text:
File:Wells Icons of Evolution.jpg

summary
Cover of the book Icons of Evolution by Jonathan Wells

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

title: File:Wells Icons of Evolution.jpg


text:
Kiss Me, Kiss Me, Kiss Me

Kiss Me, Kiss Me, Kiss Me is the seventh studio album by English rock band the Cure, released on 26 May 1987 by Fiction Records. The album was recorded at Studio Miraval in Correns, France.

The album helped bring the Cure into the American mainstream, becoming the band's first album to reach the top 40 of the Billboard 200 chart and achieving platinum certification. Like its predecessor, The Head on the Door, it was also a great international success, reaching the top 10 in numerous countries.

In 2000, the album was voted number 256 in Colin Larkin's All Time Top 1000 Albums.

Reception
In a contemporary review, Mark Coleman of Rolling Stone praised the album for its developed sound saying "The Cure is trying to deepen and refine an existing sensibility rather than reach outward to expand it".

In a retrospective review, Stephen Thomas Erlewine of AllMusic wrote that the record was "more accessible and ambitious". However, he nuanced :"Even if Kiss Me doesn't quite gel, its best moments... are remarkable and help make the album one of the group's very best."

Slant Magazine was mostly positive of the album saying "with Kiss Me Kiss Me Kiss Me, the Cure gives the listener the kind of roller-coaster rush that only great pop can provide."

Writing, Recording, and Production
Directly after wrapping filming in August 1986 for The Cure in Orange, the band embarked on a spontaneous week-long holiday in Le Mourillon before moving on to Jean Costa's studio in Draguignan for a two-week pre-production session to refine demos recorded earlier that summer in London. Smith recounted that the demos were the result of soliciting each band member for their own musical ideas and getting "six or seven songs from each one" on a series of cassettes, before winnowing down to a shortlist via full-band vote, marking a shift from Smith's previous top-down control over composition. After Draguignan, The Cure decamped to the residential setting of Studio Miraval for the three-month album recording session, where according to Smith they emphasized spontaneity, "almost jamming the songs to get the right feel" and recording in one or two takes with minimal rehearsal. The band decided during the course of the session that they had an adequate surplus of strong material to justify releasing a double LP. Smith mixed the album with co-producer David M. Allen and engineer Michel Dierickx during sessions in December 1986 (Compass Point, Bahamas) and January 1987 (ICP Recording Studios, Belgium), respectively.

Release
Kiss Me, Kiss Me, Kiss Me was released on 26 May 1987 by Fiction Records in the UK and by Elektra in the US and Canada. Though a double album in its vinyl issue, it was released as a single CD and single cassette. One track, "Hey You!!!", was omitted from the original CD release because of the 74:33 Red Book CD time restriction, but was included on all cassette releases. A limited vinyl edition came with a bonus six-track, orange 12" featuring the songs "Sugar Girl", "Snow in Summer", "Icing Sugar" (Weird Remix), "A Japanese Dream", "Breathe" and "A Chain of Flowers."

The album appeared in August 2006 in both single-disc and deluxe double-disc CD editions as part of a Cure reissue campaign. All editions notably included "Hey You!!!", marking the first time a complete version of the album was made available on CD. The second disc of the deluxe edition is composed of demos and live versions of album tracks, including a recording of "Why Can't I Be You?" from the final show of the Kissing Tour at the Wembley Arena. Robert Smith stated on his website that there was so much material to draw from that he initially compiled a three-disc edition, with the third disc containing alternate studio versions of the album's songs. However, after discussing with family and friends, he decided that the two-disc edition was a better choice for release. Smith said that it was possible that his proposed third disc may surface as a leak or in a future release.

Personnel
The Cure

 * Robert Smith – guitar, keyboards, vocals, recorder on "The Snakepit" and "Like Cockatoos"
 * Simon Gallup – bass guitar
 * Porl Thompson – guitar, keyboards, saxophone on "Shiver and Shake"
 * Lol Tolhurst – keyboards
 * Boris Williams – drums, percussion
 * Roger O'Donnell – keyboards on live tracks from the deluxe edition

Guest musician
 * Andrew Brennen – saxophone on "Icing Sugar" and "Hey You!!!"

Production
 * David M. Allen, Robert Smith – production
 * Sean Burrows, Jacques Hermet – assistant production
 * Bob Clearmountain – remixing for single version of "Just Like Heaven"

title: Kiss Me, Kiss Me, Kiss Me


text:
Bushwren

The bushwren (Xenicus longipes), also known as the mātuhituhi in the Māori language, was a very small and almost flightless bird that was endemic to New Zealand. It had three subspecies on each of the major islands of New Zealand, the North Island, South Island, and Stewart Island / Rakiura and nearby smaller islands. The species disappeared gradually after the introduction of invasive mammalian predators, last being seen on the North Island in 1955 and the South Island in 1968. Attempts were made to save the remaining population on small islands off Stewart Island, but they ultimately failed with the death of the last remaining known birds in 1972.

Taxonomy
German naturalist Johann Friedrich Gmelin described the bushwren in 1789.

Description
It grew to about 9 cm long and 16 g in weight. It fed mostly on invertebrates, which it captured by running along the branches of trees. It nested on or near the ground.

Behaviour
Bushwrens had a hopping or bobbing movement, with a fast running speed on the ground or branches. Their call was a 'subdued trill' or 'seep', sometimes repeated in quick succession. They built spherical nests near the ground with an entrance on the side, and typically laid two eggs in November or December.

Extinction
It was widespread throughout the main islands of the country until the late 19th century when mustelids were introduced and joined rats as invasive mammalian predators. The only authenticated reports of the North Island subspecies (X. l. stokesi) since 1900 were from the southern Rimutaka Range in 1918 and the Ureweras up to 1955, with probable sightings on June 13, 1949, near Lake Waikareiti, and several times in the first half of the 20th century in the Huiarau Range and from Kapiti Island in 1911. Apparently, the last population lived in the area where Te Urewera National Park was established, just around the time of its extinction.

The last authenticated reports of the South Island subspecies (X. l. longipes) were from Arthur's Pass in 1966 and Nelson Lakes National Park in 1968. There have been a few unsubstantiated reports since then from Fiordland and Nelson Lakes.

The third subspecies, the Stewart Island bushwren or Stead's bushwren (X. l. variabilis), was found on Stewart Island / Rakiura and nearby islands. It is known to have survived on Stewart Island until 1951, but was probably exterminated there by feral cats. It lived on Kotiwhenua (Solomon) Island, being reasonably common, until the early 1960s. It survived on predator-free Taukihepa / Big South Cape Island until black rats (R. rattus) invaded it in 1964. The New Zealand Wildlife Service attempted to save the species by relocating all the birds they could capture. They caught six birds and transferred them to Kaimohu Island, where they did not survive and they finally died out in 1972.

title: Bushwren


text:
Abraham bar Hiyya

Abraham bar Ḥiyya ha-Nasi (ר׳ אַבְרָהָם בַּר חִיָּיא הַנָשִׂיא; c. 1070 – 1136 or 1145), also known as Abraham Savasorda, Abraham Albargeloni, and Abraham Judaeus, was a Catalan Jewish mathematician, astronomer and philosopher who resided in Barcelona, then in the County of Barcelona.

