Quantitative Methods Database Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Quantitative Methods Database - Assignment Example Our information remembered data for the area, the kind of houses, the quantity of rooms, the cost and the parking spot. From our examination, we present various graphs that sum up the various properties of our information. The principal graph presents the standard deviation of the costs of the various sorts of homes in our regions under investigation. Standard deviation shows the level of variety in the costs of homes. From the investigation, it is obvious that most noteworthy deviation of costs happens in the costs of houses between the urban communities which has a standard deviation of 1.182649718 with the variety in the costs of cottage being 0.559803074 and 0.245835672. Therefore, the deviation between the various sorts of homes for Colchester is 1.123087983, 0.337027783 for Jaywick and 1.072970694 for Mersea Island. The deviations in the costs of homes are most elevated is Colchester. The normal costs of the homes show that possessing a home in all the three zones will cost a normal of 0.713536982, while that of a level is 0.560563004 and that of a house is 1.273070162. Therefore, claiming a lodge will cost a sum of 10808630 while it will cost 4408989 for a level and 36343708 for a house. As respects the normal of costs for the various parts of the various homes, on account of a cottage and house, it is apparent that having a withdrawn home will cost an excellent aggregate of 1.171448428 while the great aggregate for a manufactured home will cost 0.116264276, 0.808875794 for a semi-confined home and 0.615969407 for a patio home. Notwithstanding, as respects the equivalent, the terrific aggregate for possessing a cabin is 0.658932363 while the great aggregate of claiming a house is 1.172291899. As respects the normal number of rooms, the great aggregate on account of Colchester zone is 3 while that of Jaywick is 2 and 3 on account of Mersea Island.

Shakespeares Presentation of the Character of Mark Antony in Julius Caesar - Literature Essay Samples

We meet the character of Mark Antony three times before Julius Caesars death, though he speaks little and we do not get much of an indication of his character. Antony fully enters the play exactly halfway through, when he makes a gripping speech, and his eloquence changes the course of Roman history. From this point onwards, Antony becomes a key player in the action and begins to change the nature of events in the play, especially with respect to Brutus and Cassius. He takes part in the struggle for power, and is driven by the need to avenge Caesars death. Antony emerges as a flamboyant character, but one who is also hard headed, clear-sighted, and ambitious.Mark Antony was Caesars closest and most faithful friend, confidante, and follower. The two men had fought many campaigns together, and knew each other very well. Antony is the only character in the play who calls Caesar by his first name, Julius, a sign of their strong friendship. Antony had also offered Caesar the crown three t imes, signifying his generosity and devotion. We see clearly Antonys love and admiration for Caesar in the three short statements he makes before Caesars death, and over his corpse as he says, thou art the ruins of the noblest man/ That ever lived in the tide of times. After the murder, he attempts to act as Caesar would have done. However, Mark Antony is also portrayed as a partier and womanizer, that revels long-a-nights and is given/ To sports, to wildness, and much company. He leads an extravagant and indulgent lifestyle and is also portrayed as powerful and athletic. Antonys many assets emerge throughout the play; by the end his character appears to have developed, and it becomes clear to the audience that he is a loyal general who is militarily accomplished, as well as politically shrewd and exceptionally skilled at oration. Antony is similar to Caesar in that his power leads to ambition. An important moment in the play showing Antonys power and significance occurs when Caesar asks him to touch Calphurnia as he passes her in his race during the celebration of the feast of Lupercal. According to superstition, the touch of an athlete during this holy feast would make a woman fertile, and the fact that Caesar chooses Antony to touch his wife suggests that he trusts and has faith in him, and possibly even sees him as a protector. However, as Shakespeare kills off the character the play is named for, he maintains dramatic tension by making Antony emerge as even more forceful than he initially appeared to be. Brutus makes a mistake in underestimating Antonys power, believing that he is not interested in politics and that he can do no more than Caesars arm / When Caesars head is off. Consequently, Antony becomes a troublesome and dangerous rival to the conspirators. As Antonys power increases, so does his ambition, and after Caesars death he proves to be a great opportunist, quickly devising a plan for revenge. Antony ensures his servant witnesses his oration s o that he can use it to impress Octavius, Caesars heir and Antonys ally. Antony is planning far in advance, showing his high hopes for the future. From this point onwards in the play, Antony becomes ruthless and calculating, willing to use his power and his abilities for his own purposes. His power over the people and soaring ambition become similar to Caesars.Antony confirms Cassius judgement of him as a shrewd contriver when he meets the conspirators after Caesars murder. He states he is now on slippery ground, and his words have a double meaning: both literally with blood, and metaphorically in that he opposes the conspirators, but must make them believe that he can still do business with them. Although he is initially at a loss for words, Antonys skill as an orator, wit, and ability to deceive and manipulate allow him to cover his feelings, succeed in pretending to befriend the conspirators and persuading them to trust him. He begins by flattering them in order to seduce them, u sing metaphorical language, naming them master spirits of this age. He has the nerve to call Caska valiant even though he knows that Caska is shifty, and