21 oktober 1943

Det finns ett initialt minimitryck på 994,2 hPa (29,36 & quot Hg) vid 06:42. Efter den punkten skiftade vindarna från ungefär öst-sydost (när de inte var lugna) till sydväst, även om de förblev lätta. Rekorden visar att lätt regn faller från 03:30 till 06:00. Detta första barometriska minimum liknar Portlands klockan 03:42-fronten anlände till Seattle tre timmar efter att den hade passerat genom Rosestaden.

Efter att fronten rört sig genom Seattle höjdes trycket till 994,9 hPa (29,38 & quot Hg) i ungefär en timme innan det störtade ner 3,4 hPa (0,10 & quot Hg) med 09:42. Detta är början på ett mer extremt dopp som skulle nå 989,2 hPa (29,21 & quot Hg) med 11:42-och är ett exempel när det klassiska & quotdouble-dip & quot -mönstret visade tydligt i Seattle-området under en stor vindstorm. Mer typiskt verkar det som om dubbeldoppen dyker upp på platser längre söderut, som Willamette-dalen, och är resultatet av en extratropisk cyklons front som rör sig genom regionen först, vilket kan orsaka en kort nedgång i trycktrendlinjer före huvudfallet produceras av den närmaste passagen av lågtryckscentret.

Ett klassiskt exempel på dubbeldoppen visade sig i vindstormen 2 oktober 1967. Med hjälp av meteogram från stormen 1967 som modell, ser Portland och Salem ut som en hyfsad matchning för Seattle 1934 när det gäller en dubbeldämpningstryckkurva och plötslig vindattack. Seattles barometer 1934 visade inte de extrema tryckförändringar som upplevdes i Willamette Valley 1967. Detta tyder på att 1934 låga spårade längre från Seattle än 1967 års storm gjorde Salem, så & gt50 miles (80 km) norr om Seattle, troligtvis betydligt Mer. Förhållandena vid Bellingham tyder på att låga spårade precis norr om staden. Faktum är att det tillgängliga rekordet indikerar att de låga spårade strax söder om Vancouver, BC, där intensiva vindar från öst till sydost föregick den inkommande extratropiska cyklonen, vilket bidrog till en stor nedblåsning av minst 2500 träd i Stanley Park, följt av ett abrupt skift till västerut med nästan lika stor kraft (Vancouver Sun 1934b). Det lägsta trycket i Vancouver, 983,7 hPa (29,05 & quot Hg) inträffade från 13:00 till 15:00, och Bellingham rapporterade 982,0 hPa (29,00 & quot Hg) vid 14:30. När vindriktningsändringar också övervägs är det uppenbart att centrum troligen passerade mellan dessa två punkter. Detta placerar låga cirka 200 mil från Seattle vid närmaste inflygning.

Bortsett från tryckbulten och en förskjutning i vindriktningen gjorde den främre fronten lite annat i Seattle. Lite regn. Massor av moln.

Tryckavläsningar från Medford till Bellingham under 21 oktober 1934 visar den initiala deklinationen av det dubbla doppet som uppträder med kraft söderut (figur 2.3). Medford hade en snabb 4,0 hPa (0,12 & quot Hg) tryckökning i timmen från 03:42 till 04:42-märket för en ganska stark front. Minsta vid Medford inträffade en timme efter lågtryck i Portland. Barometeravläsningar för Bellingham var prickiga.

Det starka doppet i Medford kan förklaras av en bakre front som tävlar söderut från den nordostliga rörliga låga mitten, grovt avbildad på den medföljande stormbanan (figur 2.4). Tolkning av tryckhändelser längs västkusten föreslår en låg bombning snabbt långt utanför sydvästra Oregon -stränderna för att sedan flytta nordost mot Washington [Fotnot 1]. Stormen nådde sin högsta intensitet långt innan den landade, och frontsystemet tävlade långt före det mogna cykloncentrumet.

I Oregon inträffade tryckminimum längs fronten eftersom den låga mitten stannade relativt långt från dessa platser jämfört med stationer i Washington. Portland skulle förmodligen ha haft ett starkare sekundärt tryckfall om det låga inte hade börjat försvagas efter 04:00. Cyklonens långsamma nedbrytning när den rörde sig mot närmaste håll höll trycket på havsnivån ganska plant, om än lite ostadigt, vid Portland. Läget på läget tyder på att en stark sydvästlig jetström troligen sprang över Oregon, vilket bidrog till kraftigt nederbörd under stormen. För Seattle var töjningsfronten inte lika stark och det var ganska torrt. Den låga närmade sig mycket närmare denna norra stad än den gjorde Portland, och Seattle tryckavläsningar visar en markant nedgång efter fronten när låga närmade sig-det klassiska dubbeldoppen.

Det extratropiska cykloncentret passerade nästan över Tatoosh Island. Detta bevisas delvis av att Tatoosh rapporterar det lägsta trycket under stormen bland de tillgängliga stationerna. Men jämfört med platser söderut var toppvindhastigheterna vid Tatoosh inte särskilt imponerande-ett tecken på en låg passering söder om stationen (detta meteogram finns fortfarande på att göra-listan). Viktigt är också en plötslig förskjutning av vindriktningen från öst till nordost sedan nordväst runt tiden för barometriskt minimum, en tydlig signatur av ett spår precis söderut. Det nära sambandet mellan lågtryck, vindskift i nordväst och den sekundära toppen i vindhastigheter tyder på att den låga mitten passerade mycket nära ön. Förresten, precis som med toppbysten i Portland, var det faktum att det barometriska minimumet för dagen till och med noterades lite tur. Det hjälpte förmodligen att det vid 977,0 hPa (28,85 & quot Hg) var den lägsta tryckfallet för månaden. Utan denna enda datapunkt hade tryckspåret varit nästan värdelöst för den typ av tolkning som gjorts här, eftersom barometeravläsningar vid Tatoosh bara registrerades med 12-timmarsintervall under 1934 års tidsram. Det lägsta trycket och närheten till det extratropiska cykloncentrum pekar på ett ungefärligt 975 hPa (28,79 & quot Hg) centralt tryck och placerar låga vid den nordvästra spetsen av Washington runt 13:00. Detta är en timme efter Seattles lägsta tryck, och föreslår en fortsatt försvagning av stormen när den rörde sig inåt landet och något närmare staden av ljudet.

Rekord på Bellingham är fläckiga. De togs i allmänhet bara vid två tidsperioder varje dag: 09:15 och 14:30. Den 21 oktober tog väderobservatören lite initiativ under extrema förhållanden och avläste 10:30 och 13:00. Vid 13:00 hade genomsnittliga vindar från syd-sydost nått 96 km/h, och & quotSqualls till 70 & quot (113 km/h) noterades. Barometern avläste 983,4 hPa (29,04 & quot Hg), vilket är markant lägre än Seattle -avläsningen på 989,5 hPa (29,22 & quot Hg) vid 12:42. Den låga mitten hade sannolikt flyttat strax öster om Tatoosh Island inom denna tidsram (det lägsta trycket på 977,0 hPa inträffade vid 12:45).

