Vermont, State Facts – History ( Video

#Is #vermont #a #state #in #the #usa

Vermont, State Facts - History ( Video, REMMONT.COM

Is vermont a state in the usa


Governor: Phillip Scott, R (to Jan. 2019)

Lieut. Governor: David Zuckerman, P (to Jan. 2019)

Present constitution adopted: 1793

Motto: Vermont, Freedom and Unity

flower red clover (1894)
tree sugar maple (1949)
bird hermit thrush (1941)
animal Morgan horse (1961)
insect honeybee (1978)
song “These Green Mountains” (2000)

Origin of name: From the French “vert mont,” meaning “green mountain”

10 largest cities (2010 est.): Burlington, 42,417; Essex, 19,587; South Burlington, 17,993; Colchester 17,067; Rutland, 16,495; Bennington 15,764, Brattleboro 12,046; Milton, 10,352; Hartford, 9,952; Springfield, 9,078; Barre, 9,052; Williston, 8,698; Middlebury, 8,496

Geographic center: In Washington Co., 3 mi. E of Roxbury

Number of counties: 14

Largest county by population and area: Chittenden, 156,545 (2010); Windsor, 971 sq mi.

State forests: 300,000 ac.

2010 res >625,741 (49). Male: 308,206 (49.3%); Female: 317,535 (50.7%). White: 596,292 (95.3%); Black: 6,277 (1.0%); American Indian: 2,207 (0.4%); Asian: 7,947 (1.3%); Other race: 2,105 (0.3%); Two or more races: 10,753 (1.7%); Hispanic/Latino: 9,208 (1.5%). 2010 percent population 18 and over: 79.3; 65 and over: 14.6; median age: 41.5.

The Vermont region was explored and claimed for France by Samuel de Champlain in 1609, and the first French settlement was established at Fort Ste. Anne in 1666. The first English settlers moved into the area in 1724 and built Fort Dummer on the site of present-day Brattleboro. England gained control of the area in 1763 after the French and Indian Wars.

First organized to drive settlers from New York out of Vermont, the Green Mountain Boys, led by Ethan Allen, won fame by capturing Fort Ticonderoga from the British on May 10, 1775, in the early days of the Revolutionary War. In 1777 Vermont adopted its first constitution, abolishing slavery and providing for universal male suffrage without property qualifications.

Vermont leads the nation in the production of monument granite, marble, and maple products. It is also a leader in the production of talc. Vermont’s rugged, rocky terrain discourages extensive agricultural farming, but is well suited to raising fruit trees and to dairy farming.

Principal industrial products include electrical equipment, fabricated metal products, printing and publishing, and paper and allied products.

Tourism is a major industry in Vermont. Vermont’s many famous ski areas include Stowe, Killington, Mt. Snow, Okemo, Jay Peak, and Sugarbush. Hunting and fishing also attract many visitors to Vermont each year. Among the many points of interest are the Green Mountain National Forest, Bennington Battle Monument, the Calvin Coolidge Homestead at Plymouth, and the Marble Exhibit in Proctor.

Vermont has become a trailblazer for gay rights. In April 2009, Vermont became the fourth state to legalize gay marriage. It was the first state to legalize gay marriage by a legislature’s vote. The House and Senate voted to override Governor Jim Douglas’ veto. Prior to this vote, Vermont was the first state to legalize same-sex civil unions.



#Is alaska part of america * #Video

#Is #alaska #part #of #america

Is alaska part of america


Alaska’s First Retrofitted Virgin America Plane Is Now Flying

Passengers boarding their Alaska Airlines flight will soon notice the familiar appearance of the aircraft thanks to the retrofitting of their latest acquired airplanes. Alaska Airlines purchased Virgin America back in 2016, acquiring 73 Airbus aircraft in the deal. The jets have remained operational, but the company is now beginning to convert them to match the rest of their fleet.

Alaska Airlines aircraft in-flight via Alaska Airlines Media.

Retrofitting the Virgin Airplanes

The Virgin America brand was a direct reflection of its former owner, Richard Branson. The airline built its reputation off of the exotic interior designs of the aircraft. The cabins were illuminated with purple mood lighting, and each passenger had an entertainment screen located on their seatbacks. Even the Virgin Safety Video was newsworthy. Many of these features have remained on the aircraft during this early period of operation under the Alaska Airlines carrier.

The primary change that Alaska did to the planes was repainting the exteriors to match the rest of the fleet. The company is now redesigning the interiors to the acquired aircraft to match them as well. On most of the planes, you’ll still see remnants of the Virgin brand such as the mood lights and the large, white leather seats in first class. The first completed retrofitted A320 Virgin America plane is now operational, setting the example for the other planes.

Alaska Airlines cabin redesign via Alaska Airlines Media.

One of the most significant changes during remodeling is the seating configuration of the aircraft. Alaska has expanded its First Class and Premium Class sections, upgrading from 8 to 12 seats and 18 to 24 seats respectively. First Class seats will now have footrests, and all of the Premium Class seats have been relocated towards the front of the aircraft, as opposed to spaced throughout in Virgin’s configuration. Main-Class seating decreased from 129 to 114 seats to balance the changes.

Other changes include personal device streaming to replace entertainment screens. The mood lighting is also switched to Alaska blue. All of the seats will maintain power outlets and USB ports. In-flight Wi-Fi is also still available.

In addition to the Airbus A320 aircraft, Alaska Airlines will also be remodeling the acquired Airbus A321 and Boeing 737 fleet with similar features.

Why Retrofit the Aircraft?

Retrofitting the aircraft is a long process and huge investment for Alaska Airlines. The entire process is expected to be completed by the end of 2019. So why spend their resources remodeling so many of the aircraft to this extent?

Sure, Alaska could have settled with just changing the mood lights and seat colors, but there are more significant benefits to complete remodeling.

Alaska Airlines blue mood lighting in cabin via Alaska Airlines Media.

Alaska Airlines has a brand to maintain, and consistency across its entire fleet is expected to create the new, modern west coast vibe that they’re known for. Virgin is a standout brand in the airline industry to begin with so major changes were expected during the acquisition process.

Specific aircraft are also sometimes switched during operation, whether for repairs or delays, or other reasons. Re-configuring details such as seating arrangements will help avoid hassle and confusion if there is ever a need to substitute an aircraft for another.

Only one retrofitted Virgin American plane has taken flight under the Alaska brand while the remainders are currently being remodeled at Greenville-Spartanburg International Airport. Alaska Airlines distinguishes between the aircraft by name while booking online. The retrofitted airplanes are termed “Airbus A320,” but “Airbus Series” means you’ll have a chance to fly an aircraft with hints of Virgin.



#How far is arkansas from texas ^ #Video

#How #far #is #arkansas #from #texas

How far is arkansas from texas


Moretti, No. 14 Texas Tech edge Arkansas

LUBBOCK, Texas — Davide Moretti had 21 points, Jarrett Culver scored 12 of his 15 points in the second half, and No. 14 Texas Tech beat Arkansas 67-64 on Saturday night to stop a three-game slide.

Moretti’s two free throws with five seconds left sealed the SEC/Big 12 Challenge game for the Red Raiders (16-4) after their double-digit lead was trimmed to two with a minute left. They didn’t make another field goal after Norense Odiase’s dunk made it 60-48 with 7:41 left.

Arkansas (11-8) was down 65-62 when it turned it over with eight seconds remaining, leading to Moretti’s foul shots. Jalen Harris made a layup for the Razorbacks as time expired.

Daniel Gafford led Arkansas with 14 points after missing most of the first half in foul trouble. Harris and Mason Jones had 11 points apiece.

Matt Mooney scored 12 points for the Red Raiders, who shot 51 percent (22 of 43) from the field, including 10 for 19 from 3-point range.

Harris beat the halftime buzzer with a long running 3-pointer, lifting the Razorbacks to a 33-30 lead at the break. Culver tied it up right after halftime with one of his four 3s.

Texas Tech went ahead to stay when Mooney’s 3 made it 42-40 with 16:44 left, starting a 13-2 run. Culver’s 3-pointer gave Tech a 52-42 lead with 13 minutes left.

Arkansas: The Razorbacks whiffed on a chance to build momentum after topping Missouri three days earlier. They were hurt by a 4-for-19 performance from 3-point range.

Texas Tech: Ten days of struggling with three Big 12 losses in a row has been put to rest. Maybe as big as anything else, the Raiders found some offensive alternatives to Culver for the first time in a while. After 15 turnovers before halftime, they had only six in the second half.

Arkansas will try to win consecutive SEC games for the first time this season at home against Georgia on Tuesday night.

Texas Tech is home Monday night against TCU before going to No. 9 Kansas next Saturday.

