New England stone walls

The New Neo Posted on by

[NOTE: Yesterday I noticed a discussion in the open thread about stone walls in New England and elsewhere. I thought I’d link to a post I wrote about stone walls, but – as sometimes happens – I discovered there was no such post published and that I was thinking about a draft I wrote many years ago and never published. So perhaps the time has come for it to see the light of day.]

In rural (or even semi-rural) New England the stone walls are just about everywhere:

Walk into a patch of forest in New England, and chances are you will—almost literally—stumble across a stone wall. Thigh-high, perhaps, it is cobbled together with stones of various shapes and sizes, with splotches of lichen and spongy moss instead of mortar. Most of the stones are what are called “two-handers”—light enough to lift, but not with just one hand. The wall winds down a hill and out of sight. According to Robert Thorson, a landscape geologist at University of Connecticut, these walls are “damn near everywhere” in the forests of rural New England.

He estimates that there are more than 100,000 miles of old, disused stone walls out there, or enough to circle the globe four times.

I can well believe it.

When I first moved to New England eons ago, I was puzzled by the ubiquity of those stone walls in the forests. I very quickly learned that the forests are second growth and the walls were built when the land was mostly cleared fields (the rocks themselves were a by-product of clearing the once-glaciated land).

By the middle of the 19th century, New England was over 70 percent deforested by settlers, a rolling landscape of smallholdings as far as the eye could see. But by the end of the century, industrialization and large-scale farms led to thousands of fields being abandoned, to begin a slow process of reforestation.

What actually happened was that the midwest opened up, and farming was so very much better there that farmers moved away. There are still plenty of farms in New England, but they’re small.

More here:

The origins of New England’s wall stones date back to between about 30,000 and 15,000 years ago, when the Laurentide ice sheet—a remnant of which still exists in the Barnes Ice Cap on central Baffin Island—made its way southward from central Canada and then began retreating. “It stripped away the last of the ancient soils,” writes Thorson in “Stone by Stone,” “scouring the land down to its bedrock, lifting up billions of stone slabs and scattering them across the region.”

As the ice sheet melted and receded, it left behind deposits of unsorted material ranging in size from clay to massive boulders chiseled from the slate, schist, granite and gneiss bedrock of northern New England and Canada. The bucolic rolling hills and meadows of New England are formed of rich glacial soil called lodgment till—up to 60 meters thick—that was “almost single-handedly responsible for the success of the agricultural economy in New England,” Thorson says. A thinner, looser layer of rocks and sand called ablation, or “melt out” till was left above the lodgment till. Most stone walls are composed of stones from melt-out till, which were “abundant, large, angular and easy to carry,” Thorson says, compared to the smaller, more rounded stones from the deeper lodgment till.

Although New England’s stone walls are popularly associated with the Colonial era, there weren’t actually many rocks lying around in the soil at that time. As evidence, Thorson cites Swedish botanist Peter Kalm, who toured New England in the mid-1700s. In his “Travels in North America,” Kalm observed of its forest soils, “[T]he Europeans coming to America found a rich, fine soil before them, lying loose between the trees as the best in a garden. They had nothing to do but to cut down the wood, put it up in heaps, and to clear the dead leaves away.”

Likewise, Colonial-era books on farming, encyclopedias and recorded observations do not mention stone walls, Thorson notes. Instead of stone walls, Colonial farmers used rail and zig-zag fences made of wood—far more abundant at the time than stone—to pen animals. It wasn’t until the latter half of the 18th century that early stone walls were first widely constructed in New England. Even then, other than in long-farmed interior areas such as Concord, Mass., the stone was typically quarried or taken from slopes rather than from fields.

The region’s stones lay deep in the ground, buried under thousands of years’ worth of rich composted soil and old-growth forests, just waiting to be freed by pioneers clear-cutting New England’s forests—a process that reached its peak across most of New England between 1830 and 1880…

I hadn’t known that. I’d assumed the stones had been there for the earliest of settlers from Europe. But the stones were actually products of forest clearing, and it got worse in a snowball effect:

Widespread deforestation exposed New England’s soils to winter cold—scientists estimate winter was 1 to 1.5 degrees Celsius colder on average during the Little Ice Age than it is today—causing them to freeze deeper than they had before. This accelerated frost heaving, and gradually lifted billions of stones up through the layers of soil toward the surface.

