text:
World of Dinosaurs/Depositional Environments

Sedimentary rocks are made of pieces - parts of busted up rocks from some place else, or chemical bits that form minerals and rocks in place.

Conveniently, the basic principals of sedimentology are on display all around us today.

This page will explore how sediments form, move, and make rocks.

Sediments: What are they, and how do they form?
Sediments can include dirt, sand, mud, debris, boulders - whatever you've got that's ready to move and then sit around.

Consider a mountain of intrusive igneous granite, which has been sitting around eroding for a very long time.

 * Weathering breaks the granite down: freezing water breaks it apart; acid rain tears ions off some minerals.
 * Erosion turns granite chunks into smaller and smaller pieces: floods and snow and glaciers move big chunks of rock; rivers smash the pieces into smaller bits.
 * Clasts of rock, grains of mineral, and chemical elements of dissolved minerals all travel in water: rivers, springs, ponds, lakes, oceans.

It takes energy to erode and transport sediment.

If a pile of dead Camarasaurus jam up an old river, you might get some dinosaur fossils out of the deal!

Environments where erosion produces lots of sediment include:

 * river (smashes clasts into smaller and smaller bits)
 * exposed rock (beach, high mountains)
 * soil formation (plants that pull apart rocks)
 * volcanoes (those extrusive igneous basalt rocks get battered up!)
 * coral reefs (sea shells and abandoned coral homes fill with crystal)
 * Open-water oceans and lakes (microscopic life produces lots of crystal structure and lots of poop!)

Environments that transport lots of sediment include:

 * braided streams (often high in the mountains)
 * meandering rivers (on broad low plains)
 * beaches (the sand is always shifting up/down and side/side along a beach)
 * alluvial fans (the big sweep of jagged rocks that spill out of mountain canyons during flash-floods)
 * snowy volcanoes (melted snow + heavy gas + fizzy lava = bad news)
 * mountains that are too dang high

Any sediment that is above the "angle of repose" should move eventually!

Deposition: What, why, where?
What: Deposition is the process of setting sediment down.

 * Where and when an environment runs out of energy to move sediment, then the sediment will stop moving. Ta-da! A deposit!
 * (Ever come home from a long day and just drop all your stuff at the door and lay in bed? Same thing.)

Why (generally):

 * Confined flow causes erosion.
 * Unconfined flow allows deposition.
 * Examples:
 * A roaring river smashes rocks along; a quiet delta lets the rocks settle.
 * A thunderstorm flash flood sweeps rocks down a desert canyon; the water spills across the desert floor and lets the rocks settle.
 * Sea shells are swept off a high reef running around an island; they tumble down the slope and settle in quieter water.

 * If you zoom out, many settings have weathering, erosion, transport, and deposition all happening in a jumble.
 * Consider a river or an ocean beach.
 * Forming a rock from a sediment deposit requires a lot of things to go just right.

Where (generally):

 * Erosion happens high and fast.
 * Deposition happens low and slow.

Depositional Environments: What clues do they leave in rock?
Different environments collect different sediments.

 * A deep ocean will collect layers of quiet mud and dead micro-organisms.
 * A river bottom will collect alternating layers of sand, cobbles, and mud.
 * A reef-ringed island will collect layers of coral and sea shells.

Sediment layers can capture snapshots of flow patterns.

 * Water flowing along a beach can erode the sand and form ripples in the remaining sediment.
 * If deposition outpaces erosion, many layers of rippled sandstone can form.
 * Little animals leave burrows and trails in ocean mud.
 * If deposition outpaces erosion, crystals can form in the mud to record the little trails, and fossilize tiny dead animals.
 * Huge debris flows during flash flood landslides dump jumbles of huge boulders, big cobbles, and mud onto lower land.
 * If deposition outpaces erosion, the biggest clasts show how much energy the flow had, and the range of clast sizes and compositions shows the places the material came from.

Geologists use sedimentary structures like these to...

 * See which way was "up" on a layer or sample of sedimentary rock.
 * Decide the order of deposition events
 * Interpret change in habitats through time


text:
World Stamp Catalogue/Uganda

Uganda

 * Postage stamps and postal history of Uganda

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: World Stamp Catalogue/Uganda


text:
World of Dinosaurs/Basal vs Derived

The terms "basal" and "derived" are relative. They only make sense if you provide the context - what clade are you talking about?

 * Basal animals have the traits required to belong in their clade, but otherwise have a lot in common, still, with that last common ancestor that unites the clade.

 * Derived animals have features really different from the last common ancestor at the base of their clade.

Examples:

 * Coelophysis is a derived tetrapod, but it's a basal dinosaur.
 * Archeopteryx is a derived dinosaur, but it's a basal bird.

Come up with your own examples. Within any clade of animals, what is a good example of a basal animal? What is a good example of a derived animal?

title: World of Dinosaurs/Basal vs Derived


text:
Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized

Preface to the modernized edition
This is a version of Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular by Lim Hiong Seng, originally published in 1886. The original has been digitized and transcribed on Wikisource.

The original edition used phonetic spelling adapted from missionary romanization systems, and also included Chinese characters that were glosses into Mandarin or literary Chinese, rather than characters reflecting actual Teochew usage. In this modernized edition, we have added the Guangdong Education Department 1960 Pêng'im and the Tîe-lô systems of phonetic spelling as well as Teochew vernacular characters. The symbol ～ is used when a generally accepted character is not known.

Original Chinese Preface (1886)
此書乃彙集英潮土語專為英人學習潮語

潮人學習英語而發第其中華字旁註按以

潮州土音多有無字可寫者如不要二字之

類則不字當讀作唔字要字當讀作愛字便

合潮人土談其餘倣此可以類推學者舉一

反三自能玩索有得誠英潮通語之津梁也

果能潜心熟讀則言語之科應對之才無不

於此基之矣爰為之誌　潮州林雄成著集

光緒十二年元月吉日新嘉坡古友軒承印

Original English Preface (1886)
The present work differs in one respect from all other works on the Swatow language previously published, as it has been compiled by one to whom it is a mother tongue and who has learned English, instead of by a European who has learned Chinese, so that it has been possible to confine the sentences strictly to the colloquial form. It is almost impossible for a European to compile any such aid so as to be entirely colloquial, because he commences his first study of the language by engaging a Chinese teacher and acquires his knowledge of Chinese principally from that class. These teachers are in the habit of importing into their speech a certain number of “bookish” words, that is, words which are only used in the written language, and are never used in the colloquial, and are not therefore understood by the people in general. To acquire the pure colloquial it is better to start with the early study of the language from another class rather than from a pedant like the teacher class. Learned men indeed add a few polite or pedantic phrases, but these are only used on certain occasions and are mere excrescences.

The chief disadvantage of inserting book words in phrase books is that the student after discovering that a certain number of words given therein when used are not understood by the people, is led to doubt whether some other words used would be understood. Thus the student has to enquire and ascertain those words which may seem to him doubtful before he uses them. Readers of the present work will be able to use every word occurring throughout the whole volume without having any doubt of its being understood.

The following is the system of orthography employed.

VOWELS
a as a in far, never as in man.

e „ e „ they

i „ i „ machine, not as in tin, sin.

o „ aw „ law

u „ u „ rude

ṳ „ ü „ Trübner

DIPHTHONGS
In all the diphthongs each vowel is heard distinctly with its own proper sound.

ai as y in fly

au „ ow „ cow

oi „ oy „ boy

ou nearly „ ou „ four

ua „ wa „ war

ui „ wee „ weed

CONSONANTS
Most of the consonants are pronounced as in English, or very nearly so.

ch—always as in cheese. g—is always hard.

h—is always pronounced, except when final.

j—always as in judge.

ng—as in king, cut off ki will leave the exact nasal sound of ng.

s—as in song, never as in choose, lose.

z—always as ds or dz; never as in zeal, zone.

k, p, and t,—as final consonants are pronounced without the slightest emission of vocal breath as there usually is in pronouncing English.

m and ng—will be found written without any vowel (e. g. n̂g, m̄, ḿ); often also preceded by a consonant (e. g. sng, hñg, kng) “The nature of these syllables without a distinct vowel becomes at once unmistakable in singing, as at such a word all clear vocal sound at once ceases, and nothing is heard but a dull nasal murmur.

“The Aspirated Consonants are a very remarkable feature in all the languages of China, and require very special attention. They are kh, ph, th, chh, and tsh. The sounds are the same as those indicated by the same notation in the languages of India, being formed by a real distinct aspiration pronounced after the respective consonants………………The sounds are almost the same as those often used by Irishmen when pronouncing with a strong brogue such words as come, pig, &c.; they are also often heard in the mouths of the Scottish Highlanders.

“kh—may be thus described:—Pronounce……………look here! rapidly and clearly, cut off loo- and -re, and you have the Chinese “khi.” “ph—might be illustrated in a similar manner;—e. g. say loophole very rapidly and sharply, cut off loo- and -le from the two ends, and there remains the Chinese “pho.”

“th—must not be confounded with the English th, which is really a simple sound. The Chinese th is a clear distinct t followed by the aspirate. Thus the Chinese “thau” may be carved out of out-house or hot-house.

“chh—is formed in a similar way from the ch of church. Take such a word as watch-house or coach-house, remove the wa- or coa- from the beginning and the -se from the end, and something very near the Chinese “chhau” remains.[1]

tsh—is almost the same as chh, the slight difference it has is that there is not so much sound of h as in chh.

ch—is not an aspirated consonant as explained above, it is always pronounced as in cheese.