Texas Tech 67, Arkansas 64 – Final

Davide Moretti led all scorers with 21 points and Jarrett Culver added 15 as Texas Tech edged Arkansas in Lubbock. The Red Raiders’ win gave the Big 12 the win in the inter-conference challenge.

Daniel Gafford led Arkansas with 14 points on 6/6 from the floor, Mason Jones added 11 before fouling out in the final minute and Jalen Harris scored 11 as well.

The Razorbacks battled back from a 12-point second-half deficit to pull within two points with 1:01 to play, but Texas Tech hit 3/4 free throws over the final 32 seconds to seal the win. Arkansas forced the Red Raiders into 21 turnovers, but 15 came in the first half.

Arkansas falls to 11-8 on the season with the loss, and Texas Tech moves to 16-4. The Razorback return to SEC play on Tuesday against Georgia, who beat Texas in Athens earlier today.

We will have more from tonight’s game later on

Texas Tech 65, Arkansas 62 – 6.3 seconds left

Arkansas couldn’t get anything working offensively out of the timeout. Keyshawn Embery-Simpson was swung the ball late in the shot clock, Culver tapped the ball away from him and Embery-Simpson was whistled for a kick ball and the Red Raiders have possession.

Texas Tech 65, Arkansas 62 – 31.7 seconds left

Keyshawn Embery-Simpson split two free throws with a minute left after forcing a Texas Tech turnover. Mason Jones then fouled Culver with one second left on the shot clock and fouled out. Looked like he tapped Culver on the elbow just enough to draw a whistle. Tough, tough call.

Culver split the free throws, which seems to be a theme tonight, and Arkansas called for time with 26 seconds to go down three.

Texas Tech 64, Arkansas 59 – 1:48 left

Back-to-back bad possessions for Arkansas offensively. Tech went zone and Jalen Harris took a pair of jumpers and missed both, then Mason Jones forced a long 3 and missed. Gafford split free throws on the ensuing possession. Tariq Owens has fouled out.

Texas Tech 62, Arkansas 58 – 3:49 left

The Razorbacks are giving tremendous effort defensively, and it’s turning into opportunistic offense. Arkansas is on a 6-0 run over the last 1:20 of the game and is right back in it after falling behind by as many as 12.

Reggie Chaney kicked off the run with a big tip-in at the rim, Gafford followed with a freakish euro-step type move in the lane and Mason Jones got a layup to go after Arkansas’ defense sped Culver into an ill-advised layup in transition.

We’ve got ourselves a ballgame again. This should be a really interesting final few minutes.

Texas Tech 60, Arkansas 48 – 7:27 left

Razorbacks pulled within six points following a split at the line from Desi Sills and a Gafford dunk, but Texas Tech responded with an 8-2 run to balloon its lead. The run began when Adrio Bailey tried to reverse the ball with a lazy pass and Culver picked it off and dunked it on the other end. Tech’s two forwards, not known for scoring, then added buckets around the rim.

Red Raiders are scoring at a 1.364 PPP rate in the second half – 13 scores on 22 possessions. Conversely, Arkansas has eight scores on 22 possessions.

Texas Tech 52, Arkansas 43 – 11:44 left

Daniel Gafford added a free throw between the timeouts. Desi Sills, who hasn’t made a 3-pointer since hitting three at Texas A&M in the SEC opener, missed a triple on one of Arkansas’ possessions, then drove baseline and drew a foul on the next. He will be at the line when play resumes.

Red Raiders have turned the ball over just once in eight-plus minutes in the second half, and for the game, Texas Tech is shooting 59 percent and 10/17 from 3-point range. Razorbacks have to come up with some timely turnovers sooner rather than later and do something to throw Moretti, Culver and Mooney out of their shooting rhythm.

Texas Tech 52, Arkansas 42 – 12:56 left

Things have gotten a bit out of hand for the Razorbacks over the last four minutes. Red Raiders are on a 13-2 run over the last 3:48 of the game and have scored seven straight in just 1:22.

Texas Tech is 8/11 from the floor and 5/7 from 3-point range since halftime. Culver has buried three 3s, and is now up to 12 points on the night. Davide Moretti has a game-high 17.

Arkansas has five players with at least five points, but no one in double figures. Someone is going to need to step up, knock down some big shots and take control of the offense soon or Tech could begin to pull away.

Texas Tech 42, Arkansas 40 – 15:11 left

Mason Jones has four points, including a 3-pointer, since halftime and Daniel Gafford threw down a dunk in transition off Jones’ assist. Arkansas has been resilient tonight offensively with its back against the wall.

In the first half, it was Davide Moretti leading the Red Raiders in scoring with 14. Since halftime, Matt Mooney has seven points on 3/4 shooting to go with a pair of assists. Jarrett Culver opened the second half with a corner 3 to essentially nullify Harris’ score before the break.

We’ve got a great game on our hands tonight. This one has been really interesting since tipoff.

Arkansas 33, Texas Tech 30 – Halftime

After Adrio Bailey forced Jarrett Culver into a really tough jumper in the closing seconds of the first half, Bailey rebounded and found Jalen Harris, who took a few dribbles and hit a very deep 3 at the buzzer to send the Razorbacks into the half ahead by a bucket.

This is Arkansas’ first halftime lead since its SEC opener at Texas A&M.

Harris scored a team-high nine points on a team-high nine shots. Bailey has seven big points and Isaiah Joe added five. Daniel Gafford sat the final 10-plus minutes of the first half. Arkansas outscored the Red Raiders by five in his seven minutes on the floor.

Texas Tech was severely plagued by turnovers in the first half. Its 15 miscues resulted in 17 Arkansas points. Jarrett Culver has just three points on 1/4 shooting, four assists and four turnovers. Starting guard Matt Mooney also has four turnovers. Davide Moretti scored a game-high 14 points in the first half.

Arkansas 28, Texas Tech 27 – 1:19 left first half

Isaiah Joe shot faked a defender into the fans sitting courtside and knocked down a long 2 to give Arkansas its first lead of the game. Texas Tech then turned the ball over for a 14th time, and Chris Beard called for time. He was rather upset after Culver’s pass was picked off.

Texas Tech 27, Arkansas 26 – 3:07 left first half

Razorbacks continuing to hang around, even as Gafford sits on the bench with two fouls. Gabe Osabuohien just got a rare 3-pointer to fall to pull Arkansas within one at the under-4 timeout. Arkansas forced a shot clock violation defensively on the Red Raiders’ last possession.

Texas Tech has turned the ball over 12 times tonight, and those miscues have turned into 13 points. Adrio Bailey is up to seven points already. That’s a team-high at this point. He’s playing with confidence, and it makes a world of difference with this team when he does.

Arkansas holding the Red Raiders to .931 points per possession right now. That will win you some games – if you can get some big scores.

Texas Tech 22, Arkansas 19 – 7:15 left first half

Razorbacks are shooting just 33 percent (7/21) to this point, but are very much in the game. Texas Tech has turned the ball over eight times, which is why despite hitting 8 of 13 shots, Arkansas is well within striking distance.

Davide Moretti leads all scorers with nine points. Jarrett Culver has only three points on 1/2 shooting and a pair of turnovers in 12 minutes. Adrio Bailey has been a big plus for Arkansas tonight. He has five points, including an early and-1 and a solid midrange jumper to pull Arkansas within 20-19. He will be at the line when play resumes.

Texas Tech 18, Arkansas 17 – 10:50 left first half

Daniel Gafford picked up his second foul and will likely sit the remainder of the half. Chaney checks in for him.

Texas Tech 17, Arkansas 14 – 11:23 left first half

Twelve of Arkansas’ 14 points so far are either off Texas Tech turnovers or second-chance buckets. That has to continue. Jalen Harris pulled the Razorbacks within three at the under-12 timeout with a nice layup in transition. Isaiah Joe should have been credited with an assist.

Reggie Chaney not off to a good start off the bench. He traveled on his first offensive touch, then fouled a 3-point shooter and Tech completed a four-point play. He was minus-6 in his two minutes on the floor. Let’s see if Mike Anderson sticks with him and goes to him again rather than planting him on the bench like he did against Florida.

Texas Tech 8, Arkansas 6 – 15:36 left first half

Arkansas is 3/9 from the floor and 0/4 from 3-point range, but has played fairly solid to start this one. Jalen Harris scored the Razorbacks’ first bucket on a steal, Daniel Gafford added a score following an Adrio Bailey missed jumper, and Keyshawn Embery-Simpson hit a right short-corner jumper.

Embery-Simpson got lost defensively on his first possession in the lineup, then answered with the aforementioned jumper and took a charge on Jarrett Culver right before the media timeout.

Culver has three points early on for the Red Raiders. He had been 3/21 on 3-pointers in Big 12 play this season, but buried his first look of the day. He also assisted on Brandone Francis’ layup. Texas Tech is 3/4 shooting but has turned the ball over four times.