These stones weren’t conducive to farming, so, aided by their oxen, farmers hauled the stones to the outer edges of pastures and tillage lands, typically unceremoniously dumping them in piles that delineated their fields from the forest. (Some of these so-called “dumped walls” would later be relaid more intentionally when improved tools and equipment made rebuilding easier.) In the early days, artistry in stone wall building had to wait. The first priority was survival, which meant clearing land to grow crops and raise livestock.

The settlers were not unfamiliar with the process, either, because “New England” turns out to be aptly named:

…[R]ock in New England is similar to rock in England and Scotland. England and New England have similar natural landscapes because both lands have a similar geologic history. Millions of years ago, England and New England were formed within the same mountain range near the center of Pangaea. So, he says, “the similar fieldstones on opposite sides of the Atlantic were created practically within the same foundry.”

But there was one important difference between these New World and Old World stones: Britain had long been deforested, with its subterranean stones brought to the surface, so its stone walls had been constructed hundreds, if not thousands, of years earlier.

Much much more at the link.

And then – of course – there’s Robert Frost on the subject.

I’ll close with a scene from one of my favorite movies, Jan Troell’s “The Emigrants.” Warning: this scene is not a cheerer-upper. The film is set in Sweden during the mid-1800s, and this clip illustrates one of the many many reasons this family and many others emigrated to Minnesota:

Whatever happened to Brandon?

The New Neo Posted on by

Not that Brandon.

I mean Brandon Straka, the political-changer founder of the WalkAway movement, who was arrested and charged for some of his actions on January 6th in Washington DC. Well, here’s the latest (hat tip: commenter “AesopFan”):

On January 6, Brandon Straka found himself standing on the Capitol grounds. He did not go into the Capitol, foment violence, or engage in violence. Nevertheless, he was arrested and charged with two felonies and a misdemeanor. On Wednesday, Straka pled guilty to the misdemeanor and walked away from the rest. It was still overcharging but it’s a decent outcome and a symbolic one…

Given the unequal application of the law, it’s a travesty that Brandon even had to plead guilty to a Class B misdemeanor.

I was wondering what happened to Straka, and now I know.

How did Rosanne Boyland die, and how has it been covered?

The New Neo Posted on by

Remember 34-year-old Rosanne Boyland? She was one of the five people who died of various causes during or shortly after the January 6th Capitol demonstration (or “insurrection,” according to the left).

Why am I going into the story again at this point? The reason is that the January 6th Capitol incident continues to be used by the Biden administration as a justification for just about every crackdown on the right they can get away with. And what’s more, I recently had two discussions with close relatives, talks that made it very clear to me that both (highly intelligent) people have swallowed the January 6th MSM/Democrat narrative hook, line, and sinker and that it is still operating very forcefully in their political considerations. One person even said to me that, if January 6th hadn’t caused me to conclude by now how extremely dangerous the right is, I was a lost cause.

The edifice on which the rank-and-file Democrat’s perception of the meaning of January 6th is built is composed of thousands of bits of information, one piled on the other to create a very sturdy building indeed. To even begin to break it down would require showing the person a great deal of competing information, and that would require that the person have the motive and will to take the time to look at it. That doesn’t happen very often, and that’s why the MSM does what it does in order to set the narrative early and defend it against any later news that could undermine it.

The original story about the cause of Boyland’s death was that the marauding Trump-crazed crowd had stampeded and crushed her. But her autopsy results from last April indicted that she had actually died of an amphetamine overdose:

The D.C. Medical Examiner’s Office on Wednesday revealed that Roseanne Boyland, one of five people who died amid the Capitol riot, died from accidental “acute amphetamine intoxication”—instead of being crushed by the MAGA crowd as previously reported. The New York Times was the first to report on January that Boyland, a 34-year-old from Georgia who wanted to be a sobriety counselor, was seen in body-camera footage being trampled by rioters as her friend screamed for help.

Apparently Boyland fell amidst the crowd because of the drug reaction, and the crowd did not immediately realize what was happening, but it was the OD that killed her. However, if you were to poll most people on the street, I doubt the majority have ever heard of the autopsy results.

I also recently read claims that Boyland actually was beaten by a police officer and that this is shown in video. I offer that with a large caveat, however, because the assertion was advanced at Gateway Pundit, a source I don’t think it’s good to rely on. Also, I watched the video and can’t make head or tail of it, so I can’t determine whether the charge is true or not. What’s more, the autopsy made no observation of any wounds or bruises consistent with beating, as far as I know.

