Empire earth gold manual pdf download

Stream the Latest Episode of Family or Fiance. Tools and resources that will empower Black women to own their health in and beyond. Ring in the holidays all season long with OWN's first ever cooking competition and three original movies. The author describes how global warming threatens the traditional way of life in a small Alaskan village. Mowat, Farley. Orwell, George. Pollan, Michael. Pollan follows the journey of four meals from farm to table, weaving together literature, science, and hands-on investigation.

This book shows the serious consequences of the way we eat. Rothenberg, David. This book explores the tweets, squawks, and flute-like songs of birds to investigate the scientific mysteries of bird song and how it sparks the human imagination.

Read the first paragraph. Can you tell what the article will be about? Scan the article for names, dates, numbers, and boldface type. Read the last paragraph on the next page.

Now read the article all the way to the end. As you read, underline any unfamiliar words with a pencil but do not look them up in a dictionary now. You can do that later. Millions of people now rent their age of instant electronic communica- People naturally write fewer letters movies the Netflix way. They fill out tion has been predicted at least as of- when they can send e-mail messages.

But the consumption of paper respondence is to know what has the first few DVD's in the mail; when keeps rising. It has roughly doubled been lost in this shift: the pretty they mail each one back, the next one since , with less use of newsprint stamps, the varying look and feel of on the list is sent. And so, with some nuances and dence, the tangible object that was haustively analyzed for its disruptive, internal changes, does the flow of ma- once in the sender's hands.

To stay in new-economy implications. What will terial carried by mail. On average, an instant touch with parents, children it mean for video stores like Block- American household receives twice as and colleagues around the world is to buster, which has, in fact, started a many pieces of mail a day as it did in know what's been gained.

What will it mean for the 's. But even before e-mail, personal movie studios and theaters? What "Is the Internet hurting the mail, letters had shrunk to a tiny share of does it show about "long tail" busi- or helping? Critelli, a the flow. As a consultant, Fouad H. Critelli's day job is chief ex- duced to a minimum with the prolif- gle target audience? Most of that personal mail flix envelopes come and go as first- sight q PB.

They are joined by millions findings about the economic, techno- announcements, and other mail with of other shipments from online phar- logical and cultural forces that affect "emotional content," a category that macies, eBay vendors, Amazon.

Critelli says. If most letters. Whatever shrinkage e- cause of choices created by the you have just moved, for example, mail has caused in personal corre- Internet.

In turn, hanks, telecommu- that may mean mail from your new spondence, it is not likely to do much nication companies, insurance com- area's window-cleaning or handyman more. He says response rates to The Internet and allied technolo- more mail. Everyone takes for The most touching artifact among The first follows the Netflix exam- granted that FedEx and the United these e-mail studies is a survey con- ple: Postal Service fulfillment of trans- Parcel Service can track the move- ducted by the Postal Service called actions made on the Internet.

About ment of each item through their sys- "The Mail Moment. The Postal Service has now "Two thirds of all consumers do roughly one-fifth of the total—are de- installed similar scanning equipment, not expect to receive personal mail, livered by first-class mail. EBay's and in principle it can bar-code and but when they do, it makes their vendors list five million new items scan every envelope or postcard and day," it concluded.

In real- keeps them coming back each day. One Pitney Bowes ity, it does this mainly for a fee, for Even in this age of technology, ac- study found that online retailers were businesses that want to know their cording to the survey, 55 percent of increasingly using paper catalogs sent material has reached the right audi- Americans said they looked forward through the mail to steer people to ence at the right time—for instance, to discovering what each day's mail their sites.

The second force also involves fi- a local store. Now I'll confess my bias. My first nance. Many studies conclude that In Internet terms, this and related real job was at the post office.

On the people are more and more willing to improvements are intended to make day when 1 was paroled from the sort- make payments online, but that they advertising mail less like spam—un- ing floor to substitute for an absent strongly prefer to receive the original wanted and discarded—and more like letter carrier, I felt as if I were bringing bills on paper, by mail.

It's nice to think that such households from credit card compa- "Over time, there is an increasing moments will survive the Internet. Source: The New York Times. September 4, A. Write any unfamiliar words that made comprehension difficult and write their dictionary definitions. Compare your words with those of another student. Do you have any of the same words? Discuss the article with another student.

Consider these questions. Where does the writer tell you what this article is about? What do you already know about this? Were there any parts of the article that you did not understand? Read the article again. Then discuss these questions with a group of three or four students.