A small ⁿ written above the line at the end of a syllable indicates that the whole syllable becomes nasal. From the various dialects in the Swatow region that of the Departmental city known as Ch’ao-chow-foo, (or Tie-chiu-hu in this dialect,) has been chosen, although that of the department of Theng Hai is more extensively spoken in Singapore and perhaps in Swatow also. This work makes no pretence of being more than introductory, and the sentences are such as may be heard from the lips of the native in every day use, while the little dictionary attached to it will undoubtedly be found useful. For many English words there are several Chinese colloquial equivalents, and in the little dictionary two or more of these are frequently given. But there are, no doubt, others which have been inadvertently omitted, and in case of doubt as to any word which does not appear, the student will have no difficulty in ascertaining whether the word that is omitted is in common use, as he can enquire from any one who speaks the dialect, however uneducated he may be.

In conclusion the author has to thank the Rev. J. A. B. Cook for aid in bringing out the work.

LIM HIONG SENG.

Singapore, February, 1886.

Contents

 * /Introductory/
 * /A list of introductory verbs/
 * /Exercises (1)/
 * /A list of introductory adjectives/
 * /Exercises (2)/
 * /Numeral/
 * /Tones, hyphens/
 * /Grammar/
 * /Time generally/
 * /A Building &c/
 * /Human Body &c/
 * /Household Furniture &c/
 * /Garden/
 * /A List of Words used in Cooking/
 * /Provisions, Fish, Vegetable and Fruit/
 * /On Dress/
 * /Nautical/
 * /Medical/
 * /Commercial-Piece-goods/
 * /Commercial-Mineral &c/
 * /Commercial-Miscellaneous Articles/
 * /Commercial-Carpentry/
 * /Commercial-Tailoring/
 * /Commercial-Accounts/
 * /Commercial-Monetary/
 * /Commercial-A List of Words Used in Commerce/
 * /Commercial-Weights and Measures/
 * /Judicial/
 * /Hostilities/
 * /Religious/
 * /Relationships/
 * /A List of Animals and Birds/
 * /A List of Classifiers/
 * /Notes—Nautical/
 * /Notes—Medical/
 * /Notes—Commercial/
 * /Notes—Judicial/
 * /Notes—Hostilities/
 * /Notes—Religious/
 * /A Dictionary of some of the more important words in the Swatow dialect/


text:
Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Introductory

Lesson 3
---


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Exercises (1)


text:
World of Dinosaurs/Biomechanics

We can study the function of animal anatomy by comparing the mechanical properties, advantages, and challenges presented by their physical structures.

This page will link out to interesting research topics in biomechanics of dinosaurs.

Locomotion: walking, running, muscles, all that!
Different generations in society grow up with different images of dinosaur life. Spooky creeping swamp monsters, lurking giants, or nimble assassins - the movies and pop culture presentations of dinosaurs influence our ideas about past life. But how do scientists decide what dinosaurs really could have done?

Bone structure & Muscle attachments

 * Watch a T. rex walk and run, based on schematics of the bones and muscles.
 * Published by Sellers et al., 2017
 * Investigating the running abilities of Tyrannosaurus rex using stress-constrained multibody dynamic analysis
 * walking
 * running

 * What's in John's Freezer is an awesome blog with descriptions of emerging research.
 * Did you know the ostrich has TWO kneecaps in each knee!?!?
 * Or would you like to compare the tail-femur muscle of living archosaurs? - caution - this one is yucky!

Skulls - biting, crushing, stretching, chomping!
Who's got the stronger bite, a Tyrannosaurus rex or an Allosaurus fragilis?

Read the chart of computer model & animal experiment results to find out:

Who could stretch their mouth open wider?

Discuss the relative advantages an animal might gain from having a stronger bite, or being able to open their mouth wider.

On the opposite side of the spectrum check out the mobility of hadrosaur jaws and how this couples with their dental batteries.

This feature makes them well suited to processing plant material and extracting nutrition from otherwise low quality food.

Noses- Trumpets and Mazes
Armored dinosaurs like Ankylosaurs aren't just strange of their osteoderms they also have have very convoluted and intricate nostrils given the nickname "Krazy Straw" nasals.

Parasaurolophus has one of the most iconic skulls of any dinosaur but in reality that crazy crest is part of the nose! This nose is hypothesized to have a number of different functions from amplifying sounds to helping regulate temperature.

To take a look at this skull and the nasal for yourself, head here to download the models provided by the authors.

Other crazy heads

 * Skull modifications are not limited to typical or pre-existing anatomy. But what these modifications are for or how they develop can be difficult to research and can vary substantially.

 * In ceratopsians skulls these horns change throughout life giving them a very different appearance at various stages in life. Think about how this might affect our interpretations about how these features might be used.
 * Certaopsians are often thought of as using their horns for defense and combat. Studies in recent decades show that while this may have been true in some (like Triceratops) based on evidence of combat scars, for others (like Centrosaurus) we see so few combat scars that it is unlikely they were primarily used in this way.
 * Instead, the horns of Centrosaurus were likely to have been used for visual purposes. Sexual selection or perhaps even species identification by other ceratopsians
 * Pachycephalosaurs are often depicted as combative, head-striking animals like some modern sheep and deer today. Using 3D models and Finite Element Analyses (FEA) we can observe and compare how forces spread through the skull.

title: World of Dinosaurs/Biomechanics


text:
World of Dinosaurs/Dinosaur Clades of Interest

Within the clade of dinosaurs, we are interested in particular groups.

Remember - although we are interested in the way these animals lived and interacted with the changing Earth, we are grouping the animals based on shared derived anatomy, NOT on outward similarities. So will all the four-legged animals group together? No. Will all the plant-eaters group together? No.

SAURISCHIANS
"lizard hips"

This clade includes theropods and sauropods.

 * Yes, this means that our ferocious meat-eaters are in a clade with our dopey long-necked plant eaters.
 * They are called "lizard hipped" because their pelvis makes a nice triangle when viewed from the side
 * The illium rests alongside the sacral vertebrae.
 * The ischium frames the rear plumbing. Poop!
 * The pubis generally extends from the closure of the femur-socket to the lower belly area of the animal.
 * This is in CONTRAST to the "bird hipped" ornithischian dinosaurs that have a rear-racing part on the pubis bones.
 * Ironically, the "bird hipped" dinosaurs are and ENTIRELY extinct clade that does NOT include birds.
 * Facepalm!

Theropods

 * word means:"Beast foot".
 * Clade includes: The last common ancestor of a pigeon and a Coelophysis and all of its descendants.
 * Critical traits:
 * furcula ("wish bone")
 * reduced number of digits on limbs
 * shin bone: bigger tibia, smaller fibula
 * foot: stands on toes, lots of changes in the foot bones

Sub-clades within Theropods
These are groups that we want to be able to distinguish and read about in cladograms.

 * Tetanurae (stiff tail)
 * Who's in: last common ancestor of Spinosaurus & pigeon and all it's descendants
 * Key trait: teeth at front of jaws

Avetheropoda (bird beast foot)

 * Who's in: Last common ancestor of Allosaurus & pigeon, and all its descendants
 * Key traits:
 * max 3 fingers on hand
 * bigger air pockets in vertebrae

Maniraptora (hand theif!)

 * Who's in: Last common ancestor of a therazinosaur & pigeon, and all its descendants.
 * Key trait: half-moon wrist bone ("semi-lunate carpal")
 * SWEET new research on hip muscles in this group, and what it has to do with birds!

Paraves (Kinda birds)
 * Who's in: Last common ancestor of Utahraptor & pigeon, and all its descendants
 * Key trait: pennaceous feathers attach directly to the shin

Aves (Birds, legit)

 * Who's in: Last common ancestor of Confusiusornis & pigeon, and all its descendants.
 * Key trait: PYGOSTYLE! (stumpy tail bone instead of a long bony tail).
 * Alternately Avialae, but let's not get too picky!

Sauropodomorphs
"Lizard foot-shaped-ish". Long-necked dinosaurs are in this clade.

Some of the most basal dinosaur fossils we have might be sauropodomorphs - paleontologists argue about this as they keep finding new fossils.

A good example is Eoraptor ("dawn thief").

 * Initially it was described as a basal theropod,
 * but it might be a basal sauropodomorph,
 * and in this class we're just keeping it in the very basal bullpen of dinosaur clades.

Definitely a basal sauropod is the big, goofy Plateosaurus ("flat lizard").

 * Plateosaurus walked on two legs, just like other basal dinosaurs.
 * Recent fossil reconstructions emphasize that the forelimbs were not positioned to hold the animal's weight.
 * Generally you can distinguish it from theropods because it retains five fingers and five toes.
 * Plateosaurus shows off traits that distinguish sauropodomorphs from derived theropods:
 * robust, long, thick femur
 * long neck
 * very small head, compared to the body!

Sauropods
The more derived long-neck dinosaurs are proper sauropods.