Bar Ḥiyya was active in translating the works of Islamic science into Latin and was likely the earliest to introduce algebra from the Muslim world into Christian Europe. He also wrote several original works on mathematics, astronomy, Jewish philosophy, chronology, and surveying. His most influential work is his Ḥibbur ha-Meshiḥah ve-ha-Tishboret, translated in 1145 into Latin as Liber embadorum. A Hebrew treatise on practical geometry and algebra, the book contains the first known complete solution of the quadratic equation $$x^2 - ax + b = c$$, and influenced the work of Fibonacci.

Biography
Abraham bar Ḥiyya was the great-grandson of Hezekiah ben David, the last Gaon of the Talmudic academies in Babylonia. Bar Ḥiyya occupied a high position in the royal court, serving as minister of police, and bore the title of governor (נשיא). Scholars assume that Bar Hiyya would have obtained this title in the court of Banu Hud of Zaragoza-Lleida; there is even a record of a Jewish Savasorda there in the beginning of the 12th century. In his travelogues, Benjamin of Tudela mentions bar Ḥiyya living in Barcelona in the 1160s.

According to Adolph Drechsler, bar Ḥiyya was a pupil of Moshe ha-Darshan and teacher of Abraham ibn Ezra. He was held in high consideration by the ruler he served on account of his astronomical knowledge and had disputes with learned Catholic priests, to whom he demonstrated the accuracy of the Jewish calendar. Abraham bar Hiyya is said to have been a great astronomer and wrote some works on astronomy and geography. One talks about the form of the earth, the elements, and the structure of the spheres. Other works included papers on astrology, trigonometry, and music.

Some scholars think that the Magister Abraham who dictated De Astrolabio (probably at Toulouse) to Rudolf of Bruges (a work that the latter finished in 1143) was identical with Abraham bar Ḥiyya. Although the title "Sephardi" is always appended to his name, Barcelona was at the time no longer under Muslim rule, and therefore not part of Sepharad. Abraham Albargeloni (i.e., from Barcelona) thus belonged to the community of the Jews of Catalonia.

Catalonia joined Provence in 1112 and Aragon in 1137, and thus the County of Barcelona became the capital of a new Catalan-Aragonese confederation called the Crown of Aragon. The kings of Aragon extended their domains to Occitania in what is now southern France. Abraham Albargeloni spent some time in Narbonne, where he composed some works for the Hachmei Provence, in which he complained about the Provençal community's ignorance of mathematics.

Work
Abraham bar Ḥiyya was one of the most important figures in the scientific movement which made the Jews of Provence, the Jews of Catalonia, Spain, and Italy the intermediaries between Arabic science and the Christian world, in both his original works and his translations.

Bar Ḥiyya's Yesode ha-Tebunah u-Migdal ha-Emunah (יסודי התבונה ומגדל האמונה), usually referred to as the Encyclopedia, was the first European attempt to synthesize Greek and Arabic mathematics. Likely written in the first quarter of the 12th century, the book is said to elaborate on the interdependence of number theory, mathematical operations, business arithmetic, geometry, optics, and music. The book draws from a number of Greek sources then available in Arabic, as well as the works of al-Khwarizmi and Al-Karaji. Only a few short fragments of this work have been preserved.

Bar Ḥiyya's most notable work is his Ḥibbur ha-Meshiḥah ve-ha-Tishboret (חיבור המשיחה והתשבורת), probably intended to be a part of the preceding work. This is the celebrated geometry translated in 1145 by Plato of Tivoli, under the title Liber embadorum a Savasordo in hebraico compositus. Fibonacci made the Latin translation of the Ḥibbūr the basis of his Practica Geometriae, following it even to the sameness of some of the examples.

Bar Ḥiyya also wrote two religious works in the field of Judaism and the Tanach: Hegyon ha-Nefesh ("Contemplation of the Soul") on repentance, and Megillat ha-Megalleh ("Scroll of the Revealer") on the redemption of the Jewish people. The latter was partly translated into Latin in the 14th century under the title Liber de redemptione Israhel. Even these religious works contain scientific and philosophical speculation. His Megillat ha-Megalleh was also astrological in nature, and drew a horoscope of favourable and unfavourable days. Bar Ḥiyya forecasted that the Messiah would appear in AM 5118 (1358 CE).

Abraham bar Ḥiyya wrote all his works in Hebrew, not in Judaeo-Arabic of the earlier Jewish scientific literature, which made him a pioneer in the use of the Hebrew language for scientific purposes.

Other notable works

 * "Form of the Earth" (צורת הארץ), an astronomical work on the formation of the heavens and the earth, which was to have been followed by a second part on the course of the stars. A portion was translated into Latin by Sebastian Münster and Erasmus Oswald Schreckenfuchs. It appears also that complete translations into Latin and French were made. The Bodleian Library contains a copy with a commentary, apparently by Ḥayyim Lisker.
 * "Calculation of the Courses of the Stars" (חשבון מהלכות הכוכבים), the sequel to the preceding work, which is found sometimes in manuscripts with the notes of Abraham ibn Ezra.
 * "Tables" or "Tables of the Prince" (לוחות or לוחות הנשיא, Luḥot ha-Nasi), astronomical tables, called also the "Tables of Al-Battani" and the "Jerusalem Tables". Several manuscripts of this work contain notes by Abraham ibn Ezra.
 * "Book of Intercalation" (ספר העבור). This work was published in 1851, in London, by Filipowski. It is the oldest-known Hebrew work treating of the calculation of the Hebrew calendar.
 * "Meditation of the Soul" (הגיון הנפש), an ethical work upon a rationalistic religious basis. It was published in 1860 by Freimann, with a biography of the author (by the editor), a list of his works, and learned introduction by Rapoport.
 * "Scroll of the Revealer" (מגלת המגלה), a controversial work in defense of the theory that the Messiah would appear in the year AM 5118 (AD 1358). Its fifth and last chapter, the largest part of the work, may be read as an independent treatise providing an astrological explanation of Jewish and universal history based on an analysis of the periodical conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter.
 * An apologetic epistle addressed to Judah ben Barzilai al-Barzeloni.

Translations
Abraham bar Ḥiyya co-operated with a number of scholars in the translation of scientific works from Arabic into Latin, most notably Plato of Tivoli with their translation of Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos in 1138 at Barcelona. There remains doubt as to the particulars: a number of Jewish translators named Abraham existed during the 12th century, and it is not always possible to identify the one in question. Known translations of bar Ḥiyya include:
 * De Horarum Electionibus, the well-known treatise of Ali ben Aḥmad al-Imrani.
 * Capitula Centiloquium, astrological aphorisms.
 * A commentary of Aḥmad ibn Yusuf on the Centiloquium, attributed to Ptolemy.
 * De Astrolabio of Rudolph de Bruges.
 * Liber Augmenti et Diminutionis, a treatise on mathematics.

In the preface to Ẓurat ha-Areẓ, bar Ḥiyya modestly states that, because none of the scientific works such as those which exist in Arabic were accessible to his brethren in France, he felt called upon to compose books which, though containing no research of his own, would help to popularize knowledge among Hebrew readers. His Hebrew terminology, therefore, occasionally lacks the clearness and precision of later writers and translators.

