There's no games company quite as litigious as Nintendo. Whether the company is quashing another Metroid 2 remake, shutting down Pokemon Uranium, or even pushing Sony to remove Mario games from Dreams, it seems there's no fan project Nintendo won't kill. The question put to us by commenter OneBridgeEboo is why? Why does Nintendo work so hard to take down unauthorized fanworks when other companies such as Sega and Valve actively encourage similar projects? Understandably, the company has been hesitant to give a concrete explanation for this unpopular policy. Considering that these takedowns generate bad press for Nintendo, for the most part they simply prefer to shift attention away from what their lawyers are doing to shut down fanworks. The only Nintendo boss willing to speak frankly about fanworks and litigation was Satoru Iwata. In a shareholder meeting in 2010, he was specifically asked about Nintendo's policy regarding fanworks. According to Satoru, Nintendo struggles to know how far to go in attacking fanworks. Of course, we cannot say that we give tacit approval to any and all the activities which threaten our intellectual properties. But on the other hand, it would not be appropriate if we treated people who did something based on affection for Nintendo as criminals. We cannot say okay to any and all such activities, and at the same time, it is not feasible for us to immediately respond to each small issue of this nature every time. From Satoru's comment, it seems that there's some debate within Nintendo about what kind of fanworks they should allow. They want to encourage a certain amount of fan affection. Only works that threaten Nintendo a deemed worth pursuing. But then, based on the company's lengthy history of litigation, they consider an awful lot of fan projects to be a threat. Sometimes, it's not hard to see Nintendo's logic. Another Metroid 2 remake was famously taken down the year before Nintendo announced their own version of the game. Metroid, Samus Returns, Ditto Fullscreen Mario, a fan game that involved a custom level builder which was killed just months before Nintendo unveiled Super Mario Maker. It seems as if Nintendo will often allow smaller fanworks to fly under the radar unless they clash with an upcoming project. Nintendo is unwilling to let free games serve as competition, and as such, will search out and target all similar fan games to help clear the way for their official alternatives. It's also worth noting that American copyright law makes it very easy for Nintendo to do this. The company is not above taking people to court if they think it's worth their time, such as suing Jacob and Christian Matthias over their ROM piracy websites. The casual fans, though, there's an easier solution. Satoru Uwata spoke about not wanting to treat Nintendo fans as criminals. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act, or DMCA, makes it easy for the company to threaten fan creators without having to actually deal with the court case. The DMCA allows companies to issue takedown notices to anyone who uses the internet to share unlicensed copies of their work. It also allows companies to work with hosting sites and internet service providers to remove content if the intended recipient of a DMCA takedown notice is unwilling to comply. DMCA notices don't need to evolve a trial, and most hosting sites will comply with Nintendo. Thus, Nintendo can issue a takedown notice without having to get their hands dirty, whether or not a fan project is transformative enough to be legally in the clear. Plus, do you want to try and defend yourself against Nintendo's full legal team in court? For most fan creators, there's no real way to fight a DMCA. There is one other criteria that Satoru Uwata said that Nintendo considers when deciding how hard to come down on a fan work, he said. It is true that some expressions are detrimental enough to diminish the dignity of our intellectual properties, and others destroy our intellectual property's worldviews by connecting them with something not based on fact. This is tricky. Something that diminishes the dignity of Nintendo intellectual property could mean a poor quality game or fan work. It could also mean a parody piece, something which should be protected under fair use under American copyright law. Essentially, Satoru Uwata's remarks boil down to Nintendo takes down fan works if and when Nintendo feels like it. The problem with this is that Nintendo is not a single homogenous entity. One person within the company may have a different idea to someone else about what constitutes a threat to Mario's dignity. And so, Nintendo continues to come down hard on fan work seemingly at random, allowing some projects to flourish for years before eventually serving them a DMCA notice at the least convenient time. Technically, they're allowed to do this, even if they are overstepping their bounds on some aspects of copyright law in various parts of the world. Besides, for all that Nintendo fans complain, it's not like bad press from takedowns are hurting the company's bottom line. The moral of the story, depressingly, is that if you're rich enough and powerful enough, you can do whatever you want. Yay!


All right. Hey everybody, thanks very much for tuning in and watching the talk. I really appreciate the the invitation even even unfortunately, virtually, but it's nice to be able to just be able to talk with you guys. It's been a fantastic triptych. I'm sorry I couldn't make the discussion session last Friday. But I really have a high standard to live up to being in in the third position here is actually not the most desirable spot because the other talks have been so great so I'll hopefully live up to that live up to that high standard. If you don't know who I am. Let me just briefly introduce myself. I'm Charles Pence. I'm a philosopher and historian of biology for the last three years. I've been working here in Belgium at the University Catholic the Louvain few if you know the the Leuven schools. There's the there's K you live in the Dutch speaking institution. We are the Francophone institution. You say Louvain, both a little bit outside of Brussels. That's, that's enough about me. What am I going to, what am I going to talk to you about today so titled greatly exaggerated rumors of the death of biometry helping myself to some Mark Twain. But I think the way that I want to approach this talk is I want to start by developing as a foil, a sort of classic history of the field and I'm going to narrow down to a particular period I'm going to be really focusing in on like 1905 to 1920 or so. According to this classic history, there's really nothing interesting going on. Maybe there's one argument that's kind of exciting I'll talk about that in a second. But there's really not much going on between 1905 and 1920. And what I want to do is try to make trouble for this classic history I think there is actually some really cool stuff that's happening over this over this period. I want to show you what that cool stuff is is I want to turn to a more philosophy of science focused question what does it mean to make evolution, a chancey or statistical theory. And that's something I think I want to argue on which there is a lot of movement over precisely this period, in a way that merits I think more careful reconstruction and thought from sort of HPSE type approaches to to the development of evolution. And then I want to close by convincing you that this matters for anything but like my personal preoccupation with these collection of humans by showing you that there are real connections between the kind of work that I want to talk about over the course of this, this little chunk of time, and the modern synthesis and so if if these kinds of ideas if this kind of philosophical approach, sort of makes it into the early days of the modern synthesis, then it by extension, makes it into the early sort of contemporary evolutionary evolution so far as you're sort of in the line of transmission from from the history of biology straight through to today's to today's work. And so the take home that I really want to argue for is that this isn't a story of rupture and revolution, which is one of the things we learn from the classic history there's a real continuity of a really interesting philosophical approach. This underlies the sort of birth of the use of chance and the methods of statistics in evolutionary theory. Possible shameless plug I'm not sure if this actually counts as a shameless plug so this does come from a book project that is working titled pompous parade of arithmetic it's a quote from WFR Weldon reporting an insult that he received that at a scientific level if his work on statistics and evolution was a pompous parade of arithmetic. I say possible shameless plug because for the last like eight months this manuscript has been finished and sort of shuffling its way through manuscript purgatory trying to find a publisher. If you want a copy feel free to email me I'm it's not doing anybody any good sitting on my hard drive gathering virtual dust. So feel very free to drop me a line if if this kind of work interests you and you'd like to know more about the approach I'll say a little something more about some other connections to stuff that's going on in the book project to kind of situate this piece but this is one of the pieces this is sort of chapter five ish of that of that manuscript project. Okay, so there's a classic history that we get from people like will provide perhaps most prominently on the on the history of science side, but also from practitioners practitioners like the geneticists start event or punnett who make the same kind of make the same kinds of claims. We start with Darwin Darwin zone theory doesn't use chance or statistics very much at all the story here is a more complicated than that I have a whole chapter on it, Andre area is about to have an entire book on it. So the story here is is weird and and complex, but let's just let's just say for the sake of argument for the moment for the purposes of the classic history. Darwin's theory is pretty much non mathematical right there's not a formula to be found over the course of the origin of species there's not much to be found in the way of formulas in anything that Darwin writes. He quite simply it seems isn't very much attracted to the mathematical approach to the sciences. That changes right after Darwin with the advent of folks like these two gentlemen right here this is Carl Pearson on the left and Francis Galton on the right so operating sort of at Galtons impetus. We have a little school that develops the biometrical school Carl Pearson and wfr Weldon really pick up the banner from Galton as Galton steps aside just basically spent the last several decades of his life doing nothing that work is great and all according to the classic history, but after the rediscovery of Gregor Mendel's work. We basically toss it right we said all of that aside we the biometrical school is sort of falls into ill repute. Not in large in no small part because Carl Pearson is just an abrasive abrasive human being. And so we have to wait for the maturation of these kinds of methods of statistics or uses of concepts of chance to be sort of reinvented from the whole cloth by people like are a Fisher. I'm not so right JBS halting the sort of classic architects of the modern synthesis, but on the classic history. It's a reinvention story, right they are. They are starting over from scratch these these synthesis architect authors, there's really anything like a continuity here. And so this is can be framed as a sort of impact of a Mendelian Revolution, right you could say that there was this approach that was being developed slowly surely to doing evolutionary science over the course of the 1880s, 1890s 19 odds. Mendel lands like a bombshell in the middle of all of this, and that sort of resets the story. A brief aside that I should that I should make right here that I think is very important to underline. Of course, another thing that's very important that's happening during all of this history is that all of the people that I just mentioned save Darwin are the architects of eugenics as a movement. And I want to be very clear here, I am not a historian of eugenics eugenics, the history of eugenics is a very strong, a very well represented discipline there are really phenomenal people working in it, I'd be happy if if you're interested during the period to get some references about some of the authors that have really shaped my view about how to understand that side of the thought of these figures I'd be happy to share them. But I'm not going