Tatoosh ligger 126 raka linjer (204 km) från Seattle längs ett lager på cirka 297 & deg, och 104 miles (168 km) från Bellingham på ett lager av

254 & deg, så trycket kommer sannolikt att bli lägre på Bellingham med en låg nära Tatoosh. En ganska stark gradient på 6 hPa (0,18 & quot Hg) fanns ganska långt från den låga mitten. Detta kan vara märket för den hypoteserade le-low (Reed 1980), vilket kan ha bidragit till en del av tryckfallet i Bellingham (figur 2.5). Tendensen att tråna i de olympiska bergens lee förlänger nedfallande lågtryckscentra på en öst-västaxel. Med tanke på ett sydvästligt övre luftflöde, skulle mitten av lee low vara nordost om OS, i ett bra läge för att förbättra tryckgradienten över Puget Sound med en söder till sydöst trycklutning som stöder starka sydliga vindar nära ytan. Indikeras också i figur 2.5 är en mycket brant

10 hPa/100 km tryckgradient söder om lågen, en som fortsatte starkt till åtminstone Portlands latitud. Detta är förmodligen en indikation på en kraftig böjd baksida. Denna intensiva lutning påverkar redan Seattle -området vid klockan 13:00 på kartan. Den svagare lutningen som visas norr om den låga är till stor del gissningar, men stöds av att vara en typisk egenskap för många landningsfall.

Klockan 14:30 vid Bellingham visar ett tryck på 982,0 hPa (29,00 & quot Hg). Samtidigt hade trycket i Seattle tydligt börjat klättra, vilket indikerades med en avläsning på 993,9 hPa (29,35 & quot Hg). Detta resulterade i en större gradient på 11,5 hPa (0,34 & quot) mellan de två platserna. Med tanke på den låga avläsningen i Bellingham och den lätta tryckförändringen mellan 13:00 och 14:30 nådde mitten av den extratropiska cyklonen sannolikt sin närmaste punkt till Bellingham inom timmen 14:00 till 15:00. Ett barografspår från Vancouver stöder också detta, med trycket som börjar en kraftig uppgång strax efter 15:00 (Vancouver Sun 1934c). Det lägsta trycket vid Bellingham, 982,0 hPa, är förmodligen nära stormens centrala tryck vid den närmaste tiden, vilket tyder på att det låga hade försvagats med cirka 7 hPa (0,21 & quot) när det spårades från strax söder om Tatoosh Island till strax norr om Bellingham. Detta är en ganska standard fyllningshastighet för stormande stormsystem i nordvästra Stilla havet. Även med denna försvagning förblev den låga en kraftfull vindproducent.

Vid 14:30-tiden hade genomsnittliga vindar i Bellingham höjts till 120 km/h-orkanhastigheter i kategori 1-från syd-sydost, med skurar till 80, några av de mest extrema avläsningar som någonsin registrerats i regionen. Med dessa hastigheter kan vindbyar ha närmat sig 160 km/h. Uppkomsten av kraftiga vindar var ganska dramatisk. Mellan mätningarna 09:15 och 10:30 steg vindhastigheterna från syd-sydväst 3 mph (5 km/h) till sydöstra 20 (32 km/h). Under de närmaste 90 minuterna klättrade vindarna till den genomsnittliga hastigheten på 96 km/h som noterats tidigare.

När trycket började sitt andra, mer dramatiska fall på Seattle Airport, hoppade vindhastigheten med samma drama som bevittnades i Bellingham. Mellan 08:30 och 09:42 steg de genomsnittliga vindarna från bara 3 mph till 20 (5 km/h till 32) och från 09:42 till 10:10-bara 28 minuter!-vinden eskalerade till en hamrande 80 km/h. Jämfört med platser söderut, som Portland, verkar stormen i Seattle nästan omedelbar! Varaktigheten av kraftiga vindar i Seattle är också slående. Vindar var i genomsnitt 45 till 58 mph (72-93 km/h) i 6,5 timmar, en otroligt lång tid för dessa höga hastigheter. Observationsformerna saknar vindbyte, men med hjälp av 1,3 vindkastningsfaktorn för stormar på medellängd kan vindbyar närma sig och till och med överstiga 75 km/h (120 km/h) ha inträffat. Tidningar rapporterade ett värde av 70 mph (Oregonian 1934a). Detta placerar vindstormen 1934 bland de mest kraftfulla som har registrerats för Seattle-området, med en högre vindstopp än topparna som registrerades under de tre stora klassiska vägarna sydöstra 1962, 1981 och 1995.

På Seattle flygplats 1934 hoppade temperaturen från svala 49 & degF (9 & degC) vid 08:30 till en mild 62 & degF (17 & degC) vid 10:42, med det mesta av klättringen som inträffade under uppkomsten av stormstyrka från söder och syd-sydväst. Den plötsliga värmen tyder på att en varm sektor hade placerats väl inåt landet sydväst om den låga mitten, en som inte dök upp så starkt i Portland, vilket är något ovanligt. Kanske det kalla ytskiktet som placerades ut under havsbaserad vindfas före lågan skurades ut av en tillsluten front, som efterliknade en varm front. Downdrafts kan ha bidragit till uppvärmningen, och kanske också toppvindhastigheterna genom att sänka övre vindmomentet. Lägre temperaturer i Portland tycks ha varit resultatet av regn hela morgonen och eftermiddagen, medan Seattle i allmänhet klarade sig från nederbörd. Seattle verkade fast beslutet att stödja de torra vindstormens myter och fortsatte den regnlösa trenden under hela perioden med starka vindar, vilket skarpt kontrasterar mot de skuriga, kraftiga regnförhållandena i Portland. Som mest föll strössel på Seattle -området från en kraftig mulet mellan 12:42 och 15:30 medan vindarna rasade. Den höga temperaturen hände under en period av brutna moln på 2 000 fot (600 m) med åtta tiondelar täckning-den fortfarande ganska starka oktobersolen kan ha hjälpt till att värma upp luften.

Toppen PDX-SEA tryckgradient, 12,9 mb, men inte den starkaste, sätter denna storm på plats tre. Endast 3 november 1958 och 15 december 2006 vindstormar gav en högre lutning, 13,6 hPa respektive 15,9 hPa. 1958-systemet hade en fördel, eftersom det nästan gick precis över Seattle-Tacoma flygplats, vilket placerade området med den brantaste lutningen nära den låga mitten rätt i linje med PDX-SEA-måttet. Detta hände igen den 15 december 1977, då en storm gav en stigning på 12,3 mb mellan Portland och Seattle, vilket också är bland de brantaste som registrerats. Toppgradienten för den extratropiska cyklonen 2006, efter ett spår liknande stormen 1934, återspeglar en verkligt anmärkningsvärd storm. Man bör komma ihåg att stationsplatserna 1934 skilde sig från dem under tidsramen 1958-2006, även om den mindre förändringen av det totala avståndet bara skulle resultera i små modifieringar av gradientmåttet.