Surprising things about Sauropods include:

 * Quadrupedal posture (walking on four legs) is a derived trait in Sauropods.
 * Basal dinosaurs, including basal sauropodomorphs, walked on two legs.
 * Derived Sauropods have thick, dense leg bones, like pillars of a huge suspension bridge.
 * Sauropods did NOT chew their food!
 * They certainly ate plant material, and a LOT of it!
 * But they did not grind up the plants in their mouth. We can tell because:
 * They don't have cheeks to keep the food in their mouth while chewing!
 * They don't have flat grinding teeth.
 * When their teeth DO show wear-marks, it's from repeated crashing together of the teeth in the upper-and-lower jaw.
 * Think of their jaws like hedge-clippers, not like a wood chipper.
 * Sauropods have five toes on their back feet, with big claws.
 * Their ankle would be a little off the ground, but not high up like theropods.
 * There would probably be a pad of fat under the foot, like an elephant.
 * UNLIKE an elephant, Sauropod feet have big claws. It seems weird for walking but they figured it out.
 * This is why they're called "lizard foot"; living lizards today have five long toes with claws.
 * Sauropod vertebrae have big air pockets!
 * Think of their spine like the archways of a suspension bridge crossing a river or bay.
 * Complex struts extend between the elements in the archway to keep it from collapsing, folding, or bending at too sharp an angle.
 * Air pockets probably helped reduce the overall mass in a Sauropod body.
 * Air pockets in bones are a basal dinosaur trait (and probably basal to ornithodira - including the flying pteranodon), but big air pockets are a derived trait in Sauropods AND Theropods.

Within Sauropods we can consider two sister clades.

Diplodocoids
"Two beams".

These are long, long, long long dinosaurs!

 * Many Diplodocoids have long, whip-like tails, and very long necks.
 * Rather than sticking straight up, the neck may have stretched out in a long, sweeping arc to munch on brush and low plants.

Diplodocoids have long faces and peg-like teeth.

 * Their skulls are very flat compared to basal dinosaurs, with a silly smooshed, wide face.
 * The end of their mouth has little peg-like teeth.

We will pay attention to two Diplodocoids in this class.

Diplodocus, a classic example of the clade.

Barosaurus, a Diplodocoid common in Utah from Jurassic rocks. It's on display in the Natural History Museum of Utah.

Macronaria
"Big nose"

These are tall, bulky dinosaurus.

 * This clade includes the biggest dinosaurs ever, including the Titanosaurs and Argintinasaurus.
 * Their tails are not so long as Diplodocoids.
 * Their necks could probably support a more upright posture, a little more like a giraffe.
 * Their front legs actually get longer than their back legs, giving some derived ones kind of a sloped posture like an inbred German Shepard dog.
 * Their heads have a bulky nasal cavity structure on top.

We will pay attention to two Macronarians in this class.

Brachiosaurus, a classic example of the clade. It lived late in the time of dinosaurs.

Camarasaurus, a Macronarian common in Utah from Jurassic rocks. There are LOTS of them in Dinosaur National Monument.

ORNITHISCHIANS
"Bird Hips"

Welcome to a very important dinosaur category that has a very silly name!

Ornithischians include:

 * The last common ancestor of a spiky Stegosaurus and a horned Utahceratops, plus all of its descendants.
 * Most of the classic, easy to recognize "plant eating" dinosaurs EXCEPT the long-necked Sauropods.
 * At least two different independent lineages of quadrupedal gait!

What traits distinguish an Ornithischian dinosaur from other dinosaurs?

 * The pre-dentary bone.
 * This is a "beak"-like tip on the lower jaw. It is an additional little bone that makes the jaw come to a tip.
 * Once you know what to look for, it's pretty easy to recognize on the skull of ornithischian dinosaurs.
 * The predentary bone is present in basal ornithischians,
 * AND the predentary bone is critical to the fancy feeding structures that appear in derived ornithischians.

 * AnkyloSkullObliqueNHMU.jpg rear-facing projection on the pubis bone.
 * The dinosaur pelvis is made of three bones: illium, ischium, and pubis.
 * The illium runs parallel to the spine. This is the part that gets all expanded like a big shield in the derived armored Thyreophoran dinosaurs like ankylosaurids.
 * The ischium frames the rear-end plumbing of the animal. (Rather than the specialized variety of pelvic anatomy found in most mammals, we can guess dinosaurs had a simple multi-purpose outlet channel, called a cloaca, like frogs and birds have today.)
 * The pubis bone produces the forward corner of the pelvis socket where the femur fits in.
 * In ornithischians, some portion of the pubis bone is pointing backward, toward the plumbing side of the animal's pubis.
 * This can look very obvious in derived animals, where the rear-facing pubis bone is almost parallel to the ischium.
 * Or it can be subtle, as on the basal Fruitadens.
 * One proposed advantage of the rear-facing pubis bone is that it would leave more space for a big, gassy belly in these plant-eating animals, allowing them more space for digestion aided by bacteria and other microbes. Contrast this to the giant pubis bone that jams into the belly of long-necked Sauropod dinosaurs.

Genosaurs
"Cheek Lizards"

This clade includes the most recognized plant-eating dinosaurs, except for the long-necked Sauropods.

Chewing is a derived trait in dinosaurs, and this is the clade that gets it!

Genosaur clades include:

 * Armored thyreophorans
 * Duck-billed ornithopods
 * Horned marginocephalians (coming soon!)

Thyreophorans
"armor bearer"

Derived thyreophorans are easily recognized by their gnarly body armor: Stegosaurus, Ankylosaurs, etc.

Dinosaur body armor is made from scutes (pronounced "scooooooooooots", as in "Hey let's get some of those scooters and go to Yoko."), which are bones that grow right out of the skin!

 * Scutes are what make a crocodile look bumpy!
 * Scutes are basal in archosaurs, so they pop up in a lot of different groups
 * Scutes appear on some sauropods and theropods, but not as big or as many as on thyreophorans.

Our favorite basal thyreophoran is Scutellosaurus, aka "scute lizard" aka "skin bone lizard".

 * Fossils of Scutellosaurus are rare
 * Reconstructions of the animal's skeleton, posture, and capabilities are constantly revised & debated.
 * General observations & interpretations include:
 * The overall body is small; it is small like other basal dinosaurs.
 * the hindlimbs are longer and stouter than the forelimbs; this was a bipedal, or primarily bipedal, animal
 * the teeth are simple, spread across the whole jaw, and not very pointy; this animal ate plants or plants + bugs and stuff
 * the body is lined in little scutes; the skin was protected by this tough exterior
 * This paper by Benn Breeden has a beautiful reconstruction of a Scutellosaurus.

Eurypoda
"wide foot" Honestly I don't understand this name because their feet aren't that wide, but I guess compared to the more basal dinosaurs like Scutellosaurus it fits.

Lots of traits distinguish this clade but the coolest one is their bony eye sockets. Although scutes grow out of skin, on the skulls of these animals that scutes can tend to collide and grow along with the skull bones. Also a lot of the skull bones fuse together and get thick and wide, which is very different from the theropods and sauropods. A consequence of this that's easy to see on a skeleton in a museum is the fused bony socket around the eye - it's serious.

Also - obligate quadrupedalism. Eurypods walk on four legs, unlike basal thyreophorans and other basal dinosaurs.

But then the two main groups of eurypoda go very weird and different directions with the whole scute business.

Stegosaurids
"roof lizard" Stegosaur dinosaurs have big plate-shaped scutes on their back.

Different species of stegosaurids are distinguished easily by their wacky combinations of plates and spikes. Some have spikes on the tail, some have spikes on the shoulders, and all look like no one was taking their lunch money easily.

General observations and interpretations about stegosaurids:

 * Long femur and robust lower humerus; Stegosaurids were obligate quadrupeds, always walking on four legs.
 * Big plate-like scutes on the back and tail; Stegosaurids are really derived and these features might have served many different functions.
 * Stegosaurs are typically found as individual fossils, rather than big piles of bones from many individuals; Stegosaurids probably lived alone, like Pandas, rather than in a herd, like Reindeer.

Ankylosaurids
"fused lizard"

Ankylosaurs look a little less flashy than stegosaurs from a distance, but they have lots of wacky derived features with ecological interpretations.

 * Scutes line their back and sides; they were probably hard to bite.
 * Their top hip bone flares out to make a big sheild-like flat lower area along their back; they were probably less nimble than other dinosaurs.
 * Their tail bones can be fused together, making a stiff feature like a baseball bat.
 * Ankylosaurids include two sub-clades. Regular Ankylosaurs – that includes Ankylosaurus, a classic, and Acainocephalus, a new one from Utah – had clubs on the end of the tail.
 * Members of their sister clade Nodosaurids ("knot lizard") do NOT have the club on the tail, but they do rock AMAZING big shoulder spikes. Very cool.
 * Ankylosaurs have fancy nose chambers that might have helped them maintain their body temperature.
 * Ankylosaurs have decent teeth and cheeks more inset than Stegosaurids; they could probably chew tough plants better than other Thyreophorans.

Cerapoda
"horn foot"

What's this? An extra clade that is a NODE joining the branches that lead to duckbills and to horn-faces.

Duck-bills and horn faces have these features in common, which they get from a last-common ancestor:

 * rear-facing pubis extension
 * pre-dentary bone on lower jaw
 * cheeks
 * diastema

The name horn-foot can refer to the hoof-like toes that form in the derived members of this clade.

By now we are starting to notice that a lot of clades are named for DERIVED traits that show up in their famous members, so sometimes the name of the clade doesn't match to the trait that shows up on the branch leading to that node and joining all those animals via mutual inheritance.

Better-known as Duck-Billed Dinosaurs!

 * Includes the last common ancestor of an Iguanadon and a Parasaurolophus, and ALL of its descendants.
 * These animals could CHEW, and are members of the genosaurs.
 * This means they share a closer common ancestor to Stegosaurus than to, say, a Diplodocus.

