand that in publishing it, Galileo substituted being right for being wise.

Note that I am not challenging, just asking for details. Ed Poor

The article as it stand is not NPOV, but the usual caricature of the case. --AN

Very much seconded.

If you have actual historical facts to add, feel free to do so. I object to any change of words as a gesture of "neutrality". I think the case is quite clear, but there is a lot of historical revisionism, understandably, given the continuing popularity of irrational mindsets.

I wonder about 'irrational' and 'antirational' in this entry Not that I accept Kuhn and paradigm shifts lock stock and barrel, but if you're in the midst of a paradigm shift and you yourself are perfectly adequately trained in the old paradigm how is it 'irrational' to not accept the new paradigm? The proof the opponents of Galileo relied upon was not purely scriptural (which is irrational in scientific inquiry, and to that extent should certainly be detailed and condemned in the entry), but older science. And don't believe that they stopped at Ptolemy - they were entirely aware of the centuries of further observation and refinement through the Muslim scientists; the model was wrong, but wasn't it as 'rational' as Newtonian physics was in the face of modern physics? So is opposition to new scientific theory on the basis of older theory inherently irrational, or cautious? --MichaelTinkler

I agree, the word "irrational" is too strong. Particularly since the Copernican model wasn't really that much better than the improved Ptolomeic model at predicting things (though it was a lot simpler and more elegant). Maybe "narrow-minded" fits better? --AxelBoldt

I think "conservative" is the correct word here, rather than "irrational" or "narrow-minded".

Also, the article says:

 * Galileo is a classic case of a scholar forced to recant a scientific insight because it offended powerful, anti-rational forces in society

What are the other cases? -HWR

Petr Beckman's History of Pi (sounds boring as hell, doesn't it?) is a marvellous account of the history of political suppression of ideas. --LDC

I took out the "threat of torture and death" bit. Is there any evidence that he was threatened with that, beyond the generally known unfriendliness of the inquisition? He was never imprisoned, and lived at the villa of an archbishop after the trial. --AxelBoldt

Axel, yes, the threat of torture is generally well known (do a Google search: galileo torture), although apologists insist that it was only "formal" and has to be seen in light of the times, etc. I have inserted a source which summarizes the case.

Regarding conservative vs. irrational, I cannot call the use of physical force to prevent the publication of ideas which contradict your own anything but "irrational", because its underlying assumption is infalliblity. However, I agree that being conservative is equal to being irrational, so I think the substitution works just as well. -- Eloquence

The article mentions that he was arrested; EB says that after the verdict he lived with a bishop friend and later in his own house. Furthermore, EB claims that Galileo lived in comfortable quarters throughout the trials and never was imprisoned. But you're right, Google paints a different story. --AxelBoldt

Andrew Dickson White is not a reliable source for the history of science. He had a b-e-e-e-g axe to grind against organized religion, and his entire scholarly work was devoted to proving that religion had 'warred' against science. He was, by the way, a very unhappy alumnus of the college at which I teach (Hobart, Geneva, NY - that was before we admitted women and changed the name to Hobart and William Smith Colleges - separate and equal and all). So he went on to be the first president of Cornell - that's not because he was a great historian, but because he knew Ezra Cornell, et al. He was very embittered by his early religious education, and hardly a dispassionate historian. Please. Don't use A.D. White, even if he is in the public domain. Much of the historiography of 20th century History of Science has been the tale of overcoming White. --MichaelTinkler - Indeed, a very good friend of mine and the late, lamented JHK from grad school spent last summer at Cornell reading witch trial manuscripts that White bought from German collections at the end of the 19th century (uh - 'bought' is a euphemism for the worst kind of American library 'collecting') and is working on not only an article on the witch trials in 17th century south Germany, but a parallel piece on Andrew Dickson White and the suppression of evidence. It's one thing to be sure that someone had been to an obscure archive and read a document and not reported on it, but to know that he owned the manuscript and managed to not include it in his work! That's special! --MichaelTinkler

having just reread the entry LORDY! A 30 year-old process against Giordano Bruno was proof that they meant it? Hadn't the Inquisition gotten anyone else in a generation? That's exactly the kind of argumentation A.D.White and Brecht use. Not sound. 'Show trial'? In front of the media of what nation? Please! Don't project your 20th century models on the 17th. That's not history, it's the kind of silly advocacy journalism that makes 'popular history' unuseful in the long run. Oh, well, just wait until you get to Bruno. He's not the sacrificial lamb of experimental science that White makes him out to be, either. --MichaelTinkler