Why does the writer believe that the Internet is not the death of the Post Office? Do you agree with the writer? Why or why not? What evidence does the writer give to support his ideas? How do you use the post office? Do you ever buy things over the Internet? Before you read, discuss these questions with another student. Have you ever heard of this author? Have you read any of his stories or books or seen movies made from them?

Do these titles help you to guess what kind of fiction Bradbury writes? Think about the title of this story, "All Summer in a Day," and try to imagine what the title might refer to. Guess what type of story this will be. Read the story all the way to the end. Mark any confusing parts of the story with a question mark? Make notes in the margin about your reactions. Then complete the exercises that follow. All Summer in a Day Ready? Will it happen today, will it? It rained.

It had been raining for seven years; thousands upon thousands of days compounded and filled from one end to the other with rain, with the drum and gush of water, with the sweet crystal fall of showers and the concussion of storms so heavy they were tidal waves come over the islands. A thousand forests had been crushed under the rain and grown up a thousand times to be crushed again. And this was the way life was forever on the planet Venus, and this was the schoolroom of the children of the rocket men and women who had come to a raining world to set up civilization and live out their lives.

They were all nine years old, and if there had been a day, seven years ago, when the sun came out for an hour and showed its face to the stunned world, they could not recall.

She knew they thought they remembered a warmness, like a blushing in the face, in the body, in the arms and legs and trembling hands. But then they always awoke to the tatting drum, the endless shaking down of clear bead necklaces upon the roof, the walk, the gardens, the forests, and their dreams were gone. All day yesterday they had read in class about the sun.

About how like a lemon it was, and how hot. And they had written small stories or essays or poems about it: I think the sun is a flower, That blooms for just one hour. That was Margot's poem, read in a quiet voice in the still classroom while the rain was falling outside. But that was yesterday. Now the rain was slackening, and the children were crushed in the great thick windows. Margot stood alone.

She was a very frail girl who looked as if she had been lost in the rain for years and the rain had washed out the blue from her eyes and the red from her mouth and the yellow from her hair. She was an old photograph dusted from an album, whitened away, and if she spoke at all her voice would be a ghost.

Now she stood, separate, staring at the rain and the loud wet world beyond the huge glass. Margot said nothing. But she did not move; rather she let herself be moved only by him and nothing else. They edged away from her, they would not look at her. She felt them go away. And this was because she would play no games with them in the echoing tunnels of the underground city.

If they tagged her and ran, she stood blinking after them and did not follow. When the class sang songs about happiness and life and games her lips barely moved.

Only when they sang about the sun and the summer did her lips move as she watched the drenched windows. And then, of course, the biggest crime of all was that she had come here only five years ago from Earth, and she remembered the sun and the way the sun was and the sky was when she was four in Ohio.

And they, they had been on Venus all their lives, and they had been only two years old when last the sun came out and had long since forgotten the color and heat of it and the way it really was. But Margot remembered.

But she remembered and stood quietly apart from all of them and watched the patterning windows. And once, a month ago, she had refused to shower in the school shower rooms, had clutched her hands to her ears and over her head, screaming the water mustn't touch her head. So after that, dimly, dimly, she sensed it, she was different and they knew her difference and kept away. And so, the children hated her for all these reasons of big and little consequence.

They hated her pale snow face, her waiting silence, her thinness, and her possible future. And what she was waiting for was in her eyes. Is it? But this is the day, the scientists predict, they say, they know, the sun. They surged about her, caught her up and bore her, protesting, and then pleading, and then crying, back into a tunnel, a room, a closet, where they slammed and locked the door. They stood looking at the door and saw it tremble from her beating and throwing herself against it.

They heard her muffled cries. Then, smiling, they turned and went out and back down the tunnel, just as the teacher arrived. Are we all here?

They crowded to the huge door. The rain stopped. It was as if, in the midst of a film concerning an avalanche, a tornado, a hurricane, a volcanic eruption, something had, first, gone wrong with the sound apparatus, thus muffling and finally cutting off all noise, all of the blasts and repercussions and thunders, and then, second, ripped the film from the projector and inserted in its place a peaceful tropical slide which did not move or tremor.

The world ground to a standstill. The silence was so immense and unbelievable that you felt your ears had been stuffed or you had lost your hearing altogether. The children put their hands to their ears. They stood apart. The door slid back and the smell of the silent, waiting world came in to them. The sun came out. It was the color of flaming bronze and it was very large.

