Drones that do not require remote access or human inputs are considered autonomous.There are currently 23,000 manned fighter planes Within a decade it is estimated that most will be replaced by drones(33%).10,000 drones are used to mostly spy however there are a few that are used to eliminate targets.It is reported by the NOVA documentary that 70% of All Al-Qaeda leaders were killed by killer drones.NQ or predator drone is the most famous killer drone used.It flies lighter and it uses less fossil fuel.A manned fighter planes stays in the air for a maximum of four hours but these drones can do 24 hours,36 hours.Its precision allows to minimize the killing of innocent civilians.According to the hangout the FLI petition banning autonomous weapons have reached more than 3,000 signatures and many of these signatures are by famous people.The ban is mostly on weapons that operate without human control.The phase”autonomous machine” is too broad and causes many speculations.Even though the military does not plan on using autonomous weapons,the use of drones will only increase.Elon Musk paid $10 million for robotics researchers to go into the depth of the dangers of autonomous weapons.There will be a time where they might want to reconsider this option.It is important that the ban is in effect before we even have a chance to get there.Very much like Stephen Hawking many think that AI and autonomous machines could be the end of us and they might be right.There is a very good evidence of this:32 broken arrows (missile launchings that have occurred erroneously) occurred during the height of the cold war.The dangerous stability of autonomous weapons is that the feedback loop of increased response may trigger an escalating spiral.I also believe all human technologies are prone to error.When a subject is dealing with human lives we must take it seriously .However,this subject is conflicting because by decreasing fighter planes we can save military lives.It can also remove human error and report back instantly what happens.Even though going against what some might call improvement or even evolution is against almost every fiber of this technology era , there must be a line we are willing to cross, ie:human cloning and modifying DNA of our offspring for our vain reasons and the use of autonomous weapons.
Now,I personally do not condone profanity language specially targeted at POTUS, however Eminem’s critic of President Trump stooped as low and disrespectful as the President tends to get.He used actual facts to back up his frustration.With politics’ controversies running our every day lives,It was inevitable Eminem would get to attack Trump since he is known for taking political stances.I refuse to take a political stance:I am pro America and therefore I just hope things turn out for the best ,that the forgotten(poor,minorities) do not stand that way,I want money back into our public schools,that people unite not only when disasters like a mass shooting or a hurricane happen,that the immigration system is reformed without leaving honest people out,and that our right to critique and demand a change is honored.Remember the Declaration of Independence.
hen in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton
John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry
Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery
Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott
William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris
Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark
Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross
Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean
Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton
George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton
William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn
Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton
Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton
VISION-DIETER GLASSES CLAIMED TO REDUCE FOOD CRAVINGS.
The Arkansas man who “invented” this product in the 1970s claimed that they used “secret European color technology” to curb cravings and hunger pangs. Obviously, they could do no such thing, and most of the glasses were destroyed by the FDA.
LASH-LURE EYELASH DYE CAUSED “DEGENERATION OF THE EYEBALLS.”
Lash-Lure eyelash dye promised that users would “radiate personality.” What the ads didn’t say was that the active ingredient contained a poison that could cause “degeneration of the eyeballs” and blindness. One person even died after using the product.
Luckily, the dye was taken off the market and the FDA banned all future use of the toxic ingredient.
THIS COMPANY SOLD “EASY TO SWALLOW” TAPEWORMS AS A WEIGHT LOSS AID.
This ad, which dates back to the turn of the 20th century, claimed that a handy jar of tapeworms could help people “Eat! Eat! Eat! And always stay thin!”
To be fair, tapeworm infestations do result in weight loss — but other possible side effects include nausea, weakness, abdominal pain, diarrhea, fever, bacterial infections, and even seizures, according to the Mayo Clinic.
THE MANUFACTURERS OF THIS PIPE CLAIMED THEIR PRODUCT COULD ERASE THE RISK OF LUNG CANCER FROM SMOKING.
In a 1960 congressional hearing, FDA commissioner George Larrick used this product to illustrate the agency’s need for fraud-fighting funds.
THE “ORGONE ENERGY ACCUMULATOR” WAS SO EGREGIOUS, ITS CREATOR WAS THROWN IN JAIL.