to get into that today that sort of touching the history of eugenics tends to be a morass and this isn't a eugenics book I don't I don't want this to be another sort of worse copy of the work of someone like Pauline who has resumed or who's done phenomenal work on the history of eugenics already. There's no need for me to write that book again badly. So with that with that very important, very important caveat. What's the problem with this history why don't I like it why do I feel that an important goal of this book is sort of revising revising this story. The whole answer to that question in some sense is the whole book so I go through the work of Darwin the work of Galton the entire trajectory of the Biometrical School, the bit today on the period between modern synthesis and I close with some exegesis pretty careful exegesis of our Fisher, the ways in which he builds on the the ingredients that came before but let me just point out two problems to weird, weird features that got me started thinking about how we might want to tell another story why telling another story might be a good idea. First of all, the following question was the triumph of Mendelism really that straightforward. Is it really the case that Mendel's paper is rediscovered in late 1900 widely disseminated over the course of 1901 is really the case that everyone drops everything and becomes Mendelians over the course of like 18 months and very later you hear this as a sort of very quick way of describing what what went on. This isn't true at all. The story is in fact much more complicated than this and I just want to point to two different ways of trying to think about that. First is a sort of analysis by by Kim it's a it's really a sociology of science analysis. The goal is to try to talk about how consensus forms in a community. What Kim really underlines that I think is absolutely brilliant there's there's problems with this book but I think it's a I think it's still required reading for anybody who's interested in in picking up this this period of the history of biology. What Kim really underlines is there's a huge role that's being played not just by these major figures, but by a whole host of smaller figures some of whom I'll talk about today. Work to sort of move the needle on public opinion about biometry and Mendelism, and that's a much slower, much murkier, more complicated process than we might have given it credit for and a second source that really makes this point well as well as as an article of Rachel Ankeny so you really cast doubt on whether one of the classic figures here that we talk about having been converted to Mendelism as someone who started working with the biometricians and becomes a full a full fledged Mendelian very quickly after Rachel I think very compellingly that this conversion metaphor just doesn't make sense the sociology the experiences of the science of the scientists what caused them to change their minds, how, why, when is way more complicated. These personal stories deserve to be analyzed in detail and when we do that, we're going to get a much more sort of reticulated confusing history that I think is worth spending our time trying to understand. So that's the first kind of question that got me made me begin to wonder whether or not there was another story that could get told here. The second question has to do with biometry itself. And so on the classic history right there's all this work that goes on between a basically roughly 1880 and 1905.  Right. There's a 25 year false start. Sturtevant says this very, very clearly. The personal quarrel here is talking about between William Bateson and WFR Weldon certainly delayed the utilization of powerful methods of statistics and much of genetics and so there's this sort of wistful nostalgia, like if only we had been able to recognize that we could just all get along. If only these people hadn't been such obnoxious characters on a personal level obsessed with fighting with each other. Now we would have been able to develop the modern synthesis maybe 2020 or 30 years earlier than it in fact arrived. And so there's this. There's this sense that that biometry was a waste of time. And so that that there's a lot of reasons personally that that that doesn't sit right with me not least, it seems as though, of course, it's possible that an entire branch of science like that could be ruled out as a waste of time that feels like a sort of reductive, much too quick way to try to understand the history of what's going on here. Secondly, something I've some things I've worked on in the past, well before I picked up the book project, the turnaround this question of their sophisticated philosophy of science that's taking place in the community from the 1880s to the to the late 1900s, really cool stuff they're thinking very very reflect a self reflectively about what it means to be introducing math to be introducing chance to be introducing randomness to be introducing statistics into do into the doing of evolution because they knew that this wasn't a thing that we had needed before classic morphological approaches to biology simply hadn't been mathematized yet. I think in the Q&A if you're interested about the ways in which Mendel is implicated here, there's actually there's some really neat things we could things we can threads we can pull on. But in general there's there's a really that they're thinking really interesting thoughts, but if it's all abandoned anyway why should I care about it, right why should I spend time trying to analyze, other than again because I'm like personally obsessed with what some people were doing because I find their work, their evolutionary theorizing really interesting. Why bother right why bother spending time. And I think what I want to do today is sort of bring out this philosophical work is trying to help you see what philosophy of science was going on in this period at this time at least briefly to briefly, but then show you how you see it being preserved in the community of practicing biologists straight through to the early days of the modern synthesis so far from being a sort of 20 year false start that it was thrown away by the following by the following work of the biological community. In fact, the kinds of issues that the biometricians were interested in raising are important to the community they're followed they're there they're picked up upon they are in the air to use a classic but very weasel history, history phrase. They're in the air during this period. And so there is sense in trying to understand how they were developed how they were preserved why they were preserved when they weren't preserved. Why weren't they preserved etc etc. This is a story that deserves to be told. So let's start by looking at what the late biometricians were doing. So this is wfr Weldon. I love showing this photo because he looks like he's dropped straight out of a Western movie from, you know, the spaghetti Western era or something. History does get one thing pretty much right. And that is, after Weldon dies, young, unexpectedly of an illness in 1906, April of 1906, the traditional biometrical school for all that there's a sort of dedicated cluster of people as Pearson Weldon but there's also loads of laboratory assistance calculators etc etc there was a whole whole structure here it span to universities. Weldon was at Oxford and Pearson was at University College London. So there was a there was a real institutional sort of force to this. It all goes away. It all it all it all disappears. And that's pretty much that's pretty much right. And a little bit when I talk about this this sort of the period between the death of Weldon and the early works of the early works of Fisher but for now let me just leave that there. So what I want to do then is look at the view of sort of late biometry the view in particular that Weldon was developing in his manuscripts and his notebooks over the course of 1905 and 1906. He was resembling to work on someone who worked themselves to death he quite literally he quite literally killed himself with with overwork. So here's my reconstruction. It takes two chapters of book to really make the pitch for this to really tease out, not only how this, how this approach comes out in the in the biometrical school but also the biometrical school itself of course changes radically as not only technical methods are developed more data becomes available but also the philosophical sort of underpinnings, the approach to thinking about why statistics and chance are interesting for evolution. That whole approach is radically modified over the course of the few decades of the biometrical school. I'm only going to be able to give you a tiny window into this I'm sort of giving you the finished product I'm giving you the theory that I think Weldon was trying to build when he died. And that's on the basis in particular of an entire book manuscript well, and a fragmentary book manuscript but a significant chunk of fragmentary book manuscript that he left behind at his death he was actually in the process of writing a textbook of his thoughts on everything from and very interesting. This is entirely unnecessary aside but I'm going to go here anyway. Interesting as well for thoughts about what was left in or left out of the modern synthesis Weldon's textbook includes reasoning thoughts about cellular biology thoughts about development thoughts about natural selection thoughts about statistics and mathematics for Weldon this is all a sort of unified picture. As regards evolution though evolution in the narrow sense. Let me let me try to let me try to reconstruct this. Well then was in search of a statistical theory, which could let us understand the action of natural selection across generations at the population level, and which could be harmonized with Mendelian inheritance, at least as a special case so back all four of the things in blue there I don't want to not just kind of believe that. So, statistics, why statistics, why were the methods of statistics so important. So a lot of things I could say here, but the thing I want to at least want to start by underlining is, there's too many counter examples to Mendelism that these scientists are viewing the people like Pearson and Weldon are viewing in the data that they have available to them about heredity and inheritance so here's an image from a 1902 paper that Weldon offers. These are this is actually a photographic plate it's reproduced at great expense in color in a journal. There's all kinds of correspondence about how they're spending a jillians of pounds on on getting this done. Well then wants to underline here we could just look at the top row right. Remember that if you're if your mental peas are either green or yellow. And so you're supposed to very easily be able to differentiate peas into the green category and the yellow category and Weldon says well hang on. Here's a bunch of peas and by the way he mentions in the journal article. I'll mail you my extras I have a lot of extras if anybody wants more peas just send me a letter and until I run out I'll send them to you for free. Here's a here's a spectrum ranging from really green to really yellow but through yellow we green and green yellow and all the colors in between. Well then reads a well then looks at a photograph like this and says there's just no way to think about character traits that doesn't involve statistical distribution. Everything comes in degrees, practically. There are a few exceptions things like eye color we know that but it to first order the case that matters is just is evenly distributed uniformly distributed statistically distributed characters, not necessarily even your uniformly strike that statistically distributed characters. Perhaps as a special case, real mentalism might happen in some characters things like I things like the color of eyes, but that's going to be this that's going to be the exception not the rule. Natural selection is always important, in part because the biometricians consider themselves to be sort of arch gradualist Darwinians. And so they're really interested in explaining how the mechanism of natural selection could be taken to work. I think part of the reason for this that that comes out over the over the course of of my book is is that Galton had made a mess of this in his work God's, God's approach to natural selection in particular is just it's it's confused and confusing it was confusing at the time to his to his colleagues. And so the biometricians really saw okay we gonna we need to make sense if we're really going to say that we're Darwinians we really need to make sense figure out