says good Trebonius, despite knowing that Trebonius directed him aside so that they could kill Caesar. Although on the surface it appears that Antony has turned traitor to his memory of Caesar, he openly calls himself Either a coward or a flatterer, boldly speaking aloud the thoughts that they are evidently thinking to themselves. His ability to apparently see both sides of the argument and relate to the conspirators gives Antony some protection from the ill intentions of these murderers. He is in a delicate situation, but keeps them on the defensive by demanding reasons / Why and wherein Caesar was dangerous. Antony cleverly avoids dealing with Cassius by taking advantage of Brutus power and gullibility. He flatters him and attacks his weaknesses, naive sense of honour, and nobility. Antony knows that Brutus wants to believe that he will side with them he had said I know that we shall have him well to friend and therefore takes advantage of Brutus hope by deceptively telling the conspirators, Friends I am with you all, and love you all. This construct allows Antony to receive permission to speak at Caesars funeral, as it gives Brutus time to accept Antony and sympathize with him. Antony also makes a point of shaking each conspirators hand, and while doing so makes a mental note of each mans name, which allows him to improvise the act of the murder later in his speech to the crowd. Antony calls some of the conspirators by two names rather than one (for example, Decius Brutus rather than Decius, which is unusual in everyday Roman life, though this formality emphasises the tension of the moment). Antonys plan is a gamble, requiring quite some nerve, though he is not dissuaded by dishonesty. In comparison to all the conspirators, and even to Cassius, the most strategic and scheming of them all, Antony is stro ng and politically cunning.As soon as the conspirators depart, Antony begs forgiveness of Caesars dead body for being meek and gentle with these butchers. This provides a strong contrast to the gentlemen he spoke of just moments earlier, and therefore makes the audience aware that he is now able to express his true feelings and private thoughts, as well as emphasizing the falsity of his previous actions. Antony is incredibly emotional and filled with grief and anger in this soliloquy. His powerful and passionate words provide him with a sort of redemption and drive him to rouse the people of Rome to rebellion. He prophesizes Domestic fury and fierce civil strife in Italy, and uses horrific images such as infants quartered to predict the many future deaths and the chaos that are to come and to shock the audience. Antonys complete and utter loyalty to Caesars spirit, ranging for revenge, reminds us of great Caesars continuous presence despite his death, and demonstrates the extreme me asures Antony will take to avenge his friends betrayal. His words therefore set the tone for the rest of the play and prepare the audience for the forthcoming turmoil and bloodshed. Antonys soliloquy marks a turning point in the play, which begins with his masterful and manipulative speech to the plebeians to avenge his beloved friend and to gain power, and ultimately dooms Rome to endure Caesars revenge. Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears. Mark Antony begins his speech with an appeal for attention before a confused and hostile crowd. Commas punctuate his first line as he speaks slowly to give the retreating people time to hear him. This oration will test their loyalty towards Rome and towards Noble Antony. His speeches take the form of verse rather than prose, which make his words more strong, emotive, and poetic than Brutus. Antony immediately disables all opposition in the crowd with the words I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him. However, he soon begins to direct his audiences thoughts away from the evil ambition that Brutus spoke of by talking of Caesars legacy and hinting at his heroism, kindness, and honour. Being a master of rhetorical and political skill, Antony simultaneously maintains Brutus arguments while highlighting their flaws and suggesting the opposite, and thus is able to appear deferential to the conspirators but nevertheless incite a revolt against them, much as the previous scene, where he damns the murderers while appearing to pay them respect. Here, Antony states that Caesar was ambitious many times, then counters these arguments by using tangible images that appeal to the plebeians and remind them that Caesar brought money to Rome, showed compassion for the poor, and turned down the crown three times. This logical evidence questions the validity of Brutus argument and makes the crowd feel guilty by reminding them that they all loved Caesar once, though there are none so poor to do him reverence at his death. Antony also repeatedly calls the conspirators honourable men so that it seems that their view of Caesar as ambitious must therefore have been correct, and so as not to go against the crowd, who are, at this point, still in favour of Brutus. However, the use of this phrase is heavily ironic, as he believes the men are traitors. Antonys repetition of the term honourable men gives his speech power and infuses it with an increasingly sarcastic tone that questions their honour simply by drawing so much attention to it: For Brutus is an honourable man,/ So are they all, all honourable men. The emphasis on this phrase also builds rhythm into the speech which captures the crowds attention. Antony continues to flatter the conspirators by saying I am no orator, as Brutus is, despite offering a speech three times the length of Brutus. This also expresses his supposed low self-confidence, thereby evoking pity among the crowd in an attempt for support and praise of his great oration. Again demonstrating hi s ability to manipulate the thoughts of the crowd, Antony introduces the idea of mutiny and rage while claiming to prevent it, then says that if he were as skilled an orator as Brutus, he would stir the people to revenge and riot. Antony then proceeds to flatter the Romans, calling them gentle when they are in fact uncouth. By making it seem as if he is consulting the crowd, and by not explicitly enforcing any