 * Duckbills and iguanadontians have feet with THREE TOES. (hence: bird foot, ornithopod)

Duckbills and iguanadons have derived features for eating plant material.

 * Iguanadon teeth have ridges that would help gnash plant material.
 * Derived duck-billed dinosaurs, like Parasaurolophus, had packed-together batteries of teeth that could slap together to grind food.
 * Cheeks set the teeth in closer to the tongue, allowing muscles to hold food in the mouth for extra processing.
 * Even fancier, these mouths have a diastema!
 * This is an open space in between a snipping front and crunching back.
 * It leaves space for the tongue to move food around for more chewing time.
 * Lots of derived mammals have evolved a diastema, too.

Duckbills and Iguanadons probably mostly walked on two legs, but could also support their weight on their front legs.
 * Their toes on the hindlimbs developed hoof-like toenails.
 * Iguanadons also had hoof-like toenails on their forelimbs, PLUS a wacky stabby pointy nail on one digit.

The ecology of derived duck-bill dinosaurs is really well known from some excellent fossil examples of nests, and even from whole-body fossils from settings where the soft-parts preserved a bit, like a mummy.

Marginocephalia
"edge heads"

This group includes very recognizable and less-familiar animals. What they have in common is stuff on the edges of their heads.

There are two main sub-clades in Marginocephalia.

 * Pachycephalosaurs,"tough heads",
 * example: Pachycephalosaurus
 * Had thick-domed skulls rimmed with little spikes.
 * Walked on two legs.
 * Ok plant-eating teeth.
 * Ok plant-eating teeth.

 * Ceratopsians, the "horn eyes"
 * Basal example: Psittacosaurus, "parrot lizard"
 * walks on 4 or 2 legs
 * had long, simple filament feathers on its rear
 * has a ROSTRAL BONE
 * this is a bone that is added to the front of the face
 * Together with the pre-dentary, this forms a "beak" on the face
 * Derived example: Utahceratops, "Utah horn eyes"
 * A lot like the more-familiar Triceratops, but this is our special Utah version!
 * Walked on 4 legs, with hoofed toes
 * Horns
 * two substantial brow horns and a nose horn
 * Has a big frill with horns along the edges
 * and cheek horns!
 * Elaborate chewing features
 * cheeks!
 * packs of tough replacing teeth that form a grinding surface
 * plus the "beak" in the front
 * and a diastema in between - a space to move food around with the tongue.
 * Big belly
 * the ornithischian trait of a rear-facing pubis bone is really exagerated.
 * This makes a lot of space in the belly area
 * One interpretation is this space was used for guts filled with bacterial symbionts that processed tough plant foods.
 * Derived example: Centrosaurus, "middle lizard"
 * Centrosaurs are derived ceratopsians with a few key distinctive features:
 * usually a big nose horn
 * usually small or absent brow horns
 * usually a not-huge rostral bone (the upper "beak" bone on the face)
 * Walked on 4 legs, with hoofed toes
 * Elaborate chewing features
 * cheeks!
 * packs of tough replacing teeth that form a grinding surface
 * plus the "beak" in the front
 * and a diastema in between - a space to move food around with the tongue.
 * Big belly
 * the ornithischian trait of a rear-facing pubis bone is really exagerated.
 * This makes a lot of space in the belly area
 * One interpretation is this space was used for guts filled with bacterial symbionts that processed tough plant foods.


text:
User talk:Mgendy010

 * MGB:talk:Page

title: User talk:Mgendy010


title: User:Mnam23/sandbox


text:
User:Стриж Философ

 * General philosophy
 * History of philosophy

title: User:Стриж Философ


text: Template:Redirect tab

title: Template:Redirect tab


text:
Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future Casebook

Introduction
This Casebook contains a set of case studies developed by students enrolled in the Infrastructure Past, Present and Future (CEIE 499: Special Topics in Civil Engineering / GOVT 490: Synthesis Seminar for Policy and Government) course taught at George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government and the Sid and Reva Dewberry Department of Civil, Environmental, and Infrastructure Engineering by Prof. Jonathan Gifford.

2024 (Spring)

 * Skyline Drive
 * Port Miami Tunnel
 * Metro Flood Diversion (MN/ND)
 * Viet Cong Tunnel Network
 * Long Bridge
 * PJM Interconnection

2023 (Fall)

 * Mississippi River Locks and Dams
 * 5.9 GHz Spectrum
 * Texas Power Grid
 * Guangzhou South Railway Station
 * Jackson, MS Water and Wastewater Treatment
 * U.S./Mexico Border Infrastructure

2023 (Spring)

 * /Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B)/
 * GPS: Global Positioning System
 * Oroville Dam Failure
 * /Finnish Underground/

2022 (Fall)

 * /Shinkansen High Speed Rail/

 * /Port of Newport News/
 * /Brightline Rail System/
 * /Central Park/
 * /Venetian Flood Control (MOSE)/

2022 (Spring)

 * /Dutch Dikes/
 * /Big Dig/
 * /Gotthard Base Tunnel/
 * /Air Traffic Control System/

2021 (Fall)

 * /New Orleans Levees/
 * /Transcontinental Railroad/
 * /Maginot Line/
 * /Channel Tunnel/
 * /Hoover Dam/


text:
User talk:Itswill0

Please don't create red links like Atom. These are links from pages that were imported into Wikibooks - they should not be created. Rather the page with the link needs the link removing. This is one of the main differences between Wikibooks and Wikipedia - we don't have article pages like Atom. QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 15:26, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

title: User talk:Itswill0


text:
User:Itswill0/sandbox

https://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=User:Itswill0/sandbox&action=edit&redlink=1

title: User:Itswill0/sandbox


text:
Carnatic Music/Alankarams

1. Chathushra Jathi Dhruva Thalam
 * s r g m | g r | s r g r | s r g m ||
 * r g m p | m g | r g m g | r g m p ||
 * g m p d | p m | g m p m | g m p d ||
 * m p d n | d p | m p d p | m p d n ||
 * p d n S | n d | p d n d | p d n S ||

title: Carnatic Music/Alankarams


text: Template:Redirect tab/Where to put it

title: Template:Redirect tab/Where to put it


text:
Learning anatomy/Table version

This will expand every day.

This is the Table version of Learning anatomy.

title: Learning anatomy/Table version


text:
Colors and value

 * /Colors/
 * /Value/

title: Colors and value


text: Category:Book:Colors and value

title: Category:Book:Colors and value


text:
Colors and value/Colors

This is the advanced level. The different colors represent what each of the colors looks like.

Tertiary

 * Violet
 * Amber
 * Chartreuse
 * Vermilion
 * Chartreuse
 * Vermilion

title: Colors and value/Colors


text:
Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Exercises (2)

Lesson 7

Section 1
---

Section 2
---

Section 3
---

Section 4
---

Section 5
---


text: Template:Autoconfirmed user

title: Template:Autoconfirmed user


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Numeral


text:
Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Grammar

Grammar
Substantives and Adjectives are not declined: the same word expresses both the singular and the plural. Pronouns hove a plural form.

Singular. Plural.

我 Uá, I. 阮. 咱 Ún or nán, we.

爾 Lṳ́, thou or you. 恁 Nín, ye or you.

伊 I, he, she, it. 因. 伊人 I or i--nâng, they, them.

The distinctions of moods, tenses, numbers and persons are shown by the addition of certain auxiliary verbs or particles, as follows:—

indicative mood.

past tense.
The common signs of the Past Tense are 有 ũ and 甞 chêng, and are employed chiefly in asking questions and in giving answers, but seldom when a subject is simply being spoken of, viz.—

perfect tense.
The chief signs of the Perfect Tense are 了 lióu, 正 chiàⁿ, 識 pat, 有 ũ, 未 būe, and 亞未 a-būe.

Lióu[1] 了 (finish) can only be used to subjects being spoken of, and cannot be used in asking questions, viz.—

Chiàⁿ 正 (just) and 識 pat (ever) can be used both to questions and answers, viz.—

Ũ (have) 有 in the Perfect Tense, generally followed by the interrogative sign 亞未 a-būe, is used for questions only, and 未 būe (not yet) is used for answers, viz.—

future tense.
The chief signs of the Future Tense are àiⁿ, 正要 chiàⁿ-àiⁿ, (want) 會 õi (can) and 袂 bõi (cannot.) viz.—

potential mood.
The signs of the Potential Mood are 會 õi, 袂 bõi, 會得 õi-tit, 袂得 bõi-tit, 好 hó, 着 tiéh, and 不可 m̄-móⁿ.

Õi (can) 會 implies ability, and 袂 bõi (cannot) implies its opposite, inability.

Õi-tit (can) 會得 implies possibility, and 袂得 bõi-tit (cannot) implies impossibility.

Hó 好 is very nearly the same as the English auxiliary verb may, and implies liberty.

Tiéh 着 (must, ought, or should) implies obligation.

M̄-móⁿ (don't) 不可 implies the opposite of 着 tiéh, viz. must not, ought not, and should not.

The Passive verb is formed by the use of the words 分 pun, 乞 khoih (to give) and 分人 pun--nâng (give people.)