how to make sense of, of natural selection. Next up ever a population level so evolution is always a distributional population phenomenon for the biometricians on the one hand this comes sort of naturally as a consequence of the fact that they're focused on distribution traits statistically distributed that that sort of follows follows directly, but also they saw here another weakness of the Mendelian approach that is to say you're too preoccupied with deriving stuff the biometricians would say from a single mating of two parents and what offspring even if in a Mendelian case you are indeed you're breeding many parents of course Mendel. Evidence is some sort of proto statistics in the way that he approaches the populations of peas. Setting aside a detailed mental analysis which is absolutely a different talk. The biometricians are still going to say you're worried about a sort of one generation mating event. And you're worried about a one generation mating event from one particular set of parents, you're not thinking about the populations a whole, and that's a that's a blind spot. But, and this I think it's very important because this is something that the classic history gets entirely wrong after about 1903 or 1904. There's no opposition to Mendelian inheritance as something that happens. Sometimes, not all the time, not perhaps even frequently, but mentalism they think is a special case of what's happening overall in the transmission of of characters. It's important to remember right for those of you who who have worked in later periods in the in the history of biology. At this point this is still Mendelism with complete dominance it's Mendelism with two alleles usually the rest of the complications to that come later so actually think it's not weird at all to look at that and say, yeah okay I mean maybe this is maybe this happens, but it's not going to happen that frequently. And so, well done well done writes to Pearson and you know three and says it's easy to say Mendelism does not happen for that it just takes right the right kind of statistical distribution you just have to show. You just have to show a non Mendelian ratio arising in the transmission of a character from from parent from parent generation to an offspring generation. It does happen it's harder every day. Right so how do we actually understand what's going on here if we're going to reject Mendelism as sort of a universal foundation for the inheritance and transmission characters. What are we going to build in its place. Okay, so that's the kind of theory that well done wanted and of course I'm not giving you the details about his proposal for it that would take another different 45 minute talk. Absolutely you can ask me in the Q&A I could talk about it for hours. So I'm not giving you the details what I'm giving you though is this this philosophical orientation right. This is what the biometricians thought it meant to say that we would have built a good approach a good theory that took account of the phenomena that they were important. These are the reasons for which they thought it was necessary, not just not just useful, but absolutely essential to make evolution of chancee statistical process. Okay, well done dies well done well done dies what happens after well done's death, the classic history has this is a period that sort of devoid of theoretical import. Maybe Provine talks about this there's a debate in here about continuous versus discontinuous natural selection so this is the sort of mutationist saltationist debate does evolution proceed by big steps or by small steps. That's, that's an interesting debate I could I could say something about it if people want me to but it's not really I don't, I don't see it as being as all encompassing as is often taken to be to be the case, historically, by by historic historiographically, I should say. Now, it is true. And this is why I think the big the popular history the the classic history became a classic. It is true of the two major players that everything dies and they quit talking to one another so this is Carl Pearson in I believe 1911. Now, Pearson basically moves on to only work on eugenics. He keeps getting funding for the eugenics laboratory he becomes the director of the Gaulton eugenics lab after Gaulton's death at at university college and so he basically transitions into full time full time eugenic and statistical work as a supplement. He doesn't like fighting about biology alone. He liked doing it when Weldon was around he actually writes letters to this effect. Now he likes doing it if he had Weldon with him. But he doesn't feel like he has the right kind of facility with biological details with biological knowledge the facts of the case to really be able to sort of stand in a debate at the Oxford Museum and fight with William Bates and he just doesn't like it. He just stops doing it. For his part William Bates and shifts into sort of full blown condescending dismissal toward anything having to do with mathematics. So Bates and puts in a book as early I think is 1909 something something to the effect of you know it's it's quite nice that I don't even have to waste my time talking to you about all of the nonsense that went around went along under the turn under the under the name of biology because nobody likes it anymore. So base so as far as these these big towering figures are concerned I think the classic history in some sense has it right right Bates and goes on to being a sort of incremental Mendelian developing his Mendelian perspective Pearson just leaves the field essentially stops there's an asterisk and a caveat here. I owe I owe a more nuanced reading of Pearson post 1906 to Mike but all to give a great talk about this at the last ish yeah that was the last ish. Yeah, but but but long story short, it still is I think generally true that these these towering figures are done. And so what I want to do now is look at the look at some of these people that we don't normally talk about and the argument that I want to make first I want to pick up some people who I think were combining some of these threads, not all of them not all five of these sort of desiderata for the final theory of evolution that the biometricians had been advancing, but that people were sort of keeping each of those threads alive over this kind of over this kind of interregnum period as I've as I've as I've called it. So first, as a tradition of using precisely the same kinds of statistical methods that biometry that Pearson had developed that Pearson had developed well than it picked up. Without grounding in any kind of statistical view of inheritance so not saying that these will sort of directly straightforwardly describe how characters are transmitted from parents offspring but still that the methods of statistics. Contra, for example, that quote from start event that I showed you earlier are being used everywhere so here's William Castle working with his I believe former graduate student Hansford Hansford McCurdy. It started William Castles a very important Harvard mammalian geneticist he's often described without further ado has just sort of oh yeah well he's a one of the he's an American Mendelian. But here's his major report from this period from this interregnum period with McCurdy on rodent coat genetics. And he's using Pearson Indian statistics so of course he says you know, I don't mind just giving a kind of informal gloss on frequency tables, but for those who place confidence in the more precise methods of statistical analysis devised by Pearson and others, it may be more satisfactory to treat the tables which have been constructed for the various groups of individuals as correlation tables and derive from them the constants which measure the variability of parents and children respectively in the several groups, and the degree of correlation between the two. So he's doing exactly the same kind of data analysis that Pearson would have done if you'd given Pearson these these these sets of rodent coat data. There's not any sense in in in anything as a slight dismissiveness just before this quote. There's not really a sense of kind of warfare going on here. There's really just yeah easy if you if you like these tools. There's a hint under there of course if you're competent to do that to handle the mathematics in these tools. Here's what here's what they would tell you. Here for William Johansson, whose treatise on evolution includes extensive methodological discussions of the use of statistics to analyze genetic data he lobbies in the introduction for more teaching of statistics to biologists. So really knowing really evaluating a theoretical proposal in evolution he writes is only possible however if the methods that have been or at least should have been followed in the research or given special consideration. An essential aspect of these methods is their mathematical character and can be described as applied mathematics familiarity with these methods is absolutely necessary for a real understanding from many hereditary questions. And so there's several chapters is a big chunk of you have Johansson's work dedicated to grinding out the statistical method. Of course, and just to underline the kind of personal disagreeableness here so Johansson at one point writes to Pearson and says hey, we should, you know, probably collaborate because I think your stuff is really good. And Pearson basically says I don't want to talk to you go away. Please leave me alone. So this, you know, Pearson is Pearson is a problematic figure. So next up, let's look at early approaches to mathematical inheritance. So trying to mathematicalize a sort of a Mendelian approach to inheritance that don't involve statistics. So this is Herbert Spencer Jennings a Johns Hopkins geneticist who pioneered some of these early some of these early mathematical methods that are that are at work in what I've kind of this sort of American school of doing this kind of longhand mathematics. They're grinding them out as algebraic recurrence equations. So this is a rule take the series of results as finished products and make an independent study of them endeavoring by processes of trial to fit them to some series or to some formula. It's here that there is scope for ingenuity, a given series of results may resist for weeks, the discovery of the law that unites them after a law or regular series subtane that fits the first five or six generations the laws applied to give the results for three or four generations These results are then tested by the actual detailed working out so actually drawing up symbolically like the gametes that would be in the population actually mating them out longhand to try to make sure that your formula gave you the answer that you wanted. And this is what Jennings did Jennings spent two or three years doing basically just doing this from like 1914 and 1916. It gives these awesomely unreadable papers. Where he just picks different ways that you might imagine a breeding experiment different patterns of mating, assortative or non assortative different initial populations, etc, etc, and crunches out these recurrence equations and then derives. Over here on the right you see one thing that he's interested in of course thinking about breeding experiments. He's interested in the steady state. So what are the long term steady state ratios between the different the different phenotypes and how many generations would it take for you to get there so here you've got me so you get to 74% homozygous dominant after 72 generations right that could be useful if you were trying to I don't know if cows or something and you wanted to know how long it might take you to get to 74% homozygous dominant in your cow pasture or what have you. So, cool as far as it goes. There's there's there's more. There's more to say about the story Rainer Robbins of Michigan mathematician who interestingly enough would go on to run the academic investment firm Tia who might hold your retirement depending on what university you work at is the first to start doing other mathematical induction based proofs here it seems pretty clear Jennings doesn't know how to sort of handle mathematical induction which is kind of the first a proof method that would seem like if you were looking at this from a perspective of contemporary mathematics you would think that's what you would be doing. But they're still painful. This is hard to do with algebraic tools. Edward Murray East. He worked also primarily at Harvard with the same departments castle East is important for my story here in being one of the many biologists to re derive the work of the Swedish botanist Nilsson a la, who