Philosophy
Bar Ḥiyya was a pioneer in the field of philosophy: as shown by Guttmann in refutation of David Kaufmann's assumption that the Hegyon ha-Nefesh was originally written in Arabic, Abraham bar Ḥiyya had to wrestle with the difficulties of a language not yet adapted to philosophic terminology.

Whether composed especially for the Ten Days of Repentance, as Rapoport and Rosin think, or not, the object of the work was a practical, rather than a theoretical, one. It was to be a homily in four chapters on repentance based on the Hafṭarot of the Day of Atonement and Shabbat Shuvah. In it, he exhorts the reader to lead a life of purity and devotion. At the same time he does not hesitate to borrow ideas from non-Jewish philosophers, and he pays homage to the ancient Greek philosophers who, without knowledge of the Torah, arrived at certain fundamental truths regarding the beginning of things, though in an imperfect way, because both the end and the divine source of wisdom remained hidden to them. In his opinion the non-Jew may attain to as high a degree of godliness as the Jew.

Matter and Form
Abraham bar Ḥiyya's philosophical system is neoplatonic like that of Solomon ibn Gabirol and of the author of Torot ha-Nefesh "Reflections on the Soul" as Plotinus stated: "Matter, being void of all reality, requires form to give it existence. Now the union of these two by the will of God, which brings them from a state of potentiality into one of actuality, is creation, time itself being simultaneously produced with the created things. Both matter and form consist of two different elements. There is pure and there is impure matter. So also there is form too sublime to mingle with matter, such as that of the angelic or the upper world; and form which, being receptive and hollow, is susceptible to mixture with matter. The upper world, while gazing upon the lower and radiating its higher light, causes the mixture of matter with receptive form, the "tohu va-bohu"; and out of pure matter the celestial bodies, and out of impure matter the four elements, were evolved. But while the first formed into an inseparable combination and the mixture of the latter is one which constantly changes, a third form exists which mixes with matter for a certain time, to live again in a disembodied state after its separation, and this is the human soul. According to its wisdom—which makes it seek the upper world, the pure lasting form—or its folly—which makes it follow the impure matter of the perishable world below—the soul of man partakes of the nature of either the one or the other but, his destination being to live forever like the angels, man has been appointed by God to be the ruler of all beings on earth; and in the same measure in which he fulfills or deviates from his destination, does he rise or fall in dignity above or below his fellow creatures."

He agrees with Plato tht the soul in this world of flesh is imprisoned, while the animal soul craves for worldly pleasures, and experiences pain in foregoing them. Still, only the sensual man requires corrections of the flesh to liberate the soul from its bondage; the truly pious need not, or rather should not, undergo fasting or other forms of asceticism except such as the law has prescribed. But, precisely as man has been set apart among his fellow creatures as God's servant, so Israel is separate from the nations, the same three terms (bara, yaṣar, and asah) being used by the prophet for Israel's creation as for that of man in Genesis.

Three Classes of Pious Men
Like Baḥya ibn Paquda, Abraham bar Ḥiyya distinguishes three classes of pious men: In accordance with these three classes of servants of God, he finds the laws of the Torah to be divided into three groups:
 * 1) such as lead a life altogether apart from worldly pursuits and devoted only to God ("these are but few in number and may in their sovereignty over the world be regarded as one individuality").
 * 2) such as take part in the world's affairs, but are, as regards their conduct, ruled only by the divine laws and statutes without concerning themselves with the rest of men (these form the "holy congregation" or the "faithful city")
 * 3) such as lead righteous lives, but take care also that the wrong done outside of their sphere is punished and the good of all the people promoted (these form the "kingdom of justice" or the "righteous nation").
 * 1) The Decalogue, containing the fundamental laws with especial reference to the God-devoted man who, like Moses, lives solely in the service of God (the singular being used because only Moses or the one who emulates him is addressed). The first of the Ten Commandments, which he considers merely as an introductory word, accentuates the divine origin and the eternal goal of the Law; the other nine present the various laws in relation to God, to domestic life, and to society at large. Each of these three classes again refers either to the heart or sentiment, to the speech or to the action of man.
 * 2) The group of laws contained in the second, third, and fourth books of Moses, intended for the people of Israel during their wandering in the desert or during the Exile, to render them a holy congregation relying solely upon the special protection of God without resorting to warfare.
 * 3) The Deuteronomic legislation intended for the people living in an agricultural state and forming a "kingdom of justice." However, in the time of the Messianic redemption, when the evil spirit shall have vanished altogether, when the sensual man shall have become a spiritual one, and the passions that created hatred and strife shall have given way to love of man and to faithful obedience to the will of God, no other laws than those given to the God-devoted one in the Decalogue—the law written upon the heart of man—will be necessary. Men, imbued solely with love for their fellows, free from sin, will rise to the standard of the God-devoted man, and, like him, share in the eternal bliss of God.

Guttmann has shown that Naḥmanides read and used the Hegyon ha-Nefesh, though occasionally differing from it; but while Saadia Gaon is elsewhere quoted by Abraham bar Ḥiyya, he never refers to him in Hegyon. Characteristic of the age is the fact that while Abraham bar Ḥiyya contended against every superstition, against the superstitions of the tequfoth, against prayers for the dead, and similar practises, he was, nevertheless, like Ibn Ezra, a firm believer in astrology. In his Megillat ha-Megalleh he calculated from Scripture the exact time for the advent of the Messiah to be the year of the world 5118. He wrote also a work on redemption, from which Isaac Abravanel appropriated many ideas. It is in defense of Judaism against Christian arguments, and also discusses Muhammed "the Insane", announcing the downfall of Islam, according to astrological calculation, for the year 4946 A.M.

Mathematics
Bar Ḥiyya's Ḥibbur ha-meshīḥah ve-ha-tishboret contains the first appearance of quadratic equations in the West.

Bar Ḥiyya proved by the method of indivisibles the following equation for any circle: $$ A = C \times \tfrac{R}{2}$$, where $$A$$ is the surface area, $$C$$ is the circumference length and $$R$$ is radius. The same proof appears in the commentary of the Tosafists (12th century) on the Babylonian Talmud.

title: Abraham bar Hiyya


text: User talk:24.91.181.143

title: User talk:24.91.181.143


text: User talk:80.164.211.142

title: User talk:80.164.211.142


text:
Wikipedia talk:Don't bite the hand that feeds you

This page has some nice sentiments, but I don't see the "hand that feeds you" metaphor. Could someone please explain? Uranographer 15:36, 1 May 2004 (UTC)

"It's based to grow..." -- What does that mean? P0M


text: User talk:203.194.54.16

title: User talk:203.194.54.16


text:
The Tortoise and the Hare

"The Tortoise and the Hare" is one of Aesop's Fables and is numbered 226 in the Perry Index. The account of a race between unequal partners has attracted conflicting interpretations. The fable itself is a variant of a common folktale theme in which ingenuity and trickery (rather than doggedness) are employed to overcome a stronger opponent.

An ambiguous story
The story concerns a Hare who ridicules a slow-moving Tortoise. Tired of the Hare's arrogant behaviour, the Tortoise challenges him to a race. The hare soon leaves the tortoise behind and, confident of winning, takes a nap midway through the race. When the Hare awakes, however, he finds that his competitor, crawling slowly but steadily, has arrived before him. The later version of the story in La Fontaine's Fables (VI.10), while more long-winded, differs hardly at all from Aesop's.