opinion, Antony does not appear dictatorial, but rather a statesman. He involves the crowd and gives the impression that they are in control. He asks rhetorical questions, to which he supplies answers. The consultation of the crowd (such as You will compel me then to read the will?) takes on a significance, as there is an intimacy among the crowd, the speaker, and the body. Antony uses the will itself as a device to tantalize the crowd as the possibility of money makes the people selfish and excited, meanwhile stating that he cannot read it as it would demonstrate how much Cae sar loved his citizens and therefore stir them up. Here, again, he is deviously employing the craft of the rhetoric, as a riot is precisely what he wants. He plays with their desire and strengthens it by holding back information until exactly the right moment, which consequently makes the mob even more passionate and dangerous. When Antony finally reads the will, Caesars generosity in bequeathing his private gardens and orchards and seventy-five drachmans to each citizen emphasises the injustice of the assassination and sends the crowd into a frenzy. Often, actions speak louder than words, and Antony successfully uses theatrics in his oration to create a dramatic effect that will have a lasting impact on the crowd. He initially makes a powerful entrance by entering the Forum bearing dead Caesars body, which moves the audience, and from this moment onwards, all eyes are turned towards him. He makes a final lasting image when he uncovers Caesars body and reveals his wounds, at which p oint one plebeian responds with O piteous spectacle. I have seen a production of Julius Caesar at The Lyric Theatre, Hammersmith, and the constant presence of the dead body at the forefront of the stage, draped in white fabric with the bloody head uncovered, increased and sustained the dramatic tension and suspense throughout Antonys speech, while the dim blue lighting created a sombre mood and cast shadows on the characters, achieving an air of mystery. Antony thus uses the power of theatre to prolong the strife following the assassination by shocking the audience with a improvisatory account of the death, claiming to know which conspirator made each wound. He deliberately uses hyperbole such as O, what a fall was there, my countrymen! / Then I, and you, and all of us fell down, to aggravate his audience. Harsh k, r and t consonants in words like unkindest cut emphasise the brutality of the murderous assault, while soft f and l sounds echo Caesars fall. By recounting the murder in a production filled with tragic pathos, he and all the citizens of Rome are forced to relive the traumatic experience. Antonys oration is clearly based more on emotion than on reason. His passionate mourning and sorrow, as shown by his genuine tears over the corpse, and his sentimental reminiscing about Caesar throughout his speech win over the feelings of the crowd and contrast with all the other characters actions and language. Antonys long speeches are actually motivated by grief for another individual, horror, and outrage, and the audience is enchanted by such a display of loyalty. Antony states, He was my friend, taking on a softer, more reflective tone. Concerns such as friendship are ones they can all understand, and the crowd can therefore empathize with him. Antony shows how much he has been hurt by Caesars death, stating, My heart is in the coffin there with Caesar. At this point, he feels the need to pause to recover himself, and it is precisely here where the crowd insti nctively began to change sides. Moved by his emotion, the fickle crowd begin to sympathise with Antony, commenting Poor soul, his eyes are red as fire with weeping. Caught up in their own emotion, they accept everything he says. The reason Antonys speech is so successful is because he employs theatrical effects and colorful language in a way that is powerful and attractive to the audience. He is clearly not the plain blunt man he claims to be, and instead proves himself to be eloquent and articulate, with a knowledge of managing crowds. Antony skilfully uses every piece of information he can to win over the crowd. His speech is well received, and public opinion turns against the conspirators.It is by targeting the masses that Antony is able to create a chaotic situation that allows him to seize power in place of the republicans. He even later attempts to dissuade Octavius from entering Rome, possibly to avoid sharing power. By means of his ruthless show of grief and persuasive rheto ric, Antony has convinced the unruly mob to revolt against the conspirators. They are enraged to the point of rebellion and violence, and leave to cremate Caesars body with due respect, burn the houses of the conspirators, and incite general mayhem. Consequently, Brutus and Cassius flee Rome. Antonys ruthlessness becomes ever more apparent as he personifies his mischief, saying Mischief, thou art afoot: / Take thou what course thou wilt. Delighted that the crowd is now acting to his advantage, Antony immediately thinks of ways he can profit from this chaos, and visits Octavius and Lepidus at Caesars house. Utterly confident about his military strategy, Antony personifies fortune, stating Fortune is merry, / And in this mood will give us anything. By readily trading the lives of the conspirators for his own political success, Antonys merciless nature is revealed. Henceforth, he uses his current position of leadership to defeat his opponents.At the beginning of Act V, as the two oppos ing sides argue before the battle, Shakespeare shows that language has gone past the point of having an effect. It is ironic, though, that Antony accuses the Villans of kissing Caesars feet while their vile daggers / Hacked one another in the sides of Caesar, when he did the same by betraying Brutus trust and friendship while turning the crowd against him at Caesars funeral. Nevertheless, no measure of insult or accusation will deter the inevitable violence brought on by that which has already been spoken. The war at Philippi that follows reveals much about Antonys character. We primarily see that he is a skilled military leader, as he makes better decisions on the battlefield than any of the