text:
Progressive arty-rock or baroque pop-jazz fusion? The irreducible does not give a damn about labels and for two decades has pursued his creative deliriums at the antipodes of marketing and trendy buzz.
The character is unique. Certainly offbeat, it surprises and clashes in the landscape. His look is reminiscent of the Buffalo Bill of a futuristic western, a leather and rock Gandalf, a half Zappa half Corto Maltese SF adventurer or a lost neo-druid in the 21st century ... What else can be said to locate this friendly oddball who 'one would think straight out of "Back to the Future", except that he is - above all - author, composer, performer, Aries ascendant Aries, and that he also plays, among other instruments, of self-mockery and excess.
Certainly offbeat, Chardeau is unlike anyone. Captain Nemo of an unlikely ship, for two decades he has been delivering flamboyant and powerful, rich and colorful retro-futuristic music, somewhere between Chicago, Magma, Spirit, Gotainer, Genesis (Peter Gabriel era) and Stravinsky. Baroque, rock, jazz, classical ... Chardeau draws from all sources as long as they are good. He takes us on musical journeys punctuated by stopovers at 20,000 places on the air, in a symphonic and instinctive odyssey, orchestrated in the American style, eccentric and incredibly musical.
Chardeau's career is marked by several discographic milestones: Escales (first eclectic rock opus with his group Chardo's Airlines, in 1989), Data pulsions (1999), Hors scope (released in 2005 in two versions: "Highlight" and "Instrumental session »), IntéGraal (an audio DVD produced in 5 + 1 format, but which has never been published)… Over the course of his opuses, Chardeau has always called upon the cream of French musicians (Bernard Paganotti, Basile Leroux, Claude Salmieri, Didier Malherbe, Bernard Lajudie, arranger Richard Aubert…).
He passed a new milestone in 2010 with the album Resilience recorded mainly in Los Angeles with an exceptional cast. Starting with his friends (yes, yes…) Jerry Goodman (the magical violinist of John McLaughlin's Mahavishnu Orchestra, who is artistic director of the album) and Robert Lamm (the keyboard, songwriter and singer from Chicago, a group of which he is a die-hard fan), benevolent angels of Chardeau Circus.
According to the principle "the friends of my friends are my friends", also lent themselves to the game the keyboard Brian Auger (Rod Steward, Jimi Hendrix, Led Zeppelin), Chris Pinnick (guitarist from Chicago), bassist Reggie Hamilton (Luther Vandross , John Mellencamp, Seal, Tina Turner), percussionist Lenny Castro (Toto, Stevie Wonder, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Quincy Jones, David Sanborn, Ricky Lee Jones, Wayne Shorter), pianist Shelton Berg (Kiss, Joe Cocker…) and drummer Curt Bisqueira (Elton John, John Fogerty, Nelly Furtado, James Taylor, Dave Steward, Joni Mitchell). On arrival, "a pure slaughter and a sound to die for", exclaim the fans.
Enough to take more interest in the artist, the composer and his incredible musicality! Three albums were released in 2012 to discover or rediscover it. A trilogy first published in digital then edited in early 2013 on vinyl for fans, LP aficionados, curious, lovers of good music, discerning ears, nonconformists and discoverers.
Resilience 2.0> a cast of choice! The last studio album, in 2012 version refocused on ten tracks. A rare encounter to be consumed without moderation!
Ze Best Off > an overview of Chardeau's production over two decades, through 10 titles representative of his exhilarating and eccentric music, ultimately timeless!
For Sync. > soundtrack of an imaginary film! A double album of 24 instrumental tracks (original, alternative or unpublished versions, remastered or remixed) to discover not the artist but the composer, his cinematographic writing and his sumptuous orchestrations.
Continued >>>
If Chardeau did not exist, we would have to invent him !
Spring 2013 saw the release of Alternative Resilience , composed of alternative remixes of the album "Resilience" concocted by John Van Eps in Houston, who worked with Chicago and that Robert Lamm recommends to him. Revisited, reappropriated, resized, taken to sometimes unexpected sounds and horizons, these remixes breathe new life into Chardeau's musical universe.
The studio album Fauves & Pastels was released during the summer of 2014. Recorded between France and the United States, still with an exceptional cast, it continues the collaborations already started (Jerry Goodman, Hank Linderman, Brian Auger, John Van Eps. ..), to which are added Mark Andes (Canned Heat, Spirit, which Chardeau wanted to have), Drew Hester (Foo Fighters) and a big band of brass.
Less progressive rock, adopting "west coast" colors. the album is the subject of an almost worldwide digital distribution via the US label Muffin 'Records. The album was then released in France and French-speaking territories via Your Label (PBC Music department) in charge of the record's marketing and promotional strategy.
The end of 2015 will be marked by the realization of 2 exceptional concerts, prepared for several months, which took place at Gibus on November 17 and 18, 2015, 4 days after the deadly attacks that shook Paris. A way for Chardeau not to give in to fear and to defend more than ever the freedom of expression that he wears loud and clear. A very intense moment, especially since Chardeau was surrounded by Jerry Goodman, Hank Linderman, John Van Eps, George Hawkins (John Fogerty, Fleetwood Mac, Al Jarreau) and Bob Ramsey (keyboard of Leon Russell), who came specially the United States.
After 2 singles from Fauves & Pastels (Ma psychiatre et Jane Parker) , both clipped, Chardeau publishes an EP of remixes of the title L'Amour Rome Antique (renamed Love Antique for the occasion), a hot and improbable clubbing getaway for Make the fans wait, while waiting for the Sanguines album, which will be released in September 2017.
It offers 12 titles, a series of portraits more "sociological" than the previous one, with a sound more New York than Californian, a "funky Zappa" touch for instructions and an always exceptional line-up, bringing together the US regulars of Chardeautitude. and some surprises like John McFee (Doobie Brothers) and Walfredo Reyes Jr (Chicago, Santana). From this album will be highlighted the titles Photograf, Pub! and Nature is thus made for summer single.
In 2018, the meeting between Chardeau and Alan Simon (Gaïa, Excalibur, Tristan & Yseult ...) gave birth to a crazy project, called The Magical Musical Man, a crazy and intergalactic rock-opera for which Alan Simon signs the libretto and the setting scene. This extraordinary show took place on November 23, 2019 at the Océanis (Ploemeur, near Lorient, Morbihan) with an exceptional cast. This only performance to date (due to health restrictions that have shut down the entertainment world) is the subject of a DVD released in limited edition. > Find out more about the event
> Find out more about the event
The end of 2019 is also marked by the release, on November 15, of the brand new studio album In Terra Cognita ?, inspired by Chardeau's various trips across the planet. The album - whose 15 tracks make up the music for The Magical Musical Man show - benefits from international distribution by Cherry Red Records and international press and web coverage. > Find out more about the new album>
Chardeau is already working on the volume of his dreamlike and musical world tour and has not finished surprising us.


Home » MSC Crew Member Located in Grand Cayman – Why Did MSC Report Her Missing Four Days Late?
According to the Cayman News Service, the Royal Cayman Islands Police Service were told by the MSC cruise ship on March 27th about the missing woman. The crew member was identified as 34 year old Yusmaidys Ortiz Perez.
Today, the Caymans' newspaper reported that MSC Cruises reported Ms. Perez missing "four days after the MSC Opera departed from the Cayman Islands." The MSC Opera had arrived in Grand Cayman on Friday, March 23rd and departed the same day without the crew member.
The police in Grand Cayman state that Ms. Perez was found in good health in West Bay.
West Bay is a residential district located on the west side of Grand Cayman Island, located north of the island's popular Seven Mile Beach.
It's a good development that the woman has been located, although it is troubling that the cruise ship personnel delayed four days before reporting that she did not return to the ship before it left the country.