Austrian psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich believed in the existence of a “universal healing force” called orgone. (Spoiler alert: It’s not a real thing.) So in 1939, after relocating from Europe to Long Island, New York, he invented the Orgone Energy Accumulator, pictured above. The device, Reich claimed, could gather up and administer concentrated doses orgone to people. He believed it could cure colds, arthritis, ulcers, and even cancer.
The claims were so egregious that the FDA told Reich to stop selling the devices, and when he didn’t, he was sentenced to prison time.
ONE PHYSICIAN CLAIMED THAT RUBBING THE BODY WITH A METAL ROD COULD RELIEVE PAIN.
Back in the late 1700s, physician Elisha Perkins invented the “Tractor.” He claimed the small metal rod could relieve rheumatism, gout, and various aches by drawing out “noxious electrical fluids.” All you had to do was stroke it along the affected body part. The sales pitch for the product was apparently so convincing that George Washington ordered a set.
But later scientific studies determined that the Tractor’s “healing” ability was nothing more than the placebo effect, and eventually, sales died down.
“BANBAR” WAS USED BY MANY PEOPLE TO TREAT DIABETES. UNFORTUNATELY, IT DIDN’T ACTUALLY WORK.
By the mid-1920s, the FDA explains, insulin was the standard for treating diabetes. But a number of patients ditched insulin in favor of Banbar, the tonic pictured here. That choice proved fatal for many.
The FDA brought the maker of the tonic to court, but lost the case, since it appeared that the he really believed that the product worked.
THE “OSCILLOCLAST” CLAIMED TO CURE ALL MANNER OF DISEASES.
Dr. Albert Abrams believed that all diseases resulted from a “disharmony of electronic oscillations in the body,” whatever that means. So (surprise, surprise) he invented a device that could “fix” things.
According to Abrams, the Oscilloclast “played back” electronic waves into the body, thus “creating harmony” and eradicating diseases. In the 1950s, the FDA prosecuted Abrams over the false claims.
Road rage statistics from safemotorist.com:http://www.safemotorist.com/articles/road_rage.aspx
- 66% of traffic fatalities are caused by aggressive driving.
- 37% of aggressive driving incidents involve a firearm.
- Males under the age of 19 are the most likely to exhibit road rage.
- Half of drivers who are on the receiving end of an aggressive behavior, such as horn honking, a rude gesture, or tailgating admit to responding with aggressive behavior themselves.
- Over a seven year period, 218 murders and 12,610 injuries were attributed to road rage.
One scary statistic worth noting is:
- 2% of drivers admit to trying to run an aggressor off the road!
Article from New York Post
A crazed driver shot and killed a teen honor student who aspired to one day work for the FBI during a road rage incident in Pennsylvania this week, according to reports.
Bianca Nikol Roberson, 18, had just left a local mall — where she was shopping for college clothes with her mother and grandmother Wednesday — when she and a man driving a red pickup tried to merge into the same lane on a highway in West Chester, ABC 6 reported.
“And a man in the red pickup truck pulled out a gun and shot her in the head, killing her,” Chester County DA Tom Hogan told the station.
Roberson’s car veered off the southbound lanes of Route 100 in West Goshen Township and crashed, according to the report.
Highway cameras reveal that Roberson and the driver of the truck, possibly a Chevrolet, got into an altercation just before the incident. An image released by the West Goshen Township Police Department shows the suspect’s vehicle — and the victim’s — on the lower left side of the frame.
“They were jostling for a position or whatever,” West Goshen Police Chief Joe Gleason told ABC 6. “And unfortunately this gentleman took it to a degree that was just unconscionable.”
After shooting Roberson, the driver fled on Route 202 before exiting onto Paoli Pike. Cops say he is blond, between 30 and 40 years old and has a medium build.
Roberson’s grandmother was sitting in the backed-up traffic after the crash, and thought, “I hope it’s not Bianca,” the station reported.
Roberson was a recent graduate of Bayard Rustin High School in West Chester, where she was on the honor roll. She planned to attend Jacksonville University in Florida in the fall — and hoped to someday solve cases for the FBI.