other generals and is proficient at pinpointing the best point of attack; for example, when Brutus leaves Cassius army exposed, Antony attacks immediately. Even when Antony takes the inferior left hand of the even field he is victorious, while Octavius is defeated. Allowing Octavius to take the more advantageous right hand side of the battlefield could suggest Antonys modesty and reason, as it shows that he is loyal to Caesars great-nephew and heir and acknowledges his superiority. On the other hand, Antony and Octavius argue, as they are both power-craving. There is some personality clash, though they are both able to place their differences secondary to their shared aspiration to defeat Brutus and Cassius. To do this, however, they must be expedient and practical. Antony recklessly changes Caesars will, which he previously used to manipulate the Romans, by looking for ways to cut off some charges in legacies. He wants to reduce the amount of money left by Caesar to the poor of Rome, and instead keeps it for the triumvirate and to cut costs for his army. He also proves to be cold and hard-hearted in discussing the deaths of any senators with power who may threaten his reign (for example, by curtly stating that his own nephew, Publius, shall not live, rather than attempti ng to argue for his life). Antonys actions are filled with irony, as he is now assassinating people who he feels have power, just as the conspirators did to Caesar. Similarly, he goes behind the back of Lepidus, his ally, criticising him and using him resourcefully to do their errands and to ease themselves of diverse slanderous loads. Antony thus compares Lepidus to his horse, and plans to withdraw him from power as soon as they are done using him, despite him being a tried and valiant soldier. His plan is to then assume power in Lepidus place. In this scene Antony appears very controlling, and by talking down to Octavius, who defends Lepidus by reminding him that he, Antony, has seen more days than him and thereby implying that he is wiser, he comes across as pompous and self-important. By this point in the play we see how much Antony has changed. The generosity of Octavius that Antony himself used to manifest contrasts sharply with his personality now. The triumvirs, particularly Antony, defeat the conspirators, though they do so with no regard for cruelty, tyranny, and betrayal. As it stands after the battle, Antony and Octavius are both competing for domination. Antony has underestimated Octavius determination to rule Rome, and there is no clear winner, though Antonys prospects remain high. However, we have to question whether Antony would truly be a good ruler. He has been given power by the people of Rome, and they are clearly in favour of him, even though since his oration his principles appear to have changed. Although his actions have been carried out on behalf of Rome, he has adapted them for personal gain. It becomes evident that as a ruler Antony would be prepared to forget truth, loyalty, and basic principles as he has done in the past, thus losing his nobility. However, he is still able to recognize and commend nobility among others, as in the final scene Antony pays tribute to Brutus, calling him the noblest Roman of them all, recognizing that of all the conspirators he was the only one who acted with good intentions, rather than out of envy of great Caesar. This public show of praise has the added purpose of uniting the people of Rome. The future of Rome now seems to lie in Antonys hands. Brutus killed Caesar to create democracy and to prevent a one-man state, but the murder appears to have failed to solve their political problems, as Antonys climb to power indicates that he too will be a dictator like Caesar. Antony has little concern for the plebeians who will suffer due to the civil strife he has created. It is ironic that Antony hails Brutus as being a man rather than a god like Caesar was, but nevertheless is set out to be a similar type of leader. The future of Rome is the audiences primary concern in this scene, though the fact that the play ends with a sense of uncertainty means that many decisions are left up to the audience. Following the assassination we have a mourning Rome, a dangerous Rome, and since the po litical structure as it is at the end of the novel is largely how it was to begin with, the most likely conclusion is that little will change in the future. This is due to the overwhelming desire for power and authority among the ruling class. There is no prospect of hierarchy in the political system the triumvirate has created. These men should unite and work towards bringing Rome to stability, working for the good of the people, but they are in fact divided by their pride and self-interest, and their constant attempts to undermine each other. These concerns have preoccupied their minds, and as a result they have overlooked the qualities of honor and dignity that should be characteristic of all Romans. The tragedy of Julius Caesar therefore lies not only in the murderous assault on the central character, but also in the crisis of a powerful nation which rules one third of the world. Throughout Julius Caesar Mark Antony proves himself to be a sophisticated and artful public speaker, a successful military leader, and a sly politician, meanwhile fulfilling Brutus assessment of him as a wise and valiant Roman. Antony has a romantic side to him, which encourages his emotion to influence both other people, and many of his own decisions. His emotional oration over Caesars body is deserved and allows him to stand up for what he feels is right, though this emotion also provokes political unrest in Rome. Antony also embraces reason, particularly in his speech to the plebeians, and his outstanding charisma demonstrates the power of oratory, as it overwhelms the Roman people. However, his deliberate misuse of language reveals his calculating personality, which during the battle becomes brutal and cruel. Two contrasting sides of his personality are thus exposed: the logical and reasonable, and the ruthless. Antony thus symbolizes both the problem and the solution for Rome, which is the reason for the indefinite consequences of the action and events in the play.

