Bayram Cigerli Blog

Bigger İnfo Center and Archive
  • Herşey Dahil Sadece 350 Tl'ye Web Site Sahibi Ol

    Hızlı ve kolay bir şekilde sende web site sahibi olmak istiyorsan tek yapman gereken sitenin aşağısında bulunan iletişim formu üzerinden gerekli bilgileri girmen. Hepsi bu kadar.

  • Web Siteye Reklam Ver

    Sende web sitemize reklam vermek veya ilan vermek istiyorsan. Tek yapman gereken sitenin en altında bulunan yere iletişim bilgilerini girmen yeterli olacaktır. Ekip arkadaşlarımız siziznle iletişime gececektir.

  • Web Sitemizin Yazarı Editörü OL

    Sende kalemine güveniyorsan web sitemizde bir şeyler paylaşmak yazmak istiyorsan siteinin en aşağısında bulunan iletişim formunu kullanarak bizimle iletişime gecebilirisni

Debunking Dade County's "secession"

Georgia on My Mind has a nice posting on Dade County, Georgia. Legend has it that, back in 1860, when the state didn't secede fast enough to suit some of the hot-blooded citizens of Dade, the county decided to secede from both Georgia and the Union.

According to a 1945 article in the Atlanta Constitution, “Folks in Dade were big slave-owners and rabid secessionists." Representative Bob Tatum made a fiery speech in the state legislature: “By the gods, gentlemen, if Georgia does not vote to secede immediately from the Union, Dade county will secede from the state and become the independent state of Dade.”

When the state refused to act, Tatum left Milledgeville (the capital at the time) and returned to Dade, where he conducted a public meeting on the courthouse square in the county seat of Trenton. Under his guidance, the people of Dade County voted to secede from Georgia and the nation. After the vote, according to the newspaper, “the impatient Tatum actually sent a secession proclamation to Washington.”

Although neither Georgia nor the United States recognized the act of secession, Dade kept its claim of independence until the summer of 1945 when, flush with patriotism and national pride over the coming victory in World War II, the people of the county voted to rejoin the state and the Union.

The 1945 "reunion" was covered widely by the press. Even the New York Times reported “Dade County Ends ‘Secession.’” President Harry Truman sent a telegram of congratulations from Washington, ending with “Welcome home, pilgrims.”

The story of the county’s secession and the resulting Independent State of Dade is still told and accepted. The problem is, it seems that it never happened.

Professor Ellis Merton Coulter, of the University of Georgia, published an article in the Georgia Historical Quarterly back in 1957 that convincingly refutes the story of Dade’s secession.



First of all, Coulter pointed out that the people of Dade were not “big slave-owners.” “Dade County in 1860 had only 300 slaves owned by 46 people out of a total white population of 2,765,” he wrote, “and of those slaveowners only an even dozen held more than ten and only two owned as many as thirty.”

Throughout the state, there was a correlation between slave ownership and support for secession. Perhaps the people of Dade bucked the trend? But Coulter pointed out that the county’s delegates to the secession convention of January 1861 voted against every secession measure, and those delegates had been elected by a popular vote that favored, by a margin of 9 to 1, the “cooperationist” (anti-secession) candidates.

This was very much an anti-secessionist section of the state. In neighboring Walker County, a man wrote a letter in Feb. 1861 to Governor Joseph E. Brown: “We, the people of Walker County and Dade County, Georgia, do not intend to submit to [the] decision of the secession movement. . . . If southern Georgia wants to leave the Union, let her go. But, we want to stay in the Union."

What about Tatum’s speech threatening the county’s secession if Georgia didn’t act? Coulter searched the major newspaper across the state and found “not the slightest indication of such a speech,” and surely such a speech in the General Assembly would have been reported.

The alleged secession proclamation sent to Washington has never been found.

Tatum himself served two more years in the Georgia House, something he would have been unlikely to do if he believed his county had left the state.

According to Coulter, no one has been able to produce a single contemporary account of the county’s secession.