Att låga 1934 spårade genom sydvästra British Columbia och producerade en PDX-SEA-gradient som motsvarar stormar som har flyttat precis över Puget Sound markerar en mycket kraftig extratropisk cyklon. Inte ens stormen den 13 februari 1979, på sin liknande väg, gav en så brant stigning-den klarade 7,9 mb, vilket är under många av de vindstormar som finns, men passar med en låg spårning ganska långt norr om Seattle.

Ett diagram över trycket från stormen 1979 för samma stationer som visas i figur 2.3 visar bredare, mildare kurvor vid Washington -stationerna (figur 2.8). Det starka frontsystemet i Oregon 1934 hoppar också ut. Storleken på skillnaden mellan stormarna blir mycket tydlig när perioden med maximala relativa tryckskillnader jämförs: värden närmade sig en intensiv 30 hPa (0,90 & quot Hg) mellan Medford och Bellingham 1934, jämfört med en stark 20 hPa (0,60 & quot Hg) 1979. De lägre stigningarna 1979 tycks delvis vara resultatet av en cyklon som spårade längre norrut än sin mycket tidigare föregångare.

1934 extratropiska cyklonen, trots långsamt försvagning med tiden, upprätthöll en otroligt brant tryckskillnad över Washington och in i Oregon. Ungefär 13:00, med stormcentret nära Tatoosh Island, var lutningen 18,6 hPa mellan Portland och Bellingham. När mitten av Columbus Day Storm satt i en liknande position vid 22:00 den 12 oktober 1962, var lutningen 14,3 hPa mellan de två stationerna. Toppen PDX-BLI var på 22,7 1934 och 17,7 1962. Tydligen är stormen 1934 med de starkaste i inspelad historia.

Väderrekord den 21 oktober 1934 i Salem och Eugene erhölls, men ytobservationer för andra platser som Olympia och Astoria var inte tillgängliga. Och det togs inga tryckdata för Salem och Eugene 1934. Den tillgängliga informationen visar att toppvindarna minskade markant söderut i Willamette -dalen (figur 2.9). Vid Salem uppskattades vindhastigheterna från 08:42 till 11:42, möjligen på grund av ett strömavbrott som stängde av vindmätaren. Naturligtvis var detta tidsperioden för toppvindar. De högsta hastigheterna uppskattades till 56 km/h för Salem, vilket tyder på vindbyar runt 72 km/h och kanske når 50 (80 km/h). Perioder med måttligt regn rörde sig genom huvudstaden under stormen. Eugene hade en ganska lugn dag, med en toppvind på 29 km/h, men måttligt till kraftigt regn slog både tidigt på morgonen och sen kväll, med en allmänt molnig dag emellan.

Lägre toppvindar söderut stöder fint idén om att 1934 -lågen hade en stark östlig komponent på banan. Om det var ett nordstrenderande system, då hade maximala vindar varit mer enhetliga från norr till söder. Stormen den 13 februari 1979 gav liknande resultat, även om toppbyar tenderade att vara ganska enhetliga från ungefär Olympia söderut till Eugene, där vindbyar nådde 40-44 mph (65-70 km/h) på många inre rapporteringsstationer, vilket är en påminnelse att varje storm är unik, även om de tycks ha följt liknande vägar.

De högsta vindarna verkar ha träffat Oregon -stationerna ett till några timmar tidigare än Seattle, vilket tyder på att det, som nämnts ovan, var en del norrgående rörelse involverad i depressionen. Stigen var troligen öst-nordostlig. De starkaste vindarna vid Seaside var tydligen mellan 07:00 och 10:00 (Oregonian 1934b). Detta är ungefär en timme före tidpunkten för starka vindar i Portland och nästan tre timmar före Seattle. Portlands toppvind på 76 km/h hände ungefär en timme före Seattles 58 mph (93 km/h). Detta var under den period av snabba tryckfall som bevittnades i Seattle. Vindens början inom ett smalt tidsintervall är ytterligare ett tecken på en cyklon som färdas mer österut än norrut.

En journal från Winlock, Washington

Josh Berelson gav vänligt en kort journal från hans hustrus mormor (figur 3.1), som bodde i Winlock, Washington vid den tiden. Tydligen gjorde hon bara korta anteckningar om vädret och mängden ord som beskriver stormen är ovanlig. Hon fångade också ett antal andra vindstormar i sina journaler, inklusive Columbus Day Storm 1962.

& quotOct 21 [1934]: Blåsigt och regnigt hela dagen. Massor av träd föll och några vred av. Gamla byggnader föll och ledningar gick sönder. Jag åkte till Napavine på tåget. Pappa träffade mig med Alices regnkust. Jag blev inte särskilt våt. & Quot

1) För låga rörelser norrut (dvs. klassiska vindstormar) skulle stationer norr om lågcentrum uppleva tryckfall medan de söderut samtidigt visade stigningar. Östgående trendminskningar (dvs. & quotwest-jet & quot-system) som gör landfall tenderar att resultera i minimalt tryck som uppstår vid nästan lika tidpunkter mellan stationer längs en nord-syd-axel, med de lägsta avläsningarna nära det låga centrumspåret.

Datakällor och bibliografi

Datakällor

Om inte annat anges, är information som rapporteras i avsnittet Stormdata från de oredigerade & quotAirways Weather Report & -formulärerna (liknande de senare årens oredigerade ytobservationsformulär), inhämtade från National Climatic Data Center, för Seattle, Portland, Salem och Eugene, oktober 21, 1934.

Referentgranskade referenser

Reed, R. J., 1980: Destruktiva vindar orsakade av en orografiskt inducerad mesoskala -cyklon. Tjur. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 61, 1346-1355.

Oregonian, 1934a: Morning Oregonian, 22 oktober 1934.

Oregonian, 1934b: Hemma på stranden förstördes. 22 oktober 1934, s 12.

Vancouver Sun, 1934a: Utbredd förlust i fantastiska Vancouver Gale. 22 oktober 1934, s 1, 3.

Vancouver Sun, 1934b: Parkskador: Träd röts upp, vägar blockerade, skal flyr. 22 oktober 1934, s 1, 5.

Vancouver Sun, 1934c: Hur vetenskapen läste stormens gåta. 23 oktober 1934, s 1.

Vid skillnad i värden mellan den arkiverade figuren och den nya ersättaren ersätter uppgifterna i den nya figuren siffrorna i den äldre bilden.

1943, 21 oktober – Dixie BBQ Across from VA Destroyed

Brand vid 21.30 onsdag. förstörde rambyggnaden tvärs över motorvägen från U.S. Veterans Hospital kallat Dixie Barbecue. Branden rapporterades till Marions brandavdelning av personer som bodde i närheten. Byggnadens baksida låg i lågor när brandmännen kom fram. Det gick inte att rädda byggnaden på grund av bristen på vattenförsörjning och på grund av de framsteg som lågorna hade vunnit innan de kom fram, böjde brandmännen sina ansträngningar för att rädda hus och uthus i närheten. Även om lågorna från den brinnande byggnaden hotade de närliggande strukturerna, begränsades skadorna till den enda byggnaden. Så långt brandmän kunde avgöra fanns ingen i byggnaden när den fattade eld och ursprunget till branden inte fick veta.