Conjugation of French Verb Entrer (to Enter)

The French verb  entrer means to enter and its a very useful word to know. As you use French in more conversations or travel to French-speaking regions, youll find forms of  entrer  everywhere. Just like with all verbs, when we want to say entered or entering, the verb needs to be conjugated. A short lesson will demonstrate how to do that. Conjugating the French Verb  Entrer Entrer  is not only a very common verb, it also follows a very common verb conjugation pattern. This is a  regular -ER verb  and it shares the same infinitive endings with similar verbs like  enseigner  (to teach),  exister  (to exist), and many others. As with all French verb conjugations, begin by identifying the verb stem:  entr-. We can then add a new ending to match the present, future, or imperfect past tense with the appropriate subject pronoun. For instance, I enter is jentre and we will enter is nous entrerons. The easiest way to memorize all these verb forms is to practice them in context. Luckily, there are plenty of opportunities in everyday life to utilize  entrer. Subject Present Future Imperfect j' entre entrerai entrais tu entres entreras entrais il entre entrera entrait nous entrons entrerons entrions vous entrez entrerez entriez ils entrent entreront entraient The Present Participle of  Entrer The  present participle  of  entrer  is  entrant. Not only is it a verb, you can also use it as an adjective, gerund, or noun in some circumstances. The Past Participle and Passà © Composà © To express the past tense entered, you can use either the imperfect forms or the  passà © composà ©. Forming the latter is quite simple and you might find it the easier option of the two. To construct it, begin by conjugating the  auxiliary verb  Ãƒ ªtre  according to the sentences subject pronoun. Then, add the  past participle  entrà ©. As an example, I entered becomes je suis entrà © and we entered is nous sommes entrà ©. More Simple  Entrer  Conjugations Should you find that the action of entering is subjective or uncertain, use the subjunctive verb mood. Similarly, the conditional verb mood implies that entering will only occur if something else happens. The possibility of needing the passà © simple or the imperfect subjunctive is low. Thats because these are primarily reserved for writing. Yet, knowing them will help your reading comprehension. Subject Subjunctive Conditional Passà © Simple Imperfect Subjunctive j' entre entrerais entrai entrasse tu entres entrerais entras entrasses il entre entrerait entra entrà ¢t nous entrions entrerions entrà ¢mes entrassions vous entriez entreriez entrà ¢tes entrassiez ils entrent entreraient entrà ¨rent entrassent Forming short, direct commands or requests is very easy with the imperative verb form. When using this, the subject pronoun is not required, so tu entre can be entre. Imperative (tu) entre (nous) entrons (vous) entrez

How Did Feathered Dinosaurs Learn to Fly

As little as 50 years ago, the theory that birds descended from dinosaurs seemed completely ridiculous--after all, everyone knows that most birds are small, light, fluttery creatures, while most dinosaurs were huge, plodding, and distinctly unaerodynamic. But as the evidence--small dinosaurs possessing feathers, beaks, and other birdlike characteristics--began to mount, the connection between dinosaurs and birds became apparent to scientists, and then to the general public. Today, its the rare paleontologist who disputes the descent of birds from dinosaurs, though there are some outliers who try, and were left to explain why birds arent dinosaur-sized. This doesn’t mean, however, that all of the technical aspects of the dinosaur/bird transition have been settled once and for all. Researchers still disagree about which families of dinosaurs were most closely related to modern birds, whether the feathers of these dinosaurs were aerodynamic or ornamental, and--perhaps most contentiously of all--how these reptilian proto-birds managed to achieve the huge evolutionary leap into powered flight. The Origin of Feathered Dinosaurs Why, and how, did the small theropod dinosaurs of the Jurassic and Cretaceous periods evolve feathers? Its a common mistake among those unversed in evolutionary theory to assume that feathers evolved specifically for the purpose of flight. Evolution, however, is a blind process--it doesn’t know where its going until it gets there. For this reason, the most widely accepted explanation today is that dinosaurs evolved feathers as a means of insulating themselves in cold climates (and, possibly, as a way to puff themselves up in the eyes of the opposite sex with coats of garish plumage). If this sounds unlikely, bear in mind that even birds that have been flightless for millions of years, like ostriches and emus, still retain their feathers, an expensive accessory in terms of energy usage. If the purpose of feathers was solely to power flight, there would be no reason, from an evolutionary perspective, for penguins to keep these appendages: in fact, they might be better off completely naked, or sporting thick coats of fur! (For more on this subject, see Why Did Dinosaurs Have Feathers?) The first indisputably feathered dinosaurs--like Archaeopteryx and Epidendrosaurus--appeared on earth during the late Jurassic period, anywhere from 160 to 150 million years ago. As the eons ground on, the primitive (that is, short and hairlike) feathers of these early dino-birds gradually evolved into the broad, flat feathers