Arkansas’ starting lineup: Jalen Harris, Isaiah Joe, Mason Jones, Adrio Bailey and Daniel Gafford.

Adrio Bailey will make his 17th start of the season today in Lubbock. He played only eight minutes and scored one point in Arkansas’ win against Missouri on Wednesday. Reggie Chaney will continue to come off the bench. Chaney averages 6.2 points, three rebounds, a block and 1.2 steals per game in SEC play when he doesn’t start.

Arkansas may have to play one of its most efficient offensive games of the season to beat the Red Raiders at home. The Razorbacks must create tempo with their defense much like they did Wednesday. Whenever Arkansas can score when Texas Tech’s stingy halfcourt defense isn’t set, it’s a plus.

Texas Tech’s starters: Matt Mooney, Jarrett Culver, Davide Moretti, Norense Odiase and Tariq Owens.

Mooney and Owens are Texas Tech’s premiere defenders, and both were named to the midseason Naismith Defense Player of the Year Award watch list this week. Owens is among the best shotblockers in the Big 12. Offensively, it starts with Culver, who leads the Red Raiders at nearly 19 points per game. Slowing his production would go a long way in the Razorbacks having a chance to steal a big win.



#Where is university of colorado ) #Video

#Where #is #university #of #colorado

Where is university of colorado


Colorado State University

1062 Campus Delivery, Fort Collins, CO 80523 | (970) 491-1101

School Details

Fort Collins, CO Map

2019 Quick Stats

  • In-state Tuition & Fees $11,982 (2018-19)
  • Out-of-state Tuition & Fees $29,884 (2018-19)
  • Room and Board $12,566 (2018-19)
  • Total Enrollment 33,237
  • Application Deadline Aug. 1

More from this School

My Fit Custom College Ranking

Does this school best fit your college needs? Receive a personalized ranking provided by U.S. News College Compass and find out. Try it now »

You’re not seeing all the data we have!

Colorado State University is a public institution that was founded in 1870. It has a total undergraduate enrollment of 25,903, its setting is city, and the campus size is 4,773 acres. It utilizes a semester-based academic calendar. Colorado State University’s ranking in the 2019 edition of Best Colleges is National Universities, 140. Its in-state tuition and fees are $11,982 (2018-19); out-of-state tuition and fees are $29,884 (2018-19).

Colorado State University is located in Fort Collins, a midsize city at the base of the Rocky Mountains, less than an hour north of Denver. Colorado State, also known as CSU, offers more than 150 degrees in eight colleges, with graduate programs in the schools of business, engineering and education and the renowned College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences. CSU is considered one of the leading research universities, and faculty and students work together to explore fields such as atmospheric science, infectious diseases, clean energy technologies and environmental science.

Outside the classroom and research lab, students can get involved with the more than 350 campus organizations, including about 35 fraternities and sororities. Student athletes can find sports at the recreational, club and varsity level, with the CSU mascot and colors reflecting the school’s past. CSU began as an agricultural school, so the sports teams were called the Aggies and their colors were green and gold to represent farming. The school held onto the colors, but the more than 15 varsity sports teams are now called the Rams. They compete in the NCAA Division I Mountain West Conference.

General Information

School Mission and Unique Qualities

“Inspired by its land-grant heritage, CSU is committed to excellence, setting the standard for public research universities in teaching, research, service and extension for the benefit of the citizens of Colorado, the United States and the world.” -CSU MissionFounded in 1870 and established as a land grant university, Colorado State is one of the premier institutions of higher learning in the United States, rooted in the three pillars of our mission: teaching, research and public service. CSU is a fully accredited public university recognized for its excellence in academic programs from the baccalaureate to the postgraduate level. In 2015 Colorado State became the first and only campus to earn the STARS Platinum rating for sustainability, providing a vivid example of commitment to our mission.Colorado State offers over 200 programs of study within eight colleges allowing you to shape a course of study that best meets your personal and professional goals. As a student at Colorado State, you will learn side-by-side with faculty mentors who are recognized internationally as leaders in their fields. The University emphasizes the importance of active learning providing opportunities for field experience, laboratory research, internships, and study abroad. The INTO CSU programs enhance opportunities for international students, bolstering Colorado State’s global presence.Our campus is located in the center of Fort Collins, a city of about 161,000 people. Fort Collins, which ranked 3rd in College Rankers “50 Best College Towns to Live in Forever”, provides a unique blend of big city advantages and small town friendliness. You’ll find everything you want – several shopping centers, hundreds of restaurants, movie complexes, a regional cultural center, natural areas, and miles of biking and hiking trails. Within minutes you can visit the world-famous Rocky Mountain National Park, the Poudre River, and Horsetooth Reservoir. These recreation areas, as well as many others close by, offer endless opportunities for outdoor activities such as skiing, snowboarding, hiking, camping, white-water rafting, and boating. And the region’s 300 days of sunshine a year enables you to take full advantage of our spectacular surroundings.

2019 Rankings

Colorado State University is ranked #140 in National Universities. Schools are ranked according to their performance across a set of widely accepted indicators of excellence.



#Where is iu $ #Video

#IU #Robert #H

Where is iu


IU Robert H. McKinney
School of Law

Summer Law & Leadership Academy

The application deadline is approaching for the Robert H. McKinney School of Law Summer Law and Leadership Academy, June 16-22, 2019!

Spring Events are in Bloom

The spring semester is a busy time at IU McKinney! Check out our many event offerings, including academic symposia and continuing legal education programs. These events keep Inlow Hall buzzing this time of year.

Connect to the State and the World

Over 11,000 IU McKinney alumni live and work across the U.S. and around the world at leading law firms, top companies, non-profit organizations and government or judicial positions.

Experiential Learning Opportunities

IU McKinney offers a unique array of live client clinics, externships in downtown Indianapolis and beyond, as well as simulation courses, and much, much more!

Customize Your Law Degree

IU McKinney offers joint degrees, Graduate Certificates, and online courses to help you focus on an area of expertise and to fit legal studies into your busy schedule.

Make Your IU McKinney Connection!

Find out more about McKinney by connecting with Admissions staff via our information request form. Also check out our viewbook!

The McKinney J.D.

Harness the power to transform lives and make a difference with a Doctor of Jurisprudence degree from IU McKinney.

Graduate Law Programs

McKinney offers two types of graduate law degrees: the Master of Laws (LL.M.) and the Doctor of Juridical Science (S.J.D.).

M.J. Information

Law intersects everything – no matter what career path you’re on, increase your professional potential with a Master of Jurisprudence.

Attend a J.D. Open House or Info Session

Attend an LL.M. Virtual Information Session

Request Info, Connect with IU McKinney!

Featured Videos

Students Talk About Health Law at IU McKinney

30 secs of Health Law

The Center for Intellectual Property Law and Innovation

30 secs of Intellectual Property Law

Environmental, Energy & Natural Resources Law

30 secs of Environmental Law

What IU McKinney Students Love About Indy

Darwinson Valdes & Jessica Mardini

Students Talk About Health Law at IU McKinney

The Center for Intellectual Property Law and Innovation

Environmental, Energy & Natural Resources Law

What IU McKinney Students Love About Indy

Join the U.S. Military Commission Observation Project

The IU McKinney Program in International Human Rights Law (PIHRL) has been granted “NGO Observer Status” by the Pentagon’s Guantanamo Bay Convening Authority. Find out how you can visit Guantanamo or Ft. Meade and watch the trials.

Apply for the Summer Law & Leadership Academy

The Summer Law & Leadership Academy is a one-week diversity initiative designed to introduce undergraduate students from historically underrepresented backgrounds to law school. This year’s application deadline is April 5, find out more!



#What time is it in iowa usa – #Video

#What #time #is #it #in #iowa #usa

What time is it in iowa usa


What time is it in iowa usa

At MUM, you connect each discipline with your own innermost self — pure consciousness. This direct experience makes learning much more relevant and satisfying. More >

Transcendental Meditation ® >

MUM students practice this effortless, evidence-based technique for enhancing creativity & learning ability, and reducing stress & anxiety.

Immersion in one course per month >

Our secret for learning more with less stress — the block system. Each month you’re fully immersed in just one course. No juggling 4-5 classes at once! More >

Natural health & wellness >

At MUM, self-care is a priority. You’ll learn highly effective tools — including yoga postures, ayurveda self-pulse and more — to promote a healthy lifestyle.

Innovative sustainability >

MUM is among America’s most green colleges, and the first to offer degree programs in Sustainable Living and Regenerative Organic Agriculture. More >

A campus culture with heart >

You’ll thrive in a mutually supportive community where everyone is committed to personal growth.

Professors who care >

With small, full-immersion classes, our professors give students lots of personal attention and support.