(Hämtad från lokala tidningar och sammanställd av Harry Boyd, publicerad på http://www.marionfire.us)

Hjälp till att stödja denna webbplats

Sök denna sida

Söktips

För att förbättra sökresultaten när mer än två ord används i sökrutan returneras endast den exakta frasen genom att omsluta dem med citattecken. dvs "Tom Jones"

Namn stavades ofta annorlunda bakåt i tiden på grund av analfabetism och transkriptionsfel. Tänk på alla möjliga stavningar av ett efternamn. Till exempel kan Maynard också vara Manard, Menard, Maynerd eller Mainard.

Försök också att lämna efterföljande bokstäver borta från namn som har variationer och behåll bokstäverna som tenderar att förbli desamma.

Kolgruvarna går ut Kämpa WLB Run-Around

Från Labour Action, Vol. 7 nr 43, 25 oktober 1943, s. ف   & amp ق.
Transkriberad och förstärkt av Einde O ’ Callaghan för Encyclopaedia of Trotskyism On-Line (ETOL).

I sin uppmaning till de strejkande gruvarbetarna i Alabama och Illinois att återvända till jobbet sa deras fackliga president, John L. Lewis,:

Jag vet hur avskräckt och bitter du är på grund av den lurviga behandlingen du får. Du nekas en lön som ger tillräckligt med mat för dina familjer medan koloperatörerna gör historiens största vinster. ”

Uppenbarligen just av denna anledning fortsatte de 22 000 gruvarbetarna ute i Alabama sin strejk som är i skrivande stund på sin sjunde dag. Lewis agerade på begäran av War Labor Board, som sa: Denna strejk strider mot arbetskraftslöfte och nationell politik. ”

Gruvarbetarna som får ut kol från jorden gav emellertid aldrig ett åtagande utan strejk. Dessutom har de en policy som inte är att arbeta utan kontrakt.

I sex månader har gruvarbetarna väntat på ett kontrakt, och medan den så kallade vapenvilan löper ut den 21 oktober är det ännu inget kontrakt.

John J. Hanratty, internationell företrädare för UMW, uppmanade männen att inte argumentera för varför och varför i fallet, utan att ta tag i dina muckers och gå in i gruvorna idag om det är nödvändigt för att producera en rekordmängd kol i morgon. ” Och han tillade: “Om någon säger till dig att din fackförening ger dig detta råd ‘med tummarna ’ är han antingen en dåre eller en lögnare. ” Men han är berättade också för strejkarna att de är iögonfallande bland grupper nekade till och med en rättvis avkastning för deras arbete ” och gruvarbetarna ser inte varför de inte borde fråga varför portal-till-portal-löner nekas dem.

En utskick från United Press om strejken innehåller detta avsnitt: “Ett exempel på gruvarbetarnas svar var i dessa ord från en anställd vid Mylan [?] -Axeln i Tennessee Coal & amp Iron Co .: ‘Till helvete med förbund och åt helvete med WLB. Inget kontrakt, inget arbete och den här gången gäller. ’ ”

Det är mycket tveksamt om denna irriterade anfallare menade åt helvete med facket i samma mening som han menade för helvetet med WLB. Gruvarbetare vet för väl vikten av deras organisation. De är dock arga över rådet att återgå till arbetet innan deras klagomål är avgjorda och på fackliga ledare som ger det.
 

En tyst förståelse

En särskild rapport till New York Times 19 oktober gav denna betydande beskrivning av hur gruvarbetarna genomför sin strejk:

Enligt rapporter från de strejkande områdena vägrade gruvarbetarna att närvara vid möten för att de inte skulle drabbas av straff för Connally-Smith Act och de hade på något sätt skapat någon form av en tyst förståelse med varandra varigenom de gjorde behöver inte ens tala, men skulle agera som individer så länge deras löneklagomål inte rättades. ”

Gruvarbetarna verkar ha kunskapen.

Resultatet av strejken när det gäller WLB är tillkännagivandet av en offentlig förhandling den 21 oktober för att lyssna på argument om det föreslagna kontraktet som UMW och koloperatörerna i Illinois enades om för länge sedan men som motsattes av Appalachian -operatörerna. .

WLB hävdar också stolt sin policy att inte överväga ett ärende “ på punkten med en pistol ” och hotar att inte hålla utfrågningarna trots allt om inte de strejkande männen återvänder till sina jobb. Without the muzzle of the strike in their hacks, the WLB members, did not see fit even to call a public hearing.

The Appalachian operators have made haste to state that they reject the terms of the proposed agreement, that it is a “subterfuge” covering a “hidden wage increase” – and of course, these capitalists bursting with war profits are worried about the “hold-the-line” order, you bet! So, the same old run-around begins again.
 

The Questions Posed

The miners have again pioneered for the labor movement. The Alabama and Illinois mine strikes pose to the whole labor movement once more the need to fight to end the Little Steel wage formula, to repudiate the no-strike pledge, to call labor’s representatives off the WLB – and to put labor in a position to bargain collectively for its legitimate demands.

For the miners themselves, the Alabama and Illinois strikes again pose the question of nationalizing the mines and placing them under workers’ control.

Civil war ends

1990 October - The Syrian air force attacks the Presidential Palace at Baabda and Aoun flees. This formally ends the civil war.

1991 - The National Assembly orders the dissolution of all militias, except for the powerful Shia group Hezbollah. The South Lebanon Army (SLA) refuses to disband. The Lebanese army defeats the PLO and takes over the southern port of Sidon.

1992 - After elections in August and September, the first since 1972, wealthy businessman Rafik Hariri becomes prime minister.

1996 April - "Operation Grapes of Wrath", in which the Israelis bomb Hezbollah bases in southern Lebanon, southern Beirut and the Bekaa Valley. UN base at Qana is hit, killing over 100 displaced civilians. Israel-Lebanon Monitoring Group, with members from US, France, Israel, Lebanon and Syria, set up to monitor truce.

Madame Curie’s Passion

When Marie Curie came to the United States for the first time, in May 1921, she had already discovered the elements radium and polonium, coined the term “radio-active” and won the Nobel Prize—twice. But the Polish-born scientist, almost pathologically shy and accustomed to spending most of her time in her Paris laboratory, was stunned by the fanfare that greeted her.

Från denna berättelse

Photo Gallery

Relaterat innehåll

She attended a luncheon on her first day at the house of Mrs. Andrew Carnegie before receptions at the Waldorf Astoria and Carnegie Hall. She would later appear at the American Museum of Natural History, where an exhibit commemorated her discovery of radium. The American Chemical Society, the New York Mineralogical Club, cancer research facilities and the Bureau of Mines held events in her honor. Later that week, 2,000 Smith College students sang Curie’s praises in a choral concert before bestowing her with an honorary degree. Dozens more colleges and universities, including Yale, Wellesley and the University of Chicago, conferred honors on her.