demonstrated that large characters of independently assorting Mendelian characters could produce the appearance of statistical distribution so this is how to get a sort of statistically distributed character without moving to the population level without abandoning the kind of standard structure of idealism. So you're right here when one considers the difficulty of distinguishing the zygote setting various genetic formula even when dominance is comparatively perfect. You might expect the population of offspring individuals with almost continuous quantitative variation if dominance is imperfect or absent. This gives a clue to a Mendelian interpretation of the inheritance hitherto known as blended so he's talking here about imperfect dominance. And that's where about if there's a large number of Mendelian factors that will also produce the appearance of statistical distribution but this was clearly something that was very important to him. Emerson sorry East spends quite a bit of time thinking about how those kinds of characters might arise in part because he sees them. Emerson in East 1913 is a report on corn. He sees them in his experimental subjects so for exactly the same reasons that people like Pearson and Weldon were interested in. And last and perhaps most importantly this is a new you'll you'll start out as an assistant of Pearson's but he offers us an early attempt at a synthesis between biometry and Mendelism really actually picking up all five of those desiderata you'll has the same goals for an evolutionary theory that the late biometricians did. Again, I could spend an entire talk laying out you'll approach but let me just pick out a few quotes. So first he's reinterpreting Mendel as offering a sort of mechanism for the kinds of statistical and distributional facts that were being studied by biometry. The law of Mendel and his successors he writes lies not in discovering a phenomenon inconsistent with that law, the law of ancestral heredity one of the core mathematical pieces of biometry, but in showing the process consistent with it though neither suggested nor postulated by it might actually occur right so this is something that really could happen that could give rise to Mendelian results. And this should be what a synthesis, a new theory should offer us right away to show how we can get from the statistical constants describing a population to the causal influences at work on the population at issue right so what's required from the physical theory of heredity he says a bit later on is that it should assign a meaning to the variations in the constants that do occur, enabling one given the law of ancestral heredity for an organ to state the relative influences there on of the different agencies concern selection in all forms circumstance and so forth. Okay, so much for some particular instances of particular people keeping some of these biomedical claims in the air. That's fine as far as it goes for a few for a few people in particular but would people have really known about this work so that was the second the next question I wanted to tackle here. How would anybody were people actually reading this or were they being exposed to these ideas perhaps in a different way. I think the answer is yes. So, the way I want to show you that is to look at the textbook tradition so I did a deep dive on on three of the major topics that were at play in exactly these relevant years Robert Keith locks recent progress in the study of variation heredity and evolution that's a 1906 book. J Arthur Thompson's heredity from 1908 and Ed Edwin as good riches, the evolution of living organisms. And so I'm going to generalize for you because you know time time ticks by but but I want to bring out three big features. First, there's no evidence of open warfare between these traditions so here's a quote from good rich. These variations can often be accurately measured and the statistical study of variation begun by Katelyn Galton carried on by WFR Weldon K Pearson and others has yielded many important results. This is right after talking about some kinds, perhaps not all kinds but some kinds of biological variation there's nothing of the kind of condescending scorn of William Bates and anywhere in any of these three, these three textbooks. There's a general belief that we want a synthesis a synthesis would be good. So here's JR Thompson who writes developing a new vocabulary for picking up evolutionary questions is all the more justifiable so we cannot doubt that all the ordinary phenomena of a piece. Many of the ordinary modes will be embraced eventually in one general formula, probably some modification of Galton's law of ancestral inheritance and that others will be embraced in Mendelian formula. So, there's a little bit of a little bit of an equivocation here it's not super clear that this is what he means Thompson is not a good writer this book is actually painful. But let me assure you that what he means here is that we want a theory that can treat these two classes of phenomena as deriving from some kind of common foundation. And that's a thing that all three of these textbook authors make really clear over the course of their their discussion. There's caution against excess, and that's true. There's a to the extent that there's a sort of negative, negative side to this here's a quote from locks book he says you know some students of biometry however would go very much further than this. This is the best position that their own form of study is the only method by which any real advance in our understanding of the processes of evolution can be brought about. This opinion is based upon the assumption of which proof is wanting that new species have arisen exclusively through the accumulation by natural selection of variations of a strictly indefinite fluctuating or normal kind. Notably here he frames this though as sort of saying yeah the jury's out on whether or not gradual variation is actually produced all species. But perhaps with Bateson, Mendelism is showing us a way that larger variations could take place and perhaps create a species sort of from whole cloth much quicker. Okay, that's, that's what I want to do in terms of showing you that that the biomedical view stays very much in play over this period. Now I want to do even a little bit more precise digging and try to argue that it does actually show up in the architects of the modern synthesis so it gives us some common ground that played a real role in the construction of the modern synthesis. So Locke's book was really important. E.B. Wilson uses it to lecture at Columbia, it is by some anecdotal accounts the book that convinces H.J. Muller to study genetics. He's in the, he's in the lectures he's reading the book and he goes crazy. The rest of the Morgan group as well including Sturdivant Bridges definitely talk about it we have a we have a we have a testimony to that effect. He reads it during, reads it during graduate school. These are all figures that will go on to play crucial roles in the development of later 20th century biology. Goodrich is a really interesting character at Oxford, a crucial player in the sort of Oxford biological scene for decades is a great chapter. Another hat tip to Greg Radick who found this there's a chapter on zoology in morals books science at Oxford 1914 and 1939 that really goes into detail about Goodrich's lab and what Goodrich is up to. This connects him to Edie Poulton and the Huxleys so these are other you know very important figures over the course of this period in early genetics. This is published for years by James Mark Baldwin so there's American connections here as well that are kind of cool. Goodrich's textbook becomes recognized as an absolute shining exemplar of doing good pedagogical popularization of evolutionary theory. Thompson's does as well. This is talked about extensively and very clearly in Bowler's science for all it's about popularization of science during this period. Haldane so there's Haldane on the left in before the war. Haldane's only formal training in biology comes from attending Goodrich's lectures at Oxford that sees otherwise a mathematician. So he's he's getting his evolution from Goodrich are a Fisher and here we have some amazing detective work from and the Edwards who crawl through the library to find the copy of locks book in the library of the ox of the college at which Fisher did his undergraduate studies. It turns out there's some there's some hen scratch in the corner next to one of the diagrams that definitely is Fisher's because Fisher had really weird handwriting. So Fisher studies Bayton's textbook he studies Pearson's articles but he also and he also studies locks textbook so we know that there's a real a real connection between these folks. These books are these books are mattering these articles are mattering this stuff is is is absolutely feeding into the intellectual environment at work around around this time. There's a pragmatist connection here I'm just I'm just tossing this in for for Trevor. Visado argues that the American side of this and especially including Jennings and East but but several others right. So one thing you might notice I talked a lot about Harvard and Hopkins I also could have talked about Chicago. These are all major institutions where pragmatism is being developed and all of these biologists later on in their careers become super interested in social and ethical issues. There's a really interesting question about about whether or not they're sort of absorbing pragmatism in the in the coffee room. I would I want to pick that up someday I didn't have a chance to do it for this for this book project yet. So in short let me give you a couple concluding thoughts I'm a little bit over time already so let me let me try to wrap up fast. The story is a lot more complex than we thought right if we look for the elements of a late biomedical worldview, they absolutely persist through this period straight through this period from from 1905 to 1920. They absolutely influence the architects of the modern synthesis we know that they were exposed to all of this writing that I've that I've talked about today. And so there's there's not a sense in which biometry has died biometry has has sort of been metabolized in interesting kinds of ways been transmitted in interesting kinds of ways. But that's not to say that it's been sort of scoured from the earth over the course of this period. I think this narrative can serve some really good HPSC type goals history and philosophy goals. On the one hand it can sort of deemphasize the revolution of the early synthesis right I think it's good to not saddle people like Fisher and right important as they were. I talk about their papers in the book I think we have to understand them, but the idea that they sort of recreate evolution from 1918 to 1925 or so. I think that story doesn't hold up right there's a very nice sort of classic gradualist intellectual transmission story unfolding over this period. And so that's that that story of continuity I think is is important I think it can help us produce more grounded sort of more plausible, especially from a sociology of science perspective more plausible stories about what actually happens here. And three, this is the most philosophical point again to double back to one of the things that started me on this whole journey. I think it helps us focus on what it meant during this period to bring chance and statistics to evolution for each of these different authors and these are choices these are active choices that are being made. They're choosing very directly to engage with parts of this tradition to leave other parts aside. There's reasons. Institutional reasons model organism related reasons theoretical philosophical especially for are a Fisher who's personal personal philosophy of science is crazily interesting. I think it helps them to pick up those ingredients and run with them in different ways and I think that nuanced historical philosophical story is is one that that I'm really happy to have been able to engage with and at least in a tiny degree bring out for you guys here today. So, with that, thank you very much this is normally the part where I would ask you for questions but I will see you all very soon in the in the live zoom Q&A. So on any of this as well feel very free to drop me an email as I said this is a sort of live active project. I'm already revising this chapter after writing this talk because I thought of some better things to add and phrase differently. So thanks again very much for the opportunity and I'm really looking forward to talking with you guys here soon. Bye bye.


Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Read for LibriVox.org by Andrew Paul Trochan, 21st of January 2007, or Radio Romania It was brilliant, and the slightly toasted gyran gimble in the wave, all memes were the Borogovs, and the Momarass outgribe Beware the Jabberwock, my son, the jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the Jab-Jabberd, and shun the frumious pander snatch He took his warped password in hand, long time to make some foe he sought So rested he by the tom-tom tree, and stood a while in thought And as in Ophys' thought he stood, the Jabberwock, with eyes of flame, came whiffling through the toggy wood, and barbed as it came One, two, one, two, and through, and through, the warped blade went sniker-snack He left it dead, and with its head he went colomping back And as those slain the Jabberwock, come to my arms, my beamish boy, of raptious day, Colour the calay, he chortled in his joy, it was Brillig, and his life he towed to the gyre, and gimble in the vape, all memes were the Borogovs, and the Momarass outgribe This recording is in public domain Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Read for LibriVox.org by Alan Davis Drake It was Brillig, and the sliddy toads, did gyre and gimble in the vape, all memesy were the Borogovs, and the Momarass outgribe Beware the Jabberwock, my son, the jaws that bite, the claws that catch, beware the jub-jub bird, and shun, the frumius bander snatch He took his vorpal sword in hand, long time the maximum foe he sought, so rested he by the tum-tum tree, and stood a while in thought And as in a fish thought he stood, the Jabberwock with eyes of flame came woofing through the tolgy wood, and burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through the vorpal blade went snicker-snack He left it dead, and with its head he went glump-fing back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! Oh, frum-jullous day! Kalu-kale! he chortled in his joy Twas Brillig and the sliddy Toves did guire and gimble in the wave, all mimsy were the Borogovs, and the Momarass outgribe End of poem. This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll, led for LibriVox.org by Alan Drake Twas Brillig and the sliddy Toves did guire and gimble in the wave, all mimsy were the Borogovs, and the Momarass outgribe Beware the Jabberwock, my son, the jaws that bite, the claws that catch, beware the jab-jab-bird, and shun the frum-jullous band of snatch He took his vorpal sword in hand, long time the maximum foe he sought, so rested he by the tum-tum tree, and stood a while in thought And as in offish thought he stood, the Jabberwock, with eyes of flame, came whiffling through the toggy wood, and burbled as it came One, two, one, two, and through, and through, the vorpal blade went Snickersnack, he left it dead, and with its head he went the lump-thing back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy, oh frabulous day, ha-loo, ca-lay, he chortled in his joy Twas-brillig and the sliddy-toes did gire and gimble in the wave, all mimsy were the borogovs, and the Momarass outgribe End of poem. This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll, read for Librivox.org by Annie Coleman Twas-brillig and the sliddy-toes did gire and gimble in the wave, all mimsy were the borogovs, and the Momarass outgribe Beware the Jabberwock, my son, the jaws that bite, the claws that catch, beware the jub-jub bird, and shun the frumious bandersnatch He took his vorpal sword in hand, long time the manksam foe he sought, so rested he by the tum-tum tree, and stood awhile in thought And as in Uffish thought he stood the Jabberwock, with eyes of flame came whiffling through the tul-gee wood, and burpled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through the vorpal blade went snickersnack He left it dead, and with its head he went glum-thing back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! Oh, Frabjus-day! Kalu! Kale! he chortled in his joy Twas-brillig and the sliddy-toes did gire and gimble in the wave, all mimsy were the borogovs, and the Momarass outgribe End of poem This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll, read for Librabox.org by Uctra Twas-brillig and the sliddy-toes did gire and gimble in the wave, all mimsy were the borogovs, and the Momarass outgribe Beware the Jabberwock, my son, the jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the Jab-jab bird and shun, the frumiest band or snatch He took his vorpal sword in hand, long time the manxom foe he sought So rested he by the tum-tum tree, and stood a while and thought And as an afish thought he stood, the Jabberwock with eyes aflame Came whiffling through the tulji wood and burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through the vorpal blade went snicker-snack He left it dead, and with its head he went gallumping back And hest thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy Oh, frab just stay, ca-loo, ca-lay, he charled in his joy Twas-brillig and the sliddy-toes did gire and gimble in the wave All mimsy were the borogovs, and the Momarass outgribe Beware the Jabberwock, my son, the jaws that bite the claws that catch Beware the jib-jib bird and shun the frumiest band or snatch He took his vorpal sword in hand, long time the manxom foe he sought He took his vorpal sword in hand, long time the manxom foe he sought He took his vorpal sword in hand, long time the manxom foe he sought He took his vorpal sword in hand, long time the manxom foe he sought So rested he by the tum-tum tree, and stood a while in thought And as an oofish thought he stood, the Jabberwock with eyes of fling Came whiffling through the tology wood, and burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through the vorpal blade went snicker-snack He left it dead, and with its head he went gallumping back And howst thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy Oh, Frabjus Day, Calu Calay, he chortled in his joy T'was Brillig, and the slithy toves did gire and gimble in the wabe All mimsy were the borogoves, and the mom-raths outgrabe End of poem. This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky by Lois Carroll, read for Libberwock.org by Clare Cornelia T'was Brillig, and the slithy toves did gire and gimble in the wabe All mimsy were the borogoves, and the mom-raths outgrabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son, that draws it back to claws to catch Beware the jab-jab-bird, and the shum, the shum Beware the jab-jab-bird, and the shum, the frumius pander snatch He took his warple sword in hand, long time the manks on foe he sought So rested he by the tum-tum tree, and stood awhile in thought As in offish thought he stood, the Jabberwock, with the eyes of fame Came wiggling through the toledgy wood, and burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through the warple blade With sneaker's knacket left it dead, and with its head he went galloping back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock, come to my arms, my beamish boy O'frab to stake, aloo-kale, he trodled in his joy T'was Brillig and the slithy toves did gire and gimble in the wabe All mimsy were the borogoves, and the mom-raths outgrabe End of poem, this recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Read for LibriVox.org by Catherine Eastman Around Brillig, January 26, 2007 T'was Brillig and the slithy toves did gire and gimble in the wabe All mimsy were the borogoves, and the mom-raths outgrabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the Jab-jab-bird, and shun the frumia's bandersnatch He took his warple sword in hand, long time the manxome foe he sought So rested he by the tum-tum tree, and stood a while in thought And as in Uffish thought he stood, the Jabberwock with eyes of flame came Wiffling through the tulgee wood, and burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through the warple blade went Snickersnack! he left it dead, and with its head he went Glumping back And as though slain the Jabberwock Come to my arms, my beamish boy Oh, Frabj's day, Kalu, Kale, he shortled in his joy Twas-brillig, and the slithy-toes did gyre and gimble in the wabe All mimsy were the borogoves, and the mom-raths outgrabe End of poem. This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Read for LibriVox.org by Claire Gauget Twas-brillig and the slithy-toes did gyre and gimble in the wabe All mimsy were the borogoves, and the mom-raths outgrabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son, the jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the jub-jub bird, and shun the frumious bandersnatch He took his warple sword in hand, long time the mangsome foe he sought Surrested he by the tum-tum tree, and stood a while in thought And as an offish thought he stood, the Jabberwock with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the tuggly wood, and burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through the vorpal blade went snick-or-snack He left it dead, and with its head he went glumping back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy O frab-rish-day-clu-cule, he chortled in his joy Twas-brillig and the slithy-toes did gyre and gimble in the wabe All-mimsy were the borogoves, and the mom-raths outgrabe End of poem This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Read for LibriVox.org by Corrie Samuel in England 2007 Twas-brillig and the slithy-toes did gyre and gimble in the wabe All-mimsy were the borogoves, and the mom-raths outgrabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the jub-jub-bird and shun the frumious band-a-snatch He took his vorpal sword in hand Long time the manxome foe he sought So rested he by the tum-tum-tree And stood awhile in thought And as in Uffish thought he stood The Jabberwock with eyes of flame Wiffling through the tul-gee wood And burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through The vorpal blade went snick-a-snack He left it dead, and with its head He went gallump-ing back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock Come to my arms, my beamish boy Off-rab-just-day, collu-callay He chortled in his joy Twas-brillig and the slithy-toes did gyre and gimble In the wabe, all mimsy were the borrogoves And the moan-raths outgrabe End of poem. This recording is in the public domain. Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Read for LibriVox.org by David Barnes Twas-brillig and the slithy-toes Did gyre and gimble in the wabe All mimsy were the borrogoves And the moan-raths outgrabe Beware the Jabberwock my son The jaws that bite the claws that catch Beware the jub-jub bird And shun the furumious bandar snatch He took his vorpal sword in hand Long time the manksome foe he sought So rested he by the tum-tum tree And stood a while in thought And as in offish thought he stood The Jabberwock with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the tolgy wood And burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through The vorpal blade went snicker-snack He left it dead, and with its head He went glumping back And as thou slain the Jabberwock Come to my arms, my beamish boy Oh, Frabjust day, ca-loo, ca-lay He chortled in his joy Twas-brillig and the slithy-toes Did gyre and gimble in the wabe All mimsy were the borrogoves And the moan-raths outgrabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the jab-jab-bird and shun The Jabberwock with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the tolgy wood And as thou slain the Jabberwock Come to my arms, my beamish boy Oh, Frabjust day, ca-loo, ca-lay He chortled in his joy Beware the jab-jab-bird and shun The frummiest bander-snatch He took his vorpal sword in hand Long time the makesome foe he sought So rest he by the tum-tum tree And stood awhile in thought And as in offish thought he stood The Jabberwock with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the tolgy wood And burpled as it came One, two, one, two, and through and through The vorpal blade went snicker-snack He left it dead and with its head He went gallumpthing back And as thou slain the Jabberwock Come to my arms, my beamish boy Oh, Frabjust day, ca-loo, ca-lay He chortled in his joy Twas brilig and the slivy toves Did gyre and gimble in the wabe Oh, mimsy were the borough-goves And the mom-raths outgrabe This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Read for LibriVox.org by Beth Pete On 21 January 2007 at Reading, UK Twas brilig and the slivy toves Did gyre and gimble in the wabe Oh, mimsy were the borough-groves And the mom-raths outgrabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite the claws that catch Beware the Jab-jub-bird and shun The frumious bander-snatch He took his vorpal sword in hand Long time the maximum foe he sought So rested he by the tum-tum tree And stood a while in thought And as in Uffish thought he stood The Jabberwock with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the tullaby wood And burbled as it came One-two, one-two went through And through the vorpal blade Went snicker-snack He left it dead, and with its head And hast thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy Oh, fragile stay, collu collay He chortled in his joy Twas brilig and the slivy toves Did gyre and gimble in the wabe Oh, mimsy were the borough-groves And the mom-raths outgrabe End of poem This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky by Louis Carroll Read for LibriVox.org by Ezwa Twas brilig and the slivy toves Did gyre and gimble in the wabe Oh, mimsy were the borough-groves And the mom-raths outgrabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the Jab-Jab-bird And shall the freemius bend a snatch He took his vorpal sword in hand Long time the manxum fall he sought So rested he by the tom-tom tree And stood a while in thought And as in offish thought he stood The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame Came wiffling through the tolky-wood And burbled as it came One two, one two And threw and threw the vorpal blade When sneak a snack He left it dead And with its head he went glumping back And has thou slain the Jabberwock Come to my arms, my beamish bull Oh, fruptured snake, look a lay He chortled in his joy It was brilliant And the slighty-turfs The giant gimbal in the wabe All mimsy were the borough-groves And the mom-raths outgrabe End of poem This recording is in a public domain Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Read for libraryvox.org by Glenn Holstrom A.K.A. Smokestack Jones T'was brilliant And the slighty-turfs Did gyre and gimbal in the wabe All mimsy were the borough-groves And the mom-raths outgrabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The claws that bite, the jaws that catch Beware the jub-jub bird And shun the fru-mi-us bender snatch He took his vorpal sword in hand Long time the manxome foe he sought He rested by the tum-tum tree And stood a while in thought And as in offish thought He stood the Jabberwock with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the talji-wood And burbled as he came One, two, one, two, and through and through The vorpal blade went snicker-snack He left it dead, and with its head He went glumping back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock Come to my arms, my be-nish boy Oh, frappious day, kaloo-kalay! He chortled in his joy Twas-brilling, and the slide he toasted Gyre and gimbal in the wabe All mimsy were the borough-groves And the mom-raths outgrabe End of poem. This recording is in the public domain. Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Read for Librevox.org by Gemma Blythe Twas-brillig in the slide he totes Dead gyre and gimbal in the wabe All mimsy were the borough-groves And the mom-raths outgrabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the Jab-Jabber and shun The frumious band of snatch He took his vorpal sword and hand Long-time the mangsome bow he sought So rested he by the tum-dum tree And stood awhile in thought And as in ofish thought he stood The Jabberwock, with eyes of blame Game whiffling through the delgy wood And burbled as a game One-do, one-do, and through and through The vorpal blade went snicker-snack He left it dead and with its head He went glumping back And asked those lame the Jabberwock Come to my arms, my beamish boy Oh, Frabjus Day, collu collay He chortled in his joy Twas-brillig, and the sly the toves Did gyre and gimble in the wabe All mimsy were the borough-goves And the mum-raths outgrabe End of poem, this recording Is in the public domain Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Read for LibriVox.org by Julian Jameson Twas-brillig, and the sly the toves did Gyre and gimble in the wabe All mimsy were the borough-goves And the mum-raths outgrabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite The claws that catch Beware the jub-jub-bird And shun the frumius bander-snatch He took his vorpal sword in hand Long time the mangsome foe he sought So rested he by the tum-tum tree And stood awhile in thought And as in Uffish thought he stood The Jabberwock with eyes of flame Gim whiffling through the toll-gee-wood And burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through And through the vorpal blade Went snicker-snack He left it dead And with its head he went Glump-thing back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock Come to my arms, my beamish boy Oh, Frabjust day, calu-calay He chortled in his joy Twas brillig And the sly the toves Did Gire and Gimble in the wave All mimsy were the borogoves And the mom-raths outgrabe End of poem. This recording is in the public domain. Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Read for LibriVox.org by Justin Brett Twas brillig And the sly the toves Did Gire and Gimble in the wave All mimsy were the borogoves And the mom-raths outgrabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son, The jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the jab-jab bird And shun the fruminous bandage-snatch He took his vorpal sword in hand Long time the manxom foe he sought And stood a while in thought And as in Uffish thought he stood The Jabberwock with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the tallgy wood And burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through The vorpal blade went snicker-snack He left it dead, and with its head He went gallumpthing back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! Oh, Frabjust day! Caloo, calay, he chortled in his joy Twas brillig And the sly the toves Did Gire and Gimble in the wave All mimsy were the borogoves And the mom-raths outgrabe End of poem This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky By Lewis Carroll Read for LibriVox.org by Kristen Hughes Twas brillig And the sly the toves Did Gire and Gimble in the wave All mimsy were the borogoves And the mom-raths outgrabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the Jab-jab bird And shun the frumious Bandersnatch He took his Vorpal sword in hand Long time the mangsome foe he sought So rested he by the tum-tum tree And stood a while in thought And as in Uffish thought he stood The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the tul-gee wood And burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through The Vorpal blade went snick-a-snack He left it dead And with its head he went glum-fing back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock Come to my arms, my beamish boy O frabduous day, collu, collay He chortled in his joy T'was brillig, and the slithy toves Did gyre and gimble in the wabe All mimsy were the burrow-goves And the mum-raths outgrabe End of poem. This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Read for LibriVox.org by Kara Schellenberg T'was brillig, and the slithy toves Did gyre and gimble in the wabe All mimsy were the burrow-goves And the mum-raths outgrabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the jub-jub-bird and shun The frumious bandersnatch He took his Vorpal sword in hand Long time the manxome foe he sought So rested he by the tum-tum tree And stood a while in thought And as in Uffish thought he stood The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the tullgy wood And burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through The Vorpal blade went snickersnack He left it dead, and with its head He went gallumpfing back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy Oh, Frabjus Day, Kalu Kale He chortled in his joy T'was brillig, and the slithy toves Did gyre and gimble in the wabe All mimsy were the borogoves And the mom-raths outgrabe End of poem Read in Oceanside, California On January 26th, 2007 This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Read philiprevox.org by Lizzie Driver T'was brillig, and the slithy toves Did gyre and gimble in the wabe All mimsy were the borogoves And the mom-raths outgrabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the jab-jab-bird and shun The frumerous band of snatch He took his Vorpal sword in hand Long time the manx and foe he sought So rested he by the tum-tum tree And stood a while in thought And as in Uffish thought he stood The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the tolgy wood And burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through