Organic vegetarian meals >

America’s first college to serve freshly-prepared organic vegetarian meals every day — locally sourced whenever possible.

Transcendental Meditation ® >

MUM students practice this effortless, evidence-based technique for enhancing creativity & learning ability, and reducing stress & anxiety.

Self knowledge & personal growth >

At MUM, you connect each discipline with your own innermost self — pure consciousness. This direct experience makes learning much more relevant and satisfying. More >

Immersion in one course per month >

Our secret for learning more with less stress — the block system. Each month you’re fully immersed in just one course. No juggling 4-5 classes at once! More >

A campus culture with heart >

You’ll thrive in a mutually supportive community where everyone is committed to personal growth.

Natural health & wellness >

At MUM, self-care is a priority. You’ll learn highly effective tools — including yoga postures, ayurveda self-pulse and more — to promote a healthy lifestyle.

Innovative sustainability >

MUM is among America’s most green colleges, and the first to offer degree programs in Sustainable Living and Regenerative Organic Agriculture. More >

Professors who care >

With small, full-immersion classes, our professors give students lots of personal attention and support.

Organic vegetarian meals >

America’s first college to serve freshly-prepared organic vegetarian meals every day — locally sourced whenever possible.


2018 Survey Results of
MUM Transfer Students Our alumni compare MUM with their previous college

(303 reviews)

Less stress & anxiety:

Friendly campus atmosphere:

Who are we?

We come from many places, cultures, and backgrounds, but share a strong common commitment to personal inner growth, wellness, sustainability, and positive values.

We support a progressive and inclusive campus culture that’s creative, dynamic, and focused on making the world a better, more peaceful place.



#What is the land area of colorado ( #Video

#What #is #the #land #area #of #colorado

What is the land area of colorado


Our Southern Colorado professionals
are the best in the Business

About Our Land for Sale

We have a wide variety of property listings, and varying landscapes to choose from. Whether you’re interested in log cabins, vacant land, or ranch properties, we can help you find the right property for you. Click here to check out our property listings.

Mountain Property

We have many beautiful mountain properties for sale. From quiet, remote locations where you can get away from it all to wonderful acreages close to town. Southern Colorado is full of wide-open spaces, beautiful National Parks and many different kinds of recreational activities. No matter what you are looking for in the perfect property, we will help you find it.

Ranch Property

Generations of ranchers have prospered on the Colorado prairies. With mild winters and summers, the climate is perfect for all kinds of livestock. We also have a wide selection of mountain ranch land with larger acreage, views, homes, water, and utilities. Click here to see our listings of Colorado ranch land for sale.

Survival Property

Colorado Homestead offers a range of properties in Colorado and beyond. Years of working in the real estate industry has given us the essential knowledge and experience when it comes to the market’s needs. Among the many demands we handle include bug out property for doomsday preppers. With our unique properties and surrounding landscape, we provide a safe and private retreat for your needs.

Log Cabins

We have listings for many different types of cabins. These cabins are beautiful, as are the mountain properties they are set on. If you are looking for a unique mountain home, cabin, hunting, or vacation property, click here for information on Colorado cabins.

Trinidad Colorado Real Estate

Our Trinidad Real Estate in Southern Colorado features a variety of quality homes. If you want the convenience of living near a town with all the charm of a budding artisan community you will want to check out all our Trinidad Colorado properties and surrounding areas.

Explore Our Website

Colorado mountain property! Let our website be your gateway to finding the perfect land and property for you! There is an abundance of information on our site, so be sure to take the time to look at our helpful tools, advice and help, and for many of the answers to your questions. Don’t leave without checking out our Colorado mountain property!

Signup to be notified when we add new properties to our site.

We respect your privacy. We do not sell or distribute your email to any third-parties. You may unsubscribe at any time.Aguilar Weather Forecast, CO (81020)

  • Facebook
  • Linkedin
  • Youtube



#Where is kansas university located ~ #Video

#Where #is #kansas #university #located

Where is kansas university located


School of Medicine

Office of Admissions, M1-103
UMKC School of Medicine
2411 Holmes
Kansas City, MO 64108
Phone: 816-235-1870
Fax: 816-235-6579
Email: [email protected]

General Information about the Program

The Master of Medical Science Physician Assistant Program is a seven-semester program based in the UMKC School of Medicine. Students enrolled in our program benefit from the extensive medical education resources offered by the School of Medicine, such as the Clinical Training Facility, Health Sciences library, and Medical Education Media Center.

Our program is located on the UMKC Hospital Hill campus in the heart of Kansas City. The UMKC School of Medicine is proud to be one of 10 neighboring partners of the UMKC Health Sciences District, a premier academic health district engaging in cutting-edge biomedical research and entrepreneurship, delivering state-of-the science health care, and educating the next generation of health care professionals. Our program’s unique location offers access to community health centers, academic medical affiliates, and surrounding rural locations, which provide students experiences in a wide variety of settings that serve diverse patient populations.

Vision Statement

The UMKC MMSPA Program will be a leader in PA education recognized by the quality of our graduates, community partnerships, and academic excellence.

Mission Statement

To educate competent, compassionate, and culturally-aware Physician Assistants who are prepared to meet the healthcare needs of our community. Graduates will advance the Physician Assistant profession through clinical excellence, service, and dedication to professional stewardship.

Accreditation Statement

The Accreditation Review Commission on Education for the Physician Assistant (ARC-PA) has granted Accreditation-Continued status to the University of Missouri Kansas City Physician Assistant Program sponsored by University of Missouri Kansas City. Accreditation-Continued is an accreditation status granted when a currently accredited program is in compliance with the ARC-PA Standards.

Accreditation remains in effect until the program closes or withdraws from the accreditation process or until accreditation is withdrawn for failure to comply with the Standards. The approximate date for the next validation review of the program by the ARC-PA will be September 2027. The review date is contingent upon continued compliance with the Accreditation Standards and ARC-PA policy.

Graduate Performance on Certification Exam

The Master of Medical Science Physician Assistant program graduates have performed well on the Physician Assistant National Certifying Exam (PANCE). The first-time PANCE pass rate for the program is 100%.



#Which country is colorado – #Video

#Which #country #is #colorado

Which country is colorado


Which country is colorado

Call Steve at (802) 345-4230

Colorado High Country Adventures is a professional elk hunting outfitter and guide service assisting hunters since 1994. We specialize in Colorado and Wyoming elk, antelope and mule deer hunts. Private ranch (guided only) and public land (guided or unguided) pack trips available. Whether you are looking for a remote, pack-in horse hunt from a tent camp, or you would enjoy the comfort of cabin accommodations with private land, we can offer you a hunt with high opportunity and excellent service that will meet your expectations.

We offer assistance and information on all aspects wilderness hunting and licensing. Links to our information as well as many of the DOW web sites can be found below. We hope you enjoy our web site and if you have a question and do not find the answer here please call or e-mail and we’ll get right back to you. Thank you.

Colorado Private Land Rifle Elk Hunts
High Country Remote Private Ranch Elk and Mule Deer
Flat Tops Wilderness Elk Hunts
Eastern Slope Private Ranch: Elk and Mule Deer
Wyoming: Private Ranch Hunting: elk, antelope, whitetail and mule deer

***2019 Colorado rifle and archery elk hunts available.

*** The non-resident application period is now closed for 2019. Over the counter licenses remain available in Colorado.

***. Please be aware there were several major changes to licensing in Colorado. Some of the important changes: updated fees, a new paperless system for all license applications, the need for all customers to have a unique email address and password to create an on-line profile and license fees are no longer due at the time you submit draw applications. The link at the bottom of the page will take you to the Colorado Division of Wildlife web site so you can review the most current information.

*** Our hunting includes both private land and high country, pack-in horse hunts. Bull elk rifle and archery OTC area hunts are available in Colorado. Horse-back day hunts available in the Flat Tops with or without lodging.

*** Wyoming: We hunt private land in Wyoming with high success rates on mature, trophy animals. Please see the Wyoming Game and Fish web site (link below) for details on licensing requirements.

*** Flat Tops Wilderness Summer Pack Trips and Trail Riding: We offer guests outstanding trail riding into the wilderness on a day basis, or we can arrange for progressive, overnight pack vacations. This is a great way to explore by horse-back, spending your time riding, fishing and relaxing.

*** Information on our hunts can be found by using the links below. Send email to [email protected] or call Steve at (802) 468-8869 for complete information. Good luck this year! Thank you.

“Keep your head high, eyes open and nose into the wind.”