However, the news stirred up some curiosity in me about a related issue, which is how the MSM covered the Boyland autopsy results. When I did a search at the NY Times website, the most recent mention I could find there for Boyland was at the end of May (quite a while after the autopsy results were issued). The amphetamine overdose autopsy certainly wasn’t featured in any of the headlines listed, nor in the subtitles accompanying them. However, the stampede theory was heavily referenced in early headlines such as these:

[From January 15th]: “Videos Show How Rioter Was Trampled in Stampede at Capitol”

Rosanne Boyland died after losing consciousness in the crush of a pro-Trump mob as it surged against the police. Here’s how it happened.

[from January 28th] “Body Camera Footage Shows Capitol Rioters Trampling Over Woman”

Video obtained by The Times provides a police officer’s view of the deadly battle to defend a key entryway from the surging mob.

And here’s the headline and subtitle for that May 30/31 article, the final one the Times has written so far about Boyland:

“Death of QAnon Follower at Capitol Leaves a Wake of Pain”

Rosanne Boyland had never voted before 2020, but she fell prey to dark conspiracy theories, family members said. She died on the steps of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, and they are still not sure why.

So the focus now shifted to Boyland’s family and their pain, and the headline and subtitle seem to indicate that her cause of death remains a mystery. The way the article was framed and introduced, I don’t think it would necessarily be read by a whole lot of people unless they were interested in delving into the family’s psychological situation. My guess is that most people who had taken in the earlier articles’ contention that Boyland had died in a Trump-follower stampede would not be revisiting this at all. But if they did, they would be reading a while before they came to any mention of the autopsy results, and the article very much downplays them even when it does get around to discussing them.

It’s a long article of about 1800 words. The very beginning indicates the family has no idea why Boyland died. It describes the fact that she seems to have been a QAnon supporter, and that this alarmed her family and friends. It mentions her former drug addiction. But it’s only about 500 words into the article that the autopsy is mentioned, and it’s done this way, emphasizing the trampling again and introducing serious doubt about the autopsy results:

The family is also still struggling to understand how she died. From the video of the chaotic siege, it appeared that she had died after being caught in a crush of rioters. But the autopsy by the Washington medical examiner’s office did not find evidence of trampling and concluded that she had overdosed on amphetamines.

Family members said it was likely that the only amphetamine in her body was the Adderall she took every day by prescription, though it appeared that she might have taken at least twice her prescribed dose.

“We just want to find out what happened, to be able to rest,” Ms. Cave said. “This has been so messed up. We just want to grieve the normal way.”

So the Times covers the autopsy (for the first and only time, as far as I can tell) from the doubting family’s point of view. The article also gives several links to videos that supposedly support the trampling hypothesis, but no link is given to the autopsy report or to any article about the autopsy report. Then, after a lengthy discussion once again of Boyland’s belief in conspiracy theories such as QAnon, and after we also learn about her felony drug conviction and her continuing struggle against drug abuse, we read this only about 140 words before the very end of the article [emphasis mine]:

Ms. Boyland could barely be made out at first in the footage of the crowd’s surge up the Capitol steps — a short figure, outfitted in a black hoodie and American flag sunglasses.

She disappeared into the mob inside the tunnel presidents use when they emerge for their inaugurations. It was the scene of some of the day’s most brutal hand-to-hand fighting, and videos showed rioters crushing police officers between doors and warning that the crowd could become dangerously packed.

Just minutes later, after a push by the police that sent the crowd tumbling back out of the tunnel, she could be seen lying on her side, after which two men dragged her away from the door and began trying to resuscitate her.

It appeared to be a case of trampling. But then the medical examiner concluded that she had died of “acute amphetamine intoxication,” a ruling that left her family, convinced that she had not relapsed into drug abuse, flummoxed. She had been taking Adderall regularly under a doctor’s prescription and had not been seen to have any adverse effects, they said.

Several forensic pathologists and toxicologists who reviewed the autopsy report said in interviews that the level of amphetamine in her blood — most likely from the Adderall — had been enough to be potentially fatal.

Iain M. McIntyre, the former chief toxicologist at the San Diego County medical examiner’s office, said the level could be consistent with her having taken both of her 30-milligram daily doses at the same time, something Ms. Cave said her sister sometimes did. Mr. McIntyre said the high dosage of amphetamine, along with the raucous scene, her heart disease and obesity, could have been enough to make her heart stop.

And remember, this is in a woman with a lengthy history of very serious drug abuse.

So that’s the takeaway. See how the Times manages to report on the autopsy, and yet still write an article that will keep the narrative intact?