text:
DEER STONES
deer stones near Moron, Mongolia
Deer stones are ancient monoliths with images of deers and other animals carved on them. They were made between 1000 and 700 B.C., around the time that people in the steppe were becoming nomadic herdsmen. Many have images of deers. Some have images of the sun and the moon. Almost always face east towards the rising sun.
According to UNESCO: "Mongolia is rich with monuments and complex heritage sites that belong to Bronze Age culture. The main Bronze Age monuments are khirgisuurs, petroglyphs, stone sculptures such as deer stones and burial sites. The most exciting and elegant and valuable monument among Bronze Age complexes are deer stones. Deer stones will usually be found together with extraordinary monuments called khirgisuur, with slab burials or in some cases with petroglyphs forming a complex site. [Source: UNESCO |~|]
"Deer stones are unique monuments dating to the Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age that are found mostly in Mongolia and in some Central Asian countries. The Bronze Age funeral practice, sacrificial ritual and ideology and animal style art, which were spread among ancient nomads, are all together represented through deer stones. |~|
"The term "deer stone" is derived from highly artistic illustrations of deer on stone. The deer stones are created from a long block of granite with four flat sides, on which deer and other images are engraved. Deer stones have three ornamented anthropomorphic sections: a "face", "torso", and "lower body" section. The face part contains human faces, symbol of sun and moon and earrings while stylized deer, elk – occasionally horses and ibexes – are engraved in the torso. In the lower body part there are images of weapons, belt and horse riders. The main decoration, deer images are classically depicted in superimposed extraordinary abstract style. However, in many cases deer image or other animals such as horses, ibexes and pig images are occasionally depicted in rough appearance. |~|
"The size of deer stones range between 1 – 4 meters in height and 20 – 40 cm in thickness and 30 – 80 cm in width. A combination of different art making techniques is applied on the deer stones statues. Researchers believe that these sophisticated statues, which require enormous effort and skill, were dedicated to leaders and great warriors of a tribe. Therefore on the bodies of the deer stones there are engravings of various types of weapons such as daggers, grindstones, mattocks, bows with cases, spears, shields and mirrors as well as belts with decorative patterns. |~|
"The deer stone statues have their origin during the middle of the Bronze Age in the Central Mongolia and then the early Iron Age they were spread throughout Mongolia extending to some countries of Asia and Europe. The first research on the deer stone was conducted over 100 years ago. Thus far, about 1200 deer stones have been discovered." |~|
Websites and Resources: Mongols and Horsemen of the Steppe: "The Horse, the Wheel and Language, How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes shaped the Modern World", David W Anthony, 2007 archive.org/details/horsewheelandlanguage ; The Scythians - Silk Road Foundation silkroadfoundation.org ; Scythians iranicaonline.org ; Encyclopaedia Britannica article on the Huns britannica.com ; Wikipedia article on Eurasian nomads Wikipedia Wikipedia article Wikipedia ; The Mongol Empire web.archive.org/web ; The Mongols in World History afe.easia.columbia.edu/mongols ; William of Rubruck's Account of the Mongols washington.edu/silkroad/texts ; Mongol invasion of Rus (pictures) web.archive.org/web ; Encyclopædia Britannica article britannica.com ; Mongol Archives historyonthenet.com
Deer Stone People
There are 450 deer stones scattered across northern Mongolia, particularly in Bulgan, Khovd and Ulaangom provinces, and in southern Siberia. The tallest are about five meters tall. They have been dated based on weapons and tools some of the figures carry. Some scholars think they are be memorials, usually associated with burial mounds and horse graves. William W. Fitzhugh, directors of Smithsonian's Arctic Studies Center told the Washington Post, he thinks "they're symbolic of powerful chiefs and warriors."
The relationship between the Deer Stone people and other people of the steppes is not known. The lived at around the same time as the early Scythians but were not Scythians. The Scythians. also were fond of deer images but their deers were quite different that the ones seen on deer stones.
Mongolian Studies specialist Christopher Atwood of Indiana University told the Washington Post, "Most probably what you had was an attractive and charismatic package of nomadic pastrorlism and a dynamic horse culture. A small elite [of deer stone people] conquers the Scythains and then lose their language and subsequently their culture."
One of the tallest and most complete deer stones is near the place called of Ushkin Uver, near the Mongolian town of Muron, about 300 kilometers south of Irkutsk, Russia. It is one of the tallest deer stones and the only one with a full face. The face is three dimensional. Below it are outlines of a deer. It is thought the deer represents a tattoo of the warrior immortalized by the deer stone.
Deer Stone Significance
Pazyrk horseman
Smithsonian anthropologist William W. Fitzhugh wrote: "Concentrated along the northern fringe of the Mongolian steppe south of the forested mountains of Tuva in southern Siberia, stone plinths covered with graceful carvings of deer having elongated snouts and swept-back antlers stand as the earliest monumental legacy of Mongolia's ancient past. Often accompanied by stone burial mounds with fenced perimeters and satellite mounds, deer stones and khirigsuurs are interlinked components of a single Late Bronze Age mortuary ceremonial system dating to ca. 1200–700 BC. The deer stone-khirigsuur complex (DSKC) is the earliest appearance in Mongolia of a distinctive mortuary landscape tradition involving burials of humans with subsidiary horse and human burial features that continues until the decline of the Xiongnu ca. 1700 BP. [Source: "The Mongolian Deer Stone-khirigsuur Complex: Dating and Organization of a Late Bronze Age Menagerie", 2009, William W. Fitzhugh, an anthropologist who directs Smithsonian's Arctic Studies Center and is a Senior Scientist at the National Museum of Natural History /]
Deer stones "were originally believed to be grave monuments, but absence of human remains and artefacts made this hypothesis tenuous. In recent years the assumption of deer stone and khirigsuur contemporaneity came into question as archaeologists considered a possible millennium-scale khirigsuur chronology and the idea that deer stones and khirigsuurs might belong to different cultures and periods. Because these sites are found primarily in the open Mongolian steppe and rarely in forest or desert regions, a nomadic herding economic system for its parent culture was presumed, but few archaeological data other than what could be gleaned from deer stone art have been available to verify this assumption.
"The relationship of this complex, and especially its art, to the development and spread of the Scythian horizon (Rudenko 1970; Sementsov et al. 1997; Molodin 2000) may be investigated more specifically now that firm dates for deer stone art have been established as early as five centuries before the early Scythian Arzhan site (Griaznov 1980; Fitzhugh 2009). Perhaps most important, the deer stone-khirigsuur complex represents for the first time in Mongolia the emergence of a complex hierarchical society that established the foundation for the formation of later nomadic states and empires. /
It is not clear what kind of deer is represented in deer stones. Many scholars think they are reindeer. A small group of reindeer herders does live in the area where main deer stones are found. University of Oregon Art historian Esther Jacobson-Tepfer told the Washington Post she thinks they are Mongolian forest elk. "My theory is that the are a deliberate stylization of joining deer and birds, relating both to the tree of life of life and transformational souls."
Study of Deer Stones
Smithsonian anthropologist William W. Fitzhugh wrote: ""Archaeological interpretation of deer stones has had a long history among Soviet researchers beginning with A. P. Okladnikov (1954), followed by N. N. Dikov (1958), N. L. Chlenova (1962), V. V. Volkov (1981), Volkov and A. E. Novgorodova (1975), V. D. Kubarev (1979), Iu. C. Khudiakov (1987), D. G. Savinov (1994), T. Sanzhmiatav (1995), A. D. Tsybiktarov (1997; 1998; 2002; 2003) and others. E. Jacobson (1993; Jacobson-Tepfer 2001) summarizes this research tradition, which by the 1990s was stagnating due to lack of fresh archaeological data and the limitations of art historical methods. During the last decade, new attention has been given to excavation, dating, and contextual study of deer stone and khirigsuur sites. While it is still difficult to characterize the larger culture of the DSKC because of the continued scarcity of domestic sites, we now have a better understanding of its chronology, setting, relationships, ceremonial activities, functions, and social importance." [Source: "The Mongolian Deer Stone-khirigsuur Complex: Dating and Organization of a Late Bronze Age Menagerie",William W. Fitzhugh, an anthropologist who directs Smithsonian's Arctic Studies Center and is a Senior Scientist at the National Museum of Natural History /]
"For many years, deer stones and khirigsuurs drifted in archaeological void, undated manifestations of a complex culture without known qualities, affiliations, origins, or offspring...V. V. Volkov, the leading Soviet deer stone researcher of the 1960–90s, spent years mapping deer stone distributions and documenting their images, but doing little excavation (Volkov 1981 [2002]). From this corpus he defined three geographicstylistic types. The classic or Mongolian type depicting a belted warrior with stylized flying deer on his torso, which was dominant in north-central Mongolia and included the largest number of stones and greatest number of sites. Significantly, the distribution of the Mongolian type coincides with the most productive grazing land in Central Asia, where spring run-off and summer rainfall is high and open east–west valleys create corridors for rapid travel over a broad geographic area. Similar conditions are found in smaller areas of the Altai foothills and Transbaikalia, where the simpler, more stylized Gorno-Altai type and Saian-Tuva type deer stones are found, though in smaller numbers. The Gorno-Altai type illustrated a simpler rendition of a warrior whose tools often 'floated' on the torso and had few or no stylized 'Mongolian' deer. The Saian-Tuvan type was similar in overall simplicity but had fewer animal images, no Mongolian deer, and human markings were limited to belt, necklace, ears (rings), and face (double or triple slash marks). /