Where is the university of texas located $ Video

#History #of #The #University #of #Texas #System, #University #of #Texas #System

Where is the university of texas located


History of The University of Texas System

“In a real sense there has been a University of Texas System since the beginning of The University of Texas on September 15, 1883. At that time the main university at Austin and the Medical Branch at Galveston were under the authority of the Board of Regents. Over the years, other branches and components were added to the system.” (Donald W. Whisenhunt, The Encyclopedia of Texas Colleges and Universities, 1986)

“The University of Texas System was established gradually.” (Margaret C. Berry, The University of Texas: A Pictorial Account of its First Century, 1980)

The Texas Constitution was adopted. Article VII provided that “The Legislature shall as soon as practicable, establish, organize, and provide for the maintenance, support, and direction of a university of the first class, to be located by a vote of the people of this State, and styled “The University of Texas.” The Legislature vested the governance of the University in the Board of Regents of The University of Texas.

Enabling Legislation was passed. “Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Texas, that there be established in this State, at such locality as may be determined by a vote of the people, an institution of learning, which shall be known as The University of Texas. The medical department of the university shall be located, if so determined by a vote of the people, at a different point from the university proper, and as a branch thereof; and the question of the location of said department shall be submitted to the people and voted separately from the propositions for the location of the main university.

By vote of the people on September 6, the Main University was selected to be located in Austin and the Medical Branch in Galveston.

Cornerstone for Old Main laid. (Old Main Building at the medical branch at Galveston.)

Classes begin at UT Austin on September 15, with 221 students (163 men, 58 women) and eight male faculty.

First commencement is held in Austin on June 14.

The Galveston medical branch campus opens.

The institution now known as UT El Paso is created as the Texas School of Mines and Metallurgy and became a part of the UT System in 1919. (In 1949, its name was changed to Texas Western College, which remained until 1967 when its name was again changed to The University of Texas at El Paso.)

Santa Rita No. 1 strikes oil. The first oil royalty payment to the Permanent University Fund was made on August 24 in the amount of $516.53.

The Texas State Cancer Hospital (now known as UT M.D. Anderson Cancer Center) is created by the 47th Legislature under the authority of the Board of Regents.

The UT Dental Branch in Houston (now part of the UT Health Science Center – Houston) comes under the authority of the Board of Regents.

The University of Texas Postgraduate School of Medicine was established in Houston. (Now part of the UT Health Science Center – Houston)

The institution now known as The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center accepted for administration by the Board of Regents.

The Office of Chancellor is created by the Board of Regents. James Pinckney Hart is appointed chancellor.

Logan Wilson is named acting chancellor. (Wilson also serves as president of UT Austin from 1953 to 1960.)

Later that year, the Regents abolish the position of chancellor.

The Legislature creates the South Texas Medical School (now part of the UT Health Science Center – San Antonio).

The Regents re-establish the position of chancellor. Logan Wilson (still president of UT Austin) is reappointed as chancellor.

Harry H. Ransom is named chancellor. He serves until 1970. He also holds the office of president of UT Austin from 1960 to 1961. From 1963 to 1967 there is no office of president at UT Austin. As chancellor during these years, Ransom is the CAO of the Austin campus.

The Legislature creates the UT Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences at Houston (now part of the UT Health Science Center – Houston).

The institution now known as UT Arlington is transferred to UT from the Texas A&M system.

The Legislature changes the names of institutions within the UT System, giving them uniform designations.

The Legislature creates the UT School of Public Health in Houston (now part of the UT Health Science Center – Houston).

The Legislature creates the UT Medical School at Houston (now part of the UT Health Science Center – Houston).

The Legislature creates the UT Dental School at San Antonio (now part of the UT Health Science Center – San Antonio).

UT Dallas is established by the Legislature.

UT Permian Basin is established by the Legislature.

UT San Antonio is established by the Legislature.

Charles A. LeMaistre is appointed chancellor. He serves until 1978.

The Board of Regents reorganizes the biomedical units in Dallas, Galveston, Houston and San Antonio into four health science centers.

The UT Health Science Center at Houston is established by the Board of Regents through consolidation of several other UT entities.

The UT Health Science Center at San Antonio is established by the Board of Regents through consolidation of several other entities.

The UT Health Center at Tyler joins the UT System.

E. Donald Walker is named chancellor. He serves until 1984.

The institution now known as UT Tyler joins the UT System.

Voters approve a constitutional amendment extending use of Permanent University Fund Bonds to all institutions then in the UT or A&M systems.

Hans Mark is named chancellor. He serves until 1992.

UT Pan American joins the UT System.

UT Brownsville is established as a separate UT institution.

William H. Cunningham is named chancellor. He serves until 2000.

Voters approve a constitutional amendment that allows the modernization of the investment and spending policies of the Permanent University Fund.

R.D. Burck is named interim chancellor on June 1 and named permanent chancellor on December 6.

R.D. Burck announces that he intends to step down as Chancellor by Sept. 1, 2003, as part of an orderly plan for leadership succession.

Mark G. Yudof is named chancellor on June 21. He serves until 2008.

Kenneth I. Shine is named interim Chancellor on April 1.

Francisco G. Cigarroa is named chancellor on January 9.

Medical Schools established at UT Austin and in South Texas (UT Rio Grande Valley).

UT Rio Grande Valley authorized by Texas Legislature (Senate Bill 24).

Board approves appointment of Admiral William H. McRaven as next chancellor.

William H. McRaven begins his tenure as chancellor on January 5, 2015.

Classes begin at UT Rio Grande Valley on August 31 with more than 29,000 students. Enrollment surpasses projections by more than 1,000. UT Pan American closes and UT Brownsville continues to serve in an administration function for the upcoming year.

Larry Faulkner serves as Chancellor ad interim from June 1 through September 15.



#Is ohio in america ^ #Video

#Is #ohio #in #america

Is ohio in america


Is ohio in america

Aerial LiDAR view of site with (partially destroyed) prehistoric linear earthwork, showing artificial terracing on opposite (east) side of hill.

(For a compilation of a few artifact photos from this website see )

Initially recognized only as crude stone tools, but subsequently as much more, the artifacts have appeared in large quantity at depths of from near the surface to well below, and the surface of this large site has only been scratched. At this time, several doctorate-level professionals – geologists, petrologists, anthropologists, a forensic biologist, and a few archaeologists – have personally identified human agency in both lithic and organic material. The Ohio Historic Preservation Office has included the site (#33GU218) in the Ohio Archaeological Inventory, recognizing evidence of prehistoric habitation. Ohio’s state archaeologists have, however, indicated no interest in further inquiry, on the unfounded assumption that early Native Americans would have left nothing significant in this unglaciated and topographically rugged area (a bit too far from Columbus, perhaps?). This author has been proceeding largely on his own with occasional assistance and advice from professional archaeologists, anthropologists, and physical scientists including geologists and petrologists with the training and experience required to determine whether or not a given rock could have acquired its current form entirely through natural processes.

Side Project: Scandinavian artifacts (Homo Sapiens or Neanderthal?) from deep within glacial till in northern Germany

Click center image for details.

Please click on the image to see it full size (scroll as needed).

Judging from ceramic material and a long, straight, and symmetrical earthwork oriented to true north-south, it appears that the upper artifact layer at this site may date from the Early and/or Middle Woodland Period. Temporally/culturally diagnostic flint projectile points from the vicinity of the site indicate a human presence dating from the Early Archaic through the Middle Woodland Period, or roughly 10,000 – 1500 years BP.

Click image for details.

More important by far than just this particular site, the finds here have led to the discovery of a simple and consistent zoo-anthropomorphic iconography apparently routinely and usually perfunctorily incorporated into lithic and other artifact material over many thousands of years and across widely separated areas of this planet. This author has tentatively (and presump- tuously?) dubbed it “Primal Imagery”. (An overdue attempt at concisely deconstructing it may appear on this sadly disjointed website before too long. Meantime, click here to see the existing clumsy start at this.) Most commonly, the imagery is carved and/or ground into pebble- or cobble-sized stone tools. Since this website was launched in 2003 and widely viewed, these are becoming more extensively recognized, typically characterized (often rather misleadingly?) as “portable rock art”. And lately there has been quite a proliferation of new websites and blogs on this subject, at widely varying levels of plausibility and scientific validation, unfortunately at an increasingly low and embarrassing level. (Among the more cringeworthy of the recently appearing knockoff websites are the random gravel display “” and the semiliterate “”.)

In the nineteenth century Jacques Boucher de Crиvecњur de Perthes, an amateur archaeologist in France, conclusively demonstrated with the aid of professional geologists (to the dismay and anger of the archaeological establishment) that stone tools in that part of the world dated from the Ice Age, a now universally accepted fact in the archaeological community. Subsequent to this author’s recognition of the iconographic artifacts at this Ohio site, he became aware that Boucher de Perthes had also noted that many of the French artifacts in direct context with the tools incorporated simple anthropomorphic and zoomorphic imagery, calling these “Pierres Figures”, or Figure Stones”. This latter observation has since been almost completely ignored, and it remains pretty much de rigueur among modern archaeologists to summarily dismiss the many discoveries of these by amateur archaeologists and casual collectors despite their obvious imagery and physical evidence of human workmanship. The advent of the internet has recently allowed a worldwide exchange of images and data that clearly validate the presence of such artifact material and the consistency of its essential iconographic components and subcomponents. This author has adopted and applied Boucher de Perthes’ term “Figure Stones” in presenting his own and others’ finds for several years now, and, along with “portable rock art” , this seems to have become more or less the standard designation among those now pursuing this line of inquiry.