The marquee event of her six-week U.S. tour was held in the East Room of the White House. President Warren Harding spoke at length, praising her “great attainments in the realms of science and intellect” and saying she represented the best in womanhood. “We lay at your feet the testimony of that love which all the generations of men have been wont to bestow upon the noble woman, the unselfish wife, the devoted mother.”

It was a rather odd thing to say to the most decorated scientist of that era, but then again Marie Curie was never easy to understand or categorize. That was because she was a pioneer, an outlier, unique for the newness and immensity of her achievements. But it was also because of her sex. Curie worked during a great age of innovation, but proper women of her time were thought to be too sentimental to perform objective science. She would forever be considered a bit strange, not just a great scientist but a great woman forskare. You would not expect the president of the United States to praise one of Curie’s male contemporaries by calling attention to his manhood and his devotion as a father. Professional science until fairly recently was a man’s world, and in Curie’s time it was rare for a woman even to participate in academic physics, never mind triumph over it.

This year marks the 100th anniversary of her second Nobel Prize, the first time anyone had achieved such a feat. In her honor, the United Nations named 2011 the International Year of Chemistry. Curie has always been a fascinating character, the subject of books and plays and movies, and this anniversary has prompted several new works about her. October is Nobel Prize season, so it’s a good time to examine the story of her story—how she lived, but also how she has been mythologized and misunderstood.

Curie was born Manya Sklodowska in November 1867 in Warsaw, Poland, and raised there during a Russian occupation. Her mother died of tuberculosis when Marie was 10 years old. A prodigy in both literature and math, as a teenager Marie attended a secret school called the “Floating University”—its locale changed regularly to avoid detection by the Russians—which taught physics and natural history as well as the forbidden subjects of Polish history and culture. Her father, a science teacher, encouraged his daughter’s curiosity but could not afford to send her to college. Marie worked as a governess until, at 24, she had saved enough money and purchased a train ticket to Paris, where she gravitated to the Latin Quarter and enrolled at the Sorbonne.

She immersed herself in French and math and made ends meet cleaning glassware in university labs. She rationed her intake of food until, on more than one occasion, she collapsed of weakness. Science thrilled her, and she earned a degree in physics in 1893 and another in mathematics the following year.

In 1894, she met Pierre Curie, a 35-year-old physicist at a French technical college who had been studying crystals and magnetism. More than a decade before, he and his brother Jacques had discovered piezoelectricity, the electric charge produced in solid materials under pressure. Pierre was taken by Marie’s uncommon intellect and drive, and he proposed to her. “It would. be a beautiful thing,” he wrote, “to pass through life together hypnotized in our dreams: your dream for your country our dream for humanity our dream for science.”

They were married in 1895 in a civil service attended by family and a few friends. For the occasion, Marie donned a blue cotton dress, one practical enough to wear in the laboratory after the ceremony. From then on, she and Pierre followed what they called an “anti-natural” path that included a “renunciation of the pleasures of life.” They lived plainly in their apartment on the rue de la Glacière within walking distance of their experiments. Pierre earned a modest 6,000 francs per year, about $30,000 today, while Marie worked gratis in his laboratory and prepared for an exam that would certify her to teach girls.

The Curies’ first daughter, Irène, was born in 1897. A difficult pregnancy had forced Marie to spend less time in the lab just as she was gathering data for a doctoral thesis. When her mother-in-law died weeks after Irène’s birth, her father-in-law, Eugene, a retired physician, stepped in, becoming the hands-on parent that others expected Marie to be.

By the time her second daughter, Eve, was born in 1904, Marie had grown accustomed to the disdain of colleagues who thought she spent too much time in the lab and not enough in the nursery. Georges Sagnac, a friend and collaborator, eventually confronted her. “Don’t you love Irène?” he asked. “It seems to me that I wouldn’t prefer the idea of reading a paper by [Ernest] Rutherford, to getting what my body needs and looking after such an agreeable little girl.”

But read scientific publications she did. In labs across Europe, scientists were studying new and surprising phenomena. In 1895 Wilhelm Röntgen had discovered X-rays, and the mathematician Henri Poincaré sought to understand the luminescent rays that could pass through a hand and impress a ghostly image on photographic paper. Henri Becquerel was noting the emission of a different kind of mysterious rays, those from uranium salts. J. J. Thomson discovered negatively charged particles, which we now know as electrons (and which we now know are the source of X-rays).

Curie built on Becquerel’s observations of the element uranium. At first, she and other scientists were baffled about the source of the high-energy emissions. “The uranium shows no appreciable change of state, no visible chemical transformation, it remains, in appearance at least, the same as ever, the source of the energy it discharges remains undetectable,” she wrote in 1900. She wondered whether the emitted rays were violating a basic law of thermodynamics: the conservation of energy.

Finally, she posited a daring hypothesis: The rays emitted might be a basic property of uranium atoms, which we now know to be subatomic particles released as the atoms decay. Her theory had radical implications. Trish Baisden, a senior chemist at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, describes it as a shocking proposal: “It was truly amazing and a bold statement at the time because the atom was thought to be the most elementary particle, one that could not be divided. It further meant that atoms are not necessarily stable.” Curie’s hypothesis would revise the scientific understanding of matter at its most elemental level.

Curie set out to measure the intensity of uranium’s rays by adapting the electrometer Pierre had invented with his brother. The device allowed her to measure extremely low electrical currents in air near mineral samples that contained uranium. She soon repeated the experiment with thorium, which behaved in similar ways.

But she was puzzled by data that showed that the intensity of the radiation emitted by uranium and thorium was greater than expected based on the amounts of the elements she knew to be in her samples. “There must be, I thought, some unknown substance, very active, in these minerals,” she concluded. “My husband agreed with me and I urged that we search at once for this hypothetical substance, thinking that, with joined efforts, a result would be quickly obtained.”

In 1898 she indeed identified one of the substances and named it polonium, after her homeland. Five months later, she identified a second element, which the world came to know as radium. Curie described the elements she studied as “radio-active.”

Pierre put his crystals aside to help his wife isolate these radioactive elements and study their properties. Marie extracted pure radium salts from pitchblende, a highly radioactive ore obtained from mines in Bohemia. The extraction required tons of the substance, which she dissolved in cauldrons of acid before obtaining barium sulphate and other alkalines, which she then purified and converted into chlorides. The separation of radium from the alkalines required thousands of tedious crystallizations. But as she wrote to her brother in 1894, “one never notices what has been done one can only see what remains to be done.” After four years, Curie had accumulated barely enough pure radium to fill a thimble.

Working in a dilapidated shed with broken windows and poor ventilation, she nonetheless was able to make sensitive measurements. It is remarkable, says Baisden, that Curie calculated the atomic weight of radium so accurately given such deplorable conditions. “Large swings in temperature and humidity undoubtedly affected the electrometer. but Marie’s patience and tenacity prevailed.”