"Volkov accounted for 300 deer stones of all types in Mongolia, most concentrated in the north-central region, with another 300 in surrounding areas of Tuva, Russian Altai, Kazakhstan, and China (Guo Wu 2009) V. D. Kubarev (1979), building on Volkov's work, reported more than 500 specimens in Mongolia, 30 in Tuva, and 50 in the Russian Altai. Monuments classified as deer stones are also found as far west as the Ural, Crimea, and Georgia, where they are associated with the Scythian cultural horizon (600–300 BC), while a few have even been reported from the Elbe River (Volkov 1995, 326). In actual fact, the number of deer stones is several times higher than the Volkov and Kubarev estimates. Our recent work in Khövsgöl aimag has nearly doubled Volkov's census for that region. It is likely that Mongolia alone has more than 2,000 extant deer stones, many of which are simple, small-scale versions or are partially or completely buried. The largest deer stones are found in secondary burial contexts, re-purposed in the "slab" or "square" burial culture that immediately follows the deer stone period, ca. 800–500 BC." /
Deer Stone Sites
Smithsonian anthropologist William W. Fitzhugh wrote: "Deer stones occur singly or in groups, and when in multiple-stone settings, as at sites like Uushgyn Övör and Ulaan Tolgoi, they are frequently aligned north–south with the deer stone's 'face' oriented east. They are often associated with khirigsuur mounds containing human burials in shallow centrally placed pits or stone slab crypts. Shallow burial has resulted in poor preservation of human remains, and artefact recoveries are equally rare, usually consisting of small items like bronze buttons or belt buckles. In this regard Mongolian khirigsuur burials have little in common with the much more deeply buried Pazyryk frozen log tombs or the Mongolian slab burial culture. [Source: "The Mongolian Deer Stone-khirigsuur Complex: Dating and Organization of a Late Bronze Age Menagerie",William W. Fitzhugh, an anthropologist who directs Smithsonian's Arctic Studies Center and is a Senior Scientist at the National Museum of Natural History /]
"In 2003 we began excavating deer stone sites in Khövsgöl aimag in northern Mongolia to seek dating materials to better understand deer stone chronology, ritual and context (Fitzhugh 2005; 2009). We soon discovered that central Mongolian deer stones are usually associated with sacrificial offerings of horses whose heads, cervical vertebra, and hooves are buried in a tight package with the horse head facing east in shallow pits or stone features beneath small circular rock mounds. At Ulaan Tolgoi and other deer stone sites in Khövsgöl aimag such east-facing horse head burials are found around the base of deer stones. Outside the circle of horse head features were small oval hearths containing charcoal, ceramics, and calcined remains of caprids and larger mammals, which we believe are the remains of feasts, associated with deer stone dedication ceremonies. Presumably the horses were sacrificed as offerings to the deer stone personage by followers or relatives. Since 2002 we have dated more than twenty individual horse heads associated with deer stones, and almost all date (twosigma) to ca. 1200–700 BC. /
Main Deer Stone Sites
The following three sites can represent the sites of the Bronze Age cultural complex in Mongolia in the Tentative List: 1) Bronze Age cultural complex site with deer stones at Uushgiin Uvur. This complex site is located south of the Uushig mountain of Burentogtokh soum, Khuvsgul province, occupying approximately 400 hectare area. It is fascinating and interesting to see a complex of 30 deer stones and big khirgisuurs and slab burials. In terms of statue number, skillful works and illustrations this complex site is a great representation of this culture. Especially, statues with images of human face draw attentions of many scientists and considered one of the rarest statues. [Source: UNESCO |~|]
Uushgiin Ovor Deer stone site near Mörönь, Khovsgol aimag, Mongolia
2) Bronze Age cultural complex site with deer stones at Khoid Tamir valley. There are over 100 deer stones, numerous khirgisuurs, burials and petroglyphs are spread within 45,000 hectare area of Khoid Tamir river valley on territory of Battsengel and Ikh Tamir soums of Arkhangai province. This site is considered to be the biggest one that situated at one river valley. Besides the monuments, this place also keeps raw material (stones) exploitation sites, which shows that this river valley was the main area of the deer stone culture. There are also very interesting statues with engravings of fighting warriors and sling-like weapons. |~|
3) Bronze Age cultural complex site with deer stones at Jargalantyn Am This site is located 1 km from Khanui River in Undur-Ulaan soum of Arkhangai province, occupying 17.9 hectares area. A group of 30 deer stone statutes and a number of khirgisuurs and slab burials constitute this complex site. From these statues, 20 had been fallen and, in 2009-2010, these were erected on their original places. This site is called "The museum of deer stones" because there is no other sites to contain such number of deer stones so close to each other. |~|
Currently, neither of the World Heritage List and Tentative Lists have exact analogues of the Bronze Age complex site that consist of deer stones, khirgisuurs and slab burials. As being the distribution centre and origin place of the deer stone statues, Mongolia alone maintains about 90 percent of this kind. Only hundred deer stones have been found outside of Mongolian territory: over 20 in Tuva and Trsansbaikalia, over 80 in Sayan Altai, about 20 in Kazakhstan and Middle Asia and over 20 to west from Russian Orenburg, Northern Caucasus, Ukraine to Elba river of Germany. |~|
Other types of enormous standing stones in height of 4-5 m (the biggest is 20 m high and weighs 300 tons) called megaliths or menhirs are found in Europe, Africa and Asia (mainly spread in Great Britain, Ireland, Brittany of France, Caucasus, Altai, Khakassia, Ukrainian Crimea, Korea and China). Some megalithic sites including "Heart of Neolithic Orkhey", "Stonehenge", "Avebury and Associated sites", and Korean "Gochang, Hwasun and Ganghwa Dolmen" are inscribed in the World Heritage List. Compared to the deer stones in Mongolia these megaliths do not have any engravings on their bodies. However, in terms of dedication both of these structures were built for similar purposes – ritual making, sacrificing and religious belief. In Minusinsk Pad, Khakassia of Russia, there are statues, dated back to the 3rd millennium BCE – 2nd millennium BCE, with images of predators, which is one of the representations of Scyth-Siberian animal style art, and sun with rays. Also these statues could have images of woman and sheep. Even though the deer stones and above stated stone statues could be made for similar purpose, the deer stones are dominated by their abstract images of deer – the distinguished animal of the Bronze Age nomads. |~|
Deer Stone-Khirigsuur Complex
Smithsonian anthropologist William W. Fitzhugh wrote: "'Khirigsuur' refers to a specific Mongolian type of 'kurgan' whose central boulder mound is surrounded by a concentric arrangement of stone fences, satellite mounds, and hearth circles. Unlike kurgans of Western Asia with their lavish burial goods, khirigsuurs often yield poorly preserved human remains and no grave goods, resulting in recent interpretations emphasizing their use for non-mortuary purposes (Jacobson 1993, 146). West Eurasian deer stones and Altai deer stones and khirigsuurs differ in style from classic deer stones and burial mounds of northern Mongolia and Tuva. [Source: "The Mongolian Deer Stone-khirigsuur Complex: Dating and Organization of a Late Bronze Age Menagerie",William W. Fitzhugh, an anthropologist who directs Smithsonian's Arctic Studies Center and is a Senior Scientist at the National Museum of Natural History /]
"Khirigsuurs at Ulaan Tolgoi display some architectural features that are also found in deer stone settings. Every central boulder khirigsuur mound and its stone-paved plaza are surrounded by a square or round fence of small stones (Allard / Erdenebaatar 2005; Frohlich / Bazarsad 2005). Along the east side of the fence one usually finds rows of satellite mounds 2–3 m in diameter. In the centre of these mounds a single horse head is buried in a shallow depression facing east, usually accompanied by cervical vertebrae and hooves, but without artefacts, exactly as in deer stone horse head burial features. Some larger khirigsuurs have scores or even hundreds of horse mounds; Urt Bulagyn, located in the heartland of deer stone and khiriguur site distribution (also the modern centre of Mongolian horse-rearing), 1,700 horse features are associated with a single huge mound. Outside the horse mounds are small feasting hearths with calcined bone and occasional ceramic fragments identical to those at deer stone sites. /
"A Smithsonian-Mongolian project led by B. Frohlich has investigated the archaeology of khirigsuur mounds in more detail, including their spatial distribution and architecture (Frohlich / Bazarsad 2005; see Frohlich's article in this volume). Mounds are distributed unevenly across the landscape and are most frequently clustered around east-facing slopes of hills, especially hills that stand out as isolated topographic features in the middle of valleys, as in the case of Ulaan Tolgoi in the Erkhel Nuur Valley. The largest mounds (Frohlich Class A types) are found on valley floors, and progressively smaller mounds are found along the eastern flanks of hillsides (Class B), or their upper slopes (Class C), becoming smaller and simpler with increased elevation. The hillside khirigsuurs (Class B and C) often have no satellite mound features, but they always have a central mound or pavement and a circular or square fence boundary. Frohlich's surveys and excavations reveal a consistent pattern in mound construction. Square and circular fences occur in nearly equal numbers (50 / 50 percent) over a given region. Excavation of nearly 25 mounds produced human remains in nearly all cases, generally as extended burials in shallow sub-mound pits or stone box crypts beneath the centres of the mounds, rarely with associated artefacts. /
"The structural similarity between deer stones and khirigsuurs can hardly be coincidental. Khirigsuurs have mounds over central human burials and are surrounded by horse head burials and feasting hearths, while deer stones are anthropomorphic stelae without human remains surrounded by identically constructed horse sacrifices and feasting hearths. Together the two constitute elements of a single ceremonial complex that most researchers have interpreted as honoring departed leaders, one in flesh and bone and the other represented symbolically by an anthropomorphic deer stone, with ceremonial sacrifices and feasting occurring at each location." /
Deer Stone Images
There are three main types of geographical-stylistic deer stone types.Fitzhugh wrote: "1) Eurasian deer stones display minimal marks of the essential deer stone 'code,' limited to simple belt lines with hanging weapons, necklace lines, 'faces' consisting of parallel slashes, and circular rings at either side of the 'head' area of the stone. 2) Saian-Altai stones have these essential markings as well as 'floating' more-or-less 'realistic' representations of pig, moose, elk, horse, ibex, goat, or other animals, usually shown with their legs extended rather than folded. 3) Mongolian deer stones have highly stylized images of a great antlered deer and a distinct anthropomorphic tableau which frequently wraps around the four sides of the monument and includes textured or ornamented belts; tools and weapons including knives, swords, axes, quivers, bows, whetstones, fire-strikers, and chariot rein hooks; more explicit earring hoops and beaded necklaces; and sometimes human faces. [Source: "The Mongolian Deer Stone-khirigsuur Complex: Dating and Organization of a Late Bronze Age Menagerie",William W. Fitzhugh, an anthropologist who directs Smithsonian's Arctic Studies Center and is a Senior Scientist at the National Museum of Natural History /]