A big and obvious Figure Stone, a verified case in point:

Click image for published article with more photos.

Another rejected but professionally authenticated zoomorphic artifact, a bifacially edged side scraper skillfully crafted as a bird figure.

Click image for an article on this piece published in Ohio Archaeologist, fall 2013.

Some of the Artifacts from 33GU218 – click images to expand:

Equid? Flint Figures (often manuports) Yellow Ochre Figures

Human Human Human, Male and Female Petroglyphs

(Or click on the image above.)

The age of most of the artifacts at this site has not yet been conclusively determined, but their quantity, consistency of form, distinctive carving marks, and representation of bird and shaman-like hybrid bird-human images indicate that they are of human manufacture. Several spirally fractured deer bones have been unearthed, indicating human activity. Human remains in the form of hair, usually dark brown when not faded, have appeared in direct context with the lithic artifacts. Some of the hairs were submitted to the Center for the Study of the First Americans, where in November 2003 the late Dr. Robson Bonnichsen identified them as human. Genetics researcher Dr. Tom Gilbert attempted mitochondrial DNA analysis of other hairs from the site, but unfortunately none of their DNA had survived, despite their outward appearance of being in good condition. It is hoped that hairs might appear that have been adequately protected from moisture, and freezing and thawing. One of the hairs remaining after the necessarily destructive attempt at DNA extraction has been verified by Dr. Scott Moody, professor of forensic biology at Ohio University, as being obviously human and apparently quite old. Dr. Moody has also identified dyed plant fibers in context with the artifact material.

(Click images below for details:)

Whatever the age of this material might prove to be, it seems to point to an important if unrecognized anthropological and cultural phenomenon – the almost ubiquitous shaman-like bird-human figure characterizing the “rock art” at this site, remarkably consistent in its arrangement of readily identifiable sub- components. Strangely, this figure incorporates iconography quite evident in modern but traditional Inuit/Yupik art, and also present in European Paleolithic artifacts, as well as in Australian material of unknown age, apparently a Primal Image. (The presence of “portable rock art” or “mobile rock art” has long been recognized in European artifact material, and is starting to be seen for what it is at sites in North America. At this site and others, it is often incorporated into simple lithic tools.)

Bird-Human Figures – Click Photo for Explanation.

From the huge quantity of lithic artifact material, it seems that this site, with its commanding view, ample water supply, and terraced eastern (sheltered) slope, may have seen more than just part-time habitation. Initially, the possibility of a “pre-Clovis” presence came to mind since while none of the popularly recog- nized “Indian” spear heads and projectile points had appeared, many of the human-modified stones of local and non-local lithology were professionally recognized as in fact being artifactual, with others having a very high proba- bility of being so. But subsequently, similar artifact material has appeared at other sites in direct context with points, blades, etc. temporally diagnostic of time periods as recent as Middle Woodland (roughly 100 BC to 500 AD). Nonetheless, the distinct similarity of the artifact material here to that at the Gault (Clovis) and Topper (pre-Clovis) sites leaves open the at least hypo- thetical possibility that the more deeply buried artifacts (apparently at at least a meter or so beneath the terrain surface) might predate the Clovis time frame. If not temporally “pre-Clovis”, they certainly are technologically, and may represent the lithic tools from which Clovis and later technology evolved. And tools of this kind seem to have coexisted for a long time with the currently more recognized and familiar flint implements, serving when and where these were not readily available. At this point, the actual age of this officially unrecognized yet professionally verified artifact material is of less interest than the simple fact that it is present, but contextual evidence strongly indicates that in the upper strata it is Early to Middle Woodland in age, or very roughly two thousand years old.

A large linear earthwork is present at the site, a symmetrical rounded wall roughly 6 m (20′) high at its highest point and several hundred meters in length. It is quite straight and oriented to true north-south. Such astronomical orien- tation is characteristic of Late Archaic through Middle Woodland earthworks, as is the overall morphology of this structure, which includes a shallow trench along its east side (uphill toward the top of the knob, which affords a long view to the horizon in all directions).

Below, the opposite (west) end of the gateway with large and somewhat zoomorphic sandstone slabs possibly collapsed from an original structure flanking the upward path. (Note that nothing like this is present on the uphill [east] end.)

So far, aside from the earthwork, the artifact at this site that is, in terms of currently recognized evidence, best temporally/culturally diagnostic is a ceramic sherd from the uppermost artifact layer, about 12 cm (5″) down at the top of the hill. This is an apparent rim sherd identified by a professional Ohio archaeologist as likely being from the Middle Woodland Period, or roughly 2000 years BP. (Older flint points have been found on bottomland just north of the site.)

Lithic artifact material bearing the carved imagery characteristic of this site has been found in parts of Ohio that, unlike this location, were flattened by glaci- ation, suggesting that the material in those areas is less than 14,000 years old (unless, of course, it simply survived where it was earlier, or was carried in by a glacier). Dave Gillilan in Pickaway County, Ohio (glacial boundary) recently discovered, at a depth of about 1.5 m (5′) in apparently undisturbed terrain, a deliberately buried cache of artifacts quite similar in form and composition to those at Day’s Knob, but generally more refined, and accompanied by flint and quartz points, blades, etc. characteristic of the Late Archaic and Early Wood- land Periods (roughly 2000 years BP). And some of the other artifacts in direct context are very strange, including non-utilitarian objects of iron, the carbon content of which has been radiocarbon dated to roughly 400 AD, strongly suggesting prehistoric iron smelting by Native Americans. (Similar iron artifacts, not yet dated, have appeared here at 33GU218).

Click image for details and more photos.

The lithic artifacts found so far at Day’s Knob are carved, chipped, split, and/or abraded mainly from the local limestone, sandstone, hematite, and soft yellow ochre. Heavy V-profile incision and carving marks (probably decorative or symbolic in most cases) are a distinctive characteristic of this assemblage. A few of the simple tools are made from non-local igneous (sometimes volcanic) or metamorphic rock. The site is well south of the glacial boundary, beyond the extent of significant glacial outwash; also, it is on a hill rising about 120 meters (400′) above any creek beds in which such material might appear. It seems reasonable to assume that this material was imported by the site’s inhabitants.

Click image for details.

Why there are not more flint implements is somewhat of a mystery, but it is evident that the hard limestone abundant at the site was adequate for the population’s needs at the time (it is quite capable of cutting wood, for example); they just used what was there, and flint does not occur naturally in Guernsey County. Apparently they were unaware that 21st century AD lithics experts had not approved their material for tool making.

The original expectation was to deal here only with the artifacts appearing at Day’s Knob, but it has subsequently (and not surprisingly) become clear that material of very similar form and incorporated iconography is to be found in many places in North America (as far away as California), and, rather unexpec- tedly, in other parts of the world. Among professionally excavated potentially “pre-Clovis” sites in North America, it almost certainly is present (even if not recognized) at Topper beneath the Clovis-age strata, and at Gault among diagnostically Clovis-age material.

Click images for details.

Many visitors to this website, collectors and amateur archaeologists in the USA and even Europe, have contacted this author to show very similar material they have found. At least two in the USA had already independently recognized their finds as probable artifacts, and the European contributors (apparently having fewer preconceptions) had been doing this for quite some time (for example, among other longtime investigators, Ursel Benekendorff in Germany). Individual visitors’ interpretations of the material vary widely (sometimes as naturalistic depictions of extinct animals, early hominin physiognomies, etc.), frequently differing from this author’s rather conservative ones – but right now this is not so important. (And the “professionals” will eventually pontificate endlessly on all this once they become aware of it, and claim to have discovered it.) The objects from this site are, for the most part, clearly artifactual and of essentially the same morphology and incorporated symbolic motifs, particularly significant in the context of the early habitation of North America. And the overall implications for the worldwide migration timeline are obvious. Some of the visitors’ contributions (no time to include all of them yet), and some of this author’s finds from other countries can be seen by clicking these links:

____________________ Bird Forms ____________________

Strangely enough, in many cases the functional tools at 33GU218 are formed at least abstractly in the shape of birds or bird-humans, which appar- ently played a dominant role in the belief system (animism/shamanism?) of the people that left these mysterious objects behind. Most of the bird forms have a rounded or even anthropomorphic face, but the overall morphology, and an eye distinctly carved in the appropriate place, are unmistakable when one even casually looks for them.