The Progressive Form is formed by the use of the word 在 tõ (in the act of) and 要 iàⁿ (want.)

the comparative degree.
The words employed in the comparative degree are 愈 zú, 敬 kèng, (more) 𢰳 ióu, (a little) 過 kùe, (over) 贏 iâⁿ (to be superior, to defeat,) and 輸, (to be inferior, to be defeated.)

the superlative degree.
The words employed in the superlative degree are 上 siãng and 上頂 siãng-téng (supreme); the latter generally refers to the qualities of goods, viz.—


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Time generally


text:
Chess Opening Theory/1. e4/1...d5/2. e5

= 2. e5 =

While advancing the e-pawn to gain space looks somewhat natural, it is rarely seen by masters and never by players above 2500. Black has a number of ways to equalize quickly but the most common plan is to develop the light-squared bishop to f5 or g4 and then play e6. This results in a position similar to the French Defense, but where black's bishop is developed outside the pawn chain; therefore black is usually left with an improved French Defense. Black's most common move is to play 2...c5 making it awkward for white to continue 3. d4, and this move has scored very well for black. White may play d4 anyway and allow the trading of a center pawn for a wing pawn, or may prepare it with 3. c3, or may abandon d4 and play 3. f4. Less commonly black has played 2...Bf5 which also equalizes. More exotic tries include 2...d4!? with a complicated position and often an unusual pawn structure, and 2...e6?! allowing a transposition to the French Defense.

Theory table

 * 1. e4 d5 2. e5

When contributing to this Wikibook, please follow the Conventions for organization.

title: Chess Opening Theory/1. e4/1...d5/2. e5


text:
Wikibooks:Reading room/Proposals/2021/June

Image-linking with regards to licensing
Hi everyone,

I'd like to bring the following discussion to your attention: c:Special:Permanentlink/559354101.

I was asking about linking images and licensing, and did get an answer with information I wasn't aware of. I took a quick look at your image-help and did not find a corresponding hint either. So maybe you'd like to add information about this to your help pages. I will do so for german wikibooks.

Best regards --HirnSpuk (discuss • contribs) 11:50, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

 * HirnSpuk I apologize for seeing this so late. At the link you posted you made an interesting point about physical book and ebook licensing. I think instead of manual attribution, which is unsustainable to do accurately on larger works and error prone, it may be best if a template were developed which automatically handles attribution at the end of a book for all used assets using machine readable tags on commons. I'm unsure if this is truly a good approach or if there are better ideas though - Just what came to mind. --Mbrickn (discuss • contribs) 00:25, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Mbrickn, no need to apologize :-)... I need to, because I forgot to clearly mention, what's the problem: Images usually may not be linked, because licensing-requirements are lost that way. There even might be problems, when printing content.
 * I like the idea of machine readable tags, though I'm not skilled enough to even remotely jugde how this might be feasible and what benefits it could bring. In svg you can attribute within the file pretty easy, though I don't know if anybody uses this.
 * I was playing with the Cite-Extension to do something similar. Though it needs manual work. If you take a look at this edit: b:de:Special:Diff/prev/960255. For now I didn't make a Template out of this, it was just simple playing around.
 * Maybe all Wikibooks could team up and talk about a "possible solution" (assuming this is some kind of a problem), so we could present something to the mediawiki developers and/or to commons with one voice? This might be interesting to other Wikiprojects as well (thinking about e. g. Wikivoyage)?
 * Best regards --HirnSpuk (discuss • contribs) 08:45, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

OpenStax/Wikibooks Collaboration?
OpenStax seems to be on a similar trajectory with a lot of the textbooks in similar subjects to that on Wikibooks. What if we were to share resources in between and complete some of the books on our end, and help begin some of theirs, or we gain some additional editors/people who could assist in making the books. I know this is a bit of a far-out idea, but I could look into it if it seems like a remotely good idea. Also, I'm a new user because I'm intrigued by the project, and so my lack of knowledge and general experience is very present.
 * Please explain your proposal further. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 07:27, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

 * OpenStax has a lot of funding and editors for their work, and its typically for free use (aside from printed publication prices from them). If Wikibooks were to partner with them, there could be additional funding and editors creating books over here at Wikibooks possibly? I'm not really too sure on this idea and I'll have to come back to it later. Addy135 (discuss • contribs) 07:34, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I am not sure how exactly you want Wikibooks to partner - some examples would be helpful. Any freely-licensed book can be imported here after all. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 08:54, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Ah ok. I'll look more into it. How would I close this section? Addy135 (discuss • contribs) 03:40, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Reading room discussions aren't really closed per say. They typically go into an archive from what I understand once discussion has stopped and someone decides to sweep the room, like Reading room/Proposals/2021/January. I'm relatively new to editing Wikibooks, but I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. :) --Mbrickn (discuss • contribs) 22:07, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * As per working with OpenStax content in Wikibooks, there are a few things to note. Organizational partnering (In terms of sharing resources officially, etc.) is something that's a bit out of my depth, but it would probably require community consensus, and possibly the consent of the Wikimedia foundation and Rice University, which manages OpenStax depending on the exact nature of the collaboration. However, as Leaderboard points out, we are mostly free to import OpenStax content to Wikibooks due to compatible licenses. There are a few caveats of course. The biggest is that not all OpenStax content is open enough for Wikibooks, due to incompatible licenses. For example the OpenStax Calculus Book volumes 1, 2 and 3 are licensed as CC-BY-SA-NC-4.0. The NC, or non-commercial component, is right out for most Wikimedia projects, based on the Wikimedia Commons document describing how they license things here here. Fortunately most OpenStax books do not have' this non commercial requirement, making this a non issue for them. The second issue (Which is more on Wikibooks then on OpenStax) is that Wikibooks uses Creative Commons 3.0 and GDFL, and OpenStax uses Creative Commons 4.0. I'm not sure how CC 4.0 licenses interact with a site using a 3.0 license for it's content, but I suspect this is the easier factor to solve (But I'm not a lawyer).--Mbrickn (discuss • contribs) 22:22, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Pseudobot change proposals
Seeing an increasing number of users make use of AWB here. My proposal is to

 * allow any sysop to add/remove pseudobot to any account (currently they can only add it to themselves). AWB works better that way as manual confirmation is no longer needed.
 * allow any user with the pseudobot flag to remove it from themselves when finished. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 13:48, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

 * , the proposals seem fine to me. -- Jules (Mrjulesd) 11:36, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Administrators/Temporary administrators
Following a request for temporary adminship at Requests for permissions, I am suggesting the addition of the text at Administrators/Temporary administrators to administrator policy.

Please show your support or opposition here; also please discuss any amendments that may be required here, or any other comments.

 * Support as proposer. -- Jules (Mrjulesd) 11:43, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

 * "When the agreed time period for adminship expires." isn't needed - the software will enforce this. Also sure, the policy is OK, but I also have the feeling that the existing Wikibooks structure is good in that it isn't too bureaucratic and there is an unwritten provision to make exceptions when needed. Not sure if the policy is required as a result, but I have no issues with its inclusion. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 13:16, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

 * - Seems like a useful policy for when short adminships are desirable. --Mbrickn (discuss • contribs) 14:21, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Approving of someone as an administrator isn’t a casual decision I can make within a minute or two. Frankly, I am not so keen on going through the process if it is meant to last only for a month or so. Kai Burghardt (discuss • contribs) 15:59, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * . Temporary admins who promise to limit their intended tasks are not to exceed the limits without absolute necessity. Seeking to temporarily undelete means not to block users if no dire need.--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 23:37, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * . It is needed because while WB is not bureaucratic, Stewards will not act without some evidence that the community supports the action. If we can't point to a policy or a discussion then they won't de-admin a rogue user. QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 11:21, 22 June 2021 (UTC)


text:
User:ItzMo

cool asf

title: User:ItzMo


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/A Building &c


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Human Body &c


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Household Furniture &c


text:
Template:Check out URL

Check out [ ]

title: Template:Check out URL


text:
Template:Check out URL top

{{hide|Check out the URL(s).|

title: Template:Check out URL top


text:
Template:Check out URL more

, [ ]

title: Template:Check out URL more


text:
Template:Check out URL last URL

, and [ ]

title: Template:Check out URL last URL


text:
Template:Check out URL bottom

.}}

title: Template:Check out URL bottom


text:
Australian Contract Law/Agreement: Offer & Acceptance

Agreement
For a contract to be found to be valid, there must be an agreement in place. A valid agreement has two parts: an offer and an acceptance.

Offer
An offer is 'an expression to another of a willingness to be bound on stated terms'.


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Garden


text:
Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/A List of Words used in Cooking

Lesson 16 -


text: Category:Versions of learning anatomy

title: Category:Versions of learning anatomy


text:
User:Dafatskin/sandbox

Introduction
Settlers of Catan, also known as Settlers or Catan is a multiplayer board game designed by Klaus Teuber, first published in 1995 in Germany. It has become one of the first German-Style board games to achieve popularity outside of Europe.

Content Page

 * 1) Setting Up The Game

title: User:Dafatskin/sandbox


text:
Human brain/Eye

Anatomy
The parts of your eye are:
 * Sclera
 * Cornea
 * Retina
 * Anterior chamber
 * Posterior chamber
 * Iris
 * Pupil
 * Lens
 * Vitreous body
 * Optic nerve

Function
Your eyes help you see color.

Light
Color is actually from sunlight. Without the sun, everything would be black, white, and grey.

Sight
Now that we learned about color, we need to learn how we see. When light enter the pupil, and is focused through the cornea, lens, and iris. Then the image focuses on the retina. There are 2 types of cells in vision: Rods and cones. Rods see black, white, and grey. Cones see colors.

title: Human brain/Eye


text:
Talk:Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized

Teochew characters
The original text often uses Mandarin or Literary Chinese glosses for Teochew words without a standard written character. One objective of the modernization is to replace these with vernacular characters where available, or a placeholder where these are not available. In the meanwhile, the characters used in the original text are left in place - still a work in progress.