The Vorpal blade went snicker-snack He left it dead, and with its head He went glum-fing back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy O frub just day, collure, collay He chortled in his joy Twas Brillig and the slithy toves Did guire and gimble in the wabe All Memsy were the borough groves And the mom-raths outgrabe End of poem This recording is in the public domain All Memsy were the borough groves And the mom-raths outgrabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite the claws that catch Beware the jub-jub bird And shun the frumious bandersnatch He took his Vorpal sword in hand Long time the manxum foe he sought So rested he by the tum-tum tree And stood a while in thought And as in Uffish thought he stood The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the tolgy wood And burbled as it came One, two, one, two And through and through the Vorpal blade Went snick-a-snack He left it dead, and with its head He went gallump-ing back And as thou slain the Jabberwock Come to my arms, my beamish boy, O frabsher stay, collu collay He chortled in his joy Twas Brillig and the slithy toves Did guire and gimble in the wabe All Memsy were the borough groves And the momeraths outgrabe End of poem This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Read for Librebox.org by Missy Twas Brillig and the slithy toves Did guire and gimble in the wabe All Memsy were the borough groves And the momeraths outgrabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the jub-jub bird And shun the frumiest band or snatch He took his vorpal sword in hand Long time the mangsome foe he thought So rested he by the tum-tum tree And stood a while in thought And as in aphish thought he stood The Jabberwock with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the tulji wood And burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through The vorpal blade went snicker-snack He left it dead, and with its head He went glum-thing back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy Oh, Frabjus Day, cah-loo, cah-lay He choralled in his joy Twas Brillig and the slithy toves Did Geyer and Gimble in the wave Oh, Mimsy with a borigoves And the mom-raths outgrabe End of poem. This recording is in the public domain. Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the Jab-Job bird And shun the frumious bander-snatch He took his vorpal sword in hand Long time the mang-some foe he sought So rested he by the tum-tum tree And stood a while in thought And as in aphish thought he stood The Jabberwock with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the tulji wood And burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through The vorpal blade went snickersnack He left it dead, and with its head He went gallumping back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy Oh, Frabjus Day, cah-loo, cah-lay He choralled in his joy Twas Brillig and the slithy toves Did Geyer and Gimble in the wave All-mimsy were the borogoves And the mom-rats out-grabe End of poem This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky By Lewis Carroll Rep for Labourbox.org by Mark Smith Twas Brillig and the slithy toves Did Geyer and Gimble in the wave All-mimsy were the borogoves And the mom-rats out-grabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the Jab-Jab-Bird And shun the Frumius Bandersnatch He took his vorpal sword in hand Long time the Manksum foe he sought So rested he by the tum-tum tree And stood a while in thought And as he was walking He stood a while in thought And as in Uffish thought he stood The Jabberwock with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the tolgy-wood And purbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through The vorpal blade went Snickersnack He left it dead and with its head He went glumping back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock Come to my arms, my beamish boy O fratious day, ca-loo-cay He chortled in his joy Twas brillig, and the slithy toes Did guire and gimble in the wabe Hall-mimsy were the borogoves And the mom-rats out-grabe End of poem This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Recorded for LibriVox.org by Rachel Ellen Twas brillig, and the slithy toes Did guire and gimble in the wabe All-mimsy were the borogoves And the mom-rats out-grabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the jub-jub bird and shun The frumious bandersnatch He took his vorpal sword in hand Long time to make some foe, he sought So rested he by the tum-tum tree And stood a while in thought And as in Uffish thought he stood The Jabberwock with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the tolgy wood And burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through The vorpal blade went snickersnack He left it dead, and with its head He went glumping back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy Oh, frobjust day, kaloo-kalay! He chortled in his joy Twas-brillig and the slithy-toes Did gyre and gimble in the wave All-mimsy were the borogoves And the mom-rats out-grabe End of poem This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll For LibriVox.org Narrated by Sean McKinley Twas-brillig and the slithy-toes Did gyre and gimble in the wave All-mimsy were the borogoves And the mom-rats out-grabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the jub-jub bird And shun the frumius bander snatch He took his vorpal sword in hand Long time the menksome foe he sought So rested he by the tum-tum tree And stood awhile in thought And as an uffish thought he stood The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the tolgy wood And burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through The vorpal blade went snickersnack He left it dead, and with its head He went columping back Has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy Oh, Frabjus Day, Calu Calay He chordled in his joy Twas Brillig and the slithy toves Did Gair and Gimble in the wave All-mimsy were the borogoves And the mom-rats out-grabe End of poem This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Read for LibriVox.org by Sam Fould Twas Brillig and the slithy toves Did Gair and Gimble in the wave All-mimsy were the borogoves And the mom-rats out-grabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite the claws that catch Beware the jub-jub bird And shun the frumius bandersnatch He took his vorpal sword in hand Long time the manxum foe he sought So rested he by the tum-tum tree And stood a while in thought And as in Uffish thought he stood The Jabberwock with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the tulji-wood And burbled as it came One-two, one-two And through and through The vorpal blade went snicker-snack He left it dead, and with its head He went glumping back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy O-frabjus-day, kaloo-kalay He chortled in his joy Tours-brillag and the slivvy-toves Did Gair and Gimble in the wave All-mimsy were the borogoves And the mom-rats out-grabe End of poem This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Read for LibriVox.org by Sean McGaghey Tours-brillag and the slivvy-toves Did Gair and Gimble in the wave All-mimsy were the borogroves And the mom-rats out-grabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the jub-jub-bird And shun the frumius-bander-snatch He took his vorpal sword in hand Long-time the manksum-fo he sought So rested he by the tomb-tomb tree And stood a while in thought And as enoughish thought he stood The Jabberwock with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the tulji-wood And burbled as it came One-two, one-two And through and through The vorpal blade went snicker-snack He left it dead, and with its head He went glumping back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy O'frab just stay, kaloo-kalay He shouted in his joy Twas-brillig And the slithy-toes Did gyrene-gimbal in the wabe All-mimsy were the borogroves And the mom-raths out-grabe End of poem This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Read for LibriVox.org by Sean McGahey Twas-brillig And the slithy-toes Did gyrene-gimbal in the wabe All-mimsy were the borogroves And the mom-raths out-grabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the jub-jub-bird And shun the frumious bander-snatch He took his vorpal sword in hand Long time the manxome foe he sought So rested he by the tomb-tomb tree And stood a while in thought And as in aphish thought he stood The Jabberwock with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the tell-je-wood And burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through The vorpal blade went snicker-snack He left it dead and with its head He went glumping back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy O-frab-just-day-caloo-calay He circled in his joy Twas-brillig, and the slyly-toves Did gyre and gimbal in the wabe All-mimsy were the borogroves And the mom-raths out-grabe End of poem. This recording is in the public domain. Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Read for LibriVox.org by Ted D'Lorm Twas-brillig, and the slyly-toves Did gyre and gimbal in the wabe All-mimsy were the borogroves And mom-raths out-grabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the Jab-jab-bird And shun the frumious bander snatch He took his varple-sword in hand Long-time the mangsome foe he sought So rested he by the tum-tum tree And stood while in thought And as in offage thought he stood The Jabberwock with eyes of flame Came wiffling through the tolgy wood And burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through The opal-blade-wint-snicker-snack He left it dead, and with its head He went gallumping back And as thou slain the Jabberwock Come to my arms, my beamish boy O-frab-just-day-calu-cale He chortled in his joy Twas-brillig and the slyly-toves Did gyre and gimbal in the wabe All-mimsy were the borogroves And the mome wraths out-grabe End of poem This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Read for LibriVox.org by William Henseltine On January 25, 2007, in Cleveland, Tennessee Twas-brillig and the slyly-toves Did gyre and gimbal in the wabe All-mimsy were the borogroves And the mome wraths out-grabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite the claws that catch Beware the jub-jub-bird And shun the frumiest bend or snatch He took his warple sword in hand Long time the man some foe he sought So rested he by the tum-tum tree And stood a while in thought And as in a fish-thought he stood The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame Came wiffling through the