As in several other fables by Aesop, the lesson it is teaching appears ambiguous. In Classical times, it was not the Tortoise's plucky conduct in taking on a bully that was emphasised but the Hare's foolish over-confidence. An old Greek source comments that "many people have good natural abilities which are ruined by idleness; on the other hand, sobriety, zeal and perseverance can prevail over indolence".

When the fable entered the European emblem tradition, the precept to 'hasten slowly' (festina lente) was recommended to lovers by Otto van Veen in his Emblemata Amorum (1608), using a relation of the story. There, the infant figure of Eros is shown passing through a landscape and pointing to the tortoise as it overtakes the sleeping hare under the motto "perseverance winneth." Later interpreters too have asserted that the fable's moral is the proverbial "the more haste, the worse speed" (Samuel Croxall) or have applied to it the biblical observation that "the race is not to the swift" (Ecclesiastes 9.11).

In the 19th century, the fable was given satirical interpretations. In the social commentary of Charles H. Bennett's The Fables of Aesop translated into Human Nature (1857), the hare is changed to a thoughtful craftsman prostrate under the foot of a capitalist entrepreneur. Lord Dunsany brings out another view in his "The True History of the Tortoise and the Hare" (1915). There, the hare realises the stupidity of the challenge and refuses to proceed any further. The obstinate tortoise continues to the finishing line and is proclaimed the swiftest by his backers. But, continues Dunsany,
 * the reason that this version of the race is not widely known is that very few of those that witnessed it survived the great forest-fire that happened shortly after. It came up over the weald by night with a great wind. The Hare and the Tortoise and a very few of the beasts saw it far off from a high bare hill that was at the edge of the trees, and they hurriedly called a meeting to decide what messenger they should send to warn the beasts in the forest. They sent the Tortoise.

A century later, Vikram Seth broadened the satire in his verse retelling of the fable in Beastly Tales (1991) and had it both ways. There is nothing to recommend in the behaviour of either protagonist by way of a moral. While the Tortoise's victory bolsters its joyless self-righteousness, the hare-brained loser is taken up by the media and "pampered rotten/ And the tortoise was forgotten".

Applications
In Classical times the story was annexed to a philosophical problem by Zeno of Elea in one of many demonstrations that movement is impossible to define satisfactorily. The second of Zeno's paradoxes is that of Achilles and the Tortoise, in which the hero gives the Tortoise a head start in a race. The argument attempts to show that even though Achilles runs faster than the Tortoise, he will never catch up with her because, when Achilles reaches the point at which the Tortoise started, the Tortoise has advanced some distance beyond; when Achilles arrives at the point where the Tortoise was when Achilles arrived at the point where the Tortoise started, the Tortoise has again moved forward. Hence Achilles can never catch the Tortoise, no matter how fast he runs, since the Tortoise will always be moving ahead.

The only satisfactory refutation has been mathematical and since then the name of the fable has been applied to the function described in Zeno's paradox. In mathematics and computer science, the tortoise and the hare algorithm is an alternative name for Floyd's cycle-finding algorithm.

Illustrations of the fable

There is a Greek version of the fable but no early Latin version. For this reason it did not begin to appear in printed editions of Aesop's fables until the 16th century, one of the earliest being Bernard Salomon's Les Fables d'Esope Phrygien, mises en Ryme Francoise (1547). Versions followed from the Netherlands (in Dutch, 1567) and Flanders (in French, 1578) but none in English before Francis Barlow's edition of 1667.

Among the many illustrations of the fable, that by the French caricaturist Jean Grandville is novel in portraying the tortoise as running upright. This is also how he is shown in the Walt Disney cartoon version of "The Tortoise and the Hare" (1935). Another departure from the ordinary in Grandville's etching is the choice of a mole (complete with dark glasses) rather than, as usual, a fox as the judge at the finishing line. Auguste Delierre makes the judge a monkey in the 1883 edition of La Fontaine's fables that he illustrated. La Fontaine says in his rhyme that it does not matter who the judge is; his interpreters have taken him at his word. Outside of book production, there is an early 17th-century oil painting of the fable by the Flemish landscape artist Jan Wildens. The hare enters on the left, racing over an upland road as dawn breaks; the tortoise is nowhere in sight. In the mid-19th century, the French animal painter Philibert Léon Couturier also devoted an oil painting to the fable in which, as in Grandville's illustration, the tortoise is shown racing upright. In Edward Bawden's composite design of 1970 the hare is depicted racing and lying down at various stages of the race while, in contrast to his sprightly rival, the tortoise keeps going.

There have also been two pieces of popular sculpture aimed at children. Nancy Schön's was made to commemorate the centenary of the Boston Marathon in 1996 and is sited in Copley Square, the finishing line for the race. The tortoise is shown determinedly stumping forward while the hare has paused to scratch behind its ear. In the following year a painted steel sculpture by Michael Browne and Stuart Smith was set up near the cross-country finish line at Van Cortlandt Park in the Bronx. The hare is mounted on the tortoise's shell and appears to be trying to leap over him.

Philately
The fable has also appeared on stamps from several countries. These include:
 * Cyprus, in which cartoon characters are depicted on a set of five €0.34 stamps (2011)
 * Dahomey, on a 1972 set commemorating 350 years since La Fontaine's birth, in which it figures on the 10 franc stamp.
 * Dominica, on a 2 cent stamp for Easter 1984, picturing a Disney tortoise carrying Easter eggs as it overtakes the sleeping hare
 * France issued surcharged Red Cross stamps in 1978 on which the fable appeared on the 1 franc + 0.25 denomination. It was also included in the 1995 strip of six 2.80 franc stamps commemorating the third centenary of the author's death.
 * Greece issued a 1987 set illustrating Aesop's fables, including the tortoise and the hare on the 130 drachma stamp
 * Hungary issued a set in 1980 with this fable on the 4 forint stamp
 * The Maldives issued a 1990 set in which Disney characters act out the fables; the tortoise and the hare appear on the 15 laree stamp
 * Monaco issued a composite 50 centime stamp on the 350th anniversary of La Fontaine's birth in 1971, with this fable included
 * Sri Lanka issued a 5 rupee stamp for Child's broadcasting day 2007 which shows the contestants at the starting line

Musical versions
Many allusions to the fable in musical titles are of limited or no relevance, but two interpretive instrumental versions may be noted. The one by Yellowjackets jazz quartet was recorded on their Politics album in 1988. The Anglo-Irish band Flook's title is on their Haven album (2005).