Both Curies were plagued by ailments—burns and fatigue—that, in retrospect, were clearly caused by repeated exposures to high doses of radiation. Both, too, were resistant to the suggestion that their research materials caused their ailments.

In 1903, Curie became the first woman in France to earn a PhD in physics. Professors who reviewed her doctoral thesis, which was about radiation, declared that it was the greatest single contribution to science ever written.

Rumors of a Nobel Prize began to circulate, but some members of the French Academy of Sciences attributed the brilliance of the work not to Marie, but to her co-workers. These skeptics began to lobby quietly for the prize to be split between Becquerel and Pierre. But Pierre insisted to influential people on the Nobel committee that Marie had originated their research, conceived experiments and generated theories about the nature of radioactivity.

Both Curies shared the Nobel Prize in physics with Becquerel in 1903. It was the first Nobel to be awarded to a woman.

At the awards ceremony, the president of the Swedish Academy, which administered the prize, quoted the Bible in his remarks about the Curies’ research: “It is not good that man should be alone, I will make a helpmeet for him.”

Whether Marie Curie took the remark as an insult is not known—it surely rankles today—but it must be among the most grudging comments ever said to a laureate. Moreover, the notion that Marie was a mere helpmeet to Pierre—one of the more persistent myths about her—was an opinion widely held, judging from published and unpublished comments by other scientists and observers.

“Errors are notoriously hard to kill,” observed her friend, the British physicist Hertha Ayrton, “but an error that ascribes to a man what was actually the work of a woman has more lives than a cat.”

At the Sorbonne, it was Pierre who got the plum job, a full professorship. Marie was not promoted. Pierre hired more assistants and made Marie the official head of the laboratory, freeing her to conduct experiments and for the first time, be paid for it.

The most successful collaboration between a husband and wife in the history of science ended suddenly on April 19, 1906, when Pierre, apparently lost in thought, walked into traffic on the rue Dauphine and was killed instantly by an onrushing carriage.

Instead of accepting a widow’s pension, Marie took over Pierre’s position at the Sorbonne, becoming the first woman to teach there. Hundreds of people—students, artists, photographers, celebrities—lined up outside the university on November 5, 1906, hoping to attend her first lecture. She gave no outward sign of mourning. She began by summarizing the recent breakthroughs in physics research. “When one considers the progress of physics in the last decade,” she said, “one is surprised by the changes it has produced in our ideas about electricity and about matter.”

She wrote a diary during this time, addressed to her late husband, about continuing their research. “I am working in the laboratory all day long, it is all I can do: I am better off there than anywhere else,” she wrote. In 1910, she published a 971-page treatise on radioactivity. Some men in the scientific establishment still didn’t consider her an equal, however she applied for membership in the French Academy of Sciences in 1910, and although Pierre had been a member, she was denied by two votes. One Academy member, the physicist Emile Amagat, claimed that “women cannot be part of the Institute of France.”

In 1911, rumors spread that Curie was having an affair with the prominent physicist Paul Langevin, a man five years her junior who had been Pierre’s student and had worked closely with Albert Einstein. Langevin’s estranged wife discovered apparent love letters from Curie to her husband and gave them to a tabloid newspaper. It and other publications ran stories with headlines such as “A Romance in a Laboratory.” Although a widower under similar circumstances would likely not have suffered any consequences, Curie found her reputation tarnished. Neither Curie nor Langevin discussed their relationship with outsiders. “I believe there is no connection between my scientific work and the facts of private life,” she wrote to a critic.

The front-page coverage of the scandal threatened to overshadow another news story later that year: her second Nobel Prize.

This one, in chemistry, was for the discovery of polonium and radium. In her acceptance speech in Stockholm, she paid tribute to her husband but also made clear that her work was independent from his, spelling out their separate contributions and describing the discoveries she had made after his death.

At the end of 1911, Curie became very ill. She had an operation to remove lesions from her uterus and kidney, followed by a long recovery. In 1913, she began to travel again and return to science. In March of that year, Einstein paid her an extended visit, and later she opened and headed a new research facility in Warsaw. As she was setting up a second institute, in Paris, World War I broke out. She outfitted 18 portable X-ray stations that could treat wounded soldiers on the front lines. She sometimes operated and repaired the machines herself, and established 200 more permanent X-ray posts during the war.

Eve became a journalist and wrote the definitive biography, Madame Curie, published in 1937. Irène studied at her mother’s institute in Paris and married her mother’s assistant, the charismatic physicist Frédéric Joliot, with whom she bore two children. Irène maintained a strong presence in the lab, and in 1935, Irène and Frédéric Joliot-Curie were awarded a Nobel Prize for synthesizing new radioactive elements. It was another record: the first time both a parent and child had separately won the Nobel Prize.

After Marie Curie’s second Nobel Prize and her subsequent research, she was rarely dismissed as a helpmeet. And once the tabloids moved on from the Langevin scandal, her image as a homewrecker faded. But there were deliberate efforts to shape her story. A case in point was Curie’s first trip to America, in 1921.

The tour was largely the work of a New York City journalist named Missy Meloney, who had interviewed Curie in 1920 in Paris for the women’s magazine the Delineator, which Meloney edited. Meloney learned that the Curies had never patented the process for purifying radium. As a result, other scientists and U.S. chemical companies were processing radium, then selling it for cancer treatments and military research for $100,000 per gram. Curie was now unable to afford the element she had discovered. Sensing a human-interest story, Meloney created the Marie Curie Radium Fund to raise money to purchase radium for Curie’s continuing research.

American women would be inspired to give to Curie, Meloney figured, only if her image as a scientist—which stereotypically suggested someone dispassionate, even severe—could be softened. So Meloney’s articles presented Curie as a benevolent healer, intent on using radium to treat cancer. Meloney also persuaded editor friends at other newspapers and magazines to emphasize the same image. Curie understood that radium might be useful in the clinic, but she had no direct role in using it for medical treatments. Nevertheless, Curie’s motivation for discovering radium, according to a headline in the Delineator, was “That Millions Shall Not Die.” Writers described her as the “Jeanne D’Arc of the laboratory,” with a face of “suffering and patience.”

Curie disapproved of the publicity campaign. In lectures, she reminded her audience that her discovery of radium was the work “of pure science. done for itself” rather than with “direct usefulness” in mind.

And yet Meloney’s efforts succeeded: She raised more than $100,000 on Curie’s behalf within months, enough to buy a gram of radium for the Curie Institute in Paris. Meloney invited Curie to the United States.

Curie, who disliked travel and attention, agreed to come to thank Meloney and those who had contributed to the cause. But, she wrote Meloney, “you know how careful I am to avoid all publicity referring to my name. And how I should be very grateful to arrange for my voyage with the minimum of publicity.”

Curie sailed with Irène, 23, and Eve, 16, and within hours of disembarking in New York embarked on a whirlwind tour that took her as far west as the Grand Canyon. As it wore on, Curie became exhausted and asked to cancel events, or at least not have to speak at them. She appeared aloof and sometimes refused to shake hands with admirers. She did not appear to be the kindly maternal figure that Meloney had made her out to be. Clearly, Curie’s strength and patience were wearing thin.

