The Iberian Peninsula had been the site of wars for several centuries by the , and the Christian/Islamic animosity there was pronounced; enslaving captured opponents was standard practice. Portugal began the maritime innovations that would see them seize the spice trade from their Islamic rivals. is closely associated with the rise of Portuguese maritime knowledge and practice. How responsible Henry was for Portugal’s maritime prowess has long been debated, but what is not debatable is that Portugal began developing the necessary knowledge and skills for accomplishing an unprecedented feat: sailing the world’s oceans. Until that time, only the Indian Ocean was regularly traveled because of its relatively gentle and predictable nature. Not until Europe’s rise were the Pacific, Atlantic, Arctic, and Antarctic oceans regularly traveled. sailors , unsuccessfully, and even settled some Atlantic islands, but Portugal was humanity’s first successful practitioner of transoceanic navigation. Many , and sailed down the Atlantic Coast of Africa and across the Atlantic. The Portuguese began , , and in 1434, Portugal became the first European power to on the African coast.
When Turks conquered Constantinople, Venice lost its spice monopoly and perhaps the seminal event of Europe’s rise happened: attempts to find another route to obtain spices. are often made of defensive chemicals that plants produce to defend themselves from animals, and many have antibacterial properties. These properties were important for preserving food, particularly animal products (mainly meat), in warm climates before the advent of refrigeration, but the antibacterial properties of spices are important even today in warm-climate nations. Spices essentially preserved food energy so that humans could consume it rather than microbes.
So far, this essay has dealt lightly with regional differences and largely confined the discussion to polar, temperate, and tropical conditions in the seas, and rainforest versus dryer conditions on land. While existed, barriers to species diffusion on land were relatively modest, hence dominance. But at the Triassic’s end, and continental differences in plants and animals often became significant in later times. Although the formation of Pangaea had profound impacts, because land life was relatively young, the differences and resultant changes due to the removal of oceanic barriers were less spectacular than would happen in the distant future, such as when .
The grew , and there were no more island barriers on the Tethys’s east end. The was finally squeezed out of existence by islands that became part of Eurasia. The shallow margins of the Tethys became the greatest oil source in Earth’s history. The and Paleo-Tethys oceans also formed oil deposits, but about initially formed during the Mesozoic’s anoxic events, primarily along the Tethys’s margins. In the Middle East, Caspian Sea, Western Russia, North Africa, Gulf of Mexico, and Venezuela virtually all of the oil deposits were laid down by dying and preserved organisms along Tethyan shores. In the early Triassic, along the west end of what became North America, oceanic plate subduction under continental plates that continue to this day. The foundations of the Sierra Nevada mountain range were formed then. I have spent .
For an example of how geography impacted early animal evolution, therapsids are thought to have evolved in non-tropical Permian climates. That non-tropical beginning influenced therapsid evolution and particularly strategies for regulating body temperature. Therapsids were rather stocky , which is . There is plenty of speculation and research on the issue of therapsid thermoregulation because mammals are the therapsid line’s last survivors. Diapsids, on the other hand, evolved in warmer climates, were relatively gracile, and had particularly long tails. That long tail was critical for the appearance of bipedal reptiles, as it shifted their center of gravity over their hips.
I am indeed, more than sympathetic towards anybody who is in Hitler's prisons. But my sympathy goes rather to the Jews and Socialists, Communists and pacifists who suffer for the convictionsand not to people like Niemoeller, who encouraged all these atrocities from the pulpit for many years. Moreoverand this is really the cardinal pointwhatever our human sympathy for people like Niemoeller might be, have they really proved by their past that we can trust them, that we can safely collaborate with them and accept their words, their Christian faith in our sense?
Dinosaurs begin to dominate, and mammals first appear several million years later. first appear. Some argue that this extinction is more significant than the end-Triassic extinction.
These facts are unpleasant and horrible. I maintain that we can understand them and explain them only if we look at the dark figure from whom the German Lutheran clergy has for four centuries taken their orders: Martin Luther. Do not defy the authorities even if they are unjust, worship war, murder and slay the enemy, pray for a German God, exterminate the Jews, praise the authoritiesall this, as I tried to show, was first preached by Luther, and has been propagated ever since from Lutheran pulpits and universities; it is the Gospel of every German Christian. It is, to my mind, the only possible explanation of many tragic happenings which seem otherwise unexplainable. An explanation which, it seems tome, corresponds more to the horrid facts than the noble and Christian hypotheses of the Bishop of Chichester and his followers.
This, once more, must strike people as an extreme viewa view which is biased and which I cannot possibly prove. I beg them for once to forget again all the propaganda they have heard, all the stories of the great Lutheran Niemoeller they have so far believed. And to look at the Niemoeller such as he really exists. I shall, again, quote. I could show a Niemoeller in a black and horrible light, if I got hold of some of his sermons which are unknown in England. I need not do this. I shall merely quote from books which have been published in England by Niemoeller's friends.
These are my views. Those who disagree with me get more publicity, they are more believed because they are less extreme (and the Englishman hates nothing more than extreme views, even if they are true), because it is more pleasant, because it is easier. There is danger in the views of those who will notface the fact that the Lutheran tradition in Germany has produced barbarians and not Christians in our sensetheir wishful thinking produces a world war every twenty-five years and destroys the very values they are fighting to preserve.
The stock of Deissmann was exhausted. His collapse was too obvious even for the most idealistic dreamers. But in their desire to find some Christians in Germany with whom they could collaborate, they were helped by the sudden appearance of a legend. Hitler put Pastor Niemoeller into a concentration camp, and at once people like the Bishop of Chichester had found just what they wanted. A German Lutheran whose belief in a Christian kGod was greater than his loyalty to Hitler. Niemoeller and his followers must therefore be the very class of Germans whom we can trust. The Bishop of Chichester was greatly helped in his attempt to work for a not too harsh peace by German refugee-pastors. The Niemoeller-legend spread. The Niemoeller agents worked hard, andin my opiniontheir aim was exactly the same as that of Deissmann.
In the early 19th century, a dispute was personified by , a British lawyer and geologist, and , a French paleontologist. Their respective positions came to be known as and . Just as , so did uniformitarianism prevail in scientific circles. Under the comforting uniformitarian worldview, there was no such thing as a global catastrophe. Changes had only been gradual, and only the present geophysical, geochemical, and biological process had ever existed. The British Charles Darwin explicitly made Lyell’s uniformitarianism part of his evolutionary theory and he proposed that extinction was only a gradual process. Cuvier was , which contradicted the still-dominant Biblical teachings, even in the . Although Cuvier did not subscribe to the , his catastrophic extinction hypothesis was informed by his fossil studies. But Lyell and Darwin prevailed. Suggesting that there might have been catastrophic mass extinctions in Earth’s past was an invitation to be branded a pseudoscientific crackpot. That state of affairs largely prevailed in orthodoxy until the 1980s, after the was posited for the dinosaurs’ demise. An effort led by a scientist publishing outside of his field of expertise (a ) removed from its primacy. Only since the 1980s have English-speaking scientists studied mass extinctions without facing ridicule from their peers, which has never been an auspicious career situation. Since then, many and mass extinction events have been studied, but the investigations are still in their early stages, partly due to a dogma that prevailed for more than a century and a half, and Lyell’s uniformitarianism is influential. The ranking of major mass extinctions is even in dispute, , and a was recently .