I too have an axe or two to grind about organized religion. It is the most destructive force to ever befall society. An encyclopedia which seeks to describe reality will have to take these historical facts into account, and it will have to deal with historical revisionists who will try to rewrite what they see as unpleasant facts. The difference between those who seek to rehabilitate the church in its shameful persecution of Galileo and those who seek to rehabilitate Hitler or Pol Pot is that the church is responsible for more and enduring suffering through history.

White will be used as a source unless you can prove, through citation of other, more reliable sources, that specific statements of his are false. Axel, regarding the imprisonment, White writes:

The opening strategy of Galileo's enemies was to forbid the sale of his work; but this was soon seen to be unavailing, for the first edition had already been spread throughout Europe. Urban now became more angry than ever, and both Galileo and his works were placed in the hands of the Inquisition. In vain did the good Benedictine Castelli urge that Galileo was entirely respectful to the Church; in vain did he insist that ``nothing that can be done can now hinder the earth from revolving.'' He was dismissed in disgrace, and Galileo was forced to appear in the presence of the dread tribunal without defender or adviser. There, as was so long concealed, but as is now fully revealed, he was menaced with torture again and again by express order of Pope Urban, and, as is also thoroughly established from the trial documents themselves, forced to abjure under threats, and subjected to imprisonment by command of the Pope; the Inquisition deferring in this whole matter to the papal authority. All the long series of attempts made in the supposed interest of the Church to mystify these transactions have at last failed. The world knows now that Galileo was subjected certainly to indignity, to imprisonment, and to threats equivalent to torture, and was at last forced to pronounce publicly and on his knees his recantation, as follows:

Also, regarding his "comfortable villa":

To the end of his life - nay, after his life was ended - the persecution of Galileo was continued. He was kept in exile from his family, from his friends, from his noble employments, and was held rigidly to his promise not to speak of his theory. When, in the midst of intense bodily sufferings from disease, and mental sufferings from calamities in his family, he besought some little liberty, he was met with threats of committal to a dungeon. When, at last, a special commission had reported to the ecclesiastical authorities that he had become blind and wasted with disease and sorrow, he was allowed a little more liberty, but that little was hampered by close

surveillance. He was forced to bear contemptible attacks on himself and on his works in silence; to see the men who had befriended him severely punished; Father Castelli banished; Ricciardi, the Master of the Sacred Palace, and Ciampoli, the papal secretary, thrown out of their positions by Pope Urban, and the Inquisitor at Florence reprimanded for having given permission to print Galileo's work. He lived to see the truths he had established carefully weeded out from all the Church colleges and universities in Europe; and, when in a scientific work he happened to be spoken of as "renowned," the Inquisition ordered the substitution of the word "notorious."'

White also deals extensively with many of the same apologist arguments used today: http://www.santafe.edu/~shalizi/White/astronomy/retreat.html

It is a disgrace to society that we still have to deal with the same kind of bullshit more than a hundred years later. Regarding Bruno, yes, he was not a strict experimental scientist, that is widely known today -- he was more of a pagan/atheist, and such people should expect to get burned. Of course, Galileo was also accused of being an atheist. -- Eloquence

Well, it would help if White were a more honest historian. If you're quoting White, no historian of science in the late 20th and early 21st century will take you seriously. Sorry to be so blunt. --MichaelTinkler, who isn't an early modern historian, but who hangs around with them in the off-season.

Most historians wouldn't take me seriously for saying that organized religion is the most destructive force to ever befall society either -- such is not a fashionable thing to say, even if it is true. The situation in the 21st century is not really that much different from that in the 19th -- people still hold views that are completely illogical and harmful to society. The great new thing is that now we have nuclear bombs and biological warfare to fall into the hands of such people.