“If you don’t even think it was your fault, and have a conscience, come forward and give us some closure and explain in your own words what happened,” her father, Rodney Roberson, told the station.
Article from Washington Post
What is it about fame and recognition that can cause you to put your life at risk?
Why has people’s approval become so vital in our lives?Some people live for their “likes” in instagram,facebook,youtube and other social media platforms ?
Why has success been recently measured by fame?A true story of a tragedy about a young man who inadvertently plans his death.
Before Monday, before the 911 call and police investigation, Pedro Ruiz III, an aspiring YouTube star in rural Minnesota, spent considerable time persuading his girlfriend to shoot a gun at his chest.
There would be a thick encyclopedia book between the barrel and his body, authorities say he told 19-year-old Monalisa Perez. The pages, he reasoned, would stop the bullet.
He even had evidence that it had worked once before — a different book with an entrance hole but no exit.
So on Monday evening, the young couple positioned two cameras outside their home and prepared for their breakthrough stunt. They wanted fame, family said, and danger often brings it.
“Me and Pedro are probably going to shoot one of the most dangerous videos ever,” Perez teased in a tweet at 5 p.m. “HIS idea not MINE.”
It had been three months since the young couple added their vlog, La MonaLisa, to YouTube, where they posted clips of their daily lives and their 3-year-old daughter. They live in Halstad, Minn., a tiny town on the North Dakota border between Grand Forks and Fargo. Episodes featured shots from their home, the car or at the doctor’s office, which is where Perez revealed in May that she was pregnant with a boy.
Their shtick, though, was pulling minor pranks: doughnuts with baby powder instead of powdered sugar, feigning paralysis from a grocery store wheelchair, hiding hot peppers on an egg salad sandwich. Just this week, Perez posted a video of Ruiz doing a handstand inside a rotating fun house tunnel at the county fair.
But the bullet and book stunt was supposed to be their moment.
“I said, ‘Don’t do it, don’t do it,’ ” Ruiz’s aunt, Claudia Ruiz, told her nephew when he shared his idea, according to Valley News Live. “Why are you going to use a gun? Why?”
His response, she said, was simple: “Because, we want more viewers.”
With one camera attached to a ladder and the other propped on the back of a car, the couple staged their stunt, according to authorities. Ruiz held the book to his chest and Perez held the gun, a gold Desert Eagle .50 caliber pistol considered “one of the most powerful semiautomatic handguns in the world.”
From a foot away, court documents say, Perez fired.
This time, the bullet didn’t stop in the book but instead pierced Ruiz in the chest. Medics tried to revive him, authorities said, but he was declared dead at the house.
Neighbors told ABC affiliate WDAY-TV that they watched the scene unfold from afar.
“Everyone was crying,” neighbor Wayne Cameron told the TV station. “I was standing behind that tree over there. And that was it. I just couldn’t take it anymore so I had to go back home.”
When Perez called 911 at 6:30 p.m., she told dispatchers the shooting was accidental and explained the YouTube plan. Later, according to court documents, she said that her boyfriend had been trying to persuade her to shoot the book “for awhile” and she finally relented. She told them about the other book Ruiz had shot, the one that blocked the bullet, and described the gun she fired.
A sheriff’s deputy found it in the grass outside the home.
Perez was arrested Monday on a charge of reckless discharge of a gun. On Wednesday, that charge was upgraded to second-degree manslaughter. She was released on $7,000 bail after her initial court appearance and ordered to wear a GPS monitor and stay away from firearms, reported KVRR TV. If convicted, she faces up to 10 years behind bars.
“They were in love. They loved each other,” Ruiz’s aunt, Claudia Ruiz, toldValley News Live. “It was just a prank gone wrong. It shouldn’t have happened like this. It shouldn’t have happened at all.”
Claudia Ruiz described Perez as a loving girlfriend and mother who had been with her nephew for six years. According to Perez’s social media accounts, the young woman was a stay-at-home mom. It appears she controlled the camera for many of their YouTube vlogs and often shared intimate, personal details with viewers.
“Our Vlogs will show you the real life of a young couple who happen to be teen parents,” the description on their channel reads. “From highs to lows. Achievements to struggles. Join the fun, Follow our journey!”