Kbseah (discuss • contribs) 09:22, 10 October 2021 (UTC)


text:
Chess Opening Theory/1. e4/1...d5/2. exd5/2...Nf6/3. c4

= 3. c4 =

This move defends the d-pawn and essentially forces black to play a gambit. Black has two main options. The first is 3...c6, and now white should not capture the pawn, but instead play 4. d4 (or 4. Nc3 which will transpose), and after 4...cxd5 the position has transposed into the Caro-Kann Panov-Botvinnik Attack. Because this line used to be considered good for white, 3. c4 used to be the overwhelming choice of strong players. There are three reasons this is no longer the case. First, the Panov-Botvinnik is no longer considered good for white. Second, 3. d4 is now considered a serious try at an advantage for white. Third, the rise of 3...e6, the so-called Icelandic Gambit or Palme Gambit. The theoretical standing of this gambit is debated, but it scored quite well against unprepared opponents when it first rose to prominence, and continues to score surprisingly well today.

Theory table

 * 1. e4 d5 2. exd6 Nf6 3. c4

When contributing to this Wikibook, please follow the Conventions for organization.


text:
Public-Private Partnership Policy Casebook/Tideway Tunnel

This case study reviews the Thames Tideway Tunnel project as a collaborative work of Shalini Avasarala, Qiang Chen, Rian Williams. The casebook is a product of the George Mason University graduate program, as an assignment for the Public-Private Partnership Policy course under the leadership of Dr. Jonathan Gifford. It explores case elements such as key actors, event timeline, risks, financial and institutional structures, policy issues, and takeaways.

Summary
The Thames Tideway Tunnel is a PPP that will result in a 25 kilometers (16 miles) long sewer tunnel under the tidal section of the River Thames. It is a unique project in that it is considered "one of the largest infrastructure projects underway in any European city," at a cost of £4.2 billion. Its construction was officially begun in 2016.

The tunnel is part of a larger River Thames improvement plan, referred to as the Thames Tideway Scheme. This scheme seeks to address concerns of deteriorating River Thames water quality due to the workings of London's Victorian era sewage system, designed and completed in the mid-1800s. This sewage system has fail safes for when rainfall and sewage reach over-capacity, using Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs) to empty excess into the Thames instead of backing up and exiting through original entry points in homes and city streets. However, untreated sewage compromises the River Thames and poses a public health risk, as increased population density in London as well as more frequent large rain events have led to increased sewer system overflows. In addition to the domestic public health concerns this poses, the European Commission has determined the UK's system of allowing untreated sewer to flow into the Thames is in violation of the EU's Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive, applying elements of political pressure for a solution.

Thames Water, a private water utilities company and the water provider for London, has been a "central actor in the development of [a solution project]", determining through a study and various rounds of consultation that the Thames Tideway Tunnel (TTT or 'super sewer'), would be the best solution for increasing sewerage capacity and reducing overflows. The Bazalgette Tunnel Limited (Bazalgette) is a special-purpose company created to finance, construct, and operate the tunnel, as Thames Water's financial standing made it incapable of pursuing or operating the project without impacting its creditworthiness ratings.

Though the tunnel was initially estimated and confirmed for an expected 2024 completion date, COVID-19 related delays have pushed the completion date to early 2025. Concerns with the project include its cost, necessity, if the tunnel is the best solution approach, and -- considering the scope and length of the project – if potential disruptions to London’s communities and public spaces are justifiable or avoidable.

Annotated List of Actors
Thames Water Utilities Ltd.

A large private utility company that is responsible for the public water supply and waste treatment in Greater London, the Thames Valley, Gloucestershire, Surrey, north Wiltshire, and other parts of England. Thames Water serves as the UK’s largest wastewater and water services company and awarded Bazalgette Tunnel Ltd the contract to build the Tideway Tunnel.

Thames Water customers

Thames water customers will pay for this tunnel through their sewage bills. Customers both in London and outside of London will see their bills increase by approximately 80 pounds by 2020.

Thames Tideway Tunnel Ltd

This company owns the tunnel itself and was formed specifically for this project.

Bazalgette Tunnel Limited

Bazalgette Tunnel Ltd owns Thames Tideway Tunnel Ltd and serves as the “infrastructure provider.”

Government

The government’s role here is to provide a financial guarantee in case or any unexpected or unanticipated risks or costs come up during construction. There is no base funding that is coming from the Treasury.

Ofwat

Also known as the Water Services Regulation Authority. Ofwat is responsible for economically regulating privatized water and sewage in Wales and England.

Amber Infrastructure

Investor in the project.

Dalmore Capital

Investor in the project.

DIF

Investor in the project.

Allianz

Investor in the project.

Timeline of Events
The timeline of the Thames Tideway Tunnel can date back to the start and completion of the original sewer tunnels in 1859 to 1875, as the aging London sewage system infrastructure needs updating to better serve the modern community.

In 1991, the EU Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive was passed and required compliance by 2000. As the London sewer system's CSOs are not in compliance with the directive due to the discharge of untreated sewage into the river, the UK government and Thames Water pursued research for a solution. The Thames Strategic Study began in 2001 and was published in 2005, recommending improvements such as, "upgrades to five of London’s tidal sewage treatment works... constructing the Lee Tunnel to avoid the worst CSO… [and] the Thames Tideway Tunnel". The UK government publicly supported the Thames Tideway Tunnel as the "preferred solution" in 2007. This coincided with EU follow up action concerning EU Directive compliance: the European Commission notified the UK of its dissatisfaction concerning untreated sewage spilling into the river in 2006, then "launched enforcement action" in 2010 and officially confirmed through the Court of Justice of the European Union in 2012 that UK was in violation and at risk for penalties and fines until compliance was achieved.

In domestic affairs of pursuing the now proposed Thames Tideway Tunnel solution, consultation phases began in 2010. Consultations had different phases for different targeted approaches. The first phase sought to educate the public on the issues, solutions considered, and reasoning for the Thames Tideway Tunnel plan. Potential routes and dig sites were also discussed, question and answer sessions were held, and suggestions and submissions from interested and impacted parties were accepted. The second phase began in late 2011 and lasted until 2012 and targeted the local communities and impacted demographics in shortlisted route and work site areas for feedback and response. The feedback gained in consultations was used to refine the Thames Tideway Tunnel plans.

In 2015, contractors and investors were confirmed and announced, and by November 3, 2015 the contract and operating license was awarded to Bazalgette from Ofwat, the "chief project assessor" which acts as a regulatory body that "[manages] licenses and negotiations of tariffs" for both Thames Water and Bazalgette. Bazalgette, going forward, would be the infrastructure provider and would "provide finance, oversee delivery, and operate [the Thames Tideway Tunnel]".

The Lee Tunnel -- which was contracted in 2010 and began construction in the same year, and was considered the first step in the Thames Tideway Scheme (of which the Thames Tideway Tunnel is a part of) as "the first tranche of work" and is a "deep storage and conveyance tunnel," -- was completed in Jan 2016. Thames Tideway Tunnel construction then began, also in 2016. Completion of the Tunnel was originally estimated to occur in 2024, but in 2020, delays and complications related to the COVID-19 pandemic increased costs by £233 million and pushed the completion date into early 2025.

Maps of Locations

The above map shows the proposed route and work sites of the Thames Tideway Tunnel. The route and sites were confirmed and retained following the consultation processes and final refinement of project plans before the start of construction.

Risk Matrix
The estimated cost of this project is 4.2 billion pounds - excluding extra costs brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic - and will be financed by Thames Water’s commercial and residential customers through increases in their sewage bills. For a project as large as this, the cost of finance is a substantial portion of the overall cost, because consumers will be paying interest on the invested capital over the next several decades. Therefore, the government believes it will need a separate financial package to support and secure funding at reasonable cost. The challenge and risk here is the government’s ability to design their support package with a price tag that is attractive enough to the private sector to encourage competitive bidding for the project. This transfer of risk to the public sector needs to be properly managed. The problem here comes from the fact that any government financial support to investors gives the effect of reducing their exposure to certain risks, making them less likely to have an incentive to manage those risks. Therefore, making it more likely those risks actually happen.

In the case of the Tideway Tunnel, any materialized risks that lead to increased costs would be passed on to the consumer. The original cost of the project was estimated to be 1.7 billion pounds. Since then, it has been estimated to be closer to 4.2 billion pounds. Thames Water estimates that there is a strong chance that the ultimate final cost of the project will more or less be 4.2 billion pounds. Thames Water customers will pay running costs once the project is completed. Therefore, it is critical that Ofwat and the government make sure there is less pressure on all elements of cost so that customers do not pay more than needed for this tunnel.

There is a possible incentive for Thames Water to make Ofwat spend more during the planning stages than needed as Thames Water receives a return on investment (ROI) that is approved by Ofwat. The gravity of planning risk and the ability to control it relies on political sensitivity surrounding the project, the planning process, and the quality of planning done by Thames Water.

Another potential risk is that the completed tunnel does not operate as planned and consequently, does not accomplish specific goals or benefits set out in the planning stages. This could result in fines on the government, and depending on the circumstances financial consequences for Thames Water or Bazalgette Tunnel Ltd.