Happy Post-modern Indigenous People’s (Columbus) Day

The New Neo Posted on by

In honor of Columbus Day, I refer you back to this post from twelve years ago by Dr. Sanity. Nothing much has changed since then regarding respect for our western traditions and history except that things have gotten worse.

And in line with those thoughts, today I discovered this quote from Jim Bennett (hat tip: Instapundit):

This is primarily an effect of the Calvinist Puritan roots of American progressivism. Just as Calvinists believed in the centrality of the depravity of man, with the exception of a minuscule contingent of the Elect of God, their secularized descendants believe in the depravity and cursedness of Western civilization, with their own enlightened selves in the role of the Elect.

Meanwhile, fall is a tad delayed in New England, but it’s getting here. Columbus Day is traditional leaf-peeping time, and supposedly it’s arrived in the far north, so here’s a photo I took in years past:

“Out of Time” – compare and contrast

The New Neo Posted on by

“Out of Time” was a Rolling Stones song from 1966, and not an especially big hit for them. I had the record it appeared on, “Aftermath,” and I don’t even remember the song. But I came across this cover version by the Bee Gees when they still were Australian teenagers in 1966, and it features Robin Gibb at the age of 16.

It’s an oddity for a number of reasons. One is that the Bee Gees almost never did cover songs, although when they were little kids they did lots of them. I guess this was a transition time for them, from being a kid act in Australia to being a teen act in Australia. It was shortly before they moved to England to get more global exposure.. Another odd thing is their choice of a Stones song, a group they don’t resemble, and one with a sound very unlike that of the Bee Gees – although on a few occasions later on (“Heavy Breathing,” for example) the Bee Gees went to more of a rock sound.

I’m putting it up because I think it’s a good example of the maturity of Robin’s voice at that age, and the remarkable range he had. The person manning or womanning the camera seems to have had a bit of a fascination with Barry’s flowered-pantsed butt, as well, and the go-go dancers are quite the thing, too:

Here are the Stones doing the original:

And this guy had a bigger hit with it than the Stones did. On this recording, apparently Keith Richards and Mick Jagger were singing backup:

The DOJ is not charging the police officer involved in the shooting of Jacob Blake that sparked the Kenosha riots

The New Neo Posted on by

Another high-profile case that was cynically exploited by the left is revealed to be what those of us who had looked closely into the facts at the time have long known it to be: a case in which the police’s actions were not out of line and not actionable under the law.

People who have forgotten some of the details might be forgiven, because there have been so many of these cases that follow the same sad and sorry pattern: the killing by police of a resistant and violent offender who happens to be black (it happens to white people too, but those cases don’t make the headlines). The rush to judgment of Democrat politicians and presidential candidates, as well as BLM and attorneys such as Ben Crump, is abominable and fans the flames of interracial rage. The riots in Kenosha were the result.

Here’s one of many posts I wrote about the situation, a little over a year ago. In the meantime, local authorities have declined to prosecute, and now the DOJ has done the same. That tells you how incredibly weak the case against the police was, because the present DOJ is not in the habit of caving to the right:

State prosecutors decided not to file charges against Sheskey earlier this year after video showed that Blake, who was wanted on a felony warrant, was armed with a knife.

The U.S. Department of Justice launched its own investigation days after the shooting. The agency announced Friday that a team of prosecutors from its Civil Rights Division and the U.S. attorney’s office in Milwaukee reviewed police reports, witness statements, dispatch logs and videos of the incident, and determined there wasn’t enough evidence to prove Sheskey used excessive force or violated Blake’s federal rights.

“Accordingly, the review of this incident has been closed without a federal prosecution,” the Justice Department said in a news release.

Not enough evidence? Like, no evidence? That of course hasn’t stopped Blake’s family members from saying the officer should have been prosecuted, but I don’t have too much of a beef with that because this is the family and their emotions are heavily involved. It’s the cynical and mendacious leftist race-baiting politicians I have a problem with, a big one.

The Blake shooting and the resultant accusations against police, as well as the riots, have served the left’s purpose. What difference does truth make? How many people are aware of the truth as opposed to the original lie? I would say a minority, and nearly all of them are probably on the right anyway. Most people probably have only a vague memory of the case at this point, but that memory merges into a whole host of similar cases in which the takeaway will be: black men are being hunted down and persecuted, and sometimes shot and killed with no excuse other than racism, by out-of-control police. That’s the narrative the left wants to promote, and they’ve been remarkably successful in that endeavor.