were familiar with today, which are better suited to trapping air (and thus insulating the underlying skin). At this point the question asks itself: how did these feathered dinosaurs make the transition to flight? Theory #1: Feathered Dinosaurs Took a Running Leap Into Flight Extrapolating backward from the behavior of some modern birds, its reasonable to infer that the small- to medium-sized, two-legged theropods of the Cretaceous period (notably the ornithomimids, or bird mimics, but also raptors and possibly even small tyrannosaurs) could attain top running speeds of 30 or 40 miles per hour. As these theropods ran (either in the act of chasing down prey or trying to escape being eaten themselves), their coat of insulating feathers gave them a slight aerodynamic bounce, helping them land their next meal or live to see another day. Since well-fed dinosaurs, and those that avoided predation, produced more offspring, the evolutionary trend was toward larger feathers, which provided more lift. From there, the theory goes, it would only have been a matter of time before a feathered dinosaur achieved actual flight, at least for a brief period of time. But at this point, its important to understand what a short time means in an evolutionary context. There wasnt a single defining moment when a small, feathered theropod accidentally ran straight off the side of a cliff and magically took flight like a modern bird. Rather, you have to picture this process happening incrementally, over the course of millions of years--leaps of four feet, five feet, ten feet, until something resembling powered flight gradually emerged. In the excellent Nova episode The Four-Winged Dinosaur (about a specimen of Microraptor that had recently been discovered in China), a paleontologist is quoted as saying that the hatchlings of modern birds tend to recapitulate their evolutionary heritage. That is, even though these newly hatched chicks are unable to fly, they can jump for farther distances, and more easily scuttle up inclined surfaces, with the aerodynamic lift provided by their feathers--the same advantages as may have been enjoyed by the feathered dinosaurs of the Jurassic and Cretaceous periods. Theory #2: Feathered Dinosaurs Achieved Flight by Falling Out of Trees The trouble with Theory #1 is that birds arent the only animals alive today whose behavior can be extrapolated back to extinct dinosaurs. Flying squirrels, for instance, glide across forest canopies by leaping off the tall branches of trees and spreading the flaps of skin attached to their arms and legs. They’re not capable of powered flight, of course, but they can glide for impressive distances, up to two-thirds of the length of a football field for some species. (Another family of gliding and flying animals is the pterosaurs, which were only distantly related to dinosaurs and not directly ancestral to modern birds.) Conceivably, some types of feathered dinosaurs might have lived high up in trees (which would entail their being a relatively small size and having the ability to climb). These theropods, the reasoning goes, might then have followed the same evolutionary path as flying squirrels, gliding for longer and longer distances from branch to branch, or from tree to tree, as their feathers slowly evolved to the optimum shape and configuration. Eventually, they could leap off a high branch and take to the air for indefinite periods of time, and voila - the first prehistoric birds! The main problem with this arboreal theory of flight, as it’s called, is that its easier to imagine powered flight evolving in the ground-up scenario (picture a terrified dinosaur desperately flapping its vestigial wings while trying to escape a ravenous Allosaurus) than as a result of tree-to-tree gliding. We also have indirect evidence against this scenario, which is that, despite millions of years of evolution, no flying squirrel (with the exception of Bullwinkles pal Rocky) has managed to achieve powered flight--although, to be fair, bats certainly have. More to the point, though, paleontologists have adduced absolutely no fossil evidence for tree-dwelling dinosaurs. Current Thinking About Feathered Dinosaurs and Birds New genera of small, feathered dinosaurs are constantly being discovered, many of them in China. Since these dinosaurs date back to different geologic times ranging from the Jurassic to the Cretaceous, separated by tens of millions of years, it can be difficult for paleontologists to reconstruct the exact evolutionary line that led from dinosaurs to birds. For example, the weird, four-winged Microraptor has provoked intense debate: some researchers see it as an evolutionary dead end, others as an intermediate form between dinosaurs and birds, and yet others as not technically a dinosaur at all, but an offshoot of the archosaur family tree that predated the rise of the dinosaurs. Further complicating matters, its possible that birds evolved not once, but multiple times during the Mesozoic Era. (This type of convergent evolution is fairly common; its why, for instance, modern giraffes mimic the body shape of hundred-million-year-old sauropods). Some of these birds may have achieved flight runway-fashion, others by falling out of trees, and still others by some bizarre combination of the two. All we can say for sure is that all modern birds derive from one common ancestor; that is, if birds did indeed evolve multiple times during the age of dinosaurs, only one of these lines managed to survive into the Cenozoic Era.