classic Mongolian deer stone images
"For many years the typology of these tool forms was the only means for dating the monuments, ca. 500 BC. The torso area is covered with negative relief engravings of crouched or flying elk (the Asian maral, Cervus elaphus sibiricus), identified by the peaked withers and large swept-back antlers with diminutive legs folded beneath it, and a bird-like head with a large round eye and a bird-like beak whose bulbous end is slightly open. Also present in the torso area are solar discs, pentagonal chevron-shaped 'badges,' and rarely peripheral images of a feline, goat, mountain sheep, gazelle, or horse. In addition to human anatomical organization, the head, torso, and waist panels have also been interpreted as representing, respectively, heaven, earth, and underworld. In fact, deer stones images can be interpreted in multiple ways and may have intentionally had dual or multiple meanings. /
"While the treatment of the belt shows attention to specific implement forms, the torso and head register ambiguity. Grooved earring hoops imply ears and are often associated with smaller ring-shaped grooves, making them appear like the sun and moon; faces are implied but are rarely shown; and the stylized deer icon shares deer and bird features. Often the torso panel is packed with deer images, while other miniature but identical deer motifs or other images are carved into any tiny blank spaces that exist. In many cases the stones are so packed with deer motifs that they suggest horror vacui, as though any unprotected space might prove vulnerable. Chevron motifs have been interpreted as military shields, shamanistic skeleton emblems, or badges of military rank. Rarely are deer stones of such great detail and artistic merit found outside Mongolia. /
"Since the earliest interpretations by N. N. Dikov (1958), A. E. Novgorodova (Volkov / Novgorodova 1975), and A. P. Okladnikov (1954), deer stones have been seen as stylized warriors. Following the discovery of tattooed bodies at Pazyryk (Rudenko 1970; Polos'mak 2000; Griaznov 1984) K. Jettmar (1994) proposed that the deer images might represent tattoos. Magail (2005) suggests clothing designs. I would go a step further and suggest the detailed rendering of belts, weapons, and tools reveal the artist's intent to carve deer stones as representations of specific individuals. The depictions seem to represent unique assemblages of tools, weapons, and body tattoos. One never finds deer stones with identical kinds, shapes, and sizes of implements, as would be the normal case in living individuals. /
"In like fashion, the images of deer also vary from stone to stone. While the shape of the deer icon is very rigidly standardized, their number, sizes, and placement varies in every case, as probably also occurred with tattoos on a person's body according to wealth, social status, prowess, or other attributes, including an artist's skills and the desires of the subject. It is likely that these tattoos protected the wearer from harm or injury by malevolent spirits in the same way as designs on the clothing of historic Ainu, Nivkh, and other East Asian groups. Patterns on the clothing of Jomon ceramic figurines may have had the same purpose. While serving as protective devices in life, the deer spirit may also have assisted the warrior's departed soul on its journey to heaven, with the help of shamanic ritual." /
Deer Stone Animals
deer stone reindeer
Smithsonian anthropologist William W. Fitzhugh wrote: Deer stones present the viewer with a remarkable menagerie of creatures seen through the eyes of Late Bronze Age residents of the Mongolian steppe. The dominant image is a high stylization of the Asian maral (red deer). A stylistically close representation of this animal (but lacking the bird's head and beak) was recovered as a headdress ornament found at the Arzhan site dating to ca. 700 BC (Zaitseva et al. 2004). Deer ceremonialism was also an important feature among the Pazyryk people, judging from an elaborate deer antler headdress found in one of its graves (Rudenko 1970). As E. Jacobson (1993) argued in her treatise "Deer Goddess of Ancient Siberia", this animal must have held a special iconic place in the ritual and iconography of deer stone peoples. This icon was not limited to deer stones and personal objects; it is also seen in prominent positions on rock art panels ranging from the Altai Mountains to Central Mongolia (Jacobson 2002; Kortum et al. 2005). Mongolian deer are also seen, singly or with other animals, in rock art panels along the Shishged Gol in the Darkhad Valley of northern Mongolia. [Source: "The Mongolian Deer Stone-khirigsuur Complex: Dating and Organization of a Late Bronze Age Menagerie",William W. Fitzhugh, an anthropologist who directs Smithsonian's Arctic Studies Center and is a Senior Scientist at the National Museum of Natural History /]
"A stylistic feature of deer stone animal art is the iconic rendition of the master deer, head raised and mouth extended with antlers along its back in the posture of the rutting call. Its diminutive legs are tuckedbelow its body as though leaping or flying and the withers are always peaked. However, the shape of the head and eye is that of a bird with its long bill outstretched and open at its bulbous end. This creature appears to represent a spirit transformation figure – part elk, part bird – a form familiar to the world of Siberian and circumpolar shamans. The frequent illustration on deer stones of pentagonal panels with chevronor skeletal-like patterns, occasionally also shown on knife sheaths and animal bodies, reinforces the idea of shamanistic skeletal symbolism and suggests shamanistic language may have been a component of deer stone art (Bayarsaikhan 2005). Shamanic ritual is perhaps most dramatically seen on Deer Stone 14 at Uushgyn Övör on which a human face is shown with its mouth pursed and round as though singing, blowing, or sucking, as is common in circumpolar shamanic ritual. The combination of deer-bird transformation and the singing posture of the human face strongly evoke shamanistic performance and the calling forth of earth-sky spirit masters. /
"Other animals are also represented in deer stone art, but they are always shown in naturalistic rather than stylized form, and in less prominent positions on the stones. If deer stones represent specific human individuals, these minor departures from the deer stone graphic formula may be significant aspects of the individual histories of the persons represented. If so, they were illustrating totemic animals of special importance, incidents in the person's lives, or personal helping spirits. Among these animals are horse, boar, moose, mountain sheep, leopard, tiger, and, rarely, fish. In the core region of deer stone art in north-central Mongolia these animals seem incidental to the main tableau and are tucked into free spaces around the deer images, while on Altai stones they assume more central positions, often in the absence of the deer image completely. In some instances one sees a foreshadowing of Scythian style art: for instance, the confrontation between two feline predators and a horse or the twisted body of a mountain goat. /
"In this regard it is also interesting that the deer and most other animals depicted are wild creatures, mostly of the forest, whereas deer stones are found only in the grassy steppe where deer stone-makers tended sheep, goat, horse, cattle, and camel, and certainly must also have hunted wild game. With the exception of the horse, domestic animals are not illustrated on deer stones. Deer stone art features wild animals – not owned or tended cattle – animals that still retained spiritual independence and to one degree or another were spiritually equivalent to humans, who also never appear as subjects in deer stone art. Probably it is for this reason that dogs also are not shown, despite their importance in Late Bronze Age herding and hunting economy. /
deer stone reindeer detailing
"One of the most important animal representations is the feline that, while rare, is found on deer stones throughout Mongolia. The cat is seen in the form of a tiger, represented with stripes, and the snow leopard, shown with spots. In ethnographic art of East Asia, the feline usually has a shamanistic association and is principally illustrated on shaman drums and robes among the Nivkh and other peoples around the mouth of the Amur River. In Scythian art, the feline is almost always depicted catching prey, and the coiled feline found on some Mongolian deer stones also anticipates Scythian style. On Mongolian deer stones it is associated with the deer-bird spirit and is rarely seen as a predator, suggesting that in this context it serves as an image of personal empowerment or shamanic function rather than a hunter's helping spirit. /
"V. V. Volkov and others have pointed out that animals depicted in Mongolian-type deer stones have their legs tucked beneath as though leaping or flying, while Eurasian and SaianAltai deer stones often depict animals with their legs extended, thus appearing as real animals, striding or walking the earth. Generalizing, one can say that Mongolian-style deer stones have strong shamanic, cosmological, and spiritual connotation, whereas Saian-Altai and Eurasian deer stones and later Scythian art illustrate living creatures as they exist in the natural world. Some have claimed that deer stones illustrate reindeer (Vitebsky 2005, 6), but I have yet to see a convincing reindeer among the corpus of deer stone art, even in rock art. When reindeer appear in Scythian art they appear in a secondary role of prey, and in one famous case a reindeer being attacked by a predator has a collar around its neck (Rudenko 1970, Fig. 110). Such 'tethering' is found also in the ethnographic art of the Yup'ik Eskimo of south-west Alaska together with images of nets (Fitzhugh / Kaplan 1982, Fig. 145). The Scythian image suggests an attack on a collared or tethered reindeer. If so, it provides an early depiction of domestication one thousand years before we have sound pictorial evidence of reindeer domestication in northern Eurasia." /
Meaning of the Deer Stones