There have also been several verbal settings of Aesop's fable:
 * By W. Langton Williams (c. 1832–1896) in his Aesop’s Fables, versified & arranged for the piano forte (London, 1890)
 * In Aesop's Fables Interpreted Through Music for voice and piano (New York, 1920) by Mabel Wood Hill (1870–1954). In this the moral stated is that "Plodding wins the race".
 * Vincent Persichetti included it as the third piece in his Fables for narrator and orchestra (Op. 23, 1943)
 * A poetic version set for children's voices and piano by Edward Hughes in his Songs from Aesop's Fables (1965)
 * The cellist Evalyn Steinbock's setting for violin, cello and narrator in 1979
 * As the first of Anthony Plog's Aesop’s Fables for narrator, piano and horn (1989/93), in which the instruments mimic the pace of the animals
 * The first of "Aesop's Fables for narrator and band" (1999) by Scott Watson (b. 1964)
 * A setting for solo voice by Lucian Cristofor Tugui (2006)
 * Vladimir Cosma, as the sixth piece in Eh bien ! Dansez maintenant (2006), a light-hearted interpretation for narrator and orchestra of La Fontaine's version in the style of a rustic polka
 * Movement Three of Julie Giroux's A Symphony of Fables, composed in 2006
 * As one of the five pieces in Bob Chilcott's Aesop's Fables for piano and choir (2008)
 * A setting for a cappella choir by Darmon Meader (2009)
 * As one of David Edgar Walther's 'short operatic dramas', composed in 2009
 * Among ten on David P Shortland's Australian recording, Aesop Go HipHop (2012), where the sung chorus after the hip hop narration underlines the fable's moral, "Slow and steady wins the race"

Folk variants
The many other variants of the story in oral folk tradition appear worldwide and are classed as Aarne-Thompson-Uther type 275. In most of these there is a race between unequal partners but most often brain is matched against brawn and the race is won by means of trickery. Broadly this is of two types: either the slower animal jumps on the other's back or tail and hops off at the end when the creature turns round to see where his challenger has got to, or else he is deceived by lookalikes substituting themselves along the course.

Tales with a similar theme emphasizing doggedness have been recorded in Native American culture. Hummingbird and Crane agree to race from one ocean to the other. Though Hummingbird flies faster, he stops at night to sleep. Crane, however, flies overnight and is overtaken by Hummingbird later and later during the day, at length coming in first. The ultimate prize differs between versions and includes choice of habitat, the love of a girl, or the right to cut the other down to size.

title: The Tortoise and the Hare


text:
Why Do Birds Sing?

Why Do Birds Sing? is the fifth studio album by Violent Femmes, released on April 30, 1991. It was the band's last album with original drummer Victor DeLorenzo, who left two years later to devote his time to acting, and was produced by Michael Beinhorn, best-known then for his work with the Red Hot Chili Peppers on Mother's Milk and The Uplift Mofo Party Plan.

The album featured the single "American Music," which rose to number 2 on Billboard's Modern Rock chart during the week of May 18, 1991, and became a staple of the band's live shows.

Violent Femmes

 * Gordon Gano – vocals, guitar
 * Brian Ritchie – bass, guitar, bouzouki, banjo, ukulele, mouth harp, didgeridoo, xylophone, glockenspiel, vocals
 * Victor DeLorenzo – drums, percussion, tranceaphone, vocals

Additional musicians

 * Michael Beinhorn – Hammond organ on "American Music", Mellotron on "Do You Really Want To Hurt Me" and "Used To Be", piano on "Do You Really Want To Hurt Me" and "I'm Free", harmonium on "Used To Be"
 * Sid Page, Suzie Katayama, Ilene Novog, Larry Corbett – strings on "Used To Be"
 * Tommy Mandel – keyboards on "American Music"

Production

 * Violent Femmes – Producer
 * Eric "ET" Thorngren – Engineer, mixing
 * David Vartanian – Mixing
 * Susan Rogers – Engineer
 * Tom Fritze – Assistant engineer
 * Lori Fumar – Assistant engineer
 * Mike Kloster – Assistant engineer
 * Howie Weinberg – Mastering
 * Mary Jones – Photography

title: Why Do Birds Sing?


text:
John the Fearless

John I (Jean sans Peur; Jan zonder Vrees; 28 May 1371 – 10 September 1419) was a scion of the French royal family who ruled the Burgundian State from 1404 until his assassination in 1419. He played a key role in French national affairs during the early 15th century, particularly in the struggles to rule the country for the mentally ill King Charles VI, his cousin, and the Hundred Years' War with England. A rash, ruthless and unscrupulous politician, John murdered the King's brother, the Duke of Orléans, in an attempt to gain control of the government, which led to the eruption of the Armagnac–Burgundian Civil War in France and in turn culminated in his own assassination in 1419.

The involvement of Charles, the heir to the French throne, in his assassination prompted John's son and successor Philip to seek an alliance with the English, thereby bringing the Hundred Years' War to its final phase.

John played an important role in the development of gunpowder artillery in European warfare, making extensive and successful use of it in his military campaigns.

Early life
John was born in Dijon on 28 May 1371 to Duke Philip the Bold of Burgundy and Countess Margaret III of Flanders. On the death of his maternal grandfather Count Louis II of Flanders in 1384, he received the County of Nevers.

In 1385, a double wedding for the Burgundian family took place in Cambrai. John married Margaret, daughter of Count Albert I of Holland, while at the same time his sister Margaret married Albert's son William in order to consolidate John's position in the Low Countries. The marriage took place after John cancelled his engagement to his first cousin, Catherine, a daughter of King Charles V of France, who was only a child at the time.

Before his accession to become the Duke of Burgundy, John was one of the principal leaders of the French forces sent to aid King Sigismund of Hungary in his war against Sultan Bayezid I of the Ottoman Empire. John fought in the Battle of Nicopolis of 25 September 1396 against the Ottomans with such enthusiasm and bravery that he was given the cognomen Fearless (Sans-Peur). Despite his personal bravery, his impetuous leadership ended in disaster for the European expedition. He was captured and did not recover his liberty until the next year after an enormous ransom was paid.

Conflict with Orléans
John inherited the Duchy of Burgundy in 1404 upon the death of his father and the counties of Burgundy, Flanders, and Artois on his mother's death in 1405. He almost immediately entered into open conflict with Duke Louis I of Orléans, the younger brother of the increasingly disturbed King Charles VI of France. Both men attempted to fill the power vacuum left by the demented king.

John played a game of marriages by exchanging his daughter Margaret of Burgundy for Michelle of Valois, who would marry his heir, Philip the Good. For her part, Margaret was married to Louis, Duke of Guyenne, the heir to the French throne from 1401 until his death in 1415. For all his concentration on aristocratic politics, John nonetheless did not overlook the importance of the middle class of merchants and tradesmen or the University of Paris.

Louis tried to gain the favour of the wife of Charles VI, Queen Isabeau of France, and may have become her lover. After his son-in-law, the Dauphin Louis, was successively kidnapped and recovered by both parties, the Duke of Burgundy managed to gain appointment by royal decree—during one of the King's "absent" periods when mental illness manifested itself—as guardian of the Dauphin and the King's children. This did not improve relations between John and the Duke of Orléans. Soon the two rivals descended into making open threats. Their uncle, John, Duke of Berry, secured a vow of solemn reconciliation on 20 November 1407, but only three days later, on 23 November 1407, Louis was brutally assassinated in the streets of Paris. The order, no one doubted, had come from the Duke of Burgundy, who shortly admitted to the deed and declared it to be a justifiable act of "tyrannicide". According to Thomas Walsingham, Orléans had simply received his just deserts as he had been "taking his pleasure with whores, harlots, incest" and had committed adultery with the wife of an unnamed knight who had taken his revenge by killing him under the protection of the Duke of Burgundy. After an escape from Paris and a few skirmishes against the Orléans party, John managed to recover the King's favour. In the treaty of Chartres, signed on 9 March 1409, the King absolved the Duke of Burgundy of the crime, and he and Louis' son Charles pledged a reconciliation. A later edict renewed John's guardianship of the Dauphin.