And the sky around it was a blazing blue tile color. And the jungle burned with sunlight as the children, released from their spell, rushed out, yelling, into the springtime. You wouldn't want to get caught out!

It was a nest of octopi, clustering up great arms of flesh-like weed, wavering, flowering in this brief spring. It was the color of rubber and ash, this jungle, from the many years without sun. It was the color of stones and white cheeses and ink, and it was the color of the moon. The children lay out, laughing, on the jungle mattress, and heard it sigh and squeak under them, resilient and alive.

They ran among the trees, they slipped and fell, they pushed each other, they played hide-and-seek and tag, but most of all they squinted at the sun until tears ran down their faces, they put their hands up to that yellowness and that amazing blueness and they breathed of the fresh, fresh air and listened and listened to the silence which suspended them in a blessed sea of no sound and no motion.

They looked at everything and savored everything. Then, wildly, like animals escaped from their caves, they ran and ran in shouting circles. They ran for an hour and did not stop running. And then— In the midst of their running one of the girls wailed. Everyone stopped. The girl, standing in the open, held out her hand.

They came slowly to look at her opened palm. In the center of it, cupped and huge, was a single raindrop. She began to cry, looking at it. They glanced quietly at the sky. The sun faded behind a stir of mist. A wind blew cool around them. They turned and started to walk back toward the underground house, their hands at their sides, their smiles vanishing away.

A boom of thunder startled them and like leaves before a new hurricane, they tumbled upon each other and ran. Lightning struck ten miles away, five miles away, a mile, a half mile. The sky darkened into midnight in a flash. They stood in the doorway of the underground for a moment until it was raining hard. Then they closed the door and heard the gigantic sound of the rain falling in tons and avalanches, everywhere and forever.

They looked at each other and then looked away. They glanced out at the world that was raining now and raining and raining steadily. They could not meet each other's glances. Their faces were solemn and pale. They looked at their hands and feet, their faces down. They walked slowly down the hall in the sound of cold rain. They turned through the doorway to the room in the sound of the storm and thunder, lightning on their faces, blue and terrible.

They walked over to the closet door slowly and stood by it. Behind the closet door was only silence. They unlocked the door, even more slowly, and let Margot out. Discuss these questions with another student.

You may look back at the story if necessary. Did you enjoy reading the story? Explain your answer. Were there any parts of the story that you did not understand? Which ones? Were there any unfamiliar words that you need to look up in order to understand the story? Why do you think the author decided to call this story "All Summer in a Day"? Read the story a second time.

Then, working with two or three other students, retell the story to each other in your own words. In this exercise you will analyze the story for the way the writer sets the scene and tells us "who," "when," and "where.

Main characters list and describe : Setting time : Setting place : B. Compare your work with that of another pair of students. If you disagree, look back at the story to check your answers. Listed below are the events that make up the plot of "All Summer in a Day. They let Margot out of the closet. The children stood at the window waiting for the sun. The children remembered that Margot was in the closet.

All day the children read and wrote about the sun in class. The teacher left the classroom. The children put Margot in the closet. William and the children began to mistreat Margot. The whole world seemed silent and the sun came out.

Raindrops began to fall and a boom of thunder startled the children. The children went inside. The children ran and played in the sunlight. Compare your answers with those of another pair of students. In the chart below you will find the terms that are often used to discuss the main elements of the plot in a work of literature. Look again at the events listed in Exercise 3 and decide where they belong in the chart.

Write the letters a-k of the events in the appropriate box. The first one has been done for you. Note: Like many other stories, this story can be interpreted in several different ways, depending on the reader's point of view. Therefore, a variety of different answers is possible in this chart.

Be prepared to explain your choices. Exposition Where the writer provides essential information about the story: "who," b "where," "when," and "what. The sequel to the amazing Amnesia: The Dark Descent is officially due out this summer. Kelly would be proud of Firefall. Rather than just accept that the shooter's players would be stuck to the ground, they believed they could fly. With jetpacks.

Those tend to help. This new trailer shows off a bit of what's possible with the things strapped to your back. That means the disastrously bad shooter, which takes place shortly after the end of 's Aliens, has ramifications on 's Alien 3 and 's Alien Resurrection which didn't do the lore any favors either.