tolgy wood And burbled as it came One, two, one, two, and through and through The warple blade went snickersnack He left it dead, and with its head He went glumping back And has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy O frabjous day, collu collay He shortled in his joy Twas brilig And the slivy toes did gyre And gimbal in the wabe All-mimsy were the borogroves And the mome wraths out-grabe End of poem This recording is in the public domain Jabberwocky By Lewis Carroll Read for LibriVox.org By William Thompson Twas brilig and the slivy toes Did gyre and gimbal in the wabe All-mimsy were the borogroves And the mome wraths out-grabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the jub-jub bird And shun the frumius bandosnatch He took his vorpal sword in hand Long time the mang-some foe he sought He rested he by the tum-tum tree And stood a while in thought And as in Uffish thought he stood The Jabberwock with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the tullgy wood And burbled as it came One-two, one-two, and through and through The vorpal blade went snicker-snack He left it dead, and with its head He went gallumpfing back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy O-frab-just day, kalu-kale He'd shortled in his joy Twas brilig and the slivy toes Did gyre and gimbal in the wabe All-mimsy were the borogroves And the mome wraths out-grabe End of poem This recording is in the public domain This is a LibriVox recording All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain For more information or to volunteer Please visit LibriVox.org This is Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll Twas brilig and the slivy toes Did gyre and gimbal in the wabe All-mimsy were the borogroves And the mome wraths out-grabe Beware the Jabberwock, my son The jaws that bite, the claws that catch Beware the jub-jub bird Through me is bend or snatch He took his vorpal sword in hand Long-time the man's own foe he sought So rested he by the tum-tum tree And stood awhile in thought And as in a fish-thought he stood The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame Came whiffling through the toldjewood And burbled as it came One-two, one-two And through and through the vorpal blade Went snick-or-snack, he left it dead And with its head he went glum-fing back And hast thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my be-mish-boy O-frab-just-ay-caloo-calay


Opposing the empire means widening our circles of compassion. And trying to get people to care about warmongering and imperialism? What we're really trying to do is get people to widen their circle of compassion to the furthest extent possible. To extend their care for the people around them to include caring about violence and abuse against people even on the other side of the world. Everyone cares about themselves. Everyone who isn't a malignant narcissist cares about their friends and immediate family. Once you start caring about your community, you're generally thought of as a decent person. And when you care about your whole country, you'll be regarded as compassionate and politically aware. Rarer than all these is having compassion for everyone in the world, and feeling the same about someone being killed by one of your country's soldiers in an impoverished country overseas, as you would about someone being killed by police brutality in your own neighborhood. Political awareness tends to stop far short of that point. It's not hard to get people to care about tyranny that affects them personally or affects other people in their country, but getting people to think about the victims of your government's starvation sanctions, drone bombs, or proxy warfare is difficult. American progressives will happily focus on government abuses happening in their own country, but try to get them to look at the victims of their government's abuses outside their borders, and most of them get a bit squirmy. This isn't just because humans are tribal animals who are more inclined to care about their own group of humans than another. It's also largely because the dominant information sources that Westerners look to for information about the world are propaganda outlets, which work to advance the information interests of the U.S. empire. This means people are kept generally unaware of the cruelty and tyranny of the empire overseas, with their political attention being directed toward inconsequential narrative fluff like Trump's mugshot. Luckily for us, fighting the propaganda machine and working to expand humanity's circle of compassion are not two separate tasks. Any effort to get people to pay attention to the abuses of Western foreign policy helps weaken public trust in the propaganda machine which lies about those abuses, and any effort to weaken public trust in the propaganda machine helps the effort to expand people's circle of compassion.  That's the price of becoming a truly conscious species, which is the only way we'll overcome our self-destructive tendencies enough to survive on this planet together. We've got to start caring about each other, and about all the other living creatures with whom we share this world. As Einstein wrote in a condolence letter toward the end of his life, A human being is a part of the whole, called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty. Nobody is able to achieve this completely, but the striving for such achievement is in itself a part of the liberation and a foundation for inner security.


Teachers from Rozo, Peers and Brainerd are all in the running for the 2017 Minnesota Teacher of the Year, which will be chosen from a field of 132 candidates. This year's program will name the 53rd Minnesota Teacher of the Year, celebrating the tradition of excellence in teaching in Minnesota. Candidates include Pre-Kindergarten through 12th grade and adult basic education teachers from public or private schools. Teachers from the Lakeland viewing area include Carla Johnson from Brainerd, Jessica Rockallaw of Peers, and Brenda Dahl of Rozo. The 2017 Minnesota Teacher of the Year will be announced Sunday, May 7th at the Mall of America in Bloomington, Bloomington, Minnesota. Now over the coming weeks a 25-member panel of community leaders will name a group of semifinalists and finalists. If you've enjoyed this segment of Lakeland News, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to Lakeland Public Television.


What's up everybody, Jason here for jaskiescasebrakes.com This pack filler here is gonna sell the hip raid goat break as we're giving away those six bots with this 2021 panini multi pack sell prism one pack break number 102 So again guys first we do the break randomize because we're names and teams it should be the hits out And at the end of the break we'll take all 30 cuz we're names top six get a spot in the goat break So here you go dice roll it and we got ourselves a one six and a one sorry seven times This is for the break only one two three four five six seven So James done a shamanic and again seven times one two three four five six So Lakers all righty guys quickly show you guys a quick glance at your teens, but no traits There you go silver nerlin's Noel and a Grant Riller little teaser there Charlotte Hornets James There you go there you go Now let's switch scenes and again, we will be given away the last six spots guys Dice roll it and we got a three and a two for five times top six get in guys one two three four and five oh Sean Maddock you are in Mark you are in Jeremy Mola you are in Kevin you are in James Connell and Leo congratulations boom Five times top six are in congratulations guys coming up next is the break itself. Good luck everybody


The Tiger, Financial News Network. Update. Good morning, folks. This is Steve Rhodes coming to you live from the shores of sunny and very pleasant Delray Beach, Florida. This is your 9 AM update. And currently, we have all the US equity futures trading to the downside. The Dow's up 170 points. The Nasdaq off 72. The S&P off 21. The E-Main and Russell down 18. That's leading the charts of the downside off nearly 1%. You've got gold off 8 bucks. Silver down 20 cents out here. Lightspeed Crude. She's trading out at 92.38. That's up by 2 bucks. And the 30-year treasury trading off 1.12, 30 seconds. Trading out at 1.53, 17. So tell you what we're going to do here first. We're going to switch from this slide, because we did record today's show between 8 and 9. We were focused on the 30-minute timeframe charts and the daily charts for the equity future contracts. The reason we began focusing on the 30-minute charts was because of the TD9 account bottoms that had formed. Those TD9 account bottoms, they formed uniformly for all four equity future contracts, but all price did was moved up to that red oscillator and change line. Now, you do that. That's a bearish signal. Says you're going to go back and test support. Well, in the case of the ES and the NQ, they closed below those TD9 counts. So that level of sport has failed. We have a different message here when we take a look at the YM, the Dow equity future contract, and the Russell 2000. At least at this moment, or at least the bar that closed at 9 o'clock, held those TD9 account bottoms. So we've got a message or a market that is a bit confused out here. Let's try to end the confusion. And the way we'll end the confusion is we'll switch over to the daily timeframe charts. So momentarily, what we'll have pop up on our screen, is that the screen? No, I think it's this one right here. There we go on the daily timeframe. The NQ is the one that's going to be the little booger out here. Yesterday, now I don't know where it's going to close, and the question is, is it going to hold 14484? That's the center of its bearish structure daily profile. Because price had closed above that for two consecutive sessions and then pulled back and found support there yesterday. If it does find support there again today, it's telling us that this move lower is just a counter-trend move. But if it remains below 14484, the signal is, and it's trading back inside the January 24th low, that you should see a B line for 1300. In the case of the S&P 500, the ES mini, that would be a B line to about 43.96 and inside the YM. That B line would take us to about 34.466. So that's what's going on in the markets. That's your Up to the Minute update out there. But stay tuned. You're going to get Up to the Minute updates all day long here at TFN. Tom, you'll grind with the Morning Market Kickoff is up next. Have a fantastic Friday, folks. Thanks so much for being here the entire week.