Smithsonian anthropologist William W. Fitzhugh wrote: "In the absence of associated human burials, deer stones present a contradiction. The stones appear to represent warriors, chiefs, or heroic persons shown with their personal weapons, belts, and body tattoos. The presence of shamanic elements, celestial images, and iconic deer-bird master spirits shown, generally, in ascendant flight, suggests individuals whose souls are being sent off to the upper world in large organized public ceremonies involving shamanistic ritual and horse sacrifice. The deer-bird master spirit that protected these individuals in life, and which assisted their final journeys, are charismatic wild creatures of the northern forests that would have been found in the mountain forests lying along the fringe of LBA (Late Bronze Age) herding societies of the steppe lands. On the other hand the animals that most directly figure in khirigsuur burials and deer stone settings are not wild forest creatures; they are domesticated horses – the life-blood of herding economy and the engines of war that dominated the intensely competitive social life of Late Bronze Age. [Source: "The Mongolian Deer Stone-khirigsuur Complex: Dating and Organization of a Late Bronze Age Menagerie",William W. Fitzhugh, an anthropologist who directs Smithsonian's Arctic Studies Center and is a Senior Scientist at the National Museum of Natural History /]
"It is tempting to view the juxtaposition of the elk-bird master spirit and the horse in LBA ceremonial ritual as either a clash or an intersection of colliding worlds – the unpredictable and uncontrollable world that was the domain of shamanistic ritual and ceremony, from which hunters and warriors protected themselves with protective deer spirit 'armor,' and the practical world of the herders who must deal with the day-to-day life of rearing and protecting animals, families, and communities. While animal spirits assisted the hunter or warrior, it was the act of offering a horse at a deer stone or khirigsuur ceremony that legitimized one's social position in Bronze Age society. Judging from the adherence to prescribed deer stone and khirigsuur ritual and ceremony, the social world of LBA Mongolia was rigorously hierarchical. The death of a chief called for sacrificing a man's most precious material possession. /
"One can imagine the scene at dawn on the morning of the event: followers and their families gathered at deer stones or khirigsuurs awaiting the rising sun to begin killing their prized horses, stripping them of meat and burying the head, neck, and hooves in precisely-positioned mounds on the east side of the khirigsuur, at locations that must have been precisely determined and regulated according to one's social rank and standing, followed by feasts of the sacrificed horse accompanied by other lesser animals at similarly-designated oval hearth sites. /
"Khirigsuurs – one hundred times more numerous than deer stones – were the common form of social departure. By contrast, the creation and setting of deer stones was a rare event, almost certainly commemorating individuals of the highest social position. The fact that human bodies are not associated with deer stones and that deer stones do not have a one-to-one correlation with nearby khirigsuurs suggest that they may represent rites for individuals whose bodies were lost to their societies during war or other circumstances. Yet horse sacrifice was a fundamental instrument in both commemorations. /
West Asian-European deer stone images
"Horse ritual, so central to northern Mongolia LBA ceremonial life, seems to have been much less important in western Mongolia. While khirigsuurs and deer stones are present in Mongolian Altai, they occur in a different architectural form. West Mongolian khirigsuurs often have wide cobblestone fence walls and four cardinally-oriented stone radial lines that connect the fence to the central mound like spokes of a wheel. Few west Mongolian khirigsuurs have external satellite mounds. In 2008 among hundreds of mounds inspected in the Baian-Ölgii Altai Mountain region of western Mongolia we found only one khirigsuur with horse burial satellite mounds, and this khirigsuur at On Khot near Khoton Nuur had features of a Central Mongolian khirigsuur rather than those typical of western Mongolia and the Altai. The rarity of horse mounds in western Mongolia may be a function of ecology as much as belief, as western Mongolia has less capacity for supporting large horse populations than central Mongolia, which receives more summer rainfall and has less severe winters. /
"While the master deer spirits were a standard cosmological icon, horse remains from khirigsuurs and deer stone settings tell a more human story. Sexing and ageing of horse remains excavated at our sites in the Khövsgöl aimag region reveal that sacrifices include a wide range of horse demographics. Although the samples are small, horse skulls range from young adults to old horses, with both sexes represented. Young horses are sometimes also sacrificed and are found in smaller mounds adjacent to larger mounds containing adult females, probably their mothers (Allard / Erdenebataar 2005). Samples excavated to date indicate that fewer horses in their prime were sacrificed than young or old animals. In some cases the remains are partial, with incomplete sets of hooves and vertebrae, or sometimes lacking hooves and vertebrae altogether. We also have instances in which a skull was buried without a mandible, or with only a part of a mandible. Usually the remains seem to have been buried fresh after having been defleshed and bundled tightly together. In one instance we have found horse remains that were heavily weathered when they were buried, suggesting these horse bones were re-cycled long after death – perhaps to keep up appearances when a live horse was not available or could not be spared, or because the dead horse had been highly regarded.F. Allard (personal comment 2006) has researched the east-facing orientation of horse heads and the ritual and practices of horse-rearing by modern Mongolians. His results suggest surprising continuities with practices observed in the Late Bronze Age. It is common today to find horse heads perched in trees and or between rocks at the tops of high hills and eminences. Herders say these practices show respect for the horse and speak of placing remains of favored horses on high hills to the east of their camps. /
Deer Stones and the Western Scythian Tradition
Sayan-Altai deer stone images
Smithsonian anthropologist William W. Fitzhugh wrote: "Current data suggest deer stone art originated in north-central Mongolia around 3,300–3,500 years ago from an earlier tradition in Karasuk-related cultures that has not been preserved or discovered archaeologically. Earlier traditions of human-figure stelae may present in the western steppe pit-grave cultures dating to the 2nd–1st millennia BC (Chizhevskii 2009), but the direct antecedents of Mongolian deer stones remains unknown. Deer stone art and khirigsuur mound burials appears suddenly around 3200 BP and flourished for several hundred years in northern Mongolia, neighbouring Tuva, and the Altai regions adjacent to western Mongolia. To date there is no stylistic or chronological evidence suggesting a developmental sequence for either the simpler Saian-Altai or the classic Mongolian deer stone types. Given this rapid development it seems likely that deer stones and their art were transferred from an earlier medium, like wood, as suggested by K. Jettmar (1994), concurrent with introduction of metal tools. Although the Saian-Altai stones are numerically more common in Tuva and the Altai than the classic form, both frequently appear at the same sites and probably date to the same time. In Khövsgöl, some Saian-Altai stones are among the earliest dated deer stones, ca. 1300 BC, and at one site we recently excavated in Khövsgöl – Khyadag East – both types are associated with copper slag. [Source: "The Mongolian Deer Stone-khirigsuur Complex: Dating and Organization of a Late Bronze Age Menagerie",William W. Fitzhugh, an anthropologist who directs Smithsonian's Arctic Studies Center and is a Senior Scientist at the National Museum of Natural History /]
"Unlike Khövsgöl, which now has numerous dated deer stones at sites that include SaianAltai and Eurasian types, no deer stones have been directly dated in western Mongolia (where deer stone ritual does not include horse sacrifice), or other Tuva or Altai regions. In the latter areas, classic deer stones generally lack the artistic merit of central Mongolian stones, and they display a looser approach to classic deer stone style, as though the rigorous linguistic and organizational code that controlled style in central Mongolia relaxed, de-emphasizing the iconic deer and elaborate detailing of warrior belts and weapons. While the core elements (circle-earrings, slashes for the face, and necklace lines or pits) continue, images of animals on the main body of deer stone art begin to look more like the art found at petroglyphic sites occurring in these highland regions (Jacobson 1998; 2002; Jacobson et al. 2001; Kortum et al. 2005). Floating and free-standing images of animals replace the master deer spirit image, and weapons are shown unsheathed and 'in action' rather than sheathed and belted. Khirigsuurs also change, becoming more architecturally diverse, often being made in the form of fouror eight-spoked 'chariot wheels' (Savinov 1994; Kubarev 1979). /
human megalith in Mongolia
"Although the date of the Saian-Altai deer stones has not yet been determined, radiocarbon dates from 2008 excavations at spoked and un-spoked khirigsuurs in the Khoton Nuur area of Baian-Ölgii, western Mongolia, both from mounds with and without horse burials, produced results of ca. 1000–700 BC, which is within the central range of central Mongolian khirigsuurs. It seems likely, however, that the Saian-Atlai deer stones may last 200–300 years later than the deer stones of north-central Mongolia, and some of the Eurasian stones may date even later, during the West Asian Scythian period. While these western stones probably continue to mark the passing of powerful warrior-chiefs, they seem to have served a more secular purpose than the classic Mongolian deer stones, for most stones lack the deer icon and shamanistic elements, and quite a few of these stones are incorporated into the eastern sides of Khirigsuur mounds. One may speculate that these shifts are linked to changes in the role of tattooed body decoration as personal protective shields and to the development of more secular beliefs and greater attention to possession and burial of material wealth seen in the Pazyryk and later Scythian burials. Nevertheless, the spread of deer stone ceremonialism across more than half the Eurasian continent suggests it accompanied a rapid population movement involving conquest and cultural transfer, a scenario that was to be repeated during the later Turkic and Mongol incursions into western Eurasia. /
Text Sources: New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Times of London, Lonely Planet Guides, Library of Congress, U.S. government, Compton's Encyclopedia, The Guardian, National Geographic, Smithsonian magazine, The New Yorker, Time, Newsweek, Reuters, AP, AFP, Wall Street Journal, The Atlantic Monthly, The Economist, Foreign Policy, Wikipedia, BBC, CNN, and various books, websites and other publications.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Q: Docusaurus: Swizzle Navbar - Tweak Navbar items behavior with version change I want to customize my Navbar in such a way that, say when versions 1.2.0 and below are viewed, only Dropdown A should be visible. When versions 1.3.0 and above are viewed, Dropdown B or more must be visible.
For clear understanding:
Navbar when browsing version 1.3.0 and above:

Navbar when browsing version 1.2.0 and below:

Please let me also know if Wrapping will help or if will I have to Eject. Moreover, it would be great if someone could demonstrate this exact behavior because I am not sure what to import and tweak after swizzling.
I tried to swizzle Navbar and NavbarItem components but not sure how to go about it.

A: Try working with conditional Rendering on that dropdown
<Greeting isLoggedIn={false} />

this link will help you I guess
https://reactjs.org/docs/conditional-rendering.html

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


The technology world changes constantly and keeping up with new technology can be challenging. Here at TechSpecialist, we offer a consultative approach on all the latest technology that is available and match the technology that is right for you. IOT Internet of Things brings together mobility, automation and endless data.
A faster way to share and manage content, sharing the knowledge between departments more quickly and efficiently and across the whole organisation. We can help you build the infrastructure to grow your business. Contact our TechSpecialist Sales team for a quote today.


text:
Review: Kuroko no Basket (Season 1)
published on November 16, 2016byAuthor missanimegirl 2 Comment
This anime took a lot longer to finish than I originally planned. I said it in my update post, but we all know how much that gets read, so I'll reiterate here: there were some parts that were a little slow, which made my motivation to watch the episodes extremely low. Fortunately, when they finally got into playing actual basketball games, it made it seem like less of a chore to sit through.
SPOILER ALERT: If you haven't finished watching this season and plan on watching it at some point in your lifetime, or if you don't want spoilers, I suggest you don't read past the Quick Summary.
In middle school, Kuroko was part of an elite basketball team later called the generation of miracles. Kuroko was known as the phantom sixth man within this group due to his unique skill of bearing very little presence. Now graduated from middle school, he went on to Seirin to continue his basketball career. Another student, Kagami, who just came back from America with a monstrous playing style, will also be joining the Seirin basketball team. With the help of their teammates Kagami and Kuroko plan to become the best in Japan (I know they have more goals than this, but don't forget this is a generic summary).
Besides the beginning being a bit slow for me, the second half made it all worth it, and overall I liked the premise of the show. I love the underdog type shows where the main characters have different hurdles they must overcome in order to reach their ultimate goal with each hurdle getting progressively harder. And throw a sports premise on top of that story line and you have a set up for a great show.
Coming into this, I knew about the rules and basic logic behind basketball. When I was just wee babe, probably in 4th or 5th grade, I played basketball. I was that kid that everyone expected to turn into a great basketball player. I was tall and Black. Let me tell you….. that didn't mean anything. I was terrible at basketball. I think out of the entire year, I made one basket…..maybe two….. We were a really bad team.
Plus, for the first few games, I'm pretty sure I just stood on one side of the court because I didn't know I could cross over to the other half. Anyway…..
Now that I'm older I don't really do sports, so I don't have a very deep understand of anything like the strategies behind each play, but I'm pretty sure if I had to come up with some, I could figure out a few decent plays. Based on this knowledge alone I feel like I could have come up with some more captivating things to focus on during the actual basketball games in this anime.
Further into the anime….
A lot of what they seemed to focus on was how big the players were and how fast they moved. It was almost agonizing to see the characters be shocked because a player from another team was moving one leg in front of the other in a very fast manner….. yes, it is called running. There was no reason for that to cause everyone on the court to make a shocked face and small "agh" sound.
My mother had seen some episodes and she just kept making faces every time there was a slow-mo shot or multiple cuts to character reactions (she's not very into anime anyway). Episode 18 is full of them. My sister laughed through the entire episode….
Stepping back a bit and trying to look at the episode from an outsider's perspective a lot of the stuff does seem kind of dumb and childish. All the themes and lessons that were sprinkled in each episode were never profound or thought-provoking. Nor did they really build upon already established issues within the sport.
I feel like my opinion is a little biased when I talk about Kuroko no Basket and its sport technicalities, because I'm always comparing it to Haikyuu. When I think about how both anime present their sport, Haikyuu seems to breaks down the skills needed in such a way that it increases the viewer's knowledge of how the sport might actually be played in real life. It also doesn't having its characters yelling out obvious observations of plays during the middle of a game.
One other issue I had with the show was its pacing. The skills the characters already possessed at the beginning of the anime were already considered amazing and overpowered. In my mind, I was thinking "okay, so where can they grow from here?" (with the exception of Kuroko, because he only has a single well developed skill). Even in their first game against another team, Kagami literally murdered the opposing team. I was waiting for them to show the more powerful people for the main characters to set their sights on beating, but we didn't really get a glimpse of those people until the second half of episode 3 and into episode 4, and they weren't even that impressive. And why is everyone shocked when Kuroko isn't useful in the game against his own teammates? My thinking is that they should be able to beat him with no effort. He hasn't picked up any other skills since their time in middle school, and they had a chance to play practice games and real games with him. He should only be effective against people who have never played him before.
Once again, I can't talk about every single freaking character, so I'll only talk about those who left an impression, which is still a lot of people.
Tetsuya Kuroko
Why does he have no other skills?! How can someone who is the main character go a whole freaking season without any significant growth? What bothered me about Kuroko is that he didn't seem ambitious to become any better at the game. He was perfectly fine just staying in the shadows supporting stronger players. The main character should at least have some drive. Yes, at the end he showed some initiative, but this isn't some 12 episode season……this was 24 episodes and in all these episodes he did nothing but be invisible and pass the ball around. Also, I like characters with a bit more personality. Even background characters in this show had more of a personality than Kuroko. If it weren't for him being in the title I would have barely mentioned him in this review because he left such little impact. I think the real main character in this anime is Kagami…. He is probably the most stereotypical choice but he's got more going for him than Kuroko.
Taiga Kagami
He can be classified in one word: Intense. I love his enthusiasm to always try and beat people stronger than him. It's the type of objective that would lead someone to get stupid strong as the series progressed. His intensity kind of reminds me of Soma from Food Wars (Shokugeki no Soma, if you don't know its English name). Even though half the time he just seems to be pissed off, I love that his character is always determined to grow. Even though he's already kind of OP, they showed the limits to his current skill base…..part of it being his stubbornness, stupidity….and not listening to people. I'm hoping that by the end of this series that his skills can match his extremely cocky attitude. It will make for a very fulfilling ending.
I didn't like him at all at first. He was just some pretty boy character who thought too much of himself. I honestly didn't see any worthwhile skills until we got to Ryota vs Aomine. That was best episode of this show thus far. Seeing him at his full potential got me excited for all the other future matches to come. This is what I was waiting for. This episode had everything. Internal struggle, previously established overpowered strong opponent, overcoming the internal struggle and beating said opponent……but then instead of coming out on top he still lost anyway, which would have been completely unexpected had it not been for Ryota not being one of the main characters. This episode was purely for building Aomine up to an almost unstoppable level.
Daiki Aomine
How can I even describe Aomine….oh that's easy: cocky, stubborn, rude, overbearing, free spirited, overconfident, competitive, selfish, ball hog. Yes, the worst personality in the anime so far. He became like this because he realized no one else would be able to challenge him…….….he needs to get out more. If he was that good he should have just joined the NBA. That would have brought him down a notch. The people there are already pretty cocky. I would pay good money to see the dynamics of a team after Aomine joined. Even though his personality is really bad, I can't help but like this character (A note from The Editor: His seiyuu is Suwabe Junichi, so that almost makes up for his trash can personality). I'm kind of hoping no one ever beats him, but I know that it would probably be good for his character growth to lose at least once.
Shintaro Midorima
This dude…..will have a very small section dedicated to him. He's got a snobbish attitude about him that no one else has and he's serious to the point where it's comical…..ok his section won't be very inspiring…this is all I have to say.
Seijuro Akashi
Hello, my pink haired Gaara that kind of looks like a snake…..the mystery around you intrigues me. I know you will show up later and I'll learn more about you as I continue to watch more. And why are his eyes two different colors? They didn't seem to always be like that.
Satsuki Momoi
I can't tell if she is actually in love with Kuroko and just likes to bother him a lot…..or if she just cares very deeply for Aomine in a completely platonic way. I mean, who would you choose to follow? Your childhood friend? Or the boy you like? …..Now that I have actually written that question out, read it, and said it out loud…it seems really dumb…the answer is super obvious (hint: the correct answer is the boy you like….jk. I'm really not that shallow).
Papa Mbaye Siki
This one may come as a surprise to you all that he's on this list…..or maybe not……but was anybody else bothered by this character? I definitely was. Not by his appearance or his really crappy personality (which I could be). But by the way he talked. It made him sound so freaking stupid! Yeah, I realize that Japanese wouldn't be his first language but….come on now….his voice didn't have to sound like that for us to understand that he was not Japanese. His appearance alone was enough.
Since this is already super-duper long (I am so sorry), I will give you a quick ending:
Even though I bashed this anime a lot, I did actually enjoy it. It's definitely not for everyone, but if you are not looking for anything deep and just want people continuously freaking out over someone jumping really high and a bunch of action shots, this is the show for you.
About missanimegirl
Tagged as anime basketball kuroko kuroko no basket reviews
Previous Previous post: Anime I'm currently watching 11-7-16
Next Next post: Anime I'm currently watching 11-14-16
Dr. P
From the few episodes that I have seen, I feel like this anime insults my intelligence. I know it's meant for middle schoolers but they can grasp the 'complex concept ' of basketball. It could be made better without them explaining how to dribble a ball or stating the obvious. I do see why they do this, to keep the viewer interested and not just watch an animated basketball game, but I think it explains too much.
missanimegirl
Reply to Dr. P
Even though I do agree that the concepts this anime deals with are basic, I'm still motivated to keep watching it. I love underdog stories and watching characters better their skills and proving themselves. It's definitely not the parts about the actual sport of basketball that makes me want to continue watching it.


text:
A shuffling machine is a machine for randomly shuffling packs of playing cards.

Because standard shuffling techniques are seen as weak, and in order to avoid "inside jobs" where employees collaborate with gamblers by performing inadequate shuffles, many casinos employ automatic shuffling machines to shuffle the cards before dealing. These machines are also used to reduce repetitive motion stress injuries to a dealer.

Shuffling machines have to be carefully designed, as they can generate biased shuffles otherwise: the most recent shuffling machines are computer-controlled. The randomness or otherwise of cards produced from automatic shuffling machines is the subject of considerable interest to both gamblers and casinos.

Shuffling machines come in two main varieties: continuous shuffling machines (CSMs), which shuffle one or more packs continuously, and batch shufflers or automatic shuffling machines (ASMs), which shuffle an entire single pack in a single operation. Batch shufflers are more expensive, but can avoid the problems associated with some continuous shufflers, whereby the shuffling operation only slowly changes the state of the deck, and new cards may be taken before shuffling has sufficiently randomized the pack, allowing some players to "shuffle track" cards through the shuffling process.

A widely reported, but unpublished, study by Persi Diaconis and Susan Holmes in 2000 resulted in the redesign of many shuffling machines. SIAM News later published a reasonably detailed discussion of its results.

Early mechanical card shufflers
Patents regarding card shuffling devices started to appear in the United States around the end of the 19th century. It is unclear whether these devices were converted to commercial products or were discarded. These machines were often complex with many mechanical parts to achieve card retrieval, shuffling and distribution with pseudo-randomness.

In 1878, Henry Ash proposed an apparatus to shuffle cards. His device was a box with an open top where the operator would place the deck. The operator would then slightly shake the box to make the cards fall through a comb at the bottom of the box. About half of the cards would fall into the lower compartment while the rest were still in the upper compartment. The operator would take these upper cards, pack them together and do the same with the lower cards. The two packs would be placed upon each other to form a new deck and the operation could be repeated for better shuffling.

In 1887, Silvanus Tingley and Charles Stetson patented their "card shuffling apparatus". The device was composed of two card-holding boxes where the packs were held by springs. The device simulated a riffle shuffling by extracting the cards through a slot at the bottom of each box and placing them in a pile in the middle. The operator would turn a crank which was connected to gears and finally disks covered with rubber that were in contact with cards. This feeding mechanism ensured that the final stack was composed of cards "randomly" coming from the left or right chamber. The main difference with the next machines is that only one card would be ejected from a box during one turn.

In 1892, William H. Ranney filed a patent for a "card shuffling and dealing mechanism". The apparatus was basically an inclined box which was fixed to the border of the playing table. The cards were inserted from the top of the case and were trapped inside a receptacle hold by a lever. The operator would turn a crank which would slowly lower the bottom wall of the inclined receptacle. At this point, the device relied upon the friction force between the cards to achieve some kind of randomness. One card would start to slide as a result of the steepness and would attract a few cards with it. The number of cards being released at each turn would typically vary between one and five cards. The cards fell into another receptacle and the operator would turn the whole device to distribute the cards to another player. This rotation activated a roller which would distribute the bottom card out of the box. One year later, William Ranney proposed another version of his device where the original deck was split in half and cards would fall from one or both halves at once.

In 1897, two brothers, the Crooks, proposed a more complex machine which was similar to a slot machine displaying five cards. This device did not distribute cards to players but was just displaying a random sequence of cards. However, it used a shuffling mechanism that relied upon a rotating triangular frame where each side contained the same device. Only one mechanical side could operate and display cards at a moment and the operator would rotate the whole drum to perform another shuffling. A shuffling box would be split into five compartments using what they called "partition fingers". A complex pins mechanism would then mix the cards between the compartments and the new result would be displayed.

John Bowen proposed in 1899 a compact "card shuffling machine" where the unshuffled pack was enclosed between two horizontal plates. The principle of this apparatus was similar to Tingley and Stetson's machine. The top plate could move and was called the follower, the bottom plate was fixed. The operator would press the deck using a vertical handle which was connected to the follower, and he would turn a crank that activated two rollers which were above and under the deck. In front of the deck, a bar would block most cards except those on top of the pack as well as those at the bottom. The rollers were pressing against the cards and with their respective rotation, would throw them into a receptacle. At each step, cards could come from the top or the bottom of the deck and the number of cards which were ejected was not constant. Variable friction between the rollers and the cards themselves ensured some randomness as in Ranney's machine.