The good thing about Wikipedia is that, while it attracts people from all sides, it does not favor views based on their popularity in higher circles. As I said, present contradictory evidence, and the quote will be shortened, summarized or complemented.

- No, most historians don't take categorical statements like that very seriously. As I say, I'm not an early modern historian, let alone a historian of science - but I know people who are, and among that crowd A.D.W. is an example used in historiography seminars of how not to do things. Call it hegemony if you like, but he's not just fallen out of fashion - he's been rejected. --MichaelTinkler

Having read this talk-page I really look forward to the Andrew Dickson White entry. I just did a search and found a page which claims that [A.D.White's] book has become something of a running joke among historians of science and it is dutifully mentioned as a prime example of misinformation in the preface of most modern works on science and religion. Poor fellow ;-) --css

 * I hate to admit it, but I failed to buy my own copy of his 2 volume autobiography when I saw it at the Book Nook in Ithaca last year, so I'm bowing out. Too formidable for me! --MichaelTinkler

Michael: A statement becomes not any more true or relevant by repeating it.

css: What else do you expect on a page by "Reasonable apologists" but apologist rhetoric?

The quotes from White are at odds with Encyclopedia Britannica, which is the only source I have. Information on the web may be influenced by White, so that is unreliable too. Since Michael says White is discredited, it seems to be wrong for Wikipedia to blindly follow White's lead and ignore EB's stand. Michael, isn't there a standard modern biography of Galileo which we can turn to?

BTW, White claims that Galileo was cut off from his family -- in fact, his daughter cared for him when he was under house arrest, but she died early. He also was not "cut off from his friends": even when already blind, he did science with the help of a good friend and student of his in his home.

When White says that "it is now fully revealed" that Galileo was threatened with torture, does he cite references? --AxelBoldt

I do not find EB very reliable, especially on historical matters. IIRC, they still state that Caesar burned the Library of Alexandria, and their information on the Crusades and the Inquisition is biased.

Just because Michael and apologists state that White is unreliable is no reason not to use him.

Information on the web may be influenced by White,

Uhh, yeah.

Regarding sources, see

If there's controversy, then the controversy has to be openly discussed in the article, you cannot just pick one side because you like it better, label everyone else as an "apologist", and be done with it.

The URL you gave contained the word "torture" only once, and not in relation to Galileo. It didn't contain any references. --AxelBoldt

Sure, if you want to represent the apologist side of the "controversy", that's fine by me. I won't be putting arguments for Flat Earth Theory on Wikipedia either, though.

Regarding the use of the term "apologists": Note that css explicitly pointed to a page labeling itself as apologist -- this is the term used by these people for themselves, so how can it be incorrect for me to use it on them?

A reference is not only one if it is at the bottom of a page or fully expanded. White writes:

 I shall present this warfare at some length because, so far as I can find, no careful summary of it has been given in our language, since the whole history was placed in a new light by the revelations of the trial documents in the Vatican Library, honestly published for the first time by L'Epinois in 1867, and since that by Gebler, Berti, Favaro, and others.

I'm not sure if the printed book contains an expansion of these references, however, it should be easy enough to pin them down. Furthermore, regarding torture, I have explicitly cited Hellman as a source -- the book is only a popular one, but should be good enough unless you can give me any good reason that it isn't. Honestly, this whole discussion is pretty pointless. The article is quite neutral and objective as it is. You wouldn't want to read one I write when I'm not trying to be neutral.

 * The article is not neutral because it fails to mention the controversy. You have yet to answer the charge that White is generally considered to be a nutcase. Are there historians of science around who take him seriously, in other words, is there a true controversy here, or has the matter been settled in the last hundred years? Do contemporary historians of science cite White's work? --AxelBoldt

Michael Sharrat, in Galileo: decisive innovator(Cambridge, 1994), indicates that Galileo was unsuccessfully threatened with torture to force a confession that he had held Copernican views after they were proscribed, which Galileo repeatedly denied. That is something obviously quite different from threatening torture to suppress Copernican views. -HWR

Assessment comment
Substituted at 20:35, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Galileo Galilei/Archive 1