Haven't read and most likely never will but discussed the content with the author many times so I feel like I know the content. Quote from one commentHaven't read and most likely never will but discussed the content with the author many times so I feel like I know the content. Quote from one commentator: " the trinitarian conception” of God (p. viii), as a reaction against the premature 19th-century dismissal of the doctrine. This was not a common opinion at the time; Welch was taking a chance in making the prediction." In 1969, NHG Robinson said that Welch’s prediction “could scarcely have proved wider of the mark,” since in Robinson’s estimate “the trinitarian concept has disappeared in all but name from the prevailing articulations of the Christian faith.” But Robinson was watching the wrong indicators (Bultmannians and anglo-empiricists), and Welch’s prediction has come to pass in a remarkable way, as one of the major stories of late twentieth century theology. What enabled Welch to predict the return of the Trinity was not just his historical instincts, but his lively theological awareness. Only a fool would think Christianity was going to keep moving forward without the doctrine of the Trinity; Claude saw that there was a great deal of foolishness and not enough trinitarianism in mid-twentieth century academic theology."
In one of life's lesser ironies, Dad was asked to write a new introduction to the book several years before his death as they wanted to reissue it. He told me that he reread it, thought it was a good book, but he didn't believe any of it anymore....more
Well we have to shit somewhere. It was a real problem for ships at sea. It's just not that easy to throw a bucket downwind. This little gem will tellWell we have to shit somewhere. It was a real problem for ships at sea. It's just not that easy to throw a bucket downwind. This little gem will tell you more than you ever wanted to know about the development of excreta mechanisms.
One neat little trick was to move the "sanitary box" from side to side of the stern depending which tack the ship was on. The boxes were roped on to the side of the ship. Of course, some of the smaller ships might employ the ocean for another useful purpose. "For jakes, there were the 'gardens,' stools hung over the lee side, where as like or not, the sweep of the water as the ship heeled would wash your arse." Hanging over the side with holes cut in the bottom, there was an uncanny resemblance to the "garderobe" prominent on medieval castles. The overhang obviously permitted excreta to fall into the moat (geez...) Since ships in the 15th and 16th centuries were considered "sea castles," it is not illogical that their form might follow the land-based equivalent.
By the latter part of the 16th century, the "head" or "beak-head" had become more standard and was probably an attempt to build some kind of ram on the front of the ship. Forward facing guns were also employed. Having sanitary (don't you love the euphemisms) arrangements up front close to the sea and in the open had several advantages: open to the sun and washing action of the waves. It was also the area where common seamen were "stowed," as opposed to the stern which was the province of the officers. Tubs for the collection of urine were employed to help with fire-fighting.
The 17th century introduced new ship design. The beak-head was reduced and "seats-of-ease" were employed by 1670. They were located in the aft part of the beak-head, a rectangular box with backrest of the rail and unhindered access to the sea below. I suspect lingering was rare except in the calmest weather. A 1692 model of an English eighty-gun ship shows only two of these devices for a crew of 650. On the model it is assumed the person using it faced outward, perhaps so as to be able to see heavy seas coming. I wonder if there might have been more and the model builder just didn't want to make more. Internal facilities did not appear until the early 19th century and the more extensive use of iron in the hulls had much to do with it.
I must admit to really enjoying books like this that tell us about the most common things that we all need but rarely talk about. It would have been nice in the movie Master and Commander to have them indulge in a little verisimilitude. My only gripe is that the illustrations are often not very clear. There was one I enjoyed very much. Entitled " 'Hanging Out' (do you suppose that's where the phrase comes from?) from the fore chains," it shows a bare-ass sailer hanging on to the shrouds in a rather uncomfortable posture (pg 74). ...more
A quote from his blog that got me interested: "And there was worse to come. Whether it was Rep. Joe Wilson boorishly yelling “you lie!”– unprecedentedA quote from his blog that got me interested: "And there was worse to come. Whether it was Rep. Joe Wilson boorishly yelling “you lie!”– unprecedented behavior during a joint meeting of Congress assembled to hear a presidential address – or the obscene carnival of Birtherism, Obama-the-secret-Muslim, death panels, and all the rest of it, the party took on a nasty, bullying, crazy edge. From my perch on the budget committee I watched with a mixture of fascination and foreboding as my party was hijacked by a new crop of opportunists and true believers hell-bent on dragging the country into their jerry-built New Jerusalem: an upside-down utopia where corporations rule, the Constitution, like science, is faith-based, and war is the first, not the last, resort in foreign policy."
Among other things I learned was that the big to-do when Zubeta was captured after a firefight and wounded was that the US flew the best U.S. physiciaAmong other things I learned was that the big to-do when Zubeta was captured after a firefight and wounded was that the US flew the best U.S. physicians to Pakistan to treat him. He probably had the best medical care of anyone in the world so he could be completely healthy so they could torture him (no kidding.) The problem was that he was a crazy guy suffering from delusions. The CIA had all sorts of evidence that he knew nothing, was not a player, but acted as sort of the Al Qaeda travel agent for family members. Bush had made such a big thing out of his capture, it put the entire intelligence community on the spot to try to justify the torture and pretend his information had some value.
It also became abundantly clear early on, that the U.S. had evidence (from an intercepted conversation) that Ben Laden's goal was not to overthrow the United States, but rather to destabilize the Arab world: Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Lebanon, and others in hopes of establishing a true fundamentalist theocracy. He was targeting the Saudi family and the oil fields to begin with. To do so would completely unhinge the world's economy, which runs on oil. (See also The Looming Tower for more evidence of Ben Laden's strategic goals.
Bush, in a speech to West Point, in 2003 had already expressed the need for new tactics to deal with non-nation threats. It would require going after individuals rather than states and these individuals could move freely from one state to another making their apprehension quite difficult. (See my little essay on swarming as a superior tactic in OpenSalon http://open.salon.com/content.php?cid...)
The Cheney Doctrine, i.e. the One-Percent Rule that says if there is even a one-percent chance of a threat it must be dealt with, cold have enormous implications for the United States because it also meant that we should react based on suspicion rather than evidence hence the Bush Administration's throwing out many of the Constitutional protections in the name of threat avoidance.
How all this will play out in the future remains to be seen. ...more