Ironically, the phrase “the state of Dade” was used even before the Civil War, referring to the county's geographical isolation. Because of the presence of Lookout Mountain, there was no way to drive into the county from Georgia until the late 1930s; one had to leave the state and enter Dade from Alabama or Tennessee.

source: George Cram Railroad and County Map of Georgia (1885), available from the Historical Atlas of Georgia Counties

The New Georgia Encyclopedia has a good article on Dade County history.

Primordial Blog

Recommended by both Ed at Millard Fillmore's Bathtub and PZ at Pharyngula, a new blog, and it's a good one: Primordial Blog ("Life at the Intersection of Science, Religion, Politics and Culture").

Posted yesterday-- The Most Disgusting Creation Story:

The most disgusting (and my personal favourite) creation story comes from the annals of Egyptian Mythology. The story is narrated by the creator god Neb-er-tcher himself. Listen to how he does it: ....

Thus endeth the quotation. You're going to have to check out Promordial Blog for the next sentence.

Keep up the good work, Brian!

Carnival time!

For your weekend reading pleasure, Georgia on My Mind has the 3rd Georgia Carnival, and the 47th History Carnival (in which one of my own recent postings is introduced by Sen. Lisa Murkowski--well, that's what it says!) is up at Progressive Historians.

With all due respect to the Senator, I value elle's mention more highly.

Southport and the Gold Coast

The Month in Review

January was a nice relaxing month, with a bit of site seeing and a few boat projects thrown in.  We spent the whole month anchored in Bum's Bay (a.k.a Marine Stadium), just outside of Sea World, in Southport.  If you've been reading our BLOGs, then you know we love this spot.  Our boat is ultra-protected in a beautiful spot, and between the dinghy and bus system we have access to all of the surrounding cities.  It is fantastic to sit in the cockpit watching the sun set and the city lights come to life.  Staying in one locale for so long has also allowed us to make a number of new friends, including one couple (Raymond & Melissa on Basilea) who plan on traveling up to Indonesia and Thailand on the same rally we do.  This is terrific news for me, as I tend to me more reserved than Chris and have a harder time making and losing friends as we move from anchorage to anchorage. Most of the people we have been meeting are Australian.  We have watched the anchorage fill up and empty time and time again, with various summer holidays, but we seem to consistently be the only foreign flagged vessel.  Everyone has been ultra friendly, even offering use of vehicles and berths. One thing we've discovered is that Australian's sure can drink.  We've had many a social night that has been tough to handle the following morning!

Chris has been a bit psychotic with his fishing lures.  I do believe he has probably hit every fishing store within a 50km radius, and I can't even begin to count the number of hours he's been playing and experimenting with different designs.  Meanwhile I've been enjoying some computer time and planning our land travel down to Melbourne and Tasmania (to occur in mid-Feb/March).  Most of the time Chris and I are in-sync on just about everything.  So it was quite funny when I showed him a number of land travel options ... all of which had us going through the middle of Australia and visiting various outback locations.  While I was thinking, "Cool, we'll drive through the desert to the middle of nowhere and really see the outback", Chris was saying, "What the hell would we want to go through a desert for, especially in summer?"!!!  After much negotiating and discussion we finally settled on driving from Brisbane to Melbourne and then touring Tasmania.  I guess I forget that not everyone enjoys a good desert summer!

In the last week of January we were lucky enough to have a car.  Ray and Mel flew home to Melbourne and let us use their car while gone.  It was terrific to have the freedom to go anywhere, anytime, including getting inland a bit to see the Gold Coast Hinterland.  The Hinterland, as well as some of our other 'big' site-seeing trips (Currumbin Wildlife Sanctuary, Sea World, Brisbane, and Byron Bay) are covered below.