Major ones. Aliens: Colonial Marines' storyline features some lore-breaking elements that directly contradict major events from the films and makes me wonder if Fox and Gearbox or TimeGate, or whoever actually developed the campaign even understand what "canon" means. Here are my three biggest problems with this incredibly damaging new version of the Alien lore. Commence game jam!

Commence Mojam! Minecraft studio Mojang, a group of indie studios, and the folks behind the Humble Bundle have teamed up for Mojam 2, a hour game jam that starts right now.

Watch along via TwitchTV and be prepared to pay what you want for any new pixelated creations that catch your eye. Oh, hello there, new game from Square Enix. Didn't see you lurking in the shadows back there. Love the name of your website, "www.

An unromantic videogame spin on Patrick Swayze's seminal work, Ghost, perhaps? Whatever it is, I'm interested in learning more about Murdered: Soul Suspect. Preorder Warfighter, get access to the BF4 beta, the deal went.

Seven months later, it appears we're finally about to learn more about the next installment in the shooter franchise, because EA and DICE are now showing off Battlefield 4 behind closed doors and an official reveal appears imminent. Legends, myths, gods and religions appeared for the rst time with the Cognitive Revolution. But why is it important? After all, ction can be dangerously misleading or distracting. People who go to the forest looking for fairies and unicorns would seem to have less chance of survival than people who go looking for mushrooms and deer.

But ction has enabled us not merely to imagine things, but to do so collectively. We can weave common myths such as the biblical creation story, the Dreamtime myths of Aboriginal Australians, and the nationalist myths of modern states. Such myths give Sapiens the unprecedented ability to cooperate exibly in large numbers. Ants and bees can also work together in huge numbers, but they do so in a very rigid manner and only with close relatives.

Wolves and chimpanzees cooperate far more exibly than ants, but they can do so only with small numbers of other individuals that they know intimately.

Sapiens can cooperate in extremely exible ways with countless numbers of strangers. The Legend of Peugeot Our chimpanzee cousins usually live in small troops of several dozen individuals.

They form close friendships, hunt together and ght shoulder to shoulder against baboons, cheetahs and enemy chimpanzees. Their social structure tends to be hierarchical. Other males and females exhibit their submission to the alpha male by bowing before him while making grunting sounds, not unlike human subjects kowtowing before a king. The alpha male strives to maintain social harmony within his troop.

When two individuals ght, he will intervene and stop the violence. Less benevolently, he might monopolise particularly coveted foods and prevent lower-ranking males from mating with the females. When two males are contesting the alpha position, they usually do so by forming extensive coalitions of supporters, both male and female, from within the group.

Ties between coalition members are based on intimate daily contact — hugging, touching, kissing, grooming and mutual favours. Just as human politicians on election campaigns go around shaking hands and kissing babies, so aspirants to the top position in a chimpanzee group spend much time hugging, back-slapping and kissing baby chimps.

These coalitions play a central part not only during overt struggles for the alpha position, but in almost all day-to-day activities. Members of a coalition spend more time together, share food, and help one another in times of trouble. There are clear limits to the size of groups that can be formed and maintained in such a way. In order to function, all members of a group must know each other intimately. Two chimpanzees who have never met, never fought, and never engaged in mutual grooming will not know whether they can trust one another, whether it would be worthwhile to help one another, and which of them ranks higher.

Under natural conditions, a typical chimpanzee troop consists of about twenty to fty individuals. As the number of chimpanzees in a troop increases, the social order destabilises, eventually leading to a rupture and the formation of a new troop by some of the animals. Only in a handful of cases have zoologists observed groups larger than a hundred. Separate groups seldom cooperate, and tend to compete for territory and food. Humans, like chimps, have social instincts that enabled our ancestors to form friendships and hierarchies, and to hunt or ght together.

However, like the social instincts of chimps, those of humans were adapted only for small intimate groups.

When the group grew too large, its social order destabilised and the band split. Even if a particularly fertile valley could feed archaic Sapiens, there was no way that so many strangers could live together.

How could they agree who should be leader, who should hunt where, or who should mate with whom? In the wake of the Cognitive Revolution, gossip helped Homo sapiens to form larger and more stable bands. But even gossip has its limits. Most people can neither intimately know, nor gossip e ectively about, more than human beings. Even today, a critical threshold in human organisations falls somewhere around this magic number. Below this threshold, communities, businesses, social networks and military units can maintain themselves based mainly on intimate acquaintance and rumour-mongering.