He moved further closer to securing the Regency for himself when he had Jean de Montagu, Grand Master of France and the King's long standing favorite and administrator aligned with the Orleanists, arrested during another one of Charles' manic episodes, and after an expedited summary trial carried out by the Burgundian-aligned politicians, Montagu was beheaded at the Gibbet of Montfaucon on 17 October 1409.

Even with the Orléans dispute resolved in his favour, John did not lead a tranquil life. Charles, the son and heir of the murdered Duke of Orleans, was only 14 at the time of his father's death and was forced to depend heavily on allies to support his claims for the property that had been confiscated from him by the Duke of Burgundy. Chief among these allies was his father-in-law Bernard VII, Count of Armagnac. Because of this alliance, their faction became known as the Armagnacs in opposition to the Burgundians. With peace between the factions solemnly sworn in 1410, John returned to Burgundy and Bernard remained in Paris, where he reportedly shared the Queen's bed. The Armagnac party was not content with its level of political power, and after a series of riots and attacks against the citizens, John was recalled to the capital, then sent back to Burgundy in 1413. At this time, King Henry V of England invaded French territory and threatened to attack Paris. During the peace negotiations with the Armagnacs, Henry was also in contact with John, who was keen to wrest control of France away from King Charles VI. Despite this, he continued to be wary of forming an alliance with the English for fear of destroying his immense popularity with the common people of France. When Henry demanded Burgundy's support for his claim to be the rightful King of France, John backed away and decided to ally himself with the Armagnacs. Although he talked of helping his sovereign, his troops took no part in the Battle of Agincourt in 1415, although two of his brothers, Antoine, Duke of Brabant, and Philip II, Count of Nevers, died fighting for France during the battle.

Conflict with the Dauphin

Two years later, with the rivalry between Burgundians and Armagnacs at an all-time high because of the shattering defeat at Agincourt, John's troops set about the task of capturing Paris. On 30 May 1418, he did capture the city, but not before the new Dauphin, the future Charles VII of France, had escaped. John then installed himself in Paris and made himself protector of the King. Although not an open ally of the English, John did nothing to prevent the surrender of Rouen in 1419. With the whole of northern France in English hands and Paris occupied by Burgundy, the Dauphin tried to bring about a reconciliation with John. They met in July and swore peace on the bridge of Pouilly-le-Fort, near Melun. On the grounds that peace was not sufficiently assured by the meeting at Pouilly, a fresh interview was proposed by the Dauphin to take place on 10 September 1419 on the bridge at Montereau. John of Burgundy was present with his escort for what he considered a diplomatic meeting. He was, however, assassinated by the Dauphin's companions. He was later buried in Dijon. Following this, his son and successor Philip the Good formed an alliance with the English, which would prolong the Hundred Years' War for decades and cause incalculable damage to France and its subjects.

Family

John and his wife Margaret, who were married in 1385, had the following children:
 * 1) Marie (1393–1463, Monterberg bei Kalkar); married Adolph I, Duke of Cleves
 * 2) Margaret (1393–1442, Paris); married on 30 August 1404 Louis of Valois the Dauphin (heir of king Charles VI of France); then in 1423 Arthur de Richemont, the future Duke of Brittany
 * 3) Philip ΙΙΙ (1396–1467), son and heir
 * 4) Catherine (1399–1414, Ghent); promised in 1410 to Louis III of Anjou, son of Louis of Anjou
 * 5) Joanna (1399–1406), died young
 * 6) Isabelle (1400–1412, Rouvres); married at Arras on 22 July 1406 Olivier de Châtillon-Blois, Count of Penthièvre and Périgord
 * 7) Anne (1404–1432, Paris); married John, Duke of Bedford
 * 8) Agnes (1407–1476, Château de Moulins); married Charles I, Duke of Bourbon

John and his mistress Agnes de Croy, daughter of Jean I de Croÿ, had the following child:
 * John of Burgundy, Bishop of Cambrai

John and his mistress Marguerite de Borsele had the following children:
 * Guy of Burgundy, Lord of Kruibeke (killed at the siege of Calais in 1436); married Johanna, illegitimate daughter of Albert I, Duke of Bavaria
 * Antoine of Burgundy
 * Philipotte of Burgundy, Lady of Joncy; married Antoine of Rochebaron, Baron of Berze-le-Chatel

Titles

 * Blason comte fr Nevers.svg 1384–1404: Count of Nevers as John I
 * Blason fr Bourgogne.svg 27 April 1404 – 10 September 1419: Duke of Burgundy as John I
 * Blason comte fr Nevers.svg 21 March 1405 – 10 September 1419: Count Palatine of Burgundy as John I
 * Blason province fr Artois.svg 21 March 1405 – 10 September 1419: Count of Artois as John I
 * Blason Nord-Pas-De-Calais.svg 21 March 1405 – 10 September 1419: Count of Flanders as John I
 * Blason Charolais.svg 27 April 1404 – 28 January 1405: Count of Charolais as John I

title: John the Fearless


text:
Talk:Why Do Birds Sing?

Dead external links to Allmusic website – January 2011
Since Allmusic have changed the syntax of their URLs, 1 link(s) used in the article do not work anymore and can't be migrated automatically. Please use the search option on http://www.allmusic.com to find the new location of the linked Allmusic article(s) and fix the link(s) accordingly, prefereably by using the Allmusic template. If a new location cannot be found, the link(s) should be removed. This applies to the following external links: --CactusBot (talk) 19:05, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=A2r63mpc39f6o

title: Talk:Why Do Birds Sing?


text:
Icons of Evolution

Icons of Evolution is a book by Jonathan Wells, an advocate of the pseudoscientific intelligent design argument for the existence of God and fellow of the Discovery Institute, in which Wells criticizes the paradigm of evolution by attacking how it is taught. The book includes a 2002 video companion. In 2000, Wells summarized the book's contents in an article in the American Spectator. Several of the scientists whose work is sourced in the book have written rebuttals to Wells, stating that they were quoted out of context, that their work has been misrepresented, or that it does not imply Wells's conclusions.

Representatives of majority views in the scientific community have criticized the book and regard it as pseudoscientific, at the extreme of the struggle against evolutionary science. It was criticised for its claims that schoolchildren are deliberately misled, and its conclusions as to the evidential status of the theory of evolution, which is considered by scientists to be the central unifying paradigm of biology. Kevin Padian and Alan D. Gishlick wrote a review in Quarterly Review of Biology which said: "In our view, regardless of Wells's religious or philosophical background, his Icons of Evolution can scarcely be considered a work of scholarly integrity." Gishlick wrote a more detailed critique for the National Center for Science Education in his article "Icon of Evolution? Why much of what Jonathan Wells writes about evolution is wrong." Nick Matzke reviewed Wells' work in the talk.origins article Icon of Obfuscation, and Wells responded with A Response to Published Reviews (2002).

Reception by the scientific community and criticism
The members of the scientific community who have reviewed Icons of Evolution have rejected his claims and conclusions. Scientists quoted in the work have accused Wells' of purposely misquoting them and misleading readers. This includes biologist Bruce Grant, who said Wells was "dishonest" with his work and biologist Jerry Coyne who said Wells "misused" and "mischaracterized" his work on peppered moths. Specific rejections stand beside the already broader response of the scientific community in overwhelmingly rejecting intelligent design as a valid scientific theory, instead seeing it as pseudoscience.