Currumbin Wildlife Sanctuary (1/12/07)



Since cruising, we'd normally leave the parks and zoos to the kids, and be off 'hunting' in the true wilderness.  But there were a few things I just didn't see happening naturally ... such as cuddling a Koala or shaking hands with a Kangaroo.  Imagine what the claws of a wild Koala would do to you if you dared pick one up, or the punch of a huge 'ol Kangaroo if you walked right up to him (assuming you ever caught up to him in the first place).  There were also a few native creatures that as much as I wanted to see, didn't really desire seeing them if they weren't caged; mainly the crocodiles.

As we stood in line at the Currumbin Wildlife Sanctuary, Chris made fun of us; we were the only two adults without any kids!  Oh well, if growing up meant I couldn't goggle at various animals, then I suppose I'll just never really grow up.

Our first stop was the Koala's ... cute little buggers that, despite the huge long claws, you just wanted to snuggle.  The only way to actual hold one is to pay for a photo.  I was willing to do this, until we watched a few of the kids and I realized that you got to hold the Koalas for all of 10 seconds ... hardly a cuddle!  Oh well, maybe somewhere down the road I'll get in a hug, but for now just staring at them was satisfying enough.  Which, if you think about it, is surprising given that they are almost always sleeping!  Thanks to their leafy diet they don't have much energy and therefore spend about 20 hours a day asleep!!!  I suppose what is so entertaining about them sleeping is the various positions they manage to balance (and sleep) in ... we still aren't sure how they weren't falling left and right!

Another favorite stop of ours was the Kangaroo pen.  We figured they'd have kangaroos (it is Australia after all), and that maybe during the 3:00 feeding we might get to hand over some hay or something.  So we were a bit surprised when we entered a gate and found ourselves surrounded by kangaroos and wallabies.  You could pet them, feed them, or just sit and hang out with them!  I learned that the Joey's don't just hang in the pouches in the picturesque manner I've always imagined;  both mom and child head up looking out over the horizon.  Rather they seem to just climb in, in any old manner, with feet, tales, or perhaps just an ear sticking out.  Imagine being upside down while your mom is jumping around!  Some of the kangaroos were HUGE!  With forearm muscles bigger than my calves!  If you read our BLOG, then you already know that Chris was especially captivated by the 'bits' of the male kangaroos ... if you missed the blog, you can read part of it by clicking here). We had such a good time ... I think we visited them at least three times throughout the day!

We did think it was a bit cruel however that the kangaroo area is right next door to the crocodile area ... crocs, after all, eat small wallabies!  They had a number of small fresh water crocodiles and one huge salt water crocodile.  It was a bummer to learn that you aren't safe anywhere, because the big guy can live in fresh water too!  The crocodile feeding was very exciting to watch;  with the blink of an eye the croc was out of the water, had snagged up the chicken, and was back in the water!  Besides being amazingly fast, we had also heard that crocs can 'learn'.  One guy had gone as far as to tell us that when we are up north, in croc territory, not to always park our dinghy in the same spot, because the crocs would figure this out and one day we'd come ashore to find them waiting for us!   I wasn't sure how accurate this guy was, but at the sanctuary I did notice that when we first passed the crocodile pool the croc was just hanging around, but when we came back for the show, he had moved to below the feeding platform before the feeder (or food) arrived.  Last time I checked crocs didn't know how to tell time ... so there must be something to this learning thing!!!

They also seem to be clever guys!  When the worker was in the fresh water area with the smaller crocs I was amazed to see some of the crocs actually camouflaging themselves, waiting until he passed to make their move (and I was even more astounded by how calmly the guy just pushed them away with a bucket before walking by!).  One of the crocs even 'knew' to wait until the worker turned his back before trying to make an approach!  And the whole time, while all these crocs stalked and plotted, the worker just calmly stood there answering questions from the crowd.  Crazy Australians!!!

We also checked out the spiders and snakes ... learning that of the top 10 poisonous snakes, Australian is home to ... ALL 10!!!  We tried to spot a Tasmania Devil, but none could be seen.  The dingoes were equally boring ... we only spotted one, and he was sleeping!  They had some amazingly beautiful birds, many of the same variety of those we got to watch at Steve and Lynne's in Nambour.