Bird-Shaped tools – click image for details.

Tools and/or decorative/symbolic objects (“portable art”) of this form have also appeared in other parts of the world; some of these are claimed to date from several hundred thousand years ago, and the easily recognized form persists in tools well into the Neolithic.

______________ Decorative /Symbolic Birds ______________

Besides being fashioned from rock, some of the primarily symbolic or decor- ative bird figures at Day’s Knob are fashioned from various organic materials.

(Click images below for details:)

P itch Wood Clay/Hair

Click image for details.

________________ The Bird Spirit (Bird-Human )________________

Even more frequently than the actual bird form, the image of a hybrid bird-human creature appears – referred to here as the “Bird Spirit”. (Since this author seems to have discovered it, at least in this context, he presumably can call it whatever he likes.) Whatever the age of this site might prove to be, the Bird Spirit image in itself is probably of considerable anthropological signifi- cance, being apparently of quite ancient origin. In artifacts of the European Paleolithic it appears consistently, resembling in small detail the image here, and persists quite identifiably into modern but traditional Inuit/Yupik (“Eskimo”) “transformation art”. (Actually, it has subsequently come to this author’s attention that the Inuit and Yupik have been calling this bird-human figure “Bird Spirit”, or even just “bird”, for a very long time. Oops! So much for this author’s originality. ) The figure also appears in Australia, Asia, and other parts of the world, seemingly a Primal Image.

For a while, this author was tentatively identifying numerous figures on stone tools as animals such as bear and wildcat. Then came the discovery of what appeared to be the image of a human head made of a hard clay/ochre/plant amalgam, half buried at the bottom of a washed out rut in the “driveway” up the knob, and quite distinct in composition from the surrounding mud. In its mouth were two distinctly detailed birds joined together, and it was adorned with several other small bird figures. Looking more closely at the mischaracterized “animal” images on the tools and large stone figures then revealed that these usually had mouths abstractly or distinctly shaped like birds, leading to the recognition of a highly standardized albeit stylized bird-human figure. The constant repetition of a complex and recognizable pattern was unmistakable. (A few of the Figure Stones here are, however, distinctly and naturalistically in the form of particular non-bird animal heads, e.g., rabbit, dog, equid, human. And petroglyphs seem to include spider and mastodon.)

The head of a Bird Spirit may be strongly anthropomorphic, with distinctly human nose and eyes at the front of the face, or more bird-like with an elon- gated head. In either case, it usually has a mouth rather than a beak. Often one eye is open and the other is shut. Below is a sketch of the general form, a simple schematic showing most of the typical components described in following paragraphs. (Unlike the people that created these objects, this author has no artistic talent. Do not laugh.)

The sketc h below shows the general form of the two-faced (janiform) image appearing repeatedly in the carved rocks at this site, with the quasi-anthro- pomorphic shaman-like face at one end and a more zoomorphic one at the other:

A Bird Spirit (or similar zoo-anthropomorphic) figure typically exhibits at least some of the following features shown below, apparently basic components in a set of Primal Images. Click on the underscored terms or the “thumbnails” for photos:

A bird or other creature facing forward (sometimes sideward) on top of the head, often suggesting shaman headgear.

Click image for details.

Click image for details.

The head of a creature emerging from the belly of the primary figure.

Click image for details.

A creature emerging from the posterior, in the manner of an egg.

Click image for details.

Janiform – a face at one end of the figure, another at the the opposite end looking in the opposite direction. Typically one face is more or less anthropomorphic, and the other more zoomorphic.

Click image for details.

A mouth consisting of two birds conjoined most of the way back from their heads, and facing away from each other with their heads forming or occupying the corners of the mouth. When the figure is depicted only in profile (more common), the mouth has the form of a bird facing toward the back of the head. This gives an appearance that easily causes the image to be misidentified as an animal such as a bear or wildcat.

Click image for details.

Sometimes the mouth takes the form of a big toothy grin.

Click image for details.

Eyes typically circular or diamond-shaped, very often with a distinct raised or indented iris in the center. When the face appears in frontal view, often one eye is open while the other (more commonly the left?), is partly or fully closed. The eyes seem to have received particular attention to detail, and are among the most quickly recognizable evidence of human agency in the lithic artifact material. Sometimes they are micro-carved into the form of a bird or bird-human head.

Click image for details.

A nose consisting of a bird or human-like head facing outward or downward.

Click image for details.

A chin, if significantly present, in the form of another creature.

Click image for details.

A bird or bird-human riding on the back of another one, often suggesting copulation.

Click image for details.

A bird or other creature on the side of the primary figure.

Click image for details.

The figures typically exhibit symmetry in that the reverse side usually bears a similar image, at least thematically.

Click image for details.

As is obvious from the features described above, the figures are typically polymorphic/polyiconic – multiple images in one. The details of an image and its multiple components are often not deeply or distinctly carved, and are usually best visible (sometimes only visible) with the light source above the figure when positioned vertically. Often, when the figure is rotated 180 degrees, one image or set of images virtually disappears, and another comes into view. The artisans clearly understood the interplay of light and shadow. Likewise, rotating 90 degrees quite often has the same effect, or sometimes turning to an intermediate angle, depending on the geometry of the rock. While often varying markedly in overall appearance, the figures appearing almost always exhibit the same general arrangement of subcomponents.

Click image for details.

Click image for details.

The image of the Bird Spirit appears to be of ancient and primal origin, present in stone images from Europe, Asia, Australia, and Africa often dating back into the Paleolithic. This has survived from its origins in the very earliest “art” of the Old World into the Paleolithic in the western hemisphere, and in quite rec- ognizable form into the Mississippian period, as is clearly visible on the well known Cahokia Birdman Tablet:

Inuit/Yupik (Eskimo) “transformation art” incorporates many if not most of the various Bird Spirit (bird-human) themes in the Day’s Knob artifact material, like the very common bird-from-the-mouth below. A cultural affinity seems quite apparent:

It is interesting to speculate on the origin of the Bird Spirit image. Cave paintings of the Paleolithic, with their magnificent depictions of animals of all sorts, often include people only as simple “stick” figures, if at all. It has been conjectured that humans of that time considered themselves to be essentially separate from the natural world, having come from above. One of this author’s possibly strange hypotheses is that this Bird Spirit figure is the manifestation of a sort of “collective unconscious”. Many or perhaps most of us have had vivid flying dreams, particularly in childhood. It seems reasonable to think that if we do it, people hundreds of thousands of years ago did it also, and took it much more seriously and literally. And early humans poking around on the ground must have regarded birds with more than a little wonder. When people first began to think of themselves as transcending their earthbound condition, birds must have quickly come to mind, and a “morphing” of human and bird in their physically rendered imagery seems a logical extension of this.

Given its wide geographical distribution and apparently great antiquity, one might tentatively speculate that the bird-human image originated in Africa, then was carried into Europe and the Middle East, then on into Asia and Australia, and across Beringia to North America.

Click image for details .

__________________ Human Figur es __________________

Click image for details.

____________________ Petroglyphs ____________________

Click image for details.

____________________ Rock Paintings ____________________

Click image for details.

___________________ Larger Stone S culpture ___________________

These are usually explicitly or abstractly a bird or bird-human image, but may contain these images within a larger figure that looks like another animal.

Click image for details.

___________________ Personal Ornamentation ___________________

These are two pendants – one the image of a bird, the other a disk. The holes drilled in each are of the same size, and appear to have been produced in the same manner.

Click images for details.

____________________ Micro- Art ____________________

Many symbolic or decorative images are as small as a couple of millimeters, indicating remarkable visual acuity.

Click image for details.

____________________ Clay Figure s ____________________

One of the more unusual (and certainly controversial) finds at this site is the many zoomorphic figures made from clay or a compressed amalgam of mud, ochre, and plant material. Some contain verified human hairs and/or artificially colored plant fibers.

Click image for details.

Leaves and other plant material were sometimes attached, including a piece of pine cone in one case. (There are no pine trees currently at the site.) Apparently, packing the objects into the dense clay created a more or less anoxic environment that protected the plant material.

Click image for details.

______________________ Iron ______________________

Iron artifacts appear at the site, almost all of a non-utilitarian nature, and seem- ingly the product of direct-reduction smelting. (Speculative at this point.)

Click image for details.

_____________________ Glass _____________________

Click image for details.

____________________ Wood ____________________

Wooden bird figures, as well as cleanly cut and carved wooden sticks, often appear buried in the clay, rather well preserved in context with other artifact material.

Click image for details.