There is no need for formal ranks, titles and law books to keep order. A small family business can survive and ourish without a board of directors, a CEO or an accounting department. But once the threshold of individuals is crossed, things can no longer work that way.

You cannot run a division with thousands of soldiers the same way you run a platoon. Successful family businesses usually face a crisis when they grow larger and hire more personnel. If they cannot reinvent themselves, they go bust. How did Homo sapiens manage to cross this critical threshold, eventually founding cities comprising tens of thousands of inhabitants and empires ruling hundreds of millions? The secret was probably the appearance of ction. Large numbers of strangers can cooperate successfully by believing in common myths.

Any large-scale human cooperation — whether a modern state, a medieval church, an ancient city or an archaic tribe — is rooted in common myths that exist only in peoples collective imagination. Churches are rooted in common religious myths.

Two Catholics who have never met can nevertheless go together on crusade or pool funds to build a hospital because they both believe that God was incarnated in human esh and allowed Himself to be cruci ed to redeem our sins. States are rooted in common national myths.

Two Serbs who have never met might risk their lives to save one another because both believe in the existence of the Serbian nation, the Serbian homeland and the Serbian ag.

Judicial systems are rooted in common legal myths. Two lawyers who have never met can nevertheless combine e orts to defend a complete stranger because they both believe in the existence of laws, justice, human rights — and the money paid out in fees.

Yet none of these things exists outside the stories that people invent and tell one another. There are no gods in the universe, no nations, no money, no human rights, no laws, and no justice outside the common imagination of human beings. What we fail to appreciate is that our modern institutions function on exactly the same basis. Take for example the world of business corporations. Modern business-people and lawyers are, in fact, powerful sorcerers. The principal di erence between them and tribal shamans is that modern lawyers tell far stranger tales.

The legend of Peugeot affords us a good example. An icon that somewhat resembles the Stadel lion-man appears today on cars, trucks and motorcycles from Paris to Sydney.

Peugeot began as a small family business in the village of Valentigney, just kilometres from the Stadel Cave. Today the company employs about , people worldwide, most of whom are complete strangers to each other.

These strangers cooperate so e ectively that in Peugeot produced more than 1. There are many Peugeot vehicles, but these are obviously not the company. Even if every Peugeot in the world were simultaneously junked and sold for scrap metal, Peugeot SA would not disappear. It would continue to manufacture new cars and issue its annual report.

The company owns factories, machinery and showrooms, and employs mechanics, accountants and secretaries, but all these together do not comprise Peugeot. Even then, the company could borrow money, hire new employees, build new factories and buy new machinery. Peugeot has managers and shareholders, but neither do they constitute the company.

All the managers could be dismissed and all its shares sold, but the company itself would remain intact. If a judge were to mandate the dissolution of the company, its factories would remain standing and its workers, accountants, managers and shareholders would continue to live — but Peugeot SA would immediately vanish.

In short, Peugeot SA seems to have no essential connection to the physical world. Does it really exist? Peugeot is a gment of our collective imagination.

But it exists as a legal entity. Just like you or me, it is bound by the laws of the countries in which it operates. It can open a bank account and own property.

It pays taxes, and it can be sued and even prosecuted separately from any of the people who own or work for it. Homo sapiens lived for untold millennia without them. If in thirteenth-century France Jean set up a wagon-manufacturing workshop, he himself was the business. If Jean had borrowed 1, gold coins to set up his workshop and the business failed, he would have had to repay the loan by selling his private property — his house, his cow, his land. He might even have had to sell his children into servitude.

He was fully liable, without limit, for all obligations incurred by his workshop. If you had lived back then, you would probably have thought twice before you opened an enterprise of your own. And indeed this legal situation discouraged entrepreneurship. People were afraid to start new businesses and take economic risks. It hardly seemed worth taking the chance that their families could end up utterly destitute.

This is why people began collectively to imagine the existence of limited liability companies. Such companies were legally independent of the people who set them up, or invested money in them, or managed them. Over the last few centuries such companies have become the main players in the economic arena, and we have grown so used to them that we forget they exist only in our imagination.

Despite their having no real bodies, the American legal system treats corporations as legal persons, as if they were flesh-and-blood human beings.

And so did the French legal system back in , when Armand Peugeot, who had inherited from his parents a metalworking shop that produced springs, saws and bicycles, decided to go into the automobile business.