Towards the end of the day we caught the Aboriginal dance show.  I love the sound of the didgeridoo (an aboriginal wind instrument), it's unique deep sounds are captivating.

Finally, on our way out, we stopped to watch the Lorikeet feeding.  They are wild birds (not in an aviary), so they aren't guaranteed to show or eat.  We sat and watched the mass crowd of people all holding up their plates of honey-ed food; and not a lorikeet eating!  The waiting people were more entertaining then the people.  Those with patience enough to stick it out were finally rewarding when a large flock finally dug in.  Chris got a special treat when he was shooting photos and the flock alighted from a tree and swarmed right through him ... I thought for sure he'd be left with at least one plastered to his forehead!

It was a fantastic day!

Birthdays & Sea World (1/23/07)

This was a milestone birthday for Chris ... he was turning the big 4-0!  And it turned out to be big for me too, because he decided that for his birthday he wanted me as his fiancée!  I couldn't believe that after three years sailing together, five years dating, and SIXTEEN years of knowing each other we were finally 'official'.

With Sea World in our 'backyard', we decided it would be a fun way to spend "his" day.  Sea World here isn't all that different then the Sea World in San Diego, but since neither of us had been in some time it was quite fun.  We especially enjoyed the dolphin show, shark aquarium, and polar bear (although we only got to see him for a minute before he disappeared).  The 'eye', a large Ferris Wheel, is currently visiting and the view from the top, where we could see the anchorage and city, was outstanding.  We ended our day at Sea World cooling off in their water park and racing down the various water slides.

We finished off his birthday with a quiet dinner (one of our new favorite dishes, apricot and cumin stuffed lamb) aboard Billabong.  And since we are on the topic of food, I should mention that we've finally tried kangaroo (kind of sick considering how adorable we thought they were at the wildlife sanctuary).  Chris originally wanted it for Christmas ... figuring you couldn't get any more Australian than that!  But I had refused, and so for his birthday 'week' (yes, I believe in long-term b-day celebrations), I served him Kangaroo Bangers (sausages).  And honestly, they were quite good (not to mention low in saturated fat and cholesterol)!

Brisbane & Area (1/24 - 1/25/07)

Brisbane is about an hour's drive north of here.  Many times we had considered taking the bus, but just hadn't gotten around to it.  Now, with access to our friends' car, we jumped on the opportunity. Brisbane is a big city with just about every store and shopping center you could imagine.  The Brisbane River runs right through the city center.  You can actually anchor 'in' the city, right beside the peaceful botanical gardens.  We only had a day and we had some shopping that had to be done (such as buying cruising guides for Indonesia and Thailand at the local boating book store), so we didn't do any of the 'cultural stuff' (such as museums or art galleries), but we did mange to get in quite a bit of walking.  We spent the majority of our time in Central Brisbane, with a side visit to Fortitude Valley, which seemed to be a mix between China Town and camping/sport-store haven!  The shops ranged from high-end classy to low-end knock-offs;  restaurants, cafes, and fast food joints could be found every few feet; and while we didn't partake, the area was brimming with art centers and museums.  It seems that whatever your pleasure, Brisbane would have something to entertain you ... if you could survive the muggy weather;  it was suffocating at times!  We watched one thunder system roll in and could easily understand where Brisbane gets its hail reputation from (although we were lucky enough to not actually get hit that day!)

Just outside of Brisbane is a huge treat ... an IKEA!  Okay, so you're not impressed, but we love that store.  As we didn't want to have to split our time between Brisbane and Ikea, we made a special trip out to Ikea on the 24th, and visited Brisbane on the 25th.  I'll tell you one thing Ikea has done right; consistent location recognition.  We knew their was an Ikea near Brisbane, but could not remember the name of the town, and didn't know its exact location.  So we hopped on the main highway and headed in the direction of Brisbane ... Chris' theory; Ikea's are always next to a main freeway/highway.  Sounds lame, but funny enough, there it was, in easy, plain sight of the highway! Ikea isn't quite as exciting when you can't really buy anything (nowhere to put it all on a boat), but Chris was ecstatic to go to their Swedish market and stock up on all kinds of stinky-fishy foods!