Fred C Rollings in 1899 invented a device with a rotating table where cards were spread around the center using a detent with variable pressure. In 1901, Benjamin Bellows filed a patent for his device which used "gravity alone for all movements of the cards" by dividing guiding them through moving compartments. Various mechanisms were proposed during the following years with different combinations of rollers, card-holding boxes, combs and pins systems. Most of these machines were manually run by turning a crank which would activate the inner gears and rollers. Randomness could be improved by increasing the number of shuffling turns performed by the operators or by increasing the number of boxes, combs or partitioning chambers in the machines. Some devices were simple boxes with combs that would simulate a manual shuffling like riffle shuffling. In 1925, Charles and William Gunzelmann filed a patent for a simple rhombus-shaped apparatus where the cards were inserted in an upper chamber. Shaking the device would make the cards fall into a lower compartment; the shuffling was ensured by two small wings in the middle of the box that would distribute the cards. The operator would then turn the box upside down and repeat the operation. A glass windows permitted seeing that all cards had fallen into the compartment.

Improving randomness using mechanical tricks
After 1930, inventors focused on the design of machines that could directly deal the cards, an idea that was already present in Ranney's machine in 1892.

In 1932, a dealing table was patented by Laurens Hammond. This was one of the first machines to use electricity to power the necessary shuffling and dealing mechanism. His patent description provides interesting insights regarding the problems related to previous machines: If the cards were worn or bent, the shuffling could fail. He also criticized the randomness of previous shuffling methods and pointed out the risk of predicting the final sequence. The patent also contains mathematical explanations regarding the inner state of his machine. A motor drove a rotating frame that would distribute 13 cards to each player. The machine went through 53 cycles to distribute the 52 cards. During each cycle, a selector plate with 52 notches rotated by one step. There were four possible depths for the notches and a lug touching the notches would determine which player would receive the card. Each card was taken from the top of deck and sent to the corresponding player's receptacle using a conveyor track. The first cycle was used to rotate the plate and ensured that the distribution would start with a new sequence. One property of the machine was that the same player could be served during two or three consecutive cycles. To increase randomness, the author proposes to use a set of different selector plates or to use another deck being shuffled while people are playing. The machine was fast enough to shuffle a whole deck in a few seconds. If only one plate was used, the same dealing sequence would appear after 52 deals (there were 52 possible starting points on the plate; the starting point was not randomly chosen, as the plate always rotated by one step in the same direction during each cycle).

The problem of ensuring randomness using mechanical means was hard to resolve. In the early 1930s, Robert McKay proposed an ingenious machine containing a chamber with 52 balls of different diameters (for each player, there were 13 balls with the same size). Like in a lottery machine, the balls would be shaken and randomly chosen by driving them one by one into a wheel with 52 slots. This wheel would then rotate, slot by slot, and a rod in contact with the ball would "detect" its diameter. A distribution mechanism could then use the diameter information and take the appropriate action to deal the card to the correct player.

Together with the lottery machines, the shuffling devices continued to evolve. In 1934, Ralph Potter invented an electromechanical machine that would read perforated cards and generates random sequences. The data would be then used to power up lamps on the gaming table. These lights symbolized cards and roulette values. Players pressed on buttons to indicate their choices to the machine. To some extent, his device was one of the first attempts to make a computerized pseudo-random generator and game console.

During the rest of the 1930s, many inventions tried to address the dealing problem, mainly by using rotating frames that would distribute cards to each player around the table. Rotating parts were common in the shuffling machines; designers often used gears and plates with notches or holes whose purposes were similar to the sequence-generator plate of Hammond's machine. These shufflers shared some similarities with the machines used in cryptography such as Enigma. This German encryption device used during World War II contained rotors that stepped each time a key was typed and produced an encrypted version of the letter. Both domains must fulfill mathematical requirements regarding randomness to avoid known patterns, repeated sequences and other kind of statistical weaknesses or biases.

After World War II
After World War II, engineers tried to generate random sequences using electrical devices. Signals from electrical noise sources (like a hot cathode gas discharge tube or a resistor) would typically be sent through filters and amplifiers to output one or several random streams. Such a device is described in a 1940 patent by Newby et al.. Most patented machines continued to be based on old mechanical designs that did not provide as much randomness as noise sources, but were more practical. According to the patents filed during the 1950s and 1960s, designers created simple devices where a basic shuffling operation was repeated several times (by feeding the output deck back into the machine) instead of having one complex pass implying many tricky mechanical operations ending up with a poor shuffling and lower reliability. Some of them tried to reproduce what was manually done during riffle shuffling with cards interleaving each others. Card-picking rollers in contact with the top or bottom of the deck were still heavily used at that time.

Computerized shufflers

In 1969, Thomas Segers patented his "electronic card dealer" which was not working with real cards but simulating random selections. Thanks to lights, players could see the result. According to the patent, the design contains multivibrators, AND logic gates and a tube oscillator. The inventor also indicates that transistors could have been used in the circuit. In 1974, David Erickson and Richard Kronmal proposed a shuffler based upon a logic circuit with binary gates. The deck was placed in a holder and cards were extracted one by one, sent into a downward slope channel containing some flaps that would be activated or deactivated, depending upon which  stack should be fed. The flap forwarded the card into the proper container and was moved by a coil controlled by the pseudo-random generator. Synchronization was important and several methods were used to ensure that the card would follow the correct path.

Until the 1980s, there were not many innovations. In 1985, Edward Sammsel proposed a machine that extracted the cards from the bottom of two deck holders and put them in a second compartment. Another extractor would eject the card that was taken by the dealer. The order in which the two cards were taken from the holders was driven by a logic circuit whose main parts were a counter and a decoder. Photosensors detected how many cards were present in each compartment and if the card was taken by the dealer. In this case, another card would be processed from the initial holders.

See also
Shuffling
Lottery machine
Hammond Electric Bridge Table
Mahjong automatic dealing table
MindPlay
SHFL Entertainment

References

External links
Science News article: Card Shuffling Shenanigans
casinocitytimes.com article: United States Patent 6,254,096: Shuffle Master's Continuous Shuffler
: Device and method for continuously shuffling cards
A submission to the UK Gambling Commission by a shuffling machine vendor
casinocitytimes.com article: How Much of a Threat Are Shuffle-Trackers?
Discover Magazine article: The Mathematics of Shuffling: A magician turned mathematician saves the casinos' shirts, which discusses the Diaconis and Holmes work on shuffling machines
SIAM News: Within Every Math Problem, For this Mathematician, Lurks a Card-Shuffling Problem contains a detailed discussion of the Diaconis and Holmes results

Gaming devices
Card shuffling
Card game equipment

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


In this blog, we will provide an easier method to mask transfers for those of you who are struggling with the original method.
1. Take the mask material and remove it from its liner.
2. Place the mask on over your transfer then use the included squeegee to apply the material and remove all air bubbles.
3. Remove the transfer material from its original liner. Now your transfer should be only attached to the mask material.
4. You are now ready to press your material!
2. Instead of placing the mask over your transfer, switch these two around. Lay the mask down and place the transfer over the mask. Now use the included squeegee to apply the material and remove all air bubbles.
This way seems to be a little easier in aligning the mask to stick to the transfer.
It especially helps with aligning big transfers to the mask.
And we have found that it helps eliminate some air bubbles that are harder to prevent when applying the mask over the transfer!
This alternative method should work for any type of masking. We want to hear if this makes your masking process easier! Share your thoughts with us on our Facebook page!


Performance for the street & track.
Our focus is top quality parts and customer service. Shop for our custom late model Corvette, GTO, Camaro, and Truck performance solutions. All HINSON parts are made in the USA and ready for the street or the track.
HINSON Motorsports is proudly located in Birmingham, Alabama. Our focus is delivering high quality parts with the best customer service. We started the business way back in 2001 with a little LS1 V8 Mazda FD RX7 conversion project. Our size and sales have grown to now allow us to help customers from simple bolt-ons to complex projects. Contact us today to let us know how we can help.
We are actively rolling out updates to this new website platform as of August 16, 2017. Please check back often to see how products are mapped to your vehicle. Use the SEARCH function at the top of the site to find your part.


This Just In: Being A Person Is Hard!
As someone who works full-time, goes to university full-time, and volunteers every weekend, stress is a fact of life. This is true for high school students as well. In fact, half of the county's high school students face a damaging level of stress on a daily basis.
Here's something about me that I haven't been very open about yet—I've got a little stack of mental health issues: anxiety, depression and disordered eating.
Exercising While Sick - When is it OK?
Getting sick. It is one of those inevitable experiences in life. Some people get sick only a few times in their lives, while I, on the other hand, seem to get sick at the turn of every season. Well, guess what? 'Tis the season.
Learning to embrace your sexuality is a pretty crucial component of living a healthy sexual life. It's kind of what Harlot is all about. The good news is: you don't need a partner to embrace and experiment with your sexuality. I'm here to make a case for masturbation—trust me; it's got a lot of benefits.
Menstrual stigma can have a wide range of effects on young girls and women and can even influence how we care for our bodies and the products we choose to use. As a young girl I remember learning about the two ways to capture my blood flow: pads or tampons.


text:
Q: Краш приложения при выполнении действия на фрагменте Программа для решения квадратных, биквадратных уравнений. Есть одна активность и 4 фрагмента. При запуске программы, главная активность загружает первый фрагмент. На первом фрагменте все решается отлично. При переходе на 2 фрагмент (биквадратные уравнения) и нажатия на кнопку "решить" приложение вылетает с такой ошибкой:
java.lang.NullPointerException: Attempt to invoke virtual method 'void android.widget.EditText.setText(java.lang.CharSequence)' on a null object reference at helmus.myapplication.MainActivity$1.onClick(MainActivity.java:115),

где 115 строка это:
xa.setText("Корней нет");

+Ко всему прочему, если при запуске нажать на кнопку "очистить" (стирает все введенные и установленные данные с полей для ввода текста) программа вылетает.
Перед
 @Override
        public void onClick(View view) {

идет
FloatingActionButton fab = (FloatingActionButton) findViewById(R.id.fab);
    fab.setOnClickListener(new View.OnClickListener() {