Some other risks to account for are natural disasters that could cause damage to the surrounding environment, delaying the project and adding additional costs. However, the government support package mentioned above could insure the project against these remote risks and the taxpayer, or consumer in this case, would bear all the cost should this risk happen.

Contract Type
The contract type is design, building and maintenance contract. A newly created company Bazalgette Tunnel Limited (BTL, trading under the name of Tideway) is the licensed infrastructure provider (IP) for its design, build, commission and maintain the Thames Tideway Tunnel (“TTT”). This Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) is comprised of four shareholders: insurance company Allianz; independent fund management company Dalmore Capital Limited; global infrastructure fund INPP together with the insurance company Swiss Life (managed and advised by Amber Infrastructure); and the independent fund management company DIF. Tideway awarded the main works contracts to three contractors with each one responsible for design and constructing one the three tunnel sections.

Meanwhile, the System Integration contract has been awarded to infrastructure support service provider, Amey OWR Ltd., which will be responsible for providing process control, communication equipment and software systems for operation, maintenance and reporting across the Thames Tideway Tunnel system. The contractors were selected through a separate and highly competitive tender process run by Thames Water.

Cost
In July 2015, upon the financial close, the cost of Thames Tideway Tunnel Project is estimated to be £4.2 billion at 2011 prices, with probability of 80% that the cost will be £4.2 billion or less. Of the whole £4.2 billion cost, £1.1billon will be expenditure of Thames Water Utilities Limited (“TWUL”) (2014/2015 prices) and £3.144 billion (2014/2015 prices) regulatory baseline cost will be the expenditure of the IP (“Tideway”). This baseline cost is calculated based on management’s detailed assessment of cost including:

 * Direct Works of £1,855million (Main Works Contractors, System Integrator and Program Wide)

 * Indirect costs of £669 million (resources, insurances, facilities, IT)

 * Contingency of £526 million

The total value of the three construction contracts is £1.676 billion, and this cost is the major part of main works cost. A £233 million was estimated adding to the previous forecasted cost due to Covid-19.

Financial Structure
The financial sourcing TWUL responsible accounts for 24% of the cost, and Tideway needs to provide 76% of the project cost. The TTT project financial structure is as follows:

For the major part that Tideway responsible, the company shareholders have committed £1.3 billion and a further £1 billion has been committed through a Revolving Credit Facility (RCF). Furthermore, the project has secured a 35-year loan from the EIB of £700 million as well as issuing bonds totaling £350 million. The share of financing that each investors of Tideway accounts for is: Allianz (34.26%), Amber (21.32%), Dalmore (33.76%) and DIF (10.66%).

The revenue (benefits) during the project implementation includes:

 * RPI-linked revenue collected from Thames Water’s wastewater customers with fixed real WACC until 2030. Average increases to roughly £20–25 per annum of water bill will be applied to 13.8 million sewage customers of TWUL. A £7 surcharge was already included in customer’s 2015 bills to cover project costs incurred by Thames Water.  The surcharge charge will increase incrementally as the tunnel is constructed.

 * Broad insurance program in place

 * Benefits from a support package provided by the UK Government. The government support package worthy of 18 million consists of six core contract documents designed to support the Tunnel project should exceptional, highly unlikely risks happen, which the private sector could not cover at an acceptable cost, or at all. The six core contract documents are: supplemental compensation agreement, market disruption facility, contingent equity support agreement, discontinuation agreement, special administration offer agreement and shareholders direct agreement.

Institutional Structure
Following recent changes to the established UK water industry legislation, Tideway is the first project to be specified by the UK government as a large water project that should be delivered by a new company, the Tideway. Tideway’s business as a regulated utility company is to design, build, commission and maintain the TTT, a simple asset with a 120 year design life. In delivering the infrastructure and services, multi governmental departments, private entities and organizations are involved. The delivery model is showed in the following framework and responsibility of each entity in implementing this project and relationship between entities in the project are provided as follows:

OFWAT: The Water Services Regulation Authority which is a non-ministerial government department. It is the body responsible for economic regulation of the privatized water and sewerage industry in England. In this TTT project, it awards license to the Tideway regulate this infrastructure provider. The License sets out Tideway’s principal duties, other obligations and the building blocks for Tideway’s revenue prior to 2030.

TWUL: Thames Water Utilities Ltd, known as Thames Water, is a large private utility company responsible for the public water supply and waste water treatment in most of Greater London, Luton, the Thames Valley, Surrey, Gloucestershire, north Wiltshire, far west Kent, and some other parts of England. It is the sponsor of the TTT project. The split of works as between Tideway and Thames Water during the construction and operation periods will be governed by the Interface Agreement and Operation and Maintenance Agreement respectively. Also, under the Revenue Agreement Thames Water will collect from its wastewater customers the revenue Tideway is entitled to under its license.

CH2M: As program manager of the project, it contracts the Program Management Contract (PMC) from the Tideway, with the later as the client.

Insurers: Several insurers were used to provide insurance policies for the project and the IP. Tideway has procured a comprehensive set of insurance policies in line with market’s best practice. Additionally, Tideway has procured a contingent support package from DEFRA who acts as insurer of last resort for extreme risks that cannot be efficiently insured by the insurance market (see Government Support Package).

Lenders: In this project, several lenders provide funding and investment for the IP to implement the project, including Allianz, Dalmore Capital Limited, Amber infrastructure and DIF.

Main Works Contractors: Including three Joint Ventures (JV) that are responsible for designing and building each of the three sections of the tunnel. The commercial relationship with the three consortia that will deliver the bulk of the tunnel will be managed via NEC3 contracts. Finally, an alliance has been created between Tideway, the three Main Works Contractors, the System Integrator, and Thames Water with the aim to ensure co-operation between all delivery stakeholders. This relationship is regulated by the Alliance Agreement.

DEFRA: Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs, is the government department responsible for environmental protection, food production and standards, agriculture, fisheries and rural communities in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. In this project, it will provide government support package (e.g., cover for insurable events above the amount the market is ready to provide, financing to fund the shortfall otherwise it must discontinue the project in the event of cost overruns above the “Threshold Outturn” and £500 million committed liquidity facility in case of market disruption) to the PI.

Infrastructure Provider (IP): The newly created SPV, Tideway, is Responsible for design, building and maintenance of the whole project. It has direct interaction with all the six institutes during implementing the project. It assumes the most risks and responsibility for delivery of this project.

Clear Identification of Policy Issues
Policy issues and general criticisms of the project typically stem from the following issues: potential disruption of the project due to scope and construction; the cost and financing of the project; and the usefulness of the project compared to other solutions' benefits. Thames Tideway Tunnel, as a large and long-term project that is estimated to impact London citizens in an active project period of 8 to 9 years -- and then aims to serve London in perpetuity for a minimum of at least several decades if not longer, has invited much scrutiny and discussion since its early proposal days.

Because the Thames Tideway Tunnel was proposed to supplement the current London sewerage system, the route and length of the tunnel runs underneath a large distance of the city. This, in addition to the complexity of the project and the planned 24 hour work schedule in order to deliver the project on time, drew concerns of noise pollution and construction impacting property value and business capacity, worsening quality of life in areas near work sites. Traffic congestion due to construction vehicles transporting materials and waste, as well as ecological impacts of the increase in CO2 emissions due to the increased traffic and traffic time, was also a concern by opponents to the Thames Tideway Tunnel plan. These concerns were addressed by the consultation phases, which attempted to educate the public and take into account public opinion in order to better refine plans and diminish future impacts on surrounding communities. Traffic criticisms were countered by the use of water barges on the river for construction transportation. The work sites are also built in a way to attempt minimizing sound pollution, especially at night. The impact of these measures can be argued in their effectiveness, but they are the countermeasures taken by Bazalgette in attempts to diminish negative impacts.

The original cost of the Thames Tideway Tunnel project has increased at various points of the project and have incurred criticisms of the cost of the project as too high or wasteful. These criticisms align with concerns of budget estimations mismatching to cost realities by the end of the project, and relate to the concerns of customers funding the project through water utilities fee increases (which began impacting customer bills as early as 2015 through a gradual increase), at an estimated £20-25 per household. Taxpayer backing of the UK government's government support package (GSP) is also a potential point of criticism, as the costs and risks of the project can be viewed by the public and opponents as insured by citizens if the involved private entities and their insurance become unable to cover costs and uncertainties relating to the project. The counter to this criticism is the requirements in the GSP that require the private firms to hold insurance coverage to ensure the GSP is for low probability but uninsurable high-risk events, and involved parties are relatively certain the GSP will not be used.

Thames Water being incapable of financing, constructing, or operating the project has also drawn criticism, as "Thames Water’s choices, not external circumstances, led to its financial position," which left it unfit to take on the project. Though Thames Water and Bazalgette are "legally and financially [separate]," they closely engage and interact, "with Thames Water being both the supplier and customer of [Bazalgette]," which may act as countermeasures to the criticism that Thames Water's lack of direct construction and operation of the tunnel improperly tasks entities that are unfamiliar or lack specialization in London's water infrastructure with the project. It does not address the criticisms that the complexity of this structuring obfuscates and complicates responsibility and oversight -- Thames Water's lack of investor presence in the project while maintaining a position to tender construction contracts also draws concerns of lack of incentive or pressure on Thames Water for pursuing the most cost-efficient yet high-quality options for the project.