Byron Bay (1/27/07)



Byron Bay is actually in New South Wales (versus the Gold Coast); about 100km south of Southport. Lonely Planet states, "There's something for everyone in Byron Bay", and they are right.  It's not a huge town, but it's filled with various shops, craft stores, and restaurants.  It is a huge surfer town and backpacker paradise.

We first drove out to the cape, where a lighthouse sits near the most easterly point of Australian's mainland (supposedly this lighthouse is one of the most powerful in the Southern Hemisphere).  As it was nearing noon, the hottest part of the day, we opted not to walk the circuit around the cape. Instead we parked near the town centre and walked amongst the various shops.  There was everything from new age to hippie to surfer duds.  And every type of cafe, bar, and restaurant imaginable.  We grabbed a cold drink and took a break ... catching Serena's outstanding performance in the women's final of the Australian [Tennis] Open.  It was a full day of walking the streets and browsing through the various shops.

On our drive home we ventured off the main highway to drive through the small towns of Brunswick Heads and Ocean Shores.  We were surprised to see a small marina (w/ some pretty good sized sailboats) in Brunswick Heads.  We had no idea you could get a boat up the river.

Hinterland: Mount Tamborine & Springbrook National Parks (1/30 - 1/31/07)

Mount Tamborine is only 20 km inland from the coast (and about 20km north of Southport).  It is vibrant green and littered with farmland.  The road up is steep and picturesque.  We had gotten a late start, so only planned on a scenic drive (versus hiking).  Through the trees we could see the coastline with its tall high-rises shooting up from the sea.  We passed through a number of small towns (or villages as Lonely Planet calls them).  They were small and cutesy ... lots of cafes and antique shops. I did, half-heartily, try to convince Chris to go on a small walk, but it was sweltering outside and leaving the comforts of an air conditioned car wasn't appealing.

The next day we took off for Springbrook National Park (about 20km south of Southport and 20km inland).  As we drove up the steep, narrow, winding road we were reminded of parts of New Zealand; green landscapes, panoramic views, and Jurassic ferns.  The Springbrook NP is actually made up of three separate regions; Springbrook, Natural Bridge, and Mt. Cougal.  We had planned on visiting Springbrook for its waterfalls and short walks and Natural Bridge for its swimming holes. Unfortunately we didn't realize just how much gas the car would suck up on the steep inclines, and of course the ultra-mall town of Springbrook didn't have a station ... see what happens when you aren't used to driving (feet don't require gas)!!!  Luckily we had enough to explore the Springbrook area.

Our first stop was the Canyon Lookout, where Chris commented, "I like this drive-in hiking"!  From the lookout expansive greenery merged with the city skyline on the coast.  In addition we could see at least four waterfalls.  We drove down the road a bit where we could hop on a trail for a small circuit walk to the Twin Falls.  It had been awhile since we'd done any 'bush' hiking and I hadn't realized just how much I missed it.  The sounds and smells put me on a natural high ... I felt as though I could've hiked for days.  Under the cover of the trees the air was cool and bearable; we couldn't have asked for more lovely conditions.  The waterfall didn't disappoint and was worth every bit of the uphill walk getting back to the car.  The only downside of hiking in Australia is that we are both aware of just how many poisonous snakes and spiders Australia is home to (and we still can't get used to it) ... it is a bit hard to fully relax when one paranoid eye is always on the lookout for something ready to kill you!

Our next stop was the aptly named, Best of All Lookout.  All I can say is WOW!  It was stunning. There was a slight haze on the coast see we couldn't see the coast clearly, but still, the panoramic view was fabulous.  I think what I enjoyed most was the serenity of it all; it was so calm, quiet and peaceful.  The only noise was that of the local birds.  When I talked I felt the need to whisper as to not disturb the balance of nature.