In a Facebook post last week that included the vlog post from their trip to the fair, Perez wrote that they were in the process of making Ruiz his own YouTube channel. His would focus on “all the crazy stuff,” she wrote. La MonaLisa would be about their “family life.”
“Oh man is it going to be sweet!” she wrote.
Ruiz had discussed the book stunt before the shooting, family members told KVRR. Along with Perez and friends, they had tried to talk him out of it.
“I wish they wouldn’t have done it,” Claudia Ruiz told WDAY-TV. “I wish he would’ve just done another prank. He was so young. He had so much going for himself.”
Another aunt, Lisa Primeau, said she “pretty much raised” Pedro Ruiz after his mother died in Texas when he was a child, reported the Minneapolis Star Tribune. Ruiz was always “putting a dangerous twist on everything he did,” Primeau told the newspaper, like jumping off the top of the house into the swimming pool.
“We called him our little daredevil,” Primeau told the Star Tribune.
The aunts said they all are supporting Perez. They want to name her unborn baby Pedro, after his father.
“It’s a tragic incident. What she did … she has to live with that,” Primeau told the Star Tribune. “It’s the worst punishment she can get.”
The heart is a rather unsightly organ. A twisted, bulbous mass of ventricles, veins, and muscle, it inspires neither romance nor lust. Yet in a grossly simplified form, it has become the reigning metaphor of our love.
We’re talking, of course, about the anatomically incorrect heart (♥) — a symbol at once cherished by teenage texters and detested by crusaders of medical accuracy.
The symbol is ubiquitous in our modern world. It dangles from necklaces, earrings, and bracelets. It shows its face in an endless sea of Valentine’s Day cards. It’s emblazoned on t-shirts, graffitied on walls, and is offered, in an endless array of colors, across all mediums of technology.
How did this weird-looking, medically-inaccurate symbol become the go-to representation of the human heart — and moreover, an expression of our love and desire?
More specifically, how did this:
Origins of the “Heart” Shape
Historians have found relics resembling the modern heart symbol that date as far back as 3000 BC. But these early instances — etched into Grecian, Minoan, Cretian, Mycean, and Roman pottery — were actually representations of ivy or fig leaves, and had no connection with the human heart, or the idea of love.
In ancient Greece, for instance, the symbol was often used to portray a vine leaf, which harkened to Dionysus, the god of wine. Wreaths featuring these symbols were commonly worn by priests during festivals and feasts:
Gold ivy wreath featuring symbols resembling the modern heart symbol, found in Chalkidike, Macedonia, Greece (c. 350 BC)
Completely independent of the Greeks, this symbol was used elsewhere in the world, also to signify leaves of some sort. In Etruscan art (4th century BC Italy), these ivy leaves symbolized procreation, fidelity, and rebirth, and were often presented to brides and grooms during wedding ceremonies. In the 2nd century BC, Buddhists began inscribing the symbol as a way of depicting the fig leaf, which, to them, represented enlightenment.
During the 2nd century in the city of Cyrene, the symbol illustrated silphium, a plant used in ancient times as a crude form of birth control. The trade of this plant was so incredibly lucrative in Cyrene that the symbol for its seeds was printed on currency:
Coins from ancient Cyrene, depicting silphium seeds
But despite bearing great semblance to what we now recognize as the “heart symbol,” these depictions had nothing to do with human anatomy. Historians are uncertain as to exactly when these representations of leaves became interlinked with the human heart — but the answer likely lies in a lack of anatomical understanding at the time.
Some of the earliest human anatomy studies were conducted by Galen of Pergamon, a Greek physician who tended to the grave injuries of gladiators, and was able to examine human organs without performing dissections. From these studies, he composed some 22 volumes of medical text, which included an account of the heart as looking akin to a pine cone, or an inverted leaf — similar to the representation of ivy in ancient Greece.
Between antiquity and the middle ages, a tremendous body of medical knowledge was lost, in part due to the Roman Catholic Church’s discouragement of scientific advances in anatomy (religious powers outlawed autopsies). As a result, scholars, artists, and doctors had to rely on ancient, humor-based anatomical descriptions. Galen’s writings — including his description of the heart — were generally accepted, and they served as “the foundation of authority for all medical writers and physicians” for nearly 1,300 years.