[NOTE: By the way, Blake was not killed, but he’s paralyzed from the waist down and had to have quite a bit of his lower digestive tract removed as well. This is sad, but it’s the direct consequence of his actions.]

McConnell says let’s make a deal

The New Neo Posted on by

Are you angry about McConnell’s decision not to block the debt ceiling raise vote? A lot of people are. Here’s the latest on it:

Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has informed President Joe Biden that he, along with other Republican senators, will not vote to raise the debt ceiling in December should Democrats face “another avoidable crisis.”

“Last night, Republicans filled the leadership vacuum that has troubled the Senate since January,” McConnell said in a letter to Biden, referencing a vote by the Senate Thursday night, supported by 11 Republicans, to increase to the federal debt ceiling. “I write to inform you that I will not provide such assistance again if your all-Democrat government drifts into another avoidable crisis.”

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., had “three months’ notice to handle one of his most basic governing duties,” McConnell wrote.

“Amazingly, even this proved to be asking too much,” McConnell wrote.

McConnell also targeted Schumer for his “rant” following the vote to raise the debt ceiling.

Those who take the “it’s the Uniparty, and McConnell is one of the worst offenders” position will probably find this move of McConnell’s less than persuasive. My observation, though, is that sometimes McConnell seems like a caver, and sometimes he seems like a wily coyote, and I often have trouble telling the difference except quite a bit ex post facto.

So, will McConnell block this move in December or not? He says he will, but I have no idea whether that will happen.

More here:

Republicans say the move helps take pressure off of Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) to change the legislative filibuster and pokes a hole in Democrats’ argument that they don’t have enough time to raise the debt ceiling on their own.

McConnell’s letter is a warning to Democrats, but also gives an early signal to his own members that he won’t give Democrats the same offramp in December. The decision by McConnell this week to open the door to a short-term debt extension earned him an unusually intense level of criticism from the Senate GOP caucus,

Schumer’s angry speech after the GOP had cooperated with the Democrats didn’t appear to sit well with Joe Manchin:

The move angered several GOP senators as well as Manchin. Manchin and GOP Sens. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) and GOP Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) were among the senators who spoke to Schumer after the speech, with Thune telling reporters that “I let him have it.”

McConnell appeared to reference Manchin, who could be seen briefly with his hands over his face during Schumer’s speech…

McConnell warned that Schumer’s “childish behavior” had “alienated” GOP senators who helped advance the short-term debt increase and “poisoned the well even further.” They are likely the same GOP senators Schumer would need to lean on to raise the debt ceiling outside of reconciliation later this year.

Some would say this is all failure theater on the part of the GOP. I think the jury is most definitely out on that. But I do think it’s theater, of a carefully orchestrated variety. Comedy, tragedy, or farce, or some elements of all three? Each person is playing a role.

But I have never seen both parties as the same. Yes, they’re both very flawed. Yes, money is a big part of what they’re interested in, and yes, a lot of their behavior is theatrics and posing and tactics. That’s politics and it always will be. But the Democrats are now dedicated to bringing leftist destruction to this country, and the Republicans are not. In fact, I see most of the GOP as wanting to keep that from happening, although some are more sincerely dedicated to that than others.

NYC: gifted and talented no more

The New Neo Posted on by

New York City will be phasing out its gifted and talented program in the public schools.

I’m surprised it lasted this long.

I am a product of this program (or an earlier but similar program) in the NYC public schools. Without it, I really don’t know what I would have done. Many years ago, back when I was still a Democrat, I was very alarmed when people talked of doing away with such programs (and yes, they were already talking about it back then). My personal experience was that they are absolutely vital and that they are instrumental in keeping the more academically inclined kids from going crazy from boredom, as well as helping them learn in order to go on to achievement later on.

But the programs weren’t in line with racial “equity” – meaning that representation of minority students has not been exactly in line with each group’s percentage in the general population. Too many Asians; not enough black kids. So all the gifted and talented must suffer – including those black children who were rescued by such programs. And believe me, they will suffer.

This is garbage:

Instead, the city will train all its kindergarten teachers — roughly 4,000 educators — to accommodate students who need accelerated learning within their general education classrooms. The city does not yet have an estimate for how much the training will cost, though it is expected to be tens of millions of dollars.

So the plan is for these children to somehow still be identified, and to be given special treatment in regular classes. That will make it harder for teachers, cost more money, not meet the “gifted” children’s needs at all because it won’t be nearly adequate, take away the teacher’s attention from the other kids in the class, and make everyone feel rotten.