I love Southport and the area, but getting out of the city was like a breath of fresh air.  I came back feeling revived and very excited about our upcoming land travel, where I'm hoping we'll visit a number of other National Parks.

History ain't what it used to be

In my methodology class this morning, as part of a discussion on changing historiographical schools of thought, I showed my students a textbook by Lawton B. Evans, originally titled The Student’s History of Georgia: From the Earliest Discoveries and Settlements. According to the New Georgia Encyclopedia, Evans’s work, first published in 1884, was the first real Georgia history textbook. With its later editions, it “came to be regarded as the standard school text on Georgia history for many years.”

True to its subtitle, the book has little on Georgia’s Native Americans prior to the coming of the Europeans--to be precise, about half a paragraph. “As late as two hundred years ago the state was almost unbroken forest, and the people who inhabited it were savages, who built no cities, had no written language, knew nothing of their own past history, and who led a wandering life in the solitude of the great forests which covered this land.” An illustration accompanying those few words shows a woman cooking fish and several others performing various tasks outside of a tipi. The caption: “Home life of the savages.”

Except for “no written language” and the fish, none of this is accurate.

“Savages”? The word was used a little more freely a century ago, and if Evans meant “living in a state of nature,” its use might be excused. But I strongly suspect he meant the more modern sense of “uncivilized,” which is quite wrong.

“Unbroken forest”? When Hernando DeSoto traveled through what is now Northwest Georgia in 1540, he reported that, for miles at a time, his expedition was never out of sight of cultivated fields or villages.

“Built no cities”? “A wandering life”? The Indians that DeSoto encountered had settled down centuries earlier, in large permanent settlements that rivaled, in terms of population, many Europeans cities.

“Knew nothing of their own past history”? There is an element of truth here. With the arrival of the Europeans, Native Americans began to die quickly and in large numbers. Anthropologists and historians have estimated that, within a year, some areas suffered a 50 percent population decline, due mainly to the disease that the Europeans unwittingly carried with them and against which the Indians had no natural resistance. Within a few generations, the population of Southeastern Indians overall declined by 80-90 percent (some put the figure as high as 95 percent). With that tremendous and rapid decline, no doubt some history was lost.

But at the same time that Evans was writing his history of Georgia, an anthropologist named James Mooney, working for the federal government’s Bureau of American Ethnology, was compiling a record of Cherokee myths, handed down through the centuries, about everything from the creation of the earth to the origin of fire, disease, evergreens, and the lowly crawfish--enough to fill over 300 book pages. When my students read some of these myths for class, they conclude that these “savages” weren’t quite as uncivilized a people as Evans suggests.

Oh, and about that picture: Plains Indians, out West, lived in tipis; Southeastern Indians did not.

Evans’s view of Georgia history emphasizes politics, which means it’s dominated by wealthy white men. As far as I can tell, only two women are mentioned by name in the text: Mary Musgrove, who helped James Oglethorpe deal with the natives, and Revolutionary War hero Nancy Hart. Of the 155 captioned portraits in the book, one is of a woman: “Mrs. Governor Early.” (She’s not mentioned in the text.)

Evans’s book contains six sentences on slave life. Here are four of them: “Being well treated, they were free from care, and were, therefore, happy, and devoted to their masters. After the day’s labor they had their simple sports, such as dancing, playing the banjo, and ’possum hunting. They were fond of singing, even at their work. And at night, around the fire in ‘the quarters,’ they would sing their melodies in rich, musical voices.”

Actually this book is similar to others of the time. They reflect the thinking of society a century ago, and of course they also helped shape it: remember, this was the textbook that taught a generation of Georgia schoolchildren about their state.

After looking at the book, my students decided that history ain’t what it used to be. And that’s a good thing.