Vaccinations Should Be A Big Controversy Essay - 837 Words

Vaccinations have become a big controversy and interest in society. Should I get vaccinated? Should I not? Should my kids be vaccinated? What’s in the shots? Harmful or not? Many questions and demanding answers have been asked. You can be for it or against it. Each side has their own view on the vaccines. Vaccinations are freedom of choice. There are benefits and side effects for each side. In this paper I will be explaining points of views and statistics on each vaccine. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. In the end you will hear my take on this controversy. History of vaccinations For more than two centuries humans have benefited for vaccines. It all started with a man named Edward Jenner. He discovered a smallpox vaccine in the early 1790’s. If back then we had the resources and investments we would have been much healthier. Small pox killed over 1,000’s in Europe in the 18th century but got wiped out in the 1980’s. Many children died from small pox and polio. 1 in 1,000 children got polio and became paralyzed and 1 in 75 adults as well. The diseases spread like wild fire and over 40,000’s had become hospitalized. Whooping cough, another serious virus, gave us a scare in the 1970’s to the 80’s. Over 100 kids dead because of it. In 1963 we discovered the measles vaccine which saved lives. This disease infected 500,000 per year with over 500 deaths. Over 50,000 were hospitalized. Different Kinds of Vaccines There are many different vaccines and types out there.Show MoreRelatedVaccines776 Words   |  4 Pagesfrom their children for philosophical reasons, or should parents be forced to have their children immunized for the good of society? Thesis statement: â€Å"Since vaccines have been invented, there has been a lot of controversy regarding the belief whether parents should immunize their children for the benefit of the society or withhold vaccines for personal reasons†. Introduction: It is inevitable that media, especially tabloids and articles play a big role in shaping the beliefs, practices and normsRead MoreI Am Doing A Research Paper On The Controversy Surrounding Vaccines1440 Words   |  6 Pagesmy Super Saturday T-Q-E, I am doing a research paper on the controversy surrounding vaccines. Some things that I think I know about this topic is that some people believe that we should not get vaccinations and that they can do more harm than good, and yet there are others who believe that getting vaccinations is the only way to prevent a massive outbreak in a community. Some questions I wanted to ask and answer are; can vaccinations actually be harmful to you? Can you still get a disease thatRead MoreVaccination Controversy1554 Words   |  7 PagesVaccination Controversy Julie S. Bertram Excelsior College Authors note This paper was written for MLS 500: Graduate Research and Writing taught by Dr. Kyla Hammond Most healthcare professionals and leaders attribute vaccination as the single-most important reason for increasing the health of the human population during the past one hundred years. As a result, required immunizations are common in the U. S. and other developed countries. However, there is a segment of society who argue againstRead MoreThe Importance Of Vaccines786 Words   |  4 Pages A big controversy among parents is vaccinations. Should children get vaccinated? Should parents have the right to choose if they vaccinate their children? Many people believe the risk factors of a vaccination outweigh the helping abilities. A few claims on why i find this invalid include the lives saved rather than the lives lost to vaccines, the future generations protected from outbreak, and the amount of each ingredients safety in the amount used. initially, The lives saved by vaccines heavilyRead MoreAutism Is A Neurodevelopmental Disorder962 Words   |  4 Pagesgrowing rapidly in the United States beginning in the 1990s (DeLong, 2011, p.903). It becomes the great public health concern. The genetics plays a role in autisms. However, environmental factors also can trigger autism. So the question about whether vaccination is one of these environmental factors was raised. Vaccines may trigger autism due to several reasons. First of all, thimerosal is a preservative in certain vaccines. About half of its weight is mercury (Hg) which could lead to autism (Delong, 2011Read MoreShould Vaccinations Be Mandatory For Children1358 Words   |  6 PagesShould Vaccinations Be Mandatory For Children in the United States? In the United States, the law states that vaccinations are required for children entering school unless they have a valid reason that prevents them from receiving the vaccinations. Starting when children are born, they begin the regimen of vaccinations that continue throughout their adolescent years and adulthood. Each year children receive a variation of shots to protect them from the illnesses they will encounter in the worldRead MoreTo Vaccinate or Not to Vaccinate1031 Words   |  5 Pagesdeciding to vaccinate children is so difficult is due to the wide range of myths and side effects that are connected with vaccinations. Examples of myths spread to parents all over the United States is that the diseases don’t even exist anymore, rumors of vaccinations weakening a child’s immune system, and the risk of a child becoming autistic due to thimerisol in vaccinations causing autism. Side effects also scare parents out of getting their children vaccinated like brain dama ge, seizures, or allergicRead MoreManaged Care Philosophy and Initiatives Directed at Prevention and Health Maintenance. the Nature of the Problem of Vaccinations and Access to Vaccines Relative to Prevention and Health Maintenance. the Steps Taken to1188 Words   |  5 Pagesposition where they are focusing on the prevention of certain illnesses such as heart disease, diabetes among others. The nature of the problem of vaccinations and access to vaccines relative to prevention and health maintenance. Health maintenance organization (HMO) is also in the business that I would term as preventative medicine, vaccination of patients can be classified as a prevention measure. Having access to vaccines takes into consideration the patients access to medical care. Some individualsRead MoreVaccines A Cure Or Curse?984 Words   |  4 Pagescurrently many people are questioning their use and many Americans are not vaccinating their children. Vaccines are used to prevent disease not cause more health problems which is why they should be encouraged by health clinics across America and required for children to attend public schools. Public schools should require students to be vaccinated to attend school to protect the health of every student and to prevent the spread of diseases in public places. Vaccines have almost been in use from theRead MoreShould The Government Should Call The Shots1200 Words   |  5 PagesThe Government Should Call the Shots Everyday, people all over the world are suffering from life threatening diseases such as polio, measles, and chicken pox. Diseases may not seem like that big of a problem to us, but that is only because we rarely have to deal with such problems due to our blessing of herd immunity inside American borders. If you are a citizen of the United States, you probably know about the safety and protection we are provided by living here. Consequently, you may attribute