_________________ Stone T ool s _________________

Among the assemblage, several very general tool templates are evident. Since few of the implements are made of flint (which does not appear naturally in this area), they do not fit well into the classic “Indian” taxonomy, so this is only a crude attempt at classification (fitting square peg into round hole). Click on the links below for photos and/or expanded descriptions. (Please note: This part of the website is poorly developed, showing mainly low resolution photos of just a few of the earliest tool finds. There are better examples that will be posted later.)

Since there is evidence at this site of extensive earth moving and at least some plant cultivation, it seems likely that many of the tools were simply digging implements.

Small Gouges and Picks: These are pointed implements contoured for right-handed thumb and finger grasp, often in the form of a bird or bird head.

Click image for details.

Large Gouges: These are pointed or chisel-shaped right-hand implements contoured either for downward or for forward thrusting. Like the hand axes, they often exhibit the characteristic grooves and ridges for thumb and fingers.

Click image for details.

Hand Axes : These have a bifacial bit edge and a wider, rounded proximal edge for right-handed grasping. The sides of the implement are often grooved and/or ridged for thumb on one side and fingers on the other.

Click image for details.

Wing-Shaped Implements: These are flared trianguloids in a generally birdlike form, including scrapers, hand axes, gouges, and abraders. This is one of the most common templates in the assemblage, and maybe a precursor of the well known bannerstone.

Click image for details.

Misc. Scrapers and Cutting Tools: These vary considerably in size and form. Most are more or less in the shape of a bird or bird head.

Click image for details.

Semilunar Implements: These are celts, scrapers, or abraders with a bifacially beveled bit edge along the circumference, and a flat or more-or-less flat proximal grasping end. They are usually very simple, but are sometimes well detailed with contours and/or flanges for right-handed holding. The size range is considerable.

Click image for details.

Sandstone Abraders: Hand-held or finger-held grinding tools apparently for surface reduction and forming of other implements and decorative/symbolic objects. These appear in huge quantity across the site.

Click image for details.

Click image for details.

Although the implements are sometimes bizarre in appearance, close inspec- tion reveals genuine skill, creativity, and attention to detail in fabricating a functional tool from the material at hand. It seems reasonable to assume that these tools were, when actually used, applied with considerable force over an extended period of time, and that sharp or rough edges against the hand or fingers would have been intolerable. On this assumption, an object at this site is very seldom classified as a tool unless it meets these simple criteria: It must fit firmly and comfortably in the right hand, or, if small, in the fingers of the right hand. When the object is held in a position in which there is such a fit, the bit edge or point must be in the appropriate orientation to perform its func- tion. It is remarkable that, with the exception of some of the more amorphous sandstone abraders, the tools present at this site both meet these require- ments and manage in most cases to recognizably if abstractly incorporate the ever-present bird or Bird-Human image. It seems that cutting the image was an integral part of the manufacturing process, as much so as making the point or edge and the grasping surface. It was seldom an intentional display of artistic virtuosity – just part of the routine, perhaps like forming the cross on hot cross buns. Assuming an animistic belief system, maybe it was just putting the spirit’s image on the rock it was believed to inhabit. In any event, it seems that a rock was modified to incorporate both utility and symbology.

In contemplating whether a given lithic artifact is a “tool” or a piece of simple “art”, a fair amount of confusion has arisen because the concept of art is, relatively speaking, a very recent one in the course of humans’ physical and cultural evolution. Seeing and judging what was left behind by people many thousands of years ago only through only the lens of one’s own culturally conditioned perceptions will never lead to an understanding of what was really happening. This author would propose that many of the puzzling worked stones (often called “portable rock art”) that have been examined at this site and throughout much of the world, probably most of which do not show clear evidence of use wear, are both “tools” and “art” but actually neither – just potentially if not always utilitarian objects that also routinely incorporate rudimentary iconography. It has long been recognized, as in the Rift Valley in Africa, that early humans (“hominins”) produced and left behind vastly more stone implements than were ever actually used, what would seem to be an almost compulsive behavior deriving from the fact that the manufacture of stone tools was a matter of everyday survival. Perhaps an evolving animistic belief system (i.e., everything is inhabited by a spirit) and intellectual capacity for symbolic representation gave rise to the routine incorporation of simple imagery into potential tools. (This seems to have been in full swing by at least 450,000 years ago, judging from some of the European finds from reasonably secure stratigraphic context.)

As was mentioned above, a few years ago this author noted consistent motifs and their subcomponents incorporated into artifacts from this site and others in Europe and Australia, and a distinct correspondence in modern but tradi- tional Inuit/Yupik carvings and masks, which also derive from something quite ancient and primal in a culture intimately connected to nature. In this context, consider this quote from anthropologist Edmund Carpenter’s 1973 book “Eskimo Realities”: “No word meaning ‘art’ occurs in Eskimo, nor does ‘artist’; there are only people. Nor is any distinction made between utilitarian and dec- orative objects.” (Thanks to Richard Wilson of Watford, England for pointing out this book after being subjected to this author’s ravings on the similarity of Inuit/Yupik iconography motifs to those of the European Paleolithic.) It seems likely that the symbology persisted through many thousands of years of migration and ethnic/cultural diversification. (Belief systems, like languages, are not bound to ethnicity.)

It is interesting and significant that just recently professional European archae- ologists have announced with great fanfare their realization that simple tools at Wilczyce and Lalinde/Gцnnersdorf, showing no signs of use wear, are in the form of the long recognized “Venus” figurines that have appeared at various sites. The fact of the matter is that amateur archaeologists, free of the long- standing preconceptions, have been recognizing and publishing this relation- ship for decades. While the perceptiveness and insight of the professional archaeologists in this recent discovery certainly is to be commended, it seems that this announcement is, as is so often the case, a matter of assigning impor- tance to a given discovery less on the basis of its archaeological significance than on the academic credentials of the observers. The presence of rudimen- tary “portable rock art” in the form of “tools” has long been rejected in Europe and elsewhere, this being “argumentation from absence”; no one (with a very few unpopular exceptions) in the professional/academic archaeological com- munity had reported it, so it was assumed not to exist.

The artifacts unearthed so far at Day’s Knob have appeared mainly in these locations:

Along the 130m (425′) access path from the ridge road to the top of the hill, after years of erosion and maintenance grading, from roughly 25 cm (10″) to 60 cm (24″) below the current terrain surface.

In a large hole dug out by deer around a salt block at the top of the hill.

In several small test holes at random locations.

On and near the surface of the large earthwork along the west side of the hill.

On and below the surface of a large artificially terraced area including the spring on the steep east (sheltered) side of the hill.

On or near the surface, or eroding from banks in quarried or otherwise disturbed areas of the site. Characteristic artifact material has, in some cases, been retrieved from far below the current terrain surface.

Most of the artifacts collected at this site have been cataloged or at least sorted by the location of their appearance, but a controlled dig remains to be com- pleted. One 1×1 m square was started in 2003, with lithic objects logged by XYZ coordinates. This was left on hold, mainly because of the large quan- tity of artifacts that suddenly appeared as the result of heavy rains eroding the deeply rutted “driveway” up the hill, requiring full-time attention. Although barely started, this square has produced numerous clearly fabricated sand- stone objects, most of them bearing the ubiquitous bird/human image.

Click image for details.

Day’s Knob would have been highly favorable for habitation, with its commanding view in all directions, ample water supply, and abundant lithic material, and it clearly was the site of much human activity. However, it is hardly unique. There are undoubtedly many other such sites in North America waiting to be discovered by professional or amateur archaeologists willing and able to see beyond the current and rather rigidly orthodox paradigm for aboriginal American artifacts. (Topper in South Carolina is almost certainly such a site.) Many photos of similar artifact material, resembling that here in minute detail, have been e-mailed to this author. If one were given to wild speculation, one might present the heretical hypothesis that North America was well populated before the advent of the diagnostically “Clovis” implements. One way or another, it is seems likely that the ground of North America will yield quite a large body of heretofore unrecognized artifact material related to but morphologically distinct from that popularly seen as Native American.

Simple “figure stones” have, since their first discovery by the archaeological pioneer Boucher de Perthes in the nineteenth century, been rejected, ignored, and discarded by archaeologists despite verified evidence of human agency. This is a sad and almost inexcusable oversight given that figure stones present an index to a site’s early human presence where more popularly recognized artifact material is not present. In short, there is a lot more to all this than just “arrowheads”.

Note to persons recognizing and collecting artifacts like those shown here (or any other artifacts, for that matter!): Please record the exact location of each find (a handheld GPS unit can be quite helpful in this). Place the find in a plastic “zip-lock” bag along with a note detailing its provenience. Context is very important. If the artifact is damp, let it dry out before resealing the bag. If you think you must clean it, look under magnification (at least 10X) for adhering material of interest. For example, on several occasions at this site human hairs have been found in the encasing soil, even well below the current terrain surface. Thanks!

“Know what you see – don’t just see what you know.”

Please email questions, comments, and flaming arrows to