There are also criticisms of the tunnel being a less efficient solution than other potential approaches. Other solutions proposed to address the issue of rain and the amount of sewerage created by a large populace overburdening the current sewer system focus on sustainable urban development solutions and sustainable drainage solutions (SuDS). Decreasing and delaying rainwater runoff that enters the sewer system would increase capacity for sewerage. It would also be eco-friendly, as SuDS planning includes increasing permeable surfaces through measures such as green roofing, green walls, incentivizing developers to lessen paving over green space, and design housing that is compatible with the use of rainwater tanks. Furthermore, following the Flood and Water Management Act 2010, SuDS are increasingly incorporated and pursued by actors and supported by the UK government. However, Thames Water and proponents have argued lessening rainfall addition to overflows does not address the concerns of a large and growing population outpacing the sewer capacity.

Narrative of the Case
From the start, there was controversy surrounding the project. Questions regarding cost, duration, disruption, whether this was the proper solution for London and Thames Water customers were cast about. Customers were angry when they found out they were going to be funding the large cost of this tunnel through increases in their bills.

Individuals who lived near or along the proposed sites were apprehensive about noise, disruption, and loss of space due to the construction. As a way to combat these concerns and apprehension, Thames Water created a “Code of Construction Practice” to outline how they would try to minimize impacts on the public in the area and also let individuals know that they would practice these standards at all their sites.

There were some individuals who preferred an option different to the tunnel. This option was an excavation of an urban drainage system that would be under the streets of London. This was the more sustainable option; however, it was three times the cost of the tunnel.

Takeaways and Points of Discussion
This TTT project is not a typical P3 project. TWUL the sponsor, rather than a public organization, is a private utility company responsible for the public water supply and wastewater treatment. Under the public requirements, TWUL agreed to invest £1.4 billion on preparatory works and construction of the Lee Tunnel (similar as TTT, is part of the Thames Tideway Scheme). However, TWUL was unable to bear the full costs itself. So, it set about designing a completely novel way to deliver a major project. The introduction of the Flood Water & Management Act in 2013 allowed the utility to tender new infrastructure to a third-party financier. TWUL tendered for an independent infrastructure provider (IP), with its own license from regulator Ofwat, to undertake the rest of the work (in this case, the Tideway wins the bid).

Increasing utility bills to repay this large capital cost may draw public backlash. As mentioned before, a £7 surcharge was already included in customer’s 2015 bills to cover project costs incurred by TWUL. The customers have been charged for something they cannot yet see. Furthermore, the annual utility bill is estimated to increases to roughly £20–25 per annum after the project completion (a 6% increase, current UK nationwide water and sewerage bill is £396.60 a year). People may be reluctant to pay additional cost for the service that are not perceptible in their daily life (e.g., environmental cost saving).

However, as mentioned earlier in this study, London’s sewage system dates back to the Victorian era. The Thames Tideway Tunnel will provide a more efficient system while also protecting the Thames. Once the tunnel is fully operational, it will intercept 95% of the sewage that flows into the Thames and will capture dangerous debris and sediments that accumulate after long periods without rainfall. This tunnel will also prevent the number of sewage spills. Most importantly, however, the Tideway Tunnel will make the Thames a cleaner river.

In addition, there is also an added economic benefit through this project. This project created over 4,000 jobs and is estimated to create more in the coming years. Therefore, this project contributes several benefits to the people of London and the greater England area.

As for points of discussion:

1) In relation to the policy issue of Thames Water customers 'footing the bill,' what are potential perspectives on the matter? What are potential criticisms of or support for the decision?  What alternatives exist, or why was this a legitimate approach to funding the project?

2) Regarding criticisms of Thames Water being unable to pursue the project directly due to its financial standing, was the role Thames Water played in the project problematic or unavoidable?

Additional Readings
[https://wrlc-gm.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01WRLC_GML/19u1omk/cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2388006226 Nathan Zhivov. “The Thames Tideway Tunnel: A Hybrid Approach to Infrastructure Delivery.” Discussion papers (International Transport Forum) (2018): 0_1–34. Print.]

[https://wrlc-gm.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01WRLC_GML/19u1omk/cdi_crossref_primary_10_1177_0042098017736713 Loftus, Alex, and Hug March. “Integrating What and for Whom? Financialisation and the Thames Tideway Tunnel.” Urban studies (Edinburgh, Scotland) 56.11 (2019): 2280–2296. Web.]

[https://wrlc-gm.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01WRLC_GML/19u1omk/cdi_informaworld_taylorfrancis_310_1080_13604813_2019_1689730 Grafe, Fritz-Julius, and Hanna Hilbrandt. “The Temporalities of Financialization: Infrastructures, Dominations and Openings in the Thames Tideway Tunnel.” City (London, England) 23.4-5 (2019): 606–618. Web.]


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Provisions, Fish, Vegetable and Fruit


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/On Dress


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Nautical


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Medical


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Commercial-Piece-goods


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Commercial-Mineral &c


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Commercial-Miscellaneous Articles


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Commercial-Carpentry


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Commercial-Tailoring


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Commercial-Accounts


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Commercial-Monetary


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Commercial-A List of Words Used in Commerce


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Commercial-Weights and Measures


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Judicial


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Hostilities


text:
Chess Opening Theory/1. e4/1...d5/2. exd5/2...Nf6/3. d4

3. d4
This is the most popular of White's third move options. It gives back the pawn but occupies the center and attempts to gain time. White often combines this with c2-c4 to gain a space advantage. Black can play 3...Qxd5 which will often transpose to a main line, but more popular choices are /3...Nxd5/ and /3...Bg4/. The former is the more respected option but Black tends to suffer in the resulting cramped positions. This has led to the rise of the Portuguese Variation or Jadoul Gambit with 3...Bg4. This allows White to hold onto the pawn in a few ways but ensures quick development for Black and avoids many downfalls of other variations of the Scandinavian.

Theory table

 * 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. d4


text: User talk:512 megabytes

title: User talk:512 megabytes


text:
History of video games/Platforms/Unnamed SNK Console

Announcement
On December 15th, 2020 SNK Japan and SNK Global announced on twitter that a new console would be releasing the following year. The console announcement was met with speculation from the press, as little concrete information, even a name or if the console would use the NEO GEO brand, was confirmed.

At the start of 2022 the console was still unreleased.


text:
History of video games/Platforms/SNK Millennium

Rediscovery of Prototype
A likely prototype motherboard for the system surfaced in July of 2021.

Technology
The prototype motherboard used a Hitachi SH-4 CPU.

A graphics processor from Matrox was rumored, though sources for this information are lacking.

Photos of the prototype motherboard show 6 PCI slots and 2 RAM slots.


text:
History of video games/Platforms/Fitbit

History
Despite not being a gaming focused product, a number of small games were released for Fitbit products, typically as a way of exergaming.

Games
Some more traditional video games such as Snake were made for particular Fitbit models.

title: History of video games/Platforms/Fitbit


text:
History of video games/Platforms/Exent GameTanium

General
The Exent GameTanium was a was an Android subscription based service for television oriented gaming. The service would have offered an "All-you-can-eat" style service for $5 a month, with a free three day trial avalible at launch to attract users. This model is similar to many notable streaming services of the late 2010s onwards. The service would have also offered "trophies" for gamers seeking to share their achivements.

A partnership was made with FXI Cotten Candy devices. These were small Android computers contained in a stick formfactor.

Launch
The service launched on Android based tablets on Feburary 26, 2012. The service expanded exclusively to Verizon Wireless smartphones and tablets by July 13th, 2012, at a price of $5.99 a month.

Legacy
There is little written about the Exent GameTanium outside of 2012 and 2013.

Games

 * Baseball Superstars
 * Doodle God
 * Fruit Ninja
 * T-Racer HD
 * World of Goo


text:
History of video games/Platforms/Thumby

Development

Thumby was preceeded by the TinyDuino line, specifically by the portable TinyPocket.

The system was developed and produced in Akron, Ohio.

An early Thumby was first show as a personal project at Bay Area Mini Maker Faire in May of 2016. In April of 2021 the device was redesigned to use the newly released RP2040 processor.

Launch
A kickstarter for the device launched on September 28th, 2021.

Despite supply chain challenges caused by the chip shortage in 2021, enough parts were procured to produce 10,000 units by October 2021.

The hardware was made open source under the GPL V3 in 2022.

Compute
The Thumby is based on an RP2040 microcontroller.

Hardware
The system can function for approximately 2 hours on an integrated 40 milliamp hour hour lithium polymer battery.

The system measures at 29.5 mm by 18 mm by 8.5 mm.

The Thumby uses a display with a resolution of 70 pixels by 40 pixels.

At least two revisions of the Thumby were shipped - Revision 5, and a quicker to assemble Revision 6.

Software
The Thumby was designed to be easy to program, and offers a python programming option via a browser.

Design Philosophy
This console was noted by LowSpecGamer for following a similar design philosophy as the original Game Boy, using mature and inexpensive technology to create an innovative experience. This philosophy is properly known as "Lateral thinking with withered technology".

title: History of video games/Platforms/Thumby


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Religious


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Relationships


text: Category:User na-1

title: Category:User na-1


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/A List of Animals and Birds


text:
Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/A List of Classifiers

Lesson 27 -


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Notes—Nautical


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Notes—Medical


text: Handbook of the Swatow Vernacular modernized/Notes—Commercial


text:
Skaneateles Conservation Area/Invasive species/Euphorbiaceae

The Euphorbiaceae (spurge family) contains about 30 species that are found in in New York State.

 * }