She carried the gram of radium home to Paris in a vial handed to her by President Harding at the White House. She worked in her laboratory until her death.

When Curie died, at age 66 in 1934, journalists echoed the image popularized by Meloney. De New York Times called her a “martyr to science” who “contributed more to the general welfare of mankind” as a “modest, self-effacing woman.” The physicist Robert Millikan, president of the California Institute of Technology, issued a public statement: “In spite of her continuous absorption in her scientific work, she has devoted much time to the cause of peace. She embodied in her person all the simpler, homelier and yet most perfect virtues of womanhood.”

In the years after her death, scientists, historians, artists and others have grappled with her story, often highlighting qualities or imputing traits to her that reflected contemporary social values more than biographical truths. Curie’s portrayal in books and movies tended to emphasize her roles as wife, mother and humanitarian at the expense of her importance as a brilliant physicist. Most memorably, MGM’s Madame Curie (1943) featured Greer Garson as a devoted wife rather than a sometimes prickly, independent scientist.

With the women’s movement of the 1960s and 󈨊s, Curie’s reputation as a remarkable scientist came to the fore. The physicist Rosalyn Yalow, in an essay she wrote at the time of winning her own Nobel Prize in 1977 for research involving radioactive compounds, said that Curie was her inspiration. Biographers attempted to depict the brilliance and complexity of this outsize character. A new play, Radiance, written by the actor and director Alan Alda, focuses on her relationships with Pierre and Langevin as well as her science. A new graphic novel, Radioactive: Marie & Pierre Curie: A Tale of Love and Fallout by Lauren Redniss, examines Curie’s life in the context of radioactivity’s impact on history. It has a glow-in-the-dark cover.

It’s taken a century, but we can finally appreciate her as a multifaceted woman of uncommon intensity, intelligence and will—a woman of courage, conviction and yes, contradictions. After a century we see her not as a caricature, but as one of the 20th century’s most important scientists, who was, at the same time, unmistakably, reassuringly human.

Julie Des Jardins, of Baruch College, wrote The Madame Curie Complex: The Hidden History of Women in Science.

To understand this crisis we can look to the Long Depression too

'Growth, growth, my kingdom for some growth!" But the kingdom is in double-dip recession and the painful slog out of it may be longer than the government expected. Elsewhere, it's not fun either. Spain is in serious recession with unemployment at almost 25%. Its borrowing costs are increasing, as are those of Italy – two major markets for British exports. In France, whose economy is faltering, François Hollande is poised to win the presidential election. The "markets" are running scared.

Crises have always been with us. They are part of the history of capitalism. This crisis is not like any of the previous big capitalist crises except in this: "we are not all in it together". There will be winners and losers and, as usual, the outcome is uncertain.

The crisis of 1929, or the Great Depression, has become the ur-crisis, the proto-crisis, the one crisis all other crises are compared to. Is the present downturn as bad as that of 1929? Recent OECD data is not encouraging, particularly for Europe. The Federal Reserve chairman, Ben Bernanke, is more optimistic, at least for the United States. The meltdown, he explained, would have been even worse than that of 1929 had it not been for decisive government intervention (a modest way of patting himself on the back).

Comparisons are always useful, but the truth is that the crisis of 1929 was quite different from today's – not surprisingly since the world has changed considerably. It is more globalised, more financialised (in the west), and more industrialised (in what we used to call the third world). In 1929 some looked back to the previous big crisis of capitalism, the so-called Long Depression of 1873-96, in the hope of learning something. Strictly speaking, the Long Depression was not a real one in the sense of stagnant or negative growth. But prices fell – great for consumers but disastrous for businesses. Growth faltered but never turned negative. And the crisis was global. There was a realignment of the world economies (this, after all, is what big crises do) the US replaced Great Britain as the leading industrial power, while Germany caught up.

The fall in prices led to several stock exchange panics (Vienna 1873 and Paris 1882). There was a tariff war between France and Italy. Everyone, bar Britain, adopted protectionism. The US, today's haven of neoliberal ideology, was already the world's most protectionist country. Contrary to current mythology, the power of the state increased. US federal spending reached new heights. Imperial powers (France and Britain) expanded their empires. Others (Germany and Italy) tried to join in.

States also became more authoritarian. In the 1870s, Bismarck passed anti-Catholic and anti-socialist legislation. In Italy the governments waged a virtual war against southern "bandits". But along with the sticks there were some carrots. The working week was shortened, and the basis of the modern regulatory welfare state was created, particularly in rich states such as Germany, Belgium and Britain.

These reforms were spurred by the rise of labour, for in 1889 they were the central plank of the Second International, the organisation of socialist and labour parties. While dreaming to end capitalism, socialists effectively reformed it: universal adult suffrage, equal rights for all including women, legal aid, the eight-hour day, free medical service, and free education. It was during the Long Depression that most socialist parties were created, and by 1918 some were electorally stronger than they are now. Of course, they thought that capitalism would collapse. As the German socialist leader August Bebel wrote to Engels: "Every night I go to sleep with the thought that the last hour of bourgeois society will strike." Engels had to calm him down.

Bebel had a point though: rising unemployment, increased capitalist concentration, strikes – but no economic collapse. Instead, there was an increased commercial and political rivalry between the great powers and, eventually, a major European war (1914-18) that had, among its consequences, the further consolidation of the American economy, the Bolshevik revolution, and the beginning of the end of Europe as a significant political force in the world.

The crash of 1929 accelerated these trends. By 1936 it appeared to have been resolved, but a year later a second dip threatened. The second world war, the most savage of all times, resolved the situation, thanks to a mega state stimulus. Keynes had said that it would be worth paying people to dig trenches and fill them up again. War does it better: it employs people to produce and use weapons of mass destruction. The outcome eliminated Europe from any leading role in international affairs, establishing the political supremacy of the US and the rise of the USSR as a world power.

Today, of course, the chances of an international war are remote, and everyone is betting on China but what is most telling is that few had predicted the depression of 1870-96, or the crash of 1929, and fewer still guessed what would be their outcomes – just as few predicted the current crises and no one knows what will happen next. When it comes to forecasting really important events (the rise of Islamic fundamentalism, the end of the USSR, the Arab spring, etc) we are barely ahead of our ancestors, who read the future in the entrails of slaughtered goats.

The Embryo Project Encyclopedia

Leo Kanner published "Autistic Disturbances of Affective Contact" in 1943 in the journal Nervous Child. This article described the cases of eleven children with autism. Kanner described the behavior and upbringing of each child, aged two to eight, as well as the educational backgrounds of the children's parents. Though Eugen Bleuler, a professor at the University of Zürich and director of the Burghölzli Asylum in Zürich in Zürich, Switzerland in the early twentieth century, first used the term autism to describe of a symptom of schizophrenia, scientists cite Kanner's article as the first description of autism as a unique disease concept distinct from schizophrenia. One of the most cited articles about autism in the twentieth century, this article was the first to demarcate Kanner syndrome, which later called childhood autism. Researchers, including Kanner, eventually treated early infantile autism as a disorder resulting from abnormal development of the autistic children's brains.