The Rise of the Heart Symbol
Beginning in the mid-13th century, the ♥ symbol began popping up in artwork — this time, representing not ivy leaves, but the human heart, and moreover, love.
The first known instance of this appears in “Le roman de la poire” (“Romance of the pear”), a French love tale dating back to 1250, in which a man and his lover peel a pear together with their teeth. As was common in such books, the first letter of each chapter was often ornately decorated; in one of these letters, an “S,” a man is depicted handing his heart (a symbol of his love) to his damsel. Note the likeliness to the modern heart emblem:
The French text “Roman de la poire” (c. 1250) pictures a kneeling man handing his heart to a love interest — the first instance of the heart symbol signifying love in a metaphorical context
In his famous Scrovegni Chapel masterwork, Italian painter Giotto included an allegorical portrait of Charity handing her heart to Christ — again, represented as a pine-cone shaped, indented form similar to the modern heart symbol. Revered by other artists of the era, this painting influenced a number of other works throughout the 1300s and 1400s, all of which portrayed the human heart in a similar form, and enlisted it as a symbol of love.
Despite considerable advances in anatomy throughout the 16th and 17th centuries (including da Vinci’s highly accurate drawings of the human heart), the ♥ symbol exploded in popularity.
Leonardo da Vinci’s anatomically accurate heart drawings (c.1507) had little effect on eradicating the ♥ symbol in artwork
Whereas previous depictions were usually upside-down, from the 1500s onward, the heart symbol assumed its upright stance (point facing downward), and became an ubiquitous presence in paintings, books, and heraldry. Here are a few examples we dug up:
An image from the French text “Petit Livre d’Amour” (c. 1500), showing a man “depositing his heart in a marguerite flower,” which symbolizes his mistress
A shield representing the five wounds of Jesus during his crucifixion (c.1530s); note how all human body parts are represented accurately, except the heart
Saint Augustine holding a burning heart (Philippe de Champaigne, c.1650)
Another perpetuator of the anatomically incorrect heart symbol was the advent and rise of playing cards. The first suit, developed in Mamluk Egypt in the 1370s, was made up of cups, coins, swords, and polo-sticks; by 1450, the Swiss-Germans had changed this to shields, roses, acorns, and bells. It wasn’t until the early 1500s that the French coined the modern-day suit: trèfles (clubs, ♣), carreaux (diamonds, ♦), piques (spades, ♠), and cœurs (hearts, ♥).
Playing cards became immensely popular, and with them, the heart symbol became an irrevocable mainstay.
A French card set (c.1550s)
But the most lasting application of the heart symbol came from the Roman Catholic Church.
On December 27, 1673, Margaret Mary Alacoque, a nun from the Order of the Visitation of Holy Mary, claimed to encounter Jesus Christ. In this encounter, Christ supposedly told her “to rest her head upon his heart” and inform the world of his eternal love. This tale eventually resulted in the devotion of the “Sacred Heart,” or the belief that Jesus Christ’s physical heart is the representation of his divine love for humanity.
Many subsequent depictions of Christ showed him possessing “a flaming heart shining with divine light” — most often with his wounded hands pointing at the heart. It became not only an enduring image of Christ, but of the heart symbol — and it secured the symbol’s permanence long after anatomy studies proved it to be grossly inaccurate.
We ♥ Symbols
By the 19th century, (♥) had long been established as the go-to representation of the human heart, as well as the reigning symbol of love.
In 1977, New York City ran its “I ♥ NY” advertising campaign, marking the first instance of the symbol being used as a logograph for the verb “to love.” Thereafter, it became not only a representation of love, but a direct replacement for the word: “I ♥ [X]” morphed into the de facto way that people expressed their feelings for one another in Valentine’s Day cards, love letters, and (later down the line) text messages.
Interestingly, after being enlisted as a emoticon for “remaining lives” in the video game The Legend of Zelda (1986), the heart symbol also came to denote health. Dozens of video games copied Zelda, but moreover, health-food companies, and even the American Heart Association, enlisted the symbol as an ideogram for well-being throughout the 1990s.