To that end, he set up a limited liability company. He named the company after himself, but it was independent of him. If one of the cars broke down, the buyer could sue Peugeot, but not Armand Peugeot. If the company borrowed millions of francs and then went bust, Armand Peugeot did not owe its creditors a single franc. The loan, after all, had been given to Peugeot, the company, not to Armand Peugeot, the Homo sapiens.

Armand Peugeot died in Peugeot, the company, is still alive and well. How exactly did Armand Peugeot, the man, create Peugeot, the company? It all revolved around telling stories, and convincing people to believe them. Seeing that the priest had properly and assiduously observed all the procedures, millions of devout French Catholics behaved as if God really existed in the consecrated bread and wine.

In the case of Peugeot SA the crucial story was the French legal code, as written by the French parliament. According to the French legislators, if a certi ed lawyer followed all the proper liturgy and rituals, wrote all the required spells and oaths on a wonderfully decorated piece of paper, and a xed his ornate signature to the bottom of the document, then hocus pocus — a new company was incorporated. When in Armand Peugeot wanted to create his company, he paid a lawyer to go through all these sacred procedures.

Once the lawyer had performed all the right rituals and pronounced all the necessary spells and oaths, millions of upright French citizens behaved as if the Peugeot company really existed. Telling e ective stories is not easy. The di culty lies not in telling the story, but in convincing everyone else to believe it. Much of history revolves around this question: how does one convince millions of people to believe particular stories about gods, or nations, or limited liability companies?

Yet when it succeeds, it gives Sapiens immense power, because it enables millions of strangers to cooperate and work towards common goals. Just try to imagine how di cult it would have been to create states, or churches, or legal systems if we could speak only about things that really exist, such as rivers, trees and lions.

Over the years, people have woven an incredibly complex network of stories. Within this network, ctions such as Peugeot not only exist, but also accumulate immense power. An imagined reality is not a lie. I lie when I say that there is a lion near the river when I know perfectly well that there is no lion there.

There is nothing special about lies. Green monkeys and chimpanzees can lie. This alarm conveniently frightened away a fellow monkey who had just found a banana, leaving the liar all alone to steal the prize for itself. Unlike lying, an imagined reality is something that everyone believes in, and as long as this communal belief persists, the imagined reality exerts force in the world.

The sculptor from the Stadel Cave may sincerely have believed in the existence of the lion-man guardian spirit. Most millionaires sincerely believe in the existence of money and limited liability companies. Most human- rights activists sincerely believe in the existence of human rights. No one was lying when, in , the UN demanded that the Libyan government respect the human rights of its citizens, even though the UN, Libya and human rights are all figments of our fertile imaginations.

Ever since the Cognitive Revolution, Sapiens has thus been living in a dual reality. On the one hand, the objective reality of rivers, trees and lions; and on the other hand, the imagined reality of gods, nations and corporations. As time went by, the imagined reality became ever more powerful, so that today the very survival of rivers, trees and lions depends on the grace of imagined entities such as gods, nations and corporations. Bypassing the Genome The ability to create an imagined reality out of words enabled large numbers of strangers to cooperate e ectively.

But it also did something more. Since large- scale human cooperation is based on myths, the way people cooperate can be altered by changing the myths — by telling di erent stories.

Under the right circumstances myths can change rapidly. In the French population switched almost overnight from believing in the myth of the divine right of kings to believing in the myth of the sovereignty of the people. Consequently,ever since the Cognitive Revolution Homo sapiens has been able to revise its behaviour rapidly in accordance with changing needs. This opened a fast lane of cultural evolution, bypassing the tra c jams of genetic evolution. Speeding down this fast lane, Homo sapiens soon far outstripped all other human and animal species in its ability to cooperate.

The behaviour of other social animals is determined to a large extent by their genes. DNA is not an autocrat. Animal behaviour is also in uenced by environmental factors and individual quirks. Nevertheless, in a given environment, animals of the same species will tend to behave in a similar way.

Signi cant changes in social behaviour cannot occur, in general, without genetic mutations. For example, common chimpanzees have a genetic tendency to live in hierarchical groups headed by an alpha male. Members of a closely related chimpanzee species, bonobos, usually live in more egalitarian groups dominated by female alliances. Female common chimpanzees cannot take lessons from their bonobo relatives and stage a feminist revolution.