активити
@Override
protected void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {

    super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
    setContentView(R.layout.activity_main);
    Toolbar toolbar = (Toolbar) findViewById(R.id.toolbar);
    setSupportActionBar(toolbar);

    DrawerLayout drawer = (DrawerLayout) findViewById(R.id.drawer_layout);
    ActionBarDrawerToggle toggle = new ActionBarDrawerToggle(
            this, drawer, toolbar, R.string.navigation_drawer_open, R.string.navigation_drawer_close);
    drawer.setDrawerListener(toggle);
    toggle.syncState();

    NavigationView navigationView = (NavigationView) findViewById(R.id.nav_view);
    navigationView.setNavigationItemSelectedListener(this);

        @Override
        public void onClick(View view) {
            a1 = (EditText) findViewById(R.id.editText);
            b1 = (EditText) findViewById(R.id.editText2);
            c1 = (EditText) findViewById(R.id.editText3);
            d1 = (EditText) findViewById(R.id.editText4);
            xa = (EditText) findViewById(R.id.editText5);
            xb = (EditText) findViewById(R.id.editText6);
            xa1 = (EditText) findViewById(R.id.editText7);
            xa2 = (EditText) findViewById(R.id.editText8);
            xa3 = (EditText) findViewById(R.id.editText9);
            xa4 = (EditText) findViewById(R.id.editText10);
            double x1 = 0, x2 = 0, x11 = 0, x22 = 0, x33 = 0, x44 = 0;
            if ((a1.getText().toString().equals("")) & (b1.getText().toString().equals("")) & (c1.getText().toString().equals(""))) {
                Toast toast = Toast.makeText(getApplicationContext(),
                        "Введи хотя бы 1 коэффициент :)", Toast.LENGTH_SHORT);
                toast.show();
            } else {
                if (a1.getText().toString().equals("")) {
                    a = 1;
                    a1.setText("1");
                } else {
                    a = Double.parseDouble(a1.getText().toString());
                }
                if (b1.getText().toString().equals("")) {
                    b = 1;
                    b1.setText("1");
                } else {
                    b = Double.parseDouble(b1.getText().toString());
                }
                if (c1.getText().toString().equals("")) {
                    c = 0;
                    c1.setText("0");
                } else {
                    c = Double.parseDouble(c1.getText().toString());
                }
                double d = (b * b - 4 * a * c);
                String discr = String.valueOf(d);
                d1.setText(discr);
                if (d < 0) {
                    xa.setText("Корней нет");
                    xb.setText("Корней нет");
                    xa1.setText("Корней нет");
                    xa2.setText("Корней нет");
                    xa3.setText("Корней нет");
                    xa4.setText("Корней нет");
                }
                else {
                    x1 = ((-1) * b + Math.sqrt(d)) / (2 * a);
                    x2 = ((-1) * b - Math.sqrt(d)) / (2 * a);
                    x11 = (Math.sqrt(((-1) * b - Math.sqrt(d)) / (2 * a)));
                    x22 = (-1) * (Math.sqrt(((-1) * b - Math.sqrt(d)) / (2 * a)));
                    x33 = (Math.sqrt(((-1) * b + Math.sqrt(d)) / (2 * a)));
                    x44 = ((-1) * (Math.sqrt(((-1) * b + Math.sqrt(d)) / (2 * a))));

                    String coren1 = String.valueOf(x1);
                    String coren2 = String.valueOf(x2);
                    String coren11 = String.valueOf(x11);
                    String coren22 = String.valueOf(x22);
                    String coren33 = String.valueOf(x33);
                    String coren44 = String.valueOf(x44);

                    xa.setText(coren1);
                    xb.setText(coren2);
                    xa1.setText(coren11);
                    xa2.setText(coren22);
                    xa3.setText(coren33);
                    xa4.setText(coren44);
                }
                Snackbar.make(view, "Уравнение решено :)", Snackbar.LENGTH_SHORT)
                        .setAction("Action", null).show();}
        }
    });

    FloatingActionButton fab2 = (FloatingActionButton) findViewById(R.id.fab2);
    fab2.setOnClickListener(new View.OnClickListener() {
        @Override
        public void onClick(View v) {
            d1.setText(null);
            xa.setText(null);
            xb.setText(null);
            a1.setText(null);
            b1.setText(null);
            c1.setText(null);
            xa1.setText(null);
            xa2.setText(null);
            xa3.setText(null);
            xa4.setText(null);
        }
    });

    f_quad = new BlankFragment();
    f_biquad = new BlankFragment_1();
    f_triquad = new BlankFragment_2();
    f_teor = new BlankFragment_3();
    f_trans = getSupportFragmentManager().beginTransaction();
    f_trans.add(R.id.cont, f_quad).commit();

A: Как вы можете на fab2.setOnClickListener(new View.OnClickListener()обращаться к вашим EditText если они у вас инициализируются в  navigationView.setNavigationItemSelectedListener(this);, когда вы нажимаете на fab2 у вас скорее всего EditText еще не инициализированы.

A: Помог перенос всех вычислений в Java классы всех фрагментов и обращение к разметке фрагмента уже оттуда. Простите глупость новичка и спасибо, @ЮрийСПб )


text:
Bharat Petroleum to sign LNG deal
A Bharat Petroleum oil pump station displays the price of unleaded petrol (0.89$) and Diesel (0.66$) as a pedestrian walks past in New Delhi, India, February 3, 2016. File photo: Reuters
The Indian state-owned company Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (BPCL) is reported to be on the verge of signing a Sales and Purchase Agreement covering a million tonnes of LNG per annum from the consortium Mozambique LNG1.
Mozambique LNG1 is owned by the Texas-based company Anadarko and its partners in the consortium developing the infrastructure to extract and process natural gas from Offshore Area One in the northern province of Cabo Delgado.
Anadarko has recently announced that it has entered into Sales and Purchase Agreements with Shell, Tokyo Gas and Centrica, and the Chinese oil company CNOOC. In total, it now has binding sales agreements covering over 7.5 million tonnes per annum (mtpa) of LNG. It is expected that the Mozambique LNG1 consortium will take its Final Investment Decision once it has reached 8.5 mtpa worth of sales, which will happen once BPCL formally signs the agreement. In addition, last November the consortium reached a provisional agreement with Thailand's PTT for the purchase of 2.6 mtpa and it is just awaiting formal approval from the Thai government.
According to the news agency LiveMint, a BPCL company official confirmed that the decision has been made to import liquefied natural gas from Mozambique. Thus, Mozambique LNG1 looks very much on track to take its Final Investment Decision by April this year. This will enable the consortium to put in place the finance for the construction of two LNG factories on the Afungi Peninsula in Palma district. The plant will produce a total of 12.88 mtpa of LNG with exports expected to begin in 2024. Anadarko intends to expand the project in stages up to a maximum of 50 million tonnes a year. In addition, Area One will supply 100 million cubic feet of natural gas per day for domestic use in Mozambique.
Offshore Area One is estimated to hold 75 trillion cubic feet of recoverable natural gas. Anadarko is the operator with a 26.5 per cent working interest. Its partners are Mozambique's National Hydrocarbon Company ENH (15 per cent), the Japanese company Mitsui (20 per cent), the Indian companies ONGC Videsh Ltd, Beas Rovuma Energy Mozambique Ltd and BPRL Ventures Mozambique (with 10 per cent each), and PTTEP of Thailand (8.5 per cent).
BPRL is the upstream arm of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.
Mozambique to increase power supplies to Zimbabwe - Mnangagwa in Niger
Gems and precious stones will be cut in the country - Mozambique Mining Exploration Company
Mozambique has qualified professionals to work in the natural gas industry - Government
Mocuba solar power station to begin operating this month
SWECO to rehabilitate large hydropower plant in Mozambique
Anadarko strengthens support to the victims of cyclone Kenneth in Cabo Delgado
« New ID cards to have better security, with information stored on a chip	Previous PostThis is it for now! See you all next summer! Ugandans detained in Mozambique deny involvement in Cabo Delgado attacks »	Next PostStandard post with featured image


text:
Jorma Kaukonen
Been So Long is the story of how Jorma found his place in the world of music and beyond.
Positive Dave Shiflett,
Jorma Kaukonen isn't quite so famous as some of his musical peers, a group that includes Janis Joplin, Jerry Garcia and Jimi Hendrix. Yet unlike those eminences and many others, Mr. Kaukonen—a Rock & Roll Hall of Fame guitarist best known for his work with Jefferson Airplane—has hung around. Still touring as he approaches 80, he has now written an engaging memoir that will interest even those who wouldn't know Hot Tuna (his current band) from a can of sardines.
Positive Publishers Weeky
...When Kaukonen was 16, he was inspired by a guitar-playing friend to play music and, with his father's help, bought his first guitar. In high school, he met Jack Casady, who would become the bassist for Jefferson Airplane and Hot Tuna, and the two began a lifelong friendship and musical partnership ... A mesmerizing storyteller, Kaukonen delivers a memoir as intricate and dazzling as his music.
Mixed Kirkus
...The son of a State Department attaché, Kaukonen's formative years were spent traveling around the world. Along the way, he became an obsessive finger-picking guitarist and, luckily, wound up back on the family's California home turf at a time when legendary bands were formed at a moment's notice. Such was the case with the Airplane, which reaped a hefty advance from the beginning and created a new and defiantly trippy sound ... Kaukonen spares little in describing the winding path of his life, both the ups (writing and playing music) and the downs (addiction and a destructive codependent marriage). Unfortunately, his philosophical and spiritual ramblings become increasingly repetitive and tedious ... An honest personal portrait but also one where the author could have revealed more—and written less.
Let Love Rule
Lenny Kravitz, with David Ritz
Me and Sister Bobbie: True Tales of the Family B…
Willie Nelson and Bobbie Nelson with David Ritz
Right Place, Right Time: The Life of a Rock &…
Bob Gruen
Mariah Carey, with Michaela Angela Davis
Remain in Love: Talking Heads, Tom Tom Club, Tin…
Chris Frantz
What did you think of Been So Long?