Nick Matzke reviewed the work in an article titled "Icon of Obfuscation", and critiqued the book chapter by chapter. Matzke concluded, "Icons of Evolution makes a travesty of the notion of honest scholarship", and that "Icons contains numerous instances of unfair distortions of scientific opinion, generated by the pseudoscientific tactics of selective citation of scientists and evidence, quote-mining, and 'argumentative sleight-of-hand', the last meaning Wells's tactic of padding his topical discussions with incessant, biased editorializing".

Jerry Coyne wrote Icons "rests entirely on a flawed syllogism: ... textbooks illustrate evolution with examples; these examples are sometimes presented in incorrect or misleading ways; therefore evolution is a fiction."

Of the Wells' motive, Alan D. Gishlick wrote: "It is clear from Wells's treatment of the 'icons' and his grading scheme that his interest is not to improve the teaching of evolution, but rather to teach anti-evolutionism. Under Wells's scheme, teachers would be hostile to evolution as part of biology instruction. Wells and his allies hope that this would open the door to alternatives to evolution (such as 'intelligent design') without actually having to support them with science...In conclusion, the scholarship of Icons is substandard and the conclusions of the book are unsupported. In fact, despite his touted scientific credentials, Wells doesn't produce a single piece of original research to support his position. Instead, Wells parasitizes on other scientists' legitimate work." Likewise Frederick Crews of The New York Review of Books wrote: "Wells mines the standard evolutionary textbooks for exaggerated claims and misleading examples, which he counts as marks against evolution itself. His goal, of course, is not to improve the next editions of those books but to get them replaced by ID counterparts."

In 2002, Massimo Pigliucci devoted part of his Denying Evolution to refuting each point presented in Icons of Evolution. Amongst the refutations Pigliucci noted several mistakes Wells made and outlined how Wells oversimplified some issues to the detriment of the subject. Pigliucci also wrote an article-length review in BioScience and concludes, "Wells, as much as he desperately tries to debunk what to him is the most crucial component of evolutionary theory, the history of human descent, is backed against the wall by his own knowledge of biology." In 2005, Pigliucci debated Wells on Uncommon Knowledge on broader issues of evolution and intelligent design.

Barbara Forrest and Paul R. Gross discuss Wells' book in Creationism's Trojan Horse. One issue they highlighted was Wells' accusation that Haeckel forged images of embryos that are allegedly still in biology books. Forrest and Gross noted that Haeckel's, "a conservative Christian youth", work was fudged', as biologist Massimo Pigliucci says, not 'faked'." However, "we have excellent photographs, to which students can obtain easy access. Many or most colleges students of introductory biology actually see the embryos in the laboratory ..." Moreover, "vertebrate embryos, for most of the longest period of middevelopment, do look remarkably alike, pretty much, but not exactly, as Haeckel figured them in some of his drawings"(emphasis in original)."

Richard Weisenberg, biologist at Temple University, wrote an open letter to Wells in The Philadelphia Inquirer noting "Evolution by natural selection and the origin of life are entirely different subjects. ... The validity of any particular theory of biological origins (and there are several) has no relevancy to the well-established validity of evolution by natural selection." He continued, "I can only conclude that you have failed to master even a fraction of the massive body of evidence supporting the principle of evolution by natural selection."

The response of the single publisher named by Wells as having revised textbooks on the basis of his work has been condemned by Steven Schafersman, President of Texas Citizens for Science, and PZ Myers. That Wells' doctorate in biology at University of California, Berkeley was funded by Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church and a statement describing those studies as learning how to "destroy Darwinism" are viewed by the scientific community as evidence that Wells lacks proper scientific objectivity and mischaracterizes evolution by ignoring and misrepresenting the evidence supporting it while pursuing an agenda promoting notions supporting his religious beliefs in its stead. The Discovery Institute has stated in response that "Darwinists have resorted to attacks on Dr. Wells's religion."

In 2009, Patricia Princehouse, Professor at Case Western Reserve University, testified in a Mount Vernon City School District hearing that Icons was full of fraudulent representations of material in science textbooks. Christopher Hitchens describes the book as "unlikely even to rate a footnote in the history of piffle".

Reception by creationists
The book has been praised by creationists and fellows of the Discovery Institute Dean Kenyon and Paul Chien.

Wells's icons
Wells focused on 10 examples that he said were commonly used to teach evolution, which he called "icons". He evaluated how seven of these icons are treated in ten "widely used" high school and undergraduate textbooks. Although Wells established a grading scale for the textbooks, Alan Gishlick reported that the grading scale was poorly constructed and inconsistently used. Wells contended that the 10 case studies used to illustrate and teach evolution are flawed. Wells's ten "icons" were:

The last three "icons" – four-winged fruit flies, horse evolution, and human evolution –- were discussed in the book, but Wells did not evaluate their coverage in textbooks. Although most textbooks cover the first seven "icons", they are not used as the "best evidence" of evolution in any of the textbooks.

Miller–Urey experiment
The Miller–Urey experiment was an experiment that simulated what were believed to be the conditions on the early Earth and tested the Oparin–Haldane model for chemical evolution. In Icons of Evolution Wells argued that since the atmospheric composition used in the experiment is now known to be incorrect, it should not be used in textbooks. Wells said that current ideas about the atmospheric composition of the early Earth makes this type of chemical synthesis impossible due to the presence of "significant" amounts of oxygen. Matzke contends that Wells mischaracterises pre-biotic levels of oxygen; although current estimates of the oxygen content are higher than those used in the experiment, they are still far more reducing than Wells suggests. Gishlick discussed fourteen other Miller–Urey type experiments which were able to synthesise amino acids under a variety of conditions, including ones that were done under conditions like those currently believed to have been present in at the time when life is thought to have originated.

Wells gave four textbooks a D grade, and the other six Fs. Gishlick contended that Wells criteria "stack the deck against [the textbooks], ensuring failure. Wells grading criteria give a C or worse to any textbook that has a picture of the Miller–Urey apparatus unless the figure caption explicitly says that the experiment is irrelevant, regardless of whether or not the text being illustrated by the picture states that the atmosphere used in the experiment was incorrect. Gishlick notes that even the intelligent design textbook, Of Pandas and People, would only receive a C. The claim that it is irrelevant is incorrect, as the experiment marked a major advance in studies of the origin of life, its results are still valid, and for teaching purposes it shows the methods of good experimental science.

Darwin's tree of life
Wells discussed the use of phylogenetic trees in biology textbooks, though Charles Darwin himself only included a schematic diagram in his works. Wells stated that textbooks do not adequately address the "Cambrian Explosion" and the emergence of "top-down" patterns of emergence of major phyla. He said that disagreements between morphological and molecular phylogenies disprove common ancestry and that textbooks should treat universal common descent as an unproven theory. Although Wells presented the Cambrian Explosion as happening too quickly for the diversity to have been generated through "Darwinian evolution", Gishlick pointed out that the Cambrian fauna developed over 60,000,000 years. In addition, the emergence of major phyla does not mean that they originated during that time period, but rather that they developed the characteristic features that allow them to be classified into existing phyla. In addition, since phylogenies summarize data, they are not presented as "evidence of evolution", but rather as summaries.