For similar reasons, archaic humans did not initiate any revolutions. As far as we can tell, changes in social patterns, the invention of new technologies and the settlement of alien habitats resulted from genetic mutations and environmental pressures more than from cultural initiatives. This is why it took humans hundreds of thousands of years to make these steps. Two million years ago, genetic mutations resulted in the appearance of a new human species called Homo erectus.

Its emergence was accompanied by the development of a new stone tool technology, now recognised as a de ning feature of this species. As long as Homo erectus did not undergo further genetic alterations, its stone tools remained roughly the same — for close to 2 million years! In contrast, ever since the Cognitive Revolution, Sapiens have been able to change their behaviour quickly, transmitting new behaviours to future generations without any need of genetic or environmental change.

As a prime example, consider the repeated appearance of childless elites, such as the Catholic priesthood, Buddhist monastic orders and Chinese eunuch bureaucracies. The existence of such elites goes against the most fundamental principles of natural selection, since these dominant members of society willingly give up procreation. This abstinence does not result from unique environmental conditions such as a severe lack of food or want of potential mates. Nor is it the result of some quirky genetic mutation.

In other words, while the behaviour patterns of archaic humans remained xed for tens of thousands of years, Sapiens could transform their social structures, the nature of their interpersonal relations, their economic activities and a host of other behaviours within a decade or two. Consider a resident of Berlin, born in and living to the ripe age of one hundred. She had managed to be a part of ve very different sociopolitical systems, though her DNA remained exactly the same.

In a one-on-one brawl, a Neanderthal would probably have beaten a Sapiens. Without an ability to compose ction, Neanderthals were unable to cooperate effectively in large numbers, nor could they adapt their social behaviour to rapidly changing challenges. Archaeologists excavating 30,year-old Sapiens sites in the European heartland occasionally nd there seashells from the Mediterranean and Atlantic coasts. In all likelihood, these shells got to the continental interior through long-distance trade between di erent Sapiens bands.

Neanderthal sites lack any evidence of such trade. Each group manufactured its own tools from local materials. The Catholic alpha male abstains from sexual intercourse and childcare, even though there is no genetic or ecological reason for him to do so.

Another example comes from the South Paci c. Sapiens bands that lived on the island of New Ireland, north of New Guinea, used a volcanic glass called obsidian to manufacture particularly strong and sharp tools.

Laboratory tests revealed that the obsidian they used was brought from deposits on New Britain, an island kilometres away. Some of the inhabitants of these islands must have been skilled navigators who traded from island to island over long distances. Yet the fact is that no animal other than Sapiens engages in trade, and all the Sapiens trade neworks about which we have detailed evidence were based on ctions.

Trade cannot exist without trust, and it is very di cult to trust strangers. The global trade network of today is based on our trust in such ctional entities as the dollar, the Federal Reserve Bank, and the totemic trademarks of corporations.

When two strangers in a tribal society want to trade, they will often establish trust by appealing to a common god, mythical ancestor or totem animal. If archaic Sapiens believing in such ctions traded shells and obsidian, it stands to reason that they could also have traded information, thus creating a much denser and wider knowledge network than the one that served Neanderthals and other archaic humans.

Hunting techniques provide another illustration of these di erences. Neanderthals usually hunted alone or in small groups. Sapiens, on the other hand, developed techniques that relied on cooperation between many dozens of individuals, and perhaps even between di erent bands.

One particularly e ective method was to surround an entire herd of animals, such as wild horses, then chase them into a narrow gorge, where it was easy to slaughter them en masse. If all went according to plan, the bands could harvest tons of meat, fat and animal skins in a single afternoon of collective e ort, and either consume these riches in a giant potlatch, or dry, smoke or in Arctic areas freeze them for later usage.

Archaeologists have discovered sites where entire herds were butchered annually in such ways. There are even sites where fences and obstacles were erected in order to create artificial traps and slaughtering grounds. We may presume that Neanderthals were not pleased to see their traditional hunting grounds turned into Sapiens-controlled slaughterhouses.

However, if violence broke out between the two species, Neanderthals were not much better o than wild horses. Fifty Neanderthals cooperating in traditional and static patterns were no match for versatile and innovative Sapiens. And even if the Sapiens lost the rst round, they could quickly invent new stratagems that would enable them to win the next time. What happened in the Cognitive Revolution?

Midway Sportstation 25in Standard 4 Player. Operation Wolf Cabinet Service Manual. Plinker's Canyon Bulletin Nov Space Fury Sega Gremlin Prelim manual with schematics.

Space Invaders - Tatio Cocktail Color.