Unit One Assignment Fraud Basics - 879 Words

Iroda Yakubova Unit One Assignment: Fraud Basics 1. In my opinion, non-shareable financial need is the most important in causing executives, managers, and employees to commit occupational fraud. The proxies become â€Å"criminals on trust† in the case of they start to have financial difficulties, which they cannot share with nobody. They think that available option to perform completely secret financial fraud and able to give an explanation to their behavior in a given situation, allowing to reconcile presenting itself as an reproof trust the people and how user entrusted funds or property. Cressey classified very detailed and described the part of triangle, which is a pressure of circumstances and â€Å"undisclosed† problems: violation of†¦show more content†¦Good control contributes to the modeling and the promotion of behavior befitting personnel, recruitment of staff and the most honest understanding of their responsibilities. 3. The current global recession is so severe that all these factors (motivation / pressure of external circumstances, the ability to commit fraud, and the ability to justify action) became more relevant than ever. A threat to the economic survival of the company or person, the line between acceptable and unacceptable behavior may seem to some people is much less clear. Now is becoming more common this type of fraud, as a distortion of the financial statements. A significant increase in crimes of this type can be explained by failures in the control system, which occur as a result of cost reductions. Impact and pressure associated with the need to achieve the targets against the background of an increasingly complex situation. A significant part of economic crimes are committed with the direct involvement of employees or in collusion with persons working in the company. One possible reason could be a better understanding of the company s business (including its strengths and weaknesses) employees compared with external parties, which puts employees in a better position to commit unlawful acts. Most of the illegal acts committed, unfortunately,

Effects of Alcohol on NUtrition Essay Example For Students

Effects of Alcohol on NUtrition Essay There are many affects alcohol has on nutrition, in people of all ages. Each year more than 100,000 people die from alcohol related causes. According to the National Council on Alcoholism and Drug dependence more than 13 million Americans abuse alcohol. There are different types of alcohol dependency psychologically dependent and physically dependent. If you crave alcohol, or feel distresses without it you are said to be psychologically dependent, if your body changes when alcohol is stopped such as hot/cold flashes, tremor, or seizures you are physically dependent. One effect that alcohol has is on pregnant women, this causes fetal alcohol syndrome, this cause low IQ, fine motor skills dysfunction, which causes weak grasp, poor hand-eye coordination, and hyperactivity in later childhood. Heart murmurs, cervical vertebral malformations. and joint malformations are common also. Also two drinks per week have been linked to higher rates of still birth and miscarriage. Just because the mother did not want to go without a drink. Prolonged misuse of alcohol can have serious effects on health affecting certain organs of the body: Cirrhosis (scarring) of the liver (result of long term drinking, main killer of older drinkers) Ulcers in stomach and intestines Most alcoholics get 50% of calorie intake from alcohol Anemia (due to iron and folic acid deficiency_ Diarrhea Due to Vitamin B Deficiencies Loss of vitamin B1causes memory loss and abnormal co-ordination Thiamin and folate deficiencies can cause neurologic disorders Even moderate levels of alcohol are said to be a poison!! Alcohol is a complex drug it is both water and fat soluble which means it affects all the organs and tissues in the body. High rate of tumors in the breast, liver, and mouth. Liver- Cirrhosis long term affect and main killer of older drinkers. Stomach- Irritates lining, vomiting is particularly visible result, ulcers Central Nervous system- depresses almost every brain function from balance to breathing, liver damage will reverse process and speed up damage to body particularly the brain. Alcohol interferes with essential nutrients, it drains vitamins in body and slows absorption of new ones. ATTENTION WOMEN: 1 drink a day increases breast cancer by 30% 2-5 drinks a day increases breast cancer risks by 41% Even when food intake is adequate alcohol can impair mechanisms which control bodies glucose, either increasing or decreasing blood glucose. Mineral deficiency can cause bone diese, night blindness, and skin lesions On the other hand, those who drank 1 drink a day had a 20% lower death rate from all causes compared to non-drinkers, and for cardiovascular dieses themselves death rates were 30% -40% lower in those who drank 1 drink a day. Moderate drinkers also have lower levels of heart disease that heavy drinkers and those who dont drink at all. In another study, wine (moderate consumption) not hard liquors or beer is associated with a decreased risk of an eye disease known as (and) age-related macular degeneration Fatty liver and enlargement of the liver can be reversed if alcohol is withdrawn and proper nutrition is given. However, continous damage (liver) can result in alcoholic hepatitis with cell death and inflammation, which can be fatal. Health Care .