In 1938, Kanner began studying a small cohort of eleven children with similar behaviors in the Johns Hopkins clinic in Baltimore, Maryland. Donald, Frederick, Richard, Paul, Barbara, Virginia, Herbert, Alfred, Charles, John, and Elaine became the first children described with Kanner Syndrome, later called early infantile autism. In "Autistic Disturbances of Affective Contact," Kanner describes each child's preoccupation with objects, monotonous repetitions, insistence on consistency, and deficiencies of language, among other behaviors. He also described the child's home life, socioeconomic and educational background of the parents, and the parents' chief complaints about their children's behaviors. Many child psychologists used Kanner's observations to help them with their diagnoses.

The article has four main parts. It has a single-paragraph introduction that contextualizes when and why the case studies were conducted. After the introduction, Kanner details each case, one after the other. The discussion section compiles the common features and differences between the cases. Finally, the comment section attempts to describe the impact these eleven case studies have on the field of child psychiatry and suggests directions for further research.

Each case study follows a common pattern. First, the full first name and last initial of the child are given. The initials are followed by the date each child was observed at the clinic, and the child's age. Most cases then describe the parents' chief complaint, for example in Richard M.'s case, the parents' chief complaint was that Richard did not talk or respond to questions. For this reason, Richard's parents claimed that he was deaf. Next, Kanner provides the parents' description of the problem and, if he had it, the case history. Kanner then specifies the children's dates of birth followed by their weight and condition at birth, along with any complications during delivery. Kanner then lists parental descriptions of the child's early speech and motor development, followed by descriptions of what Kanner called strange or noteworthy behavior by the child while in the clinic. Finally, in each case Kanner includes written correspondence from the parents regarding any changes in the child's condition over time.

In the discussion section, Kanner interprets the common characteristics unique to autism such as self-sufficiency, being oblivious to surroundings, and acting as if hypnotized. He says that many of the children in the study were considered idiots, imbeciles, feebleminded, or schizophrenic. Kanner explains the disorder as the child's inability to relate themselves to others and as extreme aloneness. Autism can be observed in several ways, such as by the child's failure to recognize and react when he or she is being picked up, or by the inability of the child to use language to communicate. Autistic children react to loud noises and moving objects with horror, and often with repetitious utterances. Kanner interpreted these reactions to indicate that the autistic child had an obsessive desire to maintain sameness in his environment. The autistic children in Kanner's study seemed to him to relate much better to inanimate objects than to people. In the final two paragraphs of the discussion section, Kanner said that all of the children studied come from highly intelligent families and that all of the children studied were either Jewish or Anglo-Saxon.

In the comment section, Kanner argues that the characteristics of autism, though similar to schizophrenia, differ in many ways. First, the children Kanner described behaved in the way they did from birth and not from a gradual changes in behavior over time like in schizophrenic children. Second, he says that autistic children cannot interact with objects with a high level of intelligence. Third, Kanner said that the autistic child's behaviors were governed by a powerful desire to maintain sameness and aloneness. Ranging anywhere from two to five years, depending on the specific behavior in question, the autistic children under Kanner's observation started to show some improvement in their interactions with others. In the final three paragraphs, Kanner notes that obsessiveness and intelligence seemed to be in the family backgrounds of the children. At the end of this section, Kanner implicated parents as a potential cause for autism, claiming that most parents of the children studied did not seem exceptionally warm to their children.

Though Kanner largely abstained from commenting on what factors might be cause, his descriptions opened the possibility for many interpretations of its etiology. Kanner's observations about race, class, and intellectual ability shaped the concept of autism into a condition that excluded many on the basis of race, class, and intellectual grounds. His final comment about the emotional warmth of parents distressed many parents of autistic children for decades afterwards. Kanner later retracted his position on the causal relationship between parents' emotional warmth and autism in a foreword for Bernard Rimland's 1964 book Infantile Autism: The Syndrome and Its Implications for a Neural Theory of Behavior.

Scientists treat "Autistic Disturbances of Affective Contact" as the first article to codify the concept of autism as a disease, and not as a symptom. After this article was published, children who exhibited signs similar to those of these first eleven cases could be described as something other than feebleminded or schizophrenic. Researchers later in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries tested the theory that autism has its origin during early human development.

Persistent Stereotypes About Asian Americans

As many social scientists have noted, there are two primary stereotypes that continue to affect Asian Americans. One is that all Asian Americans are the same. That is, many people are either unable or unwilling to distinguish between different Asian ethnicities -- Korean American from a Japanese American, Filipino American from an Indonesian American, etc. This becomes a problem when people generalize certain beliefs or stereotypes about one or a few Asian Americans to the entire Asian American population. The result is that important differences between Asian ethnic groups are minimized or ignored altogether, sometimes leading to disastrous results.

The second stereotype is that all Asian Americans are foreigners. Although more than half of all Asians in the U.S. were born outside the U.S., many non-Asians simply assume that every Asian they see, meet, or hear about is a foreigner. Many can't recognize that many Asian American families have been U.S. citizens for several generations. As a result, because all Asian Americans are perceived as foreigners, it becomes easier to think of us as not fully American and then to deny us the same rights that other Americans take for granted. Yes, that means prejudice and discrimination in its many forms.

Finding the bill number

Typically, when beginning legislative history research you will start with a statute number. But the legislative history documents are typically organized by bill number. In order to convert your statute number to a bill number:

(1) Look at the history or credit section at the bottom of the text of the statute. The numbers in the credit section identify the enacting session law for the staute and any amendments to the stautute. An example session law number is c. 99-101 s. 2. Each session law number has a corresponding bill number and you will need to decide which session laws/bills you want to research. Sometimes you want to look at the enacting law and all the amendments but sometimes you know a specific year and amendment that you need to research.

(2) If you are in Lexis or Westlaw and the session law has a hyperlink - click on it to see the text of the session law which also include a bill number in the heading information. A sample house bill number is HB No. 1051 and a senate bill is S.B. 1045.

(3) If you are in Lexis or Westlaw and the session law is NOT hyperlinked or if you are using online sunshine or print versions of the statutes you will have to look up the session law number either in print, using HeinOnline, on Laws of Florida (1997-current), or using a session law to bill number conversion table found within the Florida Statutes or the most recent edition online.

Titta på videon: Стрелковое отделение КА. Форсирование Днепра, октябрь 1943Red Army machinegun sqouad. Oktober 1943 (Juli 2022).

Intressanta Artiklar

Decisive Victory - Slaget vid Sambre, 4 november 1918, Derek Clayton

July 7,2022

DURAND - Efternamnets betydelse och familjehistoria

July 7,2022

Jerusalem crickets, Family Stenopelmatidae

July 7,2022