Today in History: "The Raven" first published

On January 29, 1845, Edgar Allan Poe's "The Raven" was first published in the New York Evening Mirror:

Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered, weak and weary,
Over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore--
While I nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping,
As of some one gently rapping, rapping at my chamber door.
"'Tis some visitor," I muttered, "tapping at my chamber door--
Only this and nothing more."

"The Raven" has been big in American popular culture, including a number of parodies (of varying quality). My favorite re-doing: "Near a Raven," a version that remains faithful to the original while being a mnemonic device for the number pi (3.14159...) to an amazing 740 places.

Happy Birthday, University of Georgia

On January 27, 1785, the Georgia legislature approved a charter for the University of Georgia. The preamble said: “When the minds of the people in general are viciously disposed and unprincipled and their conduct disorderly, a free government will be attended with greater confusions and evils more horrid than the wild uncultivated state of nature. It can only be happy where the public principles and opinions are properly directed and their manners regulated.” (You can view the charter here.)

No other state had chartered a public university before this. (Other institutions of higher learning existed--Harvard, for example, had been around since 1636, almost a century and a half earlier--but they were private, not public, schools.) So the University of Georgia, chartered 222 years ago today, is the oldest state university, right?

Well, the University of Georgia didn’t accept its first student until 1801, sixteen years after it was chartered. Can it be a university without students? Does a professor talking in a classroom make a sound if there is no student there to hear her?

On the other hand, the University of North Carolina was not chartered until 1789--but it accepted its first student in 1795, six years before Georgia.

So which is the oldest state university: Georgia, which was chartered in 1785 but did not open until 1801; or North Carolina, which was not chartered until 1789 but opened in 1795?

This is a difficult question. My opinion is that you can’t have a university without students. The University of Georgia was just words on a sheet of paper until 1801, six years after the University of North Carolina was up and running.

The fact that I have two degrees from the University of North Carolina has nothing to do with my perspective on the matter. Instead, I base my opinion on a Georgia precedent. When was Georgia itself founded? On June 20, 1732, when the charter was signed? Or on February 12, 1733, when James Oglethorpe landed with his first colonists at Yamacraw Bluff? The Georgia General Assembly passed a law in 1909 that said February 12 should be observed as “Georgia Day,” marking the state’s founding. This means that, according to the state government, Georgia didn’t exist until there were colonists here. Using the same logic, universities don’t really exist until there are students on the campus.

So today we wish a Happy Founders' Day (as they call it in Athens) to the University of Georgia --the nation’s second oldest state university.

Jane's back!

Hard to believe it's been less than two weeks since Jane Hamsher posted a heart-rending message at firedoglake : "In mid-December I was diagnosed with breast cancer for the third time. It's a bit more serious this time and treatment is going to have to be more extensive.... On Thursday I go in for surgery at St. John's Hospital in Santa Monica."

We waited, read the frequent (but not frequent enough) updates, and waited some more. And today-- she's back! And ready to resume her share of the coverage of the Libby trial: "They tell me there's no reason I can't be in Washington DC on Monday morning, February 5, sitting at the Prettyman courthouse getting ready to watch Dick Cheney sweat, just like I promised."

Welcome back, Jane!

added later: Ed Darrell reminds us that Molly Ivins, though "still not dead," is not doing so well.

Day 49: You Geaux Girls!

Why is it that some days I really don’t feel like running even a mile and then others it is absolutely no problem?

Yesterday, Mira and I ran about 8 miles and it was easy! It took us about an hour and twenty five minutes, which is not too bad except for that it means it will take us about two and a half hours to run the half marathon. Two and a half hours seems like a really long time!

Earlier this week, I had a hard time running 4 miles. What is the difference and how can I make it so that every day is as easy as it was yesterday?

I read an article in Runners World about “the bonk”. This is when your body or mind gives up and you want to stop. There are many reasons for this bonk, the most common being not eating enough to sustain energy and not drinking enough, which causes dehydration and slows gastric emptying, which in turn causes cramps.