Today, the symbol is everywhere: We scrawl it on notepads and secretly pass it in middle school classrooms. We text it with reckless abandon. We wear it on shirts, print it on cards, and stick it to the bumpers of our cars.
This once-earnest attempt at drawing an accurate heart has long-since been proven anatomically incorrect. We know now that the heart is a complex mass that is neither cute nor emanates feelings of love — but nonetheless, “♥” has become a fixture in our lives.
Things have gotten too political lately.The latest stunt has been William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar with a Trump-Like figure.The actors have been getting death threats.It has been 5 months since Mr.Trump has taken office and some of us are still mystified as to how he got elected in the first place. Actors that have spoken for or against the president are either praised or hated for it. Kathy Griffin portrayed a beheaded Trump and anyone associated with her has had to pull out endorsements or has had to speak against her.Where is the fine line between respectfully criticizing this nation’s president and disrespecting the same?
“We just got slammed,” the executive and artistic director of Shakespeare Dallas Raphael Parry told the Globe. “It’s pretty amazing the vitriol, the wishing we would die and our family would die. A whole lot of them say that we should burn in hell.” A pair of protesters interrupted Friday’s performance and were heard shouting “Stop the normalization of political violence against the right!” and “you are inciting terrorists.”
It is healthy to talk about and express an obvious anxiety that we as a nation are feeling.It is healthy to speak out against what of what is unjust and defend the defenseless. However, ridiculing a nation’s leader is distasteful and not helpful.Let us celebrate our similarities and respectfully speak out against what we might find to be injustice without adding fuel to the fire.
Quote excerpted from http://time.com/4823353/shakespeare-threats-julius-ceasar/
I must applaud the actions of an Austin,Texas Mayor that bashed a citizen’s sexist remarks.A man was angry that select theaters would only screen for women for the movie Wonder Women.I think his arguments are brilliant and i couldn’t have said it any better. Should he want an only men screening for Superman, i’d say go ahead,but that wouldn’t prove much of a point.Men didn’t have to fight for their rights,they just always had it. Wonder Woman has become a symbol of power in a country that at times even our leaders make us feel less than, not to mention many other countries were women are mutilated, raped, and abused with no one to speak out for them. I even understand the man’s claims that this is a sexist move, but he fails to understand the need for encouragement towards women.As a woman pursuing a career in STEM I have been discouraged to do so, and the world looks at us as the weaker sex.
This man claims as follow:“The theater that pandered to the sexism typical of women will, I hope, regret it’s decision,” the man wrote in a rant. He also threw out false claims, like “women pretend they do not know that only men serve in combat because they are content to have an easier ride” and “women gladly accept gold medals at the Olympics for coming in 10th and competing only against the second class of athletes. Name something invented by a woman!”
The letter-writer continued, “If Austin does not host a men-only counter event, I will never visit Austin and will welcome it’s [sic] [deterioration].”
This is an excerpt of the mayor’s response: “I am writing to alert you that your email account has been hacked by an unfortunate and unusually hostile individual,” the mayor wrote. “Please remedy your account’s security right away, lest this person’s uninformed and sexist rantings give you a bad name. After all, we men have to look out for each other!”
“Can you imagine if someone thought that you didn’t know women could serve in our combat units now without exclusion?” Adler continued. “What if someone thought you didn’t know that women invented medical syringes, life rafts, fire escapes, central and solar heating, a war-time communications system for radio-controlling torpedoes that laid the technological foundations for everything from Wi-Fi to GPS, and beer? And I hesitate to imagine how embarrassed you’d be if someone thought you were upset that a private business was realizing a business opportunity by reserving one screening this weekend for women to see a superhero movie.”
As an added stinger, Adler ended by calling the man’s views “an embarrassment to modernity, decency, and common sense.”
Instead, I’d encourage this man to call for unification and not to impose his views. He just proves exactly our point, that there are men out there with that mindset. I guess they never heard of Madam Curie, Dorothy Hodgkin, Mileva Einstein who contributed to research with her husband Albert Einstein, and Lise Meitner the woman who discovered nuclear fission with Otto Frisch among numerous others. He should go see “Hidden Figures’ instead of Wonder Woman and also look up the advances in science that were made thanks to women.