Wells gave two textbooks Ds and the other eight Fs. Gishlick pointed out that Wells did not use the grading system consistently, criticising books for failing to discuss the Cambrian Explosion if they do so without calling it an explosion.

Haeckel's embryos
PZ Myers, reviewing the chapter in which Wells takes on Haeckel's embryos, wrote:

"Unfortunately, what Wells tries to do in this chapter is to take this invalid, discredited theory and tar modern (and even not so modern) evolutionary biology with it. The biogenetic law is not Darwinism or neo-Darwinism, however. It is not part of any modern evolutionary theory. Wells is carrying out a bait-and-switch here, marshalling the evidence and citations that properly demolish the Haeckelian dogma, and then claiming that this is part of "our best evidence for Darwin's theory." [...] While Jonathan Wells would like to discredit evolution, and in Haeckel's embryos, he has found a story to his liking. There is a bit of intentional fakery to it, there is a clear affiliation with Darwin himself, and there is a long history of recognition of Haeckel's influence intermingled with unambiguous repudiation of his ideas. [...] All he has to do is try to entangle Haeckel's discredited theories and poor modern reputation with the set of valid observations and modern explanations, and he can bury the truth under innuendo and association. [emphasis in original]"

In 2003, Holt, Rinehart and Winston said it re-evaluated the use of the peppered moth and Haeckel's drawing of embryos from its textbook prior to publication. The publisher said, ". . . in Holt Biology Texas of the Miller–Urey experiment carefully indicates the mistakes made in the assumptions about the early atmosphere. Throughout Holt Biology Texas, the theory of evolution is described as a true scientific theory that will be refined and improved in the light of new evidence."

To Wells' assertion in Icons that Haeckel's embryos and recapitulation theory appearing in biology textbooks is evidence of flaws in the teaching of evolution, Myers said "I'd say Jonathan Wells' claim is pretty much dead. Haeckel's work is not one of the pillars upon which evolution is built, and biologists have been saying so for at least 85 years (and more like over a century). Next time one of those clowns tries to haunt modern biology with the ghost of Ernst Haeckel, just look 'em in the eye and tell them they're full of crap." The documentary Flock of Dodos challenges Wells' assertion, widely repeated by design advocates, that Haeckel's embryos are widespread in evolution textbooks.

Science communicator Brian Switek said "If one reads Wells' criterion for his bogus A–F grading scale for the textbooks in Icons, it quickly becomes apparent that even publishing illustrations that resemble Haeckel's to illustrate his folly will garner the book a D, the only difference between a D and an F in Wells' mind being a 'D' grade book selecting a few embryos rather than publishing the full swath Haeckel originally doctored." PZ Myers says of Wells's claim about the use of Haeckel drawings in modern textbooks "They repeat the claim that Haeckel's embryos and all that silly recapitulation theory are still endemic in biology textbooks. It's not true, no matter how much they whine about it. I've gone over a number of these textbooks, and what you typically find at worst is a figure of the Haeckel diagrams for historical interest with an explanation that rejects recapitulation theory; more often what you find are photos or independently redrawn illustrations of the embryos."

Darwin's finches
In the chapter on Darwin's finches, Wells argues that Darwin's finches were merely a "speculative afterthought". Wells claims that ornithologist David Lack is more to be credited with the popular finches, and that it was Lack who paraded the finches and claimed that they were instrumental in Darwin's theories. This claim is contradicted by Alan D. Gishlick and Dave Wisker, who state that Darwin was in fact heavily influenced by the finches as early as 1837, with Wisker stating that "Wells seems to be the one doing the speculating". Wells argues that, rather than evolving, the finch species may be "merging", combining from multiple species into a single species rather than diverging from a single species into multiple species. Wells argues that, due to interbreeding between many of the finch "species", the 13 species may actually be less than previously thought. Contradicting this, Gishlick states that the separation "according to which species are separated by behaviors that lead animals to recognize potential mates" is "widely accepted". Wisker states that hybridization among finch species on the Galápagos Islands is, in fact, rare. Both agree that even if hybridization did occur, it would be irrelevant, because evolution does not specifically require divergence. Wisker concludes: "The general reader is done a great disservice by this chapter in Icons of Evolution. Jonathan Wells does not sufficiently address the biographical or scientific literature on Darwin's Finches to enable the reader to make an informed decision regarding his argument. He writes, with exquisite irony, 'It makes one wonder how much evidence there really is for Darwin's theory'. Since, as we have seen, Wells avoids most of it regarding Darwin's Finches, one wonders how much evidence there is to support his book."

Cover picture
The book's title is a reference to the famous picture March of Progress. This drawing, by Rudolph Zallinger, was published in the Time-Life book Early Man in 1965 and shows a sequence of primates walking from left to right, starting with a non-human ape on the left, progressing through a series of hominids, and finishing with a modern human on the right. A version of the drawing is on the cover of the book, and Wells describes it as the "ultimate icon" of evolution.

Video
In 2002, a video titled Icons Of Evolution and produced by Coldwater Media. In it, Wells discusses the ideas presented in the book. The video also covers the story of Roger DeHart, one of the Discovery Institute's media campaigns claiming discrimination. The Seattle Weekly recalled the DeHart issue saying the video did not tell "the whole truth".

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District
At meetings of the Dover Area School District Board of Education, in Pennsylvania, in June 2004, "six day" creationist board member Bill Buckingham made statements supporting creationism and objected to proposed use of the textbook Biology written by Kenneth R. Miller. The story appeared in York County newspapers, and Buckingham was telephoned by Discovery Institute staff attorney Seth Cooper, whose tasks included "communicating with ‘legislators, school board members, teachers, parents and students" to “address the topic of ID in a scientifically and educationally responsible way” in public schools. Following discussions, Cooper sent the book and DVD of Icons of Evolution to Buckingham, who required the Dover High School botany teachers to watch the DVD. They did not take up the opportunity to use it in their classes. The school board subsequently introduced a requirement that teachers read a statement to students in the ninth-grade biology class at Dover High School, asserting that Darwin's theory of evolution "is still being tested as new evidence is discovered. The theory is not a fact. Gaps in the theory exist for which there is no evidence." This led to the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District case which found that intelligent design is a form of creationism, and the school board policy was unconstitutional.

Supporting 'Icons of Evolution'

 * Icons of Evolution – Official website from the Discovery Institute

Critical of 'Icons of Evolution'

 * Icons of Evolution FAQs at the TalkOrigins Archive
 * A reasonably short guide to Wells' "icons" of evolution, and why they are not what he claims by Massimo Pigliucci
 * No Icons of Evolution: A Review of by evolutionary biologist Massimo Pigliucci
 * Fatally Flawed Iconoclasm by Eugenie Scott
 * Selection of critical reviews from Don Lindsay

title: Icons of Evolution


text:
Xavier de Roux

Xavier de Roux (4 December 1940 – 5 June 2015) was a French politician.

He was a member of the Radical Party and a deputy for the department Charente-Maritime in the National Assembly of France from 1993 until 1997 and from 2002 until 2007. From 1983 until his death in 2015 he was the elected mayor of Chaniers, a small town in Charente-Maritime.

title: Xavier de Roux


text: Talk:Violent Femmes (album)

title: Talk:Violent Femmes (album)