Even after reading this article, this still does not make sense to me. Four hours before running four miles the other day, I had a hearty lunch full of vegetables and carbohydrates as well as about 8 bottles of water throughout the day. Yesterday I ran at 8 a.m. and had not eaten since the night before. I drank a glass of water before leaving the house, but did not drink during my run.

Maybe it is just all in my head. Maybe it is only my own misgivings that are holding me back. In that case, now that I know for sure that I CAN run 8 miles, I should also know that I will be able to run thirteen miles just as easily. It is just a case of mind over matter.

AT END OF WEEK 7:

Average miles run per week: 13
Most miles run in one day so far: 8
Hours spent in the gym/at the park: 65

$$ spent on gym membership: $90.00
$$ spent on running gear: $158.74
Running farther than I ever have before: priceless
(sorry couldn’t resist)

John Wesley, evolutionist?

Jeremy Bruno recently posted Tangled Bank #71, the popular science blog carnival, at The Voltage Gate. Since many of the postings have a historical theme, especially to the 18th century, Bruno titled this edition of the carnival "Welcome to 1771!"

"As an idea, evolution was all but nonexistent in the 18th century," Bruno wrote, introducing a handful of relevant postings. Reading that sentence reminded me of an article I came across a few days ago in The Methodist Review (May 1924): "Why the Methodist Church Is So Little Disturbed by the Fundamentalist Controversy," by Philip L. Frick.

"A very interesting and suggestive phenomenon it is that, while some of the denominations of America are being shaken to their very foundation by the Fundamentalist controvery, the Methodist Church has so generally escaped," Frick wrote. He attributed this in part to the beliefs of John Wesley, generally considered the founder of Methodism: "Were John Wesley alive to-day, he would be considered a 'Modernist' regarding Evolution and the Bible.... Wesley believed that creation moves from the simple to the complex. He observed that there is a 'prodigious number of continued links between the perfect man and the ape.'"

Frick offers several Wesley quotations to prove this, the best being:

By what degrees does nature raise herself up to man? How shall she rectify the head that is inclined toward the earth? How change these paws into flexible arms? What method did she use to transform those crooked feet into supple and skillful muscle? The ape is this rough sketch of man; this rude sketch, an imperfect representation which nevertheless bears a resemblance to him and is the last creature that serves to display the admirable progression of the works of God.

Fascinating! But a little thought and investigation show us that this isn't quite what it seems.

First, Wesley didn't exactly write that passage. The quotation is from a book put together by Wesley titled A Survey of the Wisdom of God in the Creation: A Compendium of Natural Philosophy. As the subtitle suggests, this multi-volume work, first published in 1763, was largely a collection of the writings of others. (The book went through many later editions, growing in size each time. One of the later editions is available here.) As it happens, this quotation is from Charles Bonnet's Contemplation of Nature.

Wesley didn't write it, but his inclusion of it in the Compendium suggests an acceptance of evolution. But a second point: Even so, the quotation does not prove that Wesley was a "Darwinist." Darwin was a century later (Origins of Species was first published in 1859). In Wesley's day, many people were evolutionists, and he had no problem finding popular works that he could use for his Compendium. In addition to Bonnet's, there were, among others, Oliver Goldsmith's History of the Earth, and Animated Nature and Louis Dutens's Enquiry into the Origins of the Discoveries Attributed to the Moderns. Incidentally, Dutens's work, like Bonnet's, was originally published in French. Frick suggested that Wesley himself translated such works; maybe he did, but he didn't have to, as published English translations were generally available within a year or two of the original publication.

And Jean-Baptiste Lamarck would appear just a few years later.

It's not obvious that Wesley and other 18th-century figures who accepted evolution would have been comfortable with Charles Darwin, who not only introduced a mechanism (natural selection) for evolution but also made God superfluous to the process.

Philip Frick was right: The Methodist church was less affected by the Fundamentalist controversy of the early 20th century than were some other Protestant denominations. But Frick's discussion of Wesley as a "modernist" perhaps misses the mark a bit.